Global Islamic Circulations and Sufi Tariqa in Thailand

W I L D S P A C E S A N D I S L A M I C C O S M O P O L I T A N I S M I N A S I A 1 4 -‐ 1 5 J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 5 , S I N G A P O R E T h i s c o n f e r e n c e i s j o i n t l y o r g a n i s e d b y A s i a R e s e a r c h I n s t i t u t e , N a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y o f S i n g a p o r e , a n d I n t e r n a t i o n a l C e n t r e f o r M u s l i m a n d n o n -‐ M u s l i m U n d e r s t a n d i n g , U n i v e r s i t y o f S o u t h A u s t r a l i a

Global Islamic Circulations and Sufi Tariqa in Thailand

CHRISTOPHER M. JOLL

Centre for Ethnic Studies and Development (CESD) Chiang Mai University, Thailand [email protected] Introduction Particularly when compared to other ASEAN member states possessing Muslim minorities living at the extremities of Southeast Asia’s “Islamic arc” (Tagliacozzo, 2013), Islam in Thailand has been remarkably well studied. What themes might new arrivals to the study of Islam encounter, the printing off of which may require the sacrifice of a small forest? Studies specifically dealing with dynamics in the Malay far-‐south include Malay responses to modernization, development, and environmental degradation. Few describing Thai assimilation fail to analyze the reformation of pondok schools, and language policies. Another cluster of studies address the heterogeneity of Muslim communities between the far-‐south, Southern Thai-‐speaking upper south, Central Plains, and North Thailand. A number of studies based on fieldwork north of the Malay heartland have interrogated the dynamics of co-‐existence between Buddhists and Muslims. The history, inner workings, and impact of reformist and revivalist movements have also been well documented. 1 Outnumbering all these, however, are publications analyzing aspects of armed rebellions in Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat before the amnesties of late 1980s, and after 2004. Should military intelligence prove to be an oxymoron (as many have suggested) investigations of insurgent ideologies by scholars may have a role to play in (hopefully peacefully) resolving ASEAN’s most deadly subnational conflict. While it is conceivable that some may celebrate the expansive literature on Muslims in Thailand that continues to expand, these both appear to follow existing lines of enquiry, and studies of the insurgency dwarf contributions by anthropologists and historians perhaps providing hereunto ignored insights into the context for present-‐day rebellions are conducted. Equally concerning, are that assessments of southern Malayness between Malay-‐ speaking districts of Songkhla Province and districts bordering on the Malaysian border, are increasingly based on fieldwork in Pattani. As I have argued elsewhere, Thai and reformist influences are greater in Pattani than in either hulu Yala, or Narathiwat on Kelantan’s backdoor (Joll, 2011b).2 This paper presents preliminary findings from an on-‐going project best described as a historical ethnography of Sufi orders (turuq, tariqa [sg.]) in Thailand. This is an aspect of Thai Islam about which next to nothing has been written.3 I describe the most visible and viable Thai turuq that I have come encountered during my multi-‐sited

1

For the first doctoral dissertation dealing with the South Thailand’s most influential reformist leader, Dr Ishmael Lutfi Japakia, see (Muhammad Ilyas Yahprung, 2014)

2

The following are based on fieldwork outside of Pattani (Cornish, 1997; Helbardt, 2011; Pas-‐Ong, 1990; Patya, 1974; Tsuneda, 2009; Unno, 2011)

3

Uman Madaman wrote a doctoral dissertation on Thai tariqa (Madaman, 1999) and Rajeswary Brown has includes fascinating material on a range of turuq in her Islam in Modern Thailand: Faith, Philanthropy and Politics (2013, pp. 54-‐56, 69-‐74, 91-‐52, 123-‐128, 185-‐128)

DRAFT COPY – Not To Be Quoted Without Permission From The Author

1


fieldwork in Muslim communities between Central Thailand, and the Malay-‐speaking far-‐south.4 This began in late 2012 and is ongoing.5 This paper begins by interrogating reasons for scholarly disinterest in Sufism, which I argue is related to a wider disinterest with Thailand’s traditionalist majority of which it is an important constituency. This paper’s second substantive section provides details about when, from where, and by whom Sufi orders established before the mid-‐19th century became embedded in Thailand’s religious landscape. This is followed by a treatment of how from existing tariqa were revitalized, and new orders imported. I conclude by pointing out that the orders present in Thailand confirm that that Muslims and Islamic movements in Thailand are more similar to – than distinct from – those elsewhere in Southeast Asia during this period. The number of pages is not the only aspect of this paper that is limited. Space means that I have chosen to summarize both my most important findings (frequently in the form of figures) and principal arguments. Even without limits on word count, my treatment of certain themes will be more detailed once all fieldwork has been completed. My sincere hope is that this paper’s insights into Thailand’s previously neglected Islamic constituency will compensate for these limitations. Unstudied majorities: Benign amnesia or malicious neglect? Whilst scholarly interest in modernist, revivalist and reformist Islamic movements is understandable given the impact that these have had on the religious landscape in Thailand, over recent decades Thailand’s largest Muslim constituency has been almost completely neglected. What I am referring to is Thailand’s “traditionalist” majority. What do I mean by this term? Based on my analysis of attitudes to merit-‐ transference, I have previously proposed that Muslims in South Thailand may be divided between traditionalists, revivalists, and reformists. I pointed out that members of the revivalist Tablighi Jama’at included both traditionalists and reformists (Joll, 2011b, pp. 46-‐51, 64-‐66).6 As is well known, this movement came from a Sufi stable (See Ingram, 2009, 2011; Sikand, 2007). Traditionalists are sometimes inadequately defined by whom they are not, namely reformists perturbed about by practices not performed by either the Prophet (Ar. sunna) or his rightly-‐guided successors. Most traditionalists view taqlid (Ar. blind imitation) as 4

To be clear, this is far from a comprehensive summary of all the orders that I have encountered. The most important turuq not be included here include: The Ahmadiyyah-‐Qadriyyah of Sheikh Mahmud al-‐majzub (Madrasah Nurul Iman Hulu, 2009): the movement with no known silsilah established by Thai convert from Petburi, by the name of Mat’ Buri in Bluka Seno, Narathiwat; A movements with evidence of Naqshabandi influence led by an ethnic Khmer mualaf (Ar. convert) from Surin known as Ajarn Nawi that frequented the caves of Yaha before April 2004; and Ayat Pa’ (empat) of Dusun Nyoir which in the late 1940s was involved in altercations with the Thai police, and was influenced by the invulnerability cult led by Kyai Salleh during and immediately after the Japanese occupation of the Thai/Malay Peninsula.

5

During 2012, fieldwork was conducted in the following places: September 8 (Bangkok); October 2-‐4 (Narathiwat); November 12 (Bangkok); November 16-‐18 (Narathiwat); December 12-‐16 (East Bangkok). In 2013, my movements were as follows: January 24-‐30 (Songkhla, Satun, Krabi, Phuket, and Pattani); February 18-‐23 (Narathiwat and Yala); March 15 and 19-‐27 (Bangkok, and Narathiwat); April 21-‐24 (Krabi, Satun, and Bangkok); May 18-‐24 (Kota Baru, and Narathiwat); June 23-‐28 (Phang-‐nga Bay); July 26-‐27 (Phang-‐nga Bay); August 4-‐6 (Narathiwat); October 19-‐22 (Ayutthaya); November 28 (Ayutthaya); December 12-‐20 (Bangkok and Ayutthaya); December 30, 2013-‐Jan 2, 2014 (Ayutthaya). Fieldwork during 2014 was undertaken in: January 9-‐15 (Narathiwat and Songkhla); February 20-‐22 (Kota Baru, Kelantan); May 3-‐6 (Bangkok, Ayutthaya, and Mae Sot); May 9-‐10 (Songkhla); November 13-‐16 (Bangkok); December 12-‐13 (Bangkok).

6

Although even the most conservative reformists made merit for the dead, these emphasized the efficacy of pious acts by children (PM. anok solleh), sedekoh jariyah (particularly mosques), and (under strict conditions) posthumous performances of the haj. By contrast, traditionalists assisted the deceased in a number of ways, the most important of which were a regime of funeral feasts, and teams of ritual specialists being hired to read the Qur’an over the grave for up to 40-‐days. Merit made by anak salleh may be most efficacious, but others are permissible.


2


unproblematic. This permits them to perpetuate a range of practices ranging from the recital of the qunut during pre-‐dawn subuh prayers, to celebrations Mawlid al-‐nabi. Although innovations, these are bid’ah hasanah (Ar. commendable innovations) – not (often Indic) accretions any of which dance dangerously close to shirk.7 It is difficult to over-‐exaggerate the importance of Sufi orders (turuq, sg. tariqa) on traditionalist Muslims in Thailand. Most traditionalist mosques influenced by Sufism conclude salat with (sometimes lengthy) wird (Ar. litanies), whose elements may be counted on prayer beads (Ar. tasbih) avoided by reformists. In many of Central Thailand’s traditionalist mosques, wird are often followed by the selawat marhaban. Its performance involves worshippers filing past the Imam, shaking (and sometimes kissing) his hand, and forming a circle to his right. Once everyone has been greeted in this manner, the salawat is sung one last time (at a slower pace), followed by the Imam offering a final dua. The most common Malay term for feast (kenduri) is a corruption of a Persian term kanduri which refers to tablecloths used during annual feasts commemorating the death of a Sufi saint (See Saheb, 1998, p. 61). Over and above what sometimes resembles mild obsessions with security, syncretism, and trans-‐national Salafism, other reasons exist for Thai Turuq having been hereunto understudied. Sufi orders in Thailand lack the numbers found elsewhere in South and Southeast Asia, for a number of reasons. Although some of the earliest articulators of Islamic modernism and reformism were members of Sufi orders, certain Sufi practices and doctrines were singled out by local reformists, particularly after Wahhadiyyah successes in the early 1800s and 1920s.8 Less affected were turuq advocating a sober juristic Sufism described by Mark Sedgwick as Tariqa Muhammadiyya. I argue that this was best exemplified by Sheikh Abu al-‐Abbas Ahmad b. Idris al-‐ Hasani al-‐'Ara'ishi al-‐Fasi (aka Ahmad ibn Idris) (1749-‐1837) after whom the Ahmadiyyah is named. 9 Sedgwick notes that while few might be unfamiliar with the Wahhabiyyah and Salafiyyah, before the mid-‐ 19th century, it was reformed Sufism that possessed the potential to transform the Islamic world. This ultimately proved ineffective in saving Islam from both the “legalistic pedantry of the scholars”, and “empty syncretism of popular Sufism” by reorienting Islam to the Prophet in “law, practice, and spiritual method” (2004, p. 101). The impetus for this and related movement was the crisis brought about by widespread Muslim subjugation by mostly Western powers. Although the mostly Malay Muslims of the Thai/Malay Peninsula were unique in their experience of the militarized Buddhist colonialism of Rama I to III from the 1786, this may have similar impacts on Muslims attitudes to Sufism, reformist, and modernism as the 1857 Indian mutiny about which so much has been written. Brannon Ingram’s analysis of the Fatawa-‐yi Rashidiyya of Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (d. 1905) points out that although himself a member of the Chishtiyyah order, Sufi practices that “may have been permissible at one point” should be abandoned by Muslim in light of Muslim decline under British (Ingram, 2009, p. 485). The decline of Sufism in South Thailand can be connect with most traditional pondok schools having been converted into state-‐funded private schools teaching Islam (PSTI) where both the Thai national curriculum and Islamic studies. This began as early as the 1930s but became widespread in the 1960s (Liow, 2009; Madmarn, 1989, 1990)? Before the Japanese occupation, most of South Thailand’s Sufi Sheikhs were either babo (PM. pondok owners, lit. father) or senior pondok tok guru (PM. religious teachers) who were not only 7

Rong-‐eng (Ross, 2011), Ma’yong, and forms of shadow puppetry (known as nang talung, or wayang kulit) (Sweeney, 1972; Wright, 1981) have all been accused as leading Muslims into shirk, as these are associated with seeking assistance from ancestral spirits.

8

To name but a few, Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1329) was a Qadriyyah (Hourani, 1981), Muhammad ‘Abduh (d. 1905) was inducted into the Madaniyyah (Sedgwick, 2009, pp. 2, 4-‐8, 12-‐13, 86-‐88), and Hassan Al-‐Banna (d. 1949) was a Hasafiyyah (Ryad, 2006, p. 302).

9

This is in no way connected with the Ahmadiyyah of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (d. 1908)


3


inducted by local babo, Kyai in Indonesian Pesantran, or from Sheikh while studying in the Middle East. In order to induct (Ar. bai’ah) anyone into a tariqa, one must have received either written or oral permission (Ar. ijazah) to function as guides (Ar. murshid).10 The widespread – but by no means complete – registration of Malay pondoks brought about drastic changes to contacts between local murshid and their murid. In parts of the Malay far-‐south where Sufism was once active, Muslims wishing to both consolidate Islamic practice and grow in knowledge and piety, are now more likely to join the Tablighi Jama’at. This is partly due to ritual elements associated with some tariqa, being practiced by Muslims involved in armed rebellion against the Thai state.11 Although a serious set-‐backs for movements whose religious credentials had been called into question by reformist activists, the past involvement of Sufism in rebellions against British and Dutch colonial forces require the revisiting of assumptions that Salafism is inherently violent, and Sufi uniformly peaceful (See Woodward et al., 2014). 12 From the beginning of the 20th century some turuq avoided interference from Bangkok by reducing their public profile. I can personally testify to the relative ease with which individuals and institutions dispensing ijazah and practicing wird south of the Golok River in Kelantan and north of Songkhla’s district of Chana can be located. Turuq in Central Thailand might openly engage with insiders, agnostics – even adversaries – through websites, social media, and television stations.13 Nevertheless, those in the Malay far-‐south have required considerable time and energy to not only locate, but to establish sufficient rapport to secure permission to ethically undertake grounded ethnographic fieldwork.14 Without wishing to labour the point, I argue that there is a connection between the lack of fieldwork being conducted among rural traditionalists in Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat (where Sufism is the strongest) and the shortage of studies of Sufism in Thailand. Others have overlooked Sufism out of ignorance that many of the most famous ‘alim from Patani were actively involved in orders such as the Shattariyyah and Ahmadiyyah. 15 Although some biographers anachronistically present 19th century scholars as proto-‐Salafists, lines of analysis suggest ignorance at what I have referred to as the jurist Sufism of the Tariqa Muhammadiyya. Skeptics about the involvement of 10

The criteria for induction varies greatly between orders, and well known religious leaders known to have links with tariqa never inducted anyone. Some orders required aspiring murid to perform the 5 wajib prays for 40 days behind their future murshid. Others required the memorization of standard wird. I am aware of one order which will only consider inducting someone who has recited their order’s prayer of repentance (Ar. istifah) 40,000 times over a 10-‐ day period.

11

Ismael Yusof Rayalong, who is best known as Ustadz Soh, was a local religious leader from the village of Kuwa in Yala’s districts of Krong Pinang who led a clandestine group known as Hikmat Allah Abadan (the Brotherhood of the Eternal Judgment of God). Ustadz Soh was educated in an Indonesian pesantran and had close contacts with Tanah Merah in Kelantan where he trained ten local religious teachers in the 30s and 40s for three years from 2000. They returned to their villages where they recruited young men in their late teens and early 20s. Ustadz Soh claimed to possess “supernatural powers that would help them fight”. He taught recruits zikir, and wird which they were instructed to perform 70,000 times per day over a 40 day period. Doing so would permit them to become both invisible to their enemies and invulnerable to any bullets and blades (PM. air tawa) (International Crisis Group, 2005, p. 21). For more on the involvement of specific tariqa in South Thailand in rebellions, see (Aeusrivongse, 2006; Madrasah Nurul Iman Hulu, 2009, pp. 48, 103-‐104; Pitsuwan, 1985, pp. 251-‐255; Satha-‐Anand, 2006, pp. 19-‐22; Wilson, 1992, p. 53; Yegar, 2002, p. 87).

12

A range of tariqa are British Malay are mentioned by the following (Bayly et al., 2007; Cheah, 2006; Cheah Boon Kheng, 1981, 2012; Farrer, 2009; Harper, 1998; Malhi, 2010; Syed Muhammad Naguib Al-‐Attas, 1963)

13

See Taqwa TV http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQASMFj4d9SMrzptFEO_GZA

14

Most of the fieldwork on which this study is based began in October 2012.

15

The following provide details about the role of Patani’s ‘‘ulama besar in Sufism (Ahmad Fathy al-‐Fatani, 2009; Lukmanul Hakim Darusman, 2010; MHD Mustaqim MHD Zarif, 2008; Muhammad Ali, 2006, 2007; Narongraksakhet, 2010)


4


Patani’s religious aristocracy in the Shattariyyah and Ahmadiyyah can safely be assumed to have not read Perayot Rahimmula’s (1990) treatment of Sheikh Wan Ahmad b. Muhammad Zain Mustafa al-‐Fatani (Sheikh Ahmad al-‐Fatani) (1856-‐1908) and Francis Bradley’s portrayal of Sheikh Daud b. Abdullah b. Idris al-‐Fatani (Sheikh Daud al-‐Fatani) (1740-‐1847) (2010).16 Rahimmula relates that as well as functioning as a Shattariyyah murshid, Sheikh Daud was also inducted into the Samaniyyah. He may have had direct contact with its founding Sheikh, Muhammad b. Abdul Karim Samman al-‐Madani, and was a contemporary of another famous Samaniyyah Shaykh, 'Abd al-‐Samad bin 'Abd Allah al-‐Jawi al-‐Falimbani (1704-‐1789).17 Orders established before the 19th century The previous section discussed the reasons for Sufism having been overlooked in what has otherwise been an extensively studied Muslim minority. This concluded with suggestions that some of Patani’s most important Sufi personalities have been presented as proto-‐Salafists active during what Michael Laffan has recently argued to have been a significant century for Sufism (2014). This section describes orders established in Thailand before the developments in the 19th century. I concentrate below on the Shattariyyah of South Thailand, and the Qadriyyah whose arrival in Ayutthaya can be traced to the 16th century. It is significant that these turuq possess the longest history in the modern nation-‐state of Thailand known before the 1930s as Siam, that in the century before 1786 exerted loose influence over its southern suzerain states. David Morgan and Anthony Reid in their introduction to the 3rd volume of the New Cambridge History of Islam (covering the period between the 11th to 18th centuries) comment that in South and Southeast Asia during this period, the “earliest and most influential Muslim writers and teachers” were affiliated with the Qadriyyah and Shattiriyyah orders whose founders were “followed in life and revered in death” (2010, p. 10). Michael Feener has argued that sources from the late 13th century are the earliest solid evidence of the active involvement by Southeast Asian ‘ulama in what he refers to as “cosmopolitan scholarly circles active in the Middle East.” Specifically, an Arabic work of “Sufi historiography containing notices of one Abu ‘Adb Allah Masud b. Abu Allah al-‐Jawi was a teacher in the Yemeni port of Aden who was highly regarded by his famous Arabian pupil ‘Abd Allah b. Asqad al Yafi’i (d. 1367).” 18 Feener asserts al-‐Jawi to have been a “pivotal figure in the early development of the Qadiriyya,” that exerted a “lasting impact on the development of South East Asian Islam”. Yafi’i was one of many at the time who demonstrated influences from both ‘Abd al Qadir Jilani and the cosmological conceptions of Ibn al ‘Arabi such as the wujûdiyya. As is well known, this proved to be a source of considerable controversy in Aceh in the 16th centuries (2010, pp. 471-‐471). Michael Pearson claims that Ibn Battuta noted the dominance of the Qadiriyya while visiting the South Western coast of India in the mid-‐14th century (2010, p. 384). I finally note, that while studying in the Middle East in the mid 17th Century, The Sumatran scholar ‘Abd al Ra’uf mentions in his autobiographical ‘Umadt al Muhtajin, that the scholarly circles he attended in the Middle East were led by active Qadiriyyah and Shattariyyah (Feener, 2010, p. 493).19

16

Rahimmula relates that while still a child in Patani, Sheikh Daud encountered a “great Sufi from Yemen”, who rubbed his head while offering a dua that Allah would bless this child, and that he would be a “glittering star, a full moon, a shining sun and the greatest ‘ulama of the Malay soil” (Rahimmula, 1990, p. 200). Among his earliest influences in Mecca were Patani Malay who led study circles (Ar. hallaqah) in Mecca’s al-‐Haram Mosque. A certain Sheikh Muhammad Saleh bin Abdur-‐Rahman al-‐Fatani is described as a learned man in both the Shariah and Tasawwuf, specifically the Shattariyyah tariqa.

17

See (Rahimmula, 1990, pp. 193, 203, 204).

18

th

For a more thorough treatment of these 13 century personalities, see (Feener et al., 2005)

19

Qadiriyyah and Shattariyyah influence is also noted by the following studies (Gibson, 2007, pp. 55, 57, 61-‐62, 71, 119) (Azra, 2004, pp. 13, 15-‐17, 19-‐20, 47-‐18, 56-‐17, 85-‐16, 145-‐146)


5


The strength of the Shattariyyah in South Thailand, is in part explained by the extensive intermarriages between families producing some of the most influential of Patani’s ‘ulama (Rahimmula, 1990, p. 402). Bradley (2010, pp. 524-‐536) identifies three lineages. Two of the most important are the Keresik lineage derived from Sheikh 'Abd Allah b. Idris al-‐Fatani (Sheikh Daud al-‐Fatani’s father), and the Bendang Daya lineage established by Sheikh Hajji Mustafa b. Muhammad Faqih al-‐Fatani (which Sheikh Ahmad al-‐Fatani is connected to). One of the many ways that these are linked, is Sheikh Ahmad al-‐Fatani marriage the niece of Sheikh Daud al-‐Fatani’s nephew (Muhammad. b. Isma'il Da'udy al-‐Fatani) who he adopted 1845. Some miss the importance of Sufi in Sheikh Daud al-‐Fatani’s writings given the frequency with which he combined two or more fields of knowledge in any one treatise. This complicates clear-‐cut classifications about its contents as fiqh, usul aldin, or tasawwuf. Ibrahim Narongraksakhet cites nine titles specifically dealing with tasawwuf (2010, p. 8 these are listed on p. 268).20 These were written before Patani’s woes in the 1780s after which Sheikh wrote about both jihad, and a range of social problems. Tasawwuf return as his primary focus in works produced between 1817 and 1834.21 These include original works, and translations of works by luminaries such as Abu Hamid Muhammad al-‐Ghazali (1058-‐1111). Among the best known and widely read of Sheikh Daud’s works (still read today) is his translation of al-‐Ghazali’s Minhai al ‘Abidin. The presence of a short glossary in his Al-‐Manhal al-‐Ṣāfī fī Bayān Ramz Ahl al-‐Ṣūfī, suggests that to have served as a “primer to many basic Sufi doctrines (Bradley, 2013, p. 5).22 It is widely accepted that before the arrival of the Ahmadiyyah (described below) the most important tariqa throughout the east coast of the Thai/Malay Peninsula was the Shattariyyah. Rahimmula notes that over and above the pursuit of “spiritual perfection” and “esoteric knowledge” tok guru in Malay South Thailand were revered for their mystical powers through which they were able to cure sicknesses, repel sorcery, locate lost objects, and predict future events (1990, p. 403). The Qadriyyah was the second Sufi order which became a mass movement in Thailand before the mid-‐19th century. Those unfamiliar with the cultural geography of Islam in Thailand may be intrigued about the role of Muslims in the Ayutthaya that between 1569 and 1767 functioned as the capital of Siam. Following Baker (2003), Geoffrey Gunn describes Ayutthaya as a polity uniquely “self-‐sufficient agrarian kingdom sited in a large and fertile plain supporting wet-‐rice cultivation” that was also deeply involved in “maritime networks in the Gulf of Siam and the Malay Peninsula” since Srivijaya’s decline. As such, Ayutthaya represented a hybrid “maritime-‐territorial political-‐economic system” (Gunn, 2011, p. 62). In the late 15th century, Siam secured control of the ports of Martaban, Mergui, and Tenasserim and the portages between these and its capital (Chutintaranond, 1999, 2002). These made avoiding the Melaka Straits possible, which was not only plagued by pirates, but faced new threats in the form of Portuguese. As a secure entrepot located 100 kilometers up a navigable river, Ayutthaya became as accessible to Indian, Arab, and Persian merchants (from its west), as Chinese and Japanese Junks (from the east), and Malay, Javanese, and Makasarese traders (from the south). Baker and Phongpaichit refer to these western portages being central to ushering in an extended period of unparalleled prosperity at a time when Melaka (its most formidable southern competitor) was in decline (2014, pp. 10, 13).

20

For Narongraksakhet’s list see (2010, p. 268).

21

Bradley specifically mentions the following works by Sheikh Daud al-‐Fatani (1818, 1824a, 1824b, 1825, 1828, 1829, 1834a, 1834b, 1913, nd).

22

For more on Al-‐Manhal al-‐Ṣāfī, see Muhammad Zain bin Abdul Rahman (2000).


6


Figure 1: Ports and Routes across the Bay of Bengal 1580-‐1600 (Source: \Subrahmanyam, 1990, p. 150) Leonard Andaya points out that during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Muslim political power reached its peak through the (Indian) Mughal (1526-‐1858), (Persian) Safavi (1501-‐1722), and (Turkish) Ottoman (1342–1924) Empires. In all these, Persian language functioned as the language of diplomacy (1999, p. 122). Marcinkowski (2014, pp. 3-‐5) describes the Qotb-‐Shahi dynasty (1512–1687) of Deccan kingdom centered in Golconda (present-‐day Hyderabad), as an important centre for Twelver Imam Shi’ites. From the second half of the 16th century, Masulipatam functioned as the principal gateway to Ayutthaya via (Siamese controlled) Tenasserim (see figure 1).23 Mughal pressure from the north in second half of the 17th century led to decline of the Qotb-‐Shahi dynasty. Through the combined effects of instability in their South Indian base, and the expansion of international trade under the Safavid ruler Shah Abbas II (r. 1642–66), Persians in Ayutthaya – who arrived from South India or directly from Iran – were numerous enough in the late 17th century were secured royal patronage for their annual ta’zia procession witnessed by French visitors in the 1680s (Marcinkowski, 2014, p. 5). The most famous Persian immigrant to Ayutthaya in the late 17th century, was a merchant by the name of Sheikh Ahmad Qomi (1543-‐1631) who (with his brother) arrived from south India. These reorganized the management of foreign trade into the Department of the Left (Krom Tha Sai) and the Department of the Right (Krom Tha Khwa). They were given responsible for the latter, which oversaw Ayutthaya’s interests to its south and west. During the 1610 and 1620s, increase numbers of South Indian merchants became established in Ayutthaya (1999, p. 125). The role of foreigners such as Sheikh Ahmad, is one of numerous similarities between Melaka and Ayutthaya (See Ho, 2013). These are not the only insights explaining Qadriyyah presence in Ayutthaya. Few theories about how Islam became a significant part of Southeast Asia’s religious landscape fail to supply some new insights, but I view many to have inadequately conceptualized population movements, and diasporic hybridity. My arguments about the role played by creole ambassadors born on both sides of the Indian Ocean (Joll, 2012), are a 23

Pires mention Persian merchants in Pegu in the sixteenth century (Cited in Andaya, 1999, p. 125)


7


specific aspect of my wider concern to emphasize connections over comparisons through which the complex and mediated nature of Islamic transmissions are brought into focus (Joll, 2011b, pp. 27-‐33). Port cities between Patani and Ayutthaya were among the most important sites for material, cultural, and ideological exchange in present-‐day Thailand, but ships docking there arrived from both the east and the west. Torsten Tschacher refers to such multi-‐directional circulations as “circulating Islam” (2009a, pp. 49, 62). How did the Qadriyyah arrive in Ayutthaya? Reconstruction and conjecture are inevitable in historical enquiries where source materials are unavailable.24 Muslims in Ayutthaya claim that a man known as Sheikh Samat Maimun, or Shah Allah Yar, who became most widely known as Tok Takia, arrived in the mid 16th century from India. Some assert that he was originally from the village of Takia in Lucknow, Northern India, while others allege that the term takia originates from the term “takie” which refers to a knowledgeable person. Tok Takia arrived in Ayutthaya with three companions who subsequently travelled further south, settling in parts of Central Thailand and as far south as Rayong. In addition to be a Qadriyyah possessing miraculous powers (Ar. karamah), Tok Takia was also a dai (Ar. Muslim missionary) who converted a local Abbot by the name of Diwan Chao, after proving that his magical powers were more potent than his. The Abbot’s temple (Th. wat) was converted into a mosque, which became known as Wat Khaek Takia.25 His house, which after his death in 1579 was converted into a maqam, was constructed in 1554 during the reign of King Chakkraphat (r. 1548-‐1569). Before his death, King Mahathammaracha (r. 1569-‐1590) bestowed upon Tok Takia the title Chao Phrakhun Takia Yokin. From what we know of Ayutthaya and its contacts with the Indian subcontinent, it is no surprise that Indians were in Ayutthaya, but where would an Indian Qadriyyah like Tok Takia have come from? Although unapologetically engaging in speculation, answers to this question might begin with identifying the most important Qadriyyah saints in parts of India known to have contacts with Ayutthaya at the beginning of the 16th century. The Qadriyyah personality best fitting this description is Syed Sahul Hameed Nagore Andavar of Tamil Nadu (1504-‐1570) who is known as Sahul Hameed, Shahul Hamitu, or Nagore Andavar. 26 Notwithstanding the Chishtiyyah order having arrived in the Indian subcontinent as early as the 12th century, the Qadiriyyah subsequently introduced by Mohammad Ghouse Gwalior who Saheb claims to have been Sahul Hameed’s spiritual guide. Sahul Hameed’s parents (Syed Hassan Kuthos and Bibi Fatima) settled in Uttar Pradesh, after emigrating from Baghdad during the rule of Sultan Feroz Shah Thugluk of Delhi. The saint was both a 13th generation Sayyid, and 5th generation descendent of Sayyid Abdul Qadir Jilani. (Saheb, 1998, p. 56) Ronit Ricci comments that narratives involving teachers or holy men commonly cite them travelling long distances to preach Islam. Sahul Hameed was a key converting figure. Hagiographies contain troupes common in Tamil accounts of saints whose conception, birth, and childhood all contained miracles. In the case Sahul Hameed, this included prophesies that he was destined to spread Islam, ilmu tassawuf (mysticism) and ilmu tauhid both throughout the Indian subcontinent, and into adjoining countries. Being as much a teacher as a saint, he “cured the sick while still a young child, recited the entire Qur'an by the age of eight, and subdued fierce tigers with the gaze of his eyes”. As he grew older, he studied with the great masters of the time. This required traveling to distant places where he converted “thieves and kings alike”. After returning from Jeddah, eventually reached Tamil Nadu where he converted a Hindu king after rescuing him from an evil spell. The grateful monarch gifted the land on which his maqam (or dargah) in Nagore is constructed that is widely known as Nagore-‐e-‐Sharif (Ricci, 2011, p. 195). The importance of Nagore-‐e-‐Sharif

24

Ayutthaya was completely destroyed by the Burmese in 1767.

25

Khaek refers to any foreigner, but was a common way of referring to South Asians.

26

Syed Sahul Hameed Nagore Andavar was born on 10 November 1504, and died on 10 November (10 Jamathul Akhir) AD 1570.


8


in South India, Sri Lanka, Singapore, and Malaysia has been widely commented on (see figure 2). 27 Not only do local mosques and maqam architectural mimic the mother mosque, but the raising of flags central to all festivals (urs) at Nagore-‐e-‐Sharif are also central to those held in satellite mosques. In this respect, Ayutthaya is no exception to this (widely documented) rule.

Figure 2: Places visited by Syed Sahul Hameed Nagore Andavar of Tamil Nadu (Source: Saheb, 1998, p. 59) However tempting it might be to suggest Tok Takia having been influenced by the dynamic Qadriyyah movement that spread elsewhere in Southeast Asia, such speculation must consider the publication of Claude Guillot and Ludvik Kalus (2000) discovery in Mecca of a grave to Hamzah al-‐Fansuri, which is dated 1529. As is well known, his death had long been dated at 1590 (Drewes et al., 1986, p. 3). Poems penned by him contain some of the earliest references to Àbd al-‐Qadir al-‐Jilani in Southeast Asia, and it was widely assumed that he spent time in Ayutthaya. Nevertheless, he may not have encountered the Qadriyyah established of Tok Takia there for a number of reasons which I consider below. The timing of Hamzah al-‐Fansuri’s death is not the only detail about which no consensus now exists. Some assert that Hamzah al-‐Fansuri was born into a Persian family on the north-‐ western port-‐city of Fansur (or Barus), and travelled to a number of places, including Ayutthaya.28 These assume the Persian toponyms “Shahr Nawi” (the City of boats and canals) or Shahr-‐i Nav (the New City) to denote Ayutthaya. Braginsky suggests this this to have been a fairly widespread toponym that may have referred to a place near the Acehnese palace (2001, p. 28). It was through contacts with Ayutthaya’s sizable Persian community that, Hamzah al-‐Fansuri experienced a number of life-‐changing mystical insights involving Àbd al-‐Qadir al-‐Jilani. Christoph Marcinkowski and Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-‐Attas (1970) claim his family to have hailed from Sumatra, but that he himself was born in Ayutthaya (Marcinkowski, 2009, p. 397). Marcinkowski’s positions on interpret stanzas contained the mystical metaphor for “existence” (Ar. wujud) that he glosses as states of being, or existing pertaining to non-‐beings. That Ayutthaya was his literal – not just spiritual – birthplace are based on his analysis of verses such as the following. 29 Hamzah Shahr Nawi terlalu hapus [Hamzah of Shahr Nawi is truly effaced] Seperti kayu sekalian hangus [like wood, all burnt to cinders] Asalnya Laut tiada berharus [His origins is the ocean without currents] Menjadi kapur didalam Barus [he became camphor in Barus]. 30 27

Malaysia (Khoo Salma Nasution, 2009, 2014), Singapore (Tschacher, 2006, 2009a, 2009b), and Sri Lanka (McGilvray, 2004, 2013; McGlivray, 2013).

28

This is the position taken by Martin van Bruinessen (van Bruinessen, 1994, p. 114) and Braginsky (1999) who follow Brakel (1969).

29

See also (Marcinkowski, 2006)

30

Cited in (Marcinkowski, 2004, p. 32)


9


In the following stanza, Hamzah al-‐Fansuri connects his birth (zahirnya) – not wujud – with Shahr Nawi Hamzah Shahr Nawf zahimya Jawi... [Hamzah of Shahr Nawi is born (also: 'has the appearance of) a Malay]. 31 Ultimately unanswerable are questions such as whether Hamzah al-‐Fansuri’s parents left Barus for Ayutthaya where he was born before returning while he was still an infant, or (having been born in the Ayutthaya), he remained in Siam, returning to Barus after the death of his parents (Marcinkowski, 2004, p. 33). Van Bruinessen interprets “found existence” (mendapat wujud) as Hamzah al-‐Fansuri experience of initiation into the Qadriyyah in Ayutthaya (Ar. bai‘ah). Àbd al-‐Qadir is mentioned the following: Hamzah Fansuri sedia zahir [Hamzah Fansuri, originally earthly] Tersuci pulang pada Sayyid Abdul Qadir [Was purified when he turned to Sayyid Àbd al-‐Qadir] Dari sana ke sini terta'ir-‐ta'ir [He fluttered about from place to place] Akhir mendapat pada diri zahir [And finally found Him manifested in himself] This appears to refer to an initiation that “ultimately led to a mystical experience of unity”. Hamzah nin ilmunya zahir [This Hamzah's knowledge is manifest] Ustadnya Sayyid Abdul Qadir [His teacher was Sayyid Àbd al-‐Qadir] Mahbubnya selalu hadir [His Beloved is ever-‐present] Dengan dirinya nentiasa satir [Though constantly concealing Himself] Van Bruinessen rejects suggestions by Al-‐Attas that Hamzah that was a Qadriyyah khalîfa (1970, p. 11), that Al-‐Attas acknowledged being based on circumstantial evidence. Indeed, he wrote much more on Ibn ‘Arabi (1963, pp. 22-‐23). Van Bruinessen cites prose works by Hamzah al-‐Fansuri containing systematic mystical metaphysics mentioning neither Abd al-‐Qadir al-‐Jilani, nor the Qadiriyya.32 Furthermore, Shamsuddin of Pasai who is widely referred to as his spiritual successor never refers to Àbd al-‐Qadir al-‐Jilani (van Bruinessen, 2000). The Shattariyyah of South Thailand and Qadriyyah of Central Thailand described above are two orders established well in present-‐day Thailand before the 19th century. The following section delineates the personalities involved in either revitalizing existing orders, or introduced entirely new ones. Both these are summarized in figures 6 and 7 below. Revitalizers of the old and importers of the new I begin this section by presenting a brief outline of the career of Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri (1848-‐1932) widely revered in Ayutthaya as a Wali who revitalized the Qadriyyah in Ayutthaya and led to its expansion to Bangkok, and Phatthaya. The second Sufi movement summarized below, is the Ahmadiyyah derived from Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris (1760–1837) mentioned above. This arrived on the east coast of the Thai/Malay Peninsula in the late 1800s and developed a following that challenged what appears to have been a Shattariyyah monopoly on Sufism in the Malay far-‐south. The third significant development in the history of Thai turuq is the importation of a tariqa influenced by the Ahmadiyyah to the cosmopolitan Siamese capital of Bangkok in the early 20th century. This was achieved by a Hijazi Sheikh, Khalid al-‐Bakri, who established the Ahmadiyyah-‐Shadhiliyyah that best known in Thailand as the Pha Khiaw (Th. green cloths) but whose members refer to as the Shazuliyyah. This currently commands a following comparable to that of 31

Cited in (Marcinkowski, 2004, p. 33)

32

Abu Yazid Bistami, Junayd, Hallaj, Rumi, Ibn ‘Arabi, Jami, and ‘Attar are mentioned.


10


Ayutthaya’s Qadriyyah. The Ahmadiyyah-‐Badawiyyah is the third tariqa in Thailand with active followers in their thousands – the vast majority of whom live in the Southern Thai-‐speaking upper south. This was introduced there in the 1950s by two Southern Thai-‐speaking Muslims who had studied in Kelantan under Haji Abdullah Tahir (1897-‐1961), a well known Kelantanese Babo and student of Tok Kenali. The most important personality in this movement is Tok Khruu Ae (1923-‐1986) of Koh Yao Noi, a man widely respected and revered as a man rewarded for his piety with karamah. Sh. Ahmad Khatib bin ‘Abd al-‐Ghaffar al-‐Shambas (1802-‐1872) Sh. ‘Abdullah bin Ibrahim Sh. ‘Abd al-‐Karim (b. 1840) Sh. Mhd. ‘Ali bin ‘Uthman (aka. Sh. Mhd. ‘Ali Shukri) (1848-‐1932) Sh. ‘Abd al-‐Rahim bin Muhammad Nur Sh. ‘Abd al-‐Raman bin Isma’il Sh. Mhd. Tewfik bin Yusuf Figure 3: summarize Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri’s most important teachers, and successors The first Sufi personality to have revitalized an existing tariqa in Thailand was Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali bin ‘Uthman, better known as of Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri (1848-‐1932). He was born in Siam’s Qadriyyah heartland of Ayutthaya and his ornate maqam is located next to Masyid Aliyiddarol, in the village of Phu Khao Thong within sight of one of Ayutthaya’s largest stupas dedicated to King Narai (r. 1656-‐1688). He studied under a local Qadriyyah by the name of Sheikh Abdullah bin Ibrahim, locally known as Tok Khruu Abdullah Soon (Th. Abdullah the teacher) who studied in Mecca with the famous Sh. Ahmad Khatib bin ‘Abd al-‐Ghaffar al-‐Shambas (1802-‐1872) who combining the devotional practices of the Qadriyyah and Naqshabandiyyah. 33 His ability to study under a Malay from Borneo is explained by most Muslim communities in Central Thailand at the time being ethnically Malays who were bilingual in Thai and Malay. The high regard with which Tok Khruu Abdullah Soon is locally held is demonstrated by his maqam being built next to that of Tok Takia. Both these are annually visited during the festivals held at Phuu Khao Thong which are centered around the Aliyiddarol mosque and of Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri’s maqam. In addition to having studied under Tok Khruu Abdullah Soon, Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri travelled at a young age to Mecca where he studied under Sheikh ‘Abd al-‐Karim (b. 1840) who functioned and Ahmad Katib Al-‐Sambas’ successor. 34 Following his return to Ayutthaya, Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri led a Qadriyyah revival through which new communities were established in Minburi, along the Saen Saep Canal around present-‐day Praram 9 (See figure 7). In Nonthaburi and Patthaya Qadriyyah mosques are named Masyid Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri, but there is no evidence of Qadriyyah influence moving out of Central Thailand. I summarize Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri’s most important teachers, and successors in figure 3. During the decades that Sufism in Central Thailand was being revitalized by of Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri, similar developments are discernable in South Thailand. Arguably the most important of these are associated with Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris (1760–1837).35 Mark Sedgwick’s Saints and Sons (2005) provides the 33

(Laffan, 2011, pp. 54, 56, 61, 136, 145; Mulyati, 2002, pp. 37-‐45) (van Bruinessen, 1994, 1995, 2000) (Hurgronje, 2007, pp. 278, 287, 296)

34

(MHD Mustaqim MHD Zarif, 2008) (Bradley, 2010) (Hurgronje, 2007, pp. 293, 296–298, 300–302)

35

Readers interested in the accounts of the career of Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris should consult (Bang, 1997; O'Fahey, 1990; O'Fahey et al., 1987; Thomassen et al., 1993; Vikør, 2004; Voll, 1973)


11


most recent, comprehensive, and authoritative treatment of this enigmatic Moroccan sheikh.36 Sedgwick suggests that the terms “Idrisi” and “Ahmadi” are best conceived as “devotional practices, Sufi orders, and individuals” traceable to both Ahmad ibn Idris, and “perpetuated by his followers”. The confusing variety of names which are often loosely applied include the “Idrisi” state of ‘Asir that existed for a short period in the Yemen at the start of the twentieth century (Bang, 1997), and the Shadhiliyya Idrisiyya led by his grandson (Sedgwick, 2004). Ahmad ibn Idris’ students established “Ahmadi” orders, the most important of where were the Mirghaniyya/Khatmiyya of Muhammad ‘Uthman al-‐Mirghani (1793/4-‐1852/3); The Sanusiyya of Muhammad ibn al-‐Sanusi (1787–1859); and Rashidiyya orders derived from Ibrahim ibn Salih ibn ‘Abd al-‐ Rahmadal-‐Duwayhi (1813–1874), whom I refer to below as Ibrahim al-‐Rashid. It was the latter – which for the sake of clarity I refer to below as the Ahmadiyyah-‐Idrissiyah-‐Rashidiyyah – that spread the Ahmadiyyah-‐Idrissiyah to the Malay world in the late 19th century through returning students. More than any of his other of Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris’s murid, Ibrahim al-‐Rashid avoided conventional organizational forms advocated by his Sheikh, which ultimately limited its success (Sedgwick, 2005, p. 80). Rex S. O’Fahey (2004, pp. 281-‐282), comments that although his students established the Sanusiyyah and Mirghaniyyah, Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris was a Shadhiliyyah who had no intentions of establishing yet another Sufi order. In addition to passing on his Shadhiliyyah traditions, he taught the tahlil al-‐kabir, istighfar al-‐kabir, and salawat azeemiyya. All these were received from the Prophet and Nadi Kadr through a series of dreams.37 These prayers are the most reliable indicator of Ahmadiyyah influence in Thailand, an important point that I will return to when dealing with the “Shazuliyyah” of Bangkok and the Southern Thai-‐speaking upper south. The most important propagator of the Ahmadiyyah-‐Idrisiyyah-‐Rashiddiyah throughout the Thai/Malay Peninsula’s east coast, was a murid of Ibrahim al-‐Rashid’s, a certain W an Abdul Samad bin Wan Muhammad Salih bin Wan Abdul Latifal-‐Fatani (1840–1891) better known as Tuan Tabal. His hometown was the village of Tabal situated on the northern shore of the Golok River. His popularity and influence in Kelantan following his return from Mecca in the late 1860s, has been widely commented on.38 He not only introduced the latest scholarship from the Hijaz, but a previously unheard of tariqa. Although the earliest Ahmadiyyah were also Shattariyyah, Werner Kraus claims that by the end of the nineteenth century, the Shattariyyah between Patani and Kelantan was widely contaminated by a range of unorthodox beliefs and practices.39 Despite Tuan Tabal having been inducted into the Ahmadiyyah of Ibrahim al-‐Rashid, Sedgwick described him as primarily a scholar “who was also an Ahmadi”. Nevertheless, he authored a number of books, conducted the Ahmadi aurad (Ar. wirid [pl.]), and functioned as a Ahmadiyyah murshid.40 The Ahmadiyyah presence established by him continued under his sons ‘Abd Allah, Ahmad, and Wan Musa (1874–1939), and students. The most famous of these was Muhammad Yusuf b. Ahmad (1868–1933), better known as Tok Kenali (See Abdullah al-‐Qari bin Haji Salleh, 1974). Tuan Tabal’s son Wan Musa, continued the Ahmadiyyah. Sedgwick cites this as the first occurrence of “hereditary succession in the Rashidi Ahmadiyyah since the establishment of the Salihiyya” (Sedgwick, 2004; Sedgwick, 2005, p. 123). Interestingly, Wan Musa had been inducted – not by his father – but the famous Sheikh Ahmad al-‐Fatani while in Mecca (See Ahmad Fathy al-‐Fatani, 2009;

36

See also (Pauzi Haji Awang, 2001; Werner, 1999)

37

Following the standard confession of faith (La ilaha ill’Allah; Muammadun rasul Allah), the tahlil al-‐kabir states: “fi kuli lamhatin wa nafasin 'adada ma wasi'ahu 'ilm Allah”, or “with every glance and breath, the number of which is known only to God.”

38

(See Ahmad Zaki Berahim Ibrahim et al., 2012; Muhammad Ali, 2006, 2007; Pauzi Haji Awang, 2001; Wan Muhammad Azam Muhammad Amin, 2013)

39

(Werner, 1999, p. 154, cited in Sedgwick 2005, pg. 80 )

40

A list of his best-‐known works are included in the bibliography.


12


Rahimmula, 1990).41 Like his father, Wan Musa was better known as a scholar than a Sufi. In 1916, the minutes of the Majlis Ugama of Kelantan referred to his tariqa as the “Ahmadiyyah Shadhiliyyah” (Sedgwick, 2005, p. 123).42 He might have translated al-‐Rashid’s ‘Iqd al-‐durar al-‐nafis (into Jawi), taught this in his surau, and led Ahmad aurad, but he neither described himself nor acted as a shaykh … nor did he run a tariqa in the standard sense. He was scholar first, Sufi incidentally” (Sedgwick, 2005, p. 124). In 1909, Wan Musa was appointed the founding State Mufti of Kelantan (2005, p. 133).43 Commentators likening reformism and Sufism to oil and water might confess being surprised at Wan Musa’s enthusiasm for Muhammad ‘Abduh, his condemnation of a range of practices perpetuated by the Malay populace, and recorded correspondence with Muhammad Rashid Rida (Sedgwick, 2005, p. 125). All these eventually brought him into conflict with Kelantan’s religious establishment at the time. This was at a time when term kaum muda was little known (Roff, 1967). The arrival of students from another branch of the Ahmadiyyah, led this tariqa in a very different direction from that established by Tuan Tabal and Wan Musa. Ibrahim al-‐Rashid’s most important role in the spread of the Ahmadiyyah to the Malay World, was through an unlettered Egyptian murid by the name of Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-‐Dandarawi (1839–1911) who was eventually acknowledged as his Rashid successor. This was largely based on his reputation as a wali capable of performed many miracles (Winkler et al., 2009, pp. 58-‐ 60). It was Muhammad al-‐Dandarawi who inducted Sheikh Ahmad bin Muhammad Sa’id al-‐Linggi (1874– 1926). His father was an established Meccan scholar from Negeri Sembilan, and his mother hailed from Patani where he lived until leaving for Mecca in 1892, where he studied until 1900. His teachers there included Nawawi al-‐Banten, Sheikh Ahmad al-‐Fatani, and Tok Wan ‘Ali Kutan (1837-‐1913).44 Sedgwick refers to the Ahmadiyyah-‐Idrisiyyah-‐Dandarawiyyah propagated by Muhammad Sa’id al-‐Linggi as “ecstatic and populist.” The most important element of this was a state of spiritual ecstasy referred to as majzub. Initially, Wan Musa protected this controversial murshid. His refusal to write a fatwa on this issue led the Sultan of Kelantan, the young Raja Muhammad IV, to request one from Sheikh Ahmad al-‐Fatani in Mecca.45 Most Sufi movements associated with majzub in South Thailand demonstrate influence by a branch of the Ahmadiyyah originating from Lundang Paku on the outskirts of Kota Baru in Kelantan. This was one of the most formative influences on Sheikh Mahmud al-‐Majzub (1942-‐2012), a Malaysian Sheikh who fused this form of Ahmadiyyah with the Qadriyyah he encountered while studying in Chenai, which was influenced by Nagore-‐ e-‐Sharif.46 Both the Shattariyyah and Ahmadiyyah possess a wide following throughout the Malay-‐speaking far-‐south and Kelantan, but lack the visibility of the Qadriyyah (considered above), Shazuliyyah, or Ahmadiyyah-‐ Badawiyyah described below. Most active Ahmadiyyah in South Thailand have been inducted into the Ahmadiyyah-‐Idrisiyyah-‐Dandarawiyyah through contacts with its leadership in Negeri Sembilan, or his representative (Ar. khalifah) based in Kota Baru, Ustadz Ashari.

41

Sheikh Ahmad al-‐Fatani specifically refers to his involvement in the Ahmadiyyah in his Fatwa to Sultan Muhammad IV, dated 1904 (See Rahimmula, 1990, p. 880).

42

Muhammad Salah bin Wan Musa comments that Sheikh Ahmad al-‐Fatani inducted Wan Musa into the “practices of the Sufi tariqa of Abu Hasan Ash-‐Shadili” (1974, p. 155). Decades later while in Terengganu under the patronage of its chief minister, he spread the teachings of the Ahmadiyyah-‐Shadhiliyyah tariqa (1974, p. 158).

43

Sedgwick comments that this was an important position created by the British, who wished to create a position of influence that was under their formal control; the State Mufti came under the direct purview of the Rajah, who was in turn controlled by the British

44

For more details, see (MHD Mustaqim MHD Zarif, 2008, p. 117)

45

This exchange is commented upon by Laffan (2010, pp. 20-‐23).

46

A fascinating hagiography has been recently published (Madrasah Nurul Iman Hulu, 2009).


13


Figure 4: East-‐coast Malay murid of Ibrahim al-‐Rashid

Important historical connections exist between the Ahmadiyyah described above, and the Ahmadiyyah-‐ Shadhiliyyah, most commonly referred to in Thailand as Shazuliyyah or Pha Khiao (Th. green cloths) considered below. Although the earliest Ahmadiyyah between were Shattariyyah, this was an entirely new order. The importers of the Ahmadiyyah, Shazuliyyah, and Ahmadiyyah-‐Badawiyyah are distinct from Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri who instigated a season of Qadriyyah revival and expansion. Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri revitalized an existing order, while other imported entirely new ones. In addition to developing into mass movements following their introduction to Thailand in the 1930s and 1950s, the Shazuliyyah and Ahmadiyyah-‐Badawiyyah possess substantial constituencies throughout the Southern Thai-‐speaking upper south (see figure 6 & 7). The former achieved this through the son (and successor) of the founding Sheikh relocating to Nakhon Si Thammarat. This is the only mass movement possessing significant constituencies in more than one of the three linguistic and cultural milieu where Muslims are long been embedded. There are a number of connections between the Ahmadiyyah described above, with the Shazuliyyah dealt with below. That the Ahmadiyyah present in Shazuliyyah stickers which are stuck to car and house doors of murid (see fig 5) is that of Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris is beyond dispute for a number of reasons. His famous Tahlil Al-‐Kabir is placed at the top. Along the bottom of the sticker is the following (Jawi) phrase: Amalan dalam tariqa Ahmadiyyah-‐Shadhiliyyah. I have previously made mention that this was cited as Tuan Tabal’s tariqa. Why did the Shazuliyyah arrive in Siam in 1929? Mark Sedgwick (1997) has argued that as a reformist order relatively untainted by the esoteric excesses of other turuq, Ahmadiyyah lodges (Ar. zawiya) freely operated in Mecca as late as 1941 (1997). Sheikh Khalid al-‐Bakri began his Southeast Asian sojourn at the end of the decade during which his native Hijaz had been conquered by the Wahhabi forces.


14


Figure 5: Anatomy of Ahmadiyyah-‐Shadhiliyyah Sticker

Riyad Mustafa’s study of place-‐making in Baan Khrua documents Sheikh Khalid al-‐Bakri’s father (Sheikh Hussein al-‐Bakri) having lived in Baan Khrua in the Saen Saep Canal near the Chao Phraya River during the reign of King Chulalongkorn (1853-‐1910) (2011, pp. 106-‐110). He is most closely associated with the Darulfalah Mosque where the maqam of his son Ahmad al-‐Bakri is located. Intriguingly, this is directly behind the mimbar facing Mecca. Sheikh Hussein al-‐Bakri and his brother settled in Baan Khrua. The former married a local woman, with whom he had two sons. He eventually returned to the Hijaz. Before leaving, he informed his wife that she should expect their youngest son to die. The happened as predicted, but he was buried without her fulfilling a pledge to bury w ith him a green cloth. This led to locals being urgently called up to locate the corpse that w ould perm it her fulfilling her vow to her (now absent) husband. The child’s body was soon discovered to have disappeared. This led to a decision to construct the maqam whose popularity increased as the story of the Arab and the green cloth spread. During the 1930s from his base in Baan Khrua, Sheikh Khalid al-‐Bakri’s Shazuliyyah grew. Many Malay murid travelled 30 kilometers along the Saen Saep Canal to study with him and preform the long and elaborate dhikr. These eventually led them to donate land on which Baan Yai, which functions as the centre of the Thai chapter of the Shazuliyyah, being constructed. The maqam of Sheikh Khalid al-‐Bakri is located nearby, next to the Kamàl al-‐Salàm Mosque, which is currently led by Ajarn Marawan Samaun, a well-‐respected translator of the Qur’an into Thai, who served for many years as a local senator. Sheikh Khalid’s son, Sheikh Muhammad Dohar al-‐Bakri, assumed the leadership of the Shazuliyyah, but subsequently moved to South Thailand. He lived in Nakhon Si Thammarat, Krabi, and (finally) Satun where he was buried. Although his son, Sheikh Ahmad al-‐Bakri, is one of two southern khalifah, subsequent Shazuliyyah sheikh – all of whom are direct of Sheikh Khalid – have been based at Baan Yai in Minburi. The longest serving in recent decades was Sheikh Hussein who held this position for 20 years. The most recently arrived Sufi order as visible and viable as the Qadriyyah and Shazuliyyah, is the Ahmadiyyah-‐Badawiyyah. As the name suggests, this is derived from Sheikh Ahmad Al-‐Badawi (1203-‐1282), but is most widely known in South Thailand as the Muhammadiyyah. The Ahmadiyyah-‐Badawiyyah spread throughout the Southern Thai-‐speaking upper south from Koh Yao Noi and Huay On. These were the


15


hometowns of Tok Khruu Ae (1923-‐1986) and Tok Khruu Loh. 47 Both these were inducted by their Kelantanese Babo Haji Abdullah Tahir (1897-‐1961) why studying at his Madrasah Ahmadiyyah situated just outside Kota Baru in the village of Bunut Payong.48 A number of balai and (mostly unregistered) mosques established since the 1960s functioned as conduits for the Ahmadiyyah-‐Badawiyyah. Most are in Phang-‐Nga Bay, and Songkhla. The success of the Ahmadiyyah-‐Badawiyyah is largely attributable to the reputation that Tok Khruu Ae of Koh Yao Noi developed as a man possessing karamah. Approximately a thousand followers (comparable to the number of annually attending Shazuliyyah commemorations of his death at Baan Yai in Minburi) spend the three-‐days immediately after Nisfu Sha’ban in Tok Khruu Ae’s grave on Koh Yao Noi. Conclusion Despite decades of reformist activism, Sufi orders remain a highly visible Islamic constituency throughout Indonesia and South Asia. No credible claims can be made that the visibility of the Thai Turuq described above (and summarized in figures 6 and 7 below) are on a scale in other parts of South and Southeast Asia. While less visible, these are viable. No one can deny there being good reasons for the scholarly silence on Sufism practiced by a Muslim minority that has otherwise been extensively studied. Its absence in Thailand is not one of them. In addition to new perspectives on the ethnic, linguistic and sectarian diversity of Islam in Thailand, the provisional findings presented have detailed where, when, and through whom, these under-‐ studied Islamic movements were adopted. I dealt with orders established before the 17th century separately from those arriving in Central, and South Thailand from the mid-‐19th century. I have argued that the Shattariyyah arrived in South Thailand well before the 16th century during which the Qadriyyah was established in Ayutthaya. This is yet more confirmation that although Islam in Thailand represents a relatively rare example of Muslim minorities among Theravada Buddhists, Islamic influences in Thailand are more similar to – than distinct from – other parts of Southeast Asia (See Joll, 2011a; Joll, 2011b, p. 51). Not only did orders present in Aceh (such as the Shattariyyah) make their way to the Thai/Malay Peninsula, but while I can do more than call attention to connections, what would have prevented dynamic Sufi movements based on the east coast of South India expanding to places such as Ayutthaya via ships, ports, and portages? The increased ease with which Muslims between Central and South Thailand travelled to the Hijaz during the second half of the 19th century coincided with decades during which there were a number of important developments in Mecca. As is well known, Mecca functioned as the global centre for Sufi orders before the 1920s (Laffan, 2014; Sedgwick, 1997; Sedgwick, 2004). By the late 1800s, publications and pupils produced by Mecca’s Pattani school (Bradley 2010) led by ‘ulama actively involved in the Shattariyyah and Ahmadiyyah, began to impact Muslim thought and practice in Siam’s Malay far-‐south. Mecca was also the base from which a revitalized form of the Qadriyyah was spread by the Borneo-‐born Sheikh Ahmad Khatib al-‐ Sambas, and his Javanese successor, Sheikh ‘Abd al-‐Karim. Two of their murid lead what appears to have been a Qadriyyah revival following their return to Ayutthaya in the late 1800s. Although this is an example of an existing order being revitalized, most of the developments from the mid-‐ 19th century that I have dealt with, involved the introduction of entirely new orders. Some returned from Mecca as enthusiasts for a version of the juristic Sufism of Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris. Some who hailed from the east coast of the Thai/Malay Peninsula are remembered more as reformers that Sufis. The Ahmadiyyah-‐ 47

Tok Khruu Ae is mentioned by (Pitsuwan, 1985, p. 254)

48

Intriguingly, little is left of the Haji Abdullah Tahir’s legacy as Sufi sheikh. No aurad is held on Friday evenings at the mosque next to the madrasah. Unfortunately, obtaining answers to questions about Haji Abdullah Tahir’s Ahmadiyyah-‐Badawiyyah sanad (Ar. lineage) and wirid (Ar. litany) are complicated by his house having been tragically completely destroyed by a fire some decades earlier.


16


Idrisiyyah-‐Dandariwiyyah propagated by the charismatic Sheikh Muhammad Said al-‐Linngi between Kelantan and Patani, led this loose movement in a very different direction than that advocated by Tuan Tabal and Wan Musa. This did not prevent it from becoming a mass-‐movement throughout the Malay-‐speaking far-‐ south. Similar comments could be made about the Ahmadiyyah-‐Shadhiliyyah in Thailand: There is little evidence of the sober Sufism of Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris in the tariqa spread by Sheikh Khalid al-‐Bakri who arrived in the late 1920s, presumably due to increasingly inhospitable attitudes in his native Hijaz. The success of the Shazuliyyah is remarkable for the following two reasons. In spite of being a relatively recent arrival, its followers that are concentrated in East Bangkok, and between Phuket, Nakhon Si Thammarat, and Satun in the Southern Thai-‐speaking upper south are comparable with the Qadriyyah. Furthermore, it was introduced by an Arab outsider, rather than a local. The third visible and viable Sufi tariqa in Thailand described above most closely resembles the Shazuliyyah in terms of numbers, and geographical spread. Nevertheless, the Ahmadiyyah-‐Badawiyyah travelled the shortest distance and the successful introduction of (Sufi) strangeness was led by someone familiar. The impact of Tok Khruu Ae of Koh Yao Noi is explained is related to more than either his decade studying in ponkoks in Kedah and Kelantan, or his ability to translate and embody the tariqa of his Kelantanse Babo. Like Tok Takia, Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Shukri, and Sheikh Muhammad Said al-‐Linggi, he was widely respected by Muslims and Buddhists alike as a man blessed by Allah with karamah.


17


Figure 6: Where and through whom turuq in Thailand arrived


18


Ayu/haya) Bangkok) (Q))

(Q))

(S))

(Q)) (Q))

Songkhla)&)Satun) (AB))

(AB)) (AB))

KEY) (Q))Qadriyyah! (S))Shadhiliyyah) (AB))Ahmadiyyah-Badawiyyah) (AI))Ahmadiyyah-Idrisiyyah)

(S)!

Southern Thai-speaking upper south

(AB))

(AB))

(AB))

Malay-speaking far-south

Pang9nga)Bay) Narathiwat) (S)! (S)!

(AB)!

(AB))

(S)!

(AI)) Figure 7: Distribution of Thai Turq between Ayutthaya and Narathiwat


19


References Abdullah al-‐Qari bin Haji Salleh. (1974). Tok Kenali: His Life and Influence. In W. Roff (Ed.), Kelantan: Religion, Society, and Politics in a Malay State (pp. 87-‐100). Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press. Aeusrivongse, N. (2006). Understanding the Situation in the South as a “Millenarian Revolt” Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia 6(March). Ahmad Fathy al-‐Fatani. (2009). Ulama besar dari Patani. (Cet. 1. ed.). Kota Bharu, Kelantan: Majlis Agama Islam dan Adat Istiadat Melayu Kelantan. Ahmad Zaki Berahim Ibrahim, Mohd Roslan Mohd Nor, et al. (2012). Malay Text Minhat Al-‐Qarib by Tuan Tabal (D. 1891): A Reading on Fiqh munakahat and Ibadat. Middle-‐East Journal of Scientific Research, 11(9), 1250-‐1256. Andaya, L.Y. (1999). Ayutthaya and the Persian and India Muslim Connection. In K. Breazeale (Ed.), From Japan to Arabia: Ayutthaya's Maritime Relations with Asia (pp. 119-‐136). Bangkok: The Foundation for the Promotion of Social Sciences and Humanities Textbook Project Azra, A. (2004). The Origins of Islamic Reformism in Southeast Asia: Networks of Middle Eastern ‘Ulama' in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Baker, C.J. (2003). Ayutthaya Rising: From Land or Sea? Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 34(01), 41-‐62. doi: doi:10.1017/S0022463403000031 Baker, C.J., & Pasuk, P. (2014). A history of Thailand. New York: Cambridge University Press. Bang, A.K. (1997). The Idrisi State in Asir: politics, religion and prestige in Arabia. London: C. Hurst & Co. Bayly, C.A., Harper, T.N., et al. (2007). Forgotten wars: freedom and revolution in Southeast Asia. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Bradley, F.R. (2010). The Social Dynamics of Islamic Revivalism in Southeast Asia: The Rise of the Patani School, 1785-‐1909. (Ph.D.), University of Wisconsin-‐Madison, Madison. Bradley, F.R. (2013). Sheikh Daud al-‐Fatanis Munyat al-‐Musalli and the Place of Prayer in 19th-‐C Patani Communities. Indonesia and the Malay World, 41(120), 198-‐214. Braginsky, V.I. (1999). Towards the Biography of Hamzah Fansuri. When Did Hamzah Live? Data from His Poems and Early European Accounts. Archipel, 57(2), 135-‐175. Braginsky, V.I. (2001). On the Copy of Hamzah Fansuri's Epitaph Published by C. Guillot & L. Kalus. Archipel, 62(1), 21-‐33. Brakel, L.F. (1969). The Birth Place of Hamza Pansuri. Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 42, 206-‐212. Brown, R.A. (2013). Islam in Modern Thailand: Faith, Philanthropy and Politics. London: Routledge Cheah, B.K. (2006). To' Janggut: legends, histories, and perceptions of the 1915 rebellion in Kelantan. Singapore: Singapore University Press. Cheah Boon Kheng. (1981). Sino-‐Malay Conflicts in Malaya, 1945-‐1946: Communist Vendetta and Islamic Resistance. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 12(1), 108-‐117. Cheah Boon Kheng. (2012). Red star over Malaya: Resistance and social conflict during and after the Japanese occupation of Malaya, 1941-‐46. (4th ed.). Singapore: National University of Singapore Press.


20


Chutintaranond, S. (1999). Mergui and Tenasserim as Leading Port Cities in the Context of Autonomous History. In K. Breazeale (Ed.), From Japan to Arabia: Ayutthaya's Maritime Relations with Asia (pp. 104-‐118). Bangkok: The Foundation for the Promotion of Social Sciences and Humanities Textbook Project Chutintaranond, S. (2002). Leading Port Cities in the Eastern Martaban Bay in the Context of Autonomous History. In S. Chutintaranond & C. J. Baker (Eds.), Recalling local pasts: autonomous history in Southeast Asia (pp. 9-‐24). Chiang Mai, Thailand: Silkworm Books. Cornish, A. (1997). Whose Place is this? Malay Rubber Producers and Thai Government Officials in Yala. Bangkok: White Lotus Press. Drewes, G.W.J., & Brakel, L.F. (1986). The Poems of Hamzah Fansuri. Dordrecht: Foris. Farrer, D.S. (2009). Shadows of the Prophet: Martial Arts and Sufi Mysticism. (Vol. 2). Dordrecht: Springer. Feener, R.M. (2010). South-‐East Asian localisations of Islam and participation within a global umma, c. 1500 1800. In A. M. Reid & D. O. Morgan (Eds.), The Eastern Islamic World: Eleventh to Eighteenth Centuries (Vol. 3, pp. 470-‐503). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Feener, R.M., & Laffan, M.F. (2005). Sufi Scents across the Indian Ocean: Yemeni Hagiography and the Earliest History of Southeast Asian Islam. Archipel, 70, 185-‐208. Gibson, T. (2007). Islamic Narrative and Authority in Southeast Asia: From the 16th to the 21st Century. New York: Palgrave. Guillot, C., & Kalus, L. (2000). La stèle funéraire de Hamzah Fansuri. Archipel, 60(4), 3-‐24. Gunn, G.C. (2011). History Without Borders: The Making of an Asian World Region, 1000-‐1800. Hong Kong University Press. Harper, T.N. (1998). The end of empire and the making of Malaya. New York: Cambridge University Press. Helbardt, S. (2011). Deciphering Southern Thailand’s violence: organisation and insurgent practices of BRNCoordinate. (PhD), University of Passau, Passau. Ho, E. (2013). Foreigners and Mediators in the Constitution of Malay Sovereignty. Indonesia and the Malay World, 41(120), 146-‐167. Hourani, A.H. (1981). Sufism and Modern Islam: Rashid Rida. In A. H. Hourani (Ed.), The Emergence of the Modern Middle East (pp. 90-‐102). Berkeley: University of California Press. Hurgronje, S.C. (2007). Mekka in the Latter Part of the 19th Century: Daily Life, Customs and Learning, The Moslims of the East-‐Indian-‐Archipelago. (Slightly rev. 2nd ed.). Leiden: Brill. Ingram, B. (2009). Sufis, Scholars and Scapegoats: Rashid Aḥmad Gangohi (d. 1905) and the Deobandi Critique of Sufism. The Muslim World, 99(3), 478-‐501. Ingram, B. (2011). Deobandis Abroad: Sufism, Ethics and Polemics in a Global Islamic Movement. (PhD), University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. International Crisis Group. (2005). Southern Thailand: Insurgency Not Jihad Asia Report No. 98 – 18 May 2005. Brussels: International Crisis Group. Joll, C.M. (2011a). Local and Global Islams in Southeast Asia: Historical and Anthropological Perspectives. In Z. Ibrahim (Ed.), Social Science and Knowledge in a Globalising World. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Joll, C.M. (2011b). Muslim Merit-‐making in Thailand's Far-‐south. Dordrecht: Springer. Joll, C.M. (2012). Islam’s Creole Ambassadors. In P. Jory (Ed.), The Ghosts of the Past in Southern Thailand: Essays on the History and Historiography of Patani (pp. 129-‐146). Singapore: National University of Singapore Press.


21


Khoo Salma Nasution. (2009). The Tamil Muslims in Early Penang: Networks for a New Global Frontier. In Wazir Jahan Karim (Ed.), Straits Muslims: Diasporas of the Northern Passage of the Straits of Malacca. Penang: Areca Books. Khoo Salma Nasution. (2014). The Chulia in Penang: Patronage and Place-‐making Around the Kapitan Kling Mosque 1786-‐1957. George Town, Penang: Areca Books. Laffan, M.F. (2010). Understanding Al-‐Imam's Critique of Tariqa Sufism. In A. Azra, K. Van Dijk & N. J. G. Kaptein (Eds.), Varieties of Religious Authority (pp. 17-‐53). Singapore: Instiute of Southeast Asian Studies. Laffan, M.F. (2011). The makings of Indonesian Islam: Orientalism and the narration of a Sufi past. Princeton N.J. ; Oxford England: Princeton University Press. Laffan, M.F. (2014). A Sufi Century?: The Modern Spread of the Sufi Orders in Southeast Asia. In J. L. Gelvin & N. Green (Eds.), Global Muslims in the age of steam and print (pp. 25-‐39). Berkeley: University of California Press. Liow, J.C. (2009). Islam, Education and Reform in Southern Thailand: Tradition and Transformation. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Lukmanul Hakim Darusman. (2010). Jihad in Two Faces of Shari’ah: Sufism and Islamic Jurisprudence (fiqh) and the Revival of Islamic Movements in the Malay World: Case Studies of Yusuf al Maqassary and Dawud Al Fatani. (Ph.D.), Australian National University, Camberra. Madaman, U. (1999). การศึกษาเปรียบเทียบความเชื่อและการปฏิบัติของกลุมเฏาะรีเกาะฮซูฟในประเทศไทย [A Comparative study of Sufism in Thailand]. (PhD), Mahidol University. Madmarn, H. (1989). Pondok and Change in South Thailand. In R. Scupin (Ed.), Aspects of Developments: Islamic Education in Thailand and Malaysia (pp. 47-‐92). Bangi: ATMA, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Madmarn, H. (1990). The Pondok and Madrasah in Patani. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Press. Madrasah Nurul Iman Hulu. (2009). Syeikh Mahmud Al-‐Majzub: 1390H-‐1430H. Kuala Lumpur: Madrasah Nurul Iman Hulu. Malhi, A. (2010). Forests of Islam: Territory, Environment and Holy War in Terengganu, Malaya, 1928. (PhD), ANU. Marcinkowski, C. (2004). From Isfahan to Ayutthaya. Contacts between Iran and Siam in the 17th Century Singapore: Pustaka Nasional Pte Ltd. Marcinkowski, C. (2006). Shi‘ites in South-‐East Asia. In E. Yarshater (Ed.), Encyclopedia Iranica. New York: Columbia University. Marcinkowski, C. (2009). Selected Historical Facets of the Presence of Shi‘ism in Southeast Asia The Muslim World, 99(2), 381-‐416. Marcinkowski, C. (2014). Persians and Shi’ites in Thailand: From the Ayutthaya Period to the Present. (Vol. 15). Singapore: Nalanda-‐Sriwijaya Centre. McGilvray, D.B. (2004). Jailani: A Sufi Shrine in Sri Lanka. In l. Ahmad & H. Reifeld (Eds.), Lived Islam in South Asia: Adaptation, Accommodation & Conflict (pp. 273-‐289). New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books. McGilvray, D.B. (2013). Sri Lankan Sufi Transnational Networks The Encyclopedia of the Sri Lankan Diaspora. Singapore: ISEAS. McGlivray, D. (2013). Sri Lankan Sufi Transnational Networks. In P. Reeves (Ed.), The encyclopedia of Sri Lankan diaspora (pp. 55). Singapore: Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore.


22


MHD Mustaqim MHD Zarif. (2008). Hadith scholarship in the nineteenth century: A comparative study of the adaptions of Lubab al-‐Hadith composed by Nawawi of Banten (d.1314/1897) and Wan Ali of Kelantan (d. 1331/1913). (PhD), The University of Edinburgh. MHD Salleh bin Wan Musa, & (with S. Othman Kelantan). (1974). Theological debates: Wan Musa bin Haji Abdul Samad & his family. In W. Roff (Ed.), Kelantan: Religion, Society, and Politics in a Malay State (pp. 153-‐169). Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press. MHD Zain bin Abdul Rahman. (2000). An annotated translation and transliteration of al-‐Manhal al-‐Safi fi Bayan Ramz ahl al-‐Sufi of Sheikh Dawud al-‐Fatani. (MA), International Islamic University of Malaysia. (3) Morgan, D.O., & Reid, A.M. (2010). Introduction: Islam in a plural Asia. In A. M. Reid & D. O. Morgan (Eds.), The Eastern Islamic World: Eleventh to Eighteenth Centuries (Vol. 3, pp. 1-‐20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Muhammad Ali. (2006). Transmission of Islamic Knowledge in Kelantan. Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 79(2), 39-‐58. Muhammad Ali. (2007). Religion and Colonialism -‐ Islamic Knowledge in South Sulawesi & Kelantan 1905-‐45. (PhD), University of Hawaii. Muhammad Ilyas Yahprung. (2014). Islamic Reform and Revivalism in Southern Thailand: A Critical study of the Salafi Reform movement of Shaykh Dr. Ismail Lutfi Chapakia Al-‐Fatani. (PhD), International Islamic University of Malaysia. Mulyati, S. (2002). The Educational Role of the Tarlqa Qidiriyya Naqshbandiyya with Special Reference to Suryalaya. (PhD), McGill University, Montreal. Mustafa, R.T. (2011). The Making of a Cosmopolitan Muslim Place: Islam, Metropolis, State, and the Politics of Belonging in Ban Krua Community, Bangkok. (PhD), Oxford. Narongraksakhet, I. (2010). Shaykh Daud al-‐Fatani Jawi Textbooks and the Malay Language. In Rosnani Hashim (Ed.), Reclaiming the conversation: Islamic intellectual tradition in the Malay Archipelago (pp. 1-‐15). Kuala Lumpur: The Other Press. O'Fahey, R.S. (1990). Enigmatic Saint: Ahmad ibn Idris and the Idrisi Tradition. London: Hurst. O'Fahey, R.S. (2004). Small world: Neosufi interconnections between the Maghrib, the Hijaz and Southeast Asia. In S. S. Reese (Ed.), The Transmission of Learning in Islamic Africa (pp. 274-‐288). Leiden: Brill. O'Fahey, R.S., & Ali Salih Karrar. (1987). The Enigmatic Imam: The Influence of Ahmad Ibn Idris. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 19(2), 205-‐220. Pas-‐Ong, S. (1990). Trader and Smuggler: Who is Who? A Sociology of Market, Trade, State and Society. (Ph.D.), University of Bielefeld. Patya, S. (1974). Social Organization of an Inland Malay Village Community in Southern Thailand (with Emphasis on the Patterns of Leadership). (Ph.D.), Oxford University, Oxford. Pauzi Haji Awang. (2001). Tariqah Ahmadiyyah: History and Development. Petaling Jaya: Persatuan Ulama Malaysia/Intel Multimedia & Publication. Pearson, M. (2010). Islamic trade, shipping, port states and merchant communities in the Indian Ocean, seventh to sixteenth centuries. In A. M. Reid & D. O. Morgan (Eds.), The Eastern Islamic World: Eleventh to Eighteenth Centuries (Vol. 3, pp. 317-‐365). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pitsuwan, S. (1985). Islam and Malay Nationalism: A Study of the Malay-‐Muslims of Southern Thailand. (Ph.D.), Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Rahimmula, P. (1990). The Pattani Fatawa: A Case Study of the Kitab Al-‐Fatawa Al-‐Fataniyyah of Shaykh Ahmed bin Muhamad Zain bin Mustafa Al-‐Fatani. (Ph.D.), University of Kent, Canterbury.


23


Ricci, R. (2011). Islam translated: Literature, conversion, and the Arabic cosmopolis of South and Southeast Asia. Chicago ; London: University of Chicago Press. Roff, W.R. (1967). The Origins of Malay Nationalism. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Press. Ross, L.N. (2011). Rong Ngeng -‐ The Transformation of Malayan Social Dance Music in Thailand Since the 1930s. (PhD), The City University of New York. Ryad, U. (2006). Muslim response to missionary activities in Egypt: With a Special reference to the Al-‐Azhar High Corps of ‘Ulam (1925–1935). In H. L. Murre-‐van den Berg (Ed.), New Faith in Ancient Lands: Western Missions in the Middle East in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries (pp. 281-‐307). Leiden: Brill. Saheb, S.A.A. (1998). A "festival of flags": Hindu-‐Muslim devotion and the sacralising of localism at the shrine of Nagore-‐e-‐Sharif in Tamil Nadu. In P. Werbner & H. Basu (Eds.), Embodying charisma: modernity, locality, and performance of emotion in Sufi cults (pp. 55-‐76). London ; New York: Routledge. Satha-‐Anand, C. (2006). The Silence of the Bullet Monument: Violence and "Truth" Management, Duson-‐ nyor 1948, and Kru-‐Ze 2004 Critical Asian Studies, 38(1), 11-‐38. Sedgwick, M.J.R. (1997). Saudi Sufis: Compromise in the Hijaz, 1925-‐40. Die Welt des Islams, 37(3), 349-‐368. Sedgwick, M.J.R. (2004). Upper Egypt’s Regional Identity: The Role and Impact of Sufi Links. In N. S. Hopkins & R. Saad (Eds.), Identity and Change in Upper Egypt (pp. 97-‐118). Cairo: American University of Cairo. Sedgwick, M.J.R. (2005). Saints and Sons: The Making and Remaking of the Rashidi Ahmadi Sufi order, 1799-‐ 2000. Leiden: Brill. Sedgwick, M.J.R. (2009). Muhammad Abduh. Oxford: Oneworld. Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (1818). Shi‘r Saudagar Yaḥyā (Poetry of Yahya the Merchant). Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (1824a). Jam‘ al-‐Fawā’id wa Jawāhir al-‐Qalā’id (The Compilation of the Benefits and Jewels of Necklaces). Penang: Sulaiman Marie. Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (1824b). Kanz al-‐Mannān ‘alā Ḥikam Abī Madyan (Treasure of the Sustainer on the Maxims of Abī Madyan). Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (1825). Minhāj al-‐‘Ābidīn (The Path of the Worshippers). Penang: Maktabah Dar al-‐Ma‘arif. Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (1828). Hidāyat al-‐Muta‘allim wa ‘Umdat al-‐Mu‘allim (Guidance of the Student and Foundation of the Master). Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (1829). Waṣāyā al-‐Abrār wa Mawā‘iẓ al-‐Akhyār (The Commandments of the Righteous and the Morals of the Chosen). Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (1834a). Fatḥ al-‐Mannān li-‐Ṣafwat al-‐Zubad (Bounty of the Giver for the Chosen Ones) 1834. Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (1834b). Mudhākarat al-‐’Ikhwān (The Study of the Brethren). Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (1913). Ḍiyā al-‐Murīd fī Ma‘rifat Kalimat al-‐Tawḥīd [Pure Spring in the Explanation of Sufi Symbolism]. Singapore: Matbaat Dar al-‐Tibaat al-‐Misriyah. Sheikh Daud bin Abdullah al-‐Fatani. (nd). Al-‐Manhal al-‐Ṣāfī fī Bayān Ramz Ahl al-‐Ṣūfī (Pure Spring in the Explanation of Sufi Symbolism). Sikand, Y. (2007). The Reformist Sufism of the Tablighi Juma'at: The Case of the Meos of Mewat, India. In M. van Bruinessen & J. D. Howell (Eds.), Sufism and the 'Modern' in Islam (pp. 129-‐148). London: I. B. Tauris.


24


Subrahmanyam, S. (1990). The political economy of commerce : Southern India, 1500-‐1650. Cambridge England ; New York: Cambridge University Press. Sweeney, A. (1972). Malay Shadow Puppets: The Wayang Siam of Kelantan. London: The Trustees of the British Museum. Syed Muhammad Naguib Al-‐Attas. (1963). Some Aspects of Sufism as Understood and Practised among the Malays. Singapore: Malaysian Sociological Research Institute. Syed Muhammad Naguib Al-‐Attas. (1970). The Mysticism of Hamzah Fansuri. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Press. Tagliacozzo, E. (2013). The longest journey: Southeast Asians and the pilgrimage to Mecca. New York: Oxford University Press. Thomassen, E., & Radtke, B. (Eds.). (1993). The Letters of Ahmad Ibn Idris. London: Hurst. Tschacher, T. (2006). From Local Practice to Transnational Network: Saints, Shrines and Sufis AmongSingapore Tamil Muslims. Asian Journal of Social Science, 34(2). Tschacher, T. (2009a). Circulating Islam: Understanding Convergence and Divergence in the Islamic Traditions of Mabar and Nusantara. In R. M. Feener & T. Sevea (Eds.), Islamic Connections: Muslim Societies in South and Southeast Asia (pp. 48-‐67). Singapore: Islamic Connections: Muslim Societies in South and Southeast Asia. Tschacher, T. (2009b). Rational Miracles, Cultural Rituals and the Fear of Syncretism: Defending Contentious Muslim Practice Among Tamil-‐speaking Muslims. Asian Journal of Social Science, 37(1), 55-‐82. Tsuneda, M. (2009). Navigating Life on the Border: Gender, Marriage, and Identity in Malay Muslim Communities in Southern Thailand. (Ph.D.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Madison. Unno, A. (2011). “We Love Mr. King‟”: Exceptional Sovereignty, Submissive Subjectivity, and Mediated Agency in Islamic Southern Thailand. (PhD dissertation), University of Washington, Seattle. van Bruinessen, M. (1994). Origins and Development of the Sufi Orders (tarekat) in Southeast Asia. Studia Islamika, 1(1), 111-‐123. van Bruinessen, M. (1995). Tarekat and Tarekat Teachers in Madurese Society. In K. van Dijk, H. de Jonge & E. Touwen-‐Bouwsma (Eds.), Across Madura Strait: The Dynamics of an Insular Society (pp. 91-‐117). Leiden: KITLV Press. van Bruinessen, M. (2000). Shaykh Àbd al-‐Qadir al-‐Jilani and the Qadiriyya in Indonesia. Journal of the History of Sufism, 1-‐2, 361-‐395. Vikør, K.S. (2004). Ahmad Ibn Idris (1750–1837). In R. C. Martin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World (pp. 29-‐30). New York: Macmillan Reference. Voll, J.O. (1973). Two Biographies of Ahmad Ibn Idris Al-‐Fasi (1760-‐1837) The International Journal of African Historical Studies, 6(633-‐645). Wan Muhammad Azam Muhammad Amin. (2013). Reforming Sufism in Malaya: The teachings of Tuan Tabal and his followers. Intellectual Discourse, 21(1), 87-‐107. Werner, K. (1999). Sufis und Ihre Widersacher in Kelantan/Malaysia: Die Polemik Gegen de Ahmadiyya zu Beginn des 20 Jahrhunderts. In F. De Jong & B. Radtke (Eds.), Islamic Mysticism Contested: Thirteen Centuries of Controveries and Polemics (pp. 729-‐756). Leiden: Brill. Wilson, H.E. (1992). Tengku Mahmud Mahyiddeen and the Dilemma of Partisan Duality. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 23(1), 37-‐59. Winkler, H.A., & Hopkins, N.S. (2009). Ghost Riders of Upper Egypt: A Study of Spirit Possession. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press.


25


Woodward, M.R., Muhammad Sani Umar, et al. (2014). Salafi Violence and Sufi Tolerance? Rethinking Conventional Wisdom. Perspectives on Terrorism, 7(Dec). Wright, B.S. (1981). Islam and the Malay Shadow Play: Aspects of the Historical Mythology of the Wayang Siam. Asian Folklore Studies, 40(1), 51-‐63. Yegar, M. (2002). Between Integration and Secession: The Muslim Communities of the Southern Philippines, Southern Thailand, and Western Burma/Myanmar. Lanham, MD.: Lexington Books.


26