Dr. Bilal Philips UNVEILED

In the name of Allah, the Merciful to the Muslims in the World and the HereAfter, and Merciful to the unbelievers only in this World.

BILAL PHILIP'S ACCUSES AHL AL-SUNNA SCHOLAR OF SHIRK AT MADISON SQUARE GARDEN FUNDRAISING EVENT

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

In the recent fundraising event at Madison Square Garden, Bilal Philips, a follower of wahhabi (=also called "salafi") ideologies accused a reputable orthodox Sunni (Shafi'i) Shaykh, Nuh Ha Mim Keller, of shirk. The exact words of Bilal Philips, who spoke over a telephone to the large audience, were:

"We also have a distorted view coming from certain religious innovations, most of which could be attributed back to the principles of mysticism, Sufism which has appeared in the Muslim ummah, which though they attribute it back to Prophet (sall-Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), though the form which we cited [?] in half the countries have nothing to do with the Prophet's (sall-Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) teachings at all...."

Bial Philips continues to say:

"And perhaps the greatest evil which came out of it is the principle of calling upon others beside Allah, where human beings are set up as intermediaries between man and God. And so we find people today, under the guise of Sufism etc., calling for such things. PEOPLE LIKE NUH HA MIM KELLER, IN HIS BOOK "THE RELIANCE OF THE TRAVELLER", HE SPENDS A GREAT DEAL OF EFFORT AND TIME IN THE APPENDIX OF THE BOOK JUSTIFYING PRAYING TO PROPHET MUHAMMAD (Caps mine)..."

As you clearly see, Bial Philips accused a Muslim scholar of justifying praying to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and when I checked the book, "The Reliance of the Traveller" thoroughly, there was absolutely no indication that Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller was supporting shirk. Rather, Nuh Ha Mim Keller's book had a whole section on "TAWASSUL," which is to ASK ALLAH FOR SOMETHING USING AN INTERMEDIARY. Using someone as an intermediary is not the same as actually "worshipping" the intermediary. This is a slander by Abu Aminah Bilal Philips against Ahl al-Sunna wa'al Jama'a who have supported "Tawassul" for over a thousand years. Tawassul was done by the Prophet (pbuh) himself, and was practiced by great Companions (like Bilal ibn al-Harith; may Allah bless him), and others of the pious salaf us-salih (Imam Shafi'i did tawassul by means of Imam Abu Hanifah).

So in actuality, Bilal Philips is slandering not just Nuh Keller, but the Prophet (pbuh), the Companions, and the others of the salaf us-salih, and the ulema of the khalaf who followed their footsteps.

It is not new that Bilal Philips has called "tawassul," which is a permissible Islamic practice, to be unIslamic. He says the same in his books.



BILAL PHILIPS' STATEMENT IN HIS BOOK THAT TAWASSUL IS "UNISLAMIC", AND HIS REVEALING HIMSELF AS A WAHHABI

----------------------------------

Bilal Philips, in his "Evolution of Fiqh," page 130, says:

"Furthermore, in opposing tawassul...the twentieth century descendants and followers of Ibn 'Abdul-Wahhaab WERE ATTACKING UNISLAMIC PRACTICES (caps mine)."

The above statement from Bilal Philips tells the readers two things about him. First, he acknowledges to be a supporter of wahhabees and hence becomes an innovator himself. By showing respect to Muhammad ibn 'Abdl-Wahhab, the biggest innovator of the modern era, he contributes to the efforts of those who wish to destroy Islam. Ibrahim ibn Maisara reported Allah's Messenger (Salla-Allahu-'alayhi-wasallam) as saying: "He who showed respect to an innovator he in fact aided in the demolishing of Islam (narrated by Baihaqi)."

Second, Bilal Philips claims that tawassul is an "unIslamic practice" (which is why he accused Nuh Ha Mim Keller of shirk in the Madison Square Garden fundraising dinner). The false claims of Bilal Philips opposes the perspectives of Ahl al-Sunna wa'al Jama'ah (=scholars and followers of the Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali madhahib, of which 99% of Muslims have been part of). Tawassul is in fact permissible and even recommended by the Sunni ulema and plenty of evidence in the Qur'an and Sunna exists for it. Tawassul (or asking Allah for something by means of an intermediary after the latter's death -- one of the ways of the legal ways of tawassul) is only rejected by the wahhabis today.



WAHHABIS DEVIANCE AND THEIR REFUTATIONS; AL-ALBANI, TAMIMI, AND IBN BAAZ SHARE BILAL PHILIPS' DEVIANCE AND SPEAK AGAINST TAWASSUL

--------------------------------------------------------

To read a refutation of the wahhabee movement, one can read plenty of books by Ahl al-Sunna scholars. "Al-Fitnatul-Wahhabiyya," by the Mufti of Mecca, Ahmad ibn Zayni Dahlan ash-Shafi'i and "The Beacon of Humanity and the Clarification of Ignorance," by the great Shaykh Ibn Alawi Al-Haddad.

There are hundreds of other books written by other ulema although the aforementioned refutations are sufficient to expose wahhabee deviance. For your reference, here are a few more sources of refutation against the wahhabees: Shaykh Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan Al-Buti's "Al-salafiyyatu marhalatun zamaniyyatun mubarakatun la madhhabun islami" ["The Salafiyya is a blessed historical period not an Islamic school of law"], Al-muhaddith Muhammad al-Hasan ibn `Alawi Al-Maliki al-Husayni's "Mafahimu yajibu an tusahhah" ["Notions that should be corrected"], and al-Sayyid Mustafa ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan Al-Shatti al-Athari al-Hanbali's "al-Nuqul al-shar'iyyah fi al-radd 'ala al-Wahhabiyya" ["The Legal Proofs in Answering the Wahhabis"]. One will have ample evidence from these sources to prove that Bilal Philips' defense of wahhabees is tantamount to defending ignorance and reprehensible innovations.

Claims that seeking an intermediary between Allah and man is unIslamic are also made by other wahhabee "scholars." For example: Muhammad bin Suleiman At-Tamimi, in his article, "What Negates One's Islam," states:

"WHOEVER SETS UP AN INERMEDIARY BETWEEN HIMSELF AND ALLAH, whom he prays to, SEEKS INTERCESSION FROM and puts his reliance in, has BLASPHEMED according to the consensus of the scholars."

Al-Tamimi is lying in behalf of the majority of scholars because you will read below that the majority of scholars have considered setting up an intermediary between oneself and Allah and seeking intercession a permissible and meritorious act (provided that one believes that Allah is granting the wish and not the intermediary, which is clearly stated in Nuh Keller's "Reliance of the Traveller."

Furthermore, a similar statement is made by the so-called Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdl-Aziz ibnn Abdullah Ibn Baaz. Ibn Baaz, in his article "Ten Things Which Nullify One's Islam," says:

"SETTING UP INTERMEDIARIES BETWEEN ONESELF AND ALLAAH, making supplication to them, ASKING THEIR INTERCESSION WITH ALLAH, and placing ones trust in them IS UNBELIEF (KUFR)."

What Bilal Philips, Ibn Baaz, and al-Tamimi call kufr, i.e. setting up intermediaries when asking Allah, is in fact a practice of the noble Sahaba and their pious followers. This will be explained in more detail below.

THE DEFINITION OF TAWASSUL

---------------------------

According to the "Reliance of the Traveller" (the book which Bilal Philips accuses of shirk), the defintion of Tawassul is: Supplicating Allahu Ta'ala by means of an intermediary, whether it be a living person, dead person, a good deed, or a name or attribute of Allahu Ta'ala. Tawassul is a "means" Muslims seek, using an intermediary, when asking Allahu Ta'ala for something."

One of the many verses in the noble Qur'an which permit Tawassul is:

"Allah the Blessed and the Exalted said: "O ye who believe, fear Allah and seek ye the means to Him" (Sura al-ma'ida, verse34, juz' 4)



AHL AL-SUNNA SHAYKH YUSUF RIFA'I APPROVES OF TAWASSUL AND PRESENTS THE EVIDENCE

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Shaykh ul-Islam Yusuf ibn al-Sayyid Hashim al-Rifa'i, a Shafi'i scholar, former minister of state, educator, Sufi, and author explains the issue of tawassul very clearly in his "Adilla Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama'ah." The following is a translation of part of this book by Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller, who added this as a section in his translation of "Al-'Umdat al-salik" (The Reliance of the Traveller) by Shaykh Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, a student of the famous Shafi'i mujtahid Taqi al-Din al-Subki.

Shaykh Yusuf al-Rifa'i says:

"I here want to convey the position, attested to by compelling legal evidence, of the orthodox majority of Sunni Muslims on the subject of supplicating Allah through an intermediary (tawassul), and so I say (and Allah alone gives success) that since there is no disagreement among scholars that supplicating Allah through an intermediary is in principle legally valid, the discussion of its details merely concerns derived rulings that involve interschool differences, unrelated to questions of belief or unbelief, monotheism or associating partners with Allah (shirk);"

"the sphere of the question being limited to permissibility or impermissibility, and its ruling being that it is either lawful or unlawful. There is no difference among groups of Muslims in their consensus on the permissibility of three types of supplicating Allah through an intermediary (tawassul):

(1) TAWASSUL through a living righteous person to Allah Most High, as in the hadith of the blind man with the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) as we shall explain;

(2) The TAWASSUL of a living person to Allah Most High through his own good deeds, as in the hadith of the three people trapped in a cave by a great stone, a hadith related by Imam Bukhari in his "Sahih;"

(3) And the TAWASSUL of a person to Allah Most High through His entity (dhat), names, attributes, and so forth.

Since the legality of these types is agreed upon, there is no reason to set forth the evidence for them. The only area of disagreement is supplicating Allah (tawassul) through a righteous dead person. The majority of the orthodox Sunni Community hold that it is lawful, and have supporting hadith evidence..."

Shaykh Yusuf al-Rifa'i goes on to present the dalail (proof) of the hadeeth of the blind man, who asked the Prophet (Salla-Allahu-'alayhi-wasallam) to ask Allah to restore his eyesight afterwhich the Prophet ('alayhi salatu wassalam) taught him a du'a and instructed him to say it after completing ablution (wudu) and two rak'as of prayer:

"Oh Allah, I ask You and turn to You through my Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of mercy; O Muhammad (Ya Muhammad), I seek your intercession with my Lord for the return of my eyesight [and in another version: "for my need, that it may be fulfilled. O Allah, grant him intercession for me"]."

The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) added, "And if there is some need, do the same." (Related by Tirmidhi and 15 other ahadeeth masters and classified as rigorously authentic (sahih))

Shaykh Yusuf al-Rifa'i continues: "Scholars of Sacred Law infer from this hadith the recommended character of the "prayer of need," in which someone in need of something from Allah Most High performs such a prayer and then turns to Allah with this supplication together with other suitable supplications, traditional or otherwise, according to the need and how the person feels."

"The express content of the hadith proves the legal validity of "tawassul" through a living person (as the Prophet - peace be upon him - was alive at that time). It implicitly proves the validity of tawassul through a deceased one as well, since tawassul through a living or dead person is not through a physical body or through a life or death, but rather through the positive meaning (ma'na tayyib) attached to the person in both life and death. The body is but the vehicle that carries that significance, which requires that the person be respected whether dead or alive; for the words "O Muhammad" are an address to someone physically absent - in which state the living and dead are alike - an address to the meaning, dear to Allah, that is connected with his spirit, a meaning that is the ground of "tawassul," be it through a living or dead person."

So now it is known that Bilal Philips has not only accused Bilal Philips of shirk, but also Shaykh Yusuf Rif'ai (and the plenty of shuyukh who revised and approved of Shaykh Nuh Keller's translation of "The Reliance of the Traveller").

It must be noted that plenty of other ahadeeth exist to prove the validity of Tawassul through an alive or dead person. Shaykh Muhammad al-Hamid, a Hanafi scholar says (as quoted in "The Reliance of the Traveller"): "Those who call on them [the intermediaries] cannot be blamed. As for someone who believes that those called upon can cause effects, benefit, or harm, which they create or cause to exist as Allah does, such a person is an idolator who has left Islam -- Allah be our refuge!"

By the Shaykh's words, it is understood that Allah fulfills the du'as whether Allahu Ta'ala is asked directly or asked using an intermediary -- dead or alive. The wahhabees claim that it is only permissible to do tawassul while the intermediary is present and alive, but not when the intermediary is in his grave. Ibn Taymiya said that doing tawassul using an intermediary who is living in the life of barzakh is haraam (which is against the understanding of the Muslim majority), while Muhammad ibn Abdl-Wahhab said that it is "Shirk ul-Akbar" -- the "major shirk" which makes one a "mushrik" or polytheist. Bilal Philips, Tamimi, Ibn Baaz, and other wahhabees like Nasirudin Al-Albani, are simply following what Muhammad ibn Abdl-Wahhab said about tawassul, and they are ignoring what the other thousands of ulema said regarding its permissibility.

The wahhabees oppose the consensus of the Ahl al-Sunna majority, and Muhammad ibn Abdl-Wahhab accuses the majority of the Sunni ulema to be mushrikeen. That's why Bilal Philips accused Nuh Keller of shirk. This is one of many examples of how the Wahhabees revive the creed of the Kharijites who lived at the time of the noble Sahaba.

The Kharijites believed they were the only Muslims while everyone else, including Ali and Mu'awiya (Allah bless them), were Kuffar. The Wahhabees believe that for more than a thousand years Muslims were attributing partners to Allah and were kuffar because they did tawassul.

By such satanic thinking, Ibn 'Abdl-Wahhab made the blood of countless Muslims halal, and commanded his followers to butcher them in the name of Islam.

Imam Muhammad Amin Ibn Abidin, a Hanafi scholar who passed away in 1836 CE, said in his "Hashiyya radd al-Mukhtar," volume 3, page 309:

"In our time Ibn Abdl-Wahhab (Najdi) appeared, and attacked the two noble sanctuaries (Makkah and Madinah). He claimed to be a Hanbali, but his thinking was such that only he alone was a Muslim, and everyone else was a polytheist! Under this guise, he said that killing the Ahl al-Sunna was permissible..."

Another hadeeth to prove the legitimacy of tawassul, even after the intermediary is dead is the hadeeth of the man in need. Shaykh Yusuf al-Rifa'i states:

"Moreover, Tabarani, in his "al-Mu'jam al saghir," reports a hadith from 'Uthman ibn Hunayf that a man repeatedly visited Uthman ibn Affan (Allah be pleased with him) concerning something he needed, but Uthman paid no attention to him or his need. The man met Ibn Hunayf and complained to him about the matter - this being after the death (wisal) of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and after the caliphates of Abu Bakr and Umar - so Uthman ibn Hunayf, who was one of the Companions who collected hadiths and was learned in the religion of Allah, said: "Go to the place of ablution and perform ablution (wudu), then come to the mosque, perform two rak'as of prayer therein, and say:

'O Allah, I ask You and turn to You through our Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of mercy; O Muhammad (Ya Muhammad), I turn through you to my Lord, that He may fulfill my need,' and mention your need. Then come so that I can go with you [to the caliph Uthman]."

So the man left and did as he had been told, then went to the door of Uthman ibn Affan (Allah be pleased with him), and the doorman came, took him by the hand, brought him to Uthman ibn Affan, and seated him next to him on a cushion. 'Uthman asked, "What do you need?" and the man mentioned what he wanted, and Uthman accomplished it for him, then he said, "I hadn't remembered your need until just now," adding, "Whenever you need something, just mention it." Then, the man departed, met Uthman ibn Hunayf, and said to him, "May Allah reward you! He didn't see to my need or pay any attention to me until you spoke with him." Uthman ibn Hunayf replied:

"By Allah, I didn't speak to him, but I have seen a blind man come to the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and complain to him of the loss of his eyesight. The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace said, "Can you not bear it?' and the man replied, 'O Messenger of Allah, I do not have anyone to lead me around, and it is a great hardship for me.' The Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) told him, 'Go to the place of ablution and perform ablution (wudu), then pray two rak'as of prayer and make the supplications.'" Ibn Hunayf went on, "By Allah, we didn't part company or speak long before the man returned to us as if nothing had ever been wrong with him."

This is an explicit, unequivocal text from a prophetic Companion proving the legal validity of tawassul through the dead. The account has been classified as rigously authenticated (SAHIH) by the famous Huffaz Baihaqi, Mundhiri, and Haythami.

It is sufficient to accept the hadeeth of the blind man and the hadeeth of the man in need to justify that tawassul by the dead or alive is permissible. This is agreed upon by the majority of the Sunni ulema.

It must be noted that Muhammad Nasirudin Al-Albani, a wahhabi and so-called muhaddith, wrote a book titled "Tawassul" trying to disprove this practice after the intermediary is in his grave. His interpretations are of no significance since he opposes the interpretations of the majority of huffaz of Ahl al Sunna wa'al Jama'ah.

The hadeeth of Ibn Mas'ud, related by Imam Ahmad in his "Musnad," states: "Whatever the majority of Muslims see as right, then that is good to Allah, and whatever the majority of Muslims see as wrong, it is wrong to Allah." By this dalil, Al-Albani becomes among the stray and lost sheep because his opinions oppose that of the scholarly Sunni majority.

Al-Albani's and Bilal Philips' opinions only represent the wahhabee minority. It is also a fact that Al-Albani is "self-taught" and that he never had a Shaykh to teach him the knowledge of hadeeth. He does not possess a continuous chain of knowledge that goes back to the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) as the other true Sunni huffaz, like Imams Nawawi, Baihaqi, Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah, Tirmidhi, Nisa'i, and Ibn Hajar do. Hence, Al-Albani's interpretations and understanding that "tawassul done by an intermediary who is in his grave is Islamically unlawful" is false and meaningless.



BILAL PHILIPS IN ACTUALITY ACCUSES A COMPANION OF SHIRK

--------------------------------------------------------

In "The Fundamentals of Tawheed," Bilal Philips says:

"If someone prays to the Prophet (saws), to so-called saints, Jinns or angels asking for help or asking them to request help from Allaah for them, they have also committed Shirk."

This statement has both truth and falsehood in it. The truth is that whoever prays to other than Allah is undoubtedly a polytheist.

Therefore, praying to the Prophet, saints, jinns, and angels is indeed shirk because such people are mushrikeen who attribute partners to Allahu Ta'ala in worship. Only Allah is to be worshipped. Only Allah Azza Wajal creates the fulfillment of a supplication, as those who do tawassul by the alive or dead are very well aware of.

However, the last part of Bilal Philips' statement, "OR ASKING THEM TO REQUEST HELP FROM ALLAAH FOR THEM, THEY HAVE ALSO COMMITTED SHIRK" is an ugly accusation against the Sahaba that they committed shirk! May Allah protect us from falling into the abyss of ignorance as Bilal Philips has.

It is well known that a companion of the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam), Bilal ibn al-Harith, went to the grave of the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) when there was a drought, and said:

"O Messenger of Allah, ask Allah to give rain to your Ummah; they are close to perish..."

It is correct to call what he did tawassul and istighathah (seeking or asking for help), because he went to the grave of the Messenger (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) asking him to save them from the calamity that hit them by him asking Allahu Ta'ala to give them rain. The Huffaz Al-Baihaqi, and Ibn Kathir (in his "Tarikh") said that this hadeeth is SAHIH. In the issue of tawassul, Ibn Kathir adhered to the majority of Sunni ulema and agreed to the permissibility of tawassul. It is now obvious that Bilal Philips and other wahhabees are also then accusing Hafiz Ibn Kathir of shirk. May Allah protect us from wahhabi deviance.

Al-Albani said that the above hadeeth is unreliable, but his words are meaningless because the real and qualified huffaz of Ahl al-Sunna have classified it has SAHIH. Furthermore, Hafiz Ibn Abi Shayba ranks the hadeeth as SAHIH in his "MuSannaf," and Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his "Fath al-Barri" said its chain of transmission is sound (isnaaduhu Sahih).

One can clearly see that Bilal Philips has actually accused Bilal ibn al-Harith (may Allah bless him), a companion of the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam), of being a mushrik. We seek refuge with Allah from such innovators and we should shun them as much as possible. These are the people who stab the heart of the Ummah of Prophet Muhammad (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam). They stab the heart of the Ummah repeatedly because they do not refrain from such false accusations even after they are given the dalail (proof) by the pious sunni ulema (like Ibn Kathir) of Ahl al-Sunna wa'al Jama'ah.



HAFIZ IBN HAJAR AL-`ASQALANI AND HIS SHAKYH ZAYN UD-DIN AL-`IRAQI DO TAWASSUL; UNVEILING THE DECEPTION OF NASIRUDEEN AL-ALBANI

---------------------------------------------------------

Ahl al-Sunna scholars have been doing tawassul after the death of the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam). For example, Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani performed tawassul by the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) in his poems known as "an-Nayyirat-us-Sab," as did his shaykh Zayn-ud-Din al-'Iraqi at the end of his poem in "Tafsiru Mufradat-il-Qur'an." According to Bilal Philips' statements, these scholars would be "unIslamic." There has never been a scholar who has called Hafiz Ibn Hajar or Hafiz al-'Iraqi "unIslamic." Bilal Philips should correct his false accusations and make tawba to Allah.

As for Al-Albani, he quotes Hafiz Ibn Hajar as a reliable source of information in his book, "Tawassul." For instance, on page 5 of this book, Al-Albani says: "Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr, rahimahullaah..." However, Al-Albani's deception and hypocrisy is now evident because we know that Hafiz Ibn Hajar did tawassul after the death of the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) in his poem, "an-Nayyirat-us-Sab!" This is an explicit example of how wahhabees choose statements from a scholar which suit their views, but fail to acknowledge the statements made by the same scholar against them! Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani would definitely refute and testify against Al-Albani for this deception and mockery against Muslims.

What does Al-Albani have to say about this? Does he want Muslims to accept his claims "blindly?"

Moreover, Al-Albani, in his "Tawassul," page 16 says:

"...such a call for aid (ISTIGHAATHA) IS NOTHING BUT MAJOR SHIRK."

By saying that istighaatha is major shirk, he now joins Bilal Philips in accusing the Companion Bilal ibn al-Harith (and Hafiz Ibn Kathir, Shaykh Yusuf Rif'ai, and Shaykh Nuh Keller) of "Shirk ul-Akbar" because it has been proven by sahih dalil that he did istighaatha. In addition, to Al-Albani's surprise (?), Hafiz Ibn Hajar states the following hadeeth as HASSAN in his "al-'Amali:"

"Ibn Abbas related that the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam), said:'....IF ANY OF YOU FELL IN A CALAMITY IN A DESERT LET HIM CALL: OH SLAVES OF ALLAH, HELP."

This is without a doubt "istighaatha" (seeking help) so it is now evident that Al-Albani is also accusing the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) of committing "major shirk" since the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) taught "istighaatha" to the to the Sahaba. Ibn Hajar is in compliance with the Prophet's (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) words because he accepts "istighaatha" to be valid.

Al-Albani, Bilal Philips, and their deceptive followers can only wish that Ibn Hajar supported their innovative perspectives. Ahl al-Sunna will never be a partner to innovators like Al-Albani. May Allah protect us from the ignorance of Al-Albani and his blind followers. Ameen.



BILAL PHILIPS WRONGLY QUOTES AYAT IN QUR'AN WHICH REFER TO THE MUSHRIKEEN TO REFER TO THE MUSLIMS (AS THE KHAWARIJ DID).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bilal Philips, in his "Fundamentals of Tawheed," says:

"According to the Qur'aan, when the Makkans were questioned about directing their prayers to their idols, they answered, "We only worship them so that they may bring us closer to Allaah."

"The idols were only used as intermediaries yet Allaah called them pagans for their practice. Those among Muslims who insist on praying to other than Allaah would do well to reflect on this fact (end quote)."

This is an explicit example of how the Wahhabees revive a practice of the Kharijites who lived at the time of the noble Sahaba. Imam Bukhari has recorded Ibn 'Umar as saying in his Sahih [vol.9,page 50; English edition]:

"These people (the Khawarij and heretics) took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers."

The Ahl al-Sunna wa'al Jama'ah have warned Muslims from this Kharijite practice which the Wahhabees uphold today in the name of "Tawheed." By their lack of adherence and knowledge to the path of Ahl al-Sunna, they misinterpret verses from the noble Qur'an and make idol-worshippers equal in belief to the pious Muslims who are of the Ahl al-Sunna, and commit "takfeer." The above verse, stated by Bilal Philips in an attempt to invalidate the permissibility of Tawassul, is in fact refering to the idol-worshippers -- not Muslims.

The Iraqi scholar, Jamil Effendi al-Zahawi, says in his "al-Fajr al-sadiq fi al-radd `ala munkiri al-tawassul wa al-khawariq" [The True Dawn: A Refutation of Those Who Deny The Validity of Using Means to God and the Miracles of Saints"]:

"The Wahhabis say: the defense of those who practice tawassul is the same apology the idolaters of the Arabs offered as the Qur'an says describing the way the idolaters defended their worship of idols: "We only worship them in order that they may bring us nearer" (39:3)." "Hence, the idolaters do not believe that the idols create anything. Rather, they believe that the Creator is God, the Exalted, by evidence of the following verse:

"If thou ask them, Who created them, they will certainly say, God" (43:87) and: "If indeed thou ask them who is that created the heavens and the earth, they would be sure to say, God" (39:38). God has only judged against them for their disbelief because they say "We only worship them in order that they may bring us nearer."

"The Wahhabis say: Thus, do people who implore God by prophets and the pious use the phrase of the idolaters: "In order to bring us nearer" in the same sense."

Shaykh Jamil al-Zahawi, in the section of his book "Refutation of That False Comparison," continues to say:

"The answer [to the false claims of the wahhabees] contains several points:

(1) The idolaters of the Arabs make idols gods; while the Muslims only believe in one God. In their view, prophets are prophets: awliya are awliya only. They do not adopt them as gods like the idolaters.

(2) The idolaters believe these gods deserve worship contrary to what Muslims believe. Muslims do not believe that anyone by whom they implore God deserves the least amount of worship. The only one entitled to worship in their view is God alone, May He be Exalted.

(3) The idolaters actually worship these gods as God relates: "We only worship them..." Muslims do not worship prophets and pious persons by the act of imploring God by means of them.

(4) The idolaters intend by their worship of their idols to draw near God just as He relates concerning them. As for the Muslims, they do not intend by imploring God by means of prophets and saints to draw close to God, which is only by worship. For that reason, God said in relating about the idolaters: "... in order that they bring us nearer." However, Muslims only intend blessings (tabarruk) and intercession (shafa`a) by them. Being blessed by a thing is obviously different from drawing near to God by it.

(5) Since the idolaters believe that God is a body in the sky, they mean by "to bring us near" a literal bringing near. What indicates this is its being stressed by their use of the word zulfa -- nearness to power -- inasmuch as emphasizing something by its own same meaning indicates for the most part that what is intended by it is the literal meaning and not the metaphorical. For when we say: "He slew him murderously" (qatalahu qatlan) a literal killing rushes to the understanding, not that of "a hard blow" in counterdistinction to what we mean when we just say: "He slew him"; for that might mean only a hard blow. The Muslims do not believe that God is a body in the sky remote enough from them to see a literal proximity to Him by imploring God through a prophet. The ruling of Shari`a contained in the verse does not apply to them, whereas since the Wahhabis believe that God is a body who sits on his throne, they do not discover a meaning of blessing which the Muslims intend by their imploring God by prophets and awliya, but only that of drawing near which belongs to bodies. For that reason, these verses are applicable to them, not to Ahl al-Sunna." (end of quote)

ANOTHER HADEETH WHICH PROVES THE LEGITIMACY OF TAWASSUL

--------------------------------------------------------

"Whoever says when he goes out to the masjid (mosque): Oh Allah, I ask You by the right of the askers upon You and by the right of this walking of mine, because I did not go out dicontentedly, or to be praised or for fame; I went out to avoid Your anger and seeking Your acceptance. I ask You to save me from Hellfire, and to forgive my sins; no one forgives the sins except You. Allah accepts his du'a and 70,000 angels ask Allah to forgive him."

The hadeeth is related by Ibn Majah. Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani and Hafiz Abul-Hassan al-Maqdissi said: it is HASSAN. (We do not listen to Al-Albani's tad'if (ruling that a hadeeth is da'if) of the hadeeth after these Hafizan said it is authentic).



MUJTAHID MUTLAQ AHMAD IBN HANBAL APPROVES OF TAWASSUL

-----------------------------------------------------

Last but not least, one of the greatest scholars in the history of Islam, the mujtahid mutlaq Ahmad ibn Hanbal, approved the practice of tawassul by the Prophet (Salla-Allahu-'alayhi-wasallam) -- during his lifetime and after his death. This was narrated by one of the greatest students of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Abu Bakr al-Marwazi. This scholar, in copying the saying of Imam Ahmad, said that it is liked during drought to ask Allah for rain by the Prophet (Salla-Allahu-'alayhi-wasallam).

Imam Ahmad told about one of the great followers of the Companions, Safwan Ibn Sulaym, who was a pious, humble, and very knowledgeable Muslim, that just by mentioning his name, a person would hope the rain would come down as a sign of Allah's Mercy to the people. The meaning is if the people mention the name of Safwan Ibn Sulaym in their session, it is because of his great status, and as a blessing from Allah, the rain would start falling. This was narrated by al-Hafiz al-Mizzi, al-Hafiz al-'Ala'i, and Zabidi.

Imam Ahmad was also asked about touching and kissing the minbar of the Prophet (Salla-Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) for the blessing and about seeking the blessing by visiting the grave of the Prophet (Salla-Allahu 'alayhi wasallam). He responded by saying: "This matter is not prohibited," as was narrated by 'Abdullah, the son of Imam Ahmad, in his book titled "Al-'Ilal wa Ma'rifat ur-Rijal.

This is far from what the wahhabees believe, who say that it is shirk al-akbar to do tawassul by the Prophet (Salla-Allahu-'alayhi-wasallam) or the awliya after their death. Muhammad ibn 'Abdl-Wahhab, and his ignorant followers (Bilal Philips, Albani, Ibn Baaz, etc) are in a completely different direction from the methodology of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, the pious member of the praised Salaf who narrated more ahadeeth than any other Muslim.

Do Ibn 'Abdl-Wahhab, Al-Albani, Bilal Philips, and Ibn Baaz claim to be more knowledgeable than Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal? None of these innovators have lived in the time period of the praised Salaf us-Salih as Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and his students have. We cling to the practices of the Salaf -- not the so-called "salafi" or wahhabee innovators.

CONCLUSION

-----------

By the aforestated evidence from Qur'an, Sunna, and sayings of the noble ulema, it is clear that tawassul is valid, whether the intermediary is in his grave living the life of barzakh, or living the life of the world.

Bilal Philips, Al-Albani, Tamimi, Ibn Baaz -- and others who followed Muhammad ibn Abdl-Wahhab's deviant methodology -- oppose the practices of the majority of Sunni Muslims who belong to either the Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, or Hanbali madhahib. It is also clear that the wahhabis, although they claim to follow the madhab of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, are in complete contradiction to it. Also, plenty of ulema like Imam Yusuf Rifa'i, Nuh Keller, Ibn Kathir, and plenty of others like Taqi al-Din Subki, Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, Nuh Sulayman Ali, Imam Nawawi, Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, and countless other ulema agree to the permissibility of tawassul. The wahhabees are contradicting the statements and interpretations of these noble Sunni ulema. Last but not least, after quoting extensively from Nuh Ha Mim Keller's "Reliance of the Traveller," there is absolutely no indication that Nuh Keller is supporting "worshipping Prophet Muhammad" as Bilal Philips falsely alleges.

May Allah protect us from the wahhabi deviance and keep us in the fold of the Muslim majority who follow the footsteps of the pious Salaf us-salih.

Ameen.

P.S.

Bilal Philips criticized sufism, and called them innovators. However, it is well known that famous ulema have either been sufis or supported sufis.

Some prominent ulema are: Imam Nawawi, Imam Abdl-Qadir Jeelani, Imam Abu Hamid Ghazzali, Imam Izz ibn Abdl Salaam, Ibn Daqiq al-Eid, Badr Din ibn Jama'a, Abdl Ghani Nubulsi, Imam Qurtubi, Imam Ibn Hajar Haythami, Imam Jalal ud-Din Suyooti, Taqi al-Din Subki, Taj al-Din Subki, Ahmad Rifa'i, etc. Can any sane Muslim call any one of these intellectual giants "innovators?"

May Allahu Ta'ala protect us from the Ahl al-bid'a wal Ahwa and their heresy. Ameen.

Italian Muslim Majlis

refuting Sheikh Nuh Ha Mim Keller???

A brief clarification about Nuh Ha Mim Keller
“Whoever has no sheikh, has the devil as his Sheikh.” - Nuh Keller [‘Tareeqa Notes’ Pg. 2 ]

Nuh Ha Mim Keller, an American Sufi Sheikh, became Muslim in 1977 and moved to Jordan where he currently resides. Keller claims to be a scholar of Islamic Fiqh. However, some troubling points can be found in his published works. We have listed and commentated some of his many mistaken statements and ideas, in order to expose his faults, lest the people follow the wrong ideas into misguidance and self-ruin


1. Following the Sheikh to death, and Setting aside one’s intellect !

a. Keller says: “The conduct of the disciple towards the sheikh… consists of five things: following what the sheikh says, even when something else seems better; avoiding what he forbids, even if it means ones death; upholding the sheikhs honor be he present or absent, dead or alive; fulfilling the sheikhs rights to the degree possible, without remissness.”

b. He continues: “... Suspending ones intellect, knowledge, and leadership except as the sheikh confirms.”

(Reference 2. Pg. 102-103)

2. Overly praises the following problematic figures:

A. Abd Al-Wahab Shaarani is praised by Keller as a “ Sha’afi scholar and prolific author in works in Sufism, sacred law and tenants of faith…”(Reference 1 pg 1023)

Comment:

However here are two examples of what Ash-Shaarani narrated in his writings:

i) He writes: “a man would not attain the levels of the siddiqeen, until he leaves his wife as if she was a widow, his kids as if they were orphans, and takes refuge in dogs pens.”(in At-Tassawuf, Wal Masdar Pg 58)

ii) Ash-Shaarani also praised a celebrated sufi, who “cut of his own private part in the beginning of his ‘Jathbah’ a mystic Sufi state.” (in Al-Akhlaaq Al-Matbuliyyah Vol. 3 Pg. 179)

B. Ibn Arabi

Keller and other sufis refer to Ibn Arabi as: “The greatest Sheikh, ‘Al-Shaykh Al-Akbar’…(who is) widely regarded as a friend (wali) of Allah most high” (Reference 1 Pg. 1080).

The following quote is an example from Ibn Arabi’s work:

The consolation (comfort) of Pharaoh was with the belief Allah gave him when he was drowning. So Allah took him pure and purified. There was no impurity in him since He took him in his belief before he had acquired any wrong actions. Islam effaces what was before it. He (Allah) made him (Pharaoh) a sign of His concern so that none might despair of the mercy of Allah, for "no one despairs of solace from Allah except for the unbelievers." (12:87) If Pharaoh had been of those who despair, he would not have embarked on belief (Imaan). Musa, peace be upon him, was, as the wife of Pharaoh said, "a source of delight for me and for you. Do not kill him. It may well be that he will be of use to us." That is what happened. Allah gave them use of Musa, although they were not aware that he was a prophet who would destroy the kingdom of Pharaoh and his family. (The Seal of the Wisdom of Sublimity in the Word of Musa)

Comment:

(1) Contrary to Ibn Arabi’s statement the Quran clearly states that the Pharaoh died as a kaafir! See for example verse: “And indeed we went Musa with our Ayat and a manifest authority. To Pharaoh and his chiefs, but they followed the command of Pharaoh, and the command of Pharaoh was no right guide. He will go ahead of his people on the day of resurrection, and will lead them into the fire…” (Surah Hud 11:96-98)

(2) Regardless of Ibn Arabi’s statement, the simple fact is that Keller is quoting a man who was declared a kaafir by countless well-reputed Muslim scholars. Below are some such statements:

i) Imam ibn Katheer in his book of Islamic history- Al-bidaya Wal Nihaya comments on ibn Arabi “He has a book named Beads of Wisdom in which there are many things that are apparently clear kufr.”

ii) Imam adh-Dhahabi said (in Siyar ‘Alam an-Nubala) that “if ibn Arabi’s book (Beads of wisdom) does not contain clear Kufr, then there is no Kufr in the world!

iii) Imam ‘Izz ibn abdul Salam said about Ibn Arabi: “(he is) an evil liar sheik who claims that this world is eternal (i.e. was not created by Allah) and embraces promiscuity.”

iv) Also, a prominent Hanafi Scholar, Imam Bukhari Al-Hanafi, declared that: “The one who does not consider Ibn Arabi a kaafir, then he himself is a kaafir !

C. Ibn Al-Farid (References 3 Page 18)

In describing the hadra (public Dhikr), Keller said: “Singers near the sheikh, in solo or chorus, deliver mystical odes to the rhythm of the group; high spiritual poetry from masters like Ibn al-Farid...”

Comment:

Ibn al-Farid was a Sufi poet who died in 632 H. Imam adh-Dhahabi in his biographical works – Siyar ‘Alam an-Nubala- said about Ibn al-Farid: that he filled his poetry with Ittihad[1]. “If his poetry is not clear Ittihad (kufr), then there is no kufr or misguidance in this world. O’ Allah inspire us with guidance, piety, and protect us from desires. O’ Scholars of Islam don’t you get angry (by this) for the sake of Allah? There is no power except Allah.” It is strange that Nuh Keller describes this same poetry as “high spiritual poetry.”



3. Saying that people can see Prophet Muhammad (saw) while Awake !

-Keller states that certain Dua’s allow a person to see the Prophet (saw) while awake!

About the Dua ‘al-Yaqutiyya’ Nuh says: “whoever regularly recites it three times, morning and evening, shall frequently see the Prophet, both awake and asleep, in the sensory and the spiritual.” (Reference 2. Pg. 88-89)

Comment: This claim clearly contradicts the Quran and Sunnah which both confirm the death of the Prophet saw.


4. Reporting many fabricated supplications in his writings,

- Here are some examples of his innovated (man-made) supplications:

i) In the supplication ‘hizb Al-Nur’ he says: “I ask You by the reverence due to teacher, by the sanctity of the Guiding Prophet, by the sacredness of the Seventy eight,…” (Reference 2. Pg. 39)

ii) In the supplication ‘hizb Al-Sheikh’ he mentions: “And make me the treasury of the Forty” (Reference 2. Pg. 52)

Comment: What is the sacredness of the Seventy-eight?! What or who is the treasury of the Forty?!



5. Scholars and Human Intellect

a. Keller says about Abdul-Waheed Ibn Zayd (ra) and Imam Abu Haneefa (ra) they “.. performed the Dawn prayer for forty years with the ablution made for the nightfall prayer..” (Reference 1. Pg.1023 & Pg. 1028)

Comment:

1. This is against the clear teaching of the Sunnah. The Prophet saw said: “I pray some of the night and I sleep some of the night.” Sahih Bukhari. And therefore Nuh Keller is insulting Abu Haneefah and others by accusing them of disobeying the Sunnah.

2. It seems Nuh Keller is either lying, or has placed his intellect aside (as mentioned above), since it is humanly impossible for a person to refrain from sleep for (40 years x 365 days) 14,600 consecutive nights.


6. Promotes dancing and singing as a form of worship !

Keller says: “Individual motives, thoughts, and preoccupations are momentarily put aside by means of the sacred dance, of moving together as one, sublimating and transcending the limitary and personal through the timelessness of rhythm, conjoined with the melody of voices singing spiritual meanings.” (Reference 3. Pg.19)

Comment:

1. Since when have singing and dancing become means of Worshipping Allah?

2. If these are indeed means then why are there no authentic Hadeeth on how to dance for Worship.



*REFERENCES: 1. ‘Reliance of the Traveler’ by Nuh Ha Mim Keller

2. ‘Invocations of the Shadhilhi Order’ ”

3. ‘Tariqa notes’

The above have been taken from the spurious wahabi site http://nuh.faithweb.com/
You may also find similar attacks against Sheikh Nuh Ha Mim Keller at other wahabi outlets. Below is a complete defense of the sheikh.

We have seen in other posts the utter ignorance of a few to a topic that was not justifiably defended before being locked off.

Alhamdullillah, locking the post was the correct thing to do because Diamonds786 took pride in his ignorance and began posting posts from websites that have no knowledge or understanding of traditional sciences in islam.

Diamonds786 did not address the initial post and went off on his parade attacking falsely the mashayekh and sufis.

His claim was that he was addressing an earlier topic from another thread which he didn't do in that thread. However the topic in that thread was also different and he also had veered onto the same path and began attacking shaykhs and sufis without proof or evidence except from the left click on his mouse button and the cut and paste functions in his window being his
"daleel".

Furthermore, these websites have used non-muslim references to try and discredit a science which has outlasted the claims of being a sect for centuries.

Tassawuf is not a sect, but rather the very drinking glass that the awliya of the ummah drank from. Even the most notable scholars of the ummah drank from this glass.

Scholars such as:

al-Hasan al-Basri (d. 110), Imam Abu Hanifa (d. 150), Sufyan al-Thawri (d. 161), Imam Malik (d. 179), Imam Shafi`i (d. 204), Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (d. 241), al-Harith al-Muhasibi (d. 243), al-Qasim ibn `Uthman al-Ju`i (d. 248), Imam al-Junayd al-Baghdadi (d. 297), al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi (d. 320), Imam Abu Mansur `Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d. 429), Imam Abu al-Qasim al-Qushayri (d. 465), Shaykh Abu Isma`il `Abd Allah al-Harawi al-Ansari (d. 481), Hujjat al-Islam Imam Ghazali (d. 505), Abu al-Wafa' Ibn `Aqil al-Hanbali (d. 513), Shaykh `Abd al-Qadir al-Gilani (d. 561), Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597), Imam Fakhr al-Din Razi (d. 606), Abu al-Hasan al-Shadhili (d. 656), al-`Izz ibn `Abd al-Salam al-Sulami (d. 660), Imam Nawawi (d. 676), `Abd al-Salam b. Ahmad b. `Anim al-Maqdisi (d. 678), Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728), Ibn `Ata' Allah al-Iskandari (d. 709), Taj al-Din al-Subki (d. 771), Imam Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi al-Maliki (d. 790), Ibn Khaldun (d. 808), Imam al-Sakhawi (d. 902), Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d. 911), Zakariyya ibn Muhammad Ansari (d. 926), Ibn Hajar al-Haytami (d. 974), `Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha`rani (d. 973), Mulla `Ali al-Qari (d. 1014), Ibn `Abidin (d. 1252), Abu al-`Ala' al-Mawdudi (d. 1399), Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

A list of their sayings towards sufis can be found with full references at:

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


We thus ask the wahabi following and these imposter websites what they are going to do to try and refute all these great scholars who either were sufis or were in praise of sufis??

Obviously these highly regarded scholars couldnt all be "deviants" could they? Obviously scholars that they themselves quote from couldnt be innovators could they?

Some of these scholars who are actually Salaf wouldnt praise the sufis if they were deviants would they? This is the biggest proof against the claim that tassawuf was not know to the salaf!

Why then do we find muslims drift off on such tangents regurgitating the false material that the real innovators, the wahabis spread?

Maybe its lack of education, maybe its sheer ignorance, maybe its arrogance or maybe they just dont want to know the truth.

You would think however that at least they would remain silent until they studied the topics enough to learn what that truth is.

Instead they are the most confused people on the face of the earth. They dont follow teachers or scholars and this is why they lead themselves and others astray.

Rather they follow their caprice and turn to which ever zawiya they feel like at the time and never ever take a clear straight path in their life.

Instead their souls, minds and even bodies are in upheaval and total turbulence.

A similarity that Shaykh Abdul Rahman Al Shaghouri says is like "one who tries to dig in a place for water because they are thirsty. Getting frustrated they move to another place and dig again and keep doing so, eventually not doing anything but dirtying their hands and maybe dying of thirst. however, had this individual dug in one place and remained steadfast in that one place, eventually they would hit water, drink from it and quench their thirst and then quench others thirst too."

Are we as muslims willing to admit this to ourselves though? Can we look deeply into the abyss of our heart and soul and despite what our nafs wants us to believe, go against it and admit we dont actually have one direct goal?

Most of the time the answer is no. None of us do enough soul searching or contemplation for us to even realise we have an entity called the nafs which pushes us and pulls us in certain directions which is verified by the verses of the Quran in which Allah calls them, "Al Nafs al Ammara, Al Nafs al Lawamma, and Al Nafs al Mutma'innah."

Even some of the greatest Mujahideen of the Ummah were sufis or belonged to sufi orders totally rubishing the claims that sufis never engage in Jihad.

Sufis Do engage in Jihad, but they are not so stupid as to mis-interpret the verses of the Quran and Hadith and use Jihad as their platform to spread hatred across the world and thus causing more harm than good to muslims and non-muslims.

After all, what kind of Jihad can it be called when one kills innocent civilians and then has whole muslim countries bombed in return as a retaliation for killing those innocent civilians.

The weighing up of benefit verses harm has to be made and we can see more harm has happened to the muslim ummah than benefit from the imposter muslims carrrying out disasterous and horrific missions against innocent non-muslims and even muslims.

However Shaykh Nuh will speak more on this topic in part Two of my answers against the lies spread by diamonds786 and the like.

We ask that people let go of thier pre-conceived ideas and open thier hearts and let them be vessels of understanding and accepting truth, not ones of accepting claims of people who decorate their words with screaming and yelling or fancy websites in a hope to win people over superficially and then make them possibly not see the falseness or emptiness behind their claims.

This is not a simple matter of quoting hadiths and not knowing the contents behind the hadiths such as what diamonds786 did with refering to bid'ah.

So it is your choice, make it and make it for truth alone. As one scholar said: "truth is a sword, you either use it to cut or it will cut you."

The ultimate Truth is Allah and rest assured if you dont use Allah in your life to cut through the falseness of the world then Allah will cut you like he has cut down nations before you.

After we introduced what we were going to do we now introduce one of the most famous essays written by Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller regarding Tassawuf and its origins.

From this essay many have been guided if not to accept Tassawuf as thier way, at least to recognise it as a true science in islam worthy of all merit sitting alongside the other sciences of islam.

I am in no way any more learned than Shaykh Nuh to be able to speak on the topic so i therefore advance his essay in full confidence most Questions can be answered.


The Place of Tasawwuf
in Traditional Islam

©Nuh Ha Mim Keller 1995

Perhaps the biggest challenge in learning Islam correctly today is the scarcity of traditional ‘ulama. In this meaning, Bukhari relates the sahih, rigorously authenticated hadith that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said,
"Truly, Allah does not remove Sacred Knowedge by taking it out of servants, but rather by taking back the souls of Islamic scholars [in death], until, when He has not left a single scholar, the people take the ignorant as leaders, who are asked for and who give Islamic legal opinion without knowledge, misguided and misguiding" (Fath al-Bari, 1.194, hadith 100).

The process described by the hadith is not yet completed, but has certainly begun, and in our times, the lack of traditional scholars—whether in Islamic law, in hadith, in tafsir ‘Qur'anic exegesis’—has given rise to an understanding of the religion that is far from scholarly, and sometimes far from the truth. For example, in the course of my own studies in Islamic law, my first impression from orientalist and Muslim-reformer literature, was that the Imams of the madhhabs or ‘schools of jurisprudence’ had brought a set of rules from completely outside the Islamic tradition and somehow imposed them upon the Muslims. But when I sat with traditional scholars in the Middle East and asked them about the details, I came away with a different point of view, having learned the bases for deriving the law from the Qur'an and sunna.

And similarly with Tasawwuf—which is the word I will use tonight for the English Sufism, since our context is traditional Islam—quite a different picture emerged from talking with scholars of Tasawwuf than what I had been exposed to in the West. My talk tonight, In Sha’ Allah, will present knowledge taken from the Qur'an and sahih hadith, and from actual teachers of Tasawwuf in Syria and Jordan, in view of the need for all of us to get beyond clichés, the need for factual information from Islamic sources, the need to answer such questions as: Where did Tasawwuf come from? What role does it play in the din or religion of Islam? and most importantly, What is the command of Allah about it?

As for the origin of the term Tasawwuf, like many other Islamic discliplines, its name was not known to the first generation of Muslims. The historian Ibn Khaldun notes in his Muqaddima:

This knowledge is a branch of the sciences of Sacred Law that originated within the Umma. From the first, the way of such people had also been considered the path of truth and guidance by the early Muslim community and its notables, of the Companions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), those who were taught by them, and those who came after them.

It basically consists of dedication to worship, total dedication to Allah Most High, disregard for the finery and ornament of the world, abstinence from the pleasure, wealth, and prestige sought by most men, and retiring from others to worship alone. This was the general rule among the Companions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and the early Muslims, but when involvement in this-worldly things became widespread from the second Islamic century onwards and people became absorbed in worldliness, those devoted to worship came to be called Sufiyya or People of Tasawwuf (Ibn Khaldun, al-Muqaddima [N.d. Reprint. Mecca: Dar al-Baz, 1397/1978], 467).

In Ibn Khaldun’s words, the content of Tasawwuf, "total dedication to Allah Most High," was, "the general rule among the Companions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and the early Muslims." So if the word did not exist in earliest times, we should not forget that this is also the case with many other Islamic disciplines, such as tafsir, ‘Qur'anic exegesis,’ or ‘ilm al-jarh wa ta‘dil, ‘the science of the positive and negative factors that affect hadith narrators acceptability,’ or ‘ilm al-tawhid, the science of belief in Islamic tenets of faith,’ all of which proved to be of the utmost importance to the correct preservation and transmission of the religion.

As for the origin of the word Tasawwuf, it may well be from Sufi, the person who does Tasawwuf, which seems to be etymologically prior to it, for the earliest mention of either term was by Hasan al-Basri who died 110 years after the Hijra, and is reported to have said, "I saw a Sufi circumambulating the Kaaba, and offered him a dirham, but he would not accept it." It therefore seems better to understand Tasawwuf by first asking what a Sufi is; and perhaps the best definition of both the Sufi and his way, certainly one of the most frequently quoted by masters of the discipline, is from the sunna of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) who said:

Allah Most High says: "He who is hostile to a friend of Mine I declare war against. My slave approaches Me with nothing more beloved to Me than what I have made obligatory upon him, and My slave keeps drawing nearer to Me with voluntary works until I love him. And when I love him, I am his hearing with which he hears, his sight with which he sees, his hand with which he seizes, and his foot with which he walks. If he asks me, I will surely give to him, and if he seeks refuge in Me, I will surely protect him" (Fath al-Bari, 11.340–41, hadith 6502);

This hadith was related by Imam Bukhari, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Bayhaqi, and others with multiple contiguous chains of transmission, and is sahih. It discloses the central reality of Tasawwuf, which is precisely change, while describing the path to this change, in conformity with a traditional definition used by masters in the Middle East, who define a Sufi as Faqihun ‘amila bi ‘ilmihi fa awrathahu Llahu ‘ilma ma lam ya‘lam,‘A man of religious learning who applied what he knew, so Allah bequeathed him knowledge of what he did not know.’

To clarify, a Sufi is a man of religious learning,because the hadith says, "My slave approaches Me with nothing more beloved to Me than what I have made obligatory upon him," and only through learning can the Sufi know the command of Allah, or what has been made obligatory for him. He has applied what he knew, because the hadith says he not only approaches Allah with the obligatory, but "keeps drawing nearer to Me with voluntary works until I love him." And in turn, Allah bequeathed him knowledge of what he did not know, because the hadith says, "And when I love him, I am his hearing with which he hears, his sight with which he sees, his hand with which he seizes, and his foot with which he walks," which is a metaphor for the consummate awareness of tawhid, or the ‘unity of Allah,’ which in the context of human actions such as hearing, sight, seizing, and walking, consists of realizing the words of the Qur'an about Allah that,

"It is He who created you and what you do" (Qur'an 37:96).

The origin of the way of the Sufi thus lies in the prophetic sunna. The sincerity to Allah that it entails was the rule among the earliest Muslims, to whom this was simply a state of being without a name, while it only became a distinct discipline when the majority of the Community had drifted away and changed from this state. Muslims of subsequent generations required systematic effort to attain it, and it was because of the change in the Islamic environment after the earliest generations, that a discipline by the name of Tasawwuf came to exist.

But if this is true of origins, the more significant question is: How central is Tasawwuf to the religion, and: Where does it fit into Islam as a whole? Perhaps the best answer is the hadith of Muslim, that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab said:

As we sat one day with the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace), a man in pure white clothing and jet black hair came to us, without a trace of travelling upon him, though none of us knew him.

He sat down before the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) bracing his knees against his, resting his hands on his legs, and said: "Muhammad, tell me about Islam." The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) said: "Islam is to testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and to perform the prayer, give zakat, fast in Ramadan, and perform the pilgrimage to the House if you can find a way."

He said: "You have spoken the truth," and we were surprised that he should ask and then confirm the answer. Then he said: "Tell me about true faith (iman)," and the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) answered: "It is to believe in Allah, His angels, His inspired Books, His messengers, the Last Day, and in destiny, its good and evil."

"You have spoken the truth," he said, "Now tell me about the perfection of faith (ihsan)," and the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) answered: "It is to worship Allah as if you see Him, and if you see Him not, He nevertheless sees you."

The hadith continues to where ‘Umar said:

Then the visitor left. I waited a long while, and the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said to me, "Do you know, ‘Umar, who was the questioner?" and I replied, "Allah and His messenger know best." He said,

"It was Gabriel, who came to you to teach you your religion" (Sahih Muslim, 1.37: hadith 8).

This is a sahih hadith, described by Imam Nawawi as one of the hadiths upon which the Islamic religion turns. The use of din in the last words of it, Atakum yu‘allimukum dinakum, "came to you to teach you your religion" entails that the religion of Islam is composed of the three fundamentals mentioned in the hadith: Islam, or external compliance with what Allah asks of us; Iman, or the belief in the unseen that the prophets have informed us of; and Ihsan, or to worship Allah as though one sees Him. The Qur'an says, in Surat Maryam,

"Surely We have revealed the Remembrance, and surely We shall preserve it" (Qur'an 15:9),

and if we reflect how Allah, in His wisdom, has accomplished this, we see that it is by human beings, the traditional scholars He has sent at each level of the religion. The level of Islam has been preserved and conveyed to us by the Imams of Shari‘a or ‘Sacred Law’ and its ancillary disciplines; the level of Iman, by the Imams of ‘Aqida or ‘tenets of faith’; and the level of Ihsan, "to worship Allah as though you see Him," by the Imams of Tasawwuf.

The hadith’s very words "to worship Allah" show us the interrelation of these three fundamentals, for the how of "worship" is only known through the external prescriptions of Islam, while the validity of this worship in turn presupposes Iman or faith in Allah and the Islamic revelation, without which worship would be but empty motions; while the words, "as if you see Him," show that Ihsan implies a human change, for it entails the experience of what, for most of us, is not experienced. So to understand Tasawwuf, we must look at the nature of this change in relation to both Islam and Iman, and this is the main focus of my talk tonight.

At the level of Islam, we said that Tasawwuf requires Islam,through ‘submission to the rules of Sacred Law.’ But Islam, for its part, equally requires Tasawwuf. Why? For the very good reason that the sunna which Muslims have been commanded to follow is not just the words and actions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), but also his states, states of the heart such as taqwa ‘godfearingness,’ ikhlas ‘sincerity,’ tawakkul ‘reliance on Allah,’ rahma ‘mercy,’ tawadu‘ ‘humility,’ and so on.

Now, it is characteristic of the Islamic ethic that human actions are not simply divided into two shades of morality, right or wrong; but rather five, arranged in order of their consequences in the next world. The obligatory (wajib) is that whose performance is rewarded by Allah in the next life and whose nonperformance is punished. The recommended (mandub) is that whose performance is rewarded, but whose nonperformance is not punished. The permissible (mubah) is indifferent, unconnected with either reward or punishment. The offensive (makruh) is that whose nonperformance is rewarded but whose performance is not punished. The unlawful (haram) is that whose nonperformance is rewarded and whose performance is punished, if one dies unrepentant.

Human states of the heart, the Qur'an and sunna make plain to us, come under each of these headings. Yet they are not dealt with in books of fiqh or ‘Islamic jurisprudence,’ because unlike the prayer, zakat, or fasting, they are not quantifiable in terms of the specific amount of them that must be done. But though they are not countable, they are of the utmost importance to every Muslim. Let’s look at a few examples.

(1) Love of Allah. In Surat al-Baqara of the Qur'an, Allah blames those who ascribe associates to Allah whom they love as much as they love Allah. Then He says,

"And those who believe are greater in love for Allah" (Qur'an 2:165), making being a believer conditional upon having greater love for Allah than any other.

(2) Mercy. Bukhari and Muslim relate that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "Whomever is not merciful to people, Allah will show no mercy" (Sahih Muslim, 4.1809: hadith 2319), and Tirmidhi relates the well authenticated (hasan) hadith "Mercy is not taken out of anyone except the damned" (al-Jami‘ al-sahih, 4.323: hadith 1923).

(3) Love of each other. Muslim relates in his Sahih that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "By Him in whose hand is my soul, none of you shall enter paradise until you believe, and none of you shall believe until you love one another . . . ." (Sahih Muslim, 1.74: hadith 54).

(4) Presence of mind in the prayer (salat). Abu Dawud relates in his Sunan that ‘Ammar ibn Yasir heard the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) say, "Truly, a man leaves, and none of his prayer has been recorded for him except a tenth of it, a ninth of it, eighth of it, seventh of it, sixth of it, fifth of it, fourth of it, third of it, a half of it" (Sunan Abi Dawud, 1.211: hadith 796)—meaning that none of a person’s prayer counts for him except that in which he is present in his heart with Allah.

(5) Love of the Prophet. Bukhari relates in his Sahih that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "None of you believes until I am more beloved to him than his father, his son, and all people" (Fath al-Bari, 1.58, hadith 15).

It is plain from these texts that none of the states mentioned—whether mercy, love, or presence of heart—are quantifiable, for the Shari‘a cannot specify that one must "do two units of mercy" or "have three units of presence of mind" in the way that the number of rak‘as of prayer can be specified, yet each of them is personally obligatory for the Muslim. Let us complete the picture by looking at a few examples of states that are haram or ‘strictly unlawful’:

(1) Fear of anyone besides Allah. Allah Most High says in Surat al-Baqara of the Qur'an,

"And fulfill My covenant: I will fulfill your covenant—And fear Me alone" (Qur'an 2:40), the last phrase of which, according to Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, "establishes that a human being is obliged to fear no one besides Allah Most High" (Tafsir al-Fakhr al-Razi, 3.42).

(2) Despair. Allah Most High says,

"None despairs of Allah’s mercy except the people who disbelieve" (Qur'an 12:87), indicating the unlawfulness of this inward state by coupling it with the worst human condition possible, that of unbelief.

(3) Arrogance. Muslim relates in his Sahih that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "No one shall enter paradise who has a particle of arrogance in his heart" (Sahih Muslim, 1.93: hadith 91).

(4) Envy,meaning to wish for another to lose the blessings he enjoys. Abu Dawud relates that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "Beware of envy, for envy consumes good works as flames consume firewood" (Sunan Abi Dawud, 4.276: hadith 4903).

(5) Showing off in acts of worship. Al-Hakim relates with a sahih chain of transmission that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "The slightest bit of showing off in good works is as if worshipping others with Allah . . . ." (al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn, 1.4).

These and similar haram inward states are not found in books of fiqh or ‘jurisprudence,’ because fiqh can only deal with quantifiable descriptions of rulings. Rather, they are examined in their causes and remedies by the scholars of the ‘inner fiqh’ of Tasawwuf, men such as Imam al-Ghazali in his Ihya’ ‘ulum al-din [The reviving of the religious sciences], Imam al-Rabbani in his Maktubat [Letters], al-Suhrawardi in his ‘Awarif al-Ma‘arif [The knowledges of the illuminates], Abu Talib al-Makki in Qut al-qulub [The sustenance of hearts], and similar classic works, which discuss and solve hundreds of ethical questions about the inner life. These are books of Shari‘a and their questions are questions of Sacred Law, of how it is lawful or unlawful for a Muslim to be; and they preserve the part of the prophetic sunna dealing with states.

Who needs such information? All Muslims, for the Qur'anic verses and authenticated hadiths all point to the fact that a Muslim must not only do certain things and say certain things, but also must be something, must attain certain states of the heart and eliminate others. Do we ever fear someone besides Allah? Do we have a particle of arrogance in our hearts? Is our love for the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) greater than our love for any other human being? Is there the slightest bit of showing off in our good works?

Half a minute’s reflection will show the Muslim where he stands on these aspects of his din, and why in classical times, helping Muslims to attain these states was not left to amateurs, but rather delegated to ‘ulama of the heart, the scholars of Islamic Tasawwuf. For most people, these are not easy transformations to make, because of the force of habit, because of the subtlety with which we can deceive ourselves, but most of all because each of us has an ego, the self, the Me, which is called in Arabic al-nafs, about which Allah testifies in Surat Yusuf:

"Verily the self ever commands to do evil" (Qur'an 12:53).

If you do not believe it, consider the hadith related by Muslim in his Sahih, that:

The first person judged on Resurrection Day will be a man martyred in battle.

He will be brought forth, Allah will reacquaint him with His blessings upon him and the man will acknowledge them, whereupon Allah will say, "What have you done with them?" to which the man will respond, "I fought to the death for You."

Allah will reply, "You lie. You fought in order to be called a hero, and it has already been said." Then he will be sentenced and dragged away on his face and flung into the fire.

Then a man will be brought forward who learned Sacred Knowledge, taught it to others, and who recited the Qur'an. Allah will remind him of His gifts to him and the man will acknowledge them, and then Allah will say, "What have you done with them?" The man will answer, "I acquired Sacred Knowledge, taught it, and recited the Qur'an, for Your sake."

Allah will say, "You lie. You learned so as to be called a scholar, and read the Qur'an so as to be called a reciter, and it has already been said." Then the man will be sentenced and dragged away on his face to be flung into the fire.

Then a man will be brought forward whom Allah generously provided for, giving him various kinds of wealth, and Allah will recall to him the benefits given, and the man will acknowledge them, to which Allah will say, "And what have you done with them?" The man will answer, "I have not left a single kind of expenditure You love to see made, except that I have spent on it for Your sake."

Allah will say, "You lie. You did it so as to be called generous, and it has already been said." Then he will be sentenced and dragged away on his face to be flung into the fire (Sahih Muslim, 3.1514: hadith 1905).

We should not fool ourselves about this, because our fate depends on it: in our childhood, our parents taught us how to behave through praise or blame, and for most of us, this permeated and colored our whole motivation for doing things. But when childhood ends, and we come of age in Islam, the religion makes it clear to us, both by the above hadith and by the words of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) "The slightest bit of showing off in good works is as if worshipping others with Allah" that being motivated by what others think is no longer good enough, and that we must change our motives entirely, and henceforth be motivated by nothing but desire for Allah Himself. The Islamic revelation thus tells the Muslim that it is obligatory to break his habits of thinking and motivation, but it does not tell him how. For that, he must go to the scholars of these states, in accordance with the Qur'anic imperative,

"Ask those who know if you know not" (Qur'an 16:43),

There is no doubt that bringing about this change, purifying the Muslims by bringing them to spiritual sincerity, was one of the central duties of the Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace), for Allah says in the Surat Al ‘Imran of the Qur'an,

"Allah has truly blessed the believers, for He has sent them a messenger of themselves, who recites His signs to them and purifies them, and teaches them the Book and the Wisdom" (Qur'an 3:164),

which explicitly lists four tasks of the prophetic mission, the second of which, yuzakkihim means precisely to ‘purify them’ and has no other lexical sense. Now, it is plain that this teaching function cannot, as part of an eternal revelation, have ended with the passing of the first generation, a fact that Allah explictly confirms in His injunction in Surat Luqman,

"And follow the path of him who turns unto Me" (Qur'an 31:15).

These verses indicate the teaching and transformative role of those who convey the Islamic revelation to Muslims, and the choice of the word ittiba‘ in the second verse, which is more general, implies both keeping the company of and following the example of a teacher. This is why in the history of Tasawwuf, we find that though there were many methods and schools of thought, these two things never changed: keeping the company of a teacher, and following his example—in exactly the same way that the Sahaba were uplifted and purified by keeping the company of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and following his example.

And this is why the discipline of Tasawwuf has been preserved and transmitted by Tariqas or groups of students under a particular master. First, because this was the sunna of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) in his purifying function described by the Qur'an. Secondly, Islamic knowledge has never been transmitted by writings alone, but rather from ‘ulama to students. Thirdly, the nature of the knowledge in question is of hal or ‘state of being,’ not just knowing, and hence requires it be taken from a succession of living masters back to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), for the sheer range and number of the states of heart required by the revelation effectively make imitation of the personal example of a teacher the only effective means of transmission.

So far we have spoken about Tasawwuf in respect to Islam, as a Shari‘a science necessary to fully realize the Sacred Law in one’s life, to attain the states of the heart demanded by the Qur'an and hadith. This close connection between Shari‘a and Tasawwuf is expressed by the statement of Imam Malik, founder of the Maliki school, that "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." This is why Tasawwuf was taught as part of the traditional curriculum in madrasas across the Muslim world from Malaysia to Morocco, why many of the greatest Shari‘a scholars of this Umma have been Sufis, and why until the end of the Islamic caliphate at the beginning of this century and the subsequent Western control and cultural dominance of Muslim lands, there were teachers of Tasawwuf in Islamic institutions of higher learning from Lucknow to Istanbul to Cairo.

But there is a second aspect of Tasawwuf that we have not yet talked about; namely, its relation to Iman or ‘True Faith,’ the second pillar of the Islamic religion, which in the context of the Islamic sciences consists of ‘Aqida or ‘orthodox belief.’

All Muslims believe in Allah, and that He is transcendently beyond anything conceivable to the minds of men, for the human intellect is imprisoned within its own sense impressions and the categories of thought derived from them, such as number, directionality, spatial extention, place, time, and so forth. Allah is beyond all of that; in His own words,

"There is nothing whatesover like unto Him" (Qur'an 42:11)

If we reflect for a moment on this verse, in the light of the hadith of Muslim about Ihsan that "it is to worship Allah as though you see Him," we realize that the means of seeing here is not the eye, which can only behold physical things like itself; nor yet the mind, which cannot transcend its own impressions to reach the Divine, but rather certitude, the light of Iman, whose locus is not the eye or the brain, but rather the ruh, a subtle faculty Allah has created within each of us called the soul, whose knowledge is unobstructed by the bounds of the created universe. Allah Most High says, by way of exalting the nature of this faculty by leaving it a mystery,

"Say: ‘The soul is of the affair of my Lord’" (Qur'an 17:85).

The food of this ruh is dhikr or the ‘remembrance of Allah.’ Why? Because acts of obedience increase the light of certainty and Iman in the soul, and dhikr is among the greatest of them, as is attested to by the sahih hadith related by al-Hakim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said,

"Shall I not tell you of the best of your works, the purest of them in the eyes of your Master, the highest in raising your rank, better than giving gold and silver, and better for you than to meet your enemy and smite their necks, and they smite yours?" They said, "This—what is it, O Messenger of Allah?" and he said: Dhikru Llahi ‘azza wa jall, "The remembrance of Allah Mighty and Majestic." (al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn, 1.496).

Increasing the strength of Iman through good actions, and particularly through the medium of dhikr has tremendous implications for the Islamic religion and traditional spirituality. A non-Muslim once asked me, "If God exists, then why all this beating around the bush? Why doesn’t He just come out and say so?"

The answer is that taklif or ‘moral responsibility’ in this life is not only concerned with outward actions, but with what we believe, our ‘Aqida—and the strength with which we believe it. If belief in God and other eternal truths were effortless in this world, there would be no point in Allah making us responsible for it, it would be automatic, involuntary, like our belief, say, that London is in England. There would no point in making someone responsible for something impossible not to believe.

But the responsibility Allah has place upon us is belief in the Unseen, as a test for us in this world to choose between kufr and Iman, to distinguish believer from unbeliever, and some believers above others.

This why strengthening Iman through dhikr is of such methodological importance for Tasawwuf: we have not only been commanded as Muslims to believe in certain things, but have been commanded to have absolute certainty in them. The world we see around us is composed of veils of light and darkness: events come that knock the Iman out of some of us, and Allah tests each of us as to the degree of certainty with which we believe the eternal truths of the religion. It was in this sense that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab said, "If the Iman of Abu Bakr were weighed against the Iman of the entire Umma, it would outweigh it."

Now, in traditional ‘Aqida one of the most important tenets is the wahdaniyya or ‘oneness and uniqueness’ of Allah Most High. This means He is without any sharik or associate in His being, in His attributes, or in His acts. But the ability to hold this insight in mind in the rough and tumble of daily life is a function of the strength of certainty (yaqin) in one’s heart. Allah tells the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) in Surat al-A‘raf of the Qur'an,

"Say: ‘I do not possess benefit for myself or harm, except as Allah wills’" (Qur'an 7:188),

yet we tend to rely on ourselves and our plans, in obliviousness to the facts of ‘Aqida that ourselves and our plans have no effect, that Allah alone brings about effects.

If you want to test yourself on this, the next time you contact someone with good connections whose help is critical to you, take a look at your heart at the moment you ask him to put in a good word for you with someone, and see whom you are relying upon. If you are like most of us, Allah is not at the forefront of your thoughts, despite the fact that He alone is controlling the outcome. Isn’t this a lapse in your ‘Aqida, or, at the very least, in your certainty?

Tasawwuf corrects such shortcomings by step-by-step increasing the Muslim’s certainty in Allah. The two central means of Tasawwuf in attaining the conviction demanded by ‘Aqida are mudhakara, or learning the traditional tenets of Islamic faith, and dhikr, deepening one’s certainty in them by remembrance of Allah. It is part of our faith that, in the words of the Qur'an in Surat al-Saffat,

"Allah has created you and what you do" (Qur'an 37:96);

yet for how many of us is this day to day experience? Because Tasawwuf remedies this and other shortcomings of Iman, by increasing the Muslim’s certainty through a systematic way of teaching and dhikr, it has traditionally been regarded as personally obligatory to this pillar of the religion also, and from the earliest centuries of Islam, has proved its worth.

The last question we will deal with tonight is: What about the bad Sufis we read about, who contravene the teachings of Islam?

The answer is that there are two meanings of Sufi: the first is "Anyone who considers himself a Sufi," which is the rule of thumb of orientalist historians of Sufism and popular writers, who would oppose the "Sufis" to the "Ulama." I think the Qur'anic verses and hadiths we have mentioned tonight about the scope and method of true Tasawwuf show why we must insist on the primacy of the definition of a Sufi as "a man of religious learning who applied what he knew, so Allah bequeathed him knowledge of what he did not know."

The very first thing a Sufi, as a man of religious learning knows is that the Shari‘a and ‘Aqida of Islam are above every human being. Whoever does not know this will never be a Sufi, except in the orientalist sense of the word—like someone standing in front of the stock exchange in an expensive suit with a briefcase to convince people he is a stockbroker. A real stockbroker is something else.

Because this distinction is ignored today by otherwise well-meaning Muslims, it is often forgotten that the ‘ulama who have criticized Sufis, such as Ibn al-Jawzi in his Talbis Iblis [The Devil’s deception], or Ibn Taymiya in places in his Fatawa, or Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya, were not criticizing Tasawwuf as an ancillary discipline to the Shari‘a. The proof of this is Ibn al-Jawzi’s five-volume Sifat al-safwa, which contains the biographies of the very same Sufis mentioned in al-Qushayri’s famous Tasawwuf manual al-Risala al-Qushayriyya. Ibn Taymiya considered himself a Sufi of the Qadiri order, and volumes ten and eleven of his thirty-seven-volume Majmu‘ al-fatawa are devoted to Tasawwuf. And Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya wrote his three-volume Madarij al-salikin, a detailed commentary on ‘Abdullah al-Ansari al-Harawi’s tract on the spiritual stations of the Sufi path, Manazil al-sa’irin. These works show that their authors’ criticisms were not directed at Tasawwuf as such, but rather at specific groups of their times, and they should be understood for what they are.

As in other Islamic sciences, mistakes historically did occur in Tasawwuf, most of them stemming from not recognizing the primacy of Shari‘a and ‘Aqida above all else. But these mistakes were not different in principle from, for example, the Isra’iliyyat (baseless tales of Bani Isra’il) that crept into tafsir literature, or the mawdu‘at (hadith forgeries) that crept into the hadith. These were not taken as proof that tafsir was bad, or hadith was deviance, but rather, in each discipline, the errors were identified and warned against by Imams of the field, because the Umma needed the rest. And such corrections are precisely what we find in books like Qushayri’s Risala,Ghazali’s Ihya’ and other works of Sufism.

For all of the reasons we have mentioned, Tasawwuf was accepted as an essential part of the Islamic religion by the ‘ulama of this Umma. The proof of this is all the famous scholars of Shari‘a sciences who had the higher education of Tasawwuf, among them Ibn ‘Abidin, al-Razi, Ahmad Sirhindi, Zakariyya al-Ansari, al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd al-Salam, Ibn Daqiq al-‘Eid, Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, Shah Wali Allah, Ahmad Dardir, Ibrahim al-Bajuri, ‘Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulsi, Imam al-Nawawi, Taqi al-Din al-Subki, and al-Suyuti.

Among the Sufis who aided Islam with the sword as well as the pen, to quote Reliance of the Traveller, were:

such men as the Naqshbandi sheikh Shamil al-Daghestani, who fought a prolonged war against the Russians in the Caucasus in the nineteenth century; Sayyid Muhammad ‘Abdullah al-Somali, a sheikh of the Salihiyya order who led Muslims against the British and Italians in Somalia from 1899 to 1920; the Qadiri sheikh ‘Uthman ibn Fodi, who led jihad in Northern Nigeria from 1804 to 1808 to establish Islamic rule; the Qadiri sheikh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri, who led the Algerians against the French from 1832 to 1847; the Darqawi faqir al-Hajj Muhammad al-Ahrash, who fought the French in Egypt in 1799; the Tijani sheikh al-Hajj ‘Umar Tal, who led Islamic Jihad in Guinea, Senegal, and Mali from 1852 to 1864; and the Qadiri sheikh Ma’ al-‘Aynayn al-Qalqami, who helped marshal Muslim resistance to the French in northern Mauritania and southern Morocco from 1905 to 1909.

Among the Sufis whose missionary work Islamized entire regions are such men as the founder of the Sanusiyya order, Muhammad ‘Ali Sanusi, whose efforts and jihad from 1807 to 1859 consolidated Islam as the religion of peoples from the Libyan Desert to sub-Saharan Africa; [and] the Shadhili sheikh Muhammad Ma‘ruf and Qadiri sheikh Uways al-Barawi, whose efforts spread Islam westward and inland from the East African Coast . . . . (Reliance of the Traveller,863).

It is plain from the examples of such men what kind of Muslims have been Sufis; namely, all kinds, right across the board—and that Tasawwuf did not prevent them from serving Islam in any way they could.

To summarize everything I have said tonight: In looking first at Tasawwuf and Shari‘a, we found that many Qur'anic verses and sahih hadiths oblige the Muslim to eliminate haram inner states as arrogance, envy, and fear of anyone besides Allah; and on the other hand, to acquire such obligatory inner states as mercy, love of one’s fellow Muslims, presence of mind in prayer, and love of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace). We found that these inward states could not be dealt with in books of fiqh, whose purpose is to specify the outward, quantifiable aspects of the Shari‘a. The knowledge of these states is nevertheless of the utmost importance to every Muslim, and this is why it was studied under the ‘ulama of Ihsan, the teachers of Tasawwuf, in all periods of Islamic history until the beginning of the present century.

We then turned to the level of Iman, and found that though the ‘Aqida of Muslims is that Allah alone has any effect in this world, keeping this in mind in everhday life is not a given of human consciousness, but rather a function of a Muslim’s yaqin, his certainty. And we found that Tasawwuf, as an ancillary discipline to ‘Aqida, emphasizes the systematic increase of this certainty through both mudhakara, ‘teaching tenets of faith’ and dhikr, ‘the remembrance of Allah,’ in accordance with the words of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) about Ihsan that "it is worship Allah as though you see Him."

Lastly, we found that accusations against Tasawwuf made by scholars such as Ibn al-Jawzi, and Ibn Taymiya were not directed against Tasawwuf in principle, but to specific groups and individuals in the times of these authors, the proof for which is the other books by the same authors that showed their understanding of Tasawwuf as a Shari‘a science.

To return to the starting point of my talk this evening, with the disappearance of traditional Islamic scholars from the Umma, two very different pictures of Tasawwuf emerge today. If we read books written after the dismantling of the traditional fabric of Islam by colonial powers in the last century, we find the big hoax: Islam without spirituality and Shari‘a without Tasawwuf. But if we read the classical works of Islamic scholarship, we learn that Tasawwuf has been a Shari‘a science like tafsir, hadith, or any other, throughout the history of Islam. The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said,

"Truly, Allah does not look at your outward forms and wealth, but rather at your hearts and your works" (Sahih Muslim, 4.1389: hadith 2564).

And this is the brightest hope that Islam can offer a modern world darkened by materialism and nihilism: Islam as it truly is; the hope of eternal salvation through a religion of brotherhood and social and economic justice outwardly, and the direct experience of divine love and illumination inwardly.

End


We will in the next part put forth a reply to the claims that diamonds786 posted against sufis by the imposter website allaahuakbar.net

In his absolutely false post diamonds786 could not control himself and let his nafs go on a spree of ignorance searching. To fuel this search he chose the most repungent websites and references. He did not bother to check the authenticity of these claims and he merely accepted their false attacks on great scholars at face value.

Something really has to be wrong with a website that declares more than 3/4 of the muslim ummah to be kafirs or led astray.

they spare no one when they label groups such as:
Ahmediyyah
Nation of Islam
Ansaru Allah
Moors
Warith-deen
Bahaullah
Shi'ites
Baatiniyyah
Boharas
Dawoodi Boharas
Nusayris
Durze
Agakhaani
Jamaat-e-Islami
Sufism
Deobandism
Tableegi-Jamaat
Bareilwiyat
Naqshabandis
Hizb-ut-tahreer
Ikhwani
Jihaadis
Qur'ânites
Qadariyyah
Khawariji
Jahmiyyah
Ash'ariyyah
Matrudiyyah
Murji’ah
Khalifites(19ers)
Takfiris
Habashis
Mehdavis
Goharshahi,

as kuffar and outside the fold of islam.

Whilst it is true some of them have strayed in thier beliefs not all of them have. To call them kuffar so easily is not a light matter and they will be accountable on the day of judgement against all these lies.

furthermore, all thier so called proofs are lacking in substance and display to the world how little they actually know.

But this is in defence of Tassawuf and sufis from the absurd lies and fabrications of diamonds786.

diamonds786 wrote:


QUOTE
The word “Sufism” was not known at the time of the Messenger or the Sahaabah or the Taabi’een. It arose at the time when a group of ascetics who wore wool (“soof”) emerged, and this name was given to them. It was also said that the name was taken from the word “soofiya” (“sophia”) which means “wisdom” in Greek. The word is not derived from al-safa’ (“purity”) as some of them claim, because the adjective derived from safa’ is safaa’i, not soofi (sufi). The emergence of this new name and the group to whom it is applied exacerbated the divisions among Muslims. The early Sufis differed from the later Sufis who spread bid’ah (innovation) to a greater extent and made shirk in both minor and major forms commonplace among the people, as well as the innovations against which the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) warned us when he said, “Beware of newly-invented things, for every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is a going-astray.” (Reported by al-Tirmidhi, who said it is saheeh hasan).


the origin of tassawuf and sufis and thier link with the salaf and early muslims has more than adequately been answered by part two of this series of refutations.

Dr Diamonds thinks that this poor attempt at describing where sufis originate from is going to be the end of all definitions. He claims the early sufis differ from the later ones that spread bida'h and accuses the later sufis of shirk and minor and major sins. he then uses the well known hadith of the rasul about bid'a as justification and a seal on his arguement.

He does not even comprehend the real essence of the hadith as we have numerously posted time and time again against similar users of the hadith in other threads.

A thorough search on islamic sydney forums will lead you to the right way.
If that doesnt help you then i can point you to many texts and scholars who will rectify your understanding of the meaning of the word bid'a and the understanding of the scholars in regards to it.

If you were to take the hadith as EVERY innovation is going astray then by the same token we call you to be sincere in your claim and not use the modern technology and good pleasures of this world that have been newly-invented.

Otherwise you should retract your use of this hadith and place it in its proper context. That is, to use it when appropriate and against the matters appropriate not so general as you have above.

If you like we can meet up with you and give you lessons in our new book, " Bid'a for dummies."

We doubt that you would want to though and wont be holding our breath anytime soon.

Next Dr diamonds786 says:


QUOTE
Sufism has numerous branches or tareeqahs, such as the Teejaniyyah, Qaadiriyyah, Naqshbandiyyah, Shaadhiliyyah, Rifaa’iyyah, etc., the followers of which all claim that their particular tareeqah is on the path of truth whilst the others are following falsehood. Islam forbids such sectarianism.


Yes there are many branches or tariqas and you have mentioned some of them but then you falsely accuse them that they claim they are the only saved ones and of sectarianism.

Upon close observation of this false claim and your adherance to wahabi websites it can be easily concluded that you borrowed this concept from the mouths of wahabis and tried to make it stick to Sufis. I dare you to find one reference for this statement that sufis claim everyone else but themselves are following falsehood, or sectarianising the ummah.

The truth of the matter is, real tariqas do not emphasise this at all. They do not call fellow muslims who dont want to take tariqa as off the path and never have.

Therefore your use of the Quranic verses

QUOTE
“… and be not of al-mushrikoon (the disbelievers in the Oneness of Allaah, polytheists, idolaters, etc.),
Of those who split up their religion (i.e., who left the true Islamic monotheism), and became sects, [i.e., they invented new things in the religion (bid’ah) and followed their vain desires], each sect rejoicing in that which is with it.” [al-Room 30:31-32]

does not apply to them and in any case it is out of context.
Your or translators adding in parentheses the words above are not the tradiotional understanding of Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah.

In any case you have immediately gone from your first quote above to then automatically calling Sufis Mushrikoon, disbelievers, polytheists and idolators. How sorry you will be on the day of judgement when all these innocent muslims will rush to you and forcefully take your hassanat off you for such outrageous claims.

Next Dr Diamonds786 takes a cheap shot at the well supported and documented concept of tawassul in Islam.

he says:

QUOTE

The Sufis worship others than Allaah, such as Prophets and “awliya’” [“saints”], living or dead. They say, “Yaa Jeelaani”, “Yaa Rifaa’i” [calling on their awliya’], or “O Messenger of Allaah, help and save” or “O Messenger of Allaah, our dependence is on you”, etc.
But Allaah forbids us to call on anyone except Him in matters that are beyond the person's capabilities. If a person does this, Allaah will count him as a mushrik,


It is understandable that ignorance breeds ignorance and Diamonds is certainly letting his ignorance feed on itself.

To speak on the issue of tawassul and its acceptance according to the Quran and Sunnah and the righteous scholars would require volumes and i wont do it any justice fitting the topic in this small space we have available here. perhaps we will address this topic in other separate threads but for the meantime, i will counter his lies by putting forth the evidence that he has overlooked or ignored.

The Prophet Pbbuh said in a long hadith:

Allah will say: "The angels have interceded. The Prophets have interceded. The believers have interceded. There does not remain except the Most Merciful of the merciful ones."

Narrated by Muslim (Iman) from Abu Sa`id al-Khudri.


- Bukhari [Istisqa']: Annas narrated: Whenever drought threatened them, `Umar ibn al-Khattab used to ask Allah for rain through the mediation of al-`Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib. He [`Umar] used to say: "O Allah! We used to ask you through the means of our Prophet and You would bless us with rain, and now we ask You through the means of our Prophet's uncle, so bless us with rain." And it would rain.


- Tirmidhi (hasan), Ibn Majah, and al-Hakim: Abu Umama narrated that the Prophet said: "More men will enter Paradise through the intercession of a certain man than there are people in the tribes of Rabi`ah and Mudar," and that the elders considered that this was `Uthman ibn `Affan.

- Muslim (jana'iz): `A'ishah reports the Prophet as saying: "If a company of Muslims numbering one hundred pray over a dead person, all of them interceding for him, their intercession for him will be accepted."

- Muslim (jana'iz): Ibn `Abbas said: "I have heard the Prophet say: If any Muslim dies and forty men who associate nothing with Allah stand over his body in prayer, Allah will accept them as intercessors for him."

I really hate hadith and ayah bashing people but clarification is well due here and diamonds lies must be exposed. if these hadiths arent enough to prove to you the validity of intercession i can gladly post much more. enough to probably make you flee from these false accusations you make.

Next Diamonds786 tries to deny the hadiths of the Prophet pbbuh where he clearly mentions to us the concept of abdal.

diamonds says:
QUOTE
The Sufis believe that there are abdaal, aqtaab and awliya’ (kinds of “saints”) to whom Allaah has given the power to run the affairs of the universe. Allaah tells us about the mushrikeen (interpretation of the meaning):


Unfortunately, despite the fact that i hate writing in wahabi style and refuting everything that they say by posting blasts of hadith and Quran, there is no other method by which they can comprehend Islam. It is as if their brains have locked out the ability to do anything else. If this intention was sincere then one would look at it as noble. But it can be seen from their false accusations that their intentions are only to follow what pleases them, not the Quran and sunnah as they claim.

Anyway, here are hadiths proving the fact of abdal.

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal narrates in his Musnad (1:112):

... The people of Syria were mentioned in front of `Ali ibn Abi Talib while he was in Iraq, and they said: "Curse them, O Commander of the Believers." He replied: "No, I heard the Messenger of Allah say: The Substitutes (al-abdal) are in Syria and they are forty men, every time one of them dies, Allah substitutes another in his place. By means of them Allah brings down the rain, gives (Muslims) victory over their enemies, and averts punishment from the people of Syria." al-Haythami said: "The men in its chains are all those of the sahih except for Sharih ibn `Ubayd, and he is trustworthy (thiqa)." Sakhawi mentions this narration in his Maqasid (p. 33 #8) and says the same. However, he is of the opinion that it is more likely a saying of `Ali himself.

No less, Ibn Taymiyya writes at the end of his `Aqida wasitiyya:

"The true adherents of Islam in its pristine purity are Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a. In their ranks the truthful saints (siddiqin), the martyrs, and the righteous are to be found. Among them are the great men of guidance and illumination, of recorded integrity and celebrated virtue. The Substitutes (abdal) and the Imams of religion are to be found among them and the Muslims are in full accord concerning their guidance. These are the Victorious Group about whom the Prophet said: "A group within my Community manifestly continues to be in the truth. Neither those who oppose them nor those who abandon them can do them harm, from now on until the Day of Resurrection."


al-Hakim narrated the following which he graded sound (sahih), and al-Dhahabi confirmed him:

`Ali said: "Do not curse the people of Syria, for among them are the Substitutes (al-abdal), but curse their injustice."

The above is a narration of `Ali not attributed to the Prophet. Note, however, that any religious knowledge unattainable through ijtihad and authentically conveyed from one of the Companions is considered a hadith by the experts of that science.


Tabarani said in his Mu`jam al-awsat:

Anas said that the Prophet said: "The earth will never lack forty men similar to the Friend of the Merciful [Prophet Ibrahim], and through them people receive rain and are given help. None of them dies except Allah substitutes another in his place." Qatada said: "We do not doubt that al-Hasan [al-Basri] is one of them."

Ibn Hibban narrates it in al-Tarikh through Abu Hurayra as: "The earth will never lack forty men similar to Ibrahim the Friend of the Merciful, and through whom you are helped, receive your sustenance, and receive rain."

Abu Dawud through three different good chains the "Book of the Mahdi" in his Sunan (English #4273), Imam Ahmad in his Musnad (6:316), Ibn Abi Shayba in his Musannaf, Abu Ya`la, al-Hakim, and Bayhaqi narrated:

Umm Salama the wife of the Prophet related that the Prophet said: "Disagreement will occur at the death of a Caliph and a man of the people of Madina will come forth flying to Mecca. Some of the people of Mecca will come to him, bring him out against his will and swear allegiance to him between the Corner and the Maqam. An expeditionary force will then be sent against him from Syria but will be swallowed up in the desert between Mecca and Madina, and when the people see that, the Substitutes (abdal) of Syria and the best people (`asaba) of Iraq will come to him and swear allegiance to him between the rukn and the maqam..."


Imam Ahmad cited in Kitab al-zuhd, also Ibn Abi al-Dunya, Abu Nu`aym, Bayhaqi, and Ibn `Asakir narrated from Julays:

Wahb ibn Munabbih said: I saw the Prophet in my sleep, so I said: "Ya Rasulallah, where are the Substitutes (budala') of your Community?" So he gestured with his hand towards Syria. I said: "Ya Rasulallah, aren't there any in Iraq?" He said: "Yes, Muhammad ibn Wasi`, Hassan ibn Abi Sinan, and Malik ibn Dinar, who walks among the people similarly to Abu Dharr in his time."

If all this isnt enough to prove to you the fact of abdal, then i will gladly post more, but your probably getting a little wiser now and learning you shouldnt jump to conclusions before you have studied matters properly.


Then out of no where you write:

QUOTE
The mushrik Arabs knew more about Allaah than these Sufis!


I really do not know what to reply to someone who thinks a polythiest knows more about Allah than someone who prays, fasts, gives zakat, goes to hajj, believes in Allahs oneness, in the angels, the prophets, the books, the day of judgement and divine decree. The twisted state of your mentality is really shining through here. but for all relevant purposes i think you can be absolved of total blame since all you did was regurgitate material of a wahabi website and i dont think you even read it yourself, much like you dont read any other posts but your own on this forum.

Diamonds wrote:
QUOTE
The Sufis turn to other than Allaah when calamity strikes, but Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):


This has been explained under the section on tawassul and in any case the definintion of tawwasul is not turning to the people themselves but rather asking Allah alone THROUGH the people, the blessings of the people or the favour of the rank of these rightreous people to give to them what they ask for.

It is not compulsory to do and never has been, so if you want to, do it and if your scared that you cant do it without thinking your worshipping a human then dont do it and protect your faith.

Next you say,


QUOTE
Some Sufis believe in wahdat al-wujood (unity of existence). They do not have the idea of a Creator and His creation, instead they say that everything is creation and everything is god.


Subhanallah, much like the rest of your false claims, you have never in this whole post referenced any of your claims further adding to the doubtful nature of them.

Regardless, wahdat al wujjud has always been a concept distorted and misunderstood by wahabis, mainly due to a lack of comprehension in Islamic sciences, language, literature and poetic artforms of expression.

this massive topic will not be justifiably defended here but restassured sufis do not believe that They are Allah or Allah is them as misconstructed by anti-sufi literature. The real sufi holds the shariah above themself and any other human being.

But the serious inconsistencies in wahabi beliefs of creed - which are an innovation in themselves- of anthropomorphism and literal belief of Allah having hands, feet, shins, mouth, ears, face and eyes are a possible reason why they claim that sufis mean by the term wahdat al wujjud that they are Allah and Allah is them.

Having a mind full of bodily representations of Allah such that wahabis do, will lead anyone to make these foul accusations and come to these fabricated conclusions.

One need to look no further than Ibn taymiyahs "sharh aqeedat al wasitiya", which wahabis heavily believe in to see the amount of anthropomorphism that they believe in.

May Allah rid us of these incomprehnsible innovations.

next diamonds wrote:


QUOTE
The Sufis advocate extreme asceticism in this life and do not believe in taking the necessary means or in jihaad


The position of sufis with Jihad has been explained in the article by Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller. But since sufis do not agree with the hate filled wahabi interpretation of Jihad the wahabis try to make out that they are not practioners of it or believers in it.

As for the arguement of asceticism or even extreme asceticism, not you or any other person on the face of the earth has a right to determine what people take or abstain from. No one can give a benchmark for what is or isnt acceptable for humans to live by or abstain from regarding material or physical matters.

Numerous examples are available from the Quran and Sunnah as to the higher status of those who do not indulge in this world and its material affairs so there is no need for me to even begin to defend those who choose the simpleness of life over its luxuries. some Muslims have even been so blessed as to have an abundance of luxuries at their disposal yet chose to be detached from it and live simply according to their immediate needs.


diamonds continues to ignorantly write:


QUOTE
The Sufis refer the idea of ihsaan to their shaykhs and tell their followers to have a picture of their shaykh in mind when they remember Allaah and even when they are praying. Some of them even put a picture of their shaykh in front of them when they are praying.


Again total fabrication and lacking in evidence. just a baseless claim with no proof of what he is saying.

Ihsaan is the most explicitely explained concept by the sufis and none other than them have dwelled into this topic and given it justice. Your oversimplified version of it will have people reading it and wondering. Much like someone who reads the Quran and not the hadith and comes across an ayah where Allah orders them to pray. If they have never read ahadith then they will never know how to pray.

Similarily, the concept of Ihsaan, or excellence is one explained, taught and practised by the Sufis for centuries and where all sincere seekers of this noble station of Ihsaan have turned. Never will you find wahabis speaking in detail about this topic and explaining it. Reading the hadith of Gabriel alayhi salam where Muhammad pbbuh explains Islam and Iman and Ihsan needs volumes in explanation on how to implement these major concepts in a muslims life.

As for praying to a picture, i have heard of people doing this, but these are jahils or jahil sufis with no real shaykh who is authorised to teach them.

If you knew anything about the processes of the mind and psychology you would understand that as human beings we cannot grasp ultimate realities at the click of a finger. Especially the Reality of All Realities.... Allah!
Allah in his mercy has sent us Muhammad because as scholars have mentioned, if the veils were to be lifted between us and Allah then humanity will be destroyed. That is why on the day of judgement All creation will die, including the angels and the angel of death will take his own soul. Only Allah will remain and He will question the whole decayed existance " To whom is the dominion today!" None shall answer, but He will answer Himself!

The reality of the matter is, humans need the day of judgement to realise this because of thier abased state of affairs of being attached to this world. But Muhammad has taught a select few of the companions on how to live this reality in thier lives in this world so that they perceive nothing but Allah in this life and the next.

This is confirmed by the hadith of Abu Hurayra where he states: I received two vessels of knowledge from the Prophet pbbuh. One i have transmitted( ie the shariah) and the other ( haqiqa) if i were to transmit it, my throat would be cut!"

The process of coming to this stage includes systematic desensitisation to fake created worldly affairs. If all you can see in your life is created things then the creator is going to be a far goal. Going from witnessing creation to witnessing the Creator is a stage by stage process. This is verified by the hadith of Ihsaan where Muhammad first says " worship Allah as if you see him" then he says " and if you dont, then know that he sees you".

if you dont understand this hadith or take it for superficial value then it is your problem, but a check in to a real scholar will help you progress.

Next you again with no proof claim:


QUOTE
The Sufis allow dancing, drums and musical instruments, and raising the voice when making dhikr, but Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“The believers are only those who, when Allaah is mentioned, feel a fear in their hearts…” [al-Anfaal 8:2] Moreover, you see some of them making dhikr by only pronouncing the Name of Allaah, saying, “Allaah, Allaah, Allaah.” This is bid’ah and has no meaning in Islam. They even go to the extreme of saying, “Ah, ah” or “Hu, Hu.” The Sunnah is for the Muslim to remember his Lord in words that have a true meaning for which he will be rewarded, such as saying Subhaan Allaah wa Alhamdulillah wa Laa ilaaha illa Allaah wa Allaahu akbar, and so on.


If you had ever read a Hizb or a wird of a tariqa you would realise that they are all based on quran or hadiths.

Your claim that mentioning of Allahs name is bid'a has probably displayed the pinnacle of your ignorance. Why on earth would saying Allahs name, wether in person alone or in a group lead you to the hellfire. I guess the inner whisperings of shaytan that wahabis have dont like it when Allahs name is mentioned. What would you prefer, muslims say shaytan, shaytan?? In anycase the Quran clearly says at the end of verse 6:91 in Surat al-An`am:

"Say ALLAH. Then leave them to their play and vain wrangling."


The Prophet said: "The Hour will not rise before Allah, Allah is no longer said on earth." And through another chain: "The Hour will not rise on anyone saying: Allah, Allah." Muslim narrated both in his Sahih, Book of Iman (Belief), chapter 66 entitled: dhahab al-iman akhir al-zaman "The Disappearance of Belief at the End of Times."

Obviously wahabis are setting up for the end of time by trying to erradicate the recital of the name of Allah. What else can be said when they try to make muslims stop reciting it as is often witnessed in popular masjids when brothers or sisters get together for dthikr.

Imam Nawawi said in his commentary on this chapter: "Know that the narrations of this hadith are unanimous in the repetition of the name of Allah the Exalted for both versions, and that is the way it is found in all the authoritative books." (Sharh Sahih Muslim, Dar al-Qalam, Beirut ed. vol. 1/2 p. 537)



Imam Muslim placed the hadith under the chapter-heading of the disappearance of belief (iman) at the end of times although there is no mention of belief in the hadith. This shows that saying "Allah, Allah" stands for belief. Those who say it show belief, while those who don't say it, don't show belief. Therefore those who fight those who say it, are actually worse than those who merely lack belief and do not say "Allah, Allah."



Nawawi highlights the authenticity of the repetition of the form to establish that the repetition of the words "Allah, Allah" are a sunna ma'thura (practice inherited from the Prophet and the Companions) as it stands. Ibn Taymiyya's claim that the words must not be used alone but obligatorily in contruct, e.g. with a vocative form ("Ya Allah"), therefore contradicts the Sunna.



It is noteworthy that the Siddiqi translation of Sahih Muslim mistranslates the first narration cited above as: "The Hour (Resurrection) would not come so long as Allah is supplicated in the world" and the second as "The Hour (Resurrection) would not come upon anyone so long as he supplicates Allah." This is wrong as translations go, although it is right as a commentary, since saying Allah, Allah is supplicating Him, as is all worship according to the hadith of the Prophet: "Supplication: that is what worship is." (Tirmidhi and others narrate it.) However, concerning accuracy in translation, the word form highlighted by Nawawi must be kept intact in any explanation of this hadith. It is not merely "supplicating Allah." It is saying: Allah, Allah according to the Prophet's own words.



One who knows that the dhikr "Allah, Allah" has been mentioned by the Prophet himself, is not at liberty to muse whether it was used by the Companions or not in order to establish its basis. It suffices for its basis to establish that the Prophet said it. And yet, it is established that Bilal used to make the dhikr Ahad, Ahad while undergoing torture. Ibn Hisham says in his Sira: Ibn Ishaq narrates [with his chain of transmission] saying: "Bilal was a faithful Muslim, pure of heart... Umayya ibn Khalaf used to bring him out in the hottest part of the day and throw him on his back in the open valley and have a great rock put on his chest; then he would say to him: You will stay here until you die or deny Muhammad and worship al-Lat and al-`Uzza. He used to say while he was enduring this: Ahad, Ahad -- One, One!" Ibn Hajar cites it in al-Isaba (1:171 #732).



One who knows that Allah, Allah is a dhikr used by the Prophet, is not at liberty to object to similar forms of dhikr such as HU and HAYY and HAQQ. "To Allah belong the most beautiful names, so call Him by them" (7:180). As for the hadith of the ninety-nine names, it does not limit the names of Allah to only ninety-nine, as Nawawi made clear in his commentary of that hadith.

As to regarding saying Hu or Hay

- "Hu" and "Hayy" are respectively a pronoun and a name of Allah Almighty in the Qur'an according to ayat al-Kursi:



Allahu la ilaha illa HU AL-HAYY al-Qayyum (2:255)



Allah! There is no god except HE, the LIVING the Self-Subsistent



- "Haqq" is one of the names of Allah in the hadith in Bukhari and Muslim enumerating the ninety-nine Names (see below).



Furthermore, the Prophet prayed to Allah with the following invocations:



(a) "Labbayka ilah al-Haqq" [At your command, O the God of Truth]. It is narrated in the book of Hajj in al-Nasa'i's Sunan, and in the book of Manasik in Ibn Majah's.



( "Anta al-Haqq" [You are Truth]. Bukhari and Muslim.



- Allah said: "Wa lillahi al-asma' al-husna fad`uhu biha" : To Allah belong the Most beautiful Names, so call Him with them (7:180). These names are not confined to ninety-nine, as Nawawi explicitly stated in his commentary on the hadith in Bukhari and Muslim whereby the Prophet said: "Inna lillahi ta`ala tis`atan wa tis`ina isman, mi'atan illa wahidan, man ahsaha dakhala al-jannat...": "There are ninety-nine names which belong to Allah, one hundred less one, whoever memorizes (or recites) them enters Paradise..." Nawawi and others showed that the meaning of this hadith -- and Allah knows best -- is not: "There are only ninety-nine names," but "There are ninety-nine well-known names," or "There are ninety-nine names which suffice to enter Paradise if memorized."



- The Prophet used to call Allah by ALL His Names: "Allahumma inni ad`uka bi asma'ika al-husna kulliha": O Allah, I invoke You with all of Your beautiful Names. Narrated by Ibn Maja, book of Du`a; and by Imam Malik in his Muwatta', Kitab al-Shi`r.

you then went on a much more disgusting display of ignorance and accusation and say:

QUOTE

The Sufis recite love poems mentioning the names of women and boys in their dhikr gatherings, and they repeat words such as “love”, “passion”, “desire” and so on, as if they are in a gathering where people dance and drink wine and clap and shout. All of this has to do with the customs and acts of worship of the mushrikeen.


After posting in other posts that you have nothing against sufis you now call them mushrikeen. Astaghfirallah. You also falsely accuse them of drinking wine and make out that they are oversexed people who cant control themselves and recite love poems about boys and women.

Again none of this has any proof, leaving us all wondering if we shall continue with exposing your absolute foul character in making so much lies against muslims.

Qasidas are poetic islamic songs and are more than allowed. Especially ones praising Muhammad or praising righteous shaykhs. The scholars are unanimous about islamic songs permissibility so long as they adhere to the shariah use of instrumentation.

no where in sufi literature is there any evidence of sufis writing poems to boys or women and then using this as a mode of dthikr.

no where also is there any evidence of sufis being alcoholics and drunkards.

we thus await your proofs for these allegations and pray that you repent from these accusations.

I and I am sure many others are growing quite weary of reading your baseless accusations with no proof against the sufis.

i therefore am reluctant to reply to any other absurd comment you mentioned in the rest of that post.

i will however keep continuing to expose your lies in the other posts. specifically the ones about shaykh nuh.

It is obvious here that you lack education in Islam and are not willing to learn. we have tried to help you on numerous occasions pointing you in the right direction giving you proof over proof of arguements against you lies but you fail to acknowledge them.

we therefore dont see any benefit in continuing to counsel you if you do not make a positive assessment of your self and realise the mistakes you have made.

As Imam Ali said, " i never once spoke to a jahil in which he only defeated me and i never once spoke to a a'lem in which i defeated him." if imam ali radiallahu a'nu has said this and his knowledhe far surpassed most of the companions, then what is to say about us who are struggling to remain steadfast in our islam.
therefore if you continue with your ignorant and lieing insults further without verifying what you say, i have no choice but to ignore you much the same way you ignore the religon of Allah.

After no doubt exposing the lies and fabrications and false accusations against Sufis and Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller in part 1, 2 and 3 of this series we are going to further prove to you how lying and deceitful some people can be when attacking shaykhs.

Dr Diamonds786 wrote:


QUOTE
Rather than attacking me again, the internet site or google , address the issues. Sufism was the original issue in a different thread and Keller became an issue after some people thought my criticism of him was unjustified. What I found afterwards about him is mind boggling


The fact of the matter is, you were never the focus, but since you made it your duty to spread lies and falsehood about a noble shaykh without any evidence what so ever, I thus make it my duty to defend Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller against your lies.

Even still, YOU are not the focus but your ignorance, lack of education and deceit is!
As for Google, well maybe one day i can forgive them.
Adressing the issue is hardly your strong point as we have seen from your various erratic posts and contrary to what your claiming, sufism was never the issue in the other posts, rather it was saudis in one thread and wahabis in another.

What you claim to have found about Shaykh Nuh is not some unbelievable ijtihad worthy of praise nor is it even factual information that can be used to discredit him. It isnt even referenced properly nor are the references true. If your mind is boggled then i suggest a couple of dispirins and a good night sleep, because its probably the radiation from the internet that got to you rather than any serious arguement against Shaykh Nuh as we shall prove.


Diamonds786 wrote:


QUOTE
Nuh Ha Mim Keller mentions in his Tariqa Notes[1] that sacred dance is one of the rituals of the Shadhili order. According to him, the sacred dance is a type of dancing performed by Sufis in unison while they make Dhikr (remembrance of Allah). To show the permissibility of it, Keller argues that sacred dancing has 3 components:


I have the tariqa notes directly infront of me as i type now and i have it turned to page 19, mentioned in the reference by diamonds.

GUESS WHAT!!!!!

mind boggling stuff really, but no such reference exists on those pages. How could this be??? Of course, i didnt have to check it as i knew it was a lie on diamonds behalf, since ive read the tariqa notes several times and for that matter, this reference isnt on any other page either, nor in any other of his books or translations.
Subhanallah, whats next?? are you going to accuse him of dealing in magic and making those lines dissapear from the tariqa notes so that i didnt see them and only you did??

If anyone wishes to see the evidence for this then i will gladly photocopy the relevant page and post it out to whomever free of charge. Just send me a PM and i will arrange it inshallah.

Next diamonds786 continues and says that Shaykh Nuh argues that sacred dancing has 3 components of Dthikr, dancing and performing it in congregation.
Again a total fabrication and not available in any of Shaykh Nuhs books let alone the tariqa notes. Anyone that has heard Shaykh Nuh speak or read his articles, knows the high degree of esteem he has for the Sacred Law and how fearful he is of going against Allahs command.

Anyone that has an iotta of intellect realises one doesnt get authorised to translate a huge work such as ibn naqib al misris work and the maqasid of Imam al nawawi let alone the material for the darqawi-hashimi tariqa of the shadthiliya by being a fool. anyone that also realises that his work was the first ever translated work of any kind to receive an official stamp from the azhar university would realise they are dealing with a highly intelligent and qualified individual.

to get back to the issue at hand diamonds then goes off an another tangent that seem to be so becoming of his nature and starts trying to put together peices of irrellevant material to try and discredit Shaykh Nuh against something which he did not say in the first place.
This is shown here:

diamonds786 lies and says in continuation of the above false quote:


QUOTE
Dhikr

The dancing itself

Performing it in congregation

Since each of the above components is permissible if not recommended in its own, therefore –Keller concludes- combining them yields a permissible act of worship.

Although, the fallacy of this argument is so evident, we will – Allah willing- contest it hoping that some of his followers might see the truth. We’ll approach this from 2 angles:

By reasoning:

If we follow the logic Keller uses, then we can say the following:

It is an established religious fact that praying 4 rak’ahs in Dhuhr is obligatory. So this act has its roots in the Sacred Law.

It is also well known that praying 2 rak’ahs as a Nafl (voluntary) is recommended, and again it has its roots in the Sacred Law.

Based on the above, one can produce a praise-worthy Bid’ah[2] which states that it is recommended to pray Dhuhr prayer as six rak’ahs instead of four. Keller can’t argue this is a blame-worthy Bid’ah if he is to use the logic and textual evidence he provides in his works[3]..

One can provide another example regarding prayer. Keller tries to prove that the companions invented many acts in prayer and it is the Sunnah of the beloved prophet SAAWS to accept that newly invented acts. So by the same line of reasoning, one can argue:

a. Since Nafl (voluntary) prayer is recommended under the Sacred Law.

b. Dancing is permissible under the Sacred Law according to Keller.

c. The Sunnah of the prophet SAAWS is to accept the newly invented matters in prayer so long as they fall under some principle in the Sacred Law, again according to Keller[4].

One can safely say that dancing while praying is permissible if not recommended.

We do not think that a Muslim in his/her right mind will accept this conclusion which indicates that there is a fundamental error in the premises upon which the reasoning process was established. The flaw in Keller’s reasoning is that combining several recommended ( or permissible) acts of worship does not necessarily yield a religiously permissible act. Acts of worship can’t be invented but rather they are extracted from the textual evidence provided in the Quran and the Sunnah. The reader is reminded that the discussion here does not address mundane matters but rather is confined to acts of worship. It is a well accepted general rule that when it comes to acts of worship everything is haram unless specifically proven halal (permissible) by a textual evidence from the Quran or the Sunnah. However, for actions other than worship, everything is halal (permissible) unless proven otherwise[5].

Also, all people are in agreement that it is very disrespectful to dance when addressing an elder or any person of a higher status. If this (Adab) is true for addressing other fellow humans, then how can one argue that it is recommended or even acceptable to dance when addressing Allah SWT the Lord of the universe and all its creation!


Since the first quote has been proven baseless then it can be concluded that what follows it and is meant to be connected to it is also baseless.
Never the less, even if it were true, it is still faulty reasoning on behalf of diamonds to try and come to those conclusions with the examples he has given. examples that im sure confused the hell out of people when they read them due to them being so erratically out of place.

This and other monstrosities of lies has really proven to us the attitude of wahabis and their fabrications. They dont fear Allah! They have no sense of God conciousness when it comes to spreading thier lies and the beating of their chests to the tune of " we are purifying the ummah from bida'a, shirk and kufur", has done nothing but show us who really needs purifying in this ummah.

Allah will not let the imposters and liers off so easily and woe to them on the day of judgement.

From this and the previous three threads i have put up, further defence of Shaykh Nuh is not even needed as the deceitful agenda of diamonds786 has been proven over and over again. However, for the viewers reading and peace of mind we will continue.


Diamonds is not satisfied in spreading this much lies and continues to say:


QUOTE
Textual evidences from the works of Muslim scholars:

In this section, statements of early Muslim scholars about dancing are presented. The list is not meant to be extensive but rather good enough to refute Keller’s concept of a sacred dance.

a. Izz bin Abud salam (d 660 H ) RA: He is a Shafi scholar who was famous with enjoining good and forbidden evil. Keller rightly said about him:

A Shafi’i scholar and mujtahid Imam…though his main and enduring contribution was his masterpiece on Islamic legal principles Qawa’id al-ahkam fi masalih al-alanam [The bases of legal rulings in the interests of mankind][6].

We extract the following quote about dancing from that very book:

“Concerning dancing and clapping, they are considered acts of Khiffah immaturity and foolishness similar to the foolishness of females[7] which is only done by a foolish or a phony person…the prophet SAAWS has said: ‘the best of generations is my generation, then the one that comes after them, and then the one that comes after them’ and none of those –whom people take as role models- used to do any of this (clapping and dancing)[8]. In fact, Satan has taken over people who think that the excitement they experience when listening to singing is concerning Allah ‘Azz wa jalla but verily they lied about this.”

Izz continues:

“It is not becoming from one -who fears Allah and has some respect to Him- to clap or dance. These two (clapping and dancing) originate only from a foolish ignorant. They do not originate from sane and pious. As an evidence of the ignorance of whoever does them is that the Shari’ah (Sacred Law) did not legislate them neither in the Quran nor in the Sunnah, and none of the prophets had done them, nor any of their real followers. They are only performed by the ignorant immature people who confuse truth with desires. Allah SWT said: ‘We have We have not neglected anything in the Book, then to their Lord shall they be gathered’ (Surah 6, verse 3. The early Muslim generations and the pious among the late generations had proceeded without embracing any of that (clapping and dancing)”

The above quote is exceptionally clear and shows beyond any question that Sheikh Izz ibn Abdul Salam completely opposed any form of dancing as worship.

Ironically Keller quotes Sheikh Izz ibn Abdul Salam's statement where he divided Bid'ah into five categories as a basis to prove the legitimacy of Sufi Dhikr (litany). However the statements of Izz mentioned above show that Izz’s concept of Bid’ah is completely different from what Keller made it out to be. Detailed discussion of this, will be provided soon in the Bid'ah section.


Here diamonds has really messed up his arguement even further.

He mentions the quote of the famous shafi'i scholar but he says "Abud salam". Shaykh Nuh makes no reference to a Abud salam in his biography references in the back of the reliance of the traveller. Rather he does mention Al Izz Ibn Abdu Salam. We will give diamonds the benefit of the doubt and think of it as a typo and not attribute it as another fabrication, however the conclusions derived from mentioning of this scholar by diamonds are totally irrellevant and have no ground.

Shaykh Nuh quotes the great scholars interpretation of the five different categories of Bid'a. I have posted these previously in another thread about bid'a. His position is accepted amongst shafi'i scholars unanimously and even non shafi'is accept it. But we arent refering to the fake madthab here popularily known by wahabis as the "salafi madthab". Never has there been an acceptance of this outright innovation in 1423 years of islamic scholarly heritage.

rather, thier loud claims that this madthab exists above the other madthabs which were accepted since thier emergence is flung to the side and unotticed like a rotten peice of garbage!

Diamonds tries to link ONE reference in the whole book of Reliance of the traveller to dancing which was narrated by Imam Al Nawawi and commented on by Muhammad Shirbini Khatib as perfectly valid.

this is not only in shafi'i school but others as well.

anyway, he tries to say that Shaykh Nuh tries to link this commentary and shafi position on Dancing to Shaykh abdu salams bid'a explanation to justify dancing.

These lies are growing beyond riddiculous and there is no such thing ever written, stated or derived by Shaykh Nuh anywhere in audio recordings or books or internet articles by him.

If you have evidence then i suggest you put it forth very quickly because your looking more a fool by the minute.

next diamonds says:
QUOTE
b. Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah (Islamic rulings issued in India):

al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah is a collection of Islamic rulings issued and compiled by a group of Hanafi scholars from India. This scholarly work was in response to a request by the Muslim king of India and a Islamic scholar in his own standing, Muhammad Aurangzeb. In this collection of Fatawa (Islamic rulings) one finds the following:

“The Sama’ (listening to singing), singing poetry, and dancing that Sufis do these days are impermissible; both going to it and attending it are not permissible. These actions are similar to singing and music[10].


He says the hanafi position is that listening to singing, poetry and dancing is impermissible. Firstly i will state that i am not a Hanafi and dont know the explicitness of the position of these matters in the Hanafi school.
However shaykh Nuhs wife is a Hanafi and is under the guidance along with Shaykh Nuh under the Hanafi Shaykh, Shaykh Al Aranut.
It is hard to perceive that she would be a hanafi and sit at the dthikr and qasida gatherings if it were against her madthabs rules since is a most devout and noble learned woman.
However i will not comment further except to say regardless of the Hanafi position on the matter, it does no justice to mention it in an attempt to discredit the shafi'i position and doesnt prove a thing much like the rest of diamonds rubbish except that he is clutching at straws.

As for his last comment: c.


QUOTE
The encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence

This is a huge work of Islamic Jurisprudence put together by a host of contemporary Muslim Jurists. The following is a quote from their work under the title “Dancing, whirling, drums and using wind instruments”:

“Some people of Bid’ah add to Dhikr –besides what has been discussed earlier- other things.

Al-Shatibi[11] (d 790 H) said: ‘I wish they stopped at this –which in itself is blameworthy- but on top of that they have progressed into dancing, using wind instruments, whirling, and beating their chests; some bang their heads. How similar this is to the laughable acts of the foolish ones! This is so because these actions of theirs belong to kids and insane, it causes sane people to cry in sympathy for them since this can’t be taken as a path to Allah, and a way to resemble the pious ones.’

Al-Ajiry (d 360 H) said: ‘it has to be said to whoever did this (dancing, whirling, etc): know that the most truthful when admonishing, the most sincere to his Ummah, and the one with the softest heart[12] and the best among the people who came after him[13] -with no doubt- never screamed when they were admonished, nor cried out loudly or danced. If these acts were acceptable then they (the companions) are the most entitled to do them in front of the Prophet SAAWS, however (they did not) because it is Bid’ah, falsehood, and evil.’ ”

The evidences mentioned above should be sufficient to a reader who seeks the truth. We refuted Keller’s argument, concerning dancing and singing as an act of worship, by reasoning first and then by providing clear statements by renowned scholars of Islam.


Im reluctant to even acknowledge "the encyclopedia of islamic jurisprudence as a sound work since no real scholar over the past 1423 years has tried to riddicule the ummah and the religon of Allah by saying all scholarly effort in the major schools of thought can be contained in one encyclopedia, no matter how fancy or large it is or how pretty the hard cover is.

The shafi'i madthab alone would require room after room of shelves to contain its scholarly works, let alone the other schools of thought.

much like sabiqs work fiqh al sunnah it can be hardly looked at as an authoritative work doing justice to the schools of thought.