[Ebjjrxrd]

As-Salamu 'alaykum,

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf wrote,

In a time when religions suffer greatly from a lack of articulate and reasonable spokespersons, believers from any tradition who know Dr. Nasr’s work are able to raise their heads high when his name is mentioned and say, ‘He makes us all proud to be people of faith.’ I have been reading Dr. Nasr for over twenty years and his intelligence, prescience, and relevance astound me still.
(The Essential Seyyed Hossein Nasr, front material.) Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller also wrote in his translation Reliance of the Traveller,

[Seyyed Hossein Nasr] is the author of a number of works that are among the best available in English on the relevance of traditional Islamic sciences and mystical disciples to the situation of modern man, including Ideals and Realities of Islam, Man and Nature, Islamic Science: an Illustrated Study, and Sufi Essays. The translator is indebted to his writings for being among the reasons he became a Muslim.
(Reliance of the Traveller (‘Umdat al-salik), p. 1095.) They may not agree with all of his views, such as the perennial philosophy, but they do not write Nasr and his work off simply because of a few real or perceived errors. Among Muslim scholars and intellectuals in the West (and you can ask just about any of them), Nasr is perhaps the most important writer and speaker to have presented an authentic and penetrating vision of traditional Islam in all of it facets (Law, theology, Sufism, philosophy, science, art, chivalry, history, etc.)...Those who have read his works on Islam and seen how vast his influence has been would be very careful before they criticize him simply for being of Iranian origin or treating the Ahl al-Kitab with a measure of respect.

God knows best,
Nur Muhammad

[dogdesign]

As-Salamu 'alaykum,

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf wrote,



Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller also wrote in his translation Reliance of the Traveller,



They may not agree with all of his views, such as the perennial philosophy, but they do not write Nasr and his work off simply because of a few real or perceived errors. Among Muslim scholars and intellectuals in the West (and you can ask just about any of them), Nasr is perhaps the most important writer and speaker to have presented an authentic and penetrating vision of traditional Islam in all of it facets (Law, theology, Sufism, philosophy, science, art, chivalry, history, etc.)...Those who have read his works on Islam and seen how vast his influence has been would be very careful before they criticize him simply for being of Iranian origin or treating the Ahl al-Kitab with a measure of respect.

God knows best,
Nur Muhammad

JazakAllah kyran Brother.

[Aizutox]

Your understanding of 'Aqidah is seriously warped.

The day Allah makes you "master of the day of judgement" is the day I'll be concerned about what you think of my aqidah.

That's not about personality, nor about being kind/tolerant/easy-going, that's about 'aqidah.
Saying "la ilaha illa Allah, Muhammad Rasul Allah" is not enough if at the same time one holds beliefs who contradict even just one of the necessarily-known-by-everyone basics of Islamic belief (i.e. daruriyat ad-Din): in such cases one will still be considered a kafir.

Look at the wars of apostasy conducted by Hadrat Abu Bakr against those who refused to pay/denied the zakah: those people called themselves Muslims, said the Shahadah, even performed prayers and fast, but still, they were considered as non-Muslims/kuffar by the ijma' of the Sahabah , due to their negation of a basic element of our Din. Mu'adh Ibn Jabal narrated that the Messenger of Allah said, "If anyone disgraces his brother for a sin, he will not die before committing it himself." (Tirmidhi)

The Messenger of Allah also said, "It is sufficient evil for a Muslim that he should look down upon his brother. The life, wealth, and honor of a Muslim are inviolable by another Muslim" [Sahih Muslim].

Unless you show me a hadith which specifically states perennialism makes you a disbeliever, I will not dishonor anyone who say, "la Ilaha illallah Muhammad rasullah," because this is what makes you Muslim, and every Muslims has a their rights... And I will not dishonor that right because you or some scholar says so.... On the day of judgement, I will be there before my Lord, alone...

If you want to make me a disbeliever or a sinner or deviant because I won't call someone else a disbeliever because of a sin they have committed that is fine... because you are not my Lord.... I do not have to answer to you...

1) I think your analogy is flawed, the pillars of Islam are not the same thing as what is necessarily known to be part of the religion, the later being subjective... and differs between person to person and era to era...

And Allah knows best.

[SingleMan]

We can and we should leave the matters of those people who have left this world to Allah(SWT).

Then as far as the matter of perennial philosophy is concerned it clearly clashes very acutely with what Allah(SWT) says in the Noble Qur'an.

The religion near Allah(SWT) is Islam.

If this is true then any other religion is not the route to salvation.

And no other religion except Islam will be acceptable of you.

This also clearly says that we must guard our religion very carefully.

Allah(SWT) says that truth and falsehood can not be the same. Good and bad can not be the same. This type of statements clearly hint to the direction that we should turn away from those sweet philosophies that assert that any thing is good and every thing is good. Perennial philosophy is precisely that - it asserts that I'm OK and you are OK. This is not always true. The whole point of this world is that it is a test. In any test there is a right answer and there is a wrong answer. Every answer is not the right answer. Such examination, such test is phony. The world does not seem to be a phony place. Just a few days back an upright police officer was brutally crushed to death by a illegal miner. Nothing phony about it. Life is full of such events. If life is full of painful things then how can we imagine that in the hereafter everything will be OK - whatever path we choose in this world? Even intellect does not accept it that there will be no punishment in the hereafter whatever we do in this world. If we believe that all paths are correct then beloved Prophet(PBUH)'s sacrifices, na'aoozubillah, become irrelevant because whether we follow his path or any other path it, n'aaoozubillah, is the same. Just because we are hesitant to tell others that you are following the wrong path we should not ourselves start believing that all paths lead to Jannah. All paths may lead to Rome, and even that does not seem to be correct, but all paths lead to Jannah is not the correct thing to say. In Surah Fatiha we beg to be shown the correct path. Why bother about it when all paths are the same. In Surah Fatiha we beg for protection from the path of those who went astray. Why bother about that if that path is also correct. In Surah Fatiha we seek protection from the path of those on whom Allah(SWT)'s wrath has been there. Clearly there are some paths which shall invite Allah(SWT)'s wrath. Should we not try to avoid them? What is the use of such faith if we do not have complete faith even in Surah Fatiha? How can we be so naive as to believe the sweet poison that everything is OK? If I bad mouth you then it is not OK. How can it be OK if we take that path which is not preferred by Allah(SWT)?

[dosugxxx]

^ very thought provoking. Should be read over and over by those who believe perennialism is a-ok.

Baarak Allahu Ta'aala. This post should be blogged in my humble opinion.

[SingleMan]

sister for very kind words. It needs little bit of more work to go as an independent post. Let me see, IA.

[monologue]

If all paths lead to salvation then there is no point to the Shariah, or Islam, so perennialists who promote Islam in whatever capacity are undermining it at the same time. This is the same as all those non Muslims who admire and write very highly of our Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him and his family and followers, yet they do not embrace Islam...making their words hollow.

If there is no Shariah, there is no deen. Perreanialism is about fake spirituality, new age, feel good and let everyone else do whatever they like. It is the perfect counterpart to secularism and state capitalism and Riba.

[SingleMan]

Posted here.

[Trebbinsa]

If all paths lead to salvation then there is no point to the Shariah, or Islam, so perennialists who promote Islam in whatever capacity are undermining it at the same time.

In fact often they do not promote Islam.
There are istances in which people asking one organization of theirs for help in embracing Islam, have been told to rather start re-attending the church and strenghten one's knowledge of one's "originary religion" without having to embrace another religion. This - ironically - was said by "converts" themselves (converts to perennialism, not to Islam, even if they call themselves muslims).

[drycleden]

I've noticed over the years that the users on this forum who espouse perennialist and modernist nonsense tend to list themselves as Malikis. Anyone have any insight as to why this might be the case? Just an interesting trend I noticed.

[Aizutox]

I've noticed over the years that the users on this forum who espouse perennialist and modernist nonsense tend to list themselves as Malikis. Anyone have any insight as to why this might be the case? Just an interesting trend I noticed.

I am not a perennialist nor do I believe it is ok. I just don't make takfir.... If people want to call me a deviant or a disbeliever because of it that is fine...

[HaroTaure]

Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller also wrote in his translation Reliance of the Traveller,

Your post is a pernicious and deceitful attempt to legitimize the kufr of the perennialists. Reliance of the traveller came out in the 90's, Shaykh Nuh has since made it abundantly clear that perennialism is kufr. Many people were simply not aware of Nasr's perennialist philosophy in the beginning. Shaykh Nuh Keller has repeatedly cited Imam Nawawi as saying:

“Someone who does not believe that whoever follows another religion besides Islam is an unbeliever (such as Christians), or doubts that such a person is an unbeliever, or considers their sect to be valid, is himself an unbeliever (kafir) even if he manifests Islam and believes in it.” (Rawda al-talibin, 10.70).

[drycleden]

I am not a perennialist nor do I believe it is ok. I just don't make takfir.... If people want to call me a deviant or a disbeliever because of it that is fine...

I don't go out of my way to pronounce takfir on people either. But if someone tells me that he believes Christianity is a valid religion, then I know he is a kafir.

Anyway, just do a google search of the forum for threads on topics like perennialism, marting lings, frithjof schuon and even minority opinions in fiqh etc. You will see that certain users who never contribute to the forum otherwise will suddenly appear and begin to defend the perennialist/modernist side of the discussion. These users almost always have Maliki listed as their madhab. I was just wondering whether there was any particular reason for that or if it was just a coincidence.

[Trebbinsa]

I've noticed over the years that the users on this forum who espouse perennialist and modernist nonsense tend to list themselves as Malikis. Anyone have any insight as to why this might be the case? Just an interesting trend I noticed.

In Europe, Northern and Southern America, generally "Sufi" perennialists are linked to North-African turuq (following the example laid down by Guénon, Schoun, etc.), and thus have some kind of "link" with the Maliki madhhab, which is dominant there, and is strictly linked to Shadhili and Darqawi turuq (as well as others).

Unfortunately, they only claim to follow this fiqhi madhhab, but don't follow the Islamic Sunni 'Aqidah of Imam Malik (rahimahullah) and his students and the Maliki scholars.

[dogdesign]

Your post is a pernicious and deceitful attempt to legitimize the kufr of the perennialists. Reliance of the traveller came out in the 90's, Shaykh Nuh has since made it abundantly clear that perennialism is kufr. Many people were simply not aware of Nasr's perennialist philosophy in the beginning. Shaykh Nuh Keller has repeatedly cited Imam Nawawi as saying:

Brother,I don't think the brother or anyone else on this thread is trying to promote perennialist modernist drivel...my point was many on this forum supports Hamza Yusef but do not support others,who are associates of Hamza Yusef.There seem to be big time contradictions.
I am still learning and do not have the knowledge that some of you have.JazakAllah kyran

[Aizutox]

I don't go out of my way to pronounce takfir on people either. But if someone tells me that he believes Christianity is a valid religion, then I know he is a kafir.

Anyway, just do a google search of the forum for threads on topics like perennialism, marting lings, frithjof schuon and even minority opinions in fiqh etc. You will see that certain users who never contribute to the forum otherwise will suddenly appear and begin to defend the perennialist/modernist side of the discussion. These users almost always have Maliki listed as their madhab. I was just wondering whether there was any particular reason for that or if it was just a coincidence.

I am well aware of his beliefs, I have several of his books. I don't make takfir... That is between them and Allah...

It is sufficient for my belief to see that perennialism as not Islamic... It is not obligatory for me to make takfir on anybody, that is the job of the Qadi... And even if 100 Qadis make takfir on him, I still wouldn't make takfir... It is not my job...

and Allah knows best.

[HaroTaure]

It is sufficient for my belief to see that perennialism as not Islamic... It is not obligatory for me to make takfir on anybody, that is the job of the Qadi...

Does this mean that you at least acknowledge that perennialism in and of itself is kufr?

[Aizutox]

Does this mean that you at least acknowledge that perennialism in and of itself is kufr?

I think what i said is pretty clear...

[Ebjjrxrd]

Your post is a pernicious and deceitful attempt to legitimize the kufr of the perennialists. Reliance of the traveller came out in the 90's, Shaykh Nuh has since made it abundantly clear that perennialism is kufr. Many people were simply not aware of Nasr's perennialist philosophy in the beginning. Shaykh Nuh Keller has repeatedly cited Imam Nawawi as saying:

Shaykh Nuh critiques the perennial philosophy in his translation of Reliance of the Traveller and also his renewer Sea Without Shore, yet cautions that Muslims should not label particular Muslim perennialists as kuffar, leaving this task to the jurists. Similarly, yet with a bit more nuance, Shaykh Hamza critiques some of Martin Lings' views, yet refers to him as a saint or wali Allah.

Muslims should be able to take what is good from their writings and leave what they may disagree with without throwing around invectives.

Wa Salam,
Nur Muhammad