Linking to the Wider Worlds of SufismLinking to the Wider Worlds of SufismLinking to the Wider Worlds of SufismA. IntroductionSufism, or tasawwuf prescribes not only ascetic rituals but also
provides a model of social practice. As a social practice, it is in intensive contact with
other branches of Sufism and with local traditions which impact upon its articulation. This
can be seen in the development of various Sufi orders, or tarekat, in
which divergent paths of development become salient features. Some Sufi orders, for example,
have had to modify their teaching and organisation in order to be able to attract new
followers and to gain political support from local authorities (Muhaimin 1995: 231; Zulkifli
1994: 232) while others have lost followers because they failed to reformulate their positions
in a changing society. One of the most important phenomena shaping the development of Sufi orders is the
silsilah or the intellectual genealogy of Sufi masters.
Silsilah are of special significance in providing the orders with
cultural legitimacy and doctrinal authenticity. Tarekat have an
international character. Through their silsilah they trace their origins
and development across national and cultural boundaries as well as across time. The role of the silsilah parallels that of the
isnad, the chain of transmitters that authenticates a
hadith, or tradition relating to the Prophet Muhammad. As in the Sufi
orders, the authenticity of a hadith is established from its chain of
transmitters going back to the Prophet Muhammad. Both the silsilah in
Sufi orders and the isnad in hadith literature are
regarded as foundations for the development of Islamic knowledge (Voll 1980: 246-73.). A
silsilah characteristically involves a number of leading
ulama, or Muslim scholars, in the transmission of a facet of Islam,
specifically mystical knowledge. The line of transmission traces back to the
ulama credited with founding the order. A silsilah
therefore gives form to an intellectual community and plays a crucial role in the
establishment and continuing cohesion of further intellectual networks, not only within
Indonesia but also those linking Indonesian ulama with those of the
Middle-East (Azra 1995).Therefore, the silsilah plays a major role in determining the
existence of a Sufi order. To some extent, it can also be seen as presenting an argument and
an ideology, enabling the order to be socially accepted and religiously justified. The
Shattariyyah tradition in Pamijahan is a good example of the dynamics of a particular Sufi
tradition in Java, especially with regard to the role in it of a
silsilah-based narrative centred on a Sufi master.To date there has been no adequate description of the Shattariyyah tradition in West Java,
particularly in Pamijahan, which has been a famous Shattariyyah centre from early times. The
present study will contribute to our knowledge of the Indonesian Shattariyyah tradition in
general, and this chapter will focus on the silsilah of the Shattariyyah
in Pamijahan, exploring its implications for the village culture where, as has been outlined
above, all kinds of narratives are subject to negotiation. The veneration of wali is widespread in the Muslim world. I argue in
this chapter that in Pamijahan the silsilah of the
wali functions to perpetuate the teaching of the master and connects the
valley of Safarwadi to the wider world of Sufism. It is important to emphasise that in the
case of Pamijahan, the silsilah is used not only for tapping into the
master’s blessing, barakah, but also for framing and shaping social
practice in the village. B. The Roots of ShattariyyahOn theological and sociological grounds, Sufism is a problematic concept in Islam. The
pilgrimage to Mecca introduced the international character of the Islamic world into the Malay Archipelago.For a comprehensive study of this transmission, see Azra
1994 In its early period in Indonesia, the Shattariyyah teaching reflected this
international character. At its earliest stage, particularly in Sumatra, the influence of
Meccan masters dominated the interpretation of all Islamic teachings, including those of
Sufism. The best documented instance of this is the influence of al-Qushashi and Ibrahim
al-Kurani on their Indonesian pupils in the 17th century within the
interpretation of the doctrine of the the Seven Levels of Being (see below). All Indonesian
Shattariyyah silsilah relating to Abd al-Rauf of Singkel,
Acehcarry the names of these two men.However, in other areas of the archipelago such as in Java, Sufism underwent various
changes of direction that cannot be so completely or immediately attributed to international
influences. The transmission of Sufism seems to have been made more complicated because the
Javanese were more interested in practice than in theology or interpretation. For example,
some followers of Shattariyyah in East Java believe that the order provides a means to acquire
and exercise magic power. In some places in West Java, particularly in the area south of
Bandung, there are communities claiming links to Abdul Muhyi which practise certain martial
arts and cultivate alternative healing practices.It is important here to recall the Dutch scholar Rinkes’ findings about the Shattariyyah
order and its links with Abd al-Rauf of Singkel in 17th century
Aceh. Part of Rinkes’ doctoral dissertation (Rinkes 1909, 160) examined the foundations of the
Shattariyyah’s metaphysical doctrine called the ‘Seven Levels of Being’ or martabat
tujuh. Rinkes found that the Javanese Shattariyyah consisted of common general
characteristics of the order, as well as elements incorporated from various other parts of the
world. He made the following points about its Javanese variant: first, disregarding possible
inaccuracies on the part of Javanese writers, the Javanese language, like most other
languages, does not lend itself to an exact rendering of notions from other languages (in this
case, from the Arabic), especially if the author intended to re-express them in his own words.
Second, the writing in Java, without being a direct imitation of some earlier version, does
not express the scribes’ thought, but only indicates which ideas they have absorbed. Third,
because of the religious sentiments of the Javanese, which, according to Rinkes, might be said
to be generally lacking in lively exchange of thought, one should not expect to find sharply
outlined dogmas and can expect even less of their mystical speculations. I agree with Rinkes, particularly in view of the facts of contemporary Pamijahan. Mystical
speculation, lively debates on the Shattariyyah, and even the creation of new mystical texts
are rare. Such phenomena have been influenced by a social dynamic in the village. The
Pamijahanese could not maintain their mystical tradition properly because a number of their
prominent Sufi leaders moved away to settle in other places, or have passed away. So the
transmissions are halted. Furthermore, various external influences, such as the introduction
of different tarekat and the increase in pilgrimage activities have
modified their views on their ancestor’s teachings. Nowadays it is hard to imagine Pamijahan
from a perspective of 17th Sumatran Sufism, where the star of
Sufism sparkled, and debates on mystical speculation were at their liveliest. However, the
Shattariyyah followers in Pamijahan survive in a modest way, still important in village
affairs. In this regard, the local manuscripts appear as short manuals of Sufism.Although Rinkes’s study has contributed much to our understanding of the development of
the Shattariyyah in Java, Rinkes did not pay great attention to local practices, particularly
those of Pamijahan, where around 1660-1715 the order was first introduced into West Java
(Krauss 1995: 112). This is reflected in the manuscripts which Rinkes used. Although he
visited Pamijahan in 1909, it was the Cirebon manuscripts which he consulted, rather than
manuscripts then available in Pamijahan itself, even though he probably had seen manuscripts
of Pamijahan origin in the collection made by his teacher, the great Islamologist C. Snouck
Hurgronje. Some important manuscripts from Cirebon present a different
silsilah from that of the manuscripts of Pamijahan. The Shattariyyah
order in Cirebon, particularly as practised within the court, is socially exclusive. It is a
palace order. Rinkes (Rinkes 1910) also does not inform us whether any manuscripts were
extant, or if any mystical circles were active in Pamijahan at the time of his visit – leaving
a gap in our knowledge of the history of the order there. It is therefore all the more important to describe the silsilah of
the Shattariyyah in contemporary Pamijahan, particularly in the light of the fact that the
villagers have transformed Pamijahan into one of the most famous pilgrimage sites in Java
today. Recent studies confirm that the silsilah is part of the intellectual
network linking various scholars from different places in Indonesia. In his important
historical study Azra (1992) identifies various interrelated figures influenced by the idea of
neo-Sufism. According to Azra, neo-Sufism is an effort to reconcile mysticism, or
tasawwuf, and law, or sharî’ah. The
silsilah of the Shattariyyah, particularly in Indonesia, is part of
this process. Azra’s work uses extensive primary sources written by the figures in the
networks he studies. Nowadays, in several places in Java, including to some extent in
Pamijahan, the order has been overwhelmed by other orders and has lost followers. Muhaimin
(1995: 333) argues that the decline of the Shattariyyah in Cirebon is partly due to its
complicated teaching. Other tarekat such as the Tîjâniyyah, for example,
have gained much popularity from propagating simpler doctrines. Pamijahan stands out as an
exception. Even though the Shattariyyah is facing problems in other places in Java, the
villagers of Pamijahan who claim a close genealogical connection with the master are steadfast
in their attempts to perpetuate the tradition. Today a Shattariyyah congregation is held every
week in a certain villager’s house in Pamijahan (described in Chapter 8). C. The Shattariyyah Order in the World of IslamThe Shattariyyah tradition is largely shaped by a Transoxanian tradition of Central Asia,
but over time it has also come under Indian and Arab influences (Trimingham 1998: 96-104). The
tradition has also been ‘domesticated’ in Indonesia in order to meet local needs. In the
Shattariyyah’s silsilah we can sense these dynamics. The silsilah is linked to Abu Yazid al-Ishqiyyah of Transoxania, who
was influenced by Imam Jafar al-Sidiq (d. 146/763) and Abu Yazid al-Bistami (d. 260/874). Abu
Yazid al-Ishqiyyah’s order was known as the Ishqiyyah in Iran and the Bistamiyyah in Ottoman
Turkey. The Ishqiyyah was popular in 15th century Central Asia.
After the Qadiriyyah-Naqshabandiyyah order began to receive more attention in the same area,
the Ishqiyyah’s popularity decreased (Trimingham, 1998: 41). One of Abu Yazid’s successors,
Shah Abd Allah al-Shattar (d. 1428–9) who appears in the genealogy of Pamijahan manuscripts as
the ninth master before Shaykh Abdul Muhyi, brought the order to more prosperous soil for his
teachings, namely India. There, Shah Abd Allah became associated with the Shattariyyah, which
had then become another name for ‘Ishqiyyah (Rizvi 1983).After ‘Abd Allâh al-Shattar, the Shattariyyah was led by Shaykh Hidâyat Allâh Sarmat (the
eighth predecessor), and Shaykh Hâjji Udârî (the seventh predecessor). The most important of
‘Abd Allâh al-Shattar’s successors was the famous Muhammad Gawth of Gwalior (d. 1562–3).
According to Rizvi (1983), he extended the popularity of the Shattariyyah among the local
population by retranslating Yogi’s manuscript, the Amritkunda and
incorporating its practices into Shattariyyah dikir formulae. He was
known as a Sufi who respected the followers of Hinduism. Furthermore, he was a writer of
numerous mystical works. During his period the doctrine of the Shattariyyah was codified and
strengthened, as may be seen in his work Jawâhir al-Khamsah (The Five
Precious Things). Another factor which stimulated the Shattariyyah tradition was that its
leaders were able to co-operate with the royal courts of North India. This can be seen in the
period of the great Moghuls, Shâh Jahân and Aurangzeb. Shâh Jahân and Aurangzeb granted
recognition to the order as one of the official orders of the empire (Rizvi 1983).After Muhammad Gawth of Gwalior, the order was continued by Shaykh Wajih al-Dîn Gujarati
(the fifth predecessor) (d. 1018/1609) who succeeded in promoting the Shattariyyah order
throughout the Indian subcontinent (Rizvi 1983: 166). Its method of contemplation, which shows
similarity with yogic practices, and the eccentric behaviour of its master, were important
factors in the Shattariyyah’s development in India. Furthermore, through Shaykh Wajih al-Din
Gujarati’s successor, Sultan Arifin Sibghat Allah b. Ruh Allah and Shaykh Ahmad al-Nashawi,
the order spread to Mecca and Medina (Rizvi 1983). In the 17th century these two holy cities
emerged as sanctuaries of various Sufi orders and became great centres of diffusion. It was
through this line that Ahmad Qushashi, the immediate predecessor of Indonesian Shattariyyah,
obtained his silsilah. Even though some scholars have classified the Shattariyyah as a minor order in India
(Rizvi 1983), it emerged as an important order in the Indonesian archipelago during the
17th century, particularly in Sumatra. Its followers became key
players in local social transformations further afield. The king of Buton in Eastern
Indonesia, for example, adopted the symbolism of the Seven Levels of Being to impose a
hierarchical social order within his realm (Ikram 2001). In Ulakan, Minangkabau, the
Shattariyyah imbued rebels with spiritual powers in their struggle against the Dutch
(Steenbrink 1984). The same situation was also found in Java, where Shaykh Abdul Muhyi
provided the prominent rebel Shaykh Yusuf of Sulawesi with accommodation and political
sanctuary. Abdul Muhyi’s followers also took up arms against the Dutch (Kraus 1995).D. The Shattariyyah <emphasis>Silsilah</emphasis> in IndonesiaI shall now outline the setting of the 17th century and the
introduction of the Shattariyyah in Indonesia. In this period, Sufism and the
tarekat were dominated by the North Sumatran school which followed the
philosophy of Iban al-Arabi (d.1240) and was led by Hamzah Fansuri of Aceh. This was attacked
as pantheistic in a great controversy by contemporary opponents such as Nûr al-Dîn al-Raniri
(Johns 1965).However, both Hamzah and his opponents often quoted Ibn al-‘Arabî’s pantheistic teaching
regarding the nature of creation: that there is no separation between inner and outer worlds.
Agreement was never reached on exactly how God manifests Himself in the world. Hamzah
Fansuri’s work explains that the phenomenal world is the external manifestation
(tajallî) of the Ultimate Reality. In Hamzah Fansuri we read
La ilaha il-Allah itu kesudahan kata
Tauhid marifat semata-mata
Hapuskan hendak sekalian perkara
Hamba dan Tuhan tiada berbeda (Alisjahbana 1961: 76)La ilaha il-Allah is the final word
The way, nought but the Unity of God
Banish other matters from within your heart
Servant and Lord are not apart.
The poem in its entirety expounds a system which is generally designated by the term ‘The
Unity of Being’ (wahdat al-wujûd). In Hamzah Fansuri’s view, the world is
an outpouring of God’s love. Borrowing Anne-Marie Schimmel’s image, the relation between
Creator and creation is like that between water and ice, the same essence, a unity, but
evident in different modes of manifestation (Schimmel 1994, 1986). Hamzah’s follower, Shams al-Dîn of Pasai (d. 1630) developed this idea but for the first
time in Sumatran Sufi practice, he adopted the concept of the ‘Seven Levels of Being’ from
al-Tuhfah al-Mursala ila ruh al-nabi, or The Gift Addressed
to the Spirit of the Prophet. Johns, in his critical textual edition of the
Tuhfah, argues that the understanding of the ‘Seven Levels of Being’ in
the Sumatran Sufi’s work is more systematic than that expounded by Shams al-Din’s predecessors
(Johns 1965). The ‘Seven Levels of Being’ is a cosmology which explains the relation between
the Absolute and the relative. The concept resembles that of Ibn al-‘Arabî in thso far as the
relative is an outward manifestation of the Absolute (al-Attas 1966). The main advantage of
Ibn al-‘Arabî’s concept, which was adopted by Shattriyyah, is that the notion of levels
supplies a metaphor which appears to solve the philosophical problems of the relation between
the Absolute and the relative, or the One and many-ness. However, such a solution can and does only appear on a metaphorical level. The difficulty
with it for scripturalist or legalist is that mystical expressions applying unconventional
metaphors such as ‘I am God’, or ‘Servant and Lord are not apart’ are simply unacceptable
(Schimmel 1994).Thus, the ‘Seven Levels of Being’ had to be interpreted in different ways. Certain
Sumatran Sufis, such as Shams al-Dîn al-Samatrânî, interpreted the doctrine in the above
heterodox terms but Nûr al-Dîn al-Raniri of Gujerat and ‘Abd al-Raûf al-Singkel comprehended
it in other more orthodox ways.Nûr al-Dîn al-Raniri, like Hamzah, applied the metaphor of light and its shadow
(zill) to describe the relationship between God and His creation.
According to him, the world is God’s shadow (‘wujud makhluk itu terang dan benderang
yang jadi ia daripada nur wujud Allah’) (Christomy 1986:64). Both Hamzah and
al-Raniri subscribe to the same assumption about reality. In their terms, reality is the
shadow of the Ultimate. The big differences between them lie in their interpretation of
‘shadow’. For Hamzah, the shadow is the logical consequence of the light. It is not created
but projected. On the other hand, al-Raniri assumes that the shadow is
created by the Ultimate.In this ‘catechismus’ al-Raniri asserts that
Jika demikianlah ditamsilkan segala ahli Sufi akan Haq Ta’la dengan
makhluk, bahwasanya wujud Haq Ta’la itu sekali-kali tiada wujud Allah. Seperti kata jâbib
al-Insân al-Kâmâl….Maka jika ada engkau itu Haq Ta’la, maka tiada engkau itu engkau, tetapi
Haq Ta’la itu engkau, maka tiadalah Haq Ta’la itu Haq Ta’la tetapi engkau itu engkau jua.
Maka nyata daripada kata ini sekali-kali wujud Haq Ta’la itu tiada jadi wujud makhluk dan
wujud makhluk itu sekali-kali tiada jadi wujud wujüd (Hill al-Zill, see also Christomy 1986:
64).If the Sufi compares Haq Ta’la with human beings, indeed there is no
parallel between wujud Haq Ta’la and God. This is explained by the master of al-Insân
al-Kâmil…If you have the quality of Haq Ta’la you will not exist as men, but you will become
the Haq Ta’la. Haq Ta’la is Haq Ta’la but you are man (not Him). The meaning of this word is
that wujud Haq Ta’la is never embodied in mankind and mankind is not the manifestation of
wujud Haq Ta’la.
According to al-Raniri the ultimate reality, the wujud Haq Ta’la has
never become manifest in mankind, nor has creation, or the wujud makhlûq,
ever become manifest in the divine ultimate reality.
Bahwasanya Hakikat Allah itu sekali-kali tiada harus dikata akan dia
berpindah kepada hakikat makhluk itu dan hakikat makhluk itu sekali-kali tiada harus dikata
akan dia berpindah kepada hakikat Allah. (Hilll al-Zill)Now of the Essence (Allah) it should not be said that it is embodied
in creation and of creation it should never be said that it is embodied in the Essence
(Allah).
These differences escalated into an open polemic and political friction among the patrons
of the respective masters, dividing even the Acehnese sultans among themselves, with their
respective supporters. This conflict between the followers of Nûr al-Dîn al-Raniri and Hamzah
Fansuri is well known. Al-Raniri argued that Sultan Iskandar Muda (ruled 1607-1636) should
make a decree, or fatwâ against Hamzah and Shams al-Dîn regarding the
wahdat al-wujûd. It was forthcoming. Al-Raniri tried to modify Ibn
al-‘Arabî’s teaching to a more orthodox accommodation. However, his position was perhaps more
political than mystical. He was ready to support any palace policies which were in accord with
orthodoxy. For instance, he advised that all old manuscripts which did not carry at their head
the habitual formulaic opening of Islam: ‘In the Name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful…’
should be burned. He also persuaded the Sultan to ban the teaching of the wahdat
al-wujud. However, after his royal patron died, al-Raniri ran into political
difficulties. The next Sultan, Iskandar al-Thani (ruled 1636-1641) held views different from
those of al-Raniri and as a consequence al-Raniri’s position deteriorated. He fled back to
Gujarat. The more moderate qâdî, ‘Abd al-Raûf al-Singkel was appointed in
his place.Those responsible for a domestication of Ibn ‘Arabî’s teaching in Indonesia were the
Meccan masters al-Qushashi and al-Kurânî, and their pupil ‘Abd al-Raûf Singkel. Al-Qushashi
was famous as a leader of Jawi students from the Indonesian archipelago in Mecca during the
17th century. He had links with a number of mystical orders but
in Indonesia he was best known as a Shattariyyah master. He obtained his
silsilah from Sibghat Allâh and was moreover a close friend of the writer
of the above-mentioned Tuhfah, Muhammad Ibn Fadl Allâh al-Burhânpûrî.
Both were students of the popular Indian master of the Shattariyyah, Wajîh al-Dîn of Gwalior.
Al- Qushashi made a deliberate choice to teach Shattariyyah mysticism to his Jawi students.
Through his discipline the metaphysical doctrines of the martabat tujuh
were transmitted to Indonesia as part of heterodoxy, becoming the trademark of the
Shattariyyah. In other words, the speculative view on the process of creation was adjusted to
the legalistic view fo the fuqaha (Bruinessen 1994:1-23).Among al-Qushâshî’s students was ‘Abd al-Raûf al-Singkel who in turn was the master of
Shaykh Abdul Muhyi of Safarwadi. ‘Abd al-Raûf differed in several respects from his colleagues
in Aceh. He did not condemn his predecessors as heretics, or kâfir
billah, as al-Raniri had not hesitated to do. ‘Abd al-Raûf’s response to the
quarrel between al-Raniri and Hamzah’s followers was moderate. He probably was not called upon
to make a statement regarding Hamzah’s teaching for the royal court because, according to him,
it is not encumbent upon any Muslim to name another Muslim as an unbeliever, or
kâfir. ‘It is dangerous to accuse another of kufr,
of unbelief. If you do so and it is true, why waste words on it, and if it is untrue, the
accusation will turn back upon yourself” (Johns 1965: 60). It must be taken into account,
however, that these tendencies occurred as part of a general shift in the archipelago in the
17th century for legalists and mystics to be reconciled.In sum, 17th century Indonesia was characterised by various
mystical contests as a result of international infusions of tarekat
brought back from Mecca by returned pilgrims. The emergence and decline of a certain order was
much influenced, for example, by the fluctuating tendency to combine Sufism with Islamic law,
sharî’ah. Thus, the attempt was made for every pantheistic element in
tarekat, including in Shattariyyah, to be reshaped in accordance with
more orthodox features.E. The Shattariyyah <emphasis>Silsilah</emphasis> in West JavaThere is evidence that the Shattariyyah silsilah in Java follows two
main lines. The first can be traced back to Cirebon on the north coast. According to Muhaimin
(1995:333-336) the Cirebon chain reaches back to Shaykh Ahmad bin Qaras al-Sanawî. Al-Sanawi
was the father of al-Qushâshî who taught Abdul Muhyi’s teacher, ‘Abd al-Raûf al-Singkel.
Shaykh Ahmad bin Qaras al-Sanawî in turn taught Shaykh ‘Âlam al-Rabbânî who in turn taught
Shaykh Hatib Qabat al-Islam who in turn taught Shaykh ‘Abd al-Waqâb who in turn taught Shaykh
Imam Tarbiyi who in turn taught Tuan Shaykh ‘Abd Allâh bin ‘Abd al-Qahhâr who in turn taught
Tuan Haji Muhammad Mu’tasin who in turn taught Shaykh Imam Qâdir Îmân Hidâyat bin Yahyâ who in
turn taught Sayyid Shaykh Muhammad Arifudin who in turn taught Raden Muhammad Nûr Allâh Habîb
al-Dîn ingkang apilenggih ing Nagari Cirebon, Kanoman ing Dalem
kaprabonan, (“who sat on the kanoman or junior throne of
Cirebon”) (Muhaimin 1995:333). The second tradition, attributed to Shaykh Abdul Muhyi of Safarwadi, is a more popular
one, at least in West Java, than the Cirebon tradition. This is a clear indication that
Pamijahan was an important place in Java for the transmission of the Shattariyyah. This
present study focuses on the Pamijahan branch.F. Shaykh Abdul MuhyiA number manuscripts, local narratives, and Dutch reports (de Haan 1910:462) provide
convincing evidence of Abdul Muhyi’s role in spreading the Shattariyyah order in West Java.
However, the sources are not reliable regarding when and how exactly he learned the
Shattariyyah method in Aceh and Mecca, or when he returned to Gresik in Central Java, and why
he moved from there to West Java (refer to Chapter 4).
The Prophet Muhammad
Imam Ali
Amir al-Muminin Husein
Zainal al-abdidin
Imam Muhammad Baqir
Ruhaniyah Imam Jafar al-Sadiq
Shaykh Ruhainyah Sultan al-Arifin: Shaykh Abdu Yazid al-Bastami
Shaykh Muhammad al-Magribi
Shaykh Arabi Yazid al-Isqhi
Shaykh al_muzafar Turki al-Tusi
Qutub Abu al-hasan al-Kharqani
Shaykh Hudaqly
Shaykh Muhammad Ashiq
Shaykh Muhammad Arif
Shaykh Abd Allah Shattari
Imam Qadi Shattari
Shaykh Hidayat Allah Sarmat
Shaykh Haji Hudur
Shaykh Muhammad al-Gawth
Shaykh Wajih al-din Alwi
Sultan Arifin Sayyid Sifat Allah
Ahmad al-Qushashi b. Muhammad Madani . Ahmad al-Nashawi
Shaykh Abd al-Rauf
Shaykh Abdul Muhyi
Figure 16. The Spiritual Genealogy (silsilah) of
Tarekat Shattariyyah at PamijahanRinkes was the first European scholar to concern himself with the Shattariyyah in Java. In
1909, while finishing his dissertation on ‘Abd al-Raûf of Singkel, Rinkes travelled to Java
(Rinkes 1909). His mission was to trace the Shattariyyah order and investigate the nature of
the sacred sites associated with the wali sanga, the nine saints who
reputedly first propagated Islam there. The journey resulted in a series of articles
collectively titled De Heiligen van Java (The Saints of Java) which
appeared in the Tijdschrift van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en
Wetenschappen (Journal of the Batavia Society for Arts and Sciences) between 1910
and 1913.Rinkes’ articles have recently been collected and translated into
English under the title The Nine Saints of Java (Rinkes 1996) Even though he faced some difficulties in ascertaining certain historical data,
his studies do provide insights into the concept of the wali sanga in
contemporary Java. Now, in traditional Javanese historiography, Shaykh Abdul Muhyi is never
identified as one of the wali sanga, living as he did at least one
century after them. It is curious then that Rinkes’ studies open with a description of the
tomb of Shaykh Abdul Muhyi, the founder of the Shattariyyah in West Java. Rinkes gives us no
clue as to why he took up the episode of Shaykh Abdul Muhyi first. In his further failure to
provide clues about when and how the Shattariyyah came to Pamijahan, Rinkes overlooks one of
the most important aspects of any account of the order’s relationship to its shrines, the
written evidence.There are few written sources referring to the existence of Shaykh Abdul Muhyi. The oldest
manuscript found in Pamijahan only states his genealogy. Nor is there any dating associated
with him in this chronicle. Kraus (1995), the only contemporary scholar to pay attention to
the figure of Abdul Muhyi, examines the existence of the Shaykh from a primarily historical
point of view. Based on his research employing Dutch sources, Kraus concludes:
The first cluster of Indonesian ulama we know about, the wali songo,
stand between myth and history. The next group, the famous Acehnese scholars and mystics,
Hamzah Fansuri, Shamsuddin of Pasai, ar-Raniri, and Abdur Ra’uf, as well as the Maccasarese
Shaykh Yusuf are historical persons….. Abdul Muhyi of Pamijahan somehow stood between these
two groups. We know that he was a student of Abdur Ra’uf, but we have no written evidence of
his thought and we had no historical proof of his existence. (Krauss, 1995:28).
Krauss relies on secondary sources in claiming that Shaykh Abdul Muhyi must have lived
during the period of ‘Abd al-Raûf, Shaykh Yusûf and the local Sundanese figure of the Bupati
of Sukapura (see Chapter 4). Even accepting Krauss’ arguments, we still need additional
sources to bring this figure “down to earth”. In other words, as long as the original works
written by Abdul Muhyi himself have not been found, he stands as half-myth and half-history.
Nevertheless, Krauss speculates that the Shaykh lived between 1640 and 1715. In support of
this he refers to Dutch sources which identify the Shaykh as a “hajj from Carang” and friend
of the famous rebel, Shaykh Yusuf (1626–1699).In an article on Shaykh Yusuf, G.W.J. Drewes refers to a passage in
the BabadCerbon indicating that Yusuf sought refuge from the Dutch in the
village of Karang (probably modern Pamijahan) around the time that Shaykh Abdul Muhyi is
thought to have been living there. (Drewes 83-84). Krauss further claims that Shaykh Yusuf wrote a manuscript dedicated to Shaykh
Abdul Muhyi. Finally, he cites sources from a local authority in Tasikmalaya (Sukapura)
mentioning the Shaykh’s existence. So given these facts, Shaykh Abdul Muhyi emerges as a real
man, but one clouded by the absence of works clearly in his own hand. It is interesting to note that Krauss assumes that every wali like
the Shaykh must have bequeathed written material yet to be located. Of course, we should
receive this statement with care, since various factors influence the tradition of writing in
Java. A collection of manuscripts can disappear not only because of adverse political factors
but also because of mere climatic conditions.According to villagers of Pamijahan, there are external factors why original works written
by their ancestor cannot be found. In the 17th century many
kiai came home from the hâjj and were unable to
set up their own lodges in urban areas. Some of them retreated to remote areas of the
countryside. Colonial control of the hâjj network was very strong,
particularly after Dutch troops were able to capture the northern port sultanates of Banten
and Cirebon and later most of the interior of the Priangan. Some kiai,
including Shaykh Abdul Muhyi, were recognized as supporters of rebellion. In such
circumstances, it is feasible that Abdul Muhyi might have transmitted his teachings not
through written texts, as did Hamzah Fansuri and Nûr al-Dîn al-Raniri but through practical
exemplary behaviour. It is important to consider Abdul Muhyi’s teaching method within
traditional institutions such as those in which ulama and
ajengan deliver their teachings through oral discourse and practical
applications. (Dhofier 1980:55) It is also easily possible to imagine how very difficult it
must have been for Abdul Muhyi to introduce his teachings in a written form in the remote and
backward setting of Pamijahan in the 17th and 18th centuries.Certain areas of the interior of West Java have experienced long periods of war and
rebellion. A great number of cultural artefacts were destroyed or taken away to other places.
During the 1960s for example, when Islamic separatism threatened the Tasikmalaya area, a
number of Hindu relics and other pre-Islamic artefacts were deliberately destroyed. Many
statues in West Java lost their important identifying points of iconography such as heads or
hands. One of my informants in the field recited similar stories regarding various artefacts
associated with Shaykh Abdul Muhyi. According to him, in the period close to the
wali’s lifetime not only manuscripts, amulets and magically charged
daggers (kris) were lost but a sacred mosque containing various
manuscripts relating to the Shaykh was also burned. We should also consider that there were periods when the Shattariyyah teachings were
probably abandoned by adherents under pressure from the spread of other popular
tarekat such as the Naqshbandiyyah, Qâdiriyyah, Tîjâniyyah and
Idrîsiyyah. Mama Ajengan Satibi, a descendant of Shaykh Abdul Muhyi explained to me that he
had manuscripts conveying the Shaykh’s teaching which he had never read, because he was not a
follower of the Shattariyyah, the very Sufi order introduced to area by his ancestor.Written materials can decay in a short time due to the unfriendly tropical climate, while
the method of collection and storage of manuscripts by villagers leaves much to be desired.
Accordingly, the apparent lack of the Shaykh’s own works does not necessarily put his
existence into question.I found almost thirty manuscripts from various places in Java recognising Abdul Muhyi as a
Shattariyyah master (see Chapter 3). Most of these manuscripts had been copied by his
followers. According to the family of the Shaykh in Pamijahan, his pupils often made copies of
mystical works after he had initiated them as disciples. These pupils also put their own names
in the silsilah after the master’s name. This custom is consistently
mentioned in Shattariyyah manuscripts dedicated to the Shaykh. In fact, according to the
villagers, a Shattariyyah manuscript which does not provide a silsilah in
its opening is not to be recognized as genuine.G. The SuccessorsFigure 17. Shaykh Abdul Muhyi's direct successorsAbdul Muhyi’s successors were very important in transforming Pamijahan into a centre of
the Shattariyyah in the Priangan of West Java. From there the order spread to other regions of
Java. Most Shattariyyah manuscripts from Pamijahan agree that after Abdul Muhyi died the
Shattariyyah was spread by his sons by his first wife. Their names were Shaykh
Haji Abdullah, Sembah Dalem Bojong and
Emas Paqih Ibrahim. A note on each of them is necessary here.a. Paqih Ibrahim<footnote>
<para role="footnoote">For other sources on Paqih Ibrahim see also mss. Cod. Or. 7486b,
7446, 7455, and 7443 in Leiden University Library </para>
</footnote>
Figure 18. Paqih Ibrahim’s descendantsThere is no known source in Pamijahan regarding Paqih Ibrahim’s life. The
Babad Tanah Jawi indicates that there was a
penghulu from Karang who taught Islam in Kartasura (personal
communication, Professor Merle Ricklefs, 1997). This might have been Paqih Ibrahim. Rinkes
(1996) however doubts this possibility but does not provide reasons for his doubt. However,
if we trace back the silsilah of the Shattariyyah from Central and East
Java we often come across mention of a son of Abdul Muhyi named Paqih Ibrahim. There is
evidence that he settled in the north coast area and there propagated the Shattariyyah.
Local narratives in Pamijahan also note that, unlike Abdul Muhyi’s other sons, only Paqih
Ibrahim lies buried outside the village. As suggested above, it is possible that during his
lifetime he made contact with Kartasura. The Shattariyyah manuscripts from Kartasura (Leiden
Cod. Or. 7486b, and Cod. Or. 7446) support this possibility. In these manuscripts Paqih
Ibrahim delivered Shattariyyah initiation to one Tuan Shaykh ‘Abd al-Rahmân from Kartasura,
who in turn taught Kiai Muar Ibnu Syahid, who in turn taught Kiai Muar Ibn Syahid or Kiai
Mustahal, who in turn taught Kiai Muhammad Rajudin from Salakarta Adiningrat, who taught
Bagus Nasari Malang, who finally taught Purwamenggolo from Pamukan, Salakarta Adiningrat.
Furthermore, some manuscripts indicate that Emas Paqih Ibrahim not only had followers from
his own village and neighbouring villages but also from as far away as Cirebon and Garut.
Indeed, according to Ricklefs (p.c. 1997), Paqih Ibrahim was reported to have collaborated
with rebels in the court of Kartasura and then was exiled to Jakarta.b. Haji AbdullahFigure 19. Haji Abdullah’s descendantsMost manuscripts which I found in Pamijahan during my field work
narrate Haji Abdullah’s silsilah. Through his line, the Shattariyyah
silsilah is linked to the Penghulu of Bandung,
who in turn taught Haji Abdullah bin Abdul Malik who lived at Pulau Rusa in Trengganu, who
then taught Lebai Bidin son of Ahmad, an Acehnese (see also Al-Attas 1963, 29).c. Dalem Bojong Another of Abdul Muhyi’s sons, Dalem Bojong, had followers mainly from
his own village, Nagara, in Sukapura, from Mandala, and from Bandung, and Garut. The current
followers of the Shattariyyah in the village of Machmud in Bandung connect their
silsilah to Dalem Bojong. According to a manuscript from Pamijahan
(discussed below) Dalem Bojong provided the authorisation, or ijazah of
the order to Kiai Mas Hijaya from whom Kiai Mas Haji Abdul Daud in turn obtained
authorisation. After that Kiai Mas Haji Abdul Daud of Pamijahan taught Mas Haji Hanan who
later authorised Muhammad Akna of Pamijahan. Beben Muhammad Dabas, Muhammad Akna’s son, has
now taken up his family’s Shattariyyah tradition and is perpetuating it in Pamijahan (see
below). It is important to note here that besides these three famous sons of
Abdul Muhyi who are recognised, after Abdul Muhyi himself, as initial propagators of
Shattariyyah, there is another name which is also significant. Ekadjati explains that in a
manuscript found in Limus Tilu, Garut, there is reported to be another son who propagated
Shattariyyah, a certain Kiai Haji Abdul Muhyidin. The appearance of his name contradicts
information in Rinkes’ study and in local narratives, none of which mentions that Abdul
Muhyi had a son named Kiai Haji Abdul Muhyidin. If the name is correct, then in full it
should read Kiai Haji Mas Nida (Muhammad) Abdul Muhyi or Kiai Bagus Muhammad Abdul Muhyidin,
who, according to the Pamijahan manuscripts, was the son of Dalem Bojong and a grandson of
Shaykh Abdul Muhyi. Local manuscripts also state:
….lan iya iku amuruk maring Shaykh Hajji Abdul Muhyi / ing karang
desane lan ing Safawardi padukuhane lan / iya iku amuruk iya maring Kang Putra Shaykh
Hajji ‘Abd / al-lah hing Karang desane lan ing Safawardi padukuhane lan / iya iku amuruk
ia maring Kang Putu Kiahi Mas Nida Muhammad Abdul Muhyi ing Karang desane lan ing
Safawardi padukuhane …….and he taught Shaykh Hajji Abdul Muhyi / in the village of
Safawardi, Karang, and he in turn taught his son, Shaykh Hajji Abd / al-lah in the village
of Safawardi, Karang and / he in turn taught Abdul Muhyi’s grandson, Kiahi Mas Nida
Muhammad Abdul Muhyi in the village of Safawardi, Karang and in Safarwadi….
Figure 20. Dalem Bojong’s<footnote>
<para role="footnoote">See also Mss. 793b, 7433, 7486, 7455, 7397b in Leiden
Library,</para>
</footnote> descendantsd. Beben Muhammad DabasBeben Muhammad Dabas is the current leader of the Shattariyyah in Pamijahan. He derived
his Shattariyyah silsilah from his father, Haji Muhammad Akna, who was
known by villagers as a practitioner of the Shattariyyah. He told me: “My father, Muhammad
Akna, died in 1982. He said to me that I should carry on the Shattariyyah in this village.”
Before he was initiated by his father, Beben spent time in a pasantren
school in Pekalongan on the north coast of Central Java. His family was surprised by his
ability to study and to lead a tarekat because the Beben they knew as a
child had been a naughty boy. After spending time in the pasantren, he
returned to Pamijahan and established a new Shattariyyah chapter, registering his
association with the Attourney General of Tasikmalaya on April 4, 1991. Some prominent members of Shaykh Abdul Muhyi’s family consider Beben Muhammad Dabas to
be too young to be the leader of the Shattariyyah in the village. The most prominent
custodian of Pamijahan and the owner of several Shattariyyah manuscripts, Ajengan Endang
expressed an opinion representative of such attitudes. He explained that theoretically it is
very difficult to obtain an ijâzah in the Shattariyyah order because
its teaching is the wali’s own and can be fully comprehended only by
those of wali-like stature. Thus, says Ajengan Endang, there are only a
few people in contemporary West Java able to practise the Shattariyyah properly. For his
part, Beben himself seems to reject such criticism. In his view, as long as one has the true
niat, or intention to learn the Shattariyyah, one can receive an
ijazah from a master. It does not matter if the conferrer or the
recipient of the ijazah is still young. Beben’s’ silsilah, which he obtained from his father, is
legitimate, not only from the requirements of the tarekat but also from
the government’s point of view. His full claims to legitimacy, however, are more complex
than this.By hereditary privilege, Beben is connected to his father, once recognised as the
foremost local figure in the practice of Shattariyyah. Beben has also made use of a
manuscript, apparently collected by his family, to confirm his status as a legitimate
master. In this manuscript, he has added his own name to the Shattariyyah
silsilah. Evidently, he did this after a period of study under one
Ajengan Sukawangi of Singaparna, the murshid or most authoritative
Shattariyyah master in the district, who initiated him into the order and bestowed the
ijazah on him. It should be carefully noted, however, that the way
Beben Muhammad Dabas inserted his name into the silsilah after that of
his father is ambiguous. Traditionally, he should have listed his name after that of Ajengan
Sukawangi, his initiator into the Shattariyyah practice. To recapitulate, Beben argues that his father bequeathed him the
Shattariyyah, and that it is by virtue of this fact that it is legitimate for him to
continue the tradition. He also made the Shattariyyah oath of allegiance to the order,
talqin before the Ajengan Sukawangi in the traditional way. Finally,
Beben has listed his tarekat officially in the office of the Attorney
General and this is the third source of his legitimation. Official, “political” recognition of Dabas’ tarekat community has
come from the local Attorney General’s office (kejaksaan) in
Tasikmalaya. It is somewhat odd that a Sufi tarekat should be
registered with the government, as if it were a kebatinan, or
spiritualist group. In a certificate given by the Sekretariat Umum Team
PAKEM, Beben Muhammad Dabas is recognised as the leader,
pimpinan of the group. The main objective of his group, which is
written on the certificate, is to develop Islamic instruction through the teaching of right
religion, tauhid in order to gain personal peace in this world and in
the hereafter (‘mengembangkan ajaran Islam melalui ajaran Tauhid demi tercapainya
bahagia dunia dan akherat’’). The government certificate of authorisation also
states that the source of the tarekat is “teaching based on Al-Qurân,
Hadîth, Ijmâ’ ulama and Qiyâs’’ – all orthodox principles. Perhaps the most important
feature of the certificate can be seen under its Point 6, in which it confirms the history
of the order. The brief history goes as follows:
“Sejarah singkatnya, bahwa saya menerima ajaran tarekat ini dari
ayahanda bernama Muhammad Akna dan Beliau menerima ajaran ini dari Mas H. Hanan ke-29.
Beliau dan K. Mas H. Abdul Daud ke-28 Beliau dari K. Mas Hijaya ke-27. Beliau dari Shaykh
Abdulloh dan Bagus Muhammad Abdul Muhyidin Pamijahan ke-26. Beliau dari Shaykh Haji Abdul
Muhyi Safarwadi Pamijahan ke-25. Dari Shaykh Hamzah Pansuri Singgil ke-24. Dari Shaykh
Abdur Rouf ke-23. Dari Shaykh Ahmad bin Muhammad Madinah (Shaykh Qossin) ke-22. Dari
Shaykh Abi Muwahib Abdullah Ahmad ke-21. Dari Shaykh Sibgatullah ke-20. Dari Shaykh
Wajihudin al-Alnawi ke-19. Dari Shaykh Muhammad Gaos dan putra Khotimudin ke-18. Dari
Shaykh Husuri ke-17. Dari Shaykh Hidayatulloh Sarmat ke-16. Dari Shaykh qodi Satori ke-15.
Dari Shaykh Abdullah Shatori ke-14. Dari Shaykh A’rif ke-13. Dari Shaykh Muhammad Asik
ke-12. Dari Shaykh Maula Nahari ke-11. Dari Shaykh Hasana Harqoni ke-10. Dari Shaykh Rumli
Tari tusi ke-9. Dari Shaykh Qutub Mudofar ke-8. Dari Shaykh Arobi Yazidi istri ke-7. Dari
Shaykh Muhammad Magribi ke-6. Dari Shaykh Abdi Yazid Bustami ke-5. Jafarus Sodiq ke-4.
Dari Shaykh Imam Muhammad Bakir ke-3. Dari Shaykh Jenal Abidin ke-2. Hasan Husen R.A. dan
dari Sayidin Ali bin Abi Tholib K. W. beliau dari K. Nabi Muhammad S.A.W.
Beben’s blood relationship with the wali through his father, his
silsilah, and government approval for his group act as significant
proofs to some villagers that Beben Muhammad Dabas is indeed a legitimate Shattariyyah
leader.H. ConclusionThe Shattariyyah emerged as part of an expansion worldwide of Sufi orders in the
17th century. A dynamic network of various important orders
characterises this period. In Indonesia, the order gained followers not only in Sumatra but
also in Java. Shaykh Abdul Muhyi emerged as a prominent figure in Java after ‘Abd al-Raûf
al-Singkel. It is through his silsilah that followers in various places
in Central and East Java also derive their intellectual chain.The Shattariyyah tarekat, like any other
tarekat, experienced fluctuations in its development. In Pamijahan and in
other parts of Java, Shattariyyah followers were overwhelmed by other, later
tarekat. These fluctuations have often been a consequence of the
influences absorbed by pilgrims while undertaking the hâjj. Beben Muhammad Dabas claims that his Shattariyyah still survives in the village of
Pamijahan, and therefore the silsilah of the Shattariyyah in Pamijahan
constitutes a true silsilah. The contemporary Pamijahanese see this
tarekat genealogy not only in terms of Sufism but also as an instrument
of legitimation for all the families in Pamijahan who claim to be related to Abdul Muhyi. All
Pamijahanese claim that they have inherited the characteristics of Abdul Muhyi’s Sufism. Thus,
the silsilah is not only used to legitimate Beben Muhammad Dabas’ Sufi
group but also serves as an embedded identity for the Pamijahanese. The various silsilah also come forth as a major means of continuing
the cult of the wali. People believe that by reciting a particular
formulaic chant, which is dedicated to the names listed in the silsilah,
they will obtain their saint’s blessing, barakah.What I have outlined above locates Pamijahan as an important place - and the events of its
history as important events - in the story of Sufism in Indonesia, particularly in West Java.
It also provides a simple but telling example of the fact that, as Azra (1995) has described
so effectively, examining the genealogy of a Sufi order helps to reveal the network of clerics
and ulama scholars behind the Sufi phenomenon.