[h786]

^perhaps relevant is the following passage from the biogrophy of Allama Tabatabai by Hamid Algar:

Quote

His defining characteristic, however, was an immersion in the world of ‘practical gnosis’ ('irfan-i 'amali), a strict regimen of ascetic self-purification leading to the direct perception of the suprasensory realm. Undeniably reminiscent of Sufism in a number of ways, this discipline involves affiliation to a teacher who is himself the heir to an initiatic chain.

so in which ways do they differ? perhaps there's differences emerging from the path of Ahlul Bayt . if anyone has heard sheokh osama's lectures on irfan- he usually says the spiritual path of the Ahlul Bayt - or something like that.

This post has been edited by h786: 13 December 2007 - 03:43 PM

[h786]

sorry i should rephrase; not his [sheikh osama's] lectures on irfan specifically; more his lectures in general; where he quotes the advice of Aimmah on various ethical matters. I really don't know about differences; i mean the shi'i ulama study the texts of the sunni urafa- like ibn arabi- so it maybe difficult for people not versed in irfan to say anything on it [like me lol]. Perhpas theres the issue of the Qutb- and walking on his path and by his teaching- for us shias we have Imam Mahdi but sunnis maybe deprived of his light. Perhaps the whole issue of Imamate gives a specific colour to shi'i gnosis; for example, the formal silsila's found in sunni islam arent always there in shiism as Imam can initiate them himself; i draw your attention to the book Light within Me where Allama talks about the 'weaver'. so maybe there are differences. Perhaps Imam Hadi is warning us (those not versed in irfan) instead of rebuking gnostics/gnosticm in general- perhaps rebuking pseudo-sufis though or those who claim without actually possesing this knowledge. Perhaps also there may have been a group of people at the time who were known as 'Sufis' and the Imam is specifically referring to them rather than irfan in general? just some thoughts.

to tell the truth, i feel very out of place on these issues, not something i can claim to know about- hence i should just not get ahead of myself ey.

This post has been edited by h786: 14 December 2007 - 09:38 AM

[Aily`]

To me, Imam (A.S.) is referring to people who pretend to be gnostic and ascetic and actually they are not. They are just pretenders and take material benfits out of innocent followers. These self-made ascetics are wolves in the cloak of sheeps.

Whereas while we look at other true sufis (or Arifeen in actual) we found them true lovers of Prophet (SAWW) and Ahlul-Bayt (A.S.) and they treuly abide by Shariah. "Light Within Me" is an excellent book in which Shaheed Muttahiri has discussed this matter.

In short, admonished are some self-made ascetics and sufis, but not the atcuall Path of Sufism (rather Irfan).

Aily`

[SpIzo]

Are there any traditions explicitly praising or encouraging the Sufis similar to above traditions condemning the Sufis explicitly?

There are scholars who believe that Aimmah (A) did not make any exception in regards to Sufis, it includes all of them.

Imam al-Hadi (a.s.) scolded him and shouted, ‘Do not say that! He, who acknowledges our rights, does not disobey us. Do you not know that they are the worst group of Sufis, though all Sufis are dissentient to us and their way is contrary to ours? They are but Christians and magi of this nation. They do their best to put out the light of Allah with their mouths, and Allah will not consent save to perfect His light, though the unbelievers are averse…’

[Bayynat]

SpIzo, on Dec 17 2007, 12:32 AM, said:

There are scholars who believe that Aimmah (A) did not make any exception in regards to Sufis, it includes all of them.

Do they consider ALL sufis as deviants? Who are these scholars?

[SpIzo]

The hadith itself is self-explanatory.

EDIT: Unless there are ahadith praising a particular group of Sufis, elsewhere.

[.InshAllah]

salam

I dont know how authentic this hadith is, and I havent seen any ahadith praising sufis, but maybe thats because at the Imams time they were all deceivers? I dont know. What I do know is that there are many sufis today who dont fit the description in the hadith 'they do not practice rites except to deceive people, and do not decrease food except to…cheat the fool…their worships are but dancing and clapping, and their praises are but singing'.

Many sunni sufis are actually really close to shiasm. they call Imam Ali their spiritual master and the mourn in muharram. They believe that the 12 caliphs hadith refers to the Imams, and they say Ya Ali! For example yanabi.com in past years has changed its website to red to mourn Imam hussain. Google sheikh ninowy as another example. Noones doubting that there are sufis who take the sharia lightly and are just deceiving people, but there are also some really pious people.

ws

[SpIzo]

.InshAllah, on Jan 4 2008, 01:13 AM, said:

I dont know how authentic this hadith is, and I havent seen any ahadith praising sufis, but maybe thats because at the Imams time they were all deceivers? I dont know. What I do know is that there are many sufis today who dont fit the description in the hadith 'they do not practice rites except to deceive people, and do not decrease food except to…cheat the fool…their worships are but dancing and clapping, and their praises are but singing'.

Brother .InshaAllah, Imam (A) is describing just one group of Sufis when he says "they do not practice rites except to deceive people" etc. .because he mentions later: Do you not know that they are the worst group of Sufis, though all Sufis are dissentient to us and their way is contrary to ours? - they are the worst group of Sufis, although ALL Sufis are dissident to the Ahlul Bat (A) and their teachings are contrary to the Ahlul Bayt (A).

Secondly, bro as I asked in the other thread - I don't contest that there are true pious people out there - but why the tag 'Sufi'? Especially since Aimmah (A) have cursed and condemned them with their tags ie. 'Sufis'?

[.InshAllah]

Quote

Brother .InshaAllah, Imam (A) is describing just one group of Sufis when he says "they do not practice rites except to deceive people" etc. .because he mentions later: Do you not know that they are the worst group of Sufis, though all Sufis are dissentient to us and their way is contrary to ours? - they are the worst group of Sufis, although ALL Sufis are dissident to the Ahlul Bat (A) and their teachings are contrary to the Ahlul Bayt (A).

OK, so does this mean all sufis at that time, or all sufis forever?

Quote

Secondly, bro as I asked in the other thread - I don't contest that there are true pious people out there - but why the tag 'Sufi'? Especially since Aimmah (A) have cursed and condemned them with their tags ie. 'Sufis'?

Well then I guess the problem you have is with people calling themselves sufis, rather than their actual practices? So if these pious people did the same thing but called themselves another name then youd have no problem?

What I understand from sufi is a person who is part of a group that has a sheikh, that get together and do thikr. And the sheikh is the spiritual leader of the group. If thats what sufi means today then its not such a bad thing? The Imam wasnt criticising everyone who gets together to do thikr with a sheikh (which is what I understand sufism to be today), but he was criticising people who called themselves sufis but were decievers.

ws

[Eman]

I think sis Spizo's question is valid -- "Why the tag 'sufis'?".
I think there should either be a different terminology so as to recognize the true Urafas, or maybe it's better if there were no such special terminology at all.... because as Allama Husayn Tabatabai explains while contrasting Sufi beliefs with Shia beliefs in LWM...

(ii) The sufi doctrine that there must always be a Qutb6 in the world and the qualities they attribute to him, correspond to the Shi'ah doctrine of Imamat. According to the "People of the Holy Prophet's Household" the Imam (in Sufi terminology the perfect man) is a manifestation of Allah's Names7 and is responsible for supervising and guiding all human activities. This being the Shi'ah conception of Wilayat, the great Sufis may be regarded as the proponents of the Shi'ah doctrine, though apparently they followed the Sunni school. What we mean to say is that the Shi'ites being the followers of an infallible Imam, already possess all that is indicated by the mystics. As a matter of fact the Qutb or the perfect man conceived by the mystics does not actually exist anywhere outside the Shi’ite world. Mere presumption is obviously quite a different thing.

This post has been edited by Petushki: 03 January 2008 - 08:39 PM

[faress]

Yes Exactly the same Notes I made it becomes dancing etc..but you lack to understand or what was not clear enough is that Sufism or Tasawuf is a branch in Islam when it means "Zuhd".!!!not Dancing and claping.please elaborate.

[SpIzo]

.InshAllah, on Jan 4 2008, 01:46 AM, said:

OK, so does this mean all sufis at that time, or all sufis forever?

Does the Imam (A) make an exception or a conditional statement or a time limit?

Quote

Well then I guess the problem you have is with people calling themselves sufis, rather than their actual practices? So if these pious people did the same thing but called themselves another name then youd have no problem?

It depends on what they practise and what the 'same thing' is.

When I said 'I don't contest pious people out there', I meant I respect the pious people but the question I asked was why would the pious people want to be known by tags/titles which Aimmah (A) have condemned and cursed? Especially, since there is no encouragement towards Sufis from their side.

And bro, it's not about my problem or that I'm against them because I would like to make it my problem.

Quote

What I understand from sufi is a person who is part of a group that has a sheikh, that get together and do thikr. And the sheikh is the spiritual leader of the group. If thats what sufi means today then its not such a bad thing? The Imam wasnt criticising everyone who gets together to do thikr with a sheikh (which is what I understand sufism to be today), but he was criticising people who called themselves sufis but were decievers.

Sufism is not just about convening a gathering with a spiritual leader doing dhikr, but it is also about holding beliefs which are contrary to the teachings of Ahlul Bayt (A).

You can read about the types of Sufis here [if you haven't that is].

Or I might as well post it so that everyone benefits:

===========

This group is divided among various sects but the basic sects are seven only.

1) al-Wahdatiyyah (unitarian):
This sect believes in the oneness of all existence. Its belief is that everything of this world is Allah so much so that they assign to even polluted things the same godly position. They liken Allah with the river and the waves rising in it and argue that the waves which sometimes rise and sometimes fall have no separate existence other than the river but their existence is exactly the existence of the river. Therefore nothing can be separated from its own existence.

2) al-Ittihadiyyah (the unitists):
They believe that they have united with Allah and Allah has united with them. They liken Allah with fire and themselves with iron that lies in the fire and acquires its form and property.

3) al-Hululiyyah (the formists):
Their belief is that Allah takes the form of those who claim to know Him and the perfect ones and their bodies are places of His stay. In this way they are seemingly men but really Allah.

4) al-Wasiliyyah (the combiners):
This sect considers itself to have combined with Allah. Their belief is that the laws of the shari'ah are a means of development of human personality and character and that when the human self combines with Allah it no more needs perfection or development. Consequently for the "wasilin" worship and ritual become useless because they hold that when truth and reality is achieved shari'ah remains of no avail. Therefore they can do anything and they cannot be questioned.

5) az-Zarraqiyyah (the revellers):
This sect regards vocal and instrumental music as worship and earns the pleasures of this world through a show of asceticism and begging from door to door. They are ever engaged in relating concocted stories of miraculous performances of their leaders to over-awe the common people.

6) al-'Ushshaqiyyah (the lovers):
The theory of this sect is that apparency is the means to reality meaning that carnal love is the means to achieve love of Allah. That is in order to reach the stage of Allah's love it is necessary to have love with some human beauty. But the love which they regard as love for Allah is just the product of mental disorder through which the lover inclines to one individual with all his attention and his final aim is to have access to the beloved. This love can lead to the way of evil and vice but it has no connection with the love of Allah. A Persian couplet says: The truth of the fact is that carnal love is like a jinn and a jinn cannot give you guidance.

7) at-Talqiniyyah (the encounterers):
According to this sect the reading of religious sciences and books of scholarship is thoroughly unlawful. Rather the position that is achieved by an hour of spiritual effort of the Sufis cannot be achieved by seventy years of reading books.

According to Shi'ah 'Ulama' all these sects are on the wrong path and out of the fold of Islam. In this connection numerous sayings of the Imams are related. In this sermon also Amir al-mu'minin has regarded the severance of 'Asim ibn Ziyad from this world as the mischief of Satan and he forcefully dissuaded him from adopting that course. (For further study see Sharh Nahj al-balaghah al-Hajj Mirza Habibu'llah al-Khu'i vol. 13 pp. 132-417; vol. 14 pp. 2-22).

===========

Secondly, bro, if it was just about the convening a gathering to do dhikr, wouldn't the Aimmah (A) have mentioned it somewhere? Something like, this type of Sufism is allowed, but this is not. Or something like, these are not real Sufis [as you said?]. At least, there would have been some kind of exception with regards to them?

Petushki, on Jan 4 2008, 02:07 AM, said:

I think sis Spizo's question is valid -- "Why the tag 'sufis'?".
I think there should either be a different terminology so as to recognize the true Urafas, or maybe it's better if there were no such special terminology at all.... because as Allama Husayn Tabatabai explains while contrasting Sufi beliefs with Shia beliefs in LWM...

Sis, what Allamah Tabataba`i [with respect to him] is saying that there are beliefs of Sufis which are similar to Shi'ite Islamic doctrines [which is of course contested amongst the Shi'ite scholars - because according to him, it is compatible while according to other scholars, beliefs of Sufis are not at all compatible with Shi'ism]. And therefore, the belief that there is a Sufism which is condemned and there is a Sufism which is not. Hence, the tag/title 'Sufis'. This is how it is justified.

But this is what we do not believe.

Cyan_Garamond, on Jan 4 2008, 03:20 AM, said:

What is criticized is not the brand name 'sufi', but those who belief that they can forgo the guidance of Ahle Bait for even an instant and at any stage or level. They mention their own sheikhs and do not emphasize Ahle Bait . That's my guess.

It's not about mentioning Shaykhs, although you are right about forgoing the guidance of Ahlul Bayt (A). It is also about the beliefs - for example the belief of 'Everything is Allah' or the belief of Wahdat al-wujud, etc. . . which is justified as an Islamic belief.

I've come across more traditions against Sufis, but I would like to check with them first before I post them.

And again, if anyone can post a tradition praising/encouraging Sufis explicitly, then please do so.

[.InshAllah]

salam

Quote

Does the Imam (A) make an exception or a conditional statement or a time limit?

To be able to apply the hadith to all sufis alive today you have to prove what exactly sufism meant at the time of the Imam, and that it means the exact same thing today.

Quote

It depends on what they practise and what the 'same thing' is.

Hold on, if it depends on what they practice, then that means that not all sufis are included under what the Imam says? Because there could be people whho call themselves sufis, but only practice good things that bring them close to Allah swt, eg, doing thikr together, without any deception...etc.

Quote

1) al-Wahdatiyyah (unitarian):
This sect believes in the oneness of all existence. Its belief is that everything of this world is Allah so much so that they assign to even polluted things the same godly position. They liken Allah with the river and the waves rising in it and argue that the waves which sometimes rise and sometimes fall have no separate existence other than the river but their existence is exactly the existence of the river. Therefore nothing can be separated from its own existence.

All shia philosophers believe in unity of existence. Imam Khomeini, Allamah Tabatabai, Sheikh Mutahari... And they differentiate between existence and existants. Theres only one Existence, but many existants, according to them.

Quote

2) al-Ittihadiyyah (the unitists):
They believe that they have united with Allah and Allah has united with them. They liken Allah with fire and themselves with iron that lies in the fire and acquires its form and property.

All the irfan books talk about becoming 'one' with Allah swt. I dont know enough to tell you exactly what that means with certaintly, but what it doesnt mean is that they literally become Allah swt. They talk about forgetting their own existence, seeing ALlah swt in everything...etc. I think thats what they mean.

ws

[SpIzo]

.InshAllah, on Jan 5 2008, 02:44 AM, said:

To be able to apply the hadith to all sufis alive today you have to prove what exactly sufism meant at the time of the Imam, and that it means the exact same thing today.

The onus of presenting proof lies on you, not me, bro. You have to prove that the hadith does not apply to all Sufis or that it does not mean the exact same thing today.

Even if I’ve to prove it you, I’ve already presented ‘the types of Sufis’ whose beliefs are today justified as Shi’ite beliefs. You yourself have justified two of them.

Quote

Hold on, if it depends on what they practice, then that means that not all sufis are included under what the Imam says? Because there could be people who call themselves sufis, but only practice good things that bring them close to Allah swt, eg, doing thikr together, without any deception...etc.

“It depends on what they practice” because if they practice gnosis adulterated with Sufi tendencies or other foreign practices, without referring themselves as Sufis, then there is still a problem. While, if the `urafa practice gnosis strictly referring to the Qur’an and Ahlul Bayt (A) without adopting any other foreign thought, then there is no problem. And such `urafa wouldn't call themselves 'Sufis' in the first place.

Quote

All shia philosophers believe in unity of existence. Imam Khomeini, Allamah Tabatabai, Sheikh Mutahari... And they differentiate between existence and existants. Theres only one Existence, but many existants, according to them.

No, all don’t.

Quote

All the irfan books talk about becoming 'one' with Allah swt. I dont know enough to tell you exactly what that means with certaintly, but what it doesnt mean is that they literally become Allah swt. They talk about forgetting their own existence, seeing ALlah swt in everything...etc. I think thats what they mean.

Again, all don’t. As Cyan has said above, the Mashhadi scholar, Ayat. Mirza Mahdi Isfahani didn’t. In fact, he refuted all these views through the teachings of Ahlul Bayt (A). You can read one of his books here [although it is not as comprehensive].

Sayyed Sistani follows him and conveys his opinion in this matter. Well, because of the fact that he was his teacher.

[.InshAllah]

salam

Quote

The onus of presenting proof lies on you, not me, bro. You have to prove that the hadith does not apply to all Sufis or that it does not mean the exact same thing today.

Why is the onus on me? You cant just assume that all of the sufis today have the same beliefs as those of the past. You have to show me from the words of the Ahlul Bayt [as] what the sufis believed that made them contrary to the teachings of the Ahlul Bayt, and that ALL sufis alive todays hold these beliefs. Is there a hadith where the Imams say the sufis are condemned because they believe in unity of Existence, or anhilation in Allah swt?

Quote

Even if I’ve to prove it you, I’ve already presented ‘the types of Sufis’ whose beliefs are today justified as Shi’ite beliefs. You yourself have justified two of them.

Not just me, Ayatollah Khomeini, Shaheed Mutahari and Allamah Tabatabai as well. These are amongst the greatest scholars who have ever lived, although of course youre entitled to your own opinion.

ws

This post has been edited by .InshAllah: 06 January 2008 - 09:39 PM