Khilafah.com

Friday
Oct 24th
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Sufism and the Revival of the Ummah

E-mail Print PDF

Zardari's regime, announced on 7th June 2009 that it was setting up a 7-member ‘Sufi Advisory Council' (SAC) with the aim of combating extremism and fanaticism by spreading Sufism in the country. Many in the west have made it no secret that they see Sufism as a way to promote western interests and values within the Muslim world. In the 2005 RAND Report - Civil Democratic Islam, it states as a part of the west's strategy to ‘Assertively Promote the Values of Western Democratic Modernity: ‘Build up the stature of Sufism. Encourage countries with strong Sufi traditions to focus on that part of their history and to include it in their school curricula. Pay more attention to Sufi Islam.'

In Uzbekistan where the oppression and torture of Muslims tops the charts, the government is also encouraging Sufism. The Keston News Service reported back in 2002 that the Uzbek regime is: ‘using Sufism as a distinctive counterweight to those Muslims who are independent of the authorities, the so-called Wahhabis (the name given in Central Asia to Islamic fundamentalist groups, which often have little in common with the Islam that predominates in Saudi Arabia) and the international Islamic party Hizb-ut-Tahrir, which campaigns for the unification of Muslims throughout the world into a single caliphate.'

It should come as no surprise then that whilst NATO which is currently occupying Afghanistan should invite the Sufi Muslim Council based in the UK to its headquarters to "have a look around," and the Pakistan government should establish a Sufi Advisory Council in the midst of its war in Swat.

Although the west sees Sufism as a partner in their attempts to suppress and reform Islam, if we look back to Islamic history we see a very different picture of Sufism to that being painted by the west and its allies in the Muslim regimes.

What is Sufism?

Imam Abu Hanifa (85 H. - 150 H) said: "If it were not for two years, I would have perished." He said, "for two years I accompanied Sayyidina Ja'far as-Sadiq and I acquired  the spiritual knowledge that made me a Sufi in the Way." [Ad-Durr al-Mukhtar, vol 1. p. 43]

Imam Malik (95 H. - 179 H.) said: "Whoever studies Jurisprudence / Fiqh [tafaqaha] and didn't study Sufism [tasawwaf] will be corrupted; and whoever studied Sufism and didn't  study Jurisprudence will become a heretic; and whoever combined both will reach the Truth."  ['Ali al-Adawi , vol. 2, p 195]

Imam Shafi'i (150 - 205 AH.) said: "I accompanied the Sufi people and I received from them three strands of knowledge: ...how to speak; how to treat people with leniency and a  soft heart... and they... guided me in the ways of Sufism." [Kashf al-Khafa, 'Ajluni, vol. 1, p 341.]

Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (164 - 241 AH.) the said: "O my son, you have to sit with the People of Sufism, because they are like a fountain of knowledge and they keep the Remembrance of  Allah in their hearts. they are the ascetics and they have the most spiritual power." [Tanwir al-Qulub p. 405]

The above four Imams are the founders of the four universally accepted schools of law (mazhabs, or maslaqs).

Imam Nawawi, the famous Shafi'i scholar states in his al-Maqasid:

"The way of Sufism is based on five principles:

1.     having godfearingness privately and publicly,

2.     living according to the sunna in word and deed,

3.     indifference to whether others accept or reject one,

4.     satisfaction with Allah Most High when in scarcity and when you have plenty

5.     and returning to Allah in happiness or affliction.

The principles of treating the illnesses of the soul are also five:

1.     lightening the stomach by diminishing one's (excessiveness) in food and drink,

2.     taking refuge in Allah Most High from the unforeseen when it befalls,

3.     shunning situations that involve what one fears to fall victim to,

4.     continually asking for Allah's forgiveness and His blessings upon the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم night and day with full presence of mind,

5.     and keeping the company of him who guides one to Allah."

These principles outlined by Imam Nawawi do not in any way lead themselves to supporting and aiding western foreign policy interests. Moreover having godfearingness privately and publicly, and living according to the sunna in word and deed means that Muslims cannot remain silent against the oppressive regimes ruling over Muslims today such as in Uzbekistan, or supporting western foreign policy.

Sufism in Islamic History

Looking back to some of the famous Sufi scholars in Islamic history we see they were are at the forefront of enjoining good and forbidding evil, jihad and working against oppression.

Imam Ghazali is renowned for his works on refuting the incorrect philosophical thoughts that had penetrated the Muslim Ummah in his time. He also differentiated between the legitimate and illegitimate Sufi practices and worked to cleanse the Ummah of those incorrect Sufi practices that existed.

Throughout history Sufi's have been pivotal in Islamic reform and Jihad. It was Yusuf bin Tashfin the Berber and his Murabiteen Sufi movements of North West Africa in the name of the Khaleefah in Baghdad that launched the Jihad against the crusaders in Spain, and defeated them. When the Muslim rulers in Spain divided themselves and effectively split from the Khilafah, dividing the Ummah again it was Yusuf bin Tashfin under guidance from the great Sufi Imam Ghazali, with his Sufi Murabiteen movements, that dethroned these corrupt rulers by war in 1094, asserting the need for the rule of the Shariah and unity with the Khilafah.

In an almost identical fashion to the initial Murabiteen movement, inspired by great Sufi jurists and Faqihs like Imam Ghazali, the al-Muwahhidun Sufi movements came a couple of centuries later in North Africa, dethroning the by now declined namesake Murabiteen family, and again calling for the stricter application of Shariah. 

Shah Wali Allah (1703-1762), a well-known Sufi scholar, and political activist in India is known to have written letters to Afghan ruler Ahmad Shah Durrani, as well as prominent local Muslim rulers urging them to cooperate with Durrani in undertaking a jihad against the (Hindu) Marathas and Jats, to establish the Shariah in India. Shah Wali Allah was thus not only an inspiration for Durrani's invasions of 1756-57 and 1760-61, he was also responsible for helping to organize a unity of Muslim powers against the (Hindu) Marathas in Northern India.

Also famous is the anti-Russian jihad of the Naqshbandi Sufi Sheikh Mansur Ushurma. Following his destruction of an entire Russian brigade during the battle of the Sunzha River in 1785, Sheikh Mansur: "...called the mountaineers to holy war against the encroaching infidels and for some years unified practically the whole of North Caucasus, from the Chechen territory in the west to the Kumyk steppes in the east. His appeal-at least what we know of it-sounds very much like the appeals to jihad by Naqshbandi murshids [masters; leaders of Sufi Brotherhoods] of later date..."

From this watershed late 18th century jihad, through to the present era, the Naqshbandi tariqah [Brotherhood] has played a critical role defending Muslims, in the face of encroachments by both Czarist and Soviet Russia. It can said that the nearly fifty-year-long [19th century] Caucasian wars made an important contribution to the material and moral ruin of the Tsarist empire and hastened the downfall of the Romanov monarchy. During the violence of the communist revolutionary years of 1917-1921, the Sufi brotherhoods, especially the Naqshbandiya, once again played a pivotal role. Their ultimate goals in resisting the Communists were to establish the Shariah.

Naqshbandi Sheikh, Uzun Haji, one of the leaders of the brotherhood said: "If so God wills, we shall construct a Shari'ah government, for in a Muslim land there can be no republic. Were we to accept a republic, we would thereby renounce the Khilafah, which would be paramount of renouncing the Prophet and finally God himself" [Excerpts from: "Mystics and Commmissars: Sufism in the Soviet Union" X, Alexandre Bennigsen and S. Enders Wimbush,C. Hurst and Company, London, 1985]

The Ottomans were also heavily influenced by the Sufi Mawlawīyah order established by followers of the famous Sufi scholar Jalāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad Rūmī in the 13th century. Many members of this order served in various official positions of the Ottoman State.

Conclusion

Western foreign policy pundits are desperately employing various styles and means in their strategy to reform Islam and create a ‘new' secular Islam similar to what happened to Christianity during the ‘Reformation' period. Much of this campaign is aimed at rewriting Muslim history and attempting to portray modernist interpretations of Islam as well-established Islamic traditions. Those Muslims working to revive Islam according to an independent Islamic agenda what the west calls ‘extremists' or ‘Islamists' are portrayed as innovators whose ideas have no basis in Islamic tradition and history. Rewriting Sufism is one example of this.

The way to determine the correct Islamic position on any topic is to always keep in mind two things. Firstly, the attitude of the leaders of the kuffar (disbelievers) towards Islam, and secondly what the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم told us would keep us safe from going astray.

The attitude of the leaders of the kuffar towards Islam is very clear. They have one objective in attempting to reform Islam which is to extinguish the light of Allah.

Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

يُرِيدُونَ لِيُطْفِؤُوا نُورَ اللَّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَاللَّهُ مُتِمُّ نُورِهِ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ

"They wish to put Allah's light out with their mouths. But He will perfect His light, even though the disbelievers hate it." [As-Saff, 61:8]

On the authority of Abu Najih Al-Erbadh bin Sariah, who said: The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم gave us a sermon by which our hearts were filled with fear and tears came to our eyes. We said: "O Messenger of Allah, it is as though this is a farewell sermon, so counsel us." He صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "I counsel you to fear Allah and to give absolute obedience even if a slave becomes your leader. Verily he among you who lives [long] will see great controversy, so you must keep to my sunnah and to the sunnah of the rightly-guided Khalifahs - cling to them stubbornly. Beware of newly invented matters, for every invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is a going astray, and every going astray is in Hell-fire." [Abu Dawud and Al-Tirmidhi]

Trackback(0)
Comments (107)add comment

rizwan said:

Actually its all about taqlid and thats what imaam ghazali taught through out history! If sufis want thay can bring another khilafa but they are just waiting for the right momment but it will happen! We are the people of truth and have the same aqeeda that full under the four imaams! The imaams just have difference of opinions butno diagreements within each other are all sufi's of the past! nothings changed as there is a isnad (chain of narrations) to sufism, hadith, quran and practice therefore sufism will never be currupt only those who are the enemies of sufism and the khilafa! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...re=related
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
January 25, 2011
Votes: +0

mughal said:

The true sufis are Hizb ut tahrir according to definition of sufism.

One question : How can one attain a spiritual level nearer to Allah while he sees his muslim brothers being slaughtered in various regions and mllions dying of poverty?

Defenitly a sufi would first secure the boundaries of muslim lands then remove poverty only then he would do dhikr and apply various tarikah of sufi order to achieve this. The chance of getting nearer to Allah is to be given to every muslim because Islam is equal to all.! So a sufi must fight wars to defend the borders of the caliphate. Now we dont have a caliphate so the first priority is to re-erstablish it. Only then All muslims would be lifted out of poverty and their lives secured.

Whenever i try to follow the ways of sufis (either by wazifas recitation or other) to acheive the level, the image of palestine comes to my mind along with the poverty !


Another thing i have heard that "Follow what your heart says".
Now many muslims wrongly intrepret as we can do anything from cheating once to having huge amt. invested in shares.
Sufis said this because at that time Islamic state was intact and since the Islamic shariat was applied so the muslims cannot go astray .
Sufis said this keeping in mind that shariah was applied and land was dar ul islam.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 06, 2010
Votes: -1

snaz said:

@ Hasan reply.

slm,

well aljumdolillah - glad i got the answer to that.

Jzakallaj Kair...so simple.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2010
Votes: +1

Hassan said:

RE: Snaz

Jazakum Allahu khayr for your question. The article itself shows that true Sufism had unanimous support among the Ulema, including the pillars of Islamic scholarship, the 4 Imams of the 4 Islamic schools of thought. The classical Ulema are our source of guidance on things which we are not clear about, and not clearly defined decisively in the Quran and Sunnah, as our prophet (saw) said the Ulema are the inheritors of the prophets (in knowledge), so if they accepted Sufism, including being sufis themselves, then there can be no argument with these masters of knowledge - unless you believe the Ulema were all wrong on this! As for why not just calling ourselves Muslims, or why there is a group called sufis, the best way to look at it is like this: Every field in Islam had specialists, the hadith specialists were named muhadith, the quranic tafseer specialists were called mufasir, etc, so the specialists in matters of the heart and the purely spiritual aspect were called Sufis. Each field had it's leaders, branches, and students with chains back to the sahaba. These specialisms or other aspects of Islam were in no way seen as mutually exclusive, so you could be a Sufi, a muhadith, a mufasir, a mujtahid, and a mujahid. A specialist in every field was rare, but many great scholars came close, and it was never used by the ulema to justify or spawn division, as some would like to use Sufism for today.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2010
Votes: +0

snaz said:

slm,

Can someone please help me, i just want to know if what 'True' sufi's believe does not contradict Islmic teachings - them what are there a gropu called sufis? why not just call them muslims? aM I not understanding this correctly? please answer my question if you can.

Jizakallah kair for this articel.

ws
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 25, 2010
Votes: +0

Umar said:

Asalamualaikum
i would like to ask that if sufism is practicing quran and sunnah then it is true, but if u call sufism is:
Wahdatul Wajood (Allah is everywhere and in every thing)?
Rasool (saw) have Elim e gaeb?
Rasool (saw) is hayaat?
Awliya can help after the death?
worshiping graves and shrines?
And the Aqidah like Mansoor Hallaj and Ibn Arabi?
......
...........
.................Then it is WRONG
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
February 25, 2010
Votes: +0

Al-Mansur Abu al-Mahdi said:

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 47: Sahih Bukhari
Narrated Abu Huraira:

One day while the Prophet was sitting in the company of some people, (The angel) Gabriel came and asked, "What is faith?" Allah's Apostle replied, 'Faith is to believe in Allah, His angels, (the) meeting with Him, His Apostles, and to believe in Resurrection." Then he further asked, "What is Islam?" Allah's Apostle replied, "To worship Allah Alone and none else, to offer prayers perfectly to pay the compulsory charity (Zakat) and to observe fasts during the month of Ramadan." Then he further asked, "What is Ihsan (perfection)?" Allah's Apostle replied, "To worship Allah as if you see Him, and if you cannot achieve this state of devotion then you must consider that He is looking at you." Then he further asked, "When will the Hour be established?" Allah's Apostle replied, "The answerer has no better knowledge than the questioner. But I will inform you about its portents.

1. When a slave (lady) gives birth to her master.

2. When the shepherds of black camels start boasting and competing with others in the construction of higher buildings. And the Hour is one of five things which nobody knows except Allah.

The Prophet then recited: "Verily, with Allah (Alone) is the knowledge of the Hour--." (31. 34) Then that man (Gabriel) left and the Prophet asked his companions to call him back, but they could not see him. Then the Prophet said, "That was Gabriel who came to teach the people their religion." Abu 'Abdullah said: He (the Prophet) considered all that as a part of faith.


 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
January 02, 2010
Votes: +0

Hassan Abdullah said:

To those that use quotes from Ibn Taymiyyah to attack Sufis, you have to remember that he was a Sufi himself, albeit slightly different from others. He also held some deviant beliefs in Aqeeda regarding Allah's attributes, literalism about the kursi, and the eternal existence of matter , but I will not debate that here, and will not entertain that debate. You can't Use Ibn Taymiyyah against all Sufism as he was clearly a Sufi himself, see:

http://www.sunniforum.com/foru...php?t=6313

http://www.sunnah.org/tasawwuf/scholr23.htm

Imam Ibn Taymiyya, mentioned about the definition of Tasawwuf, from Volume 11,"At-Tawassuf" of "Majmu'a Fatawa Ibn Taymiyya al-Kubra," Dar ar-Rahmah, Cairo,

"Alhamdulillah, the pronunciation of the word Tasawwuf has been thoroughly discussed. From those who spoke about Tasawwuf were not just the the Imams and Shaikhs, but also included were Ahmad bin Hanbal, Abi Sulayman ad-Daarani, As-Sirr as-Saqati, al-Junayd al-Baghdadi, Hasan al-Basri, Ma'aruf al-Karkhi, Abdul Qadir Jilani, Bayazid al-Bistami [one of the grandshaikhs of the Naqshbandi Tariqat] and many others. This is a term that was given to those who were dealing with that kind of science [tazkiyyat an-nafs and Ihsan]."

Imam Ibn Taymiyya says:

"Tassawuf has realities and states of experience which they talk about in their science. Some of it is that the Sufi is that one who purifies himself from anything which distracts him from the remembrance of Allah and who will be so filled up with knowledge of the heart and knowledge of the mind to the point that the value of gold and stones will be the same to him. And Tasawwuf is safeguarding the precious meanings and leaving behind the call to fame and vanity in order to reach the state of Truthfulness, because the best of humans after the prophets are the Siddiqeen, as Allah mentioned them in the verse:
'(And all who obey God and the Apostle) are in the company of those on whom is the grace of Allah: of the prophets, the sincere lovers of truth, the martyrs and the righteous; Ah! what a beautiful fellowship.'"
(an-Nisa', 69,70)

Ibn Taymiyya continues:

"as-Sufi hua fil-haqiqa naw'un min as-siddiqeen. Fahua as-siddiq alladhee ikhtassa bil-zuhadiwal-'ibada."

which translates:

"And the Sufi is in reality a kind of Siddiq (Truthful One), that Siddiq who specialized in zuhd and worship."

He continues about the Sufis,

"some people criticised Sufiyya and Tasawwuf and they said they were innovators, out of the Sunnah, but the truth is they are striving in Allah's obedience[mujtahidin fi ta'at-illahi], as others of Allah's People strove in Allah's obedience. So from them you will find the Foremost in Nearness by virtue of his striving [as-saabiq ul-muqarrab bi hasab ijtihadihi]. And some of them are from the People of the Right hand [Ahl al-Yameen mentioned in Qur'an in Sura Waqi'ah], but slower in their progress. For both kinds, they might make ijtihad and in that case they might be correct and they might be wrong. And from both types, some of them might make a sin and repent. And this is the origin of Tasawwuf. And after that origin, it has been spread and (tasha'abat wa tanawa'at) has its main line and its branches. And it has become three kinds:

1. Sufiyyat il-Haqa'iq - the True Sufis
2. Sufiyyat il-Arzaaq - the Professional Sufis (those who use Sufism for personal gain)
3. Sufiyyat il-Rasm - the Caricature Sufis. (Sufi by appearance only)."
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
November 05, 2009
Votes: +2

salman said:

An interesting debate....

It is unfortunate that our arguments as brothers are not contemplated upon seeking greater understanding-but rather tit for tat trading of points that mask the crucial discussion points and diverts from them tend to dominate the debate. It belies the discussion of knowledge and the role of tassawaf in aquiring it!

Our Sufi brothers clearly have a problematic understanding of Ihsan which the hadith of Umar (ra) clearly relates to human action (i.e. the prayer) and its excellence in performance as apposed to Imaan and the certainty of Allah (swt) existence, which is conceptual and not relevant to ‘amal.

So how can it then be that Ihsan is a branch of Islamic knowledge that is needed to develop yakeen?? We would have to develop gnosis before we have Imaan if that were the case and this is irrational and non-sensical since Imaan must come first and it must have yakeen to be called Imaan as Allah and His Messenger have described it in the various texts.

As for what is the certainty of belief in Allah (swt) (tasdeeq e jazm), this is the intellectual proof that agrees with the human disposition (namely propensity for reverence) which then brings yakeen. Thus, when knowledge of Allah’s existence and its unity comes through a correct intellectual process (built upon observation as apposed to assumption), then the heart finds tranquillity since this is in congruence with the reverential instinct that man possesses. Some claim to have identified the genetic basis for the reverential instinct and have called it the “God gene.”

This process is explained by Allah (swt) in the story of Ibraheem (as) and his struggle against his people as related in Surah al An’am:

006.074 Lo! Abraham said to his father Azar: "Takest thou idols for gods? For I see thee and thy people in manifest error."

006.075 So also did We show Abraham the power and the laws of the heavens and the earth, that he might (with understanding) have certitude.

006.076 When the night covered him over, He saw a star: He said: "This is my Lord." But when it set, He said: "I love not those that set."

006.077 When he saw the moon rising in splendour, he said: "This is my Lord." But when the moon set, He said: "Unless my Lord guide me, I shall surely be among those who go astray."

006.078 When he saw the sun rising in splendour, he said: "This is my Lord; this is the greatest (of all)." But when the sun set, he said: "O my people! I am indeed free from your (guilt) of giving partners to God.

006.079 "For me, I have set my face, firmly and truly, towards Him Who created the heavens and the earth, and never shall I give partners to God."

006.080 His people disputed with him. He said: "(Come) ye to dispute with me, about God, when He (Himself) hath guided me? I fear not (the beings) ye associate with God: Unless my Lord willeth, (nothing can happen). My Lord comprehendeth in His knowledge all things. Will ye not (yourselves) be admonished?

006.081 "How should I fear (the beings) ye associate with God, when ye fear not to give partners to God without any warrant having been given to you? Which of (us) two parties hath more right to security? (tell me) if ye know.

006.082 "It is those who believe and confuse not their beliefs with wrong - that are (truly) in security, for they are on (right) guidance."

006.083 That was the reasoning about Us, which We gave to Abraham (to use) against his people: We raise whom We will, degree after degree: for thy Lord is full of wisdom and knowledge.

While the ulema of tafseer differ on their interpretation of these beautiful ayat, the verses show that Ibraheem (as) aquired yakeen through reasoned observation of the limitedness of the celestial bodies and presented his knowledge as arguments to his people, since they had belief in astrology. There is no indication that he practised tasawwaf in order to reach such an understanding. And Allah (swt) knows best!

This is not say that the practises of tasawwaf can not facilitate thinking and contemplation since they instill humility, discipline and other qualities to people that can facilitate study and thinking but they are not the basis of providing certaintyas this is based upon a rational process that Allah (swt) bestows on his servants.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
September 25, 2009
Votes: +1

abu jibreel said:

Brother Dawud,
As I said, you're right on many levels. The first thing to changing the situation of a person, is to "repair" his 'Aqidah. And then raise his thinking and behaviour so that it is based on Islam. But that's for the individuals. What about the society or the rulers in the muslim world? There's no ayah or hadith to show, that you can postpone one part from another. Of course here in the west, we don't go about working for Khilafah directly. That wouldn't be a plausible scenario. Also the prophet sall allahu aleihi wa sallam DID work politically in makkah, when he started critizising their corrupt practises. The thing is, everything in Islam is politics, because you connect your physical actions to your belief in Allah, and are convinced that this is the right thing to do. So the sunnah or manhaj of the prophet is one of both building Iman through 'Ibaadah and discussing the political scene and critizising the corrupt practises and gathering a public opinion against it, and calling for change.

Iman is absolutely important, but even though some muslims don't adhere to islam, we shouldn't assume they don't have Iman. That's only known to Allah - the overturner of hearts. Also, not everyone have the same intellect and depth in understanding, so there's bound to be some difference in understanding. This again cannot be fully removed, until we have the state, which will implement the Shari'ah completely. So if you're waiting for a complete removal of Shirk and Bid'ah, then i'm afraid you will be waiting for a miracle. The change is our hands.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 24, 2009
Votes: +2

abu jibreel said:

"Assalamu alaykum brother."

Wa aleikum salam wa rahmatullah, brother Dawud.

"Your wrong I have actually got contacts within Hizb and have had many meetings."

But not to your liking I gather...

"But in Makka, the prophet SAW ONLY dealt with spiritual growth. only when the spiritual growth was complete and they went on hijra to medinah did the politics come into play. But the ummah is in no way the same as the state of the early ummah of makka."

No he didn't, this is an assumption on your part. The Prophet (saw) moved on in his Da'wah, when he was instructed to by Allah (swt). The Hijrah happened when he was instructed to by Allah. Also politics is in every part of Islam. When I say to you, "akhi perform Salah," then this is Nasihah, which is Siyasah - managing or encouraging. The prophet (saw) said: "Everyone of you is a shepherd, and he is responsible...", so siyasah (politics) is ri'ayah (managing) and mas'ooliyah (responsibility).

* Siyasah
* Ri'ayah
* Nasihah
* Muhasabah
* Mas´ooliyah

A muslim should have all of these in his behaviour. It's not allowed to disregard one part from another.

"I aggree, politics is an essential part of Islam WHEN we have a state. But we dont have a state until Allah SWT wills. The sahabi RAA wanted to at least fight back during the torture and oppression in Makka but the prophet SAW did not allow this. He worked on their iman and tauheed until Allah had willed that a state should become available and a prophet lead them to build that state. Now we must continue to build our iman as an ummah and learn our deen and make dawah and unite upon haqh and eradicate bid'ah and misguidance from the ummah and only then will Allah SWT send us a reviver to unite the ummah politically into an Islamic state. until the the revivers will continue to be people who unite Muslims spiritually until we are spiritually united. While you are all busy getting angry over political issues, you could be really learning the deen and spending that time propogating the deen to others. I live in the sticks and subhan Allah after being in Islam for one year I have built a salaafi Islamic community in my area, the naqshbandi haqani sect that resided here and pretty much non existent now as we call all the youth to the manhaj of the salaaf and the old people who are more loyal to Nazim than to Allah are screwing and complaining an dasking their sheik to use his "powers" to stop us, but their "sheik" has no power because La Hawla wa la Quwatta illah Billah (There is no power and no might except Allah) and if you all worked to eradicate misguidance and unite upon haqh and bring the youth back to the deen you could take part in this revival and inshallah we could see deviations such as shia and sufism eradicated and young brothers who dont pray could be encouraged back to the deen from a united ummah."

Look, you're right on many levels. The time of the Nasr of Allah is something only He knows. We have several Fara´idh we have to adhere to. To change the political climate in the Ummah is one of them. This includes exposing the plans of the corrupt rulers and their treachery against the Ummah and Islam. And working to remove the false ideas and replace them with the right ones is essential. But not only on an individual level, no we must work together as a movement against everything, which is non-islamic.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 20, 2009
Votes: +3

Abu Fatima said:

Assalamu alaykum brother.

Your wrong I have actually got contacts within Hizb and have had many meetings.

But in Makka, the prophet SAW ONLY dealt with spiritual growth. only when the spiritual growth was complete and they went on hijra to medinah did the politics come into play. But the ummah is in no way the same as the state of the early ummah of makka.

I aggree, politics is an essential part of Islam WHEN we have a state. But we dont have a state until Allah SWT wills. The sahabi RAA wanted to at least fight back during the torture and oppression in Makka but the prophet SAW did not allow this. He worked on their iman and tauheed until Allah had willed that a state should become available and a prophet lead them to build that state. Now we must continue to build our iman as an ummah and learn our deen and make dawah and unite upon haqh and eradicate bid'ah and misguidance from the ummah and only then will Allah SWT send us a reviver to unite the ummah politically into an Islamic state. until the the revivers will continue to be people who unite Muslims spiritually until we are spiritually united. While you are all busy getting angry over political issues, you could be really learning the deen and spending that time propogating the deen to others. I live in the sticks and subhanAllah after being in Islam for one year I have built a salaafi Islamic community in my area, the naqshbandi haqani sect that resided here and pretty much non existent now as we call all the youth to the manhaj of the salaaf and the old people who are more loyal to Nazim than to Allah are screwing and complaining an dasking their sheik to use his "powers" to stop us but their "sheik" has no power because La Hawla wa la Quwatta illah Billah (There is no power and no might except Allah) and if you all worked to eradicatemisguidance and unite upon haqh and bring the youth back to the deen you could take part in this revival and inshallah we could see deviations such as shia and sufism eradicated and young brothers who dont pray could be encouraged back to the deen from a united ummah.

You mention how we all backbite each other and "worse" but it is noyt possible to be a salaafi and kill a non salaafi muslim because this contradicts the salaafi belief (hence the person would not be a salaafi). It is well accepted that the taliban are sufi (deobandi) and of course we have the vilest of all groups, the kwararij, who we see in modern day times in the form of Qutbists like Osama Bin Laden and these are the people who kill other muslims in the name of "Jihad". It is no problem for me to prove that any other group besides the salaafi are upon misguidance. And Allah SWT clearly made it known to us through his messenger SAW that there would be 73 sects but only one would be guarded from the hellfire and that will be the group who stay firm on the prophet SAW sunnah. Look at the salaafi and you will very quickly see that this is what they are about. Now go and ask the sufi where on earth they got such practices as group dickr and they will give you some obscure hadith or maybe a fabricated one and most of the other things they do are unjustifiable.

I am happy to prove my way is the right way and so inshallah I will stick to it for the sake of Allah. I actually enjoy politics but I do not believe being politisized is in the best interests of myself or the ummmah. I have alreday been there and its not the way I can promise you this
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 18, 2009
Votes: -3

abu jibreel said:

Alright brother Dawud, several things here.

We cannot bring change just by changing the ruler, everyone's aware of that. The Mujahideen killed Anwar Sadat, but instead of bringing the change, they (not the Mujahideen) brought in the Fir'awn, who's called Hosni Mubarak. To bring about change comprehensively, you must - it's fardh - change the public opinion in favor of Islam politically, in the muslim world and the world in general. The Prophet sall Allahu 'aleihi wa sallam worked with the Sahabah radhi Allahu 'anhum to build their Iman and Taqwa in Makkah, and later on he started looking for physical support to take power, which happened in Madinah. The Hizb follows that path, adopting whatever it needs from the Manhaj of the Prophet 'aleihis salam to bring about societal change in the muslim world. The Prophet is our example (Uswah). We have to follow in his footsteps, not just in the individual obligations, but in everything. Otherwise you're neglecting important parts of Islam, which is a sin. As I said, the Hizb works to unite the muslims on what they have in common. You cannot cancel the Shi'i, the Sufi, the Salafi, Brahlawi, Tableeghi etc., who act with animosity or worse towards (or when speaking about) eachother. That's something the complete implementation of Islam in the Khilafah would solve. The definition of politics - Siyasah - in Islam is managing the affairs of the Ummah according to Islam. It's not something alien to Islam. You're right as to the conditions of Allahs victory. We need to adhere to Islam, that's absolutely true. But I bet you have never discussed political change wth the Hizb, or what it entails and what it does not entail. Maybe you should visit the members or attend one of their conferences or meetings and bring it up. I'm sure they would be happy to oblige.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 12, 2009
Votes: +1

Abu Fatima said:

Brother you cannot change a country from the top down as I said. When teh communist russians simply put a dictator at the head of their government, the masses did not submuit and believe in communis. it was a diaster.

Islam can only prosper when we are united and it baffles the mind as to why people still do things which are clearly innovations into the religion and why people do shirk when teh whole point of Allah SWt sending a messenger was to teach us Tawheed. If people will "never" unite in the deen then the people have them,selves to blame. Right now, people on this very site are defending sufism while claiming to support a unification of muslims.

You can be a part of tha change by abandoning your misguided practices and calling to the way of the salaaf but instead you defend weird and deviant practices and insist that we can build an islamic state when many of the worlds muslis do not even do their 5 daily prayers and do not understand basic aqeedah or even drink alcohol. Uniting on fiqh is preferable but uniting on aqeedah is a start but not when you have deviant sufi's who allow praying to graves and sheiks and putting faith in necklaces around tehir necks to protect them from harm. We need to first unite the muslims and eradicate the misguidances and that you say it will "never" but maybe it will if you actually change your attitude and focus on the dawah rather than the politics.

Allah will continue to humilate the ummah until we come back to our deen. I can give you proof of this if you need it inshallah
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 11, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

"Now I know that Hizb ut Tahrir accepts some sufi's into the hizb and also I know the hizb defends some sufism saying it is an integral part of Islam and unfortunately this stance means I will nto be working with the hizb...."

Please read the article again to see, that there's a difference the sufism, which the great scholars spoke about, and the mystical sufism of later times and today. You have to understand that the Ummah will never unite perfectly on everything. The Fiqh cannot or should not be united in ONE Fiqh. That is not the cause of our problems. The Hizb works to unite the muslims on the things they have in common, ex. Khilafah, one leader, wala and bara etc. Cleansing the minds and Anfus of the muslims comprehensively can only happen in the Khilafah with its systems, ie. laws of education, social (men and women), penalties and so on. If you have something profound to contribute with to change our situation, and you hold out on us, then we would hold you accountable for that on the day of judgment in front of Allah.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 11, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Fatima said:

Brother we are discussing a few different issues here so lets seperrate them and not mix them up:

1: I know that hizb ut tahrir lets muslims into their organisation regardless of aqeedah because I nearly joined and had meetings with a senior member in my area and felt there were some very good points made and I learned a lot of valuable information regarding the concept of a khilafah state that I never knew before but unfortunately I declined to work with them because they are willing to let sufi's join their hizb among other misguided sects. The prophet SAW had an ummah with pure aqeedah BEFORE he had an islamic state. We are like the muslims of makka. The muslims of makka purified their tawheed and their iman, they did not engage in politics until they got to al-mahdinah. There can only be one ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah and unless hizb only allows people on the correct manhaj to join then I will not join their hizb although I will wish tehm everty success inshallah and keep an eye open to see how their success in their tasks is going.

2: I can provide you with evidence that shirk and bid'ah is sinful if you wish inshallah. If you do not aggree with me that these two things are sinful then let me know and inshallah I will post some evidences here. And I know for a fact that there are many ahl al bid'ah and mushrikeen amongst the ummah who label themselves "muslim" because alhamdulillah I am a 22 year old revert and after I found Islam I was confused about all the different hizbee's so i studied many and travelled with many and saw some really bad things. Praying to graves, praying "through" sheiks, treating their "sheiks" as prophets Aoudhu Billah, doing all kinds of weird "Zicker" and many other strange things I observed in teh sufi's. Now I know that Hizb ut Tahrir accepts some sufi's into the hizb and also I know the hizb defends some sufism saying it is an integral part of Islam and unfortunately this stance means I will nto be working with the hizb.

only when we are united on 1 Islam on the way of the sunnah of the prophet SAW will we be able to make a united global movement for change. You are trying to group togtehr a load of disunited people on different aqeedah and luping them together and hoping for a khilafah state and I do not think this will be successful (alahu alim) so Iw oudl rather spend my time doing dawah inshallah until the muslims are united inshallah and then we can begin a movement. you must change a government from teh bottom up, not the top down. the shariah has Allah SWT at teh top so we do not need to change the top, we need to the people at the bottom to have true taqwah and be on the correct manhaj inshallah.

I wil have nothign to do with sufism. I am actually in the process of eradicating sufism inshallah from the area that i live in. The only "muslims" were naqshbandi haqani in my area but in 3months alhamdulillah I have built an ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah comunity in my area and the sufi are loosing members to us and inshallah soon it will have nothing but old people who have noone to carry on their heretical beliefs to the next generation. this means a deviant sect has been absorbed into the main ummah in one small area and this is how much one person can do so imagine how much you can all do if we are all united on one islam rahter than having all these sects and deviant beluefs and innovated practices. May Allah guide us all to the haqh with sincerity. Amin
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 10, 2009
Votes: -1

Abdul-Kareem said:

RE: Abu Fatima

We need to be very careful when accusing Muslims of a sin. This is not a small matter and unless a shar'a evidence is brought to substantiate the claim then this will be considered slander which is a major sin.

You said many things, among them:

But the reason I will not join Hizb ut Tahrir is because of your compromise on the deen.
The only unfortunate thing is that you allow this rubbish to join your hizb.
Its just unforunate that you think you can have a khilafah where half the ummah are mushrikeen.


This article was written by Hasan Abdullah who is not a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir. This is why it is posted in the KCOMMENT section of the site. If you have a specific problem with the article then please raise it. If you are basing your accusations against the Hizb on the comments posted here then how do you know the person making the comment is with the Hizb or not? The KCOMMENT section is for debate and discussion from members of the Ummah, Hizb or not.

Half the Ummah are not mushrikeen. Only Allah knows what is in the hearts. They are Muslim and even though many are astray, we give naseeha to them to purify the corrupt concepts and bring them back to the deen. Allah is Ar-Rahman, Ar-Raheem and only wants good for our Ummah. The tests we are afflicted with are a mercy from Allah as they help to bring back the true believers back to the deen.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 08, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Fatima said:

I dont know if this comment will be published or how the moderators determine whethere a comment should be posted (i.e. whether we have to be pro hizb to post here).

But the reason I will not join Hizb ut Tahrir is because of your compromise on the deen.

I would go as far as to call myself a salaafi so as to distance myself from the teachings mentioned here. I read Brotherhoods posts and I aggree with you brother. Sufi's are a headache to deal with because of all the philisophical acrobats they do so mashAllah you really broke people's comments down and showed them that sufism is little more than "spiritual" sounding rhetoric. The responses from others was not good. Claims like "you didn't learn from a sheik with an unbroken chain to the prophet SAW" so where did the prophet SAW give us this advice that we must only learn from such a person?

In my local area are the naqshbandi haqani who actually pray "through" their sheik and ask him questions that apparently Allah answers (I tried to ask them the difference between their "sheik" nazim and a rasool by which I got a load of "spiritual" mumbo jumbo which danced around the obvious point that they treat their sheik both as a prophet and god aodhu billah).

So I have seen how deviant sufi can be, to the point where some sufi do not call themselves muslim at all.

It may start as a small deviation but evenutally ends up so far away from Islam that it is dangerous to begin the innoavtionsin the first place. Why go off into sects and make up your own teachings? Do you believe the message that the prophet SAW brought to mankind was incomplete? Aodhu Billah. Does your "sheik" having something additional to add to the deen?

We have everything we need in the Qur'an and Sunnah and we do not need all tehse weird sufi teachings. I recently viewed an islamophobic website and they all love sufism because of the problems its causes the muslims. they all hope sufism gets promoted. It is a tool to divide the ummah and change our teachings. But me, I will bite onto the sunnah with my molar teeth inshallah.

I have studied the hizb and aggree with almost everything you say, The only unfortunate thing is that you allow this rubbish to join your hizb. If you held firm to the true manhaj I would join the hizb in a heart beat because you are truely on haqh when you say there is a need for the khilafah. Its just unforunate that you think you can have a khilafah where half the ummah are mushrikeen. Before a global movement can be effective, we must unite islam under one deen inshallah and have a strong and firm ummah withv true iman. The prophet SAW before he create the first Islamic state spent 13 years culturing the sahaba RAA. The politics came in medina. It was the tauheed and the aqeeda and taqwa that came in makka and that is what we must work towards now. When we have an ummah of muslims who hold firm to their deen and do their 5 salah and we leave these deviated sects and are united upon one aqeedah and one fiqh we can then create the islamic state inshallah and noone will stop over 1billion united muslims except ALlah himself if he so wills that it is not our time yet. Why would Allah SWT give an Islamic state to an ummah in our current condition? leave your sects, seek refuge from bid'ah and deviant teechings and hold firm to the sunnah inshallah and when you learn your deen and work the dawah and we all are united upon one Islam then surely Allah SWT will give us victory if he SWT so wishes.

Hope your well brothers and may Allah SWT guide us all to the truth. Amin. Assalamu alaykum wa rahmah tullah
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 08, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj,
Again you just keep missing the point. What was tassawuf in the old days was understood to mean Zuhd, prioritizing the Akhirah instead of the Dunya, by adhering strictly to the shari'ah without going into excess in any part of it. Through time it became something quite different, and is very destructive to political change. There is no Dhahir and Batin meaning in the Qur'an; there is no Wahdat il-Wujood; there is no fight between the material and the Ruh. In fact by adhering to the commandments and prohibitions of Allah, you actually connect the material actions with the Ruh, the spirit. So in Islam there is no dualism. I have substantial evidence to back my opinion. What you have done is equate everything in Islam that enhances the Tazkiyyah of the Nafs, with the word Tasawwuf or Sufism. That is of your own doing and of those like you. If you re-read the comments from the brotherhood and myself, without being picky and sorting some from another, then our opinion would become clear to you. But you are stubborn, that is clear for all to see. I hope you see that someday. Insha Allah.

Ma'as salamah
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 04, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Abu Jibreel, seriously, this could go on, back and forth, forever. I think I've done more than prove that your sentiment on Sufism is based firmly upon unfounded fallacies and baseless innuendo. I have a legacy of over 1,400 years of Muslim scholarship to back everything I've posited here, and you've come with next to nothing but you're own personal opinions, lacking in insight and scholastic veracity, hence your words:" I THINK it is problematic to present Sufism in a positive light" (emphasis mine). Sincere Muslims are not interested in what you think, but in what the scholars of this religion know, can show and prove, and they have decreed Sufism an integral aspect of this Deen, both in the distant past and today.

I apologize if you wasted your time, but I no longer having time to entertain your rants, and if your previous comments are any indication of things, then I doubt I'm missing anything.

Wa D'awoon
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 04, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

They report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I am the city of knowledge and ‘Ali is its gate.” This hadeeth is da'eef (weak); indeed it is mawdoo' (fabricated) according to the scholars of hadeeth. It was narrated by al-Tirmidhi and others, but it is a lie.

They report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “The poor will sit down on the Day of Resurrection, and [Allaah] will say, ‘By My Glory and Majesty, I did not deprive you of worldly things because you are insignificant. Rather I wanted to raise your status on this Day. Go to the place where the people are standing, and whoever gave you a piece of bread, or water to drink, or clothes to wear, take him to Paradise.'” The shaykh said: this report is a lie which was not narrated by any of the scholars of hadeeth. It is baatil (false) and goes against the Qur'aan and Sunnah and scholarly consensus (ijmaa').

They report that when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) came to Madeenah, the daughters of al-Najjaar came out with daffs (hand-drums) and sang “Tala'a al-Badru ‘alayna min thaniyyat al-Widaa”, and the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to them, “Shake your tambourines, may Allaah bless you.” The hadeeth about women beating the daff on joyous occasions is saheeh, and this was done at the time of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), but it is not known that he said, “Shake your tambourines.”

They report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “O Allaah, You have brought me out of the place which is most beloved to me, so cause me to dwell in the place which is most beloved to You.” This hadeeth is also baatil (false), although it was narrated by al-Tirmidhi and others. Rather he said to Makkah, “You are the most beloved part of Allaah's land to me.” And he said, “You are the most beloved land to Allaah.”

They report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever visits me and my father Ibraaheem in one year will enter Paradise.” This is a fabricated lie which was not narrated by any of the scholars of hadeeth.

They report that a Bedouin prayed (quickly), pecking (like a bird) in his prayer. ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) said, “Do not peck in your prayer.” The Bedouin said, “O ‘Ali, if your father had pecked in prayer he would not have entered Hell.” This is a lie.

They report that ‘Umar killed his father. This is a lie, for his father died before the mission of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) began.

They report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “I was a Prophet when Adam was between the water and the clay. I was a Prophet when Adam was neither water nor clay.” This wording is false.

They narrate the words, “Whoever teaches his brother an aayah from the Book of Allaah becomes his master.” This is a lie which is not known at all in the books of the scholars. ---end of quote---

By the way, I would never condone the killing of women and children and old people. I want change via the political method, which is the only correct method, the Prophets sall Allahu 'aleihi wa sallam method. I'm neither sufi or wahhabi. I'm just a muslim.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 04, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Refuting sufi ahadeeth

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah was asked about the words which were narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), “My heaven and my earth could not contain Me, but the heart of My believing slave contains Me”?

He replied: What they mentioned is from the Israa'eeliyyaat [reports narrated from Jewish sources], no isnaad is known for it from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). What it means is that Allaah puts love and knowledge of Himself in the heart of His slave.

The report, “The heart is the house of the Lord” is like the first report. The heart is the home or seat of faith in Allaah and of knowledge and love of Him.

They reported the words, “I was an unknown treasure and I wanted to be known, so I created mankind and taught them about Myself so that they would know Me.” These are not the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and I know of no isnaad for this, either saheeh (sound) or da'eef (weak).

They reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Allaah created reason, and said to it, ‘Come here,' and it came. He said to it, ‘Go there,' and it went. He said, ‘By My Glory and Majesty, I have not created anything more noble than you. I shall reward and punish because of you.'” This hadeeth is baatil (false) and mawdoo' (fabricated) according to the consensus of hadeeth scholars.

They narrate the words, “Love of this world is the root of all evil.” This is known from Jundub ibn ‘Abd-Allaah al-Bajali, but there is no known isnaad from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

They report the words, “This world is merely a step for the believing man.” This is not known from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or from the salaf of this ummah or its imams.

They report the words, “Whoever is blessed with a thing, let him stick with it” and, “Whoever commits himself to something, let him stick with it.” The first report was narrated from one of the salaf. The second report is baatil (false), for whoever commits himself to something may have to stick to it or he may not, according to what Allaah and His Messenger have commanded.

They report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “Do favours for the poor, for tomorrow they will have authority, and what authority!” and, “Poverty is my pride and I boast of it.” Both of these are lies and are not known in any way in the well known books of the Muslims.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 04, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Ibn Al-Jawzy said after criticising the Sufis for their imposition of hardship upon themselves and for their going beyond bounds of abstemiousness to the point of self torture: "So this self deprivation which went beyond bounds, which we have been forbidden from, has been turned around by the Sufis of our time, i.e.. the sixth century, so that they have become as desirous of food as their predecessors were of hunger, and they enjoy morning meals, evening meals and sweet delicacies, all of which or most of which they attain through impure wealth. They have abandoned lawful earnings, turned away from worship and spread out carpets o­n which they idly recline, most of them have no desire except for food, drink and frivolous activities. [Talbees Iblees].

Speaking of the false miracles claimed by many Sufi leaders, Ibn Taymiyah said: "It may also be done with the help of their devils as they are a people who are as closely attended by devils as they are by their own brothers... These people who experience these satanic happenings are under a great delusion, in their foolishness they are deprived of all blessings, they o­nly increase that which is feared, they devour the wealth of the people in futile acts, they do not order the good, nor do they forbid evil, and they do not fight Jihaad in Allah's Cause." [Al-Fataawaa].
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 04, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Commenting o­n the reaction of the early Sufis while hearing Qur'an being recited (it was their practice to fall out and act dumb-struck), Ibn Taymiyah (R) says: "This was not found to occur amongst the Sahâbah, so when it appeared a group of the Companions and the Tabi'een such as Asmaa bint Abi Bakr and 'Abd Allah Az-Zubair and Muhammad ibn Seereen criticised that since they saw that it was An innovation and contrary to what they knew from the manners of the Sahâbah." [Al-Fataawaa (11/6)]. Concerning the spread of Sufism, Ibn Al-Jawzy said: "Sufism is a way whose beginning was complete avoidance of the affairs of worldly life, then those who attached themselves to it became lax in allowing singing and dancing. Therefore, the seekers of the Hereafter from the common people became attracted to them due to the avoidance of the worldly life which they manifested, and the seekers after this world were also attracted to them due to the life of ease and frivolity which they were seen to live." [Talbees Iblis]. Shaikh Abu Zahrah (R) said concerning the reason for the appearance of Sufism and the sources from which it sprung:

1. The first source: Some worshippers amongst the Muslims turned all their attention to avoidance of the worldly life and to cutting themselves off in order to worship. This first began in the lifetime of the Prophet (s.a.w.s) when some of the Sahâbah decided to spend the night striving in Prayer and abandoning sleep. Others decided to fast every day without fail. Others decided to cease having marital relations with women. So when that reached the Prophet (s.a.w.s) he said: "What is wrong with a people who say such and such. But rather I fast and I refrain from fasting, I pray and I sleep, and I marry women. So whoever turns away from my Sunnah, then he is not from me" (Al-Bukhaaree and Muslim). Furthermore, the innovation of living like monks (monasticism) is forbidden in the Qur'an. He (s.w.t.) said: "...the Monasticism which they invented for themselves..." [57:27].

However, when the Prophet (s.a.w.s) passed o­n to join the company of the highest angels, and many people entered into Islam from the previous religions then the number of those who went to extremes in avoidance of worldly life and its blessings grew and Sufism found a place in the hearts of these people since it had come across a fertile planting ground.

2. The second matter which attracted peoples' souls was something which appeared amongst the Muslims in the form of two ideologies. o­ne of them was philosophical whilst the other was from the previous religions. As for the first, then it was the view of the Illumist school of philosophers who held that knowledge and awareness is brought about in the soul by spiritual exercises and purification of the soul. As for the second ideology, then it was the belief that the Deity dwells in human souls, or that the Deity is incarnate in humanity. This idea began to find a place amongst those sects who falsely attributed themselves to Islam in the earlier times, when the Muslims became mixed with the Christians. This idea appeared amongst the Sabians and some of the Kaysaamiyyah, then the Qaraamitah, then amongst the Baatinees, then in its final shape it appeared amongst some of the Sufis...There is another source from which it took, and which causes the manifestation of Sufi tendencies, which is the idea that the texts of the Book and the Sunnah have an outer, apparent meaning and an inner, hidden meaning...it seems clear that they took this idea from the Baatinees." [Ibn Taymiyah by Abu Zahra].
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 04, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj,
It's not about ego. Irrefutable is the clear evidence. But that does not make me a magician. Allah guides whoever He wills. The point of issue here is the person wanting to be guided. If you read the Quran without wanting to find the truth, then He will not guide you. "Yudhillu bihi katheeran wa Yahdee bihi katheera" "By it He misleads many, and by it He guides many." That is my point, it's irrefutable. The evidence is simple, straightforward and clear. Only the idiot (unintelligent) does not believe in it absolutely.
Instead of going around in cirles, here are some quotes: In the book "The Dispraise of Al-Hawaa" By Imaam Ibnul Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah, the following is stated: One of the men who, "Dedicated himself to Sufism, withdrew from the world and took a wandering life", is Ahmad Zarruq. Nuh Ha Mim described him as, "One of the most renowned sheiks of the Shaathili tariqa." Zarruq's writing according to Keller, "Attest to their author's illumination in the spiritual way." Ahmad Zarruq described himself in his poem, Al-Manthoomah 'Ala Safeenat An-Najaat, as someone, who has been given the "possession of the entire East and West", running the affairs, "giving and taking souls," "bringing life to the dead hearts," and more! After such description, he "offers" his help, saying: "And in case you are in a state of distress, depression and adversity, Then call [saying] "O Zarruq", and I will come in haste." - "Verily, those whom you call upon besides Allâh, are slaves like you. So call upon them and let them answer you if you are truthful." (Al-A'raf 7:194)

Ahmad Zarruq wants people to turn to him! Nuh Ha Mim Keller quoted Ahmad Zarruq's saying that Imaam Maalik said: "He who practices Sufism without learning Sacred Law corrupts his faith, while he who learns Sacred Law without practicing Sufism corrupts himself. o­nly he who combines the two Droves true."
Attributing the above saying to Imaam Maalik is as corrupt as the Sufi concepts. This is evident in the narration by 'Abdullaah Bin Yoosuf At-Tanneesee who spoke about a man from the city of Nasiyeebeen, who came to Imaam Maalik and told him about, "some people who are called As-Sufiyyah" in the city who "when they finish eating, they start reciting poetry and dancing." Maalik exclaimed: "Are they insane?" The man responded: "No." Maalik exclaimed: "Are they boys?" The man replied: "No. They are old and intelligent men." Maalik said: "We didn't hear that anyone from the people of Islaam did like this [what the Sufis did]..."
- "Sufism is a shameful deception which begins with Dhikr and ends with Kufr. Its outward manifestation appears to be piety, but its inward reality forsakes the Commandments of Allah." [Illat-Tasawwuf Yaa Ibadallah].
Imaam Muhammad Ibn Sireen said, " Verily, this knowledge is religion. So look into (ie. Investigate) whom you take your religion from."
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 04, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

And to close, I think that Wahhabism / Salafism should be seen in a negative light, as strapping a bomb to oneself and detonating himself it in the middle of a shopping center in Baghdad or Tel Aviv is hardly an appropriate approach to Muslim political strife. Shabab al-Mujahideen, Taliban, So-called Sunni Wahhabi insurgents and the lot of "Salafi"/ Salafi influenced extremists cannot find justification for what they do in the Qur'an or the example of the Prophet (s), nor can anyone of them look me in the eye and say that such heinous acts as killing fellow Muslims or innocent women and children simply because they were born to Jewish families would've been tolerated by the Prophet (s)!
If showing the world a peace loving, tolerant, pluralistic side to Islam - a side most people haven't seen since the global Wahhabi oil explosion that began nearly 70 years ago - might bring back some much needed sympathy for the Muslim world and convice the world that Islam is not the enemy, then I'm for it. Terrorism, extremism, the radical, zealous approach has been tried and done to death and has failed to win the sympathy of the world to our cause.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 03, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Then you said: "I have several times, explained what I meant by intellectual irrefutable proof. But you seem to ignore it and persist in your rantics. When speaking about Iman, the meaning is not dhann or shakk, but YAQEEN, absolute certain knowledge, 'ILM AL-YAQEEN"
OK, this is getting good, now! How rich! What do you mean "what I meant by intellectual, irrefutable proof"?! Irrefutable proof is just that! Proof that cannot be denied or refuted, and you either have it or you don't... and you clearly don't! You had to have been trained in Islam by a Wahhabi, as you share the same dichotomic mind set as do they. One doesn't leap from Shuk to 'Ilm al-Yaqeen! Does not Allah say that iman rises and falls, increases and decreases? Ilm al-Yaqeen is just that... knowledge of certainty, and such knowledge never falls or decreases! Iman is what stands between doubt and certainty of knowledge. With iman, we do not have doubt... we believe, but we cannot prove anything, even subjectively... it lacks concrete, substantial evidence, which is what makes it so special and is why Allah doesn't reveal Himself, nor do the angels, nor can we see heaven or hell, as if we could (as the Prophet said), we would never sin at all. Life in this world is a test, and Allah says numerous times in the Qur'an, "Ayuha aladhina aminu wa 'amilu saalihaat" (O Ye who are of FAITH and perform righteous deeds...). And He says "Had He willed that all would believe, that would be easy for Him". Sadly, I'm afraid you miss the point of religion and of being Muslim altogether.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 03, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Abu Jibreel wrote: "you write - not directing your words to the person - but to the others. Instead of just explaining your opinion"
I say: I 'm explaining my opinion, which coincides with the facts as they are known, understood and determined by the scholars of this Deen, so it shouldn't matter if my words are not directed to you, alone, as I know that you're far too absorbed in yourself and your narcissistic ego to see past these to the truth, so I widen the base of the reading audience so that, perhaps, others might benefit from your obstinacy.
Then you said: "you use demeaning terms and ridicule those who have another opinion than you."
Was it not you who accused me of babbling when I simply requested that you prove God exists?! On the contrary, it is you who becomes intellectually stagnated and frustrated when, after postulating a baseless and unfounded point against Sufism and Sufis, I completely and utterly counter your claims with undeniable text proofs, backed with the sworn sentiments of a myriad of lauded, agreed upon scholars, while you've put forward Ibn Sireen, who - btw - was a Sufi himself, and your buddy (Brotherhood of Believers), who quotes Catholic priests as a source of Islamic authority in refuting the Sufis. (Not that it matters, but Father Renold A. Nicholson had written numerous works in praise of and celebrating Sufism, but I will suffice myself with the hundreds of scholars who were Muslim and practiced/upheld the Sufi sciences as my source of authorities to cite!)
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 03, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj,
Your adaab of discussion is way of. When your views are challenged, you write - not directing your words to the person - but to the others. Instead of just explaining your opinion, you use demeaning terms and ridicule those who have another opinion than you.

You said, "I'm rambling (?), yet you (Abu Jibreel) have failed to demonstrate how it is God's existence can be proven. So, here's your opportunity! Prove it! Right now, and we'll see who is babbling and who is talking sense and logic!"

I have several times, explained what I meant by intellectual irrefutable proof. But you seem to ignore it and persist in your rantics. When speaking about Iman, the meaning is not dhann or shakk, but YAQEEN, absolute certain knowledge, 'ILM AL-YAQEEN. Why do you suppose Allah described the reality around you, and connected that to being sure absolutely, that He exists? La'allakum Ta'qiloon (that you may understand it intellectually), La'allakum Tattaqoon (that you may fear Him), Ya Uulil Albaab (O people of knowledge and understanding). I wonder what Allah will say to you, when you answer Him, that, "Well I believed, but how could I be sure...?!?" Maalakum Kayfa Tahkumoon!

You also said, "Now, in light of being consistently refuted and rebutted with sound text proofs, you slyly attempt to reassess your stance, hoping that none will take notice, by your stating: "There is difference between the sufism of old and the later sufism.", meaning, of course, that the early Sufis, whom you've spent the past few days here trying futily vilify and discredit with your unwarranted libel, were true and pious Muslims, while the "so-called" Sufis of today are mere, unworthy imposters."

I haven't done anything to vilify and discredit the early sufis. It's the current sufi tendency, which makes people disassociate themselves from working politically to change the situation of the muslims, i'm critizising. That's all. And that needs to be put in a negative light, because it is just that, negative and forbidden. We should adhere to Islam, the whole of it, and not lock ourselves in the mosque, light candles and say Allahumm, which in itself is quite strange in my book. Doing dhikr according to the way the Prophet sall Allahu 'aleihi wa sallam did along with his Sahabah radhi Allahu 'anhum is enough for me. Salah, making Du'a and dhikr which is mentioned in the Qur'an and Sunnah. There are enough direct teachings in the Sunnah to suffice me. Everything else I discard. So instead of calling you or them imposters and innovators, I will just warn against it, and avoid it.

I am aware of the fact, that this discussion is public. The idea here is to express your opinion, and that is what I'm doing. I think sufism should be put in a negative light if that means, which is mentioned in the article, that the sufi council in england is invited to look around while the invading forces are bombing and occupying the country. Why are they agreeing to do that? Is this some kind of special Hikmah, that I don't know about? We should be supporting our "boys", not the soldiers who are british, american, danish, german, dutch "boys". Our brothers and sisters are the muslims, who are being wronged in pakistan, afghanistan, Iraq, Kashmir, Kosova, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Egypt, algeria, morocco etc. Our Walaa (loyalty) should be to Islam, not indirectly by trying to appease both parties (the muslims and the Kuffar) on an equal footing, but by showing your support - in words and in actions - to the cause of bringing back Islam in the muslim world. This is my opinion, and it should be everyone's opinion...
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 02, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Alright, I think I'm about through after this. As easy as it is to refute and give retort to your irresponsible and misleading diatribe on Sufism, it's time consuming and I have better things to do with my time.

You stated: "It was said he lived a life dedicated to meditation, once again in contrary to the life of Rasoolullah (saw)"

Meditation is synonous with remembrance or contemplation, and Allah has commanded us to remember Him and contemplate His ayat in numerous places throughout the Qur'an. And Allah's Messenger (s) never tired of reminding us of the importance of dhikr (remembrance), that the only regret of the people of paradise will be that they hadn't performed more of it in life. Dhikr is a Sunna mu'akkida and mustahub (confirmed prophetic practice and one that is most beloved!) Yet Brotherhood condemns this practice as being "in contrary to the life of Rasoolullah (saw)" .

Brotherhood, what do you think the Prophet (s) was doing when he received the wahi (revelation) for the first time? The same thing he did for many years prior to and there after... meditation!
Learn your religion!
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

"Abu Maydan: 'Everything outside of God is unreal, everything taken individually or collectively, when you truly know it... Whatever does not have root in his Being, can in no wise be real.'

This means that Allah is Al-Haqq, and that is all. Do you now deny the Sifat Allah?

"Muhammad al-Harraq: 'Seekest thou Laila [Divine Reality], when she is manifest within thee? Thou deemest her to be other, but she is not other than thou.”

Hadith al-Qudsi : "The vastness of the heavens and the earth contain Me not, yet the heart of my faithful servant contains Me" Sounds similar? It's called, in Arabic, majazi / balagha. Take an Arabic course.

Jalal al-Din Rumi: “Though the many ways [diverse religions] are various, the goal is one. Do you not see there are many roads to the Kaaba?”

You really tripped up bad on this one, Brotherhood! Whose words are those in brackets.. Rumi's or yours? Observe the final part of the saying: "Do you not see there are many roads to the Kaaba?”
How many other religions revere the Kaaba and hold it in religious significance?! Rumi, here, speaks not of diverse religions but the diverse paths each individual Muslim takes in pursuit of the Divine! I'd be seriously repenting by now if I were you.


Ibn Arabi: “My heart has become capable of every form: it is a pasture for gazelles and a convent for Christians, and a temple for idols and the pilgrims Ka‘ba and the tables of the Torah, and the book of the Koran. I follow the religion of Love: whatever way Love’s camels take, that is my religion and faith”

Interesting bit of critique from one who quotes Christian priests the likes of Father Renold Nicholson as a source of Islamic daleel!
Ibn 'Arabi's commentator and a specialist on the "Greatest Shaykh", Mahmoud Ghurab had proven that many of Ibn 'Arabi's works had been tampered with by Jews and detractors of Sufism, such as yourself, who would lie to forward their inscrupulous and nefarious agendas (case in point, the falsely interpreted quotes above by you). Any work where as Ibn 'Arabi ostensively promotes other religions to the rank of Islam, or enjoins pantheism and polytheism is to be measured against the Futuhat al-Makkiyya, which demonstrates the Shaykhs strict Zahiri stance and tenets of Islamic Law and theology. This is so because Mahmoud Ghurab had in his possession a manuscript copy of the Futuhat in Ibn 'Arabi's own handwriting, and no other manuscripts are extant for his other works, which contain statements clearly condradictory to those of the Futuhat.

Besides, Ibn 'Arabi once issued an edict stating that it was completely proscribed for one to read the works of the Sufis without having been trained and licensed by one who is, himself, trained and licensed by a shaykh in a successive chain back to the source. So, if you have no such ijaza (warrant of learning) Brotherhood, then you are guilty of a grave infraction! Ibn 'Arabi warned, and you heeded him not.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Brotherhood states: Pantheistic beliefs and atheistic concepts were also predominant among the following generation of Sufis, as can be seen from these statements by them:
Mansur al-Hallaj: “I saw my Lord with the eye of the heart. I said: Who art Thou? He answered: Thou.”

Now, this is precisely why isnad, in understanding Islam and the parlance of the scholars and Sufis is so indispensably important in Islam, so that Muslims might avoid the unnecessary and condemibly forbidden trap of making takfir upon the sages and scholars of this religion the way Brotherhood just did, acusing the agreed upon by the agreed upon and the most lauded and celebrated minds in our religion's history of unwarranted pantheism and atheism, my Allah protect us from such flagrant heresey, as the saints and scholars are free from that which the ignorant and lay Muslims of this contempory age accuse them of.

though some scholars condemned Ibn Mansur for what they deemed to be an act of blasphemy icluding many Sufis, others exonerated the mystic, never doubting his sincerity or questioning his piety. Their discursive rationale maybe derived from the following evidence: According to a prophetic tradition, there was a slave boy who was traversing through the vast desert wilderness with is beloved camel. Now it must be kept firm in mind that for an Arab of ancient Arabia to have been the owner of a camel would be comparable today to one holding the registration to a 2005 Audi RS-4 Quattro sports sedan, so for a young slave to be the proprietor of such an animal would have been quite exceptional. At some point during the boy’s peregrination, he managed to become separated from his fleecy dromedary. Dismayed and overcome with disquietude, the servant boy searched frantically for the woolly brute, crying out into the infinite desert expanse. After the passing of some time, the slave boy caught sight of his beast of burden, and they were thus reunited – lover and beloved. In an unbridled display of rapturous ecstasy, the slave boy - upon reunion - ejaculated, “O Allah, surely I am Thy master, and Thou art mine slave!” When word of this reached the Prophet (S), the boy was neither reprimanded nor rebuked.
Scholars state that the reason for the boy’s being excused for his blasphemous exclamation is due to the fact that he, upon being reunited with his beloved beast, fell into a state of temporary insanity, known to the Sufis as sukr - literally intoxication. And it was this very state of spiritual inebriation that, driving Ibn Mansur from his faculties, caused him to expel the very words that won him capital conviction and crucifixion.


 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Brotherhood says: 'Firstly, I had mentioned that 'Sufism strictly as a tradition emerged between the 8th-9th centuries.' I'm sure just like how all the words in this statement appear in my computer screen, they appear in all your other screens as well. I never said Sufism itself emerged in the 8th-9th centuries. What I was referring to here was the Tradition of Sufism, i.e. that which people started to follow blindly with innovations introduced into it and which was deviated from what the original Sufis who were involved in the movement actually did.

Brotherhood, when you stated that the "tradition" of Sufism emerged between the 8th -9th centuries, you did nothing to distinguish between Sufism and the acts and behaviors falsly attributed to Sufism, thus you employ the term "tradition" is some sort of unsavory light, eauating Sufi tradition with Sufi innovations. If I say, "Islam, strictly as a tradition, saw its advent with the Prophet Muhammad (s)." What does that mean to you? Well, these words surely appear on my screen the way they do everyone elses viewing these comments, and the addition of the words "strictly as a tradition" add nothing of significance to them. So you've staed nothing to validate your words.

You also said: "There thus exist various Sufi sects, orders, classifications, etc. There is a Shia-Sunni divide within the Sufi orders".

Does this divide not exist throughout Islam? If such factions invalidate a religion, then why remain Muslim? Why not apply the same objectivity you do to other aspects of Islam to Sufism and stop being some unjustly biased?!
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

And it seems that Brotherhood's sick and irresponsible ribaldry knows no bounds, as he writes with wanton nescience: "Abu Ishaq Shami, said the following: “Starvation excels all in bliss.” What does this statement go to show? It clearly shows that the early Sufis were indeed very inclined toward asceticism. But what kind of asceticism? Statements like the above by Abu Ishaq Shami clearly go to show that it was not the halal asceticism or zuhd prescribed within Shari’ah. Rather those who have knowledge on comparative religion will be able to tell that this is the kind prescribed a very long time ago by Siddhartha Gautama – the Buddha!"

Audhu billah! The Prophet, himself, stated that we shall experience two joys by way of fasting, one at the time of iftar and one upon the meeting with our Lord. It seems quite obvious that Brotherhood is of those Muslims who abstain from food during Ramadan in vain, being oblivious to the spiritual benefits one of numinous insight and piety derives from doing so.

And proving my earlier point, we have the following quote from Brotherhood: "Are these false accusations against Sufism we’re making here? The answer is a clear no, and Sufis themselves have attested to that. For example, Dr Fazlur Rahman, a very well-known Sufi himself stated in his work that “outside influences must have played an accessory role and these no one may deny.” (Fazlur Rahman, Islam (London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1966)"

And guess who this Renold A. Nicholson was?... the late, "emeritus" professor of Arabic and fellow of Trinity College at Cambridge University, an ordained Christian clergyman!!!!!! Need I say more about Brotherhood's biased penchant for taking his "knowledge" of Islam from the Kuffar orientalists when it suits his desires to do so? Now, who is the bid'ati? Who is your example, Brotherhood of Believers, the Prophet (s) or the Christian priesthood????!!!!
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Additionally, the term "Sufi" has been said to derive from the Arabic "Safa" (purity), among many other lauded possibilties, but I believe I've sufficed my point.

And as for material needs, the Sufis were foremost in spending their wealth in the way of Allah. Those sufficient reinforcements and the citadels used in battles Brotherhood spoke of... they're known as Ribats in the Maghrib (North-Western Africa) and are an exclusive Sufi creation. In fact, no Muslim jihad that was ever undertaken in the African continent has ever fought in by non Sufis before the 20th century.

Also, it is well known and documented that some of Islām's greatest mujahids were Sufis, including the likes of 'Uthman dan (ibn) Fodio, the Sultan of Sokoto, commander and amīr of the Fulani Empire of the early nineteenth century and a initiate of the Qadiri tariqa. He became infamous for his establishing an Islamic theocracy based on Shari'a in Nigeria. In addition, history also gives us the Naqshbandī shaykh, Shamil ad-Daghestani, who fought against the Russians in the Caucasus in Eurasia during the same era. Sayyid Muhammad ‘Abdullah as-Somali, a shaykh of the Salihiyya order who led the Muslims against the British and Italians in Somalia from 1899 to 1920; the Darqawi Sufi al-Hajj Muhammad al-Ahrash, who fought the French in Egypt in 1799; the Tijanī Shaykh al-Hajj ‘Umar Tal, who led Islamic jihad in Mali, Guinea, and Senegal, from 1852 to 1864; and the Qadiri shaykh Ma’ al-‘Aynayn al-Qalqami, who led the Muslim resistance against the French in northern Mauritania and southern Morocco from 1905 to 1909; the founder of the Sanusiyya order, Muhammad ‘Alī Sanusi, whose efforts and jihad from 1807 to 1859 established Islam as the predominant religion from the Libyan Desert to sub-Saharan Africa; the Shadhili master Muhammad Ma‘ruf and Qadirī Sufi, Uways al-Barawi, whose combined efforts spread Islam westward and inland from the East African Coast; and of course the Qsdiri shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri, who led the Algerians against the French occupation from 1832 to 1847.

And in Brotherhood's falsely accusing the Sufis of bid'a in regards to leaving off the material in terms of their duty to finance and participate in Jihad is in further regards to the punctilio of chivalric ideals held and practiced by many Sufis, known as Futuwwa. This medieval code of honor embodied the virtues of a chivalrous warrior, which included such attributes as moral rectitude, probity, integrity, gallantry, valor, service, piety, valiancy, selflessness, bravery and, of course, jihad, which were upheld by the various brotherhoods of many Sufi orders. Sufi fraternities were often host to various guilds, which were fully funded, operated and financially maintained by them and; while within these guilds or orders - there often being at their heart – a Sufi ribat (a cloister fortress) or a zurkhana (House of Strength), where Sufi Futawwa mujahids would train and forge their bodies in the arts of war by way of a ritualistic ceremony, which comprised of martial training and acrobatic drills executed to the beat of a duff or war drum over the recitation or singing of traditional Sufic poetry. The Futuwwa (Noble Youth) was to Sufism what the (true) Bushido code was to the honorable Samurai warrior class of medieval Japan.



 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2009
Votes: -1

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Returning back to Brotherhood, who obviously learned everything he knows about Sufism via orientalists whom are as ignorant and misinformed (or who are propagating an agenda) as he. The only way a sincere Muslim may learn about Sufism is by way of tutelege under the trained guidance of a licensed Shaykh with an isnad and warrant of learning (ijaza), not from fraudulent orientalists with an agenda who claim that Muslims worship the "moon god" and that our beloved Prophet (s) was a sexually insatiable, wife beating pedophile.

Next, Brotherhoods attempts to make an argument that Sufism is, as a rule, adverse to materialism, again, it is a simple matter to refute any particular matter when one applies fallacies and falsehoods to these matters to be refuted. Many of the greatest Sufis throughout history 'til our day, were quite wealthy and affluent. Al-Hasan al-Basri (r) was, in his adult years, among such people, as was the luminous sapient, 'Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (r), and others that the Sufis hold in high esteem, like Abu Hanifa and Imam Malik, who were both well to do financially. Once Imam Malik (r) was studying in his maktaba in the presence of a guest. A servant brought them some food, and the guest commanded of Imam Malik "Taqillah! How is it that you, a scholar and holyman employs servants to do your bidding?!". Imam Malik (r) replied with: "And if I am to serve as a guide to the people and remain a scholar, I'll haven't time enough to leave my studies to prepare my own food and keep my own house. Allah has blessed me with wealth so I might be afforded the opportunity to attain to great heights in knowledge to serve and admonish the people." Now, I follow the Sufi path, yet I'm aware of and hold to these sayings taught to me by fellow Sufis. So then do I, too, shun material wealth? 'Abd al-Qadir once stated that "Zuhd is taking the dunya from your heart and placing it into your hand." A reflection of Imam 'Ali's saying: "Zuhd is not that you should not possess a thing, rather that nothing should possess you".

Wealth is a blessing from Allah and a means to many ends pleasing to Him. Most Sufis I know are quite rich. Those Sufis who are not have done as Allah has commanded of them, i.e. to be pleased with the station Allah has grannted them.

And since the issue of "wool" keeps coming up, allow me to school you (Brotherhood and Abu Jibril) on the accepted etymologies of "Sufi" and their significance. For sake of brevity, I won't go into the definition most popular with the detractors of Sufism as it has been beat to death at this point. So, here we may examine another popular and probably more likely theory. It should be noted here that many of the redoubtable, luminary Companions of the Prophet (S) lived a life, of strict asceticism, often foregoing a life of matrimony and employment in favor of continually making remembrance of and seeking out the Countenance of their Lord. These Companions, known as the People of the Veranda (Ahl as-Ŝuffa), having no other fixed abode, resided within the mosque of the Messenger of Allah, assiduous votaries refusing to seek a livelihood or sustenance other than the sustenance Allah provided them. When the Messenger of Allah initially expressed his disapproval of this conduct route, Allah, Himself, admonished him, saying: Do not drive away those who call unto their Lord at morn and eve, desiring His Countenance. (Qur'ān: 6:52). It is related by Ibn 'Abbas that the Messenger of Allah (S) passed by the People of the Veranda and took notice of their extreme penury and self-mortification and said: "Rejoice! For whoever of my community maintains of this state which ye are, and is satisfied with his condition, he shall be amongst my comrades in Paradise!" Among the notable Companions who where of the Ahl as-Ŝuffa (a name which many scholars believe to be the derivative source for the term Ŝūfī) are Bilāl ibn Rabāĥ, Salmān al-Fārisī, Abū 'Ubayda ibn Jarrāĥ, Abū al-Yaqżān, 'Ammār ibn Yāsir, 'Abdallah ibn Mas'ūd al-Hudhali, his brother 'Utba ibn Mas'ūd, Miqdād ibn al-Aswad, Khabbāb ibn al-Aratt, Ŝuhayb ibn Sinān, 'Utba ibn Ghazwān, Zayd ibn al-Khaţţāb, the brother of 'Umar; Abū Kabsha, the Prophet's client; Abū al-Marthad, Kināna ibn al-Ĥusayn al-'Adawī, Sālim, client of Hudhayfa al-Yamāni; 'Ukkāsha ibn Miĥŝan, Mas'ūd ibn Rabi' al-Fārisī, Abū Dharr Jundab ibn Junāda al-Ghifārī, 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar, son of the Caliph; Ŝafwān ibn Baydā, Abu Dardā, 'Uwaym ibn ‘Aāmir, Abū Lubāba ibn 'Abd al-Mundhir, 'Abdullah ibn Badr al-Juhanī, Mistahibn Uthatha ibn 'Abbad, Abū Hurayra, Thawbān, Mu'ādh ibn al-Hārith, Sa'ib ibn Khallād, Thābit ibn Wadī'at, Abū Yasar Ka'b ibn 'Amr, Wahb ibn Ma'qal, 'Abdullah ibn Unays, and Hajjaj ibn 'Umar al-Aslamī. And it is largely believed that many or most of these Sahaba donned woolen raiment as as sign of their asceticism, which is the real reason why the later, 8th century Sufis did so.

 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

I'm rambling (?), yet you (Abu Jibreel) have failed to demonstrate how it is God's existence can be proven. So, here's your opportunity! Prove it! Right now, and we'll see who is babbling and who is talking sense and logic!

You stated before, for example: "So Sufism should be seen in its actual light. Sufism is understood to mean, that you bob and move your head in dhikr, dancing and singing, and performing "amazing" feats. This is something that was mixed with the practises of Islam, so therefore it is dangerous"
And in another comment you said "The prophet salla allahu 'aleihi wa sallam never said, "i have come to perfect the sufi way" or anything to that effect. That's definately a false or ignorant statement. Neither him nor the Sahabah radhi allahu 'anhum said, that ibaadah should rise up the level of sufism." and also, "I say: With your words you want me (us) to acknowledge, that Tasawwuf is a given thing in Islam. Well it isn't."...

Now, in light of being consistently refuted and rebutted with sound text proofs, you slyly attempt to reassess your stance, hoping that none will take notice, by your stating: "There is difference between the sufism of old and the later sufism.", meaning, of course, that the early Sufis, whom you've spent the past few days here trying futily vilify and discredit with your unwarranted libel, were true and pious Muslims, while the "so-called" Sufis of today are mere, unworthy imposters.

Well, what little truth there is to such a statement can and is also applied to all Muslims, as each generation after the first 3 praised as the best generations by the Prophet (s) is worse off then the preceding one, Sufi or not. We have/had people like Ibn Baz and Al-Albani, who held no ijaza or sanad in any of the Islamic sciences being declared the "Muhaddith al-'Asr" by the lay Salafi masses, when Al-Albani, himself, confessed to being approximately 60,000 hadiths short of the minimum criteria for holding such an esteemed title. So, sure the Sufis of today generally cannot compare to those of centuries past, but this holds true for the muhadiths, mafassirs, the faqahi, and every other Muslim for that matter. Heck, we haven't had a true mutlaq mujtahid in probably 200 years or more. So, what you state holds, as per usual, no relevance what so ever.

This is why I write as if I'm not directing my words to you, because your ego will never allow you to concede to the fallacies in your unfounded arguments, however, if you've been paying attention, other people, such as Saldan and Wanderer, are following along here, though you may disapprove, and we are not the only ones viewing these comments. This means that if you're not certain whether you are arguing the facts for Allah's sake, or simply arguing to be right for your ego's sake, that others may benefit or be misguided by these comments and we will be held accountable for our words here!

Lastly, if God could be proven, there be no need for faith. Do you have faith that the moon exists, or can you prove this? See, there is a difference. No one on earth denies the moon, but can this be said of God?

 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2009
Votes: +0

Brotherhood of Believers said:

Assalamu'alaikum,

With this little spare time I have, I would like to make this quick comment to clear up some of the misinterpretations before I head off:

Firstly, I had mentioned that "Sufism strictly as a tradition emerged between the 8th-9th centuries." I'm sure just like how all the words in this statement appear in my computer screen, they appear in all your other screens as well. I never said Sufism itself emerged in the 8th-9th centuries. What I was referring to here was the Tradition of Sufism, i.e. that which people started to follow blindly with innovations introduced into it and which was deviated from what the original Sufis who were involved in the movement actually did. That is why I mentioned later that "in the middle of the 9th century, Sufi mysticism and extreme asceticism began to bloom," which validates my earlier statement on the deviated traditional emergence of Sufism. It is thus clear that I am not pulling the advent of Sufism chronologically further and further from the age of the Salaf.

Secondly, I included that quote by Imam Shafi'i so that we will have a clearer and more comprehensive picture on the opinions of the Imams on Sufism. I never deleted or omitted any part of the quote, rather, I just explained the part on Sufism as that is the subject of discussion on this page anyway. If we were discussing on extreme jurists, then naturally we can use that same quote again. Rather than discussing the quote or providing arguments, Abu Siraj Tariq decided to label me as someone who's biased towards jurists, as a detractor, as deceitful. How ridiculous this is brother! You claim to be championing the cause of Sufis & claim that you are specialists in taqwa, sabr, tawakkul, etc etc, and yet you openly slander and defame fellow Muslims so that your ego is satisfied? This is so against the methods, ways and manners which a Muslim to required to carefully exercise, as prescribed in the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah, when he argues.

Lastly, much has been discussed and detailed in this whole list of comments. For those of you who have been reading and following, here's my advice. If you accept all or some of the points made here, go head and accept them. If you reject all or some of the points, go ahead and reject them. We should most importantly make du'a that all those following and involved in this discussion are guided in the straight path, and Allah(swt) guides whom He wills. Everyone can always do more research to find out more and of course can contribute their findings here as well. But the present course of discussion is headed in a totally wrong direction, and rather than spending our time and energy on this we should really be out there calling non-Muslims to Islam.

Allah(swt) says in the Holy Qur'an:

Say: "O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah." If then they turn back, say ye: "Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah's Will). (3:64)

CALL THOU (all mankind] unto thy Sustainer's path with wisdom and goodly exhortation, and argue with them in the most kindly manner- for, behold, thy Sustainer knows best as to who strays from His path, and best knows He as to who are the right-guided. (16:125)

Both the above ayats are instructions for Muslims calling non-Muslims to Islam. How sad it is that there are still such arguments of a disgraceful fashion going on among us even after we have come to common terms mentioned in the Holy Qur'an. Is this how we want the plight of our Ummah to remain?

Jazakallahu Khair
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
July 01, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj,
For someone with knowledge, you still keep missing the point, which, if you decide to read the comments from the brotherhood of believers, would become clear to you. There is difference between the sufism of old and the later sufism.

If Allah wanted it, He could have guided the whole of mankind. The orientalists are some of the most knowledgable about Islam, yet they don't believe in it. This is not because the proofs are not there. No they're there, but the orientalists approach Islam academically, so they're not reading it to find the truth, meaning their hearts are not in the study, maybe they're studying it to prevent it from gaining the awaited change in the muslim world, which is true, so their hearts are filled with hatred and prejudice. The mind and the heart needs to work together. The mind ('Aql) is convinced by the evidences and the heart (Wijdan) is filled with tranquility. You said something before, that caught my eye. Something about scholars leading to Tawfiq. This is simply not the case, because Tawfiq and Hidayah are in the hands of Allah, like Rizq and Ajal.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Now, let's look at another 8th century scholar's take of Sufism: Abu Hamifa (r) (700-767) once said what means: "If it were not for two years, I would have perished. For two years I accompanied J'afar as-Sadiq (r) and acquired the spiritual knowledge that made me a knower ['Arif (Gnostic)] in the Way [Sulook]" Al Hawi lil al-Fatawi. So Abu Hanifa (r) took Sufism from J'afar as-Sadiq (r), who, in turn, took this knowledge from Qasim ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr (r), who was taught by Salman al-Farsi (r), who was the disciple of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq (r) who was given this knowledge by the Messenger of Allah (s).

And then of course we have Imam Malik's report (d. 795), "He who practices tasawwuf (Sufism) without learning Sacred Law (fiqh) corrupts his faith, while he who learns Sacred Law (fiqh) without practicing tasawwuf. (Sufism) corrupts himself. Only he who combines the two proves true." ( Hashiwya of Ahmad ibn Zarruq / 'Ali al-Adawi , vol. 2, p. 195.), and so on.

And your saying: "This explains quotes such as 'Be both a faqih and a sufi: do not be only one of them! Verily, by Allah's truth, I am advising you sincerely' By Imam Shafi’i [al-Shafi`i, Diwan, (Beirut and Damascus: Dar al-fikr) p. 47], where he emphasized the limits of Sufism and warned against delving into it too much and not to end up as an extreme ascetic while neglecting other aspects of the Deen. Here you deceptively attempt to twist the words of Imam Shafi'i by over emphasizing what you so maliciously and clandestinely refer to as the "limits of Sufism" without referring to the limits of the jurists, as the imam speaks here of both. Truly, the detractors from Sufism cannot succeed in arriving at their ends without employing much in the way of deceit and misdirection! Then Brotherhood goes further by stating: "Sadly, in the middle of the 9th century, Sufi mysticism and extreme asceticism began to bloom", when earlier, he clearly stated that Sufism saw its advent between the 8th and 9th centuries, which was also proven to be untrue. Notice how with each given opportunity, Brotherhood pulls the advent of Sufism chronologically further and further from the age of the Salaf!
Well, it's late, so I will continue to expose the fallacy of Brotherhood's woefully contemptible rhetoric later on, insha' Allah
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj,
I'm talking about the existence of Allah, not His Essence. The existence is irrefutable and can be proven through the reality by analysis. Likewise with the Qur'an. And stop rambling. Your words should be directed at me. Don't write like you're addressing someone else...

And do read the comments from the Brotherhood of Believers.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

As for Brotherhood, he states that Sufism saw its advent between the 8th and 9th centuries, though this mendicious statement has been retroactively repudiated by Brotherhood's friend, Abu Jibreel, who clearly stated that: "Al-Hasan al-Basri once passed a Sufi, who was making Tawaf, so he offered him a dirham, but the person turned it down. Later on (in 110 AH) Al-Hasan died... ". Now, Abu Jibreel accurately marks Al-Hasan al-Basri's (r) passing at 110 AH, which translates to the early part of the 8th century, specifically 729 AD... hardly to be considered the end part of the 8th and beginning of the 9th centuries! So, here I have established that Brotherhood's rhetoric is irresponsibly inaccurate and blindly misleading from its inception, however this is only the beginning, as Sufism certainly didn't begin with the Imam of the Tabi'een, he was just the first on documented record to have used the term "Sufi", for the scholars have stated for the sake of Usool and the sciences "La b'as bi mustalah" i.e.: There is no harm in applying labels (technical terminology) to the sciences. And this is also why they stated that "Sufism: once a reality void of appellation, today a name void in reality", meaning that in the Prophet's day, Sufism was the integral reality of Islam, as are hadiths and fiqh and the Mus-haf, but like Sufism, none of these were known by their present designations... however, today, people, like yourself and Abu Jibreel, have become wholly lost to the very concept and importance of the esoteric practics of the early Muslims.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

So, Abu Jibreel's claim that God's existence and Islam's Divine authority and truth are irrefrutable may be true, but at once, it is very much deniable (intellectually or otherwise), as Allah, Himself, refers to those (Kafaroon) who are the deniers of truth. And if it can be denied, that probably (and does) mean that God and Islam cannot be proven to be the reality to those without faith anymore than a Christian can prove that the Trinity is theologically factual by employing the Bible as evidence, not because evidence doesn't exist therein, but rather because I haven't faith in the Bible to begin with.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

I'll begin with answering Abu Jibreel, not for the sake of guiding him, of course, as I'm more than convinced, as are - perhaps - most of the people who have been following these comments, that he (Abu Jibreel) is no longer debating me for the sake of arriving at the truth, rather he is arguing in spite of the truth simple for the sake of being right at all costs. Case in point: I've quoted numerous agreed upon mujtahideen ulama', including the 4 eponymous imams, and other pillars of this religion like Ibn Hajar and Nawawi, who all supported and insisted on the science they, themselves, termed Tasawwuf [Sufism], however he [Abu Jibreel] has invoked a single Tab'i, Muhammad ibn Sireen [r], who only objected to the Sufis' sense of fashion, [wool] to back has wayward claims).

You still insist that God can be easily proven as a reality, though you've yet to accept my challenge to convice the world's skeptics and the non-Muslims of His existence. On a personal level, I must agree with you, being Muslim myself, that it would "seem" unfathomably irrational to deny God's existence in light of the seemingly infinite and miraculous life forms and perfectly, uncanny structures and delicate balances that comprise the universe. However, in spite of this reality, the fact is that Allah exists beyond and completely independent from His creation, thus any attempt to scientifically or fully intellectually explain or conceive of Him would be, and is, an exercise in unending futility, as even He says that we cannot conceive of Him and He is far beyond conception or description, as nothing in creation is like unto Him.
So, by this fact, logically speaking, the premise that God doesn't exist is just as rational and reasonable as the premise that He does, since both are impossible to prove scientifically or empirically. That is why Allah commnads that we are to come to know Him by way of His signs (ayat [creation]), and these (His signs), though they may be studied scientifically, empirically and intellectually, it still may be (and has been) counter-argued that these phenomena (nature, life, the celestial spheres, etc.) were always present in one form or another and that matter and energy are eternal and absolute as the atheists purport. Now, if you have an answer to this, please call Larry King, the Pope and Oprah, because you'll have been the first in the history of humankind to bring closure to this long-standing topic. The Nobel awaits!
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Salam aleikum ya ikhwani (brotherhood of believers).
Absolutely brilliant explanation, masha Allah.

Fi amaanillah.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Brotherhood of Believers said:

I conclude by quoting these three Ahadeeth:

Narrated Anas: The Prophet said, "Whoever said "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah and has in his heart good (faith) equal to the weight of a barley grain will be taken out of Hell. And whoever said: "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah and has in his heart good (faith) equal to the weight of a wheat grain will be taken out of Hell. And whoever said, "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah and has in his heart good (faith) equal to the weight of an atom will be taken out of Hell." (Bukhari Book 1 Volume 2 Hadith 42)

Narrated 'Aisha: Once the Prophet came while a woman was sitting with me. He said, "Who is she?" I replied, "She is so and so," and told him about her (excessive) praying. He said disapprovingly, "Do (good) deeds which is within your capacity (without being overtaxed) as Allah does not get tired (of giving rewards) but (surely) you will get tired and the best deed (act of Worship) in the sight of Allah is that which is done regularly." (Bukhari Book 1 Volume 2 Hadith 41)

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded; and gain strength by worshipping in the mornings, the nights." (See Fath-ul-Bari, Page 102, Vol 1). (Bukhari Book 1 Volume 2 Hadith 38)

Wabillahi Tawfiq Wal Hidayah
Wassalamu’alaikum
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Brotherhood of Believers said:

Pantheistic beliefs and atheistic concepts were also predominant among the following generation of Sufis, as can be seen from these statements by them:

Mansur al-Hallaj: “I saw my Lord with the eye of the heart. I said: Who art Thou? He answered: Thou.”

Abu Maydan: “Everything outside of God is unreal, everything taken individually or collectively, when you truly know it... Whatever does not have root in his Being, can in no wise be real.”

Muhammad al-Harraq: “Seekest thou Laila [Divine Reality], when she is manifest within thee? Thou deemest her to be other, but she is not other than thou.”51

Jalal al-Din Rumi: “Though the many ways [diverse religions] are various, the goal is one. Do you not see there are many roads to the Kaaba?”

Ibn Arabi: “My heart has become capable of every form: it is a pasture for gazelles and a convent for Christians, and a temple for idols and the pilgrims Ka‘ba and the tables of the Torah, and the book of the Koran. I follow the religion of Love: whatever way Love’s camels take, that is my religion and faith”

Now, to this end, the background of Sufism has been provided (in a summarized fashion). One of the key points that should be noted at this juncture is that Sufism, in its very beginning and essence, already had innovations and deviant aspects inherent in it. However, reforms took place and Sufism was brought nearer to pure Islam by the some of the scholars. This is precisely why we have various Sufis defining and explaining Sufism in their own ways today. There seem to be so many interpretations of Sufism and a variety of practices, both halal and haram, incorporated in it.
The reality of the origins and the situations surrounding the origins of Sufism and its developments are rarely discussed by secular scholars, orientalists, etc. Rather, Sufism is taught, especially in secular schools, as the prime mystical and other-wordly tradition as if that is the right way to practice Islam. This also has led non-Muslims to the false belief that Islam lacked so many essentialities which Sufism had to make up for. They have used Sufism to claim that Islam lacks the spiritual aspect which is a prime aspect for a true religion. Even today, Sufism is encouraged and permitted in especially non-Muslim countries, due to the apolitical stance of many Sufi orders today and their renunciation of wordly affairs, while authentic Islam is classified as “fundamentalism”, “radicalism” and “terrorism.” The state of Sufism in Muslim countries is already provided in the beginning paragraphs of the above article, and hence needs no repetition here.

Going back to one of the comments made much earlier (I am unable to address each and every point already made previously due to limited time), it was mentioned that Islamic law, Iman and Ihsan are somewhat three pillars, where focusing on one will not meet the requirements of the other. This is an incorrect description of basic Islam. Islam is that which starts with Iman (i.e. truly believing in the Oneness of God and his last Messenger (saw)). In other words, rather than three separate pillars, there is a basic foundation that serves as the stepping stone. Within this basic foundation, the fundamentals of Islam such as salaat, zakaat, hajj, sawm, etc are contained. Anyone without this basic foundation is not a Muslim. It is only after this foundation that one, depending on his Yaqin, is able to move on to increase his love for the Deen and seek more knowledge pertaining to its laws & etc. Hence, a Muslim can still be a Muslim if he has no access to learning more on Islamic laws. And as for Ihsan, it’s something Muslims should strive to achieve and increase, thus becoming Muhsins (the precise term found in the Holy Qur’an). The question of who among us is an excellent Muhsin is not apparent to us human beings, and this knowledge only lies with Allah (swt). It is not for us to separate ourseleves into higher and lower orders on matters pertaining to Ihsan, and similarly if someone has Iman but does not delve into the Ihsani aspect of the Deen, he is still a Muslim and is no way sinning except that depriving himself of the good rewards which striving towards Ihsan can bring him, Insha Allah.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Brotherhood of Believers said:

Are these false accusations against Sufism we’re making here? The answer is a clear no, and Sufis themselves have attested to that. For example, Dr Fazlur Rahman, a very well-known Sufi himself stated in his work that “outside influences must have played an accessory role and these no one may deny.” (Fazlur Rahman, Islam (London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1966), 131. Similarly, scholar Seyyed Hossein Nasr in his work “Sufi Essays” while defending Sufism to the best of his ability, himself admitted that “Zoroastrianism had more intimate contact with Islam than Manichaeism” (Nasr, 137). He also states that “Zoroastrian angeology and cosmology were also resuscitated by Shibab al-Din Suhrawardi, the founder of the [Sufi] school of Illumination or Ishraq, who made these symbols transparent in the light of Islamic gnosis.” The son of the Mughal Emperor Shajahaan, Sufi Dara Shikoh said Sufism and Advaita Vedantism (Hinduism) are essentially the same, with a surface difference of terminology (Martin Lings, “What is Sufism?” 1975). It is empirical knowledge, and not false accusations, that outside influences played a part in the early stages and roots of Sufism, and indeed that has been the main reason for contention between Sufis and Non-Sufis.

Let’s look at the life of another well-known Sufi. The successor to Abu Ishaq Shami was Abu Ahmad Abdal Chishti. While his own father tried to prevent him from entering Sufism, he disobeyed and went into it anyway. It was said he lived a life dedicated to meditation, once again in contrary to the life of Rasoolullah (saw) and against the advice of exemplary Imams like Imam Shafi’i.

So how did such innovated Sufism endure and survive until the present age? The answer comes from the fact that these innovations by the Sufis underwent periods of reform. As Sufis themselves profess, one of their prominent reformers was Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, who removed the innovated aspects from it, one of his major works being the Ihya Ulum al-Deen. It must be stressed here that the Sufis cannot deny the fact that innovations existed in their Sufi traditions, as al-Ghazali himself very respected by Sufis sought to remove the very deviant innovations predominant within Sufis. But please note that the “reformed” Sufism did not win over its various other forms and end up as that adhered to by all the Sufis. The infamous Ibn Arabi and Mansoor al-Hallaj are known for their pantheistic beliefs, and followers of their Sufi traditions exist till today.

There thus exist various Sufi sects, orders, classifications, etc. There is a Shia-Sunni divide within the Sufi orders, as the Ni’matullahiya order is a major Shia order, named after Shah Ni’matullah Wali. The Rifa’i order established many sub-groups still existent today. The Mawlawiyya are known for whirling dervishes, which is not subscribed to by other Sufi orders. The Chishtiya and Shadhiliyya orders also have several sub-branches from the main branch.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Brotherhood of Believers said:

This explains quotes such as “Be both a faqih and a sufi: do not be only one of them! Verily, by Allah's truth, I am advising you sincerely” By Imam Shafi’i [al-Shafi`i, Diwan, (Beirut and Damascus: Dar al-fikr) p. 47], where he emphasized the limits of Sufism and warned against delving into it too much and not to end up as an extreme ascetic while neglecting other aspects of the Deen. Sadly, in the middle of the 9th century, Sufi mysticism and extreme asceticism began to bloom. Some innovators decided to take the whole idea of shunning wordly life to the next level. The female Sufi mystic, Rabia al-Adawiyah, who rejected worship motivated by the desire for heavenly reward or the fear of punishment and insisted on the love of God as the sole valid form of adoration, was one of the catalysts for the spread of the Sufi tradition, which eventually reached India, Pakistan, Persia, Africa, etc.

The question still looms as to whether the Muslims at that time were really overly materialistic? Materialism, if within the limits of Shari’ah, is indeed Halal. For example, when we read the Seerah of Rasoolullah (saw), we note that during the battles, he (saw) always ensured sufficient logistics and reinforcements, and permitted military expansion of the Muslims. These material needs were never neglected by Rasoolullah (saw) and hence we, his followers, end up being guilty of bid’ah if we shun what has been prescribed and permitted in the Deen.

Next, to what extent did the early mystic Sufis shun this wordly life and end up guilty of innovations? Common knowledge prevails that some of the early Sufis were too involved, and in some cases engrossed, with asceticism. This is what led to the advent of their focus on the mystical aspects of Islam, and hence the term Tasawwuf came into being and exists till today. For example, the first to declare himself a “Chishti Sufi,” Abu Ishaq Shami, said the following: “Starvation excels all in bliss.” What does this statement go to show? It clearly shows that the early Sufis were indeed very inclined toward asceticism. But what kind of asceticism? Statements like the above by Abu Ishaq Shami clearly go to show that it was not the halal asceticism or zuhd prescribed within Shari’ah. Rather, those who have knowledge on comparative religion will be able to tell that this is the kind prescribed a very long time ago by Siddhartha Gautama – the Buddha! Those who know his life story will be able to tell immediately that these early mystic Sufis followed a way of life very similar to his “Great Renunciation,” his venture into the forest while abandoning all his material assets, and his abstaining from food and drink which led to his deteriorating health before he changed his take on that. Rasoolullah (saw) lived a life of abstaining from the haram and enjoining what was halal. The lifestyle of some of these early Sufis thus goes to show without doubt that they mixed other sources, traditions and beliefs into their practices. What is the implication, then? This implies that these early Sufis felt what had been given and sealed as Islam was insufficient, and hence diverted their way of life to include other aspects into the Deen. This is totally contrary to what has been mentioned in the Holy Qur’an: This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favor unto you, and have chosen for you as religion AL- ISLAM. Whoso is forced by hunger, not by will, to sin: (for him) lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (5:3)
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Brotherhood of Believers said:

Assalamu’alaikum,

It would be most useful to begin with this verse from the Holy Qur’an:

O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are in authority; and if ye have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger if ye are (in truth) believers in Allah and the Last Day. That is better and more seemly in the end. (4:59)

Sadly today, we are devoid of that one ruler, that one authority, the Khalifah. However, as instructed in the above verse, any matters of discourse or differences of opinions among the Muslims should be settled by referring back to the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah of Rasoolullah (saw).

We have to analyze the history and origins of Sufism if at all we want to make sense of the real, authentic, genuine Sufism. In order to define and describe Sufism, we need to turn to its roots and origins. Just like our pure Deen, Islam, having so many diverse divisions today, indeed if someone wants to find out what Islam is, he or she has to refer back to the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah of Rasoolullah (saw).

Sufism strictly as a tradition emerged between the 8th-9th centuries. One of the most commonly cited reasons for its advent is that the thirst for materialism was at a level too high among the Muslims at that time and hence, these people who wanted to shun away from that sort of lifestyle were involved in some sort of ‘movement’ like a silent protest. The reasons for these people being classified as a certain group is the fact that they emphasized asceticism as a common means to manifest their displeasure at excessive materialism, and were specifically labeled as Sufis because they wore woolen garments - not due to their “high religious or spiritual status” or anything of that sort. They wore such garments as a symbol to show their displeasure at the way excessive materialism was spreading among the Muslims at that time. While all those involved in this protest wore wool, not everyone who wore wool was a part of this silent protest. However, the label Sufi, although literally referring to one who wears wool, was still maintained when referring to these particular Muslims. But they neither wanted to start their own separate sect or order, nor did they think of themselves as higher than other Muslims. Hence, the “Sufis” referred to by the four Imams as quoted in the above article was precisely these Muslims, who, strove to protect the Deen from corruptive external elements. It does not refer to those Sufis who were involved in mysticism or asceticism not according to the methods of the Prophet (saw).
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj,
Of course there's a difference between 'Ilm al-Yaqeen (certain irrefutable knowledge) and 'Ayn al-Yaqeen (certain irrefutable direct sensation). Iman in Islam is 'Ilm Al-Yaqeen, the certain irrefutable affirmation, which is confirmed by the reality and based on evidences. Now this is not academic, the heart should also be in it. When the 'Aql and feelings (call it Fitrah or nature) work together in the thought process, then it would be very easy to reach the level of Iman. Also, everything good happens by the tawfiq of Allah. To be guided, you must first want to be guided, sincerely. Then He will make you aware of the signs of His Greatness in everything, and increase you in knowledge.

To be a Muhsin - to have Ihsan - basically or first off, is not difficult. By practising the laws of Islam sincerely and honestly, you will be a Muhsin. It's not only in your Salah, you should have Ihsan. The betterment of your adherence to Islam should be in everything. Of course there are levels, some are better than others in their adherence. That's why there are so many levels in Jannah. In fact, Ihsan and Taqwa go together, allthough with some difference...

Please note, that while I'm explaining all this, I'm not using the word Sufism, because in my opinion, there's no need to call it Sufism. The training you mentioned and called Sufism, is what every muslim does or should do to develop his personality, ie. the mentality ('Aqliyyah - thoughts) and the psyche (Nafsiyyah - treatment of instincts and desires according to the laws of Islam).

The Mevlevi (Mawlawiy) Tariqa in turkey are the "foolish" people dancing around in circles, you can see them in commercials about travels to Turkey. It all started with a person who, rightly so, and I wouldn't hold it against him, stood somewhere, and turned a bit every few moment. So someone asked him, what are you doing? He answered, well I'm contemplating the creation of Allah. When I look here, I see the mountains. When I turn, I see the ocean. When I turn again, I see the vast lands. Everywhere I turn, I see the signs of Allahs greatness. - from this intelligent pious man, the people started dancing around in circles claiming they were imitating him. That's why I call them fools.

In the end, the Prophet sall Allahu 'aleihi wa sallam and his Sahabah Kiram radhi Allahu 'anhum never said, be a Sufi, practise Sufism.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj, alright first off, you have put so many comments, that I have to sum it all up, and give a short response to the most of it.

The 'Aqidah of Islam is provable intellectually. By that I mean, it can be confirmed without a shadow of a doubt, irrefutable. The whole universe and how it works, the material and the systems that govern it, are indications of Allahs subhanahu wa ta'alas existence, not His Essence, which is intelligable - not reachable by our senses. Because there's a universal law, in our dayli lives as well as in the things of the universe, which states that nothing can come by itself into existence, because it needs a cause. And that is - an x-factor - a creator. But we as human beings cannot communicate with the divine. So we are in need of messengers or prophets, to whom the Divine (the Creator) gave authority to express, what the Divine has to say to mankind regarding the purpose of life and the whole existence. All this is intellectual.

Then comes the question, well who is this creator? Then we look to the books, that claim they are of Divine origin. We basically have three books: the Tawrat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur'an. The first two (after study) have been tampered with through time, and are not what they used to be. The Qur'ans proof that it is of divine origin is simple, yet profound. "And if you are in doubt as to what We have revealed to our servant (Muhammad sall Allahu 'aleihi wa sallam) from time to time, then produce a chapter like it, and call all your witnesses (and helpers), and you are indeed sincere (in your doubts)." [2:23]

All this is intellectual and irrefutable. By irrefutable I mean, that it is clear and simple. Everything has a cause. A simple example: You leave your home to go to work. You lock the door and proceed in your car or by bus, whatever. When you return home, you find that some of your things are missing. Now, any normal human being would stop and say, hey I've been robbed. Lets call the police. In a broader sense, the sunrise and sunset comes about because of the rotation of the planets around eachother. This law, the planets moving in a certain way, is not of their own doing. They are pushed around by the gravity and magnetic energy in a certain orbit or lane. This is the system. Because they are unable to break free from the system, then the system is not put by themselves, some(one)thing else put it on them. And this someone(thing) is not part of the creation, because then it would also be a creation.

Now in the Qur'an we have things mentioned, which we can sense directly, and this we call 'Aqli (understandable by the intellect). Other things such as the existence of Jannah, Jahannam, Angels, Last day, the 'Arsh, the Kursi etc. etc., are not sensable by the 'Aql, so this is called Naqli (something which is told to us). We affirm all of it, because the proof the Qur'an is of divine origin was made clear to us by our intellect. And the divine does not lie.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 30, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Imam Nawawi (620 - 676 AH.)
"The specifications of the Way of the Sufis are... to keep the Presence of Allah in your heart in public and in private; to follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (s) ... to be happy with what Allah gave you..."
[in his Letters, (Maqasid at-Tawhid), p. 20

Our master and Liege-lord, Imam Muhammad ibn Idris a-Shafi'i (r) advised in his Diwan: فقيها وصوفيا فكن
ليس واحدا فإني وحق الله إياك أنصح
فذلك قاس لم يذق قلبه تقى وهذا جهول كيف ذو الجهل يصلح
فقيها وصوفيا فكن ليس واحدا فإني وحق الله إياك أنصح
فذلك قاس لم يذق قلبه تقى وهذا جهول كيف ذو الجهل يصلح

Faqîhan wa-s.ufiyyan fakun laysa wâh.idan
fa'innî wa-h.aqqillâhi iyyâka ans.ah.u
Fadhâlika qâsin lam yadhuq qalbuhu tuqan
wahâdhâ jahûlun kayfa dhûl-jahli yas.luh.u
I.e., he said: "Be both a jurisprudent and a Sufi - never just one of the two.
Truly, by the Divine Right, I am advising you sincerely!
For the former is hardened, his heart tastes no Godwariness,
While the latter is ignorant - and of what use is the ignorant?..."

Imam Shafi'i (r) also said:حدثنا محمد بن عبد الرحمن حدثني أبو الحسن بن القتات، حدثنا محمد بن أبي يحيى، حدثنا يونس بن عبد الأعلى، قال: سمعت الشافعي يقول: لولا أن رجلا عاقلا تصوف لم يأت الظهر حتى يصير أحمق.
“If a rational man (rajulan a'aqalan) does not become a Sufi, he does not reach noon except he is a dolt!”[4] Abû Nu`aym narrates this from Muh.ammad ibn `Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Fadl, from Abû al-Hasan [Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Harith] ibn al-Qattat [al-Misri], from the thiqa of Muhammad ibn Abi Yahya, from the thiqa Imâm Yûnus ibn `Abdal-A`la, from the Imam as-Shafi'i.

Adding to the list of positive statements of Imam Ash-Shafi’i regarding Tasawwuf is the following:
صحبت الصوفية فلم استفد منهم سوى حرفين، وفي رواية سوى ثلاث كلمات: قولهم: الوقت سيف إن لم تقطعه قطعك. وقولهم: نفسك إن لم تشغلها بالحق شغلتك بالباطل. وقولهم: العدم عصمة
“I accompanied the Sufis for ten years and benefited from them but from two sayings [and in another report three sayings]: their statement that time is as a sword: if you do not cut it, it cuts you, and their statement that deprivation is immunity.”
[The reported third states: “their statement: if your soul does not keep busy with truth it will keep you busy with batil [falsehood].”]
“Narrated from Muh.ammad ibn Muh.ammad ibn Idrîs al-Shâfi`î by al-Bayhaqî in Manâqib al-Shafi`i (2:208) cf. Ibn al-Qayyim in Madarij al-Salikin (3:128) and al-Jawab al-Kafi (p. 208-209) and al-Suyuti in تأييد الحقيقة العلية Ta’yîd al-Haqiqat al-`Aliyya (p. 15)”

Imam ‘Ajluni reports that Imam Ash-Shafi’i said,
حبب إلي من دنياكم ثلاث: ترك التكلف، وعشرة الخلق بالتلطف، والاقتداء بطريق أهل التصوف
“Three things in this world have been made lovely to me: avoiding affectation, treating people kindly, and abiding by the way of the people of tasawwuf!”
[source:1089 كشف الخفاء ومزيل الالباس عما اشتهر من الأحاديث عل ألسنة الناس]

Imam al-Nawawi in his Bustan al-`Arifin fîl-Zuhd wal-Tasawwuf
(“The Grove of the Knowers in Asceticism and Sufism”) narrated with his chain fromal-Shafi`i, the saying:
“Only the sincere one (al-mukhlis.)
can recognize self-display (al-riyâ').”




 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Finally, I continue to find Abu Jibreel's manner of thinking backward and inconsistent, as he denounces 'Isa for his wearing wool raiment, yet upholds the supposed words of a Tabi'een, as if his rank somehow surpassed that of a prophet's, or of Umar ibn al-Khattab (r), of whom the Prophet Muhammad said "If there were to be a prophet after me, surely it would be 'Umar"!, who was the Amir of the believers and the second Caliph, yet Ibn Sireen, for all his greatness, is to be preferred to these pillars of religion!
And not only this, in the essay above, we have testimonials from the great mujtihid imams themselves (Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Muhammad Idris a- Shafi'i, Malik ibn Anas and Abu Hanifa) as well as Imam Nawawi on their insistence and the legitimacy of Sufism. And I might gladly add to these while reviewing the others: Our Liege-lord and master, Imam Malik ibn Anas (r) said: "Ma tasaawuf wa lam tafiqaha qad zandaqa wa man tafiqawa lam tasawuf qad fasada. Man ujma baina ithnain tahaqaqa...", Hashiwya of Imam Ahmad ibn Zarruq / 'Ali al-Adawi, Vol. 2, p. 195) i.e., Imam Malik said,"He who practices tasawwuf (Sufism) without learning Sacred Law (fiqh) corrupts his faith, while he who learns Sacred Law (fiqh) without practicing tasawwuf. (Sufism) corrupts himself. Only he who combines the two proves true." ( Hashiwya of Ahmad ibn Zarruq / 'Ali al-Adawi , vol. 2, p. 195.)

Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (164 - 241 AH.)
"O my son, you have to sit with the People of Sufism, because they are the fountainheads of knowledge and they maintain the Remembrance of Allah in their hearts. They are ascetics and holders of great spiritual prowess."
[Tanwir al-Qulub p. 405]

The Mutlaq Mujtahid, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (r) also said in regards to the Sufis and their employing music as a means to Allah and a form of remembrance of Him: "I don't know a people better than them." Someone said to him: "They listen to music and they reach states of ecstasy." He said: "Do you prevent them from enjoying an hour with Allah?" Related by Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Saffarini al-Hanbali (d. 1188) in his Ghidha' al-albab li-sharh manzumat al-adab from Ibrahim ibn `Abd Allah al-Qalanasi
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

In further answer to Abu Jibreel's anomalies, you (Abu Jibreel) stated: "Now this is dangerous, do you mean to say, the 'Aqidah of Islam cannot be confirmed by the intellect? So Iman in Allah is not intellectually provable, the miracle of the Qur'an is not intellectually provable, and whatever is mentioned in the Qur'an of stories, places and beings etc. is not intellectually provable?!?! Or is it something as simple as, "Well I can't see it, so how can I be sure?" Please explain yourself..."
The Qur'sn serves as evidence of Allah and His existence, but this is only evidence, and evidence that only carries with it weight for one who chooses to believe out of faith, not proof. You cannot prove Allah's existence or the legitimacy of the Qur'an beyond a shadow of a doubt to someone who denies God or denies Islam to begin with. Only Allah guides to truth! Without first making the leap of faith, a leap that is done, not by way of evidential proof, but trust and subjective belief (which is why it's called faith), one will not embrace this religion. This is precisely why the first pillar of Islam is shahada, i.e. testifying faith and belief that there is no God, save Allah, and Muhammad is His servant and messenger, though if such a person were to come to the stand in a court of law, then be asked by an attorney to give the proof for his doing so, what could he say? He hasn't seen this Allah, nor the Messenger he professes is under His servatude.

If you feel my words are dangerous, and you can prove your faith, then I challenge you to do that which the Prophet (s) could not, himself, do, and convert the world to Islam with the proof you claim to have. And tawfiq comes from Allah alone.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

As for the comment made by the Ibn Sireen that the Sufis wore wool in imitation of 'Isa, it seems strange that he would so say with such an obvious tone of censure. Is 'Isa not a prophet of Allah? Was 'Isa not an example to be emulated? Was there ever documented or reported an action, saying or example of 'Isa that was condemned by Muhammad (s)? The truth be known, the Prophet (Muhammad) once stated in a hadīth: "Every prophet was a shepherd", as this was believed to be a common training method to prepare the prophets for their being commissioned into prophethood and to guide their people as a shepherd guides his flock. And it would be reasonable to assume that, since wool was the common, prevalent textile being manufactured during the ages of the prophets, and since Jesus, himself, watched over the ruminant flocks, this may very well mean that all prophets wore wool? Case in point, the second caliph, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (r) was well documented as wearing wool, and amongst other things, insisted that anyone who was employed under his administration lived a strict life of asceticism and wore woolen garments as a uniform mark of his caliphate. And who among men was more meticulous in his emulating the Prophet than he? An example thereof; at its annexation, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab went to the Jerusalem to receive the holy city from the hands of the abdicating Byzantium Empire. Prior to his arrival, the Caliph met with a delegation of Muslim commanders at Jabīa, outside of Jerusalem, including Khalid ibn Walīd, Yazid ibn Sufyan, and Abu 'Ubayda. Abu 'Ubayda was garbed in a coarse, woolen burnoose, much to the approval of the Commander of the Faithful, while Yazid ibn Sufyan and Khalid ibn Walid were more elaborately adorned, earning the expressed disapprobation of the Caliph. Upon their eventual arrival at Jerusalem, the Rightly Guided Caliph was met at the gate of the holy city by the venerable patriarch along with the city’s elite and others from amongst the commanders of the Muslim delegation. While those who had come to receive the Caliph donned finer raiment, ‘Umar appeared in a coarse, woolen garment typical of that worn by Arab men of his day. When advised that he might accouter attire more befitting an occasion of such caliber, the Caliph declined, stating that his prevalence and strength derived from his faith in Islam and not from any manner of dress. When the patriarch of Jerusalem witnessed the simplicity of the Commander of the Faithful, he then looked upon his own more sophisticated apparel and said, “Most assuredly, Islam has indeed excelled all other religions.” !
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Abu Jibreel, your over dependence on Ibn Sireen (r) is somewhat interesting and demonstrates you unilateral mindset and capacity to search for loopholes in the truth to give weight to your nafs. You insist on maintaining and purporting the edict of Ibn Taymiyyah, who mentions in his al-Fatawa [11/7] from Muhammah ibn Sireen that it reached him that a certain people had taken to wearing woolen clothes in order to resemble Isa ibn Maryam, so he said: 'There are a people who have chosen and preferred the wearing of woolen clothes, claiming that they want to resemble al-Masih ibn Maryam. But the way of our Prophet is more beloved to us, and the Prophet (S) used to wear cotton and other garments.'

What's significant here is that you define Sufism by offering the etymology of the very term "Sufism", or Tasawwuf in Arabic. In this way, you confuse the etymology with the meaning of Sufism itself. According to this definition, any Muslim who dons wool is a Sufi.

One thing, among far too many others, that you fail to realize is that that these woolen raiment were worn as a sign of zuhd, or worldly abstinence, yet Ibn Sireen insists that this was done in imitation of Jesus (a). What he fails to elaborate on is the fact that 'Isa (a), himself, was foremost in practicing zuhd, an example which was carried on and encouraged, and taught by the Prophet Muĥammad (s). Examples of this maybe seen in the following: Reported by Sahl ibn Sa'd (R), a man came to the Messenger of Allah and said, "O Messenger of Allah, tell me to do an action in which, if I do it, Allah and the people will love me." He said to him, "Be abstinent [zuhd] in this world and Allah will love you; do without [practice zuhd] what is in the hands of others and the people will love you".

 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Faith, as stated earlier, is, (for example) belief in hell (iman), while gnosis is knowing of hell with knowledge of certitude ('ilm al-yaqin), thus the hadith: If man were to see the hell fire, he'd never commit any transgression. Yet how many of us say we believe, yet excell at sinning? Or his (s) saying "Worship Allah as if you see Him, and if you see Him not, know that He most certainly sees you", or "Prayer each prayer as if it is your last". So, we can state that the Prophet (s) intended that faith alone is to guide us, and for most people, this is the case, however, those who deny such intuitive spiritual insight will never have hope of attaining to it, yet the Prophet (s) has stated regarding this: There are 70,000 veils between man and His Lord, yet there are no veils between Him and him" and "The vastness of the heavens and the earth cannot contain Him, yet the heart of His faithful servant contains Him". And Allah Knows best.






 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

For those who still aren't clear, to sum up; the difference between faith (Iman) and Gnosis (Ihsan), faith is the subjective belief in matters or entities that can not (at any particular time or moment) or cannot (not possible) be observed empirically or studied scientifically. Faith is a trust and confidence in something that rests not upon logical proofs or material evidence.
Question: What proof do we have of God's existence, or that Muhammd (s) was a prophet, or that Islam is a true religion?
Answer: Nothing substantial that would qualitfy as proof in the absolute sense. We simply believe and have faith. This is not to say that certain evidences don't exist, however these, often, may and can be challenged, though this is evidence of the sort which facilitates refuting reasonable doubt, not direct, primary evidence, such as seeing God, Himself, and having Him confirm our religion for us in person.

Gnosis (Ihsan / Sufism): This is, I concede) loosely used terminology, as, by translating or rendering the term Ihsan and Sufi into Gnosis / Gnostic, I mean to describe one who has attained to this hightened spiritual station, not that anyone and everyone who claims to be a Sufi has arrived at the level of gnosis.
Anytime a person professes "La ilaha ila Allah", this person has testified that he/she has publicly declared "faith" in Allah as the one God, however, as aforemention, this faith is personal and subjective, and technically, could be challenged, not just by others, mind you, but by the very one who professes such convictions.
Gnosis, or in this particular context, absolute certainty in the unseen / immaterial / metaphysical, a phenomonon that cannot be studied or observed empirically by way of material evidences, is true knowledge (not mere information mind you) of such phenomona... what the mystics often refer to as seeing things as they truly are. Though often not as keen as the wahi (revelation) of the prophets, it is - none-the-less - a knowledge of spiritual and similar matters denied by those who, though they may have faith, are still veiled by the hajaba (screen) of worldly life and sin. This is evidenced in the saying of the Prophet (s) whereas he stated what means: There were, before you, those among people who spoke with the angels, though they were not prophets. If there is, in my community, such people, then surely it is Umar (in al-Khattab (r). This narration is elucidated by the two narrations whereby the Prophet (s) states: "Allah has engraved truth on the tongue of 'Umar and in his heart" and "If there were to be a prophet after me, verily it would be 'Umar." The great muĥaddith, at-Tirmidhī stated that according to Ibn 'Uyayna "spoken to" (muĥaddathūn) here means "made to understand" (mufahhamūn), while in his narration, Imām Muslim an-Nasaybūrī added: "Ibn Wahb explained ‘spoken to’ as ‘inspired’ (mulĥam)." This is the majority’s opinion according to the insuperable ĥadīth master, Ibn Ĥajar who said: "‘Spoken to' means ‘by the angels’." An-Nawawī and Ibn Ĥajar said respectively in Sharĥ Saĥīĥ Muslim and Fatĥ al-Bārī: The scholars have differed concerning "spoken to." Ibn Wahb said it meant "inspired" (mulĥam). It was said also: "Those who are right, and when they give an opinion it is as if they were spoken to, and then they give their opinion.” It was said also: "The angels speak to them..." Bukhārī said: "Truth comes from their tongues." This ĥadīth contains a confirmation of the miracles of the saints (karāmāt al-awliya'). The one among (Muslims) who is "spoken to," if his existence is ascertained, what befalls him is not used as basis for a legal judgment, rather he is obliged to evaluate it with the Qur’ān, and if it conforms to it or to the Sunna, he acts upon it, otherwise he leaves it. Because of the inadmissibility of such knowledge as evidence, the suspicion surrounding the very concept of ilĥām (inspiration), and the overall misunderstandings that generally plague Sufism, some scholars and lay Muslims in particular have come to regard Sufis and Sufism with much reservation, animosity, and ferocious disdain.

What, however, must be kept firm in mind is the fact that, without the Ihsani tradition (Sufism), there is little which differentiates a Muslim from a Jewish or Christian scholar of Islam. These scholars know the Qur'an, hadiths, fiqh, theology (aqeeda) etc. Sure, there is faith, as testified to by way of shahada and put into practice by outwardly or exoteric deeds and actions, but gnosis is a certainty of pure, untainted knowledge that the orientalist can never taste save he accepts the religion and then taxes the self in worship, constant remembrance and self denial in order to attain to it.

 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

There was a problem with my comment, because I used forbidden characters. Here it is one more time...

Abu Siraj, you said (I have put my comment after yours):
"You state that the study of creation is the catalyst for acquiring love of Allah." Right.

"So, is this trus, as well, for acquiring contrition, dependence, patience, abstinence, self-accountablilty, sincerity, scrupulouness, virtue, and, most notably Yaqin!" That is the first step, as I said. Everything happens with the help of Allah, if you ask for it. Also Hidaayah (guidance) is with the Tawfiq of Allah.

"The atheists would certainly argue with you, and rightfully so, as it is creation that pulls them further from Allah's knowledge, as they are distracted by the material." Their starting point is not to answer why, but HOW things work. So they have fallen in love with the material, lol!

"Ihsan is being able to see and acknowledge with certainty that which lies beyond the material, the empirical, the scientific! You, are like them, in the sense that you only hold to and believe in the empirical scinces of Islam, such as tafseer, fiqh, and kalaam, while gnosis is knowledge of al-yaqin wa 'ilm al-ghayb, thus you deny it, yet Allah, Himself, is the Unseen, not a scientific entity to be placed on a scale for your determination, but the metaphysical Reality that created material creation and the scales and tools in which we study and measure it (i.e. science). Your argument, anymore, is quite desparate and is obviously an argument of your own ego, not the raw, objective facts. Studying creation certainly faciilitates faith and belief in knowledge of the unseen, but it cannot confirm it." Now this is dangerous, do you mean to say, the 'Aqidah of Islam cannot be confirmed by the intellect? So Iman in Allah is not intellectually provable, the miracle of the Qur'an is not intellectually provable, and whatever is mentioned in the Qur'an of stories, places and beings etc. is not intellectually provable?!?! Or is it something as simple as, "Well I can't see it, so how can I be sure?" Please explain yourself...
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj, you said:
"Al-Hasan al-Basri (r) perhaps said bast when he was asked "What is Islam, and who are the Muslims?"; he replied. "Islam is in books, and the Muslims are in their graves!". And he was among the great patriarchs of early Sufism."

I say: First of all, in the beginning, the Sufis were people with clothes made of wool, right? Al-Hasan al-Basri once passed a Sufi, who was making Tawaf, so he offered him a dirham, but the person turned it down. Later on (in 110 AH) Al-Hasan died, and he had worn a jacket made of wool for many years. As I said earlier, Muhammad bin Sireen (or just Ibn Sireen) said about the Sufi people, that the Prophet 'aleihis salam preferred cotton, which is soft and nice on the skin. He also said, if they did that to imitate the Messiah, 'Isa ibn Maryam, then he would rather imitate the Khaleel of Allah, Muhammad sall Allahu 'aleihi wa sallam, whose Sunnah was more dear to him.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj, you said (I have put my comment in between yours):
"You state that the study of creation is the catalyst for acquiring love of Allah. So, is this trus, as well, for acquiring contrition, dependence, patience, abstinence, self-accountablilty, sincerity, scrupulouness, virtue, and, most notably Yaqin! The atheists would certainly argue with you, and rightfully so, as it is creation that pulls them further from Allah's knowledge, as they are distracted by the material. Ihsan is being able to see and acknowledge with certainty that which lies beyond the material, the empirical, the scientific! You, are like them, in the sense that you only hold to and believe in the empirical scinces of Islam, such as tafseer, fiqh, and kalaam, while gnosis is knowledge of al-yaqin wa 'ilm al-ghayb, thus you deny it, yet Allah, Himself, is the Unseen, not a scientific entity to be placed on a scale for your determination, but the metaphysical Reality that created material creation and the scales and tools in which we study and measure it (i.e. science). Your argument, anymore, is quite desparate and is obviously an argument of your own ego, not the raw, objective facts. Studying creation certainly faciilitates faith and belief in knowledge of the unseen, but it cannot confirm it.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 29, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Sufism, Once the reality without a name, today, a name whose reality has become lost to the people. Al-Hasan al-Basri (r) perhaps said bast when he was asked "What is Islam, and who are the Muslims?"; he replied. "Islam is in books, and the Muslims are in their graves!". And he was among the great patriarchs of early Sufism.
One does not detract from Sufism in our day save that he has become a servant of his own ego and has chosen the comforting blindness and darkness of ignorance to the bright and splendid light of knowledge. To these myopic Muslims, Islam is not preserved via a successive chain of authorities (sanad), authorized by the Divine to preserve and relay this religion for future generations, rather it is the shallow stuff of individual cognition and untrained contemplation, whereas anyone can liberally take from the primary sources (Qur'an and hadiths) and arrive at "responsible" conclusions concerning these. To these people, the door to ijtihad boasts of a prominent sign, stating "Come In! All Are Welcome!".
So it also is with Sufism, a tradition and legacy long celebrated and lauded by the greatest minds, savants, sapients, polymaths and sagely adepts for well over a millenium, guardians of the esoteric knowledge of the Prophet (s) and his blessed Companions (r) via an unbroken and wholly preserved, jealously guarded chain of authorities from the advent to the present. Is Sufism, now, to be reduced to mythical heresey and a supposed innovation by a handfull of vocal amateurs who come to us now, at the end of days, boasting of the "True understanding of Islam, the Prophet (s) and his Companions"! The disheartening novelties of modernity have come to hijack our religion. Tasawwuf is isnad, and isand is tradition, our link to the past... to the great ones described in books, and lying in their graves!
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 28, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Abu Jibreel,
You state that the study of creation is the catalyst for acquiring love of Allah. So, is this trus, as well, for acquiring contrition, dependence, patience, abstinence, self-accountablilty, sincerity, scrupulouness, virtue, and, most notably Yaqin! The atheists would certainly argue with you, and rightfully so, as it is creation that pulls them further from Allah's knowledge, as they are distracted by the material. Ihsan is being able to see and acknowledge with certainty that which lies beyond the material, the empirical, the scientific! You, are like them, in the sense that you only hold to and believe in the empirical scinces of Islam, such as tafseer, fiqh, and kalaam, while gnosis is knowledge of al-yaqin wa 'ilm al-ghayb, thus you deny it, yet Allah, Himself, is the Unseen, not a scientific entity to be placed on a scale for your determination, but the metaphysical Reality that created material creation and the scales and tools in which we study and measure it (i.e. science).
Your argument, anymore, is quite desparate and is obviously an argument of your own ego, not the raw, objective facts. Studying creation certainly faciilitates faith and belief in knowledge of the unseen, but it cannot confirm it.
And you state that Sufi is an invented term, which causes confusion. This is a blatant lie on your part, since:
1) The term has been an in common currency and application since before it was first documented as having been employed by the Imam of the Tabi'een, al-Hasan al-Basri (r), and student of Imam 'Ali (r), Hussein (r) and Hasan (r), and almost no one has taken issue with the term itself until recent years, after the rise of the Wahhabis in our modern age.
2) Terms like Aqeeda are also innovations, and the sciences of kalaam have been under dispute for centuries, long before any such disputations existed on Sufism. There has been long standing polemics regarding the Sifat Allah between the M'utizilla, the old Ash'ari school, the new Ash'ari school, the Maturidis and, most recently, the Atharis, among many others. Is this not a source of confusion? Did not the new Ash'aris develop a forlmula for expounding the Qualities of Allah and other doctrinal issues in order to answer the heresies of the so-called neo-Hanbalis?! Is Aqeeda, then, a forbidden and confusing innovation in Islam? According to your standards, it is.
The premise of your whole argument is that faith (religion) is to be understood intellecually. This, my friend, is not religion but philosophy, and is quite antithetical to faith, which speaks to matters of heart, not science, mind and cognition!
I can tell you that Allah's Throne encompasses the heavens and the earth. Aqeeda describes this as a reality, Shari'a dictates that we are to accept this reality, but science and empirical observation of creation does not demonstrate that this is factual, unless you, for one, are able to see the Arsh from your bedroom window... but most of us cannot see it, so by the dictates of logic and empirical reasoning, the Throne of Allah doesn't exist. Absolute certainty of its existence can only come via Gnosis. You can sit there and say you believe, but is your faith so strong that your subjective knowledge in these regards equals that of your knowledge of those things seen? The Prophet (s) said that if we were to see the hell fire, as he did, then not one of us would ever commit a sin, yet how many of us claim to believe, yet sin on a daily basis!

Finally, if Islam was based solely on thought and independent cognition, then there would exist 1.3 billion sects in Islam, i.e. one version of this religion for every Muslim alive (or dead). This cannot possibly be and is precisely why we have scholars to interpret and guide the Muslims to Tawfiq! And as for your ramblings regarding Democracy and Ministry (wazara), that's all that these were and were a mere distraction from the relevant topic of discussion here.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 28, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj, you said:
"In your last comment, you stated the following: "We already have what we need to know how to attain Iman, Ihsan and Zuhd. If you want to call all of that Tasawwuf, who am i to stop you.", yet you fail to elaborate on this thing you assume "we already have". I believe you conveniently fail to make mention of this because you DO know, i.e. that what we need to attain to Ihsan and zuhd is Sufism. In regards to the 3 branches of our religion (Islam [Law], Iman [Doctrine] and Ihsan [Gnosis]), the previous two speak not as to how a Muslim is to attain to/acquire faith in the unseen and abstemiousness (zuhd). How do I fear Allah as commanded in the Qur'an if I see Him not, hear Him not, nor know of anyone who has? Where, in fiqh or Kalaam may I learn the this fear. How does the Shari'a instill love and passion for Allah and His Messenger (s) in my heart, or trust in Him when I've never seen either of them, nor spoke to them, or hope or even depair and contrition for my transgressions?"

I say: With your words you want me (us) to acknowledge, that Tasawwuf is a given thing in Islam. Well it isn't. Islam is thoughts. From those thoughts, we govern our sayings and actions, ie. our affairs. Everything starts from thought, and then develops into action. First and foremost to develop love for something, you must first study it. With the whole 'Aqidah we need to study the six 'Aqidah-points, so we understand it intellectually, and this calms the heart and motivates action. To be a Muhsin (a person with Ihsan), you must first understand these things and act according to the Ahkam of Islam. Studying creation and connecting to your Iman in Allah, would facilitate the love for Him Subhanahu wa Ta'ala. The same goes for the beloved Khaleel, Muhammad sall Allahu 'aleihi wa sallam. First you must understand (always starting with the thought) that mankind is in need of messengers to be guided, and then you move on to study for example the shamaa´il by al-tirmidhi, then the love for our beloved prophet and messenger Muhammad sall Allahu 'aleihi wa sallam would be facilitated.

There's no need to call all that Sufism. If a term invented, causes confusion in the Ummah, then it becomes forbidden to use. Like democracy or minister (Wazir). Some would say democracy simply means to be able to elect your ruler, fairly and freely. But there's more to democracy than that. Democracy gives you freedom to disobey Allah, and the codification of laws is given to man. The same goes for minister. A minister (wazir) in democracy has a special portfolio with staff people. In Islam the Wazir is someone helping the Khalifah with whatever he deems necessary. He does not have a special porfolio or staff people. So he's called a Mu'awin, a helper or assistant. Because of the confusion, the two terms are forbidden to use when speaking about the ruling system of Islam. Hope you see my point... Wallahul Musta'an.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 28, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Abu Siraj, you said:
"In your last comment, you stated the following: "We already have what we need to know how to attain Iman, Ihsan and Zuhd. If you want to call all of that Tasawwuf, who am i to stop you.", yet you fail to elaborate on this thing you assume "we already have". I believe you conveniently fail to make mention of this because you DO know, i.e. that what we need to attain to Ihsan and zuhd is Sufism. In regards to the 3 branches of our religion (Islam [Law], Iman [Doctrine] and Ihsan [Gnosis]), the previous two speak not as to how a Muslim is to attain to/acquire faith in the unseen and abstemiousness (zuhd). How do I fear Allah as commanded in the Qur'an if I see Him not, hear Him not, nor know of anyone who has? Where, in fiqh or Kalaam may I learn the this fear. How does the Shari'a instill love and passion for Allah and His Messenger (s) in my heart, or trust in Him when I've never seen either of them, nor spoke to them, or hope or even depair and contrition for my transgressions?"

I say:
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 28, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Abu Jibreel,
In your last comment, you stated the following: "We already have what we need to know how to attain Iman, Ihsan and Zuhd. If you want to call all of that Tasawwuf, who am i to stop you.", yet you fail to elaborate on this thing you assume "we already have". I believe you conveniently fail to make mention of this because you DO know, i.e. that what we need to attain to Ihsan and zuhd is Sufism. In regards to the 3 branches of our religion (Islam [Law], Iman [Doctrine] and Ihsan [Gnosis]), the previous two speak not as to how a Muslim is to attain to/acquire faith in the unseen and abstemiousness (zuhd). How do I fear Allah as commanded in the Qur'an if I see Him not, hear Him not, nor know of anyone who has? Where, in fiqh or Kalaam may I learn the this fear. How does the Shari'a instill love and passion for Allah and His Messenger (s) in my heart, or trust in Him when I've never seen either of them, nor spoke to them, or hope or even depair and contrition for my transgressions?
Your statement, which assumes "we already have what we need...." is a bit of a cop out and a poor attempt at deterring and distracting the readers away from the point at hand; that is that without Sufism, one cannot possibly attain to the "religion" aspect of the religion, merely the law and the doctrinal aspects alone.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 28, 2009
Votes: +0

wanderer said:

abu jibreel:

"I made a mistake in judgment regarding your mention of Ahmadiyyah. Alright then...Wahdatil wujood is still being mentioned by some. What is the difference between Wujood and Shuhood?, please enlighten me... "

I'm afraid I'm quite nil when it comes to sufism and the comments by ahmed mubarak and abu siraj were certainly enlightening to me. But even as someone who hardly knows much, I think the point's already been made quite clearly, on the difference between wujood and shuhood. Wujood being the Presence itself, and Shuhood being the witnessing or realization of the Creative Presence (through the oneness of creation), to put it crudely I guess...

I really believe the point of "differences" between the so-called "sects" has been done to death, in trying to convince people of little knowledge that Islam is full of contradictions, differences, and no unity. But sadly this propaganda really works. Just goes to show how important it is to gain firsthand knowledge of scholars and their works and their sciences before taking the secondhand knowledge of their detractors for granted. You really need to know the whole story. It's just not okay to accept verbatim what's *wrong* with something without ever having researched if there's anything *right* about it and why. I've been in a situation where my own acts and words were snatched out of my mouth in the wrong context and blown out of proportion, and in no time the entire story had turned on its head, in order to belittle me in front of a small community. It wasn't funny. We need to recognize that propaganda exists, and try to separate the truth from falsehood from whatever we hear.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 28, 2009
Votes: +0

Suldan said:

Asalaamu alaikum, the article and the different comments made by brother Ahmad Mubarak and abu jibreel were indeed excellent peace of work, they help me enlighten my previous belief of sufism. I always asked my self if I belong to sufism or wahhabism because I didnt know were the boundry was. I personally from time to time meditate and make dhikr to purify me soul but Im also hang around wahhabi moske and stricly belief no innovations. After reading this article I realised that my knowledge about Islam was limited and I need to make more effort to learn about the "Deen"
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 28, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Ahmed Mubarak:
We already have what we need to know how to attain Iman, Ihsan and Zuhd. If you want to call all of that Tasawwuf, who am i to stop you. But nevertheless here's my opinion.

He sall Allahu 'aleihi wa sallam said: "Be indifferent (Azhad - from Zuhd) to the world and Allah will love you; be indifferent (Azhad) to what people possess and they will love you."

The term Zuhd is explained thus in the Qur'an. In Surah al-Nisa' Ayah 77, Allah says: "Brief is the enjoyment of this world whereas the life to come is best for all who are muttaqun or conscious of Allah."
In Surah al-Ra'd Ayah 20, Allah says: "The life of this world is nothing but a flitting pleasure."
In Surat al-A'la Ayah 16-17, Allah says: "But may you prefer the life of this world although the life to come is better and more enduring."
In the hadith: "This worldly life is so little in the sight of Allah as this dead animal or goat is so little in your sight".

Al-Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal was asked one day if someone owns one thousand dinar, can he still be a Zahid (from Zuhd)? He replied yes, he can be still a zahid if he does not feel rejoice if the money increases and he does not become sad if it decreases. We must not become slaves to money or our worldly possessions. We can be wealthy and Zahid if we are still thankful to Allah and use wealth in the right way (provided also that we obtained this wealth in the right way). This meaning has been emphasised by Sufian Ibn 'Uyainah, one of the great scholars, when he was asked who is to be considered as Zahid. He said whoever Allah bestowed a bounty on him then he is thankful and then when he is under trial, he is patient.

This is the Zuhd. The Tasawwuf which was explained by the early scholars is very similar to that of Zuhd. Now Tasawwuf has become something else than Zuhd, expressed in the many different understandings...
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 27, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Ahmed Mubarak: my comments are in between yours...
"Either you have not read the article, or you are trying to rewrite it for us in front of our very eyes. The article clearly delineated how the sufi tariqas were fundamental all throughout Islamic history in establishing this deen. It gave examples of LATER tariqas fighting jihad etc. Now you want us all to believe that tasawuf described here is merely some abstract term used by early Muslims, which is somehow now not synomous with the SUFI. I don't know how well you know arabic, but the word sufi comes from the word TASAWUF. Sufi is the "ism" (Saad, wa, fa,ya) Tasawuf is the fail, so the SUFI is the one who does TASAWUF. They are not opposites as you try to claim."



I made a mistake in judgment regarding your mention of Ahmadiyyah. Alright then...Wahdatil wujood is still being mentioned by some. What is the difference between Wujood and Shuhood?, please enlighten me...
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 27, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

He merely was stating that once the spiritual traveler had reached his peak, he/she would experience or be shown the oneness of creation, or that everything is connected to its origin, i.e Allah, but of course not in a physical sense. Now this terminology caused some consternation with other sufis who felt that an unlearned laymen( such as yourself), would get the wrong idea and accuse the sufis of pantheism, which ofcourse is absurd. And they(the sufis) themselves objected to this terminology. One of the most vocal opponents being the Naqshbandi sufi Ahmad al Sirhindi(R) or Mujadid al than as he is known in the subcontinent. He rebutted Arabi and coined the term "wahdat ul Shuhud" or oneness of witnessing. He also although Maturidi in aqeeda, reverted back to the Ashari sifa called Wajib al wujud, meaning that Allah's existence is mandatory for creations existence.

As for you again not understanding sanad(becase you have not studied usul ul fiqh). Sanad that I was referring to was simply being taught a subject by SOMEONE, it doesn't have to be Ahl Bait, who was studied with someone reaching the Prophet(S) a sanad can be completely void of Ahl Bait.
You then made the illogical statement: "Sanad is basically important in Usool. By your standard, non of the Tabi'een who didn't get their teaching directly from the Sahabah, could teach others, because their sanad to the Prophet was non-existant, or that this means they couldn't tell the truth from falsehood?

So if they were tabieen, then by definition that means they got their teaching FROM the sahaba. It just didn't fall out the sky, nor were their Bukhari and Muslim around to read from and parrot hadiths with no knowledge of what they meant, nor were their alim cd roms and "deen intensives" to study from. They got their knowledge directly from the sahaba, who got theirs from the Rasul(S). Their is a thing in usul ul hadith called tadlis, where a narrarator of a hadith will leave out the person who told him because he/she was a sahaba, basically sahabi x telling sahabi y what x has heard. But I know thats not what you were talking about because thats different, and its obvious you have never studied usul-ul hadith.

You also went off on some tangent about sufis focusing too much on ibaadah and not getting involved in social change. Well the article above refuted that outright lie, being that it named sufis who not only engaged in jihad, but as I added to the list those who established Islamic states, such as the case with Uthman don Fodio, Umar Tall etc. In short I could go on & on and refute every single moot and historically inaccurate point you tried to make but as I said I have things to do and Tawfiq is from Allah!
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 26, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:



This is ridiculous, its obvious that the anti-sufis here are at a disadvantage when it comes to knowledge. As a result of this they(Abu Jibreel, Brotherhood) are just arguing to prove their points as opposed to acknowledging what every learned Muslim in the world knows, i.e that tasawuf is a science of the shariah, indispensable and those who excel in this are called sufi. As a result of this I will be not posting on this site anymore, I have to teach classes(Maliki fiqh, Aqeeda etc) and have no time for such nonsense. My intention by posting here was simply to try and clear up some misconceptions that some brothers had due to their reliance on what fast food fiqh, and the blatant rewriting of Muslim history by the oil dawah.

Bro Abu Jibreel where do I begin(lol) ?
you said : "The term Tasawwuf with the early scholars, if you read the statements in the article, was understood in the simplest terms. But that was Zuhd.
Either you have not read the article, or you are trying to rewrite it for us in front of our very eyes. The article clearly delineated how the sufi tariqas were fundamental all throughout Islamic history in establishing this deen. It gave examples of LATER tariqas fighting jihad etc. Now you want us all to believe that tasawuf described here is merely some abstract term used by early Muslims, which is somehow now not synomous with the SUFI. I don't know how well you know arabic, but the word sufi comes from the word TASAWUF. Sufi is the "ism" (Saad, wa, fa,ya) Tasawuf is the fail, so the SUFI is the one who does TASAWUF. They are not opposites as you try to claim.

The Ahmadiyyah which I was referring to is the "tariqa Ahmadiyyah" named after the Morroccon Sayyid, Ahmad ibn Idris(R) who lived inthe 17-th century. He migrated back to Mecca and was quite friendly with the family of Muhammad ibn abdul Wahab. His student, Muhammad Sanusi(R) also a Sayyid, became famous for his later students from his line. Umar Mukhtar( Lionof the Desert) was a later disciple of this blessed tariqa.

You also stated that the goal if sufism is to untie with Allah in "wahdatul-wujud" lol Wahadatul Wujud or unity of creation. Was a term that Ibn Arabi, used to describe tawhid. He was the first to coin it and his tariqa is no longer even in existence. It was not pantheism as some of his detractors and enemies said.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 26, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Excuse me, I didn't mean Nazis, I meant Austria-Germany in my previous comment in answer to Abu Jibreel (wrong war / Hitler was allied with the Arabs and was close to the Palestinian Mufti of the time, as they shared the common interest of wanting to prevent the Zionist state of Israel, so I got mixed up a little). However, this doesn't alter my point in the least, as this was a policital endeavor of the Ottomans (WWI), and Sufis, as a general rule, refrain from engaging in political affairs/matters.
The Wahhabis of the pre-Saudi-state, though, were closely aligned, and working together with the British Commonwealth, who had interests in India (The Arabian peninsula and much of the Arab world was deemed a trade route to India that the Britsh colonized / occupied so as to protect these interests). Wahhabism, itself, is particially the brain-child of 18th century British espionage. It was this alliance (between the English and the Arabians) that contributed significantly to the decline and eventual collapse of the Ottoman Caliphate, not Sufism.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 26, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

The fact is that Sufis of varying orders are known to moreso celebrate their similarities than emphasize their differences, as they all generally share a similar isnad ('Aliyya). This outlook is rarely shared by the varying sects of Islam, or any religion for that matter. And, as Ahmad Mubarak pointed out, Sufis may conceivably hold more than one tariqa, and many have, including Al Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, As-Sakhawi, and the famed Jalal ad-Din as-Suyuti (r), who was an initiate in the Shadhili, Uwaysi, Suhwarardi, Qadiri and Ahmadi (the tariqa Abu Jibreel ignorantly referred to as kuffar) orders, So, how, I beg, can we consider these orders to be sects, adversely opposed to one another?
And as for Abu Jibreel, I'll state that it was, among other elements, the Wahhabis, in their quest for sovereignty and liberation from the Ottomans and the establishment of an autonomous Saudi State, who contributed to the fall of the Turkish Caliphate. The Malawiyya had nothing to do with this. Read any history book on the subject, or the memoirs of TE Lawrence as a well documented and published source of these historical, factual events. And the Ottoman Turks did have technology, how do you think they managed to stay in power for so long, even into the modern age?... They had modern cannons and firearms and armored vehicles and other weaponry, much of which they acquired from the Nazis, which was the notable fatal mistake of the Ottomans, i.e. siding the Axis (Germany/Austria, Italy and Japan) in order to discourage the Zionists' mission to establish the State of Israel. But this had nothing to do with the Sufis as Abu Jibreel so fallaciously posits.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 26, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Our discussion is exactly why I said, it's problematic to present Sufism in a positive light. I know it's a complet science to be a student with the Sufi Tariqa. The term Tasawwuf with the early scholars, if you read the statements in the article, was understood in the simplest terms. But that was Zuhd. That's also, if the statement is true, what Muhammad bin Sireen meant. "Kun fid dunya ka 'Aabiris sabeel, be in this life as a traveller..." as the Hadith says. Zuhd is simly to focus on the Akhirah rather than the Dunya. That's the definition. And if a person is sincere and adherent to the rules of Islam, then that would show itself and have an effect on his feelings and reactions.

The problem with Sufism, if you focus too much on the 'Ibaadah, holding back from participating in the political change, or putting restrictions on your students, saying they are not allowed to comment on something they haven't been taught yet, like what happened when Napoleon entered Cairo and saw the muslims sitting in the masajid, the attacks in Gaza by the zionists, the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, saying the Taliban are unwelcome (statement from the deobandis) etc.; all this is problematic if you say, well I haven't been taught by a person, whose teaching Sanad goes back to the Prophet aleihis salam, therefore I cannot react to this! Then I cannot demonstrate, speak out or even help them, until someone with a correct (although unverifiable) Sanad comes along and says, let's go, follow me. That's the problem.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 26, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Ahmed Mubarak:
"So by studying with a teacher who has a sanad back to the Prophet(S) I am not referring back to the Prophet(S)? But by studying with a teacher who has no sanad to the Prophet(S) you are referring back to the Prophet(S)? lol"

Laugh all you want. By sanad you either mean he is related to the prophet aleihis salam or his teachers were related to him aleihis salam. But I say yes, just because your shaykh claims to be from the prophet, that in no way protects him from possibly being in error. The important thing here is the evidence and it's argumentation, not the person giving the evidence.

"Oook, modernist/salafis always try to belittle the importance of sanad. Well brother how do you know that what you are reading or studying is in fact the intended MEANING? I mean by your logic, we don't need teachers we just need some books printed by Dar-ul-Salaam and go for it huh?"

Sanad is basically important in Usool. By your standard, non of the Tabi'een who didn't get their teaching directly from the Sahabah, could teach others, because their sanad to the Prophet was non-existant, or that this means they couldn't tell the truth from falsehood?
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 26, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

As salaamu 'alaykum Ahmad.
I apologize for the redundancy in evidences. I hadn't realized that you posted your comments until after I wrote mine. At any rate, I'm through here. Allah only guides the sincere. As for those who are conviced of their arguments to the extent that they've fortified a wall to block out all counter claims, this is a waste of time. The amount of ignorance exhibited by our Umma in our day is profoundly unyielding and only goes further to demonstrate the reality of the words of the Prophet (s) when he stated that, at the end of days, Allah will call back the scholars (in death), leaving in their wake those who are ignorant to the His religion, and the people will then take them as their scholars... misguiding and misguided.
Abu Jibreel says that the Ahmadiyya are kuffar by consensus (he thinks you're referring to the Qadiyani sect). I mean, you can't even begin to debate with anyone without first establishing a base of commonality in terms of religious and historical education and knowledge, so what's the point?...
I'll hollar! Salaam
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 25, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Then you say "And Rasoolullah (saw) himself was not given much information about the soul, as evidenced from this verse "And they ask you concerning the soul. Say: "The soul is one of the things, of which the knowledge is only with my Lord. And of knowledge, you (mankind) have been given only a little." (Al-Israa' 17:85)" What is deemed "a little" to Allah is, to us, a wealth of knowledge that one may spend his life time in pursuit and acquisition of. So, this serves not as evidence to support such an argument in the least.

And as far as the etymology of the term Sufi, this has been an issue of dispute for centuries that has never been settled, yet you state with the certainty that has escaped thousands of scholars for generations that Sufi refers to those who donned woolen raiment! How absurdly impertinent!

And I never stated that zuhd was an end. You did so to forward your argument.I stated quite clearly that zuhd is a discipline within Tasawwuf, but it is an acquired discipline. It is a discipline that requires mastery and continuous, ongoing practice and implementation. If you are to argue against my points, then argue against them, but don't make my point for me for the ease of your refuting it.

Finally, you stated "Let us be clear that Rasoolullah (saw) would have been the 1st to practice Sufism if that indeed facilitated zuhd." I believe the aforesaid has provided a thorough answer to these words of yours.

 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 25, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

These are all matter of the heart, which we as Muslims need exhibit:sincerity, piety, presence of heart, noble intentions, consciousness, conscience, etiquette, morality and character, all traits that Allah and His Messenger call upon every Muslim to perfect, yet all of which have no direct manner of application in fiqh or aqeeda!

So, by your denying the juxposition of the scholars of Ihsan along with the other scholars and scientists of fiqh, hadiths and Qur'anic exegesis, you're blatantly denying, perhaps, the most integral aspect of Islam. One contemporary scholar once said that to destroy the books of Sufism penned by the scholars would be to dispense with 75% of all of the classical works on this religion.

So, your comment that Sufism is a tradition never sanctioned by the Prophet (s) has been retroactively refuted by the Prophet (s) himself, as to deny the Ihsani tradition of the Sufis is to deny more than one-third of the entire religion as demonstrated earlier.Thus to affirm that Allah and His Prophet (s) a commanded the aforementioned spiritual stations, then to assert that he (the Prophet) neglected to teach his Sahaba the means to attain these stations is tantamount to stating that the Prophet did not fulfill his mission as the Messenger of God!

 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 25, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Now, you state that my juxposition of Sufi with other scholastic titles is irrelevant due to the empirical nature if these other sciences. What's strange about this argument is that it totally negates and recklessly disregards the stem-sources of these sciences as they were derived from the Sunna of the Prophet (s) and the Arch Angel Jibril (a), who made reference to these traditions in the following authentic tradition:

As we sat w/the Messenger of Allah (s), a man in pure white clothing w/jet black hair came to us, without a trace of travelling upon him. He sat down before the Prophet (s) bracing his knees against his, resting his hands on his legs, and said: "Muhammad, tell me about Islam," The Prophet said: "Islam is to testify that there is no god save Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and to perform prayer, give in alms, fast Ramadan, and perform the pilgrimage to the House if you can find a way."
The man replied: "You have spoken correctly." and we were surprised that he should ask the question and then confirm the answer. Then he said : "Tell me about faith.", and the Prophet said: "It's to believe in Allah, His Angels, His inspired Books, His Messengers, the Last Day, and in destiny...its good and bad."
"You have spoken correctly" the man continued. "Now, tell me about the manifestation and perfection of God wariness." and the Prophet said: "It is to worship Allah as if you see Him, and to be remain cognizant of the fact that, though you see Him not, He always sees you.

When the visitor left, I (Umar) waited quietly for some time, then the Prophet asked "Do you know who that man was?" and I replied with: "Allah and His Messenger know best." and the Prophet said: "It was Gabriel, who came to teach you your religion (Deen)".

This is a sahih hadith as narrated by Umar ibn al-Khattab (r) in Jam'i Sahih Muslim 9.55/I.37:8.

According to scholars, the 3 branches derived from this tradition are those of Islam (Law), Iman (Aqeeda), and Ihsan (Intuitive knowledge of the Divine). Since the passing of the Prophet (s), Muslims have inevitably derived, formulated and codified various sciences the facilitate the acquisition of knowledge, its evaluation, development, synthesis, application and exegesis for the benefit of the present and future generations, each one that much further from the life time of the Prophet (s) and his noble Consort (r). Thus, they (the scholars) painstakenly developed and refined, over some centuries, the science of fiqh to give expanation to and explanation of the Sacred Law (Islam)... these were the fuqaha and mujtahadeen. Others offered commentary on the finer points of theology and doctrine (Ilm at-Tawheed/Kalaam), and these were the mutakalameem (theologists).
Now, people like you may suffice yourself with these two disciplines alone, but there remains a problem. Fiqh may speak to how we, as Muslims fast, the sifatus Salah, manasik ul-Hajj, and dictict what we can or cannot eat, wear, etc. Ilm al-Kalaam (aqeeda) may answer, to a reasonable extent, Who is Allah? How is Allah? Is He a body? Where is Allah? Who is the Messenger (s)? Are there angels? How do we rationalize man's free will and Allah's Qadr? etc. But Allah and His Messenger (s) called humankind to the hidhest of callings. You may stand in prayer, distracted by the day's happenings are yet to have happened, but the Qur'an has commanded us that we stand before Him as if we see Him, in utter fear, awe and humility. On that Day, we are to stand before our Lord with a qalb salim (sound heart) as He states that He scrutizes the heart of men. The Prophet (s) commanded that we are to love him more than ourselves and our family, that we are to fear Allah with the proper fearing of Him, love Him, as "there is no room in the heart of a believer for love of Him and love of the world; we are to attain to God conciousness (taqwa), tawba (contrition), isdq (scrupulousness), sabr (patience), zuhd (abstinence), tawakkul (reliance [upon Him alone), muhasaba (accountability), raja' (hope [in Allah), ikhlaas (sincerity in action and intention), wara' (abstaining from doubtful matters), rida (satisfaction w/His qadr), shukr (appreciation), tawadu' (humility and modesty), dhikr (meditation and remembrance upon/of Him), qurb (intimacy for Him), mahabba (love of Allah and His Messenger ), ishq (passion to be with Him), Yaqin (knowledge of absolute certainty of Him and the unseen {al-ghayb]), alonf with many other spiritual stations mandated in the Qur'an and Sunna for us to attain to before we pass on to that which we sent ahead.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 25, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Brotherhood of Believers, you obviously were quite hasty in your analysis of my comment, which was in retort to your earlier remarks, as there is no contradiction as you falsely purport. I never stated that other Sufi orders are adverse to the Rifa'i Order, only that the "amazing feats" you refer to,
which were performed as a method of frightening invading Tartars in Baghdad in 656, a century after the passing of our liege-lord, Sidi Ahmad ar-Rifa'i, are frowned upon, even by fellow Rifa'i Sufis, as being a vulgar and unnecessary spectacle, unbecoming of true Tasawwuf, though it had its place and purpose at the time of its advent. Many Tartars turned back in retreat as a result of these miraculous demonstrations and many, still, converted to Islam!
And not agreeing with one's approach or methodolgy certainly differs from harboring outright adversity toward another sect. Obviously some Sufis prefer their respective order to other orders, that's why they (the differing orders) exist, but sectarianism, more than not, views division as a necessity for refraining from heresy and preserving truth, while the turuq at-tasawwuf believe that the many orders represent the many legitimate pathways to the same destination. So, Sufi "sect" is most certainly a misnomer in the general sense
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 25, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

As Shaykh Yacoubi( May Allah preserve him) says: " sanad qisas minal iqtisas al ummah" or Sanad is a specialty or uniqueness from among the unique things of this community. Allah(SWT) revealed the Quran on a man, Sayyidna Rasul, wa Sayyid-al anam(S) So knowledge is extracted from man to man. Before the Quran was ever written down and compiles it resided in the hearts of the sahaba, who lived it. The purpose of sanad is to learn the text and the intended meaning of the text, by learning from someone who has physically learned from someone back to the Prophet(S), that is my brother refering back to the Prophet(S). And please stop putting heritcal statements in my mouth, that I never said. Maybe you are just regurgating soething you heard from a Bilal Phillips Cd or something. I never said, nor incinuated that any man besides the anibiya are masum, fear Allah and say what is correct.
Abdullah ibn Mubarak(R) said: " if it wasn't for this science of sanad, people would have said anything, because text without a living teacher who has mastered the intended meanings can be misunderstood and intrepated. This happened during the time of the Prophet(S) in regards to a ayah where Allah says people will be judged by all wrong doing(itham) and some of the sahaba said how can that be? The Prophet(S) responded that here the word meant shirk.
Another example is when some sahaba ordered another sahaba to perform wudu, despite the fact that, the sahabi in question objected as he had an open wound. They persisited and ordered him to do wudu,subsquently he died as a result. When this news got back to the Prophet(S), he exclaimed: " you kiled him" and the verse: "If they had referred it to the Messenger and to those of authority among them, then those of them whose task it is to find it out would have known the matter" (Qur’an 4:83)

—where alladhina yastanbitunahu minhum, "those of them whose task it is to find it out,"
so just reading books with anyone who has not done istnbat with an unbroken chain is dangerous.

As for what you quoted about Muhammad ibn Sireen(R), that was in reference to some of the early people who were known as sufis as thought they had a special status or the like because of this seemingly outward manifestation of piety, and that was what Ibn Sireen(R) was refuting. And this is another case of just reading books with no hands on knowledge. Ibn Sireen(R) practised taswuf his self, I have visited his grave, his maqam is on sharia ashraf in Cairo, around the corner from Sayyidna Zainab(a.s.) As the saying goes Tasawuf was first a reality without a name, now it is a name without a reality.
And Tawfiq is from Allah
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 25, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

Shaykh Ahmad Zaruruq(R) a shaykh of the Shadhili tariqa said; " Tasawwuf is not wearing the patched wool,

Weeping when singers sing,

Shouting, dancing, or enjoying (these things),

Or behaving like a madman;

Rather, tasawwuf is being pure without turbidity

And following the Haqq, the Qur’an, the din

And humbling the self to Allah, feeling unworthy

Sad, for having committed sins throughout life."

May Allah raise his rank for speaking the truth.

Now in regards to what my dear bro Abu Jibreelsaid in regards to sanad.

That's an unfounded statement. What evidence do you have, that I or my teacher must be traced back to the prophet, for my statements to be true? Allah says, "fain tanaaza'tum fi shay´in faruddoohu il-Allahi war-Rasool", "If you disagree on something refer the answer to that back to Allah and the Messenger". Maybe by your statement, you believe your Shaykh is infallible (Ma'soom). But that is exclusively for the Prophets
??
So by studying with a teacher who has a sanad back to the Prophet(S) I am not referring back to the Prophet(S)? But by studying with a teacher who has no sanad to the Prophet(S) you are referring back to the Prophet(S)? lol
Oook, modernist/salafis always try to belittle the importance of sanad. Well brother how do you know that what you are reading or studying is in fact the intended MEANING? I mean by your logic, we don't need teachers we just need some books printed by Dar-ul-Salaam and go for it huh?
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 25, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Ahmed Mubarak:
The story you mentioned cannot count as an evidence, regardless whether he was claiming to be from the family of the Prophet aleihis salam or not. The Shari'ah evidences are the four sources of the Qur'an, Sunnah, Ijma' as Sahabah and the Qiyas. Also the Majmoo' al Fatawa was written by the son Taqiuddin. I qouted the father Ahmed bin Taymiyyah, who had other rulings and deeper knowledge than his son. And the Ahmadiyyah are Kuffar by consensus of the scholars, because they claimed, there was a new Mujaddid (renewer), who came with changes to the Deen, which is Kufr. Their understanding of the Mujaddid is like that of a Prophet. The Ahmadiyyah movement with the Ghulam was a british project to direct the muslims of Hind in the wrong direction, ie. to Kufr.

The scholars who explained Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim and others were agreed, that the Ahl ul Bait should be honoured, respected, listened to and followed, on the condition that they do not go against the Shari'ah. There is no 'Ismah (infallibility) on the ahl ul bait. That is only for the prophets... They did not define Tasawwuf clearly, but gave general guidelines according to their understanding of the term. Zuhd is defined as prioritizing the Akhirah instead of the Dunya, and that has nothing to do with Sufism. Sufisms final goal is becoming one with Allah (Wahdat il-Wujood), which is foolish and Kufr. It comes from indian philosophy along with the idea of Dhahir and Batini meanings of the Qur'an. Therefore I said that it's problematic to present it in a positive light, because it has always been misleading.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 25, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

Mahmoud Ghaznawai(R) went to the grave sight of Abu Yazid Bistami(R) after he(Abu Yazid) had died. He(Ghaznawi) inquired as to who there was amogst the disciples of Abu Yazid(R) so that he could ask them some knowledge of Abu Yazid's. The people pointe dGhaznawi to an old man, Ghaznawi said: " give me some knowledge of the sage Abu Yazid Bustami(R)" The old man said: " Abu Y azid said that whoever has seen me will never enter the hell fire" Upon that Ghaznawai exclaimed: " what a wonderous statement that is, how is that when Abu Lahab saw the Prophet(S) and was from his family is in the fire?' The old man replied: " Abu Lahab did not see the Prophet(S). who he saw was the orphan of Abdul Muttalib, if he had seen the Prophet(S) then he would have been saved"
So we take from this statement that Abu Lahab through his arrogance could not "see" whom Allah had declared the Prophet(S) to be. That is the Messenger to the worlds. This is no way means that the family of the Prophet(S) has no special rank. for they indeed do as the hadiths I quoted clearly say prove. Also the ayah of tazkiyyah and mubahala, etc. So what I was meaning to intend when I mentioned that Shaykh Yacoubi for example is a descendant of the Prophet(S) and his status in the outward was to convey that this knowledge of tasawuf is a part of the entire corpus of the shariah, which was passed down from generation to generation until this very day, and it is no coincidence that the foremost amongst the sufis who have preserved this knowledge is the blessed Itrah of the Prophet(S)..
And Tawfiq is from Allah!
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

Ahmed Mubarak:
"a) never studied deen with an authorized Shaykh. By authorized we mean a Shaykh who for whatever science he/she is teaching has an unbroken chain of teachers that has reached the Prophet(S)"

That's an unfounded statement. What evidence do you have, that I or my teacher must be traced back to the prophet, for my statements to be true? Allah says, "fain tanaaza'tum fi shay´in faruddoohu il-Allahi war-Rasool", "If you disagree on something refer the answer to that back to Allah and the Messenger". Maybe by your statement, you believe your Shaykh is infallible (Ma'soom). But that is exclusively for the Prophets...

"or b) a person has "studied" the deen but only through a teacher who has no sanad, or has studied at some modern type university which is a reaction to Western criticism so they have rejected the traditional science such as tasawuf on grounds that is corrupt or a deviation. Either case these individuals don't have a firm grasp on Islamic history or its sciences."

Read my quote on where Sufism originated...it was critised by Muhammad bin Sireen.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

and so what as to a personbeing from Ahl Bait?/ wow What about the hadith in Sahih Muslim: " taraktu fikum amran lo tamsulaha la tadilla abadan ay kitab Allah wa AHL BAITI, or the authentic narration in Bayhaqi: " mithala Ahl Baiti ka safeenautul Nuh man Yarkab nijah wa man rafada gharqa..
Being from Ahl Bait is meritous IF it is matched with piety, because they(Ahl Bait) have an unbroken method of training wich goes back to the Prophet(S)..
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

and since you are quoting Ibn Taimiah why don't you read volumes 11 & 12 of majmua al fatawa which is all about Sufism. Where he clearly delineates true tasawuf from the false imposters. Why don't you read the manazil where he outride said that he himself was a Sufi from the Qadiri order lol. He said: of all the turuq the most high and excellent is that of my Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani(R). He also said:' labastu khirqa Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani wa bainana ithnayn" or I have wore the cloak of Abdul Qadir Jilani and between us there is only 2.( Meaning only two people between him and Shaykh Abdul Qadir jilani in the sanad.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

The Qadiri and others will allow some audible recitation of Quran or names of Allah, but only with the supervision of the Shaykh. My Shaykh( May Allah preserve him) said: " if a person is falling out etc inthe hadra(grup dhikr) then know that that person is weak, for the true Sufi is inwardy intoxicated with Allah but outwardly sober" Meaning they NEVER willingly act in contradiction to the Sharia. Now I could go in to different daleels for audible dhikr ect, but quite frankly I have other things to do, then sit and type on the internet all day lol( doesn't seem like it huh?)
Lastly if the tariqas" started out" something else as the brother alluded to, then they still are for example all the evidences of the sufis being engaged with jihad etc and establishing Islam, per the article says were all LATER sufis. The Naqshbandi for example, didn't begin the 19th century fighting the Russians.
Umar Mukhtar(Lion of the Desert) who was a sufi of the Sanusi order, was not an early sufi fighting the Italians. Shaykh Muhammad Hasan(Qadiri) who fought the Italian occupation of Somalia was not an early sufi. The light of his Age Shaykh Uthman don Fodio(Qadiri) who established the Caliphate of Sokoto(Norther NIgeria) in the 17-1800s was not an early sufi. Shaykh Umar Futi(Tijani) who fought the French in Futo Toro, was not an early sufi. Amir Abdul Qadir( Qadiri) of Algeria who fought the French was not an early sufi. Shaykkh Abdullah Daghestani(the SHaykh of Shaykh Nazim Haqqani) who fought the Russians was not an earl sufi.
All the ulama have known that tasawuf is a science of the Sharia, for that reason all of the "Shaykhul Islam's" during the Uthmani caliphate were either Qadiri or Khalwati. So for 500 plus years was the highest Muslim jurist in the land a deviant? The lack of basic Islamic knowledge these days is appauling.
In the end if one doesn't know about a matter then I besech us all to do as the Quran says and: " asal ahl dhikr in kumtum la ta'lamun" Ask those who know if you don't know.
And Allah knows best!
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

To Abu Siraj:
Regarding the Mawlawiyah (mevlevi): They were scholars. They gained sensitive posts in the khilafah goverment system. Their fatawa resulted in the ummah of islam not taking anything from the west, ie. the inventions and new discoveries. So yes they did contribute greatly to the destruction and downfall of the khilafah.

Regarding being from the Prophet. I have to say, right away, so what? Abu Jahl was the Prophets relative, and where is he now? And his memory was great, before being called Abu Jahl, he was called Abul Hakm, the father of wisdom. So being related to the Prophet or remembering the whole of Sahih bukhari, does not protect him from possibly being in error. But I'm talking about the concept of sufism, not the different individuals around the world...
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

Every time you seek to eliminate vices from your heart and better yourself spiritually, you are practising tasawuf. Everythime you stand at night for tahajud you are practising tasawuf. There is no debate as to whether or not Tasawuf is valid, it like all other sciences must be studied and applied properly by a authorized teacher who can teach it. From You brothers comments I doubt that you have ever talked to a real Shaykh who has ijaza in tasawuf because you would know that the faulty premise that tasawuf, is some sort of deviance or has no basis in Sharia is absolutely, historically, factually absurd!!
I used to attend the classes of Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller(May Allah preserve him), when he was teaching th Hikam in Damasus. He won't even allow a person to take tariqa unless the have prayed every salah in congregation for 40 days.Shaykh Muhammad Yacoubi(also a Shadhili) won't take on a student unless they have at least half of the Quran memorized and have studied fiqh etc. I myself took tariqa after I had studied fiqh, aqeeda for over a year with ulama at various mahads in Syria.
It was said sufism is bobbing the head and singing, the tariqa Ahmadiyya doesn't allow any dancing, movement at all in their dhikr.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

abu jibreel said:

The prophet salla allahu 'aleihi wa sallam never said, "i have come to perfect the sufi way" or anything to that effect. That's definately a false or ignorant statement. Neither him nor the Sahabah radhi allahu 'anhum said, that ibaadah should rise up the level of sufism.

Sufism began in Basrah in southern Iraq. The people of Basrah build a place for Abdul Wahid bin Zayd. Abdul Wahid was a friend to Al-Hasan Al-Basri. The people of Basrah were known for their ZUHD, 'Ibaadah and Taqwa, which wasn't the case with the other islamic areas. That's why there was a saying, Fiqh Kufi (the fiqh of the people of Kufah) and 'Ibaadah Basriyyah (the way of praying in Basrah). It was reported via Abu Al-Shaykh Al-Asbahanis Isnad (authority), that Muhammad bin Sireen was told, "There are people here, who prefer wool (Souf) textiles." He said: "Tell them: that a people chooses wool and says, that they imitate the messiah, son of Mary (Al-Maseeh bin Maryam), then I say: Our beloved Prophets guidance (Sunnah) is more dear to us than yours, and our Prophet prefered COTTON (Qutun)." [Fiqh Al-Tassawuf, by Ahmed bin Taymiyyah the father, not the son Taqiuddin]

So being rough and putting on wool, and calling that sufism, is not from the prophet sall allahu 'aleihi wa sallam, who prefered cotton, which is very soft and nice, nor from the Sahabah. Zuhd is defined as prioritizing the akhirah instead of the dunya. It's not ascetism as some say. Ascetism is from indian filosophy. So sufism or tassawuf is actually a misplaced concept...rather let's hold on to the terms that the first muslims used.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

This method of purification comes from Abu Bakr(R) , to Salman al Farsi on down etc. The other turuq known as "turuq Aliya" or the paths from Ali(R) take on different methods, they may focus more on repeated certain ayahs audibly ect to raise there rank, in conjuction with focusing on a certain aspect of Allah's majesty such as Shukr, as in the case of the Shadhilia.
The Qadiri way will focus on faqr(or spiritual poverty) Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani(R) described it as such: " Zuhd( or faqr) is this, a man arrives home to find that his manion has been burnt to the ground, he doesn't get upset but rather goes and finds another place to sleep because to him there is no difference in a mansion or a whole. Meaning the person isn't attatched spiritually to the dunya. How far this is from what the naysayers and ignorant people attatch to the sufi. Ir it is as he said; " Zuhd is to take the dunya from your heart and put in in your hand". Meaning control it don't let it control you. Now I may ask what has this to do with the gross misintrepations of this noble science as the ignorant malign us for?
Why don't people get off the internet and go and ask from the people themseleves the truth of the matter?
But as I was saying.
Now has there been mistakes in tasawuf? Ofcourse
Has there been mistakes in Hadith, Quranic exegesis etc? you bet
BUt do we say that we should take hadiths because Khaleed bin Dareek or others is unnaceptable to the scholars or hadith, or because people have lied on the Prophet(S) and forged hadith? Certainly not
Should say lets not read Quran or doubt the authenticy of the Quran becuse SOME deviant people who claim to be Shia have another surah called "Sauraltul Wali" of course not.
Should we abandon madhabs in fiqh because some people in the name of the madhahib have make errors and breeded sectarianism? of course not
So how in the world are we too disregard tasawuf because some people who ulse the name sufi have done some aggregous actions? When we know, from the quotes of the Imam's in the original article and a study of basic Islamic history that tasawuf is merely a science from amongst the sciences of the
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

Bismi-llah-ir-Rahman-ir-Rahim
Sallallahu ala Sayyidna Muhammad



As-salaamu-alaikum!
Ok, there seems to be a disconnect here, as often as with individuals who have either a) never studied deen with an authorized Shaykh. By authorized we mean a Shaykh who for whatever science he/she is teaching has an unbroken chain of teachers that has reached the Prophet(S) or b) a person has "studied" the deen but only through a teacher who has no sanad, or has studied at some modern type university which is a reaction to Western criticism so they have rejected the traditional science such as tasawuf on grounds that is corrupt or a deviation. Either case these individuals don't have a firm grasp on Islamic history or its sciences. So I believe a quick crash course is needed to remove the doubt and blatent mistruths to strike a blance and arrive at the truth of the matter.
1. Let it known that Tasawuf, Ihsan, Tazkiyyatul nafs are synomous terms. Though notin a lexical sense but in goal. The roots of this science is indeed found in the life of the Messenger(S) , and if it wasn't for brevity I could give a list of ayahs that would be to great for a forum such as this. So I will just start with what all the traditional ulama have given as a basis for this science for the laymen and that is the 'Gabriel Hadith" Without going through the the entire text and chain of the hadith we know Sayyidna Jibreel(AS) came to the Prophet(S) to ask a series of questions. 1. pertaining to Imam(which later the ulama termed aqeeda) 2)Islam(which the ulama later termed as fiqh) 3.) Ihsan( which the ulama later coined as Ihsan, or tasawuf or tazkiyyatul nafs). Basically this is the science as the hadith states: " an ta'bud Allah ka anaka tarahu wa lam takum tarahu wa laken huwa yarak. or It "Ihsan" is to worship Allah as if you see him, though you can't but know that He sees you.(Bukhari and Muslim).
So this science is how to purify the nafs or the self to where the servant is in complete submissiona nd outwardly to Allah. Hence he/she arrives at "Ihsan". Now the term sufi wasn't around during the immediate time of the Prophet(S), but neither was aqeeda ect. There were no Friday night aqeeda classes or hadith classes in the mosque of the Prophet(S). Rather during the generations of the tabi and tabi tabieen, the ulama began to systematically organize the sharia into disciplines ot be studied in a coherrent manner for those who had not witnessed the Prophet(S)., And so the various sciences began to be termed, and we see for example thats why the ulama say : la bas bi mustalah or ther eis no harm in naming things, or with terminolgy. The term sufi was first used by Hasan al Basri(R) in the famous saying where he said: " I say a sufi(ra'aty sufi) circumbulating the Kaaba and I offered him a dirham but he refused. And so the term started to applied to anyone who was known as an ascetic, and to the students of the Shuyukh who focused on this science after mastering the outward sciences such as fiqh etc. In just the same way that the schools of fiqh developed, that is based on juristic methods passed down from the sahabas to their students: ie. Abdullah ibn Umar, to Nafi to Imam Malik(the golden chain am Imam Bukhari says) or Abdullah ibn Masud to Alqama to Ibrahim Nakhai to Hamad to Abu Hanifa, or Abdullah ibn Abbas to Ikrima to Mujahid to Imam Shafi etc, the turuq began to train students in methods passed down from the Prophet(S) via his companions to the rest of the ummah. So we see for example when it comes to purifying the soul ,the Naqshbandi tariqa(named after Bahauldin Naqshband) will train to he student to do muraqaba or after the fard salah, they contemplate the name Allah after freeing the heart from all distractions. There is numerous evidences as Allah says: ina fi ilhtilaf layla wa nahara ayatul ulu bab, al ladhina yatafakaru fi khalqi samawati wa ard wa yaqul subhanak ma khalqta hdha batilan. Surely in the alterations of the day and night are signs for those who reflect, those who ponder on the creations of the heaven and earth and say O lord praise you, surely you have no created this in just.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 24, 2009
Votes: +0

Brotherhood of Believers said:

Assalamu'alaikum Abu Siraj Tariq,

Firstly, In your eager bid to defend Sufism, it seems you have unrealisingly resorted to contradicting your own statements in your comments.

You mentioned:

"And as for the performance of "amazing acts", most likely referring to those feats infamously associated with the Rifa'i Order of Sufis, these are found within a particular historical context and are largely condemned as a general spectacle by nearly all orthodox Sufi orders and authorities."

and you also mentioned:

"Sects, by definition, are generally quite adverse to each other and differ in matters of theology and usul (the framework in which legal jurisprudence is formulated and expounded). Sufi orders are generally well accepting of each other and differ not in these regards, thus they cannot be defined as sects by any stretch of the imagination. "

If indeed the various Sufi orders have minimal or negligible differences in terms of practices and exist without prejudice, then the Rifai order, regardless in historical contexts or in present contexts should and would have been "well and accepted by the other orders." And at the same time, the practice of "amazing acts" by Sufis still exists today, and this is certainly not confined to one particular Sufi order (simple research would also prove the deviant practices of the Naqshbandi Sufi order in present times.) Hence, even by your definition, the Sufis today are indeed divided and not well accepting of each other, which negates your opinion that the term "Sufi sect" is a misnomer. (sect = a group regarded as heretical or as deviating from a generally accepted religious tradition.)

Secondly, the juxtaposition of a "Faqih, Muhaddith, 'Alim, Mufassir" and Sufi is indeed incongruous. Let us define each term mentioned here. A Faqih is an expert in Fiqh/Islamic law. A Muhaddith is one who is very well-versed in Ahadeeth. An 'Alim is a scholar who has comprehensive knowledge on several matters including the Deen. A Mufassir is one who is well versed in the Tafsir of the Holy Qur'an. Muslims are accorded these titles based on what they have studied and what can be observed by others on their level of knowledge and expertise pertaining to these matters. Sufism, on the other hand, is a Tradition (emphasis added). As a tradition, Sufism is renonwned for its emphasis on the mystical aspects of life, i.e. that which cannot be directly observed by others, and which thus are subject to diverse opinions, scrutinies and criticisms. More importantly, some Sufis get overly-engrossed with aspects pertaining to what is hidden, for e.g. the Ruh, and end up adding to the list of bid'ah (innovations). Rasoolullah (saw) himself was not given much information about the soul, as evidenced from this verse "And they ask you concerning the soul. Say: "The soul is one of the things, of which the knowledge is only with my Lord. And of knowledge, you (mankind) have been given only a little." (Al-Israa' 17:85). Hence Sufism, strictly as a tradition, was never prescribed by our beloved Prophet (saw) which gives us sufficient reason to dissociate ourselves from it. While there are ample evidences from Ahadeeth where Rasoolullah (saw) encouraged Muslims to be Alims, Hafizs, etc, Sufism was never included.
Plus, the word al-soofiyyah (Sufism) literally refers to wearing woollen clothes, as the Arabic term "soof" means "wool." This definition of the word is most apt if we were to compare the terms Faqih, Mufassir, Sufi, etc on a literal basis.

Thirdly, you mentioned that:

"zuhd was not a practice in place of Sufism, rather Sufism is the discipline employed to arrive at the station of zuhd."

and you also mentioned:

"rather zuhd (abstemiousness) is one of many spirtual stations Allah and His Messenger call upon the Muslims to attain to in their pursuit of acquiring a spiritual proximity to Allah."

Let us be clear that Rasoolullah (saw) would have been the 1st to practice Sufism if that indeed facilitated zuhd. Zuhd, by simple definition, is enjoining what is halaal and forbidding or abstaining from what is haraam in every moment of our lives. In other words, it is not and end itself. It is a means - a means to attain the reward of Jannah in the hereafter. With reference to your 1st statement, Sufism, a means, has to be practiced in order to reach zuhd, an end. This is clearly a misunderstanding of the term zuhd and hence your statement quoted here is completely misleading and erroneous. In your 2nd statement, you went on to re-define zuhd as a means and the concept of drawing nearer to Allah (swt) as an end. While this is a more correct definition, once again, you end up guilty of contradicting your own statements (i.e. the 2 quoted here). Zuhd is indeed a means - a means to attain Jannah in the hereafter.

And Allah (swt) knows best.

Jazakallahu Khair
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 23, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

Another common blatent nontruth is that sufism "started out" good but somehow ended up deviant. We often hear people say: " well today sufis are not the same" I would humbly ask them to tell that to the Mufti of Syria, Jordan Morrocco, Sudan, Nigeria, Ghana Tarim, Yemen etc all of whom are outward alims of the deen in all their facets as well as Shaykhs in the science of tasawuf. Really I don't know an alim in the world in has the knowledge of and mastery of the science of hadith as say Shaykh Muhammad Yacoubi who by the way is a descendant of the Prophet(S) and has the SHORTEST chain on earth for hadith ul rahma and Sahih Bukhari. These outrageous claims meant to malign this noble science should cease until one has full knowledge of a matter
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 23, 2009
Votes: +0

Ahmad Mubarak said:

Brotherhood said: "Going back to the question on "Who or What is a Sufi really?", we also witness that the Sufis in today's day and age are not one unified global group and neither do they have one Ameer to guide or rule over them. There are further subdivisions like Qadiriya, Chistiya, Suhrawardiya and Naqshbandiyya within the Sufis, and hence, this has resulted in further deviation from the original name "Muslim" whereby, for e.g., one calls himself "Qadiriya Sufi Muslim" or "Naqshbandiyya Sufi Muslim." Such naming and labelling of Muslim individuals and groups only creates increased sectarianism and communalism within the Ummah, and hence the creation of many more groups, sub-groups and sub-sub-groups which see each other as hostile"

The "Divisions" which you speak about, are not different sects or ideologies in some kind of perpetual war with one another. Rather they are simply ways( hence the word tariq) to purify ones sould according to certain prescribed methods handed down from the time of the Prophet(S) until now. For example the way of the Shadhlliya is focused on showing shukr to Allah for what one has and Allah increses him or her in spiritual benefit. The way of the Naqshbandi is through silent dhikr and contemplation on the name Allah, until one has reached a goal The way of the Qadiriya is denyong ones self(spiritually) until Allah raises their state. So they are like the madhabs of the spiritual world. And often times a person will belong to more than one order at a time. The very high sufi Shaykhs( such as my own) can give ijazas in every path.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 23, 2009
Votes: +0

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

Noteworthy, also, is the fact that the Mawlawi Sufis of Turkey had nothing to do with the destruction of the Caliphate as stated fallaciously by Abu Jibreel in his comment. The Mawlawiyya had nothing to gain by furthering the decline of the Ottomans and actually were nearly run out of Turkey by Attaturk's secular regime after WWI.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 23, 2009
Votes: +1

Abu Siraj Tariq Al-Amin said:

In answer to Abu Jibreel's remarks, Sufism is not based on bobbing and moving one's head in dhikr, dancing and singing, and performing "amazing" feats, as he so loutishly puts it. Many, perhaps most Sufis are adversely opposed to such demonstrations and practices as whirling, dancing and singing or chanting aloud. And as for the performance of "amazing acts", most likely referring to those feats infamously associated with the Rifa'i Order of Sufis, these are found within a particular historical context and are largely condemned as a general spectacle by nearly all orthodox Sufi orders and authorities.
And zuhd is not a concept that exists in lieu of Sufism or in it's stead, as Abu Jibreel so blatantly misrepresents, rather zuhd (abstemiousness) is one of many spirtual stations Allah and His Messenger call upon the Muslims to attain to in their pursuit of acquiring a spiritual proximity to Allah. Thus, zuhd was not a practice in place of Sufism, rather Sufism is the discipline employed to arrive at the station of zuhd.

As for Brotherhood of Believers, he states firstly that those in pursuit of ibaada (worship) and purification of the soul (tazkiyya) need not and should not be labelled Sufis. He states so obviously due to his misunderstanding of this concept. Sufi is no more a "label" than Faqih, Muhaddith, 'Alim or Mufassir. No Muslim would think to do away with these scientists, nor the sciences they study and expound, so why the biased against Sufis and Sufism? Secondly the idea that the Sufi orders (i.e. Chishtiyya, Naqshbandi, Qadiri, Shadhili, etc.) contribute to further decension and sectarianism is one saturated in ignorance and only serves to prove the lack of knowledge prevalent in our Umma today. Sects, by definition, are generally quite adverse to each other and differ in matters of theology and usul (the framework in which legal jurisprudence is formulated and expounded). Sufi orders are generally well accepting of each other and differ not in these regards, thus they cannot be defined as sects by any stretch of the imagination.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 22, 2009
Votes: +1

abu jibreel said:

I think it is problematic to present Sufism in a positive light. The groups described in the article may have been good in the beginning, but in the end they were part of the factors, that lead to the destruction of the khilafah, eg. the Mawlawiyah sufis.

Also the imams of the past did not mean, that Tasawwuf was to escape from the world - ie. to escape from lifes affairs and neglect them. Actually the term Zuhd is what the prophet aleihis salam and his sahabah radhi Allahu 'anhum practised and praised.

So Sufism should be seen in its actual light. Sufism is understood to mean, that you bob and move your head in dhikr, dancing and singing, and performing "amazing" feats. This is something that was mixed with the practises of Islam, so therefore it is dangerous. Zuhd simply means, that you are contend with what you have, and give out instead of piling up your wealth. Everything is done in moderation. There should be more focus on the Akhirah, which is where the real life is, without us neglecting or forgetting our portion of this life.

Allah says, "Wa la tansa naseebaka min ad-dunya..." "but do not forget your protion of this life..."

Just a note, would it possible for the author to put the arabic quotes from the imams? To help us understand his intentions further...
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 21, 2009
Votes: +4

ALI said:

Aslaam. Whether you call yourself Ahle-Hadith, Sunni (Brelvi or Deobandi), Shia or any other and you do not support the fundamentals of an organised Islamic State according to the Quran, Sunnah, Ahle-Bayt and Sahabah, which is a Khalifah State, then I'm sorry to say that you are almost a Kafir or Fasik or Fajir and the curse of Allah and His angels is on them.

Westerners should realise Sufi or not Sufi, Muslims will Inshallah appoint a Ruler who will rule the Ummah of the Muslims which will be known as a Khalifah.

Life and reality or this world is Black or White. Muslim Ummah is living in darkness in this age and soon there will be light. Western powers should get used to this and realise the Khalifate is on its way as promised by Allah Ta'la...
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 20, 2009
Votes: +1

sister said:

Some times it can be a jungle out there with what is being told and presented. this article really has given insight into sufism and the real history. jzk
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 20, 2009
Votes: +1

Imam Ganarul said:

Now that Westerners are beginning to aprreciate the role of Sufis against extremism, Wahabis are awakened to the importance of Sufis they malign.
Sufis have been called kafirs and innovators all throughout the Wahabi teachings, it is only natural that westerners will try their best to court the side of Sufis.

But we can always breath a sigh of relief because Sufis are the last Muslims to sell their souls.
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 18, 2009
Votes: -3

Brotherhood of Believers said:

Assalamu'alaikum

This is indeed an excellent article on the contributions of the Sufis to the Muslim Ummah.

However, the categorization of Muslims into Sufis and Non-Sufis begs the question - Who or What is a Sufi really? With reference to the principles of Sufism and etc mentioned in the article, it makes one ponder that if all these descriptions depict a Sufi, then what depicts a Muslim? Do Muslims who have attained those principles mentioned in Imam Nawawi's al-Maqasid become Sufis by default? It is certainly true that all Muslims should strive to increase their faith and cleanse their Ruh through various acts of Ibadah. But should we also classify those who have attained (or claim to have attained) such spiritual enlightenment as Sufi? Why should we make such classifications when it is stated in the Holy Quran: "It is He Who has named you muslims, both before and in this (Revelation); " (22:78)

Going back to the question on "Who or What is a Sufi really?", we also witness that the Sufis in today's day and age are not one unified global group and neither do they have one Ameer to guide or rule over them. There are further subdivisions like Qadiriya, Chistiya, Suhrawardiya and Naqshbandiyya within the Sufis, and hence, this has resulted in further deviation from the original name "Muslim" whereby, for e.g., one calls himself "Qadiriya Sufi Muslim" or "Naqshbandiyya Sufi Muslim." Such naming and labelling of Muslim individuals and groups only creates increased sectarianism and communalism within the Ummah, and hence the creation of many more groups, sub-groups and sub-sub-groups which see each other as hostile.

In sum, Allah (swt) is the sole witness on whether or not a Muslim has attained a high level of spirituality and taqwa. Classifying Muslims based on our knowledge and perception of their Iman would be misleading in many contexts. Rasoolullah (saw) himself never used the word "Sufi" in either addressing himself or his companions. While we recognize and accept that in a certain time in history, people called themselves Sufis, one of the most essential aspects of unifying the Ummah today would be to abolish various "nomenclature" that keep the Muslims divided ideologically and emotionally.

Jazakallahu Khair
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 17, 2009
Votes: +4

Salmah said:

Jazakum Allahu khayran for presenting me with a different view of Sufism than I had before (which was the western-supported type)
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 16, 2009
Votes: +0

Quazi Imtiaz said:

as'salamu alaykum,
i think its the non-muslims trying to divide the muslims by all possible way they can. i went to a sifi scholar's lecture last week and some of his words and actions were very noticeable and must be appreciated.
jazaka'Allah khayr
quazi
 
report abuse
vote down
vote up
June 16, 2009
Votes: +0

Write comment
quote
bold
italicize
underline
strike
url
image
quote
quote
smaller | bigger

busy