Did Rumi murder Shams?

[Ecurb]

In "The Black Book" by Oran Pamuk, the columnist Celal espouses a theory that Rumi (the great poet) murdered Shams of Tabriz. Shams was Rumi's spiritual teacher. Although they knew each other for only a couple of years, they appear to have had an intense relationship that may (or may not) have been intensified by a homosexual affair. Devout Muslims dispute the gay lovers theory, which appears to be based on the intensity of their relationship, the poems referring to Shams as the "beloved", and the fact that they once spent 40 days alone together in a cave.

Shams then disappeared mysteriously, and Rumi searched for him for months. The two standard theories of the disappearance are that Rumi's youngest son murdered Shams, or that Shams simply decided to leave. Rumi's son had motive: Shams was an itinerant dervish preacher, of lower social class than Rumi. The possibility of a gay relationship between Shams and Rumi would also threaten the Rumi Cult, which apparently provided for his family.

IN The Black Book Celal suggests that Rumi murdered Shams, and that his search for Shams was a sham, like O.J.'s search for his wife's killer. When I mentioned this to a friend the other day, she became angry about it (she's a bid Rumi fan). Also, in the novel, Celal receives death threats from the devout for espousing his theory.

The theory (as far as I know) is that of a fictional character in a novel -- but it sounds potentially reasonable. Does anyone know more about it than I do?

[Ecurb]

I've been thinking about this a little more, and it seems likely Pamuk might promote a theory in which he believes (and he's a smart guy, if not an historical scholar) by using the pen of a fictional character. After all, Celal (the fictional columnist) gets death threats for writing the column, and Pamuk might want to protect himself from such persecution. He could always say, "Oh, come on. It's fiction. Don't blame me for some fictional columnist's theories."

[Marbles]

This theory is a purely fictional embellishment and has no basis in historical fact. There are two major classical theories as to what happened to Shams. One is that Rumi broke a very important Sufistic code which angered and disappointed Shams so much that he left. A variant of the theory speaks of a dispute between the two men about an orthodox preacher and how best to handle him. The other theory appeals to the mysterious and idiosyncratic nature of Shams himself. It wasn't the first time Shams had abandoned his disciples and disappeared, and he did the same with Rumi. Not much is known of Shams's life, but there are reports of him having been sighted in Syria years after he left Rumi. He is supposed to have died and buried in Syria.

The master-disciple relationship has been an integral part of Sufistic training for centuries. Usually it involved an older master taking on a younger disciple, and if the disciple was worthy, forming a special relationship with him. Instructions in Sufi doctrine involved spending long intervals of time alone or in the company of the master, in total seclusion. It's common for the disciple to write poetry in praise of the master and express their love using the established imagery of earthly love, often in female voice. In fact, I don't know of any major Sufi poet who hasn't done that, regardless of language or country. Rumi perfected the 'love for the murshid (master)' in his poetry and declared Shams the 'ultimate beloved,' a manifestation of divine love.

The modern mind is conditioned to see any expression of love as ultimately sensual, inevitably leading to physical congress, and this is what drives the speculations about gay relationships between Sufis, not only in the case of Rumi-Shams but many other Sufis as well. For the Sufis and their followers, however, expressing love for the master or even fellow disciples was not meant as an expression of sexual desire or orientation, nor was it is intended to be seen as such, despite the occasional sexual imagery employed in their poetry.

[Ecurb]

The master-disciple relationship has been an integral part of Sufistic training for centuries. Usually it involved an older master taking on a younger disciple, and if the disciple was worthy, forming a special relationship with him. Instructions in Sufi doctrine involved spending long intervals of time alone or in the company of the master, in total seclusion. It's common for the disciple to write poetry in praise of the master and express their love using the established imagery of earthly love, often in female voice. In fact, I don't know of any major Sufi poet who hasn't done that, regardless of language or country. Rumi perfected the 'love for the murshid (master)' in his poetry and declared Shams the 'ultimate beloved,' a manifestation of divine love.

The modern mind is conditioned to see any expression of love as ultimately sensual, inevitably leading to physical congress, and this is what drives the speculations about gay relationships between Sufis, not only in the case of Rumi-Shams but many other Sufis as well. For the Sufis and their followers, however, expressing love for the master or even fellow disciples was not meant as an expression of sexual desire or orientation, nor was it is intended to be seen as such, despite the occasional sexual imagery employed in their poetry.

On the other hand, the Sufi mind might object to the possibility of "physical congress" on the part of two famous Sufis. Both sides are prejudiced.

Also, the theory that Rumi's son murdered Shams is popular, at least on historical sites on the internet.

[Marbles]

On the other hand, the Sufi mind might object to the possibility of "physical congress" on the part of two famous Sufis. Both sides are prejudiced.

Also, the theory that Rumi's son murdered Shams is popular, at least on historical sites on the internet.

Anything is possible. However, I'd like to see any historical evidence of the murder theory from the sources over the centuries that discuss the disappearance of Shams. As far as I know this is merely a modern-day speculation that's repeated quite often like a sensational tabloid story. That's why it appears popular.

[Ecurb]

Well, you won't get any "historical evidence"from me. All I know is based on reading "The Black Book" (a novel) and skimming some internet sites (all the Sufi sites pooh pooh the theory that Rumi's relatives may have murdered Shams, the non-Sufi ones mention it.) One Sufi site blamed the theory that Shams and Rumi were lovers on an Oxford historian whose theories they discredited because he is gay. I thought the "Oxford historian" credential outweighed the "gay" disparagement of that credential.

[Ecurb]

I did a little (a very little) research, prompted by Marbles comments. I may have overstated the "Oxford Historian" comment; Andrew Harvey is the author who wrote a book on Rumi and suggested that he may have had an affair with Shams. He's an Oxford alum and a well-known author, but not on the Oxford faculty.

This site (evidently a Rumi fan site, so unlikely to repeat mere calumnies about the poet) suggests Shams may have been murdered: http://www.rumi.net/about_rumi_main.htm

Go to section 5 to learn how Rumi gave the 60-year-old Shams his 12-year-old step daughter (Kumia) as a wife, and how Kumia died months afterward. Rumi's youngest son supposedly killed Shams in revenge (as a form of honor killing). I'll grant that this is not "historical evidence", but I assume that the marriage (if not the murder) is reasonably supported by historical evidence (although I don't know for sure).