What are these Muslims doing?

[جوري]

I think there needs to be a clear distinction between true Sufism and what some people attribute of Sufism that is nothing to do with it such as whirling dervishes, grave worship, over veneratikon of saints, Mawlid etc. True Sufism rejects such practises and ONLY implements that which is purely based upon the Qur'an and Sunnah. Many people fail to make such a distinction because of a lack of knowledge about what true Sufism is really about.

I think everything is summed in this statement perfectly:

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “The words al-faqr and al-tasawwuf (i.e., Sufism) may include some things that are loved by Allaah and His Messenger, and these are things that are enjoined even if they are called faqr or tasawwuf, because the Qur’aan and Sunnah indicate that they are mustahabb and that is not altered if they called by other names. That also includes actions of the heart such as repentance and patience. And it may include things that are hated by Allaah and His Messenger, such as some kinds of belief in incarnation and pantheism, or monasticism that has been innovated in Islam, or things that go against sharee’ah and have been innovated, and so on. These things are forbidden no matter what names they are given… And it may include limiting oneself to a certain style of clothing or certain customs, ways of speaking and behaving, in such a way that anyone who goes beyond it is regarded as an outsider, although this is not something that has been stipulated in the Qur’aan or Sunnah; rather it may be something that is permissible or it may be something that is makrooh, and this is a bid’ah that is forbidden. This is not the way of the friends of Allaah (awliya’ Allaah); such things are innovations and misguidance that exists among those who claim to follow the Sufi path. Similarly, among those who claim to be servants of knowledge there are innovations that involve beliefs and words that go against the Qur’aan and Sunnah, using phrases and terminology that have no basis in sharee’ah. Many such things happen among those people.

If it is a package deal and it so often is as I am personally yet to encounter one sufi or matsawif that doesn't have the peculiar practice then yeah it is an innovation and it is clear that what doesn't confirm to Quran or Sunnah is an innovation. There's a difference between ijtihad and innovation. And the prophet PBUH didn't come with the message of 'Sufism'
People don't attribute them to Sufis, sufis practice them and thus others conclude so of them. 'Others' in this case are respected scholars of Islam not people from the forum!

 

[Hamza Asadullah]

Let us see what the most knowledgable men of this Ummah the four Imaams of jurispudence have said regarding Tasawwuf:

Imam Malik:

"He who practices Tasawwuf without learning Sacred Law corrupts his faith, while he who learns Sacred Law without practicing Tasawwuf corrupts himself. Only he who combines the two proves true."

It is related by the muhaddith Ahmad Zarruq (d. 899)[Ahmad Zarruq, Qawa`id al-tasawwuf (Cairo, 1310)], and the hafiz `Ali al-Qari al-Harawi (d. 1014)[ Ali al-Qari, Sharh `ayn al-`ilm wa-zayn al-hilm (Cairo: Maktabat al-Thaqafa al-Diniyya, 1989) 1:33], the muhaddiths `Ali ibn Ahmad al `Adawi (d. 1190)[ Ali al `Adawi, Hashiyat al `Adawi `ala sharh Abi al Hasan li risalat Ibn Abi Zayd al musammat kifayat al talib al rabbani li risalat Ibn Abi Zayd al Qayrawani fi madhhab Maalik (Beirut: Dar Ihya' al Kutub al `Arabiyah, <n.d.>) 2:195] and Ibn `Ajiba (d. 1224)[Ibn `Ajiba, Iqaz al himam fi sharh al hikam (Cairo: Halabi, 1392/1972) p. 5 6.].

Imam al-Shafi`i:

Imam Shafi’i said: "[Be both] a faqih and a sufi[sufiyyan ]: do not be only one of them, Verily, by Allah's truth, I am advising you sincerely." (al-Shafi`i in his own book: Diwan, p. 47 see also: Diwan p. 66 where Imam Shafi'i gives the advise to be both a faqih and sufi).

Imam Shafi`i said: “Three things in this world have been made lovely to me: avoiding affectation, treating people kindly, and following the way of tasawwuf.” (The muhaddith al-`Ajluni also relates that in Kashf al-khafa wa muzil al-albas (1:341 #1089).

Imam al-Shafi`i said: “I accompanied the Sufis and received from them but three words: their statement that time is a sword: if you do not cut it, it cuts you; their statement that if you do not keep your ego busy with truth it will keep you busy with falsehood; their statement that deprivation is immunity.” (Ibn al-Qayyim in his Madarij al-salikin (3:128) and al- Suyuti in his Ta'yid al-haqiqa al-`aliyya (p. 15)).

Imam Abu Hanifah:


Ibn `Abidin relates in his al Durr al mukhtar that Imam Abu Hanifa said: "If it were not for two years, I would have perished."

Ibn `Abidin comments: “For two years he accompanied Sayyidina Ja`far al-Sadiq and he acquired the spiritual knowledge that made him a gnostic in the Way... Abu `Ali Daqqaq (Imam Qushayri's shaykh) received the path from Abu al-Qasim al-Nasirabadi, who received it from al Shibli, who received it from Sari al-Saqati who received it from al Ma`ruf al Karkhi, who received it from Dawud at Ta'i, who received the knowledge, both the external and the internal, from the Imam Abi Hanifa.” (Ibn `Abidin, Hashiyat radd al-muhtar `ala al-durr al-mukhtar 1:43).

Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal:

Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Saffarini al-Hanbali (d. 1188) relates in his Ghidha' al-albab li-sharh manzumat al-adab from Ibrahim ibn `Abd Allah al-Qalanasi that Imam Ahmad said about the Sufis: "I don't know people better than them." (al-Saffarini, Ghidha' al-albab li-sharh manzumat al-adab (Cairo: Matba`at al-Najah, 1324/1906) 1:120).

May Allah lead all to the truth. Ameen

 

[جوري]

There is enough evidence and agreement from respected ulama on the subject of taking bayáh.

:wa:

There's enough evidence of whom theses bayas were given even from the posts you've provided, and it wasn't random folks who are deemed knowledgeable when they're far removed or even if not far removed.
I disagree with you saying

This is your choice and it does not remove you from the fold of Islam.

I rather think it is the other way around, as you'd have to be the one explaining your liege to someone who could potentially guide you incorrectly when in Islam we're clearly told:
Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) said: "There is no obedience to the creation in disobedience to the Creator." [Ahmed and Haakim]
"Obedience is in what is right." [Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim]

and lastly I don't believe I am being disrespectful nor am I being a deviant, I am posting my understanding and quoting respected scholars. I am also nobody's keeper but I'll not see something I consider to questionable and sweep it aside. And Why should I?

 

[Hamza Asadullah]

I think everything is summed in this statement perfectly:





If it is a package deal and it so often is as I am personally yet to encounter one sufi or matsawif that doesn't have the peculiar practice then yeah it is an innovation and it is clear that what doesn't confirm to Quran or Sunnah is an innovation. There's a difference between ijtihad and innovation. And the prophet PBUH didn't come with the message of 'Sufism'
People don't attribute them to Sufis, sufis practice them and thus others conclude so of them. 'Others' in this case are respected scholars of Islam not people from the forum!

Just because you may have met some "peculiar" people who attributed themselves to Sufism then it does not mean that those people are of those who practise true Sufism. There are many people of all groups and including salafis who are not good examples of people in their group and do practises which do not conform to the Qur'an and Sunnah. There has to be a clear distinction and this is something many people fail to do and i do not blame them in a way because those who do dodgy practises are more louder than those who practise the truth. It maybe that you come across many people who did practise true sufism but you were just not aware of it.

Yes we should highlight the fact that there are many people of certain groups and methodologys who practise that which does not conform to the Qur'an and Sunnah and such practises are not confined to those who attribute themselves to Sufism, but we should also acknowledge that the true practise of Tasawwuf has its roots firmly in the Qur'an and Sunnah and as i have shown is clearly supported and even promoted by the four imaams and even Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Al Qayyim as well as the greatest scholars of the past and present.

May Allah lead all to the truth. Ameen

 

[joyous fairy]

Salam...

I think it is clear that there are different opinions on the matter, with evidence from both sides. Some of us will be for giving bayah and some won't, lets leave it at that and speak/research the topic personally rather than going backwards and forwards. We can all find evidence for our own standpoint and post it here, however, I think enough has been posted about both sides.

 

[جوري]

acknowledge that the true practise of Tasawwuf has its roots firmly in the Qur'an and Sunnah and as i have shown is clearly supported

The article I have quoted doesn't say different, why are we going over this ad nauseam?
Also it doesn't aggrieve me one way or the other but people should have their facts sorted, and in order to have their facts sorted they need to at least know the fundamentals of their religion so when something queer is introduced in one of those 'bayas' they can say you know what I want out, this doesn't suit me, it is nothing that was brought by the prophet nor practiced by him or the sahaba!
umoor ad'deen are a done deal. il3ibadat are DONE!
You're not gonna one day wake up and find maghrib 5 rakas and then decide well raka3as are an old practice found in Quran and Sunnah so what if I add two more make it a nice odd number!

 

[Hamza Asadullah]

This is just redundancy as you can see akhi and if you've read the entire post it can be summed up in the paragraph I quoted but I can contract it further even though everything loses value with more emphasis, it clearly sets a line of demarcation those traits that are loved by Allah and his prophet and not in contradiction of Quran and Sunnah can be practiced and those include certain things in tasswuf, those things in contradiction are an innovation. It isn't a pick and choose as far as I am concerned least of which when you give a 'baya' of obedience!

Sister we are both in agreement that any practise which does not conform to, comply with and contradict the Qur'an and Sunnah is to be rejected. True Tasawwuf if practised properly does not contradict the Qur'an and Sunnah in anyway but it perfectly finds its place and its roots firmly within the Qur'an and Sunnah as the four madhabs do. The Prophet did not teach the Madhabs nor did he teach Tasawwuf but both the are also found within the Qur'an and Sunnah. This is confirmed by the quotes from the four imaams of jurispudence as well as Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Al Qayyim in my previous posts who not only emphasised te practises of Tasawwuf but promoted its benefits. The dodgy practises some people attribute to Tasawwuf have nothing to do with it just like neo salafis have nothing to do with salafism.

 

[Hulk]

I'm sure no muslim would be against anyone wanting to seek knowledge and also be on a path to purify themselves so as to be able to practice Islam at the level of ihsan.

 

[Hamza Asadullah]

More from Ibn Taymiyyah on Tasawwuf:

The righteous Ulema and religious scholars have always acknowledged and affirmed the necessity of the true from of ‘Tasawwuf’. Some excerpts from the monumental Islamic jurisprudic encyclopaedia of the reputed scholar, Ibn Taimiyyah rahmatullahi alihi, regarding the positiveness and necessity of ‘Tasawwuf’. He says: “ Verily, Sulook (a synonym for Tazkiyah, Ihsaan or Tasawwuf) is the path ordained by Allah and His Messenger , which encompasses the beliefs, devotion, worship and ethics of a person. And all this is clarified in the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Therefore, it is the provision no true Mu’min can do without.” (Vol. 19 Pg. 273)

He also states: “In Sulook, there are some points debated by the Mashaikh, but there is abundant evidence in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah substantiating the stance adopted by the majority of the scholars, for the precepts of Sulook are of the same category as the Islamic doctrinal code, all elucidated and resolved in a crystal-clear fashion in both the divine sources of Islamic Theology.” (Vol. 19 Pg. 274)

We find him uttering these words in his discourses: “…And similarly, whosoever bases his devotion, worship, and actions, relevant both to his inner status and his outer execution of deeds, on the foundation of pure Faith and Sunnah, and on the path of the Prophet and his Companions radiallahu anhum, then without any doubt, he has achieved the pathway laid down by the Prophethood. And this is the very path the righteously guided scholars of Deen follow.”

In his enlightening speeches, he goes on to explain: “All the actions of heart and soul, called ‘Maqamat’ (levels of perfection) and ‘Ahwaal’ (states of illumination) - for example, the love for Allah and His Prophet , sincerity of intentions in His worship, ultimate trust unto Him, sense of total gratitude for Him, utmost patience and absolute contentment on His decree, the equivalent mélange of paramount fear of Him, unsurpassable anticipation of his all-embracing mercy and all other similar conditions that occur to a living human soul in regards to his Master and Creator – are in their entity, incumbent on all humankind, especially believers. Its attainment is compulsory upon the people according to their stages; in depth for the people of distinction and basically for the normal layman, for the hearts and souls of all humans are not the same in their capability to achieve perfection through the medium of these ‘Maqamat’ and ‘Ahwaal’.”

Sheikh Moulana Muhammad Manzoor Ahmed No’mani rahmatullahi alaihi quotes Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab rahmatullahi alaihi commenting on Tasawwuf in his book ‘Dia’ayat Mukaththafah dhidd Ash-Sheikh Muhammad…’(Pg. 85).

The Sheikh has said: “We do not condemn the path of the Sufiya outright. We only assert that the keyword should be moderation. We agree to their practice provided it does not contradict the basic elementary tenets of Shari’ah.”

Excerpt taken from: http://www.inter-islam.org/faith/Tswfdstd.html

 

[IbnAbdulHakim]

yes they are humble enough to accept being challenged. You have the wrong idea of being the WaliUllaah and Mursheeds we speak of.

in what way is my idea wrong? and what is right per their regard?

that the ones who are truelly fit for guiding the strayed souls who are lost without them will never, ever deny being corrected.

infact my mursheed at the moment, everytime he speaks about hadith, speaks about Quran he asks the learned men aruond him "am I right here, have I remembered thsi correctly?" etc, even though EVERYONE knows taht Allah has blesed him with a knowledge that none around him can compare to, yeh he always asks, always tries, humbles himself.

Infact he was once riding in a bus in bangladesh, and in these busses it is overcrowded and there are a lot of elders (he himself if above 70) and he sat on the floor. Another man came on, not being able to see his face (as he is well known in bangaldesh) he put his feet on hsi shoulder. My mursheed covered his face from the stranger so that he doesnt feel awkward/embarassed about what he has done and he carried on throughout the long bus journey in thsi way.


this is how theya re, this is who we follow.

 

[IbnAbdulHakim]

assalamu alaikum

That even someone in his esteem was challenged in a mosque. Are you able to do that to the people you learn from?

this is the reason I began speaking about my mursheed. I didnt intend to get personal but it also strengthens the point about bay'ah, helps people understand who it is we pledge to. Its not any tom dick or harry.



Sister, I would like to say thankyou, that you have been very patient with me. I did get emotional regarding the umar ibn al khattab comment and I apologise.

May Allah forgive me.

 

[جوري]

this is the reason I began speaking about my mursheed. I didnt intend to get personal but it also strengthens the point about bay'ah, helps people understand who it is we pledge to. Its not any tom dick or harry.



Sister, I would like to say thankyou, that you have been very patient with me. I did get emotional regarding the umar ibn al khattab comment and I apologise.

There's nothing to apologize for. I really hope that your experience is enriching and that he does well by you, and I do hope if you reach more knowledge than his that you're indeed able to challenge him and not stand quiet in complete obedience!

 

[جوري]

ok tell me sis. what has compelled you to think I will stand quiet in complete obedience?

tell me exactly what it is you thought of to say taht. there must be some experiences, something you read perhaps?

after everything I said, do you think the circumstances would be such?

It doesn't really matter what I think of what you choose to do nor am I casting judgement since I have no understanding of the nuances of what it is you do, my statements have been general on the concept itself and as relates to what I believe is a done deal in Islam per ibadat not per seeking knowledge. I have clarified my position and my views echo to the letter those in post # 41 including the two bottom links which should cover the long and short of my objections.
In the end I pray that Allah swt unites the hearts of this ummah on the true message of unadulterated monotheism/Islam and its fundamentals and not that which swerves to the left or right of it. for surely the devil is in those!
Islam is a complete package not just zuhd and not just Jihad but a complete way of life.

 

[جوري]

To whom should ba’yah (allegiance) be given?​

ar - en​

Share | http://islamqa.info/en/ref/23320# http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php...sSA7LvnTEtR4A&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php...sSA7LvnTEtR4A&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha http://islamqa.info/en/ref/23320#



​

Can you please clarify whether it is compulsory for every Muslim to take BAIT on some one's Hand as people did with The Prophet PBU and Khula Rashedeen.


Praise be to Allaah.

Bay’ah can only be given to the leader of the Muslims, and bay’ah is given by the decision makers – i.e., the scholars and people of virtue and status. Once they give their allegiance to him, his position of leadership is confirmed, and the common folk do not have to give allegiance to him themselves, rather they have to obey him so long as that does not entail disobedience towards Allaah.​

Al-Maaziri said: With regard to bay’ah being given to the leader of the Muslims, it is sufficient for the decision makers to give him their bay’ah. It is not essential for each individual Muslim to come to him and put his hand in his, rather it is sufficient to commit oneself to obeying him and submitting to him by not going against him or rebel against him.​

Quoted from Fath al-Baari. Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Sharh Saheeh Muslim: With regard to bay’ah (oath of allegiance): the scholars are agreed that in order for it to be valid it is not essential for all the people or all the decision makers to give their bay’ah. Rather, if bay’ah is given by those scholars and people of virtue and status who are present, that is sufficient. It is not obligatory for each person to come to the leader and put his hand in his and give his oath of allegiance to him. Rather what is required of each individual is to submit to him and not go against him or rebel against him. What is narrated in the ahaadeeth narrated in the books of Sunnah about bay’ah refers to giving allegiance to the Muslim leader, such as when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever dies and did not make an oath of allegiance (to the Muslim leader) has died a death of jaahiliyyah.” (Narrated by Muslim, 1851). And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever gives his oath of allegiance to a leader and gives him his hand and his heart, let him obey him as much as he can. If another one comes and disputes with him (for leadership), kill the second one.” (Narrated by Muslim, 1844) And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If allegiance is given to two khaleefahs, then kill the second of them.” (Narrated by Muslim, 1853). All of that undoubtedly has to do with giving allegiance to the Muslim leader. Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan (may Allaah preserve him) said, answering a question about giving allegiance to the various groups: Bay’ah only has to do with the leader of the Muslims; these various bay’ahs are innovated and they are among the causes of division. The Muslims who are living in one country or one kingdom should have one allegiance to one leader; it is not permissible to have several kinds of bay’ah. al-Muntaqa min Fataawa al-Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, 1/367

With regard to how the allegiance should be given to the leader, in the case of men it is done in word and in deed, namely with a handshake. In the case of women, it is done by word only. This is proven in the ahaadeeth which speak of how allegiance was given to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).​

For example, ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) said: “No, by Allaah, the hand of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) never touched the hand of any (non-mahram) woman. Rather he would accept their allegiance (bay’ah) in words only.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5288; Muslim, 1866) Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in his Sharh (commentary): “This indicates that for women, allegiance is given in words only, without taking the hand of the leader, and for men it is done in words and by taking his hand.

And Allaah knows best.
​

Islam Q&A
​

 

[Muhammad]

:salamext:

Perhaps it would have been better to close this thread some time ago, but thus was Allaah (swt)'s decree and I will close it now. Before I do so, I have read a number of comments in this thread which I feel deserve a response. It is quite clear that in the end we are going to have to agree to disagree, but to make it a balanced discussion then both sides should be presented, and this is an inadequate but final attempt in doing so.

1. Bay'ah
Reading this thread it is apparent that the term bay'ah has taken on different meanings and perhaps this is one of the reasons for confusion and disagreement here. Bay’ah has been said to mean an agreement to obey one's teacher, it has been said to be a pledge to Allaah (swt), and it has also been said to be a normal student-teacher relationship with emphasis on commitment. In some places it is being called a Sunnah and likened to pledges made at the time of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) whilst in others it is being distanced from the kind of bay’ah made to a ruler. So to reach any kind of answer on this issue, we need to first be very clear on what exactly is meant by the word. Is the pledge simply cooperating in good and fearing Allaah (swt), or does it involve other, forbidden actions? This is especially important if we are going to attribute such a practice to the Sunnah of our beloved Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

An important point to bear in mind is what bay’ah is likely to mean to the average Muslim. The problem is that it is easily linked with joining a particular Sufi group and practices like those in the video of the very first post. It is often referring to what certain groups introduced as an 'initiation ceremony' for a devotee to join their ranks and eventually climb up in their hierarchies - hence a kind of bay’ah which was not practised by the early Muslims. So we must be absolutely clear that this kind of bay’ah is not what is being encouraged. The fact that certain forms of bay’ah occurred at the time of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) does not mean that anything termed a bay’ah today is automatically a Sunnah. And the significance of the practice of the Companions and those who followed them in this regard, as a way of understanding this issue more clearly, has already been highlighted earlier.



2. Sufism
It has already been clarified that Sufism is a broad term and may mean different things, so it is important to understand quotes regarding the promotion of tasawwuf as referring to that which is in accordance to the Qur’an and Sunnah. Unfortunately, many times the kind of sufism that is encouraged is not the correct one, hence we must exercise caution in our approach toward Sufi sects:

To summarize, there are in the present day and age no organized Sufi tariqahs that are error-free. The least problem that one finds in all of them, without exception, are innovations in their acts of worship. Such Sufis, whilst mistaken in these innovations, are in a completely different category than those who ascribe to their 'awliya' powers of rububiyyah or even attributes of Allah (such as knowing everything, hearing the calls of their murids, etc.). And these Sufis are (slightly) better than those who actually ask their 'saints' for supernatural help, shafa'ah, Jannah, etc.

There is no doubt that the conditions and practices of most Sufis today are known to contradict the Sunnah and are based on religious innovations that were not known at the time of the Prophet , or at the time of his Companions.

http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=7230

Hence, we advise you not to follow any Sufi sect, keep away from them and offer advice to any of them you know. Giving advice to others with whole-hearted concern is the core of religion. You should also seek knowledge of Sharee'ah at the hands of scholars who are known for their trustworthiness in creed and action in order to worship Allaah The Almighty with knowledge and insight, far removed from Shirk and religious innovations.

http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=27699

Also, Sufis adopt deviated beliefs such as pantheism and incarnation and allege that they are the people of truth and esoteric knowledge, while others are the people of Sharee‘ah rules, overt knowledge, and the like.

Moreover, they commit many religious innovations which contradict the guidance of the Prophet , and even insist on them. They depend on inauthentic and fabricated Hadeeths and excessively depend on visions and dreams, even establishing religious rulings on the basis of them, which is something that contradicts the consensus of all scholars who have stated that it is impermissible to establish any religious ruling on their basis.

Generally, it is impermissible for any Muslim to follow a Sufi group. Rather Muslims should stay away from them and warn others against their dangers.

http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=8500


There has also been mention of Ibn Taymiyyah and his stance on Sufism, so I hope the following will help to shed further clarification on this:

Regarding Ibn Taymiyyah's relationship with 'Sufism', really it all depends on how one wishes to define this rather ambiguous term. If Sufism is purely about tazkiyah an-nafs, then who amongst the Muslims does not wish to purify his soul? But the reality is that the group which identifies itself with these words also manifests mistakes in a number of areas, and Ibn Taymiyyah was a very vocal critique of all of these mistakes.

So, for example, he was against:
- group dhikrs
- Sufi awrad which each and every tariqah, without exception, is guilty of
- the unconditional veneration of saints
- traveling to visit the grave of any saint or prophet
- believing that the Quran has a 'batin' (hidden) meaning that has nothing to do with its epxlicit meaning, and which Allah blesses His chosen servants with
- believing that the Sunnah of the Prophet salla Allah alahyi wa sallam is somehow insufficient for worship and hence extra acts need to be added on to the relgion (such as the Mawlid)
- looking down upon studious scholarship with the presumption that real knowledge is not gained through rigourous study but rather thru khalwa
- taking one's beliefs and acts from sources such as dhawq, kashf, and ilhaam (all Sufi terminoligies)
- believing in the existence of a hiearchy of 'saints' awliya, qutb, ghawth, etc (again a belief each and every Sufi tariqah is guilty of)
- believing that it is necessary for a person to become a 'murid' and have a 'shaykh' whom he must unconditionally obey or give bay'ah to
etc.

Yes, he does praise some people who are labelled Sufis, such as Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, but he always points out that there is nothing in their writings that justify shirk or bid'ah; rather they were pious poeple and scholars and there is nothing at all about them or their works which makes them any more or less Sufi than other great scholars.

Ibn Taymiyyah also does not categorically label all Sufis as this or that, simply because the term encompasses a broad group of people and beliefs. Many of the early 'Sufis' were merely ascetics and worshippers - they believed nothing wrong per se but went to extremes in abandoning this world. Early scholars disapproved of this as it went against the Sunnah. However, later more radical beliefs crept in, such as wahdat al-wujud (manifested in people such as al-Hallaj, Ibn Arabi and Ibn Sabi'an), and these poeple Ibn Taymiyyah considered non-Muslims. And in between these two extremes are hundreds of shades of grey, and to each Ibn Taymiyyah gave what they deserved.

In one passage, he states taht the early Sufis were sincere people who went to extremes in their worship of Allah, and they had an ijtihad in this matter, '...but the correct opinion is that the Muslim needs to know that the best speach is the speech of Allah, and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad, and the best generation is the generation of the Companions, and the best path and way to Allah is that what he was upon and his companions.' (Majmu, 11/3)

I strongly advise the brothers to read his book al-Furqan, or 'the Criterion between the awliya of al-Rahman and the awliya of Shatan', which is meant as a refutation of the extreme Sufis. Also in volume 11 of Majmu fatawa there are many fatwas of his which clarifies his stance on this issue.

Ibn Taymiyah did not belong to a Sufi order

Question

I have come accross some disturbing articles on the Internet about Ibn Taymiyya. It says that his life was misrepresented by some people. They say that in some of his books, he apparently defends the Sufis and attributes himself to the Qâdiriyyah Sufi order. Could you please shed some light on to this matter?

Answered by

Sheikh Rashîd al-Hasan, professor at King Khâlid University

Ibn Taymiyah was not a member of the Qâdiriyyah. He had never followed or belonged to any Sûfî order. He indeed praised `Abd al-Qadir al-Jilâni and his book Futûh al-Ghayb. He also had good things to say about other Sufi scholars such as Abû `Abd al-Rahmân al-Sulamî, Sahl b. `Abd Allah al-Tustûr and al-Junayd. This only shows us how fair and objective he was in his approach. He used to be just and would accept the truth regardless of where it came from. Moreover, he would praise whoever said it. That does not in the remotest way imply that he followed the practices of the Qâdiriyyah.

Ibn Taymiyah explained some of the texts of Futûh al-Ghayb and found it to be a good book. [Majmû` Fatawâ Ibn Taymiyyah (10/456)]. At the same time he criticized the ways of the Qâdiriyyah and their habit of sitting alone, pretending to be with Allah and demonstrated how they were mistaken in this regard. He rejected their practice of innovating rites, remembrances, and prayers. This is clear to anyone who studies the works of Ibn Taymiyah.

For further reference, please refer to the following:

Majmû’ al-Rasa’l wal Masa’il, first edition (4/247-248).
Majmû’ Fatâwa Ibn Taymiyyah, first edition (22/525).
Al-Radd `Ala al-Muntiqiyyîn, Lahore edition (p 35).
Al-`Ubudiyyah, fifth edition (pp 73-82).

http://en.islamtoday.net/quesshow-13-982.htm


Allaah (swt) knows best.

I ask Allaah (swt) to guide us all to the Straight Path, to keep us firm and steadfast upon following the Sunnah upon the understanding of the Companions, to forgive us for our sins and to keep our hearts united, Aameen.