Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Ibn Al Arabi , Sunni or Shia ?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

Soo i know Ibn Al Arabi was apparently Sunni, but i heard that he was Shia and some Shia scholars think he was Shia, i also heard he believed in all 12 Imams a.s including Imam Al Mahdi a.s, now the Question is was he Sunni or was he Shia?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
(bismillah)

(salam)

Soo i know Ibn Al Arabi was apparently Sunni, but i heard that he was Shia and some Shia scholars think he was Shia, i also heard he believed in all 12 Imams a.s including Imam Al Mahdi a.s, now the Question is was he Sunni or was he Shia?

it doesnt mater. now.

shhh

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
(bismillah)

(salam)

Soo i know Ibn Al Arabi was apparently Sunni, but i heard that he was Shia and some Shia scholars think he was Shia, i also heard he believed in all 12 Imams a.s including Imam Al Mahdi a.s, now the Question is was he Sunni or was he Shia?

he was a sunni of sufi type. sufis believe in the 12 imams too but they are sunnis not shias as they accept abu bakrs leadership.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He is among the controversial figures who did not perhaps conform to any school of thought strictly, but was a scholar and spiritual master himself. Interestingly, in his encyclopediac work, Futuhat al Makkiyya, he has a chapter on the traits of the 313 companions of Imam Mehdi (as). Thus, many Shia scholars tend to praise him and his works, but differ with some of his ideas and statements.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

ibn Arabi was undoubtedly Sunni. He believed in the superiority of Umar over the Prophet in matters of this world, and that the Prophet was wrong in certain instances where Umar was correct. In his Fusus al-Hikam (The Ringstones of Wisdom), in chapter 2, entitiled "Ringstone of the wisdom of Breathing in the Word of Seth" he states:

The Messengers, due to their being saints, only see what we have spoken of from the niche of the Seal of the Saints - so what of the other saints? Even though the Seal of the Saints follows the prescriptions of the Law brought by the Seal of the Messengers, this does not impinge upon his station, nor does it contradict the position we hold;
he is lesser from one point of view, just as he is more exalted from another. The position we hold is reinforced by what has appeared in the outward aspect of our Law - in
Umar's superiority
as regards the decision made concerning the prisoners of Badr, as well as the incident of the pollination of the palms.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

I recently spoke to a very knowledgeable Sheikh about this and he told me that Ibn Arabi was Shia but was under taqiyyah. Hence all his statements about the caliphs, etc. were just a cover. He also told me that in Futuhat Makkiyah, Ibn Arabi says that the Imam of the Time is the 12th of such and is the son of Hasan Askari (as).

One interesting thing I have seen in my readings is that he quotes the hadith "I did not see anything but that I saw Allah with it, before it, after it, etc." of Imam Ali (as) but he attributes it to Abu Bakr. Obviously Abu Bakr never said anything like this, so this could be an instance of Ibn Arabi's taqiyyah.

Allahu 'alam. But my advice to all here is to not worry about it too much, because even if we are going to read Ibn Arabi we need someone qualified to teach us. I remember reading that Allamah Tabatabai (ra) thought he understood Fusus al-Hikam until Sayyid Ali Qadi (ra) taught it to him and he realized how he didn't understand it at all. Who are we then to sit here and discuss Ibn Arabi if Allamah (ra) said such a thing???

For now, we need to focus on practicing what we do know and understand. Only then should we worry abut moving on and acquiring higher levels of knowledge...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

matter of debate as to whether he was a shia,

many mainstream marjae dont regard him as shia and historians such as allama jafar murtaza amoli regarded as the top historian and stronger than allama askeri by rasool jafarian another historian have also argued against him being shia.

ulema of the past did takfir on him, re:moqadas ardabeli

many ulema also accept him

either way what difference does it make, benefit what you can from him

and try and get closer to Allah

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
(salam)

Allahu 'alam. But my advice to all here is to not worry about it too much, because even if we are going to read Ibn Arabi we need someone qualified to teach us. I remember reading that Allamah Tabatabai (ra) thought he understood Fusus al-Hikam until Sayyid Ali Qadi (ra) taught it to him and he realized how he didn't understand it at all. Who are we then to sit here and discuss Ibn Arabi if Allamah (ra) said such a thing???

For now, we need to focus on practicing what we do know and understand. Only then should we worry abut moving on and acquiring higher levels of knowledge...

I agree with your conclusion.. that we must practice on what we already know. But for those who have the urge and capacity to know more...we dont need someone qualified to just read Ibn-Arabi.

One may not get a profound spiritual experience by reading Ibn-Arabi himself but that doesnt mean he shouldn't start reading Ibn-Arabi by himself. Tabattabai was not wrong when he read Ibn-Arabi himself. He simply did not get the profound spiritual experience he got with his Shiekh. Maybe the reason why he was gifted in getting his Sheikh in the first place was precisely because he was very diligent and hard working in learning and acquiring knowledge (like reading Ibn-Arabi himself).

Without further ado i recommend the following two books which are translations on Ibn-Arabi's work:

1) The Sufi Path of Knowledge

2) The Self-Disclosure of God

Edited by eThErEaL
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Ibn Arabi was no Shi'i under taqiyah, in his time one could speak of Ahl al-Bayt. So would be no point of taqiyah by saying Abu Bakr said it rather than Imam Ali. He, just like the other real Sufis, believe in the Imams that the Twelvers claim to believe in too.

There is disagreement when it comes to Imam Mahdi.

Soroush:

Alawasim min Alqawasim was by Qadi Ibn Alarabi Almaliki, not Shaykh Alakbar Muhyiuddin ibn Arabi, radiallahu anhu arda.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
I recently spoke to a very knowledgeable Sheikh about this and he told me that Ibn Arabi was Shia but was under taqiyyah.

This knowledgeable Sheikh is actually either very ignorant, or delusional. Anyone who has ever critically read any of ibn Arabi's books can tell that he was definitely not Shi'a. He never quotes once from any primary Shi'a hadith source, but his writings are filled with ahadith from the Sunni Sahah, Sunnans and Masanid. Not one of his students, disciples, or children ever ended up becoming Shi'a - they were all Sunni. And even if Shi'as under taqiyyah had to praise the Caliphs in order to safeguard their lived, these Shi'as never wrote books explaining the greatness and merits of these Caliphs, while justifying ahadith in the Sunni texts that demeaned the Prophet in comparison to these Caliphs.

There is no way any knowledgeable person can conclude that ibn Arabi was Shi'a. Your Sheikh is completely misleading you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
(bismillah)

(salam)

Soo i know Ibn Al Arabi was apparently Sunni, but i heard that he was Shia and some Shia scholars think he was Shia, i also heard he believed in all 12 Imams a.s including Imam Al Mahdi a.s, now the Question is was he Sunni or was he Shia?

He was a Sunni. His belief in 12 Imams is derived from his sufism. There was and perhaps still is a group called Athna 'Ashari Sunnis, or the Twelver Sunnis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

Soo i know Ibn Al Arabi was apparently Sunni, but i heard that he was Shia and some Shia scholars think he was Shia, i also heard he believed in all 12 Imams a.s including Imam Al Mahdi a.s, now the Question is was he Sunni or was he Shia?

Shaykh al-Akbar Ibn al-'Arabi radiallahu anhu is one of the Mujtahids of the Sunnis. All his students were Sunni masters, and all his teachers were also Sunni masters.

Infact, some of his teachers were even higher masters than himself. I guess the twelver scholars in Iran have not come across the works of Shaykh al-Akbar teachers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
he was a sunni of sufi type. sufis believe in the 12 imams too but they are sunnis not shias as they accept abu bakrs leadership.

Sunnis do not believe in the hidden 12th Imam in occultation or so

Sunnis accept the Imama of Sayyiduna Imam Zain al-Abidin Sayyiduna Imam Muhammad al-Baqir Sayyiduna Imam Ja'far as Sadiq Sayyiduna Imam Musa al-Kadhim and his descendents.

But there is no 12th Imam son of Sayyiduna Imam Hasan al-askari radiallahu anhu

This is spiritual Imama, not the Imama concept as stated by shiis of any group.

Imam Ibrahim al-Nakha'i radiallahu anhu and his students and their students such as Imam abu Hanifa, all Sunnis, were also all students of the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt.

Shaykh al-Akbar Ibn al-'Arabi's Teachers all belonged to the 4 Schools of Sunni Islam. Since he was from Spain/Maghreb, they were mostly of the Madina School, but others too.

Shaykh al-Akbar was a Master of Tasawwuf. Sunnis proudly narrate his authenticated miracles, and there are so many, and so amaizing.

He was a Sunni. His belief in 12 Imams is derived from his sufism. There was and perhaps still is a group called Athna 'Ashari Sunnis, or the Twelver Sunnis.

Could you please give some more info on the athna ashari sunnis

(bismillah)

I read somewhere that every page of his works can be traced back to being tafsir of a saying of the Ahlul Bayt (as).

yes, sunnis say that too, and not just for him, but also for others like him

Shaykh al-Akbar ibn al-Arabi was only one Spiritual Master. I guess people here do not know about others. On of them is

Ghawth Abu Madyan Tlemcani

He is resting in Tlemcan, on the Moroccon/Algerian border

Edited by Sijistani
Link to post
Share on other sites
ibn Arabi was undoubtedly Sunni. He believed in the superiority of Umar over the Prophet in matters of this world, and that the Prophet was wrong in certain instances where Umar was correct. In his Fusus al-Hikam (The Ringstones of Wisdom), in chapter 2, entitiled "Ringstone of the wisdom of Breathing in the Word of Seth" he states:

The Messengers, due to their being saints, only see what we have spoken of from the niche of the Seal of the Saints - so what of the other saints? Even though the Seal of the Saints follows the prescriptions of the Law brought by the Seal of the Messengers, this does not impinge upon his station, nor does it contradict the position we hold;
he is lesser from one point of view, just as he is more exalted from another. The position we hold is reinforced by what has appeared in the outward aspect of our Law - in
Umar's superiority
as regards the decision made concerning the prisoners of Badr, as well as the incident of the pollination of the palms.

No, he believed no such thing. If Shaykh al-Akbar had these views, why would almost 99% of all the Masters of Tasawwuf among the innumerable Sunni Orders take Shaykh al-Akbar as one of thier most beloved teachers?

Most of these Masters of Tasawwuf were also Masters of the Sunni Creed. And the belief that any Companion was higher than the Prophets is against Sunni Creed.

The belief that any of the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt is above any of the Prophets is also against Sunni Creed, and is considered 'kufr'

Link to post
Share on other sites
This knowledgeable Sheikh is actually either very ignorant, or delusional. Anyone who has ever critically read any of ibn Arabi's books can tell that he was definitely not Shi'a. He never quotes once from any primary Shi'a hadith source, but his writings are filled with ahadith from the Sunni Sahah, Sunnans and Masanid. Not one of his students, disciples, or children ever ended up becoming Shi'a - they were all Sunni. And even if Shi'as under taqiyyah had to praise the Caliphs in order to safeguard their lived, these Shi'as never wrote books explaining the greatness and merits of these Caliphs, while justifying ahadith in the Sunni texts that demeaned the Prophet in comparison to these Caliphs.

There is no way any knowledgeable person can conclude that ibn Arabi was Shi'a. Your Sheikh is completely misleading you.

You can read his books out there, and they can be borrowed from the Arab world and taken to Qom and published and edited and translated over there. But the teachings of Shaykh al-akbar and all his works has been carefully checked by the Sunni scholars.

His teachings are preserved ONLY within the spiritual Orders of Sunni Islam. Only authorized Sunni Masters of the Science of Tasawwuf can transmit his teachings.

No one can guarantee his books posted on the beautiful internet or published here and there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

Ibn Arabi was no Shi'i under taqiyah, in his time one could speak of Ahl al-Bayt. So would be no point of taqiyah by saying Abu Bakr said it rather than Imam Ali. He, just like the other real Sufis, believe in the Imams that the Twelvers claim to believe in too.

There is disagreement when it comes to Imam Mahdi.

Soroush:

Alawasim min Alqawasim was by Qadi Ibn Alarabi Almaliki, not Shaykh Alakbar Muhyiuddin ibn Arabi, radiallahu anhu arda.

Actually, Shaykh al-Akbar's time was very anti-shia. Remember the Mamluks? Shaykh al-Akbar was perhaps in his thirties when he came to Syria and it was 50 years BEFORE the Mamluks. The Mamluks destroyed the Ismailis. And then the other shia groups in Syria and elsewhere. Dont forget the Sunni Ayyubids (during the time of Shaykh al-Akbar) before the Mamluks who also destroyed shia groups, and also the Sunni Zengids before them, and finally the Sunni Seljuqs even before! It was in the Seljuq times that Imam al-Ghazali was refuting the Ismailis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with your conclusion.. that we must practice on what we already know. But for those who have the urge and capacity to know more...we dont need someone qualified to just read Ibn-Arabi.

One may not get a profound spiritual experience by reading Ibn-Arabi himself but that doesnt mean he shouldn't start reading Ibn-Arabi by himself. Tabattabai was not wrong when he read Ibn-Arabi himself. He simply did not get the profound spiritual experience he got with his Shiekh. Maybe the reason why he was gifted in getting his Sheikh in the first place was precisely because he was very diligent and hard working in learning and acquiring knowledge (like reading Ibn-Arabi himself).

Without further ado i recommend the following two books which are translations on Ibn-Arabi's work:

1) The Sufi Path of Knowledge

2) The Self-Disclosure of God

Who can guarantee that the ibn arabi you are reading is exactly the ibn arabi in the 12th century? Shaykh Tabatabai?

You do not read Ibn Arabi. Ibn Arabi is not something to be 'read'. These are not novels or univeristy courses. Neither is ibn Arabi someone to get 'spiritual experience' from. He did not write his 'books' for these purposes. Tasawwuf is not something to be read. It is about TO DO. The works of Ibn Arabi Shaykh al-Akbar are within the Sunni Spiritual Orders Preserved. Not the books flying around out there in universities in america and canada and in the bookshelfs of masters/phd students. Let me give an example for others

Shaykh Ahmad al-Alawi radiallahu anhu, is a Master of the Shadhili Order of Sunni Islam. He is a holder of the teachings of Shaykh al-Akbar and his works. It is he who is authorized to teach the teachings of Shaykh al-Akbar, not the books you can buy for 40 dollars or something in bookstores here in the west.

One can read Rumi, one can read Rumi all his life, but its no use. Rumi's works, like Shaykh al-Akbar's works are something else, something very massive that is preserved with authorized teachers of the Orders.

Shaykh Tabatabai must have borrowed or bought Shaykh al-Akbar's works on the market and began to read them. There are many in the arab world who do it too. And then they comment on it. But it makes no difference.

You can only gain the teachings of Shaykh al-Akbar from a teacher authorized to teach them to you. You would have to go to a Spiritual Master as Shaykh Ahmad al-Alawi. But he has passed away. But his students are still there. Many of them are also passing away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

I recently spoke to a very knowledgeable Sheikh about this and he told me that Ibn Arabi was Shia but was under taqiyyah. Hence all his statements about the caliphs, etc. were just a cover. He also told me that in Futuhat Makkiyah, Ibn Arabi says that the Imam of the Time is the 12th of such and is the son of Hasan Askari (as).

One interesting thing I have seen in my readings is that he quotes the hadith "I did not see anything but that I saw Allah with it, before it, after it, etc." of Imam Ali (as) but he attributes it to Abu Bakr. Obviously Abu Bakr never said anything like this, so this could be an instance of Ibn Arabi's taqiyyah.

Allahu 'alam. But my advice to all here is to not worry about it too much, because even if we are going to read Ibn Arabi we need someone qualified to teach us. I remember reading that Allamah Tabatabai (ra) thought he understood Fusus al-Hikam until Sayyid Ali Qadi (ra) taught it to him and he realized how he didn't understand it at all. Who are we then to sit here and discuss Ibn Arabi if Allamah (ra) said such a thing???

For now, we need to focus on practicing what we do know and understand. Only then should we worry abut moving on and acquiring higher levels of knowledge...

Did Sayyid Ali Qadi have authorization to teach the works of Shaykh al-Akbar?

Remember, this authorization MUST be a chain going back to the students of Shaykh al-Akbar himself.

To practice 'what we know' also comes from the teacher authorized. He has the authority to tell you what exactly you should practice. Did Shaykh Tabatabai leave any of his students teaching Ibn Arabi and reading Ibn Arabi for other twelver shias to benefit from? I do not know this, thats why I am asking.

The knowledge of Tasawwuf, Sufism, is practice. The practice has to be guided, not read from a book, memorized/learned and then immediately begun to tread upon.

You practice under the guidance of a teacher. Until you are told that you have perfected what you learnt. May be thats the reason why Tabatabai was corrected by his teacher.

Who can guarantee that the ibn arabi in the library of shaykh tabatabai and in the library of sayyid ali qadi is the true ibn arabi?

Only a direct chain of authorization, starting from the students of Shaykh al-Akbar himself in the 12/13th centuries down to the time of Shaykh Tabatabai to his teacher Sayyid Ali Qadi can guarantee this.

This is how knowledge is transmitted in Sunni Islam and its Spiritual Orders.

Edited by Sijistani
Link to post
Share on other sites
acquiring higher levels of knowledge...

Only a teacher can tell you which level of knowledge you are on. And that teacher must be authorized. He must have a chain of authorization going back to Shaykh al-Akbar via his students. I cannot emphasize it more.

There was once a sufi. He had studied under the best, and gained extraordinary amounts of knowledge. He was known to have higher levels of irfan. But then someone came to meet him, and saw that the sufi was spitting in the direction of the qibla while walking over the road, perhaps in a hurry. The someone then realized that definitely this sufi has no knowledge, he does not even have the etiquette.

Edited by Sijistani
Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

Soo i know Ibn Al Arabi was apparently Sunni, but i heard that he was Shia and some Shia scholars think he was Shia, i also heard he believed in all 12 Imams a.s including Imam Al Mahdi a.s, now the Question is was he Sunni or was he Shia?

Rafidi, in Canada, there are many students of Shaykh Ahmad al-Alawi's students' students, who gain the knowledge of Shaykh al-Akbar's teachings directly from authorized scholars. You can meet them if you prefer. I remember you said that you were with some of your sufi sunni friends. They might know.

America is also full of them, and so is Britain.

Edited by Sijistani
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Who can guarantee that the ibn arabi you are reading is exactly the ibn arabi in the 12th century? Shaykh Tabatabai?

You do not read Ibn Arabi. Ibn Arabi is not something to be 'read'. These are not novels or univeristy courses. Neither is ibn Arabi someone to get 'spiritual experience' from. He did not write his 'books' for these purposes. Tasawwuf is not something to be read. It is about TO DO. The works of Ibn Arabi Shaykh al-Akbar are within the Sunni Spiritual Orders Preserved. Not the books flying around out there in universities in america and canada and in the bookshelfs of masters/phd students. Let me give an example for others

Shaykh Ahmad al-Alawi radiallahu anhu, is a Master of the Shadhili Order of Sunni Islam. He is a holder of the teachings of Shaykh al-Akbar and his works. It is he who is authorized to teach the teachings of Shaykh al-Akbar, not the books you can buy for 40 dollars or something in bookstores here in the west.

One can read Rumi, one can read Rumi all his life, but its no use. Rumi's works, like Shaykh al-Akbar's works are something else, something very massive that is preserved with authorized teachers of the Orders.

Shaykh Tabatabai must have borrowed or bought Shaykh al-Akbar's works on the market and began to read them. There are many in the arab world who do it too. And then they comment on it. But it makes no difference.

You can only gain the teachings of Shaykh al-Akbar from a teacher authorized to teach them to you. You would have to go to a Spiritual Master as Shaykh Ahmad al-Alawi. But he has passed away. But his students are still there. Many of them are also passing away.

:) thanks for your advice. Although i should make it known that I do not read from Tabattabai.

Edited by eThErEaL
Link to post
Share on other sites
Did Sayyid Ali Qadi have authorization to teach the works of Shaykh al-Akbar?

Remember, this authorization MUST be a chain going back to the students of Shaykh al-Akbar himself.

To practice 'what we know' also comes from the teacher authorized. He has the authority to tell you what exactly you should practice. Did Shaykh Tabatabai leave any of his students teaching Ibn Arabi and reading Ibn Arabi for other twelver shias to benefit from? I do not know this, thats why I am asking.

The knowledge of Tasawwuf, Sufism, is practice. The practice has to be guided, not read from a book, memorized/learned and then immediately begun to tread upon.

You practice under the guidance of a teacher. Until you are told that you have perfected what you learnt. May be thats the reason why Tabatabai was corrected by his teacher.

Who can guarantee that the ibn arabi in the library of shaykh tabatabai and in the library of sayyid ali qadi is the true ibn arabi?

Only a direct chain of authorization, starting from the students of Shaykh al-Akbar himself in the 12/13th centuries down to the time of Shaykh Tabatabai to his teacher Sayyid Ali Qadi can guarantee this.

This is how knowledge is transmitted in Sunni Islam and its Spiritual Orders.

I say nothing about Ibne Arabi, but regarding Mirza Ali Qazi and Allama Tabatabai; be careful speaking about those regarding whom you have no knowledge of.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

As-Salamu 'Alaykum,

I have studied Sunni Sufism, Shi'ite Sufism, and Shi'ite 'irfan. From Ibn 'Arabi's texts we know that he was a Sunni. However, his influence is not limited to the Sunni community. Beginning with Sadr al-Din Qunawi, Ibn 'Arabi's teachings began to spread in the Persian speaking world. Later certain Shi'ites such as Sayyid Haydar Amuli and Mulla Sadra incorporated many of his teachings, but took the Quran, Hadith, and teachings as the Imams as primary, and gave precedence to these when they differed with the teachings of Ibn 'Arabi, especially concerning the doctrine of Imamate.

Be that as it may, certain scholars in Iran still preserved a special place for Ibn 'Arabi's texts, wrote valuable commentaries on his work, and some even transmitted an Akbari initiation, not unlike what is preserved among some scholars in places like Damascus in the Sunni world. The great scholar Allamah Tabataba'i benefited from such an initiation which can be read about in M.H. Faghfoory's translation of "Kernel of the Kernel."

One can benefit from Ibn 'Arabi's teachings and also disagree with him on a few issues, for no scholar is infallible. Even in the Sunni world many Sufis take from Ibn 'Arabi's teachings and disagree with him on certain issues and formulations.

We should also note that Mulla Sadra's teachings are studied and respected among some Sunni scholars in India, Turkey, Malaysia, and other countries despite the fact that they disagree with him on the question of early Islamic history.

We should celebrate the fact that these noble 'urafa can be read and respected by both Sunnis and Shi'ites, although we are not obliged to agree with them on every issue. Their teachings can reach the hearts of Sunni and Shi'ites because they are first and foremost concerned with the inner meaning of tawhid, which all sincere Muslims seek to know directly. Our differences are important as well, but these were only resolved in the time and presence of the blessed Prophet (sal), and God-willing during the reign of the Mahdi (as). Finally, the fact that we can speak of scholars such as Ibn 'Arabi as a Sunni and Mulla Sadra as a Shi'ite proves that both paths lead to direct knowledge of God.

Those who want to see and maintain a sectarian understanding of Islam, both Sunni and Shi'ite, will condemn their brothers and sisters. Those who want to see and maintain the unity of the Islamic Ummah will respect our differences as providential branches of the same religion meant for different individuals and communities.

Wa Salam,

Nur Muhammad

Edited by NurMuhammad12
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

Ibne Arbi aor deegar Suffis ky baray main jo new Book translate hui hay uss ka naam " Tasheyu aor Taswuf ka Farq" hy.Yey Book Lebnon k aik Aalim Alaama Hasim ki tasneef hy jiss ko pakistan main Majma Ilmi ny Published kya hy. Iss book main Taswuf aor Tasheyu ka farq byan kiya gaya hay aor Ahaddes -e-Masoomen sy yey sabit kya gaya hay kay Suffi izm ka Tasheyu sy koi wasta nahi hay.Iss book main Ibne Arbi sameet 2nd hijjri sy lay kr baad kay door tak kay tmam Suuffis kay Haalat aor Aqaeed byan kyay gay hain.Suffis kay batil Nazreyat kay baray main jannay kay liyay yey Book zaroor Parhain

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Did Sayyid Ali Qadi have authorization to teach the works of Shaykh al-Akbar?

Remember, this authorization MUST be a chain going back to the students of Shaykh al-Akbar himself.

To practice 'what we know' also comes from the teacher authorized. He has the authority to tell you what exactly you should practice. Did Shaykh Tabatabai leave any of his students teaching Ibn Arabi and reading Ibn Arabi for other twelver shias to benefit from? I do not know this, thats why I am asking.

The knowledge of Tasawwuf, Sufism, is practice. The practice has to be guided, not read from a book, memorized/learned and then immediately begun to tread upon.

You practice under the guidance of a teacher. Until you are told that you have perfected what you learnt. May be thats the reason why Tabatabai was corrected by his teacher.

Who can guarantee that the ibn arabi in the library of shaykh tabatabai and in the library of sayyid ali qadi is the true ibn arabi?

Only a direct chain of authorization, starting from the students of Shaykh al-Akbar himself in the 12/13th centuries down to the time of Shaykh Tabatabai to his teacher Sayyid Ali Qadi can guarantee this.

This is how knowledge is transmitted in Sunni Islam and its Spiritual Orders.

What are you talking about ? Tabataba`i's [QS] preceptors does not include, and has nothing to do with, "Shaykh Al-Akbar" (despite whatever others may write about him). Not only is he not in Tabataba`i's chain, but you are also claiming that authorisation from him is necessary ?!

He explicitly writes himself:

The chain of the teachers of gnosis goes back to Imam Ali. The number of the sufi orders which have taken part in imparting the mystic knowledge is more than 100, but the main orders are not more than 25. All these orders go back to Imam Ali. Almost all of them belong to the Sunni denomination. Only two or three of them are Shi'ite. Some of these orders are traced back through Ma'ruf Karkhi to Imam Ali Reza.
But we belong to none of these orders and follow the directions of the late Akhund,
who had nothing to do with these orders.

And then fyi, he goes onto describe his chain exactly:

More than a hundred years ago there lived in Shustar a leading scholar and Qazi (judge) named Agha Sayyid Ali Shushtari. Like other eminent scholars his occupation was teaching and administration of justice. Many people called on him to take counsel. One day all of a sudden somebody knocked at his door. When Agha Sayyid Ali opened it he saw a weaver standing there. On inquiry as to what he wanted, he said: "The judgement given by you regarding the ownership of that particular property on the basis of the evidence produced before you was not correct. Actually that property belongs to an orphan little child and its deed is buried at such and such place. The course that is being followed by you is also wrong." Ayatulllah Shushtari said: "Do you mean to say that my judgement was wrong?" The weaver said: "What I have told you is the fact." After saying that the weaver went away. The Ayatullah began to think over who that man was and what he said. On further inquiry it was found that the said deed was actually buried at the place mentioned by the weaver, and that the witnesses produced were liars. The Ayatullah was alarmed, and said to himself: "My other judgements also might have been wrong." He was frightened. Next night the weaver again knocked at the door and said: 'The course being followed by you is not proper.' The same thing happened the third night. The weaver said: 'Do not waste time. Collect all your domestic effects and sell them out, and then set out for Najaf. Do as I have told you, and after six months wait for me in the Wadi'us Salam of Najaf. The late Shushtari left for Najaf. As soon as he arrived there he saw that the weaver in the Wadi’us Salam at sunrise, as if he had emerged suddenly from the ground. He gave some instructions and then disappeared once again. The late Shushtari entered Najaf and began to act according to the weavers instructions. At last he reached a position too high to be described.

The late Sayyid Ali Shushtari held Shaykh Murtaza Ansari in great respect and attended his lectures on theology and jurisprudence. Shaykh Murtaza Ansari also attended Sayyid Ali's lectures on moral law once a week. Following Shaykh Murtaza Ansari's death, the late Sayyid Ali assumed his teaching functions and began to give lectures from where Shaykh Murtaza Ansari had suspended them. But he did not live long and died after six months only. Anyhow, during this short period Sayyid Ali trained and guided Mulla Husayn Quli, one of Shaykh Murtaza Ansari's distinguished pupils. Mulla Husayn Quli already had some contact with Agha Sayyid Ali and from time to time used to ask him questions regarding moral and spiritual matters. When Sayyid Ali succeeded Shaykh Murtaza Ansari, he sent a message to Mulla Husayn Quli, on which he wrote:

'The course that you are following presently is faulty. Try to attain to higher positions.' At last Agha Sayyid Ali succeeded in persuading Mulla Husayn Quli to follow his method. Consequently before long Mulla Husayn Quli became a wonder of his time in morals, spiritual knowledge and self-mortification. Mulla Husayn Quli also trained some very distinguished and competent pupils, each of whom became a shining star on the sky of gnosis. His most prominent pupils included Haji Mirza Jawad Agha Malaki, Agha Sayyid Ahmad Karbalai Tehrani, Agha Sayyid Muhammad Sa'id Habbubi and Haji Shaykh Muhammad Bahari.

My preceptor was the late Haji Mirza Ali Agha Qazi who was a pupil of Agha Sayyid Ahmad Karbalai. This is the chain of my preceptors which goes back to the above mentioned weaver through the late Shushtari. Anyhow, it is not known who that weaver was and from where he acquired his gnostic knowledge.

Suprisingly, I see no mention Ibn `Arabi in that list anywhere..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...