What Looks Like an Egg
and Is An Egg?
by Doris Lessing (1972)
There were the mice who, having
learned not only to eat the poison
put down for them, but to like it,
ignoring the cheese in the traps, were
caught because people learned to
coat the cheese in the traps with
poison. - Reported in The London
Daily Mail, Feb. 2, 1967.
"Do you imagine that fables exist
only to amuse or to instruct and are
based upon fiction ? The best ones
are delineations of what happens in
real life in the community, and in
the individual's mental processes."-
From "Reflections," by Idries Shah.
Islamic mysticism, generally called
Sufism, has a very large literature,
covering several epochs in the past 1,400 years, and contained in the
various cultures - Persian, Arab,
Turkish and Indo-Islamic, not to
mention Indonesian - in which
Islam has been manifested. This
literature may seem more accessible
to us than other aspects of Sufism:
but this is because of assumptions
bred into us by our culture about
"mysticism." Sufism has always been
something of a mystery to Eastern
scholars and Western orientalists
alike. Why has it so many manifestations?
How can so many people
of apparently irreconcilable views
belong to it? How can it be
"Islamic" at all if so many apparent
heretics, apostates even, have
belonged to it? How can it be
"mysticism" when it expresses itself
so variously, in science, philosophy,
literature, social organization?
Each student or school of thought
has attempted to answer these
problems by finding a " thread."
Each attempt has been unsatisfactory
because it has involved
leaving out certain material to make
what is left in fit: when you are
looking at Sufism you must look at
who is telling you about it. Many
modern commentators have tried to
show that Sufism is "borrowed"
from neo-Platonism, or Christianity,
or Hinduism: this happens because
they want to answer the question
they have themselves framed: What
is this derived from?
It is in fact the variety and lack of
coherence - looked at from restricted
points of view - which give
the clue to the nature of Sufism. The
answer is that each individual manifestation
of Sufism is planned. It
takes the shape and follows the
pattern laid down by whoever is
planning it. It is not an ideology, in
which one starts with objectives, and
then has to convince people of the
need for them, and for rigid
methods. Instead, it offers "social"
contexts for local activity, creating
hordes of apparent anomalies that
most students will not face: for
instance, the Naqshbandi Sufis are
said to abhor music in ritual - the
Chishtis employ hardly anything else.
How then can it have happened that
important Sufi teachers have been
initiated into both orders and several
others as well? People have been
amazed that Rumi had disciples from
all local religions and did not convert
them to the ideology in which he
was supposedly rooted: Islam. But
this could easily be seen to be
because he did not need to do so in
order to offer the action of Sufis'.
People find it impossible to explain how Hallaj (executed for apostasy
for saying "I am God! " ) could be
revered as one of the great Sufis by
devout Moslems down the centuries.
Both in science and in logical
human thought in the "soft"
sciences the principle is universally
accepted that the most likely explanation
based on the facts is the
hypothesis that should be taken as
the probable truth about the matter
being studied. This principle holds
good in the study of Sufism. If Haji
Bektash, a descendant of Mohammed
and a Shiah (believer in the divine
right to rule subsisting in the House
of Ali), and Abdul-Qadir of Gilan, a
descendant of Mohammed and a
Sunni (believer in rulership subsisting
in majority opinion of the whole
body of believers), could both found
Sufi systems and both be regarded as
eminent Sufis -although Shiahs and
Sunnis have regularly shed one
another's blood - the basic connection
is not in ideology at all, but in
method.
The Sufis themselves seldom
conceal that they are concerned with
presentation and effectiveness, not
indoctrination. Hence their writings
are littered with phrases like "The
color of the wine is the same as the
color of the bottle," or, "Right time,
right place, right people are
necessary."
The importance of realizing these
characteristics of Sufism is that
otherwise local expressions of Sufism
suited to one time or place might be
taken as unalterable dogma ; failure
to observe the temporary nature of
Sufi formulation forces scholars to choose arbitrary categories and
hence label certain Sufis as genuine
and others as less so. Even more
important, the mere imitation of
Sufi organization and activity
promotes the growth of false cults...
... But what are the "teachings" of
Sufism, if they are not what we have
been led to expect?
"Wisdom is not in books - only
some of the ways to search for it," is
a dictum.
But, while Sufis can teach and
have taught without words, using
gestures, atmospheres, decorations
on carpets and ceramics, for us the "vehicle" is words, since that is how
our brains are programmed; it is hard
for us, indeed impossible, to think in
any other way.
Books must not be made into
"idols" - but we can approach
Sufism remembering that the teachings
are partly contained in the
lessons, the story-structures, the
reports of human interchanges,
which are part of this body of literature...
Perhaps the best introduction to
the body of [Idries] Shah's work is his first
book - his first about Sufism: he has
written on many subjects, from
travel to magic, anthropology, music,
geology. "The Sufis" remains the
most comprehensively informative.
And one is immediately forced to
use one's mind in a new way,
because it is not written within our
formulas for exegetics. It unfolds
like a branch, and to accumulate
factual information, let alone the
deeper ranges of the material, means
to expand one's attention, to
abandon the if-and-therefore, a, b, c,
d, way of thinking that is the way we
have all been trained. There is no
index; this demonstrates a good
many different things about our
memory, and certain dependencies
of the mind.
"The Way of the Sufi" also sets
out to cover ground; it contains
everything from the use of contemplating
materials to classical Persian
literature chosen to compare its
surface meaning with its deeper
levels. I wish I could have the experience
of reading this book again
for the first time: it was like a door
opening where one least expects it.
But perhaps the most shocking to
our assumptions about "mysticism"
is "The Pleasantries of the Incredible
Mulla Nasrudin," the corpus of
Nasrudin "jokes," deliberately
created to inculcate Sufic thinking,
to outwit The Old Villain, which is a
name for the patterns of conditioned
thinking which form the prison in
which we all live.
A wag met Nasrudin. In his pocket
he had an egg.
"Tell me, Nasrudin,
are you any good at guessing
games?"
"Not bad."
"Very well
then, tell me what I have in my
pocket."
"Give me a clue then."
"It
is shaped like an egg, it is yellow and
white inside, and it looks like an
egg."
"Oh I know," said Nasrudin,
" it is some kind of cake..."
(Continue reading the full article at the Idries Shah Foundation.)
No comments:
Post a Comment