Abstract
The present article intends to reconsider the reflections made regarding the illustrations of Sufi orders in Ottoman Egypt, through examination of the organization of al-Khalwatiyya.
Studies on the organization of Sufi orders in Ottoman Egypt face two major drawbacks. First, their approaches are based on the modern concept of “institution, ” neglecting the members' perceptions of the orders they adhere to. Second, the studies describe the conditions of the Sufi orders exclusively within the context of popular culture, ignoring approaching such a phenomenon as the product of high culture.
Given that al-Khalwatiyya was wide-spread among the ‘Ulama’ of Azhar, the present study scrutinizes the conditions of a given Sufi order in a society of learned. By making use of hagiographical texts (manaqib) written by members of al-Khalwatiyya, and also, the chronicles of al-Jabarti, a member of the order in question, as main referential sources, the scrutiny would be rather draw on the perceptions of the members of the order.
The organization of al-Khawatiyya, as illustrated in the sources cited above, is as follows. While, past studies described it as being divided into several sub-orders, the members of the order never viewed themselves as such. They rather perceived that they belonged to a tariga, in this case, al-Khalwatiyya. Such does not deny that their activities were not confined to small groups. So al-Khalwatiyya's orginzation could be perceived as bidimensional: a tariga, to be viewed as a mode of devotion rather than as a social group, and, and master-centered groups, where actual religious activities took place.
Also, one should not consider the group's organization as rigid, for it consisted of the direct bond linking the master to his pupils, while and interfollowers ties were quite weak, leading to its disintegration once the master passed away.
In conclusion, these perceptions of al-Khalwatiyya as reflected in the selected sources indicate that the organization of Sufi orders was totally different from that of modern “institution.”
