Sufis and Anti-Sufis: The Defence, Rethinking and Rejection of Sufism in the Modern World, Elizabeth Sirriyeh, PDF

Preview

Summary

Reviews427 sianJPerso-Islamicphilosophy. The two volumes, while reprintinga fair amount of material(some of which is of dubious quality), do presentmuch new material to the reader.They do facilitate teaching and understanding,as long as they are used carefully and critically. The Anthology is thus a...

Description

Reviews427

sianJPerso-Islamicphilosophy. The two volumes, while reprintinga fair amount of material(some of which is of dubious quality), do presentmuch new material to the reader.They do facilitate teaching and understanding,as long as they are used carefully and critically. The Anthology is thus a major contributionand once it is complete (in five or six projectedvolumes), it will no doubt transform the way in which we perceive and studyphilosophicaltraditionsin Persia. SajjadH. Rizvi Instituteof Ismaili Studies,London

Sufis and Anti-Sufis: The Defence, Rethinking and Rejection of Sufism in the Modern World,ElizabethSirriyeh, London:Curzon Press 1999, ISBN: 0-700710582 (cloth) 0-700710604 (paper)viii + 188 pp. "If on some mountaintop somewhere there were a single person of understanding,he would constitute the Muslim Community."(Sufyan al-Thawri) While, for its small size, Elizabeth Sirriyeh's study offers us a unique survey of the social history of Sufis and anti-Sufismin the contemporaryworld, her analysis suffers from the distorting prism of contemporarypoliticized and secularist understandingof mysticism, where works and authorsthat are of but marginal relevance to Sufi spiritualityare allowed to take center stage and become the judges of a science the relish of which is alien to their taste and the metaphysical subtletyof which is often beyond the scope of theircomprehension. The first chapter on "Sufis and their Critics Before the Impact of Europe" opens with a review and attemptedrevival of A. J. Arberry'slong outdatedthesis, first proposed over half a century ago in a tiny book purportingto give a brief account of Sufism, detailing "TheDecay of Sufism" supposedlyundergone by eighteenth-centurySufism.1 Since then, his thesis has been batted about, to and fro, pro and con, debated by scholars such as Fritz Meier, MarshallHodgson, and J. S. Trimingham.More recently, the entire 'Sufism and decline' paradigm has been re-examined and seriously disputed by Marcia Hermansen2as well as by CarlErnstwho observedthat The notion of the decline of Muslim nations was especially attractive to the self-image of Europeansin the colonial period, since it provided 1. A. J. Arberry,Sufism:An Account of the Mystics of Islam (London, 1950), chapter 11.

2. Marcia Hermansen, "ContemplatingSacred History in Late Mughal Sufism: The case of Shah Wali Allah of Dehli," in Leonard Lewisohn and David Morgan, eds. The Heritage of Sufism, vol. 3 Late Classical Persianate Sufism (1501-1750) (Oxford, 19999), 318-43.

This content downloaded from 146.198.210.70 on Sun, 16 Aug 2015 07:04:00 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

428 Reviews

a noble justification for conquest and empire on the basis of the 'civilizing mission' of the West (also known as 'the white man's burden'). If, however, we do not intend to supportany of these agendas,then the notion of 'classicism and decline' is distinctly unhelpful in the study of a traditionsuch as Sufism."3 Then, simultaneouslywith this book, Frederickde Jong and BermdRadtke published in 1999 (Brill) their monumental edited collection (800 pages), Islamic Mysticism Contested: Thirteen Centuries of Controversiesand Polemics, which raises some of the same discussions of decline, but with a wider historical sweep. Sirriyeh's discussion of Arberry'sthesis runs slightly more than two pages (pp. 2-3), in which she does not seem to be awareof (or at least, fails to mention) any of the above scholars except Hodgson, and generally takes the idea of decline as an adequate methodological notion on which to base her study. However, as the most cursory review of the above-cited works demonstrates,it is far from adequate. It should be underlinedthat this "urgeto refonm... clearly visible throughout the world-wide umma"(p. 21) discussed in chapterone, and presentedas if it were the naturalcorollaryto the notion of 'decline,' has always been part and parcel of the ongoing process of purification within Sufism itself, for as Carl Ernst has insightfully noted: "lamentingits decline has been part of the definition of Sufism from the beginning, as an illustrationof the tension between the ideals of mysticism and the realities of social practice."4The examples that the authorhas selected are by no means typical ones, nor can they be predicatedas being characteristic of a movement within either Sufism world-wide or "the world-wide umma." In fact, being drawn from only a small segment of the Muslim world, they may hardly he said to buttress sufficiently the conclusions drawn. The first chapterprovides a shortlistof negative opinions by Sufis and antiSufis alike on the contemporaryspiritualcondition of eighteenth-centuryMuslim society. Among the figures cited to typify the Sufi point of view are Shah Wali Allah (1703-62), one of the greatestmystical theosophersof the late classical period in the Indian subcontinent;and Ahmad Ibn Idris (d. 1253/1837), the renownedSufi saintof Moroccanorigin. Neither her coverage of Wali Allah nor Ibn Idris (pp. 4-11) is comprehensive. MisinterpretingWali Allah, and buying into the Orientalistconstructof the decline of Sufism, she characterizesWali Allah "as a great pioneeringreformer, presentingthe acceptableface of Sufism and paving the way for a much broader renewal with a modem tinge." (p. 6, italics mine) But from the twelfth century onwards,Sufism was always viewed as one of the more acceptablefaces of classical Islam (at least, if we care to heed the judgement of the most influential theologian of medieval Islam-Abu Hamid al-Ghazali- and modem scholars 3. Carl Ernst,"ChishtiMeditationPractices of the LaterMughal Period,"in Lewisohn and Morgan,TheHeritage of Sufism3: 346. 4. CarlErnst,TheShambhalaGuide to Sufism(Boston, 1997), 24-25.

This content downloaded from 146.198.210.70 on Sun, 16 Aug 2015 07:04:00 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews429

such as Hodgson5)soit hardly follows that Sufism somehow requires a modem facelift to present its credentials or display its beauty to the world of international belles lettres. Sirriyeh's misinformed bias that Sufism is somehow outside the pale or purview of the classical Islamic traditionand readinessto endorse the rhetorical posturingof certainreformists-that contemporaryMuslim thinkersneed somehow 'reorient' themselves to justify or reinvigorateits existence, unfortunately seems to pervade the entire work. I also fail to understandwhat the author means by Wali Allah's so-called "revolutionaryand distinctly modern-looking social and economic ideas," (p. 6), for as I pointed out in a recent review of Marcia K. Hermansen's The Conclusive Argumentfrom God: Shah Wall Allah of DehIl's HujiatAllaThal-Biiligha,6 Wali Allah's attitudeto society and government has distinctly little to contributeto modem political science or social theory. Her coverage of Ibn Idris likewise contains some extraordinaryassertions. She begins by commentingcaustically (p. 8) that he "mightnot be classed as an outstandingintellectual Sufi" [whateverthat means: some of the greatestclassical-period Sufis, such as Bishr Hafi (d. 226/841), Bayazid of Bistam (d. 261/875), Abu Sacid ibn Abi'l-Khayr (d. 440/1048), have left no writings behind, yet of Bishr Hafi it was said that "if the intellect with which Bishr Hafi is endowed were to be divided among the inhabitantsof Baghdad, all of them would be accounted among the foremost thinkersof the world."7]A few pages on she donnishly informs us that he combined a concern for "spiritualreform" with an attitude"sufficientlyconvincing in his fundamentalistapproach"(p. 10), while nothing could be farther from the truth. As a Sufi thinker, Ibn Idris's social significance lies in his staunch opposition to the Wahhabifundamentalists who took over Arabia, as Bernd Radtke, John O'Kane, Knut S. Vikor, R. S. O'Fahey in their work on The ExotericAhmadIbn Idris: A Sufi's Critiqueof the Madhaihiband the Wahhabis(Leiden: Brill, 2000) have recently demonstrated. Ibn ldris is all the more remarkablefor his spiriteddefence of Ibn 'Arabi's Sufi

5. See Ghazali's Al-Munqidhmin al-dalal, ed. FaridJabre(Beirut, 1969), 35-36 where he situates Sufism as the supreme science in Islam. Marshall G. S. Hodgson points out that it was men such as Ghazali who helped make Sufism "acceptable to the 'ulama themselves," so that "graduallySuifism,from being one form of piety among others, and by no means the most acceptable one either officially or popularly, came to dominate religious life not only within the Jamaci-Sunnifold, but to a lesser extent even among Shicis.'' The Ventureof Islam: The Expansion of Islam in the Middle Periods 3 vols. (Chicago, 1977), 2: 203. 6. In the Bulletinof the BritishSociety of MiddleEasternStudies27 (2000): 216-20. 7. Muhammad b. Ahmad Dhahabi, Siyar aclam al-nubala' (Beirut, 1981-85), 475, cited by A. M. Damghani, "Persian Contributionsto Sufi Literaturein Arabic," in L. Lewisohn, ed., The Heritage of Sufismvol. 1 Classical Persian Sufismfrom its Origins to Rumi,47.

This content downloaded from 146.198.210.70 on Sun, 16 Aug 2015 07:04:00 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

430 Reviews doctrines in the face of their persecutionby the Wahhabis.8So he can no more be classified as having a "fundamentalist"approach to religion than, say, Ghazali or Mulla Sadra can. Anyone who cares to read Ibn Idris's stout and eloquent apologia for Sufi ecumenical esotericism in the face of the crude calumny of his Wahhabi fundamentalist enemies (see The Exoteric Ahmad Ibn Idris, pp. 177-211), will witness how sublime the flights of his intellect, how deep the insights of his heart were. So Sirriyeh's theses, in these particular instancesat least, are completelywrong. This first chapterrepresentsa brave attemptto sum up the main attitudesto society held by a select group of four Sufi thinkersin Arabia,South Asia, West and North Africa, examining respectively the thought of Ibn Idris, Shah Wali Allah, Usuman dan Fodio (1754-1817) and Ahmad al-Tijani. However, I confess that the main thing which troublesme aboutthis chapteris a generallack of reference to Sufism's two key subjects: speculative metaphysics and the prescriptive ethics of the Path. Next to nothing about any of the psychological or metaphysical doctrines of Sufism found in their writings is mentioned here: nothing about the ahwal and maqiimat; nothing of samiC, next to nothing of wahdat al-wujud, nothing of the khanaqiihinstitution,and very little about the ethical prescriptionsof Sufism which define the place of Islamic mysticism visa-vis nomocentricIslam. In short, this book reads so far as if it were a kind of history of Methodism without citation of any of the hymns of Isaac Watts or CharlesWesley, withoutquotationof any of the sermonsof GeorgeWhitefield. This lack of adequaterepresentationof the advocates of the classical Sufi traditioncontinues in chaptertwo, devoted to "The Challengeof EuropeanAntiSufism" (pp. 27-53), which geographicallyspans Sufism in Algeria, the Sudan, the North Caucasus,the OttomanEmpire,and India, and is subdividedinto brief sections treating historical examples of the confrontationof Sufism with European imperialismand modernism,as well as some coverage of clerical reaction and resistance to tasawwuf. The relevant rubricsof the author's discussion are "Algeria: Divided Struggle, Quietism and Collaboration,""Mahdismand Sufi Resistance,""MuhammadAhmad, the Sudanese Mahdi (1844-85)," "The North Caucasus: Resistance and Revitalized Sufism," "Implications of the Lesser Jihad," "The Greater Jihad and Worldly Constraints,""Surviving the British Raj," 'The Deobandi Sufi Reformers," 'The Barelwi Defenders of Traditional Sufism,"and "Anti-SufiReformers:Ahl-i Hadith." For each of these, Sirriyehoffers vignette-likesurveys of varyingdegrees of historical breadth,doctrinaldepth, and scholarly accuracy and adequacy.While her treatment of "Surviving the British Raj", focusing on the Deobandi and Barelwi Sufis, is substantial(five pages), for instance, the conspicuousomission 8. Broughtout in my review in African Studies90/360 (1991): 476-78 of R. S. O'Fahey,EnigmaticSaint:Ahmadibn Idris and the Idrisi Tradition.

9. ThusIbn Idristolerantlystatesthat"fanaticaldevotionto one's own school,the formationof factions,andaccusingeachotherof heresy,as if it werea matterof different religions . . . such things we disapproveof." Cited in my review of O'Fahey where lbn

is highlighted. Idris'santi-fundamentalism

This content downloaded from 146.198.210.70 on Sun, 16 Aug 2015 07:04:00 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews 431

of notes referencingany of the main secondary works on Sufism in India (such as K. A. Nizami, Carl Ernst, Bruce Lawrence, M. Hermansenor S. A. Rizvi, particularlythe last two scholars' works on Shah Wali'ullah), as well as the complete absence of reference to any primary sources (throughoutthis whole chapter),makesthis vignette a cursoryratherthanan in-depthanalysis. The authornotes that the Europeanoccupation was to extend "far beyond the physical takeover of land and launch a devastating attack on all aspects of Muslim identity. In this process Sufism, as a centralfeatureof this identity, was to be challenged more severely than at any point in its history. By contrastwith this worldwide Europeanassault, all previous internalMuslim anti-Sufismpales almost into insignificance." (p. 29) While this statementhas quite a lot of truth in it, one can find frequent instances where Sufi masters expressed respect for and kinship with some of the more progressivevalues of Westem civilization in the face of the repression encountered in their own homelands from fanatical formalist Muslims, as well as frequentdeclarationsof admirationfor Sufism on the partof Europeanscholars. In 1831 (to give but one example out of many of the latter), for example, the Nicmatullahi master Zayn al-cAbidin Shirvani ("Mast cAli Shah") described his friendly encounter with a learned European gentleman in Kirmanshah,who, when asked to comment on the Europeanview of Sufis and Sufism, gave him an enthusiasticallypositive report.'0 Throughoutthis chapter, broad-brushgeneralizations abound; one finds a tendency to take particularexamples belonging to specific historico-cultural contexts and temporalpolitical circumstancesand draw from these general conclusions supposedly applicable to the wider Muslim world. The following statement,for example, may make sense in a limited historicaland geographical sense, but certainlycannotbe generallyappliedto Muslimmystics en masse. For numbersof Sufis their first encounter with Europeanswas a violent one. In areas without other effective armed forces, where larger Islamic state control was weak or non-existent, it was often they who formed the front line of Muslim resistance,engaging in the traditional religiously-approvedstrategy of jihad against the unbelieving enemy. (p. 29) Following this pronouncement,the author proceeds to discuss nineteenthcentury Sufi attitudes to "the Lesser Jihad" in Algeria. A mere two pages (32 infra-34 supra) is devoted to CAbd al-Qadir's Sufism, portrayingthe Amir as a 10. "Fromthe books of Sufismavailablein our land, " the man replied,"we have deducedthatthe sect of the Sufisarethe mostpiousandpeacefulof all Muslims.Since we considera 'perfecthumanbeing' to be someonefromwhose handand tongueall othersaresafe andsecure,whodoes notannoyandirritateothers,nordestroytheirpeace andcontentment by botheration andtorment,themainMuslimsectcharacterized by such ethics are the dervishesand theirfollowers,for this groupare seekersof wisdomand gnosis,who chooseto residein solitudeandseclusionandrefrainfromassociationwith folkof vaindisposition." Shirvani,Bustanal-siyaiha (Tehran,1315/1936),31.

This content downloaded from 146.198.210.70 on Sun, 16 Aug 2015 07:04:00 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

432 Reviews man who harboredviolent animosity for his FrenchChristianenemies, while in reality his characterwas quite the opposite-witness his heroic defense of the 15,000 Christiansof Damascus at the time of the Druze massacres (1860), so eloquentlydescribedby his biographerChurchill: "All the representatives of the Christian power then residing in Damascus, without one single exception, had owed their lives to him. Strange and unparalleleddestiny! An Arab had thrown his guardian aegis over the outraged majesty of Europe. A descendent of the Prophethas shelteredand protectedthe Spouse of Christ."" The author's cursory and dismissive account of the Amir's political career is complementedby a virtualdisregardfor the spiritualdimensionof his personality, even omittingto mentionthe existence of any of his profoundtheosophical writings, although a good anthology of these was published in both Frenchand English'2severalyears priorto this work. Sirriyeh's approachto the various forms of malaise which afflicted Sufism in the nineteenth century is generally not to acknowledge that there are any basic fundamentalprinciplesof the Sufi tarfqa which may have been perverted, but instead to view these perversions as integral dimensions of Sufism itself. The author's attitude of indifference to Sufi ethics (akhlaq) and intellectual flouting of the preceptsof suluik-the prima materia of Sufi speculativetheosophy-betrays an essential disregard for the mucdmalat,ahwal, maqamat,and ultimately,the haqrqat of classical Sufism. This dismissive attitudetowardsthe principles of Sufi ethics is visible, for instance, in her comments about the Sudanese 'Mahdi' MuhammadAhmad, who in 1884 announceda ban on all the Sufi tarrqas, declaring that their adherentsshould abandonthem. Sirriyeh here judges that "His mahdishipdid not deny the truthsof Sufism, but made its previous organizationalform obsolete."(p. 37; italics mine) Alas! The impious behaviour of this pseudo-Sufi, this so-called messiah, belies the first and fundamentalmoral truthof Sufism, which is abstentionfrom condemnationof one's fellow Muslims for adopting divergent modes of worship: a coda of tolerance that is the theme of the exordium to the chapter in Sacdi's Gulistanon "Sufi Ethics,"later versified by 'Abd al-RahmanJami in his Silsilat al-dhahabas follows: If you see a devotee engage with the Prophet'smessage yet in his wordor doctrinewitness 11. CharlesHenryChurchill,TheLifeof AbdelKader(London:ChapmanandHall, the Distortionof "FromSufismto Terrorism: 1897),323, cited by RezaShah-Kazemi, ed.,Algeria:Revolution Islamin thePoliticalCultureof Algeria,"in RezaShah-Kazemi, Revisited(London:IslamicWorldReport,1997),165. 12. Michael Chocdkiewicz,The Spiritual Writingsof 'Abdal-Kader (Albany, SUNY

Press,1995).

This content downloaded from 146.198.210.70 on Sun, 16 Aug 2015 07:04:00 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews433

a myriaderrors,faults and kinds of innovation, bewareneithercurse him as an infidel, nor reckonhim amongthe folk of the fire.'3 In any case, it seems more reasonable that Sufis should be measured by their compatibility to classical Sufi ideals, with the understandingthat, as Hujwiri put it, writing almost a millenniumago, "there'sbut one championin every host, and the genuine adepts in every sect are few-still, the masses count these fakes as genuine, and because of their conformity with the Sufis in one respect, people reckon them as Sufis in every respect. Hence, the Prophet's dictum. 'He who makes himself akin to a party is one of them."",14Any study of Sufism which fails to give focal importanceto Abu'l-Husayn Nuri's (d. 295/907) dictum "Suflsm is neithercustomarypractices nor knowledge; rather,it is ethics"'5 remains,to say the least, methodologicallyand academicallyshallow, insofar as Sufism is a type of mysticism whose primary definitions are, as Carl Ernst points out, of an ethically prescriptivenature.16 Another disturbing aspect of the book in this respect is that most of the Sufis that the authorhas chosen to discuss are actually often quite uncharacteristic of the ideals of the classical traditionof Islamic mysticism. Thus, there is very little mention of the classical tradit...