Dichotomy between Tradition and Modernity: Is Sufism in Decline?
By: Sahibzada Habeeb Ur Rehman
Tags: Sufism, Academia, Modernity, Islam, Civilizations

Dichotomy between Tradition and Modernity: Is Sufism in Decline?

Sufi organizations and orders were understood to be dramatically in decline two centuries ago and many practices and social formations were seen to be disappearing by most prominent academic scholarship on Islamic societies. It is right about the time Islam had an encounter with modernity – which brought about many fundamental and structural changes to Muslim societies. In response to modernity’s impact, there have been several reform movements from within Islam to counter the increasing threat to Muslim identity, representation, tradition, and political ideology. These reactionary movements either demanded a radical return to the traditions and guard Islamic values against the impacts of modernity (Wahhabism, Salafi, Ahl al Hadith) or accommodate these changes that come with modernization and stressed that Islamic tradition is in line with modernity and the ideas and morals of civil societies (Islamic modernism, early Salafi movements). Most of these reactions were fueled by, and informed via, orientalist discourse on Muslim civilizations.

In Western scholarship, Sufism was initially seen to be appealing to uneducated and superstitious Muslims and its tradition was due to disappear with the dawn of modernity (Bruinessen, 2009). However, there has been a remarkable resurgence of Sufi orders around the world and their engagement with the modern society has yielded several new discourses. This resurgence produced several reactions from within Islam as well as modern social theorists to position Sufism in the modern world. This article focuses on Sufism’s two-fold encounter from within Islam and western theorizing – as an ongoing impact of modernity. This article also aims to demystify western understanding towards tradition and religious social bonds in relation to modernization project emerging out of the rational social organization. Finally, this article engages with the resurgence of Sufism in separate waves throughout the modern period which might lead to a renewed understanding of the long-standing dichotomy of tradition and modernity.

The early modern configurations of European society in the 18th and 19th century – both ideologically and politically challenged the Islamic polities of the time, be it the Safavids of Iran, the Mughals of India or the great Ottomans of Near and the Middle East, Europe, Balkans and large tracts of North Africa. As it is argued among scholars that Islamic civilization with its cultural creativity and socio-political formations held the potential of global hegemony until the dawn of modernity; at which point the power balance was overturned by western civilization. Colonial encroachments of the western hegemonic powers were at the forefront to introduce the modernization project to the relatively Traditional, Eastern, and Muslim societies. Many historians and social theorists such as Ernest Renan (1862), Max Weber(1922), up to Bertrand Badie (1987) and Remi Brague (2002) have held the cultural and religious formation – entrenched in tradition, to be responsible for the delay of the Muslim world in modernization project of a global civilizing process. This Western scholarship gained prominence throughout the early modern period and is still popular today that emphasizes the legitimization of political order through the doctrine of Divine authority and the principles of social formations deeply rooted in tradition, that held Islamic civilization from adopting modern political autonomy and rationalization of social bonds and relations – which are the prerequisite for the modern society and political order.

These reductionist and evolutionist scholarly views conceptualized tradition as static and primordial culture; an impediment to modern social and economic development. It is the same principle of viewing tradition that they applied to Sufism as well. Weberian and alike understanding towards tradition demarcated Sufism from a transcendental tradition and limited it to the domain of Magic and superstition for later scholars to build on (Lane, 1860; Weber, 1922). The scholarship of Sufism in social science for the most part of the 20th century has been predominantly relying on modernization theories which render religion and tradition less plausible and attractive to modern sensitivities as well as the functioning of the society. Most of these theorists built on 19th-century discourse which views religion as an advanced form of magic and superstition to pursue self-interest – and more interestingly, most social scientists were in fact unfamiliar with academic work on highly sophisticated and mystical aspects of Sufism. Trimingham (1971) in his history and sociology of Sufi orders argued in favor of decline up until the 20th century. Arberry (2013) also concluded in a similar fashion while admitting that there were no real contemporary Sufis anymore. This view was further crystallized most notably in the writings of Clifford Geertz (1968) and Ernest Gellner (1992) maintained on, up until very recently, a religious change and a shift in traditional Sufi practices and beliefs. Geertz explained how mystical-magical Sufism has transitioned to a more scripture focused and piety driven Islam for modern Muslims. He mentioned the rise of modern & secular nationalism, which he believes is extremely crucial in reshaping, reorganizing, and modifying the social formation of Sufi groups. Gellner (1992) using his model of Muslim society and internal dynamics also maintained that the popular Sufism would eventually be devoured by an increased Urbanized Scripturalism (urban scholars) and the currents of Modernization. He also positioned Sufism as ‘Low Islam’ compared to ‘High Islam’ of strict obligation and execution of scriptural law. These uncritically established and reductionist views on Sufism can be challenged by an alternative understanding of tradition in relation to modernity.

This can be best dealt with, by highlighting scholars such as Talal Asad (1986), Johann P. Arnason (2001), and Armando Salvatore (2009) who suggested tradition to be understood as a combination of organic social action, practices, bonds, and shared communality to provide cohesiveness to human societies (Salvatore, 2009: 5). To engage with the central theme in this article it is important to view tradition as a counterpart to modernity and view both as forms of the social bond. As Salvatore states “Tradition thus conceived is essential to social action, communication, and even cultural and institutional innovation. It would be difficult to conceive of the social bond without referring to the working of tradition demarcating a field of practice whose maintenance depends on adequate mechanisms of transmission and renewal of knowledge through generations” (Salvatore, 2007: 7; Calhoun, 1992). It is, therefore, in light of this renewed understanding that the relationship between Sufism as an Islamic tradition and modernity can be conceived. This understanding would also help in exploring the reaction towards Sufism from within Islam and the indigenous developments that took place during this period.

To explore the reaction to Sufism from within Islam and the previously mentioned tension between Popular Islam and Scripturalism, it is important to turn towards the late 18th century. The most radical and utmost rejection of Sufism came from the Wahabi movement after their conquest of Mecca and Medina. Wahabis are ideologically Puritans and demand eradication of innovation (bidah) and return to the first three generations of the early Muslim community. Although they claim to be modernist in their approach they are far from other fundamentalist movements which swept across the Muslim world in the same period – these include the Ahl al-Hadith, a reformist movement from south Asia which has been relatively tolerant of Sufis and their practices but rejected shrine visitation and veneration of saints, etc. To this camp also belonged other Salafi movements with puritanical inspirations and reformers such as the Deoband movement based in India. Other less radical ideological movements such as Egyptian reformers and modernists centered around Muhammad Abduh’s and Jamal ad-din Afghani’s teachings also opposed Sufism and considered it an impediment to modernization tendencies of Islamic society. The staunchest and most notable opposition to Sufi orders occurred in early 19th-century turkey when Kamal Ata Turk deemed Sufi orders to be a threat to his modernization project and a total ban on their practices and gatherings was enacted. Turkey became the first country to bar Sufism on a countrywide scale. Many other states also attempted to exert control on Sufi orders to some degree.

Objection to Sufism has varied across regions, cultural contexts, and discourses – Sufi orders have been relatively tolerant to local practices and culture thus adoption of local components has been common except in a few it is believed. This includes veneration of saints demanding their intercession for redemption; the use of ecstatic dance and music; use of drugs and other consciousness-altering substances; use of special litanies and prayers to invocate spirits of saints – dead or alive; The attribution of miracles to Sufi masters and use of amulets etc. Most of these practices were considered to be innovation by other reactionary movements and a threat to pure Islam – primarily due to the belief that these practices are innovative, superstitious and were borrowed from other traditions which may corrupt pristine Islamic practices and in other words impede the modernization tendency of urban scriptural Islam. This understanding of Sufism from within Islamic circles is found to be similar to that of theorizing in the western scholarship.

However, Sufism as a tradition is far from superstition, magic, or even mysticism for that matter – for it has its own several different discourses, practices, social institutions to govern and support these practice regimes and scholarly positions – with adequate mechanisms of transmission and renewal of knowledge (see Salvatore, 2007:7). What connects all is the common denominator which is the heightened consciousness of the Divine – and this one aspect that emphasizes an increased awareness of God’s presence has equated Sufism with Mysticism very often in western scholarly discourse. This association has a deeper implication – which suggests that Sufi tradition is not suited to modern social and economic development as reflected in modernization theory and its variants. In a similar respect opposition from within Islam also considered Sufism to be backward, entrenched in age-old traditions, based on superstitions and a dangerous devotion to Sufi masters which again at one hand were considered to be deformation of authentic Islam and on the other, an impediment to modernization capacity of Islamic puritanism or urban scripturalism – which constitutes equivalents to secularization in themselves (Gellner, 1992; Bruinessen, 2009: 2).

Against all odds, Sufism became ubiquitous in the early 19th century and was seen to have increased membership and multiple layers of legitimacy, initially, in response to the colonial advancement of the western powers. Some scholars viewed this resurgence as early as the late 18th century which preceded the actual colonial conquest. (Bruinessen, 2009) In West Africa, a wave of Sufi movements was inevitable against pagan elements present in society. Most worthy to mention is Tijjaniyya sufi order. Far at the other end of the Muslim world, Sammaniyya emerged as a trans-local Sufi order in reaction to Dutch Colonial activity. Sannusiyya was another Sufi order that emerged during the same time in North Africa and became one of the most successful anti-colonial order. Most of these movements were in the name of Jihad and were an armed struggle against a foreign invader – This was to transform in the 20th century when the re-emergence of Sufi orders in the second half of the century against a backdrop of opposition in the first half of the century by Urban and conservative Ulemas and other reformist groups. In Egypt, they emerged as Urban Sufi networks with patronage from the state or a formal organization from within which helped them expand further – Gilsenan (1967) unlike previous theorists focused on increasing functional differentiation as a core aspect of modernity and argued: if a few social institutions fail to deliver – traditional orders adopt those functions and expand autonomously based on those functions. There has been a similar case for Indonesia – increased bureaucratization and state patronage of Sufi orders are to be seen across the world which helps understand the reemergence in a modern functional setting. In modern-day Turkey and the former Soviet Union with an absence of state patronage, we have seen a remarkable resurfacing of Sufi orders – primarily due to adopting a new outlook and social function within these societies; which also appealed to educated modern masses and a renewed appreciation of Sufism emerged among them.

There are different explanations to this: According to Salvatore (2009) If we compare it to the scholarship of Ulemas and Theologians, ‘Sufism was able to anchor their spiritual claims within ritualized collective practices that facilitated building intersubjective connectedness by integrating the triadic matrix of the social bond into cohesive groups, so avoiding both a dogmatic impasse and elitist backlash’ (Salvatore, 2009: 24). Contrary to western understanding and from within Islam’s response to Sufism, it found new appreciation from the modern educated classes as compared to the political and militant Islam that swept across almost all scriptural and puritanical groups. Sufism offered a more tolerant, embracing, and intellectual alternative to Islamism. It emphasized inter-faith harmony and detached itself from popular Islam in different respects. Many great thinkers of the 20th century were consciously influenced by metaphysical teachings of great Sufi masters, such as Rumi and Ibn Arabi. This was partly due to a renewed understanding of Sufi literature in the west and partly due to its adaptability to changing socio-political and institutional landscape – while stressing its roots in Muhammadan message and the practice of his companions. Organized Sufism offered to modern sensitivities what political Islam could not, due to its rigidity and dogmatic inclinations. In conclusion, it can rightly be claimed that Sufism as a tradition was quite innovative in the sense that it resolved the conflict between rational speculation and social organisation and prophetic discourse – In the wake of modernity and its supposed challenges to tradition lay in surprise with the resurgence of Sufism in the modern world. It calls into question old assumptions about the impact of modernity on tradition in general and on Islamic society in particular.