Removing the doubts and answering the questions (part 2)
The relationship between the master and the disciple
The notion of master-disciple relationship could be exemplified by Khidr-Moses story mentioned in Great Quran.
Moses sought neither teaching nor preaching from Khidr. Khidr also didn’t ask him to bring pen and paper. Khidr just told him: “follow me and let me move you forward step by step just the same as a mother or a foster.”
In Sufism, the followers attain some spiritual power from their master or mentor and it’s because of him that they could walk the mystical worlds path. It is not an obligatory, as it is said in Quran: “There is no compulsion in religion”. Instead, it is a mere spiritual subject with no way through it by materialistic people. The difference between a seeming religious person and a real path-seeker is like the difference between listening and comprehending and the distance between being and becoming. The relation of the disciple to the Master is as the patient to the doctor. The master of guidance and divine doctor will cure a patient who has reached the soul maturity. He will prescribe the medicine for who is aware of his disease and looks for the healing. The person who is clung to jangling of discussion and instruction, even if a savant, he is unable of perceiving such issues and would call the path of god superstition. The relationship between the disciple and the master in Sufism is not like a relationship between the Marja’ (religious reference) and the Muqallid (follower of marja’s opinions) which resembles more the relationship between a specialist lawyer and a person unaware of law. This nature of this relationship is not materialistic. The way is not an earthy, but a celestial one. It is a godly matter which has been, is and will be stable and unchanged from Adam to the last man. Thus the Human Will has nothing to do with it. It is the Right Way and the path of guidance.
Sufi community and its internal relations
In any social unit, the leader is directly or indirectly selected by the components of the unit. This act of selecting is based on the democracy principles and in order to support the rights of the society members. Thus, the leaders owe their power and authority as well as the political legitimation to people and their support. But the internal relations and structure of a Sufi community is not this type and is different from what the politicians think.
Human beings are members of a whole,
In creation of one essence and soul
If one member is afflicted with pain,
Other members uneasy will remain
The Sufi community is like a whole body whose members are made by a godly approach and a spiritual connection having roots in their hearts and souls and not by an arranged system.
Each mystic lives in the society exactly the same as other citizens. Each has a job such as Teacher, laborer, officer, farmer, lawyer, judge, martial and etc. and provide for his life. In respect of social and political attitude, one may be a conservative person and in the right wing, one may be a radical and in the left wing, one may support this or that political party, just like the other people, but they all have a common and distinct characteristic which is obeying one set of spiritual and humanistic principles learned from theosophy. Opposing or supporting the government, they try to be bound to the theosophical rules. In short, they will be tied up to these principles in any state and occupation. It is mentioned as “hand at work and heart at love” In the book “The Advice of Righteous”. Hand at work means the mentioned social role and heart at love is the Sufi community’s common point. This is a merely spiritual relationship between a varying and outspread crowd which are related to each other by a heartfelt bond. So if a mystic in any point of the world or country is harmed, other mystics, wherever they are, will inevitably show reaction. This unity and affinity is not such as the political assemblage, in which people take order of someone and do some specified actions, but the emotional and intrinsic connection prompts them to the same reaction. Being for or against the government, right or left, doctor or laborer, the divine power of Sufi community makes them to stand alongside against the aggressions. This is a spiritual action which is done spontaneously and not dependent on the order of anybody. Being for or against the government is an individual issue and has no relation with Sufism, but such hearty relationship and the unity in defense of beliefs is just spiritual and apart from political approaches.
Scale in Sufism
As said above, being the spiritual essence of religion, Sufism is such as any spiritual truth beyond the time and place and based on some stable and unchanged principles. But the way this truth reveals itself at each time or place is a variant determined by the time factor and this is the fundamental scale for Sufism which is based on the principle of form and meaning compatibility. In every time era, Sufism is exactly the saying, doing, manner and character of that era. So discussing the Sufism, none of the Sufis’ sayings and doings could be the scale, no matter at what level of spirituality he is. Since every era is dependent on the supreme master of that same era, even the surface aspect of sayings and doings of previous masters could not be a scale for Sufism.
The difference of approach in Contemporaneous Masters
Aulia Allah (friends of God) are of a single light. Imam Hasan and Imam Hosein are the same in truth. It means if each of them were in the era of other one, he would do just the same as him in respect of Imamat and guidance of people. But the Hosein approach is not permissible in Imam hasan’s era and vice versa. The Faith School in Imam Hosein era means the sayings and doings of Imam Hosein and the predecessor Aulia and it would be practicable with Imam al-Asr approval. Someone, even if obeying Imam Hasan and was a real devotee of him but refuse to obey Imam Hosein after Imam Hasan’s martyrdom, he was not called Shia’. Now if this person took an oath of allegiance to Imam Hosein but put Imam hasan as his role model, he would be a Shia’ but a reactionary and superficial one. Superficialism not only may include a special group, but also in Sufism, if a seeker relies on the past and does not put the time as the great scale, he will be a superficialist too.
Politics and Sufism
What is politics?
Politics has no comprehensive definition. It could be generally said that politics means a process of thinking and planning the strategies for management of matters and generally speaking is the method of achieving any kind of goal. According to this vast definition, politics is limitless and basically every person in any condition of ideological capacity and with different capabilities and available tools will think of or provide some plan to achieve his goals which is called politics. Each politics has its own rules. But today, it is conventionally limited to the relationship between government and people and since such relationship is mostly at the service of maintaining the power and authority of governors in any way possible, using this expression reminds fraud, lie and plot.
What is the meaning of being political?
In public image, being political means opposing the governing system; therefore, it is usually seen that people use “political” to refer the persons who are in conflict with government. However, being political is something different in government vision. During last three decades in Iran, the government has infused and promoted the supportive actions of people from itself as “being political” as well as an indication of the society’s maturity of thought and denying the political state of oppositions, admits no right to them and refers them as enemy, subversive and deserving of punishment. The consequence of such view is that the social administrators use the remove of this title from a person as an accusation in order to omit the rivals and any person or group whose actions are not compatible with their interests. In other words, if being political is in the direction of supporting the government, it will be accepted; otherwise it will be unacceptable and an illegal act.
Which factors do involve people with politics?
In every lawful system, people looking for the relief of mind and improve of the living state elect some persons for major managements to act as their representatives. The people living in such communities do trust the law and its suitable execution. They have confidence in the politicians and their performance as well as the supervisory centers and specially the freedom of speech and political parties. Thus, in case of any problem, they are free according to the citizen’s rights to assert their objection with no fear and anxiety. Consequently, they feel no need to involve in political issues and entrust such things to the politicians and the chosen representatives and avoid entering this field.
But in the societies deprived of law ruling, there will be a hidden anxiety about lack of rules and regulations involving the public mind and will be the main reason for the individualism of people in political affairs. In such communities, people either supporting or opposing the government willingly or unwillingly look for a savior to restore their rights by, instead of supporting a specific plan or charter. Therefore, being political in these communities is due to lack of the mental security. In other words, people suspect the existing situation resulting to fear and anxiety in different social aspects.
In this kind of communities, the people’s vote does not count and because of the threatening of authority owners, the people representatives are unable of presenting the people requests and requirements so people would look at them doubtfully and try to take the responsibility of supervising their representatives by themselves and step to the politics field. In fact, finding no common point between their own interests and government’s, they would all turn to the political individuals due to their significant social needs and distress. Accordingly, those who are proud of a society with political people are in a big mistake. Being a political society refers to a lawless government and insecure people. These will be followed by two opposite political approaches: a part of society step in opposition road and take a position in direction of reform and change; on the other hand, some chose to support the government to maintain their own interests. No matter which group, the common point of both is a hidden fear and a feeling of lack of security.
The interesting point is that the political authorities suffer this lack of mental security the most. Trying to overcome the fear arouse from this tension and change the insecure state to a stable one, they turn to the policy of controlling and omitting the people. Thus, they would show every single trivial social problem as a threat for the public security to justify their hostile behavior. The range of this control enlarges to the point that they allow themselves to intrude the privacy of people and interfere in the way of thinking, religion and beliefs of them. In so far as today we see that having faith and love to God also causes fear in government and is treated as a crime and protesting an individual in government is accounted as strike to the whole system.
To be continued…
Majzooban Noor Website
Part one’s Link :
https://majzooban.org/en/news-and-exclusive-content/276-clarification-and-answering-to-the-questions-part-one.html