Tasawwuf is a very general term and to this day remains undefined which has caused a lot of confusion. Due to its generality and vagueness the term has been outright rejected by the Salafis, and precisely due to its generality and vagueness, the corrupt Sufis (that’s the majority) are able to argue for its legitimacy.

Ibn al-Jawzi beautifully deals with the science of tasawwuf in his talbis iblis as I mentioned in my article. Amongst the early Muslims, there was no such thing as tasawwuf, and I think, up to Imam Ahmad’s time, at least, the term remained unknown. People were only known as ascetics – zuhhad and worshippers – ‘ubbad.

So the narrations we come across from the four Imams, either in praise, or in condemnation of the term tasawwuf, I have great reservations about those, primarily because the term didn’t seem to be around at the time.

They did have zuhhad like Bishr al-Hafi and al-Muhasibi who were perhaps the main figureheads of this so-called spiritual movement, but to my knowledge, even they didn’t call themselves as Sufis.

Bishr al-Hafi and al-Muhasibi are well respected ascetics who wrote extensively on disciplining the soul. They were, as Ibn Taymiyya would describe them, the few ascetics Imams who were upright on the Sunnah and Sharia. In spite of that Imam Ahmad censured al-Muhasibi and warned the people against him and forbade them from sitting in his gatherings. Yes, al-Muhasibi was censured for Kalam, but he was also censured for speaking deeply in spiritual matters. Bear in mind that al-Muhasibi’s works did not contain the absurdities contained in the works by latter Sufis.

So it seems the early Salaf, like Imam Ahmad, Abu Zur’a, Abu Hatim and others condemned the righteous ascetics like al-Muhasibi, al-Makki and others. If this was the case, then what would be their attitude towards Ibn ‘Arabi, who is regarded by these Sufis as al-Shaykh al-Akbar – The Grand Shaykh; whom we refer to as al-Shaykh al-Akfar – the most disbelieving of the Shaykhs?

However, it does seem that later on asceticism as practised by al-Muhasibi became acceptable, and gradually it began to develop into a science. The first Sufi amongst the Hanbalis, to my knowledge, was Shaykh al-Islam Abu Isma’il al-Harawi, who wrote his Sufi manual Manazil al-Sa’irin, which was later explained by Ibn al-Qayyim in his Madarij al-Salikin.

At the same time, there also arose a different strand in Tasawwuf which was very philosophical in its approach. This tasawwuf was represented by people like al-Hallaj and Ibn ‘Arabi who philosophised tawassuf incorporating therein pantheism, the belief that the entire existence in reality is one existence, and that is the reality of Tawhid. It is this type of Tasawwuf which became widespread by the time of Ibn Taymiyya. Hence, not only Ibn Taymiyya but many other scholars from the four schools geared their efforts against this philosophical tasawwuf.

Ibn Taymiyya, unlike Imam Ahmad and Ibn al-Jawzi, seem more tolerant towards tasawwuf, not that he was a Sufi himself. I don’t think any of the biographers ever described Ibn Taymiyya as a Sufi. To claim that he was a Sufi because he once wore the Sufi cloak, or he wrote on tazkiya subjects does not make him a Sufi, just as the fact he wrote extensively on ‘ilm al-kalam and falsafa would not make him a mutakallim or a filyusuf – a philosopher. Ibn Taymiyya was in the beginning of his career into Sufism, and an avid reader of Ibn ‘Arabi’s works, until he discovered the clear cut Kufr in Ibn ‘Arabi’s own handwriting. So it is possible that he wore a cloak during his Sufi days. Although, even in his Sufi days he did not indulge in Sufi activities.

Once, he was in the company of some of the Sufi friends who decided to do the group dhikr and began to get ‘spiritually intoxicated’, but Ibn Taymiyya kept himself out of it. One of his friends said to him: ‘why don’t you join us? You don’t know what you’re missing out on!’. Ibn Taymiyya said in reply something to the effect that if this has no basis in the Quran and Sunnah then there is nothing I am missing out on.


Sh Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Wahhab himself, along with his followers weren’t against tasawwuf as such. What they were against was the philosophical tasawwuf spearheaded by Ibn ‘Arabi and Ibn Farid.

The point is, since we know that tasawwuf is undefined, the modern day Sufis cannot use this term to legitimise their version of tasawwuf, which is firmly rooted in Shirk and bid’a of the very early pagans of Quraysh.

So yes, a great number of scholars may have been Sufis, if all the term refers to is asceticism in accordance with the Quran and the Sunnah. As for the philosophical tasawwuf represented by the vast majority of the Sufis today, which includes the belief in absolute obedience to the Shaykh as promoted by Keller, Sufi-Metal head-banging sessions as promoted by Hanson, and Wahdat al-Wujud – pantheism as promoted by Murad, then that is just blatant zandaqa and the ‘miracles’ performed by these zanadiqa are not karamat, they are outright witchcraft.

This is in terms of tasawwuf itself, but as for the fruits of this tasawwuf, then that’s another story.

Most of these people I have come across who claim to be Sufis are spiritually corrupt. You find them often boasting about their karamat.

To give you some examples, just look at the Sufi grandson of ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani. He was caught with books of Zandaqa and witchcraft, which were then burnt in public and his school handed over to Ibn al-Jawzi. Even more disgusting is how he took revenge by disgracing Ibn al-Jawzi in his old age.

Look at Ibn ‘Arabi, who is referred to by the Sufis as the Grand Shaykh. He was known amongst the scholars as the most lying of all the Shuyukh – la yuharrim farjan – extremely promiscuous, to whom marriage is the same as incest.

Look at al-Hallaj who was witnessed practising magic in his attempt to dupe people with his ‘karamat’. He was also reported to have slept with his daughter-in-law.

To learn more about their karamat, just open up karamat al-awliya by al-nabahani (taqi al-din al-nabahini’s grand father). Read the ‘karamah’ of a Sufi Shaykh whose male organ would elongate and become like a staff with which he would cane his servant. This sort of content is usually found in our spam folders, not in an Islamic book.

We then look at the writings of al-Kawthari, and the state of his corrupt soul shines through his works. You only need to look at GF Haddad, his deep hatred for Sunnah and lack of justice towards Allah’s creation, to realise stench of his diseased heart.

We only need to look at these desperate Sufi-Ash’aris who falsely claim to be Hanbalis and deliberately lie to hijack the Hanbali Madhab.

This is not even the tip of the iceberg. If you ever get to live amongst them in Syria, you would be shocked to see the division and backbiting amongst their ranks. They bicker over not only the Madhabs, but also the many different tariqas they follow, and how the shaykh of this tariqa is better than the other, and how shaykh so and so of that tariqa is a fake sufi. If you ever thought Salafiyya is in a mess, just have a glance at these Sufis, whose hearts have been turned against each other by Allah.

Now compare this to our Imams who don’t brag about karamat, nor about the state of their hearts…

Read about Imam Ahmad who said that the worse thing you can say to a person is: “You are the champion of the Sunnah!” because it would corrupt his heart. When a Abu bakr al-Marrudhi said to Imam Ahmad: “Look! All of the people of Baghdad love you! Even the Jews and the Christian!” He replied: “When a person knows himself, it does not matter to him what others say”

Read about Imam Ahmad when he advised his student ‘Abd al-Wahhab al-Warraq: “Try to be as obscure as possible, for we have been afflicted with fame!”

Read about Imam Ahmad, how he forgave all those who attended his lashing and those who lashed him.

Read about Ibn Taymiyya, and his deep tawakkul upon Allah, his constant adhkar day and night, his strong and brave heart in the face of danger, prison cells and death. Read about him how he had to endure years of imprisonment at the hands of the Sufis, and how he forgave them all when he had the chance to get them executed by the authorities in Egypt.

Read Ibn Taymiyya’s writings and see the justice glaring through them towards his friends and foes.

It is enough a lesson on tasawwuf for us to merely read the biography of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya, let alone Imam Ahmad.

Of course, it should be clarified that not all Muslims who call themselves sufis practice these deviations/innovations. Many muslims sincerely call themselves sufi because they only seek purification and spirituality.

As long as they practice Islam and perform their worship within the limits of the Qur'an and Sunnah without innovating, then there is no problem with such people. The above article is intended to warn people against some of the deviations that are widely practiced amongst various sufi groups, yet it is true that not all sufis practice these.

[...]

One of the forces of Bid'ah is mysticism, which is a strange body that feeds on ignorance. Ignorance is the fertile soil for the growth of deception, which is the main weapon of the mystics. Knowledge, however, is the impenetrable barrier that stands to protect the Muslim against all forms of evil forces. It exposes the deception and its people.

Nuh Ha Mim Keller compiled subjects in the Reliance of the Traveler, which are blind imitations of the mystic Sufi path and promotion of deviant distortions of the Islamic creed regarding the Names and Attributes of Allah. The book could be very deceptive for those who are not aware of the true nature of mysticism and of the various deviant sects whose thoughts continue to exist [and are also taught] in many parts of the Muslim world.

The original text of The Reliance of the Traveler by the Shaafi'ee faqeeh Ibn Naqeeb Al-Misri (in Arabic) is supported with authentic evidence, overall sound judgments, and provides a great deal of benefit. However, Nuh Ha Mim Keller plays with the translation using weapons of deception to distort the sound parts of the fiqh matters and mixes them with the poison of corrupt concepts of belief and mysticism in order to propagate his own deviant agenda. This is the biggest danger that the Muslims face, they start off with good intentions seeking to acquire Islamic knowledge, and are then deceived with the words of the innovators who falsely claim that "Our way is based on the Qur'aan and Sunnah," not knowing that they are actually being misled from the straight path. May Allah guide us all to the straight path and bless us with Paradise, Ameen.

One method that Nuh Ha Mim Keller uses to propagate his corrupt philosophy is through lies and fabrications. He falsely claims that Imams Maalik and Abu Haneefah (May Allah's Mercy be upon them) "had the higher education of Sufism" (See Keller's Classical Manual or Reliance, sec. w9.3, p.863). Keller quotes a Sufi scholar who fabricated the following and claimed that it was said by Imam Maalik, "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 proves true" (Reliance w9.3, p.862). Keller tries to falsely attribute this corruption to the scholars of the Sunnah so that the people without knowledge would be misled into believing that Sufism is part of Islam or that it was supported by the great scholars of the Sunnah. However, the truth is revealed about the attitude of the early scholars of the Sunnah in this authentic narration by 'Abdullah Bin Yoosuf At-Tanneesee (a trustworthy Muhaddith with great knowledge of Imam Maalik's Muwatta) who spoke about a man from the city of Nasiyeebeen who came to Imam 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." Imam Maalik exclaimed: "Are they insane?" The man responded: "No." Imam Maalik exclaimed: "Are they boys?" The man replied: "No. They are old and intelligent men." Imam Maalik said: "We didn't hear that anyone from the people of Islam did like this [what the Sufis did]." [Reported by Al-Qaadi 'Iyaad in Tarteb Al-Madaarik wa Taqreeb Al-Masaalik and many others]. This without a shadow of doubt reveals the attitude of the scholars of the Sunnah, including the Four Imams, in regards to all the innovators and their deviant sects.

Imam Maalik (May Allah's Mercy be upon him) said: "He who innovated something in Islam regarding it as something good has claimed that Muhammad (Peace be upon him) has betrayed the Message which he was entrusted to deliver. Whatever was not Deen at the time of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) cannot be considered to be a part of the Deen today." [Reported by Ash-Shaatibee in Al-I'tisaam].

Imam Al-Awzaa'ee (May Allah's Mercy be upon him) said: "Patiently restrict yourself to the Sunnah and do not go beyond the limits held by the decisions of the Sahaabah; hold their positions and avoid what they avoided. Hold to the path of As-Salaf As-Saalih (the righteous predecessors), for verily what was sufficient for them is sufficient for you." [Reported by Ibnul Jawzee in Talbees Iblees and Al-Laalikaa'ee in Sharhu Usooli 'Itiqaadi Ahli-Sunnah].

Imam Al-Barbahaaree (May Allah's Mercy be upon him) said: "The innovators are like scorpions. They bury their heads and bodies in the sand and leave their tails out. When they get the chance they sting: the same with the innovators who conceal themselves amongst the people, when they are able, they do what they desire." [Sharhus-Sunnah, p.94].

This is the position of the scholars of the pure Sunnah. They are against all forms of innovations and against all innovators because of the grave danger that they pose to the Ummah. Likewise we must Enjoin Good and Forbid Evil or else the punishment and wrath of Allah will be upon us as it was upon the Jews. Allah (Glorified and Exalted) says: "Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongues of Dawud and Isa, son of Maryam. That was because they disobeyed (Allah and His Messengers) and were ever transgressing beyond bounds. They used not to forbid one another from Al-Munkar (wrong, evil-doing, sins, polytheism, disbelief) which they committed. Vile indeed was what they used to do." [Al-Maidah, 78-79]. Therefore, all Muslims must be aware of innovation and must avoid it and call one another to Good and forbid Evil and Fear Allah, because verily Allah is Severe in Punishment. Whatever is correct is from Allah and whatever is wrong is from the evil within myself. May Allah forgive and protect the Muslims and restore their lost greatness and guide us to the straight path of His Messenger (Peace be upon him), his companions, the Righteous Predecessors, and those who followed them in goodness. Wa As-Salamu Alikum wa Rahmatuallahi wa Barakatuh.

Abu A'isha

“We were with Malik while he was surrounded by his companions, when a man belonging to the people of Nasibin said, ‘There is a group of people among us called Sufis. They eat excessively, then they begin to sing, and then they get up and dance.’ Malik asked him, ‘Are they children?’ The man replied, ‘No.’ Malik asked, ‘Are they insane?’ The man replied, ‘No. They are a group of mashayikh [religious scholars] and other intelligent people.’ Malik replied, ‘I have never heard of anyone from the people of Islam doing such a thing.’

The man said, ‘But these people eat, and then get up and dance tirelessly, some of them striking their heads, and some striking their faces.’

Hearing this, Malik laughed, then rose and went inside his house. The companions of Malik said to the man, ‘Verily you have brought bad omen to our companion. We have been in his company for more than thirty years, and we never saw him laugh until this day.’”

“Abu Bakr entered while two slave-girls of the Ansar were with me. They were singing the rhymes of the Ansar for the Day of Bu`ath, though they were not singers …”

[Bukhari, `Idayn, 445]

“A group of Sufis used this report as evidence to support the permissibility of singing and listening to songs, whether accompanied by musical instruments or not. It suffices as a response that `A’isha herself clarified the words of the report by saying, ‘they were not singers,’ negating what could be interpreted from the first part of her report [i.e. ‘they were singing’], because ghina’ [singing] refers to raising the voice, the melody which the Arabs call nasb, and the chanting of the caravan leader. The performer of this act is not called a mughanni [singer], which is a term that refers to those who sing by elongating and breaking the words, stimulating and provoking the listener by way of allusive and explicit descriptions of indecency.

Qurtubi , he is the hadith scholar Abu al-`Abbas Ahmad bin `Umar, the commentator of Sahih Muslim and the teacher of the Qur’an exegeteal-Qurtubi, says, ‘The statement of `A’isha – they were not singers – means that they were not of those who are experts at singing like professional singers. This is an indication by `A’isha (may Allah be pleased with her) of her wariness and reservation from the customary form of singing, which moves the motionless, and arouses what is deeply hidden. This is a type of singing whose impermissibility is agreed upon, if it consists of poetry that depicts the attractive features of women, intoxicants, and other forbidden things.’

He continues, ‘As for what the Sufis have innovated in this regard, then it is impermissible without disagreement. However, a large number of those attributed with virtue have been overcome by their appetitive souls, to the extent that many of them have displayed acts that are normally associated with children or the insane, such as dancing with organized steps and synchronized movements. Some of them even have the audacity to deem these acts as righteous deeds and a means of seeking nearness to God. They claim that these acts help to attain exalted states, while in reality they are among the indicators of zandiqa [heresy] and the statements of magicians. And Allah is the source of all help!’

In fact, the truth is the reverse of what they say: these acts help to attain the most evil of states.”

“No doubt adhkaar and du’aa’s are among the best forms of worship, and worship is one of the matters in which there is no room for personal opinions – we have to follow what the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did and taught, not our own whims and desires or innovations. The du’aa’s and adhkaar of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) are the best that anyone could find. The one who follows this way will be safe and sound, and the benefits and positive results that he will gain are beyond description. Any other du’aa’s and adhkaar may be haraam or they may be makrooh; they may involve shirk even though most people do not realize that – the details of this would take too long to explain here.

No one has the right to teach the people any kinds of du’aa’s or adhkaar apart from those that are mentioned in the Sunnah, or to make it a kind of regular worship which he expects the people to do regularly as they do the five daily prayers – this is the innovation in religion which Allaah does not allow… As for adopting a wird or regularly reciting a dhikr that is not prescribed in sharee’ah, this is one of the things that is not allowed. The du’aa’s and adhkaar prescribed by sharee’ah are the best that anyone could ever hope to find, and no one ignores them in favour of newly-invented, innovated adhkaar except one who is ignorant, negligent or a wrongdoer.”

"It is not allowed for any of the teachers to take from anyone an oath to agree to him upon everything that he wants, to love those whom his teacher loves and to hate whom his teacher hates. Rather, the one who does that from them then he is similar to Genghis Khan and his likes, those who make anyone that follows them a close friend and those who oppose them a tyrannical enemy. Rather, upon them and their followers is to stick to the oath of Allaah by obeying Allaah and His Messenger and that they do what Allaah and His Messenger ordered them with. That they forbid what Allaah and His Messenger forbade them with…"

Our Shaykh, Shaykul-Islam, the Haafidh of his era, chief justice, Abul-Fadal Shihaabud-Deen Ahmed bin `Ali bin Hajar Al-Kanaanee, Al-Asqalanee[2], As-Shafee, from Egypt, narrated to us:

I also saw this incident transcribed and transmitted from Al-Haafidh Taqiud-Deen Al-Faasee[3] [in his book] which our Shaykh Ibn Hajar Asqalanee himself amended - with his own handwriting – as part of the subject of declaring Ibn `Arabi 4 a disbeliever [Takfeer of Ibn `Arabi].

Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalanee said:

In the days of Az-Zaahir Barqooq[4], there was a person known as Ibnul-Al-Ameen, who was extremely fanatical and bigoted with Ibn Arabi[5], the author of Al-Fusoos [`Bezels of widsom`], and I was constantly elucidating his [Ibnul-Arabi] faults, and manifesting his mistakes and errors.

And there was a Shaykh in Egypt known as As-Shaykh Safaa, and he was closely associated with Az-Zaahir. Ibnul-Al-Ameen threatened me, saying he would disclose my identity to Shaykh Safaaa so that he may mention to the ruler Az-Zaahir that in Egypt there is a group of people - and I being amongst them - who speak ill of the pious people and other things of the same kind.

And in those days, there were outrageous acts of injustice, calamities and business losses. I was a person who possessed wealth; therefore I feared its consequences and I apprehensively feared its calamity.

And then I said to Ibnul-Ameen, `indeed here is something that is more likely better than what you intend, something that some of the Haafidh [of Hadeeth] have described as an accomplished fact based upon the occurrence of past events that whenever any two people have invoked the curse of Allah upon each other regarding a matter, a [complete] year does not elapse by for the one who is upon falsehood amongst them both.

Therefore, come on then! Let us both invoke the curse of Allah upon ourselves, so that it can be known who is upon the truth amongst us on this issue and who is upon falsehood.

Then we both, he and I, invoked the curse of Allah upon ourselves, I said to him invoke the curse of Allah upon yourself with the following words:

`Oh Allah if Ibn Arabi is upon misguidance, curse me with your curse,` He said that. Then I said: Oh Allah if Ibn Arabi is upon true guidance then curse me with your curse.` And then, we both separated from one another [left].

He used to live in a place called Ar-Rawdaah[5]. One of the sons of a soldier took him in as his guest, then for some reason he [Ibnul-Ameen] suddenly decided to leave them. So then he left in the early part of the night, with the soldiers` sons also accompanying him to escort him and bid him farewell.

Then suddenly, he felt something that passed over his feet. He said to his companions, `something soft just passed over my feet; please see what it was.` They searched to see what had passed by but didn`t see anything, so then he continued walking [alone]. He did not reach his home except that he became blind, and morning did not come except that he died. And this was in the month of Dhul-Qadah in the year 797 AH, and the Mubahalah - invoking the curse of Allah upon the liar - had taken place between us in the month of Ramadan.

Ibn Hajar, with his final words, said:

Indeed at the time when the Mubahalah took place, I informed those who were present at the Mubahalah, that the [one amongst us] who would be upon falsehood [as a result of this Mubahalah] would not even live a full year, and that is exactly what happened, and All praise is due to Allah for that. So