[Deribasov]

bumping this thread.

An 'Alim without Taqwa is more dangerous than a non-'Alim with Taqwa. A scholar giving out legal verdicts (Mufti) must be a person of Taqwa. Otherwise we must stay far away from such a Mufti.

Ulama Rabbani [Godly men of Knowledge]: that's the need of the time and the lack of Taqwa in the 'Ulama is a glaring sign of Qiyamah

We need to seek piety and 'Ilm together. This is a vital topic and something many of us have missed.

[Thomaswhitee]

bumping this thread.

An 'Alim without Taqwa is more dangerous than a non-'Alim with Taqwa. A scholar giving out legal verdicts (Mufti) must be a person of Taqwa. Otherwise we must stay far away from such a Mufti.

Ulama Rabbani [Godly men of Knowledge]: that's the need of the time and the lack of Taqwa in the 'Ulama is a glaring sign of Qiyamah

We need to seek piety and 'Ilm together. This is a vital topic and something many of us have missed.

alhamdulillah

and try to think of oneself as the lowest,regardless

[russmodel]

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajr ul-Haitami said:

"Many people, when they see their murshid (spiritual master) is firm on the matter of obligations and the Sunna of the Noble Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa Sallam accuse him of being strict. They say that he is praying too much or keeping the Sunnah too firmly.

These people don't realize that they are falling to their own destruction. Beware of believing your ego's complaints about the firmness of the shaykh's adherence to the shari'ah." [al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyya, p. 55.]

[vforvandetta]

Shaykh Uthman Dan Fodio (rahimahullah) describes four levels of al-war'a (scrupulousness) with regards to Halaal and Haraam:

"As for what is permissible (halaal) and forbidden (haraam) - showing devout scrupulousness with regard to what is forbidden is apart of the deen. Devout scrupulousness (al-war`a) has four degrees:

[1] Devout scrupulousness which is a prerequisite for being a just person for testimony (`adaalati 's-shahaada). This is what takes a person from the afflictions connected to testimony (shahaada), the judiciary (qudaa) and the government (wilaaya) and it entails guarding oneself from all outward prohibited things.

[2] The devout scrupulousness of the righteous (war`a's-saaliheen) which is showing piety regarding the dubious actions (as-shubuhaat) which are subject to diverse possibilities.

[3] The devout scrupulousness of those fearfully aware (wa`ra'l-mutaqeen) which is avoiding thegenuine permissible things (al-halaal'l-mahdi) which may lead him to commit what is forbidden. And

[4] the devout scrupulousness of the champions of truth (war`a 's-siddiqeen) which is avoiding everything which is other than Allah sub'haanahu, out of fear that even a moment will be expended from his life time which can cause him to lose any increase in nearness to Allah `azza wa jalla - this is even when he knows and is absolutely certain that it will not end up being forbidden. These have their different grades."

How many scholars and spiritual masters of today make it past the 2nd stage?

[Cgnebksb]

An extract from the book 'Scattered Pearls', a collection of anecdotes from the lives of the Auliyah.

THE SUNNAH

Islam is the Sunnah of Rasulullah ( صلى الله عايه وسالم ) and vice versa. The Wali or Sufi (special friend of Allah or Saint) is an embodiment of the Sunnah. Every facet of the wali's life is in strict obedience to the Sunnah. The wali follows the Sunnah in the minutest detail. Since he is motivated by divine love, discardance of the most 'insignificant' aspect of the Sunnah is intolerable to the wali.

A Wali is not one who necessarily has to demonstrate karaamaat (miracles). While the Auliyaa (Sufiyaa) do perform miracles, it is not a requisite for wilaayat (sainthood). The essential requisite for wilaayat is strict obedience to the Sunnah. A man whose daily life does not conform with every aspect of the Sunnah cannever be a Wali even if he walks on water, flies in the air, transforms base metals into gold, heal the sick or even bring to life the dead.

[defenderfors]

Hadhrat Hakimul Ummat, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi narrates the following eye-opening account regarding Hadhrat Muinud Deen Chishti :

“I have read the stories of the Auliya of former times. It is apparent that their condition and style were not like that of the majority of Masha-ikh of today. These (present-day) Masha-ikh do not consider obedience to the Shariah a requisite for Wusool ilallaah (Attainment of Divine Proximity). In fact, they believe Shariat and Tariqat to be two separate entities.

On the contrary, the state of Taqwa, tahaarah and ittibaa-e-Sunnat (obedience to the Sunnah) of the former Masha-ikh resembles that of the Sahaabah.

It is narrated that once Hadhrat Khwajah Muinud Deen Chishti (rahmatullah alayh) while making wudhu forgot to make khilaal of his fingers. A voice from the Ghaib (Unseen Realm) reprimanded:

“You claim love for the Rasool, but abandon the Sunnat of the Rasool!”

He immediately repented. Whenever he saw a fire, he would shiver with fear because of the feeling that on the day of Qiyaamah he may be punished for having omitted the Sunnat (of Khilaal). Thus, the condition of those Masha-ikh regarding obedience to the Sunnah was similar to the state of the Sahaabah.”

[cristmiff]

An interesting passage from one of the most authoritative books of the Hanafi Madhab:

Imam al-Marghinani (d. 593 H) wrote:

قال : (ومن دعي إلى وليمة أو طعام فوجد ثمه لعبا أو غناء فلا بأس بأن يقعد ويأكل ) قال أبو حنيفة: ابتليت بهذا مرة فصبرت، وهذا لأن إجابة الدعوة سنة، قال عليه السلام: "من لم يجب الدعوة فقد عصى أبا القاسم" فلا يتركها لما اقترنت به من البدعة من غيره كصلاة الجنازة واجبة الإقامة وإن حضرتها نياحة، فإن قدرعلى المنع منعهم وإن لم يقدر يصبر، وهذا إذا لم يكن مقتدى، فإن كان مقتدى ولم يقدر على منعهم يخرج ولا يقعد لأن في ذلك شين الدين وفتح باب المعصية على المسلمين والمحكي عن أبي حنيفة في الكتاب كان قبل أن يصير مقتدى، ولو كان ذلك على المائدة لا ينبغي أن يقعد ، وإن لم يكن مقتدى لقوله تعالى: { فلا تقعد بعد الذكرى مع القوم الظالمين }وهذا كله بعد الحضور، ولو علم قبل الحضور لا يحضر لأنه لم يلزمه حق الدعوة ، بخلاف ما إذا هجم عليه لأنه قد لزمه ، ودلت المسألة على أن الملاهي كلها حرام حتى التغني بضرب القضيب، وكذا قول أبي حنيفة رحمه الله : ابتليت ; لأن الابتلاء بالمحرم يكون

'He [i.e. Imam Muhammad in al-Jami' al-Saghir] said: "And whoever is invited to a Walimah or food, and he finds amusement or singing there, there is no harm in sitting and eating." Abu Hanifah said: "I was afflicted by this once, and I remained patient."

'This is because answering an invitation is Sunnah. He (upon him peace) said: "Whoever does not answer an invitation, he has disobeyed Abu al-Qasim." Thus, he will not leave it for what is joined to it of bid'ah from other than it; just like it is obligatory to establish Salat al-Janazah even if wailing accompanies it. If he is able to stop [them], he should stop them, and if he is unable he should be patient.

'And this is when one is not an authority (muqtada - i.e. scholar, imam etc.). If he is an authority, and he is unable to prevent them, he should leave and not sit, because in that is disfiguring the religion and opening the door to sin for the Muslims (fath bab al-ma'siyah 'ala al-muslimin). That which is related from Abu Hanifah in the book, that was before he became an authority.

'If that [i.e. singing and amusement] was on the table [that one is seated at], he should not sit even if he is not an authority, due to His (Exalted is He) saying: "And do not sit after the reminder with the wrongdoing people." (Qur'an 6:68)

'All this is after attending. And if one knows before attending [that there will be singing and amusement], he must not attend because the right of invitation is not binding on him; as distinguished from that [situation] when he heads to it because it is binding on him.

'This juristic ruling proves that all musical instruments (malahi) are haram even singing with hitting a stick. Similarly the saying of Abu Hanifah: "I was afflicted" because affliction is only by haram.' (Hidayah, Part Four, Kitab al-Karahiyah)"

[Rwujnezq]

Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanwi states:

"It is related on the authority of Nafi' that he heard Aslam say to Ibn 'Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) that 'Umar (radhiyallah anhu) once saw Talhah (radhiyallahu anhu) wearing a dyed garment as ihram, so Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) asked him about it. Talhah (radhiyallahu anhu) replied, "It's brick-dust dye." 'Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) then replied, "You are looked upon as a leader, and people follow your example. Now, if an ignorant person were to see you in these clothes, he might go around telling people that Talhah ibn Ubaydullah (radhiyallahu anhu) wears a dyed garment for ihram. Therefore, Talhah, do not wear any sort of dyed garments [as ihram]. This hadith was related by Malik in his Muwatta.

The Need for Circumspection:
From this hadith it is evident that the people who are looked up to as leaders in Islam have more need for prudence and piety than do the majority of Muslims. Since the Sufis are looked up to by most Muslims, it is clear that they need to be extra careful in their practice of Islam. Unfortunately, however, in our own times the reverse has become the norm. Indeed, it is negligence and unconcern which characterise most of our present day Sufis. Some have even gone so far as to deny the necessity of the Sharia and its emphasis on externals. May Allah deliver us from their ignorance!"

[Haqiqat al-Tariqa min as-Sunnah al-Aniqa]

[Eromaveabeara]

JazakAllahu khayran.

[c6vkuNRg]

The true spiritual master is one who should seek the strictest opinion across all the madhabs, let alone his own madhab, as much as possible. Unfortunately today's 'spiritual masters' appear to seek dispensations across all madhabs, let alone the ones found in their own madhab.

Al-Bistami makes the following excellent statement regarding this:

“It is incumbent on the sufi to acquire enough knowledge to make his actions in accordance to the Sacred Law according to all four madhhabs.

This is because if the sufi is Hanafi, for example, it is binding on him to exercise caution in the matters relating to his ritual ablutions (wudu’) and prayer and other acts of worship such that they are also in accordance with the madhhabs of Shafi`i, Malik, and Ahmad , because the way (madhhab) of the sufis is to join between the positions of the fuqaha. When this is not possible, they act on that which is religiously most precautious and most appropriate.

This is because a Shafi`i would not question you why you did not perform ritual ablutions with two qullas (216 litres) or more of water [f: if filth fell in it, whereas this is not allowed for Hanafis], and a Hanafi would not question you as to why you performed ritual ablutions upon touching your private parts or a person of the opposite sex.

And it is incumbent on the sufi to love the follower of the four madhhabs, and to make dua for the good for all of them, and not to be fanatical at all.

As for dispensations, it is binding that he leave them at all cost.” [Hall al-Rumuz]

[lollypopz]

Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani said:

"Abstinence from unlawful things is incumbent on you otherwise the rope of destruction is coiled round you. You can never get out of its tangle unless God covers you with His mercy. There is an authentic report of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) that the foundation of religion is abstinence from unlawful things and its destruction is in greed, and that whoever goes round a protected pastureland is only too likely to help himself to it as cattle pasturing freely by the side of a cornfield are only too likely to stretch their mouth towards it. It is unlikely that the cornfield would remain safe from them.

Umar Ibn Khattab (may God be pleased with him) is reported to have said:

"We used to abstain from nine-tenth of lawful things in the fear lest we should fall in the zone of unlawful things."

It is reported of Abu Bakr Siddiq (may God be pleased with him) that he said:

"We used to avoid seventy doors of permissible things for fear of getting involved in sin."

These exalted personages did so just to be away from any proximity to unlawful things; and in doing so they acted on the saying of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him):

"Beware! verily every king has a protected pasture-land and the pasture-land of God is His forbidden things.""

[35th discourse, Futuh al-Ghaib]

[sykanaxer]

excellent thread. May Allah give us himmah.
something related:
The five degrees of TAQWA- by Imam Ibn Juzayy R.A. showing the ascending order of Taqwa requirements for various classes of people.
http://tazkiyatips.blogspot.com/2012...bn-juzayy.html

[Ufkkrxcq]

Brother Abu Hamza. How many of today's 'spiritual masters' and scholars actually get past level two?

The five degrees of TAQWA- Imam Ibn Juzayy R.A.

1. That the slave should protect himself from kufr (covering over the truth), and that is the station of Islam;

2. That he should protect himself from acts of disobedience and forbidden things, and it is the station of turning or repentance [tawbah];

3. That he should protect himself from doubtful matters, and that is the station of caution or carefulness [wara'];

4. That he should protect himself from even those things that are permitted (i.e, avoiding what is more than absolutely necessary of this world) and that is the station of doing without [zuhd];

5. That he should protect himself from the presence of other than Allah in his heart, and it is the presence of witnessing [mushahadah].

Source: Al-Kalbi, Ibn Juzayy. Kitabu-t Tashil li ‘Ulumu-t Tanzil. Trans. Abdassamad Clarke. Unpublished.

[7UENf0w7]

Brother Abu Hamza. How many of today's 'spiritual masters' and scholars actually get past level two?
The five degrees of TAQWA- Imam Ibn Juzayy R.A.

1. That the slave should protect himself from kufr (covering over the truth), and that is the station of Islam;

2. That he should protect himself from acts of disobedience and forbidden things, and it is the station of turning or repentance [tawbah];

3. That he should protect himself from doubtful matters, and that is the station of caution or carefulness [wara'];

4. That he should protect himself from even those things that are permitted (i.e, avoiding what is more than absolutely necessary of this world) and that is the station of doing without [zuhd];

5. That he should protect himself from the presence of other than Allah in his heart, and it is the presence of witnessing [mushahadah].

Source: Al-Kalbi, Ibn Juzayy. Kitabu-t Tashil li ‘Ulumu-t Tanzil. Trans. Abdassamad Clarke. Unpublished.

Leave the 'spiritual masters' and scholars to themselves, whoever you are alluding to, just concentrate on improving your level, inshaAllah it will be more beneficial. You and I are not accountable for them nor are we in a position to take them to task.

[WaydayFep]

Leave the 'spiritual masters' and scholars to themselves, whoever you are alluding to, just concentrate on improving your level, inshaAllah it will be more beneficial. You and I are not accountable for them nor are we in a position to take them to task.

I'm alluding to the fake charlatans out there who legalise all sorts of doubtful actions such as istagatha, music etc., which further serves to catalyse the growth of a movement today that dismisses the whole of the noble science of tasawwuf.

for the advice, which is much appreciated.

However, please forgive me for not being able to restrain myself when I read about the true spiritual masters who would be scarred for life for failing to practise one sunnah momentarily, and those bandied about today who are beyond criticism for shaving daily, dancing to music, treating three talaqs as one, reciting regularly ya abdal qadir jilani, building over graves, and all the other doubtful practices that can be justified on the premise of adopting the tarjeeh/ijtihad of a latter day mujtahid, in conflict with the clearly recorded and non-inferred ruling of the early mujtahids.

[DumnEuronoumn]

I'm alluding to the fake charlatans out there who legalise all sorts of doubtful actions such as istagatha, music etc., which further serves to catalyse the growth of a movement today that dismisses the whole of the noble science of tasawwuf.

for the advice, which is much appreciated.

However, please forgive me for not being able to restrain myself when I read about the true spiritual masters who would be scarred for life for failing to practise one sunnah momentarily, and those bandied about today who are beyond criticism for shaving daily, dancing to music, treating three talaqs as one, reciting regularly ya abdal qadir jilani, building over graves, and all the other doubtful practices that can be justified on the premise of adopting the tarjeeh/ijtihad of a latter day mujtahid, in conflict with the clearly recorded and non-inferred ruling of the early mujtahids.

I think you may be referring to Imam Nawawi here and the trimming/shaving issue. If so, you need to really let that one go because your digging yourself further and further into a hole, never mind the fact that you are in effect dismissing a whole madhab (much in the same way as the ahle hadees do to Hanafis on issues such as raful yadayn).

PS: You have quoted Sh. Uthman dan Fodio on scrupulousness etc. you might want to do a search on him on this forum for a particular thread because as per your lofty standards he falls quite far short. He has described 4 levels of wara'a and you have asked the question whether any of the 'spiritual masters' have made it past level two. But I don't think Sh. Uthman dan Fodio would get past level 1 according to your lofty standards.

[Yb4bulVR]

I think you may be referring to Imam Nawawi here and the trimming/shaving issue. If so, you need to really let that one go because your digging yourself further and further into a hole, never mind the fact that you are in effect dismissing a whole madhab (much in the same way as the ahle hadees do to Hanafis on issues such as raful yadayn).

PS: You have quoted Sh. Uthman dan Fodio on scrupulousness etc. you might want to do a search on him on this forum for a particular thread because as per your lofty standards he falls quite far short. He has described 4 levels of wara'a and you have asked the question whether any of the 'spiritual masters' have made it past level two. But I don't think Sh. Uthman dan Fodio would get past level 1 according to your lofty standards.

through all the digging I have learnt a lot, and hopefully will continue to learn

And no, I was referring to the very concept of providing scope for giving preference to an opposing tarjeeh/Ijtihaad of a latter day Mujtahid, who is qualitatively a relative minnow, on issues in which the early Mujtahids had already deliberated and agreed upon; a process which will naturally result, as is evident today, in the complete transformation of the Deen.

All the anomalous opinions that are increasingly in vogue today, can be justified on such a premise. Ibn Taymiyyah is cited to defend rulings such as that of three talaqs; Ibn al-Humam is cited to defend the widespread displacement of the ijma' practice of the Sahabah with eight rakats taraweeh; Ibn al-Hajj is cited to defend new forms of tawassul/istagathah; an-Nablusi is cited to defend the permissibility of music; and with such a process of transformation of Deen potentially unending, the likes of al-Albani and Ahmad Raza Khan are now cited to defend many questionable rulings practised by ulama today, all of which are justifiable under the pretext of new Ijtihad being added to the Madhab, or an unrecorded and untraceable ijtihad assumed to have been issued by an early Imam, overriding what appears to be the explicitly recorded ruling of the early Mujtahids from all four Madhabs.

There's a huge difference between a Mujtahid erring in his ijtihad, or a Wali making a slip, and the people that latch onto the errors. We do not deny the zuhd and rank of the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Arabi despite their errors. I've already explained this elsewhere:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...l=1#post761083

Mujaddid Alf-e-Thani said in the 266th Letter of Volume 1:

“No practice of any Sufi is an argument to decide which is lawful or unlawful. Will it not be sufficient that instead of reproaching them we pass over their actions and leave them to the judgement of Allah? This is a matter in which the opinion of Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Abu Yousuf or Imam Muhammad should be considered authoritative rather than the practice of Abu Bakr Shibli or Abul Hasan Nuri. The half-baked Sufis of our day have taken to Raqs and whirling as an accepted religious rite and raised it to the level of divine service. These are persons who have taken their religion for sport and pastime “

Any view which conflicts with the official and authoritative position of the Shariah as confirmed by the Aimmah Mujtahideen and the early fuqaha, has to be rejected regardless of the status of the personality propagating such a view. There is no non-prophet who is free from error. If the one who advocates permissibility happens to be a reliable Aalim of the Deen, his view will be regarded as an error in ijtihad, or a misattribution, or some other suitable interpretation will be proffered. However, the laymen has no right to adopt such a position.

Despite the fact that we respect Shaykh Ibn Arabi and Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, we condemn and avoid their positions that are in conflict with the clear ruling of the Shar’iah as confirmed by the Aimmah Mujtahideen and the early fuqaha. Regardless of their rank and knowledge, their erroneous positions must be avoided. Any person who adopts their errors is clearly blameworthy, and is liable to be taken to task.

There are numerous warnings from the fuqaha that emphasize the fact that a person is on the border of Kufr if he adopts the anomalous positions that exists in our tradition:

Imam Al-Awza’i said:

“Whoever holds on to the rare and unusual positions of the Scholars has left Islam.”

Imam Sufyan al-Thawri said:

“Whoever pursues the rare and the unusual has gathered up all evil.”

Shaykh Abdul Rahman ibn Mahdi said:

“He is not an Imam in `ilm who follows anomalous positions (al-shadhdh).”

Shaykh Sulayman al-Taymi said:

“If you take the dispensation (rukhsa) or error (zalla) of every `alim, you will become the gathering point of every evil.”

Allamah Sha’raani said:

“He who follows the obscurities of the ulama, has made his exit from Islam”

The Ahl al-Bid'ah tend to leech on to the anomalous positions of the fuqaha and Awliyah, whilst also anathematising others whom they do not agree with. Maulana al-Hakim al-Sayyid Murtad Hasan Chandpuri (1868 – 1951 CE) describes the balanced path of ensuring that the laws of the Shar'iah are not altered based on dubious actions or statements attributed to some fuqaha and Auliya, whilst also exonerating them if their status and wilayat is established:

"To label the noble Awliya and great Sufiyyah as mushriks and kafirs is (Allah Almighty forbid!) the work of the irreligious people and deviants. Whatever number of noble Awliya have passed away, all are our leaders and predecessors. Love for them is a means to salvation. The person whose wilayah is established, his speech, action and belief cannot be against the Shari‘ah. If any action or speech as a consequence of being human happens to oppose [the Shari‘ah], immediately thereupon, those esteemed personalities repent after knowledge. And a belief against Islam is impossible for the Awliya of Allah Almighty. One who is not a Muslim, how can he be a Wali?!

Thus, now, two matters must be established: one is whether a certain person is really a Wali or not, and second, if that speech or action really occurred from that Wali or not. If such speech is attributed to an accepted Wali which is against the Shari‘ah, it is necessary for us to deny that speech, and if that action or speech is established by an authoritative means, it should be interpreted in a way that is fitting to his position and is not against the blessed Shari‘ah. The reason is that those ecstatic words (kalimat shathiyyah) that emerged from some esteemed personalities, the ‘ulama even gave favourable interpretations of them, and explained them with a correct meaning in accordance with the Shari‘ah; and said that a statement being a word of disbelief is one matter and applying the ruling of disbelief on a speaker is another matter...

Some Statements of the Akabir which are Outwardly Opposing [the Shari‘ah] must be Interpreted

However, it is never permissible that if any action or speech against the Shari‘ah is attributed to a Buzurg or Wali, neither is his Wilayah verified, nor is the authenticity of the narration investigated, nor is any correct meaning devised for it that agrees with the Shari‘ah, rather an effort is made to make that matter opposing the Shari‘ah in agreement with the Shari‘ah, and make it permissible for the general Muslims.

After the establishment of the wilayah of a Wali and the authenticity of the narration, it is necessary to preserve the sanctity of the Awliya against anti-Shari‘ah [views], which can be acquired by a favourable interpretation in a goodly way. Why then will the thought of changing the established ruling of Shari‘ah occur?

If a person did not die after taking ten grams of arsenic, it should be said that he has an antidote with him or he will shortly travel to the world of lifelessness, not that arsenic can no longer be called poison, and everyone is given permission to take ten grams of arsenic. Arsenic is poison, and is certainly a poison. Taking it puts an end to life. That particular person not dying has a specific reason for it which cannot be made into a general rule. This principle should always be kept in mind." (Sabil al-Sadad fi Mas'alat al-Istimdad pp. 7-8)

And Al-Hafiz Abu al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 H) wrote:

وما زال العلماء يبين كل واحد منهم غلط صاحبه قصدا لبيان الحق لا لإظهار عيب الغالط ولا اعتبار بقول جاهل ، يَقُول : كيف يرد عَلَى فلان الزاهد المتبرك به ، لأن الانقياد إنما يكون إِلَى مَا جاءت به الشريعة لا إِلَى الأشخاص ، وَقَدْ يكون الرَّجُل من الأولياء وأهل الْجَنَّة وله غلطات فلا تمنع منزلته بيان زلله

"And the 'ulama continue, each of them to explain the error of his companion, with the intention to clarify the truth not to expose the defect of the one who made the error. There is no consideration of the statement of the ignorant person who says: 'How can so-and-so ascetic from whom blessing is received be refuted?!' Because loyalty and submission is only to what the Shari'ah has come with, not to personalities. Often a person is from the Awliya' and from the people of Jannah, but he has errors. Thus, his status does not prevent elucidating his slips."

[DenisMoor]

Hakim al-Ummat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanawi in Haqiqat al-Tariqa min as-Sunnah al-Aniqa:

"Ali ibn al-husayn related that Safiyyah said: “The Messenger of Allah was in seclusion (itikaf) so I went to visit him one night. I spoke to him for some time and then got up to leave. He accompanied me until, when he reached the door of the masjid, two men from the Ansar passed by. When they saw the Messenger of Allah a they hastened [so that they may leave the precinct of the masjid quickly because they saw Safiyyah with him, and etiquette demanded that they do this]. The Messenger of Allah said to them: ‘Walk slowly [there is no need to hurry]. This is Safiyyah bint Huyayy [my wife. Do not have any other thoughts].’ They said: ‘Glory to Allah, O Messenger of Allah! [Can we have any evil thoughts about you that some strange woman is in solitude with you?!]’ He a said: ‘Satan flows in man as blood flows through his veins. I feared he might cast some evil in your hearts’, or he said: ‘some evil thoughts in your hearts.’”

This was related by Bukhari, Muslim and Abu Dawud.

Commentary: Avoiding whatever gives rise to suspicion

Some Sufis are extremely imprudent. Despite their adherence to the Sharia, they make careless statements or perform acts which cause not only the masses, but also their close associates to have negative thoughts about them. Such Sufis should ponder the lesson of this hadith, how cautious the Messenger of Allah was! As for those Sufis who really do not consider it essential to follow the Shari‘a, what can be said about them?! These days, most aspirants are like this [not bothered about following the Shari!a], and so are their masters."

[Ruidselisse]

There's a huge difference between a Mujtahid erring in his ijtihad, or a Wali making a slip, and the people that latch onto the errors. We do not deny the zuhd and rank of the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Arabi despite their errors. I've already explained this elsewhere:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...l=1#post761083

Mujaddid Alf-e-Thani said in the 266th Letter of Volume 1:

“No practice of any Sufi is an argument to decide which is lawful or unlawful. Will it not be sufficient that instead of reproaching them we pass over their actions and leave them to the judgement of Allah? This is a matter in which the opinion of Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Abu Yousuf or Imam Muhammad should be considered authoritative rather than the practice of Abu Bakr Shibli or Abul Hasan Nuri. The half-baked Sufis of our day have taken to Raqs and whirling as an accepted religious rite and raised it to the level of divine service. These are persons who have taken their religion for sport and pastime “

Any view which conflicts with the official and authoritative position of the Shariah as confirmed by the Aimmah Mujtahideen and the early fuqaha, has to be rejected regardless of the status of the personality propagating such a view. There is no non-prophet who is free from error. If the one who advocates permissibility happens to be a reliable Aalim of the Deen, his view will be regarded as an error in ijtihad, or a misattribution, or some other suitable interpretation will be proffered. However, the laymen has no right to adopt such a position.

Despite the fact that we respect Shaykh Ibn Arabi and Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, we condemn and avoid their positions that are in conflict with the clear ruling of the Shar’iah as confirmed by the Aimmah Mujtahideen and the early fuqaha. Regardless of their rank and knowledge, their erroneous positions must be avoided. Any person who adopts their errors is clearly blameworthy, and is liable to be taken to task.

There are numerous warnings from the fuqaha that emphasize the fact that a person is on the border of Kufr if he adopts the anomalous positions that exists in our tradition:

Imam Al-Awza’i said:

“Whoever holds on to the rare and unusual positions of the Scholars has left Islam.”

Imam Sufyan al-Thawri said:

“Whoever pursues the rare and the unusual has gathered up all evil.”

Shaykh Abdul Rahman ibn Mahdi said:

“He is not an Imam in `ilm who follows anomalous positions (al-shadhdh).”

Shaykh Sulayman al-Taymi said:

“If you take the dispensation (rukhsa) or error (zalla) of every `alim, you will become the gathering point of every evil.”

Allamah Sha’raani said:

“He who follows the obscurities of the ulama, has made his exit from Islam”

The Ahl al-Bid'ah tend to leech on to the anomalous positions of the fuqaha and Awliyah, whilst also anathematising others whom they do not agree with. Maulana al-Hakim al-Sayyid Murtad Hasan Chandpuri (1868 – 1951 CE) describes the balanced path of ensuring that the laws of the Shar'iah are not altered based on dubious actions or statements attributed to some fuqaha and Auliya, whilst also exonerating them if their status and wilayat is established:

"To label the noble Awliya and great Sufiyyah as mushriks and kafirs is (Allah Almighty forbid!) the work of the irreligious people and deviants. Whatever number of noble Awliya have passed away, all are our leaders and predecessors. Love for them is a means to salvation. The person whose wilayah is established, his speech, action and belief cannot be against the Shari‘ah. If any action or speech as a consequence of being human happens to oppose [the Shari‘ah], immediately thereupon, those esteemed personalities repent after knowledge. And a belief against Islam is impossible for the Awliya of Allah Almighty. One who is not a Muslim, how can he be a Wali?!

Thus, now, two matters must be established: one is whether a certain person is really a Wali or not, and second, if that speech or action really occurred from that Wali or not. If such speech is attributed to an accepted Wali which is against the Shari‘ah, it is necessary for us to deny that speech, and if that action or speech is established by an authoritative means, it should be interpreted in a way that is fitting to his position and is not against the blessed Shari‘ah. The reason is that those ecstatic words (kalimat shathiyyah) that emerged from some esteemed personalities, the ‘ulama even gave favourable interpretations of them, and explained them with a correct meaning in accordance with the Shari‘ah; and said that a statement being a word of disbelief is one matter and applying the ruling of disbelief on a speaker is another matter...

Some Statements of the Akabir which are Outwardly Opposing [the Shari‘ah] must be Interpreted

However, it is never permissible that if any action or speech against the Shari‘ah is attributed to a Buzurg or Wali, neither is his Wilayah verified, nor is the authenticity of the narration investigated, nor is any correct meaning devised for it that agrees with the Shari‘ah, rather an effort is made to make that matter opposing the Shari‘ah in agreement with the Shari‘ah, and make it permissible for the general Muslims.

After the establishment of the wilayah of a Wali and the authenticity of the narration, it is necessary to preserve the sanctity of the Awliya against anti-Shari‘ah [views], which can be acquired by a favourable interpretation in a goodly way. Why then will the thought of changing the established ruling of Shari‘ah occur?

If a person did not die after taking ten grams of arsenic, it should be said that he has an antidote with him or he will shortly travel to the world of lifelessness, not that arsenic can no longer be called poison, and everyone is given permission to take ten grams of arsenic. Arsenic is poison, and is certainly a poison. Taking it puts an end to life. That particular person not dying has a specific reason for it which cannot be made into a general rule. This principle should always be kept in mind." (Sabil al-Sadad fi Mas'alat al-Istimdad pp. 7-8)

And Al-Hafiz Abu al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 H) wrote:

وما زال العلماء يبين كل واحد منهم غلط صاحبه قصدا لبيان الحق لا لإظهار عيب الغالط ولا اعتبار بقول جاهل ، يَقُول : كيف يرد عَلَى فلان الزاهد المتبرك به ، لأن الانقياد إنما يكون إِلَى مَا جاءت به الشريعة لا إِلَى الأشخاص ، وَقَدْ يكون الرَّجُل من الأولياء وأهل الْجَنَّة وله غلطات فلا تمنع منزلته بيان زلله

"And the 'ulama continue, each of them to explain the error of his companion, with the intention to clarify the truth not to expose the defect of the one who made the error. There is no consideration of the statement of the ignorant person who says: 'How can so-and-so ascetic from whom blessing is received be refuted?!' Because loyalty and submission is only to what the Shari'ah has come with, not to personalities. Often a person is from the Awliya' and from the people of Jannah, but he has errors. Thus, his status does not prevent elucidating his slips." Mujaddid Alf-e-Thani said regarding those Sufis whose wilayat is probable, but who may have erred:

"These people may be excused; hopefully, they will be treated as an erring jurist (mujtahid), and exempted from punishment. But we do not know how Allah will treat their followers; I wish they were treated as the followers of an erring mujtahid. But if they do not get that treatment they will have a hard time..." [Volume 1, Letter 272]

[rXpX]

Imam an-Nawawi {May Allah have mercy upon him} said:

“Everyone is keen to give a Fatwa and they rush to give it, they will not be correct in giving Fatwa and will be confused. If they disliked giving Fatwa but there was no other way but to give a Fatwa, they shall be supported by Allah and their Fatwa will be correct...A Mufti must be pious, religious and knowledgeable.

[Imam] Malik {May Allah have mercy upon him} used to do what other people cannot stand and used to say:

“A Mufti will not be characterized by knowledge until he does things of piety which other people can not do. “

The same saying was reported from his Shaykh, Rabi'atur-Ra'i.

[Adab al-Mufti wal-Mustafti]

قال الحسين بن إسماعيل سمعت أبي يقول كان يجتمع في مجلس أحمد زهاء على خمسة آلاف ، أو يزيدون ، أقل من خمسمائة يكتبون ، والباقي يتعلمون منه حسن الأدب

“More than 5,000 people used to attend the Majālis [lectures] of Imām Ahmad. Less than 500 used to write, and the rest learned themselves good character from him”.

["Ādāb Shar'iyyah", 2/97]