The Albaani Site

Translation from the Works of the Reviver of this Century

Tag: sufis

Al-Albaani and The Medium Who Would Summon The Souls of the Dead in Damascus | End |


Continuing from the previous post.

“Doctor, this spirit which you summoned, is it of someone alive or dead?”

He said, “No, dead.”

I said, “Dead.  How did you summon his soul when it is in one of two states, there being no third: it is either a happy soul [i.e., one going to Paradise] or a wretched one [i.e., going to Hell]. If it is a happy one, then by Allaah, there is no way it will ever come back into this world again because it is occupied with the pleasure it has in its grave,” and I mentioned some hadiths which showed that the grave is either one of the gardens of Paradise or a pit from Hell, “and if it is a wretched soul, then it is all the more so and a fortiori that it will not be able to leave the prison it is surrounded by [in the grave]—so how are you able to summon this soul? This is something impossible according to the Legislation.”

Secondly and lastly and here is the point, “Imagine that it is possible for you to summon this soul, how do you know that it [actually] is, for example, the soul of the doctor Ibn Sina, a Muslim with all his open and hidden faults, the scholars who know him say that he was a philosopher and had deviated in many tenets of Islamic creed or [how do you know that it might even be] al-Razi the doctor of old, for example? How do you know that it is not a disbeliever, someone who associates partners with Allaah? Just because it says to you, ‘I am the soul of so and so,’ you say aameen?

These days interactions with people, between countries … when a country wants to send its ambassador to another it sends him with certified, registered, sanctioned, stamped and signed documents, and other such things of the sort, so that the country to which that ambassador has been sent is satisfied that this really is the ambassador of an Islamic country and not a dajjaal playing games with it—and this is [the situation] with people dealing with each other—[and what you are talking about] is the world of the Unseen, how can you know that this really is Doctor So and So?”

He had no choice, after having been confuted and having had the evidence established against him, except to say, “The reality, O Ustaadh, is that this was a medical gathering. We also have a gathering of knowledge, if you want to debate with us in it then you are more than welcome.”

I didn’t believe that there was a gathering of knowledge, [but] I said to him, “When?”

He said, “Sunday.”

I said, “Inshaa Allaah, our meeting is on Sunday.”

Allaah so willed that [when] Sunday did come I was obliged to assist one of our brothers who worked at the Ministry of Education where there was an effort being made to correct some books about Islamic Upbringing, books about Islamic Education which had weak and fabricated hadiths in them and Hanafi concepts which went against the Sunnah, so one of them called me to cooperate with him in that, he was an employee of the Ministry but I was not, walhamdulillaah, but I have a little knowledge as you know, so I held that it was more deserving for me to meet up with this person rather than keep my promise [of meeting the medium]. But my companion who had [initially] taken me to him came to me on the appointed day, Sunday, at the Dhaahariyyah Library upon the basis that we were going to meet up and go, so I told him that the situation was such and such and that I couldn’t make it with him, [so I said to him], “You go to him, may Allaah reward you with good, and apologise to him and inshaa Allaah set up another meeting.”

So he went and was taken aback when he found that there was no-one whatsoever at the house on the agreed upon day, [the house was] dark, unlit, nothing inside.

The next day he came to me and told me what had happened, so I said to him, “This is a victory granted to us by Allaah. Go to him [again] next Sunday.”

[He did] and naturally he met him on that following Sunday [because the medium thought that they wouldn’t actually turn up the following Sunday too], [but before he went] I said to him, “Don’t tell him that the Shaikh [i.e., al-Albaani] didn’t come [the previous Sunday], leave that hidden,” [say to him], “I came according to the appointment and didn’t find you?  Inshaa Allaah everything is ok, Dr. Haqqi Baik?”

He really said that to him and here is the point, my brothers, here take heed, O you with eyes [to see].

The medium said to him, “Go away! You brought a big, dangerous Wahhaabi to us—he doesn’t love the Prophet! May Allaah kill him!”

He said to him, “And how do you know that? That man is our friend and we attend his lessons which are always about, ‘Allaah said … Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم said …’” and so on.

He [i.e., the medium] said, “After he [i.e., al-Albaani] left …” he summoned the soul of I don’t know who, I forget who he said it was, and he [i.e., the medium] asked the summoned soul about me and he [i.e., the summoned soul] gave him all these testimonials, “That this man is a Wahhaabi who doesn’t love the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم …”

So I say that this is a proof that these people seek the help of the devils. There is no such thing as summoning the souls of the dead, that is impossible.

But the devils really do attend and inspire them with things, as the Lord of the Worlds said, “Devils among mankind and jinns, inspiring one another with adorned speech as a delusion (or by way of deception).” [An’aam 6:112]

Therefore I say that if one of our brothers has been tested, and I [purposefully] say, ‘has been tested,’ [by having to recite over people who have been possessed], because truthfully, as news has reached me [about these things], it is a situation that is a trial and a test, for a woman who is possessed may come to him and he may see that it is beneficial for him to touch her or examine her arm or neck or or and so on [by touching her]—so the Devil can come in through such easy and supple ways to start off with, and then the issue starts to get bigger and bigger until the big fitnah happens, so if one of our brothers has been tested by, and I say [has been tested by] only reciting verses from Allaah’s Book or forms of seeking refuge established from Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم to take out the Jinn which has possessed that person, then this is, as he عليه السلام said, ‘Whoever amongst you is able to help his brother, then let him do so.’

As for asking [the Jinn], ‘What is your name? What is your religion? What is your job? Where do you live? Where is so and so? What helps against such and such an illness?’ and so on, then this comes under His Saying, the Most High, which I mentioned earlier, “And verily, there were men among mankind who took shelter with the masculine among the Jinns, but they (i.e., the Jinns) increased them (mankind) in sin and disbelief.” [Jinn 72:6]

I ask Allaah for well-being and safety.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 455. [1/3/1046].


The Shaikh on the Hadith, “Du’aa is worship …”

Explaining the hadith, “Du’aa is worship …” Shaikh al-Albaani, may Allaah have mercy on him said, “And there is no doubt that arrogantly refusing to worship and supplicate to Him, the Most High, necessitates His Anger against the one who does not call on Him … and some of the ignorant Sufis are ignorant or feign ignorance of these hadiths under the assumption that supplicating to Allaah is to show bad manners to Him, being affected in that by the Israa’ili narration, ‘His Knowledge of my condition suffices me from having to ask!’  So they were ignorant of the fact that a servant supplicating to his Lord is not in order to inform Him of his need, for He, “… knows the secret and what is [even] more hidden,” [Taa Haa 20:7] but rather that it is in order for him to manifest his servitude [to Allaah], his need of Him and his destitution [before Him].”

As-Saheehah, 6/326.

The Sufis Using the Hadith of Ruqyah as a Proof for Wiping the Graves … | Using a General Proof for Something Specific and Vice Versa



Questioner: A hadith in Bukhari:

بِسْمِ اللهِ تُرْبَةُ أَرْضِنَا بِرِيْقَةِ بَعْضِنَا يُشْفَى سَقِيْمُنَا بِإِذْنِ رَبِّنَا

“In the Name of Allaah. The earth of our land with the spittle of some of us, our sick will be cured, with the permission of our Lord.”

Some of the Sufis use this as a proof for the permissibility of wiping [one’s hands on the graves etc.]?

Al-Albaani: Along with the clear invalidity of this deduction [let me add the following].

As you can see the scope of the wiping referred to in this hadith is very limited, and the occasion it is concerning is when one is seeking a cure through spittle, supplication and a little earth, [the amount] that would stick to your thumb or finger–so where is this in relation to wiping/rubbing the graves of the dead and not reciting the dhikr which has been reported from the Messenger عليه السلام?

And I say and I have said recently that if there is a general hadith–this one [mentioned in the question] is specific–and it has its restrictions as myself and you hear … [let me clarify further] if there was a general hadith but it was implemented in a specific way and was not implemented in a general manner then it is not permissible for us to implement it in a general manner. Because the one who narrated the hadith and those who directly received the hadith from the Messenger عليه السلام did not implement it in a manner which would include it amongst the general texts. I gave you an example which I will mention now in order to clarify what is meant by this statement.

His saying عليه السلام, “A man’s prayer with another is better than his prayer alone and the prayer of three [together] is better than that of two,” to the end of the hadith. So if a group of people prayed the Sunnah before the midday prayer [dhuhr] in congregation using this hadith as a proof such an argument would be rejected, why?

Because the one who said this hadith and those who heard it from his mouth عليه السلام fresh and new did not implement it with this general meaning which includes praying the Sunnahs in congregation.

So how can a hadith which is specific be used for a general topic when we reject using a general hadith as a proof for a specific topic which was not the practice of those in the first era?

And this is from the fiqh which it befits a student of knowledge to bite onto with his molar teeth because it opens a door to knowledge for them which maybe some of the major scholars do not take note of especially those who are rigid and people of blind following.

Fatawa Jeddah, 6.

PDF: On Boycotting

Here is the PDF version of all the separate posts in one place.  If you want to save it, right click on the link and go to ‘Save Link/Target As’:


PDF: An Advice to the Salafis to Show Kindness and Softness and to Reject Disunity and Differences … and to Leave the Unlegislated Type of Boycotting

Here is the PDF version of all the separate posts in one place.  If you want to save it, right click on the link and go to ‘Save Link/Target As’:



The Extremist Sufi Saying, ‘Allaah is a monk in a church …’ The Disbelief of Those Who believe in the Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood] | 1

Translated by Ahmed Abu Turaab

Questioner: The Sufis have recently come to our city, what advice can you give us?

Al-Albani: There is an old difference between the Muslims about the Sufis. The reality is that this name, Sufism [tasawwuf], and those who affiliate themselves to it, the Sufis, have many different meanings.

We know from our interaction with many of them that when the proof is established against them they say, ‘Sufism is nothing except clinging to the manners of Allaah’s Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, like abstaining from the world and desiring the Hereafter,’ this is what they say when the proof is established against them.

Thus we say that if this is what Sufism is in your opinion, then the difference between us and you regarding the word remains. Remove this word, ‘tasawwuf,’ because it has become a word having a great many meanings. One of which we mentioned just now, [i.e.,] sticking to noble manners and abstaining from the world and turning to the Hereafter. There is no need for us to use this name whose meaning is dubious when referring to that affair which [the Muslims] are united upon, i.e., sticking to the manners of Allaah’s Prophet عليه السلام and abstaining from the world and devoting oneself to the Hereafter.

But the reality is that [the word] tasawwuf [Sufism] has meanings far removed from this correct meaning [mentioned above]. And sometimes this distance [from the Truth] takes the one who is upon it out of the fold of Islaam, and sometimes it will place him among one of the misguided groups.

As for the first group [i.e., the people who have left the fold of Islaam], then it refers to those who believe in what the people of knowledge refer to as the creed of unity, or The Unity of Being/Existence [Wahdatul-Wujood] to be more precise. The Unity of Being, which is pure denial [of Allaah, ilhaad], means Nature, as expressed by naturalists (believers in naturalism), i.e. there is nothing but matter.

One of them says, ‘Everything that you see with your very eye is Allaah.’ So it’s nature, everything that you see with your eye is Allaah!

A second says:

And the dog and the pig are nothing but our God.
And Allaah is nothing but a monk in a church.

A third [Ibn Arabi, the Sufi] says:

God [Rabb] is man and man is God
How I wish to know who the one ordered (to perform worship) is

If you say man (is the one ordered), then that is a denial (of the presence of a God, based on the concept that God is man and man is God!)
And if you say God, how can He be obligated?!

A fourth:

When the Magians worshipped the fire
They worshipped nothing but the One, the Irresistible Subduer
[i.e., Al-Qahhaar, Allaah]

All of these are statements written down in their books through which they seek blessings. A belief [aqidah] such as this takes one outside the fold of Islaam, for it is a creed greater in disbelief than that of the Jews and Christians.

This reminds me of the saying of one their extremists, ‘The Jews and Christians only disbelieved because the Jews restricted Allaah to being in Uzair, and the Christians confined Him to being in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit–but as for us, we have generalized Him to be in all things.’

For this reason from their words of remembrance [dhikr]–and their dhikr is not from that of the Muslims, that which the Prophet mentioned [when he said], ‘The best form of remembrance is, ‘Laa ilaaha illallaah,’–their remembrance is, ‘He, He …’

And they [also] say other phrases which, regretfully, some of the general masses with us in Syria have latched on to. You’ll find one of them sitting, wanting to remember Allaah, and so he will say, ‘There is nothing other than Him.’ What does, ‘There is nothing other than Him,’ mean? [This is incorrect because] there is a Creator and then there is the creation.

So this is the creed of The Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood], wording which is mentioned by some people, but they have not paid attention to the misguidance found therein.

Like these phrases totally is the saying of many of the common folk and their scholars, ‘Allaah is present in all that exists, Allaah is everywhere …’ [this is] the creed of The Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood], but along with that it is the creed [aqidah] of the Ash’aris and Maturidis of the end of time.

[They say], ‘Allaah is in all places,’ this [i.e., where we are sitting right now] is a place, is Allaah here?  What is here?  Zaid, Bakr, Amr, matter, a wall, air and so on–is Allaah here?!

‘The Most Gracious rose over the [Mighty] Throne [in a manner that suits His Majesty],’ [Taa Haa 20:5]  This is the creed of the Salaf as-Saalih.

So this type of Sufism is the severest of the most severe forms of disbelief found on the face of the earth.

[Translator’s note: The following is another example of the extremists amongst them: ‘Sulaimaan bin Ali bin Abdullah al-Tilmisaani d. 690AH.  He is highly revered among Sufis.  The Shaikh of Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said about him, “He used to make all forbidden things lawful.  To such an extent that some of the reliable people reported that he said:

‘The daughter, the mother, all (foreign) women–all of them are one and the same–there is nothing forbidden in that for us.  It is only the ones who are veiled that say that that is haraam.  So we in reply say to them: ‘It is haraam for you (not us).”  (Majmoo’atur-Rasaa’il (1/184).

This Sufi Tilmisani once passed by a mangy, scabby dead dog on the street whilst he was talking to his companion about Wahdatul-Wujood (the Unity of Being/Existence).  So his companion said to him, “Is this also the Essence (Dhaat) of Allaah?” pointing to the dead dog.  So Al-Tilmisani replied:

“Yes.  Everything is His Essence.  There is nothing that is outside His Essence (Dhaat).”

High is Allaah above what the Sufis ascribe to Him!’

(Majmoo’atur-Rasaa’il (145) of Ibn Taymiyyah).]

The Extremist Sufis and the Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood] | 1

Al-Albani: All of you must have heard of a group called the Sufis, and of a [type of] knowledge, or Sufi spiritual path [sulook] known as tasawwuf.

The people who ascribe themselves to this tasawwuf are of differing ranks, some of them have overstepped all limits and left Islaam in the name of Islamic Sufism, left Islaam just as a strand of hair is pulled out of dough [i.e., totally].  Why?

Because their interpretation of aayahs from the noble Quraan [is so incorrect that it] and philosophy and apostasy are one and the same. In the eyes of the scholars of the Muslims they are known as the people who believe in Wahdatul-Wujood [lit: the unity of existence], the ones who say the same thing as the atheists, but their wording differs from that of the atheists, they say, ‘There is nothing except one.’ So [according to them] the universe that we see is Allaah. For this reason they are called people who believe in Wahdatul-Wujood.

The Muslims say that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah [Laa ilaaha illallaah], in this sentence there is an affirmation and a negation. There is a negation of whoever might interpret falsely (the presence of another god), then the affirmation that Allaah is the one and only God, the Most High.

As for those Sufis, then they say, ‘There is no He but He.’ They then paraphrase it and make it a form of remembrance which they repeat for themselves, [saying], ‘He, He …’ This is a dangerous deviation as you can see, i.e., a denial of the true existence of Allaah, and following on from that, a denial of the legislation, no Islaam … no Judaism, no Christianity–because there is no [differentiation between the] slave and the Lord, a Lord who obligates others to worship Him and a slave who is obligated to worship. For this reason one of them said:

God [Rabb] is man and man is God
How I wish to know who the one ordered (to perform worship) is

If you say man (is the one ordered), then that is a denial (of the presence of a God, based on the concept that God is man and man is God!)
And if you say God, how can He be obligated?!

[According to them] there is no He but He. So in the end: He is He!

There are words that emanate from Muslims who bear witness [by saying] Laa ilaaha illallaah Muhammad Rasulullaah, these people are not atheists but they will sometimes utter words which lead them to that false aqidah. This is something very dangerous and hardly any but a few are safe from it.

Now in our normal gatherings [you will hear] one of them say whether on a particular occasion or not, ‘Allaah is present in all that exists,’ [this statement of theirs] equals, ‘There is no He but He.’

You will hear [this statement] many times, ‘Allaah is present in all that exists,’ and after close scrutiny of its meaning and purport and what it entails one can see that it equates to the saying of the Sufis–the extremists amongst them obviously–who openly declare that, ‘There is no He but He.’

There are Two Existents Not One

Because if we were to ponder over the declaration of truth which is when a believer truly says, ‘None has the right to be worshiped except Allaah,’ [then we will find] that it establishes two existences.

‘None has the right to be worshiped except Allaah,’ negates the false deities which are worshipped other than Allaah, and they are present [as is mentioned, for example,] in the Quraan in the statement of Noah to his people, “And they have said, ‘You shall not leave your gods, nor shall you leave Wadd, nor Suwa’, nor Yaghuth, nor Ya’uq, nor Nasr.’” [Nooh 71:23] These were idols worshipped instead of Allaah, for that reason when Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, sent Noah عليه السلام to his people he ordered them to worship Allaah alone.

So, ‘None has the right to be worshiped …’ is a negation of the false deities which are present. ‘… except Allaah,’ is an affirmation of the existence of the Truth, i.e., Allaah the Blessed and Most High.

So there are two existences.  It is not possible for a Muslim who, firstly, understands his Islaam and who, secondly, believes that Allaah created him, not to affirm two [separate] existents.

The scholars of tawheed refer to the First Existent, i.e., that of the Creator the Most High, He exists in His Essence, i.e., is eternal, having no beginning. So His existence is termed as being the necessarily existent [Waajibul-Wujood].

As for the other existent then it is [called] the contingent or possible existent which is mankind and all creation. Allaah the Mighty and Majestic said to it, ‘Be!’ And it was. So it was preceded by nonexistence in contrast to the existence of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic–for He is the First having no beginning, as you all know.

A Discussion on the Ascendancy of Allaah, the Most High, and a Critique of the Belief that He is Present in all Things | 4

Translated by Ahmed Abu Turaab

Reciprocating this misguidance is another which is even greater: [the claim] that Allaah the Mighty and Majestic is not inside the world nor outside it.

The one who says that Allaah the Mighty and Majestic is inside the world, i.e., the one who says that Allaah is everywhere or Allaah is present in all things, has affirmed Allaah’s existence but he has likened Him to His creation [tashbeeh], and tashbeeh is false and futile, ‘… there is nothing like unto Him …’ [Shuraa 42:11], for this reason this [belief] is misguidance.

But the one who is even more misguided is the one who says, ‘Indeed Allaah is not inside the world nor outside of it.’ Half of this sentence is true: Allaah [indeed] is not inside the world. This is a correct statement. He is, rather, above all of the creation.

[But] as for following this statement with their saying that, ‘… nor is He outside of the world …’ then in the language of the scholars this is called ta’teel [neutralisation] of the existence of The Truth [i.e., Allaah], i.e., a denial of the existence of The Truth. Since as we mentioned just now in the hadith of Imraan ibn Hussain, Allaah the Mighty and Majestic was and there was nothing with Him.

Allaah was and there was no created thing with Him, but afterwards He created these things as can be seen, it is obligatory to have faith in that, that there are two existences, as we mentioned.

So if Allaah the Mighty and Majestic was not inside the world–and this is the truth–when someone adds to that saying, ‘… and neither outside it …’ it means that there is no deity.

It is to belie [His very Existence], a total denial and rejection [of it].

It is a return to the creed of the extremist Sufis, and I don’t say a return to the creed of the Sufis, because the Sufis are of two types. From them are extremists and those less than them.

The extremists are the ones who say that that which is present is one, at the head of these Sufis is Ibn Arabi who said that that which is in existence is one. As for the Muslims then they say, ‘Laa ilaaha ilallaah.’

So this aayah, ‘So know that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah …’ [Muhammad 47:19] affirms two existences: that of the One who is worshipped, The Truth, and that of the false deities.

As for Ibn Arabi and whoever was misguided by him, then they say that that which is in existence is one, and they have [other] terms through which they make their shirk and misguidance clear.

So for example they say that everything you see with your eye is Allaah, everything that you see with your eye is Allaah, it is Allaah, that which is in existence is one. What do you see, you see a man, a stone, a tree, the sky, the earth–all of this universe is Allaah, this is the creed of the atheists, the creed of communists–there is no god.

This results in the total and utter rejection of the existence of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic.

So when it is said that Allaah is not inside the world and nor outside of it then it means that that which is in existence is one, this is [as we stated] the creed of the extremist Sufis [who say that] everything you see with your eye is Allaah.

When the people of Noah worshipped the idols as is mentioned in the Quraan, ‘And they said, ‘You shall not leave your gods. Nor shall you leave Wadd, nor Suwa, nor Yaghuth, nor Ya’uq nor Nasr.’ [Nooh 71:23] Did they worship other than Allaah? The answer, according to the extremists from the Sufis, is that when the Magians worshipped the fire, they didn’t worshipping anything other than The One, the Irresistible Subduer.

This is total and utter rejection.

So when it is said that Allaah is not inside the world nor outside it … this [incorrect] creed [mentioned above] which today is said to be that of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah has returned. There are people who spread books, commenting on them, comments being an overstatement, stating that this creed, i.e., ‘… that Allaah is not inside the world nor outside it,’ is that of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah,

Allaah the Mighty and Majestic was and nothing was with Him, so He is now just as He was before–He is in no need [self-sufficient] just as before He was in no need of the entire creation. When He brought those created things into existence He said that He rose above them, ascended, ascended, i.e., rose above.

And to clarify this [point of] creed, a little sound intellect must be used.

After we have established through the texts of the Book and the Sunnah that Allaah the Mighty and Majestic is above all created things and not inside them, we must thereafter discuss [this issue] with those people who deny Allaah’s existence totally, even if they say that there is a deity, [and even if they say] Laa ilaaha ilallaah–but since they say that Allaah is not inside the world nor outside it then they have rejected the existence of Allaah–so we say to these people: you are [in agreement] with us that Allaah was and nothing was with him. So when He created the creation one of three things must [be true]:

  1. When He created the creation, Allaah must have entered into His creation, and they are in agreement with us that Allaah is not in every single place so thereafter the second remains:
  2. When He created the creation, Allaah must have placed it above Himself, and this is falsehood, for Allaah is above all things.
  3. Thereafter only the third option remains, that when Allaah created the creation, He rose over it, [that He] ascended over it–and this is what is becoming of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic.

PDF: Is the Sufi’s Stabbing themselves with Skewers a Miracle?

Here is the PDF version of all the separate posts in one place.  If you want to save it, right click on the link and go to ‘Save Link/Target As’:


The video:

Is the Sufi’s Stabbing themselves with Skewers a Miracle? | 1


Questioner: In relation to some of the Sufis lodges [zawaayaa], they beat the daff and use skewers, yes, what is the ruling regarding this issue?

Al-Albani: Striking the daff for entertainment is haram, but that which is even more severe than this haram is to include it as a part of worship in the remembrance of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic.

This is haram and is not permissible.

Because committing an act of disobedience is [in and of itself] disobedience, but more severe than that is seeking nearness to Allaah the Blessed and Most High, through it.

These Sufis or those who follow these tariqahs who dance when performing dhikr and beat the daff, indeed even the drum [tabl], the saying of one of the people of knowledge applies to them:

“When did the people come to know that in our religion singing is a Sunnah which is followed

And that a man eats just as a donkey does and dances amongst hordes until he falls

And they say, ‘We are drunk with the love of Allaah.’ But nothing intoxicated them except a platter stuffed with food

Just like the animals who prance around once quenched and satiated

So O People of Intellect and O Men of Understanding! Is there not one from you to denounce such innovations?

Our Mosques are disgraced by listening [to Music] and are now ‘honoured’ as churches are?” [i.e., singing and dancing is part of worship in churches under the pretense that they are honouring their places of worship through that, so these Sufis have imitated them in this by dancing and singing in the mosques].

And another said:

“O You evil, innovating generation!
You have come with an affair which is inconceivable.
Was it in the Quraan that my Lord told you–
to ‘Eat like animals and dance for Me?!”

Far be it.

So, the forbiddance of beating the daff or the drum [tabl] as part of dhikr is more severe than beating the daff as part of mere entertainment. Because the [following] Saying of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic in His Book applies to them, “Those who took their religion as amusement and play and the life of the world deceived them.” [Al-A’raaf 7:51]. And the Blessed and Most High said regarding the polytheists, “Their prayer at the House was nothing but whistling and the clapping of hands.” [An’aam 8:35].

“Their prayer …” i.e., their worship, “… at the House …” the Haram, [Ka’bah].

“… was nothing but whistling …” whistling, and nowadays you see how the youth whistle. This is a legacy which the disbelievers have inherited one from another. During the Days of Ignorance the polytheists would seek nearness to Allaah through whistling and clapping.

“Their prayer at the House was nothing but whistling and the clapping of hands.” Likewise some of the Muslims today do the same thing, and you have come to know the censure of the faqihs of the Muslims and their severe repudiation of them. So much so that some of them declared that the place where these eating dancers perform their ‘remembrance’ be razed because it is impure, i.e., the disobedience of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic having occurred therein.

That dhikr which they regard as being remembrance [of Allaah] is only idle speech.

As for striking oneself with skewers, this is the calamity of all calamities–that there are hundreds of thousands of Muslims who falsely assume that harming oneself in this way is a miracle. It is a miracle [karaamah] for those people who falsely think that they are on some [sort of Truth] in regards to the religion.

But they follow nothing.

Because the religion is [nothing but] following what the Prophet was upon عليه السلام. And neither the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم nor his noble Companions remembered Allaah in this manner. [A method of remembrance] which you have come to know something about from the lines of poetry that I recited to you.

%d bloggers like this: