Invitation to Study Sufism

Some people can’t be satisfied withpost-dated cheques or mere promises of future rewards. They can’t afford towait after pledging to marry to postpone consummation to some future time oranother life; they want immediate consummation.   They can’t afford to just gaze through aveil on the object of their love and want to take their love affair with Godseriously and live God, breathe God and not just talk about God. They want towitness first hand, on their own authority, what others are content to believeon other’s authority. They take the notion of heaven so seriously that theyclaim they have keys of it here and now and reside therein. These people don’tbelieve in being just good/decent Muslims but strive to be the best Muslims.They can’t afford compromise of any kind and seek to pursue perfection in everysphere. They live and die for beauty. They aren’t content to be mere slaves butseek audience of the King as friends (awliya).They, following Abraham, demand certitude. Such people we call Sufis.

 There are many popular criticisms of Sufismbased on lamentable  gross misreading ofsources, inexcusable methodological confusions, crass ignorance of history of Sufism as esoterism and host oftraditional sciences, unwarranted atomistic reading of canon, exotericistprejudices and intellectual laziness. One must clearly state that any lock,stock and barrel rejection of Tasawwuf in the name of Islam/Salaf isdisingenuous and reprehensible innovation of which the likes of Ibn Taymiyyahcan’t be imagined to be guilty.  Muslimcommunity has entertained certain criticisms of certain Sufis assuming orthodoxy/authorityof Tasawwuf. From Ibn Khaldoon to Ibn Taymiyyah down to Iqbal we find atradition of internal criticism rather than any outside wholesale dismissal ofTasawwuf as such. There are dozens of works published in recent history whenpeople were forgetting/betraying tradition that attempt to discredit Sufism ongrounds that have long been addressed by major Sufis themselves. A few remarksfollow to illustrate some of these points as elaborated in highly usefulanthology of essays on Sufism Tasawwufaur Sufiya: Ek Tehqeeki Mutal’a compiled by our talented young scholar Tawseef Ahmed Wani.

   

Sufismlives Love  

The book opens with the editor’s own essaythat reads Sufism as Love. If one succeeds in showing integral link betweenlove and Sufism and see both premised on primacy of love, every critique of theessence of Sufism can be shown to be missing the essential point and warrant ofSufism. Given the fact that it is in the name of love that every critique isultimately legitimated and love itself is beyond reproach and self-validating andthat the identity of Sufism and love has been demonstrably presented in IbnArabi and Rumi and their numerous followers including great Sufi poets down toIqbal, it can be asserted that no exoteric theological critique of Sufism canbe entertained if it fails, in turn, to attend to the reality of primacy oflove. Only those interpretations of scripture are ultimately authentic thatlead to furthering love as noted by one great exponent of traditional scienceof interpretation.  This implies Sufismif true to its metaphysic of love is the gold standard in light of which everyother religious/philosophical school is to be judged. Scriptures or propheticclaims find best legitimation in parallel but convergent/analogous discovery of God/the Good in the lives ofsaints and it is the later who best advocate/represent prophets. Although theauthor doesn’t introduce Ibn Arabi or Iraqi’s metaphysics of love here, he doessucceed in putting the thesis of Sufism is the Science of Love (or better itshigher flowering in compassion) on firm footing quoting Sufi authorities.

RemarkableHadith Scholarship of Sufis

Most of important Sufi authorities havebeen first rate hadith scholars and a galaxy of great hadith scholars have inturn been Sufis. There has been a rigorous methodology of hadith criticismfollowed by Sufis that passes the standard tests of hadith scholars. Certainstalwart Sufis have also claimed to be in a position to directly verify certaintraditions by recourse to audience with the Prophet they are, self avowedly,granted, a point ridiculed or missed by their exoteric critics. Prof. GhulamMustafa Azhari’s brilliant and comprehensive treatment of all these points isone of the most important correctives to much rehearsed critiques of Sufismpremised on the latter’s use of supposedly weak/fabricated traditions or laxityin approaching science of hadith. Counter-critiques of those rejecters/critics of Sufis  including on account of lax hadithscholarship have been brilliantly summarized. It can be asserted that the mostable defense of hadith in the face of several classical and modern critiques isfound in Sufi texts and accordingly should be treasured by those who advocateauthority of Salaf. Sufi defense of experiential test of determiningauthenticity of traditions is well known amongst classical hadith scholarshipthough largely ignored in modern discourses. Allama Suyuti, for instance, hasrefuted Ibn Jawzi’s judgement of fabricated regarding one hadith on the abovementioned grounds. Azhari has engaged with Albani’s rejection of experientialground and asserted that we just need to extrapolate from well agreed positionthat any hadith which contradicts well attested facts/experiences can’t beentertained to accept Sufi counterclaim against their critics. Azhari iscareful in delineating methodology of internal criticism to check any wildclaims of access to the Prophet (S.A W).

Azhari also affirms the position that onecan practise a hadith judged fabricated if there is no attested ground forforbidding the same in shariah. One need not be a hadith scholar to appraiselogical/empirical arguments for and against certain methodological premises.Cognizing such traditional stipulations as taking fatwa from one’s heart,noting scripture’s/companions’ attestation of kashf as a source of knowledge and recognition of muhaddath/mulham (on whose tongue truthflows)/ in Islamic tradition, Azhari builds a case for ignored methodology inhadith criticism advocated by Sufis. Far from being dead (or bone of contentionfor opposite ideological/sectarian ends) for all practical purposes, theProphet (S.A.W), for Sufis, is a presence and currently accessible authority.Superficial rejections of Sufi epistemology from Neo-Salafi/secularist camp ispremised on marginalizing of evidence from explorations of great treasures ofthe Imaginal world and especially the traditionally recognized veracity ofveridical dreams. Let us note that Islamic societies have highly treasured theProphetic biography after he left this physical plane and there is a whole workof seerah literature on the samerecounting access to him through dreams etc. Azhari also notes the possibility that large number of prophetictraditions not finding any mention in any work of hadith  but quoted in works of Sufi authorities maywell have been attested on the basis of kashf.

Shaykh Usama Mehmod Azhari shows how Sufiand  hadith authorities share orthodoxcreed and any attempt to justify anthropomorophism/tashbih  from works of hadithscholars is unwarranted.

 How to avoid popular misinterpretations of Sufism

Ziaur Rahman Aleemi’s paper on principlesof reading Sufism should help to answer most of the reigning critiques ofSufism. It illuminates a lot of  issuesthat are popularly debated superficially. It engages with Sufi authorities andtheir alleged critics like Ibn Taymiyyah. Approaching Sufism as the fiqh of soul, Aleemi explains why it isfoolish to jump to criticize Murshid/Sufi authorities  when apparently contravening (to shariah)point is noticed. There is a proper hermeneutic to understand – and thusexonerate – revered Sufi authorities on key points of method and doctrine andin general they can’t be reproached though there remain principles in light ofwhich we can criticize this or that statement/practice without dismissingSufism/Sufi authority in the process. Aleemi quotes Ibn Taymiyyah against those who are quick to passjudgments on revered Sufi names on the basis of some of their statements/texts.One can’t overemphasize that the key anxiety of safeguarding shariah andrespecting literal sense of text has characterized not only of Salafi and othertradition centric critics but also mainstream Sufis as well. In fact in Sufismit is taken for granted that the Umpire who decides who/what is in or out isshariah respecting authority. Aleemi also points out that anxiety regardingcertain inaccuracies in historical allusions in Sufi works may ignorereferences to other  higherdimensions/dreams   to which Sufiauthority may be alluding to. 

Qutbuddin Dmashqi’s extracts from hisRisala-i- Makkiyya aptly sum up moral and doctrinal requirements of a travelleron the path. Sayeed Alem Jaysi’s “Ahl-eTasawwuf ka Mujahidana Kirdar” adequately dispels the charge  that Sufism is apolitical or status-quoist orquietist. Among other points, it highlights role of Sufis in fighting Mongols,crusades and various modern colonialisms. Sufi aspect of the great resistanceicon Umar Mukhatar is noted. Important role in aiding/abetting/participating injihadi activity of major Sufi figures such as Abdullah bin Mubarak, IbrahimAdham, Shafiq Balkhi, Abdul Qadir Jeelani, Ghazali,Ibn Arabi and certainimportant modern figures such as Amir Abdul Qadir is highlighted.

Ghulam Mustafa Azhari takes on crucialtheme of initiation and need of Murshid in Sufism and comprehensively explainstheory and practice dispelling major misgivings of critics. Finally KhustarNoorani has argued need to reclaim much maligned and misunderstood legacy ofkhanaqahs. These khanaqahs have been spiritual and cultural nerve centres ofIslamicate cultures that helped nurture quality intellectual-spiritualculture.  No concept of integraleducation and training in the Islamicate world that delegitimates khanqahs wouldmake sense. The challenge is to strengthen such an institution in a way thatavoids certain influential pathological formations that have widely crept inkhanaqah culture. Schools are to be strengthened, not uprooted. Or we evolve aspace that combines best of khanqah, madrasa and university cultures.

We are indebted to the editorfor such a useful work that should interest anyone interested in debatessurrounding Sufism. Occasional oversight (such as attributing the statement”Today Sufism is a name without a reality. It was once a reality without a name”to Martin Lings) and some laxity in the academic rigour reflected in the firstand last paper and fewer in-text citations of sources in general needn’tdetract us from the merits of well thought out anthology.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

2 × three =