i didn't forget that i called myself sifar, because, in reality, that is what i am. and brother, i am not mocking your screen-name. can't you understand? 'ibn abi' is 'son of my father'; 'ibn abooh' means 'son of his father.' --- the fatimis are known to have controlled haramayn for a short period; but, your point is nevertheless valid - about 'how would Allah allow such thing to occur at the roza..' --- the problem is that merely visiting a shrine or agreeing to meelad does not make a sunni. and merely denying that does not make one a shunned heretic. nor does accompanying a tablighi jama'at make one a kafir*. al-`iyadhu billah. just like you make excuses for many of these ignoramuses - who might probably not even know the basic `aqidah - so should you consider those thousands of ordinary muslims who go with jama'ats. sunnis judge unforgivingly when it comes to these ordinary muslims inspite of their external acts being congruent with the shariah. don't be hasty in judging who is better. Allah ta'ala knows best.
asif naqshabandi your reasoning is totally wrong. to say, 'otherwise why would Allah allow such a thing to occur at the roza of one of his saints? i'm talking about the dhamaal itself [sacred dance] not the music...' then let me put this question to your and others who believe that Awliyaa Allah (sufis and non-sufis) have tasarrufat (capacity to do things at will) then how come Makkah & Madinah is in control by what you call them as heretics and bidatis etc ? How come Allah -- who protected His house -- let heretic bidaati wahabis/salafis take control. I've read all the history of the kaaba and I couldn't find in anytime that kaaba was in control of shia or fatimis.. It was all sunnis and now wahabis/bidatis. what is the explanation ? is it because hamza yusuf puts them as sunnis or what ? may be abu hasan (who is mocking my name but forget that he called himself sifar) may Allah give us sabr and understanding
you know, nj, i think you may be* right that they are better than the wahabis/shias but if we take that attitude, then the ignorant "sufis" will see it as a license to continue. we must take the stance of alaHazrat: strongly condemn these ghayr-shara'i practices without giving the ignorant "sufis" a "comfort zone". "oh, at least we're better than wahabis, let's party!" outright condemnation is the need. we can't make any excuses/dispensations for these juhala at all. * faqir began this thread with words of kufr that were supposedly uttered by one of their leaders. if these are their beliefs, then this may be goes out the window.
...sidi yaseen you are correct...but these sunnis are still much better than those of other badmazhabs who might externally follow the shariah to the letter. i mean of course the wahabis and their acolytes and rafidites. of course the ideal is for sunnis to also follow shariah to the letter but with illuminated hearts.
This form of 'sufis' is all toi preavalent amongst many Indo-Pak Sunnis. The worrying thing is if onhe objects to some the ghair-shar'i goings on one is labelled a wahabi.
@ibn abilhanafi: we did not 'delete' anything asif wrote. it was i who changed the title. faqir posted it with the title: 'qalandar is our god' - al `iyadhu billahi'l Wahid al-Qahhar. i found it distasteful and changed it to the one you now see. --- real sufis are scruplous in observing the shari'ah. and the first step of a salik is to correct his zahir. our teacher used to tell us: 'would anyone make a plate of very tasty biryani and stick stinking filth on the outside of the plate and claim - don't worry about the external, eat that which is inside?' and would anyone care to eat it? purification of the external is as necessary and mandatory as the purification of the internal. as imam ibn `aTa'Allah said in his Hikam: ma'stawda' min ghaybi's sarayir; DHahara fi shahadati'z zawahir' whatever you put in the hidden recess, it is manifest on the outside as its witness. [ibn ajibah:] ...the actions of external organs are in accordance with the state of the heart... when the heart is obeidient to the sunnah and compliant to the shariah, its effect is observed outside as well. --- the example of shaykh al-akbar is misplaced. while it is true that scholars criticized his writing, i don't think anybody commented that he was associated with wild practices. ---- Allah ta'ala knows best.
sidi all we are doing here is differentiating normative tasawwuf from folklore. the scholars of tasawwuf have been doing this for centuries. The works of Shaykh ibn ataillah , Sidi aHmed zarruq are all about clearing this out for us. And shaykh al-Akbar is a very complex topic which we should not delve into. Let us leave that to the diplomatic, rejuvinated soft-salafi "al-western" scholars to decide who is deviant and who is not in weekend classes - let us spare the forums - you can setup a blog, if you haven't already and post it there so that nobody can delete it. and yes we are narrow minded when it comes to ahlus sunnah. was salam
abu nibras i think you are unjust in deleting the posts of naqshbandi-jamaati ( the guy who keeps abusing me for some reason or the other ) abu nibras, we have to apply the same standard for others. just because naqshbandi-jamaati follows a sufi qalandari tariqa which may oppose your own sufi tariqah , it doesn't mean that suddenly we can take down on the guy. suppose if i post what pakka 100% sunni scholars have said about ibn arabi's deviancy. would you delete this post ? it is a litmus test. indeed, it is test (aajmayish) of how just we can be. you & abu hasan need to revise your perspective. i'm not saying narrow mindedness but surely it is in that direction. we agree and we disagree.
I did not change the title but I would have if I saw what it was before. There can be no justification to this. none. If we had thousands of people in a state of Hal the state of Sindh would be paradise on Earth. One must not fool oneself when something is so evident, you burn your nafs and turn it into ash before you experience true haal. It is people like these who bring a bad name to Sunni Islam and to Tasawwuf. I am almost fed up with fake Pirs and Sajjada Nashins who have little inkling of shariah. Imam Shafai did not say it for no good reason that if you go for tasawwuf without the basics then you go astray. In the remote possibility of finding one who is an engrossed one , a majdzub, the shariah does not allow you to imitate him, under no conditions. The deobandis usually use these examples to call everything as bidah. From an academic study of tasawwuf, what is the definition of dhamaal ? this ? Do you think Hazrat Amir Khusro and Khwaja Nizamuddin's trance was the same ? Do you think the trance of Sayyidina Qutubuddin Bakhtiyar Kaki rahimahullah was the same ?
my personally view is that many of these people dancing are in genuine states of haal and therefore not accountable under shariah for their actions. as an outside observer it is not easy for me to tell those just putting it on or those who really are in 'haal' therefore it is better for me to have husn e zann of everyone. Allah knows their hearts and their intentions. Right?
sidi i have thought about this and there must be some spiritual reason otherwise why would people do this for hundreds and hundreds of years? surely ulama would have spoken up against it if it was so wrong? for me the dhamaal seems like a sindhi version of mawlana rumi's whirling dervishes... otherwise why would Allah allow such a thing to occur at the roza of one of his saints? i'm talking about the dhamaal itself [sacred dance] not the music... ? also i don't know who changed the title to 'false sufis'-- i hope you were not referring to the sahib e mazar or the millions of devotees who throng there and are simple sunnis...so i dont know who you mean! also, similar qawwali/sama/raqs on at almost all of the major shrines of awliya in the subcontinent. if we keep on criticising like this isn't there a danger that we will put people off and push them into the arms of the deobandi and wahabi woves who are already trying to forcibly take over these shrines in the guise of purifying them from biddat? i am not defending all that goes on but looking at the bigger picture. the vast majority of people who go, go to these shrines to pay respect to the wali and ask for his help and blessings. nothing wrong with that. yes, some people use these melas an excuse to drink bhang or whatever but aren't you throwing the baby out with the bathwater?
I think I had deleted a similar link earlier for obvious reasons. I am unaware of any justification in shariah for this. was salam
<object width="425" height="353"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sl-nW-zYXyM"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sl-nW-zYXyM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="353"></embed></object> a dhamaal (with qawwali) at the shrine of a sufi saint in lahore. the qawwali is about syed sakhi shahbaz qalandar though of sehwan sharif (see above post). i am, however, fascinated by the half-naked old man at the front. Allah knows who he is....certainly looks like a faqir...you know the hadith about certain people being with dishevelled hair and dirty clothes, poor, and people looking down upon them when in reality they will be from amongst the Elect....i wonder if he is such a one...
brother, you never did fix up that translation from faisla haft masla which you said you'd do for us... http://www.sunniport.com/masabih/showthread.php?t=3154&page=2
apart from the that last line--probably a mistranslation--which pir would say something like that?--the rest of the article was very good. The name of the sahib e mazaar was actually Sayyid Usman Marwandi who was a great wali and intoxicated. A good summary on wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lal_Shahbaz_Qalander Ya Shahbaz Qalandar! p.s. the actions of a few ignorant devotees does not have anything to do with the noble Shaykh's teachings. a story: one guy from a village near ours in panjab---maybe a 1000 km away CYCLED all the way to Sehwan Sharif to attend the urs of Lal Shahbaz Qalandar!
