The Kashf al-mahjúb: The oldest Persian treatise on Súfiism — John Shaqi
The Kashf al-mahjúb: The oldest Persian treatise on SúfiismHujviri, ‘Ali ibn ‘Usman
Islamic
The Kashf al-mahjúb: The oldest Persian treatise on Súfiism
Hujviri, ‘Ali ibn ‘Usman
Sufism -- Early works to 1800
The most remarkable chapter in the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ is the fourteenth,
“Concerning the Doctrines held by the different sects of Ṣúfís,” in
which the author enumerates twelve mystical schools and explains the
special doctrine of each.[12] So far as I know, he is the first writer
to do this. Only one of the schools mentioned by him, namely, that of
the Malámatís, seems to be noticed in earlier books on Ṣúfiism; such
brief references to the other schools as occur in later books, for
example in the _Tadhkirat al-Awliyá_, are probably made on his
authority. The question may be asked, “Did these schools really exist,
or were they invented by al-Hujwírí in his desire to systematize the
theory of Ṣúfiism?” I see no adequate ground at present for the latter
hypothesis, which involves the assumption that al-Hujwírí made precise
statements that he must have known to be false. It is very likely,
however, that in his account of the special doctrines which he
attributes to the founder of each school he has often expressed his own
views upon the subject at issue and has confused them with the original
doctrine. The existence of these schools and doctrines, though lacking
further corroboration,[13] does not seem to me incredible; on the
contrary, it accords with what happened in the case of the Mu`tazilites
and other Muḥammadan schismatics. Certain doctrines were produced and
elaborated by well-known Shaykhs, who published them in the form of
tracts or were content to lecture on them until, by a familiar process,
the new doctrine became the pre-eminent feature of a particular school.
Other schools might then accept or reject it. In some instances sharp
controversy arose, and the novel teaching gained so little approval that
it was confined to the school of its author or was embraced only by a
small minority of the Ṣúfí brotherhood. More frequently it would, in the
course of time, be drawn into the common stock and reduced to its proper
level. Dr. Goldziher has observed that Ṣúfiism cannot be regarded as a
regularly organized sect within Islam, and that its dogmas cannot be
compiled into a regular system.[14] That is perfectly true, but after
allowing for all divergences there remains a fairly definite body of
doctrine which is held in common by Ṣúfís of many different shades and
is the result of gradual agglomeration from many different minds.
Footnote 12:
A summary of these doctrines will be found in the abstract of a paper
on “The Oldest Persian Manual of Ṣúfiism” which I read at Oxford in
1908 (_Trans. of the Third International Congress for the History of
Religions_, i, 293-7).
Footnote 13:
Some of al-Hujwírí’s twelve sects reappear at a later epoch as orders
of dervishes, but the pedigree of those orders which trace their
descent from ancient Ṣúfís is usually fictitious.
Footnote 14:
_JRAS._, 1904, p. 130.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account