famous part of bulleh shah peotry is pretty much malign Mullah, you mean literal abuse should be considered as maligning?
I meant that they talked against practices. Sufism is not about targeting people. Sufis believes one thing i.e talk against vice, but don't talk bad to the person who committed sins. For example take this line by Kabir Das:
Bura Jo Dekhan Main Chala,Bura Naa Milya Ko'ee
Jo Maan Khoja Apnaa,Tou Mujhse Bura Naa Ko'ee
[QUOTE]
I didnt said all the poetry of bulleh shah is blashphemous though few of his poetry is blashphemous, as i given you his poetry. I personally like his different doharray and kafis like :Kar Kattan wal dheyan kurray". if you think that is wrong explaination and out of context you can bring right explaination. and then somehow peer of bulleh shah was wrong.
[/QUOTE]
Its one opinion that you presented about the anger of Shah Inayat with Bulleh Shah. I always read the reason behind this anger was not giving due respect to Shah Inayat's guests. The source you gave also says that Shah Inayat not only forgave Bulleh Shah, but he also taught people after the death of Shah Inayat.
[QUOTE]
I am talking about rituals like roza, namaz and hajj, are these pre-concieved pre-concieved notions / rituals?
Mullah is somewhat relgeous figure but Mullah is not an authority so Malign mullah may be ok for few people.
if any of those sufis tried to counter exploitation by talking against religeous rituals, I would say they followed the most pathetic way.
and
[/QUOTE]
Poetry uses tashbeehat and sometimes taken poetry on face of it, gives different views. like 'Thag thagan de thag nu' can be interpreted as 'win the heart of Him, who has won heart of all'. Naughty children do try to do something mischievous to get the attention of those, who loved them. This is how I interpret those blasphemous lines. ( You may disagree to it).
[QUOTE]
please give me some example of exploitation through rituals? I am really not ok with this line.
[/QUOTE]
You know how Somnath got its treasure? Was that contributed by willing and rich people. It included last possessions of people, who were deceived by religious practices.
Sufis talked against the greed of Mullah using religion. They didn't generalise, but there is still majority of Mullahs in rural Pakistan, who get their bread and butter by emotional speeches, which can be proved unauthentic very easily. Fatiha, giving possession of the poor deceased person to Mullah (which could be used by the relative of deceased) are the examples that I observed in my surroundings.
shah inayat forgave buleh shah for doing blashphemous poetry, which you not ready to concede. Rather you are doubting the source by repeating perception you have. You can only doubt that sourc if you could bring equal strength of source then i would be in position to say "agree to disagree".
You know how Somnath got its treasure? Was that contributed by willing and rich people. It included last possessions of people, who were deceived by religious practices.
Sufis talked against the greed of Mullah using religion. They didn't generalise, but there is still majority of Mullahs in rural Pakistan, who get their bread and butter by emotional speeches, which can be proved unauthentic very easily. Fatiha, giving possession of the poor deceased person to Mullah (which could be used by the relative of deceased) are the examples that I observed in my surroundings.
i dont know that is true or not, even if it is true, it has nothing to do with fundamental rituals like Roza, Namaz and Hajj.
this one clearly contradict with one your shared by waris shah. "Wich hugrean dy feil karenday".
Waris Shah pointed vice in the society, he didn't point figure on a particular person. If Mullahs figured out anything about others, they had denied right of burial in their graveyard to such person.
shah inayat forgave buleh shah for doing blashphemous poetry, which you not ready to concede. Rather you are doubting the source by repeating perception you have. You can only doubt that sourc if you could bring equal strength of source then i would be in position to say "agree to disagree".
If Shah Inayat considered some of Bulleh Shah's poetry blasphemous, he might not have forgiven him. I got many versions which say that Shah Inayat was angry for not giving due respect of his guests by Bulleh Shah. Moreover, how Bulleh Shah was forgiven by Shah Inayat also says that Shah Inayat himself was not an orthodox rigid Mullah. He forgave Bulleh Shah, when Bulleh Shah came before him in disguise of dancing girl. Nach Nach ke yaar manana is again the strict concepts of clergy.
i dont know that is true or not, even if it is true, it has nothing to do with fundamental rituals like Roza, Namaz and Hajj.
Sufis don't talk against these basic fundamentals of Islam. All they say is if these things are done without khuloos and to show-off, they don't work. We also read in Quran that animals of sacrifice are Sha'aair ullah, but on other place in Quran, we read that God doesn't need flesh and blood of these animals, God needs Taqwa and Khaloos e dil. We see many people offering five times prayers and performing Haj every year carrying title of Alhaj, but in normal life they even don't earn halal rozi. Under the table transactions is their identity. Their homes carry sentences like 'Haaza min Fazl e Rabbi'. If someone raises voice against such things and let them know that their prayers with these practices would be of no use, then whats wrong in it, when Quran itself says such things.
Waris Shah pointed vice in the society, he didn't point figure on a particular person. If Mullahs figured out anything about others, they had denied right of burial in their graveyard to such person.
Unlike "Unknown Mullah" sufism says dont point finger at even wrong things, just look at yourself. however, then I would say no difference between "Unknown Mullah" and a sufi. Rather a "Unknown Mullah" is better in this context as he atleast dont sling mud on other.
its the hobby of Mullah to pronounce wajib ul qatl fatwa for anyone whose point of view differs from them, which is not the sufi thought. Sufi don’t criticize persons, but they do talk against the vice and exploitation in society. Sufism doesn’t fly in vacuum, sufi does interacts with human beings and they do care for people more than rituals unlike clergy.
If Shah Inayat considered some of Bulleh Shah's poetry blasphemous, he might not have forgiven him. I got many versions which say that Shah Inayat was angry for not giving due respect of his guests by Bulleh Shah. Moreover, how Bulleh Shah was forgiven by Shah Inayat also says that Shah Inayat himself was not an orthodox rigid Mullah. He forgave Bulleh Shah, when Bulleh Shah came before him in disguise of dancing girl. Nach Nach ke yaar manana is again the strict concepts of clergy.
Being an orthodox Mullah is one thing and being angry over poetry that is against Roza and Namaz (Batth Namazan, Chakkarr Rozay) is the other thing. Point still stands that why talk against Roza Namaz to convey the message of peace and harmony.
thats why I said that in that particular context Mullah is better as he dont sling Mud. if Mullah care about Roza Namaz that doesnt mean you should strat pointing finger at roza namaz.
what is sufism is anther story we can have separate discussion on this.
Being an orthodox Mullah is one thing and being angry over poetry that is against Roza and Namaz (Batth Namazan, Chakkarr Rozay) is the other thing. Point still stands that why talk against Roza Namaz to convey the message of peace and harmony.
They didn't talk against roza namaz in absolute terms. Their point of view is if you don't have clean intentions and you perform only these things, that won't lead you to salvation. The point is Sufis emphasize on human rights (huqooq ul ibaad) more than these fundamentals, whereas clergy is much strict towards basic fundamentals.
Sufis don't talk against these basic fundamentals of Islam. All they say is if these things are done without khuloos and to show-off, they don't work. We also read in Quran that animals of sacrifice are Sha'aair ullah, but on other place in Quran, we read that God doesn't need flesh and blood of these animals, God needs Taqwa and Khaloos e dil. We see many people offering five times prayers and performing Haj every year carrying title of Alhaj, but in normal life they even don't earn halal rozi. Under the table transactions is their identity. Their homes carry sentences like 'Haaza min Fazl e Rabbi'. If someone raises voice against such things and let them know that their prayers with these practices would be of no use, then whats wrong in it, when Quran itself says such things.
bhai jaan, as I already said we can have separate discussion what sufism is , you can see the book on bulleh shah by Yousaf Misali which says Bulleh shah condemned Shariah.
They didn't talk against roza namaz in absolute terms. Their point of view is if you don't have clean intentions and you perform only these things, that won't lead you to salvation. The point is Sufis emphasize on human rights (huqooq ul ibaad) more than these fundamentals, whereas clergy is much strict towards basic fundamentals.
no muqa, Haqooq ul ibaad is irrelevant here, just tell me why talk against Roza Namaz to convey the message of peace and harmony? Roza namaz is property of Mullah?, dont you offer prayer? dont you keep fast?
bhai jaan, as I already said we can have separate discussion what sufism is , you can see the book on bulleh shah by Yousaf Misali which says Bulleh shah condemned Shariah.
he might have condemned some sharia practices, but not in absolute terms. There are some practices in Sharia, which evolved over the time and are against the basic teachings of Islam. Bulleh Shah was not an illiterate person, who didn't know anything about religion and religious sentiment of masses to condemn religion and then liked by many even after centuries.
PS: You are welcomed to bring negative sides of Sufism. Every man-made ideology is subject to alteration and exploitation.
no muqa, Haqooq ul ibaad is irrelevant here, just tell me why talk against Roza Namaz to convey the message of peace and harmony? Roza namaz is property of Mullah?, dont you offer prayer? dont you keep fast?
I do offer these things and think positive of them, but if these things don't restrict me from other vices and exploiting humans, then I don't think I will be satisfied inside for performing that.
Bhai jaan, its ok if you are or not satisfied with these practices. but if you dont get satisfied then just leave these practices and tell the people "right" way to find satisifaction. Why point fingers at these practices?
its the hobby of Mullah to pronounce wajib ul qatl fatwa for anyone whose point of view differs from them, which is not the sufi thought. Sufi don’t criticize persons, but they do talk against the vice and exploitation in society. Sufism doesn’t fly in vacuum, sufi does interacts with human beings and they do care for people more than rituals unlike clergy.