Tag Archives: sufi

The Jihad among the Sufi Tariqa & Sufi Fanaticism

“O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth.” (Qur’an 4:157)

﷽ 

Though the above particular text was directed towards the Jewish and Christian communities, it applies to the Muslim community as well.  This is the case simply because it has nothing to do with the application of law but a general admonition that applies at all times.

Dear reader, do take note that this article is primarily written from the perspective of a team member relating actual experiences and interactions with various tariqa.

“But as for those who strive hard in Our cause -We shall most certainly guide them onto OUR PATHS that lead unto Us: for, behold, Allah is true with the doers of good.” (Qur’an 29:69)

One tariqa to rule them all, one tariqa to find them, One tariqa to bring them all, and  through the murshid bind them!

We also want to say that, from the outset, Sufism and the teachings of Sufism have been an integral part of Islam from the very beginning. Sufism has been transformative in the lives of many people. Just as Islam has a branch of science for creed, so that we have purified thoughts about our creator and a branch of science for the law, so that we have interactions with fellow human beings that are of a purified nature, it has a branch of science for the purification of the heart.

This can be readily seen from our article here: 

However, just as Muslims have clashed over the various narratives in regard to what is the correct creed and what is the correct understanding of the law, so we have clashed over which methodology for the purification of the heart is best.

We are posting this because all too often there is a ‘Public Relations’ game that is being played for people who know little to nothing about Islam.

It is the case of rival siblings trying to get the parent to punish the other.   Beyond the many rivalries and divisions among the Muslims, there probably is none fiercer than the internal conflicts among our brothers from the ‘Ahl Sunnah’.  Especially when it comes to the issues of creed.

Even more fierce than the bloodshed over issues of creed is the fealty given to Sufi Shaykhs and allegiance to their various competing Tariqa’s.

Today the west is being told that the ‘innocent’ Muslims aka ‘Sufis’ are in a struggle with the ‘Wahhabi’ or extreme Muslims.  Thus, the hope is that the western powers, intelligence apparatus, and so forth will listen to these cries of ‘wolf, wolf’ and bring their might down to bare upon their rivals.

Sufism is being touted as the ‘non-violent’, ‘apolitical’ version of Islam. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Truth be told, the various rival Sufi factions do not have the political or financial influence they once did.  Although certain groups are cozy with certain political powers.

Middle East & North Africa

  • Safavid Empire (1501–1736) – Originated from the Ṣafaviyya Sufi order in Ardabil, which transformed into a powerful Shi‘i state in Persia.
  • Mamluk Sultanate (1250–1517, Egypt & Syria) – Strong patrons of Sufi institutions, endowed khanqahs (lodges), and integrated Sufis into religious life.
  • Ottoman Empire (1299–1924) – Deeply tied with Sufism: Mevlevis, Bektashis, Halvetis, Naqshbandis flourished under their patronage. The Janissaries were historically linked to the Bektashi order.
  • Ayyubid Sultanate (1171–1260) – Saladin and successors promoted early Sufi institutions, building khanqahs in Cairo and Damascus.
  • Almohad Caliphate (12th–13th c.) – While initially reformist, many later rulers patronized North African Sufi saints.
  • Marinid Dynasty (1244–1465, Morocco) – Major sponsors of Sufi zawiyas, especially tied with the Shadhili order.
  • Saadi Dynasty (16th–17th c., Morocco) – Claimed sharifian and mystical legitimacy; closely linked to Moroccan Sufi networks.
  • Alaouite Dynasty (17th c.–present, Morocco) – Continued deep integration with Moroccan Sufi orders.

Persia & Central Asia

  • Timurid Empire (1370–1507) – Supported Naqshbandiyya and Kubrawiyya; Sufi sheikhs often had major political influence.
  • Mughal Empire (1526–1857) – Profoundly influenced by Sufism, especially the Chishtiyya order; Akbar and later emperors associated themselves with Sufi saints.
  • Delhi Sultanate (1206–1526) – Closely linked to Chishti Sufis, who shaped India’s Islamic culture.
  • Karakhanids (9th–13th c.) – Early patrons of Sufis in Central Asia.
  • Khoqand Khanate (18th–19th c., Central Asia) – Heavily influenced by the Naqshbandiyya-Mujaddidiyya.

Sub-Saharan Africa

  • Bornu Empire (1380–1893, Chad/Nigeria) – Supported Qadiriyya Sufi networks.
  • Sokoto Caliphate (1804–1903, Nigeria) – Founded by Usman dan Fodio, a Qadiriyya scholar and Sufi reformer.
  • Senegambian Muslim States (18th–19th c.) – Founded by leaders of the Tijaniyya and Qadiriyya (e.g., Umar Tall’s empire).
  • Moroccan-ruled West African emirates often spread Sufism through political expansion.

South & Southeast Asia

  • Bahmani Sultanate (1347–1527, Deccan) – Strong ties with Chishtis and Qadiris.
  • Deccan Sultanates (15th–17th c.) – Patronized Sufi saints; many rulers sought legitimacy through them.
  • Aceh Sultanate (1496–1903, Indonesia) – Promoted Sufism (especially Shattariyya and Qadiriyya).
  • Malacca Sultanate (1400–1511, Malaysia) – Spread Islam through Sufi-influenced networks.
  • Brunei Sultanate – Deeply intertwined with Sufi Islam.

The Ottoman Empire, for example, was certainly not ‘Wahhabi”

This should be an eye-opener for many.   Timothy Winter (Abdal-Hakim Murad) is certainly no friend of Wahhabism.

and we find the following statement: http://masud.co.uk/ISLAM/ahm/AHM-Ottoman_spirituality.htm

This Sufi vision cherished by simple cavalrymen gave the Turks a military prowess whose achievements in some ways recalled the early conquests of Islam. The first Ottoman sultans were urged to continue the fight for the faith by spiritual guides whose fame and sanctity had brought them into the intimate circle of the ruler, thereby adding to his charisma. The most prominent example was Ak Semseddin (d.1459), the physician, mystic poet and Sufi instructor (“seyh) who encouraged Mehmed II to conquer Constantinople, and who preached the first Friday sermon at the former cathedral of Aya Sofya. [ii] The power of his spiritual impact, as well as the Islamic sophistication of the ruler, are evident in much of Mehmed’s poetry, as in a lyric poem where the sultan uses the classical Sufi metaphors of spiritual drunkenness to affirm his dependence on his preceptor:”

So now we turn our attention to the Sufi, Ibn Tumart.  Ibn Tumart traveled to Baghdad where he met with contemporaries of Imam Al Ghazali as well as his students. This interaction ignited a flame, a passion within Ibn Tumart, who came back to the Maghrib (North Africa) and virtually slaughtered all those who did not accept the Ashari’ theological creed.

Here is an interesting extract:

“It is nothing but bigotry and small-mindedness, if not political. Indeed, in Morocco, when Al-Mahdi b. Toumart returned from his travels seeking knowledge in the East, meeting many great Ash’ari scholars, like Al-Kiya Al-Harrasi. He proceeded to disseminate the school throughout Morocco, when he claimed to disseminate the school throughout Morocco. When he claimed to be the Mahdi, and established the Almohad state, he obliged the population to adhere to the school, and fought against the school of the early Muslims, dismissing the previous Almoravid state as “anthropomorphists”,  when they actually were upon the way of the early Muslims in their beliefs. He called his own dynasty  Muwahhidun (“Monotheist”). He also opposed the Maliki school and the scholars of Morocco and Andalusia who adhered to it. In this way, enmity developed between the two groups; and the inherent cause was political.”  

Source: -The Hadith Scholar, Professor ‘Abdullah Guenon Al-Hasani, President of the Morrocan League of Scholars and Member of the Islamic World League, Mecca’  taken from page 326 (Notions that Must Be Corrected by Shaykh Muhammad b ‘Alawi Al-Maliki Al Hasani)

We would encourage you to read an account of Ibn Tumart’s slaughter of Muslims who opposed his Sufi Sunni Ashari vision of Islam.

The Rivalry between the Sufis factions.

The rivalry between various Sufi /Sunni factions is unreal.

Here are some articles by Shaykh Gibril Fouad Haddad (himself a follower of the Shafi madhab of the Ahl Sunnah, a believer in the Ashari school of creed and follower of the Naqshabandi Sufi Tariqa.

Thus, he fired off some refutations of the followers of a rival Sufi order. The followers of this Sufi order follow the Shafi madhab of the Ahl Sunnah, they believe in the Ashari school of creed and follow the Rif’ai Sufi Tariqa.

You can see the following refutations of them here:

http://www.sunnah.org/fiqh/refuting_the_habashis.htm

As well as this one: http://www.livingislam.org/o/murb_e.html

In the above article, there are also some harsh words for fellow Sunni Muslims. This time, those who follow the Maliki madhab of the Ahl Sunnah, believe in the Ashari school of creed and follow the Darqawi Sufi Tariqa.

Yet you can see the refutations of those who follow the Naqshabandi Sufi Tariqa from the followers of the Darqawi Sufi Tariqah here: http://asadullahali.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/esoteric-deviiation-in-islam.pdf

Most likely the following statement was not very well appreciated by the Naqshabandi Haqqani Sufi Tariqa:

“There is a man associated with Shaykh Nazim al-Haqqani who holds a belief of this nature. He wrote: “As with many things that need changing, I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: it probably won’t happen until Sayiddina Mahdi, alayhi wa Salam, reveals his presence. Until then, I do not consider my participation in the paper-money system any kind of sin whatsoever.” The question of paper-money is irrelevant here. What is evident is that the coming of the Mahdi could somehow exonerate some, or indeed any, wrongdoing. Later this statement was tacitly endorsed by Dr. Fouad Haddad (who would appear to be the qaddem/representative of Shaykh Nazim) in a new statement: “Waiting on the Mahdi is part of the Sunna,” written immediately after the aforementioned statement was issued. In addition, they seem to support the well known Shi’a story of the ‘occultation’ of the Mahdi. I shall provide more details later. One of his students confided to us that Shaykh Nazim often refers to the coming of the Mahdi in his speeches.”

Source: (pg 103 Esoteric Deviation In Islam by Shaykh Umar Vadillo)

Then another refutation of the Naqshabani Haqqani Tariqa, by fellow followers of the Ahl Sunnah, who follow the Hanafi and Shaf’i schools of jurisprudence and follow the Ashari and Maturdi schools of theology; and follow the Rifa’i Sufi Tariqa.

http://www.aicp.org/index.php/islamic-information/text-pdf/english/42-the-irrefutable-proof-that-nazim-alqubrusi-negates-islam  

The above refutation was done by Shaykh Samir Kadi, who says that he is ‘An Ashari in creed, a Shaf’i in jurisprudence and a Rifa’i in Tariqa.

Sharif Abu-al-‘Abbas Lakhdar Sidi Ahmed El Idrissi Tamacini of the Tijani Sufi Tariqa was involved in a long and protracted conflict with another faction of the Tijani Sufi Tariqa over a prayer entitled “The Pearl of Perfection” should it be said 11 or 12 times.  Tijani Sufi killed Tijani Sufi.

Al-Hajj ‘Umar b Sa’id Tall, himself a leading Tijani Sufi shaykh, waged ruthless wars against members of the Mukhtariyya Qadiriyya Sufi Tariqa.

What is the fruit of all this killing of Muslims by Muslims?

Shaykh Muhammad ibn al-Habib, master of the Darqawi Sufi order, is said to have commented about a Tijani aspirant who visited him.

“A Tijani faqir came to Shaykh Ibn al-Habib once while we sat with him. He informed the Shaykh that in the Tijani tariqa they did not have a Shaykh and that they did not consider one necessary. It was enough to follow the guidance of Sidi Ahmad Tijani. Our Master was silent for a while before he spoke. Then he raised his eyes and looked at the young man. ‘A dead midwife,’ he told him, ‘cannot deliver a live child.’ The faqir turned pale and then buried his head in his hands and wept from the depth of his being.”

Source: (https://bewley.virtualave.net/diwanpre.html)

The Tijani Sufi Tariqa has made some very interesting claims about their Shaykh. You can see that here:

I would direct the reader to page ’19’ of the text; where their Shaykh is called “Khatam al-Wilayah al-Muhammadiyyah

You can contrast this with the following:

http://nurmuhammad.com/NaqshbandiSecrets/qutbanniyya.htm

Please see the section with the title:

THE RANK OF SULTAN UL AULIYA

“Everything that you know of is under the spiritual control of the Sultan ul Auliya. He is the one who is in charge of all mankind in this universe. He is also in charge of all the world of Jinn’s and Angels as the Sultan of Mankind is also in charge of all the Jinn and of all Malaika (Angels). This Maqam (station) of Sultan ul Auliya is a Maqam related to the hearts. Not even a thought can be comprehended of the greatness of this Maqam. This Maqam in this time is related to Moulana Sheik Nazim.”

“Moulana has been given the power to be in every heart of every human being in this universe. He also has the immense power of being able to make the Divine Light of Allah Almighty and all the 124,000 Prophets to enter into the hearts and bodies of all humanity in just one moment.

Also, very interesting is that both the Naqashabandi Sufi and their rivals, the Tijani Sufi, have said that ‘Imam Mahdi‘ will come from their ranks!

So watch as these and other rival Sufi groups rumble over this issue in the future.  May Allah (swt) protect us and safeguard the unity of Muslims!

An experience from one of our team members:

When Imam Abdul Latif Finch was in Singapore some years back, he made the comment that “When I was a Shadhili I was hardly receiving any openings, but the moment I became a Tijani I received so many openings.”

I was having a light moment with a friend of mine and I said to him, “I can guarantee you that somewhere on this planet there is someone saying, “I was a Tijani and I hardly received any openings, but the moment I became a Shadhili I received so many openings.”

Prima Qur’an Conclusion:

When you look at the kind of loyalty and even blind fanaticism and sycophants that surround these Shaykhs and various competing Sufi Tariqah, it could make for some very tragic situations in the future.

Realize this dear brothers and sisters.  Allah (swt) has not given all of his blessings to any single creature.  The proof of this is that even his most noble creation, Muhammed (saw) was not given the blessing to read and to write.

If anyone thinks that this is speaking in an irreverent manner, then the question needs to be put to them.  “Is Allah (swt) in need of Muhammed (saw) or is Muhammed (saw) in need of Allah (swt)?”

Only Allah (swt) the Self Sufficient.

Allah (swt) reminds us concerning those who elevated the station of Christ Jesus son of Mary (alayhi salam) to an extreme.

“The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly woman. And they both used to eat food. See how We make the revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away!” (Qur’an 5:75)

As well as the following statement in the Qur’an:

“Blessed is He who, if He willed, could have made for you [something] better than that – gardens beneath which rivers flow – and could make for you palaces.” (Qur’an 25:10)

Whatever station, whatever claim, ever baraka or blessing that anyone ever makes know that Allah (swt) is capable of doing more than that!

We have not even scratched the surface at the tip of an iceberg in regard to the gravity of this situation.  I haven’t even touched the many rivalries of the Indian subcontinent, nor those of the Middle East and Turkey.   I have no doubt that a multitude of volumes could be written detailing and documenting the rival claims, rivalries, and bloodshed between the various competing Sufi Tariqa

The issue with the various competing Sufi factions is that they show a face of peace and cooperation and tolerance, but underneath the thin veneer is oftentimes some disquieting agenda in which the dominance of their particular tariqa over all others is sadly the goal.

People will claim that the Shaykh can do this and that they witnessed that.  We have seen them all make contradictory and competing claims. Our question to all these Shaykhs is that when they do these miracles and have these visions and dreams, the question is this.  “How much of that is Allah, and how much of it is you?”

If Allah were to punish men for their wrong-doing, He would not leave, on the (earth), a single living creature: but He gives them respite for a stated Term: When their Term expires, they would not be able to delay (the punishment) for a single hour, just as they would not be able to anticipate it (for a single hour).” (Qur’an 16:61)

“But as for those who strive hard in Our cause -We shall most certainly guide them onto OUR PATHS that lead unto Us: for, behold, Allah is true with the doers of good.” (Qur’an 29:69)

“And each one hath a goal toward which he is turned; so vie with one another in good works. Wheresoever you may be, Allah will bring you all together. Lo! Allah is Able to do all things.” (Qur’an 2:148)

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

6 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

My experience with Salafis and Sufis (Not always chalk and cheese)

“O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it], then indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted.” (Qur’an 4:135)

﷽ 

I thought that for today’s entry I would share with you dear readers some of my personal experience with those who call themselves Salafi’ or follow what is known as daawat salafiyyah” as well as those who call themselves Sufi’ and are associated with Sufi Tariqah (spiritual orders).

For the record I am writing this as someone who is not a Salafi’ nor do I follow the manhaj that is known as “daawat salafiyyah”. I am inclined towards some Sufi’ practices -with the exception of tawassul, and I do not belong to any tariqah.


But I want to share my experience with some people who are affiliated with or identify with either Salafi’ or Sufi’.


When I was in Manama Bahrain at the Discover Islam training centre there was a man who was driving us around in one of the vans around the city. To be honest I thought any moment we would meet our Lord because of the way he was driving. I was doing a loud dhikr to myself la ilaha il law lah. Some other brothers in the van joined in. One brother also began to do the dhikr but his Shaykh put his hand on his shoulder and said, “We don’t do that.” That was it. He didn’t condemn me or the others, he simply said of himself and his student that they do not do this.


Also, I observed at the great Masjid in Manama that the tourist were allowed to go into the Masjid unrestricted. They had to wear appropriate attire but they could go anywhere. All the way up to the niche in the wall facing the qiblah.

The hotel I stayed in Manama there was a small Masjid nearby and I can tell you that the Imam and nearly everyone in that masjid prayed in the style of brothers who are known to practice, ” daawat salafiyyah” and at that time I was following the Maliki school of jurisprudence and I was praying with my arms to the side (as is one of the positions of the Maliki school). No one said anything to me, everyone greeted me, returned my salam, and smiled. They were all very kind.

The same can be said about the people of Discover Islam, whom I gather were a mixture of Salafiyyah’ and Ikwani’ influences.


Whereas when I went with a particular Tariqah (sufi group) to a place in Malaysia called, ‘hulul langat’, just outside of Kuala Lumpur. We had a wonderful group dhikr together. However one day one of the murids was relating how the shaykh got sick and blew his nose in the tissue paper. So one of the followers of the tariqah took the tissue paper out of the wastebasket boiled it in water and drank the water. I couldn’t have been more disgusted.


There was another time when I was with a tariqah in Singapore ‘Firqat ul Huda’ the sect of guidance, a Qadiri tariqah. Beautiful beautiful dhikr, wouldn’t trade it for anything. Yet one time of the murids invited me to his house for tea. Very hospitable brother. He then discussed with me about the hadith about the Blessed Messenger (saw) existing before Adam (as). So then he asked me what I understood about “The Prophet being called the Nur of Allah.” I told him that I thought it meant that he was an illuminating guide and representative of Allah (swt). He replied, “brother the light of Allah IS Allah.” I thanked him for the tea and the hospitality and I told him that he went to a place that I could not follow him in. I parted ways with him and have never seen him since.


I witnessed first hand with my own eyes as I volunteered at the Sultan Mosque in Singapore (predominantly Sunni/Shaf’i/Ashari/Balawi) I have witnessed first-hand tourists being clapped at and shooed away from the Masjid.


One brother came up to me and said, “how do we know they don’t have maniyy (sperm) on their underwear.” To which I exclaimed, “How do you know that I don’t?” Are we going to ask everyone to drop their pants for inspection before they enter the Masjid?”

Now this was coming from someone who

a) followed a madhab -Shafi’i

b- Ashari I cannot clarify this but I’ll assume because

c) he was associated with the Balawi Tariqah.


Whereas in the same Masjid (Sultan Mosque), I witnessed a Salafi brother bring his young daughter to the afternoon salah (prayer) and pray beside him (he would pray at the furthest end so his daughter would be between him and a wall) -this was done to respect the other’s views, and even then many of them shook their head at the brother.

Then came the ban of Mufti Menk from Singapore! Now I am not a follower of Mufti Menk and again it is clear that he is following what is called, ” Daawat-us-Salafiyyah” -which for those who may not know what this means it is a claim to be following what the Blessed Messenger (saw) and his companions followed.

So Mufti Menk was banned from Singapore because someone asked him if we could say or respond to ‘Merry Christmas’ in kind with ‘Merry Christmas’ and he replied, ‘no’. Now because those Sunni Muslims who follow schools of jurisprudence and who are often associated with Sufi Tariqah are rivals of those Sunni Muslims who claim not to follow a particular school of jurisprudence this was an opportunity for them to ban Mufti Menk from Singapore.

Personally, I thought the way Mufti Menk was dealt with was quite cowardly. After all, if someone would have asked Mufti Menk can we celebrate the ‘Mawlid An Nabi’ (celebration of the Blessed Prophet’s birthday) he would say, ‘no we cannot’. It’s not like this was some personal swipe at Christianity. Mufti Menk comes from a school of thought that doesn’t recognize such urf-customs, or anything such as bid’ah hasanah – (innovations that encourage good and do not contravene establish practices of the faith).

I just thought it was strange that since Christians have been such a huge presence in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt etc…that surely there was something from the traditional schools that would warrant replying, ‘Merry Christmas‘ or something that the followers of Imam Shafi’i could have used to refute his (Mufti Menk) position.

I’m telling you this dear reader because not everything is chalk and cheese. Not all of these groups are alike and many of them even have subgroups. There is fierce competition among rival Salafi groups just as there is fierce competition among rival Tariqah groups.

However, as Muslims, we are always commanded to speak plainly, truthfully, and justly about one another even if that group does not share our world view or our approach to the Qur’an and Sunnah.

May Allah (swt) guide us all to what is beloved to Allah (swt).

“And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. And remember the favor of Allah upon you – when you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favor, brothers. And you were on the edge of a pit of the Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus does Allah make clear to you His verses that you may be guided.” (Qur’an 3:103)

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Pro Sufi & Anti Sufi Hadith Ascribed to Imam Malik on Tassawuf

“Turn you back in repentance to Him, and fear Him: establish regular prayers, and be not among those who join gods with Allah,- Those who split up their Religion, and become (mere) Sects,- each party rejoicing in that which is with itself!” (Qur’an 30:31-32)

“O mankind! there hath come to you a direction from your Lord and a healing for the (diseases) in your hearts,- and for those who believe, a guidance and a Mercy.” (Qur’an 10:57)

﷽ 

When looking at the issue of forgeries of hadith one does not have to look further than the pro-Sufi and anti-Sufi forces within the ‘Ahl Sunnah‘.

Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak said, “The isnad is from the religion; were it not for the isnad anyone could say anything they wanted.”

Source: (Reported by Muslim in the introduction to his Sahih, vol. 1, pg. 9, Dar Taibah.)

The isnad -is the chain of narration.

The word hadith in the title of the article is used in the Arabic sense of a report. Thus, for the purposes of this article it is not necessarily a statement attributed to the Blessed Prophet (saw).

Anyone who has been among people who claim to practice ‘Sufism‘ and/ or have inclinations towards a branch of study in Islam called ‘tassawuf‘ has most likely heard innumerable times the following statement attributed to Imam Malik.

“He who practices tassawuf without learning Sacred Law corrupts his faith (tazandaq) , while he who learns Sacred Law without practicing Tasawwuf corrupts himself (tafassaqa).”

Now when I studied at Zaytuna I was told time and again the importance of being connected in an ‘unbroken‘ chain of sacred knowledge that goes all the way back to the Blessed Messenger (saw) himself.

Of course, what I’m about to say may seem cynical to you the reader, but it is the atmosphere that was created around Zaytuna when I was there.

The atmosphere seemed to say to me, “Don’t you dare question anything that is presented to you, because after all who are you to question? You don’t have the requisite tools; and you didn’t study under a Shaykh who toes the line that we tell you to tow. Therefore, all of your sincere lines of inquiry are invalid.”

So let us say that someone has reservations about giving their complete allegiance (the custody of their soul) to a Shaykh. However, this person agrees to or understands the necessity of following someone learned in jurisprudence.

Thus, the concept of the following someone learned in jurisprudence is used as a jump-off point for handing over complete sovereignty of your soul to a Spiritual guide or Shaykh. Many who call themselves ‘Sufi’ today use the following modus operandi:

Start by getting the spiritual aspirant the necessity of following someone learned in jurisprudence. Use the idea of following Imams in jurisprudence to advance their position. Thus, if Imams like Shaf’i and Malik are seen to be in favor of Sufism or ‘Tassawuf‘ then whom are we to question it!

So even until today, you have world-renown people like Shaykh Hamza Yusuf attributing such statements to Imam Malik.

You can see the following video where he attributes the above-mentioned statement to Imam Malik. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_5d9c2UdiU @ 1:14 in the video you can hear Shaykh Hamza attribute this statement to Imam Malik

Interestingly the term Sufi was applied to those given the appellation “Mutazalites” long before it was applied to Junayd.

This is according to the research of Christopher Melchert in his article: “The Piety of the Hadith Folk” which can be found here: http://www.ilmgate.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/The-Piety-of-the-Hadith-Folk.pdf

“The term Sufi was applied to Mu’tazili ascetics before it was to Junayd and his circle. Early Mu’tazili ascetics and the later Karramiyya, who more or less absorbed Mu’tazili asceticism, sometimes exalted complete renunciation of normal gain, counting it best to live off alms.”

Origins of the term ‘Ahl al sunnah’

Christopher Melchert also gives some very keen insights into the term ‘Ahl al sunnah’ and the fact that a great many factions were called themselves by this appellation.

He says,

“The 9th-century hadith folk’s own preferred term for themselves was “Ahl al-sunna.” It is not convenient for us to call the hadith folk “Sunnis” because that term now calls to mind the great tripartite division of Sunnis, Shi’is, and Kharijis. At least for the 9th century and earlier, a mere tripartite division is simplistic and practically impossible to document. To begin with, 9th-century definitions of Shi’ism were considerably different from those of later times; for example, traditionalist rijal critics regularly distinguished between ‘tashayyu’, special regard for ‘Ali and his house that the hadith folk was willing to overlook, and rafid, the rejection of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar that they thought put one outside the Muslim community. With equal emphasis, the 9th-century hadith folk distinguished themselves from Qadariyya, Murji’a, Mu’tazila, and other theological parties not accounted for by a simple, anachronistic dichotomy between Sunnis and Shi’is. The polarity of Sunni and Shi’i was not strong until the mid-10th century, and full Sunni mutual recognition and self-awareness appeared only in the mid 10th century. Finally, modern scholars should avoid endorsing the hadith folk’s own estimate that they were the overwhelming majority, as calling them “Sunnis” might do.”

” The significance of their calling themselves ‘Ahl al-sunna’ is not that their views were identical to those of the later, great Sunni community, which they were not, but that the later community deliberately identified them as its forebears. We need to understand their piety. Their adversaries preferred not to call them ‘Ahl al-sunna’ and proposed various other terms.’ Al-Jahiz disparaged the nabita, those who sprouted up like weeds to extol the enemies of ‘Ali and to promulgate such crass ideas as assigning God an imaginable body (tajsim, taswfr). Other writers attributed similar errors to the hash- wiyya (vulgar). The hadith folk complained that the Murji’a called them shukkak (doubters) for saying, “I am a believer, God willing,” while the Qadariyya called them mujbira or jabriyya for upholding divine predestination. To use any of these terms for the hadith folk would mean taking sides as much as it would mean calling them ‘Ahl al-sunna’, which is needless for modern scholars.”

“The hadith folk emerged as a distinct group at about the end of the 8th century. They lost importance in the 10th century. Chroniclers usually refer to their 10th-century successors in Baghdad as the Hanabila or simply al-‘amma (the general), periodically rioting against the Shias. Meanwhile, their own name for themselves, ‘Ahl al-sunna’, was claimed by virtually all parties except the Shi’is. Even Mu’tazila called themselves Ahl al-sunna wa-al-jama’a, on the plea that if they were not actually the great majority, they ought to have been. (I have not compared the piety of the hadith folk with that of 9th-century Shi’is, rewarding though such a comparison would be. At least a wing of the Shi’ movement probably had something very close, which ought to show up in Shi’i hadith.)”

So again we can see there was a lot of conflict and turmoil in the very early history of Islam. Conflict and turmoil that is with us until this very day. So less I digress let me go back to the opening quotation attributed to Imam Malik:

He who practices tassawuf without learning Sacred Law corrupts his faith (tazandaq) , while he who learns Sacred Law without practicing Tasawwuf corrupts himself (tafassaqa).”

Gibril Fouad Haddad who is a follower of the Sufi group ‘The Naqshabandi Haqqani* has provided some very insightful information to this claim above.

* note: This Sufi group is to be distinguished from their rivals the ‘Naqshabandi Mujaddidi‘ as well as other rival Sufi groups.

He has the following to say about the above quotation attributed to Imam Malik :

Cited without the chain of transmission by Al-Qari in Sharh ‘Ayn al-Ilm and Mirqat al-Mafatih, Ahmad Zarruq in the Forth of his Qawa’id al-Tassawuf in his commentary on Ibn Abi Zayd’s Risal a (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Kutub al Arabiyyah, Ibn Ajiba in Iaqaz, Al Himan fi Sharh al-Hikam and Al-Tata’i in his commentary on Ibn Rushd’s Muaqaddima.”

Source: (The Four Imams and their Schools page 180)

Ponder that for a moment, respected readers. A statement seemingly in support of ‘Tassawuf‘ put into the mouth of Imam Malik and then repeated by men like Al Qari, Ahmad Zarruq, Ibn Abi Zayd, Ibn Ajiba, and At Tata’i. Yet, no chain of narration!

In my previous conversations with Dr. Abdullah bin Hamid Ali and Ustadh AbdasSamad Clarke, both have confirmed to me that it is not authentically ascribed to Malik.

Anti-Sufi reports attributed to Imam Malik

Incident no. 1 )

“Al -Tinnisi said: We were sitting with Malik with his companions around him. A man from the people of Nasibin said, ‘We have some people who go by the name of Sufis. They eat a lot then they start (chanting) poems (qasa’id), after which they stand and start (chanting) dancing.” Malik asked, “Are they boys (sibyan)?” He said no. Malik asked, “Are they insane?” He said, No, they are old men (mashaykh) and other than that, and they are mature and sane (‘uqala.” Malik said, “I never heard that any of the people of Islam do this.” The man said to him, “Indeed, they do! They eat, then they stand up and start dancing intensively (dawa’ib), and some of them slap their heads, and some of their faces.” Malik started laughing then went into his  house. His companions said to the man. “You were, O man, ill luck (mash’um) for our friend [Malik]. We have been sitting with him thirty-odd years and never saws him laugh except today.” “Narrated without a chain by Al-Qadi ‘Iyad in Tartib Al-Madarak.”

Source: (The Four Imams and their Schools by Gibril Fouad Haddad page 180)

Incident no.2 )

“Abd al-Malik ibn Ziyad al-Nasibi said: “We were with Malik when I mentioned to him Sufis in our city. I said to him that they wear fancy Yemenite clothes, and do such and such. He replied, ‘Woe to you! Are they Muslims?’He then laughed until he lay on his back. Some of his companions said to me, ‘What is this?’ We have not seen more trouble (fitna) caused to the Shaykh than you, for we never saw him laugh!” “Narrated by al-Khallal in al-Hathth ‘ala al-Tijara wal-Sina’a wal-Amal (Abu Ghudda) with a weak chain because of ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Ziyad al-Nasibi who is “disclaimed in his narrations and untrustworthy” (munkar al hadith, gahyr thiqa) according to al-Aazdi as per Ibn al-Jawzi in al-Du’afa wal-Matrukin (1:149) while Ibn Hibban in his Thiaqat (8:390) said he reports oddities from Malik.”

Source: (The Four Imams and their Schools by Gibril Fouad Haddad page 181)

So you can imagine the incongruity of all of this. Notice the similarities between the two seemingly Anti-Sufi reports attributed to Imam Malik.

1) His strong reaction: ‘I never heard that any of the people of Islam do this. & Woe to you! Are they Muslims?’

2) His hearty laugh after hearing of their doings. ‘Malik started laughing then went into his house. & He then laughed until he lay on his back’.

3) The shock of the people present at Maliks’ reaction. ‘You were O man, ill-luck (mash’um) for our friend [Malik]. We have been sitting with him thirty-odd years and never saws him laugh except today. & What is this?’ We have not seen more trouble (fitna) caused to the Shaykh than you, for we never saw him laugh’!

Now let us look at how these statements are treated http://www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/sm1-gfh_e.html#4

You can scroll down to the section: “Imam Malik and the Sufis” Gibril Fouad Haddad has the following to say about the two incidents, reported above:

Concerning the first incident, he says, “This is narrated without chain by al-Qadi `Iyad. in Tartib al-Madarik (2:53-54).” That is all he has to say. There is no chain of transmitters. Case closed.

Concerning the second incident, he simply gives the reason one of the transmitters is dismissed. Then he concludes by saying:

“Content-wise, neither of the above reports shows unambiguous condemnation of group dhikr but only that some people who passed for Sufis in the Imam’s time reportedly committed certain childish excesses or irrational breaches of decorum. The reports only show that Imam Malik found the story amusing. The delator seems obsessed with the ‘eating and dancing’ which he mentions twice as if afraid Malik didn’t hear it the first time. There is also on the part of Malik’s circle clear disapproval of the delator who is apparently perceived as an interloper. And Allah knows best.”

Actually what the reports show assuming they are true at all is the following:

The reports show that Imam Malik does not even seem to be even vaguely familiar with such groups. The asking ‘if the people are Muslim‘, and making statements such as ‘the people of Islam are not heard of doing this‘ would be very difficult for Muslims having a pro-Sufi bias to fathom. Especially, in the first report since, we don’t have Imam Malik laughing until after hearing about people slapping their faces.

There are also statements attributed to Imam Shafi’i they seem that they can be either pro ‘Sufism‘ or anti ‘Sufism‘. http://www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/sm1-gfh_e.html#4

You may also be interested in reading the following:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/attacks-upon-sahih-hadith-by-ashari-theologians

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

6 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Attacks upon Sahih hadith by Sufi Leaning Ashari Theologians

“And Noah called to his Lord and said, “My Lord, indeed MY SON IS OF MY FAMILY (AHLI)and indeed, Your promise is true; and You are the most just of judges! He said, “O NOAH, INDEED HE IS NOT OF YOUR (AHLIKA) FAMILY; indeed, he is one whose work was other than righteous, so ask Me not for that about which you have no knowledge. Indeed, I advise you, lest you be among the ignorant. Noah said, “My Lord, I seek refuge in You from asking that of which I have no knowledge. And unless You forgive me and have mercy upon me, I will be among the losers.”(Qur’an 11:45-47)

﷽ 

We are often told that our presuppositions may preclude us from being fair in accessing certain hadith traditions. That we would approach the text with our own suppositions. I don’t disagree with this statement. The real point is who doesn’t approach something with their own suppositions?

However, I think the point is we all approach any situation with our own suppositions. The point is to be mindful of this, and know when it may impede our ability to look at something from a different perspective, or not.

What better example than the attacks upon ‘sahih’ -ahadith found in the collection of Muslim, by those who hold to the Ashari theological school.

In particular, things that the ‘Sufi‘ find troubling about the following sahih hadith. As well as those who have been affected by the Shia-fication of Sunnism as follows:

Narrated from Anas (ra) that a man said: “O Messenger of Allah, where is my father?” He said: “In Hell.” When he turned away he called him back and said: “My father and your father are in Hell.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim/1/408)

Some may say why even talk about this subject? It is bad manners?

The very people who say that, are the very people themselves who have brought the topic up.

There is actually no good reason to reject this hadith. The only reason to reject this hadith is based upon an emotional attachment to the ‘Ahl Bayt‘ and to the family of the Blessed Prophet (saw).

“Say, [O Muhammed], “If your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your relatives, wealth which you have obtained, commerce wherein you fear decline, and dwellings with which you are pleased are more beloved to you than Allah and His Messenger and jihad in His cause, then wait until Allah executes His command. And Allah does not guide the defiantly disobedient people.” (Qur’an 9:29)

If this is the state of faith that Muslims are to have in regards to Allah (swt) It is certain that the Blessed Messenger (saw) had this state of faith, a state of faith that none of us would pale in comparison to.

There is also the reality that hellfire is real. That some people will go to hellfire. Those people will be other people’s fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters. All of us live with the reality that either ourselves or our most beloved family will not be in paradise.

With the Blessed Messenger (saw) making that statement about his father, it makes the Blessed Prophet (saw) very relatable to our grievances.

Now the “Sufis” will go on and on about knowledge of the unseen that the Blessed Messenger (saw) is said to have had.

However, when it comes to something like this they simply cannot accept that the Blessed Messenger (saw) may have had some insight into what happened to His (saw) parents; albeit a very painful insight.

The same people will go absolutely ballistic when anyone challenges their Sahih hadith canons, but themselves will pull out all the stops when they come across something that goes against their presuppositions.

It is worth it to watch the entire video presentation of Dr. Jonathan Brown. However, for the purpose of this entry, it would suffice to watch from @42:50, to see exactly what I am talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r1GhCQGf9w

At @43:50 Dr. Jonathan Brown takes liberties by saying ‘there is an important principle in Islam that in order to be accountable for anything you have to have knowledge‘.

First, it should be very clear what he is about to present to the audience is not necessarily the position of ‘Islam’. It is a position of creed, one that a certain group of Muslims with their own presuppositions hold to.

Basically what Dr. Jonathan Brown is doing is expounding upon a position in the Ashari theological school. (Albeit in a very superficial manner)

They assume that just because people have not heard about Islam, these people would automatically enter into paradise.

In other words, if divine guidance has not come to you, you will automatically enter paradise.

Think of the implications of that for a moment. Now, if your going to talk about justice this creedal position of the Ashari turns the justice of Allah (swt) into a cosmic comedy.

Why?

Well, how is it fair for people who have been exposed to Islam entered into it and possibly still end up in hell?

Whereas it would have been more preferable (I mean we are talking about eternity here) for said people to have never heard about Islam, and enter into heaven automatically, simply by virtue of the fact of not receiving guidance.

So if you do not receive divine guidance you automatically enter into heaven?

However, if you do hear about divine guidance and reject it you will go to hell.

In General: Assurance of salvation is not a doctrine in Islam.

Then if you embrace the divine guidance you have a 50/50 chance of going to heaven/hell.

Something seems very inconsistent here.

As educated and eloquent as Dr. Jonathan Brown is he gives an example. What that would be relatable to the Ashari school. He gives the example about ‘the man living in a remote part of Nebraska‘.

So you mean to tell me this man who lives in a remote part of Nebraska and never heard about Islam, or even had an adequate presentation of Islam delivered to him, can steal from his mother, rape a child, rob a bank, never pay back any of his loans, constantly lie, beat his wife and lead an overall horrible life and he will enter heaven?

Whereas countless Muslims all of the world are trying their utmost to have a relationship with their Creator and to fulfill the commands as they understand them, in a sea of competing sects and schism, and then there is a very likely chance that they could end up in hell?

Does that honestly make any sense to anyone at all?

Notice Dr. Jonathan Brown says @45:13God will judge them on the day of judgement like God judges everybody

So why would God judge them? If they would automatically enter into heaven? If God judges them than doesn’t that mean they stand a chance to be condemned?

If they do stand the chance to be condemned than the Ashari needs to explain based upon what.

Apologies to the readers, as I digress.

However, this is fundamentally important to the discussion, because it is an ironclad proof! It is an ironclad proof from within that if those from the Ashari school find something that goes against their presuppositions they will discard a hadith!

Gibril Fouad Haddad is a modern scholar who gave a lengthy apologetic response to the issue in pages 51-64 of his book “The Four Imams and Their Schools

Which by the way if you don’t have that book you absolutely should buy it. You should buy everything written by Gibril Fouad Haddad for that matter. He has absolute astute attention to detail. He is in my view one of the most, candid and truthful traditonalist scholars in our time. Surely he will receive his reward with his Lord.

In the pages of his book, there are some eye-opening admissions. His book also contains his own biases and leanings for example:

Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari and his Minah Al-Rawd Al-Azhar, commentary on Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar is simply thrown under the bus.

Shaykh Haddad states:

“Mulla Ali al-Qari claimed in Sharh al-Fiqh Al Akbar, Mu’taqad Abu Hanifa, and Shar al-Shifa that Imam Abu Hanifa said, “The parents of the Prophet (saw) died as disbelievers.” and that this was the Maturidi position. He was refuted harshly by his student, the Faqih and Friend of Allah, Imam Abd al-Qadir ibn Muhammed ibn Ahmad al Tabari, during the latter’s lessons in the Makkan Sanctuary, Al-Qari died in Makka shortly after those lectures from a bad fall-May Allah have mercy on him and forgive him. Shaykh Ibrahim al-Halabi, the Hanafi faqih, held the same view as Mulla Ali al-Qari as well as does al-Azim Abadi in AAwn al-Mabud.” (pg 51 The Four Imams and Their Schools)

The innuendo is certainly not subtle at all.

Al-Qari died in Makka shortly after those lectures from a bad fall-May Allah have mercy on him and forgive him.

The implication is Allah (swt) made the learned scholar, Mulla Ali al-Qari die from a bad fall for simply repeating what he found attributed to Imam Abu Hanifa.

Is what is attributed to Imam Abu Hanifa a forgery?

Shaykh Haddad quotes Dr. Inayatullah Iblagh al-Afghani in the 1987 2nd edition of his published doctoral thesis titled ‘al-Imam al-A’zam Abu Hanifa al-Mutakallim (“The Greatest Imam, Abu Hanifa, the Theologian”), said:

“Regarding the text [of al-Fiqh al-Akbar] we find in some of them: “and the two parents of the Prophet (saw) died according to pristine disposition” (mata ala al-fitra), In some others, it is: “did not die as disbelievers” (ma mata ala al-kufr) while in others yet, we find: “died as disbelievers” (mata ala-al kufr)”

Shaykh Haddad continues: The erudite scholar al-Kawthari noted that the word fitra can be easily altered to read kufr in Kufic Arabic calligraphy. It is highly probable, therefore, that the copy with “died according to pristine disposition” was changed to “died disbelievers.” The original reading implies that the Greatest Imam was arguing against those who adduce the hadith; “My father and your father are both in Hellfire.” (pg 57 The Four Imams and Their Schools.”

So now let us think about this claim.

The text could read:

did not die as disbelievers/did not die in pristine disposition

or

could read died as disbelievers/died according to pristine disposition.

Now, we can’t assume that the version that Shaykh Hadad prefers is the original version. Especially if it simply a copyist error. However, something that was not pondered upon at all is the possibility of forgery. The reason I believe this was not discussed is that to discuss forgery we need to discuss a motive. We have a high motive for someone to change the text from disbeliever to pristine disposition. However, what possible motive would any Muslim have for changing the text from pristine disposition to disbeliever?

Let us look at some other evidence that shows contrary to what some people desire that relatives of the Blessed Messenger (saw) were indeed people who do not make it to paradise.

“The daughter of Abu Lahab, Subay’a came to the Messenger of Allah (saw) and said, “Messenger of Allah!” The people are calling me the daughter of the Fuel of the Hellfire! The Messenger of Allah (saw) stood angry and said on the pulpit: “What is the matter with the people that harm me in my relatives? Whoever harms my relatives harms me, and whoever harms me has harmed Allah!”

Source: (Narrated from Ibn ‘Umar, Abu Hurayra, and Ammar bin Yasir by Ibn Abi ‘Asim in al-Ahad wal-Mathani (5:470 & 3165).

“May the hands of Abu Lahab be ruined, and ruined is he.” (Qur’an 111:1)

Did Allah (swt) find it insensitive to name someone’s father as a resident of hellfire?

Ali himself said that Abu Bakr is the only Companion to have both parents, Abu Quhafa and Umm al-Khayr enter Islam.

Sources: (Aisha by Malik in Muwatta, Ibn Sa’d (3:194-195) Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Sunan al-Kubra (6:169-170 & 11728, 6:178 & 11784, 6:257 & 12267, Abd Al-Razzaq (9;101) , Al-Tahawi in Sharh Ma’ani al-Athar (4:880, Istiab (4:1807), Nasb (2:630), al-Lalika’i in Karamat al-Awliya (p 117), al-Mizzi in Tadhib al-Kamal (35:380) and Muhhib al-Din al-Tabari in al-Riyad al-Nadira (2:122-123 & 576)

Narrated by Al Musaiyab:

“When Abu Talib’s death approached, the Prophet went to him while Abu Jahl and ‘Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya were present with him. The Prophet said, “O uncle, say: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, so that I may argue for your case with it before Allah.” On that, Abu Jahl and ‘Abdullah bin Abu Umaiya said, “O Abu Talib! Do you want to renounce ‘Abdul Muttalib’s religion?” Then the Prophet said, “I will keep on asking (Allah for) forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden to do so.” Then there was revealed: ‘It is not fitting for the Prophet and those who believe that they should invoke (Allah) for forgiveness for pagans even though they are of kin after it has become clear to them that they are companions of the Fire.’ (9.113)”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:1360)

The point being is that all of these groups and factions you are hard-pressed to find anyone to be consistent.

People will attack Shaykh Nasir Ad-Deen Al Abani because he said that Bukhari itself was bound to have mistakes.

However, the same people in my humble opinion apply double standards. They use their own presuppositions to evaluate the truthfulness of a text even if it said hadith is within the category of something deemed ‘sahih’ -sound!

“O you who have believed, why do you say what you do not do?” (Qur’an 61:2)

It is not for the Prophet and those who have believed to ask forgiveness for the polytheists, even if they were relatives after it has become clear to them that they are companions of Hellfire.” (Qur’an 9:113)

So extreme are these presuppositions concerning that the father of the Prophet (saw) that these same people have taken some strange approaches concerning the father of Prophet Ibrahim (as)

You may read about that here:

https://primaquran.com/2023/02/24/do-sunni-muslims-believe-animals-can-go-to-hell/

You may also be interested in reading the following:

https://primaquran.com/2024/06/09/are-the-prophets-parents-in-hell-dr-shaykh-abdullah-al-muammari/

May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah!

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah!

6 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized