Painting Coal Gold The Use and Misuse of

PAINTING COAL GOLD
AN ESSAY ON THE MISUSE OF THE BEKTASHI NAME IN

THE WEST
Muhammed A. al-Ahari
Published by the Magribine Press
5333 W. Rosedale Ave.
Chicago, IL 60646-6539
© 2006 Magribine Press
First Edition
All rights reserved, including the right of
reproduction in whole or in part in any form.
Copyright © 2006 by Magribine Press
Cover design & book layout: J.L. Abiba
This work is based on a paper presented at:

THE 1ST INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ALEVISM
& BEKTASHISM
28-30 September 2005 / İsparta – Turkey
Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Theology
2
To all those
who gave their lives for
the well-trod Path
of Haji Bektashi
in communist Albania
3
4
IN THE WEST there continues to be an
enduring inclination to regard membership in secret
societies a means by which to gain social ascent and
self-aggrandizement. The more secretive and exotic
the ritual and history of any given secret group, the
longer the line to join will inevitably be. The most
primitive of these secret societies includes Instructive
Masonry, a movement that supposedly traces its
origins back to ancient Greece and Egypt. The
libraries of these orders, as well as their rituals, are
quite ludicrously maintained to have derived from
clandestine Moroccan (in the case of the
Rosicrucians), Persian (for the Grotto), as well as
Arabian and Egyptian (for the Shriners) mystic
orders.
The 19th century discoveries of Tibet (and the
ensuing legends about the mythical kingdom of
Shambala and all its secreted esoteric knowledge), the
lost tribes of the Caucasus, the Order of the Peacock,
and “science” of Theosophy presented Westerners
with a profusion of material to aid in the enlargement
of arcane and occult daydreams. “Truth explorers”
were purportedly able to find hidden-away spiritual
guides and guarded texts claiming to reveal the
mysteries of the universe. This era also brought out a
proliferation of occult texts of dubious origin, such as
those by the famed Madame Blavatsky (1831-1891 CE)
who gave us the Stanzas of Dzyan, Richard Burton
(1821-1890 CE) the The Kasidah of Haji Abdu El-
Yezdi, as well as the ritual books of the Grotto and the
Shriners. None of these works have any verifiable
authenticity and lack any ancient manuscript, leading
one to presuppose - with almost complete certainty -
their spurious nature.
My motivations for writing this short exposé
are several, the foremost being a wish to distance the
5
noble Bektashi Order of Sufis (the Tariqat ul-
Baktashiyya) from individuals and groups who have
indefensibly utilized the name “Bektashi” in their
organizations without any solid rationalization, an
occurrence that has caused a significant amount of
confusion among inquisitive minds. Since the 19th
century a number of individuals who have sought out
the genuine path of the 13th century Islamic mystic
Haji Bektash have been led to things that are
incontestably not Bektashi Sufism and, despite claims
to the contrary, have no origin in Bektashism at all.
Historically, these first purported links to Islamic
mysticism (out of which came Bektashism) came from
Freemasonry and its root source, the Knights
Templar.
The Knights Templar:

The Origins of Freemasonry
The Knights Templar were a military order
founded at the height of the Crusades in Palestine by a
group of nine warriors who had sought out spiritual
glory and worldly fortune. The King of Jerusalem -
Baldwin II (r. 1118-31 CE) - gave these warriors
quarters in his palace, a place purportedly founded on
the site of Solomon’s Temple (hence the name
“Templar”).
Members of The Knights Templar took vows of
poverty, chastity, as well as obedience to no other save
the Grand Master of the Order (the first being Hugh
du Paynes). The men were divided into four ranks:
knights, chaplains, squires, and servants. The knights
wore a white mantle emblazoned with a large red
cross, while the lower grades wore a black or brown
mantle. What is exceptional about The Knights
Templar is that it grew rapidly (from 9 to 30,000) in a
relatively short time, allowing it to become
6
exceedingly wealthy.
Other militant Christian orders throughout
Europe and Palestine grew covetous of wealth and
prestige of The Knights Templar. A number of these
orders, such as the Hospitallers, gained the ear of the
French king as well as the Pope. When the city of Acre
fell to the Mamluks in 1291 CE and the various
Christian orders withdrew to Cyprus, The Knights
Templar were accused of being associates of the
unorthodox Ismācīlī sect of Islam and of espousing the
heresy of Unitarianism (that is absolute monotheism).
In 1307 CE, King Philip IV of France began to
confiscate their properties with the consent of the
Pope, who issued a papal bull dissolving the order in
1312 CE.
The last Grand Master of The Knights Templar,
Jacques de Molay, was burned at the stake in 1314 CE
along with several of his closest followers in the
courtyard of Notre Dame Cathedral. Modern
researchers obviously see the persecution of The
Knights Templar as a horrific and fanatical distortion
of justice. Outside of France, The Knights Templar
were generally cleared of the charges of blasphemy
and were given time to go underground. Such was the
case of community in the British Isles.
Sixty years after their suppression, The Knights
Templar resurfaced in a supposed peasant revolt
against the English Crown. This eight day revolt was
lead by Walter the Tyler (interestingly “tyler” is a
Masonic appellation) and the sources of leadership of
that brief revolt were not traced to The Knights
Templar at that time [Robinson, xii]. In Masonry, a
“tyler” guards the door of the lodge against intruders
and is a post that is found in Bektashism: the “Gözcü”
or “Watchman”. Surely, a suppressed and secretive
religio-military order would be in great need of such a
7
person to guard the entrances to its meeting halls.
While there is no explicit documentation
proving that The Knight Templar framed its
hierarchical structure on the one formed by the
Ismācīlīs of Alamut, there is evidence that at times
they and the Ismācīlīs allied in common cause. For a
period, the King of Jerusalem came under the
intrigues of both The Knights Templar and the
Ismâcîlis. The Ismācīlīs had been paying tribute to
The Knights Templar and sent a message to the King
of Jerusalem that they would convert en masse to
Christianity if the tribute were lifted. Instead, The
Knights Templar ambushed the King of Jerusalem’s
envoy to the Ismācīlīs and brutally murdered him.
The relationship between The Knights Templar’s
Grand Master and the Ismācīlīs was close enough that
he likely knew of the whole affair. [Waite, 50]
After their long association with the Middle
East, The Knights Templar had naturally become
tinted by its lore, theosophy, and exotic rituality.
These were actually the base of the charges brought
against them when they were under direction of De
Moley. These included accusations of heresy,
urinating on crosses, homoerotic unions, and devil
worship, all forthcoming. [MacKinzie, 125-143]
Nevertheless, the foremost sacrilege The Knights
Templar were accused of committing was their denial
of the Trinity. Further charges of witchcraft and the
worship of an idol called “Baphomat” were added to
make their persecution seem rational.
These suspected heretics escaped their gloomy
fate whenever the chance arose. Yet they had an
organization prepared to operate under these trying
circumstances. Except in France (where they were
victims of a thoroughgoing inquisition), The Knights
Templar were able to go underground and become
8
mercenaries, shopkeepers, clergymen, and members
of trade guilds. They carried with them the ability to
survive (if given chance) and escape the inquisitor’s
holy flame. The decades of association with the
workings of Byzantine politics, the esoteric teachings
of the Ismâcîlis sect of Islam, as well as the intrigues
within Muslim courts, prepared them for a life of
duplicity and furtiveness. The church, with it blood-
spattered denunciation of protest and social change,
provided The Knights Templar with many willing
sympathizers.
The secrecy much needed in those days
remains a part of Masonic ritual. A candidate for the
brotherhood must be able to keep secrets, be of sound
body, and devoid of senility or mentally deficiency.
The candidate must be recommended by an already
enrolled member, interviewed and put through a
ritual that ensures that he is genuine in his quest for
self-improvement, and community service. The
candidate strips to his trousers and undershirt,
removes all coins from his clothes, bares his left arm
and breast, and rolls one pant leg to the knee. He then
is “cable-towed” and “hood-winked”. After being lead
past the “Tyler”, the “Worshipful Master” reminds the
candidate of the punishments in store for anyone
revealing the secrets of the lodge. The punishments
were the same handed out to The Knights Templar
during their persecution.
When the “Worshipful Master” has questioned
the candidate and heard the correct answers, the hood
is removed as a result of the candidate’s answering the
question, “What are you searching for?” with the
word, “Light.” Upon uttering this, the candidate is
taught the passwords and signs of his degree and is
invested with a white woolen apron - a connection,
perhaps, to the Sufa (wool) of Sufism? It is important
9
to note here for the sake of our initial objective to
mention that these initiatory devices can be found in
the Bektashi Sufi Order.
After being made an “Entered Apprentice” for
a short period, the candidate can rise in the Masonic
ranks to become a “Fellowcraft” or “Journeyman”.
Originally, this was the highest rank and a Master was
selected from them.
Only later did the 3rd degree of “Master Mason”
develop [Mackenzie, 211]. The ritual for this is similar
to that of the “Entered Apprentice”, but the lectures
involved differ. Candidates at this level are lead to a
“Middle Chamber” and given a lecture on the heavenly
and earthly geometry (knowledge attributed to
Solomon, but likely through Arab sources). There he
is told the three degrees are symbolic of life: youth
(Entered Apprentice), maturation (Fellowcraft), and
old age (Master Mason). The lecture then discusses
numerology of which the number seven is stressed (7
liberal arts, 7 heavens, 7 years to build Solomon's
Temple, 7 wonders of the world, etc.). This number ‘7’
is most important in Ismācīlī cosmology and the
Masons (formerly The Knights Templar) perhaps
garnered its significance from them [Mackenzie, 214].
About the lodge itself, more should be said.
The lodge refers not to a meeting place, but a safe
house for a member of the order. The floor of the
lodge, a black and white mosaic, is the final key. It is a
repetition of a black block above a white block below.
The black symbolizes the black world left behind by
those joining the order, the white the world of
knightly purity now entered. The gloves worn by
initiates are from The Knights Templar also, due to
their wearing of gloves to keep their hands pure to
receive communion. The travel to “the East” is but a
remembrance of the path The Knights Templar went
10
to fight in the Crusades. As The Knights Templar
prayed in round churches so no one was able to be in
a position of higher rank, a compass has been retained
and became part of the Masonic legend of their being
an ancient order of freethinkers and mathematicians.
The ‘G’ for ‘Geometry’ comes from Masons being
responsible for rebuilding London after the Great Fire
of 1666. Other communities and proofs that the
Masons are the direct descendants of The Knights
Templar could be given but the interest reader should
go to Robinson’s Born in Blood and other such as:
Stephen Knight’s The Brotherhood and The Secret
Diary of Jack the Ripper for more proofs. “More
than six hundred years have passed since the
suppression of The Knights Templar, but their
heritage lives on in the largest fraternal organization
ever known [Freemasons].” [Robinson, xix] The
direct descendants of The Knights Templar are:
1) The Pirates of Mahadiah
2) Irish Freemasons
3) Scottish Freemasons
4) York Rite Masons.
In America the first Scottish Rite Lodge was
founded in Charleston S.C. by Stephen Morin in 1801.
Scottish Rite Masonry was first publicly promulgated
in 1758. Stephen Morin was granted patents to
increase the number of degrees on August 27, 1761.
The Grand Lodge of Perfection was first operated
under Isaac De Costa - the Inspector General of South
Carolina in 1783. This lodge has not survived. In
1801, the lodge was reestablished with a Grand
Council under Fredrick Dalcho, John Mitchell,
Stephen Morin and others. The Shriners evolved out
of the 33rd degree system of Scottish Rite Masonry.
Freemasonry
11
The Masonry we know today is called
“Speculative” Masonry. It only replaced
“Constructive” (building or guild) Masonry over a
long period. The year 1717 is usually marked as the
start of Speculative Masonry. In 1723 CE the first book
of rituals, catechisms and constitutions were issued by
Anderson.
Masonry membership is of three degrees:
Apprentice, Fellowcraft and Master. All other degrees
were added later and can be seen as spurious. An
individual must progress in Masonry by learning the
catechisms, listening to charges and through study. At
each degree, one learns certain handgrips, passwords
as well as a series of questions and answers. Masonry,
in effect, is all theory at present. The craft ritual was
destroyed in 1717 and replaced by new rituals such as
those put down in Anderson’s manual.
Negro Freemasonry was started by a West
Indian named Prince Hall (d. 1807). His lodges are
regular, but those with distaste for Black membership
had put claims of heresy and clandestine activities on
them. Prince Hall’s rituals are nearly identical to those
of European Freemasonry. His first lodge was
Boston's Africa Lodge Number 459. (see Islam,
Christianity and Free Masonry).
The Shriners
For a number of reasons many Muslims living
in the United States are often under the impression
that members of the Shriners are fellow members of
the Islamic faith. In fact, the Encyclopedia of
Freemasonry has a ten-page article dealing with the
‘Assassins’ that would lead one to believe in a credible
and verifiable Islamic-Shriner connection.
The best source for students of the Shriners is
the popular history written by Fred Van Deventer
12
entitled Parade to Glory: The Story of the Shriners
and the Hospitals for Crippled Children. The history
of this Masonic order, as given by the Shriners, is that
it was,
“...established in Mecca, Arabia
and became an acknowledged power in
the year 5459, equivalent to the year of
our Lord 1698. The Ritual was compiled
and arranged in Aleppo, Arabia and
issued by Louis Marracci, the great Latin
translator of Mohammed’s Al-Koran. The
mysterious Order continued to thrive in
Arabia from that date to the present. It
was revised and instituted in Cairo, Egypt,
in 5598, equivalent to June 14, 1837.
The Order was primarily instituted
for the purpose of promoting the
organization and perfection of Arabic and
Egyptian inquisitions, to dispense justice
and execute punishment of criminals
whom the tardy laws did not reach to
measure their crimes. Being designed to
embrace the entire pale of the law and
composed of sterling and determined men
who would upon a valid accusation
fearlessly try, judging and if convicted,
executing the criminal within the hour-
leaving no trace of their acts behind....”
[Van Deventer, 35-36].
The text goes on to describe a mythical bond
between their group and famous Sufis of the past.
These connections with the great sages of Islam are
thoroughly ridiculous, and the claim to be related to
the Bektashi Order of Dervishes is absolutely
groundless. Nevertheless, we have the first attempt by
Westerns to fraudulently employ the name ‘Bektashi’
13
to lend credence to their claims:
“The most prominent and powerful
of those orders is the Bektashy [sic!], or
Nobles of the Mystic Shrine. Its offshoots
and satellites are the Darkawy, Khowan,
Abdel Kader El Baghdadi, and the
Issawiye, similar in obligation and
purpose. These are not altogether
politico-religious societies as generally
supposed by the outside world. Although
ostensibly appearing as such there is a
deep and hidden meaning beneath the
exposed superficial exterior, as
promulgated to the profane.” [Van
Deventer, 36].
The Shriner’s claim that they have a view of
changing Islam to fit American circumstances is also a
Shriner view as we see in the following passage,
“The Bektashy [sic!], or Nobles of
the Mystic Shrine, as it is known in America,
is of necessity divested of its inconsistent
Islamic dogmas and its ritual adapted to the
consistencies of Christian institutions and
American laws, and is destined to become a
powerful order here in America.” [Van
Deventer, 36]
The Shriners go on to say that Haji Bektash was
an Arab (he was not an Arab, but rather a Persian)
and they further tell of his blessing the famed
Janissary Corp, which may have some historical
validity. The Shriners believe the order was called
“Janissaries” because this means, “they were freed
captives who were adopted into the faith and the
army.” Actually, the word “janissary” comes from the
Turkish term Yeniçeri, literally “New Troops.” In
14
addition, Shriners believe that the Sacred Mosque in
Mecca (the Harām al-Sharīf) is nothing other than
the Temple of cAlī ibn Abī Tālib and is under control
of the chief officer of “Alee Temple of Nobles”. This,
of course, is absolute fantasy.
A member of the Mecca Temple of New York
and the U.S. consul to Malta raised quite a furor by
sending letters from the years 1882 to 1892, giving
alleged translations of ritual from Algiers, Tripoli,
Cairo and other temples. The Arabic originals,
conveniently, do not exist and his pass or passport to
various “Islamic” shrines counterfeit. Yet for his
forgeries, he received $500 a year from the Mecca
Temple.
In truth, is the Shriners were founded by a
British stage actor named William J. Florence and Dr.
Fleming of New York in 1870. They were thirty-
second or thirty-third degree Scottish Rite Masons.
As shown above, they concocted legends claiming
initiation from persons as dissimilar as the “Grand
Sheikh of Mecca”, Sultan Selim III, the Illuminati in
addition to the Bektashi Sufi Order. These claims are
spurious and improvable. Yet this did not thwart the
late Mr. Duro Çini, an Albanian Shriner from Canada,
from divulging to me the supposed ‘secret’ Bektashi-
Shriner connection. While it can be said that many
19th century Turkish Freemasons were of Bektashi
upbringing, the influence was going in the wrong
direction: it was the Masons who influenced many
later Bektashis, not vice versa.
Although started in 1876 CE, the Shriners were
not a working group until nearly a full decade
afterwards. Furthermore, Frederick von Deventer
printed a letter in which Fleming’s son said all the
Shriner legend originated in his father’s head. His son
did not disclose the errors in the legend, but I will do
15
so here. First off, the Bektashis were never in
“control” of the city of Mecca; there were never
Shrines in the Middle East who could, via a silsilah,
trace their origin to Imam cAlī; the Bektashis were
primarily Turkish or Albanian in membership, not
Arab; the terminology of the Shriners shows more of a
borrowing from Hebrew rather than Arabic (like the
reference to the Hebrew year etc.); I could go on and
on.
Many who analyze Shriner ritual fail to realize
what they are looking at. The language used in most
cases is Hebrew. The rituals are based more on the
ritual of other Masonic orders and the cult of the
number 13. There is nothing Bektashi or even Islamic
at all about them, other than certain cosmetic
appearances and nomenclatures. Yet whatever else
may be said about them, the Shriners provided a new
form of heresy as a conduit of cultural transfer.
An Afro-American form of the Shriners was
started by a handful of 32 nd Degree Prince Hall
Masons at the World's Fair in 1893. The organization
of the order was a self-styled “Arab” named Rofelt
Pasha. To this day his true origins are unknown and
even more masked in obscurity than later Black
leaders like Drew Ali and Fard Muhammad. With a
Scandinavian name like “Rofelt” hardly being Arabic,
this individual was nothing more than one more
charlatan in Oriental garb. (see African American
Freemasons: Why they should accept Islam by
Mustafa El-Amin for details.)
The Grotto
An organization similar in nature to the
Shriners was the “Persian Order”, started by
seventeen members of Hamilton Lodge, No. 120, in
Hamilton, New York, in the summer of 1889 under
16
the direction of ex-Postmaster General, Thomas L.
James. Beyond its “Persian ritual”, which tells the
story of an unnamed, leprosy-covered Persian prophet
who wears a veil, they have a component group called
the “Knights of Khorrosan [sic!]” (Khorasan being the
birthplace of Hajji Bektash Veli). This is the Blue
Lodge’s playground, much like the Shrine is for the
32nd and 33rd degree Masons. The chief moving spirit
in the founding of this organization was LeRoy
Fairchild. At their meeting on September 10, 1889,
they decided to honor the founder by calling it
Fairchild Deviltry Committee.
When the new order grew too large for one
locality, the Fairchild Deviltry Committee duly
established the “Supreme Council, Mystic Order of
Veiled Prophets of the Enchanted Realm” on July 13,
1890. It is mystic in its lessons and method of
teaching. It is veiled because all secrets are known but
are hidden in the impure heart and are unveiled as the
heart is cleansed. The order is an enchanted realm as
it is separate from the world and is full of joy as
“sorrow burdens any unenchanted realm.”
The handbook of the Grotto is named Grotto
Creed and Prophets’ Compact. It tells us the Grotto
was made to encourage Masonic fraternity free of
discrimination based on status in life. True fraternity
should be based on lodge membership and such
membership not be used for advancement of material
interest. Like Shriners, they have a charitable side –
study of cures for cerebral palsy and dental work for
the poor.
The Thule Society

Immediately after the end of World War One,
numerous secret and semi-secret occult societies
began to appear throughout Germany. Some of these
17
groups were founded as a means to recreate the
defeated German Reich, while others sought to
become a healing spring for the nation’s many ills
caused by both internal and external parasites. One of
the strongest (and one closely associated to the Nazi
Party) was the Thule Society, which held that secret,
occult wisdom was held in a mythical arctic land
known as the “Ultima Thule”.
The Thule Society was founded by Baron
Rudolf von Sebottendorff (1875-1945). He claimed
that he “discovered” an ancient wisdom that had been
long been perverted through Freemasonic teachings.
Sebottendorff was born in Silesia in November, 1875.
Early in life he became a merchant seaman and
traveled to the Middle East. This travel in search of
knowledge placed him among the ranks of other such
spiritual adventures as Christian Rozencrantz, Rofelt
Pasha, and even founders of several Black Muslim and
Holiness Churches in the United States like Daddy
Grace, Fard Muhammad, Prof. Ezzaldeen
Muhammad, and Noble Drew Ali.
While in Turkey Sebottendorff was allegedly
exposed to a group that he called the “Ancient Turkish
Freemasons”, although they were probably little more
than a local Masonic lodge. In the advertisement of
English translation of his work The Practice of the
Ancient Turkish Freemasons: The Key to
Understanding of Alchemy – A presentation of the
Ritual, Doctrine and Signs of Recognition among the
Oriental Freemasons, a modern publisher, Runa-
Raven, presents the book as containing,
“The secret spiritual practices of the
Bektashi order as taught in the early part
of the 20th century. These practices make
use of signs and vocal formulas, which, if
performed exactly and to their conclusion,
18
transform the individual into the object of
the magnum opus of the medieval
alchemists.”
A closer reading of the text finds less than a
half dozen brief quotes from Sufi saints, none of
whom are Bektashi writers, sheikhs, or poets. The
rituals presented in the text include use of mirrors
and candles for meditation and which are aimed to
elevate the level of mental concentration. All of these
rituals can be found in basic mail-order Rosicrucian
texts and are definitely not part of any known Sufi
practice. Quotes from a Latin Rosicrucian manuscript
and from miscellaneous Hindu and Egyptian ritual
texts containing similar concepts prove that there is
no connection whatsoever between the text and Islam
or the Bektashi Order. For example the first line in the
book is a quote from Latin: “Libelli habeant sua fata,”
– “Books should have their own destiny.”
Sebottendorff then quotes a saying of the Prophet
Muhammad: “tether your ass and trust in God”
(although the original is “tether your camel”) on the
second page without reference and calls it an Arab
proverb.
Sebottendorff’s knowledge of Islamic history is
proven by the text to be superficial and he repeats the
slanderous charges leveled against it by Jewish and
Christian writers:
“Not far from Mecca lived an aged hermit,
Ben Chesi [?], who was teaching the
Prophet [Muhammad]. When the lessons
were over, he gave him a metallic plate
(upon which were engraved formulas), the
meaning of which the then 30-year old
Prophet had just learned. Soon thereafter,
the hermit died, but Muhammad kept on
teaching the secret of these formulas in
19
the most intimate circles. Abu Bekr, the
first Calif, inherited the plate and the
knowledge which only spread within a
small circle after the death of the Prophet:
this is the secret knowledge of the
Oriental Freemasons” (Sebettondorff,
page 6)
Sebottendorff goes on to explain that the keys
to these plates are hidden within the Qur’ān in the
hurūf al-muqata’āt, the cryptic abbreviated letters
that precede some chapters. This connection between
the ‘metallic plates’ and the hurūf al-muqata’āt are
not found in any traditional Islamic, Bektashi, or Sufi
text. Some scholars do give mystical explanations to
these letters, but none mention metallic plates or a
hermit named Ben Chasi. Sebottendorff goes on to
explain the length of various consciousness raising
practices based on the numeric values of these letters.
Supposedly, the source for this was a Turkish
‘Kabbalist’ named Hussein Pasha who used an
untraced manuscript Ilm ul-Miftah (Knowledge of
the Key). He describes this work as, “the preparation
of the Philosophers’ Stone, the magnum opus, the
mystery of the Rosicrucians and alchemists”
(Sebottendorff, page 19).The source for the title of the
text above is his novel Der Talsiman Rosenkreuzers.
Sebottendorff did live in Turkey and had ties
through the Turkish Red Crescent Society and
individual Freemasons and, perhaps, to Sufis there,
but he seems to have had no clear connection with an
established Sufi Order beyond knowing a few brief
quotes, quotes that could have been easily culled from
any European library. Another source that
Sebottendorff mentions in his text is Sheikh Jachya
Charam [?] el-din. Most other texts mentioned are
German and Latin Rosicrucian texts. However, he
20
does quote from Mahmud Shabistari’s Gulshan-i Raz
at length where the Zodiac is described as a ‘sign of
Allah.’
Sebottendorff fought in the Balkan Wars of
1912-1913, became a director of the Red Crescent
Society and became Grand Master of the Turkish
branch of the Rosicrucian Society. He learned to
speak Turkish, and when he returned to Germany he
had the garb of a Grand Master. Few could, at the
time, contest his claims and really had no reason to
since they presented a path to the rebuilding of the
Reich. Ties to the Rosicrucian society are also seen in
the title of his autobiographical novel Der Talsiman
Rosenkreuzers.
The Rosicrucians were a German secret society
founded by Christian Rosencrantz, an alchemist who
claimed to have gained his spiritual knowledge from
unnamed Sufi shaykhs in Morocco. His teachings
were transmitted in such texts as the Fama and the
Chemical Wedding. They dealt such occult practices
as crystal gazing, self hypnotism, and Astrology. These
practices and works do not suggest any Islamic or
Bektashi base for the Thule Society or their claims to
the teachings of Ancient Turkish Freemasonry. A
brief search of the Internet will show the modern
version of this Germanic Order called the AMORC and
its attempts to trace its teachings to ancient Egypt and
Tibet. Such details can be found in the text Unto Thee
I Grant. This work was purportedly written by
Amenhotep and then later placed in a Tibetan Lamas
Monastery.
In 1913 Sebottendorff returned to Germany
with two treasures – wealth he inherited from his
adoptive father and a vast knowledge of the East. On
his return he began to make contact with the leaders
of various German occult and mystical groups. He
21
came to the attention of Rudolph Hess and Herman
Pohl of the Germanen Order and helped to found the
journal “Runen” and “Münchener Beobachter.” The
later journal was eventually purchased by the Nazi
Party and renamed “Völkisher Beobachter.”
Sebottendorff oversaw the founding of the
Thule Society on August 17, 1918 and it became in
many ways the cradle of the National Socialist
Movement. After the German defeat in the First World
War, the society became a focal point for the anti-
communist struggle. Hitler never joined the Thule
Society itself, but joined its political wing, which later
became the Nazi Party. Sebottendorff even wrote
about this in his work Bevor Hitler Kam.
The society eventually devoted itself to study of
German history and customs and began to search for
the mystical land of Thule. However it eventually
ruptured into two groups – one whose focus was
totally mystical and the other that was a blend of the
occult, mystical, and political. Sebottendorff returned
to Turkey and published his The Practice of the
Ancient Turkish Freemasons. While there he joined
the “Imperial Constantine Order” and fought against
Judeo-Bolshevik ideology. His works were later
suppressed by the Nazis and he died under
mysterious circumstances in 1945. With his death,
Sebottendorff’s work has been relegated to the pens of
historians of the Nazi Movement and bookshelves of
White supremacist groups. Like the Thule, the next
group I shall discuss - that of the Dawoodi-Bektashis -
likewise claim Turkish origins for its concocted
teachings.
The Bizarre Case of the Dawoodi Order

My reasons for writing this short essay have
been several, the foremost being a wish to distance the
22
noble Bektashi Order of Sufis from those individuals
and groups who have untenably and dishonestly
adopted the name “Bektashi” without any clear
rationalization. In recent years quite a number of
individuals seeking out the genuine path of Haji
Bektash have been led to something that is
unquestionably not Bektashism and, despite its
claims to the contrary, has no origin in Bektashism at
all. This is a group calling itself the “Dawoodi-
Bektashis,”1 a cult that purports to be a bona fide
branch of Bektashism. The head of this group is an
American-born professor named Thomas McElwain
(known as “Ali Haydar” to his followers).
McElwain’s allegations regarding the origin of
his self-fabricated Sufi order have been persistently
conflicting and contradictory. His most important
assertion is that his Dawoodi-Bektashi Order is the
genuine embodiment of what was taught by the 13 th
century Anatolian saint Haji Bektashi and that it has
existed, in one form or another, for centuries, both
around the world, and, in particular, in Appalachia.
McElwain professes to have inherited this spiritual
path from his West Virginian forefathers and has in
the last several years decided to go public with it…to
an extent.
In the Fall of 2004 a number of individuals
inquired by way of internet postings and emails as to
the nature of the relationship between the Bektashis
and the Dawoodis, all of which received very
circuitous explanations by representatives of the later-
mentioned group. Such direct questioning of Dawoodi
origins led to a fair amount of argumentative feelings
1 In November of 2004, the leader of this group, Thomas
McElwain, ordered his followers to stop openly identifying
themselves as Dawoodi-Bektashis and call themselves simply
“Dawoodis”, even though he continues to claim a Bektashi
connection to his sect.
23
being exhibited by McElwain’s indecorous and
pretentious khalifah, Kemal Argon (aka “Norsu
Nazruddin”) who in one discussion with members of
the Bektashi Order accused “non-Dawoodi” Bektashis
of going “beyond the pale of God's laws,” and of being
“spiritually retarded ignoramuses” as well as a people
who are “such a waste of time for believing Muslims to
talk to.”2 Mr. Argon railed against all who questioned
the authenticity of this New Age construct he and his
shaykh tried to pass off as authentic Sufism.
Having for several years kept his peculiar
claims to himself and an intimate band of followers,
Prof. McElwain ventured into the realm of academia
in 2004 with a number of his speculations and claims
in an article entitled, “Sufism Bridging East & West:
the case of the Bektashis” found in Sufism in Europe
and North America (2004, edited by David
Westerlund), a work that should have been of interest
for any historian of American-Muslim History. In this
article, McElwain told of a previously secreted and
unknown Sufi order in Appalachia that had been
preserved through family transmission and which
dated from the 1500s.
The only problem with this amazing claim is
verifying its reality. While rumors of Muslim
wayfarers from the 1500s can be found in a range of
historical documents, as far it is known to date none
of these early Muslims were known to have passed
Islamic religious traditions beyond a few generations.
Even where slavery and assimilation had not hindered
the transmission of Islam as a faith, most Muslims
living in North America prior to the 20 th century had a
great difficulty training their children in the faith for
several reasons: lack of Islamic education on the part
of parents, interfaith marriages, and interest on the
2 Yahoo group “Sufi-Dhikr” post #6019
24
part of children.
Before progressing further, I wish to mention
one disconcerting smudge on McElwain’s above-
mentioned “academic” article (especially when
juxtaposed against his claims made in internet
postings) which is that it is so full of confusing
theories and vague conjectures - with every assertion
being started with countless “maybe’s” and “if’s” - that
it makes the entire work appear amateurish at best
and incompetent at worst. It also gives rise to one very
serious question: What is McElwain’s motivation for
all of this hypothesizing? Maybe that claims to
represent an Appalachian “Bektashi” tradition cannot
stand even the slightest academic scrutiny.
One obvious failure that will certainly alert
careful researchers is McElwain’s abstention from
mentioning anywhere in the article whatsoever the
name of his much-touted Dawoodi-Bektashi
“tradition”! Any reader would think given the
purported antiquity of the “order” that an entire study
could be made solely on it.
As I read the article in question, I found many
factual gaffes in McElwain’s depiction of both early
American Islam and, more distressingly, of
Bektashism. I will not discuss these gaffes in detail,
given that Stephen Schwartz and Huseyin Abiva (see
appendix) have already presented comprehensive
critiques of the work. What I will mention though is a
particular passage where McElwain purports a
Bektashi presence in North America from the 16th
century, along with my comments.
McElwain writes, “In America there may be
[emphasis mine, as is all further instances] an early
Bektashi influence. Brent Kennedy postulates a
survival of Turkish and Moorish prisoners set ashore
in the early 1500s and having descendants among the
25
Melungeons of the southern Appalachians.” For those
who may be unfamiliar with the name, the
Melungeons are a mixed-race Appalachian group that
was made-up of bits and pieces of the “Lost Colony” of
Roanoke Island, runaway slaves, and several Native
American tribal groups. There are over 200 similar
groups in America such as the Ben Ishmael Tribe, the
Sumter Turks, the Seminoles, the Dismal Swamp
Maroons, and the West Virginian Guineas.
Providentially for us scholarly works on the
Melungeons and their folklore are starting to make a
modest appearance, with such as Wayne Walker’s
Walking towards the Sunset, and Elizabeth
Hirschman’s Melungeons: The Last Lost Tribe in
America. Certainly, the whole question of Melungeon
origins will be revealed through modern DNA testing.
McElwain had written previously about the
Melungeons and their folklore, but in this study of his
he failed to mention of any Islamic connection to this
group until Brent Kennedy’s The Melungeons: A
Forgotten Folk came out in the early 1990s. Kennedy
offered the theory of a potential Turkish (hence
Muslim) bloodline for certain Melungeon families.
After its appearance, McElwain made much use of this
theorized link to bolster his own claims of the
existence of a Dawoodi “tradition,” although he
continually failed to offer any evidence other than the
most circumstantial kind.
In actuality, McElwain went out of his way to
place enough disclaimers into his assertions that it
seriously undermined what little credibility could
have been given to any such Dawoodi-Bektashi
tradition. For instance: “There are Melungeons who
retain some personal practices, but there is no
organizational presence within living memory nor any
record of it. Melungeons have been covering their
26
tracks for several centuries, so it is unlikely that
real evidence will turn up,” as well as, “Another
problem lies in the fact that such a population, if it
actually existed, was separated from the centre of
Bektashi development before it crystallized into its
more stable form in the sixteenth century.”
Are there traces of Bektashism among the
Melungeons or not? McElwain clearly claimed in
other places that Bektashism (and his Dawoodi
“branch”) indeed existed among this Appalachian
group although, “Documentation is generally lacking,
and family traditions are plagued with falsifications.” 3
But then in the same post he goes on to claim an
unbroken chain of transmission to himself:
“Dawoodism has been a continual factor among
certain Appalachian Melungeon families through
whom the tradition has come down in an unbroken
line to the present bearers.” 4 Who are these present
bearers? Himself? Where are these other bearers? He
doesn’t say.
It is known that Sir Walter Raleigh forcibly
seized nearly 500 people from the Mediterranean
basin and from Brazil to replace the members of his
first colony, but after leaving the new colonists, he
failed to return for over three years and when he did
found a tree on which was carved the word “Croatan”
as the only trace of the fate of his second “Lost
Colony”. Among the over 500 members of the “Lost
Colony” there included small numbers of slaves taken
from Portuguese Brazil (who may have had Muslims
among them), Croats and Dalmatians, and possibly a
Turk or two.
Now what a Turk or Moor was defined as in
those days is still under debate, and it can be assumed
3 Yahoo Sufi-Dhikr group, post #1797

4 ibid.
27
that a handful of the 500 could have been Muslim.
There might have even been Sufis among them, but
certainly not Bektashi Sufis, given that this particular
order was not widespread in the Balkans during this
time. In fact, it was not until the late 18th century that
Bektashism gained it predominant presence in
Albania, Greece and western Macedonia. So even if
there were Muslims with Raleigh, what is the
possibility that any of these from the Balkans or even
Anatolia would have been Bektashi? So slight that it
would not even be worth speculating.5
An additional feature of McElwain’s article (as
well as his internet postings) is that he tries to find
Bektashis (and by extension his own Dawoodi
creation) everywhere, even in places where they had
never been. He states in one of his posts that,
“Dawoodis have spread to many areas of the world
almost invisibly, leaving traces that are hard to
document.”6 How convenient!
One of his striking errors in this regard is his
attributing Bektashism to the shaykh of the Rifa’i-
Karabaşi Sufi order of Skopje, Ibrahim Erol (d. 2005),
and claiming that (conveniently through an alleged
second hand source) that his Sufi lodge (tekke) is “rife
with the fakir trickery.” While the difference between
the Rifa’i’s and Bektashis may not be clearly
perceptible to a novice student of Sufism, could it be
to someone claiming to be a “shaykh,” like McElwain?
An academic? The idea of the use of “trickery” and of
physical proofs of faith (such as handling “red-hot
spikes”) should have signaled to McElwain that
Shaykh Ibrahim and his tekke were definitely not
5 More information on the Balkan element of the Lost
Colony can be found in the work Croatia and the Croatians of the
Lost Colony by Adam S. Eterovich.
28
Bektashi, and that he should have further investigated
what his “second-hand” source was telling him.
Bektashis have never been known to engage in
mortification of the flesh. In fact, given the Bektashi
reverence for the human body, many would see
harming it in any way a sin!
Elsewhere in the article McElwain imagines
that Bektashi lodges continue to exist in Hungary and
other parts of Western Europe. As far as I know, only
the türbe (mausoleum) of Gül Baba in Budapest still
exists in Hungary, seeing that Islam and Bektashism
ceased to have a presence in that land when the
Hapsburg armies conquered it in 1686.
McElwain is correct about Alevis being in
modern Germany and France, but he makes a simple
failure to make a distinction between Alevis and
Bektashis. While the two traditions share much in
common in regards to origins, ritual and spiritual
outlook, they are nonetheless distinct religious
traditions.
McElwain then makes an exciting claim of how,
in some way, the Anabaptists of Silesia (perhaps he
meant Transylvania and perhaps he meant
Unitarians) were related to the Bektashis. He actually
opens “Sufism Bridging East & West: the case of the
Bektashis” with,
“The Silesian Anabaptists, who in
the sixteenth century frantically
appealed to the Sultan for help in the
face of the Lutheran threat, never met
their Bektashi brothers attached to the
Ottoman army, for it never got past
Vienna and came too late.”
Can McElwain give us a reference for this
alleged connection to the Bektashis? What does he
imply by “Bektashi brothers”? Brothers in a human
29
sense? Brothers theologically? Or were the
Anabaptists Bektashis themselves? Given his constant
reference to Protestantism in a number of his online
posts, perhaps McElwain sees connections that I miss.
In the above-mentioned work and in his online
material McElwain makes much of the curious figure
of Edward Elwall (1676-1744), an Englishman who
was a member of the Presbyterian Church who was
later prosecuted for blasphemy in 1726 for his
outspoken criticism of the Trinity. 7 Elwall seems had
done business in the Ottoman Empire and had at
some point become a Unitarian. There is no explicit
evidence that he became a Muslim, even though his
sympathies with Islam were quite apparent. He was
even noted to have taken to the “Turkish Habit out of
respect to the Unitarian faith of the Mahometans” and
to have donned turbans and robes.8 What is in
question here is McElwain’s shifting assertions of
Elwall being a Bektashi.
In his A Path in Time online essay, McElwain
openly states that Elwall was a Bektashi: “There is no
evidence that Edward Elwall, probably the most
eminent and visible of English Bektashis, ever
succeeded in establishing a partnership with a single
one of his countrymen.”9 This position is also
maintained on the website that presents his writings:
“This did not prevent his [McElwain’s] representing
the Seventh Day Baptist Missionary Society in
northern Europe until the end of 1990, referring to the
precedent of the foremost English writer of that
tradition, Edward Elwall, who was also a member
7 McElwain has posted a number of Elwall’s writings

online at
(http://www.rosanna.com/mcelwain/elwall/index.htm).
8 Champion, 1992, page 177
9 http://rosanna.com/mcelwain/pathintime/path1.htm
30
of the Bektashi order.”10 Yet I am puzzled as to
why he would write in one of his posts on the history
of his tradition that, “Dawoodis have long been found
in Europe as well. Edward Elwall’s early 18 th century
writings reveal him to have had connexion [sic!] with
some Sufi order, and his teachings are most
consonant with Dawoodi principles.” 11 Why didn’t he
openly say “Bektashi” instead of now using “some Sufi
order”? Further down in the same post he surprisingly
states that, “neither the Eckerlins nor Edward Elwall
can be noted with certainty to have been members of
the order.” One day Elwall is a Bektashi the next not?
If the later is the case, why would there even be need
to constantly mention him in the context of Bektashis
at all?
The Eckerlin brothers mentioned above are
another connection McElwain attempts to use to
make his case for an early Bektashi presence in
America. The Ekerlins were involved with the
Dunkard community of Ephrata, Pennsylvania and
were said to have had an “Ishmaelite” faith (perhaps
Unitarian is meant, although the Dunkards certainly
weren’t Unitarians) and were exiled to what is now
Preston County, West Virginia in the 1750’s.
McElwain notes in his A Path in Time that, “Evidence
of their [the Eckerlins] contact with Bektashis is not
strong since most of the direct documentation was
destroyed, but they certainly have a spiritual practice
closely resembling the musahiblik.” In post #1797 of
the Sufi-Dhikr discussion group Prof. McElwain adds
the following lengthy information about the Eckerlin
brothers:
“Dawoodis have had a presence
10 http://rosanna.com/mcelwain/
31
on the American continent apparently
for many centuries. Stories of
transmission include references to the
Friday evening sema’, of the decalogue
and the Psalms among certain
Melungeon families. There is a strong
possibility of contact between the
Eckerlin brothers and Dawoodis
between 1752 and 1756. The Eckerlins
may have had correspondence, directly
or indirectly, with Edward Elwall.
However, neither the Eckerlins nor
Edward Elwall can be noted with
certainty to have been members of the
order.”
Again, why mention any of these figures at all
given that their connection to Bektashism can in no
way be verified? If one would note all the individuals
throughout history who held beliefs and practices
containing the slightest similarities with Bektashism
you’d be able to fill out volumes!
Deplorably, it is only halfway through “Sufism
Bridging East & West: the case of the Bektashis” that
McElwain mentions a confirmable and verifiable
presence of a Bektashi in America, that of Baba
Rexheb Ferdi (1900-1995) and the center he
established in Michigan in 1954. Baba Rexheb,
nonetheless, receives only one miniscule paragraph,
despite his being a man who devoted his entire life to
the way of Haji Bektash, a man who gave up a family
life, a man who lived in exile from his homeland for 50
years and a man who was single-handedly responsible
for safeguarding the Bektashi tradition during the
darkest hours of communist rule over Albania.
Additionally Baba Rexheb wrote a length study in
Albanian on Islamic Mysticism and Bektashism
32
entitled Misticimza Islame dhe Bektashizme, which
was later partially translated to English. It is
astonishing that McElwain does not even discuss this
work and only says that Bektashism failed to become
more widely spread in North America because of
“Baba Rexheb’s integrity in not compromising the
spiritual tradition for other agendas.” I can only ask,
can anyone name a real spiritual guide who has done
otherwise? Unfortunately, McElwain fails to mention
what these “other agendas” are.
The next subject I would like to draw attention
to is McElwain’s statement that the Dawoodi “branch”
represents “the tradition that most closely adheres to
the teachings of Hajji Bektash.”12 To begin with, has
history ever witnessed a tariqat that posts a legal
disclaimer about potential misuse of a novice manual?
For “Dawoodi-Bektashis” this manual is entitled How
to Form a Sufi Lodge: The Dawoodi-Bektashi Order
of Dervishes Guide for Establishing and Maintaining
a Sufi Lodge,13 and its presents the reader with a
general view of the religious currents driving group as
formulated by McElwain and his khalifah, Kemal
Argon. Reading through it one is hard pressed to find
anything remarkably Bektashi in it at all. The entire
manuscript appears to maintain an adherence to
normative Sunni Islam (albeit with orthodox Twelver
Shi’ite leanings) and typical Sufi practice, coupled
with a heavy dose of quotations from the Old
Testament.
In reality, the actual source of McElwain’s
claims to be a pure representation of Haji Bektashi
does not come from any genuine Bektashi tradition
but rather can be found in his own writings and posts.
12 Yahoo Dervish group, post #932

13 The word ‘Bektashi’ has been dropped from recent
editions of this manual.
33
We are told in one communication that the Dawoodi
Order was founded by none other than Haji Bektash
himself (Sufi-Dhikr message #4409), and then we
read in a later post (#5383) that there was no order
known as the “Dawoodi-Bektashi” until McElwain
formulated the designation himself. In the very same
post, he divulges that, “because of the lack of
historical documentation, I have felt it best to
suppress the chain of transmission altogether, and
rely merely on the twelve imams.” However, why
would this need to be done? Why would there be a
need to conceal ones religious affiliation, especially
since he now resides in secular Scandinavia and his
followers are found primarily in North America? Are
there currently squads of fanatic mullahs running
around the mountains West Virginia with the sultan’s
troops in tow hounding out closeted Bektashi
heretics?
Thus we find that in the Dawoodi movement
McElwain created a Sufi brotherhood containing
commonplace Sufi ritual, and which recites both the
Qur’ān and Bible verses in their sama’. The
description of the dhikr ceremony as provided in
How to Form a Sufi Lodge has nothing Bektashi
about except a mention of the 12 Imams and Haji
Bektash Veli. Moreover, it should be added that
Bektashis do not make group dhikr with repetitive
chanting, as described in McElwain’s manual. It
should also be noted that Bektashis (or any other Sufi
order to my knowledge) have never used the Bible as
an authoritative religious scripture as McElwain does.
In his section on beliefs and practices, McElwain
repeatedly emphasizes a Bektashi use of the Qur’ān
and the Bible. I personally have read many Bektashi
texts as well as sung many a Bektashi nefes and I have
never encountered any examples of Bektashis using
34
the Bible to prop up religious doctrine. Bektashis
honor the Four Scriptures, as do all Muslims, but they
do not teach from them. As a Muslim, teaching from
the Zabur or Psalms can be problematical in any
event since an authoritative Islamic translation and
commentary on them has never existed.
What McElwain does constantly assert is the
very Bektashi concept of the “Four Gates”, except that
his elucidation of them is cursory at best. He even
makes an oblique jab at the Bektashi hierarchical
pathway of Shari’ah, Tariqah, Ma’rifah and Haqiqah
by stating, “All four gates must be active. It is an old
Bektashi principle, lost by the hierarchical orders, that
the adherent must engage in all of the mystical states,
not just one of them.” 14 A good reading of J.K. Birge’s
noteworthy The Bektashi Order of Dervishes presents
a much more focused view, as would a cursory reading
of Bektashi nefes. However, I must presume that
McElwain has no access to the overabundance of
material on Bektashism in Turkish and a few lines
from his semi-autobiographic Hello I am God: A
Bektashi Rosary should explain why:
“Many of the villagers did me the
honor of coming to pay their respects.
There was a line of visitors almost every
day it seemed. One gentleman listened
carefully to everything I said. He eyed me
curiously. Finally, he said to the host in a
loud whisper, ‘Is your friend mentally
deficient?’ ‘Why no,’ said my friend.
‘Then why does he speak Turkish so
poorly?’”
There are many concepts in authentic
Bektashism (and Alevism) that McElwain stridently
35
rejects, such as the concept of “Allah-Muhammad-Ali”
joined in a Reality. He posts: “In this we contrast with
those Bektashis, influenced I believe by Western
scholarship, who maintain a trinity of deities in Allah-
Muhammad-Ali, or who are outright pantheists.” 15 I
surmise that the reason he also ferociously opposes
this so-called Bektashi “trinity” is that he possesses a
Muhammad and ‘Ali who haven’t yet made union with
Reality. Yet he would rather assert godhood for
himself (read through his Hello, I’m God and see what
I mean) and claim that is the legendary “Bektashi
Secret” while ranting against Bektashi tradition.16
As I have stated, most of what can be passed for
as “Bektashi” in McElwain’s How to Form a Sufi
Lodge can easily be retrieved from Birge’s book as
well as from the extremely flawed work Extremist
Shi’ites by Matti Mousa. Those Dawoodi “traditions”
that can be found in Birge’s book are listed as “village
Alevi” practices that may or may not correspond to
Bektashi customs. This inventory is by no means
original and is not expanded upon by McElwain.
Rather it reads like a laundry list of already known
facts rather than a systematic interpretation of faith
and practice.
One interesting point in this regard is
McElwain’s claim of the Bektashi trait of tolerance
and goodwill to people of all faiths. Certainly,
Bektashis have long been known for tolerance and
liberality, but the complex nature of Bektashi theology
did not necessarily make it easier for converts to be
accepted easily into the fold. And given the amount of
contempt and disdain related in many of the posts of
the group’s official representatives in the Sufi-Dhikr

16 For the full text of this work see
http://rosanna.com/mcelwain/hello/index.htm
36
discussion group makes one wonder if such principles
are really stressed at all. I will give the following
lengthy example of one of Kemal Argon’s tirades
leveled against genuine Bektashis:
“I was going on the assumption
that there are different kinds of
Bektashis. There are those who are good
practicing Muslims and there are others
who place themselves beyond the pale of
God's laws and have no shortage of
convenient little rationalizations for why
they are indifferent to Right Guidance,
misguided, and are spiritually retarded
ignoramuses. Those ignoramuses are
such a waste of time to talk to. In fact,
when I have met one of those for certain,
I felt a need to dissociate myself from
him or her because I don’t want to see
and hear how they have taken a
magnificent religious tradition that was
entrusted to them and neglected it
completely, allowing it to turn into some
pseudo-religious cultural phenomenon
which is a mockery of its former
achievement. I have met some of those
and it was good to be able to say that I
don't need them. Usually it is enough to
say that I don’t speak Turkish and my
Dawoodi-Bektashism is not dependent
on speaking Turkish or Albanian and I
also don't care to spend too much time
learning those languages (and if I did I
would not tell them.) This conveniently
ditches all that irrelevant Turkish and
Albanian irreligious cultural baggage.
These people are such a waste of time for
37
believing Muslims to talk to. It is also not
my job to waste time educating them for
free when they are obviously not the best
candidates for instruction in our path. If
any of them come to me, I am going to be
looking for evidence of commitment to
Islamic faith and practice. If that is not
present, they will be dismissed before
they waste any more of my time.”17
Sounds like a real broadminded Sufi here!
How to Form a Sufi Lodge bases itself around

an extended commentary on the Ten Commandments
more so than anything Islamic or Sufic. These biblical
commands form the real basis of the Dawoodi
practices. But why would an Islamic Sufi order use
Christian or Jewish sacred texts as a criterion to judge
Islamic sources? I can comprehend studying Jewish
or Christian works using the Qur’ān as a criterion, but
the inverse? Such a thing is unheard of in Islamic
history and certainly there is nothing in Bektashism
would lend itself to such a practice. The manual ends
with a description of time keeping for the Dawoodi in
the Appalachians. The notching of a wooden post each
evening at sunset is interesting. An evening dhikr
being held when each seventh notch was being made
must have destroyed many a porch post over the past
five centuries.
To justify the basis for his creating a Bektashi
“group” McElwain claims in his A Path in Time to
have discovered that Bektashis “can be divided into
three groups. One group follows a hereditary leader,
another non-hereditary, and the final one, hardly to
be called a group at all, has no visible leadership.” 18
18 http://rosanna.com/mcelwain/pathintime/path1.htm
38
Let met state explicitly: There have never been
“branches” of Bektashis. McElwain is correct in noting
that there are the two parallel currents of Babagan
and Çelebi. Yet if he would have had access to the
works of Turkish scholars of Bektashism he would
have found that the Çelebis, though claiming paternal
decent from Haji Bektash, never claimed to be a
Bektashi “Order”. The “Babagan” or Tariq-i Nazanin
(the Delicate Way) as it has been called is what even
the most mediocre student of Sufism or Ottoman
history knows to be Bektashi. There have never been
any hyphenated Bektashi branches, ever!
Moreover, McElwain implicitly degrades the
Babagan through his claim that it does not represent
Haji Bektash’s teachings in its genuineness. He states
that, “Especially in the 1500s reforms came into
prominent branches of the order with changes and
additions, but the Dawoodi-Bektashi branch was
unaffected by that.”19 Balım Sultan (d. 1520)
systematized ritual and organized the Bektashi Order
and is venerated as its Pîr-i Thânî (Second Patron
Saint). However, McElwain is wrong to assume that
Balım Sultan somehow made “additions and
changes.” Reverence for the 12 Imams and leanings
towards antinomianism were already present in the
Qalandar roots of the order starting with Haji
Bektash Veli’s grand-shaykh Ahmad Yesevi. Balım
Sultan (whom McElwain erroneously refers in the
article to as “Pir Sultan”) may have standardized the
order and formalized ritual, but the doctrines and
beliefs of the Bektashis after Balım Sultan were
certainly not invented by him. In addition the image
of a “Sunni” Shari’ah-stressing Haji Bektash (to which
McElwain appears to prop up) is a nothing more than
39
a rehashing of the 20th century rewriting of Bektashi
history by certain individuals in Turkey holding
sectarian agendas.
The story given at the end of McElwain’s
“Sufism Bridging East & West: the case of the
Bektashis” narrating his supposed meeting with a
descendant of Yunus Emre while in Turkey seems to
imply that this event is the origin of his Bektashi
“connection”, but once again it is a very disingenuous
allusion. This Bektashi individual (so McElwain
claims) was not a member of any tekke and he
affirmed his Sufi doctrine with the words: “Allah is my
pir” as well as “Allah is my musahip.” McElwain
discloses that the man’s silsilah consisted only of the
Twelve Shi’i Imams (identical to our Shaykh Ali
Haydar’s!) and no mention of Haji Bektash is made at
all. From this man McElwain claims to have learned
the repetition of some names of Allah as a form of
“lone dervish” dhikr. He also alleges that he was
exposed to a Khidr-like teaching experience while
visiting Konya. There, an inebriated Bektashi version
of the Mevlevi whirling was a way to tell McElwain
about the idea of the Abdal, but Shaykh Ali Haydar
hasn’t seem to have made the connection; a real
Bektashi would have. This leads to McElwain’s final
contention that only a “Bektashi of the wandering
dervish sort” could able to follow the path of Haqiqat
without a shaykh or spiritual guide. I do believe it was
Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani who stated that, “The
shaykh of a one without a shaykh is none other that
Shaytan.”
Despite all of his claims and assertions to
historical legitimacy, in one revealing internet post we
have McElwain saying he suppressed his order’s 400
year-old silsilah, shortened the introduction of the
liturgy, and to have added both the names “Dawoodi”
40
and “Bektashi” himself to what he was teaching. He
himself named his order the “Dawoodiyya” in order
not to confuse it with the Isma’ili Dawoodi-Bohras of
India and out of reference “to the prevalent practice
(not necessarily always followed) of reciting the Zabur
or Psalms of David as a central part of dhikr.” He
further claimed direct Anatolian and Kurdish origins
to his group when he noted that, “The only extensive
reference in a scholarly work that I know of is the one
in the book Extremist Shi'ites: The Ghulat Sects, by
Matti Moosa, Syracuse University Press, 1988.”
There are numerous messages posted on the
Yahoo Sufi-Dhikr group where McElwain accentuates
a connection between his group and those Dawudis
mentioned by Mousa (who are in fact an obscure
branch of the Ahli Haqq of western Iran and have
nothing to do with the Bektashis), leading uniformed
readers to believe that the two groups are one and the
same. Yet all of this contention is completely wrecked
with McElwain’s final revelation that the “tradition”
he espoused was obtained from very surprising
sources which will be discussed below.
Let me address the aforementioned points
here. Only the most elementary students of Islamic
mysticism could possibly confuse the
Anatolian/Balkan Bektashis and Indian Ismai’ilis, and
just because you may have inserted the name of Haji
Bektashi into your prayer does not make you
Bektashi. Acceptance of a legally ordained and
competent Bektashi murshid, as well as having a
community, along with a study of its teachings, does.
The “lone dervish model” invented by McElwain can
only be seen as an excuse for his lack of legitimate
authority, as such a model does none of this. There
was nothing stopping him from traveling to Turkey
and studying under a Bektashi baba and then, if he
41
was deemed competent, he could have been given a
license (‘ijazat) to teach Bektashi spirituality. And this
lack of genuine spiritual legitimacy is illustrated quite
well in the rude and boorish behavior of many of his
disciples.
In his collection of writings and in his
numerous internet postings McElwain neglects to
show even the slightest knowledge of Haji Bektash’s
writings, be they in Turkish, Persian, Arabic or any
other language. His grasp of these seems nothing
more than a very jumbled and ambiguous
understanding of authentic Bektashi (or Alevi for that
matter) beliefs, rituals, customs and social attitudes.
Although he continually makes reference to the
group’s validation to claim Bektashism being their
supposed use of Haji Bektash’s Maqalat, it is a work
that has only recently been translated into English by
Prof Tahir Uluç of Selcük University. Of course,
McElwain has now exploited this work for his own
ends, although it raises other questions as to why he
was never able to quote or teach from the book before.
Unfortunately, one can only surmise how he will use
this to further justify his claims. He made the
following comments after the publication of Prof.
Uluç’s work:
“I find it gratifying that the basic views
expressed here are the very ones that we
have been emphasizing and that were
transmitted to us. Some of them are
issues that other Bektashis criticized us
for: such as our inclusion of shari'a
within the Sufi experience and our regard
for the four books, and our expansion of
the ten Sufi stages to reflect a broader
foundation. It goes without saying that
the four gates and the four basic mystical
42
experiences, which we have always
maintained as the core of our teaching, is
primary in this document. It is just
final proof that we have
transmitted the true teaching of
Hajji Bektash and are not off on a
tangent as some of our critics have
implied or even stated.”
Transmitted “to us” by whom? Where did
McElwain get this “spiritual” tradition from? Where?
Well on the 21st of October, 2004, he finally disclosed
the “Bektashi” origins of his Dawoodi group. In a post
made on Yahoo Sufi Dhikr group that day, he stated
that his teacher was none other than his late
grandmother, Evalyn Mullins McElwain (1900-1984).
She received the Dawoodi teaching, McElwain
maintains, from her father, John Mullins, a farmer
whose parents were originally from Kentucky and who
were farmers.
What Evalyn McElwain purportedly taught was
a silsilah containing the names of the 12 Imams, the
concept of the four gates, the four books, veneration of
the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments), a recitation
of Psalms on Friday night and the prohibition of
alcohol. Except for the acceptance of the 12 Imams
and 4 gates and books there is nothing a devout rural
Southern Baptist would not accept. For that reason, if
we can believe this claim that there was a tradition in
existence before McElwain’s birth (which given his
track record of fabrications is very dubious), it
certainly would not have stood out. More revealing to
us is that McElwain admits in the very same post that
this spiritual “tradition” cannot be traced back
before 1850 (although John Mullins was born in
1868) and he mentions the possibility that his great-
grandfather made the whole thing up, although I am
43
inclined to suspect that it is he who made the whole
thing up.
McElwain shockingly states in this post that,
“There is no documentation for the order beyond
1850 that we know of, and no documentation of a
historical Turkish connexion [sic!]. There is the
possibility that John Mullins invented the whole
thing.” What then are we to make of all the “potential”
connections we have been feed by McElawin in
regards to the Silesian Baptists, Bektashis, Elwall, and
the Melungeons over the last few years? What are we
to do with his earlier assertions of a Dawoodi tradition
originating with Haji Bektash and then how it
survived for 400 years in the mountains of West
Virginia? Where exists, then, the connection between
Thomas McElwain and Haji Bektash Veli? Can any of
his claims to be a spiritual guide now be taken
seriously?
In closing, I would very much like to ask
McElwain to show us another “Dawoodi-Bektashi”
from his particular lineage that is not an immediate
family member and who is a Melungeon. Can any
information be provided beyond his constant
fabrication, speculation and highly improbable
theories? Bektashi history is there for all to read. It is
a tradition that has been clearly recorded and that has
a foundation in historical fact. Can the same be said
for this self-styled “branch” of Bektashism? If he can,
I’ll eat a rabbit.
Afterthought
Following the initial presentation of this exposé
in November of 2004, McElwain and his followers
publicly recanted their claim to Bektashism and
admitted that they had no legitimate connection to the
order whatsoever. References to Bektashism were
deleted from their Lodge Guide (at least to the one
44
presented to me) and membership to their Yahoo
group Sufi-Dhikr restricted in an attempt to dissuade
further investigation and questioning of their
spurious claims. Unfortunately, the Dawoodi group
continues to maintain that they are Bektashis and as
of May 2006 McElwain asserted that:
“Dawoodiyya is, I believe, the tradition
that most closely adheres to the
teachings of Hajji Bektash. Yet, not
having a clear tradition of using the
term Bektashi [funny he didn’t have a
problem using it prior to 2004], when
faced with the situation where that terms
represents in many minds the contrary of
what we teach and live, we are wise to
avoid it, at least in any public documents.
Yet we remain Bektashi in the sense
that we follow his teachings, refer to his
name and writings, and are similar in
some ways to other groups who also do
so. Yet we avoid misunderstanding by
not including the term on such
documents as the lodgeguide.”
He also scornfully dismisses any criticism of
his self-initiated Sufi order by stating, “Every time
someone makes a claim [on the internet], no matter
how modest, there are six or eight dogs who come
yapping about it.”
45
Appendix
Reviews of “Sufism Bridging East & West: the

case of the Bektashis” by historian Huseyin Abiva and
well-known journalist Stephen Schwartz.
Huseyin Abiva writes:

I have received the book “Sufism in Europe and
North America” (Routledge/Curzon; ed. David
Westerlund) that contains the essay “Sufism bridging
East and West: The case of the Bektashis” by Thomas
McElwain. Mention of it was brought up here [Yahoo
Bektashi group] a few weeks back so I decided to have
a look at the work. I am posting my comments here
because others may also have read the work since its
initial mention. First off, I would like to thank
Professor McElwain for his effort in bringing further
discussion and interest to the Bektashi Order.
However, there are more than a few factual errors and
obscure statements in his work that could lead to
serious misinterpretations of what Bektashism is and
what it is not:
1) It is stated that Bektashi mysticism “must
have enhanced the cruelty of action for which [the
Janissaries were] sometimes known.” Does Bektashi
spiritualism encourage cruelty in any way? Can this be
elucidated further?
2) “The Albanian development is rather
special, since it was attached to the court of the king
himself.” By king, I assume you mean King Zog (1895-
1961), who ruled as sovereign over Albania during the
1920's and 1930's. While he certainly did not hinder
the Bektashis in his country, he was not intimately
connected with the order and was, officially, a Sunni
Later in his life, during his exile in Cairo, his family
46
did develop warm relations with Ahmet Sirri Dede of
the city’s Kaygusuz Tekke.
3) “The Hurufi doctrine, emphasizing the
mystical meaning of numbers…” I know it may sound
hypercritical, but Fazulullah Astarabadi emphasized
the “Huruf”, i.e. letters, not numerology. Indeed the
Hurufi connection to the Bektashis is more complex
than commonly perceived notions have led many to
believe. One can read Shahzad Bashir’s extensive
biography of
Fazulullah Astarabadi for more on the Hurufi-
Bektashi connection.
4) “The reforms of Pir Sultan at the beginning
of the sixteenth century.” Do you mean Balim Sultan
(d.1520) here? Pir Sultan (Abdal) is actually an
altogether different figure more commonly associated
with the Anatolian Alevis and Kızılbaş than with the
Bektashis.
5) “After this golden age, Bektashism appears
to have been more static and less willing to adopt
new beliefs and practices. Indeed, it had become so
eclectic by this time that different strands of
Bektashis have had trouble recognizing each other as
bearers of the same tradition.” Can this be clarified?
Most Alevis and Bektashi today would have no
problem in recognizing shared origins for their
spiritual systems. Yet there seems to be a rather loose
interchange of the terms “Alevi” and “Bektashi” in the
text. The two, while having connections on several
points, are not the same. I understand what you are
trying to get at, that “Bektashi” is a blanket term for all
groups claiming Haji Bektashi. For most readers
however, “Bektashi” certainly would mean those who
have followed the order as it appeared during the
47
Ottoman Empire. In this regard, there may be serious
confusion between “Alevi” and “Bektashi” in the
modern sense. For instance, there is mention of
Bektashi “dance groups” regularly performing in
modern Turkey. These are actually Alevi groups, not
Bektashi. As Bektashism is still officially outlawed in
secular Turkey, there are no public displays as such.
There are no such restrictions on the Alevis, who are
seen as an ethnic group not a Sufi order.
7) “The lodge in Skopje under the direction of
Halife Ibrahim is very popular.” There are no
Bektashi lodges in modern-day Skopje. Halife Ibrahim
(Shaykh Ibrahim Myrteza, a man I know personally) is
actually a Rifa'i-Karabaşi shaykh, not a Bektashi.
There are, however, other functioning Bektashi tekkes
in Macedonia today: one each in Tetovo, Kičevo, and
Kanatlar.
8) Your speculations on the Melungeons are
captivating. However, the section suffers from a
serious lack footnotes (as does the entire book in
fact!).
9) The mention of a “Bektashi revival” in
Bulgaria is once again misleading in that Alevis are
once again confused with Bektashis. The Bektashi
presence in Bulgaria disappeared with the departure
of the Ottomans. There are, however, large segments
of the Turkish population that describes itself as
Kızılbaş, meaning Alevi, not Bektashi.
10) “The canon of accepted Scriptures is open
and diverse, but always seems to include the four
books, that is the Bible (the Torah, Psalms and
Gospels) and the Quran.” While this may be true
for some Alevi groups, to state that this acceptance is
48
“almost universal among Bektashis” is not true.
11) “In my experience, most of the Bektashis I
met in Turkey did use alcohol, and on one occasion I
even found drunkenness a part of the ritual.” While I
agree with the first part, Bektashis have never
encouraged drunkenness as part of ritual, especially
as part of ritual. There is even a person assigned
during the muhabbet whose duty is to see to it that
there is no overindulgence of the dem. Perhaps this
was an anomaly you ran into and not representative of
Bektashi tradition.
12) “A final Bektashi practice is that of laying
a spoon with the bowl of it down instead of up.”
Actually, Bektashis place the spoon face up. The
notion of it being placed face down after a meal is a
long held inaccuracy.
13) There is a second mention made by you of a
Bektashi lodge in Skopje and of its members being
“very strict in their adherence to Islamic law.” As I
stated above, there are NO functioning Bektashi
lodges in Skopje and given my longstanding affiliation
with the Albanian and Macedonian Bektashi
community, I have never come across any that could
be described as “very strict in their adherence to
Islamic law” at any stretch of the imagination (as
proven in your statement about the use of alcohol
above). In addition, Bektashis have never performed
the darb/burhan (which is described by you as “fakir
trickery”). It is simply not part of Bektashi ritual or
tradition. This is a Rifa'i, Sa'di and (to a lesser extent)
Qadiri devotion in Macedonia and Kosovo. I had the
opportunity to take part in this ritual piercing in the
Hazinadar Baba Rifa'i tekke of Skopje, as rest assured
the metal going through my cheek was no trick.
49
Once again, I do not mean these concerns as a
challenge to anyone, rather in as a move to seek
clarification, discussion and further instruction.
With Love,
Ashik Huso
From international journalist Stephen

Schwartz:
I have now had a chance to read Thomas
McElwain’s essay, “Sufism Bridging East and West,
The case of the Bektashis” and I must say that, if
anything, my criticism of it would be much harsher
than that of Brother Huseyin Abiva. To begin with, I
believe that publications on these topics must be as
careful, factual, and detailed as possible. I am not an
academic, but in all my books and articles have sought
to work to an academic standard. In the past, this
stance was motivated by the fact that my efforts
concentrated on criticism of the history of the pro-
Soviet left, and I knew that if my writings were not
“bulletproof” they would be torn to shreds, and I
would be discredited. At present, I face a similar
situation because my work is so critical of Wahhabism
– the enemy lies in wait and hopes to use any mistake
or ambiguity to undermine my arguments.
In my own view, scholarly standards are even
more important when we present our knowledge of
Sufism to the uninitiated public, because of the
pitfalls of the New Age approach and similar
distortions of Islam prevalent in Western society.
Nevertheless, I have already stated and restated that
point and will not belabor it unnecessarily here.
I am disturbed by the following formulations in
Prof. McElwain’s essay:
50
1. “the militant mysticism of Ahmed Yassavi in
Central Asia.” I do not understand what this is
intended to convey, and am sorry to see it presented
without elucidation. I recently visited the massive
türbe complex of Hojja Yasawi in Kazakhstan, and
nothing I heard from people there indicated that his
legacy is seen as “militant.” An easily-accessed
website includes this citation: ”If you meet the
unfaithful, do not offend him. God averts from the
cruel-hearted men, from souls of offenders.”
2. “It thus became in some sense the
competitor of the famous whirling dervishes,
founded by Jalal al-Din Rumi at about the same
time.” I don’t favor this kind of extreme
simplification of the history of Sufism.
3. “Circle prayer with the recitation of the
Qur’ān and perhaps Bible portions.” I do not
approve of the introduction of the Bible here,
especially with nothing more than the qualifier
“perhaps” to ameliorate the absence of a source for
this comment. This is a highly controversial issue and
if it is to be discussed it must be done so thoroughly.
4. “It formed the rallying point for the elite
Janissaries, and with its fostering of mystical
devotion must have enhanced the cruelty of action
for which that body is sometimes known.” I have
already made clear my very serious objection to this
comment. Aside from its accommodation to
Islamophobia, it is both logically and grammatically
incoherent. Bektashism was not a “rallying point” for
the Yeniceri. The concept that mystical devotion
enhances cruelty cannot be considered anything but a
serious attack on the whole character of Sufism. I
51
think Prof. McElwain has confused the Yeniceri with
the başibozuks, who represented an entirely different
phenomenon.
5. “Bektashi sympathizers today are among
the most faithful admirers of Atatürk.” A statement
like this, especially following mention of the
suppression of Sufism by Mustafa Kemal, cannot
stand without elaboration. No Sufi should ever refer
to the secularizing, militarist dictator of the Turkish
republic by the name used by the regime to confer on
him “fatherhood of the Turks,” without at least a
qualifier – but that is only my opinion.
6. “There are still organized lodges in
Macedonia, Bulgaria and Kosovo, and perhaps even
in Hungary. The Albanian development is rather
special, since it was attached to the court of the king
himself. With the new independence of Albania the
order has reappeared strongly, especially in the
southern part of the country. However, the
Communist regime was fairly successful in
exterminating the earlier spirituality, and it is
difficult in reconstruction to get beyond mere
identity and forms.” For reasons I noted in an earlier
communication, this entire paragraph is deeply
offensive. The Albanian Bektashi order was never
“attached to the court of the king.” In reality, the
Communist regime was unsuccessful in extirpating
the religiosity and spirituality of the Albanian nation.
If one is going to discuss the special nature of
Albanian Bektashism, it cannot be elided in this
fashion.
7. There then emerges the first of the
indications that this paper deliberately ignores the
difference between Alevis in Turkey and Bektashis.
52
This is an extremely serious and irritating error.
Alevis are not the same as Bektashis. They can only
be considered a subset of Bektashis in the most
general way, in the same manner that both can be
considered subsets of Muslims. Obscuring these
differences will not help any scholar or spiritual
seeker. It will only put obstacles in their way, which is
not our mission.
8. The inclusion of the discussion of Edward
Elwall seems to me completely gratuitous, adding
nothing to the understanding of Bektashism, while
also being excessively speculative.
9. I have already expressed myself on this
entire Melungeon discussion but will only add that I
am of Appalachian origin on my mother’s side, and as
a young man, then studying anthropology, read a good
deal on the Melungeons, because for a while I believed
my great-grandmother was a Melungeon (she was not;
she was a Tsalagi (Cherokee) from North Carolina). I
am also now aware of efforts to claim all sorts of
Arabic and Islamic presences in the Americas before
recent times, including the argument advanced by an
otherwise-reputable scholar that Arabic was the
fourth most common spoken language in Charleston,
South Carolina, in the 18th century. I am suspicious of
all of these speculative claims unless they can be
supported by solid sources. But I have already said
that.
10. “a re-establishment of Albanian
Bektashism is likely to take place.” It has already
taken place, more than a decade ago, and to suggest
otherwise, especially in print, is not only erroneous,
but extremely offensive. I suggest Prof. McElwain sit
down with someone who reads Albanian and go
53
through references to Bektashism in that language via
Google.
11. “The success of this will probably depend
on the action of Albanian American Bektashis.” This
is also erroneous and offensive, but I can add nothing
about this to what I wrote in point. The rest of this
article is so vague, sloppy, and superficial that it really
can do serious harm to the image of Bektashism
among scholars.
12. However, I must say I am deeply, deeply
offended by the statement “Like the Mevlevis, the
Bektashis are known for their tolerance of Judaism
and Christianity as well as Islam.” The Naqshbandis
are not known for this? The Halvetis? The Chishtis?
The Rifa’is? How many more orders do I have to
name? To limit a discussion of this elementary aspect
of Sufism to the Mevlevis and Bektashis is to create a
completely new genre of “tourist Sufism.”
13. I am equally offended, as a Sufi and as an
author and scholar, by the ridiculous statement,
“More than the Mevlevis, they are considered to have
taken on beliefs and practices from outside the
Islamic tradition.” Is this something that is unique to
the Mevlevis and Bektashis? Hardly. Anybody with
the slightest real knowledge of Sufism should know
this.
14. Then we have this almost unbelievable
paragraph, so laden with misapprehensions and
errors as to require a whole separate discussion:
“So far as I know, no researchers have
remarked on the similarities between
Bektashis and Jews, although the
historical contact with the Dönme or
54
Muslim convert followers of the
seventeenth-century 'false' Messiah
Sabbetai Zwi is well known. Considering
the various possibilities of contact with
several Jewish communities of different
kinds, that failure seems surprising. There
are a number of features that might well
have Jewish origins. The diet is more like
Jewish kashrut than Sunni halal, differing
only in the lack of regard to mixing milk
and meat. Although there is nothing like
the Sabbath observance of Judaism,
certain actions are widely avoided on
Saturdays, especially entertainment and
commerce. Nails are pared early on Friday,
full ablutions are made, and marriages and
funerals avoided on that day. Although
this is certainly not limited to Judaism, the
Star of David or Solomon's seal is a
prominent decoration in Haci Bektash
Koyu. It is found above all of the ancient
wells in the area, and even on the big
dipper in the large kettle in the kitchen, a
utensil that is almost considered sacred.
All in all, Bektashism is particularly
adapted to attracting people of either
Christian or Jewish background.”
First, numerous Jewish researchers have
remarked on the similarities between Bektashis and
Kabbalistic Jews; it is something of a cliché in Jewish
studies. Second, there is no verifiable basis to claim a
historical contact between Sabbatai Zvi or the
Dönmeh and the Bektashis, which is another cliché.
The fact that the Bektashi diet more resembles
kashrut than Sunni halal standards is something
anyone who knows anything serious about Islam
55
should be aware of, i.e. that the Shi’i dietary laws are
the same as the Jewish dietary laws except for the
milk/meat issue and the fact that Shi’is are allowed to
eat shrimp or prawns if caught fresh. Otherwise,
Shi’is do not eat shellfish or fish without scales or
catfish, and any book of Shi’i fiqh includes this.
Sistani’s volume of fiqh for Shi’is living in the West
includes photographs of halal fish. The real howler
here, however, is the reference to the Star of David,
because it has become infamous among superficial
commentators. The six-pointed star was not
considered a Jewish symbol until the end of the 18th
and beginning of the 19th centuries, when the idea of a
Jewish national consciousness emerged in Europe.
The traditional Jewish symbol seen on graves and
other monuments was the menorah. I was once told
by a Wahhabi idiot in Prishtina, Kosovo that the
oldest mosque in Kosovo was built by Jews, because
its walls included six-pointed star motifs. These
motifs are extremely common in Islamic art and
architecture.
15. Then we have this pearl: “Albanian
Bektashism still tends to be rather nationalistic in
character. Despite its poverty, with its new
governmental support, it may in time provide a
community of interest to visitors.” What is going on
here? Has Prof. McElwain concluded that because
Albanians are little known and speak an obscure
language they are free targets for abusive, speculative
comments? Since when does poverty afflict the
Bektashi order? Since when does the government of
Albania provide support to Bektashism? What form
does this alleged support take? Prime Minister Fatos
Nano is a former Communist from an Orthodox
background. What business would he have
supporting Bektashism? And what stands in the way
56
of Albanian Bektashism presently being of interest to
visitors?
16. “Hu” as a reference to Allah is derived from
“Hu” as the breath of God, or at least that is what I
was taught. It is not derived from YHVH, the Hebrew
divine name. It is the same as “hu” in Aramaic, as it
appears in the Jewish Kaddish, “berich hu.” In both
Arabic and Aramaic it is typically translated as “He,”
of which it is a synonym.
I apologize if these comments seem needlessly
reproachful. They are motivated only by a desire for
inscription of truth on paper and in books as well as
on hearts.
--Stephen Schwartz
57
58
Select Bibliography
Amin, Mustafa el-, (1990). African American

Freemasons: Why they should accept Islam.
Jersey City, New Mind Productions.
--------------------, Al-Islam, Christianity and
Freemasonry, (1990. Jersey City, New Mind
Productions.
---------------------, Freemasonry, Ancient Egypt and
the Islamic Destiny, (1990). Jersey City, New
Mind Productions.
The Ancient Arabic Order, Nobles of the Mystic
Shrine for North American Recognition Test,
(n.d.). Chicago, Ezra A. Cook Pub. Inc.
Baba Rexhebi, (1970). The Mysticism of Islam and
Bektashism, N.Y., Waldon Press.
Barrett, M.J., (1968). Noble’s Quiz Book. Ezra Cook
Publications, Inc.
Birge, J. K., The Bektashi Order of Dervishes (London
Lucazc, 1938)
Burr, Nelson, (1961). A Critical Bibliography of
Religion in America, Princeton U.P.
Chocrane, Harry Hayman, (1934). The Shriner’s
Book: Following the Fez.
Davis, Harry E., (1946). A History of Freemasonry
among Negroes in America. United Supreme
Council Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite
Northern Jurisdiction, Inc.
Duncan’s Masonic Ritual and Monitor, (1980, rev.
ed.). Chicago, Ezra A. Cook Pub. Inc.
Ellwood, Robert S. and Harry B. Partin, Religious and
Spiritual Groups in Modern America.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Eterovich, Adam S., Croatia and the Croatians of the
Lost Colony
Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas, (1992). The Occult Roots
59
of Nazism: Secret Aryan Cults and their
influence on Nazi ideology, N.Y., N.Y. U.P.
Hirschman, Elizabeth, Melungeons: The Last Lost
Tribe in America
Kennedy, Brent. The Melungeons: A Forgotten Folk
McElwain, Dr. Thomas, A Path in Time
----------------------------, Hello, I’m God: a Bektashi
Rosary (Minerva, 1998)
Moosa, Maati (1998). Extremist Shi'ite: The Ghulat
Sects, Syracuse U.P.
Muraskin, William Allen, (1975). Middle Class Blacks
in a White Society: Prince Hall Freemasonry
in America. Berkeley, University of California.
The Mystic Shrine: An Illustrated Ritual of the
Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of the Mystic
Shrine, (1975, rev. ed.). Chicago, Ezra Cook
Pub., Inc.
Norsu AbdurNur, Shaykh Kamal & Shaykh ‘Ali, (2005,
revised ed.). How to Form a Sufi Lodge: The
Dawoodi-Bektashi Order of Dervishes: Guide
for Establishing and Maintaining a Sufi Lodge
Rashad, Adib, (1991). History of Islam and Black
Nationalism in America. Beltsville,
M.D.,Writers’ Inc.
Sebottendorf, Baron Rudolf von, (2000). The Practice
of the Ancient Turkish Freemasons: The Key
to Understanding of Alchemy – A
Presentation of the Ritual, Doctrine and Signs
of Recognition among the Oriental
Freemasons. Smithville, Texas, Runa-Raven
Press, (translated by Stephen E. Flowers).
Secret Societies Illustrated, (n.d.). Chicago, Ezra Cook
Pub., Inc.
MacKinzie, Norman, ed. (1967). Secret Societies.
Chicago, Holy, Reinhart and Wilson.
Southern, R.W., (1962). Western Views of Islam in
60
the Middle Ages. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
U.P.
Tsou, Dr.Cao (1923, trans.), Infinite Wisdom. Chicago:
DeLawrence Co.
Van Deventer, Fred, (1959). Parade to Glory: The
Story of the Shriners and Their Hospitals for
Crippled Children. N.Y., William Morrow and
Co.
Waite, Arthur Edward, (1970). New Encyclopedia of
Freemasonry. N.Y., Weathervane Books.
Westerlund, David, ed., Sufism in Europe and North
America (Routledge-Curzon, 2003).
Whalen, William, (1966). Handbook of Secret
Organizations. Milwaukee, The Bruce
Publishing Company.
Wilmore, Gayrand, (1973). Black Religion and Black
Radicalism. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press,
Doubleday.
Wilson, Peter Lambourn, (1988). Scandal: Essays in
Islamic Heresy. Brooklyn, Autonomedia.
----------------------------, (1993). Sacred Drift Essays
on the Margins of Islam. San Francisco, City
Lights.
61
62

Painting Coal Gold The Use and Misuse of

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Painting Coal Gold The Use and Misuse of

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Painting Coal Gold The Use and Misuse of

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PAINTING COAL GOLD

AN ESSAY ON THE MISUSE OF THE BEKTASHI NAME IN

This work is based on a paper presented at:

The Knights Templar:

The Thule Society

The Bizarre Case of the Dawoodi Order

2 Yahoo group “Sufi-Dhikr” post #6019

3 Yahoo Sufi-Dhikr group, post #1797

7 McElwain has posted a number of Elwall’s writings

12 Yahoo Dervish group, post #932

14 Yahoo Dervish group, post #823

15 Yahoo Dervish group, post #803

How to Form a Sufi Lodge bases itself around

19 Yahoo Sufi-Dhikr group, post #4409

Reviews of “Sufism Bridging East & West: the

Huseyin Abiva writes:

From international journalist Stephen

Amin, Mustafa el-, (1990). African American

You might also like