Category Archives: True Sufism/ Tasawwuf

THE ‘MYSTICAL’ PATH OF THE SATANISTS

Mujlisul Ulama

Tasawwuf  or  Sufi’ism  is  an  integral  constituent  of  Islam. Tasawwuf  which  has  been  erroneously  described  as ‘mysticism’,  is  the  product  of  the  Qur’aan  and  Sunnah. Tasawwuf  is  completely  subservient  to  the  Shariah.  Any  brand of  sufi’ism/tasawwuf  which  is  in  conflict  with  the  Shariah  is  Satanism. 

Elaborating  this  subject,  Hadhrat  Sayyid  Abdul  Qaadir  Jilaani  (rahmatullah  alayh)  classified  these  Satanists  into several classes.

1)  Hulooliyyah   or  the  Incarnationists:  They  believe  that it  is lawful  to  stare  at  a  woman  or  a  man  whether  they  happen  to  be wives  or  husbands,  daughters  or  sisters,  etc. They  intermingle and dance  together.

2)  Haaliyyah:  They  claim  to  be  in  ecstasy.  They  are  entranced  by  singing,  jumping,  shouting  and  clapping  hands. They  believe  that  their  sheikhs  are  above  the  laws  of  the Shariah

3)  Auliya-iyyah:  They  claim  to  have  achieved  divine proximity  of  the  loftiest  stage,  hence  all  the  injunctions  of  the Shariah  are  not  applicable  to  them.  They  also  claim  that  a  wali has  a  higher  status  than  a  Nabi.  They  believe  that  while knowledge  came  to    Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam) via  Jibraeel  (alayhis  salaam),  it  comes  to  the  wali  directly  from Allah Ta’ala.

4)  Shamuraaniyyah:  These  heretics  believe  that  the  world  is eternal.  It  never  had  a  beginning  nor  will  it  ever  end.  They  consider  themselves  above  the  ahkaam  of  the  Shariah  which  they  believe  do  not  apply  to  them.  There  is  nothing  such  as  haraam  and  halaal  in  their  belief  concept.  Musical  instruments  are  used  in  their  so-called  religious  rituals.  They  do  not differentiate  between  man  and  woman  regarding  them  to  be  the  same.

5)  Hubbiyah:  They  believe  that  when  a  person  attains  the stage  of  ‘love’,  they  are  freed  from  the  obligations  of  the Shariah.  They  also  believe  in  nudism.  They  expose  their private  parts.

6)  Huriyyah:  They  seek  to  gain  ecstatic  experiences  by  means of  shouting,  singing  and  clapping  hands.  They  claim  to  having  sexual  relations  with  the  houris  of  Jannat.

7)  Mutakaasiliyyah:  Laziness  is  a  cardinal  article  of  their  faith.  They  beg  from  door  to  door  for  their  sustenance.  While  they  rot  in  their  laziness  they  claim  that  this  is  renunciation  of  the world.

8)  Mutajaahiliyyah:  They  deliberately  feign  ignorance,  dress immodestly  and  emulate  non-believers  (They  resemble  the  modernists  of  our  age.  –  The  Majlis)

9)  Waafiqiyyah:  They  claim  that  no  one  can  understand  and know  Allah  Ta’ala,  hence  they  deliberately  abandon  the  Shariah  on  the  basis  of  this corrupt  assumption.

10)  Ilhaamiyyah:  They  believe  in  ilhaam  (inspiration). Thus  they  abandon  knowledge  and  forbid  its  acquisition.  They believe  that  the  Qur’aan  is  a  barrier  for  them.  Poetry  and  music are  their  Qur’aan.  (On  the  occasion  when  Allah  Ta’ala expelled  Iblees  from  the  heavens,  he  supplicated  for  a ‘qur’aan’.  Granting  his  supplication,  Allah  Ta’ala  informed  him that  his ‘qur’aan  will  be  poetry   and singing.  This  group  of  Satanists  follow  him  in  this  aspect.  They  receive  their  ‘ilhaam’ (inspiration) from shaitaan. – The Majlis)

Besides  these  sects  of  Satanists,  there  were  many  others  as  well  such  as  the  Qalandaris  (wandering  beggars),  Haydaris (those  who  pretend  to  be  heroes)  and  Adhamis  (those  who  fraudulently  pretend  to  follow  Hadhrat  Ibraahim  Adham’s  path  of  renunciation. He  had  abandoned  the  throne of  Balkh).

A  very  prominent  sect  of  Satanists  in  our  era  is  the  Qabar  Pujaari  sect.  They  worship  the  graves  of  dead  saints  and  claim  to  ascend  to  lofty  spiritual  stages  via  the  avenue  of  ecstasy  while  in  reality  their  ‘ecstasy’  is   nothing  but  pure  hallucination,  the  product  of  smoking  dagga  (hashish)  and  opium.  Their  headquarters  are  always  located  at  the  graves  of  Auliya  which  they  have  converted  into  haunts  of  shirk  and kufr.

Hadhrat  Abdul  Qaadir  Jilaani  (rahmatullah  alayh)  states  in his  kitaab,  Sirrul  Asraar  that  there  are  two  signs  of  the  people of  Truth  who  follow  the  Sunnah  of  Rasulullah  (sallallahu alayhi  wasallam).  One  sign  is  zaahir  (external).  They  follow  the  ahkaam  of  the  Shariah  meticulously.  They  are  firmly fettered  to  the  Shariah.  The  other  sign  is  baatin  (internal  spiritual).  They  follow  the  Akhlaaq-e-Hasanah  (Beautiful Moral  Character)  of  Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam). Thus,  they  are  firmly  anchored  to  the  Shariah  and  the  Sunnah. And,  this  is  the  Naaji  group  –  the  only   group  of  the  73  sects, which  will  attain  salvation in  the  Aakhirah.

Warning  Muslims  of  the  Satanist  trap  of  deception,  Hadhrat  Sayyid  Abdul  Qaadir  Jilaani  (rahmatullah  alayh)  says  in  his  kitaab:  “Beware, O  Traveller  in  search  of  the  Truth!  Beware of the  blind  leading  the  blind. Your  sight  should  become  so  fine  to enable  you  to  distinguish  between  the  slightest  particle  of  good  and  evil.”

Deobandi Sufi

Tasawwuf is an essential element of religion according to the Deobandis.

It is this tasawwuf that produces life in the physical forms of worship done and makes them worthy of being accepted. Without it Shariah is a body without a soul.

However, it must be clear that tasawwuf alone without the actions prescribed by Shariah is heresy (zindaqah).

All great scholars of Deoband were either shuyukh or mureedeen in Chishti, Naqshbandi, Qadri or Suharwardi tariqahs.

For example, Qutub e ‘Alam Mawlana Rashid Ahmed Gangohi , Hakeemul Ummat Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanavi and Shaykhul-Hadith Mawlana Zakariyyah Kandhlawi (rahimahumullah) were from Chishti silsilah. Mawlana Aziz ur Rehman, Mawlana Habibur Rehman and Mawlana Badar e Alam Meerthi (rahimahumullah) were Naqshbandi-Mujaddidi. Mawlana Taj Mehmood Amrooti and Mawlana Ahmad Ali Lahori (rahimahumullah) were Qadiri. Mawlana Anwar Shah Kashmiri (rahimahullah) had ijaza’ from his father in Suharwardi tariqah.

Also, most of the present day serious Deobandi scholars are into Tasawwuf practically. This is evident by their demeanor, speech, mutual and financial dealings, etc. Not by mere lip-service and boastful claims.

As it is said in Persian proverb: mushuk (musk) does not need a label to let others be aware that it is musk. Its smell in enough advertisment.

A very important fact is that real tasawwuf exists in these Deobandi shuyukh to date.

In Muslim world you find a lot who claim to be sufi, whereas in reality they are not. It is a ritualistic or ceremonial SUFISM  they follow. It has nothing to do with effacement of destructing moral characteristics like pride, envy, love of wordly etc and establishment of elevating moral traits, like sincerity, love of Allah Ta’ala and His Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), humility, perpetual remembrance, etc. all leading to a firm and acceptable relationship with Allah Ta’ala (that is, ta’aluq ma’Allah).

The real Tasawwuf  is thriving, vital and pristine in Deobandi-tradition. It is totally subservient to Shariah and hence, in complete harmony with Sunnah. It is a unique treasure to be acquired as soon as possible.

It is within our home. Why ignore and look outside at the flashy gimmicks?

Please, take time to reflect!

We, the admirer of Deobandi-tradition where do we stand?

Are we following the real inheritors of this tradition?

Present-Day Sufis & Bid’ah

[Majlisul Ulama]

Some of the ‘khulafaa-e-mutakh-khireen’ (the later spiritual mentors) of this lofty branch (of Tasawwuf, viz., Naqshabandiyah) have been guilty of the introduction of bid’ah practices into the Path. Consequently, they strayed from the Path of the Seniors (Akaabir). They have thus lost the direction of the Senior Mentors of this Path. A group of the disciples of these later mentors (who had gone astray by their introduction of bid’ah) hold the i’tiqaad (belief) that the perfection of this Path (of Naqshabandiyah) is to be achieved via the means of these bid’ah practices. Allah forbid! Never is this possible.

A large group of ‘sufis’ have made their exit from the confines of the Shariah. They labour in the deception that they have emerged from the shell of the Shariah and have attained the essence of Tariqat. This deception is among the errors of the sufis. In this way many imperfect persons have embraced atheism and irreligiosity and have made their exit from the glittering circle of the Shariah. Thus have they gone astray and have led others astray as well.

Barkat and Fuyooz (spiritual grace and benefit) remains only as long as bid’ah has not been introduced into the Path (tareeqat). When bid’ah is innovated into the Path (of Tasawwuf), the spiritual effulgence and benefit of the Path come to a halt The mashaa-ikh (spiritual mentors) of other Paths of Tasawwuf too have introduced bid’ah practices based on their intentions and opinion. And, among these mentors of Naqshabandiyah too, a group of later mentors have shunned the lofty Way of their predecessors and have innovated the practices of samaa and raqs (spiritual darkes and music) and zikr jahr (loud forms of zikr).

(Note: According to the general  purport of the Ahaadith, Thikr bil  Jahr is prohibited. This is also the  view of Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh). Hadhrat  Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) was a Faqeeh  and the greatest among our Buzrugs. According to him it is  bid’ah to consider Thikr bil Jahr to be better and more meritorious. However, for gaining concentration it is permissible, but if this same act is given more larger stage as Masnoon Ibadat, then it will be a bid’ah, and this is what the present-day sufis are guilty of by conducting such mass collective-loud “Thikr-programmes”.)

People of this calibre ( i.e. mentors who have introduced bid’ah) by virtue of spreading bid’ah have extremely little relationship with the Seniors of this Path (of Naqshabandiyah) which is a Path established of Sunnah. There are those in this Path who have by virtue of their short-sightedness accepted the bid’ah practices and by means of these bid’ah have; attracted the hearts of people towards themselves. They labour under the deception that their bid’ah practices have achieved the perfection of this Path. Allah forbid! Never is this possible. In reality, this group (of innovators) have initiated the annihilation of this Path.

The way of najaat (salvation) is obedience to the Shariah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), both in belief and practice. The mureed (disciple) submits himself to an Ustaad or Peer (Spiritual Mentor) for this very reason – that the way of the Shariah is indicated and by virtue of its grace, practice and belief of the Shariah is made easy. The purpose of being initiated into the Path is not to obtain freedom for the disciples so that they may do as they please and eat as they please the Spiritual Mentors becoming the shield of their disciples, saving them from the punishment (of the Hereafter). This is a hollow wish. There (in Qiyaamah) no one will be able to intercede on behalf of another. without Divine Permission.

In this age many have donned the garments of the Sufis and are masquerading (as spiritual mentors). They are advertising the question of ‘wahdatul wujood’ (unification with Allah) and besides this question they know of no other goodness. They have deprived themselves of the reality of true knowledge. They have dragged the actions of the Senior Mashaa-ikh into the scope of their forged and baneful interpretations and in this manner have set themselves up as the leaders of the community. By means of their deception they are seeking to create a boom in the slump which their market (which involves the plunder of mean) has suffered.

Spiritual exercises which have been adopted besides the taqleed (following) of the Sunnah of Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are of no significance because even Hindus, Yogis, Brahmins and the Greek philosophers are their co-partners in such forms of soul-exercising practices. These soul and mind exercises are nothing but error for them. They are led astray by these very practices. These ‘mind over matter’ practices indicates to them no road other than the path of spiritual ruin.

In the view of Tareeqat even the ‘shathiyaaf (statements which are made in ecstacy) of the Mashaa-ikh which are in contradiction of the Shariah, are on the stage of kufr. The true Auliyaa who have been infused with the wealth of Islam are pure from such disrespect and are the firm followers of the Ambiyaa, both in the zaahir (external path) and in the baatin (internal path).

These mentors of bid’ah accord priority to the observation of the day of Aashuraa, the day of Baraat, the 27th night of Rajab and the first Jumu’ah night of the month which they name ‘lailatur – raaghib’. They observe these occasions with the utmost of preparation, and with the fullest of contentment do they perform Nafl Salaat in congregation. They regard these practices as meritorious. But, they are unaware that these practices (the manner in which the innovators are practicing) are among the deceptions of shaitaan who presents evil in the form of virtue.

Also Read: The reasons for un-Islamic ideas being mixed into True Islamic Tasawwuf

The reasons for un-Islamic ideas being mixed into True Islamic Tasawwuf

Just as iman and Islam are two independent branches of deen, on the same line, ihsan too is an independent branch attending to the perfection of deen which begins with:

انما الاعمال بالنيات

Actions are judged by intentions.

and finally manifests itself with:

ان تعبد الله كانك تراه

To worship Allah with complete consciousness as if you are seeing Him.

Our history of Islam is replete with examples of the concurring existence of the teaching of the Qurʼan and the Sunnah together with the rectification of the inner soul and heart which gradually adopted the name of Tasawwuf. Tasawwuf has many other names as well, such as Tariqah, Suluk, Ihsan, ‘Ilm al-Akhlaq, ‘Ilm al-Qalb, etc, but it is more commonly known as Tasawwuf. In essence, some actions pertain to the outer limbs and some pertain to the inner. The aforementioned category is known as Amal Zahirah (outward actions or Shari‘ah) and the latter is known as Amal Batinah (inward actions or Tariqah). The position of the outward actions is like the similitude of the body, while the inward actions playing the role of the soul. In this way, each component is in need of the other.

Shah Wali Allah Muhaddith Dehlwi (rahimahullah) states:

Shari‘ah without Tariqah is a mere philosophy and theory and Tariqah without Shari‘ah eventually leads to apostasy and infidelity. [Tashil Qasd al-Sabil pg. 8]

What is the reality of this Tasawwuf or Tariqah, for this we will reproduce a comprehensive definition from Allamah al-Shami (rahimahullah):

هو علم يعرف به انواع الفضائل وكيفية اكتسابها وانواع الرذائل وكيفية اجتنابها

Tasawwuf is that branch of knowledge which deals with the varieties of noble character together with its method of attainment and the varieties of ill-traits and how to abstain from it. [Radd al-Muhtar vol. 1 pg. 127]

The extent to which purifying ones heart is necessary can be well understood from the following quote of Moulana Ashraf ‘Ali Thanwi (rahimahullah)  (d. 1366 A.H):

The aspect of Shari‘ah which deals with inward actions is called Tasawwuf or Suluk and the aspect dealing with outward actions is called Fiqh. The subject matter of Tasawwuf concerns reformation of character and the objective is attaining the pleasure of Allah Ta’ala. The methodology adopted is complete adherence to the laws of Shari‘ah. So to say, Tasawwuf is the soul and perfection of deen which purifies a person’s soul from ill-traits and bad manners and beautifies his character with virtuous actions and upright morals and ethics, thereby acquiring attentiveness to Allah, which is the objective of life. Therefore, Tasawwuf and Tariqah are definitely not contrary to Shari‘ah; rather it is necessary for every Muslim to be a sufi, without which he cannot become a complete Muslim. [Shari’ah wa Tasawwuf pg. 16]

It is a reality upon which the sufiyyah and the ‘arifin have unanimously agreed; just as that Tasawwuf which is taught and recommended by Islam is a means of guidance for the universe, in a like manner that Tasawwuf which is adopted from other sources besides Islam (which entered into the ummah after the fourth century) demolishes and destroys the fabric of a Muslim’s iman. It is for this reason that we find from the likes of Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) (d. 728 A.H) and Hafiz Ibn Qayyim (rahimahullah)  (d. 751 A.H) to the likes of Moulana Ashraf ‘Ali Thanwi (rahimahullah) (d. 1366 A.H) and Moulana Sayyid Husayn Ahmad Madani (rahimahullah) (d. 1377 A.H), and every other reformist of the ummah, that they zealously called for jihad against all un-Islamic forms of Tasawwuf and repeatedly warned the Muslims of its harms. The poem of Dr. Iqbal Marhum very aptly discusses this un-Islamic Tasawwuf:

This is a very delicate matter, so guide me to your pleasure

Protect me from falling into your displeasure through this path-(Tasawwuf)

Just as Islam remains un-blemished through the wanderings of a few individuals, similarly a blanket rule cannot be placed over Tasawwuf due to the deviation of a few sufiyyah.

How did un-Islamic Tasawwuf find its way into Islam? Hereunder we mention the explanation of Professor Salim Chishti (rahimahullah):

At the time when the Karmathians (or Qaramitah) began their efforts of propagation, Tasawwuf had already begun amongst the Muslims and (its) various schools had already been established. For the sake of being accepted in the circles of the sufiyyah, the Karmathians portrayed themselves to be the same, i.e. they began misleading the sufiyyah in the garb of Tasawwuf. Thus, mixing un-Islamic beliefs into Tasawwuf, they laid the foundations for un-Islamic Tasawwuf in Iran, which gradually spread amongst all the Muslims and became merged into Islamic Tasawwuf, to the extent that it had become impossible for the general masses to distinguish between Islamic and un-Islamic Tasawwuf. [Islami Tasawwuf mein Ghair Islami Nazriyyat ki Amezish pg. 31]

On the one hand, the Karmathians (imposters and heretics) accustomed the Muslims to un-Islamic Tasawwuf. On the other hand, with great dexterity, they interpolated the works of upright sufiyyah and with it misled the Muslims with their false beliefs. The great thinker of Islam-Moulana Sayyid Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali Nadwi (rahimahullah) (d. 1420 A.H), writes in the biography of Hafidh Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) (d. 728 A.H):

Some incautious and denominationally prejudiced authors have attributed such statements to him which necessitate kufr (disbelief) according to the general belief system of the Ahl al-Sunnah and the vast majority. Such statements have been attributed to him which denote disrespect and disparagement of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) (May Allah save us and all the Muslims from such an act). Such treatment has not only been meted out to Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) but other elders of the ummah have also been subject to this ploy of the antagonists. Not only has such statements and beliefs been attributed to them of which they were completely innocent, but such content has been introduced into their books which necessitates disbelief and deviation. [Tarikh Dawat wa Azimat, vol. 2, pg. 157]

These enemies of Islam have went a step further, by themselves authoring separate books (that contained statements of disbelief) and attributing them to well-known sufiyyah, after which they circulated it among the masses. Moulana Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali Nadwi (rahimahullah) says:

The same approach was faced by Hujjat al-Islam Imam al-Ghazzali (rahimahullah). A very large group of the scholars believe that Al-Madnun bihi ala Ghayr AhlihiAl-Madnun bihi ala Ahlihi, Maarij al-Quds and Mishkat al-Anwar are books which are unfounded and attributed to other than their actual author. The adversaries and evil-wishers of Imam al-Ghazzali (rahimahullah) authored them and thereafter attributed them to him.

Imam al-Sha‘rani (rahimahullah)  and others believe this practice to have been carried out and interpolation to have taken place in the contents and subject matter of the books of Shaykh Muhiyy al-Din Ibn al-‘Arabi (rahimahullah). [Ibid pg. 158]

The great mystic, Imam al-Sha‘rani (rahimahullah) (d. 976 A.H.) writes in connection with his own book, an interesting incident which serves as an eye-opener. He states in Al-Yawaqit wa l-Jawahir:

وكذلك دسوا عليّ أنا في كتابي المسمى: البحر المورود، جملة من العقائد الزائفة وأشاعوا تلك العقائد في مصر ومكة نحو ثلاث سنين، و أنا بريء منها كما بينت ذلك في خطبة الكتاب لما غيرتها وكان العلماء كتبوا عليه وأجازوه فما سكنت الفتنة حتي أرسلت إليهم النسخة التي عليها خطوطه ، وكان ممن انتدب لنصرتي الشيخ الإمام ناصر الدين الكتاني المالكي رضى الله تعلى عنه، ثم إن بعض الحسدة أشاع في مصر ومكة أن علماء مصر رجعوا عن كتاباتهم على مؤلفات فلان كلها، فشك بعض الناس في ذلك فأرسلت نسخة للعلماء ثالث مرة فكتبوا تحت خطوطهم:كذب والله من ينسب إلينا أننا رجعنا عن كتابتنا على هذا الكتاب وغيره من مؤلفات فلان، وعبارة سيدنا ومولانا الشيخ ناصر الدين المالكي – فسح الله تعالى في أجله – بعد الحمد لله وبعد، فما نسب إلى العبد من الرجوع عما كتبته بخطي على هذا الكتاب وغيره من مؤلفات فلان باطل باطل باطل.

Similarly, they have interpolated against me as well, in my book named Al-Bahr Al-Mourud, a collection of deviated beliefs and they have spread such beliefs in Egypt and Makkah for close to three years, whereas I am free of it (i.e. these beliefs that they have interpolated) as I have clarified in the prologue of the book when I edited it. The scholars have written regarding it (i.e. what I have written) and consented to it. Thus, the crisis only subsided, when I dispatched to them (i.e. these scholars) the copy which had on it their handwritings. From amongst those who rose to support me was Shaykh Imam Nasir al-Din al-Kattani  (rahimahullah), the Maliki scholar. Thereafter, some jealous individuals promulgated in Egypt and Makkah that the scholars of Egypt had retracted what they had written with regards to all the works of so-and-so. Hence, (as a result of such propaganda) some people doubted in that (matter). So I dispatched the copy to the scholars for the third time. Thus, they wrote below their handwriting: “By the oath of Allah, whoever attributes to us that we have retracted our support for this book and others that the author has written has lied upon us.” The words of Sayyiduna Moulana Nasir al-Din, the Maliki scholar – May Allah increase his lifespan – after praising Allah were: “As for what follows, that which has been attributed to the servant (i.e. referring to himself), viz. retracting from what I have written (with my own hand) regarding this book and others from amongst the works of so-and-so is false, (it is) false.” [Al-Yawaqit wa l-Jawahir vol. 1 pg. 7]

There are many examples of this interpolation and falsification (which the Karmathians and heretics effected within the writings of the noble sufiyyah) which may be observed in the book of the honourable Professor Salim Chishti (rahimahullah), Islami Tasawwuf mein Ghayr Islami Nazriyyat ki Amezish (The Mixing of un-Islamic ideas into Islamic Tasawwuf).

The reason for the interpolation in the books of the sufiyyah

Due to the fact that the honourable sufiyyah were overwhelmed with observing good thoughts of others, many matters according to them were excluded from (the aspect) of academic criticism, even though the worldly abstinence of these people (i.e. the sufiyyah) is accepted by one and all. Professor Salim Chishti (rahimahullah) writes:

The weakness of these sufiyyah was that they were neither scholars of hadith nor were they historians. Over and above that, as a matter of fact, according to these people (i.e. the sufiyyah) academic criticism and scholarly appraisal – all of it – entered into (the domain of) disrespect. The Tasawwuf of Junayd  (rahimahullah) was: “We will evaluate every issue, making the Qurʼan and Sunnah the criterion. If anything contradicts the Qurʼan and Sunnah, then it is rejected, regardless of whoever’s tongue it was emitted from. However, in the ninth century after hijrah, with the wicked endeavours of the Karmathians, the mindset of the Sunni sufiyyah changed and instead of observing whether the statement was good or evil, they began looking at the one who stated it. In other words, no matter how mentally or reportedly incongruous a narration was, if it was attributed to any pious person, then by this mere attribution to him it was considered worthy of being relied upon; while academically reviewing and examining it would be construed as disrespect. It is for this reason that for centuries false narrations continued to be passed down and today no person has the moral courage to declare them untrue, and thus relinquish his popularity and reputation. [Islami Tasawwuf mein Ghayr Islami Nazriyyat ki Amezish pg. 84-85]

Moulana Najm al-Din Islahi  (rahimahullah), the khalifah  (spiritual vicegerent) of the Shaykh of the Arabs and non-Arabs- Moulana Sayyid Husayn Ahmad Madani (rahimahulah), writes in the sub-notes of (the book) Maktubat-e-Shaykh al-Islam:

In the books of the sufiyyah (the statement): “We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad” has been asserted as being an authentic hadith. However, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani (rahimahullah) reports that Imam Nasaʼi (rahimahullah) said it to be the words of Ibrahim ibn Ulayyah. The assertion of the words is a strong indication that this cannot be the words of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam). Furthermore, such an eminent scholar of hadith such as Shah ‘Abd al-‘Aziz (rahimahullah) has not seen it in any of the books of hadith. Thus, the decision of (what is) hadith and (what is) not hadith should be made in light of the principles and standards of the scholars of hadith, because if the opinion of a master in the field is not accepted then immunity will be lost and the Shari‘ah will continue to lose its credit. The unfortunate sufiyyah who were overtaken by maintaining good thoughts (of people), where did they have the time to critically examine (statements)? Nor was it their habit (to do so). Whatever they heard or witnessed, they believed to be true. By this (concept) of theirs of maintaining good thoughts (of people), the words of any person being the statement of Rasulullah  (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) will not be established. [Maktubat-e Shaykh al-Islam vol. 1, p. 324]

Mujaddid Alf-e Thani  (rahimahullah) writes:

One should know that in each of those issues wherein a difference of opinion exists between the scholars and the sufiyyah, if one examines them carefully then it would become apparent that the truth is on the side of the scholars. The underlying reason for this is that the basis for following the ambiya according to the scholars is their perfection of nubuwwah which encompasses their knowledge as well, whereas according to the sufiyyah it is their perfection of wilayah and is confined to their knowledge. Hence, the knowledge derived from nubuwwah will undoubtedly be superior and true compared to that which is derived from the wilayah.  [Maktubat-e Imam Rabbani letter: 266]

The condition of Moulana Jami’s books

Moulana ‘Abd al-Rahman Jami (rahimahullah) (d. 898 A.H.) is recognised in the circles of the Ahl al-Sunnah as a sufi, eloquent poet and a linguist; more so when his poems of love and reverence for Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) are recited by the orators in their unique way, wherein an ecstatic atmosphere is created. Nevertheless, the question which needs to be asked: Are the books of Moulana Jami (rahimahullah) free from interpolations like the books of other sufiyyah, or did the Shi‘ah distort them as well; inserting statements contrary to the belief system of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama‘ah? The late Professor Salim Chishti (rahimahullah) writes:

The plague of interpolation and falsification had become so widespread in the poems of the sufiyyah that when Moulana Jami (rahimahullah) arrived in Baghdad, there was a throng of Rawafid present there. They raised a few objections against Moulana’s book Silsilat al-Dhahab. A certain Rafidhi wrote some poetry, filled with exaggeration with regards to the status of Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu) and attributed it to Moulana.

A debate was arranged in the Jami‘ Masjid of Baghdad, the purpose of which was for the Rawafid to present their objections. Nevertheless, the first objection raised was against those poems which the Rafidhi attributed to Moulana. It was the Ahl al-Sunnah who raised the objection against those poems. [For further details of this incident, refer to Hayat al-Jami by Dr. Ali Asghar Hikmatp. 83]

From this incident, I merely wish to point out that a favourite pursuit of the Isma‘iliyyah, Qaramitah and Rawafid was to distort the words of the sufi poets; inserting poems filled with exaggeration regarding Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu), and at times declaring the divinity of Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu) (or disparagement for Sayyiduna Mu‘awiyah radiyallahu ‘anhu).

Other than this, the Imamiyyah beliefs of Imams being Omnipresent (Hazir Nazir), to have power over universal affairs (Ikhtiyar al-Kul & Mukhayyir al-Kul) have somehow been deceitfully crept into the books of the sufiyyah, through which some of the people of Sunnah have deviated and adopted such beliefs from Shi’i interpolation of the books of pious sufiyyah.

One might ask how they (the Qaramitah) dared to do such a thing and the response will be that all schools and followers of the sufiyyah – without exception – admire Sayyiduna ‘Ali  (radiyallahu ‘anhu), honour him and regard him worthy of reverence. The specific reason for this is that from amongst the four links (of Tasawwuf) three links culminate from Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu). It is for this reason that wherever the sufi poets impressively praised the merits of the three khulafaʼ, they expressed even greater praise for Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu). Therefore, the Rawafid and Qaramitah did not find it difficult to make insertions to their poems. Suppose Moulana Jami (rahimahullah) compiled a poem regarding the status of Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu) comprising of twenty-one verses; if anyone were to discreetly insert two or three verses into this poem raising Sayyiduna (‘Ali radiyallahu ‘anhu) to a deity, it would easily pass unnoticed. [Islami Tasawwuf mein Ghayr Islami Nazriyyat ki Amezish, p. 45-46]

A few examples of interpolation in Shawahid al-Nubuwwah

We will now present a few references to the book of Moulana Jami (rahimahullah)-Shawahid al-Nubuwwah. You be the judge whether these are the beliefs of the Shi‘ah or of the Ahl al-Sunnah.

1) Moulana Jami (rahimahullah) mentions in his book the incident of a monk embracing Islam at the hands of Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu) and writes that when becoming a Muslim he recited the following:

أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وأشهد أن محمدا عبده ورسوله وأشهد أنك علي وصي رسول الله

I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah and Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) is His servant and Rasul, and I bear witness that you- ‘Ali, are the wasi of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam). [Shawahid al-Nubuwwah, p. 155, Rukn-e Sadis dar Bayan-e Dalail wa Shawahid]

Is the belief of Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu) being the wasi of the Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) the belief of the Shi‘ah or that of the Ahl al-Sunnah?

Moulana Jami might have intended to say that just as it is necessary to bear witness to the oneness of Allah and the nubuwwah of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) when becoming a Muslim, so too is it necessary to recognise the virtue and merit of Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu), which is why Moulana Jami (rahimahullah) mentions this incident without any criticism or doubt under the karamat (miraculous feats) of Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu).

2) Moulana Jam’i (rahimahullah) writes:

Amir al-Muʼminin ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (radiyallahu ‘anhu) is the first of twelve Aʼimmah. [Shawahid al-Nubuwwah, p. 150, Rukn-e Sadis dar Bayan-e Dalail wa Shawahid]

Is the belief in twelve Aʼimmah a belief of the Ithna ‘Ashariyyah or that of the Ahl al-Sunnah?

3) Moulana Jam’i rahimahullah writes:

After the martyrdom of Amir al-Muʼminin Imam Husayn (radiyallahu ‘anhu), Muhammad ibn Hanafiyyah (rahimahullah)  came to visit Sayyiduna Zayn al-‘Abidin (rahimahullah) one day and said to him: “Due to the fact that I am elder than you and I am also your uncle, thus I am more deserving and worthy of khilafah than you are. Therefore hand over the weapons of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) to me.” Imam Zayn al-‘Abidin (rahimahullah) retorted: “O my uncle! Fear Allah. Do not quarrel regarding what you have no right to.” After much discussion, they both accepted to make the al-Hajr al-Aswad (Black Stone) the arbitrator and sought a judgment from it. Thus the al-Hajr al-Aswad (Black Stone) bore witness to the leadership of Imam Zayn al-‘Abidin (rahimahullah).  [Summarized from Shawahid al-Nubuwwah, p. 169, Rukn-e Sadis dar Bayan-e Dalail wa Shawahid ]

The belief of Imamah being a divine decree of Allah is a Shi‘i concept and the exact words mentioned above can be found in the most relied upon Shi‘ah books such as Usul al-Kafi vol. 1 pg. 48, and Al-Shafi vol. 2, p. 314. The Ahl al-Sunnah have no connection to this false belief.

4) Moulana Jam’i (rahimahu Llah) has mentioned in his book that the birth of Imam Mahdi took place in the home of Imam Hasan al-‘Askari (rahimahulah). Furthermore he has mentioned that he spoke in his childhood. [ Shawahid al-Nubuwwah, p. 198,Rukn-e Sadis dar Bayan-e Dalail wa Shawahid]

This too is a belief of the Shi‘ah. For further details, refer to the book of Moulana Diya al-Rahman al-Faruqi al-Shahid  (rahimahullah) (d. 1417 A.H.)- Imam Mahdi, and for a exhaustive rebuttal refer to Mirqat al-Mafatih, the commentary of Mishkat al-Masabih by Mulla ‘Ali Qari (rahimahullah (d. 1041 A.H.) vol. 10, p. 179-180.

5) Moulana Jam’i (rahimahullah)  has written in Shawahid al-Nubuwwah that Sayyiduna Hasan (radiyallahu ‘anhu) was poisoned by his wife- Ja‘dah, on the instruction of Sayyiduna Mu‘awiyah (radiyallahu ‘anhu) [Shawahid al-Nubuwwah pg. 163], whereas Allamah Ibn Khaldun (rahimahullah) (d. 808 A.H.) writes:

And what has been reported that Mu‘awiyah (radiyallahu ‘anhu) poisoned him in conjunction with his wife- Ja‘dah bint al-Ash‘ath is from the fabricated narrations of the Shi‘ah. It is farfetched that Mu‘awiyah (radiyallahu ‘anhu) would carry out such an act. [Tarikh Ibn Khaldun vol. 2, pg. 1135]

6) Contrary to the majority of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama‘ah, the opinion of Moulana Jami (rahimahullah) regarding Sayyiduna Mu‘awiyah (radiyallahu ‘anhu) is that he committed a grave error which – Allah forbid – necessitates a companion of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) becoming a fasiq, which in itself is a fundamental tenet of the Shi‘ah faith.

I will suffice on these six points and will address the issue again if necessity arises. Ultimately, our readers should make the decision for themselves whether it is possible for a stringent follower of the Ahl al-Sunnah to hold these types of beliefs. If these texts were written by Moulana Jami himself then no doubt Moulana Jami is a Shi‘ah. However, if he did not write this then our claim is proven that some deviants inserted these words in Moulana Jami’s works. Allah alone knows the number of Muslims in the last six hundred years who were ruined by such writings on account of the prominence and virtue of Moulana Jami (rahimahullah). Even if these texts were to be accepted as interpolated, still the enemies of Islam have succeeded in their objective, and even if these interpolated texts were to now be erased, it would be tantamount to:

Stitching silk over coarse cloth

The status of Moulana Jami

There is significant difference of opinion regarding the personality of Moulana ‘Abd al-Rahman Jami (rahimahullah). Some have classified him to be from amongst those who were inclined towards Shi‘asm, while others have openly stated that he was amongst those who practised taqiyyah (dissimulation) and a far cry from being a member of the Ahl al-Sunnah but rather a Shi‘ah in his beliefs and doctrines.

Furthermore, they claim that the poems he composed in praise of the four khulafaʼ are all also based on taqiyyah, as the beliefs Moulana Jami (rahimahullah)  propagated in his books, especially in Shawahid al-Nubuwwah, are clearly Shi‘i beliefs. Sayyid ‘Arif Naushahi in his biography of Moulana Jami (rahimahullah)- entitled Jami [Mizan al-Kutub by the late Moulana Muhammad ‘Ali, pg. 511-513] writes under the chapter of the beliefs of Moulana Jami:

He was a Shi‘ah inclined towards the Ahl al-Sunnah. [Jami pg. 254] Briefly, in light of the content of the above-mentioned book (Shawahid al-Nubuwwah) it is clear that the author is a Sunni, whose heart is free from sectarianism and together with this, he is inclined towards the beliefs of the Imamiyyah sect. [Ibid pg. 255] In the ideas of Jami there is proof of a mixture of Shi‘ah and Sunni beliefs. [Ibid]

Iranian Shi‘ah who hold Jami in high regard, will go out of their way to prove Jami to be a devout Shi‘ah. He will regard these poems and statements of Jami which mention praise for the three khulafaʼ as taqiyyah.

Consequently, they refer to the following part of his final poem in his book- Sajjat al-Abrar, wherein he criticizes the three khulafaʼ and praises ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu) by implication and insinuation:

پنجہ در كن اسد اللہى را  * بيخ پر كن دو سہ روباہى را

The lion of Allah extended his claws

Towards the three, who were more cunning than foxes. [Ibid. 256]

The Shi‘ah scholar ‘Abbas al-Qummi writes in his Al-Kuna wa l-Alqab regarding Jami (rahimahullah):

 

المولى عبد الرحمن بن أحمد بن محمد الدشتي الفارسي الصوفي النحوي الصرفي الشاعر الفاضل … ويقال له الجامي لأنه ولد ببلدة جام من بلاد ما وراء النهر سنة 817 ه … وله سبحة الأبرار وشواهد النبوة في فضائل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم والأئمة عليهم السلام … وهل هو من علماء السنة كما هو الظاهر منه بل من المتعصبين كما هو الغالب على أهل بلاد تركستان وما وراء النهر ولذا بالغ في التشنيع القاضي نور الله مع مذاقه الوسيع، أو أنه كان ظاهرا من المخالفين وفي الباطن من الشيعة الخالصين، ولم يبرز ما في قلبه تقية كما يشهد بذلك بعض أشعاره، منها ما عن سبحة الأبرار قوله:

پنجہ در كن اسد اللہى را  * بيخ پر كن دو سہ روباہى را

واعتقده السيد الأجل الأمير محمد حسين الخاتون آبادي سبط العلامة المجلسي (وينقل) حكاية في ذلك مسندا وحاصلها أن الشيخ علي بن عبد العالي، كان رفيقا مع الجامي في سفر زيارة أئمة العراق عليهم السلام وكان يتقيه فلما وصلوا إلى بغداد ذهبا إلى ساحل الدجلة للتنزه فجاء درويش قلندر، وقرأ قصيدة غراء في مدح مولانا أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ولما سمعها الجامي بكى وسجد وبكى في سجوده، ثم أعطاه جائزة ثم قال في سبب ذلك اعلم أني شيعي من خلص الإمامية ولكن التقية واجبة وهذه القصيدة مني وأشكر الله أنها صارت بحيث يقرأها القارئ في هذا المكان. ثم قال الخاتون آبادي: وأخبرني بعض الثقاة من الأفاضل نقلا عمن يثق به أن كل من كان في دار الجامي من الخدم والعيال والعشيرة كانوا على مذهب الإمامية، ونقلوا عنه أنه كان يبالغ في الوصية بأعمال التقية سيما إذا أراد سفرا والله العالم بالسرائر.

Moula ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Dashti al-Farsi al-Sufi al-Nahwi al-Sarfi, the poet and scholar. He was called Jami because he was born in Jam, a town in Ma Wara al-Nahr, in the year 718 A.H. Amongst his works are Sajjat al-Abrar and Dalaʼil al-Nubuwwah, which discusses the virtues of Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) and the honourable Aʼimmah. Was Jami a scholar from the Ahl al-Sunnah as is apparent or more precisely an extremist Sunni, as is famous in Turkistan and the areas of Ma Wara al-Nahr, which could be the reason why, despite being inherently lenient, he severely reprimanded Qadi Nur Allah al-Shostari. Or perhaps he might have outwardly portrayed himself to be from the opposition (Ahl al-Sunnah) and inwardly was a devout Shi‘ah and out of taqiyyah did not expose what he truly believed? This (second possibility) is endorsed by some of his poetry such as the following poem in Sajjat al-Abrar:

پنجہ در كن اسد اللہى را  * بيخ پر كن دو سہ روباہى را

The lion of Allah extended his claws

Towards the three, who were more cunning than foxes

This is further supported by the story mentioned by Amir Sayyid Husayn al-Khatun Abadi, the grandson of Mulla Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi. The summary of this narration is as follows:

Shaykh ‘Ali ibn ‘Abd al-’Ali once accompanied Jami on a journey towards Iraq to visit the graves of the saints. He would embark on these journeys by means of taqiyyah. When they reached Baghdad both went to the shores of the Tigris River. Meanwhile a dervish arrived and recited a few heart-rendering couplets in praise of Moula Amir al-Muʼminin ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu). When Jami heard this poem, he began sobbing and fell into prostration, reduced to tears. He further gave the poet a gift and told him: “You should be aware that I am a Shi‘ah and a devout follower of the Imamiyyah but taqiyyah is necessary. These poems are my collection and I thank Allah that he has spread it to this extent.” Thereafter Muhammad Husayn al-Khatun Abadi said: “An authentic exemplary narrator has reported this to me on the authority of authentic narrators that the entire household of Jami, near and far, are all upon the beliefs of the Imamiyyah and have been given strict orders by Jami to practise taqiyyah; especially when he undertakes journeys and Allah alone is the Knower of secrets.” [Al-Kuna wal-Alqab vol.2 pg.138-9]

The story narrated by ‘Abbas al-Qummi can also be found in Diwan Kamil Jami Bakhshish Dahm pg.194.

Our stance

Due to the fact that wherever Shi‘ah beliefs are mentioned in the books of Moulana Jami, it is also accompanied with the beliefs of the Ahl al-Sunnah, no precise conclusion can be made. However, since the senior ‘ulama of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama‘ah always accepted Moulana ‘Abd al-Rahman Jami (rahimahullah) as a Sunni sufi and counted him as one of the Muslim poets, always praising him and entertaining good thoughts regarding him; we too will not accept the irrational conclusions the Shi‘ah have arrived at regarding him. As far as these references are concerned, my claim is as follows:

The Sabbaʼiyyah (those who curse the Sahabah), Batiniyyah and enemies of the Sahabah have deliberately created doubts in the beliefs of the famous sufiyyah, thereby confusing those who hold them in high regard with the doubt that they could have adopted taqiyyah or that they had inclinations towards Shi‘asm. The purpose of such ploys would be to incline others towards Shi‘asm as well, making it easier to convert them to what they would refer to as the “Religion of your fore-fathers”. This claim will be proven in due time. The tombs of majority of the Sunni saints in Pakistan have been taken over and are cared for by people of the Imamiyyah sect and they inform their ignorant followers that these saints were in actual fact followers of the Imamiyyah. What a strange spectacle it has become that the tomb of a Sunni is now being taken care of by a Shi‘ah trustee! Without doubt, this is the ‘poisoned apple’ which this sect has used for the past thousand years, claiming that the sufiyyah and auliya were followers of the Imamiyyyah sect, so that the general masses will be inclined to follow in their footsteps.

Basic principles to protect oneself from Shi‘ah conspiracies by Moulana Qasim Nanotwi

Moulana Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi (rahimahullah) has mentioned in his famous book-Hadiyyat al-Shiah, six basic principles to be applied before accepting the words of any book or author in order to protect the ummah from the evils and conspiracies of the Shi‘ah. It is imperative that we scrutinize any reference given by the Shi‘ah or anyone affected by them using these principles. If the reference conforms to these principles then it will be accepted by all means, and if not then it will be rejected or alternatively interpreted. He says:

Firstly, as a precaution, the book at hand must be that of a notable and trustworthy author. Just as there are many grades of authors old and young, trustworthy and untrustworthy, those with understanding and those without, in the same way books are also of many grades. The unfaithful and irreligious have written the names of many great scholars in their works but have also filled their books with hundreds of false claims and narratives. Likewise, most of the great works of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama‘ah for the benefit of the people were left in their unedited form so that they could be reviewed but due to circumstances, this revision did not take place and eventually this unedited magnum opus fell into the wrong hands. Some of these books were considered extremely rare and valuable and others were even considered lost. However, these were later found in the hands of irreligious and like-minded people. They eventually added their fabricated narrations to these books and attributed it to them when debating the Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama‘ah in order to silence them. Referencing such books is a common practice amongst the Shi‘ah. Therefore it is of utmost importance to first question a reference when debating with them. Thereafter it should be seen if the reference is reliable. Gauging the reliability is based upon the six basic principles:

Principle 1

The purpose of the author must be to explain and expound upon facts and not merely to gather whimsical fairy tales or storytelling. If this is not the case then a genre of flowery and colourful stories, fairy tales, strange and fictitious narrations will become widespread.

Principle 2

The author should be unbiased, and his accuracy and trustworthiness in narration should also be well-known such that no doubts arise at the mention of his name. If this is not the requirement, then should not the volumes of heroic tales sung by the young girls in praise of their forefathers and the cowardice of their enemies also be accepted? And what is the value of any narration if the words of every individual is taken into consideration? If we unify our call and accept every deviant belief and the Ahl al-Sunnah begin to accept the Shi‘ah chain of narrators and vice versa, turning a blind eye to differences in the strength of narrators and weaknesses as well as differences in their memory and truthfulness etc, then what reliance would remain in narration?

Principle 3

The author should possess an acceptable degree of expertise on the topic at hand regardless of his truthfulness or reliability. He should not be a personification of the proverb:

Half a Mulla is as dangerous for iman as half a doctor is for health

Principle 4

The fourth principle to be considered is that any book despite possessing the afore-mentioned qualities should be well-known and accepted by the earlier generation of scholars, who also possess the afore-mentioned qualities and it should be passed down through a reliable chain. If this were not the case then the Bible and Torah should have been as reliable as the final revelation of the Noble Qurʼan.

Principle 5

The fifth principle is that the author must make it a precondition upon himself to only narrate authentic and established narrations, like those from the Sihah Sittah (i.e. BukhariMuslimTirmidhiAbu DawudNasaʼiIbn Majah); whose authors placed the condition of only narrating what is authentic (according to them) because of which they are called “Sihah”. So if any book has been compiled in an unedited form by the author with the intention that he will in due time differentiate between right and wrong, true and false and delete any unauthentic narrations (as was done by Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) and Imam Muslim (rahimahullah) or that he will explicitly mention which narrations are authentic, fabricated, or weak following the narration (as Imam Tirmidhi  rahimahullah had done) but coincidentally fate did not allow the author the opportunity to fulfil this desire and his soul was taken prior to completing his task, then the book will not be considered reliable because every author compiles his book all-encompassing with the intention of sifting through it later. There are many narrations mentioning that Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah)  sifted through six hundred thousand ahadith to compile his Sahih. Imam ‘Abd al-Razzaq  (rahimahullah) narrates from Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) himself that he compiled all of these ahadith in an unedited form on three different occasions before settling on the Bukhari of his Sahih. This is mentioned in the second or third chapter of the foreword to Sahih al-Bukhari’  printed in Delhi by Ahmadi Publications. In any case, these types of unedited masterpieces attributed to great scholars of hadith do exist. If Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) had compiled all of his Sahih al-Bukhari and before sifting through them left this temporary abode, would we still consider it reliable even though it would be the work of Imam Bukhari  (rahimahullah) himself? Everyone knows that if this were the case then Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) would not have undertaken the job of sifting through them. Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) is himself testifying to the fact that the unrevised version of his book is unreliable. So why should we rely upon the work of any scholar of hadith solely based on the attribution of a hadith or narration to him without a secondary revision? If any book of this sort is found, no matter how great a scholar the author may be, it is considered unreliable and unacceptable; not only to the scholars but even to the common layman. In any case, this point should be kept in mind that many people may fall into this trap merely because of the name of a great scholar.

Principle 6

If several narrations differ from each other, reaching a level of contradiction and it cannot be conclusively established which of them is not authentic then preference will be given based on the strength of the chain of narrators. If this were not the case then the Shi‘ah would have to accept that their narrations and the narrations of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama‘ah are both correct. [Hadiyyat al-Shiah pg. 255-258]

Moulana Qasim Nanotwi  (rahimahullah) speaking further on the topic says:

These tricks of the Shi‘ah have been carried out with ease in books which are uncommon. For this reason, the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama‘ah consider their books like the Bible and the Torah in severity and have deemed them unreliable. Their narrations will be gauged against the narrations from the reliable books of the Ahl al-Sunnah. Those narrations which will conform with our narrations will be upheld and those contradicting our narrations will be considered deceitful innovations. As for narrations which are not categorized as being conformist or contradictory to our narrations but stand alone, they are the same as those narrations that contradict our narrations, if they disagree with logical reasoning. The reason being that even though it may not contradict our narrations, they definitely do not lend support to them. Subsequently, even if a narration appears in any of their works and there is no apparent meddling by them nor does this contradict a narration of the Sihah, even then this narration will be approached with scepticism and not used as a proof by us, it will be considered similar to a narration of the Bible or the Torah i.e. we will not negate nor affirm it. [Hadiyyat al-Shiah pg. 260-261]

Conclusion

The above mentioned details make it clear that the ijtihad of Moulana Jami (rahimahullah) cannot be used as a proof against the Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama‘ah. According to the scholars of Islam, Moulana Jami  (rahimahullah) is regarded as a great sufi, a poet, and an imam in the sciences of grammar and language. However, he is not considered to be a muhaddith, muffasir or a faqih. The scholars of Islam have agreed that the opinions of the sufiyyah will not be considered as a valid proof in Shari‘ah regarding matters of halal and haram. Mujaddid Alf-e Thani (rahimahullah) (d. 1024 A.H) said it most beautifully:

The actions of the sufiyyah regarding halal and haraam are not a proof. It is sufficient for us to consider them excused and not rebuke them leaving their matter to Allah. Here we shall consider what Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimahullah), Imam Abu Yusuf (rahimahullah), and Imam Muhammad (rahimahullah) have to say and not what Abu Bakr al-Shibli or Abu al-Hasan al-Nuri said. [Maktubat-e Imam Rabbani letter: 266]

The rule of Imam Ibn al-Jawzi (rahimahullah) is no secret:

إذا وقع في الإسناد صوفي فاغسل يديك منه

When a sufi appears in the chain of narration then dust that narration off your hands. [Al-Alalat al-Najiah pg. 77]

Moulana Sayyid Husayn Ahmad Madani (rahimahullah) (d. 1377 A.H) said:

The reality is that these are great scholars in the field of Tasawwuf and Tariqah, but not scholars of the external and Shari‘ah. The Aʼimmah of this field are Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimahullah), Imam Muhammad (rahimahullah), and Imam Abu Yusuf (rahimahullah) and the fuqaha. It is their opinions which will be upheld as proof in this field. The legal verdicts of Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (rahimahullah),  Shaykh Junayd al-Baghdadi (rahimahullah), Shaykh Khawajah Bahaʼ al-Din al-Naqshbandi (rahimahullah), Shaykh Khawajah Muhiyy al-Din al-Sanjari (rahimahullah) will not be considered as reliable proofs although they may have been giants in the field of Tariqah.

لكل فن رجال

Every field has its experts. [Maktubat-e Shaykh al-Islam vol. 3 pg. 225]

Allamah Qadi Ibrahim al-Hanafi (rahimahullah) (d. 1000 A.H) says:

Those ascetics who are not of the people of ijtihad will be viewed as laymen. Their opinions will not be relied upon. If their opinions conform to reliable books then we will take them into consideration. [Nafaʼis al-Izhar tarjama Majalis al-Abrar pg. 127]

Shaykh ‘Abd al-Haqq Muhaddith Delhwi (rahimahullah) (d. 1025 A.H) writes:

The way of any sufi shaykh is not a proof, rather a proof will be drawn from the Qurʼan and Sunnah. [Akhbar al-Akhyar pg. 93]

It was said most beautifully by one of the ascetics:

The saying and actions of any shaykh is not a proof, rather hold fast to the sayings of Allah and the actions of Muhammad sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam.

It becomes clear from the above that the words of the sufiyyah are not a proof in the rulings of halal and haram except when in conformity to the Shari‘ah. When we are not allowed to draw proof from their words in matters of fiqh then how can we draw proof from their words in the matter of ‘aqidah (beliefs)? Especially in one as delicate as the differences of the Sahabah and more so where their opinions contradict the opinion of the majority? In such a case, a sahih hadith will not even be taken into consideration. Maulana Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi said:

With regards to beliefs, the sahih ahadith of Sahih al-Bukhari  and Sahih al-Muslim will be put aside when they are not explicit or mutawatir, so what can be said about weak narrations. Hypothetically, if Jami had not been accused of being a Shi‘ah and even if the additions of the Shi‘ah had not been established in his book, then too his words would still be rejected because of his contradiction of the vast majority of the scholars. [Fatawa Ridwiyyah vol 2 pg. 505]

Khatam Khawajagan in the light of Shari’ah

[Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias]

Shariat is easy, complete and approved by Allaah, To make zikr is praiseworthy, good, laudable, rewardable, gains proximity onto Allaah, provided it is done in accordance with the Shariah.

In Shariat, acts are classified Fardh, Wajib, Sunnat, Masnoon, Nafl, Mustahab, Mubah, Bid’at etc.

For every occasion, set-up, problem, difficulty, joyous occasion, sad occurrence, the Shariah is detailed with what to read, what measures to take, what not to do, what to avoid, how to behave etc.

Now to take a case, in a situation/set up of difficulties, we will find a set of proceedings to be followed as stated in the Qur’aan and Sunnat; then we also find a set of proceedings by the pious predecessors who formulated then and after trying then found these good and beneficially. These formulations were chosen from the Qur’aan and Ahadith and at times, duaa combinations of the pious. No pious one said that you have to do this or this method is Fardh, Waajib, Sunnat. This formulations such as “Khatam Khwajaghan” are neither Fardh, Waajib, Sunnat or Nafl  but “mubah”. If a person does it,
Knowing that this is neither Fardh, Waajib or Sunnat but it is a
tried and beneficially formulations that worked for/ by the pious ones, so lets also do it, Insha – Allaah, it will work for me in my state of difficulty etc.

Now understand another important aspect, one is “Dawaam” (constantly, regularity) and the other “Iltizaam” (to make necessary, essential, compulsory).

At times one decides that one is going read one para everyday, this the person decided to do regularly and constantly. This is an ‘mubah’ act which the person will be rewarded for tremendously. Now this person tells others, that you’ll also have to read one para daily constantly and regularly, making it essential, necessary on others (iltizaam). This is now turning into ‘Dawaam’ into Bid’at.

“Khatam Khwajagan” and other formulations, provided that the wardings do not contain un- Islaamic meanings, or erroneous beliefs then it will be permissible to read as long as one fully understands the jurisprudic status of that recitations and also does not oblige others to join and does not feel at the least hurt when no one joins or develops a sense of pride and show when many join.

Moreover the Sufi orders generally encourage such recitations, thus it is most highly advisable that such recitations be done under the strict guidance of a pious, righteous, reliable, authentic, spiritual mentor who will see that no un-Islaamic practices intrude these sessions, like inter mingling of sexes, photography, turning into social gatherings, adopting tea- gossip, party set up, sessions leading to holding hands whilst making zikr, then standing, then turning, then jumping, then dancing, then doing all the above together.

It is very quick for those activities that barely become permissible, to reach the stage of Bid’at.

A permissible act becomes Bid’at, due to time, place, condition, method specification which are not proven and are attached to
them.

It is far better to use a formulation as specified in the Sunnat of Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) than to practise and promote any other permissible formulation.

We make duaa Allaah blesses all the understandings of Deen and grant us the ability to practise upon the pure, blessed, sanctions, approved, easy Sunnat of Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallan).

Understanding the Concept of Wahdatul Wujood

[By Majlisul Ulama]

Mr. al Madhkali  avers: “….it  has  become  combined  with  the  saying  that  everything  in existence  is  in  reality  Allaah  (wahdatul  wujood)….”

The  writer  has  made Ibn Arabi’s  writings  the  fulcrum  for  his  criticism understood  Ibn  Arabi’s  view  in  the  concept  of Wahdatul  Wujood of  Tasawwuf.  Having to  be  kufr,  he  (the  writer) has  brazenly  and  baselessly  attributed  it  (Ibn  Arabi’s  concept)  to  all  the  Sufiya.  At  this juncture  we  are  not  elaborating  on  this  concept  in terms  of  the  understanding  stemming  from Ibn Arabi’s  writings.  However,  attention  is  drawn  to  the  gross  injustice  which  this  al Madkhalee  character  has  rendered  to all  the  Sufiya  from  the  era  of  the  Salaf Saaliheen  to recent  times.

Ibn  Arabi  flourished  in  the  fifth  century  Hijri — He  died  in  543  Hijri. Tasawwuf  or  Sufism was  in  existence  more  than  five  centuries  prior  to  the  advent  of  Ibn  Arabi.  By  what  stretch  of logic  or  hallucination  is  it  intelligent  to  align  all  the  Akaabir  Sufiya who  had  adorned  Islam’s firmament  of Tazkiya- e-Nafs  and  Taqwa  with  the  view  expounded  by  Ibn  Arabi  five  hundred years  later?

Furthermore, in  the 9  centuries  after  Ibn  Arabi,  there  were  millions  of  Sufis.  On  what basis  does  the  writer  claim  that  all  these  millions of  Sufiya  from  the  pre  and  post  Ibn  Arabi age  had  all  subscribed  to  Ibn  Arabi’s  concept  of Wahdatul  Wujood? And,  what  is  the
evidence  for  the  contention  that  the  Sufi  technical  term, Wahdatul  Wujood had the same meaning    for  all  the  Sufiya  who  came  after  Ibn  Arabi?

One  of  the  fundamental  basis    of  the  errant  writer  for  his baatil  refutation  of  Sufism  is  Ibn Arabi’s Wahdatul  Wujood concept.  Who  of  the  Akaabir  Sufiya before  Ibn  Arabi  and  after  Ibn Arabi  had  espoused  his peculiar concept?   And,  if  there are  isolated  Sufis  who  had  adopted Ibn Arabi’s concept of Wahdat al Wujud, on  what  does  the  writer  base  his  charge  that all the Sufiya  subscribe  to  Ibn  Arabi’s  view?  Why  did  the  writer  not  view  Tasawwuf  in  the  light  of  the expositions  and  practices  of the  great  Auliya  such  as  Ibn  Mubaarak,  Sufyaan  Thawri, Fudhail  Bin  Iyaadh,  Imaam  Maalik,  Imaam  Ahmad,    Junaid  Bagdhaadi,  Sirri  Saqati,  Dawood Tai,  Sayyid  Abdul  Qaadir  Jilaani,  Haji  Imdaadullah,  Hadhrat  Maulana  Rashid  Gangohi, Hadhrat  Thaanwi  and  thousands of  other  Sufiya  before  and  after  Ibn  Arabi?

It  is  bigotry  and  spiritual  aridity    which  have  constrained  the  writer  to  condemn  Tasawwuf en  toto. He  has  illogically,  irrationally  and  stupidly  made  Ibn  Arabi  the  pivot  for  his  rejection of  Sufism.  Ibn  Arabi  is  an  individual  who  by  no  means  was  the  originator  of  Tasawwuf.  The Founder  of  Tasawwuf  is  none  other  than  the  Founder  of  the  Shariah,  viz.,  Muhammadur Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam),  for  Tasawwuf  is  nothing  other  than Tazkiya-e-Nafs which  is a  Waajib  obligation  on  every  Mu’min.

Let  all  anti-Tasawwuf  morons  understand  that Wahdatul  Wujood  is  a  technical  term  in  the terminology  of  the  Sufiya.  Elaborating  on  the  meaning  of    this  term,  Hakimul  Ummat Maulana  Ashraf  Ali  Thaanvi    (rahmatullah  alayh)  who  was  the  Mujaddid  of  Sufism  in  this century, says:

Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam)  said:

(1) “Allah  Ta’ala  said:  ‘The  son  of  Aadam  (i.e.  man)  causes  distress  to  Me.  He  abuses  Time whilst  I  am  Time.  Affairs  are  in  My  Hand.  I  alternate  night  and  day.” (Bukhaari,  Muslim  and Abu  Dawood)

Continuing  his  elaboration  of Wahdatul  Wujood,  Hadhrat  Maulana  Ashraf  Ali  Thaanvi (rahmatullah  alayh)  writes:  “All  actions  and  effects  are  in  the  control  of  Allah  Ta’ala.  The Actual  Operator  and  the  Independent  Existent  are  only of Allah  Ta’ala.  The  Hadith  clearly substantiates  the  contention  of  the  Sufiya.  Besides  Allah  Ta’ala  no  creation  has  an independent  existence.  Entire  creation  depends  on  Him  for  its  existence.  This  concept  has been  designated Wahdatul  Wujood.

The  meaning  is  not  that  Allah  Ta’ala  and  creation  is  one.  It    merely  means  that  the  being of  creation  has  no  independent  existence.  All  existences  despite  existing,  but  in  relation  to the  Divine  Existence,  their  existence  is  superficial,  not  original  and  independent.  Whilst  the Divine  Existence  is  perfect,  that  of  creation  is  defective.  Whilst  all  creation  exists  by  virtue  of the  existence  bestowed  to  it  by  Allah  Ta’ala,  this  (created)  existence  has  no  significance  in relation  to  the  Divine  Existe nce.  In  fact,  all  existences  in  relation  to  the  Divine  Existence  are nonWahdatul  Wujood existent.  Thus,  there  is  only  One  True  Being  Who  Exists  independently.  This  concept    is called to  convey    emphasis  on  the  One  True  Existing  Being.

A  narrational (Naqli) daleel  for  this  concept  is  the  Qur’aanic  verse: “Everything  will  perish except  His  Face.” (Obviously  when  everything  is  perishable,  then  there  is  only  One  real Existing  Being  Whose  existence  is  independent.)

Night  and  day  are  constituents  of  Time  which  Allah  Ta’ala  attributes  to  Himself.  Whatever is  in  time,  and  which  man  attributes to  it  (time)  is  in  Allah’s  power  Who  is  the  One  Who  gives effect  to  all  affairs.  Hence,  abusing  affairs  which  happen  is  tantamount  to  abusing  Allah Ta’ala. It  is  quite apparent that  Allah  Ta’ala  and  Zamaanah  (Time)  are  not  a  single  entity  or a Unity.   However,  despite  the  non-existence  of  unity,  the  effect  of  unity  has  been  stated  in terms  of  an  interpretation. On  the  basis  of  this ta’weel,  the  Muhaqqiqeen  have   stated  the concept of Wahdatul Wujood End  of  Hadhrat  Thaanvi’s  summarized  explanation.

The  concept  of Wahdatul  Wujood explained  by  Hadhrat  Maulana  Ashraf  Ali  Thaanvi (rahmatullah  alayh)  as  well  as  other  Akaabir  Sufiya is  explicitly  affirmed  by    the  tafseer  of aayat  3  of  Surah  Hadeed  presented  by  Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam).

He  is  the  Awwal  (The  First),  the  Aakhir  (The  Last),  the  Zaahir  (The  Manifest)  and  the Baatin  (The  Hidden).”   [Aayat  3,  Surah  Hadeed]. Tafseerul  Mazhari, presenting  the  tafseer of  this  aayat states:

He  is  Awwal:  He  was  before  everything.  There  was  nothing  before  Him.  Verily,  He  is  the Originator  (The  One  Who  brought  into  existence)  all  things.

He  is  Aakhir: He  will  remain  after  everything  perishes  (and  is  annihilated).  Verily  the existence  of  Allah  Ta’ala  is  Original  (True  and  Independent).  There  is  no  possibility  of separation  of  existence  from  him  and  of  annihilation.  The  existence  of  things  besides  Him  is borrowed  in  the  decree    of  Allah  Ta’ala…..He  will  remain  after  ev erything,  and  nothing  will  be after  Him.

He  is  Zaahir: He  is  above  everything.  Nothing  is  above  Him.  The  objective  of  zuhoor  (being manifest)  is  existence.  There  is  no  zuhoor  (manifestation)  for  the  ma’doom  (that  which  is non existent).  The  existence  of  e verything  is  acquired  from  Him,  and  is  a  shadow  by  virtue  of His  existence.  Thus  the  manifestation  of  everything  is    abranch  of  His  Manifestation.

He  is  Baatin: He  is  the  Hidden  by  virtue  of  the  perfection  of  His  Zuhoor  (Manifestation), and  also  because  o f  the  Baatin  of  His  Essence..  There  is  nothing  besides  Him……

Muslim,  Abu  Dawud,  Tirmidhi,  Nisaa’,  Ibn  Maajah  and  Ibn  Abi  Shaybah  narrated  from Abu  Hurairah  (radhiyallahu  anha),  and  Abu  Ya’la  Musali  narrated    from  Aa’ishah  (radhiyallahu anha)  that  Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam)  said  whilst  he  was  lying  down:

O  Allah!  Rabb  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and  Rabb  of  the  glorious  Throne!  Our  Rabb and  the  Rabb  of  everything;  The  One    Who  splits  the  seed;  The  One  who  revealed  the Taurah,  Injeel  and  Fur qaan!  I  seek  refuge  with  You  from  the  evil  of  everything  which  You grab  by  its  forelock.  O  Allah!  You  are  the  First,  and  nothing  was  before  You.  You  are  the Last,  and  nothing  will  be  after  You.  You  are  the  Manifest,  and  there  is  nothing  above  You. You  are the  Hidden,  and  there  is  nothing  besides  You…….”

Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam)  himself  negated  the  existence  of  everything.  This negation  is  in  relation  to  Allah’s  Existence.  This  is  the  meaning  of Wahdatul  Wujood-Only One  True  Existing  Being. The  Sufiya  never  believed  that  Allah  Ta’ala  is  incarnate  in  human beings  or  in  any  of  His  creation  or  creation  is  Allah. Nauthubillaah!

Another  basis  for  the  concept  of Wahdatul  Wujood as  explained  by  the  Sufiya,  and  which concept  is  fully within  the  confines  of  the  Qur’aan  and  Sunnah,  is  the  following  Hadith-e-Qudsi. Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam),  reporting  a  Hadith  Qudsi,  said  that  Allah Ta’ala  said:

Whoever  bears  animosity  for  My  Wali,  verily,  I  issue  to  him  an  ultimatum  of war. There is nothing  more  beloved  to  Me  for  a  servant  gaining  My  proximity  than  that  which  I  have  made obligatory  on  him.  The  servant  incrementally   gains  My  proximity  with  Nawaafil  until  I  love him.  Then  when  I  love  him,  I  become  his  ears  with  which  he hears; his  eyes  with  which  he sees;  his  hands  with  which  he  touch,  and  his  feet  with  which  he  walks.”    (Bukhaari)

In  another  narration,  reported  by  Abdul  Waahid,  it  also  appears: “And  (I  become)  his heart  with  which  he    thinks  and  his  tongue  with  which  he  speaks.” 

Another  Hadith  also  affirming  the  correctness  of  the  Sufiya’s  concept  is  the  following Hadith: Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi  wasallam)  said:

Verily,  on  the  Day  of  Qiyaamah  Allah  Ta’ala will  say  to  a  man:  ‘O  son  of  Aadam!  I  was  sick,  but  you did  not  visit  Me.’  The  man  will  say:  ‘O my  Rabb!  How  could  I  visit  you  whilst  you  are  Rabbul  Aalameen?’  Allah  Ta’ala  will  say: ‘Don’t  you  know  that  My  certain friend  was  sick  and  you  did  not  visit  him?  Don’t  you  know that  if  you  had  visited  him,  you  would have  found  Me  by  him?’

‘O  son  of  Aadam!  I  asked  food  from  you,  but  you  did  not  feed  Me.’  The  man  will  say:  ‘O my  Rabb!  How  can  I  feed  You  whilst  You  are  Rabbul  Aalameen?’  Allah  Ta’ala  will  say:  ‘Did you  not  know  that  a  certain  friend  of  Mine  had  asked  yo u  for  food,  but  you  did  not  feed  him? Did  you  not  know  that  if  you  had  fed  him,  you  would  have  found  Me  by  him?’

‘O  son  of  Aadam!  I  had  asked  you  for  water  to  drink,  but  you  did  not  give  it  to  Me.’  The man  will  say:  ‘O  my  Rabb!  How  can  I  give  You  water  to drink  when  You  are  Rabbul Aalameen?’  Allah  Ta’ala  will  say:  ‘A  certain  friend  of  Mine  asked  you  for  water,  but  you  did not  give  it  to  him.  If  you  had  given  him  water  to  drink,  yo u  would  have  found  that  by  Me.” [Muslim]

Similarly,  as  Hadhrat  Thaanvi  has elucidated,  in  the  second  Hadith  (above)  Allah  Ta’ala explicitly  states  that  He  becomes  the  ears,  eyes,  heart,  hands  and  feet    of  His  devotee,  and that  it  is  He  who  is  doing  all  the  actions  emanating  from  His  devotee.  Despite  this  unification (Wahdatul  Wujood– Unity of  Existence) expressed  in  the  Hadith,  there  is  no  real  or  actual unification  or hulool of  Allah  Ta’ala  into  the  person  or  into  any  of  His  creation.  The  extreme and  lofty  level  of  Divine  Proximity  which  the  devotee  is  bestowed  with  by  virtue of  his  love and  obedience  for  Allah  Ta’ala,  is  in  fact  the  meaning  of Wahdatul  Wujood. It  means  nothing else.  It  does  not  refer  to  the  kufr  concept  of hulool  or  incarnation  or  of  Allah’s  pervasion  in insaan  or  in  any  aspect  of  His  creation.

Likewise,  in the  third  Hadith,  Allah  Ta’ala  attributes  the  devotee’s  sickness  to  Himself, saying  that  He  was  sick,  and  He  was  hungry  and  He  was  thirsty.  Any  Muslim  in  possession of  some  brains  not  deranged  by  stupidity  will  understand  that  these  are  metaphorical expressions  denoting  the  lofty  state  of  Divine  Proximity (Qurb-e-Ilaahi) and  Divine Acceptance (Maqbooliyat)  the  devotee  enjoys.  It  is  this  metaphorical  ‘unity’  which  is  termed Wahdatul  Wujood of  the  Sufiya-e-Kiraam, which  the  spiritually  barren  baboons  of  crass materialism  have  interpreted  to  mean  divine  hulool/incarnation/pervasion, conception  of  kufr  did  not  dawn  in  the  pure  Souls  of  the  Auliya  of  Allah  Azza  Wa  Jal.

It  is  a  technical  term  having  a  methaphorical  connotation.  Never  did  the  Sufiya intend thereby hulool (i.e. the  pervasion/incarnation  of  Allah  Ta’ala  physically  into  the  being  of  the devotee) Nauthubillaah! When  Hadhrat  Mansur  Al Hallaaj  (rahmatullah  alayh) during  a  state of spiritual Sukr experienced  certain mukaashafaat inexplicable  in  human language,  and  in  consequence  exclaimed: which  are ‘Anal  Haqq!’, which  statement  is  in  conflict  with the  Zaahir  of  the  Shariah,  he  was  sentenced    to  death  and  executed.  Hadhrat  Junaid Baghdaadi  (rahmatullah  alayh),  his  Shaykh  and  the  Chief  of  the  Auliya  of  all  ages,  and  the noblest  of  the  Sufiya,  despite  understanding  the  spiritual  mystery (Sirr) of  Mansur’s utterance,  in  deference  of  the  Shariah  and  for  the  safety  of  the  Imaan  of  the  masses endorsed  the  verdict  of  execution.  It  is  therefore  contemptible  injustice  to  accuse  the  Sufiya of  propagating  any  concept  of  kufr  and  shirk. Who  can  deny  that  there  is  only  One  Independent  Original  Existent Allah  Azza  Wa  Jal?

Who  can  deny  that  there  is  only  One  Independent  Original  Existent of Allah  Azza  Wa  Jal? And  who  can  deny  that  the  entire  creation  of  mankind,  jinnkind,  the  world  of  the  countless trillions  and  ‘impossibillions’  of  Malaaikah,  the  innumerable  worlds  of  other  species  of creation- intelligent  and  superficially  unintelligent,  the  billions  of  universes  with  their  billions of  stars,  suns,  moons  and  Allah  Alone  knows  what  else, are  all  dependent  for  their  existence on  the  One  Eternal  Existing  Being?  Who  can  deny  that  the  shadow  is  dependent  for  its existence  on  the  body  casting  the  shadow?  And  who  can  deny  that  the  reflection  in  the mirror  is  dependent  for  its  existence  on  the object  portrayed  in  front  of  the  mirror?  All  these ‘existences’  are  in  relation  to  Allah  Azza  Wa  Jal  superficial,  secondary  and  entirely dependent  on  His  command.  This  is  the  meaning  of Wahdatul  Wujood– the unity of existence.

By  existence  in  this  context  is  meant  Independent  Existence– uncreated  existence- The  Existence  which  has  neither  beginning  nor  ending,  and  that  Existence  is  only  Allah Azza  Wa  Jal.  If  morons  fail  to  comprehend  this  simple  issue,  it  will  be  the  effect  of  some curse  having settled  on  their  brains.  And  that  curse  has  destroyed  what  is  termed Fahm. If  the  brain  is  not  adorned  with  this  spiritual  glitter,  it  cannot  understand  the  meaning of mukaashafaat. About  such  noxious  brains,  the  Qur’aan  states: “And  Allah  casts rijs  (filth) in  those  who  lack  intelligence.”

However,  with  regards to mukaashafaat of  the  Auliya,  the  Sufiya  themselves emphasize  abstention  from  even  reading    their  writings  on  this  subject.  Just  as  medical books  and  other  textbooks  of  technical  and academic  import  are  valid  terrain  for  only  their respectives  experts,  so  too,  it  is  not  permissible  for  morons  and  the  masses  at  large  to  even read    books  of  the  Sufiya  which    discuss Asraar (spiritual  mysteries) and mukaashafaat (spiritual  revelations).

Once  when  some  people  praised  Ibn  Arabi  in  the  presence  of  Hadhrat  Shuhaabuddeen Suharwardi  (rahmatullah  alayh),  he  said:  “Beware!  Never  go  even  near  to  him,  for  you  will become    zindeeq.” (Zindeeq  is  a  kaafir). When  Ibn  Arabi  died  and  Shaikh  Shahaabuddeen was  informed,  he  said:  “The  Qutb  of  the  age  and  Allah’s  Wali  has  died.”  Amazed  at  this comment,  people    said:  ‘Hadhrat,  then  why  did  you  deprive  us  of  his suhbat? ’  The  noble Shaikh  responded:  “His  statements  are  beyond  your  intellectual  comprehension.  If you  had listened  to  his  statements,  you  would  have    gone  astray.  It  was  therefore  imperative  (for  the safety  of  your  Imaan)  to  prevent  you  from  his suhbat.”

In  fact,  Ibn  Arabi  himself  said:  “Those  lacking  in  comprehension  should  not  study  my kutub.”

There  is  much  to  comment  and  write  about  Shaikh  Ibn  Arabi.  However,  the  present treatise  is  not  a  defence  of  Ibn  Arabi.  It  is  in  defence  of  Tasawwuf  which  is  an  integral constituent  of  Islam,  and  with  which  the  Qur’aan  and  Sunnah  are  replete.  Tasawwuf  is  not the  consequence  of  Ibn  Arabi’s  writing.  He  appeared  on  the  Islamic  scene  five  centuries after  the  inception  of  Islam.  The mukaashafaat (revelations  in  spiritual  trances  and  states) are  unrelated  to  Tasawwuf.  The  subject  matter  of  Sufi’ism  is  not mukaashafaat and  the  like.  Tasawwuf  deals  with  Tazkiya-e- Nafs nor  miracles and  the  experts  of  this  department  of  the Deen  are  the  Auliya-e-Kiraam (the  Sufiya).

To  condemn  Tasawwuf  and  the  entire  Jamaat  of  Sufiya  on  the  basis  of  the  writings  of  a few    Sufiya  is portrayal  of jahaalat.  Since  Ibn  Arabi’s  writings  have  no  relevance  to  Sufism, there  is  no  need  in  this  refutation  to  respond  to  the  attack  on  him.  If  necessary,  and  if  Allah Ta’ala  grants  the  taufeeq,  the  subject  of  Ibn  Arabi’s  views  could  be  tackled in  a  separate treatise.

On  the  topic  of Wahdatul  Wujood it  suffices  to  say  that  this  is  a  technical  term  in  the language  of  the  Sufiya.  The  Qur’aan  and  Ahaadith  are  replete  with  its  meaning.  The  views of  a  few  Sufis  which  conflict  with  the  Shariah  may  not  be  presented  for  dismissing  and negating  this  simple  concept.  Allah  Ta’ala  Himself  has  affirmed Wahdatul  Wujood declaring  that  He  becomes  the  ears,  eyes,  heart,  limbs of the  very  being by His  devotee. Allah  Ta’ala  says  with  clarity  in  the  Hadith-e-Qudsi that  He  acts  through  the  organs  and limbs  of  His  devotee.  Just  as    every  Muslim  is  obliged  to  accept  this  affirmation  of  Wahdatul Wujood by  Allah  Azza  Wa  Jal,  so  too  is  the  very  same  concept  expressed  by  the  Sufiya acceptable.  Considerable  brains  are  not  necessary  for  understanding  that  the  unity  of existence  in  this  context  is  in  a  metaphorical  sense.

Wudhu and the Soul

[by Majlisul Ulama]

In his spiritual sojourn towards the attainment of Qurb-e-Ilaahi (Divine Proximity), it is essential that the Saalik (the spiritual traveller) remains ever diligent against his nafs and shaitaan. He should inculcate this diligence by perpetually remaining in the state of wudhu. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: Wudhu is the weapon of the Mu’min.”

It, therefore, ‘does not behove the Saalik in the spiritual path to go unarmed in the fight against shaitaan and the nafs. Com manding diligence, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: Be steadfast and firm (in goodness and piety). Be not indolent. Know that the best of your righteous deeds is Salaat and it is only a true Mu’min who guards his wudhu.” 

There are many benefits in the practice of being constantly with wudhu. The Saalik remains under the special mercy and protection of Allah Ta’ala. He is saved from calamities and the nafs and shaitaan do not quickly over-power him.

Therefore, remain constantly in the state of wudhu, especially when retiring to bed at night so that baatini (internal/spiritual) purity is acquired by virtue of this zaahiri (external/physical) act of ibaadat. A man who fails or who is neglectful in maintaining the zaahiri purity of his body in terms of the Shariah, will not adapt for Tareeqat (the Path of spiritual upliftm ent) because the zaahir is in fact the reflection of what takes place in the baatin (spiritual heart). By constantly maintaining Tahaarat, Divine Anwar (spiritual rays of lustre) will reflect from him.

This reflection will be impressed on his mind. His-spiritual eyes will perceive such anwaar. Further, the practice of remaining permenantly with wudhu is an act of mujaahadah against the nafs. It is detestable to the nafs. By imposing this state of Tahaarat on the nafs, it learns to submit. Its darkness and rebellion decrease and the heart becomes more conducive for dhikrullah. About the people who maintain external (bodily) purity, the Qur’aan Majeed says:

“Verily, Allah loves those who purify themselves.” This verse in the first instance is a reference to the People of Musjid-e-Quba. These Believers were in the habit of purifying themselves with water after answering the call of nature.