The Theoretical and Scholarly Interpretation of Sufi Sources in Abdurrahman Güzel’s Research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58905/athena.v4i4.817Keywords:
Sufism, Source Criticism, Religious-Mystical Literature, Conceptual Differentiation, Spiritual EthicsAbstract
This article examines Abdurrahman Güzel’s scholarly interpretation of the origins, primary sources, and conceptual boundaries of Sufism. It addresses a recurrent methodological problem in comparative scholarship: external similarities between Sufi practices and other religious or mystical traditions are often taken as evidence of common origin or conceptual identity. The study aims to systematize Güzel’s source-based approach and to assess its methodological significance for research on Sufi thought and religious-mystical literature. A qualitative, interpretive design combines descriptive, source-critical, comparative-typological, and conceptual analysis. The principal corpus is Güzel’s Yeni Bir Disiplin Dîni-Tasavvufi Türk Edebiyati (2025), supplemented by Fariduddin Attar’s Tazkirat ul-avliyo for the ethical dimension of sainthood and service. The analysis shows that Güzel consistently locates the foundations of Sufism in the Qur’an and the Sunnah and distinguishes the tradition from philosophical mysticism, Christian monasticism, Indian mystical models, Kabbalah, and certain Iranian mystical tendencies. His interpretation further links sayr al-sulūk, fanā, baqā, ethical action, and service in a single developmental model in which spiritual perfection culminates not in withdrawal but in a responsible return to communal life. The study reconstructs these propositions as a two-tier analytical model (epistemic and practical) and derives a three-level test that separates observable similarity, historical interaction, and doctrinal identity. The value of Güzel’s framework lies in its insistence on terminological precision, source hierarchy, and conceptual differentiation; however, his classifications should be read as a particular scholarly position rather than a final taxonomy of Sufi history. The resulting framework offers a transferable procedure for Uzbek Sufi studies and for comparative research on religious-mystical literature.
References
A. Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam. Chapel Hill, NC, USA: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1975.
A. Knysh, Islamic Mysticism: A Short History. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2000.
C. W. Ernst, The Shambhala Guide to Sufism. Boston, MA, USA: Shambhala, 1997.
A. Güzel, Yeni Bir Disiplin Dîni-Tasavvufi Türk Edebiyati. Ankara, Türkiye: Akçağ Yayınları, 2025.
R. A. Nicholson, “A historical enquiry concerning the origin and development of Sufism,” J. Roy. Asiatic Soc. Great Britain Ireland, pp. 303–348, 1906.
A. J. Arberry, Sufism: An Account of the Mystics of Islam. London, U.K.: George Allen & Unwin, 1950.
L. Massignon, Essay on the Origins of the Technical Language of Islamic Mysticism, B. Clark, Trans. Notre Dame, IN, USA: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1997.
A. T. Karamustafa, Sufism: The Formative Period. Edinburgh, U.K.: Edinburgh Univ. Press, 2007.
A. T. Karamustafa, God’s Unruly Friends: Dervish Groups in the Islamic Later Middle Period, 1200–1550. Salt Lake City, UT, USA: Univ. of Utah Press, 1994.
M. F. Köprülü, Early Mystics in Turkish Literature, G. Leiser and R. Dankoff, Trans. London, U.K.: Routledge, 2006.
Abu al-Qasim al-Qushayri, Al-Qushayri’s Epistle on Sufism, A. D. Knysh, Trans. Reading, U.K.: Garnet, 2007.
F. Attar, Tazkirat ul-avliyo. Tashkent, Uzbekistan: G‘afur G‘ulom NMIU, 2012.
The Qur’an, M. A. S. Abdel Haleem, Trans. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford Univ. Press, 2004, Q. 57:27.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dilshoda Haqqulova

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.