Iranian Studies

ISSN: 0021-0862 (Print) 1475-4819 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cist20

Beyond Dogma: Rumi's Teachings on Friendship

with God and Early Sufi Theories

Abolfazl Moshiri

To cite this article: Abolfazl Moshiri (2014) Beyond Dogma: Rumi's Teachings on Friendship with
God and Early Sufi Theories, Iranian Studies, 47:4, 658-662, DOI: 10.1080/00210862.2014.906208

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00210862.2014.906208

Published online: 02 May 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 146

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cist20
658 Reviews

that Persian term adab, like humanism, might well have outworn its usefulness: “The
current condition of its self-worlding keeps moving from one creative register to
another—from film to fiction, poetry, drama, photography, and any number of
other visual, performing, and literary arts, all perceived, conceived, and delivered on
a vastly expansive public domain” (p. 326). The vital and dynamic public cultural
sphere Dabashi describes might demand new conceptual frames of reference. And
those who undertake the task will have much to learn from Dabashi’s laudable rendi-
tion of the history of Persian literature.

Nasrin Rahimieh
University of California, Irvine
© 2014, Nasrin Rahimieh
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00210862.2014.906209

Beyond Dogma: Rumi’s Teachings on Friendship with God and Early Sufi
Theories, Jawid Mojaddedi, New York: Oxford University Press, 2012, ISBN 978-
019536923-6, 256 pp. (hardback)

Mojaddedi’s book Beyond Dogma is a challenging and poignant work, which discusses
the various issues surrounding the concept of Friendship with God (velayat) and its
relation to prophethood (nabovvat) in the Sufi literature. He focuses on the writings
of celebrated Persian mystic Jalal al-Din Rumi (d. 1273) as well as the works of the
early Sufi authors. While the book is written in a very accessible language, to fully
appreciate its arguments one requires a certain level of knowledge in both Islamic
theology and Sufism, as well as a good grasp of Rumi’s major works to comprehend
it. Since the book is mostly dedicated to one central theme, namely Rumi’s teaching
on the Friends of God (Owlia’), the mind of the reader does not wander off to differ-
ent topics as it often does with other works on Rumi. Another remarkable aspect of
Mojaddedi’s book is his approach to the study of Rumi’s hermeneutics. Unlike some
of the new scholars who rely heavily on the modern European philosophies of Derrida,
Foucault and Lacan to reconstruct Rumi’s work, Mojaddedi remains loyal to the tra-
ditional approaches of Sufi studies to present his argument. He draws his conclusions
and interpretations solely from early Sufi works as well as Rumi’s own writings. This
methodology, which requires the mastery of all of Rumi’s works and early Sufi texts, a
skill that Mojaddedi clearly possesses, is perhaps the best way to unlock the mysteries
of the Sufi hermeneutics without reference to modern Western philosophies.
In chapter 1, titled “Sources,” Mojaddedi introduces the major sources for his
research and provides the grounds for choosing these particular works. These
sources include two of Rumi’s works, Fihe Ma Fih and the Masnavi, and six major
Sufi treaties which include: Kharraz’s al-Kashf va al-Bayan, Hakim Termezi’s Sirat
al-Owlia’, Sarraj’s Ketab al-Luma‘ fi Tasavvof, Kalabadi’s al-Ta‘arrof le-Mazhab-e
ahl-e Tassavof, Qushairi’s Resaleh and Hojviri’s Kashf al-Mahjub. In each chapter
 Reviews 659

the author first explains the subject matter from Rumi’s point of view, then he moves
on to find the supporting evidence for the same subject in these six early Sufi texts and
finally he compares Rumi’s hermeneutics to those of early Sufis. While the author’s
choice of sources and the method by which he interprets certain passages from
these texts might suggest that his argument is somewhat skewed to serve his overall
hypothesis, nonetheless it shows his comprehensive and attentive approach to the con-
troversial issue of prophethood versus sainthood and its manifestation in Rumi’s work.
Mojaddedi should be commended for drawing many anecdotes from the lesser known
work of Rumi, Fihe Ma Fih, and holding it on the same level of significance as the
Masnavi. In regard to the dating of Fihe Ma Fih, Mojaddedi argues that it was possibly
compiled before the Masnavi and he provides several examples to support this hypoth-
esis. The author does not explain why such dating is important and what benefit could
be drawn from the supposition that Fihe Ma Fih was compiled before Masnavi. In
spite of his examples there is no conclusive attestation that the compilation of
Masnavi took place after Fihe Ma Fih. Some of the dignitaries whose names are men-
tioned in Fihe Ma Fih, including Rumi’s personal physician Akmal al-Din-e Tabib
and the celebrated Rum Seljuk vizier Mu’in al-Din Suleiman Parvaneh, were alive
after Rumi’s passing which indicates the possibility that the sermons of Fihe Ma
Fih could have been given contemporaneously with the composition of the Masnavi.
The second chapter, entitled “Friendship with God in Relation to Prophethood,” is
dedicated to expounding on different aspect of the relationship of the Friend of God
(vali) with the Prophets. The author methodically investigates the historiography and
development of the title “seal of the prophets” in reference to the Prophet Muham-
mad from a theological perspective as well as within the early Sufi apologetic writings.
In his assessment he also presents a formidable discussion regarding the diverse
opinions on claims and counterclaims concerning the superiority of the Friends of
God to the Prophets in the early Sufi literature. After examining the works of
several early mystical texts, Mojaddedi concludes that although most of these texts
reject, in one way or another, the idea of the superiority or equality of the Friends
of God with the Prophets, nonetheless the vagueness remains in their refutation of
the claim that the Friends of God hold the higher rank.
As Mojaddedi rightly states, the Prophets and the Friends of God (anbia’ va owlia’)
are paired together on some occasions in Rumi’s writings. He also suggests that Rumi
hinted that the Prophets, due to their preoccupation with the welfare of the commu-
nity, might not have had the luxury of an intimate and constant relationship with
God, such as Friends of God enjoy. Mojaddedi additionally refers to a verse in the
Masnavi in which a Sufi master is described as being like the Prophet of his time.
However, Rumi never makes the claim that a Prophet is like the Friend of God
(vali) of his time. This would suggest that it is always the Friend of God who
aspires to become like a Prophet to the people of his time and not vice versa,
which indicates the higher statues of the Prophets. In another section, when using
a passage from Fihe Ma Fih in which Prophet Mohammad, Moses and Khezr were
compared, Prophet Mohammad complains about his preoccupation with the commu-
nity as a hindrance to complete friendship with God. Mojaddedi concludes that
660 Reviews

because of this passage Rumi consequently saw no virtue in the preoccupation with the
community. Yet in the Masnavi Rumi indicates that the greatness of the Prophets is
due to the hardships that they endure during their encounter with the community and
therefore their souls are superior to all men.1
Finally, while Mojaddedi points out that Rumi often pairs the Prophets and the
Friends of God, he does not indicate many other occasions on which these two cat-
egories appear separately. In fact, the number of episodes in the Masnavi concerning
the lives of the Prophets greatly outnumbers the number of occasions on which even
the greatest of Friends of God such as Bayazid-e Bastami, Joneyd-e Baghdadi or Hallaj
are mentioned. Mohammad, Moses, Abraham, Jesus and Joseph are the most frequent
names repeated in the Masnavi, which clearly indicates that Rumi viewed the lives and
the stories of Prophets as far superior in inspiring and guiding the wayfarer on the Sufi
path. One thing to bear in mind is that in his Divan, Rumi shows a more sympathetic
view of the Friends of God than the Prophets, and Mojaddedi would have benefited by
investigating many of the similes and symbolism of the Divan which are full of ecstatic
utterances regarding Rumi’s greatest Friend of God, Shams-e Tabrizi. In the Divan
Shams is elevated by Rumi to a rank in divinity that is not attainable even by the great-
est of the Prophets. These descriptions of a Friend of God cannot be found in any
other works of Rumi.
In chapter 3, which is entitled “Divine Communication,” Mojaddedi discusses
various aspects of the divine communication (vahy) and its relation to both Prophets
and Friends of God. He starts the chapter by perceptively stating that Rumi claimed
his work to be comparable to the Qur’an due to the fact that both texts were divinely
inspired. He then examines the origin of early mystical interpretations of the concept
of divine communication in the six early Sufi sources and the way they differentiate
between Prophets and Friends of God on the issue of revelation. He concludes that
all of these early Sufi sources were somewhat ambiguous about declaring the superior-
ity of the Prophets’ revelations over that of the Friends of God. This ambiguity,
Mojaddedi argues, became the basis for the later Sufi writers like Rumi who took a
more assertive approach in claiming that there is no difference between the Prophets
and the Friends of God regarding revelation, and that although the line of prophet-
hood might have been sealed, God still communicates with man through His friends.
In chapter 4, entitled “The Friend of God and the Sharia,” Mojaddedi examines the
views of the Friends of God on religious orthodoxy as it was discussed in the early Sufi
writings as well as in Rumi’s work. Although the author rightly relates many confron-
tations of Rumi with the jurists of his time, what he fails to fully pay attention to is the
fact that Rumi himself was a grand jurist (mofti) by training and according to Aflaki
his concern for religion was so deep that he even gave a religious verdict ( fatva) to a
questioner during a Sufi dance procession (sama‘).2 There are also several episodes
both in Fihe Ma Fih and Masnavi which clearly indicate Rumi’s interest in minute
details of religious jurisprudence ( feqh). As for the whole episode of Shams and his

1
Masnavi, 4: 100–101
2
Shams al-Din Ahmad Aflaki, Manaqeb al-‘Arefin, ed. Tahsin Yaziji (Tehran, 1375/1996), 1: 325.
 Reviews 661

wine drinking and the way it was rationalized and esotericized by Rumi, it appears to
be a fanciful hyperbole on Aflaki’s part. After all, by the time that Aflaki was writing
Manaqeb al-‘Arefin, Rumi’s grandson Fereydun Amir ‘Aref-e Chalabi was addicted to
wine, which troubled many people, among them the successor to Hosam-e al-Din-e
Chalabi, ‘Ala al-Din-e Amasavi, who admonished Amir ‘Aref for his behavior.3
Aflaki relates that at one point he himself was ordered by Borhan al-Din Elyas
Pasha, the grandson of Sultan Valad, to fetch some more wine for the banquet.4
Hence it is obvious that for Aflaki, who never saw Rumi and lived in a milieu in
which wine drinking and the malamati lifestyle were becoming a prevalent feature
for Rumi’s descendants, inventing an episode in which wine drinker Shams would
be defended by Rumi is understandable. These sort of after-the-fact stories with
their hyperbolical and apocryphal twists, which are all too common in the Persian
hagiographical tradition, were used by Aflaki not only show the depth of Rumi’s
love for Shams, but also to portray the drinking habits of Rumi’s grandson as a per-
missible and esoteric act. In these episodes Aflaki defends the wine drinking of
Rumi’s grandchildren by claiming that they did not pay any attention to the dogmatic
aspects of religion and that wine drinking did not really influence them much. This is
exactly the same sort of justification that he gives for the fanciful episode concerning
the wine drinking of Shams and the way Rumi rationalized it.
Like many of the earlier Sufi sayings, Rumi’s writings on some subjects often seem
paradoxical. For instance, as Mojadeddi rightly noted, while Rumi was critical of the
religious jurists who are trapped within the boundaries of permissible (halal) and for-
bidden (haram), yet at the same time he was also making fun of the gluttonous and
lazy Sufis who were pretentious and pompous. It is an irrefutable fact that Rumi was
against any established dogma in religious orthodoxy as well as in Sufism which pre-
vented the mind and spirit freely experiencing the divine. References in the Masnavi in
which Rumi ridicules and debases the exoteric aspects of Islamic feqh are abundant.
While the author rightly asserts that Rumi did not adhere to some of the dogmatic
formulas of the jurists of his time, especially when it came to issues such as the pro-
hibition of music, nonetheless there is no strong evidence for Rumi trampling on
or belittling of any laws of the Shari‘ah or jurisprudence, such as the consumption
of wine.
Chapter 5, the final chapter before the conclusion, is entitled “The Friend of God
and Miracles.” In it the author examines the question of miracles and their manifes-
tation in relation to the Friend of God and the Prophet. Unlike the controversial issue
of “Seal of the Prophets,” which angered the orthodox establishment and created many
problems for the apologist Sufi writer to retract, Mojadeddi suggests that when it came
to the concept of miracles (mo‘jezat), a term that in Islam is referred to as one of the
signs of prophethood, the religious scholars were more tolerant. By performing such
miracles Sufis reinforced the popular belief and drew convert to Islam by claiming
that the true follower of Muhammad (i.e. Sufis) were also capable of performing

3
Ibid., 2: 873.
4
Ibid., 2: 937–8.
662 Reviews

such extraordinarily miracles similar to the ones performed by the Prophets of other
religions and hence proving the superiority of Islam. The author also describes the
various stages of miracles and explains that although early Sufis might have had
some reservations about labelling the supernatural acts of the Friends of God as mira-
cles, Rumi did not differentiate between a miracle (mo‘jezeh) of a Prophet and a Sufi’s
thaumaturgy (keramat) simply because he saw the same divine source for both.
Rumi until the last days of his life remained a practicing jurist ( faqih) as well as a
staunch proponent and propagator of the Ash‘arite school of thought. Yet he saw spiri-
tuality as something above the petty rulings of the jurists. By paying attention to the
title of Mojaddedi’s book the reader can perhaps resolve the contentious issue of
Shari‘ah versus mysticism. What Rumi offers is not forsaking the law of Shari’ah,
but rather striving to find the true path toward the Truth. Rumi encourages a
search for the true Friend of God who will help to look “beyond dogma.” For him
simple following of the dogma of the Shari‘ah, although necessary, would not suffi-
ciently equip the Sufi wayfarer (salek) to reach the ultimate Truth. Hence while
Shari‘ah was important to Rumi, it was neither sufficient nor complete in the eyes
of the Friend of God. As Mojaddedi hints, what Rumi also boldly brings into the
picture for the first time is taking the same criticism which was raised by the jurists
against Sufism back to the law and claiming that it is not mysticism but the kind
of Shari‘ah made by such jurists, which is incongruent with the true message of
Islam. By doing this Rumi attempts to purify the Shari‘ah’s dogmatic, absolutist
and authoritative worldview and turn it into a spiritual journey which according to
him is the true root of Islam, and this message is at the heart of Mojaddedi’s book.

Abolfazl Moshiri
University of Toronto, Canada
© 2014, Abolfazl Moshiri
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00210862.2014.906208

Superstition as Ideology in Iranian Politics: From Majlesi to Ahmadinejad

(Cambridge Middle East Studies), Ali Rahnema, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2011, ISBN 978-0-521-18221-8 (pbk), 334 pp.

The chief objective of Ali Rahnema’s latest book is to address the role of “superstition”
in Iranian politics and in this respect it is not merely a work of scholarship, but also a
highly engaged work in its own right. The influence of what today has come to be
known as “religious intellectualism” or “religious reformism,” particularly Ali Shari′ ati,
is readily evident in Rahnema’s approach to the question of “superstition” in Shi′ ism
and the oeuvre of Mohammad Baqer Majlesi in particular. To readers familiar with
Rahnema’s seminal biography of Shari′ ati, this book might appear to comprise part
of a larger personal and academic project, which endeavors to elaborate the “rational”