Nicolaus - Recenzja

Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

Review Article The Yezidi Religion Peter Nicolaus Former UN High Commissioner for Refugees in Kabul, Salzburg

Abstract The article presents a detailed discussion of several key issues concerning the essentials of the Yezidi identity―the Yezidi religion, particularly the folk pantheon and the conceptions of divinity, based upon the analysts of the recent monograph by Garnik S. Asatrian and Victoria Arakelova. Keywords Yezidi Religion, Yezidi Folk Pantheon, Heretic Sects, Peacock Angel, Serpent

Garnik Asatrian and Victoria Arakelova have succeeded introducing a book1 “entirely dedicated to the essentials of Yezidi identity—the Yezidi religion, or more precisely the so-called Yezidi folk pantheon in its varied dimensions” (p. ix), which also probes “Yezidi conceptions of divinity in the light of a comparative religious analysis” (p. x). Part I initially addresses the notion of God (Monotheism versus Polytheism), and then explores the manifestations of God—the Yezidi triad (Malak-Tāwūs, Sheikh ‘Adi, and Sultan Ezid). By comparing, inter alia, Old Iranian, Islamic, and Greek concepts of the divine, the authors clearly demonstrate that Yezidism is, without any doubt, a monotheistic religion, and that the component deities within the Yezidi triad are “unambiguous manifestations of the one god” (p. 3)—known to the Yezidis as Xwadē. The authors then segue into an analysis of Xwadē’s rather bizarre nature. 1

Garnik S. Asatrian, Victoria Arakelova, The Religion of the Peacock Angel: The Yezidis and their Spirit World, Durham: “Acumen”, 2014, 157 pp.  Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2014

DOI: 10.1163/1573384X-20140306

316

P. Nicolaus / Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

Xwadē is a transcendent creator-god who is completely disinterested in his creation and has no concern about its fate. In other words, a typical deus otiosus,2 who in turn does—as already Layard remarked—not receive “any direct prayer or sacrifice” from the people he created.3 After a careful examination of the syncretistic background, the authors convincingly suggest that Xwadē could be “the residue of the ‘hidden god’ of some ancient Gnostic system, and that his manifestations in the triad are comparable to the emanations from the far removed divine” (p. 6 and p. 124125). However, Xwadē is not only the echo of the removed Supreme Being (the highest and unknowable God of the Gnostic), but has also merged with “the Gnostic’s image of the Demiurge” (p. 125). This already confusing dichotomous trait of Xwadē is further blurred by Xwadē transferring his demiurgical functions to the triad (see below), in particular to MalakTāwūs, the Peacock Angel. Thus, the authors are implicitly inviting the question of whether the dualistic nature of Malak-Tāwūs is actually not the result of the unique and strictly non-Gnostic merging of the Supreme Being (good) with the Demiurge (evil, or at least imperfect), and the subsequent manifestation of Xwadē in Malak-Tāwūs. Malak-Tāwūs, the Peacock Angel, is the most important character in the Yezidi belief. He “dominates all major and minor divinities of the pantheon”. The authors analyse, in detail, the supreme role of this deity in the Yezidi cult and tradition, introduce the genesis and symbolism of the peacock image, explain the role Malak-Tāwūs plays in other traditions, and examine not only this cosmically ambiguous character but also his relation to the fallen angel of Islam and the apologia he receives in early Sufism. They conclude that, in the Near Eastern tradition (including Iran), the peacock symbolises not only magnificence and grandeur, but also pride, vanity and lust; he displays beauty (stunning plumage), but also has repelling features (ever-open, evil staring eyes, ugly legs and an unpleasant voice). In Old Iranian beliefs, the peacock is fashioned by the principle of evil (Ahriman)—his only creation of something good. Hence, the peacock seems to possess “both divine and infernal attributes” (p. 26). The 2 In the same vain Eszter Spät, The Yezidis, London, 2005: 32; and Birgül Açikyildiz, The Yezidis, The History of a Community, Culture and Religion, London/New York, 2010: 71. 3 A. H. Layard, Nineveh and Its Remains, vol. 1, London 1849 (Reprint, Piscataway, 2010): 297.

P. Nicolaus / Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

317

view of early Sufis—reflected by several Yezidi myths—that “Satan is an adherent absolutely devoted to his creator” (p. 28), who failed out of love and the desire to keep Allah’s law, merged with the ambivalent nature of the peacock. This synthesis suggests that the Peacock Angel represents both God and evil at the same time; and that “the double nature of [his] character, whose glorification had become a crucial concept” (p. 29) in the Yezidi religion, catapulted Malak-Tāwūs to the top of the Yezidi pantheon. In the context of the genesis of the peacock image, the authors make an interesting connection between the peacock and the Gnostic serpent (p. 24 and 126-127). This somehow reminds one ofa quip of a Yezidi princess (a member of the Mir’s family) associating Malak-Tāwūs with both the peacock and the snake: “The peacock represents the beauty of the worshiped and the snake his wisdom, because he is both beautiful and wise”.4 Such juxtaposition of the Peacock Angel with the serpent would certainly further underline Malak-Tāwūs’ dualistic trait, as the likewise Delphic nature of the serpent (death and destruction, as well as fertility, life and wisdom) would complement the aforementioned ambiguous character of the peacock. Furthermore,—following the authors remark about “the serpent and the peacock, appearing together, Yezidism has inevitably [to be viewed] within the orbit of Gnosticism”(p. 24)—one could speculate that Malak-Tāwūs, in addition to being the emanation of Xwadē, has also become the manifestation of the salvific figure, often depicted by Gnostics as serpent. In their chapter concerning Malak-Tāwūs, the authors also solve the Sharfadin enigma. Although an insignificant figure of Sheikh ‘Adi’s family, Sharfadin is quoted by many Yezidis as the representative of their faith: “Sharfadin is my religion” (p. 29). Šaraf ad-dīn means “the Honour of Religion” in Arabic, and the authors conclude that the term had been “one of the main epithets of the principal deity” and, at a later stage, replaced in many instances the partially tabooed name of Malak-Tāwūs. Thus, the term “Sharfadin” came to denote the religion in general. Then, “by way of a secondary reference, the name became associated, even identified, in 4

Shaikh Iskandar Yusuf al-Hayik, apud Sami Said Ahmed, The Yazidis. Their Life and Beliefs, Miami 1975: 222.

318

P. Nicolaus / Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

the folk tradition with the respective member of the ‘Adawi family” (p. 30). The two other representatives of the Yezidi triad are—in contrast to the purely religious and mythical figure of Malak-Tāwūs—deified historical personalities: the great Sufi Master Sheikh ‘Adi bin Musafir and the Umayyad Caliph Yazid. Their functions, characteristics, and titles are superposed and intertwined with each other and with that of Malak-Tāwūs. The authors even refer to a “unification of the characters” and stress that “they can act in tri-unity” (p. 39). With regard to the Sufi saint, it is interesting to note that—contrary to other experts of Yezidism5—the authors clearly and rightly see Sheikh ‘Adi “among the Sufis exculpating Iblis, a fact that later dramatically influenced the whole Yezidi doctrine” (p. 38). Nevertheless, during the time of Sheikh ‘Adi and shortly thereafter, Yezidism was firmly rooted in mainstream Islam; and as an example for this the authors quote from the Yezidi requiem Qawlē Saramargē and conclude: “Much as this fact seems amazing, in the religion, now totally dissociated from Islam and even approaching the Muslim milieu as hostile, the death of the Prophet of Islam and the first Shi‘a Imam is represented as terminus comparationis in the context of a personal grief, a loss of kinsman, or, rather, the inevitability of death for any human being—even for Allah’s messenger and his close kin” (p. 42). Other thought-provoking findings by the authors, in the context of Sheikh ‘Adi, are significant Shi‘a elements in Yezidism, like the deity (Sheikh ‘Adi) riding Dundul, the legendary and mythical steed of Caliph ‘Ali, the first Shi‘a Imam, and the glorification of the main subjects of Shi‘a veneration, ‘Ali and his wife Fatima, as well as their sons Hasan and Hussain. All of them are captured in religious Yezidi lore and hymns (e.g. the Hymn to ‘Ali, God’s Lion). In view of the hatred that mainstream Shi‘a bears towards the Umayyad Caliph Yazid, whom they hold ultimately responsible for the death of the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad (Hussain) in the battle of Karbala and whom they consider the eponym of Yezidi people, the authors convincingly suggest that these features en5 E.g. Kreyenbroek, Yezidism, Its Background, Observances and Textual Tradition, Lewiston, 1995: 47: “[A]lthough a certain veneration for Iblis was not unknown in Sufi circles in his time, Sheykh ‘Adi’s work shows no trace of such attitude and goes no further than to affirm that Satan is subordinate to God’s omnipotence”.

P. Nicolaus / Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

319

tered Yezidism “from the heterodox Shi‘a milieu”, or were rather “shaped out of the same heretical field” (p. 42). Although Sultan Ezid, compared with Sheikh ‘Adi and Malak-Tāwūs, plays only a secondary role in the Yezidi triad, the authors attest that his name is used to identify the Yezidi faith: “Sultan Ezid is our religion” (p. 45). They very rightly equate Sultan Ezid with the Yazid bin Mu’āwiya ibn Abī Sufyān, the second Umayyad Caliph (680-683). They further substantiate this fact by pointing out that the second part of the name “Mu’āwiya, in the form of Māwī, occurs in Yezidi religious hymns” (p.48).However, the authors also emphasise that many Yezidis categorically negate any connection between their deity (Sultan Ezid) and the historical character, and recognise this “as an attempt to separate the Yezidi tradition from Islam and from any personage attested in the history of Islam” (p. 49). Their work also answers the striking question as to how a ruler, whose dubious character is even recognised within some Sunni quarters, could become a major deity in the Yezidi pantheon: a political and religious movement, supporting and venerating the Umayyad dynasty, which called themselves Yezidis, joined, together with other groups and sects, the ‘Adawiyyas (venerating Sheikh ‘Adi) in the early 12th century. They proved to be influential enough to succeed in the deification of their adored Caliph Yazid and to impose their name on the entire conglomerate by the 16th century, when the endo-ethnonym Yezidi (one among others) also became “a pejorative exo-ethnonym applied mainly by the Shi‘as to the people venerating the cursed enemy” (p. 48). The highlight of this book is most definitely Part II, which introduces the minor deities of the Yezidi folk-pantheon. It is based on an article previously published by the authors (Iran and the Caucasus, vol. 8.2. (2004): 232-279), but the analysis is more in-depth, and characters of veneration are introduced, which were not included in the earlier publication, like Sheikh Kirās (Spirit of the Garment), Sheikh Shams (Sun), and Malak Farxadin (Moon). There is a particularly interesting analysis of one of these newly introduced deities, namely Sheikh Kirās, as well as Pīrā Fāt, the foremother of the Yezidis, and Xidir-Nabī, the universal deity. Sheikh Kirās is—as the authors attest—an almost forgotten deity, which is most probably linked to “the process of death, transmigration of souls, maybe even reincarnation—the exchange of bodies like that of

320

P. Nicolaus / Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

clothes” (p. 77). The authors suggest that Sheikh Kirās could have been “an epithet to the name of Nasr ad-din, a psychopomp and the angel of death, one of the manifestations of Malak-Tāwūs” (p. 78); and that at a later stage this epithet was transformed into a separate personage with particular functions. Considering the great devotion Yezidis profess for the garment (robe) of faith, it is very surprising that the interest in the deity representing the venerated garment has faded away. Due to the fact that the belief in reincarnation being almost completing, replaced by the concept of paradise and hell (which existed before in tandem), the importance of Sheikh Kirās’ has diminished, at least among the Armenian Yezidis. However, this does not explain why he also vanished into ‘thin air’ in the centre of Yezidism (Northern Iraq). There both concepts continue to coexist,6 “but reincarnation is not dominating” (p. 122) and, at the time of Furlani’s research in the 1930s, Sheikh Kirās was still known (p. 77). In other words, a fascinating question that invites further studies. The authors should be praised for their field research in Armenia, as well as for their discovery and subsequent analysis of the second, almost submerged, myth describing the genesis of the Yezidis. So far, the legend, introducing Shahid bin Jarr (the son of Adam, but not of Eve) as the forefather of all Yezidis, was considered the only myth of origin. Spät has analysed this Semitic myth in detail and highlighted its Gnostic background.7 The lore discovered by the authors has no Gnostic pedigree, but is rooted in Iranian mythology involving the female deity Pīrā Fāt (literally Old Woman Fāt). In the Yezidi tradition she is “the patroness of women in labour, as well as of new born babies, who protects them from the evil demoness Āl” (p.73). In this legend of the origin of the Yezidis—only partially preserved through secondary and indirect references—she is the keeper of the seed from which the Yezidis originate—a primordial liquid representing the pearl, “the quintessence of the universe, coexisting with the divine in eternity, prior to everything else” (p. 127). For seven hundred, or—according to other sources—seven thousand, years Pīrā Fāt keeps the seed—entrusted to her by Sheikh Abu Bakr, the incarnation of the Angel

6 During my own research in 2003, most of the Yezidis interviewed in Lalish and other villages confirmed that they believed in reincarnation, as well as in heaven and hell. 7 Eszter Spät, Late Antique Motifs in Yezidi Oral Tradition, Piscataway, 2010: 327-368.

P. Nicolaus / Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

321

Michael (one of the Avatars of Malak-Tāwūs) and only releases it on God’s command to produce “the first Yezidi from the primordial seed” (p. 76). Fāt is certainly a short form of Fātima, denoting the daughter of the Prophet Muhammed, who has “absorbed many of the features of pre-Islamic patron deities of fertility and family” (p. 74), and who is adored all over the Muslim world and venerated, in particular, within the different shadings of the Shi‘a. There Fatima shows many traits of the Old Iranian Goddess Anahita, but does not play the role of a seed-keeper. The Yezidi religion associates her even more closely with her archetype, as “Anahita is in charge of the man’s seed, as well as childbirth: she is the purifier of all men’s seed and all women’s womb” (p. 75). From Anahita the authors turn to the primal creation (Bundahishn) of Zoroastrianism, where the deity of the earth (Armati-Spandārmat) keeps the seed of the first man (Gayōmard), and they conclude that the “preservation of the primordial seed […] is in general a common mythologeme in the Iranian tradition”(p. 76). The authors’ findings invite more extensive and targeted research into other Yezidi communities to establish whether more information about this myth of creation has survived in different countries and regions where Yezidis live. As the authors confirm, Xidir-Nabī is certainly a “secondary figure” (p. 95) within the Yezidi pantheon. However, his presence there triggers interest, because he seems to be a classical example of syncretism. In a number of Islamic and non-Islamic traditions, he is known as a messenger—even as a prophet. Over time the figure of Al-Xidr has merged with various mythical personages and saints. The Yezidis in Armenia and Northern Iraq equate him with the Prophet Elijah, “which causes the emergence of a character with a double name “Xidirnabī-Xidiraylās” (p. 95) and with Surb Sargis (Saint Sergius),8 a popular Armenian saint. XidirNabī has borrowed several features from this Armenian saint, and their respective annual feasts are celebrated during the same period (the second half of February). One can only agree with the authors’ conclusion: “Xidir-Nabī is a regional character with a very extensive range of functions, an incomer from the Muslim environment, though having been 8

Some of the Yezidi men of religion, I interviewed in Lalish in 2003, mentioned in the context of Xidir-Nabī also Saint George.

322

P. Nicolaus / Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

shaped as a pantheon figure against the Armenian cultural and historical background” (p. 97). Among other prominent findings of the authors is Milyāk’atē-qanǰ―probably the only relict of the phallic cult among the Iranian peoples. In Chapter 5, the authors cursorily reflect on animals, plants and celestial bodies in the Yezidi tradition, “all of them turning out to be a reflection of early forms of religion” (p. 109). Since the peacock and the serpent are introduced and analysed in other parts of the book, the authors focus on the chameleon (the celestial snake), the rooster, and the dog. They also dispel, with good reasons, a theory according to which the donkey was allegedly venerated by the Yezidis. Of particular interest is how they outline traces of the ancient Iranian dog cult, which, however, must have sank into oblivion centuries ago, as it is last mentioned in the 17th century. The authors confirm that there is no explicit tree or plant veneration in Yezidism, and that cults around the onion and the mandrake—if they ever existed—are, nowadays, merely references made to these plants in fairy tales. They also refer to interesting connections between the respective Yezidi lore on plants and the surrounding Armenian Christian environment. Another interesting element with regard to sacred trees, is, a short reference to “the existence of a cultic complex connected with the so-called Dārā-mirāzā or ‘the Trees of Desire’” (p. 113). These are trees of no particular species, but they grow at sacred sites, or possess particular attributes, like shape and age. Festivals celebrated under these trees, in late autumn, and their background could certainly be the subject of thought-provoking research. With regard to natural phenomena, as well as celestial bodies, the authors emphasise that “the interpretations of natural phenomena in the Yezidi belief are as a whole typical for the Near Eastern region, yet some of them are not devoid of interest” (p. 116). They briefly introduce earthquake, rainbow, thunder and lightning, rain and hail, as well as the Milky Way, the constellation of Aries, Pleiades and Libra, Venus, Sun and Moon, Comets, and the personal star possessed by each person, according to Yezidi belief. The main celestial bodies are dealt with elsewhere in the book, e.g., Sheikh Shams (Sun) and Malak Farxadin (Moon) are found in the chapter on minor deities, whilst the natural phenomena are mostly at-

P. Nicolaus / Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

323

tributed to a deity discussed previously. Therefore, the authors constrain themselves to some additional information from the relevant Yezidi tradition. The last chapter of the book consists of a summary of the sources of the syncretistic Yezidi religion: heterodox Shi‘a sects, Gnosticism and Sufi elements. The comparison between Yezidism and the extreme Shi‘a sects, like ‘Ahl-i-Haqq and the Alevism of the Zaza people, is highly interesting and shows striking similarities; for instance, the parity of their cosmology, reincarnation, and religious practices. One of the authors summarises the problem and the way forward in an (unfortunately) not yet published paper: “Comparative study of heterodox Islam and its derivatives (like the Yezidism) naturally reveal multiple parallels easily explained by the common Muslim origin or regional popular traditions. Some of those striking similarities, however, occur in the religious systems separated from each other by time and geography and thus can hardly be determined by religious developments of a certain historical period in a concrete area. The esoteric character of most such traditions excludes the factor of their mutual influence as well. Revealed on different levels—being either among the main characteristics of non-dogmatic traditions or among their marginal elements—these phenomena can still be generally defined as specific markers of the Near Eastern—‘heretic’ milieu, and not only that of the heterodox Islam”.9 The section on Gnostic influences in Yezidism bolsters the arguments already made with regard to the Peacock Angel, the Serpent and the Pearl. A great point of fascination lies with the serpent and its role in Gnostic systems, as well as the parallels to the Mandaean religion. The authors very convincingly conclude that “the serpent was originally one of the main symbols of Gnosis and, quite naturally, in most traditions affected by Gnosticism this symbol had to be preserved, either in a degraded form (as with the Mandaeans), or in a formal representation with no [or at least hidden] dogmatic context (as among the Yezidis)” (p. 126). In this context, the authors also mention the enigmatic image of a snake preserved and revered by the Sheikhly Dārā Mirāzā clan in Armenia. Although the 9

Victoria Arakelova, .

P. Nicolaus / Iran and the Caucasus 18 (2014) 315-324

324

holder of the image has, meanwhile, revealed some background information and even allowed a non-Yezidi to see it,10 the conundrum concerning its role in the Yezidi religion still exists. With regard to the Sufi heritage, there is mention of the two “most obvious elements”, or rather figures that greatly shaped Yezidism: Sheikh ‘Adi, the Sufi master, who was later deified, and Malak-Tāwūs “whose cult was mainly developed upon the Sufi idea of the apology of Iblis” (p. 128). As these both personages were introduced and analysed in previous chapters, the authors, therefore, focus here more on other, relatively unknown, pieces of Sufi legacy, such as the Yezidi abhorrence of the circle. They also demonstrate, by quoting from early and later qauls (hymns), how the initial positive Sufi image deteriorated with the lapse of time; in other words, from early qauls in which “prominent Sufis are approached as righteous Yezidis defending their faith” (p. 129), to later qauls, written at a time when Yezidism had disassociated itself from Islam and was considered by the Muslims as a form of devil worship (where Talibs, Sufis and Mullahs are called stupid liars, who will be thrown into hell). These examples evidence the difficulties faced if one interprets religious lore and hymns without considering the Zeitgeist prevailing at the time of their origin. This book is yet another masterpiece in which the authors have more than lived up to the expectations of an audience interested in Yezidism. They have produced a work that addresses and analyses the core aspects of the Yezidi religion, and that encompasses, as well as introduces all known deities of the Yezidi pantheon. This allows the reader to see the quintessence of Yezidism’s cosmic vision. By analysing and comparing the deities of the Yezidi religion with Old Iranian beliefs, variants of the extreme Shi‘a, Gnosticism and Sufism, the authors have further solidified the place Yezidism holds within a (‘heretic’) milieu, characterised by numerous sects and religions patched together in the Near and Middle East.

10

See Peter Nicolaus, “The Serpent Symbolism in the Yezidi Religious Tradition and the Snake in Yerevan”, Iran and the Caucasus, vol. 15, 2011: 49-72.