Splits and fusions

 

Credit: Hedwig Storch

“The Ismailis: Their History and Doctrines” is a voluminous and extremely detailed book by Farhad Daftary. I read the first (1990) edition years ago, and now I´ve also devoured most of the second edition from 2007. The Ismailis, Ismaili or Ismailites (not to be confused with the Biblical Ishmaelites) are a branch of Shia Islam. Or rather several branches! Their history is notoriously complex, unfolding in several quite different theatres: North Africa, Syria, Persia, Yemen and India. Sources are often meager, except those written by hostile outsiders. Since the Ismailites were frequently conspiratorial or persecuted, much original literature have been lost or is jealously guarded by small Ismailite communities. For centuries, the Ismailite Fatimid dynasty ruled an empire centered on Egypt, but when their regime was overthrown by Saladin, this "hero" destroyed their House of Learning with its large library...

Daftary begins his "door-stopper" by debunking the myth of "The Old Man on the Mountain" and "The Assassins". Apparently, all the stories we´ve memorized by heart about the hashish, the paradise garden and the beautiful young maidens are just romantic tall tales, mostly of a medieval Crusader provenance (and Marco Polo). What *is* true is that the so-called Nizari Ismailites really did carry out a long string of assassinations of political opponents (or acts of terrorism, if you like). Their Arab opponents referred to the Nizaris as "hashasheen" or hash-smokers, from which the European word "assassin" is derived. And, of course, all the hash legends! In Arabic, however, the word´s connotation at the time was "underclass rabble" rather than literal users of cannabis-derived drugs.

To summarize Daftary´s 760-page long book is impossible (over 200 pages seem to be footnotes), but a few things stand out. It´s frequently asserted that Khomeini turned Shia Islam revolutionary, probably inspired by Communism, and that the original religion was quietist. In reality, Shia Islam has always oscillated between revolutionary and conservative periods, and also between openness and concealment. Khomeini´s activities are no mystery. The original Shiites were probably revolutionaries, including the proto-Ismailites. On the "far left" of the Shia spectrum stood the Qarmatians, who ruled a "socialist" state centered on Bahrain. The Qarmatis even attacked Mekka and stole the black stone! On the "far right" we have Jafar al-Sadiq, who could perhaps be regarded as the "founder" of Shia Islam proper. Jafar is recognized as an imam (spiritual leader and esoteric exegete) by Ismailites and Twelver Shias alike, and is respected even by Sunni Muslims. The Fatimids ended up somewhere in the center of this spectrum, while the Nizaris are more to the "left". 

Another thing that stands out is that history always repeats itself (it´s almost as if the Shia idea of "cycles" is true - or not really, since their cycles are supposed to have a Messianic consummation). The Middle East has virtually always been war-torn, brutal and Machiavellian. In Daftary´s book, the Crusaders are a supporting act, not the evil imperialists everything revolves around (a common trope in both the modern Muslim world and among Western leftists). Oh, and suicide attacks were just as common during the Middle Ages as they are today. It´s not clear what could impose order on this volatile region - a centralized empire, perhaps, and even that only barely (since there is usually more than one). Another repeating theme is the revolution betrayed by its own leadership. The Abbasids used revolutionary Shia ferment to overthrow the Umayyads...and then quickly turned against the radicals, becoming aristocratic Sunnis instead. The Safavids used the Qizilbash to take power in Persia, and of course turned against them and other radical Shia or Sufi groups while consolidating their quasi-theocratic Twelver Shia regime. Even the Ismailite Fatimids follow this pattern, becoming more conservative and "Byzantine" when firmly entrenched in power in Egypt than they had been ditherto. 

And speaking of the Fatimids...

Fatimid Egypt is sometimes used as a splendid example of "Muslim religious tolerance", but the background is never explained. As a ruling Shia minority in predominantly Sunni Egypt, the Fatimids tried to broaden their social base by allying with Coptic Christians and Jews. As already noted, Saladin - often depicted as some kind of Christ-like figure by Western Islamophiles - was the destroyer of this relatively tolerant dynasty in the name of orthodox Sunni Islam (when he wasn´t busy executing Suhrawardi). It´s also interesting to note that the Fatimids even when settling down as the rulers of an imperial polity nevertheless fomented rebellious sentiments in other Muslim lands through a vast network of Ismaili missionary organizations. In modern times, we have an obvious parallel case in...Soviet Communism.

Daftary is very positive towards the Nizari Ismailites during their "Alamut period", precisely the period when they were known as the Assassins. To Daftary, the Persian Nizaris were a kind of Persian nationalists against foreign (Seljuk and Mongol) domination. They also represented the interests of the poor, downtrodden and oppressed masses in both town and country. Hasan-i Sabbah (the bad guy of much anti-Ismailite polemics) is the hero of this story. Although the author never says it aloud, Hasan-i Sabbah comes across as a Lenin: an austere, ascetic and stern man who was also a genial organizer and revolutionary strategist. But somewhere here, we also see a problem. The leaders of the Nizari Ismailites were obeyed almost without question, they were seen as infallible gurus or even god-like figures, and the Nizaris suffered virtually no splits even though the U-turns of the leadership could be pretty dramatic. In other words: the Assassins were a cult! Or perhaps an early version of a Stalinist vanguard party...

Which brings me to the religious aspect of the equation. Shia Islam believes that while prophets reveal an exoteric or public message (as when God instructed Muhammad to reveal the Quran), there is also a hidden revelation. This esoteric message is explained (perhaps only to initiates) by the imam. The first imam of the Islamic dispensation was Ali. All subsequent imams are supposed to be descendants of Ali, and they are also supposed to be designated by the previous imam during his lifetime. Sometimes, this goes together with strong apocalyptic expectations. All these things create constant problems for the Shia, when imams are killed before they can appoint a successor, change their designations, or fail to inaugurate the parousia. Hence, the constant disputes over who has the right to the imamate, and all the creative theological "solutions" to the inability of the imams to live up to the expectations. There are "hidden" imams, representatives of the imams, and (I think) representatives of the representatives. The prophetic cycles are constantly prolonged with various excuses. In one form of Ismailism, the final Qaim (Messiah) won´t appear until 130 billion years into the future, although I´m sure even on this reckoning you could get in trouble if some partial Qaim doesn´t show up on time! On the "positive" side, I suppose the ability of the imams to simply change the message at will does give the Ismailites a certain resilience, since they can simply adapt to changed circumstances. The modern Nizaris, led by the Aga Khan, are far from revolutionary...

The esoteric side of Ismailism is fascinating, but also difficult to understand. The various systems have affinities with Gnosticism, Neoplatonism and Kabbala. There are similarities to Hindu notions of gurus, avatars and cycles. Daftary makes a valiant attempt to sort out these doctrines, but I´m not sure if he entirely succeeds. As an aside, he also mentions the peculiar Druze religion, since it began as an Ismaili faction devoted to the deification of Fatimid caliph-imam al-Hakim.

"The Ismailis: Their History and Doctrine" is hardly an introductory work in any sense of that term, but if you really are into Shiite historiography (or even hierohistory), I suggest you give it a try!  

  

  

    

The mystery of the Druze

 

An interesting YouTube clip about the Druze, a minority religion in Lebanon, Syria and Israel. Popularized scholarly material. 

The Secret Order of the Druze

“Sons of Abraham: The Secret Order of the Druze” is a relatively short documentary about the Druze, a peculiar religious minority in Lebanon, Syria and Israel. The documentary was originally released in 1984 and seems to be French, but in this version the narrator speaks English.

Since the Druze are organized as a secret initiatory order, we don´t learn *that* much about their actual teachings. The Druze religion originated in Egypt during the 11^th century. Its prophet was a man named Hamza, who preached the divine nature of al-Hakim, a Shia Muslim Fatimid ruler of Egypt. Muslims, Christians and Jews seem united in condemning al-Hakim as literally insane, but in the documentary, his destruction of religious shrines is rather seen as a form of theologically motivated iconoclasm.

The Druze seem to have a Neo-Platonist view of God or the Divine, and venerate Greek philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle and Pythagoras as divine manifestations. Biblical characters also play a prominent role. The documentary shows Druze pilgrimages to the supposed tombs of Jethro and Job, the former being seen as the “initiator” of Moses. We also get to see a Druze marriage and a funeral. The Druze are most well known for their belief in reincarnation, explored more in detail in another documentary also available at YouTube, “To the ends of the Earth: Back from the dead”.  

A curious fact about the Druze is that their community in Israel supports the Jewish state, even to the point of doing military service in the Israeli Defense Forces, while the communities in Syria and Lebanon are pro-Arab and pro-Palestinian. “Sons of Abraham” claims that this is all a ruse – the Druze actually practice a higher-order form of taqiyya (the Shia tradition of protective dissimulation), all of them really being a single community mostly loyal to itself. The narrator claims that the supposedly pro-Israeli Druze mourned the death of Kamal Jumblatt, the prominent anti-Israeli Druze leader in Lebanon!

In passing, we also get to know the symbolism of the Druze flag. Its stripes symbolize the Universal Soul (red), the Logos (yellow), the cosmos (blue) and the material world (white), all united by a green triangle symbolizing Universal Reason (presumably God). I admit that the symbolism is pretty neat.

Since the Druze don´t accept converts, you will probably never learn the secrets of their religion. Nor will I. Nor, I suppose, did Soviet spy Stig Bergling. Unless, of course, we will be reincarnated as members of the Secret Order in some future life of ours…

To the ends of the earth...and back again?

The Druze are a religious minority in Syria, Lebanon and Israel. They are organized almost like a secret society, and it´s not clear how much of their *real* teachings have leaked out to the world at large. One of their distinctive public beliefs is the reality of reincarnation.

In this documentary, “To the ends of the Earth: Back from the dead”, a British research team interviews Druze children in Lebanon who claim to be reincarnated adults who died in the civil war. They also talk to members of the bereaved families who in all featured cases accept the kids as reincarnated dead relatives. These families also belong to the Druze minority.

Although I would like to believe in “metempsychosis”, I don´t think there is any evidence for it in this production. Quite the contrary, in fact. The Druze are a relatively small community, so it´s not impossible for the children (who all attend school) to get information about other Druze families and then model their “past life memories” accordingly.  When the team investigates supposed reincarnation cases, they find that one of the dead adults never existed, while *two* boys claim to be reincarnations of another dead man! It´s also painfully obvious that the child who is supposedly a reborn famous soccer player, didn´t really recognize the player´s sister – it was the sister who not-so-subtly identified herself to him, since she strongly wants the kid to be her reincarnated brother. 

I think the skeptics are right in this case. The Druze belief in reincarnation (whatever else it might be) functions as a psychological coping mechanism and a social glue tying the community even tighter together. That doesn´t mean the Druze are consciously lying, but it *does* mean that they have a very strong will to believe…

But as usual, the best way to proceed is to study the question yourselves and make up your minds accordingly!

The cross and the crescent

“Korset och halvmånen” (The Cross and the Crescent) is a book by Ingmar Karlsson, unfortunately only available in Swedish. Karlsson has worked as a diplomat in both Syria and Turkey. I haven´t seen the new edition of his book, but the original 1991 version is widely available in public libraries all over Sweden. It seems to be the only popularized introduction in the Swedish language to the thorny issue of religious minorities in the Middle East. It deals extensively with the Monophysite and Nestorian Christians, the Druze and with several “Ghulat” groups within Shia Islam. 

Karlsson valiantly tries to describe the esoteric messages of the Ismailites, Alawites and Druze (or what little was known about them in 1991), and he treats the various Christological controversies within the early Church with equal erudition. The most fascinating chapter deals with the Kurdish Yazidis, who have often been accused of “Devil-worship” (and therefore viciously attacked by the ISIS terrorists – a Yazidi recently got the Nobel Peace Prize). The weakest chapter in my opinion is the one about the Samaritans. But then, perhaps information about them was difficult to get by when the book was written? 

One thing that struck me when reading “Korset och halvmånen” is that many of the “minorities” mentioned are large enough to play important political roles – or at least well-placed enough to do so. Thus, Syria is controlled by a small clan of Alawis, while the Druze had a significant role in the Lebanese civil war. Today, many Yazidis have joined the leftist guerillas in northern Syria, while the Christian Question looms large all over the Middle East. 

I somehow suspect that Karlsson, or his publishers, will have to update this book again at some point in the near future…

Renaissance man

“Renaissance Emir” is a book about Fakhr ad-Din (1572-1635), a Druze Emir of Kurdish descent ruling the territory today known as Lebanon. He is a significant figure in Lebanese history, at least among groups who lay claim to a specific Lebanese identity. Fakhr ad-Din also play a role in European Renaissance history, since he spent several years as an exile in Florence (ruled by the illustrious Medici family) and southern Italy (then under Spanish tutelage). The Emir, who was in conflict with the Ottoman Sultans of Constantinople (his nominal overlords), hoped to receive military aid from the Christian powers. To that end, he lobbied the papacy in Rome for a new crusade against the infidel, with the purpose of recapturing Jerusalem. T J Gorton's book deals with this colorful character, his impressions of Europe, the constant intrigues at the Medici court surrounding his exile in Florence, and his perennial conflicts with the Muslim Ottoman Empire. Gorton even attempts to unpack the curious Druze religion, an esoteric breakaway sect from the equally secretive Shia Muslim Ismailis. The Druze still exist, and play a significant political role in Lebanon and Syria. There is also a small Druze minority in Israel.

While Fakhr ad-Din wasn't a “modernizer” or “reformer” in the strict sense, he clearly admired the ordered, lawful and “republican” government of the Florence city-state. Back home, the Emir built Italianate castles, attempted to introduce Western agricultural methods and favored Catholic missionary orders such as Jesuits and Franciscans. He also built expensive new roads and market-places, which sounds trivial but was unheard of in the stagnant and corrupt backwater of the Ottoman Levant. Fakhr ad-Din was tolerant to most religious groups within his domains (which at their greatest extension included Lebanon and parts of Syria and Palestine), but clearly favored the Maronites, who were in communion with Rome. (The Druze-Maronite unity came to a tragic end in the 19th century and today, the two communities are adversaries.)

Christian nations during the 17th century were generally intolerant in matters of religion. Florence was a notable exception. The Tuscan dukedom extended asylum to both Muslims and Jews fleeing the Spanish Inquisition, and, of course, to Fakhr ad-Din himself when he was forced to temporarily leave Lebanon due to Ottoman military pressure. While the Emir constantly pretended to be interested in converting to the Christian faith, and according to legend died with the Lorraine cross on his chest, there is no evidence that he ever strayed from the Druze religion. Organized almost like a secret society, the Druze are allowed to dissimulate and mimic the traditions of other religions. This explains the peculiar fact that Fakhr ad-Din, while being an “infidel” by Muslim standards, nevertheless lived as a Muslim during his stay in Christian Florence, eating only halal food, observing Ramadan and meticulously secluding his women, all the while calling on the pope to organize a crusade to liberate the Holy Grave from the Turks. He even claimed to be a literal descendant of Godfrey of Bouillon, the first ruler of the crusader states!

In the end, the Ottoman Empire proved too strong for the seditious Emir. Fakhr ad-Din was captured by a punitive expedition, sent to Constantinople and strangled on the Sultan's orders. Despite this sad end, he nevertheless looks like the posthumous victor. The Ottoman Empire, despite its “great power” status, was in a decrepit position already during the Emir's lifetime. In Florence, the Druze leader and his entourage gasped at such seemingly trivial things as banks, the rule of law (taxes and punishments for crimes weren't arbitrary!) or publicly funded education. Suggesting, of course, that such things are far from trivial, after all. As a parting gift, the Emir was given one of Galileo's telescopes…

“Renaissance Emir” is in the grey zone between the scholarly and the popularized. I assume that it's mostly intended for a more popular audience. (It even includes a joke on p. 86. Can you spot it?) I admit that T J Gorton's description of “The Father of Lebanon” wasn't the most interesting book I've read, but at least it confirmed what I long suspected. It really was necessary to stop the Ottomans from ever conquering Italy!