Is the Sufism of historical figures such as Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi and Muhammad al-Fatih considered evidence of the validity of the Sufi methodology? And was their Sufism similar to that of contemporary Sufis in terms of innovations, especially since some rely on the hadith, "What a magnificent leader that leader is, and what a magnificent army that army is," as proof of this?

A distinction is made between the emergence of the term "Sufism" as a name, which appeared after the virtuous generations, and Sufism as a path of ethics and asceticism in worship, which appeared in the first Hijri century and was influenced by narrations transmitted from the People of the Book. Sufism developed historically, acquiring scholars specialized in rectifying the heart and conduct. It also incorporated components of Gnostic and pantheistic philosophies, as well as innovative and idolatrous practices. Thus, it evolved into four types: Sunni Sufism, innovative (bid'i) Sufism, polytheistic (shirki) Sufism, and philosophical Sufism.

Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror was a Sufi of the Mawlawi order and built a tomb and a mosque over the grave of Abu Ayyub al-Ansari, which is among the transgressions of innovative Sufism. A Muslim should know that the best of speech is the speech of Allah, and the best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad, peace be upon him, and the best of generations is the generation of the Prophet. A Muslim individual combines good deeds and bad deeds. One who knows what they love about a person should not love that person absolutely and disregard their flaws, nor the inverse.

As for the hadith, "Constantinople will certainly be conquered, and how excellent the leader who conquers it, and how excellent the army that conquers it," it is weak. However, the conquest of Constantinople whose praise is authentically established in the Sunnah is the conquest of the End of Times, which will occur through "La ilaha illa Allah, Allahu Akbar."