Hitherto, collective
studies on medieval Sufism have tended to suffer from some basic shortcomings:
they have focused on mystical ideas devoid of any serious contextualisation, or
upon a particular order, or a region, or have even attempted to discern an Arab
or simply Persianate essence to the phenomena of Sufi practice and thought.
Many of these studies have also been characterised by an ahistorical approach
to the subject of inquiry. Those which have exhibited a historical approach
have tended to assume that Sufi practice in the medieval period shifts from the
establishment of orders and their dominance to a gradual decline into the
colonial and imperial period. However, a number of recent works try to engage seriously with the historical contextualisation of Sufi movements as well as the construction of hagiographies. The present volume of papers makes at least two
major contributions: first, it brings together a series of studies from the
Ottoman and Indian worlds rarely combined in the same volume – and partly, no
doubt, due to the fact that Curry’s research has hitherto focused on the
Halveti order in the Ottoman realm and Ohlander’s on the Suhrawardī order not
least in India; and second, it engages with some of the major themes in the
historical study of medieval Sufism from the rise of the orders through to the
cusp of the colonial period, in particular focusing on the relationship with
political power, the conundrum of the ‘court of the Sultan versus the court of
the Sufi shaykh’, initially raised masterfully in the Indian context by the
late Simon Digby. It also complements a number of more recent studies on Sufism
that demonstrate the actual agency that Sufis have deployed and make sense of
doctrine rooted in social, intellectual and cultural contexts. Broadly, one can also discern a Persianate flavour in the volume that accounts for elements of cultural continuity from Turkey to India.
The editors themselves
locate these studies within two key contemporary contexts – critical insofar as
history remains very much the domain of how the present makes sense of the past
in the light of its own concerns and prejudices. The first is the current
debate over violence and jihad and whether Sufism provides the required
‘moderate’, non-violent and ecumenical face of the religion to be bolstered
against the extremists, a policy that in itself is problematic given the
history of antipathy, hostility, and violence towards Sufism exhibited by the
violent Salafī tradition that has spawned al-Qaeda and its cognates. One way to
understand the role of Sufism within the current landscape therefore requires
an understanding of how Sufis have engaged with power and violence in the past
– and how the very notion of constitutes Islam has been and remains contested. Such a study can provide useful correctives to misguided attempts at promoting a 'peaceful, non-violent' and other-worldy Sufism as a bulwark against violent extremism. The second frame is the desire to provide a fuller history of Sufism and
society in the pre-modern period, especially in the few centuries leading up to
the colonial period, and to produce a richer account by considering different
cultural and geographical contexts.
The chapters are then
arranged into four sections of three papers each. The first on historiography attempts
to reconsider and re-evaluate the sources that we have for the history of
Sufism. Auer’s paper on the Delhi Sultanate questions the very fissure between
religious and political conceptions of authority and power. A couple of key
questions remain: is the relationship also a discourse about legitimation, and
to what extent should we consider some of these chronicles are discursive
constructions of elite life that do not allow us to hear the subaltern speak? A
corollary could also investigate whether tales of baraka and karāma are
always currency within elite discursive negotiations? But the article whets the appetite and suggests a more serious reading of Auer's recent book on the sultanate. Ohlander interrogates
trans-regionalism and the assumption of the relative isolation of the
Indo-Muslim context by examining the sources on the famous Suhrawardī Shaykh
Bahāʾ al-Dīn Zakarīyāʾ (d. 1268). One additional point in favour of
transregionalism and the transmission of networks and lineages associated with
key figures and spaces in India is the basic question of property and
patronage. It is no accident that much of the elite (including Sufi)
immigration into India in the late medieval and early modern period was
associated with the desire to acquire power and wealth, since India was
relatively far richer in resources than anyone else in the Persianate world. Exchange
and negotiation at shrines was not just about the spiritual currency of baraka. Foley discusses the network
around the Naqshbandi Shaykh Khālid (d. 1827) as a means to question the use of
some theoretical approaches relating to modernization and social movement
theory that are sometimes deployed in the study of more recent Sufism. His
paper is an important marker that frames the upper temporal limit of the scope
of the study and raises the interesting question of the nature of Sufism in
societies on the brink of modernity and colonization.
The second section on
landscapes considers how Sufism shapes the moral, intellectual and physical
landscape and how one frames the study of Sufism in medieval society. Anjum’s
piece is an ambitious attempt to understand how hierarchies of spirituality
were constructed from the formative period and then challenged and interrogated
later as visions of authority and reality were diversified following the Mongol
invasions. The focus in the chapter is on Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 1351) as
the liminal exemplar between Sufism and reforming anti-Sufism. However
interesting the attempt (and rather lacking in actual detailed consideration of
evidence), it is pretty much impossible to provide a total account for the
relationship of diverse visions of spirituality to their socio-political
contexts throughout the totality of the history of Islam. Yurekli’s chapter
looks at the key centres of Sufi agency, namely the tombs of saints, and
demonstrates the distinction of the Ottoman sphere in which there was greatest
scholarly resistance to Sufism and hence the nature of the sacred space of the
tomb quite different from the rest of the Persianate world. Bukhari focuses on
a specific case of patronage by the Mughal princess Jahānārā (d. 1681) and how
her contribution was an attempt to inscribe her own literary and spiritual
presence into some of the major Sufi spaces in India, not least at the shrine
of the founding shaykh at Ajmer, Khwāja Muʿīnuddīn Chishtī.
The third section shifts
to doctrine and praxis and shifts in the Mamluk and Ottoman worlds. Ingalls
examines the evolution of the Sufi fatwa and the move towards accommodation
such that by the sixteenth century the scholarly culture of Cairo was far more
sympathetic to both Sufi thought and practice than before. Yildirim considers
Qizilbash spirituality, another major lacuna in the historiography, and its
relationship to the futuvvat literature and the transition to Shiʿi affiliation
in Anatolia. Ambrosio examines the later history of one of the most important
Sufi orders, the Mevlevi, but focuses on its later manifestations and their
interaction with the broadly anti-Sufi, puritanical movement of the
Kazizadelis. The final section entitled negotiations considers how Sufis
negotiated the social reality of their time and context. Emre examines the Sufi
Ibrahim-i Gulşeni (d. 1534) within the context of the transition from Mamluk to
Ottoman Cairo. Curry considers the relationship between the prominent Halveti
shaykhs in Istanbul and the Ottoman court of Murad III (d. 1595). The final
chapter by Nyazioğlu studies the role of dreams in the major Ottoman text Şaka’iku ‘n-nu‘maniyye. A number of the
contributors to the volume are young and creative scholars suggesting that the
future of the intellectual and socio-cultural history of Sufism is bright and
one expects much to emerge to transform the field.
Overall, there are more
papers that deal with the Ottoman context than any other. It would have been
useful to see more papers on the Central Asian contexts – and at some point,
more studies need to emerge on Sufism and society in Africa, in the Indian
Ocean system and others. Further research is also desirable, given our contemporary
concerns, on issues of Sufism and gender, community, individuality, and not
least magic and rationality. One would also like to see a discussion of how
Sunni and Shi‘i affiliations flowed and intersected with Sufism in the period –
Yildirim is the only one which touches indirectly upon that – especially given
the fundamental shifts in the Naqshbandi, Dhahabi and Ni‘matullahi orders that
emerged from the onset of the Ottoman and Safavid empires with distinction
theological identities. But this volume does present a gradual step toward a
richer understanding of the history of Sufism and ought to be read alongside
others; most importantly it demonstrates the efficacy and facility of using
theory to elucidate the social contexts and roles of Sufism.
No comments:
Post a Comment