Abu Ja'far al-Hanbali's Research on Sufism nowadays
Interesting article he wrote. He mentions the evils that have crept inside popular sufism in the name of the qadiri tariqa and cast doubts on the non-Hanbali Qadiri Salasil:
Our Failure Is Our Loss - Part 2
http://ukiew.org/htp/index.php?optio...ask=view&id=61
Im just quoting some parts:
VIRTUE BY ASSOCIATION
Obviously, anyone that would challenge such an entrenched system,
which is the same one prevailing in certain circles of the Muslim world,
will find resistance. A common evidence quoted is where the Messenger
of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, stated,
‘The scholars are the inheritors of the prophets.’ 22
If the scholars are the inheritors of the prophets, then they are obviously
their successors and as such it would entitle them to a certain authority.
That being the case, we should heed the words of the scholars,
submitting to their authority, as the breadth and depth of their
knowledge is far more steep than our own. The scholars, they maintain,
at times have a hidden knowledge of things that we fail to grasp. Thus,
things that the ‘shaykh’ may say or do, although appearing to be kufr and
shirk, are actually consonant with the Revelation. An example used for
illustration is where the Prophet Mūsa, peace be upon him, met the great
figure al-Khidr, peace be upon him. 23 While taking a journey with the
sage, the Prophet Mūsa, witnessed certain things that were reprehensible
in his estimation and were condemnable. But when the time for them to
part ways had come, al-Khidr, peace be upon him, explained the events
and the divine plan behind them. 24
Modern ‘shaykhs’ use this as evidence of the fact that the student does
not always know the truth of a matter, so it is better not to speak up,
even if seeming contradictions abound. The teacher has access to
knowledge that the student could never hope for, as his illuminated state
is evident to all of his seekers. This way of logic and reasoning stifles any
opposition that could be brought, those questioners or doubters merely
being dubbed as ‘not very spiritual’ or ‘non-traditional.’ But questioning
will still persist, which leads to the next line of defence, that of
precedent.
At the presence of opposition to their orders or statements, sceptics will
be told that this is the way of the Tarīqahs of old. Every Tarīqah has this
method. From the outset, the beginning Tarīqahs, Qādirī, 25 Suhrawardī,
26 Chishtī 27 and Naqshabandī,28 engaged in the same actions, thus
negating them from these contemporary figures is to actually question
history and Islamic scholarship at its’ highest level. Enlightened ‘Sūfi
Shaykhs’ will coo their detractors into submission, pronouncing the
words, ‘Brother, there is a difference of opinion about this,’ or ‘This
issue is not agreed upon,’ giving the innocuous appearance that the issue
contains some shade of doubt, therefore, condemnation would be
bigoted, sectarian and absolutely partisan.
There are now some defending the practice of samā`29, use of stringed
and wind instruments in worship for devotional purposes, stating that
certain named scholars understood this to be the case. If they in their
knowledge, overflowing and mountainous in depth, accepted this, how
could we then find condemnation? The oversimplification present simply
has to be exposed. A scholar is not only revered for his scholarly
demeanour, but first and foremost his evidence. If a scholar was of
exalted character and would not pray, it would not be of any avail for
him to quote his reasons why, as he is in direct contravention of divine
writ. 30
Those who hold fast to transplanting these same blameworthy practices
into the countries where Muslims now reside also claim none other than
Shaikh ul-Islam `Abdul Qādir al-Jīlānī, may Allah have mercy upon him,
as a rallying cry to hide behind, using his name for all manner of things.
Some of the most famous accretions attributed to him are,
a) False banquets and gatherings, told to be in his honour and that he
approved of silently or explicitly, with regard to Hereafter events
as well such as punishment of the grave. 31
b) Gatherings of musical instruments being played during worship. 32
c) Use of his name to bolster some modern spear heads of Tasawwuf
33
When examining their claim to Shaikh ul-Islam, one would have to
examine his life and personal characteristics. Fortunately, his biography
has not been lost in the vicissitudes of time, like in the case of religious
figures such as Buddha, Zoroaster or Confucius. The praise being to Allah,
the Hanbalīs, his legal school, keep and have always kept copious records
on their scholars. Those seeking to establish traditions from him
regarding his personal and devotional life have plenty of sources from
eye witness accounts. Eye witnesses include Imāms Muwaffaq ud-Dīn Ibn
Qudāmah,34 `Abdur-Rahmān ibn al-Jawzī 35 and other great Hanbalī
figures.
Shaikh ul-Islam `Abdul Qādir al-Jīlānī, may Allah have mercy upon him,
was once asked, ‘Has there ever been a walī of Allah upon other than the
creed of Imām Ahmad ibn Hanbal?’ He replied, ‘Neither has that
happened, nor will it happen.’ 36
Many may not understand the significance of the question or the answer.
The fact is, Shaikh ul-Islam al-Jīlānī, may Allah have mercy upon him, did
not give ijāzah to non-Hanbalīs in a capacity to succeed him or in
teaching Ihsān or other texts or sciences for that matter. In fact, the
very question, asked by a Hanbalī to him in a gathering of all Hanbalīs,
indicates the absence of non-Hanbalīs in the gatherings. In addition to
this point, his two most senior students, Imāms Muwaffaq ud-Dīn Ibn
Qudāmah and `Abdur-Rahmān ibn al-Jawzī, never report from anyone
else in the gatherings, be it music or otherwise. 37 And as his Tarīqah was
the first one that was fully operational in his lifetime and prepared, it
would take the most precedence. The practices and methods of those
scholars firmly grounded in the Sunnah, the Basran way of perfection
that emanated from the household of the Prophet, peace and blessings
be upon him, have the most right to be followed and not later accretions
attributed to them.
Some notes:
25 This is named after the legendary Shaikh ul-Islam `Abdul Qādir ibn Mūsā al-Jīlānī (470-560 AH/1077- 1166 AD), one of the greatest Hanbalī scholars of his time and a strong preacher of salvation and purification. Although originally coming from Jīlān in today’s Iran, he came to Baghdad and studied with scholars of high calibre, showing promise for the future. His Tarīqah began as a hostel for students, wives fleeing domestic abuse and a refuge from recovering alcoholics and criminals. These people in turn became
scholars or were reformed to upright believers. Some stayed at the hostel in the capacity of groundskeepers, cooks and the like. Of those that are claiming the Qādirī title so boastfully, where is the grassroots work that this way was founded upon? Indeed, much of the Tarīqah posturing has become little more than sloganeering.
30 This is the same thing that has happened with wind and string instruments. Scholars have used their rank as the measuring stick, shifting the ground from evidence and the first three generations, to their outward
character.
32 Those who would claim they may use wind and string instruments, Shaikh ul-Islam condemns them when he says,
‘They consider it lawful to play the drum, the mandolin and other musical instruments. They have no rules of lawfulness in their relations with women. They are unbelievers and it is permissible to shed their blood.’
(Kitābu Sirr il-Asrār wa Mazhar il-Anwār, pp. 114-115)
Shaikh ul-Islam says of clapping and dancing in circles of remembrance,
‘They claim that it is lawful to dance and clap hands. They claim for their shaikh a special status that puts him beyond the jurisdiction of the Sharī`a. This is an innovation, entirely incompatible with the practice of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him.’ (Kitābu Sirr il-Asrār wa Mazhar il-Anwār, pp. 114-115)
37 One then has to wonder, how have all of these non-Hanbalīs in creed and fiqh become involved with the Tarīqah when the first Qādirīs possessed no one from another madhhab? Claims made by some to the Qaadiri Tariqah seem even more fanciful when remembering that again, the Shaikh gave no unbroken ijāzah leading back to himself to anyone from another madhhab. Those who have any transmission back to him have interrupted or connected transmissions. The writer has only been able to find two authentic links of transmission from non-Hanbalis (and these are interrupted or connected, not unbroken) back to Shaikh ul-Islam, one being a Mālikī source and one coming from one Hanafi source. Besides this, evidence is lacking regarding thousands upon thousands claiming allegiance to a scholar who did not believe they could become a friend of Allah without leaving their present madhhab.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by tazkiyyah
Bookmarks