Before Homosexuality in the Arab-Islamic World, 1500-1800 (13 page)
Read Before Homosexuality in the Arab-Islamic World, 1500-1800 Online
Authors: Khaled El-Rouayheb
BOOK: Before Homosexuality in the Arab-Islamic World, 1500-1800
9.09Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
CHAPTER TWO
Aesthetes
The Damascene poet Abū Bakr al-‘Umarī (d. 1638) was, according to a near-contemporary anthology of poets by Yusuf al-Badīʿī (d. 1662/3), inclined toward the “turbaned” (male) rather than the “veiled” (female) beloved, and was once apprehended with a beardless boy “in a state which it would be vile to call by its vile name.” The two culprits were subsequently pilloried by being dragged through the market places of the city. In his great biographical dictionary of the notables of the eleventh century of the Muslim era (1591—1688), the Damascene scholar Muhammad Amīn al-Muhibbī(d. 1699) quoted Badīʿīʾs passage in his entry on ʿUmarī, only to add:
I have inquired about this report from among those who knew al-ʿUmarī and did not find any traces of it, and in my opinion it is probably a slander ... True, al-ʿUmarī had a character that was inclined to beauty (
mayyāl li-al-jamāl
), and an inclination is potentially suspicious to those who vie in the field [i.e., rivals]. In short, a story such as this is related only in order to show it to be groundless ... The sum of the matter is that al-ʿUmarī was among the accomplished of his age and the outstanding of his time.
1
In presenting ʿUmarī as an aesthete rather than a pederast, Muhibbī did not want to imply that the poet would not be attracted to boys. Quite the contrary, many boys were considered to be handsome, and an anecdote that Muhibbī quoted from ʿUmarīʾs own collection of poetry has him sitting with a friend in a coffeehouse admiring one of them.
2
However, by recasting the object of ʿUmarīʾs inclination as beauty rather than boys, Muhibbī succeeded in presenting him in a more positive light. The phrase “he inclines to boys,” being equivalent to the ordinary, nontechnical meaning of the term
Lūtī,
had negative connotations. An inclination to beauty, by contrast, though it might make its possessor vulnerable to malicious rumors circulated by jealous rivals, was perceived as unobjectionable in itself. Muhibbī attributed it to several other persons, including close friends and relatives, and in contexts that indicate that he did not regard it as a negative trait: “gentle-mannered, of much beneficence to his students, a sincere, guiding teacher ... an elementary student would make a trite point and he would oblige him and listen to it as if he had not heard it before, and he was an aesthete
(jamālī)
in all his affairs, by character in love with beauty (
yuḥibb al-jamāl
), and he was diligent in conveying kindness and goodness to everyone in need”; “he would mention original witticisms and refined poetry, and mastered the Turkish language, and was enamored of beauty
(mughram bi-al-jamāl)
and spent his whole life in sprightfulness and joy and so was never seen except happy and smiling, and he was munificent and pious, fasting on most days.ʾʾ
3
Other occurrences of the phrase in the biographical literature are usually equally devoid of negative connotations.
4
Indeed, Muhibbīʾs distinction between a commendable aesthetic sense and a reprehensible sexual interest was conventional rather than idiosyncratic. One of the most influential Islamic theologians, Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī (d. IIII), in his seminal work
Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn,
which was widely read, quoted, and commented upon in the period under study, insisted on the distinction between the appreciation of beauty and carnal lust :
2
However, by recasting the object of ʿUmarīʾs inclination as beauty rather than boys, Muhibbī succeeded in presenting him in a more positive light. The phrase “he inclines to boys,” being equivalent to the ordinary, nontechnical meaning of the term
Lūtī,
had negative connotations. An inclination to beauty, by contrast, though it might make its possessor vulnerable to malicious rumors circulated by jealous rivals, was perceived as unobjectionable in itself. Muhibbī attributed it to several other persons, including close friends and relatives, and in contexts that indicate that he did not regard it as a negative trait: “gentle-mannered, of much beneficence to his students, a sincere, guiding teacher ... an elementary student would make a trite point and he would oblige him and listen to it as if he had not heard it before, and he was an aesthete
(jamālī)
in all his affairs, by character in love with beauty (
yuḥibb al-jamāl
), and he was diligent in conveying kindness and goodness to everyone in need”; “he would mention original witticisms and refined poetry, and mastered the Turkish language, and was enamored of beauty
(mughram bi-al-jamāl)
and spent his whole life in sprightfulness and joy and so was never seen except happy and smiling, and he was munificent and pious, fasting on most days.ʾʾ
3
Other occurrences of the phrase in the biographical literature are usually equally devoid of negative connotations.
4
Indeed, Muhibbīʾs distinction between a commendable aesthetic sense and a reprehensible sexual interest was conventional rather than idiosyncratic. One of the most influential Islamic theologians, Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī (d. IIII), in his seminal work
Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn,
which was widely read, quoted, and commented upon in the period under study, insisted on the distinction between the appreciation of beauty and carnal lust :
Do not think that the love of beautiful forms
(ḥubb al-ṣuwar al-jamīlah)
is only conceivable with an eye toward satisfying carnal desire, for satisfying carnal desire is a distinct pleasure that
may
be associated with the love of beautiful forms, but the perception of beauty in itself is also pleasurable and so may be loved for its own sake. How can this be denied, when greenery and flowing water are loved, not with an eye toward drinking the water or eating the greenery or to obtain anything else besides the looking itself?
5
The chaste love of beauty is a recurrent theme in the collection of poetry of the Egyptian scholar and Rector of the Azhar, ʿAbdallah al-Shabrāwī (d. 1758). At one point, for example, he said:
I fancy you, you handsome thing, but God knows it is with no ulterior motive.I have a chaste conscience, and my soul abhors in love any trait which would displease God ...My creed is to love beauty, and whenever a gazelle appears I fancy him at first sight.
6
The same contrast between love of beauty and lust is presupposed in the following lines of verse, in which the scholar Ismāʿīl al-Nābulusī (d. 1585), who was mentioned in the previous chapter in connection with an accusation of sodomy, denounced a contemporary:
Judge ʿAlī is but a person who inclines to nothing but
liwäṭ.So he does not love an upright physique, nor is he captivated by a dark-lashed eye.But he who has a behind and presents it, is for him the handsome and beautiful.
7
The literature of the period clearly shows that boys as well as girls could be described as having “an upright physique”
(qadd qawīm)
and “dark-lashed eyes”
(ṭarf kaḥīl).
8
The poem, in denouncing
liwāṭ,
is therefore not condemning those who would be attracted to these qualities in either sex, but asserts that the judge, because of his lewdness, does not belong to their rank. Scholars who did not mince their words in condemning
liwāṭ
could very well express their own fascination with the beauty of a particular beardless boy. For example, Hasan al-Būrīnī condemned the above-mentioned mercenary
Sakbān
in the following terms: “Most of them commit the act of the people of Lot, ever falling [in merit] to the lowest levels of Hell.ʾʾ He also indignantly rejected the rumor according to which an acquaintance of his was inclined to ”the males of humanity
(al-dhukrān min al-ʿālamīn),ʾʾ
an expression used by the Qurʾan of the people of Lot.
9
Yet, on several occasions in his biographical dictionary, he dwelled on the attractiveness of certain youths: “upon my life! the beloved was [as] a succulent twig, and a full, radiant moon”; “he was extremely beautiful, like the full moon on the night of the fourteenth [of the Muslim lunar month], and as to his physique, it eclipses a tender branch”; “he was of a beauty that exceeds the moon in its radiance, and the garden as it flourishes in its bloom.ʾʾ
10
Such venting of aesthetic appreciation abounds in the literature and could, in contradistinction to the ʿʿinclination to boys,” hardly have been regarded as discreditable by their authors. Ahmad ibn al-Mulla (d. 1594/5), Aleppine scholar and historian, apparently had no compunctions in expressing his enthrallment with a boy he happened to see in the vicinity of the town of Shayzar: “a gazelle fawn, my heart flew toward him only to find a predator between his eye-lids; a beauty who shone like the moon in its fullness, and who smiled, revealing teeth as ordered pearls; he was followed by a group of pretty young women, and he was playing among them as if they were houris, and he one of the boys of paradise.ʾʾ
11
The Damascene poet Darwīsh al-Tālawī (d. 1606) was equally unreserved in his praise of a youth who accompanied him and a number of friends on an outing to one of the popular garden-resorts surrounding Damascus: ”... and with us was a youth in his prime, with a graceful physique and comely cheeks, a lovable fellow called ʿAbd al-Nabī, his jasmine beauty was embellished by a rosy bloom, and its whiteness brought out the blackness of his beauty-spot.ʾʾ
12
The Iraqi scholar ʿAbdallah al-Suwaydī (d. 1761), spending some time in Damascus on his way to and from Mecca, mentioned that he had taught a youth named Muhammad some grammar during his sojourn in the city, and that the youth, who was the beloved of one of his local friends, was “in truth and by common consent, the most handsome of the handsome of Damascus; indeed I have never set eyes upon anything more handsome; he has a dazzling beauty and a radiant and bloomy countenance ... so glory be to Him who created him and formed him in the most excellent fashion.ʾʾ
13
(qadd qawīm)
and “dark-lashed eyes”
(ṭarf kaḥīl).
8
The poem, in denouncing
liwāṭ,
is therefore not condemning those who would be attracted to these qualities in either sex, but asserts that the judge, because of his lewdness, does not belong to their rank. Scholars who did not mince their words in condemning
liwāṭ
could very well express their own fascination with the beauty of a particular beardless boy. For example, Hasan al-Būrīnī condemned the above-mentioned mercenary
Sakbān
in the following terms: “Most of them commit the act of the people of Lot, ever falling [in merit] to the lowest levels of Hell.ʾʾ He also indignantly rejected the rumor according to which an acquaintance of his was inclined to ”the males of humanity
(al-dhukrān min al-ʿālamīn),ʾʾ
an expression used by the Qurʾan of the people of Lot.
9
Yet, on several occasions in his biographical dictionary, he dwelled on the attractiveness of certain youths: “upon my life! the beloved was [as] a succulent twig, and a full, radiant moon”; “he was extremely beautiful, like the full moon on the night of the fourteenth [of the Muslim lunar month], and as to his physique, it eclipses a tender branch”; “he was of a beauty that exceeds the moon in its radiance, and the garden as it flourishes in its bloom.ʾʾ
10
Such venting of aesthetic appreciation abounds in the literature and could, in contradistinction to the ʿʿinclination to boys,” hardly have been regarded as discreditable by their authors. Ahmad ibn al-Mulla (d. 1594/5), Aleppine scholar and historian, apparently had no compunctions in expressing his enthrallment with a boy he happened to see in the vicinity of the town of Shayzar: “a gazelle fawn, my heart flew toward him only to find a predator between his eye-lids; a beauty who shone like the moon in its fullness, and who smiled, revealing teeth as ordered pearls; he was followed by a group of pretty young women, and he was playing among them as if they were houris, and he one of the boys of paradise.ʾʾ
11
The Damascene poet Darwīsh al-Tālawī (d. 1606) was equally unreserved in his praise of a youth who accompanied him and a number of friends on an outing to one of the popular garden-resorts surrounding Damascus: ”... and with us was a youth in his prime, with a graceful physique and comely cheeks, a lovable fellow called ʿAbd al-Nabī, his jasmine beauty was embellished by a rosy bloom, and its whiteness brought out the blackness of his beauty-spot.ʾʾ
12
The Iraqi scholar ʿAbdallah al-Suwaydī (d. 1761), spending some time in Damascus on his way to and from Mecca, mentioned that he had taught a youth named Muhammad some grammar during his sojourn in the city, and that the youth, who was the beloved of one of his local friends, was “in truth and by common consent, the most handsome of the handsome of Damascus; indeed I have never set eyes upon anything more handsome; he has a dazzling beauty and a radiant and bloomy countenance ... so glory be to Him who created him and formed him in the most excellent fashion.ʾʾ
13
The difference in terms of actual behavior between “the inclination to boys” and “the inclination to beauty” need not have been particularly great, and it is clear that the two terms were often alternative ways of describing the same behavioral pattern. The Iraqi scholar ʿAbd al-Rahmān al-Suwaydī (d. 1786), son of the above-mentioned ʿAbdallah, advised chaste lovers of handsome boys not to flaunt their inclinations, since they were liable to be perceived as
lūṭīs
by less sympathetic observers. He added as a case in point: “I have seen people slander a man from among the seekers of learning, despite his piety and asceticism, and ascribe sodomy
(al-liwāṭah)
to him, because he used to say: I love beauty and adore the gazelle [i.e., the beloved].ʾʾ
14
Two notables whose pederastic love affairs were the topic of several anecdotes were described in the following terms in the biographical work of the Aleppine scholar Abū al-Wafāʾ al-ʿUrḍī (d. 1660): the poet Aḥmad al-ʿInāyātī was ”chaste in love, proverbial in excellence, resplendent in manners, covetous of those with a handsome countenance”; Ibrāhīm al-Batrūnī (d. 1642/3), a student of ʿUrḍīʾs father, ”took beauty as his creed” and was nicknamed ”the amorous
(al-gharāmī).ʾʾ
15
Yet, as underlined by such passages, the effect of the shift in terminology was to ameliorate, if not to remove completely, the negative connotations associated with the phrase “he inclines toward boys.” Ordinary life supplies numerous parallel cases in which divergent descriptions of the same behavioral pattern reveals divergent evaluations. An example was encountered in the previous chapter while discussing the different attitudes toward “screwing” and “committing sodomy.” In both instances, the cultural ambiguity tends to betray the coexistence of potentially conflicting ideals in a society. On the one hand, the behavior designated by the phrase “he loves beauty” was not readily assimilable to some widely held ideals, such as piety, asceticism, and dignified sobriety
(waqār).
There is an inkling of such a realization even among those who saw it as, on the whole, a positive trait. In the poetic anthologies and biographical dictionaries, the pursuit of beauty was conventionally attributed to the days of youth, before graying hair served as a reminder of mortality and divine judgment.
16
On the other hand, aesthetic sensitivity was implicated by a complex of ideals whose influence is abundantly attested in the writings of the period. Whether in the biographical or the belletrist literature, one constantly comes across expressions praising a character
(ṭabʿ, ḥāshiyah) mazāj, dhāt)
that is “refined,” “delicate,” or “elegant”
(laṭīf, raqīq, ẓarīf).
17
A refined or delicate character was of course recognizable by the traits exhibited by its possessor. The more important of these seem to have been urbanity, affability, wit, emotional sensibility, a taste for belles-lettres, especially poetry, and an appreciation of beauty, particularly human and floral.
18
The same evaluative ambiguity mentioned in connection with the inclination to beauty obtained in the case of the other traits belonging to the same complex. Urbanity, affability, and wit might have been regarded as positive attributes, but so were an otherworldly inclination to asceticism, solitude, austere piety, and religious moralism (“commanding the good and forbidding the bad”). Similarly, the profusion of poetry in the literature of the period leaves no doubt as to its popularity, and biographical works confirm that poetic abilities were highly prized. Yet, it was generally recognized that the Prophet—usually the model of behavior for the believers—had not said any poetry, and some of the sayings attributed to him are indeed hostile to the art. Religious jurists discussed whether secular poetry should be considered reprehensible
(makrūh),
and ascetics often abandoned the genre as part of their turning away from the transitory world.
19
The conflict of ideals was sometimes sought resolved by resorting to the idea of the mean between extremes. After mentioning one of the Prophet’s sayings which seem hostile to the art of poetry, the Damascene jurist Ibn ʿĀbidīn (d. 1836) opined that this should be understood as applying to an inordinate attachment. There was no problem with a little poetry, “if it aims at displaying witticisms, subtleties, excellent comparisons, or superior expressions, even if it is of physiques and cheeks [i.e., love poetry].ʾʾ
20
In the same spirit, a person could be praised for being of a temperate
(muʿtadil)
character, neither a shameless profligate nor a “cold” recluse.
21
lūṭīs
by less sympathetic observers. He added as a case in point: “I have seen people slander a man from among the seekers of learning, despite his piety and asceticism, and ascribe sodomy
(al-liwāṭah)
to him, because he used to say: I love beauty and adore the gazelle [i.e., the beloved].ʾʾ
14
Two notables whose pederastic love affairs were the topic of several anecdotes were described in the following terms in the biographical work of the Aleppine scholar Abū al-Wafāʾ al-ʿUrḍī (d. 1660): the poet Aḥmad al-ʿInāyātī was ”chaste in love, proverbial in excellence, resplendent in manners, covetous of those with a handsome countenance”; Ibrāhīm al-Batrūnī (d. 1642/3), a student of ʿUrḍīʾs father, ”took beauty as his creed” and was nicknamed ”the amorous
(al-gharāmī).ʾʾ
15
Yet, as underlined by such passages, the effect of the shift in terminology was to ameliorate, if not to remove completely, the negative connotations associated with the phrase “he inclines toward boys.” Ordinary life supplies numerous parallel cases in which divergent descriptions of the same behavioral pattern reveals divergent evaluations. An example was encountered in the previous chapter while discussing the different attitudes toward “screwing” and “committing sodomy.” In both instances, the cultural ambiguity tends to betray the coexistence of potentially conflicting ideals in a society. On the one hand, the behavior designated by the phrase “he loves beauty” was not readily assimilable to some widely held ideals, such as piety, asceticism, and dignified sobriety
(waqār).
There is an inkling of such a realization even among those who saw it as, on the whole, a positive trait. In the poetic anthologies and biographical dictionaries, the pursuit of beauty was conventionally attributed to the days of youth, before graying hair served as a reminder of mortality and divine judgment.
16
On the other hand, aesthetic sensitivity was implicated by a complex of ideals whose influence is abundantly attested in the writings of the period. Whether in the biographical or the belletrist literature, one constantly comes across expressions praising a character
(ṭabʿ, ḥāshiyah) mazāj, dhāt)
that is “refined,” “delicate,” or “elegant”
(laṭīf, raqīq, ẓarīf).
17
A refined or delicate character was of course recognizable by the traits exhibited by its possessor. The more important of these seem to have been urbanity, affability, wit, emotional sensibility, a taste for belles-lettres, especially poetry, and an appreciation of beauty, particularly human and floral.
18
The same evaluative ambiguity mentioned in connection with the inclination to beauty obtained in the case of the other traits belonging to the same complex. Urbanity, affability, and wit might have been regarded as positive attributes, but so were an otherworldly inclination to asceticism, solitude, austere piety, and religious moralism (“commanding the good and forbidding the bad”). Similarly, the profusion of poetry in the literature of the period leaves no doubt as to its popularity, and biographical works confirm that poetic abilities were highly prized. Yet, it was generally recognized that the Prophet—usually the model of behavior for the believers—had not said any poetry, and some of the sayings attributed to him are indeed hostile to the art. Religious jurists discussed whether secular poetry should be considered reprehensible
(makrūh),
and ascetics often abandoned the genre as part of their turning away from the transitory world.
19
The conflict of ideals was sometimes sought resolved by resorting to the idea of the mean between extremes. After mentioning one of the Prophet’s sayings which seem hostile to the art of poetry, the Damascene jurist Ibn ʿĀbidīn (d. 1836) opined that this should be understood as applying to an inordinate attachment. There was no problem with a little poetry, “if it aims at displaying witticisms, subtleties, excellent comparisons, or superior expressions, even if it is of physiques and cheeks [i.e., love poetry].ʾʾ
20
In the same spirit, a person could be praised for being of a temperate
(muʿtadil)
character, neither a shameless profligate nor a “cold” recluse.
21
The connection between refined character and the sensitivity to human beauty is apparent in the previously mentioned discussion of human love by Mulla Sadr al-Dīn al-Shīrāzī (d. 1640/I). The Persian philosopher explicitly attributed the refined love of handsome youths to
al-ẓurafāʾ
(the “genteel” or “elegant”), and asserted that
al-ẓurafāʾ
(the “genteel” or “elegant”), and asserted that
we do not find anyone of those who have a refined heart and a delicate character ... to be void of this love at one time or the other in their life, but we find all coarse souls, harsh hearts, and dry characters ... devoid of this type of love, most of them restricting themselves to the love of men for women and the love of women for men with the aim of mating and cohabitation, as is in the nature of all animals in which is implanted the love of mating and cohabitation.
22
Other books
Unexpected Changes by A.M. Willard
The Sheik's Rebellious Mistress by Elizabeth Lennox
Highfall by Alexander, Ani
Amadís de Gaula by Garci Rodríguez de Montalvo
The Key by Simon Toyne
Left in the Dust: A Standalone Bad Boy Romance by Winter Scott
The Legacy of Lord Regret: Strange Threads: Book 1 by Sam Bowring
Life Embitters by Josep Pla
Billy Hooten by Tom Sniegoski
She's Out of Control by Kristin Billerbeck