Philosophy Now Forum

“All night, a man called out “God! God!”
Until his lips were bleeding.
Then the Adversary of mankind said, “Hey! Mr Gullible!
… How come you’ve been calling all night
And never once heard God say, “Here, I AM”?
You call out so earnestly and, in reply, what?
I’ll tell you what. Nothing!”

The man suddenly felt empty and abandoned.
Depressed, he threw himself on the ground
And fell into a deep sleep.
In a dream, he met an angel, who asked,
“Why are you regretting calling out to God?”

The man said, “ I called and called
But God never replied, “Here I AM.”

The Angel explained, “God has said,
“Your calling my name is My reply.
Your longing for Me is My message to you.
All your attempts to reach Me
Are in reality My attempts to reach you.
Your fear and love are a noose to catch Me.
In the silence surrounding every call of “God”
Waits a thousand replies of “Here I AM.”

― Rumi

Please present your argument in philosophical form.

I do not like them Sam I am; I do not like green eggs and ham.

-Imp

alan1000 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 02, 2025 12:21 pm Please present your argument in philosophical form.

At a dinner party, Robert Frost was seated next to a pretty young woman. "I love your new poem," she gushed. "But I'm not sure I understand it? What does it mean?"

"What do you want?" asked Frost. "For me to say it over again in worser English?"

---------------

Rumi, of course, is the great poet of Sufi descent. IN Nobel winner Orhan Pamuk's The Black Book (a novel) the columnist Celal espouses a theory that Rumi murdered Shams of Tabriz. Shams was Rumi's spiritual teacher. Although they knew each other for only a couple of years, they appear to have had an intense relationship that may (or may not) have been intensified by a homosexual affair. Devout Muslims dispute the gay lovers theory, which appears to be based on the intensity of their relationship, the poems referring to Shams as the "beloved", and the fact that they once spent 40 days alone together in a cave.

Shams then disappeared mysteriously, and Rumi searched for him for months. The two standard theories of the disappearance are that Rumi's youngest son murdered Shams, or that Shams simply decided to leave. Rumi's son had motive: Shams was an itinerant dervish preacher, of lower social class than Rumi. The possibility of a gay relationship between Shams and Rumi would also threaten the Rumi Cult, which apparently provided for his family. Also, Rumi gave his 12-year-old daughter to 60-year-old Shams as a wife, and she died under mysterious circumstances a few months later. She may have committed suicide, and Rumi's son may have sought revenge.

IN The Black Book Celal suggests that Rumi murdered Shams, and that his search for Shams was a sham, like O.J.'s search for his wife's killer. When I mentioned this to a friend the other day, she became angry about it (she's a big Rumi fan). Also, in the novel, Celal receives death threats from the devout for espousing his theory. Pamuk may have had a fictional character present the theory to protect himself from the ire of fanatical Sufi Rumi fans.

Alexiev wrote: ↑Sun Mar 02, 2025 3:39 pm

alan1000 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 02, 2025 12:21 pm Please present your argument in philosophical form.

At a dinner party, Robert Frost was seated next to a pretty young woman. "I love your new poem," she gushed. "But I'm not sure I understand it? What does it mean?"

"What do you want?" asked Frost. "For me to say it over again in worser English?"

That seems a bit silly. It's not unusual that rephrasing something in different words can add clarity. Obviously for many poems, the ambiguity is part of the point, but if someone wishes to make a philosophical point, it's fair to ask for more clarity.

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Sun Mar 02, 2025 3:59 pm

Alexiev wrote: ↑Sun Mar 02, 2025 3:39 pm

alan1000 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 02, 2025 12:21 pm Please present your argument in philosophical form.

At a dinner party, Robert Frost was seated next to a pretty young woman. "I love your new poem," she gushed. "But I'm not sure I understand it? What does it mean?"

"What do you want?" asked Frost. "For me to say it over again in worser English?"

That seems a bit silly. It's not unusual that rephrasing something in different words can add clarity. Obviously for many poems, the ambiguity is part of the point, but if someone wishes to make a philosophical point, it's fair to ask for more clarity.

Poems cannot be paraphrased. Their "meaning" includes the rhythm, rhyme, sound, and phrasing. (Whether they can be translated, as Rumi's are, is a different question.) Obviously, critics attempt to explicate the meaning of poems, and their efforts need not be futile or wasted. Frost's possibly apocryphal comment is meant mainly to be entertaining and funny. It isn't an argument-- it's a bon mot. I've noticed that humor often gets a short shrift on this forum; some members take themselves very seriously.

Alexiev wrote: ↑Sun Mar 02, 2025 5:38 pm

Why did you say it? It's a joke?

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑
Alexiev wrote: ↑
Why did you say it? It's a joke?

I said it for two reasons. First, I think it is an amusing anecdote and thought other posters might agree. Apparently I .misjudged.

Second. I think it's a strange comment about a poem. The Rumi poem is more interesting than most posts on this forum. Why would anyone ask for it to be restated in more boring and prosaic language? Why (as Frost suggested) say it over again in worser English?

My Rumi discussion is also an attempt to write an entertaining post. Arguing about whether Rumi murdered Shams has to be more interesting than rehashing determinism vs. free will for the thousandth time. I appear to be alone this opinion. Many posters seem more interested in the philosophy of BigMike than in the poetry of Rumi. Not I, though.

Another way to see God's invisible presence is to listen to WORDS.

''Truly, truly, I tell you,” Jesus declared, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

I Am is the silent invisible witness. You were here before your NAME



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sZZm_syuyQ

The ‘REAL YOU’ is Hidden (And Your Mind Won’t Let You See It)

the REEL me went fishing...

-Imp

Impenitent wrote: ↑Mon Mar 03, 2025 1:26 pm the REEL me went fishing...

-Imp

Love it!

"the REEL me went fishing..."

Stop being so sarCASTic, bro. If you keep it up, I'll start wanting a reBAIT every time I'm LUREd into reading one of your posts.

*drops mic*

promethean75 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 03, 2025 7:03 pm "the REEL me went fishing..."

Stop being so sarCASTic, bro. If you keep it up, I'll start wanting a reBAIT every time I'm LUREd into reading one of your posts.

*drops mic*

The Word is not merely a spoken word but a person, as later verses reveal, who is active in the world. This phrase indicates a distinct yet intimate relationship between the Word and God. The preposition "with" suggests a face-to-face relationship, implying both distinction and unity.

Uni verses.

Are you reading, or is reading you?

^^^ about that very thing, try this and see what it does to your brain piece.

Taken from: http://anti-dialectics.co.uk/Rest_of_Su ... Twelve.htm

"... These theorists would therefore begin to misinterpret a conventionalised social form as a secret code that powered the universe -- mastery of which would help those inducted into these mysteries to grasp the 'essential' aspects of 'Being', and then, perhaps, control it.



In that case, Traditional Theorists would start to see reality as not simply 'rational', but as ultimately linguistic, constituted by the word of some 'god', or other. In ancient creation myths, the 'Deity' spoke and everything not only popped into existence, it sprang to attention and thereafter always did as it was told. On this view, seemingly inert matter had the capacity to obey orders (but only when addressed with the right sort of language -- hence, once again, the search initiated by generations of sorcerers for these magical words), as if matter was intelligent and possessed of a will of its own. Nature thus came to be viewed as an enchanted 'Being', with 'secrets' hidden 'beneath the surface', and because of the distorted view of language that underpinned it, this 'Being' could be recruited to the 'legitimation' and 'rationalisation' of class power."

Brain piece/peace.

“When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace”

Metaphorically speaking of course.

Reality is already liberation. She is love.