Golden Principles of Raising Children
The following is from Imam Ghazali’s: Disciplining the Soul (Kitab Riyadat al-Nafs), being Book XXI of Ihya’ `Ulum al-Din (The Revival of the Religious Sciences) translated by T.J. Winter (Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad)
Mujaddid Alf Sani on the importance of the Shari’ah to the Sufi path:
The Shari`ah is of fundamental importance to the Sufi path. This point is very strongly made by the great Naqshbandi Sufi, Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi (also known as Imam ar-Rabbani), in his letters. Here is a small excerpt from one of his letters, where he clarifies this topic:
The Shari`ah has three parts: knowledge, action, and sincerity of motive (ikhlas); unless you fulfil the demands of all these parts, you do not obey the Shari`ah. And when you obey the Shari`ah you obtain the pleasure of God, which is the most supreme good in this world and the Hereafter. The Qur’an says: “The pleasure of God is the highest good.” Hence, the Shari`ah comprehends all the good of this world and the next, and nothing is left out for which one has to go beyond the Shari`ah.
The tariqah [”way”] and the haqiqah [”reality”] for which the Sufis are known, are subservient to the Shari`ah, as they help to realize its third part, namely, sincerity. Hence they are sought in order to fulfil the Shari`ah, not to achieve something beyond the Shari`ah. The raptures and ecstasies which the Sufis experience, and the ideas and truths which come to them in the course of their journey, are not the goal of Sufism. They are rather myths and fancies on which the children of Sufism are fed. One has to pass over them all and reach the stage of satisfaction (rida) which is the final goal ofsuluk [”travelling”, i.e. the Sufi path] and jadhbah [”overwhelming love”]. The purpose of traversing the stages of of tariqah and haqiqah is nothing other than the realisation of ikhlas which involves the attainment of rida. Only one out of a thousand Sufis is graced with the three illuminations (tajalliyat sih ganah) and gnostic visions, given ikhlas and elevated to the stage of rida.
Mawlana Jalaluddin Rumi said:
The Sufi is hanging on to Muhammad, like Abu Bakr.
He also said:
Following (the example of) the Holy Prophet of God is among all the required duties for the people of spiritual reality.
Source: Ibrahim Gamard’s “Rumi and Islam: Selections from His Stories, Poems, and Discourses — Annotated & Explained”, p. 171.
Brother Yursil’s perspective on Wikipedia’s entry on the Prophet, sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam:
I’ve been approached by a few people for thoughts and discussion about a petition going around regarding the Wikipedia entry on the Prophet (Sallahu’alaihiwassalam). I did scan the article on Wikipedia, and of course it has numerous mistakes, but certainly not the level that requires such a blunt response against, of all things in the article, the pictures.
Only two ancient illustrations on the article are showing something supposedly representing the Prophet’s (S) face. The rest of the illustrations of the Prophet (S) are from Sunni artists, who were careful about concealing the Prophet’s (S) face and even hands.
The flattened look, the lack of perspective and depth of the artists of the centuries long past was quite intentional. The ulema of the time understood that the art was not intended to be realistic, not approach anything akin to an idol, nor should it be any aggression against Allah
’s authority as the Creator. This avoidance of true realism is the reason why traditional Islamic art was based in calligraphy (a calligraphic lion, bird, etc are all part of the tradition) or the Ottoman/Persian miniature style.
It is from the illustrated text “Seyr-i Nabi” that the first picture was taken for the Wikipedia article.
It is impossible to find one ’scholar’ who criticized Sultan Murad III, the Shaikh ul Islam of the time, or other religious authorities for ordering the illustration of Seyr-i Nabi, the authoritative work of Seerat in Ottoman times. The work which Seyr-i Nabi is based from has been used in contemporary Seerah’s including Martin Ling’s popular “Muhammad”.
Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad on the Archbishop’s Shari’ah Remarks:
The controversy over the Archbishop’s remarks on Shari’a rumble on. Last week, in the hours before the full text became available, concerned voices were raised, worried that he was advocating legal separateness for Britain’s largest minority. Many commentators became understandably angry.
As the weekend wore on, however, my impression was that the mood slowly shifted. There were signs that more people were actually reading the Archbishop’s lecture, which was written as a subtle reflection on the right relationship between faith, law, and citizenship in the modern state. And the criticisms grew more muted.
Many leapt to his defence. Others took the view that Dr Williams might well be right, but should have expressed himself in a way that could not have been misinterpreted.
It is now clear to most that Dr Williams, far from recommending some kind of parallel law for Muslims, was pointing out that informal religious tribunals which already adjudicate on a limited number of civil - never criminal - matters, in a way which is entirely legal under arbitration laws, should be more systematically brought under the regulation of the legal system. He was not commending greater separateness, or an expansion of Muslim courts - quite the opposite.
Although his prose is sometimes dense, I know he thinks this because a few weeks ago I was with him in Singapore, where we were shown how many of the city’s religious minorities, including the Muslims, have their own courts to deal with civil matters such as marriage and divorce. He is interested in the challenge that religious diversity poses to a secular legal system. But he is sure that social cohesion is best served when there is a mechanism by which arbitration conducted within communities can be formally related to national law.
A storm in a teacup, then? Not quite. The issue of how faith is acknowledged in law will continue to be a tricky one, and not just for Muslims. For instance, one recent poll showed that nine percent of Americans think that the Bible should be their country’s only source of law, and that percentage is growing.
For me, my major reaction to this dispute has been a sadness that so many of us so readily leap to judgement.
In the Koran itself, we read: ‘O people of faith! If a person brings you some news, inquire into it carefully, lest you should harm others unwittingly, and afterwards be sorry for what you did.’
Sufis use the word huzn (sadness) as the opposite of rejoicing and joy, and to express the pain one suffers while fulfilling his or her duties and realizing his or her ideals. Every perfected believer will continue to suffer this pain according to the degree of belief, and weave the tissue of life with the “threads” of sadness on the “loom” of time. In short, one will feel sadness until the spirit of the Muhammadan Truth is breathed in all corners of the world, the sighing of Muslims and other oppressed peoples ceases, and the Divine rules are practiced in the daily lives of people.
This sadness will continue until the journey through the intermediate world of the grave is completed, safe and sound, and the believer flies to the abode of eternal happiness and blessing without being detained by the Supreme Tribunal in the Hereafter. A believer’s sorrows will never stop until the meaning of: Praise be to God, Who has put grief away from us. Surely our Lord is All-Forgiving, Bountiful (35:34) becomes manifest.
Continue reading on Sidi Fethullah Gülen’s site…