Suavi, Ali
Suavi, Ali (1838/1839-1878). A popular reformist figure of the nineteenth century Ottoman Empire. Suavi exemplifies the ideas of conservative Ottomans who were drawn into a struggle for the expression of the popular will. Although trained in the modern educational system of the rusdiye, the secular post-primary schools established during the Tanzimat reforms, he assumed the role of a spokesperson for a type of popular discontent with the Tanzimat which was expressed in a religious idiom. His ideas acquired a wide audience when he began to contribute to a newspaper published in Istanbul, Muhbir.
Suavi joined the Young Ottoman leaders Mehmet Namik Kemal and Mehmet Ziya Pasa when they fled to Europe, and he was the editor of the first newspaper published by these exiles, also titled Muhbir. It soon became clear that there were fundamental differences between his political ideals and those of Kemal and Ziya. Suavi was suspicious of parliamentary government, and his idea of democracy was one in which the just ruler dealt directly with his subjects. After leaving the Young Ottomans, Suavi devoted himself to the publication of Ulum, an encyclopedic periodical. This attempt to demonstrate that conservative Muslims like himself could keep abreast of Western scientific knowledge predated that of better known nineteenth century Muslim thinkers, such as Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1838/39-1897), who wrote in the same vein.
Returning from France, where he had established himself after the dethroning of Sultan Abdulaziz (1876), he was made the director of the Galatasary Lycee, a school for training the Ottoman elite in conformity with a French program of instruction. He was dismissed owing to his incompetence. Abdulaziz’s successor, Murad V, had a short reign, having been found mentally unbalanced. In 1878, Suavi attempted to reestablish Murad, but was killed during the coup that he organized.
Suavi’s populism was bolstered by an Islamic conception of politics that underscores the differences between his worldview and that of the Young Ottomans. Suavi found Kemal’s principle of popular sovereignty to be meaningless. In response to the Young Ottoman’s separation of powers, he proposed the“unity of the imamate,” referring to all forms of leadership. Suavi also believed that violence was a legitimate means of achieving the just political system. Here, too, he was at odds with Kemal. Suavi believed that the natural social hierarchy was one where the ‘ulama’ occupied a position of arbiter of socio-political regulations. This type of elitism coexisting with a sincere populism provides us a model of the ideas that were to appear much later in the thought of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1902-1989) and underlines the necessity to see Islamic social ideals as incommensurable with those of Western democracy. Suavi’s literary style was also a harbinger of “pure” Turkish to be used increasingly in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. He was one of the first persons to explore the original identity of Ottomans as “Turks” in a well-known article that appeared in his Ulum, published in Europe after his split with the Young Ottomans.
Ali Suavi worked as a teacher at Bursa elementary school and preached at Sehzade Mosque in Istanbul. He was a writer at Philip Efendi’s newspaper Muhbir and he worked in different positions at offices in Simav, Plovdiv and Sofia. He was a member of the Young Ottomans and was the editor of its official journal. He was exiled to Kastamonu because of his writings against the Abd-ul-Aziz.
Ali Suavi was one the first modern Turks to die in the pursuit of democratic ideals. Originally trained in religious sciences, Suavi was an Islamic radical who was placed in charge of the first Young Ottoman publication to appear in Europe, Muhbir. The publication eventually became an embarrassment to the Young Ottomans, after Kemal and Ziya requested that Suavi remove the Young Ottoman association with the publication. Suavi drifted around with his bitterness against the Young Ottomans growing, eventually leading him to begin publishing a periodical that lambasted Young Ottomans and Ottoman Statesmen together as enemies of the people.
After Abdulhamid became sultan, Ali attempted a coup in 1878, in an attempt to end the increasing authoritarianism and re-install Murad V, who had been sympathetic to liberal ideals. The coup failed and Ali Suavi was killed in the attempt.
Interestingly, the writings of Ali Suavi showed great respect to the institution of the Sultan. He called for reform to be pushed through from above by a hero of the Ottomans who had fought to save its land. Unfortunately for Ali this hero figure was not to appear until after his death with the emergence of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Also, as history shows, Ataturk did not come to share Ali’s view of Islam and secularism.
The works of Ali Suavi include:
* A Propos de L'Herzegovine (Regarding Herzegovina, 1876),
* Ali Paşa'nın Siyaseti (The Politics of Ali Paşa, 1908),
* Defter-i Âmâl-i Ali Paşa (Defter-i Amal-i of Ali Paşa),
* Devlet Yüz On Altı Buçuk Milyon Borçtan Kurtuluyor (The Government Gets Out of a One Hundred and Sixteen and a Half Million Debt, 1875).
* Hive (Hive, 1873),
* Hukuku'ş-Şevari (Ways of the Law, translation from Gazali, 1808),
* Montenegro (Montenegro, 1876),
* Nesayih-i Ebu Hanife Kamusu'l Ulûm ve'l Maârif (Nesayih-i Ebu Hanife, Dictionary of Science and *Education, an unfinished essay of encyclopedia, 1870),
* Saydu'l Mefkûd (The Lost Prey, 2 volumes),
* Taharriyat-ı Suavi alâ Tarih-i Türk (The Research of Suavi on Turkish History),
* Usul-i Fıkıh Nam Risalenin Tercümesi (Translation of the Pamphlet named Methodology of the Canon Law, 1868).
Ali Suavi see Suavi, Ali
Suavi joined the Young Ottoman leaders Mehmet Namik Kemal and Mehmet Ziya Pasa when they fled to Europe, and he was the editor of the first newspaper published by these exiles, also titled Muhbir. It soon became clear that there were fundamental differences between his political ideals and those of Kemal and Ziya. Suavi was suspicious of parliamentary government, and his idea of democracy was one in which the just ruler dealt directly with his subjects. After leaving the Young Ottomans, Suavi devoted himself to the publication of Ulum, an encyclopedic periodical. This attempt to demonstrate that conservative Muslims like himself could keep abreast of Western scientific knowledge predated that of better known nineteenth century Muslim thinkers, such as Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1838/39-1897), who wrote in the same vein.
Returning from France, where he had established himself after the dethroning of Sultan Abdulaziz (1876), he was made the director of the Galatasary Lycee, a school for training the Ottoman elite in conformity with a French program of instruction. He was dismissed owing to his incompetence. Abdulaziz’s successor, Murad V, had a short reign, having been found mentally unbalanced. In 1878, Suavi attempted to reestablish Murad, but was killed during the coup that he organized.
Suavi’s populism was bolstered by an Islamic conception of politics that underscores the differences between his worldview and that of the Young Ottomans. Suavi found Kemal’s principle of popular sovereignty to be meaningless. In response to the Young Ottoman’s separation of powers, he proposed the“unity of the imamate,” referring to all forms of leadership. Suavi also believed that violence was a legitimate means of achieving the just political system. Here, too, he was at odds with Kemal. Suavi believed that the natural social hierarchy was one where the ‘ulama’ occupied a position of arbiter of socio-political regulations. This type of elitism coexisting with a sincere populism provides us a model of the ideas that were to appear much later in the thought of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1902-1989) and underlines the necessity to see Islamic social ideals as incommensurable with those of Western democracy. Suavi’s literary style was also a harbinger of “pure” Turkish to be used increasingly in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. He was one of the first persons to explore the original identity of Ottomans as “Turks” in a well-known article that appeared in his Ulum, published in Europe after his split with the Young Ottomans.
Ali Suavi worked as a teacher at Bursa elementary school and preached at Sehzade Mosque in Istanbul. He was a writer at Philip Efendi’s newspaper Muhbir and he worked in different positions at offices in Simav, Plovdiv and Sofia. He was a member of the Young Ottomans and was the editor of its official journal. He was exiled to Kastamonu because of his writings against the Abd-ul-Aziz.
Ali Suavi was one the first modern Turks to die in the pursuit of democratic ideals. Originally trained in religious sciences, Suavi was an Islamic radical who was placed in charge of the first Young Ottoman publication to appear in Europe, Muhbir. The publication eventually became an embarrassment to the Young Ottomans, after Kemal and Ziya requested that Suavi remove the Young Ottoman association with the publication. Suavi drifted around with his bitterness against the Young Ottomans growing, eventually leading him to begin publishing a periodical that lambasted Young Ottomans and Ottoman Statesmen together as enemies of the people.
After Abdulhamid became sultan, Ali attempted a coup in 1878, in an attempt to end the increasing authoritarianism and re-install Murad V, who had been sympathetic to liberal ideals. The coup failed and Ali Suavi was killed in the attempt.
Interestingly, the writings of Ali Suavi showed great respect to the institution of the Sultan. He called for reform to be pushed through from above by a hero of the Ottomans who had fought to save its land. Unfortunately for Ali this hero figure was not to appear until after his death with the emergence of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Also, as history shows, Ataturk did not come to share Ali’s view of Islam and secularism.
The works of Ali Suavi include:
* A Propos de L'Herzegovine (Regarding Herzegovina, 1876),
* Ali Paşa'nın Siyaseti (The Politics of Ali Paşa, 1908),
* Defter-i Âmâl-i Ali Paşa (Defter-i Amal-i of Ali Paşa),
* Devlet Yüz On Altı Buçuk Milyon Borçtan Kurtuluyor (The Government Gets Out of a One Hundred and Sixteen and a Half Million Debt, 1875).
* Hive (Hive, 1873),
* Hukuku'ş-Şevari (Ways of the Law, translation from Gazali, 1808),
* Montenegro (Montenegro, 1876),
* Nesayih-i Ebu Hanife Kamusu'l Ulûm ve'l Maârif (Nesayih-i Ebu Hanife, Dictionary of Science and *Education, an unfinished essay of encyclopedia, 1870),
* Saydu'l Mefkûd (The Lost Prey, 2 volumes),
* Taharriyat-ı Suavi alâ Tarih-i Türk (The Research of Suavi on Turkish History),
* Usul-i Fıkıh Nam Risalenin Tercümesi (Translation of the Pamphlet named Methodology of the Canon Law, 1868).
Ali Suavi see Suavi, Ali
Subandrio
Subandrio (Soebandrio) (September 15, 1914 - July 3, 2004). Indonesian politician and diplomat. After medical training and a brief career in the Partai Sosialis Indonesia (PSI), Dr. Subandrio was posted to London in 1947 as Indonesian official representative and later ambassador. He jointed the Partai Nasional Indonesia (PNI) in 1957 and served as foreign minister from 1957 to 1966. He was an architect of the so-called Jakarta-Beijing Axis. From 1963, he was deputy prime minister and was associated with the shift to the left that occurred during the later years of Sukarno’s Guided Democracy. Arrested in March 1966, Subandrio was tried in October, convicted of participation in the 1965 Gestapu coup, and sentenced to death.
Subandrio was born in Malang, East Java, and educated at the Sekolah Tinggi Kedokteran Jakarta (GHS) in Jakarta. As a medical student, he was active in the movement for independence. During World War II, while practicing medicine, he worked with anti-Japanese resistance forces. After the war, he was appointed secretary-general of the information ministry.
After 1945 Subandrio became a supporter of the nationalist leader Sukarno, and was sent as Sukarno's special envoy to Europe, establishing an information office in London in 1947. From 1954 to 1956, he was ambassador to the Soviet Union. During this time, he developed strong left wing views, although he was never a Communist as later alleged.
In 1956, Sukarno recalled him to Jakarta to become secretary-general of the foreign ministry, and then Foreign Minister. In 1960 he was also made Second Deputy Prime Minister, and in 1962 he was appointed Minister for Foreign Economic Relations. He held all three posts, and also acted as intelligence chief, until 1966.
Subandrio was the main architect of Indonesia's left-wing foreign policy during this period, including the alliance with the People's Republic of China and the policy of "Confrontation" with Malaysia, which created great hostility between Indonesia and the western powers, particularly the United States and the United Kingdom.
On September 30, 1965, a group of army officers, allegedly supported by the powerful Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI), attacked a part of the Army leadership that was supposedly plotting to overthrow Sukarno. Six Army generals were killed but the alleged "coup attempt" failed. In the resulting anti-Communist backlash the conservative General Suharto took control of the government. Sukarno tried to retain Subandrio in the cabinet, but in 1966 he was forced to agree to his dismissal.
Subandrio was sentenced to death by the Extraordinary Military Court on charges of being involved in the "30th of September Movement," although there was no real evidence that Subandrio knew of the plot in advance or played any part in it (he was in Sumatra at the time). This sentence was afterwards reduced to life imprisonment. He served until 1995, when he was released due to ill health. He died in Jakarta in 2004.
Soebandrio see Subandrio
Subandrio (Soebandrio) (September 15, 1914 - July 3, 2004). Indonesian politician and diplomat. After medical training and a brief career in the Partai Sosialis Indonesia (PSI), Dr. Subandrio was posted to London in 1947 as Indonesian official representative and later ambassador. He jointed the Partai Nasional Indonesia (PNI) in 1957 and served as foreign minister from 1957 to 1966. He was an architect of the so-called Jakarta-Beijing Axis. From 1963, he was deputy prime minister and was associated with the shift to the left that occurred during the later years of Sukarno’s Guided Democracy. Arrested in March 1966, Subandrio was tried in October, convicted of participation in the 1965 Gestapu coup, and sentenced to death.
Subandrio was born in Malang, East Java, and educated at the Sekolah Tinggi Kedokteran Jakarta (GHS) in Jakarta. As a medical student, he was active in the movement for independence. During World War II, while practicing medicine, he worked with anti-Japanese resistance forces. After the war, he was appointed secretary-general of the information ministry.
After 1945 Subandrio became a supporter of the nationalist leader Sukarno, and was sent as Sukarno's special envoy to Europe, establishing an information office in London in 1947. From 1954 to 1956, he was ambassador to the Soviet Union. During this time, he developed strong left wing views, although he was never a Communist as later alleged.
In 1956, Sukarno recalled him to Jakarta to become secretary-general of the foreign ministry, and then Foreign Minister. In 1960 he was also made Second Deputy Prime Minister, and in 1962 he was appointed Minister for Foreign Economic Relations. He held all three posts, and also acted as intelligence chief, until 1966.
Subandrio was the main architect of Indonesia's left-wing foreign policy during this period, including the alliance with the People's Republic of China and the policy of "Confrontation" with Malaysia, which created great hostility between Indonesia and the western powers, particularly the United States and the United Kingdom.
On September 30, 1965, a group of army officers, allegedly supported by the powerful Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI), attacked a part of the Army leadership that was supposedly plotting to overthrow Sukarno. Six Army generals were killed but the alleged "coup attempt" failed. In the resulting anti-Communist backlash the conservative General Suharto took control of the government. Sukarno tried to retain Subandrio in the cabinet, but in 1966 he was forced to agree to his dismissal.
Subandrio was sentenced to death by the Extraordinary Military Court on charges of being involved in the "30th of September Movement," although there was no real evidence that Subandrio knew of the plot in advance or played any part in it (he was in Sumatra at the time). This sentence was afterwards reduced to life imprisonment. He served until 1995, when he was released due to ill health. He died in Jakarta in 2004.
Soebandrio see Subandrio
Subki
Subki. Name of a large family of Shafi‘i scholars and judges in Egypt from the fourteenth through the twentieth centuries. The name of origin is derived from the place Subk in the region of Memphis.
Subki. Name of a large family of Shafi‘i scholars and judges in Egypt from the fourteenth through the twentieth centuries. The name of origin is derived from the place Subk in the region of Memphis.
successors
successors (in Arabic, tabi’un). Term used for those Muslims who belong to the generation coming after that of the Companions of the Prophet.
The Tābi‘ūn (Arabic: "Followers") are the generation of Muslims who were born after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, but who were contemporaries of the Sahaba "Companions". As such, they played an important part in the development of Islamic thought and philosophy, and in the political development of the early Caliphate. In particular, they played a vital role in the partition in the Islamic community between Sunni and Shia Muslims. To this day, interpretations of their behavior and characters are highly controversial.
Muslims from the Sunni branch of Islam define a Tabi‘i as a Muslim who:
1. Saw at least one of the Companions of Muhammad.
2. Was rightly guided (according to the Sunni, one who adheres to the beliefs and actions of the Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jama'ah).
3. One who died in that state. A good example to explain would be the Khawarij. They saw many of Muhammad's companions but still were not referred to as Tabi‘un, as they were not rightly guided (held by both Shia and Sunni Muslims).
Sunni Muslims also regard the Tabi‘un as the best generation after the Sahaba. According to Sunni Muslims, Muhammad said: "The best people are those living in my generation, then those coming after them, and then those coming after (the second generation)".
A list of Tabi‘includes:
* `Abd-Allah ibn Amr
* `Abd-Allah ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah
* `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Abdillah (son of ibn `Abdullah ibn `Umar)
* Abu Hanifa an-Nu‘man
* Abu Muslim al-Khawlani
* Abu Zur'ah
* Al-Hassan al-Basri (130-180 A.H.)
* Al-Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah (d. 100 A.H.)
* Alqama ibn Qays al-Nakha'i
* Al-Qasim ibn Muhammad ibn Abî Bakr (d. 103 A.H.)
* `Atâ' ibn Abî Rabah (d. 106 A.H.)
* `Atâ' ibn Yasar (d. 106 A.H.)
* Habib al-`Ajami(ar)
* Ibn Jurayj
* Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri (d. 124 A.H.)
* Masruq ibn al-Ajda' (d. 103 A.H.)
* Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr
* Mujahid ibn Jabr
* Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab (d. 93 A.H.)
* Ubayd-Allah ibn Abd-Allah (d. 98 A.H.)
* Urwah ibn al-Zubayr (d. 94 A.H.)
* Zayd ibn Ali (d. 740 C.C. (122 A.H.))
tabi'un see successors
followers see successors
successors (in Arabic, tabi’un). Term used for those Muslims who belong to the generation coming after that of the Companions of the Prophet.
The Tābi‘ūn (Arabic: "Followers") are the generation of Muslims who were born after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, but who were contemporaries of the Sahaba "Companions". As such, they played an important part in the development of Islamic thought and philosophy, and in the political development of the early Caliphate. In particular, they played a vital role in the partition in the Islamic community between Sunni and Shia Muslims. To this day, interpretations of their behavior and characters are highly controversial.
Muslims from the Sunni branch of Islam define a Tabi‘i as a Muslim who:
1. Saw at least one of the Companions of Muhammad.
2. Was rightly guided (according to the Sunni, one who adheres to the beliefs and actions of the Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jama'ah).
3. One who died in that state. A good example to explain would be the Khawarij. They saw many of Muhammad's companions but still were not referred to as Tabi‘un, as they were not rightly guided (held by both Shia and Sunni Muslims).
Sunni Muslims also regard the Tabi‘un as the best generation after the Sahaba. According to Sunni Muslims, Muhammad said: "The best people are those living in my generation, then those coming after them, and then those coming after (the second generation)".
A list of Tabi‘includes:
* `Abd-Allah ibn Amr
* `Abd-Allah ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah
* `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Abdillah (son of ibn `Abdullah ibn `Umar)
* Abu Hanifa an-Nu‘man
* Abu Muslim al-Khawlani
* Abu Zur'ah
* Al-Hassan al-Basri (130-180 A.H.)
* Al-Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah (d. 100 A.H.)
* Alqama ibn Qays al-Nakha'i
* Al-Qasim ibn Muhammad ibn Abî Bakr (d. 103 A.H.)
* `Atâ' ibn Abî Rabah (d. 106 A.H.)
* `Atâ' ibn Yasar (d. 106 A.H.)
* Habib al-`Ajami(ar)
* Ibn Jurayj
* Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri (d. 124 A.H.)
* Masruq ibn al-Ajda' (d. 103 A.H.)
* Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr
* Mujahid ibn Jabr
* Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab (d. 93 A.H.)
* Ubayd-Allah ibn Abd-Allah (d. 98 A.H.)
* Urwah ibn al-Zubayr (d. 94 A.H.)
* Zayd ibn Ali (d. 740 C.C. (122 A.H.))
tabi'un see successors
followers see successors
Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al- ('Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi) (Al-Sufi) ('Abd ar-Rahman as-Sufi) ('Abd al-Rahman Abu al-Husayn) ('Abdul Rahman Sufi) ('Abdurrahman Sufi) (Azophi) (December 7, 903 - May 25, 986). One of the two most outstanding practical astronomers of the Middle Ages. Al-Sufi was the first astronomer to describe the “nebulousity” of the nebula in Andromeda in his book of constellations (his Atlas of the Heavens). Al-Sufi named the southern group of stars al-Baqar al-Abyad or the “White Bull” after receiving reports from Arab navigators in the Malay Archipelago. We now know this group of stars as Nubecula Major (the greater Magellanic Cloud).
Al-Sufi prepared charts of the heavens from his own observations and carefully adjudged their magnitudes. His book Kitab al-Kawatib al-Thabit al-Musawwar was a masterpiece on stellar astronomy. The Kitab al-Kawatib is considered important even now for the study of proper motions and long period variables. In it he included Theta Eridani among the 13 brightest stars then known. Ulugh Beg, the grandson of Timur, in 1437 found it to be of the first magnitude in his list of fixed stars. Edmund Halley in his voyage to Saint Helena at the beginning of the eighteenth century saw it as a star of the third magnitude.
Beer and Madler in their famous work Der Mond (1837) named a surface feature of the Moon after Al-Sufi (Azophi). It is a mountainous ring twenty-six miles in diameter.
'Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi was a Persian astronomer who was also known as 'Abd ar-Rahman as-Sufi, 'Abd al-Rahman Abu al-Husayn, 'Abdul Rahman Sufi, or 'Abdurrahman Sufi and was known in the west as Azophi. The lunar crater Azophi and the minor planet 12621 Alsufi are named after him. Al-Sufi published his famous Book of Fixed Stars in 964, describing much of his work, both in textual descriptions and pictures.
Al-Sufi's name implies that he was a Sufi Muslim. He lived at the court of Emir Adud ad-Daula in Isfahan, Persia, and worked on translating and expanding Greek astronomical works, especially the Almagest of Ptolemy. He contributed several corrections to Ptolemy's star list and did his own brightness and magnitude estimates which frequently deviated from those in Ptolemy's work.
Al-Sufi was a major translator into Arabic of the Hellenistic astronomy that had been centered in Alexandria, and was the first to attempt to relate the Greek with the traditional Arabic star names and constellations, which were completely unrelated and overlapped in complicated ways.
Al-Sufi identified the Large Magellanic Cloud, which is visible from Yemen, though not from Isfahan. It was not seen by Europeans until Magellan's voyage in the 16th century. He also made the earliest recorded observation of the Andromeda galaxy in 964; describing it as a "small cloud". These were the first galaxies other than the Milky Way to be observed from Earth.
He observed that the ecliptic plane is inclined with respect to the celestial equator and more accurately calculated the length of the tropical year. He observed and described the stars, their positions, their magnitudes and their color, setting out his results constellation by constellation. For each constellation, he provided two drawings, one from the outside of a celestial globe, and the other from the inside (as seen from the earth).
Al-Sufi also wrote about the astrolabe, finding numerous additional uses for it. He described over 1000 different uses, in areas as diverse as astronomy, astrology, horoscopes, navigation, surveying, timekeeping, Qibla, and Salah prayer.
Since 2006, the Astronomy Society of Iran – Amateur Committee (ASIAC) has held an international Sufi Observing Competition in the memory of Al-Sufi. The first competition was held in 2006 in the north of Semnan Province and the 2nd observing competition was held in the summer of 2008 in Ladiz near the Zahedan. More than 100 observers from Iran and Iraq participated in this event.
'Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
Azophi see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
Sufi, al- see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
'Abd ar-Rahman as-Sufi see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
'Abd al-Rahman Abu al-Husayn see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
'Abdul Rahman Sufi see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al- ('Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi) (Al-Sufi) ('Abd ar-Rahman as-Sufi) ('Abd al-Rahman Abu al-Husayn) ('Abdul Rahman Sufi) ('Abdurrahman Sufi) (Azophi) (December 7, 903 - May 25, 986). One of the two most outstanding practical astronomers of the Middle Ages. Al-Sufi was the first astronomer to describe the “nebulousity” of the nebula in Andromeda in his book of constellations (his Atlas of the Heavens). Al-Sufi named the southern group of stars al-Baqar al-Abyad or the “White Bull” after receiving reports from Arab navigators in the Malay Archipelago. We now know this group of stars as Nubecula Major (the greater Magellanic Cloud).
Al-Sufi prepared charts of the heavens from his own observations and carefully adjudged their magnitudes. His book Kitab al-Kawatib al-Thabit al-Musawwar was a masterpiece on stellar astronomy. The Kitab al-Kawatib is considered important even now for the study of proper motions and long period variables. In it he included Theta Eridani among the 13 brightest stars then known. Ulugh Beg, the grandson of Timur, in 1437 found it to be of the first magnitude in his list of fixed stars. Edmund Halley in his voyage to Saint Helena at the beginning of the eighteenth century saw it as a star of the third magnitude.
Beer and Madler in their famous work Der Mond (1837) named a surface feature of the Moon after Al-Sufi (Azophi). It is a mountainous ring twenty-six miles in diameter.
'Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi was a Persian astronomer who was also known as 'Abd ar-Rahman as-Sufi, 'Abd al-Rahman Abu al-Husayn, 'Abdul Rahman Sufi, or 'Abdurrahman Sufi and was known in the west as Azophi. The lunar crater Azophi and the minor planet 12621 Alsufi are named after him. Al-Sufi published his famous Book of Fixed Stars in 964, describing much of his work, both in textual descriptions and pictures.
Al-Sufi's name implies that he was a Sufi Muslim. He lived at the court of Emir Adud ad-Daula in Isfahan, Persia, and worked on translating and expanding Greek astronomical works, especially the Almagest of Ptolemy. He contributed several corrections to Ptolemy's star list and did his own brightness and magnitude estimates which frequently deviated from those in Ptolemy's work.
Al-Sufi was a major translator into Arabic of the Hellenistic astronomy that had been centered in Alexandria, and was the first to attempt to relate the Greek with the traditional Arabic star names and constellations, which were completely unrelated and overlapped in complicated ways.
Al-Sufi identified the Large Magellanic Cloud, which is visible from Yemen, though not from Isfahan. It was not seen by Europeans until Magellan's voyage in the 16th century. He also made the earliest recorded observation of the Andromeda galaxy in 964; describing it as a "small cloud". These were the first galaxies other than the Milky Way to be observed from Earth.
He observed that the ecliptic plane is inclined with respect to the celestial equator and more accurately calculated the length of the tropical year. He observed and described the stars, their positions, their magnitudes and their color, setting out his results constellation by constellation. For each constellation, he provided two drawings, one from the outside of a celestial globe, and the other from the inside (as seen from the earth).
Al-Sufi also wrote about the astrolabe, finding numerous additional uses for it. He described over 1000 different uses, in areas as diverse as astronomy, astrology, horoscopes, navigation, surveying, timekeeping, Qibla, and Salah prayer.
Since 2006, the Astronomy Society of Iran – Amateur Committee (ASIAC) has held an international Sufi Observing Competition in the memory of Al-Sufi. The first competition was held in 2006 in the north of Semnan Province and the 2nd observing competition was held in the summer of 2008 in Ladiz near the Zahedan. More than 100 observers from Iran and Iraq participated in this event.
'Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
Azophi see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
Sufi, al- see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
'Abd ar-Rahman as-Sufi see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
'Abd al-Rahman Abu al-Husayn see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
'Abdul Rahman Sufi see Sufi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
Sufis
Sufis. Practitioners of Sufism (in Arabic, tasawwuf). The Arabic term refers to the practice of wearing a robe of wool (in Arabic, suf) and denotes the act of devoting oneself to the mystic life.
Sufi is an Arabic term pertaining to Muslim mystics or to their beliefs, practices, or organizations. Sufis are ascetics who wear coarse wool clothing (suf) and are devoted to spiritual life. In the twelfth century, the Sufis, as defenders of Sunni doctrine, were grouped together in the khanaqh and the ribat. Both the Persian darvish (dervish) and the Arabic faqir (both meaning “poor”) are used to describe Sufis, referring to the Sufi way of life.
The term Sufism is the name most often applied to Islamic Mysticism consisting of three overlapping but distinct historical periods: classical, medieval, and modern.
The origins of the Sufi movement are obscure. Some hold that Sufism was intrinsic to primitive Islam, that Muhammad himself was a Sufi, as were his companions and the first four caliphs. There is no doubt that certain Sufi concepts, e.g., faqr (“pious poverty”) and tawakkul (“total reliance on God”), as well as characteristic practices, e.g., dhikr (“constant repetition of the divine name”) and sama (listening to poetry or music), had antecedents dating back to the first century of Islam. More difficult is the task of discerning the complex undercurrents of political and religious ideology that characterized late Umayyad and early ‘Abbasid Islam.
Some members of ascetic protest movements may have been influenced by contact with Zoroastrians, Buddhists, Hindus, and also Monophysite Christians. Christian ascetics, for instance, were known to have worn woolen garments not dissimilar from those which the early Sufis wore and by which they came to be known. Whatever the point of original inspiration, tasawwuf -- Sufism -- in its formative period must have reflected attitudes and activities, rituals and rigors, intrinsic to the geographic locale where the ninth and tenth century masters lived and taught. Thus, Fudayl ibn ‘Iyad of parched Khurasan became renowned for his renunciation of family life, Dhu’l-Nun Misri of temperate Egypt for his lilting summation of ontological polarities, Abu Yazid Bistami of mountainous Bistam for his profusion of mind-staggering aphorisms, and Junayd of cosmopolitan Baghdad for his adherence to social norms while engaging in a ceaseless, inner struggle.
Later Sufi theorists, such as Ali Hujwiri, found it convenient to ascribe ascetic, antinomian tendencies to Khurasanian masters and moderate, accommodative teachings to their Iraqi counterparts. Yet we know too little about the actual lives of early Sufis to venture more than tentative speculations about the impact of environment on their spiritual formation. Even major figures such as Bistami and Junayd represented not so much a place as a disposition that came to be esteemed among Sufis of a later generation and was then retrospectively associated with a ninth or tenth century master, usually through anecdotes or dicta (Bistami) and occasionally through treatises or letters (Junayd). Sufi exemplars from the classical period were remembered as stereotypes of piety rather than historical figures. Only Husayn ibn Mansur al-Hallaj, the dissident disciple of Junayd, was a partial exception.
By the late tenth century theorists attempted to consolidate and synthesize the elements of Sufi teaching. The handbooks they produced abound in correlations -- between desirable virtues and exemplary individuals, between technical terms and schools of thought. The formative period of tasawwuf is reduced to a maze of obscure proper names and recondite Arabic key words. Ali Hujwiri typifies this approach. His Kashf al-mahjub, hailed as the oldest Persian treatise on Sufism, reviews the entire classical phase of Islamic mysticism in one lengthy chapter, linking each famous master to a particular doctrine and then reviewing variant interpretations of the same doctrine. Struggle with the lower self, for instance, is set forth as the pre-eminent legacy of the Sahlis (followers of the ninth century Shaikh Sahl ibn ‘Abdallah Tustari), but its complement, ruh or spirit, is scarcely mentioned; the full assessment of ruh occurs much later in the chapter when Hujwiri exposes the heresy of the Hululis or incarnationists.
The medieval period is demarcated by a new kind of doctrinal systemization among Sufi theorists and by the popularization of Sufi teaching through the establishment of mystical orders. After Hujwiri, there were numerous other efforts to consolidate and systematize Sufi thought. Two of the most successful came from the pens of intellectual giants who, unlike Hujwiri, approached tasawwuf in a holistic framework, relating it to other major fields of philosophical or theological inquiry explored by the cosmopolitan elite of medieval Islam.
The first synthesizer of Sufism, Abu Hamid al-Ghazzali (d. 1111), had been a professor at the major center of traditional learning in Baghdad, the Nizamiyya madrasa -- the Nizamiyya college --, before resigning his post in 1091 to become a Sufi. Al-Ghazzali’s major work, the Ihya ‘ulum ad-din (“The Bringing to Life of the Religious Sciences”),examined every approach to knowledge before affirming that only the inner truth sought by Sufis could satisfy the comprehensive, painstaking demands of the Islamic faith.
Abu Hamid, in the opinion of many, was a lesser mystic than his brother, Ahmad (whose pithy verse is still prized among Sufi devotees), but he performed a valuable service in wedding tasawwuf (Sufism) to Sunni Islam without slighting the authority of either.
The second catalytic genius of the medieval period was Muhyi ‘d-din ibn‘Arabi. A Spanish mystic, familiar with Christian as well as Islamic philosophical categories, ibn ‘Arabi probed the deepest levels of meaning in Muslim scripture and described the central concept of tawhid (oneness of God) with originality that both captivated and antagonized his fellow Muslims.
Subsequent expositions of theoretical or theosophical Sufism invariably dealt with concepts such as the perfect man (al-insan al-kamil) and the pole (quth), and touched upon the metaphysical dimensions of light and love, precisely because the prolific, influential writings of al-Ghazzali and Ibn ‘Arabi made it impossible to avoid them. Nevertheless, in a sense, the mood of medieval Sufism was determined as much by mystical poetry as by systematic or speculative theology. Ibn ‘Arabi had written Arabic verse, some of which cryptically extolled the beautiful Persian woman whom he had once met on the hajj, but his fame rested on his prose treaties.
Quite different was the eclat of Mawlana Jalal ad-Din Rumi. A brilliant theologian, tireless raconteur, and inventive poet, Rumi channeled his spiritual vision into verse which captivated the imagination of Persian speaking Muslims everywhere. There were numerous mystical poets who wrote in the Persian language before Rumi.
Sa’di of Shiraz (d. 1293), moreover, was Rumi’s contemporary, and he, together with a later Shirazi lyricist, Hafiz (d. 1390), had an enormous impact on mystically minded Muslims. Yet Rumi’s ecstatic verse, as it poured forth in mammoth collections like the Mathnavi and Divan-i Shams-i Tabrizi, epitomized a quality of medieval Sufism: its devotees plunged into the quest for love, forsaking home, reason, and even life to find their Beloved. The alliterative, unsystematic, anecdotal versifications of Rumi came closer to the mood of that quest than the refined, comprehensive tomes of al-Ghazzali or the deft, dialectical soundings of Ibn ‘Arabi.
Rumi also inspired the formation of a Sufi order popularly known as the Whirling Dervishes. The establishment of mystical orders signaled the development of popular Sufism on an unprecedented scale. Prior to the eleventh century there appear to have been loosely defined communities of Sufis, gathering together for companionship. There were rules but no rigid lines of authority or precedence among the members.
By the end of the eleventh century and throughout the rest of the medieval period, however, the Shaikh emerged as the locus of attention and activity within Sufi communities. The Shaikh was distinguished from other men by his daily discipline and charismatic blessing. Usually such a person was born into a wealthy or at least respected family, educated in traditional scholarship, exposed to numerous people and places through extensive travel, converted to tasawwuf through a divine vision or unusual human encounter, and then given credentials by an already acknowledged master to be his successor. Founders of most of the major pan-Islamic orders conform to this pattern. In fact, many of them are spiritually interdependent. Thus, ‘Abd-al-Qadir Jilani (d. 1166), the founder of the Qadiri order, was himself a teacher of Abu Hafs ‘Umar Suhrawardi, the pivotal organizer of the Suhrawardi order.
Major shaikhs were not only related in the same generation, but they also traced their common affiliation back to early Sufis -- in the case of the Suhrawardis and their twelfth and thirteenth century contemporaries, to the tenth century saint Junayd. Another major pan-Islamic order, the Naqshbandiyya, traced their lineage back to Junayd’s spiritual opposite, the northwest Iranian shaikh Abu Yazid Bistami. Other regionally based orders, such as the Badawiyya, named after the Egyptian saint Ahmad al-Badawi (d. 1276), were not as conscious of their classical roots, though they too maintained genealogies that linked them to the first generation of Muslims and even to the Prophet Muhammad. It is, in part, because of their shared sense of spiritual interdependency that the orders, despite intense loyalty to their own shaikhs, minimized conflict with one another, and during the later medieval period some masters sought -- and frequently obtained -- simultaneous membership in two or more orders.
The social role of the orders is reflected in their buildings and organization. A residential center or hospice was maintained for disciples, family, and visitors; often it was situated near a tomb and was linked to other similar convent tomb complexes in adjacent regions. Death marked an important transition in the function of these complexes, for at the death of a shaikh his successor (khalifa) had to be chosen. The principle for selection varied from order to order. The will or last testament of the shaikh was determinative; usually it excluded women but, unlike Muslim inheritance laws, it did not invariably conform to primogeniture. The date of the master’s death subsequently became the occasion for an annual feast (‘Urs), celebrating both his union with God and continuous intercession on behalf of his followers.
Other intensive devotional gatherings, including dhikr exercises and lengthy musical performances (mahafil-e sama’), characterized most medieval Sufi communities. Such gatherings provoked antagonism with the ‘ulama’, learned functionaries who were custodians of ritual prayer -- salat. Especially in regions of the world where Islamization had barely begun, the Sufi shaikhs, with their charisma, their devoted followers, and their convivial public ceremonies, attracted greater attention, sympathy, and support than the sincere but dull, educated but aloof ‘ulama’. Since Islam, with few exceptions (e.g., India and Spain), was a state religion and public prayer an expression of political control, Sufis could, and often did, provoke not only the ‘ulama’ but also governmental authorities. In some cases, the shaikhs chose to cooperate with devout Muslim rulers; in other cases they refused to participate in court life.
Doctrinal disputes hounded the great shaikhs and their followers throughout the medieval period. The extreme veneration accorded the master in his group made it necessary to distinguish him from the Prophet Muhammad, who, by the intrinsic nature of Islam, had to be venerated at a still higher level than even the greatest shaikh. Primitive Islam had forbidden worship of Muhammad or any other man. Nevertheless, Sufis, in their love of the Prophet, did pray to him, as they did also to deceased saints. Orthodox Muslims objected to such excesses, and the controversy gave rise to more and more refined efforts to distinguish sainthood from prophethood, to elevate one without diminishing the other and somehow to preserve the authority and integrity of each.
For Shi‘ite Muslims, the doctrinal disputes took another form. Always respectful of Muhammad because of their special attachment to his family, they weighed their intercessory prayers and devotional life toward Ali and Ali’s successors, the imams. In their eyes, excessive veneration of Muhammad and invocation of the saints detracted from the pre-eminence of the hidden imam (whether he was seventh or twelfth in line from Ali), and thus was objectionable. Because most Sufi masters also tended to support the belief structure and ritual pattern of Sunni Islam, whatever their differences with particular ‘ulama’ or rulers, the evolution of a Shi‘ite brand of Sufism was always a minor phenomenon, and after the establishment of the aggressively pro-Shi‘ite, anti-Sufi Safavid empire in sixteenth century Iran, it became even less noticeable.
It is also important to note that Islamic mysticism persisted outside the established orders (tariqa). In addition to the magisterial shaikhs, their select disciples, and numerous lay followers, tasawwuf (Sufism) encompassed “holy fools,” spiritual ecstatics who were also social eccentrics, openly flaunting the norms of acceptable behavior. Known as malamati or qalandar, these were the itinerant dervishes whom European travelers later dubbed faqirs. Their rejection of conventional mores led them to mock even the patterned life that pertained in the convent tomb complexes of the famous shaikhs. They were a throwback to the earliest Sufis, whose ascetic behavior had contrasted with the worldly piety of ninth century Baghdad, and it is probably for this reason that Sufis of the medieval period usually accepted even the vilest abuse hurled at them by anonymous qalandar.
The time of greatest influence for the Sufi orders coincided with the regional hegemony of the Ottoman and Mogul empires, spanning approximately three centuries, 1500-1800. The number of Muslims affiliated with Sufi brotherhoods during this period was certainly not less than half the population and may have been as high as 80 percent.
One reason for the swelled ranks of Sufi orders was their catalytic role in the expansion of Islam. Pan-Islamic brotherhoods like the Qadiriyya and the Rifa’iyya were instrumental in winning to Islam geographic areas as disparate as Anatolia (Asia Minor) and West Africa, while regional orders, such as the Badawiyya and Shadhiliyaa (both derived from the Rifa’iya) helped to intensify Islamic loyalties in Egypt and the Magrib. From the thirteenth century on, North India was populated with the convent tomb complexes of the Chishtiyya and the Suhrawardiyya. Distant Southeast Asia withstood any wide-scale Islamization until the late sixteenth century. However, it was Qadiri and Shattari masters who succeeded in penetrating the complex Hindu-Javanese belief system of the archipelago. In fact, the belated ascendancy of mystical Islam in Indonesia aptly illustrates the flexibility of the shaikhs as agents in the spread of Islam. Affiliated with urban based craft guilds and trade corporations, many of them with headquarters in the Arabian heartland of Islam, Sufi masters traveled to the archipelago by ship with Muslim traders. They were well received by kings in the major port cities, occasionally marrying princesses, and in other ways too gaining influence in the courts. As they increasingly moved inland after 1600, the shaikhs converted the inhabitants of Hindu-Buddhist hermitages to Islam and transformed the indigenous structures into hospices and madrasas (schools).
What happened to Sufism subsequently, especially during the period of European colonial expansion into all parts of the Muslim world, is still not well understood. Two interconnected developments account for the largely negative assessment of the latter-day role of the Sufi brotherhoods:
(1) The Wahhabiya, an eighteenth century puritanical revivalist movement emanating from Arabia, condemned Sufism along with all other accretions to the pristine creed declaimed by Muhammad in seventh century diatribes of Ibn Taymiyya, but with a difference. Sufi brotherhoods were excoriated not only as syncretistic dilutions of pure Islam but also as contributing causes to the political-military weakness of Muslim ruling groups vis-a-vis resurgent Europe.
(2) Western scholars confirmed the judgment of the Wahhabis by extolling the formative period of theoretical Sufism and debunking what followed it.
Though the emergence of Sufi orders might have led to a reification of Sufi subtleties or a calcification of Sufi energies, the opposite, in fact, seems to have been the case. Eighteenth century India, for instance, produced two of the foremost geniuses of Islamic history, both intimately related to organizational as well as theoretical tasawwuf (Sufism): Mirza ‘Abd-al-Qadir Bedil (d. 1721) and Shah Wali Allah Dihlawi (d. 1762). During the turbulent nineteenth century, moreover, organized Sufism proved itself a unique vehicle for both reviving Islamic consciousness and mobilizing Islamic resistance to European colonialists.
It was because the Sufi orders represented kinship groups, classes, professions and lineages integrated vertically under the authority of an all-powerful shaikh that the brotherhoods could and did assume political roles. Nor were they an isolated phenomenon of nineteenth century Islamic society: the Mahdist and pro-Caliphate movements also emerged during this period, sometimes among overlapping constituencies of like-minded Muslims. Their common redirection to a non-mystical sphere of activity was prompted by the same perceived threat that motivated the Wahhabis: European encroachment on Islamic soil. Thus, Wahhabis and Sufi activists, despite their differences, shared warriors” -- an influential group of nineteenth century North Indian Muslims, have been alternately described as neo-Sufis or neo-Wahhabis.
The mujahidin were, in fact, both. They espoused political and scripturalist aims similar to the Wahhabis, at the same time that they affirmed their links to reformist Naqshbandi shaikhs. Devotion to Sufism and militant anti-colonialism also characterized several nineteenth century African revivalists, from Uthman dan Fodio of the traditional Qadiriyya to al-Hajj‘Umar Tal of the neo-Sufi Tijaniyya. Even African orders which de-emphasized military confrontation and confined themselves to traditional pursuits could not avoid being drawn into the escalating conflict between Christian and Muslim, European and African, foreigner and native. The pro-Ottoman but politically quiescent Sanusiyya, for example, were victimized by the manipulation of French and Italian forces, first having to curtail and then later redirect their activities prior to the outbreak of World War I.
During the twentieth century, other Sufi orders have shared the fate of the Sanusiyya. Nowhere in the Muslim world today does organized Sufism have political leverage comparable to that which it exercised for much of the last century.
The earliest manifestations of a burgeoning mystical tradition in Islam date from the eighth and ninth centuries. This ascetical movement centered primarily in the province of Khurasan, especially the city of Balkh; in Iraq, especially the cities of Baghdad, Basra, and Kufa; and in Egypt.
While our knowledge of the lives and teachings of many of the early ascetics is restricted to hagiographic sources, some early Sufis did write religious poetry, prayers, and treatises on the spiritual life. These texts were very influential in shaping the classical Sufi tradition. Hasan al-Basri (d. 728) and Rabi’a al-Adawiyya (d. 801) are two pivotal figures of this period. Rabi’a is credited with introducing love mysticism into Islam.
The late tenth and eleventh centuries saw the production of important manuals of the Sufi life written as guides to novices newly embarked on the Path. Prominent examples are the Qut al-qulub of Abu Talik al-Makki (d. 996) and the Kashf al-mahjub of Ali ibn Uthman al-Jullabi al-Hujwiri (d. 1071). A didactic genre of a different sort, the biographical dictionary, attained prominence during the same period. These collections of the lives of Sufis provide a wealth of practical guidance in the form of the preerved teachings of Sufi masters and edifying stories, both historical and mythical, about their lives. Well known are the Tabaqat al-sufiyya of Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami (d. 1021), which was expanded and revised first by Abd Allah Ansari (d. 1089) and later by Abd al-. Rahman Jami (d. 1492). The most comprehensive biographical dictionary is the multi-volume Hilyat al-awliya of Abu Nu’aim al-Isfahani (d. 1037).
Theoretical speculation about the nature of mysticism developed in tandem with expressions of mystical ecstasy, exemplified by the ecstatic utterances of Abu Yazid al-Bistami (d. 874) and Husain ibn Mansur al-Hallaj (d. 922). Al-Hallaj’s “Ana al-Haqq” (“I am the Divine Truth”) and his other mystical paradoxes could not help but shock the uninitiated and raise questions about the nature of mystical experience in Islam. For al-Hallaj and other prominent Sufis, paradox was the means to express the suprarational quality of mysticism. None of the traditional religious sciences was believed capable of encompassing in rational discourse what mystics experience in ecstasy.
The science of paradox had serious ramifications: in certain Sufis’understanding of ethics, good and evil are seen to have no objective basis in reality; rather, whatever God wills for the individual is good, no matter how it appears to the common folk. For the Sufi ecstatic, God’s will is mediated by the mystical relationship of loving union, not by the synthesis of Qur’an, hadith, and shari‘a that mediates for the rest of the Muslim faithful. This did not necessarily lead to antinomianism or to the rejection of the religious structures of the Islamic community. The more common result was a two-tiered ethical system, the primary tier for the mass of believers, the secondary and more elitist for the Sufi adepts.
The tension in Sufism between sober and ecstatic, or “drunken,” mysticism reached a unique point of resolution in the life of Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (d. 1111), who strove to integrate the life of the scholar-theologian with that of the enraptured mystic. The blueprint of his spiritual quest, His autobiography, Al-munqidh min al-dalal, and his classic theological treatise The Revivification of the Religious Sciences (Ihya ulum al-din) remain, with his numerous othe writings, major sources of inspiration and learning in the Islamic world.
In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the mathnavi literary form, familiar in secular Persian literature principally through Firdausi’s Shahnama (The Epic of the Kings), became popular among a number of Sufi writers. Several of these mystical mathnavis have become classics of Muslim spirituality, chief among them the mathnavis of Farid al-Din Attar (d. 1221) and Jalal al-Din Rumi (d. 1273).
The literary developments of twelfth and thirteenth century Sufism must share center stage with the theoretical advances sparked by the work of one of the most creative minds of Islam, Muhyi al-Din ibn Arabi (d. 1240). Ibn Arabi was born at Murcia in Muslim Spain in 1165. He traveled widely, finally settling in Damascus in 1230. The volume of his literary output was enormous, matched only by the complexity and density of his ideas.
Sufism before Ibn Arabi focused primarily on the experience of loving union between the soul and God. The arduous Sufi path was the means by which the initiate prepared himself or herself for this unique experience of intimacy. The mystical encounter could not be induced, only prepared for. The success or failure of the quest depended primarily on the desire of the Beloved to enter into union with the Lover.
Ibn Arabi’s understanding of the mystical relationship was radically different. At the heart of his synthesis is the metaphysical principle of wahdat al-wujud, the unity of being. It would be an oversimplification to conclude that Ibn Arabi’s system is but another form of monism, for God is not identified substantially with his creation. God transcends all categories, even that of substance.
Creation results from God’s longing to be known and loved. The world of plurality is, therefore, the mirror of the Ultimate. Existents are not identical with God but reflections of his attributes. An analogy to breathing would be most apt: as breath is exhaled and inhaled so too does God continue to create and annihilate until all is eventually reunited in the One.
Because of creation’s illusory quality, God is identified as the only true existent. All created realities by their very nature yearn to be restored to the source from which they have sprung. Abd al-Karim Jili (d. 1428) describes in detail how the Perfect Man, al-Insan al-Kamil, acts as the ultimate mediator between God and creation, for the Perfect Man is the reality in which God is most perfectly manifest. When the process of return reaches its culmination, all the paradoxes and tensions of opposites that characterize the experience of the Sufi mystic will be resolved. Good and evil, reward and punishment, union and separation -- all become empty concepts, for nothing exists but the One.
Sufism after Ibn Arabi bears his indelible imprint. There is perhaps no other Sufi whose influence has been so pervasive. The evolution of Sufism during the thirteenth century should not, however, be restricted to theoretical issues. One extremely significant social phenomenon was the growth and development of Sufi orders or fraternities (tariqas).
Signs of Sufi social groupings date back as far as the eighth century, but these early organizations remained fluid in character through the eleventh century. Individual charismatic Sufi masters (known as shaikhs or pirs) attracted a number of disciples who would settle around the master, but the group would often disband after the death of the charismatic guide. Some disciples would seek another master; others might have begun to attract their own followers. There were no codes, however, to regulate the structure of the group.
The support of Sufi convents through the waqf system and the increased involvement of the civil authorities in funding and regulating Sufi convents during the Seljuk period contributed to the growing trend toward stabilization among Sufi groups. By the thirteenth century, self-perpetuating tariqas became more the norm. Rather than disband after the death of the founder, the Sufis would select a new leader from among the members of the group. In some tariqas, the transmission of authority was hereditary. The new shaikh would be entrusted with preserving and promulgating the teachings of the deceased master. Consequently, each order began to take on a unique personality, molded by the spirit and writings of the original shaikhs as well as by the contributionsof renowned later members.
The success of the tariqas cannot be attributed solely to their charisma and social stability. Many of them provided the wider community with a vibrant and easily accessible form of devotional piety. Whereas the abstruse and highly sophisticated mystical theory of Ibn Arabi appealed to the Sufi intellectual elite, the rituals of dhikr and sama opened important avenues of religious experience to the majority of the faithful.
Dhikr (“remembrance”) is an exercise that can be performed alone or with a group, silently or aloud; it consists of the rhythmic repetition or chanting of phrases that often contain one or more of the ninety-nine names of God. The performance of dhikr may also entail rhythmic body movements, breath control, and other practices usually associated with meditation techniques. The goal of the dhikr ceremony is to foster interior states and an exterior environment conducive to an intense and intimate experience of God; for one or more of the participants this involves the attainment of mystical ecstasy.
A devotional exercise similar to dhikr is that of sama (literally,“audition”). Sama involves the musical recital of religious poetry and is oftern accompanied by the chanting of verses from the Qur’an. The music acts as the stimulus for various forms of Sufi dance. The types of poetry, music, and ritual movement are as varied as the Sufi groups themselves. The Mevlevis, for example, founded in Turkey by Jalal al-Din Rumi, are noted for the aesthetic refinement of their sama ceremony. The mystical dance of the Mevlevis (known popularly as the Whirling Dervishes) is the consummate example of the wedding of interior religious states to the external forms of ritual movement.
Not all performances of sama are as aesthetically refined as that of the Mevlevis. Nevertheless, sama possesses a power that is independent of aesthetics, whether the performance be encountered in a rural village or modern city in the Islamic world, whether its music and poetry be artistically sophisticated or the popular music and poetry inspired by local Sufi saints. The sama invariably creates an environment charged with religious fervor that provides men and women with an important outlet through which to express their pent-up religious and emotional feelings.
The immediacy of the experiences of dhikr and sama contrasts dramatically with the traditional Sufi path, which demands years of dedication and training. Yet it is the easy accessibility of these experiences that facilitated the integration of the tariqas into the religious life of the general Muslim population.
To the power of dhikr and sama must be added the widespread acknowledgment by both Sufi and layperson of the potent spiritual force known as baraka (“blessing”). The great shaikhs of the tariqas as well as individual Sufis of spiritual renown were believed to possess a unique spiritual power that could be transmitted to their disciples or devotees. Baraka even survived the death of the holy person: thus visits to tombs and shrines are considered particularly efficacious.
The attribution of baraka to the great Sufi shaikhs is closely related to the sophisticate theory of the Perfect Man (al-Insan al-Kamil) elaborated by Jili; the charismatic Sufi saint who possesses extraordinary baraka serves as the qutb (“pole”), that is, the unique manifestation of spiritual authority in the universe and the mediator of all religious experience.
The pervasive influence of the tariqas is evident throughout the Muslim world, from the Levant and Central Asia through Africa, the Indian subcontinent, Malaysia, Indonesia, and other Islamic lands. In addition, to responding to the religious needs of the populace, the tariqas played an important missionary role. A prime example is the Indian subcontinent, which first encountered Islam in 711-712 with the conquest of Sind by a representative of the Umayyad caliph. A more extensive empire was established by Mahmud of Ghazna (d. 1030), from which Lahore emerged as an important political and intellectual center. It is here that al-Hujwiri, the author of the Kashf al-mahjub, died in 1071. He is still revered as the city’s patron saint under the name of Data Ganj Bakhsh.
The Chishti was the first major Sufi order in the subcontinent, established there in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries by Muinuddin Chishti (d. 1236). The Chistis attracted many followers through their dhikr ceremonies and through their devotion to music and poetry. The Chishti convent (jama’at-khana or khangah).functioned as a center not only for Sufis but for the wider community as well, since the Chishtis were devoted to the care of the poor and needy. Life in the convent centered around the pit, who closely directed the lives of his followers and managed the secular affairs of the convent.
The second great order was the Suhrawardi, whose first master was Bahauddin Zakariya of Multan (d. about 1267). In contrast to the Chishtis, the Suhrawardis placed a greater emphasis on material well-being and family life. They accepted government support and were more intimately involved with the ruling powers.
By no means were these the only Sufi groups to have a significant impact on Islamic life in the region. Many other Sufi communities -- ranging from the strict, reform minded Naqshbandis (whose center of power was in Central Asia and Afghanistan) to the antinomian Qalandars -- were integral elements in the evolving religious life of South Asia.
While it is true that the classical period of Sufism (ninth to fifteenth century) was a time of enormous religious, literary, and social creativity, the modern period possesses its own vibrancy. Sufism remains an extremely influential force throughout the Islamic world and will continue to contribute to the evolution of Muslim religious life in the future.
Faqir see Sufis.
Dervish see Sufis.
Darvish see Sufis.
Sufis. Practitioners of Sufism (in Arabic, tasawwuf). The Arabic term refers to the practice of wearing a robe of wool (in Arabic, suf) and denotes the act of devoting oneself to the mystic life.
Sufi is an Arabic term pertaining to Muslim mystics or to their beliefs, practices, or organizations. Sufis are ascetics who wear coarse wool clothing (suf) and are devoted to spiritual life. In the twelfth century, the Sufis, as defenders of Sunni doctrine, were grouped together in the khanaqh and the ribat. Both the Persian darvish (dervish) and the Arabic faqir (both meaning “poor”) are used to describe Sufis, referring to the Sufi way of life.
The term Sufism is the name most often applied to Islamic Mysticism consisting of three overlapping but distinct historical periods: classical, medieval, and modern.
The origins of the Sufi movement are obscure. Some hold that Sufism was intrinsic to primitive Islam, that Muhammad himself was a Sufi, as were his companions and the first four caliphs. There is no doubt that certain Sufi concepts, e.g., faqr (“pious poverty”) and tawakkul (“total reliance on God”), as well as characteristic practices, e.g., dhikr (“constant repetition of the divine name”) and sama (listening to poetry or music), had antecedents dating back to the first century of Islam. More difficult is the task of discerning the complex undercurrents of political and religious ideology that characterized late Umayyad and early ‘Abbasid Islam.
Some members of ascetic protest movements may have been influenced by contact with Zoroastrians, Buddhists, Hindus, and also Monophysite Christians. Christian ascetics, for instance, were known to have worn woolen garments not dissimilar from those which the early Sufis wore and by which they came to be known. Whatever the point of original inspiration, tasawwuf -- Sufism -- in its formative period must have reflected attitudes and activities, rituals and rigors, intrinsic to the geographic locale where the ninth and tenth century masters lived and taught. Thus, Fudayl ibn ‘Iyad of parched Khurasan became renowned for his renunciation of family life, Dhu’l-Nun Misri of temperate Egypt for his lilting summation of ontological polarities, Abu Yazid Bistami of mountainous Bistam for his profusion of mind-staggering aphorisms, and Junayd of cosmopolitan Baghdad for his adherence to social norms while engaging in a ceaseless, inner struggle.
Later Sufi theorists, such as Ali Hujwiri, found it convenient to ascribe ascetic, antinomian tendencies to Khurasanian masters and moderate, accommodative teachings to their Iraqi counterparts. Yet we know too little about the actual lives of early Sufis to venture more than tentative speculations about the impact of environment on their spiritual formation. Even major figures such as Bistami and Junayd represented not so much a place as a disposition that came to be esteemed among Sufis of a later generation and was then retrospectively associated with a ninth or tenth century master, usually through anecdotes or dicta (Bistami) and occasionally through treatises or letters (Junayd). Sufi exemplars from the classical period were remembered as stereotypes of piety rather than historical figures. Only Husayn ibn Mansur al-Hallaj, the dissident disciple of Junayd, was a partial exception.
By the late tenth century theorists attempted to consolidate and synthesize the elements of Sufi teaching. The handbooks they produced abound in correlations -- between desirable virtues and exemplary individuals, between technical terms and schools of thought. The formative period of tasawwuf is reduced to a maze of obscure proper names and recondite Arabic key words. Ali Hujwiri typifies this approach. His Kashf al-mahjub, hailed as the oldest Persian treatise on Sufism, reviews the entire classical phase of Islamic mysticism in one lengthy chapter, linking each famous master to a particular doctrine and then reviewing variant interpretations of the same doctrine. Struggle with the lower self, for instance, is set forth as the pre-eminent legacy of the Sahlis (followers of the ninth century Shaikh Sahl ibn ‘Abdallah Tustari), but its complement, ruh or spirit, is scarcely mentioned; the full assessment of ruh occurs much later in the chapter when Hujwiri exposes the heresy of the Hululis or incarnationists.
The medieval period is demarcated by a new kind of doctrinal systemization among Sufi theorists and by the popularization of Sufi teaching through the establishment of mystical orders. After Hujwiri, there were numerous other efforts to consolidate and systematize Sufi thought. Two of the most successful came from the pens of intellectual giants who, unlike Hujwiri, approached tasawwuf in a holistic framework, relating it to other major fields of philosophical or theological inquiry explored by the cosmopolitan elite of medieval Islam.
The first synthesizer of Sufism, Abu Hamid al-Ghazzali (d. 1111), had been a professor at the major center of traditional learning in Baghdad, the Nizamiyya madrasa -- the Nizamiyya college --, before resigning his post in 1091 to become a Sufi. Al-Ghazzali’s major work, the Ihya ‘ulum ad-din (“The Bringing to Life of the Religious Sciences”),examined every approach to knowledge before affirming that only the inner truth sought by Sufis could satisfy the comprehensive, painstaking demands of the Islamic faith.
Abu Hamid, in the opinion of many, was a lesser mystic than his brother, Ahmad (whose pithy verse is still prized among Sufi devotees), but he performed a valuable service in wedding tasawwuf (Sufism) to Sunni Islam without slighting the authority of either.
The second catalytic genius of the medieval period was Muhyi ‘d-din ibn‘Arabi. A Spanish mystic, familiar with Christian as well as Islamic philosophical categories, ibn ‘Arabi probed the deepest levels of meaning in Muslim scripture and described the central concept of tawhid (oneness of God) with originality that both captivated and antagonized his fellow Muslims.
Subsequent expositions of theoretical or theosophical Sufism invariably dealt with concepts such as the perfect man (al-insan al-kamil) and the pole (quth), and touched upon the metaphysical dimensions of light and love, precisely because the prolific, influential writings of al-Ghazzali and Ibn ‘Arabi made it impossible to avoid them. Nevertheless, in a sense, the mood of medieval Sufism was determined as much by mystical poetry as by systematic or speculative theology. Ibn ‘Arabi had written Arabic verse, some of which cryptically extolled the beautiful Persian woman whom he had once met on the hajj, but his fame rested on his prose treaties.
Quite different was the eclat of Mawlana Jalal ad-Din Rumi. A brilliant theologian, tireless raconteur, and inventive poet, Rumi channeled his spiritual vision into verse which captivated the imagination of Persian speaking Muslims everywhere. There were numerous mystical poets who wrote in the Persian language before Rumi.
Sa’di of Shiraz (d. 1293), moreover, was Rumi’s contemporary, and he, together with a later Shirazi lyricist, Hafiz (d. 1390), had an enormous impact on mystically minded Muslims. Yet Rumi’s ecstatic verse, as it poured forth in mammoth collections like the Mathnavi and Divan-i Shams-i Tabrizi, epitomized a quality of medieval Sufism: its devotees plunged into the quest for love, forsaking home, reason, and even life to find their Beloved. The alliterative, unsystematic, anecdotal versifications of Rumi came closer to the mood of that quest than the refined, comprehensive tomes of al-Ghazzali or the deft, dialectical soundings of Ibn ‘Arabi.
Rumi also inspired the formation of a Sufi order popularly known as the Whirling Dervishes. The establishment of mystical orders signaled the development of popular Sufism on an unprecedented scale. Prior to the eleventh century there appear to have been loosely defined communities of Sufis, gathering together for companionship. There were rules but no rigid lines of authority or precedence among the members.
By the end of the eleventh century and throughout the rest of the medieval period, however, the Shaikh emerged as the locus of attention and activity within Sufi communities. The Shaikh was distinguished from other men by his daily discipline and charismatic blessing. Usually such a person was born into a wealthy or at least respected family, educated in traditional scholarship, exposed to numerous people and places through extensive travel, converted to tasawwuf through a divine vision or unusual human encounter, and then given credentials by an already acknowledged master to be his successor. Founders of most of the major pan-Islamic orders conform to this pattern. In fact, many of them are spiritually interdependent. Thus, ‘Abd-al-Qadir Jilani (d. 1166), the founder of the Qadiri order, was himself a teacher of Abu Hafs ‘Umar Suhrawardi, the pivotal organizer of the Suhrawardi order.
Major shaikhs were not only related in the same generation, but they also traced their common affiliation back to early Sufis -- in the case of the Suhrawardis and their twelfth and thirteenth century contemporaries, to the tenth century saint Junayd. Another major pan-Islamic order, the Naqshbandiyya, traced their lineage back to Junayd’s spiritual opposite, the northwest Iranian shaikh Abu Yazid Bistami. Other regionally based orders, such as the Badawiyya, named after the Egyptian saint Ahmad al-Badawi (d. 1276), were not as conscious of their classical roots, though they too maintained genealogies that linked them to the first generation of Muslims and even to the Prophet Muhammad. It is, in part, because of their shared sense of spiritual interdependency that the orders, despite intense loyalty to their own shaikhs, minimized conflict with one another, and during the later medieval period some masters sought -- and frequently obtained -- simultaneous membership in two or more orders.
The social role of the orders is reflected in their buildings and organization. A residential center or hospice was maintained for disciples, family, and visitors; often it was situated near a tomb and was linked to other similar convent tomb complexes in adjacent regions. Death marked an important transition in the function of these complexes, for at the death of a shaikh his successor (khalifa) had to be chosen. The principle for selection varied from order to order. The will or last testament of the shaikh was determinative; usually it excluded women but, unlike Muslim inheritance laws, it did not invariably conform to primogeniture. The date of the master’s death subsequently became the occasion for an annual feast (‘Urs), celebrating both his union with God and continuous intercession on behalf of his followers.
Other intensive devotional gatherings, including dhikr exercises and lengthy musical performances (mahafil-e sama’), characterized most medieval Sufi communities. Such gatherings provoked antagonism with the ‘ulama’, learned functionaries who were custodians of ritual prayer -- salat. Especially in regions of the world where Islamization had barely begun, the Sufi shaikhs, with their charisma, their devoted followers, and their convivial public ceremonies, attracted greater attention, sympathy, and support than the sincere but dull, educated but aloof ‘ulama’. Since Islam, with few exceptions (e.g., India and Spain), was a state religion and public prayer an expression of political control, Sufis could, and often did, provoke not only the ‘ulama’ but also governmental authorities. In some cases, the shaikhs chose to cooperate with devout Muslim rulers; in other cases they refused to participate in court life.
Doctrinal disputes hounded the great shaikhs and their followers throughout the medieval period. The extreme veneration accorded the master in his group made it necessary to distinguish him from the Prophet Muhammad, who, by the intrinsic nature of Islam, had to be venerated at a still higher level than even the greatest shaikh. Primitive Islam had forbidden worship of Muhammad or any other man. Nevertheless, Sufis, in their love of the Prophet, did pray to him, as they did also to deceased saints. Orthodox Muslims objected to such excesses, and the controversy gave rise to more and more refined efforts to distinguish sainthood from prophethood, to elevate one without diminishing the other and somehow to preserve the authority and integrity of each.
For Shi‘ite Muslims, the doctrinal disputes took another form. Always respectful of Muhammad because of their special attachment to his family, they weighed their intercessory prayers and devotional life toward Ali and Ali’s successors, the imams. In their eyes, excessive veneration of Muhammad and invocation of the saints detracted from the pre-eminence of the hidden imam (whether he was seventh or twelfth in line from Ali), and thus was objectionable. Because most Sufi masters also tended to support the belief structure and ritual pattern of Sunni Islam, whatever their differences with particular ‘ulama’ or rulers, the evolution of a Shi‘ite brand of Sufism was always a minor phenomenon, and after the establishment of the aggressively pro-Shi‘ite, anti-Sufi Safavid empire in sixteenth century Iran, it became even less noticeable.
It is also important to note that Islamic mysticism persisted outside the established orders (tariqa). In addition to the magisterial shaikhs, their select disciples, and numerous lay followers, tasawwuf (Sufism) encompassed “holy fools,” spiritual ecstatics who were also social eccentrics, openly flaunting the norms of acceptable behavior. Known as malamati or qalandar, these were the itinerant dervishes whom European travelers later dubbed faqirs. Their rejection of conventional mores led them to mock even the patterned life that pertained in the convent tomb complexes of the famous shaikhs. They were a throwback to the earliest Sufis, whose ascetic behavior had contrasted with the worldly piety of ninth century Baghdad, and it is probably for this reason that Sufis of the medieval period usually accepted even the vilest abuse hurled at them by anonymous qalandar.
The time of greatest influence for the Sufi orders coincided with the regional hegemony of the Ottoman and Mogul empires, spanning approximately three centuries, 1500-1800. The number of Muslims affiliated with Sufi brotherhoods during this period was certainly not less than half the population and may have been as high as 80 percent.
One reason for the swelled ranks of Sufi orders was their catalytic role in the expansion of Islam. Pan-Islamic brotherhoods like the Qadiriyya and the Rifa’iyya were instrumental in winning to Islam geographic areas as disparate as Anatolia (Asia Minor) and West Africa, while regional orders, such as the Badawiyya and Shadhiliyaa (both derived from the Rifa’iya) helped to intensify Islamic loyalties in Egypt and the Magrib. From the thirteenth century on, North India was populated with the convent tomb complexes of the Chishtiyya and the Suhrawardiyya. Distant Southeast Asia withstood any wide-scale Islamization until the late sixteenth century. However, it was Qadiri and Shattari masters who succeeded in penetrating the complex Hindu-Javanese belief system of the archipelago. In fact, the belated ascendancy of mystical Islam in Indonesia aptly illustrates the flexibility of the shaikhs as agents in the spread of Islam. Affiliated with urban based craft guilds and trade corporations, many of them with headquarters in the Arabian heartland of Islam, Sufi masters traveled to the archipelago by ship with Muslim traders. They were well received by kings in the major port cities, occasionally marrying princesses, and in other ways too gaining influence in the courts. As they increasingly moved inland after 1600, the shaikhs converted the inhabitants of Hindu-Buddhist hermitages to Islam and transformed the indigenous structures into hospices and madrasas (schools).
What happened to Sufism subsequently, especially during the period of European colonial expansion into all parts of the Muslim world, is still not well understood. Two interconnected developments account for the largely negative assessment of the latter-day role of the Sufi brotherhoods:
(1) The Wahhabiya, an eighteenth century puritanical revivalist movement emanating from Arabia, condemned Sufism along with all other accretions to the pristine creed declaimed by Muhammad in seventh century diatribes of Ibn Taymiyya, but with a difference. Sufi brotherhoods were excoriated not only as syncretistic dilutions of pure Islam but also as contributing causes to the political-military weakness of Muslim ruling groups vis-a-vis resurgent Europe.
(2) Western scholars confirmed the judgment of the Wahhabis by extolling the formative period of theoretical Sufism and debunking what followed it.
Though the emergence of Sufi orders might have led to a reification of Sufi subtleties or a calcification of Sufi energies, the opposite, in fact, seems to have been the case. Eighteenth century India, for instance, produced two of the foremost geniuses of Islamic history, both intimately related to organizational as well as theoretical tasawwuf (Sufism): Mirza ‘Abd-al-Qadir Bedil (d. 1721) and Shah Wali Allah Dihlawi (d. 1762). During the turbulent nineteenth century, moreover, organized Sufism proved itself a unique vehicle for both reviving Islamic consciousness and mobilizing Islamic resistance to European colonialists.
It was because the Sufi orders represented kinship groups, classes, professions and lineages integrated vertically under the authority of an all-powerful shaikh that the brotherhoods could and did assume political roles. Nor were they an isolated phenomenon of nineteenth century Islamic society: the Mahdist and pro-Caliphate movements also emerged during this period, sometimes among overlapping constituencies of like-minded Muslims. Their common redirection to a non-mystical sphere of activity was prompted by the same perceived threat that motivated the Wahhabis: European encroachment on Islamic soil. Thus, Wahhabis and Sufi activists, despite their differences, shared warriors” -- an influential group of nineteenth century North Indian Muslims, have been alternately described as neo-Sufis or neo-Wahhabis.
The mujahidin were, in fact, both. They espoused political and scripturalist aims similar to the Wahhabis, at the same time that they affirmed their links to reformist Naqshbandi shaikhs. Devotion to Sufism and militant anti-colonialism also characterized several nineteenth century African revivalists, from Uthman dan Fodio of the traditional Qadiriyya to al-Hajj‘Umar Tal of the neo-Sufi Tijaniyya. Even African orders which de-emphasized military confrontation and confined themselves to traditional pursuits could not avoid being drawn into the escalating conflict between Christian and Muslim, European and African, foreigner and native. The pro-Ottoman but politically quiescent Sanusiyya, for example, were victimized by the manipulation of French and Italian forces, first having to curtail and then later redirect their activities prior to the outbreak of World War I.
During the twentieth century, other Sufi orders have shared the fate of the Sanusiyya. Nowhere in the Muslim world today does organized Sufism have political leverage comparable to that which it exercised for much of the last century.
The earliest manifestations of a burgeoning mystical tradition in Islam date from the eighth and ninth centuries. This ascetical movement centered primarily in the province of Khurasan, especially the city of Balkh; in Iraq, especially the cities of Baghdad, Basra, and Kufa; and in Egypt.
While our knowledge of the lives and teachings of many of the early ascetics is restricted to hagiographic sources, some early Sufis did write religious poetry, prayers, and treatises on the spiritual life. These texts were very influential in shaping the classical Sufi tradition. Hasan al-Basri (d. 728) and Rabi’a al-Adawiyya (d. 801) are two pivotal figures of this period. Rabi’a is credited with introducing love mysticism into Islam.
The late tenth and eleventh centuries saw the production of important manuals of the Sufi life written as guides to novices newly embarked on the Path. Prominent examples are the Qut al-qulub of Abu Talik al-Makki (d. 996) and the Kashf al-mahjub of Ali ibn Uthman al-Jullabi al-Hujwiri (d. 1071). A didactic genre of a different sort, the biographical dictionary, attained prominence during the same period. These collections of the lives of Sufis provide a wealth of practical guidance in the form of the preerved teachings of Sufi masters and edifying stories, both historical and mythical, about their lives. Well known are the Tabaqat al-sufiyya of Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami (d. 1021), which was expanded and revised first by Abd Allah Ansari (d. 1089) and later by Abd al-. Rahman Jami (d. 1492). The most comprehensive biographical dictionary is the multi-volume Hilyat al-awliya of Abu Nu’aim al-Isfahani (d. 1037).
Theoretical speculation about the nature of mysticism developed in tandem with expressions of mystical ecstasy, exemplified by the ecstatic utterances of Abu Yazid al-Bistami (d. 874) and Husain ibn Mansur al-Hallaj (d. 922). Al-Hallaj’s “Ana al-Haqq” (“I am the Divine Truth”) and his other mystical paradoxes could not help but shock the uninitiated and raise questions about the nature of mystical experience in Islam. For al-Hallaj and other prominent Sufis, paradox was the means to express the suprarational quality of mysticism. None of the traditional religious sciences was believed capable of encompassing in rational discourse what mystics experience in ecstasy.
The science of paradox had serious ramifications: in certain Sufis’understanding of ethics, good and evil are seen to have no objective basis in reality; rather, whatever God wills for the individual is good, no matter how it appears to the common folk. For the Sufi ecstatic, God’s will is mediated by the mystical relationship of loving union, not by the synthesis of Qur’an, hadith, and shari‘a that mediates for the rest of the Muslim faithful. This did not necessarily lead to antinomianism or to the rejection of the religious structures of the Islamic community. The more common result was a two-tiered ethical system, the primary tier for the mass of believers, the secondary and more elitist for the Sufi adepts.
The tension in Sufism between sober and ecstatic, or “drunken,” mysticism reached a unique point of resolution in the life of Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (d. 1111), who strove to integrate the life of the scholar-theologian with that of the enraptured mystic. The blueprint of his spiritual quest, His autobiography, Al-munqidh min al-dalal, and his classic theological treatise The Revivification of the Religious Sciences (Ihya ulum al-din) remain, with his numerous othe writings, major sources of inspiration and learning in the Islamic world.
In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the mathnavi literary form, familiar in secular Persian literature principally through Firdausi’s Shahnama (The Epic of the Kings), became popular among a number of Sufi writers. Several of these mystical mathnavis have become classics of Muslim spirituality, chief among them the mathnavis of Farid al-Din Attar (d. 1221) and Jalal al-Din Rumi (d. 1273).
The literary developments of twelfth and thirteenth century Sufism must share center stage with the theoretical advances sparked by the work of one of the most creative minds of Islam, Muhyi al-Din ibn Arabi (d. 1240). Ibn Arabi was born at Murcia in Muslim Spain in 1165. He traveled widely, finally settling in Damascus in 1230. The volume of his literary output was enormous, matched only by the complexity and density of his ideas.
Sufism before Ibn Arabi focused primarily on the experience of loving union between the soul and God. The arduous Sufi path was the means by which the initiate prepared himself or herself for this unique experience of intimacy. The mystical encounter could not be induced, only prepared for. The success or failure of the quest depended primarily on the desire of the Beloved to enter into union with the Lover.
Ibn Arabi’s understanding of the mystical relationship was radically different. At the heart of his synthesis is the metaphysical principle of wahdat al-wujud, the unity of being. It would be an oversimplification to conclude that Ibn Arabi’s system is but another form of monism, for God is not identified substantially with his creation. God transcends all categories, even that of substance.
Creation results from God’s longing to be known and loved. The world of plurality is, therefore, the mirror of the Ultimate. Existents are not identical with God but reflections of his attributes. An analogy to breathing would be most apt: as breath is exhaled and inhaled so too does God continue to create and annihilate until all is eventually reunited in the One.
Because of creation’s illusory quality, God is identified as the only true existent. All created realities by their very nature yearn to be restored to the source from which they have sprung. Abd al-Karim Jili (d. 1428) describes in detail how the Perfect Man, al-Insan al-Kamil, acts as the ultimate mediator between God and creation, for the Perfect Man is the reality in which God is most perfectly manifest. When the process of return reaches its culmination, all the paradoxes and tensions of opposites that characterize the experience of the Sufi mystic will be resolved. Good and evil, reward and punishment, union and separation -- all become empty concepts, for nothing exists but the One.
Sufism after Ibn Arabi bears his indelible imprint. There is perhaps no other Sufi whose influence has been so pervasive. The evolution of Sufism during the thirteenth century should not, however, be restricted to theoretical issues. One extremely significant social phenomenon was the growth and development of Sufi orders or fraternities (tariqas).
Signs of Sufi social groupings date back as far as the eighth century, but these early organizations remained fluid in character through the eleventh century. Individual charismatic Sufi masters (known as shaikhs or pirs) attracted a number of disciples who would settle around the master, but the group would often disband after the death of the charismatic guide. Some disciples would seek another master; others might have begun to attract their own followers. There were no codes, however, to regulate the structure of the group.
The support of Sufi convents through the waqf system and the increased involvement of the civil authorities in funding and regulating Sufi convents during the Seljuk period contributed to the growing trend toward stabilization among Sufi groups. By the thirteenth century, self-perpetuating tariqas became more the norm. Rather than disband after the death of the founder, the Sufis would select a new leader from among the members of the group. In some tariqas, the transmission of authority was hereditary. The new shaikh would be entrusted with preserving and promulgating the teachings of the deceased master. Consequently, each order began to take on a unique personality, molded by the spirit and writings of the original shaikhs as well as by the contributionsof renowned later members.
The success of the tariqas cannot be attributed solely to their charisma and social stability. Many of them provided the wider community with a vibrant and easily accessible form of devotional piety. Whereas the abstruse and highly sophisticated mystical theory of Ibn Arabi appealed to the Sufi intellectual elite, the rituals of dhikr and sama opened important avenues of religious experience to the majority of the faithful.
Dhikr (“remembrance”) is an exercise that can be performed alone or with a group, silently or aloud; it consists of the rhythmic repetition or chanting of phrases that often contain one or more of the ninety-nine names of God. The performance of dhikr may also entail rhythmic body movements, breath control, and other practices usually associated with meditation techniques. The goal of the dhikr ceremony is to foster interior states and an exterior environment conducive to an intense and intimate experience of God; for one or more of the participants this involves the attainment of mystical ecstasy.
A devotional exercise similar to dhikr is that of sama (literally,“audition”). Sama involves the musical recital of religious poetry and is oftern accompanied by the chanting of verses from the Qur’an. The music acts as the stimulus for various forms of Sufi dance. The types of poetry, music, and ritual movement are as varied as the Sufi groups themselves. The Mevlevis, for example, founded in Turkey by Jalal al-Din Rumi, are noted for the aesthetic refinement of their sama ceremony. The mystical dance of the Mevlevis (known popularly as the Whirling Dervishes) is the consummate example of the wedding of interior religious states to the external forms of ritual movement.
Not all performances of sama are as aesthetically refined as that of the Mevlevis. Nevertheless, sama possesses a power that is independent of aesthetics, whether the performance be encountered in a rural village or modern city in the Islamic world, whether its music and poetry be artistically sophisticated or the popular music and poetry inspired by local Sufi saints. The sama invariably creates an environment charged with religious fervor that provides men and women with an important outlet through which to express their pent-up religious and emotional feelings.
The immediacy of the experiences of dhikr and sama contrasts dramatically with the traditional Sufi path, which demands years of dedication and training. Yet it is the easy accessibility of these experiences that facilitated the integration of the tariqas into the religious life of the general Muslim population.
To the power of dhikr and sama must be added the widespread acknowledgment by both Sufi and layperson of the potent spiritual force known as baraka (“blessing”). The great shaikhs of the tariqas as well as individual Sufis of spiritual renown were believed to possess a unique spiritual power that could be transmitted to their disciples or devotees. Baraka even survived the death of the holy person: thus visits to tombs and shrines are considered particularly efficacious.
The attribution of baraka to the great Sufi shaikhs is closely related to the sophisticate theory of the Perfect Man (al-Insan al-Kamil) elaborated by Jili; the charismatic Sufi saint who possesses extraordinary baraka serves as the qutb (“pole”), that is, the unique manifestation of spiritual authority in the universe and the mediator of all religious experience.
The pervasive influence of the tariqas is evident throughout the Muslim world, from the Levant and Central Asia through Africa, the Indian subcontinent, Malaysia, Indonesia, and other Islamic lands. In addition, to responding to the religious needs of the populace, the tariqas played an important missionary role. A prime example is the Indian subcontinent, which first encountered Islam in 711-712 with the conquest of Sind by a representative of the Umayyad caliph. A more extensive empire was established by Mahmud of Ghazna (d. 1030), from which Lahore emerged as an important political and intellectual center. It is here that al-Hujwiri, the author of the Kashf al-mahjub, died in 1071. He is still revered as the city’s patron saint under the name of Data Ganj Bakhsh.
The Chishti was the first major Sufi order in the subcontinent, established there in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries by Muinuddin Chishti (d. 1236). The Chistis attracted many followers through their dhikr ceremonies and through their devotion to music and poetry. The Chishti convent (jama’at-khana or khangah).functioned as a center not only for Sufis but for the wider community as well, since the Chishtis were devoted to the care of the poor and needy. Life in the convent centered around the pit, who closely directed the lives of his followers and managed the secular affairs of the convent.
The second great order was the Suhrawardi, whose first master was Bahauddin Zakariya of Multan (d. about 1267). In contrast to the Chishtis, the Suhrawardis placed a greater emphasis on material well-being and family life. They accepted government support and were more intimately involved with the ruling powers.
By no means were these the only Sufi groups to have a significant impact on Islamic life in the region. Many other Sufi communities -- ranging from the strict, reform minded Naqshbandis (whose center of power was in Central Asia and Afghanistan) to the antinomian Qalandars -- were integral elements in the evolving religious life of South Asia.
While it is true that the classical period of Sufism (ninth to fifteenth century) was a time of enormous religious, literary, and social creativity, the modern period possesses its own vibrancy. Sufism remains an extremely influential force throughout the Islamic world and will continue to contribute to the evolution of Muslim religious life in the future.
Faqir see Sufis.
Dervish see Sufis.
Darvish see Sufis.
Sufyan al-Thawri, Abu ‘Abd Allah (Abu ‘Abd Allah Sufyan al-Thawri) (715-778). Theologian, traditionist and ascetic from Kufa. As a jurist, he was the founder of a law school which
however later disappeared.
'Abu 'Abd Allah Sufyan al-Thawri see Sufyan al-Thawri, Abu ‘Abd Allah
'Abu 'Abd Allah Sufyan al-Thawri see Sufyan al-Thawri, Abu ‘Abd Allah
No comments:
Post a Comment