Woman as Human Being
Ibn ‘Arabî views human reality as one in all human beings, males and females. The two genders are equal in respect of humanity, and that is their origin. Maleness and femaleness are contingent states in the human essence. He says: “Humanity unites male and female, and in it maleness and femaleness are contingencies, not a human reality. He also says: “Eve was created from Adam, and so she has two determinations (hukm), that of male by virtue of origin and that of female by virtue of contingency. Based upon this gender equality as human being, woman is qualified to work in all the same occupations as a man does, and possesses the aptitude for the performance of all intellectual and spiritual activities.
Woman’s aptitude for knowledge
Sufi circles are, for the most part, open to both genders, looking upon woman as a human being and not as a female, as a person with exactly the same aptitude for divine closeness and gnosis as a man.
Ibn ‘Arabî further developed the vision of the sufis who preceded him, with regard to women being people of knowledge and gnosis. Woman manifested in his works in two aspects: the sufi and the Fikh fields.
Woman as spiritual teacher, guiding the shaykh, and spritual mother
This characterisation was personified by a woman of gnosis from Seville,
استمر في القراءة ←
For what moderns have agreed to call ‘progress’, is nothing else than a purely material progress; but its ‘benefits’, of which they are so proud, aren’t they illusory? most people today claim they increase their ‘welfare’ by this means; in my opinion, the aim they set to themselves, even if it was really reached, its not worth of so much effort; moreover, it seems a very debatable question whether they do reach it really, since the modern society constantly creates more artificial needs than it can satisfy…So people get never really satisfied and always run after a new material desire…
Other than that, it should be taken into account also that not all men have the same tastes or the same needs, and that there are still who would wish avoid modern commotion and the craving for speed, but who can no longer do so ?? Could anyone presume to maintain that it is a ‘benefit’ to these people to have thrust on them what is most contrary to their nature? It will be said in reply that there are few such men today, and this is considered a justification for treating them as a negligible quantity; in this, as in the field of politics, the majority arrogates to itself the right to crush minorities, which, in its eyes, evidently have no right to exist, since their very existence defies the egalitarian mania for uniformity.
But if the whole of mankind is taken into consideration, instead of merely the Western world, the question bears a different aspect: the majority i have just spoken of then becomes a minority. A different argument is therefore used in this case, and by a strange contradiction it is in the name of their ‘superiority’ that these ‘egalitarians’ seek to impose their civilization on the rest of the world, and that they bring trouble to people who have never asked them for anything; and, since this ‘superiority exists only from the material point of view, it is quite natural that the most brutal means are used to assert it. if the general public accepts the pretext of ‘civilization’ in all good faith, there are those fo
استمر في القراءة ←
Humanism, a group of philosophies and ethical perspectives , born in 16 th century, which emphasize the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers individual thought and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over established doctrine or faith, was the first form of what has subsequently become contemporary secularism; according to this definition, secularism is therefore, the negation of any principle higher than individuality, and the consequence is the reduction of the civilization, in all its branches, to purely human elements; this is the characteristic feature of the ‘ secular , profane point of view’ .
secularism necessarily implies the refusal to accept any authority higher than the individual, as well as any means of knowledge higher than individual reason; these two attitudes are inseparable, so it begins by denaturing religion and,
استمر في القراءة ←