Dr. Salar Tawgozi

Sufism is not merely a spiritual religious path, but also plays an important role in the political sphere, which is the reason for choosing this research entitled: (The Relationship Between Sufism and Politics in the Islamic World and Kurdistan). The importance of the research lies in examining an under-discussed aspect of Sufism – particularly in Kurdistan – in which the researcher seeks to answer these questions:

• What is Islamic Sufism and when did it emerge in the Islamic world and Kurdistan?
• What is the relationship between politics and Sufism in the Islamic world and Kurdistan?
• What has been the position of Sufism toward political authority?
• What are the points of convergence and divergence between political Islam and political Sufism?

The research problem is the complexity of the relationship between Sufism and politics, and between political Sufism and political Islam, which we wish to clarify and identify.

The research relies on historical and analytical methodology. It consists of an introduction and a summary concerning the definition of Sufism and the history of its emergence and the relationship between Sufism and politics, in addition to identifying the points of convergence and divergence between political Islam and political Sufism.

The conclusion of the research is devoted to the findings, the most prominent of which is that, contrary to common opinions, we have concluded that the primary cause of the emergence of Islamic Sufism was a reaction to the oppression of politicians, not influence by external sources such as Greek philosophy and Buddhist, Jewish, and Christian religions, or influence by internal sources such as the Quran and Sunnah. Also, the relationship between Islamic Sufism and politics has undergone changes according to time and place and manifests itself in four situations: (neutrality and isolation, cooperation and support, confrontation, seizure of power).

A Summary Concerning the Definition of Sufism and the History of Its Emergence

Sufism (al-Tasawwuf) is a monotheistic path and has roots within most religions such as Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. However, the Sufism we are focusing on is (Islamic Sufism), which does not have a specific and concrete definition, but most definitions concentrate Sufism in turning toward God, inner purity, morality, and the spiritual, educational, and psychological aspects. In one definition it is stated: Sufism is the knowledge of Almighty God through the heart. Another definition says: It is a spiritual school for cultivating the human soul and purifying the heart at the hands of true educators and inheritors of the prophets, peace be upon them (1).

In another definition, it states that Sufism consists of tasting (al-Dhawq) and illumination (Ishraq) of God’s light in hearts (2). Also, (Abu al-Abbas Ahmad al-Burnusi) in discussing the definition of Sufism says: “Sufism has been defined, depicted, and explained from two thousand perspectives, and the reference point of all of these is one thing, which is turning toward God” (3). The primary objective of Sufism is to lead people to knowledge of God (ma’rifat Allah), apart from which all other objectives are secondary (4). The primary objective of Sufism also aligns with this Quranic verse which states: ﴿And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship Me﴾ (5), which according to the interpretation of (Abdullah ibn Mas’ud) means that God created jinn and humans so that they might know Him (6).

The history of the emergence of Islamic Sufism, like its definition, is a subject of debate. Some trace its roots to (Ahl al-Suffah), who consisted of a group of poor and destitute companions of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) who remained in the mosque. Some others trace it back to around the year 200 AH, when Muslims were divided into several groups and sects, each claiming that asceticism and worship were greater among them. Among these groups, people emerged who called themselves (Sufiyyah) or (Mutasawwifah). Also, some researchers have identified some similarities between Islamic Sufism and Greek philosophy and Christian monasticism, and some believe that the source of Sufism is the Buddhist religious belief. This view connects Islamic Sufism to external sources, but there is an opposite view that rejects any external source and connects Sufism to internal sources. For example: the English Orientalist Reynold Alleyne Nicholson, who is an expert in Sufism, and Louis Massignon, who is a French Orientalist who gave importance to writing and research about Islam and Sufism, reject the emergence of Islamic Sufism under the influence of any factor external to Islam, and their research is based more on the opinions of classical Muslim scholars. According to Nicholson, Sufi mysticism is the successor and completion of the ascetic path that emerged among Muslims in the first century of the Hijra. Massignon also believes that Islamic Sufism emerged entirely from within Islam. He also refers to several verses of the Holy Quran that speak of asceticism and mysticism (7).

Islamic Sufism is divided into several groups and paths (tariqah), including: (Suhrawardiyyah, Mawlawiyyah, Kubrawiyyah, Chishtiyyah, Qadiriyyah, and Naqshbandiyyah). Each of these paths emerged in a specific time and place. One who follows one of these paths is called in Kurdish (Sufi). In Arabic, they are called (Sufi), meaning “wool-wearer,” and at the time this was said of those who had renounced the world and wore clothing made of animal wool (suf), which was rough and coarse. Their purpose in this was that the rough and coarse wool would cause discomfort to their bodies and not let them sleep so that they would always be engaged in remembrance of God (8). According to the opinion of (al-Khatib al-Baghdadi) and (Henry Corbin), the first person to be individually known as a Sufi was (Abadah al-Sufi), who was a wool-wearer and did not eat meat. However, the master and leader of Orientalists (Massignon) believes the first Sufi was (Jabir ibn Hayyan). There is another view that considers (Abu Hashim al-Kufi) as the first Sufi, but these names that have been designated as the first Sufi are all from Kufa (9).

The Emergence of Sufism in Kurdistan

Because the majority of Kurdistan’s population is Muslim, it has not been excluded from the wave of Sufi groups, paths, currents, and intellectual and political schools that emerged in the Islamic world. Therefore, when Islamic Sufism emerged and gradually developed, it spread to Kurdistan through the tariqahs. The environment of Kurdistan allowed Sufism to have an important religious and social role in the Kurdish sphere from an early stage, from the ninth century CE, and to establish itself as the most important religious sphere and the closest manifestation of Islam in Kurdish consciousness, becoming a foundation for Kurdish understanding of Islam, to the extent that many aspects of Kurdish understanding of Islam are based on Sufi beliefs (10).

There are different opinions regarding the first Sufi path in Kurdistan. One opinion says: The first Sufi path in Kurdish lands was (Suhrawardiyyah), which later gave its place to the (Nurbakhshiyyah path) (11).

However, there is another opinion that believes Nurbakhshiyyah was the first path spread among Kurds by someone named (Sayyid Muhammad Nurbakhsh), who was the brother of (Sheikh Isa) and (Sheikh Musa) al-Barzanji and came to Barzinja in the year 860 AH with their father (Baba Ali Hamadani) (12).

The Nurbakhshi tariqah continued until the time of Baba Rasul (d. 1056 AH/1646 CE). Baba Rasul mixed the (Alawiyyah) path, which was part of the (Khalwatiyyah) path, with Nurbakhshiyyah, and the tariqah became popular among the Barzanji sayyids and spread throughout Kurdistan through them.

The situation of this Sufi path continued until the time of (Sheikh Muhammad al-Nawdi), then his son succeeded him, whose name was (Sayyid Ismail Qazanqayi), who in some sources is also called (Ismail Walyani). He made a journey to Baghdad and there received the (Qadiri path) from (Sheikh Ahmad Ahsani), and this path goes back to (Sheikh Abdul Qadir al-Gilani). After returning, Sayyid Ismail settled in the village of (Qazanqaya) and many people from all regions came to him and pledged allegiance to him, and he made four of his sons and brothers caliphs. From that time until today, the Qadiri path continues to spread in Kurdistan, and the sheikhs and sayyids of Barzinja have had a clear role in this (13), and alongside them, the families of (Talabani, Soley, Brifkani, Kasnazani, and the sheikhs of Nahri) are among the most important families that have had a major role in spreading the Qadiri path among Kurds (14). Because of them, the Qadiri path remains one of the major and widespread Sufi paths in Kurdistan to this day. After that comes the (Naqshbandi path), which was brought to Kurdistan by (Mawlana Khalid al-Naqshbandi), although there is talk that the Naqshbandi path existed in Kurdistan before Mawlana, but it was weak. Mawlana received the Naqshbandi path in India from (Shah Abdullah al-Dihlawi), and the foundation of this path goes back to (Abdul Khaliq Ghujdawani), but after him Sheikh Baha al-Din Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Bukhari, known as Shah-i Naqshband or Baha al-Din Naqshband (717-791 AH), formed and developed the path by adding some principles (15).

The Relationship Between Islamic Sufism and Politics

Although Islamic Sufism calls for renunciation of worldliness and politics occupies itself with worldly affairs, Sufism has not been distant from politics and has had more or less dealings with it.

After its emergence, Islamic Sufism has always been one of the influential schools of Islam, which has not only played a role in the religious, spiritual, psychological jihad, and moral improvement aspects, but has also had a clear influence in the political sphere, even sometimes calling for physical jihad and leading several movements, uprisings, and armed revolutions, and in some countries has been able to seize power. This has resulted in the creation of (political Sufism), which alongside its spiritual duties has also fulfilled worldly duties. Sometimes Sufism has distanced itself from politics or at the very least remained neutral.

Islamic Sufism fundamentally took shape after the martyrdom of the Muslim Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib in 661 CE, for the martyrdom of this caliph resulted in the emergence of various currents, one of which was Sufism, which began with the withdrawal of ascetics from the world, especially from the political world of that era in which the Umayyads were dominant and went to extremes in worldliness and moved away from worship of God. This became the reason for the formation of the Sufi current – which, contrary to the Umayyads – called for worship of God and withdrawal from worldly desires and pleasures and criticized the rulers (16), particularly in the cities of Kufa and Basra, which had a favorable environment for the birth of Islamic Sufism. The Sufis initially began with asceticism, seclusion, contemplation, self-restraint from worldly desires, drawing near to God, and preparing themselves for meeting God after death, because asceticism fundamentally consists of a movement of seclusion and withdrawal from the world and turning to continuous worship (17).

At that time, Kufa, in addition to having its own cultural characteristics, was also a center of political opposition, where dissatisfied people stood against the Umayyad and Abbasid authorities. Therefore, we can say: The beginning of the emergence of Islamic Sufism was this stance against the politics of the ruling authorities. This is a view that (Dr. Hassan Hanafi) supports and rejects all those opinions that connect the beginning of the emergence of Islamic Sufism to philosophical, Buddhist, Indian, Greek, Persian, Christian, Shi’ite, Sunni, or even Quranic sources. Hanafi believes that Islamic Sufism as an orientation toward the hereafter and a reaction against worldliness,争夺 (struggle for) power, and bloodshed among political conflicts over the caliphate emerged during the era of the Great Fitna (18).

Also in Kurdistan, politics was a powerful factor in the emergence of Sufism in the fourth century of the Hijra. Kurdish Sufism was a reaction against politics and the deterioration of the situation of Islamic and Kurdish society, the rulers of the state moving away from the spirit of Islamic religion, the corruption of rulers, and several other inappropriate and illegal acts (19).

In the modern era, the story of the relationship between Sufism and politics is more complex and more puzzling, with many ups and downs. Therefore, Sufism appears in politics in several ways: while Sufi groups in some neighboring countries are friends with occupying and corrupt authorities, in some other countries like North Africa they fight against occupying and oppressive authorities and struggle for justice and freedom (20).

Generally, we can say: The relationship between Sufism and politics is unstable and complex. To untangle the complexity, we present the relationship in these four situations below:

1. Neutrality and Isolation

Sufism is fundamentally asceticism and withdrawal from the world, including politics and political authority. Therefore, many Sufis have viewed political conflicts neutrally, and some have completely distanced themselves from politics. This type of Sufi believes that politics is the source of corruption and evil and distances them from God. They have never allowed politics to use their social position for its own benefit, and they themselves have had no desire for politics, such as: (Junayd al-Baghdadi, Abu Yazid al-Bistami, and Abdul Qadir al-Gilani). However, some of those who withdrew from the world and politics were not cut off from the public life of people. For example, Sheikh Abdul Qadir al-Gilani (1077-1166 CE) made efforts for national reform in society and his words were respected, to the extent that he was the most influential figure at the end of the Abbasid era. When he died, all the people of Baghdad mourned him and participated in his burial ceremony (21).

Some sheikhs, personalities, murids, and affiliates of Sufism, despite being isolated from politics, sometimes gently advised rulers like (Mawlana Khalid al-Naqshbandi) and his advice to the Baban rulers. Sometimes they have frankly and to some extent harshly criticized rulers and spoken with them. One of these personalities is (Imam al-Ghazali), who as a religious scholar of Sufism did not refrain from criticizing oppressive politics and officials. He believed that the main cause of deviation of oppressors and rulers was financial corruption. He clearly and openly said that dealing with oppressive sultans is forbidden, and very strongly criticized those scholars who were close to rulers. He also prohibited dealing with those judges who had connections with oppressive rulers. He also considered it forbidden to benefit from institutions built with illegitimate wealth. This is in addition to his letters to emirs and sultans that are full of bitter and harsh criticism, such as his letters to (Fakhr al-Mulk) and (Mujbir al-Din), in which he strongly criticizes their oppression (22).

In Kurdistan as well, at certain times and periods, Sufism was distant from politics, such as during the era of the Kurdish emirates. Therefore, we can say: Generally, that period was a period of emphasis by the sheikhs on their spiritual authority, and they were more occupied with the affairs of their tariqahs and did not pose a threat or danger to authority. Also, the general direction of the sheikhs of Biyara was isolation from politics. For example, some sheikhs like Sheikh (Uthman Sirajuddin II) requested that religious leaders distance themselves from politics, otherwise they become worldly leaders. For this reason, the role of these sheikhs in political movements is less apparent, and they were less of a source of trouble for political officials, so they were mostly subordinate to political authority (23).

2. Cooperation and Support

Very often the relationship between Sufism and politics has been bilateral and based on common interest, meaning that rulers and politicians have used the religious and political position of Sufi sheikhs and personalities for their own benefit so that they would support them and give spiritual legitimacy to their authority, and in return they have helped the sheikhs and Sufis. For example, the Abbasid Caliph (al-Nasir li-Din Allah), when he learned of the social influence of the sheikh of the Suhrawardi Sufi path (Sheikh Shihab al-Din Abu Hafs Umar al-Suhrawardi al-Baghdadi al-Shafi’i), brought him close and greatly respected him, even making him his representative. Also, the Caliph established a caravanserai specifically for Sufis and provided a special place for the sheikh that included a garden and house. Although this sheikh benefited from politics, he was not very worldly, as evidenced by the fact that before his death he distributed all his possessions and wealth to the poor (24).

Also, the Kurdish Muslim Sultan (Saladin al-Ayyubi) had good relations with the Sufis, to the extent that when he left Damascus for Egypt, he turned his house in Damascus into a khanqah for Sufis. When he traveled to Cairo, he did not cut off his relationship with the people of Sufism. He was perhaps the first ruler to establish a khanqah for Sufis in Cairo called (Khanqah al-Salahiyyah). The Sufis of the khanqah were known for their intelligence and goodness, and blessings were expected from them. The Sufi khanqah in Egypt was able to serve the society and Ayyubid authorities, playing the role of a religious, social, and cultural institution in society, and Saladin himself consulted with them (25).

In Kurdistan as well, when Mawlana Khalid al-Naqshbandi returned to Sulaymaniyah, (Mahmud Pasha al-Baban) served him greatly, establishing a khanqah for him and endowing some good properties such as the village of (Kamalan) and several other villages to the khanqah (26).

Mawlana wanted to put this good relationship with the Baban emirs into service of a reform project and establish political, social, and religious peace, but his project failed due to opposition from some mullahs, officials, and other sheikhs like (Sheikh Ma’ruf al-Nawdi). Mawlana distanced himself from the Baban authorities. At that time, Sheikh Ma’ruf himself was a sheikh of the Qadiri tariqah and was close to the Baban and Ottoman authorities. Therefore, the presence of another sheikh and another tariqah like Naqshbandiyyah close to the Baban king was seen as a threat to himself and his path, to the point that he issued a fatwa and declared Mawlana an infidel. Even at that time, an attempt was made to assassinate Mawlana, and so much opposition was made that he was forced to leave Kurdistan completely, which was a great loss for the Kurds, because “most of those who viewed Mawlana Khalid politically believe that if the Baban authorities had not created obstacles to the spread of his tariqah and had helped him, if Sheikh Ma’ruf al-Nawdi and some other Kurdish mullahs had not so fiercely opposed him, Mawlana Khalid would have played a major role in the future of the Kurds and laid a large foundation for Kurdistan, protecting the Babans from collapse and extending their rule further, especially since at that time the Ottoman state was sick and had lost authority over most of its subject countries” (27).

When Mawlana also died and was buried in a foreign land, some of his caliphs who had previously settled in Istanbul quickly and far from Ottoman financial supervision and assistance stood on their own feet and spread the Naqshbandi path further, which was contrary to the wish of Ottoman (Sultan Mahmud), who from the beginning tried to prevent the spread of the path and tame it to their side. Some of Mawlana’s followers were seduced with ranks and positions and given status (28). However, despite Mawlana Khalid’s withdrawal, his path created political awareness among the masses of people in Kurdistan. Some sheikhs, caliphs, and mullahs belonging to the Naqshbandi path became leaders and influenced the course of events. On the other hand, some Naqshbandi-Khalidi Sufis did not cut off their relationship with the Ottomans. For example: the relationship between the Ottomans and the sheikhs of Hawraman continued based on common interest. Moreover, the sheikhs of Hawraman had relations with the Qajar and Pahlavi authorities, especially after the collapse of the Ardalan authority and the efforts of the Qajar state to control the areas subject to the Ardalans and sending Farhad Mirza, known as Mu’tamid al-Dawla (1818-1888 CE), to govern Sanandaj and the regions of Kurdistan. The political role of the sheikhs in the political events and incidents of the region became greater in the second half of the Qajar reign, which coincides with the Nasiri period. From that time onward, the direct relations of the Naqshbandi sheikhs of Hawraman with the officials of the Qajar state began (29).

When the Ottoman authority collapsed and the country of Iraq was created, the authorities of successive regimes in that country have always tried to use the Sufi paths in Kurdistan for their own benefit. However, this does not mean that there has been no sheikh, dervish, murid, affiliate, or mullah belonging to the Qadiri and Naqshbandi paths who has confronted Iraqi regimes, or whose mosque, khanqah, or takiya has not been a refuge for peshmerga. For example, during the mountain struggle, (Tekya Hiran), which belongs to the Qadiri tariqah and also has good relations with Naqshbandiyyah, became a refuge for peshmerga. For this reason, it paid a price and was bombed and its library was burned, which contained several valuable manuscripts (30).

After the March 1991 uprising, with the establishment of the Kurdistan Regional Government, Sufism has not confronted authority, because it has considered this authority as a Kurdish self-governing authority and has seen itself as the owner of this authority, in the struggle for whose realization it actively participated, contrary to political Islam, which either through armed struggle and jihad or civil struggle has tried to overthrow the Kurdistan Regional Government and become its successor.

During the period of the Kurdistan Regional Government’s authority, Sufis have either been cooperative and supportive, or have behaved neutrally toward politics. However, at the same time, like the regional rulers, they have come under the excommunication (takfir) of extremist political Islam. This has increased cooperation and coordination between Sufis and authority, and both have dealt with each other on the basis of common interest. The authority has wanted to bring Sufis close to itself to give spiritual legitimacy and confront the extremism of some extremist political Islamic parties, groups, and personalities. The Sufis have also wanted to be close to authority to protect themselves and for material benefit.

3. Confrontation

One of the accusations leveled against Sufis is that they have chosen silence in the face of occupiers and invaders and have not made any resistance and have surrendered themselves to fate and destiny. However, if we examine historical sources, the falsehood of this accusation becomes clear to us, showing how sheikhs, murids, and their affiliates have played a pioneering role in various stages of political life and have fought against occupiers. Examples of these are many, such as: (Sheikh Najm al-Din al-Kubra, Sheikh Shamil al-Daghestani, Sheikh Ubaydullah al-Nahri, and Sheikh Sa’id Piran), in addition to the sheikhs of Hawraman, whose loyalty to the Ottoman state led them to call for jihad against the Russians at the height of World War I (31).

Moreover, Sufis at several different places and times throughout the Islamic world have played a confrontational role in the political sphere against oppressive and occupying authority, using their mosques, khanqahs, and takiyas as a refuge for revolutionaries and a center for gathering and mobilizing the masses. Perhaps one of the most prominent was in Africa, where the (Sanusiyyah path), which goes back to Sheikh Muhammad ibn Ali al-Sanusi (1787-1859 CE), trained his followers on the basis of an educational methodology and made his khanqahs the stronghold of a political movement system in which the sheikh’s ideas were scientifically implemented. Thus, the Sanusi path established a solid foundation and made politics one of its aspects (32).

One of the great men and brave personalities of the Sanusi path was (Umar al-Mukhtar), who until his last breath of life and hanging courageously confronted Italian colonialism (33). The political role of the Sanusis did not end with the martyrdom of Umar al-Mukhtar and the suppression they faced. They continued without giving up until they reached power and established the (Kingdom of Libya). The first king was Muhammad Idris ibn Muhammad al-Mahdi al-Sanusi (1890-1983 CE), who in a speech he delivered on December 24, 1951, announced the independence of Libya (34).

Also, Sheikh (Abd al-Qadir al-Jazairi) is one of those Sufi sheikhs who on November 27, 1837, became the emir of the Algerian national resistance and fought against French occupation, becoming a source of amazement to both his friends and enemies (35). He was not only a formidable defender, military leader, and founder of the new Algerian state, but also a great poet, capable thinker, and follower of the Qadiri path, who was an intellectual figure with extensive reading in philosophy, mysticism, history, geography, language, and other fields, and was also well educated by his father. He also developed the field of education and teaching in his country and allocated salaries for teachers (36).

Also in Sudan, the (Sammaniyyah path), whose name is derived from Sheikh Muhammad Abd al-Karim al-Samman (1718-1775 CE), played a role in reform in the southern provinces of the Ottoman state (37).

In Iraq as well, after the liberation process, the (Army of the Men of the Naqshbandiyyah), which consisted of Arab Sunni Naqshbandi Sufis, confronted the American army. When ISIS occupied a large part of the Sunni-inhabited areas, the Naqshbandi Army once again appeared at the forefront of the political arena, and clashes occurred between them and ISIS (38).

In Kurdistan as well, sheikhs and Sufis have a long history of resisting occupiers and the oppression of tyrannical rulers. For example: “In the first half of the twentieth century, the Naqshbandi sheikhs of Nahri, Sheikh Abd al-Salam al-Barzani, Sheikh Mahmud al-Barzanji, and Sheikh Sa’id Piran, within the political, social, and historical process of that time, had a great role and influence in leading the political movement and uprisings of the Kurds against the oppression and injustice of various authorities in the region” (39). We must not forget that many of those leaders and intellectuals who struggled for liberation, freedom, and independence either belonged to Sufi paths, were influenced by them, or were themselves descendants of a sheikh from the sheikhs of Sufi paths, especially the Qadiri and Naqshbandi paths.

4. Seizure of Power

Sometimes the political struggle of Sufis has resulted in their seizing power, under the leadership of tariqah personalities and sheikhs who possessed charismatic personalities. This has enabled them to be a source of inspiration for fighters and gather a large force around themselves, integrate with their spiritual force, and courageously confront the greatest occupying forces. The best example is the Sufi sheikhs belonging to the Sanusiyyah path that we mentioned earlier.

Also in Sudan, a Sufi movement called the Mahdist movement (1881-1899 CE) emerged, which played an important role in the political field. The movement relied on khanqahs and retreats as bases for spiritual and religious education and called for purifying Islam from innovation and acts contrary to Sharia, emphasizing the implementation of justice and Sharia and reform in society. The leader of the movement was someone named Muhammad Ahmad Abdullah (1844-1885), who introduced himself as the awaited Mahdi (al-Mahdi al-Muntazar), was a murid of the Sammaniyyah path, later became a sheikh of the path, gathered an army, and fought against the government and armies of Egypt, Turkey, and Britain in his country, established an independent authority, and later his caliphs continued his path. The Mahdi in Sudan fought against Turkish, Egyptian, and later British occupation and tried to establish an independent Islamic state under his leadership. He actually established the state in 1885 and led the Mahdist movement until his death. During his political struggle, he was able to gather various Sudanese tribes under the banner of religion and jihad and left a far-reaching political and religious legacy in Sudan (40).

In Iraq and Kurdistan as well, although Sufism has not been able to seize political power, it has worked shoulder to shoulder with self-governing authority and has not been excluded from the benefits of power. If we look back, we see that in the second half of the nineteenth century, when the authority of the Kurdish emirates ended, Sufi sheikhs were able to fill that political vacuum. If during the heyday of the Kurdish emirates they occupied themselves more with the spiritual pillar of religion, after the disappearance of the emirs they emerged as an influential force with a strong social position politically and in organizing Kurdish tribes (41). When the spring uprising of 1991 occurred in southern Kurdistan, the two main parties that participated were the (Patriotic Union of Kurdistan) and the (Kurdistan Democratic Party). Although these two parties are nationalist, the history of their political struggle is not separate from the influence of Sufism. The founder of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan is (Mam Jalal), who is a descendant of the Talabani sheikhs and they are counted as belonging to the Qadiri path. Also, the president of the Kurdistan Democratic Party is (Masoud Barzani), who is from a Naqshbandi family.

Political Islam and Political Sufism

The arrival of some paths and people belonging to Sufism at power raises a question, which is: What is the difference between political Islam and political Sufism?

To answer this question, we must point out that undoubtedly political Sufism does not completely go with political Islam, but there are several points of convergence and divergence between them, which we present below. However, first we must point out that (political Islam) is a new term that has entered the political space from the media space. The term refers to those intellectual and political movements that operate politically within the framework of a comprehensive view of human life, wishing to reorganize that life in a way that aligns with Islamic directions and organize it within the framework of a country, party, or any social institution (42). Also, political Islam considers it its duty to confront oppressive and occupying authority. It believes that Islam is not just a religion that we limit to the relationship between the individual and God and some rituals and worship, but is a comprehensive system of life that includes politics, authority, law, and social values. Therefore, any party, group, or path belonging to the schools of (Ikhwan), (Salafi), and (Sufi) that works to achieve these above objectives can be called political Islam. Although establishing an Islamic authority is the goal of some students of these three Islamic schools, they never completely accept each other, and each governs according to its own understanding of Islam. Generally, we can identify some points of convergence and divergence between political Islam and political Sufism, which are:

Points of Convergence:

• The reference for both is Islam, and they want to use that religion in the public and political sphere and not limit it to the worship of individuals in society.
• Both possess a religious-political reference point.
• Defense and jihad against oppressive and occupying authority are two paths that both political Islam and political Sufism rely on.
• Political Islam in some countries like Egypt and Tunisia has reached power, and political Sufism, such as the Mahdist movement in Sudan and Sanusiyyah in Libya, has also reached power.

Points of Divergence:

• Political Sufism relies on spiritual experience and sheikhs, khanqahs, and takiyas. However, political Islam, like Ikhwan and Salafi movements, relies on direct Sharia texts and political jurisprudence (fiqh).
• The position of Sufism in power toward the other is different, softer, and views the other on the basis of humanitarianism and forgiveness. However, political Islam views it on the basis of (al-Wala’) and (al-Bara’) and deals harshly with it.
• Sufism makes efforts for reform in individuals and society through asceticism, dhikr (remembrance), and spiritual education. However, political Islam does this through strict implementation of Sharia.
• The discourse of political Sufism is spiritual and jihadist, but the discourse of political Islam is legal and administrative and emphasizes the state, Islamic constitution, and Sharia.
• Political Sufism is closer to the spirit of Islamic society. Whereas political Islam is closer to the administration of society.

Conclusion

1. The primary cause of the emergence of Islamic Sufism was a reaction to the oppression, corruption, and excessive luxury of rulers and their unjust policies toward people, not influence by external sources or internal sources such as the Quran and Sunnah.
2. Although Sufism has called for withdrawal from the world and politics occupies itself with worldly affairs, the history of Sufism is not devoid of mixing with politics.
3. The relationship between Islamic Sufism and politics has undergone changes according to different times and places and the conditions of Islamic societies. However, generally the relationship manifests itself in four situations: (neutrality and isolation, cooperation and support, confrontation, seizure of power).
4. There are common and different points between political Sufism and political Islam.
5. Political Sufism in Kurdistan has never dreamed of overthrowing Kurdish authority, because it has considered it its own, but political Islam has continuously dreamed of overthrowing Kurdish authority, and in pursuit of this has engaged in civil struggle and even jihad or armed struggle.
6. Sufism in Kurdistan has not been merely a spiritual experience or a religious current, but has also been a social and political institution that has influenced the formation of collective consciousness and the direction of events. After the collapse of the Kurdish emirates, it has filled the political vacuum.
7. Sometimes foreign political authority, for its own benefit, has used Sufism in Kurdistan, but there have also been times when some Kurdish sheikhs and Sufis have not submitted to foreign politics, and indeed have used Sufism for the benefit of the Kurdish people, spreading national thought and confronting occupiers and oppressors.