Malāma is blame, and the Malāmatī is the person who accepts it. Al-Hujwīrī gives the subject a short chapter of its own, the sixth in the Kashf al-Maḥjūb. It starts from a distinction that most later writing blurs:
Now blame (malámat) is of three kinds: it may result (1) from following the right way (malámat-i rást raftan), or (2) from an intentional act (malámat-i qaṣd kardan), or (3) from abandonment of the law (malámat-i tark kardan).
In the first case, he says, “a man is blamed who minds his own business and performs his religious duties and does not omit any practice of devotion: he is entirely indifferent to the behaviour of the people towards him.” He is not seeking blame; it comes to him because he is not seeking praise.
The second kind is the one the Malāmatiyya are known for. A man finds he is “greatly honoured by the people and pointed out among them,” and his heart begins to lean on that honour. To free himself, he “purposely incurs their blame by committing some act which is offensive to them but which is no violation of the law.” The condition matters: the offence is to opinion, never to the law. Al-Hujwīrī adds one of the strongest claims in the chapter, that this is a distinction peculiar to the Sufis:
This sect (the Ṣúfís) are distinguished above all creatures in the universe by choosing to be blamed in the body on account of the welfare of their souls
A later passage supports the same idea from a different angle. He quotes Ḥamdūn al-Qaṣṣār, whose doctrine he describes as “the manifestation and divulgation of ‘blame’”: “God’s knowledge of thee is better than men’s knowledge,” and explains that “thy preoccupation with men is the greatest veil between thee and God.” (Chapter XIV)
The third kind is where al-Hujwīrī is severe. A man who drops the law and says he is following the way of blame is simply wrong:
He who abandons the law and commits an irreligious act, and says that he is following the rule of “blame”, is guilty of manifest wrong and wickedness and self-indulgence.
He describes meeting one such person. The man committed a wicked act and said he had done it for the sake of blame; a bystander called it nonsense, and the man sighed. Al-Hujwīrī’s reply is brisk: “If you claim to be a Malámatí and are firm in your belief, this gentleman’s disapproval of what you have done ought to encourage you to persevere.” The point, he says, is that the claim needs proof, “and the proof consists in observing the Sunna.” He also notes a deeper irony in the whole business: “one must already have gained popularity before deliberately acting in such a way as to make the people reject him; otherwise, his making himself unpopular is a mere pretext for winning popularity.”
The same wariness appears in the Awārif, where Suhrawardī warns that anyone who claims wajd and ḥāl without having received them is committing “the essence of hypocrisy and of sin” (Chapter V). Together the texts mark the line between a freedom the Sufi earns and a licence he only claims. Related entries: Khirqa and Murīd (where blame and dress meet), Nafs and Rūḥ (the lower soul that love of praise feeds), and Faqr.
The passages above are quoted from complete public-domain translations, all of which are free to read here in full.
Read the Kashf al-MaḥjūbRead the Awārif al-Maʿārif