Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of The Multiversal Communist Collective ::: mcc.MarkFoster.red

Hammer, Sickle, and Star Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ in Arabic calligraphy Fist
Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of
The Multiversal Communist Collective
Mōšẹh ʾẠhărōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl
Píra ū Mur°šida Bullet Píra ū Mur°šida Bullet Pír–o–Murshid
The Muliversal Communist Collective
١. Brief Prologue to the Monograph
Social fiction tackles significant issues using a diverse assortment of entertainment media. From a social scientific perspective, the value of social fiction should not be underestimated. The subjects addressed, sometimes cloaked in metaphor, can frequently be serious and consequential. Among these fictional genres is online gaming. Like visual and performance art, such gaming frequently brings to the fore topics only rarely considered in customary lifeworlds (German/Deutsch, Lebenswelten [MP3]). Methodologically, the agency or instrumentality of forming and governing fictional nations will be studied ethnographically—utilizing participant observation—and through Heartfulness Inquiry™ and The Echoing Practice™, two variations on essentially the same mode of phenomenological analysis (MP3; Arabic, تَحْلِيل مِن العِلْمُ الظَّوَاهِرُ [MP3], taḥ°līl min ʾal•ʿil°mu ʾal•ẓẓawāhiru).
This narrative, while largely a fictional piece, is grounded in a personal interpretation of historical and social facts. The reflections mirror only the provisional thoughts of the author. He occupies, heavens forbid, no station more exalted than the dust of the Earth, while his plane of knowledge lies beneath the lowly ant. The writer’s musings are an applied exercise in concrete utopianism, a concept originally delineated by the German Marxist philosopher Ernst Bloch (MP3), 1885–1977, and subsequently adapted by the British Marxist philosopher and libertarian communist Roy Bhaskar (MP3; Hindi, राम रॉय भास्कर [MP3], Rāma Rôya Bhāskara), 1944–2014. However, my characterizations express neither official religious statements nor authoritative theoretical expositions. The considerate reader will, I hope, regard my interpretations as nothing more than personal reflections.
The perspectives which have been diagramed in the libertarian communist pentad (Arabic/ʿArabiyyaẗ, خُمَاسِيَّة الشُيُوعِيَّة اللِيبِرْتَارِيَّة [MP3], ẖumāsiyyaẗ ʾal•šuyūʿiyyaẗ ʾal•lībir°tāriyyaẗ) intertwine Islamic studies (Arabic/ʿArabiyyaẗ, دِّرَاسات الإسْلاميَّة [MP3], Ddirāsāt ʾal•⫰Is°lāmiyyaẗ) with a preternatural praxis through a multifaceted engagement with the integrated fivefold perspectives of Marxism–Luxemburgism (MP3), Autonomist Antifa (MP3; Arabic, مُضَادّ الفَاشِيَّة مِن الاِسْتِقْلَال [MP3], muḍād ʾal•fāšiyyaẗ min ʾal•ʾis°tiq°lāl), a socialism from below (Arabic, اِشْتِرَاكِيَّة مِن الأَسْفَل [MP3], ʾištirākiyyaẗ min ʾal•⫯as°fal) from third–camp Trotskyist Hal Draper and others, Roy Bhaskar’s critical realism (Arabic, وَاقِعِيَّة النَقْدِيَّة [MP3], wāqiʿiyyaẗ ʾal•naq°diyyaẗ), and, ultimately, Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw and Patricia Hill Collins’ intersectional theory (Arabic, نَظَرِيَّة التَقَاطُعَات [MP3], naẓariyyaẗ ʾal•taqāṭuʿāt):
Tetrad
Luxemburgism is a libertarian communist tendency which, unlike some other left–libertarian currents, acknowledges the importance of direct as well as indirect democracy. Autonomist Antifa is a libertarian communist commitment to fighting fascism and its evil cousins. Third–camp socialist Hal Draper’s (1914–1990) socialism from below, later adopted by those within a broad cross section of currents, is a left–libertarian disavowal of the socialism from above, or so–called authoritarian socialism, which single handedly wreaked havoc upon the 20ᵗʰ century. Authoritarianism has, albeit inscrutably to me, been appealing to some people. It may be fine if the authoritarians are your friends. What happens, however, if the authoritarians are your sworn enemies? A libertarian communism will, optimistically, promote a positive view of communism and its wonderful possibilities.
Bhaskarian critical realism is a metatheory, and a critical theory which, like all critical theories, incorporates a methodology for emancipation or, in this case a methodology for actualizing libertarian communism. Intersectionality, staunchly grounded in Black feminism (Arabic, نِسْوِيَّة مِن السَوْدَاء [MP3], nis°wiyyaẗ min ʾal•saw°dāˁ) and critical race theory (Arabic, نِسَائِيَّة الْعُنْصُرِيَّة النَقْدِيَّة [MP3], nisā⫯yiyyaẗ ʾal•ʿunṣuriyyaẗ ʾal•naq°diyyaẗ), is legal scholar Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw’s (born 1959) critical theory. According to this perspective, individuals and cohorts of one sort of another will traverse diverse intersections on a metaphorical roadmap or, according to sociologist Patricia Hill Collins (born 1948), will experience a matrix of domination and, hopefully, shifting the center of their thinking to the other or the socially marginalized and, thereby, reconstructing their knowledge.

Return to the Page Menu.

٢. Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS)
Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ (Arabic, طَرِيقَة البَاهُوِيَّة [MP3]), the namesake of Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (Arabo–Persian/Fārisiyyaẗ–ʿArabiyyaẗ, حَضْرَت سُلْطَان بَاهُو [MP3]), ʿalay°hi ʾal•ssalām (Arabic, عَلَيْهِ السَّلَام [MP3], “upon Him be peace” or “AS”), was established as a parabolic Western branch of Bāhū’s (AS) Punjabi (Persian/Fār°sí, پِنْجَابِی [MP3], Pun°ǧābí; Urdu/ʾUr°dū, پُنْجَابِی [MP3], Pun°ǧābí; Shahmukhi Punjabi/Šāha Muḱ°hí Pun°ǧābí, پَنْجَابِی [MP3], Pan°ǧābí; and Guramukhi Punjabi/Guramukhī Pajābī, ਪੰਜਾਬੀ [MP3] order. Although it is an imaginative and a fictitious, not a genuine, spiritual path, its rudiments, excluding the statements concerning this servant’s position of leadership, have been gathered from historical source materials.
Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of The Multiversal Communist Collective™ (MP3) is a puppet nation which has remained attached to Ṣạdiyqiym hạ•Dāṯ hạ•Bāhāʾiyṯ of Democratic Communist Federation (Spartakusland)™. The Collective belongs, on NationStates, to The Confederation of Traditional Socialist Nations, which is a signatory to The Vanguard Treaty. Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ™, Path of Bāhūism, governs The Multiversal Communist Collective™ through a radical proletarian democracy. In such a radical democracy, dissent would not simply be tolerated but also encouraged and embraced. The perspectives of various races, genders, ethnicities, castes, and tribes must be lovingly welcomed. Etymologically, radical comes from the Latin/Lingua Latīna, rādīcālis (MP3), “having roots.” A radical democracy would connect us with our shared roots in the nondual ground state.
Therefore, Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ, as a communist internationalist coördinating body, now enters the sil°silaẗ (Arabic, سِلْسِلَة [MP3], “chain”) of Qād°riyyaẗ (Arabic, قَدْرِيَّة [MP3], “capability” or “competence”) and the branch sil°silaẗ (Arabic, سِلْسِلَة الشُعْبَة [MP3], sil°silaẗ ʾal•šuʿ°baẗ) of Sarvari (originally Persian, سَارْوَارِی [MP3], sār°vārí; Urdu, سَارَوَارِی [MP3], sārawārí; Hindi, सरवारी [MP3], saravārī; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਰਵਰੀ [MP3], saravarī; or Arabization/تَعْرِيب [MP3]/taʿ°rīb, سَارْوَارِيَّة [MP3], sār°wāriyyaẗ, “mastery”). (For excellent guidance on pronouncing the Arabic letter ʿay°n [Arabic, عيْن; MP3], as in ʾal•šuʿ°baẗ, listen to this well–explained MP3 audio presentation.) Now, utilizing the traditional Arabic numbering system, the following enumeration incorporates multiple additional linguistic renderings of Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ:
  1. Ṭaríqat•i Bāhū⫯ýiýat (Arabo–Persian, طَرِیقَتِ بَاهُوِئیَت [MP3])
  2. Roh•i Bahu (Tajik/Toçikī, Роҳи Баҳу [MP3])
  3. Ṭaríqata•i ʾal•Bāhū⫯ýiýýata (Arabo–Urdu, طَرِیقَتَِ البَاهُوِئیَّتَ [MP3])
  4. Ṭaríqah di Bāhū⫯ýiýat (Arabo–Pashto/Bāš°tuwiyyaẗ–ʿArabiyyaẗ, طَرِیقَه دِ بَاهُوِئیَت [MP3])
  5. Bāhū Lārah (Pashto/Paṣ̌°tū/Pax̌°tū, بَاهُو لَارَه [MP3])
  6. Rastū mān Bāhū⫯yiyat (Sindhi/Sin°dʱī, رَسْتُو مَان بَاُوِئيَت [MP3])
  7. Bāhū dē Tāriḱaṭa (Arabo–Shahmukhi Punjabi/Ban°ǧābiyyaẗ Šāh Mūkiyyaẗ–ʿArabiyyaẗ, بَاهُو دَے تَارِکَٹَ [MP3])
  8. Bāhū dē Tārikaṭa (Arabo–Guramukhi Punjabi/Ban°ǧābiyyaẗ Ǧūra Mūkiyyaẗ–ʿArabiyyaẗ, ਬਾਹੂ ਦੇ ਤਾਰਿਕਟ [MP3])
  9. Bāhū Dharama (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਬਾਹੂ ਧਰਮ [MP3]; or Shahmukhi Punjabi, بَاهُو دهَرَمَ [MP3])
  10. Bāhū Dharma (Hindi/Hiṃdī, बाहू धर्म [MP3]; Nepali/Nēpālī, बाहू धर्म [MP3]; Marathi/Marāṭhī, बाहू धर्म [MP3]; Bengali/Bāṅāli/Bānlā, বাহূ ধর্ম [MP3]); or Telugu, బాహూ ధర్మ [MP3])
  11. Pāhū Tarmā (Tamil/Tamiḻ, பாஹூ தர்மா [MP3])
  12. Bahu Pasu (Japanese/Nihongo, バヘゥ パス [MP3])
  13. Pahu T’ongno (Korean/Han’gugŏ/Chosŏnmal, 바후 통로 [MP3])
  14. Bahu Pāt (Sinhalese/Siṁhala, බහු පාත් [MP3])
  15. Bahui Čanaparh (Armenian/Hayeren, Բահուի ճանապարհ [MP3])
  16. Đường Bắhủ (Vietnamese/Tiếng Việt [MP3])
  17. Bahu Putʹ (Russian/Rossiâne, Баху Путь [MP3])
  18. Bahu Šlâh (Ukrainian/Ukraí̈nsʹka Mova, Баху Шлях [MP3])
  19. Bahu Pateka (Macedonian/Makedonski, Баху Патека [MP3])
  20. Bahu Ceļš (Latvian/Latviešu Valoda [MP3])
  21. Bahu Vojo (Esperanto [MP3])
  22. Bahu Voyo (Ido [MP3])
  23. Bahu Dao (Lingwa de Planeta/Lidepla/LdP [MP3])
  24. Dẹrẹḵiyṯ hạ•Bāhūʾiyṯ (Hebrew/ʿIḇəriyṯ, דֶּרֶכִית הַבָּהוּאִית [MP3])
Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of The Multiversal Communist Collective™ is a continuation of the order or path founded by Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS). Here is a listing of that path’s name, the Qadri–Sarvari Path, in numerous languages:
  1. Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Qād°riyyaẗ ʾal•Sār°wāriyyaẗ (Perso–Arabic/ʿArabiyyaẗ–Fārisiyyaẗ, طَرِيقَة القَاْدرِيَّة السَارْوَارِيَّة [MP3]).
  2. Ṭaríqat•i Qād°riýah•i Sār°vāriýah (Arabo–Persian, طَرِيقَتِ قَادْرِیِیَهِ سَارْوَارِیَهِ [MP3]).
  3. Roh•i Kadri•i Sarvari (Tajik, Роҳи Кадрии Сарвари [MP3]).
  4. Ṭaríqata•i ʾal•Qād°riýýah ʾal•Sārawāriýýah (Arabo–Urdu/⫯Ur°diyyaẗ–ʿArabiyyaẗ, طَرِيقَتِ القَادْرِیَّہ‬ السَارَوَارِیَّہ‬ [MP3]).
  5. Qādriyah–Sārwāriyah Ṭarīqū (Sindhi, قَادرِيَه ـ سَاروَارِيَه طَرِيقُو [MP3]),
  6. Kādarī–Sāravārī Māraga (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਕਾਦਰੀ–ਸਾਰਵਾਰੀ ਮਾਰਗ [MP3]).
  7. Qādarí–Sāravārí Māraga (Shahmukhi Punjabi, قَادَرِی ـ سَارَوَارِی مَارَگَ [MP3]).
  8. Qadərəyə–Sarəvārəyə Mänəgädə (Amharic/ʾÄmarəña, ቃድርይ፡ሳርቫርይ መንገድ [MP3]).
  9. Tarīkata kā Kādarī–Sāravārī (Hindi, तरीकत का कादरी–सारवारी [MP3]).
  10. Mārga kā Kādarī–Sāravārī (Hindi, मार्ग का कादरी–सारवारी [MP3]).
  11. Qadri–Sarvari yolu (Turkish/Türk dili [MP3]).
  12. Patthara ala Kādarī–Sāravārī (Marathi, पत्थर अल कादरी–सारवारी [MP3]).
  13. Pathēra ēra Kādarī–Sārabārī (Bengali, পথের এর কাদরী–সারবারি [MP3]).
  14. Pattār āl Kādrī–Sārvārī (Malayalam/Malayaḷaṃ, പത്താര് ആല് കാദ്രീ–സാര്വാരീ [MP3]).
  15. Kātarī–Sāravārī iṉ Pātai (Tamil, காதரீ–ஸாரவாரீ இன் பாதை [MP3]).
  16. Kādarī–Sārvārī yokka Mārgaṁ (Telugu, కాదరీ–సర్వారీ యొక్క మార్గం [MP3]).
According to tradition, ʿAb°d ʾal•Qad°r ʾal•Ǧīlāniyy (Arabic, عَبد القَادْر الجِيلَانِيّ [MP3]), the Ṣūfiyy (Arabic, صُوفِيّ, Ṣūfiyy [MP3], wearingwoolengarments) forebear of Bāhū’s (AS) own ṭarīqaẗ, was the founder (Arabic, الإِمَام [MP3] ʾal•⫰imām, “the pathfinder”) of Qād°riyyaẗ. He is commonly referred to as pír•i pírān (Persian, پِیر‎ِ پِیرَان [MP3], “elder of elders.”) Etymologically:
  1. ʿAb°d (Arabic, عَبْد [MP3]) is “servant” or “slave.”
  2. Qād°riyyaẗ is a form of Qadir (Arabic, قَدِر [MP3]) or Qad°r (Arabic, قَادْر [MP3]), “capable one” or “competent one.” Qadir, from ʿAb°d ʾal•Qad°r ʾal•Ǧīlāniyy, is one of the 99 names of ʾAllꞌah (Arabic, اللّه [MP3], “the God”), sub°ḥān°h wa•taʿātaỳ (Arabic, سُبْحَانْه وَتَعَالَى [MP3], “glorified and exalted be He” or “SWT”)
  3. Ǧílān (Persian, جِيلَان [MP3]), “courtier,” is a city in Iran (Persian, اِیْرَان) [MP3], ʾIý°rān or, though not a transliteration I prefer, ʾÍrān).
  4. Ṭarīqaẗ (Arabic, طَرِيقَة [MP3]), ṭaríqat (Persian, طَرِیقَت [MP3]), ṭaríqata (Urdu, طَرِیقَتَ [MP3]), or tarīkata (Hindi, तरीकत [MP3]) is “path” or, by implication, “order.”
Bāhū (AS) was born in the Punjabi village of Angah (Urdu, انْگَہ [MP3], ʾAn°gāh), Soon Valley (Urdu, وَادْیِ سُون [MP3], Wād°ý•i Sūn), Khushab District (Urdu, ضِلَع خُوشَابَ [MP3], Ḍilaʿ H̱ūšāba), which is located in today’s Pakistan (Urdu and Shahmukhi Punjabi, پَاكِسْتَانَ [MP3], Pākis°tāna, “land of the pure”). Indeed, He spent His entire life, circa 1628–1691, in present–day Pakistan’s portion of a not–yet–divided Punjab (originally Persian, پُنْجَاب [MP3], Pun°ǧāb; Urdu, پُنْجَابَ [MP3], Pun°ǧāba; Shahmukhi Punjabi, پَنْجَابَ [MP3], Pan°ǧāba; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਪੰਜਾਬ [MP3], Pajāba; or Arabic, Ban°ǧāb, بَنْجَاب [MP3]), the “five–waterland).
Map of the Punjab
These five waters—rivers or waterways—which flow through the Punjab are themselves tributaries of the Indus River (Urdu, دَرِیَائَِے سِنْدْھَ [MP3], Dariýā⫯ýē Sin°d°ha; Shahmukhi Punjabi, سِنْدْھَ دَرِیَا [MP3], Sin°d°ha Dariýā; or Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਿੰਧ ਦਰਿਆ [MP3], Sidha Dariꞌā). The tributaries are:
  1. the Jhelum River (Urdu, دَرِیَائَِے وْیِتْھَ [MP3], Dariýā⫯ýē V°ýit°ha)
  2. the Chenab River (Urdu, دَرِیَائَِے چَنَابَ [MP3], Dariýā⫯ýē Čanāba)
  3. the Ravi River (Urdu, دَرِیَائَِے رَاوِی [MP3], Dariýā⫯ýē Raví)
  4. the Sutlej River (Urdu, دَرِیَائَِے سُتْلِجَ [MP3], Dariýā⫯ýē Sut°liǧa)
  5. the Beas River (Urdu, دَرِیَائَِے بْیَاسَ [MP3], Dariýā⫯ýē B°ýāsa)
Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS) was, truly, among the leading Exemplars of the Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy (bhakti as originally Sanskrit/Saṃskrtam, भक्ति [MP3], bhakti; or Urdu, بْھَکْتِی [MP3], b°haḱ°tí, “involvementwith the beloved) movement. Bāhū (AS), “with ʾAllꞌah” (SWT), was a very cleverly, indeed an astutely, formulated portmanteau (Arabic, مَزْج كَلِمَات [MP3], maz°ǧ kalimāt, “blending of words”) by His own mother, Bíbí Rās°tí (Persian, بِیبِی رَاسْتِی; MP3, “Grande Dame; MP3, Truth”), ssalām ʾAllꞌah ʿalay°hā (Arabic, سَّلَام الله عَلَيْهَا; MP3, “peace of ʾAllꞌah be upon her” or “SAA”). In her exalted rank as the virtuous, sanctified, and loving mother of Bāhū (SA), she abides, without any question which I can conceive, within the company of the most blessed women to have inhabited the Earth.
Linguistically, Bāhū (AS), was formulated by Bíbí Rās°tí (SAA) from the Indo–European “bā” (Persian, بَا; MP3, “with”) and the Semitic “Hū” (Arabic, هُوَ; MP3, Huwa or , “He,” i.e., ʾAllꞌah, , SWT). Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS) wrote principally in Persian. Some samples of his writing have been incorporated into this monograph. Others will eventually follow, but here is the first example:
With one dot, Bā Hū [Perso–Arabic, بَا هُو; MP3, “With He”) becomes Yā Hū [Arabic, يَا هُو; MP3), “O He”] ….
And Bāhū is always steeped in the remembrance of Yā Hū.
〜 Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū. Source unknown. Undated.
Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū
Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū
I humbly regard that hallowed Soul of the Perfect Man (Arabic, إِنْسَان الكَامِل [MP3], ⫰In°sān ʾal•Kāmil, “the complete man”), Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS), viewed within the specialized context of Sufism (Arabic, تَصَوُّف [MP3], Taṣawwuf, or صُوفِيَّة [MP3], Ṣūfiyyaẗ; Persian, تَصَوُّف [MP3], Taṣavvuf; or Urdu, تَصَوُّفَ [MP3], Taṣawwufa) as well as in the broader scope of Islam (Arabic, إسْلَام [MP3], ⫰Is°lām, “peaceful surrender”), to be a Lesser Apostle―a Muǧaddad (Arabic, مُجَدَّد [MP3], “Reformer or Renewer”) or a Ġaw°ṯ ʾal•Zamān (Arabic, غَوْث الزَمَان [MP3], “Intercessor, Aid, or Succor of the Time”). He was also a pure and receptive Crescent to the resplendent and magnificent Star of the Prophet Muḥammad (Arabic, النَبِيّ مُحَمَّد [MP3], ʾal•Nabiyy Muḥammad), ṣallaỳ ʾAllꞌah ʿalay°hi wa•ssalām (Arabic, صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَّلَام [MP3], “blessings of ʾAllꞌah be upon Him and peace” or “SAAW”).
Neither Sunniyy [Arabic سُنِّيّ; MP3] nor Šīʿiyy [Arabic شِيعِيّ; MP3] am I.
Heartburn doth afflict me with one as with the other.
The moment I cast them aside, my pathway was arid no longer. I found myself immersed in the ocean of divine Unity.
Many souls, poorly prepared for that which awaited them, dived into the ocean and drowned. Few swam successfully to the journey’s end.
Only those who held steadfastly to the Master’s hand reached the heavenly shore in safety.
〜 Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū, Kalām•i Bāhū (Perso–Arabic, کَلَامِ بَاهُو [MP3], Discourse of Bāhū). Translation significantly modified by Mark A. Foster (Mōšẹh ʾẠhărōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹl).
Furthermore, Bāhū (AS) has made these promises to His beloveds:
O seeker! Thou hast requested permission [Arabic, إِجَازَة, ⫰iǧāzaẗ] for mystical knowledge [Arabic, مَعْرِفَة; MP3, maʿ°rifaẗ] from me ….
I will show thee ʾAllꞌah as nearer to thee than thy jugular [or life] vein [Persian, šāh°rag شَاهْرَگ; MP3], king vein].
〜 Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū, Kalām•i Bāhū. Translation significantly modified by Mark A. Foster (Mōšẹh ʾẠhărōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹl).
Whoso shalt study this book, by day and by night, with sincerity, certitude, and conviction will become cognizant of the divine [Arabic, إِلهِيّ; MP3, ⫰ilhiyy] secrets. He hath no need of instruction [Arabic, تَلْقِين; MP3, tal°qīn] and teaching [Arabic, تَعْلِيم; MP3, taʿ°līm] from a living guide [Arabic, مُرْشِد; MP3], mur°šid].
〜 Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū, Kalām•i Bāhū. Translation significantly modified by Mark A. Foster (Mōšẹh ʾẠhărōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹl).
Lesser Apostles or Prophets, ʿalay°him ʾal•ssalām (Arabic, عَلَيْهِم السَّلَام [MP3], “upon Them be peace” or “AS”), may appear under the authority of each major Prophet. Subject to the sovereign Will of ʾAllꞌah (SWT), that sacred pattern repeats itself again and again. Some lesser Prophets (AS), or all of Them during the present age, might not be divinely authorized to readily broadcast their Stations. In either case, a lesser Prophet will remain a lesser Prophet whether, on the one hand, He is afforded the permission, either by ʾAllꞌah (SWT) or by the Major Prophet, to forthrightly promulgate His Own Prophethood to the entirety of humanity, or, on the other, He is requested to maintain His silence on this matter. To my understanding, one of the many eminent personifications of lesser Prophethood, even though He not usually recognized as occupying that position, is the Apostle Paul.
A Man born Saul (Hebrew, שָׁאוּל‬ [MP3], Šāʾūl, “Asked or Prayed for”) became, in a mere moment, the Apostle Paul (Latin, Paulus [MP3]; or Hellēnistikḗ Koinḗ/Common Greek, Παῦλος [MP3], Paûlos, “Small or Humble One”), AS. Thus, Paul (AS) was transmuted from making a heavenly request to attaining self–annihilation (Arabic, فَنَاء [MP3], fanāˁ). Paul, AS, was not among the twelve apostles. No matter, after an initiatory Revelation (Arabic, تَنْزِيل [MP3], Tan°zīl), as with each Prophet, from the Major Prophet Jesus Christ (Latin, Christus Iēsus [MP3]; Common Greek, Ἰησοῦς Χριστός [MP3], I̓ēsoûs Christós; or Hebrew, יֵשׁוּעַ הַמָשִׁיחַ [MP3], Yēšūʿạ hạ•Māšiyḥạ, “Deliverance, the Annointed One or Messiah”), AS, on a journey, Paul, AS, proclaimed Himself an Apostle or a Messenger of ʾAllꞌah (SWT). In Paul’s (AS) heavenly epistles, He elucidated His Authority.
The Prophet–Founder of the Bahá’í Faith (Arabic, دِّيَانَة البَهَائِيَّة [MP3], Ddiyānaẗ ʾal•Bahā⫯yiyyaẗ, “Judgment or Religion of the Glory”), Bahá’u’lláh (Arabic, بَهَاء الله [MP3], Bahāˁ ʾAllꞌah, “Glory of God”), AS, lived 1817–1892. He precisely and indubitably wrote, “Whoso layeth claim to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years, such a man is assuredly a lying impostor.… Whosoever interpreteth this verse otherwise than its obvious meaning is deprived of the Spirit of God and of His mercy which encompasseth all created things. Fear God, and follow not your idle fancies.” (Bahá’u’lláh. Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh. Shoghi Effendi, translator. Wilmette, Illinois: Bahá’í Publishing Trust. 1980. Page 233.) Bahá’u’lláh (AS), while not negating the possibility of lesser Prophets arising during His Age, stated that None would proclaim Their Stations.

Return to the Page Menu.

٣. ⫯Uway°siyy transmissions
An ⫯Uway°siyy (Arabic, أُوَيْسِيّ [MP3]) transmission is an inward, spiritual communication from Muḥammad (Arabic, مُحَمَّد [MP3], “Praised One”), SAAW, or other divine beings, to a true believer. Unlike other supernal conveyances of grace or sanctity, neither the bestower of the blessing nor its direct recipient are in immediate physical proximity. This heavenly act of consecration occurs in the sublime stations of concealment, not in the lowly realms of exposition. ⫯Uway°siyy transmissions may thus be considered, in a certain sense, to be miraculous. However, the mechanisms operating in the celestial, empyrean Kingdom vis–à–vis the mundane, prosaic dimensions should be correlated only with the greatest vigilance and reservation.
By “⫯Uway°siyyūna” (Arabic, أُوَيْسِيُّونَ [MP3], “⫯Uway°siyys”) or “⫯Uway°siyyīna” (Arabic, أُوَيْسِيِّينَ [MP3], “⫯Uway°siyys”), some form of spiritual or divine permission and authorization (Arabic, إِجَازَة [MP3], ⫰iǧāzaẗ) is conveyed, while in occultation (Arabic, غَيْبَة [MP3], ġay°baẗ), from an outwardly unrelated entity (whether living, deceased, or possibly mythological), such as Muḥammad (SAAW), the legendary or semilegendary ʾal•H̱iḍ°r (الخِضْر [MP3], “the Green One”), glorified departed šuyūẖ (شُيُوخ [MP3], “elders” or “shaykhs”), the founders (Arabic, أَئِمَّة [MP3], ⫯a⫯yimmaẗ, “pathfinders” or “imams”) of Ṣūfiyy orders, the Guardian Angels (Arabic, مَلَائِكَة الحَارِسَة [MP3], Malā⫯yikaẗ ʾal•Ḥārisaẗ)—Who reside everlastingly in the Valley of Wonderment (Persian, وَادِیِ حَیْرَت [MP3], Vādí•i Ḥaý°rat) of the Seven Valleys (Persian, هَفْت وَادِی [MP3], Haf°t Vādí)—among other illustrious beings.
In a outstretched spectrum of diverse mentally abstracted and otherworldly states, including inspired dreams (Arabic, مَنَامَات [MP3], manāmāt; or أَحْلَام [MP3], ⫯aḥ°lām) and luminous visions (Arabic, رُؤًى‏ [MP3], ru⫯waṇỳ; تَصَوُّرَات [MP3], taṣawwurāt; or بَصِيرَات [MP3], baṣīrāt), vows of loyalty, like the oaths of fealty once owed by knights to medieval European feudal lords, are pledged one to another. Yet, a state of receptivity in spirit is negated by gullibility. Since these events transpire in unconscious states, hypnotic suggestability may be maximized. It, consequently, becomes important, in my view, that the recipient of the transmission does not allow the bane of wishful thinking, the vainglorious fancies of self–delusion, or the deathbed of egotism to dominate, and unwittingly distort, one’s purported spiritual gnosis or knowledge. Self–deception instigates many downfalls from grace.
The following words are either cognates or transliterations of gnosis (Ancient Greek/A̓rchaía Hellēniká, γνῶσις [MP3], gnō̂sis):
  1. ġunūṣ (Arabic, غُنُوص [MP3]).
  2. g°nūsís (Persian, گْنُوسِیس [MP3]).
  3. g°ýāna (Urdu, گْیَانَ [MP3]) or, phonetically, g°nūsisa (گْنُوسِسَ [MP3]).
  4. gənōsiys (Hebrew, גְּנוֹסִיס [MP3]).
  5. ḡənʾọsiys (Yiddish/Yiyḏiyš, גְנאָסִיס [MP3]).
  6. gunōshisu (Japanese, グノーシス [MP3]).
  7. kŭnosisŭ (Korean, 그노시스 [MP3]).
  8. gǎnwù (Mandarin Chinese/Zhōngguó•Guānhuà, 感悟 [MP3]).
  9. jñāna (Sanskrit, ज्ञान [MP3]).
  10. jñāna (Hindi, ज्ञान [MP3]).
  11. jñāna (Nepali, ज्ञान [MP3])
  12. jñāna (Kannada/Kannaḍa, ಜ್ಞಾನ [MP3])
  13. jñāna (Gujarati/Gujarātī, જ્ઞાન [MP3])
  14. jñāna (Bengali, জ্ঞান [MP3]).
  15. jñāna (Assamese/Asamīẏā, জ্ঞান [MP3]).
  16. jñānamu (Telugu, జ్ఞానము [MP3]).
  17. znanie (Russian, знание [MP3]).
  18. znannâ (Ukrainian, знання [MP3]).
  19. ỵāṇ (Thai/P̣hās̄ʹā Thịy, ญาณ [MP3]).
  20. nhean (Khmer/Pheasaeakhmer, ញាណ [MP3]).
  21. gnosis (Norwegian/Norsk [MP3]).
The term ⫯Uway°siyy is named in honor of the illustrious saint, ⫯Uway°s ʾib°n ⫯Amīr ʾib°n Har°b ʾal•Qar°niyy (Arabic, أُوَيس اِبْن أَمِير اِبْن هَرب القَرْنِيّ [MP3]). He was the first individual known to have experienced such a celestial encounter. Although ⫯Uway°s ʾal•Qar°niyy lived as Muḥammad’s (SAAW) contemporary, the two of them never had the opportunity to meet face to face. Yet, tradition has it, this venerated Yemenite (Arabic, يَمَنِيّ [MP3], Yamaniyy) was the recipient, within the world of spirits (Arabic, العَالَم الأَرْوَاح [MP3], ʾal•ʿālam ʾal•arwāḥ), of a sacred transmission from the beloved Muḥammad (SAAW). Linguistically, ⫯Uway°s (Arabic, أُوَيس) translates as “wolf cub,” while ʾal•Qar°niyy (Arabic, القَرْنِيّ) is “the centenary.” The blessing of encountering his presence (Arabic, حَضْرَة [MP3], ḥaḍ°raẗ) may be enumerated as one of my many aspirations for the world to come.
The ⫯Uway°siyy transmission of Muḥammad (SAAW) to Bāhū (AS) can be compared, mythopœically, to Mōšẹh ʾẠhărōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl (Hebrew and Yiddish, מֹשֶׁה אַהֲרֹן בֶּן הֶערְשֶׁעל [MP3]). After engaging in a spiritually blessed ⫯Uway°siyy communion with Bāhū (AS), bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl fictively converted from Judaism (Hebrew, הָיַהֲדוּת [MP3], Yạhăḏōṯ]) to Islam becoming the founding píra ū mur°šida or pír–o–murshid (Urduized Persian and Arabic/ʿArabiyyaẗ–⫯Ur°diyyaẗ–Fārisiyyaẗ, پِیرَ و مُرْشِدَ [MP3], “elder andguide possessingintegrity, maturity, and sensibility”) of Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ). Other South Asian versions are: pīra aura murśida (Hindi, पीर और मुर्शिद [MP3]) or pīra–o–murśida (पीर-ओ-मुर्शिद [MP3]), piẏāra ēbaṁ murśida (Bengali, পিয়ার এবং মুর্শিদ [MP3]), and piyar oppaṁ marṣid (Malayalam, പിയർ ഒപ്പം മർഷിദ് [MP3]).
Customarily, bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl is addressed, all too politely, as píra ū mur°šida. This Urdu honorific is a compound phrase from Persian, Urdu, and Arabic. Pír (Persian, پِیر [MP3]) may be translated as either “elder” or “elderly man.” It fits. Surely, at old with “full–blown osteoporosis” and osteoarthritis, bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl is fast becoming an old man. Ū (و [MP3]), like ʾaw°ra (Urdu, اوْرَ [MP3]), is an Urdu term for “and.” Mur°šid (مُرْشِد [MP3]), finally, remains an Arabic designation for a guide possessingintegrity, maturity, and sensibility.” That being said, bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl remains a simple and modest man. Oblivious to any of the élitist frivolities of temporal salutations, he regards himself, above all, as a servant of ʾAllꞌah (SWT) and of all humanity (Arabic, عَبْد الله وَالبَشَرِيَّة الجَمْعَاء [MP3], ʿab°d ʾAllꞌah wa•ʾal•bašariyyaẗ ʾal•ǧam°ʿāˁ). There is, in his heart, no more blessed honor.
Another example of an alleged ⫯Uway°siyy transmission from Bāhū (AS) is Hazrat Syedna Riaz Ahmed Sarkar Gohar Shahi (Urdū, حَضْرَةَ سِیُدْنَا رِیَاضَ احْمَد سَرْکَارَ گُوھَرَ شَاہهِی, Ḥaḍ°rata Siýýid°nā Riýāḍa ʾAḥ°mada Sar°ḱāra Guhara Šāhí [MP3], his holy “presence, our master,” gardens ofparadise, highly prized, overseer, jewel, imperial”). Intriguingly, before I was consciously aware of beloved Bāhū, I sought out and received personal instruction in my suburban Kansas City home (Olathe, Kansas) from an initiator authorized by Guhar Šāhí (commonly, Gohar Shahi). This amiable disciple, whose name I unfortunately cannot recall, represented the American Sufi Institute (P.O. Box 462, Devil’s Lake, North Dakota, U.S. 58301).
The American Sufi Institute has since been renamed as ʾal•Mar°ḱāza–i Rūḥāní Qād°rí (Urdu, المَرْکَازَِ رُوحَانِی قَادْرِی [MP3], “the Spiritual Center of Qād°rí”) (Qādirīyyaẗ Sufism). This group, which is presently located in the Jamshoro District (Urdū, ذِلَاِ جَامْشُورُو [MP3], Ḏilā-i Ǧām°šūrū) of Sindh (Sindhi, سِنْڌ [MP3], Sin°dʱ; or Urdu سنْدْھ [MP3], Sin°d°h), Pakistan, regards Guhar Šāhí as a Sunni Muslim (Arabic, مُسْلِم السُنِّيّ [MP3], Mus°lim ʾal•Sunniyy)—not as a mih°dí (Urdu, مِہْدِی [MP3]), mih°dí (Persian, مِهْدِی [MP3]), mehdi (Turkish [MP3]), mehdi (Azerbaijani/Azərbaycan dili [MP3]), or mah°diyy (the original Arabic, مَهْدِيّ [MP3], rightlyguided one”) or as a messiah (Hebrew, מָשִׁיחַ [MP3], māšiyḥạ; Arabic, مَسِيح [MP3], masīḥ; Persian, مَسِیحِی [MP3], masíḥí; or Urdu, مَسِیحَا [MP3], masíḥā, “anointed one”) —who welcomed people from all religions.
Guhar Šāhí taught various meditative practices, including a type of taṣavvur-i ism-i ḏāt. As I discovered much later, Šāhí, after claiming to have an inward, mystical experience with Bāhū (AS), founded a similarly ⫯Uway°siyy branch of Ṭaríqat•i Qād°riýah•i Sār°vāriýah, ʾal•Qād°riyyaẗ ʾal•Mun°tahiyyaẗ [Arabic, القَادرِيَّة المُنْتَهِيَّة [MP3], the Qādirīyyaẗ of the Uttermost], and he developed a comprehensive set of teachings and methods called the Religion of God (Persian, دِينِ اِلَهِی [MP3], Dín-i ʾIlāhí; or Urdu, دِينَِ اِلَہِی [MP3], Dína•i ʾIlāhí). Šāhí was, I feel, my personal gateway to Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS).
Born in 1941, and now controversially deceased (2001 or 2003), Šāhí is, I believe, my fellow traveller under Bāhū’s watchful eye:
When … Guhar Šāhí was at about the age of thirty four, at one night Ḥaḍ°rata Barí ʾImāma [Urdu, حَضْرَتَ بَرِی اِمَامَ; MP3] (tomb is in Islamabad [Urdu, اِسْلَامَ آبَادَ; MP3, ʾIs°lāma ʾÂbāda, “city of Islam”]) appeared before him and said: “My son your time has come, you must go to the shrine of Sulṭān Bāhū [AS] to receive the Spiritual Knowledge.” … Guhar Šāhí then left every thing and went to shrine of Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū [AS]. Sulṭān Bāhū [AS] appeared before him and advised to read and act upon his book Nūr ʾal•Hudaỳ ([Arabic, نُور الهُدَى; MP3] Light of Guidance) and go to Saý°h°wan Šaríf [Urdū, سَیْہْوَن‬ شَرِيف; MP3], … Dadu [Urdu, دَادُو, Dādū [MP3], Pakistan.… Guhar Šāhí read the book Nūr ʾal•Hudaỳ and went … for self-purification and peace of heart ….
… [Guhar Šāhí] then left his work, family and parents and went to Šūr°ḱuṭ [Shahmukhi Punjabi, شُورْکُوٹ; MP3], where under the blessful supervision of … Sulṭān Bāhū [AS] … [Guhar Šāhí] made the book Nūr ʾal•Hudaỳ (a book written by … Bāhū [AS] …), his journey’s companion. He then went to Sayhwan Šarīf for self-mortification and peace of heart and spent a period of three years in the mountains of Sayhwan Šarīf and the [southern Indian] forest of Lālbāg [Kannada, ಲಾಲ್‌ಬಾಗ್; MP3, “Red Garden”] in self-Purification. Thereafter pursuant to a revelation … [Guhar Šāhí] went to Ǧām°šūrū where he spent six months in a hut behind the Textbook Board Building, henceforth, with Almighty ʾAllꞌah’s will, His Holiness … [Guhar Šāhí] started to shower Almighty ʾAllꞌah’s creation with his benevolence.
Guhar Šāhí. 2009. Retrieved on September 8, 2013. Some words have been transliterated differently and spellings corrected.
I have never claimed to be Mih°dí. The false claimant [Younus AlGohar?, Urdu, یُونُسَ الگُوھَرَ [MP3], Ýūnusa ʾal•Gūhara, Joseph the Jewel] is misled and ill–fated. However, I have elaborated the signs of True Mih°dí. As Holy Prophet Muḩammad (peace be upon him) has a seal of prophet at his back. Likewise on the back of Mih°dí there will be a seal of Mih°dí which will be embossed by veins and whosoever will posses this sign we will accept him as … Mih°dí.
〜 Guhar Šāhí, A Great Spiritual Personality. October, 1999. Retrieved on September 8ᵗʰ, 2013. Some words have been transliterated differently and spellings corrected.
With profound humility and spirituality, Bāhū (AS), in His lovingkindness or compassion (Pāli, मेत्ता [MP3], mettā; Sanskrit and Hindi, मैत्री [MP3], Marathi, मैत्री [MP3], maitrī; Nepali, मैत्री [MP3], mitratā; Gujarati, મિત્રતા [MP3], mitratā; Sinhalese, මිත්රත්වය [MP3], mitratvaya; Thai, มิตรภาพ [MP3], mitrp̣hāph; Telugu, మైత్రీ [MP3], maitrī; or Khmer, មេត្តា [MP3], mettea), remains, until the end that has no end, the collective center of our obeisance. Although I only recognized the eminent Bāhū’s (AS) personal agency back in 2011, he may have been with me, guiding me, during my entire life. For some inexplicable reason of the heart, I was drawn, above all else, to beloved Bāhū (AS) while immersed in studying the exalted tradition of Sufism. He was truly one the most exceptional Beings to inhabit the Earth in the last several centuries.
Mā šāʾa ʾAllꞌah! or Mashallah (Arabic, مَا شَاءَ الله! [MP3], “ʾAllꞌah has willed it!”) Later, on September 8ᵗʰ, 2013, during a reflection, I realized that Bāhū (AS) reached out, though Guhar Šāhí, and connected more deeply with me. Šāhí was, at the time, still, unarguably, in this world:
Click on the Image to Enlarge

Return to the Page Menu.

٤. Joining Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ
Bis°mi ʾAllꞌah or Bismillah (Arabic, بِسْمِ الله [MP3], “In the Name of ʾAllꞌah”): In the Name of ʾAllꞌah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful! (Arabic, ﷽! [MP3], bis°mi ʾAllꞌah ʾal•Rr°ḥ°man ʾal•Rraḥīmi!). Should one yearn to drink from the life–giving waters or, more literally, wellspring of life (عَيْن الحَيَاة,ʿay°n ʾal•ḥayāẗ [MP3]), one may obtain membership in Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of The Multiversal Communist Collective. The hand of ʾAllꞌah (SWT) remains outstretched to all sincere souls. None are ever refused. Bārak ʾAllꞌah fīka! (Arabic, بَارَك الله فِيكَ! [MP3]), “May ʾAllꞌah bless you!” ʾal•Ssalāmu ʿalay°kum wa•rraḥ°maẗ ʾAllꞌah wa•barakāt°h! (Arabic, السَّلامُ عَلَيْكُم وَرَّحْمَة الله وَبَرَكَاتْه! [MP3]), “Peace be upon you and ʾAllꞌah’s mercy and blessings!
ʾal•Ḥam°du li–llꞌahi! or Alhamdulillah! (Arabic, الْحَمْدُ للهِ! [MP3], “Praise be to ʾAllꞌah!”) Only an aspirant (Arabic, طَمَّاح [MP3], ṭammāḥ; طُمُوح [MP3], ṭumūḥ; or طَامِح [MP3], ṭāmiḥ; Hebrew, שׁוֹאֵף [MP3], šōʾēp̄; Persian, آرْزُومَنْد [MP3], ʾâr°zūman°d; Urdu, آرْزُومَنْدَ [MP3], ʾâr°zūman°da; Shahmukhi Punjabi, بَینَتِیکَرَ [MP3], bēnatíḱara; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਬੇਨਤੀਕਰ [MP3], bēnatīkara; or Hindi, आकांक्षी [MP3], ākāṃkṣī) truly committed to the following reverential activities attains, in both spirit and form (Arabic, رُوح وَقَالِب [MP3], rūḥ wa•qālib), to the station (Arabic, المَحَطَّة [MP3], ʾal•maḥaṭṭaẗ), indeed the exalted station (Arabic, مَكَانَاً العَلِيَّاً [MP3], makānāṇ ʾal•ʿaliyyāṇ), of ʾal•murīd (Arabic, المُرِيد [MP3], “the aspirant”):
  1. Bay°ʿaẗ (originally Arabic, بَيْعَة [MP3]), baý°ʿat (Persian, بَیْعَت [MP3]), baý°ʿata (Urdu, بَیْعَتَ [MP3]), or baiata (Hindi, बैअत [MP3]) is a sale, transaction, deal, or bargain with mabīʿāt (Arabic, مَبِيعَات [MP3]) as the plural form. Similarly, the “seller” or “salesman” would be ʾal•bā⫯yiʿ (Arabic, البائِع‎ [MP3]) or ʾal•bāʿaẗ (Arabic, البَاعَة‎ [MP3]) when pluralized. The “saleswoman” is ʾal•bā⫯yiʿaẗ (Arabic, البائِعَة [MP3]) with a plural of ʾal•bā⫯yiʿāt (Arabic, البائِعَات [MP3]). Bayʿaẗ, an ordinary Arabic word, carries mundane connotations of mere merchandizing. In Taṣawwuf or Sufism, however, bayʿaẗ or baý°ʿat has been brilliantly reimagined. It heralds the dawn of a blissful journey toward reunion with the divine Presence.
    In Taṣawwuf, bayʿaẗ is a spiritual transaction. In the sense of chivalry, bayʿaẗ refers to a physical or metaphorical handshake or, more precisely, a handclasp. One pledges one’s allegiance, or homage, to a guide or elder. Thus, joining a ṭarīqaẗ is frequently described as giving bayʿaẗ. One may, in prayerful communion, offer bayʿaẗ to Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS). Having completed this ritual, one is now a dervish (originally Persian, دَرْوِیش [MP3], dar°víš; Turkish, derviş [MP3], Arabic, دَرْوِيش [MP3], dar°wīš, or Urdu, دَارْوِش [MP3], dārawiša, a spiritualmendicant” or anascetic”) and a nascent Bāhuwiyy (Arabic, بَاهُوِيّ) [MP3], a disciple of Bāhū, AS). The dual form is Bāhuwayni (بَاهُوَينِ [MP3]), while the plural can be either Bāhuwiyyūna (بَاهُِيُّونَ [MP3]) or Bāhuwiyyīna (بَاهُِيِّينَ [MP3]).
  2. Focus, continually, upon visualizing or conceptualizing the performance of devotionally writing the name of ʾAllꞌah (اللّه, SWT), in Arabic, upon your own heart (Arabic, تَصَوَّرَ الاِسْم الذَات [MP3], taṣawwara ʾal•ʾis°m ʾal•ḏāt; or Perso–Arabic, تَصَوَّرِ اِسْمِ ذَات [MP3], taṣavvar•i ʾis°m•i ḏāt, “imagining the nameof ʾAllꞌah (SWT)engraveduponyour ownheart). This practice was formulated by the blessed Apostle Bāhū (AS). In some Ṣūfiyy paths or orders (Arabic, طُرُق الصُوفِيَّة [MP3], ṭuruq ʾal•Ṣūfiyyaẗ), the heart (Arabic القَلْب, ʾal•qal°b [MP3]) is a subtlety (Arabic, لُطْف [MP3], luṭ°f) and one of the six subtleties (Arabic اللَطَائِف السِتَّة [MP3], ʾal•laṭā⫯yif ʾal•sittaẗ). Remarkably, but perhaps due to the Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy confabulation, the notion of ʾal•laṭā⫯yif ʾal•sittaẗ bears a striking resemblance to the concept of chakras (Sanskrit, चक्र [MP3], cakra, wheel; or चक्राणि, [MP3], cakrāṇi, wheels) in other South Asian religious communities.
    ʾal•Qalb ʾal•Laṭāꞌif ʾal•Sittaẗ
  3. Practice ḏik°r (Arabic, ذِكْر [MP3]) or divine remembrance (a cognate of the Hebrew, zēḵẹr, זֵכֶר [MP3], “remembrance,” and zāḵạr, זָכַר [MP3], “remember”). In the daily ḏik°r of this ṭarīqaẗ, ḏik°r ʾal•qal°b (Arabic, ذِكْر لُطْف, “remembrance of the heart” [MP3]), ʾal•murīd audibly repeats the phrase, Yā ʾAllꞌahu, wa•yā Muḥammad, wa•yā Bāhū! (Arabic, يَا اللّهُ، وَيَا مُحَمَّد، ويَا بَاهُو! [MP3]), for an extended period of time. (The literal English–language translation is O the God, and O Praised One, and O with He!) Stop yourself, however, before becoming exhausted. You may also inscribe the Arabic ḏik°r in your correspondance and other writing. While reciting or chanting this ḏik°r, turn in the direction (Arabic, القِبْلَة [MP3], ʾal•qib°laẗ) of Gah°ṛa Mahārāǧā (30°50′0″ north and 71°54′0″ east). The map directly below might be helpful in this regard.
    Click on the Image to Enlarge
    Ḏik°r, for those individuals unfamiliar with the practice, is similar in convention to repeating a mantra in Hinduism (Sanskrit and Hindi, हिंदू धर्म, Hiṃdū Dharma [MP3], “Indic Support,” or सनातन धर्म [MP3], Sanātana Dharma, “Eternal Support”), Buddhism (Sanskrit and Hindi, बुद्ध धर्म [MP3], Buddha Dharma, “Awakened Support”), Jainism (Sanskrit and Hindi, जैन धर्म [MP3], Jaina Dharma, “Victorious Support”), and Sikhism (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਿੱਖ ਧਰਮ [MP3], Sikha Dharama, “Disciple’s Support”).
    One of the more common Hindu mantras, dedicated to the God Shiva (Sanskrit, शिव [MP3], Śiva, “Auspicious One”), is Oṃ Namaḥ Śivāya (Sanskrit, ओं नमः शिवाय [MP3]). My interpretive English–language rendering is: “Oṃ obeisance to the Auspicious One of the Heavens.” Another Hindu mantra is the Gāyatrī maṃtra (Sanskrit,गायत्री मंत्र [MP3]). This mantra, named after the Goddesss Gāyatrī (Sanskrit, गायत्री [MP3], song or hymn), reads: Oṃ bhūrbhuvasva:; tatsaviturvareṇyam; bhargo devasya dhīmahi; dhiyo yo na: pracodayāt (Sanskrit, ओं भूर्भुवस्व: । तत्सवितुर्वरेण्यम् । भर्गो देवस्य धीमहि । धियो यो न: प्रचोदयात् [MP3]. My interpretive English–language rendering is: “Oṃ the Embodiment of spiritual vitality is the Eradicator of all sufferings and the Embodiment of happiness; the Radiant One is as resplendent as the sun and is truly the Most Exalted; the divine Destroyer annihilates all sins; and our insights are thereby illuminated.”
    A well–known Buddhist example is the Japanese Namu•Myōhō•Renge•Kyō (南無妙法蓮華經 [MP3]) also rendered as Namu Myou Hou Renge Kyo (なむ みょう ほう れんげ きょう or ナム ミョウ ホウ レンゲ [MP3]) or the arguably distorted Japanese Nammyoho Renge Kyo (なっみょほ れんげ きょ or ナッミョホ レンゲ キョ [MP3]). My English–language rendering of the mantra is: “Hail to the inexplicable (or mysterious) law of the Lotus Flower Sutra.” Sūtra (Sanskrit, सूत्र [MP3], sutta (Pāli, सुत्त [MP3]), cūtrā (Tamil, சூத்ரா [MP3]), sūtra (Telugu, సూత్ర [MP3]), sūtra (Malayalam, സൂത്ര [MP3]), sūtra (Kannada, ಸೂತ್ರ [MP3]), s̄ūtr (Thai, สูตร [MP3]), or sūt°ra (Urdu, سُوتْرَ [MP3]) is “thread.”
    A common Tibetan Buddhist mantra, from the original Sanskrit, is Auṃ Maṇipadme Hum (Sanskrit and Nepali, औं मणिपद्मे हुम् [MP3]), Oṃ Maṇipadme Hum (Hindi, ओं मणिपद्मे हुम् [MP3]), oM ma Ni pad+me hU~M (Tibetan, (ཨོཾ་མ་ཎི་པདྨེ་ཧཱུྃ [MP3]), Ommanibanmehum (Korean, 옴마니반메훔 [MP3]), Ǎn•ma•ne•bā•mī•hōng (Mandarin Chinese, 唵嘛呢叭咪吽, [MP3]), Uuံmanibadmehôn (Burmese, ဥုံမဏိပဒ္မေဟုံ [MP3]), Aum Maṇipadmē Hum̐ (Bengali, ঔম্ মণিপদ্মে হুঁ [MP3]), Ō Maṇipatm Ham (Tamil, ஓ மணிபத்ம் ஹம் [MP3]), Ō Maṇipadmē Ham (Telugu, ఓ మణిపద్మే హమ్ [MP3]), O Maṇippēṁ Haṁ (Malayalam, ഒ മണിപ്പേം ഹം [MP3]), Ō Maṇīpadēmē Hama (Gujarati, ઓ મણીપદેમે હમ [MP3]), Aoum Máni Pántme Choum (Modern Greek/Néa Ellēniká, Αουμ Μάνι Πάντμε Χουμ [MP3]), Úm Ma Ni Bát Ni Hồng (Vietnamese [MP3]), or ʾAw°ma Maní Pad°mē Huma (Urdu, اوْمَ مَنِی پَدْمَے ہُمَ [MP3]). A rough translation is: “Auṃ praise to the Jewel in the Lotus Flower.”
    Oṃ or Auṃ, as chanted in this MP3 audio file, has no particular or known definition. However, the syllable has sometimes been regarded as the primordial sound of existence, as the original vibration which set the universe in motion, or, in comparison to conventional doctrines in numerous branches of Christianity, as a poignant expression of the creative Word (Ancient Greek, Λόγος [MP3], Lógos) of God. Commonly referred to as the praṇava mantra (Sanskrit, प्रणव मन्त्र [MP3], “powerful mantra”), Oṃ or Auṃ remains a sacred sound in a variety of respectable South Asian spiritual and faith traditions. Oṃ (Sanskrit, ओं [MP3]) and the common Buddhist spelling Auṃ (Sanskrit, औं [MP3]) are symbolized by the Sanskrit glyph ॐ [MP3], Oṃ, and the Bengali glyph, ওঁ [MP3], Ōm̐.
    Quite similarly, the pronunciation of YHWH or YHVH (Hebrew, יהוה‎) is frequently approximated as Yahweh or Yahveh (Hebrew, יָהְוֶה [MP3], Yāhəwẹh). These letters, spelled in any fashion, are considered so profoundly sacred by some religious Jews that giving them voice is prohibited. YHWH, known as the Tetragrámmaton (Ancient Greek, Τετραγράμματον [MP3], literally, “four letters”), may offer a useful analogue to Oṃ or Auṃ. Based upon the reflections of the Franciscan Roman Catholic priest, Father Richard Rohr (born in 1943), YHWH literally cannot be voiced. The word, to him, is not a word. Instead, the Yahweh Prayer (MP3), as Rohr calls it, represents the sound of a full breath (yah … weh):
    I cannot emphasize enough the momentous importance of the Jewish revelation of the name of God. It puts the entire nature of our spirituality in correct context and, if it had been followed, could have freed us from much idolatry and arrogance. As we now spell and pronounce it, the word is Yahweh.… It [YHVH] was considered a literally unspeakable word for Jews, and any attempt to know what we were talking about was “in vain,” as the commandment said (Exodus 20:7). Instead, they used Elohim [Hebrew, אֱלֹהִים; MP3, ʾĔlōhiym, “Almighty”] or Adonai [Hebrew, אֲדֹנָי; MP3, ʾĂḏōnāy, “Lord”] in speaking or writing. From God’s side the divine identity was kept mysterious and unavailable to the mind; when Moses asked for the divinity’s name, he got only the phrase that translates something to this effect: “I AM WHO AM.… This is my name forever; this is my title for all generations” (Exodus 3:14–15).
    This unspeakability has long been recognized, but we now know it goes even deeper: formally the word was not spoken at all, but breathed! Many are convinced that its correct pronunciation is an attempt to replicate and imitate the very sound of inhalation and exhalation. The one thing we do every moment of our lives is therefore to speak the name of God. This makes it our first and our last word as we enter and leave the world.
    〜 Richard Rohr. The Naked Now: Learning to See as the Mystics See. New York: A Crossroad Book imprint of The Crossroad Publishing Company. 2009. Pages 25–26.
    My own rendering of a Jain mantra’s name is the genuflection mantra (Sanskrit, णमोकार मंत्र [MP3], ṇamokāra maṃtra): “Ṇamo arihaṃtāṇaṃ. Ṇamo siddhāṇaṃ. Ṇamo āyariyāṇaṃ. Ṇamo uvajjhāyāṇaṃ. Ṇamo loe savva sāhūṇaṃ. Esopaṃcaṇamokkāro, savvapāvappaṇāsaṇo. Maṃgalā ṇaṃ ca savvesiṃ. Paḍamama havaī maṃgalaṃ.” (Sanskrit, णमो अरिहंताणं ॥ णमो सिद्धाणं ॥ णमो आयरियाणं ॥ णमो उवज्झायाणं ॥ णमो लोए सव्व साहूणं ॥ एसोपंचणमोक्कारो । सव्वपावप्पणासणो ॥ मंगला णं च सव्वेसिं ॥ पडमम हवई मंगलं ॥ [MP3]) The following is an actual English–language translation of the text of the genuflection mantra: “I bow to the conquerers. I bow to the accomplished ones. I bow to the preceptors. I bow to the monks. I bow to all the sages of the world. This five–fold salutation completely destroys all sins. Of all auspicious mantras, [it] is indeed the most auspicious one.”
    Sikhism was, of course, discussed earlier in this obsequious monograph. Returning to the subject, among the more common Sikh mantras is the mool mantra (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਮੂਲ ਮੰਤਰ [MP3], mūla matara, “root mantra”): (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਇੱਕ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ੴ ਸਤਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਨਿਰਭਉ ਨਿਰਵੈਰੁ ਅਕਾਲ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਅਜੂਨੀ ਸੈਭੰ ਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥ [MP3 file contains two renditions of the mantra], Ika Ōꞌakāra Sati Nāmu karatā purakhu nirabhaꞌu niravairu akāla mūrati ajūnī saibha Gura prasādi.). My own interpretive rendering of the mantra is as follows: “One Oṃ–Maker. Through the True, the Ideal, Name of the Personal Creator, may fear and hatred be wiped away forevermore. The manifestation of the Preexistent One is eternally self–subsisting. By the grace of Guru, the Enlightener.”
  4. Islamophobia (Arabic, خَوْف مِن إِسْلَام [MP3], ẖaw°f min ⫰Is°lām; or Hebrew, אִסְלָאמוֹפוֹבְּיָה [MP3], ʾIsəlāʾmōp̄ōbəyāh), which is rampant on the Right, is obviously forbidden for members of this Islamic ṭarīqaẗ. Unfortunately, I have also occasionally witnessed Islamophobia on the Left (or faux left). Certainly, Leftists, including our members, have no business imitating right–wing bigots and being Islamophobes. Personally speaking, as an sociologist with a specialization in religious studies, Sufism in particular, I have constantly found myself fighting Islamophobia. Muḥammad (SAAW), to be explicit, did not consummate the relationship with His child bride, Aisha (Arabic, عَائِشَة [MP3], ʿA⫯yišaẗ, “living one”), SAA, until she had passed the time of puberty. Bear in mind, however, that the Prophet’s matrimonial practices were virtually universal in premodernity, as with the early U.S. settlers and as reported in the Old Testament. At a four–year college I once worked, in Southern Appalachia, one of the female members of the cleaning staff was married, she told me, at the age of twelve. Furthermore, slavery and marriage practices cannot be, legitimately, compared. Slavery, as a form of oppression, I, as a moral realist, would assert is bad under all circumstances. However, marriage practices, even today, vary widely across the world (even in my own country, the U.S.). As I often say, the past cannot be judged by the standards of the present. The social more, or significant norm, of marrying at older ages is quite recent. Over the long sweep of history, people, particularly females, got married at young ages. I am not arguing against current social mores regarding marriage, only pointing out that they are, in fact, new. Instead of the focus being on the Prophet Muḥammad (SAAW), it should instead be on how the practices of marrying at older ages in some, though not all, contemporary societies came to be adopted. The fundamental reasons for the ever–increasing delays in marriage are industrialization, which led to increased urbanization—as young people left farming communities to work in the factories—resulting in the rise of the nuclear, or conjugal, family. More recently, additional delays can be attributed to the rising numbers of women in the workplace.
  5. As a member of a Marxist–Luxemburgist (MP3) communist ṭarīqaẗ, dedicate yourself, in a lifestyle of divine servitude (Arabic, عُبُودِيَّة [MP3], ʿubūdiyyaẗ), to fighting capitalism, fascism, imperialism, injustice, racism, sexism, sectarianism, and all forms of oppression in the capitalist world–system. Practice a pure, sincere, high–minded, and classless etiquette of tʿāraf (Persian, تعَارَف [MP3], “deference or civility”), liḥāẓa (Urdu, لِحَاظَ [MP3], “deference or consideration”), kāḇōḏ (Hebrew, כָּבוֹד [MP3]), “deference or honor”), ⫰iḏ°ʿānuṇ (Arabic, إِذْعَانٌ [MP3], “deference or compliance”), sūfīr (Sindhi, سُوفِير [MP3], “deference”), rak°hinī (Sindhi, رَكْهِنِي [MP3], “keeping deference”), sanamāna (Gurumakhi Punjabi, ਸਨਮਾਨ [MP3], “deference or respect”), or sanamāna (Shahmukhi Punjabi, سَنَمَانَ [MP3], “deference or respect”). Like the Marxist heroine Rosa Luxemburg ([German/Deutsch; MP3], Róża Luksemburg [Polish/Polski; MP3], Róży Luksemburg [Polish; [MP3], Rōzạh bạṯ ʾĔliyyāhū [Hebrew, רוֹזַה בַּת אֱלִיָּהוּ; MP3], Rʾọsʾạ bạṯ ʾĔliyyāhū [Yiddish/Yiyḏiyš, ראָסאַ בַת אֱלִיָּהוּ; MP3], Rūzaẗ ʾib°naẗ ⫰Iy°liyā [Arabic, رُوزَة اِبْنَة إِيْلِيَا; MP3], or Rūzah duẖ°tar•i ʾIl°ýās [Persian, رُوزَه دُخْتَرِ اِلْیَاس; MP3], Roza duxtar•i Iljos [Tajik, Роза духтари Илёс; MP3], ʾIý°laýāh ḱí Bēṭí ḱā Rūzā [Urdu/ʾUr°dū, اِیْلَیَا کِی بَیٹِی کَا رُوزَا; MP3], Ēlīyāha dī dhī Rōzā [Guramukhi Punjabi, ਏਲੀਯਾਹ ਦੀ ਧੀ ਰੋਜ਼ਾ; MP3],ʾAý°líýāha, i.e., ʾĒ°líýāha, dí d°hí Rūzā [Shahmukhi Punjabi, اَیْلِییَاہَ دِی دْھِی رُوزَہ; MP3], or Red Rosa 🌹 [German, rote Rosa [MP3 or Polish, rudy Rosa [MP3]), daughter of Eliasz (Polish; MP3) and Liny (Polish; MP3), was born, in Poland, on March 5ᵗʰ, 1871.
    As only 48–years old, Rosa became a secular martyr, after being assassinated by rifle, in Berlin, Germany, on January 15ᵗʰ, 1919. That very same year, my Jewish father was born—eight months nine days later—on September 24ᵗʰ, 1919, in Brooklyn, New York. In her magnificent spirit, work heartily, and with revolutionary fervor, for democratic libertarian communism. Defend the masses, especially the victims of neofascism, in the Autonomist Antifa Movement (MP3). Bāhū (AS) Himself, while living centuries before the inception of Marxism, was personally committed to ending sectarian divisions in Islam. Upon rejecting disunity or dualism for unity or nonduality, the dialectical contradictions in His life were absented. He was emancipated through copresence or solidarity. Sadly, “radical” has become merely an over–used smear word. It is much too commonplace.
    Conservative religious theology and practice, frequently viewed through the patronizing lens of moral exclusivity by religionists on the right, may receive the majority of the public’s attention. By the same token, historically, many of the greatest saints, heroes, and heroines, presently championed by some of these same conservative religionists, were themselves anything but conservatives. They broke with traditional social norms and, at the same time, openly challenged dominant religious authorities. A similar narrative holds true today. Whatever the language, one should be proudly, and globally, a extremist:
    1. Semitic: mutaṭarrif (Arabic, مُتَطَرِّف [MP3]), qiyṣōniy (Hebrew, קִיצוֹנִי [MP3]), sꞌənəfäña (Amharic, ጽንፈኛ [MP3]), sawpanaʾ (Syriac/Sūryayaʾ, ܣܵܘܦܵܢܵܐ [MP3]), and estremisti (Maltese/Malti [MP3]).
    2. Indo–Iranian: ʾin°tihā pasan°da (Urdu, اِنْتِہَا پَسَنْدَ [MP3]), ʾin°tihāpasan°d (Sindhi, اِنْتِهَاپَسَنْد [MP3]), ʾif°rātí (Persian and Pashto/Paṣ̌°tū/Pax̌°tū, اِفْرَاطَی [MP3]), ifrotgaro (Tajik, ифротгаро [MP3]), kaṭaṛavādī (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਕੱਟੜਵਾਦੀ [MP3]), ḱaṭaṛavādí (Shahmukhi Punjabi, کَٹَڑَوَادِی [MP3]), ativādin (Sanskrit/Saṃskrtam, अतिवादिन् [MP3]), ativādī (Hindi, अतिवादी [MP3]), antavādīn (Sinhalese, අන්තවාදීන් [MP3]), ugravādī (Nepali/Nēpālī, उग्रवादी [MP3]), and caramapanthī (Bengali, চরমপন্থী [MP3]).
    3. Dravidian: oru tīvravādi (Malayalam, ഒരു തീവ്രവാദി [MP3]), ugragāmi (Kannada, ಉಗ್ರಗಾಮಿ [MP3]), ativāda (Telugu, అతివాద [MP3]), and tīviravāti (Tamil, தீவிரவாதி [MP3]).
    4. Sino–Tibetan: jíduān•ēnzi (Mandarin Chinese, 极端分子 [MP3]), gik•dyun•zyu•ji (Cantonese Chinese/Gwong•Dung•Waa, 极端分子 [MP3]), and a hcyan•ayrark•warde (Burmese/Myanmarbharsar, အစြန္းေရာက္ဝါဒီ [MP3]).
    5. Kra–Dai: h̄ạw•runræng (Thai, หัวรุนแรง [MP3]) and hua•hunæhng (Lao/Pʰasalav, ຫົວຮຸນແຮງ [MP3]).
    6. Austroasiatic: chroulniyom (Khmer, ជ្រុលនិយម [MP3]) and một kẻ cực đoan (Vietnamese [MP3]).
    7. Italic: ultra (Latin, ultrā [MP3])) or ne plus ultra (Latin, nē plūs ultrā [MP3]), extrémiste (French [MP3]), extremista (Spanish [MP3]), extremista (Portugese/Portuguê [MP3]), extremista (Italian/Italiano [MP3]), and extremist (Romanian/Limba Română [MP3]).
    8. Germanic: Extremist (German [MP3]), extremistische (Dutch/Nederlands [MP3]), ekstremist (Danish/Dansk [MP3]), ekstremistisk (Norwegian [MP3]), extremist (Swedish/Svenska [MP3]), öfgafullur (Icelandic/Íslenska [MP3]), víðgongdur (Faroese/Føroyskt Mál [MP3]), ekstremist (Frisian/Frysk [MP3]), and ekstremistiese (Afrikaans [MP3]).
    9. East Slavic: ékstremistskij (Russian, экстремистский [MP3]), ekstremíst (Ukrainian, екстреміст [MP3]), and ékstrémíst (Belarusian/Belaruskaâ Mova, экстрэміст [MP3]).
    10. West Slavic: extrémista (Slovak/Slovenčina [MP3]), ekstremista (Polish [MP3]), and extrémisty (Czech/Čeština [MP3]).
    11. South Slavic: ekstremista (Bosnian–Serbo–Croatian/Bosanski–Srpski–Hrvatski, ekstremista or екстремиста [MP3]), ekstremistki (Bulgarian/Bǎlgarski, екстремистки [MP3]), skrajnežev (Slovenian/Slovenščina [MP3]) or ekstremistično (Slovenian [MP3]), and ekstremistički (Macedonian/Makedonski, екстремистички [MP3]).
    12. Finnic–Uralic: äärimmäisyysmies (Finnish/Suomi [MP3]) and äärmuslik (Estonian/Eesti keel [MP3]).
    13. Austronesian: seorang ekstremis (Indonesian/bahasa Indonesia [MP3]), lan ekstremis (Javanese/basa Jawa [MP3]), ka poʿe extremist (Hawaiian/ʿŌlelo Hawaiʿi [MP3]), kaiwhakatuma (Māori/Te Reo Māori [MP3]), extremist (Sundanese/Basa Sunda [MP3]), and ekstremista (Filipino/Wikang Filipino [MP3]).
    14. Turkic: aşırılıkçı (Turkish [MP3]), ékstremisttik (Kyrgyz/Kyrgyzča, экстремисттик [MP3]), ekstremistik (Uzbek/Oʻzbek tili [MP3]), ékstremistík (Kazakh/Qazaq Tílí, экстремистік [MP3]), and ifratçı (Azerbaijani [MP3]).
    15. Bantu: wachikulire (Chichewa/Cinyanja/Cinianja [MP3]) and chinopisa (Shona [MP3]).
    16. linguistic isolates: cayraheġakan (Armenian, the lone survivor of the Thraco–Phrygian Indo–European sub–family, ծայրահեղական [MP3]), extremistḗs (Modern Greek, εξτρεμιστής [MP3]), muturreko (Basque/Euskara [MP3]), kŭktan chuŭija (Korean, 극단 주의자 [MP3]), and ekstremist (Albanian/Gjuha Shqipe [MP3]).
    17. constructed languages (conlangs): ekstremisto (Esperanto [MP3]), lölimik (Volapük [MP3]), estremiste (Lingua Franca Nova/Elefen/LFN [MP3]), extremista (Interlingua [MP3]), ekstremist (Interslavic [MP3]), extremiste (Sambahsa/Sambahsa–Mundialect [MP3]), extremista (Lingwa de Planeta/Lidepla/LdP [MP3] my own coined term based upon standard LdP rules), ekstremist (Slovio [MP3]), extremist (Unish [MP3]), uvilupuno (Kah [MP3]), and extremarum partium fautor (Neo–Latin [MP3]) or extremarum partium sectator (Neo–Latin [MP3]).
    18. miscellaneous: kageki•ha (Japanese, 過激派 [MP3]), kageki ha (Japanese, かげき は [MP3]), kageki ha (Japanese, カゲキ ハ [MP3]), msimamo mkali (Swahili/Kiswahili [MP3]), xag–jirnimo (Somali/Af–Soomaali [MP3]), extremistas (Yucatec Maya/Màaya tꞌàan [MP3]), and ekstʼremistʼuli (Georgian/Kartuli En, ექსტრემისტული [MP3]).
    Morality, as emancipatory praxis, is spiritually transformative agency. In a theology of liberation, the Apostles became revolutionaries and Leftist extremists. They were not reactionaries. Sadly, some social conservatives have have duped the U.S. public. Presumably to win elections, they equate morality with traditionalism, while the opposite is true. Was Jesus (Hebrew, יֵשׁוּעַ [MP3], Yēšūʿạ; or Arabic, يَسُوعَ [MP3], Yasūʿa), AS, in challenging polytheism, a conservative? Muḥammad’s (SAAW) followers, clearly not pacifists in the face of injustice, engaged in a revolutionary defense of their community. When Moses (Hebrew, מֹשֶׁה [MP3], Mōšẹh; Arabic, مُوسَى [MP3], Mūsaỳ), AS, and His disciples were persecuted in Egypt, they trusted in ʾAllꞌah (SWT) and traversed the wildernesss. Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS), for His part, challenged, and then rejected, both major branches of Islam.
  6. The official, though neither obligatory nor universal, religion of the Collective is Taṣawwuf ʾal•Qād°riyyaẗ ʾal•Sār°wāriyyaẗ (Perso–Arabic, تَصَوُّف القَاْدرِيَّة السَارْوَارِيَّة [MP3], “Sufism of the Competence of Mastery”), Taṣavvuf•i Qād°riýah•i Sār°vāriýah (Persian, تَصَوُّفِ قَادْرِیِ سَارْوَارِیه [MP3], “Sufism of the Competence of Mastery”), or Taṣawwufa•i Qād°riýýah•i Sārawāriýýah (Urdu, تَصَوُّفَِ قَادْرِیَّهِ سَارَوَارِیّه [MP3]) of Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS). Since this form of Taṣawwuf guides the philosophy and activity of our ṭarīqaẗ, each of the honored members is expected to earnestly follow the guidance of Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ, represented by the píra ū mur°šida, as a branch of Taṣawwuf ʾal•Qād°riyyaẗ ʾal•Sār°wāriyyaẗ. More broadly, however, the predominant varieties of religious expression within The Multiversal Communist Collective are the highly diverse traditions of Ṣūfiyy Islam (Arabic, إِسْلَام الصُوفِيَّة [MP3], ⫰Is°lām ʾal•Ṣūfiyyaẗ). Citizens of the Collective are associated with a considerable number of them and may join as many as they choose.

Return to the Page Menu.

٥. Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy Studies and More
This fanciful collective and its mythical ṭarīqaẗ lovingly commemorate the glorious Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement (Arabic, حَرَكَة البْهَاكْتِيَّة ـ الصُوفِيَّة [MP3], ḥarakaẗ ʾal•b°hāk°tiyyaẗ–ʾal•Ṣūfiyyaẗ), circa 800–1700 A.D. Furthermore, my personal prototype, or ideal type, for devotion is that same Bhakti or Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement. The adorational center, or flowering, of the Golden Age of Islam might be found in this heart–focused movement. It arose chiefly from within the subaltern (MP3), or marginalized, peasant populations of diverse faiths in South Asia (Urdu, جَنُوبِی ایْشِیَا MP3], Ǧanūbí ʾAý°šiýā), including the Indus Valley (Urdu, وَادْیِ سنْدْھَ [MP3], Wād°ý•i Sin°d°ha). It was a wonderful spiritual movement. Yet, it can, honestly, never be recouped in the wake of the horrendous, disgusting, and all–pervasive interfaith violence from the South Asian anticolonial warfare of the mid–20ᵗʰ century.
To put it another way, Sufism developed principally in South Asia. The extended association between devotional Hindus [Sanskrit, हिंदुओं (MP3) Hiṃduoṃ, “rivers” or “oceans”] and Muslims (Arabic, مُسْلِمُونَ [MP3], Mus°limūna, “peacefully surrendering ones”) was largely responsible for this wonderfully transcendent phenomenon. Although aspects of the Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement have been carried forward in some contemporary spiritual organizations, the final and unfortunate breakup of India into two, and then three, countries in the 20ᵗʰ century signaled the end of the movement’s prominence as a compelling social force in South Asia. Yet, the regional and Western influence of the Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement’s has endured, albeit with a considerably diminished influence, to the present time. I have produced two relevant podcasts (MP3) for The Dr. Mark Foster Show.
Listen to this delightful Hindu (Sanskrit, हिंदू [MP3], Hiṃdū, “river” or “ocean”) bhakti song (MP3). The ecstasy of infatuation, rather than the tragedy of legalism, galvanized this enlightened era of interfaith amity. Indeed, given the syncretism of the Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement, terms from Urdu, Punjabi, Sanskrit, Hindi, and so forth are scattered throughout the manuscript. The parent order of Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ, the Ṭaríqat•i Qād°riýah•i Sār°vāriýah, was, moreover, integral to both the potency and the continuity of that movement. Here is some background information pertaining to the Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement’s illustrious history, including the contributions which were made by the Muḥammad’s extraordinary Lesser Prophet, the Luminous Moon of the Punjab Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS):
The Bhakti–Sufi movement was … [a] major pan–Indian articulation … of subaltern dissent.
The spokesmen/women of the movement mostly came from the subaltern or marginalised sections of society and were workers, women or Muslims …. Sultan Bahu … and other Sufi poets were Muslims by birth.
〜 K. Satchidanandan, “Between Saints and Secularists.” Belonging. Volume II. Issue 3. Undated. No pagination.
An important landmark in the cultural history of medieval India [Hindi, इंडिया; MP3, Iṃḍiyā, “river” or “ocean”] was the silent revolution in society brought about by a galaxy of socio-religious reformers, a revolution known as the Bhakti Movement. This movement was responsible for many rites and rituals associated with the worship of God by Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs [Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਿੱਖਾਂ; MP3, Sikhāṁ] of [the] Indian subcontinent. For example, Kirtan [Sanskrit, कीर्तन; MP3, kīrtana, “telling”] at a Hindu Temple, Qawaali [Urdu, قَوُّالِی; MP3, qawwālí, “utterance”] at a Dargah [Persian, دَرْگَه; MP3, dar°gah, “threshold” or, by implication, shrine] (by Muslims), and singing of Gurbani [Guramukhi Punjabi, ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ; MP3, gurabāṇī, “wise speech”] at a Gurdwara [Guramukhi Punjabi, ਗੁਰਦੁਆਰਾ; MP3, guraduꞌārā, “door to the guru”], are all derived from the Bhakti movement of medieval India (800–1700) ….
Sufism represents the inward or esoteric side of Islam or the mystical dimension of Muslim [Arabic, مُسْلِم, Mus°lim, “peacefully surrendering one”] religion. However, the Sufi saints transcending all religious and communal distinctions, worked for promoting the interest of humanity at large. The Sufis [Arabic, صُوفِيُّونَ; MP3, Ṣūfiyyūna] were a class of philosophers remarkable for their religious catholicity …. It [Sufism] rebelled against all forms of religious formalism, orthodoxy, falsehood and hypocrisy and endeavoured to create a new world order in which spiritual bliss was the only and the ultimate goal ….
… Sultan Bahu (ca 1628–1691) was a Muslim Sufi and saint who founded the Sarwari Qadiri Sufi order. Sultan Bahu was born in Anga, Soon Valley, in the Punjab Province of Pakistan. Like many other Sufi saints of South Asia Sultan Bahu was a prolific writer. More than forty books on Sufism are attributed to him, mostly in Persian.
〜 Arun Joshi, “Bhakti Movement in India and Punjab.” The Times of India. Undated. No pagination.
India saw a remarkable fusion of Islamic [Arabic, إِسْلَامِيَّة; MP3, ⫰Is°lāmiyyaẗ] and indigenous Hindu traditions, giving rise to a rich composite culture.… One of the best representatives of this confluence of traditions is the Bhakti-Sufi movement, a form of personal piety that challenged the hegemony of the religious orthodoxy and crusaded against caste and community divisions and meaningless ritualism.
A wealth of literature abounds with the teachings and writings of these Hindu and Sufi mystics ….
〜 Laxmi G. Tewari, “Common Grounds between Bhajan and Qawwali.‧ Conference on Music in the World of Islam. Assilah. August 8ᵗʰ–13ᵗʰ, 2007. Assilah, Morocco. Page 1–3. Retrieved on August 17ᵗʰ, 2013.
There have been further expressions of the Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement, and its subsequent offshoots, to which I was drawn at various points of my life. For instance, at 12 years old (1968), I nearly joined Sikhism, a progeny of that movement, which was founded by Gurū Nānaka (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ [MP3]), 1469–1539. Sikhism’s strong monotheism coupled with its doctrine of reincarnation were particularly attractive to me. However, through snail mail correspondence, that same year, with the Sikh Temple in Stockton, California, I was, sadly at the time, convincingly dissuaded by the five Ks (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਪੰਜ ਕਕਾਰ [MP3], paja kakāra), which has been illustrated in the image below, for baptised Sikhs.
Reluctantly, I acknowledged that Sikhism, however much I loved it, was rooted in an earlier time and a far different locale. The religion’s mode of dress and hair style was never intended for the student locker room of a 1960s American gymnasium. Attiring myself with such unconventional accoutrements, displayed in the two pictures below left, made no more sense than wearing the medieval European apparel of a traditional Hasidic Jew (Hebrew/ʿIḇəriyṯ, יְהוּדִי הַחָסִיד [MP3], Yəhūḏiy hạ•Ḥāsiyḏ), as portrayed below right. Being thus adorned, with the trappings of one faith or the other, would have placed a target on my back. I cannot imagine the reception by my seventh–grade classmates, especially the school’s bullies.
Sikh man Sikh man Hasidic men
Nevertheless, my interest in Sikhism was undeterred. That affinity has, in fact, continued even to the present day. I established an association with the neo–Sikh Sant Nirankari Mission (Hindi, संत निरंकारी मिशन, Saṃta Niraṃkārī Miśana [MP3]; or Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸੰਤ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੀ ਮਿਸ਼ਨ, Sata Nirakārī Miśana [MP3], “Mission of the Truth–Teller of the Formless One”) on April 6ᵗʰ, 2018. It is currently under the direction of Satguru Mata Savinder Hardev Ji (Hindi, सतगुरु माता सविंदर हरदेव जी [MP3], Sataguru Mātā Saviṃdara Haradeva Jī; or Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਮਾਤਾ ਸਾਵਿਤਰੀ ਹਰਦੇਵ ਜੀ [MP3], Satigurū Mātā Sāvitarī Haradēva Jī), born in 1957.
The organization was started, in 1980, by Baba Buta Singh (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਬਾਬਾ ਬੂਟਾ ਸਿੰਘ [MP3], Bābā Būṭā Sigha; or Hindi, बाबा बंटा सिंह [MP3], Bābā Baṃṭā Siṃha), 1954–2016 (perished in an automobile accident):
Baba Buta Singh
Baba Buta Singh
Mata Savinder Hardev Ji
Mata Savinder Hardev Ji
The simran (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਿਮਰਨ [MP3], simarana; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਿਮਰਨਾ [MP3], simaranā; Hindi, सिमरण [MP3], simaraṇa; Hindi, सिमरन [MP3], simarana; or Urdu and Shahmukhi Punjabi, سِمَرَنَ, simarana [MP3], “remembrance”), an originally Guramukhi Punjabi word (from the Sanskrit, स्मरण [MP3], smaraṇa, “remembrance”), of Sant Nirankari Mission is Eka tū hī niraṃkāra, maiṃ terī śaraṇa, menū bakṣa lo (Hindi, एक तू ही निरंकार, मैं तेरी शरण, मेनू बक्ष लो [MP3] or chanted [MP3], “O Thou Formless One, I surrender to Thee. Please forgive me.”).
Decades earlier, unaware of any historical nexus with Sikhism, I was, in approximately 1970, attracted to the religion of Eckankar (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਇੱਕ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ [MP3], Ika Ōꞌakāra; Shahmukhi Punjabi, اِکَ اوَنْکَارَ [MP3], ʾIḱa ʾAwanḱāra; Hindi, एक ओंकार [MP3], Eka Oṃkāra; Urdu, اَیْکَ اَوْنْکَار [MP3], ʾAy°ḱa ʾAwn°ḱāra; Bengali, এক ওয়ানঙ্কার [MP3], Ēka Ōẏānaṅkāra; Telugu, ఒక ఒయాంకర్ [MP3], Oka Oyāṅkar; Tamil, ஒரு ஒயிங்கர் [MP3], Oru Oyiṅkar; Sinhalese, එක ඔයන්කාර් එකක් [MP3], Eka Oyankār Ekak; Malayalam, ഒരു ഓങ്കങ്കർ [MP3], Oru Ōṅkaṅkara, “One Oṃ–Makeror One God, symbolized as ੴ)―an Americanized branch of a heterodox (Arabic, , غَيْر الأُرْثُوذُكْسِيِّينَ [MP3], ġay°r ʾal•⫯ur°ṯūḏuk°siyyīna) and extrasensory (Arabic, خَارِجَ الحَوَاسّ [MP3], ẖāriǧa ʾal•ḥawass) outgrowth from Sikhism and, hence, the Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement in the main.
Eckankar was founded, in 1965, by John “Paul” Twitchell (1909–1971). Regrettably, Twitchell brazenly lied when denying any prior involvement with his parent tradition, Radha Soami Satsang (Hindi, राधा स्वामी सत्संग [MP3], Rādhā Svāmī Satsaṃga, “true associationbythe possessor of prosperity”), and its clairvoyant and clairaudient meditation, Surat Shabd Yoga (Hindi, सूरत शब्द योग [MP3], Sūrata Śabda Yōga, “union through attention to the word”). He became an adept of Kirpal Singh (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਕਿਰਪਾਲ ਸਿੰਘ [MP3], Kirapāla Sigha), 1894–1974, and his Ruhani Satsang (Hindi, रूहानी सत्संग [MP3], Rūhānī Satsaṃga, “spiritual true association”) in 1955. The latter was an illicit schism, since the true successor was appointed in a will, of yet another schism, Radha Soami Satsang Beas (Hindi, राधा स्वामी सत्संग ब्यास [MP3], Rādhā Svāmī Satsaṃga Byāsa).
Eventually, a photograph featuring Twitchell alongside Singh torpedoed the scam. A considerable number of Eckists, as they are called, dolefully abandoned the organization. Heartbroken, many felt, legitimately it seems to me, as though Twitchell had duped, even swindled, them. In my own case, I recall that only a minor postal miscommunication between me, at around thirteen-years old, and the movement’s Las Vegas headquarters (subsequently in Menlo Park, California, and presently in Chanhassen, Minnesota) prevented me from attaining membership in the organization. Their returned letter could have dampened my enthusiasm, but I had already lost interest. Even so, my attraction to Surat Shabd Yoga resumed in earnest several years later.
Kirpal Singh with Paul Twitchell
Kirpal Singh (middle) and Paul Twitchell (far right)
I was, therefore, ultimately initiated, following my ethnographic or participant–observational interests as a sociologist, into three other factions of the contemplative Surat Shabd Yoga. However, I stopped practicing the meditation after I developed something like tinnitus (Arabic طَنِينُ الأُذُن [MP3], ṭanīnu ʾal•⫯uḏun), which could have some relation to my Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder (Arabic اِضْطِرَاب الوَسْوَاس القَهْرِيّ [MP3], ʾiḍ°ṭirāb ʾal•was°wās ʾal•qah°riyy)—a secondary comorbidity to my Autism Spectrum Disorder (Arabic اِضْطِرَاب الطَيْف التَوَحُّد [MP3], ʾiḍ°ṭirāb ʾal•ṭay°f ʾal•tawaḥḥud)—that might, and bear in mind that I am just speculating here, be results of the mantric aspect of the practice. In any event, I associated with the following groups, at various times, over a considerable number of years:
  1. Sree Sree Thakur Anukulchandra Satsang (Bengali শ্রী শ্রী ঠাকুর অনুকূলচন্দ্র সৎসঙ্গ [MP3], Śrīśrīṭhākura Anukūlacandra Saṯsaṅga) is a peculiarly Indocentric Radhasoami tradition. Anukulchandra (1888–1969) supported the Indian caste system. I was initiated by one of his disciples, Ray Archer Hauserman, in his Glen Cove, Long Island, New York, home.
  2. Sant Mat (Hindi, संत मत [MP3], Saṃta Mata, “truth–teller’s teaching”) was founded by Thakur Singh (Hindi, ठाकुर सिंह [MP3], Ṭhākura Siṃha), 1929–2005, one of Kirpal Singh’s several successors. Thakur Singh, under whose authority I was initiated (in New York, New York), was, in turn, replaced by Baljit Singh (Hindi, बलजीत सिंह [MP3], Balajīta Siṃha), born in 1962.
  3. Spiritual Freedom Satsang (with their Facebook page), founded by Sri Michael Turner (born in 1958), is a small organization which belongs to the Radhasoami Satsang Beas tradition. Specifically, Turner, who personally initiated me over the phone, hails from the offshoot of Eckankar, ATOM: Ancient Teachings of the Masters. That group, now essentially a publishing house, was founded by the late Darwin Gross (1928–2008), a former master in Eckankar who was controversially forced out of the organization.
Due to the primarily inward transmissions of successorship, the neo–Sikh Surat Shabd Yoga movement has repeatedly divided. Self–delusion, in personal mysticism, is easy. It is extraordinary difficult, perhaps virtually impossible, to clearly distinguish between inspiration and guidance from ʾAllꞌah (SWT), His Prophets, Guardian Angels, and departed souls, on the one hand, and wishful thinking and a thoroughgoing imagination, on the other. Surat Shabd Yoga began, however, with Agrah (Hindi, आग्रह [MP3], Āgraha), India’s Shri Shiv Dayal Singh Sahab (Hindi, श्री शिव दयाल सिंह साहब [MP3], Śrī Śiva Dayāla Siṃha Sāhaba), 1818–1878. He was, by religion, a Sikh and, by occupation, a banker. Among his many devotees, he is referred to using the reverential title of Soamiji Maharaj (Hindi, स्वामी जी महाराज [MP3], Svāmī Jī Mahārāja, “respectful and sovereign master”).
The mantras recited by devotees vary, sometimes considerably, between the multiple traditions of Radha Soami Satsang. Nevertheless, in Radha Soami Satsang Beas and in many of its branches, the Surat Shabd Yoga tradition with which I am most familiar, five names (Sanskrit, पङ्च नमः [MP3], paṅca namaḥ; Persian, پَنْج نَامَ [MP3], panǧ nāma; Urdu, پانچ ناموں [MP3], panča nāmūṉ; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਪੰਜ ਨਾਮ [MP3], paja nāma; or Bengali, পাঁচ নাম্বার [MP3], pām̐ca nāmbāra) are conventionally used. Eckankar is one well–known exception. In that organization, adherents are instructed to chant Hu (MP3), a word which may be related to Huwa (Arabic, هُوَ [MP3], “He”), frequently a reference to ʾAllꞌah (SWT).
Surat Shabd Yoga consists of two distinct spiritual methodologies. First, the ears are plugged, and the sound current, supposedly intensifying in frequency as one progresses, is listened to from the right side. Second, the eyes are entirely shut, while reciting the prescribed regimen of mantras, which will permit the meditator to allegedly witness visions of progressively higher celestial planes and the beings residing within them (including, ultimately, one’s spiritual master). Before providing the paṅca namaḥ, here are three preliminary points:
  1. Out of a respect for current meditators, and a sincere desire not to unduly offend them, I shall note that, in some groups of the Radhasoami Satsang Beas tradition, the five names are provided confidentially. An explicit request is made through the initiator, speaking on behalf of the master, not to divulge them to others. However, that practice of surreptitiousness began with Kirpal Singh. It has continued with some of his successors. Yet, the secrecy is not, by any means, a universal stipulation.
  2. In the Quan Yin Method (Mandarin Chinese, 观音法 [MP3], Guān•Yīn•Fǎ, “Way of Witnessing Sound”) of Ching Hai (Mandarin Chinese, 驚駭 [MP3], Jīng•Hài, “astonished one”), born in 1950, the paṅca namaḥ have been modified, or perhaps unintentionally distorted, as: Gomtrazan, Gwaarla, Rarunka, Sohuan, Satnum. Ching Hai was, like myself, an initiate of Thakur Singh. Yet, to my knowledge, Ching Hai, as with Twitchell before her, has never publicly acknowledged her autobiographical connection with the Radhasoami Satsang Beas tradition.
  3. The precise Sanskrit and Punjabi (both Guramukhi and Shahmukhi) spellings of the paṅca namaḥ provided here, and the translations of those words, are based upon my own original research.
With those qualifications now out of the way, the following simran constitutes the most widely taught five–part mantra as presented verbally by the initiator and then silently or inwardly repeated by disciples within the Radha Soami Satsang Beas tradition:
  1. Jyōta Nirañjana (Sanskrit, ज्योत निरंजन [MP3]), Jyoti Niraṃjana, (Sanskrit, ज्योति निरंजन [MP3]), Jōti Nirajana (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਜੋਤਿ ਨਿਰੰਜਨ, [MP3]), or Ǧūtí Niran°ǧana (Shahmukhi Punjabi, جُوتِي نِرَنْجَنَ [MP3], “Flawless Light.”
  2. Oṃkāra (Sanskrit, ओंकार [MP3]), Ōṅkāra (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਓਂਕਾਰ [MP3]), ʾAw°n°ḱār (Shahmukhi Punjabi, اوْنْکَارَ [MP3]), Ōꞌakāra (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਓਅੰਕਾਰ [MP3]), or ʾAwan°ḱār (Shahmukhi Punjabi, اوَانْکَار [MP3]), “Oṃ–Maker.”
  3. Raraṃkāra (Sanskrit, ररंकार [MP3]), Rarakāra (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਰਰੰਕਾਰ [MP3]), or Raraḱāra (Shahmukhi Punjabi, رَرَكَارَ [MP3]), “Reciting the Name of the Dark One,” i.e., Rāma (Sanskrit, राम [MP3]), Rāma (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਰਾਮ [MP3]), or Rāma (Shahmukhi Punjabi, رَامَ [MP3]).
  4. Sohaṃga (Sanskrit, सोहंग [MP3]), Sōhaga (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸੋਹੰਗ [MP3]), or Sūhan°ga (Shahmukhi Punjabi, سُوہَنْگَ [MP3]), “I am He (or That).”
  5. Satanāma (Sanskrit, सतनाम [MP3]), Satanāma (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਤਨਾਮ [MP3]), Satanāma (Shahmukhi Punjabi, سَتَنَامَ [MP3]), Satināma (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਤਿਨਾਮ [MP3]), or Satināma (Shahmukhi Punjabi, سَتِنَامَ [MP3]), “True (or Ideal) Name.”
He [a yogī] preached yoga [Sanskrit, योग, MP3, yoga, “union or yoking”] practice but with a few words of praises to God namely: Jot Niranjan, Onkar, Rarankar, Sohang, Satnam. He believed that that the utterance of these words in the initial stage of smadhi [Sanskrit, समाधि, MP3, samādhi, “contemplation”] will help the yogi [Hindi, योगी, MP3, yogī, “practitioner of union”] to attain higher concentration and there after the yogi has to follow his mind where ever it treads. He met a Sikh, Shiv Dyal of Agra and converted him to yogimat [Hindi, योगी मत, MP3, yogī mata, “doctrine of practitioner of union”]. Swami Shiv Dyal preached this concept on a large and organised scale.
〜 Anonymous, “Dialogue with Yogis: The Sidh Goshat of Guru Nanak.” Punjab Monitor. April, 2015. Retrieved on March 5ᵗʰ, 2018.
By contrast, initiates of certain other Surat Shabd Yoga traditions simply recite “Radhasoami” (Hindi, राधास्वामी [MP3], Rādhāsvāmī, “possessor of prosperity”). In Shabd Pratap Ashram (Sanskrit, शब्द प्रताप आश्रम [MP3], Śabda Pratāpa Āśrama, “Word of Power Monastery”), another Surat Shabd Yoga tradition, devotees are instructed to deliver this three–part Dhunyatmak Naam (Hindi, धनात्मक नाम [MP3], Dhanātmaka Nāma; or Urdu, دَنَاتْمَكَ نَامَ [MP3], Danātmaḱa Nāma, “Positive Name”):
  1. Dharā (Sanskrit, धरा [MP3], “Support” or, commonly, “Waterfall”).
  2. Sindhu (Sanskrit, सिन्धु [MP3], “Ocean,” “Stream,” “Flood,” “Waters,” “Sea,” or “Indus River”).
  3. Pratāpa (Sanskrit, प्रताप [MP3], “Heat,” “Warmth,” “Splendor,” “Glory,” “Majesty,” “Power,” “Strength,” or “Energy”).
Furthermore, inspired by my personally transformative experiences with Bāhū (AS), I have been engaged in further participant–observational research or ethnographic studies, without becoming a member, of no less than twelve Ṣūfiyy, Ṣūfiyy–influenced, or Muslim–inspired organizations within Islamdom (Arabic, عَالَم الإِسْلَامِيّ [MP3], ʾālam ʾal• ⫰Is°lāmiyy, “the Islamic world”), including:
  1. American Sufi Institute (discussed in a previous section).
  2. Bawa Muhaiyaddeen Fellowship (Tamil with my version of “fellowship” added, பாவா முஹையுத்தீன் தோழமை [MP3], Pāvā Muhaiyuttīṉ Tōḻamai).
  3. Naqshbandi Order of sheikh Taoshobuddha (my Urduization, نَقْشْبَنْدِی طَرِیقَتَِ شَیْخَ تَاوْشُوبُْدّْھَا [MP3], Naq°š°ban°dí Ṭaríqata•i Šaý°ẖa Tāw°šūbudd°hā). I developed an association on June 11ᵗʰ, 2011.
  4. Naqshbandiyya Nazimiyya Sufi Order of America (my Urduization, نَقْشْبَنْدِیَّہ نَاظمِیَّہ صُوفِی طَرِیقَتَِ امْرِیکَہ [MP3], Naq°šban°diýýah Nāẓimiýýah Ṣūfí Ṭaríqata•i ʾAm°ríḱā). I developed an association on December 14ᵗʰ, 2009, and, again, on April 22ʳᵈ, 2010 (through two different websites belonging to the same order).
  5. Sahaj Marg (Sanskrit, सहज मार्ग [MP3], Sahaja Mārga, “Natural Path”) is a Hinduized Naq°š°ban°dī Ṣūfiyy order. I had a meditative session with one of the organization’s preceptor’s shortly after the turn of the 21ˢᵗ century. The founder was Ram Chandra (Sanskrit, रामचन्द् [MP3], Rāmacand, “dark moon”) also known as Lālajī Mahārāja (Sanskrit, लालजी महाराज [MP3], “honored playful one”), 1873–1931. He was allegedly the first non-Muslim šayẖ of the Naq°š°ban°dī Ṣūfiyy order. He was given bay°ʿaẗ by a Muslim. Lālajī’s legacy has been claimed by both Hindus and Muslims. See also Shri Ram Chandra Mission.
  6. The Golden Sufi Center. It is a Naq°š°ban°dí–Muǧaddadí (Urdu, نَقْشْبَنْدِی ـ مُجَدَّدِی, [MP3]) Ṣūfiyy order which is traced back to a nephew of Lālajī Mahārāja, Rādhā Mohana Lāla (Sanskrit, राधा मोहन लाल [MP3]), to Ahmad Ali Khan (Urdu, احْمَدَ عَلِی خَانَ [MP3], ʾAḥ°māda ʿAlī H̱āna), to Fazl Ahmad Khan (Urdu, فَضْلَ احْمَدَ عَلِی خَانَ [MP3], Faḍ°la ʾAḥ°māda H̱āna), 1857–1907, to Irina Tweedie (1907–1999), to, presently, Llewellyn Vaughan–Lee (born in 1953). In Arabic, Muǧaddad, as previously cited, is “renewer.” I was accepted directly by Llewellyn Vaughan–Lee, through an emailed response to a phone call, on June 27ᵗʰ, 2011.
    Dear Mark
    Thank you for your e-mail and enquiry. You ask about having a teacher. You are very welcome to travel with us on this path. When you have come come and visit here in Inverness.
    With best wishes
    Llewellyn
    Ps. Thank you for your excellent Sufi web site.
  7. Naqshbandi Mujaddadi Sardari Tariqah (Urdu, نَقْشْبَنْدِی مُجَدَّدِی سَرْدَارِی طَرِیقَتَ [MP3], Naq°š°ban°dí Muǧaddadí Sar°dārí Ṭaríqata). Sar°dārí (Urdu, سَرْدَارِی [MP3]) is “chiefship.” I developed an association on April 23ʳᵈ, 2010.
  8. Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement for the Propagation of Islam (Urdu, احمَدِیَّہَ انْجُمَنَ اِشَاعَتَِ اِسْلَامَ لَاہُورَ [MP3], ʾAḥ°madiýýaha ʾAn°ǧumana ʾIšāʿata•i ʾIs°lāma Lāhūra). I developed an association on January 23ʳᵈ, 2010.
  9. The Rose Sufi Crescent.
  10. United Submitters International of Rašād H̱alīfaẗ or Rashad Khalifa (Arabic, رَشَاد خَلِيفَة), 1935–1990 (assassinated). I developed an association in March, 2010. The organization’s other websites include: Proclaiming One United Religion for All People, Masjid Tucson (international headquarters), Submission.org, and God’s Mosque.
  11. I developed an association with the Spiritual Order of Faqr of Sultan-ul-Ashiqeen (Urdu, طَرِیقَتَِ سُلْطَانَ العَاشِقِین كَے فَقْرَ [MP3], Ṭaríqata•i Sul°ṭāna ʾal•ʿĀšiqín kē Faq°ra) on February 19ᵗʰ, 2018. I sent my initial email on February 9ᵗʰ, 2018. It is dedicated to, and focused upon, Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS). See the websites: Online Oath of Allegiance and Online Bayat With Sultan ul Ashiqeen Instructions.
  12. I joined with Roohaani (Urdu, رُوحَانِی [MP3], Rūḥāní), founded by Jahan Qadri (Urdu, جَهَانَ قَادْرِی [MP3], Ǧahāna Qad°rí), on August 14ᵗʰ, 2010. The order, which is in the tradition of Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS), may have folded or, at least, discontinued its former website.
Significantly, four of the organizations mentioned above—Naqshbandi Order of sheikh Taoshobuddha, Naqshbandiyya Nazimiyya Sufi Order of America, Naqshbandi Mujaddadi Sardari Tariqah, and The Golden Sufi Center—are associated with Naq°š°ban°diyyaẗ (Arabic, نَقْشْبَنْدِيَّة [MP3]), Naq°š°ban°dí (Persian, نَقْشْبَنْدِی [MP3]), Naq°š°ban°diýýah (Urdu, نَقْشْبَنْدِیَّہ [MP3]), or Nàkèshénbāndí (Mandarin Chinese, 納克什班迪 [MP3]). The first portion of the word, naq°š (Persian, نَقْش [MP3]), translates as inscription. The second segment of the word, ban°d (Persian, بَنْد [MP3]), derives from the same Indo–European root as bond, bind, or binding to ʾAllꞌah (SWT). An integral part of the Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement, Naq°š°ban°diyyaẗ was once the largest Ṣūfiyy order in medieval, or premodern, India.
Another historically unrelated Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy movement to which I am drawn is Sri Viswa Viznana Vidya Adhyatmika Peetham (Hindi, श्री विश्व विज्ञान विद्या आध्यात्मिक पीठम् [MP3], Śrī Viśva Vijñāna Vidyā Ādhyātmika Pīṭham; or Telugu, శ్రీ విశ్వము విజ్ఞాన విద్య ఆధ్యాత్మికం పీఠము [MP3], Śrī Viśvamu Vijñāna Vidya Ādhyātmikaṁ Pīṭham, “Spiritual Seat for the Radiant Understanding of Knowledge”). Historically, a branch of Qād°riyyaẗ, current members include Hindus and Muslims. It was founded by Brahmarishi Sri Madeen Kabir Shah (Hindi, ब्रह्मर्षि श्री मदिन् कबीर शाह [MP3], Brahmarṣi Śrī Madin Kabīra Śāha; or Telugu, బ్రహ్మరిషి శ్రీ మదిన్ కబీర్ షా, Brahmarṣi Śrī Madin Kabīr Ṣā), a saintly being born during the final decades of the Bhakti-Ṣūfiyy movement. He was a disciple of the aforementioned ʿAbd ʾal•Qādir ʾal•Ǧīlāniyy.
Sri Viswa Viznana Vidya Adhyatmika Peetham’s motto is “Service to Humanity is Service to God.” The organization refers to its devotional system of beliefs and practices as Sufi Vedanta (Hindi, सूफी वेदांत [MP3], Sūphī Vedāṃta; or Telugu, సూఫీ వేదాంత [MP3], Sūphī Vēdānta, “Ṣūfiyy End of Knowledge”) and Arsha – Sufi Dharma (Hindi, आर्ष – सूफी धर्म [MP3], Ārṣa – Sūphī Dharma; or Telugu, అర్ష్ – సూఫీ ధర్మ [MP3], Arṣ – Sūphī Dharma, “Sage – Ṣūfiyy Support”):
Sufi Vedanta and Sufi Dharma
The ancestors of Brahmarṣi Śrī Madin Kabīra Śāha emigrated from Baghdad (Arabic, بَغْداد [MP3], Baġdād) to the Indian metropolitan distict of Delhi (Hindi, दिल्ली [MP3], Dillī; or Telugu, ఢిల్లీ [MP3], Ḍhillī) and, ultimately, to the Indian city of Hyderabad (Hindi, हैदराबाद [MP3], Haidarābāda; or Telugu, హైదరాబాద్, Haidarābād) in the present–day Indian state of Andhra Pradesh (Hindi, आंध्र प्रदेश [MP3], Āṃdhra Pradēśa; or Telugu, ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ [MP3], Āndhra Pradēś). Upon relocating, around 1700 A.D., from Hyderbad to Pithapuram (Hindi, पितापुरम [MP3], Pitāpurama; or Telugu, పిఠాపురం [MP3], Piṭhāpuraṁ), India, Brahmarṣi Śrī Madin Kabīra Śāha founded the organization.
By male primogeniture, the firstborn or eldest son has since become the peethadhipathi (Hindi, पीठाधिपति [MP3], pīṭhādhipati; or Telugu, పీఠాధిపతి [MP3], pīṭhādhipati, “chairman”). The present, and ninth, peethadhipathi or guru of the organization is Brahmarishi Sri Dr. Umar Alisha–2 (Hindi, ब्रह्मर्षि श्री डाक्टर ओमर ऐलिस २ [MP3], Brahmarṣi Śrī Ḍākṭara Ōmara Ailisa II; or Telugu, బ్రహ్మరిషి శ్రీ డాక్టర్ ఒమర్ ఆలిస్ ౨ [MP3], Brahmarṣi Śrī Ḍākṭar Omar Ālis II), born in 1966:
Present Guru
A separate and an additional Bhakti–Ṣūfiyy attraction, to me, was founded by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (Sanskrit, चैतन्य महाप्रभु [MP3], Caitanya Mahāprabhu), 1486–1584, i.e., Gaudiya Vaishnavism (Sanskrit, गौड़ीय वैष्णव, [MP3], Gauṛīya Vaiṣṇava]) and its philosophy of Achintya Bheda Abheda (Sanskrit, अचिन्त्यभेदाभेद [MP3], Acintyabhedābheda, “inconceivable difference and oneness”). Duality and nonduality are harmonized. Gaudiya lies in South Asia’s Bengal (Bengali, বঙ্গ [MP3], Baṅga) region. Vaiṣṇava focuses upon Vishnu (Sanskrit, विष्णु [MP3], Viṣṇu, “All–Pervasive One”) worship, but Krishna (Sanskrit, कृष्ण [MP3], Kṛṣṇa, “Dark”), whose dates of birth and death remain disputed, is often included.
Gaudiya Vaishnavism is widely, but not uniquely, linked to the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). On July, 1966, this devotional organization was established, in New York City, by Abhay Charanaravinda “A. C.” Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada (Bengali, অভয়চরণারবিন্দ ভক্তিবেদান্ত স্বামীপ্রভুপাদ [MP3], Abhaẏacaraṇārabinda Bhaktibēdānta Sbāmīprabhupāda; or Sanskrit, अभय चरणारविन्द भक्तिवेदान्त स्वामी प्रभुपाद [MP3], Abhaya Caraṇāravinda Bhaktivedānta Svāmī Prabhupāda). A native of Kolkata (Bengali, কলকাতা [MP3], Kalakātā; or Hindi, कोलकाता [MP3], Kolakātā), previously Romanized as Calcutta, India, he was born in 1896 and died in 1977.
A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
The mantra of ISKCON, one especially conspicuous to members of my own baby–boomer generation from Western metropolises (including my hometown, New York City), is referred to by devotees within the original organization and its several splinter groups as the mahāmantra (Sanskrit, महामन्त्र [MP3] “great mantra”). That mantra is chanted as follows: Hare [Power or Potency] Krṣṇa [Black], Hare Krṣṇa, Krṣṇa Krṣṇa, Hare Hare; Hare Rāma [Dark], Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare (Sanskrit, हरे कृष्ण । हरे कृष्ण । कृष्ण कृष्ण । हरे हरे ॥ हरे राम । हरे राम । राम राम । हरे हरे [MP3], “Power to Krishna, Power to Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Power Power; Power to Rama, Power to Rama, Rama Rama, Power Power.”
The quotation directly below is a complete translation of the only known, or extant, text by Caitanya. Transliterations from the original Sanskrit were humbly modified by me. I also translated these Sanskrit terms into English:
Glory to the Śrī–Kṛṣṇā–saṅkīrtana [Sanskrit, श्री–कृष्ण–संकीर्तन; MP3, “Radiant Krishna chanting”], which cleanses the heart of all the dust accumulated for years and extinguishes the fire of conditional life, of repeated birth and death. This saṅkīrtana [Sanskrit, संकीर्तन, “chanting”] movement is the prime benediction for humanity at large because it spreads the rays of the benediction moon. It is the life of all transcendental knowledge. It increases the ocean of transcendental bliss, and it enables us to fully taste the nectar for which we are always anxious.
O my Lord, Thy holy name alone can render all benediction to living beings, and thus Thou has hundreds and millions of names, like Kṛṣṇā and Goviṃdā [Sanskrit, गोविंदा; MP3, “protector of cows”]. In these transcendental names Thou hast invested all Thine transcendental energies. There are not even hard and fast rules for chanting these names. O my Lord, out of kindness Thou does enable us to easily approach The by Thine holy names, but I am so unfortunate that I have no attraction for them.
One should chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking oneself lower than the straw in the street; one should be more tolerant than a tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige, and should be ready to offer all respect to others. In such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly.
O Almighty Lord, I have no desire to accumulate wealth, nor do I desire beautiful women, nor do I want any number of followers. I only want Thy causeless devotional service, birth after birth.
O Son of Mahārāja Naṃdā [Sanskrit, महाराज नंदा; MP3, “Great or Exalted King of Joy,” i.e., Kṛṣṇā’s custodial or “foster” father], I am They eternal servitor, yet somehow or other I have fallen into the ocean of birth and death. Please pick me up from this ocean of death and place me as one of the atoms at They lotus feet.
O my Lord, when will my eyes be decorated with tears of love flowing constantly when I chant They holy name? When will my voice choke up, and when will the hairs of my body stand on end at the recitation of They name?
O Goviṃdā! Feeling Thy separation, I am considering a moment to be like twelve or more years. Tears are flowing from my eyes like torrents of rain, and I am feeling thoroughly vacant in the world in They absence.
I know no one but Kṛṣṇā as my Lord, and He shall remain so even if He handles me roughly by His embrace or makes me brokenhearted by not being present before me. He is completely free to do anything and everything, for He is always my worshipful Lord, unconditionally.
〜 Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Śrī Śikṣāṣṭakama (Sanskrit, श्री शिक्षाष्टकम [MP3], “Radiant Knowledge”).
Artistic Representation of Caitanya Mahāprabhu

Return to the Page Menu.

٦. Preternatural Multiverse
Now, in the 21ˢᵗ century, a speculative narrative on many worlds theory (radio show; MP3)—among quantum physics’ theories of everything—and a Ṣūfiyy–type mysticism takes communism into the omniverse. The transformative praxis of the syncretistic, if apocryphal, Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of The Multiversal Communist Collective can be summarized as follows: the meditative cultivation of a transdimensional commune–ism with loving beings from other metaphysical universes. The figurative “vehicles” for contact and communication with a myriad of omniversal creatures—which reside within both ourselves and this world—are the phenomenological analyses (MP3) of Heartfuless Inquiry™ or The Echoing Practice™.
ʾal•Ssalāmu ʿalay°kum! (Arabic, السَّلَامُ عَلَيْكُم! [MP3], “peace be upon you!”) Before commencing this cursory exposition, I feel duly inspired to offer earnest and heartfelt apologies for any possible mispronunciations, on my part, throughout the entire monograph. My abundant weaknesses, in this area and in many others others, must surely be acutely obvious to the careful reader. Nevertheless, I will, as best I can, attempt to set them aside and proceed to the subject at hand. Similar perspectives to the ones presented in the following diagram have been considered more or less cogently within The Institute for Dialectical metaRealism™, The Unicentric Paradigm™, and Echoes of Cosmic Unity™:
  1. UNIVERSE OF TAW°ḤĪD: This Collective Center of Taw°ḥīd–Täwahədo–Tawəhidə–Yiḥūḏ—the innermost universe of universes for all the beings and things in existence—is inhabited by the Cosmic Unity of ʾAllꞌah–ʾÄlahə–ʾAlāhā–ʾĔlōhiym. Additionally, those quadruplicate sets of words are pairs of Semitic cognates. Taw°ḥīd (Arabic, تَوْحِيد [MP3]), Täwahədo (Geʾez/Gəʾəzə, ተዋህዶ [MP3]), Tawəhidə (Amharic, ታውሂድ [MP3]), and Yiḥūḏ (Hebrew, יִחוּד [MP3]) refer to “Unification.” On the other hand, ʾAllꞌah (SWT), ʾÄlahə (Amharic, አላህ [MP3]), ʾAlāhā (Syriac/Suryāyā, (ܐܲܠܵܗܵܐ [MP3]), and ʾĔlōhiym (Hebrew, אֱלֹהִ֔י [MP3]) are designations for “God.” Like rolling a ball of yarn, not peeling back the layers of an onion, these successive universes spiral out from the Collective Center.


  2. UNIVERSE OF TAḤARRUR: The term Taḥarrur (Arabic, تَحَرُّر [MP3]) refers to “emancipation” or “liberation.” In Sanskrit and Hindi, mokṣa or moksha (मोक्ष [MP3]) brings into its orbit various forms of “emancipation.” Extending out from this hidden, unknowable universe, its exterior universes will be enumerated in the following categories.
    1. UNIVERSE OF RUSUL: These sanctified Rusul (Arabic, رُسُل [MP3], “Apostles or Messengers”), residing in this universe, are omniscient and omnipotent Beings, AS. A Rasūl (Arabic, رَسُول [MP3]), AS, on the other hand, is a single “Apostle or Messenger” (ʿAlay°hi ʾal•Ssalām or Peace be upon Him). Greater and Lesser Apostles are Emissaries (AS) of the UNIVERSE OF TAW°ḤĪD. Their eloquent discourses are addressed to mortal and everlasting souls. Avatārāḥ (Sanskrit, अवताराः [MP3]) or Avatāroṃ (Hindi, अवतारों [MP3]), AS, are “Descending Ones or Ones Who cross down.” The singular form is the Sanskrit and Hindi Avatāra (अवतार [MP3]), AS.
      1. Universe of Maẓ°rūf ʾal•Kaw°niyy: The Rusul (AS) abide together, living as Many in One, within a great Maẓ°rūf ʾal•Kaw°niyy (Arabic, مَظْرُوف الكَوْنِيّ [MP3]), a Cosmic Envelope. The Cosmic Envelope of divine Unity is a celestial kūn°fid°rāliyyaẗ (Arabic, كُونْفِدرَالِيَّة [MP3]), an Indo–European loanword for a “confederation.” Also relevant is the term anekāntavāda (Sanskrit and Hindi, अनेकान्तवाद [MP3])―a concept in Jainism for many–sidednesss.
      2. Universe of Nis°biyyaẗ: Each Apostle (ʿAlay°hi ʾal•Ssalām or Peace be upon Him) has a unique relative reality. Nis°biyyaẗ (نِسْبِيَّة [MP3]] is “relativity.” Āpekṣikatva (Sanskrit and Hindi, आपेक्षिकत्व [MP3]) is also “relativity.”
    2. UNIVERSE OF ⫯AR°Ḍ ʾAL–ṢIR°FAT̈: ⫯Ar°ḍ ʾal•Ṣir°faẗ (Arabic, أَرْض الصِرْفَة [MP3], “Pure Land”), Jìngtǔ (Mandarin Chinese, 淨土 [MP3], “Pure Land”), Jōdo (Japanese, 浄土 [MP3], “Pure Land”), Chŏngt’o (Korean, 정토 [MP3], “Pure Land”), Tịnh Độ (Vietnamese/Tiếng Việt [MP3], “Pure Land”), Din Dæn Bris̄uthṭhi̒ (Thai, ดินแดนบริสุทธิ์ [MP3], “Pure Land”), Dei Sot (Khmer/Pheasaeakhmer/Khemorphasa, ដីសុទ្ធ [MP3], “Pure Land”), Thidin Bolisud (Lao/Law, ທີ່ດິນບໍລິສຸດ [MP3], “Pure Land”), Śuddha Jamīna (Hindi and Marathi, शुद्ध जमीन [MP3], “Pure Land”), Śuddha Bhūmi (Nepali, शुद्ध भूमि [MP3], “Pure Land”), Biśudꞌdha Bhūmi (Bengali, বিশুদ্ধ ভূমি [MP3], “Pure Land”), Tanah Murni (Malay/Bahasa Malaysia [MP3], “Pure Land”), or ʾẸrẹṣ hạ•Ṯāhōr (Hebrew, אֶרֶץ הַטָהוֹר [MP3], “Pure Land”), is the true and eternal universe of the bodhisattvāḥ (Sanskrit, बोधिसत्त्वाः [MP3], “awakening essences”). Each bodhisattva (Sanskrit, बोधिसत्त्व [MP3], “awakening essence”) devotes her or his everlasting life to the service of others. All departed souls now dwell, for all eternity, in various strings of this universe.
      1. Universe of Dirāyaẗ: The world of dirāyaẗ (Arabic, دِرَايَة [MP3]), “knowledge,” possessed by the bodhisattvāḥ comes, progressively, from the Rusul (AS) Themselves. In Sanskrit and Hindi, vidyā (विद्या [MP3]), from the same Indo–European root as “wisdom” and “wise,” is “knowledge.”
      2. Universe of Raḥ°maẗ: Raḥ°maẗ (Arabic, رَحْمَة [MP3]), “compassion or mercy,” is the ṭarīqaẗ (Arabic, طَرِيقَة [MP3], rās°tah (Urdu, رَاسْتَہ [MP3]), “path”), dẹrẹḵə (Hebrew, דֶּרֶךְ [MP3], “path”), duka (Amharic, ዱካ [MP3], “path”), pathi (Sanskrit, पथि [MP3], “path”), patha (Bengali, পথ [MP3], “path”), dào or tao (Mandarin Chinese, 道 [MP3], “way or path”), dao (Lingwa de Planeta/Lidepla/LdP [MP3], “path”), vojo (Esperanto [MP3], “path”), voyo (Ido [MP3], “path”), sentiero (Interlingua [MP3], “path”), luveg (Volapük [MP3], “path”), weth (Láadan [MP3], “path”), стежка in Cyrillic or stežka in Roman (Interslavic [MP3], “path”), paund (Sambahsa [MP3], “path”), or pluta (Lojban [MP3], “path”) of universal maturity for all bodhisattvāḥ.
      3. Universe of ʾÂẖiraẗ: In this universe of the great beyond, the intended result of our moral lives in the Universe of Ṭabīʿaẗ (Arabic, طَبِيعَة [MP3], “nature”) is revealed to be personal and social emancipation as completed bodhisattvāḥ. ʾÂẖiraẗ (Arabic, آخِرَة [MP3]) is the “Hereafter.” In Hebrew, Šāmạyim (שָׁמַיִם [MP3]) is “Heaven.”
    3. Universe of Ṭabīʿaẗ
    4. UNIVERSE OF ⫯AḤ°LĀM: The dream state and the Guardian Angels (Arabic, المَلَائِكَة الحَارِسَة [MP3], ʾal•Malā⫯yikaẗ ʾal•Ḥārisaẗ) Who inhabit that universe can be powerful agents for self-discovery. One (AS) came to me in a dream, bumped into my bed, and said, “Uh, oh.” I thought I was dreaming. However, when I got up, my keys were missing from the push pin in my wall. At my assistant resident manager’s urging, I filed a police report. The officer, named “Stephen” as I recall, took photographs of my apartment. When I woke up the following morning, the keys were returned. I obviously cancelled the police report. However, I was also transformed from an unempathetic Autist into an empathic, loving human being. ⫯Aḥ°lām (Arabic, أَحْلَام [MP3]) are “dreams.”
    5. UNIVERSE OF FAḌĀ⫯YIL: Through the Rusul (AS), each of us can, while living in this universe, become a virtuous bodhisattva. Faḍā⫯yil (Arabic, فَضَائِل [MP3]) are “virtues.”

  3. UNIVERSE OF NĀSŪT: Nāsūt (Arabic, نَاسُوت [MP3], “humanity”), which occupies the relatively limited universe of human beings, contains rational (such as thinking and free will), sensory, growing, and cohesive characteristics. This universe is interplanetary, interstellar, intergalactic, and perhaps interdimensional.
    1. UNIVERSE OF TAWĀǦUD ʾAL–MUŠ°TARAK: Groups, layered within this universe, unite around one or more Rusul (AS). Tawāǧud ʾal•Muš°tarak (Arabic, تَوَاجُد المُشْتَرَك [MP3], “joint presence” or “common presence”), is “copresence.” In Sanskrit and Hindi, ekatā (एकता [MP3]) is “unity” or “copresence.”
    2. UNIVERSE OF WAH°M: The negation or contradiction of copresence divides people from one another. Wah°m (Arabic, وَهْم [MP3]) is delusion or imagination. In Sanskrit and Hindi, māyā (Sanskrit and Hindi, माया [MP3]) is “illusion”, “dualism,” or “demireality.”
    3. UNIVERSE OF MĀDDIYYAT̈: Human bodies, in the physical universe, include the characteristics of animals, vegetables, and minerals. Māddiyyaẗ (Arabic, مَادِّيَّة [MP3]) is “materiality.”

  4. UNIVERSE OF ⫰IḤ°SĀS: Each animal in this universe contains sensory, growing, and cohesive characteristics. They are the animal’s bodily functions (shared by human beings). ⫰Iḥ°sās (Arabic, إِحْسَاس [MP3]) is “sensation.” In Sanskrit, vedanā (वेदना [MP3]) is “sensation” or “feeling.”

  5. UNIVERSE OF NUMUWUṆ: Each vegetable occupying this universe of germination contains growing and cohesive characteristics. Numuwuṇ (Arabic, نُمُوٌّ [MP3]) is “growth.”

  6. UNIVERSE OF TARĀBUṬ: Each mineral within this universe of elemental connectedness contains cohesive characteristics. Tarābuṭ (Arabic, تَرَابُط [MP3]) is “cohesion.” Likewise, in Sanskrit and Hindi, saṃsakti (संसक्ति [MP3]) is “cohesion.”

Return to the Page Menu.

٧. Perils of Left and Right Populism
Populism (Arabic, شَعْبِيَّة [MP3], šaʿ°biyyaẗ), whether on the left or the neofascist right, is highly dangerous. Left–wing populism, as an opponent of critical theory, is hostile toward political correctness, African American socialist intersectionality, Black Lives Matter, and Antifa (even as tactics, not as strategies). Critical thinking and the long–term success of legitimate left revolutionary movements are threatened. Moreover, an anti–intellectual, pseudo–left populism thrives on categorical—either–or and good–bad—statements. All critical theorists should be vigilant concerning the cancerous growth of leftist populism in numerous dark recesses of the Internet and be willing to confront it forthrightly. Such a spurious leftism (Arabic, يَسَارِيَّة الزَائِفَة [MP3], yasāriyyaẗ ʾal•za⫯yifaẗ) may present the most dangerous challenge to the Left since McCarthyism (Arabic, مْكَارْثِيَّة [MP3], M°kār°ṯiyyaẗ).
Anecdotally, I and my academic colleagues are often treated like trash by left–wing populists. I searched inside myself for any culpability in the anti–intellectualism on NationStates. Then I looked around and could find no other academics. Initially, I was kicked out of a NationStates “region” after standing up to a moderator who verbally abused me. Later, in the Left–Wing Discussion Thread III, I became the target of vicious attacks for simply self–identifying as an academic Marxist and for discussing critical social theory. I have repeatedly declared that I elevate left refoundation (Arabic, إِعَادَة التَأْسِيس اليَسَار [MP3], ⫰ʿādaẗ ʾal•t⫯āsīs ʾal•yasār) and left regroupment (Arabic, عَادَة التَجْمِيع اليَسَار [MP3], ⫰ʿādaẗ ʾal•taǧ°mīʿ ʾal•yasār) over allegiance to my tendency. That fact notwithstanding, I was accused of being a rigid Luxemburgist and an élitist (Arabic, نُّخْبِيّ [MP3], nnuẖ°biyy).
Communists can never be too extreme about justice. Nothing excels it in importance. Yet, many left–wing populists, parotting a meme, disparage others as social justice warriors (SJWs). What is the point of being a Leftist if one does not fight social injustice? There are hosts of other activities in which one could become engaged. Hobbies are abundant. One can shop, text, surf the web, or chat on the phone. Battling particular injustices does not preclude one from struggling, more specifically, for revolution. One can enroll in courses, or read books, on time management. Ultimately, how much one chooses to engage daily in this or that activity is a private matter. One could even, heavens forbid, dedicate one’s life to battling injustice through an honorable life as a social justice warrior (Arabic, مُحَارِب لِأَجْل العَدَالَة الاِجْتِمَاعِيَّة [MP3], muḥārib li•⫯āǧ°l ʾal•ʿadālaẗ ʾal•ʾiǧ°timāʿiyyaẗ).
Bolsheviks (Russian, Большевики, Bolʹševiki [MP3]) often view capitalism in purely economic terms. To them, the fight for social justice is simply a distraction from their economic version of revolution. In my own communist or revolutionary socialist world, we would probably not even remain in the same room, or tendency, together. I, like my fellow libertarian Marxist Roy Bhaskar, view all expressions of liberation from injustice as aspects of the fight for communism. To me, SJWs should, in copresence, be embraced, not, in demireality, be rejected. At that point, they can be encouraged to become revolutionaries. Such a liberation from social injustice and all forms of inequity—the radical essence of left–libertarianism (Arabic, اليَسَار مِن لِيبِرْتَارِيَّة [MP3], ʾal•yasār min lībir°tāriyyaẗ)—is, in my view, the key to achieving communism.
Thus, I would never attack any SJWs, since I regard them, not only as allies, but as as potential candidates to become libertarian communists. Yet, even beyond the pragmatic dimension, which can only take one so far, a libertarian communist must, I also believe, become an SJW. To me, an anti–SJW libertarian communist is plainly a contradiction in terms. If the liberty in libertarianism is not universalized to the fight against all expressions of plenary injustice, one might as well, from my perspective, be a Marxist–Leninist, a syndicalist, or, for that matter, a fascist. Why squander one’s life and time with a philosophy, libertarian Marxism, which, through critical realism, emphasizes universal liberation from demireality or disunity?
As a libertarian communist, I consider myself to be an SJW. Moreover, I would argue that a non–SJW libertarian communist is an oxymoron―a contradiction in terms. What libertarian communism offers to those activists—committed to serving humanity through social justice warfare—is a sound basis for praxis (practice) strongly grounded in Marxist theory. Yet, even without Marxist theory, some practitioners of social justice warfare have accomplished considerable good. As Rosa Luxemburg taught us, reform, while limited in its productivity when contrasted with revolution, can be beneficial. However, those advantages can be accelerated by synthesizing social justice warfare with Marxism.
Social justice is not always compatible with egalitarianism. However, in all cases, social justice surpasses egalitarianism in importance. To consider an applicable issue of social reform, in the sense that Rosa distinguished it from revolution, African Americans continue to derive socioeconomic and other costs from the plantation system. On the other hand, European Americans have persisted in extracting socioeconomic and other benefits from that same plantation system. Is there an appropriate remedy? Yes, but I sadly doubt that such a solution will be implemented. Paying reparations to African Americans would certainly not be egalitarian. Yet, it would be just. Many white conservatives would wail. My response: Who the hell cares?
Regarding feminism in particular, the claim has been made, on NationStates, that after women achieved suffrage, the feminist movement should have ceased to exist. Such comments not only disqualify that person as a Leftist. They raise the question of whether the category of human being has been used too broadly. I mean, what person in her or his right mind would oppose the successes of the women’s liberation movement in guaranteeing equal pay for equal work, the protections of women against sexual harassment and assault, and the freedom of women to serve in military combat as worthy and wonderful achievements? Perhaps these sorry individuals are candidates for a psychiatrist’s couch, but they are certainly in need of pity.
Relative to revolutionary emancipation, dear Rosa Luxemburg recognized the limitation of reforms, or wars for social justice in the contemporary vernacular, yet she welcomed them. Idealism, to Rosa, must never be elevated above the immediate welfare of the worker. A pragmatism of this sort should be embraced by all communists. Of course, it is not. Far too many communists, mostly Marxist–Leninists in my experience, get so caught up in their own thoughtless mind games, that they fail to see both the forest of revolution and, however imperfect, the trees of immediate improvements. Libertarian communists cannot make that error. Revolution comes first. However, as the saying goes, one can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Progressives want to reform societies, not to supplant them with entirely different systems. Leftists, however, would rather see present-day societies completely replaced by communism or revolutionary socialism. On the other hand, Rosa was not opposed to reform. As a loving, compassionate, and true humanitarian, she favored anything which would ameliorate the lives of the proletariat. That notwithstanding, she recognized that reforms are shot-term fixes. The real solutions will only come through revolution. In other words, reforming the world cannot become a substitute for creating an entirely new one. Communists cannot allow themselves to be seduced by politicians into abandoning the revolutionary struggle for empty promises.
The difficult question must be asked: Who precisely is going to legislate reforms? The answer: It is the elected or, in some societies, the appointed legislators. They are, if we are to be brutally honest with outselves, among the very people who benefit from the status quo. An incentive for bringing about real change is lacking. Most governments are bought and paid for by corporations. Therefore, no matter how much progressives may pressure their governments to enact reforms, any supposed improvements in the capitalist world–system will never be sufficient to alleviate human suffering, to bring about individual emancipation, or to transform the entire planet through libertarian communism. Only a real revolution will be sufficient.
In Rosa’s day, a social democracy, a term she employed, was democratic communism. Still, despite Rosa’s best efforts to preserve social democracy for her democratic libertarian communism, nomenclatures continually change. Early in the 20ᵗʰ century, the revised social democracy, or democratic socialism, divided. Some remained democratic socialists. On both sides of the pond, the democratic socialists adopted counterrevolutionary Eduard Bernstein’s evolutionary socialism. A few called themselves Marxists, but some abandoned the label. That fision among democratic socialists endures till now. Through another split, social democracy became reformist capitalism. U.S. social democrats supported Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal or, subsequently, Bernie Sanders’ Our Revolution. Prior to disgraced UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, the Labour Party widely backed social democracy.
Progressive activists may be sorely misguided. Their diligence, however, should never be disparaged. Such advocates of progressivism, with their admittedly nascent class consciousness, are sometimes excellent candidates to become revolutionaries. The theoretical praxis of constructing thought bridges from progressivism to libertarian Marxist communism can, in some situations, be a highly effective communist entry tactic. Today, a mere one–dimensional communism has become disengaged in the struggle for universal emancipation from human oppression. A counterfeit communism, indeed, betrays the Left. Genuine projects of liberation are ontologically incompatable with populist smear campaigns against feminists and SJWs.
One example of institutionalized social justice warfare, in the U.S., is Affirmative Action. Most people are unaware that, because of several decades of a relatively conservative Supreme Count, Affirmative Action currently exists in name only. Whenever I have been fortunate enough to serve on a search committee for a new assistant professor of sociology, I have been required to attend a seminar on Affirmative Action. We are simply told not to ask any personal questions regarding race, sexual identity, ethnicity, and so forth. That is Affirmative Action in the 21ˢᵗ century. White people sued claiming the fallacy of reverse discrimination. People holding power cannot discriminate against themselves, but they do want to keep their privileges.
Likewise, whenever a sign language interpreter enters anyone of my classes for a deaf student, that is preferential treatment. If one of my students with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder—or ADHD—(Arabic, اضْطِرَابُ نَقْصِ الانْتِبَاهِ مَعَ فَرْطِ النَّشَاط [MP3], ʾaḍ°ṭirābu naq°si ʾal•ʾan°tibāhi maʿa far°ṭi ʾal•hāšāṭ), Autism (Arabic, تَوَحُّد [MP3], tawaḥḥud), or learning disabilities (Arabic, عَوَائِق التَعْلِيمِيَّة [MP3], ʿawā⫯iq ʾal•taʿ°līmiyyaẗ) obtains extra testing time, that is preferential treatment. When my Blind (Arabic, أَعْمَى [MP3], ⫯aʿ°maỳ) students obtain recorded or Braille–coded testbooks, they are also receiving preferential treatment. The point of such treatment is to compensate for existing disparities or inequities. As such, many higher educational disability offices have been redesignated as Access Services or words to that effect. All students should reap the greatest advantages for their success.
I feel deeply grateful that, as an autonomous being, I control my own agency. My liberty, as a libertarian communist or socialist, is mine and mine alone. No other human being, including on NationStates, can take that agency and liberty from me. Perhaps I am missing something, but what is the alternative to social justice? Social injustice? The key is not to abandon social justice projects but to ground them in Marxist theory. A NationStates signature contains the conspiratorial line, “Social justice is a bourgeois plot.” Furthermore, when asked to define progressivism, the first member of NationStates quoted below characterized it with supposedly negative characteristics, while the second poster replied affirmatively to the comment:
Anti–white racism, misandry, Islamophilia…
〜 Liriena, “Left Wing Discussion Thread IV: Oh Hai Marx.” NationStates Forum. March 13ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on March 13ᵗʰ, 2018.
Ah  I see. SJW [social justice warrior] stuff?
〜 West Leas Oros, “Left Wing Discussion Thread IV: Oh Hai Marx.” NationStates Forum. March 13ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on March 13ᵗʰ, 2018.
On the other hand, after an apparent right–wing populist wrote me on NationStates, “Sooooo what does … [about] your being a libertarian communist? if you hate it in the U.S., why not move elsewhere? Or do you not have the means?,” I replied:
Oh, you are an advocate of America, love it or leave it. I don’t love any country. As I tell my students, what better country to be in, for a communist, than the evil American Empire. The only reason I would leave is laziness. I am not lazy.
〜 Mark A. Foster, “Left Wing Discussion Thread V: Completing the Five Thread Plan.” NationStates Forum. May 29ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on May 29ᵗʰ, 2018.
Among many left–wing populists on NationStates, terms like SJW, regressive left, and, perhaps saddest of all, feminist have become shorthand articulations for everything I do not like—and then some. People use these designations, while rarely (if ever) defining them, and assuming that the people deciphering these postings will share the identical definitions as the original writers. Words, in and of themselves, lack significance, yet one makes up, concocts, some meaning within one’s own mind. Such jargons are convenient means to write or speak without ever saying anything. As one just recently awakened Autistic, new to the experiences of empathy and love, I adore these people and, what is more, deeply identify with them.
As this Autistic grew up, I was entirely unable to experience, or even to understand in any meaningful fashion, empathetically. Beginning around the year 2000, I had an extended series of breathtaking spiritual experiences, some of them during meditations and others during dreams and visions, which rapidy awakened me out of my plenary ignorance. I now feel blissfully condemned to partake, virtually routinely, in a life filled with empathy. These days, it disturbs me, often tortures me, to see feminists and others who have suffered being attacked, never loved, by socialist pretenders. Here is a typical, only sparsely edited, response which I made to a left–wing populist, on the NationStates forum, who participates in the unfortunate, and all–too common, right–wing mimicry of bashing both feminism and feminists:
“Have you heard of socialist feminism, Marxist feminism, material feminism, and anarcha–feminism? No, I have not been asleep at the wheel, as you charged. However, I am an academic communist, not a left–wing populist. This forum has made me aware of a massive rift on the left. As a a New Leftist beginning in 1968, I was somehow previously unaware of it. NationStates has proved to be an awakening for me and, to be honest, a quite difficult, but necessary, one. No academic communists I know, and I literally know hundreds, would ever dream of attacking feminism. We view feminists as our allies or potential allies. Seeing feminists as anything less betrays every principle I have lived by since 1968. I will not change.”
The American women’s liberation movement was among the most successful social movements in U.S. history. Was it perfect? Unequivocally, no. Was it revolutionary? Of course not. However, on both counts, so what? This social justice movement, while progressive and not Leftist, resulted in tremendous social, economic, political, familial, and occupational benefits for women. Even now, many of those gains have continued to unfold. The movement also layed the groundwork for diverse and numerous Marxist, anarchist, socialist, and communist feminisms which followed. Revolution would, ultimately, clearly be preferable to reform. By the same token, the accomplishments of the latter should not be diminished or attacked.
Another bogeyman of many left–wing populists is identity politics (or the politics of identity). My views are rather straightforward: If the politics of identity is a tactic for revolutionary transformation, or the sufferings of the subaltern or workers are amelioriated, I love it. Otherwise, I could not give a damn about politicizing identity. A politics of identity may sometimes have an emancipatory function. However, it must, in that case, serve as a thought bridge to transformational class consciousness. Such an identity politics pertains solely to an oppressed minority. The politics of identity, or identitarianism, championed by certain white supremacists, fascists, neonazis, and the alt–right is fit only for the septic tank or neighborhood sewer.
One of the self–defined fascists on NationStates quotes a sentence, in his forum signature, from the Italian fascist Julius Evola (MP3), 1898–1974. Today, on April 3ʳᵈ, 2018, he used the disparaging term, “Jap” for the Japanese people. I responded to him, “I would really, really appreciate it if you would not use that derogatory term for the Japanese people.” The fascist’s reply was “Get over it.” I reported this person’s words to the moderation team. The fascist was banned from NationStates for a single day. The moderator then wrote to the fascist, “… when someone points out that you’re using a potentially offensive word in a way that offends them and your only response is ‘get over it’ I have trouble seeing your intent as anything but to offend or annoy.” As someone who cares deeply about social justice, which is why I identify with Antifa, I am grateful even for small victories.
A neofascist on NationStates fancies himself a left–wing populist. He is not. A rattlesnake may say, “I am a scorpion.” Both animals are venomous, but the old rattlesnake remains. I, as a libertarian communist, am one of this person’s favorite targets of opportunity. Recently, I pointed out a mere truism, namely, that some, but categorically not all, National Bolsheviks (Russian, Национальные Большевики [MP3], Nacionalʹnye Bolʹševiki) or Nazbols (Russian, Нацболы [MP3], Nacboly) are fascists or third positionists. It was certainly not an original statement, and most reasonably well–read people would, I presume, be aware of that fact. His response to my comment? He called me—the Russian–Austrian child of Jewish parents and distant relative of persons assassinated in the Holocaust—an antisemite. Many people seem to lack the acumen needed to function as human beings.
Critiquing someone else on NationStates for making stereotypical comments about Islamic law, I asked:
Can you, therefore, explain what Shariah (Arabic, شَرِيعَة, Šarīʿaẗ) law is? Or even what the word means? And no Wikipedia references please.
〜 Mark A. Foster. NationStates Forum. Jul 3ʳᵈ, 2018. Retrieved on July 3ʳᵈ, 2018.
I never received a response to my question, not that I expected one, but the neofascist replied:
Lol [laughing out loud]. Trying to handwave how it’s actually practised by modern cultural conservatives by demanding that we can only discuss it through a series of closed academic questions based around dictionary definitions, textbook references and what it’s allegedly ‘meant’ to be, rather than actually existing Sharia. It’s an exact repeat of the methods used in the intersectionality debate. Strap yourselves in and put your space helmets on lads, we’re heading back to the reality-abstracted lecture hall floating at the end of the universe.
〜 NationStates Forum. Jul 4ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on July 5ᵗʰ, 2018.
Some of the jumble in words honestly escaped me, but I think I got the gist of it. I responded:
Came back for more after accusing me, the child of two Jewish parents and relative to people killed in the Holocaust, of antisemitism? No, I am confronting Islamophobia, as I always do and always will. It is something many, or perhaps most, libertarian communists do.
So, why, pray tell, does it bother you that I am opposed to Islamophobia? Do you support it? Oppose it? or what?
〜 Mark A. Foster. NationStates Forum. Jul 5ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on July 5ᵗʰ, 2018.
The neofascist continued:
Most of us are phobic of transparent attempts to shut down criticism of oppressive cultural practices by writing off reality as inadmissible and demanding that debate centers only around your multilingual thesaurus and derail emporium. We’re also phobic of nonsensical thread policing where no–one is allowed to comment unless they proceed first through your irrelevant closed questionnaire first, at which point you hope everyone’s forgotten the original topic. It’s why no–one takes you very seriously. You may have success railroading your students due to the power-dynamics around your possession of the lectern, but your intellectually dishonest little schemes will not wash here and it's well past the time for you to realise this and come to terms with the fact that you're nowhere near as good at this as you think you are.
〜 NationStates Forum. July 5ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on July 5ᵗʰ, 2018.
My retort:
Most of us is one of those little phrases people use when they have no evidence to back up what they are saying. For example, who is the us that you are speaking of? Everyone who posts in this thread? If so, I will pass. I am happy, as a libertarian communist, not to be a part of that us. And how in the world could you possibly know that “no–one takes … [me] very seriously”? I will simply tell you that your assessment is incorrect. Should you be, as you say, “phobic,” there are some highly effective remedies for that problem.
Nevertheless, I am unclear how you can, short of telepathy, know what most of us believe. Putting all that aside, your posting consists largely of a series of logical fallacies. I can assure you that I am far from being intellectually dishonest. Indeed, I have been accused of being brutally honest on occasion. Or is that a further example of your telepathy? I certainly believe what I say and say what I believe. Perhaps you are confusing you own views with mine or yourself with me? Moreover, I am not scheming, or could it be that you are engaging in conspiracy theorizing? I most certainly do not, as you have accused me, railroad my students. I practice what I preach in my classes — libertarian communism. That means, I focus on oppression, but I listen to all voices.
Finally, you are merely looking in a mirror. If you think that my critique of Islamophobia is policing, then your unending critiques of me (and anyone else you disagree with) — but especially me — is one of the clearest examples of policing I have seen in a long time. You spend much of your time dictating to me what I can and cannot (or should and should not) say. You also keep on returning to your gripe with intersectionality, which is one of the bulwarks of contemporary Marxist theory in academia. But, oh, I forgot, you don’t much like academia, do you? Come to think of it, what is it that you like? After reading all of your postings, I know what you hate backwards and forwards (including me). I have absolutely no idea of what you like or agree with.
〜 Mark A. Foster. NationStates Forum. July 5ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on July 5ᵗʰ, 2018.
One more response from the narcissistic neofascist:
“Criticism of me is criticism of all academia.”
“Telling me I can’t demand everyone pass through a gauntlet of functionally irrelevant closed academic questions before they're allowed to talk about contemporary issues on a discussion thread is the real policing. Stop bulli.”
“If you don’t like my shady behaviour you must just be a hater who doesn’t contribute to discussions. Never mind those tens of thousands of other posts, it’s all about MEEEEE!!!”
“I don’t think this particular article is of publishable quality.
〜 NationStates Forum. July 5ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on July 5ᵗʰ, 2018.
Honestly, I don’t think that this neofascist has fully processed that others, and not only myself, have been reading his postings. Here is one final comment from me:
Well, you have evaded my questions, read into my postings things I have never said, and, instead, returned with additional insults. I think we shall go back to being nonconversant.
〜 Mark A. Foster. NationStates Forum. July 5ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on July 5ᵗʰ, 2018.
After I made a post in which I highlighted the inseparability between libertarian communism and social justice warfare, I received a more–or–less friendly critique from yet another poster. Still, this poster thinks I should refer to myself by his neologism, progressivist. She or he apparently has no understanding of libertarian communism, particularly critical realism, and its distinctiveness from Marxism–Leninism:
No, just no. why not call yourself as ‘progressivist’ [sic], more elegant, and the concept of SJW is used as derogatory term. And from my perspective, ‘SJW’s hold mainly centrists views (RADICAL CENTRISTS(tm) without the fun or wisdom). For someone who doesn’t lives in the US or Europe, the ideals of ‘SJW’ people appear somewhat strange and something that only can happen in the ‘first world.’ Also antifa is bourgeois trash. Let it burn and found your own true commie militia asap.
〜 NationStates Forum. July 5ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on July 6ᵗʰ, 2018.
Are you a Marxist-Leninist, a syndicalist, or a left populist? Generally, it is people in those categories who object to my views. I have been a communist since 1968, which is considerably longer than most people on NationStates have been alive. I have never been a progressive and never will be. Perhaps you should read up on libertarian communism and recognize that not all communists march to the beat of the same drummer. Antifa, which you call bourgeois trash (noting your misspelling), is an example of libertarian communism. It was actually started by the Autonomist movement, which is a libertarian communist tendency. Point: You dislike libertarian and left communism. So did [Vladimir] Lenin [Russian, Влади́мир Ле́нин, Vladímir Lénin; MP3]. He demonstrated his bigotry, replicated by the bigotry expressed by some people in this thread, when he called us an infantile disorder. Nevertheless, we are not going away.
〜 Mark A. Foster. NationStates Forum. July 5ᵗʰ, 2018. Retrieved on July 5ᵗʰ, 2018.
I oppose no one in particular. My enemy is the capitalist world–system, as an intersectional cartology, and the filth it embodies: classism, racism, ethnicism, sexism, ableism, ageism, nationalism (fervently opposed by Rosa), audism, sizeism, Islamophobia, heterosexism, lesbophobia, mentalism, neurelitism, and so on. If fascists, nazis, alt–rightists, and so forth sincerely choose to abdicate their odious ideologies for libertarian communism, I would welcome them with open arms. Revolutions should not be vendettas. They are fought for the transformation, emancipation, and efflorescence of the human lifeworld (German, Lebenswelt [MP3]). We are all flawed. Turning the other cheek is excusing human frailty. On that course, hate is a stumbling block, not a stepping stone to progress. Yet, serving others is not being a doormat. If someone abuses me once, that will be the last time.
Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also ….
〜 Jesus Christ. Matthew 5:39. New Revised Standard Version.
If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also ….
〜 Jesus Christ. Luke 6:29. New Revised Standard Version.
If left–wing populists, fascists, or Calvinistic presuppositional apologists wish to debate with you on their terms, flatly refuse. If you consent, they will win. They know their rules much better than you do. Long after you are frustrated, they will be talking up a storm. Insist that they they dialogue with you following your own directions. Lay out a regimen. Then never back down. Deftly lead them onto your turf of familiarity. Set out guidelines, and topics for discussion, which work to your advantage. In many cases, an unjustified self–confidence, sometimes even conceit, will seduce the other person into acceding to your demands. It is child’s play. At that point, the dispute has, candidly, ended. You now won the argument before it even got started. I did so, on one occasion, with a presuppositional apologist, in order to illustrate logic, or its abuse, and truth becoming mutually exclusive.
Bear in mind that general dictionaries are often useless with specialized vocabularies. Even the good ones have their shares of biases. They can be either subtle or overt. As a case in point, former U.S. President Barack Obama has been a moderately conservative responsive communitarian since he was a law student. However, to many Republicans, he was a communist. To me, only communists or revolutionary socialists, whether Marxists or anarchists, should be referred to as Leftists. However, I have a broader definition of left–wing. Anybody who is even slightly left of center, a category which would exclude Barack Obama, would fall under the last category. To make life interesting, I regularly have discussions with people who have vastly different definitions of terms than my own. Still, precious few things in life can be more grafiying than to be on the winning end of a debate.
My point is simple: You and I are real. Yet, words, possessing no substance, are not real. Words, that is to say, are not ontological or metaphysical entities but epistemologies or frameworks of knowledge. Rather than being objective or empirical entities, terminologies are merely pragmatic tools or instruments to facilitate human conversations. Those are some of the reasons why it is important and vital that we clearly understand the ways in which individuals are using words. Otherwise, people may think they are communicating with one another, and they literally are not. They may also believe that they agree or disagree with a given person, while the reverse is actually true. These scenarios, unfortunately, occur all the time. Experts in interpersonal communication call such miscommunications noise. Moreover, cherish the value of offending people, if necessary, with accuracy.
A clique of over–rated pundits, hybrids of left–wing populism and neoconservatism, have launched a smear campaign against alleged regressive leftists. That deplorable pejorative assails to some degree the fact that many academic communists, myself included, refuse to condone imperialist offensives of so–called liberation in predominantly Muslim countries and are Islamophiles, lovers of Islam. I publicly confess my sinfulness in this matter and ask, albeit sardonically, for absolution from these woefully misguided individuals. This wayward world, I suggest, has no place for the unscrupulous notions streaming from the collective consciousness of such persons. The cause is Western imperialism. Islamism is merely the effect. Looking at the world the other way around is not only bigoted. It is dangerous.
Almost all communists, from a broad spectrum of tendencies, despise Western imperialism. Claiming to be a communist while not hating Western imperialism, as the source of global capitalism, is a contradiction in terms. I like most Westerners I know, so that is not my reason for Western scorn. Sadly, some people have read little Marxist theory. They are what I often call word–of–mouth communists. Therefore, assorted people, who purport to be communists, unwittingly argue against communism. It is not their fault, but they are not well grounded in the primary sources. By immersing themselves in classical and modern communist theory, I suspect that many would become more dedicated. Still others might repudiate communism. The conceivable results are difficult to predict.
Populists, whether to the left or to the right, often oppose diversity as political correctness (PC). Indeed, one finds PC both to the left (prioritizing politeness over honesty and frankness) and to the right (teaching creationism or intelligent design and prayer in public schools) of center. The push for diversity is, however, a recognition of our common humanity. The alternative to embracing diversity is social alienation and endless warfare. In this regard, a right–wing populist anti–intellectualism is particularly menacing. Many of its naïve proponents viciously attack evolution, minorities, immigration, humanly–caused climate change, or science in general, on the one hand, and promote unusual assortments of beliefs in irrational and unempirical conspiracy theories, especially the illuminutty Illuminati and the considerably more recent (from October, 2017) QAnon, on the other.
Populism should not be confused with what the general populace necessary believes. Rather, populism is a specific belief system which focuses on anti-intellectualism, a distrust of intellectuals, and a repudiation of cultural pluralism. Consequently, populism commonly subsists even in societies where the majority of its members are not themselves populists. The metastasizing of disenchantment with the modern world, academia, and critical thinking stir the flames of populism. A moribund capitalism interfaces with an ignorance on resolving pressing social problems and a shared sense of helplessness. The ultimate solution to the pestilence of populism will be the unqualified destruction of capitalism and the end to all its contradictions. That is certainly a tall order to fill, and it may literally take many hundreds of years to attain even the merest beginnings of a communist completion.
Critical pedagogy (MP3; or Arabic, عِلْمُ التَرْبِيَة النَقْدِيَّة [MP3], ʿil°mu ʾal•tar°biyaẗ ʾal•naq°diyyaẗ; or Hebrew, פֶּדָגוֹגְית הַבִּקָּרְתִּית [MP3], pẹḏāḡōḡəyṯ hạ•biqqārətiyṯ), from the lauded Brazilian educator Paulo Freire (MP3), 1921–1997, emphasizes conscientização (Portugese [MP3]), concienciación (Spanish [MP3]), conscientisation (French [MP3]), coscientizzazione (Italian [MP3]), conscientization (English MP3), or critical class consciousness. The French, conscience (MP3), may be rendered either as conscience or consciousness. Both nuances are found in Freire’s work. The broad base of today’s working class has, unfortunately, yet to encounter the emancipation of conscientization. Since nearly everybody, except for the power elite of oligarchs or plutocrats, has false consciousness, not just the working class and disenfranchized, almost all people can benefit from conscientization.
For a libertarian communist, there is nothing worse than the devastating blight of moral relativism or situation ethics. Depriving the individual of her or his moral compass makes that person less humane … and less human. A homo sapien, by a mere technicality, lacking even a taint of humanity is no better than an untamed wild animal. Since effective moral codes must be structured around liberation from domination, education not founded upon a critical pedagogy, teaching for emancipation, is simply a waste of time and resources. Virtuousness should be recognized, with one’s eyes wide open, as the innermost substance, or the principled fabric, of the universe. Moral truth is an ontological reality, not an arbitrary social construction.
Should the working class, as a whole, become militarized? I would say, “hardly.” Yet, much of that class—especially where I have lived in Middle America since 1993 as well as my previous seventeen–year residence in the American South—own huge stockpiles of weapons. In New York City, my hometown, such matters were either unknown to me or simply never considered, given the area’s strict gun–control laws. Anecdotally, any regional differences notwithstanding, most people I meet, wherever I have stayed in the U.S., despise communism with a passion. Such persons are certainly not ripe to become revolutionary Marxists. We require, not merely desire, democratic centralism and a democratically controlled vanguard:
The indispensable conditions for the realization of Social Democratic centralism are:
  1. The existence of a large contingent of workers educated in the class struggle.
  2. The possibility for the workers to develop their own political activity through direct influence on public life, in a party press, and public congresses, etc.
These conditions are not yet fully formed in Russia. The first – a proletarian vanguard, conscious of its class interests and capable of self-direction in political activity – is only now emerging in Russia. All efforts of socialist agitation and organization should aim to hasten the formation of such a vanguard. The second condition can be had only under a regime of political liberty.
With these conclusions, Lenin disagrees violently. He is convinced that all the conditions necessary for the formation of a powerful and centralized party already exist in Russia.
〜 Rosa Luxemburg, “Organizational Questions of the Russian Social Democracy.” Marxists Internet Archive. April 30ᵗʰ, 2013. Retrieved on June 26ᵗʰ, 2018.
The issue of gun control has always been contentious among Marxists, including libertarian communists. My own observation has been, over the years, that most people with a strong opinion on the subject simply surmise that other people who call themselves the same name will automatically agree with them on all issues. As most people assuredly know, from their experiences in other areas, that is rarely true in any matter. I have heard the argument repeated, to a sickening degree, the all proletarians have guns. I have thoroughly rejected it. I think of nuts like Alex Jones—or who makes a good living posing as nuts—and his minions. My resolution is that access to weapons should be placed into the able hands of a proletarian vanguard, an institution supported by Rosa Luxemburg, perhaps the most brilliant mind produced within Marxist communism.
As a libertarian communist, not a left populist, I do not want weaponized enemies. Revolutionary communists alone should carry. I am unaware of any communist revolutionaries committing mass murder in universities. In the U.S., the National Rifle Association (NRA) has successfully promoted an absurdity, that anyone can bring guns onto college campuses. If so, I might, albeit tongue in cheek, counter the NRA’s argument. Average citizens carrying guns have abetted multiple deaths upon deaths. Police officers, for their part, routinely assassinate unarmed Black women and men. As an aside, for some reason, sexism perhaps, the female victims of police brutality are rarely, if ever, headlined by the media. Why should I trust the cops? I have yet to be convinced by any of the arguments presented. Of course, most of those cases have been by cops themselves.
The proletarian vanguard will, when the time arrives, distinguish between revolutionaries, who should have guns, and renegades. The point of gun ownership, for a libertarian Marxist, is revolution, not, as in the gun culture which misinterprets the U.S. Constitution as an entitlement to guns for their own sake. The founding fathers opposed an army and authorized armed militias in the Second Amendment. It was annulled by the army. Why, however, would a communist want their counterrevolutionary enemies, especially the police, to possess guns? Sadly, whenever this subject comes up, people engage in name–calling. Someone called me authoritarian. I may be many things, including an empathetic person, but an authoritarian is not one of them. Some people seem incapable of discussing any number of issues without lashing out at others. That is clearly not helpful for anyone.
To put it another way, what is the point of owning a gun, in a communist revolution, unless one is a revolutionary? Struggles against the capitalist system, as I understand Marxist theory, is the entire purpose of acquiring weapons in any hypothetical communist revolution. Its founders were not adherents of that asinine U.S. gun culture which has turned mass murder into a ritual. I suspect that they would have regarded this subculture as a form of capitalist disintegration or, perhaps, degeneracy. Nevertheless, any determinations of the sort will, I assume, be made, on the ground, by the democratic proletarian vanguard at the time. No one can possibly know the future. All I am doing, indeed all anyone can do, is to meekly speculate. Still, American communists should not confuse Marx, who never proposed universal armament, with the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
〜 Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Return to the Page Menu.

٨. Libertarian and Authoritarian Lefts
I am a libertarian communist on 8values, a libertarian socialist with Spekr, and a left–libertarian with The Political Compass (and another quiz). Those three online tests are popular on NationStates. Academically, Luxemburg, as a proto–left communist, is often called a libertarian communist or socialist. The term is variously defined. One is an absolute rejection of the state. Another is a total renunciation of authoritarian governance. Rosa supported a democratic proletarian state, but on a authoritarianism–to–libertarianism scale, she was a libertarian. Other tests have me as a far–left moderate social libertarian (a bit oxymoronic?), a libertarian Marxist, a Luxemburgist, and an anarchist (seemingly these two tests’ only rubric for left–libertarians). The scientific validity and reliability of the tests notwithstanding, they persuaded me that Luxemburgists are libertarian Marxists.
I was asked what qualifies me as a libertarian communist. I wrote: Primarily the fact that I am a Luxemburgist―and Rosa Luxemburg critiqued Leon Trotsky and her personal friend Vladimir Lenin for their authoritarian tendencies), that I believe in Hal Draper’s socialism from below, that I reject the Stalinist socialism from above, that I am a critical realist as founded by the libertarian Marxist Roy Bhaskar, and that I support the Antifa movement with U.S. roots in the libertarian Marxist autonomism of the New Left. Marxist communism is often illustrated on a horizontal scale with left–libertarianism (socialism from below) situated on one side and left–authoritarianism (socialism from above) at the other extreme. According to several online quizzes—take them or leave them—I am an intense left–libertarian. I fully repudiate left–authoritarianism and all that it represents.
As a revolutionary communist, I am not a Gandhist. Only a libertarian communist revolution, not the practice of nonviolent resistance (originally Gujarati/Gujarātī, સત્યાગ્રહ [MP3], satyāgraha; Sanskrit, सत्याग्रहः [MP3], satyāgrahaḥ; or Hindi, सत्याग्रह [MP3], satyāgraha, “persistence in truth”), can ultimately transform the world. Strictly speaking, all civil disobedience would constitute nonviolent resistance, and, yet, on the other hand, not all nonviolent resistance constitutes civil disobedience. For instance, by wearing, as is my unusual custom, commie or Leftist tshirts when teaching college classes, I am engaged in nonviolent resistance. I am not, however, involved in civil disobedience. In other words, I would never intentionally break the law. For all of its limitations, in advancing emancipation, nonviolent resistance, as part of a larger struggle, can often be a suitable tactic.
With all due respect to anarchists, and I warmly consign many of them to the company of my Leftist comrades, libertarian Marxism is not a clone of anarchism or its disparate theories. Libertarian Marxism is soundly constructed upon a diversity of Marxian theories and philosophies. Although some anarchists selectively use Marxist theories, there is a cornucopia of anarchist theories, as well. Rather, any libertarian Marxism worthy of that name must strongly suppport a nonauthoritarian or democratic communism and a communism or revolutionary socialism from below. Contrary to the horribly misbegotten Bolshevik (Russian, Большевик [MP3], Bolʹševik) project of the 20ᵗʰ century, which wrecked the lives of many innocents, a proper libertarian Marxist communism places power, without fail, in the hands of the people, the proletariat and socially marginalized in particular.
Obviously, to be a left– or right–wing authoritarian, one needs to be, respectively, on the Left or the Right. Examples of the latter include Adolf Hitler (MP3) in Nazi Germany and Benito Mussolini (MP3) in Fascist Italy. Although I disagree with the brutal, authoritarian tactics exhibited by Leon Trotsky (Russian, Лео́н Тро́цкий, León Tróckij [MP3]), born Lev Davidovich Bronstein (Russian, Лев Давидович Бронштейн [MP3], Lev Davidovič Bronštejn), after moving to North American, he became a Leftist. Yet, no one knows what would have become of the former Soviet Union had Lev, not Joseph Stalin (Georgian/Kartuli Ena, იოსებ სტალინი [MP3], Ioseb Stʼalini; or Russian, Иосиф Сталин [MP3], Iosif Stalin) whose legacy I despise, ascended to power. Lev’s rhetoric was dire, but, as with Stalin before his dictatorship, rhetoric is a faulty prognosticator of action.
The opposite of left–libertarianism is left–authoritarianism (such as Stalinism), not the simple use of force. There is nothing inherently wrong with force. Parents use it on their own children. I use it on my college students. Revolutionaries may, in some hypothetical future, use it on the bourgeoisie. That is generally where libertarian Marxists and anarchists part company. I have no problem with verticalism per se. Most anarchists strongly oppose it and, in its place, advocate horizontalism. Although Rosa used force throughout her life, she critiqued both Trotsky and her friend Lenin for what she regarded as authoritarianism. I can agree with aspects of anarchism, but I think that differing views of power have prevented Left regroupment or left unity between left–anarchists and libertarian Marxists. Unfortunately, I have yet to come up with a workable solution. Perhaps there is none.
Marxist communists and anarchocommunists have generally disagreed over whether communism should be achieved in two stages or in one stage. Anarchocommunists have historically rejected the Marxist two–stage theory of communism. The dictatorship of the proletariat, a common term, is not the way in which Marx and Engels most frequently described the intermediary stage. They regarded the first stage of communism (which Lenin later, unfortunately, called socialism) as communism with elements of the bourgeois state still present. More specifically, the proletariat collectivize the bourgeois state (first stage) then replace the state with further collectivization in an administration of things (second stage). Anarchocommunists have wanted to go directly to the second stage.
Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of The Multiversal Communist Collective, of Mōšẹh ʾẠhărōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl, founded the Libertarian Communist Party. Its doors are open to all member nations of The Confederation of Traditional Socialist Nations. The political party, including its leadership, is based upon strong democratic principles, whether direct or indirect. Among our party’s stated positions is that, while always empathizing with the poor, a universal basic income, as with social democracy in general, promotes false consciousness and, intentionally or not, throws breadcrumbs to the proletariat and subaltern. Revolution is forestalled. Please join the party, and move your nation to our great Confederation. It is one of the best–managed Leftist regions on NationStates.
Left–libertarianism or libertarian communism includes libertarian socialism, commonly used by anarchists, and libertarian Marxism. Libertarian communists tend to focus upon a panoply of dimensions which oppose true liberty in the intersectional capitalist world–system. Such factors include racism, ethnicism, sexism, ageism, ableism, nationalism, and colonialism. Some other communist variants, by contrast, conceive of capitalism using a rather shallow economism (economic determinism or reductionism). Likewise, communism absent universal liberation becomes an unrevolutionary communism of economism. To further specify my lexicon, libertarian communism could be a species of social justice warfare based on Marxist theory but surely not non–theoretically–based social justice warfare or progressivism. These nuanced distinctions, even if admittedly tedious, are imperative.
I truly could not care less about U.S. presidents, and their vain policies, and the Empire, a term popularized by Autonomist Marxists for America. Really, the only transformation productive for the proletariat is a revolution against capitalism. Here, I am using the term capitalism in the sense of both Immanuel Wallerstein’s world–system analysis and libertarian Marxist Roy Bhaskar’s demireality (disunity) or dialectical absence. Capitalism is the intersections of oppression which are integrated into capitalist societies. Thus, as an understatement, I firmly oppose such economistic, or one–dimensional, definitions of capitalism. Capitalism comprises the causal mechanisms of oppression in a capitalist societies, including the class system, racism, sexism, misogynistic anti–feminism, ableism (disablism in British Commonwealth English), ethnicism, nationalism, nativism, and so forth.
Hearken to the cries from a pair of valleys: “Do as thou wilt is the whole of the law,” yells Aleister Crowley. “Freedom for the subaltern,” I shout. U.S. (right–)libertarianism is abetted by pro–corporatists from such organizations as: the Foundation for Economic Education, the CATO Institute, The Libertarian Institute, the U.S. Libertarian Party, and a plenitude of others. This type of libertarianism is commonly associated with the retired member of the American House of Representatives Ron Paul and, to a lesser extent, with his son U.S. Senator Rand Paul. Some of these libertarians identify with anarchocapitalism (stateless capitalism) or Ayn Rand’s Objectivism―(right–)libertarianism mingled with atheism. The second major version of U.S. libertarianism, civil libertarianism, is illustrated by the progressive legal coalition, the American Civil Liberties Union (the ACLU).
American (right–)libertarians are frequently perturbed when familiarized with libertarianism on a global scale. Soberly, they now discern, their own philosophy is an international anomaly. Rosa Luxemburg and Roy Bhaskar, these U.S. (right–)libertarians only recently learned, are properly referred to as libertarian Marxists. They espoused a outlook on liberty broader, and more transcendent, than most Bolsheviks. To many libertarian Marxists, sexism, racism, classism, ableism, heterosexism (homophobia), Islamophobia, and other ideologies are facets, one and all, of the capitalist world–system. Communism would rid us of these odious ideologies. On the other hand, Bolsheviks tend, with some notable exceptions, to support a pseudo–leftist approach to capitalism which either entirely excludes any consideration of these ideologies or relegates them to a second–rate status.
As a left–libertarian, I strongly disagree with so–called (right–)libertarianism. In my view, the (right–)libertarian perception of liberty is incorrect and often authoritarian. Authoritarianism is, of course, common to many ideologies, not only (right–)libertarianism. Nevertheless, my principal issue is with the fact that self–defined (right–)libertarianism is among those authoritarian ideologies. In addition, the very term “libertarianism” was used by Leftists long before it was appropriated by people on the right. My contention is that (right–)libertarians often utilize what sounds like libertarian rhetoric, but their positions on outsiders—non–(right–)libertarians or non–nationals—are commonly authoritarian. Moreover, I would never dream of suggesting that the oppressed, or anyone else for that matter, be deprived of the liberty to live in whatever country they so choose.
The authoritarianism of (right–)libertarianism is frequently shameless and undisguised. The former member of the U.S. House of Representatives Ron Paul often waxes on the U.S. Constitution like he was Holy Ghost preaching about the Bible. I shall openly concede to having an absence of much affection for that Constitution. By the same token, one can endorse any given document without appealing to a virtually Christian fundamentalist literalism. I have, further, met some (right–)libertarians who have literally construed the U.S. Constitution as a divinely inspired text—bestowed by the grace and bounty of God. To put it another way, despite outward differences in ideology and tone between (right–)libertarianism and fascism, the two positions are often considerably closer—even when witnessed in the words and actions of particular individuals—than one might imagine.
(Right–)libertarianism is, in my view, a kissing cousin with right–authoritarianism. Bhaskar, regarded liberty, or libertarianism, as freedom from capitalism, racism, sexism, ageism, classism, the class system, ethnicism, nationalism, ableism/disablism, heterosexism or heteronormativity, and so forth. That is about as remote from (right–)libertarianism as I can imagine. Just about all that right– and left–libertarianism have in common is the unfortunate similarity in name. Some left–libertarians in Antifa are willing to engage in violence in order to destroy fascism. I accept them as fellow libertarianisms while strongly dissenting from their tactic of punching people. Nonetheless, I do not consider (right–)libertarians to be libertarians. Yet, out of courtesy, I am willing to call them by that name. No matter what I happen to think, I accept that people have a right to define themselves.
Many of my students, who call themselves (right–)libertarians, have advocated for restrictions upon immigration, especially for Muslims, Latinos, and Black and Brown people in general. When these same students have done so, I have often pointed out the logical inconsistency of their positions on immigration with liberty (and with the plaque mounted on the Statue of Liberty). Usually, their response has been that these individuals threaten the liberty of Americans. When I have asked for evidence, I either get none, some diversionary tactic, or a half–baked conspiracy theory. Moreover, why are Americans entitled to a greater degree of liberty than people immigrating or visiting from other countries? To me, that is authoritarianism, without qualifiers, certainly not libertarianism. Right– and left–libertarians, plain and simple, cannot even agree upon a shared definition of liberty.
On the other hand, I would argue that capitalists, racists, sexists, fascists, neonazis, and so forth should be prevented by an international state or an international federation of regions or nations from oppressing the proletariat and the subaltern. However, to me, such a policy is left–libertarian and anti–authoritarian. Based upon having had many experiences with (right–)libertarians over the years, their positions often appear considerably closer to fascism than to what I personally consider to be libertarian (left–libertarianism). There are, as such, a considerable number of self–defined libertarians who are currently serving in the U.S. Congress. Despicably, many of them are opposed to universal health care. To me, the willingness to deprive people of the liberty of health care is, in itself, about as anti–libertarian as I can imagine. (Right–)libertarians, in short, are authoritarians.
I never call myself a libertarian but always a left–libertarian. No matter how pretentious it might sound to me, (right–)libertarians are entitled to define themselves as “libertarians.” That is their business, not mine. In the U.S., the number of left–libertarians might fit into a lecture hall. Yet, the same scenario is not found in Europe and other locations. (Right–)libertarianism is, as I see it, a very bourgeois philosophy. The rights identified as such are ordinarily those of the bourgeoisie, not the poor. I have yet to meet a (right–)libertarian who supported, for instance, the redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. The reason is that (right–)libertarians will fail, as a rule, to entertain the issue of whether liberty and free–market capitalism are compatible. Many of them reside in a bubble which entirely excludes the disenfranchized. That is a recipe for oligarchy or plutocracy.
Libertarian communism has virtually nothing in common with libertarianism in the usual American sense, such as Ron Paul. Rather, a libertarian communist opposes authoritarianism in all its forms. That includes capitalism and its many contradictions: racism, classism, sexism, ageism, ableism (disablism), ethnicism, and so forth. A libertarian communist would never ever even consider attacking feminists or SJWs. Entertaining the thought of such indecent attacks disgusts me beyond all measure. In a sense, libertarian communism takes American libertarianism and turns it upside down on its head. Instead of capitalism and extreme individualism as the solutions to our problems, communism and nonduality become the only answers. My freedom ends where my fist meets someone’s face. Materials which violate the liberty of others, especially oppressed peoples, can be regulated.
Capitalism is an aggregated structure. Hence, it must be understood and addressed holistically. Islamophobia, for instance, is one of the foremost phantoms currently being utilized to justify capitalist imperialism. Piecemeal remedies for domination which focus exclusively, or nearly so, on the economic or financial dimensions of capitalism are doomed to failure. If libertarian communists genuinely care about establishing a global, human–centered civilization, one focused on the ethical principle of eudaimonia (Ancient Greek, εὐδαιμονία [MP3], eu̓daimonía, “good fortune” or, rather loosely, flourishing), they must consider, relationally, the diverse ways in which capitalism destroys human lives. Since capitalism is authoritarian, a (right–wing) libertarianism becomes impossible. Anything less is sorely insufficient. Thus, American (right–wing) libertarianism is a contradiction.
Some people on NationStates, I have discovered, subscribe, sincerely I presume, to an authoritarian philosophy I have, over time, come to describe as a one–dimensional communism. To them, communism concerns the class struggle and nothing more. Communists who, thus, focus on other issues, whether imperialism or social justice, are, to them, somehow not true communists. These multi–dimensional communists are, in effect, compromised. They have, so say the one–dimensional communists, taken their eye off the ball. If that is the measure of a communist, I suppose I am a square peg in a round hole. Fortunately, I am in good company. Neither Karl Marx (MP3) nor Friedrich Engels (MP3) were true communists either. For they, like myself, examined a broad range of issues. Arguably, Engels, in his final years, was moving toward an institutional approach to scientific socialism.
One might contend, however implausiblly, that the redistribution of wealth is authoritarian. I vehemently disagree. The concentration of wealth in a small class of plutocrats or oligarchs seems very authoritarian to me. On the other hand, a more comprehensive term, which includes the massive redistribution of wealth, is at our disposal. It is called a communist revolution. The mythical Robin Hood can, depending upon one’s perspective, be seen as an authoritarian or a revolutionary. To me, he is clearly the latter. Libertarian Marxist activists and revolutionaries are, in a sense, all Robin Hoods. Through revolution, wealth is taken from the rich, collectivized, and used to establish a libertarian and an emancipatory civilization. That is the eudaimistic world I desire for my descendents. Concerning the voluntary redistribution of wealth, my only question is, So how is that working?
Private property, on the one hand, and individual possessions or personal property, on the other, are entirely distinct. The former is the ownership of the means of production or the capitalists’ privatized materials or tools for producing goods and services. Cellphones, personal computers, tablets, chairs, medication, clocks, and other items of entirely personal utility are excluded. People would be completely at liberty to use and dispose of these items as they wish. Communism is freedom. With the end of privatization—and the sublation, synthesis, negation, or absenting of capitalism—comes the rise of producer, worker, and distributor coöperatives. These firms would be publicly run, owned, and managed, collectively, by the proletariat.
With the elimination of capitalism, social institutions which serve the public should be collectivized. For instance, without exception, all education, beginning with preschool and continuing on to the postgraduate level, should be completely free. Educational institutions would be transformed into coöperatives. They will be owned by the communities or regional entities they serve. In addition, there needs to be an agency, higher than the locality, which would insure that schools are not permitted to teach pure pseudoscience, like creationism, climate-change conspiracies, and, according to U.S. President’s Donald J. Trump’s Counselor Kellyanne Conway in an interview with Chuck Todd on the U.S. network NBC, “alternative facts” (MP3).
One might ask, how can education and other public services be free? Albeit unlikely, in the short term, one taxes the wealthy at exorbitant rates. If these tycoons choose to relocate in a more profitable economic climate, laws would be enacted to prevent them from conducting business with entities in one’s country. Yet, that solution prescribes aspirin to a patient with terminal cancer. Over the long haul, the only feasible remedy is a revolution, of some sort, which would overthrow capitalism and replace it with libertarian communism or libertarian socialism. As members of society act in their highest interests, the question of compulsion becomes irrelevant. Still, given free agency, communism, unlike the revolution, can never be guaranteed.
Following the global nuclear calamities to come, which will end capitalism, the world will, by necessity, consist of local autarkies. During the first stage of communism, when vestiges of the bourgeois state are still present, a strong central government might be necessary to get the house in order. My hope, however, is that as we gradually progress toward the second phase of communism, the state will give way to a federation or administrative order. At that point, centralization will be superseded by localism. That is not to say that a central government, an administration, will cease to exist. However, it will not operate as a dominating force. Instead, given the greater maturity among members of society, more power will be delegated to the grassroots. The federal government, whatever it would be called, will offer the guidance and required coordination between diverse localities.
Most certainly, communist internationalism is not inherently incompatible with localism, national, or regionalism. On the other hand, communist internationalism is assuredly inconsistent with racism, ethnicism, castism, tribalism, or nativisim. The point is not to eliminate the power of diverse geographical areas. Rather, the intent is to assure that that the inhabitants of those diverse areas, particularly the proletariat and the subaltern, are united under the banner of proletarian internationalism. In other words, internationalism must take priority over loyalty to all other geographical regions. Sources of division, such as racism, must, however, be thoroughly intolerable to the inhabitants of a libertarian communist world–system.
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels utilized the term class in a highly nuanced manner. They referred to the relationship of a specified sector of the population with the means of production. That is to say, people are either owners or chattel. Under capitalism, the owners are the capitalists, while the chattel are the workers. Once capitalism is expelled, there will, by definition, be no classes. However, the term class often refers, colloquially, to levels of income. Marx and Engels did not focus on that subject. Neither poverty nor wealth can exist in a communist society. Even so, if people are receiving sufficient earnings to meet their needs, there is no reason why the general populace cannot receive only slight variations in compensation.
Stalin, perhaps defensive as a Soviet Georgian, not an ethnic Russian, became a knee–jerk Soviet nationalist. As a faux–left Third Positionist, he discovered that dark domain where Right and Left begin to disintegrate, and he embraced it. Máo•Zé•Dōng or Mao Tse–tung (Mandarin Chinese, 毛泽东 [MP3]), who said that he agreed with Stalin on most matters, was also a Third Positionist. In fact, the majority of what has passed for left–wing governance, during and since the bygone era of Stalin and his so–called red fascism (Arabic, فَاشِيَّة مِن الحَمْرَاء [MP3], fāšiyyaẗ min ʾal•ḥam°rāˁ; Hebrew, פָשִׁיזְם הַאָדֹם [MP3], p̄āšiyzəm hạ•ʾāḏōm; or Persian, فَاشِیسْمِ قِرْمِز [MP3], fāšís°m•i qir°miz), has, for the most part, been Third Positionism (Arabic, مَرْكَز الثَالِث [MP3], mar°kaz ʾal•ṯāliṯ; Hebrew, פּוֹזִיצְיָה הַשְׁלִישִׁי [MP3], pōziyṣəyāh hạ•šəliyšiy; or Persian, مُوضِعِ گِیرِیِ سِوُّم [MP3], muḍiʿ•i gírí•i sivvum).
Stalin made no attempts to broaden the Bolshevik revolution to other countries. In point of fact, shortly after World War II, when, of course, the Soviet Union and the U.S. were allies, Stalin proposed continued rapprochement with the U.S. For whatever political reasons, the U.S. declined his offer. Clearly, Stalin, having just expended considerable blood and treasure in destroying the Third Reich, was looking for peaceful coexistence, not a global proletarian revolution. What true communist leader would pursue an alliance with the U.S., the center of global imperialism (Arabic, إِمْبِرِيَالِيَّة العَالَمِيَّة [MP3], ⫯im°biriyāliyyaẗ ʾal•ālamiyyaẗ; or Hebrew, אִימְפֶּרְיָאלִיזְם הַעוֹלָמִי [MP3], ʾiməpẹriyāʾliyzəm hạ•ʿōlāmiy)? As the seeds of failure had been planted in the Bolshevik Revolution from the start, with Stalin tending to the watering hole, the demise of the U.S.S.R. should have been anticipated.
Practically speaking, Third Positionism, in its multiple varieties, is frequently little more than a euphemism, or a cover, for neofascism. As one of the disgusting ideologies which have constituted the Right, Third Positionism has regrettably remained with us to until the present day. The primary features of Third Positionism have included: an ownership of the primary means of production by the state, an extreme and a fervent nationalism, a clear preference for hardcore political authoritarianism over even a semblance of republicanism, and a seemingly boundless appetite for militarism. In some regions of the present–day world, we have been witnessing the cultural diffusion, perhaps even the rebirth, of Third Positionism, and other like–minded ideologies, throughout much of the Western world, including parts of Europe and the U.S.
Two possible exceptions to the overarching dominance of Third Positionism in the 20ᵗʰ century, albeit not libertarian communist, were the Titoism (Serbian/Srpski, Титоизам [MP3], Titoizam) of Marshal Josip Broz Tito (Serbian, Маршал Јосип Броз Тито [MP3], Maršal J̌osip Broz Tito) in the former Yugoslavia (Serbian, Југославија [MP3], J̌ugoslaviǰa) and then the Castroism (Spanish/Español, Castrismo [MP3]) of Fidel Castro (Spanish [MP3]) on the island nation of Cuba (Spanish [MP3]). Hence, with the rise of the New Left in Europe and the U.S., through a resurrected libertarian communism or socialism, came the last great hope for the libertarian Left. It failed dreadfully. Beginning just then, in the early 1970s, the world fell into a rapid downward spiral. The power of the dialectic should never be underestimated. Time is not on the side of the capitalist world–system.
My issues of contention concerning Maoism (Mandarin Chinese, 毛泽东思想 [MP3], Máozé•Dōng•Sīxiǎng; or Cantonese Chinese 毛泽东思想 [MP3], Mou•Zaak•Dung•Si•soeng) are multiple. Mao replaced the proletariat with the peasantry. Since China was, using original Marxist criteria, unprepared for communism, Mao questionably rewrote Marx to make China fit. (We cannot evaluate Marx, since his communism has never been implemented.) Mao, as a tyrant, once claimed that Stalin was 70% correct. I could ask regarding the 70%, but that inquiry is needless. Examining Mao’s mode of running Mainland China provides our answer. A much more pragmatic, yet also perplexing, question concerns the 70%–30% ratio. Why not 100% agreement with Stalin? Perhaps Mao simply did not want to give Stalin all of the credit for his perspective, but I am only surmising.
The criticisms I have of Lenin follow from Rosa. She was quite friendly with Lenin who visited her at her home. Lenin especially liked Rosa’s cat Mimi. Still, Rosa was intellectually harsh on Lenin’s views. She accused him of authoritarianism. Red Rosa’s thoughtful analysis turned out to be a prophecy or an inner vision. My only response to the accusation she leveled at Lenin is that, since she was assassinated before Stalin took over from Lenin, she was spared the ultimate tragedy. Rosa also strongly argued that Lenin, like Trotsky, had developed a formulaic approach to communism. Rosa was more open-minded than Lenin and a true intellectual. She struggled for hours upon hours to resolve some of the issues with Marx’s texts.
Lenin was much more superficial than Rosa in his treatment of Marxist theory. Prior to assuming leadership of the former Soviet Union, he read Marx, much of the time, entirely at face value. Then, after becoming premier, Lenin began to throw Marx’s ideas, or what little he grasped of them, into the trashcan. By replacing Marx’s communism from below with an authoritarian state capitalism from above, Lenin preordained the demise of so–called 20ᵗʰ–century communism. From the moment that Lenin made his break with Marx’s communism from below, the destinies of Bolshevism, Maoism, and most of the rest were sealed. For Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, the obituary for alleged 20ᵗʰ–century communism was etched into the æthers.
The New Left was a amalgamation. However, we were, with few exceptions, anti–authoritarian or, in other words, left–libertarian. After the New Left disintegrated, its proponents spun out in various directions. Some struggled, in futility, to keep the New Left alive. Others migrated to the more disgusting parts of the right (hello, David Horowitz). Still others became Maoists, Trotskyists, other Leftists, or even sell–out yuppies (young urban professional people). Attracted to collectivization, I made a variety of turns or intellectual shifts in my own communist tendencies. Yet, during all of these turns, I mostly remained a devoted left–libertarian and averse to all permutations of: élitism (Arabic, نُّخْبَة [MP3], nnuẖ°baẗ), authoritarianism (Arabic, اِسْتِبْدَادِيَّة [MP3], ʾis°tib°dādiyyaẗ), and state–sponsored terrorism (Arabic, إِرْهَاب المَدْعُو مِن الدَوْلَة [MP3], ⫰ir°hāb ʾal•mad°ʿūm min ʾal•daw°laẗ):
  1. Students’ Democratic Coalition of the left–libertarian U.S. New Left (1968–1969).
  2. Titoism (MP3; Serbian/Srpski, Титоизам [MP3], Titoizam; Arabic, تِيتُوِيَّة [MP3], Tītuwiyyaẗ; Hebrew, טִיטוֹאִית [MP3], Ṭiyṭōʾiyṯ; Hebrew, טִיטוֹאִיזְם [MP3], Ṭíṭōʾiyzəm; Persian, تِیتُوِیسْم [MP3], Títuwís°m; Urdu, ٹِیٹُوَنَے [MP3], Ṭíṭuwanē; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਟਿਟੋਵਾਦ [MP3], Ṭiṭōvāda; Shahmukhi Punjabi, ٹِٹُووَادَ [MP3], Ṭiṭōvāda; Sindhi, ٽَائْٽُوِزْم [MP3], Ʈā⫯y°ʈuwiz°m; or Hindi, टीटोवाद [MP3], Ṭīṭovāda).
  3. the post–Maoist (MP3) left–refoundational Maoism of Freedom Road Socialist Organization (Left Refoundation).
  4. the post–Trotskyist (MP3) Solidarity (U.S.) of left–refoundation and left–regroupment.
  5. inexplicably, the post–Maoist Third–World Maoism (Arabic, مَاوِيَّة مِن العَالَم الثَالِث [MP3], Mawiyyaẗ min ʾal•ʿĀlam ʾal•Ṯāliṯ; Hebrew, מָאוֹאִיזְם בְּעוֹלָם הַשְׁלִישִׁי [MP3], Māʾōʾiyzəm bə•Ōlām hạ•Šəliyšiy; Persian, مَائُوئِیسْمِ جَهَان سِوُّم [MP3], Mā⫯ū⫯ýís°m•i Ǧahān Sivvum; Urdu, تِیسْرَا دِنِیَا مَاؤُوِزْمَ [MP3], Tís°rā Diniyā Mā⫯wuwiz°ma; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਤੀਸਰਾ ਸੰਸਾਰ ਮੌਸਮ [MP3], Tīsarā Sasāra Mausama; Shahmukhi Punjabi, تِیسَرَا سَسَارَ مَوْسَمَ [MP3], Tísarā Sasāra Maw°sama; Mandarin Chinese, 第三世界的毛主义 [MP3], Dì•Sān•Shìjiè•de•Máo•Chǔyì; or Cantonese Chinese/Gwong•Dung•Waa, 第三世界毛澤東思想 [MP3], Dì•Sān•Shì•Jiè•Máo•Zé•Dōng•sī•Xiǎng). My current views of this tendency are rather negative. Still, my dabblings in it only persisted for a few weeks.
  6. the post–Trotskyist international socialism (Arabic, اِشْتِرَاكِيَّة الدَوْلِيَّة [MP3], ʾiš°tirākiyyaẗ ʾal•daw°liyyaẗ; Hebrew, סוֹצְיָאלִיזְם הַבֵּינְלְאֻמִּי [MP3], sōṣəyāʾliyzəm hạ•bēynələʾumiy; Persian سُوسِیَالِیسْمِ بِین‌َالْمِلَلِی [MP3], sūsiýālís°m•i baýnāl°milalí; Urdu, بَیْنٍ اُلاقْوَامِی سُوسِهِلِزمَ [MP3], bay°na ʾul•ʾaq°wāmí sūsihiliz°ma; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਅੰਤਰਰਾਸ਼ਟਰੀ ਸਮਾਜਵਾਦ [MP3], atararāśaṭarī samājavāda; or Shahmukhi Punjabi, انْتَرَرَاشَٹَرِی سَمَاجَوَادَ [MP3], ʾan°tararāšaṭarí samaǧawāda) of International Socialist Tendency, Counterfire, International Socialist Network (IS Network), Socialist Solidarity (Canada), The International Socialist Organization (ISO), New Socialist Group, Socialist Alternative (Australia), rs21: revolutionary socialism in the 21ˢᵗ century, and Left Unity.
  7. the neo–Trotskyist (MP3) third–camp socialism (Arabic, اِشْتِرَاكِيَّة الثَالِثَة لِلمُخَيَّم [MP3], ʾiš°tirākiyyaẗ ʾal•ṯāliṯaẗ lil•muẖayyam; Hebrew, סוֹצְיָאלִיזְם שֶׁל הַמַחֲנֶה הַשְׁלִישִׁי [MP3], sōṣəyāʾliyzẹm šẹl hạ•mạḥănẹh hạ•šẹliyšiy; Persian, سُوسِیَالِیسْمِ سِوُّمِ ارْدُوگَاه [MP3], sūsiýālís°m•i sivvum•i ʾar°dūgāh; Urdu, تِیسْرِی چْھَاؤْنِی اجِتَمَاعیَاتَ [MP3], tír°sí č°hā⫯w°ní ʾaǧitamāʿýāta; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਤੀਜੇ ਡੇਰੇ ਸਮਾਜਵਾਦ [MP3], tījē ḍērē samājavāda; or Shahmukhi Punjabi, تِیجْے ڈَیرَے سَمَاجَوَادَ [MP3], tīǧē ḍērē samāǧavāda) of the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty.
  8. nearly rebounding full circle to the left–libertarian Luxemburgism (MP3) and left–libertarian Antifa (MP3) I so deeply cherish.
Within The New Left was a left–libertarian assemblage of tendencies. Some Maoists and Trotskyists could also be found in the mix. Personally, I identified with no particular communist tendency or current at the time. As a preteen, I really gave such matters little thought at the time. However, generally speaking, I was a libertarian Marxist. I was both extremely fortunate and decidedly cursed to be a part of the 1960s American New Left. I was perhaps fortunate because I can offer the kind reader a first–hand oral history of my own little lifeworld. However, I was simultaneously cursed because, without any excuse I can muster, we, collectively, ran out of steam and failed miserably. Then the Indochina War ended. Equivocation does favors for no one. Many New Leftists deserted the Left, and, to be painfully honest, it is difficult to blame them following our downfall and disgrace.
American Autonomism, which includes Antifa in the U.S., was one of the finest fruits of the American New Left. Sadly, Antifa is viscerally hated by many Marxist–Leninists, syndicalists, and others—not to mention, fascists and the virtually synonymous third–positionists. We, those who bore witness to the history of the American New Left, genuinely believed in the immediacy of a genuine revolution, and, further, that we were among the vanguard. How, I frequently ask myself, could we be so horribly mistaken? The opposite of everything we anticipated transpired. The revolutionary optimism of the 1960s gave way to the inward–looking of the nonsensical New Age Movement and the intensely solipsistic, or bluntly masturbatory, psychobabble of the 1970s and, thereafter, the neoliberalism—Reaganomics in the U.S. and TINA (there is no alternative) in the UK—of the 1980s.
Through the American New Left, most Marxists in my field, sociology, became left–libertarians, not Stalinists. A minority were Trotskyists. That state of affairs can be historically attributed to the so–called sociology wars of the late 1960s and early 1970s. The bulk of sociology professors, from the birth of American sociology until that time, were conservatives. The students, especially graduate students, were not. Eventually, the professors retired. The majority are long deceased. The graduate students, largely libertarian Marxists, became the newly minted professors. Sociology, which has never been the same, abides as the most left–wing field in academia. In my own department, all five full–time sociology professors are Marxists. Two of us, including myself, are committed communists. Two of us, yet another person and I, are critical realists. I am the only libertarian Marxist.
Now, how did this situation develop? I remember those days fondly and wistfully. Modern sociology, with its roots in the New Left, was the most popular U.S. major during the 1960s. The New Left was overall a movement of libertarian Marxists and some left anarchists. Autonomist Marxism, a libertarian Marxist current originally from Italy, dominated much of the American New Left. Since contemporary U.S. sociology was born out of the matrix of the New Left, pre–New–Left sociology and post–New–Left sociology are generally incommensurable fields. Many American sociology departments continue to be dominated by left–libertarians. The same holds true for junior professors. Birds of a feather flock together, I suppose.
Outside of sociology departments, Marxists tend to represent various forms of Marxism–Leninism: Stalinism, Maoism, and Trotskyism. In other words, the virtual headquarters of libertarian communism and libertarian Marxism remains in departments of sociology. Unfortunately, although libertarian communism and socialism can be found camped outside of sociology, as in the small cells of the Antifa movement, the libertarians have never experienced the same level of expansion, however minuscule, as the diverse flavors of Marxism–Leninism. That notwithstanding, I am more than pleased to say that the legacy of the U.S. New Left has, to one degree or another, been central of this writer’s world for the majority of his life.
One nation cannot, realistically, disarm unilaterally. Following the complete and unequivocal elimination of national sovereignty, there needs to be an international politburo. Such a communism from below or libertarian socialism—formally operated through the organ of a vibrant revolutionary proletarian democracy—would enforce global offensive demilitarization and promote the collective security of the world community. An attack upon one nation must be treated as an attack upon all. Until such a time when this august body is constituted, our planet will inevitably, as if trapped in a revolving door, move unwittingly from one potential crisis to another. I do not know about others, but that is not the future I want for my progeny.
On NationStates, I have seen, first hand, why the Left has been divided asunder for so many decades. What’s more, the situation could not have been otherwise. Left regroupment has been hindered by the dialectical absence of left refoundation. Without a common metatheory to unite the Left, it will, I regrettably predict, remain embroiled in warring camps. Skirmishes will continue over issues both significant and relatively inconsequential. Yet, the primary controversy remains territoriality. Sometimes, it appears to me, the importance of the disagreement is almost irrelevant. The fight endures only for its own sake. Lacking a critical realist method for working toward libertarian communism, pointless battles become a distraction.
On June 2ⁿᵈ, 2018, I joined a region, Soviet Democracy, under one of my three nations. Initially, I was pleased regarding the positive endorsement policy. You were rewarded for how many other members you endorsed. I piled up nearly twenty, and I felt at home. People were polite. The message board and the Discord chat room were active. Still, the region’s rules adversely mentioned fascists. Today, June 3ʳᵈ, 2018, I discovered that one self–described semi–fascist and another self–described third positionist were contenders for regional president. When I expressed surprise, I was firmly told that none could be barred from holding office in the region based upon ideology. Even the cartoon character, the Roadrunner (Arabic, عَدَّاء الطَرِيق [MP3],ʿaddāˁ ʾal•ṭarīq, “the road runner”), could not have sprinted faster than me.
Regarding the war on ISIL (Arabic, دَوْلَة الإِسْلَامِيَّة فِي العِرَاق والشَّام [MP3], Daw°laẗ ʾal•⫰Islāmiyyaẗ fī ʾal•ʿIrāq wa•ʾal•Ššām, “The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant”) or IS (Arabic, دَوْلَة الإِسْلَامِيَّة [MP3], Daw°laẗ ʾal•⫰Islāmiyyaẗ, “The Islamic State”), if I were a fool, I might propose to hire a company which demolishes buildings to build my next apartment complex. The U.S., the axis of evil, indirectly created ISIL through its imperialist policies. I cannot predict the future. Still, the U.S. is destroying our planet through unchecked capitalism. That cannot be permitted to continue unabated and unchallenged. Instead, problems like the U.S. and ISIL can only be resolved by the final authority of an international communist state or federation.
Expanding the range of our considerations, the polar opposite of imperialism (Arabic, إِمْبِرْيَالِيَّة [MP3], ⫰im°bir°yāliyyaẗ) is not isolationism (Arabic, اِنْعِزَالِيَّة [MP3], ʾinʿizāliyyaẗ). Hardly. Rather, the antithesis of imperialism is multilateralism, coöperation, and global governance. Sadly, the U.S. has become so accustomed to demanding that other nations play follow the leader that it has not internalized this lesson. Although I remain pessimistic, I hope it is learned before the world spins even further out of control. With the breakneck pace of global change, and of nuclear proliferation, the U.S. may, grievously, discover that time, long ago, passed it by. One can trust that others, in the unforeseen future, may look back, with profound regret, upon the tragic errors now committed. Perhaps these societies shall benefit from the inevitable cataclysms caused by arrogance and ethnocentrism.
With the capitalist world–system, and the world writ large, on the brink of dialectical destruction, a libertarian unity of the Left has never been a greater social, political, and economic imperative. We literally have no more time. Unfortunately, during the period in which we are now living, such an international solidarity appears more distant than at any point in my . Even as the peoples of the world continue crying out for answers, many of them can be seen moving in a reactionary direction. Still, if the past got us to where we are presently, can it hold the answers to the future? Perhaps regressing does harbor the solutions, but I truly doubt it. Meanwhile, members of the Left contend over diverse assemblages of trivialities. The revival of the Left may only arrive as a consequence of considerable pain and sorrow.
To the question, Do I care about the United States? My response is, at best, mixed. On the one hand, since I appreciate that the immense power of the dialectic will rapidly bring unprecedented tragedy upon my country, and I really do not have the power, acting alone, to do much, if anything, to reverse the situation, the answer is, regrettably, no. On the other hand, I possess a tremendous conviction, and a concern, that the longer my country continues on its wanton path of capitalist intersectionary, the greater, ultimately, will be the devastation. The earlier the annihilation occurs, the less may be the anguish. Thus, in that sense, I care, but certainly not in the usual sense. I obviously do not want to witness anyone suffering needlessly in the collective plunder. By the same token, I feel that, considered overall, we deserve every single bit of it. So, I am a communist, not a progressive.
I staunchly believe in the potentiality of an international communist polity. However, I do not assume that the U.S., Europe, the Antipodes, Israel (Hebrew, יִשְׂרָאֵל [MP3], Yiśərāʾēl), and so forth shall remain. Actually, my view is quite the opposite. Marx, Engels, and Luxemburg were careful to avoid making too many prognostications. I seem to lack some of their caution. Needless to say, I am willing to speculate, at least to an extent, on the shape of the future. Generally speaking, colossal earth, including climate, changes accompanied by disastrous thermonuclear world wars might be just around the corner. The length of time it will take to turn that corner is, alas, considerably above my pay grade. Perhaps, in the long run, that is for the best. Too much speculation on the future can easily deteriorate into a self–pity party. There is plenty of work to occupy our time right now.
With that qualification, the Earth of the future will, by and large, be populated in far–flung regions of the world. Many white and other peoples, those who presently inhabit the soon–to–be devastated industrialized areas of the globe, may shortly be vaporized or irradiated. Landmasses of the erstwhile Global North might, in revolution’s second stage following destruction, be resettled and rebuilt, from the bottom on up, by the Black and Brown populations of the distant future. This exercise in futurism recalls the libertarian, heterodox, third–camp Trotskyist Hal Draper’s socialism from below. Sufferings will be intense and longstanding, and like the European invading horde which migrated across North America, significant numbers may perish. I doubt that any excavations of the vast ruins by archæologists could be a priority for multiple centuries―possibly millennia.
To employ a metaphor, what if you suddenly found yourself living in a Mad Max world? When you have all that you need for survival, not asking questions is easy. However, after the rug is pulled out from under your feet, you have nothing to lose. Everything is topsy–turvy. What once seemed impossible is now the stark truth. If fantasy became reality, which, given the operations of the dialectic, might be just around the corner, how would you react? Could you stave off the humans–cum–monsters? What steps will you take to protect your loved ones? You have a multitude of questions but, quite literally, no answers. For those individuals who may somehow manage, against all odds, to outlive the devastating dialectical catastrophes to come, many decisions will need to be made. No prescribed rulebook shall be available. For a time, the remnant may literally envy the deceased.
In the next world, Hell, Hellfire, or Gehenna (Arabic, جَهَنَّم [MP3], Ǧahannam; Hebrew, גֵּיהִנֹּם [MP3], Gēhinnōm; Syriac, ܓܸܗܲܢܲܐ [MP3], Gehannaʾ; or Common Greek, Γέεννα [MP3], Géenna) seems, all things being equal, the soul’s eternal station. Even so, such divine causal mechanisms operate as: personal invocation, intercessory prayer, mediations of ʾal•Ḥūriyyāt (الحُورِيَّات [MP3], “the black–in–white–eyed maidens”) living forever in the Angelic realm, superb and charitable deeds which have been performed in the name of the deceased individual, directed interventions by ʾAllꞌah (SWT) and His Messengers or Apostles, and other factors. One can, according to ʾAllꞌah’s (SWT) supreme Will (Arabic, إِرَادَة [MP3], ⫰irādaẗ), be redeemed from everlasting torments to one degree or another. Hence, since ʾAllꞌah (SWT) is beneficent and generous, even to the undeserving, hope is ever–present.
In other words, although ʾAllꞌah (SWT) is an ⫰ilāhuṇ (Arabic, إِلَاهٌ [MP3], god) of infinite justice, He is, likewise, an ⫰ilāhuṇ of infinite forgiveness, mercy, and compassion. No one, no matter how outwardly loathesome and despised, is ever a lost cause. The endless grace of ʾAllꞌah (SWT), as it is manifested through His Prophets, exceeds all measures available to His creatures. Unfortunately, humanity has, thus far, made too many horrifying choices. Considering that we have been heading down the wrong path for so many generations, insufficient time may remain before total destruction encircles us on all sides. Calamities could be so sudden and unanticipated that regret might have no occasion to set in until arriving in the hereafter. With all the accoutrements accumulated by us left behind, we will have an eternity, without distractions, to reflect on our decisions from this world.
I will be more forthright than above: Concerning myself, I am a strong theist. The U.S. is being administered by a government—its executive, its legislature, and, arguably, its Supreme Court—dominated by corrupt politicians and wicked jurists. As types of Satan (Arabic, شَيْطَان [MP3], Šayṭān; or Hebrew, שָׂטָן [MP3], Śāṭān), the Devil (Arabic, الإِبْلِيسُ [MP3], ʾal•⫰Ib°līsu; Hebrew, הַשָׂעִיר [MP3], hạ•Śāʿiyr; or Common Greek, ὁ Διάβολος [MP3], ho Diábolos), and his demons (Arabic, شَيَاطِين [MP3], šayāṭīn; جِنّ [MP3], ǧinn; or عَفَارِيت [MP3], ʿafārīt), the leaders and their vassals are going to Hell. Though I am neither a Christian, a Muslim, nor a Judaist, I wish my comments to be read at face value. What may occur in the wake of this plight? After the U.S. and most of the world is, in the blink of an eye, decimated beyond recognition, the centuries–long communist revolution might begin.
Namely, diabolic terms refer to allegorical types, not to otherworldly entities. In these final minutes of the present hour, that literal devil is, to my understanding, Donald J. Trump. To be honest, what ordinary human being would authorize the summer, 2018, project to separate Latino parents, looking for his help and protection, from their children? The Statue of Liberty should be returned to France without undue delay. Trump’s cabinet, congressional supporters, Supreme Court appointees, and advocates, including a considerable number of unchristian conservative evangelicals, are his demons. In these verses, the author of the Apocalypse (Ancient Greek, Ἀποκάλυψις [MP3], A̓pokálypsis, “uncovering”) or Revelation warned, in stark and poignant terms, of the mental and emotional travails, unmistakable deceptions, and rapidly approaching, all–but–universal destructions:
… I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and locked and sealed it over him, so that he would deceive the nations no more, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be let out for a little while.… When the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison and will come out to deceive the nations at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, in order to gather them for battle; they are as numerous as the sands of the sea. They marched up over the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from heaven and consumed them.… [A]nyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
〜 Revelation 20:1–3, 7–9, and 15. New Revised Standard Version.

Return to the Page Menu.

٩. Palestine and Israel in Turmoil
Concerning nationalism, a sovereign Israel, like a sovereign anywhere, ought not exist in the present or future. Nationalism is a social problem. All countries must unify as an international proletarian democracy. Yet, the majority of Jewish Zionists I have known over the years are nationalists and pro–colonialists, not Jewish supremacists. That distinction goes largely to Christian Zionists. Geopolitics, not religion, is the dominant factor in acts of colonialism, and most Jews firmly reject the chosen people mythos. Practically, not legally, American Zionists are dual nationals. Americanism—Pax Americana, the Monroe Doctrine, and American exceptionalism—and Zionism (Hebrew, צִיּוֹנוּת‬ [MP3], Ṣiyōnūṯ) are palpably the most oppressive nationalisms in today’s world. In dismantling them both, the precipating events, the debut if you like, may join great wars with major Earth changes.
In supporting Israel, and in relocating the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv (Hebrew, תֵּל אָבִיב [MP3], Tēl ʾĀḇiyḇ) to Jerusalem (Hebrew, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם [MP3], Yərūšālạyim), is Trump a religious supremacist? Certainly not. Indeed, if Trump has any religion at all, it is self–worship. One might contend that he has been influenced, at least to an extent, by his son–in–law Jared Kushner, who was born into an Orthodox Jewish family, and by Trump’s daughter Ivanka. She converted to Orthodox Judaism in order to become Kushner’s wife. However, Trump is primarily interested in enhancing his power and in receiving accolades. He is neither a Christian nor Christian Zionist. The man is not even functioning well in his job, but that is an unrelated issue.
Israel offers us a stark example of how failing a severe test, in this case the Holocaust, can lead to hatred without a conscience or a sense of justice. Upon reflection, evil exists, to one degree or another, in all of us. Global abominations are plentiful and too vast to name. As we observe in each day’s news, the world is dominated by considerable malice. Perfect people can be found only in imaginative works of fiction. However, it can sometimes be valuable to study entities who have allowed their evil inclinations dominate their better angels. In a sense, when we do so, we are staring at a looking–glass. More accurately, we are gazing into a crooked mirror. It reveals to us what we can all become, each one of us, if caution is thrown to the wind. When it comes to human beings, there is no evil other. We all, without exception, have the potential, hidden within ourselves, to become that person.
Still, Jews in Israel need not return to the lands of their forebears—contradicting the very spirit of communist internationalism. People should be free to reside anywhere. Criminals and terrorists can be arrested. Immigration, passports, and visas must be tossed into the dustbin of history. They are not the causal mechanisms of unity or copresence but of disunity, demireality, or dialectical absence. Yet, remaking the world does not wipe away past misdeeds. Jews stole Palestine (Arabic, فِلَسْطِين [MP3], Filas°ṭīn) and committed horrendous acts of terrorism. For a people, my very own people, who survived the Holocaust, such behavior is baffling. Today, Israel unjustly places Palestinians (Arabic, فِلَسْطِينِيُّونَ [MP3], Filas°ṭīniyyūna, or فِلَسْطِينِيِّينَ [MP3], Filas°ṭīniyyīna) in abominable and inhumane prison cities reminiscent of the Jews held in Nazi death camps in the middle of the 20ᵗʰ century.
As a libertarian Marxist communist internationalist and a Marxist–Luxemburgist—not a deplorable neoconservative American imperialist and a Zionist—my true sympathies have long been for the struggling Palestinians of the Levant (Arabic, الشَّام, ʾal•Ššām [MP3]) and additional subaltern or marginalized peoples. That notwithstanding, without an international communist union, I would never condone the establishment of a Palestinian state anymore than I could, in good conscience, support other nation–states, such as apartheid Israel. The final remedy for the massive demireality, or disunity in difference, of modernity is not the proliferation of independent national identities but, rather, the establishment of a global communist state. A worldwide communist federation or administration of nations and localities may then gradually develop over the course of many centuries.
A doubtful solution to the problems of the present hour is the two–state solution. My proviso: Although a two–state solution will do, it must occur in a global communist federation. Nonetheless, I would strongly prefer a one–state solution. Conservative Israeli (Hebrew, יִשְׂרָאֵלִי [MP3], Yiśərāʾēliy) politicians play a little game anytime this formidable issue arises. As a tactic for stonewalling this, admittedly unlikely, two–state solution, they feign support. Essentially, they are making a poker–face or bluffing. Although these politicians continue to oppose all policies which could restrict Israel’s perpetual hegemony in the region, they hoax as a ploy to delay. When nations and human rights groups call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) against Israel, these hypocritical politicians cry antisemitism! Sadly, because this woe–is–me tactic has often succeeded, it is repeated time and again.
Since before the founding of the nation of Israel, Jewish persons, from liberal to Orthodox, have held a variety of irreconcilable views on the topic of political or state Zionism (MP3; Arabic, صَهْيُونِيَّة الدَوْلَة [MP3], Ṣah°yūniyyaẗ ʾal•daw°laẗ; Hebrew, צִיּוֹנוּת הַמַמְלַכְתִּית [MP3], Ṣiyyōnūṯ hạ•mạməlạḵətiyṯ; Persian, صَهْیُونِیسْمِ دَولَتِی [MP3], Sah°ýūnís°m•i daw°latí; Urdu, رَیَاسْتِی صِیہُونِیزْمَ [MP3], raýas°tí Ṣiýūniz°ma; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਰਾਜ ਦੇ ਜ਼ੋਨਿਜ਼ਮ [MP3], rāja dē Zōnizama; or Shahmukhi Punjabi, رَاجَ دَے زُونَزَمَ [MP3], rāǧa dē Zōnizama). As a communist internationalist, I insist that Palestinians (Arabic, فِلَسْطِينِيِّينَ [MP3], Filas°ṭīiyyīna; or Hebrew, פָלַסְטִינִים [MP3], P̄ālạs°ṭiyniym), Jews (Arabic, يَهُود [MP3], Yahūd; or Hebrew, יְהוּדִים [MP3], Yəhūḏiym), and others must be free to reside wheresoever they so choose. Absolutely no restrictions on geographical mobility should be imposed upon anyone.
Ideally, a newly unified Holy Land would be designated neither as Palestine nor as Israel. Since the controvery surrounding these dual descriptors is a pill too bitter to swallow, this pair of charged terms ought to be tossed into the dustbin of history. Despicable acts of righteous indignation might be understandable responses, among some Palestinians, were the country again entitled Israel. As a man raised in two Jewish neighborhoods in New York City, I must also dispute using that attribution. To be ethical, just, upright, civil, and impartial, why resurrect the loaded names of old warring nation–states? When all is said and done, a communist collective with a fresh start, open to one and all, can now be dubbed The Holy Land: ⫯Ar°ḍu ʾal•Muqaddasaẗ (Arabic, أَرْضُ المُقَدَّسَة [MP3]), ʾẸrẹṣ hạ•Qōḏẹš (Hebrew, אֶרֶץ הַקֹּדֶשׁ [MP3]), or Hāʾārẹṣ hạ•Qəḏōšāh (Hebrew, הָאָרֶץ הַקְּדוֹשָׁה [MP3]).

Return to the Page Menu.

١٠. Collective’s National Anthem
National anthems (Arabic, أَنَاشِيد الوَطَنِيَّة [MP3], ⫯anašīd ʾal•waṭaniyyaẗ; or Hebrew, הִמְנוֹנִים לְהַאֻמִּים [MP3], himənōniym lə•ha•ʾummiym) can serve to integrate a broad spectrum of a population from various backgrounds, for the purpose of comradery, and provide them with a common identity. Yet, in the case of communist internationalism, national anthems must serve a considerably greater purpose. Such anthems must not encourage a spirit of nationalism, or even a more subdued patriotism, but, rather, facilitate a mutual commitment to firmly opposing all varieties of national chauvinism. Such anthems should strive to bring together, in unity, the scattered masses of the world under the common red flag (Arabic, عَلَم الأَحْمَر [MP3], ʿalam ʾal•⫯aḥ°mar; or Hebrew, דֶּגֶל הַאָדֹם [MP3], dẹḡẹl hạ•ʾạḏōm) of communism.
Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of The Multiversal Communist Collective and its members desire to serve as a paragon for global libertarian communism. Consequently, the majestic national anthem (Arabic, نَشِيد الوَطَنِيّ [MP3], našīd ʾal•waṭaniyy; or Hebrew, , הִמְנוֹן לְהַאֻמִּי [MP3], himənōn lə•hạ•ʾummiy) for ʾal•Ǧamāʿiyyaẗ (Arabic, الجَمَاعِيَّة [MP3], “the Collective”) or hạ•Qōlẹqəṭiyḇ (Hebrew, הַקוֹלֶקְטִיב [MP3], “the Collective”) and its ṭarīqaẗ, while not our own original composition, has been beautifully and stirringly vocalized by the incredible singer, Muhammad Iqbal Bahu (Urdu and Shahmukhi Punjabi, مُحَمَّدَ اِقْبَالَ بَاهُو [MP3], Muḥammada ʾIq°bāla Bāhū; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਇਕ਼੍ਬਾਲ ਬਾਹੂ [MP3], Muhamada Iqbāla Bāhū; or Hindi, मोहम्मद इकबाल बाहू [MP3], Mohammada Ikabāla Bāhū):
Bāhuwiyyaẗ (Arabic, بَاهُوِيَّة [MP3]) or Bāhūʾiyṯ (Hebrew, בָּהוּאִית [MP3]):

MP3 Anthem Musical Notes

Return to the Page Menu.

١١. Collective’s Bird and Animal
The state bird of Punjab, India, a species of large hawk, is called the baaz (Hindi, बाज़ [MP3], bāza; or Urdu, بَازَ [MP3], bāza) or northern goshawk (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਉੱਤਰੀ ਗੋਸ਼ਾਕ [MP3], utarī gōśāka; or Shahmukhi Punjabi, اُتَرِی گُوشَاکَ [MP3], ʾutarí gūšāḱa). The blackbuck (Hindi, काला हिरन [MP3], kālā hirana; Shahmukhi Punjabi, کَالَا ہِرَنَا [MP3], ḱālā hiranā; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਕਾਲਾ ਹਿਰਣਾ [MP3], kālā hiraṇā; or Urdu, بْلَیْکَ بُکْسَ [MP3], b°laý°ḱa buḱ°sa) or Indian antelope (Shahmukhi Punjabi, بْھَارَتِی ایْنِیلُوپَ, b°hāratí ʾaý°nílūpa [MP3]; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਭਾਰਤੀ ਐਨੀਲੋਪ, bhāratī ainīlōpa [MP3]; Hindi, भारतीय एंटीलोप [MP3], Bhāratīya eṃṭīlopa; or Urdu, ہِنْدُوسْتَانِی بَارَه سِنْگَا [MP3], Hin°dūs°tāní bārah sin°gā) is the state animal.
Here are two photographs:
Northern Goshawk
Baaz or Northern Goshawk
Blackbuck
Blackbuck or Indian Antelope
However, the provincial bird of Bāhū’s (AS) region of Punjab, in modern Pakistan, is the peacock (Urdu and Shahmukhi Punjabi, مُورَ [MP3], mūra; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਮੋਰ [MP3], mōra; and Hindi, मोर [MP3], mora). The provincial animal is the urial (Urdu, پُنْجَابِی اُڑِیَالَ [MP3], Pun°ǧābí ʾuṛiýāla; Shahmukhi Punjabi, پَنْجَابِی اُرِیئَِلَ [MP3], Pan°ǧābí ʾurī⫯yiala; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ਉਰੀਅਲ [MP3], Pajābī urīꞌala; and Hindi, पंजाबी यूरीअल [MP3], Paṃjābī Yūrīala, “Punjabi urial”). This subspecies of wild sheep is also known as the arkars and the shapo. The peacock and the urial have been formally proclaimed, respectively, as the Collective’s official bird and animal:
Peacock
Peacock
Urial
Urial, Arkars, or Shapo

Return to the Page Menu.

١٢. Collective’s Currency
The rupee ([MP3] originally Persian, رُوپِیِه [MP3], rūpiýih; Urdu, رُوپِیَہ [MP3], rūpiýah; Hindi, रुपीया [MP3], rupīyā; Bengali, রুপি [MP3], rupi; Tamil, ரூபாய் [MP3], rūpāy; Telugu, రూపాయి [MP3], rūpāyi; Malayalam, രൂപ [MP3], rūpa; Arabic, رُوبِيَّة [MP3], rūbiyyaẗ; Guramukhi Punjabi, ਰੁਪਏ [MP3], rupaꞌē; Shahmukhi Punjabi, رُپَأَے [MP3], rupa⫯ē; Sindhi, رُوپِيَا [MP3], rūpiyā; Pashto, رُوپۍ [MP3], rupəi; Hebrew, רוּפִּי [MP3], rūpiy; Tajik, рупия [MP3], rupiâ; or Amharic, ሩፒ [MP3], rupi, “silver”) is the Collective’s medium of exchange. This legal tender, which has remained the official monetary standard in India to this day, first became the regional currency for much of South Asia, including the Punjab, in the 16ᵗʰ century. These side–by–side photographs illustrate some of the first rupees coined in that century:
silver rupee coin made during the reign of the Mughal Emperor Alamgir II rupee from 1540–1545 A.D.

Return to the Page Menu.

١٣. Collective’s Capital City
Garh Maharaja (Urdu or Shahmukhi Punjabi, گَڑْھَ مَہَارَاجَا [MP3], Gaṛ°ha Mahārāǧā; Hindi, गढ़ महाराजा [MP3], Gaṛha Mahārājā; or Guramukhi Punjabi, ਗੜ੍ਹ ਮਹਾਰਾਜਾ [MP3], Gaṛha Mahārājā, “Fort of the Great King”) is a municipality belonging to Pakistan’s Punjab. That blessed city serves as the capital of Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of The Multiversal Communist Collective. Most importantly, however, the building or ediface which houses the shrine (Urdu, مَزَارَ [MP3], mazāra) and the mausoleum (Urdu, مَقْبْرَہ [MP3], maq°b°rah) of Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (AS) is located in Garh Maharaja:
Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū’s Shrine

Return to the Page Menu.

١٤. Some Concluding Comments
I have never been particularly orthodox (Arabic, حَنِيف [MP3], ḥanīf) in my methods. In lieu of an ordinary conclusion, other appellations which, to varying degrees, possess similar connotations to Mōšẹh ʾẠhărōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl’s honorific, píra ū mur°šida, include:
  1. šay°ẖ (Arabic, شَيْخ [MP3]), “shaykh, male elder, or elderly man” (corresponding to pír or píra).
  2. šay°ẖaẗ (Arabic, شَيْخَة [MP3]), “shaykha, female shaykh, female elder, or elderly woman.”
  3. šay°ẖ ʾal•šuyūẖ (Arabic, شَيْخ الشُيُوخ [MP3]), “shaykh of shaykhs or elder of elders.”
  4. šay°ẖaẗ ʾal•šay°ẖāt (Arabic, شَيْخَة الشَيْخَات [MP3]), “shaykha of shaykhas or female elder of female elders.”
  5. mur°šid ʾal•mur°šidīna (Arabic, مُرْشِد المُرْشِدِينَ [MP3]), “guide of guides.”
  6. mur°šidaẗ (Arabic, مُرْشِدَة [MP3]), “murshida, female murshid, or female guide.”
  7. mur°šidaẗ ʾal•mur°šidāt (Arabic, مُرْشِدَة المُرْشِدَات [MP3]), “female guide of female guides.”
  8. ḥaḍ°raẗ (originally Arabic, حَضْرَة [MP3]); ḥaḍ°rat (Persian, حَضْرَت [MP3]); ḥaḍarata (Urdu, حَضَرَتَ [MP3]); or hazarata (Hindi, हज़रत [MP3]), her or his blessedpresence.” In Arabic, ḥaḍ°raẗ is primarily used for men but occasionally for women.
  9. ġaw°ṯ (Arabic, غَوْث [MP3]), “aid or succor.”
  10. naqīb (Arabic, نَقِيب [MP3]), “captain.”
  11. ⫰imām (Arabic, إِمَام [MP3]), “pathfinder.”
  12. mullā (Arabic and Persian, مُلَّا [Arabic MP3] or [Persian MP3]; Urdu, مُلَّا [MP3]; Turkish, mollâ [MP3]; Bengali, মোল্লা [MP3], mōllā; or Hindi, मुल्ला [MP3], mullā), “master, guardian, or vicar.”
  13. sayyid (Arabic, سَيِّد [MP3]), “lord, sir, Mr. (originally an abbreviation for “master,” not “mister”), or a descendent of the Prophet Muḥammad (SAAW).”
  14. sayyidaẗ (Arabic, سَيِّدَة [MP3]), “lady, Miss. (originally an abbreviation for “mistress”), Mrs. (also originally an abbreviation for “mistress”), Ms. (similarly a term which was originally an abbreviation for “mistress”), or a female descendent of the Prophet Muḥammad (SAAW).”
  15. sayyidī (Arabic, سَيِّدِي [MP3]), “my lord.”
  16. ⫯amīr (Arabic, أَمِير [MP3]), “prince.”
  17. ⫯amīraẗ (Arabic, أَمِيرَة [MP3]), “princess.”
  18. ʾâyaẗ ʾAllꞌah (Arabic, آيَة الله [MP3]) or ʾâýat ʾAllꞌah (Perso–Arabic, آيَت‌ الله [MP3]), “ayatollah or sign of ʾAllꞌah.”
  19. ẓill ʾAllaꞌh fī ʾal•ʿālam (Arabic, ظِلّ الله فِي العَالَم [MP3]), “shadow of God in the world or, by implication, shadow of God on Earth.”
  20. hādī (Arabic, هَادِي [MP3]), “guide or leader.”
  21. hādiyaẗ (Arabic, هَادِيَة [MP3]), “female guide or leader.”
  22. maw°laỳ (Arabic, مَوْلَى [MP3]), “friend.”
  23. ʾânisaẗ (Arabic, آنِسَة, [MP3]), “lady or miss.”
  24. rabb (Arabic, رَبّ [MP3]), “master.”
  25. rabbaẗ (Arabic, رَبَّة [MP3]), “mistress or lady.”
  26. waliyy (Arabic, وَلِيّ [MP3]), “guardianor saint.
  27. waliyy ʾAllꞌah (Arabic, وَلِيّ الله [MP3]), “divine guardianor divine saint.
  28. waliyyaẗ (Arabic, وَلِيَّة [MP3]), “female guardianor female saint.
  29. qiddīs (Arabic, قِدِّيس [MP3], “saint.”
  30. qiddīsaẗ (Arabic, قِدِّيسَة [MP3], “female saint.”
  31. muḥibb (Arabic, مُحِبّ [MP3]), “lover.”
  32. muḥibbaẗ (Arabic, مُحِبَّة [MP3]), “female lover.”
  33. maw°lānā (Arabic, مَوْلَانَا [MP3]); mūlānā (Persian, مُولَانَا [MP3]); maw°lānā; (Urdu, مَوْلَانَا [MP3]); and mevlânâ (Turkish [MP3]), “our lord or master.”
  34. sayyidat°nā (Arabic, سَيِّدَتْنَا [MP3]), “our lady.”
  35. maw°lawiyy (Arabic, مَوْلَوِيّ [MP3]); mav°laví (Persian, مَوْلَوِی [MP3]); maw°lawí (Urdu, مَوْلَوِی [MP3]); mevlevi (Turkish [MP3]); and maulavī (Hindi, मौलवी [MP3]), “my lord” (a title given to a dervish).
  36. ʿālim (Arabic, عَالِم [MP3]), “knower, scholar, or scientist.”
  37. ʿālimaẗ (Arabic, عَالِمَة [MP3]), “female knower, female scholar, or female scientist.”
  38. ʿir°fāniyy (Arabic, عِرْفَانِيّ [MP3], “mystical knower or, loosely, a gnostic” (from Ancient Greek, γνῶσῐς [MP3], gnō̂sĭs, “knowledge”).
  39. faqīr (Arabic, فَقِير [MP3]), “poor one, pauper, or destitute one.”
  40. faqīraẗ (Arabic, فَقِيرَة [MP3]), “poor woman, female pauper, or destitute woman.”
  41. quṭ°b (Arabic, قُطْب [MP3]), “pole or pivot.”
  42. watad (Arabic, وَتَد [MP3]), “peg or pillar.”
  43. bādala (Arabic, بَادَلَ [MP3]), “substitute.”
  44. maẖ°dūm (Arabic, مَخْدُوم [MP3]), “master.”
  45. efendi (first adopted into Turkish [MP3] from the Modern Greek, αφέντης [MP3], aphéntēs, “master”); ⫯afan°diyy (Arabic, أَفَنْدِيّ [MP3]); ʾafan°dí (Persian and Pashto, اِفِندِی [MP3]); ʾâfan°dí (Urdu, آفَنْدِی [MP3]); ʾâfan°dī (Sindhi, آفَنْدِي [MP3]); ʾaý°faý°n°ḍí (Shahmukhi Punjabi, ایْفَیْنْڈِی [MP3]); aiphaiṇḍī (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਐਫੈਂਡੀ [MP3]); īpheṃḍī (Hindi, ईफेंडी [MP3]); efendiyê (Northern Kurdish/Kurmancî [MP3]); iphēndi (Bengali, ইফেন্দি [MP3]); āfántí (Mandarin Chinese, 阿凡提 [MP3]); efendi (Japanese, エフェンディ [MP3]); and ep’enji (Korean, 에펜디 [MP3]), “effendi, sir, mister, lord, or master.”
  46. ẖān (Persian, خَان) [MP3]); and ẖāna (Urdu, خَانَ [MP3]), “khan or commander.”
  47. ẖānum (Persian, خَانُم [MP3]; and ẖānuma (Urdu, خَانُمَ [MP3]), “khanum, lady, or madam” (a female adaptation of ẖān or ẖāna).
  48. ẖātūn (Persian, خَاتُون‎ [MP3]); and ẖātūna (Urdu, خَاتُونَ‎) [MP3]), “lady” (another female adaptation of ẖān or ẖāna).
  49. dar°víš (originally Persian, دَروِیش [MP3]), dārawiša (Urdu, دَارَوِشَ [MP3]); derviş (Turkish [MP3]); dar°wīš (Arabic, دَرْوِيش [MP3]); and daraveśa (Hindi, दरवेश [MP3]), “dervish or mendicant.”
  50. mír°zā (Persian, مِیرْزَا [MP3]), “nobleman, prince, or scholar
  51. ʾus°tād (originally Persian, اُسْتَاد [MP3]); and, later, ʾus°tāda (Urdu, اُسْتَادَ [MP3]) and ⫯us°tāḏ (Arabic derivation/اِسْتِخْلَاص [MP3]/ʾis°tiẖ°lāṣ, أُسْتَاذ [MP3]), “master, expert, teacher, or professor.”
  52. qalan°dar (Persian, قَلَنْدَر [MP3]); and qalan°dara (Urdu, قَلَنْدَر [MP3]), wandering Sufis (etymology unknown).
  53. čirāġ (Persian, چِرَاغ [MP3]); and čirāġa (Urdu, چِرَاغَ [MP3]), “cherag or lamp.”
  54. sar°ḱār (Persian, سَرْکَار [MP3]) and saraḱāra (Urdu, سَرَکَارَ [MP3]); and sarakāra (Hindi, सरकार [MP3]), “overseer.”
  55. ẖuwāǧah (Persian, خُوَاجَه [MP3]), Ṣūfiyymaster.”
  56. ācārya (Sanskrit, आचार्य [MP3]), “acharya or moral exemplar.”
  57. svāmī (Sanskrit, स्वामी [MP3]), “swami or master.”
  58. brahmarṣi (Sanskrit, ब्रह्मर्षि [MP3]), “transcendent seer.”
  59. maharṣi (Sanskrit, महर्षि [MP3]), “maharishi or great seer.”
  60. arhat (Sanskrit, अर्हत् [MP3]), “deserving one.”
  61. guru (Sanskrit and Hindi, गुरु [MP3]), “enlightener or, literally, darkness–light.”
  62. sadgurū (Sanskrit, सतगुरू [MP3]); sataguru (Hindi, सतगुरु [MP3]); saṯguru (Bengali, সৎগুরু [MP3]); satigurū (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ [MP3]); and catkuru (Tamil, சத்குரு [MP3]), “satguru, true enlightener, or, literally, true darkness–light.”
  63. saṃta (Hindi, संत [MP3]); sata (Guramukhi Punjabi, ਸੰਤ [MP3]); and san°ta (Shahmukhi Punjabi, سَنْتَ [MP3]), “sant or truth–teller” (a false cognate with saint, originally derived from the Latin sancīre [MP3] for “consecrate”).
  64. mahaṃta (Hindi, महंत [MP3]), “mahantaor monasticsuperior.”
  65. avatāra (Sanskrit and Hindi, अवतार [MP3]), “descending one or one who crosses down.”
  66. bla ma (Tibetan/Bod Skad, བླ་མ [MP3]), “lama or high priest.”
  67. rin po che (Tibetan, རིན་པོ་ཆེ་ [MP3]), “rinpoche or precious one.”
  68. oshō (Japanese, 和尚 [MP3] or オショー [MP3]), “master.”
  69. a̓pothéōsis (Ancient Greek, ἀποθέωσις [MP3]), “deification or divinization.”
  70. theopháneia (Ancient Greek, θεοφάνεια [MP3]), “theophany or divine manifestation.”
  71. e̓piphaínō (Ancient Greek, ἐπιφαίνω [MP3]), “epiphany, I came into view (literally), appearance, or manifestation.”
  72. bhikkhu (Pāli, भिक्खु [MP3]), bhikṣuṇī (Sanskrit, भिक्षुणी [MP3]), p̣hiks̄ʹuṇī (Thai, ภิกษุณี [MP3]), bǐqiū (Mandarin Chinese, 比丘 [MP3]), bikku (Burmese/Myanmabatha, ဘိက္ခု [MP3]), pigu (Korean, 비구 [MP3]), biku (Japanese, 比丘 [MP3], びく [MP3], or ビク [MP3]), bhikṣuva (Sinhalese/Siṃhala, භික්ෂුව [MP3]), bhikṣuvu (Tagalog/Wikang Pambansâ, భిక్షువు [MP3]), or phikkho (Khmer/Cambodian/Pheasaeakhmer, ភិក្ខុ [MP3]), “Buddhist monk or, literally, male mendicant.”
  73. bhikkhunī (Pāli, भिक्खुनी [MP3]), bhiksu (Sanskrit, भिक्षु [MP3]), p̣hiks̄ʹu (Thai, ภิกษุ [MP3]), bǐqiūní (Mandarin Chinese, 比丘尼 [MP3]), bikkuni, (Burmese, ဘိက္ခုနီ [MP3]), piguni (Korean, 비구니 [MP3]), bikuni (Japanese, 比丘尼 [MP3], ビクニ [MP3], or びくに [MP3]), bhikṣuṇiya (Sinhalese, භික්ෂුණිය [MP3]), bhikṣuvuni (Tagalog, భిక్షువుని [MP3]), or phikkhoni (Khmer, ភិក្ខុនី [MP3]), “Buddhist nun or, literally, female mendicant.”
  74. dàoshì (Mandarin Chinese, 道士 [MP3]), “scholar of the Way or Path.” (Mandarin Chinese, 道, Dào [MP3], “Way or Path.”) or, by implication, “Taoist (or Daoist) priest.” Taoism (or Daoism) is (Mandarin Chinese, 道教 [MP3], Dàojiào). Taoist (or Daoist) is (Mandarin Chinese, 道人 [MP3], Dàorén).
  75. nǚ•dàoshì (Mandarin Chinese, 女道士 [MP3]), “female scholar of the Way or Path.” or, by implication, “female Taoist (or Daoist) priest.”
ʾal•Ssalāmu ʿalay°kum, Mōšẹh ʾẠhărōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl (Heb/Yid, מֹשֶׁה אַהֲרֹן הַלֵוִי בֶּן הֶערְשֶׁעל), píra ū mur°šida. footer
Communist Social Fiction, Bhaskarian critical realism, Antifa Luxemburgism, Dialectical metaRealism, footer
🙵 The MarkFoster.NETwork. Ṭarīqaẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of Ḥaḍ°rat Sul°ṭān Bāhū (Perso–Arabic, حَضْرَت سُلْطَان بَاهُو). footerfooter
A footer ḏik°r (Arabic, ذِكْر, remembrance): Yā ʾAllꞌahu, wa•yā Muḥammad, wa•yā Bāhū! (Arabic, يَا اللّهُ، وَيَا مُحَمَّد، وَيَا بَاهُو!). footer

Return to the Page Menu.

This site has been published through The MarkFoster.NETwork™.
Copyright  ©  2017– Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. All rights reserved.
Foster adores both ⫰Is°lām Taṣawwuf, but he follows neither one.
Mōšẹh ʾẠhărōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəšẹʿl is Foster’s communist name.
Hammer, Sickle, and StarStar and CrescentRaised Fist
The Confederation of Traditional Socialist Nations logoThe Confederation of Traditional Socialist Nations flagThe Vanguard Treaty
Guhar ŠāhíNationStates.net and General AssemblyPosadist 4ᵗʰ International logo
The Gestalt Prayer by Frederick S. “Fritz” Perls Hamsa or Khamsa is a Semitic hand amulet which translates as 5 in Arabic, Syriac, and Maltese and as 50 in Amharic. The Hebrew word is only a transliteration of the Arabic.
H̱am°saẗ (Arabic/ʿArabiyyaẗ, خَمْسَة), 5
Ḥaməsāh (Hebrew/ʿIḇəriyṯ, חַמְסָה‬), 5
Häməsa (Amharic/ʾÄmarəña, ሀምሳ), 50
Ḥamšā (Syriac/Sūryayaʾ, ܚܡܫܐ), 5
or Ħamsa (Maltese/Malti), 5
A Semitic Hand Amulet.”
Not Related to “Hamṣa” (Sanskrit/
Saṃskrtam, हंस
), Swan or Goose.”
Ţarīqāẗ ʾal•Bāhuwiyyaẗ of The Multiversal Communist Collective, Mōshẹh ʾẠhạrōn hạ•Lēwiy bẹn Hẹʿrəshẹʿl, Pír ū Mur°šid
Trading Card Trading Card
ʾAllꞌah’s heart Prayer Beads The Confederation of Traditional Socialist Nations Praying Hands Peace and Blessings