{"title":"Authorship in Sufi Poetry","authors":"Michael Frishkopf","doi":"10.2307/1350077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores authorship in the Sufi poetry of Egypt. How do we explain apparent paradoxes: attribution of new poetry to an old saint, to more than one person, or to a performer? The Sufi's world includes a close-knit spiritual-social network, spanning entities (both living and dead), across which text and inspiration flow. Poetic production (primarily the recombination of pre-fabricated units), occurs as much in social performance as in \"private\" composition. Since the Sufi author is always network-connected, every poetic practice is always collaborative. Conversely, every Sufi (\"poet,\" performer, or listener) acquires authorial attributes. The article terms the social network of authors the \"interauthor,\" and claims that it is precisely the social analog to the symbolic \"intertext\" emphasized through textual repetition. Paradoxes result from coercing the Sufi interauthor into an alien modernist frame of autonomous authorship. Ironically, in practice this sacred \"tradition\" exhibits more postmodern features of authorship than contemporary secular Arab poetry. ********** The celebrated Sudanese Shaykh Muhammad 'Uthman 'Abdu al-Burhani, founder of a now-global Sufi order (tariqa), (1) passed away on April 4th, 1983; several years later, the tariqa published his collection (diwan) of sacred poetry, Sharab al-wasl [The Drink of Union] (al-Burhani). Each poem in this diwan carries the date of its composition, and poems are presented in chronological order. All of this seems perfectly ordinary. Somewhat less ordinary is the date of the first poem, April 13th, 1983, a full week after the death of its putative author. How can we understand such an enigma? What is the meaning of authorship for the Sufis? I. Problems of Authorship, and Sufi Poetry This article is an exploration of authorship, and related concepts of textuality and meaning, in Sufi poetry, based on more than five years' participant-observation research among Sufis, Sufi singers, and Sufi poets in Egypt. What I intend to do is to interpret the concept of authorship of Sufi poetry as Sufis themselves appear to understand it, without attempting to bracket their beliefs within the confines of a \"higher\" theory. Rather, I seek to trace the relation between their \"emic\" (insider) view, and the \"etic\" (outsider) theories propounded by Western literary philosophers and critics. An analysis of Sufi authorship may help in developing a theory of authorship for sacred literatures, and perhaps even contribute towards theories of authorship in general. Conventional assumptions about authorship were most famously challenged by Roland Barthes in a highly influential article (Barthes, \"The Death of the Author\"), in which he melodramatically declared the \"death of the author.\" But I rather follow Foucault (\"What is an Author?\") in problematizing the contours of authorship (the \"author-function\"), freeing \"authorship\" from necessary attachment to a singular concept of individualized creative genius. Spurred by such problematization, ethnographic investigation of Sufi poetic practice can proceed to supply a radically contrastive sociological concept of generalized author. This \"interauthor,\" as I call it, is precisely the social and emic counterpart to the symbolic and etic intertext (formulated by Kristeva and many others). Where the insider (Sufi) sees a network of spiritual-social relations, transcending the individual author, as a distributed source of textual production, the outsider (critic) sees a network of symbolic-textual relations, transcending the individual text. Both concepts correspond to the relative backgrounding of the individualized author and text, within a broader network of Sufi social and symbolic relations, as compared to the secular Arabic literary tradition. Although (or, as we shall see, because) they are grounded in a traditional (pre-modern) mystical theology, such networks ensure a fluidity and superfluity of meaning, such that every \"reading\" can be different. …","PeriodicalId":36717,"journal":{"name":"Alif","volume":"28 1","pages":"78"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alif","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1350077","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16
Abstract
This article explores authorship in the Sufi poetry of Egypt. How do we explain apparent paradoxes: attribution of new poetry to an old saint, to more than one person, or to a performer? The Sufi's world includes a close-knit spiritual-social network, spanning entities (both living and dead), across which text and inspiration flow. Poetic production (primarily the recombination of pre-fabricated units), occurs as much in social performance as in "private" composition. Since the Sufi author is always network-connected, every poetic practice is always collaborative. Conversely, every Sufi ("poet," performer, or listener) acquires authorial attributes. The article terms the social network of authors the "interauthor," and claims that it is precisely the social analog to the symbolic "intertext" emphasized through textual repetition. Paradoxes result from coercing the Sufi interauthor into an alien modernist frame of autonomous authorship. Ironically, in practice this sacred "tradition" exhibits more postmodern features of authorship than contemporary secular Arab poetry. ********** The celebrated Sudanese Shaykh Muhammad 'Uthman 'Abdu al-Burhani, founder of a now-global Sufi order (tariqa), (1) passed away on April 4th, 1983; several years later, the tariqa published his collection (diwan) of sacred poetry, Sharab al-wasl [The Drink of Union] (al-Burhani). Each poem in this diwan carries the date of its composition, and poems are presented in chronological order. All of this seems perfectly ordinary. Somewhat less ordinary is the date of the first poem, April 13th, 1983, a full week after the death of its putative author. How can we understand such an enigma? What is the meaning of authorship for the Sufis? I. Problems of Authorship, and Sufi Poetry This article is an exploration of authorship, and related concepts of textuality and meaning, in Sufi poetry, based on more than five years' participant-observation research among Sufis, Sufi singers, and Sufi poets in Egypt. What I intend to do is to interpret the concept of authorship of Sufi poetry as Sufis themselves appear to understand it, without attempting to bracket their beliefs within the confines of a "higher" theory. Rather, I seek to trace the relation between their "emic" (insider) view, and the "etic" (outsider) theories propounded by Western literary philosophers and critics. An analysis of Sufi authorship may help in developing a theory of authorship for sacred literatures, and perhaps even contribute towards theories of authorship in general. Conventional assumptions about authorship were most famously challenged by Roland Barthes in a highly influential article (Barthes, "The Death of the Author"), in which he melodramatically declared the "death of the author." But I rather follow Foucault ("What is an Author?") in problematizing the contours of authorship (the "author-function"), freeing "authorship" from necessary attachment to a singular concept of individualized creative genius. Spurred by such problematization, ethnographic investigation of Sufi poetic practice can proceed to supply a radically contrastive sociological concept of generalized author. This "interauthor," as I call it, is precisely the social and emic counterpart to the symbolic and etic intertext (formulated by Kristeva and many others). Where the insider (Sufi) sees a network of spiritual-social relations, transcending the individual author, as a distributed source of textual production, the outsider (critic) sees a network of symbolic-textual relations, transcending the individual text. Both concepts correspond to the relative backgrounding of the individualized author and text, within a broader network of Sufi social and symbolic relations, as compared to the secular Arabic literary tradition. Although (or, as we shall see, because) they are grounded in a traditional (pre-modern) mystical theology, such networks ensure a fluidity and superfluity of meaning, such that every "reading" can be different. …
本文探讨了埃及苏菲派诗歌的作者身份。我们如何解释明显的悖论:将新诗归于一个老圣人,一个以上的人,或一个表演者?苏菲的世界包括一个紧密结合的精神社会网络,跨越实体(活着的和死去的),文本和灵感在其中流动。诗歌创作(主要是预制单元的重组)在社会表演和“私人”创作中同样多地出现。由于苏菲作者总是与网络相连,所以每一次诗歌实践都是协作的。相反,每个苏菲派(“诗人”、表演者或听众)都获得了作者的属性。本文将作者的社会网络称为“互作者”,并声称这正是通过文本重复强调的象征性“互文”的社会类比。悖论的产生是由于把苏菲派的作者强迫进入一个陌生的现代主义自主作者的框架。具有讽刺意味的是,在实践中,这种神圣的“传统”表现出比当代世俗阿拉伯诗歌更多的后现代作家特征。**********苏丹著名的谢赫穆罕默德·奥斯曼·阿卜杜·布尔哈尼(sheikh Muhammad ' othman 'Abdu al-Burhani),当今全球苏菲派(tariqa)的创始人,于1983年4月4日去世;几年后,塔利卡出版了他的圣诗集《联合之饮》(al-Burhani)。每首诗都有其创作日期,并按时间顺序呈现。所有这些看起来都很平常。不那么寻常的是第一首诗的日期,1983年4月13日,在假定的作者去世整整一周之后。我们如何理解这样一个谜?对苏菲派来说,作者身份的意义是什么?本文基于对埃及苏菲派、苏菲派歌手和苏菲派诗人五年多的参与式观察研究,对苏菲派诗歌中的作者身份以及相关的文本性和意义概念进行了探索。我打算做的是按照苏菲派自己的理解来解释苏菲派诗歌作者的概念,而不是试图将他们的信仰置于“更高”理论的范围内。相反,我试图追踪他们的“内位”(局内人)观点与西方文学哲学家和评论家提出的“外位”(局外人)理论之间的关系。对苏菲作者身份的分析可能有助于发展一种关于神圣文献作者身份的理论,甚至可能对一般的作者身份理论有所贡献。罗兰·巴特(Roland Barthes)在一篇极具影响力的文章(《作者之死》(The Death of The Author))中挑战了关于作者身份的传统假设,他在这篇文章中戏剧性地宣布了“作者之死”。但我更愿意追随福柯(《作者是什么?》),对作者身份的轮廓(“作者功能”)提出质疑,将“作者身份”从对个性化创造天才的单一概念的必要依恋中解放出来。在这种问题化的推动下,对苏非诗歌实践的民族志调查可以继续提供一种完全相反的广义作者的社会学概念。正如我所说的,这种“互作者”恰恰是符号互文和客位互文(由克里斯蒂娃和其他许多人提出)的社会和主题对应物。局内人(苏菲派)将超越个体作者的精神-社会关系网络视为文本生产的分布式来源,而局外人(批评家)则将超越个体文本的符号-文本关系网络视为文本。与世俗的阿拉伯文学传统相比,这两个概念都对应于个性化的作者和文本的相对背景,在更广泛的苏菲社会和象征关系网络中。尽管(或者,正如我们将看到的,因为)它们是建立在传统的(前现代的)神秘主义神学基础上的,这样的网络确保了意义的流动性和多余性,这样每一次“阅读”都可以是不同的。…