Being a student of knowledge is undoubtedly a meritorious endeavor. That is, if you do it for the right reasons. As I mentioned elsewhere, the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam forbade us from earning knowledge for the sake of argumentation and other ignoble reasons. Alhamdulillaah, the Ummah has enough students of knowledge - we see more every day. Yet how many are students of Islam? That is to say how many are willing to accept the Truth from the Quran, the Sunnah, the Sahaabiyaat, and the classical scholars without having a pre-conceived notion?

     Yet I can hardly blame the students of knowledge who were immediately told, upon signing for the job, "Republican or Democrat? Chicken or Beef? Salafi or Sufi?" The fact is one can hardly study in any religious institution that is not already aligned with a methodology and an approach to Islam. And while that may be useful in learning one of the schools of thought on Islam, it is up to the "Independent" to take from various sources to get a more holistic view of Islam.

       I know the Truth can be a scary thing. This is not only true of atheists, Jews and Christians, and "others" whom we ask to be fair and unbiased, but applies to us as well. For most of us have notions we were raised with, that our parents or society taught us, that we instinctively felt, and when those notions are challenged, it takes some strength not to as the Quran describes it, be "averse". So how can we ask others to give up their whole lives, everything they knew and held dear, if we are not ready to do the same?

     The person who sincerely seeks the Truth, "no fear shall be upon them, nor shall they grieve". For if you find you are mistaken, you will be happy to correct yourself and align yourself with the Truth, and if you find you are correct, you will be happy to have even greater conviction and firmer resolve. But this is not an easy state to achieve. Most people simply cannot let go and are fooling themselves when they fancy themselves independent. This does not in any way mean you may not have beliefs, just that you are willing to give them up for things which may be frightening or unpleasant, simply because you can admit the Truth.

     Another issue is that of "guidance". There is a lot of worry that perhaps you will be "misguided" if you are "open" - but how do you know that you are guided in the first place? Because someone told you? The only way is to be sincere towards Allah and let Him guide you - to not reject the Truth when it becomes available to you.  For if you have no pre-conceived notion, it will not harm you. If the Truth supports this, you go towards this, and if the Truth supports that, you go towards that. Although guidance is an important issue, the WAY most people have of "ensuring" guidance is simple - do not listen to the others who are "misguided". So how would a Christian, who is also of course keen on not being "misguided" by a bunch of devilish, barbaric polytheists (Muslims) ever come to Islam? How would an atheist abandon his supposed objective, scientific reality for "religious delusion"? The fact is, Islam IS the Truth and ENCOMPASSES the Truth, all of it, and a KNOWLEDGABLE Muslim fears to go nowhere.

     This leads to another unfortunate issue - that of suppressing knowledge. In the Quran, Allah makes numerous entreaties to the People of the Book (Jews and Christians, the recipients of previous revelations) to not hide the Truth (the coming of Muhammad, the revelation of God, etc.). Yet how often we see Muslims following in their footsteps - they hide some information that would take away from what they want others to believe, all in the name of "saving others". Yet as the Quran mentions of those who think they are making sure others are "guided" (and by guided they mean think the way they do) or fooling Allah and the Believers, they only fool themselves. Why not admit the Truth and what Truth from Islam are we afraid of anyway?

     Which brings me to the central point of this paper - a case study of how far things have become polarized amongst the Muslims. Aside from the laypeople, who by in large, try their best to fulfill their worship to God, most of the "knowledgable" people are the ones who have rent the Ummah in two. Perhaps they have good intentions and want to save us from ourselves and all that, but they do so by suppressing knowledge or presenting things AS IF there is ijmaa’ah (concensus) on an issue when none exist.

     Take the two "sons", Ibn ‘Arabi and Ibn Taymiyyah. Unfortunately, these two figures have become SYMBOLIC for each side, and no longer can anyone see them for what they were - but they must be aggrandized and made "sacred" because they represent two philosophies and approaches to Islam. Perhaps any of you who "do not know", meaning those who are open to information, will find the following information about them interesting (I make no claim to interest those who "know" for most likely they do not see information as information, but merely as ammunition or scandal).

     Ibn Taymiyyah, rahimahullaah

     Ibn Taymiyyah (1263 - 1328) was a great Hanbali scholar and considered "Shaykh ul Islaam" due to his immense knowledge. I have seen some people downplay his knowledge or impact, but no doubt, these people are not just in their assessment. I don’t think anyone can doubt his knowledge or his impact on religious matters. Nevertheless, he did diverge from the Hanbali school and was censured and even imprisoned for some of his beliefs and fataawaa, some of which were heavily refuted or flatly contradicted by other ‘ulemaa` of his time.

     However, the REAL issue with Ibn Taymiyyah is not if he was right or wrong, but the fact that he is the "founder" of the "Salafi da’wah". Salafis, of course claim there is no founder except the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam himself, and  I am sure are sincere in this belief. But the fact remains that Ibn Taymiyyah came with opinions not previously held and did have a very dominant personality and had a vigorous and coherent methodology. This is not a problem for him, but rather, the problem is that nowadays, Ibn Taymiyyah is untouchable to Salafis. I have seen many instances where the IDEA that he made a mistake (in fiqh or ‘aqeedah, etc.) is dismissed outright. IF there is any hint of a refutation or rebuke, even from his own students, it is dismissed as fabrication or other (as one site labeled them) "plausible" explanations. (Uh, "plausible" is not the same as "probable" or even "true".) 

     Perhaps Ibn Taymiyyah had great ideas and principles for Islam - yet the status and position he receives in the current da’wah is a little extreme. Many who defend him have not in reality read some of his own statements which would raise some eyebrows in relation to issues of ‘aqeedah, shirk, or kufr. Yet the public must be guarded against those statements because he is no longer a scholar - but a symbol. May Allah have mercy on him - until now I consider Ibn Taymiyyah as very dear to my heart. And I do consider him one of the greatest scholars, beginning with the Tabi’een on down, but I do not delude myself into thinking he was the only one or whom all of Islam must originate from.

     I must say I purposely did not reprint the negative things I have read about Ibn Taymiyyah because I personally believe some of his statements are misunderstood, while some of the statements are vehemently attacked as "baseless" while I have some doubt if indeed they were. Once you see people who can not admit the truth of statements that go against their beliefs, their testimony becomes unreliable. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if after publication of this almost NOTHING about Ibn Taymiyyah, "it" will have to be "refuted" and the symbol will have to be hotly defended, for the very da’wah of "true" Islam depends on this legend. Why publish another book of Seerah when you can study the life of this great scholar and founder of an entire movement? So I leave that to anyone who cares to research it for himself/herself. Why? NOT to indulge in the negative points of ANY of the scholars, but merely to see that things are not always what you are told…  

     Ibn ‘Arabi, rahimahullaah

     Ibn ‘Arabi (1165-1240) was born in ‘Andalus but settled in Damascus. He was known to be a great Mujtahid Imam, and followed the Dhaahiri (literalist) school of thought in Fiqh. He was also known to be a pious ascetic, Sufi mystic, and prolific writer. Aside from that, many of his statements (the same issue lol - one should note not all statements attributed to him are accepted as "authentic") came under scrutiny in his time until now.

     Again, you should know that Ibn ‘Arabi is merely "symbolic" of Sufism and even Traditionalism (I have written elsewhere that the two are not necessarily synonymous). The fact of the matter is that the scholars were divided about him. Some deeply believed he was a saint (walee), and others declared his beliefs heretical or even disbelief. What might surprise many Sufis is that these were not just "anybodys" who disagreed with him. Even some of his own teachers, even those who were masters of Tasawwuf, condemned him.

     Why is this so hard for Sufis to admit? I see countless defenses of one who was not unanimously sanctioned - because again, he is a legendary figure. It would be better if the people were just and said that the people disagreed about him - while keeping his contributions. Yet, Ibn ‘Arabi, being a symbolic figure, is heavily attacked by Salafis, most of whom do not understand any of his writings and could not be just to him to save their lives (of course, when attacking someone, you need not verify sources), and also fanatically defended by Sufis. It’s as if the Salafis are saying "Sufism, you mean, like Ibn ‘Arabi?!", seeking to cite an "extreme" example of spirituality gone awry as a kind of blanket refutation of something which also cannot be given just estimate (ie Sufism). And the Sufis of course must rush to his defense, seeking to erase any blemish on the legendary figure.

     The sad thing is this is so extreme it’s almost shocking - I wrote an article a few weeks back MENTIONING Ibn ‘Arabi and in fact what I said about him was you could say, something a Salafi could take as a "point" for their side - yet it did not stop a Salafi brother from writing an entire "refutation" of Ibn ‘Arabi based on nothing! (Should I be flattered that my MENTIONING someone is enough to illicit a clarification?) And this grew, with another brother calling me and saying, "You like Ibn ‘Arabi, the one who said such and such…"?! So you see, :) at no point will either of these political parties let an incident go by that they don’t have to make sure that everyone knows exactly what to think about the "Sons of War". We are supposed to be Ahl us Sunnah - but now add to that Ahl Ibn Taymiyyah or Ahl Ibn ‘Arabiyy too? I challenge you - simply ask a group of people what they think of either of these "decisive" figures - and I dare you to get a "mixed" answer. The responses have been programmed very well depending on who you are. May Allah save us from the traps of Shaitaan, fixated on useless issues and dividing our Ummah further.             

     So why do we do it? Because da’wah is now politics, and instead of discussing ISSUES, we discuss PERSONALITIES. And of course, trust - who do you trust? Why the guy with the big grin and the easy answers, who says, "Vote for this guy - he’s your ticket to salvation! And here’s all the dirt on the other guy!"

     Things have gone too far and I pray that this "violence" stops. Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullaah was one of the greatest scholars of Islam, a brilliant writer, and not the founder of Islam. Ibn ‘Arabi was a great scholar, known for personal devotion, and also not the founder of Islam. What these men brought of Truth, take it, and what they erred on, may Allah forgive them. If they were wrong on any matter, what harm can it do to Islam? For Islam is above that and these tribalistic alliances should end. You will not be asked in the grave your opinion of either of these.

     Perhaps the best answer I have seen was the one given by Imam An-Nawawi, rahimahullaahu ta’aalaa, when asked about Ibn ‘Arabi:

That was a nation who has passed away. They shall receive the reward of what they earned, and you of what you earn. And you will not be asked of what they used to do.

Sigh…it is really frustrating when you are trying to find answers and everyone has an agenda. I don’t mind if people take sides (except of course when they make it out that it’s the only side) but I do mind the lack of honesty. People either tell outright lies, spread fabrications without verifying them, quote things out of context, or give you a “story” (as opposed to facts). There are several major obstacles I have encountered.

The first is when people are not just. For example, I heard some things about Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullaah. The speaker would mention Ibn Taymiyyah’s opinion as if it was a new thing, whereas Ibn Taymiyyah would often hold an opinion or practice of a Companion as followable. Wouldn’t it be better to say that Ibn Taymiyyah was following an odd opinion of the Sahaabiyyaat which is not followable according to the 4 schools, etc.? That way you credit where the idea came from but can also further the point that it is not valid. Another example, many people criticize many of the opinions of the 4 schools, yet those opinions have proof to back them up. It does not matter if you hold the proof as strong enough or not (with your amazing knowledge of fiqh) but rather the opinions adhere to a methodology which is established and is valid. Why can’t we respectfully and truthfully present the other side, even if we disagree with it?

Another problem is when us “common people” get warned about people that are “deviant”. Mostly, someone will be sitting there minding their own business when someone comes along and says “let me tell you about those people“. This is equivalent to a non-Muslim learning about Islam from some Christians. Unfortunately, many Muslims have no idea what they are “refuting” or “calling against” - they simply pass on the dirt they heard from the outside. And the problem with that is usually the “objections” are extreme and atypical anyway. What happens then is that a bunch of lay people, for the “good of the Ummah” keep preaching against a people they know virtually nothing about (except the extreme stories). It reminds me of the time when at a conference there was a convert sister next to me taking notes. The speaker likened something haraam to some practices of Jamaat ut Tabligh. The sister clicked her tongue, shook her head, and commented, “I can’t believe Tablighis drink!” I, having grown up Tablighi, pointed out that the speaker hadn’t said that, only likened one of their practices to something else. Alhamdulillaah, the sister was humble enough to realize her mistake, and turning red, said, “Astaghfirullaah” and erased her note, but it just goes to show you how wildly crazy a group can look from someone who knows nothing about them but some “refutations”. If you are a layperson like me and really want to know the truth about a group, what I suggest is that you meet people who are of that persuasion, and try to see why it is that they believe/practice as they do. Yes, you could still reject it, but at least this time you’d be doing it with actual knowledge. I hate to say it, but often we have been scared and barred from contact with a “deviant group” of which we did not have accurate information.

Another thing is that hardly anyone can be consistent to what they themselves are saying in terms of methodology. I saw some brothers mock the author of a Tablighi book because he had used weak ahadeeth in it, yet there is practically consensus that you can use weak ahadeeth for “fadhaa`il”. In addition, it is part of Imam Ahmad’s methodology - that when there is a weak hadith, he prefers this to reasoning. These same brothers, many of whom champion Imam Ahmad, could obviously not give the Tablighi book any respect simply because it was what they considered not correct in its political alignment. On the other hand it seems that many people present Traditionalism as synonymous with Sufism, when that was not the case at all. Or you see that often times people go to great lengths to clarify the position of a “misunderstood” scholar (ex: Ibn ‘Arabi, whose own teachers differed about him) whereas they do not go to equal lengths to understand the “deviant” beliefs of their opponents. I even saw one article that mentioned that to understand Ibn ‘Arabi’s work, one should fulfill an entire list of conditions, some to do with external things such as knowledge, and others which were of the heart! You have to wonder if you could demand such a list to understand some of the other “misunderstood” scholars of the past. To me, I try to understand all of them and I have the greatest respect for all of them, whether I hold their positions or not, rahihmahumullaahu ta’aalaa.

But I believe the most common and frustrating is that almost everyone nowadays is political and has an agenda or thesis, and this clouds all the Islam they will teach you. I don’t know if I really know anyone who says, “I want to know what Islam is” and goes out with an open mind and tries to learn from the sources of Islam - the Quran, the Sunnah, the Sahaabah, the scholars of Islam, and doesn’t already have a methodological persuasion. And it only seems to be getting worse over time. I read some statements from classical scholars, and while many differed, they still had some level of respect or tolerance. It seems that the minor differences keep getting magnified over time until now there are huge chasms between 2 sides who may well both have very good points. I also know all this is done with “good intentions” but someone else’s good intentions cannot determine what the truth is for everyone else. We each need to make our intention to seek Islam sincerely, not have eyes which only see “ammunition” for our opponents or “fuel” for our own arguments. And to me the worst blindness is when someone sees a proof (say a Companion who held an opinion) and insists on his position as the only one, making up plausible excuses to dismiss it, simply because it contradicts what he already believes. And honestly, I blame the scholars for this - because although a scholar, with his knowledge, may in fact disagree with another group, he has no wisdom in spreading his belief to the masses of common people, who now rejoice in their own group and make enemies of all those their leader has called against, so that even the most ignorant or sinful person on the street has a superior attitude towards “the deviants”.

The fact is, if you keep getting burned by the scare tactics of each group, you simply stop aligning yourself to any one of them. (The same way very early on I became suspicious of the assertion of “ijmaa’ah” - how many times did I believe it only to find other scholars, just as respected, even on the same “side” methodologically who held a dissenting opinion!) Due to all this, I don’t think I can ever call myself anything except a Muslim or at most, a “Sunni”. That is why I refuse to join a party. NOT because I am one of those “feel good” Muslims who says “can’t we all just get along” simply so the issues will go away, but because I have looked at many of those issues (and continue to) and sincerely see that both sides have good points and that I haven’t yet got “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” from anyone yet. It’s like trying to see an entire picture which has broken and become fragmented, while some people are withholding the pieces. May Allah grant myself and our Ummah tawfeeq…

And hold fast, all of you together, to the Rope of Allah, and be not divided among yourselves, and remember Allah’s Favour on you, for you were enemies one to another but He joined your hearts together, so that, by His Grace, you became brethren, and you were on the brink of a pit of Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus Allah makes His Signs clear to you, that you may be guided. (3:103)

and:

And be not as those who divided and differed among themselves after the clear proofs had come to them. It is they for whom there is an awful torment. (3:105)and:   The believers are nothing else than brothers. So make reconciliation between your brothers, and fear Allah, that you may receive mercy. (49:10)and:   O you who believe! Let not a group scoff at another group, it may be that the latter are better than the former; nor let (some) women scoff at other women, it may be that the latter are better than the former, nor defame one another, nor insult one another by nicknames. How bad is it, to insult one’s brother after having Faith. And whosoever does not repent, then such are indeed the Unjust. (49:11)

I have been looking into the issue of Tasawwuf (more formally) for over 2 years now and have been in Jordan for 1 1/2 years, and in all that time I did not actually consider joining the Tariqah. I was interested in learning, pretty much in an academic sort of way. My husband would even say to me sometimes, “Why don’t you join?” and I was resistant for many reasons, among them my belief that they are not necessary, for I have seen some people who simply have a closeness with Allah and devotion to Him that is innate and unschooled. I remember my grandfather, may Allah have mercy on him, who would wear his attire of the Sunnah, loved to dress in white, who would comb his beard before every prayer, and who would walk not 5, but 6 times a day to the masjid (including tahajjud). He had three prostration markings on his forehead, in a pyramid, and if he had a toothache would say, “O Allah, this is the tooth you gave me. If you wish to cure it, cure it, and if you wish to leave it, leave it.” He was not part of any tariqah but simply had a deep attachment and love for Allah.

So I do not know why, and Allah knows best why, only in the past several weeks have I suddenly felt urgently that I would like to join. Perhaps it was because I started studying Quran. I almost give a sigh of relief when I see that if I hadn’t joined the Tariqah, it would have been as if I was only gaining knowledge but not light. Anyway, Allah owns our hearts and turns them as He wills, and I pray that I am guided.

I prayed istekhaarah and joined, seeking at first only to “learn”, but now happy with what I find. Again, I am sure someone could do it on their own, but I wonder if most do. It is nice to follow someone for a change (the bai’ah means that you will listen to your Shaikh in what is right, as he is there to instruct you - and if you wish, you can leave the Tariqah at any time). It is nice to systematically look at yourself (I have done this in the past, but it is nice to follow a tradition of amazing worshippers and scholars who for hundreds of years have done it this way) - the Tariqah is a self-motivated course, and you only get out of it what you put in. No one comes after you - but as you complete your lessons, you seek more out. It is beautiful, alhamdulillaah.

Also, it does not take as much time as I thought - the only mandatory thing (aside from any incidental requests/commands, etc.) is to do the Wird (a compilation of adhkaar) morning and night. Aside from that, you can take as long as you want on any of the lessons.

The basis of the Tariqah is what is called “The 40 Grand”. It requires you to pray all of your prayers on time, without excuse, as well as to control your anger (defined as not shouting, cursing, or crossing bounds when feeling angry) for 40 consecutive days. If you can do this, you can begin Lesson 1. If you ever break the 40 Grand, you must repeat it (sort of a cleansing and preparation for any lessons you get) and then you can restart the lesson you were on. No matter what you think of the whole Sufism business, you have to admit - focus on prayer and controlling yourself can lead to good.

The Tariqah traces its chain back to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam by way of ‘Ali radhi’allaahu ‘anhu and Hasan al Basree rahimahullaah. Many of the greatest scholars of Islam were a part of it. As Shaikh Nuh explained, it was not knowledge that was passed down but “haal”, or state of being, their having met and learned from one another. The goal at the end is to reach a level of emaan as close as possible to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, just as if you were to take an ijaazah in Quran, your goal after completing the courses, exercises, and programs, would be to recite as close as possible to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam.

It’s funny, I have almost done a 180. Initially I wanted knowledge of Tasawwuf, but I am less interested in the knowledge of it now (I do have basic information about its validity and origins, etc.) than I am in using it as a means of self-improvement and strengthening of myself. Because my primary goal in terms of knowledge is still the Quran, may Allah open my heart to keep it.

I hope this account helps any of you who are “out of the loop” and simply curious about this matter, but there are many sites and links out there (both official and unofficial) if you need more information. To me, it’s not as big a deal as some (who accept Sufism or those who do not) would make of it. It is not a symbol of my alliance with anyone or disavowal of anyone. To me I am simply open to any way (from Ahl us Sunnah) Allah opens for me, and I pray it is beneficial for me. I do believe we each have a “path” to Allah if we are sincere, and so we take what we find beneficial for ourselves from anywhere in our quest for Him. If it is for you or not, that is for you to decide…

I have to admit, at one time I was. Not only was he a “crazy Sufi shaikh”, deviating and inventing, opposed to the Sunnah, but even his name was weird (Ha Meem - what was that supposed to mean?).

But now I have come to know more of the reality of who he is. No one asked me to write this piece, and perhaps people (both who like him and don’t) may even be upset with me for writing, but I wanted to share this with you since so many people have a phobia of Shaikh Nuh Ha Meem Keller. (I’ve heard him referred to as “the Killer”). He’s supposed to be some monster of crazy deviations, etc. but I think if people met him or knew some things about him, they would be surprised (just like I think some Sufis who met those monstrous “Wahhabis” might feel if the person was a pretty normal Muslim who didn’t have to make takfeer of them and kill them on the spot).

I want to add I am not one of those um “deranged” fans who are like “oh my God, Shaikh Nuh!” which I would be lying if I didn’t say that is annoying (when it happens to anyone, not just this Shaikh). I straightforwardly asked him if I could join his tariqah for “learning purposes” and he was cool about it, may Allah reward him. So I guess what I’m trying to say is that I’m “hard to impress” and don’t really go “ga-ga” for anyone.

But I will say this - I think it is very hard to not respect Shaikh Nuh. He is knowledgable, mashallaah. But more than that is simply the way he “is”, his practices. He seems to do everything with thought, discipline, and ihsaan (in the sense of “in the best way”). I guess you just expect a lot from someone like that. And so far, I haven’t been disappointed.

First off, he has extreme respect for knowledge, for Islamic Law. He is not one of those “crazy shaikhs” that think they are above the Law (the Shari’ah) rather it’s the opposite - he takes the strictest opinion of all the schools for himself. The women who are in his presence must wear niqab, whether they wear it normally or not, so he will not see them. So the “crazy, liberal” image of the Sufi does not apply to him at all. Instead, he takes the hard road and has great respect for Allah’s Law.

Secondly, his appearance, his mannerisms, his demeanor is the closest to date that I have personally seen of someone in terms of resembling the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam. I am not saying he IS the Prophet, or at his level, nor am I saying there couldn’t be someone better than him. Just personally he reminds me very strongly of someone who resembles him, the closest I have seen until now. He doesn’t laugh and joke, but can certainly smile or be kind to someone. He also enjoins discipline on himself and those around him. He occupies himself with rememberance of Allah (not talking about his personal life, since I don’t know of that, but meaning in his speech to others). He also works to support himself and is therefore not flaky.

I myself have always had an admiration of what I call “golden qualities”, qualities I feel are universally admirable (by themselves) in anyone. For example, working for yourself is more admirable than someone who does not work for themselves or is supported by others. Note that Islam does not necessarily REQUIRE these golden qualities (for example, it is ok to ask others for help etc.), but they are held up as lofty ideals that were achieved by some (the Sahaabiyaat, etc.). Shaikh Nuh simply seems to have many of those golden qualities, and Allah knows best.

Even his physical appearance, even if he is a “white guy” exudes wisdom and strength - he wears the turban, as is the Sunnah of our Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, modest, simple clothing which is neat, and he carries himself with dignity but is not lofty. Of course he has a long beard. And I hate to say it, but he’s not fat. The reason I say this is that there is a hadith mentioning it will be common in the last days and you somehow lose a tiny bit of respect for a scholar who seems to not eat in moderation. (The same as seeing an overweight doctor who tells you that you must monitor your eating habits.)

Anyway, I have always had respect for people higher than me in knowledge and practice - and Allah knows best every person’s internal status - but I have always sought them out. Even if I am with some sisters in a social gathering I am always looking for someone “better than me”, so I might be influenced by them to be better myself. I have the ability to “take the good and leave the bad” and so have been known to sit with sisters of “deviation” if I saw that there was something in terms of devotion to Allah I could gain from them. So I had a general respect for Shaikh Nuh before I got here, even if I disagreed with him on some things. Now that I have experienced being around him, I can say that that has only increased.

For example, when he sat with me a few minutes, answering a question, when the adhaan was called, he stopped and recited along with the du’aas. Now, you might not think that’s a big deal, but it was to me, for I have seen many scholars and speakers who do not pause, but continue talking, explaining, etc. I know that’s not “haraam” but still, it just raised the bar for me to see someone who had respect for the Sunnah to such a level, who wasn’t too rushed or eager to abide by it. I just expect better from him now, and that’s a good thing.

I know Shaikh Nuh is human and of course I don’t raise him to the level of the classical scholars, the Sahaabiyaat, let alone the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, nor am I saying he’s the only one like this or that he is “perfect” and without fault. But subhanallah, you just have to respect someone who seems to be so attached to Allah and His Messenger sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, not just in his lectures, but in his life. There are few, if any, shuyookh that I have seen match that “total package”, who weren’t disappointing in one way or another.

So I urge anyone who cares to meet people who are more knowledgeable or devoted than them, to seek them out for it is one of the most beneficial things you can do. As ‘Umar radhi’allaahu ‘anhu said, in the dunya look to the one below you, so that you feel gratitude, and in the aakhirah look to the one above you, so you do not feel self-satisfied. Subhanallah, we do things the opposite way, keeping up with the Jones’s and feeling we are the best in our group of friends, or that we’re not “that bad” (and happy with that!). So ignore the myths, the lies, the attacks, even the annoying hype - look to benefit yourself in knowledge and devotion.

That is why, although I don’t believe it’s a must or even the only way to get to a lofty level with Allah, I have decided to inshallah join the tariqah, simply because as I said I want to learn about and experience the knowledge of tasawwuf, as well as the fact that I have the opportunity right now to be instructed by a teacher like Shaikh Nuh (who knows if I will have the opportunity later, as I first planned).

May Allah guide him, preserve him, bring through him much benefit for the Muslims, and grant him the status of those near to Allah…

I must say, I’m one of the most naive people I’ve met. :) When I heard about the “Hadhrah”, or “Dhikr” I seriously just thought it was a bunch of people sitting and saying “Subhaanallaah…Alhamdulillaah…Allaahuakbar” and I was really looking forward to it. LOL when I got there, I was surprised to see everyone stand up, hold hands in a circle, and start moving and breathing in rhythm. My first instinct was to speak to Allah - “Oh my goodness! What is this? O Allah, forgive me if we are angering you!” etc. I obviously did not want to disrupt the devotion I saw around me. I half-heartedly mimicked everyone else, all the while making my own “Dhikr” in my heart!

The women around me were bending forward, bowing to each other, gasping, some crying even. I could not make out what they were saying, and the men, who lead the Hadhrah from their side, were singing and chanting, but again, I could not understand the Arabic. It seemed very strange to me, even though in general, I believe in being soft-hearted and emotional about the religion. I felt like a robot, a stiff and stoic person compared to them. That was my first experience of the Hadhrah, and I did not find it beneficial. I just couldn’t shake the feeling that I couldn’t see the Prophet doing this, and if any non-Muslims watched us and asked “why do you do that/where did that practice come from” I hardly knew how I would answer!

However, I was still learning about Sufism in general and I was convinced that there were ways to attain spiritual enlightenment, to do trainings in exercise and discipline, etc. and I still wanted to learn. But I needed to know what I was doing. So I tried reading up on it. After some searching, I found there was not much that was useful on the net. Most things were just vague benefits or experiences. Shaikh Nuh did write a good article about it, finally addressing some of the legal aspects of it. However, I wanted to know what the “acts” of the Hadhrah were, the significance of the actions, for without the meaning behind them, they were just movements to me.

I finally spoke to Umm Sahl (Shaikh Nuh’s wife), and although I am sure I could get a more complete picture by asking the Shaikh himself (sorry but I just find speaking to a women more convenient and have been so busy I have sort of put that off) I did learn some things. First of all, the Hadhrah varies from tariqah to tariqah. She mentioned the Naqshabandis are closer to what I had in mind - straight up focus on worship. The Shadhili tariqah is more focused on knowledge, and so many of the chants/songs you hear from the men are poems and traditions in that vein.

The rhythms are a way to retain focus (indeed, the Hadhrah can be a solid hour of physical/mental focus), the holding of hands and circle embrace a unity with the worshippers, the Raaki’een, etc. And the breathing is something called “Dhikr Sadri”, or remembrance in a special way in which you say “Allah” while breathing through your chest. (I was happy that at least they were saying “Allah” and not just having empty breathing or chanting something unfamiliar.)

I could live with that. Now I am looking forward to going there once a week and sort of having a spiritual workout. It is actually very nice and relaxing, and can certainly stir your emotions, and when that emotion is love towards Allah, that is a good thing. Although of course, “plain” dhikr is the light of the soul, its nourishment (I remember when I was a teenager I could actually make my mouth taste sweetness by reciting adhkaar thousands of times - and it was so pleasurable subhanallaah) - this is a nice variation. Again, I don’t feel anyone “has” to do it this way, for there are lots of ways, both formal and informal, personal and institutionalized, but it IS “a” way.

I just wanted to share this with you in case you were curious, and give you an “insider’s view” because honestly, what I have seen countless times in my life is that things look quite different from the outside.

Although the Mawlid is by no means exclusive to “Sufis” or “Traditionalists”, I do know amongst Salafis it is an area of apprehension since it is thought of as a bid’ah. First of all, you should realize that the Mawlid was approved of by many great classical scholars from Ahl-us-Sunnah, including Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani, who is respected by all. Again, I have written about the differing viewpoints on innovation elsewhere, so this piece is merely a glimpse for those who are curious, as to what happens at “a mawlid” (scary music).

As I said, most Muslims all over the world do celebrate the Mawlid, and here in Jordan, the Salafis tend to simply hold talks on the Seerah of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam while the Sufis are more ceremonial. I myself did not attend this year’s Mawlid celebration at the zawiyah (nor the class held at my Quran school), not out of disrespect to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, but because I was busy. I did, however, attend last year’s Mawlid, and here was my experience of that.

Now, I have heard of people who believe the Prophet visits them at the Mawlid, etc. but the one in Shaikh Nuh’s camp was quite “orthodox”. First off, the date is not strictly adhered to. They tend to have the Mawlid for the men on a certain day, the women and children’s Mawlid following.

Secondly, it is a time of happiness and love, of remembrance of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, and a meditation of his virtues. There are poems read, nasheeds sung, of course the Burdah is recited. It is all very respectful and tame. Finally, there was a standing for his honor, but it was nothing crazy, merely symbolic. Overall, I felt satisfied with the result and think that once in a while we do need a beautiful reminder of the Best of Creation and be thankful to Allah for sending him to us. There were fresh flowers in the hall and beautiful scented candles lit. Alhamdulillaah, there was nothing cheesy or overly commercial. It was just…nice.

Again, I don’t feel it’s “fardh” on me to do the Mawlid, but I did like having the chance to attend one. To those who insist that we only remember the Prophet by reading books of hadeeth or fasting Mondays and Thursdays, I half agree with you, for of course, the best way to “love” the Prophet is to follow him. But in the end, I feel, if you do plan to be “romantic” or “ceremonial” about someone’s life, why not the Prophet’s?

The word “Sufism” conjures up a wide range of reactions, depending on your exposure of the subject. To some, it is a respectable, much admired aspiration. For others, it denotes insanity and extremism in religious deviation. I don’t claim to know “the” answer of what it is exactly, but I can share with you some of my experiences in learning about this subject.

In my youth, I was raised in Tablighi Jamaa’aat (Jamaa’aatut Tableegh), which was a way for the masses of Muslims (most notably in the South Asian subcontinent) to learn, practice, and spread Islam. Although we did not practice Sufism, we did hear scant references to “saints” or those who experienced “relgious ecstasy”, etc. and for sure they were a mysterious people who were respected and above us.

After that, as I grew up and started thinking about Islam on my own, it seemed natural to me to read the Quran, ponder its meanings, and worship Allah in whatever way I knew as well as whatever way I felt was proper. So as a youth, I struggled to ponder death, to practice controlling my “nafs” (desire, self), pray with my eyes closed in deep concentration, etc. I would even do things such as fast without speaking because I had read about Zachariyyah and Mariam in the Quran. I had no concept of “innovation”, etc.

When I entered college, I became exposed to the Salafi da’wah, where I learned that innovations in religion were cause for deviation, for losing the original Islam, for following the ways of men over the ways of God. To be fair, I still see the point made here, for no doubt, people should know the roots of what they practice. And even if those who call themselves “Traditionalists” feel this is an erroneous and ill-formed understanding of the religion, no one can doubt that the fault of people who rely only on “transmission” or “following” had led to such a decline that indeed when Salafis would come quoting Quran and Sunnah, one had to bow to the knowledge.

However, if one is to exert themselves a bit, one can see that indeed many of the practices often dismissed as “innovation”, etc. can be seen upheld by many of the greatest scholars in our history - scholars accepted by all. I will not go into detail about this issue (the treatment of “innovation” by various methodologies) as I have discussed it in other places on this blog, but suffice to say there is a lot of confusion on the increasingly polarizing views of the Salafi doctrine (individualist literalism) and those of the Traditionalist doctrine (hierarchical, inherited knowledge). (But I cannot resist adding that the two camps are not exclusive in their treatment of Sufism, for there were Traditionalists who have condemned some aspects while some Literalists allowed things now considered “innovation”, etc.)

So to begin with, you should realize “Sufism” (although often aligned with “Traditionalism”) is simply a separate sphere of study in Islam. Many great scholars of the past were either Sufis themselves, or merely learned from, studied with, or accompanied them. It is the “spiritual path”, to put it simply. A Sufi is one who strives to be near to Allah and is a disciple of spiritual exercises (many scholars have written on this topic, and some even consider “tasawwuf” the only fardh knowledge - in the sense that it is tazkiyyatun nafs, etc.). Yes, it does soften the heart and unlock emotions, and that is why you hear some crazy things from this realm as well.

To clarify, I don’t think you HAVE to be a “Sufi”. In fact, I know of several people who are AMAZING (Allah knows best), people who never joined a tariqah, made bai’ah to a Shaikh, etc. - probably don’t even know what “Sufism” IS, but who try with every fiber of their beings to be close to Allah and are in loving devotion to Him. So what’s the point? The point is that just as much of the knowledge of Islam has been codified and taught, so has some of the spiritual training found within Islam. So for example, if you study “Tajweed”, it is clear you are studying something “new”, not taught by the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam. Yet, the science of Tajweed developed over time, as we got further and further away from the natural proficiency that people at the time of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam had. The Sahaabiyaat, radhi’allaahu ‘anhum, were Arabs from that time period, who heard and learnt the recitation of the Quran from the Prophet, etc. Yet, as we moved away from that time period, naturally, we needed more and more knowledge to record exactly how the Quran was originally recited.

Now, you might say, yes, well, that is to recite the Quran in the SAME way (the goal being the same) whereas Sufis do weird things NOT done by the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam or only done in a rudimentary form which the Sufis exaggerate in. Yet, you should understand that the GOAL is to come near to the SPIRITUAL state of the most righteous people, and this is done through training passed down by the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, his Companions, radhi’allaahu ‘anhum, and on down through righteous scholars, etc. So just as Tajweed is more complicated, so is all the information and study of how we can get to a spiritual state close to those of our original predecessors (As-Salaf As-Saalih).

Take for example, respect. You might say the Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam sat with his Companions, so close that you could cover all of them with a single sheet. Yet, we know that their level of respect for the Prophet was very high. They would not utter words in his presence, they would hesitate to answer in order to hear his answer first, they would give up all comforts to serve him. Nowadays, we have come so far from the time of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, that often a Shaikh who is “relaxed” and comfortable with his students, who sits near them and with them, finds that they do not in fact have much respect for him. Instead, they seem him as almost a buddy or pal, someone they can interrupt, disturb, etc.

The “Salafi” in me says that if you have a very high level of respect for your teachers and Shuyookh without the practices of standing, kissing the hand, etc. then all the better - you are there. Yet, many of our youth could use a little training in respect - respect for elders, for teachers, for the knowledgable and authoritative amongst us. Obviously, this should not exceed bounds but one must admit we have come a long way and could use a bit of training.

Thus, Sufism is a study. The Tariqahs trace their chains back to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam (I know that the Shadhili Tariqah, through which Shaikh Nuh trains people, goes through ‘Ali radhi’allaahu ‘anhu). I am thinking of joining this Tariqah, not actually because I think I need it (I do not say this out of arrogance, that I think I’m already great or anything, but meaning in general I don’t believe, just as everyone doesn’t have to study Tajweed, but should know the basics of recitation necessary for daily worship, that anyone HAS to join a Tariqah), but simply because Shaikh Nuh is a 10 minute walk from my house. What a shame it would be to miss learning from such a knowledgeable and devoted (and Allah knows best) scholar. I simply want to learn what I can.
As I mentioned, my knowledge is not great on this topic, but I did feel I wanted to share some of my experiences for the “uninitiated” and maybe inshallah it will bring some insight or benefit, bi ithnillaah.