First of all congratulations on your great and interesting page!
However, I would like to comment on the thing regarding Sufism that you wrote in your Q and A section.
I don’t consider myself to be a Sufi, but I don’t agree with you in calling Sufism a “parallel religion” to Islam. Yes, there were and still are Sufis and Sufi orders, e.g. the Bektashi order, which are far far away from orthodox Islam, but to take this as a point to view Sufism in general as not identical to a Muslim movement would be as wrong, I think, as calling an Afro-American someone of British descent, just because his mother language is English.
Many Sufi- masters have stressed the importance of the Shari`ah and the Muslim belief systems and only SOME Sufis would interpret tawhid in the way you mentioned it.
I would like to refer you to some interesting articles starting at the following URL:
It would be nice if you could comment to me on these articles, but of course you don’t have to.
May Allah help you in all your efforts and keep on your good work on your site.
I consider Sufism to be something distinctly separate from Islam on the basis of the writings of the most proclaimed, accepted, acknowledged and referred scholars of the field. I am sure you would agree, this is the correct method of determining the contents of what is and is not Tasawwuf (Sufism). Our reliance in determining the concept of Tawheed as presented in Tasawwuf has primarily been on the following works:
“Manaazil al-Saayireen“ by Abu Ismail Al-Harawi (Arabic);
“Ihyaa Uloom Al-Deen“ by Abu Hamid Mohammed Al-Ghazali (Arabic);
“Fusoos Al-Hikam“ by Muhiyuddin Ibn Al-Arabiy (Arabic);
“Futoohaat e Makkiyah“ by Muhiyuddin Ibn Al-Arabiy (Arabic);
“Maktoobaat“ by Shaikh Ahmad Badruddin Abul Barakaat Farooqi Sirhandy (Persian); and
“`Abaqaat“ by Shah Mohammed Ismail;
The fact that the Sufis consider “the Unity of Being” (Wahdat al-Wujood) or “the Unity of Witnessing” (Wahdat al-Shuhood) as the ideal and the aspired level of the understanding of Tawheed can easily be derived from all the above writings. However, if you are of the opinion that the concept of the ideal level of understanding of Tawheed presented in these writings, as has also been briefly mentioned in the article which you have referred to in your comment1, is not correct then it would only be reasonable that any introduction to a new concept of Tasawwuf begins with a declaration of immunity from the ideas presented by these great names. This, I am sure you would agree, is necessary because Tasawwuf is not a new and unknown discipline. It has a long history. The title implies certain concepts to those who understand it. Certain names are considered authorities in the field. In this background, if someone were to ask me about my opinion regarding Tasawwuf, I would have no other option but to give my opinion based on the writings of the most acclaimed and recognized scholars of the field. That, you would appreciate, is precisely what I did.
September 21, 2000
- The author of the referred article writes:
“Considering all that has been said about creation and revelation as well as about the manifestation of God’s names in creation, mystics like Ibn al-‘Arabi do not talk about a polarity of God and humankind, God and creation etc. For the, God is the final reality that is hidden and transcentdent and at the same time manifested and present in the ever-changing forms of creation. In this context, they use the term Unity of Being (wahdat al-wujÂ»d) where creation cannot be considered separate from the Creator and His revelation. Nevertheless it is not identical with the Creator as it is imagined in patheist and monist thought. On the other hand, creation receives its reality from Him, that is, it is not a mere illusion.” (www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/8206/hkrausen/myst2e.htm) [↩]