إشكالية الجمع بين الشريعة و الحقيقة عند الصوفية: أحمد زروق نموذجا

الملخص EN

Through this research, the researcher sought to address the issue of the relationship between Sharia and truth from Sheikh Ahmad Zarrouk's perspective.

after the historical introduction, through which he presented the biography of Sheikh Zarrouk and the debate, the researcher touched upon the understanding of the meaning of the Sharia and the truth in their linguistic and idiomatic aspects.

then we touched upon the issue.

the discussion presented the entirety of what Sheikh Zarrouk mentioned about the issue, based on the texts of Zarrouk from the writing of establishing the rules and principles and achieving benefits for those with access in matters more generalized by Sufism and its aspects of recognition called in short the rules of Sufism and evidence of recognition, and in the truth of the relationship between Sharia and truth, Sheikh Zarrouk says what the meaning is that the monotheistic truth is a throne, and the purified law is the seat of that throne, and the rights preferred are their heavens and the psychological lines are their land, Every truth that is not accompanied by the Sharia is not a lesson for its owner, and every law that is not supported by the truth has no perfection, but the collection appears when considering, and it follows the details of rights.

the researcher concluded for many results, the most important of which are the following: first: the main disagreement between the jurists and Sufis is caused by the two parties lack of understanding of each other.

jurisprudence deals with matters of acts of worship and transactions, which are actions of the outward and ruling on them.

it draws its provisions and rules from the same source.

the main source is the Book and the Sunnah of the Prophet-the Sharia, with different methods and means used by each of them.

Second: what was presented by Sheikh Ahmed Zarrouk in his treatment of the issue of the relationship between Sharia and truth, jurisprudence and mysticism, it is tantamount to unification and union between them.

rather, he explained through what he presented, that there is no dispute between them at all, and that the relationship between them is a relationship of consensus and not disagreement.

jurisprudence.