RICEI.

]NTVERSITY
of
SafavidShi'ism,theEclipseof SufismandtheEmergence

'Irfan

By
Ata Anzali
A THESISSUBMITTED
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENTOF T}IE
FORTTIEDEGREE
REQUIREMENTS
Doctorof PhilosoPhY
AppnovsD, TIIESISCovrutrrEE:

JeffreyJ. Kripal, Chair, J, ew

RayzorProfessor
r ReligiousStudies

DavidB. Cook,

ReligiousStudies
iite Profess6r,

PaulaSanders,ProfessorHistory,Vice Provostfor AcademicAffairs,

Deanof Graduate&PostdoctoralStudies

BruceB. Lawrence,NancYandJe

MarcusHumanitiesProfessor,
DukeUniversitY

20!2
December
Texas
Houston,

ABSTRACT
Safavid Shiism, the Eclipse of Sufism and the Emergence of Irfn
by
Ata Anzali
The fundamental question I have tried to answer in this dissertation is how and when
in the religious history of Iran the term "irfn" came be used as an alternative to "taavvuf." I
demonstrate in detail how this discursive development was a response to major
transformations in the religious landscape of Iran in the Safavid period, during which time the
majority Sunni populace gradually converted to Twelver Shiism. I begin my discussion with a
general overview of this transformation and the subsequent emergence, in the seventeenth
century, of a Shii hierocracy aided by the Safavid Court. I then focus on the efforts of the
ulama to establish a new Shii orthodoxy by labeling alternative religious views "heterodox"
and by launching literary, and sometimes physical, campaigns against those who held them.
More specifically, I focus on the anti-Sufi campaign that swept across major urban centers in
Iran during the mid-seventeenth century and how, due to the convergence of a number of
favorable socio-political conditions, the heirocracy was gradually able to stigmatize terms like
"Sufi" and "Sufism" in the eyes of the public. This campaign would have not met with success, I
argue, had it not been for the the efforts of charismatic, Sufi-minded, and syncretistic
members of the 'ulama to incorporate popular elements of Sufi thought into their newlydesigned, alternative Twelver mode of spirituality, which was based on new terminology. I also
examine the Sufi response to the abovementioned transformation and to the anti-Sufi
campaign by focusing on the historical and intellectual developments of the ahab Sufi order.
Then, based on my analysis of both the Sufi-minded and anti-Sufi fronts in the cultural

battleground of Safavid Iran, I turn to the educated circles of Shiraz to discuss in detail how
several intellectual trends found there contributed to the formation of the category of irfn in
the early decades of the eighteenth century. In my analysis I focus particularly on the work
and career of Shah Muhammad Drb and Qub al-dn Nayrz. Then I offer a brief synopsis of
how the category of irfn came to be used with greater frequency in the writings of
eighteenth-century Persian scholars of Islam. Finally, and in order to show the contemporary
relevance of this early modern semantic development as well as its continuity and
discontinuity with modern usage, I offer a sketch of the evolution of the category of irfn in
twentieth-century Iran.

vii

Note on Transliteration
I follow the IJMES transliteration system for Arabic and Persian with following exceptions: In
the case of Persian names of contemporary figures, they often adopt a specific English spelling
of their names (or are referred to by one consistent spelling of their name in English-language
media), and I reflect these spellings to the extent possible. In addition, I have avoided
transliterating the names of major urban centers in the Middle East, except when they appear
as part of a persons name (thus: Qom and Qum, Tehran and Tihrn). I also do not
transliterate Arabic and Persian words that have been adopted into use by mainstream English
media, following the guidance of the Oxford Dictionary of English (See: Catherine Soanes and
Angus Stevenson, eds., Oxford Dictionary of English, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2005). Transliterated words are italicized only in their first appearance in the dissertation. The
Arabic definite article al- has been dropped from surnames in overwhelmoing majority of
cases as per Persian usage due to the Persian cultural and linguistic focus of the project.
Finally, in Persian, the t
a is rendered a, not ih, for the sake of consistency with the
Arabic. Persian i is indicated as i (-yi for words ending in vowels), but omitted in personal
names (e.g., Qu b al- n ayr instead of Qu b al-dn-i ayr ).

Contents
Introduction: the Question of irfn in Contemporary Iran............................................................ 1
Chapter One: The Big Picture ........................................................................................................ 12
Sufis, Philosophers, and the Quest for Marifa or gnosis ....................................................... 13
Avicenna and His Legacy of Irfn ............................................................................................. 24
Safavid Beginnings and Sufism ................................................................................................. 42
The ahabiyya during the Sixteenth Century....................................................................... 50
Shh Abbs, the Demise of the Qizilbash, and the Rise of Ulama........................................ 54
Ab Muslim, Sufism and Storytelling .................................................................................... 57
Chapter Two: The Making of the anti-Sufi Front .......................................................................... 70
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 71
Refutation of Sufism in Seventeenth Century Iran ................................................................... 73
Philosophy between Sufism and anti-Sufism............................................................................ 88
Conclusions and Analysis ........................................................................................................ 117
Chapter Three: The Sufi Response .............................................................................................. 128
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 129
The Zahabs during the Seventeenth Century ........................................................................ 132
Tafsr Mumin Mashhad ...................................................................................................... 140
Bayn al-Asrr ..................................................................................................................... 141
Muain-i Khursn and the Making of the Golden Lineage ............................................ 144
a b al-dn Ri and the Demise of rganized Sufism ....................................................... 159
Conclusions and Analysis ........................................................................................................ 170
Chapter Four: The Invention and Spread of Irfn ...................................................................... 179
Introduction: The Shiraz Circle ............................................................................................... 180
adr, His Students, and Irfn ................................................................................................ 185
Qu b al-Dn ayrz and the ahab rder .............................................................................. 193
a l al-Khitb ....................................................................................................................... 195
Shh Mu ammad Drb, Sufism and Irfn............................................................................ 209
Mir al-Kaml..................................................................................................................... 214
Irfn after the Safavids ........................................................................................................... 232

ix
Abd al-Ra m Damvand ................................................................................................... 233
Bdbd and arq ............................................................................................................ 242
The imatullh Revival ..................................................................................................... 251
Epilogue: Modern Developments in Irfn .................................................................................. 260
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 261
Kayvn Qazvn and his Discontent with Sufism................................................................. 263
Final Thoughts ..................................................................................................................... 274
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................ 278
Manuscripts ............................................................................................................................. 279
Published Sources .................................................................................................................... 281

List of figures:

Figure 1: Anti Sufi Polemics during the Safavid Period . 77

Figure 2: Anti Sufi Polemics 1500-1900256

Introduction: the Question of irfn in Contemporary Iran

On October 5, 2011, the fourth channel of government-run Islamic Republic of Iran

Broadcasting (IRIB4) televised a debate featuring Mahdi Nasiri and Mohsen Gharavian. 1 The
former is an independent commentator on religious and social issues and the editor-in-chief of
Simt, a quarterly ournal established to, as the subtitle of the ournal goes, provide a platform
to explain and defend the teachings (marif) of the Quran and the family of the Prophet, peace
be upon them.2 The latter is a well-known and somewhat controversial ayatollah from Qom, a
lecturer in Islamic philosophy, and the author of several books on theology, philosophy, logic,
and other subjects.3 The theme of the debate, which was broadcast nationally in Iran, was the
relationship between irfn and Islam.4 Nasiri has long been known for his adherence to a

IRIB4 primarily caters to highly educated class of Iranians on various subjects in humanities, arts and sciences. The debate
can be accessed online at: n r -yi j njl-yi N siri v Gh r vi n d rbr -yi irfn v dn, 2011,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-DZIQHdfsg&feature=youtube_gdata_player.
2

All issues of the journal can be accessed online at http://www.sematmag.com/index.php.

For his personal website see http://www.gharavian.ir/.

The term irfn has been translated into English by scholars of Persian mystical tradition as Islamic mysticism, mystical

2
puritanical reading of Shiism and his passionate promotion of the idea that the true face of
Islam and the original doctrines of the twelve Shii imams have been obscured by various
curtains over the course of the centuries. ne of these curtains is Sufism, and another is
philosophy.5 In contrast to Nasiri, Gharavian, who studied under prominent teachers of
philosophy and irfn in Qom, is a firm believer that irfn is not only compatible with, but also
an integral part of the teachings of the imams.
Many aspects of this debate would be interesting to discuss, but the feature that goes to
the heart of the question asked in this dissertation is the terminology used by the two men.
Throughout nearly an hour of back and forth debate, Gharavian consistently uses the word
irfna term that generally has positive connotations among Persian speakersto refer to
the mystical tradition of Islam. Nasiri, on the other hand, insists on using the term t
(Sufism), or alternatively the pe orative irfn-i m

vv f

(the so-called irfn). asiris

semantic choice strikes the native speaker of Persian as strange, but it is deliberate: he wishes
to make the point that what is called irfn in Iran today is in fact Sufisma term imbued with
negative connotations and sometimes used as a pejorative, especially among religious people.
This televised debate, in particular asiris word choices and their implications, is one
of many examples of the dispute in larger Iranian society over the status of irfn and Sufism
and their relationship to authentic Islamic teaching. o in-depth study of the intensification
of this debate has been carried out, but having tracked publication trends in Iran in recent

knowledge, theosophy, gnosis and gnosticism. Given the opaque and amorphous conceptual boundaries of the terms
like mysticism, gnosticism and theosophy in English, there is little in the way of clarity that such translations can offer. Thus, I
have decided to use the original term in the hopes that, after reading this research, the reader would at least understand the
rationale of each one of the abovementioned translations chosen by scholars of the field. Therefore, this introduction does not
aim to provide the reader with a clear definition of the category of irfn and set its conceptual boundaries vis--vis Sufism;
rather, its goal is to illustrate the real-life relevance and implications of the semantic dichotomy maintained in contemporary
Persian literature, in which irfn and Sufism are conceived as two separate poles.
5

A third curtain is modernity.

3
years, it seems clear to me that the argument between proponents and opponents of Sufism
and irfn has escalated over the course of the last decade.6 I believe this can be traced to
socio-cultural developments in Iran following the Islamic Revolution.
After the success of the Islamic Revolution of 1979 and the subsequent takeover of
major branches of government by conservative religious circles led by Ayatollah Khomeini, a
new form of religiosity came to be promoted and idealized in Iran. This religiosity was based
primarily on a framework laid out by Khomeini and his students, particularly the prominent
religious intellectuals Morteza Motahhari and Ayatollah Montazeri.7 Irfn was a ma or
component of this revolutionary religiosity. This was related to the fact that Khomeini, the
architect and the leader of the Islamic Revolution, was not only a mujtahid (jurisconsult) and
m rj -i t qld (source of emulation) of the highest caliber, he was also an acclaimed rif or
gnostic.8 As such, he was a proponent of and commentator on works of speculative
mysticism by Ibn Arabi (d. 638/1240), the Islamic philosopher and mystic par excellence, as well
as a student of the mystical philosophy of the Shii philosopher and theologian Mull adr (d.
1050/1640).9 Exclusive, unlimited media access enabled Khomeinis students to promote an
Islamic ideology that combined the modernist, juristic and mystical elements reflected in their
leaders religious outlook. The invasion of Iraqi forces in the summer of 1980 and the ensuing,
disastrous war that engulfed both nations for eight years heightened the relevance of this
6

See note 22 below.

These two men played a fundamental role in constructing the framework on which the Islamic Republics ideology has rested
ever since. Other important contributors also existed; for a detailed discussion of this ideology and its architects see: Hamid
Dabashi, Theology of Discontent: the Ideological Foundation of the Islamic Revolution in Iran (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction
Publishers, 2006).
8

The explanation for choosing the term gnostic as an equivalent for rif (lit. knower) is given in the first chapter.

or more on Khomeinis irfn see: Alexander Knysh, Irfan Revisited: Khomeini and the Legacy of Islamic Mystical
Philosophy, Middle East Journal 46, no. 4 (October 1, 1992): 631653.

4
ideological rhetoric, one which portrayed the invading force, backed by the imperialist West,
as the enemy of Islam rather than Iran. This casting of the conflict as a holy war reinforced to
the Iranian public the mystical aspects of this ideology, which drew on foundational Shii
narratives of the martyrdom of the Prophets grandson usayn at the hands of the Umayyad
Caliph Yazd during the Battle of Karbala in 680.10
Those in the seminaries, however, were not always inclined to embrace the mystical
elements of the new ideology. Khomeinis penchant for mysticism was an exception, not a
norm, in the upper echelons of the Shii hierocracy in Qom. Most high-ranking religious
scholars were suspicious of philosophy and irfn, to say the least, and they were disinclined to
give irfn a free pass to enter the seminary curriculum. Granted, Ibn Arabs speculative
mysticism and Mull adrs philosophy had been taught in the seminaries for over two
centuries, but the teachers who propagate their thought had always been marginalized (if not
demonized or opposed outright) by jurists intent on safeguarding orthodoxy. In fact, during
the 1950s, Khomeini himself was at odds with Ayatollah Bur ird, the most prominent m rj
of the time, over the issue of teaching the mystical philosophy of adr openly in the
(the Shii seminary system).11 Nor were his mystical views well-received among Arab religious
scholars when he was exiled by the Shah to Iraq. Khomeinis followers often speak of how
exoteric and literalist urists despised him to the extent that they considered even his son to
be ritually impure because of his fathers indulgence in the heretical teachings of Ibn Arab
and his teaching of Mull adrs books.12 Even after the revolution, Khomeini was forced to

10

For more on mysticism, martyrdom, and the youth see: Roxanne Varzi, Warring Souls: Youth, Media, and Martyrdom in PostRevolution Iran (Durham: Duke University Press, 2006).
11

12

Roy P. Mottahedeh, The Mantle of the Prophet: Religion and Politics in Iran (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1985), 24243.

The story, which is probably a myth, is continually repeated. For an informed discussion of Khomeini and his opponents in
this regard (and one that mentions this story), see Ali Mousavi Bo nordi, Imm Khumain va mukhlfn-i hawzav-ash, Samin

5
cancel a series of nationally broadcast lectures due to mounting pressure from the traditional
seminary authorities who were outraged by the strong mystical and philosophical coloring of
Khomeinis b in (esoteric) interpretation of the Quran.
Despite such opposition, proponents of philosophy and irfan have gradually, in the
years since the revolution, changed the status quo such that Mull adrs mystical philosophy
is now an accepted element of the official seminary curriculum. Moreover, Ibn Arab and his
followers works on speculative mysticism are taught with greater frequency, freedom, and
openness. This is largely thanks to the efforts of Muhammad usayn abtab in the prerevolutionary period13 and to structural reforms in the administration and curriculum of the
seminary introduced by Khomeinis supporters after the revolution. The gradual move of both
philosophy and irfn into the mainstream is perhaps best reflected by the adoption into the
awza curriculum of two textbooks written by abtab for students of philosophy as well as
the production of the first ever textbook on speculative mysticism.14
In advocating irfn, ideologues of the revolution provided the passionate young
generation of Iranians known as the Children of the Revolution with an attractive

(blog), March 29, 2010, http://mousavibojnordi.blogfa.com/post-9.aspx.

13

abtab (d. 1981) was the twentieth centurys most prominent Twelver Shii philosopher. For more on his life and thought
and for an overview of Islamic philosophy in Iran in modern times, see Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to
the Present: Philosophy in the Land of Prophecy, SUNY Series in Islam (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006), 254277.
Also See Mehdi Aminrazavi, Islamic Philosophy in the Modern Islamic World: Persia, in History of Islamic Philosophy, ed.
Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Oliver Leaman, Routledge History of World Philosophies (London: Routledge, 1996), 10371050.
14

The two textbooks on adrs philosophy, Bidy t l- ikma (The Beginnings of Philosophy) and Nihy t l- ikm (The
Conclusion of Philsophy), were written in the first decade after the revolution in response to the demand in the seminaries
that novice religious students be educated in accordance with the Khomeini-approved model. See Mu ammad usayn
ab ab, Bidy t l- ikm (Qom: Muassasat al-Nashr al-Islm al-Tbia li-Jamat al-Mudarrisn, 1985); Mu ammad usayn
ab ab, Nihy t l- ikm (Qom: Muassasat al-Nashr al-Islm al-Tbia li-Jamat al-Mudarrisn, 1984). The Bidy is also
translated into English: Mu ammad usayn ab ab, The Elements of Islamic Metaphysics: (Bidy t l- ikm ), trans. Al Ql
Qar (London: ICAS, 2003).
The textbook of speculative mysticism mentioned above was published only within the last several years, and the late
date is an indication of how problematic Ibn Arabs school of thought remains in circles of leadership in the awza. See
Yadollah Yazdanpanah, bn v
l-i irfn-i n r (Qom: Intishrt-i Muassasa-yi mzish va Pazhhish-yi Imm
Khomeini, 2009).

6
spirituality and a grand framework of meaning. The promotion of irfn as the true essence
of Islams mystical tradition also entailed casting aspersions on institutional Sufism and
questioning the authenticity and orthodoxy of imatullh and ahab Sufis. However, due to
Khomeinis deep and personal investment in the tradition of High Sufism (represented by Ibn
Arab and his school of thought), organized Sufism remainedfor a whilesafe from outright
persecution.
The end of the war with Iraq and the liberal economic and cultural policies pursued
under the presidencies of Rafsanjani and Khatami brought dramatic changes in the Iranian
socio-cultural landscape. One aspect of this change was a rapid increase in the number of
syncretistic, New Age-inspired religious movements. Scientific theories, alternative medicine,
traditional esoteric sciences like alchemy, and modern forms of spirituality began to be mixed
with orthodox Islamic beliefs in various ways to cater to (for lack of a better term) middle-class
Iranians in major urban centers who have increasingly resisted the state-sponsored religion
forced down their throats.15
These new spiritual movements are generally described by the adjective irfn in
contemporary Persian discourse.16 This designation highlights their place in a modernist
trajectory of religious thought and practice which began in the early twentieth century and
which has led to the formation of a distinct category to which the word irfn now refers.
15

For more on these new developments see Alireza Doostdar, antasies of Reason: Science, Superstition, and the
Supernatural in Iran (Harvard University, 2012).
16

For example, a new school of mysticism known as irfn-i k yhn (cosmic mysticism) or irfn-i lq (ring mysticism) has
recently become wildly popular in major urban centers of Iran. The founder of this school, Mohammad Ali Taheri, published a
number of books explaining his vision, all of which were promptly banned by the authorities, who were alarmed by the
increasing number of people joining his school of thought. See Muhammad Ali Taheri, Irfn-i k yhn ( lq ) (Qom: Intishrt-i
Andsha-yi Mndagr, 2009).
The major common denominator of many of these new spiritual movements appears to be their emphasis on the
compatibility of modern science with the supernatural. Doostdar talks extensively about this aspect of new spiritual
movements in his dissertation. See Alireza Doostdar, antasies of Reason: Science, Superstition, and the Supernatural in
Iran (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2012).

7
The present-day proponent of irfn in Iran tends to be wary of institutional forms of Sufism,
which are often viewed as despotic, corrupt and superstitious. Instead, modern-minded
intellectuals in Iran embrace the category of irfn as a realm distinct from that of traditional
Sufism. In doing so, they construct a modern discourse of spirituality (often called m n viyy t)
that picks and chooses from the long history of Persian Sufism those aspects that are deemed
sufficiently modern to meet the needs of a new generation of highly-educated Iranians who
aspire to a spirituality compatible with science, modern philosophy, and contemporary
lifestyles.17
Such alternative readings of religion and mysticism give the ideologues of revolution
an immense amount of anxiety, and the Islamic regime has proven increasingly intolerant of
independent and popular religious/spiritual movements, no matter how much they emphasize
their allegiance to Shii orthodoxy. The regime has become increasingly obsessed with drawing
clear and fast boundaries between genuine, Khomeini-style irfn and pseudo-irfns
(irfn-h-yi kib).18 The main responsibility of combatting these deviant mysticisms both
ideologically and physically is relegated to the extensive, quasi-militia branch of the
Revolutionary Guards known as the Basi . In a clear shift of policy from Khomeinis time, a

17

Soroush Dabbagh, son of the famous Iranian intellectual and religious reformer Abdulkarim Soroush, has recently published
two consecutive articles on the subject. In these two articles he attempts to lay out the philosophical foundations of what he
calls irfn-i mudirn (modern irfn) in contradistinction to irfn-i s nn t (traditional irfn). See Soroush Dabagh, ar vra-yi az irfn-i mudirn: tanh manav, simn, no. 1 (2011). The second installment, entitled ar -vra-yi az irfn-i
mudirn (2), can be found in authors personal website at http://soroushdabagh.com/home/pdf/191.pdf. The early
development of this modernist discourse on spirituality will be discussed in the epilogue of this dissertation.
In contrast, Mustafa Malekian, another prominent contemporary intellectual and philosopher in Iran, has put more
emphasis on the category of m n viyy t (spirituality) in his construction of a modern Persian spiritual discourse in which
traditional mysticism is put in conversation with a modern form of rationality. Hence the title of his major project:
Aqlniyyat va manaviyyat (Rationality and Spirituality). or more on his views see Mustaf Malikiyan, ds-i ri m nd:
j strhy d r qlniyy t v m n vviy t, Bnish-i Manav 41, (Tehran: igh-i Musir, 2010). See also Mu af Malikiyn, Rh
bih r hy: j strhy d r bb-i qlniyy t v m n viyy t, Bnish-i Manav (Tehrn: igh-i Mu ir, 1381), and Mu af
Malikiyn, Dn, m n viyy t v r sh nfikr-yi dn: sih g ft v g b
f likiyn, (Tehran: Nashr-i Pyn, 1387). A weblog
dedicated to the propagation of his thought and that of a handful of other Iranian intellectuals and philosophers can be found
at http://neeloofar.ir/index.php.
18

As Doostdar has shown, the more one tries to pinpoint differences between true and false esoteric practices, the more
elusive these differences become. See Doostdar, antasies of Reason.

8
brutal and unyielding policy of persecution against traditional Sufis and the New Age
movements has accelerated under Khamenei, Irans current supreme leader.
As noted above, due to Khomeinis personal sympathy with Sufi tradition, a dont ask
dont tell policy was followed under his leadership. As a result, the imatullhs and ahabs,
which had generally been considered orthodox orders and which subjected themselves to
clerical hegemony, were left to practice and preserve their centers.19 Times changed, however,
after Khomeini died. His heir, Khamenei, lacked his predecessors strong background in irfn,
and he had no sympathy for traditional Sufi groups. The liberal tendencies of Presidents
Rafsanjani and Khatami did not initially provide Khamanei with amenable circumstances for
attacking the Sufis. However, following the election of Mahmud Ahmadinejad as president in
2005, Khamanei was able to consolidate his power over the upper echelons of the political
system, and the inherent tension between the totalitarian interpretation of Shiism centered
around the idea of vily t-i faqih (guardianship of the jurist) on the one hand, and the Sufi
demand for total submission to the will of the m rshd or pr (spiritual guru) on the other,
became readily apparent. The first major clash between the regime and the orthodox Sufi
orders happened in May of 2006, when one of the most important imatullh khnaqhs
(centers), located in the holy city of Qom, was confiscated and razed to the ground in the

aftermath of a bloody clash between the imatullh dervishes and the Basi militia.20 The
pressure on the imatullhs and other Sufi groups has been increasing ever since.21

19

ther Sufi groups that were deemed heterodox, like the rbakhshi branch of the imatullh order, were not so fortunate.
They were brutally persecuted and pushed underground soon after the revolution. Their leader, Sayyid Javad Nurbakhsh, fled
to London and died there in 2008.
20

Although authorities have denied imatullh claims regarding the death of several dervishes, officials confirmed the arrest
of over 1200 members of the imatullh khnaqh.
21

The annual Human Rights Watch report designates the imatullhs as a religious minority under discrimination. See
World Report 2011: Iran | Human Rights Watch, n.d., http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2011/iran. For Amnesty
Internationals report see Amnesty International | Working to Protect Human Rights, n.d.,

9
As mentioned above, amidst the heightened political and social tensions of the past
several years scholars have increasingly focused their attention on the irfn versus Sufism
debate and the question of the relationship of each with authentic Islam.22 imatullh
leaders, long suspicious of the irfn/Sufism dichotomy,23 have grown increasingly aware of the
danger posed by this seemingly innocuous semantic distinction, which allows proponents of
state-sponsored irfn to marginalize institutional Sufism and persecute Sufis without
appearing to be opposed to spirituality. This has led the imatullhs to push more strongly
their arguments in favor of using the two terms synonymously.24

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/iran/report-2011.
A more detailed report listing instances of illegal detainments, torture, and intimidation can be found at
Hr_violations_dervishes.pdf, n.d., http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/dir/dv/hr_violations_dervish/hr_violations_dervishes.pdf. I am not in a position to confirm the details of this report, but there
is little question in my mind that most of the information found in it is factually correct.
22

For the first two decades after the revolution there was little debate on the issue. One of the few (and perhaps the sole)
discussions on the topic in that period can be found in a 1994 issue of K yhn-i ndsh that contains two essays dealing with
the difference(s) and similarities between Sufism and irfn. See Manchihr adq, Yagnag ya dugnag-yi ta avvuf b
irfn, K yhn-i ndsh , no. 54 (1994): 8690, as well as Ran bar aqq, Sayr dar irfn va ta avvuf, K yhn-i ndsh , no. 54
(1994): 99116.
In contrast, recent years have seen a dramatic surge in the number of articles and books dealing with the issue of ta avvuf
versus irfn. The following works are among many that address the issue in detail or are devoted to it entirely: Alireza Arab,
vv f v irfn ddgh-i l m-yi m t khkhr-i Sh (Tehran: Intishrt-i min-i h, 2009); Javad Tehrani, Arif va f chi
mg y nd (Tehran: Nashr-i fgh, 2011); Ali Agha-Nuri, rifn-i m s lmn v sh ri t-i islm (Qom: ashr-i Dnishgh-i Adyn,
2008); Muhammad Javdan, limn-i sha va ta avvuf, H ft smn, no. 33 (2004); Al Muva idiyn A r, f m-i irfn
(Qom: Nashr-i Dnishgh-i Adyn, 2009).
The recently-established publication house Rh-i kn has been very active in publishing works that deal with the
distinction between true and false versions of irfn and/or the relationship between the latter and Islam. The ma ority of
these can be considered part of the anti- imatullh propaganda encouraged by state policy. Examples of works published by
Rh-i kn are Jafar Tavn, Sarchashma-h-yi ta avvuf (Tehran: Rh-i kn, 1386); Reza Madani, Irfn-i islm v irfn iltiq :
b rr s v n qd-i qyid-i firqa-yi g nbdiyy (Tehran: Rh-i kn, 2008); and Muhammad Reza Rousta, fv t-i irfn v
t vv f (Tehran: Rh-i kn, 2009).
Several issues of the periodical Irfn-i Iran, edited by the scholar of Persian Sufism Seyyed Mustafa Azmayesh, a
imatullh himself, feature articles that deal with this distinction. See especially Nos. 7, 10, 22 and 27-8.
23

As will be discussed in detail in the last chapter, imatullhs entered the cultural landscape of Iran from India in the early
decades of the nineteenth century and thus, unlike the ahabs, they did not participate in the formation of this dichotomy.
Instead, their literature often deemphasizes the difference between irfn and Sufism. or example, afalshh, the renowned
late nineteenth century imatullh q b (pole), questioned the validity of such a distinction. See asan af Al Shh, Irfn lqq (Tehran: Muhammad, 1954).
24

ral Tbanda, shin-yi b irfn v t vv f (Tehran: Intishrt-i aqqat, 2001). This work can be accessed online at
http://www.sufi.ws/books/download/farsi/ashnaeebaerfan-chap3.pdf. Tbanda is the current murshd of the Gunbd
branch of the imatullh order.
Shahram Pazouki, a prominent scholar of Sufism and a imatullh himself, has argued that the use of the term irfn
to indicate the mystical tradition of Islam has a relatively short history. See Shahram Pazouki, Prduks-i ta avvuf nazd-i
astd va shgirdn-i Mull adr, ls f , f l-nm m j ll -yi dnishk d -yi d biyyt v l m-i insn dnishgh-i Tehran, no. 12
(2006): 93108.

10
This dissertation is an attempt to identify the cultural trajectories and intellectual
trends that contributed to the formation of this dichotomy. One that has been exploited in
several episodes of the Iranian history, including the above-mentioned contemporary scene, as
an effective discursive tool both by secular and religious authorities to legitimize the
persecution of Sufis. Thus, this genealogical study is not only well overdue as a scholarly work,
but also, and more importantly, helps give a voice to the subaltern Sufis of Iran.
In chapter one, I provide a backdrop for my subsequent narrative and arguments by
outlining the historical and intellectual contexts in which the category of irfn emerged and
was developed. Chapter two discusses in detail the formation and development of a strong
anti-Sufi front in seventeenth century Iran, comprised of religious scholars and centered in
Isfahan. I also treat the influence of this front on perceptions of Sufism as Safavid rule
declined. In chapter three, I analyze the Sufi response to the above-mentioned phenomenon
and, more generally, the increasing dominance of Shiism in Iran. In doing so, I focus on the
development of branch of Sufism that came to be known as the ahabiyya order, while
simultaneously keeping in view its rival order, the prominent rbakshiyya. Chapter four
expands on the material in preceding chapters by discussing the intellectual, social, and
religious forces that contributed to the formation of a new discourse on spirituality centered
on the emerging categories of rif and irfn. It also examines the ma or intellectual figures,
based primarily in Shiraz, who were responsible for the formation and spread of this

Counter-arguments in line with the official narrative of the Islamic Republic have been developed. See, for example,
Hossein Ghaffaris response to the abovementioned article by Pazouki: Hossein Ghaffari, Ta avvuf y irfn? Psukh bar
maqla-yi prduks-i ta avvuf nazd-i astd va shgirdn-i Mull adr, ls f , f l-nm -yi majalla-yi dnishk d -yi d biyyt
v l m-i insn-yi dnishgh-i Tehran, no. 12 (2006): 109126. Ghaffari is a prominent student of the late Morteza Motahhari, the
main ideologue of the Islamic Republic.
A considerable amount of activity surrounding the issue has taken place on the internet as well. Take, for example, an
anti-Sufi blogger who has entitled one post Irfn yes, Sufism no. (Saber Qodsi, Irfn r, ta avvuf na, March 15, 2006,
http://www.kherghe.blogfa.com/post-77.aspx). See also this substantial anti-Sufi website: Pazhhish darbra-yi Mu y aldn Ibn Arab, irfn va ta avvuf, n.d., http://www.ebnearabi.com/.

11
alternative discourse. These include Qu b al-dn ayrz, Shh Muhammad Drb and Abd alRa m Damvand. Finally, I close with a brief sketch of how these developments connect to
transformations initiated by the forces of modernity in late nineteenth- and twentieth century
Iran.

Chapter One: The Big Picture

13

Sufis, Philosophers, and the Quest for Marifa or gnosis25

In Arabic, the root -r-f, from which the term irfn, rif, and marifa are derived,
denotes recognition or knowledge. Its beginnings in Arabic literature of the Islamic period
are humble. The Quran does not contain the terms m rif and irfn, and when other words
derived from the root -r-f appear, they generally correspond to recognition (which is

25

From an etymological perspective, both m rif and gnosis come from roots that denote knowledge. Both are
overwhelmingly used for a particular type of knowledge that relates to divine mysteries. (The ED defines gnosis as the
knowledge of spiritual mysteries. See Angus Stevenson, ed., Gnosis oun, Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford Reference
Online (Oxford University Press, n.d.), http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezpprod1.hul.harvard.edu/views/ENTRY.html?entry=t140.e0339470&srn=1&ssid=1173748542#FIRSTHIT.)
There are also other connotations of the term gnosis, rooted in its strong association with Christian Gnosticism, that make it a
good candidate to render in English what is meant by m rif . Among them is the unmediated nature of this knowledge, the
fact that it is reserved for a few elite, and its realization through exploring the inner self. (See: Wouter J. Hanegraaff, ed.,
Gnosticism (Leiden: Brill, 2006), http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.ejournals:sfx3170000000000647.). Yet, as we will see in
the coming pages, in talking about m rif and irfn, rather than emphasizing the noetic aspect of the concept, it is
overwhelmingly used to refer to an advanced spiritual station (m qm), which is associated with the profound realization of
the true nature of Reality ( l- qq) in non-dual terms. Therefore, it seems appropriate to point out that m rif is technically
closer to what Versluis has called metaphysical gnosis in contrast to cosmological gnosis. While the latter entails a subtle
dualism of subject-object, to some extent belongs to the realm of knowledge, and reveals correspondences between subject
and ob ect, or between humanity and the natural world, metaphysical gnosis is non-dualistic spiritual insight, as one finds in
the work of Meister Eckhart or in that of the contemporary American author Bernadette Roberts [It] represents direct
insight into the transcendent (See: Arthur Versluis, What Is Esoteric? Methods in the Study of Western Esotericism,
Esoterica IV (2002): 3 and 11.)
Yet, I refrain from translating irfn to gnosis as Corbin, and asr following him, has done (Henry Corbin, History of Islamic
Philosophy (London: Kegan Paul International, 1993), 21; Seyyed Hossein asr, Shiism and Sufism: Their Relationship in
Essence and in History, Religious Studies 6, no. 3 (1970): 229242. This has mostly to do with the fact that, first, I am at odds
with the particular methodology and a-historical framework within which Corbin and his followers have defined irfn as
gnosis. Secondly, and as I will demonstrate in detail in later chapters, irfn, in contrast to marifa, especially from the
eighteenth century onward is often used in the literature as a form of ism, that is, for example, as an equivalent for the term
ta avvuf or Sufism. The most systematic and clear definition of irfn, I believe, is offered by Gerhard Bwering. See Gerhard
Bwering, ER (1), ed. Ehsan Yar-Shater, Encyclopdia Iranica (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1982). Here, he suggests
Islamic theosophy as an equivalent for irfn and offers several defining features of the modern use of the concept. They are
(1) an emphasis on the mystico-philosophical side of Sufism and Shiism in contra-distinction to the organized practice of
Sufism (t vv f) and to the rational speculation and legalistic reasoning of Shiite theology (k lm) and law (fiqh); (2) an stress
on the intuitive side of Islamic thought and wisdom ( ikm ), traced back to Shihb al-dn Ya y Suhravard and Ibn Arab, as
against the tradition of deductive philosophy (falsafa), associated with Ibn Rushd (d. 595/1198); (3) roots in the b in, the inner
and hidden side of Islamic religiosity, that is understood, together with the generally more prominent, outer and manifest side
( hir) of Islamic law and religion, as shaping the totality of Islam (See: Ibid.). While I find Bwerings systematic and clear
exposition of the outlines of category of irfn extremely valuable, it has a ma or shortcoming. amely, it does not take into
account the most important modernity-inspired shift that took place in the category of irfn during the early twentieth
century. The new conceptual dimensions introduced to irfn can best be understood by following the corresponding
developments in Western understandings of the concepts of spirituality and mysticism. ( or the latter two terms and their
modern developments see L. E. Schmidt, The Making of Modern Mysticism, Journal of the American Academy of Religion 71, no.
2 (June 1, 2003): 273302; Richard King, Orientalism and Religion: Post-coloni l heory, Indi nd the ystic E st (London:
Routledge, 1999). I will talk about this aspect of the category of irfn briefly in the Epilogue.

14
opposed to forgetfulness), rather than knowledge.26 Instead, beginning with the Quran, the
concept of knowledge (which is opposed to jahl, ignorance) is denoted by words derived
from the root -l-m, from which come various verb constructions as well as nouns like lim and
ilm. In contrast with the non-appearance of irfn, the term ilm is used as knowledge
more than sixty times in the Quran.27 Furthermore, it is important to note that constructs
from the root -r-f are never used to denote something about the Divine nature, acts, and
attributes, whereas al- lm (the Knower) is one of the most commonly used Names of God. In
accordance with the Quran, Muslim authors have refused to acknowledge al-rif as a Divine
Name, arguing that the latter root signifies a prior knowledge that has been, or is susceptible
to being, forgotten and then remembered. This recognition, they explain, is not applicable to
the omniscience God. Hence, Muslim authors have made several attempts to draw a clear line
of distinction between ilm and marifa. Any substantial discussion of such distinctions, mostly
based on philological observations, as interesting as they might be, fall beyond the scope of
this dissertation. 28 What is important for this project is that Sufi authors, even when they
theoretically distinguish between the two terms, have largely used them interchangeably.29
It appears that the term marifa, along with the active participle rif (knower or
gnostic), was first singled out as a distinct category in the early Sufi lexicon around the

26

See: 2:89; 2: 146; 5:83; 6:20; 6:46; 9:102; 12:58; 12:62; 16: 83; 22: 72; 23: 69 among others. This is the case for another repeatedly
used construction of the root -r-f in the Quran, i.e., term m r f, which means the recognized [way].
27

This count is specifically for the form ilm. If we count all various derivatives of the root -l-m, there are more than six
hundred cases.
28

or a basic summary of such efforts see: "Marifa." Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Brill Online , 2012. Reference.
Harvard University. 23 May 2012 http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/marifa-COM_0686
29

See, for example, Chitticks statement about the use of ilm and m rif in Ibn Arabs corpus in William C Chittick, The Sufi
Path of Knowledge: Ibn al-Ar bis et physics of Im gin tion (Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1989), 149.

15
middle of the third/ninth century.30 The emergence of marifa as a category is in fact
connected to an important transformation in the early spiritual landscape of the Islamic
heartlands. This transformation occurred when the ideal type of spirituality signified by zuhd
(renunciation) and associated with a pietistic lifestyle centered on bd (worship) was
challenged by a new spiritual vision in which the ideal adept was primarily concerned with the
cultivation of the inner life.31 This new vision, according to Karamustafa, was an
inward turn [that] manifested itself especially in new discourses on
spiritual states, stages of spiritual development, closeness to God, and love; it
also led to a clear emphasis on knowledge of the interior (ilm l-b in) acquired
through ardent examination and training of the human soul. or these
interiorizing renunciants, the ma or renunciatory preoccupation of eschewing
this world (d ny, literally, the lower, nearer realm) in order to cultivate the
other world (khir , the ultimate realm) was transformed into a search for the
other world within the inner self.32

There were a number of distinct spiritual movements in the early centuries after the
dawn of Islam that contributed to the development of this inward turn. ot all associated

30

Massignon credits u al- n al-Mi r (d. 245/856) with singling out m rif as a distinct category [Louis Massignon, Essay on
the Origins of the Technical Language of Islamic Mysticism (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997), 143.]
31

Historians and hagiographers have traditional taken the early hhd or ascetics to be Sufis-in-waiting, or proto-mystics,
(See, for example, the now classic Annemarie Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam (Chapel Hill,: University of North Carolina
Press, 1975). However, I am in general agreement with Nile Green that the two could better be understood as manifestations of
rival visions of the spiritual path. See Nile Green, Sufism: a Global History (Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012), 20
23.
32

Ahmet T Karamustafa, Sufism: the Formative Period, The New Edinburgh Islamic Surveys (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press, 2007), 2.

16
with those movements initially identified as Sufis,33 but the confluence of these different
trends in the spiritual landscape of early Islam eventually led to the emergence of a more
unified entity, called Sufism, starting roughly from the fourth/tenth century.34 Early figures
who were influential in the development of the inward turn, including u al- n, Ya y b.
Muz (d. 258/871), Sar al-Saqa (d. circa 253/866), and others used the concept of marifa,
among others, to identify and distinguish the new paradigm of spirituality. or them, rif
(gnostic) as an ideal type stands in contrast, and is superior, to the previous ideal of the hid
(ascetic). or example, u al- n is recorded to have said that [A]scetics are the kings of the
afterlife, and gnostics (rifn) are the kings of the ascetics. 35 Similarly, Sir Saqa contrasts
the two, saying that an ascetics life is not pleasurable since he is occupied with his self, but
the life of a gnostic is pleasurable because he is occupied with other than his/her self.36 In the

33

For example, k rrmiyy and m lm tiyy seem to be significant rivals of the early Sufi movement in Khurasan region.

34

The Arabic term that is usually translated into English as Sufism is ta avvuf. The latter, as a verbal noun, means the process
of becoming a Sufi, and as such it refers to the spiritual and ethical ideal that early Sufi masters offered as their goal. ne
finds many definitions of ta avvuf in classical and early Sufi literature. All these definitions are somewhat elusive from the
perspective of descriptive history and social science, as Ernst points out. They do not have any clear reference to a defined
group of people. Instead, they accomplish a powerful rhetorical transaction; the person who listens to or reads these
definitions is forced to imagine the spiritual or ethical quality that is invoked by the definition, even when it is paradoxical.
Definitions of Sufism are, in effect, teaching tools. Carl W Ernst, The Shambhala Guide to Sufism (Boston, Mass.: Shambhala,
1997), 234. Ernst then points out the problems of translating the term to Sufism as a form of ism, the most obvious being that
ta avvuf is often understood in Sufi literature as a prescriptive term that refers to a process that the adept must go through,
that is, the process of becoming a Sufi. In contrast, Sufism is essentially descriptive, connoting something static and
describing, as all isms, a coherent system of beliefs that belong to particular philosophic or social movements often with welldefined boundaries. Yet, he admits, the widespread use of the translation gives us little choice but to use it, while remaining
aware of its shortcomings and problematic history. (For his detailed discussion see: Ibid., 131.) Taking issue with the term
Sufism from another perspective, Nile Green has suggested that it might be better to use Sufi Islam instead of Sufism to
emphasize how Islam and Sufism are inseparable for most Muslims, even though, like Ernst, he is aware that the current
convention is unlikely to change. Green, Sufism, 18. For an informed discussion of the problems involved in translating Sufism
to Islamic mysticism see Ibid., 15.
otwithstanding the vexing problem of translation, scholars have pointed out the significance of the emergence of transition
from the term Sufi to the more substantial form of ta avvuf by tenth century as an indicative of the consolidation of a core set
of beliefs and practices for the early Sufi movement. Ibid., 16, 42; Karamustafa, Sufism, 51. The increasing use of terms like hl
l-t vv f (folks of ta avvuf) or simply l- if (the group) from the tenth century onward in the Sufi literature can be
understood in a similar way. The transition from various early designations like Sufi, akm, rif, malmat and others to ahl
al-ta avvuf is indicative of a certain maturity in the process of consolidation of the Sufi movement and a reflexive selfconsciousness among its adherents.
35

36

ard al-Dn A r,

kir t l-A liy (Leydan: Brill, 1907), 128.

ibid., p. 283

17
same vein, Ya y b. Mu says the ascetic is pure in appearance but polluted (mkht ) inside,
[whereas] the gnostic is pure inside and polluted in appearance.37
In addition to the abovementioned statements, popular sayings were invented and
circulated either as q ds hadith (sacred traditions ascribed to God) or as mursal (traditions
ascribed to the Prophet) in order to provide a basis of legitimacy and authenticity for the
introduction of this new term, and more generally this new paradigm of the inward turn.
The famous quds hadith m n r f n fs h f q r f r bb h (he who knows himself, knows
his Lord), which was apparently put into circulation by Ya y b. Muz, is a case in point.38
The rise to prominence of such statements in Sufi literature in subsequent centuries played an
instrumental role in popularizing the terms rif and marifa in later Sufi literature.
From the beginning of its use in the third/ninth century, the concept of rif, or
gnostic, stands out as a descriptor of someone who has reached an advanced level of
spiritual achievement. In the spectrum of spiritual stages and layers of inner realization, a
gnostic, to use u al- ns terms, is among the Sufis, yet distinct from them.39 In the sources,
advanced levels of spiritual achievement have mainly to do with the realization of a unitive
state in which the agency of the wayfarer is subsumed and annihilated in the agency of God,
who is the only true agent. Accordingly, u al- n develops a three-level hierarchy of m rif
in which the highest level is concerned with ift l-v dniyy or the attribute of unity.40
Ab af of Nishabur (d. ca. 260/874) is reported to have said,

37

ibid., 305 and 307.

38

Massignon, Essay on the Origins of the Technical Language of Islamic Mysticism, 8388. Also: Bwering, ER (1).

39

A r,

40

Ibid., 127.

kir t l-A liy, 126.

18

Gnosis necessarily entails for the man his absence (ghayba) from himself,
in such a way that the memory of God reigns exclusively in him, that he sees
nothing other than God and that he turns to nothing other than to Him. For, just
as the man who reasons has recourse to his heart, to his reflection and to his
memories, in every situation which is presented to him and in every condition
which he encounters, so the gnostic has his recourse in God. Such is the
difference between him who sees through his heart and him who sees through
his Lord. 41

Likewise, al-Shibl (334/946) is believed to have said, When you are attached to God,
not to your works, and when you look at nothing other than Him, then you have perfect
gnosis.42 And in a similar vein, Abu Yazd al-Bistm (261/875) is recorded as saying, The
creature has its conditions, but the gnostic does not have them, because his traits are effaced
and his essence (huviyya) is abolished in the essence of the One. His features become invisible
beneath the features of God. Al-Bistm is later remembered in Sufi literature as s l n lrifn or the king of the gnostics.43 This appellation is not surprising in light of his ecstatic
mystical states, of which he reported with hybrid utterances (sh

t) like Glory be to me!

How great is my majesty! and Thy obedience to me is greater than my obedience to Thee.
As one of the most celebrated Sufis, he is famous for his open statements in which he talks

41

Quoted from " Marifa." Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Brill Online , 2012. Reference. Harvard University. 23 May
2012 http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/marifa-COM_0686
42

Ibid.

43

A r,

kir t l-A liy, vol. 1: 134.

19
about shedding his I-ness like a snakes skin in the state of annihilation (f n), only to gain a
transformed self-consciousness in which there is no self but God. This was, in fact, what a
gnostic was supposed to achieve.
Abu Bakr al-Vsi (320/932) is also worthy of quotation:
A gnostic is not authentic when there remains in the man an
independence which dispenses with God and the need for God. For to dispense
with God and to have need of Him are two signs that the man is awake and that
his characteristics remain, and this on account of his qualifications. Now the
gnostic is entirely effaced in Him whom he knows. How could thiswhich is due
to the fact that one loses his existence in God and is engrossed in contemplation
of Himbe rue, if one is not a man devoid of any sentiment which could be for
him a qualification, when one approaches existence?44

What is striking about the above quotes is that they emphasize the consequences of
attaining gnosis rather than focusing on the actual content of it. That is to say, gnosis, at least
at this level of development, is not about a specific subject of knowledge, about the what of
what the mystic knows. Rather, it is indicative of a mystical m qm (station) which is
acquired by the gnostic when he advances close to God. In such a state, we are told, the gnostic
recognizes that what he thought was him, his acts, and his attributes, are, in fact,
those of God. The literature is thus concerned with what follows from acquiring such a state,
rather than what is entailed, in noetic terms, in that knowledge. In fact, the distinction
between being and knowing no longer applies at this advanced spiritual station. Moreover, it
44

Quoted from " Marifa." Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Brill Online , 2012. Reference. Harvard University. 23 May
2012 http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/marifa-COM_0686

20
should be emphasized that at this stage of historical development we are still far from the
nuanced and sophisticated Akbarian language of Sufi metaphysics that made it possible for the
latters followers to talk extensively about the Divine worldthe world of Unseenin concrete
terms.
As the older and rival paradigm of zuhd weakened and the term Sufi became more
prevalent as an umbrella term, the term rif came to be situated and understood in
relationship to the term Sufi, rather than zhid. In this process, however, it retained its elitist
connotations, referring to a level of spiritual realization attained only by the select among the
friends of God (

liy). In an early compilation of the sayings of the great Sufi of Khurasan,

Ab Sad Abu al-Khayr (d. 440/1049), the following conversation is reported to have happened
between him and a certain Kh a Ma ad, in which the latter praised Ab Sad with these
words: I am not going to call you a Sufi or a dervish, but a perfect rif.45 Here, Ab Sad is
identified as an accomplished gnostic rather than a Sufi or a dervish, implying that the former
is superior to the latter two terms. It is important to note, however, that the abovementioned
anecdote, when analyzed in the context of other similar anecdotes, does not appear to
conceive of gnostics as a group distinct from the Sufis, as Pourjavady argues, or as an antithesis
to Sufis, as Ghaffari has suggested.46 Rather, the former denotes a person who has reached a
particularly advanced spiritual maqm (station) of mystical realization, and it is used as a
designation for accomplished friends of God, whether they identify as Sufis or not. Similarly,
Abdullh An r (d. 481/1088), in his biography of Tirmi (d. ca 297/910), recognizes the latter
45

ibn Ab Sad ibn Ab hir ibn Ab Sad ibn Ab al-Kayr, Asrr Al-t
Bahmanyr, chp-i 2. (Tehran: Kitbkhna-yi ahr, 1978), 231.
46

d f

qmt l-Sh ykh Ab S d, ed. A mad

a r Allh Pr avd, Ishrq v irfn: ql -h v N qd-h, Chp-i 1., Markaz-i Nashr-i Dnishgh (Series) Irfn; 3. (Tehran:
Markaz-i ashr-i Dnishgh, 1380), 250255.Ghaffari Husayn, Ta avvuf Ya Irfn? Psukh bar Maqla-yi Prduks-i Ta avvuf
azd-i Astd va Shgirdn-i Mull adr, ls f , l-nm
j ll -yi Dnishk d -yi Ad biyyt v Ul m-i Insn Dnishgh-i
Tehran, no. 12 (2006): 109126.

21
not as a Sufi but as a akm (wise man) who was also a gnostic ( km b d rif).47
Furthermore, in the early hagiographical sources, discussions of the meaning of the terms Sufi
and Sufism are often immediately followed by anecdotes about marifa and rif.48 Thus there is
a strong sense of continuity and connection between the two sets of concepts, rather than
opposition and contra-distinction. In the few cases that the term irfn appears in early
classical Sufi literature, its range of meaning is indistinguishable from that of the term marifa,
indicating a lack of semantic independence and significance.49
Gnosis reached its climax in Ibn Arabs thought as the pivotal concept of a trend
within Sufism usually known as High Sufism, As Sufism spread throughout the Muslim
world, its adherents diversified. Many among the learned sought refuge in Sufism after
becoming disillusioned with the spiritual promise of other fields of religious knowledge.
Experts in theology, jurisprudence and other sciences converted to Sufism, sparking
conversation between, and a synthesis of, these branches of knowledge, which significantly
influenced the future trajectories of all of them, including Sufism. The thought and work of Ibn
Arab (d. 638/1240), otherwise known as the Greatest Master (al-shaykh al-akbar), are among
the most remarkable products of this type of synthesis. Even a basic understanding of his
complexities of thought and mind-bogglingly vast writings requires familiarity with nearly all
the Islamic sciences from jurisprudence and theology to medicine and the esoteric sciences.
This is especially the case with his magnum opus, l- t t l-Makkiyya.

47

or information on how the term akm was used early on in Khurasan to refer to a mystically-minded group associated
mainly with the malmats, not than Sufis, see Sara Sviri, akm Tirmidh and the Malmat Movement in Early Sufism, in
The Heritage of Sufism, ed. Leonard Lewisohn and David Morgan, vol. 1 (Oxford: Oneworld, 1999), 592596.
48

For example see the anecdotes in K shf lu al- n.

49

j b about Junayd. Also the anecdotes in

kir t l-A liy on Bishr al- afi and

The word only appears three times in the entire volume of Kashf al-m hj b, a relatively early classical Sufi hagiography
written by al-Hu vr (d. 465/1072). Again, in two out of the three, irfn is used in a secular meaning.

22
It was with Ibn Arab and the school of thought he founded that the category of gnosis
(marifa) became the hallmark of intellectual Sufism.50 Thanks primarily to Ibn Arabs spiritual
accomplishments, intellectual gifts, and ability to develop a language to talk systematically
about the World of the Unseen (lam al-ghayb), an alternative paradigm arose in Sufism. This
paradigm, to use Chitticks words, is the Sufi path of knowledge, and it contrasts with an
equally strong and important paradigm, the Sufi path of love. The following paragraph is a
good illustration of the path of knowledge, written by the Greatest Master himself:
God never commanded His Prophet to seek increase of anything except
knowledge, since all good (khayr) lies therein. It is the greatest charismatic gift
(k rm ). Idleness with knowledge is better than ignorance with good works . . .
By knowledge [marifa] I mean only knowledge of God, of the next world, and of
that which is appropriate for this world, in relationship to that for which this
world was created and established. . . .Knowledge [ilm] is an all-encompassing
divine attribute; thus it is the most excellent bounty of God. Hence God said,
[Then they found one of ur servants, whom We had given mercy from Us],
and whom We had taught knowledge from Us (18:65), that is, as a mercy from
Us. So knowledge derives from the mine of mercy.51

50

An alternative and equally strong tra ectory was the Persian ecstatic trend of love Sufism in which the concepts of ishq and
m bb were the primary players. Rumi is the most celebrated and renowned representative of this trend. Obviously,
categories like intellectual Sufism and love Sufism are abstract scholarly constructs. They are useful insofar as they can
help us understand, classify and account for the apparent differences that we see in the Sufi literature and all the different
ways in which various Sufi masters approach fundamental questions of the spiritual path. Actual Sufis are always a mixed bag
of all these ideal types, to use Webers terminology. Thus, Ibn Arab writes an entire treatise on the sub ect of love titled
rjimn l-Ashvq.
51

Ibn Arab, al- t t l-Makkiyya, ed. Uthmn Ya y and Ibrhm Makr, Monumenta Classica. (al-Qhira: al-Haya alMi riyya al-mma lil-Kitb, 1972), vol. 2, p. 370. Quoted from: Chittick, The Sufi Path of Knowledge, 148.

23
Ibn Arab speaks of the rif n (plural of rif) as the greatest friends of God and defines
marifa as any knowledge which can be actualized only through practice (amal),
godfearingness (t qv), and wayfaring (s l k).52 The prominence of the concept of rif in his
oeuvre can be gleaned from the fact that the term occurs more than one thousand times in the
t t.53 In spite of this, irfn is a marginal term, not only in Ibn Arabis corpus, but also in
other classical works of Sufism from this period. In the rare cases that the word irfn is used
by Ibn Arab, it does not signify an ism like Sufism. Rather, it denotes an advanced spiritual
maqm (station) at which one becomes a gnostic (rif). Even as late as the
seventh/thirteenth century, the term only appears twice in A rs (d. 1221) classic Sufi
hagiographical work, Takirat al-A liy. One of the two occurrences is a reference to nonreligious knowledge, and in the other, irfn is interchangeable with marifa. Therefore it
seems safe to say that irfn is an obscure term in Ibn Arabs time and the centuries that
followed, despite the monumental influence of the Greatest Masters speculative mysticism
and its heavy dependence on the category of gnosis. This obscurity remained the case until the
late Safavid era, when, in the seventeenth century, an important semantic change occurred in
regards to irfn. But another branch in irfns genealogical tree must be addressed before we
move to the Safavid period.

52

53

Chittick, The Sufi Path of Knowledge, 149.

My count includes singular form rif as well as its plural forms rifn and rifn. I have based this estimate upon the results
gained from oor softwares search engine. The concept of gnosis or marifa is as popular. Terms like Sufi and Sufiyya (and
related general references such as al-qawm) do appear frequently but much less than the former cluster of terms (about three
hundred times). One is tempted to compare this, for example, with kir t l-A liy of A r in which the occurrence of terms
like Sufi and ta avvuf is comparable to that of rif and marifa (The term Sufi appears close to a hundred times in kir t. The
term ta avvuf scores around the same. The term rif scores a little bit higher, close to a hundred and fifty). This, of course, is a
rudimentary and impressionistic comparison that does not take into account many factors, not least among them the
difference in genre.

24

Avicenna and His Legacy of Irfn

The elitist nature of the concepts of rif, and marifa made them popular not only
among sophisticated Sufi intellectuals, but also another elite group, i.e., philosophers. The
philosopher par excellence of the Islamic world, Avicenna (d. 416/1037), dedicates an entire
chapter of his classical al-Ishrt v

l- nbht to a systematic exposition of the spiritual stages

traversed by gnostics entitled m qmt l-rifn or The Stations of the Gnostics. Here too rif
is contrasted to zhd and bid. While the latter two, Avicenna says, are mostly concerned
with avoiding the lower realm of the world (d ny) and its attachments, the gnostic is entirely
absorbed in the divine world, constantly receiving manifestations of light his innermost heart
and preferring nothing to His irfn (irfnih).54 One of the earliest commentators of al-Ishrt,
Fakhr al-Rz (d. 606/1210) starts his comments on this chapter by saying that it is the most
noble among the chapters of this book and that in it the author (Avicenna) has systematized
the sciences of Sufis ( l m l- fiyy ) in a way no one has done before him.55 There is no
question that the content of this chapter would have not been possible were it not for the
development of the concept of rif and other related concepts in Sufi literature. Yet it is
problematic, in my view, to describe the chapter as one in which the science of Sufism is
discussed, as Rz and other commentators who have followed him on this point have said. At
the very least, to say that Sufism is the best descriptor of the chapters contents flies in the
face of Avicennas avoidance of any reference to such terms, or to names or works associated
with Sufism, despite their relation to the themes he addresses. In other words, by forgoing any
54

Ab Al usayn ibn Abd Allh Ibn Sn (Avicenna), al-Ishrt v

375.
55

Ibid., vol. 3: 363.

l- nbht (Tehran: Ma baat al- aydar, 1958), vol. 3: 369 and

25
explicit reference to the original web of concepts from which key terms like maqm, rif,
riy

(self-mortification), ird ([mystic] will) and others emerged, Avicenna is consciously

portraying his spiritual discourse as independent from, and contrasting with, the prevailing
Sufi discourse. This comes as no surprise given the sour relationship between philosophers and
Sufis throughout much of the history of the Islamic world. Sufis overwhelmingly disapproved
of the discursive philosophy promoted by Avicenna and his students; in fact, philosophy was
the main target of their criticism. There is no one more distant from the law of the Hashemite
prophet than a philosopher says A r, echoing Sans sentiments: rom words like
primary matter and primary cause you will not find the way into the Presence of the Lord.56
In short, as Schimmel eloquently and succinctly puts it, [t]he little philosopher is both the
laughing stock and the scapegoat for the mystics. 57
Having said that, the problematic view of commentators in subsequent centuries
(namely, that this chapter of al-Ishrt explains the science of Sufism) is understandable when
we take into account the historical and intellectual changes that had taken place in the Muslim
world since the time of Avicenna. Sufism grew rapidly in the centuries after the great
philosophers death, effectively conquering the cultural landscape of the Middle East at both
the elite and popular levels (this transformation will be addressed further below). It was only
natural for later commentators of Avicenna, who lived and breathed in a Sufi-dominated
intellectual environment, to interpret the ninth chapter as a distinct section discussing the
science of Sufism rather than an independent piece of philosophical discourse.

56

Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam, 1819.

57

Ibid.

26
The Avicennan ideal of the perfect gnostic, therefore, stands in contrast to the ideal
espoused by many Sufis. It presupposes a thorough training in the rational sciences, especially
in discursive metaphysics. Epistemologically, it rejects mystical visions (m ksh ft) as primary
sources of knowledge in favor of the faculty of reason. or peripatetic philosophers like
Avicenna, philosophy ( ikm ), was comprised of two branches, the practical and the
speculative,58 which provided the adept with a wholesome, integrated, and complete vision of
the meaning of life and its final goal. The perfect philosopher, in other words, is not one who
completes theoretical training in discursive philosophy and then, with a purified intellect and
soul, awaits the light of divine gnosis to spark in his mind. The right conception of philosophy
entails spiritual growth, spiritual realization, and perfection.
Perhaps the best signifier of the independence of Avicennas philosophical discourse
from that of Sufism is expressed in his re-definition of the concept of pr, or spiritual mentor,
in his treatise entitled yy ibn

q n or The Living, Son of the Wakeful ne. This symbolic,

enigmatic story tells of how the soul of the adept meets its heavenly master, the Active
Intellect (al-aql al-f l), and asks it about the mysteries of the world. The Active Intellect, or
the Living, in the metaphysical scheme of peripatetic philosophy, is emanated as a son
from the Wakeful one, that is, the penultimate pure Intellect. Both metaphysical entities are
discussed in great detail in the theory of creative emanation professed by rb and Avicenna.
In Avicennas story, the Active Intellect surpasses the perceptible world through knowledge,
the souls guide towards its prime Principle, which is the Being that shines forth over all
others. Although some scholars have tried to argue that Avicenna was a Sufi and to make sense

58

n the philosophical origins of this classification see Avner Giladi, " n the rigins of Two Key Terms in Gazls I y l m aldn," Arabica XXXVI, no. 1 (1989), pp. 81-93.

27
of the story by interpreting it as a mystical, illuminationist piece59 or an explicitly Sufi
treatise,60 the story makes perfect sense within the confines of peripatetic principles, as
Goichon has convincingly argued.61
As Pourjavady has pointed out, this symbolic story is probably the first treatise in
which the term pr, which refers to a human guide in Sufi literature, is redefined as an
abstract, heavenly entity -- in this case the Active Intellect -- that appears to the philosopher
or the mystic, guides him/her, and provides him/her with divine secrets.62 The philosophers
goal is to gain access to the Active Intellect in order to realize the Truth of the universe as it is.
This transformation of the idea of the pr from a human master to an abstract heavenly entity
is, in my mind, a significant indicator of Avicennas elitist aversion to the most fundamental
requirement of the Sufi path, that of following the commands of the spiritual guru just like the
corpse in the hands of the washer. Instead, it is the heavenly Active Intellect that guides the
philosopher toward final realization of the Truth. This aversion to the Sufi notion of the
spiritual guru also explains the absence of such a figure in the ninth chapter of al-Ishrt. In the
coming chapters we will follow closely the different interpretations of the notion of the
spiritual guru, known in Sufi literature variously as pr, murshd, std, q b and shaykh, for an
authors interpretation is an important barometer of how closely he associates with traditional
institutionalized forms of Sufism. Tracking this helps us to make sociological and intellectual
distinctions that allow an accurate charting of the genealogy of the category of irfn.

59

Avicenna and Henry Corbin, Avicenna and the Visionary Recital (Irving, Tex.: Spring Publications, 1980), 2327.

60

Georges C. Anawati, ll ft Ibn Sn, W h J rj Shi t Q n

(Cairo: Dr al-Marif, 1950), 213244.
61

t.

dr li-A m d Amn,

q ddim li-Ibrhm

dk r.

Amlie Marie Goichon, ayy B. Yan, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition (Brill Online, 2012),
http://referenceworks.brillonline.com.ezproxy.rice.edu/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/hayy-b-yakzan-COM_0281.
62

Pr avd, Ishrq v irfn, 147150.

28
Avicennas deployment of the notion of rif and irfn, I believe, is also different in key
ways than that of his Sufi counterparts. That is, rather than viewing an rif as someone who
has reached an advanced stage in the Sufi path, he uses the term to refer to an advanced
philosopher, one whose rational soul has reached the stage of the Acquired Intellect (ql-i
m st fd).63 Given his consistent refusal to employ the term ta avvuf, it is only natural that
Avicenna would attempt to construct a new substantive term to refer to the system of spiritual
growth and attainment that he lays out in the ninth chapter. Given the centrality of the
concept of rif in this chapter, it is not surprising that Avicennas substantive construct comes
from the same root and is, in fact, irfn. As a systematic thinker and an astute philosopher,
Avicenna realizes the need to define this new category, which he does as follows:
Irfn begins with differentiation (t frq), renounciation (n q ), abandonment
(tark) and rejection (r f ). It continues with an integration (jam) which is the
integration of Divine attributes into the essence of the true seeker. It ends in the
One ( l-v id), and then, stillness (v q f).64
Whoever prefers irfn for the sake of irfn has associated a second with God,
and whoever realizes irfn it is like not realizing it but realizing the one who is
known (al-m r f bih) and thus he has plunged into the abyss of intimacy (v l)
and there are [other] stages unknowable and unspeakablewhoever wants to
know them he has to ascend gradually until he is among the folks of vision (ahl
al-m shh d ) rather than dialogue (m shf h ) and among the one who has
reached the Reality (al-ayn) rather than those who have heard of its vestige
( s r).65
Here, irfn is understood as a process through which one goes to become an rif. As
such, it is similar to the abovementioned process of ta avvuf, through which one becomes a
Sufi.

63

Dimitri Gutas, AVICE A V. Mysticism, Encyclopdia Iranica, Online Edition, December 15, 1987,
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/avicenna-v.
64
65

Ab Al usayn ibn Abd Allh Ibn Sn (Avicenna), al-Ishrt v

Ibid., vol. 3: 390.

l- nbht, vol. 3: 389.

29
Avicennas al-Ishrt quickly became an indispensable textbook of philosophy, a fact
that is attested by the considerable number of commentaries written on it and their wide
distribution. As early as the late sixth/twelfth century it had become known as m

f l-

f lsif , literally The Sacred Book of Philosophers.66 Yet its mystical vision was overshadowed
by that of Sufism, which was omnipresent in all layers of Muslim society. In such a context the
philosophers remarks about spirituality and mysticism were not destined to have a
tremendous impact on the society of the learned, at least in the short run.
As Sufism permeated Muslim societies, philosophers were forced to come out of their
comfort zone of metaphysics in order to prove their knowledge and relevance, writing
treatises with themes similar to those of Sufi writings. As mentioned above, by Avicennas
time, Sufism and philosophy were considered two alternate and competing trajectories for the
novice aspiring s d , or eternal felicity. Ghazl (d. 505/1111) clearly delineates these two
alternative trajectories, pitting philosophy against Sufism in his i n l-amal, which was
written just before he converted to Sufism and left his teaching chair in Baghdad,67 In i n he
states his belief that one should begin with thorough training in the rational sciences before
(possibly) embarking on the Sufi path. However, in al-Munqi min l- ll, a spiritual
autobiography written after his conversion, Ghazl vehemently re ects the notion that
philosophy and theology (k lm) lead to sadat. It is only the Sufi path, he claims, that can
guarantee such an outcome. 68
66

Jean R. Michot, La Pandmie Avicennienne Au VIe/XIIe Sicle Prsentation, Editio Princeps Et Traduction De Lintroduction
Du Livre De Ladvenue Du Monde (Kitb udth Al-lam) dIbn Ghayln al-Balkh, Arabica 40, no. 3 (November 1, 1993): 287
344.
67

Ab mid Ghazzl, n l-Am l, ed. Sulaymn Duny, al- aba 1., Zakhir al-Arab, 38 (Cairo: Dr al-Marif, 1964), 220
228.
68

Ab mid Ghazzl, al- nqi min l- ll v -l- v il il l-I v l-J ll, UNESCO Collection of Representative Works:
Arabic Series. (Beirut: al-Lajna al-Duvalyya li Tar amat al-Ravi, 1959), 1828. Scholars of Ghazl have recently taken into
question the stark contrast that is portrayed in the Deliverer between the pre-conversion and post-conversion framework of

30
Similarities can be detected in the A f l- shrf of Kh a a r al-Dn Ts (d.
672/1274), one of the most important philosophers of his time, a prominent commentator on
al-Ishrt, and a man of politics during the tumultuous times following the Mongol invasion. In
the opening remarks of A f, Ts says that after writing a treatise on ethics (entitled Akhlq-i
N ir) following the principles of philosophers, he desired to write one based on the principles
of the slikn-i rq t. The latter phrase is an unmistakable reference to Sufi adepts, and the
author continues to use such terminology throughout the work. 69 Ts devotes a chapter of
A f to the notion of marifa or gnosis, pointing out in the beginning that gnosis is attained in
several stages. It is accessible to lay people as well as the most accomplished mystics, but only
the latter can achieve the title rif or gnostic.70
Readers of this Persian treatise on ethics will find that Ts has given up his forebears
ambition to establish and promote an independent spiritual discourse based in philosophy as
an alternative to that of Sufism.71 This can be understood in the context of his era, a time of
great change that anticipated the predominance of Sufism in Muslim societies in the Mongol
period. In Madelungs terms:
It is thus not surprising that he felt competent to compose a treatise on the Sufi
path. Both he and the vizier Juwayni, a Sunni and firm supporter of Islam, must
Ghazls thought. They agree, however, that notwithstanding Ghazls own framework of thought, he did see philosophy as
an obstacle for majority of his readership in their pursuit of felicity. See: Kenneth Garden, Revisiting al-Ghazls Crisis
through his Scale for Action ( i n l-Am l), unpublished article. For a detailed treatment of the philosophic and Sufi
underpinnings of Ghazls thought see Alexander Treiger, Inspired Knowledge in Islamic Thought: Al-Ghazali's Theory of Mystical
Cognition and its Avicennian Foundation (London and New York: Routledge, 2011).
69

a r al-Dn Mu ammad ibn Mu ammad s, A f Al- shrf, ed. Mu ammad Mudarris, trans. Mu ammad ibn Al Jur n
(Tehran: Kitbfursh-i Islmiyya, n.d.), 2834.
70

71

Ibid., 13334.

Also, Ts seems to have been unimpressed by Avicennas concept of irfn, as the term does not appear in A f. It is not
until the early sixteenth century that Aw f and the ninth chapter of al-Ishrt are taken as sources of inspiration for a
prominent philosopher of the early Safavid era in Shiraz, i.e., Ghiys al-dn Man r Dashtak (d. 1541 or 42) to compose a new
treatise called qmt l-Sirn v
qmt al-rifn. The concept of irfn plays a more important role in his sixteenth
century treatise, as we will see in the final chapter of this dissertation.

31
have sensed the growing tide of Sufi sentiment throughout Islam, which was to
reach its peak in the Mongol age. They must have been aware that Sufism, if
anything, could break down the barriers between schools and sects and unite all
Muslims under the banner of the great Sufi orders. Tusi thus conceived his
treatise on Sufi ethics as a complement, addressed to the common Muslim, to
his philosophical ethics, addressed to the elite. 72
In pointing to the growing tide of Sufi sentiment throughout Islam in the Mongol age
as the reason behind Tss decision to write A f, Madelung refers to the well-established
historical fact that during the latter half of the twelfth century and thirteenth century,
important developments took place in Sufism. In the words of Nile Green:
Having established their institutional footholds across a wide region, the period
between 1100 and 1500 saw the Sufis achieve an extraordinary ascent to a
position in which, from Morocco to Bengal, they acted as the social and
intellectual linchpins of the very different communities that they penetrated
across this vast area. By 1500, not only were Sufis at once the patrons and
clients of kings, they were also central to the lives of lower class groups in town
as well as country, a position consolidated by their role in the conversion of
nomadic and cultivator groups to Islam in expanding frontier regions.73
This new Sufism was in full bloom from the thirteenth- to the sixteenth century. The
reorganization of Sufism was completed in the latter half of the twelfth century with the
establishment of formal Sufi brotherhoods or orders (tariqa). These developments were
characterized by two main features. The first was the institutionalization of Sufism; namely,
the emergence across the Muslim world of Sufi silsilas (orders) which practiced formalized
rituals of mystical worship known as ikr. The second was the popularization of Sufism,
indicated by the widespread appeal of Sufi shaykhs as charismatic leaders and saintly figures
at the center of popular cults.
72

Wilfred Madelungs article asir al-Din Tusis Ethics: Between Philosophy, Shiism and Sufism in Giorgio Levi Della Vida
Conference 1983: University of California, Los Angeles) and Richard G. Hovannisian, Ethics in Islam (Malibu, Calif.: Undena,
1985), 85-101. An updated version of this article can be found online at:
http://www.iis.ac.uk/WebAssets/Large/Nasir%20al-Din%20Tusi%27s%20Ethics%20-%20final.pdf
The latter has been my source.
73

Green, Sufism, 71.

32
The establishment of Sufi brotherhoods (silsilas), some local and some trans-regional,
followed the emergence of Sufi lodgesvariously called khn qh, rib , zaviy , d rgh, or
tekiyyeas significant centers of medieval social life alongside madrasas and mosques. In the
aftermath of the Mongol invasion and the termination of the office of caliphate in 1258 and its
attendant blow to the unity of the worldwide Muslim community (umma), these brotherhoods
gave the ordinary Muslims who oined them both the conceptual and institutional framework
with which to connect themselves to a contemporary community of fellow believers and a past
tradition of blessed forerunners.74 A series of towering figures emerged and laid down the
foundations of the Sufi worldview, codes of social conduct, and details of the spiritual path.
Some among them later became known as founders of Sufi orders. These include: Ab a b
al-Suhravard (d. 1168), Abd al-Qdir al-Jln (d. 1166), A mad b. al-Rif (d. 1182), A mad alYasav (d. 1166), a m al-Dn Kubr (d. 1221), Mun al-dn Chisht (d. 1236), Abu al- asan alShil (d. 1258), Jall al-Dn Rm (d. 1273) and Bah al-Dn al-Naqshband (d. 1389). These
founders, as Green suggests, are better understood as men who amassed resources whether
patrons and property or teaching and charisma that could be inherited and used by their
successors to found the brotherhoods which were named after them.75
The Sufi ethos went beyond the walls of the khnaqh, entering the fabric of society in
the form of kh/futuvva mens clubs and guild organizations that functioned as regulators and
maintainers of the social order. As a result, Sufism gradually began not only to dominate

74

Ibid., 87.

75

Ibid., 85.

33
religious life of the people, but also to provide an important basis for social order.76 In
Hodgsons words,
[T]he Sufi tie at once deepened the local moral resources, and tied them
into a system of brotherhoods in some ways as universal as the old caliphal
bureaucracy had been, which had disappeared.Thus Sufism supplemented the
Sharia as a principle of unity and order, offering the Muslims a sense of
spiritual unity which came to be stronger than that provided by the remnant of
the caliphate.77

In terms of the popularization of Sufism, Sufi prs, especially after their deaths, became
the centers of popular cults. Fantastic stories of their miraculous works (k rmt) spread with
viral speed, and tombs were built at their gravesites, becoming the center of shrine visitation
rites. The common people performed such visitations in search of the intercession of the Sufi
saints, in whose human sympathies they found more comfort and compassion than in the
remote Oneness of God. Peasants in both the towns and the countryside sought shelter in the
shade of local ascetics who had received the khirqa (cloak) of a prominent order, considering
them the protectors of their villages or towns and honoring their tombs as loci of spiritual
power.78
It is important to note that the abovementioned developments occurred with the
overwhelming consent of the ulama. By the early twelfth century, urists, hadith scholars, and
theologians had, in accordance with their populist principles, mostly accepted the new Sufism
76

Marshall G. S Hodgson, The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1974), vol. 2, 204.
77

Ibid., 221.

78

Ibid., 21718.

34
of the masses and merely tried to discipline it. In fact, in this period Sufi shaykhs and the
ulama did not constitute two opposing poles, as the common misperception would have it.
That is to say, the ulama generally accepted Sufism as a dominant reality of their lifetime, and
the Sufi shaykhs, sometimes highly educated religious scholars, usually emphasized the
importance of observing religious law while simultaneously claiming that exclusive authority
rested in esoteric knowledge of Divine revelation. Erik Ohlander, in his in-depth study of the
life and work of Umar al-Suhravard, a towering figures of this time who later became
recognized as the founder of Suhravardiyya Sufi order, emphasizes the same point when he
says:
While Suhrawardi was a Sufi shaykh, he was also a member of the ulama,
publicly enunciating his membership in their ranks through participating in
their culture and, what is more, counting among his many teachers, students,
associates, and disciples individuals who clearly identified themselves as fullfledged members of that body, transmitting hadith, teaching in madrasas,
serving as muftis and qadis, preaching, and leading prayers in Friday
congregational mosques. Judging from both Suhrawardis lengthy arguments
for the Sufis, in their capacity as the other worldly-ulama, as the legitimate
possessors of prophetic heirship and their very public presence in multiple
arenas of power and influence, the sheer self-assuredness of Suhrawardi and his
associates is as astounding as it is telling. For Suhrawardi, it was not a matter of
effecting some types of reconciliation between the ulama and the Sufis through
answering criticisms voiced by individuals such as Ibn al-Jawzi, but rather
consolidating a position of a group who were already well-established, deeply
entrenched in a culture of religious professionals toward whom the state looked
for support and legitimacy and the people for religious guidance and
intercession.79
As a result of the spread of Sufism both within the circles of the learned elite and
among the lay masses, Sufis Succeeded in combining a spiritual elitism with a social
populism [Therefore,] Sufism provided a wide field of free development for the exceptional
individual, as we shall be seeing; it also provided a vehicle for expressing every aspect of
79

Erik S. Ohlander, Sufism in an Age of Transition: Umar al-S hr

rd nd the Rise of the Isl mic ystic l Brotherhoods, Islamic
History and Civilization, 0929-2403; V. 71 (Leiden;: Brill, 2008), 193.

35
popular piety within Islam.80 This broad appeal came at a cost. Some scholars speak of the
price81 paid using terms like decadence, corruption, degeneration and
vulgarization,82 but others have chosen terms like vernacularization and diversification
to avoid not only the negative overtones of the first group of words, but also the sharp
dichotomy drawn by the former between elite versus popular Sufism.83
I incline toward the view that emphasizing this dichotomy, as scholars have
traditionally done, often leads to a distorted picture of Sufism in general. The most obvious
problem with such dichotomies is that they are products of elitism. That is, they are discursive
tools produced by the insider, learned elite to maintain and promote their status, or by the
outsider, scholarly, modern elite who have an aversion to what they consider to be popular
(and therefore not worthy of study) religiosity. Insider elites consider themselves to be the
guardians of true Sufism and often dismiss the ignorant masses for being easily fooled by
charlatans and tricksters who pose as saints and wonder workers. Outsider elite scholars who
have dedicated their lives to the study and analyses of this true Sufism are equally appalled
by such superstitious renderings of pure Sufi teachings.
Having said this, I cannot entirely avoid this dichotomy in a dissertation that is an
exercise in writing intellectual history, which by definition is a history of the learned elite.
Moreover, learned Sufis of the late Middle Ages and early modern era used this dichotomy, or
similar tropes, to describe how they felt about the culture of their time and its players, how
80

Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, 218.

81

Kathryn Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs: Cultural Landscapes of Early Modern Iran, Harvard Middle Eastern
Monographs; 35 (Cambridge, Mass.: Distributed for the Center for Middle Eastern Studies of Harvard University by Harvard
University Press, 2002), 447.
82

Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, 218. and 456-457. Leonard Lewisohn, Sufism and the School of I fahn: Ta awwuf and Irfn in
Late Safavid Iran: Abd al-Razzq Lah and ay -i Kshn on the Relation of Ta awwuf, ikmat and Irfn, in The Heritage of
Sufism, ed. Leonard Lewisohn and David Morgan, vol. 3 (Oxford: Oneworld, 1999), 105. Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam, 20.
83

Green, Sufism, 101.

36
things were, and where they felt they should be headed. From their point of view, there was
indeed a striking contrast between an advanced Sufi master and the wandering mendicant
dervish who sold herbs and drugs and entertained people with fantastic stories. The latter was
often a freelance beggar and an adventurer who at times veered into trickery and theft, while
the former was (at least from an elitist point of view) a guardian of the Sufi ideal who busied
himself penning treatises and training students to pass on the authentic tradition of Sufism.
More specifically, there is a clear tendency among some Sufis, especially those who
followed Ibn Arab, to focus exclusively on the so-called m

qqiq n (realizers) among the

Sufis, a small group of elite friends of God (awliy), and to distance themselves from pedestrian
and ignorant aspirants of the Sufi way, who are often designated by the derogatory epithet
jahalat al-s fiyy (ignorant Sufis). The teachings of Ibn Arab in particular lent themselves to
such an elitist approach since the highly complicated and abstract nature of his thought and
work made them accessible, and relevant, only to a few elites within Sufi society and beyond.
As we saw earlier, Ibn Arab himself encourages such an elitist approach in his writings by
focusing primarily on gnostic uraf, of whom he considers himself to be the most
accomplished.

In addition to the detectable frustration in learned circles over some aspects of the
popularization of Sufism, one can also discern a growing sense of resentment among
intellectual elites of the Later Middle Period of Islamic history over what they saw as the
increasing dominance of formalities and the hegemony of rigid orthodoxies, not only within
Sufi circles, but also other in learned traditions such as jurisprudence and philosophy. 84 One of

84

I am adopting Marshal Hodgsons terminology in speaking about the Middle Period. It refers, in his own words, to the
period between the mid-tenth century at the collapse of the classical caliphate, under whose auspices the culture had been

37
the most noteworthy manifestations of this resentment is the emergence of the antinomian
Qalandars, but the critiques that emerged from this trend are pertinent to this study because
they were often framed in terminology that pits the gnostic against the Sufi based on their
attachment, or lack thereof, to such formalities.
In an interesting example, Rumi, himself an accomplished and learned Sufi, juxtaposes
all three of the terms (Qalandar, rif, and Sufi) in one statement, saying, I envy the Qalandars
since they have no beardthe Sufis en oy the abundance of beard, but before the Sufi is done
with combing his beard, the gnostic has already reached God.85 This brief anecdote
encapsulates an important cultural criticism of Muslim Societies in the Later Middle Period. As
Sufi institutions developed and worship became more formalized, or, to put it in Hodgsons
terms, as the early Sufi tradition of intensive interiorization re-exteriorized its results,86 focus
often shifted to institutional formalities, outward signs of piety, and the nuances of outward
performance. Also, as a result of their popularity, Sufi shaykhs were able to secure huge
financial resources mostly in the form of pious endowments and donations and forge
political connections with local and regional holders of power. Starting from the fifteenth
century, in the region stretching between Anatolia and India we find more and more saints
being described through the terminology of kingship. Saints were termed emperors (shh),
their shrines called royal courts (dargh), and their headgear considered crowns (tj). 87

taking form, and the end of the fifteenth century, when a new world geographical balance gave its first intimations with the
opening up of the wider oceans by ccidentals.Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, vol. 2: 3. Hodgson divides the Middle Period into
the Earlier Middle Period (950-1250) and the Later Middle Period (1250-1500).
85

Shams al-Dn A mad Aflk, nqib Al-rifn, ed. Tahsin Yazc, Trk Tarih Kurumu Yaynlar. III. Dizi; Sa. 3. (nqara:
Chpkhna-yi Anjuman-i Trkh-i Turk, 1959), 412. Qouted in Manchihr adq, Yagnag ya dugnag-yi ta avvuf b irfn,
K yhn-i ndsh , no. 54 (1994): 8690
86

Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, vol. 2: 218.

87

Green, Sufism, 99.

38
Sufism was no longer solely about the initial inward turn, a spiritual promise attained
through spiritual and material poverty (faqr), observing the inner life, and abstinence from
worldly desires. It was also connected in a fragile economy and poor society to centers of
power and authority. Affiliation could mean minimal sustenance, and if one was lucky enough,
wealth and political connections. As these worldly appeals influenced the rank and file of those
affiliated with the khnaqah, the problem of riy (hypocrisy) and t vr (dissimulation) became
the object of important cultural critique. Hafez is perhaps the most outspoken and eloquent of
the critics of hypocrisy. Like Rumi, he prefers the antinomian Qalandar or the bandit (rind),88
whose hallmark is an absolute indifference to social status and outward appearance, to the
sham piety of ascetics and Sufis and their ceremonious attire that trumpets a superficial and
dishonest spirituality. Many cloaks are superficial symbols of superstition and patchwork
mantle of poverty (dalq) a sign of hypocrisy, Hafez says:

Not all Sufi coin is pure and unadulterated;

How many cloaks deserve to be thrown in the fire!
Would that the touchstone of experience were in our midst,
That those who are adulterated might be embarrassed.
Those brought up in the lap of luxury will not find their way to the friend,
The lovers path is for rinds who throw caution to the wind.
Hafez old cloak and prayer mat will go to the wine-seller,
If his wine comes from the hand of the moon-faced cup-bearer.89

88

Rind, variously translated in English as rake, ruffian, pious rogue, brigand, libertine, lout, debauchee, etc., is the very
antithesis of establishment propriety. or more on Hafezs depiction of rind and Qalandar see: ranklin Lewis, HA EZ Viii.
HA EZ A D RE DI, ed. Ehsan Yar-Shater, Encyclopdia Iranica (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, December 15, 2002),
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/hafez-vii-viii.
89

Ghazal #155. I would like to thank Laurie Pierce for her help with this translation. My references are to ghazal numbers in
Hafezs Dvn follow their order in Khnlars critical edition: Shams al-Dn Mu ammad fi, Dvn-i fi Khj Sh ms l-Dn

39

Hafiz portrays the gnostic as part and parcel of the Sufi world, a world from which he
can (and must) redeem himself.90 In order to find such redemption he needs only to burn the
Sufi cloak, which will open up the path toward becoming the leader of the worlds rinds.

Set fire to the cloack and then become, O gnostic wayfarer, the leader of
the ring of the world rinds.91

This radical critique of outward and formal signs of piety, including Sufi forms, is
bound up in Hafez use of a language full of symbolic allusions (ishrt) and allegories that has
bewildered scholars of Persian literature, who have long argued over the meaning and
reference points of his poetry. The poets independent, rebellious, and free-spirited quest for
beatitude and wisdom has prevented him from being pigeonholed into traditional categories
like Sufi, scholar, ascetic, and so on. Some scholars have talked about him as an rif or gnostic,
a designation that both reflects his non-conventionality and emphasizes the spiritual
significance of his wisdom, which earned him the title of Tongue of the Unseen (lisn l-ghayb).
Yarshaters comments on Hafez as an rif deserve to be quoted in full:
Hafez very often is called an rif. The application of this term depends on what
is meant by it. If by rif is meant a person of wisdom and insight, broadmm d, ed. Parvz til Khnlar, Chp-i 2. (Tehran: Khrazm, 1983).
/
/
/
/
90

91

Lewis, HA EZ Viii. HA EZ A D RE DI.

Ghazal # 267

40
mindedness and understanding, given to reflection on human destiny, the
transience of life, and the vanity of our worldly concerns, a man who would not
go for the dogmatic rigidity of formal religion and the intervention of selfappointed guardians of faith in the daily lives of believers, but would prefer the
devotion of truly pious men and sets high value on purity of heart and
kindliness towards others rather than pretentious observation of religious
ordinancesin other words, a benevolent sagethere is no reason to deny that
epithet to Hafez . n the other hand, if by rif is meant a mystic, that is, a
person who believes in the theory and practice of Sufism, is attached to a
certain Order or the circle of a Sufi mentor (pir) or a khnaqh, or allows the
clarity of his mind to be clouded by the irrational and obfuscated by the woolly
thinking of some Sufis and their belief in miraculous deeds ascribed to their
saints, then the epithet is a misnomer. While it is clear that Hafez distinguishes
sincere, self-effacing, and godly mystics from the false ones, he does not belong
to any Sufi school of thought, but chooses to be entirely free and independent of
any such attachment Confusing Hafezs lack of fanaticism, his broad world
view, and his contemplative and moral musings with mysticism implies a
subjective interpretation of his poetry.92
or me, Yarshaters remarks above reveal more about the dominant paradigm of the
early twentieth century in which the scholar and his colleagues were trained than they do
about the nature of Hafez and his spirituality. The paradigm I reference was one in which
institutionalized Sufism was highly stigmatized and loaded with excessively negative
projections.
Notwithstanding this peripheral observation, Yarshaters point that Hafez represents
an independent spirituality that stands in contrast to formalized and institutionalized
religiosity is well taken. This refusal to be limited to the confines of any specific orthodox
model also manifests itself in the highly elusive and heavily symbolic language of Hafez, which
renders it impossible to reduce and interpret the poems within the boundaries of established
discourses of meaning.

92

Ehsan YarShater, HA EZ I. A VERVIEW, ed. Ehsan Yar-Shater, Encyclopdia Iranica (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,
December 15, 2002), http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/hafez-vii-viii.

41
Within the highly elusive constellation of signifiers in Hafezs Dvn, the symbolism of
the pr, or spiritual guru, stands out in its importance to this study. In line with Sufi thought,
Hafez consistently emphasizes an adepts need for a guide in his/her spiritual ourney.
However, the way he talks about the pr prevents his discourse from being reduced to an
essentially Sufi one. The spiritual guide of Hafez poetry is the pr-i m ghn (The Zoroastrian
master), who is based in kh rbt (tavern). In one instance, however, Hafez refers to a certain
pr-i golrang (The Rose-colored Master) as his spiritual guide.93 Many scholars have searched the
historical record in the hopes of identifying this figure as a real human being, a Sufi shaykh of
a specific khnaqh. Pour avady has convincingly demonstrated, however, that the Rosecolored Master is better understood not as a human guide, but as a symbolic reference to the
abstract divine reality, the Active Intellect that manifests itself to the wayfarer to guide him
along the Path, much as we saw in Avicannas yy ibn

q n.94 Poujavaday points out that

Hafez was not the first figure to have used color imagery to refer to the Active Intellect. 95
As the last chapter of this dissertation will demonstrate, Hafez is among the inspiring
figures for the late seventeenth century Safavid religious scholars who constructed a category
of irfn independent from and contrasting with ta avvuf. Among others, his symbolic take on
the notion of spiritual guru that locates him the World of the Unseen was probably
fundamental in paving the way for later mystically-minded Twelver scholars of religion to
pro ect onto the figure of the imams, especially the enigmatic figure of the Hidden Imam, all
the qualities normally attributed to the murshd or the pole (qu b) in Sufi literature.

93

Ghazal # 199.

94

Pr avd, Ishrq v irfn, 166177.

95

For example, one of Suhravads short Persian treatises is titled Aql-i Surkh (the Red Intellect) and tells a similar symbolic
story of the encounter of the soul of the gnostic with his heavenly spiritual guide.

42
Between the fourteenth-century poet Hafez and his seventieth-century commentator
Shh Muhammad Drb (about whom we will talk later) lie three centuries in which the most
important religious transformation seen in Iran since the advent of Islam took place. The
relevant aspects of this fundamental change in the Persian religious landscape must be
discussed in order to understand both the continuities and the disruptions in intellectual
trends from pre-Safavid times to the post-Safavid era.

Safavid Beginnings and Sufism

The Safavid Sufi order is said to have been founded by Shaykh af al-dn Ardabl (d.
1334). Sometime during the fifteenth century the order took on a strong political-military
agenda, and both Shaykh Junayd (d. 1460) and Shaykh aydar (d. 893/1488), the grandfather
and father, respectively, of Shh Isml (d. 931/1524), died on the battlefield in their fight
against Q r q y nl rulers. With the help of Anatolian Sufi tribes known as the Qizilbash (Red
Heads) that acted as their military and ideological backbone, the Safavids struggle culminated
in the enthronement of Shah Isml as the first Sufi-king of Iran.
Qizilbash religiosity was marked by a mixture of shamanistic ideas, Sufi ideals, and a
distinct messianic vision. Each of the early Safavid rulers was venerated by the Qizilbash not
only as the murshid-i kmil (perfect leader), but also as the reincarnation of heroic figures of
the past who fought for the cause of the family of the Prophet. They were believed to have
acquired certain divine qualities and powers that even made them worthy of worship. An
anonymous Venetian merchant who was in Tabriz in 1518 stated the following about the
Safavid ruler:

43
This Sophy is loved and reverenced by his people as a god, and especially by his
soldiers, many of whom enter into battle without armour, expecting their
master Ishmael to watch over them in the fight. There are also others to go into
battle without armour, being willing to die for their monarch, rushing on with
naked breasts, crying Schiac, Schiac. [shaykh, shaykh] The name of God is
forgotten throughout Persia and only that of Ismael remembered; if any one
falls when riding or dismounted he appeals to no other god but Schiac, using the
name in two ways, first as god Schiac; secondly as prophet; as the Mussulmans
say Laylla, laylla Mahamet resuralla [L ilha ill Allh, Muhammad Rasl
Allh. That is: There is no god but God and Muhammad is his messenger] the
Persians say Laylla , yllala Ismael vellialla [There is no god but God and Ismael
is his friend] besides this, everyone, and particularly his soldiers, consider him
immortal. 96
At the nascent stage of the Safavid revolution, the symbolic and charismatic role played
by Shah Ismal prompted many of the Qizilbash Turkish tribes to pay allegiance to him,
guaranteeing their unconditional submission and support.97 The syncretistic, revolutionary,
and popular form of religiosity to which the Qizilbash adhered, although extremely helpful in
the initial stages of the Safavid revolution, was a liability in later phases, when rulers focused
their efforts on the stabilization and institutionalization of the newly-established empire. At
this stage bureaucrats and the landed elite were more needed. Additionally, the establishment
of a new religious orthodoxy capable of providing society with law and order was an
indispensable necessity.
Although it is not entirely clear why Shah Isml chose Twelver Shiism as the statesponsored national religion for his kingdom, it is abundantly clear that in the following
decades, with a brief exception, Safavid religious policy increasingly consisted of promoting
Twelver orthodoxy, which provided the kingdom with legitimacy and a basis upon which to
96

Giosofat Barbaro et al., Travels to Tana and Persia, Harvard College Library Preservation Microfilm Program; 02724. (London:
Printed for the Hakluyt Society, 1873), 206207.
97

or an interesting perspective that tries to understand the religious relationship between the Qizilbash and Shah Isml by
reference to the formers cannibalistic rituals see Shahzad Bashir, Shah Ismail and the Qizilbash: Cannibalism in the Religious
History of Early Safavid Iran, History of Religions 45, no. 3 (February 1, 2006): 234256.

44
construct and maintain social cohesion. Hand in hand with this policy went the suppression of
religiously-inspired dissident movements that threatened this unifying orthodoxy. The Safavid
kings claimed legitimacy as the shadows of God on earth, guardians of the true faith, and
upholders of Twelver tradition. As such, it was imperative that they fight Sunnism (most
notably the Sunni Turks of the Ottoman Empire) and combat movements that did not conform
to orthodoxy. Although several brutal massacres took place during the late sixteenth- and
early seventeenth century, particularly involving adherents to the N qt v and H r f heresies,
the kings appeared aware of the problems entailed in killing their way to conformity and social
cohesion.98 Establishing a strong and popular religious orthodoxy proved a more attractive
method of suppressing and preventing such deviations. In other words, identifying and
suppressing heresy in a systematic way requires a systematic notion of orthodoxy and an
organized group of guardians who patrol the boundaries between heresy and orthodoxy.
With the support of the royal court, such a group came into being: a class of Shii ulama that
emerged in the early seventeenth century and grew in size and strength as newly-established
Twelver centers of learning in Iran produced exponentially increasing numbers of graduates.
It is an irony of history that the demise of organized Sufism came about under the
Safavids, who themselves came to power as a Sufi order. In the beginning of the sixteenth
century, when most of Iran fell under the control of the Safavids, many active Sufi orders
existed throughout Persia. By the end of Safavid rule, there is little evidence of any active Sufi
orders in Iran.

98

For a fascinating overview of the religious views of the Hurfs and their founder see Shahzad Bashir, Fazlallah Astarabadi and
the Hurufis, Makers of the Muslim World ( xford: neworld, 2005). or uq avs see diq Kiy, N qt viyn P sikhnyn, rn
Kda; Shumra-yi 13 (Tehran: Anjuman-i Irn, 1941).

45
In attempting to account for the drastic decline of organized Sufism, historians of the
Safavid period have largely assumed the existence of a royal policy of active, targeted, and
systematic persecution of Sufi orders, enforced more or less consistently throughout the
dynastys rule. This assumption is both plausible and convenient, and thus it has been repeated
time and again as a fundamental explanation for the eclipse of organized Sufism in Iran.99 My
reading of the sources, however, suggests that this top-down conversion model tells us more
about the problematic assumptions of its advocates rather than a close reading of the
contemporaneous historical evidence. A detailed critique of this assumption is beyond the
scope of this dissertation, but I would like to devote a bit of space here to sketching the
outlines of an alternative model for analyzing and understanding the disappearance of
organized Sufism in Iran.
This decline, I believe, can be more accurately attributed to the conversion of Irans
masses to Shiism in the sixteenth century, the crowns ferocious propagation of anti-Sunni
Twelver idealogy by way of the Qizilbash zealots, and the way in which the existing Sufi orders
responded to the changing religious environment. Dina Le Galls fascinating study of the
history of the aqshaband order, although not concerned with Safavid history per se, is (as far
99

Said Amir Arjomand, The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam: Religion, Political Order, and Societal Change in Shiite Iran from the
Beginning to 1890, Publications of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies; No. 17 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984),
112119. Ar omands historical overview of the phenomenon, which he discusses under the heading Suppression of Sufism,
has been the main source for many later scholars in constructing similar narratives, either based on the same scant primary
sources on which Arjomand bases his argument or by simply referring the reader to the above mentioned section in the
latters book. See, for example: Sa ad H Rizvi, A Sufi Theology it for a Sh King: The Gawhar-i Murd of Abd al-Razzq Lh
(d. 1072/1661-2), in Sufism and Theology, ed. Shihadeh Aymen (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007), 8388. Lewisohn,
Sufism and the School of I fahn: Ta awwuf and Irfn in Late Safavid Iran: Abd al-Razzq Lah and ay -i Kshn on the
Relation of Ta awwuf, ikmat and Irfn, 6784. Green, Sufism, 141. The notion of Safavid suppression of Sufism is much older,
however, going back to the late nineteenth and early twentieth century Iranian scholars of Persian literature. In his A Literary
History of Persia, Edward Browne defers to the authority of his learned and scholarly friend, Muhammad Qazvn, to whom he
wrote to inquire about the reason of the decline of Persian poetry during Safavid times. The latter attributes this decline to
the connection between poetry and mysticism in general. Since mysticism, he says, was brutally suppressed by the Safavids, it
is no surprise that belle lettres and poetry declined. See: Edward Granville Browne, A Literary History of Persia (Cambridge:
University Press, 1928), vols. 4: 2628. In contrast, abhullh af, in his rkh-i Ad biyyt d r Irn, offers a quite different
perspective that, in spite of some important points of disagreement, I find much more accurate when it comes to the roots of
the decline of organized Sufism in Iran. afs position on this sub ect comes very close to the alternative framework I suggest
below. See: ab Allh af, rkh-i Ad byt d r rn, Chp-i 6. (Tehran: irdaws b hamkr-i Adb, 1984), vols. 5: 201222.

46
as I am aware) the first major step toward questioning the assumptions traditionally made by
historians and constructing a new framework for understanding this period.100
aqshbands were among the Sufi orders disinclined to adopt the Safavid version of
Twelver Shiism. As Le Gall explains in her work, in the first half of the sixteenth century,
several outstanding members of the order travelled as missionaries from Greater Khurasan to
major urban centers like Qazvin in the Iranian plateau with the intent of establishing
aqshband centers there.101 These missions faced increasing hostility due to their emphasis on
their Sunni roots. By the second half of the century, this antagonism had forced them to move
to the fringes of the Safavid Empire, where the central government had little muscle to bother
them, or to leave entirely and settle in ttoman lands. Le Galls analysis of the decline of the
Naqshbandiyya provides us, I believe, with a good starting point for a sounder analysis of
Safavid attitudes towards Sufism. She says:
The picture that emerges from sixteenth-century Naqshband sources is
somewhat more complex. The Safavids may well have sought to extirpate the
ariqa, as well as other manifestations of Sunnism, but this was not easily
achieved in central Iran, and certainly not in border areas such as Khorasan or
Azerbai an. In time, the aqshband presence did disappear throughout the
country. However, this was the product of a protracted process that lasted some
fifty years in Herat and Qazvin and over a century in Tabriz and its environs. It
involved instances of outright repression, of flight or emigration to Sunni
territories beyond the border, and of shaykhs who simply withdrew from
teaching or proselytizing. Nor was emigration out of Iran always a response to
direct and outright repression by the regime: it might be induced by the
100

As far as I know, Kathryn Babayan was the first to mention the challenge that Le Galls narrative poses for the paradigm
espoused by Arjomand. See Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 114 note 91. In addition to Le Galls valuable contribution, I
must point out, two articles in Mazzaouis edited volume, Safavid Iran and Her Neighbors from Hamid Algar and R. D. McChesney
also push for a new direction in understanding the sixteenth century Safavid Iran. See: R. D. McChesney, The Central Asian
Haj-Pilgrimage in the Time of the Early Modern Empires, in Safavid Iran and Her Neighbors, ed. Michel M Mazzaoui (Salt Lake
City: University of Utah Press, 2003), 129156; Hamid Algar, aqshbands and Safavids: A Contribution to the Religious History
of Iran and Her eighbors, in Safavid Iran and Her Neighbors, ed. Michel M Mazzaoui (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press,
2003), 748. urthermore, the fact that ewmans balanced narrative of the Safavid history in his Safavid Iran does not
emphasize the suppression assumption too much is a good sign of a general preparedness in revisiting the problem. See:
Andrew J Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire, Library of Middle East History; V. 5 (London: I.B. Tauris, 2006).
101

Dina Le Gall, A Culture of Sufism: N qshb nds in the Ottom n World, 1450-1700, SUNY Series in Medieval Middle East History
(Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005).

47
inauspicious atmosphere that the establishment of a Shii state entailed, or by
the actual or anticipated loss of patrons, or simply by the towering difficulty of
living among Shii neighbors who became increasingly arrogant as Safavid rule
was becoming more entrenched.102
In other words, when the Safavid policy of religious coercion started in the sixteenth
century with an emphasis on the two central pillars of t v ll (love for the family of the
Prophet) and t b rr (dis-association from the enemies of the family of the Prophet, most
important among them the three first Caliphs), many among the lim-Sufis who had no
problem with the first pillar refused, as standard-bearers of Sunni religiosity, to compromise
on the second, which involved cursing revered companions of the Prophet whose legacy was
central to that religiosity.103 Under the social pressure caused by the tabarr Qizilbash, they
had no choice but to leave the heartlands of the Iranian plateau either for the fringes of the
Safavid Empire or Ottoman and Mughal realms where they found the environment much more
hospitable. And, like the aqshband shaykhs, some of the most important Kubrv masters
preferred to continue their activities in Uzbek territory or northern Mughal regions.
With the constant drain of learned Sufis from the central Safavid realm, Sufism was
increasingly dominated by Qalandars, wandering dervishes and low-profile populist shaykhs
with little knowledge of Islamic sciences, to say nothing of the jugglers, magicians, and
entertainers who posed as dervishes to project a holy and enigmatic aura. Amidst such
circumstances the newly-emerging class of Shii ulama was able to paint its conflict with the
Sufis as a war between knowledge and superstition, discipline and laxity, and observance and
antinomianism.

102

103

Ibid., 245.
af, rkh-i Ad byt d r rn, vols. 5: 157162.

48
The other major Sufi order of pre-Safavid Iran, the imatullhiyya, was clearly in
decline long before the advent of Safavid rule, and thus it is utterly confounding to see
historians reference, as if it were an established fact, Safavid suppression of the imatullh
order.104 During the fifteenth century, imatullhs in Kerman lost their two ma or leaders,
one to India and the other to death. What remained of the order in Iran soon became an
aristocratic familial entity mostly interested in preserving its material interests and forging
profitable political alliances. As such, when the Safavids established their power, the
imatullhs forged close relationships with the Court by arranging strategic marriages
between the two families, and they held important official posts in the Safavid dynasty,
especially in Yazd.105 The cozy relationship between the imatullhs and Safavid monarchs
began to sour only in the first decades of the seventeenth century, when a member of the
imatullh family known as Mrmrn became involved in a rebellion in Kerman against the
Shah.
Other Sufi orders, like the Kubraviyya, had a religious outlook that included distinctly
Shii elements like belief in the sanctity of the Twelve imams and the occultation of the
Twelfth Imam and his return as the messiah (the Mahdi).106 These were naturally more prone
to adopting elements of the increasingly dominant religious outlook of the state-sponsored

104

For example, see Terry Grahams sensational choice of title in Terry Graham, The imatullh rder Under Safavid
Suppression and in Indian Exile, in The Heritage of Sufism, ed. Leonard Lewisohn and David Morgan, vol. 3 (Oxford: Oneworld,
1999), 178200. In addition to the fact that his general conception of the so-called Safavid suppression of Sufism is entirely
dependent upon Ar omands work, the author presents not a single piece of evidence to substantiate his claim that the
imatullhs were suppressed by the Safavids. n the contrary, Grahams narrative often provides us with evidence that such
suppression could not have happened in the first place because, as Graham puts it, by 1450 what was remaining of the
imatulllh Sufi order had already declined from a dynamic spiritual institution into a moribund dynastic family tradition.
Ibid., 178.
105

See: " imat-Allhiyya." Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Brill Online , 2012. Reference. Harvard University. 09 July
2012 <http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/nimat-allahiyya-COM_0865>
106

Mari an Mol, Les Kubrawiya entre sunnisme et shiisme aux huitime et neuvime sicles de lhgire, Revue des tudes
Islamiques 29 (1961), 61-142.

49
Shii ulama at the expense of Sufi beliefs and practices that, from a creedal as well as a
sociological point of view, set them apart from orthodox religious groups. Growing anti-Sufi
sentiment among the public, exacerbated and perpetuated by the anti-Sufi campaign of the
mid-seventeenth century, forced Sufis to downplay distinctly Sufi components of their
identity, such as the use of a specifically Sufi technical vocabulary, participation in social
networks centered around the khnaqh, and adherence to beliefs and forms of practice not in
tune with the new orthodoxy.
f the Kubrav branches, the rbakhshiyya was by far the most prominent Sufi order
in Iran from the sixteenth- through the mid-seventeenth century.107 Yet its rival branch, later
called the ahabiyya, played the most significant role in the Shii-Sufi synthesis and the
eventual emergence of irfn as a distinct category in the latter half of the seventeenth
century. This was due to the latter being more willing than any other Sufi order to adopt
Safavid-approved Twelver religious belief and practice. The presence and activities of the
charismatic and influential ahab master, Muain Khursn (d. 1082/1671), in midseventeenth century Isfahan was a major factor in this adoption.108 Given this fact, studying
the development of the ahab Sufi order provides us with a unique window into
understanding how Sufism came to terms with the new religious environment of Safavid Iran
and how Sufis forged a new identity comprised of both Sufi and Twelver Shii elements after
they, like Persian society at large, were cut off from traditional Sunni-Sufi ways. In order to
properly understand the ahab response during the seventeenth century, a brief overview of
the origins and developments of the order during the preceding centuries is necessary.

107

That is, if we do not enter the ruling Safav order and its Qizilbash supporters into our comparison.

108

Muains life and career will be analyzed extensively in chapter three of this study.

50
The story of the ahab Sufi order, which the next few chapters tell in great detail, is
intertwined with that of the rbakhsh order. In fact, as I plowed through the primary
sources for an extended period of time with the goal of understanding the changes through
which the ahabs went, I increasingly realized that another talea rbakhsh oneis told
between the lines of ahab history. Some aspects of the rbakhsh story are lost forever, but
others have been preserved in disguise as parts of ahab history. The assimilation of
rbakhsh heritage into ahab lore began in the early eighteenth century as the former
order teetered on the verge of extinction while the latter, thanks to the sharp political
instincts of its leader, was heading toward one of the high points of its short history. This high
point was reflected by considerable literary activity and the social prestige of its leaders in
Shiraz and will be discussed further below. For the remainder of this chapter, however, we will
return to sixteenth- and early seventeenth century Iran to discuss relevant aspects of
important religious, political, and social developments of the era.

The ahabiyya during the Sixteenth Century

The story of the ahabiyya and their lineage in Sufi tradition begins with a split that
occurred in the Kubrav order in the first half of the fifteenth century, when Abdullh
Barzishbd (d. ca. 856/1452), a prominent student of the Central Asian master Is q
Khuttaln (d. 826/1423), parted ways with his master, who had apparently come to believe
and support the messianic claims of another of his students, the charismatic Sayyid
Muhammad Nurbakhsh.109 ollowers of the latter came to be known as rbakhshiyya.
109

A masterful analysis of the contesting accounts of this split is presented in: Devin DeWeese, The Eclipse of the Kubraviyya
in Central Asia, Iranian Studies 21, no. 1/2 (January 1, 1988): 4583. See, especially pp. 55-62. His analysis is based, for the most
part, on two alternative narratives, one in r Allh ibn Abd Allh Shushtar, jlis Al-m minn, Chp-i 4. (Tehran:

51
Abdallh Barzishbd himself had a following, though his students were not known under a
unified title. Rather, the primary sources indicate that different regional branches of his
followers were known by different titles. For example, the author of

jlis l-m minn reports

at the end of fifteenth century that the followers of Abdallh in the region of Khurasan are
called with the general ephitet fiyya or Sufis.110 Hfi Hussayn Karbal (d. 997/1589), the
author of R v t l-Jinn (written in 975/1576) and one of the last representatives of the Lala
branch, a regional offshoot of the followers of Abdallh Barzishbd in Tabriz, refers to his
spiritual lineage using various general designations like Ahmadiyya, Alaviyya, Ala alDavliyya, Kubravyya, and Junaydiyya. The most specific designation he uses is that of
Abdullhyya.111 The author of Takirat al-kirn, a rbakhs Sufi known as Mu aqqiq
Ardabl (d. after 1055/?) reports that the followers of Abdallh Barzishbd could be found in
Herat in his time, and that they are known as

, a word in the manuscript not

legible enough to read in its entirety, but clear enough to determine that it is definitely not
ahabiyya.112 The lack of a fixed and well-known title for the Barzishbd branch, in contrast
to the rival rbakshiyya, might be due to a lack of charismatic unified leadership among the
followers of Abdullh. This, in turn, might have contributed to an easier transition among
those followers to the Safavid-sponsored Twelver religious outlook that was a significant part
Kitbfursh-i Islmiyya, 1377), vol. 2, 144149, and the other in usayn Karbal Tabrz, R t l-Jinn v J nnt l-J nn, ed.
Jafar Sul n Qurr, Ma ma-yi Mutn-i rs (Tehran: Bungh-i Tarjuma va Nashr-i Kitb, 1965), 243250.
110

Shushtar, jlis Al-m minn, vol. 2, 156. Even as late as 1083/1672, there is evidence that could indicate a continuation of
the usage of the designation fiyy for the order. In the section dedicated to dervish poets, asrbd introduces a certain Mr
Muhammad and says that he was a disciple of Shaykh Muhammad Al Mashhad, who was a Sufi. In contrast, none of the
other mystically-minded poets mentioned in this section are called Sufis. See: Mu ammad hir a rbd I fahn, kir -yi
Na rbd: kir t l-Sh r Bih In imm-i R sil, nsh t v Ashr, ed. Mu sin a rbd, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: As r,
1999), 302.
111

Karbal Tabrz, R t l-Jinn v J nnt l-J nn, vol. 2: 373. Although he uses the term silsilat al-ahab to refer to the
spiritual lineage of Barzishbd (Ibid., vol. 2: 207.), it is obvious that the term is meant as a salutary attribute for this spiritual
lineage rather than a proper designation for a particular silsila.
112

Mrz Muhammad Ardabl Bdgul, Takirat al-kirn, 1780 1194, 91, Ms. o. 345, Kitb-khna-yi Madrasa-yi amz.

52
of the new identity forged in the seventeenth century by the order, which eventually
consolidated under the title of ahabiyya in Shiraz. Keep in mindand this is among the
original findings of this researchthat there is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that the
designation ahabiyya was used to refer to any branch of existing Sufi orders in Iran until the
final decades of the seventeenth century. Later ahab attempts to date this designation to
sources from the sixteenth century or earlier are based either on hagiographical narratives
with little historical value or on intentional manipulations of older manuscripts involving the
ex post facto insertion of the designation. 113
Up until the early sixteenth century, the major strongholds of the followers of
Barzishbd were located outside the Safavid realm in Greater Khurasan. It was in the time of
H Muhammad Kabshan (d. 1531/938), otherwise known with the honorary title Makhdmi Aam, that one of his students, a certain Shaykh Ghulm-Al shbr (d. ?), introduced a
branch of this order in Iran proper (that is, in the Safavid realm). No
biographical/hagiographical information on the latter seems to exist. In fact, sources indicate
113

Two ma or studies of the history of the ahab order are conducted by two Persian scholars affiliated with the order.
Though the works do have some scholarly value, they are for the most part a repetition of traditional sacred history. See
I snullh Al Istakhr, U l-i
vv f (Tehran: Knn-i Marifat, 1960). Asadullh Khvar, h biyy :
vv f-i ilm, sr-i
Ad b (Tehran: Intishrt-i Dnishgh-i Tehran, 1983). or a counter argument on some aspects of ahab hagiography see Sad
afs, J st j d r A vl thr-e rd l-Dn A r Nshb r. (Tehran,: Kitbfursh va Chpkhna-i Iqbl, 1320). Here afs
easily debunks the attribution of
h r l- jib in which a rather ambiguous mention is made to an order called h b and
is picked up by Istakhr and Khvar - to the famous Persian poet A r shbr (d. ca. 627/1230).
Many examples for manipulation of earlier source can be presented. For one, see the recent edition of
f -yi
Abbsi, printed in Iran under the auspice of the ahab order upon which aghfoorys translation of the work into English is
based (See: Mu ammad Al Mashhad Sabzavr,
f -yi Abbs: the Golden Chain of Sufism in Shite Isl m, trans. Mohammad
Hassan aghfoory (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2008). The original manuscripts to which I had access do not
include the epithet ahabyya ( Muhammad Al Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), n.d., f. 15, Ms. No. 590,
University of California, Los Angeles. Library. Dept. of Special Collections: Caro Minasian Collection of Persian and Arabic
Manuscripts, http://minasian.library.ucla.edu/browse.html.). This is evidently interpolated later into the print version, both
the early one printed on the margins of S b l-Masn ( a b al-dn Ri Tabrz Isfahn, S b l- sn (Tehran: Intishrt-i
Khniqh-i A mad, 1981), 11.) and the newer edition. Another case of the interpolation of the designation ahabyya can be
found in Ibid., 5. Compare it to a b al-dn Ri Tabrz Isfahn, Sab al-Masn (Manuscript), n.d., f. 5a, MS. o. 2901, Kitbkhna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm, http://dl.ical.ir., in which the word ahabyya is missing. Another
example is the curious appearance of the designation ahabyya in a number of manuscripts of R v t l-Jinn. as Sultan alQar points out in his excellent introduction to the work, there are all later interpolation (as late as nineteenth century) to
the original text by ahab copiers who, in the absence of any living Lala tradition to claim the book, have been all too happy
to adopt this important text of immense historical value into their own lore. See: Karbal Tabrz, R t l-Jinn v J nnt lJ nn, 35.

53
that he was by no means the most important disciple of Makhdm-i Aam or even a notable
one, for the prominent students of the order remained in Central Asia. For example, in the
takira literature of Central Asian Sufis and beyond, the name of Shaykh usayn Khrazm (d.
958/1551), the central figure in the Kubrav order after Khabshn, looms large.114 In the face
of the absence of information on shbr and his most important disciple, Shaykh T al-Din
Hussayn Tabdkn (d. ?), whom the ahabs consider the next leader of the order,
contemporary ahab authors have been content to misidentified the latter with the Central
Asian usayn Khrazm. This misidentification supplies desirable hagiographical information
about one of the many enigmatic and otherwise unknown ahab Shaykhs who purportedly
oversaw the ahabiyya order over the course of the entire sixteenth century.115 While there is
no doubt that the real Khrazm was a Sunni, the one adopted into ahab sources has been
transformed into a passionate Shii.116 Given the paucity of information, we do not know when
exactly the ishabr branch of the Barzishbd order officially converted to the Safavid
version of Twelver Shiism. Hamid Algar has suggested that the perpetuation in Khursn of
the line from ishabur, at a time when Shiism was being energetically propagated there by
the Safavids, suggests that this branch of the Kubrav had already made the transition to
Shiism.117 While we cannot be certain about this, it is quite obvious that the connection
between the Central Asian centers and the Iranian centers was soon cut off, likely due to
114

Shushtar, jlis Al-m minn, 162. DeWeeses account of his life and activities incorporates many of the earliest accounts
and is by far the best one we have on Khrazmis life. See DeWeese, The Eclipse of the Kubraviyya in Central Asia, 6975.
115

See: Khvar, h biyy , 26163.Istakhr, U l-i

vv f, 35161. Obviously Gramlich is mis-led by these identifications and
repeats the same mistake Richard Gramlich, Die Schiitischen Derwischorden Persiens, Abhandlungen Fr Die Kunde Des
Morgenlandes; 36 (Marburg: Deutsche Morgenlndische Gesellschaft, 1965), 16.
116

Khrazms collection of poems contains a harsh repudiation of the so-called rfi is or re ectors, that is, those who re ect
the companions of the Prophet. Khwrazm Kaml al-dn usayn, db al-Murdn, n.d., f. 79a, MS. o. 10043, Kitb-khna,
Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
117

Hamid Algar, AHABYA, Encyclopdia Iranica, December 15, 1993, http://iranica.com/articles/dahabiya-sufi-order-ofshiite-allegiance.

54
constant military conflict between the Safavids and the Uzbeks in the Khurasan region.
ollowing the divisive Safavid policy of propagating a tabarr version of Twelver Shiism,
Uzbeks reacted with a similarly ferocious campaign against the so-called rfi a (the Rejecters
[of the companions of the Prophet, the first three caliphs]) which is, to some extent, reflected
in Sufi literature of the era as well.118 The era of doctrinal ambiguity and synthesis between
Shiism and Sunnism was over.
Meanwhile, at the turn of the century, the Safavid Empire was undergoing the dramatic
structural and ideological changes that had such profound impact on the seventeenth century
religious landscape. These changes were primarily implemented by the most powerful and
influential of Safavid monarchs, Shah Abbs the Great (r. 996/1587-1039/1629).

Shh Abbs, the Demise of the Qizilbash, and the Rise of Ulama

Due to the efforts of Shah Abbs I, Safavid rule evolved beyond agrarian-based
military-fiscal polity into a territorial empire, one in which complex ideology, sophisticated
culture, and religious zeal, rather than raw military power, provided cohesion.119 A major
component of this transformation was entrance on the political scene of a corps of Caucasian
slaves (gh lm) which Abbs I introduced for the purpose of supplanting the influence and
taking over the rule of the Qizilbash.120 As a result, by the time Shah Abbs Is successor, Shh
af (r. 1039/1629-1052/1642), was inaugurated as the king, Caucasian slaves in the Safavid
118

or more on the religious milieu of Central Asia and the disputes between Shia and Sunni parties see: Rasl Jafariyn,
f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, Chp-i 1., Pizhhishkada-i awza va Dnishgh; 37-39 (Qom: Pizhhishkada-i
awza va Dnishgh, 2000), vols. 1: 4967. Also see af, rkh-i Ad byt d r rn, vols. 5: 163170.
119

Rudolph P. Matthee, Persia in Crisis: Safavid Decline and the Fall of Isfahan, International Library of Iranian Studies; 17.
(London: I. B. Tauris, 2012), 251-52.
120

For a fascinating and detailed account of this new elite class see Sussan Babaie, Slaves of the Shah: New Elites of Safavid Iran,
Library of Middle East History; V. 3. (London: I.B. Tauris, 2004).

55
household were in full control of the political arena. 121 It is probably not an exaggeration to
say that the Zohab treaty with the Ottomans in 1639, in which Safavids acknowledged in
perpetuity their rivals claim to Mesopotamia, sealed this transformation.122 It symbolized the
end of war as the natural condition of the state, which in turn spelled the end of its many
practical and symbolic functions, including keeping tribal forces engaged, acquiring booty and
slaves, enhancing the shahs heroic aura, and forcing him to patrol his realm.
The demise of the Qizilbash was concomitant with the ascendance of alternative status
groups of a different disposition. Most important among these were the bureaucrats (men of
the pen who were mostly ethnic Persians), the new clerical class (composed of Persians as
well as Arab immigrants from Lebanon and Bahrain), and, eventually, the eunuchs who came
to dominate court politics in the later seventeenth century.123 As this new clerical elite
consolidated power and became a prominent class, they were able, with the help of the
political center, to impose their desired version of orthodoxy upon the populace, objecting to
the aspects of popular religiosity that they found most objectionable, especially those
represented in the religious outlook of Qalandars, Qizilbash, and many wandering dervishes.

121

Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 148. For more on this transformation see Idem, The Safavid Synthesis: rom
Qizilbash Islam to Imamite Shiism, Iranian Studies 27, no. 1/4 (January 1, 1994): 135161. Also see the same authors
dissertation: Kathryn Babayan, The Waning of the Qizilbash: the Spiritual and the Temporal in Seventeenth Century Iran
(Princeton University, 1993), http://search.proquest.com/docview/304099961?accountid=11311. Babayans dissertation, which
unfortunately remains unpublished, is the most brilliant scholarly narrative of this transformation. (Parts of this unpublished
dissertation do appear in her Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs).
122

123

Matthee, Persia in Crisis, 252.

Ibid. Andrew Newman has questioned the factuality of the migration of a significant number of Arab ulama from Jabal Amil
to Iran, calling it a myth. See:Andrew J. ewman, The Myth of the Clerical Migration to Safawid Iran: Arab Shiite pposition
to Al al-Karak and Safawid Shiism, Die Welt Des Islams 33, no. 1, New Series (April 1, 1993): 66112. His arguments have not
been persuasive for the majority of the historians of Safavid era. Counter-arguments have been offered in Mahdi Farhani
Munfarid, Muhajarat-i l m -yi Shi
J b l-i Amil bih Ir n: d r sr-i Safavi (Tehran: Amir Kabir, 1998); Rula Jurdi Abisaab,
Converting Persia: Religion and Power in the Safavid Empire (London: I.B. Tauris, 2004); Devin J. Stewart, otes on the Migration of
mil Scholars to Safavid Iran, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 55, no. 2 (April 1, 1996): 81103.

56
However, the ulamas consolidation of power was not realized fully until the second
half of the seventeenth century. To speak of a hierocracy in previous times is anachronistic,
for up until that time the ulama were largely divided among themselves, with clashing
agendas and drastically differing views of what constituted orthodoxy. Yet one can definitely
say that the process of institutionalization (or routinization of charisma, to borrow from
Weber) started in the early decades of the seventeenth century. With a critical mass of the
populace, especially in the heartlands, converted to Shiism, and with the official sponsorship
of Safavid kings, the emerging class of Shii ulama was in a favorable position to draw up the
blueprint of a new social order. The one hundred years from 1620 to the abrupt end of the
Safavid Empire in 1722 can be seen, from this perspective, as a century in which we witness the
evolution of the ulama from a heterogeneous, and in some cases syncretistic, group in which
prominent figures like Shaykh Bah and Ma lis Sr. depended more on their Sufi-inspired
personal charisma than on institutional power, to a tightly-controlled, highly hierarchical and
institutionalized social class. This transition resulted in a clerical hierocracy that depended on
the discourse of orthodoxy imposed by the power of the state and promoted via its vast
financial resources. The key to this evolution was religious education. Thanks to financial
support from the Safavid court, numerous madrasas were built and endowed in major urban
centers. This building process gained momentum especially after Abbs I transferred the
capitol to Isfahan. Hundreds of students flocked to these madrasas to study under prominent
Shii lims. Some of these teachers were imported from Lebanon and Bahrain long Twelver
strongholds and others were local Persian scholars. This new, energetic, and idealistic
generation took charge of educating the masses and attacking various forms of deviance.

57
Ab Muslim, Sufism and Storytelling

Such attacks were not initially targeted against Sufism proper, since, in the early
decades of the seventeenth century, the Safavid dynasty still lived under the shadow of its past
strong Sufi affiliations. By the early seventeenth century, remnants of the Sufi past, like
referring to the shah as the murshid-i kmil and using the s jjd -i irshd (prayer mat of
guidance) in coronation ceremonies had lost much of their original significance and meaning,
but they were remained symbolically attached to Safavid discourses of legitimacy and
authenticity to the extent that they could not be thrown out.124 Instead, other deviations
related to Sufism provided easier targets for puritan defenders of God and were usually called
by the technical term bid t, or innovation. ne such deviation was the popular practice of
storytelling. At the time, storytelling (qi

-khn) was among the most influential mediums for

creating, guiding, and expressing religious, economic, and social aspiration and discontent.
Stories were performed by professional storytellers (q

or qi

-khnn) in public venues:

coffee houses, bazaars, and elsewhere. Although a major source of entertainment, they were
also frequently used as powerful political tools.
According to Babayan The story of Ab Muslim, as told in its many versions across
Iran and Anatolia, represents one such political narrative. It encapsulated an alternative
historical narrative of the Abbasid revolution that overthrow the tyrannical rule of the
Umayyads (41/661-750/133), who had usurped the right of the family of the Prophet to rule
over the Muslim community.125 The tone of this drama as a genre is set by the death of the

124

It was only decades later, during the reign of Shah Abbs II, that there seems to be a conscious effort on the part of the
Safavid monarch to disentangle Safavid political discourse from the remnants of Sufi-infused symbols. One such example is the
decision not to use the sa da, for the first time, in Abbs IIs coronation. See Sholeh Alysia Quinn, Coronation arratives in
Safavid Chronicles, in History and Historiography of post-Mongol Central Asia and the Middle East: Studies in Honor of John E. Woods,
ed. Judith Pfeiffer and Ernest Tucker (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), 32728.
125

Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 122. My brief report on the subject of Ab Muslim-nmas heavily relies upon

58
prophets grandson Husayn (d. 61/680) at Karbala. The martyred family of Muhammad is
portrayed as the victim of the aggression of the the qawm (Umayyads), who had usurped the
right of leadership of the Muslim community of Ali and his children. Most of the epics written
in Turkish that would have been heard and retold by the Qizilbash begin with Husayn holding
his half-brother Muhammad b. anafiyya (d. 700) in his arms.126 Husayn then designates his
half-brother as the heir of his authority (Imamate) and envisions a line of imams that differs
from that of Twelver Shiism. The genealogy can be reactivated in the future, however, with
his expected return in another human form, notably including that of Ab Muslim.127 Like
Husayn and Ab Muslim, Shah Isml and his Qizilbash devotees entered the battlefield and
sacrificed their lives for the beloved family[F]or his Safavi adepts, Junayd [Ismls
grandfather] like Ab Muslim for the Khurramiyya, was the reincarnation of the divine one. 128

In the legendary realm of the J n ydnme, Junayd was a descendent of Ali and a contemporary

of Ab Muslim. At the end of this epic, the reader is sent to the Ab

slimnme to follow the

story of Junayd.129
Storytellers, tapping into widespread sentiments of what Marshal Hodgson aptly called
Alid loyalty,130 recounted the chivalric struggles of Ab Muslim and his companions as
supporters of the rights of the family of the Prophet against the perceived injustice of the
Umayyads. As Safavid missionaries traveled to Anatolia from Iran to propagate their cause
Babayans masterly narrative.
126

Ibid, 126.

127

Ibid, 126.

128

Ibid., 138-39. Also see af, rkh-i Ad byt d r rn, vol. 5: 148.

129

Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 140. Primary sources tell us that a group of Sufis, referred to as Sfiyn-i Ardabl,
recited the stories of Ibn anafiyya and Ab Muslim. See Ibid., 121.
130

Hodgson, The Venture of Islam.

59
among the Qizilbash, the story of Ab Muslim was used to draw parallels between the mythical
figure and the actual struggles of their time. Thus Ab Muslim-nmas were used as powerful
tools to incite the Turkmen of Anatolia and Syria. But as the power of the Qizilbash in court
began to wane and their form of religiosity was seen as a liability, the court was eager to
endorse attacks on practices that were becoming increasingly problematic, that is, practices
that inspired the masses and could be (and were) used to manipulate them. Attacks on the
practice of storytelling were not only politically beneficial for the state, they were also in the
interest of the newly emerging clerical class for whom identifying forms of heresy and
deviation was the easiest means to define orthodoxy (albeit in a negative way).
Popular practices like storytelling were brought to the public by diverse people, but
mostly by wandering dervishes, some of whom had loose connections to organized Sufism. The
storytellers entertained people with religious stories of the family of the Prophet, reciting
passionate poems about their unique and heavenly qualities, their heroic acts in defense of the
true faith, and the sufferings they endured in their noble cause. This practice was widely
known as m ddh. They also told secular epic stories from irdawsis Shh-nm (Book of the
Kings) about ancient Persian kings. Although not all maddhs were qi a-khns and vice
versa, there was some overlap.131 Not all storytellers were affiliated with organized Sufism.
Instead, they were part and parcel of a widespread, popular, and highly visible social
phenomenon sometimes referred to as dervishism in the older tradition of orientalism. 132
However, most did have ties with organized Sufism, and their paraphernalia and technical
vocabulary were suggestive of such an affiliation. Thus they were widely perceived by the
131

132

Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn,

rh ng v Siys t, vol. 2: 859.

George Swan, An Outline for the Study of Dervishism Covering Six Elementary Lectures on the Popular Development of Sufism or
Mohammedan Mysticism (Cairo, 1925).

60
common people, learned scholars of the madrasa, and foreign travelers as a Sufi-related group
in spite of the fact that many of those who donned the dervish garb and travelled from town to
town with fantastic stories did not have slightest adherence to any otherworldly and ascetic
lifestyle.133
It would be wrong to draw a firm line between the so-called dervishism, i.e., the
conglomerate of highly eclectic and syncretistic forms of belief and practice represented by
individual free-ranging dervishes, and the tradition of organized, institutional Sufism of the
khnaqh. Members of organized Sufism were also involved in such practices. We are told, for
example, that the renowned rbakhsh Sufi shaykh, Q Asad Quhpy (d. 1048/1638), who
oversaw the rbakhsh khnaqh in Kshn in the early seventeenth century, was fond of
Ab Muslim.134 Even some of the Sufi-minded ulama of the early seventeenth century,
luminaries of the Safavid era like Muhammad Taq Ma lis, who will be discussed in the next
two chapters, are reported to have been comfortable with such practices. Sufis are also
portrayed as fans of Shh-nm khn in different sources. In the middle of the seventeenth
century, in diq t l-Sh , the pseudo-Ardabl tells of a certain group of Sufis called Jawriyya
or J riyy who are fond of listening to the stories of the Zoroastrians (gabrn) and that of Shhnm .135 Even much later, when such practices were supposed to have been marginalized,
another elite rbakhsh Sufi, namely Mirz Abu al-Qsim Sukt (d. 1238/1822) nearly lost his

133

Abd al- usayn Zarrnkb, D nbl -yi J stj d r

vv f-i rn, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Amr Kabr, 1362), 22829. James Morriers
account in his The Adventures of Haji Baba Isfahani, although it dates to the early eighteenth century, is a good example of how a
suspicious outsider might have seen wandering dervishes.
134

See Rasl Jafariyn, Sih Risla dar Bb-i Ab Muslim va Ab Muslim ma-h, in rs-i Islm-i rn, vol. 2 (Iran:
Kitbkhnah-yi a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash a af, 1995), 255.
135

pseudo-Ardabl, dq t l-Sh , ed. diq asanzda and Al Akbar Zamnnizhd, Chp-i 1. (Qom: An riyn, 1998), vol. 2:
777.

61
life when the mob attacked his house, accusing him of reading Shh-nm with his disciples.136
As these examples demonstrate, the so-called popular or folk aspect of Sufism was often
linked and lived together with elite or high Sufism in the context of organized Sufi orders
centered in khnaqh. It was perhaps this intermingling of popular with elite elements of
Sufism that made it possible for puritan mullas, after the concern with storytelling subsided, to
initiate the next phase of their religious crusades: a fierce anti-Sufi campaign.
While there are instances of some ulama opining against the practice of storytelling,
especially the story of Ab Muslim during the sixteenth century, the wave of coordinated
attacks came only later. Early examples include the great Arab mujtahid, Shaykh Al al-Karak
(d. 940/1533), who came to Iran upon Shah Iamls invitation. He issued a f tv, a religious
opinion, in which he encouraged the followers of the imam to curse Ab Muslim and other
enemies of the family of the Prophet.137 A short time later, a student of his named Muhammad
b. Is q al- amav (d. after 938/1531) wrote a treatise called Ans l-m minn against Abu
Muslim-nmas. Babayans view is that these early attacks constitute the first of two waves of
anti-Ab Muslim propaganda in which representatives of Twelver orthodoxy tried to
suppress what they considered to be heretical renditions of the sacred history of the infallible
Imams.138 Her reconstruction of this so-called first wave is based entirely upon amavs
work. Many details of Hamavs assertions, like the destruction of the tomb of Ab Muslim by

136

Mu ammad Ma m Shrz Ma m Al Shh, riq l- qiq, ed. Mu ammad Jafar Mah b (Tehran: Kitbkhna-yi
Brn, 1960), vol. 3: 249. He was, according to the missionary Rev. Henry Martin, one of the most renown Soofies in all
Persia and a large proportion of the people of Shiraz, it is computed, [were] either the secret or avowed disciples of Mirza
Abulcasim. John Sargent, A Memoir of the Rev. Henry Martyn, B. D.: L te ello of St. Johns College, C mbridge, nd the Ch pl in to the
Honourable East India Company (Boston: Perkins & Marvin, 1831), 300.
137

The fatv is mentioned in a number of early sources, including the Ans itself. It is reproduced in Jafariyans valuable report
of the content of his work along with a lengthy brilliant discussion of the practice of storytelling during the Safavids. See
Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, vols. 2: 862869.
138

Babayan, The Waning of the Qizilbash, 204.

62
Shah Tahmsb (r. 1524-1576) in Khurasan,139 are not mentioned in any of the chronologies
dedicated to the life of the first two kings of the Safavid house, as Babayan herself
acknowledges.140 Given amavs strong bias against the folk of Ab Muslim, it is very unlikely
that the early attacks constituted a coordinated and wide spread attempt, a wave, so to
speak against such a popular practice. Even if we accept his claim about the destruction of Ab
Muslims tomb in the vicinity of ishabur, the fact that, according to amav himself, the tomb
was soon re-built by Ab Muslims fans indicates that during the sixteenth century public
opinion was still overwhelmingly in favor of this mythic figure and as such a strong and
coordinated attack against his myth is very unlikely to have occurred.141 The fact is that the
Shii ulama still lacked effective organization and had yet to establish a discourse of orthodoxy
that would function as a base for attacking heterodoxy gives us further reason to doubt the
existence of anything beyond scattered and isolated attempts to attack the practice.
It is only toward the end of the reign of Shah Abbs I, when the initial foundations of
the clerical hierarchy were being laid, that we witness the emergence of what can be called a
concerted campaign against Ab Muslim and the storytellers who recited his epic, one that
ignited a major debate in seventeenth-century Iran. These polemical writings, which took the
form of refutations (r d d), were authored by a group of religious scholars from Isfahan,
Mashhad and Qom.142 Among the earliest rudd was that of Umdat al-m ql written by the son

139

Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn,

140

Babayan, The Waning of the Qizilbash, 204.

141

142

amav, Ans l-

rh ng v Siys t, vol. 2: 864.

minn, 182.

Rasl Jafariyn has extensively dealt with various aspects of this cultural phenomenon, its underlying reasons, and its
connection to Sufism, messianic and apocalyptic movements, and the ghult or exaggerationists trends within Shia society
at the time. Rasl Jafariyn, f viyy h d r Ar h-yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, Chp-i 1., Pizhhishkadah-i awzah va Dnishgh;
37-39 (Qom: Pizhhishkadah-i awzah va Dnishgh, 2000), vols. 2: 85179. as well as Rasl Jafariyn, Qi h-khnn d r rkhi Islm v rn: r r B r J r yn-i Qi h-khn, Ibd v
v r-i n d r rkh-i rn v Islm, Chp-i 1. (Iran: Dall, 1999).

63
of al-Karak, asan (d. after 966/1559). There is also a small treatise against the practice of Ab
Muslim-nma khn (reading the story of Ab Muslim) titled f t l-rishd written by the
vehement enemy of Sufis in Mashhad, Muhammad Zamn (d. 1041/1631).143 He was also said to
be the teacher of Muain Khursn before the latters conversion to Sufism under the
guidance of Shaykh Htam, his beloved master.144
In his introduction to the work, Zamn tells how he learned about a certain sayyid
(descendent of the Prophet) in Isfahan, known as Mr Law , who suffered a strong reaction
from the people there because of his controversial public comments against Ab Muslim. It
was in his support, Zamn recounts, and with the hope of guiding the people of Isfahan that he
took upon himself to write the treatise.145 Many other sympathetic ulama were to follow his
lead. In twenty years, more than 17 works were written in Law s support, of which if t lrishd is one of the earliest.146 The attack on Sufism followed immediately after this anti-Ab
Muslim campaign. The puritan activists were eventually successful, in both cases, in
marginalizing what they perceived to be a threat to the true reading of Islam. The attacks on
storytellers and later on Sufis and a host of other heretical movements only shows the
empty half of the glass, so to speak. For such popular and wide-spread practices to be
marginalized, the emerging class of Shii ulama needed to provide the populace, and the
learned, with an attractive alternative. In order to do so, they started a tireless substantial
143

This treatise, along with two other important examples belonging to the same genre, have been published by Jafariyan. See
Rasl Jafariyn, Sih Risla dar Bb-i Ab Muslim va Ab Muslim ma-h. Mr Muhammad Zamn Mashhad (d. 1041/1631),
otherwise known as the Mujtahid, was, according to Amal al-mil, not only a skilled urist, but also a recognized philosopher
( akm) and theologian (mutakallim) in the early seventeenth century in Mashhad. See Mu ammad ibn al- asan urr almil, Amal Al-mil., 1965, vol. 2: 273.
144

Val Qul ibn Dvd Qul Shml, Qi Al-khqn, ed. asan Sdt ir (Tehran: Szmn-i Chp va Intishrt-i Vizrat-i
arhang va Irshd-i Islm, 1371), vols. 2: 18284.

145

Muhammad Zamn Ra av, a fat Al-rshd, in rs-i Islm-i rn, ed. Rasl Jafariyn, vol. 2 (Qom: Kitbkhnah-yi
a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash a af, 1994), 26869.

146

Mu ammad Mu sin gh Buzurg ihrn, al- r il

nf l-Sh (Beirut: Dr al-A v, 1983), vol. 4: 152.

64
effort in which they focused on traditions of the imams, known as hadith literature, as an
alternative source of authority that could provide them with a new religious framework that
met the worldly and otherworldly needs of everyday people. Therefore, during the
seventeenth century, there was immense activity by Twelver religious scholars, financially and
politically supported by the Safavid monarchs, to gather, discover, comment upon, and
distribute the heritage of the imams from all the existing sources scattered in every corner of
the Shii world.147 It is fair to say that one of the most striking features of Shii intellectual life
in Safavid Iran from the early decades of the seventeenth century till the fall of Isfahan in 1722
is the stunning pace at which the study of hadith became the most dominant business of the
ulama. The period represents one of the most intense episodes in the history of Shiism in
terms of both the gathering and discovering of the sayings or hadiths of the imams. In the
frantic race to contribute to the formation of a new religious framework for the newlyconverted people of Iran, the most pressing task was to find reliable sayings of the imams to
replace the old Sunni ones as foundations of legitimacy and authority.
The radical increase in scholarly activity when it comes to canonical collections of
Twelver hadith is perhaps nowhere more obvious than in the number of commentaries on the
most important part of the canon, Us l l-K f. Out of twenty commentaries that I was able to
identify using gh Buzurgs bibliographical compendium, sixteen were written between 1600
and 1737 (see the table).148 Perhaps the most interesting fact about these commentaries is that

147

For example, convoys were sent to libraries around the Muslim world, even as far as Yemen, to find unique manuscripts of
the early hadith works compiled by Shia scholars. See Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, vol. 2: 751. In
addition, many hitherto obscure collections of hadith, almost forgotten by history, along with some others that had previously
been unknown, were either discovered or recovered, and then their content was authorized in miraculous encounters
with the imams during the seventeenth century and early eighteenth century, with increasing implications for religious
thought and life.
148

The list of commentaries was compiled from the following pages in: gh Buzurg ihrn, al- r il
13: 95 100; ibid., vols. 14: 26 28.

nf l-Sh , vols.

65
the portfolio of commentators reflects an amazing spectrum of diverse intellectual leanings.
They include the founder of the Akhbr school, Mull Amn Astarbd (d. 1036) and other
Akhbr scholars who were vehemently against philosophy and Sufism, like Mull Khall
Qazvn (d. 1089/1678), U l urists like Al al-mil (d . 1103/1691) and Muhammad li
Mzandarn (d. 1081/1670), as well as Sufi-minded philosophers like Mull adr, pure
philosophers like Mr Dmd, and theologian-philosophers like Mrz Raf. This diversity
illustrates the centrality of Shii hadith literature in the consolidation of orthodoxy and the
competition and rivalry in authorization and authenticity that it involved. The fact that no
Sufi shaykh can be found amongst the commentators is a significant indicator that in this
competition, Sufis lagged behind the ulama.

1500-1550

1551-1600

1601-1640

1641-1690

1691-1737

1738-1783

The exponential increase in hadith-related scholarly activities also meant that the
number of traditions circulating in scholarly circles grew significantly. Therefore, the next
generation of hadith scholars like Muhammad Bqir Ma lis, the prominent son of Muhammad
Taq, and Shaykh urr al-Amil (d. 1104/1693), a prominent member of the Arab immigrant
religious scholars from Lebanon, were urged in the last decade of the seventeenth century to
take on the daunting task of compiling massive encyclopedic works like Bi r l-Anvr and

66
V sil l-Sh . The modern standard edition of the former is published in 110 volumes whereas
the latter, which deals only with matters of Sharia is no less than 30 volumes.
Simultaneous with this upsurge in general scholarly interest in the study of hadith
came the establishment and rapid spread of the Akhbr (Scripturalist) legal school of thought
that eclipsed the traditional Sunni-inspired rational U l school in the latter half of the
seventeenth century and for most of the eighteenth century. Several attempts have been made
to explain the popularity of the Akhbr school at this point in the history of Twelver Shiism.
Robert Gleave has summarized such efforts succinctly, pointing out briefly why each
explanation ultimately fails to account for the schools success and popularity. In general,
Gleave says, such explanations fail to understand and appreciate the multifarious intellectual
interests and diverse academic careers of its various adherents.149 This failure, I believe, partly
has to do with the lack of attention to the larger context in which Akhbrism flourisheda
larger context in which there was an urgent and immediate need for wide ranging, authentic
hadith upon which to base the new Twelver religious framework of thought. The Akhbr
School, with its considerably relaxed and liberal approach to authenticating hadith
statements, maximized the number of much-needed traditions speaking to different aspects of
everyday life. Thus, it served this urgent need much better than the traditional U l
methodology, in which the elaborate disciplines of ilm al-rijl and ilm diry

l-hadith were

used to evaluate the reliability of the narrators involved in the isnd of each hadith (that is, the
line of transmission through which the hadith has reached the scholar from the imam).150

149

R. Gleave, Scripturalist Islam: the History nd Doctrines of the Akhbr Sh School, Islamic Philosophy, Theology, and Science; V.
72 (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 17374.
150

In fact, as Arjomand has observed, the re-emergence of an authentically Shiite U l school of urisprudence at the end of
the eighteenth century seems to be predicated on the Akbhr interregnum. In his own words, [T]he fruits of Akhbr
traditionalism were fully appropriated by orthodox Shiism in the closing decades of the eighteenth century, the collections
of traditions such as ay s Wf, al- urr al-mils W sil, and Ma liss own Bi r served as invaluable and indispensable new

67
Furthermore, the Akbhr movements categorical re ection of Sunni sources and Sunni
methodology in the study of hadith and Islamic law, especially as reflected in the writings of
its founder Muhammad Amn Astarbd (d. 1037/1627),151 was conveniently in line with
Safavid propaganda, which made every effort to draw a sharp distinction between the Sunni
Turks ( ttomans) and the followers of the family of the Prophet (Shii Savafid denizens). By
contrast, the U l school of thought was dependent on a platform mainly laid by Sunni
scholars of law.152
Akhbarism as a form of legal orthodoxy, then, should be analyzed and understood in
the larger context of the enormous popularity of and emphasis on exclusively Twelver
traditions. It is not surprising, then, that scholars like Muhammad Taq Ma lis and his son
Muhammad Bqir Ma ils (d. 1110/1699), whose primary agenda was the collection and
dissemination of the Shii hadith literature, are understood to have been more aligned with the
Akhbr movement in spite of their assertions that they chose a middle road between

sources upon which the value-rational ingenuity of the U l jurists in creation of new legal norms could be exercised. In fact,
it does not seem to be an exaggeration to say that the accumulation of traditions in this period was a precondition for the
revival of jurisprudence, which aimed both at the harmonization of the traditions as normative stereotypes and deduction of
further positive ( ) norms. See Ar omand, The shadow of God and the Hidden Imam, 153.
151

Devin J. Stewart, Islamic Legal Orthodoxy: Twelver Shiite Responses to the Sunni Legal System (Salt Lake City: University of Utah
Press, 1998), 20708. Gleave, Scripturalist Islam, 157.
152

In another essay he argues against the dominant scholarly perspectives that pigeonhole the Akhbr movement as antiphilosophy or anti-Sufism, saying that there is no single Akhbr position on the role of philosophy and mystical experience
in the discovery of religious knowledge. Robert Gleave, Scripturalist Sufism and Scripturalist Anti-Sufism: Theology and
Mysticism Amongst the Shii Akhbariyya, in Sufism and Theology, ed. Ayman Shihadeh (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,
2007), 158176. Although I am in essential agreement with Gleave on this latter point, when it comes to mainstream discursive
philosophy, otherwise known as peripatetic (m shsh) philosophy, there seems to be an overwhelming consensus among the
Akhbr scholars to condemn it as a foreign and un-Islamic discipline of knowledge by referencing to its Greek roots and some
purportedly heretical beliefs that, they said, ma or philosophers held. Akbr scholars like Mull adrs student ay Kshn,
who were well-versed in Islamic philosophy, usually differentiate between what they call official philosophy ( ikm t-i
rasmiyya), which they do not hesitate to express their aversion to, and divine philosophy ( ikm t-i ilh), which is, according
to them, is derived from prophetic sources of revelation and the traditions of the imams. Besides this, Gleaves astute
observations on the nature of the Akhbr movement ought to be welcomed and praised as a much-needed corrective to the
misleading picture of Akhbrism that plagues primary sources of urisprudence, mostly hostile to Akhbrism, and, from there,
some scholarly and non-scholarly expositions in Persian, Arabic and English in which proponents of this school are generally
understood to be rigid literalists and fanatic bigots. This picture has prevailed as a result of negative U l portrayal of Akhbr
scholars in biographical and bibliographical resources. Since the Akbr school was effectively eradicated by the early
nineteenth century, what is remembered of Akhbrism comes mostly from later hostile U l ulama.

68
Akhbrism and U lism. Both of their lives were occupied with an enthusiastic effort to
recover the forgotten legacy of the imams, which had been dispersed in hundreds of canonical
and non-canonical sources, thereby reorienting the scholarly priorities of their colleagues by
bringing the study of hadith from the periphery to the center of attention.153
Together, and with the help of the many students they trained, they not only brought
the study of hadith from the margins of madrasa to the center of the curriculum but also took
important steps toward broadening the potential audience of hadith by translating major
canonical works into Persian. According to Ma lis Sr., prior generations of ulama had paid
little attention to the study of hadith, preferring to rely upon rationalist (istidll) methods in
jurisprudence in issuing their opinions (f tv). He speaks of a time when hadith books were
difficult to find in Isfahan and credits his teacher, Shaykh Bah, and Mulla Amn Astarbd,
the author of al- vid l-Madaniyya, for reversing the trend. In his own words:
About 30 years ago,154 the great and learned Mawln Muhammad Amn
Astarbd began to occupy himself with the examination and study of the
khb r (traditions) of the sinless Imams. He studied the censure of opinion and
evaluation [found in the akhbr] and became acquainted with the method of the
companions of the holy sinless imams. He wrote the al- vid l-Madaniyya and
sent it to this country [that is, Iran]. Most of the people of a af and the Atabt
(lit. the Sacred Threshholds) approved of his method and returned to the
akhbr. The truth is that most of what Mawln Muhammad Amn said is
trueAnd now, it is close to forty years that I have toiled so that in many
libraries there are several copies of all the books [of hadith], not only in Isfahan
but also in the surrounding towns and other counties. The water that was gone
from the river is back and, praise be to God, the majority of the learned of this
time spend their time with the hadith literature and this [mood] increases
everyday and, praise be to God that the sovereign King and the exalted mrs
(princes) also spend much of their time reading and discussing the hadith
literature. 155
153

Jafariyan makes a similar remark. See Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn,

154

This refers to the last years of Astarabadis life.

155

rh ng v Siys t, vol. 3: 1043.

Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, vols. 3: 10581060. Here, Jafariyan is quoting from the manuscript of
Ma liss L vm h bq rn, written from 1065 to 1066/1655-66, dedicated to Shah Abbs II.

69

Given this situation, it is not surprising to find Sufi shaykhs and Sufi-minded religious
scholars inclined to the Akhbr position, as it allowed a more flexible and relaxed approach in
integrating much-needed traditions from hadith collections into their discourse as indicators
of its authenticity. In fact, most of the major figures discussed in the following chapters either
explicitly express their preference for the Akhbr to the hadith literature or implicitly
demonstrate such Akhbr leanings in their discussions of certain hadiths.156

Having surveyed the most important political, religious, and intellectual developments
relevant to the upcoming discussion of the late Safavid debate over Sufism and irfn, we will
now proceed to the specifics of what led to the near-total marginalization of organized Sufism
and its associated discourse in the latter half of the seventeenth century as well as the
emergence of irfn as an alternative.

156

Unlike the abovementioned Sufi-minded figures, philosophers, especially those in the mainstream who adhered to an
essentially peripatetic philosophical framework, were naturally more in line with the rationalist U l discourse and as such,
many of them tend also to be urists of U l leaning. Figures like Mr Dmd and his student Sayyid A mad al-Alav are good
examples.

Chapter Two: The Making of the anti-Sufi Front

71

Introduction
This chapter analyzes the formation of the anti-Sufi front in the second half of the
eleventh/seventeenth century. I will examine the surge in refutations of Sufism, taking into
consideration the religious outlook of the most active of their authors, the specific groups
targeted in such works, and the kind of charges leveled against the Sufis. My emphasis will be
on the aspects of anti-Sufi rhetoric that I believe were most instrumental in the eventual
eclipse of the categories of Sufi and Sufism, which in turn necessitated the invention of the
category of irfn. While this chapter deals with the way opponents of Sufism stigmatized and
marginalized institutional Sufism by emphasizing its Sunni roots and the antinomian behavior
of some Sufis and dervishes, the next chapter will be devoted to an analysis of how highranking participants in organized Sufism responded to those accusations. As such, this and the
subsequent chapter should be seen as two parts of a single unit.
Radd, or refutation, is among the oldest and most popular genres of Islamic literature.
As Islam rapidly expanded, early Muslims consolidated their power over the Middle East and
beyond, and in the process they came into contact with religious othersrepresentatives of
a host of different religious beliefs and practices. Intellectual confrontations with these people
sparked the writing of polemical works, which began in earnest during the second Islamic

72
century. The earliest targets of such writings were other religions, like Christianity and
Judaism, rather than internal doctrinal disputes.157 As these works increased in number, they
were categorized under a distinct literary genre, that of r d d or refutations.158
As the threat of foreign religions subsided by the end of the third century when Muslim
converts from Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism reached a critical mass, the focus shifted
toward internal disputes and various deviant types of belief and practice among Muslims
themselves.159 A close examination of the quantity and quality of the works written in this
genre, the specific groups targeted, and the type of deviant beliefs and practices focused
upon in each era is indispensable to the historian of religions who seeks to construct an
accurate image of the type and severity of perceived and actual threat(s) to the authority of

157

Fortunately, some recent and substantial studies of Muslims writings on other religions/sects have substantially increased
our understanding of this important subject. A survey by Guy Monnot represents one of the most sustained and valuable
efforts at systematically retrieving the Muslim literary production on non-biblical religious other(s) up to 1882. His invaluable
chronological classification of over one hundred and sixty literary references is complemented by Patrice Brodeur who,
incorporating Adang and Anawatis data, added to the survey writings on biblical religions. See Georges C. Anawati, Polmique,
apologie et dialogue Islamo-chrtiens: positions classiques mdivales et positions contemporaines, 1969; Camilla Adang, Muslim Writers
on Judaism and the Hebrew Bible: from Ibn Rabban to Ibn Hazm, Islamic Philosophy, Theology, and Science, 0169-8729; V. 22
(Leiden;: E.J. Brill, 1996); Patrice Claude Brodeur, rom an Islamic Heresiography to an Islamic History of Religions: Modern
Arab Muslim Literature on Religious thers with Special Reference to Three Egyptian Authors (Harvard University, Divinity
School, 1999).
158

The second/ninth and third/tenth centuries were marked by fierce religious competition, which led to the many
refutations written during the early Abbasid Caliphate and targeting both non-Muslim religions and various Islamic
tendencies. In contrast, in the third Islamic century (ninth century C.E.), the growth in polemical refutations led to the
development of what Monnot called general heresiography. He explained this generic consolidation by noting the shift from
the juxtaposition of polemical writings (kutub al-radd) to the progressively more systematized treatises (al-maqalat).
159

Therefore, the number of refutations against other religions drops drastically in the fourth/eleventh Islamic century, in no
small part due to the decline of Mutazili prominence and the victory of Islam over the Manichaeans, whose headquarters
moved from Baghdad to Samarqand at the beginning of the fourth Islamic century. The following table, which is taken from
Brodures dissertation, best speaks to this point. See: Brodeur, rom an Islamic Heresiography to an Islamic History of
Religions, 35.

General heresiography

II (cent.)
0

III
5

IV
6

V
6

VI-IX
8

Particular refutations
Descriptive works

11
7

31
7

3
3

5
7

7
3

73
the political, intellectual and social guardians of the interpretation of the faith that prevailed
at the time.

Refutation of Sufism in Seventeenth Century Iran

No concrete evidence suggests substantial activity in writing such refutations against
Sufis during the sixteenth century.160 This can be seen in the light of the continued and strong
presence of Sufi institutions from the Late Middle Period in Iran as an indicator of the
continued dominance of Sufi ethos and networks within Safavid Persianate society.
Furthermore, it can be read as indicative of the lack of, or weakness of, a political/religious
power structure whose continued dominance was tied to maintaining a certain version of
religious orthodoxy that considered Sufism a threat. This, however, does not preclude the
existence of the political will, as we saw in the case of Shah Abbs, to suppress certain groups
of politically active Sufis (such as the disenchanted Qizilbash tribes as well as the heretical
uq av movement) who posed a threat to the recently established political order.161 It was
only after Shah Abbs reforms and the transformations of the late sixteenth- and early
seventeenth century, which led to the demise of the old religious and political structures of

160

We are told that the Lebanese jurist of the early Safavid times, al-Karak, wrote a treatise called Ma in l-Mujrimiyya that
included a refutation of Sufism. The work has not survived and as scholars have noted, it is doubtful that it was anything
beyond a refutation of the story of Ab Muslim. We are also told that, in the middle of the sixteenth century, al-Karaks son
wrote a treatise called Umd l- ql that contained anti-Sunni and anti-Sufi rhetoric. This work has not survived either.
See Rasl Jafariyn, f viyy d r r -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, Chp-i 1., Pizhhishkada-i awza va Dnishgh; 37-39 (Qom:
Pizhhishkada-i awza va Dnishgh, 1379), vol. 2, 520-21.
161

The initial persecution of this movement under Shah Isml and Shah ahmsb gradually led those involved to disguise
themselves as dervishes. Thus the most important uq av figure at the turn of the century was known as Dervish Khusraw (d.
1002/1593 ). Khusraw initially developed a cozy relationship with Shah Abbs but was eventually executed on charges of
heresy. uq avs were increasingly considered a political threat, and thus brutally persecuted, at which time they began to
oin the Qizilbash and translate their political ambitions into action by participating in the latters rebellions. See Babayan,
Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 101. This was most clearly epitomized in the revolt of the disenchanted Qizilbash uq av
leader, Dervish Ri (d. 1631) in Qazvin, which was brutally suppressed, putting an end to a series of uq av and Qizilbash
revolts. Ibid., 37778.

74
power and the rise of new ones based upon clerical authority, that the cultural and political
landscape of Persia was ripe for an organized and sustained attack against Sufism.
Although this chapter focuses exclusively on seventeenth century attacks on Sufism, it
is important to keep in mind that these were not the first, or the last, attacks against Sufis. Nor
were such polemical and sometimes physical attacks on Sufis launched exclusively by the
clergy, as was the case in the Safavid era. As Von Ess and Bowering have emphasized, a
considerable number of polemical works and acts of actual persecution against Sufis were
carried out by Sufis themselves.162 That is to say, many polemics directed against a given group
of Sufis were instances of intra-Sufi debates over controversial doctrines and practices. Most
notably, we know that although Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328) was a Qdir Sufi, he attacked Ibn
Arab virulently and had an influence on Ibn al-Jawziyya (d. 751/1350), the author of

lbs

Ibls, arguably the most widely read classical work written against Sufism. What happened
during the Savafid era, however, happened in a unique religious and political context. The old
equilibrium between the ulama and Sufis was broken in the aftermath of state-sponsored
propaganda that introduced a militant and exclusive Twelver Shiism, primarily defined and
understood in anti-Sunni terms, as the official religion of Safavid Persia. A new equilibrium
was sought by the center of political power, and much was at stake.
It was in this context, and under the watch and approval (whether implicit or explicit)
of the Safavid kings, that some mid-ranking religious scholars found the opportunity to launch
a sustained and public literary attack on Sufism that began roughly in the fourth decade of the
seventeenth century and was sustained, more or less, throughout the century.163 The

162

F. de Jong and Bernard Radtke, eds., Islamic Mysticism Contested: Thirteen Centuries of Controversies and Polemics, Islamic History
and Civilization. Studies and Texts; V. 29 (Leiden: Brill, 1999).
163

My use of the term campaign to describe this wave of anti-Sufi polemics is justified, I believe, by its sustained and co-

75
outpouring of polemical works against Sufism began immediately following the anti-Ab
Muslim campaign discussed in the previous chapter. While the attacks against Ab Muslim
were mostly limited to the two decades between 1036/1626 and 1059/1649, 164 the anti-Sufi
campaign, which started to pick up around the same time (See Figure 1 below),165 was sustained
for a much longer period, an indication of the strength and significance of the target and its
deep roots in the society.166
As Figure 1 indicates, the most intense period of attacks, in terms of the sheer number
of anti-Sufi treatises produced, was between the years 1061/1651 and 1077/1666 under the
reign of Abbs II (r. 1642-1666).167 To emphasize only the quantitative increase, however,

ordinated nature.
164

This is based upon Babayans estimations. See Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 421. For her rationale See ibid., 158
note 73. Newman, however, maintains that the year 1043/1633 was the starting point of two decades of polemical works
against Ab Muslim. See Andrew J Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire, Library of Middle East History; V. 5
(London: I.B. Tauris, 2006), 131. To reconcile the two dates, we need to keep in mind that while Babayan is concerned with the
start of debate on Ab Muslim, which apparent was initiated by Mr Law s oral attacks from the pulpit, ewmans dating
reflects the start of the essay-writing campaign, which, based upon the information Zayn al-bidin Alavs son has provided us
at the end of his fathers polemical work I hr l- qq, started a little bit later. See Mu ammad Mu sin gh Buzurg ihrn,
al- r il
nf l-Sh (Beirut: Dr al-A v, 1983), vols. 4: 15051.
165

Between the years 1631 and 1650 the following works were written specifically against Sufism:
l-Mashrabayn, Law
R dd-i fiyn, Muhammad hir Qum; Salva al-Sh , Law ; U l
l l , Mr Law ; dq t l-Sh , Anonymous
(probably Qum and Law together, see footnote 179 below).
166

Interestingly, simultaneous to this campaign in Safavid Iran, a similar phenomenon occurred in Ottoman domains, where a
co-ordinated campaign against Sufis was launched by the middle-class religious scholar and preacher Kadizade Mehmet b.
Mustafa (d. 1635), the figurehead of what is known as the Kadizadeli movement. The success of the Safavid anti-Sufi campaign
and the eventual demise of the Ottoman one speak to the dramatically different religious and cultural contexts in which the
two operated. Why the two anti-Sufi movements happened roughly at the same time has not been explored. A comparative
historical analysis of the two movements might answer this important question and shed light on some hitherto-neglected
shared cultural dynamics between the Safavids and the Ottomans. For more on the Kadizadeli movement see Madeline C. Zilfi,
The Kadizadelis: Discordant Revivalism in Seventeenth-Century Istanbul, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 45, no. 4 (October 1,
1986): 251269. Also see Semiramis Cavusoglu, The Kdzdeli movement: an attempt of seriat-minded reform in the Ottoman
Empire (Princeton University, 1990).
167

For this chart, I have consulted with al- r , taking advantage of its extensive references cross-references. I was able, then,
to tally a comprehensive list of such works and thereafter to locate and get access to most of them, which mostly remain in
manuscript from. Based on gh Buzurgs suggestions and my own explorations of the primary sources, I was able to date,
more or less successfully, each work and sort them out in historical order. This time consuming task was made easier by a
software among the valuable productions of the Noor company, titled rjim v Kitb-shins, in which some the contents of
some of the most famous bibliographical compendiums, including al- r are searchable. In addition to following al- r s
many many cross references, and in order to make sure my search is comprehensive enough to cover the overwhelming
majority of anti-Sufi literature, I went through all search results brought up by searching the keyword radd, in addition to
search results of other general key words lie ta avvuf, muta avvif, and f. I have also consulted other bibliographical
sources like Amal al-mil and its tmm and Takmila. The results were tallied and processed to be used as the basis for the

76
would be somewhat misleading given the fact that there were two particularly active
polemicists writing in this period, namely Muhammad hir Qum (d. after 1098/1686) and
Mr Law (d. after 1082).168 Each of these men penned several refutations.169 Toward the end of
the seventeeth century there is a decline in the number of works written against Sufism, but
the number of religious scholars contributing to the campaign increases.170 This is a good
indicator of the success of early attempts spearheaded by Qum and Mr Law to spread their
anti-Sufi agenda and attract more people to their side, finally bringing high-ranking ulama,
like urr mil and Mull Khall Qazvn, to join their campaign and strike the final blow to
Sufism.

charts. Needless to say, it is impossible to date some of the works with precision. For such cases, I have used approximations
based on what can be derived from external as well as internal evidence. In the case of the works that belong to the sixteenth
century, that is, l- in l-Mujrimiyya by al-Karak and Umda al- ql by his son, neither of them have survived us and it is
not clear that they were primarily written against Sufis. Even if they were, the fact that they were written in Arabic
significantly reduced the range of their audiance to a few learned students of religious sciences. I am also not entirely
comfortable with categorizing adrs K sr l-A nm l-Jhiliyy as a anti-Sufi treatise because of the entirely different
perspective from which his criticism of Sufism was launched. I will talk about the peculiarity of this work in some detail in the
comng pages.
168

Although usually referred to as Mr Law , his full name is Muhammad b. Muhammad Law al- usayn al-Msav alSabzavr. Mu taf Sharat has recently produced evidence that Muhammad was not the given name of the author, saying
that his full name wass simply Mr Law Msav Sabzavr. See: Mr Law Sabzavr, Kify t l- ht d f rf t l-Mahdi
Al yhi l-S lm, ed. Mu taf Sharat Msav (Qom: dar al-Tafsir, 2005), 2126.
169

Between the years 1651 and 1666 the following polemical works were written against Sufism: l l-Akhyar, nis l-Abrr,
ikm t l-rifn, tv mm l- fiyy , B rhn Q i and
f t l-Akhyr, all by Muhammad hir Qum; Alm libbn,
Idr l-qiln, nbh l-Qfiln and Tasliyat al-Sh r , all by Mr Law ; S q b l-Shihb and Shihb l- minn, anonymous (a
student of Mr Dmd. see footnote 207); Hidy t l-Avm or N t l-kirm, byI m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn (for
information on him, see the following discussion); R dd-i b r fiyn, A mad b. Muhammad Tn; and al-Sihm l- riq , Al almil.
170

During the period between 1667 and 1699 the following were penned in refutaion of Sufism: Diry t l-Nisr, lam al-Hud b.
ay Kshn;
ibbn-i Kh d and al- vid l-Dniyy , Muhammad hir Qum; lkimt, Mulla Khall Qazvn; al-Isn
sh riyy , urr al-mil; Arb n, Mull u-l-faqr, and Jmi Ard bl, h mm d Al Shaf Mashhad.
From 1700 to 1733 we have R dd B r fiyn, Ra Qazvn; R dd-i fiyy , Jadd al-Islm; al-R dd l Ahl l-Sh h d,
Muhammad Sad Lh . All the abovementioned lists exclude works written in India against Sufis.

77
16

15

14
12
10
8

4
2

1700-33

1734-66

0
1500-1550 1551-1600 1601-30

1631-50

1651-66

1667-99

Number of anti-Sufi treatises

Figure 1 Anti Sufi Polemics during the Safavid Period

The public and political costs of directly attacking Sufism were very high when Law
began his oral attacks from the pulpit. And even later, at the peak of anti-Sufi polemic in the
second half of Abbs IIs reign, Sufism in both popular and elite forms still had a vibrant and
strong social presence.171 Fierce debate on the issue broke out not only in the capital, but also
in other major urban centers like Mashhad.172 Abbs II, who was sympathetic with the Sufis,
was disturbed by the fact that some had dared to publicly denounce the heritage upon which
Safavid dynasty based its legitimacy, and he threatened to physically punish and cut off the
stipend of the people involved in the campaign.173 In an additional gesture of explicit support

171

There were at least twenty-one active khniqhs in Isfahan alone during Shh Sulaymns (r. 1079/1668-1106/1694) reign.
See Mu li al-dn Mahdav, Zind g-nm -yi Allm
jlis (Tehran: Dabrkhna-yi Hamyish-i Buzurgdsht-i Allma Ma lis,
Bakhsh-i Intishrt, 1999), 201202.
172

See a b al-dn Ri s report of this debate in Mashhad in a b al-dn Ri Tabrz Isfahn, S b l- sn (Tehran:
Intishrt-i Khniqh-i A mad, 1981), 360366. Relevant pages from a manuscript I accessed have also been consulted for the
sake of accuracy. In this case, see a b al-dn Ri Tabrz Isfahn, Sab al-Masn (Manuscript), n.d., f. 328a334a, MS. No.
2901, Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm, http://dl.ical.ir.
173

Tabrz Isfahn, S b l-

sn, 365.

78
for Sufis, he ordered a Sufi center to be built on the banks of the Zyanda River in 1070/1660.174
The center was called

kiy -yi

y after the Sufi-minded religious scholar Mull Mu sin ay

Kshn (d. 1091/1680), whose work will be discussed below. The shahs threat appears to have
calmed the situation somewhat in Isfahan, at least for a brief period, but in cities like Mashhad
the acrimonious nature of the debates intensified.175 Mounting pressure from the Sufi camp
forced Law , after his initial attacks on Sufism, to keep a low profile for a time, and for two
decades he published his anti-Sufi rhetoric pseudonymously. The mood of the time is vividly
reflected in one of his own treatises, Salvat al-Sh , which was written under the pen name
Muhammad b. Mu ahhar al-Miqdd. Here, speaking of an anonymous Sayyid (i.e. himself),
he says:
and they [Sufi sympathizers] forged so many lies against himevery
single day they would make one of their followers famous as a maln (cursed)
by him [that is to say, they would spread the rumor that Law cursed so and so
and he would become immediately popular among the Sufi-minded people], so
much so that, from the end of the year 1050 to this time which is the middle of
1060, and in order to avoid any trouble and keep their mouth shut, he [Law ]
would not accompany the epithet lan (cursed) upon mentioning Satans name,
would not curse Yazd, Muviya, and Banu-Umayya, and be careful so that
nobody would hear the term lanat (curse) from him176

174

Mu ammad hir Va d al-Zamn Qazvn, Abbs-nm : y sh r -i ind gn-i

Dihgan (Ark: Dvd, 1950), 256.

sl -i Shh Abbs Sn, 1052-1073, ed. Ibrahim

175

a b relates that one of the ma or debates in public, in the presence of the Shaykh al-Islam of Mashhad, happened between
his master Muain Khursn and an anonymous opponent, an Arab mulla whom he describes as mdda-yi fisd (the root of
[this] corruption). This could perhaps be a reference to the famous anti-Sufi Shaykh urr al-mil, whom we know arrived in
Mashhad around 1073.
176

Mir Law , Salvat al-Sha, in rs-i Islm-i rn, ed. Shaykh A mad Abid, vol. 2 (Iran: Kitbkhna-yi a rat-i yat Allh

79

As mentioned in the previous chapter, Law s attacks from the pulput were largly
responsible for starting the heated debate on Ab Muslim both in public spaces and in learned
circles. The reaction to Law s attacks was strong, and he came under increasing attack, even
receiving threats to his life.177
According to his own statements, Law was trained in Isfahan under the most
prominent scholars of the period, Shaykh Bah and Mr Dmd. 178 As a mid-ranking mull
with little taste for scholarship but an unbeatable talent forpreaching and an unmatched
puritan spirit, he represents the populist front of the attacks on Sufism. He mobilized his
audience in extraordinary ways. His popularity greatly impressed the French traveller John
Chardin (d. 1713) who, as an outsider observer, had this to say about an incident he witnessed
firsthand:
They found the year 1645, at the corner of an old tomb, a marble with the
inscription of Shaykh Ab al- ut . Everyone imagined that it was the epitaph
of the famous Shaykh Ab al- ut Rz, the author of the famous commentary
on the Quran in Persian, who was a saint in their eyes, and soon they built a
mosque there and a tomb within, which adorned the people at will by its
offerings and other devotions. But all this devotion was soon passed, for at the
same time a famous Mulla, whom I met, called Mr Law , one of the popular
preachers in the country, who sometimes preached in full space, began to prove
by passages of history and tradition that the real Shaykh Ab al- ut had been
buried in the small town of Rayshahr, and that this Ab al- ut was a Turkish
Sunni and a great enemy of the Imams. So he persuaded the people, one day
after hearing him preach, two thousand people went towards the mosque and
al-Um Marash a af, 1374), 356. Interestingly enough, and in perfect harmony with this account, a b writes of an
ignorant Mulla nicknamed (that is, by his enemies, the Sufis) Mull Lanat [the Curse(d) Mull] for his unrelenting
insistence on cursing prominent Sufis in public. See: Tabrz Isfahn, S b l- sn, 362.
177

Mir Law , Salvat al-Sha, vols. 2: 35456. rs-i Islm-i rn (Iran: Kitbkhna-yi a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash
a af, 1373), 2: 269, 27477. Also: Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), 1083/1672, f. 9b, o. 1154,
Central Library & Documentation Center, University of Tehran.
178

In several places of his Kify t l- ht d he refers to both as his teachers. See: ra Afshr and Mu ammad Taq
Dnishpazhh, Fihrist-i Kitb-h-yi Kitbkhn -yi rk -i Dnishgh-i Tehran (Tehran: Dnishgh-i Tehran: Intishrt-i
Kitbkhna-yi Markaz va Markaz-i Asnd, 1965), vols. 5: 665, 678, 691,693, 699.

80
the tomb and plundered and razed the building. I later saw that place reduced in
latrines from which you can judge how far away is the Muslim clergy from
prudence and authority of the Roman church, which is careful not to permit
examination by the subjects it exposes people to its worship and veneration.179
Chardins final observation is of utmost importance. Comparing the structure of the
Muslim clergy to that of the Roman Church, he notes how independent religious action and
expression in Safavid Iran were much less controlled and centralized than in Roman Catholic
realms. Only in the absence of a well-established and dominant hierocracy can the populace
make or break saintly figures in a matter of a day, something that, according to Chardin, could
never happen in the Catholic Church. It is highly possible that many high-ranking clerics of
the time, or those who aspired to be included among the elite group of religious scholars
sponsored by the state, agreed with Law about the heretical nature of Sufism. What they did
not share with him was the puritan passion needed to prompt them to take on the political and
social risks of expressing their opinion. The topic was too hot to touch, in other words.
By the time anti-Sufi rhetoric accelerated, the power of Qizilbash in the Safavid court
had waned, and the Sufi ethos of the dynasty that positioned the shah at the center as murshidi kmil had become, for the most part, a hollow legacy rather than a meaningful and practiced
reality. But the Safavid discourse of legitimacy was still bound up in a past full of Sufi symbols
that could not be quickly forgotten. In other words, the memory of the founding fathers of the
Safavid dynasty, most significantly af al-Dn Ardabl, Shaykh Junayd, Shaykh aydar, and
Shah Isml, still held a firm grip on the public imagination and thus any attack on Sufism
could easily be seen or portrayed as an attack on the roots of Safavid dynasty. The high-

179

John Chardin, S f rnm -i Shrd n: Matn-i Kmil, trans. Iqbl Yaghm, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Ts, 1993), vols. 4: 151920. For the
French original, See: Sir John Chardin, Voyages du chev lier Ch rdin en Perse, et tres lie x de lOrient: enrichis d n gr nd nombre de
belles figures en taille-douce, reprsentant les antiquits et les choses remarquables du pays (Le Normant, Imprimeur-Libraire, 1811),
vols. 8 : 20-21.

81
ranking ulama, even those intellectually opposed to Sufism, were either connected to the
court or considered the kind of activities in which Law was involved to be too politically
risky.They felt it more prudent to spend their time consolidating their power in the court and,
in the case of aspiring students, achieving the necessary academic credentials to be promoted
to the ranks of the elite.
The latter seems to have been the case for Muhammad ahir Qum, the other active
member of the anti-Sufi literary campaign. Quite contrary to Mr Law s populist personality,
which earned him the title of L

m r k -gir among his detractors,180 Qum was a scholar

by nature, and his involvement in the fight against Sufis in the early period of his career
appears not to have been entirely his own decision. The story, recorded by none other than
Mr Law , unfolds as follows:
Qum, a young, mid-ranking religious scholar at the time (that is, sometime before
1060/1650), wrote a short treatise against Sufis entitled R dd-i fiyan. According to Law ,
Qum had no intention of distributing the treatise widely, thereby triggering a high-profile
controversy. Rather, it was a certain disciple (murd) of all called Al Beg who stole
Qums Radd and circulated it among the ulama in Isfahan in order to provoke them against
the former. Eventually the work came to the attention of Ma lis Sr., Qums Sufi-minded
teacher in hadith, who took it upon himself to write marginalia in the treatise refuting its
assertions.181 Ma lis Sr.s notes and the original text were later combined by Mr Law in a

180

Muhammad Mumin usayn abb Tunikbun, Ba rat al-Muminn, n.d., 180, MS o. 3928, Central Library &
Documentation Center, University of Tehran. Marika-gr was a common epithet used in the period to refer to public
performers and entertainers like storytellers, eulogizers of the imams, ugglers, athletes, and so on. Law was given this title
in an apparent allusion to the populist and passionate nature of his lectures from the pulpit. n Marika-gr See abhullh
af, Ishra-yi Kth Bi Dstn Guzr va Dstn Guzrn t Dawrn-i Safav, Irn-Shins, no. 3 (1989): 466.
181

Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), f. 187a. The unlikelihood of a unior religious scholar like
Qum engaging in a direct dispute with his teacher is part of gh Buzurgs argument against ascribing the marginalia to
Ma lis Sr. See gh Buzurg ihrn, al- r il
nf l-Sh , vol. 4: 497.

82
treatise entitled

l-

shr b yn v

nqi

l-Mahabayn, which contained Law s

marginalia in support of Qums position.182 This work, unfortunately, has not survived in its

182

This was not the only instance in which Law and Qum worked in close collaboration, nor was it the most important
one. One of the most cited and influential anti-Sufi books, diq t l-Sh , I believe, is a product of corroboration between the
two. dq has been traditionally ascribed by the anti-Sufi ulama to the famous early Safavid jurist and religious scholar
A mad b. Muhammad al-Ardabl (d. 993/1585), otherwise known as Muqaddas Ardabl. Many Sufi-minded ulama have cast
doubts on the matter, rejecting most of the traditions as later fabrications, and developing several hypotheses as to the
identity of the real author. The heated debate between the two camps reflects the strategic position of the text in this debate.
The influences of dq as a fundational source for later anti-Sufi polemics cannot be overemphasize. This is especially true of
a number of hadiths that appear, for the first time, in this work and authenticated by their ascription to Ardabl, are
circulated widely afterwards. As Babayan has pointed out, dq is also unique in the fact that it is the only substantial
refutation of Sufism to start with an attack on Ab Muslim. This particular format, she observes, allows us to place the
dq t l-Sh in time, for it is the work that connects both waves of disputations, falling squarely in the middle of the two
and contains both a section on Ab Muslims heresy and a section on Sufis. Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 42122.
Several independent scholarly studies have also been accomplished in recent decades to investigate the problem of authorship
regarding this book, both by Iranian as well as Western scholars. (For example, see Andrew J. ewman, Sufism and AntiSufism in Safavid Iran: The Authorship of the adqat al-Sha Revisited, Iran 37 (January 1, 1999): 95-108 and Mahdi
Tadayyun, adqat al-Sha Y Kshif al- aqq, rif 6 (1364): 105121.) While some scholars, like Babayan, are unanimous
in rejecting the authenticity of dq ts alleged authorship. While some, like Babayan, speculate that Mr Law is the author,
others, like Dnishpazhh and ewman, re ect such speculation and identify Qum as the real author. Although both
hypotheses are plausible, they ignore the possibility of an alternative explanation in which multiple authors may have
contributed to the formation of the text. There is in fact some evidence in the text that supports such a hypothesis. A major
portion of the same text has long been known with the title of Kshif l- qq (written in 1058/1648 in Deccan of India). Written
by Mull Muizz Ardastn, it comes without the anti-Sufi polemical section. The anti-Sufi section of the book, which is most
probably added later to Kshif, closely resembles in structure and in content, as Newman demonstrates, to one of the earliest
treatises written by Qum against Sufis, mentioned earlier in this chapter, namely R dd-i fiyn. In many places, even the
wordings of the two are exactly the same. Having analyzed these similarities in a long and informative article, Newman finally
comes to the conclusion that Al-Qummibecame apprised of the Indian essay Kshif l- qq, redrafted its discussion of Ab
Muslim to add the ferocious anti-Sufi polemic detailed above, and circulated it as al-Ardabl s the adqa ...emboldened by his
support from some established clerics and only further dismayed with the subsequent machinations of the court (as witnessed
by Abbs II s flirtation with Sufism and the Shah s invitations to Taq al-Ma lis and ay ), now somewhat abridged, and
created some variations on, the earlier work in order to create a separate essay, preserving enough of the original s verve to
add fuel to the fire. ewman, Sufism and Anti-Sufism in Safavid Iran, 102103. While this is a plausible scenario, it does not
account for some unique features of the content of the work, nor it does seem to be compatible with basic facts regarding
Qums treatise. irst, the earliest extant manuscript of Radd belongs to the year 1061 whereas we have no manuscript of
dq earlier than 1095/1684. In terms of references, while the earliest mention to the latter appears in Mr Law s Salvat alSh (written 1060), the former, as a basis of U l
l l has been in circulation among the learned circles much
earlier. ewmans observation that Qum, in one instance, corrected the dq (thus implying a later date for the former) is
simply based on a dropped line in the print edition (See Andrew J. ewman, Sufism and Anti-Sufism in Safavid Iran: The
Authorship of the adqat al-Sha Revisited, Iran 37 (January 1, 1999): note 40). Furthermore, the fact that, while in earlier
manuscripts of dq t there is no reference to Ma lis Jr.s Bi r l-Anvr, this latter book is mentioned a number of times in
the latter manuscript, thus indicating a rather long process of redactions and editions that finally produced the text as we
know it at the end of the seventeenth century. The author of B ir t l-m minn provides us with some further clue regarding
other collaborators of the project dq . He says that a certain Mulla Qsim Al Mashhad (d. ?), a pshn m or prayerleader
was in fact the one who fabricated the famous anti-Sufi traditions that, for the first time, appear in dq and, from there,
spread to other similar polemical works and into anti-Sufi polemics like urr al-mils al-Isn Ash riyy . (See: Muhammad
Mumin usayn abb Tunikbun, Ba rat Al-muminn, n.d., 225, MS o. 3928, Central Library & Documentation Center,
University of Tehran). Secondly, ewmans hypothesis cannot account for the very interesting fact when we compare diq
to Radd: in a number of places in the latter work where only ulam are mentioned as the guardians of truth in contrast to
Sufis, diq in ects sayyids besides ulam in a sentence that are otherwise is exactly the same in both works (Compare,
for example, Muhammad hir Qum, Radd-i fiyn, n.d., f. 28b, MS No. 5468, Central Library & Documentation Center,
University of Tehran to pseudo-Ardabl, dq t l-Sh , ed. diq asanzda and Al Akbar Zamnnizhd, Chp-i 1. (Qom:
An riyn, 1998), vol. 2: 784). This in ection of the title sayyid is best explained if we assume that a sayyid was in charge of
later redactions of Radd. In this case, Law is the best candidate. The prologue of Kify t, of which we talked about earlier,
testifies to how strongly he felt about being associated with sayyids in contrast to ulam, which, in the case of that
prologue, are represented by Ma lis Jr (See Mr Law , Kify t, folios 1-4, Tehran University Central Library MS, 1154).
Moreover, a contemporary source, i.e. B r t l-m minn, explicitly accuses Law of writing the diq in spite of the fact that

83
original form. It appears, however, that it was a voluminous treatise, and Law cites its length
as the reason for his decision to write a summary of it entitled Us l

l l-

and

designed to be more accessible to a broader audience. 183 A unique manuscript of the latter
work has survived, on which Jafariyan has commented extensively.184
Having been dragged into a debate with his teacher, Qum seems to have embraced the
role of debator, writing numerous treatises exposing the heretical views of the likes of all
and Ibn Arab and effectively functioning as the intellectual backbone of the anti-Sufi
campaign. As a talented scholar and shrewd politician, he gradually rose to fame in later stages
of his career, holding both the office of shaykh al-islam and the postion of Friday prayer leader
in Qom.
An important point about the debate over Sufism during this period is that nearly all of
the polemical works were written in Persian rather than Arabic in an attempt to reach a
broader audiance. In other words, the campaign did not primarily target elite learned circles,
but instead aimed to change public perceptions of Sufism, thereby creating a hostile

the entire work is written, as the author indicates in his introduction, in response to the Judge of Qum and his anti-Sufi
polemics. See usayn abb Tunikbun, Ba rat al-Muminn, 180. The author is a Sufi, and the personal physician of the
Safavid king.
Based on external evidence, we can be pretty sure that diq was written between 1058/1648 -1060/1650; a date
that matches perfectly with this liminal position of the book between the two campaigns. By 1060, the anti-Ab Muslim
campaign has effectively come to an end and the anti-Sufi one is in full swing. My dating is based on the assumption that the
author of diq has in fact taken Kshif l- qq and inserted the anti-Sufi material to it. Based on this assumption, there are
two pieces of evidence that back my dating. We know that Kshif was finished in 1058 in India according to the date at the end
of that book (See Tadayyun, adqat al-Sha Y Kshif al- aqq, 97). The first mention to diq as an anti-Sufi treatise is
found in Mr Law s Salvat al-Sh , which was written at 1060/1650 (See Mir Law , Salvat al-Sha, 351). Babayan argues that
the Hadiqat al- Sha was written between 1055/1645 and 1086/1675, citing a reference in the text to a tomb in Isfahan which
was extant in 1055/1645 but destroyed as Chardin left, i.e. after 1086-87/1677 (Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 233
note 556). Elsewhere, however, she gives 1058/1648-49 as the completion date (Ibid., 249).
183

Mr Law , Arban, n.d., 397, MS o. 0356, University of California, Los Angeles. Library. Dept. of Special Collections: Caro
Minasian Collection of Persian and Arabic Manuscripts, http://minasian.library.ucla.edu/browse.html.
184

Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, vols. 2: 57275. Given the fact only a single copy of its summary is
available, Law s assertion in Kify t that, at the time of the writing, i.e. 1081-1083, there were thousands of copies of this
work circulating in Isfahan must be hyperbole. Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), f. 186b.

84
environment for dervishes and Sufis who occupied and controlled public spaces like bazaars,
central squares, and coffeehouses.
The eventual success of this campaign, in spite of initial opposition by prominent and
popular ulama like Ma lis and ay as well as by the shah ( Abbs II, for example, was known
as the shh-i d rvsh-d st, or dervish-loving king),185 is a testament to the importance of such
public debates and their effectiveness in shaping public opinion and, ultimately, the opinion of
the elite. In turn, this demonstrates the limited extent to which the political center could exert
its influence in public debates and spaces. As ewman convincingly argues, the center may
have tried to shape public and private debates and discourse, but it was only one among many
social forces, and by no means always the strongest of them. 186 Babayan has also emphasized
the uncontrollable nature of public spaces like coffeehouses.187 The center, as much as it
influenced public opinion due to its ability to finance its own approved narrative, was itself
influenced by changes in public and learned opinion that occurred beyond its control. The
degree to which public opinion can be shaped and the imagination of the masses inspired by
forces independent of state propaganda is evidenced in a description of the coffeehouses of
Isfahan during the reign of Abbs II, written by Chardin. The renchman depicts coffeehouses
as a place where one heard news and talk of politics freely, without any fear of the authorities.
Denizens of a coffeehouse would play chess and backgammon, but there would also be a mulla,
a dervish, or a poet to whom they could listen if they so desired. According to Chardin:

185

Mu ammad hir Va d al-Zamn Qazvn, rkh-i J hnr-yi Abbs, ed. Sad Mr Mu ammad diq and I sn Ishrq
(Tehran: Pizhhishgh-i Ulm-i Insn va Mu lat-i arhang, 1383), 744.
186

Newman, Safavid Iran.

187

Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 443. For more on public spaces in the Safavid era see Ibid., 439-446.

85
The speeches of mollahs or dervishes are moral lessons similar to our
sermons, but it is not scandalous to ignore them. No one is obliged to leave his
game or his conversation in order to listen. A mulla stands up in the middle or
at one end of the coffeehouse and begins to speak out loud, or a dervish
suddenly enters and admonishes the gathering about the worlds vanity, of the
worthlessness of wealth and honor. It happens often that two or three people
talk at the same time, one at one end, and one storyteller at the other.
Ultimately, there is here ample in the world [of coffeehouses.] The serious man,
of course, would not dare engage in pleasantries, each does his harangue and
listens to whom he pleases.188

The ones preaching, storytelling, and entertaining in such public spaces were not
shaykhs of Sufi khnaqhs or learned mu tahids. Rather, they were wandering dervishes and
low ranking mullas, poets, and maddhs. Accordingly, it should be emphasized again that Mr
Law and other mullas involved in the anti-Ab Muslim campaign or the anti-Sufi campaign
were not among the high-ranking ulama of their age.189
Sufis were the easier targets for passionate puritan preachers like Mr Law and
writers like Qum. A more difficult task was standing against some of the most prominent,
188

Chardin, S f rnm -i Shrd n, vols. 2: 84445. English translation, with minor modifications, by Babayan in Mystics, Monarchs
and Messiahs, 441. For the original French see: John Chardin, Voyages Du Chevalier Chardin En Perse, Et A tres Lie x De lOrient,
Enrichis D n Gr nd Nombre De Belles ig res En ille-douce, Reprsentant Les Antiquits Et Les Choses Remarquables Du Pays., Nouv.
d., soigneusement confre sur les 3 ditions originales, augm. dune notice de la Perse, depuis les temps les plus reculs
usqu ce our, de notes, etc.,. (Paris: Le ormant, 1811), vols. 4: 6869, http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.FIG:004370194.
Comparing the Persian rendition to the original French, it is amazing to see the degree of liberty that Mr. Iqbl has taken in his
translation.
189

M ammad hir Qum became a prominent cleric decades after the initial stage of anti-Sufi campaign, centered around his
response to Ma lis Jr. At the time of writing his refutation of Sufism, he was only a junior scholar. He was also a student of
Ma lis Sr. That is why gh Buzurg doubts that he could dare to engage in a dispute with the latter. gh Buzurg ihrn, al r il
nf l-Sh , vol. 10: 207.

86
charismatic religious scholars of the time like Ma lis Sr. and Shaykh Bah, whose syncretistic
religious outlook the puritans equally abhorred. The task was easier in the case of Shaykh
Bah, a polymath and arguably the most celebrated religious scholar in Iranian popular
imagination across generations. Bah is said to have en oyed the company of dervishes and
Sufis, his works like al-Arb n and K shk l contain strong mystical overtones, and there are
even tales that he travelled around in a Sufi cloak,190 but because he was deceased, his
detractors were safe from being taken to task for the way they portrayed him to the public. By
contrast, going up against the likes of Ma lis Sr and Mu sin ay , both well-known for their
mystical leanings, portended a long, nasty internal fight among the ulama over who was to
define orthodoxy.
The enmity and hatred of Law toward Ma lis Sr and his son are most colorfully
manifested in the formers Kify t l-

ht d fi marifat al-Mahdi, otherwise known as Arb n,

which is essentially a diatribe against the two Ma liss.191 In this work, Law criticizes both
Ma lis Sr. and the ignorant people of Isfahan (Ma lis Sr.s followers), accusing them of
harboring ghuluvv or exaggeration in their beliefs and practices ust as Sufis did. According
to Law , at Ma liss burial ceremony, the people considered the Hidden Imam his servant
and attributed miracles to his mule, and they broke his coffin and hung the pieces on their
arms as a talisman, looking for blessing and luck in this way. 192

190

or more about Shaykh Bahs mystical tendencies see: Leonard Lewisohn, Sufism and the School of I fahn: Ta awwuf
and Irfn in Late Safavid Iran: Abd al-Razzq Lah and ay -i Kshn on the Relation of Ta awwuf, ikmat and Irfn, in
The Heritage of Sufism, ed. Leonard Lewisohn and David Morgan, vol. 3 (Oxford: Oneworld, 1999), 8889.
191

Kathryn Babayan gives a fairly detailed report of the way Law portrays Ma lis Sr. See: Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and
Messiahs, 46173.
192

Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), f. 9a.

87
Law goes on to claim that the masses prostrated themselves in front of Ma lis Sr.s
tomb and circumambulated it.193 He also relates that the latter had a personal singer (m rib)
named Shh Mirak Zarkash in his service.194 Law was also furious over Ma liss unapologetic
support and service to the Safavid house and the cozy relationship he had developed with the
king, and he accused him of worldly ambitions and of being embroiled in politics for the
purpose of material gain.
Such allegations might be easily dismissed as fabrications of a hostile mind, and there is
ample evidence that Law s rhetoric against his opponents was full of hyperbole and
exaggeration, if not outright lies. Yet other sources confirm, at least partially, what he said
about Ma lis. Take for example Chardins report of peoples visitation to Ma liss tomb:

[U]nder the dome bearing the name of the dervishes shrine [lies] the
grave of a certain Mohammad Taqi, who was the priest of this mosque or Pich
amaz, during Abbs II. He was recognized as a saint during his life, which he
led in extreme detachment from the world; the populace venerated him as a
prophet. He predicted his death, they say, three months before it occurred,
while being in perfect health. 195

193

Ibid., f. 185a. Also in Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 465.

194

Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), f. 185b. Also in Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs,
164.
195

From: Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 465.

88
Ma lis Sr. is among the religious scholars who argued for the permissibility of listening
to beautiful tunes, provided that they remind the listener of God.196 His position favoring the
consumption of hashish is often mentioned by later scholars who debated the issue in their
works of jurisprudence.197 Mr Law also relates that Ma lis Sr. would praise Ab Muslim and
all from the pulpit.198 Again, while it is difficult to know for certain whether Ma lis would
have publicly defended such controversial figures, there is little doubt about his strong Sufi
proclivities.199

Philosophy between Sufism and anti-Sufism

It was not only the exoteric jurists and puritans who opposed Sufism. Although their
efforts were in no way as strong and influential as the abovementioned anti-Sufi campaign, the
elitist philosophers in Isfahan, founders of the so-called School of Isfahan, were also quick to
express their contempt for institutionalized and popular Sufism. For example, Mr indirisk
(d. 1050/1640), although reportedly sympathetic towards dervishes,200 did not hesitate to
condemn what he considered to be problematic aspects of popular manifestations of the Sufi
spirit, including the Qalandar pheonomenon. In an interesting analogy that casts society and
196

197

198

Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn,

rh ng v Siys t, vol. 2: 700.

imat Allh ibn Abd Allh Jazir, al-An r Al-n mniyy (Tabrz: Kitb aqqat, 1959), vol. 4, 55.
Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), f. 9a.

199

It is noteworthy in this regard that, in a small treatise ascribed to him and entitled shvq l-Slikn, Ma lisi identifies the
ahab ariqa as the best path toward God. The work is dedicated to defending Sufism against its detractors. It is very difficult
to confirm shvq as an authentic work of Ma lis. Even if we do accept such an ascription, it is doubtful that the designation
ahab refers to what is later known as the ahabiyya, a particular Sufi order. As we saw in the previous chapter, the
designation ahabiyya was not used in reference to a specific Sufi order in his time. Therefore, use of the term should either be
seen as an instance of later ahab meddling with earlier sources for the purposes of associating influential Sufi figures and
ulama with their order, or understood as a general designation referring to the esoteric teachings transmitted by the family of
the Prophet, especially through the line that begins with the first imam and ends with the eighththe so-called marf
spiritual line of transmission.
200

Lewisohn, Sufism and the School of I fahn: Ta awwuf and Irfn in Late Safavid Iran: Abd al-Razzq Lah and ay -i
Kshn on the Relation of Ta awwuf, ikmat and Irfn, 99100.

89
its different classes and groups as the human body with its organs and parts, Mr indirisk
asserts that the Qalandars, who refuse to make a living on their own and instead live off
charitable donations are the pubic hair that should be removed from society as the Islamic
tradition of sunan al-fi ra, which concerns the removal of pubic hair, recommends.201
Philosophers opposed manifestations of Sufism beyond the antinomian and radical. The
most prominent philosophical figure of the early seventeenth century, Mr Dmd, otherwise
known by the honorary title of the Third Teacher,202 brushed off some of the metaphysical
teachings of so-called high-Sufism in addition to popular forms of Sufism.203 For example, he
dismissed the signature metaphysical postulate of the Sufis, that is, the existence of an
intermediate imaginal world (mundus imaginalis) between the material and abstract worlds, as a
poetical fancy that cannot be proven by reason.204 His critique of Rumi and the poets famous

201

Ab al-Qsim ibn Mrz Buzurg Mr indarisk, Risl -yi iniyy , ed. asan Jamshd, Chp-i 1., alsafa va irfn; 152. (Qom:
Muassasa-i Bstn-i Kitb, 2008), 19. Although there appears to be a clear distinction between Qalandarsim as an antinomian
social movement on the one hand and organized Sufism on the other, it is not quite clear if the two could be distinguished
when it came to the popular mode of Sufi religiosity known as dervishism. imat Allh ibn Abd Allh Jazir, al-Anvr lN mniyy (Tabrz: Kitb aqqat, 1959), vol. 2: 308.
202

After Aristotle, the First Teacher, and al-Farabi, the Second Teacher.

203

See: Lewisohn, Sufism and the School of I fahn: Ta awwuf and Irfn in Late Safavid Iran: Abd al-Razzq Lah and ay -i
Kshn on the Relation of Ta awwuf, ikmat and Irfn, 9395. This article, which is going to be cited a couple of times in the
following pages, is the most relevant scholarly piece on the subject. Lewishons polemical tone significantly reduces the
analytic value of the article. Nevertheless, his vast knowledge of primary sources, reflected in this article, was a significant
help for me in the initial stages of my research.
204

Mu ammad Bqir ibn Mu ammad Dmd, J vt v

vqt, ed. Al Aw ab, Chp-i 1., Mras-i Maktb (Series). Ulm va
Marif-i Islm; 35. (Tehran: Mrs-i Maktb, 2001), 6267. This, of course, is not to say that Mr Dmd did not have mystical
visions or a penchant for spirituality. See Henry Corbin, Confessions Extatiques De Mr Dmd, Maitre De Thologie Ispahan,
in Mlanges Louis Massignon (Damas: Institut franais de Damas, 1956). Rather, and in contrast to what Nasr and Dabashi have
argued, my argument is that his type of spiritual quest can be analyzed squarely within the peripatetic philosophical
framework in which mystical visions are not considered as valid epistemological sources of knowledge. This is a model in
which even the power of prophecy is interpreted as a special function of a purified reasoning faculty known as ds or
intuitive udegment. See: Mu ammad Bqir ibn Mu ammad Dmd, l-R vshi l-S mviyy f Sh r l-A ds l-Immiyy
(Tehran: s.n., 1894), 32. or asrs position see, for example: Seyyed Hossein asr, Spiritual Movements, Philosophy and
Theology in the Safavid Period, in The Cambridge History of Iran: Timurid and Safavid Periods, ed. Peter Jackson and Laurence
Lockhart, vol. 6 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 669675, http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn3:hul.ebookbatch.CAMHI_batch:9780511467783. Dabashi agrees with asr. See Hamid Dabashi, Mr Dmd and the ounding
of the School of I fahn, in History of Islamic Philosophy, ed. Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Oliver Leaman, Routledge History of
World Philosophies (London: Routledge, 1996), 597634. What remains to be explored in detail is the possibility that Mr
Dmds opinions about rational reasoning and mystical visions have gone through an evolution from works like al-Q b st in
which he looks like a pure and rigid peripatetic philosopher, and works written at the end of his career, like al-J liyy and al-

90
verses205 that liken philosophers to lepers dependant on the shaky and unreliable leg of
reasoning is well-known.206
Mr Dmds sentiment was prevalent among many of his students. Sayyid A mad alAlav al-mil (d. after 1054/1644), one of the most prominent of these and an established
philosopher himself, wrote I hr l- qq v

iyr l-idq to refute the practice of storytelling.207

We also have a lengthier treatise against Ab Muslim titled Kh l t l- vid, written by

another notable student of Dmd named Abd al-Mu alib b. Ya y liqn (d. after
1043/1633).208 liqn says that he repeatedly heard Mr Dmd speak highly of Mr Law .209
In fact, and as mentioned above, Law himself claims that he was a student of Shaykh Bah
and Mr Dmd and had great respect for them both.
There were other prominent students of the Third Teacher at the forefront of the
attacks against Sufism.210 Among them, none had more influence on the course of rational and
mystical Shii thought than Mull adr, the author of one of the earliest polemical works

Khalsa al- l k tiyy in which he seems to be more interested and invested in mystical visions and thought. As far as I knkow,
ayrz was the first to raise this possibility. See Ab al-Qsim Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i l l-Khi b,
ed. Mu ammad Kh av, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Mawl, 2004), vol. 3: 1211.
205

See Jall al-Dn Mu ammad al-Balkh al-Rmi,

Kabr, 1984), vols. 1: line 21252153.

sn v-i

n v, ed. Reynold Alleyne Nicholson, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Amr

206

or Mr Dmds response to Rumi and a passionate rebuttal by ayrz, see Sayyid Qu b al-dn Muhammad ayrz, Qa dayi Ishqiyya, n.d., f. 98b, Ms. o. 4889, Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
207

A mad al-Alav al-mil, Ihr al- aqq va Miyr al- idq, in rs-i Islm-i rn, ed. Rasl Jafariyn, vol. 2, 10 vols. (Iran:
Kitbkhna-yi a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash a af, 1373), 26068.
208

The treatise was written two years after the death of the aforementioned Mulla Muhammad Zamn in 1043/1633. liqn
also provides us with a long list of books and treatises written in Law s support by the ulama.
209

Abd al-Mu alib b. Ya y liqn, Khul at al- avid, in rs-i Islm-i rn, ed. Rasl Jafariyn, vol. 2 (Iran: Kitbkhnayi a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash a af, 1373), 274.
210

The author of N t l-kirm refers to an anonymous prominent sayyid among the students of Mr Dmd who penned two
important anti-Sufi treatises entitled Shihb l- minn and S q b l-Shihb. It is true that, as a pillar of the early Safavid
system of education, Mr Dmd trained hundreds of students among whom there were some more sympathetic toward
Sufism. Having said that, the fact that such a considerable number of the scholars he trained harbored such a hostile attitude
towards Sufism indicates that, at the very least, Mr Dmd did not exhibit any outstanding sympathy towards Sufism. Quite to
the contrary, as is shown above, his works indicate an explicit sense of disapproval.

91
against Sufism. In his K sr A nm l-Jhiliyy or Breaking the Idols of Ignorance, completed in
the reign of Shah Abbs I in 1027/1618, he rails in virulent, stinging language against a group
he calls pretend Sufis (m t

vvif n). 211 His critique of this group has two fundamental

aspects. First, he accuses them of hypocracy and pursuing worldly pleasures such as lust and
fame, and of deceiving simpletons and ignorant people around them in order to succeed in
their abominable goal. Second, he portrays them as staunch enemies of knowledge and
learning, as a bunch of ignorant charlatans who find the pursuit of knowledge beyond the
reach of their laziness and immersion in worldly pleasures. Given this damning portrayal, one
might think that adr was exclusively targeting wandering, low-profile dervishes with no ties
to institutionalized Sufism, who spend their days entertaining people with stories and talents
in uggling and the like. Yet adr makes clear the fact that his critique applies equally to
shaykhs at the center of organized Sufism: Woe to the ignorance of these tail-less and earless
donkeys, he says, who have all become shaykh-fabricators and shaykh-sellers. Every couple
of days they would become disciples of an ignorant [and, thus] empty of their religion and
their wit.212 Accordingly, he continues, the majority of those who retreat to the monasteries
(

ma) to be pointed at [as a virtuous person] and sit in the khnaqhs to become famous as

ascetics and performers of miracles are deficient, damned fools, and imprisoned by the fetters
of lust. 213

211

As asr reminded us many years ago The term mutasavvif is perfectly legitimate in most schools of Sufism, where it refers
to the person who follows the path of Sufism, but in Safavid and post-Safavid Iran it gained a pejorative connotation as
referring to those who "play" with Sufism without being serious, in contrast to the real sufis who were called Sufijya. It thus
acquired the meaning of mustasvif, a term used by some of the earlier sufis to designate those who know nothing about Sufism
but pretend to follow it. asr, Spiritual Movements, Philosoophy and Theology in the Safavid Period, 679 note 4.
212

Mu ammad ibn Ibrhm adr al-Dn Shrz, K sr A nm l-jhiliyy , ed. Mu sin Jahngr, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Bunyd ikmati Islm-i adr, 2002), 176.
/
/
213

Ibid., 17778. I have had an eye on Mu ammad b. Ibrhm al- adr al-Dn Shrz, Breaking the Idols of Ignorance: Admonition of

92
ne should not, however, categorize adrs criticism of most aspects of the Sufism of
his time with the many anti-Sufi treatises written decades later in the middle of the
seventeenth century. adrs intellectual outlook, the two decades of separation between his
Kasr and the anti-Sufi campaign discussed above, and the content of his work are among the
most salient factors that should persuade any observer of the cultural landscape of Safavid
Iran to treat his criticism as a representative of a distinct intellectual tra ectory. adrs unique
intellectual outlook sets his writings, including the Kasr, apart from even the mainstream
philosophical elite. That is, adr cannot be categorized as a participant in the mainstream
philosophical discourse of his time. He was no ordinary philosopher, and his radical views
were very costly for him socially and intellectually. Perhaps nothing speaks to his
marginalization from the intellectual circles of his time more than his self-imposed exile to the
small village of Kahak in the vicinity of Qum and the correspondance with his teacher that
dates to that time, in which he complains about the hostilities he faced.214 His uneasy
relationship with mainstream philosophers, exoteric jurists and puritan fundamentalists is
expressed in detail in his Sih A l, in which he rails against a group of hypocritical and worldly
scholars comprised of philosophers, theologians and urists who were, according to him,
completely obsessed with fame, worldly gain, rivalry, and envy.215
Another reason why his critique of Sufism should be treated separately is that although
he was vehemently opposed to pretend Sufis, the teachings of high Sufism remained sacred
to him. In fact, he uses the terms Sufi, dervish, and Sufism (ta avvuf ) in a relatively positive
sense in his Sih A l, which was written primarily to defend a group of enlightened elite known
the Soi-Disant Sufi, trans. Mahdi Dasht Bozorgi and Sayyed Khalil Toussi (London: ICAS Press, 2008) for my translations.
214

Jall al-Dn shtiyn, Sh r -i l v r-i

215

Mu ammad ibn Ibrhm adr al-Dn Shrz, Risl -yi Sih A l, ed. Seyyed Hossein asr (Tehran: Mawl, 1961), 910.

ls f-i

ll dr (Tehran: ah at-i Zann-i Musalmn, 1981), 67.

93
as r f (gnostics) and

liy (the friends of God) against the attacks of exoteric, literalist

jurists and theologians.216 Similarly, in his Kasr, he is careful to carve out a safe space for real
Sufis, whose spiritual states remain hidden from the eyes of people. A Sufi, he adds,
remains hidden from the eyes of the mind as a Sufi even though his body and other aspects of
his personality might be visible to the [bodily] eyes.217
It is not only Sufis who, from adrs perspective, can be divided in to separate real
and predend categories. Such a distinction should also be made, he believes, when it comes
to philosophers, or

k m. Real or divine philosophers, together with the Lords of truth

and gnosis ( rbb-i

qq t v irfn) are pitted not only against the exoterist jurists and

theologians, but against the mainstream philosophers (j mh r-i f lsif ) and their official
philosophy ( l- ikm

l-rasmiyya). As a disciple of Ghazl, the highest form of knowledge for

adr is not ultimately the discursive disciplinary one, but the unmediated knowledge of
mystical visions (ilm-i m ksh ft) which leads one to esoteric knowledge of the Quran and the
hadith literature.218 The only real disciple of knowledge is ilm l-t

d or the science of

unification otherwise called ilm-i ilh or the divine science.219 The same picture is reflected
in his magnum opus, al-Asfr l- rb , in which he quotes Ibn Arab and other Sufis whom he
holds in high regards, calling them l-m

qqiq n min l-s fiyy (the Realizers among the

Sufis) or simply rifn (gnostics).

216

Ibid., 39, 43, 113, 122.

217

adr al-Dn Shrz, K sr A nm l-jhiliyy , 177.

218

adr al-Dn Shrz, Risl -yi Sih A l, 96 and 104.

219

Ibid., 122. To say that the only real kind of knowledge is the science of unity does not preclude, for adr, the necessity of
preparing oneself by pursuing madrasa-based disciplinary sciences as prerequisites.

94
Unlike terms like rif and marifa, the category of irfn does not appear frequently in
drs own works. Neither does it in his students works, as we will see in the next chapters.
Yet the grand synthesis of philosophy, speculative mysticism, theology, and Twelver hadith
tradition that his innovative and masterly philosophical system known as l-ikm

l-

Mut liy or Transcendental Philosophy achieved became a primary reference later once the
term irfn was established.
Transcendental Philosophy is therefore a bold attempt, and an original contribution,
toward integrating major elements of Sufi thought like the Unity of Being and the Ishraq
School with its emphasis on mystical visions as valid sources of knowledge into a single,
coherent philosophical system. With his adoption of these mystical elements, adr
acknowledges that in the final analysis, rationality and reason can only take the wayfarer so
far toward understanding the mysteries of God. For him the realm of afterlife and the
knowledge of the self, for example, remain fundamentally beyond the reach of reason and
rationality. To attain true knowledge in such areas one must rely upon mystical visions and
Prophetic injunctions. Only after doing so can the student of philosophy hope to develop
rational arguments to establish the philosophic validity of such ideas and ideals.
In this light, adrs Kasr might be best understood not as an outsider attack meant to
destroy the foundations of Sufism, but as an insider critique from the elitist margins of
philosophy and speculative mysticism, aimed at reforming both Sufi and Twelver thought by
offering a new mystical ideal based on the synthesis of Twelver Shia hadith literature, Ibn
Arabs speculative mysticism, peripatetic discursive philosophy, Illuminationist principles,
and theology. In factand this is an original contribution of this chapterit was adrs
attempts to synthesize speculative Sufi metaphysics with philosophy, especially his defense

95
and promotion of the idea of the Unity of Being, that brought philosophy under the radar of
the puritan fundamentalist critique in the second half of the seventeenth century.
We now turn to the fascinating way in which authors of anti-Sufi literature broadened
their scope of attacks to include philosophy by focusing on a unique and understudied treatise
written between 1075/1664 and 1081/1670 by I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn (d. after
1081).220 The title of the work is recorded as Hidy t l-Avm v
alternatively as N t l-Kirm v

t l-Lim and

t l-Lim.221 The work has largely been neglected by

scholars except for a brief, but valuable report by Jafariyan, who examined an incomplete
manuscript at the Marash Library in Qom.222 We known nothing about the author from
bibliographical sources,223 and no other work written by him seems to exist.224

220

My dating is based on two observations. First, the marginalia on folio 128b (which was apparently added later, probably by
the copier of the manuscript), was written to announce and thank God (!) for the death of Muain in 1082, which clearly
signifies that the main body of the text was written before the latters death. See: I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn,
a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, 1083, f. 128b, MS. o. 10369, Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi
Islm. Second, the reference to N t in Mr Law s Kifaya is immediately followed by an explicit reference to the year 1081.
See Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), f. 11b.
221

gh Buzurg ihrn, al- r il

nf l-Sh , vol. 24: 182.

222

Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, vols. 2: 570572. Unfortunately, Jafariyans report does not include
anything from the most important part of the manuscript, its lengthy epilogue. This is apparently due to the fact that the copy
he consulted is missing a substantial part of the epilogue. In the Ma ls copy, the epilogue starts at folio 112b. The Marash
copy, according to the information provided by the cataloguer, ends abruptly at a place that correspondes to folio 120b of my
copy. A mad usayn, Fihrist-i Nuskha-h-yi Kh -i Kitbkhn -i Um m-i r t y t Allh l-U m N j f r sh (Qom:
Chpkhna-i Mihr-i Ustuvr, 1354), vols. 5: 15456. The Ma ls copys prologue continues to folio 144b.
223

The one scant piece of biographical information comes from the epilogue, in which the author identifies Shaykh Abdallh
Shshtar and Shaykh Bah as masters of his masters.I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at
al-Lim, f. 141b and 120a.
224

The fact that I m is unknown for bibliographical sources has been the primary reason behind Jafariyans assertion that it
is a pseudonym. According to Jafariyan, the real author must be Muhammad hir Qum, whom Jafariyan believes wrote
under a pseudonym as a safety measure. Jafariyans con ecture does not hold on several accounts. irst, it is not clear why
Qum would write so many anti-Sufi treatises under his real name, sending some of them, like nis l-Abrr to the Safavid
monarch for him to read, and then suddenly decide to hide behind a pseudonym. As far as we know, in terms of scholarly fame
and respect as well as his relationship with the Royal Court, Qums star was rapidly rising. Indeed, he would soon be appointed
as the Chief Judge of Qom and the Friday prayer leader of the city. As such, there is no reason for him to hide his identity
under a pseudomym. urthermore, in the epilogue, to which Jafariyan apparently did not have access, the author of this work
explicitly acknowledges that the twelve chapters of the book are copied from another work, that is Qums
f t l-Akhyr.
Throughout the chapters, there are instances in which I m adds a paragraph or two making a clear distinction between his
voice and the voice of Qum by adding va I m gyad... (and I m says...). See, for example: Ibid., f. 3a, 15a. In addition to
these points, the author explicitly references his differences of opinion with the author of
f t l-Akhyr in the epilogue,
saying know that many conversations crossed the mind of this humble [man], whose name is Muhammad and who is known
as I m, throughout the previous twelve chapters, but I held my tongue so that absolutely nothing is added to the statements

96
The book is a reproduction of Qums

f t l-Akhyr to which a lengthy and important

epilogue is added by I m that contains critical information about the anti-Sufi campaign and
the general framework of the debate on Sufism and philosophy, as well as extensive quotes
from polemical works against Sufis and philosophers that have not survived elsewhere. I m
sets up the stage for his critical attacks by categorizing his targets into two groups: f lsif
(philosophers) and m bt di (innovators). By the second group, he explains, he means Sufism
and all other kinds of heresy, including the uq av and other movements that he views as
intimately connected to Sufism. In calling the Sufis innovators he is simply following Qums
usage in

f t l-Akhyr, in which this designation is used many times in reference to the

followers of all and Bayazd.225

The author of N t provides us with unique glimpses of the dynamics of the anti-Sufi
campaign in a number of ways. First, his work clears up confusion about the authorship of a
number of polemical works of this period.226 I m also provides us with the most detailed
picture of how the anti-Sufi camp viewed the activities of Muain and other active Sufis.
Although the basic framework of his narrative is very similar to that of Kify t l-

ht d, I m

adds detail to Mr Law s account.227 More importantly, he provides us with brief descriptions

of the author of the book on those sub ects, and they are left untouched Ibid., f. 113a.
225

Mu ammad hir ibn Mu ammad usayn Qum,

f t l-Akhyr (Tehran: Chp-i Mu avvar, 1958). Bida or innovation is a
common term used in reference to beliefs and practices that contradict conceptions of orthodoxy at a given time. Qum seems
to be particularly fond of the term, which he uses extensively in his criticism of Sufism. Both N t and Kify t refer us, on
several occasions, to another polemical work called
yi l- bt d . Although the author of the latter is not named, given
Qums vocabulary, it is possible that this lost work belongs to him.
226

He explicitly states, for example, that works like Tasliyat al-Sh and its abbreviated form, entitled Salvat al-Sh , are written
by a certain Sayyid (that is, Mr Law ) who, out of concern for his own safety, wrote under the pseudonym Mu ahhar b.
Muhammad Miqdd.I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 121a121b. While
Jafariyan is not aware of this explicit statement, he comes to the same conclusion based on other evidence. See Jafariyn,
f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, vols. 2: 559560. He also mentions that the same author is responsible for two other
polemical works against Sufism, i.e.,
l-Mashrabayn and Alm libbn. I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn,
a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 124a124b.
227

I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 126a 129a. Mr Law actually refers to
N h t for further information about Muain. Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), f. 11b.

97
and sometimes extensive quotes from polemical works against Sufism that would otherwise
have been completely lost to us. Among these are two works written by an anonymous sayyid,
who is described as one of the renowned men of knowledge and exalted sayyids of the time,
whom I do not know of anyone in our age who can match his erudition and knowledge.228
I m goes on to recount two of this anonymous sayyids works, which were written against
Sufis and philosophers: Shihb lRajm al-

minn fi R jm l-Sh y n l-

bt din and S q b l-Shihb fi

rtb. The former has not survived in any form, and the only part of the latter that

exists is an extensive quote from the introduction found in N t. In the quoted portion, the
anonymous author mentions that he decided to write the S q b since his other work, Shihb lminn, in which he refutes the two groups of innovators and philosophers, was too laden
with technical vocabulary to be suitable for a general audience. He adds that he decided to
write S q b when he noticed that lay people were being led astray by the lure of Sufi music
and dance.229
Perhaps the most important features of N t are its coupling of philosophy and
Sufism in its attacks and its emphasis on and extensive quoting from the abovementioned
treatises that, according to the author, were written against both philosophy and Sufism. The
closing section of the epilogue is quite revealing in this respect. Most of other anti-Sufi

228

I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 114b. The quote extends from folio 115a
to folio 121a. In one of the excerpts quoted from his works, this anonymous sayyid claims to be a student of (among others)
Mr Dmd, whom he calls ustd al-kull or the Universal Teacher and whose anti-Sufi stand he references. Ibid., f. 120a. gh
Buzurg speculates that this particular sayyid could be only Sayyid A mad al-Alav (d. after 1054/1644) the prominent
philosopher student of Mr Dmad. See gh Buzurg ihrn, al- r il
nf l-Sh , vol. 5: 8. This does not seem to be
supported by the content of S q b that is quoted here, for the author of S q b is unapologetically and vehemently against
philosophy. Also, I m demonstrates explicit approval of Sayyid A mads work later in his discussion of ghin, feeling no need
to conceal his identity. See I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 134b. I am
tempted to suggest that this anonymous sayyid is none other than our own Mr Law . I believe gh Buzurg has given too
much credit to the hyperbolic statement of I m that this sayyids erudition is unrivalled. Obviously, for those who were
obsessed with polemical writings against Sufis, Law was a hero who deserved such praises.
229

I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 117b.

98
treatises of the time are relatively unconcerned with philosophy. If they mention it at all, it is
only in passing remarks or brief chapters that are dwarfed in length by the anti-Sufi material.
f t l-Akhyr, the work reproduced in N t, is an apt example, for philosophers are only
targeted in its last chapter.230 It appears that the author of N t, by adding the epilogue,
wanted to shift and expand the rhetoric to cover philosophy in more detail alongside Sufsim.
He thus builds upon Qums critique of philosophers by spending the first few pages of the
epilogue on an extensive quote from S q b that constitutes a strong rebuttal of philosophy. He
follows the quote with the usual anti-Sufi rhetoric and then returns to philosophy at the end as
his primary target.231 In this closing section, several quotes from Safavid luminaries like
Shaykh Bah, ay Kshn, Ma lis Jr., and others are presented in which these figures
condemn the study of philosophy. 232
In oining philosophy with Sufism as a target of his attacks, I m asserts that the
master of Sufism and the mul ids have been often philosophy-minded. 233 He complains about
the fact that, in his time, philosophy has defiled and led astray many students in madrasas:
In these times, there are many people of corrupt beliefthere is a group of
them that call themselves seekers of knowledge ( lib l-ilm) and, by doing so,
soil the name of the seekers of religious sciences. That is because they embark
upon reading books of philosophers and Sufis without [first] having the power
of certitude and without seeking the knowledge of religion. Thus, they have
become corrupt in their beliefs and most of them go on to deceive ignorant
230

This chapter is curiously missing from the print version of

231

f t l-Akhyr. See Qum,

f t l-Akhyr.

In the part specifically dedicated to attacks against Sufism, several figures are explicitly named. Among them is a certain
Mr Taq Sdn, who is said to have been a student of Ma md Piskhn, the leader of the uqtav heresy. According to the
author, the former was declared an infidel by Shaykh Al aq Kamara (d. 1060/1650), a judge from Shiraz who was promoted
as the Shaykh al-Islam of Isfahan during the reign of Shah Abbs II. ne Sufi awrz is also mentioned, who was murdered in
Shiraz after being declared an infidel. I m al-dn Muhammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 119a.
ther Sufi names include Mr Askar Rkhtagar, usayn Rkhtagar and Abdullh Muta annn. The latter also looms large in Mr
Law s rhetoric in Kify t. It is unlikely, however, that this was his real name. Rather, Muta annn appears to be a deragetory
epithet that Law has chosen to label this Abudllh a lunatic. Unfortunately, I was unable to determine his identity.
232

Ibid., f. 133a139a.

233

Ibid., f. 120a.

99
people it must be known that those among the Twelver ulama who possess a
perfect power of certitude and divine souls, if they want to study books of
philosophy and other books after finishing up their studies in religious sciences
in order to break the glasses of misgivings (sh b ht) and corrupt imaginations
with stones of refutation thrown out of the sling (f lkh n) of reasoning and
syllogism, then that is permissible, yet they cannot be called
philosopherstherefore, for others, it is better for them to turn away from
reading and hearing such books so that they are not inflicted with an enormous
loss.234
These remarks, I believe, represent a new turn in the long battle against different types
of heterodoxy by the emerging guardians of Safavid Twelver orthodoxy. The battle, as we
depicted in the previous chapters, started off with uq avs and storytellers, expanded to
Sufism, and was then ready to take on another major enemy, philosophy. In other words, after
Sufism became the focus of attention in the middle of the seventeenth century, philosophy
seems to have become the favorite target of attacks, especially in the last three decades of the
Safavid rule. To put in perspective the growing anti-philosophy sentiment in some clerical
circles, it is interesting to note that dq t l-Sh contains not the slightest criticism of
philosophy. In fact the author(s) of dq t, contrary to his usual aggressive mood, explicitly
name a number of major figures in the history of Islamic philosophy, like Avicenna and Sayyid
aydar mul (d. 787/1385), going on to excuse these authors support for Sufism by asserting
that they had been tricked by Sunnis. Everyone is sub ect to mistakes, except for the infallible
imams, the anonymous writer(s) says.235
The attacks on philosophy in works like N t were mostly written in Persian, a clear
sign of the intention of their authors to engage a more general audience. However, they did
not appear out of the blue. Rather, one can see the first inklings of the turn against philosophy

234

Ibid., f. 120a120b.

235

pseudo-Ardabl, dq t l-Sh , vol. 2: 795.

100
in the latter half of the seventeenth century in a number of treatises written in Arabic that, as
such, were intended for the scholarly elite. The earliest known independent work against
philosophy in this period belongs to none other than the most learned anti-Sufi religious
scholar of the time, Muhammad hir Qum. Written before 1075 and titled ikm t l-rifn,236
the work is an outstanding and learned critique of a variety of received philosophical and
theological positions from an Akbarian point of view.237 Given the fact that this work was
written in Arabic and saturated with highly technical philosophical and theological
vocabulary, there is no doubt that it was meant only for an elite group of professionals. The
focus of attention had not yet shifted toward bringing the debate about philosophy into the
public domain.
A brief examination of the content of the book reveals several interesting points. irst
of all, one of its striking features is its extensive quotations from important works by Mull
adr, like al-Asfr and al-Sh vhid.238 adr is one of the primary targets of Qums critique,
along with Ibn Arab and other prominent members of his school like Qay ar. The author
expresses his surprise that in his time some are trying to synthesize philosophy and Sufism (a
clear reference to the school of Mulla adr), given the fact that Sufis had abhorred and
ridiculed the philosophical quest from the earliest centuries of Islam and the inception of the
mystical quest as a distinct trend in Muslim world.239 This is not only some of the earliest

236

Newman dates the book to somewhere between the years 1068/1657-1075/1664. See: ewman, Sufism and Anti-Sufism in
Safavid Iran, note 46.
237

The only substantial study of this work is in process by Sayyd Muhammad Hd Girm. I am indebted to his brief analysis of
the content of the work published online at:
http://sematmag.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=176:2011-01-21-20-38-42&catid=43:no-3&Itemid=53
238

Muhammad hir Qum, ikmat al-rifn, n.d., 145, 163 and 168 among others, Ms. o. 13822, Kitb-khna, Mzih, va
Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
239

Ibid., 229.

101
evidence that Sadrs philosophy had already gained some prominence among the learned by
the third quarter of the seventeenth century; it also confirms our hypothesis that the
beginning of the attacks against philosophy had much to do with the synthesis that Mulla
adr tried so hard to create between the discursive philosophical tradition of the time and the
mystical tradition, especially as represented by the Ibn Arabi school. 240
Qums choice of title here is also significant. In choosing to call his critique of
discursive philosophers as well as the mystical philosophy of adr ikma, he is effectively
trying to reclaim the category, which has Quranic roots, from the philosophers who,
according to him, had long hi acked it and manipulated its Islamic and Quranic outlook to
mislead people about the foreign content of their speculations. His choice to name the
posssessors of this Quranic ikma or wisdom rifn is another important strategic move vis-vis the Sufis and especially the proponents of adrs mystical philosophy. With it he seems
to be trying to offer a new definition, or a new vision within which the term rif can be
redefined in accordance to the canonical sources of Twelver Shiism. This new vision replaces
God with imam as the primary sub ect of marifa, or gnosis. The famous quds hadith he who
knows himself, knows his Lord, mentioned in the opening section of the first chapter as one of

the foundations upon which the pursuit of marifa was legitimized, is replaced with an
exclusively Shii hadith focusing on the imamate that says ne who dies not knowing his
imam has died a jhil death [that is, as a non-Muslim].241 The importance of this shift in focus,
epitomized by the two abovementioned hadiths, cannot be over emphasized.242 Whatever the

240

Jafariyan has also suggested a similar thesis. See: Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn,

241

Source

242

rh ng v Siys t, vol. 2: 537.

This important point was brought to my attention by Todd Lawson. See Todd Lawson, The Hidden Words of ay Kshn,
in Iran, Questions Et Connaissances: Actes Du IVe Congrs Europen Des tudes Iraniennes, ed. Philip Huyse and Maria Szuppe, Studia
Iranica. Cahier, 25-27 (Paris: Association pour lavancement des tudes iraniennes, 2002), 430 note. 13.

102
disagreements and hostilities between the pro-Sufi and anti-Sufi camp were, they both agreed
on one very important point: the foundations of Shii marifa or gnosis must be built, they
held, on the knowledge of the imams. Admittedly, the two groups had very different ideas
about the nature of the imams and the essence of their teachings. But the esotericism that
permeated Shii teachings even in the most important canonical works like al-Kf meant that
both groups increasingly understood the imams in terms of their quasi-divine qualities, their
miraculous deeds, and the secret, esoteric base of their teachings.243 This important thread will
be followed in chapter four, where attention will be given to the career and works of Qu b aldn ayz, whose magnum opus is also known by its alternative title ikm t l-rifn, as well as
the works of Abd al-Ra m Damvand.
Starting around 1080/1669, the Persian polemical works against philosophy follow
Qums ikm t l-rifn. The final chapter of his

f t l-Akhyr and an independent work

entitled al- vid l-Dniyy , both written in Persian by Qum, are prime examples. The latter
book was written during the reign of Sultan Sulaymnin in a question and answer format. Its
content sheds light on the context of anti-philosophy discourse at the time. In one instance
Qum is asked to explain why, if philosophical ideas are so dangerous and heretical, none of
the ulama has bothered to declare philosophers infidels. The question itself reveals the extent
to which the author is concerned with the lack of precedence for attacking philosophy among
the ulama. Unable to mention any contemporary religious scholars who had taken up writing
refutations of philosophy, he brings up Ghazl and his famous critique of philosophy as his
only substantial example. The name of the latter is brought up in spite of the fact that as a Sufi

243

For more on the esoteric nature of the early Shii teachings see Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi, he Divine G ide in E rly Shiism:
the Sources of Esotericism in Islam (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994); Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi, The
Spirituality of Shii Islam: Beliefs and Practices (London: I.B. Tauris, 2011).

103
and a Sunni, Ghazl was otherwise a primary target of criticism for Qum and other anti-Sufi
polemicists like Shaykh Al Amil.244 Nevertheless, Qum summarizes Ghazls arguments and
opinions against philosophy as reflected in his l-

nqi and al- hf t.245

Qums treatises can be seen as the first serious attempt by a high-ranking religious
scholar to confront philosophy, not only within intellectual circles but in public. We have
contemporary reports that popular preachers also began the practice of condemning
philosophy as a foreign science and a heresy along with Sufism around the same time. 246
The two tracts mentioned above, Shihb l-

minn and S q b l-Shihb, should also be seen as

part and parcel of this novel polemical development.

Philosophy proved a much different target than Sufism. Due the efforts of Shii
intellectual giants like a r al-dn s and al- ill, philosophical vocabulary had been
integrated into and become a natural part of of traditional madrasa discourse, especially in
theology (kalm) and the principles of urisprudence (

l l-fiqh). By the time the Safavids

came to power, theology had become almost indistinguishable from philosophy, and the
vocabulary of Aristotelian logic had penetrated the science of u l al-fiqh to the extent that
the mastery of the former was considered a prerequisite for the student aspirings to advance
his knowledge in the latter. Unlike organized Sufism centered in the khnaqh, philosophy, at
least to the extent that it was required to understand theology, was an integral part of the

244

At one point, he calls Ghazzl the head of the enemies of the family of the Prophet. Al b. Muhammad b. al- asan b. Zayn
al-Dn al-Amil, Al-Sihm al-Mriqa f Aghr al-Zandiqa, n.d., f. 8a, Ms. o. 1968, Central Library & Documentation Center,
University of Tehran.
245

Muhammad hir Qum, al- avid al-Dniyya, n.d., 724728, Ms. No. 2749, Central Library & Documentation Center,
University of Tehran.
246

Muhammad Bqir Sabzavr, the appointed Shaykh al-Islam of Isfahan after Ma ls Jr., expresses his concern over some
preachers who portray a picture of philosophy for the public that is totally opposed to Islamic teachings. See Mu ammad
Bqir ibn Mu ammad Mumin Sabzawr, R
t Al- nvr-i Abbs, Chp-i 1., Mrs-i Maktb (Series).Ulm va Marif-i Islm;
7. (Tehran: yina-yi Mrs, 1998), 599602. Quoted in Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, vol. 2: 532.

104
madrasa curriculum. As such, prominent teachers of traditional peripatetic philosophy were
among the most respected of the learned class in the madrasas and had a congenial and warm
relationship with the higher echelons of the political order. This being the case, such teachers
constructed and sustained a powerful philosophical orthodoxy, controlling the relevant
discourse as well as the prestigious philosophy chairs in the madrasas. The prominent
members of this establishment, for obvious socio-economical and intellectual reasons, did not
welcome innovations of the sort that Mulla Sadr, for example, was eager to introduce into
philosophical thinking.
This explains, to a large extent, the reason why philosophy, in spite of its obvious
foreign roots, came under the radar of puritans so late in the Safavid period. Another
important development that facilitated the turn against philosophy at the end of the this
period was the gradual rise to prominence of Akhbrism in madrasas as an alternative
framework of legal thought in which u l al-fiqh (and its Aristotalian foundations) was
completely rejected as a methodology for juristic inquiries,. The jurists adhering to the
Akhbr legal school, in a fundamentalist return to rq t l-qudama (the way of the
predecessors [among hadith scholars]) freed themselves of the necessity of incorporating the
extensive technical u l vocabulary that was, in turn, thoroughly indebted to peripatetic
philosophy and logic. Thus they were also free to attack philosophy as a foreign element that
needed to be purged from the madrasas.
Yet philosophys dominant position was extremely hard to shake. Perhaps nothing
illustrates the position of philosophical studies at the end of the Safavid period more
powerfully or vividly than the testimony of the Augustinian friar named Antonio, a native of
Portugal who converted to Islam in Isfahan in 1108/1696 and wrote several treatises against

105
Christianity and Judaism under his new name, Ali-Qul Jadd al-Islm (d. after 1135/1722). His
testimony deserves to be quoted at length:
It has happened too often for me to be in the company of a group of them
[religious students] who, having spent years in the madrasas in pursuit of
knowledge, believed they knew something and numbered themselves amongst
the knowledgable (ahl-i ilm). Even as a recent convert at the time with no
thorough knowledge of the hadiths, when I asked them about a tradition that
dealt with the most fundamental matters of religion, they did not know, and I
was the one who taught them on the matter. They said, we study philosophy
( ikma); it is a number of years that we have been busy with books like Sh r -i
Hidy and Shif and Ishrt so we could not find spare time to study hadith, an
excuse that is worse than the offense itself! You see, all this considerable money
that is tiresomely collected is spent in madrasas in pious endowments with the
intention of creating ulam and educating the followers of the first Imam Ali in
matters of religion [and then] these students end up reading such material
one time when I had a conversation with one of these philosophy-reader Mullas
and told him that Plato and Aristotles philosophy has nothing to do with
religion and religiosity. In response, he told me that nowadays the amount of
stipend depends on ones knowledge of Plato and Aristotles philosophy; I and
people like me, who come to study here, since we are poor, also want to make a
living as a student; and as we see that the system of stipends and promotions in
Isfahan revolve around philosophy, we spend our time studying Plato and
Aristotles philosophy and do not bother with urisprudence (fiqh) or hadith.247
Another interesting anecdote comes from

tmm Am l l-mil, in the section in which

its author describes the most prominent and politically well-connected jurist of the final
decades of Safavid rule, Muhammad Bqir Khtunbd (d. 1127/1715), who was the first cleric
to occupy the position of mullbsh (a position created by the last Safavid king, Shh Sultan
Husayn, which was the highest religious office in the land.248 The anecdote goes as follows:
I heard my master Amr Muhammad li al- usayn [al-

247

248

Khtnabd] say: we were studying Sh r

l-Ishrt and its marginalia with our

great teachers. We were told to study Sh r

l-Ishrt with Amr Muhammad

Jafariyn, f viyy d r r -yi dn, f rh ng v siys t, 677678.

or more on Khtn-bd, see Jafariyans excellent introduction in: Mu ammad Bqir Kh nbd, Tarjama-yi Anjil-i
Arb , ed. Rasl Jafariyn, Chp-i 1., Mrs-i Maktb; 31 (Tehran: ashr-i uq a, 1996), 4454.

106
Bqir [Khtnbd] for what was in it in terms of getting closer to the Sultan
[becase the teacher was close to him], so we sat in his class while he boasted of
what he did not possess; and he would narrate something from al-Allma alKhnsrs marginalia and oppose him with absurd criticism. Then, when we
re ected his criticism of Khnsr, he would return to us and say, We wanted to
say that very thing!249

Khtnbd is categorized in

tmm as a faqh or urist. The fact that he took it upon

himself to teach philosophy, even thoughas the quote indicateshe was not an authority on
the rational sciences, reveals much regarding the curriculum of the madrasas and the position
of philosophy therein. The author also relates the story of another Khtnbd, H Isml,
who taught the music section of Avecinnas magnum opus Shif in one of the most important
madrasas of Isfahan, Madrasa-yi Jmi Sultn.250
The lengthy quotations above on the position of philosophy in the Safavid era are
necessary as a corrective to romantic notions about the persecution of philosophers among
some modern scholars who focus upon the Safavid era, Islamic education, and the madrasa
system. Such notions cast philosophers as noble guardians of rationalism and reason who were
as threated, along with Sufis, those incarnations of tolerance and universal peace, by bigoted
literalists and exotericists. The most detailed, scholarly and passionate account in which

249

Abd al- ab ibn Mu ammad Qazwn, tmm Am l l-mil, ed. A mad usayn, min makh t Maktabat yat Allh alMarash al-mma; 16. (Qom: Maktabat yat Allh al-Marash, 1407), 78.
:


250

Ibid., 66.

107
philosophy, along with Sufism, is portrayed as a victim of literalist jurists is found in Hamid
Dabashis contribution to Seyyed Hossein asr and liver Leamans History of Islamic Philosophy.
251

In a passionate tone that betrays his personal disdain for the opposing camp, Dabashi
writes: Those who engaged in philosophical matters did so at some peril to their personal
safety and social standing, and thus, the fate of philosophy was left in the hands of whimsical
monarchs who for a number of practical and symbolic self-interests, such as their need for a
court physician and court astronomer, would inadvertently provide for the possibilities of
philosophical pursuit which has never had any institutional foundations except at the
clandestine peripheries of the madrasa system, in the libraries of wealthy individuals, and
ultimately in the whimsical vicissitudes of the court. Dabashi dramatizes the miserable
situation of the noble science of philosophy by suggesting that [ ]inancial support for
students of philosophy was virtually non-existent, and that The madrasa system and its total
reliance on religious endowments prohibited any financial support for students who were
attracted primarily to philosophy.
To support such sweeping claims, Dabashi offers only slight historical evidence, the
weakness of which is revealed upon closer scrutiny. Examples buttressing his argument
include Mulla Sadrs retreat from Shiraz to Kahak, a village near Qom. The expulsion of
another philosopher, Mulla diq Ardistn (d. 1134/1721), by Shah Sultn usayn during the

251

Dabashi, Mr Dmd and the ounding of the School of I fahn. This perspective is by no means limited to his work. In
fact, it has become the standard view of scholars working on the intellectual and cultural history of late Safavid Iran with few
exceptions. or a few examples see Zarrnkb, D nbl -yi j stj d r t vv f-i rn, 262-66; Pierre-Jean Luizard, Les Confreries
Soufies En Iraq Aux Dix-neuvieme Et Vingtieme Siecles Face Au Chiisme Doudecimain Et Au Wahhabisme, in Islamic Mysticism
Contested: Thirteen Centuries of Controversies and Polemics, ed. F. de Jong and Bernard Radtke, Islamic History and Civilization.
Studies and Texts, 0929-2403; V. 29 (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 283315. Arjomand, The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam, 151 and
158-159; and Sayyid Hussein Nasr in his various works on Islamic philosophy. The latter two subscribe to a limited version of
the persecution thesis in which philosophers are seen as under heavy attack only in the last couple of decades of the Safavid
rule. I argue that even at that period, perceptions of persecution are heavily exaggerated. See footnote 261 below.

108
final decade of the Safavid rule, is cited as another example of how philosophers were victims
of bigotry and narrow-mindedness.
In addition, Dabashi refers us to reports indicating that on the front doors of some
schools in Isfahan the patrons had specifically prohibited the teaching of philosophy. 252 But if
the late Safavid environment was so unwelcoming of and even hostile to the pursuit of
philosophy, how was it that it nurtured one of the most extraordinarily innovative episodes in
the history of philosophical thinking in Muslim lands, one that Dabashis former teacher
Seyyed Hossein asr boasts was one of the apogees of Muslim history both aesthetically and
intellectually?253 For Dabashi, the Safavids get no credit for this intellectual renaissance. In fact,
he says, If we witness the rise of a particular philosophical disposition, recently identified as
the school of Isfahan during the Safavid period, this phenomenon must be attributed more to
the diligent and relentless philosophical engagements of a limited number of individuals
rather than considered the product of favorable and conducive social circumstances.254 One
wonders what to make of this curious statement given that just one page before Dabashi
emphasizes that The flourishing of Mr Dmd and the establishment of the School of
Isfahan would hardly have been possible without these necessary political and social
developments (that is, the advent of the Safavids in Persia and their establishment of Isfahan
as their capital and the new center of the Shii world).255

252

Hamid Dabashi, Mr Dmd and the ounding of the School of I fahn, in History of Islamic Philosophy, ed. Seyyed Hossein
Nasr and Oliver Leaman, Routledge History of World Philosophies (London: Routledge, 1996), 599600.
253

Mian Mohammad Sharif, A history of Muslim philosophy. With short accounts of other disciplines and the modern renaissance in
Muslim lands. (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1963), vol. 2, 904. asrs position in this regard seems to have gone through an
evolution. For his latest remarks in this regard See Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present:
Philosophy in the Land of Prophecy, SUNY Series in Islam (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006), 212.
254

Dabashi, Mr Dmd and the ounding of the School of I fahn, 598.

255

Ibid., 597.

109
The portrayal of philosophy as a victim emerges from a misguided reliance on
secondary sources rather than a rigorous study of the primary ones. In the case of adrs
retreat to Kahak, as Rizvi points out, the reason behind it remains highly debatable, and it is
not obvious at all that the so-called nomocentric urists were behind it.256 Dabashi also fails to
mention that after a while, Immqul Khn, who became governor of Shiraz in 1030/1621, built
a magnificent madrasa, the Madrasa-yi Khn, and invited Sadr to return and teach philosophy
there.257 adr accepted the invitation and began to teach there around 1037-38/1627, more
than a decade after he left in the same city for Kahak. The madrasa gained so much fame that
the European traveler Herbert Thomas reports [A]nd, indeed, Shiraz has a college wherein is
read philosophy; astrology, physic, chemistry, and the mathematics; so as its the more
famoused through Persia.258 As for the oft-cited incident of the expulsion of the philosopher
Mulla dq Ardastn along with a number of his students, including azn from Isfahan,
Jafariyan has recently questioned the reliability of the only source containing the story.259
Reliability issues aside, the original source, from which the story is copied repeatedly in the
works of opponents of the bigoted Ma lis Jr., tells the story of Ardastns expulsion
explicitly in the context of Ma lis Jr.s efforts against Sufis, among whom Ardistn and others
supposedly exiled from Isfahan are surpisingly included. There is no mention that philosophy
had anything to do with his expulsion; in fact, philosophy is not mentioned at all.260

256

Sajjad H. Rizvi, ll dr Shr : His Life and Works and the Sources for Safavid Philosophy, Journal of Semitic Studies.
Supplement; 18 (Oxford: Oxford University Press on behalf of the University of Manchester, 2007).
257

Rizvi even claims that the vaqf-nma of the madrasa required the teaching of philosophy. I was unable to find such a
requirement in the document, however.
258

asr, Spiritual Movements, Philosophy and Theology in the Safavid Period, 679.

259

Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn,

260

Ab al- asan Qazvn,

rh ng v Siys t, vol. 2: 587.

vid l- f viyy , ed. Maryam Mr A mad (Tehran: Muassasa-yi Mu lat va Ta qqt-i arhang,

110
Ardistns association with Sufism is understandable if we take into account the fact
that two of his prominent students, Qu b al-dn ayrz and Abd al-Ra m Damvand, about
whom we will talk extensively in the next two chapters, were affiliated with the ahab and
rbakhsh Sufi orders. Another, azn Lh , also had a strong penchant for mysticism. This
strongly suggests that Ma liss reported enmity with Ardistn was rooted mainly in the
latters Sufi proclivities rather than in his position as a teacher of philosophy. Even Ardistns
purportedly anti-Sufi student, Mull Isml Kh (d. 1173),261 who wrote a treatise refuting
the notion of va dat al-vu d, is careful to remind his readers at the end of this treatise that a
twelfth group of Sufis, unlike the eleven heretical Sufi denominations he previously
enumerated, are truely Shi as who avoid the antinomian behaviors of the other goups like
singing, dancing, drinking, and looking at beautiful faces, devoting themselves instead to a life
of asceticism following the model of the imams. 262 His previous description of the eleven
deviant groups of Sufis is undoubtedly informed by diq t l-Shi , but his decision to allow
for a group that is ok, stands in contrast to all other anti-Sufi treatises of the period, which
categorically condemn Sufism in all its forms. This decision is probably rooted in his personal
familiarity with a Safavid Shii-compliant brand of Sufism that was represented by his teacher,
Ardistn, or by the latters students. urthermore, as shtiyn has suggested, Ardistns
philosophical views, reflected in the two extant treatises Risl t l-J l and ikm t-i digiyy ,
demonstrate his debt to adr, and thus his deviation from mainstream discursive philosophy,
often referred to as ikm t-i r sm. His works provide us with the earliest example of

1988), 7879.
261

or a succinct yet rich biography of him see Al Karbs, km-i t ll Bdbd: I yg r-i ikm t-i Sh d r Q rn-i
D v d h m-i Hijr, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Pizhhishgh-i Ulm-i Insn va Mu lat-i arhang, 2002), 6568.
262

Isml Kh , Risla, n.d., Ms. o. 869/2, Kitbkhna-yi Dnishgh-i Isfahn.

111
philosophical literature in which the tangible influence of Mull adrs synthesis of high
Sufism and discursive philosophy can be seen.263 With all of this in mind, the story of his
expulsion from Isfahan, irrespective of its historic accuracy, confirms an earlier claim I made,
namely, that the increasing discontentment with and criticism of philosophy as a foreign
science began when Mull adrs Transcendental Philosophy blurred the boundaries between
Sufism and philosophy.
In spite of the increasingly hostile and heated rhetoric against philosophy,
philosophers remained highly influential in the court up until the early decades of the
eighteenth century and thus their high social status was preserved. Examples of this include
the prominent role played by Mull Muhammad Bqir Sabzavr (d. 1090/1679) in Sulaymns
accession to the throne. The philosophically oriented gh usayn Khnsr (d. 1089-90/16789)a student of Mr Dmd, Taq Ma lis, and Sabzavrwas also among the trusted members
of the court ulama, and the shah erected him a mausoleum upon his death. And we have
already seen how Muhammad Bqir Khtnbd, the mullbsh of the late Safavid period,
was compelled to teach philosophy in spite of his obvious lack of competence.264

263

Mu ammad ibn Ibrhm adr al-Dn Shrz, al-Sh vhid l-R b biyy f lChp-i 2. (Mashhad: Markaz-i ashr-i Dnishghi, 1981), advahijdah.

nhij l-S l kiyy , ed. Jall al-Dn shtiyn,

264

It might be said, by proponents of the limited version of the persecution of philosophy thesis like Nasr and Arjomand, that
the abovementioned figures do not cover the last three decades of the Safavid rule, when, they believe, the actual persecutions
against philosophers happened. In addition to the abovementioned anecdote from Khtnbds teaching of philosophy, in
order to further substantiate my claim, I surveyed the biographical contents of tmm Am l l-mil by Shaykh Abd al- ab
Qazvn (d. after 1197/1783) to see if there is any meaningful decline in the number of ulama with expertise in ratinal sciences
in the early decades of the eighteenth century compared to the latter half of the seventeenth century. tmm is a perfect
bibliographical source for such a survey sinec it was written at 1191/1777 as a supplement to Shaykh urr al-mils Amal almil to extend the latters coverage of the prominent ulama to the twelfth/eighteenth century and also to make up for some
important figures of the past that slipped mils attention. The author lists one hundred and thirty-seven names, mostly
from the twelfth/eighteenth century, providing a short biography for each. Among them, seventy-two cases were active
mostly during the last three decades of the Safavid rule and beyond, and can be divided into two groups: first, the ulama who
passed away after 1150/1738, and who were most probably actively teaching in their profession after the fall of Isfahan (fifty
cases), and second, those who died before 1150/1738, which means a major part of their career as teachers of Islamic sciences
overlapped the last three decades of the Safavid rule (twenty-two cases). The results are very interesting:
Number of
the ulama

Number of philosophers or those with combined

expertise in transmitted and rational sciences

percentage

112
The polemical works, however, met with a certain degree of success, especially as they
were bolstered by the increasing influence of Akhbrism at the final decades of the Safavid
rule. Their level of success in shifting public opinion against Sufism and philosophy in the last
three decades of the Safavid rule can be judged from a comparison of vaqf-nm s (pious
endowment documents) from the time of Abbs II with those written during the reign of Shah
Sultn usayn (r. 1694-1722), the last Safavid king. No such documents dating to the former
period explicitly exclude philosophy or Sufism from the curriculum of the madrasa being
endowed, but a number of documents belonging to the latter period explicity condemn the socalled illusory sciences.
The vaqf-nma of two of the most important madrasas built during the reign of Abbs
II, namely Jadda-yi Kchak and Jadda-yi Buzurg, do not put any conditions on resident
students in terms of the type of studies they might pursue.265 The documents also include the
list of books donated to the library, among which no major work of philosophy or Sufism can
be found. Nor do they include a considerable number of hadith collections. Rather, the
overwhelming ma ority of the books are related to urisprudence, theology (kalm), and m n iq
(logic). This stands in striking contrast to the vaqf-nma of the Sultn madrasa, one of the

Death before 1150/1738

d. 1150/1738 to 1192/1777
Total

22
50
72

13
22
35

%59
%44

As we can see, nearly sixty percent of the featured ulama who died before 1150 are either described as philosophers ( akm) or
as encompassing both rational and transmitted sciences (jmi l-m q l v -l-m nq l). For the other group, it is forty-four
percent. This is a clear indication that although at the end of the Safavid era the number of students occupying themselves
with philosophy has a meaningful decline, nearly half of the students of religion studied philosophy during the span of this
century.
I have been inspired here, I must gratefully acknowledge, by Jafariyans analysis of the Tatmm. My conclusions are
based, however, on my own reading of the work. Jafariyn comes to a similar conclusion based on several observations,
including the fact that from among one hundred and seventy-five book titles mentioned in the work, close to fifty are on
philosophy. The number of books on urisprudence is only slightly more. See: Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng va
Siys t, vols. 2: 72528.
265

Ahmad uzhat, ed., Chahr Vaqf-nma az Chahr Madrasa dar Dawra-yi Safavi, in rs-i Islm-i rn, vol. 3 (Iran:
Kitbkhna-yi a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash a af, 1374), 93111.

113
most splendid projects of the Safavid era, built between 1118/1706 and 1126/1714. This
document explicitly prohibits resident students from discussing books of pure philosophy
( ikm t-i irf) and Sufism.266 In another case, the vaqf-nma of the Maryam Bigum madrasa,
built in 1115/1703, explicitly prohibits the students from teaching or learning from books of
illusory sciences, i.e., the sciences of sh bh (doubt), as rational sciences and ikma were
known. Such books included Shif, Ishrt, ikm t l-Ayn, Sh r

l-Hidy , and the

like.267Additionally, the vaqf-nma of a madrasa in Hamadan, built in 1100/1689 by Shaykh

Al Khn Zangana Itimd al-Dawla, similarly asserts that if the teacher and students occupy
themselves with teaching and learning of philosophical sciences ( l m-i ikmiyy ) that are
contrary to the Sharia without refuting it, their stipend should be withheld and they must be
expelled from the madrasa.268
In addition to these explicit exclusions, we should also take into consideration a curious
phenomenon in which, in at least two of the vaqf-nmas belonging to madrasas established
during the reign of Shah Abbs II and Shh Sultn usayn, there is a meaningful erasure
exactly where the author clarifies what sciences may be pursued in that madrasa. One example
is the vaqf-nma of the Shafiiyya madrasa built in 1067/1657. According to the document,
eligibility to receive stipeds is contingent on the condition that the students pursue [.]

266

See Abd al- usayn Sipint, rkhch -yi A qf-i I f hn. (Isfahan: Intishrt-i Idra-i Kull-i Awqf, Mantaqa-i I fahn, 1967),
168.; also in Man r ifatgul, Skhtr-i Nihd v Andsh -i Dn d r rn-i A r-i f v: rkh-i
vv lt-i Dn-i rn d r S d -h-yi
D h m t D v d h m-i Hijr-i Q m r, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Ras, 2002), 336:




267

Ibid., 338-339.

268

Ibid., 331:

114
religious sciences. 269 A similar erasure is observable in the vaqf-nma of the Immiyya
madrasa in Isfahan, built in 1129/1717, six years before the fall of the Safavid capital.270
Although we do not know what words are missing, these erasures indicate the extreme
sensitivity surrounding what was considered a legitimate pursuit of knowledge and speaks to
the political battle over who defines such boundaries. Tampering with a vaqf-nma is
considered among the most grievous sins one can commit, but apparently the stakes were high
enough in the abovementioned cases that such concerns could be overruled.
The evidence contained in the vaqf-nmas mentioned above should be taken with a
grain of salt. That is, the documents cannot be taken as representatives of widespread or
universal practice. Rather, they can only be seen as indicators of a growing trajectory. Other
vaqf-nmas available to us from the same period are silent about philosophy and Sufism. One
such example is the vaqf-nma of the Sultn usayniyya madrasa built by gh Kaml (d. after
1133/1720), director (

ib J m) of the Central Treasury (Kh nh-yi mir ), on which

construction began in 1107/1695 and continued until 1133/1720, with an attendant extension
of its endowments.271 This document contains no negative mention of philosophy or Sufism. In
fact, quite to the contrary, an examination of the brief list of books endowed to the madrasa at
the end of this document reveals some classics in the study of philosophy, such as Avicennas
al-Shif, among the endowed books.272

269

Ibid., 327:
...

270

Adb-i Barmand, Abdul-Al, Vaqf nma-yi Madrasa-yi mmiyya-yi Isfhn in V qf, rs-i Jvdn. (Tehran: Szmn-i
Awqf va Umr-i Khayriyya), Nos. 19-20, 1376/1997, 137-39.
271

Rasul Jafariyan (ed.), rs-i Islm-i rn, vol. 1, 251-290.

272

Ibid., 290.

115
Furthermore, as we move from Isfahan to other major urban centers like Shiraz, there
is no substantial indication that either philosophy or Sufism was targeted. To the contrary,
when we assemble the pieces of the historical puzzle, the image of an intellectual environment
quite welcoming to philosophers and Sufis emerges. The vaqf-nma of the Muqmiyya
madrasa, built in 1059/1649, states that students should occupy themselves with learning
l m-i dniyy or religious sciences like fiqh, hadith, tafsr, u l, and also other preliminary
sciences like Arabic grammar and literature. The document states further that students are
allowed to extend their area of study to other sciences with the aim of sharpening their
minds; an explicit reference to mathematics and philosophy.273 Another vaqf-nma from the
year 1094/1683 that belongs to the Immiyya madrasa of Shiraz requires the superintendent or
mutavall to find and appoint a scholar as the madrasas primary teacher who is competent
both in naql or transmitted and aql or rational sciences.274 We already mentioned
Herbert Thomas observations on the Khn madrasa wherein he says, philosophy, astrology,
physic, chemistry, and the mathematics [are read]; so as its the more famoused through
Persia.275 Another piece of testimony comes from the memoir written by azn Lh (d.
1179/1766) about his travel and stay in Shiraz, in which he fondly remembers many teachers of
philosophy and Sufism whom he met there. These include figures like the mystically-minded
Shh Muhammad Drb Shrz (d. 1130/1718), 276 as well as philosophers like khnd Masi

273

Htam, ima, Vaqfnama-yi Madrasa-yi Muqimiyya-yi Shiraz (1059) in V qf, rs-i Jvdn. Nos. 43-44, 1382/2003, 40-59:
.

274

Rasul Jafariyan (ed.), rs-i Islm-i rn., vol. 9, 678

275
asr, Spiritual Movements, Philosophy and Theology in the Safavid Period, 679.
276

Mu ammad Al azn, rkh v S f rnm -i n, ed. Al Davn, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Markaz-i Asnd-i Inqilb-i Islm, 1375),
17778.

116
asav (d. 1127/1715), a student of gh usayn Khnsr, the Shaykh al-Islam of Isfahan. 277 We
will return to this environment and the important teachers of philosophy and Sufism in Shiraz
that contributed, more than anyone else, to the formation of the category of irfn, in chapter
four.
azns remarks about Isfahans intellectual environment in the final decades of Safavid
rule are also colorful, and they remind us to view the success of the anti-philosophy, anti-Sufi
campaign in relative terms. He speaks of his wonderful years in Isfahan and his erudite
teachers, including Mr Sayyid asan Tliqn who, according to azn, synthesized the vision
of philosophy ( ikma) with that of Sufism and taught not only Ibn Arabs

but also

Suhrawards H ykil l-N r.278 In Isfahan he also studied with the famous mystically-minded
philosopher of the time, Mull diq Ardistn. His comments about Isfahans intellectual
environment are not followed by complaints about the opponents of Sufism and philosophy.
or does he mention his alleged expulsion from Isfahan, along with Ardistn and others
among the latters students, at the order of the shah. Rather, what can be gleaned from his
memoirs is (1) that the study of hadith had become a normal occupation of not only the
students of hadith but also of those in the philosophically- and mystically minded circles of
learning and (2) that in spite of growing opposition, philosophy continued to be pursued by
students without any major hassles.279
It was only after the fall of Isfahan that many of the elite members of society, including
azn himself, decided to flee the city they adored so much, and it was then that the enterprise

277

278

279

Ibid., 169.
azn, rkh v S f rnm -i n, 169-170.

I will present a more detailed picture of his memoir in the fourth chapter that will substantiate the two abovementioned
points.

117
of teaching and learning philosophy and mysticism was damaged due to a lack of financial
resources and the dispersion of human resources.280

Conclusions and Analysis

The relationship between Sufism and Islamic rationalist discourses on the one hand
and puritan discourses on the other has been often an uneasy one. By rationalist discourse, I
mean the variety of disciplinary practices in which the process of human reasoning,
understood fundamentally on the basis of Aristotelian logic, is considered a valid and
inevitable epistemological source for extracting authentic truths when it comes to religiously
significant questions and debates. Early Mutazilite theology, u l urisprudence, classical
Asharite theology (which was practically indistinguishable from discursive philosophy
especially in fundamental questions of the metaphysics of being), and Islamic discursive
philosophy are all considered, from this perspective, rationalist discourses. By puritan
discourses, I am referring to movements within Muslim learned society that are marked by (1)
their desire to free Islamic knowledge from foreign elements of influence and thus (2), an
anti-establishment agenda that challenges the authority and validity of certain traditional
disciplines of Islamic sciences in favor of a return to the pure fundamentals of faith found in
the early golden age of the Prophet and his Companions.281 The ahl al-hadith movement of the
early Abbasid period, pioneered by scholars of hadith like Ibn anbal and later Ibn Taymiyya,

280

Corbins appraisal of the situation seems relatively accurate in this regard. See: Henry Corbin, History of Islamic Philosophy
(London: Kegan Paul International, 1993), 34849.
281

I intentionally avoid using the term fundamentalism here since, as Bruce Lawrence and others have shown, it is essentially
a modern phenomenon. See Bruce B. Lawrence, Defenders of God: the Fundamentalist Revolt Against the Modern Age, Studies in
Comparative Religion (Columbia, S.C.) (Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina Press, 1995). There are, however,
considerable similarities between the outlook, structure of thought, and ideals of what I call puritan movements and
modern fundamentalist discourse.

118
and the Akhbr school of legal thought that emerged during the Safavid era can be considered
puritan discourses for the purposes of this analysis.
For their part, Sufis did not hesitate to express their disdain for philosophy, dismissing
rational methods of inquiry about God as limited and futile.282 At the root of this disdain was
the subordinate and ultimately unnecessary position of reason in Sufi epistemology, which
casts reliance on the limited capabilities of human reasoning as a hindrance to an adepts
spiritual progress. For most Sufis disciplinary knowledge, especially rational discourse, was
irrelevant at best, and a major obstacle and distraction at worst.
For both the philosopher and the jurist, the cult of Sufi saints was at best an aberration
of superstitious and uneducated minds, and at worst, evil directly at work. For the expert in
Islamic law, whose efforts are geared toward regulating social spaces and transactions as well
as providing ritual guidelines, predictability and rationality as defined within the limits of
religious law are of utmost importance. The fact that jurisprudence as a discipline was based
upon the rationalist science of u l al-fiqh, in addition to the fact that many jurists were also
trained as theologians, made their intellectual outlook similar to that of the philosophers,
especially when it came to the fundamental concepts that defined God and shaped the way
Muslim intellectuals though about divinity and its relationship to humanity. Philosophers too,
inasmuch as they were obsessed with crafting rational explanations of the universe and
human interactions, were deeply troubled by the prospect of chaotic and spontaneous
mystical experiences, which came dangerously close to undermining the fragile social
structure that philosophy underwrote. Their tightly sealed systems of legal interpretation and
282

The story of the alleged meeting between Avicenna and Ab Said Ab al-Khayr is merely one example of how the rational
method was often distained, though not rejected, by Sufis. In the story of their encounter, the two are said to have met and
engaged in a three-day private conversation. At the end, each is asked his impression of the other, to which Ab-Sa d replies
that everything that he could see, Avicenna knew. In turn, Avicenna said that everything he knew, Ab-Sa d could see. Rumis
contempt of rational inquiryand his conception of it as an unreliable and shaky starting point from which to pursue Divine
knowledge is famous.

119
metaphysical speculation stood in contrast to the seemingly chaotic, spontaneous world of
Sufis in which ruptures between the Unseen world and the conscious mind constantly
threatened established norms.
To put it in terms of the politics of spiritual and material power, authority, and
dominance, the immanent and easily accessible God whom the Sufi shaykh of the khnaqh
and the syncretistic wandering dervish claimed to mediate through their charisma or baraka
was a formidable threat to the competing authority that the jurists claimed as interpreters of
Gods will, commandments, and preferences. The promise of an ever-present, immanent God,
present in fresh and tangible ways and experienced via human yet divine abodes filled with His
Presence was perhaps the most powerful aspect of the Sufi messagean aspect that made
Sufism popular with the lay masses who found little solace in the philosophers dry notion of
God and the urists obsession with obedience to a remote and often demanding God. The
saintly figure offered what neither the philosopher nor the jurist could: a direct connection to
the supernatural; the possibility of tapping into the infinitely abundant resources of the World
of Unseen (lam al-ghayb) for meeting both worldly and other-worldly needs; the ability to
bring heaven and earth and the mundane and sublime together in the present momenthere,
now, embodied.
Puritan critiques usually reflect the struggle of an anti-establishment minority
within learned society to topple existing power structures of knowledge replace them with an
alternative, utopian model. The successful resistance of ahl al-hadith to state-sponsored
Mutazilite theological thought in spite of a brief but intense period of inquisition under Caliph
Amin is an apt example. More relevant examples are found in the figures of Mr Law and
Qum, whom we studied in this chapter. As mentioned above, both were mid-ranking religious

120
scholars and neither had strong ties to or a considerable stake in the political establishment in
their early and mid careers.283 In fact, both vehemently opposed and entered a costly debate
with Ma lis Sr. and ay Kshn, who were allies of the monarch in promoting and preserving
the state-sponsored religious power structure. In waging a war not only against Sufis, but also
against syncretistic readings of Islamic sources by the ulama, Mr Law and Qum aspired to
replace the existing paradigm of scholarship in madrasas with a new one that they considered
authentic and in accordance with the way Islam was understood and explained by the imams
and the Prophet.
Accordingly, ulama trained in the madrasa system consistently portrayed the Sufis of
this period as ignorant and opposed to learning and education. This is a common feature of
both esoterically- or exoterically inclined ulama. Mull adr, for example, in his critique of
Sufism claims that the real pursuit of spirituality can only happen after a thorough training in
disciplinary sciences. According to adr, the quest to attain gnosis cannot result in genuine
outcomes if one refrains, as many dervishes and Sufis do, from participating in disciplinary
discourse, which is housed in the madrasa.284 Accordingly, he stridently accuses the pretendSufis of having slidden into the abyss of imaginary illusions by prohibiting their discursive
and rational faculties from flourishing through learning:
Those who have installed themselves during out time in the position of irshd
(guidance) and khalfa (vicegerency [of God]), most of them, but all of them are
stupids ignorant of the ways of kwowledge and maturity (r shd) they have
mostly banned conceptual understanding ( l- v r l-idrkiyy ) and have block
the doors of sciences and knowledge (m rif) thinking that such an action on
283

Qum later became the shaykh al-Islam as well as the judge of Qum. Accordingly, he declared his fealty to the political
establishment by writing a treatise on the necessity of Friday prayers at the time of Occultation as a religious obligation at
1069/1558. See ewman, Sufism and Anti-Sufism in Safavid Iran, 101102. For a case study of the political implications of the
hotly debated issue of riday prayers during the Safavid period see Andrew J ewman, ayd al-Kashani and the Rejection of
the Clergy/State Alliance: riday Prayer as Politics in the Safavid Period, in he ost Le rned of the Shi : the Institution of the
rj qlid, ed. Linda S Walbridge (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).
284
adr al-Dn Shrz, K sr A nm Al-jhiliyy , 2646.

121
the part of the seeker is the one that prepares him/her to focus the attention
towards the Bountiful Origin (al-m bd l-f yy ) and have not understood that
to prevent perceptory, rational and imaginary faculties from maturity leads
them to slip towards distorted concepts fabricated by imagination.285
The same line of attack against institutional Sufism and its anti-knowledge position is
pursued by Abd al-Razzq Lah (d. 1072/1661-2), a prominent theologian and student of
adr. In his introduction to G

h r

rd, a theological work that stresses the importance of

the spiritual path and is dedicated to Shah Abbs II, he says:

The reality of ta avvuf is nothing but the travelling of the esoteric Pathand we
already said that to embark upon such a Path, the exoteric path is a prerequisite. So, a Sufi should first become a philosopher ( akm) or a theologian
(mutakallim). To claim to have become a Sufi before getting a solid grounding in
philosophy and theology, that is, without completing the way of reason,
whether it is according to the terminology of the ulam or not, is charlatanism
and deceiving the mass. The point is not about the word ta avvuf or Sufi.
Rather, our intention is the spiritual Path (s l k) and the pursuit of real union
(v l).286
In a reiteration of his teachers critique of non-madrasa-trained Sufis and dervishes he says:
Sufis and Qalandars who do not have firm grounding in discursive philosophy
( ikm t-i b siyy ), who lack acquaintance with theology (kalm), traditional
commentaries and exoteric knowledge concerning ontological origins and end
of creation (m bd v m d), while introducing themselves as masters
(murshid) and spiritual guides of people as do the q b of our own period and
previous epochs are nothing but bridands who waylay the common folk. adr
al-Mutaallihn [Mull adr] in his treatise K sr A nm l-Jhiliyya took such
people to task and exposed the [un]learning of this group, revealing the extent
of their decadence.287
ther madrasa-based scholars, even though they where fundamentally opposed to
adrs vision of what a truly Shii gnosis looks like, shared his and his students derision of this
285

Ibid., 39.

286

Abd al-Razzq Lh , Gawhar-i rd, ed. Zayn al-bidn Qurbn, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Szmn-i Chp va Intishrt-i Vizrat-i
arhang va Irshd-i Islm, 1993), 3839.

287

I have slightly changed Lewisohns translation of Lh s remarks here: Lewisohn, Sufism and the School of I fahn:
Ta awwuf and Irfn in Late Safavid Iran: Abd al-Razzq Lah and ay -i Kshn on the Relation of Ta awwuf, ikmat and
Irfn, 112.

122
alleged anti-intellectual tendency of Sufis. For example, later on, Sayyid imatullh Jazir (d.
1112/1701), a high-ranking religious scholar, a student of Ma lis Jr., and a vehement critic of
Sufism, explains in his al-Anvr l-N mniyy that one of the reasons behind the popularity of
Sufis is that their path is much easier than that of disciplinary knowledge, for the former
promises the same results in a much shorter period of time!288 Another prominent Akhbr
scholar and the author of the influential anti-Sufi treatise Isn sh riyy , Shaykh urr Amil,
makes a similar point when he says:
And it has come to a point regarding those who claim to have had visions that
they say the seekers of [disciplinary] knowledge ( l b t l-ilm) are wrong, that
they are only concerned with exoteric matters and that they do not know God
and his religion, and that the Sufis are the folks of esoteric matters and they are
the ones who know God as He deserves to be known. Therefore, [in their minds]
Sufism has become the opposite of the pursuit of knowledge, so they say: are
you a Sufi or a seeker of knowledge?289
The dichotomy of the Sufi Path (sulk) versus disciplinary knowledge, then, surfaces in
anti-Sufi literature no matter the intellectual outlook of the author. This debate can be
understood, of course, as a rivalry between two alternative hegemonic systems, that of the
khnaqh and the madrasa. In the former the adept must totally submit himself to the shaykh
like a corpse in the hands of the washer, as the famous Sufi saying goes. In the latter, the
student is disciplined by the mentor in accordance to a very specific interpretation of selected
texts. This educational discipline secures the conservative mystical experiences and rules
out the possibility or validity of alternative experiences, providing controlled venues through
which the erratic and unruly eruptions of the mystical may be channeled.290

288

Jazir, al-Anvr l-N mniyy , vol. 2: 293.

289

Ri Mukhtr, ed., Risala f al-Ghin, in Ghin, sq, vol. 1, Chp-i 1., Mrs-i iqh (Qom: Muassisa-yi Bstn-i Kitb
(Markaz-i Intishrt Daftar-i Tablght-i Islm ), 2008), 183.
290

Drawing rigid boundaries between the genuine and false pursuits of gnosis emphasized by Sadra guarantees that the

123
In an analysis that starkly contrasts with what we said above, Lewisohn has claimed
that the emphasis on the pursuit of disciplinary knowledge reflected in Lh s Gawhar is the
sine q

non of practical Sufism and was not by any means an independently developed

doctrinal innovation original to the Safavid Shii theological milieu in which he [Lh ]
flourished: the doctrine has definite resonances, if not its entire origin, in the classical Persian
Sufi tradition itself.291 Lewisohn, unfortunately, does not give us any clue as to how he has
established this sweeping claim in regards to the totality of classical Persian Sufi tradition.
The only example he mentions is a quote from the Kubrav Sufi master, Azz asaf (d.
between 1281-1300) in which the latter says that the novice should first go to the madrasa
and acquire necessary Islamic legal knowledge (ilm-i sh ri t) Then, he should study
beneficial knowledge so that he becomes quick-witted and fathoms subtile expressions, since
the understanding of learned discourse which is acquired in the madrasa is an extremely
important pillar of this sub ect. Then, he goes to the khnaqh and affiliates himself as a
disciple to a shaykh, devoting himself to the threshold, contenting himself with one shaykh
alone, learning what is necessary of the science of the mystical path (ilm-i rq t).292

noetic content of the mystical experience, to borrow from Willam James, will not be understood and interpreted against
orthodoxy according to his understanding. Of course, all such efforts only meet with partial success as a certain degree of
innovativeness marks the mystical in all contexts. That is what, I believe, constructivist interpretations of mystical
experiences fail to account for. or more on the conservative nature of mystical experiences see Steven T. Katz, The
Conservative Character of Mysticism, in Mysticism and Religious Traditions, ed. Steven T. Katz (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1983), 360; Steven T. Katz, Languauge, Epistemology, and Mysticism, in Mysticism and Philosophical Analysis, ed. Steven
T. Katz (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978), 2274. His views have been influential and have recently been taken up by
scholars of Sufism as an interpretive framework for understanding Sufism. See Nile Green, Sufism: a Global History (Chichester,
West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012), 34. Katzs view, however, have been challenged by several counter-arguments. See, for
example Robert K. C. Forman, Mysticism, Mind, Consciousness (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1999). Also see Ata
Anzali, Skhtgir S nn t v Irfn (Qom: Anjuman-i Marif-i Islm, 2005), 232298.
291

Lewisohn, Sufism and the School of I fahn: Ta awwuf and Irfn in Late Safavid Iran: Abd al-Razzq Lah and ay -i
Kshn on the Relation of Ta awwuf, ikmat and Irfn, 110.
292

Translated by Lewisohn in Ibid. note. 217

124
While this passage in and of itself seems to support Lewisohns claim, what immediately
follows it--which is unfortunately left out by Lewisohn-- represents a more complex picture.
asaf explicitly mentions that while he indeed believes that going through the madrasa
education and then embarking upon the esoteric training is the best way to go, there are two
opinions regarding the best way to proceed with the esoteric path: While some insist upon
proceeding through the path of learning and repetition [of disciplinary knowledge] towards
the goal of esoteric realization, others emphasize the necessity and urgency of starting right
away with ascetic and meditative practices under the provision of a shaykh. The latter group
argues against the necessity of madrasa training first by pointing out that, given the limited
time a normal person has at his/her disposal, it is virtually impossible for the novice to finish
all the necessary training in disciplinary knowledge, and secondly, they point out, the heart of
the mystic, upon its purification with the regimen of mystical practices, will be like a polished
mirror reflecting the omniscience source of knowledge and thus making all human knowledge
irrelevant.293
asafs entire discussion is predicated upon Ghazls exposition in n l-Amal. In
the latter work, Ghazzl contrasts the position of Sufis regarding the pursuit of knowledge
with that of a specific group of learned people (ahl al-ilm), whom he calls al-nar. As
Kenneth Garden has argued, the term most likely refers to philosophers. 294 While the latter
group believes in the necessity of complete training in discursive knowledge first, the Sufis
dont encourage [adepts] to learn and teach [disciplinary] knowledge and read what the

293

Azz al-Dn ibn Mu ammad asaf, jm -yi R sil

rnshins-i arnsa dar Tehran, 1980).
294

shh r bi-Kitb Al-insn Al-kmil, ed. Marijan Mol (Tehran: Anjuman-i

Kenneth Garden, Revisiting al-Ghazls Crisis through his Scale for Action ( i n l- m l), Forthcoming in the proceedings
of the Conference Islam and Rationality: the Impact of al-Ghazali, The Ohio State University, November 10-12, 2012, Leiden:
Brill, Georges Tamer ed.

125
authors have written [about it]. Rather, [they say] the [valid] path is that of beginning with
struggle (m jh d ) by eradicating the vices, cutting all the attachments, and facing towards
God with the totality of ones resolution and will (himma).295 Al- ar, or philosophers,
Ghazl says, agree that this is ultimately a legitimate course of action, yet they insist upon
educating the faculty of reason so that the wayfarer can distinguish between baseless illusions
on the one hand and real spiritual accomplishments and states on the other.296 Ghazl
continues with the interesting and well-known example of a painting competition between the
Chinese and the Romans to illustrate the difference between the two paradigms.297 The same
example is mentioned in asafs discussion. inally, Ghazl suggests that his personal opinion
is that the madrasa-then-khnaqh model is meant only for a few gifted and elite aspirants of
the mystical path who embark upon their journey at a young age. For the common man, who
has neither the intellectual power nor the time required to finish the madrasa curriculum, his
recommendation is to skip the madrasa and oin the khnaqh right away.298
Ghazls exposition of the Sufi perspective in his n in which Sufi path is portrayed
as discouraging, or being unenthusiastic, about the disciplinary Islamic sciences is
corroborated by mainstream classic Persian Sufi texts like ir d l-Ibd in which only a
minimal knowledge of Sharia, not thorough training in the exoteric sciences, is considered a

295

Ab mid Ghazzl, n l-Am l, ed. Sulaymn Duny, al- aba 1., Zakhir al-Arab, 38 (Mi r: Dr al-Marif, 1964), 221
222:


296

Ibid., 22324:

....


297

Ibid., 22526.

298

Ibid., 22628.

126
prerequisite for embarking upon the Sufi path and oining the khnaqh. rom this
perspective asafs position, in which he advocates a combination of madrasa and khnaqh
training as the ideal, reflects a new development in the learned Sufi tradition in which Sufism
and the quest for gnosis is increasingly seen as the culmination of rather than an alternative to
the quest for discursive knowledge. The earliest trends of this development can be observed in
Ghazls n, and it reaches its apex, perhaps, in the scholarly complexity of Ibn Arabs
oeuvre. Having said this, it is important to note that asaf, simultaneous to his advocacy of
the abovementioned synthesis, admits that such a dichotomy is indeed prevalent, and as such,
if there is a choice to be made between these two alternative approaches, the latter path,
which does not necessitate training in disciplinary knowledge, is the closer and more
conducive to getting results,299 which is Ghazls own position regarding ordinary seekers of
felicity.
Given Sufisms strong tradition of seeing the disciplinary sciences as obstacles for
wayfarers, it should not surprise us that adr and his students frame their antagonism toward
institutional Sufism as an opposition between madrasa training and the regimen of the
khnaqh, in which discursive knowledge is highly suspect and under-emphasized, if not
rejected outright, in favor of a set of meditational steps novice takes under the supervision of
his shaykh.
To conclude, then, the jurist, theologian, and philosopher can all be seen as trainees of
the madrasa system who were dependant on that systems rational discourse and elaborate
curriculum. Together they formed a block in a power struggle against the Sufis whose primary
modus operandi was the khnaqh, socially speaking, and mystical visions (mukshaft),

299

asaf,

jm -yi R sil

shh r bi-Kitb Al-insn Al-kmil, 92.

127
epistemologically speaking. The Sufi master, located at the center of the khnaqh as the
intermediary visionary through whom a community of followers received divine guidance,
represented a challenge to the mujtahid, located at the center of the madrasa as an
intermediary hermeneut through whom the community of followers gained access to the
divine, present in the form of sacred letters and words in the canonical scripture. It must be
noted, however, that the debate cannot be reduced to economics or politics. It was also a
genuine religious debate in which both parties fought for what they considered to be the
original message of Islam as embodied in the sayings and acts of the Prophet and, more
importantly, the imams. To reduce this rivalry to mere politics would be a mistake, I believe,
and a distorted view of how religious subjects construct their world and live their religion.

Chapter Three: The Sufi Response

129

Introduction
By the middle of the seventeenth century, the Safavid project of converting Iran to
Shiism had successfully pushed Sunnism to the fringes of Safavid lands, with most Sunnis
living in tiny pockets surrounded by an overwhelming Shii ma ority. Ma or Sufi orders present
at the time in Iran had already converted to Shiism, though not necessarily to the official
Twelver version. This marginalization and conversion, however, did not prevent the enemies
of Sufism from continuing to question the validity and authenticity of the Sufi quest based on
its Sunni past. As far as the critics were concerned, the ostensibly Shii Sufis had preserved the
ma or Sunni elements of their thought. Thus, as disguised Sunnis, Sufis represented a tainted
and distorted version of Shiism.300 Early Sufi figures like Sufyn Sawr and asan Ba r, whose
uneasy relationship with the imams are preserved in a number of traditions in canonical

300

See, for example, the way Qum questions the sincerity of the rbakhsh Sufis, saying their claim to be Shia was merely a
bluff. Mu ammad hir Qumm, Shish Risl -yi rs, ed. Jall al-Dn usayn Mu addis (Tehran, 1960), 303.

130
hadith collections,301 were brought up, along with ecstatic figures like all and Byazd, to
emphasize the problematic Sunni origins of Sufism as well as the heretical nature of its
teachings.302 Additional traditions, taken primarily from dq t l-Sh on the authority of
Ardabl, were produced and circulated to substantiate the claim that the imams took an active
stand against the Sufis of their time.303 The problem was not that Sufism was perceived as
incompatible with Islam, as a Wahhabi, for example, would declare. For these detractors,
Sufism was indeed compatible with Islam ust with the wrong version.
By the mid-seventeenth century, the Sufi orders remaining in the Safavid heartlands
were already fully Shii according to the Safavid interpretation of the term. Yet their past
history, naturally, was deeply embedded in the Sunni world. Any successful response to
charges of Sunnism, then, necessitated efforts to revise and redefine the past. The earliest (and
yet the most thorough and substantial) example of this revisionist attempt, rallh
Shshtars

jls l-

minn, belongs to the turn of the century (it was written in 1010/1602).

The author of this work, a Kubrav Sufi affiliated with the rbakhsh branch, argued that the
Kubrav masters, along with many other prominent scholars of the past, were dissimulating
Shiis (that is, they practiced taqiyya or dissimulation out of fear of persecution).

jlis

became one of the most frequently quoted hagiographical sources among seventeenth century
Sufi-minded Shii scholars as well as Sufis themselves. Central to this revisionist agenda was a

301

n Sawr see, for example, Mu ammad ibn Yaqb Kulayn, al-U l min l-Kf, ed. Al Akbar Ghaffr (Tehran: Dr al-Kutub
al-Islmiyya, 1957), vols. 1: 39394 and 5: 6570. n Ba r see ibid., vol. 1: 51; 2: 222 and 5: 113. See also Qums long and
damning diatribe, which is based on the abovementioned traditions. Qum,
f t l-Akhyr, 3036.
302

303

Mu ammad ibn al- asan urr al-mil, l-Isn Ash riyy f Al-r dd l l- fyy , al- aba 2. (Iran: Dard, 1987), 15.

One of the most comprehensive compilations of traditions from dq t and other sources is urr al-mil, l-Isn Ash riyy
f Al-r dd l l- fyy . Curiously, urr mentions a hadith, ostensibly quoted in Shaykh Bahs K shkh l, in which the Prophet
is said to have predicted the emergence of a group called S fiyy . The Prophet dissociates himself from this group and calls
them the Jews of this nation (umma) who are more deviant from the infidels. Ibid., 16 and 34. Not surprisingly, the hadith is
not found in the K shk l.

131
categorical denial that any ma or Sufi figure, like Rumi, Ibn Arab, af al-Dn Ardabl, Attr,
Najm al-Dn Kubr, Al al-Dawla Simnn and others, had any affiliation with Sunnism. This
revisionist hagiographical agenda took centuries to be completed. The results, however, were
astonishing, as can be seen in the following quote, spoken two centuries later by Shrvn, the
imatullh Sufi traveler and historian of the early Qa ar period: A Sufi, [by definition,]
cannot be a Sunni!304 It is interesting to contrast this statement with what an elitist mystic of
the fifteenth century, in al-dn Turka (d. 830/1427), had to say about Sufism: All the Sufi
shaykhs follow the Sunni denomination. In fact, no one who is not a member of Sunni
denomination can grasp this science [of Sufism]. Hence, anyone who comes to a Sufi master
(murshid) in pursuit of this science will not be offered any spiritual direction until he or she
converts to Sunnism.305
In order to better understand how this transformation happened and how organized
Sufism came to terms with the fundamental changes in religious landscape of Iran, I found it
helpful to focus on one specific Sufi order and track the relevant changes in its religious
outlook. Otherwise, the task would have been daunting, and certainly beyond the scope of one
dissertation. The history of ahab order is intertwined, as I have stated above, with that of the
rbakhsh order. Therefore, in the course of our discussions of ahab historiography and
hagiography, rbakhsh masters will pop out, from time to time, from corners of
concealment and obscurity. This, in fact, has been one of the most fascinating aspects of my
exploration of Sufi history in Iran in this period.

304

305

Zayn al-bidn Shrvn, B stn l-Siy

(Tehran: Krkhna-i abb Allh, 1897), 29293.

Quoted from Leonard Lewisohn, Sufism and Theology in the Confessions of in al-Dn Turka I fahn (d. 830/1437), in
Sufism and Theology, ed. Ayman Shihadeh (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007), 66.

132

The Zahabs during the Seventeenth Century

According to ahab sources, the center of the orders activity was transferred to
Mashhad by an illiterate artisan-turned-Sufi, one Dervish Mu ammad Krindih (d. circa
1037/1627), who, according to a b al-dn Ri , was a shoemaker. 306 Mashhad, home to the
shrine of Al b. Ms al-Ri , the eighth Shii imam, was, not surprisingly, a Shii stronghold.307
According to official ahab genealogies, Krindih became the leader of this Sufi order after
his master Ta al-Dn usayan Tabdakn (d. ?) passed away. The official ahab lineage
proceeds from Dervish Mu ammad Krindih to Shaykh tam Zarvand (d. circa 1647/1057),
yet another obscure shaykh in the ahab lineage about whom we know little.308 The ahabs
also emphasize that Shaykh Krindih was utterly unsuccessful in establishing himself as heir
to the office of shaykh, spending much of his life in seclusion, unwilling to face several other
disciples of Tabdkn who made similar claims of being the legitimate heir of the master.309
External evidence confirms this marginalization. Krindih and his heir Shaykh tam
seem to have been completely overshadowed in popularity by another prominent Sufi of the
time, Shaykh Mumin Mashhad (d. 1063). The author of Qi

l-Khqn recounts that the

latter was the most respected and prominent Sufi shaykh (shaykh al-mashiykh) in the entire
Khursn region. Shml also mentions the considerable financial resources that Shaykh

306

See Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), f. 10. a bs account of his activities is by far the most detailed
and reliable that we have. See Tabrz Isfahn, S b l- sn, 346.
307

In fact, as the Safavids increasingly sought the assistance of the Twlever ulama in forging a basis of legitimacy to replace the
old Qizilbash-Sufi paradigm, Mashhad surpassed Ardabl as the most important symbolic center of the state-sponsored
religiosity. Shah Abbss trip on foot to Mashhad could be seen as a watershed moment in this regard. or more on Mashhad
and its increasingly important role in Safavid religious polity see Sefatgol, Skhtr-i Nihd v Andsh -i Dn d r rn-i r-i f v,
229232.
308

Tabrz Isfahn, S b l-

309

Ibid., 34647.

sn, 349.

133
Mumin had at his disposal and the many charitable constructions built at his behest.310 In spite
of Mumin Mashhads prominence in Khurasan, not much is known about his life or literary
activity. Some information exists, however, in a work written by Shaykh usayn Zhid (d.
after 1058/1648) and titled B yn l-Asrr (written at 1058/1648). Its author is a descendent of
Shaykh Zhid Glan (d. 1301), af al-Dn Ardabls master. The Zhid family in general, and
our author in particular, had close ties with the royal court as custodians (m t v ll) of the
shrine of af al-Dn in Ardabil,311 arguably the most important sacred space in Iran after alRi s tomb in Mashhad.
Zhid frequent references in B yn to figures like af al-Dn Ardabl, Pr-i Plndz
(the packsaddle-maker master), and own master Shaykh Mumin Mashhad make it clear that
he considered them part and parcel of a unified spiritual constellation to which he himself also
belonged.312 The author mentions rbakshiyya as a prominent and very famous Sufi order
in the whole of Khurasan and specifically associates their arqa with the silent ikr (ikr-i
kh f) rather than the vocal ikr (ikr-i j l) which, according to him, is a hallmark of the Safavid

310

Shml, Qi

Al-khqn, 18384.

311

usayn Zhid, Silsil t l-N s b S f viyy : N s b-Nm -yi Pdishhn-i b im t-i S f v, Publications Iranschhr; 6 (Birlin:
Caphana-i Iransahr, 1964).
312

The fact that Zhid did not view his simultaneous connections to the Safavid order through his family, and to Shaykh
Mumin through discipleship, as mutually exclusive requires further attention here. Zhids multiple spiritual loyalties can be
interpreted in more than one manner. I believe the soundest interpretation results from a comparison of the situation of
Sufism in Iran during the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries to the formative centuries of early Islamic era (the third
to fifth centuries). In both cases there is certain fluidity in the way spiritually-minded people shaped their identity and chose
their affiliations. The borders between Sufi orders seem to have been less distinguishable than we tend to conceive of them,
which allowed individuals to change shaykhs and learn from leaders of different spiritual lineages, while later Sufis were
attached to specific silsilas. This is typical of eras in which new identities are in the process of emerging and the connections
to old identities are loosened, allowing individuals to move across them with relative freedom. That is why I agree with Bashir
that translating the term silsila to order leads to an exaggerated conception of the internal cohesion and discipline such
entities possessed and that, for the purposes of scholarly analyses, the term network conveys the reality on the ground
much better (Shahzad Bashir, Sufi Bodies: Religion and Society in Medieval Islam (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011), 11.
or translation purposes, however, silsila must be translated into order since the term was intentionally used by Sufis to
convey a sense of internal cohesion and discipline.

134
Sufi order.313 Furthermore, he associates Pr-i Plndz, with the silent method of ikr, quoting
him as an authority in this respect.314 He makes no mention of the ahabiyya (or any other Sufi
order for that matter).315
Later genealogies produced by the ahabs claim both Pr Plndz, and Shaykh
Mu ammad Mumin, as a part of their own lineage.316 We know that the memory of the rivalry,
or even enmity, between the followers of rbakhsh and the followers of Barzishbd was
alive and well at the end of sixteenth century, according to the report of

jlis l-m minin

that I mention above.317 Yet with the eclipse of the rbakhsh order in Iran during the
eighteenth century and the rise to prominence of the ahab order, ahab writers began to
take advantage of the rbakhshs demise to bolster their claims of legitimacy, history, and
authority by rewriting rbakhsh history as their own. They not only claim rbakhsh

313

usayn Zhid, Bayn al-Asrr (Manuscript), n.d., 105, Ms. o. 3043/1, Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i
Shr-yi Islm. We know from contemporaneous sources that the Barzishbd Sufis, in contrast to the rbakhshs,
practiced the vocal method in their ikr sessions.
314

Ibid., 110111. rom sources like Muains

f as well as later ahab writings, we know that ahabs, like the Safavi
Sufis, practiced the vocal rather than silent ikr.
315

Zhid is silent about the purported master/disciple relationship between Shaykh Mumin and Pr-i Plndz. It is safe,
however, to assume that these two figures were closely related in terms of their Sufi affiliations. Faghfoory misreads B yn in
this regard (Mashhad Sabzavr, The Golden Chain, xxx.).
316

To see Dervish Mu ammad Krindih identified as Pr-i Plndz, see Shams al-dn ahab Parvz, kir t Al-A liy, 1953,
130; Mu sin Imd Ardabl, sn v k r t Al-slikn (Tehran: ab-i Kitb, 1949), 43. rom there in Khvar, h biyy , 26464;
Istakhr, U l-i
vv f, 36364. This misidentification is easily explained by the prominence of the latter figure (Pr-i
Plndz). His beautiful tomb is still a destination of pilgrimage ad acent to the shrine of al-Ri , but the building was built,
according to the date engraved on a white stone inside, in 985/1577. This is inconsistent with Krindihs death date, which is,
according to a b, almost a half a century later at 1037/1627. either a b nor ayrz refer to him as Plndz. a b
explicitly mentions that this Dervish Mu ammad was a shoemaker (kh fff) rather than a packsaddle-maker. See Tabrz
Isfahn, S b l- sn, 34648; Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i l l-Khi b, vol. 3: 1212. Zhids remarks
suggest also cast doubt on this identification. In his remarks in B yn l- srr, Pr-i Plndz is implicitly associated with the
rbakhsh order (Zhid, Bayn al-Asrr (Manuscript), 6061, 111 and 128). We might conclude, then, that this is most likely
another attempt of the ahabs to claim the heritage of the rbakhsh Sufis as their own. Shrvn avoids such conflation in
his illustrated map of Sufi genealogies. See Zayn al-bidn Shrvn, Riy l-Siy , ed. mid Rabbn (Tehran:
Kitbfurrsh-i Sad, 1960). Unfortunately, Algar takes this identification for granted, relying on pro-ahab narratives. See
Hamid Algar, AHABYA, Encyclopdia Iranica, December 15, 1993, http://iranica.com/articles/dahabiya-sufi-order-of-shiiteallegiance.
317

Shushtar,

jlis Al-m minn, vols. 2: 15657.

135
shaykhs, but also go so far as to completely deny that such a rivalry has ever existed. 318 This
denial explains the otherwise-surprising appearance of rbakhsh treatises in the margins of
S b l-Masn319 by the ahab Shaykh a b al-dn Tabrz Isfahn (d. 1108/1696) and the
change of the author of B yn l- srrs name to usayn ahab, which allowed this important
work to be claimed as a ahab piece of literature. 320
In any case, Zhids remarks on the prominence of rbakhshs in Khurasan in the
mid-seventeenth century are confirmed by hostile sources. The rbakhshiyya happen to be
the only Sufi order specifically named in the anti-Sufi polemical works written in the second
half of the seventeenth century.321 Prominent scholars like Bashir and Algar downplay the
importance of such statements as merely rhetorical exercises.322 Qums remarks, however, are
too specific to be brushed off as false rhetoric. In addition, there is much evidence for the
presence of rbakhshs in Iran that has evaded these fine scholars of Sufism. or example, we
know that an active khnaqh existed near Sabzavr in the village of Sidr until the late

318

In his introduction to the early edition of the

f printed in Tabriz, the ahab activist and calligrapher Mu sin-i l,
otherwise known as Imd al- uqar (d. 1914), dismisses jlis l- minns account of the schism between rbakhshiyya
and ahabiyya as a lie fabricated by a fanatic nsib (enemy of the household of the Prophet) and criticizes Shrvn and
Ma m Ali-shah quite harshly for repeating the same nonsense in their accounts. See Mashhad Sabzavr, The Golden Chain,
xviiixix.
319

See the three rbakhshi treatises on the margins of S b. (Tabrz Isfahn, S b l- sn, 120140, 14151 and 152220.).
This was first printed in 1922 through the efforts of the aforementioned Imd al-Fuqara, along with Va d al-Awliy (d. 1955),
the next ahab Shaykh.
320

The authors name is transformed to Shaykh usayn ahab, and his remark on the prominence of rbakhsh order is
erased from the authorized ahab version. See usayn ahab (sic), B yn l-Asrar (Tabriz, 1954), 83. This seems to be an
agenda that was pursued by Shams al-dn Parvz, himself a ahab. See his remarks in ahab Parvz, Takirat Al-A liy, 88. To
his credit, Khavari cautions the readers of the unreliable nature of Parvzs Takirat al-A liy. See: Khvar, ahabiyya, 304 note
1.
321

322

Qum, Shish Risl -yi rs, 303; Qum,

f t l-Akhyr, 202; pseudo-Ardabl, dq t l-Sh , vol. 2: 796.

Shahzad Bashir, Messianic Hopes and Mystical Visions: the N rb khshiyy Bet een edieval and Modern Islam, Studies in
Comparative Religion (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2003), 194. Algar, Hamid, " rbakhshiyya," Encyclopaedia
of Islam, Second Edition, ed. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, and W.P. Heinrichs, Brill, 2011, Brill Online,
RICE UNIVERSITY, 20 May 2011. http://www.brillonline.nl.ezproxy.rice.edu/subscriber/entry?entry=islam_SIM-5992.

136
seventeenth century.323 Dervish Kaml and Shaykh Muhammad Mumn Sidr after him were
the last rbakhsh masters who operated in Sidr. Sometime in the early eighteenth century,
under the leadership of Mr Mu ammad-taq Khursn (otherwise known as Shh), the
lineage transferred its center to Mashhad. As we will see in the next chapter, Shh is among a
handful of Sufi masters that ayrz met during his lifetime. The latter praised Shh highly in
his writings, saying that he was renowned in every quarter of the earth and among the
murshds for those who seek guidance in the spiritual Path.324 ayrz and other writers of
biographical sources in which Shhs name appears curiously suppress the name of the Sufi
order with which he was associated.325 In spite of this censorship, we know that he was a
master of the rbakhsh Sufi order. He appears in the rbakhsh lineage as a student of
Mu ammad Mumn Sidr from the very khnaqh in Sidr mentioned above.326

323

Shml, Qi Al-khqn, 193194. Although Shml does not explicitly identify the center in this village as a rbakhsh
one, the names match precisely the rbakhsh genealogies mentioned in later sources. See, for example, Shrvn, Riy lSiy , 336. rom there Shrz Ma m Al Shh, riq l- qiq, vol. 2: 321. This rbakhsh lineage is also mentioned in a
unique manuscript in Tehran Universitys collection. See Silsila-yi Sidriyya-yi rbakhshiyya-yi Hamadniyya, n.d., Ms. o.
4689/2, Central Library & Documentation Center, University of Tehran. This manuscript even extends the lineage beyond the
late seventeenth century. It is obvious, however, that the rbakhsh masters abandoned the center at Sidr for Mashhad. The
ruins of this khnaqh still exist in the village of Sidr (nowadays, Istr), known locally as the tomb of Pr-i Istr. According to
the reports of eyewitnesses, there are three gravestones on which the names of six masters are inscribed. They are Shaykh Ali
[Juvain] (d. ?), Shaykh [Dervish] asan (d. ?), Shaykh [Dervish] Mu ammad-ri (d. ?), Shaykh [Dervish] Kaml al-dn [Sidr]
(d. 1071), Shaykh Muhammad Mumn [Sidr] (d. after 1076), and a certain H Mumin (d. ?). These names match, almost
perfectly, with what is recorded in the abovementioned genealogies. Local people consider the buried saints to be descendants
of Kumail b. Ziyd, a close confidant of the first imam in esoteric matters, according to the Twelver tradition. or more
information on this tomb visit:
http://razavi-chto.ir/?portal=MainPortal&modules=content&ref=146
324

Ab al-Qsim Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

Mawl, 2004), vol. 3: 1220.

l l-Khi b, ed. Mu ammad Khv av, Chp-i 1. (Tehran:

325

or example, Abd al- ab Qazvn, in accordance with the strong anti-Sufi sentiments inherited from his teacher, Mull
Khall Qazvn, gives a detailed account of Shhs miracles and exemplary piety and asceticism while going on to point out
that all the people of knowledge and nobility who met him and with whom I met mentioned that he never spoke as Sufis
speak about their superstition, their technical vocabulary, their pretentions, and beliefs. (Ibid., 86)
326

Shrvn, Riy l-Siy , 336. His source is probably Silsila-yi Sidriyya-yi rbakhshiyya-yi Hamadniyya, f. 2. This might
in fact be the first evidence we have of the attempt by ahab authors to suppress the name of the rbakhsh order as they
sought to assimilate its heritage as their own.

137
In the early seventeenth century, prominent students from this khnaqah like Q
Asad Khp (d. 1048/1638) established another important center in Kshn.327 The
overwhelmingly Shii makeup of the population of both Sabzavr and Kshn suggests that
rbakhsh Sufis had made a smooth and easy transition to Twelver Shiism.328 We know that
the khnaqh at Kshn was operational until 1076/1665 under Asads disciple, Mrz
Mu ammad Ardabl Bdgul, also known as Mu aqqiq (d. after 1076/1665). Sometime in the
final decades of the seventeenth century, however, this center seems to have ceased to operate
as a khnaqah. The Sufi- rbakhsh literary tradition that was produced and preserved there,
however, had a significant and lasting impact on later developments in the spiritual landscape
of Iran. 329 This influence is especially evident in the writings of the arqs, two celebrated
religious scholars who lived much of their lives in Kshn and who, as we will see in the final
chapter, had access to this literature.
In sum, to the extent that the primary sources give us an accurate picture of the
situation of organized Sufism during the latter half of the seventeenth- and the early decades
of the eighteenth century in Iran, the rbakhshiyya are the only ma or Sufi order known
both to proponents and opponents of Sufism in the heartlands of the Safavid Empire. The rival
Barzishbd branch, led by Muain and a b during most of this period, is mentioned only
sporadically under general titles in Sufi sources. The new title of ahabiyya emerged, as I
327

The tomb of Q Asad still exists in Kshn. He was buried in his khnaqah, most of which was razed in the early twentieth
century to make space for a road pro ect. or more on Asad see a rbd I fahn, kir -yi N rbd, 300. Asads rbakhsh
lineage is recorded a work by his prominent disciple, Mu aqqiq Ardabl (d. after 1076). See Ardabl Bdgul, Takirat alkirn, 9091.
328

Perhaps nothing signifies the symbolic importance of Kshn as the ideal urban center in Safavid imagination than the
choice to bury the great Shh Abbs, the Safavid monarch most revered by Iranians even up to the present day, in that city.
329

Although much of this heritage is now lost to us, extant works enable us to get a glimpse of its vibrancy and intellectual
rigor. One of these is the dvn (collection of poems) of Q Asad, which has survived and is presently being prepared for
publication by Afshin Atefi. Three other works by Mu aqqiq were at the final stage of publication when I was preparing the
final draft of this manuscript.

138
have argued, only in the early eighteenth century. The consolidation of the order under this
new title, I believe, is an important indication of a new identity that emerged as a result of a
synthesis between the old Kubrav Sufi ethos and the new Safavid Twelver Shiism aggressively
propagated by the ulama.
As such, I believe the so-called ahab order was going through an important transition
at this period that was marked by a crisis of identity in terms of its connection to Sufi
tradition, the sources of legitimacy upon which it drew, and its relationship to the emerging
hierocracy of Twelver ulama. It is important to emphasize the Safavid nature of this crisis.
That is to say, I am not talking simply about love for the twelve imams, a prevalent marker of
the pre-Safavid and early Safavid era that Marshal Hodgson aptly called Alid loyalty. 330 Nor am
I speaking only of the basic dichotomy that cast Safavid Twelver discourse as the polar
opposite of (Ottoman and Uzbek) Sunni discoursesa dichotomy in which t b rr,
disassociation from other companions of the Prophet, was a necessary accompaniment to
t v ll, love of the imams.331 Rather, I am talking about the urgent need for a new discourse of
legitimacy to supplant a Sufi discourse rooted in the Sunni pastan alternative discourse
based on Twelver hadith sources and the discursive tradition built upon those sources by
Twelver ulama. ortunately, a number of important works written precisely at this time
provide us with a detailed picture of Sufis innovative attempts to legitimize and authenticate
their tradition on the basis of a new canon: the four early Shii compendiums of hadith332 along

330

Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, vol. 2: 446. Also see Matthew S. Melvin-Koushki, The Quest for a Universal Science: The
ccult Philosophy of in al-Dn Turka I fahn (1369-1432) and Intellectual Millenarianism in Early Timurid Iran (Yale
University, 2012), 6971. Other scholars have called this blurring of the boundaries between Shiism and Sunnism Twelver
Sunnism. See Rasl Jafariyn, rkh-i sh yy d r rn: A gh t Q rn-i Dahum-i Hijr, Chp-i 1. (Qom: An aryn, 1996), vol.
2: 726.
331

This phenomenon was mostly known to the Sunni world under the title of raf , or re ection, with the Shia labeled rfi .
See Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, 3236.
332

These are al-Kf by Kulayn,

hb and

n l

r by Ibn Babya and l-Istib r by s.

139
with other, less universally-accepted, hadith compilations that they found helpful. Such
attempts necessarily involved the partial or complete demolition of problematic aspects of the
previous narrative of sacred history, in which Sunni sources of hadith, Sunni scholars, and
Sunni Sufi shaykhs were the primary sources used in the construction of an authentic religious
discourse. As a result, many of the old markers of identity for Sufi orders, which had informed
the connections and distinctions between Sufi discourse and other learned Islamic discourses
as well as between rival Sufi orders, became increasingly irrelevant. New markers of identity
were needed, and as they were invented by innovative Sufi masters of the time, they came to
play important roles in defining the emerging religious identity of Sufi orders, including that
of the ahabiyya. Most of these new markers connected Sufi discourse to the Sufi elements of
Safavid sacred history (going back to the foundational figure of af al-dn Ardabl) or to
sources of Twelver tradition that lent themselves to being used as evidence of the
authentically Twelver nature of Sufi discourse.
In order to demonstrate more concretely how these new priorities and markers of
identity manifested themselves in works written by Sufis as well as the Sufi-minded ulama, I
turn now to an analysis of a number of important texts that, I believe, are good representatives
of the abovementioned changes during the seventeenth century. The works address here are
(1) a commentary on the thirtieth section of the Quran by Shaykh Mumin Mashhad most
likely written during the early decades of the century; (2) hids B yn l- srr (written circa
1058) which I mentioned briefly above; and (3) Muains
1075/1666 during the reign of Abbs II.

f -yi Abbs, written before

140
Tafsr Mumin Mashhad

Published two decades ago in Mashhad, this is a commentary on the thirtieth (the final)
part of the Quran (known as amma juz). The author identifies himself on the first page as
Shaykh Mumin Mashhad.333 The work is written in Persian and dedicated to Shah Abbs I on
the occasion of his travel to Mashhad.334 The style and the content of the work suggest that it
was written in the early seventeenth century, and its mention of Shh Abbs coming to
Mashhad probably references the shahs famed ourney on foot from Isfahan to Mashhad to
visit the shrine of the eighth imam in 1010/1601. 335
A reading of the text quickly reveals that its author is an erudite Sufi shaykh. Although
his references to Twelver Shiism as the firqa-yi njiy , or the saved sect, indicates that he
adhered to Twelverism at least nominally, a closer examination of the content of book reveals
that the author had a long way to go in order to be regarded as a truly Shii author by the
standards of mid-seventeenth century Isfahan. The commentary, as a whole, is heavily based
upon an important work of tafsir by Zamakhshar (d. 539/1144), that is, al-K shshf. It quotes
Sunni canonical sources extensively, rarely making use of specifically Shii sources of hadith.
The authors knowledge of Shii exegetic tradition is superficial, and his lack of reference to the
canonical Shii hadith collections is a strong marker that he speaks from the vantage point of a

333

There is a possibility that this Shaykh Mumin is the same Shaykh Mumin of whom we spoke earlier, i.e., the prominent
rbakhshi master of the early seventeenth century. Since there are several people called Shaykh Mumin in this period in
Khurasan, however, this remains a conjecture. It should be noted, though, that the title of Mumin (which is used to frequently
by individuals in this period as part of their name) could indicate a recent conversion into the official version of Shiism. The
word mumin in Shii literature, when used in contrast to Muslim, often refers to a person who is a true believer in Twelverism
in contrast to a Sunni, who is only a nominal Muslim.
334

Ibid. Given this dedication, the date that appears at the end of the manuscript (1089/1678) must a mistake or a reference to
the date in which this particular manuscript was copied from the original.
335

The symbolic significance of this trip occupied Iranian imagination for centuries to come. See, for example Abbs ibn
Mu ammad Ri Qumm, ft Al-jinn (Beirut: Dr I y al-Turs al-Arab, n.d.).

141
Sunni-dominated educational curriculum and its relevant intellectual world.336 The network of
authorities and references brought up throughout the work to support the points raised is
similar to that of Sufi works written in Central Asia in the mid- and late sixteenth century. As
such, the work belongs to a nascent stage of the transformation of Sufism in Iran, one in which
Sufi teachings remain deeply embedded in traditional Sunni frameworks of reference despite
nominal adherence to Safavid Twelverism.
Soon, however, a different kind of Sufi writing appeared in the new cultural
environment of Iran, especially in major cities that contained larger proportions of Twelvers
or were more central to the Safavid agenda. This type of writing is marked by a conscious
effort to draw upon the broader hadith literature associated with Shiism. B yn l-Asrr, of
whose author I spoke earlier, is representative of this development.

Bayn al-Asrr

B yn is written as a commentary on i b

l-Sh ri v

ift

l- qq . The latter

work is comprised of one hundred chapters written from an esoteric perspective on the
spiritual levels and qualities of the wayfarer. The work is heavily laden with Sufi vocabulary.
Within learned Shii circles, the earliest appearance of content that appears later in the work
that came to be known as the i b is found in al-Aml by Ibn Bbya (d. 381/ 991), better
known as Shaykh adq.337 Ibn Bbya makes no mention of a book called i b , and the
essential figure in the transmission of this content appears to be the well-known Sufi, Shaqq
336

Several examples of the many references to Sunni tafsr works are as follows: Mu ammad Mumin Mashhad, fsr-i
mm d min shh d B r J -i S m-i Q rn-i jd, ed. Al Mu addis, Ma ma-yi Mrs-i rn va Islm. (Tehran:
Markaz-i Intishrt-i Ilm va arhang, 1983), 14, 30, 61, 149, 171, and 172.
337

Mu ammad ibn Al Ibn Bbawayh al-Qumm, Aml-i Sh ykh d q, ed. Mu ammad Bqir Kamara, Chp-i 4. (Tehran:
Kitbkhna-yi Islmiyya, 1362), 638640. Mu ammad Bqir ibn Mu ammad Taq Ma lis, Bi r Al- n r, ed. Abd al-Zahr
Alaw (Tehran: Dr al-Kutub al-Islmiyya, 1376), vol. 1, 32.

142
al-Balkh (d. 193/809), who ascribes it not to Jafar al- diq, but to b

hl al-ilm (some learned

people).338 It is not quite obvious what happened between the eleventh- and the thirteenth
century, when Al b. Tvs al- ill (d. 663/1265) not only mentions the name of the book,
i b , in his work entitled al-Amn, but also confidently ascribes it to Jafar al- diq, the sixth
imam, strongly recommending that devout Shiites take the book as their company during
travels.339 Despite this mention and recommendation, the work seems to have been unknown
to all but a few Sufi-minded religious scholars of Shiism. It was not until the advent of the
Savafids that the work began to circulate widely among Twelver Sufis of the time. i b
provided Shii Sufis as well as Sufi-minded Shii religious scholars with an important source for
authorizing and legitimizing their teachings based on what they considered to be an
authentically Shii work. A brief look at the number of manuscript copies of the work
preserved in libraries in Iran demonstrates its importance. Only two extant copies of the book
can be dated to the sixteenth century, and not a single copy dating to previous centuries has
survived. The situation changes dramatically when it comes to the eleventh/seventeenth
century, as fifty-seven manuscripts can be dated, precisely or approximately, to that century,
and twenty-five to the subsequent one (See the Figure below).340 This is a huge and dramatic

338

Although I was not able to trace the reception of i b in early Sunni-Sufi learned tradition, based upon a manuscript I was
able to examine through Houghton Librarys online collection (dated 711/1311) as well as on the above information about the
appearance of some parts of the book in early Shii works on the authority of Shaqq Balkh, it appears that at least a nucleus
of what later came to be known as i bh was in fact Shaqq al-Balkhs contribution. or Houghton Librarys manuscript see
Shaqq ibn Ibrhim Balkh, Mi b Al-shara Wa-mift Al- aqqa / min Ta nf al-Shaqq al-Balkh, 711, MS Arab 124,
Hougton Library, Harvard University, http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL.HOUGH:1580067.
339

Ra al-Dn Ab al-Qsim Al ibn Ms Ibn ws, al-Amn min Akh r Al- sfr W -al- mn (al- a af: Manshrt al-Ma baa alaydariyya, 1951), 91.

340

I have consulted the massive and comprehensive index of the manuscripts recently published by the majlis under Mustafa
Dirayatis supervision as the source for this chart. See: Mu af Diryat, ihristvr -i Dastnivisht-h-yi rn (Din)., Chp-i 1.
(Tehran: Kitbkhna, Mzih va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm, 1389), vol. 9, 656-664.

143
increase that demonstrates the important role the work played in the cultural and religious
landscape of the second half of the Safavid rule. 341

Date

Number of
surviving manuscripts

1500-1550

1551-1590

1591-1640

1640-1688

30

1689-1737

11

1738-1785

The question of who wrote the i b does not concern me here. Rather, the
importance of B yn lies in the fact that it represents one of the earliest examples of Sufi
writings in which authors begin to focus upon traditions of the Twelve imams rather than
those of the Prophet, his companions, and the early and foundational figures of Sufism. That is
to say, B yn can be seen as an early example of an emerging Sufi discourse validated through
an alternative set of authoritative sources. Accounts of the imams effectively become the new

341

It is important to mention the role that a noteworthy Arab Shii scholar of the early Safavid era plays in this regard. Zayn alDn al-Jub al-Amil (d. 966/1558), otherwise known as the Second Martyr, appears to be the link through whom Sufi authors
of the seventeenth century come to know i b . The author of B yn for example, in his introduction, states that it was Zayn
al-Dn who named the collection i b l-Sh ri v ift l- qqa, even though he does not question that the content of the
book is attributable to the sixth imam. Zhid, Bayn al-Asrr (Manuscript), 3. There is also a unique manuscript of i b
copied in 1082 by none other than our own Muain Khursn. In this manuscript, the author claims that he copies from an
original that was penned by the Second Martyr himself. See Dnishgh-i Tehran. Dnishkada-yi Maql va Manql. and Ziy alDn Ibn Ysuf Shrz, Fihrist-i Kitbkhn -yi Madrasa-yi li-i Sip hslr (Tehran: Chpkhna-i Dnishgh, 1315), vol. 1, 308-310.
Zayn al-Dn had strong Sufi leanings that are reflected in some of his writings, especially his Munyat al- rd. His scholarly
credentials, and especially his tragic execution by Ottoman authorities for being a Shia, gave him an impeccable aura of
sainthood and authority. Sufi authors in Safavid Iran took advantage of the combination of Sufi-Shii elements in his character
and writings as an important source of legitimacy for their teachings.

144
hagiographica. One of the most active Sufis of the time who contributed significantly to the
formation of this emerging discourse was Muain Khursn, the prominent learned Sufi
master of the latter half of the seventeenth century in Isfahan.

Muain-i Khursn and the Making of the Golden Lineage

Mu ammad Al Mashhad (d. 1078/1668) was initiated into the Kubrav-Barzishbd

Sufi order and trained by Shaykh tam Zarvand, and after the latters death he emerged as
one of the most influential Sufi figures of his time in Iran, especially in Mashhad and Isfahan.
Biographical information about him in contemporary chronicles represents him as a popular
and charismatic shaykh and a devout lover of the family of the Prophet. Val-qul Shml, a
Sufi-minded chronicler of late Savafid times, provides the most extensive report on Muain
in his Qi

l-khqn.342 According to Shml, in the year 1652, Muain left for hajj along with

a large group of pilgrims from across Khurasan, and the author notes that he sponsored many
poor people on this ourney: This humble one has heard from a reliable source that after this
peerless shaykh returned from that trip, he owed fourteen hundred tuman. In a short while, it
was granted to him as a freely bestowed gift from the Royal Treasury (kh n -yi mira).343
According to the same source, he made a second hajj trip in 1655, and on his way back home,
during the reign of Shh Abbs II, he stayed in the capitol for an extended period of time. His
charismatic personality and erudition soon made him a prominent member of elite society in
342

Babayan gives a partial report of this section of Qi

in Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 453455.

343

Shml, Qi Al-khqn, 187. Translation from Babayan. Here Babayan mistranslates the term khazna-yi mira to the
Royal Treasury. Although there is no doubt that in specific contexts the term can indeed be translated as Babayan has done,
the context of this passage leaves no doubt that what the author has in mind is the Divine Treasury. See: Babayan, Mystics,
Monarchs and Messiahs, 428 and 454. Compare it to Shml, Qi Al-khqn, 185.
n a completely different register, it is quite entertaining to compare Shmls report of Muains ha trip and the financial
problems entailed with Mr Law and I ms version referenced previously. Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat alMa d (Manuscript), f. 11a. I m al-dn Mu ammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 126a 129a.

145
Isfahan as well as a popular figure among the populace as a prayer leader and a preacher. His
erudition made it possible for him to forge connections with some of the ulama, like ay
Kshn, as well as members of Royal Court, including the king himself.344
Due to his success in forging connections with prominent political and religious figures
of his time and his popularity as a charismatic Sufi master, he became a primary target of the
anti-Sufi campaign. Mr Law portrays him as a skilled charlatan who fooled people into
giving him large sums of money by fabricating fantastic stories of the miracles and dreams of
the imams he had experienced.345 He is called nothing less than a human Satan, the leader of
the caravan of misguidedness (pshh ng-i krivn-i

ll t) and infidel (kfir). Law s

frustration with Muains popularity is clearly reflected in the following remarks:

[Isnt] there someone out there more righteous, more knowledgeable, or more
ascetic than this Shaykh Mu ammad Al? Which one of the ulama, f l
(knowledgeable men), or bbd (worshippers or ascetics) of the time has been
the subject of such great interest by the people compared to him? Some
insightful people who know the situation of that leader of the caravan of
misguidedness ( ll t) know that this destroyer of religion busies himself with
nothing but making accusations (iftir) about God, the Prophet, and the
immaculate imams, and that he occupies himself with songs and illicit music
(ghin) in the mosque; and even though many among the ust believers ( d l-i
m minn) and reliable people of religion (siqt-i ahl-i dn) have officially signed a
document indicating his kufr (infidelity), not one of his deceived followers
turned their back on him, rather they grew even more interested in that satan
afterwards what business do the common folk have with the teachings of the
ulama?346
344

In this report he is said to be present in a special session convened by Abbs II to meet with two prominent dervishes from
the ttoman lands, Dervish Mustafa and Dervish Ma nn who requested to meet with their Safavi counterparts, Mulla Ra ab
Al and Dervish Mu ammad li Lunbn, who had just received grants from the monarch. In this courtly assembly, Mulla
Mu sin ay is also said to have been present. Mu ammad hir Va d al-Zamn Qazvn, Abbs-nm , ed. Ibrahim Dihgan
(Ark: Dvd, 1951), 255.
345

A more extensive and detailed account of charges of financial fraud and other accusations can be found at I m al-dn
Mu ammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 126a129a.
346

Mr Law , Kifyat al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), f. 10a11a. Also in Mr Law , Arban, 17. Babayans
understanding and translation of this passage is flawed, leading to unwarranted statements about Muains religious outlook.
Instead of making accusations (iftir) about God, the Prophet, and the immaculate imams she has he made higher claims
than God, the Prophet, and the immaculate Imams. Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 452. This mistranslation paves the
way for her to argue for a non-existing ghuluvv that has infused the religiosity of men like him (Ibid., 455).

146

The picture reflected in Muains own writings, however, is quite different. Two
substantial pieces of his work survive. First and foremost is a substantial work on Sufism titled
f -yi Abbs, written around the year 1666 and, as the title suggests, dedicated to the
Safavid monarch, Shah Abbs II.347 Second is a collection of his poems, his Dvn.348 Whereas the
bulk of the poems in the latter work belongs to the early years of his career as a Sufi master
prior to his extended stay in Isfahan, 349 the former work belongs to his Isfahan period, which
spanned the final decade of his life. The picture of his religious outlook reflected in the Dvn is
that of a devout Shia, a passionate lover of the family of the Prophet and the twelve imams
(whom he understands in an unmistakably Twelver Shii way), as well as a genuine Sufi who
does not shy away from defending controversial practices such as s m (Sufi musical dance)
and the vocal congregational sessions of ikr. urthermore, he frequently and explicitly refers
to his beloved master, Shaykh tam. In line with most traditional Sufi poetry, the central Sufi
notion of love or ishq, is emphasized. In his case, however, he gives this central concept an
overwhelmingly Shii tone by emphasizing the primacy of the love of the imams and its
importance for embarking and continuing through the spiritual Path or sulk.350 Among all the

347

fa has been printed twice in Iran; once in the early twentieth century and the other in twenty-first century. It has also
recently found its way into English thanks to aghfoorys translation. Mashhad Sabzavr, The Golden Chain. My references
here will be primarily to two manuscripts from the Minasian Collection and the Majlis Library, although I will occasionally use
aghfoorys translation when I quote from the manuscript. aghfoorys excellent translation is based, unfortunately, on an
early twentieth century print edition of the work which has been corrected by ahab editors.
348

Mu ammad Al Mashhad, Dvn, n.d., Ms. o. 8983/1, Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.

349

I found no mention of Isfahan or figures and events associated with his adventures in the post-hajj period in the poems. It is
clear that some poems recorded in the Dvn belong to the early years of his career as a master of this Sufi order (For example,
see ibid., f. 120a). This particular poem, in which he mourns his master, was most likely written soon after the death of his
master, Shaykh tam. Another ghazal refers to the year 1062/1651, before his first hajj trip (See: Ibid., f. 115a). The Majlis
manuscript is incomplete, though (See: Ibid., f. 135a). It is possible that a complete version includes some poetry that was
written after his pilgrimage to Mecca.
350

Ibid.

147
imams, the figure of the eighth Imam, Al b. Ms al-Ri , the patron of the ahab order
looms large in his poetry.

f -yi Abbs

In contrast to his Dvn, Muains

f -yi Abbs clearly reflects the influence of the

religious, intellectual, and political environment of Isfahan. It is a major and innovative

contribution to the project of shifting the foundations of old Sufi teachings to the newlydeveloped and expanding platform of Shii hadith literature.351 A deeper look into the content
of the book provides us with a unique window through which we can understand and analyze
the dramatic transformations of Sufism in this critical period.
Before getting into details, I would like to make two general observations about the
content of the book. First, the author is clearly preoccupied throughout the work with
responding to the increasing attacks of the anti-Sufi campaign, which was at its peak when he
wrote the book. In fact, the attacks constitute the very r ison dtre of penning the

f , as

Muain mentions in his opening remarks.352 The main accusation that Muain seems to be
worried about countering is that of being Sunni. To counter such false accusations, he argues
that the scarcity of Shii traditions in mainstream Sufi sources is, for the most part, a result of
the practice of taqiyya or dissimulation. In writing the

f , Muain claims, he is making

the first attempt in Shii literature to demonstrate how the basics of the Sufi path and its

351

Seyyed Hossein Nasr was the first scholar of Persian Sufism to have emphasized the importance of the
f a couple of
decades ago. See asr, Spiritual Movements, Philosophy and Theology in the Safavid Period, 66365. Perhaps based on his
suggestion, Mohammad Faghfoory, a close friend of Nasr, translated the work into English. Although my analysis of the
f
is based on two manuscripts that I examined for the purpose of this research, I have used aghfoorys good translation in my
direct quotations of the work, with minor corrections.
352

In the introduction, the author specifically points out that he was compelled to write the book because of the onslaught of a
fierce anti-Sufi campaign that was initiated by the ignorant who know nothing of the exoteric as well as the esoteric
knowledge. See Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 11.

148
precepts and practices are fully rooted in, and in compliance with, the teachings of the
infallible imams.353 What follows is an extensive discussion in twelve chapters (the number is
not a coincidence) in which he draws upon Shii hadith sources like Kulayns U l l-kf,
adqs al-

jlis and tiqdt, Sayyid Ra s Nahj al-b lgh , ss al-Aml and Ibn Ab Jumhr

al-A ss Avli l-L l.354 This takes us to the second striking feature of the work, that is, the
ubiquitous presence of copious quotations from Shii hadith collections as well from the
writings of well-known Sufi-minded Twelver scholars of the past. This clearly reflects a period
in Safavid religious history that, as I discussed in chapter one, is marked by intense scholarly
activity in hadith studies. It also clearly speaks to the abovementioned urgent need of Sufi
authors to develop an alternative framework of reference to legitimize their teachings.
Shmls astute and extremely important remarks about Muain, in which he mentions that
the latter was busy during his years of residence in Isfahan with the study of hadith literature,
should be understood in this context.355
Moving beyond the general remarks above, Muains prologue contains a number of
extremely important points about the situation of the so-called ahab order at this time. irst,
much like the author of B yn, he writes as both an affiliate and proponent of the Safavid Sufi
order as well as a member of the specific Sufi tradition he has inherited from his master.
Neither in his Dvn nor in

f does Muain use the term ahabiyya in reference to the Sufi

order to which he belongs.356 Rather, he employs a number of general epithets like silsil -yi

353

Ibid., 1115.

354

Shrz Ma m Al Shh,

355

Shml, Qi

356

riq l- qiq, 22848.

Al-khqn, vol. 2: 187.

Contrary to what later ahab sources would have us believe, the designation ahabiyya does not occur even once in the
entire book. The Minasian collection manuscript, which has been my primary source throughout this research, does not
include the epithet ahabiyya where it is apparently inserted in later redactions (See the margins on Tabrz Isfahn, S b lsn, 11. compare to Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 15.). A similar case can be found in the text of

149
kh

-yi muqaddasa-yi nabaviyya (the special, sacred, and prophetic order) and rq -yi

m r iyy -yi m kht

-yi m rt

viyy (the unique, laudable and Alid path). The term

murta aviyya (Alid) also appears in his Dvn as a title for this arqa.357 He emphasizes that
genealogically his silsila is connected to the pure caliphate-foundation house (khnidn-i
khilf t b nyn) of the Safavids and boasts of being trusted as a gatekeeper and a treasurer
of the secrets of this royal Sufi order.358 To make this connection clearer, he provides a chain of
transmission that connects him and the order to the legendary figure of Shaykh af al-dn
Ardabl as a supplement to the primary Barzishbd chain of spiritual transmission, which he
lays out in detail.359 This dual lineage, at the same time that it provides him with a way to
distinguish his lineage from that of the Safavid order, also provides with a much-needed
source of authentication and legitimacy.
Muains attempt to connect his spiritual lineage through an additional alternative
line to the Safavid order is by no means a unique phenomenon, as we saw with the case of
B yn. Irrespective of the historical value of such claims, there is no doubt that forging such
connections, or emphasizing existing ones, were valuable and indispensable to a Sufi orders
survival in the new Shii milieu of Iran. Karbal, who belongs to another Barzishbd branch
S b l-Masn itself (See Tabrz Isfahn, S b l- sn, 5, where the term ahabiyya is mentioned, and compare it to the
manuscript: Tabrz Isfahn, Sab al-Masn (Manuscript), f. 5a.). As for the term silsilat al- h b, there is only one place in the
entire work where it appears. This, however, is in the middle of a quote from the famous Central Asian Naqshbandi Shaykh,
Kh a Muhammad Prs (d. 865/1460), in which the latter, in accordance to the traditional aqshbandi usage, makes use of the
term as an honorary one for the chain of transmission from al-Ri to the Prophet (See: Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs
(Minasian MS), 203204.). Given the fact that we know that Barzishbd was in fact a student of Prsa for a long period of
time, it is quite normal to see Prsas usage of the term to be adopted beyond the aqshband lineage by the Barzishbd
shaykhs.
357

Mashhad, Dvn, f. 128a.

358

Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 10. The exact phrase appears in Shml, Qi
l-khqn, vol. 2, 186,
which indicates that Shml had access to the book a confirmation not only of Shmls mystical proclivities but also of the
well-received position of Muains work among the elite members of the Safavid house.
359

Ibid., 20809. Also see the Ma lis manuscript: Mu ammad Al Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Ma lis MS), n.d., f.
27b30a, Ms. o. 17760, Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Ma lis-i Shr-yi Islm. The claimed link between Muains
primary Kubrav lineage and the Savafid lineage is Shh Qasim Anwr (d. 837/1434), a student of Shaykh afs son, Shaykh
Badr al-Dn. The figure of Shayh af remained beyond the reach of even the most outspoken critiques of Sufism.

150
called the Lala after its founder, Sayyid Badr al-dn A mad Lala (d. . 912/1506), claims that
Shah Ismal spared this branch in Tabriz from persecution by Qizilbsh zealots partly due to
his awareness of the connection between the two orders.360 The same connections helped the
rbakhsh Sufi order flourish in Khurasan and Central Iran, especially in Kshn and araq.
Using general epithets like nabaviyya, murta aviyya and ra viyya (which refer explicitly to the
Prophet, Ali, and the eighth imam, consecutively), and paying lip service to the Safavid Sufi
order by pointing out the abovementioned connections, not only indicate the formation of a
new identity based on the personality and teachings of the Twelve imams, but also its
compliance with the hegemonic Sufi discourse of the Safavids.
As we transition from the prologue to the content of the book, we find a long
introduction (muqaddima) that is divided into five uneven chapters that together constitute
more than one-third of the whole book. The author starts with a discussion of the meaning of
the terms Sufi and ta awwuf. Little here departs from the traditional Sufi discourse of past
masters. The tra ectory of the chapter changes significantly, however, as Muain embarks
upon an explanation of how the majority of those who are called Sufis and dervishes in his day
are impostors. After spending nearly ten pages enumerating the vices and dangers of such
people, he follows with a lengthy discussion of what constitutes a real Sufi, what attributes
and qualifications a Sufi must have, and how scarce such people are. For more than sixty pages
he quotes numerous traditions, primarily from the imams but also from the Prophet. In every
case, the original Arabic text is accompanied by its Persian translation, an important indicator
of the kind of audience the author had in mind while writing the work. Most of these traditions
from Shii hadith collections talk about the extraordinary spiritual accomplishments and

360

Karbal Tabrz, R

t l-Jinn v J nnt l-J nn, vol. 2: 105 and 159.

151
qualifications of real mumins or true Shiites. or Muain, however, they refer to real Sufis
since, we are told, one cannot be a true Shiite without following the path of Sufism and vice
versa. Copious quotations from Twelver sources followed by extensive discussion of how they
affirm the validity of the Sufi path is the main strategy of the author in providing his sketch of
a prototype that is at once an ideal Sufi and an ideal Shii.
After a cursory discussion of the two main precepts of the faith, i.e., taw id (the
unification of God) and m d (Resurrection), the rest of sections in the introduction are
dedicated to explaining the Sufi perspective on that most crucial of doctrines, the imm
(Imamate). A lengthy eulogy for each imam follows. The brevity of the author on the sub ects
of taw id and m d versus the length at which he treats the Imamate is a clear indication of
the primary intellectual issues of the time. In his conclusion of this part, and after clarifying
the meaning of imam from a Sufi point of view, the author presents us with a general
discussion of how Sufis trace their teachings back to the imams, after which he lays out his
own spiritual genealogy connecting him to the imams and, through them, to the Prophet.361
Throughout this long introduction, Muain takes advantage of every opportunity to
emphasize the importance to Sufis of observing Sharia, again a clear indication of the sort of
allegations he faced.362
The main body of the book starts with a lengthy discussion of knowledge. Again, I take
this as a sign of the primacy and importance of the issue of religious knowledge and
epistemology for Muain. Shiism has concerned itself with the issue of religious knowledge,

361

362

Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 20809.

Ibid., 183191. At the end, he specifically mentions that a group called m l id claim that the burden of observing the law is
taken off of the accomplished mystics. ot surprisingly, Muain categorically re ects this claim. The term mal ida (Sing.
m l id) is usually used in classical sources to refer to Ismailis, but in this context it might also refer to the N qt v movement
that had been suppressed by Shh Abbs ust decades before
f was written.

152
its nature, and its authentic sources from the early times. Shii ulama have long emphasized
the imams as the only valid sources of religious knowledge, the sole inheritors of the prophetic
gnosis, and the treasurers of divine secrets. It has been long noted that al-Kf, the most
celebrated and authoritative among the four Shii canons of hadith, begins with a chapter
titled kitb l-aql va-l-jahl (The Book of Intellect and Ignorance). Having noted this, I believe
there is something more going on in

f and its authors concern with knowledge. The

debate over approved sources and methods of attaining gnosis or marifa, as I mentioned in
the concluding section of the previous chapter, was at the center of the battle between Sufis
and the ulama over the attempt to define the basic framework of Twelver orthodoxy. Whereas
the Sufi considers intuitive unmediated knowledge, gained by purifying the heart through
bodily mortification and mental meditation, to be the true and authentic religious knowledge,
the madrasa scholar disdains such a conception, emphasizing disciplinary discursive
knowledge as the only true religious knowledge. The stakes were incredibly high. Whoever
won the battle of definition and gained the authority to define what is and is not a legitimate
source of religious knowledge and how such knowledge can be attained, could effectively
dominate and control religious discourse at the expense of rival claimants. As such, it should
not surprise us that this issue was constantly debated between pro-Sufi and anti-Sufi authors.
Knowledge, then, is the subject of one of the most extensive discussions of Tuhfa.363
This is why Muain insists on talking about Sufism as a science and highlights a
dichotomy between formal disciplinary fields of knowledge ( l m-i rasmiyya), in which
reasoning plays an essential role in constructing arguments, and what he calls the real
sciences ( l m-i

363

Ibid., 21239.

qqiyy ). The latter, for him, is nothing but the science of Sufism (ilm-i

153
vvuf ), and it is only by mastering the latter that a drop of the unfathomable ocean of

Divine gnosis can be distilled in the heart. In talking about Sufism as a science, Muain
aligned himself not only with a long tradition of learned Sufism364 but also with some of the
respected Sufi-minded Twelver religious scholars, like his contemporary ay , his teacher
adr, and the (much earlier) respected Lebanese religious scholar, the Second Martyr. The
latters Munyat al-

rd is among the most-cited works in Sufi treatises of this period. A

favorite paragraph from this work that is frequently referenced by Sufis and Sufi-minded
religious scholars in regards to the above-mentioned classification of the branches of
knowledge deserves to be quoted in full here:
After learning the exoteric sciences and all that earlier scholars have compiled
in their books such as [rules] for daily prayers, fasting, recitation of the Quran
and other prayers, there are other things the learning of which is necessary for
a scholar. For, in addition to the supererogatory rites, obligatory rituals and
duties that are expected of every individual who reaches the age of adolescence
(mukallaf) to observe are not limited to the ones compiled by jurisprudents.
Rather, there are sciences beyond them and learning them is more essential and
observing them more important. They are also subject of great debate and
controversy. They include [the science of] purification of the soul from vicious
habits and traits such as pride, bigotry, jealousy and hatred or other poisonous
characteristics that have been discussed in relevant sciences It is mandatory
for everyone to learn these sciences and put them to practice. These are duties
and obligations that cannot be found in the books of jurisprudence or
discussions of [the laws of] transaction and rent and the like. In order to acquire
the knowledge of these sciences every individual who reaches the age of
adolescence (mukallaf) is expected to seek scholars of the truth ( l m -yi
qq t) and read books they have written in these fields. There is no pride more
destructive for a divinely learned man than his preoccupation with the formal
sciences and his negligence of his own soul and struggle to earn Gods pleasure,
Blessed and Exalted is He.365
364

References to Sufism as a branch of knowlege or ilm go back as early as eleventh century in works like Hu vrs K shf lj b and Abdullh Ansrs n il l-Sirn. Later on, Ghazl divided knowledge into the categories of exoteric and esoteric
and divided the latter into ilm al-mumalt and ilm al-mukshaft. With the emergence of Ibn Arab, the latter division
expanded significantly and resulted in the establishment of a distinctly Sufi metaphysical school of thought, usually referred
to as al-ilm bi-Allh or ilm lh in contrast to ilm m n il l-khir or simply ilm al-man il that referred to what Ghazl called
ilm l-m m lt. Further research is necessary to lay out exactly how all the abovementioned categories overlapped and
interacted.
365

Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 238239. I have used aghfoorys translation here, with minor
corrections. See Mashhad Sabzavr, The Golden Chain, 103104. Originally in Zayn al-Dn ibn Al Shahd al-Thn, Munyat Al-

154

[T]hen after complete knowledge of exoteric sciences (ilm l- hir) [the seeker
of knowledge] moves forward to learn the real sciences ( l- l m l- qqiyy )
and the true disciplines ( l-f n n l- qqiyy ). Indeed, these are the kernel of the
sciences and the essence of all that is known. Through these sciences one can
attain the stations of those who were brought nigh to God and reach the station,
as those [before you] who have reached the station of union [with the Beloved].
May God connect us and you to that threshold, verily He is the Generous and the
Bestower.366
or Muain, there is no question that the abovementioned emphasis of al-mil on
the real sciences over the official ones can only be interpreted in one way, that is, as a
reference to the science of ta avvuf. The real lims are none other than Sufis.367 Thus, he
concludes:

Therefore, it is prudent to say that by relying on formal knowledge based

on reason one cannot attain the station of irfn, which is the abode of
those who are brought nigh to the Lord. One cannot witness the beauty
of the true Beloved by any means other than the light of the sun of
divinely inspired knowledge. Because on the path of reason there are
many thorns of skepticism and doubt and the feet of reason are
traversed through the realm of thoughts and the end of most of the
arguments is disagreement and the basis of syllogism (qiys) is often
conjecture and exaggeration (g f).368
Muain also finds in Zayn al-Dn an ally for himself on the sub ect of the traditional
Sufi classification of ulama369 into three groups: (1) exclusively well-versed in exoteric matters
(al-lim bi-amr Allah); (2) exclusively well versed in esoteric matters (al-lim billh); or (3) wellm rd f Ad b Al-m fd W -al-m st fd, ed. Ri Mukhtr, al- aba 1. (Beirut: al-Amra lil- iba wa-al-Nashr wa-al-Tawz, 2006),
15455.
366

Mashhad Sabzavr, The Golden Chain, 109. riginally in Shahd al-Thn, Munyat Al-m rd f Ad b Al-m fd W -al-m st fd, 389.

367

Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 239.

368

Mashhad Sabzavr, The Golden Chain, 107. Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 249.

369

The term ulama in the context of this old classification (see the note below) should not be understood as having the same
meaning and connotations of its modern use in which it is overwhelmingly used to refer to a distinct social class and heirarchy
of religious scholars trained and based in madrasa. Rather, it denotes a more general meaning of someone who is
knowledgeable about religious matters.

155
versed both in esoteric and exoteric sciences (al-lim billh va-bi-amr Allah). 370 The third type,
obviously, is the ideal, not only from Muains perspective, but also from that of Zayn al-Dn,
and it is this type, according to Muain, who are real Sufis, those poles ( q b) of the time of
whom only a handful can be found in the east and west in each aeon. They are the ones under
whose patronage the entire populace lives.371
Zayn al-Dn was not the only prominent Sufi-minded Twelver scholar of the past whose
work Muain found extremely useful in laying the foundations of the alternative Twelver
basis of legitimacy for Sufism. The original affinity between Shii thought and Sufi thought, and
the fact that most Twelver scholars throughout history operated in a predominantly Sunni
environment in which Sufism was a major and often dominant player, resulted in many wellknown religious scholars of Shii affiliation writing treatises that drew upon, and deeply
resembled, Sufi literature. As such, beyond the classical sources of Twelver hadith and wellknown Sufi works,

f is filled with copious quotations from, to mention a few important

examples, Ibn Ab Jumhr al-A ss Avli l-L l,372 Ibn ahd ills la r al-dn ss A f l-Ashrf, Allma ills inhj l-K rm and Sh r

n fi ift l-rifn,373
l- jrd, Shaykh

Bahs K shk l, l-Arb n and other works, including, finally, Zayn al-Dn al-mils Munyat alrd. By the end of the first chapter of the

f , the halfway point of the book has been

passed. This, again, is indicative of how important the subjects covered in the early portions
were to the author.

370

This is a very old classification that is ascribed by Rz in his Quran commentary to Shaqq al-Balkh. akhr al-Dn
Mu ammad ibn Umar Rz, al- fsr Al-k br, al- aba 3. (Beirut: Dr I y al-Turs al-Arab, n.d.), vol. 2: 181. Zayn al-dn
paraphrases Rz in some length here. See Shahd al-Thn, Munyat Al-m rd f Ad b Al-m fd W -al-m st fd, 12325.
371

Ibid. 278-79

372

or his biography, see Shrz Ma m Al Shh,

373

or information on ill, see ibid., 22123.

riq l- qiq, vols. 1: 24851.

156
I would like to close my analysis of the content of

f -yi Abbs with a brief note on

how this work addresses the sub ect of the spiritual guru or pr. As I suggested earlier, the way
this sensitive and fundamental element of traditional Sufi thought is handled in the writings of
this era provides us with a useful barometer of how transformations in the religious
environment influenced Sufis understanding of their own heritage and social institutions. The
spiritual guru and his necessity for the wayfarer is address in the last chapter of

f . The

chapter features a detailed discussion of 1) why one must seek a pr in order to embark upon
the mystical path and 2) the necessary qualifications of those who wish to embark upon this
path as disciples, or those who present themselves as qualified masters ready to guide.
According to the author, someone truly worthy of shaykhhood needs to have attained five
fundamental and twenty secondary qualities in terms of his mystical capabilities and moral
character. 374 Muains discussion of these qualities and is taken, often word for word, from a
classical Sufi source, that is ir d l-ibd by the Kubrav Sufi shaykh, a m al-Dn Rz Dya
(d. 654/1256). While it is quite normal for a Sufi master like Muain to paraphrase ir d,
what interests me here is the places in which he feels it is necessary to edit or add to Dyas
comments.
In ir d, the author begins his discussion of what it takes to qualify as spiritual guru
with five fundamentals upon which such qualification is based. Four of these have to do with
the ability of the potential spiritual guru to be able to receive Divine secrets and grace,
unmediated.375 As such, these four fundamentals demonstrate beautifully how the Sufi vision of
the ideal religious type is fundamentally different from that offered by the ulama, whose
374

375

Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Ma lis MS), 494529.

Abd Allh ibn Mu ammad a m al-Dn Rz, ir d Al-ibd, ed. Mu ammad Amn Riy , Ma ma-yi Mutn-i rs; 46
(Tehran: Bungh-i Tarjuma va Nashr-i Kitb, 1973), 23740.

157
emphasis has always been on the mediation of proper religious knowledge through other
human beings, that is, prominent teachers past and present. Here Muain follows the author
of ir d with minor additions and modifications.376 What he leaves out, however, is Dyas
final remarks in which he discusses how the novice should attain this unmediated knowledge.
Dya emphasizes the crucial role of falling in love with the beauty (j ml) of the master and,
then, giving up all personal preferences and choices in favor of those of the master.
Apparently, such language did not seem suitable to Muain given his erudite orthodox
audience. Another example of such an erasure comes a number of pages later when Dya
discusses the proper mode of behavior in sam, or Sufi dance, and the proper way of
prostration in front of the master.377
Moving to the twenty additional qualities that a person must have to be a true master,
two important differences between ir d and

f can be found at the beginning of the list

that are quite useful for our purposes. The first quality that Najm al-Dn considers necessary
for a Sufi master is a minimal knowledge of Sharia, which allows him to give appropriate
advice to his disciples in urgent cases.378 Muain adds the following provision to Dyas
remark: if the master reaches the station of leadership of the community, mastery of the
exoteric sciences is necessary so that one can help solve the questions and problems of
wayfarers and disciples.379 This additional provision, I believe, is a reflection of the intellectual
environment of Isfahan and the struggle for dominion over the newly formed Shii religious
discourse. Muain understands that, as a resident of a khnaqh, he would not be taken
376

Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 512516.

377

Najm al-Dn Rz, ir d Al-ibd, 263; Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 527.

378

Najm al-Dn Rz, ir d Al-ibd, 244.

379

Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Ma lis MS), 515.Mashhad Sabzavr, The Golden Chain, 208.

158
seriously by the ulama, who were increasingly expanding their control over the social,
financial, and political resources that any major religious discourse would need to survive. Had
he chosen to ignore the so-called official sciences in favor of his real science, he would
have been dismissed and marginalized as an ignorant dervish against whom not only the
puritan anti-Sufis wrote, but also the mystically-minded ulama like adr and ay . Thus, it is
not difficult to understand why, at such a late stage in his career, he decided to spend time
studying hadith. In the heyday of scholarly attention to, and even obsession with, hadith in the
middle of the seventeenth century, such study would provide him with the needed credentials
to engage in a meaningful conversation with his colleagues from madrasas and patrons of the
court. The second striking, and yet not surprising, contrast to ir d is the latters emphasis on
the necessity, for both the master and disciple, to adhere to the essentials of Sunni doctrine
(itiqd-i ahl-i s nn t v j m t). Muain simply replaces this with his own emphasis on the
necessity of a pure and unwavering submission to the teachings of the imams.380
Muain was a pivotal figure in the fluid and dynamic spiritual and religious
environment of Safavid Iran, and his intellectual and religious outlook provides us with a
window into the major cultural trajectories of the era. First, we have the early decades of his
career (the pre-Isfahan era) in which he functioned as a popular Sufi shaykh, located centrally
and comfortably in his khnaqh, and practicing regular ikr and sam with his disciples
much as the old Kubrav masters would have done. Then, came the second phase of his career
(post-Isfahan), epitomized by his

f , which is indicative of an acute sense of awareness and

concern about the issues that were debated in the intellectual environment of Isfahan in
regards to religious authority and authenticity. As such, Muain stood between the two

380

Najm al-Dn Rz, ir d Al-ibd, 244; Mashhad Sabzavr, Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), 516.

159
worlds and made an original and innovative attempt to arbitrate their differences. That is,
between the world of institutionalized Sufism and that of the religious and political elite of the
capitol, where he represented the learned tradition of Sufism and engaged in scholarly
conversations with mystically-minded ulama and sought the sponsorship of the Safavid
monarch by presenting himself a true guardian of the Safavid Sufi legacy and a devout
Twelver.381

a b al-dn Ri and the Demise of rganized Sufism

During the final decades of Safavid rule, the pressure on Sufis and dervishes increased.
The death of Ma lis Sr. in 1659, whose popularity and explicit proclivities toward Sufism made
him a valuable and strategic ally of Sufis facing the increasing pressure of the anti-Sufi
campaign, was a significant blow to the pro-Sufi front. Seven years later, Sufis lost another
ma or ally, Shah Abbs II, the last Safavid king who openly favored dervishes and Sufis. Four
years later, Muain, one of the most prominent Sufi masters of the time in terms of his
influence in the capitol, passed away. The remaining prominent players in the religious
landscape of Iran gradually distanced themselves from Sufism in the wake of the increasing
pressure of the anti-Sufi campaign and the weakening of royal support. The tide was rapidly
turning against Sufis.

381

Muain is, for example, reported to have raised the authority of ay Kshn when questioned about the validity of the
practice of sam in his khnaqh. In response, we are told, ay denied having supported such a practice (See I m al-dn
Mu ammad b. im al-dn, a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, f. 126b127a). Babayan reports the same story based on
Jafariyans report in Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs, 448. Although, as she has pointed out, ay s denial is in
agreement with the stand he takes against the practice of ikr-i al in his lkimt, since the story only appears in antiSufi literature and serves an obvious polemical goal, it must be approached very carefully. Irrespective of the factuality of the
story, it vividly portrays the place of ay in between the two cultures, that of the Sufis and that of the ulama. For such a story
to be told, his authority must be evoked both by Sufis seeking to legitimize a given practice, and by their opponents, to
undermine its legitimacy.

160
or example, ay Kshn, who initially wrote treatises in which he favored Sufism, at
least in its learned forms, gradually distanced himself from it at the final decades of his career
and wrote a treatise in which he expressed regret for having spent his time with such
inauthentic teachings.382 This trend became more pronounced, culminating in the work of his
erudite son, Mu ammad b. Mu sin (known as Alam al-Hud) who as a prominent religious
scholar wrote several treatises against Sufism.383 The same trend is observable with Ma lis Sr.
and his son. While the former, as mentioned, did not hesitate to defend certain elements of
Sufi thought, his son Mu ammad Bqir Ma lis (d. 1111/1699), who gradually rose to
prominence after his fathers death to become the shaykh al-islam of Isfahan, vehemently
opposed Sufism and wrote treatises that contributed to the anti-Sufi campaign of his time. His
appointment to the office of shaykh al-islam was followed by two other similarly important
appointments in Qom and Mashhad. By 1687 three of the most prominent and outspoken antiSufi critiques, Mu ammad hir Qum in his hometown, Shaykh urr Amil in Mashhad, and
Ma lis Jr. in Isfahan were appointed to the highest clerical positions in these three ma or
urban centers of Iran. The emergence of this Mashad-Qom-Isfahan triangle of anti-Sufi shaykh
al-islams is an important development in the anti-Sufi campaign. Whereas in the early decades
only mid-ranking mullas engaged Sufis, as the final decades of the seventeenth century
approached, high-ranking ulama were given the power and authority to fight all forms of
heresy, including Sufism.384

382

or an analysis of the evolving position of ay regarding Sufism see Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn,
vols. 2: 537556.

rh ng v Siys t,

383

or a bibliography of Alam al-hud see iy al-dn usayns introduction to al-Vf: Mu ammad ibn Murta ay Kshn,
al-Vf, al- aba 1. (Isfahan: Maktabat al-Imm Amr al-Muminn Al al-mma, 1986), vols. 1: 1829.
384

Sefatgol, Skhtr-i Nihd v Andsh -i Dn d r rn-i r-i f v, 452. The fact that the archbishops of all three of the most
important urban centers of Iran, religiously speaking, were also followers of Akhbrism testifies to the dominant position of
this legal school of thought in the final decades of Safavid rule.

161
Ma lis Jr. also engaged in a revisionist agenda regarding his fathers legacy in which he
categorically denied the latters Sufi proclivities. In a well-known and widely-circulated
statement he says:
Beware lest you suspect my erudite father that he was among Sufis or
believed in their pathfar from ithe was the most familiar to traditions of the
family of the Prophet among his contemporarieshis path was the path of
asceticism (zuhd) and abstention (vara)and in the initial stages of his
[scholarly] life he used to associate with the title of ta avvuf so that they [Sufis]
get interested in him and are not scared away, so that he can forbear them from
holding such beliefs, and he was successful in guiding many of them to the path
of the Truthand, at the end of his life, as he realized that such a provision has
expired and that the flags of misguidedness ( ll) have been removed, and
realized that they are explicit enemies of God, he distanced himself from them
and used to declare them infidels and I am more familiar with my fathers
path, and his writings about this are at my disposal. 385
Contemporary western historians have made much of the so-called volte-face of
Ma lis Jr. in painting a damning picture of the latter as a fanatical and bigoted mulla.386 There
is no doubt that his position vis--vis Sufism was in contrast to his fathers. It is also true that,
especially in the final decade of his life, he took on the mission of fighting deviant yet
popular practices like drinking, prostitution, juggling, storytelling, and so on. Religious
minorities also suffered persecution under his watch. Having said that, two important points
must be taken into consideration, especially regarding his opposition to Sufism. Ma lis Jr.s
385

Ma lis, irt l-N jt, quoted in Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v Siys t, vols. 2: 53031. Interestingly enough,
Mr Law quotes the above statement a number of times at the end of Kify t disapprovingly, saying that Ma lis Jr. Sufi
proclivities were too obvious to be denied by such statements. Law even specifically names a certain Mr Qsm kir (d. ?) as
Ma liss murd (Sufi master) and the one who sow the seed of the love for ghn (singing) in his heart. See Mr Law , Kifyat
al-Muhtad f Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), f. 185b.
386

A negative picture of Ma lis Jr., as a bigoted and fanatical clergy has dominated Western scholarship since E.G Brownes
groundbreaking studies. For a brief and refreshingly personal account of this bias against him see: Newman, Safavid Iran, ix. As
Newman indicates, the stereotype proves to be very resilient. It is easily discernible in Arjomand, The shadow of God and the
Hidden Imam. Influenced by Ar omands studies, Lewisohn continues to adhere to the same stereotype, calling Ma lis Jr. a
bigot (Leonard Lewisohn, An Introduction to the History of Modern Persian Sufism, Part I: The imatullh rder:
Persecution, Revival and Schism, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 61, no. 3 (January 1,
1998): 410.). More recently, this inaccurate image in which Ma lis is seen responsible for wiping out much of organized Iranin
Sufism in Matthi s Van Den Bos otherwise valuable study of imatullhs during the nineteenth and twentieth century.
(Matthijs van den Bos, Mystic Regimes: Sufism and the State in Iran, from the Late Qajar Era to the Islamic Republic (Leiden: Brill,
2002), 51. A balanced and informed analysis of his career can be found at Sefatgol, Skhtr-i Nihd v Andsh -i Dn d r rn-i
A r-i f v, 217223.

162
stance should be seen in the larger context of a growing discontent with Sufism at the time.
Ma lis Jr., as a pupil of not only his father but also Mu ammad hr Qum, was born into an
environment more hostile toward Sufism, and his contributions make better sense when read
against such a background.387 With such a context in mind, it can be said that what father and
son had in common far outweighed their differences. As Zarrnkb has noted, Ma lis Jr.
himself made a distinction between Sufis who complied with the percepts of Sharia and other
more antinomian Sufis. Thus, portrayals of his blanket opposition to Sufism cannot be taken at
face value. 388
More importantly, the central concern overshadowing the lives of both was a genuine
and enthusiastic effort to recover the forgotten legacy of the imams dispersed in hundreds of
canonical and non-canonical sources, and thus, reorienting the scholarly priorities of their
colleagues by bringing the study of hadith from the periphery to the center of attention.389 In
this effort, they assimilated many elements of Sufi thought, as I will discuss below in this
chapters concluding remarks. Both Ma liss eagerly spoke of their dreams and mystical
experiences involving the imams, often the Hidden Imam. Ma lis Jr., who surpassed his father
in gaining popular support and seizing the public imagination as a saint, was buried, at his own
request, in a spot near his father and was visited in the same way. Symbolically, there can be
no stronger sign to indicate that the son, rather than viewing himself as someone who broke
with his fathers path, considered himself the upholder of his legacy, viewed him as his
example, and wished to be buried beside him.

387

Although this needs further research, one cannot dismiss Ma lis Jrs claim that his father distanced himself from Sufis at
the end of his career.
388

Zarrnkb, D nbl -yi J stj d r

389

Jafariyan makes a similar remark. See Jafariyn, f viyy d r r -yi Dn,

vv f-i rn, 260.

rh ng v Siys t, 1043.

163
At the same time, the Safavid realm was faced with increasing problems in managing
the economy and the financial resources of the empire.390 As if this was not enough, during the
first decade of the rule of Shah af II, Iran was struck by two bad harvests, a devastating
earthquake in Shirvan, and several other calamities that proved that the shah had been
crowned at an inauspicious time, thus necessitating that the coronation be done anew, this
time under the name Shh Sulaymn.391 The economic hardship nevertheless continued for
most of Sulaymns reign. The following decade proved to be domestically troublesome, in
spite of relative calm on the borders. Despite the overall deterioration in the general financial
and structural health of the empire, and mainly due to the unwavering support of the Safavid
monarchs, especially the final king, Shah Sultan usayn (d. 1726),392 the ulama were
increasingly successful in securing the necessary financial and political resources to build the
grand structure of their hierocracy. An increasing number of madrasas were built, and the
general environment of religious education was flourishing apace.393 The period of more than
half a century after the death of Shah Abbs II can be considered the apex of clerical power,
when the religious hierocracy was consolidated with an elaborate structure and strong alliance
with the political establishment.394
In contrast, the Sufi khnaqhs and dervish monasteries came under increased
pressure because of the difficulty they faced in securing the necessary financial resources to
390

Matthee, Persia in Crisis.

391

The 1670s witnessed drought, harsh winters, locust swarms, famine, and earthquakes In 1678-79 some 70,000 people
were said to have perished from famine in Isfahan alone ( ewman, Safavid Iran, 94-95). Newman also tells us about another
poor harvest in 1669, and a plague in Gilan in 1684-5 which spread to Aradabil, where some 80,000 were said to have died, and
thence to Hamadan. It went on to strike Azerbaijan, Mazandaran, Astarabad, and Isfahan itself in 1686-7. In 1689 plague was
said to have killed thousands in Shiraz, and struck areas from Baku to Basra, Mosul and Baghdad (Ibid).
392

For his religious sensibilities and devotion see Sefatgol, Skhtr-i Nihd v Andsh -i Dn d r rn-i A r-i f v, 9197.

393

For a detailed and masterly analysis of the hierocratic structure of the late Safavid period see ibid., 397458.

394

Ibid., 184234.

164
keep such centers operational. The ahab order is an excellent example. According to ahab
sources, the leadership of the order was passed on to an artisan named a b al-Dn Ri Zargar
Tabrz (d. ca. 1108/1696) who lived in Isfahan for most of his life. A careful reading of a bs
own reconstruction of the chain of events that led to his assumed designation to the
leadership of the order,395 as well as the information available to us from independent sources
reveals otherwise. Takira-yi N srbd (written at about 1672) includes the name of a certain
Mr Mu ammad in the list of poet-dervishes of the time and a disciple of Shaykh Mu ammd
Al Mashahd (Muain) who succeeded him as the leader of the order.396 His full name was Mir
Muhammad Sharf Mashhad (Qain), and he is mentioned in R

t l-J nnt along with

Mu ammad Al al-Muain as the two prominent Sufis of the age.397 a b himself calls Mir
Mu ammad the perfect disciple (murid-i kmil) of Muain.398 The fact that Mr Mu ammads
name appears in a number of independent contemporaneous sources that are completely
silent about a b suggests that the latter was not a well-known or serious claimant.
It is only natural to speculate that after Muains death, it was Mr Mu ammad who
was viewed as the next leader. His leadership, however, lasted only for a brief period, since Mr
Mu ammad was nearly the age of his master, Muain, and died soon after. It is more likely
that a b began to lay claims to the position of the leadership of the order after Mr

395

a b al-dn Ri Tabrz Isfahn, r al-Hidya (Manuscript), 1230, f. 184b186a, Ms. o. 4978, Kitb-khna, Mzih, va
Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm. Also in a ib al-Din Riza Tabrz Isfahn, N r l-Hidy (Tehran: Chapkhana-i Ilmi,
1946), 28486. See also Tabrz Isfahn, S b l- sn, 368.
396

a r-bd,

kir -yi N rbd, 302.

397

Muhammad Bqir Khwnsr, R t l-J nnt f A vl l-Ul m v

Maktabat Ismliyn, 1962), vol. 3: 142.
398

Tabrz Isfahn, r al-Hidya (Manuscript), f. 183a.

l-Sdt, ed. Mu ammad Al al-Raw t Isfahn (Tehran:

165
Mu ammads death. His low profile and literary silence for more than a decade after his
master passed away speaks clearly to his peripheral position. 399
a bs autobiographical account of his miserable situation in Isfahan is a personal
testimony not only of the effects of the abovementioned economic hardships, but also to his
utter failure to reinvigorate the order after his masters death. a b was unable to gain a
considerable number of followers in Isfahan. In the very last pages of S b l-Masn, written in
Isfahan in 1090/1680, he complains about the city that was built by Judas and empty of any
muruvvat or chivalry.400 He explains that in the initial years of his residence in the capitol, he
was able to gather and spend some level of fortune. As a result, many desperate people in those
harsh economic times frequented his house. The rapid depletion of his resources and his
inability to replenish them speak to a situation in which, in the absence of wealthy and wellconnected patrons, many Sufi centers must have been faced with no choice but to stop
operating after a while. This stands in stark contrast to a report on Mashhad written by a b
nearly a decade earlier, in which he portrays a prosperous khnaqah with a kitchen full of
food. 401
In spite of his dismal record in terms of leadership, a b permanently marked the Sufi
order by giving it the name that it continued to be known by from the eighteenth century

399

Each of his three works dates to between 1090 and 1100. Khavari mistakenly dates N r l-Hidy to 1077. The book was
finished after 1089 since the latter date is specifically mentioned in the text. See ibid., f. 101b.
400

401

Tabrizi Isfahani, S b Al-Masani., 372-73.

He lost three or four of his children to these harsh economic conditions in Mashhad and then in Isfahan. For his
heartbraking account of losing his children see Tabrz Isfahn, r al-Hidya (Manuscript), f. 172b173a. Also in Tabrz
Isfahn, S b l- sn, 37273. A more detailed account is provided in a b, N r l-hidy , folio 178, Majlis Library MS 4978. In
one place a b complains about how the people who frequented him took advantage of the food and then left him alone as
soon as he ran out of the financial resources to support such generosity (ibid.). His account tells us much about the situation
on the ground in terms of Sufi lodges and hospices. Many people who frequented such places did so partly because they met
some of their basic needs such as food and shelter. Such was the role his masters khnaqh played in Mashhad, according to
him. According to N r l-hidy , a ib lived in his masters compound for a while on the second floor, beneath which was the
food storage place for the khnaqh. Ibid.

166
onwards, i.e. the ahabiyya. Anyone familiar with the Sufi world will quickly note that the
designation ahabiyya is an anomaly for a Sufi order. That is to say, it contrasts with the
overwhelming majority of Sufi orders and their various branches, which are named after their
charismatic founding figures.402 ahab sources, which have not been able to agree on a single
explanation for the designation, seem to be as confused and unsure about its origins as
everyone else, including contemporary scholars. Yet given the increasing pressure from the
anti-Sufi front, which in turn led to the stigmatization of epithets like fiyya, by which the
order was previously known, and given the urgent need for an authentically Twelver outlook,
both in social and intellectual terms, the title of ahabiyya was the perfect choice given its
strong semantic association with the figure of the eighth imam, Ali b. Ms al-Ri . It was also
a natural choice given the fact that the order had flourished in Mashhad during the previous
century with an active khnaqh located close to the shrine as its center of activities. The
eighth imam was in effect the patron of the order from the early seventeenth century onward.
The choice of ahabiyya as a designation was also in accordance with the increasing role that
the eighth imam played in the religious imagination of the newly-converted Shii population of
Iran. It confirmed the Twelver nature of this Sufi order and preemptively responded to the
charges of Sunnism usually leveled against the Sufis at this time.
It is in a bs writings, then, that the first literary evidence of an attempt to use the
term ahabiyya as the official designation of the Sufi order can be observed. The second
decade of the eighteenth century marks the peak of his literary activities. It was in this period
that we can see in at least two of his works clear attempts to introduce the new designation. In
his N r l-Hidy , there is a section near the end in which he expands upon the claim that all

402

For a comprehensive list see Triminghams illustrated genealogies (J. Spencer Trimingham, The Sufi orders in Islam (London:
Oxford University Press, 1973), p. 30, 46, 56, and Appendix C.

167
Sufis derive their esoteric knowledge from the fountain of the family of the Prophet, and that
all masters trace their spiritual genealogy to one imam or the other. In this section, he
classifies all of the important Sufi groups of his time into four principal orders: (1) the Rifa, (2)
the aqhshband, (3) the Sha r order, and finally (4) the Kubrav orders. The latter, a b
says, is also

called silsilat al-ahab. It is the mother of orders (umm al-s lsil) that all
orders of [spiritual] poverty sprang from [because] through generations of
immaculate imams it[s teachings] has reached the hands of Al ibn Musa al-Ri .
There is no doubt whatsoever in this orders Shiism and validity since it is said
in a hadith that [whoever] believes in al-Ri is without any doubt a pure Shiite
and [consequently] believes in the rest of the imams. This order is based in Iran
and its branches are spread out all over the world, and it goes back, via Marf
al-Karkh, to Al-Ri 403

Thus, the designation ahabiyya was born at the end of the seventeenth century as the
legitimate child of a new and distinct religious and spiritual milieu that was, more than

403

Tabrz Isfahn, r al-Hidya (Manuscript), f. 186b188a. In some other cases, instead of using the term ahabiyya, a b
first mentions the traditional title of Kubraviyya, followed by a mention of the possible alternative silsilat al-ahab. See ibid., f.
95b., in which he uses the same term to refer to the adherents of this order (f qirn-i silsilat al- h b). See also ibid., f. 189b.,
where he mentions silsilat al-ahab again and says that it is called silsila-yi k br as well. This is unlike his later work, S b lsn (written 1095), in which the he repeats the same four-fold categorization of the Sufi orders but clearly prefers the new
designation over the old one. He chooses a shortened version of the designation silsilat al-ahab, i.e., ahab, to refer to the
fourth principal Sufi order. o mention is made of Kubraviyya. See Tabrz Isfahn, S b l- sn, 6465. In S b, a b also
experiments with several other forms of the designation, including r viyy , m rt viyy (Tabrz Isfahn, Sab al-Masn
(Manuscript), f. 5b.) and h biyy -yi Ri Tabrz Isfahn, S b l- sn, 13. Both cases are obviously attempts to emphasize
the links of this order to the first and the eighth Imam. This flexibility of terminology is a clear sign that no particular
designation among the aforementioned possibilities had been fixed upon.
Another observation that requires further investigation is the noteworthy absence of any mention of the
rbakhsh Sufi order. This could be among the earliest signs of the ahab revisionist efforts to de-emphasize, and ultimately
deny, any distinction between the two rival Kubrav branches in Iran.

168
anything else, Safavid in nature. As a spiritual order, they were in full compliance with the
official hagiographical narrative constructed to provide spiritual legitimacy to Safavid rule
a narrative that revolved around the figure of af al-Dn Ardabl as the founding figure of the
Safavi Sufi order. 404 af al-Dn was the center of an elaborate foundational myth as a sayyid
(descendent of the Prophet) and a pious and orthodox Sufi follower of the Twelve imams. As
such, he embodied the ideal type in Safavid spirituality, a model to be emulated, and an
example to be followed completely. His presence overshadowed other Sufi figures of the past,
effectively pushing them to the background. As we have seen, a bs master, Muain,
pro ected a similar picture of himself as a gatekeeper to the secret teachings of the Grand
Master, af al-Dn.
The Safavid nature of this silsila also meant that it incorporated into its worldview
essential elements of the new Twelver orthodoxy developed by the ulama. Most important in
this regard was the omnipresence of the Twelve imams in the orders literature, whose
dazzling charisma and indisputable authority effectively relegated all other Sufi figures to the
margins. The saintly figures of the past, charismatic Sufis and dervishes at the center of public
devotional rites, were eclipsed by the Twelve Imams and their descendants. Devotion to the
latter replaced the former cults and their quasi-divine powers and the powerful symbolism of
the imams became the new focus of the mass religiosity as well as the main theme of religious
literature by the elite.
In spite of this original contribution, and as a result of several abovementioned factors,
such as the hostile environment created against Sufis and the lack of financial resources, a b
404

Therefore, the connection of the spiritual lineage of the ahab Sufi order to the Safavid order remains important. This is
reflected in a bs remarks, taken almost word for word from his masters
f . He says first, that Shaykh afs silsila can
also can be traced back spiritually to al-Ri via Marf and second, that silsilat al-ahab is also connected to the founder of the
Safavi order, Shaykh af. The connecting link is, again, Shh Qasim Anvr. See: Tabrz Isfahn, r al-Hidya (Manuscript),
f. 188a189a.

169
al-Dn spent the last years of his life in isolation, passing away around 1108/1698.405 For the
next two decades, there is little to report about ahab social, literary, or intellectual activities.
So murky was the situation of organized Sufism in general and the ahab order in particular
that the very existence of the next ahab pole, Al-naq I ahbnt (d. 1126), would be
doubtful were it not for the fact that his successor, ayrz, mentions him as his master.406 Until
recently, no piece of writing was ascribed to I ahbnt in primary and secondary sources
about the history of the order. A recently-published monograph titled B rhn l-

rt n,

however, has shed light on the situation of the order during those difficult times.407 The
structure of B rhn and the issues with which its author is most concerned are similar to those
of

f . In fact, the work is not so much an original contribution as it is a rehashing of the

themes already treated by Muain and a b. In the opening section, however, the author
gives us a clue of how hostile the environment had become for Sufis in comparison to several
decades prior:
The masses because of their ignorance and misguidedness, have found
the courage to be sarcastic and curse and harass Gods servants to the degree
that they consider such harassment the most important religious duty after the
five daily prayers. They use sword, stone and sticks if they are able; otherwise
they consider backbiting, defaming (iftir), traducement (b htn), sarcasm ( n),
cursing (l n) obligatory upon themselves.408

405

406

or his death date see Khvar, h biyy , 28789.

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

407

l l-Khi b, vol. 3: 1199.

Khvar, h biyy , 297. I ahbnts monograph has been published recently. See: Al-naq I ahbnt, B rhn led. Mu ammad Hurtaman (Isfahan: Muqm, 2003).
408

I ahbnt, B rhn l-

rt n, 12.

rt n,

170

In spite of this hostility and the extremely weak situation of the order, this is an
important episode in the history of the ahabs, because after this time the center of the order
is permanently transferred to Shiraz. In comparison to Isfahan, the latter was a much more
welcoming and tolerant environment for unorthodox figures. I ahbnt died in his
hometown at 1126/1714 in anonymity, barely noticed by the learned notables of his time.409
The ahab order, however, underwent a revival under the leadership of his disciple, ayrz,
who spent half a century engaged in intense cultural activities as a prolific writer and
respected teacher. 410 These efforts won him the epithet of mujaddid or reviver in ahab
sources.411 This prominent ahab shaykh, Qu b al-dn ayrz, however, was more similar to a
ranking resident of a the madrasa than a Sufi shaykh of the khnaqh, both in terms of his
outward appearance and in terms of his intellectual and religious outlook. He was an
established teacher in madrasas of Najaf, the study of hadith was his main occupation, and, as
we will see in the coming chapter, he even refused to be called a Sufi. This was a fascinating
and important development for the future of Persian Sufism in general and the ahab order in
particular that I will follow in detail in the next chapter.

Conclusions and Analysis

The picture above details how well positioned Sufism was in the early seventeenth
century, before the first attempts were made by a group of mid-ranking ulama to challenge its

409

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

l l-Khi b, vol. 3: 1199. n his death date see Khvar, h biyy , 296.

410

or an account of later developments in ahab leadership see: Leonard Lewisohn, An Introduction to the History of
Modern Persian Sufism, Part II: A Socio-Cultural Profile of Sufism, from the Dhahab Revival to the Present Day, Bulletin of the
School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 62, no. 1 (January 1, 1999): 3659.
411

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

l l-Khi b, .

171
legitimacy. It also gives a vivid sense of how dramatically this position had changed by the
early decades of the eighteenth century, by which time public opinion had turned against Sufis
and dervishes. Lack of sponsorship and this coordinated and well-organized campaign,
implicitly supported by sources of power, explain how Sufism was negatively affected and
weakened. However, it does not account for how the average denizens of Safavid Empire,
especially in major urban cities, who had previously depended on the rich and diverse
symbolism of Sufism to make sense of the natural and supernatural worlds, were able to severe
those ties in a matter of less than a century. It also does not explain how they became
domesticated Twelvers who looked up to the ulama as the new source for meeting their
religious needs and connecting them to the Absolute source of power, grace and knowledge.
The key to answering this question lies in the role of hybrid and extremely popular
figures like Shaykh Bah, Ma lis Sr., his son, and ay Kshn. Throughout the seventeenth
century, they played an important role in redirecting peoples religious attention from the
charismatic Sufi shaykh toward the imams when it came to worldly as well as otherworldly
needs and aspirations. These figures acted as spiritual translators, so to speak, allowing people
to successfully and satisfactorily replace former ways of finding meaning and staying
connected to the heavens. The imams, through their assumed infallibility and the fantastical
accounts that had developed around their personalities, had already been accorded quasidivine status, and it was only necessary to develop ways for the people to access them easily, as
they previously had Sufis and dervishes. In Ar omands sociologically informed words:
The basic religious predispositions and demands of the masses are marked by
the congeniality of savior soteriology and the desire for solicitation of
supernatural powers for earthly benefits such as good health and fulfillment of
wishes. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the lay masses demand for
salvation was met by living saviors: the Sufi shaykhs and the claimant to
mahdihood. For these the Shiite religious professionals had to substitute

172
acceptable otherworldly saviors. These same otherworldly saviors could then be
solicited and induced to use their supernatural powers from the worldly benefit
of the believers.
To establish their hierocratic domination over the masses in Iran, the
Shiite doctors had to take two sets of factors into account: the predispositions
and religious demands of the lay masses, and the services required by the rulers
in exchange for which the indispensable royal political support could be
secured. Under the impact of these two sets of factors, the established or
orthodox Shiism that the doctors of Safavid period sanctioned and propagated
came to differ in some important respects form the Shiism of the sectarian
phase, a religion of urban minorities that had borne the imprint of the outlook
of their literate dominant strata.412
Such hybrid figures among the ulama were popular not only because of their personal
piety but also because, unlike proponents of puritanical discourse like Mr Law and elitist
advocates of rationalist discourse like peripatetic philosophers and exoteric u l urists, they
represented and promoted a syncretistic mode of religiosity that integrated popular belief and
practices. In doing so, they adopted major elements of popular Sufism and looked for
traditions from the imams that could serve as a basis for incorporating those elements into the
outlook of a new Twelver religious orthodoxy, one that was developing throughout the second
half of the seventeenth and the first half of the eighteenth century. Even when these hybrid
figures could not find such traditions they would seek alternative rationales for incorporating
elements of popular religiosity.
Quasi-magical and magical invocations previously under the domain of dervishes and
Sufis, such as d n vs (charm writing), istikhr (consultation of the Quran to determine
whether or not to undertake a specific action), and the use of talismans were increasingly
taken over by a professional class of mullas who did not hesitate to claim exclusive authority
over these practices. Take for example, Ar omands succinct account of one of the treatises
written by Ma lis Jr., titled Ikhtiyr t. In this work, Ajromand says:
412

Arjomand, The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam, 164.

173
[B]asing his prescriptions on a mixture of considerations drawn from astrology,
geography, and sacred history, he determines the appropriateness of the days of the
year for specific activities, the significance of natural and astral phenomena, the proper
times, places, and conditions of copulation, the hours of istikhr , and the days and
manners of seeking help from the men of the invisible world (rijl l-ghayb). It is
interesting that in con unction with this last topic, Ma lis has to admit the absence of
reference in the traditions gathered by the Shiite scholars to the men of the invisible
world, but opines that they must be the souls of the fourteen Immaculates (the
Prophet, imah, and the twelve Imams), and of the prophets Khi r and Els, who are
identified by the Sufis as the poles (of the universe; sing. Qu b).413
The other major adoption of Sufi rituals took the form of endorsing and encouraging
the masses practice of visiting the tombs of the imams and their descendants (imm-zda), a
practice known as ziyarat. The intercession of the imams and their descendants was perceived
as the key to success in this world and salvation in the hereafter, and one of the best ways to
acquire this was to please them by visiting their resting places. A visit to the tomb of an imam,
some traditions held, was equal, if not superior to the hajj.414 Most of the tombs used for immzda were doubtless former shrines of Sufi saints, and many more were discovered during
the Safavid era in remote regions. Such discoveries often brought considerable financial
resources to the attendant region. The pilgrim would even prostrate and circumambulate the
tomb, imploring the immaculate imams to intercede on their behalf that God might grant their

413

414

Ibid., 15758.

or a very interesting comparison of the attention ziyrat received in later hadith collections as compared to that of early
canonical texts, see ibid., 169. According to the data Arjomand retrieves from a number of classical sources, the number of
pages dedicated to the matter of a in early compilations dwarf that of ziyrat by at least a factor of four. The equation is
virtually reversed, however, in Ma lis Jr.s Bi r where, in contrast to 387 pages dedicated to hajj, more than a thousand pages
deal with matters of ziyrat. A romand also raises the interesting point that Shiite theologians of Jabal al-Amil do not seem to
have modified, over time, the proportions of attention paid to ha and ziyrat in the our Books. The assertion is solely
based, however, on the famous al- urr al-mils massive V sil l-Sh , in which a similar ratio is found as in the early
canonical works. Further research is necessary to draw any general conclusions. Also, it is important to note that in the case of
the anti-Sufi campaign, the major players who start the polemics and remain in the spotlight are Iranian, although Arab
scholars join in later. That is to say, this is not, as Ajormand insists, a fight between the Persian ulama, the so called sayyid
notables, and the clerical estate, which was comprised of immigrant Arab ulama. Rather, sources suggest a mixed and
rather unified front against the dervish cult that had so deeply penetrated the public life of the denizens of Iran, especially in
Isfahan.

174
wishes, which, most of the time, pertained to worldly needs.415 The belief in the ability of the
imams and their descendants to perform such tasks was the cornerstone of this popular
practice, and its r ison detre. The Sufi metaphysical concept of the Perfect Man and his
indispensable role in channeling divine grace and attention was perfectly embodied in the
imams, and fantastic accounts of the supernatural powers of the imams and their miracles
occupied the public imagination as well as thousands of pages of the newly-collected hadith
compilations. Such fantastical accounts were by no means exclusively attributed to the imams,
however. Their most sincere followers, especially those among the ulama and particularly if
they were sayyids (descendants of the family of the Prophet), were believed to be endowed
with the same magical powers and, as such, they became the center of religious devotion and
imagination, especially after their death. In addition, visions and dreams became an important
venue for creating channels of connection to the imams by both Sufis and the ulama and a
pillar for establishing authority and charisma. 416
The high ranking ulama, and even the mid-ranking mullas would not have been
successful in gradually shifting the focus of religious sensibilities and the aspirations of the
masses to the imams were it not for their populist allies, their foot soldiers known as m ddh
(eulogizer [of the imams]). The performance of eulogies of the imams in which the memories
of their heroic lives and sufferings for God were transmitted was an old practice that not only
had enormous religious significance but was also a ma or form of entertainment. Eulogizing
the Twelve imams and remembering their suffering, especially the tragic death of usayn, the

415

The importance of the shrines of the real and putative imm-zdas in popular religiosity a feature of popular Sufism taken
over by Safavid Shii smis clearly shown in the seventeenth-century European sources. Ibid., 167.
416

This is an extremely important issue that needs to be further investigated in the context of seventeenth century Safavid
Iran. For a recent and fascinating collection of essays on the role of dreams in Mfuslim societies see Ozgen Felek and Alexander
D. Knysh, eds., Dreams and Visions in Islamic Societies (State Univ of New York Pr, 2012).

175
grandson of the Prophet and the son of the first Imam Al, was widely popular in the period
between the thirteenth- and sixteenth centuries, when the lines between Shiism and Sunnism
were blurred not only in Iran but also in many other Muslim-dominated regions of the Middle
East. This period saw the rise of a phenomenon that Hodgson aptly called Alid loyalism,417
which preceded the rise of the anti-Sunni and divisive Qizilbash tabarr propaganda machine.
Vi Kshifs R

t l-Sh h d, a passionate account of the suffering of the martyrs of

Karbala that became so popular in seventeenth century Safavid Iran and beyond was compiled
in the Timurid court before the advent of Shh Isml. The Timurid Court, in fact, represented
the pinnacle of the spread of what Koushki calls imamophilism, which made it difficult even
for strictly Sunni orders like the Naqshbandiyya to distinguish between an approved version
of love for the imams and the disapproved hatred and cursing of the first three caliphs as well
as isha, the Prophets beloved wife, that was known as Raf (rejection).418 So m ddh
(performing the eulogies of the Imams) and r

-kh n (remembering the passion of the

third imam) became increasingly popular.

Such stories and eulogies were often told by dervishes as part of their multi-faceted
entertainment skills. They would entertain people with storytelling, juggling, snake charming,
and selling exotic merchandise and herbal medicine in coffeehouses, bazaars, and central
squares. In the context of seventeenth century Safavid Iran, the propagation of Twelver
Shiism was considered a prestigious and sacred duty and was not only the primary agenda of

417

Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, vol. 2: 446. Moles old yet still authoritative on the Kubravi order between Shiism and
Sunnism provides an excellent account for the general phenomenon that is some scholars have called Twelver Sunnism (See
Jafariyn, rkh-i sh yy d r rn, vol. 2: 726.) provides further details in the case of a specific Sufi order, a branch of which
cam to be known later in Iran as ahabiyya. See Mari an Mol, Les Kubrawiya entre sunnisme et shiisme aux huitime et
neuvime sicles de lhgire, Revue des tudes Islamiques 29 (1961), 61-142.
418

Matthew S. Melvin-Koushki, The Quest for a Universal Science: The ccult Philosophy of in al-Dn Turka I fahn (13691432) and Intellectual Millenarianism in Early Timurid Iran, 6971.

176
the ulama but also the ma or component of the Safavid ideological agenda. As such, a huge
amount of financial, political, and social resources flowed in that direction. Wandering
mendicant dervishes found their storytelling and entertainment skills useful in eulogizing the
infallible imams.
The religious outlook of dervishes comprised a wide spectrum from antinomian
Qalandars who cared little for religious precepts to passionate devout Twelver dervishes who
were squarely within the boundaries of orthodoxy as drawn by the clerics. For example,
according to Zarrnkb, the all dervishes arriving from India were sometimes called
Qalandars by the lay people even though they did not have any relation to the old Qalandars,
and maddh was their main occupation, which they considered far (a mandatory religious
obligation) aydars and Sha rs would specially appear on the street with their strange
appearance, sometimes nude and sometimes with a piece of animal skin on their shoulders.
The Jalls would wander in the streets and bazaars chant poems [eulogizing the Imams] and
collect donations In spite of the resentment of the urists and puritans, the desperate
appearance of the dervishes would invoke the generosity of lay people.419 These dervishes
would often gather in a lodge, usually called tekiya, to share their donations, eat together, and
have sam sessions. Yet, with the increasing power of religious hierocracy and its persecution
and suppression of antinomian and problematic aspects of the dervish phenomenon, they
increasingly functioned under the auspice of clerics as auxiliaries in propagating an orthodox
version of the love of the family of the Prophet among the populace. These men gradually gave
up their dervish paraphernalia, and their outlook and religious worldview came to be less and
less defined by the traditional Sufi ethos and the ethos of chivalry (fityn) and m lm tiyy

419

Abd al- usayn Zarrnkb, D nbl -yi J stj d r

vv f-i rn, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Amr Kabr, 1362), 24245.

177
(the folks of blame). Mr Law s father, a well-known dervish-maddh called Mull Law ,
is a perfect example of this new class of eulogizers that appears to have emerged during the
seventeenth century in Safavid Iran and functioned increasingly as an effective arm of the
clerical hierarchy. a rbd records that Law s poetry eulogizing the imams was so elegant
that most of his colleagues, other dervish eulogizers, used them.420 As dervishes complied with
the requirements of the dominant religious orthodoxy, the name for their lodge, tekiya, was
increasingly used to refer to a place where the passion of the third imam was commemorated
and as a gathering place for other religious celebrations connected to the life and career of the
imams.421
In sum, as Shiism made inroads into Iranian society during the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries, these Sufi-minded ulama banished and abandoned some elements of
the Sunni-Sufi framework of thought and action, while remodeling other elements to bring
them more in line with fundamentally Shii religious sensibilities. These remodeled Sunni
elements kept their essential functions. This is especially true of Sufi practices and beliefs,
where the process of transition to Twelver Shiism can be primarily seen as a redirection of
Sufi sensibilities and loyalties. Yet, there is no doubt that this process of religious and
intellectual appropriation and synthesis was concomitant with an equally important process of
socio-political domestication. The Sufi pr or qu b was not just an idea. It was a reality. And
420

421

a rbd I fahn,

kir -yi N rbd, 430.

It is interesting to note that the latter term, tekiya, was used as an equivalent to khnaqh, zviya, and rib , to denote an
establishment that belonged to a group of Sufis, at least as early as the tenth/sixteenth century especially the Ottoman
Anatolia. See Clayer, Nathalie. " Tekke." Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Brill Online , 2012. Reference. RICE
UNIVERSITY. 28 June 2012 http://referenceworks.brillonline.com.ezproxy.rice.edu/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/tekkeSIM_7486
It was perhaps through the Turkish tribes of Anatolia, the Qizilbash, that constituted the military backbone of the the early
Safavid Empire that this distinct term migrated to Iran and started to be used to refer to dervish lodges. There, while it was
used as a synonym for khnaqh, as the establishment of tekiya-yi ay by Shh Abbs II indicates, it was increasingly also
used to refer to places in which the maddh and raw a-khwn dervishes would perform their eulogies and tell the story of
usayns passion. Later, perhaps by the end of the eighteenth century, tekiya ceased to function as a Sufi center and its latter
fuction came to define its semantic connotation.

178
this reality was intimately connected with an extensive array of social relationships and
institutions, like the widespread and popular institution of the khnaqah and the social
structure shaped and guided by the dynamics of the master/disciple relationship. It was this
social aspect that the emerging class of Shii religious scholars of all affiliations found most
threatening to their claims to exclusive authority and power in religious matters and beyond.
Sufis thus came under severe attacks and, sometimes, actual persecution. It was also this Sufi
concept that was most heavily revisited and reshaped by Sufis and Sufi-minded religious
scholars, a phenomenon that will be discussed in detail in the next chapter.

Chapter Four: The Invention and Spread of Irfn

180

Introduction: The Shiraz Circle

So far, my discussions of the debates on Sufism at the end of the Safavid era have been
focused mostly on Isfahan, and for good reason. In the post-Shah Abbs era of Safavid
absolutism, the bureaucracy, administration and finances of the empire became increasingly
centralized. An unparalleled amount of wealth and power were concentrated in the capital,
and thus Isfahan was not only the political center of Safavid Iran, but also the intellectual,
educational and religious heart of the entire realm. Those who aspired to become scholars,
especially in the religious sciences, would, after spending some years in their hometown going
through the basics, migrate to Isfahan in order to train under the most prominent scholars of
the era. For anyone to be taken seriously as a learned member of Safavid society, he had to
forge connections to the Isfahan elite. With the increasing interest of Safavid monarchs in
religious sciences and debates and the resultant flood of financial resources into madrasas and
the hierocracy in control of the education system, Isfahan was full of promise for the novice
aspirant.

181
Such is azn Lh s (d. 1179/1766) depiction of the cultural and intellectual
environment of the late seventeenth century and early eighteenth century.

azn is

emblematic of the urbane, cultivated, and cosmopolitan Shiite educated in late Safavid
Isfahan. Open-minded and tolerant, he sought out fellow scholars among Christians, Jews, and
Sabians, and in return was equally admired and esteemed by the Muselmn, Hindoo, and
English inhabitants of India.422 Born in 1103/1691, he spent nearly two decades of his early life
in the capitol as an avid student. His autobiography provides a colorful and vibrant picture of
the circles of learning in Isfahan, where he studied medicine, mathematics, astronomy,
jurisprudence, hadith, philosophy, and mysticism with prominent teachers of the time. 423
Among these was Mr Sayyid asan Tlqn, azns teacher in philosophy and
mysticism who taught Ibn Arabs

and Suhrawards H ykil l-N r.424 According to azn,

liqn was an outstanding scholar who synthesized ikma and ta avvuf. Although azn
complains about the charges of heterodoxy leveled by exoteric religious students against
mystically-minded scholars like Tliqn, it is clear from his overall account that it was
possible for an interested student to pursue both philosophy and mysticism, at least in their
speculative forms, with relative freedom in the context of the madrasa. It was only after the
fall of Isfahan that many of the elite members of society, including azn himself, fled the city
that they adored so much. Thereafter the enterprise of teaching and learning about

422

Quoted in John Perry, AZI LHIJI, Encyclopdia Iranica, December 15, 2003, http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/hazin-lahiji.
423

424

azn, rkh v S f rnm -i n, 168172.

Ibid., 169170.

182
philosophy and high mysticism was damaged due to a lack of financial support and the
dispersal of human resources.425
Isfahan, however, was by no means the only important cultural hub of the Safavid
realm. Other major urban centers, like Qom, Mashhad, Kashan, and Shiraz were also actively
involved in learning and education. The latter city stands out as a vibrant intellectual center,
especially for philosophically and mystically inclined students of religious sciences. The
cultural outlook of Shiraz was different from that of Isfahan in a number of ways. First, and
perhaps due to the strong presence and influence of organized Sufism, it was marked by a
liberal spirit, a more tolerant environment that was hospitable to forms of belief and practice
that would have been marked, contested, and persecuted as deviant or heretical in other,
more conservative urban centers like Isfahan, Qom, and Mashhad. Second, because Shiraz had
been the heart of Persian intellectual and aesthetic life for centuries before the advent of
Safavids, and because of its strategic geographic location, the intellectual outlook of many of
its learned denizens was markedly cosmopolitan. This was due in part to a fascinating cultural
exchange between Shiraz and India.426 Shiraz was also host to the most prominent
philosophers of the Islamic world in the period between the ninth and tenth centuries. igures
like Jall al-dn Davn (908/1502), adr al-dn Dashtak (903/1497), Ghiys al-Dn Mansr
Dashtak (948/1541), Mu aqqiq Khafr (957/1550), and a m al-Dn Ma md ayrz (d. 1526)427
formed the core of what has come to be known as the School of Shiraz.428
425

Corbins appraisal of the situation seems accurate in this regard. See: Corbin, History of Islamic Philosophy, 34849.

426

The constant flow of scholars, poets, and dervishes back and forth from some regions of Iran, like the Caspian Sea area and
Shiraz, to India is a fascinating and understudied phenomenon that needs further investigation.
427

Reza Pourjavady, Philosophy in Early Safavid Iran: Najm al-Dn

and Science; V. 82. (Leiden: Brill, 2011).
428

m d l-N yr nd His Writings, Islamic Philosophy, Theology,

This term has recently been used by some Iranian scholars to refer to the flourishing and vibrant period of Islamic
philosophy at the Late Middle Period in Shiraz. See, for example, Kakaeis remarks about the so-called maktab-i Shiraz at

183
The city was also a major stronghold of Sufism.429 The urbakhsh Sufi order in
particular had had a major presence in the city since the building of the riyya khnaqh by
a prominent student of rbakhsh, Mu ammad Lh . A scholarly narrative of the history of
Sufism in Shiraz during this period is long overdue. We know virtually nothing about the fate
of the riyya khnaqh and the developments of organized Sufism there in the sixteenth and
seventeenth century. The uq av movement also seems to have had a strong presence in
Shiraz in this period. A number of extremely important Sufi figures of Shiraz, like Ma md
Dihdr, better known by his pen name Ayn, and his son Mu ammad Dihdr (d. 1016), whose
pen name was n, seem to be connected to this movement.430
Although the center of philosophical learning moved to Isfahan beginning with the
early seventeenth century and the rise of prominent figures like Mr Dmd, Shiraz remained
an important cultural and intellectual center throughout the Safavid period. azns remarks
on his trip to Shiraz beautifully demonstrate the vibrancy of educational system there. He
relates that after moving to Shiraz shortly before the year 1130/1717, he studied the most
celebrated canon of Shii hadith, Us l l-Kf, with Shh Mu ammad Drb Shraz (d.
1130/1718), by some accounts the most prominent mystically-minded religious scholar of

Ghiyth al-Dn Man r Dashtak Shrz, Ghiys l-Dn n r D sht k v

ls f -yi Irfn:
ed. Qasem Kakaie, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Intishrt-i arhangistn-i Hunar, 1387).
429

430

n il l-Sirn v

qmt l-rifn,

Ibid., 22.

Most of Dihdrs writings remain in manuscript form. A number of them, however, were published in Iran more than two
decades ago. See: Mu ammad ibn Ma md Dihdr Shrz, R sil-i Dihdr, ed. Mu ammad usayn Akbar Sv, Chp-i 1.,
Mrs-i Maktb (Series); 1. (Tehran: uq a, 1996). Corbin is perhaps the first scholar of Sufism to have drawn our attention to
the importance of these two figures. His remarks are brief, and as the editor of Dihdrs works mention, confused (see: Ibid.,
13-14). or Corbins remarks see: Corbin, History of Islamic Philosophy, 337. Dihdrs indebtedness to the uq av worldview is
most apparent in his treatise titled Durr-i tm. See Kiy, N qt viyn P sikhnyn, 2532. For a more recent scholarly piece
about the Dihdr family see: Abbs Zri Mihrvarz, Pazhhish-i Darbra-yi Kndn-i Dihdr, Aftabir.com, n.d.,
http://www.aftabir.com/articles/view/applied_sciences/geograohy_history/c12c1216705220_history_p1.php/%D9%BE%DA%
98%D9%88%D9%87%D8%B4%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A9%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%AF%D9%87%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1.

184
Shiraz.431 He also studied philosophy with khnd Masi asav (d. 1127/1715), a student of
gh usayn Khnsr, the shaykh al-islm of Isfahan. 432 In addition, azn gives a brief
account of other prominent mystically-minded figures whom he met there, like Mu ammad
Bqr f, who taught him Suhravards

lv t, and Mu ammad Al Sakk, who was

affiliated with organized Sufism.433

It was perhaps due to Shiraz more hospitable environment that I ahbnt moved
there permanently. It was also there, as I will demonstrate in this chapter, that the category of
irfn was conceived. There were several important intellectual tra ectories that contributed to
the formation of this category in Shiraz, all of which constituted attempts to salvage
traditional Sufi discourse from ruin at the hands of the clerical hierocracy and their foot
soldiers, who had successfully stigmatized Sufism among the public. These attempts were
focused on introducing a new Twelver mystical discourse that borrowed heavily from Sufi
teachings, but was purged of the problematic and innovative aspects of institutionalized
Sufism. Most importantly, this new discourse was built around new terminology that helped
its proponents significantly in their claim that this authentic Shii mystical discourse was not
the same as the heretical, Sunni-dominated, Sufi one. Mystically-minded religious scholars
who hailed from Shiraz were the pioneers of this discourse, and they came at it from different
intellectual vantage points. These were 1) the tradition of philosophical mysticism pioneered
by adr and his students; 2) the reformed tradition of organized Sufism represented by the
ahab Sufi order and, most importantly, Qu b al-dn ayrz; and 3) a distinct and independent
trend represented by Shah Mu ammad Drb who, as a prominent poet and a religious
431

azn, rkh v S f rnm -i n, 17778.

432

Ibid., 178.

433

Sakk will be discussed briefly below.

185
scholar, tapped into the rich poetic tradition of Shiraz as well as its strong philosophical
tradition to contribute to this project. The rest of this chapter is dedicated to explaining how
each of the above-mentioned trends contributed to the formation of the category of irfn, and
to how the next generation of mystically-minded Persian religious scholars began to use this
category in contrast to Sufism.

adr, His Students, and Irfn

Mull adr, who is without doubt the most influential philosopher of the Safavid era in
the later history of Islamic philosophy, is best known for the grand synthesis of philosophy,
speculative mysticism, theology, and Twelver hadith tradition in his innovative and masterly
philosophical system known as l-ikm

l-

t liy or Transcendental Philosophy. In this

synthesis, he stands on the shoulders of giants like Avicenna, Ibn Arab, Suhravard, and
Ghazl. This is clear from his frequent quotation of the aforementioned figures in his magnum
opus, al-Asfr l- rb (the our Journeys), in which he laid out the contours of his
philosophic thought in their most extensive form.
The pivots around which his teachings revolve are the ideas of v d t l-v j d, or unity
of being, and al-insan al-kmil, or the Perfect Man. The former references the belief that
ultimately all of Reality is one. All manifestations of existence, therefore, are reflections of this
single Reality. Everything in the cosmos is the result of a divine t j ll, or theophany.434 The
idea of the Perfect Man reflects Ibn Arabs understanding of human nature. The human being,
as an androgyny, contains potentially all levels of existence within and is, thus, the mirror in
which God, the ultimate Reality who is the One, contemplates Himself. The reality of this

434

As far as I know S. H. asr has been the first to translate ta all as theophany.

186
archetypal notion of human being is contained potentially in every human being but is
actualized only within the being of prophets and the greatest saints. On the basis of these two
doctrines, Ibn Arab developed an elaborate cosmogony, sacred psychology, eschatology,
epistemology, and prophetology.
Although these two principles in Ibn Arabs grand metaphysical thought were
developed well within the boundaries of traditional Sufism, the highly complicated, abstract
nature of his teachings which presupposed a thorough knowledge in almost all fields of Islamic
thought made them accessible, and relevant, only to a few elite within Sufi society. As such,
they were detached relatively easily from the social contexts of Sufism. This was a task that a
group of Shiite philosopher-mystics took upon themselves. With their efforts, Ibn Arabis
cosmogony and his idea of the Unity of Being and his metaphysical anthropology and the
relevant notions sainthood or valya and the Perfect Man were adopted to be used as an
interpretive framework in which the fundamental concept of Imamate was understood.
Although adrs mystical philosophy represents the culmination of such a synthesis, the
process started much earlier. A ma or early figure is Sayyid aydar mul (d. 1385), a major
Twelver Shii theologian and a disciple of the school of Ibn Arab, who wrote an important
commentary of the

. His Jm l- srr or The Sum of Divine Secrets is the pivotal text

that provides an Akbarian take on the Shii doctrine, especially that of the Imamate. Although
he criticizes Ibn Arab in a number of places on the doctrine of valya or sainthood, the
fundamental structure of Sayyid aydars understanding of valya as it is applied to the
infallible imams of Shiism is thoroughly shaped by Ibn Arabs school of thought. The
perfect cohesion between the theosophy of al-Suhrawardi's ishraq, the theosophy of Ibn al-

187
'Arabi and the Shiite tradition was consolidated by Ibn Abi Jumhur (804/1401-1402) and his
great work, the Kitab al-

jli according to Corbin.435

We should also take into consideration the works of Mu ammad Dihdr which, as
Corbin has noted, are predicated on the synthesis between Shiism and Sufism that is the
hallmark of Sayyid Haydar mls writings. As such, Dihdrs works anticipate the full-blown
synthesis of adrs Transcendental Philosophy.436 Thus we see that, in addition to the
influence of giants like Ibn Arab and Suhravard, an existing trend in Shii thought helped lay
the groundwork of adrs grand and majestic system of thought.
This synthesis was, thus, taken to the level of perfection by Mull adr whose thought
has left a personal stamp on Iranian philosophy or, more broadly speaking, Shii thought down
to our own time.437 Transcendental Philosophy succeeded in integrating the abovementioned
fundamental aspects of the Sufi metaphysical thought with an Ishraq coloring and bring it
home with the esoteric traditions from the imams in a single coherent philosophical system. 438

435

Corbin, History of Islamic Philosophy, 335.

436

Corbin, History of Islamic Philosophy, 332334.

437

Corbin, History of Islamic Philosophy, 342.

438

Nasr is correct in emphasizing the importance of the fact that adr never wrote a commentary on Ibn Arabs
or any
independent treatise that was exclusively dedicated to matters of speculative Sufism as ibn Arabs disciples did. He would
certainly consider himself a philosopher, rather than a disciple of the school of Ibn Arab. His notion of philosophy, however,
was quite different compared to the common notion of what philosophy is in his period, as well as our period. In this light,
many scholars have justifiably questioned translating ikma to philosophy and have suggested other alternatives like
theosophy, and onto-theology.S. h. asr uses theosophy as in equivalent throughout his writings. Sa ad Rizvi proposes
the term onto-thology. See: Sa ad H. Rizvi, Philosophy as a Way of Life in the World of Islam: Applying Hadot to the Study
of Mull adr Shrz (d. 1635), Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 75, no. 01 (2012): 3345. Both of the
alternatives, however, fail to convey that, for the most part of his writings, consistently and continuously, Sadra strictly
follows the inherited logic of rational argumentation from Aristotelian philosophy based on the ultimate and exclusive
validity of syllogism as the only method for philosophic inquiry. Having said so, it is true that Sadr did not consider
philosophy to be just about argumentation, syllogism, and fierce debates over conceptual hair-splitting. Influenced by the
ishrq or Illuminationist school of philosophy best represented by the Slain philosopher, Suhrawardi (d. ), he also
considered ikma to be a way of life, and rationality, along with ascetic practices and obedience to the Divine law, a means
towards an end that is attaining the marifa or gnosis pertaining to issues of ultimate importance to human being, i.e., the
knowledge of the Self, and Divine, his Attributes and Names, and the way in which the whole creation is from Him and will
eventually return back to Him. The result is a unique understanding of the essence and function of philosophy elaborated
under the title of Transcendent Philosophy.

188
As a result of the adoption of these mystical elements, adr is ready to acknowledge that, at
the final analysis, there is only so much that rationality and reason can do to help the wayfarer
to understand the mysteries of God. For him, for example, the realm of afterlife, and the
knowledge of the self, remains fundamentally beyond the reach of reason and rationality. To
attain true knowledge in such fields, one has to rely upon mystical visions and Prophetic
injunctions. Only after doing so the student of philosophy can hope to develop rational
arguments to establish the philosophic validity of such ideas and ideals. 439
As I also mentioned in chapter two, the category of rif in Mull adrs works is used
in accordance with its traditional meaning, i.e., to denote the advanced among the awliy or
friends of God. What is noteworthy about adrs usage, however is his coupling of rifs with
those whom he calls the real or divine philosophers ( k m l-m t llihn).440 This is a clear
indication of the adrian synthesis in which the ideal rif and the ideal akm are seen as
identical. In contrast to adrs frequent use of the term rif, the term Sufi rarely appears. The
term irfn is likewise infrequently used, but when it does appear, it follows the
abovementioned paradigm and is used in conjunction with terms like b rhn (philosophic
argument), y qn (certitude) and l- ikm al-ilhiyy (divine philosophy). The few instances in
which adr uses the term make it clear that it had not yet become the semantic locus of an
established set of beliefs or practices. In other words, its scattered and casual use indicates that
it does not refer to a particular concept with clear boundaries classified under an ism like
439

S. H. Nasr reminds us that adrs school of thought should technically be categories as a form of ikmat or philosophy
rather than irfn, which, for him, is the Persian name for doctrinal Sufism. I would contend that, technically speaking, irfn,
as a constructed category, came to be used for the Twlever reception of Ibn Arabs teaching much later. Even those who
considered themselves to be students of Ibn Arab did not think of their intellectual activities under the category of irfn. To
the contrary, such doctrinal elaborations were considered to be an integral part of ta avvuf, variously called ilm l-t vv f or
the science of Sufism, or ilm-i ilh or the divine sciene. Therefore, to contrast ikma to irfn as asr always does in his
exposition of The twelver tradition of gnosis (marifa) is anachronistic. See, for example Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Garden of
Truth: the Vision and Practice of Sufism, Isl ms ystic l r dition, 1st ed. (New York: HarperOne, 2007), 225.
440

There are many instances. or several examples see Mu ammad ibn Ibrhm adr al-Dn Shrz, al-ikm
Asfr l-Aqliyy . (Tehran: Shirkat Dr al-Marif al-Islmiyya, 1958), vol. 1: 6.

l-

t liyy f l-

189
Sufism. Instead, irfn refers to an idealthe highest and ultimate goal of the seeker of gnosis.
The same seems to be true in the writings of adrs prominent students, who increasingly
emphasized the category of rif, but not in such a way that distinguishes it as a coherent and
distinct group with a defined set of beliefs and practices.
Gawhar-i

rd, an important work by a prominent student of adr named Abd al-

Razzq Lh (d. 1072/1661 ), provides us with an illuminating statement in this regard. In his
classification of the rational sciences, he emphasizes that, unlike kalm (theology) and ikm t-i
m shsh (peripatetic philosophy), the ishrq (Illuminatist) school of philosophy and Sufism
cannot be categorized as branches of knowledge. Whereas the former two are, according to
Lhi , concerned with exoteric ways of acquiring knowledge, Sufism and Ishrq are concerned
with practicalities of the mystical/esoteric Path.441 But, Lhi notes, there exists another school
of philosophy in which the philosopher and the Sufi come much closer to one another:

The most urgent kind of knowledge is knowing yourself and returning to

it and knowing your God and recognizing your Gods command. It is the totality
of this kind of knowledge that theologians call u l al-dn (principles of
religion), philosophers hikmat-i lh (divine philosophy), and Sufis marifat
(knowledge, or gnosis). 442

The use of the term marifat (=marifa) instead of irfn as an equivalent to divine
philosophy in this passage is noteworthy. It clearly speaks to the fact that the grand synthesis

441

Lh , Gawhar-i

442

Ibid., 19.

rd, 3841.

190
of adr, even by the middle of the seventeenth century, was not known as irfn, and neither
was the Sufi ideal of self-knowledge. This would soon change. A century later, religious
scholars like Mull Mahd araq (d. 1209/1794) and his son Mull A mad, who were trained in
adrs mystical philosophy, would refer to both as irfn, as we will see at the end of this
chapter.
A similar trend is observable in the writings of Mull adrs other prominent student,
Mull Mu sin ay (d. 1091/1680). In the two works in which indebtedness to his teacher is
most obvious, K limt

kn na and U l l-

The very title of the former work, K limt

rif, the category of marifa, again, is prominent.

kn n min Ul m hl l- ikm v -l-

rif is telling

in this regard. Again, we see the pairing of ikma and marifa, which indicates their increasing
proximity in Transcendental Philosophy. A quick look at the contents of the book reveals that
ay draws heavily upon the school of Ibn Arab and its elaborate metaphysical system in
order to explain fundamental questions regarding the reality of being and the position of
human being. He begins most of the chapters (kalimas) by laying out what the ahl al-m rif or
the folks of gnosis say regarding the topic of the chapter.443 In most cases, the content of
what the folks of marifa say is saturated with the vocabulary of the school of Ibn Arab. ay
mentions Rm, calling him al-rif al-R m,444 and he mentions Mull adr in his
autobiography, calling him

dr-i ahl-i irfn (The chief of the folks of irfn).445

In associating ikma with marifa, ay is careful to distinguish between the standard,

mainstream discursive philosophy known as peripatetic philosophy, and the type of

443

Mu ammad ibn Murta ay Kshn, K limt

54, 55, 74.
444

445

kn n min Ul m Ahl l-ikm v

l-

rif , n.d., 5, 24, 25, 28, 36, 42, 45, 48,

Ibid., 16.
ay Kshn, Risl -yi Sh r -i dr. quoted in Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn,

rh ng v Siys t, vol. 2: 545.

191
philosophy that to him epitomizes real ikma.446 The difference can be gleaned from a brief
comparison of two of his important works U l l-m rif and K limt. In the former, ay rarely
talks about ahl-i marifat. In fact, the book is an standard exercise in discursive philosophy,
although like his master, he deviates somewhat from the accepted norms of peripatetic
philosophy and argues for the alternative principles, like
and

r k t-i j

l t-i v j d (primacy of existence)

h r (substantial motion), that define adrs Transcendental Philosophy in

contrast to other schools of philosophy. On the rare occasions that he speaks of the folks of
gnosis, he is referring to his master teacher, to other figures in the school of Ibn Arab, or Ibn
Arab himself.447
We get a better sense of what real ikma or gnosis means for ay in K limt, a highly
eclectic synthesis of the metaphysical principles of Ibn Arab with the traditions of the Twelve
Imams, in the footsteps of Mull adr. 448 Copious quotes from canonical and non-canonical
hadith sources are followed by comments and explanations according to the principles of ahli marifa. Clearly, the authors primary concern is to reconcile philosophical and mystical
principles with the statements of the imams found in the hadith literature, thereby
demonstrating that there is no contradiction between real ikma on the one hand, and the
way of prophecy on the other.449 This is a concern that he shares with his teacher, Mull adr,
and many other members of the ulama, whether philosophically inclined or of scripturalist
446

447

ay Kshn, K limt

kn n min Ul m Ahl l-ikm v

Mu ammad ibn Murta ay Kshn, U l lDnishgh-i irdaws, 1975), 178, 176, 94, 56.

l-

rif , 341.

rif, ed. Jall al-Dn shtiyn (Mashhad: Muassasa-yi Chp va Intishrt-i

448

Having said so, the role of his other teacher in Shiraz, the prominent Akhbr scholar, Sayyid M d al-Ba rn (d. ) can not
be underestimated. As it is quite clear from a cursory look at the ay ian oeuvre, his concern and engagement with the hadith
literature is much more serious and extensive than adrs.
449

ay Kshn, U l l- rif, 4.



.

192
(Akhbr) leanings. As the new Shiite orthodoxy took shape in the various disciplines, the
most urgent need of proponents of rival narratives was to authenticate their respective
hermeneutics by drawing upon the authoritative hadith sources. The clearest sign of this
concern amongst the religious elite of Safavid Persia in the seventeenth century is the number
of commentaries and marginalia written on the most authoritative hadith canon, U l l-Kf.
Out of twelve commentaries on U l l-Kf written during the twelfth century (Islamic
calendar), six are written by philosophically-inclined scholars.450
ay s K limt is so thoroughly informed by the vocabulary of Sufi metaphysical
thought that one might be tempted to categorize it as a work of Sufism. As Lawson indicates in
his excellent study of K limt, however, this is the wrong conception and categorization of the
book.451 K limt is better understood as a representative of a genre that emerged in relation to
the new paradigm of Twelver spirituality that developed during the seventeenth century; one
that, although deeply indebted to the Sufi literature, gradually formed an independent
identity. One hundred years later, this identity acquired a name for itself: irfn.
As mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, however, it was not only adr and the
circle of students closest to him who contributed to the development of a distinct discourse
that came to be known later as irfn. Sufis and Sufi-minded religious scholars also played a
role.

450

Most notable among them are Mr Dmd, Mull adr, Mrz Raf (d. 1082).

451

Lawson, The Hidden Words of ay Kshn, 428432.

193

Qu b al-Dn ayrz and the ahab rder

Sayyid Mu ammad Qu b al-dn ayrz (d. 1173/1760) was born around 1688/1100 in
ayrz, a small town in the ancient province of ars.452 He is considered by ahab Sufis to be
the thirty-second Qu b of the order, that is, the successor of Al-naq I ahbnt (d. circa
1129/1717), whom I mentioned in the final pages of the previous chapter. I ahbnt died in
his hometown in anonymity, barely noticed by the learned notables of his time.453 The ahab
order, however, underwent a revival under the leadership of his disciple, ayrz, who devoted
nearly half a century to intense cultural activity, writing prolifically and functioning as a
respected teacher. 454 These efforts won him the epithet of mu addid, or reviver, in ahab
sources.455
ayrz has been at the center of ahab hagiographical accounts since the nineteenth
century, when the influential ahab master Abulqsim Rz Shrz (d. 1286/1869), the thirtyfifth pole of the order who was otherwise known as Mrz Bb, wrote the first detailed
account of his life. His biography is peppered with dozens of miraculous events (karmt).456 In
the second half of the twentieth century, two major pieces were written on the history of the
ahab order that treat the life and Sufi career of ayrz in depth.457 Most of ayrzs writings

452

According to Kh av in Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i l l-Khi b, v (pan ). Also see Abulqsim usayn
Sharf Shrz ahab, Yak Qismat az Trikh-i ayt va Karmt-i a rat-i Sayyid Qu b Al-dn Mu ammad Shrz, in kir t
Al-A liy, ed. Shams al-dn ahab Parvz, 1953, 4. or his date of birth see Khvars discussion: Khvar, h biyy , 299300.
453

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

l l-Khi b, vol. 3: 1199.

454

or an account of later developments in ahab leadership see Lewisohn, An Introduction to the History of Modern Persian
Sufism, Part II.
455

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

l l-Khi b., p. XVIII ()

456

At the time of this writing I did not have access to this work in its entirety. A significant portion of it, however, was at my
disposal thanks to its having been printed as part of Parvzs kir . See ahab Parvz, kir t Al-A liy.
457

I am referring to I snullh Istakhr and Asadullh Khvars contributions. While there is much that can be learned from
their account, there is an unmistakable hagiographical tone to their writing and a partisan bias that prevents them from

194
have been published in recent decades thanks to active ahab publication house in Shiraz and
especially to the continuous efforts of Muhammad Khajavi.458
The story of ayrzs initiation to Sufism follows a familiar and repeated pattern in
which is said to have spent years mastering the official fields of discursive knowledge,
especially the rational sciences of philosophy and theology, with the purpose of finding
satisfaction and salvation. Disillusioned, he gave up the madrasa career, at least for a while,
and converted to Sufism under Al-naq I ahbnt, who was his shaykh al-irshd (master of
guidance).459 After spending many years in seclusion, meditation and self-mortification, he
emerged as a learned and prominent Sufi master. His most celebrated and most extensive work
is

l l-Khitb, sometimes known as ikm t l-Arifn. This is a lengthy m sn v written in

Arabic in which he lays out his mystical worldview in detail. Although most of

l l-Khitb

was written at the height of his career as a Sufi master in the final years of Safavid rule in
Isfahan, he assembled scattered pieces and edited them as a single work only after the fall of

critically engaging the sources they have painstakingly examined. Khvars work is significantly superior to Istakhrs in this
regard. In spite of his ahab affiliations, he has attempted to keep a critical distance from the primary material in some parts
of his work and to offer an alternative narrative, though he was not always successful. A few examples will be mentioned in
the coming pages.
458

or a detailed bibliography of ayrz see Khvar, h biyy , 52665. Khvar mistakenly attributes some treatises to
ayrz based on what appears to be a misreading of the primary sources. For example, he mistakenly includes a treatise titled
Jm-i J hn-n m among ayrzs writings (ibid., 548). The source of this mistake is likely a manuscript collection in which this
treatise, which is a well-known work of the prominent Sufi Shaykh Mu ammad Maghrib Tabrz (d. 809/1406, otherwise
known as Shrn), is bundled with other treatises that belong to ayrz. see Sayyid Qu b al-dn Mu ammad ayrz, Risla-yi
Jm-i Jahn-nam va R iyya, n.d., f. 1, Ms. o. 4889, Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm ( ote
that in f. 3b the date 738 is mentioned by the author, which accords perfectly with the treatise being written by Shrn).
urthermore, Khvar counts two other treatises, Sh r -i Ziyr t-i Jmi and Sh r -i vid among ayrzs writings. Khvar,
h biyy , 530. This is also the result of a misreading of his source, in this case bshr l-ikm , in which the two
abovementioned treatises are attributed to Shaykh A mad al-A s. See Abulqsim usayn Sharf Shrz ahab, bshr likm : Sh r -i ds-i N r
mm d (Shiraz: Khngh-i A mad, 1973), 88.
The most dependable report in regards to the number of ayrzs writings is perhaps found in a work written by his
daughter Umm Salama and entitled Jmi l-K lliyt. Umm Salama mentions that her father had penned fourteen works,
though she does not provide their names. Umm Salma ayrz, J mi l-Kulliyat, ed. Mahd Iftikhr (Qom: Bakhshiysh, 2007),
18. To my knowledge, the most accurate enumeration of ayrzs works based on this report is Kha avis. See his introduction
to Sayyid Qu b al-dn Mu ammad ayrz, Risl -yi R iyy v inh j l- rr, ed. Mu ammad Kh av (Shiraz: Kitbkhna-yi
A mad, 1977), 1533.
459

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

l l-Khi b, vol. 3: 1317.

195
Isfahan. In the aftermath of this catastrophic event, he stayed in Iran for a time, travelling
extensively to different cities like Qazvin and Mashhad, but eventually followed the itinerary
of many of the learned of Isfahan in their exodus to the Atabt (the Sacred Thresholds, that is
the tombs of imams in Najaf and Karbala). It was in the relatively safe and tranquil
environment of Najaf that he was able to gather the disparate parts written previously in
between the two covers of

l al-Khitb.460 He later returned to Shiraz, only to leave again for

the Atabt in 1163/1750, in the final decade of his life. He passed away in a af on April fifth,
1760.461

a l al-Khitb

The picture of ayrz reflected in

l l-Khitb is that of an erudite religious scholar

and a passionate Shiite who views himself as a member of the lineage of learned and great
gnostics ( r f) and the kings of spiritual poverty (m l k l-faqr). These gnostics and kings of
spiritual poverty, he says, adhere to a worldview derived from the Quran and the teachings of
the imams, and he believes it an honor to be in the service of such people. He does not call
these people Sufis, as I will discuss momentarily, but he leaves us no doubt as to their identity:

460

Ibid., vol. 3: 1309 and 1267. Kh avs recent polished edition of Khuys commentary on l, that is n l- vb f Sh r
l l-Khitb, is the primary reference used in this study for understanding ayrzs worldview. The commentary includes two
independent works of ayrz, Sh ms l-ikm and K n l-ikm . For the sake of convenience, however, we will refer to the
work as l even when our reference is actually to Sh ms l-ikm or Kanz.
461

ayrz, J mi l-Kulliyat, 19.

196
I have served gnostics, the leaders of the Ald Shia partywho were the
kings of poverty in their age, and they associated, in terms of their arqa (Sufi
path) with the holy ra av order known as ahabiyya.462

When speaking of gnostics and kings of spiritual poverty, he highlights the name of his
Sufi master, Al-naq I ahbnt, saying the latter was the pride of the greatest divine men
(ilhiyyn) in asceticism and the king of kings of poverty, my shaykh and master (murshd), and
my reference in the al- ikm

l-mawhibiyya (divinely endowed philosophy). [He] was unique

among the dervishes of his age, and I did not meet anyone who could match his glory. 463
He mentions only one other figure as his teacher: Shh Mu ammad Drb, under
whom he studied hadith and who was, according to ayrz, the teacher of all of the learned
in Shiraz in his time.464 The life and career of Drb will be discussed in some detail in the
coming pages. Suffice it here to say that Drb must have exerted ma or influence over
ayrzs post-conversion intellectual outlook, given that he is the only intellectual whom
ayrz mentions having learned from. My extensive examination of the two mens writings
suggests that this influence played itself out in more than one way.
As it was for Muain in his
throughout his

f , the most central and pressing concern for ayrz

l is to establish the authenticity of his discourse by rooting it in the

teachings of the imams. Therefore, the work is filled with copious quotations of hadith and
ubiquitous references to the imams and their teachings. Reading through

l it is clear that

ayrz was tremendously influenced by the hadith movement of the late Safavid period. More
462

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

463

Ibid., vol. 3: 1199.

464

Ibid., vol. 3: 1201.

l l-Khi b, vols. 3: 1198, 1318.

197
particularly, although there is no explicit proclamation of his adherence to the Akhbr legal
school of thought, there are strong signs that he indeed preferred Akhbrism as his
methodology in dealing with the hadith corpus. In

l and the many other writings by him

that I examined, ayrz never once touches upon topics discussed in u l al-fiqh (principles of
jurisprudence) and ilm al-rijl (science of biographical evaluation). For an erudite religious
scholar of his caliber, this can be taken as indicative of his preference for the opposing,
Akhbr school of thought. Furthermore, his explicit disdain for and extensive criticism of
Aristotelian logic (m n iq), upon which not only philosophy and theology but also u l al-fiqh
heavily rely, also suggests that he was fundamentally at odds with the u l discourse.465 As we
will see, his teacher in hadith, Drb, also preferred the Akhbr method.
Another striking feature of

l is its strong rhetoric against discursive philosophy.

Throughout the work ayrz maintains a sharp distinction between falsafa, which is portrayed
in the light of its Greek roots and incompatibility with Islamic doctrine, and ikm , which is
presented as the antithesis of the former, derived from the fountainhead of prophecy. The
former is often called l- ikm

l-falsafiyya (discursive philosophy) or l- ikm

(Greek philosophy). The latter, in contrast, is called l- ikm

ikm

l-y n niyy

l-alaviyya (Alid philosophy) or l-

l- m diyy or nabaviyya (Muhammadan philosophy).466 His vehement condemnation of

the philosopher, when taken at face value, suggests that ayrz thinks about metaphysics and
other core questions dealt with by Islamic philosophy in a fundamentally different manner
than the philosopher he critiques. A close reading of his exposition of key elements of the
alternative ikma ayrz outlines, however, tells us otherwise. That is, his attacks on
philosophy are essentially used as a rhetorical tool to differentiate his discoursean
465

466

For his criticism of Aristotelian logic see, for example: Ibid., vols. 1: 12728 and 2: 55762.
a l al-Khitb is filled with this dichotomy. To mention a few examples see ibid., vols. 3: 1319 and 1: 2458.

198
authentic one based solely on the teachings of imamsfrom the foreign discourse of
philosophers based on Greek thinking. The reality is that, other than his disagreements with
the way peripatetic philosophers framed their discussions of the ecessary Being (v ib alvu d), ayrz uses the same vocabulary of philosophical inquiry related to God that the
Muslim intellectual world inherited from Avicenna and al- rb. This is not to say that he was
a peripatetic philosopher. He definitely did not consider himself to be a philosopher, let alone
a peripatetic one. His critique, however, shares fundamental similarities with that of adr and
his followers against mainstream philosophy, namely that it focuses solely on discursive
practices without any concern for the realization of wisdom through metaphysical discussions.
Therefore, his critique might be better understood as an insider attempt, like those of Sayyid
aydar and Mull adr, to reform philosophical discourse according to the precepts of
Twelver doctrine and the mystical/esoteric aspirations exemplified in the ideal type of gnostic
rather than as an outsider Akhbr attack aimed at dismantling the entire discipline of
philosophy,
In emphasizing the prophetic or Alid nature of the ideal ikma, ayrz stands in a long
list of Twelver philosophers in the Safavid era, starting with Mr Dmd, who distinguished
between the essentially secular philosophical discourse he referred to as y n n (Greek) and
the faith-based philosophy referred to as y mn (Yemeni) philosophy.467 This distinction was
primarily a rhetorical one. That is to say, the advocates of faith-based philosophy did not
467

Yamn (lit. right) or yaman (lit. Yemen) as symbols that are most probably used in referece to a Prophetic tradition found in
al-Kf and other primary hadith collections in which the prophet praises Yemenis as the best among the people of Arabia and
says l-mn y mn v -l- ikm y mniyy (the Faith is Yemeni and the ikma as well). Kulayn, al-U l min l-Kf, vol. 8: 70. As
such, they refer to what is authentically Prophetic and faith-based.
Corbin offers a different understanding of their symbolism, which in my view is incorrect. Regarding Mr Dmds use of this
symbolism he says, Yamani philosophy means the wisdom revealed by God to man through the prophets and through
illumination; Yaman (Yemen) symbolizes the right or oriental (mashriqi) side of the valley in which Moses heard the message
of God. It is, therefore, the source of divine illumination in contrast to the occident, the source of Peripatetic philosophy, the
ccident symbolizing darkness and being on the plane of philosophy, i.e., rationalism. See Henry Corbin, Le rcit dinitiation
et lhermetisme en Iran, Eranons Jahrbuch, vol xvii, 1949, 136-37.

199
attempt to come up with a distinct philosophical and metaphysical tradition based on the
traditions of the imams (if such a thing were even possible; rather they tended to emphasize
philosophical understanding as the most appropriate conceptual framework for making sense
of Twelver traditions. Twelver traditions, in the eyes of these philosophers, revealed their
most profound meaning when interpreted in a philosophical framework. That being said, this
was definitely not a one-way street. The hadith literature also informed philosophical
discourse, for example by suggesting questions to be dealt with and goals to be met.
At any rate, developing a philosophical discourse that functioned as an interpretive
tool for making sense of Twelver esoteric doctrine was at the center of Mull adrs
innovative attempts, and his students like ay followed in his path. Therefore, it should not
surprise us that both of them are mentioned by ayrz among a handful of intellectual figures
that, ayrz claims, adhered to the same vision that he elaborates in

l.468 His remarks about

Mull adr are particularly interesting:

He was the reference (istnd) of the teacher of my teacher and many of

his writings, some of his poetry and some written by his own hand are in my
possession. However, since at his age philosophers were dominant he did not
have any choice but to speak in their language. [Thus] he has explained divine
sciences (al-m rif l-ilhiyy ) that belong to the folks of divine poverty (alf q r l-ilhiyyn) according to the logic of philosophers and in the language of
theologians, and there is no dispute in terminology (l m sh

468

t f-l-i il ).469

ther prominent contemporaneous figures included in his list are Mu ammad Bqir Khursn, Abu al-Razzq Lh , and
the latters student, Q Sad Qum. Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i l l-Khi b, vols. 3: 12041224.
469

Ibid., vol. 3: 1220.

200

Thus the vehement and unwavering condemnation of philosophy becomes, in the case
of adr, a passing reference to differences in vocabulary.470 Given ayrzs long
companionship with Mu ammad diq Adrastn, one of the earliest philosophers of the time
to adhere explicitly to the fundamental principles of Transcendental Philosophy, his sympathy
with adr and ay should not come to us as a surprise.471
Another similar feature of

l and

f is that both of their authors make a

substantial effort to compile a list of authoritative Twelver ulama whose writings and
biography can be used to bolster arguments for the authenticity of their mystical discourse.
ayrzs list of figures is similar to that in Muains

f . Those among the ulama who,

according to ayrz, sympathized with the folks of poverty include a r al-dn s (A f

al-Ashrf), Bb Af al al-Ksh, Allma al- ill ( inhj l-Kirm ), Ibn Ab Jumhr al-A s
(Avl l-L l), Sayyid aydar mul ( l(Munyat al-

rd), the author of i b

l-A m and Jmi l-Asrr), Zayn al-Dn al-mil

l-Sh ri , Mr Dmd,472 Shaykh Bah,473 Ibn ahd al-

ill, and Ibn Tvs. The recurrent appearance of hadiths and quotes from the above-

470

ayrz has a point here. adr himself explicitly says in a number of places that in some of his works he followed the
conventions and vocabulary of mainstream philosophy in spite of the fact that , in the final analysis, his views are much closer
to the gnostics among the most accomplished Sufis, especially when it comes to the fundamental doctrine of the Unity of
Being. See adr al-Dn Shrz, al-ikm l-Mutaliy f l-Asfr l-Aqliyy ., vols. 1: 912. A brief look at the major themes
covered in his l confirms his debt to adr.It is impossible here to summarize ayrizis grand metaphysical thought. or the
interested reader, I suggest starting with Kh avs introduction to l in which he discusses ma or themes of ayrzs
worldview in some detail. See: Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i l l-Khi b, vol. 1: hijdah sivahaft. It
suffices here to say that in his primary attempt in l to introduce a proper explanation of the doctrine of the Unity of Being,
he uses terminology similar to that used by adr. Examples include the reference to taw d (the doctrine of unity of God) in
terms of al-va da al-tiyya al- aqqiyya or the essential True Unity as opposed to al-va da al-adadiyya or numerical
unity. See ibid., vols. 1: 265303.
471

or Ardastns take on adrs philosophy see shtiyns remarks in adr al-Dn Shrz, al-Sh vhid l-R b biyy f lnhij l-Sul kiyy , advahifdah advanzdah.

472

Mr Dmd, according to ayrz, turned away from the path of philosophers at the end of his life.

473

According to ayrz, he was initiated into the ahab order by Shaykh Mumn Mashhad.

201
mentioned sources is another element shared by both

l and

f , which testifies to the

limited pool of traditions and secondary works from authoritative Twelver ulama whose
work can be effectively used in this regard.474
The alternative title ayrz sometimes uses for

l, that is, ikm t l-rifn, tells us

much about the intellectual environment that prompted the writing of his magnum opus. It is
highly unlikely that, in choosing such an alternative title, ayrz was unaware of Qums
substantial criticism of the metaphysical speculations of philosophers and mystics in his book
titled ikm t l-rifn, which I discussed briefly in chapter two. Almost a fourth of Qums work
is dedicated to a detailed refutation of the idea of va dat al-vu d or Unity of Being as
explicated by the students of the school of Ibn Arab. 475 Within this section, Qum specifically
criticizes adr and his followers novel innovation in which they have combined philosophy
with Sufism.476 Va dat al-vu d is also a ma or concern informing ayrzs work. ne might
say that the r ison detre of writing the

l is the offering of an authentic understanding of

this doctrine in contrast to the deviant understandings promoted by the soi-disant Sufis and
those among the learned philosophers who had not properly understood this doctrine. As
such,

l can be seen as an attempt to rescue the idea of va dat al-vu d from the gross

misunderstanding and distortion that ultimately resulted in the doctrine being targeted as a
form of heresy by Qum and other anti-Sufi authors.

474

ayrz also gives us a sense of what his library looked like. He points out, with much pride and satisfaction, that he
possessed some of the works of Sayyid aydar, Mulla adr and ay . He specifically points out Sayyid aydars two
abovementioned works, many of Mull adrs monographs, some in his own handwriting, and, finally, ay s l-Vf, l-f
and his Dvn. Once again, there is no mistake whose intellectual genealogy he imagined himself to be a part of.
475

Qum, ikmat al-rifn, 312398.

476

Ibid., 314315.

202
In this surprising way, then, ayrz can be considered a faithful student of Qum in
spite of the stark differences in their understandings of Shiism and mutual hostility on the
issues of spiritual authority and authenticity. Both of them agree on the primacy and priority
of hadith literature as a foundation of the new Shii thought. urthermore, they agree that
traditional discursive philosophy and what is generally understood as the teachings of Sufism
is utterly unsuitable and in many cases contradicts the teachings of the imams outright. Their
differences, however, can be seen in ayrzs defense of an authentic version of Sufi
doctrines, explicated in Sayyid aydar and Mull adrs adoption of Ibn Arabs original idea.
Whereas Qum criticizes both Ibn Arab and Mull adr for their innovations and for their
advocacy of the heretical and blasphemous idea of the Unity of Being, ayrz spends much of
his magnum opus offering an explanation of this doctrine that, according to him, is fully
compatible with the esoteric teachings of the imams.

l l-Khitb is filled with Shii traditions

that, according to ayrz, are best understood as explications of the doctrine of va dat alvu d. That is why, he concludes, not believing in va dat al-vu d must be considered a
heresy!477
In writing works dedicated to ikm from the perspective of the rif, that is ikm t lrifn, Qum and ayrz both laid claims onto these categories and how they should be defined
and understood. That is to say, the categories of ikm and rif were at the center of a
discursive dispute in which both sides were attempting to rehabilitate those categories that
had previously been hi acked by discursive philosophers and ignorant Sufis. ayrz and
Qum have dramatically different perspectives and in many respects their respective beliefs
about what constitutes real ikma or irfn stand in sharp contrast to each other.

477

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

l l-Khi b, vol. 3: 1847.

203
As an Akhbr puritan religious scholar, Qum does not have much to offer in terms of a
systematic and well-defined exposition of authentic ikma and marifa. In his writings, there is
not much to be found in this regard beyond general remarks that the highest form of marifa is
the knowledge of the imam (m rif t l-imm) and that a true akm or a real rif is one who
knows the true imam and learns religious teachings (m rif dniyy ) from him.478 He spends
the overwhelming majority of his writings refuting alternative visions with which he
disagrees. That is to say, he does a tremendous job in tearing down what he considers to be a
problematic reading of the teachings of the imams but has little to offer in terms of a positive
and elaborate alternative that could take the place of such misunderstandings. This, in fact, is
the hallmark of all puritan, fundamentalist, and reactionary discourses.
or ayrz, one the other hand, while the need to derive authentic religious knowledge
from the fountain of imam is imperative, the scope of reliable traditions upon which this true
ikma can be built is much wider that what Qum would allow. These include the kind of
hadiths that he, Muain, adr, and other Sufi-minded scholars or Sufi Shiite shaykhs
emphasize in their writings, none of which make their appearance in Qums writings,
presumably because of their less reliable nature, or their ambiguous meaning. Furthermore,
ayrzs Sufi affiliation and his strong belief in the ultimate validity of a refined tradition of
metaphysical thinking, informed both by philosophical and Sufi discourse, as the best one in
which the teachings of imams can be interpreted sets him apart, significantly, from Qum and
other puritan anti-Sufi and anti-philosophy authors. He is, in spite of his strong rhetoric of
advocating a purely Alid philosophy, in the lineage of syncretistic thinker.

478

Qum, ikmat al-rifn, 45.

204
Having mentioned his sympathy for synthetic and syncretistic modes of thought
represented by the above-mentioned religious scholars, there is no mistake in the fact that
ayrzs heroes in

l are a group that he often calls them folks of poverty or ahl al-faqr, an

elite and chosen group among the learned people (ahl al-ilm), otherwise known as gnostics.479
They stand, as the pinnacle of creation, in opposition to a triangle of evil. Philosophers stand
in one corner of this triangle and comprise the primary target of ayrz. He bashes them for
having hi acked the Path of God by introducing their innovations, that is, their foreign
sciences borrowed from Greeks. ayrzs strong rhetoric against philosophy should be
understood in the context of the last three decades of Safavid rule when, as mentioned in
chapter two, philosophy, along with Sufism, was increasingly targeted by puritan mullas. Such
mullas reside in the second corner of the abovementioned triangle and are usually referred to
as shbh hl l-ilm (pseudo-learned men) who made the cultural environment of his time so
hostile and poisonous for the friends of God. These exoteric ulama refuse to consider
anything but the literal meaning of the Twelver traditions. According to ayrz, the fall of
Isfahan was a catastrophe visited on the people of Iran by God in retribution for their
harassment, cursing, and persecuting the folks of poverty and genuine dervishes.480
The last corner of the trianglethe final group to come under ayrzs ireis the most
surprising: the Sufis. ayrzs negative use of the term Sufi and Sufism throughout
479

480

See, for example: Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

l, and

l l-Khi b, vol. 2: 546.

This spiritual pathology of the Safavid society is an interesting and unique freature of l that needs to be further
investigated. ayrz expand on this pathology in an independent treatise titled ibb l- mlk (Medicine of the kingdoms).
No extant copy of this work treatise has been known until recently. Rasul Jafariyan argues for a possible match in an
anonymous manuscript that he has discovered based upon his analysis of the content of the work. This manuscript is
published, along with its Persian translation and a thorough introduction. See: Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn, rh ng v
Siys t, vols. 3: 13091355. Also, see the story printed on the margins of l from Jall al-dn Mu ammad Shrz known as
Majd al-ashrf, the thirty-sixth pole of the ahab order on the authority of his master. The story focuses on ayrzs various
attempts, writing letters, meeting people, etc to raise awareness of his contemporaries of this malady and seek a way out of
what he saw was a definitive way towards the collapse of the Safavid rule. See: Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i
l l-Khi b, vols. 3: 12511254. Although it is clear that the structure of the story is constructed and edited later, it seems to
contain some historically accurate information about the chaotic period around the Afaghan invasion.

205
his consistent effort to draw a sharp line between Sfiyya on the one hand and the folks of
poverty on the other (among whom he counts himself) is a striking feature of this work. Unlike
his predecessors who single out a group of soi-disant Sufis usually called muta avvifun and
differentiate between them and the real Sufis, ayrzs criticism of Sufis is not qualified in
such a way. It seems that for ayrz, terms like Sufi and Sufism are stigmatized beyond any
hope for redemption. They are so tainted in the public eye by negative implications that
ayrz finds the old strategy of differentiating between good versus bad Sufis useless. So,
in a strategic semantic retreat, he gives up on the term Sufi and uses it exactly as opponents of
Sufism would. As a result, the term Sufi in ayrzs lexicon is used as a synonym of muta avvif,
the soi-disant Sufi of his predecessor.481 Those who would have previously been called real
Sufis are now called faqr or dervish and, more frequently, rifs or gnostics.
Ironically for a ahab Sufi master, ayrz vehemently admonishes those who accuse
him of being a Sufi: those liars have called us infidels; we will call them stupid, truthfully.482
He also says, in their foolish understanding, and because of their excessive ignorance, they
called all the gnostics Sufis.483 In an expression of the continuation of such accusations even
after the fall of Isfahan he says:

I heard the lowly liars accuse me of Sufism, without any knowledge and
solely on the basis of their stupidity ... people like them destroyed the Iranian

481

For some examples, see: Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i l l-Khi b, vols. 2: 551, 612 and 3: 1182, 1199,
1241, 1243, 1249, 1302. That is why in almost in every single case, the commentator is urged to use the term s fiyy -yi r d
(literally, bad Sufis) to explain ayrzs critical comments. In page 552, Khuy actually makes an attempt to answer the
question directly and explains ayrzs negative usage of the term in term of its overwhelming association in the public use
with heretical and antinomian beliefs.
482

Ibid., vol. 3: 1241.

483

Ibid.

206
territories with similar stupid accusations. Those among them who have
survived in different corners of your land are [again] expressing their animosity
with the folks of God (ahl Allh) with the same accusation, with which they
destroyed cities and with which they opposed the great noble Shias (followers)
of Ali.484

In the same way, ayrz laments that in spite of his masters outstanding
accomplishments in the ascetic life and his unique mastery of divine secrets, the people of his
time not only failed to take advantage of his knowledge, they also looked down on him. The
arrogant people of Isfahan, he says, belittled friends of God in every land. Because of their
deficient insight, they called them, the greatest ones among the pious, Sufis, simply because
of their asceticism.485
At the same time, he revels in the history of Sufism, while simply using alternative
titles like faqr (poverty) for his heritage. For example, he tells us that there are four important
orders of the folks of poverty (s lsil hl l-faqr) within Muslim community.486 Here, ayrzs
reference is to the fourfold classification of Sufi orders by the ahab master, a b al-dn Ri ,
in his N r l-Hidy . According to this classification, out of four Sufi orders, that is the
aqshbandiyya, the Sha riyya, the Rifiyya and the ahabiyya it is only the last that is active
Iran and is honored to be particularly associated with the eighth Imam. 487 It is of this order
that ayrz considers himself the guardian.

484

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

485

Ibid., vol. 3: 1199.

486

Ibid., vol. 3: 1185.

487

Ibid., 1187. Also: Tabrz Isfahn, r al-Hidya (Manuscript), f. 186a186b.

l l-Khi b, vol. 3: 1302.

207
The author of

l also provides us with a list of prominent gnostics among the learned

of his time who, according to him, although some might have some reservations about the
others, they are in fundamental agreement with the way of the folks of poverty that is
represented best by his master Al I ahbnt, i.e., the ahabiyya. The list of people is
important, as it reflects whom among the learned elite of his time ayrz associated the most.
Six people are enlisted here with whom ayrz had a close relationship. These are (1) Shh
Mu ammad Drb;488 (2) Mu ammad Al Sakk Shrz (d. 1135);489 (3) Mu ammad diq
Ardastn (d. 1134 or 38);490 (4) gh Khall Isfa n [Qazvn] (d. 1136);491 (5) Amr Ibrhm
Qazvn (d. 1149);492 and finally (6) Mr Mu ammad-taq Khursn (d. circa. 1150).493 Of the
above six figures, five are either officially affiliated with a Sufi order (#2, #5 and #6), or have
strong mystical proclivities (# 1 and #3).
Unfortunately, contemporaneous sources are silent about the exact order to which
Sakk paid allegiance. A later source, that is, the rs-nm -yi Nsr, associates him with the
ahab order.494 This, rather than a reflection of an earlier source, seems to be an
impressionistic con ecture on behalf of as given the prominence of the ahab order in

488

Mu ammad Al azn Lh , rkh v S f rnm -i n, ed. Al Davn, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Markaz-i Asnd-i Inqilb-i Islm,
1996), 17778.
489

Ibid., 179.

490

We are told that Ardastn was expelled from Isfahan due to his Sufi proclivities. Although we cannot be sure of the
historicity of this incident, as we mentioned earlier, there is no doubt about his inclination towards Sufism which made him an
ideal candidate as the figure .
491

Mu ammad Mu sin gh Buzurg ihrn, b qt Alm l-Sh , ed. Al aq Munzav, al- aba 2. (Qom: Muassasat
Ismlyn, 1990), vols. 6: 1516. Also: Abd al- ab ibn Mu ammad Qazvn, tmm Am l l-mil, ed. A mad usayn, min
Makh t Maktabat yat Allh al-Marash al-mma; 16. (Qom: Maktabat yat Allh al-Marash, 1987), 14246.
492

Ibid. Also Mu sin al- usayn mil, Ayn l-Sh (Beirut: dar al-Taruf, 1986), vols. 2: 2278. On his Sufi proclivities and his
close relationship to Mr Mu ammad-taq (#6 above) see: Qazvn, tmm Am l l-mil, 85.
493

494

Qazvn,

tmm Am l l-mil, 8487.

asan ibn asan usayn as, rsnm -yi N ir, ed. Man r Rastigr as (Tehran: Amr Kabr, 1989), vol. 2: 1171.

208
Shiraz during his lifetime in the mid to late nineteenth century. While Sakks affiliation with
organized Sufism is clearly mentioned in azns remarks as well, it is highly unlikely that he
was a ahab. If that were the case, one wonders, why would ayrz have failed to mention it?
In fact, given ayrzs conscious effort to conceal the rbakhsh identity of other Sufi
masters he accompanied, and his above-mentioned reference to reservations that some of
these six had about each other, it is more likely that Sakk was a rbakhsh Sufi. The fact, we
know that rbakhshs and sometimes aqshbands used the term silsilat al-ahab to refer to
a particular spiritual lineage that connected them to the imams, especially the eighth imam,
through Marf Karkh.
Another case of a rbakhsh acquaintance of ayrz is Mr Mu ammad-taq
Khursn, otherwise known as Shh. ayrz praises him with the highest of his words. Shh
is, according to him, renowned in every quarter of the earth and among the murshds for
those who seek guidance in spiritual Path. The name of the Sufi order he associated with,
however, is curiously suppressed both by ayrz and other biographical sources that mention
him.495 In spite of this censorship, we know from a unique manuscript that he was a master of
the rbakhsh Sufi order. His name appears on the rbakhsh orders lineage as a student of
Mu ammad Mumn Sidr, from the khnqh in Sidr, close to Sabzavr, that we mentioned it
as one of the active rbakhsh centers in Khursn in second chapter.496
Yet it is not the career of the members of organized Sufism among his companions that
interests us here. It is in the figure of Shh Mu ammad Drb, a mystic-poet and an

495

or example, Abd al- ab Qazvn, with his strong anti-Sufi sentiments inherited from his teacher Mull Khall Qazvn,
after giving a quite detailed account of his miracles and his exemplary piety and asceticism makes sure to point out that all
the people of knowledge and nobility who met him and with whom I met mentioned that he never spoke as Sufis speak about
their superstition, their technical vocabulary, their pretentions, and beliefs. (Ibid., 86)
496

Shrvn, Riy

l-Siy , 336. Most probably, his source is: Silsila-yi Sidriyya-yi rbakhshiyya-yi Hamadniyya, f. 2.

209
outstanding religious scholar who was ayrzs hadith teacher that we find what we are
looking for in terms of the possible model that ayrz looked into in his dramatic choice to
put aside the category of Sufism and choose the epithet of rif as an alternative that stands in
direct opposition and contrast to the former.

Shh Mu ammad Drb, Sufism and Irfn

Information about Drbs life and works is scattered piecemeal in a wide variety of
primary sources. Based on these sources, prominent bibliographers of poets and ulama have
constructed a picture of his career and life that can be quite puzzling at times.497 Sources of
confusion are Drbs longevity (his students insist that he lived more than a hundred years)498
and the fact that he, like many poets and writers of his time, spent many years in India in
pursuit of royal sponsorship. These factors resulted in Drbs life being discussed under two,
and sometimes three, different names. 499

497

The best attempt to reconstruct the basic chronology of Drbs life has been accomplished recently by dq Ashkivar. See
his introduction to: Drb Shh Mu ammad, kir -yi L if l-Kh yl, ed. Yusf Bayg Bbpr and dq Ashkivar (Qom:
Ma ma-i akhir-i Islm, 2012), uh Haftdudu. A comprehensive list of Drbs writings is included in Ashkivaris
informative introduction.
498

499

or example azn claims that lived close to a hundred and thirty years. azn, rkh v S f rnm -i n, 178.

or example, damiyyat has divided Drbs works under three different entries: Mu ammad usayn Ruknzda
damiyyat, Dnishm ndn v S kh ns ryn-i rs (Tehran: Kitbfurshh-yi Islmiyya va Khayym, 1337), vols. 3: 229, 230 and
544. Similarly, gh Buzurg contends that there are two Drbs in this period whose identity and work should not be mixed.
See: gh Buzurg ihrn, al- r il
nf l-Sh , vols. 9: 6656. His contention seems to be based upon 1) the fact that two
different pen names, Shh and rif are reported by the sources as having been used by Drb, and 2) that one of these
appears to refer to a poet who lived and died in India whereas the other refers to the master of Hazn and ayrz and a ma or
scholar who was born in I ahbnt, lived in Shiraz, and died in his hometown. Therefore, gh Buzurg distinguishes between
Mu ammad rif I ahbnt, the famous scholar of hadith and the author of irj al-K ml and Riy l-rifn and Shh
Mu ammad Drb or Drb ird, the author of kir t l-sh r who died in India.
In response, it should be said that the the use of two different pen namesShh in some poems and rif in
othersdoes not necessarily mean that two different authors wrote the poems. See A mad Gulchn Man, rkh-i kir hyi rs, Publications De lUniversit De Tehran; o. 1236/1. (Tehran: Dnishgh-i Tehran, 1348), vols. 2, 103. In this survey of
biographical works on Persian poets the author provides an extensive description of L if l-kh yl by Shh Mu ammad

210
Turning to the matter of Drbs longevity, it should be acknowledged that miraculous
length of life is often attributed to saintly figures. In Drbs case, however, a number of
reports by his contemporaries lead one to believe that he indeed lived more than one hundred
years. The earliest known literary trace left by Drb is an extant copy of Urf Shrzs Dvn,
copied by Drb himself in 1636 while the latter was in India. In order for him to have been
old enough to travel to India from Shiraz and an accomplished enough calligrapher to produce
such a beautiful piece of art, he must have been at least in his late twenties at the time. 500 This
puts his birth date somewhere around the beginning of the second decade of the seventeenth
century. More concrete dates in relation to his literary activities come from his ir j, which
mentions the year 1104/1692,501 and from his commentary on the fourth imams f , which
Drb penned in Isfahan in the year 1114/1702.502 Another important piece of information
about the chronology of his life comes from his student azn, who mentions that Drb
Drb, going on to count irj l-k ml among the latters writings. Gulchn Man also mentions that Drb wrote poetry
using two pen names: Shh and rif. The author also makes no mention of Drbs death in India, in spite of gh Buzurgs
claim. In fact the wording of b -i Gulshan gives the impression that his permanent abode was not India, and that he was
there only for a visit. Ali Hasan Khan shiq, Subh-i Gulshan. (Bhopal: Fayz-i Manba-i Ranq-i Ariyai,, 1878), 220,
http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.b3819092. It is indeed a possibility that the author use two different pen names at different
stages of his life, or, alternate pen names depending upon his residence (Iran or India). While the pen name Shh appears to be
deeply rooted in his Indian connections, the pen name rif would have been a beneficial and natural choice in Iran, especially
towards the end of the seventeenth century when Sufism had come under increasing pressure, allowing the author to keep
from being targeted as a Sufi. The possibility of India versus Iran explanation is supported by Ashkevaris finding that the
author himself appears to have scratched out the pen name rif and replaced it with Shh as he was finalizing the copy of
L if in India. See the related remarks in Shh Mu ammad, kir -yi L if l-Kh yl, Shastvachahr. gh Buzurg himself
seems to have reconsidered his position and later explicitly acknowledges the possibility that the two were one and the same,
given that there is doubt about b -i G lsh ns report regrding his death in India. See: gh Buzurg ihrn, b qt Alm lSh , vols. 6: 330332.
Other scholars have also emphasized that these purportedly different personalities all belonged to one man. See Ashkevars
introduction to the recent publication of L if: Shh Mu ammad, kir -yi L if l-Kh yl. Davn also leans towards this
conclusion. See his remarks in azn, rkh v S f rnm -i n, 333. This view is also held by some contemporary scholars.
ther examples of this confusion, mostly based on gh Buzurgs misleading comments are: Al Karbs, km-i
t ll Bdbd: I yg r-i ikm t-i Sh d r Q rn-i D vzdahum-i Hijr, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Pizhhishgh-i Ulm-i Insn va
Mu lat-i arhang, 1381), 68.
500

This beautiful manuscript was brought to my attention by Sadeq Ashkevari. I later found out that it was the property of the
late Stuart Cary Welch. His descendants put it up at auction last spring in London, where it sold for 73,250 by Sotheby in
London at April 6th, 2011.
501

502

Mu ammad ibn Mu ammad Drb, Mir al-Kaml, n.d., 117, MS. o. 7205, Kitbkhna-yi stn-i Quds Ra av.

Mu ammad ibn Mu ammad Drb, Riy l-rifn f Sh r f t S yyid l-Sjidn, ed. usayn Dargh and Mu amad Taq
Sharatmadr, al- aba 1. (Tehran: Dr al-Usva, 2000), 10.

211
passed away while he was studying in Shiraz. Although we know azn stayed in Iran until
1146/1733, we do not know the exact dates of his study in Shiraz. He was likely in his late
twenties and early thirties while in Shiraz, and his stay certainly occurred during the last
decade of Safavid rule, a couple of years before the fall of Isfahan. This puts Drbs
approximate death date somewhere around 1130/1717.503 Based on this timeline, his claim to
have been a student of Shaykh Bah might not be that farfetched.504
Drb also appears to have lived in India for extended periods of time on several
occasions. In fact, the title of shah (king) before his name indicates a strong connection to
India, where it was customary for Sufi saints and friends of God to be honored with this title.505
All three of Drbs prominent students who left behind biographical information
about him relate that he was their primary teacher in hadith and mention him teaching
classical philosophy textbooks as well as other sciences.506
503

or a list of different death dates mentioned in primary sources see Shh Mu ammad, Takir -yi L if l-Kh yl, bst. I am
inclined toward gh Buzurgs conclusion in this regard: gh Buzurg ihrn, al- r il
nf l-Sh , vol. 9: 666.
504

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i l l-Khi b, 1212. See also Gulchn Man, rkh-i kir -h-yi rs,, vols.
2, 101. Gulchn refers to L if l-Kh yl as his source. At the time of writing, the recent edition of the latter work was not at
my disposal to verify this issue.
505

or a summary of his trips see Shh Mu ammad, kir -yi L if l-Kh yl, Hijdahnzdah. Although the exact length of his
stay(s) is not clear, there are specific times when we know he was in India. For example, from an extant manuscript of the
Dvn of Urf Shrz, scribed by none other than our own Shh Mu ammad, we know that he was in India in the year
1046/1636, in a town called Muhammadpr. We also know from another extant treatise by Drb that in the year 1062/1651
he entered Ahmadabad, the capital of Gujerat province in India, via Surat. Mu ammad ibn Mu ammad Drb, L f -yi Gh yb
(Shiraz: Kitbkhna-yi A mad, 1978), 131. Tihrn has obviously missed this explicit mention to the year 1062 when he
contends that the received scholarly view that L f was written around 1087 is not correct and suggests, based upon what
appears to be a misreading of a paragraph in the work, that it appears to have been compiled sometime between the years
1038 and 1043. As we will presently see, an analysis of the contents of L f reveals its striking similarity to works written in
the late twelfth century. Ashkevar confirms the later date of 1087 and adds that the date is mentioned at the end of a
manuscript of L f that he has examined as well. See: Shh Mu ammad, kir -yi L if l-Kh yl, sivayik. According to
Ashkevari, he stayed in India for five years until he returned to Shiraz and Isfahan in 1067. Ibid., zdah. His second trip to
India appears to have happened around 1076 when he started to write kir -yi L if l-Kh yl, a biography of Persian poets
there. See Ibid. It looks like he stayed there until 1083, the date he finished his Riy l-rifn. A number of years later he
headed back to Iran and resided in Isfahan for a couple of years, where a rbd met him. a rbd I fahn, kir -yi
N rbd, 592. His last trip to India, as far as we know, happened around 1100. The date is mentioned in small treatise on l m
l- isl (imaginal world) which he wrote aboard ship while sailing to India. azn Lh , rkh v S f rnm -i n, 333.
Ashkevari contends that this is probably Drbs last work, since no other work among his writings is dated later than 1100. In
my udgment, however, Ashkevari seems to have overlooked that the year 1104 is mentioned in Drbs irj. See his remarks
in: Shh Mu ammad, kir -yi L if l-Kh yl, Bstvapanj.

212
Drbs mastery of hadith is best exemplified in his commentary on l- f
S jjdiyy , which he titled Riy

l-

l-rifn. This work was written during the reign of Shah

Sultan usayn and dedicated to the same. Therefore, it is no surprise that ayrz mentions
Drb as the primary teacher on whose authority he narrates the traditions of the family of
the Prophet (his shaykh al-ij , in other words). In his own words:
f the learned (fu al) with whom I met among the contemporaries:
first, the learned professional, my teacher and the one whom I reference in
narrating from the infallible imams master of both rational and narrated
sciences (jmi l-m q l v

l-m nq l), container of the principle (

l) and the

branches (f r ) [of religion], the most knowledgeable, most intelligent, Mawl

Shh Mu ammad Drb, peace be upon him. He was the teacher of all the
learned of Shiraz in his age, and I am in possession of a treatise by him titled
irj l-K ml in his own handwriting, which is an inquiry about the meaning of
shaykh and [his] guidance, and disciple (murd) and his seeking of guidance
(istirshd).507

This emphasis on hadith by Drb and his students is another testament to how the
study of hadith was a centerpiece of the madrasa curriculum in the early decades of the
506

or a comprehensive list of his students see Ashkevaris notes in Shh Mu ammad, kir -yi L if l-Kh yl, Bistvadu
bistvachahr. Hazn Lh praises him as teacher of the ulam ( std l- l m) and example of the gnostics (usvat al r f) and recalls his participation in Drbs class on U l l-kf as well as his philosophy class in which he learned ikm t lAyn from him. Mu ammad Al azn, kir t l- irn, ed. Masma Slik, Chp-i 1., Mrs-i Maktb (Series). Zabn va
Adabyt-i rs; 2. (Tehran: Nashr-i Sya, 1996), 11213. azn, rkh v S f rnm -i n, 17778. Mu ammad Mumin
Shrz Jazir, his other student, also praises Drb in the highest terms, stating that he was his primary teacher not only in
hadith, but also in the natural sciences, philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, and music, among others. Mu ammad Al
Kashmr, N j m l-S m f rjim l-Ul m, ed. Shihb al-Dn Marash a af (Qom: Maktabat Ba rat, 1981), 172. Here
Jazir points out that Drb was born in I ahbnt (hence his epithet I ahbnt instead of Drb in some sources) and
died around 1140 in his hometown after spending his life as the master of all the learned in Shiraz teaching and writing.
Hazns report, as we mentioned, indicates that his death occurred before the fall of Isfahan at 1135.
507

Amn al-Shara Khuy, n l- vb d r Sh r -i

l l-Khi b, 1201.

213
eighteenth century, whether one was interested in hadith and jurisprudence or philosophy
and mysticism.
Another interesting fact about Drb is that, despite his strong penchant for mysticism
and the fact that his vocabulary borrows heavily from Sufi literature, none of his
contemporaries associated him with organized Sufi orders, either in India or in Iran.508 The fact
that ayrz refers to Al I ahbnt, and not Drb, as his shy kh t- rqa (master of the
[Sufi] Path) is also reflective of Drbs hesitation to operate within the framework of
traditional Sufi institutions.509
The importance of Drb for our inquiry is that the earliest attempts to replace terms
like Sufi and Sufism with rif and irfn occur in his writings. Later figures like ayrz
operated under his direct influence as they sought to unburden themselves from the heavy
weight of the negative connotations such terms had acquired in the aftermath of the anti-Sufi
campaign. In fact, an examination of the numerous extant works by Drb demonstrates that
he, along with Muain and ayrz, was at the front line of the Sufi response to this
campaign. He wrote works dedicated to three hotly debated issues of the time related to
Sufism:

qmt l-Slikn on the issue of music (ghin) and its legitimate and illegitimate

forms,510 irj l-K ml on the master/disciple relationship in Sufism,511 and L f -yi Gh yb

508

The only exception is a report that around the year 1038/1630 someone named rif Shrz entered Isfahan in dervish garb
(libs-i faqr) and claimed to be a nephew of Urf Shrz. azn, kir t l- irn, 245. If this rif is the same as our Shh
Muhammad, whom we know sometimes wrote poetry with the nickname rif, then it follows that Drb, at least in the early
stage of his career, officially associated with Sufism. Most likely, however, he changed his appearance later on as he advanced
his knowledge of various disciplines and emerged as a prominent teacher in Shiraz.
509

There is an ambigious piece of evidence that raises the possibility of him being affiliated with organized Sufism at the early
stages of his career. See ibid.
510

Mu ammad ibn Mu ammad Drb, Maqmt al-Slikn, in Ghin, sq, ed. Sayyid Jafar abav, vol. 1, 2 vols., Chp-i 1.,
Mrs-i iqh (Qom: Muassisa-yi Bstn-i Kitb (Markaz-i Intishrt Daftar-i Tablght-i Islm ), 2008), 283496.
511

Drb, Mir al-Kaml.

214
that contains his take on the debate over terms like Sufi and Sufism.512 Directing our focus
upon him is worthwhile not only because of his influence on ayrz and the latters choice to
distance himself from the term Sufi, but also because of his larger influence on the intellectual
circles of Shiraz. As a prominent and universally respected teacher in the city for over a
century, he contributed to the nascent stages of the formation of the paradigm of irfn in an
unparalleled way due to the number of students he influenced. Among his works that
contributed to the debate on Sufism during the seventeenth century, none were more
important than irj l-K ml and L f -yi Gh yb. The former is only work by Drb included
in the handful of titles ayrz explicitly cites as belonging to his library, an indication of how
important he considered this work to be.

Mir al-Kaml

irj l-K ml is the only work by Drb that deals exclusively with the debates over
Sufism in his time.513 As the subtitle of the work indicates, it focuses on what was perhaps the
most volatile issue in the debate between the Sufi-minded and anti-Sufi camps, the issue of
master/disciple relationship, whether it could be reconciled with the role of the infallible
imams vis--vis their followers and, as a result, whether or not it was innovation or bida. I
should mention that I am not concerned here with the master/disciple relationship as an
isolated issue that revolves around a person-to-person relationship in spiritual matters. To the
contrary, I am primarily concerned with it as a highly significant social phenomenon
developed across centuries and located at the heart of an array of social rituals and an
elaborate ethos. Such rituals and codes of conduct played an important role in regulating not
512

513

Ibid.; Drb, L f -yi Gh yb.

There is only one known copy of this work available which is held at the Central Library of Astan-i Quds in Mashhad, Iran. I
was fortunate to be able to get a digital copy of the work via my generous friend Mr. Sayyed Sadeq Ashkevari.

215
only the social hierarchy of the khnaqh, but also the larger network of social groups that
were connected to Sufi institutions in different ways. The significant social implications of this
relationship were what the emerging hierocracy of the ulama found most threatening to their
authority and power in religious matters and beyond. This sense of threat led to the Sufis
coming under severe attacks and, sometimes, actual persecution. It would be simplistic and
nave, however, to reduce the activities of the ulama (a highly complex and amorphous social
group) vis--vis Sufis and dervishes to a series of negative attacks aimed at the suppression
and silencing of the latter camp. As we mentioned at the end of the previous chapter,
simultaneous to those attacks, a highly innovative and syncretistic attempt was being made
within the boundaries of the clerical hierocracy to offer an alternative model of guidance that
had the infallible imams at its center. In other words, the ulama did not merely say what,
from their perspective, was wrong with Sufism. They also offered an alternative vision of how
one could pursue spirituality in the right way. I believe that this, in addition to the
unwavering support the ulama received from the political establishment, was an important
contributing factor in their ultimate success. At the level of the illiterate masses, the
development of cults of veneration and worship around the tombs of imams and their
descendants, as discussed earlier, as well the widespread retellings of miraculous stories about
the infallible imams by passionate mullas, wondering dervishes, and maddhs, was
instrumental in focusing public attention on the imams instead of Sufi saints. As the n vvb or
deputies of the Hidden Imam, similar stories and cults of worship were developed around
charismatic and high-ranking members of the hierocracy.514 or the learned ulama
themselves, dreams and visions of the imams and the enormous literary legacy of the imams as

514

I will have more to say about the language of deputyship and its implications in the coming pages.

216
preserved in the hadith literature functioned as primary sources of spiritual guidance. A new
spiritual hierarchy developed in which the gates of heaven opened not by way of the saintly
figure of the Sufi shaykh at the khnaqh or the local Sufi shrine, but by way of the charismatic
clergy and the local immzda.
It was in the context of such negotiations about the authentic channels of connection
between heaven and earth that Drb dedicates a whole treatise to explaining the meaning of
guidance. The exercise of explaining what the concept of guidance means in spiritual matters
presupposes the existence of a certain degree of confusion and uncertainty about the
boundaries of the notion and a debate over its definition. The ones who eventually gained the
upper hand in defining such boundaries became the new guardians of the gates of heaven. This
is what irj is about.
As a Sufi-minded religious scholar, Drb, somewhat like Muain in

f , seems to

be straddling the two worlds of traditional Sufism and the newly-emerging orthodox Twelver
Shiism. There are differences, however, in the two authors approaches. As someone solidly
grounded in the world of organized Sufism, Muain approached this shady area where the
two worlds intermingled (m jm l-b r yn) privileging traditional Sufi discourse. However
Drb, as someone solidly grounded in the tradition of madrasa, approached the same
problems with a primary commitment to orthodox Twelver discourse. As such, his arguments
in irj, although thoroughly informed by traditional Sufi discourse and employed mainly in
defense of its fundamental ideas, can be seen as an attempt to domesticate the Sufi tradition by
revisiting some key concepts, their definitions, and premises.
Similarly to Muain in

f , Drb opens his remarks in irj with a discussion of

the nature of religious knowledge and a basic classification of the scholars of religion, the

217
ulama. This confirms our claim once again that the crucial point of disagreement between the
Sufis and the emerging clerical class was regarding the proper relationship between
disciplinary/rational knowledge, which is based in the madrasa, and inspirational/intuitive
knowledge, which is gained through training in the khnaqh. The same tripartite division
that we discussed in

f is presented by Drb, who divides the ulama are divided into

those who are experts in the exoteric sciences ( l m l-hir) and those who are experts in
the esoteric sciences ( l m l-b in). The ideal spiritual guide occupies the third category as
lim who is competent in both the esoteric and exoteric sciences.515 Representatives of this
third group are called al- l m l-r bbniyyin (divinely [inspired] religious scholars) and,
according to Drb, terms like pr and murshd refer to none other than these divinely
inspired religious scholars.516 He maintains that these ulam are in fact the same as those the
Second Martyr calls the l m l- qq , those who embark on the path of asceticism and
spiritual advancement after finishing formal training in the religious disciples. In other words,
they combine the knowledge of Sharia with accomplishments in arqat and the realization of
aqqat.517 The term lim r bbn went on to be used frequently in later Shii mystical literature
as one of the important alternative for the original Sufi concept of pr. Thus a new terminology
appeared, suited to a context from which organized Sufism, along with important elements of
its technical language, were purged in favor of a new, Shii-inspired lexicon.
Interestingly, one of Drbs primary strategies in defending the orthodox nature of
terms like pr or qu b, which are found in abundance in Sufi literature, was to play down their
technical meanings and treat them essentially as synonyms of more general and less loaded
515

Drb, Mir al-Kaml, 97.

516

Ibid., 129 and 1345.

517

Ibid., p .66

218
terms like std (teacher), rhn m (guide), shgird (student), rhr (wayfarer), lim (scholar),
m t llim (learner), and others. All of these terms, according to him, refer to nothing more
than an educational relationship in which knowledge flows from the more to the less
informed.518
onetheless, Drb is clear in his belief that embarking upon the spiritual path is
impossible without the proper training of a master, a murshd (in Arabic) or pr (in Persian).519
He qualifies this general statement, however, by saying that no one can be the ultimate
spiritual guru but the imam. It is only in the period of occultation, that is, when the ultimate
qu b or pole of the universe is not accessible, that any degree of authority can be attributed
to the gnostics, those divine religious scholars who are masters of both exoteric and esoteric
aspects of religion:
So, if you said what is meant by [terms like] murshd is no one but the
infallible [Imams] we say: yes, but when they are present. When they are in
occultation, however, the gnostics among the religious scholars who know the
esoteric sciences are, with the help of their hadiths, their deputies (nuvvb).
Then if it is said that their hadith is sufficient for us, we would say, if their
hadith is sufficient, then why do exoteric religious scholars [go to their teachers
in hadith] and take the hadith and hear it from their m shyikh l-ij ?
Therefore, [one has to] take the way of practice ( rq t l-amal) from the

518

Drb, Mir al-Kaml, 95.

519

Ibid., 94.

219
murshd ust like one learns his way in the science of hadith from the masters of
hadith (m shyikh al-hadith).520

The language of deputyship or niyba in the above quote is highly significant.

Beginning with Al al-Karak in the early sixteenth century, Twelver urisconsults
(mu tahids) began, with the support of Safavid monarchs, to employ the language of niyba
or deputyship to solidify their authority as true representatives of the Hidden Imam.521 The
Safavid monarchs benefitted extremely from this claim since, they claimed, the jurisconsults
graciously relegated the burden of governance to them. The shah, in other words, acted as a
deputy of the Hidden Imam, approved by the learned mujtahid, to rule over the masses. While
Drb does not directly challenge the deputyship claims of the exoteric mu tahid whose
expertise is solely in the matter of Sharia, he states emphatically that it is the third group,
those who combine exotericism and esotericism, who are the true deputies of the Hidden
Imam. Drb quotes a number of hadith to substantiate his claim and concludes:
And this [hadith] is explicit in [saying] that the perfect master who is
the believer (mumin) [mentioned there], stands as the representative of the
infallible Imam, and there is no doubt that he has a partial valya (v ly nqi ),
which is the position of the murshd; and it should be clear that the master of

520

Ibid., 105. (margins)

.

521

Jafariyn, f viyy d r Ar -yi Dn,

rh ng v Siys t, vols. 1: 122, 212 and 215.

220
the esoteric sciences also have the exoteric sciences. Otherwise, he would not be
qualified for the position.522

Therefore, it might be more fitting to analyze the above-mentioned remarks of Drb

in terms of their relation to an emerging power struggle within the hierocracy itselfa
struggle over who has the right to claim the deputyship of the Hidden Imam, rather than a
debate between the Sufi shaykh on the one hand, and the jurist on the other.
Another striking similarity between irj and

f unfolds in the final pages of the

former, where Drb starts a discussion about the necessary qualities that both the master
and the disciple need to possess. The list is almost identical to that we saw in

f .523 A few

points of divergence from the latter, however, clearly indicate that Drbs vision of the
master/disciple relationship was different than that of a solid member of organized Sufism like
Muain. irst, it is interesting that although Drb does not fail to mention the necessity of
the disciple submitting to the master, he qualifies this assertion with an overarching principle
that the adept does not need to obey the shaykh if the latters demands are contrary to
Sharia.524 Although Drb sets the parameters of his discussion so that it is inconceivable for
the pr to do or made the adept do something contrary to the law, the fact that he brings up
such a hypothetical is a significance departure from the traditional Sufi understanding in
which, based on the famous story of Moses and an anonymous companion traditionally
understood to be Khi r, the disciple is required to submit to the will of his master
unconditionally, like a corpse in the hands of the washer, even if the orders of master violate
522

Drb, Mir al-Kaml, 172.

523

Ibid., p 174.

524

Ibid , p 178.

221
common sense and basic tenants of Sharia. In fact, a m al-dn Rz, in his classical ir d libd, based on the logic of the abovementioned Quranic story emphasizes that the disciple is
to submit to the will of the master even when he thinks that it contradicts the law.525 This is
exactly where Drb is not willing to adhere to the well-established and traditional Sufi
understanding of the relationship. In his elaboration of the twentieth qualification of the
disciple in irj taken almost word for word from Muains Tu f he drops the reference
to the traditional corpse/washer analogy even though he still makes use of the Quranic story
to emphasize the importance of disciples submission.
In his innovative attempt to decontextualize and then redefine central Sufi concepts
connected to the concept of pr, Drb also addresses the concept of v ly or friendship
[with God] and v l or friend [of God]. There few terms more important in classical Sufi
literature than valya. Accomplished Sufis, by the virtue of their advance spiritual stations,
that is, their closeness to God, become his favorite servants, the pinnacles of his creation,
and the r ison detre for its sustenance. Such friends of Allah are called vals in another sense
of the root, that is, because God has bestowed upon them guardianship over the general
order of the universe, and, more particularly, over ignorant people who have gone astray.
The vals guide Gods wandering servants toward him, and in order to do so, they have been
given a special authority that otherwise belongs only to God. That is, the authority to manage
and decide on the affairs of their disciplines in every aspect of their lives. This authority
overrules the authority of the subject himself over his body, his soul, and his life in general.
They are thus called vals because they literally are

l bi l-t

rr f(one who has priority in

managing the affairs of somebody else).

525

Abd Allh ibn Mu ammad a m al-Dn Rz, ir d l-Ibd min l147.

bd il Al-m d (Tehran: Kitbkhna-yi San, 1984),

222
In re-evaluating the role of spiritual master from a Shii standpoint, Drb argues that
such absolute authority can only be conferred by God to a handful of his most perfect servants,
that is the infallible imams. Therefore, he says, the term val cannot be understood to refer,
as it previously had, to someone has priority over a disciples body and soul in all matters. To
the contrary, the term val must be understood in light of its more general meaning to be
something similar to n ir (helper) or m ibb (someone who takes care of another out of
affection).526 Drb follows with the explicit conclusion that accusing Sufis of having believed
that an adept should act, in terms of his will, like a corpse in the hands of a washer, is
baseless.527
This takes us to a striking feature of irj as a whole that I alluded to above. That is, its
re-interpretation of technical Sufi concepts in a way that their connection to the technical
vocabulary of traditional Sufism is much weakened. Drbs liberal willingness to compromise
on hardcore Sufi terminology and to settle on less problematic and more authenticlooking alternative terms can be seen throughout, as he reminds us often that the technical
terms one chooses to use do not matter. Rather, it is the realities to which such terms point
that are important:528 l m sh t fi l-i ilh (there is no dispute in terminology).529 This
conscious attempt to de-emphasize the technical framework of reference for fundamental Sufi
terms can be understood as a response to the criticism that Sufi vocabulary is, for the most

526

Drb, Mir al-Kaml, 978.

527

Ibid., 149.

528

Ibid., 100.

529

For example, see ibid., 10607, 160. Drbs tendency to de-emphasize and de-contextualize the technical meanings of Sufi
terms is also clearly seen in L f . As long as one submits himself to the path laid out by the infallible imams, in matters both
exoteric and esoteric, Drb says, it is of no importance whether he or she is called Sufi or faqh ( urist). Sufism is not ust a
word, it is its meaning that is the criteriathe letters f, qf, and h [=fiqh] are not [in their own] luminous (n rn), neither
are the letters t, d, vv, and f [=ta avvuf] dark ones ( l mn) that belong to hell (j h nn m). Drb, L f -yi Gh yb, 110.

223
part, alien to that found in authoritative hadith collections. Drb pursues a double strategy in
which, on the one hand, he de-emphasizes the technical meanings of such terms and, on the
other hand, cites many examples from other disciplines of knowledge in which extra-canonical
terminology are used without inciting charges of innovation.530
An interesting example is his discussion of the term ikma, or philosophy. As a
prominent teacher of peripatetic philosophy, and in response to criticism from the anti-Sufi
and anti-philosopher camp who noted that Quranic ikma had nothing in common with the
field of knowledge that had come to be known by the same term, he redefines the term in the
following way:
So, if you said the ikma that is praised in the science of Sharia is different from
the ikma that is customary among the students I would say: [the definition of]
ikma is to know the reality of things as they are according to the capacity of
human understandingand the result is that the philosopher ( akim) is one
who knows things as they are and acts accordingly. That is why in ikm t-i Al
it is said in Persian that the akim [is] the truthful (rst-g ftr) and righteous
(durust-kirdr). Therefore, ikma is something that includes the science of
Sharia and the science of tafsr, hadith, and fiqh are all included in
ikmaand our master, Shaykh Bah, has pointed out in some of his writings
that ikma is derived from the fountain of prophethood (nubuvva), and since the
names of some prophets were recorded in Greek, people got confused [and
thought] that those names refer to philosophers rather than prophets, and then
he said [for example] Hermes Trismagestus is the [Greek] name of prophet Idris
and Pythagoras the name of prophet Shs [Seth, son of Adam]. 531
As the reader has surely noticed, this willingness to compromise on terminology is not,
in spite of Drbs claim, simply a superficial exchange of different words referring to the
same truth. Quite to the contrary, terms that are deeply rooted in a Sunni-Sufi heritage are
taken out of their original register, the original network of meaning to which they belonged,

530

Drb, Mir al-Kaml, 105106.

531

Ibid., 15556.

224
and re-introduced in a different register in which they are understood in the context of a new
web of meaning and signification that revolves around Twelver teaching.
Among such terms Sufism itself. Drb experiments with several alternative terms for
this concept, irfn among them. or Drb, irfn is primarily an authentic, Shii word for
spirituality, in contrast to the problematic, Sunni-related aspects of ta avvuf:
If the fact that there are Sunni scholars among urists (fuqah) is not
considered a stain on the face of the glorious science of fiqh, similarly, the fact
that there are rare Sunni Sufis among the uraf (gnostics) is not a blemish for
irfn.532

Therefore, a gnostic, ideally, cannot be a Sunni. Drb makes the latter point clear in a
number of places in irj by emphasizing that the spiritual lineages that originate from
problematic Sunni figures like asan Basr and Sufiyn Sawr, whom I discussed in brief earlier
in this dissertation, are illegitimate.
And if you said that some orders trace their lineage back to asan al-Ba r or
Sufiyn Sawr and these two are condemned [by the imams] I would say only a
few among the orders end in those two and it does not impinge upon the
discipline of ta avvuf and irfn.533
A Sufi who is opposed to the pure imams is cursed forever the
disparagement of Sufism that is found in some hadiths refers to this group who
were opposed to Their Majesties, disputed them, and were actively pursuing a
way contrary to the true way of Twelverism. It does not refer to a group whose
spoken words, deeds, and religious observances best followed their Highnesses,
the pure imams. How it is fair to call this latter group Sufis just because they
persist in remembrance of God (ikr), purification of their food and their soul
and refining their ethical qualities and, then, start fighting them, expressing
hostility towards them, and rejecting them. As soon as we have learned a couple
of [ urisprudential] problems (masala) from the books of transactions and
532

Ibid., 113.

533

Ibid., 125 and 113.

225
business (mumilt va ta rat), even if we have thousands of blameworthy
deeds opposed to the exalted tradition of Their Majesties, we consider ourselves
better than the group that we have called Sufis; even if we observe them doing
their best to follow their Highnesses, the Imams. [And this] merely based on the
presumption that we are jurists and they are Sufis. What kind of logic does this
follow, and according to what notion of fairness, judgment, and law is it? 534
In spite of this rhetorical emphasis on the Shii-Sunni dichotomy between irfn and
ta avvuf, Drb uses the two words in con unction with one another (irfn va ta avvuf) in a
number of passages like the one above. This, I believe, was a way for the author to give his
readers a sense of what the newly-introduced category meant. As far as I have been able to
determine, Drb was the first author who used irfn in con unction with ta avvuf as an
alternative and an equivalent. In doing so, he transcribes many of the semantic denotations
and connotations of Sufism onto irfn. Irfn is used, therefore, as a substantive term that
signifies a particular discipline (fann), rather than a signifier of an advanced spiritual station
that is marked by gnostic, ontological realization of the unity that underlies apparent
multiplicity. Drb also calls it a mahab, which implies a defined set of beliefs and practices or
a particular school of thought. 535 As I mentioned previously, the term ta avvuf, based on its
literal derivation, signifies a process in which one becomes an accomplished Sufi. This
procedural denotation is also transcribed onto irfn by Drb. In a brief but important
passage in which he gives a rough definition of the abovementioned terms he says,
Sufism and irfn means to be devoid of all the vices (rail) and to be adorned with all
the virtues (f il) and to observe the exoteric and the esoteric [aspects] of the Sharia.536

534

Drb, L f -yi Gh yb, 108109.

535

Drb, Mir al-Kaml, 150.

536

Ibid., 148.

226
This definition clearly draws upon that given to irfn by Avicenna in the latters alIshrt, which was briefly treated in the first chapter. According to Avicenna, irfn begins
with differentiation (tafrq), renunciation (naq ), abandonment (tark) and re ection (raf ). It
continues with an integration ( am) that is the integration of Divine attributes into the
essence of the true seeker. It ends in the ne (al-v id), and then stillness (vuqf). 537 Ts, in
his clarification of this condensed and abstruse definition, explains that the beginning stages
of irfn mentioned by Avicenna essentially refer to a stage of the Sufi Path called takhliya
(emptying [the soul from vicious traits and qualities]). Similarly, the middle stage, called am,
refers to what is known in Sufi literature as t liy (adornment [of the soul with divine
qualities and attributes]) among the Sufis. This eventually leads the sincere seeker to the stage
of oneness (v d ) and tranquility.538 Ts provides a more detailed schema of the ascending
order of spiritual stages in his A f l-Ashrf, drawing heavily upon the m n il ([spiritual]
stations) genre of Sufi literature, best represented by Abdallh Ansrs

n il l-Sirn.539 As I

mentioned earlier, the fact that both akhr Rz and s take this Sufi-inspired understanding
of Avicennas remarks for granted is primarily due to the increasing dominance of Sufi
discourse in their era. Avicenna himself does not make any reference to terms like Sufi or
Sufism or to prominent figures associated with Sufism.
As a teacher of philosophy in Shiraz, Drb was fully aware of the Avicennan tradition
of irfn. As a part of the vibrant intellectual environment of Shiraz.540 he personally knew
adr during the later stages of the latters teaching career in the city, and Drb actually
537

Ab Al usayn ibn Abd Allh Ibn Sn (Avicenna), al-Ishrt v

538

Ibid. Tss commentary on the margins.

539

540

l- nbht, vol. 3: 389.

or an informative analysis of Tss Aw af see: Pr avd, Ishrq v irfn, 22447.

Shh Mu ammad,

kir -yi L if l-Kh yl, shastvapanj.

227
mentions adrs name approvingly in

qmt l-Slikn.541 His philosophical approach,

however, especially to fundamental questions of the metaphysics of being, seems to have

remained largely Avicennan and thus untouched by the latter.542 Yet, the fact that he is on
record as having written a treatise called Isbt l m l- isl or Proving the [existence] of the
Imaginal World indicates the heavy influence of Sufi-illuminationist trends of thought on
him. Here, Drb contends that although the existence of such a realm cannot be proved by
reasoning, it has been confirmed by mystical visions and also by the implications of hadith
literature.543 The lack of attention to adrs philosophy is not surprising here, even for a
denizen of Shiraz. We know that adrs innovative mystical philosophy remained marginal in
philosophical circles until the end of the eighteenth century and the emergence of Mull Al
r (d. ).544
It was not, then, the mystical philosophy of adr that informed Drbs notion of
irfn. Quite the contrary, in his attempts to introduce this category as an alternative for
Sufism, he was influenced by mainstream figures of philosophy and theology like Avicenna and
s. As a mystically-minded Shii religious scholar, the most important medium through
which he interpreted the Avicennan tradition is the figure of a ir al-dn s. The latters

541

Drb, Maqmt al-Slikn, 32324.

542

or example, in his comments on the issue of va dat al-vu d va-l-maw d that appear on the margins, he lists five
distinct positions. Among the five, he ascribes one, that is, va dat al-mawjd va-l-vu d, to the uraf. Surprisingly, he does
not adhere to this position, but sticks to the standard peripatetic position in which vu d is understood to be identical to the
essence of God, but an accident (ara ) when it comes to the essence of contingent beings. This is in contrast to adrs
signature position, that of l t l-v j d (primacy of being), which, in the final analysis, is replaced by the Sufi position of
va dat al-vu d). Drbs preference of the position of the ukam, and branding it as the position of Twelver Shiism, is
indicative of how much his general outlook is defined by traditional philosophical discourse. In the end, however, Drb
downplays the difference between the abovementioned positions, casting it as an essentially terminological one. Drb,
Mir al-Kaml, 151.
543

See Ashkevaris brief report of this treatise in: dq Ashkivar, lam al-Misl: Muarrif-yi Pazhhash az A r-i afav,
I ilt-i ikm t v
rif t, no. 73 (2012): 3435.
544

adr al-Dn Shrz, al-Sh vhid l-R b biyy f l-

nhij l-S l kiyy , .

228
name appears in Drbs writings more than that of any other Shiite lim. Drb cites
passages from ss works frequently, especially from his Sharh al- jrd as well as A f lshrf. 545
Although the dominance of the Sufi tradition largely prevented Avicennas notion of
irfn from reaching the attention of many learned circles, it appears that the situation in
Shiraz was somewhat different. For some reason, in early sixteenth century Shiraz, the
distinctively Avicennan notion of irfn came into the spotlight after half a millennium thanks
to a small treatise titled

n il l-Sirn v

qmt l-rifn and written by the prominent

philosopher and dignitary of early Safavid Shiraz, Ghiys al-dn Man r Dashtak (d. 1542). This
work offered a fresh look at the ninth chapter of Avicennas al-Ishrt that drew heavily upon
Tss commentary on that chapter as well as the latters A f. The title of the work, which is
a precise combination of the title of the ninth chapter of al-Ishrt (
of Ansrs abovementioned classical work (

qmt l-rifn) and that

n il l-Sirn) is an explicit restatement of

Avicennas definition of irfn in terms of Sufi stages of spiritual advancement, just as found in
Tss A f.546 The heroes of Dashtaks

n il, however, are the gnostics, and their special

gift is irfn. Sufism and Sufis are not mentioned at all, and if they are, they are disapprovingly
called soi-disant Sufis (muta avvifun).547
Dashtaks definition of irfn in this work is taken verbatim from al-Ishrt.548 What
represents a development from the latter work, however, is Dashtaks increasing use of irfn

545

s, A f Al- shrf. Drb also frequently quotes from Tss important and foundational work of theology
See, for example, p. 137-138
546

or a fuller analysis of Dashtaks sources in his

547

Dashtak Shrz, Ghiys l-Dn

548

Ibid., 179180.

n r D sht k v

n il see Pr avd, Ishrq v irfn, 248262.

ls f -yi irfn, 169, 178.

jrd l-Itiqd

229
as a substantive term that sometimes refers to a distinguished group of people, the rbb-i
irfn (Lords of Irfn).549 To further reinforce irfn as a distinct category and the folks of irfn
as a distinct group of the learned, Dashtak provides us with a short list of terms that are used
by the folks of irfn.550 Although he does not mention this fact, the list is taken, almost word
for word, from Suhravards K lim t lheading m

vv f, in which the terms are listed under the

l t l- fiyy (technical terminology of the Sufis).551 That is to say, in spite of

his indebtedness to Sufi literature, Dashtak follows the example of Avicenna in eschewing any
mention of Sufis or Sufism in his reproduction of the irfnian discourse. This is not the case,
however, with Drb. As a Twelver religious scholar who had an equal footing in hadith,
philosophy, and Sufism, the latter explicitly brought together elements from each of the
aforementioned fields to establish a distinctively Safavid Shii mystical discourse that referred
to by the term irfn.
The above discussion was exclusively focused on Drb as a religious scholar and the
way in which his scholarly background and commitments informed his idea of what irfn is.
Yet Drb was also a poet from the very city that was home to two of the most celebrated and
popular Persian poets, Hafez and Sadi. Centuries after these poets deaths, the cultural
environment of Shiraz was still indelibly marked by the legacy of these two towering figures in
the history of Persian literature. Interestingly for this study, Drb chose to use the pen name
rif, or gnostic, in his poetry, which indicates the significance of this notion in Drbs
overall mystical-poetic thought.

549

Ibid., 150 and 159.

550

Ibid., 180.

551

See Kks comments: Ibid., 229 (n. 59), 251 (n. 150).

230
urthermore, Drb is the author of what can be considered the first commentary on
the ghazals of Hafez. 552 His L f -yi Gh yb, a brief commentary on a limited number of Hafezs
odes, is arguably the most widely read of his works, certainly among Persian men of letters; it
is also the work in which he uses the category of irfn most frequently and consistently. In
fact, given the popularity of L f among a wide range of learned Iranians who were interested
in reading about Hafezs poetry, one could say that this work probably played a more
important role than irj in the establishment and spread of the notion of irfn.553
As Drb mentions in his introduction of the work, his ma or drive in writing L f was
to defend Hafez against increasing attacks by critics who accused the poet of being a Sunni and
a heretic based upon their reading of some of his odes. 554 Although I was not able to find any
literary evidence of Hafez being directly attacked in anti-Sufi literature, it is quite obvious
from the text of L f as well as the reason stated by its author for its writing, that Hafez was
in fact targeted by puritan defenders of orthodoxy. In fact, one would be surprised if this were
not the case, given Hafezs subversive and erotic imagery, his syncretistic and pluralist
tendencies, and his anti-establishment tone and indulgent manners.
Drbs commentary, the earliest substantial one in which Hafezs poems are
interpreted against the grain of their literal meaning, in a completely symbolic and
otherworldly manner, should be understood in the context of such attacks. In fact, one could
552

The only work preceding L f in this genre is Davns commentary on a single ghazal and two lines of poetry from Hafiz.
Jall al-Dn Davn Kzarn, Naqd-i Niy : d r Sh r -i D B yt v
k Gh l Khj fi Shr , ed. usayn Muallim, Chp-i 1.
(Tehran: Amr Kabr, 1994). or an interesting analysis of this commentary see: Carl W Ernst, Jalal al-Din Davanis
Interpretation of Hafiz, in Hafiz and the Religion of Love in Classical Persian Poetry, ed. Leonard Lewisohn, Iran and the Persianate
World. (London: I. B. Tauris in association with Iran Heritage Foundation, 2010), 197211.
553

irj still remains in manuscript form. There are only two known extant copies. In comparison, more than a hundred
known manuscripts from L f can be found around the world. In addition, it has been published several times. First, it was
printed among the publications of the first modern-style university established in Iran, Dr al- unn, in 1304/1886. Then, the
publication house of the ahab order in Shiraz, Kitbkhna-yi A mad, printed it again in the early twentieth century. Finally,
L f has been recently published in Iran in 2006 by arvat publications.
554

Drb, L f -yi Gh yb, 7.

231
argue that the long tradition of treating Hafezs language symbolically, as representative of a
purely metaphysical eros, can be chalked up entirely to the desire, among religious readers, to
make this beloved Persian poet acceptable to the guardians of orthodoxy. Doing this required
the domestication of the explicitly sexual, pluralistic, and sometimes antinomian nature of
Hafezs language and the neutralization of its subversive potential by transferring its referents
to the afterworld and a heavenly beloved.
In his attempt to avoid the stigma of ta avvuf and associate himself with the new
paradigm of irfn as an alternative, Drb finds Hafez, with his anti-establishment tone and
rage against religious formalities and hypocrisy, an important ally. His imaginative ahl-i irfn,
or folks of irfn, are not entangled in myriad formalities and a convoluted and corrupt web
of social hierarchies and, as such, they are naturally at home in the world of Hafez. I say
imagined because notion of irfn was still in its infancy, and no set of beliefs had been
outlined that glued a group of like-minded elites together as gnostics. Although Drb
frequently refers to prominent Sufis and Sufi-poets like Ibn Arab, a m al-dn Kubr,
Hamadn, al-Kshn, Maghrib, Bb Afal, Irq and others, he rarely uses the epithet Sufi to
describe them. Instead, they are each part and parcel of the imagined and idealistic notion of
ahl-i irfn. Drb traces irfn itself back to the first imam, whom he calls s r

lqa-yi rbb-i

irfn or the foremost in the chain of the lords of irfn.555

The most pronounced attempt by Drb to identify the folk of irfn as a group with an
independent discourse comes at the end of L f , where a concise lexicon of technical terms
used mainly by Hafez and other Sufi poets is included under the title of i il t-i ahl-i irfn or
the [technical] vocabulary of the folks of irfn. This is somewhat similar to the list by

555

For example: Ibid., 8.

232
Dashtak mentioned earlier in this chapter, but a key difference is that Drbs list, rather than
referencing an elitist philosopher-Sufi like Suhravard as its source, uses the popular figure of
Hafez as a reference point of the vocabulary of the folks of irfn.556

Irfn after the Safavids

The sudden collapse of the Safavid Empire was a catastrophe of monumental
proportions for the people, particularly in the capitol, and especially for the elite who were
sustained by royal patronage or by endowment revenues that flowed into madrasas in a
seamless process supported by the Safavid king. Some scholars were killed, and many others
left the devastated capitol for the Indian courts or the holy shrines of the imams in Najaf and
Karbala within the territory of the Ottoman Empire. This process of immigration did not
happen overnight or even within the first year after the fall. It took some scholars a decade to
exhaust all alternatives for staying within the Shiite Realm. Yet the extensive religious
endowment system that backed the madrasas and the mosques outlived Safavid rule for the
most part, and in spite of decreased revenues in the aftermath of the dramatic decrease in
Isfahans population, some scholars were able to sustain themselves and remained in Isfahan.
By all accounts, however, it was the Sacred Thresholds of Karbala and Najaf that
received the greatest number of exiled ulama. This is not surprising given the fact that even
prior to the fall of Isfahan a constant flow of religious scholars travelled between major Iranian
urban centers and the Atabt for the purpose of pilgrimage. This meant that a network of
human connections and potential financial and social supporters existed prior to the fall of the

556

Drb also draws upon classical works like Shabistars Gulshan-i R rather than a marginal treatise like K lim t l(See: Ibid., 1920, and 38.)

vv f

233
Safavids. As we already mentioned in the previous chapter, ayrz, after spending some years
wandering in Iran after the fall, finally decided to move to the Atabt and start teaching there.

Abd al-Ra m Damvand

Some of ayrzs mystically-minded contemporaries also left Isfahan for the Atabt.
Among these religious scholars was Abd al-Ra m Damvand (d. after 1160), whose career and
work are pertinent to our goal in outlining the development of the irfnian discourse.
Although we are fortunate in that a number of his works are available (mostly in manuscript
form but some recently printed), there is a dearth of material when it comes to his biography.
We know little of his early education, his travels, etc. What information exists tells us that
Damvand was, like ayrz, a student of Mu ammad diq Ardistn (d. 1134).557 The fact that
he is called Abd al-Ra m I fahn by one of his students indicates that he resided in the
Safavid capital for an extended period of time.558 In keeping with the intellectual climate of the
early eighteenth century, even a quick look at the content of his works demonstrates that
commenting upon the traditions of infallible imams was the focal point of his intellectual and
literary agenda.559 His intellectual pedigree includes the names of prominent members of the
Shirazi elite like Mull adr,560 his student ay Kshn,561 and Shh Mu ammad Drb,562 all

557

Abd al-Ra m Damvand, Mift -i Asrr al- usayn, in Anthologie Des Philosophes Iraniens: Dep is Le XVIIe Sicle J sq Nos
Jours. Textes Persans Et Arabes Choisis Et Prsents Par Sayyed Jalloddn Ashtiyn. Introduction Analytique Par Henry Corbin., ed. Jall
al-Dn shtiyn and Henry Corbin, vol. 4, Bibliothque Iranienne; No 18-19 (Teheran: Departement diranologie de lInstitut
franco-iranien de recherche, 1971), 589590 and 736.
558

Abd Allh ibn r al-Dn Tustar, al-Ij l-K br , ed. Mu ammad Samm ir, al- aba 1., min Makh t Maktabat Ayat
Allh al-Marash al-mma; 23. (Qom: Maktabat al-Marash, 1989).
559

This is even obvious from the choices he makes for the titles of his writings. Most of them include an imams name. or
example: y t l- s yniyy , ift Asrr l- s yn, and ll R m R viyy among others.
560

See, for example, his discussion of the concept and the reality of vu d (being) in which he quotes adrs al-Asrr at some
length: Abd al-Ra m Damvand, all Rumz Ra aviyya dar Shar -i ads Ras al-Jlt, n.d., f. 60a, Ms. o. 1952, Marashi
Library. Also see his extensive quotes from adrs discussions on the nature of knowledge in abstract beings (m j rr dt): Abd
al-Ra m Damvand, Shar -i Kalm-i Alav, n.d., f. 72a73a, Ms. o. 1952, Marashi Library.

234
of whom he frequently cites. Looking farther back, Ibn Arab and his school of thought play a
considerable role in Damvands thinking, in which ay , adr, and Drb largely figure as
explicators of and commentators on the grand metaphysical perspective that was laid down by
Ibn Arab and his students.563
As far as we know, ift Asrr l- s yn is the only lengthy and substantial extant
work by Damvand. According to the author, this work was written to communicate secret
teachings that cannot be found in the writings of other ukam (philosophers) and uraf.
Damvand says writing it also provided him the opportunity to share some of his own visions
and mystical experiences.564 Reading through Mift , one can easily see how Damvand fits
into adrs school of thought in which, as mentioned before, there is a conscious effort to
emphasize the similarity of the two ideal types of akm (philosopher) and rif (gnostic) by
linking them when speaking of the vision of ikma and marifa. Damvand thus begins this
work with a philosophical argument for the existence of God, inspired by his teacher Ardistn,
before discussing taw d, the unity of God, according to the way of gnostics. Unlike the
rational arguments of philosophers, Damvand says, the notion of the unity of God from a
gnostics perspective is something that can only be attained through mystical visions. In other
words, catching a glimpse of what the gnostic means by the term va dat al-vu d is outside the

561

See, for example, his references to ay s al-Vf and his Ayn l- qn: Abd al-Ra m Damvand, uy t al- usayniyya f
Taf l al-Insn al-Kmil al al-Qurn, n.d., f. 63b64a, Ms. o. 1952, Marashi Library. Also Abd al-Ra m Damvand, AlTaw d, n.d., f. 68b, Ms. o. 1952, Marashi Library.Damvand, Shar -i Kalm-i Alav, f. 74a. His special attention to
Kshns works is also evident from the fact that he wrote a marginalia on the latters Quranic commentary, l-f. See
Damvand, uy t al- usayniyya f Taf l al-Insn al-Kmil al al-Qurn, f. 65b; gh Buzurg ihrn, al- r il
nf lSh , vol. 4: 281.
562

or example see Damvand, uy t al- usayniyya f Taf l al-Insn al-Kmil al al-Qurn, f. 64b. Also see: Damvand,
Al-Taw d, f. 67a68a. A ma or portion of the content of these pages is taken verbatim from Drbs irj. See Drb,
Mir al-Kaml, 151.
563

Damvand, Shar -i Kalm-i Alav, f. 79a.

564

Damvand, Mift -i Asrr al- usayn, 57778.

235
ability of reason.565 It is here that Damvand tries to distinguish between the two ways by
defining ilm and marifa in contrast to each other. The former means to know God via
reasoning and exoteric disciplines of knowledge, whereas the latter means to reach God via
mystical visions and esoteric knowledge. Thus an lim, a religious scholar, is one who has
discursive knowledge of God, whereas a gnostic is one who has reached perfect union with
God.566 The group of philosophers he identifies as divine (lh) or theosophers (m t llh) are
distinguished from traditional discursive philosophers by their acceptance of mystical visions
(m ksh ft) as legitimate venues for ascertaining true esoteric knowledge upon which their
philosophy is based. There is no doubt from the context of ifth that adr and his mystical
philosophy, inspired by the illuminationist principles of Suhravard and the esoteric synthesis
of Amul, are among the prime members of this elite and exalted group.
Throughout ift and in the rest of his oeuvre, Damvand, like Drb and ayrz,
makes a conscious effort to avoid the stigmatized terms of Sufism and Sufi whenever possible.
Following in the footsteps of the latter two, he also chooses to replace those terms with words
like rif and irfn. He also frequently refers to his favorite group of gnostics as the folk of
irfn and sets them apart as adherents to a distinctive spiritual ideal, which is, in turn,
reflected in their taste in spiritual matters, their distinctive set of metaphysical beliefs, and
their books.567 But he falls short of promoting irfn to the position of a discipline, a fann like

565

Ibid., 60408.

566

Ibid., 607.

567

Ibid., 648, 681, and others. In terms of a distinctive set of metaphysical commitments, Damvand particularly singles out
their position on the problem of being (vu d) expressed in their unwavering belief in the Unity of Being, va dat al-vu d, and
also their belief in the imaginal realm (lam al-misl). The latter issue, for a long time, was a marker of difference between
philosophers, who rejected the existence of such a realm, and the Sufis who emphasized its existence. It was Suhravard who,
for the first time, assimilated this realm, situated in between the material world and the world of abstract entities
(mu arradt) based on his own mystical visions rather than a particular discursive argument. We already mentioned Drbs
independent treatise dedicated to proving the existence of this realm based on visions as well as his particular reading of some
traditions from the infallible imams. Damvand follows the latters footsteps by claiming that many traditions of the imams

236
theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. To the contrary, in his discussion of what constitutes
the subjects of inquiry in several fields of knowledge, he emphasizes the identity of the subject
matter in theological and philosophical inquiries with that of the real Divine [discipline of]
knowledge (ilm-i ilh-yi
gnostics (m

qq) whose masters are usually identified as realizers among the

qqiqn-i r f) and divine among the philosophers (illhiyyn m t llihn

k m).568 All of these terms are also mentioned repeatedly in adrs oeuvre. Several decades
will pass before this important step is taken, that is, before the term irfn becomes the official
title of this divine discipline of knowledge. This happens in the time of Mull Mahd arq
(d. 1209/1794) whom we will discuss later in this chapter.
Damvands notion of the spiritual guru, or pr, should be touched upon here. Like
Drb and many other mystically-minded authors we have discussed, Damvand insists on
the necessity of pursuing the spiritual path under the guidance of a mentor. When it comes to
identifying his own murshd, however, we observe an important and peculiar development
that, as far as I can find, is unique to Damvands thought. He simply insists that the third
imam, usayn b. Al, is his murshd and refuses to mention any ordinary human being as his
spiritual mentor.569 This unique and important development can be interpreted in the context
of the shifting boundaries of the master/disciple relationship, which were transitioning out of
the traditional Sufi register into the newly-developed Twelver-Safavid register in which the
imams dominate the spiritual realm as immanent guides for their mystically minded followers,

that otherwise cannot be made sense of are in fact perfectly understood if we interpret them as referring to incidents
happening in this intermediary realm, rather than the material world. He also mentions that the existence of this realm,
which is something implied in the hadith literature, is confirmed by the illuminationist philosophers and the folks of irfn.
Ibid., 699.
568

Damvand, Mift -i Asrr al- usayn, 66165.

569

Ibid., 622, 728.

237
the perfect murshds. In this context, the ordinary, that is, non-infallible, murshds of each
era are simply seen as advanced followers of the imams. They are perfect Shias who are
given permission to guide lay Shiites towards the marifa of imams.570
That is why Damvand dedicates an entire chapter of his ift to the issue of
murshdology (m rshd-sh ns). One thing in this chapter that immediately strikes the reader
is Damvands observation that it had become increasingly difficult to find a murshd.
Damvand accepts the fact that is no pr to follow, or so it appears. Yet, he says, the world
cannot be empty of hidden friends of God. In fact, he proposes a combination of prayers and
daily meditational and devotional practices, almost all of which are focused on the
intercessory power of the imams to help the seeker find a spiritual mentor.571 The eclipse of
the khnaqh as a social space reserved for murshds and prs has naturally resulted in their
occultation. Such spiritual mentors cannot be easily located anymore. Mull adrs elitist
and self-fulfilling dream has come true: all those who would have taken refuge in khnaqh
have been indeed declared deficient, damned fools, and imprisoned by the fetters of lust. In
contrast, the identity of the exalted and elite servants of God in possession of marifa, those
fruits of creation and ultimate purpose of the universe, have been concealed by God
himself from being known by the lowly nature of the ignorant people.572
In spite of his unwavering emphasis on the central role of the imams in the mystical
quest, Damvand is no orthodox religious scholar. After succeeding in finding such a murshd,

570

It would be fascinating to analyze Shaykh A mad A ss notion of the perfect Shia in this light. My impression is that the
Shaykh movement, and the Bb one afterwards, represent the danger that was entailed in the above-mentioned shift of
charisma and spiritual authority from Sufi saints to the imams. The real possibility of having dreams and encounters with the
latter by advanced followers of them opened the space up for all sorts of possibilities from special deputyship to Mahdihood.
571

572

Damvand, Mift -i Asrr al- usayn, 67677.

adr al-Dn Shrz, K sr A nm Al-jhiliyy , 17778.

238
he confirms the validity of meditational practices in which the spiritual mentor is the subject
of mental concentration. He dismisses charges of idolatry raised against such a practice and
explains the reason why it is needed for an initiate to do so.573 Damvands defense of such
problematic Sufi teachings is indicative of his close association, if not outright affiliation, with
organized Sufism. In fact, I argue based on his writings that he was affiliated with the
rbakhsh order.
The unorthodox nature of Damvands teachings is revealed most plainly in his radical
interpretation of the meaning of the Ma d, and the related concept of the Seal of the Saints
(kht m l-

liy). The twenty-eighth chapter in ift is dedicated to this discussion. In

Twelver literature the Mahd has traditionally been understood to be the Twelfth Imam who
has long been in occultation (ghayba) and whose return at the End of Time to restore justice
to the world is anticipated. Damvands understanding of this notion, however, is colored by
Ibn Arabs notions of the Seal of the Saints and the Perfect Man. In this regard, he makes a
distinction between two types of vals or friends of God. Valya (friendship [with God]), he
explains, can be either solar (sh ms) or lunar (q m r). The Perfect Man, or the Seal of the
Saints, who is himself a perfect and comprehensive mirror in which all divine attributes are
reflected, is likened to the sun and portrayed as the original source of the light of valya. In
contrast, all other friends of God are likened to the Moon in terms of their dependence on that
original source of light. In other words, their friendship with God is a reflection of that of the
Perfect Man. The more spiritually accomplished they are, the more perfectly their mirror
reflects, until at last they become full-moons that perfectly mirror the Sun.574

573

Damvand, Mift -i Asrr al- usayn, 679.

574

Ibid., 73033.

239
Such friends of God whose distinctly advanced level of mystical realization allows them
to stand face in face with the Sun and reflect it in full, Damvand says, often claim to be
Mahds themselves. In such cases, the disciple should accept the claim, understanding the
difference between the eschatological Mahd personality, who will come at the end of the time,
and such lunar claimant to Mahdhood that are results of a perfect union, a merger of
identity, between the mystic and the Seal of the Saints.575 Damvand closes his discussion of
the Mahd by pointing out that his interpretation of the station of Mahdihood is sometime
referred to as bur -kmil or perfect manifestation, which is the flow (s r yn) of the perfect
friend of God (the Ma d) in others.
Burz is among the original ideas of the founder of the rbakhsh Sufi order and
relates to his understanding of the role of the Perfect Man. Although it still is not clear what
rbakhsh himself exactly meant by the idea, his most prominent student, Shams al-Dn
Mu ammad Lh (d. circa. 912/1506), offered his own interpretation in a famous commentary
on Shabistars Gulshan-i R entitled

fth l-Ij . According to Shahzad Bashirs analysis of

Lh s comments, for him, Burz means that the Muhammadan Reality manifests itself in the
bodies of living human beings through the process of pro ection (burz). This occurs at
varying levels, so that the perfect humans in a given historical period are receptacles of the
pro ection available in that age. Bashirs analysis of Lh s worldview leads him to believe
that Lh most likely regarded rbakhsh as the physical manifestation of Muhammadan
Reality in his lifetime in this sense (thus the term, m hd-yi d

rn), and not as the

eschatological savior who is to be the only other complete manifestation of the Muhammadan

575

Ibid., 734. Damvand also relates an account of a personal conversation with a certain Shaykh usayn from Qa f whose
teacher, named Mull Mu ammad Al, reports his encounter with a mahd in India. Ibid., 73637.

240
Reality besides Muhammad the Prophet;576 an analysis that is confirmed by Damvands own
understanding mentioned above.
Damvands comments in this particular chapter draw heavily upon the latter source.
The appearance of the notion of burz in Damvands writings brings us to the question of his
Sufi affiliations. shtiyn, in his short introduction to ift , contends that the author was
apparently among the ahab Sufis of his time.577 He does not share with us the source upon
which he has relied, however. This identification flies in the face of his belief in burz, which is
a signature rbakhsh idea. Given the numerous instances in which we have seen ahab
authors appropriating rbakhsh works and figures as their own, one cannot help but wonder
whether this is another such case. A strong confirmation of this suspicion comes from the
author of

riq, who classifies Damvand among the greatest shaykhs of the rbakhsh

order.578
Not all Sufi-minded religious scholars were as radical in their conception of the
spiritual guide as Damvand. In fact, one might say that the extent to which that they
operated within the boundaries of the Twelver orthodoxy determined the amount of social
space and economic opportunity granted them by the established hierocracy to be raised as
the guardians of the esoteric aspect of Shiism from the ranks of ulama.579

576

Shahzad Bashir, Messianic Hopes and Mystical Visions: the N rb khshiyya between Medieval and Modern Islam, Studies in
comparative religion (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2003), pp. 174-75.
577

Damvand, Mift -i Asrr al- usayn, 576.

578

Shrz Ma m Al Shh,

579

riq l- qiq, vol. 3: 163.

Although this is beyond the immediate focus of this dissertation, it is important to point out here that there is an inherent
potential in the logic based upon which Shiism is built that even the most literalist and puritan readers would have difficult
time to interpret away the abundance of traditions from the imams speaking quite directly to the matter. By this inherent
logic, I mean the essential belief that the community of Muslims after the Prophet is still in need of divinely guided leaders
whose knowledge is inherited, in an esoteric transmission, from the Prophet himself. This was in fact one of the major reasons
why the charismatic figures mentioned in chapter three could so easily assimilate pivotal popular elements of Sufism into
their worldview and present themselves as alternatives for the public. For more on this see Amir-Moezzi, he Spirit lity of Shii
Islam. Also see his earlier work, Amir-Moezzi, he Divine G ide in E rly Shiism. or an alternative point of view on Shiism and

241
The second half of the eighteenth century witnessed the realization of what
had only been imagined in previous works. This time period saw the development of a group of
mystically-minded Twelver religious scholars who were highly knowledgeable about the
esoteric aspects of Shiism and at the same time fully trained in the exoteric matters of Sharia
in madrasa. These saintly figures later came to be known as the akhlqiyyn (moralists), a
reference to their emphasis on the ethical requirements of being a true Shiite. They operated
more or less within the framework of the established Twelver hierocracy and become
reference points for students of religious knowledge (talaba) who sought guidance in matters
pertaining to the spiritual quest. In spite of the glaring resemblance of their spiritual discourse
to Sufism, they were, like others before and after them, reluctant toand even scared of
being associated with that worldview or even with its lived reality. Among the prominent
members of this newly-emerging group of moralist ulama were gh Mu ammad Bdbd (d.
1198/1782), Mull Abd al- amad Hamadn (d. 1216/1801), Mull Mahd irq, and the latters
son, Mull A mad irq (d. 1245/1829 ).580

esotericism see Hossein Modarressi Tabatabai, Crisis and Consolidation in the Formative Period of Shiite Isl m: Ab J f r Ibn Qib
R nd His Contrib tion to Immite Shite ho ght (Princeton, N.J.: Darwin Press, 1993).
580

l-

I have purposefully not included the name of the prominent Arab jurisconsult (mujtahid), Sayyid Mahd b. Mutra a af,
better known as Ba r al-Ulm (d. 1212/1797), in this list in spite of his reported penchant for Sufism and esotericism. My
decision is based on the fact that his intellectual genealogy is different from that of the Iranian figures. The philosophical
mysticism of Mull adr plays no role in his thought, and the sources leave us with many unanswered questions regarding his
mystical tendencies.The hagiographical narratives written by other religious scholars remembers him most importantly for
several meetings that we are told he had with the Hidden Imam in which he was greeted with a warm hug. In Sufi literature,
however, he is remembered as secretly meeting with the imatullh Sufi r Alshh for spiritual advice. Shrz Ma m Al
Shh, riq l- qiq, vols. 3: 199200. More importantly, a brief treatise has been ascribed to Ba r al-Ulm titled Sayr va
S l k which is, especially in the second half, filled with technical Sufi vocabulary. gh Buzug has suggested that the whole
treatise or at least the latter parts of it are not from Ba r al-Ulm. (gh Buzurg ihrn, al- r il
nf l-Sh , vol. 12:
284. The editor of the treatise is conviced otherwise: Mu ammad Mahd ibn Murta Ba r al-Ulm, Risl t l-Sayr va al-S l k,
ed. Mu ammad usayn usayn ihrn, al- aba 1., Dawra-yi Ulm va Marif-i Islm, 4 (Beirut: Dr al-Ma a a al-Bay ,
2001), 1013. While this is not the place to offer a detailed argument, my initial analysis of the treatise reveals that the latter
parts do indeed demonstrate a considerable difference, in terms of the worldview of the author, from the initial parts. The
original author of the last chapters, I suggest, is probably a Sunni Sufi, possibly with aqshband affiliations. Since we cannot
be sure that the treatise belongs to him, we are basically left with little upon which to base our analysis of his mystical
worldview.

242
Although these men differed in terms of their level of adherence to adrs
Transcendental Philosophy, their intellectual outlook is marked by a shared sympathy for
adrs notions of philosophy and gnosis as well as for his attempt to synthesize and
understand both in light of Shii hadith. More particularly, their understanding of the doctrine
of the Unity of Being was shaped not only by prominent followers of Ibn Arab like Dvd
Qaysar and Abd al-razzq Kshn but alsoand more importantlyby adrs grand
synthesis of philosophy and mysticism. Often, they would teach jurisprudence or hadith as a
means to establish their authority and pay lip service to the dominant madrasa paradigm. At
the same time, they would have a smaller circle of students with whom they studied texts of
philosophy. They would also leave their more esoteric comments on hadith literature for such
small circles of close students, or would bury them in obscure and marginal small treatises.581 It
is impossible to treat all the above-mentioned figures in detail here. It will suffice, I believe, to
discuss in some length the relevant aspects of the thought of Bdbd and arq.

Bdbd and arq

gh Mu ammad Bdbd and Mull Mahd irq are both among the religious
scholars who were trained mainly in Iran in the traumatic intellectual environment of postSafavid Isfahan. Unlike many of his contemporaries, the former is not recorded as ever having
spent extensive time in Najaf or Kabala.582 Bdbd received his training in the study of

581

A number of fascinating writings by the above-mentioned ulama on the occult sciences like alchemy, letterism and
numerology are extant. The transmission of occult sciences among Shia mystically minded ulama in this period as a whole is
a significant and exciting subject of research that I decided to leave out of my discussions.
582

A major biography of him was recently published by Al adr in Iran. This has been among the most important sources
for my discussion of Bdbd. See: Karbs, km-i t ll Bdbd.

243
hadith583 and in esoteric sciences like alchemy,584 philosophy, and urisprudence. arqs
religious training years, however, were divided between an initial stage in Isfahan and a
secondary stage in the Atabt.585
In the early years of their training, each learned philosophy from the prominent postSafavid philosopher of Isfahan, Isml Kh (d. 1173/1760), a student of Ardistn whom we
discussed in chapter two.. Therefore, the two men contribute an important continuity in the
transmission of the philosophical tradition from the Safavid times through the Interregnum to
the Qajar period. Both are described and praised in biographical literature as gnostics as well
as philosophers.586 Their intellectual outlook is marked, as mentioned earlier, by a special
attention to Mull adr and his notions of philosophy and mysticism. Bdbd happened also
to be the teacher of Mull Al r (d. 1246/1830) who has rightly been credited with
promoting adrs philosophy such that his works became mainstream, standard textbooks for
students of philosophy.587 arqs Qurrat al-Uy n is a ma or philosophical treatise on the
metaphysics of being throughout which the influence of adr, often referred to as rif-i

583

He is also said to have been a student of Mu ammad-taq Alms (d. 1159), a grandson of Ma lis Sr in the study of hadith.
urthermore, he has been enumerated among the prominent Akhbr scholars of his time.Khnsr, R t l-J nnt f A l lUl m v l-Sdt, vol. 7: 118. Alms has been identified as one of the earliest scholars to take drs mystical philosophy
seriously into consideration for teaching, and thus he played an instrumental role in promoting his works. Mu ammad Jafar
ibn Mu ammad diq Lh n, Sh r Risl t l- shir ll dr, ed. Jall al-Dn shtiyn, al- aba 2. (Qom: Maktab al-Ilm
al-Islm, n.d.), 17. This speculation is not substantiated by reference to primary sources. This needs to be further investigated.
584

Murta Gar Gurgn, Bdbd, gh Mu ammad, ed. Kim Msav Bu nrd, Dir t lMarkaz-i Dirat al-Marif-i Buzurg-i Islm, 1988).

rif-i Buzurg-i Islm (Tehran:

585

asan im, Kuhan-tarn Shar -i l-h-yi Mull Mu ammad Madh irq, Kitb-i h-i Dn, no. 5354 (2002): 2630.
For a more detailed biography and bibliography of his works see asan arqs introduction to: Mu ammad Mahd ibn Ab
arr arq, al-L m Al-ilhiyy v l-K limt l-V j , ed. Jall al-Dn shtiyn (Mashhad: An uman-i Falsafa, 1978), 147.
586

Shrz Ma m Al Shh, riq l- qiq, v. 3: 214. For a fairly detailed biography and a comprehensive bibliography of
arq see arq, al-L m l-ilhiyy v l-K limt l-V j , 147.

587

or more on rs influence in reviving adrs philosophy see Ashtiyns remarks in his introduction to adr al-Dn
Shrz, al-Sh vhid l-R b biyy f l- nhij l-S l kiyy , .

244
Shr , as well as the tradition of high Sufism represented by the Akbarian school is
unmistakable.

The intellectual and spiritual outlook of both seems to have also been influenced by
Sufi shaykhs of their time, as well as the Sufi literature to which they had access. Bdbd is
reported to have been, during his years of learning in Isfahan, a student of Qu b al-dn
ayrz.588 This has been the major factor prompting ahab authors to include Bdbd in
their lineage of master/disciple as a murd of ayrz.589 Although his affiliation with the
ahabiyya is probably a myth, Bdbds penchant for esotericism and mysticism is beyond
doubt. Much of his correspondence is in fact comprised of questions about the spiritual path
submitted to and answered by him in his capacity as an accomplished gnostic. Both Bdbd
and arq were heavily influenced by the Akhbr thought that dominated the intellectual
environment of the ma or centers of learning in Iran and Iraq, and they can be categorized as
Akbhr thinkers with a penchant for mystical philosophy of adr. Thus they are similar to
ay Kshn, who lived nearly a century before them.590
An important and relevant aspect of Bdbds teachings that I would like to highlight
is his emphasis on the necessity of an ordinary spiritual guru, that is, a pr/murshd. But he
de-emphasizes the conception of a personal and unique relationship between master and
disciple in which the latter receives a detailed set of customized instructions, instead focusing
588

shtiyn has disputed this. His ob ection seems to be based on his disdain for Sufis. The truth is that there is no concrete
historical evidence to prove either way.
589

Shrz Ma m Al Shh, riq l- qiq, vol. 3: 215; Shrvn, Riy l-Siy , 336. See also Karbs, km-i t ll
Bdbd, 20304. and usayn Mudarris abtab, Du Risla az gh Mu ammad Bdbd dar Sayr va Sulk, Va d. Neither
his own writings nor the biographical information we have from non-Sufi-affiliated authors do confirm this claim
590

or a detailed and wonderful analysis of the intellectual outlook of Mahd arq in the context of the eighteenth century
religious and cultural trends in Iran and Iraq see Juan R. I. Cole, Ideology, Ethics, and Philosophical Discourse in Eighteenth
Century Iran, Iranian Studies 22, no. 1 (January 1, 1989): 734.

245
on the necessity of complying with the most minute details of Sharia, performing obligatory
and supererogatory devotional practices based on the hadith literature, and an intense and
central focus on the suppression of lust and controlling the animal soul. The term murshd
and its equivalents rarely appear in his writings, and when they do, they are used to refer to
the imam as the universal murshd (m rshd-i kull).591 Reading through his vast correspondence,
it is clear that many of his contemporaries looked to him as a potential spiritual guide, but that
he intentionally declined to play the role of the traditional murshd who gave specific
instructions and demanded the complete obedience of his potential disciples. For example, in
an interesting written exchange, Sadr al-dn Kshif Dizfl, who is called Bdbds murd in
Sufi literature despite the fact that the two never actually met, asks the latter for a ikr
formula that he can use as a novice for progressing along his sulk.592 Bdbd, in a brief and
humble response, merely says that according to the traditions [of the imams], there is no
better ikr than l ilh ill Allh (There is no god but God).593 Dizfl, in a response that reflects
his utter disappointment, writes:
Oh my master (s yyidin) and my lord (m

ln), this ikr is brief. It has neither a

number, nor a set time. [May I further ask,] should it be [recited as] a verbal ikr (ikr-i lisn) or
a ikr of heart (kr-i q lb) as the folks of visions and irfn has written about it? Is it supposed

591

usayn Mudarris abtab, Sih Maktb az gh Mu ammad Bdbd dar Sayr va Sulk, V d, no. 246247 (1357): 390.
Examples to the contrary of what I stated above can be found, but they are usually found in works that we have good reason to
believe they are falsely attributed to Bdbd. or example, there is an explicit reference to the shaykhs of the Sufi ariqa and
the necessity of their permission for the adept to begin observing a specific regimen of ikr practices in: Mr Sayyid asan
Mudarris Hshim, Sh r -i Risl -yi Siy r v S l k ns b Bih ...
mm d Bdbd, ed. Al Karbs, Chp-i 1. (Isfahan: Knn-i
Pizhhish, 1997), 206. The ascription of this work to Bdbd, as the editor himself acknowledges in his introduction, has been
seriously questioned by scholars of the field. See:Ibid., 35 and 85 (n. 45).
592

adr al-dn Kshif Dizfl, irt l-Ghayb: Bih H mrh-i qq l- qq li-Arbb l- rq , ed. hd al-Sdt Pizishk, Chp-i 1.
(Tehran: Bztb, 2006), 835.
593

Qouted in: Mudarris Hshim, Sh r -i Risl -yi Siy r v S l k

ns b bih

mm d Bdbd, 14.

246
to be after some bodily mortification (riy t) or not? Please kindly explain its requirements
and its etiquette (db) in detail for this humble servant. 594

Dizfl may have been dissatisfied with Bdbds general recommendations, but the
orthodox nature of the latters spiritual discourse appealed to elite and high-ranking members
of the clerical estate. It is a great irony that Mrz Abu al-Qsim Qum (d. 1231/1815), one of the
most prominent and famous jurists (mujtahids) of his time in Iran, an enemy of Sufism, and the
author of an anti-Sufi treatise, personally wrote Bdbd to ask for spiritual advice as he
prepared to visit the Atabt.595 The two are said to have had a cordial relationship. Moreover,
this was a complementary relationship in which Qum claimed authority in the worldly
domain and, as the deputy of the Hidden Imam, relegated the otherworldly domain of spiritual
guidance to Bdbd.
Mull A mad arqs J mi l-S dt, an important work of ethics and morality that
became extremely popular among subsequent generations after his son translated it into
Persian (with some additions) as irj l-S d , provides us with another example of how this
moralist group of mystically-minded ulama contributed to the establishment and spread of
irfn as a category among their audience.596 In his introduction to Jm, arq explains that
he decided to write the book as a compendium on ethics ( khlq), comprised of Islamic
traditions from the Prophet and the imams and a summary of what the pillars ( s n) of

594

595

Kshif Dizfl, irt Al-ghayb, 87.

Al adr Khuy, db al-Sayr va al-Sulk, P ym-i

: Nashriyya-i Sh r-yi l-i
Accessed online at: http://mazhabi-farhangi.mihanblog.com/post/1650
596

-i Ilmiyy ., no. 6 (1373): 99118.

Jmi was translated by the order of the Qajar monarch at -al Shh so that a wider audience might benefit from its
contents. The Persian translation soon came to be the standard textbook of ethics to which the ulama would refer their clients.

247
ikma and irfn have said in this regard.597 He continues with advice for the pupil who
seeks to embark upon the laborious path of knowledge and learning. He suggests that such a
student always take a balanced approach to the different disciplines and avoid being
obsessed with one or the other. Here, irfn is mentioned alongside ikma, ishrq, and kalm as
one of the disciplines of the rational sciences. The author encourages the pupil to
incorporate each one of them into his studies, but none at the expense of the others.598
Throughout the book the pattern of mentioning the folk of irfn alongside the folks of
ikma continues. There is no doubt that what arq has in mind when he casts irfn as a
discipline of the rational sciences is the elaborate metaphysical school of thought established
and developed by Ibn Arab and his students, which was eventually provided with a sound
philosophical basis in Mull adrs Transcendental Philosophy. arq was in fact an
outstanding student of adrs synthesis, as his Qurrat al-Uy n, a philosophical treatise on
metaphysics completed in 1186/1772, demonstrates. This long and erudite treatise shows how
deep a mark adrs philosophy has left on his philosophical thinking, and it is a confirmation
of the fact that the received philosophical paradigm had shifted from the traditional
peripatetic one to the synthesis introduced by adr more than a century and a half earlier.599
adr, along with Ibn Arab and his followers like Qay ar and Qnav are among the names
most cited in this treatise. However, they are all cast as outstanding gnostics rather than
597

Mu ammad Mahd ibn Ab arr arq, Jmi Al-s dt, ed. Mu ammad Kalntar, al- aba 4. ( a af: Dr al- umn lil- iba
va-l-Nashr, n.d.), 34.
598

Ibid., vol. 1: 119.

599

Jall al-Dn shtiyn and Henry Corbin, Anthologie Des Philosophes Iraniens: Dep is Le XVIIe Sicle J sq Nos Jo rs. extes
Persans Et Arabes Choisis Et Prsents Par Sayyed Jalloddn Ashtiyn. Introduction Analytique Par Henry Corbin., Bibliothque
Iranienne; No 18-19 (Teheran: Departement diranologie de lInstitut franco-iranien de recherche, 1971), 352.

248
Sufis.600 Throughout the work, the position of philosophers is contrasted with that of gnostics.
Mull adr, along with the aforementioned Akbarian scholars, constitute a second camp in
opposition to the traditional peripatetic philosophers and theologians.
At the end of Jm the author lists six groups of people most susceptible to conceit
(gh r r), and these include the muta avvifa, or pretend-Sufis, preachers, and seekers of
knowledge (ahl al-ilm). His criticisms of Sufis, although similar in content those discussed
previously, are unique in one aspect. That is, he rarely uses, even in condemnation, the
designation Sufi. To the contrary, his rebuttal is focused on pretend-gnostics. That is, those
who portray themselves as gnostics in spite of the fact that they lack proper knowledge of, or
experience in, the spiritual path. Such people, he says, think if they resemble the true rifs
in attire, customs, rites, and words, they have succeeded in reaching advanced stages of irfn.
He dismisses their naivet and warns those who claim ta avvuf and irfn in this manner
that they will be exposed and punished in the hereafter.601 Since he mentions the specific
language and particular customs and attire of true rifs, there can be no mistake that he is
talking about a group of Sufisabout an organized order. Yet, he refrains from using the term
Sufi for this group, members of which he views as honest and true friends of God.
arqs reference to specific Sufi rites, attire, and vocabulary should not come as a
surprise to us. His hometown, arq (which is located close to Isfahan), and the city of his
residence, Kashan, were both strong rbakhsh strongholds. Among arqs contemporaries
600

Mull adr is frequently called rif-i Shrz and Qnav adr al-uraf. See, for example: Mu ammad Mahd ibn Ab
arr arq, Qurrat al-Uyn, in Anthologie Des Philosophes Iraniens: Dep is Le XVIIe Sicle J sq Nos Jo rs. extes Pers ns Et
Arabes Choisis Et Prsents Par Sayyed Jalloddn Ashtiyn. Introduction Analytique Par Henry Corbin., ed. Jall al-Dn shtiyn and
Henry Corbin, Bibliothque Iranienne; No 18-19 (Tehran: Departement diranologie de lInstitut franco-iranien de recherche,
1971), 392, 405, 417 and 424 among others.
601

arq, Jmi Al-s dt, vols. 3: 2930.

- -
! ...
.

249
was an active rbakhsh shaykh, Abd al-Vahhb n (d. 1212/1797), a disciple of
Mu ammad-taq Shh whose name I mentioned among the contemporaries and companions
of ayrz.602 Although information about the situation of rbakhsh khnaqh in Kashan
during the eighteenth century is lacking, it is clear that rbakhsh literature, the legacy of
writers like Mrz Mu ammad Bdgul, was available to both father and son.603 This can be
gleaned from arq Jr.s Kitb l-Kh

in or the Book of Treasures, a marvelous collection of

passages taken from various sources dealing with everything from the most technical details
of the astrolabe, numerology, and mathematical problems to more quotidian, yet admittedly
important, problems like premature ejaculation!604 In spite of the fact that a considerable
number of passages in the text are taken from or inspired by Sufi literature, arq is
successful in completely avoiding the term Sufism and its related cognates, using in their place
the phrase ahl-i irfn. As it is customary in the genre of k shk l, the author sometimes quotes
extensively from unique sources at his disposal that he believes deserve to be preserved for
later generations.
ne important literary source to which arq had access was the rbakhsh
literature preserved in the orders khnaqh in Kashan, which was also the resting place of the
charismatic master Asadullh Quhp. Accordingly, al-Kh n includes a discussion of the Sufi
techniques of ikr-i kh f (hidden ikr) in which the author lays out different techniques as
practiced in specific Sufi orders.605 arqs exposition is an abridged version of Mu aqqiq

602

n was based in his hometown as a Sufi shaykh and buried there close to the tomb of another rbakhsh master, Sayyid
M ammad La av rbakhs (d. 903) Shrz Ma m Al Shh, riq l- qiq, vols. 3: 159 and 21516.
603

arq Sr. mentions the two Sufi orders of rbakhshiyya and aqshbandiyya in his Qurrat al-Uy n. See: arq, Qurrat alUyn, 474.
604

The work was completed after 1229 since that date appears in it. See: A mad ibn Mu ammad Mahd arq, al-Kh in, ed.
Al Akbar Ghaffr (Tehran: Kitbfursh-i Ilmiyya Islmiyya, 1960), 422.
605
Ibid., 33334.

250
Ardabls discussion in Takirat al-Zkirn, which he follows immediately with a complete
spiritual lineage of the latter and his master Q Asad Quhp, which is likewise taken and
abridged from Ardabls work.606 Another discussion of the seven levels of ikr follows the
lineage, after which comes a quote from the Hadiyya al-Khayr of asan b. Qsim b. Mu ammad
rbakhsh, grandson of the founder of the order. This includes a discussion of technical
details concerning the specific moves involved in ikr.607 These rbakhsh works still exist in
manuscript form in the library of the Sultn madrasa, one of the most beautiful monuments
from the Safavid period where arq taught for many years.608
Although quoting from rbakhsh sources, especially in the context of the kashkl
genre, does not necessarily mean that arq was affiliated with the order, it does strongly
suggest that he viewed the rbakhsh heritage as part of the larger Twelver world and their
Sufi pursuit a legitimate one, albeit with some reservations. or example, arq quotes
passages from Sufi literature in which the issue of the murshd and the necessity of his
guidance for the adept in the initial stages of his spiritual journey is raised. In most cases,
however, arq reminds the reader that the imams, as perfect murshds, are the true
figures to whom the term refers. He goes on to explain that due to the difficulty of
distinguishing between real masters and charlatans, followers of the imams should seek their
guidance in the sayings and deeds of the infallibles as recorded in the hadith literature.609 On
one occasion, he endorses a controversial Sufi meditational technique, that of visualizing the

606

607

Ardabl Bdgul, Takirat al-kirn, 5053 and 8995. Narq, al-Kh in, 33435.
arq, al-Kh in, 33638.

608

I have been informed that Mr Afshin Atefi is in the process of editing three of Ardabls treatises for the purpose of
publication. Q Asads Divan is also in the final stages of publication.
609

arq, al-Kh in, 409, 411 and 415.

251
face of the shaykh and meditating upon it. It is surprising to see this prominent member of the
Shii hierocracy endorse a practice that had been criticized even by some Sufi orders. This
signifies the extent to which he and others like him were willing to embrace Sufism. araq,
however, is quick to qualify his endorsement by making clear that shaykh in the context of
this practice can be none other than one of the imams.610
In conclusion, it is in the career and works of this father and son that irfn is finally
established as a term that contrasts with ta avvuf and refers to a particular discipline of
religious knowledge. This newly consolidated use of irfn became the semantic locus of a decontextualized, privatized, elitist, and somewhat pluralistic version of Sufi discourse; decontextualized because its connections to previous Sufi discourse were de-emphasized or
intentionally severed; privatized, because it existed in the absence of the strong social
networks that existed around Sufism with the khnaqh at their center; elitist, because the
complex mystical philosophy at the heart of irfn was only accessible those trained for years
in Islamic philosophy and Ibn Arabs speculative mysticism; and pluralistic due to having
been significantly influenced by Hafezs pluralism and cosmopolitan thought. Although the
latter characteristic was neglected by religious scholars deeply committed to an exclusively
Twelver framework of thought, it was taken up in the early decades of the twentieth century
by modern minded intellectuals of Iran, who sought a universal and pluralistic concept to
describe their spiritual perspective and experience. I will discuss this briefly in the epilogue.
The imatullh Revival

To continue the story of Sufism and irfn beyond figures like arq and Bdbd into
the nineteenth century would require a detailed discussion of the most significant historical

610

Ibid., 41415.

252
event of the century for organized Sufism, that is, the re-introduction of the imatullh Sufi
order to Iran by missionaries from India. Such a discussion is at present beyond the scope of
this research project, but a brief overview of the most important aspects of this reintroduction
helps transition us to the epilogue, where we close with a brief discussion of the contemporary
situation of irfan.
The imatullh order is named after one of the most celebrated Sufi masters of
classical Persian Sufism, Shh imatullh Val (d. 834/1431). It started as a dynamic spiritual
movement, but with the departure of his prominent successor, Shh Khallullh (d. 860/1455),
to India and the premature death of the latters son, Mr Shams al-dn (d. 854/1450), the order
declined rapidly in Persia and by 1450 was little more than a moribund dynastic family
tradition. The spiritual center of the order, however continued vibrantly in Deccan region of
India.
More than three centuries later, with the power of the clerical hierocracy in Iran
having weakened after the demise of Safavid Empire, the imatullh center decided to send
missionaries to revive organized Sufism in Iran. In line with this intention, Shh hir Dacan
(d. ? ) and, a bit later, Ma m Al-Shh (d. 1211-12/1796-97) were sent to Iran from India by
Ri a-al Shh (d. 1214/1799), the shaykh of the imatullh khnaqh in India.611
When Ma mAl-shh arrived in Shiraz in 1190/1776-77, the city was a thriving and
peaceful environment under the auspices of the Zand ruler, Karm Khn (r. 1171-1193),612 who,

611

or a brief historical account of the imatullh past see: " imat-Allhiyya." Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Brill
Online , 2012. Reference. Harvard University. 30 June 2012 http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-ofislam-2/nimat-allahiyya-COM_0865
612

or more on Karm Khn see Perrys informative account of his life and career John R. Perry, Karim Khan Zand, Makers of the
Muslim World (Oxford: Oneworld, 2006).

253
we are told, had cordial relationship with the ahab Sufis of Shiraz.613 Unlike their ahab
brethren, Ma m and his close disciples did not receive a friendly welcome from the political
establishment or the clerical hierocracy. Their problems with the Zand authorities were likely
related to their alliance with the Qajars, who were locked in a power struggle with the Zand
dynasty.614 Their problems with the ulama, however, had to do with their foreign and
unorthodox outlook and teachings.
The contrast between the way ahabs and imatullhs were received speaks clearly
to how extensively the Safavid period had changed the profile of the ahab Sufi order. By this
time, ahab shaykhs had given up their distinctive Sufi attire and embraced the standard
attire of the ulama in order to escape the suspicion of religious puritans. The unremarkable,
scholarly appearance of the ahab masters was in stark contrast to the stunning sight of a
passionate Sufi fresh from India, decked out in the cloak of a dervish with all its paraphernalia
whose hair, like that of a Qalandar, was uncut.615
Ma ms charismatic personality led to the conversion of several people who became
extremely devout disciples, and their expertise in music and beautiful voices and faces seem to
have added to the charisma of the movement.616 They travelled extensively in Iran and
613

Under the relatively secure and prosperous environment that was provided under the Zand dynasty and the figure of Karm
Khn, and taking advantage of a cordial relationship that was developed between the ruling party and the ahab upper
echelon, ahabs were successful in securing their stronghold in Shiraz. They were even promoted as the custodians of the
shrine of Shh-chirgh, easily the most important religious site of Shiraz, with a huge amount of revenues in religious
endowments and donations. The political innocence of the ahab religious agenda must have contributed significantly to the
cordial relationship that existed between the master of the ahab order at the time, gh Mu ammad Hshm Darvsh. For an
standard exposition of the ahab perspective of his life and Sufi career see: Istakhr, U l-i
vv f, 327343. For a more
detailed and better researched account, still from a ahab point of view, see ayyiris introduction to his critical edition of
nhil l- qq: Mu ammad Hshim Darvish Shirazi, nhil l- qq, ed. Mu ammad Ysuf ayyir (Shiraz: Dary-yi r,
2003), 180.
614

Abbas Amanat, Resurrection and Renewal: the Making of the Babi Movement in Iran, 1844-1850 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University
Press, 1989), 75.
615

616

Shrz Ma m Al Shh,

riq l- qiq, vol. 3: 175.

Ma ums disciples came from extremely diverse socio-cultural backgrounds. Some had been trained in the madrasa and
some were uneducated. Among the former group was his first disciple, ay -al Shh (d. 1199/1784), who is recorded to have

254
Mesopotamia, including to the holy city of Karbala.617 Their problematic religious outlook
and rapid success alarmed the ulama, who were, however, unable to take serious action
against them in the absence of a strong political establishment. This latter problem was solved
with the rise of Qa ar dynasty to power in Iran at 1794 and, especially after the enthronement
of the second Qa ar king, at -li Shh in 1797, who had a close and warm relationship with
the Shiite hierocracy. The powerful corroboration of the state and the hierocracy that had
functioned so effectively in preserving and promoting the interests of both parties against
rival social entities was re-instituted. The only difference was that the hierocracy, having had
more than a hundred years to refine its power structures, was in a much stronger position vis-vis the newly-established Qajar dynasty. Compared to the Safavid monarchs, the Qajars had a
greater need for the ulama to function as underwriters of their rule in order for the dynastys
legitimacy to be established in the eyes of the public. 618
As a result, a new wave of anti-Sufi polemical works was penned,619 but this time the fight was
not confined to rhetoric. The anti-Sufi urists felt empowered enough to launch a wave of physical
persecution against the newly-arrived Sufis, effectively containing the rapid rise to popularity of
been a rbakhsh Sufi before he oined his master. See William Ronald Royce, Mir Masum ali Shah and the imat Allahi
Revival 1776-77 to 1796-97: A Study of Sufism and Its Opponents in Late Eighteenth Century Iran (Ph.D., Princeton University,
1979), 956,
http://search.proquest.com.ezpprod1.hul.harvard.edu/pqdtft/docview/302926950/citation/1381ED8D3CC5050DD00/1?accountid=11311. (This is yet another evidence of the fact that the rbakhsh Sufi order had a considerable presence in
some ma or Iranian urban cities, including Shiraz and Kashan). Another learned disciple of his was r-al Shh, who is also
recorded as being extremely handsome and having exquisite taste and facility in composing poetry. See: Royce: 102. MushtqAl Shh (d. 1206/1791) was a professional instrumentalist and vocalist, as was darvish usayn-al. See Shrz Ma m Al
Shh, riq l- qiq, vols. 3: 175, 19495. n the popularity of his music see Royce, Mir Masum ali Shah and the imat
Allahi Revival 1776-77 to 1796-97, 108.
617

Royces unpublished dissertation remains, I believe, the most accurate scholarly account of the career of Ma m in Iran.
Several other pieces of scholarship were produced afterwards. A summary of what can be found in imatullh and other
sympathetic sources is provided in Lewisohn, An Introduction to the History of Modern Persian Sufism, Part I. A more
critical reading can be accessed in Amanat, Resurrection and Renewal, 7180.
618
For a detailed analysis of the relationship between the ulama and the state during the Qajar period see Hamid Algar, Religion
and State in Iran, 1785-1906: the Role of the Ulama in the Qajar Period (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980). Also see
Amanat, Resurrection and Renewal, 1109.
619

See the chart below. The abovementioned Mrz Qum as well as the Sufi Killer Bihbahn were both contributors of this
second wave of anti-Sufi polemics.

255
Ma m and the initial circle of imatullh shaykhs.620 This persecution, of course, was carried out in
close corroboration with the state. The Sufis were declared infidels and chased from city to city and
town to town. Sources tell us that some of the opponents of Ma m, probably those among the puritan
defenders of orthodoxy, exploited the title of shah (king) in his name and made the authorities
suspicious that he was pursuing an undercover political agenda.621 Between 1206 and 1217, several
prominent imatullhs were murdered. Mu ammad-Al Bihbahn (1216/1801),622 one of the
prominent jurisconsults of the time, came to be known as the Sf-kush (the Sufi Killer) for his
involvement in the murder of several imatullhs including Ma m-Al Shh. 623 As Amanat has
observed, the .persecution of imatullhs was the first successful case of the ulamas vigorous
campaign to involve the government in the task of eradicating religious dissent.624 The previous antiSufi campaign, as we have seen, was carried out with the tacit approval of the Safavid state, but the
state did not play a direct role. The following chart gives the reader a sense of how these two anti-Sufi

620

See Malcolms rough estimations in John Malcolm, The History of Persia, from the Most Early Period to the Present Time: Containing
an Account of the Religion, Government, Usages, and Character of the Inhabitants of That Kingdom., A new rev. (London,: Murray, 1829),
vols. 2: 290300, http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.FIG:005948666. Amanats analysis of Malcolms statements is helpful. See
Amanat, Resurrection and Renewal, 80.
621

Shrz Ma m Al Shh,

riq l- qiq, vol. 3: 172.

622

n him, see: Hamid Algar, BEHBAH , M AMMAD-AL, Encyclopaedia Iranica, Online Edition, December 15, 1989.
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/behbahani-aqa-mohammad-ali-b
623

Mushtq-Al, along with one of his disciples named Jafar-Al, was beaten and stoned to death in 1206/1791 by a mob in
Kirman that attacked them after being stirred by a puritan preacher. Ma um-Al was detained and murdered on the order of
Bihbahn in Kirmnshh in 1211-12/1796-97. The latter also was involved in the murder of Muaffar-Al Shh, a prominent
disciple of Mushtq-Al in 1215/1800. r-Al Shh was also poisoned, most probably by the agents of the Sufi Killer in Mosul,
and he died there at 1212/1797. Mua ar-Al Shh, another disciple of Mushtq, was beaten to death in 1217/1802.
624

Amanat, Resurrection and Renewal, 78.

256
campaigns compare in terms of literary activity:
18
16

Number of polemical writings

14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

15001550

15511600

16011630

16311666

16671699

17001733

17341766

17671798

17991833

18341866

18671899

Persian

17

16

Arabic

Figure 2 Anti Sufi Polemics 1500-1900

The brutal persecution of the imatullhis, compared to the relative peace and
prosperity in which ahabs lived during the same period, simply demonstrates the extent to
which the anti-Sufi movements of in the latter half of the seventeenth century, as well as the
general religious environment of Iran, had been successful in transforming Sufi institutions
and traditions to conform to the established norms of the Twelver hierocracy. imatullh
leaders of the at the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century were, by contrast,
faithful to traditional Sufi teachings, including the traditional conceptualization of the
master/disciple relationship. They did not have the long history of interaction with the

257
cultural forces of Iran, including the ulama, that would have given them an understanding,
like that the ahabs had, of how to survive in a religious environment where the clerical
hierocracy had powerful resources at its disposal to systematically suppress rival religious
visions. or example, unlike what he saw with Drb and his notion that the deputyship of the
Hidden Imam belonged to a group of ulama excelling in both exoteric and esoteric aspects of
religion, the imatullhs directly challenged the theoretical foundations of the collective
deputyship of the ulama. In their view, the q b, the spiritual and secular leader of the Sufi
order, rather than the ulama in their entirety should be considered to be the special
representatives of the Hidden Imam. 625
Although it took the newcomer imatullhs some time to come in terms with the
reality of the hostile environment toward Sufis in Iran, after a couple of decades they gradually
came to terms with this new cultural landscape as their masters transitioned the order
towards a more conformist and orthodox-friendly one. Unlike early masters who were either
illiterate or less educated, an advanced level of knowledge in exoteric matters through
madrasa training was a routine part of later imatullh masters intellectual outlook. This
was reflected in a moderated imagery, and in the fact that each of the orders q bs would
now also be a mulla.626 In the process, imatullhs ceased to be an influential force in the
public domain, but they won an important victory when they entered the court and managed
to recruit several prominent members of the Qa ar family, including the Crown Prince Abbs

625

Oliver Scharbrodt, The Qu b as Special Representative of the Hidden Imam: The Conflation of Shii and Sufi Vilyat in the
imatullh rder, in Shii rends nd Dyn mics in odern imes (XVIIIth-XXth Centuries) = Courants Et Dynamiques Chiites
Lpoq e oderne (XVIIIe-XXe Sicles), ed. Denis Hermann and Sabrina Mervin, Bibliothque Iranienne; No 72. (Beirut: OrientInstitut, 2010), 41.
626

Bos, Mystic Regimes, 62.

258
Mrz (d. 1249/1833 ).627 As a result, from the middle of the nineteenth century onward, the
imatullh order can be viewed from a social perspective as an aristocratic elite Sufi group. 628
Their heavy presence in court circles naturally gave the imatullhs enormous political
power. Accordingly, they played an important role in Irans tumultuous transition into a
modern nation-state over the course of the latter half of the nineteenth century, up through
the Constitutional Revolution (1906). However, in the public domain they were not able to
operate many khnaqhs as instruments for recruiting the masses.
ne important aspect of the history of the imatullh order in late nineteenth
century Iran was the widespread and bitter infighting between several branches of the
imatullh establishment.629 As a result, there was no single imatullh position when it
came to vexing questions of the time, especially regarding modernity and the modern nationstate. While some branches supported the old tradition of kingship, others pioneered modern
intellectual and political concepts. Their response to the category of irfn was also varied.
While the more traditional branches, like the Gunbds, preferred the use of Sufism as a
sacred term over irfn, others embraced the latter designation, mostly under the influence
of modernity. Any analysis of the notion of irfn and its developments during the nineteenth
and early twentieth century, therefore, needs to incorporate the imatullh circles and their
influence on Qajar religious and cultural discourse as a major factor.

627

For an anthropologically informed analysis of this important development see ibid., 5267.

628

On the use of aristocratic see ibid., 62: note 89.

629

For a brief account of these splits see ibid., 7680. A much more detailed account can be found at Lewisohn, An
Introduction to the History of Modern Persian Sufism, Part I.

259

Epilogue: Modern Developments in Irfn

261

Introduction

As we approach the end of the nineteenth century, that is, the period in which
modernist ideas were forcefully debated among Iranian intellectuals, irfn, the preferred
category of reference for a group of syncretistic ulama whose mystical proclivities did not
allow for a wholesale rejection of Sufi ideas and ideals, also came under the radar of a group of
mystically-minded modernist intellectuals who shared the former groups disdain for popular
manifestations of Sufi practice, belief, and social institutions, viewing them as remnants of a
backward looking social malady that had kept the nation from progressing towards the
Promised Land of modernity. Irfn provided both groups with an amenable discursive and
spiritual space in which they could talk about their spiritual experiences and aspirations in an
individualistic and personal manner without contradicting philosophical, rationalist, and
modernist modes of thinking and/or the fundamentals of Shii belief and practice.
Up until this time this new definition of irfn, as a creation of elite religious circles,
does not seem to have spread much beyond them. Prior to the early twentieth century, none of

262
the ma or Persian, Arabic, and Turkish dictionaries dedicate a separate entry to irfn. It is
occasionally mentioned under marifa or the root a-r-f as a cognate meaning of knowledge,
insight, or culture. or example, the Persian dictionary of Ghiyas al-l ght, first printed in
1826, gives us two ma or meanings for irfn: the first is knowledge (in general); and the
second is knowledge of God.630 Later Persian dictionaries authored in the late nineteenth
century, like Anandraj (written ca. 1888),631 or in the early twentieth century, like Farhang-i
N fs, which was written the famous physician and intellectual im al-A ibb (d. 1923), have
similar definitions.632 In the same vein, the Persian-English Dictionary of . Steingass (1892)
defines irfn as Knowing, discerningknowledge, learning, science, whereas ta avvuf is
translated into Mysticism, Sufism; contemplation, thus emphasizing the virtual monopoly
of the term ta avvuf in referring to the so-called mystical aspects of Islam among the learned
of that time.633
It is only with the emergence of modern media and, simultaneously, the social
transformations that occurred in Iranian society as a result of the introduction of modern
ideas, that irfn came to be used among the learned in reference to an interpretation of
spirituality and mysticism that contrasted with traditional notions held mainly by Sufis but
also by some of the ulama. ne of the most influential figures in shaping the modern category

630

Ghiys al-Dn Mu ammad Rmpr, Marifa, ed. Man r Sarvat, Ghiys l-L ght (Tihrn: Amr Kabr, 1984).

631

Muhammad Pdshh Shd, Farhang-i An ndrj (Thran: Kitabkhana-yi Khayym, 1956).

632

Al Akbar afs, Marifa,

633

rn dsr ( rh ng-i N fs) (Tihrn: Rangn, 55 1940).

rancis Joseph Steingass et al., Ta avvuf, A Comprehensive Persian-English Dictionary: Including the Arabic Words and Phrases to
Be Met with in Persian Literature (London: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd., 1930). Francis Joseph Steingass et al., Marifa, A
Comprehensive Persian-English Dictionary: Including the Arabic Words and Phrases to Be Met with in Persian Literature (London: K. Paul,
Trench, Trubner & co., ltd., 1930).

263
of irfn in this regard is Abbs Kayvn Qazvn (d. 1938), a famous preacher in Tehran in the
early twentieth century.634

Kayvn Qazvn and his Discontent with Sufism

Kavyn was first and foremost a preacher, a mid-ranking mulla who spent years in the
madrasa system. He was also affiliated with the imatullh Sufi order for over three decades
of his life and acted, according to sympathetic sources, as an itinerant shaykh (shaykh-i
s yyr), first as a disciple of the afalshh branch of imatullhiyya and then, after many
travels, as an adherent of the Sul talshh branch.635 After becoming disillusioned with
Sufism, he dedicated the last decade of his life to writing and preaching about the fundamental
reforms he believed were necessary to traditional Sufism. His writings during this period are of
particular interest to this study. Although he was not a scholar and most of his writings
contain inaccuracies rooted in the primarily rhetorical intent of their author, Kavyns
insights into the situation of Sufism and the Sufi-minded ulama in Iran during the early
decades of the twentieth century are extremely valuable. Having been affiliated and then cut
his ties with organized Sufism, he had both the first-hand lacked by those without insider
knowledge of Sufi circles as well as the intellectual distance difficult for a practicing Sufi to
attain.

634

Kayvns biography, and especially the years he spent as a imatullh adept, were sub ects of much dispute between his
students, who provide friendly accounts, and the imatullhs, whose accounts are hostile. or a fairly balanced biography of
Kayvn see: Kayvn Sam and Manchihr adq, D Risl D r rkh-i J dd-i
vv f-i rn, Chp-i 1. (Tehran: Pzhang,
1991). 125-152. His success as a preacher is reflected in the early pages of Sams biography. See Ibid. 125-6. Independent
sources confirm his fame as a preacher: Al Ri Iti m, Bih Rivy t-i Sad N fs: Kh irt-i Siys, Ad b, J vn, Chp-i 1.
(Tihrn: Markaz, 2002), 588.
635

Matthijs van den Bos, Mystic Regimes: Sufism and the State in Iran, from the Late Qajar Era to the Islamic Republic (Leiden: Brill,
2002), 81. imatullh sources deny that he was promoted to the rank of an itinerant shaykh.

264
Before looking at his criticism of traditional Sufism, I would like to delve into an
original and insightful classification that he introduces regarding the Sufi-minded groups of
his era. This phenomenological classification touches upon some of the most central concerns
of this dissertation. It delineates three different ways in which Sufi-minded groups positioned
themselves vis--vis traditional Sufism in general and the term Sufi and Sufism in particular.
In this classification, Kayvn draws on his years of familiarity with different religious groups
over the course of his career. As such, he has much to offer to the researcher in terms of a
birds-eye perspective of the spiritual landscape of Iran at the time.636
According to Kayvn, Sufi-minded groups of his time position themselves vis--vis the
fundamental category of Sufism in three distinct ways. The first group occupies a state called
barzakh, or limbo, meaning they exist in the space between exotericism and esotericism
(barzakh bayn-i qishr va lubb). The second group is located at the outset of Sufism (bidy t-i
t avvuf), and the third group is at the center of Sufism (m rk -i t

vv f). What all three

have in common is 1) a disdain for exotericism and praise of esotericism; 2) accepting Rumis
sn v in their hearts even if they deny that in front of people; 3) making efforts to improve
their moral character and talking about Universal Peace ( l -i kull); 4) refraining from
indulging in worldly pleasures (khush-g

rn); and 5) exaggerating (ghuluvv) about the

imams, the saints, the prs, and their miracles.637 These commonalities could spark an
interesting conversation in and of themselves, but what differentiates the groups is more
pertinent to this study.
636

This classification has surprisingly received no major scholarly attention. It has only been quoted in two works of Persian
scholars of Sufism with no analysis. See Al Karbs, km-i t ll Bdbd: I yg r-i ikm t-i Sh D r Q rn-i D v d h m-i
Hijr, Chp-i 1. (Tihrn: Pizhhishgh-i Ulm-i Insn va Mu lat-i arhang, 2002), 206; Manchihr adq, rkh-i k m
V Ur f-yi t khkhir (Tehran: ikmat, 2002), 21415.
637

Abbs Kayvn Qazvn, R g sh, Bihn S kh n, Ust vr, ed. Ma md Abbs, 1997, 13435.

265
The first and the second group are differentiated in only one way: the first group does
not have special instructions for ikr-i q lb, while the second does. In another place in the
same work, Kayvn makes it clear how important ikr of the heart is in comparison to ikr of
the tongue, remarking that the former is essential in the eyes of Sufi masters to consider one
an official member of their Sufi order.638 Therefore, the existence of special instructions and
distinct techniques for performing this kind of ikror the lack thereofis an important
parameter for him in his classification. Both groups, however, have significant differences with
the Center that are unrelated to instruction about the ikr of the heart. Kayvn enumerates six
principal differences. All of them have to do with the presence of a strict set of rules, the wellorganized hierarchy, and the accompanying formalities and technical vocabulary that are the
hallmark of the Center and that are lacking in the Outset. The real distinction, therefore, is
between traditional, institutionalized Sufi groups and those who, from Kayvns perspective,
occupy the turf of Sufism, but disassociate themselves from the formalities, institutional
hierarchy, and most of the technical vocabulary that defines the Center. or example, groups
at the Center are full of titles like shah and qu b, they require the performance of elaborate
initiation rites in order to become a member, and disciples are required to adhere to a single
spiritual master or qu b. Furthermore, the initiate is not free to act as a missionary for his
spiritual vision unless given permission by the shaykh. In contrast, groups at the Outset are
defined by their lack of the abovementioned characteristics.639
In addition to laying out the general distinguishing markers above, Kayvn gives us the
name of prominent figures that he associates with each group. Among the prominent

638

Ibid. 239.

639

Kayvn Qazvn, R g sh, 14042.

266
members of the second group, Kayvn includes his contemporary, Mull Javd Isfahn (d.
1339/1921), who is known as dna, as well as gh Mu ammad Bdbd. I spoke in detail
about Bdbd in the previous chapter. Moving into the 20th century, dna was among the
most prominent teachers of the mystical philosophy of Mull adr in his time after his
teacher Jahngr Khn Qashq (d. 1328/1910) in Isfahan.640 Kayvn tells us that he himself was
among the disciples of dna for several years and was given special instructions by him to
perform a difficult form of the hidden ikr.641 Both figures are said to have been associated with
the ahab order. Irrespective of the truth or falsehood of such associations, the very fact, as I
mentioned in relation to Bdbd, that their association is said to have been with the ahab,
and not the imatullh order is meaningful.
ames he places in the first group include Mulla at -Al Sultnbd (d. 1900)642 and
Mull Husayn-qul Hamadn (d. 1311/1893), under whom Kayvn claims to have been
educated for a while in Najaf.643 These are among the prominent members of the ulama who
later came to be known as the khlqiyy n (moralists) due their emphasis on moral purification
and following a strict ethical code of conduct that was based on the teachings of the imams
and read through the lens of irfn and Sufism. The first two groups, Kayvn says, do adhere to
the tenants of Twelver Shiism and there is nothing particular about their belief worth
mentioning. In other words, figures who are categorized under the first and second group
operated mostly within the boundaries of the Twelver orthodoxy of their time.

640

adq, rkh-i k m V Ur f-yi

t khkhir, 33435.

641

Kayvn Qazvn, R g sh, 138.

642

About him See adq, rkh-i k m V Ur f-yi

643

t khkhir, 237257.

Hamadn was among the students of the most prominent teacher of adrs Transcendental Philosophy in Qa ar era, H
Mull Hd Sabzavr (d. 1289/1872).

267
The most relevant feature of Kayvns discussions for our purpose is his description of
each groups relationship with the term Sufism. Whereas the first group is extremely scared
of being called Sufis,644 the third group considers the term sacred to the extent that they say
it is extremely difficult to find one truly worthy of the title among masters of each age.645 In
contrast to these two extremes, the second group occupies a middle ground. While they are
not scared of the term, they do not necessarily apply it to themselves either.
These distinct reactions to the terms Sufi and Sufism correlate to Kayvns choice of
title for each group. Groups at the Center consider Sufi to be the holiest of terms, groups at the
Outset take a neutral stance, and those in Limbo afraid of being associated with it. The Center
is comprised of traditional organized Sufism that, in Kayvns mind, is best exemplified by the
imatullh order.646 The Outset is represented by religious scholars who, due to their close
relationship with Sufi masterssomething that, in the case of Bdbd and dna, resulted in
them being identified as ahabsare accustomed to the traditional world of Sufism. They do,
however, follow an independent spiritual trend marked by a distinctive discourse that allows
them to distance themselves from traditional Sufi discourse. It is primarily among this group
that the category of irfn flourished as a definition of their independent spiritual discourse.
The third group consists of individuals among the ulama whose contact with Sufi masters is
the weakest of all. As such, even the hagiographical accounts of their lives and career have not
been successful in associating them specific spiritual gurus. Usually they happen to be students

644

He recounts a personal memory of his master in which dna tells him how he was previously scared of becoming a Sufi
but after a dream he was convinced that there was no need to be scared of the term Sufi anymore! See Kayvn Qazvn,
R g sh, 140.
645

646

Ibid.

A glaring fact about Kayvns works is the absence of any mention to ahabiyya. Given his extensive involvement in Sufism
for more than three decades, it is unlikely that this absence is due to his unfamiliarity with the order.

268
of the second group of ulama (the utset) and, as such, they often do see irfn as the most
appropriate identifier of their spiritual journey.
After positing organized Sufism as the center, Kayvn engages in a detailed criticism
of it. He severely criticizes the increasing sectarian feuds between different Sufi orders and the
hegemonic nature of the relationship between the master and his disciples, which often led to
scandalous exploitations of the disciples by opportunistic and world-seeking masters. His
criticism, in other words, is all related to the vices of corrupt Sufi social institutions and
hierarchies.647 In place of those institutions and hierarchies, he advocates a more pluralistic
and universal understanding of Islam and Sufism, and he finds institutionalized Sufism illsuited to the realization of that goal. Emphasizing the term irfn over ta avvuf is a strategy for
him to change the existing paradigm in which everything he loved about the essence of
religion was categorized under the rubric of either zuhd (asceticism) or ta avvuf.
To this end, he re-defines irfn as a broad concept that can be divided into (1) ilm, or
speculative; and (2) m l, or, practical.648 In doing so, he effectively takes the traditional
classification of ta avvuf (t

vv f-i ilm versus t

vv f-i m l) and replaces ta avvuf with

irfn. urthermore, he elevates irfn as a concept such that ta avvuf becomes a subcategory
that can be discussed under the former. Therefore, for him the purported necessary
connection between irfn and ta avvuf is baseless. The relationship between the two is partial
overlap. either all gnostics (rifs) are Sufis, nor all Sufis gnostics.649 In another step that
further marginalizes the concept of Sufism, he also makes a distinction between two kinds of

647

Kayvn was a prolific writer. His critique of the imatullh order is detailed in his R g sh and Bihin-sukhan. His criticism
of organized forms of Sufism in general is best found in his Irfn-nm and Ust vr.
648

Kayvn Qazvn, R g sh, 326.

649

Ibid., 124.

269
Sufism,

qq, or genuine, versus m rs m, or traditional. Most of what is associated with

organized and institutionalized forms of Sufism fits under the second subcategory, that is, the
non-genuine traditional Sufism.650 At the same time, he speaks sympathetically about the first
subcategory, that is, genuine Sufism, which according to him is devoid of all the corruptions
and superstitions with which traditional Sufism is polluted. Irfn, he says, is the proper
designation for the latter.
The main difference between Sufism (that is, the non-genuine form which, according to
him, is what is practiced by an overwhelming ma ority of Sufis and irfn is that 1) the latter
lacks hierarchical structures, either in the form of orders or in the form of the master/disciple
relationship; 2) it has no place for secretive and non-accessible language and teachings; and
finally 3) the genuine impulse of irfn is not confined to one specific set of beliefs, practices,
customs, or organizations.651 Therefore, although nowadays we dont know of any Sufis with
traditional titles and organizations outside the world of Islam, he says, real Sufis can be
found not only within the Islamic world, but within every religion.652 Who are these
anonymous Sufis of the West, one wonders? In a brief footnote related to this point, Kayvn
opens up a window allowing us a glimpse of what he means by real Sufis. According to him,
adherents of the Theosophical Society can be properly categorized under the title of universal
irfn, which is not bound to any specific religion.653
Kayvns approach to religion in general, and irfn in particular, reflect a universalistic
perspective. n the former he says: My materials are based on human thought with no regard
650

Ibid., 326.

651

Abbs Kayvn Qazvn, Irfn-nm , Chp-i 1. (Tehran: farnish, 2009), 35.

652

Ibid.

653

Ibid.

270
to race, nationality, science, or religion. People of all places are my audience without any
exception.654 The latter is also defined in a universalistic spirit:
[Irfn] is neither an official field of knowledge nor it is a religion or a branch
of a specific religion that is biased or defensive against other religions and
denominations and sets its goal on the same level with other religions goal and
makes every attempt to promote it and to falsify the others. To the contrary, it
is an all-encompassing way of knowledge that can turn to any science, religion,
and philosophy and take benefit from them at the same time that they take
benefit from it so that eventually it becomes intimately united with them
therefore, irfn is not only the basis of science and religion but also their
ornament and perfection, and it is the means by which they resolve their
differences and reconcile their hostilities.655
The main characteristics of the notion of irfn, based on the above definition and other
remarks by Kayvn in his writings are as follows:
(1) Irfn refers to a highly individualistic form of spirituality.
(2) It is universalistic and pluralistic in nature.
(3) It is agreeable to reasoning and knowledge.
It is not difficult to realize that all of these characteristics are emblematic of a modernminded approach to spirituality, and this was an approach that resonated with many of the
enlightened scholars of that time. Yet these characteristics also existed in the notion of irfn
that we discussed in the previous chapters. There we saw how, by undermining the extensive
social network within which Sufism operated, the alternative mode of spiritual quest signified
by the term irfn was in effect an individualistic one. This is not, of course, to say that the
post-Safavid concept of irfn was devoid of authoritative and hegemonic systems that
controlled its function. The irfni quest was possible for the adept only if he or she operated
within the established norms of Twelver orthodoxy. Yet, the fact that the intimate and highly-

654

Kayvn Qazvn, Irfn-nm , 17.

655

Kayvn Qazvn, R g sh, 72; Kayvn Qazvn, Irfn-nm , 28.

271
hegemonic personal relationship between master and disciple was transformed into a
symbolic and highly-abstract form of relationship that the adept was supposed to establish
with the imams gave the student much freedom to come up with his/her own detailed plan of
how to progress toward the end goal of mystical realization. As for the third characteristic
mentioned above, I have discussed in detail how the proponents of irfn during the late
Safavid period, most of whom were trained in the madrasa tradition, tried to portray their
opposition to organized Sufism in terms of a dichotomy between knowledge and ignorance.
Given the resonance of Kavyns notion of irfn with both modernist-intellectual
(munavvar ala-fikr) and traditional-rationalist discourses, it is not surprising to find, after three
decades, that a well-known professor of Persian literature and Sufism, Jall al-dn Hum
echoes Kayvns remarks so closely. He writes:
Irfn, in its widest meaning, is not a science or a technologyto the contrary, it can be
said that it is compatible with all kinds of science and technology and does not belong to a
specific religion or sectit is compatible with all religions and sects. It is a misconception to
think that the terms rif or Sufi or irfn are the same with ta avvuf principally ta avvuf
itself should be considered one of the branches of irfn; Ta avvuf is a way of sulk [or
spiritual pursuit] that originates from the fountain or irfn. Irfn is a more general concept
that includes Sufism and other paths (ni l -ha)[therefore] it is possible for a person to be an
rif but not a Sufi.656

656

Jall al-Dn Hum, Jilva-h-yi Irfn-i Irn: Az Barnma-h-yi Marz-h-yi Dnish, Rdy Irn: N shriy -yi Idr -yi Kull-i
Intishrt V Rdy , no. 44 (1960): 1617.

272
This definition was so well-received that it quickly found its way into the most
prestigious contemporary Persian dictionary, the Dihkh d, without the slightest change.657
This authoritative Persian dictionary includes a lengthy entry on irfn written in the late
1960s or early 1970s. Three ma or meanings are listed under the entry. irst we read that irfn
can be used as a synonym for ta avvuf. Second we are told that it can mean gnosis, or
knowledge of the Divine. According to the entry, this gnosis can be attained either through
rational reasoning or mystical visions. inally, in its broadest sense, the dictionary declares
that irfn is finding out the true reality of things through visions. In clarifying this latter
meaning, the entry adds that ta avvuf is ust one manifestation of irfnit is only a specific
sect, a particular spiritual path that stems from the fountain of irfn. The latter is a universal
and comprehensive term that includes ta avvufit is possible for an rif, thus, not to be a Sufi
and vice versa.
Lets focus on the latter two definitions that conceive of irfn as a distinct concept
from ta avvuf. The experiential and personal nature of irfn is underscored by pointing
out the central role of mystical visions in both definitions. This is further reinforced when we
take into account the lack of reference to any specific Sufi-related social institution, such as
the khnaqh, or communal rituals like ikr. The dictionary furthermore emphasizes that
irfn, as gnosis, although primarily a product of mystical visions, can also be attained through
rational-philosophical argumentations. That is to say, irfn is in essence compatible with
reasoning and rationality. The influence of adrs mystical philosophy is most forcefully
demonstrated in such claims. inally, there is an unmistakable emphasis on the superiority of
657

Al Akbar Dihkhud, Mu ammad Mun, and Jafar Shahd, Irfan, L gh tnm -yi Dihkhuda (Tihrn: Muassasa-i Intishrt
va Chp-i Dnishgh-i Tihrn:, 1373 [1993 or 1994-1994 or 1995 1372). The imatullah master, Sayyid abd al-hu a Balaghi
aini, otherwise known as Hu at Al-Shh (d. 1976), borrows the exact same definition in his work. See: Manchihr adq,
Yagnag Ya Dugnag-ye Ta avvuf B irfn, K yhn-i Andsh , no. 54 (1994): 89.

273
irfn, as a universal and all-encompassing concept, to ta avvuf, a restricted and narrow one.
This is the only characteristic of irfn as understood by Kayvn and his followers that is not
explicitly contained in post-Safavid understanding of the term.
This emphasis on the compatibility of irfn with all kinds of philosophies, knowledge,
and religions, or, as a contemporary author put it, with all kinds of science and technology,
should be understood in the context of a deep soul-searching among the learned of that time
to identify cultural elements responsible for the backwardness of their country in contrast
to the progressiveness of Western civilization. To this effect, people like Kayvn who deeply
valued what religion in its genuine form has to offer society, made every attempt to
distinguish what they consider to be at the heart of the prophetic message from human
defilements in the form of corrupt organizations, hierarchies, and dogmas. Kayvns own
words clearly reflect this sentiment and the influence of Western currents of thought. He says:
I protest against the form of Sufi orders and against the title of qu b and the institution
of master/disciple. I want to distinguish between two kinds of ta avvuf as Protestants made a
distinction between two aspects of Christianity and said we do accept the essence of Christian
religion as sacred and necessary to abide by, but refuse the Popes arbitrary interference in
matters of dogma.658

It is significant to note that the word protest in the abovementioned quote is not a
translation. Kayvn himself deliberately uses the exact word, transliterated from English into
Persian script. This can be seen as an attempt to emphasize 1) the familiarity of the author
with a modern culture and its lexicon; and 2) the deep similarity that he perceived between his

658

Kayvn Qazvn, R g sh, 34243.

274
reformist ideas and objection to traditional Sufism on the one hand and the Protestant
Reformation on the other.659 Kayvns modernist agenda is perhaps nowhere more clear than
in the 1930 version of his Irfn-nm in which he used the Gregorian calendar, the measure of
the modern age. In line with this modernist stance, his prominent student, Mudarris
Chahrdah (d. 1997) referred to his master not as sheikh but as the great philosopher.660
The same mood is reflected in the words of a prominent Iranian politician and man of
culture of the early twentieth century, Zak al-Malik urqh (d. 1942).661 In his forward to
riq l- qiq, a classic source on the history of Persian Sufism printed in 1900, urqh
deliberately avoids any reference to the term ta avvuf. Instead, he repeatedly uses terms like
rif and irfn, which are rarely used in the actual content of the book. Furthermore, he warns
that this new conception of irfn, if not accompanied by reasoning and trustworthy evidence,
has no place among the learned and critical generation of the age of discovery.662
Final Thoughts

Based on this brief exposition of some aspects of the modern development of the
concept of irfn, I conclude that there is no doubt that certain aspects of the contemporary
irfni discourse developed in response to, and were influenced by, the process of
modernization in Iran. Other elements, however, have been in the making since the
659

Kayvns observation deserves to be studied in more depth, especially given the similarities between the religious
developments in Iran discussed in this dissertation and those occurring in Europe over the course of the Protestant
Reformation, which was in full swing during the early Safavid period.
660

Bos, Mystic Regimes, 84.

661

the famous intellectual and the publisher of first non-state sponsored periodical in Iran

662

Mu ammad Ma m Shrz Ma m Al Shh, riq l- qiq, ed. Mu ammad Jafar Mah b (Tihrn: Kitbkhna-yi
Brn, 1960), vol. 1: 8. urq and Kayvn represent only a portion of the modernist intelligentsia in Iran. ther more radical
thinkers, like at al Akhndzda (d. 1878) and later A mad Kasrav (d. 1946), thought Twelver Shiism in general, and Sufism
and Dervishism in particular, were corrupt beyond hope. In order to deliver on the promise of modernity to the Iranian
nation, they held that traditional religion and Sufism needed to be expunged. For an authoritative and masterful scholarly
account of the position of Sufism from 1850-1950 in Iran and different views that various social groups held about it see: Lloyd
V. J Ridgeon, Sufi Castigator: Ahmad Kasravi and the Iranian Mystical Tradition, Routledge Sufi Series; 19 (London: Routledge, 2006).

275
seventeenth century in an authentically Persian context. That is to say, if the concept of irfn
as a category referring to a privatized, elitist, rational, science-friendly, and universal concept
looks much like the concept of mysticism, it is not because it was transplanted into the soil of
Iranian culture by so-called westoxificated puppets of imperialism, or by reactionary
fundamentalists who, despite their rhetoric, are deeply embedded in modernity. To the
contrary, in proposing irfn as an alternative to ta avvuf, modern Iranian intellectuals
appropriated an already well-developed notion that they found to be an apt expression of their
modern aspirations.
In the final paragraphs of this dissertation, I would like to use this genealogy of irfn to
explore whether we, as scholars of religion, have anything to learn from it about the ways in
which we use analytical categories, like mysticism, in cross-cultural studies. Take, for example,
the privatized nature of the mystical quest, which is often listed as one of the prominent
features of a distinctively modern and Western religious consciousness.663 Richard King deals
with this aspect of mysticism to some extent in his Orientalism and Religion. I would like to quote
him at some length, as his remarks are germane to the point I would like to make. Speaking of
what he sees as distinctive features of modern Western notions of mysticism, King says [T]he
privatization of mysticism that is, the increasing tendency to locate the mystical in the
psychological realm of personal experiences, serves to exclude it from political issues such as
social justice. Mysticism thus has become seen as a personal matter of cultivating inner states
of tranquility and equanimity, which, rather than seeking to transform the world, serve to
accommodate the individual to the status quo through the alleviation of anxiety and stress In

663

Richard King, Orientalism and Religion: Post-coloni l heory, Indi

nd the ystic E st (London: Routledge, 1999), 13.

276
this way, mysticism has been thoroughly domesticated[it] has become at once
decontextualized, elitist, antisocial, [and] otherworldly.
My point is simple: there is nothing uniquely modern or Western about such
developments: irfn was all of thesedecontextualized, elitist, depoliticized, antisocial,
otherworldly, and domesticatedmany years before the advent of modernity in Persia. There
was no scholarly and/or imperial will to make it amenable to simplistic comparative
analysis, as King asserts about mysticism. There was no foreign colonial agent seeking to
make Sufism irreconcilable with the goals of political and social transformation, to turn it to
an anti-revolutionary opiate, so to speak. It is true that Sufism was domesticated and even
violently suppressed. But it is also true, as I have tried to demonstrate, that concurrent with
but quite independent fromits suppression and domestication, irfan flourished as a distinct
notion of mystical quest with a distinctly rational, elitist, and otherworldly flavor.
ow, it is true that Kings primary focus, like many other scholars of religion who
concentrate on postcolonial studies, is on Eastern religions, especially Hinduism and
Buddhism. But, there can be no mistake that the case studies in this work and many others are
used to draw broad conclusions about how concepts like religion and mysticism, as categories
deeply embedded in the history of Western colonialism, should either be abandoned
completely in scholarly discourse or not applied in comparative analysis and cross-cultural
classifications. There is no question that such studies, which re-examine the historical
contingencies that shape our seemingly solid categories, need to be taken seriously. In fact,
they have been taken seriously by scholars for good reasons.
What makes me uncomfortable with this trend of scholarship, however, is its exclusive
attention to the modern West, its emphasis on the utter distinction between the West and the rest

277
and between the modern and the pre-modern. These dichotomies are supposed to be destabilized
in postcolonial and postmodern frames of thought, but somehow they always manage to sneak
their way back in, as can be evidenced in, for example, itzgeralds The Ideology of Religious Studies.664
This, I believe, has partly to do with the current status of the study of religion and the default
position of prioritizing Western phenomena in religious theorizing.665 In their attempt to break
away from the status quo by focusing on Eastern rather than Western religious phenomena,
deconstructionist scholars easily fall into a reactionary discourse that reproduces the same binary
thinking and modes of power and dominion that they supposedly reject. In their determination to
fight the perceived imperialistic agenda of religious studies as a Western discipline of knowledge
and indict the scholars of religion for their sins in this regard, the agency of the Other is too easily
dismissed as a form of resistance or adaptation. It is as if other cultures and civilizations have
never been smart enough, or imperialist enough for that matter, to think of comparisons and
classifications, or to impose their constructed categories on others. But, we know that other
cultures have also used comparative analyses, that they have objectified their own Others. We
know that Western colonialism was not the first colonialism, and that comparison has long been an
imperial enterprise.666 Only through taking these things in account might we overcome recent
unhealthy moves in the humanities toward the ghettoization of the Western world of ideas.

664

Timothy Fitzgerald, The Ideology of Religious Studies (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).

665

Robert A. Orsi, The Cambridge Companion to Religious Studies, Cambridge Companions to Religion. (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2012), 312.
666

Wendy Doniger, Post-modern and -colonial -structural Comparisons, in A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the
Postmodern Age, ed. Kimberley C. Patton and Benjamin C. Ray (Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 2000), 6374.

Bibliography

279

Manuscripts
Amil, Al b. Mu ammad b. al- asan b. Zayn al-Dn. Al-Sihm al-Mriqa f Aghr al-Zandiqa, n.d. Ms. o. 1968.
Central Library & Documentation Center, University of Tehran.
Ardabl Bdgul, Mrz Mu ammad. Takirat al-kirn, 1780 1194. Ms. o. 345. Kitb-khna-yi Madrasa-yi
amz.
Balkh, Shaqq ibn Ibrhim. Mi b Al-shara Wa-mift Al- aqqa / Min Ta nf al-Shaqq al-Balkh, 711. MS
Arab 124. Hougton Library, Harvard University. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL.HOUGH:1580067.
Damvand, Abd al-Ra m. Al-Taw d, n.d. Ms. o. 1952. Marashi Library.
. uy t al- usayniyya i Taf l al-Insn al-Kmil al al-Qurn, n.d. Ms. o. 1952. Marashi Library.
. all Rumz Ra aviyya dar Shar -i ads Ras al-Jlt, n.d. Ms. o. 1952. Marashi Library.
. Shar -i Kalm-i Alav, n.d. Ms. o. 1952. Marashi Library.
Drb, Mu ammad ibn Mu ammad. Mir al-Kaml, n.d. MS. o. 7205. Kitbkhna-yi stn-i Quds Ra av.
usayn abb Tunikbun, Mu ammad Mumin. Ba rat al-Muminn, n.d. MS o. 3928. Central Library &
Documentation Center, University of Tehran.
I m al-dn Mu ammad b. im al-dn. a at al-Kirm va a at al-Lim, 1083. MS. o. 10369. Kitb-khna,
Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
Kaml al-dn usayn, Khrazm. db al-Murdn, n.d. MS. o. 10043. Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i
Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
Khv , Isml. Risla, n.d. Ms. o. 869/2. Kitbkhna-yi Dnishgh-i Isfahn.
Mashhad Sabzavr, Mu ammad Al. Dvn, n.d. Ms. o. 8983/1. Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i
Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
. Tu fa-yi Abbs (Ma lis MS), n.d. Ms. o. 17760. Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shryi Islm.

280
. Tu fa-yi Abbs (Minasian MS), n.d. Ms. o. 590. University of California, Los Angeles. Library. Dept. of
Special Collections: Caro Minasian Collection of Persian and Arabic Manuscripts.
http://minasian.library.ucla.edu/browse.html.
Mr Law . Arban, n.d. MS o. 0356. University of California, Los Angeles. Library. Dept. of Special Collections:
Caro Minasian Collection of Persian and Arabic Manuscripts.
http://minasian.library.ucla.edu/browse.html.
. Kifyat al-Muhtad i Marifat al-Ma d (Manuscript), 1083h. o. 1154. Central Library & Documentation
Center, University of Tehran.
ayrz, Sayyid Qu b al-dn Mu ammad. Qa da-yi Ishqiyya, n.d. Ms. o. 4889. Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i
Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
. Risla-yi Jm-i Jahn-nam va R iyya, n.d. Ms. o. 4889. Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i
Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
Qum, Mu ammad hir. al- avid al-Dniyya, n.d. Ms. o. 2749. Central Library & Documentation Center,
University of Tehran.
. ikmat al-rifn, n.d. Ms. o. 13822. Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
. Radd-i fiyn, n.d. MS No. 5468. Central Library & Documentation Center, University of Tehran.
Silsila-yi Sidriyya-yi rbakhshiyya-yi Hamadniyya, n.d. Ms. o. 4689/2. Central Library & Documentation
Center, University of Tehran.
Tabrz Isfahn, a b al-dn Ri . r al-Hidya (Manuscript), 1230. Ms. o. 4978. Kitb-khna, Mzih, va
Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.
. Sab al-Masn (Manuscript), n.d. MS. o. 2901. Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi
Islm. http://dl.ical.ir.
Zhid, usayn. Bayn al-Asrr (Manuscript), n.d. Ms. o. 3043/1. Kitb-khna, Mzih, va Markaz-i Asnd-i
Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm.

281

Published Sources
Ashiqi, Ali Hasan Khan. Subh-i Gulshan. Bhopal: Fayz-i Manb-yi Ranq-i riyai, 1878.
http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.b3819092.
Ab Al usayn ibn Abd Allh Ibn Sn (Avicenna). al-Ishrt v
1958.

l- nbht. 3 vols. Tehran: Ma baat al- aydar,

Ibn Ab Sad ibn Ab hir ibn Ab Sad ibn Ab al-Kayr, Muhammad. Asrr l-taw d f
Edited by A mad Bahmanyr. Chp-i 2. Tehran: Kitbkhna-yi ahr, 1978.

qmt l-Sh ykh Ab S d.

Abisaab, Rula Jurdi. Converting Persia: Religion and Power in the Safavid Empire. London: I.B. Tauris, 2004.
damyat, Mu ammad usayn Ruknzda. Dnishm ndn v S kh ns ryn-i rs. 5 vols. Tehran: Kitbfurshh-yi
Islmya va Khayym, 1337.
Adang, Camilla. Muslim Writers on Judaism and the Hebrew Bible: from Ibn Rabban to Ibn Hazm. Islamic Philosophy,
Theology, and Science, V. 22. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996.
Aflk, Shams al-Dn A mad. nqib l-rifn. Edited by Tahsin Yazc. Trk Tarih Kurumu Yaynlar. III. Dizi; Sa.
3. nqara: Chpkhna-yi Anjuman-i Trkh-i Turk, 1959.
Afshr, ra , and Mu ammad Taq Dnishpazhh. Fihrist-i Kitb-h-yi Kitbkhn -yi rk -i Dnishgh-i Tehran. 10
vols. Tehran: Dnishgh-i Tehran: Intishrt-i Kitbkhna-yi Markaz va Markaz-i Asnd, 1965.
gh Buzurg ihrn, Mu ammad Mu sin. al-h r il
.

nf l-Sh . 25 vols. Beirut: Dr al-A v, 1983.

b qt Alm l-Sh . Edited by Al aq Munzav. 6 vols. Al- aba 2. Qom: Muassasat Ismlyn, 1990.

Agha Nouri, Ali. rifn-i

s lmn v Sh ri t-i Islm. Qom: Nashr-i Dnishgh-i Adyn, 2008.

Balkh Rmi, Jall al-Dn Mu ammad.

Tehran: Amr Kabr, 1984.

sn v-i

n v. Edited by Reynold Alleyne icholson. 4 vols. Chp-i 1.

282
Algar, Hamid. aqshbands and Safavids: A Contribution to the Religious History of Iran and Her eighbors. In
Safavid Iran and Her Neighbors, edited by Michel M Mazzaoui, 748. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press,
2003.
. Religion and State in Iran, 1785-1906: the Role of the Ulama in the Qajar Period. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1980.
Amanat, Abbas. Resurrection and Renewal: the Making of the Babi Movement in Iran, 1844-1850. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell
University Press, 1989.
mil, Mu sin al- usayn. Ayn l-Sh . 11 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Taruf, 1986.
Amn al-Shara Khuy, Ab al-Qsim. n l- vb d r Sh r -i Fa l al-Khi b. Edited by Muhammad Kh av. 3 vols.
Chp-i 1. Tehran: Mawl, 2004.
Aminrazavi, Mehdi. Islamic Philosophy in the Modern Islamic World: Persia. In History of Islamic Philosophy,
edited by Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Oliver Leaman, 10371050. Routledge History of World Philosophies.
London: Routledge, 1996.
Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali. The Divine G ide in E rly Shiism: the Sources of Esotericism in Islam. Albany: State
University of New York Press, 1994.
. he Spirit lity of Shii Isl m: Beliefs and Practices. London: I.B. Tauris, 2011.
Anawati, Georges C.

ll ft Ibn Sn. Cairo: Dr al-Marif, 1950.

. Polmique, apologie et dialogue Islamo-chrtiens: positions classiques mdivales et positions contemporaines, 1969.
Anzali, Ata. Skhtgir, S nn t v Irfn. Qom: Anjuman-i Marif-i Islm, 2005.
Arab, Alireza.

vv f v Irfn

Ddgh-i Ul m-yi

t khkhr-i Shi . Tehran: Intishrt-i min-i h, 2009.

Arjomand, Said Amir. The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam: Religion, Politic l Order, nd Societ l Ch nge in Shiite Ir n
from the Beginning to 1890. Publications of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies; No. 17. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1984.
Ashkevari, Sadeq. lam al-Misl: Muarrif-yi Pazhhash az A r-i afav. I ilt-i ikm t v
(2012): 3435.

rif t, no. 73

shtiyn, Jall al-Dn, and Henry Corbin. Anthologie Des Philosophes Iraniens: Dep is Le XVIIe Sicle J sq Nos Jo rs.
Textes Persans Et Arabes Choisis Et Prsents Par Sayyed Jalloddn Ashtiyn. Introduction Analytique Par Henry

283
Corbin. 4 vols. Bibliothque Iranienne; No 18-19. Teheran: Departement diranologie de lInstitut francoiranien de recherche, 1971.
shtiyn, Jall al-Dn. Shar -i l v r-i

ls f

ll dr. Tehran: ah at-i Zann-i Musalmn, 1981.

A r, ard al-Dn. Takirat al-A liy. 2 vols. Leydan: Brill, 1907.

Babaie, Sussan. Slaves of the Shah: New Elites of Safavid Iran. Library of Middle East History; V. 3. London: I.B. Tauris,
2004.
Babayan, Kathryn. Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs: Cultural Landscapes of Early Modern Iran. Harvard Middle Eastern
Monographs; 35. Cambridge, Mass.: Distributed for the Center for Middle Eastern Studies of Harvard
University by Harvard University Press, 2002.
. The Safavid Synthesis: rom Qizilbash Islam to Imamite Shiism. Iranian Studies 27, no. 1/4 (January 1,
1994): 135161.
. The Waning of the Qizilbash: the Spiritual and the Temporal in Seventeenth Century Iran. Princeton
University, 1993. http://search.proquest.com/docview/304099961?accountid=11311.
Ba r al-Ulm, Mu ammad Mahd ibn Murta . Risl t l-Sayr va al-S l k. Edited by Mu ammad usayn usayn
ihrn. Al- aba 1. Dawra-yi Ulm va Marif-i Islm, 4. Beirut: Dr al-Ma a a al-Bay , 2001.
Barbaro, Giosofat, Ambrogio Contarini, William Thomas, Eugene Armand Roy, and Henry Edward John Stanley
Stanley. Travels to Tana and Persia. Harvard College Library Preservation Microfilm Program; 02724.
London: Printed for the Hakluyt Society, 1873.
Bashir, Shahzad. Fazlallah Astarabadi and the Hurufis. Makers of the Muslim World. Oxford: Oneworld, 2005.
. Messianic Hopes and Mystical Visions: the N rb khshy Bet een ediev l nd odern Isl m. Studies in
Comparative Religion. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2003.
. Shah Ismail and the Qizilbash: Cannibalism in the Religious History of Early Safavid Iran. History of
Religions 45, no. 3 (February 1, 2006): 234256.
. Sufi Bodies: Religion and Society in Medieval Islam. New York: Columbia University Press, 2011.
Bos, Matthijs van den. Mystic Regimes: Sufism and the State in Iran, from the Late Qajar Era to the Islamic Republic.
Leiden: Brill, 2002.

284

Brodeur, Patrice Claude. rom an Islamic Heresiography to an Islamic History of Religions: Modern Arab Muslim
Literature on Religious thers with Special Reference to Three Egyptian Authors. Harvard University,
Divinity School, 1999.
Browne, Edward Granville. A Literary History of Persia. Cambridge: University Press, 1928.
Cavusoglu, Semiramis. The Kdzdeli movement: an attempt of seriat-minded reform in the ttoman Empire.
Princeton University, 1990.
Chardin, John. S f rnm -i Shrd n: Matn-i Kmil. Translated by Iqbl Yaghm. 5 vols. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Ts, 1993.
. Voy ges D Chev lier Ch rdin En Perse, Et A tres Lie x De lOrient, Enrichis D n Gr nd Nombre De Belles ig res En
Taille-douce, Reprsentant Les Antiquits Et Les Choses Remarquables Du Pays. Nouv. d., soigneusement
confre sur les 3 ditions originales, augm. dune notice de la Perse, depuis les temps les plus reculs
jusqu ce our, de notes, etc.,. Paris: Le ormant, 1811. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.FIG:004370194.
Chittick, William C. The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn al-Ar bis et physics of Im gin tion. Albany, N.Y.: State
University of New York Press, 1989.
Cole, Juan R. I. Ideology, Ethics, and Philosophical Discourse in Eighteenth Century Iran. Iranian Studies 22, no. 1
(January 1, 1989): 734.
Corbin, Henry. Confessions Extatiques De Mr Dmd, Maitre De Thologie Ispahan. In Mlanges Louis Massignon.
Damas: Institut franais de Damas, 1956.
. Avicenna and the Visionary Recital. Irving, Tex.: Spring Publications, 1980.
. History of Islamic Philosophy. London: Kegan Paul International, 1993.
Dabbagh, Soroush. ar -vra-yi Az Irfn-i Mudirn: Tanh Manav. simn, no. 1 (2011).
Dabashi, Hamid. Mr Dmd and the ounding of the School of I fahn. In History of Islamic Philosophy, edited by
Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Oliver Leaman, 597634. Routledge History of World Philosophies. London:
Routledge, 1996.
. Theology of Discontent: the Ideological Foundation of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. [Transaction]. New Brunswick,
N.J.: Transaction Publishers, 2006.

285
Dmd, Mu ammad Bqir ibn Mu ammad. al-R vshi al-S mviyy f Sh r al-A ds al-Immiyy . Tehran: s.n.,
1894.
. Ja vt v
vqt. Edited by Al Aw ab. Chp-i 1. Mras-i Maktb (Series). Ulm va Marif-i Islm; 35.
Tehran: Mrs-i Maktb, 2001.
Damvand, Abd al-Ra m. Mift -i Asrr al- usayn. In Anthologie Des Philosophes Iraniens: Depuis Le XVIIe Sicle
J sq Nos Jo rs. extes Pers ns Et Ar bes Choisis Et Prsents P r S yyed J lloddn Ashtiyn. Introd ction
Analytique Par Henry Corbin., edited by Jall al-Dn shtiyn and Henry Corbin, 4:575790. Bibliothque
Iranienne; No 18-19. Tehran: Departement diranologie de lInstitut franco-iranien de recherche, 1971.
Dnishgh-i Tehran. Dnishkada-i Maql va Manql., and Ziy al-Dn Ibn Ysuf Shrz. Fihrist-i Kitbkhn -i
Madrasa-i li-i Sip hslr. Tehran: Chpkhna-i Dnishgh, 1315.
Drb, Mu ammad ibn Mu ammad. La f -yi Gh yb. Shrz: Kitbkhna-yi A mad, 1978.
. Maqmt al-Slikn. In Ghin, sq, edited by Sayyid Jafar abav, 1:283496. Chp-i 1. Mrs-i iqh.
Qom: Muassisa-yi Bstn-i Kitb (Markaz-i Intishrt Daftar-i Tablght-i Islm), 2008.
. Riy l-rifn f Sh r a f t S yyid l-Sjidn. Edited by usayn Dargh and Muhammad Taq
Sharatmadr. Al- aba 1. ihrn: Dr al-Usva, 2000.
. Takir -yi L if al-Kh yl. Edited by Yusf Bayg Bbpr and dq Ashkivar. 2 vols. Ma ma-i akhir-i
Islm, 2012.
Darvsh Shrz, Mu ammad Hshim.
2003.

nhil l-

qq. Edited by Mu ammad Ysuf ayyir. Shiraz: Dary-yi r,

Dashtak Shrz, Ghiyth al-Dn Man r. Ghiys l-Dn n r D sht k v

ls f -yi Irfn: n il l-Sirn v
qmt l-rifn. Edited by Qsim Kk . Chp-i 1. Tehran: Intishrt-i arhangistn-i Hunar, 2008.
Davn Kzarn, Jall al-Dn. Naqd-i Niy : Dar Shar -i d B yt v y k Gh
Muallim. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Amr Kabr, 1994.

Khj fi Shr . Edited by usayn

DeWeese, Devin. The Eclipse of the Kubravya in Central Asia. Iranian Studies 21, no. 1/2 (January 1, 1988): 4583.
Dihdr Shrz, Mu ammad ibn Ma md. R sil-i Dihdr. Edited by Mu ammad usayn Akbar Sv. Chp-i 1.
Mrs-i Maktb (Series); 1. Tehran: Nuq a, 1996.
Derayati, Mustafa. ihristvr -i Dastnivisht-h-yi rn (Din). Chp-i 1. Tehran: Kitbkhna, Mzih va Markaz-i
Asnd-i Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm, 2010.

286
Doniger, Wendy. Post-modern and -colonial -structural Comparisons. In A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion
in the Postmodern Age, edited by Kimberley C. Patton and Benjamin C. Ray, 6374. Berkeley, Calif.:
University of California Press, 2000.
Doostdar, Alireza. antasies of Reason: Science, Superstition, and the Supernatural in Iran. Harvard University,
2012.
Ernst, Carl W. Jalal al-Din Davanis Interpretation of Hafiz. In Hafiz and the Religion of Love in Classical Persian
Poetry, edited by Leonard Lewisohn, 197211. Iran and the Persianate World. London: I. B. Tauris in
association with Iran Heritage Foundation, 2010.
. The Shambhala Guide to Sufism. Boston, Mass.: Shambhala, 1997.
Farhani Munfarid, Mahdi. Muhajarat-i Ul m -yi Shi

J b l mil bih Ir n d r sr-i Safavi. Tehran: Amir Kabir, 1998.

im, asan. Kuhan-tarn Shar -i l-h-yi Mull Mu ammad Madh irq. Kitb-i h-i Dn, no. 5354 (2002):
2630.
ay al-Kshn, Mu ammad ibn Murta . al-Wf. 26 vols. Al- aba 1. Isfahan: Maktabat al-Imm Amr alMuminn Al al-mma, 1986.
. K limt

kn n min Ul m Ahl l-ikm v

l-

rif , n.d.

. U l l- rif. Edited by Jall al-Dn shtiyn. Mashhad: Muassasa-yi Chp va Intishrt- Dnishgh-i
irdaws, 1975.
Felek, Ozgen, and Alexander D. Knysh, eds. Dreams and Visions in Islamic Societies. State Univ of New York Pr, 2012.
indarisk, Ab al-Qsim ibn Mrz Buzurg. Risl -yi iniyy . Edited by asan Jamshd. Chp-i 1. Falsafa va irfn;
152. Qom: Mu assasa-i Bstn-i Kitb, 2008.
Fitzgerald, Timothy. The Ideology of Religious Studies. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Forman, Robert K. C. Mysticism, Mind, Consciousness. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1999.
Le Gall, Dina. A Culture of Sufism: N qshb nds in the Ottom n World, 1450-1700. SUNY Series in Medieval Middle East
History. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005.
Ghazzl, Ab mid. l- nqi min l- ll -l-Muva il il al-Izza va-l-J ll. UNESCO Collection of
Representative Works: Arabic Series. Beirut: al-Lajna al-Duvalyya li Tar amat al-Ravi, 1959.

287
. n l-Amal. Edited by Sulaymn Duny. Al- aba 1. Zakhir al-Arab, 38. Mi r: Dr al-Marif, 1964.
Giorgio Levi Della Vida Conference 1983: University of California, Los Angeles), and Richard G. Hovannisian. Ethics
in Islam. Malibu, Calif.: Undena, 1985.
Gleave, R. Scripturalist Islam: the History nd Doctrines of the Akhbr Sh School. Islamic Philosophy, Theology, and
Science; V. 72. Leiden: Brill, 2007.
Gleave, Robert. Scripturalist Sufism and Scripturalist Anti-Sufism: Theology and Mysticism Amongst the Shii
Akhbariyya. In Sufism and Theology, edited by Ayman Shihadeh, 158176. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press, 2007.
Gramlich, Richard. Die Schiitischen Derwischorden Persiens. Abhandlungen Fr Die Kunde Des Morgenlandes; 36.
Marburg: Deutsche Morgenlndische Gesellschaft, 1965.
Green, Nile. Sufism: a Global History. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012.
Gulchn Man, A mad. rkh-i Takira-h-yi rs,. Publications De lUniversit De Tehran; No. 1236/1. Tehran:
Dnishgh-i Tehran, 1969.
fi, Shams al-Dn Mu ammad. Dvn-i fi Khvj Sh ms l-Dn
Chp-i 2. Tehran: Khvrazm, 1983.
amav, Mu ammad ibn Is q. Ans lBunyd-i Bisat, 1984.

ammad. Edited by Parvz til Khnlar.

minn. Edited by Hashim Muhaddis. Tehran: Va id-i Ta qqt-i Islm,

Hanegraaff, Wouter J., ed. Gnosticism. Leiden: Brill, 2006. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn3:HUL.ejournals:sfx3170000000000647.

Haqiqi, Ran bar. Sayr dar irfn va Ta avvuf. K yhn-i Andsh , no. 54 (1994): 99116.
azn Lh , Mu ammad Al. rkh v S f rnm -i n. Edited by Al Davn. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Markaz-i Asnd-i
Inqilb-i Islm, 1375 Sh./1996.
. Takirat al- irn. Edited by Masma Slik. Chp-i 1. Mrs-i Maktb (Series). Zabn va Adabyt-i rs;
2. Tehran: Nashr-i Sya, 1996.
Hodgson, Marshall G. S. The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization. 3 vols. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1974.

288
Hr_violations_dervishes.pdf, n.d. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/dir/dv/hr_violations_dervish/hr_violations_dervishes.pdf.
Hum, Jall al-Dn. Jilva-h-yi Irfn-i Irn: Az Barnma-h-yi Marz-h-yi Dnish. Rdy Irn: N shriy -yi Idr -yi
Kull-i Intishrt v Rdy , no. 44 (1960): 1617.
urr al-mil, Mu ammad ibn al- asan. l-Isn Ash riyy f Al-r dd l l- fyy . Al- aba 2. Iran: Dard, 1987.
. Amal Al-mil., 1965.
Hossein, Ghaffari. Ta avvuf ya Irfn? Psukh bar Maqla-yi Prduks-i Ta avvuf nazd-i Astd va Shgirdn-i
Mull adr. ls f , l-nm
j ll -yi Dnishk d -yi Ad biyyt v Ul m-i Insn Dnishgh-i Tehran, no.
12 (2006): 109126.
usayn ahab (sic). B yn l-Asrar. Tabriz, 1954.
Hosseini, Ahmad. Fihrist-i Nuskha-h-yi Kha -i Kitbkhn -i Um m-i r t y t Allh l-U m N j f
vols. Qom: Chpkhna-i Mihr-i Ustuvr, 1354.

r sh. 40

usayn as, asan ibn asan. rsnm -yi N ir. Edited by Man r Rastigr as. 2 vols. Tehran: Amr Kabr,
1989.
usayn Sharf Shrz ahab, Abulqsim.
A mad, 1973.

bshr l-ikm : Shar -i ds-i N r

mm d. Shrz: Khngh-i

. Yak Qismat Az Trikh-i ayt Va Karmt-i a rat-i Sayyid Qu b Al-dn Mu ammad Shrz. In Takirat
al-A liy, edited by Shams al-dn ahab Parvz, 1953.
Ibn Arab. al- t t l- kky . Edited by Uthmn Ya y and Ibrhm Ma kr. Monumenta Classica. Cairo: alHaya al-Mi rya al-mma lil-Kitb, 1972.
Ibn Bbya Qum, Mu ammad ibn Al. Al-Aml. Edited by Mu ammad Bqir Kamara. Chp-i 4. Tehran:
Kitbkhna-i Islmya, 1362 Sh./1983.
Ibn ws, Ra al-Dn Ab al-Qsim Al ibn Ms. al-Amn min Akh r Al- sfr
Ma baa al- aydarya, 1951.
Imd Ardabl, Mu sin.

sn v

I ahbnt, Al-naq. B rhn l-

-l- mn.

a af: Manshrt al-

karat al-slikn. Tehran: ab-i Kitb, 1949.

rt n. Edited by Mu ammad Hurtaman. Isfahan: Muqm, 2003.

289

Istakhr, I snullh Al. U l-i Ta avvuf. Tehran: Knn-i Marifat, 1960.

Etesam, Alireza. Bih Rivy t-i S d N fs: Kh irt-i Siys, Ad b, J vn. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Markaz, 2002.
Jafariyn, Rasl. Qi a-khvnn d r rkh-i Islm v rn:
rkh-i rn v Islm. Chp-i 1. Iran: Dall, 1999.

r r b r J r yn-i Qi a-khvn, bd b

avur-i n d r

. f vyy D r Ar a-i Dn, rh ng v Siys t. 3 vols. Chp-i 1. Pizhhishkada-yi awza va Dnishgh; 37-39.
Qom: Pizhhishkada-i awza va Dnishgh, 1379 Sh./2000.
. Sih Risla Dar Bb-i Ab Muslim va Ab Muslim ma-h. In rs-i Islm-i rn, 2:247301. Iran:
Kitbkhna-i a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash a af, 1374 Sh./1995.
. rkh-i

sh yy d r rn

gh t Q rn-i Dahum-i Hijr. 2 vols. Chp-i 1. Qom: An aryn, 1996.

Javdan, Muhammad. limn-i Sha va Ta avvuf. H ft smn, no. 33 (2004).

Jazir, imat Allh ibn Abd Allh. al-Anvr l-N mniyy . 4 vols. Tabrz: Kitb aqqat, 1959.
de Jong, F., and Bernard Radtke, eds. Islamic Mysticism Contested: Thirteen Centuries of Controversies and Polemics.
Islamic History and Civilization. Studies and Texts; V. 29. Leiden: Brill, 1999.
Karamustafa, Ahmet T. Sufism: the Formative Period. The New Edinburgh Islamic Surveys. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press, 2007.
Karbal Tabrz, usayn. R t l-Jinn v J nnt l-J nn. Edited by Jafar Sul n Qurr. 2 vols. Ma ma-yi
Mutn-i rs. Tehran: Bungh-i Tarjuma va Nashr-i Kitb, 1965.
Karbasi, Ali. km-i t llih Bdbd: I yg r-i ikmat-i Sh d r Q rn-i D v d h m-i Hijr. Chp-i 1. Tehran:
Pizhhishgh-i Ulm-i Insn va Mu lat-i arhang, 1381 Sh./2002.
Kshif Dizfl, adr al-dn. irt l-Ghayb: bih Hamrh-i aqq al- qq li-Arbb l- rq . Edited by hd al-Sdt
Pizishk. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Bztb, 2006.
Kashmr, Mu ammad Al. N j m l-S m f
Maktabat Ba rat, 1981.

rjim l-Ul m. Edited by Shihb al-Dn Marash a af. Qom:

Katz, Steven T. Languauge, Epistemology, and Mysticism. In Mysticism and Philosophical Analysis, edited by Steven
T. Katz, 2274. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.

290
. The Conservative Character of Mysticism. In Mysticism and Religious Traditions, edited by Steven T. Katz,
360. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983.
Kayvn Qazvn, Abbs. R g sh, Bihn S kh n, Ust vr. Edited by Mahmud Abbasi, 1997.
. Irfn-nm . Chp-i 1. Tehran: farnish, 2009.
Kh nbd, Mu ammad Bqir. Tarjama-yi Anjil-i Arb . Edited by Rasl Jafariyn. Chp-i 1. Mrs-i Maktb; 31.
Tehran: Nashr-i Nuq a, 1996.
Khvar, Asadullh. h biyy :

vv f-i ilm, sr-i Ad b. Tehran: Intishrt-i Dnishgh-i Tehran, 1983.

Khvnsr, Muhammad Bqir. R t l-Jannt f A l l-Ul m v

Isfahn. 8 vols. Tehran: Maktabat Ismliyn, 1962.
King, Richard. Orientalism and Religion: Post-coloni l heory, Indi

l-Sdt. Edited by Mu ammad Al al-Raw t

nd the ystic E st. London: Routledge, 1999.

Kiy, diq. N qt viyn P sikhnyn. rn Kda; Shumra-yi 13. Tehran: Anjuman-i Irn, 1951.
Knysh, Alexander. Irfan Revisited: Khomeini and the Legacy of Islamic Mystical Philosophy. Middle East Journal
46, no. 4 (October 1, 1992): 631653.
Kulayn, Mu ammad ibn Yaqb. al-U l in l-Kf. Edited by Al Akbar Ghaffr. 8 vols. Tehran: Dr al-Kutub alIslmya, 1957.
Lh n, Mu ammad Jafar ibn Mu ammad diq. Shar Risl t lshtiyn. Al- aba 2. Qom: Maktab al-Ilm al-Islm, n.d.

shir

ll dr. Edited by Jall al-Dn

Lh , Abd al-Razzq. Gawhar-i rd. Edited by Zayn al-bidn Qurbn. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Szmn-i Chp va
Intishrt-i Vizrat-i arhang va Irshd-i Islm, 1993.
Lawrence, Bruce B. Defenders of God: the Fundamentalist Revolt Against the Modern Age. Studies in Comparative
Religion (Columbia, S.C.). Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina Press, 1995.
Lawson, Todd. The Hidden Words of ay Kshn. In Iran, Questions Et Connaissances: Actes Du IVe Congrs
Europen Des tudes Iraniennes, edited by Philip Huyse and Maria Szuppe, 427447. Studia Iranica. Cahier,
25-27. Paris: Association pour lavancement des tudes iraniennes, 2002.

291
Lewisohn, Leonard. An Introduction to the History of Modern Persian Sufism, Part I: The imatullh rder:
Persecution, Revival and Schism. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 61,
no. 3 (January 1, 1998): 437464.
. An Introduction to the History of Modern Persian Sufism, Part II: A Socio-Cultural Profile of Sufism, from
the Dhahab Revival to the Present Day. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of
London 62, no. 1 (January 1, 1999): 3659.
. Sufism and the School of I fahn: Ta awwuf and Irfn in Late Safavid Iran: Abd al-Razzq Lah and ay i Kshn on the Relation of Ta awwuf, ikmat and Irfn. In The Heritage of Sufism, edited by Leonard
Lewisohn and David Morgan, 3:63134. Oxford: Oneworld, 1999.
. Sufism and Theology in the Confessions of in al-Dn Turka I fahn (d. 830/1437). In Sufism and
Theology, edited by Ayman Shihadeh, 6382. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007.
Luizard, Pierre-Jean. Les Confreries Soufies En Iraq Aux Dix-neuvieme Et Vingtieme Siecles Face Au Chiisme
Doudecimain Et Au Wahhabisme. In Islamic Mysticism Contested: Thirteen Centuries of Controversies and
Polemics, edited by F. de Jong and Bernard Radtke, 283315. Islamic History and Civilization. Studies and
Texts, 0929-2403; V. 29. Leiden: Brill, 1999.
Madani, Reza. Irfn-i Islm v irfn Iltiq : B rr s v N qd-i qyid-i Firqa-yi G nbdy . Tehran: Rh-i kn, 2008.
Mahdav, Mu li al-dn. Zind g-nm -yi Allm
Majlis, Bakhsh-i Intishrt, 1999.

jlis. Tihran: Dabrkhna-yi Hamyish-i Buzurgdsht-i Allma

Ma lis, Mu ammad Bqir ibn Mu ammad Taq. Bi r Al- n r. Edited by Abd al-Zahr Alaw. ihrn: Dr alKutub al-Islmya, 1376.
Malcolm, John. The History of Persia, from the Most Early Period to the Present Time: Containing an Account of the Religion,
Government, Usages, and Character of the Inhabitants of That Kingdom. A new rev. London,: Murray, 1829.
http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.FIG:005948666.
Malekian, Mustafa. Dn, n vy t v R
Nashr-i Pyn, 2008.

sh nfikr-i Dn: Sih Guft v G B

. Hadis-i Ari m ndi: J str-h-yi d r qlniyy t v

1381 Sh./2010.

st f

leki n. Chp-i 1. Tehran:

n viyy t. Bnish-i Manavi; 41; Tehran: igh-i Mu ir,

Mashhad Sabzavr, Mu ammad Al. Tu fa-yi Abbs: the Golden Ch in of S fism in Shite Isl m. Translated by
Mohammad Hassan Faghfoory. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2008.
Massignon, Louis. Essay on the Origins of the Technical Language of Islamic Mysticism. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of
Notre Dame Press, 1997.

292

Matthee, Rudolph P. Persia in Crisis: Safavid Decline and the Fall of Isfahan. International Library of Iranian Studies;
17. London: I. B. Tauris, 2012.
Matthew S. Melvin-Koushki. The Quest for a Universal Science: The ccult Philosophy of in al-Dn Turka
I fahn (1369-1432) and Intellectual Millenarianism in Early Timurid Iran. Yale University, 2012.
McChesney, R. D. The Central Asian Ha -Pilgrimage in the Time of the Early Modern Empires. In Safavid Iran and
Her Neighbors, edited by Michel M Mazzaoui, 129156. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2003.
Michot, Jean R. La Pandmie Avicennienne Au VIe/XIIe Sicle Prsentation, Editio Princeps Et Traduction De
Lintroduction Du Livre De Ladvenue Du Monde (Kitb udth Al-lam) dIbn Ghayln al-Balkh.
Arabica 40, no. 3 (November 1, 1993): 287344.

Mr Law Sabzavr. Kify t lDar al-Tafsir, 2005.

ht d f

rf t l-

hd Al yhi l-S lm. Edited by Mu taf Sharat Msav. Qom:

Mir Law . Salvat al-Sha. In rs-i Islm-i rn, edited by Shaykh A mad Abid, 2:339359. Iran: Kitbkhna-yi
a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash a af, 1374 Sh./1995.
rs-i Islm-i rn. 10 vols. Iran: Kitbkhna-i a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash a af, 1373 Sh./1994.
Modarressi Tabatabai, Hossein. Crisis nd Consolid tion in the orm tive Period of Shiite Isl m: Ab J f r Ibn Qib
R nd His Contrib tion to Immite Shite ho ght. Princeton, N.J.: Darwin Press, 1993.

l-

. Sih Maktb Az gh Mu ammad Bdbd dar Sayr va Sulk. V d, no. 246247 (1357): 3542.
Mottahedeh, Roy P. The Mantle of the Prophet: Religion and Politics in Iran. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1985.
Mousavi Bo nordi, Ali. Imm Khomeini va Mukhlfn-i awzav-ash, March 29, 2010.
http://mousavibojnordi.blogfa.com/post-9.aspx.
Mudarris Hshim, Mr Sayyid asan. Shar -i Risl -i Siy r v S l k
Karbs. Chp-i 1. Isfahan: Knn-i Pizhhish, 1997.

ns b Bih ...

mm d Bdbd. Edited by Al

293
Mukhtr, Ri , ed. Risala fi al-Ghin. In Ghin, sq, 1:101184. Chp-i 1. Mrs-i iqh. Qom: Muassisa-yi
Bstn-i Kitb (Markaz-i Intishrt Daftar-i Tablght-i Islm ), 2008.
Mumin Mashhad, Mu ammad. fsr-i Mu mm d min shh d b r J -i S m-i Q rn-i jd. Edited by Al
Mu addis. Ma ma-i Mrs-i rn va Islm. Tehran: Markaz-i Intishrt-i Ilm va arhang, 1983.
n r -yi J njl N siri Gh r vi n D rbr -yi Irfn v Dn, 2011. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDZIQHdfsg&feature=youtube_gdata_player.
Movahhedian Attar, Ali.

f m-i Irfn. Qom: Nashr-i Dnishgh-i Adyn, 2009.

afs, Sad. J st j d r A vl thr-e

Sh./1941.

rd l-Dn A r Nshb r. Tehran: Kitbfursh va Chpkhna-i Iqbl, 1320

Najm al-Dn Rz, Abd Allh ibn Mu ammad. Mir d Al-ibd. Edited by Mu ammad Amn Riy . Ma ma-i
Mutn-i rs; 46. Tehran: Bungh-i Tarjuma va Nashr-i Kitb, 1973.
arq, A mad ibn Mu ammad Mahd. al-Kh in. Edited by Al Akbar Ghaffr. Tehran: Kitbfursh-i Ilmya
Islmya, 1960.
arq, Mu ammad Mahd ibn Ab arr. al-L m Al-ilhy W
Mashhad: Anjuman-i Falsafa, 1978.

l-K limt l-W j . Edited by Jall al-Dn shtiyn.

. Jmi Al-s dt. Edited by Mu ammad Kalntar. 3 vols. Al- aba 4. al- a af: Dr al- umn lil- iba wa-alNashr, n.d.
. Qurrat al-Uyn. In Anthologie Des Philosophes Iraniens: Dep is Le XVIIe Sicle J sq Nos Jo rs. extes Pers ns
Et Arabes Choisis Et Prsents Par Sayyed Jalloddn Ashtiyn. Introduction Analytique Par Henry Corbin., edited
by Jall al-Dn shtiyn and Henry Corbin. Bibliothque Iranienne; No 18-19. Teheran: Departement
diranologie de lInstitut franco-iranien de recherche, 1971.
asaf, Azz al-Dn ibn Mu ammad. jm -i R sil shh r bi-Kitb Al-insn Al-kmil. Edited by Marijan Mol.
Tehran: Anjuman-i rnshins-i arnsa dar Tehran, 1980.
Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the Land of Prophecy. SUNY Series
in Islam. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006.
. Shiism and Sufism: Their Relationship in Essence and in History. Religious Studies 6, no. 3 (1970): 229242.
. Spiritual Movements, Philosophy and Theology in the Safavid Period. In The Cambridge History of Iran:
Timurid and Safavid Periods, edited by Peter Jackson and Laurence Lockhart, 6:656697. Cambridge:

294
Cambridge University Press, 2008. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn3:hul.ebookbatch.CAMHI_batch:9780511467783.

-------. Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the Land of Prophecy. SUNY Series in Islam. Albany:
State University of New York Press, 2006.

. The Garden of Truth: the Vision nd Pr ctice of S fism, Isl ms ystic l r dition. 1st ed. New York: Harper One,
2007.
Na rbd I fahn, Mu ammad hir. Takira-yi Na rbd:Takir t l-Sh r Bih In imm-i R sil,
Ashr. Edited by Mu sin a rbd. Chp-i 1. Tehran: As r, 1999.
ayrz, Sayyid Qu b al-dn Mu ammad. Risl -yi R
Kitbkhna-yi A mad, 1977.

y v

nsh t v

inh j l-Ta rr. Edited by Mu ammad Khv av. Shrz:

ayrz, Umm Salma. J mi l-Kulliyyat. Edited by Mahd Iftikhr. Qom: Bakhshiysh, 2007.
ewman, Andrew J. ayd al-Kashani and the Rejection of the Clergy/State Alliance: Friday Prayer as Politics in
the Safavid Period. In he ost Le rned of the Shi : the Instit tion of the rj qlid, edited by Linda S
Walbridge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
. Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire. Library of Middle East History; V. 5. London: I.B. Tauris, 2006.
. Sufism and Anti-Sufism in Safavid Iran: The Authorship of the
(January 1, 1999): 95108.

adqat al-Sha Revisited. Iran 37

. The Myth of the Clerical Migration to Safawid Iran: Arab Shiite pposition to Al al-Karak and Safawid
Shiism. Die Welt Des Islams 33, no. 1. New Series (April 1, 1993): 66112.
Ohlander, Erik S. Sufism in an Age of Transition: Umar al-S hr
rd nd the Rise of the Isl mic ystic l Brotherhoods.
Islamic History and Civilization, 0929-2403; V. 71. Leiden: Brill, 2008.
liver Scharbrodt. The Qu b as Special Representative of the Hidden Imam: The Conflation of Shii and Sufi
Vilyat in the imatullh rder. In Shii Trends and Dynamics in Modern Times (XVIIIth-XXth Centuries) =
Co r nts Et Dyn miq es Chiites Lpoq e oderne (XVIIIe-XXe Sicles), edited by Denis Hermann and Sabrina
Mervin, 3349. Bibliothque Iranienne; No 72. Beirut: Orient-Institut, 2010.
Orsi, Robert A. The Cambridge Companion to Religious Studies. Cambridge Companions to Religion. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2012.

295
Pazhhish Darbra-yi Mu y Al-dn Ibn Arab, Irfn va Ta avvuf, n.d. http://www.ebnearabi.com/.
Pazouki, Shahram. Prduks-i Ta avvuf azd-i Astd va Shgirdn-i Mull adr. ls f ,
Dnishk d -yi Ad biyyt v Ul m-i Insn Dnishgh-i Tehran, no. 12 (2006): 93108.

l-nm

j ll -yi

Perry, John R. Karim Khan Zand. Makers of the Muslim World. Oxford: Oneworld, 2006.
Pourjavady, Reza. Philosophy in Early Safavid Iran: Najm al-Dn
m d l-N yr nd His Writings. Islamic
Philosophy, Theology, and Science; V. 82. Leiden: Brill, 2011.
pseudo-Ardabl. dq t l-Sh . Edited by diq asanzda and Al Akbar Zamnnizhd. 2 vols. Chp-i 1. Qom:
An riyn, 1998.
Pourjavady, Nasrullah. Ishrq v irfn: ql -h v N qd-h. Chp-i 1. Markaz-i Nashr-i Dnishgh (Series) Irfn;
3. Tehran: Markaz-i Nashr-i Dnishgh, 1380 Sh./2001.
Qazvn, Abd al- ab ibn Mu ammad. tmm Am l l-mil. Edited by A mad usayn. Min Makh t Maktabat
yat Allh al-Marash al-mma; 16. Qom: Maktabat yat Allh al-Marash, 1987.
Qazvn, Ab al- asan. vid l- f viyy . Edited by Maryam Mr A mad. Tehran: Muassasa-yi Mu lat va
Ta qqt-i arhang, 1988.
Qodsi, Saber. irfn r, T avvuf ah, March 15, 2006. http://www.kherghe.blogfa.com/post-77.aspx.
Quinn, Sholeh Alysia. Coronation arratives in Safavid Chronicles. In History and Historiography of post-Mongol
Central Asia and the Middle East: Studies in Honor of John E. Woods, edited by Judith Pfeiffer and Ernest
Tucker, 31131. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006.
Qum, Mu ammad hir. Tu fat al-Akhyr. Tehran: Chp-i Mu avvar, 1958.
. Shish Risl -i rs. Edited by Jall al-Dn usayn Mu addis. Tehran, 1960.
Qum, Abbs ibn Mu ammad Ri .

ft Al-jinn. Beirut: Dr I y al-Turth al-Arab, n.d.

Ra av, Mu ammad Zamn. a fat Al-rshd. In rs-i Islm-i rn, edited by Rasl Jafariyn, 2:268272. Iran:
Kitbkhna-i a rat-i yat Allh al-Um Marash a af, 1373 Sh./1994.
Rz, akhr al-Dn Mu ammad ibn Umar. al- fsr Al-k br. Al- aba 3. Beirut: Dr I y al-Turs al-Arab, n.d.

296
Ridgeon, Lloyd V. J. Sufi Castigator: Ahmad Kasravi and the Iranian Mystical Tradition. Routledge Sufi Series; 19.
London: Routledge, 2006.
Rizvi, Sa ad H. A Sufi Theology it for a Sh King: The Gawhar-i Murd of Abd al-Razzq Lh (d. 1072/16612). In Sufism and Theology, edited by Shihadeh Aymen, 8388. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,
2007.
.

ll dr Shr : His Life and Works and the Sources for Safavid Philosophy. Journal of Semitic Studies.
Supplement; 18. Oxford: Oxford University Press on behalf of the University of Manchester, 2007.

. Philosophy as a Way of Life in the World of Islam: Applying Hadot to the Study of Mull adr Shrz (d.
1635). Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 75, no. 01 (2012): 3345.
Royce, William Ronald. Mir Masum ali Shah and the imat Allahi Revival 1776-77 to 1796-97: A Study of Sufism
and Its pponents in Late Eighteenth Century Iran. Ph.D., Princeton University, 1979.
http://search.proquest.com.ezpprod1.hul.harvard.edu/pqdtft/docview/302926950/citation/1381ED8D3CC5050DD00/1?accountid=11311.
Rousta, Muhammad Reza.

fv t-i Irfn v

vv f. Tehran: Rh-i kn, 2009.

adr al-Dn Shrz, Mu ammad b. Ibrhm. Breaking the Idols of Ignorance: Admonition of the Soi-Disant Sufi.
Translated by Mahdi Dasht Bozorgi and Sayyed Khalil Toussi. London: ICAS Press, 2008.
. al-ikma al-

t ly f l-Asfr l-Aqly . Tahrn: Shirkat Dr al-Marif al-Islmya, 1958.

. al-Sh vhid l-R b biyy f l- nhij l-S l kiyy . Edited by Jall al-Dn shtiyn. Chp-i 2. Mashhad:
Markaz-i Nashr-i Dnishghi, 1981.
. Kasr A nm Al-jhily . Edited by Mu sin Jahngr. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Bunyd ikmat-i Islm-i adr, 2002.
. Risl -yi Sih A l. Edited by Seyyed Hossein asr. Tehran: Mawl, 1961.
adr Khuy, Al. db al-Sayr va al-Sulk. P ym-i awza: N shry -i Sh r-yi l-i awza-i Ilmy ., no. 6 (1373):
99118.
adq, Manchihr. rkh-i k m v Ur f-yi

t khkhir. Tehran: ikmat, 2002.

. Yagnag Ya Dugnag-ye Ta avvuf B irfn. K yhn-i Andsh , no. 54 (1994): 8690.

Safa, Zabihullah. rkh-i Ad byt d r rn. Chp-i 6. Tehran: irdaws b hamkr-i Adb, 1984.

297

. Ishra-yi Kth Bi Dstn Guzr va Dstn Guzrn T Dawrn-i Safav. Irn-Shins, no. 3 (1999): p 463
471.
afAlshh, asan. Irfn l- qq. Tehran: Muhamad, 1954.
Sam, Kayvn, and Manchihr adq. D Risl d r rkh-i J dd-i Ta avvuf-i rn. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Pzhang, 1991.
Sargent, John. A Memoir of the Rev. Henry Martyn, B. D.: L te ello of St. Johns College, C mbridge, nd the Chaplain to the
Honourable East India Company. Boston: Perkins & Marvin, 1831.
Schimmel, Annemarie. Mystical Dimensions of Islam. Chapel Hill,: University of North Carolina Press, 1975.
Schmidt, L. E. The Making of Modern Mysticism. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 71, no. 2 (June 1,
2003): 273302.
Sefatgol, Mansur. Skhtr-i Nihd v Andsh -i Dn d r rn-i A r-i f v: rkh-i Ta vv lt-i Dn-i rn d r S d -hyi D h m D v d h m-i Hijr-i Q m r. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Ras, 2002.
Shd, Muhammad Pdshh. Farhang-i An ndrj. Thran: Kitabkhana-yi Khayym, 1956.
Shahd al-Thn, Zayn al-Dn ibn Al. Munyat Al-m rd f Ad b Al-m fd W -al-m st fd. Edited by Reza Mokhtari. Alaba 1. Beirut: al-Amra lil- iba wa-al-Nashr wa-al-Tawz, 2006.
Shml, Val Qul ibn Dvd Qul. Qi a Al-khqn. Edited by asan Sdt ir. Tehran: Szmn-i Chp va
Intishrt-i Vizrat-i arhang va Irshd-i Islm, 1371 Sh./1992.
Shrz Ma m Al Shh, Mu ammad Ma m.
Tehran: Kitbkhna-yi Brn, 1960.

riq l- qiq. Edited by Mu ammad Jafar Mah b. 3 vols.

Shrvn, Zayn al-bidn. B stn l-Siy a. Tehran: Krkhna-i abb Allh, 1897.
. Riy

l-Siy a. Edited by mid Rabbn. ihrn: Kitbfurrsh-i Sad, 1960.

Shushtar, r Allh ibn Abd Allh.

jlis Al-m minn. Chp-i 4. Tehran: Kitbfursh-i Islmya, 1377 Sh./1998.

Sipint, Abd al- usayn. rkhch -yi A qf-i Isfahan. Isfahan: Intishrt-i Idra-i Kull-i Awqf, Mantaqa-i Isfahan,
1967.

298
Soanes, Catherine, and Angus Stevenson, eds. Oxford Dictionary of English. 2nd /. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2003. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:hul.ebook:ORO_0198613474.
Stevenson, Angus, ed. Gnosis oun. Oxford Dictionary of English. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University
Press, n.d. http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezpprod1.hul.harvard.edu/views/ENTRY.html?entry=t140.e0339470&srn=1&ssid=1173748542#FIRSTHIT.
Stewart, Devin J. Islamic Legal Orthodoxy: Twelver Shiite Responses to the Sunni Legal System. Salt Lake City: University
of Utah Press, 1998.
. otes on the Migration of mil Scholars to Safavid Iran. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 55, no. 2 (April 1,
1996): 81103.
Sviri, Sara. akm Tirmidh and the Malmat Movement in Early Sufism. In The Heritage of Sufism, edited by
Leonard Lewisohn and David Morgan, 1:583613. Oxford: Oneworld, 1999.
Swan, George. An Outline for the Study of Dervishism Covering Six Elementary Lectures on the Popular Development of
Sufism or Mohammedan Mysticism. Cairo, 1925.
Tbanda, rAl. shin-yi b Irfn v

vv f. Tehran: Intishrt-i aqqat, 2001.

ab ab, Mu ammad usayn. Bidy t Al- ikma. Qom: Muassasat al-Nashr al-Islm al-Tbia li-Jamat alMudarrisn, 1985.
. Nihy t Al- ikma. Qom: Muassasat al-Nashr al-Islm al-Tbia li-Jamat al-Mudarrisn, 1984.
. The Elements of Islamic Metaphysics: (Bidy t l-ikma). Translated by Al Ql Qar . London: ICAS, 2003.
Tabrz Isfahn, a ib al-Din Riza. N r l-Hidy . Tihran: Chapkhana-i Ilmi, 1946.
. S b l-

sn. Tihran: Intishrt-i Khnaqh-i A mad, 1981.

Tadayyun, Mahdi. adqat al-Sha y Kshif al- aqq.

rif 6 (1364 Sh./1985): 105121.

Taheri, Muhammad Ali. Irfn-i K yhn ( lq ). Qom: Intishrt-i Andsha-yi Mndagr, 2009.
Tavana, Jafar. Sarchashma-h-yi Ta avvuf. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Rh-i kn, 1386 Sh./1997.
Tehrani, Javad. Arif v S f chih ig y nd. Tehran: Nashr-i fg, 2011.

299

s, a r al-Dn Mu ammad ibn Mu ammad. Aw f Al- shrf. Edited by Mu ammad Mudarris. Translated by
Mu ammad ibn Al Jur n. Tehran: Kitbfursh-i Islmiyya, n.d.
Tustar, Abd Allh ibn r al-Dn. al-Ij l-K br . Edited by Mu ammad Samm ir. Al- aba 1. Min
Makh t Maktabat Ayat Allh al-Marash al-mma; 23. Qom: Maktabat al-Marash, 1989.
Va d al-Zamn Qazvn, Mu ammad hir. Abbs-nm . Edited by Ibrahim Dihgan. Ark: Dvd, 1951.
. rkh-i J hnr-yi Abbs. Edited by Sad Mr Mu ammad diq and I sn Ishrq. Tehran: Pizhhishgh-i
Ulm-i Insn va Mu lat-i arhang, 1383 Sh./1994.
Varzi, Roxanne. Warring Souls: Youth, Media, and Martyrdom in Post-revolution Iran / c Roxanne Varzi. Durham: Duke
University Press, 2006.
Versluis, Arthur. What Is Esoteric? Methods in the Study of Western Esotericism. Esoterica IV (2002): 115.
World Report 2011: Iran | Human Rights Watch, n.d. http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2011/iran.
Yazdanpanah, Yadollah. bn v U l- Irfn-i N
Imm Khomeini, 2009.

r. Qom: Intishtt-i Muassasa-yi mzish va Pazhhish-yi

ahab Parvz, Shams al-dn. Takirat Al-A liy, 1953.

Zhid, usayn. Silsilat al-Nasab Safaviyya: Nasab-Nama-yi Padisahan-i Ba `azimat-i Safavi. Publications Iranschhr; 6.
Birlin: Caphana-i Iransahr, 1964.
Zri Mihrvarz, Abbs. Pazhhish-i darbra-yi Kndn-i Dihdr. Aftabir.com, n.d.
http://www.aftabir.com/articles/view/applied_sciences/geograohy_history/c12c1216705220_history_p
1.php/%D9%BE%DA%98%D9%88%D9%87%D8%B4%DB%8C%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AF%D9%87%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1.
Zarrnkb, Abd al- usayn. D nbl -i J stj d r

avvuf-i rn. Chp-i 1. Tehran: Amr Kabr, 1362 Sh./1983.

Zilfi, Madeline C. The Kadizadelis: Discordant Revivalism in Seventeenth-Century Istanbul. Journal of Near Eastern
Studies 45, no. 4 (October 1, 1986): 251269.