May Allah bless all of you in great abundance. The days without NBF are never easy. May Allah gather all of us in the highest degrees of Jannatil Firdaws without account.
I’m definitely a perennialist and I’ve offered anyone a public conversation on the subject matter in the context of the Dawah crew. Wahdat al wujud, divine simplicity (Ibn Sina), Advaita in Hinduism, Hypostasis in Christianity, Fanaa, it’s the same mystical language
Because all humans have similarities such as having a face, two eyes, a mouth, and so on. Similarly, the human soul and mind has similarities across different humans. So we may find similarities from a mystical perspective also. However, religion is based on pophetic revelation and not personal experiences of humans. Just like humans may develop the same cardiac disease and experience the pain and discomfort. Or they may fall in love with their spouses and have similar emotional and mental states in love. Similarly humans can have similar kinds of mystical experiences just because they are all humans. However, when it comes it Islām it's based on prophetic revelation from God. Mytical experiences cannot 'surpass' the Divine revelations that came upon the prophets. Even from a non-mystical perspectives different religions may talk about God. And mystics in those religions may understand those beliefs from an experiencial perspective. But just like a non-mystic of a religion other than Islām is wrong similarly a mystic who goes against the Shariah or the right Aqeeda is wrong. In the Islamic tradition real Tasawwuf is grounded in Shariah, the principles of fiqh and all other Islamic sciences. All Islamic sciences are bounded by each other. Similarly Islamic Tasawwuf/Sufism is bounded by all other Islamic sciences. We have to base our beliefs and practice of the religion from the original prophetic sources agreed upon by our scholars. Just like the Mutakallimeen (scholars of Kalām) are bounded by the Shariah and all other Islamic sciences so are the Sufia (mystics). Without being a Muslim it makes no sense to go into the details of Tasawwuf. What is required from us is to adhere to the Shariah and the Sunnah. And to keep our heart in a state of remembrance of Allah. The purpose of Islām is not to enter certain spiritual states. There is no Vision of Allah in this world. The true vision of Allah is possible only in Jannah (paradise). We can't move away from the Quran and the Sunnah and the traditional Sunni scholars. Shaykh Ahmed Al-Faruqi As-Sirhindi corrected wahdatul-wujud to wahdatush shuhood. To mean that to say all is Him (Hama Oust) is not correct rather all is from Him (Hama az Oust). He strictly adhered to the Sunnah and wrote about the importance of making one's aqeeda as per the Ahle Sunnah wal Jama'at. May be you need a true Shaykh and an Ustad (Teacher) to guide you on the path of Tasawwuf that is based on the Shariah and Sunnah. For Islamic spiritual growth one has to first of all enter Islām.
Believing in everything is the same as believing in nothing. How can you as a perennialist resolve the contradictions that exist when you compare Abrahamic faiths to the Dharmic ones? One is a strictly monotheistic tradition while the other is plethora of ideas forcefully contained under single banner(for example Hinduism has a rang of traditions within its umbrella, from monotheistic traditions to pure polytheism) 🤷♂️
@@ismail_ali998it is true believeing in everything leads you nowhere. But exclusive doctrine are much more dangerous. Think about it if islam is the only true religion then which sect of islam is true and that is the same problem with Christianity and exclusive monotheistic religion that have so much contradiction in their scriptures. If monotheism is true then why is monotheistic god given pantheistic attributes like omnipresence which totally makes no sense. Religious scriptures contains different concept of theism all at the same time.
We don’t say to “ignore your intellect”-what we say is that what has properly been called the “Intellect” in traditional systems, the Nous in Greek or Buddhi in Sanskrit, is not the same as the discursive/reasoning faculty, which is limited to horizontal thinking, like a computer. All arguments against perennialism from a normative religious view begin with the same false assumption: that the perceiver and his perceptions are separate, and that the perceiver just passively experiences all his perceptions, which are outside of himself. The metaphysical reality is that there is no separation between a perceiver and his perceptions; there is something of the perceiver in all of his perceptions, therefore it is impossible that every single person can ‘objectively’ conclude truth in exactly the same way. There is no such thing as pure ‘objectivity’ in this world; least of all regarding the Absolute. If you claim that the Infinite can only approach men in one way, what you are claiming is that the Infinite is not infinite. Only the Absolute is absolute.
I respect your understanding. but, I believe Dr Shadee is more referring to the idea that if perennialism finds truth in everything, then that would make it inherently false because in reality there is one truth regardless of what you believe in we will all find out eventually. As Muslims we believe there is truth in all religions but there are also lies and corruption so we do not deny the books of other belief neither do we advocate for them. To negate intellect is to ignore contradictions in other religions. Regardless the Creator has a criteria to be determined as the all powerful and infinite but other religions contradict these attributes towards the Creator. It is our job to find the correct belief that does not contradict the Creator’s attributes and by using intellectual honesty and deductive thinking do you arrive at Islam as the true religion that attributes the Creator in the correct criteria with 0 contradictions, if you establish that, then it’s only logical to follow its teachings as you have objectively proved the Creators existence and the correct message then you proceed to follow the revelations and messengers he sent down. This is not ignorant thinking we accept truths in other religions the same way we accept a liar to recognise certain rights and wrongs, a Liar could tell you that hurting people is wrong and he is speaking the truth here but it does not mean I become a follower of him as he practices lies.
It takes great brains to understand the philosophy but unfortunately these religious folks are in lower consious segment. They don't even understand how god functions in this world. This is because they are worshipping a jealous diety.
That many religions recognize One Transcendent Truth and Reality, this is undeniable. There are two types of Perennialists; the Traditionalists that are characterized by many Muslim authors (Rene Guenon, Frithjof Schuon, Martin Lings, Seyyed Hossein Nasr), who remain faithful to their Islamic tradition whilst discussing the common ground between different religions, and then there's the Aldous Huxley type Perennialists, who are actually syncretists and theosophists; they pick and choose beliefs from different religions and melt them all together into one globalist worldview.
Do you believe the Traditionalists - Guenon, Lings, etc. - really are faithful Muslims? Do they not hold that there are multiple paths to salvation besides Islam - as long as one subscribes to the orthodox, traditional version of their respective faith?
@@froggydragon738 Well the Quran holds that if you sincerely search for the Truth, and all that you can find is Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism or any of the other ethical "monistic" religions, then you're saved. This is just pure Islam. Even Jews have a concept of Noahides who are saved despite not being Jewish, and Catholics say that God will include in his plan of salvation the Jews and Muslims because they believe in God. It's just that Islam is more universal. This is not to say that concepts like tawhid and trinity are equally valid. No. It just means that God will judge us according to our conditions and our understanding. Ultimately, there is nothing like Him, so whatever the theological doctrine might be, it's not even a spec of dust compared to the reality of God.
@@DarioHaruni Thanks for the response. Would you at least somewhat disagree with this view held by Schuon, Nasr, etc. that Tawhid and the Christian Trinity, for example, do not conflict on a metaphysical level? A quote from Nasr on inter-religious dialogue between Muslims and Christians from some years agon: "It is easier for the Christian mind, in which there is already the element of unity, although it is not much emphasized, to move towards a doctrine of Unity than for a Muslim to move towards the doctrine of a Trinity, which is incomprehensible to it on a popular or exoteric plane. On the metaphysical plane, of course, this has all been explained in the writings of the traditionalists, especially Frithjof Schuon. The doctrine of the Trinity, on a metaphysical plane, is in perfect accord with the doctrine of tawhîd, of Unity, and I for one have no qualm or difficulty about that whatsoever." I am not well-read on this topic, really, or if Traditionalist figures changed their views on certain topics throughout their lives.
JAK, Dr. Shadee. This topic is very sensitive, for the teachings of perrenialism are being promoted harshly in pseudo-sufi circles. As you mentioned, it has nothing to do with Sufism.
So many sects rose during Ottoman period from sufi orders that weren't cracked down on. Look at Sufi-Shia like Bektashis, Alevis etc Nowadays UAE using Sufis to push perennialist interfaith kufr
Very interesting talk. I absolutely love perennialism to be honest with you, and I have yet to see any of its proponents say that all religions are the same. Nor do I agree with you that perennialism is illogical. All it claims is that 1. There is a divine Ground of Being 2. That this Ground can be directly apprehended by human beings. 3. That human beings have both a phenomenal ego AND are identical with the divine Ground, and 4. That the supreme goal of life is to realize and identify oneself with the Ground. Nothing illogical there at all as far as I can see. But some of your criticisms made sense, thank you.
thanks for clarifying the zaituna college's issue. I have my reservations with Sheikh Hamza Yusuf regarding some of his views and how he has given dawah to Christians. He is a knowledgeable person who needs to go back to the orthodox sunni views. 10:10 isnt he maliki? He has stated this many times in the past.
With all due respect Sheikh, I think you’re misunderstanding “perennial philosophy.” While there are these hippy-dippy nonsense people who claim that all religions are true, that is not what Traditionalism is Guenon’s public writings did not make truth claims about religions (ie this religion is true because xyz reasoning). What he said is that the Truth (with a capital T in their context) is the Divine, and that people and societies must follow the Divine rather than vice versa. Divinity can be expressed within certain traditions, be it Christianity, Hinduism, Daosim, Islam, etc, but that does not mean they’re necessarily correct in everything they say (although, he would say that there are common fundamental truths expressed in many of these religions). The value of these religions is in the fact that they have a tradition which connects with the Divine, and have existed for thousands of years with people in them sincerely chasing that higher Truth. This was his big critique of New Age religions, since they have no real tradition they are just making it up as they go along, and they can’t follow any idea greater than themselves. One thing that makes Guenon and other perennialists writings hard to understand is their idiosyncratic vocabulary use that differs from how we might commonly use certain words I don’t mean to write this to convince anyone of Traditionalist philosophy, but to point out that there’s more than one reading of these ideas. I myself have reservations about certain aspects of it, but I do believe that Guenon was a devout Muslim who, after entering Islam, wrote in a way that was within the framework of an Islamic worldview, and that he wasn’t a gnostic as some falsely ascribe to him. He well and truly believed that Muhammad was the greatest and final Messenger from Allah. However, when writing as an intellectual, he merely meant to warn people of all religious traditions of the dangers of modernity and subsisting the divine to the material. Most of the European Muslims (meaning ethnically European) were influenced by Guenon’s writings so I think we should hold back before we ascribe kufr to something that might have an explanation behind it
That "most of the European Muslims were influenced by Guenon's writings" is not true. Maybe a large part of the old generation were up to 2001, but definitely now they are a tiny minority. Also that doesn't count for the UK where the amazing work of Sunnis like Shaykh AbdulQadir asSufi rahmatuLlahi 'alayhi prevented the infection of the guenonian virus. Anyway, numbers of followers are totally irrelevant. The beliefs expounded in Guenon's books are clearly kufr. Reading them and doubting of their kufr is kufr itself.
Asalamu Alaykum sheikh, i was wondering what your thoughts about what’s happening in palestine are and what is the islamic consensus on the jihad being done against occupation. جزاك الله خيرا
Wait can someone explain how a perennialist can still be a Muslim? Dr. Shadee says here "he's a Muslim, just a zindiq" isn't a zindiq like an atheist or something?
It would be useful to have a perennial apologist in the conversation to defend its stance (not me). Under what conditions does perennialism work? What are the preconditions for perennialism? I think perennialism is an amazing ideal but only for those that are actually already religious. First become a person of a single religion and call yourself that (Catholic, Hindu, Isalm, etc) then do the subsequent philosophical work to unify with others over shared ideas of the sacred. People refer to Aldous Huxley's book Perennial Philosophy as a primary source of what the philosophy calls for. From what I understand is that perennialism is an approach to relieving one's ignorance about other conceptions of truth. It's a unifying principle not a religious system.
@@SafinaSociety who are you to say it is kufr ? you are trating all muslim perenialist as kafir ? People that pray and say la ilaha ila Llah every day. don't you fear the Almighty ?
If you hold any belief that there is validity in worshipping idols, that reincarnation could be true, that polytheistic religions could be valid, and that *any* religion that doesnt hold the necessary beliefs of basic islamic aqidah is valid, that belief takes you outside the fold of islam according to every scholar of Islam within ahl al sunnah and even outside of it.@@inprincipioeratverbum1844
@@MohammadAshirIbnSaeed And so much so it doesn't matter what you say or think about them, they are still muslim. Deal with it. Even the prophet didn't judge people by what is in their heart, but by what they do Q68:7 - Surely your Lord ˹alone˺ knows best who has strayed from His Way and who is ˹rightly˺ guided.
I seriously think Sh. Hamza Yusuf has been interested in the Perennialist position for a long time, and not just because of donations to his college. Back in the 90s he did some lectures at Berkeley and elsewhere with Thomas Cleary who I personally heard Sh. Hamza say was probably a Perennialist, even as he disavowed their beliefs. He was also familiar with the work of Victor Danner, one of my college teachers back in the day. It seems that college town was a stronghold of Perennialist thought, with Frithjof Schuon and his group
Hmm... they *Muslims who claim they are perennialists* don't quote hadith? Shows the speaker's inadequate knowledge. Why don't you check Dr Chttick's Sufi Path of Knowlege's Hadith Index section? I think a person should be honest in their criticism. Disappointing.
God preserve shaykh Misry, but he doesn’t know anything about perennialism. Read anything from Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, his perennialism is on his sleeve- I don’t know of any scholar that doesn’t owe something to him …
There is a misrepresentation of the Akbariyya view of intellect. While it is true that there is the threefold division as indicated by Quran and Ahadith (e.g. when the prophet tells sayyidana Abu Bakr that he would not comprehend if he told him certain divine secrets etc.) yet no one has the permissal of running around and judging on which martabah a person is. It is introspective and can only be known by the 'arif himself. There is no taqlil of 'aql whatsoever. I advise or rather himby ask the beloved Shaykh Al-Masry to revisit his Futuhat readings. Perhaps a reading of the Fusus with a commentary like al-Qonawi might help. Wassalam alaykum wala ahli al quds al mazlum.
Not sure whether you paid attention or not but the Shaykh with all due respect to his good character and great work misconstrued even the divisions. The three levels (mind you though that Ash-Shaykh al-Akbar does not call it رتب but أنواع that is kinds) these are: 1. Dialectic / intellectual knowledge علم العقل (which comprises both common sense logic and what Shaykh Shadee called the understanding of "most of the Ulama", it has in fact nothing to do with that) 2. Empiric / experiential kndowlege علم الذوق that is science attained by "tasting" and experiencing the things by traversing different states dirrectly. Like the knowledge of love, the taste of honey etc. 3. Finally secretary knowledge علم الأسرار which is the only type that lies وراء طور العقل behind the limit of intellect, to be mentioned especially that it is not what is contrary to intellect. This is confined to saints and prophets أولياء و أنبياء. If this he denies then I really wonder how he explains the story of Khidr ans Sayydina Musa or the selfsame hadeeth you mentioned. I ask the Shaykh to state what he actually researched because his portayal of the"Akbari" position (there is no agreed upon Akbari tariqah or madhab) is highly superficial and frankly very Wahhabite - not to antagonize or other anyone - it just has a strong semblance he picked up that nonsense on the go. I humbly plead for a clarification
That was rhetorical. Saying you are not something is not a condemnation of it. "I'm not a perrenialist" carries no more condemnation than "I'm not a Hanafi."
It's clear that you did not touch any Guenon or Schuon book. You didn't get anything and even more, you are lying. Eventhough i am not a perennialist, i am christian, but i ve read a lot of perennialism and tasawwuf. Don't lie to people.
![A Problem With My Religion - (in defense of Perennialism) [Esoteric Saturdays]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SxWgOHNa-YU/mqdefault.jpg)
May Allah bless all of you in great abundance. The days without NBF are never easy. May Allah gather all of us in the highest degrees of Jannatil Firdaws without account.
Âmîn.
I’m definitely a perennialist and I’ve offered anyone a public conversation on the subject matter in the context of the Dawah crew. Wahdat al wujud, divine simplicity (Ibn Sina), Advaita in Hinduism, Hypostasis in Christianity, Fanaa, it’s the same mystical language
Even if its the same "mystical language", the meaning is contradictory.
Because all humans have similarities such as having a face, two eyes, a mouth, and so on. Similarly, the human soul and mind has similarities across different humans. So we may find similarities from a mystical perspective also.
However, religion is based on pophetic revelation and not personal experiences of humans.
Just like humans may develop the same cardiac disease and experience the pain and discomfort. Or they may fall in love with their spouses and have similar emotional and mental states in love. Similarly humans can have similar kinds of mystical experiences just because they are all humans.
However, when it comes it Islām it's based on prophetic revelation from God. Mytical experiences cannot 'surpass' the Divine revelations that came upon the prophets.
Even from a non-mystical perspectives different religions may talk about God. And mystics in those religions may understand those beliefs from an experiencial perspective.
But just like a non-mystic of a religion other than Islām is wrong similarly a mystic who goes against the Shariah or the right Aqeeda is wrong.
In the Islamic tradition real Tasawwuf is grounded in Shariah, the principles of fiqh and all other Islamic sciences. All Islamic sciences are bounded by each other. Similarly Islamic Tasawwuf/Sufism is bounded by all other Islamic sciences.
We have to base our beliefs and practice of the religion from the original prophetic sources agreed upon by our scholars. Just like the Mutakallimeen (scholars of Kalām) are bounded by the Shariah and all other Islamic sciences so are the Sufia (mystics).
Without being a Muslim it makes no sense to go into the details of Tasawwuf. What is required from us is to adhere to the Shariah and the Sunnah. And to keep our heart in a state of remembrance of Allah.
The purpose of Islām is not to enter certain spiritual states. There is no Vision of Allah in this world. The true vision of Allah is possible only in Jannah (paradise). We can't move away from the Quran and the Sunnah and the traditional Sunni scholars.
Shaykh Ahmed Al-Faruqi As-Sirhindi corrected wahdatul-wujud to wahdatush shuhood. To mean that to say all is Him (Hama Oust) is not correct rather all is from Him (Hama az Oust). He strictly adhered to the Sunnah and wrote about the importance of making one's aqeeda as per the Ahle Sunnah wal Jama'at.
May be you need a true Shaykh and an Ustad (Teacher) to guide you on the path of Tasawwuf that is based on the Shariah and Sunnah.
For Islamic spiritual growth one has to first of all enter Islām.
Believing in everything is the same as believing in nothing. How can you as a perennialist resolve the contradictions that exist when you compare Abrahamic faiths to the Dharmic ones? One is a strictly monotheistic tradition while the other is plethora of ideas forcefully contained under single banner(for example Hinduism has a rang of traditions within its umbrella, from monotheistic traditions to pure polytheism) 🤷♂️
Wahdatal wujud and divine simplicity are logically at odds with each other.
@@ismail_ali998it is true believeing in everything leads you nowhere. But exclusive doctrine are much more dangerous. Think about it if islam is the only true religion then which sect of islam is true and that is the same problem with Christianity and exclusive monotheistic religion that have so much contradiction in their scriptures. If monotheism is true then why is monotheistic god given pantheistic attributes like omnipresence which totally makes no sense.
Religious scriptures contains different concept of theism all at the same time.
We don’t say to “ignore your intellect”-what we say is that what has properly been called the “Intellect” in traditional systems, the Nous in Greek or Buddhi in Sanskrit, is not the same as the discursive/reasoning faculty, which is limited to horizontal thinking, like a computer.
All arguments against perennialism from a normative religious view begin with the same false assumption: that the perceiver and his perceptions are separate, and that the perceiver just passively experiences all his perceptions, which are outside of himself. The metaphysical reality is that there is no separation between a perceiver and his perceptions; there is something of the perceiver in all of his perceptions, therefore it is impossible that every single person can ‘objectively’ conclude truth in exactly the same way. There is no such thing as pure ‘objectivity’ in this world; least of all regarding the Absolute.
If you claim that the Infinite can only approach men in one way, what you are claiming is that the Infinite is not infinite. Only the Absolute is absolute.
I respect your understanding. but, I believe Dr Shadee is more referring to the idea that if perennialism finds truth in everything, then that would make it inherently false because in reality there is one truth regardless of what you believe in we will all find out eventually.
As Muslims we believe there is truth in all religions but there are also lies and corruption so we do not deny the books of other belief neither do we advocate for them.
To negate intellect is to ignore contradictions in other religions.
Regardless the Creator has a criteria to be determined as the all powerful and infinite but other religions contradict these attributes towards the Creator.
It is our job to find the correct belief that does not contradict the Creator’s attributes and by using intellectual honesty and deductive thinking do you arrive at Islam as the true religion that attributes the Creator in the correct criteria with 0 contradictions, if you establish that, then it’s only logical to follow its teachings as you have objectively proved the Creators existence and the correct message then you proceed to follow the revelations and messengers he sent down.
This is not ignorant thinking we accept truths in other religions the same way we accept a liar to recognise certain rights and wrongs, a Liar could tell you that hurting people is wrong and he is speaking the truth here but it does not mean I become a follower of him as he practices lies.
It takes great brains to understand the philosophy but unfortunately these religious folks are in lower consious segment. They don't even understand how god functions in this world. This is because they are worshipping a jealous diety.
That many religions recognize One Transcendent Truth and Reality, this is undeniable.
There are two types of Perennialists; the Traditionalists that are characterized by many Muslim authors (Rene Guenon, Frithjof Schuon, Martin Lings, Seyyed Hossein Nasr), who remain faithful to their Islamic tradition whilst discussing the common ground between different religions, and then there's the Aldous Huxley type Perennialists, who are actually syncretists and theosophists; they pick and choose beliefs from different religions and melt them all together into one globalist worldview.
And I bet the Aldous Huxley’s type of perennialism is very secular and liberal as well right? Haha
Guenon is not faithful at all to Islam. The ideas contained in his books, at least, are unequivocably kufr
Do you believe the Traditionalists - Guenon, Lings, etc. - really are faithful Muslims? Do they not hold that there are multiple paths to salvation besides Islam - as long as one subscribes to the orthodox, traditional version of their respective faith?
@@froggydragon738 Well the Quran holds that if you sincerely search for the Truth, and all that you can find is Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism or any of the other ethical "monistic" religions, then you're saved. This is just pure Islam. Even Jews have a concept of Noahides who are saved despite not being Jewish, and Catholics say that God will include in his plan of salvation the Jews and Muslims because they believe in God. It's just that Islam is more universal. This is not to say that concepts like tawhid and trinity are equally valid. No. It just means that God will judge us according to our conditions and our understanding. Ultimately, there is nothing like Him, so whatever the theological doctrine might be, it's not even a spec of dust compared to the reality of God.
@@DarioHaruni Thanks for the response. Would you at least somewhat disagree with this view held by Schuon, Nasr, etc. that Tawhid and the Christian Trinity, for example, do not conflict on a metaphysical level? A quote from Nasr on inter-religious dialogue between Muslims and Christians from some years agon: "It is easier for the Christian mind, in which there is already the element of unity, although it is not much emphasized, to move towards a doctrine of Unity than for a Muslim to move towards the doctrine of a Trinity, which is incomprehensible to it on a popular or exoteric plane. On the metaphysical
plane, of course, this has all been explained in the writings of the traditionalists, especially Frithjof Schuon. The doctrine of the Trinity, on a metaphysical plane, is in perfect accord with the doctrine of tawhîd, of Unity, and I for one have no qualm or difficulty about that whatsoever."
I am not well-read on this topic, really, or if Traditionalist figures changed their views on certain topics throughout their lives.
JAK, Dr. Shadee. This topic is very sensitive, for the teachings of perrenialism are being promoted harshly in pseudo-sufi circles. As you mentioned, it has nothing to do with Sufism.
So many sects rose during Ottoman period from sufi orders that weren't cracked down on.
Look at Sufi-Shia like Bektashis, Alevis etc
Nowadays UAE using Sufis to push perennialist interfaith kufr
Loving the new intro graphics!
Very interesting talk. I absolutely love perennialism to be honest with you, and I have yet to see any of its proponents say that all religions are the same. Nor do I agree with you that perennialism is illogical. All it claims is that 1. There is a divine Ground of Being 2. That this Ground can be directly apprehended by human beings. 3. That human beings have both a phenomenal ego AND are identical with the divine Ground, and 4. That the supreme goal of life is to realize and identify oneself with the Ground. Nothing illogical there at all as far as I can see. But some of your criticisms made sense, thank you.
thanks for clarifying the zaituna college's issue. I have my reservations with Sheikh Hamza Yusuf regarding some of his views and how he has given dawah to Christians. He is a knowledgeable person who needs to go back to the orthodox sunni views. 10:10 isnt he maliki? He has stated this many times in the past.
He is maliki
With all due respect Sheikh, I think you’re misunderstanding “perennial philosophy.” While there are these hippy-dippy nonsense people who claim that all religions are true, that is not what Traditionalism is
Guenon’s public writings did not make truth claims about religions (ie this religion is true because xyz reasoning). What he said is that the Truth (with a capital T in their context) is the Divine, and that people and societies must follow the Divine rather than vice versa. Divinity can be expressed within certain traditions, be it Christianity, Hinduism, Daosim, Islam, etc, but that does not mean they’re necessarily correct in everything they say (although, he would say that there are common fundamental truths expressed in many of these religions). The value of these religions is in the fact that they have a tradition which connects with the Divine, and have existed for thousands of years with people in them sincerely chasing that higher Truth. This was his big critique of New Age religions, since they have no real tradition they are just making it up as they go along, and they can’t follow any idea greater than themselves. One thing that makes Guenon and other perennialists writings hard to understand is their idiosyncratic vocabulary use that differs from how we might commonly use certain words
I don’t mean to write this to convince anyone of Traditionalist philosophy, but to point out that there’s more than one reading of these ideas. I myself have reservations about certain aspects of it, but I do believe that Guenon was a devout Muslim who, after entering Islam, wrote in a way that was within the framework of an Islamic worldview, and that he wasn’t a gnostic as some falsely ascribe to him. He well and truly believed that Muhammad was the greatest and final Messenger from Allah. However, when writing as an intellectual, he merely meant to warn people of all religious traditions of the dangers of modernity and subsisting the divine to the material. Most of the European Muslims (meaning ethnically European) were influenced by Guenon’s writings so I think we should hold back before we ascribe kufr to something that might have an explanation behind it
Exactly. It is an unfair criticism without a full understanding of the concepts.
That "most of the European Muslims were influenced by Guenon's writings" is not true. Maybe a large part of the old generation were up to 2001, but definitely now they are a tiny minority.
Also that doesn't count for the UK where the amazing work of Sunnis like Shaykh AbdulQadir asSufi rahmatuLlahi 'alayhi prevented the infection of the guenonian virus.
Anyway, numbers of followers are totally irrelevant. The beliefs expounded in Guenon's books are clearly kufr. Reading them and doubting of their kufr is kufr itself.
It is important though, when writing as a Muslim, to explicitly state what is false, and this is something that never appears in their works.
@@SafinaSociety I don’t think you read Rene Guenon
Asalamu Alaykum sheikh, i was wondering what your thoughts about what’s happening in palestine are and what is the islamic consensus on the jihad being done against occupation. جزاك الله خيرا
Wait can someone explain how a perennialist can still be a Muslim? Dr. Shadee says here "he's a Muslim, just a zindiq" isn't a zindiq like an atheist or something?
It would be useful to have a perennial apologist in the conversation to defend its stance (not me). Under what conditions does perennialism work? What are the preconditions for perennialism? I think perennialism is an amazing ideal but only for those that are actually already religious. First become a person of a single religion and call yourself that (Catholic, Hindu, Isalm, etc) then do the subsequent philosophical work to unify with others over shared ideas of the sacred. People refer to Aldous Huxley's book Perennial Philosophy as a primary source of what the philosophy calls for. From what I understand is that perennialism is an approach to relieving one's ignorance about other conceptions of truth. It's a unifying principle not a religious system.
Is a Unifying Princple a bad thing?
Thank you!
Doctor Shadee El Masry. I will ask you a simple question. Did you read anything from Rene Guenon? If yes, which book did you read?
THEY DIDNT PUT A WIRE IN MY SONS HEAD
I KNOW THEY HAVE BEEN TEACHIN HIM BEHAVIOUR TRICKS
BUT IM TRYING 2 F THEM UP BIG TIME CAUSE THAT IS JUST AS BAD
Sh. Hamza Yusuf has openly stated that he is not a perenneliast, it's on video.
Correct. That's not a condemnation of its kufr tho. Where did he ever say it's kufr?
@@SafinaSociety who are you to say it is kufr ? you are trating all muslim perenialist as kafir ? People that pray and say la ilaha ila Llah every day. don't you fear the Almighty ?
If you hold any belief that there is validity in worshipping idols, that reincarnation could be true, that polytheistic religions could be valid, and that *any* religion that doesnt hold the necessary beliefs of basic islamic aqidah is valid, that belief takes you outside the fold of islam according to every scholar of Islam within ahl al sunnah and even outside of it.@@inprincipioeratverbum1844
@@inprincipioeratverbum1844 It doesn't matter what they do it's still kufr
@@MohammadAshirIbnSaeed And so much so it doesn't matter what you say or think about them, they are still muslim. Deal with it. Even the prophet didn't judge people by what is in their heart, but by what they do
Q68:7 - Surely your Lord ˹alone˺ knows best who has strayed from His Way and who is ˹rightly˺ guided.
Hello can you talk about rene guenon/sheykh abd al wahid yahya?
Who are the top modern perennialist rn?
Seyyed Hossein Nasr
I seriously think Sh. Hamza Yusuf has been interested in the Perennialist position for a long time, and not just because of donations to his college. Back in the 90s he did some lectures at Berkeley and elsewhere with Thomas Cleary who I personally heard Sh. Hamza say was probably a Perennialist, even as he disavowed their beliefs. He was also familiar with the work of Victor Danner, one of my college teachers back in the day. It seems that college town was a stronghold of Perennialist thought, with Frithjof Schuon and his group
Sh. Hamza Yusuf has openly stated that he is not a perenneliast, it's on video
@@----f good! I’m glad that’s clear.
The skipping of silence parts of the video is kind of distracting, I would prefer to just leave those in and unedited.
ONCE IM OFFLINE THEYRE SCREWED
What is the book by Mark Sedgwick that was mentioned?
Interesting!
Hmm... they *Muslims who claim they are perennialists* don't quote hadith? Shows the speaker's inadequate knowledge. Why don't you check Dr Chttick's Sufi Path of Knowlege's Hadith Index section? I think a person should be honest in their criticism. Disappointing.
Have you actually studied the perennialist philosophers?
God preserve shaykh Misry, but he doesn’t know anything about perennialism. Read anything from Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, his perennialism is on his sleeve- I don’t know of any scholar that doesn’t owe something to him …
Nasr to me doesn’t even fit in this age. He has brought forth ancient wisdom into our times.
There is a misrepresentation of the Akbariyya view of intellect. While it is true that there is the threefold division as indicated by Quran and Ahadith (e.g. when the prophet tells sayyidana Abu Bakr that he would not comprehend if he told him certain divine secrets etc.) yet no one has the permissal of running around and judging on which martabah a person is. It is introspective and can only be known by the 'arif himself. There is no taqlil of 'aql whatsoever. I advise or rather himby ask the beloved Shaykh Al-Masry to revisit his Futuhat readings. Perhaps a reading of the Fusus with a commentary like al-Qonawi might help. Wassalam alaykum wala ahli al quds al mazlum.
Not sure whether you paid attention or not but the Shaykh with all due respect to his good character and great work misconstrued even the divisions. The three levels (mind you though that Ash-Shaykh al-Akbar does not call it رتب but أنواع that is kinds) these are: 1. Dialectic / intellectual knowledge علم العقل (which comprises both common sense logic and what Shaykh Shadee called the understanding of "most of the Ulama", it has in fact nothing to do with that) 2. Empiric / experiential kndowlege علم الذوق that is science attained by "tasting" and experiencing the things by traversing different states dirrectly. Like the knowledge of love, the taste of honey etc. 3. Finally secretary knowledge علم الأسرار which is the only type that lies وراء طور العقل behind the limit of intellect, to be mentioned especially that it is not what is contrary to intellect. This is confined to saints and prophets أولياء و أنبياء. If this he denies then I really wonder how he explains the story of Khidr ans Sayydina Musa or the selfsame hadeeth you mentioned. I ask the Shaykh to state what he actually researched because his portayal of the"Akbari" position (there is no agreed upon Akbari tariqah or madhab) is highly superficial and frankly very Wahhabite - not to antagonize or other anyone - it just has a strong semblance he picked up that nonsense on the go. I humbly plead for a clarification
Plz state where Hamza Yusuf says or allude to that he's not shafi or hanafi or follow a madhab thanks
That was rhetorical. Saying you are not something is not a condemnation of it. "I'm not a perrenialist" carries no more condemnation than "I'm not a Hanafi."
@@SafinaSociety i thought so
Sh Hamza is a Maliki
It's clear that you did not touch any Guenon or Schuon book. You didn't get anything and even more, you are lying. Eventhough i am not a perennialist, i am christian, but i ve read a lot of perennialism and tasawwuf. Don't lie to people.
#freepalestine