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 Arabi and the concept of Khatm ul Awliya

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

:salam:

The below video says Ibn Arabi referred to himself as Khatm ul Awliya (The Seal of The [Muhammadan] Saints). Does this concept exist in Shi’a or Sunni Islam? Can anyone other than Imam Mahdi (عجّل الله تعالى فرجه الشريف) inherit from the knowledge of Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)? I have heard Ibn Arabi believed in Imam Mahdi (عجّل الله تعالى فرجه الشريف). 

In William Chittick’s book Ibn 'Arabi: Heir to the Prophets (1943), he describes the concept as follows:

Quote

When God opened the door for him, Ibn 'Arabi found that he had inherited all the sciences of Muhammad. Among these sciences was the knowledge that no one after him — except Jesus at the end of time — would be Muhammad's plenary inheritor. It was this unveiling that allowed him to see himself as the Seal of Muhammadan Friendship, that is, the last person to actualize the specific mode of friendship that results from embodying the fullness of the paradigm established by Muhammad.

By no means does Ibn 'Arabi's claim to be the Muhammadan Seal imply that he was the last friend of God. Rather, it means that no one after him, with the exception of Jesus, would inherit the totality of prophetic works, states, and knowledge— a totality that had been realized only by Muhammad among all the prophets.

One should not be surprised that Ibn 'Arabi privileges Muhammad here. This is the Islamic tradition, after all, and every tradition privileges its own founder. For those who prefer a more universal language, we can say that for Muslims, Muhammad is the full embodiment of the Logos, which is the Divine Word that gives rise to all creation and all revelation. Ibn 'Arabi calls this Logos by several names, including "the Muhammadan Reality."

Ibn 'Arabi maintains that there are friends of God in every age and that they will continue to inherit from Muhammad, but they will no longer have access to the entirety of Muhammad's works, states, and sciences. The modalities of the inheritance will be defined by their connection to specific prophets embraced by Muhammad's all-comprehensive prophethood. After the Muhammadan Seal, "No friend will be found 'upon the heart of Muhammad' " (F. II 49.26).

Ibn 'Arabi's claim to be the Seal of the Muhammadan Friends has appeared pretentious and even outrageous to many people

I know some very controversial and daring comments are attributed to Ibn Arabi. Regardless, I hope everyone sticks to the topic and focuses on the question rather than calling him “Sheikh al Akbar” or “heretic”.

Edited by 313_Waiter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Zaidi opinion on is strict against Sufism. We have zuhd and tazkiyya but nothing beyond that interms if hidden knowledge through scholars.

Ibn Arabi is seen in a negative view especially concepts such as wahdatul wajood.

That being said what's Ibn Arabi proof of the concept of seal of the saints

And what is the proof that he is it.

Wasn't their some views that he was the Mahdi ?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Fulan
2 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

:salam:

The below video says Ibn Arabi referred to himself as Khatm ul Awliya (The Seal of The [Muhammadan] Saints). Does this concept exist in Shi’a or Sunni Islam? Can anyone other than Imam Mahdi (عجّل الله تعالى فرجه الشريف) inherit from the knowledge of Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)? I have heard Ibn Arabi believed in Imam Mahdi (عجّل الله تعالى فرجه الشريف). 

In William Chittick’s book Ibn 'Arabi: Heir to the Prophets (1943), he describes the concept as follows:

I know some very controversial and daring comments are attributed to Ibn Arabi. Regardless, I hope everyone sticks to the topic and focuses on the question rather than calling him “Sheikh al Akbar” or “heretic”.

Salamun Alaykum

there have been a few well known Sufis that have considered themselves a seal of the saints.  What comes to mind is Shaykh Al-Akbar (aka Ibn Arabi) and much later Shaykh Ahmad Tijani (founder of the largest Sufi Tariqah in Africa).  And These two men are considered, by the vast majority of Traditional Sunnis to be among the awliya of God.  For Shias, the 12th Imam (عليه السلام) is obviously the Seal of the Saints!

Now, one way of reconciling this is to say that the idea of seal of the saints has a very relative meaning rather than an absolute meaning.  So "the seal of the saints" notion or idea caries a meaning that is relative to a particular context and in a particular way.  So, you can have Seal of Saints with respect to someone who expounds on metaphysical ilm (which is presumably the kind of seal of saints that Ibn Arabi was), because he has clearly had the greatest influence in the later intellectual Islamic Tradition whether directly or indirectly (he has even influenced Mulla Sadra and all subsequent Urafa of the Shia tradition to great extent to say the least).  As for Shaykh Ahmad Tijani, one can say that He is a seal in perhaps practical methodology (not exactly sure, just giving an example).  And in the Shia tradition, the 12th Imam (عليه السلام) carries a particular Shiite meaning within the context Imamology and whatever that entails - perhaps Shias will argue that the context to which seal of saints applies to the Mahdi (عليه السلام) has a more encompassing meaning and more universal meaning!). 

This is just a possible way of seeing this.

Take care

Masalama

Fulan bin Fulan

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Warilla said:

Ibn Arabi is seen in a negative view especially concepts such as wahdatul wajood

What confuses me relating to this matter is that I’ve heard shias say God’s essence is beyond our knowledge, imagination, while His attributes manifest into creation; hence “wherever you turn, there is the Face of God” (2:115). But then again, our scholars say His attributes are not seperate from His essence. So wouldn’t this be pantheism i.e. there is only God? 
 

But on the contrary, Imam Ali (عليه السلام)’s allegorical explanation of 2:115 may be suggesting God is completely outside His creation, His face is not known and He is completely inscrutable:

In response to this the Sufis might say he (عليه السلام) was referring to Huwa (His essence). 

On the other hand we have hadiths saying the Imams are the Face of Allah. Which would make sense if we believe in Haqiqat e Muhammadi I.e. the Nur of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) (made from the same light) being the first creation and the rest of creation being made from them.

I guess I need to study a lot more before I can understand this stuff.

...Allah knows best.

Edited by 313_Waiter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
10 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

What confuses me relating to this matter is that I’ve heard shias say God’s essence is beyond our knowledge, imagination, while His attributes manifest into creation; hence “wherever you turn, there is the Face of God” (2:115). But then again, our scholars say His attributes are not seperate from His essence. So wouldn’t this be pantheism i.e. there is only God? 
 

But on the contrary, Imam Ali (عليه السلام)’s allegorical explanation of 2:115 may be suggesting God is completely outside His creation, His face is not known and He is completely inscrutable:

In response to this the Sufis might say he (عليه السلام) was referring to Huwa (His essence). 

On the other hand we have hadiths saying the Imams are the Face of Allah. Which would make sense if we believe in Haqiqat e Muhammadi I.e. the Nur of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) (made from the same light) being the first creation and the rest of creation being made from them.

I guess I need to study a lot more before I can understand this stuff.

...Allah knows best.

Salaam, 

Precisely,and these are the same questions that end up circling in my head, round and round, because i dont know which angle to understand things from..which one is it?? I dont like this not knowing how to operate or think about things as i conduct my day to day life:(

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
17 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

What confuses me relating to this matter is that I’ve heard shias say God’s essence is beyond our knowledge, imagination, while His attributes manifest into creation; hence “wherever you turn, there is the Face of God” (2:115). But then again, our scholars say His attributes are not seperate from His essence. So wouldn’t this be pantheism i.e. there is only God? 

I guess I need to study a lot more before I can understand this stuff.

...Allah knows best.

Salam, I am not sure of those scholars.  But, many Sufis believe in the statement underlined above.

Let us try to understand from Al-Kafi

H 304, Ch. 15, h4

Muhammad ibn abu ‘Abd Allah has narrated from Muhammad ibn Isma‘il from some of his people from Bakr ibn Salih from Ali ibn Salih from al-Hassan ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid ibn Yazid from ‘Abd al-A‘la from abu ‘Abd Allah,recipient of divine supreme covenant, who said the following:

 

The name of Allah is something other than Allah Himself.  Everything that is called a thing is created except Allah. Whatever (like the word ‘Allah’) is expressed by the tongue or is  worked out by hands (written down) is all created. The word Allah is one example of names and an end to serve the purpose of naming. The end is different from the thing for which it is.  The end that is describable is created. The Maker of things is not describable by the limits of the fact behind the name. He did not become, so the maker who is other than Him would have recognized His becoming a being. Whatever end people may reach is something other than Him. Do not ever move away from understanding this rule. This is the true and pure belief in the Oneness of Allah. Observe it, acknowledge it and understand it by the permission of Allah.

“Those who think they understand Allah by means of covering, form or image become polytheists; His covering, form and depiction are not Him. He is only One and one alone. How can one form a belief in His oneness by thinking that one is able to know Him through things other than Him? One comes to know Allah only by Allah His Own Self. One who cannot know Him by His Own Self has not known Him. He only comes to know something else. There is nothing between the Creator and the created. Allah is the Creator of things but not from a thing that was there already. Allah’s names are His names but He is different from His Own names and the names are other than Him.”

 

More understand from the following hadith

H 229, Ch. 5, h1
Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from Muhammad ibn ‘Isa ibn ‘Ubayd from Hassan
ibn Mahbub from ibn Ri’ab from more than one person from abu ‘Abd Allah,
recipient of divine supreme covenant, who said the following:
“Whoever worships Allah on the basis of Wahm, (a degree of
acknowledgement that in terms of knowledge about His
existence is valued less than fifty percent), has certainly denied
His existence. Whoever worships the names without their
meaning certainly has denied His existence also. Whoever
worships both the names and the meanings he certainly has
become a polytheist. There are those who worship the meaning,
with an understanding that names only point to the attributes that
He Himself has said are His. They firmly tie this up to their
hearts and make their tongues speak it up in private and in
public. These are certainly of the friends of ’Amirul al-
Mu’minin Ali ibn abu Talib, recipient of divine supreme
covenant.”
According to another Hadith, “They, certainly, are true
believers.”
 

Wallahualam.

Layman

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
18 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

But then again, our scholars say His attributes are not seperate from His essence. So wouldn’t this be pantheism i.e. there is only God?

His attributes are not seperate from His essence in the sense that He does not switch (I.e alter Himself) to being merciful or compassionate rather God chooses to express these attributes they are not separate from Him they have always existed it is just a matter of them being manifested.

to simplify it for you take for an example John, John is known for being compassionate, merciful and loving. These attributes are not separate from Him their is not a another John who is compassionate, another who is merciful, and another who is loving nor does he alter(change) himself in order to express these rather these attributes are given due to his personality that has been manifested; these are within his nature but do not describe(I.e explain) his humanity. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Additional hadith that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) created names and attributes as means between His Own Self and creature...  

 

 

H 311, Ch. 16, h7
Muhammad ibn abu ‘Abd Allah in a marfu‘ manner, has narrated from abu
Hashim al-Ja’fari who said the following:
“Once I was in the company of abu Ja’far al-Thani, the 2nd,
recipient of divine supreme covenant, when a person asked him,
The names and attributes of the Lord, the Most Holy, the Most
High, mentioned in His book (the Holy Quran) are they He
Himself?

.....

“Allah existed but there were no creatures. He created names
and attributes as a means between His Own Self and the
creatures
. Through these means they pray to Him and ask Him
for help, and names are the means to speak of Him
. Allah
existed without being mentioned. The One mentioned through
names is Allah the eternal , Who will be there eternally. Names
and attributes are created and their meaning and what they
indicate is Allah, Who is by far above plurality and combination,
which happens only to the moving things. If you say that Allah
is compiled it is a false statement and so is saying that He is a
great deal or very little. He His Own Self is eternal . What is
other than the Only One, it is divisible. Allah is not divisible.
Not even in one’s imaginations can be thought of as more or
less. Everything divisible or being thought of as less or more, in
one’s imagination, is created. All created things are signs of the
existence of the Creator.

.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
13 hours ago, PureExistence1 said:

Salaam, 

Precisely,and these are the same questions that end up circling in my head, round and round, because i dont know which angle to understand things from..which one is it?? I dont like this not knowing how to operate or think about things as i conduct my day to day life:(

Walaikum Salam,

Same I am quite confused myself sister. I suppose if we look at the hadiths that the brothers have posted above that may help. I’ll try my best to put forward what I’ve learnt from watching a couple of videos (so take everything I say with a grain of salt). InshaAllah if God wills we will understand eventually.

I feel Seyyed Hossein Nasr’s explanation of a proof for God also helps here:

So “our” Mahiya (essence, quiddity) is not Wujud (existence), “we” didn’t have to exist. “We” are contingent existents whilst Allah is. In and of himself He cannot not Be (the necessary existence).

Now, if we want to hold onto or accept what Ibn Arabi has been saying, then God is the only Existence (which some have criticised as being pantheism) and there is no reality, no-thing but God. So that has some implications. Our true self, is God (as blasphemous as that sounds to some people). I will attach some slides from the brother who made the above lecture ^^ on the YouTube channel called “Let’s Talk Religion”.

F34356C1-1FB5-43EE-820D-372C2F1AF256.jpeg.20bc84b78d178d5af71388b1b342a2df.jpeg
 

7F0E1179-7908-412B-BFA4-46D3CF32668B.jpeg.dd2febe6442195a307991896511697b8.jpeg
 

So all of this sounds similar to Pantheism and Hinduism (God being Brahman for them), or even blasphemy (thus some people calling him a heretic). This may also be linked to Buddhism where one can reach their True Self through meditation (but the True Self is not really our thoughts, emotions, feelings etc). But Ibn Arabi understood that whilst our True Self is God, our “self” is  nothingness:
870F5744-34F8-4B33-A911-AEF7697D2CE2.jpeg.fa1c2544f159ffa80721f4ea7e38588d.jpeg
So in this sense an analogy was drawn in the video. The projector is God and He (Hu) is shining His light onto the screen, which is nothing. (The video explained it better). Thus Ibn Arabi’s understanding of God professed both divine transcendence (Tanzih) and Divine Immanence (Tashbih).

74DCC76E-99CD-44DF-9C09-6B36925F3CE3.jpeg.6af2207b5457f59966007179e90a2d5d.jpeg
 

Ibn Arabi explained the apparent paradox of one being God and not God at the same time using the phrase Huwa, la Huwa (He, not He). Everything is 'He' (Huwa) and everything is 'not He' (la Huwa). I don’t know if that made any sense, since i am quite confused myself. Brother @eThErEaL  / FuLaN will explain it better than me since he has been reading this stuff for ages whilst I’ve basically just started.

Dr Sekaleshfar explained it in this way:

 

Edited by 313_Waiter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, layman said:

Names and attributes are created and their meaning and what they indicate is Allah,

Jazakumullahu Khayran brother.

So we need to be careful to worship the Meaning.

5 hours ago, layman said:

Everything that is called a thing is created except Allah. Whatever (like the word ‘Allah’) is expressed by the tongue or is  worked out by hands (written down) is all created

Alhamdulillah. This makes everything clear.


Now, to examine whether we agree with Ibn Arabi or disagree with him, we need to understand what “creation” means. I have heard some Sufis consider it shirk that we say anything but Him (Hu) exists. This is because La Ilaha illa Allah. There is no one worthy of worship (Ilah) except God (Allah). Since God is al Haqq (the truth), there is no truth/reality except The Truth. There is no mercy except The Merciful etc.

As ethereal described it:

23 hours ago, Guest FuLaN said:

La ilaha iIla Allah.

Literally:  la (no) ilaha (God), in-la (if not), Allah (God). 

There are two parts to the shahada, each of which is composed of two words.

1) La Ilaha (negation-nafy) This corresponds to the world (as Manifestation) inasmuch as it is illusory in relation to Ultimate Reality.

2) In-la Allah (affirmation-ithbat) This corresponds to Ultimate Reality which, in relation to the world (as Manifestation), is the sole reality.  

But pure illusion cannot exist on its own, and this is why there is "ilah', (Reality) within the first part of the shahada)

And the world cannot be unless it is prefigured in some way within Ultimate Reality.  This is why you have In-la within the second part of the shahada.  The word Allah would be Ultimate Reality itself.   

 

I hope this helps

FuLaN BIN FuLaN

But all that we see around us, changes, but God does not change (as per the Bible), so it can’t be God. And it isn’t God. It’s an illusion. It doesn’t exist.

Quote

And this world's life is naught but a play and an idle sport (6:32)


I don’t know if I agree with Ibn Arabi, I am quite confused. It is known that some of our eminent scholars in the Islamic Republic of Iran agreed with him. Some of them even went through spiritual experiences. Though i wonder why the older scholars did not explicitly describe such concepts. Are they an innovation or did they always exist?

And Allah knows best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
4 hours ago, THREE1THREE said:

His attributes are not seperate from His essence in the sense that He does not switch (I.e alter Himself) to being merciful or compassionate rather God chooses to express these attributes they are not separate from Him they have always existed it is just a matter of them being manifested.

So you agree with the above^^ that there is nothing but God?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Some say that this spiritual and philosophical knowledge of Ibn Arabi is nothing new and that all True religions and spiritual traditions are rooted in this wisdom. The New Age movement also espouses this notion that the “true self” is God. Our brother Mike Tyson got in trouble with the dawah guys for saying “you are God” at the beginning of Logan Paul’s podcast (he took some drugs):

Perhaps it could also be described as monorealism. I am not an Ismaili, but here’s an explanation:

Quote

To reduce the concept of monotheism to the affirmation of “one” God in the numerical sense where God is merely a supreme personal being ruling over other beings is little better than professing polytheism except with less gods. Atheists cannot be blamed for rejecting this personalist theism, since it amounts to nothing more than anthropomorphism and metaphysical idolatry. Brian Davies, a Catholic philosopher of religion, calls this “theistic personalism,” and David Bentley Hart calls it “mono-polytheism” or “monopoly-theism.” This sort of personalist theism, which reduces God to a metaphysical tribal idol made in the image of humans, allows Protestant colleges to claim that Muslims and Christians worship different gods entirely. Ismaili theology is the pre-eminent negative or apophatic theology of Islam because it affirms the absolute Oneness of God (tawhid) through negating all names, descriptions, conceptions and limitations from God.  Alongside these Ismaili teachings, we provide corroborating comments from David Bentley Hart, a contemporary Orthodox Christian theologian, to show how this Ismaili theology is just as relevant for modern times as it was in the past.

https://ismailignosis.com/2016/01/22/ismaili-teachings-on-the-oneness-of-god-tawhid-beyond-personalist-theism-and-modern-atheism/

Also see sermon 1 by Imam Ali (عليه السلام):

Quote

The foremost in religion is the acknowledgement of Him, the perfection of acknowledging Him is to testify Him, the perfection of testifying Him is to believe in His Oneness, the perfection of believing in His Oneness is to regard Him Pure, and the perfection of His purity is to deny Him attributes, because every attribute is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed and everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute.

Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah recognises His like, and whoever recognises His like regards Him two; and whoever regards Him as two recognises parts for Him; and whoever recognises parts for Him mistook Him; and whoever mistook Him pointed at Him; and whoever pointed at Him admitted limitations for Him; and whoever admitted limitations for Him numbered Him. Whoever said: ‘In what is He?’, held that He is contained; and whoever said: ‘On what is He?’, held He is not on something else.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, 313_Waiter said:

So you agree with the above^^ that there is nothing but God?

His creation manifests His character, in short wherever you turn you see Allah (I.e His personality which is one; the attributes just simply and explain it in order for us to understand) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

Alongside these Ismaili teachings, we provide corroborating comments from David Bentley Hart, a contemporary Orthodox Christian theologian, to show how this Ismaili theology is just as relevant for modern times as it was in the past.

His trinity contradicts tawheed let alone the Torah. Pualanity is full of anthropomorphism in their concept of God and the trinitarians are even worse. The Protestants are correct in saying the “Christians” Believe in a different God to the Muslims since their concept is full of anthropomorphism unlike tawheed. 

Edited by Mahdavist
Insulting comment removed
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 1/15/2021 at 2:29 PM, Guest Fulan said:

Salamun Alaykum

there have been a few well known Sufis that have considered themselves a seal of the saints.  What comes to mind is Shaykh Al-Akbar (aka Ibn Arabi) and much later Shaykh Ahmad Tijani (founder of the largest Sufi Tariqah in Africa).  And These two men are considered, by the vast majority of Traditional Sunnis to be among the awliya of God.  For Shias, the 12th Imam (عليه السلام) is obviously the Seal of the Saints!

Now, one way of reconciling this is to say that the idea of seal of the saints has a very relative meaning rather than an absolute meaning.  So "the seal of the saints" notion or idea caries a meaning that is relative to a particular context and in a particular way.  So, you can have Seal of Saints with respect to someone who expounds on metaphysical ilm (which is presumably the kind of seal of saints that Ibn Arabi was), because he has clearly had the greatest influence in the later intellectual Islamic Tradition whether directly or indirectly (he has even influenced Mulla Sadra and all subsequent Urafa of the Shia tradition to great extent to say the least).  As for Shaykh Ahmad Tijani, one can say that He is a seal in perhaps practical methodology (not exactly sure, just giving an example).  And in the Shia tradition, the 12th Imam (عليه السلام) carries a particular Shiite meaning within the context Imamology and whatever that entails - perhaps Shias will argue that the context to which seal of saints applies to the Mahdi (عليه السلام) has a more encompassing meaning and more universal meaning!). 

This is just a possible way of seeing this.

Take care

Masalama

Fulan bin Fulan

 

Walekum assalam,

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 1/15/2021 at 7:59 PM, Guest Fulan said:

So, you can have Seal of Saints with respect to someone who expounds on metaphysical ilm (which is presumably the kind of seal of saints that Ibn Arabi was), because he has clearly had the greatest influence in the later intellectual Islamic Tradition whether directly or indirectly (he has even influenced Mulla Sadra and all subsequent Urafa of the Shia tradition to great extent to say the least).  As for Shaykh Ahmad Tijani, one can say that He is a seal in perhaps practical methodology (not exactly sure, just giving an example

Walaikum Salaam,

I don’t think that these Shuyukh categorised their “Sainthood” (wilayah). They also were not very modest when it comes to what they meant by their wilayah:

For example, Ahmed Tijani (1735–1815):

Quote

The bounties that flow from the Prophet (peace and blessing be upon him) are received by the natures of the prophets, and everything that flows and emerges from the natures of the Prophets is received by my own nature, and from me it is distributed to all creatures from the origin of the world until the blowing on the trumpet... No saint drinks or provides water to drink, except from our ocean, from the origin of the world until the blowing on the trumpet... 'The spirit of the Prophet and my spirit are like this' – pointing with his two fingers, the index finger and the middle finger. 'His spirit supports the Messengers and the Prophets and my spirit supports the poles, the sages, the saints, from pre-existence to eternity (mina al-azal ila abad)... These two feet of mine are upon the neck of every saint of Allah, from the time of Adam until the blowing of the trumpet... 'Our station in the Presence of Allah in the Hereafter will not be attained by any of the saints, and it will not be approached by anyone, whether his importance is great or small. Of all the saints among from the very beginning of creation until the blowing on the trumpet, there is not one who will attain to my station

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Fulan
On 1/16/2021 at 10:06 AM, 313_Waiter said:

Walaikum Salaam,

I don’t think that these Shuyukh categorised their “Sainthood” (wilayah). They also were not very modest when it comes to what they meant by their wilayah:

For example, Ahmed Tijani (1735–1815):

 

 

I don't think that is by Shaykh Ahmed Tijani (qs).. perhaps that is misquoted from another great awliya of God (qs).  There is someone else, but I don't want to mention his name on this forum as I fear the wrath of God from a bad opinion one may have of him due to the possible misunderstanding his words.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The number one rule of being a Shia as instructed by the Imams(Peace be upon them) of the Household of the Prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is:

"Stay away from Sufis. Do not listen to them. Do not go near them. They are cursed. No matter how much they revere holy Personalities(Peace be upon them). The Sufis are not from the ones on the Sirat-Al-Mustaqim".

This is basically a summarization of the various hadith we have from our Imams(عليه السلام).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 1/18/2021 at 9:06 PM, Guest Fulan said:

I don't think that is by Shaykh Ahmed Tijani (qs).. perhaps that is misquoted from another great awliya of God (qs).  There is someone else, but I don't want to mention his name on this forum as I fear the wrath of God from a bad opinion one may have of him due to the possible misunderstanding his words.  

Yes but even what Chittick attributed to Ibn Arabi is quite extraordinary^^ that he would be among the last to inherit the totality of prophetic works, states, and knowledge. The closest I have come in Shiite traditions (if I remember correctly) to this is that the Shia of the Imams (عليه السلام) are counted as their Ahl (in a non-literal sense). Also something attributed to Imam Ali (عليه السلام) that we are “the evident book” and that the universe is enfolded within us (though I don’t think the hadith has a chain). Thus giving us endless potential and the ability to manifest more of His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) attributes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Thoughts on these verses:

Quote

 

He is the First and the Last, and the Apparent and the Hidden, and He is a Knower of all things [57:3]

So you did not slay them, but it was Allah Who slew them, and you did not smite when you smote (the enemy), but it was Allah Who smote, and that He might confer upon the believers a good gift from Himself; surely Allah is Hearing, Knowing. [8:17]

 

Thoughts on these ahadith? Could it be referring to the "true self" being God? Note that any Ghuluw is strictly prohibited and the Imam (عليه السلام) is said to burn Ghulat after they did not repent from calling Imam Ali (عليه السلام) God:

Quote

Al-Husayn Bin Abdul Wahaab in Uyoon Al-Mo’jizaat, said, ‘Narrated to me Ibn Ayyash Al-Jowhary, from Abu Talib Abdullah Bin Muhammad Al-Anbary, from Abu Al-Husayn Muhammad Bin Zayd AlTastary, from Abu Sameena Muhammad Bin Ali Al-Sayrafi, from Ibrahim Bin Umar Al-Yamani, from Hamaad Bin Isa well known as ‘Gareek Al-Johfa’, from Umar Bin Azina, from Abaan Bin Abu Ayyash, from Sulaym Bin Qays Al-Hilaly who said:

 

‘I heard Abu Zarr Jundab Al-Janaada Al-Ghaffaryra say, ‘I saw Al-Sayyad Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) (Rasool-Allah (saw)) that he (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said to Amir-al-Momineen (عليه السلام) one night: ‘When it is the morning, proceed towards the Baqee Mountains and pause upon the high ground, so when the sun emerges, greet it, for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has Commanded it that it should answer you (عليه السلام) with regards to yourself (عليه السلام)’.

 

When it was the morning, Amir-al-Momineen (عليه السلام) went out, and with him (عليه السلام) were Abu Bakr, and Umar, and a group from the Emigrants and the Helpers, until he (عليه السلام) came to the Baqee and paused upon the high ground. When the sun displayed its rays, he (عليه السلام) said: ‘Greetings be upon you, O the new creature of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), O the obedient to Him ((سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى))’.

 

They heard a rumble from the sky and a Caller answered saying, ‘And Peace be upon you (عليه السلام) ‘أول يت) ‘O the First one), ‘آخر يت) ‘O the Last one), ‘ظتهر يت) ‘O the Apparent one), ‘حتطن يت ‘O Hidden one, ‘عليم شيء حكل هو من يت ‘O the one who is knowledgeable of all things!’ 

 

When Abu Bakr, and Umar, and the Emigrants, and the Helpers heard the speech of the sun, they swooned (passed out). Then they came around after a while, and Amiral-Momineen (عليه السلام) had left from the place. So they came to Rasool-Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) along with the group and said, ‘You (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said that Ali (عليه السلام) is a human similar to others, but when he (عليه السلام) addressed the sun, the sun answered to him (عليه السلام) by what the Creator (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) (Allah ((سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى))) is Himself (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) addressed by?’

 

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: ‘And what did you all hear from it?’ They said, ‘We heard it say, ‘Peace be upon you (عليه السلام), ‘أول يت) ‘O the First one). He (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: ‘It spoke the truth, he (عليه السلام) is the first one to believe in me (saw)’. 

 

They said, ‘We heard it say, ‘آخر يت) ‘O the Last one). He (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: ‘It spoke the truth, he (عليه السلام) is the last of the people to separate from me (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). He (عليه السلام) will wash me  (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), and shroud me (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), and enter me (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in my (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) grave’. 

 

 They said, ‘We heard it say, ‘ظتهر يت) ‘O Apparent one). He (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: ‘It spoke the truth, all of my (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) knowledge has been made apparent to him (عليه السلام)’. 

 

They said, ‘We heard it say, ‘حتطن يت) ‘O the Hidden one). He (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: ‘It spoke the truth, all of my (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) secrets are hidden in him (عليه السلام)’.  

 

They said, ‘We heard it say, ‘عليم شيء حكل هو من يت) ‘O the one who is a knower of all things). He (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: ‘It spoke the truth, he (عليه السلام) is knowledgeable of the Permissibles and the Prohibitions, and the Obligations, and the Sunnah, and all (the things) resembling that’.

 

All of them stood up and said, ‘Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has put us in a trap’, and they went out from the door of the Masjid’’.

 

Quote

Whoever seeks Me will find me

Whoever finds Me will know me

Whoever knows Me will like me

Whoever likes Me will love me

Whoever loves Me I will love them 

Whoever I love I will kill them [their nafs]

Whoever I kill, upon me is their blood money

Whoever's blood money is upon me, I am the blood money!
I am his hearing! I am his eyes!

(From Sheikh Sekaleshfar)

Sunni Hadith:

Quote

On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:

Allah (mighty and sublime be He) will say on the Day of Resurrection: O son of Adam, I fell ill and you visited Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I visit You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so had fallen ill and you visited him not? Did you not know that had you visited him you would have found Me with him? O son of Adam, I asked you for food and you fed Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I feed You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so asked you for food and you fed him not? Did you not know that had you fed him you would surely have found that (the reward for doing so) with Me? O son of Adam, I asked you to give Me to drink and you gave Me not to drink. He will say: O Lord, how should I give You to drink when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: My servant So-and-so asked you to give him to drink and you gave him not to drink. Had you given him to drink you would have surely found that with Me.
It was related by Muslim.

https://sunnah.com/qudsi40/18

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
23 hours ago, El Cid said:

The number one rule of being a Shia as instructed by the Imams(Peace be upon them) of the Household of the Prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is:

"Stay away from Sufis. Do not listen to them. Do not go near them. They are cursed. No matter how much they revere holy Personalities(Peace be upon them). The Sufis are not from the ones on the Sirat-Al-Mustaqim".

This is basically a summarization of the various hadith we have from our Imams(عليه السلام).

Thanks for this brother. This is true that the Imams (عليه السلام) told us to stay away from them but we need to confirm whether the Sufis back then had the same beliefs, philosophy, metaphysics or did they have some other practice that the Imams (عليه السلام) told us to stay away from. For example, the Imams (عليه السلام) may have told us to disassociate from them because of their practice of monasticism, which is against Islam and it may not be as prevalent today.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, 313_Waiter said:

Thanks for this brother. This is true that the Imams (عليه السلام) told us to stay away from them but we need to confirm whether the Sufis back then had the same beliefs, philosophy, metaphysics or did they have some other practice that the Imams (عليه السلام) told us to stay away from. For example, the Imams (عليه السلام) may have told us to disassociate from them because of their practice of monasticism, which is against Islam and it may not be as prevalent today.

Allama Ardbili wrote in Hadiqat al Shia: And by a sahih (authentic) sanad (chain of narration) from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. abi Nusr al Bazanti, and Muhammad b. Ismail b. Bazi', from Imam al Redha (عليه السلام) that he said: "One in whose presence the Sufis are mentioned but he does not denounce them with his tongue and heart, so he is not from us. And the one who denounces them, so he is like the one who fought the kuffar along the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم))."

 

from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nusr al Bazanti, from Imam al Redha (عليه السلام), that he said: A man among our companions said to Imam al Sadiq Ja'far bin Muhammad (as): "A group has appeared in this period, they are called sufis, so what do you(عليه السلام) say about them?" Imam(عليه السلام) said: "Indeed they're our enemies so whoever is inclined towards them so he's not from us and would be resurrected with them and people would come (in the future) claiming to love us while they would be inclined to them (sufis) and would imitate/emulate them(sufis), adopt their titles and interpret their sayings, but then whoever is inclined to them (sufis) so is not from us and I(عليه السلام) dissociate from them and whoever denounces their teachings so he's like as if he did jihad against the kuffar  along the Prophet((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم))."

 

It has been narrated from Imam al Redha (عليه السلام) that: "None professes by Sufism but for deception, deviance or idiocy."

From Ali b. al Hussain b. Babuweh al Qummi in Qarbul Isnad, who wrote it from Sa'd b. Abdullah from Muhammad b. Abdul Jabbar from al Askari (عليه السلام) that he (عليه السلام) said: Imam al Sadiq (عليه السلام) was asked about the state of abi Hashim al Kufi. So he (عليه السلام) said: "Indeed he has an extremely corrupt belief. And he is the one who started the religion called Sufism and made it the basis of his evil belief."

^

Salam.

The fact of the matter is that the Imams(عليه السلام) didn't just tell us to "stay away from them". They(عليه السلام) ordered the Shi'ah to completely denounce Sufism and curse it. They(عليه السلام) haven't said that it's due to X or Y reason such as the one you mentioned being monasticism. It's deviance altogether as it's further poisoning of the Muslim Ummah(more sect divison and misguidance of people). It is not worth studying or research even as it's the same as studying the belief system of Musailmah the liar or Sajah.

This entire topic is disobedience to the Imams(Peace be upon them) who have explicitly stated above to not only stay away from Sufi affairs but to also curse them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
25 minutes ago, El Cid said:

Salam.

The fact of the matter is that the Imams(عليه السلام) didn't just tell us to "stay away from them". They(عليه السلام) ordered the Shi'ah to completely denounce Sufism and curse it. They(عليه السلام) haven't said that it's due to X or Y reason such as the one you mentioned being monasticism. It's deviance altogether as it's further poisoning of the Muslim Ummah(more sect divison and misguidance of people). It is not worth studying or research even as it's the same as studying the belief system of Musailmah the liar or Sajah.

This entire topic is disobedience to the Imams(Peace be upon them) who have explicitly stated above to not only stay away from Sufi affairs but to also curse them.

Alaikum Salaam wrb brother,

Thanks for the ahadith. There is also a hadith that calls the people of Zanj a deformed creation who we cannot marry. If we take this hadith at face value it seems racist and many people accuse Shiism of racism because of this (even though the Imams are said to marry black women). But when we go deeper we may understand the reasons (maybe it was due to their practices or their idolatry) or reject such ahadith based on textual criticism. Anyway my point is that it’s important to understand who the Imams (عليه السلام) were referring to and whether today’s Irfan / Sufism proponents are the same as those referred to in the ahadith. 

So what do you say about scholars like Allama Tabatabai, Imam Khomeini, Allama Hasanzada Amoli, or Sayyid Haydar Amuli who was an exegete, jurist, narrator and one of the great scholars of Ithna Asheri Shiism as well as many others?

According to this link:

Quote

Since you wanted to know Imam Khomeini's opinion on this issue I should know that he was a firm admirer of Ibn Arabi and his letter to Mikhail Gorbachov, Russian president he referred to Ibn Arabi as "Abar Mard" (the greatest man). Allameh Tabatabai was also Ibn Arabi's admirer he is said to have said that "all writings on Islam are not worth of two sentences of Ibn Arabi's works on Islam".

https://www.al-islam.org/organizations/AalimNetwork/msg00054.html

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, 313_Waiter said:

Alaikum Salaam wrb brother,

Thanks for the ahadith. There is also a hadith that calls the people of Zanj a deformed creation who we cannot marry. If we take this hadith at face value it seems racist and many people accuse Shiism of racism because of this (even though the Imams are said to marry black women). But when we go deeper we may understand the reasons (maybe it was due to their practices or their idolatry) or reject such ahadith based on textual criticism. Anyway my point is that it’s important to understand who the Imams (عليه السلام) were referring to and whether today’s Irfan / Sufism proponents are the same as those referred to in the ahadith. 

So what do you say about scholars like Allama Tabatabai, Imam Khomeini, Allama Hasanzada Amoli, or Sayyid Haydar Amuli who was an exegete, jurist, narrator and one of the great scholars of Ithna Asheri Shiism as well as many others?

According to this link:

 

Zanj women aren't a deviant sect of Islam so your example doesn't really fit the bill in this context. Allama Tabatabai, Imam Khomeini, Allama Hasanzada Amoli, or Sayyid Haydar Amuli aren't Shia 12elver Imams either but our Imams(Peace be upon them) have put up these barriers for us for a reason. The biggest reason is misguidance and deviance. No matter how noble your academic pursuits are, certain things do have a chance of taking you out of the fold of Sirat-al-mustaqim for example there was once a member on SC who researched extinct shi'a sects. Then he became misguided and became a member of the extinct shi'a sect which led to him denouncing Imam Ali Reza(عليه السلام) and the Imam of our time. So that's why it's better to avoid and obey our Imams than go against them as they know better whats good for our spirituality and mind than we will ever know for ourselves.

Wasalam.

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...