Diebert wrote:
No, I think you value it mainly because it's ultimately the group you belong to that does speak out and which has to be valued over any other group. The true individual from which you speak has no problem arising anywhere it needs to arise. Actually all indications are that it could rise even more effectively in a more oppressive environment, thereby sharpening the masculinity of the individual.
People group together; it is our nature to do so. The individual, by definition, does not depend on any group. There are, of course, some circumstances that are more beneficial for his development; such as having the time and freedom to strengthen his mind. If he doesn't have that environment, he will find it much harder going.
Masculinity only survives in more open cultures because the feminine considers it ‘useable’ - but that can change very quickly. The West’s intensifying worship of the feminine could mean that anyone found openly lobbying for the continuance and advancement of the masculine mind - such as this forum does – will be stopped from pursuing its course.
All of humanity is grasping for that 'dash of masculinity', while at the same time demonizing it. The social world is a woman. So what? This is all way beyond any Islam/Christianity or Muslim/West clash.
No – the few humans left are fighting against the whole of society to preserve masculinity. The ‘dash’ left, mostly goes towards the development and furtherance of the feminine. “So what?†you ask – any “clash†between any peoples over religion, race, creed, money, love, land, or any other thing that takes their fancy, is totally irrational - being just another outpouring of the feminine. The only time a “clash†is acceptable, is when one form of irrationality is more destructive towards the survival of Truth than another – and, as I’ve already noted, having the time and freedom to think, is important for the development of an individual – so any culture that is able to provide such an environment is to be protected.
All we submit to can be called 'allah', 'god' or idol. Show me the difference with your Western individualist. At least Allah is still a more abstract concept that could be a stepping stone to a higher understanding and correct submission to Truth. A TV reality show or postmodern philosophy brings one even further away than Allah ever could.
Allah was not a true Great Man – he
was in the right place at the right time; which is the usual story for the men, and women who have made their mark on history.
A true Great Man is timeless – depending neither on history or politics, nor fashion or trends – he understands the same Truth, no matter the era or circumstances he finds himself in.
“A TV reality show†and “postmodern philosophy†both show up the pettiness of Western culture, but they are not taken seriously by the
whole of this culture. Only portions of our society take an interest in them, and out of them, only a few will dedicate their lives over to them completely.
A TV show, Allah, and academic philosophy are neither; good or bad, closer to, or further away from Reality than anything else in the universe. They could be useful tools in awakening the mind to an understanding of Reality; but then, it's hard to imagine a budding philosopher finding any of them inspiring for very long.
Again you fail to demonstrate any real difference with the West, since you have argued before than men and women in general are almost equally feminine. What difference would the Muslim 'separation' then really cause? At least you could say they still have a healthy suspicion going. For what reason you think there's an 'emotional pleasure' created by their lack of integration?
You remember the old saying, ‘opposites attract’ - only when there is that
difference can men and women enjoy their conquering of, and submitting to, each other. If everyone is the same, the dynamics goes out the window. For example, have a look at how Western culture is dealing with a change in the dynamics happening right now:
Western men are now going to a lot more trouble over their appearance than they did a few decades ago. Cosmetics and skincare for men are starting to compete for shelf space alongside the women’s range. Men’s fashion; once pushed to the back corner of department stores; now are strategically placed up front to impact even greater sales. Men can find ‘advice’ in a plethora of men’s and women’s magazines, Sunday supplements and TV shows – all directed at making him; slimmer, fitter, smoother skinned, have shinier hair, whiter teeth, fresher breath, a better lover, fashionably dressed, a great cook, sexier smelling, a fantastic dad – all to make him a more acceptable male to females. And men are lapping this up and not just young single men who will try anything to ‘pull a chick’, but married men with children, and even single older men who are looking for a companion to see out their last decades with. All these guys are racing to become ‘better men’, because that is what it takes to get, and keep a woman these days.
And what are women doing now that they are getting a run for their money in the feminine stakes? They are being pushed to become even more feminine than they were before. Whereas a few decades ago women considered themselves worthy of the social and political change brought about by the feminist movement, they now hanker for the days of yore when men would treat a ‘lady’ like a precious jewel wrapped in the most delicate silk. And if you don’t believe me, take a look at what women are wearing these days, and at what they read and the films they go to.
* * *
Men and women from all cultures have the same dynamic happening - they just express it in different ways. The West can afford, both economically and psychologically, to allow its people the freedom to express themselves as they do; whereas the Muslim culture have to resort to easier and simpler options, such as keeping the sexes apart.
...you'd notice that philosophers like for example Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi (13th century), ad-Din ash-Shiraz (17th century) and Muhammad Baqir as-Sadr (20th century) all have mastered the principles of causality and the Absolute, using much of the same reasoning... The religious phrasings that make the texts harder to read is not more of a problem than they are in the writings of Spinoza or Kierkegaard. Many current Muslim philosophers are aware of the Western nihilism and reject it, not because they fear Western freedom and individuality in itself but because they can see the black hole to where mindless application of these leads to. The challenge is for them to look for new ways, using the abstract notions of Allah, to lead people to know divine Reality. I wish them all the best.
Truth can be written in any language, but it will always say the same thing. It is extremely difficult for those who do not understand the Truth to distinguish what is true and what is false. Every now and then, someone may come up with something that sounds quite truthful, but if the rest of what he says is lies, you cannot consider him to be Wise. He's like a tiny drop of water surrounded by desert – no use to a man who thirsts for absolute certainty.
Men who lived their lives dedicated to their deep understanding of Truth, such as Kierkegaard, wrote with their future readers in mind - readers who would also understand the Truth.
Most people, from every culture, are caught in a cycle of life and death – making their lives, as well as their future lives a living hell. Because of this, I don’t “wish them the best†– I instead do my best to wipe from my own mind, and thereby all minds, the lies that keep Truth hidden.
Sue