The problem of the corporate identities of medieval Sufi communities in the eastern Islamic world, from the Mongol conquest through the Timurid era, is a central issue for understanding the emergence of important Sufi ‘orders’ that dominated Sufi thought and organization in subsequent times. As such, this problem is of significance for the history of Sufism in general, and for the social history of the Muslim world since the 15th century, but the problem has not received sufficient attention.

It has often been customary to assume that the labels we attach to particular Sufi lineages and ‘orders,’ such as Naqshbandī, Kubravī, Chishtī, Qādirī, and so forth, apply historically to discrete communities identifiable from the time of each ‘order's’ eponym. In the case of the Kubravī tradition, for instance, we often speak of the “Kubravīya” as having been in existence from the time of Najm al-Dīn Kubrā himself, in the early 13th century. We do this (1) even though we know that Najm al-Dīn did not set about to establish a ‘path’ or an ‘order’ named for himself; (2) even though we know that among the many figures identified as disciples or associates of Najm al-Dīn, there is a great diversity of activity and affiliation in their later lives, and only one or two can be reliably linked with a subsequent lineage that came to be characterized as “Kubravī;” and (3) even though we know that the very term “Kubravī” never appears in our sources until the 15th century (or the late 14th, at the earliest).