On the necessity of a master, according to Ibn Khaldun

By Rédaction soufisme.org · August 6, 2021 · 13 min read

Contents

On Ibn Khaldun’s work “The satisfactory answer to the one who seeks to elucidate the questions” (Shifa’ as-sa’il li-tahdhib al-masa’il)¹.

The Islamic tradition is increasingly assailed by new theories presenting themselves as the true, if not the only possible, Islam. It seems to us crucial to bring out what is authentic in the Islamic tradition, and to return to reliable and undisputed sources in order to find elements of an answer to certain contemporary questions and challenges. Some, for instance, contest the validity of Sufism and reject the notion of the spiritual master, regarding it as a form of associationism². As one might expect, Muslims did not wait for the birth of Wahhabism in the eighteenth century to look into this question in the most detailed and complete manner possible.

Who was Ibn Khaldun?

Around the years 1372-1374, a question was already stirring the believers of Granada, in the heart of Andalusia: to commit oneself to a path as demanding as the one whose sole aim is “the search for the Face of God”, is it indispensable to place oneself under the direction of a spiritual guide? Or can one guide oneself, and for that purpose be content with using, individually, the books (numerous, for that matter) dealing with these subjects?

To settle the question, the opinion of two scholars of Fez was sought, Abu-l-’Abbas Ahmad ibn Qasim al-Qabbab and Ibn ’Abbad of Ronda. A manuscript was drawn up and faithfully recorded the discussion and the arguments exchanged. Ibn Khaldun, who was staying in Fez at the time, also brought his contribution to the debate, and it went well beyond the question posed: for this contribution dealt not only with the question of the guide, but also constituted a genuine little treatise on the nature and evolution of Sufism. We propose to present this treatise here, and more particularly the part devoted to the notion of the guide.

’Abd ar-Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn Khaldun was born in Tunisia in 1332 of the Christian era. He served as an official at the Merinid court in Fez, before being obliged to settle in Spain. He then returned to North Africa, to Bougie first, then to Fez again. He later settled in Egypt, in the service of the Mamluk sultan, where he became the grand qadi of the Maliki rite. He died there in 1406.

Ibn Khaldun is regarded by Muslims and by those who study Islamic civilisation as the initiator and founding father of a strange science, unknown until then, which was later called sociology. He is also a jurist, a philosopher, a historian who has no equivalent in the history of Muslim countries. He is a scholar regarded as combining the rigour, the pragmatism, the complete absence of dogmatism and the purest rationality that Islamic civilisation could “produce”. His two main works are the Muqaddima, a monumental treatise on historical philosophy and sociology, and the Kitab al-’Ibar, a treatise on world history (from the ancient Persian and Roman civilisations down to his contemporaries).

Ibn Khaldun’s treatise

Ibn Khaldun’s treatise concerning the relation between the spiritual path and the divine Law is entitled The Satisfactory Answer to the One Who Seeks to Elucidate the Questions. It comprises five parts.

The first states that in Islam the divine prescriptions are of two types: those relating to the body and those relating to the heart. Ibn Khaldun defines the Sufis as those who attach greater importance to the prescriptions relating to the heart, without for all that neglecting those relating to the body.

The second part of the treatise distinguishes the three degrees of the inner struggle³ against one’s own passions:

the struggle for piety (mujahadat at-taqwa), which corresponds to the struggle for the salvation of the soul;
the struggle for rectitude (mujahadat al-istiqama), which corresponds to the quest for happiness and for the highest degrees of the ultimate abode;
finally, the struggle for the lifting of the veil (mujahadat al-kashf wa-l-ittila’), which corresponds to the search for knowledge of divine things through the lifting of the veil separating the being from the divine vision, allowing direct contemplation from this life below.

The third part of the treatise chiefly endeavours to explain the progressive narrowing of the meaning of the term “Sufism” to the last type of spiritual struggle, the one aiming at the lifting of the veil and divine contemplation.

In the fourth part, Ibn Khaldun takes up the account of the discussion in which he took part at Fez, and comments on the arguments and justifications that were exchanged.

Finally, the fifth part is devoted to the question of the necessity of the spiritual guide (shaykh). It is on this part that the rest of our presentation will bear. Ibn Khaldun first establishes that the need for the guide or spiritual master differs according to which of the inner struggles mentioned above the aspirant has in view.

The cases in which a guide is necessary

In the case of the struggle for piety, it suffices, according to the author, to know the precepts and decrees of God. For that, one can be content either with drawing from books, or with learning them from a teacher. A greater perfection is nevertheless attained by following the teachings of a “guide-teacher” (shaykh mu’allim). In this respect, the example is given by the Prophet, may God’s peace and blessings be upon him, who learnt to pray by following the archangel Gabriel’s teaching in deeds. Thereafter, when tribes came to see the Prophet to learn the prescriptions of the Law, he sent them to the companions so that they could see with their own eyes the approach to follow. Ibn Khaldun concludes at this point that the spiritual guide is not necessary. He considers nonetheless that following one allows one to travel the path more easily and more perfectly.

In the case of the struggle for rectitude, the aspirant must adopt the behaviour and morals prescribed by the Qur’an and practised by the Prophet. It is strongly recommended, according to Ibn Khaldun, to have recourse to a guide and to regulate one’s conduct on that of this guide, for he knows the possible pitfalls along the way. Since this approach follows the very explicit prescriptions of the Qur’an and the sunna, the guide is nevertheless not an absolute necessity. Even without a guide, then, if the aspirant remains firmly attached to the sunna, he may hope to stay safe from the dangers strewn along this path.

Finally, in the case of the struggle which aims at the lifting of the veil and the direct perception of the spiritual world, a “guide-teacher-educator” is necessary. Without the help of this kind of guide, it is generally impossible to reach the intended goal, and this for four major reasons:

The Islamic Law (shari’a) constitutes a way⁴ common to the use of all believers, with a view to obtaining salvation and happiness after death; the struggle against the inclinations of one’s soul (mujahada or jihad an-nafs), for its part, is a way destined for people moved by particular spiritual aspirations and demands. These aspirations incline one to desire the germ of supreme happiness before death, through that lifting, here below, of the veil which ordinarily falls with death. This spiritual demand thus has all the makings of a particular shari’a, possessing its own statutes and its own code of propriety, in which one imitates no one but those who laid it down and put it into practice as a rule of conduct. Now, all the scholars agree in considering the spiritual master a required condition for committing oneself to this path and travelling it. All warn against the danger of walking it autonomously and finding oneself alone in one’s inner desert. They make it an obligation for the mystical traveller to place the reins of his spiritual life in the hands of a guide who has already travelled this road and reached the goal sought, namely divine contemplation, having learnt to know the obstacles and the ambushes of the journey thanks to his own irreplaceable experience, and not by inheriting the information from third parties. The scholars of tasawwuf⁵ even recommend that the disciple place himself in the hands of the guide as the corpse in the hands of the one who washes it, and as the blind man walking along the edge of a precipice, held by the hand of the one who leads him.
The second reason for the necessity of the master in the spiritual struggle is that choosing this kind of path entails two conditions: one depending on one’s own efforts, the other escaping one’s action. The first condition relates to ridding oneself of blameworthy character traits and purifying oneself by adorning oneself with virtuous traits. The other condition concerns the spiritual states which occur before, during and after the lifting of the veil. Now these spiritual states, which are the fruit of qualities acquired through works, depend on one another and are linked in an unbroken chain up to the station of contemplation. So if one of these states is corrupted, that entails the corruption of the following states; the damage grows and becomes irreparable. There is no way of ridding oneself of these negative states by willpower alone. It can only be done under the direction of a guide who knows how to discern between what is sound and what is unsound in spiritual states, who knows what favours spiritual progress and what hinders or interrupts it, who knows how spiritual states independent of the will are the consequence of voluntary acts. Under the guide’s direction, the disciple is thus safe and can escape the dangers strewn along this path.
The third reason for the necessity of the master lies in the profound meaning of this path, which induces a “death” by anticipation; that is, this spiritual path allows one to extinguish all the bodily passions and to vivify the spirit, thus drawing close to real death. In this way the disciple will be able to be graced with the spiritual state proper to natural death, and to plunge his gaze into the beyond before physical death occurs. This approach finds its source in the Prophet’s saying: “Die before you die.” For every teaching, one imitates a thing or a natural manifestation; in this case, it is death. Because of the mystery surrounding the laws of nature, and concerning death in particular, it is necessary to have recourse to a “guide-teacher-educator” who directs the aspirant into the most mysterious recesses of this discipline. Without a guide, the disciple can draw no profit from the asceticism he practises.
Finally, the necessity of the master is justified by the realities the aspirant confronts on the path. These realities are of two kinds. The first category belongs to the domain of things known by the majority and able to be recorded in books: it is the concrete form of the journey. The second kind of reality is not of the order of commonly admitted things: these realities belong neither to the domain of the senses, nor to that of reason or of the acquired sciences. They are the province of spiritual taste and intimate experience. They can only be spoken of by allusions. They cannot be codified scientifically or in technical terms. These realities manifest themselves to the traveller in the form of states, inspirations, sudden suggestions or ecstatic emotions, from the beginning of the journey to its fulfilment. These realities constitute the central point, the profound truth of the path without which nothing can be realised. That is why, as long as the traveller cannot distinguish among these different kinds of experience what makes him progress from what obstructs him, the efforts he makes are in vain and his goal is not realised. And neither books nor precise formulations will procure him that knowledge.

Ibn Khaldun concludes, at the end of his analysis of these reasons, that the aspirant aiming at the lifting of the veil separating him from divine contemplation cannot do without the guidance and discernment of a true master.

The same conclusion in the Emir Abdelkader

Ibn Khaldun is not the only eminent scholar to conclude that the master is necessary. The Emir Abdelkader, a great Sufi, reached the same conclusion when commenting, in one of his letters (mawqif)⁶, on this verse of the Qur’an: “O you who believe! Fear Allah, and seek a means of approach to Him, and strive on His path: perhaps you will attain success!” (Qur’an 5:35). We reproduce here an extract from that letter.

First of all, God commands the believers to practise the fear of Him (taqwa). This corresponds to what, among us, is called the station of repentance, which is the basis of all progress on the path and the key for reaching the “station of realisation”. God then tells us: “and seek a means of approach to Him”. That means is the master whose initiatic lineage is without defect, who has a true knowledge of the path, of the deficiencies that obstruct it and of the illnesses that prevent one from reaching gnosis, who possesses a proven science of therapeutics, of temperamental dispositions and of the remedies that are suitable. There is absolute unanimity among the people of God that, on the path and in gnosis, a “means of approach” (wasila), that is, a master, is indispensable. Books in no way allow one to do without him, at least once supernatural inspirations (al-waridat), the flashes of theophanies and spiritual events occur, and it then becomes necessary to explain to the disciple what in all that must be accepted or rejected, what is sound and what is flawed. By contrast, at the very beginning of the path, he can be content with books dealing with pious behaviour and with the spiritual struggle in its most general sense. “And strive on the path”: this is a command to fight after having found a master. It is a special holy war, waged under the command of a master and according to the rules he prescribes. No trust can be placed in the spiritual struggle waged in the absence of a master, save in very exceptional cases, for there is no single holy war conducted in a single way: beings’ dispositions vary, their temperaments differ greatly from one another, and a thing that profits one may harm another.