Homoeroticism in Sufi Literature and Mysticism

By Sumit Paul, New Age Islam 28 Feb. 25 “However, the love expressed by some Sufis is more perplexing. Take, for instance, Amir Khusrau’s devotion to Hazrat Nizamuddin, where he casts himself as the yearning lover and Nizamuddin as the beloved. Such expressions blur the line between spiritual longing and personal attachment. A similar dynamic can be observed between Sri Ravi Shankar and his disciple Rishi Nityapragya—just listen to him singing Bollywood love songs for his Guruji. x1MdFmCwl-8 WnB3hdRHoac cxPCqQgoM0U Furthermore, some among them are known to have harboured forbidden desires for boys, raising serious questions about the nature of their so-called 'divine love.' This aspect of Sufism does not command my respect. Spirituality is absent where physicality obtrudes.” Your fragrant tresses are like a trap, o boy / Your face resembles the full moon, o boy! (Zolf-e moškinat čo dām ast ey pesar / ʿĀreżat māh-e tamām ast ey pesar; Divān, p. 233). (From Files) ... Though I often beg to differ with Mr Rasheed, I agree with him that the love expressed by some Sufis is a bit bizarre, if not wholly abnormal. I too have certain reservations about the 'bond' between Amir Khusro and his spiritual master Hazrat Nizamuddin. Mind you, I'm not at all against homosexuality and lesbianism as some individuals have different (sexual) orientations and inclinations. That's their lookout and one has no right to criticize or condemn that. But when homosexuality happens in the spiritual realm, some may justifiably frown upon it. I reiterate, neither Mr Rasheed nor should I cast aspersions on this facet of Iranian or Islamic mysticism. Yet, it's imperative to know the genesis of it from the perspective of Persian mysticism: That emotional ties should develop between Sufi mentors (pirs) and their young disciples in the Sufi hospices (Ḵānaqāhs) is only natural, given the widespread tendency toward homoeroticism and its social acceptance on the one hand, and the exclusion of women from Ḵānaqāhs, on the other. How far these ties went and whether they led to physical exploitation of the amatory feelings is a moot point. The Sufis explained such religiously suspect relationships by putting a Sufi interpretation on them. In Sufi Persian literature we find a good deal of discussion about both the approval and appreciation of the love of pretty faces and beautiful youths (Šāhed, lit. “Witness,” which developed a secondary meaning as a “beautiful youth” on the grounds that he was a “witness” to divine beauty), as well as admonitions and arguments against it (for a full discussion of Šāheds and God manifesting Himself in beautiful ones according to some Sufis, see Ritter pp. 484-517). With the spread of pantheistic philosophy in Iran, a great many Sufis adhered to the notion that human beauty was an instance or the manifestation of divine beauty, or rather explained their proclivity to contemplate and pay homage to earthly beauty as having recourse to the limited and ephemeral in order to reach the absolute and everlasting. They argued that appreciating earthly beauty paved the way to the contemplation of divine beauty and served as a bridge to the love of the divine. Among the leading Sufis who subscribed to this notion and defended it were Aḥmad Ḡazāli (d. ca. 1123, q.v., the author of Sawāneḥ, a major mystical work); ʿAin-Al-Qożāt, Attar, Awḥad-Al-Din Of Kermān (635/1237), Faḵr-Al-Din ʿErāqi (d. 1289, q.v.). For a discussion of their views and arguments see Foruzānfar, Šarḥ-E Maṯnawi, p. 1170; Šamisā, pp. 97-113. In mystical Ghazals such as those by ʿerāqi, Attar, Rumi (b. 1207), and Qāsem-Al-Anwār (d. 1433) or in Ghazals on which the mystically-minded readers place a Sufistic interpretation, the beauty of the Šāhed is taken to be an earthly representation of divine beauty. Such interpretations are generally derived from the Sufi philosophy of pantheism (waḥdat al-Wojud, “unity of being”), which, following the doctrine of ʿEbn Al-ʿArabi (q.v.), became very popular in Persia and in the countries influenced by Persian culture such as Turkey and India. The neglect of, or rather, the omission of and silence about, the subject has been apparently due to a number of causes, including general currents of homophobia in both the West and modern Persia, aggravated perhaps by the translation and discussion of accounts of earlier European travellers and writers on Persia and the Middle East, who had emphasized the strong element of homoeroticism in the East. The fact that in the Persian language grammatical gender is not distinguished and the 3rd person pronouns u and ān may refer to either male or female antecedents has helped to gloss over and obfuscate the true intent of Persian lyrics, even though the ḵaṭṭ and other indications of the maleness of the beloved discussed above are clear enough for everyone to see. Recently, however, the growing refusal of gays and lesbians to accept a clandestine existence and the resultant visibility of gay culture has led some writers in the West to pay attention also to the widespread currency of pederasty in the Middle East. Among these authors one may mention Minoo Southgate, pp. 413-52 and S. Murray, pp. 132-41). Homosexuality among the Sufis is an open secret; at least, researchers are in the know of it. But human spirit being the same, this tendency is prevalent in all religio-spiritual traditions and faiths. I shall discuss this proclivity among the spiritual seekers belonging to other faiths. Here, I agree with Dr Ghulam that the whole shebang of spirituality is a humbug. It's self-deception and delusional in nature. It is to be noted that the Arabic words used in Persian poetry for the beloved—Maʿšuq, Maḥbub, and Ḥabib—are all, not feminine, but masculine adjectives. Lastly, in Persian love lyrics, however, one can hardly find the kind of homosexual relationship that is understood in the modern West; love is a one-sided and asymmetrical affair. As a rule, it is between an adult male and a boy or youth. Therefore, it should be characterized more properly as paedophilia, and its physical aspect as pederasty, rather than described under the more nebulous concept of homosexual love. In a number of poems the beloved is actually called Kudak or Ṭefl, i.e., a child, a young lad, or a minor, e.g.: I love silver-bodied, ruby-lipped children. / Wherever you see one of them, call me there (Dust Dāram Kudak-E Simin-Bar-e Bijāda-Lab / Har Kojā Z’išān Yeki Bini Marā Ānjā Ṭalab;Farroḵi, Divān, p. 5). Discerning readers might be aware that the person for whom the great mystic Hafiz Shirazi was more than willing to give away cities like Samarkand and Bukhara was not a girl, but a young and coy 16-yr-old Beresh (without a moustache/beard) boy: If that Turk of Shiraz should gain my heart / I bestow upon him Samarkand and Bukhara for his black beauty spot (Agar Ān Tork-E Širāzi Be Dast Ārad Del-E Mā Rā / Be Ḵāl-E Henduyaš Baḵšam Samarqand O Boḵārā Rā; Divān, No. 3; See Browne, Lit. Hist. Persia III, P. 304). URL: https://www.newageislam.com/spiritual-meditations/homoeroticism-in-sufi-literature-mysticism/d/134746 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism