Introducing Sayyid Dildar Ali’s critique of mysticism, al-shihab al-thaqib (\u0627\u0644\u0634\u0647\u0627\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u062b\u0627\u0642\u0628), Dr. Athar Abbas Rizvi writes:<\/p>\n
\u201cMawl\u0101n\u0101 Dildar Ali (1753 – 1820) toed the line of the Safawid Ulama<\/a>\u00a0 in fiercely opposing sufism. Like them he considered it was a threat to Shi’ism. He wrote a detailed work entitled the Shihab al-Saqib refuting sufi doctrines and condemning the leading sufis.<\/p>\n The principal target of his attack is the Wahdat al-Wujud (Unity of Being) of ibn Arabi. The Mawl\u0101n\u0101 points out initially the differences between scholars, philosophers and sufis in their approach to Wujud (Being) and Wajib (Necessary Being). It goes on to explain in detail the sufi theory of the Wujud al-Mutlaq (the Absolute). The sufis believe that Necessary Being is the essence of the Absolute Being, the Mawl\u0101n\u0101 asserts, and that essence is found in all objects.<\/p>\n The Mawl\u0101n\u0101 summarises the sufi arguments on Wahdat al-Wujud and counters each of them. He also demolishes Haydar Amoli’s proposition concerning it and condemns the views of Sharif Juzjani and Sadru’d-Din Shirazi (Mulla Sadra).<\/p>\n To the Mawl\u0101n\u0101, the self-delimitation theory of the Absolute is misleading. He quotes the Qur’anic verses which, according to the sufis, endorse the Wahdat al-Wujud belief and marshalls arguments showing that the sufi interpretations have no relevance to the real meaning of the verses. The Mawl\u0101n\u0101 gives verses and ah\u0101d\u012bs which contradict the sufi views of the Wahdat al-Wujud.<\/p>\n The book also shows that the best description of God and His Attributes is available only in the sayings of the Imams of the Prophet’s family. According to them, God is omnipresent by His own essence and He demonstrates His essence by His essence and not through worldly objects.<\/p>\n A chapter of the work deals with the definition of kashf (sufi revelations) and asserts that knowledge obtained through this process was not necessarily correct. Kashf did not discriminate between truth and falsehood and so could not be made the basis for a final decision. If it could, the past-masters of kashf would have been infallible. A section of the chapter points out the faults of eminent sufis starting with ibn Arabi (1165 – 1240). It quotes the correspondence between ibn Arabi’s supporter, Abdur-Razzaq Kashi, and ibn Arabi’s opponent, Ala’ud- Dawla Simnani, and refutes the statements made by his followers, including those of Haydar Amoli (1319 – 1385).<\/p>\n The mystic Hasan Basri (641 – 728) is accused of introducing anti-Islamic monastic practices into the faith. According to the Mawlana, the Imamiyya works did not justify Sayyid Haydar Amoli’s statement that Hasan Basri was one of Imam Ali’s most eminent disciples.<\/p>\n Section three of the same chapter accuses Sufyan Sawri of hostility to Ahl-i bayt and blames him for disseminating many baseless ahadis. The famous utterances of Ab\u016b Yazid Bist\u0101mi (d. 874 or 877) such as \u201cGlory be to me. How great is my Majesty\u201d (\u0633\u0628\u062d\u0627\u0646\u06cc \u0645\u0627 \u0627\u0639\u0638\u0645 \u0634\u0627\u0646\u06cc) are condemned as heretical by the Mawl\u0101n\u0101 and Ab\u016b Yazid is described as a propagator of theories supporting hulul (infusion of God into a creature) and ittihad (unification of the Divine and human nature).<\/p>\n He quotes Sayyid Murtaza ar-Razi who, comparing Abdullah ibn Saba with Ab\u016b Yazid, wrote that it was surprising that the Sunnis condemned Abdullah ibn Saba because he attributed Divine attributes to Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib, but raised no objections against Ab\u016b Yazid who thought himself superior to God. Referring to Ab\u016b Yazid’s services to Im\u0101m Ja’far as- Sadiq, the Mawl\u0101n\u0101 says that these did not reduce the weight of his sins.<\/p>\n He reiterates that the respect shown by authors such as Qazi N\u016bru\u02bbllah Shustari (1549 – 1610) and Bah\u0101’u’d-Din ‘Amili (1547 – 1621) to some sufis did not indicate that they supported the Wahdat al-Wajid doctrines. The section on Ab\u016b Yazid also condemns Mansur al-Hall\u0101j (killed 922).<\/p>\n There is another section devoted solely to Mansur in which he is castigated as a zindig (believer in a Magi sect), an heretic and an infidel.<\/p>\n In the section dealing with Ghazali (d. 1111), the author states that he was a bigoted Sunni whose life-mission was to strengthen enmity towards Ahl-i bayt. The Mawl\u0101n\u0101 remarks that Ghazali’s defence of Yazid was preposterous and showed that he had no respect for Imam Husayn. His assertion that the Shi’i faith was false was based merely on personal kashf and flimsy arguments.<\/p>\n Shaykh Abdu’l-Qadir Jilani (d. 1166) hated the Shi’is even more deeply than his predecessors, claims the Mawl\u0101n\u0101. The Shaykh fervently believed that the tenth of Muharram was not a day of mourning but of rejoicing, for, before the advent of Islam, it had proved an auspicious day for some of the early prophets. According to Shaykh Abdu’l-Qadir, A’isha was superior to all other women and the Shi’i beliefs resembled those of the Jews.<\/p>\n In the section on Rumi, the Mawl\u0101n\u0101 quotes verses from his Masnawi to show that Rumi did not discriminate between Islam and infidelity and that his similes and metaphors were sacrilegious. The Mawlana continues that the poetry of ‘Attar, San\u0101’i and other sufi poets was heretical and irreligious.<\/p>\n The last but one chapter condemns the mystical practices of sufis and accuses them of violating the basic principles of Islamic teachings. The sufi meditational postures, music, ascetic exercises and love affairs with young boys are, according to the Mawl\u0101n\u0101, unlawful. He claims that their practices of wearing woollen garments and loud and silent zikr, the system of bay’a and the presentation of khirqa (sufi robes) are acts of perversion and apostasy.<\/p>\n The last chapter deals with various sufi orders which, in the Mawl\u0101n\u0101’s opinion, are totally profane, blasphemous and inculcate materialism and licentiousness.\u201d (1)<\/p>\n The lightening strike: al-shihab al-thaqib by Sayyid Dildar Ali Nasirabadi \u2013 Dr. Sajjad Rizvi<\/a><\/p>\n Sayyid Dildar Ali Naqvi Naseerabadi, also known as Ghufran-Ma’ab, (1753 \u2013 1820) was a Shia theologian and jurist of India. Born in the village of Nasirabad, Raebareli, India, he got his early education in his home town. He received his higher education from Sayyid Ghulam Husayn Dakhini Ilahabadi, Mawlawi Haydar Ali Sandilawi and Mawlawi Babu’llah of Raebareli. Most of his teachers in India were Maturidiyya Hanafis. He studied astronomy under a renowned scholar of that time, Allama Tafazzul Hussain Khan Kashmiri<\/a>. (2)<\/p>\n Like other Shia intellectuals of the time, Mawl\u0101n\u0101 Dildar Ali became an akhbari and a rationalist as he greatly admired the Fawaid-i Madaniyyaz by Mulla Muhammad Amin Astarabadi which endorsed this stance. In 1779, Mawl\u0101n\u0101 Dildar ‘Ali, financed by Mirz\u0101 Hasan Riz\u0101 Kh\u0101n, left for further studies in Iraq and Iran.<\/p>\n The Mawl\u0101n\u0101 was unable to accept the usuli theory of ijma’ (consensus). He supported the akhb\u0101ri position that it was meaningless to consider religious questions finally decided on the basis of ijma’ or a unanimous decision by a number of qualified scholars. The akhbari belief that such questions could never be finally settled appeared true to him.<\/p>\n At Najaf he called initially on Sayyid Muhsin Baghdadi and told him that the book Fawa’id-i Madaniyya had converted the Indian Shi’a intellectuals to the akhbari point of view and even he himself was confused. Sayyid Muhsin replied that ignorance of the usul theories was responsible for the popularity of the akhb\u0101ri traditions. The Sayyid then gave him the Fawaid al-Makkiyya by N\u016bru’d-Din ‘Ali bin Husayn (d. 1658).<\/p>\n Mawl\u0101n\u0101 Dildar Ali then called on Shaykh Ja’far Najafi, the author of Kashful-ghita. They too discussed the problem of ijma’ but the Mawl\u0101n\u0101’s doubts and anxieties remained unresolved. From Najaf the Mawl\u0101n\u0101 moved to Karbal\u0101. There he studied under B\u0101qir Bihbah\u0101ni, the author of the commentary on the Istibs\u0101r and under Sayyid ‘Ali Tab\u0101tab\u0101’i. The libraries in Karbal\u0101 contained a large number of usuli and akhb\u0101ri works and this prompted the Mawl\u0101n\u0101 to study the problem thoroughly. His intensive reading convinced him that Mulla Muhammad Mu’in Astar\u0101b\u0101di, the author of Fawaid-i Madaniyya, had condemned the mujtahids unjustly. His mental satisfaction made his studies meaningful.<\/p>\n At Karbal\u0101 he was also one of Sayyid Mahdi Shahrast\u0101ni’s students. At Najaf his teacher was Bahru’l-‘Ul\u00fcm Aq\u0101 Sayyid Muhammad bin Murtaz\u0101 bin Muhammad al Hasani al-Husayni, known as Mahdi Tab\u0101tab\u0101’i Bur\u016bjardi. Later on he visited Mashhad and studied under Sayyid Mahdi bin Sayyid Hidayatullah Isfah\u0101ni. From Mashhad he returned home with certificates of ijtihad.<\/p>\n Back in Lucknow, the first Friday congregational prayer was organised by the prime minister Hasan Riza Khan in his own palace on Friday, 12 May 1785. This was the anniversary of Im\u0101m ‘Ali’s birthday. On 27 Rajab, the anniversary of Prophet Muhammad’s call to the Prophethood, the Friday congregational prayers were held in public. The Mawl\u0101n\u0101 led the prayers and gave a sermon on historical, ethical and religious topics.<\/p>\n Mawl\u0101n\u0101 Dildar ‘Ali’s sermons and teachings raised the deteriorating ethical standards of the Shi’a aristocracy in Awadh. He strengthened the Shi’a intellectual traditions and stimulated the production of scholarly religious works. The Mawl\u0101n\u0101’s own writings can be divided into six categories:<\/p>\n 1. Books relating to the refutation of the akhb\u0101ris; At his suggestion Nawab Asafu’d-Dawla built a canal in Karbala and financed the rebuilding of the Imams’ tomb there. The Nawab and his successors also sent liberal gifts to the seminaries, students and deserving people at Karbala, Najaf and other holy Shi’a centres in Iraq.<\/p>\n Mawl\u0101n\u0101 Dildar Ali’s sons and disciples were also pious, dedicated scholars and teachers. The Shi’as considered them the undisputed leaders of the community.<\/p>\n On 8 March 1820, Mawl\u0101n\u0101 Dildar Ali made his eldest son his successor. The Mawl\u0101n\u0101 died in the night of 2 May 1820. His body was buried in his Imambara at Lucknow. He was given the title Ghufran Ma’ab (he who has taken refuge in Divine forgiveness) to show respect to his memory. (3)<\/p>\n Prof. Sayyid Athar Abbas Rizvi (1921\u20131994), a modern scholar of India’s islamic history, earned his PhD in 1949. He started his academic career from Aligarh Muslim University. Later he joined the Department of Asian Civilizations at the Australian National University, Canberra in 1967, where he worked until 1986. He was elected a fellow of the Australian Academy of Humanities in 1969. In 1972, he also joined Jawaharlal Nehru University as a visiting faculty. He authored many well cited and widely published books on medieval Indian history. He died in Mashhad, Iran and his body was laid to rest within the precincts of the Shrine of Im\u0101m Ali Reza (PBUH). (4)<\/p>\nFurther reading and manuscript download:<\/h2>\n
Brief biography of Ghufran Ma’ab<\/h2>\n
\n2. Works discussing the basic principles of the Shi’a faith and jurisprudence;
\n3. Books relating to the history of the Im\u0101ms and the promotion of the mourning ceremonies of Muharram;
\n4. Glosses and commentaries on classical text books;
\n5. Anti-Sufi literature;
\n6. A refutation of the Sunni condemnations of the Shi’as aroused by the Tuhfa-i Isna Ashariyya by Shah Abdu’l-Aziz Dehlavi.<\/p>\nSayyid Athar Abbas Rizvi – a responsible historiographer<\/h2>\n