Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T09:19:07.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shiʻism and Sufism: Their Relationship in Essence and in History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

Seyyed Hossein Nasr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In discussing the intricate and somewhat complex relationship between Shiʻism and Sufism, both in principle and essence or in their metahistorical reality as well as in time and history, we need hardly concern ourselves with the too often repeated criticism made by certain orientalists who would doubt the Islamic and Quranic character of both Shiʻism and Sufism. Basing themselves on an a priori assumption that Islam is not a revelation and, even if a religion, is only a simple ‘religion of the sword’ for a simple desert people, such would-be critics brush aside as un-Islamic all that speaks of gnosis (ʻirfân) and esotericism, pointing to the lack of historical texts in the early period as proof of their thesis, as if the non-existent in itself could disprove the existence of something which may have existed without leaving a written trace for us to dissect and analyse today. The reality of Shiʻism and Sufism as integral aspects of the Islamic revelation is too blinding to be neglected or brushed aside by any would-be historical argument. The fruit is there to prove that the tree has its roots in a soil that nourishes it. And the spiritual fruit can only be borne by a tree whose roots are sunk in a revealed truth. To deny this most evident of truths would be as if we were to doubt the Christian sanctity of a St Francis of Assisi because the historical records of the first years of the Apostolic succession are not clear. What the presence of St Francis proves is in reality the opposite fact, namely, that the Apostolic succession must be real even if no historical records are at hand. The same holds true mutatis mutandis for Shiʻism and Sufism. In this paper in any case we will begin by taking for granted the Islamic character of Shiʻism and Sufism and upon this basis delve into their relationship. In fact Shiʻism and Sufism are both, in different ways and on different levels, intrinsic aspects of Islamic orthodoxy, this term being taken not only in its theological sense but in its universal sense as tradition and universal truth contained within a revealed form.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , September 1970 , pp. 229 - 242
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 229 note 1 We have dealt elsewhere with the Islamic origin of Shiʻism and Sufism. See Nasr, S. H., Three Muslim Sages, Cambridge (U.S.A.), 1964, pp. 83–90Google Scholar; Nasr, S. H., Ideals and Realities of Islam, London, 1966, chapter VGoogle Scholar; H. Corbin (with the collaboration of Nasr, S. H. and Yahya, O.), Histoire de la philosophie islamique, vol. I, Paris, 1964Google Scholar, part one. Concerning the Islamic origin of Sufism see Abû Bakr Sirâj ed-Dîn, ‘The Origins of Sufism’, Islamic Quarterly, April, 1956, vol. III, pp. 53–64Google Scholar; Schuon, F., Understanding Islam, trans. by Matheson, D. M., London, 1963Google Scholar, chapter IV; and Guénon, R., ‘L'Esotérisme islamique’, in L'Islam et l'Occident, Paris, 1947, pp. 153–9.Google Scholar

Besides Corbin, some of the earlier Western scholars have also emphasised the close connection between Shiʻism and Sufism. See Andrae, T., Die Person Muhammads im Leben und Glauben seiner Gemeinde, Stockholm, 1918Google Scholar, where however in contrast to Corbin everything of an esoteric character in Islam is relegated to Hellenistic and Christian sources.

page 230 note 1 Concerning these relationships see Nasr, Ideals and Realities of Islam, chapter VI.

page 230 note 2 ‘On ne peut plus, en tout rigeur, faire de “soufisme” et de mystique musulmane, deux termes interchangeables depuis que l'on sait, en particulier grâce aux travaux de H. Corbin, qu'il existe une mystique musulmane-la gnose ismaélienne et imâmite notamment-que ne se reconnâit das “soufique”. Toutefois, ce qui est dit ici du tasawwuf à ses débuts vaut également pour cette mystique, ou gnose non soufique, laquelle a aussi sa source dans les enseignements du Prophète et de certains compagnons, dont surtout ‘Alî.’ Michon, J. L., Le soufi marocain Ahmad ibn Ajîba et son mi‘râj (Thèse de doctorat, Faculté des Lettres, Université de Paris, 1960, p. 2, n. 1.)Google Scholar

page 230 note 3 Ibn, Khaldûn, Muqaddimah, trans. by Rosenthal, F., vol. II, New York, 1958, p. 187.Google Scholar Ibn Khaldûn continues, ‘The fact that (the Sufis) restrict (precedence in mysticism) to ‘Alî smells strongly of pro-Shî‘ah sentiment. This and other aforementioned Sufi ideas show that the Sufis have adopted pro-Shî‘ah sentiments and have become enmeshed in them.’ ibid., p. 187.

On this question see also the extensive and well-documented work of Kâmil al-Shîbî, al-Silâh bayn al-tasawwuf wa' l-tashayyu', 2 vols., Baghdad, 1963–64.Google Scholar

page 231 note 1 This anachronistic practice is criticised by Taylor, John B.. ‘Ja‘far al-Sâdiq, Spiritual Forebear of the Sufis’, Islamic Culture, vol. XL, no. 2, April 1966, pp. 97 ff.Google Scholar

page 231 note 2 ‘So many-sided is this Sunni sentiment—in hadîths, in the Sufi orders, in guilds, in popular tales—that not only in its support of the original ‘Alî claims but in its whole piety Sunni Islam can be called half Shî‘ite’. Hodgson, M. G. S., ‘How did the early Shî‘a become Sectarian?’, Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 15, 1955, p. 4.Google Scholar See also Taylor, J. R., ‘An Approach to the Emergence of Heterodoxy in Medieval Islam’, Religious Studies, vol. 2, no. 2, April 1967, p. 202CrossRefGoogle Scholar, where the words of Hodgson are also quoted.

In certain areas of the Islamic world, particularly in the Indo-Pakistani sub-continent, one meets among Sufis certain groups as devoted to the Shî‘ite Imams, especially ‘Alî and Husayn, as any Shî‘ite could be, yet completely Sunni in their practice of the law (madhhab).

page 231 note 3 See Schuon, F., ‘De la tradition monothéiste’, Etudes Traditionelles, 1933, p. 257.Google Scholar

page 232 note 1 See Corbin, H., ‘L'Imâm caché et la rénovation de l'homme en théologie shî‘ite’, Eranos-Jahrbuch, 1960, pp. 87 ff.Google Scholar

page 232 note 2 On the ‘cycles of initiation and prophecy’, see Nasr, S. H., Ideals and Realities of Islam, pp. 87 and 161Google Scholar; and H. Corbin, op. cit.

page 232 note 3 Hakîm al-Tirmidhî devoted a major work to this question entitled Khatm al-awliyâ' which has been recently edited by O. Yahya, a work which had much influence upon Ibn ‘Arabî and later Sufis.

page 232 note 4 Ibn ‘Arabî and following him Dâ'ûd al-Qaysarî consider Christ as the universal ‘seal of sanctity’, and Ibn ‘Arabî refers indirectly to himself as the ‘particular seal of sanctity’ whereas most Shiʻite authors believe these titles belong to ‘Alî and the Mahdî respectively. In this delicate question the distinction between the ‘universal seal of sanctity’ and the ‘particular or Muhammadan seal of sanctity’ must be kept especially in mind. In any case this is a point of contention between Ibn ‘Arabî and even his most ardent Shiʻite followers such as Sayyid Haydar Âmulî.

page 233 note 1 This hadîth appears in many different forms in Shiʻite sources such as the Ghâyat al-marâm, Tehran, 1272, pp. 287 ff.Google Scholar

page 234 note 1 Ibn Abî Jumhûr, Kitâb al-mujlî, Tehran, 1329, p. 379.Google Scholar This hadîth has been mentioned with slight variations by many Shiʻite gnostics and Sufis. See for example, ‘Alî Sabziwarî, Muhammad, Tuhfat al ‘abbasîyah, Shiraz, 1326, pp. 93–4.Google Scholar Many other Shiʻite authors like Ibn Abi'l-Hadîd, Maytham al-Bahrânî and Sayyid Haydar Âmulî have referred to this hadîth. See al-Shîbî, , al-Silah bayn al-tasawwuf wa'l-tashayyu‘, vol. II, p. 117.Google Scholar

page 234 note 2 On the role of the Imam in Shiʻite spirituality see the many works of H. Corbin in the Eranos-Jahrbuch especially ‘L'Imâm caché et la rénovation de l'homme en théologie Shî‘ite’, and ‘Pour une morphologie de la spiritualité Shî‘ite’, Eranos-Jahrbuch, vol. XX, IX, 1961.Google Scholar

page 235 note 1 From the Jâmi ‘al-asrâr quoted by Kâmil Mustafâ al-Shîbî, Al-Fikr al-shî‘îwa'l-naza‘ât al-sûfîyah, Baghdad, 1966, p. 123.Google Scholar

page 235 note 2 Concerning the Sufi doctrine of the universal man see the translation of al-Jîlî's al-Insân al-kâmil by Burckhardt, T. as De l'homme universel, Lyon, 1953Google Scholar; also Guénon, R., Symbolism of the Cross, trans. by Macnab, R.. London, 1958.Google Scholar

page 235 note 3 Al-Shîbî, in his al-Shah…; vol. II, pp. 52–3Google Scholar writes that Ibn ‘Arabi has made use of Shiʻite sources in formulating his doctrine of the haqîqat al-muhammadîyah, wahdat al-wujûd and the Mahdî.

page 235 note 4 On Imam Ja‘far's teaching on this subject as it pertains to both Shiʻism and Sufism see Taylor, ‘Ja'far al-Sâdiq, Spiritual Forebear of the Sufis’, pp. 101–2.

page 236 note 1 This is a very complex question which of necessity we can only treat in very summary fashion. A fairly extensive survey of this question is found in the two works of al-Shîbî, al-Silâh bayn al-tasawwuf wa'l-tashayyu‘ and al-Fikr al-shî‘î wa'l-naza‘ât al-sûfîyah but even these two scholarly works deal mostly with the central lands of Islam leaving out of discussion the Maghrib, much of Central Asia and especially India where the relation between Shiʻism and Sufism has produced results not found elsewhere, results which should be closely studied.

page 236 note 2 On the pretext that the Nahj al-balâghah is not by ‘Alî but comes from the pen of its compiler Sayyid Sharîf Radî, many Western orientalists have simply brushed it aside as unauthentic. First of all many of the sayings compiled in the Nahj al-balâghah exist in texts antedating Radî, secondly their style is totally different from the many books that have survived from Radî‘s pen and finally their innate quality is sufficient guarantee of their celestial inspiration. Today there are too many works of purely spiritual character which are brushed aside by simply attaching the name ‘pseudo’ to them or by doubting their authority with total disregard for the innate value of their content.

A few years ago in a session in which the famous Shiʻite theologian and gnostic, ‘Allâmah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabâtabâ'î, and Professor Henry Corbin were present, Professor Corbin asked the Shiʻite authority as to whether the Nahj al-balâghah was the work of ‘Alî, the first Imam. ‘Allâmah Tabâtabâ'î answered, ‘He who has written the Nahj al-balâghah is for us the Imam even if he lived a century ago.’

In any case it is curious that through completely inadequate historical arguments which do not at all disprove its authenticity, the Nahj al-balâghah, a book which is the most revered in Shiʻism after the Quran and prophetic sayings and which has taught so many famous Arab writers such as Kurd ‘Alî and Taha Husayn how to write eloquent Arabic, has been neglected to this extent.

page 237 note 1 Zabûr-i âl-i Muhammad.

page 237 note 2 See especially his Essai sur les origins du lexique technique de la mystique musulmane, Paris, 1954Google Scholar, and Recueil de textes inédite concernant l'histoire de la mystique en pays d'Islam, Paris, 1929.Google Scholar

page 237 note 3 The relationship between the Imams and the first generations of zuhhâd that later became known as Sufis is discussed by ‘Allâmah Tabâtabâ’î in Shiʻite Islam, translated and edited by S. H. Nasr, part II, section 3 (in press).

page 237 note 4 See Nasr, S. H., An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines, Cambridge (U.S.A.), 1964, chapter I.Google Scholar

page 238 note 1 See al-Shîbî, , al-Fikr al-shî‘î…, pp. 73 ff.Google Scholar

page 238 note 2 This monumental work has been edited for the first time by Corbin, H. and Yahya, O. and has appeared in the collection of the Institut Franco-Iranien of Tehran, 1969.Google Scholar

Concerning Âmulî see Corbin, , ‘Sayyed Haydar Âmulî (VIIIe-XIVe siècle) théologien shîîite du soufism’, Mélanges Henri Massé, Tehran, 1963, pp. 72–101.Google Scholar

page 239 note 1 See Nasr, S. H., ‘Seventh Century Sufism and the School of Ibn ‘Arabî’, journal of the Regional Cultural Institute (Tehran), 1967, vol. I, no. 1, pp. 43–50.Google Scholar

page 239 note 2 This work called the Manâqib has been also commented upon in Persian. See Mûsâ, Khalkhâlî, , Sharh manâqib Muhyî al-Dîn ibn ‘Arabî, Tehran, 1322.Google Scholar

page 239 note 3 See al-Shîbî, , al-Fikr al-shî‘î…, pp. 179–244, 302–27.Google Scholar

page 239 note 4 Concerning his life and works see Aubin, I., Matériaux pour la biographie de Shah Ni‘matullâh Walî Kermanî, Tehran-Paris, 1956Google Scholar, and several studies devoted to him by J. Nourbakhsh, the present qutb of the order, published by the Ni‘matullâhî Khâniqâh in Tehran during the last decade.

page 240 note 1 Concerning Shaykh Nûrbakhsh and also the Kubrawîyah and their importance in connection with Persia becoming Shiʻite see the articles of Molé, M. in the Revue des études islamiques from 1959 to 1963.Google Scholar

page 240 note 2 The text of his declaration is quoted by al-Shîbî, al-Fikr al-shî‘î…, p. 335.Google Scholar

page 240 note 3 Concerning the different Sufi orders in the Shiʻite climate of Persia, see Mol, M.é, Les mystiques musulmans, Paris, 1965, chapter IV.Google Scholar

page 240 note 4 Based on the original historic sources such as ‘Âlam ârây-i ‘abbâsî and Rawdat al-safâ’, many historical works have been devoted to the origin of the Safavids by such scholars as Minorsky, Togan, Hinz, Aubin, Savory and others. See for example, Togan, Z. V., ‘Sur l'origines des safavides’, Mélanges Louis Massignon, Paris, 1957, vol. 3, pp. 345–57.Google Scholar The work of Hinz, W., Irans Aufstieg zum Nationalstaat im fünfzehnten Jahrhundert, Berlin, 1936Google Scholar, is of particular value for its historical analysis.

page 240 note 5 Concerning these figures see Nasr, S. H., ‘The School of Ispahan’ and ‘Sadr al-Dîn Shîrâzî’ in Sharif, M. M. (ed.), A History of Muslim Philosophy, vol. II, Wiesbaden, 1966Google Scholar; and Corbin, H., ‘Confessions extatiques de Mîr Dâmâd’, Mélanges Louis Massignon, pp. 331–78.Google Scholar

page 240 note 6 See Sayyid ‘Abd al-Hujjat Balâghî, Mâqalât al-hunafâ’ fî maqâmât Shams al-‘urafâ’, Tehran, 1369.

page 241 note 1 Concerning these figures see Gramlich, R., Die schiitischen Derwischorden Persiens, Erster Teil: Die Afflliationen, Wiesbaden, 1965, pp. 33 ff.Google Scholar

page 241 note 2 See Nasr, S. H., ‘Sabziwârî’, in A History of Muslim Philosophy, vol. II.Google Scholar

page 242 note 1 On the spiritual significance of Khidr see Massignon, L., ‘Elie et son rôle transhistorique, Khadirîya en Islam’, Etudes carmélitaines: Elie le prophète, vol. II, Paris, 1956, pp. 269–90.Google Scholar Massignon has also devoted numerous other artides to this subject most of which have appeared in the Revue des études islamiques. There are also many valuable references to initiation in Sufism though Khidr and the afrâd who have received such initiation in the writings of R. Guénon on initiation.