Her approach was egalitarian with regards to gender, and she expanded many areas of Islamic practice into realms they hadn’t gone before. Her self-annihilation to achieve divine union went much further than Islamic practice normally did; her asceticism and withdrawal from the world were extreme paths not expected of everyday Muslims.  Most controversial I’d say is the notion of love that’s so great and so pure that even heaven as reward or hell as punishment were ideas that took away from pure love of the Creator – that even that could be idolatry.  She certainly seems situated, from a Christian mystic point of view, in a position whereby she could almost be swapped with one of several Christian mystics and be very similar, lending possible credence to a notion of ‘mystics’ as a justifiable knowledge category.  What I would like to know better is in which ways does she fit from a uniquely Islamic perspective that has little/no overlap with other mystics? 

Her approach was egalitarian with regards to gender, and she expanded many areas of Islamic practice into realms they hadn’t gone before. Her self-annihilation to achieve divine union went much further than Islamic practice normally did; her asceticism and withdrawal from the world were extreme paths not expected of everyday Muslims.

Most controversial I’d say is the notion of love that’s so great and so pure that even heaven as reward or hell as punishment were ideas that took away from pure love of the Creator – that even that could be idolatry.

She certainly seems situated, from a Christian mystic point of view, in a position whereby she could almost be swapped with one of several Christian mystics and be very similar, lending possible credence to a notion of ‘mystics’ as a justifiable knowledge category.

What I would like to know better is in which ways does she fit from a uniquely Islamic perspective that has little/no overlap with other mystics?

[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]