Muhiyuddin Ibn Al-Arabi (Rahimahullah) and His Aqeedah - Islam R
Muhiyuddin Ibn Al-Arabi (Rahimahullah) and His Aqeedah - Islam R
Muhiyuddin Ibn Al-Arabi (Rahimahullah) and His Aqeedah - Islam R
Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn al-‘Arabi, Abu Bakr Muhyi al-Din al-Hatimi al-Ta’i al-
Andalusi al-Mursi al-Dimashqi, known as Ibn ‘Arabi to differentiate him from Qadhi Abu Bakr
Ibn al-‘Arabi the Maliki jurist. A scholar of Arabic letters at first, then tafsîr and tasawwuf,
nicknamed al-Qushayri and Sultan al-‘Arifin in his time for his pre-eminence in tasawwuf,
known in his lifetime for his devoutness to worship, asceticism, and generosity, Ibn ‘Arabi was
praised by al-Munawi as “a righteous friend of Allah and a faithful scholar of
knowledge” (waliyyun sâlihun wa ‘âlimun nâsih), by Ibn ‘Imad al-Hanbali as “the
absolute mujtahid without doubt,” and by al-Fayruzabadi as “the Imam of the People
of Shari‘a both in knowledge and in legacy, the educator of the People of the Way in practice
and in knowledge, and the shaykh of the shaykhs of the People of Truth through spiritual ex-
perience (dhawq) and understanding.”
His Teachers
He travelled East and West in the study of hadith, taking knowledge from over a thousand
shaykhs, among them Abu al-Hasan ibn Hudhayl, Muhammad ibn Khalaf al-Lakhmi, Ibn
Zarqun, Abu al-Walid al-Hadrami, al-Silafi, ‘Abd al-Haqq al-Ishbili, Ibn ‘Asakir, Ibn al-Jawzi,
and Ibn Bushkuwal. His principal shaykhs in tasawwuf were Abu Madyan al-Maghribi, Jamal
al-Din Yunus ibn Yahya al-Qassar, Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Tamimi al-Fasi, Abu al-Hasan ibn Jami‘,
and al-Khidr (alayhis salaam).[2] He became known first as al-Shaykh al-Kabir (“The Great
Shaykh”) then al-Shaykh al-Akbar (“The Greatest Shaykh”) with specific reference to the sci-
ences of tasawwuf in which he authored hundreds of books.[3]
His greatest and best-known work is his last, al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya (“The Meccan
Conquests”) which begins with a statement of doctrine – translated in the present volume –
about which al-Safadi said: “I saw that from beginning to end it consists in the doctrine of Abu
al-Hasan al-Ash‘ari without any difference whatsoever.”[4]
In jurisprudence Ibn ‘Arabi is often said to follow the Zahiri school, but this is incorrect since
he himself denies it, as quoted by Ibn ‘Imad from Ibn ‘Arabi’s two poems al-Ra’iyya and al-
Nuniyya, which state respectively:
Laqad harrama al-Rahmânu taqlîda Mâlikin
lâ wa lâ Ahmadu wa la al-Nu‘mânu
The name of Ibn ‘Arabi remains associated with controversy because of those who criticized
him severely for the work attributed to him under the title Fusûs al-Hikam (“The Precious
Stones of the Wisdoms”). The attribution of this work in its present form to Ibn ‘Arabi is un-
doubtedly incorrect as the Fusûs contradicts some of the most basic tenets of Islam expounded
by Ibn ‘Arabi himself in his authentic works, such as the finality of Prophethood, the primacy
of Prophets over non-Prophets, the abrogation of all religious creeds other than Islam, the ev-
erlastingness of the punishment of Hellfire and its dwellers, the abiding therein of anyone that
does not accept the Prophet after his coming, Pharaoh’s damnation, etc. Nevertheless
the Fusûs have received commentaries by the following scholars among others: Sadr al-Din al-
Qunawi (d. 671), ‘Afif al-Din al-Tilimsani (d. 690), Mu’ayyid al-Din al-Jundi (d. 700), Sa‘d al-Din
al-Farghani (d. 700), Kamal al-Din al-Zamalkani (d. 727), Dawud al-Qaysari (d. 751), Kamal al-
Din al-Qashani (d. 751), Sayyid ‘Ali al-Hamadani (d. 766), Khwaja Muhammad Parsa (d. 822)
the intimate friend of Shah Naqshband, Mawlana Jami (d. 898), Isma‘il al-Anqarawi (d. 1042),
‘Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi (d. 1144), and others.
In response to an attack by Burhan al-Din al-Biqa‘i (d. 885) entitled Tanbih al-Ghabi ila Takfir
Ibn ‘Arabi wa Tahdhir al-‘Ibad min Ahl al-‘Inad (“Warning to the Ignoramus Concerning the
Declaration of Ibn ‘Arabi’s Disbelief, and Cautioning the Servants of Allah Against Stubborn
People”) Sayyid ‘Ali ibn Maymun al-Maghribi (d. 917) wrote a fatwa entitledTanbih al-Ghabi fi
Tanzih Ibn ‘Arabi (“Warning to the Ignoramus Concerning Ibn ‘Arabi’s Vindication”). Al-Suyuti
wrote a fatwa with the same title, in which he stated:
The scholars past and present have differed concerning Ibn ‘Arabi, one group considering him
a friend of Allah (walî) – and they are correct – such as Ibn ‘Ata’ Allah al-Sakandari and ‘Afif al-
Din al-Yafi‘i, another considering him a heretic – such as a large number of the jurists – while
others expressed doubts concerning him, among them al-Dhahabi in al-Mizan. Two opposed
verdicts are reported from Shaykh ‘Izz al-Din ibn ‘Abd al-Salam, one attacking him, and one
describing him as the Spiritual Pole (al-qutb). What reconciles them is indicated by Shaykh Taj
al-Din ibn ‘Ata’ Allah in Lata’if al-Minan [fi Manaqib Abi al-‘Abbas al-Mursi wa Shaykhihi Abi al-
Hasan al-Shadhili], namely, that Shaykh ‘Izz al-Din at the beginning acted in the fashion of ju-
rists in passing quick judgment on the Sufis. When Shaykh Abu al-Hasan al-Shadhili went to
pilgrimage and returned, he came to Shaykh ‘Izz al-Din before entering his own house and
conveyed to him the Prophet’s (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) greeting. After that, Shaykh ‘Izz al-
Din humbled himself and began to sit in al-Shadhili’s gatherings….[6] Our shaykh, Shaykh al-
Islam, the last remnant of the mujtahids, Sharaf al-Din al-Munawi replied, concerning Ibn
‘Arabi, that silence was safest. And this is the stance that befits every truly God-wary person
who fears for himself. For me, the last word concerning Ibn ‘Arabi – and this is accepted nei-
ther by his contemporary admirers nor by his detractors – is that he be considered a walî, but
reading his books is forbidden.[7]
Whatever is transmitted and attributed to the [Sufi] Shaykhs – may Allah be well pleased with
them – if it contradicts external knowledge, bears various possibilities:
Second, after authenticity is established, it may have a figurative meaning; if not, then one
should say: “Perhaps it has a figurative meaning for the people of internal knowledge and the
knowers of Allah Almighty.”
Third, this may have come from them in a state of intoxication and distraction, and the law-
fully intoxicated person is not taken to task as he is not held responsible in such a state.
Holding a bad opinion about them after all these resolutions is a sign of deprivement of suc-
cess. We seek refuge in Allah from failure and a terrible verdict, and from all evils![8]
Al-Suyuti’s attitude and what he reports from al-Munawi is echoed by Imam al-Safadi who
said of Ibn ‘Arabi: “He was a very great man, and whatever can be understood from his words
is excellent and upright; as for what we find difficult, we leave its matter to Allah, for we were
not tasked with following him nor with doing all that he said.”[9] Similarly al-Qari admitted in
one of his fatwas against Ibn ‘Arabi and his works: “The safest course in Religion concerning
the person of Ibn ‘Arabi is silence, as the scholars differed about him.”[10]
The hadith master Ibn al-Najjar (d. 643) wrote a long notice on him in his biographical history
in which he said: “I met him in Damascus and copied some of his poetry. What a wonderful
shaykh he was!”[11] Among the famous authorities who held a good opinion of Ibn ‘Arabi are
the following:
· The Qur’anic commentator and jurist Imam al-Baydawi who called him “the Imam of
Verification in reality and outwardly”;
· The hadith master al-Sakhawi who chronicled al-Biqa‘i’s fitna in his Ahsan al-Masa‘i fi Idah
Hawadith al-Biqa‘i and went on to write al-Qawl al-Munabbi ‘an Tarjima Ibn ‘Arabi which he
summarized in al-Kifaya fi Tariq al-Hidaya. He also authored another book titled Tajrid Asma’
al-Akhidhin ‘an Ibn ‘Arabi in which he listed all the scholars who borrowed material from the
Shaykh.[14]
th
· Al-Adnahwi (11 c.) who called him in his Tabaqat al-Mufassirin “the Peerless Shaykh in his
Time.”a
· Ibn ‘Imad al-Hanbali who called him “the Great Knower of Allah” (al-‘ârif al-kabîr);[15]
· Kamal al-Din ‘Abd al-Wahid ibn ‘Abd al-Karim Ibn al-Zamalkani al-Dimashqi (d. 651) who
called him “the Ocean replete with all kinds of divine knowledges”;
· Safi al-Din al-Azdi al-Ansari in his epistle on the scholars of his time;
· Majd al-Din al-Shirazi al-Siddiqi in his fatwa entitled al-Ightibat bi Mu‘alaja Ibn al-Khayyat;
[17]
· The renowned lexicographer, hadith scholar and jurist al-Fayruzabadi who in his commen-
tary on al-Bukhari’s Sahih often quotes Ibn ‘Arabi’s explanations;
· Imam al-Yafi‘i who called him in his Tarikh “the Paragon of the Friends of Allah in knowledge
and fiqh outwardly and inwardly”;
· The lexicographer and hadith master Murtada al-Zabidi who often cites Ibn ‘Arabi in his
commentary on al-Ghazzali’s Ihya’ entitled Ithaf al-Sada al-Muttaqin.
· Qadi al-Qudat Shams al-Din al-Bisati al-Maliki who opposed before the Sultan – in Ibn Hajar’s
presence – ‘Ala’ al-Din al-Bukhari’s verdict of takfîr of Ibn ‘Arabi and whoever accepted him;
[18]
· Shaykh al-Islam Siraj al-Din al-Makhzumi who said: “Our shaykh,Shaykh al-Islam Siraj al-Din
al-Bulqini and likewise Shaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki used to criticize the Shaykh in the begin-
ning, then they changed their position after they realized what he was saying and the explana-
tion of his intent.”[19]
· Al-Bulqini who was reported by his student al-Makhzumi as saying: “We seek refuge in Allah
from saying that he [Ibn ‘Arabi] asserts indwelling (hulûl) or communion-with-the-
divine (ittihâd)! He is far above that. Rather, he is one of the greatest imams and among those
who have probed the oceans of the sciences of the Book and the Sunna.”[20]
· Shaykh al-Islam Zakariyya al-Ansari in the chapter on apostasy in his book Sharh Kitab al-
Rawd fi al-Fiqh wa al-Fatwa;[21]
· The hadith master and Qur’anic commentator Shaykh Isma‘il Haqqi in his book al-Khitab;
· Imam Muhammad Ibn ‘Abidin, the foremost authority in the late Hanafi school;[22]
· The Ottoman writer Katib Çelebi who devoted a chapter on Ibn ‘Arabi in his book Mizan al-
Haqq fi Ikhtyar al-Ahaqq;
· The hadith master of Damascus and Renewer of the Fourteenth Islamic century, Shaykh Badr
al-Din al-Hasani;[23]
· The Wahhabi supporter, student of al-Shawkani, scholarly nawab of Bhopal and author
of Abjad al-‘Ulum Siddiq Hasan Khan al-Qinnawji in the third chapter of his Takhrij al-Wasaya
which he titled: “Concerning the Instructions of One of the Pure People of Excellence Com-
monly Named ‘Sufis’ – Allah Grant Us and All of Them Mercy Through the Immense Honor of
the Master of Messengers e (bijâh sayyid al-mursalîn)” The chapter then begins: “The most sub-
lime shaykh and knower of Allah (al-shaykh al-ajall al-‘ârif billâhi ta‘âlâ) said in al-Futuhat al-
Makkiyya…” Al-Qinnawji then goes on to cite Ibn ‘Arabi for over forty pages.[24]
· Shaykh al-Islam al-Munawi who cited him over two hundred times inFayd al-Qadir and else-
where declared:
A group of scholars professed suspension of judgment and benefit of good opinion (al-
taslîm)… their Imam being Shaykh al-Islam al-Nawawi who replied, when asked about Ibn
‘Arabi: (Those are a people who have passed away. Theirs is that which they earned, and
yours is that which you earn. And you will not be asked of what they used to
do) (2:134). [Ahmad] Zarruq reported from his shaykh al-Nuri the words: “They differed about
him from the verdict of disbelief to that of spiritual primacy (qutbâniyya); giving the benefit of
good opinion is therefore an obligation.”[27]
Perhaps the most famous misrepresentation of the Shaykh that resulted from the Fusûs is the
attribution to him of the doctrine of “oneness of being” (wahda al-wujûd) in the pantheistic
sense of the immanence of the Deity in everything that exists. Al-Qari cites, for example, a
verse of poetry which he references to the Fusûs, stating:
This attribution and others of its type are evidently spurious and Ibn ‘Arabi’s ‘Aqida flatly con-
tradicts them. Furthermore, verifying scholars such as Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi in his epistles,
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi in al-Radd al-Matin ‘ala Muntaqid al-‘Arif Billah Muhyi al-
Din and Idah al-Maqsud min Wahda al-Wujud, and al-Sha‘rani in al-Yawaqit wa al-Jawahir
and Tanbih al-Aghbiya’ ‘ala Qatratin min Bahri ‘Ulum al-Awliya have rephrased Ibn ‘Arabi’s ex-
pression of “oneness of being”(wahda al-wujûd) as “oneness of perception” (wahda al-
shuhûd) in the sense in which the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) defined excellence
(ihsân) as “worshipping Allah as if you see Him.”[29] And to see Him is to see nothing else.
This is what is meant in such expressions as the question uttered again and again by the late
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Hamid Kishk: “Allah is my Lord! Is there in all existence any but He?” (Allâhu
rabbî! Hal fi al-wujûdi siwâh?) or aphorism 133 of Ibn ‘Ata’ Allah: “The universes are affirmed
by His affirmation of them and they are erased by the unicity of His Essence” (al-akwânu
thâbitatun bi ithbâtihi wa mamhuwwatun bi ahadiyyati dhâtihi). Shaykh ‘Abd al-Hadi Kharsa
explained:
Those who have come to know Allah Ithrough His own self-disclosure to them(ta‘rîf Allâhi
lahum) – they did not come to know Him via their minds – have known him with the light
which Allah I imparted to their hearts and minds. This light then reflected itself upon all
things. Then they saw that all things subsist in Allah, and they witnessed the Onenesse of
Allah I in all those created aspects despite their multiplicity. For these aspects have no auton-
omy of existence. Their subsistence is only through the divine Sustainment (qayyûmiyya) and
their affirmation is through the Support (imdâd) of Allah. [Allah chooses for Himself whom
He will, and guides unto Himself him who turns (toward Him)] (42:13). The people of turn-
ing to Allah (ahl al-inâba) Allah guides unto Himself. The people of His choice (ahl al-
ijtibâ’) are those whom He especially purifies (istafâhum). [And peace be on His slaves whom
He has chosen] (27:59). O Allah, let us be of them and with them! Aamin.[30]
And when we appear through Him, yet He appears without our help.
I never heard nor shall I ever hear a sane and reasonable person
What is the meaning of the expression “oneness of perception”? When I interact with causes
with full respect to the ways of Allah, His orders, and His Law, knowing that the sustenance
that comes to me is from Allah; the felicity that enters my home is from Allah Almighty; my
food is readied for me by Allah – I mean even the smallest details; the wealth with which I
have been graced, comes from Allah; the illness that has been put in my being or that of a rela-
tive of mine comes from Allah Almighty; the cure that followed it is from Allah Almighty; my
success in my studies is by Allah Almighty’s grant; the results which I have attained after ob-
taining my degrees and so forth, are from Allah Almighty’s grant – when the efficacy of causes
melts away in my sight and I no longer see, behind them, other than the Causator Who is Allah
Almighty: at that time, when you look right, you do not see except the Attributes of Allah, and
when you look left, you do not see other than the Attributes of Allah. As much as you evolve in
the world of causes, you do not see, through them, other than the Causator, Who is Allah. At
that time you have become raised to what the spiritual masters have called oneness of percep-
tion. And this oneness of perception is what the Messenger of Allah rexpressed by the
word ihsân [which he defined to mean]: “That you worship Allah as if you see him.” You do
not see the causes as a barrier between you and Allah. Rather, you see causes, in the context of
this doctrine, very much like pure, transparent glass: the glass pane is present – no one denies
it – but as much as you stare at it, you do not see anything except what is behind it. Is it not so?
You only see what is behind it. The world is entirely made of glass panes in this fashion. You
see in them the efficacy of Allah in permanence, so you are always with Allah Almighty. None
has tasted the sweetness of belief unless he has reached that level of perception.[32]
Ibn Taymiyya is quoted in his Fatawa as being asked repeatedly about “the verdict of Islam
concerning Ibn ‘Arabi who asserted Oneness of Being,” and other similar questions. However,
it seems that Ibn Taymiyya did not review the Shaykh’s huge Futuhat in its totality when he
answered these questions. At times, his discussions about Ibn ‘Arabi depend, as he puts it, on
“whether these are his actual words” while at other times he attacks him outright on the basis
of these unverified assumptions, or himself levels specific accusations against the Shaykh.
Muhammad Ghurab – a contemporary authority on Ibn ‘Arabi’s works – in a book published
in the 1980s by Dar al-Fikr in Damascus, states having read the Futuhatseveral times from
cover to cover without finding the expressions for which Ibn Taymiyya took the Shaykh to
task while citing this work. The late scholar of Damascus Shaykh Mahmud al-Rankusi simi-
larly affirmed that Ibn Taymiyya answered questions about Ibn ‘Arabi without confirming
them against his actual writings, and that the sharp temper of the former further complicated
his attitude towards the Shaykh. On the basis of these opinions and in the light of Ibn
Taymiyya’s occasional reservations and his otherwise apparently correct approach to ambigu-
ous expressions, it seems that the misquotations of Ibn ‘Arabi became so numerous in Ibn
Taymiyya’s time that it became inconceivable to him that they were all incorrect, whereupon
he treated them as facts. The errors causing these misquotations can also be inferred from the
fact that since the misquotations revolved around issues of doctrine – in which
misunderstandings are fraught with grave dangers – and in light of the Shaykh’s complex style
and obscure expressions, queries would be commonly sent to muftis concerning what some
people thought they had read, without actually citing nor understanding the expressions in
question. All this could have been avoided by the due observance of faithfulness (amâna) in
textual citation, as the early scholars insisted with reference to hadith transmission. Yet many
later scholars, beginning with Ibn Taymiyya and after him, relied on second and third-hand
paraphrases and attributions, endorsing the accusations against Ibn ‘Arabi and even general-
izing them so as to target all tasawwuf. Finally, Ibn Taymiyya in his letter to al-Munayji actu-
ally states his admiration for the Futuhat and reserves his criticism only for the Fusûs![33]
Among the scholars claimed by al-Qari as condemning Ibn ‘Arabi as an innovator or even an
outright heretic (zindîq) and disbeliever because of Fusûs al-Hikam: Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam, al-
Jazari, Sharaf al-Din ibn al-Muqri, Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi, Sa‘d al-Din al-Taftazani,[34] Jamal
al-Din Muhammad ibn Nur al-Din,[35] Siraj al-Din al-Bulqini who supposedly ordered his
books burnt,[36] Burhan al-Din al-Biqa‘i, Ibn Taymiyya,[37] and his student al-Dhahabi who
said:
He may well have been one of the Friends of Allah Whom He strongly attracted to Himself
upon death and for whom He sealed a good ending. As for his words, whoever understands
them, recognizes them to be based on communion-with-the-divine (ittihâdiyya), knowing the
deviation of those people and comprehending theirs expressions: the truth will be apparent to
him as against what they say.[38]
The Hanafi shaykh ‘Ala’ al-Din al-Bukhari, like Ibn al-Muqri, went so far as to declare anyone
who did not declare Ibn ‘Arabi a disbeliever to be himself a disbeliever. This is the same ‘Ala’
al-Din al-Bukhari who said that anyone that gives Ibn Taymiyya the title Shaykh al-Islam is a
disbeliever.
Al-Haytami’s Response
Our shaykh [Zakariyya al-Ansari] said in Sharh al-Rawd… in response to Ibn al-Muqri’s state-
ment: “Whoever doubts in the disbelief (kufr) of Ibn ‘Arabi’s group, he himself is a
disbeliever”:
The truth is that Ibn ‘Arabi and his group are the elite of the Umma. Al-Yafi‘i, Ibn ‘Ata’ Allah
and others have declared that they considered Ibn ‘Arabi a walî, noting that the language
which Sufis use is appropriate among the experts in its usage and that the knower of
Allah (‘ârif), when he becomes completely absorbed in the oceans of Unity, might make some
statements that are liable to be misconstrued as indwelling (hulûl) and union (ittihâd), while
in reality there is neither indwelling nor union.
It has been clearly stated by our Imams, such as al-Rafi‘i in his book al-‘Aziz, al-Nawawi in al-
Rawda and al-Majmu‘, and others:
When a mufti is asked about a certain phrase that could be construed as disbelief, he should
not immediately say that the speaker should be put to death nor immediately make permissi-
ble the shedding of his blood. Rather, let him say: The speaker must be asked about what he
meant by his statement, and he should hear his explanation, then act accordingly.[39]
Look at these guidelines – may Allah guide you! – and you will find that the deniers who as-
sault this great man (Ibn ‘Arabi) and positively assert his disbelief, are riding upon blind
mounts, and stumbling about like a camel affected with troubled vision. Verily Allah has
blocked their sight and hearing from perceiving this, until they fell into whatever they fell
into, which caused them to be despised, and made their knowledge of no benefit. The great
knowledge of the Sufis and their utter renunciation of this world and of everything other than
Allah testify to their innocence from these terrible accusations, therefore we prefer to dismiss
such accusations and consider that their statements are true realities in the way they ex-
pressed them. Their way cannot be denied without knowing the meaning of their statements
and the expressions they use, and then turning to apply the expression to the meaning and see
if they match or not. We thank Allah that all of their deniers are ignorant in that kind of
knowledge, as not one of them has mastered the sciences of unveilings (mukâshafât), nor even
smelled them from a distance! Nor has anyone of them sincerely followed any of
the awliyâ’ so as to master their terminology.
You may object: “I disagree that their expressions refer to a reality rather than being meta-
phorical phrases, therefore show me something clearer than the explanations that have been
given.” I say: Rejection is stubborness. Let us assume that you disagree with what I have men-
tioned, but the correct way of stating the objection is to say: “This statement could be inter-
preted in several ways,” and proceed to explain them. You should not say: “If it meant this,
then… and if it meant that, then…” while stating from the start “This is kufr”! That is ignorance
and goes beyond the scope of sincere faithfulness (nasîha) claimed by the critic.
Do you not see that if Ibn al-Muqri’s real motivation were good advice, he would not have
exaggerated by saying: “Whoever has a doubt in the disbelief of the group of Ibn ‘Arabi, he
himself is a disbeliever”? So he extended his judgment that Ibn ‘Arabi’s followers were
disbelievers, to everyone who had a doubt as to their disbelief. Look at this fanaticism that ex-
ceeds all bounds and departs from the consensus of the Imams, and goes so far as to accuse
anyone who doubts their disbelief. (Glorified are You, this is awful
calumny!) (24:16) (When you welcomed it with your tongues, and uttered with your
mouths that whereof you had no knowledge, you counted it a trifle. In the sight of Allah,
it is very great) (24:15).
Notice also that his statement suggests that it is an obligation on the whole Community to be-
lieve that Ibn ‘Arabi and his followers are disbelievers, otherwise they will all be declared dis-
believers – and no one thinks likes this. As a matter of fact, it might well lead into something
forbidden which he himself has stated clearly in his book al-Rawd when he said: “Whoever ac-
cuses a Muslim of being a disbeliever based on a sin committed by him, and without an at-
tempt to interpret it favorably, he himself commits disbelief.” Yet here he is accusing an entire
group of Muslims of disbelief.[40] Moreover, no consideration should be paid to his interpre-
tation, because he only gives the kind of interpretation that is detrimental to those he is criti-
cizing, for that is all that their words have impressed upon him.
As for those who do not think of Ibn ‘Arabi and the Sufis except as a pure light in front of
them, and believe in their sainthood – how can a Muslim attack them by accusing them of
disbelief? No one would dare do so unless he is accepting the possibility to be himself called a
disbeliever. This judgment reflects a great deal of fanaticism, and an assault on most of the
Muslims. We ask Allah, through His Mercy, to forgive the one who uttered it.
It has been narrated through more than one source and has become well-known to everyone
that whoever opposes the Sufis, Allah will not make His Knowledge beneficial, and he will be
inflicted with the worst and ugliest diseases. We have witnessed this taking place with many
naysayers. For example, al-Biqa‘i – may Allah forgive him! – used to be one of the most distin-
guished scholars, blessed with many meritorious acts of worship, an exceptional intelligence,
and an excellent memory in all kinds of knowledge, especially in the sciences of tafsîr and ha-
dith, and he wrote numerous books, but Allah did not allow them to be of any kind of benefit
to anyone. He also authored a book called Munasabat al-Qur’an in about ten volumes, about
which no-one knows except the elite, and as for the rest, they never heard about it. If this book
had been written by our Shaykh Zakariyya [al-Ansari], or by anyone who believes [in awliyâ’],
it would have been copied with gold because, as a matter of fact, it has no equal: for (Of the
bounties of thy Lord We bestow freely on all, these as well as those: the bounties of thy
Lord are not closed to anyone) (17:20).
Al-Biqa‘i went to extremes in his denial and wrote books about the subject, all of them clearly
and excessively fanatical and deviating from the straight path. But then he paid for it fully and
even more than that, for he was caught in the act on several occasions and was judged a disbe-
liever. It was ruled that his blood be shed and he was about to get killed, but he asked the help
and protection of some influential people who rescued him, and he was made to repent in
Salihiyya, Egypt, and renew his Islam.[41]
Al-Dhahabi voiced something similar to al-Haytami’s warnings against those inclined to attack
Sufis:
Our Shaykh Ibn Wahb [= Ibn Daqiq al-‘Id] said – may Allah have mercy on him: ‘Among the
predicaments that mar the discipline of narrator-discreditation are the divergences that take
place between the followers of tasawwuf (al-mutasawwifa) and the people of external
knowledge (ahl al-‘ilm al-zâhir); animosity therefore arose between these two groups and
necessitated mutual criticism.’
Now this [animosity against Sufis] is a plunge from which none escapes unscathed except one
thoroughly knowledgeable with all the evidentiary proofs of the Law. Note that I do not limit
such knowledge to the branches [of the Law]. For, concerning many of the states described by
the people of truth (al-muhiqqîn) among the Sufis, right cannot be told from wrong on the
mere basis of knowledge of the branches. One must also possess firm knowledge of the princi-
ples of the Law and be able to tell apart the obligatory from the possible, as well as the ratio-
nally impossible from the customarily impossible.
It is, indeed, a position fraught with danger! For the critic of a true Sufi (muhiqq al-sûfiyya) en-
ters into the hadith: “Whosoever shows enmity to one of My Friends, I shall declare war upon
him.”[42] While one that abandons all condemnation for what is clearly wrong in what he
hears from some of them, abandons the commanding of good and the forbidding of evil.[43]
It is remarkable that there were very few contemporaries of Ibn ‘Arabi among his accusers, al-
though he travelled and taught all over the Islamic world and, as Ibn Hajar stated, “he made
his mark in every country that he entered”[44] while his admirers among the authorities of
Islam lived both in his own lifetime and later.
· “Whoever is truthful in something and pursues it diligently will obtain it sooner or later; if
he does not obtain it in this world, he will obtain it in the next; and whoever dies before vic-
tory shall be elevated to the level of his diligence.”
· “The knower of Allah knows through eyesight (basar) what others know through
insight (basîra), and he knows through insight what virtually no-one knows. Despite this, he
does not feel secure from the harm of his ego towards himself; how then could he ever feel se-
cure from what His Lord has foreordained for him?”
· “The knower’s declaration to his student: ‘Take from me this science which you can find
nowhere else,’ does not detract from the knower’s level, nor do other similar declarations that
appear to be self-eulogy, because his intention is only to encourage the student to receive it.”
· “The discourse of the knower is in the image of the listener according to the latter’s powers,
readiness, weakness, and inner reservations.”
· “If you find it complicated to answer someone’s question, do not answer it, for his container
is already full and does not have room for the answer.”
· “The ignorant one does not see his ignorance as he basks in its darkness; nor does the knowl-
edgeable one see his own knowledge, for he basks in its light.”
· “Whoever asks for a proof for the oneness of Allah, a donkey knows more than him.”
Ibn ‘Arabi’s short book of poetry Tarjuman al-Ashwaq (“The Interpreter of Desires”) is consid-
ered one of the masterpieces of classical Arabic poetry and has been translated in several lan-
guages. The Futuhat al-Makkiyya also contains some outstanding samples of the Shaykh’s po-
etry. Following is a poem he addresses to the Ka‘ba:
valley,
18. I heard him call upon Allah and say, beside the Black
Stone: “O my heart!
Ibn ‘Imad said: “He died – may Allah have mercy on him! – in the house of the Qadi Muhyi al-
Din ibn al-Zaki and was taken to Qasyûn [Damascus] and buried in the noble mound, one of
the groves of Paradise, and Allah knows best.”[50]
Islamic Doctrine
The Blessings and Peace of Allah Upon the Messenger of Allah and Upon his Family and
All his Companions
[Al-Futuhat §130] My faithful brethren – may Allah seal your lives and mine with goodness! –
when I heard the saying of Allah I about His Prophet Hûd u, as the latter told his folk who had
belied him and his apostleship: (I call Allah to witness, and do you (too) bear witness, that
I am innocent of (all) that you ascribe as partners (to Allah)) (11:54), [I saw that] he called
his folk to witness in his regard – although they belied him – that he was innocent of associat-
ing any partners to Allah, and that he positively confirmed His Oneness; and since he knew
that Allah Iwill summon human beings before Him and ask them about what he himself knew,
either to exonerate or convict them, until every single witness bears witness;
[131] And since it was related that the caller to prayer (mu’adhdhin) is witnessed to by every
living and non-living thing as far as his voice can reach, and by everything and everyone that
hears him; hence “The devil flees at the call to prayer, passing wind”[52] so that he will not
hear the caller’s call to prayer and then have to witness on the latter’s behalf, thereby becom-
ing one of those who contribute to the felicity of the one being witnessed to, whereas he is the
absolute enemy and does not bear for us an iota of good – may Allah curse him!
[132] Now, if the enemy himself is obliged to testify on your behalf to whatever you call him to
witness regarding your own person, it is even more certain that your friend and beloved
should testify on your behalf – for the latter shares your religion and belongs to your religious
community – and it is more certain that you yourself should testify, in this world, for yourself,
to Oneness (al-wahdâniyya) and Belief (al-îmân).
[133] Therefore, O my brethren, O my beloved – may Allah be well pleased with you! – a weak
slave calls upon you to witness, a poor one utterly dependent on His Lord in every glimpse of
the eye, the author and maker of this book [al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya (“The Meccan
Conquests”)]; he calls you to testify in his regard, after calling Allah I to witness, His angels,
and whoever is present with him and hears him among the believers, that he bears witness in
word and in full conviction (qawlan wa ‘aqdan) that:
[134] Allah the Exalted is One God, without second in His divinity;
[136] Absolute owner [of all] (mâlik) without partner; absolute king (malik) without minister;
[137] Creator (sâni‘) without any disposer of affairs (mudabbir) with Him;
[138] Existing in Himself (mawjûdun bî dhâtihi), without any dependence on, or need for an
originator (mûjid) to originate Him. Rather, every existing thing other than Him, depends on
Him and needs Him to exist. The whole universe exists through Him, and He alone can be said
to exist in Himself.
[139] There is no outset (iftitâh) to His existence nor end to His permanence. His existence is
absolute and unconditioned.
[141] He is transcendent (muqaddasun) above possessing directions (jihât) and regions (aqtâr).
[142] He can be seen with the hearts and the eyes, if He so wills.
[143] He established Himself over His Throne just as He said and in the meaning that He in-
tended; also, the Throne and everything else was established by Him (bihi istawâ),
[53] and (unto Him belong the after (life), and the former) (53:25).
[144] He has no conceivable equivalent whatsoever (laysa lahu mithlun ma‘qûl), nor can minds
represent Him. Time does not confine Him, nor place lift nor transport Him. Rather, He was
when there was no place, and He is now as He ever was.[54]
[145] He created fixity (al-mutamakkin) and place (al-makân),[55] brought time into existence,
and said: “I am the One, the Ever-Living” (anâ al-Wâhid al-Hayy).[56] Preserving His creations
in no way tires Him. Attributes which do not describe Him and are devised by creatures do
not apply to Him.[57]
[146] Exalted is He far above being indwelt by originated matters, or indwelling them, or that
they be “after Him” or that He be “before them”! Rather, we say: “He was and there was noth-
ing with him.” For the words ‘before’ and ‘after’ are among the locutions of Time, which He in-
vented.[58]
[147] He is the Self-Sustaining Sustainer of All (al-Qayyûm) Who sleeps not, the All-Compelling
Subduer (al-Qahhâr) Whom one resists not. (There is nothing whatsoever like unto
Him) (42:11).
[148] He created the Throne (al-‘arsh) and made it the boundary (hadd) of istiwâ’, and He cre-
ated the Footstool (al-kursî) and made it encompass the earth and the heavens.
[149] The Sublimely Exalted (al-‘Alî)contrived the Tablet and the Sublime Pen, making them
bring about the inscription of His Knowledge concerning His creation until the Day of
Determination and Verdict.
[150] He contrived the entire universe without precedent. He created creation then caused
what He created to wither.
[151] He sent down the souls (al-arwâh) into the specters (al-ashbâh) as custodians, and made
those soul-endowed specters deputies on earth.
[152] He made subservient to us all that is in the heavens and the earth from Him, whereof
not one atom moves except back to Him and because of Him.
[153] He created everything without need for it, and no necessity drove Him to do so, but with
His foreknowledge that He would create whatever He created.
[154] (He is the First and the Last and the Manifest and the Hidden) (57:3), (and He is able
to do all things) (5:120, 11:4, 30:50, 42:9, 57:2, 64:1, 67:1).
[155] (He surrounds all things in knowledge) (65:12) (and He keeps count of all
things) (72:28), (He knows the traitor of the eyes and that which the bosoms
hide) (40:19). (Should He not know what He created? And He is the Subtle, the
Aware) (67:14).
[156] He knew all things before they came into existence, then He brought them into existence
exactly as He knew them. He has known them without beginning to His knowledge, and such
knowledge in no way becomes newer upon the renewal of origination (tajaddud al-inshâ’). He
brought all things to perfection in His knowledge, then He established them firmly (bi ‘ilmihi
atqana al-ashyâ’a fa ahkamahâ). Likewise, He has full knowledge of their smallest
details (juz’iyyât) according to the consensus and complete agreement of the people of sound
scrutiny.[59] (Knower of the invisible and the visible! and exalted be He over all that they
ascribe as partners (unto Him)) (23:92).
[156—A] (Doer of what He will) (85:16), He is therefore willing (murîd) for existent entities in
the earthly and heavenly worlds. However, His power is without link to anything (lam
tata‘allaq bi shay’) until He wills it.[60] Likewise, He does not will anything until He knows it.
For it is impossible in the mind that He wills something of which He knows not, or that one
who is endowed with the choice of not doing, should do what He does not want to do.
Likewise, it is impossible that all these realities be attributed to one who is not living, and it is
impossible that the Attributes subsist in other than an Entity described by them.
[157] There is not in all existence any observance nor sin, any gain nor loss, any slave nor free
man, any cold nor hot, any life nor death, any happening nor elapsing, any day nor night, any
moderation nor inclination, any land nor sea, any even nor odd, any substance nor accident,
any health nor sickness, any joy nor sadness, any soul nor specter, any darkness nor light, any
earth nor heaven, any assembling nor disjoining, any plenty nor scarcity, any morning nor
evening, any white nor black, any sleep nor wakefulness, any visible nor hidden, any moving
nor still, any dry nor moist, any shell nor core, or any of all such mutually contrasting, varie-
gated, or similar entities, except it is so willed by the Real – Exalted is He!
[158] How could He not will it when it is He Who brought it into existence? And how could the
one endowed with free will, bring into existence what He does not want? None can turn down
His command, and none can dispute His decision.
[159] ([He] gives sovereignty unto whom [He] will, and [He] withdraws sovereignty from
whom [He] will. [He] exalts whom [He] will and [He] abases whom [He] will) (3:26). ([He]
sends whom [He] will astray and guides whom [He] will) (7:155). Whatever Allah wants,
comes into existence (mâ shâ’a Allahu kân), and whatever He does not wish to be, does not
come into existence (mâ lam yasha’ an yakûna lam yakun).
[160] If all creatures convened to want something which Allah does not want them to want,
they cannot want it. Or, if they convened to do something which Allah does not want to bring
into existence – although they willed it whenever He wanted them to will it – they cannot do
it; nor can they even be capable of doing it; nor does He enable them to.
[161] Therefore, disbelief and belief, observance and sin, are all according to His
desire (mashî’a), His wisdom (hikma), and His will (irâda). And He – Glorified is He! – is de-
scribed as possessing such will without beginning.
[162] The universe is in oblivion and nonexistence, although firmly established in itself in [the
divine] knowledge. Then He brought the universe into existence without
reflection (tafakkur) nor deliberation(tadabbur) such as accompany ignorance or unaware-
ness and would then presumably provide Him the knowledge of what He knew not – greatly
exalted and elevated is He above that! Rather, He brought it into existence on the basis of
foreknowledge(al-‘ilm al-sâbiq), and the exact specification (ta‘yîn) of transcendent, pre-exis-
tent will(al-irâda al-munazzaha al-azaliyya) determining just how it brought the universe into
being with respect to time, place, forms, masses, and color. None exists exerting will, in reality,
other than He. For He says: (And you will not, unless Allah wills) (76:30, 81:29).
[164] He speaks, not after being previously silent nor following presumed tacitness, with a
speech pre-eternal and beginningless like the rest of His attributes, whether His knowledge,
will, or power. He spoke to Musa u. He named it [His speech] the divine Bestowal (al-tanzîl),
the Book of Psalms (al-zabûr), the Torah, and the Evangel. [All this] without letters (hurûf),
sounds (aswât), tones (nagham), nor languages (lughât). Rather, He is the Creator of sounds,
letters, and languages.[63]
[165] His speech is [spoken] without [the organs of] uvula and tongue, just as His hearing is
without auditory meatus nor ears, His sight is without pupil nor eyelids, His will is without
cogitation (qalb) nor inner reflection (janân), His knowledge is without
compulsion (idtirâr) nor examination of any proof, His life is without the vapor which is
caused in the cavity of the heart by the admixture of the elements. His Entity accepts neither
increase nor decrease.
[166] Glorified, most glorified is He Who, from afar, comes near! To Him belongs tremendous
majesty, surpassing goodness, magnificent generosity! Everything that is other than Him is but
an outpouring of His munificence. His grace unfolds it and His justice folds it up again.
[167] He perfected the making of the universe and made it uniquely excellent(akmala san‘a
al-‘âlami wa abda‘ahu) when He brought it into existence and invented it. He has no partner in
His domain (milk) nor joint disposer of affairs (mudabbir) in His dominion (mulk).
[168] Whenever He shows favor He sends comfort and ease; and this is His kindness.
Whenever He sends adversity He punishes; and this is His justice. In no way does He intrude
upon another’s domain so as to be attributed tyranny and injustice. Nor is anyone besides Him
entitled to pass judgment on Him so that He could be attributed apprehension or fear from
such. Everything other than Him is under the authority of His subjugation (qahr) and subject
to the disposal of His will and His command.
[169] It is He that inspires with Godwariness or rebelliousness the souls of those who are
legally responsible. It is He that disregards the transgressions of whomever He will, and holds
to task whomever He will, both here and on the Day of Resurrection. His justice does not hold
sway (yahkum) over His kindness nor does His kindness hold sway over His justice.
[170] He brought forth the world as two handfuls (qabdatayn) to which He gave two levels
(manzilatayn), saying: “These are for Paradise, and I care not (lâ ubâlî)![64] Those are for
Hellfire, and I care not!”[65] No-one raised the least objection at that time. One handful stands
under the Names of His adversity (balâ’), and one stands under the Names of His favors (âlâ’).
[171] If He wished that the whole universe be in felicity, it would be so; and [if He wished that
it be] in misery, it would not have obtained the slightest degree of felicity. However, He did not
wish it so, and it was exactly as He wished. Consequently, people are either miserable or
happy, here and on the Day of Return. There is no possibility to change whatever the Pre-eter-
nal One has decided. He has said, concerning prayer: “It is five although it counts as
fifty.”[66] (The sentence that comes from Me cannot be changed, and I am in no wise a
tyrant unto the slaves)(50:29) for My authority over the disposal of affairs in My domain and
the accomplishment of My volition in My dominion.
[172] All this is because of a reality that sights and insights (al-absâr wa al-basâ’ir) are utterly
unable to see, nor can mental powers and minds stumble upon its knowledge except through
a divine bestowal and token of the All-Merciful’s generosity towards him whom He nourishes
among His servants, and who was fore-chosen for this at the time he was summoned to wit-
ness. He then came to know – when He was given to know – that the Godhead (al-ulûha) de-
vised this allotment and that it is one of the refinements of the One Who is without beginning.
[173] Glory to Him besides Whom there is no effecter (fâ‘il), nor any self-existent
being (mawjûd li nafsih)! (And Allah has created you and what you make) (37:95), (He will
not be questioned as to what He does, but they will be questioned) (21:23), (Say—For to
Allah belongs the final argument — Had He willed He could indeed have guided all of
you) (6:149). [67]
[174] Just as I have called upon Allah and His angels, as well as all His creation and yourselves,
to testify in my regard to my declaration of His oneness, likewise, I call upon Him – glorified is
He! – and His angels, as well as all His creation and yourselves, to testify in my regard to my
firm belief in the one He elected and chose from the very time he existed. That is: our master
Muhammad r whom He sent to all people without exception, (a bearer of glad tidings and a
warner) (2:119, 34:28, 35:24, 41:4) (And as a summoner unto Allah by His permission, and
as a light-giving lamp) (33:46).
[175] The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) thus conveyed fully all that was revealed to
him from his Lord, discharged His trust, and acted faithfully (nasaha) toward his Community.
He stood, in his farewell Pilgrimage, before all those present among his followers, addressing
and reminding them, deterring and cautioning them, giving them glad tidings and warning
them, promising and threatening them. He showered them with rain and made them tremble
with thunder. He did not address anyone specifically at the exclusion of others in his admoni-
tion. He did all this after permission from the One, the Everlasting I. Then he said: “Lo! Have I
conveyed the message?” They replied: “You have conveyed the message, O Messenger of
Allah!” So he said: “O Allah! Bear witness.”[68]
[176] Likewise, [I call upon all] to testify that I firmly believe in everything that the Prophet
(sallallahu alayhi wasallam) brought – that which I know and that which I know not. Among
the things which he brought is the decree that death comes at a time specified in the presence
of Allah I and that, come that time, it is not delayed. I, for my part, firmly believe this, without
the slightest reservation nor doubt.
[177] Just as I firmly believe and declare that the interrogation of the two examiners in the
grave is true; the punishment in the grave and the raising of the bodies from the grave are
both true; the review in the presence of Allah I is true; the Basin is true; the Balance is true;
the flying (tatâyur) of individual Records in every direction is true;[69] the Bridge is true;
Paradise is true; Hellfire is true; (A host will be in the Garden, and a host of them in the
Flame) (42:7) truly; the agony of that day is true for one group; as for another group, (the
Supreme Horror will not grieve them) (21:103);[70]
[178] The intercession of the angels, the Prophets, and the Believers, followed by the taking
out of the Fire, by the most Merciful of those who show mercy, of anyone He wishes, is true; a
group of the grave sinners among the Believers shall enter Hellfire and then exit it through in-
tercession and gratification truly; eternal and everlasting world-without-end (al-ta’bîd) in the
midst of the pleasures of Paradise is true for the Believers and those who affirm Oneness; eter-
nal and everlasting world-without-end in the Fire for the dwellers of the Fire is true; and all
that was announced by the Books and Messengers that came from Allah – whether one came
to know it or not – is true.
[179] This is my witness in my own regard, and it is the responsibility of each and every per-
son that it reaches, to bring it forward if asked about it, whenever and wherever he may be.
Final Supplication
[180] May Allah grant us and grant you the greatest benefit with this faith. May He make us
adhere to it firmly at the time of journeying from this abode to the abode of true life. May He
replace for us this abode with the abode of munificence and good pleasure. May He intervene
between us and a dwelling with (raiments of pitch) (14:50). May He count us in the troop that
take their record with the right hand and return from the Pond fully sated, those in whose fa-
vor the Balance weighs down and whose feet stand firm on the Bridge. Truly He is the Munifi-
cent (al-Mun‘im), the Giver of All Good (al-Mihsân)!
[181] (All praise to Allah, Who has guided us to this. We could not truly have been led
aright if Allah had not guided us. Verily the messengers of our Lord did bring the
Truth!) (7:43).
Bibliography
Abu Nu‘aym al-Asfahani. Hilya al-Awliya’ wa Tabaqat al-Asfiya’. 12 vols. Ed. Mustafa ‘Abd al-
Qadir ‘Ata. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1997.
Al-Adnahwi. Tabaqat al-Mufassirin. Ed. Sulayman ibn Salih al-Khazzi. Madina: Maktaba
al-‘Ulum wa al-Hikam, 1997.
Al-Bayhaqi. Al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat. Ed. Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari. Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-
Turath al-‘Arabi, n.d. Reprint of the 1358/1939 Cairo edition.
–––––––. Al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat. 2 vols. Ed. ‘Abd Allah al-Hashidi. Riyad: Maktaba al-Sawadi, 1993.
Al-Buti. Kubra al-Yaqinat al-Kawniyya. Beirut and Damascus: Dar al-Fikr, 1997.
Al-Dhahabi. Mizan al-I‘tidal. 4 vols. Ed. ‘Ali Muhammad al-Bajawi. Beirut: Dar al-Ma‘rifa, 1963.
–––––––. Mukhtasar al-‘Uluw li al-‘Ali al-Ghaffar. Ed. M. Nasir al-Din al-Albani. Beirut: al-Maktab
2
al-Islami, 1991 .
–––––––. Al-Muqiza fi ‘Ilm Mustalah al-Hadith. Ed. ‘Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda. Aleppo: Maktab
3
al-Matbu‘at al-Islamiyya, 1998 .
Al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi. Nawadir al-Usul. Beirut: Dar Sadir, n.d. Repr. of Istanbul ed.
Al-Haytami, Ahmad. Al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyya. Cairo: Mustafa al-Baba al-Halabi, Repr. 1970,
1989.
rd
Al-Haythami, Nur al-Din. Majma‘ al-Zawa’id wa Manba‘ al-Fawa’id. 3 ed. 10 vols. Beirut: Dar
al-Kitab al-‘Arabi, 1982.
Hilmi. Al-Burhan al-Azhar fi Manaqib al-Shaykh al-Akbar. Cairo: Matba‘a al-Sa‘ada, 1326/1908.
Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam. Al-Ishara ila al-Ijaz fi Ba‘d Anwa‘ al-Majaz. Ed. ‘Uthman Hilmi. Al-Matba‘a
al-‘Amira, 1313/1895.
–––––––. Al-Mulha fi I‘tiqad Ahl al-Haqq. InRasa’il al-Tawhid. Ed. Iyad Khalid al-Tabba‘. Beirut
and Damascus: Dar al-Fikr, 1995. Also in Ibn al-Subki, Tabaqat al-Shafi‘iyya al-Kubra, vol. 8 p.
219-229.
Ibn ‘Arabi, Muhyi al-Din. Al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya. 1- vols. Eds. ‘Uthman Yahya and Ibrahim
Madkur. Cairo: al-Hay’a al-Masriyya al-‘Amma li al-Kitab, 1972- .
Ibn al-Athir. Al-Nihaya fi Gharib al-Athar. 5 vols. Eds. Tahir Ahmad al-Zawi and Mahmud
Muhammad al-Tabbakhi. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1979.
Ibn Hajar. Inba’ al-Ghumr bi A‘mar al-‘Umr. 4 vols. Ed. Hasan Habash. Cairo: Lajna Ihya’ al-
Turath al-Islami, Wizara al-Awqaf, 1994.
–––––––. Lisan al-Mizan. 7 vols. Hyderabad: Da’ira al-Ma‘arif al-Nizamiyya, 1329/1911. Repr.
Beirut: Mu’assassa al-A‘lami, 1986.
Ibn ‘Imad. Shadharat al-Dhahab fi Akhbar Man Dhahab. 8 vols. Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath
al-‘Arabi, n.d.
th
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya. Al-Manar al-Munif fi al-Sahih wa al-Da‘if. 6 ed. Ed. ‘Abd al-Fattah
Abu Ghudda. Beirut: Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyya; Aleppo: Maktab al-Matbu‘at al-Islamiyya,
1994.
Kabbani, Shaykh Muhammad Hisham. Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine. 7 vols. Moutain View:
Al-Sunna Foundation of America, 1998.
Al-Kawthari, Muhammad Zahid. Maqalat. Ryad and Beirut: Dar al-Ahnaf, 1993.
–––––––. Ed. Al-Bayhaqi, Abu Bakr. Al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat. Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabi,
n.d. Reprint of 1358/1939 Cairo edition.
Al-Nawawi. Bustan al-‘Arifin fi al-Zuhd wa al-Tasawwuf. Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi, 1985.
Al-Qasimi. Qawa‘id al-Tahdith. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya and Dar Ihya’ al-Sunna al-
Nabawiyya, n.d.
Al-Qinnawji [Siddiq Hasan Khan]. Takhrij al-Wasaya Min Khabaya al-Zawaya. Ed. ‘Abd Allah
al-Laythi al-Ansari. Beirut: Mu’assasa al-Kutub al-Thaqafiyya, 1986.
Al-Qurtubi. Al-Asna fi Sharh Asma’ Allah al-Husna. 2 vols. Ed. Muhammad Hasan Jabal, Tariq
Ahmad Muhammad, and Majdi Fathi al-Sayyid. Tanta: Dar al-Sahaba li al-Turath, 1995.
Al-Sakhawi, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman.Al-Daw’ al-Lami‘ li Ahl al-Qarn al-Tasi‘. 12 vols. in
6. Ed. Muhammad Jamal al-Qasimi. 1313/1896. Repr. Beirut: Dar al-Jil, 1992.
Shatta, Ibrahim al-Dusuqi. Sira al-Shaykh al-Kabir Abi ‘Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Khafif al-
Shirazi. Cairo: al-Hay’a al-‘Amma li Shu’un al-Matabi‘ al-Amiriyya, 1977.
Al-Suyuti, Jalal al-Din. Al-Durr al-Manthur fi al-Tafsir al-Ma’thur. 8 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr,
1994.
–––––––. Tanbih Al-Ghabi Fi Takhti’a [or Tanzih]Ibn ‘Arabi. Ed. ‘Abd al-Rahman Hasan Mahmud.
Cairo: Maktaba al-Adab, 1990.
REFERENCES:
[2] Ibn ‘Ata’ Allah in Lata’if al-Minan (1:84-98) states that there is consensus among the Sufis
that al-Khidr is alive. Ibn al-Jawzi in his book‘Ujala al-Muntazir fi Sharh Hal al-Khadir (cf. Hajji
Khalifa, Kashf al-Zunun [2:1125] and Abu Ghudda infra) voices the extreme view that to sug-
gest that al-Khidr is alive contradicts the Shari‘a, yet in his Manaqib al-Imam Ahmad (p. 144) he
himself narrates the report of a meeting of Bilal al-Khawass with al-Khidr! Ibn al-Qayyim in al-
Manar al-Munif (p. 67-76) and his editor, ‘Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda, also claim that al-Khidr is
not alive. Among the strongest transmitted proofs to the contrary are two reports, one nar-
rated by Imam Ahmad in al-Zuhd whereby the Prophet e said that Ilyas and al-Khidr meet ev-
ery year and spend the month of Ramadan in al-Qudus, and the other narrated by Ya‘qub ibn
Sufyan from ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz whereby a man he was seen walking with was actually al-
Khidr. Ibn Hajar declared the chain of the first fair and that of the second sound in Fath al-
Bari (1959 ed. 6:435). He goes on to cite another sound report narrated by Ibn ‘Asakir from
Abu Zur‘a al-Razi whereby the latter met al-Khidr twice, once in his young age, the other in his
old age, but al-Khidr himself had not changed.
Al-Qadi ‘Iyad in his notice on Ibn Abi Zayd inTartib al-Madarik narrates from al-Ajdabi: “I was
sitting with Abu Muhammad [Ibn Abi Zayd] when Abu al-Qasim ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Abd al-
Mu’min the mutakallim was with him. A man asked them about al-Khidr and whether it could
he said that he was still in this world in spite of all this time and would not die until the Final
Hour comes and whether this is refuted by the words of the Almighty,[We did not give any
human being before you immortality] (21:34). They both replied to him that that was possi-
ble and permitted and al-Khidr could live until the Final Trumpet was blown. For immortality
is connected to remaining as long as the Next World remains, while remaining until the
Trumpet is blown is not immortality. Do you not see that Iblis – may Allah curse him – is not
immortal, but he is one of those deferred until the Day of a Known Time?”
The hadith master al-Sakhawi stated: “It is well-known that al-Nawawi used to meet with al-
Khidr and converse with him among many other unveilings (mukâshafât).” Al-Sakhawi,
Tarjima Shaykh al-Islam Qutb al-Awliya’ al-Kiram wa Faqih al-Anam Muhyi al-Sunna wa Mumit
al-Bid‘a Abi Zakariyya Muhyi al-Din al-Nawawi (“Biography of the Shaykh of Islam, the Pole of
the Noble Saints and Jurist of Mankind, the Reviver of the Sunna and Slayer of Innovation Abu
Zakariyya Muhyiddin al-Nawawi”) (Cairo: Jam‘iyya al-Nashr wa al-Ta’lif al-Azhariyya,
1354/1935 p. 33).
Al-Barzanji in his book al-Isha‘a li Ashrat al-Sa‘a (1997 ed. p. 279-281; 1995 ed. p. 204-205) lists
proofs to the effect that al-Khidr u is alive and shall face and belie the Antichrist (al-Dajjâl), as
he is the one meant in the hadith whereby a man faces the Antichrist and belies him, where-
upon the latter saws him in half then revives him only to be belied again. Narrated from Abu
Sa‘id al-Khudri by Abu Ya‘la in his Musnad (2:332) and al-Hakim (1984 ed. 4:581=orig. ed.
4:537), both with a chain containing ‘Atiyya ibn Sa‘d who is weak, and with another chain (by
Abu Ya‘la 2:535) containing Sufyan ibn Waki‘ who is weak; also narrated from Abu Umama al-
Bahili by Ibn Majah in his Sunan (book of Fitan) with a chain containing Isma‘il ibn Rafi‘, who
is weak in his memorization; also narrated by Nu‘aym ibn Hammad (d. 288) in Kitab al-
Fitan (2:551) who said: al-Zuhri said: ‘Ubayd Allah ibn ‘Abd Allah [ibn] ‘Utba narrated to us
that Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri said… The latter is a sound chain but there are several unnamed links
between Nu‘aym and al-Zuhri. Also narrated by al-Dani (d. 444) in his book al-Sunan fi al-Fitan
(6:1178) but with a chain that stops at the Tabi‘i Abu Mijlaz. None of the weakness mentioned
above in the chains raised to the Prophet e is grave. If the weak links are at the same levels of
the narrators’ biographical layers and are judged to strengthen each other, it would raise the
grade of the hadith to “fair due to corroborative/witness chains” (hasan li ghayrih). It is con-
firmed by the hadith related from Abu ‘Ubayda ibn al-Jarrah whereby the Prophet (sall said:
“It may be that one of those who saw me and heard my speech shall meet the Dajjal.” Narrated
by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih (15:181) with a weak chain according to Shaykh Shu‘ayb al-Arna’ut,
however, Imam al-Tirmidhi in his Sunan said it is also narrated from three other Companions
and thus graded the hadith itself “fair and single-chained (hasan gharîb) as narrated from Abu
‘Ubayda,” and Allah knows best.
[3] See Hilmi’s 284-entry bibliography in al-Burhan al-Azhar as well as the books of Prof.
Michel Chodkiewicz (The Seal of Saints and An Ocean Without Shore) and his daughter Prof.
Claude Addas (Quest for the Red Sulphur).
[7]Al-Suyuti, Tanbih al-Ghabi fi Takhti’a Ibn ‘Arabi (p. 17-21). The correct title has tanzihinstead
of takhti’a as in Hajji Khalifa’s Kashf al-Zunun (1:488) and al-Qari’s works.
[11]Ibn al-Najjar, Dhayl Tarikh Baghdad as quoted in al-Suyuti, Tanbih al-Ghabi (p. 64-66) and
in Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan (5:311 #1038).
[14] See al-Sakhawi, al-Daw’ al-Lami‘ (8:17) and al-Kawthari’s Maqalat (p. 412-413).
[17] Al-Qari addresses it towards the end of Firr al-‘Awn (p. 142f.).
[18] See Ibn Hajar, Inba’ al-Ghumr bi A‘mar al-‘Umr (3:403-404), year 831.
[29] Narrated from Abu Hurayra by Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad, al-Nasa’i, and Ibn Majah; from
‘Umar by Muslim, al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Ahmad, and al-Nasa’i; and from Abu
Dharr by al-Nasa’i, all as part of a longer hadith.
[30] From his Damascus lessons on the Munajat of Ibn ‘Ata’ Allah, 21 September 1997.
[31] i.e. if some texts seem to affirm indwelling, they do so metaphorically, as the literal given
of divine Transcendence is not open to question.
[32] From Dr. Sa‘id al-Buti’s unpublished commentary on the Hikam of Ibn ‘Ata’ Allah.
[33] “I was one of those who, previously, used to hold the best opinion of Ibn ‘Arabi and extol
his praise, because of the benefits I saw in his books, such as al-Futuhat, al-Kanh, al-Muhkam
al-Marbut, al-Durra al-Fakhira, Matali‘ al-Nujum, and other such works.” Ibn Taymiyya,Tawhid
al-Rububiyya in Majmu‘a al-Fatawa (2:464-465).
[34] In the epistle attributed to him and entitled Fadiha al-Mulhidin or Risala fi Wahda al-
Wujud, a title also used by al-Qari. Al-Kawthari revelad in his Maqalat (p. 413) that the real au-
thor of al-Taftazani’s supposed epistle was ‘Ala’ al-Din al-Bukhari. The Hanafi jurist Isma‘il
Kalnabawi responded to that epistle in a fatwa cited in full in al-Burhan al-Azhar (p. 18-22).
[36] In al-Qari, Firr al-‘Awn (p. 144). Al-Fayruzabadi said: “If the report whereby Ibn ‘Abd al-
Salam and our shaykh al-Bulqini ordered Ibn ‘Arabi’s books burnt were true, not one of his
books would have remained today in Egypt or Sham, and no-one would have dared copy them
again after the words of these two shaykhs.” In Hilmi, al-Burhan al-Azhar (p. 32). Al-Hilmi adds
(p. 34) that a further proof that al-Subki changed his position concerning Ibn ‘Arabi is that he
wrote many refutations against the heresies of his time but never wrote against Ibn ‘Arabi, al-
though his books were widely read in Damascus and elsewhere.
[37] He wrote al-Radd al-Aqwam ‘ala ma fi Fusûs al-Hikam but is on record as not objecting to
Ibn ‘Arabi’s other works, as noted.
[38] Mizan al-I‘tidal (3:660). Al-Dhahabi in the same chapter makes derogatory comments and
reports a strange story which Ibn Hajar cited in Lisan al-Mizan. Al-Qari also attributes nega-
tive comments on Ibn ‘Arabi to al-Suyuti in the latter’s al-Tahbir li ‘Ilm al-Tafsir and Itmam al-
Diraya Sharh al-Niqaya.
[39] Al-Khadimi wrote in the introduction to hisSharh Ma‘ani al-Basmala: “It was stated in al-
Bazaziyya that if a certain question has a hundred aspects, ninety-nine of which entail disbe-
lief and one precludes it, the scholar must lean towards the latter and not give a fatwa to the
apostasy of a Muslim as long as he can give his words a good interpretation. Also, in al-Usul:
No preference is given in the face of abundant evidence to the contrary.” As cited in al-Burhan
al-Azhar (p. 17-18). In Bustan al-‘Arifin al-Nawawi states, after reporting Abu al-Khayr al-
Tibyani’s apparent breach of the Shari‘a: “Someone that imitates jurists without understand-
ing may imagine wrong and object to this, out of ignorance and stupidity. To imagine wrong
here is plain recklessness in giving vent to suspicions against the Friends of the All-
Merciful. The wise person must beware from such behavior! On the contrary, if one did not
understand the wisdoms from which they benefited and their fine subtleties, it is his duty is to
understand them from one who does. You may witness such occurrences about which the su-
perficial person gets the illusion of deviation, but which are actually not deviant. On the con-
trary, it is obligatory to interpret figuratively the actions of the friends of Allah.” As cited in al-
Suyuti’s Tanbih al-Ghabi (p. 45-46) and Ibn ‘Imad, Shadharat al-Dhahab (5:194). The rules
spelled out by al-Nawawi, al-Haytami, and al-Khadimi refute the presumption that only the
statements of the Prophet r may be interpreted figuratively (cf. al-Qunawi in al-Qari’s Risala fi
Wahda al-Wujud p. 110 and al-Suyuti’s Tanbih al-Ghabi p. 44-45, as against ‘Ala’ al-Din al-
Bukhari in al-Qari’s Firr al-‘Awnp. 153; cf. al-Munawi in Ibn ‘Imad, Shadharat 5:194) or that
“every truth that contravenes the outward rule of the Law consists in disguised disbelief (zan-
daqa)” (al-Qari, Firr al-‘Awn p. 152). The most shining refutation of the latter claim lies in the
Prophet’s r hadith of the straying desert traveller who, finding his mount and provisions after
having lost them, is so overwhelmed by joy that he exclaims: “O Allah, You are my slave and I
am Your master!” Narrated from Anas by Muslim in his Sahih.
[40] Al-Sakhawi in al-Daw’ al-Lami‘ similarly points out this contradiction between al-Biqa‘i’s
expressed principles and his actual practices.
[41] Al-Haytami, Fatawa Hadithiyya (p. 331). For the account of the condemnation of al-Biqa‘i
himself as a kâfir see al-Sakhawi’s al-Daw’ al-Lami‘ and al-Shawkani’s al-Badr al-Tali‘.
[42] The complete hadith states: “Whosoever shows enmity to one of My Friends, I shall de-
clare war upon him. My servant draws not near to Me with anything more loved by Me than
the religious duties I have enjoined upon him, and My servant continues to draw near to Me
with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his hearing with
which he hears, his seeing with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes, his foot with
which he walks. Were he to ask something of Me, I would surely give it to him. Were he to
seek refuge in Me, I would surely grant him it.Nor do I hesitate to do anything as I hesitate to
take back the believer’s soul, for he hates death and I hate to hurt him.” Narrated from Abu
Hurayra by Bukhari. Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam in al-Ishara ila al-Ijaz (p. 108) said: “The ‘hesitancy’ of
Allah I in this hadith is a metaphor of the believer’s superlative rank in the presence of Allah
and connotes a lesser hurt to prevent a greater harm, as in the case of a father’s severance of
his son’s gangrened hand so as to save his life.”
[44] Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan (5:311 #1038). See also his words in al-Intisar li A’imma al-
Amsarand in al-Qari’s Risala fi Wahda al-Wujud (p. 113).
[47] Multazam is the space between the Black Stone and the Ka‘ba’s door (including the two)
where prayers are answered.
[50] Main sources: Hilmi, al-Burhan al-Azhar; Ibn ‘Imad, Shadharat al-Dhahab (5:190-202); al-
Suyuti, Tanbih al-Ghabi.
[51] From ‘Uthman Yahya’s edition of al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya (1:162-172), Part Three of “The
Meccan Conquest,” chapter entitled “Attachment Comprising the Essential Creed of All, Which
is the Doctrine of the People of Islam Agreed To Without Examining the Proof Nor the Prese n-
tation of Evidence” (Waslun Yatadammanu Mâ Yanbaghî an Yu‘taqad ‘alâ al-‘Umûm wa Hiya
‘Aqîdatu Ahl al-Islâmi Musallamatan min Ghayri Nazarin ilâ Dalilin wa lâ ilâ Burhân). Also
quoted in full in Hilmi’s al-Burhan al-Azhar (p. 69-77).
[52] Part of a hadith of the Prophet r narrated from Abu Hurayra by Bukhari and Muslim.
[53] Cf. al-Shibli in Ibn Jahbal’s Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya §27 (published in full separately):
“The Merciful exists from pre-eternity while the Throne was brought into being, and the
Throne was established and made firm (istawâ) by the Merciful.”
[54] See Appendix entitled “Allah is Now As He Ever Was” in our translation of Ibn ‘Abd al-
Salam’s al-Mulha fi I‘tiqad Ahl al-Haqq, published separately under the title The Belief of the
People of Truth.
[55] Or: “He created place and all that takes place.”
[57] Lâ tarji‘u ilayhi sifatun lam yakun ‘alayhâ min sun‘ati al-masnû‘ât. Ibn ‘Arabi apparently
allows inferred attributes which do describe Him, such as “The Far” (see §163 below and note)
in contradiction of the general principle that the divine Names and Attributes are ordained
and non-inferable (cf. Appendix entitled “The Names and Attributes of Allah Are Ordained
and Non-Inferable” in our translation of Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam’s The Belief of the People of Truth).
[58] See our translation of Ibn Khafif’s Correct Islamic Doctrine (published in full separately)
§10: “In no way does He subsist in originated matters (laysa bi mahall al-hawâdith) nor they in
Him.” This is due to the mutually exclusive nature of contingency (hudûth) and incontin-
gency (qidam). The former refer to whatever is created, the latter to the beginningless and un-
created, “and the twain never meet.”
[59] This is directed against the Mu‘tazila and those affiliated with them.
[60] The notion of “linkage” (ta‘alluq) between the pre-eternal Attributes of Act and the acts
pertaining to creation was expressed by some scholars as a distinction between two types of
linkage (ta‘alluq) to the act: “beginninglessly potential” (salûhî qadîm) and “actualized in
time” (tanjîzî hâdith).
[61] No such Attribute is established in the texts, but Ibn ‘Arabi here states it without contra-
diction of his own precept (§145, cf. §180) that “Attributes which do not describe Him and are
devised by creatures do not apply to Him” since He uses “the Far” in the same way that some
have used the indefinite qualificative “Separate” (bâ’in) – likewise not found in the Qur’an and
Sunna – meaning “far and separate from creation,” so that nearness in no way affects Him as
it affects creatures. Al-Tabari (in his Tafsir on verse 17:79) relates from some of the Salaf a con-
trary position which states that Allah is not said to be “in contact with,” nor “separate from”
anything. The latter is reminiscent of Abu Nu‘aym’s narration from ‘Ali in Hilya al-
Awliya’ (1997 ed. 1:114 #227): “How can even the most eloquent tongues describe Him Who
did not exist among things so that He could be said to be ‘separate from them’ (bâ’in)? Rather,
He is described without modality, and He is (nearer to [man] than his jugular vein) (50:16).”
Al-Bayhaqi reports the Ash‘ari position on the issue from Ibn Mahdi al-Tabari: The Pre-eternal
One (al-Qadîm) is elevated over His Throne but neither sitting on(qâ‘id) nor standing
on (qâ’im) nor in contact with (mumâss), nor separate from (mubâyin)the Throne – meaning
separate in His Essence in the sense of physical separation or distance. For ‘contact’ and its op-
posite ‘separation,’ ‘standing’ and its opposite ‘sitting’ are all the characteristics of
bodies (ajsâm), whereas (Allah is One, Everlasting, neither begetting nor begotten, and
there is none like Him.) (112:1-4) Therefore what is allowed for bodies is impermissible for
Him.” Al-Bayhaqi, al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat (Kawthari ed. p. 410-411; Hashidi ed. 2:308-309). This
shows with remarkable clarity that those who made it a categorical imperative to declare that
“Allah is separate from creation” went to excess, although their intention was to preclude no-
tions of indwelling. Examples of these well-founded excesses are given by Ibn Khuzayma:
“Whoever does not definitely confirm that Allah established Himself over His Throne above
His seven heavens, separate (bâ’in) from His creation, he is a disbeliever who must be sum-
moned to repent” [in al-Dhahabi’s Mukhtasar al-‘Uluw (p. 225-226)] and Sulayman ibn ‘Abd
Allah ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab: “It is obligatory to declare that Allah is separate
(bâ’in) from His creation, established over His throne without modality or likeness or exam-
plarity” [in al-Tawdih ‘an Tawhid al-Khallaq fi Jawab Ahl al-‘Iraq (1319/1901, p. 34, and new ed.
al-Riyad: Dar Tibah, 1984)].
[62] The Prophet r said: “His veil is light, and if He removed it, the glorifications (subuhât) of
His face would burn everything His eyesight fell upon.” Narrated from Abu Musa by Muslim,
Ibn Majah, Ahmad, Abu ‘Awana, Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi, Ibn Abi ‘Asim, al-Ajurri, and al-
Bayhaqi in al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat (Kawthari ed. p. 180-181; Hashidi ed. 1:465-466 #392-394). Al-
Bayhaqi said: “The veil mentioned in this and other reports refers to creatures for they are the
ones who are veiled from Him by a veil He created in them. Allah said of the disbe-
lievers: (Nay, but surely on that day they will be covered from (the mercy of) their
Lord) (83:15). His saying: ‘if He removed it’ means if He lifted the veil from their eyes without
empowering them to see Him, they would have been burnt and would have been unable to
bear it.” Al-Qurtubi in al-Asna (2:92) said: “If he had removed from them the veil, His
majesty (jalâl), awe (hayba), and subjugation (qahr) would have caused everything His sight
fell upon to disappear – from the Throne to the undersoil, for there is no end to His sight, and
Allah knows best.” Cf. Ibn Khafif’s ‘Aqida §12: “Nor does He hide Himself(istatara) with any-
thing created.”
[63] See Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam’s refutation of those who claimed the pre-eternality of letters and
sounds in various passages of his Mulha.
[64] In al-Nihaya, entry b-l-â: “Al-Azhari said that a number of scholars glossed ubâlî as
‘loathe’ (akrah).” Meaning: “It adds nor subtracts nothing from My greatness.”
[65] Narrated from Anas by Abu Ya‘la with a chain of trustworthy narrators except for al-
Hakam ibn Sinan al-Bahili who is weak, and by Ibn Marduyah; from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn
Qatada al-Sulami by Ahmad and al-Hakim who declared it sahîh, and al-Dhahabi concurred;
from Mu‘adh ibn Jabal by Ahmad with amunqati‘ chain missing the Successor-link; from Abu
Sa‘id al-Khudri by al-Bazzar and Ibn Marduyah; from Ibn ‘Umar by al-Bazzar and al-Tabarani;
from a Companion named Abu ‘Abd Allah by Ahmad in his Musnad with a sound chain ac-
cording to Ibn Hajar in al-Isaba (7:258 #10198); from Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari by al-Tabarani in al-
Kabir; from Abu al-Darda’ by al-Tabarani in al-Kabir and Ahmad with a sound chain in
the Musnad according to al-Kattani. Also narrated, but without the words lâ ubâlî, from Abu
Hurayra by al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi in Nawadir al-Usul; without mention of the handfuls, from
‘Umar by Malik in al-Muwatta’, Ahmad, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi (hasan), al-Nasa’i, and others.
Al-Suyuti in al-Durr al-Manthur under the verse (And remember when your Lord brought
forth from the Children of Adam, from their reins, their seed) (7:172) cited other narra-
tions to that effect from Abu Umama, Hisham ibn Hakim, and other Companions. Al-Fattani
in Tadhkira al-Mawdu‘at said its chain was “muddled”(mudtarib al-isnâd) because of great
variations in it, which makes the narration mutawâtir al-ma‘na or mass-narrated in its import
– as opposed to its precise wording – as indicated by al-Kattani in Nazm al-Mutanathir, due to
the great number of Companions that relate it.
[66] Hadith qudsi within the narration of the Prophet’s r ascension: “The day I created the
heavens and the earth I made obligatory upon you and upon your Community fifty prayers:
therefore establish them, you and your Community…. Let them be five prayers every day and
night, and let every prayer count as ten. That makes fifty prayers. This word of Mine shall not
be changed nor shall My Book be abrogated.” See the translation of Shaykh Muhammad ibn
‘Alawi al-Maliki’s his collated text of the sound narrations of the
Prophet’s risra’ and mi‘raj entitled al-Anwar al-Bahiyya min Isra’ wa Mi‘raj Khayr al-
Bariyya translated in full in Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani’sEncyclopedia of Islamic
Doctrine.
[67] For §168-173 see also Ibn Khafif, al-‘Aqida al-Sahiha §32-37: “[32] Allah is doer of what He
will: [33] Injustice is not attributed to Him, [34] And He rules over His dominion as He will,
without [anyone’s entitlement to] objection whatsoever. [35] His decree is not revoked nor His
judgment amended. [36] He brings near Him whomever He will without [need for] cause and
He removes far from Him whomever He will without [need for] cause. [37] His will for His
servants is the exact state they are in.”The Ash‘ari position is that Allah rewards and punishes
without being obliged to do so by the actions of His servants (“Allah is doer of what He will”).
He is free to place the disbeliever in Paradise and the believer in Hellfire without any injustice
on His part (“Injustice is not attributed to Him”), since He owns all sovereignty over the heav-
ens and the earth, and no one received any share or authority from Him to object to what He
does.
The evidence for this is in the verses: (Know you not that unto Allah belongs the
Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth? He punishes whom He will, and forgives
whom He will. Allah is Able to do all things) (5:40);(Say : Who then can do aught against
Allah, if He had willed to destroy the Messiah son of Mary, and his mother and everyone
on earth? To Allah belongs the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is
between them. He creates what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things) (5:17); (The
sentence that comes from Me cannot be changed, and I am in no wise a tyrant unto the
slaves) (50:29). At the same time it is obligatorily known that Allah does not take back His
promise to reward those who believe and do good and punish evil-doers: (But as for those
who believe and do good works We shall bring them into gardens underneath which
rivers flow, wherein they will abide for ever. It is a promise from Allah in truth; and who
can be more truthful than Allah in utterance?) (4:122). The scholars have described the for-
mer evidence as “based on reason” (dalîl ‘aqlî) and the latter as “based on law” (dalîl shar‘i),
noting that it is the latter which takes precedence over the former. Cf. al-Buti, Kubra al-
Yaqinat (p. 149).
[68] Narrated from Abu Bakrah al-Thaqafi, Ibn ‘Umar, Ibn Mas‘ud, and Jabir by Bukhari,
Muslim, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Ahmad, and al-Darimi.
[69] The Prophet r was asked by ‘A’isha – may Allah be well-pleased with her: “Will the
beloved remember his beloved on the Day of Resurrection?” He replied: “On three occasions
he will not: At the Balance until it either weighs for or against him; at the time the individual
Records fly in every direction, so that he should be given his record either with the right hand
or the left; and at the time a long neck comes out of the Fire, winding itself around them [at
the Bridge over Hellfire]…” Narrated by Ahmad in his Musnad with a fair chain, ‘Abd al-
Razzaq, Ibn Abi Shayba, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Hakim who stated it is sahîh, al-Ajurri in al-Shari‘a,
and ‘Abd ibn Humayd in his Musnad as stated by al-Suyuti in al-Durr al-Manthur. Abu Dawud
narrates it in his Sunan without mention oftatâyur.
[70] Another possible translation is: “the interrogation of the two examiners in the grave is
real; the punishment in the grave and the raising of the bodies from the grave are both real;
the review in the presence of Allah is real; the Basin is real; the Balance is real; the
flying(tatâyur) of individual Records in every direction is real; the Bridge is real; Paradise is
real; Hellfire is real; (A host will be in the Garden, and a host of them in the Flame)(42:7)
really; the agony of that day is real for one group; as for another group, (the Supreme Horror
will not grieve them) (21:103).” Cf. Ibn Khafif’s Aqida §83: “Paradise is true; Hellfire is true;
Resurrection is true; the Rendering of Accounts is true; the Balance of Deeds is true; the Bridge
[over the Fire] is true; the punishment of the grave is true; and the questioning of the angels
Munkar and Nakîr is true.”
AL-SUYUTI’S RESPONSE TO AL-BIQA‘I FUSÛS AL-HIKAM IBN ‘ARABI’S ADMIRERS
OTHER CRITICS OF IBN ‘ARABI SHAYKH MUHYI AL-DIN IBN ‘ARABI THE
CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING IBN ARABI WAHDA AL-WUJÛD OR ONENESS OF BEING