RIse of Early Sufisn

History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.
The Rise of Early Sufism: A Survey of Recent Scholarship

on its Social Dimensions
Harith Bin Ramli*
University of Oxford
Abstract
By the late mediaeval period, Sufism (sometimes defined as Islamic mysticism) was a clear presence
in every Muslim town or village, and Sufis were present in many different levels of Muslim soci-
ety. However, if we were to look back to the earliest centuries of Islamic history, it becomes
increasingly harder to find evidence of individuals going by the description of ‘Sufi’. Individuals
with the name appear around the late eighth century C.E., but we only start to see the rise of a
particular group using that name in the mid-nineth century. But how and why did Sufism rise in
this period, and what were the reasons behind its growing importance for Muslim society? By
looking at the contributions of scholars in recent decades, this article will try to trace the develop-
ment of Sufism from its early origins, up to its consolidation as a visible social institution during
the 12th century.
Marshall Hodgson, author of the monumental study of Islamic history, The Venture of
Islam, described the rise of Sufi experience and teaching as being one of three major for-
mative aspects of what he called ‘Islamicate civilization’ (the other two being the militari-
zation of political authority and the assertion of sharı’a law as the basis for legal and social
relations).1 By the late mediaeval period, Sufism had a clear presence in every Muslim
town or village, and Sufis were present on many different levels of social life. However,
if we were to look back to the earliest centuries of Islamic history, it becomes increas-
ingly harder to find evidence of individuals going by the description of ‘Sufi’. Individuals
with the name appear around the late 2nd ⁄ 8th century, but we only start to see the use
of the name in relation to mystical teachings and practices in the mid-2nd ⁄ 9th century.2
At this stage, many of the early mystics identified as the forerunners of later Sufi tradition
were found mainly in the cultural centres of the central Islamic lands of Iraq, Syria,
Arabia and Persia. It is hard to say to what degree this collection of individual mystics
and ‘seekers’ saw themselves as a distinct group, and many did not use the word ‘Sufi’ to
describe themselves. Rather, it might be more appropriate to talk of early ‘Sufism’ as
consisting of interrelated networks, composed of individuals or small groups that did not
always agree on aspects of doctrine or practice.3
By the beginning of the 4th ⁄ 10th century, various members of these networks began
to coalesce around the central figure of Junayd (d.298 ⁄ 910). This group increasingly
began to use the word ‘sufıyya’ to describe itself, and the word ‘tasawwuf ’ for its teach-
ings.4 As the influence of_ this group grew, it began to incorporate _ many aspects of pre-
existing mystical groups. This included identifying the leading figures of these groups as
the ancestors of the 4th ⁄ 10th century sufıyya, and the incorporation of their teachings
_
into the growing body of tasawwuf literature. This writings can also be seen as part of a
_
wider effort among the sufıyya to gain recognition as a legitimate aspect of mainstream
_
Islamic tradition. Tasawwuf was not, its proponents argued, a recent sectarian
_
ª 2010 The Author
History Compass ª 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
1300 The Rise of Early Sufism
development, but the authentic inner teachings of the Prophet Muhammad and the early
Muslim community, complementary to the teachings of religious scholars ( <ulama) repre-
sented in fields of learning such as Quranic recitation (qira’a) and exegesis (tafsır), jurispru-
dence (fiqh) and the collection of narrations from the early Muslim period (hadıth, akhbar).
It did not represent the esoteric teachings of a fringe group, but the ultimate _ meaning
and fulfilment of the Sacred Law (sharı <a) and Islamic creed. The success of the sufıyya in
proving so can be seen not only in the growing numbers of people described_ as Sufis,
but the increasing association of the term tasawwuf with anything related to mystical expe-
_
rience or the esoteric. This success also brought about the growth of popular forms of
Sufi devotion, such as the veneration of saints and the visitation of tombs. Such populari-
zation naturally came with a cost. For many, the original sense of the words sufı and
tasawwuf was lost on many who were attracted to the tradition for the wrong _ reasons.
_
Already by the 4th ⁄ 10th century, we have one Sufi stating that ‘tasawwuf was once a real-
ity without a name, now it has become a name without a reality’. _ 5 For some, even to
use the word ‘Sufi’ to describe oneself was to reflect lack of the humility and ostentation
that were considered so essential to the aims of Sufi teachings.6 In order to understand
such statements, and the way in which Sufis and tasawwuf became widely recognized
aspects of Muslim tradition, we will have to trace the _ history of Sufism from its early
origins, looking at the various developments that led to its formation. This article will
attempt to do so by looking at the contributions of scholars in recent decades, focusing
more on the development of the sufıyya as a social group and body of tradition, rather
than looking at the development of_ Sufi thought and doctrine.
Before we do so, it is necessary to make a number of preliminary comments regarding
the contemporary study of Sufism. First, the usage of the word ‘Sufism’ itself has been
contested by many significant figures in the field. A comprehensive discussion of the
problematic usage of the term and its origins in 19th century European scholarship can
be found in Carl Ernst’s The Shambhala Guide to Sufism.7 The usage of such a term with-
out qualification does not only repeat the dangers inherent in applying the terms ‘mysti-
cism’ and ‘spirituality’ uncritically.8 It also unquestioningly assumes the 4th ⁄ 10th century
Sufi narrative as represented in the tasawwuf literature of the period, while, as we shall see
_
below, the reality of the preceding period was much more nuanced. In actual fact, not all
Muslim mystics were Sufis, and not all who called themselves Sufis were necessarily as
engaged in mysticism as supposed.9 Nevertheless, for due to its widespread use even in
specialist academic works, I have chosen to retain the usage of the word ‘Sufism’ for the
purposes of this article.
It is also worth bearing in mind that the only source of information we have for this
period is textual, probably reflecting a very small fraction of overall Sufi activity. Such
writings were also not necessarily aimed at people within Sufi circles, but a wider edu-
cated readership. Therefore, one has to avoid making hasty conclusions about the activi-
ties, teachings and social life of Sufis of this period. Furthermore, much of what remains
of this textual evidence represents only a fraction of what was written, and to some
degree reflects the preferences and ‘editing’ of later Sufi tradition. Bearing in mind also
the close connection between the transmission of oral and textual teachings in this period,
our lack of knowledge about the way in which these texts were meant to be read or used
limits our ability to understand their significance and function.10 Focusing on the texts of
this tradition also leads to the exclusion of several other elements of mysticism in wider
early Islamic history, such as the mysticism of early Shi<ite circles. Even within Sunni
tradition, which, due to constraints of space shall be the focus of this article, the textual
evidence could lead one to assume that the distinction between tasawwuf and other fields
_
ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x
The Rise of Early Sufism 1301
of learning had consolidated before the end of the 4th ⁄ 10th century. As we shall see, this
was far from being realized even in this period. Thus, the main argument of this article is
that the study of the formation of Sufism must take into consideration its connection
with the wider development of Islamic traditions and schools of thought.11
Sufism has frequently been said to have developed out of an earlier Islamic ascetic tra-
dition known as zuhd. This theory has some basis in Sufi tradition itself. Early Sufi bio-
graphical works such as Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sulamı’s (d.412 ⁄ 1021) T abaqat al-Sufiyya
(The Classes of the Sufis) tend to portray _ a link between the Sufis of _the 9th and _ 10th
centuries and earlier practitioners of zuhd, known as zuhhad. The word zuhd is often
translated as ‘asceticism’, as the zuhhad were known for imposing upon themselves extre-
mely simple and even difficult lifestyles, as well as promoting modes of piety that em-
phasised ‘fear of God’ and ‘renouncing the world’. This translation has been criticised,
and substitutes have been suggested such as ‘abstinence’ or ‘renunciation’.12 Strictly speak-
ing, the term zuhd has less to do with a form of action such as abstaining or renouncing
(although these actions might result as a consequence), but a state of perception: hav-
ing low regard for something.13 To abstain, renounce or exercise ascetic discipline is to
show some remaining level of attachment, but the ideal goal of zuhd was to be able to be
in the world while effortlessly not be attached to it. Leah Kinberg has written a brilliant
essay on the subject, summarizing the various ideas associated with it.14 Ideal depictions
of zuhd can be seen in statements describing the zahid as ‘a man whose heart was deserted
by joy and sadness; he does not become happy with what he finds in this world, not is
he sad for what it lacks’ (Ibn al-Sammak, d.183 ⁄ 798), or he for whom ‘the prohibited
does not overcome his patience, nor the permissible overcome his gratitude’ (Fudayl b.
‘Iyad, d.187 ⁄ 803).15 _
_
Earlier scholars such as Louis Massignon (1883–1962) and Marshall Hodgson (1922–
1968) placed such modes of piety within the wider context of early Muslim history. Keen
on rebutting ideas put forward by scholars who proposed that Muslim asceticism and
mysticism had foreign origins, Massignon wanted to show that this was an entirely inter-
nal development within Islam.16 According to Hodgson, the various streams of Sunni and
Shi’i Islam that were to develop during the 2nd ⁄ 8th and 3rd ⁄ 9th centuries originated in a
core early community of ‘piety-minded’. Major figures associated with this community
advocated greater devotion to God and the afterlife, and renunciation of worldly con-
cerns.17 More recently, Fred Donner and Thomas Sizgorich have tried to understand the
early development of Islamic ideas of asceticism and sainthood against the background of
the wider cultural world of Late Antiquity.18 Early Muslim historiography would natu-
rally see its early heroes as possessing similar characteristics to the saints of earlier commu-
nities. A significant indicator of this can be seen in the story of the Christian monk
Bahıra, who foretells that young Muhammad is destined to become a prophet.19 Sizgo-
rich demonstrates that Muslims from the 1st ⁄ 7th century onwards were not only familiar
with saintly archetypes of the Late Antique world, but also hagiographic texts.20 We are
now in a better position to evaluate zuhd and its practitioners, due to Richard Gramlich’s
work in compiling information from the literary sources,21 as well as studies by Michael
Bonner and Deborah Tor, who have evaluated the social and political implications of
zuhd. Michael Bonner’s Aristocratic Violence and Holy War looks at zuhhad who participated
in warfare on frontier regions bordering the Byzantine Empire in mid-2nd ⁄ 8th to early
3rd ⁄ 9th century. Such figures were not only distinguished as warriors and exemplars in
piety, but also respected for their learning in areas such as law and the narration of early
Islamic tradition (hadıth), as we shall see below.22 Deborah Tor’s study of the ‘ayyar, mili-
tant bands who _ were characterized by pious vigilantism, builds on Bonner’s work,

extending the discussion to later periods.23 She argues that while bands of militant ascetics
were attracted to the Byzantine frontier in the 2nd ⁄ 8th century, the growing threat of
heretical Muslim groups attracted more groups to the Eastern frontiers of Islam in the
3rd ⁄ 9th century. Such groups increasingly became known as ‘ayyar, and had an influence
on the later development of both Sufism and the Muslim chivalric tradition
(futuwwah ⁄ javanmardı). These groups were also to become influential in political develop-
ments such as the rise of the Saffarid state in Iran in the mid-nineth century, and would
retain the ascetic and pious characteristics of their forebears.
Therefore, to understand the rise of Sufism, we must look at developments within
the wider community of Muslims that identified with the earlier piety-minded milieu.
From the late 2nd ⁄ 8th century onwards, those who identified with such pious-minded
Muslim predecessors seem to have undergone significant diversification and differentia-
tion into various streams and communities. Some differentiation can be said to have
already occurred along political lines in the first Muslim century, as seen in the polari-
zation between those who saw leadership of the community exclusively being the pre-
rogative of members of the family of the Prophet Muhammad, and others who
accepted the legitimacy of the reigning Caliphs, which was to develop into the major
Shi<a-Sunni divide seen till today. Other divisions, often transcending Shi’i-Sunni lines,
can be said to have occurred due to the development of specialized Muslim scholar-
ship.24 The development of Muslim legal institutions led to the formulation of Muslim
law, jurisprudence (fiqh) and legal tradition (sunna), with regional variations. Over time,
many jurists and concerned Muslims saw the need for consistency between the law and
what they saw as the authentic sunna of the Prophet and his companions (or his rightful
inheritors from among his family in the case of the Shi<a). Such demands led people to
collect and transmit reports (khabar, plural: akhbar) and narrations (hadıth, plural: ahadıth)
that described the life and practice of the early community. Over_ time, the collection _
of hadıth for Sunnis became focused more exclusively on the prophet Muhammad as
the_ source of emulation and law, and was more often described as ahadıth. This process
also brought about the development of a specialized science of had _ ıth collection and
_
assessment, led by a group of people who dedicated their lives especially to such a pur-
suit (muhaddithun). The wider community who were sympathetic with the efforts of
these mu_haddithun is often referred to as the hadıth folk (ahl al-hadıth).25 Naturally, hadıth
folk saw _ itself as themselves inheritors of the_ ‘true authentic tradition
_ _
(sunna)’ and there-
fore described themselves as the people of the Sunna. This community, a central ele-
ment in the formation of Sunnism proper in the 3rd ⁄ 9th century, has often been
described as ‘traditionalists’.26
Continuing Massignon’s,which recognized that much of the driving elements behind
the development of early Sunni mysticism came from such traditionalist circles, some
recent studies have attempted to trace the point at which ascetics and more scholarly
hadıth folk divided. By looking at changing biographical narratives regarding two central
_figures of the early 3rd ⁄ 9th century, the hadıth scholar Ahmad b. Hanbal (d.241 ⁄ 855) and
_
the ascetic Bishr al-Hafı (d.227 ⁄ 841), Michael Cooperson_ has shown
_ that the way these
_
figures were perceived reflects the growing distinction between those more concerned
with the scholarly enterprise of collecting prophetic traditions (hadıth), and those more
focused on zuhd asceticism.27 Similarly, Christopher Melchert has _ drawn on the hadıth
literature to look at the changing perceptions of zuhhad among hadıth folk.28 Although _
_
earlier zuhhad were respected by such circles, and figures such as Ibn Hanbal themselves
wrote books on zuhd, it seems that by the 2nd ⁄ 8th century contemporary _ figures of zuhd
were increasingly looked at with suspicion. This might be explained partly due to the

increasing specialization in both hadıth study and zuhd practices, which put demands on
time and attention and therefore _made it harder to excel in both.29
However, despite such increasing differentiation, both saw themselves as followers of
authentic Prophetic tradition, and shared the same views with regard to who were the
leading Islamic figures in the first two centuries after the time of the Prophet. The exis-
tence of zuhhad ascetics as central figures in the forming Sufi narrative of the late nineth
century should therefore not be seen as something unique to Sufism. Many other Muslim
narratives forming in the same period derived inspiration from the same heroic figures,
and also often described them with ascetic or miraculous and saintly characteristics. A
notable example of such a figure commonly found in all narratives is al-Hasan al-Basrı
(d.110 ⁄ 728), claimed as a founding father of Sufism, Sunni traditionalism and_ the Mu’taz-
_
ila theological school alike.30
Therefore, to look for the beginnings of early Sufism, we will move a little later to the
middle of the mid 3rd ⁄ 9th century, where we first start to see the mention of mystics in
the traditionalist milieu. Christopher Melchert has contributed a number of articles dedi-
cated to this subject. An early article set out to prove that the earlier figures of the
1st ⁄ 7th and 2nd ⁄ 8th centuries mentioned in Sufi works do not seem to show explicit
signs of the use of mystical language.31 Such language only appears around the
mid-3rd ⁄ 9th century. After this period, those who talked of mystical or miraculous expe-
riences came into conflict with many zuhhad who did not approve.32 According to Melc-
hert, the resulting persecution might have led to the formation of a more moderate form
of mysticism under the direction of the central figure of al-Junayd (d.298 ⁄ 910) of Bagh-
dad.33 It is only with the circles around al-Junayd that we see the beginnings of Sufism
proper.
While it has been widely acknowledged among scholars that Islamic mysticism only
seems to appear in the mid-nineth century, there has yet to be an adequate explanation
for its appearance. Melchert has tentatively suggested that social developments such as the
increase of arbitrary military power and growth in the development of institutions of
material support for religious specialists could have led to the rise of mysticism.34 Most
studies of Sufism such as Melchert’s aforementioned essay have tended to assume that the
development of mysticism was a natural outcome of the earlier ascetic tradition. There
is some basis for this assumption. However, although it might be acknowledged that
ascetic practices and pursuits could lead to mystical experience,35 not all of those who
have had such experiences are inclined to formulate their experiences in the form of
teachings or writings and pass them on to others. It was most probably such an open dis-
course, rather than personal religious experience itself, that angered so many zuhhad of
the 3rd ⁄ 9th century. Another explanation that has been given is demographic. Richard
Bulliet has suggested that new forms of religiosity became more popular with the increas-
ing number of converts.36
Suffice to say, many interesting explanations have been made to describe the appear-
ance of explicitly mystical forms of Islam, but a comprehensive explanation over which a
scholarly consensus can be formed has yet to be made. As mentioned in the introduction,
limitations of the textual resources make it difficult for us to say anything conclusive
about this period. Together with this, scholars such as Massignon have argued that mysti-
cism can be observed in the religiousity of the early Muslim community, especially in the
recitation of certain passages of the Quran.37 This makes it difficult to say whether the
mid 3rd ⁄ 9th century saw the appearance of mystics, or the rise in explicit articulation of
mystical teachings.

At this point of time, mystical teachings can be seen in wide variety of movements,
and not just among the precursors of 4th ⁄ 10th century Sufis. Research over the last few
decades has tried to uncover the variety of movements that developed out of this phe-
nomenon. The most promising research in this area so far has been that on developments
in Eastern Iran. Earlier articles by Jacqueline Chabbi established the diversity of mystical
trends in this region.38 Among the early and most prominent movements was the
Karramiyya, named after its founder Muhammad b. al-Karram (d. 255 ⁄ 869), known in
his time as an ascetic and theologian. _ The social and political importance of this
group has been discussed in earlier studies by Clifford Bosworth and Wilfred Madelung.39
Reflecting the demographic trends and rise of theological speculation mentioned above,
the Karramiyya seems to have attracted mainly those from recently converted lower clas-
ses, and had its own particular theological doctrine.40 Over time, it grew in popularity
and managed to spread its influence to other regions of the Muslim world. This growth
was made more effective by the building of lodges (khanaqa) wherever they attracted
followers, a practice that was to be adopted later by mediaeval Sufism.41 The growing
influence of the Karramiyya inevitably led to a clash with other groups. The interaction
and competition between the various religious movements of Nishapur in Eastern Iran
has been studied by a number of scholars. Building on earlier research on newly discov-
ered Karramı texts,42 Margaret Malamud has looked at the social and doctrinal reasons
behind opposition to the Karramiyya by the Sufi movement, which appeared from Iraq
in the 4th ⁄ 10th century.43
An earlier, more local group opposing the Karramiyya was the Malamatiyya. Melchert
has studied the formation of this group and its relationship with the Karramiyya and later
appearance of Sufi teachings from Iraq.44 The Malamatiyya cultivated inner religious
experience while remaining inconspicuous in outward appearance, in contrast to the
Karramiyya, who carried an obvious physical presence. Some of the differences between
the two can be explained in terms of the social background of the followers of the two
streams. The Malamatiyya, more connected to urban, middle-class concerns might have
disapproved of the Karramiyya’s more lax approach to the idea of earning a living. How-
ever unlike the Karramiyya, and later Sufism, this group does not seem to have any
evidence of mystical teaching in recorded form.45 Thus, it is hard to distinguish the
Malamatiyya from earlier zuhd, especially as it seems that opposition to ostentatious asce-
tic behaviour already seems to have existed before the appearance of mysticism in the
mid-3rd ⁄ 9th century.46 Sara Sviri and Bernd Radtke’s work have looked at the formation
of this trend in relation to the writings of the mystic al-Hakım al-Tirmidhı (d. between
_ Malamatiyya with the exis-
295 ⁄ 905 and 300 ⁄ 910).47 Sviri has also tried to connect the
tence of the chivalric tradition (futuwwa, javanmardı) that appeared in Iran during this
time.48
Nishapur was not the only area in which mystical trends were developing. Mysticism
appeared quite early on in south Iraq as well, particularly in Basra. A recent article by
Melchert explores a particular group here that might have given rise to the usage of the
word ‘Sufi’ later in Baghdad.49 Later on another circle formed around the mystic Sahl
al-Tustarı (d.283 ⁄ 896), who has been the subject of a detailed study by Gerhard Böwer-
ing.50 As Basra was the birthplace of several theological schools, it is not surprising that
some of Tustarı’s disciples formed a mystical school with distinct theological leanings, the
Salimiyya. Thanks to Spanish scholarship, we are now also more aware of the develop-
ments in the Western edge of the Muslim world. Ibn Masarra of Andalusia (d.319 ⁄ 931)
displayed mystical inclinations of a more philosophical type, seemingly influenced by
Neoplatonism.51 However, before this period, there does not seem to be evidence of

mysticism, and it seems that, with the exception of Ibn Massara, it only appears with the
arrival of Sufism from the East.52
A number of mystical trends still await more scholarly attention. The existence of
important mystics coming from Egypt (Dhu’l-Nun al-Misrı, d.245 ⁄ 860) and Syria (Abu
Sulayman al-Daranı, d.215 ⁄ 830) has not yet been looked _ at in detail, and could yet
uncover particular mystical trends in these regions. Returning to Eastern Iran, mention
should also be made of Bayazıd al-Bistamı (d.234 ⁄ 848?), famous for his ecstatic mystical
utterances (shat hiyyat). A study looking _ at al-Bistamı against the background of various
Iranian mystical_ _ trends discussed earlier has yet _ to be done.53 Furthermore, it is also
worth mentioning that the relationship between 3rd ⁄ 9th century Sunni mysticism and
the circles of Ja’far al-Sadiq (d.148 ⁄ 765) and his descendents is still not fully understood.
_
Such figures became central to Shi’ı narratives, but also retained an important position
within Sunni tradition. Current research has shown that their teachings show an ear-
lier appearance of mystical thought in the 2nd ⁄ 8th century. Influenced by Massignon’s
early explorations of this topic, Paul Nwyia has looked at such teachings in Quran
exegesis while Muhammad Ali Amir-Moezzi has studied the early Imamı corpus of
traditions.54
As mentioned in the introduction, from the early 4th ⁄ 10th century onwards, we start
to see elements of these various mystical movements coalesce around the central figure of
al-Junayd in Baghdad, many of whom adopted the name ‘sufı’. While we now know
much more about the diversity of mystical trends in the 3rd_ ⁄ 9th century, the origins of
Sufi circles in Baghdad and the reasons behind their formation is still unclear. The origin
of the term ‘Sufi’ itself has been the subject of much speculation. It probably first
appeared as a way of designating certain types of zuhhad who donned rough wooly gar-
ments (suf is the Arabic for wool). The first person that we hear of with such a label is
_
Abu Hashim of Kufa in Iraq in the mid-2nd ⁄ 8th century. An essay by Melchert has tried
to trace the development of the word ‘Sufi’ until it eventually was adopted by the late
3rd ⁄ 9th century circles of Junayd.55 He agrees with Bernd Radtke that the wearing of
such uncomfortable and dishevelled garments implied anti-social and even anti-govern-
mental attitudes (although he disagrees with Radtke’s suggestion that this also implies
antinomianism).56 For reasons that Melchert does not explain clearly, this term began to
be used in ninth-century Basra, particularly for those identified as disciples of Abu Hatim
_
al-’A t tar (d.260s ⁄ 874–84). As this group was associated with Junayd’s circle, Melchert
_ _
suggests that contact between the two led the latter to acquire the name ‘Sufi’. Ahmet 57
Karamustafa has speculated that the adoption of such a name might boil down to a cer-
tain ‘hip’ quality, having a certain ‘avant-garde’ resonance.58 The connection between
dishevelled clothing and anti-establishment attitudes certainly brings to mind the fashion
styles popular among counter-cultural movements in the 20th century C.E. Like the
terms ‘hippy’ or ‘cool’, the term Sufi could have had negative or positive connotations
depending on the crowd. We must also take into account that the meaning and associa-
tions given to a term can change with time, and from place to place.59
Karamustafa’s explanation suggests that the Baghdad Sufis might have intentionally
adopted or acquired their name due to its controversial connotations. But the idea that
they were intentionally courting controversy or openly challenging convention goes
against one of the dominant explanations for their appearance in the first place. Influ-
enced mainly by Massignon’s study of the inquisition and execution of the controversial
Husayn b. Mansur al-Hallaj (d.309 ⁄ 922),60 scholars have often seen the formation of
Baghdadi Sufism_ as a reaction
_ aimed at moderating the persecution of mystics going on
at the time. Citing various examples, especially an inquisition in Baghdad led by Ghulam

Khalıl (d.275 ⁄ 888) a popular Basran preacher and traditionalist, Melchert argues that Suf-
ism developed in an environment of opposition to mysticism. Accordingly, al-Junayd for-
mulated a moderate ‘sober’ form of mystical language that would not alienate the wider
community of Muslims. Such a language retained the possibility of mystical experience,
but reassured critics that theological boundaries and the individuals’ social commitments
as demanded by religious tradition would still be retained.61 Against this, Karamustafa has
tried to show that such cases of persecution were rare, and cannot be used to prove a
general climate of persecution. Al-Hallaj, he argues, was not executed for his association
_
with mysticism, but rather for his involvement in politics.62 Ghulam Khalıl, on the other
hand, according to him represents an exception to the mostly cordial relationship
between members of al-Junayd’s circle and traditionalists.63 In fact, the Baghdad Sufis
managed to tread the middle ground between mysticism and Sunni traditionalism. Being
mostly of urban middle-class origin, and positive towards family and economic activity in
principle if not in practice, they fitted well with the mainstream scholarly class of
Sunnism as it was forming in the 4th ⁄ 10th century.64
Overall, Karamustafa’s description of the Baghdad Sufis explains how they managed to
introduce a socially acceptable form of mystical teaching, but it does not adequately
explain why such teachings developed to begin with, and does not take into account the
various divisions within Sunni traditionalism. By this period, a number of developments
had occurred within this community. A major division existed over the degree to which
engagement in theological speculation (kalam) was acceptable. Kalam, which utilized a
philosophical method (not to be confused with the Hellenised philosophical tradition of
falsafa) to theological questions based on reasoning, appealed to many of the educated
urban elite. Their usage of such method had led to them being described somewhat
problematically as ‘rationalists’ in the academic literature. Several kalam schools existed,
with varying positions over matters of theological doctrine. One of them, the Mu <tazila,
gained influence in the Caliphal court during the reign of al-Ma<mun (198 ⁄ 813–
218 ⁄ 833), during which a persecution (mihna) of rivals such as the hadıth scholar Ibn
Hanbal was carried out. The period of persecution lasted until the reign_ of al-Mutawakkil
_ ⁄ 847–247 ⁄ 861). By then, many traditionalists were opposed to any involvement with
(232
kalam, arguing that it had no basis in scripture, and led to blasphemous doctrines such as
those held by the Mu<tazila. In between such strict traditionalists and the Mu<tazila, there
were scholars who affirmed the main tenets of the traditionalist camp, but applied kalam
methods to proving or defending them.65 Such schools, which Melchert has termed
‘semi-rationalist’, developed out of the circles of the jurist al-Shafi’ı (d.204 ⁄ 820), and
formed a middle ground between kalam and traditionalism.66 Al-Junayd himself was
linked to two figures involved with Shafi’ı’s circle, by virtue of his being an associate of
al-Harith al-Muhasibı (d.248 ⁄ 857–858), and a follower of Abu Thawr (d.240 ⁄ 854) in
law._ Many, but _ not all, semi-rationalists in the 4th ⁄ 10th century seem to have been
attracted to the Shafi’ı school of law, combining it with the theological approach of the
Ash’arı school. Bulliet, Malamud and Melchert have looked at how the rise of Shafi’ısm
and Ash’arısm in Eastern Iran facilitated the spread of Baghdad Sufism in this area,
although they disagree on the nature of this development.67 Melchert has also described
the convergence between the attraction of older forms of traditionalism to the Shafi’ı
school, and the attraction of the local Malamatiyya to Baghdad Sufism.68 On the other
hand, he has also shown how in the mid-3rd ⁄ 8th century, there already seems to be a
division between the proto-Sufis such as Muhasibı and the most traditionalist of all
schools of law, the Hanbalı school.69 Some of those_ linked to the early Sufi group, as we
_
shall see below, also objected to the adoption of kalam as a theological method. Such

differences within the Sufi circles and also among traditionalists support the contention
that the relationship between the early Sufis and the traditionalist camp was far from
stable.
Such studies have prompted more investigations into the spread of Sufism to other
parts of the Muslim world through networks of Muslim scholars. More links between
Baghdad and Nishapur have been explored by Sara Sviri in a recent article.70 A study by
Florian Sobeiroj has looked at the spread of Sufism to Eastern Iran, and Spanish scholars
such as Maribel Fierro and Manuela Marin have traced its movement westwards to
Muslim Spain.71 A good summary incorporating most of the abovementioned studies is
Karamustafa’s Sufism: The Formative Period, which also traces the spread of Baghdad Sufism
to areas that have not received as much attention from scholars, such as Arabia and
Transoxiana.72
The 4th ⁄ 10th century development and spread of Sufism, however, was not a com-
pletely smooth process. There is some indication that there was opposition to al-Junayd’s
new, more acceptable form of describing mystical experience by certain members of his
own circle in Baghdad. One such associate was Abu’l-Husayn al-Nurı (d.295 ⁄ 907–8)
who might represent a segment of older-style mystics that_ disapproved of compromising
the old way of discussing mystical experience for the sake of social acceptance.73 His
disagreement over the need for compromise might be seen as part of his social activist
stance, as opposed to al-Junayd’s more quietist tendencies. Al-Nurı went even so far as to
smash wine jars belonging to the Caliph on one occasion.
The rise of Sufism also inevitably led to conflict with other older forms elsewhere. In
Eastern Iran, we see the Karramiyya surviving for a few more centuries, even occasionally
persuading political authorities to persecute Sufis or Shafi’ı-Ash’arı scholars associated with
Sufism.74 These clashes were to earn the Karramiyya a place in later Sunni heresiography.
Scholars have also recently challenged the assertion that the Malamatiyya group might
have integrated easily with the Sufis. Despite similarities, such as having a common
enemy (the Karramiyya), there is evidence that there was some disagreement between the
two in the 4th ⁄ 10th century.75 Along with the Karramiyya, another group of mystics that
was accused of deviation was the Salimiyya of Basra. However, unlike the Karramiyya,
we still understand very little of the disagreement between members of this group and
the Sufis of the 4th ⁄ 10th century. The writer Abu Talib al-Makkı (d. ⁄ 386 ⁄ 996), was asso-
ciated with the Salimiyya, but his major work, the _ Qut al-qulub (Nourishment of the
Hearts), managed to retain a mostly favourable position in later Sufi tradition, even exer-
cising an influence on such authorities as al-Ghazali in the 5th ⁄ 11th century.76
The bad reputation that the Salimiyya acquired might have had more to do with dis-
agreement over theological, rather than mystical, discourse. Members of the Salimiyya
such as al-Makkı were opposed to the adoption of forms of theological discourse based on
the kalam method, discussed above. As mentioned earlier, many of those who were influ-
enced by al-Junayd were also inclined to semi-rationalist forms of theology. However, the
admissibility of using such forms of theological discourse was still a disputed issue among
many other Sunni traditionalists. Although such traditionalists were beginning to accept
that it was increasingly difficult for Islamic law to be based solely on narrations of the
Prophet, without any recourse to legal reasoning, it was harder to prove the need for such
reasoning in elucidating theological doctrine.77 Thus, although such traditionalists would
be united over their esteem for Sufi forms of mystical discourse, they might disagree over
the use of kalam. Karamustafa has discussed a number of influential Sufi writers who were
critical of the use of kalam such as the aforementioned al-Makkı and ‘Abd Allah al-Ansarı
(d.481 ⁄ 1089).78 Such diversity in religious affiliation among Sufis themselves indicates that _

we must be cautious not to treat 4th ⁄ 10th century Sufism as a homogenous movement.
Although its success can be attributed to its formulation and integration through the social
networks and discourse of Sunni traditionalist scholars, such networks and discourse were
also undergoing formation and development themselves.
An understanding of Sufism formation and development, therefore, must not be studied
in isolation, but as part of the wider developments of 4th ⁄ 10th and 5th ⁄ 11th century C.E.
Sunni traditionalism.79 Like the schools of law and theology that were forming in this per-
iod, Sufis were engaged in formulating a narrative incorporating significant authorities of
the past and making Sufi teachings accessible through books and treatises. Although such
activities probably formed a small part of actual Sufi activities, they were vital in creating a
sense of authentic tradition that would put them on par with other concerns of Sunni tra-
ditionalism such as law (fiqh) and the transmission of Prophetic traditions (hadıth). Sarraj’s
introductory treatise to Sufism can be seen as a good example of this, as it _clearly outlines
the relationship between Sufism, fiqh and hadıth scholarship. Through its engagement with
_
the inner states of the heart and higher realities of religious experience, Sufism is described
as a superior yet complementary discipline to the latter two.80 Karamustafa, following
scholars such as Pierre Lory, has argued against seeing Sufi ‘manuals’ such as Sarraj’s as
being merely apologetic in purpose. Instead, such manuals should be seen as a sure sign
that Sufism was becoming an integrated part of the mainstream Sunni outlook.81
Another important aspect of the formation of Sufi tradition was the writing of bio-
graphical tabaqat works. Any acceptable form of Sunni traditionalist discourse needed to
_
prove its origins in the ultimate source of authenticity that of the great heroes of early Isla-
mic tradition. Works such as the T abaqat al-Sufiyya of Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sulamı
_
(d.412 ⁄ 1021) show a willingness among Sufis_ to ground themselves in the _ earlier ascetic
tradition of zuhd, not only to separate themselves from the wider Muslim tradition, but
also to show how they were connected to a common source. The Sufi tabaqat literature
has been the subject of a literary study by Jawid Mojaddedi, who has tried _ to reconstruct
82
the forming of this narrative. The success of integrating Sufi narrative into Sunni tradi-
tionalism can be seen in Abu Nu’aym al-Isfahanı’s (d.430 ⁄ 1038) Hilyat al-awliya’, which
traces back famous saintly ‘friends of God’_ (awliya’) up to the closest_ companions of the
Prophet. Melchert has suggested this work should not necessarily be seen as specifically
‘Sufi’ work, but as a reflection of wider traditionalist piety.83 Nevertheless, the increasingly
higher number of Sufis that appear in Isfahani’s biographies of awliya’ in later generations
_
reflects the growing identification of ‘friendship with God’ with following the Sufi path.
The increasing popularity and growth of Sufism in the 5th ⁄ 11th century can be seen
through a number of trends. One of these was the development of the role of the Sufi
master (shaykh) from that of teacher (shaykh al-ta’lım) to that of personal spiritual instruc-
tor and guide (shaykh al-tarbiyya). Fritz Meier noticed a significant change in the 5th ⁄ 11th
century, when the role of the Sufi shaykh became more rigid and formalised. While for-
merly, Sufi aspirants would move between different masters to gain knowledge, after this
period the importance of personal intimate guidance under a single shaykh became more
vital.84 While Laury Silvers-Alario agrees with Meier that it became increasingly less
common to see Sufis moving between various teachers, he points out to the existence of
intimate master–disciples relationships in the early period of Sufism as well.85 The rising
significance of the personal Sufi guide might be attributed to the increasing number of
people interested in pursuing Sufism, including those who were not necessarily of the
educated urban middle class. A social history of this period has yet to be written, making
it harder to understand the way in which Sufism was perceived by the wider populace.
Such people might not necessarily have been literate or able to afford the cost of

travelling between different masters. The need for more personal and focused attention
may have given rise to the building of specialised buildings and locations for the purpose
of Sufi instruction. As we have seen, earlier movements such as the Karramiyya already
built lodges (khanaqah) to facilitate instruction to wider groups of people. It is not surpris-
ing that with growing numbers of followers, Sufis of the 5th ⁄ 11th century such as Abu
Sa’ıd b. Abu’l-Khayr (d.440 ⁄ 1049) would also find the need to build such lodges. The
popularity of a Sufi figure among a certain population might also have continued after his
(or her) death with the building of a special shrine.86
The growing popularity of Sufism and the Sufi master indicate that by the 6th ⁄ 12th
century, Sufism had become established in Muslim society, but had transformed from its
origins as a small circle of mystics. As areas such as law, theology and hadıth transmission
became increasingly specialised scholarly pursuits, Sufism also became an _ important disci-
pline, with concerns beyond the narrow field of mystical language. For many in educated
Sunni traditionalists, Sufism represented an essential interior aspect of Islam. The ethical
and moral heritage of earlier generations of Muslims became increasingly associated with
Sufism. The more intellectually inclined would also try to connect the deeper mystical
experiences of Sufis with the metaphysics of kalam and the Greek-influenced Muslim
philosophical tradition. On a more popular level, the Sufi way and the path to sainthood
was starting to look identical. By the 6th ⁄ 12th century C.E., Sufism had developed from
being a way of life cultivated by a small number of circles to become a widespread social
presence throughout the Muslim world.
Short Biography
Harith Bin Ramli holds a BA in Arabic and Middle eastern and Islamic Studies from the
University of Durham (2004). He completed his Masters degree (MPhil in Medieval Ara-
bic Thought) at the University of Oxford in 2006, where he wrote a dissertation on the
connection between Sufi thought and the Muslim philosophical tradition (falsafa) as seen
in the works of al-Raghib al-Isfahanı (fl. late 10th–mid-12th century). He is currently a
PhD student at Oxford, where _ he is studying a 4th ⁄ 10th century Sufi text, the Qut
al-qulub by Abu Talib al-Makkı. His thesis will investigate how this text reflects the con-
nection between_ the forming Sufi tradition and other disciplines developing within the
Sunni traditionalist milieu such as Islamic law (fiqh) and the transmission of traditions
(hadıth). This study will also look this text can tell us about the ways Sufism related to
_ intellectual trends of the period, in particular theological discourse known as kalam.
the
He has presented a paper on this subject, looking at the theological discourse in the Qut
al-qulub and the connection between Makkı and the Salimiyya, a mystical group with an
inclination towards engaging with kalam. This article, titled ‘Abu Talib al-Makkı and the
_
Salimiyya: The Transmission of a Mystical Doctrine’, is to be published online as part of
a collection of Institut français d’archéologie orientale (IFAO).
Notes
* Correspondence: University of Oxford, Pusey Lane, Oxford OX1 2LE, UK. Email: harith.binramli@orinst.
ox.ac.uk.
1
M. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization, 3 vols. (Chicago: Chicago
University Press, 1974), 395 (Volume 1).
2
The dating system used here incorporates both the Muslim Hijrı calendar (Year 0 starting from the Prophet’s
migration from Mecca to Medina) and the Christian or Common_ Era calendar.

3
A useful introduction to this is Carl Ernst’s The Shambhala Guide to Sufism (Michigan: Shambhala Press, 1997).
4
Many explanations of this word have been given. Some claim that it comes from the wooly garments (suf ) worn
by some early ascetics. Others relate it to early Muslims known as the People of the Bench (ahl al-suffa) _ because
they used to frequent the bench area in the Prophet’s mosque. This explanation assumes that the People _ of Bench
were the original predecessors of the Sufis. Another explanation connects it to the Arabic root s-w-f, which among
other things relates to the meaning of purification. _
5
This statement can be found attributed to ‘Alı b. Ahmad al-Bushanjı (d.348 ⁄ 959-60) in Abu ’Abd al-Rahman
_
al-Sulamı’, Tabaqat al-Sufiyya, ed. J. Pedersen (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1938), 459.
6
This seems to be the _ sense in which the abovementioned Sulamı used the word in his lesser known work, <Abd
al-Fattah Ahmad al-Fawı Mahmud (ed.), Usul al-Malamatiyya wa Ghalatat al-Sufiyya [translation: The Principles of
the Mal_amat_ıs and the Mistakes_ of the Sufis]_ (Cairo: Matba <at al-Irshad,
_ 1985).
_ In this work, the author contrasts
those who are described as Sufis, who reveal their special_ status outwardly, with the Malamatiyya, who hide them-
selves by behaving outwardly as average Muslims. See a further discussion of the little known Malamatiyya tradition
below.
7
C. Ernst, The Shambhala Guide to Sufism, 18–31.
8
This is not the place for such a theoretical discussion, but it is worth mentioning that recent scholars have ques-
tioned the use of the term ‘mysticism’. Both Omid Safi and Ahmet Karamustafa have pointed out to the particular
Post-Enlightenment universalist associations of the term that tends to isolate the study of Sufism from its sociopoliti-
cal and historical context. O. Safi, ‘Bargaining with Baraka: Persian Sufism, ‘‘Mysticism’’ and Pre-Modern Politics’,
The Muslim World, 90 ⁄ 3 (2000): 259–288; A. Karamustafa, Sufism: The Formative Period (Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press, 2007), vii–viii. A detailed account of the development of ‘mysticism’ as a modern concept is given
in L. E. Schmidt, ‘The Making of Modern ‘‘Mysticism’’’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 71 (2003):
273–302. Julian Baldick has rightly pointed out that the phenomenon of mysticism in Islam was not confined to
the Sufi tradition. Two other examples he gives are the manifestations of mystical thought seen in both the Islamic
philosophical tradition (inspired by Neo-Platonic and Gnostic influences), as well as in Shi’ism. See J. Baldick,
Mystical Islam (London: I.B.Tauris, 2000), 2–5.
9
Julian Baldick has rightly pointed out that the phenomenon of mysticism in Islam was not confined to the Sufi
tradition. Two other examples he gives are the manifestations of mystical thought seen in both the Islamic philo-
sophical tradition (inspired by Neo-Platonic and Gnostic influences), as well as in Shi’ism. See J. Baldick, Mystical
Islam (London: I.B.Tauris, 2000), 2–5.
10
A good introduction to the interconnected nature of oral and textual forms of knowledge in early Islam can be
seen in works of the German scholar Gregor Schoeler, whose articles can be found translated and compliled in The
Oral and The Written in Early Islam, translated by Uwe Vagelpohl and edited by James Montgomery (Routledge:
New York, 2006).
11
It would be therefore useful for the reader to consult other studies on the development of various aspects of
Muslim tradition. I shall mention some of these at each appropriate point of the article, but it would be useful to
mention a few useful introductory studies. The first two volumes of Marshall Hodgson’s Venture of Islam, mentioned
in the beginning of this article, were published in the 1960s, but are still a very readable introduction to the study
of Islamic (or Islamicate) civilization. Louis Massignon’s even earlier studies on early Islamic mysticism, especially
his three volume study of the executed mystic al-Hallaj (d.309 ⁄ 922) still provides a detailed view of society in this
period, even though it is severely in need of revision _ due to his rather confusing methodology. These can be found
translated into English from the original French. Essay on the Origins of the Technical Language of Islamic Mysticism,
trans. B. Clark (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997). The Passion of al-Hallaj: Mystic and Martyr of
Islam, edited and translated by H. Mason (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982). To _ understand the growing
consolidation of Sunni tradition and its intellectual leaders, the <ulama’, the studies of George Makdisi on the devel-
opment of scholarly institutions in the 3rd ⁄ 9th to 5th ⁄ 11th centuries are useful. In chronological order: The Rise of
the Colleges: Institutions of Learning in Islam and the West (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1981); The Rise of
Humanism in Classical Islam and the West: with Special Reference to Scholasticism (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press, 1990). It is worth bearing in mind that Makdisi paid less attention to the development of Sufism, preferring
instead to focus on the development of the schools of law and theology.
12
Leah Kinberg has suggested the former, stating that ‘asceticism’ does not come close to the etymological sense of
the original Arabic term. See, ‘What is meant by Zuhd’, Studia Islamica, 61 (1985): 27–28. Christopher Melchert
has suggested the latter as a way to avoid the Weberian dichotomy of asceticism and mysticism. See ‘Early Renun-
ciants as Hadıth Transmitters’, The Muslim World, 92 ⁄ 3–4, 407.
13 _ be seen in the one time it occurs in the Quran. In a passage describing the selling of Joseph into slav-
This can
ery, the Quran (12:.20) describes how Joseph’s brothers sold him for a meagre price, due to the fact that ‘they were
of those who held him in low esteem (kanu f ıhi mina’l-zahidın)’.
14
Kinberg, ‘What is meant by Zuhd’ Studia Islamica, 61 (1985): 27–44.
15
Kinberg, ‘What is meant by Zuhd’, 31–32.
16
L. Massignon, Essay on the Origins of the Technical Language of Islamic Mysticism, trans. B. Clark (Notre Dame,
University of Notre Dame Press, 1997). It is worth mentioning here that this idea has appealed to many scholars in

the past. Some important examples: I. Goldziher (1850–1921), Introduction to Islamic Theology and Law, trans. A.
Hamori and R. Hamori (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981), 129–134; M. Smith, Studies in Early Mysti-
cism in the Near and Middle East. Being an Account of the Rise and Development of Christian Mysticism up to the Seventh
Century, of the Subsequent Development in Islam, known as Sufism, and of the Relationship between Christian and Islamic
Mysticism. With References, A Bibliography and Two Indexes (New York: Sheldon, 1931).
17
Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, 392–394 (Volume 1).
18
F. Donner, Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1998). T. Sizgorich, ‘Narrative and Community in Islamic Late Antiquity’, Past and Present, 185 ⁄ 1 (2004):
9–42. Donner’s work has recently been critiqued in book in A. Elad, ‘Community of Believers of ‘Holy Men’ and
‘Saints’ or Community of Muslims: The Rise and Development of Early Muslim Historiography’, Journal of Semitic
Studies, 47 ⁄ 2 (2002): 241–308.
19
Sizgorich, ‘Narrative and Community’, 26–29.
20
Sizgorich, ‘Narrative and Community’, 29–33.
21
R. Gramlich, Weltverzicht: Grundlagen und Weisen Islamischer Askese (Weisbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1997).
22
M. Bonner, Aristocratic Violence and Holy War: Studies in Jihad and the Arab-Byzantine Frontier (New Haven: Amer-
ican Oriental Society, 1996), 107–134.
23
D. Tor, Violent Order: Religious Warfare, Chivalry and the ‘Ayyar Phenomenon in the Medieval Islamic World (Würz-
burg: Orient-Institut Istanbul, 2007).
24
For an in-depth study of the various narratives related to this issue, see W. Madelung, The Succession to Muham-
mad: A Study of the Early Caliphate (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). See also Robert Gleave’s
review of recent scholarship on early Shi<ism: ‘Recent Research into the History of Early Shi <ism’, History Compass,
7 ⁄ 6 (2009): 1593–1605.
25
Contemporary studies of the development of law and hadıth are often inspired by, or a response to J. Schacht’s
Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (Oxford: Clarendon Press, _ 1950). Wael Hallaq has written a number of works
that criticize the research of Schacht and other scholars as a form of Orientalism, the most recent being The Origins
and Evolution of Islamic Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005). For a review of such works by Hallaq,
see a recent article by D. S. Powers, ‘Wael B. Hallaq and the Origins of Islamic Law: A Review Essay’, Islamic Law
and Society, 17 (2010): 126–157. For a discussion on the institutional development of Muslim schools of law from
their early origins as regional traditions, see C. Melchert, The Formation of the Sunnı Schools of Law, 9th–10th century
es C.E. (Leiden: Brill, 1997). Melchert’s work builds on George Makdisi’s research, cited earlier. Melchert has also
made the hadıth folk the subject of numerous papers: ‘The Hanabila and the early Sufis’, Arabica, 48 (2001): 352–
67; ‘Early _ Renunciants as Hadith Transmitters’, The Muslim World, 92 (2002): 407–18; ‘The Piety of the Hadith
Folk’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, 34 (2002): 425–39. See also his monograph on I. Hanbal, Ahmad
ibn Hanbal (Oxford: Makers of the Muslim World Series, Oneworld, 2006). S. Lucas, Constructive Critics, _ Hadıth Lit-
erature, and the Articulation of Sunnı Islam: The Legacy of the Generation of Ibn Sa<d, Ibn Ma<ın and Ibn Hanbal _ (Leiden:
Brill, 2004) takes a detailed look at the relationship between traditionalists and the formation of Sunni _ Islam.
26
Although considering the importance of tradition in other streams of thought, and their focus on the important
of the texts of Prophetic reports, it might be more correct to describe them as ‘textualists’ as Marshall Hodgson has
suggested. Hodgson, Venture of Islam, 1: 63–66. It is worth bearing in mind here that ‘textual’ in this period does
not necessarily exclude an oral dimension. See Gregor Schoeler, cited above.
27
M. Cooperson, ‘Ibn Hanbal and Bish al-Haf ı: A Case Study in Biographical Traditions’, Studia Islamica, 86
(1997): 71–101. _ _
28
C. Melchert, ‘Early Renunciants as Hadıth Transmitters’, The Muslim World, 92 ⁄ 3–4 (2002): 407–418.
29
Melchert, ‘Early Renunciants’, 411. _
30
A recent study by Suleiman Ali Mourad looks at the formation of various narratives about this figure. Early Islam
between Myth and History: Al-Hasan al-Basrı and the Formation of His Legacy in Classical Islamic Scholarship (Leiden:
Brill, 2005). _ _
31
C. Melchert, ‘The Transition from Asceticism to Mysticism in the Middle of the Ninth Century C.E.’, Studia
Islamica, 83 (1996): 51–70.
32
Melchert, ‘The Transition from Asceticism’, 64–66.
33
34
35
Melchert describes this developed form of ‘insipient mysticism’ as the ‘self-abnegation and concentration on
God that would soon conduce to mysticism’. C. Melchert, ‘Basran Origins of Classical Sufism’, Der Islam, 82
(2005): 235. _
36
R. Bulliet, Conversion to Islam in the Medieval Period : An Essay in Quantitative History (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1979), especially 33–62.
37
Essay on the Origins of the Technical Language of Islamic Mysticism, 34–36.
38
J. Chabbi, ‘Remarques sur le developpement historique des mouvements asc6tiques et mystiques au Khurasan’,
Studia Islamica, 46 (1977): 5–72; ‘Reflexions sur le soufisme iranien primitif’, Journal Asiatique, 266 (1978): 37–55.

39
C. E. Bosworth, ‘The Rise of the Karamiyyah in Khurasan’, The Muslim World, 50 ⁄ 1 (1960): 5–14; ‘Karramiyya’
in Encylopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn. W. Madelung, Religious Trends in Early Islamic Iran (Albany: State University of
New York Press, 1988), 39–54.
40
J.-C. Vadet looks at the theological dimensions of the Karramiyya in ‘Le Karramisme de la Haute- Asie au
carrefour de trois sectes rivale’, Revue des Etudes Islamiques Paris, 48 ⁄ 1 (1980): 25–50.
41
See J. Chabbi’s ‘Khankah’ in E. Van Donzel, B. Lewis and C. Pellat (eds.), Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn.
42 _
J. V. Ess, Ungenützte Texte zur Karramiya (Heidelburg: Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissens-
chaften, 1980). A. Zysow, ‘Two Unrecognised Karramı Texts’, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 108 ⁄ 4 (1988):
577–587. See also more recent research in Michael Bonner’s ‘The Kitab al-kasb attributed to al-Shaybanı: Poverty,
Surplus, and the Circulation of Wealth’, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 121 ⁄ 3 (2001): 410–427.
43
M. Malamud, ‘The Politics of Heresy in Medieval Khurasan’, Iranian Studies, 27 ⁄ 1 (1994): 37–51; ‘Sufi Organi-
zations and Structures of Authorities in Medieval Nishapur’, International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 26 ⁄ 3
(1994): 427–442.
44
C. Melchert, ‘Sufis and Competing Movements in Nishapur’, Iran, 39 (2001): 237–247.
45
Melchert, ‘Sufi and Competing Movements’, 240.
46
C. Melchert, ‘Basran Origins of Classical Sufism’, Der Islam, 82 (2005): 221–240 (see in particular the section
‘The Enstrangement _of Pre-Classical sufiyya and Proto-Sunnıs, 229–234).
47
B. Radtke, ‘Theologien und Mystiker _ in Hurasan und Transoxianen’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen
Gesselschaft, 136 (1986): 536–569. S. Sviri, ‘Hakım Tirmidhı and the Malamatı Movement in Early Sufism’, in
L. Lewisohn (ed.), Classical Persian Sufism from_ its Origins to Rumi (London: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi Publications,
1993), 583–613. al-Tirmidhı has been the subject of numerous studies by Bernd Radtke. See al-Hakim al-Tirmidı:
Ein islamischer Theosoph des 3. ⁄ 9. Jahrhunderts (Freiburg: Klaus Schwarz, 1980). _
48
D. Tor, Violent Order: Religious Warfare, Chivalry and the ‘Ayyar Phenomenon in the Medieval Islamic World (Würz-
burg: Orient-Institut Istanbul, 2007).
49
Melchert, ‘Basran Origins’.
50
G. Böwering,_ The Mystical Vision of Existence in Classical Islam: The Qur’anic Hermeneutics of the Sufı Sahl al-Tustarı
(d.283 ⁄ 896) (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1980). _
51
M. A. Palacios, The Mystical Philosophy of Ibn Masarra and His Followers, trans. E. H. Douglas (Leiden: Bril,
1978).
52
M. Fierro, ‘The Polemic about the Karamat al-Awliya and the Development of Sufism in al-Andalus (Fourth ⁄
Tenth–Fifth ⁄ Eleventh Centuries)’, Bulletin for the School of Oriental and African Studies, 55 ⁄ 2 (1992): 236–249.
M. Marı́n, ‘Muslim Religious Practices in al-Andalus’, in S. K. Jayyusi (ed.), The Legacy of Muslim Spain (Leiden:
Brill, 1994), 890.
53
For a general study of shat hiyyat, see C. Ernst, Words of Ecstacy in Sufism (Albany: State University of New
York Press, 1985). _ _
54
P. Nwyia, Exégèse coranique et langage mystique. Nouvel essai sur le lexique technique des mystiques musulmans (Beirut:
Dar el-Machreq, 1970). M. A. Amir-Moezzi, The Divine Guide in early Shi‘ism: The Sources of Esotericism in Islam,
trans. D. Streight (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994).
55
C. Melchert, ‘Basran Origins of Classical Sufism’, 221–240.
56
Melchert, ‘Basran_ Origins’, 222–229. See B. Radtke’s article ‘Tasawwuf’ in Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn.
57
Melchert, ‘Ba_sran Origins’, 234–240. _
58 _ Sufism: The Formative Period, 7.
A. Karamustafa,
59
A good example would be the term ‘Tory’ in English, which has been used to designate Irish rebels (early 17th
century), pro-Catholic Jacobins and the modern Conservative Party in Britain.
60
L. Massignon, The Passion of Al-Hallaj: Mystic and Martyr of Islam, 3 vols. (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1982).
61
Melchert, The Transition from Asceticism’, 66–70.
62
Karamustafa, Sufism: The Formative Period, 25–26.
63
Karamustafa, Sufism: The Formative Period, 23.
64
Karamustafa, Sufism: The Formative Period, 23–25.
65
Three introductory works to the development of Islamic theology are: M. Watt, Islamic Philosophy and Theology:
An Extended Survey (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1985); T. Nagel, The History of Islamic Theology: From
Muhammad to the Present (Princeton: Markus Wiener, 2000); and J. Van Ess, The Flowering of Muslim Theology, trans-
lated by J. M. Todd (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2006). Recent scholarship on this subject is dis-
cussed by Mustafa Shah in his review article, ‘Trajectories in the Development of Islamic Theological Thought:
The Synthesis of Kalam’, Religion Compass, 1 ⁄ 4 (2007): 430–454.
66
C. Melchert, The Formation of the Sunni Schools of Law, 9th–10th centuries C.E. (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 68–86;
‘Adversaries of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal’, 245–253.
67 _
Bulliet, Conversion _ 59–62, Malamud, ‘Sufi Organizations and Structures’; Melchert, ‘Sufis and Compet-
to Islam’,
ing Movements’, 242–243.
68
Melchert, ‘Sufis and Competing Movements’, 243.

69
C. Melchert, ‘The Hanabila and the Early Sufis’, Arabica, 48 ⁄ 3 (2001): 352–267.
70
S. Sviri, ‘The Early _Mystical Schools of Baghdad and Nıshapur, or: Ibn Search of Ibn Munazil’, Jerusalem Studies
in Arabic and Islam, 30 (2005): 451–482.
71
F. Sobieroj, Ibn Haf ıf aš-Šırazı und seine Schrift zur Novizenerziehung (Kitab al-Iqtisad) (Beirut: Orient-Institut der
Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesselschaft im Komission bei F.Steiner Verlag Stuttgart, _ 1998). M. Fierro, ‘Opposi-
tion to Sufism in al-Andalus’, in de Jong and Radtke (eds.), Islamic Mysticism Contested: Thirteen Centuries of Contro-
versies and Polemics (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 174–206; ‘The Polemic about the Karamat al-Awliya and the Development
of Sufism in al-Andalus (Fourth ⁄ Tenth–Fifth ⁄ Eleventh Centuries)’, Bulletin for the School of Oriental and African Stud-
ies, 55 ⁄ 2 (1992): 236–249. M. Marı́n, ‘Abu Sa’ıd Ibn al-A’rabı et le développement de sufisme dans al-Andalus’,
Revue du monde musulman et la Médeiterranée, 63–64 (1992): 28–38. _
72
Karamustafa, Sufism: The Formative Period, 58–59 and 69–70. For a general discussion of the spread of Baghdad
Sufism, see Chapter 3, 56–82.
73
Melchert, ‘The Transition from Asceticism’, 68–70. Nurı was notable for his political activism, having famously
smashed wine jars belonging to the Caliph.
74
Some rulers of the Ghaznavid dynasty were persuaded to adopt the Karramiyya doctrine, leading to the persecu-
tion of Ash’arı scholars in the 11th century. Bosworth, ‘The Rise of the Karamiyya’, 11. C. Cahen, ‘The Political-
Religious History of Nishapur in the Eleventh Century’, in D. S. Richards (ed.), Papers on Islamic History III: Islamic
Civilisation 950–1150 (Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1973), 71–92.
75
Melchert already warns us to consider that in Nishapur ‘the absorption of the local traditions proceeded gradu-
ally, and was never complete in the tenth century’. ‘Sufis and Competing Movements’, 243. See also the example
of Abu Sa’d al-Khargushı (d.406 ⁄ 1015 or 407 ⁄ 1016) who opposed synthesizing the Malamatiyya with Sufism. This
is discussed in Karamustafa, Sufism: The Formative Period, 65–66. For more on Khargushı, see Sviri, ‘The Early Mys-
tical Schools’.
76
See a discussion of Abu Talib al-Makkı and the Salimiyya in Böwering’s discussion of Sahl al-Tustarı’s disciples
in Mystical Vision, 75–99. See_ also the introduction in Richard Gramlich’s translation of Makki’s work into German,
Die Nahrung der Herzen: Abu Talib al-Makkıs Qut al-Qulub, 3 vols. (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1994–1995).
77
Christopher Melchert has _ shown how the 10th century marks the decline of the study of Muslim law based
completely on the narration of traditions. ‘Traditionist-Jurisprudents and the Framing of Islamic Law’, Islamic Law
and Society, 8 ⁄ 3 (2001): 383–406.
78
Karamustafa, Sufism: the Formative Period, 87–96.
79
A recent overview of such developments can be seen in A. El Shamsy, ‘The Social Construction of Orthodoxy’,
in T. Winter (ed.), The Cambridge Introduction to Classical Islamic Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2008), 97–117.
80
Reynold A. Nicholson has made this book relatively accessible to English readers. See A. N. al-Sarraj, al-Sarraj,
in R. A. Nicholson (ed.), Kitab al-luma’ fi’l-tasawwuf (London: Luzac and Co., 1914). A discussion of Sarraj can be
found in Karamustafa, Sufism: the Formative Period, _ 67–69.
81
P. Lory, A. N. ‘A b. ‘A. ‘al-Sarradj, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn. Karamustafa, Sufism: the Formative Period, 68.
82
J. A. Mojaddedi, The Biographical Tradition in Sufism: The tabaqat genre from al-Sulamı to al-Jamı’ (Richmond:
Curzon, 2001). _
83
Melchert, ‘Early Renunciants’, 410.
84
F. Meier, ‘Khurasan and the End of Classical Sufism’, in J. O’Kane (trans.), Fritz Meier: Essays on Islamic Piety
and Mysticism (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 189–219.
85
L. Silvers-Alario, ‘The Teaching Relationship in Early Sufism: A Reassessment of Fritz Meier’s Definition of
the shaykh al-tarbiya and the shaykh al-ta’lım’, The Muslim World, 93 ⁄ 1 (2003): 69–97.
86
This is a brief summary of a brilliant discussion of the various popular trends in Sufism of the 11th and 10th
centuries that can be found in the last two chapters of Karamustafa, Sufism: the Formative Period.
Bibliography
Amir-Moezzi, M. A., The Divine Guide in Early Shi’ism: The Sources of Esotericism in Islam, trans. D. Streight (Albany:
State University of New York Press, 1994).
Baldick, J., Mystical Islam (London: I.B.Tauris, 2000).
Bonner, M., Aristocratic Violence and Holy War: Studies in Jihad and the Arab-Byzantine Frontier (New Haven: Ameri-
can Oriental Society, 1996).
Bonner, M., ‘The Kitab al-kasb attributed to al-Shaybanı: Poverty, Surplus, and the Circulation of Wealth’, Journal
of the American Oriental Society, 121 ⁄ 3 (2001): 410–27.
Bosworth, C. E., ‘Karramiyya’, in Encylopaedia of Islam, Vol. 4, 2nd edn. (Leiden: Brill, 1960–1999), 667–69.
Bosworth, C. E., ‘The Rise of the Karamiyyah in Khurasan’, The Muslim World, 50 ⁄ 1 (1960): 5–14.
Böwering, G., The Mystical Vision of Existence in Classical Islam: The Qur’anic Hermeneutics of the Suf ı Sahl al-Tustarı
(d.283 ⁄ 896) (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1980). _

Bulliet, R., Conversion to Islam in the Medieval Period: An Essay in Quantitative History (Cambridge: Harvard Univer-
sity Press, 1979).
Cahen, C., ‘The Political-Religious History of Nishapur in the Eleventh Century’, in D. S. Richards (ed.), Papers
on Islamic History k: Islamic Civilisation 950–1150 (Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1973), 71–92.
Chabbi, J., ‘Khan k _ah’, in E. Van Donzel, B. Lewis and C. Pellat (eds.), Encyclopaedia of Islam, Vol. 4, 2nd edn.
_
(Leiden: Brill, 1960–1999), 1025–26.
Chabbi, J., ‘Remarques sur le developpement historique des mouvements ascetiques et mystiques au Khurasan’,
Studia Islamica, 46 (1977): 5–72.
Chabbi, J., ‘Reflexions sur le soufisme iranien primitif’, Journal Asiatique, 266 (1978): 37–55.
Cooperson, M., ‘Ibn Hanbal and Bish al- Hafı: A Case Study in Biographical Traditions’, Studia Islamica, 86
(1997): 71–101. _ _
Donner, F., Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1998).
El Shamsy, A., ‘The Social Construction of Orthodoxy’, in T. Winter (ed.), The Cambridge Introduction to Classical
Islamic Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 97–117.
Elad, A., ‘Community of Believers of ‘Holy Men’ and ‘Saints’ or Community of Muslims: The Rise and Develop-
ment of Early Muslim Historiography’, Journal of Semitic Studies, 47 ⁄ 2 (2002): 241–308.
Ernst, C., The Shambhala Guide to Sufism (Michigan: Shambhala Press, 1997).
Ernst, C., Words of Ecstacy in Sufism (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1985).
Fierro, M., ‘Opposition to Sufism in al-Andalus’, in Frederick de Jong and Berndt Radtke (eds.), Islamic Mysticism
Contested: Thirteen Centuries of Controversies and Polemics (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 174–206.
Fierro, M., ‘The Polemic about the Karamat al-Awliya and the Development of Sufism in al-Andalus (Fourth ⁄
Tenth–Fifth ⁄ Eleventh Centuries)’, Bulletin for the School of Oriental and African Studies, 55 ⁄ 2 (1992): 236–49.
Gleave, R., ‘Recent Research into the History of Early Shi <ism’, History Compass, 7 ⁄ 6 (2009): 1593–605.
Goldziher, I., Introduction to Islamic Theology and Law, trans. A. Hamori and R. Hamori (Princeton: Princeton Uni-
versity Press, 1981).
Gramlich, R., Die Nahrung der Herzen: Abu Talib al-Makkıs Qut al-Qulub, 3 vols. (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1994–5).
Gramlich, R., Weltverzicht: Grundlagen und Weisen_ Islamischer Askese (Weisbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1997).
Hallaq, W., The Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
Hodgson, M., The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization, 3 vols. (Chicago: Chicago Univer-
sity Press, 1974).
Karamustafa, A., Sufism: The Formative Period (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007).
Kinberg, L., ‘What is meant by Zuhd’, Studia Islamica, 61 (1985): 27–44.
Lory, P., ‘al-Sarradj’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Vol. 9, 2nd edn. (Leiden: Brill, 1960–1999), 65–6.
Madelung, W., Religious Trends in Early Islamic Iran (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988).
Madelung, W., The Succession to Muhammad: A Study of the Early Caliphate (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1997).
Makdisi, G., The Rise of the Colleges: Institutions of Learning in Islam and the West (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press, 1981).
Makdisi, G., The Rise of Humanism in Classical Islam and the West: With Special Reference to Scholasticism (Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press, 1990).
Malamud, M., ‘The Politics of Heresy in Medieval Khurasan’, Iranian Studies, 27 ⁄ 1 (1994a): 37–51.
Malamud, M., ‘Sufi Organizations and Structures of Authorities in Medieval Nishapur’, International Journal of Middle
Eastern Studies, 26 ⁄ 3 (1994b): 427–42.
Marı́n, M., ‘Abu Sa’ıd Ibn al-A’rabı et le développement de sufisme dans al-Andalus’, Revue du monde musulman et
la Médeiterranée, 63–64 (1992): 28–38. _
Marı́n, M., ‘Muslim Religious Practices in al-Andalus’, in S. K. Jayyusi (ed.), The Legacy of Muslim Spain (Leiden:
Brill, 1994).
Massignon, L., Essay on the Origins of the Technical Language of Islamic Mysticism, trans. B. Clark (Notre Dame: Uni-
versity of Notre Dame Press, 1997).
Massignon, L., The Passion of Al-Hallaj: Mystic and Martyr of Islam, 3 vols. (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1982).
Meier, Fritz, ‘Khurasan and the End of Classical Sufism’, in J. O’Kane (trans.), Fritz Meier: Essays on Islamic Piety
and Mysticism (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 189–219.
Melchert, C., ‘The Adversaries of Ibn Hanbal’, Arabica, 44 ⁄ 2 (1997a): 234–53.
Melchert, C., Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Oxford: _ Makers of the Muslim World Series, Oneworld, 2006).
Melchert, C., ‘Basran Origins of Classical Sufism’, Der Islam, 82 (2005): 221–40.
Melchert, C., ‘Early_ Renunciants as Hadıth Transmitters’, The Muslim World, 92 ⁄ 3 (2002a): 407–18.
Melchert, C., The Formation of the Sunni _ Schools of Law, 9th–10th centuries C.E. (Leiden: Brill, 1997b).
Melchert, C., ‘The Hanabila and the early Sufis’, Arabica, 48 (2001c):352–67; ‘Early Renunciants as Hadith Trans-
mitters’, The Muslim World, 92 (2002): 407–18.

Melchert, C., ‘The Piety of the Hadith Folk’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, 34 (2002b): 425–39.
Melchert, C., ‘Sufis and Competing Movements in Nishapur’, Iran, 39 (2001a): 237–47.
Melchert, C., ‘Traditionist-Jurisprudents and the Framing of Islamic Law’, Islamic Law and Soceiety, 8 ⁄ 3 (2001b):
383–406.
Melchert, C., ‘The Transition from Asceticism to Mysticism in the Middle of the Ninth Century C.E.’, Studia
Islamica, 83 (1996): 51–70.
Mojaddedi, J. A., The Biographical Tradition in Sufism: The tabaqat genre from al-Sulamı to al-Jamı’ (Richmond: Curzon,
2001). _
Mourad, S. A., Early Islam between Myth and History: Al-Hasan al-Basrı and the Formation of His Legacy in Classical
Islamic Scholarship (Leiden: Brill, 2005). _ _
Nagel, T., The History of Islamic Theology: From Muhammad to the Present (Markus Wiener: Princeton, 2000).
Nwyia, P., Exégèse coranique et langage mystique. Nouvel essai sur le lexique technique des mystiques musulmans (Beirut:
Dar el-Machreq, 1970).
Palacios, M. A., The Mystical Philosophy of Ibn Masarra and His Followers, trans. E. H. Douglas (Leiden: Bril, 1978).
Powers, D. S., ‘Wael B. Hallaq and the Origins of Islamic Law: A Review Essay’, Islamic Law and Society, 17
(2010): 126–57.
Radtke, B., al-Hakim al-Tirmidı: Ein islamischer Theosoph des 3. ⁄ 9. Jahrhunderts (Freiburg: Klaus Schwarz, 1980).

Radtke, B., ‘Ta_sawwuf’ in Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn. (Leiden: Brill, 1960–1999).
_
Radtke, B., ‘Theologien und Mystiker in Hurasan und Transoxianen’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Ges-
selschaft, 136 (1986): 536–69.
Safi, O., ‘Bargaining with Baraka: Persian Sufism, ‘‘Mysticism’’ and Pre-Modern Politics’, The Muslim World, 90 ⁄ 3
(2000): 259–88.
al-Sarraj, A. N., in R. A. Nicholson (ed.), Kitab al-luma’ fi’l-ta sawwuf (London: Luzac and Co., 1914).
Schacht, J., Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (Oxford: Clarendon _ Press, 1950).
Schmidt, L. E., ‘The Making of Modern ‘‘Mysticism’’ ’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 71(2003):273–302.
Schoeler, G., The Oral and The Written in Early Islam, translated by Uwe Vagelpohl and edited by James Montgom-
ery (Routledge: New York, 2006).
Scott, L., Constructive Critics, Hadıth Literature, and the Articulation of Sunnı Islam: The Legacy of the Generation of Ibn
Sa<d, Ibn Ma<ın and Ibn Hanbal _ (Leiden: Brill, 2004).
Shah, M., ‘Trajectories in_ the Development of Islamic Theological Thought: The Synthesis of Kalam’, Religion
Compass, 1 ⁄ 4 (2007): 430–54.
Silvers-Alario, L., ‘The Teaching Relationship in Early Sufism: A Reassessment of Fritz Meier’s Definition of the
shaykh al-tarbiya and the shaykh al-ta’lım’, The Muslim World, 93 ⁄ 1 (2003): 69–97.
Sizgorich, T., ‘Narrative and Community in Islamic Late Antiquity’, Past and Present, 185 ⁄ 1 (2004): 9–42.
Smith, M., Studies in Early Mysticism in the Near and Middle East. Being an account of the Rise and Development of Chris-
tian Mysticism up to the Seventh Century, of the Subsequent Development in Islam, known as Sufism, and of the Relation-
ship between Christian and Islamic Mysticism. With References, A Bibliography and Two Indexes (New York: Sheldon,
1931).
Sobieroj, F., Ibn Haf ıf aš-Šırazı und seine Schrift zur Novizenerziehung (Kitab al-Iqtisad) (Beirut: Orient-Institut der
Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesselschaft im Komission bei F.Steiner Verlag Stuttgart, _ 1998).
al-Sulamı, A. ‘A.-R., in J. Pedersen (ed.), Tabaqat al-Sufiyya, 2nd edn. (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1938).
al-Sulamı, A. ‘A.-R., in <Abd al-Fatta h A hmad_ al-Fawı Mahmud (ed.), Usul al-Malamatiyya wa Ghala tat
_
al- Sufiyya (Cairo: Matba <at al-Irshad, 1985). _ _ _ _
Sviri, _S., ‘The Early Mystical
_ Schools of Baghdad and Nıshapur, or: Ibn Search of Ibn Munazil’, Jerusalem Studies in
Arabic and Islam, 30 (2005): 451–82.
Sviri, S., ‘Hakım Tirmidhı and the Malamatı Movement In Early Sufism’, in L. Lewisohn (ed.), Classical Persian
Sufism from_ its Origins to Rumi (London: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi Publications, 1993), 583–613.
Tor, D., Violent Order: Religious Warfare, Chivalry and the ‘Ayyar Phenomenon in the Medieval Islamic World (Würzburg:
Orient-Institut Istanbul, 2007).
Vadet, J.-C., ‘Le Karramisme de la Haute- Asie au carrefour de trois sectes rivale’, Revue des Etudes Islamiques Paris,
48 ⁄ 1 (1980): 25–50.
Van Ess, J., The Flowering of Muslim Theology, translated by J. M. Todd (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
2006).
Van Ess, J., Ungenützte Texte zur Karramiya (Heidelburg: Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissens-
chaften, 1980).
Watt, M., Islamic Philosophy and Theology: An Extended Survey (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1985).
Zysow, A., ‘Two Unrecognised Karramı Texts’, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 108 ⁄ 4 (1988): 577–87.


RIse of Early Sufisn

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RIse of Early Sufisn

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.

The Rise of Early Sufism: A Survey of Recent Scholarship

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

ª 2010 The Author History Compass 8/11 (2010): 1299–1315, 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00718.x

You might also like