- 一般社団法人 日本オリエント学会
- オリエント (ISSN:00305219)
- vol.33, no.1, pp.64-79, 1990-09-30 (Released:2010-03-12)
In my last paper [in The World of Islam, Nos. 33/34, 1990] on the controversies over the orthodoxy of Wahdah al-wujud in the late Mamluk period, I pointed out that most of the sufis were within the ‘orthodox’ and that in this period we find no ‘ulama’ vs sufi schema.In this article I take up Ibn Taymiyah's comprehension of tasawwuf for enlargement of my last study. It is fact that Ibn Taymiyah, who belongs to the early Mamluk period, severely criticized Wahdah al-wujud and some popular sufi practices, but he was not against tasawwuf itself.He divides sufis into three groups as follows; (1) ‘true’ sufis who worship only Allah, (2) sufis who observe legal (shar'i) manners in their practices, and (3) superficial sufis who follow some customs without understanding of their true meaning. He puts his own position in the first group, and from this inner standpoint he criticizes other sufis such as those of Ahmadiyah-Rifa'iyah Tariqah, who belong to the third group, for their innovation and deviation from shari'ah, and demands their repentance. According to his view, Wahdah al-wujud goes outside of this framework of sufis. So his criticism on Wahdah al-wujud was not against tasawwuf, rather his aim was to defend ‘true’ tasawwuf as he thinks it.From this and the last study, we can conclude that nobody was against tasawwuf itself in the Mamluk period with the only exception of Wahdah al-wujud, which was criticized as philosophy by some, not all, thinkers.