[occurrini]

As'salamu 'alaykum,

I didn't read this post because I assumed that it was about another statement about Firawn that comes from the Fusus, but I'm glad my curiosity got the better of me. Shaykh Muhyiddin ibn al-Arabi was a mujtahid in several fields of knowledge. It was possible that he expressed some things that were incorrect. I think that people tend to over react in defense (and critique) of Ibn al-`Arabi and thus the impression is given that his defenders believe that every single thing that he ever uttered was true. It was possible that he made mistakes like others made mistakes.

The only difference is that when Ibn al-`Arabi uttered something that might be a mistake, people holler "kufr", but when someone like Ibn Taymiyyah did the same, "Everyone's words are measured against the Qur'an and Sunnah" and he is excused. People undoubtably misunderstand him, especially those who have aligned themselves against tasawwuf as a conviction, but not everything that he said can or should be explained away as being a false attribution.

I'd be interested to see both what Mahmud Ghurab says about the probable authencity of this passage, as well as what the traditional commentaries say about it before I dismiss it as a Jewish conspiracy.

There is a statement in the Qur'an that implies that Pharoah accepted Musa's nabuwwa and what is entailed thereby, prior to being drowned. Ibn al-Arabi was a master in Arabic, far beyond most scholars of today. Much of his beliefs come purely from the Arabic language, which is something that no reasonable person can condemn him for. Perhaps he joined between the verses in Surah al-Hud, the verse that states that no amount of good will go unrewarded, and the verse that states he submitted prior to dying. I do not believe that anyone was suggesting that Ibn al-Arabi said he was rightly-guided. Rather, all he seems to assert is that he repented, even though he lead his people to ruin. Ibn al-Arabi, by his statement, seems to be joining all the verses together in a more wholistic manner, including that about people who prop themselves up as taghoot, is their repetence not accepted?

Even if he is wrong, the verse is there and to assert that he was a kafir, or that this idea is kufr, is a wee bit extreme don't you think? Especially by people who demand that the Qur'an and ahadith always be understood according to the dhahir, which was Ibn al-`Arabi's madhhab. He has been described affectionaly as a Salafi by scholars who support him, and based on the little bit that I have read that has been directly translated from the Futuhat, that is not farfetched. The man considered it haram to paint flowers for God's sake. . .

What what do I know? I'm nobody important. Allah be well pleased with him and with us.