RSOC 133 Final Exam Study Guide

Section 1: Short Essay Questions

Major Sufi Figures and Ideas

Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi and His Significance

• His ideas about light formed the basis of his ontology and epistemology.

• Proposed that everything in the universe exists in the form of light, with God as the purest form of light.

• Developed a hierarchy where beings reflect and transmit divine light, guiding human spiritual ascension.

• Introduced the World of Likenesses, where visions and dreams allow humans to access experiential knowledge superior to learned knowledge.

Institutionalization and "Branding" of Ṭarīqas

• Formalization of relationships between murshid (master) and murid (disciple).

• Political support from rulers like the Saljuqs, Ayyubids, and Mamluks helped spread Sufi orders.

• Standardized rules and etiquette books ensured consistent training for initiates.

• Adoption of physical symbols (colored robes, shaved heads, earrings) to identify members.

Chishti vs. Naqshbandi Ṭarīqas

• Chishti Order:

  • Originated in Chisht, Khurasan, and expanded into India.

  • Avoided rulers, embraced music (sama‘), and interacted with Hindus.

  • Played a role in the gradual conversion of non-Muslim tribal communities.

• Naqshbandi Order:

  • Developed in a non-Muslim governed region and emphasized a humble, ascetic approach.

  • Maintained connections with rulers, condemned music, and promoted jihad against infidels.

Sufis and Political Power

• Sanctification of Sufis led to their recognition as saints.

• Construction of shrines and writing of hagiographies reinforced their spiritual authority.

• Pilgrimage practices developed around Sufi tombs, which attracted ruling elite support.

• Rulers patronized Sufis to gain legitimacy and religious favor.

Vernacularization and the Role of Persian

• "Vernacularization" refers to the spread of Sufi texts in non-Arabic languages.

• Early Sufi texts were exclusively in Arabic, making them inaccessible to most Muslims.

• Persian became the primary language of Sufi dissemination, followed by Turkish and Hindi/Urdu.

• Three modes of vernacularization:

  1. Courtly (Persian)

  2. Scholarly (Dakani, Urdu, Malay)

  3. Folkloric (local dialects)

• Persian texts dominated due to their association with elite culture and resources for transcription.

Criticism and Reform of Sufism

Accusations of Bidʿa in the 17th Century

• Increased Sufi diversity raised concerns about deviation from Islamic traditions.

• Sufi groups criticized each other, claiming to be the "true" path while dismissing others as innovations.

• Scholars traveling across regions observed highly varied Sufi practices, leading to theological disputes.

Kadizadeli Movement in the Ottoman Empire

• Advocated for strict adherence to Qur’anic teachings.

• Denounced Sufi shrine veneration as idolatry.

• Movement led to violent confrontations, with attacks on Sufi shrines and followers.

• Fueled by dissatisfaction with Sufi dominance in religious institutions.

Mughal Sufi Reformers: Ahmad Sirhindi and Shah Waliullah

• Ahmad Sirhindi emphasized returning to Shari‘a and Sunna, rejecting shrine worship.

• Shah Waliullah criticized Sufi innovations, advocating for a focus on the Qur'an.

• Both sought religious reform, distinguishing between Sufi spirituality and Islamic law.

Muhammad Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab’s Criticism

• Most radical anti-Sufi reformer, targeted shrine veneration and saint intercession.

• His movement, later known as Wahhabism, aimed to eliminate Sufi practices rather than reform them.

• Unlike other critics, Wahhabism gained state backing under the Sa‘udi family, enabling systematic suppression of Sufism.

Section 2: Primary Source Analysis

Analyzing a Sufi Text

1. Historical Context

   • Identify author, period, and political/religious affiliations.

   • Determine association with a ṭarīqa and societal role.

2. Textual and Thematic Analysis

   • Establish intended audience (scholars, common followers, rulers).

   • Identify text type (poetry, treatise, autobiography, sermon).

   • Analyze key themes: divine love, unity of being, personal ascension.

3. Ethical and Socio-Political Implications

   • Examine the text’s role in religious or political discourse.

   • Consider how the text was used historically and contested over time.

Reflection Questions and Answers

Why did early colonial scholars conclude that “Sufism had only the most tangential relation with Islam”

Early colonial scholars concluded that Sufism had only the most tangential relation with Islam because Shi'i leaders were very hostile towards Sufis- to the point of persecution, in 1800- and influenced the opinions of the scholars. The quote used in the first question is an opinion agreed upon by most European scholars at the time, and is described as, "...derived from a hostile Shi'i leader." (13). In addition, Sufis had much different opinions on a fundamental part of Islam, worship. Their beliefs lead them to "...discard all rites and religious worship, regarding it as a matter of little importance in what manner the thoughts are turned to God, provided they rest in contemplation on his goodness and greatness." (13).  Islam is of course known for its emphasis on worship and traditions, and most Muslims pray five times a day via a ritual more complex than many other major religions. The Muslim belief in the importance of worship is directly opposed to the Sufi belief in it's lack of importance, which is why it is hard to say that the two have more than a tangential relation.

Why would early European portrayals of “Sufism” have been “unrecognizable to most Sufis”

European portrayals of Sufism would have been unrecognizable to most Sufis for several reasons, one being because they often used poor sources such as "...poetry or else obscure and biased..." (16) in their research instead of learning from Sufi experts first hand. Additionally, and perhaps more notably, the scholars themselves were extremely biased. Their "Protestant theological dogma" (16) caused them to treat Sufism as an abstract mystical philosophy, ignoring the social and political contexts of the Sufi beliefs. The main reason, however, was that they separated Sufism from Islam, therefor denying Sufis the foundation of their belief system- the prophet Mohammed, the Qur'an, and Islamic law- on which their "mysticism" originated. Sufism is a subsect of Islam, and is seen as such by Sufis. By describing them as an entirely different, unrelated religion, European colonial scholars created a definition that the Sufis themselves wouldn't recognize.

How was the word “Sufi” used in Sufi texts (and how might this differ from essentialist conceptions of “Sufism”)?

The word "Sufi" was actually not used often in literature on Muslim mysticism. In fact, Sufis did not want to call themselves as such because of the "...intrinsic tension between the ideal of selflessness and the egotism inherent in claiming such status." (6) There were other words that they used to describe themselves, such as mutasawwif, for someone that legitimately aspired to be a Sufi, or mustaswif, for someone falsely claiming to be Sufi. In fact, it was a common sarcastic challenge to someone's religious legitimacy to call them a Sufi. The essentialist conceptions of "Sufism" differ from this in that they were referring to what they saw as an entirely separate religion when they used the term "Sufi." Sufis, in contrast, saw themselves as Muslim and used words to refer to the special features of their branch of Islam rather than referring to the branch as a whole in the way European Christian scholars referred to their branches of Christianity.

What was significant about the ideas of either Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi or Muhyi al-Din ibn ʿArabī?

According to Green, Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi's ideas about light were significant because they laid the foundation for ontology (the nature of existence/being) and epistemology (the nature of knowledge) (75). Suhrawardi believed that everything in the universe existed in the form of light and that all knowledge was an expression of that light. He thought that the universe itself was made up entirely of light, which originated from God, the purest and most self-existent form of light. Below God, the universe was arranged in a hierarchy of light beings, each reflecting light from above and passing it down to the next level. Also, he believed that the human journey “is to ascend that hierarchy by coming into contact with each of its light-beings in turn,” meaning that humans must move through different stages of spiritual growth to get closer to the divine light (75). Besides just the physical and angelic worlds, Suhrawardi placed an intermediary realm called the “World of Likenesses, " a meeting place for humans and angelic beings. It was a realm where humans would enter when having visions or dreams. Suhrawardi thought this space was significant to his system because “it was here that humans could begin to gather the ‘experiential knowledge’ (film al-Suzuki) that he considered superior to ‘acquired knowledge’ film al-hustle) gathered from books and lessons” (76). This reveals that he believed the knowledge gained through mystical experiences was much deeper and more meaningful than knowledge from written texts.

How did the institutionalization and "branding" of the various ṭarīqas develop in this period? (For a reminder of what a ṭarīqa is, check the earlier Green reading).

Green explains that the institutionalization and “branding” of various ṭarīqas (Sufi orders or spiritual paths) began with the creation of “brotherhoods” or “orders” (81). This process involved formally organizing Sufi groups and spreading them across different regions. One key development was the establishment of formal relationships between the master (murshid) and disciple (murid), which were often outlined in written rules and rituals (83). Green also writes that the political support from rulers, such as the Saljuq, Ayyubid, and Mamluk dynasties, also significantly spread Sufi orders. The rulers helped fund the construction of Sufi lodges and shrines where Sufis could gather and teach. In addition, the process of “branding” involved several key elements. Rules became more detailed, leading to the creation of etiquette books to ensure standardized training for initiates. Members adopted physical symbols like colored robes, shaved heads, earrings, and other recognizable paraphernalia (84).

What were the major differences between the Chishti and Naqshbandi ṭarīqas?

The Chishti ṭarīqa was a brotherhood that originated in the town of Chisht in Khurasan and was constructed from the legacy of Mu’in al-Din Chishti. According to Green, it was a brotherhood that not only established itself in the commercial and administrative settings of India’s cities but also spread through rural areas, where it received land grants and contributed to the gradual conversion of non-Muslim tribal and forest peoples to Islam (89). According to Green, they cultivated “an association with music, an antipathy for royal associations, and an openness for interaction with Hindus.” They focused on serving rural communities, especially non-Muslim tribal and forest people, introducing Islamic practices alongside agriculture and trade. In contrast, while Chishti ṭarīqa was more openly engaged with urban and elite Muslim circles, the Naqshbandi ṭarīqa was a brotherhood that emerged in a region governed by non-Muslims, focused on a more humble, ascetic approach (90). They were less concerned with social visibility, often emphasizing retreat within society as a core practice, focusing on personal piety and detachment from worldly wealth and power. According to Green, the main distinction between both groups is that “one avoided rulers, sought God through music and accommodated Hindus, while the other cultivated connections at court, condemned music and regularly promoted jihad against infidels” (91).

How did the relationship between Sufis and political power developed with the growing "sanctification" of Sufis (i.e. the increasing recognition of Sufis as saints)?

As Sufis gained recognition as saints, their relationship with political power grew more intertwined. The process of “sanctification” involved the construction of shrines, the writing of hagiographies, and the establishment of pilgrimage practices, transforming Sufis into spiritual guides and conduits of divine power. Green highlights that while sainthood was initially controversial, by the 12th century, Sufi shrines had become key pilgrimage sites (92). Ruling elites recognized the “prospective dividends of such patronage” and supported Sufis to secure religious legitimacy and social favor (95). In return, Sufis believed to possess baraka (divine blessings), could offer these blessings to their supporters, reinforcing the mutual benefits of this relationship.

What does Green mean by "vernacularization"?

When Green speaks of "vernacularization," he is referring to the massive increase in the distribution of Sufi texts in languages other than Arabic, most notably Persian. He notes that almost entirely without exception, early Sufis had written their works exclusively in Arabic, and that Arabic was as structurally different to the other Muslim speaking languages at the time as it is to English. This, in the context of the massive Sufi expansion Green discussed earlier in the text during the period of 1100 to 1400, meant that Arabic had become the "...language of the learned, with the vast majority of Muslims speaking languages that... were structurally as distinct from Arabic as English." (Green, 103-104) As Sufi influence spread and grew, Green claims it became obvious that for Sufism to evolve from a form of Islam limited only to the elites that could speak Arabic, it needed to vernacularize- or be translated to the local languages. As this process began, some key religious terms were kept in the original Arabic to create a standardized Muslim vocabulary. The act of vernacularization could also be, according to Green, split into 3 broad categories: courtly, scholarly, and folkloric. In courtly vernacularization, Persian was mainly used. In the scholarly vernacularization, Dakani, Urdu, and Malay, and in folkloric vernacularization it was various other languages that Sufis interacted in with their followers, although only evidence of Turkish and once again Dakani, Urdu, and possibly Malay. Of these languages, Persian was significantly more popular to the point where hundreds of Persian Sufi texts from this period have survived while some vernaculars only had the occasional collection of verses.

What role did Persian play in this process?

Hindi and Turkish did play a role in the vernacularization of Sufi texts, in a very similar way to that of Persian. Green describes the popularity of Sufism in those languages, writing, "Just as, under the shadow of Arabic, Persian took several centuries to establish its credentials as a literary language, so did the various forms of Turkish and Hindi/Urdu need time to emerge from the shadows of Persian." (Green, 110) Persian was considered the vernacular of Central Asia and Iran and was understood by the educated in Anatolia and India, in the latter two it was not commonly spoken by the average person. While this second phase of vernacularization wasn't finished until the 17th century, the Sufi texts found in those languages from the time of the first phase is evidence that the Sufi vernacularization process had already begun for them.

What role did languages like Hindi and Turkish play?

Persian, as mentioned above, played a larger role than any other language in vernacularization. This is because it was the language of choice in Green's courtly mode of vernacularization. He describes the reasons behind this, saying, "Such are the connections between language, power and script that Persian was by far more successful in entering the written record..." (Green, 104)  What he means by this is that Persian was the language of the rich and powerful, and as Sufis sought to expand their influence they were of course motivated to share their teachings with those who could give them power. In addition, the Persian-speaking elite could afford to have more Sufi texts translated and have more of those translations made. When considering the historical context the languages of vernacularization were in, it is logical that Persian would be the most successful in entering the written record.

What was the function of Arabic in Sufism during this period?

During this period, Arabic continued to expand alongside Persian in its use in Sufi writing. Arabic- and Persian once it reached a high enough use rate- continued to expand not because of Vernacularization, but because of the now wide-spread Sufi influence. There were more Sufi scholars and writers than ever before, writing on a wide range of topics. Green says that, "In Arabic and its Persian handmaiden, the expansion into the unwritten vernaculars was therefore matched by a massive literary profusion by way of biographies, pilgrimage manuals, letter collections, recorded conversations, epic poems and dream diaries, to name just a few examples." (Green, 113) As Sufism in other vernaculars grew in their use, Sufism in Arabic grew in genres, complexity, themes, and depth.

Why did Sufis increasingly come to be accused of "bidʿa" in the 17th century?

By the 17th century, Sufism was so widespread and popular that it had diversified greatly, to the point where different Sufis practiced their beliefs in such a variety that it "...begged the question as to whether all of them could possibly be the true tradition of the Prophet." (Green, 155) There was such a great number of diverse Sufi practices that it was easy for Sufis and non-Sufis alike to critique them. Each Sufi order claimed to be the true Sufism, and would then of course consider the practices of other Sufi groups to be "innovations" that went against the Qur'an. Additionally, non-Sufi Muslims who read the Qur'an could immediately tell fro the vast difference in the beliefs of different Sufi orders that for one of them to be the right path, all of the others had to be wrong. In this way, Sufism suffered from an abundance of success in spreading their beliefs. The reason this over diversification vecame an issue in the 17th century specifically is that as the world moved into the "early modern" period, it became easier for Mulim scholars to travel and witness their religion in faraway places. What they found was a very different representation of their beliefs, which they deemed bida'.  Additionally, as people travelled more, they brought their religious traditions and beliefs with them, leading to more interactions between conflicting Sufi practices.

What was the Kadizadeli movement and why was it significant for religious life in the Ottoman Empire?

The Kadizadeli movement occurred in the early to mid 1600's, and saw many of the religious officials cultivated by the Ottoman empire seemingly turn against their political supporters and sow discord into what they saw as a morally wrong society. The founder of the movement, Kadizade Mehmed, believed in a need to return to the Prophetic Vision and renounce innovations.  As Green puts it,  "Kadizade Mehmed used his influence as preacher in the largest mosques of Istanbul to disseminate his vision of a decadent age needing a renewal of faith" (Green, 158) He instilled such vigor and wrath in his followers that for a period of time, they acted as vigilantes vandalizing Sufi shrines and attacking and even killing Sufis themselves. This movement was able to gather a large number of followers, which Green in part attributes to Sufis high up in the government giving preaching and other religious positions to those of their own orders, leaving those unaffiliated with the powerful brotherhoods begrudged. Ultimately, this movement divided the Sufi institution the Ottomans had made official in their empire until the Kadizadeli movement petered out, but more importantly was a spark that inspired debate over the legitimacy of Sufism and its adherence to the Qur'an.

What were the central ideas developed by Ahmad Sirhindi, Shah Waliullah and other Sufi reformers in the Mughal Empire?

Ahmad Sirhindi was an Indian Naqshbandi Sufi who helped Sufism acheive a foothold in the Mughal Empire. He believed in a need to return to the Prophetic Vision, and "The present age, he thought, was one in which morals had become lax through the abandoning of Sunna and Shari'a and so required a renewer to bring Muslims back to the path of salvation." (Green, 164) He like Shah Waliullah and other Sufi reformers in the Mughal Empire, saw the significant weakening of their state and reacted by emphasizing a need for legalistic change in their teachings and writings. Shah Waliullah was specifically focused on innovations, and was increasingly critical of Sufi shrine-worshipping throughout his life.

How do the critiques of Muhammad Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab compare to these other movements?

Muhammad Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab is considered by Green to be the most influential Sufi critic. Green writes that, "The central concern of Ibn ‘Abd al Wahhab was to attack all forms of “innovation” and “idolatry” that divorced Muslims from what he saw as Muhammad’s original teachings." (Green, 160) "Wahhabism" began as Green describes it, critiquing shrine veneration and the treatment of Sufi holy men as intermediaries between man and God, but eventually evolved into a critique of Sufism as a whole. In his own period, Sufism was still to large and popular to fully reject, (which may be why whenever referred to Sufism directly) but the rise of the Sa'udi family eventually saw his ideas transformed into an anti-Sufi agenda. While other movements critiquing Sufis were more focused on reform and improvement in a Qur'anic sense, Ibn ‘Abd al Wahhab's more extreme views fully denounced Sufi practices.