Accueil English pages Articles written Shaykh al-Alawî - A kind word in response to those who reject sufism - CHAPTER FIVE: PROTECTING THE DOCTRINE
Shaykh al-Alawî - A kind word in response to those who reject sufism - CHAPTER FIVE: PROTECTING THE DOCTRINE
English - Articles written
Écrit par Ahmad al-Alawî   
Mercredi, 14 Septembre 1921 13:40
Index de l'article
Shaykh al-Alawî - A kind word in response to those who reject sufism
ABSTRACT
DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
TRANSLATOR’S INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER TWO: THE DEFENSE OF THE SCHOLARS
CHAPTER THREE: PROOF OF SUFISM
CHAPTER FOUR: PERMISSIBILITY OF SPECIFIC PRACTICES OF THE SUFIS
CHAPTER FIVE: PROTECTING THE DOCTRINE
KEYWORDS
GLOSSARY OF ARABIC TERMS
NOTES
REFERENCES
Toutes les pages

 

CHAPTER FIVE: PROTECTING THE DOCTRINE

All this can be gathered [107] from his saying ‘…some of them...’ to the end of what he mentioned about the conditions which he considered to be nothing but misrepresentation.

 

What helps us to know that he has acknowledged the Sufis is, when he mentions in one of his statements, ‘… no person would think that what he mentioned is a rejection of any pledge to be taken from its people for themselves with its condition. Since the pious ancestors (Salaf), may Allāh allow us to benefit from them, followed the same way’. He continued by saying, ‘… neither do I reject any association towards the Shaykhs with its condition.’ After an overall discussion he mentions some of the morals of the people of Sufism as follows, ‘So these were their states and excellent conduct and they are an example for those who will come after them and cling to their path. I ask Allāh not to turn us away from their state.’

 

This is some of what (al-Madkhal) contains, which is a proof that its author had a regard for the doctrine of Sufism, like other great scholars beside him. He is innocent from that which you have ascribed unto him, since you have purposely and selectively quoted in order to harmfully mislead the one who has no knowledge of the author of (al-Madkhal). Had it not been for his book bearing testimony in his favour, it would have been assumed that he followed your belief in the condemnation of Sufism. Your example is like that which has been narrated from Abū Darda, where he says that the Messenger of Allāh said, ‘The example of the one who sits and listens to wisdom and only speaks bad of what he has heard from the speaker, is like a man who goes to a shepherd asking,‘ Shepherd, donate unto me a sheep from your herd.’The shepherd tells him, ‘Go and take by the ear of the best sheep.’ He then goes and takes by the ear of a sheepdog.’ In this Prophetic narration is the clearest comparison of what you did with the author of (al-Madkhal) and others from whom you have transmitted.

 

The sufis, saints or charlatans

As for that which Tartusi and others mentioned, according to what is understood from his transmitted chapters, this is not his true belief about Sufis. This is the very chapter you relied on when you said,

‘He says in (al-Madkhal) ‘the chapter which mentions some of those who imitate the Shaykhs, and [108] people of power and this is a wide and diverse chapter. Whilst it is almost impossible to encompass all of it due to its vastness, we shall refer to some of it. Amongst them are some who claim to be pious and religious and that they are of the people of union (with Allāh). He relates the stories of some of the great men who have passed and then decorates his own speech with it. In this way he would claim these states upon himself, claiming that he has a part in it and amongst them are some who confer on themselves miracles, breaking through the usual course of nature, while being deprived of it by the characteristic which opposes it. Then there is the one amongst them who claims to have seen Khidr who confirm it with an oath so that its acceptance could be more convincing. Then there are some who, when he wishes to set forth an idea in order to camouflage the masses into believing his speech and that he is amongst the pious. He places before them the quotation of evidence from the Book of Allāh, 'On the day of Judgement wilt thou see those who told lies against God;-, Their faces will he turned black' [39:60]. He would also swear by Allāh to this evidence and that he definitely has seen and he was addressed through his heart.’

 

In reply I say that I do not reject the existence of misrepresentation of certain individuals amongst the pious for such is Allāh's way with His creation. Some people have even claimed Prophethood and there is no dispute in all this. The only dispute is your rejection of the doctrine of Sufism and your degrading and accusing of heresy the groups of dhākirūn whichever group they may belong to. What the author of (al-Madkhal) has mentioned is a probability, since what is it that tells you or him that there cannot be sincere ones amongst the individuals referred to, whereas that which is hidden belongs to Allāh. The Messenger of Allāh (blessings and peace be upon him) has said, ‘Allāh has hidden three in three things…’ and one of these is, the Wali hidden in His creation. For this reason the having of a good opinion is one of the most important qualities of this religion. Shaykh Abdul Wahab Sharani says in book (Al-Minan), ‘One of the blessings which Allāh has bestowed upon me, is the veneration of everyone upon whom I see the appearance of the Sufis and the characteristics which they display.'[109] ‘This and its like can only appear from someone who believes in the existence of piety within those who are attached to Allāh Most High and not from those who removethe good from the Community in general. Then you said,

‘A man has already claimed all that which has been discussed, but I will add more to his long citation. Some feebleminded and those who are knowledgeable have been deceived by him. He claims that he has a perfect state, but Allāh has exposed all of them so that they would be an example for those who reflect.’

 

We have always found you to be careless in what you have transmitted, but as for attributing this shame to the one who claims all this, is correct if it happened according to what you have mentioned. But to ascribe it to the one who believes all this, then no, because Allāh has left him to deceive himself.

 

'Umar Ibn Abdul 'Aziz (may Allāh be pleased with him) said,’The one who has deceived us with Allāh has only deceived himself.’ Yes, a liar cannot deceive the one who has a bad opinion, just as he cannot benefit from someone who tells the truth. He is in actual fact deceived by Satan, the supreme liar, since he has caused him to have a bad opinion of the dhākirūn . Yet, he did not know that the sign of the love of Allāh is the love for HIS dhikr and the sign of the love of His dhikr is the love for the dhākirūn . Are you not aware that the dhikr is a testimony to the faith of the person in any case and the one who opposes dhikr, will testify to the hypocrisy of such a person. We do not know what sin you have committed, but its punishment would be for you, because of your attacking the honour of the dhakirun.

 

Then you started to attach all that which is outside of their doctrine to the people of Sufism, when you quoted from the author of (al-Madkhal),

‘… and amongst them are those who claim to enter the fire not burning in front of peoples eyes.’ Should this be true, it is considered a reprehensible innovation since the condition of a miracle is to disclose it and to challenge with it. A charismatic gift is the opposite of that, because when he discloses it to people, [110] it is no longer karamah. They say by Allāh, unless it is in the case of a legitimate necessity, which requires disclosure. Some of them disclose their karamat by seizing and charming snakes. Whatever is in all of this is a contradiction to the noble law and deceiving the Community with that which has no reality, since many people do it for their livelihood. So how can it be considered a karāmah? And some of them eat snakes while they are still alive, which is forbidden, because its eating is not permissible, except if it is slaughtered in the manner prescribed by the law. This is according to those who hold the view that it is permissible to eat bearing in mind that it has no reality because it falls under magic and sorcery. Sorcery is forbidden unanimously, so how can he be a saint notwithstanding that he has committed the acts that are forbidden? Amongst them are also some who do not take off anything from their body. This is ugly and abominable, because it resembles the practice of the monks. It is also dirty and spreads disease as well as the fact that it is prohibited. There are those of them who wear the fibre and things that do not cover the private parts.’

 

In my opinion, whatever you have gathered in this section has no aim other than defaming the honour of the Sufis and defiling their character. Your intention is also to affirm that which you have placed in the mind of the reader that this is the Sufi’s character. Far be it that the one who has regard for the principles of Sufism, knowing its laws, to believe that this is the legality of the Sufis or that which they rely on. Their writings have the most adequate proof if they have ever said that or instructed it and whoever invents something will bear its punishment. Sufism will always remain a sun that will never be darkened and a full moon that will never sink, as long as the Sunnah is acted upon and the protected. Provided the Law governs over the Sufis and others. The Sufis have more knowledge about Allāh's religion than you and your kind. I could almost say that they are the most knowledgeable servants of Allāh concerning Him and His laws. The doubts will be removed [111] on the day when man will be gathered before Him!

 

In the end what you have implied by way of allusion, you sanctioned the opposite by you yourself saying,

‘… and amongst them are those who wear patched clothes which the Commander of the Righteous 'Umar bin Khattab (may Allāh be pleased with him) prohibited from wearing known to us as Bu-Darbalah, to the point that some of the general people named their children Bu-Darbalah which has the meaning of piety. This is amongst the disgusting nicknames in the Law.’

 

In reply I say that it is your nature to reject things and then affirm it with mere opinion without considering Allāh’s judgment in it, as you have mentioned the prohibition of the wearing of patched clothes attributing it to Sayyidina 'Umar bin Khattab (may Allāh be pleased with him). That which is more widely known, is contrary to it since he made use of it himself. The reports have recurred from a number of sources and one of it is the narration of Anas Bin Malik (may Allāh be pleased with him) who said, ‘I saw 'Umar ibn Khattāb circumambulating the Sacred House of Allāh wearing a coat in which there were twelve patches, one of which was from tanned skin.’ Thus, what you have mentioned about Umar’s prohibition of wearing a patched garment is farfetched, whereas it is confirmed that he wore it himself. So is it correct for him to prohibit a moral and then carry out the like of it? Especially when the law-giver has made it permissible according to a narration in which he (blessings and peace be upon him), said to Áishah (may Allāh be pleased with her), ‘ If you want to follow me, do not shed a garment until you have patched it.’ And there are more examples of this kind, but we do not know what it is that you have attributed to Sayyidina'Umar (may Allāh be pleased with him). Is it merely falsification on your part or a weakness in the narration or a restricted prohibition?

 

Wearing patched clothing

He would not prohibit that which is allowed by the Law nor make it permissible except for a reason that would restrict certain individuals, if that was the case. In any case, you do not ascribe the words of its narrator to his narration nor a transmitter to his transmission. This is from the point of view of what relates to the prohibition of wearing patched [112] garments.

 

As from the point of view which relates to your poor style of expression which you have constructed in this sentence, it requires that the argument be avoided. One of the qualities of the incompetent person is that the truth cannot be obtained from falsehood, so what is this useless roaring without any results? What is the benefit of your saying, ‘… to the point that some of the general people give their children the name Bu-Darbalah’? If it was a surname (kunyah) having before it a name, then especially with regards to what you have said that the meaning of Bu-Darbalah is piety, then from where have you taken this explanation? Oh, how far is it from its true meaning! Why do you not say that its meaning is possessor of patches? And then you said it is amongst the ugly nicknames (laqab) in the Law. Is it not a kunyah then? So what is the matter with you to call it a laqab? Then you restricted it to being ugly according to Law. How amazing is it not of people who, by their nature, make things ugly and then attribute it to the Law! Which Law has made that word ugly and which text is it in our Law that has defined Bu-Darbalah as one of the ugly nicknames? From which matter have you derived its ugliness, is it from the surname of Abū Hurairah (father of kittens), or is it from the surname Abū Turab (father of dust) which the Messenger of Allāh (blessings and peace be upon him) gave to `Ali bin Abu Talib?

 

What difference is there for example between the names cats, patches and dust until some of them are considered to be amongst the ugly words? It is very strange for you to say that the meaning of Bu-Darbalah is piety and then you said that it is one of the ugly names. In my opinion there is an enormous difference between ugliness and piety. They cannot be combined in one word, but if you had shown respect to the Law, you would not have been in such a hurry to ascribe any judgment without knowledge. Have you not heard his saying (blessing and peace be upon him), ‘Whoever passes judgment on people without knowledge is cursed by the angels of the heavens and the earth’? So what is it in this word that you should commit this crime with it compelling you to describe it as ugly according to the Law? I think [113] that you embarked boldly upon this in order to gain access to the defamation of those whom you are not ashamed to defame and this is what you said,

‘And from what is told, is that some of them would say to the Sufi, '… sell me your cloak …' and he would answer, '…when a hunter sells his net, with what will he hunt?' and if you look at the Sufis of our time possessing the characteristics according to what we have mentioned, you will find them to be the hunters of the people of shirk and confusion. Aside from the masses, people of knowledge have often fallen into shirk, as we have seen and heard. The masses in most cases do not fall into their abyss, except after those educated people have fallen into it. With that pseudo-ascription they are able to plunder the people's wealth with falsehood thereafter becoming rich after having been poor. Often they rely on those in authority, so that every one of them could attain to his goal.’

 

This is the cause that their weapons strengthens and their authority becomes manifest and this is the intended purpose of their actions. They are more harmful to the Muslims than the enemy and the people of usury (riba), because the usurer pays a little money in order to gain much from it. You know what is mentioned about the usurer in the Qur’ān and the Sunnah. The Shaykh of the Tariqah does not pay anything at all, while he takes the people's money using the religion. If such are his characteristics, then how can he still be considered as one of Allāh's saints?’

 

I can only say that I have never benefited anything from what you have mentioned in this statement more than what I know about your shamelessness and your lack of manliness. Modesty is a part of faith and he who is not modest in front of man, is not modest in front of Allāh. Have you not heard what Allāh has threatened the slanderers with? Has Allāh not prohibited you when He says, ‘Nor speak ill of each other behind their backs. Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Nay, you would abhor it’ [49:12]. Is this not amongst the major sins? Hasan al-Basri (may Allāh be pleased with him) narrated that the Messenger of Allāh (blessing and peace be upon him) said, ‘amongst the major sins is for a man is to display arrogant behaviour towards the [114] honour of his brother. Ibn 'Umar narrated that the Messenger of (blessing and peace be upon him) said, ‘Whoever harms a Muslim has harmed me and whoever harms me has harmed Allāh .’ (al-Jami` al-Saghir).

 

In any case, I think that you do acknowledge to the Islam of the Sufis. If so, then why all these afflictions which has committed you to your cause of defaming their reputation, since you have defiled them in every form and referred to them by every vice. If you had excluded anyone amongst them then he would have interceded for you regarding my correspondence to you. In this you have generalised by saying, ‘The intended purpose of their deeds is only to gain access in accumulating the world…’ and other things with which you have referred them with. Are you not aware of their asceticism, mortification of appetites and their turning away from the world, until they have become a proof against people of your kind, now and in the future?

 

Have you ever seen the one in whose heart the love of the world has become firmly established and mixed with his marrow, that he is able to cut himself off from the pleasures of the world of today in order to gain mastery over it in the future? This is one of the most obvious absurdities for the one who is able to use his reason. How is it possible to leave off something for the purpose of gaining access to it, even if we should say that their deeds were for that purpose. Would you have been able to do what they did, sincerely for the sake of Allāh so that you may be an example if you claim to be of those who are sincere. Nay ‘It is indeed hard, except to those who are humble…’ [2:45].

 

I have scrutinised carefully that which you have mentioned and found, Allāh knows best, that which you bear is only envy. In it is some kind of objection that you have towards Allāh in His allotment. Since He has bestowed upon them and deprived you and this is Allāh's allotment. Neither they nor you have any access to it. Do you not know that the company of the dhākirūn who are advanced to the foremost in guidance, Allāh has promised them the like of that.

 

Allāh says, ‘God has promised, to those among you who believe and do righteous deeds, that He will, of a surety grant them in the land, inheritance (of power), as He granted it to those before them; that He will establish in authority their religion- the one which He has chosen for them; [115] and that He will change (their state), after the fear in which they (lived), to one of security and peace’ [24:55]. And they have indeed become princes after they were poor. ‘For God bestows His abundance without measure on whoms He will’ [2:212].

 

We have most certainly, by Allāh, given up the world, yet you summoned us, and we became unmindful of it, yet you attached us, and we will continue to resist it with our hearts, while she (world) still comes after our track, thus she is one of our followers and you are one of her followers, ‘That is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing’ [36:38] whether you like it or not. But I wish that Allāh pardons you and forgives you before you quiet down soon, because death is near and that which you have pursued is difficult. Then, after you presented your slander in detail, you said with the aim of advice to the Muslims so that they may adhere to your abominable belief about the dhakirun,

 

‘So become aware and alert, and do not become like the misled and deceived ones who have become immersed in their vessel and we do not speak with them except those of them whom Allāh has assisted by His Grace and His Honour, and we only speak with those who have never become immersed in their impure and evil vessel.’

 

In reply I say: Enough is all this by which you are occupied in defaming the honour of the dhākirūn, who have attached themselves to Allāh Most High, and all this is due to lack of faith, otherwise it would have prevented you from laying attacks on the dhākirūn and you would have contented yourself with their dhikr whatever the case may be, because it testifies to the Imān (faith) of its possessor, just as opposing the dhākirūn would testify to the hypocrisy of its opponent.

 

I ought not to prolong the discussion with one having this description, because some wise men were asked regarding those like you, ‘Why do you not admonish so and so?’ And they would say, ‘He has a lock on his heart and its key is lost.’ But I hope and pray to Allāh that the benefit of what we have written should not be lost whether it reaches (returns to) you or others beside you, so in whoever's hand our letter falls, [116] nothing stops him from comparing between the two speeches and then he lay down one of the books in respect of the other. I do not absolve myself (of blame), I am only absolving the doctrine from what you have attributed to it of ignorance, misguidance and idleness, until the one who has a clear mind is not deceived by the falsehood which your letter contains, and the shamelessness that you have pursued in it, with the purpose of deceiving the servants of Allāh and depreciating what Allāh has elevated, but the caravans are not hindered by the barking of the dogs.

‘But God will complete (the Revelation of) His Light, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).’ [61:8].

 

You said in one of your arguments (statements) which you have falsified,

‘Verily for the one who wishes for the safety and security of his religious and worldly affairs, it is incumbent on him to observe Allāh 's Holy Book, the sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and the path followed by the worthy ancestors (may Allāh be satisfied with them all). It is the one and only path leading towards Allāh , he should also refrain from all the innovations introduced by the innovators’

 

This is a word of truth and an authentic statement, however your intention with it was wrong, namely your statement, ‘and to refrain from all the innovations introduced by the innovators’

 

By this you implied that they are the Sufis, as well as that which they enjoined upon those whose wish it is to belong to them, and for the attachment, and for the companionship of the Murshid etc., Then you referred to yourself as a firm adherent of the Qur'an and Sunnah of the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him), and assuming the character of the ancestors in word and deed.

 

What a difference between the two groups! Like the difference between doubt and certainty. Here I am going to clear the clouds for you so that you may be just to yourself if you are of those of reason. By Allāh, what knowledge do you have of Allāh's Book? Where as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) spoke about it when he said,

‘Verily the Qur'an has an outer and an inner meaning, and restricted boundaries and boundless horizons.’

 

In another narration,

‘Verily every verse has an outer and inner meaning, restricted boundaries and boundless horizons, from seven to seventy interiors.’

 

So, have you acquired any of these inner meanings? Nay! You have never even encompassed its outer meaning, so where are you from [117] its inner meanings, its restricted boundaries and boundless horizons. Where is your understanding from the companions’ understanding of Allāh 's Book? Abdullah ibn Abbas has said,

‘If I should tell you what I understand about the commentary (Tafsir) of the verse in which Allāh says 'Through the midst of them (all) descends His Command.' [65:12], you would either stone me or call me a disbeliever (kufr)’

 

(Shar’ ani mentions this in his book ( Al-Yawakit Wa l-Jawahir).) And most certainly do I say that the meaning of some of the verses in the Qur'an which has escaped you is much more than what you have obtained from the entire Qur'an. Such is the aim (goal) amongst the elect of the Sufis, whom you claim to be your enemy. This is some of what relates to the Book of Allāh .

 

As for that which relates to the sunnah's of Allāh 's Messenger , I say: Verily the Sunnah is an expression of the way the Prophet was in his speeches, his acts and his states, and to sum it up: Whatever he spoke was wisdom, his silence was contemplation, his vision was a education, and his acts were obedience. As for his state, he was constantly with Allāh. He spent the night with his Lord, who gives to eat and drink. Where are you from these beautiful qualities? Do you think that the Sunnah is merely a movement of the tongue, or an expression of patched clothes? Nay, it is an expression (means) of following him in his sayings, his acts and his states.

 

As for the sayings and the acts, some of these were made possible by implication, and by showing the form outwardly. As for the (spiritual) states, these can only be obtained through companionship with the people of spiritual states, whom the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) referred to in his saying,

‘Frequent those whose faces will remind you of Allāh, whose speech will increase you in knowledge, and whose acts will awaken your desire for the Hereafter.’

 

The Sunnah in general is an expression of exalted morals and spiritual states, resembled in the Prophet. It is like a magnet for the one in whom it is found, attracting unto it special virtues, like the character of the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) which used to attract those who were in front of him, until everyone who associated with him (blessings and peace be upon him) adopted his character without being aware.

 

If you had your share (of it), you would have refined the followers [118] with your character. You would have trained them, like yourself, to be much silent; illuminated their inside by your radiance, until the spiritual state emanating from you would be enough as a form of education. Because it is purer and more eloquent than the speech of the tongue, in the sight of the people with the spiritual state.

 

However, everything is acquired from the people of its kind. So if you were to frequent the Sufis for a very short period of time with a special character of slave-hood, which is the intrinsic requirement, derived from the verse in the Holy Qur'an ‘O ye men! It is ye that have need of God: but God is the One Free of all wants, worthy of all praise’ [35:15]; then their exhortation (eminence) would have touched you, and their state (citation) would have made you happy, and your qualities would have been transformed. ‘God will change the evil of such persons into good’ [25:70], They did not obtain those exalted states, except through their application of the Prophetic Sunnah and following the way of the pious ancestors, until they were the worthy ancestors in every community for those who came after them. Shaykh Abū Madyan (may Allah be pleased with him) says in praise of them,

‘A people of distinct character wherever they dismount

There the traces of their perfume is left behind’

 

Furthermore, I wish to inquire from you: Do you think that your inner state possesses that which the companions of Allāh’s Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him) possessed of the Divine sciences and hidden secrets? If so, the distinction of the community of Muhammad (blessings and peace be upon him) would be lost. If the hidden secret of revelation were to circulate in the minds of the general people, there would be no benefit in occupying oneself exclusively with Allāh and turning one’s face towards Him. No exalted mind would hold this view. Everyone knows that what the secrets of the elect encompass of Divine Knowledge, is unlike that which is circulated by the general people and this is why Zainul Abidin said,

‘O My Lord! A jewel of knowledge, if I were to proclaim it

They would accuse me of being an idol worshipper.

The muslims would declare my blood permissible.

And they would consider the worse things done to me as beautiful.’[119]

And similar to this is what the Sultan of the lovers has said,

‘And beyond the words of the text lies a knowledge too subtle

To be grasped by sound intelligence

I obtained it, from and through my soul did I take it

And it was my soul that stretched out towards the gift’

 

Were it not for this and its like, there would be no need for a spiritual guide in the path of Allāh, whom you have rejected according to what is understood by your statement.

 

You said,

‘As for their saying, 'He who has no Shaykh, Shaytan is his Shaykh'.

What is meant by Shaykh here is an expert and a knower of Allāh , who teaches people the matters of the religion, so that they do not acquire knowledge by themselves, and form their own opinions. What is meant by Shaykh is not the ignorant Shaykh of the path, to whom the Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him) referred to when he said,

'At the end of time there will be ignorant worshippers and sinful reciters of the Qur'an.'

This is a most outrageous lie. If you say that what is meant by their saying,

‘He who has no Shaykh, then Shaytan is his Shaykh’,

 

What they mean by it is the Shaykh who is a teacher, because everyone acknowledges to the falseness of your statement; even the teacher himself will tell you, what they mean by the Shaykh is the Shaykh who guides towards the special knowledge of Allāh . He is the one through whose companionship the disciple benefits, from whom he learns refinement of character. His inward is illuminated by his radiance. He is the one who connects the disciple to Allāh by his glance. The Shaykh is the one who takes the disciple from the darkness of associationism towards the light of faith, from the light of faith towards the secret of certainty, from the secret of certainty towards the occurrence of witnessing and from the occurrence of witnessing, to being non-existent in creation. Here it is when the ‘Truth’ becomes his ears, his eyes, his hands and his feet, as mentioned in the authentic Prophetic narration. This is the aim of proximity (to Allāh ). The slave becomes extinct from the proximity (of his being) to the ultimate proximity.

 

This is sometimes given the expressions of concealment, extinction, annihilation and effacement, amongst other terminologies of theirs. Such are the fruits of Sufism that are unknown to you. It is with this definition that Imām Junayd defined [120] Sufism, when he was asked about it,:

‘Sufism is that the Truth (Al-Haqq) should cause you to die within yourself and resurrect you in Him.’

 

So tell me, in the name of Allāh, do you have a share in that which we have mentioned? You are classified in accordance with your adherence to that which we have presented of the (spiritual) ranking.. If such is your case, their saying: ‘he who has no Shaykh, Shaytan is his Shaykh ‘, implies you. In my opinion, your remoteness from this is inversely proportionate to the desired nearness. It is outright rejection. This is what concerns us about your situation. However, if you have denied the ecstacy of the one who has this description, the matter would have been much easier. If we were to give you advice in particular, it would be said to you: strive sincerely and you will find a guide (murshid); become a companion for a short while, then you may refute this matter. If you say there is no need for the well versed, in the exoteric sciences, to seek the companionship of someone to guide him to that which is hidden from him of the Divine Secrets, then we say, the story of Musa with Khidr (may Allāh's peace he upon them) is a proof against you and those of your kind. What we have compiled is sufficient for the one who is rightly guided. ‘And seeing that they guide not themselves thereby, they will say, ‘This is an old falsehood!’ [46:11].

 



 
Copyright © 2017 A.C.A.A - Les Amis du Cheikh Ahmed al-Alawî. Tous droits réservés.
Joomla! est un logiciel libre sous licence GNU/GPL.