From *On the Boundaries of Theological Tolerance in Islam* (Faysal Al-Tafriqa Bayn Al-Islam wal Zandaqa) by Al-Ghazali (translation: pdf ) writes: > Included among such matters would be the claims of some **who style themselves Sufis to the effect that they have reached a state between themselves and God wherein they are no longer obligated to pray, and that drinking wine, devouring state funds, and other forms of disobedience are rendered licit to them**. Such people, without doubt, must be executed... This passage took me quite by surprise. The text is nearly 1000 years old and might be obsolete. Moreover, even back then, it might only be referring to a very small proportion of the Sufi population. Hence my question: **Question**: Is it common among Sufis to not feel obligated to pray, drink wine, etc.? I'm guessing it's not common, but I don't have anything to back up that guess. And there's plenty of Muslims around who don't pray, drink wine, and so on.

I'm a bit curious about the interpretation of the mentioning/honoring of Ibrahim (), especially from the Shi'a and/or Sufi perspective (not excluding other interpretations, but I have no access/knowledge of sources of the named sects) in context of the verses: - The verse in surat a-Shu'ara where Ibrahim () asks Allah () to give or grant him a good reputation by later generations: > And grant me a reputation of honor among later generations. (26:84 ) - and the verse from surat as-Saffat where Allah () has "answered" Ibrahim's supplication, saying: > And We left for him [favorable mention] among later generations: (37:108 )

I just answered https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/21751/17163 , and it struck me as likely that Sufis might have a different interpretation of anger and a different approach to coping with anger, perhaps more spiritual than other Muslims. Googling sufi anger gives two references: - Sufi University : He says that if you’re angry, then you do the Sufi practice of tawbah and return to divine love now. The tawbah practice can be used to bypass by the past and the 'root' of the problem. - Sufispirit.com.au : When a person gets angry, this is a form of pride. They are saying, 'I am better than you'. So it seems likely that there's a different attitude in Sufism to anger. However, I don't know how reliable/accurate these references are among Sufis. **Question**: What is the Sufi interpretation and method to control anger?

I'm a revert. So naturally, my knowledge is very limited. However, the Islam I came to is completely different from the one that people I live with practice. They have weird beliefs and Aqeedah like believing in 40 Abdaal that have powers *given to them by Allah*, and as soon as one of them dies, another person takes its place and becomes the new Abdaal. Out of curiosity, I asked one of them for the sources of these beliefs and he cited me [this source](https://makashfa.wordpress.com/2014/03/25/hadith-of-40-abdal-authenticity-and-proofs/) . I managed to find that hadith on Sunnah.com, its reference is [Musnad 896](https://sunnah.com/ahmad:896) : > Shuraih - i.e., bin Ubaid said: The people of Syria were mentioned in the presence of Ali bin Abi Talib (رضي الله عنه) when he was in Iraq. They said: Curse them, O Ameer al-Mu`mineen. He said: No, I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: “The abdal (people who are close to Allah) will be in Syria, and they will be forty men. Every time one of them dies, Allah will replace him with another man. By virtue of them rain is sent and through them victory is achieved against the enemy and punishment is warded off from the people of Syria. It is graded weak by Darussalam. The source clearly rejects that and gives reason for it. However, their argument heavily relies on the assumption that in the Musnad Ahmad, the takhrij about the hadith being weak is not from Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal himself. Probably suggesting that it is added by the publisher or something. See the image below. **Question: Is it true that this comment is not by Imam Ahmad? What is really the authenticity of these hadiths and why are there some scholars who seem to not think these stories are fabrication ([like here](https://islamqa.org/shafii/shafiifiqh/30127/narrations-on-the-abdal/)) . And also what are good hadiths or verses from the Qur'an to counter this belief if this is fabrication?** Jazakallahu Khayran!

The renowned South American writer, Borges , gave a series of conferences on diverse topics called *Siete Noches* (Seven nights), where we can read/hear the following (among many other scattered comments on the subject). > For the ulema, the doctors of Muslim law, the Qurʾān is not a book like the others. It is a book ―this is incredible, but this is how it is― previous to the Arabic language, so one may not study it historically or philologically, because it is previous to the Arabs, previous to its/their language, and previous to the universe. Nor even do they admit that the Qurʾān be a work of God; it is something more intimate and mysterious. The Qurʾān, for the orthodox Muslims, is an attribute of God, like His rage, His mercy, or His justice. The Qurʾān itself speaks of a mysterious book, the mother of the book, the celestial archetype of the Qurʾān. It is in heaven and is worshiped by the angels. (my own literal translation). I am interested in the second part of the paragraph where he says that the Qurʾān is considered an attribute of God. Does that exist in any school of Islamic mysticism? If so, which ones and what else has been said along those lines.

Did Al-Gazali, author of "The Revival of Religious Sciences" ever marry? Had he any wife or children?

Al-Burdah also known as الكواكب الدرية في مدح خير البرية is a poem of "imam al-Busiri" (the Muslim Sufi poet al-Busiri البوصيري whom studied the seerah of the prophet deeply and almost all his poems are praising the prophet()) which he wrote to praise the Prophet (). > The Burda is divided into 10 chapters and 160 verses all rhyming with each other. ... .Each verse ends with the Arabic letter mīm, a style called mīmīya. The 10 chapters of the Burda comprise: > > - On Lyrical Love Yearning > - On Warnings about the Caprices of the Self > - On the Praise of the Prophet > - On His Birth > - On His Miracles > - On the Exalted Stature and Miraculous Merits of the Qur'an > - On the Ascension of the Prophet > - On the Struggle of Allah's Messenger > - On Seeking Intercession through the Prophet > - On Intimate Discourse and the Petition of One's State. (Source: Wikipedia ) But this poem doesn't seem to find acceptance by the salafis (like Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab, and modern salafis such al-Albani, ibn Baz etc.). Of course mainly it is hard to say they reject the whole poem, but they surely seem to have some objections to certain parts/rhyms/words of it. > The Burda was accepted within Sunni Islam and was the subject of numerous commentaries by mainstream Sunni scholars such as Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, Nazifi and Qastallani. It was also studied by the Shafi'i hadith master Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852 A.H.) both by reading the text out loud to his teacher and by receiving it in writing from a transmitter who heard it directly from Busiri himself. > > Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab]], considered the poem to be shirk (idolatory). (source Wikipedia ) Note that the hanbali scholars ibn al-'Imaad ابن العماد الحنبلي and ibn Hisham (who also was a linguist he called his "sharh": الكواكب الدرية) is one of many scholars who have written explanations and interpretations of this poem. In many countries, this poem is well known or in the worst case a few verses of it are popular (see for example these youtube videos: Mesut Kurtis or an-Naqshabandi ). Some Muslims -mainly sufis- especially recite it/them during the Mawlid an-Nabawi. My question is what rhymes/words/parts do salafis reject or consider as blasphemous or as words of kufr etc.? (I don't need a full list but examples of each kind of objection)

I was reading about Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti on wikipedia and the article claimed that he formally allowed music so that it would be easier for the new converts to adopt Islam. It is sourced from a book called "The Oxford Dictionary of Islam" written by John Esposito published in 2004. Here is shown what was in the book: Is this true?

Adaab. I don't know much about different sub sects and diversities of Islamic culture but it looks like the Sufi tradition is quite different. They worship on shrine, practices meditation, uses musical instrument and have monk-like Darvishes who participate in religious dance. This differs from many other sects of Islam. Now, how does Islam (The Quran and Hadiths?) sees them? Is sufiism considered to be Islam ? (As I have read that Islam is very strict about whether every commandment is obeyed ) Is sufiism totally goes with Islamic religion? or it is seen as a different religion? Update on comment: I am looking for **all** major perspectives. This includes perspectives from Sufis themselves, Sociologists and other.

What is the meaning of the word 'spirituality'? What does it really mean? I understand that it could mean several things and is to be understood in specific context, but is there any general understanding of the term? Given a certain description of it, how can it be reconciled with the concept of a 'spiritual authority'? For example, in the context of political Islam and caliphate, there is difference of opinion related to whether the caliph is a temporal authority, spiritual authority or both. Sometimes I feel as though 'spirituality' is used just for quasi-obscurantism, i.e. it purports to claim that there are some very real matters pertaining to a very real and *accessible* 'spiritual realm,' (perhaps to select few) but then hides every description of it. The purpose of it being - in addition to the superiority of the elite few - a lure of the occult that works to numb the inquisition of a critical mind.

Ibn sina believes two things wich are problematic to me: 1.that there is emanationism of Allah(aj) in creation like the neoplatonics,thru his single eternal act of self knowing wich is eternal. wich to me would imply that creation is eternal.wich to me is problematic and it also implies we are Allah,doesn't it? this also is used by ibn sina to explain why a absolutely one cause can create a multiplicity of effects,as philosophers like Vasubandhu have criticized this to 'prove'that Allah(aj)doesn't or cannot be the creator of the universe. 2.that all possibilities are realized necasserily by Allah(aj) he bases this on his understanding of absolute Divine simplicity. what is the creed of the sufis in regards to this(emanationism of Allah in creation,wich would make it eternal) and do the sufis follow A'shari,maturidi or ibn A'rabi in Aqeedah?what is Ibn A'rabi's stance on this,and what is his account of Allah's simplicity,his tawheed and his role in creation? I do believe in divine simplicity because to me it means absolute tawheed and vice versa,and I also am from a trinitarian backround with a latin eternal modalistic model so I was led to islam by understanding Aquinas,and taking it to the conclusions that his catholic presuppositions prevented him from reaching Vis-a-vis the Trinity. but I heard that al-Ghazali spoke against absolute divine simplicity?if I believe in absolute divine simplicity am I still a orthodox muslim?or am I outside the pale of islam?

Some Muslims after a Fardh Salaah recite a wazifah (Allah's name or Ya Nur or Quranic ayah) so many times you then blow on your fingers and rub over your eyes. Virtue of doing so is Allah will strengthen your eyes and protect them from seeing haraam. Is this proven from the sources or bid'ah please?

Are sufi schools equally divided amongst the two major branches of Islam - Shia & Sunni, or are they primarily associated with Shia Islam?

A Pew Poll has given the percentages of Sunnis, Shiites, and those who identify as "just a Muslim" throughout the world. Each of these is considered mutually exclusive by the pollster. Then it says: >For some Muslims, another layer of identity comes from membership in a Sufi order. ... These orders can fall within either Sunni or Shia Islam. It then gives the percentages of Sufis in various countries, as it had for Sunnis and Shiites. But it doesn't really give an idea of the overlap between them. Have any polls or studies said how many Sufi Muslims also adhere to Sunnism or Shiism?

I heard to perform Ism-e-Azam in several places. I heard that it has a significance but don't know how or what? So, - What is Ism-e-Azam? - What it's significance and why?

al-ʾImām al-Ṣādiq (عليه السلام) was asked about the sufis, he replied: "They are one of our enemies. Whoever is inclined to them is one of them, and will be gathered with them on the Day of The Judgement. There will be people who claim to love us (Ahl al-Baīt), but will be inclined to the sufis, they will resemble them, they will use their titles. They will replicate their words. Whoever is inclined to them isn't of us. We reject those ones; whoever denies them and responds them will be granted with the status of perfoming Jihād with Rasūl Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله) and his family. References: Safīnat al-Bihār volume 2, page 57. Mustadrak al-Wasāʾil volume 12, page 323.

What is the concept of hoolol in Sufuism? From my understand it is the concept that that Allah dwells in the creation? This to me opens the door to great forms of shirk as this seems a concept from Hinduism. As i have herd such statements among the sufis : Ibn Arabi said, "العبد رب و الرب عبد" or "al-abd-u rabb-un wa-r-rabb-u abd-un" (the slave is the lord and the lord is the slave)." In my understanding Allah resides above al-arsh : The Most Merciful [who is] above the Throne established.(Quraan 20:5) This to me is a concept very far from Islam and the tawheed of Allah. Pleases help me to understand this concept and its validity as this is very confusing to me.

What are the views of Shia Muslims regarding the principles of esotericism that is promoted by Sufism? I would like to disregard more fringe values purported as Sufism such as drinking and worshipping saints (literally rather than merely intercession) so as to minimize the misrepresentation of the Sufi doctrine.

I have come to know there are reports about prophet (S.A.W) isolating himself for worship. Is this isolation regarded as *khawla* as defined or does it have any other interpretations in Islam and *'uzla* is also understood as a kind of isolation for worship, so are they both in the same context or if different, what are the main differences?. Mostly I find these two terms in Sufi literature but haven't come across a definition related to authentic Islamic tradition.

When we read the biography of ibn 'Ata' Allah (also referred to as ibn 'Ata' al-Iskandari -from Alexandria-) ابن عطاء الله السكندري. We usually read that he was following the maliki school of jurisprudence and it is also said that he was a scholar and an opponent of Sufism before meeting his sufi teacher abul 'Abbas al-Mursi أبو العباس المرسي. It is said that he used to say: All translation in this post are of my own take them carefully! > "من قال أن هنالك علماً غير الذي بأيدينا فقد افترى على الله عز وجل" > "Whoever pretended that there's a knowledge apart of that we have in hands, he has fabricated a lie against Allah the Almighty." He is also known as the teacher of the well known Shafi'i scholar Taqi ad-Dyn as-Subki تقي الدين السبكي the father of Taj ad-Dyn as-Subki تاج الدين السبكي. I also found in ibn al-'Imad's ابن العماد الحنبلي book Shadharaat a-Dhahab شذرات الذهب: > وقال الكمال جعفر: سمع من الأبرقوهي، وقرأ النحو على الماروني، وشارك في الفقه والأدب، وصحب المرسي."شذرات الذهب " لابن العماد (6 /20). > Al-Kamal Ja'afar said: He heard the Al-Abarqohy and he learnt nahw (Arabic grammar) from al-Maroni, and he has some contibutions in Fiqh and Adab and he accompanied al-Mursi. Ahmad Zarruq أحمد زروق an author of one of the commentaries of ibn 'Ata' Allah's "Hikam" wrote in his introduction of the commentary: > كان جامعاً لأنواع العلوم من تفسير وحديث وفقه ونحو وأصول وغير ذلك كان متكلماً على طريق أهل التصوف واعظا انتفع به خلق كثير وسلكوا طريقه. He gathered different kinds of knowledge like tafsir, hadith-sciences, fiqh, nahw', osol and other sciences and he was among those who spoke in the manner of Sufis and he was a preacher from whom many people have gathered benefit and followed his path. If he was a scholar there must be at least a mentioning of some of his works or contributions in the jurisprudence or other "Islamic sciences", but all one can easily find are his works on Sufi or Sufi related topics. I'd like to know if there are works that can be identified as his works on Jurisprudence?