Both the Khw?jag?n/Naqshband? ?ar?qa and the Shaykhs of J?m, the descendants of A?mad-i J?m (d. 1141), have been well-known for developing antagonistic relationships and tense rivalries with other Sufi groups.  But despite a number of potential areas of conflict, all the evidence indicates that when representatives of the Naqshband? ?ar?qa encountered and dealt with the Shaykhs of J?m (and vice-versa), they treated each other with respect and admiration. In fact, members of the two groups developed strong ties and studied with one-another, with some of the Shaykhs of J?m even “joining” the Naqshband?s. Based on my research of the sources important to the traditions of the Naqshbandiyya and the Shaykhs of J?m, particularly from the fourteenth to the early sixteenth centuries, my paper investigates the phenomenon of Sufi rivalries in Khur?s?n and Central Asia by looking at a case of how the potential for rivalry did not precipitate. In doing so, my study helps to reveal other important aspects in the history of both the Naqshbandiyya and the Shaykhs of J?m. Exploring how the two groups did not develop into rivals, despite the fact that an early hagiographer of A?mad-i J?m seems to pick a fight with an early ancestor of the Khw?jag?n, shows that the development of these two groups’ silsila-consciousness was a gradual development. This comparison of the two groups’ silsilas also highlights the different “objects” of transmission (the dhikr for the Naqshbandiyya and the khirqa for the Shaykhs of J?m) which made the two into quite different Sufi organizations. The constraints and advantages of these two types of organization help to explain both how the Naqshbandiyya could become so popular and also so amicable towards the Shaykhs of J?m.

Mawl?n? ‘Al?’ al-D?n al-Abizh? al-Quhistan?, or Mu?ammad b. Mu?ammad b. Mu’min al-Abizh? al-Quhistan?, but more often known in the sources simply as Mawl?n? ‘Al?’ al-D?n 'Maktabdar' ('the Schoolteacher') was one of the followers of the 15th-century Naqshbandi shaykh Sa?d al-D?n al-K?shghar?. Although noted by the main historians of the time and described in the major hagiographies of the order, he has not been studied in his own right. However, one of his followers wrote a hagiography - the Raw?at al-s?lik?n - about him, which exists in only a handful of copies. It is thus a relatively untapped source for the study of the Naqshbandiyya in this period, and is important because it sheds light on a figure who has been treated as rather peripheral, although in fact he assumed a very prominent role in the leadership of the Naqshbandiyya after the death of Shaykh Sa'd al-Din in 1453. The work, when read in conjunction with other sources for the order in this period, places Mawlana 'Ala' al-Din at the center of religious life in Herat in the second half of the 15th century, and reveals that here was a figure who assumed as much importance as his direct contemporary Nur al-Din 'Abd al-Rahman Jami.

In this essay I will explore a hitherto largely unstudied aspect of the religious history of Afghanistan and Central Asia in the early modern period, namely the re-emergence of a Naqshband? Sufi community in the city and region of Herat beginning in the mid-18th century. While the history of the Naqshband?yah in Herat in the Timurid period has received a considerable amount of scholarly attention, and while some notice has been given to contemporary Naqshband? and Sufi communities in the region, thus far the religious history of this region in the 18th and 19th centuries has remained largely unexplored. The material for this essay will be primarily drawn from an early 20th-century text titled the Ris?lah-i Maz?r?t-i Hir?t, or “Treatise on the Shrines of Herat.” This work is a hagiographical compendium and shrine guide focusing on 35 prominent Sufi figures associated with the region of Herat, most of whom lived between the mid-18th and early 20th centuries. Aside from this text, this paper draws upon a number of additional biographical and historical sources produced in Afghanistan, Central Asia and India in the 18th and 19th centuries. I argue in this paper that the reappearance of the Naqshband?yah in Herat after two centuries of its suppression under Safavid rule should not be understood as a mere re-emergence or continuation of an older spiritual structure. Rather, this phenomenon should be viewed within the context of the development and expansion of the newer Mujaddid? formulation of the Naqshband?yah. While the earlier Naqshband? community in 15th and early 16th century Herat could be viewed as an extension of the Central Asian Naqshband?yah, the 18th century appearance ultimately traced its origins to the Indian subcontinent, primarily through the figure of A?mad Sirhind? and his disciples, and demonstrated only the most tenuous connections with the older Naqshband? community within the region. At the same time, the sources examined here indicate that this movement in Herat was by no means exclusively or even predominately associated with a Naqshband? identity. Rather, the spiritual and familial lineages presented within these biographical accounts demonstrate a multitude of affiliations and “bundled silsilahs.” Ultimately, this paper will seek to address a number of issues of importance both for the religious history of Central Asia and Afghanistan, as well as for understanding the development and spread of the Naqshband?yah in the early modern period.

Although the impact of the Naqshband? Sufi tradition on Central Asian society has been acknowledged, its history in the 19th century still remains almost untouched. This study intends to fill this gap by focusing on the Naqshband? tradition under the Am?r Na?rull?h’s reign, who ruled the Bukharan Manghit dynasty from the year 1827 to 1860. In order to assess the influence that the Naqshband? tradition wielded at the court of the ruler, several historical narratives and religious works, which primarily remain in manuscript form, were investigated for this paper. My conclusion is that the influence of the Naqshband?yah on Am?r Na?rull?h’s reign was substantial but multifaceted. According to the Fat?namah-i Sul??n?, one of the historical chronicles produced at Am?r Na?rull?h’s court, the contacts with the Naqshband? tradition contributed to strengthening Am?r Na?rull?h’s legitimacy, not only during the period of succession struggle, but also after his enthronement. He appears in this source as a pious ruler who adhered to the veneration of the shrine of Bah? ad-d?n Naqshband. Apart from the rites of the shrine, Naqshband?ya Mujaddid?ya khalif?hs and other khw?jahs of different lineages also influenced Am?r Na?rull?h. One of the most important features in his rule was the strict observance of shar?‘ah. This observance also served to strengthen sovereign power by allowing him to punish amirs and other officials who tended not to observe shar?‘ah. However, Am?r Na?rull?h’s emphasis on the observance of shar?‘ah law did not guarantee that his own personal inclination was regulated by shar?‘ah. Rather, the ruler was described in some sources as inconsistent in his morality, and was remembered with a negative evaluation. I argue that this ambivalent approach in the sources was related to the long-standing debate within the Naqshband?yah over the practice of the dhikr-i jahr, or the vocal dhikr, as well as other rites that appealed more to the common people.