Spiritual Advancement and the Self in Classical Sufism

Spiritual advancement and enlightenment are goals which lie at the heart of Sufism. The desire for intimacy and radical union with “absolute Reality” and to transcend the illusionary state that is ordinary, everyday reality was a catalyst for the mystical movement within Islam, which is Sufism (Izutsu 7). While the Sufis had a rich and complicated history ranging from issues of legitimacy and outward perception to issues of internal structure and organization, the central concern of the Sufis was spiritual progress and union with God, Who is the “absolute Reality” (Izutsu 7). This concern fueled the development of an articulate, intelligible path for Sufis to follow with a complex panoply of concepts to explicate the path. It is these concepts which are the inspiration of this essay.

The central focus of this essay will be the nature of spiritual advancement in Sufism and how this discloses the Sufi view on the nature of the self. This essay will begin by explicating the spiritual path in Sufism, which is called “tariqa,” and the path’s end, which is “fana”: the annihilation of the ego (Khanam 14 & Karamustafa 16). It will also examine the notion of “baqa,” which is the state of “subsistence” in God after fana (Khanam 120). It will then speak on the different waystations and the essence of the waystations themselves. It shall then explain how these waystations relate to spiritual advancement and ethical living in the world for the classical Sufis. With the backdrop of the Sufi spiritual path and the nature of advancement on that path in place, this essay will then move to show how these conceptual frameworks relate to the Sufi view of the self. The philosophical work of Ibn Arabi will be explored in order to bolster this view.

Fundamentally, this essay will argue that the nature of the spiritual path, tariqa, in Sufism and the way one advances on that path reveals that the classical Sufis ultimately viewed the true self as a pure channel for God’s presence in the world and viewed the ordinary sense of self, the self-as-distinct-from-God, as illusory.

The Spiritual Path and How to Move Along it in Sufism

The spiritual path in Sufism is referred to as “tariqa” (Khanam 14). It is a path which is meant to help and enable someone “to sacrifice one’s life for God” (Khanam 14). A follower on this path “is called a salik, or traveler” (Khanam 14). While the spiritual path “is, in principle, open to everyone … if one is to do it the Sufi way, it must be done under the guidance of a shaykh, also called a murshid or pir” (Khanam 15). After a ritual of initiation in which the salik is taken under the shaykh, “the shaykh dispenses any guidance his disciple might require, starting from the exigencies of everyday life and ending with the spiritual guidance that aims at losing oneself in God” (Khanam 15). In the Sufi tradition, the salik surrenders himself completely to the shaykh so that he can practice his surrender to God through his subservience to the shaykh. Some of the characteristic features of the Sufi life which travels along the “tariqa” are “a life of poverty, sincerity, submission to God’s will, deep devotion, contemplation, nightlong vigils and prayers, nearness to God, divine inspiration and other-worldly visions” (Khanam 13). Examples of how these features would manifest in everyday life can be found in al-Suhrawardi’s A Sufi Rule for Novices. These rules are all oriented towards the complete renunciation of the novice’s self. For example, a “novice should not speak on any question unless he is asked about it,” an ordinance which shows the submission that is expected of Sufis, most especially novices (Al-Suhrawardi 39). This aligns with the primary purpose of early Sufis which was renunciation as the Sufi movement formed out of previous groups of “renunciants (zahid) and pietists (abid, nasik)” (Karamustafa 1). This renunciation is part of the essence of tariqa, as it is through this renunciation, which is done through Sufi practices under the guidance of a shaykh, that one advances along tariqa and moves towards the end of the goal of tariqa, which is “fana” or annihilation of the ego (Karamustafa 16). This end goal is the mystical height towards which all Sufis strive. It is a state of complete self-annihilation. One sufi, “Junyad,” “thought that when the human individual approached God with his customary sense of being a self-contained, separate entity, it proved impossible for him to affirm God’s unity since his own self-consciousness imprisoned him in himself … the only solution was for him to ‘pass away from his sense of self,’” which is “fana” (Karamustafa 16). Such a statement by Junyad makes it seem that the ordinary sense of self, which can be referred to as the self-as-distinct-from-God, was seen by the classical Sufis as what needed to be annihilated in the spiritual life since it hindered union with God.

Once the goal of fana is placed as the horizon towards which all Sufis advance, one of the key concepts that classical Sufis used to articulate how one moves towards fana, the notion of waystations or simply “stations,” can be understood (Sells 196). These waystations are virtues that one must cultivate in order to advance spiritually. Furthermore, there is an order to these waystations as some of them presuppose other ones. For example, when ending his discussion of “the station of repentance,” “as-Sarraj” says that “repentance demands watchfulness,” thus implicitly acknowledging that the virtue of repentance is a precondition for the virtue of watchfulness (Sells 196, 199-200). So there is a sense in which these virtues can be viewed horizontally; that is, they can be seen as points on the straight line of tariqa whose end is fana. However, there is a sense in which these waystations function non-linearly. As Sells points out, as-Sarraj “begins” his discussion of each waystation “with the conventional understanding of a given station (such as poverty), then treats a second version practiced by ‘the select’ (al-khass), and ends with a culminating version practiced by the realized ‘knower’ (al-arif)” (Sells 196-197). These three tiers demonstrate that there is a sense in which one can move towards fana vertically, as it were, where one’s overall spiritual state and maturation enables them to practice the virtue at a deeper level, which includes more detachment from worldly things, thus enabling them to move closer to the annihilation of the self-as-distinct-from-God. So while some waystations presuppose others, this vertical dimension of the waystations shows that there is a non-linear aspect to them. As spiritually progresses overall, perhaps by going through the stations one full time, they can then return to the first waystation and go through them again, this time at a deeper spiritual level, thus enabling them to annihilate more of their ego, their self-as-distinct-from-God, than when they first went through the stations. 

Despite the importance of fana, it is not, in itself, the complete end of the Sufi spiritual path as baqa, which is “subsistence” within God’s being (Khanam 120).

Baqa is a spiritual state which functions in tandem with fana, but comes, at least in some sense, after fana since baqa is subsistence within God where one’s being is wholly united with God’s being since His being is “the only Existence” (Khanam 63). Fana can be seen as a transitory state where the self-as-distinct-from-God is annihilated in order for a person to become a pure channel for God’s presence in the world, which is the state known as baqa. It is important to note that the annihilation of ego, or the annihilation of the self-as-distinct-from-God, does not mean that the person or self ceases to exist. There must be some sense in which the person continues to exist after fana, otherwise there is nothing that can subsist in God’s being. Rather, it is this self-as-distinct-from-God which is annihilated in fana, thus enabling someone to be a mere channel for God’s presence in the world. 

Thus, it is important to note that the waystations mentioned earlier have an important practical, ethical purpose. The reason being that once fana has been achieved, one, whilst transformed, nevertheless still remains in the world and operates in the world as an agent of God’s will in the state known as baqa. The waystations cultivate virtues which enable one to advance spiritually, but this spiritual advancement always has the execution of God’s will as its primary end. Therefore, these virtues, waystations, also enable one to practice ethical living in the world since they foster the worldly detachment which is a prerequisite for such living in the world, thus allowing a practitioner to exist in the perfect state of subsistence within God’s very being: baqa.

Now that this clarification has been proclaimed, the nature of the self in Sufism can be explored.

The Nature of the Self in Sufism 

With this conceptual framework in place, one can see how the nature of the spiritual path in Sufism and how to progress on it displays how Sufis viewed the self. As discussed above, the goal of the Sufi path, tariqa, is fana, or annihilation of the self-as-distinct-from-God or ego. This seems to lend credence to the view that the classical Sufis viewed the true self as a mere vessel for God’s presence in the world and that the self-as-distinct-from-God or ego is not a part of true or ultimate reality; that is to say, the self-as-distinct-from-God is an entity which does not come from God. This will be demonstrated by investigating the nature of the tariqa and examining the works of Ibn Arabi.

First, there is evidence from the spiritual path itself. Obviously, the notion of fana, at least prima facie, seems to open the possibility that the Sufis viewed the self as illusory since if the goal of the spiritual life is to destroy the self-as-distinct-from-God, then it seems odd to grant it a space within the realm of true reality. Moreover, the purpose of the spiritual life is to align oneself with reality so if the ultimate goal of the spiritual life is to eliminate oneself, then it seems like the self-as-distinct-from-God does not possess any real being and so is illusory. If everything that comes from God is real, and if the self-as-distinct-from-God came from God, then the self-as-distinct-from-God would not need to be destroyed. On the contrary, if the self-as-distinct-from-God came from God then it should be preserved and perhaps even enable someone to grow closer to God, but it is just the opposite for the Sufis. Indeed, harkening back to Junyad’s experience of being unable to unite with the divine because of he thought of himself as “a self-contained, separate entity,” the distinction between oneself and God inhibits union with God because one is still other to God, distinct from God, and so cannot be one with Him (Karamustafa 16). Given that the notion of the self-as-distinct-from-God inhibits union with God, thereby inhibiting the fulfillment of the spiritual path, tariqa, it seems to logically follow that the self-as-distinct-from-God must not be real for the Sufis. Even if Sufis did not explicitly acknowledge this, although there is reason to think that some of them did which will be discussed later, the illusory nature of the self-as-distinct-from-God, nevertheless, is the conclusion of Sufi reasoning. 

Furthermore, if one analyzes the waystations then one finds more evidence that the self-as-distinct-from-God was considered illusory by classical Sufis. According to as-Sarraj, the final waysation is “the station of acceptance” (Sells 209). In this station, practitioners learn to acquire “‘stillness in the face of the divine decree (qada)’” (Sells 209). They also learn to take “good-pleasure” in the divine decree and while Sells says that this “acceptance is not a passive virtue” since “for the Sufis a person’s active accepting and good-pleasure in his life will lead to an empowerment to act effectively in fulfilling the divine will,” this understanding must be placed within the context of fana (Sells 209-210). While this acceptance may be active in the sense that the Sufi does not merely let God do what He pleases with him since an important part of this virtue is the pleasure that comes from such acceptance, the very essence of acceptance requires that someone be, in some way, in a posture of receptivity as is they are not in this posture, then they may resist the divine will. Moreover, the goal of this acceptance is to ensure that the Sufi will live in a way where “his life will lead to an empowerment to act effectively in fulfilling the divine will,” and carrying out the divine will requires one to be receptive since they are following the will of another (Sells 210). Going further, working as an agent for the divine not only requires receptivity, but necessitates that one be a vessel for the divine will because of how all-encompassing God’s agency in the world is. Being a vessel for the divine, given the power of God, would also seem to imply a kind of identity with the divine for all that is real, all that is truly real, is God. Furthermore it would make sense to think that this waystation of acceptance would conclude with the collapse of the distinction between God and the believer since once one has fully accepted the divine will, they would be fully real and so would become united to God, which would result in the elimination of the self-as-distinct-from-God since it is an entity which hinders unity with God. In other words, since the waystation of acceptance leads one to be a vessel for the divine will, and this results in unity with God, it must also lead to elimination of the self-as-distinct-from-God since this false conception of the self presupposes that God and the believer are distinct, which is not possible in this kind of radical union.

So, there is clearly some evidence from an examination of the tariqa and the waystations that the classical Sufis ultimately viewed the self-as-distinct-from-God as illusory. With this evidence in place, the writings of Ibn Arabi can be examined to support this interpretation of classical Sufism since his writings can be examined and interpreted to show that he believed the self-as-distinct-from-God was, ultimately, illusory and that he viewed the true self as conduit for God’s being in the world. A good scholar to look towards in examining the work of Ibn Arabi is Toshihiko Izutsu.

In the first chapter of his analysis comparing Sufism and Taoism, Izutsu points out that “so-called ‘reality’, the sensible world which surrounds us and which we are accustomed to regard as ‘reality’ is, for Ibn Arabi, but a dream” (Izutsu 7). Ibn Arabi himself says that “the world is an illusion: it has no real existence. And this is what is meant by imagination (khayal). For you just imagine that it (i.e. the world) is an autonomous reality quite different from and independent of absolute Reality, while in truth is nothing of the sort … Know that you yourself are an imagination” (Izutsu 7). Such a quote may seem rather puzzling at first, but his notion of imagination is explicated in just the next page of Izutsu’s text when he says “that whatever a man perceives in this present world is to him as a dream is to a man” (Izutsu 8). In other words, just as a dream is not real in the sense that it is true reality since it is only a figment of a man’s imagination, so is the everyday world not real in the sense that it is true reality since it is a projection of “absolute Reality” (Izutsu 7). 

Connecting this to the Sufi view of the self, Ibn Arabi’s saying here seems to support the view that the Sufi’s viewed self-as-distinct-from-God as an illusion. The ordinary world, which includes the self-as-distinct-from-God, is not reality in the truest sense of the term since it is reality only insofar as it is a projection of a man’s mind. Indeed, this is why he says that it is “you” who imagines that “the world” “is an autonomous reality quite different from and independent of absolute Reality, while in truth is nothing of the sort” (Izutsu 7). The illusory reality of ordinary life does not, however, completely occlude “absolute Reality”, but rather “vaguely and indistinctively reflects” it (Izutsu 7). “The expression: ‘to die and wake up’ … is for Ibn Arabi nothing other than” taking the “‘imaginal form’” of reality “back to its original and true status”, which is “absolute Reality” (Izutsu 7 & 8). “Thus ‘death’” refers to “a spiritual event consisting in a man’s throwing off the shackles of sense and reason, stepping over the confines of the phenomenal, and seeing through the web of phenomenal things what lies beyond” which is “the mystical experience of ‘self-annihilation’ (fana)”; that is, the destruction of the self-as-distinct-from-God (Izutsu 8). What “a man” sees “when he wakes up from his phenomenal sleep is the self-illuminating state of ‘subsistence’ (baqa)” within God’s very being (Izutsu 8). In this state, the self-as-distinct-from-God is no longer present since it is a figment of man’s imagination; all that remains is the true self, the self which is perfectly aligned with “absolute Reality” is a pure channel for this reality’s presence in the world since there is no reality besides “absolute Reality” present in the person (Izutsu 7). Ibn Arabi goes on to explicate the nature of baqa through his ontological and metaphysical discourses, but what is most relevant to this paper is the fact that he viewed this state as one where the illusory self, self-as-distinct-from-God, does not exist, which supports the central claim of this essay that the classical Sufis viewed this conception of self as, ultimately, an illusion.

Conclusion

This essay explored what lies at the heart of Sufism: spiritual advancement and enlightenment. It was fueled by a desire to understand the Sufi spiritual path and an interest in seeing how this path reflected deeper Sufi understandings about the self. 

The central focus of this essay was the nature of spiritual advancement in Sufism and how this discloses the Sufi view on the nature of the self. It began by explicating the spiritual path in Sufism, which is called “tariqa,” and the path’s end, which is “fana”: the annihilation of the ego (Khanam 14 & Karamustafa 16). It also examined the notion of “baqa,” which is the state of “subsistence” in God after fana (Khanam 120). It explored on the different waystations, investigating the essence of the waystations themselves, but also related the waystations to the broader arc of the Sufi spiritual path. Once the Sufi spiritual path and the nature of advancement on that path were sufficiently expounded upon, the essay moved to show how these conceptual frameworks relate to the Sufi view of the self. The philosophical work of Ibn Arabi was the primary source which was explored in order to flesh out how the Sufis viewed the true self

Fundamentally, this essay argued that the nature of the spiritual path, tariqa, in Sufism and the way one advances on that path reveals that the classical Sufis ultimately viewed the true self as a pure channel for God’s presence in the world and that the self-as-distinct-from-God is, in the final analysis, an illusion.

The author of this essay hopes that his work has borne a fruitful contribution to Sufi discussions on the spiritual path and the nature of the self.

Works Cited

Al-Suhrawardi, Abu al-Najib. A Sufi Rule for Novices. Translated by Menahem Milson, Harvard Univ. Press, 1975.

Izutsu, Toshihiko. Sufism and Taoism: A Comparative Study of Key Philosophical Concepts. University of California Press, 2016.

Karamustafa, Ahmet T. Sufism: The Formative Period. University of California Press, 2007.

Khanam, Farida. Sufism: An Introduction. Goodword Books, 2006.

Sells, Michael Anthony. Early Islamic Mysticism: Sufi, Qur'an, Miʻraj, Poetic and Theological Writings. Suhail Academy, 2004.