2.6.5.1 - The Difference Between Sufis and Jurists

However, I later saw this same man, when he came to Seville, attending upon the jurists and keeping company with those devoted to the things of this world. He took up the study of jurisprudence and theology. He stayed on in Seville to teach the Quran, but the company he was now keeping encouraged him to deny the spiritual attainments of the brethren and to reject them.

God forbid, my brother, that you should think that I blame the jurists for being jurists or for their practice or jurisprudence, for such an attitude is not permissible for a Muslim and the nobility of the Law is beyond question. However, I do censure those jurists who, harboring merely worldly aims, cynically study the Law with the sole object of acquiring fame, of putting themselves in the public eye, and who indulge in constant hair splitting and useless controversy. It is such men who seek to refute the claims of the brethren who fear God and who are instructed by God directly. This kind of jurist attempts to contend against them in a field of knowledge of which he has no inkling of the first principles. Were any of them to be questioned about some term employed by the gnostics they would soon display their ignorance on the subject. If they would only reflect on God’s saying: ((Here you are disputing on something of which you know nothing)) [Quran: 3.65], they would consider the matter more carefully and repent.

The Prophet himself censured those of the learned who sought knowledge for other than God’s sake or who exercised it in ways displeasing to God. It is clear that he did not censure them simply because they were learned, since he praised those who seek knowledge in the fear of God.

In the same way, I have censured certain Sufis; not the sincere ones, but only those who affect before men a holiness which is contradicted by their true condition. God says: ((There are those whose eloquence amazes men in this worlds life, but God knows well what is in their hearts.)) [Quran: 2.204]. I do not therefore take the whole of the legal profession to task, since the Prophet said: (Whom God wishes well He causes him to have knowledge of the Faith.) [Kanz: 28705]. However, the jurists I have mentioned are dominated by their egotistical and lustful desires, being in the grip of Satan. Since they continually offend against the Friends of God, they shall surely perish by their own testimony, as will be shown later.

As for those of the learned who are truly and deeply rooted in religious knowledge, they are the rightly guided, the torches of guidance, the models of piety, heirs to the Messenger of God in knowledge, works, sincerity and character, who properly merit the name of righteous. When you therefore hear me censure the jurists, I mean only those who are led by their selfish and lustful desires. Likewise, in censuring certain of the Sufis, I mean the kind I have mentioned above, since the incarnationists and free-thinkers who attach themselves to our Way are in fact the fellow-travelers of Satan and a betters of perdition. May God illuminate our inner sight and theirs, may He restore our inner hearts and theirs and cause them to awaken to their errors so that they may return to the straight path.

In connection with the above-mentioned Abul-Hasan and my foregoing remarks concerning certain legists, it is interesting to note that when al-Mawruri, al-Habashi and I went to visit him, one who had witnessed the working of his (the Shaykhs) spiritual power, his reaction was as follows: When the Shaykh al-Mawruri knocked on his door he called out and asked who was there. When he was told Abdullah al-Mawruri there was a silence after which his son came out to tell us, firstly that his father was busy, and then that he was not available. Thus he pretended not to know who the Shaykh was, so far had his hatred of the brethren gone and so tainted had he become by the jurists. May God protect us from one who would sever us from Him, His Folk and His Elite.

Whenever this Abu al-Hasan met me he would rebuke me for associating with the Folk, saying, How can a fellow like you associate with the likes of them? I retorted that such as I was not worthy even to serve them, since they were the true leaders of men. The only reason he sought me out was that I might help him in his studies and not because I was on the Way and loved its Folk. Finally I left him for God to deal with and severed my association with him. Today he thinks as other jurists do, that sanctity is a vain fancy and that none is known to possess it. Whenever I hear a jurist talking about the miraculous deeds of the Saints, I press him for details of these things and then demonstrate these things to him in someone. Then he says, Who would be foolish enough to think this fellow genuine? If he were so, you would not have staged this demonstration. The whole thing is a hoax. It is clear that such a man would think no good of anyone. I have never ceased to maintain the rights of the brethren against these jurists and I have always sought to guard and protect them. This I was inspired to do, for whoever sets out to rebuke the Saints generally or specifically and whoever, not having associated with them, attacks one who does, that person demonstrates his ignorance and will never gain salvation.

A certain judge, one Abdul-Wahhab al-Azdi, a jurist from Alexandria, talked with me one day in the Sanctuary at Mecca. The Devil had instilled into him the belief that the times were completely lacking in all spiritual degrees (of attainment) and that all claims to this effect were fabrications and superstition. I therefore asked him how many lands belonged to the Muslims, to which he replied that there were many. Then I asked him how many of these lands he himself had visited, to which he replied that he had been in six or seven of them. Then I asked him how many people, in his opinion, lived in these lands, to which he replied that they were very many. Then I further asked him which were in the majority, the ones he had himself seen or those he had not seen, to which he replied that the majority were, without doubt, those he had not seen. Then I laughed and said, How smitten and stupid is one who thinks he has seen many when he has only seen a few and judges the many by the few, elevating such a judgment to the status of an expert opinion. Surely any thinking believer would admit that there might be one he hasn’t seen, even from the few he thinks he has seen, and that that one might be blessed with spiritual attainment. How then is it possible to doubt the ignorance of one who admits he has only seen a few countries and even fewer people, and yet holds such a belief. God causes such a one to perceive only the deficiencies of this world and none of its good, so that, judging what he has not seen by what little he has seen he is wretched in the sight of God. In this connection one should consider Gods saying, “Were you to obey most people in the world, they would lead you astray from God”, and “... except those who believe and do what is good, few are they.” Here God points out that the former are in the majority and the latter in the minority.

This judge then proceeded to amaze us further, for I heard him say something which demolished his own intellectual position. He said, Men are of two kinds, the intelligent and the unintelligent. The unintelligent man is not worth talking to by reason of his deficiency, and the intelligent man is far from infallible, so nothing is reliable. Consider how, in his wretchedness, this man sees nothing but deficiencies and drawbacks, not looking for the good at all. Does he not imply, in making the division, that the unintelligent man, because of his own deficiency, seeks instruction from the learned man, hoping that God will thus furnish him with knowledge? In fact the intelligent man is, for the most part, accurate in his judgments and, by reason of his intelligence, is usually satisfied only with clear proofs. If, after exercising his intelligence on a matter, he is still mistaken, he is either to be forgiven or he returns to the right way.

As for this mans self-contradiction, consider the saying of the Prophet regarding the ruler, If he exercises his own judgment and is right he has two rewards; if he does so and makes a mistake he has one reward. Thus everyone who uses his own intelligent judgment is right in some respect, since, in both cases, he is to be rewarded and not reprimanded. Whatever results is the will of God. For this reason did I consider the jurist exceedingly ignorant. Praise be to God, Lord of the Worlds.