Speaker 1 00:00:13 <inaudible> and you're listening to history speaks on the Medan podcast, a series that situates the Islamic intellectual tradition within a sociopolitical context and connects it to pertinent issues. Today. Our third episode turns to Sophia ism and ideas of the self and its relation to society in Muslim mystical thought. In this episode, I speak with Sada Opta leaf, and <inaudible> about their research on Sophia ism from its early formative period in Nisha pulled to the early modern and contemporary periods in west Africa. Our conversation today covered many different topics from Sophie conceptions of the self has dynamic and fluid, the role of the paradox and Sophie thought and the simultaneous subversion and authorization of hierarchies and Sophie pedigree.
Speaker 1 00:01:08 All right, well, thank you so much. Uh, uh, Ola, Domini, and SATA. Thank you again for coming and speaking with me, uh, on, uh, the history speaks stream. Um, it really is such a, a pleasure and an honor to be able to have this conversation with you. Um, I wanted to begin by asking you both, uh, this question around the idea of the conceptions of self and selfhood in the individual. Um, so, you know, for me, one of the things that I've been thinking a lot about in my own work on Islamic law and, um, and particularly around conversations that happen, uh, in our contemporary, um, in our contemporary moment. So, you know, my sense is that a lot of the kind of contemporary conversations around autonomy and self-determination, uh, and the idea of the individual, uh, is very much based on particular conceptions of the self, uh, and, and then the, you know, the, the, the self and their relation to society at large. So I wanted to sort of begin our conversation just by asking you, um, can you give us a sense of how the self is conceptualized, uh, in, in Sophia,
Speaker 2 00:02:19 Thank you for having us audio is honestly a pleasure. Um, absolutely. Uh, you know, I I'm working medieval sooth as them, so around 11th to 13th century. And so for me, that's, it's a moment where Sufism has becoming institutionalized a bit more formalized. It's less of a, of an individual ascetic experience and more regulating the social order of a Sufi group. Right? So, and when I think about in that period of time, specifically, what self-determination or the idea of the self is, um, it's sort of occupying kind of a paradoxical state for me because was Sufi theology, uh, at that they're talking about the elimination of the self, the elimination of the individual identity and allowing yourself to clear the channel for God's will to come through, right. And at the same time you have these rival groups. So there is some self-determination required, uh, there's the creation of boundaries around what it actually means, what true dervish hood looks like in comparison to that rival group across the street was not true, not a true form of Sufism in the eyes of these writers.
Speaker 2 00:03:27 And so it's the paradox that I'm finding is that they're discussing the elimination of the self and trying to remove these particular cruxes of identity. And at the same time using the identity of the other in a kind of a way of using the friction of the identity of other two creates smoothed out version of this prescriptive ideal form of the true Sufi. Um, so I play with that paradox a lot, and I learned a lot, uh, in my specific research hat, you know, these, these are elite men who are usually writing these tests. So I'm looking at how they're talking about people who they consider different from themselves along various assays. Like some of the axes you've already mentioned gender age, uh, free three people versus enslaved individuals sometimes coming from different geographical locations. And I just kind of watch what they do with that information, whether they adopt that language, whether they change it.
Speaker 2 00:04:21 And when they're trying to refine this notion of what they consider the ideal Sufi to be at that time. Yeah. That's really interesting. And thank you, uh, Saudia for having us on the podcast. I work mainly on, um, Sufism in west Africa from like, I don't know, 18th century to the present day. Um, and do you see that same paradox, uh, or similar paradox you could say of this? The self is nothing or the self is everything and it's both at the same time, so that the self is, um, is something to be, it's an illusion to be overcome this being like the enough's, uh, but then the kind of divine self, the sear or the happy, or the alpha or something is not other than God or not other than the profits or the reality of, uh, the deep reality of human consciousness or human subjectivity is not other than, uh, divine consciousness or, or divine subjectivity.
Speaker 2 00:05:20 And this is realized in the state known as fun annihilation, which is the passing away in isolation. Oh, the kind of ordinary everyday. So, um, and then the backhaul, the subsistence in so-called, uh, uh, the subsistence by God, uh, by the divine, uh, self to discuss Sufi notions of the self, you have to situate the self within soupy cosmology in which you have this hierarchy of levels of reality in a different groups have different, uh, formulations, um, of this. But basically you have at the kind of, um, different Sufi switch that hierarchies, whether you'll have like at the, your body, then you have, uh, naps, then you have, uh, uh, hearts than more subtle and you have, uh, an apple and intellect and more subtle. You have then more subtle, you have a sear, then you have a, uh, coffee more hidden than you have an app.
Speaker 2 00:06:22 So you have this kind of a spectrum of the self, or you have a similar Sufi notions going back to the classical period of different levels of ness, NAFSA, Sala. Bisou the soul that commands the evil NAFSA, Lawana the blaming. So naps on will hammer the inspire to all the way up to NAFSA. Kameelah the perfect or perfected. So most of these conceptions of self it's, it's kind of a spectrum and it's embedded, as you said, in a social context, but then there's social context within Sufi, cosmologies gets a bit more complicated because it's metaphysical, you have living dead saints, you have the profits, you have the messengers, you have angels, you have, and most importantly, you have got, um, who are all part of the, you could say social media who are interacting, um, and defining and shaping, uh, this spectrum concept of, of, of the self and shout out to my colleague, uh, how many photo could just publish this, this book, um, sculpting the self, I think, would be university of Michigan press that puts, uh, some of these ideas from, I think mostly south Asian and like Persian, uh, later Sonic philosophy and supers them into conversation with, uh, um, some Western philosophical ideas and neuroscience and stuff like that.
Speaker 1 00:07:45 Yeah, that sounds, that sounds really wonderful. And I really appreciate, uh, you know, this, uh, point that you're bringing up onto that many, which is that, uh, you know, that, that even like what it is that we conceptualize to be the, you know, the social or society that the self is in relation to is very different. When you bring in this kind of cosmology in which there are the saints who are living the saints who have passed, there are, you know, there's the prophet there has gone. Uh, it reminds me of this. Um, so when I was doing my master's at McGill, I did my thesis then on, uh, female jurists in the pre-modern period. Uh, and I was, you know, researching on the life of this 14th century, female jurist, uh, who was a contemporary with eBay Mia. And there's this really interesting entry, um, uh, about her, where, uh, you know, what's being described as a, she used to climb the member, uh, at the mosque to sort of sermonize, uh, to these large crowds that would show up.
Speaker 1 00:08:40 And supposedly, um, <inaudible> Mia felt uncomfortable with this and decided that he wanted to stop her, but, but, you know, he sort of prayed on it and slept on it. And then of course had a dream where the prophet comes to him and says, this is a pious woman, right. And then he'd been Tamia never said anything to her, didn't try to stop her. And it's, you know, this really interesting kind of moment where you can see that, you know, the, both like the idea of what is appropriate or not, is not always determined by, you know, uh, social norms or legal rulings, but that there are these other, uh, you know, forces that can, can intervene and they are compelling for people. And if you move outside of that cosmology, there's no way of ever being able to account for the agency right. Of the prophet or of God and the experiences that people have with them and the ways in which that shapes right. The, their relationship with other people.
Speaker 2 00:09:35 So these visionary encounters with the profit are really big in, uh, west African Sufism. I'm the biggest Sue for them as a whole, but they're really central in west African Sufism, as early as the 15th century, the chef in Timbuktu, uh, celiac here <inaudible>, uh, said to have had visions of the prophet every night, um, until he did something, which ended the profit and then got them back. Um, and, uh, they were really key in these big Sufi reform movements. Um, almost all of which, uh, began with, uh, the founder or the leader, uh, taking some kind of retreats and having a visionary encounter with the profit. So for example, um, uh, what's more than 40 <inaudible>, uh, really began when he was given, he had a visionary encounter with the profits and public Giuliani who, uh, bouncing with the turbine and gave from the sword of truth and gave him permission to which he had kind of been trying to avoid outright warfare, uh, with, with the king at the time who had been, uh, persecuting him and his followers and share Hartman Obama's mission has particularly, uh, the non-violent aspect of it.
Speaker 2 00:10:57 According to modern sources, came from a visionary encounter with the prophet Rudolph, where it tells the story wonderfully on several of his lectures, um, which I'm going to run by had these visions of the profit, but it was kind of behind the veil in Southeastern people behind the veil. And the prophet told them that these were the people of God and Bomba said, well, what can I do to, to, to be with you always like the way they are. And, uh, the prophet told him, well, there's no sacrifice you can offer it because they, they spilled their blood. Um, and they spoke blood when they didn't want to spill blood and when they didn't want to have their blood spilled, but now the time for spilling blood is over. So there's no, there's nothing you can give that will get you to their place and this devastated Bomba and he, and completed, and the prophet relented, cause he's out for our hill and said, all right, what's, you're going to suffer greatly at the hands of your enemies.
Speaker 2 00:11:51 Uh, but as long as you don't share a single drop of blood, as long as you're not violent, even so much as to crush a scorpion, um, then you'll be with me always the way they are. Um, and so this, according to moderate, uh, sources is the reason for Bambas nonviolence, the nonviolence of, uh, his, his movement, the reason why he enjoined this kind of non-violent resistance to, um, French colonial occupation. Um, and didn't engage in jihad, the jihad of the sword. Yeah, that's a good story. Saudia too. I like that story a lot too, because I think about, um, you know, what, what does it take for someone to vouch for a woman in this type of, you know, story that's shared in this anecdote? You know, if at the time you had gone to another chef at the time, would that have been enough or does it really need to be this metaphysical encounter with the prophet? So this kind of like notion of how the gendered aspect of it, for me sits in what it takes for a woman to be allowed or to be accepted, or to be invited to take up the space that she's taking through that kind of encounter. So I like that story a lot. Yeah.
Speaker 1 00:13:11 Yeah, no. And, and, uh, you know, one of the things that I, I, you know, I found the story, like I mentioned years ago, and it's just kind of stayed with me and I keep sort of, you know, ruminating on it. And, and, you know, one of the things that, um, you know, that I've been thinking about a lot now is the ways in which, uh, you know, once you kind of take away these sorts of possibilities for people, right, that the, the dream of the profit coming to you is no longer authoritative the way that, you know, in the story it was for eBay, Mia, it forecloses certain possibilities for, uh, you know, people who might have a disadvantaged position in society, in, you know, the, the, the law, because these, you know, the profit can not sort of come in and intervene or the saints can not come in and intervene.
Speaker 1 00:13:59 And, and if they do, you're sort of sitting there going, I don't know whether I should trust this or not. Right. Uh, and there's so many stories like, like this, where, you know, um, people who, uh, are seen as very sort of saintly and pious figures, uh, have these dreams that correct them in something that it is that they said or did, and then they're compelled to change that. And that is, uh, a way in which, you know, people who are disadvantaged in society can negotiate their position in the social order. Right. That then becomes completely close to them once you no longer think cosmologically in those ways. Um, I wanted to come back to this point that both of you raised that I really appreciate, which is this question of, uh, you know, this paradox in, in Sophie, in Sophia's in-between, self-annihilation, that, that is sort of at one level the goal.
Speaker 1 00:14:47 Right. Um, but then at the same time, you know, the, the, the kind of onus is on you as, as the individual, right? Like there is this kind of self-determination, that's built into that and that you are supposed to very actively engage in this process of moving down this path. Right. Two words. Uh self-annihilation and I just wanted to ask both of you to maybe, um, you know, uh, talk to us a little bit more about how you see that paradox working and, um, and how that kind of helps us understand ideas of the self when there is this paradox between the annihilation of the self, but also the self as being the one who has the, the onus and the ability to actually move towards that.
Speaker 2 00:15:31 Right. Yeah. I mean, there's, there's the, there's that interesting seafood tradition, right? That says we're not funded. And so that notion of, you know, you start with your sense of self with that enough, and that's through the process of examining data, right? So in one of the many steams of the different forms of self that you go through the hierarchy of the self, I think Dominique was just talking about it, then that itself, that takes account for his own actions. That level of the self is supposed to be one of the first stages you reach, where you're sitting there. And you're examining all the aspects of how the mechanism of the self works for you. And that includes the illusion of who you are in the world in society. It also includes the things that you may not know, this slide ways that either eat or self insert itself into, um, your interactions in particular, in your relationship with God and in your relationship with, uh, the ship.
Speaker 2 00:16:27 And then you move past that. So if that's the starting point, do you start to sort of merge with the teacher in some of these traditions, right? You, you start to not, or eliminate yourself, let yourself in your teacher. So then there's this mirror itself in, uh, this individual that has more authority for you stands before you, and you, you mimic them or you imitate them and you allow yourself to dissolve into them, and then you move. So it's almost like you start with the small self that kind of moves through these different phrases, absorbed these other people, or these other identities, and slowly starts to lose through the absorption into higher beings or into more authoritative beings. You start to lose the self that you started with. So I think the paradox works as a lot of the time and Sufi thought and NCP teachings, right? They use of the paradox is sort of it polarizes different aspects, and it allows something new to come through. So it's the same thing, sort of you polarize the identity, the self, um, in two different directions, and then you allow it all to fade away and move through. So that's just one of one way, I think we can conceptualize how the paradox actually has a pedagogical function on, on the spiritual path.
Speaker 2 00:17:41 Yeah, I think this, um, the, the step-by-step the stage, the different McCombs or Manasseh aspect is really key because as long as you still experience yourself as having a separate self, you have responsibility as you know, you're, you're self-directed, but that's, for most of these traditions, something that's moved beyond and then in a certain sense required. So, uh it's so what, what happens, uh, like for example, the Gianni tradition that I studied, first thing that happens, uh, is out law. That's the first one. So you get a certain set of ADKAR exercises that you do. Um, you do that, your experienced fan outfit, law, you, you, you don't experience yourself. You don't perceive yourself, you don't perceive anything else. You just perceive, uh, God, the divine reality, no distinction as that, then you continue in that until you get annihilation in the prophet. And then after that annihilation in maybe what, like <inaudible> or one of these other realities, and that's a way of kind of integrating your ordinary separate self with this kind of, uh, opening this fat, this opening up onto a kind of expanded divine consciousness.
Speaker 2 00:18:58 Um, or another way of looking at it is in cosmologically. Everything comes from God. Everything's manifested from God through the person of the prophet and everything returns to God through the spiritual reality of, of, of, of the profit as well. So that means that the underlying substratum, the underlying reality of everything is this prophetic reality is that Mohammed DIA is, is the divine reality. And you have all these verses who is closer to you, then you're joking, laughing the profits closer to the believers in their own cells. Um, these, these kinds of things are interpreted in light of this cosmology and, and, and these and these experiences. Um, and so the, uh, this, I mean, it's, it's kind of this, this basic paradox of, uh, of separate self or a separate will, which is generally in the like, posts not be tradition. They love using the, the verse of the Koran <inaudible> you didn't throw when you through God through, right?
Speaker 2 00:19:57 So there's, there's a negation of, you could say the action of the separate self, then there's the affirmation, then there's the negation of it again. So you didn't throw so no action of the separate self when you through, rather than as the affirmation of it. And then there's also the negation, um, as, as well. So you have the, have the fun now, but for now it's not the end. The end is the end is the subsistence. Cause we adjusted, like you can't tell you can't, you can't drive a truck in front of it. You can't, you can't eat for now. You know, you're not going to be around very long. The goal is to say that the combination, Gemma Farquhar jump the combination of union and separation the union of union and separation. So in front now you just see, God, you don't see things in separation and Jessie things, you don't see God in, in the union of separation in union, you see things in God and God and things.
Speaker 2 00:20:51 And so it's a kind of union of, I have no self with, uh, the, with the, the relative existence of, of a separate of self as at the jelly, as a divine, um, manifestation. Um, and that's done through following in the footsteps of, of the, of the prophet or even finding an isolation in the profit. So it's, it's, it's complicated, it's, it's paradoxical, but there's a, there's a real continuity of, uh, of discourse and practice, particularly from the cost of not being electric in century. Um, onwards of course, are all these interesting differences and competitions amongst different groups, but there's, there's a lot of similarity, um, on this, uh, particular front alberca schema. And it's this conception of the self that's burned up, gone away and then comes back, uh, in a certain relative sense, like, like a dream, like a dream, like where, you know, it's like, we're all gods is one of my favorite analogies when teaching like God dreams all of us into existence. And so were these dream characters, and then you kind of wake up and realize there's nothing but God, but then come back in the dream. But with this consciousness that contextualizes everything.
Speaker 1 00:22:03 Hmm. That's a beautiful analogy. So, and so powerful in terms of understanding, you know, this kind of way of understanding human existence and, you know, and what is real, um, and you know, part of what I hear both of you, uh, talking about, which I, you know, would love to sort of hear your thoughts more on is, you know, is that, um, uh, in some ways, you know, are kind of like more common conceptions of, you know, the, you know, who you are that, um, circulates in, in, in our world today, uh, you know, when you hear these kinds of articulations of be yourself, right? Like, know who's your authentic self things of that nature. Uh, and you know, and part of what I hear both of you talking about is that, you know, in, in, in, as kind of Sophie understanding of the, of the human self, it's so much more complex in terms of like, what is even the self that exists in you? There are all these, you know, the <inaudible> and then there is the self that is, you know, unmade and remade. Uh, so, you know, it really raises this question of like, well, who are you, right? Like, what is you? And I'd love for, you know, to hear both of your thoughts on, on this.
Speaker 2 00:23:16 Yeah. That's a, that's a good, that's a good question. Um, in fact, that's the beginning of some of these Sufi treatises, like, uh, Gosha and Eros and things like that. It's like, what is, what, what is the I, uh, what is, what is the human, um, intellect? Yeah, it's um, at one of the most interesting answers <inaudible> stepson and, uh, you know, kind of successor, uh, puts it in very philosophical, theological language that the, the right, the, the quiddity, uh, the, what, what is this of the human being is simply, would you, so, you know, typically Islamic philosophy theology, you have the Mahia and the, would you like the, what it is, the being of it? Um, uh, and in the case of the necessary existence, the Mar here, the what is it? Liquidity is simply its existence. He says being made in God's image means that's the same thing for human beings that they have no mafia, human beings have no, uh, in chronic form of small combat loom have no fixed station have no, what it is that's different from the philosophical, you know, rational animal or hairless bipedal, uh, you know, some pelvis fatherless bipedal or something like that.
Speaker 2 00:24:31 Um, it's the definition of a human being is that that which cannot be defined, um, because that's what it means to be made in the image of God who also cannot be limited, um, or, or defined. But I mean, generally kind of practically speaking again, it usually goes to this kind of spectrum thing. So it's like, which level of reality are you talking about? Which, which level of this self are you talking about? Are you talking about, uh, physical self? Are you talking about my social self, or you talking about my psychological self, or you talking about my subtle or imaginable self, you know, the self you encounter and dreams that you dream with, or you're talking about my spiritual self. Um, and then there's this notion of ion and fabrics are these fixed entities, which are that the self is who you are in, God's eternal knowledge of you.
Speaker 2 00:25:20 Um, and that's, I guess if you wanted to, yeah. That's so there's this whole spectrum of self-worth from just kind of, uh, would you the most luck, an absolute being all the way down to, you know, uh, the ship of Theseus paradox with my toenails, you know, like all, all of my, all of the, all of the physical parts of me have gone away, um, and, and then, and replaced everything, everything from my dust to, to, uh, you know, my, my iron in, in, in God's knowledge and while in some schemes, one is higher than the other, again, with this later Sufi, uh, schema they'll flip things often, and we're like the physical as the highest, because it's that which, uh, has the most herbal DIA. Yeah. That was beautifully explained. Thank you, Natalie. Um, that, that notion of the lack of fixedness is in my work, when I'm learning, when I'm reading these two free texts, it's, it's part of the it's, how is it looking at methodology almost right.
Speaker 2 00:26:21 You know, the goal is to shake you out of your conceptions of reality. So the lack of fixedness to say that, that there's no real human self is in God's, right. There's no other way to describe a route, your reality. Um, so the lack of fixedness and the use of reversal, they use of, you know, saying, oh, you thought your body was a lowest form of reality. It's actually the highest, what it mainly points to is that there's not, there's not going to be, I think there's not going to be a stable, consistent teaching about these things. It will be sort of in that moment with the particular, you know, these teachers, students relationships are so important. So would the student before you was their own relatively fixed notions that you would have to break as the teacher, you would offer something that would reverse their idea of reality, not so that they hold on to that as a new reality, but so that they break out of any notion of fits in this in the first place to carry you through an experiential understanding for once, rather than any mental construction of who you are in the world outside of the world.
Speaker 1 00:27:35 Yeah. I love this point that you're bringing up solder about the, you know, the, the, the, that there isn't a kind of fixed notion and as point that you brought up, um, <inaudible> about like enlightenment thought in this kind of model of the self, right? That is, that is, uh, presented. Um, and it kind of reminds me of, you know, some of this, uh, stuff that I've read on, on, on possession, you know, spirit possession, possession by gods and goddesses. Um, you know, that is trying to make this point that, you know, in, in, in that kind of conception of the world and the, you know, the human in this sort of broader, um, uh, you know, world, there are all of these, you know, it, isn't the kind of fixed self that can be relied upon to be the same from moment to moment, right.
Speaker 1 00:28:20 And that is somehow bounded and will not be affected by, you know, all these other forces that kind of exist in the world. It's a, it's a self that is constantly in motion and movement and, you know, it can be possessed and, you know, and all of that. And, and, and that, you know, there's a certain amount of being shaken that you need, right? That you're, you're, um, uh, dependency on something that is fixed and stable needs to be shaken in order for you to be able to move, uh, you know, in the context of, of is, um, to move spiritually. Uh, so I really love, uh, you know, this point that, uh, both of you are bringing up on, you know, that, that, that there is something that is lost to us when we come to rely on very fixed ideas of the self and a particular like, model of, you know, this is what the self is and, and, and, you know, reliance on that,
Speaker 2 00:29:08 Oh yeah. Something you and Sarah just said reminded me of, so there's this doctrine, uh, but it gets picked up often attributed to him. It's very popular in the west African tradition of the renewal of creation at each moment. So that's at each moment, everything in the universe is being created in the cosmos is created and returned to God in the same breath in time and space, like the images you see on like a projector or something like that. So there's actually in a certain sense, there's no continuity from one moment, and here it's not even like regular tempo moment, but one moment of existence to the next, each one is a completely new manifestation from, from, from the divine. So, I mean, similar to certain Buddhist notions of, of, uh, no, no, no self words, um, at, at a certain level. Um, so yeah, it's very, you get all of these, but again, all of these pictures and conceptual, um, uh, you could say constructions or models, I think are things like that. Aren't meant to just kind of stand alone as, uh, just a picture of what reality is, but are meant to produce, produce, produce itself. They're the meant to produce a particular kind of self-worth.
Speaker 1 00:30:23 Yeah. I, I, you know, I often find, uh, when I'm teaching this, as I feel like one of the most challenging things to get across to students, uh, teaching, you know, about Sophia's, um, but you know, more broadly, uh, teaching about, uh, the pre-modern, uh, Islamic had context, because I think there's such an idea of, you know, who the self of what the self is and what the individual should want that students come in, uh, believing to be universally true. Right. And, and as an absolute good, and to then be introduced to this whole other world of how to think about the idea of the self, that it's not fixed, that there's constant movement and like, you know, who is even the self, right? There's this cacophony of voices inside you, right. There's the, sort of the, the, the, the different ways in which the different, uh, <inaudible> are pulling on you.
Speaker 1 00:31:11 Then there is the west west. I write those whisperings of, uh, of the, of Satan and other sort of, uh, you know, uh, evil forces. So who, you know, how do you know whether this voice is your own, right? Are you trusted or not, like all of these things are things that people are trying to think through, uh, and, and, and, you know, to get students to sort of, because I, you know, what I've sort of experienced it is that students are often willing to, uh, challenge their own conception of what is right and wrong provided that, uh, what they're uncomfortable with is an affirmation of an individual's, you know, autonomy and determined self-determination. So it's like, you know, they come across things that they see as, uh, you know, that they're sort of uncomfortable with. Uh, and then, you know, and then they're like, okay, I can accept this if this is what the individual wants.
Speaker 1 00:32:01 Right. And to how to kind of move them to recognize that, well, you know, in this context, it's not just that this is what the individual wants, right. That this is a kind of articulation of their own desire, but that they are actually very critical of their own desire. So this has meant precisely to undo, you know, their own desire. And, uh, you know, it's so challenging to kind of get, uh, you know, people to understand that, because it is so different in some ways than the ideas of, um, self and self-affirmation that have become, so, um, you know, such a, such a truth for us. Yeah.
Speaker 2 00:32:37 I ended up doing think it's sort of takes me a while to discuss in a more informal setting with students at kind of way of thinking about these people as human beings, just like you and me with very similar ways of trying to solve problems. Right. But that the result solution they might come to might be very different because of their particular socio-historical circumstances, but to do the thought experiment of putting yourself in their shoes at that time, with the resources that you have and having a problem with the self come up, or I have them think through what would, what would you do in those shoes? And a little bit of the consistency of the human experience on the outside might look very different. Right? Right. Exactly. Yeah. I, from talking to students about things where they do encounter this, like exercise or diets, or, um, or love, particularly my favorite classes that teach us what is love class, we read a lot of love poetry. Um, so when you think about, okay, well, your beloved doesn't want to see you right now, but you want to see him or her. So do you do what you want or do you do what your beloved wants?
Speaker 2 00:33:51 So these, these kinds of things, getting creative and getting them to put themselves in either a similar situation or find an analog, or you want to look at all the freedom breakdown. So it's half, if you do a gymnast, they can do all this stuff. How do they get that freedom to do that? Kind of, I put on some music and tell you guys to dance. Half of you were just going to be doing the same awkward, shaping things, whatever, you know, but, you know, unless you grew up dancing, but you know, how do people who are really good dancers get like that by this there's a context there's kind of discipline there's, there's training whether formal or informal. Um, and that's, that's how you get this kind of freedom. Um, and so examples like this, I think give them a little bit of, uh, a little bit of a window into what it's like.
Speaker 1 00:34:46 Yeah. That's a really great point that both of your raising of like getting, you know, getting students to see themselves, that these ideals that we have around individual self-determination right. And that whatever you do you do, because you choose to do it, uh, you know, is even in our own realities, doesn't play out. I, I brought this up recently with, uh, students this semester about, you know, coming to the institution, like you choose to come to the institution, you want to come to the institution, but that didn't mean that you chose every aspect of what that decision would then mean. And oftentimes you would disagree with right ways in which you're expected to live while at this institution or what the culture of the institution is that you are then really being molded into. Um, but you, you know, you do it and some might resistant, but somewhat also kind of, you know, lean into it because, you know, at some level you're invested this, the institution creates desires in you that didn't exist before. Right. So it's like really complicates, uh, you know, this idea that like, it's just me making decisions, you know, every step
Speaker 2 00:35:46 Of that. Yeah. Actually remember we talked about this with, with our classes. Cause I was like, okay, so you guys all chose to take this class, but I know some days you don't want to come to class. Right. So you don't want to turn to just of zoom, but some of you did it anyway. So you get a sense of this kind of complexity, but I mean, it gets really deep in the Sufi sense of this famous saying that again gets repeated throughout the ages, down to the present date with, from a <inaudible> or do I want not to want, I want to not want, um, and th the kind of, uh, abandonment of, of wanting as being freedom, um, is a really, really strong, uh, thread that runs through a lot of these different traditions that eventually get called super zoom. Right?
Speaker 1 00:36:35 Yeah. That's a really incredible point about, you know, like, like what is freedom, right. And what are we, if, if, if liberation is the aspiration, well, liberation from what right. Uh, and, and liberation to do what, and in the example that you're giving is a, is a very, you know, a particular way of understanding, you know, what you're trying to free yourself from until, you know, into what purposes, um, I wanted to, you know, ask, uh, this question about which I think, you know, for a lot of people who study Sophia's, um, but also for the many of us who kind of read, you know, your scholarship and are very interested in Sophia's, um, uh, you know, uh, are, are kind of, sort of trying to grapple with, which is this kind of hierarchical aspect of Sophie thought, uh, and, you know, we'd love to, you know, kind of get your thoughts on it.
Speaker 1 00:37:26 And this is, again, something that, you know, in my own work, I see that, um, you know, the kind of, uh, social order that's imagined by the jurists that I spend a lot of time reading is one that is, uh, you know, very, very hierarchical along, uh, you know, a very complex matrix of different, um, identities, uh, you know, that, that set up a number of different hierarchies. And I always, you know, find myself both really appreciating the, the way in which they understand the individual as very much a part of, and, you know, located in, um, you know, in that those kinds of, uh, you know, social connections and relations, but then also, you know, start to feel uncomfortable with that kind of hierarchical ordering of it. Uh, so I would love to hear your thoughts on how this, uh, you know, um, manifest itself in, uh, in, you know, the particular time periods and, uh, thinkers that you're looking at, and also how you kind of grapple with this question.
Speaker 2 00:38:24 Yeah, that's a great question. I think definitely the concept of the hierarchy gets even stricter and the debts that you have, these levels of beings who continue their work in the unseen and, and the, and the pyramid, so to speak the hierarchy itself is so is so rigid that it's, it's almost like the attendance of their will, as channels of all was well God's will, you know, so you, you kind of follow through in their footsteps in that sense. So, uh, and then it manifests even in the physical plane, when you have a Sufi order with the ship, and then you have his Khalifa's or, you know, whatever this team might be, that these things that the authority that you invest in these individuals, you can't just invest in anybody. So I think hierarchy is one of the things people find quite tough about Sufism, for a tradition, that's all about, you know, the lack of fits in this of the self and all these things, and being one with God with no intermediary and all, all that kind of stuff.
Speaker 2 00:39:27 But one way that I sit and I conceptualize, I think through it is that while we've been talking about a lack of fixedness of the self and eliminating the self, um, at the same time, while the individual self, the goal is to eliminate it, the container in which you do so is actually quite rigid hierarchy, right? So it's, it's through the ability to maintain the structure and the integrity of the container I eat through the Cecilia or the chain of transmission from teacher to student. It's only through the rigidness of that, that a lot of times, if the belief is that you can receive the teachings as purely as possible in order to walk the path in the best way. So then you have that kind of paradox. You have the outside being rigid so that the inside can fade 10 dissolve.
Speaker 2 00:40:13 Yeah, that's a great, um, I mean, it's really complicated when you get into this social stuff, cause you get all kinds of forms of social organization, social hierarchy, there, antinomian Sufi movements, which were like all, I mean, even present that to no means will be once we're all against certain social hierarchies, you have very much Sufi movements that are wedded to, or that produce new hierarchies or verbal, all, all different kinds of things. But I think the key is in what Sarah was saying, ah, there's this famous quote, um, that defines kind of super prism as, or Woody as all hit on and <inaudible> bought in on, uh <inaudible>. So it's, it's outward slavery and urban data is like really slavery and inward freedom. And that's among the character traits of the, of the noble. So there's a certain sense in which the outward is, is really, really fixed in, in some ways.
Speaker 2 00:41:07 So like there's no, almost no compromise on saying the five prayers on time and all, you know, in, in, in some orders in congregation and then the rules of these different orders that come a really, really strict, but that's how you're supposed to get the kind of, uh, inward freedom. So it's at what level is the freedom, but then again, it gets with this cosmology, there's the potential for everything to turned upside down, right? So you have the social ads, but then you also have the profit coming to people and initiating them directly. You have. So for all of these different things, this, this kind of opening into the vape allows for these, um, what can seem to us like exceptional circumstances, but which in so-called pre-modern or non-modern, uh, uh, societies, our settings almost like par for the course in which you have, you have the eruption of their head into the shadow of the unseen into the, into the, into the scene, which produces new social orders, new hierarchies, disrupts things.
Speaker 2 00:42:07 So you have all of these. So you have loads and loads of Sufi stories in which, uh, like Sarah was talking about, you have this hierarchy of saints and like the top people are all enslaved outwardly, you know, they're, they're all, um, they're all, uh, at the lowest level. I mean, this, this has become like a trope in, in, in Soviet literature. So these, these people are at the lowest rung of society outwardly, but at the, at the highest levels of the kind of divine hierarchy that governs the universe and, and, and, and, and everything, and this is complicated because in a certain sense, it's this it's subversive of the hierarchy, but there's a kind of trace of it, reinforcing the hierarchy. Like, oh, it doesn't matter that this, this, uh, this, this unjust or whatever social hierarchy, um, because these people are at, you know, at the, at the top of, of the inward hierarchy, but then you have all of the Sufi, particularly in west Africa, you have all of these Sufi revolutionary movements that create new societies and new.
Speaker 2 00:43:10 Uh, some of them according to Rudolph were, uh, being anti-slavery or at least anti slave trade. And then with the case of <inaudible>, uh, as well too, uh, intentionally destroying the, the kind of cast system that exists. So he showed how many Bomba leader in the colonial, what was then becoming colonial French. Uh Senegambia uh, in the early 20th century, late 19th century intentionally takes people from leather, working families from these cast, it like low cast from slave backgrounds and puts them in charge of people from scholarly families. So he's intentionally trying to, but then the order is ordered, develops once its own structure and you get a different hierarchy there as well. So you're constantly get it. There are these social hierarchies that are established, uh, Sufi is, are part of these outward social hierarchies, but because of this kind of openness of the unseen, there's this potential, again, not, not always realized for this, uh, disruption or subversion of these, uh, social hierarchies or for a re inscription and, uh, support of existing social hierarchies.
Speaker 2 00:44:22 Yeah. That's a, that's a really good point. Um, but also to your point, Satya, I think what's vocalized with Sufi texts, particularly when there is, uh, an actual conscious effort to put down teachings. What's vocalized is usually the tip of the iceberg on purpose. Right. And so, again, just any kind of statement of equality I, or no, or otherwise I don't, I don't sit and take it as that's what that person believes. I sit and think, what are they trying to meet or goes through in reading the sentence even more so in person. Right? So if you know, a particular, I'm saying with a particular Sufi teacher, and they're explaining something as a radical equality, it's as for me as a scholar of Sufi teachings and literary devices, and all these kinds of rhetorical moves, I'm thinking, what experience are they trying to put me through?
Speaker 2 00:45:18 What version of reality are they trying to induct me into? And so the words are almost avail in themselves. They're an illusion in themselves that it can be very, very hard to pinpoint whether or not a particular Sufi teacher or master actually believes these words, or they're using them as a distraction to put you through a process of transformation that's at the heart of their pedagogical technique. Yeah. I was also thinking, I mean, the things that have said, but there's also so much more to just like, uh, the embodied, like the kissing of hands, the, um, who's serving of water. So like some chefs will go and serve all of their disciples, water, other shapes we'll sit and then people come and serve them water, right. And massage their feet and, and do other things. Other people, they hate people kissing their hands. They won't let it happen.
Speaker 2 00:46:11 Others, you know, go around and let everybody kiss the hand. There's all of these different ways. And I think what Sarah was saying is there, um, I mean, for some people might just like to get their hands case, but if you think of it, in terms of like serious Sufi pedagogy, it's also being a certain progress. A certain pedagogical lesson is also serving as the shot up as, as illusions that are supposed to help train or develop and teach certain things to the disciples. So you see this in written texts, you see this in gestures, you see this, um, and if a body language greetings, um, it really kind of all, all, all comes together and you see this a lot, this stuff I know the best is if not be an afterwards in which they'll just constantly flip these hierarchies onto the set-up one hierarchy and in the next three pages and just completely flip it, right. And then the next it's like a kaleidoscope, you just keep turning it and you get a different perspective on it. And it's, it's meant to kind of, it's like what, putting you through conceptual yoga or something like that. You go through these different positions and that's supposed to transform the way you see things, you see yourself and the way you're supposed to transform your being. Right. Right.
Speaker 1 00:47:22 One of the things I've seen in, in, in my own work, um, you know, which is, which is not to sort of idealize or romanticize, uh, you know, hierarchical, uh, you know, social orders. But one of the things that I've been thinking about is that, you know, in the, in the sort of legal world, um, there are so many different hierarchies, right? Like there isn't just one hierarchy, there are many, many different kinds of hierarchies. And so, you know, having a world in which there's so many different hierarchies that are functioning allows for people to move across the different hierarchy. So they're not always only in a disadvantaged position. Uh, and, and I think that, you know, a lot of us that have been thinking about Islamic law and particularly like from a kind of, you know, thinking about gender and Islamic law have kind of missed the ways in which, you know, different kinds of women might sit in different places in the social order, depending on which hierarchy, right.
Speaker 1 00:48:16 We're looking at because, uh, you know, woman and man, right. That gender hierarchy is not the only one. And so if you are a free adult woman who, you know, can sort of has the financial ability to also, uh, you know, uh, have slaves, for example, right now you are in a hierarchical relationship over in to people. Right. And so what does it mean then to only see you as a woman who has disadvantaged? And so those multiple kinds of hierarchies that are functioning at the same time also allows movement, uh, you know, across the hierarchies that in it's, you know, in another way kind of, you know, challenges and, and ideas.
Speaker 2 00:48:54 Yeah. Because when, when we're looking at the prescriptive models, right. We're not seeing where it's not, for me, it's like, sort of like when you're on a sidewalk, they're laying down these tones, but there's ways that grass shoots through anyway. And so depending on the intersection of the person's identity, and I think intersectional methodology really works well in history as well. And it's not used as much. That's, that's where we start to you. If you analyze these things, a lot of each other, how does free elite woman who owns enslaved individuals operate in this circumstance versus that circumstance when you line them all up and then compare that with other people, you start to see how these systems are not, as they're not consistent, really at all, they're sort of points that are put on the horizon. And then people are just trying to do their own thing.
Speaker 2 00:49:39 They walk their own paths. So, um, so that's, that's, that's where I really think, uh, intersectional gender and methodologies, wait, is way more useful and would serve Sonder studies much better in this Oracle context, because then it allows you to break some of the ways that we even as scholars, we categorize things as a social hierarchy as if it's rigid and operates in that way. When the lived realities is often, always much more complex, right? I love that image of the grass growing up through the, through the concrete or the stepping stones or things like that, because people expect these there's a certain expectation. I think of scholars that these social hierarchies are systems of oppression or something will be like logical or people, people doing the people, doing things and re reacting to different circumstances. And I mean, they're rarely Latin, there's a certain logic to them, but they're rarely logical.
Speaker 2 00:50:36 Like racism's not that logical. You can understand it and how it works, but it's rarely or sexism or any of these other things. Um, and it, with souffles though, it gets really, uh, very interesting because you have these people who come from, you know, presumably the lowest backgrounds, you have black enslaved women, um, who, uh, are lauded as these great saints and put on top of these, these, these hierarchies, um, of, of sanctity and like, oh, they're the ones you have to ask to pray if there's a drought or they're the ones who, so you get, you get these, these, these tropes and even like contemporary examples. So we have people who are, um, looked down on by society, like sell shoes. They're like walking around selling shoes. Um, and then somebody will realize their status or something like that. And then their social situation will change if they want it to, some people just want to be left, left alone. But so you get this, these interesting possibilities of subverting or changing the social one when you add these kinds of spiritual hierarchies, in addition to these complicated and complex and dynamic, um, social hierarchies as, as well.
Speaker 1 00:51:50 Yeah. That's there reminds me what you're saying with many about, you know, this kind of ethic that was drilled in us as kids when we were little, uh, you know, growing up in Boston about, you know, being very careful, um, in your dealings with people who are, uh, you know, who've been dealt with unjustly or who are oppressed or who are vulnerable in society because the, you know, the, the, the distance between them and God is very, very short. And so, you know, you, you want to be very careful because if you sort of step the wrong way and they pray against you, right. You are going to get destroyed. Uh, and you know, and I mean, obviously that didn't mean that people were actively working to change the conditions that these people were in, but it does kind of, you know, in some ways provide, uh, uh, you know, a certain kind of spiritual tool for those people to be able to navigate their situation.
Speaker 1 00:52:41 Right. And they oftentimes did call on that right. In that, like, if they felt like somebody was being cruel to them, right. They would call in this way of saying, you know, be careful in the way that you relate to me. Right. Because I don't want to make a, you know, a prayer against you. Right. Uh, and that, and that had a power, right. That, that, that did actually have powered. It would silence people. Right. Uh, in ways that I think certainly is not something that, you know, I have seen since my childhood now that I've moved to a totally different, you know, different contexts, there's all these stories about these, you know,
Speaker 2 00:53:24 They have the spiritual, but, you know, I, I think about the function of those stories, a lot in my research and, you know, it's not an invitation to be in their situation ever. Those, there are very, very much tropes that allow the elite male presumed reader to reflect on himself through another, that he considers completely and drastically different from himself. Right. So in the context that you're talking about, and I had similar things growing up in plea and in Egypt, right. Um, the idea is that, you know, what's the lesson, right? The idea is that you don't know, who's supposed to just be careful. Things are not as they seem. And then that same lesson is in the stories that are, that are repeated in Sufi tats, where it's like, things are not as they seem, but in the stories, the difference I've found is that they, at the same time we enforce it, that still housing should stay, though.
Speaker 2 00:54:16 It seems may not be as they seem, but the outward social hierarchies, how things should stay just as this one person in the desert, who looks at an old woman who didn't have anything ended up being able to do the spiritual feet or cut off or whatever doesn't mean that now you can go and meet her the head of your Sufi order, right. It's a very specific momentary flash of spiritual authority. That's supposed to get the male reader to think about themselves and how they can be better, so they can end up becoming the head of the Sufi order. So, yeah, I think that's definitely how they use sometimes, but classically, and then, especially in the west African case, you do get the opposite. You do get people from moly backgrounds being named as prominent McAdams, given each other, <inaudible> put over people from traditional elite backgrounds officially and unofficially, and the ways in which this Zahid and bought in discourse, um, that, that circulates, okay, this person is the Halifa is all Huron, but bought-in on this person is really this, this old woman is really the holy fuck.
Speaker 2 00:55:23 So we should all, but then that translates into actual social capital for that person. So that person like, um, so I've, I've seen both contemporary examples and then even in, in, in texts and things like this. So you have this interesting example of, um, uh, that's really widely read texts in west Africa, Abdulaziz at the BA who's a semi-literate, uh, Fessy, um, not, not that well educated, um, comes from attending family. Although he sees he's a say it, and he has this incredible fat, like Hitler comes to him and teaches him these prayers and has this incredible family. And, uh, then this chef from Nigeria comes and completes his training and does all this wild stuff. And anyway, he becomes the teacher of all of these full cohort infest, very prominent elite scholars in, in Fez who kind of, uh, through dreams and other things and asking him questions, recognize this high spiritual station and come to him for Lee.
Speaker 2 00:56:19 They'll like ask him questions and he'll ask the prophet and then give the answers back to them and reasons and explanations. And they ended up following him and becoming his students. And so you have these, like, the texts can operate and you see this in west Africa as well too. It's just like for elites to look at, oh, wow. Isn't that interesting. The roles could be reversed this function in this way of upholding the hierarchy, but you also have these ways in which the texts, and then these actual social situations lead to these strange reversals of, or even, um, what was it shot on these shifts? Allie, how us, um, you know, was, was supposedly unlettered, um, as, as, as well, you, you have these interests or these interesting stories, whether legendary or, or historical, uh, in which these bought-in or hidden or spiritual hierarchies lead to real, uh, we're not, I shouldn't say real physical, you know, lead to social or Zohair, um, reversals or, or changes, uh, as, as in behavior in social structure. Um, and, and, and other things too, and this is most like, very, very evident in all of these kinds of Sufi, jihads, and new social movements that are produced, um, in, in west Africa from the, from the 18th century onwards, which just creates all these new social orders.
Speaker 2 00:57:44 Um, I don't know, or that Sarah Sarah's point about the instrumental way in which these reversals are used to, uh, reinforce hierarchy is a really important one because they really are used like that. And it's not the only way they're used, but they, I want to make sure I don't come across as just disagreeing with that because I very much agree with it. No, you brought a really good point. Yeah. None of, none of these things will operate in a singular way. Right. They'll always operate in, in lots of different ways, depending on the needs. And one of the things I was thinking about as you were explaining the specific ways that it didn't operate that way in your examples, I was thinking immediately, well, that's interesting. I wonder what the history of dogs are in like west African soupy circles that you're talking about, that they would at some point feel that they need to have them re-educated in a certain way by people from a different social media.
Speaker 2 00:58:39 Right? So, because I'm looking at the very formative period of like the emergence of Sufi orders, where it was at least one minority with my research is that I do think, especially in initial four, where I look at it was an elite phenomenon, the Sophie's in the dervishes were very much from the upper classes of missionary society. So of course it would operate differently when you have the starting to emergence of these elite circles that are putting together what a Sufi order is, what a correct way of being a CP student is who the teacher is versus fast forward later when you've had automat. And you've had lots of unsure political infighting about these sorts of things. And then you have this reversal in the ties and, you know, let's get, do this person from a tanning family, and that has, it's a whole other different purpose.
Speaker 2 00:59:25 And I'm sure I'm very interesting sociopolitical background too. So if you have anything, I would love to hear a little bit more personally about sort of the sociopolitical context of, yeah, this is interesting trends, um, in west African Sufism, which has been kind of the expansion of SoFi devotional practices and disciplines and, uh, notions of attaining a modified direct knowledge, uh, of, of God reality and, uh, sanctity, or we lighter too from kind of elites scholarly circles or scholarly, miniatures to non scholars, Housewives, lay people, uh, young people, uh, et cetera. There's kind of an increasing, if you look at these different Sufi movements, uh, can say like start with 40 or Socrato movements. Uh, so for some is very, very important there it's there to the outside then Podio identifies and his whole clan identify very strongly with <inaudible>.
Speaker 2 01:00:34 Um, but it's Sufism is just kind of part of this, uh, integral passive package of being, uh, a good Muslim, a good scholar. And the census that the, as in, as, as a practice is still somewhat an elite practice, uh, the devotions that this popular devotion and popular piety that's influenced by be by Sophie cosmologies and other things, but they're really serious discipline of supers. Them seems to a certain degree to be limited to these, uh, to the people who have already excelled or who also Excel in these other disciplines as well. So we're kind of scholarly elite then with, um, <inaudible>, uh, movements at the turn of the 20th century. Um, you, you see a much greater popularization of socialism, uh, to, and Sufi practices and Sofia initiations to amongst non scholars. Um, amongst people don't come from a scholarly background, even amongst people who don't, uh, develop much, uh, scholarship, you know, don't develop anything beyond a basic mastery of fit or Arpita.
Speaker 2 01:01:50 Uh, they're receiving serious Sufi training, uh, as, as well. So there's an increased emphasis there on kind of popularization of Sufism. And then this, you see this dynamic really comes to the fore with the fighter, the movement of shepherd brown. Yes. Um, which promises a modifier at very high spiritual stations to really anyone who undergoes the discipline regardless of their, uh, scholarly training, knowledge of Arabic, uh, et cetera. So it's really kind of, uh, democratized the popularized, uh, very serious Sufi training, um, to the extent that, you know, people will often do to do their spiritual training and then go and study Arabic and, uh, the, uh, exoteric sciences, uh, mocha, et cetera.
Speaker 1 01:02:49 Thanks for listening to this episode of history speaks. I'm very grateful to <inaudible> and Sada for speaking with me today about their research, you can find more information about their work as well as more information about the history speak
[email protected] backslash podcast, and please stay tuned for our next episodes.
