[Ceriopal]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqm_0...eature=related

Sayyid Shaykh Muhammad (from Damascus) exposes the Bid'ah of the Wahabis.

[KevinDonae]

so the fact that he personally met a brother who refuted a hadeeth as being fabricated (when presumably a sufi was trying to use it), means that salafis "bid'ah" has been exposed.

If anything it exposes that someone was trying to use a fabricated hadeeth and it just happend that a brother knew the hadeeth wasnt authentic.

The claim that he made was wrong, the usual salafi methodlogy is start with 40hadeeth of imam an nawawi, then riyadus saliheen , the bukhari, muslim, etc etc.

You can find this in the book ettiquettes of seeking knowledge by bakr abu zaid that lays out our methodlogy and order of seeking knowledge and what books we start with on each field

[JanetMorris]

Is Muhammad Yaqoubi a Barelvi?

[evarekataVame]

What a bad state of affairs they Sufis have been pushed into by science and Salafis !

[evarekataVame]

Is Muhammad Yaqoubi a Barelvi?

It will be safe to say that he is the Arab equivalent of a Barelvi

[TZtrDuso]

GOD! have we not had enough of this types mudslinging. Leave this to the scholar. We could not care less. Allmost every day the kuffar are plotting and making our lives difficult and here we are like petty school kids are fighting over small things.

[KevinDonae]

GOD! have we not had enough of this types mudslinging. Leave this to the scholar. We could not care less. Allmost every day the kuffar are plotting and making our lives difficult and here we are like petty school kids are fighting over small things.

i agree with this

there has to be limits though. refuting qadiyyanis and nation of islam and submitters is presumably not mud slinging? So the question is, are barelwis deviant ebough to warrant a refutation? How do we gauge this? same for shia

[KevinDonae]

What a bad state of affairs they Sufis have been pushed into by science and Salafis !

what do you mean bro?

[evarekataVame]

what do you mean bro?

Sufism mainly flourished in the "dark ages" when ignorant people were taken by a hype of the so called "Karamaat" . The foundation stones of Sufism stood on some hearsay narration , fake stories and fabricated Hadiths. During the 20th century when they (Sufis) were exposed to the scientific revolution at one hand and the "rationalization-authentication" movement of the Salafis on the other hand , they started losing the plot. The mythical stories of "Karamat" crawled back into the rocks since the advent of Camera. The fake narration/stories which they were using to delude the people were debunked by the Salafis. So here they stand today crippled and fighting their battle of existence which they seem to have lost.They are misfits in the present society.
Take the example of Mr Nazzim Haqqani. The Salafis have been teasing him since long now for his words and actions and he has tried to reply them back in his own manners.At the other hand , Camera has exposed him and most of the people don't take him seriously anymore. In this state of being a "misfit" , where no more he can use fake stories and fake karamats to keep his crowd in order , he has come up with a unique trick. That is to terrorize the minds of the people with his prophecies of "Mehdi is coming , the end is near" and he thinks that he can keep himself in the news through that. But even the prophecies have lost their flavor now.
The funniest aspect of the story is that out of desperation , the Sufis have bulldozed the historical pet-line of sufis " Sufis are the torchbearers of love and peace" . They have portrayed themselves as "Salafi haters" instead.
The clever ones among them have stopped talking about Karamats etc and have taken refuge in "Tasawwuf is only a tool for Tazkiya Nafs and an apparatus to help one reach the status of Ehsan" . This new pet-line has kept a few in the show till now.

[penpizdes]

Sufism mainly flourished in the "dark ages" when ignorant people were taken by a hype of the so called "Karamaat" . The foundation stones of Sufism stood on some hearsay narration , fake stories and fabricated Hadiths. During the 20th century when they (Sufis) were exposed to the scientific revolution at one hand and the "rationalization-authentication" movement of the Salafis on the other hand , they started losing the plot. The mythical stories of "Karamat" crawled back into the rocks since the advent of Camera. The fake narration/stories which they were using to delude the people were debunked by the Salafis. So here they stand today crippled and fighting their battle of existence which they seem to have lost.They are misfits in the present society.
Take the example of Mr Nazzim Haqqani. The Salafis have been teasing him since long now for his words and actions and he has tried to reply them back in his own manners.At the other hand , Camera has exposed him and most of the people don't take him seriously anymore. In this state of being a "misfit" , where no more he can use fake stories and fake karamats to keep his crowd in order , he has come up with a unique trick. That is to terrorize the minds of the people with his prophecies of "Mehdi is coming , the end is near" and he thinks that he can keep himself in the news through that. But even the prophecies have lost their flavor now.
The funniest aspect of the story is that out of desperation , the Sufis have bulldozed the historical pet-line of sufis " Sufis are the torchbearers of love and peace" . They have portrayed themselves as "Salafi haters" instead.
The clever ones among them have stopped talking about Karamats etc and have taken refuge in "Tasawwuf is only a tool for Tazkiya Nafs and an apparatus to help one reach the status of Ehsan" . This new pet-line has kept a few in the show till now.

I notice the same thing about today's Sufis. They have nothing to offer...only criticism of Salafi and "Wahhaabis"....that too based on ignorance.

What they don't realize is by constantly attacking and demonizing the Muslims who adhere to the Sunnah, these Sufis are resembling lthe Jews in the time of Eesa ibn Maryam
Why did the Jewish scholars and rabbis consistently oppose the Prophets? Because while they knew these Prophets were upon the truth, they were afraid of losing their power and influence over the masses. This is the same thing with Sufis, they fear Salafiyyah because they fear the hold they will lose over the people whom they are leading astray.

[evarekataVame]

I notice the same thing about today's Sufis. They have nothing to offer...only criticism of Salafi and "Wahhaabis"....that too based on ignorance.

What they don't realize is by constantly attacking and demonizing the Muslims who adhere to the Sunnah, these Sufis are resembling lthe Jews in the time of Eesa ibn Maryam
Why did the Jewish scholars and rabbis consistently oppose the Prophets? Because while they knew these Prophets were upon the truth, they were afraid of losing their power and influence over the masses. This is the same thing with Sufis, they fear Salafiyyah because they fear the hold they will lose over the people whom they are leading astray.

Very true. InshAllah sanity is prevailing and probably these are last of the Sufis the world is to see.

[TZtrDuso]

Dr. Ati
You know I am sufi inclined and am averse to anyone who does not uphold shariah rule and violates it. There are plenty of practioner of tassawuf who will agree with your criticism of the deviant psudo sufis but to call everysingle one of us is a bit harsh.
I find the sufi bashing salfist as a response to Salafist bashing sufi is bit imature and fruitless.
Hence why add fuel to fire.
Allahualam

[evarekataVame]

Brother Nomadic
Not after becoming a Salafi , i used to think this way even when i was a Deobandi. It is my honest opinion that Sufism is a parasite in the brain of Muslim Ummah and the irony is that it has survived there in the name of Islam , with which it has no relation. I also honestly feel that it has been mainly due to the influx of Sufism into Islam that we find the Muslim Ummah in the present state of affairs. I further believe that there is no objective "good sufi , bad sufi , real Sufi , Psuedo Sufi" classification possible. As i said that the clever ones among the Sufis changed their pet-line to " Tasawwuf is nothing more than a tool for Tazkiya Nafs and an apparatus to help one reach the status of Ehsan" . These clever ones are the so called "real Sufis" while if you sit with a real Malamati Sufi , he will call them "traitors of Sufism" lolz.

[RogHammon]

One has to differentiate between the 'Sufis' as this slogan is used by everyone in Tasawwuf - even by the Mubtadi'oon. This differentiation is a must because of the fact there are different flavours of it. Some drenched in heresy, some are upon the Shari'ah whilst some are frankly scam artists.

Even Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah has differentiated between them, in his Majmu' al-Fatawa:

http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/d...k_no=22&ID=651


الصوفية " ثلاثة أصناف "

صوفية الحقائق

وصوفية الأرزاق

وصوفية الرسم

If one were to read the major passages above in the Shaykhs Fatawa he is infact for Tasawwuf and Sufism.

Regardless, it would be abit foolish not to seperate the frauds, misguiders from the real Sufis.

[layedgebiamma]

One has to differentiate between the 'Sufis' as this slogan is used by everyone in Tasawwuf - even by the Mubtadi'oon. This differentiation is a must because of the fact there are different flavours of it. Some drenched in heresy, some are upon the Shari'ah whilst some are frankly scam artists.

Even Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah has differentiated between them, in his Majmu' al-Fatawa:

http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/d...k_no=22&ID=651


الصوفية " ثلاثة أصناف "

صوفية الحقائق

وصوفية الأرزاق

وصوفية الرسم

If one were to read the major passages above in the Shaykhs Fatawa he is infact for Tasawwuf and Sufism.

Regardless, it would be abit foolish not to seperate the frauds, misguiders from the real Sufis.

This is an excellent point, however, the question remains: what group of Sufis do you think represent the sort that Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah spoke about in his Majmoo al-Fatawa? If you could substantiate this with quotes from his Majmoo al-Fatawa, then please go right ahead- perhaps he named or specified a tariqa that he was in favor of, and enumerated upon its practices- this would help in differentiating the Sufis who have deviated strongly from the Sufis who stuck strictly to practices found in the Qur'an and Sunnah.

It would also help if you connected it to the Sufis of today- perhaps which group it was then and whether their practices are the same now as they were then.

[RogHammon]

This is an excellent point, however, the question remains: what group of Sufis do you think represent the sort that Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah spoke about in his Majmoo al-Fatawa? If you could substantiate this with quotes from his Majmoo al-Fatawa, then please go right ahead- perhaps he named or specified a tariqa that he was in favor of, and enumerated upon its practices- this would help in differentiating the Sufis who have deviated strongly from the Sufis who stuck strictly to practices found in the Qur'an and Sunnah.

It would also help if you connected it to the Sufis of today- perhaps which group it was then and whether their practices are the same now as they were then.

As far as i am aware he makes no distinction as to which tariqah is better and which is not, infact he praises the Major known Sufis eselwhere in his work - and he doesn't criticise any specific Tariqahs.

He instead repudiates claims made by the Anti-Sufis (in his day and age) that Sufism and Tasawwuf are people of Bid'ah and are out of the Sunnah.

I dont think Ibn Taymiyyah touched very much upon it's practcies but if you mean dhikr gatherings and ijtimas of other sorts then yes elsewehere in his Majmu' he does talk about it in his answers to various questions - il see if i find something.

To me it is simple, find a Shaykh who is proficient in Shari'ah, i.e. Mufassir, Muhaddith, Faqeeh and be under their tutelage in Tasawwuf be it in any Tariqah. Because those who have knowledge in Deen find a balance in both the external and the internal.

WaSalaam

[layedgebiamma]

As far as i am aware he makes no distinction as to which tariqah is better and which is not, infact he praises the Major known Sufis eselwhere in his work - and he doesn't criticise any specific Tariqahs.

He instead repudiates claims made by the Anti-Sufis (in his day and age) that Sufism and Tasawwuf are people of Bid'ah and are out of the Sunnah.

I dont think Ibn Taymiyyah touched very much upon it's practcies but if you mean dhikr gatherings and ijtimas of other sorts then yes elsewehere in his Majmu' he does talk about it in his answers to various questions - il see if i find something.

To me it is simple, find a Shaykh who is proficient in Shari'ah, i.e. Mufassir, Muhaddith, Faqeeh and be under their tutelage in Tasawwuf be it in any Tariqah. Because those who have knowledge in Deen find a balance in both the external and the internal.

WaSalaam

Here's a question. Is the work in Majmoo al-Fatawa not to be weighed with the remainder of his work?

Because it's quite clear that a large amount of his work was dedicated to criticizing heavily well-known Sufis and practices with regards to Sufism during his time- such as the Friends of Allah and the Friends of Shaytaan; that work in particular is quite scathing and obviously directed at certain sufis.

And then there's his (and others') takfeer of Ibn Arabi', who is regarded as 'al-Shaykh al-Akbar' by a great number of groups today. Then take into account his refusal to support any forms of dhikr not specifically (specifically, not implicitly) supported by the Qur'an and Sunnah... (an opinion shared by the Hanbali scholars, such as Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (see Jami al-Uloom wal Hukam) and Ibn Qudama , see Ibn Qudama's opinion of hadras)...

Taking all this into account, well, who exactly are the Sufis he praises, whose work can be seen and viewed today in a context free of additions? What Tariqa indeed would fit into Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah's Sufism paradigm? I doubt very much that the ones nowadays would.

[Arbinknit]

are barelwis deviant ebough to warrant a refutation?

Imam Ibn Othaymeen said that Barelwis are mushrikeen.

[evarekataVame]

Imam Ibn Othaymeen said that Barelwis are mushrikeen and that we cant pray behind them.

Here is Mufti ZarWali khan db ( a very prominent deobandi scholar) Takfeer on Barelvis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW-Rv1z0si8

[RogHammon]

Here's a question. Is the work in Majmoo al-Fatawa not to be weighed with the remainder of his work?

Because it's quite clear that a large amount of his work was dedicated to criticizing heavily well-known Sufis and practices with regards to Sufism during his time- such as the Friends of Allah and the Friends of Shaytaan; that work in particular is quite scathing and obviously directed at certain sufis.

And then there's his (and others') takfeer of Ibn Arabi', who is regarded as 'al-Shaykh al-Akbar' by a great number of groups today. Then take into account his refusal to support any forms of dhikr not specifically (specifically, not implicitly) supported by the Qur'an and Sunnah... (an opinion shared by the Hanbali scholars, such as Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (see Jami al-Uloom wal Hukam) and Ibn Qudama , see Ibn Qudama's opinion of hadras)...

Taking all this into account, well, who exactly are the Sufis he praises, whose work can be seen and viewed today in a context free of additions? What Tariqa indeed would fit into Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah's Sufism paradigm? I doubt very much that the ones nowadays would.

Please quote the relevant parts in his Majmu' so it can be weighed in reference to Tasawwuf and Sufism.

Also please quote the relevant parts where he critisizes heavily well known Sufis. By any chance is Shaykh 'Abd al-Qadir Jilani in this list of those whom he critisized?

I for one would also critisize many people under the pretence of 'Sufism' and you would find many 'Sufis' of today doing the same - this doesn't mean anything.

The Takfeer of Shaykh Ibn al-'Arabi by Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah then this based upon some of the beliefs in Fusoos which he found inappropriate something to do with Aqaa'id - this has nothing to do with Takfeering a Sufi or reprimanding the Ahl al-Tasawwuf - otherwise Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah has many praises for Shaykh Ibn al-'Arabi's other books that deal with Tasawwuf and Tazkiyah al-Nafs.

As for Dhikr / Adhkar there are many Sufis that do recite the well known Adhkars that comes via Qur'an and Sunnah, your an example of a person painting everyone with the same brush.

And also for Ijtima'i Gatherings, Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah was asked:

http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/d..._no=22&ID=1727

وسئل عن رجل ينكر على أهل الذكر يقول لهم : هذا الذكر بدعة وجهركم في الذكر بدعة وهم يفتتحون بالقرآن ويختتمون ثم يدعون للمسلمين الأحياء والأموات ويجمعون التسبيح والتحميد والتهليل والتكبير والحوقلة ويصلون على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم والمنكر يعمل السماع مرات بالتصفيق ويبطل الذكر في وقت عمل السماع

And he answers:

فأجاب : الاجتماع لذكر الله واستماع كتابه والدعاء عمل صالح وهو من أفضل القربات والعبادات في الأوقات ففي الصحيح عن [ ص: 521 ] النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال : { إن لله ملائكة سياحين في الأرض فإذا مروا بقوم يذكرون الله تنادوا هلموا إلى حاجتكم } وذكر الحديث وفيه { وجدناهم يسبحونك ويحمدونك } لكن ينبغي أن يكون هذا أحيانا في بعض الأوقات والأمكنة فلا يجعل سنة راتبة يحافظ عليها إلا ما سن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المداومة عليه في الجماعات ؟ من الصلوات الخمس في الجماعات ومن الجمعات والأعياد ونحو ذلك

If by music / singing / dancing is what you see only amongst the Sufis today, then quite frankly you need to wake up . There are MANY Sufis that do not practice any of that even at times speaking against it.

lastly, you say:

I doubt very much that the ones nowadays would. Taking all into account you have bought from the works of IbnTaymiyyah (null), your claims is currently far-fetched.

anyway what i really would like to know Akhi,is what do YOU think Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah meant by Tasawwuf / Sufiyyah? and what practices / 'amals did he include and what did he dislike? please quote me from his kitaabs.

Ma'a al-Salaamah.