Perspectives on Early Islamic Mysticism

The World of al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī and his Contemporaries

Sara Sviri

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN: 9780415303071
• eBook ISBN: 9781134413171
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Teologia e religione
• Subtopic: Politica mediorientale

This monograph explores the original literary produce of Muslim mystics during the eighth–tenth centuries, with special attention to ninth-century mystics, such as al-Tustar?, al-Mu??sib?, al-Kharr?z, al-Junayd and, in particular, al-?ak?m al-Tirmidh?. Unlike other studies dealing with the so-called 'Formative Period', this book focuses on the extant writings of early mystics rather than on the later ??f? compilations.

These early mystics articulated what would become a hallmark of Islamic mysticism: a system built around the psychological tension between the self (nafs) and the heart (qalb) and how to overcome it. Through their writings, already at this early phase, the versatility, fluidity and maturity of Islamic mysticism become apparent. This exploration thus reveals that mysticism in Islam emerged earlier than customarily acknowledged, long before Islamic mysticism became generically known as ??fism.

The central figure of this book is al-?ak?m al-Tirmidh?, whose teaching and inner world focus on themes such as polarity, the training of the self, the opening of the heart, the Friends of God (al-awliy??), dreams and visions, divine language, mystical exegesis and more.

This book thus offers a fuller picture than hitherto presented of the versatility of themes, processes, images, practices, terminology and thought models during this early period. The volume will be a key resource for scholars and students interested in the study of religion, ??f? studies, Late Antiquity and Medieval Islam.

Part I

Asceticism and mysticism (zuhd and taṣawwuf)

1 ‘Ṣūfism’

Reconsidering terms, definitions and processes¹

Terms and definitions: introductory notes

The examination of terms, definitions and processes pertaining to a given historical setting shows that the meaning of terms shift: for a period of time they may stably point to a certain definition, but then, while the term remains, its definition shifts and is reapplied. In the minds of later observers, such semantic shifts may cause perplexity and misperceptions. In the context of what follows, I shall apply this observation to the early phases of what became known as Ṣūfism. I set out to question widely accepted uses and definitions of terms pertaining to the early period of Islamic mysticism and consequently to review paradigms describing the processes that took place in this historical context. Two generally accepted postulations are at the forefront of my inquiry: the first relates to the alleged synonymity of ‘Ṣūfī’/’Sufism’ with ‘Islamic mystic’/’mysticism’ respectively; the second relates to the popular paradigm according to which full-blown Islamic mysticism (taṣawwuf) gradually evolved from an initial phase of ‘asceticism’ (zuhd).

At the outset, one should note that the term ‘mysticism’ itself, as a universal signifier, has been challenged by Islamicists and scholars of religions alike. Omid Safi, for example, in a lengthy paper which deals with two eminent eleventh-century Persian Ṣūfīs,² takes issue with the term ‘mysticism’ on two grounds: on the one hand as a category which, like religion, is “not a given … but … must be constructed” and is, therefore, “imagined”;³ and, on the other, as a category which, being “steeped in a Western, Protestant Christian tradition”, its “usefulness to studies of non-Christian (and even non-Protestant) mystics is dubious”. Such a critical approach is hardly unique. The critique of mysticism as a term and category, initially raised by scholars of religious studies, has been endorsed by scholars of Islamic as well as of Jewish mysticism. It bears the clear hallmark of the new school of historians of religion; in particular those post-Eliade scholars who have questioned enduring paradigms within the study fields of religious phenomena and have attempted to “reconstruct a History of Religion”.⁴ However, it is not only terms such as ‘mysticism’ which “have fallen from theoretical grace”.⁵ In the field of Islamic studies, attempts at dethroning old terms have been coupled with the post-colonial and anti-orientalist critique, which stems from the Saidian school of thought. Among scholars with such orientation, the use of the term ‘Ṣūfism’ has likewise been questioned. Carl Ernst, to take one example, writes:

Since the very concept of Sufism is hotly contested among both Muslims and non-Muslims today, it is important first of all to examine briefly the historical development of the European study of Sufism … The modern concept of Sufism emerged from a variety of European sources, including … Orientalist constructions of Sufism as a sect with a nebulous relation to Islam … Outsider terminology for Sufism stressed the exotic, the peculiar, and behavior that diverges from modern European norms; in the context of colonialism, this terminology emphasized the dangers of fanatic resistance to European rule.⁶

Against these calls for a re-examination of previously accepted nomenclature, my less radical historical inquiry of terms and their implications throws me, whether I like it or not, into a sticky debate where contemporary scholars (‘outsiders’, according to the lingo) strive for a safer, more politically correct ground upon which to build their theses and discourse.⁷ Why sticky? Because what I have set out to articulate in this chapter is likewise motivated by a wish, originating from critical observations, to re-examine terms and definitions which customarily, and often uncritically, have been employed in the study of early Islamic mysticism. Yet I have no quarrels with either of the terms ‘mysticism’ and ‘Ṣūfism’ in their own right. In the case of the former, I do not wish to invent a neologism to replace ‘mysticism’; neither do I see much point in substituting it with ‘spirituality’, ‘piety’, ‘devotion’, or similar alternatives. True, both Arabic and Hebrew lack a home-grown term for this discipline – and scholars of (so-called) mystical texts and phenomena in these fields are, no doubt, aware of this. It should also be noted that modern Arabic, in rendering what in European languages is named ‘mysticism’, has been using the term taṣawwuf generically; thus, Jewish mysticism is rendered al-taṣawwuf al-yahūdī, Hindu mysticism al-taṣawwuf al-hindī and so on. However, regardless of its genealogy and derivation, and in spite of its terminological ambiguities, I consider ‘mysticism’ a useful term for indicating certain human attitudes vis-à-vis the sacred and the extraordinary. Therefore, I shall assume the understanding that mysticism is a current within religions and cultures, associated with voluntary efforts, usually beyond and in addition to traditional religious practices, aimed at gaining an intensified experience of the sacred. A mystic, by the same token, is an individual desirous of such an experience, confident (or, at least, hopeful) that it can be gained during his/her lifespan and willing to commit him-/herself to the efforts whereby such an experience can be gained. Admittedly, this is no more than a basic, working definition offered mainly from the perspective of the Islamic material at hand; I have no claim of offering an all-inclusive definition of mysticism. So much for mysticism.

Turning my attention now to the terms ‘Ṣūfism’ and ‘Ṣūfī’, I ponder: Can the above characterization of mystics and mysticism apply also to Ṣūfīs and Ṣūfism – in other words, were Ṣūfīs mystics? Here a suspension of judgement is required vis-à-vis the textual evidence: if the terms apply to Ṣūfīs and Ṣūfism as they have become known since approximately the second half of the third/ninth century onwards, then yes, Ṣūfism is, without doubt, a mystical current within Islam, one that revolves around the search, preferably within some communal affiliation and under the supervision of a master, of an intensified personal experience of God; and, yes, a Ṣūfī is someone who willingly strives, by means of special practices – preferably under the guidance of an expert master and within a somewhat intimate community – to achieve such an experience. Thus, according to the Ṣūfī lore, as developed and written from the second half of the third/ninth century onwards, supererogatory practices (nawāfil, ṭāʿāt) such as fasts, prayers, vigils, remembrances, periods of seclusion and contemplation, should be diligently carried out alongside a careful observation of the obligatory religious rituals (ʿibādāt). The exertion of voluntary efforts is motivated by the understanding that efforts are indispensable for attaining a here-and-now experience of the divine spheres. From this perspective Ṣūfīs are, indeed, mystics. However, if my attention is directed towards certain individuals or groups in earlier phases of Islamic history (mainly the first and second half of the third/ninth century) to whose name the chroniclers attached the label al-ṣūfī, then the answer is not at all straightforward, for it turns out that not all Ṣūfīs were mystics and that not all mystics were named Ṣūfīs.

It is from this perspective that I shall examine the term Ṣūfism and its cognates; not due to political correctness nor from a malaise with the ‘-ism’ ending, but because of the semantic shifts and cultural adaptations which this term underwent in the course of its historical development. I wish, therefore, to revisit the primary sources in order to tease out of them answers to these questions. These answers I shall weigh vis-à-vis previous scholarly evaluations in an attempt to offer new interpretative options. This is not to say that the scholarly works referred to above do not engage with primary sources. However, in my view, much thought has been invested in projecting culturally dependent postmodern models and constructs of discourse upon the relevant material, at the expense of revisiting the material itself. Indeed, for the scholar, one advantage that primary sources have is that they are free from the constraints of either following or rejecting any sets of time-bound dogmas and methodologies such as counter-Orientalism, Post-colonialism, Post-enlightenment and the like. One may argue, as some scholars do, that the term Ṣūfism, or even the term Islam, are an orientali...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of figures
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction: perspectives on Early Islamic Mysticism – the world of al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī and his contemporaries
• PART I: Asceticism and mysticism (zuhd and taṣawwuf)
• PART II: Schools and teachers
• PART III: Polarity
• PART IV: The spiritual hierarchy
• PART V: Language and hermeneutics
• Bibliography
• Index