The Sufi and the Friar: A Mystical Account of Two Men in the Abode of Islam by Minlib Dallh

Abstract

Reviewed by: The Sufi and the Friar: A Mystical Account of Two Men in the Abode of Islam by Minlib Dallh Christian Krokus Minlib Dallh, The Sufi and the Friar: A Mystical Account of Two Men in the Abode of Islam. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2017. Pp. 214. $85.00, cloth; $20.95, paper. Though Serge de Beaurecueil (1917–2005) is less known than his co-founders of the Institut dominicain d’etudes orientales (IDEO), Georges Anawati and Jacques Jomier, he deserves equally serious attention. This is the first book-length scholarly account in English of Beaurecueil’s life and work, an important contribution to ressourcement in Catholic-Muslim dialogue and comparative theology. Chapter 1 reviews Beaurecueil’s life-curve, from his childhood of “wounded privilege” through his early Dominican years and discovery of Khwaja ‘Abdullah Ansari of Herat (1006–88), the subject of Beaurecueil’s doctoral theses and decades-long scholarship (p. 18). Chapter 2 introduces the life and thought of the Hanbali Sufi Ansari, including an overview of medieval Khorasani mysticism. Beaurecueil visited Ansari’s tomb at Herat, Afghanistan, and eventually left IDEO at Cairo for the University of Kabul. His interest transcended the scholarly-intellectual; mysteriously, Ansari and Beaurecueil shared a master-disciple relationship across time that Dallh presents sympathetically without explaining entirely. The contrast between the personalities of Beaureceuil and Ansari is striking. Ansari was a combative apologist for literal interpretation of the Qur’ān and Sunna. He rejected so-called drunken Sufism and the veneration of saints, while the conciliatory Beaurecueil venerated Ansari’s tomb and engaged the Muslim master in spiritual conversation and discipleship. [End Page 470] Chapter 3 presents Beaurecueil’s scholarship, which consisted of critical-historical manuscript authentication, translation, and thematic analysis of Ansari’s three major spiritual treatises: Sad Maydan (The Hundred Fields), Manazil (The Stages of the Wayfarers), and Munajat (Cris du Coeur). Beaurecueil’s historical-contextual training at Le Saulchoir becomes evident. Chapter 4 reviews Beaurecueil’s voluntary “downward mobility” from university professor to organizer of the Maison d’Abraham, a Kabul orphanage that was his most significant apostolate (p. 99). Beaurecueil’s scholarship was rigorous but, nonetheless, dependent upon prayer and mystical relationship with Ansari. He left academia for the ordinary life of his Afghan neighbors partly because he met Ghaffar, who offered to “share bread and salt . . . once at your house and another time at mine and we will be friends forever” (p. 118). Such distinctive openness to the teachings, culture, and people of Islam brought creative results. For example, Beaurecueil incorporated sayings of Ansari at his celebration of the eucharist and the office (p. 79). It also created doctrinal tension that Beaurecueil never reconciled, and it raised painful doubts about the worthwhileness of living as an isolated Dominican priest among Muslims: “At sixty, here I am: no habit, no liturgy of the hours and I live [a] thousand miles away from my priory of assignment (Beirut), which I have not seen in years. Here, I am overwhelmed by my profane work . . . nothing like what I first had in mind. . . . Ironically, I feel right at home. Am I faithful?” (p. 104). The doubts were fruitful, however, resulting in praxis mystica that teaches the church much about inculturation among Muslims (p. 14). While the subtitle mentions “two men,” it could mention three; Dallh shows how pervasive was Louis Massignon’s influence upon Beaurecueil as model and mentor. The book is highly recommended to anyone seeking rejuvenation of Catholic-Muslim understanding. Christian Krokus University of Scranton, Scranton, PA Copyright © 2019 Journal of Ecumenical Studies