04.11.08

Sufi?

Posted in New Age at 4:48 pm by nemo

SK comment suggesting I am a ‘sufi’

Sillykitty, I need to clarify the suggestion that in some fashion I am a ‘sufi’. It simply isn’t true. First, the term is undefined, and has no meaning, actually. But in the conventional sense, it can be very destructive to pin that label on anyone. It implies that a whole series of strangers are in a position to harrass you if you don’t conform to a standard that isn’t specified.
And calling people sufis is itself a sufi tactic of entrapment. The Shah people called Shakespeare a sufi, and proceeded to imply that anyone who wished to write poetry like that must submit to their regime!!! A whole slew of nonsense like that. Completely brazen tactics to confuse beginners.

So I categorically deny being a ‘sufi’. As proof positive of that I should say that any real sufi would go into hiding so deep noone would be able to penetrate his disguise. So if I am discussing the question at all in public it is proof I am merely a general student of culture and religion. Note my parallel discussions of Buddhism. I have met so-called sufis, in the seventies, along with people in a host of spiritual movements, across a spectrum. So what? As it happens I have learned more than is usual about sufism, the more to make me keep my distance.

Actually, if your read my book on World History, I have made my position exceedingly clear. I am a general ‘secularist’ (uh oh, another label), that’s it. So it is unfair to be dragged into all of that. My experience is of the uniquely malevolent character of the ‘sufis’ I encountered years ago. I would not wish anything to do with that, or any association. And my work would suffer instant bias if I were an adherent of any religion, cult, or suchwise group of associated believers, all too eager to entrap writers in their movements.

etc, etc….

Permalink