Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Ibn 'Arabi and the salvation of Fir'awn in the Hereafter

This is a discussion on Ibn 'Arabi and the salvation of Fir'awn in the Hereafter within the Beliefs and Fundamentals forums, part of the Main Topics category; The following excerpts are taken from Aisha Bewley's (a prominent member of the "Murabitun" group) translation of Ibn 'Arabi's infamous ...

  1. #1
    Senior Member Abdullah ibn Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,876

    Default Ibn 'Arabi and the salvation of Fir'awn in the Hereafter

    The following excerpts are taken from Aisha Bewley's (a prominent member of the "Murabitun" group) translation of Ibn 'Arabi's infamous work "Fusus al-Hikam", chapter: "The Seal of the Wisdom of Sublimity in the Word of Musa".

    (You can see the whole original here:
    http://bewley.virtualave.net/fusus25.html)

    Read carefully the bolded and especially the underlined text to see what is actually being claimed about Fir'awn, and prepare to be shocked!

    Ibn 'Arabi said:

    "The consolation of Pharaoh was with the belief Allah gave him when he was drowning. So Allah took him pure and purified. There was no impurity in him since He took him in his belief before he had acquired any wrong actions. Islam effaces what was before it. He made him a sign of His concern so that none might despair of the mercy of Allah, for "no one despairs of solace from Allah except for the unbelievers." (12:87) If Pharaoh been of those who despair, he would not have embarked on belief. Musa, peace be upon him, was, as the wife of Pharaoh said, "a source of delight for me and for you. Do not kill him. It may well be that he will be of use to us." That is what happened. Allah gave them use of Musa, although they were not aware that he was a prophet who would destroy the kingdom of Pharaoh and his family..."


    "...As for the words of Allah, "but their belief when they saw Our violent force was of no use to them. That is the pattern Allah has always followed with His slaves," (40:85) [Bewley's footnote: It like is in Qur'an 10:98, where the punishment is removed from the people of Yunus after they believed.] that did not mean that it did not profit them in the Next World through His exception, "except for the people of Yunus." He meant that that did not prevent them being punished in this world. For that reason, Pharaoh was seized in spite of the existence of his belief even though his affair was that of someone who is certain that his death is approaching. The circumstances accord that he was not certain that he was going to die because he saw the believers walking on the dry path which had appeared when Musa struck the sea with his staff. Pharaoh was not certain that he would perish since he believed that he would not die until the moment actually reached him. He believed in the One in whom the Tribe of Israel believed, in certainty of his deliverance.

    "It was indeed certain, but it was in a form other than the one he wanted. He was saved from the punishment of the Next World in himself and his body was saved as Allah says, "Today We will save your body that you might be a sign for those after you," (10:92) because, if his form had vanished, his people might have said that he had gone into occultation. His known form appeared as a corpse that it might be known that it was really him. Deliverance was encompassed both in the senses and in the meaning.
    "The one who has the word of the punishment in the Other World realized for him [Bewley's footnote: cf. Qur'an 39:71.] will not believe, even if every ayat had been brought to him, "so that they might see the painful punishment," that is, taste the punishment of the Next World. Pharaoh left this class of people. This is the literal meaning of what the text of the Qur'an brought us. We say, and the matter belongs to Allah, that the fixed idea which the common people have regarding the wretchedness of Pharaoh is not based on anything in the divine text. As for his family, that is another judgement. This is not the place to mention it...."

    End of quote from Ibn 'Arabi.

    Some of the die-hard defenders of this group assert that "Fusus al-Hikam" is not authentically attributed to Ibn 'Arabi, but that it - or at least parts of it - was fabricated by his enemies to incriminate him falsely.

    They also claim that just because Aisha Bewley has translated the objectionable statements about Fir'awn, this doesn't necessarily mean that she (or the other top Murabitun figures) actually agrees with it or believes it.

    However, both of these objections are weak and illogical, or to put it in another way, a futile attempt to clutch at straws.

    The problem with the first objection is that if Aisha Bewley believes that the work is not authentically that of Ibn 'Arabi, then why translate the whole work and then proceed to attribute it all to Ibn 'Arabi? There is not even a passing mention in any of the footnotes - particularly the ones about the fate of Fir'awn in the akhirah - indicating that Bewley believed that it was the work of anyone other than Ibn 'Arabi.

    And the problem with the second objection is that if Bewley (and her mentor Abdalqadir) doesn't agree with it, then why is this not made clear in the footnotes? Their translation of "Fusus al-Hikam" is replete with explanatory footnotes, why are their none explaining their objections towards - or even an attempt at an explanatory "ta'wil" of - the claims made about Fir'awn dying on iman and being from the saved?

    What indeed can be said about the state of someone who agrees with this statement:

    "We say, and the matter belongs to Allah, that the fixed idea which the common people have regarding the wretchedness of Pharaoh is not based on anything in the divine text." ("Wretchedness" here being the translation of the Arabic word ash-shaqa', meaning to be doomed to the Hell-fire eternally!)

  2. #2
    Muslim Abdullah Abbas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abdullah ibn Adam View Post
    The following excerpts are taken from Aisha Bewley's (a prominent member of the "Murabitun" group) translation of Ibn 'Arabi's infamous work "Fusus al-Hikam", chapter: "The Seal of the Wisdom of Sublimity in the Word of Musa".

    (You can see the whole original here:
    http://bewley.virtualave.net/fusus25.html)

    Read carefully the bolded and especially the underlined text to see what is actually being claimed about Fir'awn, and prepare to be shocked!

    Ibn 'Arabi said:

    "The consolation of Pharaoh was with the belief Allah gave him when he was drowning. So Allah took him pure and purified. There was no impurity in him since He took him in his belief before he had acquired any wrong actions. Islam effaces what was before it. He made him a sign of His concern so that none might despair of the mercy of Allah, for "no one despairs of solace from Allah except for the unbelievers." (12:87) If Pharaoh been of those who despair, he would not have embarked on belief. Musa, peace be upon him, was, as the wife of Pharaoh said, "a source of delight for me and for you. Do not kill him. It may well be that he will be of use to us." That is what happened. Allah gave them use of Musa, although they were not aware that he was a prophet who would destroy the kingdom of Pharaoh and his family..."


    "...As for the words of Allah, "but their belief when they saw Our violent force was of no use to them. That is the pattern Allah has always followed with His slaves," (40:85) [Bewley's footnote: It like is in Qur'an 10:98, where the punishment is removed from the people of Yunus after they believed.] that did not mean that it did not profit them in the Next World through His exception, "except for the people of Yunus." He meant that that did not prevent them being punished in this world. For that reason, Pharaoh was seized in spite of the existence of his belief even though his affair was that of someone who is certain that his death is approaching. The circumstances accord that he was not certain that he was going to die because he saw the believers walking on the dry path which had appeared when Musa struck the sea with his staff. Pharaoh was not certain that he would perish since he believed that he would not die until the moment actually reached him. He believed in the One in whom the Tribe of Israel believed, in certainty of his deliverance.

    "It was indeed certain, but it was in a form other than the one he wanted. He was saved from the punishment of the Next World in himself and his body was saved as Allah says, "Today We will save your body that you might be a sign for those after you," (10:92) because, if his form had vanished, his people might have said that he had gone into occultation. His known form appeared as a corpse that it might be known that it was really him. Deliverance was encompassed both in the senses and in the meaning.
    "The one who has the word of the punishment in the Other World realized for him [Bewley's footnote: cf. Qur'an 39:71.] will not believe, even if every ayat had been brought to him, "so that they might see the painful punishment," that is, taste the punishment of the Next World. Pharaoh left this class of people. This is the literal meaning of what the text of the Qur'an brought us. We say, and the matter belongs to Allah, that the fixed idea which the common people have regarding the wretchedness of Pharaoh is not based on anything in the divine text. As for his family, that is another judgement. This is not the place to mention it...."

    End of quote from Ibn 'Arabi.

    Some of the die-hard defenders of this group assert that "Fusus al-Hikam" is not authentically attributed to Ibn 'Arabi, but that it - or at least parts of it - was fabricated by his enemies to incriminate him falsely.

    They also claim that just because Aisha Bewley has translated the objectionable statements about Fir'awn, this doesn't necessarily mean that she (or the other top Murabitun figures) actually agrees with it or believes it.

    However, both of these objections are weak and illogical, or to put it in another way, a futile attempt to clutch at straws.

    The problem with the first objection is that if Aisha Bewley believes that the work is not authentically that of Ibn 'Arabi, then why translate the whole work and then proceed to attribute it all to Ibn 'Arabi? There is not even a passing mention in any of the footnotes - particularly the ones about the fate of Fir'awn in the akhirah - indicating that Bewley believed that it was the work of anyone other than Ibn 'Arabi.

    And the problem with the second objection is that if Bewley (and her mentor Abdalqadir) doesn't agree with it, then why is this not made clear in the footnotes? Their translation of "Fusus al-Hikam" is replete with explanatory footnotes, why are their none explaining their objections towards - or even an attempt at an explanatory "ta'wil" of - the claims made about Fir'awn dying on iman and being from the saved?

    What indeed can be said about the state of someone who agrees with this statement:

    "We say, and the matter belongs to Allah, that the fixed idea which the common people have regarding the wretchedness of Pharaoh is not based on anything in the divine text." ("Wretchedness" here being the translation of the Arabic word ash-shaqa', meaning to be doomed to the Hell-fire eternally!)
    akhi i dont prefer to attack people but what makes Aisha or Abdul Haqq Bewley ''Ustaadh'' and ''Ustadha''

    btw she translating material by ibn arabi is ridiculous

    Imam ibn Katheer in his book of Islamic history- Al-bidaya Wal Nihaya comments on ibn Arabi He has a book named beads of wisdom in which there are many things that are apparently clear kufr.

    Imam adh-Dhahabi said (in Siyar Alam an-Nubala) that if ibn Arabis book (Beads of wisdom) does not contain clear Kufr, then there is no Kufr in the world!

    Imam Izz ibn abdul Salam said about Ibn Arabi: (he is) an evil liar sheik who claims that this world is eternal (i.e. was not created by Allah) and embraces promiscuity.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Abdullah ibn Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,876

    Default

    akhi i dont prefer to attack people but what makes Aisha or Abdul Haqq Bewley ''Ustaadh'' and ''Ustadha''
    The funny thing is that on shaykh Abdalqadir's website, there is a recording of a speech given to a group of the "murabitun" by a moroccan shaykh called Muhammad Wazzani (who it seems is quite closely associated with their group) in which he lambasts and bombards those who use the term "ustadh", and he claims that only the modernists - and he is clearly referring to those considered as "salafis" - use this term "ustadh", and that it was never used by the classical ulama, and that the word "ustadh" is the persian translation of a french title that refers to a particular freemasonic degree! (Even though ash-Shafi'i himself is on record as saying "Malik was my ustadh"!)

    What is even more amusing is that Muhammad Wazzani then goes on to say something like: "And don't even ask me about the term "doctor"! Upon which you hear the voice of "Shaykh Dr. Abdalqadir" (see the title at the top of his website) giving what almost sounds like an approving cheer of Wazzani's criticism of those who call themselves "Dr.", forgetting in the process that Abdalqadir uses the title "Dr." himself!

  4. #4
    Muslim Abdullah Abbas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abdullah ibn Adam View Post
    The funny thing is that on shaykh Abdalqadir's website, there is a recording of a speech given to a group of the "murabitun" by a moroccan shaykh called Muhammad Wazzani (who it seems is quite closely associated with their group) in which he lambasts and bombards those who use the term "ustadh", and he claims that only the modernists - and he is clearly referring to those considered as "salafis" - use this term "ustadh", and that it was never used by the classical ulama, and that the word "ustadh" is the persian translation of a french title that refers to a particular freemasonic degree! (Even though ash-Shafi'i himself is on record as saying "Malik was my ustadh"!)

    What is even more amusing is that Muhammad Wazzani then goes on to say something like: "And don't even ask me about the term "doctor"! Upon which you hear the voice of "Shaykh Dr. Abdalqadir" (see the title at the top of his website) giving what almost sounds like an approving cheer of Wazzani's criticism of those who call themselves "Dr.", forgetting in the process that Abdalqadir uses the title "Dr." himself!
    hillarious akhi , to come back to the ibnu arabi issue what did shaykhul islaam ibn taymiyya say about this heretic?

  5. #5
    Senior Member Abdullah ibn Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,876

    Default

    Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said that basically, in the beginning he was impressed by some of Ibn 'Arabi's works, particularly al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah, however later on he realised the reality of the man's beliefs after finding out what was contained in some of his other books like Fusus al-Hikam.

    Actually, al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah is a very interesting read, and contains a lot of interesting insights into how thoughtfully Ibn 'Arabi looked into and considered the deeper aspects/meanings of many prescribed acts of worship, like prayer, fasting, purity etc. Although many of those are highly questionable from various aspects.

    However, it is definitely not the kind of book that should be taken as a basis on which to build your 'aqidah or knowledge. It contains a lot of very specialised and technical sufi "jargon", and therefore is very difficult to understand for people who are unfamiliar with these things.

    To put it simply, though, ignorance of the contents of "al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah" will not be detrimental to you in any way.

  6. #6
    Muslim Abdullah Abbas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abdullah ibn Adam View Post
    Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said that basically, in the beginning he was impressed by some of Ibn 'Arabi's works, particularly al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah, however later on he realised the reality of the man's beliefs after finding out what was contained in some of his other books like Fusus al-Hikam.

    Actually, al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah is a very interesting read, and contains a lot of interesting insights into how thoughtfully Ibn 'Arabi looked into and considered the deeper aspects/meanings of many prescribed acts of worship, like prayer, fasting, purity etc. Although many of those are highly questionable from various aspects.

    However, it is definitely not the kind of book that should be taken as a basis on which to build your 'aqidah or knowledge. It contains a lot of very specialised and technical sufi "jargon", and therefore is very difficult to understand for people who are unfamiliar with these things.

    To put it simply, though, ignorance of the contents of "al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah" will not be detrimental to you in any way.
    interesting , akhi i also heard a while ago that ibnu arabi believed that the fire of hell would go out after a certain time?

  7. #7
    Senior Member Abdullah ibn Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,876

    Default

    interesting , akhi i also heard a while ago that ibnu arabi believed that the fire of hell would go out after a certain time?
    It wouldn't surprise me, brother.

    From what I remember, he said that the hell-fire wouldn't go out, but that it would stay there, however, after the kuffar have been punished according to what (Ibn 'Arabi thinks) they deserve, then the fire would become cool and refreshing for them (perhaps like it was with Ibrahim, 'alayhis-salam?)...

    Anyway, for a person who basically said in his book Fusus al-Hikam that the idol-worshipping people of Nuh were actually muwahhidun, who were drowned by the water of knowledge followed by the fire of divine love, anything is to be expected...

  8. #8
    Abu Shawarma
    Layth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    13,515

    Default

    "the fire of Divine love"???
    however, after the kuffar have been punished according to what (Ibn 'Arabi thinks) they deserve, then the fire would become cool and refreshing for them (perhaps like it was with Ibrahim, 'alayhis-salam?)..
    Doesn't Siraj Wahhaj also believe that at some point everyone will come out of jahannam except for "those whom the Quraan has trapped"? Whatever the hell that means. He said that in this lecture:

    Check from minute 44..



    Seems like a very vague answer to a simple straight forward question.
    Last edited by Layth; 23rd September 2008 at 01:03 PM.
    ٰ


    {And is one who was dead and We gave him life and made for him light by which to walk among the people like one who is in darkness, never to emerge therefrom? Thus it has been made pleasing to the disbelievers that which they were doing.}

    Al-An'aam 122

  9. #9
    Senior Member Abdullah ibn Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,876

    Default

    Doesn't Siraj Wahhaj also believe that at some point everyone will come out of jahannam except for "those whom the Quraan has trapped"?
    From what I am aware, this is mentioned in a hadith or athar, the meaning of "those whom the qur'an has trapped" is the kuffar, who will be in hell forever. Everyone else, i.e. the believers who were in hell due to sins, will be taken out, leaving only the kuffar, whom the Qur'an says will be there forever.

  10. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    9

    Lightbulb Re: Ibn 'Arabi and the salvation of Fir'awn in the Hereafter

    Assalamu alaikum!

    This is my first post in the forum. Really unfortunate that i have to begin with the controversial issue. But i have to clarify it.

    Regarding Ibn Arabi and Firawn, It is said that Ibn Arabi held Firawn to be a Kafir in his later work Futuhat al-Makkiyya. How far is it true? This is what the person said in FB, and i dont understand arabic!


    : .
    Last edited by Ibn Thahir; 6th May 2012 at 06:36 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Silence is Salvation
    By Abu_Salamah in forum Islam in General
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 6th March 2011, 03:53 AM
  2. Two Women Who Stood Up to Fir'awn
    By Detainee no. 05315-748 in forum Islam in General
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 20th August 2008, 07:59 AM
  3. The Path of Salvation
    By Insight in forum Islam in General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 17th February 2008, 05:28 AM
  4. To Ibn arabi followers
    By Madarijas-Salikeen in forum Beliefs and Fundamentals
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 31st May 2007, 02:31 AM
  5. The Price of Salvation: Fiqh of Zakaat
    By Fajr in forum Events and Announcements
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 13th April 2007, 11:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258