Righteousness in Islam

Quran verses on the criteria for the righteous and pious

Allah tells us in the Quran the following criteria for being righteous an1d pious:

righteousness in islam quran

It is no virtue. That you turn your faces towards the east or the west, but virtue is that one should sincerely believe in Allah and the Last Day and the Angels and the Book and the Prophets and, out of His love, spend of one’s choice wealth for relatives and orphans, for the needy and the wayfarer, for beggars and for the ransom of slaves, and establish the Salat and pay the Zakat. And the virtuous are those who keep their pledges when they make them and show fortitude in hardships and adversity and in the struggle between the Truth and falsehood; such are the truthful people and such are the pious.

Quran (Surah Al-Baqarah, Verse 177)

Righteousness in Islam

This Ayah contains great wisdom, encompassing rulings and correct beliefs. The virtues highlighted here are right Faithsteadfastness in prayer, spending in charity, (for the sake of Allah and not for worldly gains like praise and popularity), fulfillment of contracts, and patience in adverse circumstances. 

The futility of excessive emphasis on religious forms

In order to show the futility of excessive emphasis on external religious forms, it has been pointed out, as an instance, that there is no real virtue in the mere act of turning faces to the east or to the west in prayer. 

The mere performance of some religious rites or formalities is not real virtue. Rather it’s the sincerity and piety associated with following the commands of Allah that makes the real difference.

Allah first commanded the believers to face Bayt Al-Maqdis (in Jerusalem), and then later to face the Kaabah during the prayer. This change was difficult for many, including some Muslims. Then Allah sent revelation which clarified the wisdom behind this command.


Reflections from these verses:

  • Birr, Taqwa and complete faith is seen in obedience to Allah, adhering to His commands, facing wherever He commands facing, and implementing whatever He legislates.
  • Facing the east or the west does not necessitate righteousness or obedience, unless it is legislated by Allah.
  • Belief in the ‘Books’ refers to the Divinely revealed Books from Allah to the Prophets, which were finalized by the most honorable Book (the Quran).
  • The Quran supersedes all previous books, it mentions all types of righteousness, and the way to happiness in this life and the Hereafter.
  • Helping the poor, the needy, and the orphan should be a result of one’s love for Allah, seeking Allah’s Face only. No reward or thanks is to be expected or desired from the people.
  • One’s relatives have more rights than anyone else to one’s charity.
  • The needy traveler who runs out of money also deserves help to return to his land. Such is also the case with whoever intends to go on a permissible journey; he is to be given what he needs for his journey and back. The guests are included in this category.
  • Praying on time and giving the prayer its due right; the bowing, prostration, and the necessary attention and humbleness required by Allah.
  • Giving the Zakah, the required charity due on one’s money.
  • Fulfilling the covenant of Allah and not breaking the bond.

Narrations and Ahadith pertaining to this verse

Abu Al-`Aliyah said, “The Jews used to face the west for their Qiblah, while the Christians used to face the east for their Qiblah. So Allah said:

“It is not Birr that you turn your faces towards east and (or) west (in prayers” (2: 177) meaning, “this is faith, and its essence requires implementation.” This was also reported from Al-Hasan and Ar-Rabi` bin Anas.

Ath-Thawri recited: “Birr is the one who believes in Allah”, and said that what follows are the types of Birr. Those who acquire the qualities mentioned in the Ayah will have indeed embraced all aspects of Islam and implemented all types of righteousness; believing in Allah, that He is the only God worthy of worship, and believing in the angels the emissaries between Allah and His Messengers.

In the Sahihayn it is recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that Allah’s Messenger said: “The Miskin is not the person who roams around, and whose need is met by one or two dates or one or two bites. Rather, the Miskin is he who does not have what is sufficient, and to whom the people do not pay attention and, thus, do not give him from the charity.”

It is recorded in the Sahihayn that Abu Hurayrah narrated that the Prophet said: “The best charity is when you give it away while still healthy and thrifty, hoping to get rich and fearing poverty.1

Abdur-Razzaq reported that `Ali said that the Prophet said: 

“Sadaqah (i. e., charity) given to the poor is a charity, while the Sadaqah given to the relatives is both Sadaqah and Silah (nurturing relations), for they are the most deserving of you and your kindness and charity.”

(References: Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi – Tafhim al-Qur’an, and Tafsir Ibn Kathir)

Taken from http://www.IqraSense.com

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

My Ummah Will Split Into 73 Sects… That’s It!

My Ummah Will 

Split Into 73 

Sects… 

& That’s It!

6 years ago

If you were to ask an average Muslim that has the smallest amount of knowledge regarding the Muslim sect they attribute themselves to, there is a very high chance that they will claim to be part of the “saved sect – الفرقة الناجية”, or at the very least on the “true way” of being in this sect. This claim is made while it escapes him or her that such a claim is quite an audacious one and more often than not has no basis, except that they were informed that they were on the path of “the strangers”, which were foretold about by the Prophet peace be upon him. The interesting part is, you will hear the same rhetoric as this person from another who might seem to be doing things in what looks superficially to be an opposite way. In fact, I’ve personally heard one individual claim that they are on the Sunnah of the Prophet peace be upon him and they’re part of “the strangers”, while throwing some label such as “Sufi” or “Ash’ari” or “innovator” on another Muslim whom they do not see eye to eye with. On the other hand, this other individual that was labelled by the first is saying exactly the same thing regarding the first, but the label is different. Instead they will call the first a “Salafi” or “Wahhabi” as a way to demean them and apparently “show” how they’re on the wrong path.

From my personal experience, the more I learn, the more I see the ridiculous nature of this discourse and the more I see why we as Muslims have gotten to this point. Every time I hear such language I immediately remember God’s words in the Qur’an when He says in Chapter 23, Verses 52 & 53:

وَإِنَّ هَـٰذِهِۦۤ أُمَّتُكُمۡ أُمَّةً۬ وَٲحِدَةً۬ وَأَنَا۟ رَبُّڪُمۡ فَٱتَّقُونِ * فَتَقَطَّعُوٓاْ أَمۡرَهُم بَيۡنَہُمۡ زُبُرً۬ا‌ۖ كُلُّ حِزۡبِۭ بِمَا لَدَيۡہِمۡ فَرِحُونَ

And surely this your religion is one religion and I am your Lord, therefore be careful (of your duty) to me. But they cut off their religion among themselves into sects, each part rejoicing in that which is with them

It’s extremely sad that many Muslims recite the Qur’an on a daily basis and yet when it comes to learning from it and taking its instructions to heart, many of us simply fail. In fact, we have many Muslims that have either memorized the whole Qur’an cover to cover, or are currently focusing and working hard on memorizing it. But how many of us are working hard on implementing  and  understanding the Qur’an in our daily lives? It truly brings what the Prophet peace be upon said to the companions about the end of time to a vivid realization for anyone reflecting upon it:

أنتم في زمان قليل قراؤه كثير فقهاؤه وسيأتي زمان كثير قراؤه قليل فقهاؤه

You’re living during a time when few have memorized while many have understood, and a time will come when many will have memorized while few have understood

When it comes to the above mentioned verse, Imam Al Qurtubi mentions in his commentary Al Jami’ Li Ahkam Al Qur’an that the verse is understood in light of the narration from the Prophet peace be upon him in which he said:

ألا إن من قبلكم من أهل الكتاب افترقوا على ثنتين وسبعين ملة وإن هذه الملة ستفترق على ثلاث وسبعين ثنتان وسبعون في النار و واحدة في الجنة وهي الجماعة

Verily the people before you from the People of the Book split into seventy two religions, and this religion will split into seventy three; seventy two are in Hell and one is in Heaven and it’s the group

This narration was reported by Abu Da’uwood and it ended at that point. 

At’Tirmithi narrated it and had an addition that was missing in which the companions may God be pleased with them asked the Prophet peace be upon him:

ومن هي يا رسول الله؟ قال: ما أنا عليه وأصحابي

And who shall it be o’ Messenger of God? He said: what I’m upon and my companions

As Imam Al Qurtubi explains, the splitting into groups being warned about in both the Verses and Prophet narration is to split on the principles and foundations of Islam. 

This is the case due to the specific use of the word “milla – ملة” in the narration. 

On the other hand, this narration CANNOT be used when it comes to the branches of the religion. 

Unfortunately, some Muslims mistakingly use this narration from the Prophet peace be upon him to attack the following of a particular Matth’hab and claim that it “splits the Ummah”. 

Such a fallacious use of the words of the Prophet peace be upon him is nothing else but a sign of ignorance. With respect to what the Prophet peace be upon indicated regarding what he and his companions may God be pleased with them, this is what is known as the “Sunnah“.

To drive this point home, the Prophet peace be upon him said in another narration:

عليكم بسنتي وسنة الخلفاء الراشدين من بعدي عضوا عليها بالنواجذ وإياكم ومحدثات الأمور فإن كل بدعة ضلالة

Follow my way and the way of the rightly guided caliphs after me, and hold on to this with your teeth, and beware of innovated matters (in the religion) because every innovation (in the religion) is a misguidance

Furthermore, Imam Malik may God be pleased with him used to quite often say:

فإن خير أمور الدين ما كان سنة وشر الأمور محدثات البدائع

The best of religious matters is what was in accordance to the Sunnah, and the most evil of matters are the newly innovated ones (in the religion)

It should be made clear here that the definition of Sunnah according to the Sharia excludes what were customary norms within the Arabian society. 

Acts that are in accordance with that society’s general norms or against them are not named Sunnah or Bidah, even if they were acts of the Prophet peace be upon him. For example, the Prophet peace be upon him milked his own goat, but no one can say it is a Sunnah for a Muslim to milk their own goat.

There is another term for Sunnah that is more restrictive than just jurisprudence, and it deals with Creed. 

This is in regards to the difference between Sunnah and Shia, and what is meant with these names is political regarding the caliphate. 

At the very beginning, Muslims split into three groups depending on their view on who should qualify to be the ruler of the believers, and the three positions were:

  1. The caliphate is restricted to the family of the Prophet peace be upon him – Shia
  2. The caliphate is not restricted to anyone – Kharijites
  3. The caliphate is restricted to the tribe of Quraysh – Sunni

Although this was a political split, it later took a creedal form, and that solidified the split between Muslims to this day.

With respect to the Arabic linguistic meaning of the term “al jama’a – الجماعة”, it refers to the group of people that have pledged allegiance to someone. The term started to be widely used during the time of the third rightly-guided caliph Othman Bin Affan may God be pleased with him when the Kharijites defected from the rest of Muslims and killed him. This term is no longer valid for use during our times because it was initially used to describe the majority of Muslims that were in allegiance with the caliph, which is no longer in existence.

But let’s get back to the narrations about the 73 sects. Shaykh Muhammed Al Hasan Wald Ad’Dido is a contemporary scholar and president of the Association for Preparing Scholars in Mauritania. He is one of the very few living scholars that seem to have mastered many of the Islamic sciences, and seems to have memorized anything that anyone can think of when it comes to the Islamic Tradition. More importantly, unlike many of our contemporary scholars and imams of mosques that simply relate what they read in the Hadith books as they have studied them in the universities they attended, Shaykh Ad’Dido didn’t just study and memorize all the Hadith texts such as Bukhari and Muslim and Abu Da’uwood with scholars of Hadith, but he can also relate the narrations in these books in all their versions with chains of transmission that go all the way back to the Prophet peace be upon him (click here to see what I mean). 

According to Shaykh Ad’Dido, the part of the narration saying that seventy two out of the seventy three sects are in Hell except for one is not authentic. The narration stops at the splitting into seventy three sects, and all other additions seen are either fabricated or weak. Furthermore, the splitting is not a negative or a positive thing. Rather, the Prophet peace be upon him foretold about it because it was inevitably going to happen due to the differences of intellectual powers and comprehension abilities of people. What one individual is able to understand from a Qur’anic Verse or narration of the Prophet peace be upon him is not necessarily going to be at the same level as someone else.

The opinion of Shaykh Ad’Dido is one of others that the scholars of Hadith have about this particular narration. Another opinion that I was taught is that the added part regarding the different groups says that seventy two are going to be in Heaven except for one, which is apparently also as authentic as the version most commonly narrated among Muslims that opposes it (that 72 are in Hell and 1 is in Heaven).

If you thought it ended there, think again. When it comes to the interpretation of the narration itself, regardless of whether you take the first version or second or third or or or, you will find it quite odd that there is such a wide diversity of ways to read this narration. 

One interpretation talks about the fact that all of humanity is the Ummah of the Prophet peace be upon him, because he was sent to all of them. Those who respond and accept the Message are called the Ummah of Affirmation (أمة الإستجابة), while others who have not are called the Ummah of Invitation (أمة الدعوة). Therefore, one interpretation is that the seventy two sects will form the Ummah of Invitation, while the remaining sect that goes into Heaven is the Ummah of Affirmation, irrespective of how many groups are within it.

There are many other interpretations for this Hadith that I’m not going to get into here, but I think I made my point, which is that some Muslims who try to quote this Prophetic narration as if it’s clear and has no ambiguity in it are in fact mistaken. Nothing that is clear cut would have the mind boggling number of opinions this particular narration has. Many have delved into it and commented about it, and many more Muslims nowadays will quote this narration from the Prophet peace be upon him and claim to be from the “saved sect” until the cows come home. 

But the truth of the matter is, the falsehood is not necessarily fallen on the narration  itself, but rather it falls on those who occupy themselves to an unacceptable extent with it.

In fact, it is impermissible in Islam to declare anyone or any group of people to be saved except for those who have been explicitly named in the Qur’an or authentic narration from the Prophet peace be upon him.

There is another narration from the Prophet peace be upon him where he said:

بدأ الإسلام غريبا وسيعود غريبا فطوبى للغرباء

Islam started as a strange thing and will return as a strange thing, so glad tidings are for the strangers

In the spirit of making claims, which is a major ailment that Muslims are suffering from, many will claim to be on the way of the “strangers”. I have yet to meet a single Muslim that quotes this narration and completes it with the two endings that it’s been narrated with. The companions may God be pleased with them asked:

من هم الغرباء يا رسول الله؟

Who are the strangers O’ Messenger of God?

There are two versions of responses that he peace be upon him gave:

قوم صالحون في قوم سوء كثير، من يعصيهم أكثر ممن يطيعهم

Righteous people among wicked people. Many more will disobey them than those who obey

and

من يصلحون ما أفسد الناس من سنتي

Those who fix what people have broken in my Sunnah

In the interpretation of the word “strangers”, according to the scholars of Hadith, the first “strangers” were the Prophet peace be upon him and his first companions in Mecca may God be pleased with them. They were weak and could not manifest the Truth or speak of it. The return to that was foretold by the Prophet peace be upon him, which is when those who have the Truth will not be able to speak it. Many Muslims have misunderstood the word “strangers” to mean those who do things differently or look a little different than others. The first “strangers” at the beginning of Islam were strange among their own people, who looked like them, dressed like them, ate like them, and had the same customary practices as them. Take that to nowadays and apply it. My personal experience with this matter has been quite “strange”.

I’ve been studying and travelling to sit with scholars and learning much about the Islamic Tradition over the past 4 years in quite a focused and intense way. As I began studying I realized that I’ve never raised my eyebrows so much in my life. Much of what I thought were given facts turned out to be merely opinions by some scholars that others, and in some instances most did not agree with. The methodology behind approaching the Tradition itself, which I was exposed to previously before sitting with teachers was flawed in its essence, because it gave authority to the intellect of those who were not trained and did not seriously study. Lately, I’ve even had a question about why I placed importance on having a chain of transmission for anything being done in the religion that goes back to the Prophet peace be upon him, such as praying and wudu’. Among Muslims, the way to do Islam now is to either buy the books yourself and pretend you’re Ibn Hazm, or just go on Google or YouTube, and practice Do It Yourself Islam. But to emphasize sitting with teachers and learning from them and ask for a chain of transmission for anything being said that relates to the religion and practicing it, has now been getting me very weird looks. To top it off, those who find the traditional way of obtaining knowledge strange, will decree themselves as the “saved sect” and the “strangers”, while everyone else is apparently doomed.

Quick pause and side note: I’m not making a claim to be one of the “strangers”. I’m just trying to give perspective on things. When I share that I’m getting weird looks, it’s due to me trying to follow in the footsteps of the previous generations of scholars in hopes of attaining a small percentage of what they had. But I am convinced that the right away to obtaining knowledge and learning the Islamic Tradition has been lost among most Muslims and is now looked upon as “strange”.

Back to what I was saying. Imam Ibn Taymiyyah may God have mercy on him said:

أما أن يفرد الإنسان طائفة منتسبة إلى متبوع من الأمة ويسميها أهل الحق ويشهر أن كل من خالفها في شيء فهو من أهل الباطل فهذا حال الأهواء والبدع

For one person to single out a sect that follows a particular imam from among the Muslims and name it the “People of Truth”, and announce that all who disagree with it in any matter are the “People of Falsehood” – this is the state of people following their personal whims and innovations

I absolutely love this saying of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah may God have marcy on him. It is basically a commentary on the Verse:

ولا تزكوا أنفسكم هو أعلم بمن اتقى

And do not exalt yourselves. He knows best who has achieved awareness (of God)

Furthermore, Imam Ibn Taymiyyah may God have mercy on him used the term insan in Arabic, which in English can be translated into person. However, the Arabic word comes from the root word meaning “to forget”. In the statement by Imam Ibn Taymiyyah may God have mercy on him, he says that the individual doing this singling out of one group over others is one who has forgotten what Islam actually teaches and forgot his place in the world.

A final word about this subject. Many claim to be following the Sunnah of the Prophet peace be upon him. But if one examines things closely, it turns out for the most part to be an empty claim. Every sincere Muslim would know that they’re really lacking and are not following most of the Sunnah, and they acknowledge that. The danger comes when one has enough pride to believe that they are indeed “saved”, and then start judging others. The scholars have unanimously ruled that it’s impermissible to declare anyone as one who is not part of the People of Sunnah, unless those scholars who are the level of being able to discern this have a unanimous agreement that he or she has seriously strayed away from the People of Sunnah. Otherwise, even if one is violating certain givens, or happens to be unanimously declared as an innovator in a certain matter, they are still part of the People of Sunnah.

Heaven and Hell are none of anyone’s business but God’s. So each of us should mind our own business and work on rectifying our states.

This and God knows best!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Reply of Ashari to Salafi’s Article

Go Back   Multaqa Ahl al-Hadeeth ‘Aqeedah & Refutation of Deviant Sects

  #1  

 08-16-2012,

 07:53 AM

ubaid88 

Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 406

 Reply of Jahmi to Al-Boriqee’s Article

As Salam Elekum wr wb,

I shared this article

http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=4648

with a Jahmi on facebook. See his reply and state of his Jahmified mind.

Quote:

I’ve quickly skimmed through your article and can already spot multiple problematic issues with it, which begin with your almost complete reliance on a single Hanbali scholar and then attributing his conclusions to the whole of Ahl As’Sunnah (I know you used 2 more for single quotes but most of the article is based on Ibn Qudama Al Maqdisi). 

I’ll have to go through this in a bit more detail when I get a chance, but your whole analysis of what came to the mind of an Arab when they heard something and what terminology did or did not exist does not reflect a proper understanding of how Arabic works, how it developed, or what came to the mind of an Arab or even what comes to a general mind when someone hears a description of anything. 

For the most part, and I mean no disrespect with this, the article is based on the propaganda put out for the outside world by the anthropomorphic pseudo-Salafi machine. If you go to their centres, and get a first hand education on aqeedah, which I personally did for several years, you’ll know their true intention behind holding on to the dhahir of the text. It most certainly NOT what you discuss in this piece.

For those following this post, I realize how passionate I can be about this subject, but if you study logic, and the rational reasons for why we believe Allah exists, and the necessary attributes of Allah that are concluded based on pure reason, you’ll see why every single person that leaves Islam has based their apostasy on a fallacious aqeedah wrongly attributed to Islam that happened to be espoused by a couple of Muslim scholars who now are promoted through petro dollars to be the only ones who really got things right. Those who Allah has helped me to bring back to the Deen, I had to go through a massive correction of their understanding of what Islam teaches us about Allah and how it doesn’t contradict the human intellect, the contrary of which is the unfortunate outcome of petro-dollar Islamic aqeedah.

May Allah protect us and guide us to the Straight Path!

  #2  

 08-16-2012, 

09:46 AM

rizwan 

 Join Date: May 2009

Posts: 2,485

Why are you wasting youre time with this idiot. Tell him why did GF Hadaad clearly say that Shaikh Abdul Qadir Gilani did believe that allah was above the throne with his essence as was reported by him in his Ghunya, something which GF Hadaad has affirmed now.

__________________

  #3  

 08-16-2012, 

10:26 AM

abusidra 

 Join Date: Feb 2009

Posts: 819

whats this person’s id ?

Any ways as Rizwan suggested its a waste of time with such face bookies

  #4  

 08-16-2012,

 02:54 PM

ubaid88 

 Join Date: Feb 2010

Posts: 406

https://www.facebook.com/mohamed.ghilan/


Well he is a blog writer on science and atheism. I admired his articles against atheism. But he turned out to be from clan of Hamza Yusuf and Abdul Hakim Murad.

His recent reply.

Quote:

Yes, of course, the one scholar – may Allah forgive him – who spearheaded this fitna on aqeedah and was put in jail for it by other scholars for it, is now the representative of Ahl As’Sunnah. 

Although Ibn Taymiyyah was the only respectable attempt at refutation of logic, he was sufficiently responded to and his case was put to rest. 

So now you’re promoting that Islam is a religion that doesn’t necessarily go with intellect and logic. Masha’Allah. 

So as far as you’re concerned Allah will give us a power that elevates us above animals, and then we have to negate it. No wonder atheism among Muslim youth is on the rise – it’s reasoning like this getting a loud voice, which is causing us all problems.

You’ve very unacademic in your approach. You appeal to authority of a couple of individuals and ignore the thousands who opposed them. It’s quite clear that for you it’s more an emotional attachment to these scholars than a proper attachment to Truth. 

In this case, as well as in others similar to this one, I find myself speaking about the subject matter while the opposing individual keeps throwing Ibn Taymiyyah’s name or Ibn Al Qayyem’s or whoever else was in their small little circle. I could do the same fallacious appeal to authority, and I would hands down win because the truth of the matter is the greatest majority of the Ummah arrived at a different consensus. 


But at the end of the day, it’s foolish to know Truth by the men who speak it – it’s men who are known for the Truth they speak. 


I’m going to end it here. Enough of this nonsensical back and forth argumentation. I really wish people who don’t get this stuff would just not delve into it. 

Philosophy, logic, and didactic theology is not for everyone. You’ll either find it too difficult and reject it as an integral part of our Islamic tradition, or you’ll adopt fallacious views and espouse them as the correct understanding.

Peace!

Now he took a defeatist path and now he started to delete my post. Very ta’asubi attitude.

My purpose of this post was to expose his Jamhified mind. He is the first one I came across who in reality claim attrubutes of Allah should be identified from reason. Other than him neo-asharis usually try to deny their link with Kalam and Greek philosophy.

 

 #5  

 08-17-2012, 

12:04 AM

al-boriqee 

Join Date: Jun 2007

Posts: 4,365

asalamu alaykum

I hope everyone had a benficial Ramadhaan

as for this poor excuse of a confused Islamophobe propagandist, tell him that he can come to my website  http://islamthought.wordpress.com/  and I will allow him to freely express his views without censoring him. Tell him that Im not a facebooki and that since his madhaab is as intellectually bankrupt as the m’utazilah of old, I would not address him through his facebook because I now it will get deleted purely because of his bankruptness. Tell him that I don’t blame him as an individual, rather I know it is a result of this heterodox defunctness of his ideology that makes him resort to such measures.

As for everyone else, Eid Mubarak

asalamu alaykum

__________________

ابو نعيمة علي البريكي

http://islamthought.wordpress.com/

http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/

 

 #6  

 08-17-2012, 

04:02 AM

rizwan 

Join Date: May 2009

Posts: 2,485

Salaam Alaikum. 

The Brother, Muhammed Ghilan, what is he on. When he refers to the Thousands who opposed Ibn Taymiyah, who is he refering to. Does he not even know that Shaikh Abdullah Bin Bayah, whom i’m pretty sure he respects, declared him as Shaikh ul-Islam. And also the book written called RADD AL-WAFIR which details around 80 scholars that declared Ibn Taymiyah Shaikh al-Islam.

Or is he reffering to Our stance on the siffat of Allah. Has he decided to totally block out the Islamic History from the formation of the earliest sects who denied the attributes. What warped Minds these people have and also such ego’s, i just been on his Facebook page to see that his avtar is him dressed in his white Garments reading what is either Al-Qur’an or some Islamic book, to the unsuspecting mind he is some big scholar.

Direct him also to www.Asharis.com if he wants to read articles written by someone who has a clear grasp of Philosophy, logic, Kalaam etc.

And also what is he specificaly refering to with regards to the views of a couple of scholars. is he talking about the attributes, Has he not seen the countless of statements from the Salaf on these issues. Or is he talking about Allahs Ulluw then direct him here – www.abovethethrone.com and he can see all the clear statements from the salaf on Allah being above the throne with his essence.

__________________

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Wahdat al-Wujud

 Taken from http://www.ummah.com> forum

AbuZayd Al-Britaani said:

15-05-04                                  01:11 PM

Taken from the article by Umm Sahl (Shaykh Nuh’s wife) on

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/masud/…isc/nabulsi.htm

Wahdat al-Wujud

The first issue that we’ll look at, inshallah, is the “doctrine of the unity of existence (wahdat al-wujud)”. I would rather translate this as “oneness of being” as I believe this more accurately represents what is meant by this concept. 

Akram wrote the following after translating one of the poems of Sheikh `Abd al-Ghani from his Diwan al-Haqa’iq (Collected Poems of Higher Spiritual Realities), 

“Notice the doctrine of “unity of existence (wahdat al-wujud)”, which is to believe that the existence of all things is one and that existence itself is Allah. Exalted is Allah Most High above their Satanic heresy”. 

Akram has made the common mistake of taking this concept of “oneness of being” in its ostensive sense, as would be expected, as this is what comes to mind from the literal meaning of the words and he hasn’t been exposed to any other definition. 

In order to understand this concept we will first have to look at how existence is defined by the Imams of tenets of faith (`aqida). 

In the Ahl al-Sunna schools of `aqida existence or being is divided into three categories. The first is necessarily existent (wajib al-wujud), which defines the existence of Allah Most High. Allah Most High exists independently through Himself and His existence is necessary for the existence of all other things. None of His creation share in His existence. 

It is to this category of being that the Sufis are referring when they say “oneness of being (wahdat al-wujud)”. 

The second category is contingent existence (al-wujud al-mumkin). This defines the existence of created things that may or may not exist. Created things have no independent being and their existence is not necessary. Allah Most High brought them into being through His will, power and knowledge and if He willed they would have no existence. Creation only exists through Him giving it being, so in this sense it exists through Him, but doesn’t share in His independent, necessary being. 

The third category is impossible being (mustahil al-wujud), which includes the existence of a co-sharer in Allah’s entity, attributes or actions, which is impossible both according to revelation and the intellect. 

If the difference between necessary existence (wajib al-wujud) and contingent existence (mumkin al-wujud) is clearly understood, then a lot of difficulty in Sufi literature is explained. When the Sufis such as `Abd al-Ghani refer to “oneness of being”, they are referring to the existence of Allah Most High. Creation is not what is intended. Created things have no being in themselves in the sense that the movement of a puppet points to the presence of the puppeteer, or a shadow that something is making the shadow. If the puppeteer stopped pulling the strings the puppets being would come to an end. Is the puppet the same as the puppeteer and share in his existence? 

No. 

Could the puppet exist without the existence of the puppeteer? 

No. 

Does the puppet have a true existence that is in any way parallel to or comparable to the existence of the puppeteer? 

No. 

If not that Allah created us and sustains every moment of our life, we would have no life. 

Does this mean that we are Allah? 

Certainly not. 

Is our existence independent of Allah? 

No. 

Does our appearance of being in any way resemble the independent being of Allah Most High? 

No. 

That what Sheikh `Abd al-Ghani meant when referring to “oneness of being” was the necessary existence of Allah and not creation is verified in the following poems also taken from the Diwan al-Haqa’iq. 

On page 44: 

The Oneness of Being that we maintain is none other than the Oneness of the Truth (al-Haqq), so understand what we say, 

The Oneness of Allah, the sole Unity, which the pre-eminent luminaries have witnessed, 

And there is no difference with us, O ignoramus, whether we say 

“Being (wujud)” or “The Truth (al-Haqq)”, 

Don’t imagine that the Being (wujud) that we mention is 
creation according to us. 

Also, in vol.1, Page 22: 


Truly, Being is unseen by eyes, 
In respect to what the beholder sees; 
Eyes perceive nothing of it besides “what is besides”, 
Namely, contingent things, a collection of shadows; 

A shadow but shows that there is something standing, 
That controls it, beyond any doubt; 

So beware of thinking that what you perceive 
Is that Being: be one of those who know; 

For all of what you perceive is but what “is there (al-mawjud)”, 
Not this True Being, He of Glorious Signs; 

Of a certainty, Being is completely debarred from you, 
In its majesty, elevation, and exaltedness; 

For all you see is contingent and perishable, 
and you too, are bound to perish. 

It should be obvious that Sheikh `Abd al-Ghani was not a pantheist and I think that if Akram had not been hasty, but rather made an objective investigation, he would have reached the same conclusion and absolved himself the responsibility of accusing a Muslim of a doctrine that has no resemblance to that Muslim’s belief.

 

AbuZayd Al-Britaani said:

28-05-04                                   10:32 PM

Brother Hujja, Assalamu alaykum, I notice that you constantly bring up the issue of Wahdat al Wujood in an effort to defame tasawwuf and those you label as “sufis”……. 

what are your views on what is written above by Mufti Ebrahim Desai and Umm Sahl (may Allah preserve them)

Wasalam.

 

Abdullah al-Muhajir said:

31-05-04                                  01:40 PM

Alhumdulillah. 

 

Huja Usman said:

31-05-04                                   07:53 PM

Originally posted by Sunni 
Brother Hujja, Assalamu alaykum, I notice that you constantly bring up the issue of Wahdat al Wujood in an effort to defame tasawwuf and those you label as “sufis”……. 

what are your views on what is written above by Mufti Ebrahim Desai and Umm Sahl (may Allah preserve them)

Wasalam.

alaykum salam . Brother Sunni, Often the You have a diffirent meaning of a word then I have.

For me Wahdat-Wujud is as Some missguided people say That there exists nothing But Allah. Everything is Allah. It can also be Hululiya, Meaning Thos ewho want to enter Allah (azubillah)

You probably know Who Hallaj is? The guy who said ana-alhaq. (I am Allah).

The muslims executed him for saying this kufr things. Shaykh Baghadi (rah) said that Hallaj have opended a hole of fitnah that only his head can fit it.

If you go to the circles of “sufi” circles,of sufi claimers there are people who claim this.

I dont even know how this talk about wahda wujud came. Now I understand long philosophical thoughts confuses muslim. Your article confuses people sunni. Did Muhammed saw talk about “wahdat wujud” and the stuff that your article is talking about?

 

AbuZayd Al-Britaani said:

01-06-04                                     05:41 PM

Akhi, I would never have brought the issue up unless you had first brought it up in an effort to disparage the noble science of Tasawwuf and the Sufis. To turn around and then blame me for confusing the Muslims is unfair. Rather I suggest that before you take any Tom, Dick and Harries definition of Islamic concepts and use it to defame Tasawwuf you ought to first contact the true Ulema of this science and seek clarification from them.

 

faqir said:

23-04-05                               09:50 AM

“Because of not understanding Wahdat ul Wujood’s meaning, many deviant groups were created, some believing in Hulool and others in Ittihad”

– Hadhrat Haji Sahib Imdadullah Muhajir Makki Rahimahullahu Ta`ala {Imdad ul Mushtaq malfoodh 145.}

Last edited by faqir; 23-04-05 at 09:55 AM.

 

Supernova Nebula said:

23-04-05                              09:51 AM

is this all bro faqir?

 

faqir said:

23-04-05                                09:53 AM

Assalaamu ‘alaikum wa rahmatullaah, 

Wahdat al-Wujood Simplified 

Summary of the explanation of Wahdat al-Wujood by Maulana Zafar Ahmad Usmani in the Introduction of his Urdu book “Al-Qawlul Mansur fi Ibn al-Mansur” (also known as “Seerat-e-Mansur Hallaj”) 

Allah Ta’ala has many qualities, one of them is wujood (existence). The wujood of Allah is compulsory (Allah is ‘wajib al-Wujood’). The wujood of Allah has no beginning and no end. The wujood of the creation of Allah is ‘hadis’ (of recent occurrence) and dependent upon Allah Ta’ala in all its aspects. 

Regarding the wujood of the creation, the Ulama-e-Zahir say that the wujood of the creation is ‘mustaqil’ (confirmed), meaning that it is not a shadow of the existence of Allah but entirely dependent upon Allah in all its aspects. 

The soofia-e-kiram say that the wujood of the creation is ‘ghair-mustaqil’ (unconfirmed). Indeed, the wujood of the creation is ‘khayali’ (speculative). 

The real wujood is that of Allah alone. The entire creation is a testimony of the wujood of Allah. 

In other words, the existence of the creation is totally different than the existence of Allah. One can not make ‘qiyas’ (analogical deduction) of Allah’s wujood with that of the creation. The existence of Allah is real and independent. 

Therefore, wahdat al-wujood means that Allah is one in His existence as He is one in His ‘zaat’ (self/identity). It is a much deeper notion of ‘tawheed’ (oneness of Allah). 

‘Wahdat as-shuhood’ means that the mere speculative existence of the creation testifies the independent existence of Allah. 

‘Wujood-e-khayali’ (the speculative existence of the creation) is of two types: 

1. ‘Waqi’ee’ (occurring) 

2. ‘Ghair waqi’ee (non-occurring) 

The soofia say that the creation is ‘waqi’ee’ (occurring) but its occurrence is limited in terms of ‘makaan’ (place) and ‘zamaan’ (time) and dependent upon Allah. It would be wrong to call the creation non-occurring and say that everything one sees is Allah, this is against the ‘aqaa’id’ (beliefs) of the Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah. 

This is where all the misunderstanding arises. In reality, the beliefs held by the ‘soofia-e-kiram’ in regards to the oneness of Allah are in exact accordance with Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah and much deeper and firm-rooted than those of the ‘ulama-e-zahir’. Once a person believes that the creation is only speculative then he will not think and believe that the benefits and harms being displayed by the creation are its creation but all harm and benefit is the creation of Allah. The creation only displays the orders of Allah. 

The ‘hikmah’ (wisdom) of ‘wahdat al-wujood’ and ‘wahdat as-shuhood’ is to ingrain a deep ‘yaqin’ (conviction) of Allah in the depths of the hearts. 

If a person has a hard time understanding this, he should stick to the basic beliefs and tenets of Islam as described by the ‘ulama-e-zahir’ because these are proven from the Quran with clarity. 

However, one does not have the right to criticize the ‘soofia’ for their beliefs just because one is unable to understand the reality of their views. One should also understand that the views of the ‘soofia’ regarding ‘wahdat al-wujood’ are not from the fundamentals of ‘tassawwuf’ and understanding it is not a condition for a ‘saalik’ (seeker of truth). Those who speak ill of the ‘soofia’ should fear Allah and contemplate over the following hadith of Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi WaSallam): 

إملاء الخير خير من السكوت والسكوت خير من إملاء الشر رواه البيهقى فى شعب الايمان 

“Speaking what is good is better than silence and silence is better than talking evil.” 

(Reported by al-Bayhaqi) 

From: http://www.geocities.com/hujjatulmuslim/wahdatalwujood

 

Supernova Nebula said:

23-04-05                                     09:54 AM

bro faqir, are u bro zayd al-britani too?

 

faqir said:

23-04-05                                 09:56 AM

Yes.

 

Saifullah said:

23-04-05                               11:38 AM

 Originally Posted by faqir

Yes.

your also the faqir on sunniforums ?

 

faqir said:

23-04-05                                  04:01 PM

Yes.

 

Soulja said:

23-04-05                                04:12 PM

All wahdat al-wujood means is that we are simply CONTINGENT being (i.e. we are possible to exist or not exist) but Allah (SWT) is a NECESSARY being (i.e. he MUST exist or nothing else exists)

Unfortuantely some people have changed such meanings up in history.

Allah (SWT) knows best.

 

faqir said:

06-01-06                               07:00 PM

Re: Wahdat al-Wujood – The understanding of SUNNI Islam

 

Salman Al-Farsi said:

06-01-06                               07:41 PM

Re: Wahdat al-Wujood – The understanding of SUNNI Islam

So, maybe I exist, maybe I dont, maybe I posted this, maybe I didnt. Maybe we live in the matrix, maybe a flying carpet will come and take me to the ‘fairy land’ I always wanted to go there, maybe it exists, maybe it doesnt…. Confused?? welcome to the world of Sufi doctrine of ‘Wahdatul Wujud’. 

maybe I should write ‘Wahdatul Wujud Simplified’ 

 

faqir said:

07-01-06                                   09:30 AM

Re: Wahdat al-Wujood – The understanding of SUNNI Islam

From the Hanbali Fiqh yahoogroup article: 

“Why Knowledge is Essential for Criticism”

by Sidi Musa Furber

[see: http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/h/44.htmlfor full article]

  1. Another example pivots around phrases like “I see Allah in everything” and “I see Allah, and I don’t see anything in existence except for Allah”.

    According to a group of people who claim to be associated with the Hanbalis and the Salaf, these phrases constitute shirk, namely associating Allah with His creation or the concept known as unity of being (wahdat al-wujud).

    But a quick flip through a book usul al-fiqh in the Hanbali mathab shows that there is nothing wrong with these phrases, since they fall under the topic of majaz, a concept intrinsic to the Arabic language. Both of these phrases have an explanation that fully conforms to Arabic style.

    As for the first phrase, it goes back to Allah Most High being the cause for everything to exist, and so it means: “I see everything, and I used it to point me to Allah.” (The technical term for this is al-tajawaz bi-l-`ullah `ala `an al-ma`lul. See Ghayat Al-Saul, p110, or any other basic book of usul.)

    As for the second phrase, it goes back seeing Allah’s influence which point the observer back to Allah. (The technical term for this is al-tajawaz bi-l-muathir `an al-athr. Ibid., p111.)

    So really, the person who claims to be affiliated with the Salaf and the Hanbalis should learn the basics of usul al-fiqh before voicing any criticism on the issue. Of course, if the critic denies majaz itself, that’s a whole different issue.

    And Allah knows best.

     

  2. Umm Layth's Avatar


    Umm Layth said:

    Re: Wahdat al-Wujood – The understanding of SUNNI Islam

     Originally Posted by Salman Al-Farsi

    So, maybe I exist, maybe I dont, maybe I posted this, maybe I didnt. Maybe we live in the matrix, maybe a flying carpet will come and take me to the ‘fairy land’ I always wanted to go there, maybe it exists, maybe it doesnt…. Confused?? welcome to the world of Sufi doctrine of ‘Wahdatul Wujud’. 

    maybe I should write ‘Wahdatul Wujud Simplified‘ 

    Akhee thats not Wahdatul Wujud, its far more complicated than this and you know it. This sounds more like something warped from Harun Yahya.

    and yah, maybe you should write ‘wahdatul Wujud simplified’ I dont think many people understand its depths, write ‘sufism simplified’, and while you are at it, ‘wahabbism simplified’ 

    Good luck 

     

  3. Salman Al-Farsi's Avatar


    Salman Al-Farsi said:

    Re: Wahdat al-Wujood – The understanding of SUNNI Islam

     Originally Posted by Umm Layth

    Akhee thats not Wahdatul Wujud, its far more complicated than this and you know it. This sounds more like something warped from Harun Yahya.

    and yah, maybe you should write ‘wahdatul Wujud simplified’ I dont think many people understand its depths, write ‘sufism simplified’, and while you are at it, ‘wahabbism simplified’ 

    Good luck 

    lol.. thanks for catching me out, I was only checking if people are still awake.
    welldone. You get the rep points.

    I ll leave ‘wahabism’ simplified to you, since your the expert. 

     

  4. faqir's Avatar


    faqir said:

    Ibn Kathir RH and the so-called refutation of Wahdat al-Wujood

    I relation to this thread:

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?t=91562

    I wish to draw your attention to post 3 where the author has drawn on the explanation of Ibn Kathir RH in order to refute his straw man argument.

    Now, if we go back to post 2 some ayaat are posted.

    Ibn Kathir’s explanation of these ayaat is fascinating.

    (A) Numerous Qur’aanic verses state that Allah, the Exalted is above His Arsh (Throne) in a manner that befits His Majesty and Glory. Allah says: 

    “Your Rabb (Lord) is Allah, Who created the Heavens and the earth in six days and then rose above His Arsh (Throne), He manages all things.”[1]

    Ibn Kathir says in relation to 



    Verse 7:54


    Imam Ibn Kathir says in his Tafsirof the verse ثُمَّ ٱسْتَوَىٰ عَلَى ٱلْعَرْشِtranslated by some as: 
    “Then He ‘was established’ (istawa) upon the Throne” (Qur’an 7 : 54) :


    وأما قوله تعالى: { ثُمَّ ٱسْتَوَىٰ عَلَى ٱلْعَرْشِ } فللناس في هذا المقام مقالات كثيرة جداً ليس هذا موضع بسطها، وإنما نسلك في هذا المقام مذهب السلف الصالح مالك والأوزاعي والثوري والليث بن سعد والشافعي وأحمد وإسحاق بن راهويه وغيرهم من أئمة المسلمين قديماً وحديثاً، وهو إمرارها كما جاءت من غير تكييف ولا تشبيه ولا تعطيل،والظاهر المتبادر إلى أذهان المشبهين منفي عن الله، لا يشبهه شيء من خلقه و
    { لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَىْءٌ وَهُوَ ٱلسَّمِيعُ ٱلْبَصِيرُ }


    …people have many positions on this matter, and this is not the place to present them at length. On this point, we follow the position of the early Muslims (salaf)—Malik, Awza‘i, Thawri, Layth ibn Sa‘d, Shafi‘i, Ahmad, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, as well as others among the Imams of the Muslims, ancient and modernnamely, to let the verse pass as it has come, without saying how it is meant (bi la takyif), without any resemblance to created things (wa la tashbih), and without nullifying it (wa la ta‘til), and the literal outward meaning (dhahir) that comes to the minds of anthropomorphists (al-mushabbihin) is negated of Allah, for nothing created has any resemblance to Him: “There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing” 


     

  5. faqir's Avatar


    faqir said:

    Re: Ibn Kathir RH and the so-called refutation of Wahdat al-Wujood

    Numerous verses in every Soorah also indicate the same, from amongst them are,

    “He is irresistible, above His slaves, and He is the All-Wise, Well-Acquainted with all things.”[2] 

    Again, from Tafsir Ibn Kathir:


    Verse 6:18



    (وَهُوَ الْقَاهِرُ فَوْقَ عِبَادِهِ وَهُوَ الْحَكِيمُ الْخَبِيرُ) 
    قال الامام ابن كثير: ( ” وَهُوَ الْقَاهِر فَوْق عِبَاده ” أَيْ هُوَ الَّذِي خَضَعَتْ لَهُ الرِّقَاب وَذَلَّتْ لَهُ الْجَبَابِرَة وَعَنَتْ لَهُ الْوُجُوه وَقَهَرَ كُلّ شَيْء وَدَانَتْ لَهُ الْخَلَائِق وَتَوَاضَعَتْ لِعَظَمَةِ جَلَاله وَكِبْرِيَائِهِ وَعَظَمَته وَعُلُوّهُ وَقُدْرَته عَلَى الْأَشْيَاء وَاسْتَكَانَتْ وَتَضَاءَلَتْ بَيْن يَدَيْهِ وَتَحْت قَهْره وَحُكْمه )

    “And He is the Irresistible, above His servants…”

    وَهُوَ الْقَاهِر فَوْق عِبَاده 
    meaning, to Him the necks are subservient, the tyrants humble before Him and He has complete control over all things. The creatures have all bowed to Allah and are humbled before His grace, honor, pride, greatness, highness and ability over all things. The creatures are insignificant before Him, for they are all under His irresistible decision and power



  6. .

    “To Him ascend (all) the good words, and the righteous deeds exalt them.”[3]

    This time from a multitude of Tafsirs:

    Al-T.abarī : “Al-H.asan and Qatāda said: ‘Allāh does not accept (lā yaqbalu) any word without deed; whoever speaks good words and does good deeds, Allāh accepts it from him.’”

    Al-Qurt.ubī: “Ascent is upward movement which is inconceivable of words for they are accidents [or signs] (a‘rād.). Ascent here stands for acceptance.”

    The same is found in Abū H.ayyān’s Qur’anic commentary.[2]

    Ibn H.ajar : “Al-Farrā’ [Muh.yī al-Sunna al-Baghawī] said: ‘The meaning of the verse is that the good deed carries up the good word. That is, the latter is accepted if there is a good deed with it.’… Al-Bayhaqī said: ‘The ascent of the good word and the good charity stands for acceptance.’”[3]

    Al-Mah.āllī in Tafsīr al-Jalālayn: “ascendsi.e. He knows it; He raises iti.e. He accepts it.”

    Ibn Jahbal said in his Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya:

    42. (Unto Him the good word ascends)(35:10)… The sense of ascension here is none other than acceptance (al-qabūl), without inkling of boundary nor location.

    [1] Or: (and the good deed He raises up.)

    [2]Tafsīr al-Bah.r al-Muh.īt. (7:303).

    [3]In Fath. al-Bārī (1959 ed. 13:416).

     


  7. AbuNajm said:

    Re: Ibn Kathir RH and the so-called refutation of Wahdat al-Wujood

    I can see Faqir has been busy while revivingislam has been down.

    what do you think about ‘Imaam al Juwayni’s Risaalat fi ‘Ithbaat al ‘Istawaa’ wal Fawqiyyat?

    there is also ‘Ibn Qudama’s work on ‘Uluww, Daraqutni’s work on as Sifaat, and others that clearly explain Allah Azza wa Jal as being ‘above’ creation and that this is a reality, not a metaphor, and actually this is the position of Ahl as Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah…

    And in regards to al ‘Istawaa’ then it is agreed upon from ‘Imaam Maalik and the others you quoted, that it is ghayri Majhul. Not speaking on or imagining the Sifaat of Allah Azza wa Jal, is not the same as not knowing their meaning.

    May Allah guide us.

    -Abu Najm Muhammad

     

  8. faqir's Avatar


    faqir said:

    Re: Ibn Kathir RH and the so-called refutation of Wahdat al-Wujood

    Nice to see you on Ummah again.  

    Last time I recall you be thrown off for calling me a Kafir.  

    I look forward to a repeat performance from you  

    what do you think about ‘Imaam al Juwayni’s Risaalat fi ‘Ithbaat al ‘Istawaa’ wal Fawqiyyat?

    Why don’t you tell me what you think then I’ll tell you  

    there is also ‘Ibn Qudama’s work on ‘Uluww, Daraqutni’s work on as Sifaat, and others that clearly explain Allah Azza wa Jal as being ‘above’ creation and that this is a reality, not a metaphor, and actually this is the position of Ahl as Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah…

    really? i’ll take your word for it. of course it don’t mean its correct!  

    And in regards to al ‘Istawaa’ then it is agreed upon from ‘Imaam Maalik and the others you quoted, that it is ghayri Majhul. Not speaking on or imagining the Sifaat of Allah Azza wa Jal, is not the same as not knowing their meaning.

    really? what meaning did Imam Malik give it?

     

  9. KeeKee's Avatar


    KeeKee said:

    Wahdatul Wujood

    Wahdatul Wujood

    By Mufti Ebrahim Desai
    Posted: 11 Safar 1424, 13 April 2003

    Q.) I have been reading articles on the subject of Wahdatul Wujood, and have been very confused. In the Qur’an, Allah says He is above his throne… Allah fawq al-‘Arsh. HE IS ABOVE HIS THRONE. This literally means He is above his throne, however he sees all. How come the Deobandis say that Allah Ta’la is actually and physically everywhere? Allah can see everything, but is He physically everywhere? This doesn’t make sense. Please answer with evidence from Qur’an and Sunnah, so I can also tell my friends. Jazak’Allahu Khayr and may Allah Ta’la preserve you Ameen. [Owais Saab]

    A.) Saadu-deen Taftazani has explained the aspect of ‘Where is Allah?’ in the following words: ‘And He is not at any place’. (Sharh Aqaaid)

  10. Imam Malik was asked about the Ayat in Surah Taha, ‘Allah is above His Ársh’, he answered: ‘Being above (Istawaa) is known but the reality is unknown and – questioning that – is innovation.’ Jaaluddin Suyyuti also comments on the Ayat saying, ‘Istawa (being above) according to whatever is appropriate for Allah. (Jalaalayn vol. 2 p. 260).

    However, the verse does not speak about the Zat (Person) of Allah being on the Ársh but it is to indicate the establishment and control of the Kingdom of Allah by Himself.

    The Ulama of Deoband do not say that Allah Ta’ala is physically present everywhere. And Allah Ta’ala Knows Best

     

    Hafsah1 said:13-06-11 08:10 PM

    What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

    Also what is that dhikr where they just say “Hu, Hu, Hu, Hu” called, and what part of the Quran or Authentic Ahadith is that dhikr from? Thanks

     

    uncle umar said:13-06-11  08:22 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXTgB…eature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PFJI…eature=related

    Last edited by uncle umar; 13-06-11 at 08:25 PM.

    And the (faithful) slaves of the Most Gracious (Allâh) are those who walk on the earth in humility and sedateness, and when the foolish address them (with bad words) they reply back with mild words of gentleness. (25:63)

    O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a trade that will save you from a painful torment? (10) That you believe in Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad SAW),and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (11) (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwellings in Adn (Edn) Paradise; that is indeed the great success. (12)

    JazakAllah khair for the duas but i would prefer duas for shahadah instead.

    sponsor an orphan

     

    .Hajar. said:13-06-11 08:43 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

    just wondering, are you working on some kind of research Hafsah1..?

     

    Hafsah1 said:13-06-11 09:03 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

     Originally Posted by S@Z 

    just wondering, are you working on some kind of research Hafsah1..?

    Lol Not Really, its just nice to know what different people believe, so if they believe in correct Aqeedah I can read their books but if they have the wrong Aqeedah, then there is not much point.

     

    .Hajar. said:13-06-11 09:38 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

    “their books”? ok..

    have you read the tafsir of surah al ikhlas? you’ll learn so much more from it wrt correct aqeedah

     

    Ibn Sina said:13-06-11 09:51 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

    wahdat al wajood = pantheism

    its a type of shirk

     

    muslim ak said:13-06-11 09:54 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

     Originally Posted by Ibn Sina 

    wahdat al wajood = pantheism

    its a type of shirk

    Deobandi Scholars unanimously support the theory of Wahdat al-Wajood

     

    Ibn Sina said:13-06-11 10:01 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

     Originally Posted by muslim ak 

    Deobandi Scholars unanimously support the theory of Wahdat al-Wajood

    Allah and the Creation are distinct

    I’m guessing you also have no problem with the christian mangod theory

     

    muslim ak said:13-06-11 10:07 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

     Originally Posted by Ibn Sina 

    Allah and the Creation are distinct

    I’m guessing you also have no problem with the christian mangod theory

    i don’t really know much about it to comment on it, all i know is deobandis support it, don’t know who else

     

    Ibn Sina said:13-06-11 10:13 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

     Originally Posted by muslim ak 

    i don’t really know much about it to comment on it, all i know is deobandis support it, don’t know who else

    doesnt look like it

    http://www.deoband.org/2010/05/hadit…fest-position/

     

    muslim ak said:13-06-11 10:18 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

     Originally Posted by Ibn Sina 

    doesnt look like it

    http://www.deoband.org/2010/05/hadit…fest-position/

    elders of deoband:

    http://www.ahya.org/tjonline/eng/03/7wahdat.html

     

    loonietoonie said:13-06-11 11:00 PM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

    The only definition of wahdatul wujood I know is that “Allah is the only reality i.e. nothing exists except Allah”. This is blatant kufr and denial of the Qur’an.

     

    al faqeer said:14-06-11 04:56 AM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

    Depends how it is understood and Defined . 

    Like if i go to a Masjid now here , and i go up to the people and tell them Your lord is under my feet In Arabic ! 

    I would probably be killed in a split sec  .

    But one intelligent fella decides to dig where i stood , and finds a treasure full of Newly printed bills  

    just an example of how people can understand something wrong , Judge and take the wrong action and then regret .

     

    Brother Hassan said:14-06-11 10:28 AM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

    The Deobandis have a different definition of Wahdatul Wajood 
    muslim ak misquoting can prove anyone wrong  If you think you have a valid argument ask the guys at deoband.com  By quoting only one verse you can prove Alcohol halal 
    I suggest you don’t go into this stuff before strong knowledge about the Qur’an & the Sunnah, cause in the end thats what really matters 

     

    Fais said:14-06-11 10:29 AM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

     Originally Posted by Brother Hassan 

    The Deobandis have a different definition of Wahdatul Wajood 


    muslim ak misquoting can prove anyone wrong  If you think you have a valid argument ask the guys at deoband.com By quoting only one verse you can prove Alcohol halal 


    I suggest you don’t go into this stuff before strong knowledge about the Qur’an & the Sunnah, cause in the end thats what really matters 

    You sure you got enough smiley faces there?

     

    Brother Hassan said:14-06-11 10:48 AM

    Re: What is Wahdatul Wajood? Who was Ibn Arabi? And what is Sufism about? Thanks

     Originally Posted by Fais 

    You sure you got enough smiley faces there?

    lol Smiling is a Sunnah 
    Thats why I like to use smilies 



  • Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

    What is Wahdat al-Wujood : 03 Explaination

    faqir
    02-07-06,                           09:01 PM
    :salams

    This is complete nonsense from multiple angles.

    It is a misrepresentation of the concept of Wahdatul Wujood as understood by the Deobandi Ulema.
    A straw man argument has been created and a so-called “refutation” has been posted in response.

    The other point is that this issue has never been one of Aqida. 

    Wahdatul wujood is an experience not a theological point.
    It is a state that one achieves when one realises that the existence of everything in creation is entirely dependent on Allah – so it is as though only He exists. 

    This does not mean that Allah is “everywhere” or He is part of His creation – Allah’s refuge is sought from such baatil!

    Perhaps a more fair representation of how the Deobandis understood this concept can be gained through the words of a prominent Deobandi himself:

    Wahdat al-Wujood Simplified

    Summary of the explanation of Wahdat al-Wujood by Maulana Zafar Ahmad Usmani in the Introduction of his Urdu book “Al-Qawlul Mansur fi Ibn al-Mansur”

    Allah Ta’ala has many qualities, one of them is wujood (existence). The wujood of Allah is compulsory (Allah is ‘wajib al-Wujood’). 

    The wujood of Allah has no beginning and no end. The wujood of the creation of Allah is ‘hadis’ (of recent occurrence) and dependent upon Allah Ta’ala in all its aspects.

    Regarding the wujood of the creation, the Ulama-e-Zahir say that the wujood of the creation is ‘mustaqil’ (confirmed), meaning that it is not a shadow of the existence of Allah but entirely dependent upon Allah in all its aspects. 
    The soofia-e-kiram say that the wujood of the creation is ‘ghair-mustaqil’ (unconfirmed). 

    Indeed, the wujood of the creation is ‘khayali’ (speculative). The real wujood is that of Allah alone. The entire creation is a testimony of the wujood of Allah. In other words, the existence of the creation is totally different than the existence of Allah. One can not make ‘qiyas’ (analogical deduction) of Allah’s wujood with that of the creation. The existence of Allah is real and independent. 

    Therefore, wahdat al-wujood means that Allah is one in His existence as He is one in His ‘zaat’ (self/identity). It is a much deeper notion of ‘tawheed’ (oneness of Allah). ‘Wahdat as-shuhood’ means that the mere speculative existence of the creation testifies the independent existence of Allah. 

    ‘Wujood-e-khayali’ (the speculative existence of the creation) is of two types: 

    1. ‘Waqi’ee’ (occurring) 
    2. ‘Ghair waqi’ee (non-occurring) 

    The soofia say that the creation is ‘waqi’ee’ (occurring) but its occurrence is limited in terms of ‘makaan’ (place) and ‘zamaan’ (time) and dependent upon Allah. It would be wrong to call the creation non-occurring and say that everything one sees is Allah, this is against the ‘aqaa’id’ (beliefs) of the Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah. 

    This is where all the misunderstanding arises. In reality, the beliefs held by the ‘soofia-e-kiram’ in regards to the oneness of Allah are in exact accordance with Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah and much deeper and firm-rooted than those of the ‘ulama-e-zahir’. Once a person believes that the creation is only speculative then he will not think and believe that the benefits and harms being displayed by the creation are its creation but all harm and benefit is the creation of Allah. The creation only displays the orders of Allah. The ‘hikmah’ (wisdom) of ‘wahdat al-wujood’ and ‘wahdat as-shuhood’ is to ingrain a deep ‘yaqin’ (conviction) of Allah in the depths of the hearts. 

    If a person has a hard time understanding this, he should stick to the basic beliefs and tenets of Islam as described by the ‘ulama-e-zahir’ because these are proven from the Quran with clarity. 

    However, one does not have the right to criticize the ‘soofia’ for their beliefs just because one is unable to understand the reality of their views. 

    One should also understand that the views of the ‘soofia’ regarding ‘wahdat al-wujood’ are not from the fundamentals of ‘tassawwuf’ and understanding it is not a condition for a ‘saalik’ (seeker of truth). 

    Those who speak ill of the ‘soofia’ should fear Allah and contemplate over the following hadith of Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi WaSallam): 

    إملاء الخير خير من السكوت والسكوت خير من إملاء الشر رواه البيهقى فى شعب الايمان 

    “Speaking what is good is better than silence and silence is better than talking evil.” 
    (Reported by al-Bayhaqi) 

    From: http://www.geocities.com/hujjatulmuslim/wahdatalwujood (http://www.geocities.com/hujjatulmuslim/wahdatalwujood)

    faqir
    02-07-06,                                 09:09 PM

    A quote from one of the shuyukh whose views have been misrepresented above which clearly shows that he did not believe that Allah is “everywhere”:

    “Because of not understanding Wahdat ul Wujood’s meaning, many deviant groups were created, some believing in Hulool and others in Ittihad”

    – Hadhrat Haji Sahib Imdadullah Muhajir Makki Rahimahullahu Ta`ala {Imdad ul Mushtaq malfoodh 145.}

    FollowerOfMuhammad
    03-07-06,                                    01:12 PM

    Wahdat al-Wajood or Wahdat ul-Wujood is a concept based upon the idea that nothing exists other than Allah, and creation is merely the manifestation of Allah. This implies that the creation is Allah, and Allah does not exist outside the creation.

    This whole article can be refuted with its first statement itself :

    1. 
    Wahdat al-Wajood or Wahdat ul-Wujood is a concept based upon the idea that nothing exists other than Allah, and creation is merely the manifestation of Allah 

    The guy has never studied wahdatul wujood.

    It actually is based on the concept that nothing can exist by itself except ALLAh and not nothing exists except ALLAh.

    Al-Irhaab
    05-07-06, 11:33 PM

    any reply to the above statements 🙄

    faqir
    13-07-06, 11:50 PM

    :salams

    Although not directly related, I have been collecting some excerpts from Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir.

    see: http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15394&page=1&pp=10
    {if anyone sees any errors in translation do let me know!}
    :salams

    Um Abdullah
    14-07-06, 04:31 AM

    “Because of not understanding Wahdat ul Wujood’s meaning, many deviant groups were created, some believing in Hulool and others in Ittihad”

    – Hadhrat Haji Sahib Imdadullah Muhajir Makki Rahimahullahu Ta`ala {Imdad ul Mushtaq malfoodh 145.}

    yes, because you believe in something that is unclear and confusing, and Islam is all clear with no beliefs that are ambiguous or can’t be comprehended.

    Your shaikh Ibn Arabi is the one who started this “wuhdat al-wujud” thing.

    And it seems that scholars during his time and after understood it to mean other than what you say, to the point that some made takfir towards him.

    So those scholars are “ignorant” and don’t understand Ibn Arabi and Ibn Farid and other Sufi Scholars who spoke of it?

    And your shaikhs are the only ones who can understand it?

    Isn’t that amazing.

    PocketY
    14-07-06, 09:57 AM

    I think we need to be careful before we say things about what other scholars have written without going through the proper training or simply relying upon translations that may not be accurate. 

    Shouldn’t we make 70 excuses for our brethren in Islam? 

    What happened to husn-al-dhann? 

    I do not want to face my Lord on the Day of Judgement with the sin of having slandered one of His Awliya (any scholar could be one). ‘The flesh of scholars is poison’. 

    If as brother Faqir has said, it is not an issue of aqida, then shouldn’t we stop wasting our time on this and concentrate more on perfecting our understanding of tawhid? 

    Or reading more Quran.
    Jumu’ah Mubarak!

    Um Abdullah
    14-07-06, 02:09 PM

    Although not directly related, I have been collecting some excerpts from Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir.

    see: http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show…4&page=1&pp=10

    {if anyone sees any errors in translation do let me know!}

    You need to study tafsir before you write stuff like that.

    I am sorry to make you disappointed, but Ibn Kathir himself quoted in his tafsir of ayah (2:34) the quote of At-Tabari rahimahu Allah, who quoted a lengthy narration attributed to Ibn Abbas radiyallahu anhu, in which you find:

    ” so He created Adam from it (clay) with His hand”.

    And that is confirming the hand.

    alhamdulillah.

    I will only comment on a few ayat you mentioned in ur post:
    Verse 43:84

    “And He it is Who is Allah in the heavens and Allah in the earth”
    means, He is the God of those who are in the heavens and the God of those who are on earth; all of 
    them worship Him and are humbled before Him. “And He is the All-Wise, the All-Knower.”

    so what is the problem here?

    That is the actuall meaning of the ayah.

    Where the word (Allah) is in the translation, it is (iIlah) in the ayah, and illah means “ma’bood” (the One worshipped).

    And the translation of Hilali & Khan makes it more clear than the other translations:

    [It is He (Allâh) Who is the only Ilâh (God to be worshipped) in the heaven and the only Ilâh (God to be worshipped) on the earth. And He is the All-Wise, the All-Knower.]
    verse 7:54 …

    …people have many positions on this matter, and this is not the place to present them at length. On this point, 
    we follow the position of the early Muslims (salaf)—Malik, Awza‘i, Thawri, Layth ibn Sa‘d, Shafi‘i, Ahmad, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, as well as others among the Imams of the Muslims, ancient and modern—namely, to let the verse pass as it has come, without saying how it is meant (bi la takyif), without any resemblance to created things (wa 
    la tashbih), and without nullifying it (wa la ta‘til), and the literal outward meaning (dhahir) that comes to the 
    minds of anthropomorphists (al-mushabbihin) is negated of Allah, for nothing created has any resemblance to Him:

     “There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing” 

    note 
    he said: والظاهر المتبادر إلى أذهان المشبهين منفي عن الله،

    and the literal outward meaning “that comes to the minds of anthropomorphists (al mushabbihin)” is negated by Allah.

    so what comes to the mind of anthropomorphists?

    what comes to their minds when they hear that Allah has a “hand” is that “His hand is like the creations’ hand” 
    exalted is Allah.

    And it seems that that is what came to the mind of Asha’ira, so they made ta’wil, because they couldn’t “comprehend” it any other way, so they resorted to ta’wil in some of the attribues and they didn’t negate Allah’s attributes, which keeps them inside the fold of Islam (alhamdulillah), but Jahmiyyah were stupid, because when that came to their mind they resorted to negating all of Allah’s attributes !

    But what comes to NON anthropomorphists is that His “hand” is not like the “creations'” hands, and that His hand is in a manner that befits His Majesty, which Ibn Kathir mentions after what you quoted:

    “and it is like the Imams said, from them are Na’eem bin Hammad al-Khuza’i, he said: 



    who does tashbih (anthropomorphism) of Allah to His creation becomes a disbeliever, and who negates what Allah described Himself with becomes a disbeliever, and there is no tashbih in what Allah described Himself with or His messenger , so who confirms to Allah Ta’la what came in the clear ayat (verses of the Quran) and the authentic reports in the manner that befits Allah’s Majesty and negates from Allah the faults, then he has taken the path of guidance.”                  end of quote

    So because the “literal meaning that comes to anthromorphists minds” didn’t come to their mind, they didn’t negate the attribute nor did they do ta’wil, but they confirmed the attribute with its general meaning with no takyif (modality) or ta’wil or tashbih (anthropomorphism).

    Alhamdulillah.

    faqir
    14-07-06,                                    10:22 PM

    You need to study tafsir before you write stuff like that.

    :salams

    Sister, I am trying to study Ibn Kathir’s tafsir – not making my own tafsir!

    In fact, the post I have linked has translations of the Imam’s tafsir provided with the original arabic text.

    I am sorry to make you disappointed, but Ibn Kathir himself quoted in his tafsir of ayah (2:34) the quote of At-Tabari rahimahu Allah, who quoted a lengthy narration attributed to Ibn Abbas radiyallahu anhu, in which you find:

    ” so He created Adam from it (clay) with His hand”.

    And that is confirming the hand.

    alhamdulillah.

    What do you mean by “that is confirming the hand”? 

    I will only comment on a few ayat you mentioned in ur post:

    so what is the problem here?

    That is the actuall meaning of the ayah.

    Where the word (Allah) is in the translation, it is (iIlah) in the ayah, and illah means “ma’bood” (the One worshipped).

    And the translation of Hilali & Khan makes it more clear than the other translations:

    [It is He (Allâh) Who is the only Ilâh (God to be worshipped) in the heaven and the only Ilâh (God to be worshipped) on the earth. And He is the All-Wise, the All-Knower.]

    There is no problem with the translation of the explanation given by Ibn Kathir.

    However, what is the literal translation of the ayah? 
    Is it to be believed literally?

    note he said: 

    والظاهر المتبادر إلى أذهان المشبهين منفي عن الله،

    and the literal outward meaning “that comes to the minds of anthropomorphists (al-mushabbihin)” is negated by Allah.

    Read what I posted.
    so what comes to the mind of anthropomorphists?

    Well, as you can read Arabic you will know what Ibn Kathir thinks comes to the minds of the anthropormphists = “the literal outward meaning [dhahir]” – so I guess we should avoid that.

    what comes to their minds when they hear that Allah has a “hand” is that “His hand is like the creations’ hand” 
    Is that the literal outward meaning [dhahir] of yad
    exalted is Allah.

    Yes.

    And it seems that that is what came to the mind of Asha’ira, so they made ta’wil, because they couldn’t “comprehend” it any other way, so they resorted to ta’wil in some of the attribues and they didn’t negate Allah’s attributes, which keeps them inside the fold of Islam 

    (alhamdulillah), but Jahmiyyah were stupid, because when that came to their mind they resorted to negating all of Allah’s attributes ! 

    Well, according to the asha’ira the literal outward meaning is not the intent, the safest position is tafwid but ta’wil is employed to refute the innovators if there is a proof from the early generations or scope within the language of the qur’an.

    But what comes to NON anthropomorphists is that His “hand” is not like the “creations'” hands, and that His hand is in a manner that befits His Majesty, which Ibn Kathir mentions after what you quoted:

    “and it is like the Imams said, from them are Na’eem bin Hammad al-Khuza’i, he said: who does tashbih (anthropomorphism) of Allah to His creation becomes a disbeliever, and who negates what Allah described Himself with becomes a disbeliever, and there is no tashbih in what Allah described Himself with or His messenger , so who confirms to Allah Ta’la what came in the clear ayat (verses of the Quran) and the authentic reports in the manner that befits Allah’s Majesty and negates from Allah the faults, then he has taken the path of guidance.” 

    end of quote

    Yes, thank you. Here it is:
    بل الأمر كما قال الأئمة، منهم: نعيم بن حماد الخزاعي شيخ البخاري، قال: من شبه الله بخلقه كفر، ومن جحد ما وصف الله به نفسه فقد كفر، وليس فيما وصف الله به نفسه ولا رسوله تشبيه، فمن أثبت لله تعالى ما وردت به الآيات الصريحة، والأخبار الصحيحة، على الوجه الذي يليق بجلال الله، ونفى عن الله تعالى النقائص، فقد سلك سبيل الهدى

    But the fact of the matter is as explained by the Imams; like Nu`aym ibn Hammad al-Khuza`yi who is Imam Bukhari’s shaykh – he said:

    Whosoever held a similitude for Allah from His creation has committed disbelief [kufr], whosoever disputes what Allah has attributed for Himself has committed disbelief [kufr], there is absolutely no similitude [tash’bih] in what Allah taala has described Himself or His messenger; so, whosoever affirms [the attributes] for Allah ta`ala [just] as they have been mentioned in the [qur’anic] verses, and in the authentic reports – that is befitting the Majesty of Allah ta’ala and negates all flaws [naqayiS] from Allah ta’ala has truly struck the path of guidance.

    This is actually another lovely quote. 

    No mention of taking literal meanings. Just mentioning as has been revealed.

    So because the “literal meaning that comes to anthromorphists minds” didn’t come to their mind, they didn’t negate the attribute nor did they do ta’wil, but they confirmed the attribute with its general meaning with no takyif (modality) or ta’wil or tashbih (anthropomorphism).

    Alhamdulillah.

    I’m glad you agree that the literal outward meaning is not intended.

    JazakAllahu khairan.

    faqir
    14-07-06,                                  10:27 PM

    yes, because you believe in something that is unclear and confusing, and Islam is all clear with no beliefs that are ambiguous or can’t be comprehended.

    Your shaikh Ibn Arabi is the one who started this “wuhdat al-wujud” thing.

    And it seems that scholars during his time and after understood it to mean other than what you say, to the point that some made takfir towards him.

    So those scholars are “ignorant” and don’t understand Ibn Arabi and Ibn Farid and other Sufi Scholars who spoke of it?

    And your shaikhs are the only ones who can understand it?
    Isn’t that amazing
    .
    :salams
    I think you will find that the original post is in reference to the Deobandi Ulema. 

    I have tried to provide you some explanation directly from Deobandi sources. If it is still unclear to you then I suggest you seek out a Deobandi shaikh and ask him directly.

    May Allah reward you.
    :salams

    Um Abdullah
    15-07-06, 05:46 AM

    Sister, I am trying to study Ibn Kathir’s tafsir – not making my own tafsir!
    I meant study tafsir Ibn Kathir, the whole thing, before talking about his manhaj, or his beliefs in a certain issue, because in one part he might be ambiguous and more clear in another part, so to understand the stance of a person in an issue you have to read all of his book not only part of it.

    And that is a good thing that you are studying the tafsir.

    by the way, I advise you to study usool tafsir and manahij mufasireen also.

    It will help in ur study of tafsir.

    And it is fundemental in comprehending the issue of tafsir.

    What do you mean by “that is confirming the hand”? 

    what I meant is that he confirmed its general meaning, that Allah does have a hand but a hand that is in a manner that befits Allah ‘azza wa jal.

    not a hand like His creations hand. exalted be He.

    If he didn’t believe that Allah had a hand he would have said that Allah created Adam with his power or ability or kept quiet about it if he did tafwid of its meaning.

    And it is important to understand that similarity in “names” doesn’t necessitate similarity in “modality” (kayfiyyah), even the attributes in the creation are not all the same.

    For example, the arms of an octopus are not like our arms, also the eyes of a fly are not like the human eyes (you can read about it yourself), the power of an elephant is not like the power of an ant… etc.

    So the attribute has the same name, but the actualy modality of it in the creation is different. walillahi al-mathalu al-a’la.

    So it has to do with the essence, our essence is weak so our attributes are weak and have faults, but Allah’s essence is Great and perfect, so Allah’s attributes would be Great and perfect and are definitly not like ours.

    Exalted be Allah.

    However, what is the literal translation of the ayah? Is it to be believed literally?

    brother, I told you the meaning of “illah” which is used in the ayah, the literal meaning of “illah” is “ma’bood” (the One worshipped), so what does that mean?

    It means that he is “the one worshipped” in the heaven and in the earth.

    So where is the ta’wil in the tafsir of the ayah?

    Well, as you can read Arabic you will know what Ibn Kathir thinks comes to the minds of the anthropormphists = “the literal outward meaning [dhahir]” – so I guess we should avoid that.

    Is that the literal outward meaning [dhahir] of yad?



    he said “the literal meaning >> that << comes to the mind of anthropomorphists.

    He didn’t say that what comes to the mind of anthropomorphists is the literal meaning.
    You see, there is a general meaning, and a detailed one, the detailed one is the kayfiyyah, meaning u start going into details about its meaning, saying how the attribute is.

    But when u confirm its general meaning, saying that yes Allah has a hand that is a hand not “power” or “ability” or something that is totally ambiguous, meaning it is the same as saying “gahslgh”, its letters are there but the meaning is ambiguous, we don’t know what it means.

    But going into “how” the attribute is, here it is not allowed and it is “khawd fi al-ma’na خوض في المعنى” meaning going into details of the meaning, and that is what anthropomorphists have done when they did tashbih, because what came to their mind is the detailed meaning, the attribute and its kayfiyyah.

    Well, according to the asha’ira the literal outward meaning is not the intent, the safest position is tafwid but ta’wil is employed to refute the innovators if there is a proof from the early generations or scope within the language of the qur’an.

    That is why ‘Asha’ira are Muslims, I mean they are inside the fold of Islam (alhamdulillah), because their ta’wil is based on some kind of proof, although it was incorrect to choose another meaning other than the literal one (general meaning not detailed one = kayfiyyah), because Salaf didn’t do that, they believed in it like it came with no ta’wil at all. and without going into details of its meaning, they just believed in the general meaning.

    I’m glad you agree that the literal outward meaning is not intended.
    JazakAllahu khairan.

    Yes, the detailed literal meaning (kayfiyyah) is not intended, but the general literal meaning is intended (the linguistic meaning with no takyif – modality).

    And I hope the examples of similarity in names and difference in modality made my statement about general and detailed meaning more clear.

    Um Abdullah
    15-07-06, 06:01 AM

    I think you will find that the original post is in reference to the Deobandi Ulema. 


    I have tried to provide you some explanation directly from Deobandi sources. If it is still unclear to you then I suggest you seek out a Deobandi shaikh and ask him directly.


    May Allah reward you.
    wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

    What I didn’t understand is why the scholars at that time understood differently than the ur scholars of today.

    And if it does have to do with Ibn Arabi and other sufi scholars using language that can only be comprehended by certain people, then what is the use of their books and why even come up with this “concept”, that can be so confusing.

    I mean “tawhid” in Quran and sunnah and the explanation of Scholars of Salaf was very clear and simple, and is enough.
    Why make such complicated terms and concepts like wuhdat al-wujud, which caused some people (because of misunderstanding it -which you mentioned in ur post 

    (http://www.ummah.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1158528&postcount=5)) to go astray and believe in kufr.
    That is what is confusing to me.

    Um Abdullah
    15-07-06,                               06:47 AM

    correction: I meant the general meaning and the “details of” the meaning, not the detailed meaning.

    faqir
    15-07-06, 08:48 AM
    :salams

    Sister, I had actually typed out a point for point response but I feel this issue is best discussed in another thread dedicated to this subject – perhaps in the Muslim section of this forum.

    I do find this subject interesting. 
    Actually, I think that the difference between what you and I are saying is likely to be just an issue of semantics.
     I have been collecting some quotes from the Ulema regarding this issue as well – (see Fulfilling a Need of Clarifying the Creed of the Salaf and Khalaf Regarding Tafweed )

    (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13478

    Regarding the actual subject of this thread and the categorising of Tawhid – there is no problem with that. Yes, some have misunderstood Wahdatul Wujood – they should avoid this concept – no problem.

    :salams

    Universal_Islam
    15-07-06, 09:10 AM

    Salam alaikum,

    I completely believe in “Wahdat-ul-Wujud” and also “Wahdat-ul-Shuhud”.

    It is not something I believed just by reading books or listening to scholars. It is something that my heart was opened to it by Allah. And, I consider it the highest level of “Tawheed”
    Also, I believe that this “tawheed” is the tawheed of Prophets and Awaliya’. 

    However, since Islam and Quran addresses all level of “mind-capacities” and “personal acceptance”, people who don’t reach to the level of realizing that Allah is his creation, too, are also on the right track. This is Allah’s mercy. At the end, he gave everything its creation. 
    So, every person has special creation given to him by Allah guarded by unique Divine Name (The Lord) which gives him the knowledge -Allah gave him since pre-existance.

    the term “Wahdat-ul-Wujud” was coined later in Islamic history, but that doesn’t mean that the Prophet (saaws) didn’t have it. He had it as well as some of the companions, like AbuBak, Ali. AbuBakr once said: 

    “Whenever I looked at something, I see Allah behind it”. He is refering to that the reality behind the images sensed in this world is Allah and that the images are manifestation of his reality. However, we cannot comprehend that reality.

    Also, “wahdat-ul-wujud” is the at the deeper meaning of Allah’s Divine Name “Al-Ahad”, that is, it is completely different than the Name “Al-Wahid”

    Among the ancient scholars who had “ma’rifa” of Allah (and believed in wahdat-ul-wujud) are Al-Junaid, Abu Yazeed Al-Bistami, Al-Hallaj. Then, came Abdul-Qadir Al-Jilaani, then, Ibn Arabi, and many others.

    Also, one cannot attain the belief in “wahdat-ul-wujud” just by reading books or listing to shyoukh. It is a gift from Allah put into one’s inner sight. To reach to that level, one has to understand deeply different Islamic issues, like 
    (1) “Al-Qadar” (Pre-destination) to a very deep level, 
    (2) the secrets of “Kun Fa Yakoun” (BE and It is), (3) the deeper meaning of “creation”, and many others.

    People who believe in “Wahdat-ul-Wujud” are no longer see “cause-and-effect”, “reasons”,..etc. They perceive eveything as ‘KUN’ even their talks. They are no longer with the “creation”, they are with Allah. That’s why “Wahdat-ul-Wujud” remains absurb and mind-boggling to normal people or people who cannot perceive things beyond their appearance level.

    And for those who restrict the meaning of Quranic verses to one meaning, they are striping the Quran from its endless oceans of knowledge. 

    One verse (even one word or one letter) has different meanings on different layers. They are all true and consistent on that layer. Each one gets into the level of understanding according to his creation. This is Allah’s mercy and wisdom.

    so, no one can restrict a Quranic verse to one meaning and force others to believe in that meaning.

    Salam alaikum,

    Um Abdullah
    15-07-06, 01:16 PM

    Sister, I had actually typed out a point for point response but I feel this issue is best discussed in another thread dedicated to this subject – perhaps in the Muslim section of this forum.

    Did you start one?

    where is it?

    Um Abdullah
    16-07-06,                              07:40 PM

    Actually, I think that the difference between what you and I are saying is likely to be just an issue of semantics.
    That is incorrect.

    From your thread, that u posted the link to, and from what I know about ‘Asha’ira

    You (‘Asha’ira) say that the “literal” meaning of the attributes is not meant, and ur scholars did ta’wil to some of the attributes.

    And you say that the Salaf did tafwid of the meaning to all of the attributes of Allah ‘aza wa Jal, meaning that to them it was ambiguous, and only Allah knows its meaing; and that (the salaf doing tafwid of meaning) is incorrect, because the Salaf did confirm the literal meaning (linguistic meaning) and did tafwid of al-kayfiyyah (modality), so they believed in it like it came (with its literal linguistic meaning) but did tafwid to the details of the meaning (kayfiyyah – modality).

    and the proof of them confirming the literal meaning (without the details of it – the “how) is that they said, when talking about the meaning of “istawa ‘ala “,: it means ” ‘alaa” and “irtafa’a” (rose above) 

    and that is confirming the literal meaning without the details, because only Allah knows the details of the how, and Allah said in the Quran (laysa kamithlihi shay’ = There is nothing like unto Him).

    Also, saying that the salaf did tafwid to all the attributes, means they did it to the attributes of (sight, hearing, mercy, speech, greatness ..etc.), so these attributes would be ambiguous to them?!!

    Allah ‘azza wa Jal has “al-asma’ al-husna” (Most beautiful names), and the names would not be “husna” unless it had a meaning … and because His names are derived from His divine attributes it means that those attributes mean what they are, meaning the literal linguistic meaning.

    OUmmah
    07-06-09, 03:33 AM

    I was going to post a new topic asking does tableeghi jamat believe in wahadatul wajood , but found this in a search, so does anyone know if tj believe in it ?

    in_exile
    12-07-09,                                    11:19 PM

    look forget the terms wahdat ul wajood and forget about what you think of the tablighis and salafis and everything else…

    the way to settle this argument is to read what each person has said..

    these guys say that Allah (swt) is one and that he is separate from his creation and he is not like his creation and that his existence is completely independant of his creation and that his creations existence is completely dependent on him, that all that is important in existence if Allah (swT) and his will and everything else is secondary to that and is irrelvent, meaning cannot be compared…

    now do you agree with the above?

    Usmi
    12-07-09, 11:55 PM

    wahdat ul wujood is basically saying that Allah is Independant in His existence

    wahdat–oneness
    wujood–existence.

    And that all his creation exists becoz of Him creating them..so infact Allah is the Only One that Exists because He is independant and Self-Sufficient.

    Theres nothing to refute about…its not going against Islam.

    Only the salafi’s have a problem with it…they term it as pantheism…which is very wrong and does not describe it.

    Abu ‘Abdullaah
    13-07-09, 12:15 AM

    I’ve read about one concept that says only Allaah exists, and that the creation is nothing but an illusion. It might have been in one of Harun Yahya’s books.

    advghori
    13-07-09, 06:18 AM

    This is mind boggling.
    Yaa Allah save me from this fitna :rubeyes:

    Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

    What is Wahdat al-Wujood : 02 Criticism

    Abu Mughira
    02-07-06,                               04:21 PM

    Refutation of Wahdat al-Wajood in light of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah 

    __________________________________________
    The clear belief of Allah’s being upon his Throne is itself a refutation of Wahdat al-Wajood and those who say, ‘Allah is everywhere.’

    (A) Numerous Qur’aanic verses state that Allah, the Exalted is above His Arsh (Throne) in a manner that befits His Majesty and Glory. Allah says: 

    “Your Rabb (Lord) is Allah, Who created the Heavens and the earth in six days and then rose above His Arsh (Throne), He manages all things.”[1] 

    Additional six similar verses are found in the Qur’aan. Numerous verses in every Soorah also indicate the same, from amongst them are,

    “He is irresistible, above His slaves, and He is the All-Wise, Well-Acquainted with all things.”[2] 

    “To Him ascend (all) the good words, and the righteous deeds exalt them.”[3]

    (B) Numerous Ahaadeeth of Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) clearly prove that Allah, the Exalted, is above his Throne and not among His creation in essence.

    1. Muawiyah Ibn al-Hakam (radhi allahu anhu) said:

    “I had a servant girl, who used to tend my sheep in the area of mount Uhud…. One day, I came to see them only to find out that a wolf had made off with a sheep from her flock… (for which) …I gave her a terrible slap in her face. When I came to Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) with the story, he considered it to be a grave thing for me to have done so. I said: “O Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam), couldn’t I free her?” He replied: “Bring her to me.” So I brought her. He (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) then asked her: 

    “Where is Allah?” She replied: “Above the Sky.” He (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) then asked her: “Who am I?” and she replied: “You are Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam).” So, the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) said: “Free her for she is a true believer.”[4]

    2. Abu Saeed al-Khudree (radhi allahu anhu) reports that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) said: 

    “Do you not trust me, and I am the trustworthy servant of Him, Who is above the sky. The news of the Heaven comes to me in the morning and in the evening.”[5]

    3. Abu Hurayrah (radhi allahu anhu) reported: 

    “The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) said: 
    “When Allah completed the creation, He Wrote in a Book (which He kept) with Him above His Throne: “Verily, My Mercy precedes My Anger.”[6]

    4. The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) said: 

    “Every night when it is the last third of the night, our Lord, the Superior, the Blessed, descends to the nearest Heaven and says: ‘Is there anyone to invoke Me so that I may respond to his invocation? Is there anyone to ask Me, so that I may grant him his request? Is there anyone asking My forgiveness, so that I may forgive him?’”[7]

    5. It is mentioned in Saheeh al-Bukharee, the wife of Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam), Zaynab bint Jaysh (radhi allahu anha) used to boast to the other wives of the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) that their families gave them away in marriage to the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam), while Allah from above the Seven Heavens gave her away in marriage.”[8]

    (C) The Fitrah (Natural Inclination)

    The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) said: 

    “Every child is born in the state of Fitrah (i.e. a Muslim). Then his parents make him a Jew, Christian or a Zoroastrian.”[9] 

    It is against the conviction of natural pure Fitrah to believe that all creation is Allah, which also includes filth and dirty places. No sane Muslim would ever accept such corrupt and immoral belief about His Lord, except him who has lost his senses or his Fitrah has been corrupted, as the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) stated: 

    “…Then his parents make him a Jew, Christian or a Zoroastrian.”

    Even a simple-minded Hindu in India remember the Lord as, “Uper-wala” or ‘the One Who is above’. The disbelieving Pharaoh too was naturally inclined to this belief, 

    “…The Pharaoh said, ‘O Haamaan, build a lofty place for me so that I may attain the ways of (reaching the) Heavens for me to behold the God of Moosa…”[10]

    (D) Isra wal-Meraj

    Another manifest proof that Allah is above the Seven Heavens is the miraculous event of Isra wal-Meraj, during which Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) was taken above the Seven Heavens to meet Allah, the Exalted. If Allah is present everywhere and in everything, (Na’oodho billah); the virtues and wisdoms behind the journey of Meraj would prove to be insignificant and worthless!
    ===========

    Footnotes

    ===========

    [1] Soorah Yunus (10): 3-4.

    [2] Soorah al-An’aam (6): 18.

    [3] Soorah Faatir (35): 10.

    [4] Saheeh Muslim (Eng. Trans.) vol. 1, p.271-272, no.1094.

    [5] Saheeh al-Bukharee (Eng. Trans.) vol. 8, no: 67, and Saheeh Muslim (Eng. Trans.) vol. 2, no: 742.

    [6] Saheeh al-Bukharee (Eng. Trans.) vol.9, p.382-383, no.518) and Saheeh Muslim (Eng. Trans.) vol.4, p.1437, no.6628)

    [7] Saheeh al-Bukharee vol: 9, no: 586 and Muwatta no: 15/30. Transmitted in Sharh as-Sunnah at-Tirmidhee no: 2601.

    [8] Saheeh al-Bukharee (Eng. Trans.) vol. 9, p.382, no: 517.

    [9] Saheeh al-Bukharee, vol. 8, no: 597, and Saheeh Muslim, vol. 4, no: 6423.

    [10] Soorah Ghaafir (40): 36-37.
    Abu Mughira
    02-07-06, 04:22 PM
    Additional Proofs from the Sayings of our Pious Predecessors (as-Salaf as-Salih)

    _________________________________________________
    Abu Bakr (radhi allahu anhu): Abdullah Ibn Umar (radhi allahu anhu) reported: 

    “When the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) was taken (passed away). Abu Bakr (radhi allahu anhu) entered and kissed his (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) forehead and said: “May my father and mother be sacrificed on you! You were good in life and in death.” Then he remarked: 

    “He who worshiped Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam), then Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) is dead. (But) he, who worships Allah, then Allah is above the sky, He lives and does not die.”[1]

    Imam Malik (d.179H): Abdullah Ibn Naafi reported that Malik Ibn Anas (rahimahullah) said: 

    “Allah is above the sky and His Knowledge is in every place, not being absent from anything.”[2]

    Shaikh al-Islam Abdullah Ibn Mubarak (d. 181H): 

    Alee Ibn al-Hasan Ibn Shaqeeq reports, I asked Abdullah Ibn al-Mubarak: 

    “How are we to know our Lord?” He replied: 

    “He is above the seventh Heaven above His Throne. We do not say as the Jahmiyyah[3] say, He is here on the earth.” 

    This was mentioned to Ahmad Ibn Hambal (rahimahullah), he stated: “That is how it is with us (i.e. how we believe).”[4]

    Imam Muhammad Ibn Idrees ash-Shafi’ee (d. 204H): 

    Abu Thawr and Abu Shuaib both reported that ash-Shafi’ee said: 

    “The saying which I found and hold regarding the Sunnah, those which I have seen Sufyan, Malik and others believing in are; ‘the testification, ‘None has the right to be worshiped but Allah and Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) is the Messenger of Allah’, Allah is above His Throne over the Heavens, He draws near to His creation as He wishes and descends to the lowest Heaven as He wishes….”[5]

    Imam Ahmad Ibn Hambal (d. 241H): 

    It was said to Abu Abdullah (Imam Ahmad): 

    “Allah is above the seventh Heaven, over His Throne, separate from His creation. His Power and Knowledge are in every place.” 

    He said, “Yes, He is above the Throne and His Knowledge is in every place.”[6]

    Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah writes, ‘the early generations of Muslims and their Imams were in complete and unanimous agreement that the Lord is separate and distinct from His creation.’[7]

    These are few sayings of the scholars, Adh-Dhahabee has collected more than two hundred sayings of the early scholars in this regard in his book al-’Uluw.[8]

    Misconception Cleared

    _______________________________________________
    A number of Qur’aanic verses indicate the nearness of Allah to His creations, one among them is “He is with you, wherever you are…”[9]

    The nearness of Allah to His slaves refers to His Absolute Knowledge, as is also explained by Imam Ibn Katheer (rahimahullah) in his Tafseer of the above mentioned verse. 

    He says, “meaning, He is Watching over you and Witnessing your deeds wherever you may be, on land or on sea, during the night or the day, at home or in open areas or deserts. All of that is the same before His Knowledge and all of it is under His Sight and Hearing. He hears your speech and sees wherever you are…”

    Thus, the nearness in the Qur’aanic verses is not by the Essence of Allah, but in Knowledge. Allah is As-Sameeh (the All-Hearer), Al-Baseer (the All-Seer) and al-Aleem (the All-Knower). He does not need to be among His creation to know their actions and conditions.

    Imam Ibn Katheer (rahimahullah) writes in the Tafseer of the verse, 

    “and Indeed, We have created man, and We know what his self whispers to him. And We are nearer to him than his jugular vein.” 

    Means, His Angels are nearer to man than his jugular vein. Those who explained ‘We’ in the verse to mean, ‘Our Knowledge,’ have done so to avoid falling into the idea of incarnation or indwelling; but these two creeds are false according to the consensus of Muslims. Allah is praised and glorified, He is far hallowed beyond what they ascribe to Him. The words of this verse do not need this explanation (that ‘We’ refers to ‘Allah’s Knowledge’), for Allah did not say, ‘and I am closer to him than his jugular vein.’ Rather, He said, “And We are nearer to him than his jugular vein.’ Just as He said in the case of dying person, “But We are nearer to him than you, but you see not.”[10]
    ==========

    Footnotes

    ==========
    [1] Reported by ad-Daarimee in ar-Radd ‘alal Jahmiyyah, with a hasan isnaad.

    [2] Reported by Abdullah Ibn Ahmad in As-Sunnah (p.5), Aboo Dawood in al-Masaa’il (p.263), Al-Aajuree in ash-Sharee’ah (p. 289) and al-Laalikaa’ee (1/92/2).

    [3] Jahmiyyah are the followers of Jahm Ibn Safwan, who was the first one to publicly declare the denial of Allah’s Attributes. Before long he denied the Attributes of Allah, he was killed and crucified by Khalid Ibn Abdullah Al-Khusari, Prince of Iraq. This took place during the era of the Tabioon, (students of the Companion). All the scholars at his time called him a Kafir on account of plainly denying the Attributes of Allah.

    [4] Reported by ad-Daarimee in ar-Radd ‘alal-Mareesee (p.24 and 103) and ar-Radd ‘alal-Jahmiyyah (p. 50) and Abdullaah Ibn Ahmad in as-Sunnah (p.7, 25, 35 and 72).

    [5] Mukhtasar al-’Uluww (l96).

    [6] Reported by al-Khallaal in al-Mukhtasar.

    [7] ‘Al-Furqaan bayna Awliya ar-Rahmaan wa-Awliya ash-Shaytaan’ by Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah on p.111.

    [8] ‘The Ever-Merciful Istiwa Over the Throne’ by Shaikh Abdullah as-Sabt deals with this subject in details.

    [9] Soorah al-Hadid (57): 4.

    [10] Soorah al-Waqi’ah (56): 85.

    Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

    What is Wahdat al-Wujood : 01 The Concept

    Ummah.com – Muslim Forum > Islam > General Islamic Topics > Wahdat al-Wajood!         What is it ?

    Abu Mughira

    02-07-06,                             03:13 PM

    1). What is Wahdat al-Wujood?
    ______________________________________________

    Wahdat al-Wajood or Wahdat ul-Wujood is a concept based upon the idea that nothing exists other than Allah, and creation is merely the manifestation of Allah. This implies that the creation is Allah, and Allah does not exist outside the creation.

    Hadhrat Imadadullah Mahajir Makki, the spiritual guide of the most prominent Deobandis, explains Wahdat al-Wajood in a booklet by the same name, with an example of a seed and a tree.

    He states that the seed is Allah and the creation is the tree with its stem, roots, branches and leaves. Initially, only the seed was present, and the entire huge tree was hidden in the small seed. When the plant grew into a massive tree, the seed disappeared. The seed is now manifest in this huge tree and does not have an existence outside of it.

    The Sufis consider the realization of Wahdat al-Wajood to be a matter of great wisdom. According to them, Tawheed (lit. making one) is a complete denial of existence for everything other than Allah, as explained by the Deobandis in ‘Irshaadul Mulook’ and ‘Ikhmaalush Shiyaam’, 

    “The root of Tawheed is the negation of the non-existent and transitory things and the confirmation of the everlasting thing.”[1] 

    “A concept which posits true existence for any being other than Allah is Shirk in Divine Attribute of Existence (Wajood).”[2]

    The Sufis consider this type of Tawheed to be suitable only for the ‘Spiritually Elite’, and claim that only those who have reached the ‘stage’ due to excessive penance and Dhikr are able to comprehend Wahdat al-Wajood.

    2). The Stages of Wahdat al-Wujood
    _______________________________________________

    The Sufis in their circles exaggerated greatly upon the concept of fearing Allah, and subjected themselves to constant and excessive mental anxiety. They express their fear in ways that are far from the Sunnah like in the story mentioned in Fazaail-e-Aamaal of a man who never lifted his face towards the sky and when asked the reason, he said, “I am ashamed! How can I lift up this sinful face to such a Great Benefactor.”[3]

    The effect of this anxiety was that they would enter a state of ecstasy or fall down unconscious or dead when hearing the Qur’aan, or music or even the singing of birds.

    1. ‘One saint relates: 

    ‘I saw Hazrat Shaikh Samnoon once swinging side from side in ecstasy while performing Tawaaf. I took his hand and asked him: “By the truth that you shall stand before Allah one day, I ask you, how did you reach Allah?” As soon as he heard the words, ‘stand before Allah’, he fell down unconscious…”[4]

    2. Another incident mentioned in Irshaadul-Mulook states, 

    “Hazrat Hafiz (Dhaamin) Sahib was fond of doves. One day when he approached the cage to feed the birds, one of the doves sang such a rapturous rhapsody that Hazrat Hafiz Sahib fell unconscious into an ecstatic swoon”[5]

    The effects of Qur’aan on those who listen with understanding have been mentioned in the Qur’aan. Listening to the Qur’aan causes the hearts to fear Allah, the faith to increase, the heart to soften and the eyes to shed tears.[6] But falling unconscious or dead, as a result of imposed anxiety is not the true fear that stems from the understanding of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah and such was never reported from the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) or his Companions.[7]

    Another good example of misunderstanding the proper way to love and fear Allah, and subjecting oneself to extreme anxiety can be seen in the following incident mentioned in Fazaail-e-Aamaal.

    It is said that Malik Ibn Deenar met a young man on his way to Hajj, walking on foot, with no provision or water. Malik Ibn Deenar offered him his shirt, but he refused saying: “…It is better to remain naked, than to acquire worldly shirts.” Later, when the Hajis (the pilgrims) put on the Ihram, read the Talbiyah, this young man kept silent and said, ‘I fear that on reciting ‘Labbaik’, a reply may be heard, “La Labbaik, La Sadaik” (Your cry is not heard and we do not return to you in Pleasure.) The young man justified his acts that were apparently opposed to the Sharee’ah by saying, “And blame me not for this love for Him, for if thou knowest the thing I see then surely will you never speak.” Later, when the pilgrims sacrificed the sheep, this young man asked Allah to accept his life as a sacrifice and then died shortly afterwards. 

    This story also claims that a voice from the Unseen said: “This is Allah’s friend, and Allah’s martyr.” Later that night, Malik Ibn Deenar asked the young man in his dream, ‘What did Allah do to you?’ He said: ‘I have gained a reward like that of the martyrs of the battle of Badr – Nay, even more… They died at the swing of the swords of the infidels, while I died by the sword of Allah’s love.”[8]

    3). Degrading oneself to the status of Dogs and Pigs
    _______________________________________________

    After having exaggerated and innovated in the concept of Allah’s love and fear, the Sufis began to compare their existence and stature to that of Allah, and found themselves to be completely insignificant in front of Him. 

    Exaggerating further in the concept of humility and modesty, they felt that they should degrade themselves in order to be truly free from Riya (showing off). Following are some examples of this…

    1. Moulana Zakariyah says that among the Akhlaq of the Sufiya is ‘to regard oneself as the most inferior…’ This has also been quoted as a saying of Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi by Moulana Zakariyah in Mashaikh-e-Chist (Eng. Trans.) p.255.

    2. Moulana Zakariyah says:

    “Hazrat Shah Ishaq Muhajiree Makki advised to Imdadullah Muhajir Makki: 

    “Regard yourself to be most inferior in the entire creation.”[9]

    3.Story is mentioned, 

    “A man, who used to fast throughout the year and offer Salaat throughout the night for thirty years. He was one of the regular attendants of the circle of Abu Yazeed al-Bastami (one of three mystic ‘masters’). Nevertheless, he was unable to find the kind of knowledge, which Abu Yazeed possessed! So, Abu Yazeed taught him that even if he fasts for three hundred years and offers Salaat throughout the nights of such period he would not be able to find even an ant-weight of such knowledge! When asked about the ‘cure,’ Abu Yazeed told him that he should shave his head and beard, hang a nosebag filled with nuts around his neck, gather some kids in the market around him and tell them, ‘Everyone who slaps me once, I will give him a nut!’[10]

    4. Shah Abu Saeed Naumani traveled to Balkh to his Shaikh in order to learn Sufism. 

    His Shaikh started his training by assigning him to look after the toilets. He was given little food but was not allowed to meet his Shaikh not was any Dhikr prescribed for him. After a considerable period passed, the Shaikh ordered a cleaner to dump a basket of dirt onto Abu Saeed. The cleaner did as he was told. This angered Abu Saeed and he threatened the cleaner, which meant that he was not ready to enter Sufism. After a period of time, the Shaikh again instructed the cleaner to do as before, but this time Abu Saeed got angry but did not say anything. Now too, Abu Saeed was not ready. After a period of time, the Shaikh instructed the cleaner to throw dirt on Abu Saeed again. On this occasion his Nafs was completely docile and submissiveness. He gathered the dirt, which had fallen to ground and strew it onto himself. When the Hazrat Shaikh was informed, he commented: “Alhamdulillah! The first stage has been traversed.”[11]

    Taking a step further, the Sufis began to address themselves as dogs, given that dog is generally looked down upon. 

    The Qur’aan says, 

    “So his description is the description of a dog: if you drive him away, he lolls his tongue out, or if you leave him alone, he (still) lolls his tongue out. Such is the description of the people who reject Our Ayah (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.).”[12]

    1. Moulana Muhammad Qasim, the founder of Darul-Uloom Deoband says in a poem, which has been recorded in Fazaail-e-Aamaal, 

    “Because of the huge amount of sins even the dogs treat my name as an abuse, but I am proud of your name and your relationship (Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam))… and I desire that my name may be included as a dog of (the streets of) Medina… May I live with the dogs of your Haram and when I die may my corpse be eaten by the vultures of Medina.” [13]

    2. Moulana Zakariyah advises a person in a letter that when he goes to the Prophet’s grave he should also say: 

    ‘One black Indian dog (Moulana Zakariyah Kandhalvi) also sends his salaams.’[14]

    3. Moulana Ilyas signs his letters addressing himself as 

    THE DOG OF PROPHET’s CITY [15]

    4). Denying the Existence of all the creation
    _______________________________________________

    The Sufis eventually denied their own existence and the existence of all the creation. They claimed that only Allah exists and nothing else. Having reached the pinnacle of misguidance, the Sufis took an extremely dangerous and opposite turn, whereby they explained that the existence of the creation does not negate Tawheed al-Wujoodi, because Allah is manifest in his creation. The creation is part of Allah Himself, and Allah does not exist outside his creation, as explained by Haji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki with the example of the seed and tree.

    Now the people, who did not consider themselves worthy of being called humans and referred to themselves as dogs, now consider themselves to be Allah and Allah to be in the detestable creatures like dogs and pigs![16] And Sufis like Mansoor al-Hallaj proclaimed ‘Anal-Haqq’ (I am the Truth, i.e. Allah) and Abu Yazeed al-Bastami said: ‘Subhani ma-Aadham-shaaani’ (far removed am I from all imperfections, how great is my state) (And these descriptions are only for Allah).

    From the above, we see the various stages of Wahdat al-Wajood in light of examples and quotes from the books of the Deobandis. What started with self-imposed anxiety led to degrading one’s existence to the level of dogs and pigs. Further exaggeration led to the complete denial of the existence of the creation, until finally it was claimed that all that exists is nothing but the Creator.

    This evil concept is a result of the Sufi’s gross misunderstanding and distance from the clear teachings of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah and arrogance in following one’s own whims and desires.

    The most overt and clear refutation of Wahdat al-Wajood is the unmistakable distinction between the Creator and the created in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. “Allah created all things and He is the Wakeel (Trustee, Disposer of affairs, Guardian) of all things.”[17] We are the creation and Allah is our Creator. He is the One in Whose Hands our affairs lie, and He is the One, Who truly deserves to be worshiped. His Attributes cannot be compared to ours and His Self is beyond our comprehension and imagination.

    5). Wahdat ash-Shuhood
    ______________________________________________

    Backing down from the extreme concept of Wahdat al-Wajood was the later innovated concept of Wahdat as-Shuhood. The Majlis ul-Ulema, the Deobandi lobby of South Africa, describes the believer in Wahdat ash-Shuhood as, a high ranking Wali whose soul dwells in a lofty state of Divine Presence and Perception.[18]

    From Irshaadul-Mulook,

    “To the Sufiya, the true Tawheed means the abandonment of every Tawheed during the state of Tawheed because any focus of the attention of any being other than Allah is within the scope of Tashbeeh (comparison).”[19]

    This concept implies that the creation exists, but due to the Sufi’s complete concentration upon Allah, the creation becomes oblivious to him. This concept just serves one purpose and that is to make excuses for the previous Sufis and their open statements of Kufr. Otherwise, this concept is too as baseless as Wahdat al-Wajood. The best and the most perfect worshiper of Allah – Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) – did not experience Wahdat al-Wajood or Wahdat ash-Shuhood.

    What the Sufis experience in the form of hallucinations or imaginations is due to the excessive physical abuse of their bodies and Shaytaan’s taking advantage of their venerable state of mind weakened due to starvation, anxiety and wandering in the wilderness.

    6). The Concept of Allah being everywhere
    _______________________________________________

    A closely related concept that has been spread among the masses is that Allah is everywhere. The people are expected to believe in this concept without questioning or pondering upon its implications. The saying, “Allah is everywhere by His Self (Dhaat)” opposes the guidance given in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. It is mentioned at seven places in the Qur’aan[20] that Allah (who calls Himself al-Alaa (the Most High), is above His Arsh (Throne). He is not within or among His creation in His Essence. However, He is all-Seer (as-Sameeh) and all-Hearer (al-Baseer), and Knows everything that the hearts conceal.

    The concept of ‘Allah being everywhere’ was neither the belief of the pious predecessors (as-Salaf as-Salih) nor the pious Imams (scholars) of Islam who came after them. For instance is the belief of Imam Abu Haneefah recorded by Ibn Abil-Ezz al-Hanafee in the explanation of “Al-Aqeedah at-Tahawiyah (p. 288)”

    Mutee’ al-Balakhee reported that he asked Abu Haneefah’s opinion about a person who says that he does not know whether his Lord is in the Heavens or on earth? Imam Abu Haneefah (rahimahullah) replied: “He has disbelieved, for Allah says: ‘The Most Merciful is above the Throne’[21] and His Throne is above His Seven Heavens.” Al-Balakhee then asked: “What if he said that Allah is above the Throne, but he does not know whether the Throne is in the Heavens or on earth? Imam Abu Haneefah replied: “He has disbelieved because he has denied that Allah is above the Heavens and whoever denies that He is above the Heavens, has disbelieved.”

    This is an example of how a large number of Hanafee scholars adopted an important matter of Aqeedah from deviant Sufi beliefs. Imam Abu Haneefah used the word “Kufr” or ‘disbelief’ for him, who denies that Allah is above His Arsh or above the Heavens, which show the great importance, which he gave to the matters of Aqeedah. This is an example of how those who affiliate themselves with the Hanafee Madhhab, only follow the Hanafee Fiqh, but not the Aqeedah (beliefs) of Imam Abu Haneefah.

    Likewise, various beliefs of Imam Abu Haneefah mentioned by Ibn Abil-Ezz al-Hanafee (in the explanation of “Al-Aqeedah at-Tahawiyah”) are contradictory with the ideas of the present day Deobandi scholars.

    7). Deobandi Scholars unanimously support the theory of Wahdat al-Wajood
    ______________________________________________

    Following are some quotes from the books of Deobandis…

    1. Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi says about his Pir (spiritual guide), 

    “Haji Sahib (Haji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) was greatly over-powered by Tawheed… As for Wahdat al-Wajood, it seemed as if he was an eyewitness to it. Once, he was listening to Soorah Ta-Ha, a condition overcame him when he heard the verse: “Allah! There is no God but He, to Him belong the Best Names (al-Asma al-Husna).” He said in the explanation (Tafseer) of this verse: “A question may be raised from the first part of this verse that since there is none other than Allah, (then) what are these Hawatith?[22] 

    The answer is thus, (as in the next part of the verse), ‘Lahul Asma al-Husna’ meaning that all are the Madhahar[23] (manifestations) of Him (Allah). Someone has said (in a poem): “In the garden, I saw every flower. Neither does it have Your color nor Your fragrance.” 

    Haji Sahib (Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) said: 

    “This poet is a Dhahiri (only aware of the outward matters). If he were an Aarif[24], he would have said: “In the garden I saw every flower. They all have Your color, they all have Your fragrance.” 

    However, expressing such sayings or relating them is not for everyone.”[25] 

    Click to view the Scanned Image of the Quote (http://www.ahya.org/tjonline/quotes/malfozathummat-1-244/malfozathummat-1-244.htm)

    Imdadullah Muhajir Makki has also written a book on Wahdat al-Wajood.

    2. Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi said, 

    “He (Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) used to say that the human being is outwardly a slave and inwardly (Batini) the Haqq (Allah).” Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi further elaborates, “The batin is the reality which is manifest in the human, and the batin should not be considered a part of the human…”[26]

    Click to view the Scanned Image of the Quote (http://www.ahya.org/tjonline/quotes/imdad-ul-mushtaq-62/imdad-ul-mushtaq-62.htm)

    3. Once, Moulvi Muhammad Ahsan, a resident of Mecca, expressed his skepticism on the issue of Wahdat al-Wajood to Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi. He (Moulvi Ahsan) remarked that this issue seems to oppose Eemaan. 

    Ashraf Ali Thanvi replied: 

    “Someday listen to my lecture on this issue, then you will yourself say that Eemaan cannot be complete without the belief in this (i.e. Wahdat al-Wajood).” 

    Then, Ashraf Ali Thanvi gave a speech of two hours on a Friday morning. After the lecture, Moulvi Ahsan could not help saying: “Belief in this (Wahdat al-Wajood) is so crucial that without it Eemaan cannot be understood.” 

    The biographer of Ashraf Ali Thanvi comments, 

    “Ashraf Ali Thanvi declared the belief of Wahdat al-Wajood as the completion of Eemaan. But Muhammad Ahsan went much further by saying that Eemaan rests on the belief in Wahdat al-Wajood.”[27]

    4. Ashraf Ali Thanvi says: 

    “You are amazed at people who claim Prophet-hood… People have claimed Lordship. However, nobody must think that Hussain bin Mansoor (al-Hallaj) in his saying, ‘Aanal-Haqq’ [I am the Haqq (Truth meaning Allah)] claimed Lordship (i.e. claimed to be God). Because upon him was a condition, otherwise he also believed in Abdiyaah (the state of being a worshiper) and therefore he offered Salaah. Someone asked him (al-Hallaj): “Since you are Allah, to whom do you prostrate?” He (al-Hallaj) answered: “I have two states, one outward and the other inward. My outward self prostrates to my inward self.”[28]

    Click to view the Scanned Image of the Quote 

    (http://www.ahya.org/tjonline/quotes/malfozathummat-1 251/malfozathummat-1-251.htm)

    5. Moulana Zakariyah says: 

    “Hazrat Shaikhul Islam, Moulana Madani said that the same kaifiyat (spiritual state) which constrained Mansoor al-Hallaj to proclaim: “Anal Haqq (I am the Truth i.e. Allah) prevailed for six months on Hazrat Mainji (Nur Muhammad) [who was the Pir (Shaikh) of Imdadullah Muhajir Makki].”[29]

    6. In Shamaaim-e-Imdadiyah, a story of a Fakir (hermit) who believed in Wahdat al-Wajood is mentioned. 

    After approving the Aqeedah of the Faqir, the author says: 

    “It is Shirk to differentiate between the worshiper (Aabid) and the Worshiped (Ma’bud)… To summarize, based upon the explanations of our predecessors, we understand that this position is Haqq (true) and there is no doubt about it. However, its reality is experienced only when a disciple becomes distant from his own self by striving hard and ignoring every danger. Because when a person becomes unaware of his self, he is unaware of everything. Nothing remains in his thoughts or his sight except Allah. Therefore, all concentration of the disciple is upon Allah. When nothing distracts his attention and he meditates his mind on Allah; then when he opens his eyes, he sees nothing but Allah. (At this stage) the Dhikr of Hu Hu (He He) turns to Ana Ana (Me Me). This stage is called Fanah der Fanah … (Similarly) from the special Ummah, Ba Yazid Bastami[19] said: ‘Subhaani maa Aadhaam-Shaani (Glory be to me, Far removed am I from all imperfections, how great is my state) and Mansoor Hallaj said: ‘Anal-Haqq’ (I am the Truth).[30]

    Click to view the Scanned Image of the Quote (http://www.ahya.org/tjonline/quotes/shamaim-imdadiya-35/shamaim-imdadiya-35.htm)

    7. From Shamaaim-e-Imdadiyah, 

    “In the stage of Uboodiyyah (The state of being Abd or worshiper), there are three meanings of the Kalimah – “Laa ilaha illa Allah” Laa Ma’bood (Nobody is worthy of worship) Laa Matloob (Nobody is desired) and Laa Mowjood (None exists), the last being the loftiest stage.”[31]

    Click to view the Scanned Image of the Quote (http://www.ahya.org/tjonline/quotes/shamaim-imdadiya-42/shamaim-imdadiya-42.htm)

    8. In the book Irshaadul-Mulook, a letter written by Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi to his Pir, Imdadullah Muhajir Makki, has been mentioned in which Rasheed Ahmad Gungohi writes at the end, 

    “In reality I am nothing. It is only Your Shadow – only Your existence (i.e. Allah’s existence). What am I? I am nothing. Only He is. You and me are Shirk upon Shirk.”[32]

    Comment: 

    In this letter, Rasheed Ahmad Gungohi informs his Pir, Imdadullah Muhajir Makki of his well being, and then says that in reality neither he, nor his Pir exists. And to differentiate between the Creator and the created is Shirk. Creation is only the Shadow of Allah. 

    So, then who is writing the letter to whom? Sufism is full of self-contradictions!!

    Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) mentions a story in relation to the theory of Wahdat al-Wajood in his book, ‘Al-Furqaan bayna Awliya ar-Rahmaa wa-Awliya ash-Shaytaan’ on page. 101, 

    “The book, ‘Essence of Wisdom’ of Ibn Arabee was read to at-Talmasani and said: “This book of yours goes against the Qur’aan.” 

    To which he replied: ‘The whole Qur’aan is associationism (Shirk), Tawheed is only found in our writings.” 

    Then it was said to him: “If all existence is only one, why is a wife Halaal to a man while his sister is Haraam?” 

    He said: “Both of them to us are Halaal, but he who is veiled says, Haraam! And so we say Haraam for you.’ 

    The Shaikh further mentions, ‘This person, aside from his blatant belief (Kufr), has also contradicted himself! 

    If all existence is one, who is the veiled one and who is the one who veils? 

    Thus, one of their Shaikhs said to one of his followers: ‘Whoever tells you that there is anything other than Allah in the Universe has lied.’ 

    The student then asked him: ‘Who then is the one who lied?’ 

    They said to another student: 

    ‘These are nothing but appearances.’ 

    He said to them: ‘Are these appearances other than that, you have introduced relativity (no unity of existence!) and if they are the same, then it is as I said.’

    8). Wahdat al-Wajood and Moksha
    ______________________________________________

    If one analyzes the Hindu concept of the relationship between God and mankind, he would be startled at the similarity between the Pagan concept of Moksha and the Aqeedah of Wahdat al-Wajood of the Deobandis and Sufis. Following are some excerpts from the book, “The Religion of the Hindus.”[33]

    “The Hindu scriptures teach that the ultimate end of human life is liberation (Moksha) from that finite human consciousness, which makes humans see everything as separate from one another and not as part of a whole. When a higher consciousness dawns upon us, we see the individual parts of the Universe as deriving their true significance from the central unity of spirit. This is the beginning of the experience, which the Hindu scriptures call, ‘the second birth’, or ‘the opening of the third eye’ or ‘the eye of wisdom’. The end of this experience is more or less permanent establishment of the inspiring consciousness, which is the ultimate goal of man.

    Our political and social institutions, our arts and sciences, our creeds, and rituals are not ends in themselves, but only means to this goal of ‘liberation’. When this goal is reached, man is lifted above his mortal plane and becomes one with that ocean of pure Being, Consciousness and Bliss called ‘Brahman’ in Hindu scriptures.

    The ultimate aim of man is liberation. Liberation is not only from the bondage of the flesh but also from the limitations of a finite being. In other words, ‘Moksha’ means becoming a perfect spirit like the Supreme Spirit.”

    ==========
    Footnotes
    ==========

    [1] Irshaadul-Mulook (Eng. Trans.) p.152.
    [2] Ikhmaalush-Shiyaam (Eng. Trans.) p.219.
    [3] Fazaail-e-Aamaal (Hindi Trans.) Virtues of Hajj, p.256. story no.3 (First Edition 1984 – Published by Idara Ishaat-e-Diniyaat).
    Fazaail-e-Aamaal (Eng. Trans.), Virtues of Hajj, Conclusion, p.233, story no. 3, (New Edition 1982, Published by Dini Book Depot – Delhi). 
    [4] Virtues of Charity and Hajj story no: 40, p.270 (New Edition 1982, Published by Dini Book Depot).
    [5] Irshaadul-Mulook (Eng. Trans.), p.22.
    [6] See Soorah al-Anfaal (8): 2, Soorah az-Zumar (39): 23, and Soorah Maryam (19): 58.
    [7] For more information refer to, “The Dispraise of al-Hawaa” by Dr. Saleh as-Saleh, p.74-75.
    [8] See Fazaail-e-Aamaal (Eng. Trans.) Virtues of Charity and Hajj story no: 4, p.234 (New Edition 1982, Published by Dini Book Depot – Delhi).
    [9] Mashaikh-e-Chist (Eng. Trans.) p.220.
    [10] Qut al-Quloob vol.2, p.70.
    [11] Mashaikh-e-Chist (Eng. Trans.) p.192.
    [12] Soorah a-A’raf (7): 176.
    [13] Fazaail-e-Aamaal (Eng. Trans.) The Virtues of Darood, p.164, no. 46. (Edn. 1985 – Published by Dini Book Depot, Delhi).
    [14] Savaneh Muhammad Yousuf, p.132. (India – Maktabaa Taalifaat Ashrafeeyah) 1304 H.
    [15] Makatib Hazrat Moulana Shah Mohammad Ilyas) compiled by Moulana Sayed Abul-Hassan Ali Nadvi – Idara Ishaat al-Diniyat, Nizamuddin, New Delhi) p.54.
    [16] See Al-Kashf anil-Haqeeqat as-Soofiyyah p.162.
    [17] Soorah az-Zumar (39): 62.
    [18] Mashaikh-e-Chist (Eng. Trans.) p.192.
    [19] Irshaadul-Mulook (Eng. Trans.) pp. 155.
    [20] This has been mentioned at seven places in the Qur’aan. Soorah al-Ar’af (7): 54, Soorah Yunus (10): 3, Soorah ar-Rad (13): 2, Soorah Ta-Ha (20): 5, Soorah al-Furqan (25): 59, Soorah as-Sajdah (32): 4 and Soorah al-Hadid (57): 4.
    [21] Soorah Taahaa (20): 5.
    [22] Hawatith : Things that do not exist originally, but come into existence later.
    [23] Madhahar : The point of manifestation. Here it means (according to the explanation of Haji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) that the creatures are nothing but the visible manifestations of Allaah. Just like Allaah’s Asmaa al-Husnaa (Beautiful Names) are not other than Him, similarly these Hawadith are not other than Him.
    [24] Aarif: a Soofi who has reached the stage of Ma’rifah, i.e. has gained knowledge through mystical means.
    [25] Malfoodhat Hakeem al-Ummat (a biography of Ashraf Ali Thanvi by Muhammed Iqbal Quraishi) vol.1, p.244
    [26] Imdadul-Mushtaq ila Ashraful-akhlaq (Urdu) saying no.74, p.62.
    [27] Maqtoobat wa-Malfoozaat Ashrafeeyah (Writings and Sayings of Ashraf Ali Thanvi), a biography by one of Thanvi’s Khaleefahs, Moulana Muhammed Shareef p.185-186.
    [28] Malfoozat Hakim al-Ummat (a biography of Ashraf Ali Thanvi by Muhammad Iqbal Qurayshi), vol.1, p.251. The same belief is found in the poem of Ibn al-Faridh, which he entitled, Nudhum As-Suluuk.
    [29] Mashaikh-e-Chist (Eng. Trans.) p.213.
    [30] Abu Yazld bin Tayfur bin ‘Isa al-Bistami, one of the founders of Soofism hailed from Bistam, a town in the Iranian province of Khamis.
    [31] Shamaaim-e-Imdaadiyah, p.35 and 36. Sai Baba used to make similar statements such as, “I am Parwardigar (Persian for God)” [The Life and Teachings of Sai Baba, p.4.]
    [32] Soorah al-Hajj (22): 6.
    [33] Shamaaim-e-Imdaadiyah, p.43.
    [34] Irshaadul-Mulook, (Eng. Trans.) p.11.

    Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment