Invitation to Study Sufism

Why Neo-Salafi and other Modernist Critiques of Sufism aren’t convincing?

Some people can’t be satisfied with post-dated cheques or mere promises of future rewards. They can’t afford to wait after pledging to marry to postpone consummation to some future time or another life; they want immediate consummation. They can’t afford to just gaze through a veil on the object of their love and want to take their love affair with God seriously and live God, breathe God and not just talk about God. They want to witness first hand, on their own authority, what others are content to believe on other’s authority. They take the notion of heaven so seriously that they claim they have keys of it here and now and reside therein. These people don’t believe 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 every sphere. They live and die for beauty. They aren’t content to be mere slaves but seek audience of the King as friends (awliya). They, following Abraham, demand certitude. Such people we call Sufis.       There are many popular criticisms of Sufism based on lamentable gross misreading of sources, inexcusable methodological confusions, crass ignorance of history of Sufism as esoterism and host of traditional sciences, unwarranted atomistic reading of canon, exotericist prejudices and intellectual laziness. One must clearly state that any lock, stock and barrel rejection of Tasawwuf in the name of Islam/Salaf is disingenuous and reprehensible innovation of which the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah can’t be imagined to be guilty. Muslim community has entertained certain criticisms of certain Sufis assuming orthodoxy/authority of Tasawwuf. From Ibn Khaldoon to Ibn Taymiyyah down to Iqbal we find a tradition of internal criticism rather than any outside wholesale dismissal of Tasawwuf as such. There are dozens of works published in recent history when people were forgetting/betraying tradition that attempt to discredit Sufism on grounds that have long been addressed by major Sufis themselves. A few remarks follow to illustrate some of these points as elaborated in highly useful anthology of essays on Sufism Tasawwuf aur Sufiya: Ek Tehqeeki Mutal’a compiled by our talented young scholar Tawseef Ahmed Wani. 

Sufism lives Love  

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

Remarkable Hadith Scholarship of Sufis 

Most of important Sufi authorities have been first rate hadith scholars and a galaxy of great hadith scholars have in turn been Sufis. There has been a rigorous methodology of hadith criticism followed by Sufis that passes the standard tests of hadith scholars. Certain stalwart Sufis have also claimed to be in a position to directly verify certain traditions by recourse to audience with the Prophet they are, self avowedly, granted, a point ridiculed or missed by their exoteric critics. Prof. Ghulam Mustafa Azhari’s brilliant and comprehensive treatment of all these points is one of the most important correctives to much rehearsed critiques of Sufism premised on the latter’s use of supposedly weak/fabricated traditions or laxity in approaching science of hadith.  Counter-critiques of those rejecters/critics of Sufis including on account of lax hadith scholarship have been brilliantly summarized. It can be asserted that the most able defense of hadith in the face of several classical and modern critiques is found in Sufi texts and accordingly should be treasured by those who advocate authority of Salaf. Sufi defense of experiential test of determining authenticity of traditions is well known amongst classical hadith scholarship though largely ignored in modern discourses. Allama Suyuti, for instance, has refuted Ibn Jawzi’s judgement of fabricated regarding one hadith on the above mentioned grounds. Azhari has engaged with Albani’s rejection of experiential ground and asserted that we just need to extrapolate from well agreed position that any hadith which contradicts well attested facts/experiences can’t be entertained to accept Sufi counterclaim against their critics. Azhari is careful in delineating methodology of internal criticism to check any wild claims of access to the Prophet (S.A W).       Azhari also affirms the position that one can practise a hadith judged fabricated if there is no attested ground for forbidding the same in shariah. One need not be a hadith scholar to appraise logical/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 truth flows)/ in Islamic tradition, Azhari builds a case for ignored methodology in hadith criticism advocated by Sufis. Far from being dead (or bone of contention for opposite ideological/sectarian ends) for all practical purposes, the Prophet (S.A.W), for Sufis, is a presence and currently accessible authority. Superficial rejections of Sufi epistemology from Neo-Salafi/secularist camp is premised on marginalizing of evidence from explorations of great treasures of the imaginal world and especially the traditionally recognized veracity of veridical dreams. Let us note that Islamic societies have highly treasured the Prophetic biography after he left this physical plane and there is a whole work of seerah literature on the same recounting access to him through dreams etc. Azhari also notes the possibility that large number of prophetic traditions not finding any mention in any work of hadith but quoted in works of Sufi authorities may well have been attested on the basis of kashf.       Shaykh Usama Mehmod Azhari shows how Sufi and hadith authorities share orthodox creed and any attempt to justify anthropomorophism/tashbih from works of hadith scholars is unwarranted.

How to avoid popular misinterpretations of Sufism

Ziaur Rahman Aleemi’s paper on principles of reading Sufism should help to answer most of the reigning critiques of Sufism. It illuminates a lot of issues that are popularly debated superficially. It engages with Sufi authorities and their alleged critics like Ibn Taymiyyah. Approaching Sufism as the fiqh of soul, Aleemi explains why it is foolish to jump to criticize Murshid/Sufi authorities when apparently contravening (to shariah) point is noticed. There is a proper hermeneutic to understand – and thus exonerate – revered Sufi authorities on key points of method and doctrine and in general they can’t be reproached though there remain principles in light of which we can criticize this or that statement/practice without dismissing Sufism/Sufi authority in the process. Aleemi quotes Ibn Taymiyyah against those who are quick to pass judgments on revered Sufi names on the basis of some of their statements/texts. One can’t overemphasize that the key anxiety of safeguarding shariah and respecting literal sense of text has characterized not only of Salafi and other tradition centric critics but also mainstream Sufis as well. In fact in Sufism it is taken for granted that the Umpire who decides who/what is in or out is shariah respecting authority. Aleemi also points out that anxiety regarding certain inaccuracies in historical allusions in Sufi works may ignore references to other higher dimensions/dreams to which Sufi authority may be alluding to.       Qutbuddin Dmashqi’s extracts from his Risala-i-Makkiyya aptly sum up moral and doctrinal requirements of a traveller on the path. Sayeed Alem Jaysi’s “Ahl-e Tasawwuf ka Mujahidana Kirdar” adequately dispels the charge  that Sufism is apolitical or status-quoist or quietist. Among other points, it highlights role of Sufis in fighting Mongols, crusades and various modern colonialisms. Sufi aspect of the great resistance icon Umar Mukhatar is noted. Important role in aiding/abetting/participating in jihadi activity of major Sufi figures such as Abdullah bin Mubarak, Ibrahim Adham, Shafiq Balkhi, Abdul Qadir Jeelani, Ghazali, Ibn Arabi and certain important modern figures such as Amir Abdul Qadir is highlighted.       Ghulam Mustafa Azhari takes on crucial theme of initiation and need of Murshid in Sufism and comprehensively explains theory and practice dispelling major misgivings of critics. Finally Khustar Noorani has argued need to reclaim much maligned and misunderstood legacy of khanaqahs. These khanaqahs have been spiritual and cultural nerve centres of Islamicate cultures that helped nurture quality intellectual-spiritual culture.  No concept of integral education and training in the Islamicate world that delegitimates khanqahs would make sense. The challenge is to strengthen such an institution in a way that avoids certain influential pathological formations that have widely crept in khanaqah culture. Schools are to be strengthened, not uprooted. Or we evolve a space that combines best of khanqah, madrasa and university cultures.       We are indebted to the editor for such a useful work that should interest anyone interested in debates surrounding 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 first and last paper and fewer in-text citations of sources in general needn’t detract us from the merits of well thought out anthology.
https://www.greaterkashmir.com/news/opinion/invitation-to-study-sufism/