É. Apor , I. Ormos (ed.): Goldziher Memorial Conference, June 21–22, 2000, Budapest.
LARSSON, Göran: Ignaz Goldziher on the Shuübiyya Movement
G ÖRAN LARSSON apply the concept of nationalism to the shufibiyya , since ideas linked to nationalism and nationalist feelings and pride first arose at the end of the nineteenth century, from which time nationalist feelings swept over the countries of Europe. 2 6 But even though this is a plausible reading, nothing in Goldziher's diary covering this period seems to indicate a direct link between his interpretation of the shu cübiyya and the contemporary political situation in Hungary. For example, in his diary for 18891890 Goldziher makes no mention of either the conflicts in Hungary or the shufibiyya movement. 2 7 Nonetheless, to Mottahedeh it is surprising that neither Goldziher nor Gibb made use of the Qur'än commentaries (the tafsir literature) when they analysed the shu übiyya movement. This is especially striking, since its name is derived from süra 49:13, which reads: O mankind, We have created you male and female, and appointed you races and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely the noblest among you in the sight of God is the most godfearing of you. God is All-knowing, All-aware.' 8 No matter how we interpret the chosen illustrations - a very important but difficult task due to the situation with sources - it seems to me that the main problem with Goldziher's analysis is his idea that the shii'übiyya was a party.' 9 This idea was also accepted and reinforced by D. Macdonald in the first edition of the Enzyklopaedie des Islam , where he proposes the following definition of the shifübiyya : [„Die shu übiyya sind]...eine bestimmte dynastische und politische Richtung... auch eine religiöse Richtung, welche Häresie und ZindTqismus in sich schloss". 3" Although neither Gibb nor Mottahedeh ever says that Goldziher's analysis is a simplification of early Muslim history, in my view this is the fundamental problem with his analysis. Again, we should remember that Goldziher's work on the shu übiyya was pioneering and that he had little material to compare it with. Yet it is still not possible to describe or define the shufibiyya as a homogeneous group or a political/religious party with a fixed programme. The shufibiyya should rather be seen as a complex movement embracing a large number of different, often contradictory ideas, values and opinions. From this point of view, the shif übiyya could be described as a collective name for a large number of opinions brought together by the fact that they are all addressing the relationship between Arab and non-Arab Muslims. 2 6 On the rise of nationalism in Europe, see Eric Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. 2nd ed. Cambridge 1994. 2 7 Cf. Ignaz Goldziher, Tagebuch. Ed. Alexander Scheiber. Leiden 1978. 2 8 English transl. Arthur Arberry, The Koran Interpreted , New York 1964, 538. Cf. Mottahedeh 1976 and Marlow 1997 for a large number of different and often contradictory Islamic interpretations of süra 49:13. 2 9 Goldziher 1889-1890, 147. 9 1 D. Macdonald, 'ShuTiblya', in: Enzyklopaedie des Islam , Vol. IV, Leiden 1934. 425. 156
