Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic第Area
Studies 8年(March2015) 頁
イスラーム世界研究
8 巻（2015
3 月）40‒56
Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies, 8 (March 2015), pp. 40–56

Redefining Sufism in Its Social and Political Contexts:
The Relationship between Sufis and Salafis in Contemporary Sudan1
MARUYAMA Daisuke*
I. Introduction
In this article, I tackle the complexities and confusion surrounding the issue of what Sufism
is and, more specifically, which features of Sufism can be usefully regarded as its identifying
and distinguishing attributes. It is evident that the way in which Sufism has been represented
by interested observers —— including both insiders (such as tariqa members) and outsiders(such as non-Sufis, non-Muslims, and researchers like myself ) —— includes an extensive
spectrum of stances, ranging from its depiction as Islamic mysticism to its portrayal as a setof popular practices, exemplified by the various saint veneration activities in which Sufis
engage, such as visiting the tombs of Sufi saints and celebrating the anniversary of Sufi saints’
birthdays or deaths.
When Sufism is categorized as Islamic mysticism, its mystical dimension is taken ——if only inferentially —— to be the most prominent or dominant of its extensive range ofdimensions [e.g., Schimmel 1975]; when it is categorized as popular practices, its populardimension is taken as such. I maintain, however, that while the mystical dimension remains amajor feature of Sufism today, it is no longer anywhere near as prominent as it once was. Thatis, the mystical dimension has declined markedly in importance within Sufism as a movement
relative to certain other dimensions.2 In my view, Sufism has undergone a major transformation,from being what might be appropriately regarded as Islamic mysticism to having become far
more exoteric —— more open and accessible —— in its appearance or style.
For the purpose of examining, analyzing, and making sense of Sufism as a multidimensional phenomenon that has been transformed over time, I will draw on the frameworkprovided by Yasushi Tonaga. For Tonaga, Sufism exhibits three pivotal axes, or principal* Post-doctoral Research Fellow of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
1 This paper is mainly based on two presentations given at i) the Sudan Studies Association 33rd Annual
Conference held at the University of San Francisco, USA, in May 2014 (the title was “From Mysticism to
Ethics: Making Sense of Changing Representations of Sufism in Sudan”), and ii) the Fourth World Congress
for Middle Eastern Studies (WOCMES-4) held at Middle East Technical University, Turkey, in August 2014
(the title was the same as this article). I wish to thank the audiences of these conferences and those involvedin the WOCMES-4 panel, especially Professor Masayuki Akahori of Sophia University and Professor Yasushi
Tonaga of Kyoto University. I employ data that I gathered through my field research conducted in Sudan (inparticular, Khartoum and Omdurman) on three separate occasions: first from October 2008 to March 2011;second from January to March 2012; and third in January 2013. In order to assure the anonymity of myinformants, I use aliases throughout this article except in the case of several Sufi shaykhs who play a central
role in their tariqas’ administration as representatives.
2 However, this does not necessarily mean that Sufism has also declined in the contemporary Islamic world.
Rather, a resurgence of Sufism and a revival of Sufi orders have been obvious [Bruinessen 2009: 135, 140].

40

Redefining Sufism in Its Social and Political Contexts

dimensions, which he calls i) mysticism, ii) ethics, and iii) popular cult [Tonaga 2006: 11–12],
but which I will refer to as i) the mystical, ii) the ethical, and iii) the popular. According toTonaga, in the early years —— or first phase —— of Sufism, the mystical and ethical axes
were the most prominent [Tonaga 2006: 13]. He claims that the twelfth century saw the
emergence of Sufism’s popular axis, followed by its ascendancy to the point at which Sufism
acquired the status of a popular cult [Tonaga 2006: 13]. Subsequently, says Tonaga, a further
modification occurred. Starting in the eighteenth century, there was a resurgence of the ethicalaxis, so much so that it became more prominent, important, and influential within Sufism thanthe mystical, the popular, or any other dimension [Tonaga 2006:12–13, 15–18].
While there is no doubt about the rise of the ethical dimension of Sufism over thelast couple of hundred years or so [Tonaga 2006: 14 (figure 2-c)], in my view Tonaga has
misrepresented the concurrent development in the part played by and significance of Sufism’s
popular dimension. For me, the popular dimension has retained a considerable presence, tothe extent that Sufism continues to qualify as a popular cult. Nonetheless, I wish to argue that
despite its continuing importance within Sufism, the popular dimension has given ground toyet another dimension, one that Tonaga appears to have neglected. This is what I will refer toas the communal dimension.3
The popular dimension and the communal dimension share at least one basic component.
Both dimensions entail people identifying with Sufism. However, whereas the populardimension is inclusive, or extensive, in character, the communal dimension is exclusive,or restrictive, in character. Concomitantly, the communal dimension entails a deeper, more
intensive identification with Sufism than the popular dimension entails. The communal
dimension is that whereby contemporary Sufis share and are bound together by communality,
or a deep-seated feeling of and commitment to a Sufi community —— to Sufi solidarity, to the(relative) exclusion of non-Sufis, of outsiders.
The communal dimension of Sufism is that aspect through which Sufis can be and areat one with each other,4 whereas the mystical dimension entails a set of ideas, principles, andpractices whereby Sufis can be —— are able to be —— at one with Allah or, at least, at one
with Allah’s way, in the sense of Allah’s wants, expectations, demands, and the like. Basically,
3 As mentioned above, saint veneration is regarded as one of the typical examples within the populardimension of Sufism. Sufis venerate the eponymous shaykh of their tariqas and his successors as saints.
In addition non-disciples, that is non-Sufis, also revere Sufi saints. Because “popular beliefs and practices
around Sufism have spread beyond the frameworks of Sufi organizations,” Akahori proposes that the
popular dimension “is not integral, but rather a kind of grafted or ‘add-on’ component to Sufism” [Akahori
2014b: 1–2; Akahori 2015: 58]. In this article I mainly focus on tariqa-based Sufism, therefore I employ thecommunal dimension, which is closely relevant to tariqas, as a core dimension of Sufism. I would like todiscuss the popular dimension of Sufism more fully in a separate article.
4 I wish to express my thanks to Professor Paul Close (visiting fellow of the Institute of Education,
University of London) for drawing my attention to the phrase and notion of being at one with and its variants,
something which subsequently proved to be of considerable value in writing this article.

41

Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 8 (March 2015)

Sufism’s mystical dimension is about what can be known and not known, understood andnot understood about Allah and Allah’s way, and concomitantly about the circumstances thatare or are not conducive to achieving union with the latter in so far as union in each case istheoretically possible.
Whereas the mystical dimension of Sufism is about Sufis being at one with Allah orwith Allah’s way, and the communal dimension is about Sufis being at one with each other,
the ethical dimension is about Sufis being at one with others more inclusively, more widely.
It is about Sufis being at one with people in general. Sufism’s ethical dimension entails a setof ideas about how Sufis should act toward, interact with, and conduct relationships with not
only each other, insiders, but also everyone else, outsiders. In other words, it involves a set ofideas that amounts to a non-exclusive or universal code of conduct, or practice, in accordancewith which Sufis are required to treat everyone, whoever they are, in a non-discriminatory,
equal, proper, fair, and egalitarian manner.
Ethics are rooted in and underpinned by morals but are not to be confused with the latter.
Morals are ideas, beliefs, and values in accordance with which people make evaluations,judgments, and assessments about people —— including themselves; about what people think,about what people do, about what people believe, and so on. Morals are used by people todecide between such alternatives as good and bad, right and wrong, and the like. Sufis, forexample, subscribe to a set of morals on the basis of which they judge themselves (insiders)
and their ways to be good and right, in contrast to how they assess others (outsiders) and theirways. Ethics, at least in the case of Sufism, are a set of ideas or principles in accordance withwhich Sufis are required to treat others, all others, in a non-discriminatory manner irrespectiveof how Sufis morally evaluate others, including any —— such as Salafis —— they judge to be
morally inferior, deviant, degenerate, or something of the kind.
As with each of the other aforementioned dimensions of Sufism, the communal
dimension is, in the first instance, or fundamentally speaking, ideational. Moreover, as withthe ethical dimension in particular, the communal dimension concerns how to be at one withpeople. However, whereas the Sufi ethical code is about being at one with people in general,
Sufi communal ideas are about being at one with each other —— with fellow Sufis —— only.
The prevailing theme and thrust of communality among Sufis is the foundation upon which
they distinguish and discriminate in practice between themselves as insiders and everyone else
as outsiders, and especially those outsiders who they regard as their competitors, opponents,
adversaries, foes and the like, and so above all between themselves and Salafis.
To summarize: for me, contemporary Sufism displays three principal or coredimensions.5 The mystical dimension concerns Sufis’ relationship with Allah or, at least, with
5 I recognize that contemporary Sufism has a number of other dimensions. It has, for example, economic,
political, and spiritual dimensions. However, in this article I concentrate on Sufism’s core dimensions, that is,42Redefining Sufism in Its Social and Political Contexts

Allah’s way; the ethical dimension concerns Sufis’ relationships with others in general, and sowith people and society overall; and the communal dimension concerns Sufis’ relationships
more exclusively, that is with each other.
While Tonaga’s three-dimensional framework represents a useful starting point
for examining, analyzing, and making sense of contemporary Sufism and its historicaldevelopment, he fails to provide sufficient empirical evidence for its retention without
modification [Akahori 2014a: 303]. In what follows, I will draw on a body of original
fieldwork data that supports my alternative three-dimensional scheme, while at the same time
indicating how the mystical dimension of Sufism is indeed far less important than the ethicaldimension and the communal dimension. Although the mystical dimension was dominant in
the past —— so much so that Sufism may well have qualified as Islamic mysticism —— it has
been superseded in importance by those dimensions that are about being at one with people.
In other words, currently, ethics and communality constitute the central, mainstay, and driving
elements of Sufism.
In this article, the focus is on the way in which the ethical and communal dimensionsof Sufism have gained ground together, in unison, with special reference to two tariqas ——al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya and al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya —— in contemporary Sudan.
What is more, I draw attention to how the communal dimension has gained the most, as canbe observed in a strong and growing community-formation trend within Sufism and, more
specifically, on the part of tariqas in response to perceived external threats.
II. The Relationship between Sufism and Salafism: The View from al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīyaal-‘Arakīya
This section addresses the overall relationship between i) Sufism as a doctrine and movement
and ii) Salafism as an alternative and rival doctrine and movement a) under Islam and b)
within contemporary Sudanese society. It draws on what can be gleaned about the Sufi-Salafi
relationship from evidence, including original fieldwork data, on the approach and activities
of one particular, carefully selected Sufi tariqa, this being al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya.
Al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya is highly instructive for the purpose at hand. It has a long history,
having been introduced into Sudan —— from Iraq via Hijaz —— in the middle of the sixteenth
century,6 and today is one of the most staunchly traditional of all Sufi tariqas.7 Moreover, it
is one of the seven largest, most prominent and most influential tariqas, alongside al-Ṭarīqa
its mystical, ethical, and communal dimensions.
6 Tāj al-Dīn al-Bahārī al-Baghdādī (ca. 1520 – ca. 1600) introduced al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya into Sudan in
the second half of the sixteenth century [Karrar 1992: 21; Kramer et al. 2013: 359]. He entered Sudan (fromBaghdad via Hijaz) around 1577 [Ḥasan 1992: 8], and taught in the Gezira region for seven years [Karrar
1992: 22; Kramer et al.: 2013: 359].
7 Al-Ṭarīqa al-Shādhilīya, which was introduced in the fifteenth century, is the first tariqa that spread into
Sudan [Karrar 1992: 36].
43

Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 8 (March 2015)

al-Sammānīya, al-Ṭarīqa al-Khatmīya, al-Ṭarīqa al-Burhānīya, al-Ṭarīqa al-Aḥmadīya,al-Ṭarīqa al-Idrīsīya, and al-Ṭarīqa al-Tijānīya.
Al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya has an extensive network of branches deriving from its shaykhs’
genealogical lines. These branches include al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya (its eponym
being ‘Abd Allāh al-‘Arakī 8), al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-Kabbāshīya (its eponym being Ibrāḥīm
al-Kabbāshī, d. 1869/70 9), al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-Badrīya (its eponym being Muḥammad
wad Badr, d. 1884), and al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-Mikāshfīya (its eponym being ‘Abd al-Bāqī
al-Mikāshfī, d. 1960). I will focus on al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya10 given how it is themost traditional of al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya’s branches while holding considerable sway overSufism overall, as a movement within Sudanese society. All things considered, in my view,al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya provides an especially useful case study for elucidating
Sufism’s general character, its activities and relationships within Sudan today, and mostimportantly its interaction with Salafism.
With reference to the principal dimensions of Sufism as a movement (as outlined in
the Introduction), I will clarify al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya’s particular and somewhat
distinctive interpretation of Sufism as a doctrine and its implications for the points of conflict
between Sufism and Salafism.
Al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya overtly emphasizes the importance of one particulardimension of Sufism above all others in how it operates, and consequently in how it shapes
its members’ everyday lives, activities, and relationships, this being the movement’s ethicaldimension. According to one of al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya’s shaykhs, Muḥammad,
who I interviewed in 2010, from the perspective of the tariqa, Sufism is the primary source of“knowledge [about] human beings” (‘ilm al-bashar), human life, human development, andhuman progress. Muḥammad neatly summarized the tariqa’s ethical stance in the following way:
First of all, Sufis must love Allah and [the prophet] Muḥammad. It is also
important [for Sufis] to love their parents and all mankind […]. Sufi thinking[encourages] respect for all people (iḥtirām kull al-nās). Sufis should respect
all religions (yaḥtarimūn kull al-adyān). They do not regard any religions as
infidel because this [charge of unbelief] is Allah’s work.
8 The year of his death is unknown. ‘Abd Allāh al-‘Arakī is said to have lived around 1570 [Hill 1967: 4;
Kramer et al.: 2013: 69].
9 Although Hill’s biographical dictionary states that the year of his death is 1865 [Hill 1967: 173], I adopt
1869/70 (1286 AH) on the basis of the references [Karrar 1992: 31; Majlis 2004: 376].
10 It is problematic to define the range and scale of the tariqa. As well as other tariqas, al-Ṭarīqa
al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya has many sub-branches all over Sudan. These sub-branches identify themselves asal-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya. Because they more or less act independently, we might regard each subbranch as a tariqa. In this article, I do not distinguish a sub-branch from others. However, I regard al-Ṭarīqa
al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya as one particular tariqa.

44

Redefining Sufism in Its Social and Political Contexts

It would seem that al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya is unequivocally committed tohaving its members interact with others in accordance with an ethical code of conduct thati) emphasizes “respect and love” (iḥtirām wa maḥabba) and ii) applies equally, and so without
discrimination, or universally, to all others —— to Sufis and non-Sufis alike, Muslims andnon-Muslims alike, and so on. It applies, in other words, to how the tariqa’s members treat,
act towards, and relate to Salafis, which is of note in that theologically, philosophically, anddoctrinally speaking, Salafis are Sufis’ closest neighbors and, not unconnectedly, greatest
rivals, opponents, and adversaries.
Al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya’s members are expected to abide by its respectfulcum-universal ethical code in an unmitigated, unswerving manner under all circumstances.
To this end, the tariqa is overtly engaged in performing an educational function. It claims
to be “an Islamic school” (madrasa islāmīya) in which its shaykh is “the teacher” (ustādh).
The purpose is to have its members, or students, fully develop their Islamic faith and theirethical awareness, competence, and conduct, doing so to the benefit not only of its members
themselves, but also of the tariqa, of Sufism, and of society. My informant, Muḥammad, told
me:11
Sufism has two aspects. One is a personal aspect (jānib fardī). The other isa social aspect (jānib ijtimā‘ī). As to the personal [level], disciples should
put their efforts into the development and consolidation of their private
relationship with Allah. Disciples should not distance their souls from Allahthrough disobedience, fault, or sin. As to the social [level], disciples should
live together and acquire Islamic knowledge from each other. What is more,disciples should develop such ethical tenets as modesty, respect, love, andhonesty (tawāḍu‘ wa iḥtirām wa maḥabba wa istiqāma). Sufis should
start from [ensuring] their own spiritual improvement (iṣlāḥ al-nafs). This
influences their family (usra) and neighbor (jīrān). If all individuals do this,every society [becomes] right and wholesome (kull mujtama‘ ṣāliḥ wa nāfi‘).
At the personal level, in terms of Sufism’s mystical dimension, the tariqa’s members are
required to reinforce their faith and consolidate their personal relationship with Allah. But in
addition, also at this level, in terms of Sufism’s ethical dimension, its members are required
to improve their grasp of those principles that when implemented in practice have welcome
consequences for their and everyone else’s mundane, everyday relationships, and thereby forsociety.
For al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya, the successful realization of its educational
11 I summarize his interview held in 2013 for quotation and translation purposes.
45

Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 8 (March 2015)

function hinges upon its members engaging in one particular activity, or ritual —— in, thatis, dhikr (the recitation of the name of Allah). Its members are expected to perform dhikr
regularly, frequently, and, most importantly, in a highly disciplined manner. Moreover, they
are required to perform dhikr not individually, but instead collectively. Performing collective
dhikr in a highly disciplined manner means doing so with the greatest degree of self-restraint
and self-control, something that, while being necessary for the tariqa members’ educational
progress, also happens to be conducive to both the smooth communal performance of dhikr
and the cohesiveness and solidarity of the tariqa, not to mention in turn to Sufism as amovement overall.
Under the tutelage, guidance, and surveillance of the presiding shaykh and his assistants,
the tariqa members are required to recite the same phrases and repeat the same movements
to the same rhythm,12 the emphasis being on coordination and synchronization. In effect,
this dhikr code of practice promotes in its members a disciplined, controlled, and orderly
approach to being at one with each other.13 At the same time, however, al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīyaal-‘Arakīya allows men who are not its members to participate in dhikr, as a result of whichon occasions even as many as half of participants are non-members.14 Consequently, dhikr
provides a means by which the tariqa members can and do engage in good, smooth, andharmonious relationships with non-members —— or, that is, by which they can be and areat one with external others, so to speak. In effect, if not by design, dhikr provides a valuable
educational tool that helps to further in practice the ethical principles upon which the tariqa
lays considerable emphasis. This spin-off benefit of dhikr is widely recognized within thetariqa, as was made clear by several of my fieldwork interviewees. A considerable emphasis
is placed on dhikr participants being thoroughly at one with each other, an experience that has
a welcome spillover for members’ relationships overall, both internally and externally, andconcomitantly for the tariqa’s external relationships. For al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya,
being at one with each other during dhikr helps to promote the principle and practice of beingat one with people whoever they may be, in general, universally.
Given its dhikr code of practice, the possibility arises of there being within the tariqa
12 Participants practice dhikr by bending their elbows and moving their arms back and forth in front of
their chest. Moreover, they repeat the phrases such as “Allāh,” “Yā Allāh” (Oh Allah), and “Lā ilāh illā Allāh”(There is no god but Allah). In the slower rhythm, practitioners recite Allāh repeatedly. In the faster rhythm,
they repeat yā Allāh or lā ilāh illā Allāh. The presiding shaykh specifies the phrases on the basis of the tempo.
Dhikr is not practiced in the same tempo, but the slower and faster tempos alternate. The practice of dhikr
usually continues for one to two hours.
13 What are thought of as immoderate, excessive, or fanatical actions are strictly prohibited. If aparticipant’s self-restraint slips, he is immediately and severely admonished by the supervising shaykh or oneof the shaykh’s assistants. He is sternly reminded of his obligation to abide by the correct way of performing
dhikr, and how failure to do so may result in his being told to leave, something that would cause him
considerable embarrassment.
14 In turn, non-members of the tariqa who participate in dhikr are required to keep to the regulations
during the dhikr practice.
46

Redefining Sufism in Its Social and Political Contexts

a degree of tension between this tariqa’s ethical dimension and its communal dimension.
However, while this possibility cannot be ignored, what is also germane is how the tariqa’s
commitment to an ethical code according to which its members are required in principle to act
in a non-discriminatory way towards everyone internally and externally is not fully realized inpractice.
For instance, the tariqa members have acted in a markedly inconsistent, or deviant,manner toward outsiders, in particular one specific faction of outsiders, namely, Salafis,
these being —— far from coincidentally and accidentally —— Sufis’ closest philosophicalneighbors, so to speak, and their greatest religious rivals. This can be amply and poignantly
illustrated by making reference to what happened during and following the violent clashesof 2012, in which Sufis engaged with Salafis, and with one Salafi faction, Jamāʻa Anṣār
al-Sunna al-Muḥammadīya (hereafter, Anṣār al-Sunna), in particular.15 During and following
the clashes, many, if not all, al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya’s members simply and readily
abandoned those ethical principles according to which they are required to treat everyone
in a universal, equal, proper, and fair way; that is, to treat everyone without exception withunshakeable tolerance, whatever their religious, philosophical, or other outlook. The membersof the tariqa have not concealed their disdain for Salafism and hatred of Salafis. They
insultingly describe Salafis as “Wahhabis” (wahhābīya), as being overly demanding, strict,and oppressive, as being “extremists” (mutaṭarrifīn) in their religious views and activities, andeven as being “terrorists” (mujrimīn).
Al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya’s dismissive and discriminatory approach toward
Salafis is all pervasive, extending from its shaykhs to its ordinary disciples. For example,
according to one of the shaykhs, Muḥammad, in contrast to the rigid and dictatorial way inwhich Salafis are required to accept and apply Salafi principles and practices, Sufi practices
are not performed “under [any kind of] duress” (bi-l-‘askar) [Maruyama 2013b: 114], butinstead with an emphasis on choice and latitude. This claim as to a major distinction between
the Sufi way, on the one hand, and the Salafi way, on the other, is indicative of a widely held
Sufi view, namely, criticism and rejection of Salafism that appear to ignore the details of
how Sufis themselves are required to practice dhikr. After all, as we have already seen, Sufis
perform dhikr under considerable pressure and duress —— under a regime of force, threats,and sanctions of the kind they scornfully associate with what they claim to be the distinctive
Salafi way.
In addition to the spontaneous and tolerant attitude towards Sufi practices, the spiritual
genealogy of Sufism becomes another conflictive point between Sufism and Salafism. As
well as other Sufi tariqas in Sudan, al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya has silsilas (continuous
15 Regarding the details of this clash and the hostility between Sufis and Salafis (in particular, Anṣār
al-Sunna members) that escalated from 2012, see my article [Maruyama 2013b: 109-116].
47

Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 8 (March 2015)

chains of spiritual descent from the prophet Muḥammad to the current shaykh). The membersof this tariqa respect and admire the late and current shaykhs on the basis of this spiritual
genealogy. However, Salafis totally reject this notion. According to an Anṣār al-Sunnainformant, “genealogies do not decide [who qualifies as] saints (awliyā’). Only Allah decidesit.” Moreover, he rejected “the worship of particular person” (ibāda al-shakhṣ al-khāṣṣ) suchas Sufi shaykhs, and therefore claimed that “Sufis go against monotheism” (tawḥīd). The
Salafis’ intention is “the return to the original [Islam] and the purification of Islam” (ta’ṣīl
wa taṣfiya al-islām). Because Salafis regard Sufi activities as “innovations” (bida‘), Salafis
propose to remove Sufism from their purified Islam.
The members of the tariqa are at one with each other in vehemently condemning Salafis
and in accusing them of being a threat to Sufis and the distinctive Sufi way, as demonstrated
in how Salafis —— it is claimed —— were responsible for the destruction in 2011 of Sufi
shaykhs’ tombs and for the violent clashes in the following year that occurred during mawlid
al-nabī (the birthday of the prophet Muḥammad). More fundamentally, in comparison withand in contrast to the morally sound Sufi interpretation and application of Islam, the Salafi
version is decidedly immoral. It is specifically on these grounds that Sufis, including thistariqa members, argue that Salafism and Salafis are a serious threat not only to Sufism andSufis but also to Islam, to Muslims, and to Sudan; and, therefore, that Salafism should be
opposed and rejected in Sudan and even that Salafis should be ejected from Sudan [Maruyama
2013b: 116]. In other words, al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya’s communal dimension resorts
to the exclusion of Salafis and Salafism from Sudan and Islam. It is on these grounds —— or
so it is rationalized —— that Sufis should resist Salafis, should stand together against Salafism
and Salafis, and so should be, as a priority irrespective of all other considerations including
ethical ones, exclusively at one with each other (fellow Sufis).
While al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya’s self-representation entails both an ideal
Islamic moral outlook —— by which it distinguishes itself from outsiders, in particular
Salafis —— and an ideal approach to Sufi ethics, whereby its members are required to treat
everyone (insiders and outsiders alike) in the universal, non-discriminatory, and equitable way,
there is the potential and prospect here for a considerable degree of conflict between principles
and practices, which is then realized in the discrepancy between al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīyaal-‘Arakīya’s ethical code, on the one hand, and its morally rationalized, or excused, practices
in relation to Salafis, on the other.
Of course, al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya’s acerbic stance and aggressive practices
in relation to Salafism and Salafis, while explained in terms of the immorality of Salafis andso the moral threat posed by Salafis to Sufism, Sufis, Islam, and Sudan, a) are similar, if not
identical, to those Salafi attitudes and activities that Sufis evaluate and dismiss as immoral (thatis, that Sufis claim to be symbolic of Salafism’s moral degeneracy); b) qualify as unethical48

Redefining Sufism in Its Social and Political Contexts

when judged in terms of the tariqa’s own, proclaimed ethical code and, in turn, conflictwith those Islamic morals (as can be read in or into, for instance, the Qur’ān) that underlie
this code; and c) can be accounted for not so much in terms of what Sufis claim to be theimmorality and moral threat of Salafis, but in terms of the threat of Salafism to Sufism as amovement or force within Sudan understood not in narrow religious or philosophical terms,
but in broader socio-political terms.
III. Bridging the Divide between Sufism and Salafism: The Ethics and Communality ofal-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya16
In the last section, I explored how the relationship between Sufism as a doctrine andmovement and Salafism as an alternative and rival doctrine and movement under Islam andwithin Sudanese society could be elucidated with reference to the approach and activitiesof al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya. I pointed out that al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya
provides a highly instructive case study for examining the Sufi-Salafi relationship.
Al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya can be contrasted with the tariqa I have chosen as thecase study for Section III, namely, al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya. I will discuss the approach andactivities of al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya in relation to the religious, philosophical, and ideational
divide between Sufism and Salafism, doing so with reference to this tariqa’s stance vis-à-vis
the principal dimensions of Sufism as a movement (as outlined in the Introduction), andin particular to the implications of its ethical outlook, on the one hand, and its communal
position, on the other.
The first point of contrast to note between al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya andal-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya is that the latter has a far shorter history, having been created in 1918
by Muḥammad Aḥmad al-Rukaynī (d. 1964). The second, and not unrelated point of contrast,
lies in the fact that since its inception, al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya appears to have been firmly
committed to bridging the divide between Sufism and Salafism. Certainly, its self-declared,
driving mission is to try to pursue this task successfully.
In light of these facts, a number of basic questions come to mind, such as i) in whatway, or to what extent, does al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya want to bridge the Sufi-Salafi divide?;ii) how successful has it been and can it be in its bridging mission?; iii) what difficulties standin the way of it realizing its mission?; and iv) what is the relevance of the core dimensions of
Sufism as a movement to al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s bridging goal? In my view, the characterof Sufism’s ethical and communal dimensions and the relationship, in principle and especially
16 Although this section overlaps the examples and evidence of the previous article [Maruyama 2013a]
to a certain degree, the points of argument are different between them. The previous article focuses on thedoctrinal and educational aspects of al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya, while this article mainly concentrates on the
ethical and communal characters of this tariqa. Regarding the references of the previous article, I wrote
al-Majlis al-Qawmī li-l-Dhikr wa al-Dhākirīn as Majlis al-Qawmī li-l-Dhikr wa al-Dhākirīn [Maruyama
2013a: 37] by mistake, which I should correct.
49

Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 8 (March 2015)

in practice, between these two dimensions are of the greatest importance to this tariqa’s
prospects of bridging the divide between Sufism and Salafism. The importance of thisrelationship to al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s bridging mission hinges upon what is, it seems tome, the inherent and therefore inevitable tension, even incompatibility, between this tariqa’s
outward-looking ethical code and its inward-looking communality.
Basically, there are two somewhat distinct possibilities —— or projects —— for bridging
the Sufi-Salafi divide: a narrow (restricted or exclusive) one and a broad (unrestricted or
inclusive) one. Thus, does al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya wish merely to bridge the divide between
Sufism and Salafism in a restricted, doctrinal sense within the tariqa itself? Or, alternatively,
and more inclusively, does it wish to bridge the divide between Sufism overall, as amovement, and Salafism overall, as a movement? While the broad bridging project is far moreembracing and ambitious than the narrow one, there is evidence to suggest that it is this broad
approach to bridging the religious, philosophical, and ideational divide between Sufism andSalafism to which al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya is committed.
Al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s broad bridging intention can be read in how it describes itself
as al-ṭarīqa al-ṣūfīya al-salafīya; that is, as the Sufi and Salafi order. This self-identificationreflects the fact that al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya was, at the outset, just as it remains today,
inspired and driven by taṣawwuf al-salaf, that is, by the Salaf’s Sufism. It was and stillis intent upon incorporating into Sufism what it calls manhaj al-salaf (the Salaf’s way),something that makes it unique within Sufism as a movement. Of course, the Salaf17 are
iconic figures not only for Sufis but also for Muslims in general, and embracing the Salaf’s
way by itself does not necessarily mean that al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s mission is to bridge thedivide between Sufism as a movement and Salafism as a movement. However, that the broad
bridging project is one to which al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya is indeed committed is indicated byfurther evidence, including my own original fieldwork data.
In my interviews with him in during 2011 and 2012, ‘Abd al-Raḥīm, the director ofal-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s Khartoum branch, acknowledged that al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya haselected to fulfill a mission on behalf of both Sufism and Salafism. Thus, ‘Abd al-Raḥīm
asserted that al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya has, as he put it, “the responsibilities (mas’ūlīyāt)18 [tocorrect both Sufism and Salafism] as a renewing tariqa (ṭarīqa mujaddida).” As if not only
to underline al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s corrective responsibility on behalf of both Sufism andSalafism, but also to suggest that its broad, movement-oriented bridging mission is a feasible
17 The Salaf includes in the first instance the companions of the prophet Muḥammad. In addition, it
includes such other seminal figures as the founders of the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Shāfi‘ī,Ḥanafī, Mālikī, and Ḥanbalī schools) and the two Islamic theological schools (Ash‘arī and Māturīdī schools).
For a more detailed account on the range of the Salaf, see my article [Maruyama 2013a: 20–21].
18 In the previous article, I wrote this term as mas’ūliyāt [Maruyama 2013a: 19] by error, which I wantto correct.

50

Redefining Sufism in Its Social and Political Contexts

quest, ‘Abd al-Raḥīm explained that the source of the antagonism and hostility between
contemporary Sufis and Salafis is not religion itself but their poor understanding of Islam[Maruyama 2013a: 19].
For al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya, it is possible for Sufis and Salafis to make common
progress in their grasp of their over-arching religion, Islam, and thereby come together arounda singular, undifferentiated path to being faithful to Allah and becoming “perfect Muslim[s]”(muslim kāmil). For ‘Abd al-Raḥīm, al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s responsibility in this regard
derives from the fact that it is best placed to promote the coming together of Sufism andSalafism in practice, given its unique appreciation, acceptance, and embrace of the Salaf’s
way. In my interviews with him, ‘Abd al-Raḥīm argued that al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s
approach to the relationship between Sufism and Salafism as movements is “the right way”(ṭarīqa ṣaḥīḥa) if only because it is “the middle way” (ṭarīqa wasaṭīya), the apposite solution
to any bridge-building challenge.
Still, despite al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s commitment and ‘Abd al-Raḥīm’s confidence,the question remains: What are the chances of al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya being successful inits bridging mission? Al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s bridging prospects largely depend upon the(internal) character of and (external) relations among the core dimensions of Sufism as amovement, and above all upon i) the principles and practices of the ethical dimension, whichin my view (as I have made clear in the Introduction) is the main distinguishing dimensionof Sufism in Sudan today, and ii) how these characteristics dialectically relate to, in turn,the principles and practices of a) the mystical dimension and b) the communal dimension inparticular.
The mystical dimension is without doubt fundamental to Sufism as a doctrine andmovement, even though its relative importance in shaping Sufism appears to have waned
considerably. The weakening of the mystical dimension within Sufism has been exhibited ina highly distinctive manner in al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya. Whereas being at one with Allah (suchas fanā’, annihilation) can be regarded as the traditional, conventional, and widely accepted
goal toward which all Sufis strive, for al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya, being at one with (whatthey call) Allah’s desire (irāda Allāh), or with (what I will call) Allah’s way, is sufficient.
According to al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya, being at one with Allah is an out-of-reach ideal, while
being at one with Allah’s way is a realistic possibility and all that is required for disciples todemonstrate their faith in Allah and become perfect Muslims, or at least to become as close as
can be expected to perfect Muslims. It is argued that Allah’s way cannot be directly known (thatis, directly accessed), but is nonetheless exemplified by the Salaf’s way (manhaj al-salaf), theSalaf being venerated as the perfect Muslims, or at least near-perfect Muslims, that have everexisted in practice.
The Salaf’s way is both a) the necessary and the sufficient means by which all Muslims
51

Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 8 (March 2015)of whatever kind —— Sufis, Salafis, and so on —— can be faithful and become (close tobeing) perfect, and b) the means by which i) Sufis and Salafis can be drawn together, andii) Sufism as a movement and Salafism as a movement can be bridged. The question arises:
What precisely is the Salaf’s way, manhaj al-salaf, or the Salaf’s Sufism, taṣawwuf al-salaf?
Basically, the Salaf’s way entails two interdependent, mutually influential strands, orcomponents, the first whereby followers relate to Allah and Allah’s way, the second whereby
followers relate to each other and to other people in general. As ‘Abd al-Raḥīm put it in
my interview with him in March 2012, the second component of the Salaf’s way provides
guidelines on “cooperation among people” (taʻāmul maʻa al-nās) [Maruyama 2013a: 27].
The first component of the Salaf’s way reflects the presence of and part played by
the mystical dimension of Sufism as a movement from its beginnings, while the second
component reflects the presence of and parts played by the other two core dimensions (thecommunal and ethical dimensions) —— those which today, in my view, are more prominent
than the mystical dimension in Sufis’ everyday lives while nonetheless being rooted in thelatter —— in how Sufis relate in principle and in practice to Allah and Allah’s way.
The relevance and value of the Salaf’s Sufism to the disciples of al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya
in their everyday lives, relationships, and experiences can be illustrated by reference to its
guidance on how they should use their money. At all times and in all circumstances, followers
should use their money only in a religiously, morally, and ethically correct manner, and so
only in ways that benefit each other, people in general, and society as a whole. They can put
this principle into practice by making good-cause donations, by alms-giving, by assisting thepoor [Maruyama 2013a: 27], and by making similarly pious and virtuous, morally respectable,
and ethically sound contributions to people’s welfare and society’s well-being.
On this matter, as on all others, disciples should be guided by the Salaf’s Sufism at theexpense of any other considerations or influences that might affect their desires and decisions,
their judgments and actions, and their social interactions and relationships. For al-Ṭarīqa
al-Rukaynīya, in effect, followers of the Salaf’s Sufism are required at all times and in all
circumstances to control and constrain their desires, decisions, and actions in accordancewith certain personal, or inner, qualities that have moral, ethical, and (socially) beneficial
ramifications, at the forefront of which is one particular quality, that of modesty [Maruyama
2013a: 28].
According to al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya, modesty (tawāḍuʻ) provides the main meansby which its members can and do act in compliance with Sufism’s ethical code of conduct,
the code that is primarily responsible for distinguishing Sufism from other movements, inparticular, Salafism. Al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s emphasis on modesty is consistent with therequirement of its members to conduct themselves in accordance with Sufism’s other ethicalprinciples, in particular those whereby they are expected to show respect for and love toward
52

Redefining Sufism in Its Social and Political Contexts

others, and not only each other but also everyone else. That is, disciples are expected toshow respect for and love toward all human beings whoever they are, whatever they believe,
whatever they think, whatever they do, and so on. Thus, the Salaf’s Sufism offers guidanceon the full range of disciples’ everyday concerns, from how they can consolidate, realize, andexpress their inner being to how (externally) they can and should conduct themselves in theirsocial relationships, thereby acting in the interests of both themselves and everyone else, andso of greater society and social progress. As ‘Abd al-Raḥīm put it in my interviews with him,
the Salaf’s Sufism is the way for people to attain the respect and love for other people, which
results in society becoming more cohesive [Maruyama 2013a: 29].
Al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s commitment to the Salaf’s way means that it is well placed,indeed uniquely placed, to help Muslims shape and re-shape their morals and ethics, and byextension to help them both be at one with Allah’s way and, concomitantly, be at one withpeople in general, this being conducive and essential to social unity and cohesion among
Muslims, all Muslims. What is more, the tariqa does not exclude Salafism from Islam andSufism but rather brings together Salafis and Sufis under the umbrella of its Salaf’s Sufism.
Because of this, the communal position of this tariqa seems to be more outward and inclusive.
At the same time, however, in my interviews with him, ‘Abd al-Raḥīm qualified
al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s achievements so far in this regard. He repeatedly suggested thattoday, while Salafis are invariably far too strict and stern in their approach to Islam, Sufis
in turn often stray from the prescribed religious path [Maruyama 2013a: 19]. Today, albeit
somewhat differently, Salafis and Sufis are both guilty of deviating from true Islamicprinciples, those reflected in the Salaf’s way, in particular vis-à-vis their morals and moral
judgments, their morality (how they can be evaluated in terms of their own morals), and theirlifestyles (how these stand up to the test of what is morally acceptable). As mentioned above,‘Abd al-Raḥīm attributed the recent (sometimes violent) clashes between Sufis and Salafis toa misunderstanding of Islam, while nonetheless arguing that, everything considered and onbalance, al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya offers the best way forward for not only its disciples but all
Sufis and all other Muslims, including Salafis. Reflecting this status, ‘Abd al-Raḥīm describedal-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya as a renewing tariqa on behalf of Muslims and Islam, a depiction that
may be regarded as questionable if only in view of what ‘Abd al-Raḥīm himself had madeclear is al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s best way forward.
Here, of course, there is an indication of the perhaps insurmountable difficulty facing
this tariqa in any attempt it makes to achieve reconciliation and harmony between Sufism
and Salafism. According to al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya, the Salaf’s Sufism embraces the method
for being at one with people without exception and showing respect for all people. However,in order to rationalize its Salaf’s Sufism as the best way for Islam, al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya
disdains other Sufis and Salafis as ignorant of Islam. As a consequence, it opposes deviation
53

Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 8 (March 2015)

from the Salaf’s Sufism’s ethical code of conduct and its communal position. In this sense, theethical practice of this tariqa can be regarded as more exclusive.
Al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya also proposes to bring other people with different philosophicalbackgrounds into accord and to share the Salaf’s Sufism in order to bridge the gap between
Sufism and Salafism. Although this proposal seems to be reflected by the ethical principle
and the communal position, the exclusive access to knowledge of the Salaf’s Sufism implies
al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s privileged status over any other factions, including Sufi tariqas
and Salafi groups. Because this approach distinguishes between people in terms of theirknowledge, it has the potential to discriminate between people, thereby instituting a newcontradiction between ethical principle and practice.
IV. Concluding Remarks
In this article, I have tried to shed light on the representation of Sufism in two particular
tariqas in Sudan, al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya and al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya, doing soa) in terms of what in my view are the three core dimensions of Sufism; b) with reference tothe issue of the distinction between principles and practices; and c) drawing attention to theimplications for the relationship between Sufism and Salafism.
For members of al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya, Sufism instills in its followers an
ethical awareness that directs them to treat everyone with equal respect. In principle, the tariqa
members are expected to share Islamic knowledge with each other, participate in collective
dhikr, and act in a disciplined manner. Learning this harmonious and coordinated approachthrough this tariqa’s practices helps the followers to improve their ethics.
For al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya’s members, having the Salaf’s Sufism as its guiding doctrine
provides the best, and indeed only, reliable means by which Muslims can acquire the truest
religious faith together with the fullest array of personality traits that are most conduciveto establishing and maintaining social harmony. This tariqa also has a mission to bridge thedivide between Sufism and Salafism. Therefore, the communal dimension that this tariqa
embraces is more inclusive than that of al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya.
In principle, the ethical dimension of Sufism within al-Ṭarīqa al-Qādirīya al-‘Arakīya
and al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya requires all disciples to be at one with all human beings (including
even Salafis) by showing respect and love. Moreover, the communal dimension, which
depends on an ethical outlook, plays an important role in improving followers’ ethics. It also
provides helpful clues for disciples to learn how to be at one with people more widely andwith society. In this regard, the communal and ethical principles of Sufism are consistent inpromoting oneness with others.
However, in practice, these approaches are severely tested and come under considerable
strain because of the way in which Sufis regard themselves as moral but others, especially54

Redefining Sufism in Its Social and Political Contexts

Salafis, as immoral. Under current circumstances, including the escalated antagonism with
Salafis, both tariqas prioritize their moral judgment (or ethical practices), which leads to their
being at one with fellow Sufis only. What is more, the two tariqas also run the risk of trying
to conduct their affairs around a considerable discrepancy between the ethical dimension(and its idealized self-representation around its commitment to these principles) and thecommunal dimension (and its restricted and exclusive manner). In particular, there seem tobe discrepancies between i) their ethically oriented principles and ii) their morally oriented
actions and reactions toward the threat of religiously distinct factions, such as Salafism.
Future progress in this research depends upon gathering and analyzing further evidence
on such matters as i) these two tariqas’ historical and current interaction with and influence
on Sufi tariqas and Salafi factions; ii) two tariqas’ interaction with, influence on, and, in turn,dependency upon Sudanese society and institutions, not least those associated with the stateand iii) the assessment of the core dimensions of Sufism (in particular, ethical and communal
dimensions) through making comparisons of various tariqas in Sudan as well as in the Islamic
world.
Acknowledgements
The research on which this article is based has been generously funded by the Heiwa
Nakajima Foundation (from 2008 to 2010) and the Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows (243817
and 262047). I also wish to acknowledge the support for my field research of the Institute ofAfrican and Asian Studies (University of Khartoum), in particular during my stays in Sudanfrom 2008 to 2011.
References
Akahori, M. 2014a. “Book Review, Yasushi Tonaga. Islam and Sufism: Mysticism, Saint
Cult and Ethics, Nagoya: The University of Nagoya Press, 2013,” Asian and African
Area Studies 13(2), pp. 300–304.
———. 2014b. Toward a Theory of Dynamic Composition of Sufism and Saint Veneration inIslam: An Anthropological Approach, Paper presented at the Fourth World Congress for
Middle Eastern Studies (WOCMES-4), pp. 1–5.
———. 2015. “Towards a Dynamic View of Sufism and Saint Veneration in Islam: An
Anthropological Approach,” Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 8, pp. 57–68.
Al-Majlis al-Qawmī li-l-Dhikr wa al-Dhākirīn (abbr. Majlis). 2004. Mawsū‘a ahl al-dhikr
bi-l-sūdān. Vol.1. n.p.: Sharika Matābi‘ al-Sūdān li-l-‘Umda al-Maḥdūda.
Bruinessen, M. van. 2009. “Sufism, ‘Popular’ Islam and the Encounter with Modernity,”
Muhammad Khalid Masud, Armando Salvatore, and Martin van Bruinessen (eds.) Islam andModernity: Key Issues and Debates, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 125–157.
55

Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 8 (March 2015)Ḥasan, Y. F. 1992. “Muqaddima,” Muḥammad al-Nūr ibn Ḍayf Allāh (Yūsuf Faḍl Ḥasan
ed.), Kitāb al-ṭabaqāt f ī khuṣūṣ al-awliyā’ wa al-ṣāliḥīn wa al-‘ulamā’ wa al-shu‘arā’fi-l-sūdān (al-ṭab‘a al-rābi‘a), al-Kharṭūm: Dār Jāmi‘a al-Kharṭūm li-l-Nashr, , pp. 1–33.
Hill, R. 1967. A Biographical Dictionary of the Sudan (Second Edition). London: Frank Cass.
Karrar, A. S. 1992. Sufi Brotherhoods in the Sudan. Illinois: Northwestern University Press.
Kramer, R.S., R. A. Lobban Jr., and C. Fluehr-Lobban (eds.) 2013. Historical Dictionary of
the Sudan (Fourth Edition). Lanham: Scarecrow Press.
Maruyama, D. 2013a. “Seeking Articulation between Sufi and Salafi: Doctrines andEducation of al-Ṭarīqa al-Rukaynīya in Sudan,” Annals of Japan Association for Middle
East Studies 29(1), pp. 1–40.
———. 2013b. “Clashes, Conflicts and Contradictions: The External Policies of Sufi Tariqas
in Contemporary Sudan,” The Journal of Sophia Asian Studies 31, pp. 103–122.
Schimmel, A. 1975. Mystical Dimensions of Islam. Chapel Hill: The University of North
Carolina Press.
Tonaga, Y. 2006. “Sufism in the Past and Present: Based on the Three-axis Framework of
Sufism,” Annals of the Japan Association for Middle East Studies 21(2), pp. 7–21.

56