What is Sufism ? – Mir Valiuddin

Scholars wrangle about the derivation of the word Sufi though about its exact connotation I do not think that there is any reason to quarrel. Let us cast a hurried glance at the various attempts of the lexicographers:—

1. Some say: “The Sufis were only named Sufis because of the purity (Safa) of their hearts and the cleanliness of their acts.”

‘ Bishr ibn al-Harith’ said : “The Sufi is he whose heart is sincere (Safa) towards God.” Another great Sufi has said: “The Sufi is he whose conduct towards God is sincere, and towards whom God’s blessing is sincere.”

But if the term Sufi were derived from ‘Safa’ the correct form would be ‘Safawi’ and not Sufi !

2. Others think that the Sufis were only called Sufis “because they are in the first rank (Saff ) before God, through the elevation of their desires towards Him, the turning of their hearts unto him and the staying of their secret parts before Him.”

But if the term Sufi were referred to Saff (rank) it would be Saffi and not Sufi.

3. Others have said: They were only called Sufis because their qualities resembled those of the people of the Dais who lived in the time of God’s Prophet (God’s blessing and peace be upon him!). They had left this world, departed from their home and fled from their companions. They look of this world’s goods only, so much as is indispensable for covering nakedness and allaying hunger. Because they were devoid of all worldly possessions they were called ‘paupers’ One of them was asked : Who is a Sufi? He replied: “He who neither possesses nor is possessed.” By this he meant that he is not the slave of desire. Another said: “The Sufi is he who possesses nothing, or if he possesses anything spends it.“

But, remember, if the term ‘Sufi’ were derived from ‘‘ Suffah” (or Bench) the correct form would be “ Suffi ” and not “ Sufi ! ”

(4) Lastly it has been claimed that they were only called Sufis because of their habit of wearing Suf i.e., wool. For they did not put on raiment soft to touch or beautiful to behold, to give delight to the soul: they only clothed themselves in order to hide their nakedness, contenting themselves with rough haircloth and coarse wool.

If the derivation from Suf (wool) be accepted the word is correct and the expression sound from the grammatical point of view. Abu Bakr al- Kalabadhi thinks that “it at the same time has all the necessary meanings such as withdrawal from the world, inclining the soul away from it, leaving all settled abodes, keeping constantly to travel, denying the carnal soul its pleasures, purifying the conduct, cleansing the conscience, dilation of the breast and the quality of leadership.”

Ibn-Khaldun was also of the opinion that the word ‘Sufi’ is derived from Suf. But it is necessary to remember that it is not merely by putting on rough hair-cloth and coarse wool that one becomes a Sufi. As Hujwari has said: “ Purity(Safa) is a blessing from God and the ‘ wool’ is the proper dress of the cattle.”

According to the researches of Imam Qushayri the word “‘ Sufi” came into vogue a little before the expiry of the second century of the Hijra (or 822 A.D.). After the death of the Holy Prophet, ‘’Companion” was the title adopted by the people of that age. They needed no better title, for “‘ Companionship” was unanimously regarded as being the highest and the best state. Those who associated with the “ Companions ” were called in their own times ‘ Taba‘in ” “followers.” was the title conferred upon those who sat at the feet of the Followers. After the expiry of this period there was a slackening of religious spirit. Hearts were turning more towards the pleasures of the world than towards God. A number of systems and orders cropped up, and each order was divided into a number of branches. Seeing this state of affairs those who adored God above all things and were wholly consumed by the fire of His love separated themselves from the rest of the world and devoted themselves to the recollection and remembrance of God the only object of their love.

“I recollected thee,

Not that my memory

For the twinkling of an eye

Suffered thee to slip by !”

These men were later called the “Sufis’’. They were cut off from humanity for God’s sake, clean of impurities, full of meditation, and in their eyes gold and mud were equal. And that is why Ibn-‘Ali ar-Rudhabari has defined a Sufi thus:

“One who wears wool over (his) purity, gives his lusts the taste of tyranny, and having overthrown the world, journeys in the pathway of the chosen one” (i.e., the Prophet).”

In the light of these historical facts it is now easy to determine the exact meaning of Sufism. If you cast a glance over the various definitions of Sufism given by the Sufis themselves you will find not a few necessary attributes ascribed to them. It is not necessary to try to state them all here. But the gist of them all is beautifully expressed in a definition formulated by Shaikh-ul-Islam Zakeryah Ansari which is as follows :

“Sufism teaches how to purify one’s self, improve one’s morals, and build up one’s inner and outer life in order to attain perpetual bliss. Its subject-matter is the purification of the soul and its end or aim is the attainment of eternal felicity and blessedness.” By way of illustration compare the following few sayings of more prominent Sufis which amplify and extend with fresh details the definition above formulated :

Imam Qushayri, the author of the great Sufi compendium, Rasa’ il, takes Sufism in the sense of purity, i.e. the purity of inner and outer life and says that “purity is something praiseworthy in whichever language it may be expressed and its opposite impurity is to be eschewed,” Abu’l-Husayn an-Nuri being asked what Sufism is, replied : ‘’Abandoning all the portion of the carnal soul.’’ Al-Junayd was asked the same question and said: “It is the purification of the heart from associating with created beings, avoiding the temptations of the carnal soul, taking up the qualities of the spirit, attachment to the sciences of reality, using what is more proper to the eternal, counselling all the community, being truly faithful to God and following the Prophet according to the Law.”

To Abi ‘Ali Quzwini Sufism is nothing but “pleasing manners”; Aba Sahl Sa‘luki defines it as “abstaining from objections” ; Abu Muhammad al-Jurayri thinks that Sufism is the building up of good habits and the keeping of the heart from all evil desires and passions.

It is clear, then, that according to these great Sufis, Sufism is nothing but the purification of the senses and the will. It is the effacement of one’s desires in the will of God. It is the building up of a solid wall between the pure self and the Gog and Magog of passions and desires. It is, in a word, self-discipline the avoidance of what is forbidden and the performance of what is ordained. The Sufis are agreed that all the ordinances imposed by God on His servants in His Holy Book and all the duties laid down by the Prophet (in the Traditions) are a necessary obligation and a binding imposition for adults of mature intelligence; that they may not be abandoned or forsaken in any way by any man, whether he be a veracious believer (Siddiq), or a saint or a Gnostic, even though he may have attained the furthest rank, the highest degree, the noblest station, or the most exalted stage. They hold that there is no station in which a man may dispense with the prescriptions of the religious law, by holding permissible what God has prohibited, or making illegal what God has declared legal, or legal what God has pronounced illegal, or omitting to perform any religious duty without due excuse or reason, which excuse or reason is defined by the agreed judgment of all Muslims and approved by the prescriptions of the religious law. The more inwardly pure a man is, the higher his rank and the nobler his station, so much the more arduously does he labour with sincerer performance and a greater fear of God.

In this sense Sufism is a purely Islamic discipline which builds up the character and inner life of the Muslims by imposing certain ordinances and duties, obligations and impositions which may not be abandoned in any way by any man. The Prophet Muhammad was sent to “ instruct mankind” in Scripture and Wisdom and to sanctify them.”! The Sufis keep these “instructions” before their eyes, strive their utmost to perform what has been prescribed for them to do and to discharge what they have been called upon to do subsequent to that prescription. God says; ‘‘And those who fight strenuously for us we will surely guide them into our way “and again “Oh ye who believe! Do your duty to God, seek the means of approach unto Him and strive with might and main in His cause: that ye may prosper.“ Believing in these exhortations the great Sufi Yahya has said : “The spirit of gnosis will never reach thy heart, so long as there is a duty owing to God which thou hast not discharged !” Thus Sufism, in the words of Abo ‘Ali ar-Radhabari, is “giving one’s lust the taste of tyranny” and “journeying in the pathway of the Holy Prophet.”

But this is not the whole meaning of Sufism in Islam. It certainly has an esoteric sense. To understand this esoteric meaning it is necessary to follow the three main categories or classifications of men given by the Qur’an in Sura LVI (Waqi‘a). Here men are sorted out into three classes .

The Companions of the Right-Hand (Ashab-ul-Maimana);

The Companions of the Left-Hand (Ashab-ul-Mash’ama);And

Those nearest to God (Muqarrabin).

The Companions of the Right-Hand are “those who believe in the Unseen,” are “steadfast in prayer’’ and ‘‘have the assurance of the Hereafter” in their hearts. They are ‘‘on the right path guided by their Lord.” The Companions of the Left-Hand are “those who reject Faith,” and go after false Gods. The Qur’an describes them as those “who have bartered guidance for error” and “have lost their true direction.” This classification is thus according to the knowledge out of which spring their actions knowledge of the right path and knowledge of the wrong path.

But who are the “Muqarrabin” They are not just the companions of the Right-Hand only. Otherwise they would not have been placed in a different category. Tine Sufis believe that it is just another name for those who are not only on the right path guided by their Lord but also know the right relation between ‘Haqq’ and ‘Khalq,’ or between the Creator and the Created, between God and man. To be more explicit those who regard their Creator as their ‘Ilah’ or Deity and worship Him alone and ask for His aid alone and believe that there is none other than He worthy of our devotion and able to help us, are called in the Qur’an the Companions of the Right-Hand. And those who regard some Created Beings as their deities and worship them and seek their aid, thus rejecting the faith which lays down that God alone is our Cherisher and Sustainer, are termed the Companions of the Left. The ‘‘Muqarrabin” are those not only believe in their Creator as their only Deity and worship Him alone and seek for His help alone, but also know the true relation that exists between them and their Creator. Thus the great Sufi Saint Shaikh Shahabuddin Suharwardi in his famous Sufi Compendium ‘Awarif-ul-Ma’rif (Chapter One ) holds that though the term Sufi is not used in the Holy Qur’an, the word “Muqarrib” connotes the same meaning as that which is expressed by the term Sufi.

Now let us determine in some detail the nature of the exact relation which the Qur’an posits between Haqq and Khalq.

At the outset it is clear that the Qur’an teaches the doctrine of Pluralism. As opposed to the claims of Singularism it posits the “otherness” of Khalq, or created things, their discreteness, their manyness, and plurality, This otherness is “real’’ and not merely “suppositional.” Haq or God, the One, exists and possesses infinite attributes. Things, the Many, also exist and have attributes, externally, things are the creatures of God and God is the creator of things. Says the Qur’an: “God is the Creator of every thing.” Internally things are the ‘Ideas’ (i.e. objects known) of God. God knows the things-—is their Knower. And God knew them before He created them. They existed as “ ideas” in His mind before they were created.

“And He knows everything.”

Now the relation between the Creator and the Created, the Knower and the Known, is not one of “Identity” but is definitely that of “otherness.”

Things known or created are the ‘other’ of their Knower and Creator.

A painter conceives, say, the idea of a dog and then paints it on the canvas. The idea exists in his mind, depends for its (mental) existence totally on his mind. The painter’s mind is the Substratum of the idea. But the Knower and the Known, the mind and the idea are in no sense identical. The painter is not-the dog and the dog is not the painter. The relation between the two is clearly one of ‘otherness.’

Now, as was shown above, things are internally the ideas of God. Gad being Knower from eternity Knows His own thoughts —those being the objects of His knowledge. Now the Sufis call the ideas of God the “Essences of things” which when manifested or created are called “external objects” or “created things” or merely the many ‘things’ of the world (Khalq).

Let us now analyse more fully the internal aspect of things, things considered as the ideas of God or “Essences,” i.e. before they are created externally. Even as ideas, things are not identical with the essence or Zaat of God. Now what constitutes the difference between God, the Knower, and the ideas of God or essences which must now be termed as “the Known” This may be briefly expressed thus:

The Known

Is a form possessing limitation or determination or individualisation.

Subsists in the mind of the Knower, does not possess its own independent existence. The Sufis call it “ a relative non-existent.”

Possesses no attributes, e.g., life, knowledge, will, etc, though possesses the capacity acquiring those attributes, if given.

Is passive. Having no existence and existential attributes of their own, they possess no activity of their own.

The Knower

(1) Is free from any limitation or determination—is not a form,

(2) Exists in Himself, depending on nothing else but Himself.

(3) Possesses positive attributes, i.e., life, knowledge, will, speech, power, hearing, sight and speech (These are called the primary attributes of God).

(4) Is active.

From the above statement it is clear that the relation between the Known and the Knower is one of ‘otherness,’ never of ‘Identity.’ The essence cf things are the ideas of God, co-eternal with God, God is ‘One,’ His ideas are ‘many.’ God exists independently; ideas depend on the mind of God for their existence. The essence of God is free from any limitation or determination ; the ideas, though unlimited in number, are limited or determined in form, possessing their own peculiarities or characteristics or essential nature, termed,) ‘Shaklat’ in the Qur’an.

If the ideas or essences are ‘the other’ of God, things which are just the external manifestation of ideas must, for the same reason, be the other of God. God manifested externally what was contained in the essence or the essential nature of things. God transcends the limitations and determinations of things. Says the Qur’an :

“He is not in the likeness of anything;

He is the hearer and the seer.”

Again;

“Praise and glory be to Him: For He is above what they attribute to Him.”

The essence or Zaat of God being absolute is free from all limitations and, as all things are necessarily determined, ‘’God is not in the likeness of anything” and is “above what they attribute to Him”. How can God be identified with things? How can the Creator be the same as the Created? Essentially things are different from) God, and this difference is not merely suppositional but is a real difference. Difference of essences, the essence of God being the other of the essence uf things. God is comparable to no created beings. He is transcendent in the sense of being a necessary being self- begotten, self-caused self-existent, independent and absolute in contradistinction to the contingent, created and determined beings of the phenomenal world. He is transcendent also in the sense that He is unknowable and incommunicable and beyond all proof, as the Qur’an says:

” God keeps the knowledge of His Self hidden from you.”

The relation between God, the one, the transcendent Being (‘’not in the likeness of anything”) to the many things of the Universe may be expressed in theological language thus :

The One

Khaliq (Creator)

Rabb (Lord)

Ilah (The worshipped)

Malik (The Master)

The Many

Makhlooq (Created beings)

Marboob (Slaves)

Malooh (Worshippers)

Mumlook (Servants)

Thus the gist of the whole doctrine so far stated is that man cannot become God, as some people considering Islamic mysticism to be a phase of Pantheism are led to suppose.

So far I have stated the doctrine of Pluralism according to which the essence of God is different from the essence of the Created beings and shown how the relation of ‘otherness’ exists between the two. Now it is equally true that according to the Qur’an as shown by the Sufis, Pluralism does not negative Singularism. Apparently this seems to be a strange thesis, combining two irreconcilables—Pluralism and Singularism. Let me formulate the thesis of Singularism or Monism as stated in the Qur’an.

The Qur’an asserts that God is imminent in all beings whatever. This immanence is clearly indicated in various ways. The proximity of God to man is shown in the following verses :

“We are nearer to man than his jugular vein” (S.L-16).

“We are nearer to him than ye and ye see not” (LVI-85)

The Omnipresence of God is shown by the following verses:

“To God belong the East and the West: Whithersoever ye turn, there is the presence of God, for God is all-pervading, all-knowing” (II-1115).

“And God it is that encompasseth all things” (IV-126.)

“ And He is with you where so ever ye may be” (LVII-4).

“He is the First and the Last, the Outward and the Inward and He knows everything” (LVII-2).

How is this proximity, nearness, omnipresence, outwardness, inwardness or immanence of God to be understood? How is the transcendence of God to be reconciled with His immanence? How is God, in spite of being the ‘other’ of things, the first and the last, the inward and the outward of things? Here a clear knowledge of the metaphysical background of the problem is necessary. At the risk of repetition let me state the whole thing succinctly.

The Sufis believe that according to the Qur’an God exists and is the absolute knower. Knowing implies ‘knowledge’ and the ‘object known.’ God knows His own thoughts, these being the objects of His knowledge.

Now if God’s knowledge is perfect (which, ex-hypothesis, is the case), His ideas (objects of knowledge) are also perfect in every way. But God has knowledge, is a Knower from eternity. Therefore His ideas are also eternal. They are uncreated. Knowledge is an attribute of God and can- not therefore be separated from Him. It constitutes the very essence of God. As God is uncreated His knowledge (or ideas) is also uncreated. The difference, of course, does not impair the essential unity of knowledge, Knower and Known, but is nonetheless inherent in the nature of things, i.e., in Reality as manifested to us. “Triplicity” as Ibn-ul-‘ Arabi says, “is the foundation of becoming.”

Now the ideas of God are technically called ‘‘Essences.” The essences are firstly uncreated and secondly perfect and unchangeable. They are the essences of things. Every essence has its own characteristics or essential nature. In the Qur’an these characteristics are called “Shakilaat.”

As the essences are uncreated and unchangeable their characteristics or aptitudes are also uncreated and immutable.

Now as we have seen above, creation is nothing but the external manifestation or actualisation of the ideas of God or the ‘essences.’ The secret of Creation, the Sufis believe, is that God manifests or reveals Himself in His own Ideas. In thus manifesting Himself God remains unchanged as He ever was, is, and shall be. God gives and yet preserves Himself, is multiplied and yet remains one. He manifests Himself according to the ‘aptitudes’ of the things in which He is manifesting Himself. He bestows His attributes on His Ideas or forms or essences and they become things. The essences of things are in themselves non-existent, that is to say, they subsist only in the Knowledge of God as ‘ideas.’

They derive what existence they possess from God who is the real substance of all that exists, There is really nothing in existence except God. He is the First, the Last, the Outward, the Inward, He is the substance of what is manifested and is substance of what remains latent at the time of manifestation. In explaining the Qur’anic Verse: “He is the First and the Last, the Outward and the Inward, and He knows everything.” (LVII-2). The Prophet says:

“You are the Outward and there is nothing above you: You are the Inward and there is nothing below you; you are the First and there is nothing before you and you are the Last and there is nothing after you.” Thus by reason of His manifesting Himself in the forms of things God becomes the First and the Last, the Outward and the Inward of things. That is how His proximity, nearness, omnipresence, in a word, immanence in everything becomes comprehensible.

An eminent Indian Sufi has expressed the whole thing in the following couplet beautifully:

“The same incomparable Being in spite of its in-comparability has manifested itself in the form of everything.” Ibnul‘-Arabi says: ‘‘Glory be to God who created things, being Himself their essence, i.e., external being.”

When things derive their existence from God who is the real substance of all that exists, it follows necessarily that all attributes, i.e., life, knowledge, will, power, hearing, sight and speech, belong to God alone. As ‘Abdul-Karim Jili’ has said : “When the Sufi knows the true meaning of ‘God’ was and there was naught beside Him,” in that moment it is revealed to him that his hearing is God’s hearing, his sight God’s sight, his speech God’s speech, his life God’s life, his knowledge God’s knowledge, his will God’s will and his power God’s power, and that God possesses all these attributes fundamentally; and then he knows that all the aforesaid qualities are borrowed and metaphysically applied to himself whereas they really belong to God. This is what is called the doctrine of Tauhid-i-Sifati, a necessary consequence of the doctrine of Tauhid-i-Zaati.

Attributes go forth into actions. When attributes really belong to God it necessarily follows that God alone is the doer, the agent. We negate actions, according to the Qur’an, from the essences of things as we negate existence and attributes from them ( Tauhid-i-Fe’li) God alone exists, has attributes and is the real agent. And to God alone “belong all things in the heaven and on earth” . He is the only Lord and Master (Taubhid-fi’l-Athar )

Such is then the nature of the relation between ‘Haqq’ and ‘Khalg.’ The Knower (or Haqq or Reality) manifests Himself in the Known (or Khalq) revealing all the aptitudes of the Known. Khalq by itself is nonexistent. Existence belongs to the Knower alone, which is the only Reality.

There is no duality of Being or existence. Ontologically there is but one Reality, (Singularism—Unity of Existence).

The existence is one but the Essences are multiple. Essences, as we have seen above, are the Ideas of the Knower. They are co-eternal with the Knower. They are uncreated. If the Ideas were created by the Knower, the Knower did not possess them before they were created by Him. But this means that the Knower was ignorant of them before they were created. Nobody thinks of God as ignorant at any moment. Therefore the Ideas are co-eternal with God. Ideas constitute the knowledge of God and are not separable from Him. Further the Ideas are not the same as God. For various reasons given above, a relation of ‘otherness’— not of identity—exists between the Knower and the Known. But this constitutes no “Shirk” (believing in another external existence), for ideas possess no external existence. They merely subsist in the mind of God. God manifests himself in the forms of His Ideas, expressing their aptitudes in full, and thus the world appears.

If the Ideas or Essences are the ‘other’ of God, being limited in form things which are just the external manifestation of ideas must for the same reason be the ‘other’ of God. So in the Qur’an they are called the others of God, (Pluralism—Multiplicity of Essences),

Thus in Existence there is unity, but in Essences there is multiplicity. And one who knows the true relation that exists between himself and God is a Sufi, in the esoteric sense of the word. The Sufi knows that internally he is an idea in the mind of God. Being an idea he is co-eternal with God. Externally he is a created being in whose form God has manifested Himself according to the aptitudes or ‘Shakilat’ of the Sufi. He possesses neither independent existence of his own nor any existential attributes (life, knowledge, power, etc.), He exists with the existence of God, sees through God, hears through God, etc. As one of the Sufis as said :

When Truth its light doth show

I lose myself in reverence,

And I am as one who never travelled thence

To life below.

When I am absented

From self in Him, and Him attain,

Attainment’s self thereafter proveth vain,

And self is dead.

In Union divine

With Him, Him only I do see:

T dwell alone, and that felicity

No more is mine.

This mystic union

From self hath separated me:

Now witness concentration’s mystery

Of two made one.

Scholars wrangle about the derivation of the word Sufi though about its exact connotation I do not think that there is any reason to quarrel. Let us cast a hurried glance at the various attempts of the lexicographers:—

1. Some say: “The Sufis were only named Sufis because of the purity (Safa) of their hearts and the cleanliness of their acts.”

‘ Bishr ibn al-Harith’ said : “The Sufi is he whose heart is sincere (Safa) towards God.” Another great Sufi has said: “The Sufi is he whose conduct towards God is sincere, and towards whom God’s blessing is sincere.”

But if the term Sufi were derived from ‘Safa’ the correct form would be ‘Safawi’ and not Sufi !

2. Others think that the Sufis were only called Sufis “because they are in the first rank (Saff ) before God, through the elevation of their desires towards Him, the turning of their hearts unto him and the staying of their secret parts before Him.”

But if the term Sufi were referred to Saff (rank) it would be Saffi and not Sufi.

3. Others have said: They were only called Sufis because their qualities resembled those of the people of the Dais who lived in the time of God’s Prophet (God’s blessing and peace be upon him!). They had left this world, departed from their home and fled from their companions. They look of this world’s goods only, so much as is indispensable for covering nakedness and allaying hunger. Because they were devoid of all worldly possessions they were called ‘paupers’ One of them was asked : Who is a Sufi? He replied: “He who neither possesses nor is possessed.” By this he meant that he is not the slave of desire. Another said: “The Sufi is he who possesses nothing, or if he possesses anything spends it.“

But, remember, if the term ‘Sufi’ were derived from ‘‘ Suffah” (or Bench) the correct form would be “ Suffi ” and not “ Sufi ! ”

(4) Lastly it has been claimed that they were only called Sufis because of their habit of wearing Suf i.e., wool. For they did not put on raiment soft to touch or beautiful to behold, to give delight to the soul: they only clothed themselves in order to hide their nakedness, contenting themselves with rough haircloth and coarse wool.

If the derivation from Suf (wool) be accepted the word is correct and the expression sound from the grammatical point of view. Abu Bakr al- Kalabadhi thinks that “it at the same time has all the necessary meanings such as withdrawal from the world, inclining the soul away from it, leaving all settled abodes, keeping constantly to travel, denying the carnal soul its pleasures, purifying the conduct, cleansing the conscience, dilation of the breast and the quality of leadership.”

Ibn-Khaldun was also of the opinion that the word ‘Sufi’ is derived from Suf. But it is necessary to remember that it is not merely by putting on rough hair-cloth and coarse wool that one becomes a Sufi. As Hujwari has said: “ Purity(Safa) is a blessing from God and the ‘ wool’ is the proper dress of the cattle.”

According to the researches of Imam Qushayri the word “‘ Sufi” came into vogue a little before the expiry of the second century of the Hijra (or 822 A.D.). After the death of the Holy Prophet, ‘’Companion” was the title adopted by the people of that age. They needed no better title, for “‘ Companionship” was unanimously regarded as being the highest and the best state. Those who associated with the “ Companions ” were called in their own times ‘ Taba‘in ” “followers.” was the title conferred upon those who sat at the feet of the Followers. After the expiry of this period there was a slackening of religious spirit. Hearts were turning more towards the pleasures of the world than towards God. A number of systems and orders cropped up, and each order was divided into a number of branches. Seeing this state of affairs those who adored God above all things and were wholly consumed by the fire of His love separated themselves from the rest of the world and devoted themselves to the recollection and remembrance of God the only object of their love.

“I recollected thee,

Not that my memory

For the twinkling of an eye

Suffered thee to slip by !”

These men were later called the “Sufis’’. They were cut off from humanity for God’s sake, clean of impurities, full of meditation, and in their eyes gold and mud were equal. And that is why Ibn-‘Ali ar-Rudhabari has defined a Sufi thus:

“One who wears wool over (his) purity, gives his lusts the taste of tyranny, and having overthrown the world, journeys in the pathway of the chosen one” (i.e., the Prophet).”

In the light of these historical facts it is now easy to determine the exact meaning of Sufism. If you cast a glance over the various definitions of Sufism given by the Sufis themselves you will find not a few necessary attributes ascribed to them. It is not necessary to try to state them all here. But the gist of them all is beautifully expressed in a definition formulated by Shaikh-ul-Islam Zakeryah Ansari which is as follows :

“Sufism teaches how to purify one’s self, improve one’s morals, and build up one’s inner and outer life in order to attain perpetual bliss. Its subject-matter is the purification of the soul and its end or aim is the attainment of eternal felicity and blessedness.” By way of illustration compare the following few sayings of more prominent Sufis which amplify and extend with fresh details the definition above formulated :

Imam Qushayri, the author of the great Sufi compendium, Rasa’ il, takes Sufism in the sense of purity, i.e. the purity of inner and outer life and says that “purity is something praiseworthy in whichever language it may be expressed and its opposite impurity is to be eschewed,” Abu’l-Husayn an-Nuri being asked what Sufism is, replied : ‘’Abandoning all the portion of the carnal soul.’’ Al-Junayd was asked the same question and said: “It is the purification of the heart from associating with created beings, avoiding the temptations of the carnal soul, taking up the qualities of the spirit, attachment to the sciences of reality, using what is more proper to the eternal, counselling all the community, being truly faithful to God and following the Prophet according to the Law.”

To Abi ‘Ali Quzwini Sufism is nothing but “pleasing manners”; Aba Sahl Sa‘luki defines it as “abstaining from objections” ; Abu Muhammad al-Jurayri thinks that Sufism is the building up of good habits and the keeping of the heart from all evil desires and passions.

It is clear, then, that according to these great Sufis, Sufism is nothing but the purification of the senses and the will. It is the effacement of one’s desires in the will of God. It is the building up of a solid wall between the pure self and the Gog and Magog of passions and desires. It is, in a word, self-discipline the avoidance of what is forbidden and the performance of what is ordained. The Sufis are agreed that all the ordinances imposed by God on His servants in His Holy Book and all the duties laid down by the Prophet (in the Traditions) are a necessary obligation and a binding imposition for adults of mature intelligence; that they may not be abandoned or forsaken in any way by any man, whether he be a veracious believer (Siddiq), or a saint or a Gnostic, even though he may have attained the furthest rank, the highest degree, the noblest station, or the most exalted stage. They hold that there is no station in which a man may dispense with the prescriptions of the religious law, by holding permissible what God has prohibited, or making illegal what God has declared legal, or legal what God has pronounced illegal, or omitting to perform any religious duty without due excuse or reason, which excuse or reason is defined by the agreed judgment of all Muslims and approved by the prescriptions of the religious law. The more inwardly pure a man is, the higher his rank and the nobler his station, so much the more arduously does he labour with sincerer performance and a greater fear of God.

In this sense Sufism is a purely Islamic discipline which builds up the character and inner life of the Muslims by imposing certain ordinances and duties, obligations and impositions which may not be abandoned in any way by any man. The Prophet Muhammad was sent to “ instruct mankind” in Scripture and Wisdom and to sanctify them.”! The Sufis keep these “instructions” before their eyes, strive their utmost to perform what has been prescribed for them to do and to discharge what they have been called upon to do subsequent to that prescription. God says; ‘‘And those who fight strenuously for us we will surely guide them into our way “and again “Oh ye who believe! Do your duty to God, seek the means of approach unto Him and strive with might and main in His cause: that ye may prosper.“ Believing in these exhortations the great Sufi Yahya has said : “The spirit of gnosis will never reach thy heart, so long as there is a duty owing to God which thou hast not discharged !” Thus Sufism, in the words of Abo ‘Ali ar-Radhabari, is “giving one’s lust the taste of tyranny” and “journeying in the pathway of the Holy Prophet.”

But this is not the whole meaning of Sufism in Islam. It certainly has an esoteric sense. To understand this esoteric meaning it is necessary to follow the three main categories or classifications of men given by the Qur’an in Sura LVI (Waqi‘a). Here men are sorted out into three classes .

The Companions of the Right-Hand (Ashab-ul-Maimana);

The Companions of the Left-Hand (Ashab-ul-Mash’ama);And

Those nearest to God (Muqarrabin).

The Companions of the Right-Hand are “those who believe in the Unseen,” are “steadfast in prayer’’ and ‘‘have the assurance of the Hereafter” in their hearts. They are ‘‘on the right path guided by their Lord.” The Companions of the Left-Hand are “those who reject Faith,” and go after false Gods. The Qur’an describes them as those “who have bartered guidance for error” and “have lost their true direction.” This classification is thus according to the knowledge out of which spring their actions knowledge of the right path and knowledge of the wrong path.

But who are the “Muqarrabin” They are not just the companions of the Right-Hand only. Otherwise they would not have been placed in a different category. Tine Sufis believe that it is just another name for those who are not only on the right path guided by their Lord but also know the right relation between ‘Haqq’ and ‘Khalq,’ or between the Creator and the Created, between God and man. To be more explicit those who regard their Creator as their ‘Ilah’ or Deity and worship Him alone and ask for His aid alone and believe that there is none other than He worthy of our devotion and able to help us, are called in the Qur’an the Companions of the Right-Hand. And those who regard some Created Beings as their deities and worship them and seek their aid, thus rejecting the faith which lays down that God alone is our Cherisher and Sustainer, are termed the Companions of the Left. The ‘‘Muqarrabin” are those not only believe in their Creator as their only Deity and worship Him alone and seek for His help alone, but also know the true relation that exists between them and their Creator. Thus the great Sufi Saint Shaikh Shahabuddin Suharwardi in his famous Sufi Compendium ‘Awarif-ul-Ma’rif (Chapter One ) holds that though the term Sufi is not used in the Holy Qur’an, the word “Muqarrib” connotes the same meaning as that which is expressed by the term Sufi.

Now let us determine in some detail the nature of the exact relation which the Qur’an posits between Haqq and Khalq.

At the outset it is clear that the Qur’an teaches the doctrine of Pluralism. As opposed to the claims of Singularism it posits the “otherness” of Khalq, or created things, their discreteness, their manyness, and plurality, This otherness is “real’’ and not merely “suppositional.” Haq or God, the One, exists and possesses infinite attributes. Things, the Many, also exist and have attributes, externally, things are the creatures of God and God is the creator of things. Says the Qur’an: “God is the Creator of every thing.” Internally things are the ‘Ideas’ (i.e. objects known) of God. God knows the things-—is their Knower. And God knew them before He created them. They existed as “ ideas” in His mind before they were created.

“And He knows everything.”

Now the relation between the Creator and the Created, the Knower and the Known, is not one of “Identity” but is definitely that of “otherness.”

Things known or created are the ‘other’ of their Knower and Creator.

A painter conceives, say, the idea of a dog and then paints it on the canvas. The idea exists in his mind, depends for its (mental) existence totally on his mind. The painter’s mind is the Substratum of the idea. But the Knower and the Known, the mind and the idea are in no sense identical. The painter is not-the dog and the dog is not the painter. The relation between the two is clearly one of ‘otherness.’

Now, as was shown above, things are internally the ideas of God. Gad being Knower from eternity Knows His own thoughts —those being the objects of His knowledge. Now the Sufis call the ideas of God the “Essences of things” which when manifested or created are called “external objects” or “created things” or merely the many ‘things’ of the world (Khalq).

Let us now analyse more fully the internal aspect of things, things considered as the ideas of God or “Essences,” i.e. before they are created externally. Even as ideas, things are not identical with the essence or Zaat of God. Now what constitutes the difference between God, the Knower, and the ideas of God or essences which must now be termed as “the Known” This may be briefly expressed thus:

The Known

Is a form possessing limitation or determination or individualisation.

Subsists in the mind of the Knower, does not possess its own independent existence. The Sufis call it “ a relative non-existent.”

Possesses no attributes, e.g., life, knowledge, will, etc, though possesses the capacity acquiring those attributes, if given.

Is passive. Having no existence and existential attributes of their own, they possess no activity of their own.

The Knower

(1) Is free from any limitation or determination—is not a form,

(2) Exists in Himself, depending on nothing else but Himself.

(3) Possesses positive attributes, i.e., life, knowledge, will, speech, power, hearing, sight and speech (These are called the primary attributes of God).

(4) Is active.

From the above statement it is clear that the relation between the Known and the Knower is one of ‘otherness,’ never of ‘Identity.’ The essence cf things are the ideas of God, co-eternal with God, God is ‘One,’ His ideas are ‘many.’ God exists independently; ideas depend on the mind of God for their existence. The essence of God is free from any limitation or determination ; the ideas, though unlimited in number, are limited or determined in form, possessing their own peculiarities or characteristics or essential nature, termed,) ‘Shaklat’ in the Qur’an.

If the ideas or essences are ‘the other’ of God, things which are just the external manifestation of ideas must, for the same reason, be the other of God. God manifested externally what was contained in the essence or the essential nature of things. God transcends the limitations and determinations of things. Says the Qur’an :

“He is not in the likeness of anything;

He is the hearer and the seer.”

Again;

“Praise and glory be to Him: For He is above what they attribute to Him.”

The essence or Zaat of God being absolute is free from all limitations and, as all things are necessarily determined, ‘’God is not in the likeness of anything” and is “above what they attribute to Him”. How can God be identified with things? How can the Creator be the same as the Created? Essentially things are different from) God, and this difference is not merely suppositional but is a real difference. Difference of essences, the essence of God being the other of the essence uf things. God is comparable to no created beings. He is transcendent in the sense of being a necessary being self- begotten, self-caused self-existent, independent and absolute in contradistinction to the contingent, created and determined beings of the phenomenal world. He is transcendent also in the sense that He is unknowable and incommunicable and beyond all proof, as the Qur’an says:

” God keeps the knowledge of His Self hidden from you.”

The relation between God, the one, the transcendent Being (‘’not in the likeness of anything”) to the many things of the Universe may be expressed in theological language thus :

The One

Khaliq (Creator)

Rabb (Lord)

Ilah (The worshipped)

Malik (The Master)

The Many

Makhlooq (Created beings)

Marboob (Slaves)

Malooh (Worshippers)

Mumlook (Servants)

Thus the gist of the whole doctrine so far stated is that man cannot become God, as some people considering Islamic mysticism to be a phase of Pantheism are led to suppose.