Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

www.alhassanain.org/english

Three Sources of Shiʿi Knowledge and Authority:

Texts, Reason, and Mysticism in Islamic Intellectual History

Zackery M. Heern

Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho, USA

www.alhassanain.org/english

Notice:

This version is published on behalf of www.alhassanain.org/english

The composing errors are not corrected.

Table of Contents

Introduction 5

1. Formation of law, mysticism, and hadith collection (c. 700-1000) 8

2. Rationalism and illuminationism (c. 1000-1600) 12

3. Akhbārī School and the School of Isfahan (c. 1600-1800) 16

4. Neo-Uṣūlism and Shaykhism (c. 1800-Present) 18

Conclusion 23

Endnotes 24

Introduction

Throughout Shiʿi history, scholars (ʿulamāʾ) have been trying to answer the following question: in the absence of the Prophet and the Imams, how is sure knowledge (ʿilm) derived? As the duty of producing an answer to this question became the responsibility of scholars, the limits of their authority also came into question. This paper argues that the Shiʿi tradition of producing knowledge and justifying clerical authority consists of a tripartite system rooted in the texts, reason, and mysticism. In other words, Shiʿi socio-intellectual activity was built on the foundational texts (Qurʾan and hadith), rational thought, and mystical experience (including intuition and dreams). These three sources have caused inter-scholastic divisions since most scholars have categorically rejected one or more of these sources. Some scholars, however, have accepted a synthesis of the three sources. The following illustrates that appeals to these three sources of knowledge and authority have been made in each major period of Shiʿi thought. As a result of a broad reading of Shiʿi intellectual activity, this paper suggests that scholarly appeals to the three sources are historically consistent.

The fourteenth-century Baghdadi scholar, Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī, was one of the first to synthesize the three sources in his theoretical approach to knowledge. He argues that the way of the philosophers (ʿaql), the tradition of the theologians (naql), and the intuition of the mystical theosophists (kashf) are the three parts of metaphysics.1 Moreover, in his Risālah fī Maʿrifāt al-Wujūd, Āmulī claims that these sources are the methods of attaining knowledge, but only kashf leads to divine reality.2 In other words, Āmulī accepted all three sources, but favoured kashf.

Historically, mainstream scholars were often defined by their approach to textualism, rationalism, and mysticism. Akhbārīs emphasized a textualist approach, while Uṣūlīs have become synonymous with those who accept reason. Scholars who emphasized mysticism as a source of knowledge and authority are generally known as theosophists (ḥikmat al-ilāhiyyah) or illuminationists (ishrāqiyyah). During the critical post-Safavid period, three schools of thought competed as representatives of each knowledge source: Akhbārīs, Uṣūlīs, and Shaykhīs (who preferred to be called Kashfiyyah (Intuitionists)). Although these schools developed into competing socio-intellectual movements, the divisions between them may not be as rigid as is often assumed. The following, therefore, will emphasize both the convergences and divergences that connect and disconnect the three sources of knowledge and authority. Since scholars in one school often borrow from the other schools, we should be wary of imposing rigid divisions between the three trends in Shiʿi thought.

The basis for authority in Shiʿism is the Imamate, an institution whose foundation rests on the Imams’ infallible knowledge. According to Louis Massignon, the Imam is humanity rendered divine.3 As Mohammad Amir-Moezzi has pointed out, the Imam has also been considered the ‘manifestation of a primordial Light proceeding from divine Light, a theophanic entity.’4 Traditions attributed to the Imams suggest that the Prophet Muḥammad and Imam ʿAlī were created together from the same light some two thousand years before the creation of the world.5 Additionally, the Imams have been referred to as the ‘exoteric facet of God’, which makes God, whose essence is unknowable, accessible to mankind. Therefore, according to Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq, ‘it is thanks to us [the Imams] that God is known.’6 In the Shiʿi tradition, therefore, knowledge and authority are intimately associated with the Imams.

During the occultation of the twelfth Imam, authority has been delegated to Shiʿi scholars, who have justified their authority on the basis of their knowledge of the texts, their rationalist methodologies, and their mystical experiences. Of course, not all scholars claim authority on the basis of all three methods. In fact, it is rare for a scholar to utilize each source in this tripartite system. Most scholars place emphasis on one of the three sources. However, if we take Shiʿism as a whole, these three trends form the bases on which Shiʿi scholars make claims to knowledge and authority.

Periodizations of Shiʿi thought often emphasize the tension between textualism and rationalism, which reflects the primacy that Shiʿi scholars generally assign to legalism. But this focus on legalism can lead to the false dichotomy that frames Shiʿi history as a competition between rationalists and traditionists. Likewise, mystical trends should not be overemphasized at the expense of Islamic law.

Indeed, much of the scholarship on Shiʿi law, especially in the modern period, emphasizes the Uṣūlī-Akhbārī dispute.7 The main disagreements between Akhbārīs and Uṣūlīs, which Khwānsarī summarizes from ʿAbd Allāh al-Samāhijī’s famous list are as follows:

1. Uṣūlīs accept ijtihād, while Akhbārīs rely on the texts;

2. Uṣūlīs accept four sources of law, while Akhbārīs accept the first two;

3. Uṣūlīs divide the community into mujtahids and muqallids (emulators), while Akhbārīs believe that all Shiʿis are muqallids to the Imams; and

4. Uṣūlīs issue legal rulings based on ijtihād, while Akhbārīs issue judgments on the basis of texts.

Scholars who work on Shiʿi legalism include Hossein Modarressi,8 Robert Gleave,9 Devon Stewart,10 Norman Calder,11 and Etan Kohlberg.12 Those who highlight mystical trends in Shiʿism include Seyyed Hossein Nasr,13 Mangol Bayat,14 Mohammad Amir-Moezzi,15 Abdulaziz Sachedina,16 and Henry Corbin.17 While Modarressi and others primarily view Shiʿism through the lens of jurisprudence, Henry Corbin concludes that ‘Shiism is, in essence, the esotericism of Islam.’18 Whereas Modarressi divides Shiʿi law into eight periods, which he defines almost exclusively in terms of rationalism and traditionism,19 Corbin divides Shiʿism into ‘four great periods,’ two of which he defines solely in terms of theosophical thinkers.20

Building on the periodizations of Modarressi, Corbin, Ahmad Kazemi Moussavi,21 and others, the remainder of this paper outlines a brief history of Shiʿi textualism, rationalism, and mysticism during the following four broad periods:

1. Formation of law, mysticism, and hadith collection (c. 700-1000)

2. Rationalism and illuminationism (c. 1000-1600)

3. Akhbārī School and School of Isfahan (c. 1600-1800)

4. Uṣūlī School and Shaykhī School (c. 1800-Present).22

1. Formation of law, mysticism, and hadith collection (c. 700-1000)

The formative period of Shiʿi thought was primarily associated with the succession of Shiʿi Imams. According to Shiʿi teachings, the world cannot exist without a proof (ḥujjah), which indicates knowledge (ʿilm) in both its exoteric (zāhir) and esoteric (bātin) forms. The Imams inherited perfect knowledge from the Prophet Muḥammad, which they passed on to the community through their infallible (maʿsūm) guidance. In fact, possession of infallible knowledge and divine inspiration are defining characteristics of the Shiʿi conception of the Imamate.23 According to Imam Muḥammad al-Bāqir (d. 735), the family of the Prophet (ahl al-bayt) was the only source of knowledge. More specifically, only the designated living Imam possessed such perfect knowledge. The Imam’s brothers, for example, did not necessarily possess it. The Imams received their knowledge in various ways, including the voice of angels, a column of light, and a ‘scratching in the heart.’24 Knowledge attributed to the Imams encompasses, but is not limited to, the following: all of the sciences, law, the unseen, interpretation of the Qurʾan, the past and the future, thoughts of others, and all languages (including that of animals).25 Unlike prophets, however, Imams do not receive revelation (waḥy) in the form of a distinct book, or a separate legal system. Additional distinctions of the Imams include that they do not cast a shadow, they are always in a state of ritual purity, they can see what is behind them, their urine and faeces are invisible, and their prayers are always answered.26

Imāmī Shiʿi law is often referred to as the Jaʿfarī School after Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq (d. 765), whose “statements form the major source of imami jurisprudence,” according to Robert Gleave.27 Following Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq’s lead, early Shiʿi scholars generally accepted the consensus (ijmāʿ) of the companions of the Imams, but rejected analogical reasoning (qiyās) and personal judgment (raʾy), since they only produce probable or conjectural knowledge (ẓann). Shiʿi scholars often used raʾy and ijtihād interchangeably, and the rejection of raʾy, therefore, was generally interpreted as a prohibition of ijtihād.28 Norman Calder argues that Shiʿi scholars rejected qiyās and ijtihād as part of the polemical debate with Sunnis.29 (Uṣūlī acceptance of ijtihād later became a critical issue that divided Akhbārīs and Uṣūlīs.) Departing from the conventional idea that ninth- and tenth-century Shiʿi scholars were traditionists, Christopher Melchert suggests that, like Shāfiʿīs, they were a ‘semi-rationalist middle party - traditionalist, perhaps by self-definition and intention, but willing to argue for their position in a rationalist style.’30 Modarressi argues that the Imams employed an exemplary method of reasoning and consistently encouraged their followers to utilize rational thought.31

One of the initial roles of scholars was the collection of traditions attributed to the Imams. They also debated theological questions, such as whether the Imams possessed infallibility, or if they were simply pious scholars with a comprehensive knowledge of the Qurʾan and Prophetic hadith. At times, disagreements became so heated that they would result in one scholarly circle declaring infidelity (takfīr) on another - a practice utilized by modern Uṣūlīs who declared that Akhbārīs, Sufis, Shaykhīs, and others were infidels.32 Rifts also occurred between hadith collectors and theologians. Some collectors of hadith fabricated hadith reports to defeat their rivals.33 Clearly, texts and reason played a fundamental role in the formation of Shiʿi law and theology.

Shiʿis also embraced the mystical tradition that developed in this period and acknowledged that the Imams possessed supreme esoteric knowledge just as their exoteric knowledge was perfect. The Imams are said to have possessed the red lambskin (al-jafr al-aḥmar), which includes the Prophet’s sword, and the white lambskin (al-jafr al-abyaḍ), containing divinely revealed books, including the Torah, Gospel, Psalms, and Abraham’s Scrolls. These texts were handed down from the Prophet through the Imams starting with Imam ʿAlī and are thought to have empowered the Imams with prophetic vision.34 Among other secret sources of knowledge, the Imams possessed ‘Fāṭimah’s Book,’ which was a revelation from God that is three times longer than the Qurʾan, and was presented by an angel or Imam ʿAlī to Fāṭimah in her sleep in order to help her cope with the death of Muḥammad, her father.35 Imam ʿAlī clearly stated that the Imams ‘see what others cannot see and they hear what others do not hear. They have access to divine secrets.’36 In fact, this is a primary characteristic that differentiated Imams from others. Therefore, the primary source of knowledge and authority during this period was inspiration obtained by the Imams.

During the Umayyad period (661-750), Muslim scholars began challenging the religious authority of the caliph and claimed to be the heirs of Muḥammad. This sentiment is summed up by the founder of neo-Uṣūlism, Wahīd Bihbihānī (d. 1792), who argues that mujtahids ‘are successors of the Chosen Messenger, guardians of the Chaste Ones’ orphans, cut off from them by occultation and concealment, treasures of the precious faith after the Prophet and the Imams, and custodians of the way of the saved sect among the Muslim community.’37 Additional Shiʿi scholars, including al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī (d. 1277) and Ḥusayn ibn al-Ḥasan al-Karakī (d. 1592) referred to jurists as heirs of the prophets.38

By the Abbasid period (750-1258), Muslim scholars emerged as an influential group. During the pre-occultation period, the primary role of Shiʿi scholars was the transmission of legal traditions. Additionally, the Imams often taught esoteric secrets to their disciples and bestowed some of their charismatic authority on them, allowing them to perform miracles. Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq said that his disciples ‘are the repositories of my secrets and through them all innovations are nullified.’39 At this stage, practical authority of the ʿulamāʾ primarily rested on their knowledge of the texts, not the performance of miracles. However, esoteric knowledge continued to be associated with them.

There is no shortage of accounts in biographical literature depicting hadith transmitters as recipients of the miraculous powers of the Imams. For example, Imam al-Bāqir extracted gold from the ground with his foot after Jābir ibn Yazīd al-Juʿfī (d. 745) complained of being poor. The Imam is also reported to have shown Jābir al-Juʿfī the kingdom of heavens and the earth in a similar manner that God had shown Abraham.40 Taking an additional step down the path of esoteric knowledge, disciples claimed to perform their own miracles. With knowledge from the Imams, Maytham al-Tammār and Muḥammad ibn Sinān (d. 835) were able to predict the future. Salmān al-Fārisī (d. 644-647) possessed even greater spiritual powers. After Imam ʿAlī taught him the greatest name of God (al-ism al-aʿẓam), he could foretell the future and communicate with angels.41 Amir-Moezzi argues that ‘there is thus an “organic” link between the imam and his initiate,’ who ‘participates in the divine Being’ and ‘possesses the ontological and initiatory qualities required for performing miracles.’42 As the claims to miraculous phenomenon grew in the early Shiʿi community, heresiographers started identifying some figures as exaggerators (ghulāt), who were not to be confused with moderate Shiʿis. Amir-Moezzi contends that this ‘distinction between “moderate” and “extremist” Shiʿism appears to be artificial…unless one considers the imams themselves to be “extremist”.’43

When the Twelfth Imam disappeared in 874, Shiʿi scholars argued that it was impossible for him to be dead because the world cannot exist without a proof (ḥujjah). Therefore, they maintained that he was still alive, but entered the state of occultation (ghaybah). He would continue to provide guidance to four successive deputies, who were granted the spiritual power to access the Imam’s perfect knowledge. The deputies became intermediaries between the Hidden Imam and the Shiʿi community by seeing and communicating mystically with the Imam.44 In fact, these deputies were not known for their own learning but for their spiritual connection to the Imam. Like many hadith transmitters, the deputies were famous for possessing supernatural powers, such as divination, innate understanding of different languages, and clairvoyance.45 The miracles that they performed provided proof of their claims of communication with the Imam. In other words, they established their authority on the basis of intuitive knowledge.

Once the last deputy died in 941 without appointing a successor, the Major Occultation of the Hidden Imam began. The Shiʿi community was now faced with the crisis of not having direct access to an Imam. Who, if anybody, would fill the void of the Imam during the Major Occultation, which was supposed to end when the Hidden Imam reveals himself at some future date? For Shiʿis this was a crisis not unlike the death of Muḥammad. In practice, leadership and guidance of the Shiʿi community was now placed squarely on the scholars. Although lacking infallibility, scholars were left to fill the void of the Imams, which led to debates over the nature and limits of their authority and knowledge. During the pre-occultation period, scholars had already served the Shiʿi community as doctors of law and transmitters of traditions. Neo-Uṣūlīs eventually argued that it was their prerogative to inherit the leadership that was once the sole responsibility of the Imams. In practice this authority translated to the following: enacting legal norms, imposing legal punishments, leading jihad, dividing booty, leading Friday prayer, collecting and distributing zakat and khums, and upholding legal norms.46 Many non-Uṣūlī scholars argued, however, that these functions could not be carried out until the Hidden Imam returns from occultation.

The legacy of the position filled by the ʿulamāʾ, then, is based on their traditional roles as hadith transmitters, deputies of the Hidden Imam, and successors of the Prophet. Akhbārīs understood the role of ʿulamāʾ more as transmitters and collectors of hadith, while Uṣūlīs eventually saw themselves as deputies of the Hidden Imam and successors of Muḥammad. Although most Akhbārīs emphasize the fact that early scholars transmitted the knowledge of the Imams to lay Shiʿis, some also point out that hadith transmitters possessed some measure of the charisma of the Imams through access to intuition. Significantly, the Imams taught some of the transmitters more esoteric secrets than others, and some scholars claim to have reached a higher level of esotericism than others.

According to Amir-Moezzi, ‘from the second half of the fourth/tenth century, the “theologico-legal-rational” movement, which continues to this day, began to dominate, thus marginalizing the original “esoteric non-rational” current.’ For Amir-Moezzi, this means that knowledge was now limited primarily to rational theology and law, and that power now meant temporal authority instead of thaumaturgical ability.47 However, hagiographical works, especially Tunikābunī’s Qiṣaṣ al-ʿUlamāʾ, contain numerous accounts of Shiʿi clerics performing such supernatural feats.48 The importance of the miracles that Tunikābunī and others attribute to Shiʿi scholars lies in the development of Shiʿi thought and leadership, not in the historical veracity of Tunikābunī’s stories. Because early scholars were said to have performed miracles, it became necessary for later scholars, especially those advocating change, to possess the ability to perform them as well. If they could not, on what other basis could it be proven that they were authorized to initiate changes in the Shiʿi establishment? Mysticism of the Imam, therefore, is evident in the rationalist tradition - especially after Shaykh al-Mufīd and Shaykh al-Ṭūsī.49

2. Rationalism and illuminationism (c. 1000-1600)

Shaykh al-Mufīd and al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā promoted a rationalist approach to Shiʿi thought. Shiʿi law entered a new phase when Shaykh al-Mufīd (d. 1022) adopted rational argumentation in his al-Muqnīʿah,50 which clearly moved beyond the transmission of the textual sources of the Qurʾan and hadith. Shaykh al-Mufīd maintained the superiority of the foundational texts by arguing that reason needed the help of the texts, not the opposite. In practice, however, he does seem to use textual sources to back up his reasoning instead of using reason to expound on revelation. Prior to Shaykh al-Mufīd, the task of scholars was to collect traditions, not give their opinions on them. Shaykh al-Mufīd harshly attacked scripturalists and accused them of being too liberal in their collection of traditions, without investigating or even thinking about what they were reporting.51 He rejected their use of traditions transmitted by only one source (akhbār al-āḥād) and instead relied on the Qurʾan, widespread (mutawātir) traditions, and consensus (ijmāʿ) of Shiʿis as the first threes sources of law.

Additionally, Shaykh al-Mufīd argued that reason (which included an understanding of language and textual criticism) was a source of Shiʿi law that would help jurists make sense of the textual sources. It was Shaykh al-Mufīd, therefore, who was the first to adopt the four sources of the Uṣūlī system - the Qurʾan, hadith, consensus, and reason. He put these ideas forward in his al-Tadhkīrah bi-Uṣūl al-Fiqh, the first known Shiʿi work on the principles of jurisprudence (uṣūl al-fiqh). To this day, Uṣūlī scholars accept the four sources of uṣūl al-fiqh advocated in this text. In practice, this rationalist approach allowed for greater pliability of the law for the newly established Buyid dynasty (945-1055) in Baghdad, which sponsored Twelver Shiʿism. In fact, this rationalist approach would often be preferred by state-sponsored Shiʿism.

A student of al-Mufīd, al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā (d. 1044), further developed the rationalist approach to jurisprudence and argued for an even more prominent role for reason. He claimed that knowledge could be established by reason alone.52 His treatises on the legality of working for the government, for example, are based more on rational argument, than on textual references from the Imams.53 Like al-Mufīd, al-Murtaḍā suggested that only traditions that are widely transmitted (mutawātir) are sure to produce perfect knowledge, whereas isolated reports (akhbār al-āḥād) could not because they were probably the result of fabrication.

The third important rationalist of this period was Shaykh al-Ṭāʾifah al-Ṭūsī (d. 1067), who applied the rational arguments of al-Mufīd and al-Murtaḍā to the traditions. Shaykh al-Ṭūsī’s rationalist-traditionist compromise transformed Shiʿi law and was considered authoritative for a full century after him, a period that is often described as a period of emulation (taqlīd) because of the overwhelming acceptance of his work and the lack of intellectual output, which resulted from the Seljuq invasion of Baghdad.54 Unlike his rationalist predecessors, he retained the authority of isolated hadith reports and developed a method to reconcile contradictory traditions. Shaykh al-Ṭūsī also compiled hadith collections (Tahdhīb al-Aḥkām and al-Istibṣār, which are considered as two of the ‘four books’) and relied more on texts and less on reason than had al-Murtaḍā.55 He concluded that most traditions are isolated reports (al-akhbār al-āḥād), but they are valid because previous generations of Shiʿis had accepted them. Rejecting any recourse to doubt (shakk), Shaykh al-Ṭūsī employed caution (iḥtiyāt) in order to proceed when certainty cannot be determined.

The capital city of the Mazyadid dynasty (961-1150) that ruled central Iraq was Ḥillah, which became an important Shiʿi centre of learning for a full three centuries. Scholars in Jabal ʿĀmil also played a central role in Shiʿi thought during this period.56 Ibn Idrīs al-Ḥillī (d. 1202) was the first major scholar of the Ḥillah School and is credited for ending what is often described as a period of emulation (taqlīd) of Shaykh al-Ṭūsī. Ibn Idrīs criticized al-Ṭūsī for introducing innovations into Shiʿi thought. Rejecting the validity of isolated hadith reports, he and additional scholars of his time revived the rationalist methodology of al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā.57

Al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī’s (d. 1277) conception of law moved even closer to that of Sunnis and further from Shaykh al-Ṭūsī’s reliance on the practice of early Shiʿis. Al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī used his knowledge of Sunni law to justify the use of ijtihād and qiyās (which were previously vehemently opposed by Shiʿis) as long as they were formed in the presence of an Imam. Thus, he became the first Shiʿi scholar to adopt ijtihād into his theoretical approach, which he legitimized on the basis of probability (ẓann), a principle later accepted by Wahīd Bihbihānī and the neo-Uṣūlī School. Acceptance of probable knowledge was a ground-breaking development as it was an admission that certitude in law is not always accessible. Because of the importance that al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī placed on ijtihād, he increased the authority of mujtahids and reinforced the claim that Shiʿi scholars are the deputies of the Hidden Imam during the occultation. He insisted that the ruling of a judge is the same as knowledge from God and that the issuance of a fatwa is like ‘talking with the tongue of [God’s] law.’58 Given that the endeavours of a mujtahid may only result in probable knowledge, al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī’s theory, therefore, is somewhat paradoxical.

Al-Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī’s nephew, al-ʿAllāmah al-Ḥillī (d. 1327), elevated the position of rational proofs to a new height. He claimed that reason was on par with revelatory texts and that only scholars who were skilled in applying rational proofs could interpret theological and judicial questions. Therefore, he carved out an even larger niche for Shiʿi clerics. Al-ʿAllāmah al-Ḥillī was the first to suggest that the Shiʿi community is divided into mujtahids and muqallids.59 He further suggested that if a muqallid failed to comply with the rulings of a mujtahid, he was a sinner. This is the general framework later accepted by Uṣūlīs.60 Muḥammad Amīn al-Astarābādī (d. 1626-7) accused al-ʿAllāmah al-Ḥillī of claiming that most Shiʿi traditions were not sound (ṣaḥīḥ), and in fact, al-ʿAllāmah thought that most traditions were isolated (al-akhbār al-āḥād), which did not produce certainty.61

The school at Ḥillah was destroyed by the Shiʿi Mushaʿshaʿ dynasty in 1449, but rationalist influence continued under the guidance of scholars in Jabal ʿĀmil, who played a prominent role in Iran during the Safavid period. Initially, however, Sufi shaykhs had more charismatic authority than jurists. It was in this context that al-Muḥaqqiq al-Karakī (d. 1534) and al-Shahīd al-Thānī (d. 1559), a follower of the school of al-Shahīd al-Awwal (d. 1384), addressed problems that arose as a result of the adoption of Shiʿism as a state religion. At the heart of these matters were the limits of the power of religious scholars.

It was al-Shahīd al-Thānī who formulated the theory of general vicegerency (al-niyābah al-ʿāmmah), which claims that the ʿulamāʾ are vicegerents of the Hidden Imam. Building on al-ʿAllāmah al-Ḥillī, he suggested that all the latent duties of the Imams are the responsibility of the ʿulamāʾ.62 Significantly, al-Shahīd al-Thānī, like previous jurists, was primarily concerned with the duties of the Imam that had practical implications for the state. These pragmatic rationalists did not include esoteric dimensions of the Imam’s authority in their theoretical conceptions. In other words, they replaced the intuitive methods that the Imams had used to obtain knowledge with reason.

As Shiʿi rationalism was developing in the eleventh century, Sufism also flourished as a popular form of religious expression. Sufism initially remained closely connected to Sunni Islam. As such, it was rejected by many early Shiʿis, especially during the Seljuq period. Shiʿi scholars, then, were in a position of competing with Sufis for claims on esoteric forms of Islam. Therefore, claims to intuition (kashf) and inner knowledge (bāṭin) were prominent during this era. Shaykh al-Mufīd, for example, supported the designation of gates (sing. bāb) to describe the special companions of the Imams, including the above-mentioned Jābir al-Juʿfī. Shaykh al-Mufīd explains that because of their close connection with the Imams, bābs were able to perform miracles. However, by the end of this period, rationalists began to reject the term bāb precisely because of its widespread usage by self-proclaimed bābs. Shaykh al-Ṭūsī, for example, even used the word bāb negatively, indicating that the term had lost its meaning because of its widespread usage.63

Arguably the most important thinker of this period was Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī (d. 1274), who applied philosophical ideas from Avicenna and others to Shiʿi theology after having spent considerable time with Ismāʿilīs in the famous Alamūt fortress of the Nizārīs.64 Initially Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī received patronage from Ismāʿilīs and later became prominent in the government of the Mongol emperor Hulagu Khan (d. 1265). Al-Ṭūsī wrote on a variety of subjects, including mathematics, theology, astronomy, and philosophy, and is often referred to as ‘the third teacher’ (al-muʿallim al-thālith), after Aristotle and al-Fārābī. Immersed in Shiʿi theology and Sufi mysticism, al-Ṭūsī came to the conclusion that the distance between philosophy and mysticism was not great.65 In his autobiography, Sayr wa Sulūk, al-Ṭūsī explains that he rejected exoteric kalām and came to support Ismāʿilī esoteric philosophy.66 He also wrote a treatise called Rawḍā t al-Taslīm, which is a guide for travelling from the physical plane to the spiritual world and includes a description of Shiʿi cosmology. He explains that religious duties must be followed outwardly, but perfect knowledge only emanates from the esoteric path.67

Sayyid Ḥaydar Ā mulī , mentioned above, is one of the most cogent theosophical Shiʿi thinkers, who claimed that the Imams were his spiritual mentors. Among his most important works is a commentary on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s (d. 1240) Fuṣūṣ under the grand title ‘The Compendium of Esoteric Doctrines and the Source of Light’ (Jamīʿ al-Asrār wa Manbaʿ al-Anwār). An underlying theme in this text is that the real Shiʿis are those who employ the inner reality (bāṭin) of things transmitted from the Imams. Therefore, those who are concerned with religious doctrines and law are only probing the external realities of Shiʿism. More importantly for our discussion, he claims that Ibn al-ʿArabī’s book, Fuṣūṣ, was an ‘inspired book’ since it was transmitted to Ibn al-ʿArabī by the Prophet after the Prophet had received it in the hereafter.68 Ā mulī also explains that his own texts ‘form two categories: there are those that can be considered as effusions from above, and those that emanate from within us. As to the effusions from above, these are the spiritual exegesis (taʾwīlāt) from the Holy Quran.’69 He confirms that his commentary on Fuṣūṣ is in fact one of those that was ‘effused upon him from above’ and was therefore the result of divine inspiration (kashf). Ā mulī argues that although the period of revelation is closed, the path of kashf is open through Shiʿi gnosiology, the science of attaining intuitive knowledge.70 In sum, Ā mulī claimed that his knowledge was not the result of prolonged research, but divine inspiration.

Sayyid Muḥammad Nūrbakhsh (d. 1463) also combined rationalist Shiʿi thought with Sufi mysticism. After having studied in the Shiʿi school of Ḥillah, he claimed absolute authority of the Mahdī, both mystically and judicially. According to al-Khwānsarī, rationalist scholars were alarmed at Nūrbakhsh’s proclamation, but did not consider him an infidel because of his orthodox approach to both Sufism and shariʿah.71 A Sufi order named after Nūrbakhsh has survived until the present in Baltistān, located in the mountains of northern Pakistan.72

3. Akhbārī School and the School of Isfahan (c. 1600-1800)

Traditionist scholars rejected Uṣūlī rationalism, charged them with adopting Sunni methods of jurisprudence, and maintained a reliance on the texts. After Muḥammad Amīn al-Astarābādī (d. 1626-7) articulated an attack on rationalist methodology in his al-Fawāʾid al-Madaniyyah, the scripturalist trend grew into what has become known as the Akhbārī School.73 Al-Astarābādī rejected ijtihād as a tool of Sunnis and because it did not produce perfect knowledge, but resulted in probability (ẓann) at best. Since al-Astarābādī did not think that the Qurʾan could be understood directly by scholars, he argued that traditions are the real source of authority for Shiʿis during the occultation of the twelfth Imam. He replaced ẓann and ijtihād with ordinary certainty (al-yaqīn al-ʿādī) and sensible reasoning (al-ʿaql al-ḥissī).

Underlying al-Astarābādī’s approach was the idea that a reliance on traditions will result in a more unified community than the acceptance of probable rulings arrived at by fallible scholars. This is not to be confused with a rejection of juristic authority. Al-Astarābādī was more concerned with how the jurist acquires authoritative rulings than the limits of the jurist’s authority. In practice al-Astarābādī’s approach did, in fact, place limits on the role of mujtahids. Whereas Uṣūlīs eventually argued that the mujtahids themselves are the authoritative sources of emulation (sing. marjaʿ al-taqlīd) for the Shiʿi community, al-Astarābādī explained that the hadiths are the marjaʿ of the Shiʿi community during the occultation. He insisted that only the hadith reports, which are the key source of knowledge and authority, should be emulated in the absence of the Imam.74

Al-Astarābādī’s challenge to rationalists spread through scholarly networks and his ideas were adopted in many Shiʿi centres of learning, including Bahrain and Karbalāʾ.75 The Safavid scholar Muḥammad Taqī al-Majlisī I (d. 1659) suggests that the majority of students in the centres of Shiʿi learning accepted al-Astarābādī’s views. Although al-Majlisī I further explains that he chose a moderate position between Uṣūlīs and Akhbārīs, he admitted that most of what al-Astarābādī said was true.76 Al-Majlisī I rejected analogical reasoning (qiyās) and personal judgment (raʾy) and only used ijtihād to reconcile contradictory hadith reports. The focus on traditions during this period brought new hadith reports to light. In fact, al-Majlisī I’s son and successor, Muḥammad Bāqir al-Majlisī II, compiled the most important hadith collection during this period in his Biḥār al-Anwār. Similar to his father, al-Majlisī II is often said to have taken a moderate path, adopting an Akhbārī approach judicially, but a more Uṣūlī stance in terms of clerical authority. The Akhbārī School placed the emphasis back on the texts to the point that Bihbihānī’s Uṣūlī School eventually accepted the primacy of revealed sources over reason, similar to Shaykh al- Mufīd.

Another development that occurred during the late Safavid period was the rise of the School of Isfahan,77 which stressed the role of intuitive and inner knowledge. The school’s founder was Muḥammad Bāqir al-Astarābādī, better known as Mīr Dāmād (d. 1631), whose disciple recounts his visions of the Imams, from which he learned the prayer for protection from Imam ʿAlī.78 The School of Isfahan was a continuation of the illuminationist philosophy that originated with Shahāb al-Dīn Suhrawardī (d. 1191), who promoted the idea that true knowledge was the result of both rational and intuitive emanations from the mind.79 Suhrawardī promoted Neo-Platonism after he dreamed of Aristotle, who told him of Plato’s superiority.80 For Suhrawardī, intuitive knowledge comes from mystical experiences, which include different stages of intuition, such as mystical perception (dhawq), mystical vision or unveiling (kashf), and mystical revelations (mukāshafāt). It is only experiential knowledge that leads to certainty. Supreme authority in the community and deputyship of God, according to Suhrawardī, rest on the one who reaches perfection in philosophical knowledge and mystical experience.81 Suhrawardī was eventually executed by the great Saladin on charges of claiming that prophecy after Muḥammad was possible.

The main proponent of this school of thought during the Safavid period was Mullā Ṣadrā Shīrāzī (d. 1640),82 who promoted a cosmology that included rationalism and visionary experience, and required purification of the soul through asceticism, mysticism, and gnosis. He conceived of knowledge as an interaction and unveiling of existence and therefore ‘makes epistemology an exercise in ontology.’83 For Mullā Ṣadrā, existence must be known and experienced intuitively. Knowledge, which is ultimately the same as existence, is the result of a process that is ‘obtained through unveiling (mukāshafah), confirmed by revelation (waḥy), and proved through demonstrative arguments (burhān).’84 Although Uṣūlī jurists have challenged his thought, aspects of Mullā Ṣadrā’s metaphysics are accepted in mainstream Shiʿism, and many Shiʿi scholars consider Mullā Ṣadrā’s work to be the most advanced mystical philosophy ever written.85

Shiʿi mystical thought continued to grow towards the end of the Safavid period, especially after the reign of Shah ʿAbbās I. The School of Isfahan became so prominent that many government officials and mainstream Shiʿi ʿulamāʾ embraced it, including Mullā Muḥammad Taqī al-Majlisī I (d. 1070/1659) and Mullā Muḥammad Bāqir Sabziwārī (d. 1090/1679), who was the shaykh al-islām of Isfahan. Additionally, Mullā Muḥsin Fayḍ Kāshānī (d. 1680), a student of Mullā Ṣadrā, developed his ideas, including transcendent wisdom (al-ḥikmah al-mutaʿāliyyah). Unlike Ṣadrā, Kāshānī was an avowed Akhbārī, even if his Akhbārī credentials were questioned by Yūsuf al-Baḥrānī in Luʾluʾāt al-Baḥrayn because of Kāshānī’s affiliation with mysticism.86 Kāshānī enjoyed a high position at the Safavid court after Shah ʿAbbās II (1642-66) summoned him to live in the capital, where he advised the Shah on religious matters and led the Friday prayer.

Muḥammad Bāqir al-Majlisī II was a significant figure of this period, in part because he supported a synthesis of rationalist, scripturalist, and illuminationist trends. As already noted, his Biḥār al-Anwār is one of the most important modern Shiʿi collections of hadith. However, he also promoted Uṣūlī rationalism and the necessity of mujtahids. Additionally, al-Majlisī II promoted the esoteric dimension of Shiʿism, and in Biḥār al-Anwār he says that the goal of the life of every Shiʿi is to emulate the Prophet and the Imams in order to reach their inner state. He further suggests that the elite (khawāṣṣ) are fully capable of accessing esoteric knowledge.87

The Origins of Islamic ?Irfan:

In order to understand any discipline or science, it is essential to study its history and the historical developments associated with it. One must also be acquainted with the personalities who have originated or inherited it and with its source books. In this lecture, and the fourth one, we will turn to these matters.

The first issue to arise is whether Islamic?Irfan is a discipline that originated in the Islamic tradition, such as fiqh, usul al-fiqh, tafsir, and 'ilm al-hadith . That is, is it one of those disciplines that were originated by the Muslims who, having received in Islam the original inspiration, sources and raw material, developed them by discovering their rules and principles? Or is it one of those sciences that found their way into the Islamic world from outside, like medicine and mathematics, which were then developed further by the Muslims in the environment of Islamic civilization and culture? Or is there a third possibility?

The 'urafa' themselves maintain the first of these alternatives, and are in no way ready to admit any other. Some orientalists, however, have insisted - and some still insist - on the second view that?Irfan and its subtle and sublime ideas have come into the Islamic world from outside. Sometimes they maintain a Christian origin for it, and claim that mysticism in Islam is the result of early contact of the Muslims with Christian monks.

At other times they claim it to be a result of the Persians' reaction against Islam and the Arabs. Then again sometimes they make it entirely a product of Neo-Platonism, which itself was composed of the ideas of Plato, Aristotle and Pythagoras, influenced by Alexandrian gnosticism and the views and beliefs of Judaism and Christianity. Sometimes they claim it to be derived from Buddhism. Similarly, the opponents of?Irfan in the Islamic world also strive to show the whole of?Irfan and sufism as being alien to Islam, and for this purpose they too maintain that gnosis has non-Islamic origins.

A third view admits that?Irfan , whether practical or theoretical, draws its primary inspiration and material from Islam itself; having taken this material, it has tried to give it a structure by devising certain rules and principles and in this process has also been influenced by external currents, specially the ideas of scholasticism and philosophy, especially of the Illuminationist school. Now there are a number of questions which arise in this context. Firstly, to what extent have the 'urafa' been successful in developing correct rules and principles for structuring their material? Have the 'urafa' been as successful in carrying this out as the jurisprudents?

To what extent have the 'urafa' felt themselves bound not to deviate from the actual principles of Islam? And, similarly, to what extent has?Irfan been influenced by the ideas of outside traditions? Has?Irfan assimilated these external ideas by shaping them in its particular moulds, and used them in its development? Or, contrarily, have the waves of these foreign currents carried away?Irfan in their flow?

Each of these questions requires a separate study and careful research. But that which is certain is that?Irfan has derived its basic sources of inspiration from Islam itself and from nowhere else. Let us consider this point.

Those who accept the first view, and to some extent also those who take the second view, see Islam as being a simple religion, popular and unsophisticated, free of all sorts of mysteries and difficult or unintelligible profundities. To them, the doctrinal system of Islam rests on tawhid (monotheism), which means that just as a house has a builder other than itself, so the world has a transcendent Creator other than itself. Also, the basis of man's relationship with the enjoyments of this world is, in their view, zuhd (abstinence). In their definition of zuhd, it means refraining from the ephemeral pleasures of this world in order to attain the everlasting enjoyments of the Hereafter. Besides these, there are a series of simple and practical rituals and laws that are handled by fiqh.

Therefore, in this group's view, that which the 'urafa' call tawhid is an idea that goes beyond the simple monotheism of Islam; for the 'arif's view of tawhid is existentialist monism in the sense that he believes that nothing exists except God, His Names, Attributes, and manifestations.

The 'arif's conception of the spiritual path (sayr wa suluk), likewise, they say, also goes beyond the zuhd enjoined by Islam, for the spiritual path of?Irfan involves a number of ideas and concepts - such as love of God, annihilation in God, epiphany - that are not to be found in Islamic piety.

Similarly, the 'arif's concept of the Tariqah goes beyond the Shari'ah of Islam; for the practice of the Tariqah involves matters unknown to fiqh.

Furthermore, in the view of this group, the pious among the Holy Prophet's Companions whom the 'urafa' claim to be their precursors were no more than pious men. Their souls knew nothing of the spiritual path of?Irfan and its tawhid. They were simple otherworldly people who abstained from worldly pleasures and directed their attention to the Hereafter and whose souls were dominated by mixed feelings of fear and hope - fear of the punishment of Hell and hope of the rewards of Paradise. That is all.

In reality this view can in no way be endorsed. The primal sources of Islam are far more extensively richer than what this group - out of ignorance or knowingly - supposes. Neither the Islamic concept of tawhid is as simple and empty as they suppose, nor Islam limits man's spirituality to a dry piety, nor were the pious Companions of the Holy Prophet simple ascetics, nor is the Islamic code of conduct confined to the actions of bodily limbs and organs.

In this lecture, brief evidence will be produced that will suffice to show that Islam's fundamental teachings are capable of having inspired a chain of profound spiritual ideas, both in the theoretical and the practical realms of?Irfan . However, the question of the extent to which the Islamic mystics have used and benefited from Islam's fundamental teachings and the extent to which they may have deviated, is one that we cannot go into in these short lectures.

On the subject of tawhid, the Holy Quran never likens God and the creation to a builder and a house. The Quran identifies God as the Creator of the world, stating at the same time that His Holy Essence is everywhere and with everything:

Wither so ever you turn, there is the Face of God.... (2:115)

And We are nearer to him than the jugular vein. (50:16)

He is the First and the Last, the Outward and the Inward; (57:3)

Evidently, these kind of verses represent a call to the thinking minds to a conception of tawhid which goes beyond commonplace monotheism. A tradition of al-Kafi states that God revealed the opening verses of the Sura al-Hadid and the Sura al-'Ikhlas because He knew that in future generations there will emerge people who will think profoundly about tawhid.

As to the spiritual path of?Irfan , in which a series of stages leading to ultimate nearness to God are conceived, it suffices to take into account the Quranic verses which mention such notions as liqa 'Allah (meeting with God), ridwan Allah (God's good pleasure), or those which relate to revelation (wahy), ilham (inspiration), and the angels' speaking to others who are not prophets - for instance, Mary - and especially the verses relating to the Holy Prophet's Ascension (mi'raj; 17:1).

In the Quran there is mention of the

'commanding self' (al-nafs al-'ammarah; 12:53), the 'self-accusative self' (al-nafs al-lawwamah; 75:2), and the 'contented self' (al-nafs al-mutma'innah; 89:27).

There is mention of 'acquired knowledge' (al-'ilm al-'ifadi) and inspired knowledge (al-'ilm al-ladunni; 18:65), and of forms of guidance resulting from spiritual struggle:

And those who struggle in Us, We will surely guide them to Our paths (29:69)

Mention is made in the Quran of the purification of the self, and it is counted as one of the things leading to salvation and deliverance:

(By the self) verily he who purifies it has succeeded, while he who corrupts it has indeed failed. (91:7-10)

There is also repeated mention there of love of God as a passion above all other human loves and attractions.

The Quran also speaks about all the particles of creation glorifying and praising God (17:44), and this is phrased in a way to imply that if one were to perfect his understanding, he would be able to perceive their praise and magnification of God. Moreover, the Quran raises the issue of the Divine breath in relation to the nature and constitution of the human being (32:9).

This, and much more besides, is sufficient to have inspired a comprehensive and magnificent spirituality regarding God, the world, and man, particularly regarding his relationship with God.

As previously mentioned, we are not considering how the Muslim 'urafa' have made use of these resources, or whether their utilization has been correct or incorrect. We are considering whether there did exist such great resources that could have provided effective inspiration for?Irfan in the Islamic world. Even if we suppose that those usually classed as 'urafa' could not make proper use of them, others who are not classed as such did make use of them.

In addition to the Quran, the traditions, sermons, supplications (du'a'), polemical dialogues (ihtijajat)* and the biographies of the great figures of Islam, all show that the spiritual life current in the early days of Islam was not merely a lifeless type of asceticism blended with a worship performed in the hope of the rewards of Paradise. Concepts and notions are found in the traditions, sermons, supplications, and polemical dialogues that stand at a very high level of sublimity. Similarly, the biographies of the leading personalities of the early days of Islam display many instances of spiritual ecstasy, visions, occurrences, inner insights, and burning spiritual love. We will now relate an example of it.

Al-Kafi relates that one morning after performing the dawn prayer, a young man (Harithah ibn Malik ibn Nu'man al-'Ansari) caught the Prophet's eye. Lean and pale, his eyes sunken, he gave the impression of being unaware of his own condition and of being unable to keep his balance. ?How are you?? inquired the Prophet ?I have attained certain faith,? the youth replied. ?What is the sign of your certainty?? the Prophet asked.

The youth replied that his certainty had immersed him in grief. It kept him awake at night (in worship) and thirsty by day (in fasting), and had separated him from the world and its matters so completely that it seemed to him as if he could see the Divine Throne already set up (on the Judgement Day) to settle the people's accounts, that he together with all of mankind were raised from the dead. He said that it seemed to him that even at that moment he could see the people of Paradise enjoying its bounties, and the people of hell suffering torments and he could hear the roar of its flames.

The Holy Prophet (S) turned to his Companions and told them, ?This is a man whose heart has been illuminated with the light of faith by God?. Then he said to the youth, ?Preserve this condition you are in, and do not let it be taken away from you.? ?Pray for me,? the youth replied, ?that God may grant me martyrdom.?

Not long after this encounter, a battle took place, and the youth, taking part, was granted his wish and was martyred.

The life, utterances and prayers of the Holy Prophet (S) are rich with spiritual enthusiasm and ecstasy, and full of the indications of gnosis, and the 'urafa' often rely on the Prophet's supplications as reference and evidence for their views.

Similarly, the words of Amir al-Mu'minin 'Ali (A), to whom nearly all the 'urafa' and sufis trace the origin of their orders, are also spiritually inspiring. I wish to draw attention to two passages of the Nahj al-balaghah. In Khutbah No. 222, 'Ali states:

Certainly, God, the glorified, has made His remembrance the means of burnishing the hearts, which makes them hear after deafness, see after blindness, and makes them submissive after unruliness. In all the periods and times when there were no prophets, there have been individuals with whom God - precious are His bounties - spoke in whispers through their conscience and intellects.

In Khutbah No. 220, speaking about the men of God, he says:

He revives his intellect and mortifies his self, until his body becomes lean and his coarseness turns into refinement. Then an effulgence of extreme brightness shines forth for illuminating the path before him, opening all the doors and leading him straight to the gate of safety and the (permanent) abode. His feet, carrying his body, become fixed in the position of safety and comfort on account of that which engages his heart and on having won the good pleasure of his Lord.

The Islamic supplications, especially those of the Shi'ah, are also replete with spiritual teachings. The Du'a' Kumayl, the Du'a' Abi Hamzah, the supplications of al-Sahifat al-Kamilah and the group of supplications called Sha'baniyyah, all contain the most sublime spiritual ideas.

With the existence of all these resources in Islam, is there a need for us to search for the origin of Islamic?Irfan elsewhere?

This reminds us of the case of Abu Dharr al-Ghifari and his protest against the tyrants of his time and his vocal criticism of their practices. Abu Dharr was severely critical of the favoritism, partisan politics, injustice, corruption and tyranny of the post-Prophetic era in which he lived. This led him to suffer torture and exile, and finally it was in exile, deserted and alone, that he passed away from this world.

A number of orientalists have raised the question of what motivated Abu Dharr to act as he did. They are in search of something foreign to the world of Islam to explain his behavior.

George Jurdaq, a Lebanese Christian, provides an answer to these orientalists in his book al-'Imam 'Ali, sawt al-'adalah al-'insaniyyah (Imam 'Ali, the Voice of Human Justice). There he says that he is amazed at those who wish to trace Abu Dharr's mentality to an extra-Islamic source. He says it is as if they see someone standing at the side of a sea or river with a pitcher of water in his hands, and begin to wonder from which pool he has filled his pitcher, and then, completely ignoring the nearby sea or river, go off in search of a pool or pond to explain his full pitcher of water.

What other source other than Islam could have inspired Abu Dharr? Which source could have the power of Islam in inspiring the likes of Abu Dharr to rise against the tyrants of this world such as Mu'awiyah?

Now we see a similar pattern in regard to?Irfan . The orientalists are in search of a non-Islamic source of inspiration of?Irfan , while they completely overlook the great ocean of Islam.

Can we really be expected to overlook all these resources - the Holy Quran, the traditions, the sermons, the polemical dialogues, the supplications, and the biographies - simply in order to give credence to the view of a group of orientalists and their Eastern followers?

Formerly, the orientalists took great pains to project the origins of Islamic?Irfan as lying outside the original teachings of Islam. Lately, however, such individuals as the English R.A. Nicholson and the French Louis Massignon, after having made extensive studies in Islamic?Irfan , without being unacquainted with Islam in general, have expressly admitted that the principal sources of?Irfan are the Quran and the Prophet's Sunnah.

We will conclude this lecture by quoting a passage by Nicholson from the book The Legacy of Islam:

(Though Muhammad left no system of dogmatic or mystical theology, the Qur'an contains the raw materials of both. Being the outcome of feeling than reflection, the Prophet's statements about God are formally inconsistent, and while Muslim scholastics have embodied in their creed the aspect of transcendence, the Sufis, following his example, have combined the transcendent aspect with that of immanence, on which, though it is less prominent in the Qur'an, they naturally lay greater emphasis.)1

?Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth? (xxiv:35);

?He is the first and the last and the outward and the inward? (lvii:3);

?there is no god but He; everything is perishing except His Face? (xxviii:88);

?Have breathed into him (man) of My spirit? (xv:29);

?Verily, We have created man and We know what his soul suggests to him, for We are nigher unto him than the neck-artery? (1:15);

?wheresoever ye turn, there is the Face of Allah? (ii:114);

?he to whom Allah giveth no light hath no light at all? (xxiv:40).

Surely the seeds of mysticism are here. And, for the early Sufis, the Qur'an is not only the Word of God: it is the primary means of drawing near to Him. By fervent prayer, by meditating profoundly on the text as a whole and in particular on the mysterious passages (xvii:1; liii:1-18) concerning the Night journey and Ascension, they endeavored to reproduce the Prophet's mystical experience in themselves.2

The doctrine of a mystical union imparted by divine grace goes beyond anything in the Qur'an, but is stated plainly in apocryphal traditions of the Prophet, e.g. God said, ?My servant draws nigh unto Me by works of supererogation, and I love him; and when I love him, I am his ear, so that he hears by Me, and his eye, so that he sees by Me, and his tongue, so that he speaks by Me, and his hand, so that he takes by Me.?3

As repeatedly said before, we are not concerned here with the question whether the 'urafa' have succeeded in correctly utilizing the inspiration provided by Islam; our purpose was to consider whether the main source of their inspiration lay within Islam or outside it.

Notes

??? 1. R.A Nicholson, Mysticism in The Legacy of Islam, London 1931 ed. by Sir Thomas Arnold and Alfred Guillaume pp. 211-212

??? 2. Ibid

??? 3. Ibid

A Brief History

The previous lecture dealt with the question of locating the principal origin of Islamic?Irfan , that is, whether there exists in the teachings of Islam and the lives of the Holy Prophet and the Imams a precedent that could have inspired a series of profound and subtle mystical ideas, on a theoretical level, and which could have prompted spiritual enthusiasm and mystical elation on a practical level. The answer to this question was seen to be positive. Now we will continue this discussion.

The genuine teachings of Islam and the lives of its spiritual leaders, so rich with spirituality and spiritual splendor, which have provided the inspiration for profound spirituality in the Islamic world, are not encompassed by that which is termed as?Irfan or sufism. However, it is beyond the scope of these lectures to discuss other parts of Islamic teachings that do not bear this name.

We will continue our discussion on the branch that is labeled as?Irfan or sufism, and obviously the limited scope of these lectures does not permit us to go into a critical research. Here we will try to give an outline of the currents and events that have occurred within this branch. For this purpose, it appears to be appropriate that we begin by providing a simple history of?Irfan or Sufism from the beginnings of Islam until at least the 10th/16th century, before turning, so far as is practical in a venture such as this, to an analysis of the issues of?Irfan .

What seems certain is that in the early era of Islam, that is throughout the 1st/7th century at least, there existed no group amongst the Muslims known as 'urafa' or sufis. The name sufi was first used in the 2nd/8th century.

The first person to be called by the name sufi is Abu Hashim al- Kufi. He lived in the 2nd/8th century and he it was who first built at Ramlah, in Palestine, a hospice for worship by a group of ascetically- minded Muslims.1 The date of Abu Hashim's death is not known, but he was the teacher of Sufyan al-Thawri who died in 161/777.

Abu al-Qasim Qushayri, himself an eminent 'arif and sufi, states that the name sufi had appeared before the year 200/815. Nicholson also states that the name appeared towards the end of the 2nd century H. From a tradition contained in kitab al-ma'ishah (vol. V) of al-Kafi, it appears that a group - Sufyan al-Thawri and a number of others - existed in the time of al-'Imam al-Sadiq (A) (that is to say, during the first half of the 2nd century H.) who were already called by this name.

If Abu Hashim al-Kufi was the first to be called sufi, then, since he was the teacher of Sufyan al-Thawri who died in 161/777, this name was first used during the first half of the 2nd century H., not at its end (as Nicholson and others have stated). Nor does there appear to be any doubt that the reason for the name being sufiyyah was their wearing of wool (sufi: wool). Due to their asceticism, the sufis abstained from wearing fine garments, and instead followed a practice of wearing clothes made of coarse wool.

As for the date this group first began to call themselves 'urafa', again there is no precise information. All that is certain, as confirmed by the remarks quoted of Sari Saqati (d. 243/867)2 is that the term was current in the third century H. However, in the book al-Luma' of Abu Nasr al-Sarraj al-Tusi, one of the reliable texts of?Irfan and sufism, a phrase is quoted of Sufyan al-Thawri which gives the impression that this term appeared sometime in the second century.3

At all events, there was no group known as sufis during the first century H. This name appeared in the 2nd century H., and it seems that it was during the same century that the sufis emerged as a particular group, not in the third century as is the belief of some people.4

However, even though no special group existed in the first century by the name of 'urafa' or sufis or any other name, it does not imply that the eminent Companions were merely pious and ascetic persons and that all of them led lives of simple faith devoid of spiritual depth. Perhaps it is true that some of the pious Companions knew nothing more beyond mere piety and worship, yet a group of them possessed a powerful spiritual life. Nor were they all of the same level. Even Salman and Abu Dharr were not of the same degree. Salman enjoyed a degree of faith that Abu Dharr could not have withstood. Many traditions have come to us telling us:

If Abu Dharr knew what was in Salman's heart, he would (considering him a heretic) have killed him.5

Now we will list the different generations of the 'urafa' and sufis from the 2nd/8th to the 10/16th century.

Notes

??? 1. Dr Qasim Ghani, Tarikh eTasawwuf Dar Islam, p. 19

??? 2. Farid al Din al Attar, Tadhkirat al-awliya

??? 3. Abu Nasr al Sarraj, al-Luma, p. 427

??? 4. Dr. Qasim Ghani, op. cit

??? 5. Abbas al Qummi, Safinat al Bihar, under s-l-m

'Urafa' of the Second/Eighth Century

1. Al-Hasan al-Basri

The history of what is termed as?Irfan , like kalam, begins with al-Hasan al-Basri (d. 110/728). He was born in 22/642 and lived for eighty-eight years, having spent nine-tenths of his life in the first century H.

Of course, al-Hasan al-Basri was never known by the term sufi, but there are three reasons for counting him amongst the sufis. The first is that he compiled a book called Ri'ayah li huquq Allah (Observance of the Duties to Allah)1 , which can be recognized as the first book on sufism. A unique manuscript of this book exists at Oxford. Nicholson has this to say on the subject:

The first Muslim to give an experimental analysis of the inner life was Harith al-Muhasibi of Basrah 'The Path' (tariqah), as described by later writers, consists of acquired virtues (maqamat) and mystical states (ahwal). The first stage is repentance or conversion; then comes a series of others, e.g. renunciation, poverty, patience, trust in God, each being a preparation for the next.2

Secondly, the 'urafa' themselves trace their orders back to al- Hasan al-Basri; and from him to 'Ali (A), such as the chain of the shaykhs of Abu Sa'id ibn Abi al-Khayr.3 Similarly, Ibn al-Nadim, in his famous al-Fihrist, traces the chain of Abu Muhammad Ja'far al-Khuldi back to al-Hasan al-Basri, stating that al-Hasan al-Basri had met seventy of the Companions who had fought at Badr.

Thirdly, some of the stories related of al-Hasan al-Basri give the impression that he was in fact part of a group that in later times became known as sufis. We will relate some of these stories when appropriate later on.

2. Malik ibn Dinar

He was one of those who took asceticism and abstinence from pleasure to the extreme. Many stories are told about him in this regard. He died in the year 130/747.

3. Ibrahim ibn Adham

The famous story of Ibrahim ibn Adham resembles that of Buddha. It is said that he was the ruler of Balkh when something happened that caused him to repent and enter the ranks of the sufis.

'Urafa' attach great importance to this man, and a very interesting tale is told about him in Rumi's Mathnawi. He died around the year 161/777.

4. Rabi'ah al-'Adawiyyah

This woman is one of the wonders of her time (d. 135/752 or 185/801). She was named Rabi'ah because she was the fourth daughter of her family (rabi'ah: fem. gender of fourth). She is not to be confused with Rabi'ah al-Shamiyyah, who was also a mystic and a contemporary of Jami and lived in the 9th/15th century.

Lofty sayings and soaring mystical verses are recorded of Rabi'ah al-'Adawiyyah,' and she is noted for amazing spiritual states (halat).

5. Abu Hashim al-Sufi of Kufah

The date of this man's death is unknown. All that we can say is that he was the teacher of Sufyan al- Thawri; who died in 161/777. He appears to be the first person to have been called sufi. Sufyan says about him: ?If it were not for Abu Hashim I would not have known the precise details of ostentation (riya').?

6. Shaqiq al-Balkhi

He was the pupil of Ibrahim ibn Adham. According to the author of Rayhanat al-'adab, and others quoted in Kashf al-ghummah of 'Ali ibn 'Isa al-'Arbili and Nur al-'absar of al-Shablanji, he once met al-'Imam Musa ibn Ja'far (A) and has given an account of the Imam's great station and miracles. Shaqiq died in 194/810.

7. Ma'ruf al-Karkhi

He is one of the famous 'urafa'. It is said that his parents were Christian and that he became a Muslim at the hands of al- 'Imam al-Rida (A), learning much from him.

The lines of many orders, according to the claims of the 'urafa', go back to Ma'ruf, and through him to al-'Imam al-Rida, and through al- 'Imam al-Rida to the preceding Imams and thus to the Prophet himself. This chain is therefore termed the 'golden chain' (silsilat al-dhahab). Those known as the Dhahabiyyun generally make this claim.

8. Al-Fudayl ibn 'Iyad

Originally from Merv, he was an Iranian of Arab descent. It is said of him that at first he was a highwayman, and that as he was preparing to carry out a robbery one night he heard the voice of his potential victim, reciting the Quran. This had such an effect on him that he experienced a change of heart and repented. The book Misbah al-Shariah is attributed to him and it is said to consist of a series of lessons that he took from al-'Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (A). This book is considered reliable by an erudite scholar of traditions of the last century, the late Hajj Mirza Husayn Nuri, in the epilogue to his Mustadrak al-Wasa'il. Fudayl died in 187/803.

Notes

??? 1. Harith al Muhasibi, not Hasan al Basri

??? 2. Nicholson, op cit p. 214

??? 3. Dr. Qasim Ghani, op cit p. 462

'Urafa' of the Third/Ninth Century

1. Abu Yazid al-Bistami (Bayazid)

One of the great mystics, it is said Bayazid was the first to speak openly of 'annihilation of the self in God' (fana fi 'Allah') and 'subsistence through God' (baqa' bi 'Allah).

He has said ?I came forth from Bayazid-ness as a snake from its skin.?

His ecstatic ejaculations (shathiyyat) have led others to call him a heretic. However, the 'urafa' themselves consider him one of those given to mystical 'intoxication' (sukr), that is, he uttered these words when he was beside himself in ecstasy.

Abu Yazid died in 261/874 or 264/877. Some have claimed that he worked as a water carrier in the house of al-'Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (A). However, this claim is not supported by history; Abu Yazid was not a contemporary of the Imam.

2. Bishr ibn al-Harith al-Hafi

One of the famous sufis, he was another who led a corrupt life and then repented.

In his book Minhaj al-karamah, al-'Allamah al-Hilli has related an account that depicts Bishr's repentance as being at the hands of al-'Imam Musa ibn Ja'far (A), and because at the moment of his repentance he was barefoot in the street, he became known as 'al- Hafi' (hafi=barefooted). However, others have given a different reason for his being known as al-Hafi.

Bishr al-Hafi (born near Merv c. 150/767) died in 226/840 or 227/841 in Baghdad.

3. Sari al-Saqati

One of the friends and companions of Bishr al-Hafi, Sari al-Saqati was one of those who bore affection for the creatures of God and of those who preferred others above themselves.

In his book Wafayat al-'a'yan, Ibn Khallikan writes that Sari once said, ?It is thirty years that I have been seeking forgiveness for one phrase, Praise be Allah's, that I allowed to pass my lips.? When asked to explain he replied, ?One night the bazaar caught fire, and I left my house to see if the fire had reached my shop. When I heard that my shop was safe, I said, 'Praise be Allah's'. Instantly I was brought to my senses with the realization that, granted my shop was unharmed, should I not have been thinking about others'??

Sa'di is referring to this same story (with slight variations) where he says:

One night someone's chimney kindled a fire, And I heard that half of Baghdad had burnt down. One said, thank God that in the smoke and ashes, My shop has not been damaged. A man who had seen the world replied, O selfish man, Was your grief for yourself and no other? Would you be satisfied that a town should burn down by fire, If your own dwelling were left unscathed?

Sari was the pupil and disciple (murid) of Ma'ruf al-Karkhi, and the teacher and maternal uncle of Junayd of Baghdad. Sari has many sayings on mystical unity (tawhid), love of God and other matters. It was also he who said: ?Like the sun, the 'arif shines on all the world; like the earth, he bears the good and evil of all; like water, he is the source of life for every heart; and like fire he gives his warmth to all and sundry.? Sari died in 253/867 at the age of ninety-eight.

4. Harith al-Muhasibi

He was one of the friends and companions of Junayd. He was called 'al-muhasibi' due to his great diligence in the matter of self-observation and self-reckoning (muhasabah). He was a contemporary of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who, being an opponent of 'ilm al-kalam, rejected Harith al-Muhasibi for entering into theological debates, and this led to the people avoiding him. Born in Basrah in 165/781, he died in 243/857.

5. Junayd of Baghdad

Originally from Nahaw and, the 'urafa' and sufis have given Junayd the title Sayyid al-Ta'ifah, just as the Shi'ah jurisprudents call al-Shaykh al-Tusi Shaykh al-Ta'ifah.

Junayd is counted as one of the moderate mystics. The kind of ecstatic ejaculations uttered by others were never heard from his lips. He did not even put on the usual dress of the sufis, and dressed like scholars and jurisprudents. It was suggested to him that for the sake of his associates he should wear the sufi dress. He replied: ?If I thought clothes were of any importance I would make an outfit of molten iron, for the call of truth is that:

There is no significance in the (sufi) cloak, Importance lies only in the (inward) glow.

Junayd's mother was the sister of Sari Saqati and Junayd became his pupil and disciple. He was also the pupil of Harith al-Muhasibi. It seems that he died in Baghdad in 298/910 at the age of ninety.

6. Dhu al-Nun al-Misri

An Egyptian, he was the pupil in jurisprudence of the famous jurisprudent Malik ibn Anas. Jami has called him the leader of the sufis. He it was who first began to use symbolic language and to explain mystical matters through the use of a symbolic terminology which only the elect could understand.

Gradually this became the standard practice, and mystical concepts were expressed in the form of love-poetry (ghazal) and symbolic expressions. Some believe that Dhu al-Nun also introduced many Neoplatonic ideas into?Irfan and sufism.1 Dhu al-Nun died in 246/860 in Cairo.

7. Sahl ibn 'Abd Allah al-Tustari

He is one of the great 'urafa' and sufis. A sect of gnostics who consider the main principle of spirituality to be combatting the self is named 'Sahliyyah' after him. He associated with Dhu al-Nun of Egypt at Mecca. He died in Basrah in 282/895.2

8. Husayn ibn Mansur al-Hallaj

Now famous simply as al-Hallaj, he is one of the most controversial mystics of the Islamic world. The shathiyyat uttered by him are many, and he was accused of apostasy and claiming divinity. The jurisprudents pronounced him an apostate and he was crucified during the reign of the 'Abbasid caliph al-Muqtadir. The 'urafa' themselves accuse him of disclosing spiritual secrets. Hafiz has this to say about him:

He said, that friend, who was raised high on the cross,

His crime was that he used to reveal secrets.

Some consider him no more than a juggler, but the 'urafa' themselves absolve him and say that the statements of al-Hallaj and Bayazid that gave the impression of unbelief were made when they were beside themselves in the state of 'intoxication'.

Al-Hallaj is remembered by the 'urafa' as a martyr. He was executed in 309/913.3

Notes

??? 1. Ibid, p. 55

??? 2. Abu Abd al Rahman al Sulami, Tabqat al sufiyyah, p. 206

??? 3. Authors work Ilal e girayeh be maddehgari

'Urafa' of the Fourth/Tenth Century

1. Abu Bakr al-Shibli

A pupil and disciple of Junayd of Baghdad and one who had met al-Hallaj, al-Shibli is one of the famous mystics. He was originally from Khurasan. In the book Rawdat al-jannat, and in other biographies, many mystical poems and sayings have been recorded of him.

Khawajah 'Abd Allah al-'Ansari has said: ?The first person to speak in symbols was Dhu al-Nun of Egypt. Then came Junayd and he systematized this science, extended it, and wrote books on it. Al-Shibli, in his turn, took it to the pulpit.? Al-Shibli; died in 334/846 at the age of 87.

2. Abu 'Ali al-Rudbari

He traced his descent to Nushirwan and the Sasanids, and was a disciple of Junayd. He studied jurisprudence under Abu al-'Abbas ibn Shurayh, and literature under Tha'lab. Due to his versatile knowledge, he was called the 'collector of the Law, the Way, and the Reality' (jami' al-Shari'ah wa al-Tariqah wa al-Haqiqah). He died in 322/934.

3. Abu Nasr al-Sarraj al-Tusi

Abu Nasr al-Sarraj is the author of the book al-Luma', one of the principal, ancient and reliable texts of?Irfan and sufism. Many of the shaykhs of the sufi orders were his direct or indirect pupils. He passed away in 378/988 in Tus.

4. Abu Fadl ibn al-Hasan al-Sarakhsi

He was the pupil and disciple of Abu Nasr al-Sarraj, and the teacher of Abu Sa'id ibn Abi al-Khayr. He was a mystic of great fame. He died in 400/1009.

5. Abu 'Abd Allah al-Rudbari

He was the son of Abu 'Ali al-Rudbari's sister. He is counted as one of the mystics of Damascus and Syria. He died in 369/979.

6. Abu Talib al-Makki

The fame of Abu Talib al-Makki rests largely on the book he authored on?Irfan and sufism, Qut al-qulub. This book is one of the principal and earliest texts of?Irfan and sufism. He passed away in 385/995 or 386/996.

'Urafa' of the Fifth/Eleventh Century

1. Shaykh Abu al-Hasan al-Khurqani

One of the most famous 'urafa', the 'urafa' relate amazing stories about him. Amongst these is one according to which he would go to the grave of Bayazid and converse with his spirit, taking his advice in solving his difficulties. Rumi says:

After many years had passed since the death of Bayazid Bu'l-Hasan appeared. Now and then he would go and sit By the side of his grave in his presence, Until came the spirit of his shaykh, And as soon as he uttered his problem, it was solved

Rumi has remembered Shaykh Abu al-Hasan a lot in his Mathnawi, which shows his devotion and attachment to him. It is said that he met with Abu 'Ali Sina, the philosopher, and with Abu Sa'id ibn Abi al- Khayr, the famous 'arif. He died in 425/1033-34.

2. Abu Sa'id ibn Abi al-Khayr

One of the most famous of all mystics, Abu Sa'id ibn Abi al-Khayr is also one of those most noted for their spiritual states (halat). When once asked the definition oftasawwuf , he replied: ?Tasawwuf is that you give up whatever is on your mind, give away whatever is in your hand, and to give over yourself to whatever you are capable of.?

He met with Abu 'Ali Sina. One day Abu 'Ali participated in a meeting at which Abu Sa'id was preaching. Abu Sa'id was speaking about the necessity of deeds, and about obedience and disobedience to God. Abu 'Ali recited these verses (ruba'i):

We are those who have befriended your forgiveness,

And seek riddance from obedience and disobedience.

Wherever your favour and grace is to be found,

Let the not-done be like the done, the done like the not-done.

Abu Sa'id immediately replied:

O you who have done no good, and done much bad,

And then aspire after your own salvation,

Do not rely on forgiveness, for never

Was the not-done like the done, the done like the not-done.

The following ruba'i is also of Abu Sa'id:

Tomorrow when the six directions fade away,

Your worth will be the worth of your awareness.

Strive for virtue, for on the Day of Retribution,

You shall rise in the form of your qualities.

Abu Sa'id passed away in the year 440/1048.

3. Abu 'Ali al-Daqqaq al-Nishaburi

He is considered one of those who combined in himself the expertise of the Shari'ah and the Tariqah. He was a preacher and an exegete (mufassir) of the Quran. To such an extent did he use to weep while reciting supplications (munajat) that he was given the title 'the lamenting shaykh' (shaykh-e nawhahgar). He passed away in 405/1014 or 412/1021.

4. Abu al-Hasan 'Ali ibn 'Uthman al-Hujwiri

He is the author of Kashf al-Mahjub, one of the famous sufi books and one which has recently been published. He died in 470/1077.

5. Khwajah 'Abd Allah al-'Ansari

A descendant of the great Companion of the Prophet, Abu Ayyub al-'Ansari, Khwajah 'Abd Allah is himself one of the most famous and pious of all 'urafa'. His fame rests largely on his elegant aphorisms, munajat, and ruba'iyyat.

Amongst his sayings is this:

When a child you are low, when a youth you are intoxicated, when old you are decrepit; so when will you worship God?

He has also said:

Returning evil for evil is the trait of a dog; returning good for good is the trait of a donkey; returning good for evil is the work of Khwajah 'Abd Allah al-'Ansari.

The following ruba'i is also his:

It is a great fault for a man to remain aloof,

Setting oneself above all the creation.

Learn thy lesson from the pupil of the eye,

That sees everyone but not itself.

Khwajah 'Abd Allah was born in Herat where he died and was buried in 481/1088. For this reason he is known as 'the Sage of Herat' (Pir-e Herat).

Khwajah 'Abd Allah authored many books, the best-known of which, Manazil al-sa'irin, is a didactic manual on sayr wa suluk. It is one of the most well-written works of?Irfan , and many commentaries have been written on it.

6. Imam Abu Hamid Muhammad al-Ghazali

One of the best-known scholars of Islam whose fame has penetrated the East and the West, he combined in his person the knowledge of the rational and traditional sciences (ma'qul wa manqul). He became head of the Nizamiyyah Academy in Baghdad and held the highest position of his age accessible to any scholar. However, feeling that neither his knowledge nor his position could satisfy his soul, he withdrew from public life and engaged in disciplining and purifying his soul.

He spent ten years in Palestine, far from all who knew him, and it was during this period that he became inclined towards?Irfan and sufism. He never again accepted any post or position. Following his period of solitary asceticism, he wrote his famous Ihya' 'ulum al-Din ('Reviving the Sciences of Religion'). He died in his home city of Tus in the year 505/1111.