Dear Brother Alex’s blog pointed me out to this post by Shabana Mir titled “Literalistic Wahabistic Sufism”. (Alternative Link)

One of the problems of tariqa is that students are rarely capable of understanding the fundamentals of their own tariqa, much less attempting to understand another. Before we begin labeling other tariqa’s as “goofy-sufi’s” or “literalistic wahabi sufi’s”, are we ready to examine our own tariqa or at least our own commitment to tariqa?

There also seems to be a confusion brewing among supposed Sufi mureeds and mureedah’s, such as in Shabana’s article, that Sufism is simply a form of anti-Wahabi Islam. It is disturbing to her that, outwardly, some Sufi’s may actually look or behave like Wahabi’s (in terms of promoting orthodoxy and other traditional practices). The question becomes, is it the Sufi’s imitating the Wahabi’s or is it quite the reverse?

Why don’t we first examine the purpose of Sufism? Tazkiyat al Nafs. Purification of the self, the ego.

Looking at history, one can see Sufi’s were very well established as to their purpose and methods well before the birth of these extremists reformers. Not everyone was a mureed. Those that decided to accept the Way dedicated themselves to the principles of their tariqa and the lessons taught by their Shaykh. Suppressing the Nafs is not a simple matter, and the organized approach offered by the tariqa’s is grounded with specific techniques in order to enact change.

The first thing we need to understand is that Tazkiyat al Nafs involves change. Gradual or [shudder] immediate, the mureed is nothing if he is not affected by the transformative process of the tariqa in either some minor or major way. A failure to change is a really a failure of the mureed, of the Shaykh and of the tariqa itself. I wonder if some may consider the transformation as something less than “real” as the article suggests? If so, what form of transformation is acceptable to our ultra-modern brethren?

In fact, it is part of the transformative process that Sufi’s leave what is considered a false ‘reality’ to a more true form of reality. What they leave cannot be described as “Western”, nor is it even “Eastern”, but it is what we call the “Dunya” itself. Any simple glance of the work of the great Shaykh’s of Islam will provide that understanding.

The second thing to emphasize is that Sufism is not the religion, it is simply the area of study. The religion is Islam. Progressive, reformist, modernist ideas might have a place in Islam as a religion, but the claim that Sufism incorrectly promotes dogmatic or literalistic ideals is quite odd to hear. A tariqa is a -Way- towards self-purification and control over one’s ego, changing how that is accomplished is (in reality) creating a new tariqat.

And when dealing with a multitude of Sufi orders, the best way to judge between them is through something we call the Shariat, which is quite a bit older than the 12th century mentioned in Shabana’s article. Shariat is the compass which allows us to seperate the deviant versus the rightly guided in all things in life (not just Sufism). Furthermore, the proper implementation of the Sacred Law is in fact, an intricate part of many Tariqa’s lessons and techniques:

Partly because their staunch orthodoxy recommended them to the ulema, the Naksibendiye were among the most widespread and politically and socially influential Ottoman tarikats. - Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad “Spiritual Life in Ottoman Turkey”

As far as this omnipresent fear of applying the Shariat to one’s life that exists within some of the pseudo-elite Western Muslims: the idea that it’s application is somehow, less “Real”, is actually quite sad. Is it “wahabistic literalism” to believe that there exists legalism at all within the Islamic tradition?

If we can at least acknowledge some form of legalism exists within Islam, then why don’t we spend time learning that (in the traditional manner) before condemning it to be too “firm” or “literalistic”?

Understanding the complexities of Shariat law and how it can organically grow within its own tradition is quite important before creating an irrational fear of it in one’s heart. A fear that may come from the unknown or knowing only pieces.

When considering some of the inconveniences Shariat may cause (i.e. in Shabana’s flight example), it might be helpful to remember that it is one’s nafs which hates inconveniences and loves ease.

Finally, the accusation of an ill-functioning “gradualism” away from “literalism” is one that Shabana will want to rethink. It is not gradualism in the direction of abandoning Shariat that even the ‘easy’ Sufi tariqas take. Rather, it is a historically recorded technique of the Sufi orders to use gradualism towards Shariat, at least when dealing with the masses. The Wahabi movement is actually a good example of this. It only took a few centuries for many of today’s Indo/Pak Muslims to go from being converted to Islam by Sufi’s (from liberal pagan religions) to adoring the most rigid literalistic forms of Islam.

It is actually an important reminder for all of us that Sufism does promote a proper application of the Shariat as part of its very core.

The Wahabi’s are wrong, but its not because they adore the Shariat and Orthodoxy, it is because they misunderstand it.

Bismimg2

as-salamu’alaikum,

I’ve had a bit more time to surf the web lately and I’ve found quite a lot has gone on while I was taking a brief hiatus.

First, I am surprised to find I was nominated for the Brass Crescent awards while I was not blogging too much. Alhamdulillah I appreciate the sentiments from Izzy Mo and Haroon and anyone else who nominated me for something! I rather think I should win the ‘Most cyclical blogger’ award if it were to exist.

Second, a few other people have recently come to some similar conclusions as I have about the al-Maghrib institute. It’s always nice to have some company

Third, I am extremely fortunate to have reconnected to Shaykh Abdul Kerim in NYC (and hence, Maulana Shaykh Nazim, May Allah Sanctify his Secret), being distanced due to my strange schedule, family obligations, and laziness on my part was really hurting me spiritually. Also being around some established murids has been helpful. It’s helped me focus on some issues mentioned in the “Umm Zaid’s: I gotta voice” post.

Bismimg2
In the name of Allah the Most Beneficient, the Most Merciful

When earth is shaken with a mighty shaking and earth brings forth her burdens, and Mans says, ‘What ails her?’ upon that day she shall tell her tidings for that her Lord has inpsired her. Upon that day men shall issue in scatterings to see their works, and whoso has done an atom’s weight of good shall see it, and whoso has done an atom’s weight of evil shall see it. 

I’ve read and debated with Christians about these before, and while in those days (and in these days still) I did not give weight to the words of the Bible, sometimes there is just too much evidence for it to be so easily ignored. Most Muslims have read these somewhere or another, but sometimes I find that extremely good references such as the ones below become intermingled with ones which require a bit more elaboration, detail, and sometimes even imagination than the average person is willing to spend on the subject.

So this is, in my humble opinion, ‘the cream of the crop’ on the matter.

Old Testament

Deuteronomy 18:18: I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

The Prophet Muhummad (??? ???? ???? ? ???) did exactly as the above, the Quran is literally the output of “my words in his mouth”. Bretheren is taken to mean “brothers”, and the Arabs are the brothers to the Jews, who are the subject of this verse.

Isiah’s Prophecy (Isaiah 29):

“And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which [men] deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, [I pray thee]: and he saith, I cannot; for it [is] sealed: And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, [I pray thee]: and he saith, I am not learned. “

Uncanny how similar this is to the very first revelation that the Prophet (??? ???? ???? ? ???) received, the response that he is illiterate was the very response that Sayiddina Muhummad (??? ???? ???? ? ???) had to give a thousand years later.

From Martin Lings biography of Sayiddina Muhummad (??? ???? ???? ? ???),

The Angel said to him: “Recite!” and he said: “I am not a reciter,” whereupon, as he himself told it, “the Angel took me and whelmed me in his embrace until he had reached the limit of mine endurance. Then he released me and said: ‘Recite!’ I said: ‘I am not a reciter,’ and again he took me and whelmed me in his embrace, and again when he had reached the limit of mine endurance, he again released me and said: ‘Recite!’, and again I said ‘I am not a reciter.’

(”Reciter” used here is not the best translation here, since the word can mean “recite” as well as “read” . There are some interpreters who suggest that this misunderstanding is what caused our Prophet (??? ???? ???? ? ???) to not repeat the words immediately, though allahu’alim.)

In the New Testament:

Jesus is quoted as saying in John 16:7-14,

“Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew [it] unto you.”

First thing to note: “Comforter” is translated from the Greek “Periklytos”, this also has the meaning of “admired one” or “glorified one”. At the same time the name “Muhammad” ‘coincidentally’ means “admired/praised one”.

Again, the prophecy is very amazing when viewed in the light of Sayiddina Muhummad’s (??? ???? ???? ? ???) life.

1) The first part “because they believe not on me”. The Quran emphasizes belief in Jesus (AS).
2) Jesus seems to be saying that it will be difficult for him to demonstrate righteousness because he is not going to be present. Taken another way it could mean that since Jesus(AS) is leaving imminently, his behavior of righteousness will be insufficient to use as an example. Sayiddina Muhummad’s (??? ???? ???? ? ???) life on the other hand is documented clearly in this regard.
3) Judgment. The Quran and Islam in general emphasize this much more than, say, the New Testament.

Then the next part, again, “he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak…”

Similar to Deuteronomy… again, very much seems to be describing the form of direct revelation with Muhummad (??? ???? ???? ? ???) experienced.

—-

These evidences are interesting for the agnostic and the Christian in the light of the fact that they a require pretty in-depth reading of the Bible to discover, and convenient indexes and such were not available in the time of the Prophet(??? ???? ???? ? ???). It should also be remembered that the Quran was revealed in a time when books were rare and hand-copied, and literacy itself was also rare. It was common knowledge that the Prophet (??? ???? ???? ? ???) himself could not read or write.

Excerpts from Beads of Dew:

With every breath a person breathes, a treasure is wasted and lost. It is necessary to recognize, with every breath, that Allah is Present and Watchful. When this awareness takes control, the sense of humble modesty is felt in Allah’s presence, and heedlessness departs.

–

The devil [shaitan] is twofold: concrete and abstract. The concrete devil is the one known as Iblis, while the abstract devil is the lower self [nafs]. The abstract devil does certain things the concrete devil cannot do. For instance, while the concrete devil teaches good deeds to the human being, intending to make him renounce them later, the abstract devil resorts directly to the greatest evil, using goodness as a pretext. He acknowledges the Prophetic tradition concerning the reward due to those who observe the fine practices of Allah’s Messenger, and to those who disseminate them, then he plays the trick of citing invented traditions. Satan himself is not capable of going to this length. To give another example, the concrete devil teaches the human being to recite the Quran in a loud voice, and envisages various pitfalls in this. As for the lower self, which is the abstract devil, it converts this teaching into the bad morality of the hypocrite, who makes a public show of his Quranic recitation, in his passionate desire to gain a good repuation. And so on, and so forth….

Taken during my bouts of Paralysis:

We can die anytime.

Paralysis is a preview to death.

Sadness towards affliction can lead to rebelliousness or to reflection, sometimes both

In order of difficulty: paralysis of the body, paralysis of the mind, paralysis of the soul.

Being unable to command your body is proof you can never command anyone else.

The one who can’t move has an overwhelming desire to move, the one who can move has an overwhelming desire to rest.

Sleep and dreams are a sweet blessing to the paralyzed, what will your dreams be of in the grave?

Our soul is not in our arms, our legs, or our chest or head.

Do your prayer before you cannot.

Begin using the walking stick as a sunnah before it becomes a necessity.

The use of a cane is a sunnah to be proud of though weakness removes any pride in its use.

Kindness from pity is comforting while at the same time humiliating.

Experiencing humilation is one of the techniques used to realize your true state.

Periodic paralysis is a whip, each attack is a lash towards discipline.

Shaykh Abd al Qadir Jilani (rad) said:

“When His prohibition comes, you should be as if you had gone flabby in the joints, with your senses out of action, drained of energy, physically incapacitated, all passion spent, all outer perceptions erased and impressions effaced, oblivious of any influence, like a toppled throne in an empty room in a ruined building on a darkened lot, devoid of sensation and out of touch. Let your ears be deaf as if from birth, your eyes as if blindfold or inflamed or totally deprived of sight, your lips as if covered with swellings and sores, your tongue as if it were mute and dumb, your teeth as if they were abscessed and aching and loose, your hands as if they were paralyzed and without any grip, your legs and feet as if they were shaky and trembling and bleeding, your genital organ as if it were impotent and without any interest in sex, your stomach as if it were bloated and quite indifferent to food, your mind as if it were crazy and deranged, your body as if you were dead and being carried to your grave.”

Some feel the paralysis first and the prohibition second.

Shaukh Abu Uthman Hairi sought permission from his own Shaikh, Abu Hafs Haddad, to deliver sermons to the people. His Shaikh asked: “What has caused you to feel this desire?” He replied: “Kindness and compassion for the people!” The Shaikh went on to ask: “What degree of kindness and compassion for the people?” He gave the answer: “The degree of my kindness and compassion for the people is such, that if they put me in Hell instead of them, on account of their sins, I am well content!” The Shaikh said: “It is acceptable for such a person to deliver sermons to the people.” He then seated himself beside the pulpit, ready to hear Abu Uthman Hairi’s sermon.

Abu Uthman had just begun to deliver his sermon, when a pauper begged, in a loud voice, for something to wear on his back. Abu Uthman promptly stripped the cloak from his own back, and gave it to him. At that very moment, his Shaikh, Abu Hafs, yelled at him: “Oh liar! Step down from the pulpit!” Abu Uthman stepped down in amazement and asked his Shaikh: “For what reason am I a liar? Will you explain?”

The Shaikh gave the response: “This is why you are a liar: If you really felt kindness and compassion for the people, instead of taking unto yourself the spiritual reward for giving, you would have left it to others! If you had waited, and no one emerged to seek this reward, only then should you have removed your cloak and given it to the beggar!”