1. Muhammad Jaᶜfar Mahjub, introduction to Futuwwat-nāmah-i Sulṭānī (henceforth FNS), by Mawlana Husayn Vaᶜiz-i Kashifi (Tehran, 1350/1971), 7–8. See also The Royal Book of Spiritual Chivalry (Futūwat nāma-yi sulṭānī), trans. Crook, Jay R. (Chicago, 2000)Google Scholar.

2. FNS, 32.

3. Riyaz, Muhammad, Aḥwāl wa āār wa ashᶜār-i Mir Sayyid ᶜAlī Hamadānī (Islamabad, 1991), 328–34Google Scholar lists thirty medieval works on futuwwat. Mahjub, introduction to FNS, 7–13, discusses numerous treatises on futuwwat and other historical and religious texts that mentioned futuwwat. Note also Taeschner, Franz, Zμnfte und Brμderschaften im Islam: Texte zur Geschichte der Futuwwa (Munich, 1979)Google Scholar, which is a comprehensive collection of most of his work on the futuwwat phenomena and his translations of treatises on futuwwat. For a discussion of fifteenthcentury Sufi manuscripts which viewed the ethic of jawānmardī as an important aspect of Sufi life, see Paul, Jμrgen, Die politische und soziale Bedeutung der Naqshbandiyya im Mittelasien im 15. Jahrhundert (Berlin-New York, 1991), 34–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also helpful are the bibliographies in Cl. Cahen, “Futuwwa,” EI ², 2: 961–65, and Franz Taeschner, “Futuwwa: Post-Mongol Period,” EI ², 2: 966–69.

4. Murtaza Sarraf has published the two works of Suhrawardi in his collection of treatises. See Suhrawardi, “Futuwwat-nāmah,” in Rasāᵓil-i Jawānmardān: mushtamil bar haft Futuwwatn āmah (henceforth RJ), (Tehran, 1352/1973), 89–166. Taeschner gives brief extracts from these treatises in Zμnfte, 242–56. See also Angelika Hartmann, an-Nasir li-Din Allah (1180–1225): Politik, Religion, Kultur in der späten Abbasidenzeit (New York and Berlin, 1975), 33.

5. Mention must be made of four works that will be referred to throughout this article. The first Persian treatise written after the demise of institutional futuwwat was the Futuwwat-nāmah of Najm al-Din Zarkub Tabrizi (d. ca. 712/1313), a shaykh from Tabriz, apparently related to ᶜUmar Suhrawardi. Kashifi lists Zarkub in the chain of transmission of the traditions of futuwwat (FNS, 126–27). A second treatise on futuwwat, Tuḥfat al-Ikhwān, originally written in Arabic, was edited and translated into Persian by the author himself, ᶜAbd al-Razzaq Kashi (or Kashani) (d. ca. 730/1335), who, it should be noted, was a follower of Ibn ᶜArabi (d. 638/1240). Shams al-Din Muhammad b. Muhammad Amuli wrote a comprehensive encyclopedic work, Nafāyis al-funūn fī ᶜarāyis al-ᶜuyūn (written 742/1345), which includes a section on futuwwat, that represents a Persian abridgment of Ibn Miᶜmar's Kitāb al-Futuwwa, written during al-Nasir's caliphate. Especially helpful is Amuli's definition of terms (RJ, 141–42). These three Persian texts have been published in Sarraf's Rasāᵓil-i Jawānmardān. A fourth treatise to be noted is Risāla-i Futuwwatiyya by the Kubrawi Sufi shaykh, Mir Sayyid ᶜAli Hamadani (d. 786/1384), published in Riyaz, Mir Sayyid ᶜAli Hamadānī, 341–66.

6. Although it has been assumed that the author of FNS is Husayn Vaᶜiz Kashifi, the question remains open. In his introduction, the author identifies himself as Husayn al-Kashifi; however, he does not dedicate the treatise to his Timurid patrons, but rather to the administrators of the shrine (khuddām-i mazār) of Imam Riza at Mashhad. This raises the possibility that the work may actually be from the early Safavid period and was only attributed to Kashifi. Furthermore, in his biographical note on Kashifi, written twenty years after Kashifi's death, Khwandamir lists numerous works by him, but makes no mention of the FNS (Ghiyath al-Din Khwandamir [d. 942/1536], Ḥabīb al-Siyar, 4 vols., ed. Muhammad Dabir Siyaqi [Tehran, 1982], 4: 345–46). Hence, it may be speculated that it is an early Safavid work. It is known, however, that Timurid officials frequently spent time in Mashhad, and Kashifi himself also visited Mashhad (Gholam Hosein Yousofi, “Kāshifī,” EI ², 4: 704). Furthermore, the author names all four of the rightly-guided caliphs in the preface (although the preface to one of the manuscripts appears corrupted), which makes it unlikely that it was written during the Safavid period. In his study on the Timurid preacher, Adam Jacobs has shown how the well-known Rawżzat al-shuhadāᵓ, which we are certain was written by Kashifi, has much in common with FNS. Although both works appear to reflect a Shiᶜite thrust, this does not preclude them from being pre-Safavid treatises, for we know that there was a notable Shiᶜite population in Herat during the Timurid period and the veneration of ᶜAli and his family was common to Sunnis and Shiᶜites alike during the Timurid period. Kashifi himself was accused of heresy by both Sunnis and Shiᶜites. According to Jacobs, the internal similarities between these two works add evidence that Kashifi was the author of FNS, and this may permit us to assume that the FNS is a Khurasani work from the late fifteenth–early sixteenth century. See Adam Jacobs, “Sunnī and Shīᶜī Perceptions, Boundaries and Affiliations in Late Timurid and Early Ṣafawid Persia: An Examination of Historical and Quasi–historical Narratives” (Ph.D. diss., University of London, 1999), 50–80.

7. FNS, 3–4.

8. The twentieth-century Iranian poet laureate Muhammad Taqi Bahar commented, “Futuwwat-nāmah-i Sulṭānī…is a very useful book and if we did not have it in hand, we would have lost a valuable source of information on the social history of medieval Iran which consists of the bands of futuwwat and jawānmardī or ᶜayyārī… . It is the key to all [the futuwwat treatises].” See Bahar, Muhammad, Sabk Shināsī (Tehran, 1349/1971), 3: 197–98Google Scholar.

9. Sarraf, introduction to RJ, 10, suggests that the final two chapters of Kashifi's work are the most important, while the first four chapters are extracts from earlier treatises.

10. FNS, 4, 118, 147. Abdμlbaki Gölpⲓnarlⲓ has attempted to identify some of the sources used by Kashifi and also gives a brief summary of the FNS. Abdμlbaki Gölpⲓnarlⲓ, “Fμtμvvet Nâma-yi Sultânî ve Fμtμvvet Hakkⲓnda Bâzi Notlar,” Iktisat Fakμltesi Mecmuasⲓ 17–19 (1955–58): 125–55. Gölpⲓnarlⲓ concludes that Kashifi must have seen the Ottoman work, Miftāḥ al-Daqāᵓiq, also known as the Great Futuwwat-nāmah (dated 931/1524), by Sayyid Mehmed b. Sayyid ᶜAlaᵓ al-Din al-Husayni al-Rizawi. According to Gölpⲓnarlⲓ, all the customs and rituals of futuwwat mentioned in FNS were already recorded in Miftāḥ al-Daqāᵓiq (Ibid., 132). For an overview of the work, see Taeschner, “Futuwwa: Post-Mongol period,” 967.

11. For an example, see the Futuwwat-nāmah–yi chītsāzān (makers of calico textiles) in RJ, 225–39. M. Gavrilov published in Russian translation a collection of such Persian treatises—see M. Gavrilov, “O remeslennykh tsekhakh Srednei Azii i ikh statutakh–risolia” [On crafts guilds in Central Asia and their statutes/risala], Izvestiia Sredneaziatskogo komiteta po delam muzeev i okhrany pamiatnikov stariny, iskusstva i prirody (Tashkent, 1928), 3: 223–41.

12. FNS, 7, 332, 352.

13. FNS, 207.

14. Cahen, “Futuwwa,” 963.

15. FNS, 101.

16. For general discussions of the Naqshbandi order, see Paul, Jμrgen, Doctrine and Organization: The Khwajagan/Naqshbandiya in the First Generation after Baha’uddin (Berlin: ANOR, 1998)Google Scholar; Paul, Die politische und soziale Bedeutung; and Algar, Hamid, “The Naqshbandi Order: A Preliminary Survey of its History and Significance,” Studia Islamica 42 (1976): 123–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17. Fakhr al-Din ᶜAli b. Husayn Vaᶜiz Kashifi, Rashaḥāt-i ᶜayn al-ḥayāt (hereafter RAH), ed. ᶜAli Asghar Muᶜiniyan, 2 vols. (Tehran, 1970), 1: 38–47.

18. Algar, “The Naqshbandi Order,” 137–41.

19. Nur al-Din ᶜAbd al-Rahman Jami, Nafaḥāt al-uns, ed. Muhammad Duᶜabadi (Tehran, 1370/1991), 391. ᶜAli Safi offers a similar definition of “khalwat dar anjuman” (RAH, 1: 42 and 213).

20. FNS, 13.

21. Jami, Nafaḥāt al-uns, 392.

22. Algar argues that “khalwat dar anjuman or solitude within society proceeds from the recognition that seclusion from society for the purpose of devotion leads paradoxically to an exaltation of the ego, which is far more effectively effaced through a certain mode of existence and activity within society, inspired by devotion to God. Insofar as the Naqshbandis regard their path as being that of the first generation of Muslims, they must also seek to emulate the combination of intense outward activity and inward devotion and tranquility.” See Algar, “The Naqshbandi Order,” 133–34.

23. See Gross, Jo-Ann, “The Economic Status of a Timurid Sufi Shaikh: A Matter of Conflict or Perception?” Iranian Studies 21 (1988): 90CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also idem, “Multiple Roles and Perceptions of a Sufi Shaikh: Symbolic Statements of Political and Religious Authority,” in Naqshbandis: Historical Developments and Present Situation of a Muslim Mystical Order, ed. Marc Gaborieau, Alexandre Popovic, and Thierry Zarcone (Istanbul and Paris, 1990), 109–21.

24. Paul, Doctrine and Organization, 48–51. On Khwaja Muhammad Parsa, see Maria Eva Subtelny, “The Making of Bukhārā–yi Sharīf: Scholars, Books and Libraries in Medieval Bukhara (The Library of Khwāja Muḥammad Pārsā),” in Studies on Central Asian History in Honor of Yuri Bregel, ed. Devin DeWeese (Bloomington, 2001), 82–91.

25. A. E. Affifi, The Mystical Philosophy of Muhyid Din Ibn al-Arabi (Cambridge, 1939), 10–12.

26. Affifi, Mystical Philosophy, 15–16.

27. Quoted in Chittick, William, The Self Disclosure of God (New York, 1998), 5, 21–22, 70Google Scholar.

28. Affifi, Mystical Philosophy, 47–52.

29. FNS, 108. Kashifi quotes the Qur’anic verse (33:72), “We offered the trust unto the heavens and the earth.”

30. Qur’an 7: 172.

31. See Shams al-Din Muhammad Hafiz (d. 792/1390), Dīwān, ed. Muhammad Qazwini and Qasim Ghani (Tehran, 1983), 125. The verse from Hafiz reads: “The heavens could not bear the burden of trust/They threw the dice and it fell on me, the fool.”

32. FNS, 11. Kashifi uses different terms to refer to the Primordial Covenant: the covenant of Allah (ᶜahd-i Allāh), the covenant of creation (ᶜahd-i fiṭrat) (FNS, 23), the covenant of love (ᶜahd-i maḥabbat) (FNS, 44, 47), and rūz-i alast (FNS, 11, 34, 38, 115).

33. FNS, 43.

34. FNS, 7.

35. FNS, 193.

36. FNS, 178.

37. F. Gabrieli, “Adab,” EI ², 1: 175. See also R. Waltzer and H.A.R. Gibb, “Akhlāq,” EI ², 1: 325.

38. D. J. Khalegi–Motlagh, “Adab,” EIr, 1: 431–32. For a thorough analysis of pre–Islamic Iranian adab and its literature, see Charles–Henri de Fouchécour, Moralia: Les notions morales dans la littérature persane (Paris, 1986), 24–112.

39. Lapidus, Ira M., “Knowledge, Virtue and Action,” in Moral Conduct: The Place of Adab in South Asian Islam, ed. Metcalf, Barbara (California, 1984), 38–40Google Scholar; and Gabrieli, “Adab,” 175–76.

40. FNS, 43.

41. FNS, 207.

42. FNS, 207.

43. FNS, 8.

44. FNS, 12.

45. Qur’an 2: 207, cited by Kashifi, FNS, 22 as Qur’an 2: 203.

46. FNS, 9–10, 17.

47. FNS, 10. The fourteenth-century Persian writers on futuwwat had expressed much the same idea. Kashani, whom Kashifi cites as one of his sources, devoted much of his treatise to the same issue: “[The goal] of human nature is to be freed from the power of sensual (nafsānī) attributes and the powerful tyranny of the body, and to return it to its original state… .Futuwwat is the appearance of the light of human nature…and its starting point is the cleansing of the nafs and the purification of the heart” (Kashani, RJ, 14–15). Amuli began his treatise on a similar note: “The science of futuwwat consists of the inner knowledge of the quality of the light of human nature and its power over the darkness of carnal desires so that moral virtues reign supreme and evil character is totally cut off” (Amuli, RJ, 59.)

48. FNS, 10, 12.

49. FNS, 42.

50. FNS, 10, 13, 33.

51. FNS, 10–11.

52. “Dil” (literally: heart) is a technical term in Islamic mysticism referring to the organ of perception and self-realization. The Persian writers on futuwwat use dil in this technical meaning. Ibn ᶜArabi stated that when one becomes aware that ultimate Reality is God and the phenomenal world is but a veil of the Divine Reality, he has reached self-realization and hence, is a fatā. See al-Sulami, Ibn al-Husayn, Kitab al-Futuwwah (The Way of Sufi Chivalry), trans. al-Jerrahi, Tosun Bayrak (Vermont, 1983), Introduction and 26–27Google Scholar.

53. FNS, 17.

54. Goldziher, Ignaz, Muslim Studies, 2 vols., ed. Stern, S. M. (London, 1967–71), 1: 27–30Google Scholar. Goldziher contrasts the Arab pagans’ delight in wine and women with Muhammad's message of self-restraint and abstinence. For a brief overview on the differences between pre-Islamic and Islamic muruwwat, see B. Farès, “Murūᵓa,” EI ², 7: 638.

55. Kashani, RJ, 20, 48; Amuli, RJ, 70;+- and FNS, 14.

56. Toshihiko Izutsu, God and Man in the Koran (Tokyo, 1964), 201–205. See also Lapidus, “Knowledge, Virtue and Action,” 40–43.

57. FNS, 26, 32, 46, 53.

58. FNS, 43.

59. FNS, 207.

60. FNS, 24–26; Suhrawardi, RJ, 94–98.

61. FNS, 26–27; Farid al-Din ᶜAttar, Dīwān-i ᶜAṭṭār, ed. Saᶜid Nafisi (Tehran, 1339/1960), 92–95. It is interesting to note that in the thirteenth- or fourteenth-century popular romance, Samak-i ᶜAyyār, the warriors agree that there are seventy–two codes of jawānmardī. Faramarz bin Khudadad bin Abdullah al-Katib al-Arjani, Samak-i ᶜAyyār, 6 vols., ed. Parwiz Natil Khanlari (Tehran,1362/1983–1364/1985), 1: 26. The Grail knighthood of Christian Europe had a similar code of seventy-two rules. Mahmud Shelton, introduction, The Royal Book of Spiritual Chivalry, xxv–xxvi.

62. Kashani, RJ, 17; Amuli, RJ, 67. See also Yusuf Karkahri's six maxims, “Futuwwatn āmah,” RJ, 221.

63. FNS, 208.

64. FNS, 261.

65. Suhrawardi, RJ, 120.

66. Suhrawardi, RJ, 120.

67. Paul, Die politische und soziale Bedeutung, 39.

68. FNS, 207.

69. FNS, 250.

70. RAH, 2: 409.

71. RAH, 2: 409.

72. FNS, 226–27.

73. RAH, 2: 409–11. Bahaᵓ al-Din apparently was so exact in his behavior that he even expressed politeness to animals by asking leave of them. Paul, Die politische und soziale Bedeutung, 35.

74. Kashani, RJ, 49.

75. FNS, 224.

76. FNS, 245.

77. FNS, 266.

78. The traditional jawānmard was expected to carry a ladle and a broom to demonstrate that he was ready for any form of service, including sweeping floors and cooking meals. Ghulam Haydar, ᶜAyyārān wa kākā-hā-yi Khurāsān-zamīn dar gustārah-i tārīkh (Kabul, 1365/1986), 4.

79. FNS, 263–68.

80. FNS, 217.

81. Samak-i ᶜAyyār, 1: 29.

82. FNS, 20–21.

83. Kashani, RJ, 9.

84. Suhrawardi, RJ, 164.

85. FNS, 233.

86. FNS, 248–49.

87. For a discussion of the etymology of the term sirwāl and shalwār, see W. Björkman, “Sirwāl,” EI ², 9: 676.

88. Kashani, RJ, 16.

89. Zarkub, RJ, 196.

90. Hamadani, “Risāla–i Futuwwatiyya,” Mīr Sayyid ᶜAlī Hamadānī, 344.

91. FNS, 7. See also Suhrawardi, RJ, 94. Kashifi also devotes a lengthy section explaining the spiritual meaning of the Sufi robe (khirqa) and the code for wearing it—see FNS, 151–71.

92. Zarkub, RJ, 196.

93. FNS, 113. A similar story is related from the Ottoman tradition. See Mehmet Zeki Pakalⲓn, Osmanlⲓ Tarih Deyimleri ve Terimleri Sözlμǧμ (Istanbul, 1971), 3: 314–15.

94. FNS, 113–14. For another version of this myth written in verse form some thirty years after the fall of Baghdad, see Nasiri, Mawlana, Futuwwat-nāmah-i Mawlānā Nāṣirī, ed. Taeschner, Franz (Leipzig, 1944), 35–37Google Scholar, 487–553. In approximately 800 lines, the text outlines the initiation ceremony with its three ritual items—the goblet, the shalwār and the shadd—which had already become institutionalized in the reforms of al-Nasir.

95. Zarkub, RJ, 196.

96. FNS, 25.

97. Kashifi, however, devotes an entire section of his treatise to discussing cloaks and their colors, different types of headgear and other attire worn by tradesmen and artisans. Rather than censuring the apparel, some of which appears to be quite luxurious and ornate—fancy embroidered cloaks, silver and gold threaded cloaks, fluffed-up laced cloaks, for a total of fourteen different types (FNS, 172–81)—he provides ethical and mystical interpretations of each item of attire, which corresponds to the intent of the treatise. See FNS, 172–204.

98. FNS, 97.

99. FNS, 11, 34, 38, 115.

100. FNS, 11. See also FNS, 23.

101. FNS, 100–101.

102. FNS, 23.

103. Zakeri, Mohsen, Sasanid Soldiers in Early Muslim Society: The Origins of ᶜAyyārān and Futuwwa (Wiesbaden, 1995), 309Google Scholar.

104. Rosalind O’Hanlon, “Manliness and Imperial Service in Mughal North India,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 42.1 (1992): 64.

105. Zakeri, Sasanid Soldiers, 76–78. The Persian terms for soldier, jānsipār (“one who give's one's life”), jānbāz (“one who plays with one's life”) and sarbāz (“one who plays with his head”), all denote complete sacrifice to one's master.

106. FNS, 102–103.

107. In the seventeenth–century ode to the wrestler Gul–Kushti, wrestlers are described as cheering each other on with the slogan “shadd kun” (Cry out!) as they exercised in the zūrkhānah (house of strength). Mir Nijat, (Mir Abdul Al), in Tārīkh-i Warzish-i Bāstān-i Īrān, ed. Husayn Partaw Bayzaᵓi (Tehran, 1337/1958), 397. See also Dihkhuda, Lughat-nāmah, 12: 510.

108. FNS, 103.

109. FNS, 111–12.

110. Amuli, RJ, 77. Although the zunnār was the belt or cord worn by Eastern Christians and Jews, the early Arab historian al-Masᶜudi (d. 345/956) identified the Zoroastrian shadd as the same as the Christian zunnār. Zakeri, Sasanid Soldiers, 309. It seems that, by the fourteenth century, there was a clear distinction between clothing worn by adherents of the different religions.

111. FNS, 106–10. See also “Futuwwat-nāmah-i chītsāzān,” RJ, 225–39.

112. FNS, 136–37. For the Ottoman practice of girding initiates into guilds, see Pakalⲓn, Osmanlⲓ Tarih Deyimleri ve Terimleri Sözlμǧμ, 3: 314. The Sufi orders, Rifaᶜi, Saᶜidi and Bedevi all practiced the ritual tying of the sash (shedd baπlamak) with great celebration. Similarly, artisans and craftsmen would initiate new members by girding an apprentice with this sash. For further examples of girding, see the fifteenth-century work on Aqquyunlu rule in Anatolia, Abu Bakr-i Tehrani, Kitāb-i Diyārbakriyya: Ak-koyunlular Tarihi (Ankara, 1993), 253–54; and Woods, John E., The Aqquyunlu: Clan, Confederation, Empire—A Study in 15th/9th Century Turko-Iranian Politics (Chicago, 1976), 95–96Google Scholar. A similar initiation rite in nineteenthcentury Egypt is described in Lane's work, indicating how universal the ceremonial process and, specifically, the sash, had become since the medieval period—see Lane, E. W., An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians: Written in Egypt during the years 1833–1835 (New York, 1890), 472–73Google Scholar.

113. FNS, 141.

114. Mahjub, introduction to FNS, 48. See Kashani's detailed discussion in RJ, 13–14.

115. FNS, 140.

116. FNS, 85, 99, 133.

117. FNS, 118–21. Kashifi offers the traditional Shiᶜite Muslim interpretation of the event of Ghadir Khumm where Muhammad is said to have publicly named ᶜAli as his successor upon his return from his final pilgrimage. The tradition is based on the utterance, “He of whom I am the mawlā (patron), of him ᶜAli is also the mawlā.” Kashifi incorporates the utterance into the original girding of ᶜAli where he took on the mantle of futuwwat from the Prophet. See L. Veccia Vaglieri, “Ghadir Khumm,” EI ², 2: 993–94; and I. K. Poonawala, “ᶜAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661),” EIr, 1: 839.

118. FNS, 128–30. Irene Mélikoff discusses a ḥalwa banquet during the twentieth century with sacred significance rooted in the traditions of medieval Turkey—see Irene Mélikoff, “Le Rituel du Helva,” Der Islam 39 (1964): 180–91. Ḥalwa still carries religious significance in many Middle Eastern cultures.

119. FNS, 139.

120. Note the brief sixteenth-century treatise, Futuwwat-nāmah-i chītsāzān, devoted specifically to the makers of calico textiles. The premise for writing the text is much the same—to explain the spiritual meaning of the craft in order to reform the craftsmen themselves. See “Futuwwat-nāmah-i chītsāzān,” in RJ, 226–39.

121. RAH, 2: 622.

122. RAH, 2: 457.

123. RAH, 1: 287. See also Paul, Die politische und soziale Bedeutung, 39–40.

124. FNS, 260–61.

125. FNS, 261. For Kashifi's reliance on the ideas of Nasir al-Din Tusi and his Akhlāq-i Nāṣirī, see the article by Maria Subtelny in this volume, 604ff.

126. Paul, Die politische und soziale Bedeutung, 41–47. See also Mukminova, R. G., “Craftsmen and Guild Life in Samarqand,” in Timurid Art and Culture: Iran and Central Asia in the Fifteenth Century, ed. Subtelny, M. and Golombek, L. (Leiden, 1992), 29–35Google Scholar.

127. Paul, Die politische und soziale Bedeutung, 46–47.

128. FNS, 280.

129. FNS, 292, 297, 302, 310, 314, and 360.

130. Kashifi's section seven on the implement professions is incomplete (FNS, 345–93). For a further discussion of Kashifi's sections and chapters, see Mahjub, FNS, 345, n. 1 and FNS, 393, n. 2. Jay Cook provides a detailed outline of all the performers and trades in his English translation, The Royal Book of Spiritual Chivalry, v–xvi. See also Savory, R. M., “Communication,” Der Islam 38 (1962)Google Scholar.

131. Samak-i ᶜAyyār, 1: 142, 156, 214, 236, 303.

132. RAH, 2: 516–17.

133. Calmard, Jean, “Shiᶜi Rituals and Power,” in Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society, ed. Melville, Charles (New York, 1996), 140Google Scholar.

134. FNS, 275–76.

135. FNS, 328.

136. FNS, 20.

137. FNS, 277. This is very similar to the code in secular jawānmardī–to please the public: “The preeminent code of jawānmardī is to carry out the desires of people.” Samak-i ᶜAyyār, 1: 346.

138. FNS, 276.

139. FNS, 333.

140. FNS, 276. See also FNS, 279.

141. FNS, 332.

142. FNS, 352.

143. FNS, 335–36.

144. FNS, 284.

145. FNS, 278–79.

146. RAH, 2: 481–82.

147. Paul, Die politische und soziale Bedeutung, 38.

148. Note ᶜAli Safi's account of how the darwīsh was expected to express his spirituality through his profession, RAH, 2: 618–19.

149. FNS, 307.

150. FNS, 341. The chest (ṣandūq) was the puppeteer's box from which he drew his puppets and to which he returned them. This notion that God is the Divine Puppeteer who creates the stage and puppets, and eventually puts all his puppets back into the chest of unity is an important theme in Farid al-Din ᶜAttar's allegory, Ushtur-nāmah. See Annemarie Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam (North Carolina, 1975), 191, 278; also H. Ritter, “ᶜAṭṭār,” EI ², 1: 754.

151. FNS, 322–23.

152. FNS, 350–52.

153. FNS, 355.

154. FNS, 357.

155. FNS, 359.

156. FNS, 364.

157. FNS, 368.

158. FNS, 387–89.

159. The Turkish Futuwwat-nāmah by Evliya Çelebi lists the professions of the prophets. See Dankoff, Robert and Kreiser, Klaus, Materialien zu Evliya Çelebi, II. A Guide to the Seyahatname of Evliya Çelebi—Bibliographie raisonnée (Wiesbaden, 1992), 9Google Scholar.

160. FNS, 41; also FNS, 70. Suhrawardi relates the same story—see Suhrawardi, RJ, 91.

161. To this day, some weavers in the Iranian world consider Seth the “father” of their profession.

162. FNS, 372.

163. FNS, 295.

164. FNS, 42; also FNS, 48, 53, 78–79 (3x), 161, 200.

165. Qābūs-nāmah, 258–59.