Haravī, Amīr Husaynī

harav{, am{r `usayn{ 147 thought also to bring baraka to their sponsor, to those in attendance, and to the ceremonial area itself. Today, the public performances of the mādsha have entered Moroccan “folklore” and become tourist attractions. They participate, for example, in the annual music festival in Essaouira. Bibliography Joseph Herber, Les Hamadcha et les Dghoughiyyin, Hespéris 3 (1923), 217–36; Georges Drague (Georges Spillmann), Esquisse d’histoire religieuse du Maroc, Paris [1951]; Émile Dermenghem, Le culte des saints dans l’Islam maghrébin, Paris [1954]7; Vincent Crapanzano, The Hamadsha, in Nikki R. Keddie (ed.), Saints, scholars, and Sufis (Berkeley 1972), 327–48; Vincent Crapanzano, The amadsha. A study in Moroccan ethnopsychiatry, Berkeley [1973]; Vincent Crapanzano, Mohammed and Dawia, in Vincent Crapanzano and Vivian Garrison (eds.), Case studies in spirit possession (New York 1976), 141–76; Vincent Crapanzano, Tuhami. Portrait of a Moroccan, Chicago 1980; Mu ammed bin Ja far al-Kattānī, Salwat al-anfās wa mu ādathat al-akyās bi-man uqbira min ulamā wa-l- ula ā bi-Fās, 3 vols. (Casablanca 2004 (1887)), 404–5. Vincent Crapanzano Haravī, Amīr usaynī Amīr Fakhr al-Sādāt Sayyid Rukn al-Dīn usayn b. Ālim b. asan usaynī Ghūrī Haravī, a lesser-known Persian ūfī poet of the seventh-eighth/ thirteenth-fourteenth centuries, popularly known as Amīr usaynī or Mīr usaynī Sādāt (with the takhallu , or pen name, usaynī), was born in the village of Ghuziv, in Ghūr, a mountainous area near Herat in modern-day Afghanistan ( afā, 3/2: 752; Māyil Haravī, 1). The date of his birth is disputed. afā gives it as circa 671/1272, but two more recent scholars Sayyid Mu ammad Turābī (in Haravī, Mathnawīhā, introduction, 1) and Najīb Māyil Haravī (24) basing their reckoning on Furūgh ikmat’s Ph.D. dissertation on Haravī, give the date as some three decades earlier, between 641/1243 and 646/1248. This earlier date seems more reasonable since Haravī composed a panegyric on Shaykh Bahā al-Dīn Zakariyyā Multānī (d. 661/1262; Nizami, “Bahā al-Dīn Zakariyyā,” EI2) in the introduction to his Kanz al-rumūz (Mathnawīhā, 23–4), where he declares Multānī to be his master (verse 112). Hence, had the poet been born as late as 671/1272, he could not have been Multānī’s disciple. But if, on the other hand, we place his birth date circa 641–6/1243–8, it is reasonable to assume that he could have been initiated in his late teens by Multānī, who was then in his declining years: (see also Chīma, 40). Abd al-Ra mān Jāmī (d. 898/1492), the great poet and ūfī master of Herat (Nafa āt, 603), gives the date of Haravī’s death as 16 Shawwāl 718/11 December 1318; according to Dawlatshāh (249), he died on the same day a year later, that is, on 16 Shawwāl 719/30 November 1319. K. A. Nizami (“ usaynī Sādāt Amīr,” EI2), however, asserts both these dates to be incorrect, claiming that the poem Zād al-musāfirīn (“Wayfarer’s Provisions”) was completed in 729/1328. Echoing this view, Chīma (44) likewise cites a chronogrammatic verse from an Indian manuscript of this mathnawī, which gives 729/1328 as its date of completion. But in the critical edition compiled from five ancient manuscripts of Zād al-musāfirīn edited by Turabī, no such line appears, even as a genuine variant version in the other manuscripts, so Nizami’s postulation of a later death date is probably incorrect. Māyil Haravī (2) cites a couplet inscribed on Haravī’s 148 tombstone in Herat, which states that he died on 16 Shawwāl 718 (the same date given by Jāmī), so we must assume that date to be correct. Of Haravī’s affiliation to a ūfī order ( arīqa, “way”), only the bare essentials are known. Inasmuch as Haravī’s spiritual master Bahā al-Dīn Zakariyyā Multānī was a direct disciple of Shihāb al-Dīn Umar Suhrawardī (d. 632/1234) (as afā, 753, observes), Haravī’s chain of initiation goes directly back to founder of the Suhrawardiyya. According to Jāmī (whose account of this topic is followed by most other authorities), Haravī in his adolescence fell in with a group of wandering dervishes ( javāliqiyān) passing through Herat and ended up accompanying them on their journey to India. When the troupe reached Multān, they were entertained by Shaykh Multānī, who in a vision perceived the precocious genius of young Haravī, “and so took him out of the wild dervishes’ company, and educated him until he attained sublime spiritual degrees,” as Jāmī (Nafa āt, 603) puts it. However, in his Ta rīkh-i Firishta, the Indian historian Mu ammad Qāsim Firishta (d. 1032/1623) claims Haravī went to Multān in the company of his father on an educational field trip (Sul ānzāda, 1: 523). Later on in his account, Jāmī (603) elaborates that “this is what is popularly known about him, although in some books I have seen it written that he was a disciple of Shaykh Rukn al-Dīn Abū l-Fat , who was a disciple of his father Shaykh adr al-Dīn who was a disciple of his own father Shaykh Bahā al-Dīn Zakariyyā Multānī.” Writing at the end of the ninth/fifteenth century, Mu ammad Lāhījī (d. 912/1507) (Mafātī , 32) describes Haravī as the disciple as well as the successor (khalīfa) of Shaykh Zakariyyā Multānī (he was in fact one of harav{, am{r `usayn{ Multānī’s successors: see Trimingham, Appendix C). Māyil Haravī (11) agrees with Jāmī’s reconsidered opinion, who had identified him as a disciple of both Multānī and his son adr al-Dīn. After spending a number of years subject to discipline under Shaykh Zakariyyā Multānī, Haravī returned to Herat, serving the rest of his life as a representative of the Suhrawardī Order (Haravī, Mathnawīhā, introduction, 4). Although we know that he spent most of his life in Herat (Sul ānzāda, 523), few other details of his biography are known. He praised several local rulers in his poetry, among whom may be mentioned the Indian monarch Fīrūzshāh Khaljī (r. 689–95/1290–6), who was of Afghan origin and Ghiyāth al-Dīn Kart I, who ruled the Herat region from 707/1308 to 729/1329 (Māyil Haravī, 1 7–9), but it is evident, as Māyil Haravī puts it, that “he was a man of the ūfī khānaqāh, not one to frequent the prince’s court” (Shar -i āl, j). Although according to his prose work Nuzhat al-arwā (“Spirits’ Delight”), he did travel to India (Māyil Haravī, 11), it is not clear precisely which areas he visited. From a tale cited by the poet about his father in the Zād al-musāfirīn (verses 300– 6), we know that he grew up in a learned family where ūfism and arīqa-centered subjects were constantly discussed. Of Haravī’s wife and family, we know nothing. His granddaughter married the great ūfī master Shāh Ni matu’llāh Walī (d. 834/1431) (Graham, 183). Apart from his evident admiration for the celebrated Persian ūfī poet Ma mūd Shabistarī (d. after 737/1337), in posing to him the fifteen theosophical queries which inspired the Gulshan-i rāz (“Garden of Mystery”), nothing is known of his relations with other contemporary ūfīs (except his harav{, am{r `usayn{ master Zakariyyā Multānī). Although Dawlatshāh’s description (246) of Haravī’s undertaking a retreat (khalwat) with the celebrated Persian ūfī poet Fakhr al-Dīn Irāqī (d. 688/1289) and the Persian ūfī master Aw ād al-Dīn Kirmānī (d. 635/1238) is historically anachronistic, the tale does possess a kind of verisimilitude that cannot be completely dismissed, considering the similarity of the theosophical teachings of these masters. Haravī’s ūfī humility is everywhere apparent in his works. He claims to have frequented Christian cloisters ( awma a), been a student in religious seminaries (madrasa), and both to have been a disciple and served as a master, before concluding “I am just a nobody occupied with nothing. And assessed more precisely, less than nothing” (Zād al-musāfirīn, verses 16 4–71). He was the author of three important mathnawīs, all of which are devoted to ūfī themes: 1) The 922-line-long Kanz al-rumūz (“Treasury of Mysteries”), estimated to be his first poetic work, was written in the same ramal form of mathnawī metre used by Rūmī. 2) The Zād al-musāfirīn (“Wayfarers’ provisions”; 1408 couplets), written in ba r-i hazaj-i musaddas-i akhrab-i ma dhūf, the same metre as Laylī u Majnūn of Ni āmī (whose style he consistently imitates), A ār’s Ilāhī-nāma, and Shabistarī’s Gulshan-i rāz. This is his most mature and powerful ūfī poem, and the one most frequently anthologized. It is divided into eight discourses (maqāla), concerning respectively: a) divine transcendence (consisting of five tales); b) the nobility of man (five tales); c) the ūfī Path ( arīqat) and conduct thereon; d) 149 the characteristics of wayfarers on the ūfī Path towards divine Reality (four tales); e) an exposition of love and its stages (four tales); f ) mystical knowledge of the soul and its qualities (one tale); g) mystical knowledge of religion with a spiritual inquiry thereon; h) an exposition of the master and disciple relationship (two tales). 3) The Mathnawī-yi sī-nāma (“Three Epistles”), written in the hazaj-i musaddas-i ma dhūf metre, is devoted to the loverbeloved relationship, and was, according to Dawlatshāh, composed in his youth. All three mathnawīs have been published by Sayyid Mu ammad Turābī in an excellent critical edition. Two other poetic works of lesser importance by Haravī are his Panj-ganj (“Five Treasures”), which contains five odes (qasā id ) on mystical and metaphysical themes, and his unpublished Dīvān of some 1500 lines—a unique manuscript of which is in the possession of the Alī A ghar Khān ikmat family in Tehran (Turābī in Haravī, Mathnawīhā, introduction, 13)—featuring ghazals and qa ā id devoted to both romantic-erotic and ethical-homiletic themes. His four main prose works are: 1) The arab al-majālis (“Congregations’ Delight”) 2) The Nuzhat al-arwā (“Spirits’ Delight”), composed in 711/1311. This is a metaphysical and ethical treatise devoted to ūfī romantic and gnostic themes. Composed in rhyming prose interspersed with poetry in imitation of the Gulīstān of Sa dī, it has been subjected to at least two commentaries (Chīma, 50). It is divided into five chapters: a) on 150 creation and the divine command; b) on mystical and political anthropology (this chapter is modelled on a chapter from the Rasā il of the Ikhwān al- afā, the ‘Brethren of Purity’, who composed this philosophical encyclopædia in the fourth/tenth century (Māyil Haravī, 9 7–8); c) on the nobility and superiority of man over the animal kingdom; d) on the virtues; e) on the vices. A commentary was written on the Nuzhat al-arwā by Abd al-Wā id Ibrāhīm usaynī Bilgrāmī in 980/1514. 3) The irā -i mustaqīm (“The Straight Path”) is a short prose treatise on the science of spiritual conduct in the Suhrawardī arīqa (Māyil Haravī, 52). 4) The Ru al-arwā (“The Spirit of Spirits”) is a long prose commentary on the ninety-nine divine Names. Mīr usaynī Haravī follows many of the radical, classical ūfī doctrines popularised in the Persian “School of Love” that began with allāj (d. 309/922), passed through A mad Ghazālī (d. 520/1126)—author of the most important Persian treatise on mystical love, Sawani al- ushshāq (“The Lovers’ Experiences”) and brother of the celebrated theologian Abū āmid Ghazālī (450/1058–504/1111)—and culminated with Ayn al-Qu āt Hamadhānī (executed 526/1132), A ār (d. 618/1221) and Rūzbihān Baqlī (d. 606/1210). One important doctrine of this school was its members’ sympathetic interpretation of Satan—Iblīs—whom they viewed as the supreme exponent of divine love beyond formal sectarian faith and religion, a doctrine which Haravī takes up in the Zād al-musāfirīn (verses 692ff.), where he defends the probity of Satan’s divine love over the “theologically correct” but heartless legalistic religiosity of Moses. Like- harav{, am{r `usayn{ wise, in his Bayān-i munā ara-yi ishq-u aql (“Exposition of the Debate between Love and Reason”) (Kanz al-rumūz, verses 22 3–49) he echoes similar views of A ār, Rūmī (d. 672/1273) and Najm al-Dīn Rāzī, who had emphasised the superiority of love over reason, advocating the ūfī doctrine that the ecumenical dimensions of the path of love transcend the confines of formal religious faith and infidelity (Zād al-musāfirīn, verse 766). Similarly, Haravī espoused the doctrine of the transcendental “unity of religions”, viewing the Muslim ūfī, Christian, Jew, and Hindu as coequal devotees of the same divine Unity, Who is praised in different ways in diverse tongues (Zād al-musāfirīn, verses 21ff.). Unlike those of Irāqī (his colleague and fellow disciple of Bahā al-Dīn Zakariyyā Multānī), who composed the Lama āt (“Divine Flashes”) after listening to the lectures of adr al-Dīn Qunawī (d. 673/1274), in Haravī’s writings there appears none of Ibn Arabī’s (d. 638/1240) technical terminology. His exposition of the doctrine of the “Unity of Being” (wa dat al-wujūd ), to which Māyil Haravī alludes (35–8), seems to owe more to a philosophical and mystical notion of taw īd celebrated by A ār and Rūmī, rather than to the classical Akbarian position found in Irāqī or Jāmī. Furthermore, unlike his master Bahā al-Dīn Multānī, who was opposed to musical audition (samā ), Haravī was a vigorous supporter of samā , concluding his Kanz al-rumūz with verses (873–907) that are celebrated (and often cited) in later treatises devoted to this fundamental Persian ūfī practice. In the annals of Persian literature, Haravī is principally remembered today as the author of the seventeen queries posed to Ma mūd Shabistarī in 717/1317 about harav{, am{r `usayn{ various intricacies of ūfī metaphysics— which prompted the latter to compose the Gulshan-i rāz—arguably the greatest (and most concise) summary of Ibn Arabī’s teachings in the history of Persian ūfī poetry. His mastery of the art of rhyming prose (nathr-i musajja ) in his arab al-majālis, Nuzhat al-arwā , and irā -i mustaqīm echoes the dynamic dithyrambic style of his fellow townsman Khwāja Abdullāh An ārī (d. 481/1089) (Māyil Haravī, 39), although as afā points out, “compared to the style of his predecessors, the power of Mīr usaynī’s rhyming prose appears diminished” ( afā, 3/2: 1282). Modern literary historians (e.g. afā, 3/2: 757; Turābī in Haravī, Mathnawīhā, introduction, 13) generally tend to agree that Haravī ranks as a poet of ‘average’ accomplishment in the pantheon of Persian ūfī poets. There has, however, never been any question but that Haravī was a mystic of the highest degree of spirituality, equal to the greatest of any of his contemporaries in his insight of heart and mastery of the science of ūfī mystical states and spiritual stations (a wāl va maqāmāt). In his own lifetime, he was subject of one of the most famous panegyrics in the history of Persian ūfīsm in the Gulshan-i rāz by Ma mūd Shabistarī, who introduced him as “a great man who is celebrated there (Khurāsān) for being like the source of sunlight for all kinds of art. All the people of Khurāsān, whether noble and ignoble, say that in this age he is supreme over all others. He is the delight of the world and the light of the soul, that is, the Leader of the ūfī wayfarers: Sayyid usaynī” (68, verses 34–6). A century and a half later, Jāmī lauded him as having been “learned in both the exoteric and esoteric sciences” (603). At the same time, Mu ammad Lāhījī (32) celebrated him as being “the 151 center of the circle of communio sanctorum of the saints,” while Dawlatshāh credited him as being “in learning and knowledge a second Junayd” (247). Jamālī Dihlavī in his Siyar al- ārifīn (composed between 937/1530 and 942/1536) similarly comments that “he possessed a sublime degree (of spirituality). During his day he had no equal in the entire land of Khurāsān in knowledge, gnosis, and understanding of the practices of the great ūfī masters. His ascetic discipline was awesome. His devotion was focused solely on God.” (cited by Chīma, 45). Such honorary epithets and compliments are not simply courtly politesse nor just the usual specimens of Oriental hyperbole, but rather a sincere testimony to the eminence of his stature in the company of Persian ūfī awliyā’ during his age. Bibliography Mu ammad Akhtar Chīma, Shammih-yi az a wāl-u āthār-i Amīr usaynī Haravī, Dānish, 50, (1376Sh/1997), 3 9–51; Terry Graham, Shāh Ni matullāh Walī. Founder of the Ni matu’llāhī ūfī Order, in Leonard Lewisohn (ed.), The heritage of ūfīsm (Oxford 1999), 2:17 3–90; Amīr usaynī Haravī, Mathnawīhā-yi irfānī-yi Amīr usaynī Haravī, ed. Sayyid Mu ammad Turābī, Tehran 1371sh/1992); Amīr usaynī Haravī, Nuzhat al-arwā , ed. Najīb Māyil Haravī, Mashhad n.d.; Amīr usaynī Haravī, arab al-majālis, ed. Sayyid Ri ā Mujtahidzāda, Mashhad n.d.; Najīb Māyil Haravī, Shar -i āl-u āthār-i Amīr usaynī Ghūrī Haravī, Kabul 1344Sh/1965; Furūgh ikmat, Zindigī va āthār-i Amīr usaynī Haravī, Ph.D. diss., Tehran University 1327Sh/1948; Abd al-Ra mān Jāmī, Nafa āt al-uns min a arāt al-quds, ed. Ma mūd Ābidī, Tehran 1370Sh/1991; Mu ammad Lāhījī, Mafātī al-ī jāz fī shar -i Gulshan-i rāz, ed. Mu ammad Ri ā Barzgār Khāliqī and Iffat Karbāsī, Tehran 1371Sh/1992; Khaliq Ahmad Nizami, Bahā al-Dīn Zakariyyā, EI2; Khaliq Ahmad Nizami, usaynī Sādāt Amīr, EI2; Dhabī allāh afā, Tārīkh-i adabiyāt dar Īrān, harav{, am{r `usayn{ 152 13th ed., 5 volumes in 8 books, Tehran 1373Sh/1994; Dawlatshāh Samarqandī, Tadhkira al-shu arā, ed. Mu ammad Abbasī, Tehran n.d.; Ma mūd Shabistarī, Majmū a-yi āthār-i Shaykh Ma mūd Shabistarī, ed. amad Muwa id, Tehran 1365Sh/1986; Shahnāz Sul ānzāda, Amīr usaynī Ghūrī Haravī, in Dānishnāma-yi Zabān va adab-i fārsī, ed. Ismā īl Sa ādat, 3 vols. published (out of 5 expected) (Tehran 1384Sh/2005), 1, 523–25; John Spencer Trimingham, The ūfī orders in Islam, Oxford 1971. Leonard Lewisohn THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF ISLAM THREE Max Planck Commentaries on World Trade Law VOLUME 3 THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF ISLAM THREE Edited by Gudrun Krämer, Denis Matringe, John Nawas and Everett Rowson with Roger ALLEN, Edith AMBROS, Oliver BAST, Thomas BAUER, Jonathan BERKEY, Sheila BLAIR, Jonathan BLOOM, Léon BUSKENS, Stephen DALE, Eve FEUILLEBOIS-PIERUNEK, Maribel FIERRO, Edmund HERZIG, Alexander KNYSH, Roman LOIMEIER, Marie MIRAN-GUYON, David POWERS, Merle RICKLEFS, Sabine SCHMIDTKE, Ayman SHIHADEH, and Gotthard STROHMAIER LEIDEN • BOSTON 2011 This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congres Cataloging-in-Publication Data A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. EI3 is published under the patronage of the international union of academies. ADVISORY BOARD Azyumardi Azra; Peri Bearman; Edmund Bosworth; Farhad Daftary; Emeri van Donzel; Geert Jan van Gelder (Chairman); R. Stephen Humphreys; Remke Kruk; Wilferd Madelung; Barbara Metcalf; Hossein Modarressi; James Montgomery; Nasrollah Pourjavady; and Jean-Louis Triaud EI3 is copy edited by Linda George with Alan H. Hartley and Brian Johnson. ISSN: 1873-9830 ISBN: 978 90 04 20983 1 © Copyright 2011 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Global Oriental, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change.