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

Shia-sufism


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

I think you missed the point of my post.

The very fact that the people who claim to have spiritual knowledge talked about it is enough to refute Wahdat al Wujud.

Did Salman (as) reveal his knowledge to Abu Dhar (ra) ? No.

So what sort of knowledge could Khomeini possibly have that he reveals it?

One who has the knowledge, doesn't reveal it.

One who doesn't have the knowledge, reveals misguidance.

Khomeini revealed, therefore he didn't have the knowledge, and he is only misguiding.

Simple logic.

I mean seriously, what double-standards... These people will do taqiyya and call for you to be polite and respect Abu Bakr, and erase hadith from books, just for politics... But they won't do taqiyyah to hide their Wahdat al Wujud beliefs, they openly print literature about this kufr.

simple logic?? :mellow:

do you even know what that word means?!

revealing gnostic knowledge means misguidance?!

logic?!

there aren't the right emoticons to express what I'm feeling ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

simple logic?? :mellow:

do you even know what that word means?!

revealing gnostic knowledge means misguidance?!

logic?!

there aren't the right emoticons to express what I'm feeling ...

It's sad that nobody can have an intellectual conversation anymore without someone claiming to be a gnostic and then exploding with emotions when someone wants to discuss their ideologies with them.

Wahdat al Wujud is kufr, stop promoting it, case closed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

It's sad that nobody can have an intellectual conversation anymore without someone claiming to be a gnostic and then exploding with emotions when someone wants to discuss their ideologies with them.

Wahdat al Wujud is kufr, stop promoting it, case closed.

no brother, nobody with intellect wants to have an intellectual conversation with YOU personally. who would want to have an intellectual conversation with someone who says: 'nobody can have an intellectual conversation .... wahdat al wujud is kufr case closed...'' !!! :lol:

you intellectual you!

Edited by thecontentedself
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

no brother, nobody with intellect wants to have an intellectual conversation with YOU personally. who would want to have an intellectual conversation with someone who says: 'nobody can have an intellectual conversation .... wahdat al wujud is kufr case closed...'' !!! :lol:

you intellectual you!

Let's have an intellectual debate about whether Jesus is God.

You will enter with the presumption that Jesus is not God.

That doesn't make you unintellectual.

Let's debate whether God can manifest in Poop = Wahdat al Wujud = kufr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Ah! I see that like all posts in Shiachat, this has exploded into meaningless bickering and the usual calling everyone who disagrees with you a kafir-- if it didn't, this wouldn't be Shiachat!

Quick word about the knowledge of Sufis/Arifs and Wahdat al-Wujud. The Sufis and Arifs are UNANIMOUS in their declaration that the expression and communication of such knowledge through their books is impossible. It is well-established that the only purpose of such books is to give people a small taste of the states being experienced by the Arif. Actual communication of such knowledge, however, is impossible. The Sufis are all well-aware that attempting to explain the concept of Wahdat al-Wujud in their books is a task that cannot be accomplished-- this is part of the reason why the Sufis/Arifs also constantly state that the reading of their books is pointless (and in certain cases, even prohibited) for those who have not had some actual experiential knowledge of the states and concepts they are attempting to explain.

For those who like to keep repeating the point that Wahdat al-Wujud equates to some sort of pantheism, Ibn Arabi makes very clear in many of his books that Allah is separate from His creation and that His creation cannot be compared to Him. But again, do to the inherent impossibility of being able to explain something like Wahdat al-Wujud through human language, the Sufis/Arif have had to resort to somewhat exotic and extraordinary language to give people a glimpse into what they mean and as a result are often labeled as heretics, kafirs etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Ah! I see that like all posts in Shiachat, this has exploded into meaningless bickering and the usual calling everyone who disagrees with you a kafir-- if it didn't, this wouldn't be Shiachat!

Quick word about the knowledge of Sufis/Arifs and Wahdat al-Wujud. The Sufis and Arifs are UNANIMOUS in their declaration that the expression and communication of such knowledge through their books is impossible. It is well-established that the only purpose of such books is to give people a small taste of the states being experienced by the Arif. Actual communication of such knowledge, however, is impossible. The Sufis are all well-aware that attempting to explain the concept of Wahdat al-Wujud in their books is a task that cannot be accomplished-- this is part of the reason why the Sufis/Arifs also constantly state that the reading of their books is pointless (and in certain cases, even prohibited) for those who have not had some actual experiential knowledge of the states and concepts they are attempting to explain.

For those who like to keep repeating the point that Wahdat al-Wujud equates to some sort of pantheism, Ibn Arabi makes very clear in many of his books that Allah is separate from His creation and that His creation cannot be compared to Him. But again, do to the inherent impossibility of being able to explain something like Wahdat al-Wujud through human language, the Sufis/Arif have had to resort to somewhat exotic and extraordinary language to give people a glimpse into what they mean and as a result are often labeled as heretics, kafirs etc.

tumblr_lje9hsu96I1qclgof.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Lol some guy named Ibn Arabi posts defending Kufr big surprise.

I've read Ibn Arabi where he says you didn't experience pleasure having sex with ur wife but it was Allah u pleasured from sex

Kufr

Not even going to respond to this other than to say that the reason I hold Ibn Arabi in such high esteem is because when my faith was nearly broken and brought to the brink of atheism, having read the work of a multitude of different authors and thinkers, none of them helped to turn my situation around but for Ibn Arabi. It was his writing that brought back into my heart the love for our Holy Imams, and in particular, the Imam of Our Age, Mohammad al-Mahdi (as). So attack him all you want, but the personal debt I owe Ibn Arabi remains all the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Less than a month ago, I made some posts on Ibn Arabi. These posts were in no way an extensive research on him. Some of you may be interested in reading them

http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/2012/01/ibn-arabi-part-1.html

http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/2012/01/ibn-arabi-part-2.html

http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/2012/01/ibn-arabi-part-3.html

http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/2012/01/ibn-arabi-part-4.html

Someone also posted a question on my blog today. He/She asked

Why is Ibn Arabi is being referred to as having made contributions to "Shi'ite" Sufism? If anything he was anti-Shia for what I know? Can you shed some light?

This is my answer to him/her based on what I know/am aware of

There is no such thing called Shia Sufism. Shia Imamiah is very distinct from Sufism. Sufis are not Shias. Sufism existed in the time of Imams of Ahl al-Bayt. The Imams of Ahl al-Bayt condemned Sufis in very harsh tone.

Many people don’t know that Sufis only pay lip service to the Ahl al-Bayt. The Sufis do not have desire to become true followers of Ahl al-Bayt (the Shia). Most of Sufis are interested in seeking the pathway of their masters and not the Ahl al-Bayt.

If you read what Ignaz Goldziher said, the teaching of the Sufi Master like Ibn Arabi was sometimes from his imagination and not backed by Islamic literature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Not even going to respond to this other than to say that the reason I hold Ibn Arabi in such high esteem is because when my faith was nearly broken and brought to the brink of atheism, having read the work of a multitude of different authors and thinkers, none of them helped to turn my situation around but for Ibn Arabi. It was his writing that brought back into my heart the love for our Holy Imams, and in particular, the Imam of Our Age, Mohammad al-Mahdi (as). So attack him all you want, but the personal debt I owe Ibn Arabi remains all the same.

Alhamdulilah, I've been pulled out of non-religiousity by Salafis before, but it didn't make them correct.

Many people can inspire in some short bursts, but the marathon belongs only to the Masomeen (as).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Salam alaykom

Dawud let us jump back to wahdatul nur

Do you believe in noor-e-muhammad ?

if yes what do ahdith say that nor-e-muhammd was created from?

and on that note what was created from Noor-e-muhammad according to hadith?

Edited by Maitham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salam alaykom

Dawud let us jump back to wahdatul nur

Do you believe in noor-e-muhammad ?

if yes what do ahdith say that nor-e-muhammd was created from?

and on that note what was created from Noor-e-muhammad according to hadith?

and How many books have you actually read on Wahdatul wujud? have you had any philosphy classes? studied any irfan?

(wasalam)

Please pardon my answering questions with questions, but it would be much more beneficial for you to introduce Wahdat al Nur before we discuss it.

Explain your concept of noor-e-Muhammad and Wahdat al Nur, etc... You must answer your own questions, if these are concepts you believe in.

I haven't studied Wahdat al Wujud more than what is apparent from my posts. I know people who have studied Irfan for years and who don't believe in Irfan, then there are people who learn about Irfan for the sake of refuting it. There are many scholars who reject it, and many scholars who believe in it. So the discussion goes deeper than we can take it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Those who learn a thing just to refute people are not seen as good in hadith are they ?

and i will not answer i would like you to show me, as if what i am thinking it would be the defintion of what people have been trying to explain to you about this xoncept but just presented diffirently if i am correct.

but if i must define it i will say that there is only one powerful and that is god. there is not joining of two powers rather one power which is also life, that casues all things to be. imam ali (as) said "Everything submits to Him and everything exists by Him. He is the satisfaction of every poor, dignity of the low, energy for the weak and shelter for the oppressed. Whoever speaks, He hears his speaking, and whoever keeps quiet, He knows his secret. On Him is the livelihood of everyone who lives, and to Him returns whoever dies. " this is basically what people were trying to prove to you while disputing about whadatul wujud, as ther eis much more in depth one can go, this is eolgequent enough.

I personally think relizing our weakness and dependence on Allah is not bad. but seems some call people mushriks for that.

Edited by Maitham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Those who learn a thing just to refute people are not seen as good in hadith are they ?

and i will not answer i would like you to show me, as if what i am thinking it would be the defintion of what people have been trying to explain to you about this xoncept but just presented diffirently if i am correct.

Bro, to me the question is the same as if I ask you "Please explain what you think about Dadaleci Shume"

I don't know what Wahdat al Noor is, so I can't answer your questions.

Enlighten me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

There is no such thing called Shia Sufism. Shia Imamiah is very distinct from Sufism. Sufis are not Shias. Sufism existed in the time of Imams of Ahl al-Bayt. The Imams of Ahl al-Bayt condemned Sufis in very harsh tone.

Whatever you believe Sufism to be and the opinion of Ahlul Bayt on it to be, it has not stopped there being Shia-Sufis. And it has not stopped the development of Sufism and Shi'ism next to eachother. Hell, the main reason Iran is Shia to this day is thanks to the Safaviyya, a Sufi order of Shi'ites complete with dervishes. And even the structure of Shi'ism is akin to a tariqat, even the Ismailis sometimes refer to themselves as tariqas. And there are certainly Twelver Sufi lodges of dervishes today in Iran and India and the Anatolian region

Many people don’t know that Sufis only pay lip service to the Ahl al-Bayt. The Sufis do not have desire to become true followers of Ahl al-Bayt (the Shia). Most of Sufis are interested in seeking the pathway of their masters and not the Ahl al-Bayt.

Funny, from my understanding, many Shia follow a marja with little to no question, seeing them as the figures to model their religious life after. What's the difference between that and the Sufis following the pathway of their masters? Because they don't follow the pathway you think is right they must not be interested in following Ahlul Bayt? That's kinda arrogant if you ask me and is playing with semantics in order to paint yourself as being the only one who is sincere in his or her faith. If you ask me, the Sufis following the way of their respective masters, both dead and alive, is pretty much the same as following a marja. Heck, it IS following a marja. :mellow:

If you read what Ignaz Goldziher said, the teaching of the Sufi Master like Ibn Arabi was sometimes from his imagination and not backed by Islamic literature.

Depends on what you mean by "imagination" the whole idea of irfan is centered around not limiting yourself solely to book learning, but learning through personal experiences as well. Sufism/Irfan centers around mystical experiences and deriving knowledge and wisdom from those experiences. The visions and revelations brought about through intense meditation, contemplation, and remembrance as well as just everyday life can yield knowledge and wisdom that brings about better clarity of the experiences related in book learning (since the books can only relate and describe a limited fraction of the experiences) or knowledge and wisdom one cannot find in book learning.

I can't comment on the truthfulness of Ibn Arabi's teachings or the commentary of Ignaz Goldziher, since I have not studied in depth either individual, but I just wanted to clarify why one might, kinda understandably so, say why a mystic is speaking from his "imagination and not literature," It's not that there's no value in book learning to the true mystic, just that one should seek to utilize the experience of reading of the divine to be actively experiencing the divine both within and beyond the spectrum of what is related in the books.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salaams,

For those who are interested: Dr Hajj Nur'Ali Tabandeh, Master of the Erfan Gonabadi Order (an orthodox Twelver, as in they adhere to Shariah, branch of the Nimatullahis) on Shiism, Sufism and Gnosticism http://www.sufi.ws/books/download/english/Shiism-Sufism-and-Gnosticism.pdf

Another article by the Shaykh wherein he affirms orthodox Twelver doctrine:

http://erfan-gonabadi.com/Selected_Articles/Arjang1/Opening_Stat_____/opening_stat_____.html

I see that Ibn Arabi and Wahdat al Wujud are again misunderstood and tarred with the brush of kufr. I'll just repeat a basic summary of the doctrine that I posted to another thread on this very topic:

Pantheism holds that All is God, that the universe (a created thing) and the divine (the Creator) are identical. Wahdat al Wujud IS NOT this.

On the highest level, Wujud (being) is the absolute and non delimited reality of God, the "Necessary Being" (Wajib al Wujud) that cannot not exist. In this sense, wujud designates the Essence (Dhat) of God or of the Real (Al Haqq), the only reality that is real in every respect.

For creatures (makhluq), Being is not part of their essence because a creature does not own its being, it can never be independent in and of itself. In this sense, the created does not deserve the attribution of Being. Only God is Being, and all the rest is in reality a possibility, a relative, possible non-existence.

Ultimately, what Ibn Arabi is saying is the following: Only He who possesses Being in Himself and whose Being is His very essence, merits the name of Being. Only God can be like that.

Wahdat al Wujud is Tawheed (or the understanding of) at its purest.

Peace.

Edited by Hagop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Whatever you believe Sufism to be and the opinion of Ahlul Bayt on it to be, it has not stopped there being Shia-Sufis. And it has not stopped the development of Sufism and Shi'ism next to eachother. Hell, the main reason Iran is Shia to this day is thanks to the Safaviyya, a Sufi order of Shi'ites complete with dervishes. And even the structure of Shi'ism is akin to a tariqat, even the Ismailis sometimes refer to themselves as tariqas. And there are certainly Twelver Sufi lodges of dervishes today in Iran and India and the Anatolian region

The Ismaili sect is heavily based on Sufism. Ismailis do embraces Sufism.

The Shia Imamiah sect as a whole doesn't embrace Sufism. Imami sect is not being that influenced by Sufism. The Imamis are very orthodox in ritualistic point of view. The school is still based on the Quran and the Sunnah. You'll have some minor free thinking going around, but for the most part, things are still heavily regulated.

Funny, from my understanding, many Shia follow a marja with little to no question, seeing them as the figures to model their religious life after. What's the difference between that and the Sufis following the pathway of their masters? Because they don't follow the pathway you think is right they must not be interested in following Ahlul Bayt? That's kinda arrogant if you ask me and is playing with semantics in order to paint yourself as being the only one who is sincere in his or her faith. If you ask me, the Sufis following the way of their respective masters, both dead and alive, is pretty much the same as following a marja. Heck, it IS following a marja. :mellow:

If the Sufis were interested to follow the Ahl al-Bayt then I imagine they would be seeking the Shia marjas or would be busy reading Shia books. But reading Shia books doesn't make one Shia. Even the Sunnis and the wahhabis are reading Shia books.

Most of the Shia marajas are not Sufi masters. You can educate me if you know any of the Shia Marja who is also a Sufi Master. Most of the famous Sufi Scholars are not known as Shia Scholars. They are also not known as Shia followers.

Depends on what you mean by "imagination" the whole idea of irfan is centered around not limiting yourself solely to book learning, but learning through personal experiences as well. Sufism/Irfan centers around mystical experiences and deriving knowledge and wisdom from those experiences. The visions and revelations brought about through intense meditation, contemplation, and remembrance as well as just everyday life can yield knowledge and wisdom that brings about better clarity of the experiences related in book learning (since the books can only relate and describe a limited fraction of the experiences) or knowledge and wisdom one cannot find in book learning.

I guess everyone have personal experiences. I don't understand why someone's else personal experience needs to become a path way to others. We are not that important. The only important people are the Holy Prophet and the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt. Their experiences are the only one that counts. Also, I don't prefer Sufi master's supernatural experience or his imagination to become part of my religion.

I can't comment on the truthfulness of Ibn Arabi's teachings or the commentary of Ignaz Goldziher, since I have not studied in depth either individual, but

I just wanted to clarify why one might, kinda understandably so, say why a mystic is speaking from his "imagination and not literature," It's not that there's no value in book learning to the true mystic, just that one should seek to utilize the experience of reading of the divine to be actively experiencing the divine both within and beyond the spectrum of what is related in the books.

I don't see much value of things from imagination. I have the tendency to treat things of that nature as fiction.

Edited by Gypsy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

The Ismaili sect is heavily based on Sufism. Ismailis do embraces Sufism.

The Shia Imamiah sect as a whole doesn't embrace Sufism. Imami sect is not being that influenced by Sufism. The Imamis are very orthodox in ritualistic point of view. The school is still based on the Quran and the Sunnah. You'll have some minor free thinking going around, but for the most part, things are still heavily regulated.

Well with the Twelvers, the structure of the schools and the clerical hierarchies is relatively akin to the structure to Sufi tariqas, except that the madrasas of Twelver don't all delve into the realm of irfan. The Twelver tradition has always had a Sufi tradition, whether or not other Twelvers agree with such traditions (likewise, many Sunnis also dislike the Sunni-Sufi tradition while others embrace it and admire it) both in the form of brotherhoods of dervishes and in the irfani studies in proper proportion to its size. And whether or not one agrees with these practices, I don't think it hurts to acknowledge they are present (Like I said, the Safaviyya are an important part of Shia history, regardless of how one personally feels on the legacy they left)

If the Sufis were interested to follow the Ahl al-Bayt then I imagine they would be seeking the Shia marjas or would be busy reading Shia books. But reading Shia books doesn't make one Shia. Even the Sunnis and the wahhabis are reading Shia books.

I'm quite sure Shia-Sufis read Shia books, in fact I know for certain they do. What differentiates the Shia-Sufis from the Sunni-Sufis is they are actually trying to be "Shia of Ali," that is unlike the Sunni-Sufis who do feel obligated to follow Ahlul Bayt and try to, rather admirably, to do so, they are "rafidah"

Most of the Shia marajas are not Sufi masters. You can educate me if you know any of the Shia Marja who is also a Sufi Master. Most of the famous Sufi Scholars are not known as Shia Scholars. They are also not known as Shia followers.

I think you missed what I was saying. I was saying they shouldn't be condemned for being committed to following the ways of a master by Twelvers since Twelvers do just that: follow the ways of a respective master or masters they feel embody the meaning of what it means to be pious and wise. The Sufis just follow their respective marjas just as anyone else does.

I don't see much value of things from imagination. I have the tendency to treat things of that nature as fiction.

Well, if it is a legitimate mystical experience, one can't very well say it is from the "imagination" can they? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Well with the Twelvers, the structure of the schools and the clerical hierarchies is relatively akin to the structure to Sufi tariqas, except that the madrasas of Twelver don't all delve into the realm of irfan. The Twelver tradition has always had a Sufi tradition, whether or not other Twelvers agree with such traditions (likewise, many Sunnis also dislike the Sunni-Sufi tradition while others embrace it and admire it) both in the form of brotherhoods of dervishes and in the irfani studies in proper proportion to its size. And whether or not one agrees with these practices, I don't think it hurts to acknowledge they are present (Like I said, the Safaviyya are an important part of Shia history, regardless of how one personally feels on the legacy they left)

I'm quite sure Shia-Sufis read Shia books, in fact I know for certain they do. What differentiates the Shia-Sufis from the Sunni-Sufis is they are actually trying to be "Shia of Ali," that is unlike the Sunni-Sufis who do feel obligated to follow Ahlul Bayt and try to, rather admirably, to do so, they are "rafidah"

I think you missed what I was saying. I was saying they shouldn't be condemned for being committed to following the ways of a master by Twelvers since Twelvers do just that: follow the ways of a respective master or masters they feel embody the meaning of what it means to be pious and wise. The Sufis just follow their respective marjas just as anyone else does.

Well, if it is a legitimate mystical experience, one can't very well say it is from the "imagination" can they? ;)

Mate, you're fighting a losing battle I'm sorry to say. You hear the same false criticisms leveled against the Sufis time and again. And it's always the same thing-- people misquoting the Sufis, attributing false quotes to them, quoting them out of context, and repeating the same propaganda that has been spewed forth for generations with little regard for the truth. The sadness in all of this, however, is that the Wahhabis attack the Shi'a in the exact same way and when it is done to us, we are disgusted. Yet when we take the very same behaviour and apply towards another group of people apparently it is completely justified.

I'm not here as an apologist for the Sufis-- many Sufis have gone astray just as have many Shi'as. However, overwhelmingly, many of the most prominent and well-known Sufis were actually at their core in line with the standard Islamic beliefs and adhered very strictly to the outward Islamic practices. In fact, many of them go so far as to express extreme disgust at the very Sufis who reject the outward Islamic practices and fundamental beliefs. But no matter how many times people like myself or Saintly_Jin23 say this, we will always be ignored and have the same lies thrown back in our faces it seems. This is the reason why many of our great ulama' have outwardly denounced the Sufis/practices of Irfan while secretly practicing them-- most people just do not want to listen.

Also, just in response to that other guy who made the point that just because Sufism made someone more religious it doesn't mean it's correct, I agree with this point. I was merely highlighting my personal experience and not arguing deductively. However, a point I was trying to make was that Sufism has reinforced my love for Ahlul Bayt, made me want to follow their path even better, and brought me closer to Shi'ism-- not further away from it. This idea that Shi'ism and Sufism have to somehow hate each other is a poisonous myth.

Besides, we do not have to agree with everything the Sufis said. As the Imam Ali (as) himself stated, "Truth is truth no matter what the source". So our obligations is to take whatever truthful and honorable practice any group of people may offer us and to put those to use while rejecting falsehood and reprehensible practices. On a personal level, my only concern with the Sufis is to take whatever practices they offer for spiritual elevation and follow those and rejecting any practices that drag the spirit down. Even Ibn Taymiyyah, for all he was despised by the Shi'a, said a correct thing or two in his life. We cannot simply label the entire belief system of a group of people wrong because we do not like them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Also, just in response to that other guy who made the point that just because Sufism made someone more religious it doesn't mean it's correct, I agree with this point. I was merely highlighting my personal experience and not arguing deductively. However, a point I was trying to make was that Sufism has reinforced my love for Ahlul Bayt, made me want to follow their path even better, and brought me closer to Shi'ism-- not further away from it. This idea that Shi'ism and Sufism have to somehow hate each other is a poisonous myth.

It has been reported that our pure Infallibles (peace be upon them) condemned the one who adopts the philosophers and Sufi’s path.

When Imam al-Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked about Sufis, he answered: “THEY ARE OUR ENEMIES, WHOEVER IS INCLINED TOWARDS THEM THEN HE'S ONE OF THEM AND WILL BE RESURRECTED WITH THEM. There will be people who claim they love us but they are inclined towards them and they try to be like them, call themselves with their name, and say what they say, WHOEVER IS INCLINED TOWARDS THEM HE'S NOT FROM US and we are innocent from him and whoever rejects them and refutes them he's like someone who performed Jihad against the disbelievers with the messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his pure family)” (Safinatul Bihar, by al-Muhadith al-Qummi, vol. 2, p. 57).

MOST DANGEROUSLY, THIS SATANIC APPROACH LEADS ITS FOLLOWER TO BELIEVE IN THE CONCEPT OF ‘WAHDAT AL WUJOOD WAL MAWJOOD” AND THEREFORE TO SHIRK.

The following Hadith of our master Imam al-Sadiq (peace be upon him) is one of the useful ways to refute this concept: “God is absolutely independent of all His creatures and all His creatures have absolutely nothing in common with Him. And to whatsoever the expression ‘thing’ is applicable is a creature except God and God is the Creator of everything, blessed is He, naught is as His likeness and He is the All-Hearing and All-Seeing”. (al-Kafi, vol. 1, p. 82).

After reading the above, I don't know how anyone can say anything good about Sufism when the very word itself has been demonized by the Imaams (as).

The riwayah from the Shi'a hadith are very clear, that Sufism and these philosophies are a deviation and are abhorrent.

You can dress Wahdat al Wujud up all you want and try to make it sound like "Pure Tawheed", but you have absolutely no basis in Qur'an and Hadith to do so, and in fact are contradicted blatantly by Qur'an and Hadith.

Honestly, after reading the above hadith, one must be very brainwashed to continue associating with Sufism in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Now you're just being rude, not to mention repeating the same rhetoric over and over again on things. You hardly even understand what it is you are even arguing against.

Calling us "brainwashed" because we contest or just simply question a couple random hadith attributed to the Imams (which is nothing new or shocking by the way in the Shia community) is just sorry behavior.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Now you're just being rude, not to mention repeating the same rhetoric over and over again on things. You hardly even understand what it is you are even arguing against.

Calling us "brainwashed" because we contest or just simply question a couple random hadith attributed to the Imams (which is nothing new or shocking by the way in the Shia community) is just sorry behavior.

Imaam (as) says "Sufis are not from us"

Sufi says "Sufis can be Shi'a"

lol?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Imaam (as) says "Sufis are not from us"

Sufi says "Sufis can be Shi'a"

lol?

I find it strange that someone like Allamah Tabatabai, possibly the greatest Ithna'asheri scholar of the last century and by all accounts from those I have spoken to who have met him a very saintly and pious man, would identify himself with Sufism and the teachings of Ibn Arabi if he honestly believed the Imams (as) found it to be abhorrent and a path to the hellfire. You couldn't possibly tell me the legendary compiler of the voluminous Al-Mizan was so ignorant of the position of Ahlul Bayt (as) on Sufism that he made the great mistake of identifying with it. What hope then is there for arrogant, unlearned common people as myself if even our greatest scholars have erred on such a supposedly simple position?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Imaam (as) says "Sufis are not from us"

Sufi says "Sufis can be Shi'a"

lol?

Completely missed my point. We're not arguing against what the Imams said, we argue against what you and other detractors say they said. There's a difference you know, and if you can't see that there is a difference then there really is little hope for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salaams,

I think part of the problem here is that the opponents of sufism see it as some kind of sect in its own right, a sect in competition with Shiism and Sunnism. It isn't. It's simply another Islamic science like fiqh, hadith and kalaam.

Perhaps it would help if we simply called it by another name, like tazkiyatun nafs, something that all believers are supposed to engage in. These are things like purifying one's intention in worship, lowering your gaze, remembering death, fighting hubb ad-dunya, cultivating zuhd etc.

Seen from this perspective, the detractors of sufism (Salafi or Shi'i, scholars or laymen) engage in 'sufi' practices in one form or another.

Yes there are sufis who become cultish, who abandon sound doctrine and obligatory acts of worship. However, being a sufi is not about wearing big hats/distinctive robes, taking the hand of a shaykh, cloistering oneself in a khaniqah, engaging in hadra etc. It's simply about perfecting, as much as possible, one's emaan and ehsan.

Don't get lost in outward labels.

Peace.

Edited by Hagop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salaams,

I think part of the problem here is that the opponents of sufism see it as some kind of sect in its own right, a sect in competition with Shiism and Sunnism. It isn't. It's simply another Islamic science like fiqh, hadith and kalaam.

Perhaps it would help if we simply called it by another name, like tazkiyatun nafs, something that all believers are supposed to engage in. These are things like purifying one's intention in worship, lowering your gaze, remembering death, fighting hubb ad-dunya, cultivating zuhd etc.

Seen from this perspective, the detractors of sufism (Salafi or Shi'i, scholars or laymen) engage in 'sufi' practices in one form or another.

Yes there are sufis who become cultish, who abandon sound doctrine and obligatory acts of worship. However, being a sufi is not about wearing big hats/distinctive robes, taking the hand of a shaykh, cloistering oneself in a khaniqah, engaging in hadra etc. It's simply about perfecting, as much as possible, one's emaan and ehsan.

Don't get lost in outward labels.

Peace.

I think you've pretty much nailed this one. This is precisely the point I've been trying to make. Btw, I see your interests are very similar to mine. If you don't mind, please click my profile and shoot me a brief email. Perhaps we can get a fruitful dialogue going. Same applies to Saintly Jinn if you want to give me a shout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I would very much like to get this thread a little more back on track in discussing individual Sufi figures themselves that may be relevant to Ithna Ashari Shi'ism.

Let's listen to the late Grand Ayatollah Mohammad Shirazi

Question: Muslim or not Muslim?

Are there some sects within Islam that are NOT considered Muslims, could you please provide me with a small list of sects which our Ulema don't consider them as Muslims....

Are Sufis considered Muslims?

Was-Salaam

Answer

A muslim is he who submits to the Will of Allah and therefore to His Teachings, Commands and Orders. Mankind receives His Teachings through His Messengers and Allah Almighty considers complying with the teachings of His Messengers as tantamount to submission to Him.

"O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you." 4:59.

"Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things." 33: 40.

There are the Ahmadis who claim that there is another prophet after prophet Muhammad (S), and people such as those are not regarded as Muslims. [When the Ahmadis are confronted about their views they say to the Muslims you do not appreciate what we are saying.]

Other sects who may call themselves or referred to as Muslims but in fact they are considered non-Muslim are the Babi's, the Baha'is, Qadyanis, and also the following:

The Nawasib are those have animosity towards Ahl-ul-Bayt ,

Imam Saadiq said: “love towards us constitutes imaan and hatred towards us constitutes kufr.”

The Khawarij are those who believed that Amir-ul-Mu'mineen is kafir,

The Ghulaat are those who believe that Amir-ul-Mu'mineen is Allah,

The Mujassamah are those who believe that Allah has a body, face, etc.

Imam Saadiq said: “those who believe that Allah has a face are Mushrik and those believe Allah has limbs like His creatures are kafir.”

The Mujbirah are those who say man is forced to do what he is doing

Imam Redha said, “He who believes in Jabr is kafir.”

The Sufis are many groups and sects and in general they may be categorised in two broad categories. One are those who use Sufism for self-discipline but adhere to the teachings of Islam and its laws and Shari'ah.

And there are some of them who are not considered as Muslims for their deviated and false belief. In particular are those sects who believe in Wahdat-el-Wujud or Pantheism. They are not considered to be Muslims. They too say to the Muslims you do not appreciate what we are saying, when confronted about their beliefs. They say, "Everything is Allah. There is no reality other than Allah, and this is the meaning of La Ilah Illa-Llah. What we see around us is just illusion, whereas in fact there is nothing around us except Allah."

Great Shi'a scholars and jurists have decreed that Sufism is false and Kufr . . . . See for example Orwat-ol-Wothqa by Sayyed Muhammad Kaadhem Yazdi. Given the importance of the book almost every Shi'a Faqih and Jurist has written commentary on the Orwat-ol-Wothqa. In Orwat-ol-Wothqa, Ayatollah Sayyed Muhammad Kaadhem Yazdi states that those Sufis who practice their beliefs of Wahdat-el-Wujud are even considered as Najis!]

Furthermore there are many hadeeths from Ahl-ul-Bayt (peace be upon them all) strongly condemning Sufism.

One of the first people who used the Sufi during the Islamic era was Abu Hashim al-Kufi who lived during the time of Imam Ja'far al-Saadiq. The imam, peace be upon him, describes Abu Hashim of Kufa as follows:

"He is of a severely corrupt Aqidah and he is the one who has innovated a new math-hab called Sufism, which he has made it (his math-hab) as a means to present his devious Aqidah."

[sheikh al-Hurr al-Aameli, "Al-Ithna Ashareyyah"; p 33. and "Hadeeqat-ul-Shi'a", p 564.]

Imam Redha, peace be upon him says:

"No one takes up Sufism except for (the reason of) deception, or misguidedness, or stupidity."

[safeenat-ol-Behaar; vol. 2, p 58].

In one hadeeth, Imam Hassan al-Askari (peace be upon him) says:

"The Sufis are all our opponents and their practice is opposite to ours and in fact they are none but the Christians and Zoroastrians of this Ummah."

[safeenat-ol-Behaar; vol. 2, p 58].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Just leave, nobody cares what you have to say. This thread is for the discussion of these topics with an open mind and for those who WANT to find wisdom in them or question the detractors of the Sufis, not a thread to be thrown cliche rhetoric by scholars we don't even follow. I don't listen to or follow Ayatollah Shirazi and don't care about his opinion. Again, if you are just here to condemn us, LEAVE NOW! Cause now, you are just spamming.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Just leave, nobody cares what you have to say. This thread is for the discussion of these topics with an open mind and for those who WANT to find wisdom in them or question the detractors of the Sufis, not a thread to be thrown cliche rhetoric by scholars we don't even follow. I don't listen to or follow Ayatollah Shirazi and don't care about his opinion. Again, if you are just here to condemn us, LEAVE NOW! Cause now, you are just spamming.

I'm quoting hadith bro,

One of the first people who used the Sufi during the Islamic era was Abu Hashim al-Kufi who lived during the time of Imam Ja'far al-Saadiq. The imam, peace be upon him, describes Abu Hashim of Kufa as follows:

"He is of a severely corrupt Aqidah and he is the one who has innovated a new math-hab called Sufism, which he has made it (his math-hab) as a means to present his devious Aqidah."

[sheikh al-Hurr al-Aameli, "Al-Ithna Ashareyyah"; p 33. and "Hadeeqat-ul-Shi'a", p 564.]

Imam Redha, peace be upon him says:

"No one takes up Sufism except for (the reason of) deception, or misguidedness, or stupidity."

[safeenat-ol-Behaar; vol. 2, p 58].

In one hadeeth, Imam Hassan al-Askari (peace be upon him) says:

"The Sufis are all our opponents and their practice is opposite to ours and in fact they are none but the Christians and Zoroastrians of this Ummah."

[safeenat-ol-Behaar; vol. 2, p 58].

Why don't you quote some hadith where the Imaams (as) praised Sufism and tasawwuf and Irfan?

If you don't have any then why are you defending it and still calling yourself Shi'a?

Edited by Dawud Miqdad al-Amriki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

I'm quoting hadith bro,

Yes, the same hadith over and over again that we've heard a thousand times that we've already said are just garbage. that's called spamming.

Why don't you quote some hadith where the Imaams (as) praised Sufism and tasawwuf and Irfan?

If you don't have any then why are you defending it and still calling yourself Shi'a?

The unreasonableness of the hadith you have presented is enough. Now, again, stop spamming, you've made your point clear enough already, now leave cause your just repeating yourself. Call us defiant, brainwashed, stupid, whatever, I don't care about your opinion, just leave my thread.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I'm quoting hadith bro,

Why don't you quote some hadith where the Imaams (as) praised Sufism and tasawwuf and Irfan?

If you don't have any then why are you defending it and still calling yourself Shi'a?

You realize that not all hadith are correct, right? Otherwise I should just quote you some hadiths from Sahih Bukhari and Muslim to prove to you Umar's superiority over Ali (as), may God forbid such a thing. Of course, in evaluating any hadith, we must look at the chain of narrators-- something conspicuously absent from all of the hadiths you have quoted. Furthermore, it is permissible to dismiss hadiths on the grounds that they do not comport with reason. None of your hadiths are in line with reason and to attribute such petty language to our Imams (as) is very low. Also, as has already been mentioned, we do not even know which group of Sufis are being mentioned by the Imams in these hadiths even if we assume these hadiths are genuine.

Furthermore, you have made no response to any of our legitimate arguments, and just keep repeating the same things.

Regardless, it is no correct for you to go around labeling others, and especially your fellow Shi'a who love and adhere to the path of Ahlul Bayt, as kafirs. Instead of beinig so hasty with your words you should perhaps remember that God will judge you on Judgment Day and no action of yours, however small, shall go unjudged. To label fellow lovers of Ahlul Bayt is kafirs is not something I assume will be taken lightly.

As Saintly_Jinn23 said, if you have nothing further to add to this conversation, please leave. We have all heard what you have to say and considered it.

Salam

Salaams Ibn Arabi,

Will do.

Wasalaam.

Salam,

Looking forward to it! May the Lord increase both of us in knowledge!

Salam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Maybe now we can get back to business. Right now, I'm trying to search up some good sources of information on Sufi saints. I'll be happy to share what I find here when I do. I'll start examining a couple figures I have in mind that are well known in the Sunni-Sufi tradition and then I'll also examine a list that one of the users on the other pages here posted which included figures like Hajj Bektash Veli.

Link to comment
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...