Transcriber’s Notes
Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected. Variations
in hyphenation have been standardised but all other spelling and
punctuation remains unchanged.
The precise location of footnote 37 is speculative since it is not
indicated in the original.
Al-Bertuni is only mentioned once in the book, with an anchor to a
footnote which is not present. The anchor has not been included.
The first footnote to chapter VII has no anchor, nor any mention of the
apparent topic within the chapter so it has not been indexed.
Italics are represented thus _italic_, and superscripts thus y^e.
WORLD WORSHIPS SERIES
HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY, in 4 Volumes. _By Andrew Stephenson_
SEX WORSHIP AND SYMBOLISM OF PRIMITIVE RACES. _By Sanger Brown, II._
DEVIL WORSHIP, THE SACRED BOOKS AND TRADITIONS OF THE YEZIDIZ. _By
Isya Joseph._
ZOROASTRIANISM AND JUDAISM. _By George William Carter._
MESSIAHS: CHRISTIAN AND PAGAN. _By Wilson D. Wallis._
THE DEEPER ASPECTS OF ROMAN EMPEROR-WORSHIP. _By Louis Matthews Sweet._
RICHARD G. BADGER, PUBLISHER, BOSTON
[Illustration: THE SYMBOL OF THE DEVIL.]
DEVIL WORSHIP
THE SACRED BOOKS AND
TRADITIONS OF THE
YEZIDIZ
BY
ISYA JOSEPH, B.A., M.A., PH.D.
[Illustration]
BOSTON
RICHARD G. BADGER
THE GORHAM PRESS
Copyright, 1919, by Richard G. Badger
All rights reserved
The Gorham Press, Boston, U. S. A.
Made in the United States of America.
TO MY TEACHERS IN UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY,
COLUMBIA, AND HARVARD UNIVERSITIES, THIS
BOOK IS INSCRIBED WITH GRATITUDE
AND ESTEEM
CONTENTS
Chapter Page
INTRODUCTION—THE ORIGIN OF THE MANUSCRIPT 11
NOTES ON THE INTRODUCTION 22
PART I. THE TRANSLATION OF THE
ARABIC TEXT
PREFACE, IN THE NAME OF THE MOST COMPASSIONATE
GOD 29
I. AL-JILWAH—THE REVELATION 30
II. MASHAF RES—THE BLACK BOOK 36
III. APPENDIX TO PART I. 53
IV. THE POEM IN PRAISE OF ŠEIḪ ‘ADI 70
V. THE PRINCIPAL PRAYER OF THE YEZIDIS 73
VI. SEVEN CLASSES OF YEZIDIS 75
VII. THE ARTICLES OF FAITH 77
NOTES ON PART I. 83
PART II. THE CRITICAL DISCUSSION
OF YEZIDISM
I. THE RELIGIOUS ORIGIN OF THE YEZIDIS 89
I. The Yezidi Myth 89
II. The Christian Tradition 96
III. The Speculative Theories of Western
Orientalists 103
IV. The Dogmatic View of Mohammedan
Scholars and the Writer’s Own Explanation 118
Notes on Part I. 138
II. THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS IN YEZIDISM 145
I. The Yezidi View of God 145
II. The Deity of the Second Degree 147
1. Melek Ṭâ´ûs 147
2. Šeiḫ ‘Adî 158
3. Yezid 166
Notes on Chapter II. 167
III. OTHER DEITIES AND FESTIVALS 169
I. The So-Called Seven Divinities 169
II. The Day of Sarsal or New Year 174
Notes on Chapter III. 177
IV. SACRAMENTS, RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCES AND
SACERDOTAL SYSTEM 178
I. Sacraments 178
II. Some Other Religious Practices 180
III. The Sacerdotal Orders 182
Notes on Chapter IV. 185
V. THEIR CUSTOMS 186
I. Marriage 186
II. Funerals 192
III. Nationality 194
IV. Locality 195
V. Dwellings 197
VI. The Language 198
VII. Occupation 198
Notes on Chapter V. 200
VI. LIST OF THE YEZIDI TRIBES 201
The Tribes Across the River from Mosul 201
The Tribes at Sinjar and Jezireh 202
The Tribes of Midyat Region 203
VII. PERSECUTION 205
Notes on Chapter VII. 210
BIBLIOGRAPHY 213
INDEX 219
DEVIL WORSHIP
INTRODUCTION
THE ORIGIN OF THE MANUSCRIPT
The Arabic manuscript here translated was presented to me before I left
Mosul by my friend Dâud aṣ-Ṣâîġ as a memento of our friendship. Ḫawâja
aṣ-Ṣâîġ was a man of culture, in sympathy with western thought, and an
intimate acquaintance of M. N. Siouffi, the vice-consul of the French
Republic in Mosul. From the first page of the manuscript it appears
that through some Yezidis he had access to their literature. I know he
was in close touch with many of them, especially with the family of
Mulla Ḥaidar, which is the only Yezidi family that can read and guard
the sacred tradition of the sect.
The manuscript comprises a brief Introduction, the Sacred Books, and
an Appendix. In the first, the compiler indicates the sources of his
information and gives a sketch of the life of Šeiḫ ‘Adî, the chief
saint of the Yezidis.
The Sacred Books comprise _Kitâb al-Jilwah_ (Book of Revelation), and
_Maṣḥaf Rêš_ (Black Book)—so named because in it mention is made of the
descent of the Lord upon the Black Mountain (p. 32). _Al Jilwah_[1]
is ascribed to Šeiḫ ‘Adî himself, and would accordingly date from the
twelfth century A. D. It is divided into a brief introduction and
five short chapters. In each, ‘Adî is represented as the speaker. In
the Preface the Šeiḫ says that he existed with Melek Tâ´ûs before
the creation of the world, and that he was sent by his god Tâ´ûs to
instruct the Yezidi sect in truth. In the first chapter he asserts his
omnipresence and omnipotence; in the second he claims to have power
to reward those who obey him and to punish those who disobey him; in
the third he declares that he possesses the treasures of the earth;
in the fourth he warns his followers of the doctrines of those that
are without; and in the fifth he bids them keep his commandments and
obey his servants, who will communicate to them his teachings. The
_Black Book_,[2] which perhaps dates from the thirteenth century, is
larger than the Book of Revelation, but is not divided into chapters.
It begins with the narrative of creation: God finishes his work in
seven days—Sunday to Saturday. In each day he creates an angel or
king (_melek_). Melek Ṭâ´ûs, who is created on Sunday, is made chief
of all. After that Fahr-ad Dîn creates the planets, man, and animals.
Then follows a story about Adam and Eve, their temptation and quarrel;
the coming of the chief angels to the world to establish the Yezidi
kingdom; the flood; the miraculous birth of Yezîd bn Mu‘awiya; and
certain ordinances in regard to food, the New Year, and marriages.
The Appendix contains the following:
1. A collection of materials concerning the Yezidi belief and practice.
2. A poem in praise of Šeiḫ ‘Adî.
3. The principal prayer of the Yezidis, in the Kurdish language.
4. A description of the Yezidi sacerdotal system.
5. A petition to the Ottoman government to exempt the sect from
military service, presented in the year 1872 A. D.
An analysis of the texts shows that the material is taken from
different sources: part of it is clearly derived from the religious
books of the sect; another part from a description of the beliefs
and customs of the sect given by a member of it to an outsider; a
third, partly from observations by an outsider, partly from stories
about Yezidis current among their Christian neighbors. Unfortunately
the compiler does not specify whence each particular part of his
information is obtained. On closer examination it is evident that part,
at least, of the Arabic in hand is a translation from Syriac.
The Yezidis, frequently called “Devil-Worshippers,” are a small and
obscure religious sect, numbering about 200,000.[3] They are scattered
over a belt of territory three hundred miles wide, extending in length
from the neighborhood of Aleppo in northern Syria to the Caucasus in
southern Russia. The mass of them, however, are to be found in the
mountains of northern and central Kurdistan and among the Sinjar Hills
of Northern Mesopotamia.
By reason of their mysterious religion, the Devil-Worshipers have
been an object of interest and investigation for several generations.
Our chief firsthand sources of information in regard to the manners,
customs, and practices of these people are: Sir Henry Layard, _Nineveh
and its Remains_ (1849), _Nineveh and Babylon_ (1853); G. P. Badger,
_The Nestorians and their Rituals_ (1852); my honored teacher, Rev.
A. N. Andrus, veteran missionary of the A. B. C. F.M., resident in
Mardin, Mesopotamia, “The Yezidis,” in the _Encyclopaedia of Missions_;
P. Anastase, “The Yezidis,” in the Arabic periodical, _Al-Mašrik_, Vol.
II (1899); Professor A. V. Williams Jackson, of Columbia University,
_Persia Past and Present_ (1906); “The Yezidis,” in the _International
Encyclopaedia, s. v._; also in _J A O S_, XXV, 178; M. N. Siouffi,
in the _Journal Asiatique_, 1882 (vii^e série, T. 20), p. 252, and
1885 (viii^e série, T. 5), p. 78. Siouffi was the first to discover
and establish the historical character of Šeiḫ ‘Adî, about whom the
scholars had been puzzled. He published an extract relating to ‘Adî
from Ibn Ḫallikân’s _Wafaiyât ‘al-Ayân_ (bibliographical work). Of the
second-hand sources of information may be mentioned _Les Yezidis_, by
J. Menant (Paris, 1892), and the article by Victor Dingelstedt, “The
Yezidis,” in the _Scottish Geographical Magazine_, Vol. XIV, pp. 259
ff.[4]
In addition to these descriptions, several manuscripts have come to
light of recent years which give a great deal of information about the
beliefs and customs of the Yezidis.
Two of these manuscripts are in the Bibliothèque Nationale, in Paris
(_Fond Syriaque_, Nos. 306 and 325). A translation of the Arabic
(Carshuni) texts in these manuscripts relative to the Yezidis was
published by Professor E. H. Browne in an appendix to O. H. Parry,
_Six Months in a Syrian Monastery_, 1895. Professor Browne at that
time proposed to edit the Arabic text (see J.-B. Chabot, _Journal
Asiatique_, 1896, ix^e série, T. 7, p. 100); but so far as I can
ascertain this intention has not been carried out.
The manuscript translated by Browne, which according to Parry (_loc.
cit._, p. 357) was written by a native of Mosul, seems to be closely
related to that translated below. There are, however, some differences
in contents and arrangement: my copy is divided into the Book of
Revelation, the Black Book, and an Appendix; while Browne’s embraces
the Book of Revelation which corresponds to that in my manuscript),
and two other “Accounts,” the greater part of which is contained in
the Black Book of my text, and the rest in the Appendix. Further, in
my manuscript _Al-Jilwah_ immediately follows the Introduction; while
in Browne’s the discussion of the sacerdotal system, the petition to
the Ottoman government, and some other matters, are inserted between
the Introduction and _Al-Jilwah_. In Browne’s, moreover, the Poem
in Praise of Šeiḫ ‘Adî, and the Principal Prayer (in Kurdish) are
absent, while the petition to the Turkish government is briefer, and
lacks articles iv and xiv. The text of this petition, in its original
form, was published by Lidzbarski in _Z D M G_, LI, 592 ff., after a
manuscript in Berlin which was procured from Šammas Eremia Šamir.
Two Syriac texts have also been printed. The first, edited and
translated by J.-B. Chabot in the _Journal Asiatique_, 1896 (ix^e
série, T. 7), p. 100 ff., from the Paris manuscripts referred to above,
corresponds, with slight variations, to the second “Account,” of Browne
(Parry, _loc. cit._, pp. 380-87).
The second was published with an Italian translation, by Samuel Giamil,
under the title, _Monte Singar; Storia di un Popolo Ignoto_ (Rome,
1900), from a manuscript copied for him in 1899 from an original in
the monastery of Rabban Hormizd. The author of this work, a Syrian
priest, Isaac, lived for a long time among the Yezidis, and not only
had unusual opportunities of observation, but, as is evident from
several anecdotes, possessed their confidence and esteem in a singular
degree. His work is in catechetical form: a youthful Yezidi inquirer
questions a teacher about the beliefs, traditions, and customs of his
people, and the answers contain the fullest exposition of these matters
we at present possess. Occasionally the author falls out of his role,
and lets it appear that the questioner is no other than Priest Isaac
himself.
The work is divided into ten sections, which treat respectively of the
works of God and his abode (p. 3); the creation of Adam and Eve (p. 8);
the wonderful deeds of the god Yezîd (p. 16); the Yezidi saints (p.
27); the New-Year (p. 32); marriage customs (p. 46); death and burial
(p. 53); the pilgrimage to Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s shrine (p. 67); the festivals
and assemblies at Šeiḫ ‘Adî (p. 80); and the Yezidi kings (p. 87).
Apart from the _Kitâb al-Jilwah_, Priest Isaac’s work is clearly the
source from which is derived most of the material in the Syriac and
Arabic manuscripts that have hitherto come to light.
Beside the Arabic manuscript from Dâud aṣ-Ṣâîḡ which is translated
below, I have in my possession two others, which were sent me by the
Rev. A. N. Andrus. The first of these written by Šammas Eremia Šamir
(designated in the notes hereafter as SS), seems to be a duplicate of
that from which Browne’s translation was made. They agree in contents
and arrangement, and in certain readings in which they differ from the
other texts. At the close of SS the writer says that he compiled it
(chiefly from _Al-Jilwah_) for the benefit of some of his friends who
wished to acquaint themselves with the Yezidi religion.
The origin of the Yezidi sect has been the subject of much discussion,
but no satisfactory solution of the problem has as yet been reached.
There are those who assert that the Yezidis are the remains of the
ancient Manichaeans;[5] others entertain the view that the Yezidis were
originally Christians, whom progressive ignorance has brought into
their present condition[6]—some even going so far as to connect the
name “Yezidi” with “Jesus”![7] Some think that the Yezidi sect takes
its name from the Persian word _yazd_, ‘god, or good spirit,’ over
against Ahriman, the evil principle;[8] while others associate it with
_Yazd_ or _Yezid_, a town in central Persia, the inhabitants of which
are chiefly Parsees.[9] Some finally maintain that the sect was founded
by Šeiḫ ‘Adî.[10]
The Yezidis themselves had a curious legend connecting the name with
the Caliph Yezîd bn Mu‘âwiya[11] (see p. 37).
In a dissertation presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in
Harvard University I called attention to a statement of aš-Šahrastânî
the importance of which seems hitherto not to have been appreciated,
but which appears to me to give the most probable explanation of the
name and of the original affinities of the sect. The passage is as
follows (_Kitâb al Milal wan-Nihal_, ed. Cureton, I, 101):
The Yezidis are the followers of Yezîd bn Unaisa, who kept friendship
with the first Muhakkama, before the Azariḳa; he separated himself
from those who followed after them with the exception of the
Abadiyah,[12] for with these he kept friendly. He believed that God
would send an apostle from among the Persians, and would reveal
to him a book that is already written in heaven, and would reveal
the whole (book) to him at one time,[13] and as a result he would
leave the religion of Mohammed, the Chosen One—may God bless and
save him!—and follow the religion of the Sabians mentioned in the
Koran.[14] (These are not the Sabians who are found in Ḥarân and
Wasit.[15]) But Yezîd associated himself with the people of the Book
who recognized the Chosen One as a prophet, even though they did not
accept his (Mohammed’s) religion. And he said that the followers of
the ordinances are among those who agree with him; but that others are
hiding the truth and give companions to God, and that every sin, small
or great, is idolatry.[16]
The statement of Aš-Šahrastânî is so clear that it can bear no other
interpretation than that the Yezidis were the followers of Yezîd bn
Unaisa. He calls them his _´aṣḥâb_, that is, his followers, a term by
which he designates the relation between a sect and its founder.[17]
The statement comes from the pen of one who is considered of the
highest authority among the Arab scholars on questions relating to
philosophical and religious sects.[18] This precise definition of the
position of Yezîd bn Unaisa in the sectarian conflicts of the first
century of Islam seems to show that he had exact information about him.
The prediction about the Persian prophet is quoted, almost in the same
words, by another great Mohammedan authority on religious sects, Ibn
Ḥazm, who lived a century before Aš-Šahrastânî. (The Egyptian edition
of Ibn Ḥazm, Vol. IV, p. 188, reads Zaid bn Abi _Ubaisa_; but that
Unaisa should be restored is evident from the fact that Ibn Ḥazm is at
pains to distinguish the author of this unorthodox prediction from the
well-known traditionist of the name—e. g., Tabari, I, 135.[19]
The prophecy was perhaps preserved among the leaders of the Abaḍiya,
with which sect Yezîd bn Unaisa is associated. Aš-Šahrastânî’s
statement, the significant part of which we have found also in Ibn Ḥazm
was doubtless derived from an older written source.
Who is intended by the coming Persian prophet—if, indeed, any
particular individual is meant—it is not possible to determine.
Kremer[20] cannot be right in identifying him with Šeiḫ ‘Adî, for the
supposed prediction was in circulation a century or more before his
time. He is said to have been, not a Persian, but a Syrian from Baalbek
or elsewhere in the West; and both in Arabic authors[21] and in his own
writings[22] he appears as a Moslem, a Sufi saint in good standing. The
Yezidis to this day await the appearance of the Persian prophet.[23]
On the basis of these scanty bits of fact, it appears that: The Yezidis
were originally a Ḫarijite[24] sub-sect, akin to the Abadiya, bearing
the name of their founder, Yezîd bn Unaisa. Certain distinctive
Ḫarijite peculiarities seem indeed to have outlived among them the
common faith of Islam; such as the tolerant judgment of Jews and
Christians; the condemnation of every sin as implicit idolatry. In
their new seats in Kurdistan, whither they migrated about the end of
the fourteenth century[25] they were drawn into the movement of which
Šeiḫ ‘Adî was in his life time the leader and after his death the
saint, and ended by making of him the incarnation of God in the present
age.[26] With this they joined elements drawn from Christianity,[27]
with here and there a trace of Judaism, and with large survivals of the
persistent old Semitic heathenism, many of which they share with their
neighbors of all creeds.
Difficult problems,[28] however, remain unsolved, especially the origin
and nature of the worship of Melek Ṭâ´ûs.[29] The certain thing is that
the actual religion of the Yezidis is a syncretism, to which Moslem,
Christian (heretical, rather than orthodox), pagan, and perhaps also
Persian religions have contributed.[30]
NOTES ON THE INTRODUCTION
[1] Al-Jilwah is said to have been written in 558 A. H., by Šeiḫ
Faḫr-ad-Dîn, the secretary of Šeiḫ ‘Adî, at the dictation of the
latter. The original copy, wrapped in linen and silk wrappings, is
kept in the house of Mulla Ḥaidar, of Baadrie. Twice a year the book
is taken to Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s shrine. (Letter from Šammas Jeremia Šamir to
Mr. A. N. Andrus, of Mardin, dated October 28, 1892.)
[2] The Black Book is said to have been written by a certain Ḥasan
al-Baṣrî, in 743 A. H. The original copy is kept in the house of
Kehyah (chief) ‘Ali, of Kasr ‘Az-ad-Dîn, one hour west of Semale, a
village east of Tigris. The book rests upon a throne, having over it a
thin covering of red broadcloth, of linen, and other wrappings. Then
is disclosed the binding, which is of wood.
[3] The exact number of the Yezidis is unknown. See also Société de
Géographie de l’Est, _Bulletin_, 1903, p. 284; Al Mašriḳ, II, 834.
[4] For a fuller account of the literature on the Yezidis, consult J.
Menant, _Les Yézidis_, and Paul Perdrizet, Société de Géographie de
l’Est, _Bulletin_, 1903, pp. 281 ff.
[5] Société de Géographie de l’Est, _Bulletin_, 1903, p. 297.
[6] Fraser, _Mesopotamia and Persia_, pp. 285, 287; Rich, _Residence
in Kurdistan_, II, 69; _Al Mašriḳ_, II, 396; Badger, _The Nestorians
and their Rituals_, I, 111; Assemani, _Bibliotheca Orientalis_, III,
439.
[7] Michel Febvre, _Theatre de la Turquie_, p. 364; Société de
Géographie de l‘Est, _Bulletin_, 1903, pp. 299, 301; cf. also J.
Menant, _Les Yézidis_, pp. 52, 86, 132.
[8] Oppenheim, _Vom Mittelmeer zum persischen Golf_, 1900, II, 148;
Victor Dingelstedt, _Scottish Geographical Magazine_, XIV, 295;
Southgate, _A Tour through Armenia_, II, 317; A. V. Williams Jackson,
“Yezidis,” in the _New International Encyclopedia_, XVII, 939;
Perdrizet, loc. cit., p. 299.
[9] A. V. Williams Jackson, _Persia Past and Present_, p. 10, _New
International Encyclopedia_, “Yezidis;” Perdrizet, loc. cit.
[10] Dingelstedt, loc. cit.; _Revue de l’Orient Chrétien_, I,
“Kurdistan.”
[11] Société de Géographie de l’Est, loc. cit.; _Encyclopedia of
Missions_, “Yezidis”; A. V. Williams Jackson, loc. cit.
[12] On these sects consult Aš-Šahrastânî, I, 86, 89, 100.
[13] Not like Mohammed, to whom, according to Moslem belief, the Koran
was revealed at intervals.
[14] On the Ṣabians of the Koran, see Baiḍâwi and Zamaḫšari on _Suras_
2, 59; 5, 73; 22, 17.
[15] On the Ṣabians of Ḥarrân, see Fihrist, p. 190; on the Ṣabians in
general consult Aš-Šahrastânî, II, 203; on the location of Ḥarrân and
Wasit, see Yaḳût, II, 331, and IV, 881.
[16] To get more particular information in regard to Yezîd bn Unaisa,
I wrote to Mosul, Bagdad, and Cairo, the three centers of Mohammedan
learning, and strange to say, none could throw any light on the
subject.
[17] Al-Haraṯiyah he describes as _Aṣḥâb Al_-Ḥareṭ (I, 101),
al-Ḥafaziyah, Aṣḥâb Ḥafez (_ibid._), etc.
[18] Ibn Ḫallikân says: “Aš-Šahrastânî, a dogmatic theologian of the
Ašarite sect, was distinguished as an Imâm and a doctor of the law. He
displayed the highest abilities as a jurisconsult. The _Kitâb al-Milal
wa-n-Nihal_ (this is the book in which Aš-Šahrastânî traces the Yezidi
sect to Yezîd bn Unaisa) is one of his works on scholastic theology.
He remained without an equal in that branch of science.”
[19] It is to be noticed also that the name “Unaisa” is very common
among the Arabs; cf. Ibn Sa‘ad (ed. Sachau), III, 254, 260, 264, 265,
281, 283, 287, 289; Musnad, VI, 434; Mishkat, 22, 724.
[20] _Geschichte der herrschenden Ideen des Islams_, p. 195.
[21] Ibn Ḫallikân (Egyptian edit., A. H. 1310), I, 316; Mohammed
al-‘Omari, al-Mauṣili, “Šeiḫ ‘Adî,” quoted by M. N. Siouffi, _Journal
asiatique_, 1885, 80; Yaḳut, IV, 374.
[22] ‘Itiḳad Ahl as-Sunna, “Belief of the Sunnites,” the Waṣaya,
“Counsels to the Califs”; cf. C. Huart, _History of Arabic
Literature_, p. 273.
[23] See p. 61 of this book.
[24] Aš-Šahrastânî regards them a Ḫarijíte sub-sect.
[25] Layard, _Nineveh and its Remains_, II, 254.
[26] Mohammed al-‘Omari al-Mausili and Yâsîn al-Ḫâtib al-‘Omari
al-Mauṣili, “Šeiḫ ‘Adî,” quoted by M. N. Siouffi, _Journal asiatique_,
Série viii, V (1885), 80.
[27] George Warda, Bishop of Arbila, _Poems_, edited by Heinrich
Hilgenfeld, Leipzig, 1904.
[28] Such as their ceremonies at Šeiḫ ‘Adî (Badger, _The Nestorians_,
I, 117), which have obtained for them the name Cheraḡ Sonderan, “The
Extinguishers of Light.” Bar Hebraeus (_Chronicon Eccles._, ed.
Abeloos-Lamy, I, 219) speaks of similar practices among what he
calls “Borborians,” a branch of the Manichaeans, and calls them “The
Extinguishers of Light.” This name is applied to other eastern sects
also; see _Abhandlungen für die Kunde des Morgenlandes_, V, 124.
[29] Professor Jackson, of Columbia University, seems to trace it to
the “old devil-worship in Mazandaran” (_J A O S_, XXV, 178). But it is
not certain that the Yezidis believe in Melek Ṭâ´ûs as an evil spirit.
In the history of religion the god of one people is the devil of
another. Asura is a deity in the Rig Veda and an evil spirit only in
later Brahman theology. In Islam the gods of heathenism are degraded
into jinns, just as the gods of North Semitic heathenism are called
še‘îrîm (hairy demons) in Lev. 17:7; or as the gods of Greece and Rome
became devils to early Christians. See W. R. Smith, _Religion of the
Semites_, p. 120; Fihrist, pp. 322, 326.
Professor M. Lidzbarski (_Z D M G_, LI, 592), on the other hand,
argues that Ṭâ´ûs is the god Tammuz. His contention is based on the
assumption that the word Ṭâ´ûs must embody the ancient god; that in
Fihrist, 322, the god Tâuz has a feast on the 15th of Tammuz (July);
that in Kurdish, the language of the Yezidis, _m_ is frequently
changed to _w_. This theory also is untenable, for one might guess at
any ancient god. The exact form of the name “Tauz” is uncertain (see
Chwolsohn, _Die Ssabier_, II, 202); the statement that in Kurdish _m_
is frequently changed to _w_ is not true, if one would set it up as
a grammatical rule to explain such phenomena; the Kurdish-speaking
people never pronounce Tammuz, “Tauz;” and, finally, in the Yezidi
conception of Melek Ṭâ´ûs there are no traces of the notion held
respecting Tammuz.
[30] Such a state of affairs finds a historical parallel in other
religions. Take, for example, Christianity. In it we find that the
distinctive characteristics of the founder have been wrapped up
in many foreign elements brought in by those who came from other
religions.
PART I
THE TRANSLATION OF THE ARABIC TEXT
PREFACE
_In the Name of the Most Compassionate God!_
With the help of the Most High God, and under his direction, we write
the history of the Yezidis, their doctrines, and the mysteries of their
religion, as contained in their books, which reached our hand with
their own knowledge and consent.
In the time of Al-Muḳtadir Billah, A. H. 295,[31] there lived
Manṣûr-al-Ḥallâj,[32] the wool-carder, and Šeiḫ ‘Abd-al-ḳâdir of
Jîlân.[33] At that time, too, there appeared a man by the name of Šeiḫ
‘Adî, from the mountain of Hakkari,[34] originally from the region of
Aleppo or Baalbek. He came and dwelt in Mount Lališ,[35] near the city
of Moṣul, about nine hours distant from it. Some say he was of the
people of Ḥarrân, and related to Marwân ibn-al-Ḥakam. His full name
is Šaraf ad-Dîn Abû-l-Fadâîl, ‘Adî bn Musâfir bn Ismael bn Mousa bn
Marwân bn Al-Ḥasan bn Marwân. He died A. H. 558 (A. D. 1162-63). His
tomb is still visited; it is near Ba‘adrei, one of the villages of
Moṣul, distant eleven hours. The Yezidis are the progeny of those who
were the _murids_ (disciples) of Šeiḫ ‘Adî. Some trace their origin to
Yezid,[36] others to Ḥasan-Al-Baṣrî.[37]
AL-JILWAH (THE REVELATION)
Before all creation this revelation was with Melek Tâ´ûs, who sent
‘Abd Tâ´ûs to this world that he might separate truth known to his
particular people. This was done, first of all, by means of oral
tradition, and afterward by means of this book, Al-Jilwah, which the
outsiders may neither read nor behold.
CHAPTER I
I was, am now, and shall have no end. I exercise dominion over all
creatures and over the affairs of all who are under the protection
of my image. I am ever present to help all who trust in me and call
upon me in time of need. There is no place in the universe that knows
not my presence. I participate in all the affairs which those who are
without call evil because their nature is not such as they approve.
Every age has its own manager, who directs affairs according to my
decrees. This office is changeable from generation to generation, that
the ruler of this world and his chiefs may discharge the duties of
their respective offices every one in his own turn. I allow everyone
to follow the dictates of his own nature, but he that opposes me will
regret it sorely. No god has a right to interfere in my affairs, and
I have made it an imperative rule that everyone shall refrain from
worshiping all gods. All the books of those who are without are altered
by them; and they have declined from them, although they were written
by the prophets and the apostles. That there are interpolations is
seen in the fact that each sect endeavors to prove that the others are
wrong and to destroy their books. To me truth and falsehood are known.
When temptation comes, I give my covenant to him that trusts in me.
Moreover, I give counsel to the skilled directors, for I have appointed
them for periods that are known to me. I remember necessary affairs
and execute them in due time. I teach and guide those who follow my
instruction. If anyone obey me and conform to my commandments, he shall
have joy, delight, and goodness.
CHAPTER II
I requite the descendants of Adam, and reward them with various rewards
that I alone know. Moreover, power and dominion over all that is on
earth, both that which is above and that which is beneath, are in my
hand. I do not allow friendly association with other people, nor do I
deprive them that are my own and that obey me of anything that is good
for them. I place my affairs in the hands of those whom I have tried
and who are in accord with my desires. I appear in divers manners to
those who are faithful and under my command. I give and take away; I
enrich and impoverish; I cause both happiness and misery. I do all
this in keeping with the characteristics of each epoch. And none has a
right to interfere with my management of affairs. Those who oppose me
I afflict with disease; but my own shall not die like the sons of Adam
that are without. None shall live in this world longer than the time
set by me; and if I so desire, I send a person a second or a third time
into this world or into some other by the transmigration of souls.
CHAPTER III
I lead to the straight path without a revealed book; I direct aright my
beloved and my chosen ones by unseen means. All my teachings are easily
applicable to all times and all conditions. I punish in another world
all who do contrary to my will. Now the sons of Adam do not know the
state of things that is to come. For this reason they fall into many
errors. The beasts of the earth, the birds of heaven, and the fish of
the sea are all under the control of my hands. All treasures and hidden
things are known to me; and as I desire, I take them from one and
bestow them upon another. I reveal my wonders to those who seek them,
and in due time my miracles to those who receive them from me. But
those who are without are my adversaries, hence they oppose me. Nor do
they know that such a course is against their own interests, for might,
wealth, and riches are in my hand, and I bestow them upon every worthy
descendant of Adam. Thus the government of the worlds, the transition
of generations, and the changes of their directors are determined by me
from the beginning.
CHAPTER IV
I will not give my rights to other gods. I have allowed the creation
of four substances, four times, and four corners; because they are
necessary things for creatures. The books of Jews, Christians, and
Moslems, as of those who are without, accept in a sense, i. e., so
far as they agree with, and conform to, my statutes. Whatsoever is
contrary to these they have altered; do not accept it. Three things
are against me, and I hate three things. But those who keep my secrets
shall receive the fulfilment of my promises. Those who suffer for my
sake I will surely reward in one of the worlds. It is my desire that
all my followers shall unite in a bond of unity, lest those who are
without prevail against them. Now, then, all ye who have followed my
commandments and my teachings, reject all the teachings and sayings of
such as are without. I have not taught these teachings, nor do they
proceed from me. Do not mention my name nor my attributes, lest ye
regret it; for ye do not know what those who are without may do.
CHAPTER V
O ye that have believed in me, honor my symbol and my image, for they
remind you of me. Observe my laws and statutes. Obey my servants and
listen to whatever they may dictate to you of the hidden things.
Receive that that is dictated, and do not carry it before those who are
without, Jews, Christians, Moslems, and others; for they know not the
nature of my teaching. Do not give them your books, lest they alter
them without your knowledge. Learn by heart the greater part of them,
lest they be altered.
Thus endeth the book of Al-Jilwah, which is followed by the book of
Maṣḥaf Reš, i. e., the Black Book.
MASHAF REŠ (THE BLACK BOOK)
In the beginning God created the White Pearl out of his most precious
essence. He also created a bird named Angar. He placed the White
Pearl on the back of the bird, and dwelt on it for forty thousand
years. On the first day, Sunday, God created Melek Anzazîl, and he is
Ṭâ´ûs-Melek, the chief of all. On Monday he created Melek Dardâel, and
he is Šeiḫ Ḥasan. Tuesday he created Melek Israfel, and he is Šeiḫ
Šams (ad-Dîn). Wednesday he created Melek Miḫâel, and he is Šeiḫ Abû
Bakr. Thursday he created Melek Azrâel, and he is Sajad-ad-Dîn. Friday
he created Melek Šemnâel, and he is Naṣir-ad-Dîn. Saturday he created
Melek Nurâel, and he is Yadin (Faḫr-ad-Dîn). And he made Melek Ṭâ´ûs
ruler over all.[38]
After this God made the form of the seven heavens, the earth, the sun,
and the moon. But Faḫr-ad-Dîn created man and the animals, and birds
and beasts. He put them all in pockets of cloth, and came out of the
Pearl accompanied by the Angels. Then he shouted at the Pearl with a
loud voice. Thereupon the White Pearl broke up into four pieces, and
from its midst came out the water which became an ocean. The world
was round, and was not divided. Then he created Gabriel and the image
of the bird. He sent Gabriel to set the four corners. He also made a
vessel and descended in it for thirty thousand years. After this he
came and dwelt in Mount Lališ. Then he cried out at the world, and the
sea became solidified and the land appeared, but it began to shake.
At this time he commanded Gabriel to bring two pieces of the White
Pearl; one he placed beneath the earth, the other stayed at the gate
of heaven. He then placed in them the sun and the moon; and from the
scattered pieces of the White Pearl he created the stars which he hung
in heaven as ornaments. He also created fruit-bearing trees and plants
and mountains for ornaments to the earth. He created the throne over
the carpet.[39] Then the Great God said: “O Angels, I will create Adam
and Eve; and from the essence of Adam shall proceed Šehar bn Jebr,
and of him a separate community shall appear upon the earth, that of
Azazîl, i. e., that of Melek Ṭâ´ûs, which is the sect of the Yezidis.
Then he sent Šeiḫ ‘Adî bn Musâfir from the land of Syria, and he came
(and dwelt in Mount) Lališ. Then the Lord came down to the Black
Mountain. Shouting, he created thirty thousand Meleks, and divided them
into three divisions. They worshiped him for forty thousand years, when
he delivered them to Melek Ṭâ´ûs who went up with them to heaven. At
this time the Lord came down to the Holy Land (al-ḳuds), and commanded
Gabriel to bring earth from the four corners of the world, earth, air,
fire, and water. He created it and put in it the spirit of his own
power, and called it Adam.
Then he commanded Gabriel to escort Adam into Paradise, and to tell
him that he could eat from all the trees but not of wheat.[40] Here
Adam remained for a hundred years. Thereupon, Melek Ṭâ´ûs asked God
how Adam could multiply and have descendants if he were forbidden to
eat of the grain. God answered, “I have put the whole matter into thy
hands.” Thereupon Melek Ṭâ´ûs visited Adam and said “Have you eaten
of the grain?” He answered, “No, God forbade me.” Melek Ṭâ´ûs replied
and said, “Eat of the grain and all shall go better with thee.” Then
Adam ate of the grain and immediately his belly was inflated. But Melek
Ṭâ´ûs drove him out of the garden, and leaving him, ascended into
heaven. Now Adam was troubled because his belly was inflated, for he
had no outlet. God therefore sent a bird to him which pecked at his
anus and made an outlet, and Adam was relieved.
Now Gabriel was away from Adam for a hundred years. And Adam was sad
and weeping. Then God commanded Gabriel to create Eve from under the
left shoulder of Adam. Now it came to pass, after the creation of Eve
and of all the animals, that Adam and Eve quarreled over the question
whether the human race should be descended from him or her, for each
wished to be the sole begetter of the race. This quarrel originated
in their observation of the fact that among animals both the male and
the female were factors in the production of their respective species.
After a long discussion Adam and Eve agreed on this: each should cast
his seed into a jar, close it, and seal it with his own seal, and
wait for nine months. When they opened the jars at the completion of
this period, they found in Adam’s jar two children, male and female.
Now from these two our sect, the Yezidis, are descended. In Eve’s
jar they found naught but rotten worms emitting a foul odor. And God
caused nipples to grow for Adam that he might suckle the children that
proceeded from his jar. This is the reason why man has nipples.
After this Adam knew Eve, and she bore two children, male and female;
and from these the Jews, the Christians, the Moslems, and other nations
and sects are descended. But our first fathers are Šeth, Noah, and
Enosh, the righteous ones, who were descended from Adam only.
It came to pass that trouble arose between a man and his wife,
resulting from the denial on the part of the woman that the man was
her husband. The man persisted in his claim that she was his wife.
The trouble between the two was settled, however, through one of the
righteous men of our sect, who decreed that at every wedding a drum and
a pipe should be played as a testimony to the fact that such a man and
such a woman were married legally.
Then Melek Ṭâ´ûs came down to earth for our sect (i. e., the Yezidis),
the created ones, and appointed kings for us, besides the kings of
ancient Assyria, Nisroch, who is Našir-ad-Dîn; Kamush, who is Melek
Faḫr-ad-Dîn, and Artâmîs, who is Melek Šams-(ad-)Dîn. After this we had
two kings, Šabur (Sapor) First (224-272 A. D.) and Second (309-379),
who reigned one hundred and fifty years; and our amirs down to the
present day have been descended from their seed. But we hated four
kings.
Before Christ came into this world our religion was paganism. King
Ahab was from among us. And the god of Ahab was called Beelzebub.
Nowadays we call him Pir Bub. We had a king in Babylon, whose name was
Baḫtnaṣar; another in Persia, whose name was Aḥšuraš; and still another
in Constantinople, whose name was Agriḳâlus. The Jews, the Christians,
the Moslems, and even the Persians, fought us; but they failed to
subdue us, for in the strength of the Lord we prevailed against them.
He teaches us the first and last science. And one of his teachings is:
Before heaven and earth existed, God was on the sea, as we
formerly wrote you. He made himself a vessel and traveled in it in
_kunsiniyat_[41] of the seas, thus enjoying himself in himself. He then
created the White Pearl and ruled over it for forty years. Afterward,
growing angry at the Pearl, he kicked it; and it was a great surprise
to see the mountains formed out of its cry; the hills out of its
wonders; the heavens out of its smoke. Then God ascended to heaven,
solidified it, established it without pillars. He then spat upon the
ground, and taking a pen in hand, began to write a narrative of all the
creation.
In the beginning he created six gods from himself and from his light,
and their creation was as one lights a light from another light. And
God said, “Now I have created the heavens; let some one of you go up
and create something therein.” Thereupon the second god ascended and
created the sun; the third, the moon; the fourth, the vault of heaven;
the fifth, the _farḡ_ (i. e., the morning star); the sixth, paradise;
the seventh, hell. We have already told you that after this they
created Adam and Eve.
And know that besides the flood of Noah, there was another flood in
this world. Now our sect, the Yezidis, are descended from Na‘umi, an
honored person, king of peace. We call him Melek Miran. The other
sects are descended from Ham, who despised his father. The ship rested
at a village called ‘Ain Sifni,[42] distant from Mosul about five
parasangs. The cause of the first flood was the mockery of those who
were without, Jews, Christians, Moslems, and others descended from
Adam and Eve. We, on the other hand, are descended from Adam only, as
already indicated. This second flood came upon our sect, the Yezidis.
As the water rose and the ship floated, it came above Mount Sinjar,[43]
where it ran aground and was pierced by a rock. The serpent twisted
itself like a cake and stopped the hole. Then the ship moved on and
rested on Mount Judie.
Now the species of the serpent increased, and began to bite man and
animal. It was finally caught and burned, and from its ashes fleas were
created. From the time of the flood until now are seven thousand years.
In every thousand years one of the seven gods descends to establish
rules, statutes, and laws, after which he returns to his abode. While
below, he sojourns with us, for we have every kind of holy places. This
last time the god dwelt among us longer than any of the other gods
who came before him. He confirmed the saints. He spoke in the Kurdish
language. He also illuminated Mohammed, the prophet of the Ishmaelites,
who had a servant named Mu‘âwiya. When God saw that Mohammed was not
upright before him, he afflicted him with a headache. The prophet then
asked his servant to shave his head, for Mu‘âwiya knew how to shave.
He shaved his master in haste, and with some difficulty. As a result,
he cut his head and made it bleed. Fearing that the blood might drop
to the ground, Mu‘âwiya licked it with his tongue. Whereupon Mohammed
asked, “What are you doing, Mu‘âwiya?” He replied, “I licked thy blood
with my tongue, for I feared that it might drop to the ground.” Then
Mohammed said to him, “You have sinned, O Mu‘âwiya, you shall draw a
nation after you. You shall oppose my sect.” Mu‘âwiya answered and
said, “Then I will not enter the world; I will not marry.”
It came to pass that after some time God sent scorpions upon Mu‘âwiya,
which bit him, causing his face to break out with poison. Physicians
urged him to marry lest he die. Hearing this, he consented. They
brought him an old woman, eighty years of age, in order that no
child might be born. Mu‘âwiya knew his wife, and in the morning she
appeared a woman of twenty-five, by the power of the great God. And
she conceived and bore our god Yezid. But the foreign sects, ignorant
of this fact, say that our god came from heaven, dispised and driven
out by the great God. For this reason they blaspheme him. In this they
have erred. But we, the Yezidi sect, believe this not, for we know that
he is one of the above-mentioned seven gods. We know the form of his
person and his image. It is the form of a cock which we possess. None
of us is allowed to utter his name, nor anything that resembles it,
such as _šeitân_ (Satan), _ḳaitân_ (cord), _šar_ (evil), _šat_ (river),
and the like. Nor do we pronounce _mal‘ûn_ (accursed), or _la‘anat_
(curse), or _na‘al_[44] (horseshoe), or any word that has a similar
sound. All these are forbidden us out of respect for him. So _ḫass_
(lettuce) is debarred. We do not eat it, for it sounds like the name
of our prophetess Ḫassiah. Fish is prohibited, in honor of Jonah the
prophet. Likewise deer, for deer are the sheep of one of our prophets.
The peacock is forbidden to our Šeiḫ and his disciples, for the sake of
our Ṭâ´ûs. Squash also is debarred. It is forbidden to pass water while
standing, or to dress up while sitting down, or to go to the toilet
room, or to take a bath according to the custom of the people.[45]
Whosoever does contrary to this is an infidel. Now the other sects,
Jews, Christians, Moslems, and others, know not these things, because
they dislike Melek Ṭâ´ûs. He, therefore, does not teach them, nor does
he visit them. But he dwelt among us; he delivered to us the doctrines,
the rules, and the traditions, all of which have become an inheritance,
handed down from father to son. After this, Melek Ṭâ´ûs returned to
heaven.
One of the seven gods made the _sanjaḳs_[46] (standards) and gave them
to Solomon the wise. After his death our kings received them. And when
our god, the barbarian Yezîd, was born, he received these _sanjaḳs_
with great reverence, and bestowed them upon our sect. Moreover, he
composed two songs in the Kurdish language to be sung before the
_sanjaḳas_ in this language, which is the most ancient and acceptable
one. The meaning of the song is this:
Hallelujah to the jealous God.
As they sing it, they march before the _sanjaḳs_ with timbrels and
pipes. These _sanjaḳs_ remain with our emir, who sits on the throne of
Yezîd. When these are sent away, the _ḳawwâls_ assemble with the emir,
and the great general, the šeiḫ, who is the representative of Šeiḫ
Nasir-ad-Dîn, i. e., Nisroch, god of the ancient Assyrians.[47] They
visit the _sanjaḳs_. Then they send each _sanjaḳ_ in care of a _ḳawwâl_
to its own place; one to Ḫalataneye, one to Aleppo, one to Russia,
and one to Sinjar. These _sanjaḳs_ are given to four _ḳawwâls_ by
contract. Before they are sent, they are brought to Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s tomb,
where they are baptized amid great singing and dancing. After this
each of the contractors takes a load of dust from Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s tomb. He
fashions it into small balls, each about the size of a gall nut, and
carries them along with the _sanjaḳs_ to give them away as blessings.
When he approaches a town, he sends a crier before him to prepare the
people to accept the _ḳawwâl_ and his _sanjaḳ_ with respect and honor.
All turn out in fine clothes, carrying incense. The women shout, and
all together sing joyful songs. The _ḳawwâl_ is entertained by the
people with whom he stops. The rest give him silver presents, everyone
according to his means.
Besides these four _sanjaḳs_, there are three others, seven in all.
These three are kept in a sacred place for purposes of healing. Two
of them, however, remain with Šeiḫ ‘Adî, and the third remains in the
village of Baḥazanie, which is distant from Mosul about four hours.
Every four months these _ḳawwâls_ travel about. One of them must
travel in the province of the emir. They travel in a fixed order,
differing each year. Every time he goes out, the traveler must cleanse
himself with water made sour with _summaḳ_ (sumac) and anoint himself
with an oil. He must also light a lamp at each idol that has a chamber.
This is the law that pertains to the _sanjaḳs_.
The first day of our new year is called the _Serṣâlie_, i. e., the
beginning of a year. It falls on the Wednesday of the first week
in April.[48] On that day there must be meat in every family. The
wealthy must slaughter a lamb or an ox; the poor must kill a chicken
or something else. These should be cooked on the night, the morning
of which is Wednesday, New Year’s day. With the break of day the food
should be blessed. On the first day of the year alms should be given at
tombs where the souls of the dead lie.
Now the girls, large and small, are to gather from the fields flowers
of every kind that have a reddish color. They are to make them into
bundles, and, after keeping them three days, they are to hang them
on the doors[49] as a sign of the baptism of the people living in
the houses. In the morning all doors will be seen well decorated
with red lilies. But women are to feed the poor and needy who pass
by and have no food; this is to be done at the graves. But as to the
_ḳawwâls_, they are to go around the tombs with timbrels, singing in
the Kurdish language. For so doing they are entitled to money. On the
above-mentioned day of _Serṣâlie_ no instruments of joy are to be
played, because God is sitting on the throne (arranging decrees for
the year),[50] and commanding all the wise and the neighbors to come to
him. And when he tells them that he will come down to earth with song
and praise, all arise and rejoice before him and throw upon each the
squash of the feast. Then God seals them with his own seal. And the
great God gives a sealed decision to the god who is to come down. He,
moreover, grants him power to do all things according to his own will.
God prefers doing good and charity to fasting and praying. The worship
of any idol, such as Seyed-ad-Dîn or Šeiḫ Šams is better than fasting.
Some layman is to give a banquet to a _kôchak_ after the fasting of the
latter forty days, whether it be in summer or in winter. If he (the
_kôchak_) says this entertainment is an alms given to the _sanjaḳ_,
then he is not released from his fasting. When it comes to pass that
the yearly tithe-gatherer finds that the people have not fully paid
their tithes, he whips them till they become sick, and some even die.
The people are to give the _kôchaks_ money to fight the Roman army, and
thus save the sect (Yezidis) from the wrath of the man of the year.
Every Friday a load of gifts is to be brought as an offering to an
idol. At that time, a servant is to call the people aloud from the
roof of a _kôchak’s_ house, saying, it is the call of the prophet to a
feast. All are to listen reverently and respectfully; and, on hearing
it, every one is to kiss the ground and the stone on which he happens
to lean.
It is our law that no _ḳawwâl_ shall pass a razor over his face. Our
law regarding marriage is that at the time of the wedding a loaf of
bread shall be taken from the house of a _kôchak_ and be divided
between the bride and the bridegroom, each to eat one-half. They may,
however, eat some dust from Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s tomb instead of the bread for
a blessing. Marriage in the month of April is forbidden, for it is
the first month of the year. This rule, however, does not apply to
_ḳawwâls_; they may marry during this month. No layman is allowed to
marry a _kôchak’s_ daughter. Everyone is to take a wife from his own
class. But our emir may have for a wife any one whom he pleases to
love. A layman may marry between the ages of ten and eighty; he may
take for a wife one woman after another for a period of one year. On
her way to the house of the bridegroom, a bride must visit the shrine
of every idol she may happen to pass; even if she pass a Christian
church, she must do the same. On her arrival at the bridegroom’s house,
he must hit her with a small stone in token of the fact that she must
be under his authority. Moreover, a loaf of bread must be broken over
her head as a sign to her that she must love the poor and needy. No
Yezidi may sleep with his wife on the night the morning of which is
Wednesday, and the night the morning of which is Friday. Whosoever does
contrary to this commandment is an infidel. If a man steal the wife
of his neighbor, or his own former wife, or her sister or mother, he
is not obliged to give her dowry, for she is the booty of his hand.
Daughters may not inherit their father’s wealth. A young lady may be
sold as an acre of land is sold. If she refuses to be married, then she
must redeem herself by paying her father a sum of money earned by her
service and the labor of her hand.
Here ends Kitâb Reš, which is followed by several stories, some of
which are told secretly, some openly.
APPENDIX TO PART I
APPENDIX TO PART I
They say our hearts are our books, and our šeiḫs tell us everything
from the second Adam until now and the future. When they notice the sun
rise, they kiss the place where the rays first fall; they do the same
at sunset, where its rays last fall. Likewise they kiss the spot where
the moon first casts its rays and where it last casts them. They think,
moreover, that by the multiplication of presents to šeiḫs and idols
they keep troubles and afflictions away.
There is a great difference among the _ḳôchaks_, they contradict one
another. Some say, “Melek Ṭâ´ûs appears to me and reveals to me many
revelations.” Others say, “We appear to people in many different ways.”
Some believe that Christ is Šeiḫ Šams himself. They say that they have
had prophets in all times; the _ḳôchaks_ are the prophets. One of the
_ḳôchaks_ says in one of his prophecies: “I was in Jonah’s ship, where
a lot was cast in my presence. It fell on Jonah; and he was thrown into
the sea, where he remained forty days and nights.” Another said: “I was
sitting with the great God, who said, ‘I hope the time will come when
I shall send Christ to the world.’ I said to him, ‘Yes.’ Then he sent
him. After making a sign in the sun, Christ came down to the earth.” He
appeared to our sect only, and made for us seven circles, which are
at Šeiḫ ‘Adî. Now he appeared to us because we observe the necessary
order, which the other sects do not observe. Their origin and race
are unknown; ours are known. We are emirs and sons of emirs; we are
šeiḫs and sons of šeiḫs; we are _ḳôchaks_ and sons of _ḳôchaks_, etc.
But Christians and Moslems make priests and mullas for themselves out
of those who had none of their kindred in those offices before, and
never will have afterward. We are better than they. We are allowed to
drink wine; our young men also may desire it when they, in company with
women, engage in religious dancing and playing. Some of the _ḳôchaks_
and šeiḫs, however, are not allowed to drink it. When one is about
to die, he is visited by a _ḳôchak_, who places a bit of Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s
dust in his mouth. Before he is buried his face is anointed with it.
Moreover, the dung of sheep is placed on his tomb. Finally, food is
offered on behalf of the dead. The _ḳôchaks_ pray for the dead at the
graves, for which service they are paid. They tell the relatives of the
dead what they see in dreams and visions, and the condition of their
dead, whether they have been translated to the human or to the animal
race. Some people hide silver or gold coins that they plan to take out
in case they are born the second time in this world. Some believe that
the spirits of many righteous persons travel in the air. Those spirits
make revelations to the _ḳôchaks_, who are acquainted with the world
of mysteries and secrets. Life and death are in their hands. Hence
the fate of the people depends on the gratitude and honor which they
show the _ḳôchaks_. According to Yezidis, hell has no existence. It
was created in the time of the first Adam, they say, when our father,
Ibrîḳ al-Aṣfar, was born.[51] By reason of his generosity and noble
deeds, Ibrîḳ had many friends. Now, when he viewed hell he became
very sad. He had a small _baḳbûḳ aṣfar_,[52] into which, as he kept
weeping his tears fell. In seven years it was filled. He then cast it
into hell, and all its fires were put out that mankind might not be
tortured. This incident relates to one of the noble deeds of our first
father, Ibrîḳ al-Aṣfar. They have many more such upright men of noble
deeds. Such an one is Mohammed Rašân, whose resting place is behind the
mount of Šeiḫ Mattie.[53] He (Rašân) is exceedingly strong, so that
the most sacred oaths are sworn by him. If any one becomes sick, he
takes refuge in making vows to _ḫasin_, i. e., pillars of idols. Now
there is a place of religious pilgrimage which is called Sitt Nafîsah.
This place is a mulberry tree in the village of Ba‘ašîḳa. Another such
place is called ‘Abdi Rašân, and is in the village of ḳarabek. A third
place of pilgrimage is in the village Baḥzanie, which is called Šeiḫ
Bakû. Nearby is a spring, and beside this is a mulberry tree. Whoever
is afflicted with fever, goes to that tree, hangs on its branches a
piece of cloth from his clothes, and casts bread in the spring for the
fish. All this he does that he may be cured. They entertain the belief
that whoever unties or shakes off one of the shreds of cloth will
catch the disease with which the man was afflicted when he hung it up.
There are many such trees in the village of Ba‘ašîḳa, and in some other
places. There is also a spring of water, called in the common language
‘Ain aṣ-Ṣafra (Yellow Spring). The Yezidis call it Kanî-Zarr.[54] In
this swim those who are afflicted with the disease of _abû-ṣafar_
(jaundice). But those who are troubled with dropsy go for cure to the
house of the Pir that lives in the village of Man Reš.
When they assemble at Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s, no one is allowed to cook anything.
Everyone is to eat from Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s table. As to the _ḳôchaks_, every
one of them sits on a stone, as one sits in prayer. To them the laity
go, seeking succor. They give them money while making their petition,
and vow to the stone on which the _ḳôchak_ sits, sheep and oxen,
everyone according to his means. Now, at the New Year the places are
given in contract. When they assemble at the New Year, they dance
and play with instruments of joy. Before eating the _kabdûš_, i. e.,
the vowed ox, they swim in the water of Zamzam, a spring coming from
beneath the temple of Šeiḫ ‘Adî. Then they eat in haste, snatching meat
from the pot like fanatics, so that their hands are frequently burned.
This practice is in accordance with their rules. After eating, they
go up the mountain, shooting with their guns, and then return to Šeiḫ
‘Adî. Everyone of them takes a little dust and preserves it for the
times of wedding and death. They wear entwined girdles which they call
the ties of the back (belt). They baptize these and the _sanjaḳs_ with
the water of Zamzam. He who is called Jawiš[55] wears a stole which is
woven from the hair of a goat. It is nine spans in length and around it
are _sansûls_ (tinsels).
When the gathering comes to an end, they collect the money from the
_ḳôchaks_ and the contractors, and bring it to the emir. After everyone
has taken according to his rank, the remainder goes to the emir.
They have another gathering which takes place at the feast of
Al-Hijâjj. At this pilgrimage they go up to the mountain which is
called Jabal al-‘Arafât.[56] After remaining there an hour, they hasten
toward Šeiḫ ‘Adî. He who arrives there before his companions is praised
much. Hence everyone tries to excel. The one who succeeds receives
abundant blessings.
They still have another assembly. This is called “the road of the
_ḳôchaks_,” when each, putting a rope around his neck, goes up the
mountain. After collecting wood they bring it to Šeiḫ ‘Adî, carrying
it on their backs. The wood is used for heating purposes and for the
emir’s cooking.
During these assemblies the _sanjaḳs_ are passed around. In the first
place they are washed with water made sour with sumac in order to
be cleansed from their rust. The water is given away in drinks for
purposes of blessing. In return money is taken. In the second place,
the _ḳôchaks_ go around with the _sanjaḳs_ to collect money.
In their preaching, the šeiḫs tell the people that all kings have
come from their descent, such as Nisroch,[57] who is Nasr-ad-Dîn, and
Kamuš who is Faḫr-ad-Dîn, and Artâmîs, who is Šams-ad-Dîn, and many
others, as Shabur and Yoram; and many royal names of the ancient kings,
together with their own (Yezidi) kings, are from their seed. The sign
of the Yezidi is that he wears a shirt with a round bosom. It differs
from that of the other people, the bosom of whose shirts are open all
the way down.
There is one occasion when no Yezidi will swear falsely, viz., when
one draws a circle on the ground, and tells him that this circle
belongs to Ṭâ´ûs-Melek, Šeiḫ ‘Adî, and Yezîd, and _baryshabaḳei_. He
places him in the middle of the circle, and then tells him that Melek
Ṭâ´ûs and all those who were mentioned above will not intercede for
him after his death, and that the shirt of the Jewish Nasim[58] be on
his neck, and that the hand of Nasim be on his neck and eye, and that
Nasim be his brother for the next world, and let him be to him for a
šeiḫ and a _pir_ if he does not tell the truth. Then if he swears to
tell the truth, he cannot conceal anything. For an oath made under such
conditions is considered greater than that made in the name of God, and
even than that made in the name of one of their prophets.
They fast three days in a year from morning till evening. The fast
falls in December, according to the oriental calendar. They have no
prayer[59] except what is mentioned above, such as that referring to
the sun and the moon, and asking help from šeiḫs and holy places
when they say, “O Šeiḫ ‘Adî, O Šeiḫ Sams,” and the like. They are all
forbidden to teach their children anything, with the exception of two
stanzas which they teach their children out of necessity and because it
is traditional.
A story is told about them by reliable people. Once when Šeiḫ Naṣir was
preaching in a village at Mount Sinjar, there was a Christian mason
in the audience who, seeing the house filled with people, thought
they were going to pray. He then pretended to take a nap, that he
might amuse himself with what he should hear. He knew the Kurdish
language. When the Christian seemed to be asleep, but was really awake
and listening, Šeiḫ Naṣir began to preach saying: “Once the great God
appeared to me in vision. He was angry at Jesus because of a dispute
with him. He therefore caught him and imprisoned him in a den which
had no water. Before the mouth of the den he placed a great stone.
Jesus remained in the den a long time, calling upon the prophets and
the saints for help and asking their aid. Every one whose succor Jesus
asked went to beg the great God to release him. But God did not grant
their requests. Jesus therefore remained in a sorrowful state, knowing
not what to do.” After this the preacher remained silent for a quarter
of an hour, and thus a great silence prevailed in the house. Then he
went on to say: “O poor Jesus, why are you so forgotten, so neglected?
Do you not know that all the prophets and all the saints have no favor
with the great God unto Melek Ṭâ´ûs? Why have you forgotten him and
have not called upon him?” Saying this, the preacher again remained
silent as before. Afterward he again continued: “Jesus remained in the
den till one day when he happened to remember Melek Ṭâ´ûs. He then
sought his aid, praying, ‘O Melek Ṭâ´ûs, I have been in this den for
some time. I am imprisoned; I have sought the help of all the saints,
and none of them could deliver me. Now, save me from this den.’ When
Melek Ṭâ´ûs heard this, he descended from heaven to earth quicker than
the twinkling of an eye, removed the stone from the top of the den, and
said to Jesus, ‘Come up, behold I have brought thee out.’ Then both
went up to heaven. When the great God saw Jesus, he said to him, ‘O
Jesus, who brought thee out of the den? Who brought thee here without
my permission?’ Jesus answered and said, ‘Melek Ṭâ´ûs brought me out
of the den and up here.’ Then God said, ‘Had it been another, I would
have punished him, but Melek Ṭâ´ûs is much beloved by me; remain here
for the sake of my honor.’ So Jesus remained in heaven.” The preacher
added, “Notice that those who are without do not like Melek Ṭâ´ûs.
Know ye that in the resurrection he will not like them either, and he
will not intercede for them. But, as for us, he will put us all in a
tray, carry us upon his head, and take us into heaven, while we are in
the tray on his head.” When the congregation heard this, they rose up,
kissed his clothes and feet, and received his blessing.
Now the views of the Yezidis regarding the birth of Christ and the
explanation of the name of the Apostle Peter, are found in one of their
stories, which runs thus: “Verily Mary the Virgin mother of Jesus,
begat Jesus in a manner unlike the rest of women. She begat him from
her right side,[60] between her clothes and her body. At that time the
Jews had a custom that, if a woman gave birth, all her relatives and
neighbors would bring her presents. The women would call, carrying
in their right hand a plate of fruits which were to be found in that
season, and in the left hand they would carry a stone. This custom
was a very ancient one. Therefore when Mary the Virgin gave birth to
Jesus, the wife of Jonah, who is the mother of Peter, came to her; and,
according to the custom, carried a plate of fruit in her right hand and
a stone in her left. As she entered and gave Mary the plate, behold,
the stone which was in her left hand begat a male. She called his name
Simon Cifa, that is, son of the stone. Christians do not know these
things as we do.”
They have a story explaining the word heretic. It is this: When the
great God created the heavens, he put all the keys of the treasuries
and the mansions there in the hands of Melek Ṭâ´ûs, and commanded him
not to open a certain mansion. But he, without the knowledge of God,
opened the house and found a piece of paper on which was written, “Thou
shalt worship thy God alone, and him alone shalt thou serve.” He kept
the paper with him and allowed no one else to know about it. Then God
created an iron ring and hung it in the air between the heaven and the
earth. Afterward he created Adam the first. Melek Ṭâ´ûs refused to
worship Adam when God commanded him to do so. He showed the written
paper which he took from the mansion and said, “See what is written
here.” Then the great God said, “It may be that you have opened the
mansion which I forbade you to open.” He answered, “Yes.” Then God
said to him, “You are a heretic, because you have disobeyed me and
transgressed my commandment.”
From this we know that God speaks in the Kurdish language, that is from
the meaning of this saying, “Go into the iron ring which I, thy God,
have made for whosoever does contrary to my commandment and disobeys
me.”
When one criticizes such a story as this by saying that God drove Melek
Ṭâ´ûs from heaven and sent him to hell because of his pride before God
the most high, they do not admit that such is the case. They answer:
“Is it possible that one of us in his anger should drive out his child
from his house and let him wait until the next day before bringing
him back? Of course not. Similar is the relation of the great God to
Melek Ṭâ´ûs. Verily he loves him exceedingly. You do not understand the
books which you read. The Gospel says, ‘No one ascended up to heaven
but he who came down from heaven.’ No one came down from heaven but
Melek Ṭâ´ûs and Christ. From this we know that the great God has been
reconciled to Melek Ṭâ´ûs, who went up to heaven, just as God came
down from heaven and went up again.”
The following is a story told of a _kôchak_: It is related that at one
time there was no rain in the village of Ba‘ašîḳa. In this village
there was a Yezidi whose name was Kôchak Berû. There were also some
saints and men of vision dwelling there. They (people) gathered to ask
Berû to see about the rain. He told them, “Wait till tomorrow that I
may see about it.” They came to him on the next day and said, “What
have you done concerning the question of rain? We are exceedingly
alarmed by reason of its being withheld.” He answered: “I went up to
heaven last night and entered into the divan where the great God, Šeiḫ
‘Adî, and some other šeiḫs and righteous men were sitting. The priest
Isaac was sitting beside God. The great God said to me, ‘What do you
want, O Kôchak Berû; why have you come here?’ I said to him, ‘My lord,
this year the rain has been withheld from us till now, and all thy
servants are poor and needy. We beseech thee to send us rain as thy
wont.’ He remained silent and answered me not. I repeated the speech
twice and thrice, beseeching him. Then I turned to the šeiḫs who sat
there, asking their help and intercession. The great God answered me,
‘Go away until we think it over.’ I came down and do not know what took
place after I descended from heaven. You may go to the priest Isaac and
ask him what was said after I came down.” They went to the priest and
told him the story, and asked him what was said after Kôchak Berû came
down. This priest Isaac was a great joker. He answered them, “After
the _kôchak_ came down, I begged God for rain on your behalf. It was
agreed that after six or seven days he would send it.” They waited
accordingly, and by a strange coincidence, at the end of the period it
rained like a flood for some time. Seeing this, the people believed in
what they were told, and honored the priest Isaac, looking upon him as
one of the saints, and thinking that he must have Yezidi blood in him.
For more than twenty years this story has been told as one of the tales
of their saints.
Once Šeiḫ ‘Adî bn Musâfir and his _murids_ were entertained by God in
heaven. When they arrived, they did not find straw for their animals.
Therefore Šeiḫ ‘Adî ordered his _murids_ to carry straw from his
threshing floor on the earth. As it was being transported, some fell on
the way, and has remained as a sign in heaven unto our day. It is known
as the road of the straw man.
They think that prayer is in the heart; therefore they do not teach
their children about it. And in their book neither is there any rule
regarding prayer, nor is prayer considered a religious obligation.
Some assert that at one time Šeiḫ ‘Adî, in company with Šeiḫ
‘Abd-al-ḳâdir, made a pilgrimage to Mecca, where he remained four
years. After his absence Melek Ṭâ´ûs appeared to them (the two šeiḫs)
in his symbol. He dictated some rules to them and taught them many
things. Then he was hidden from them. Four years later Šeiḫ ‘Adî
returned from Mecca; but they refused him and would not accept him.
They asserted that he had died or ascended to heaven. He remained
with them, but was without his former respect. When the time of his
death came, Melek Ṭâ´ûs appeared to them and declared, “This is Šeiḫ
‘Adî himself, honor him.” Then they honored him and buried him with
due veneration, and made his tomb a place of pilgrimage. In their
estimation it is a more excellent spot than Mecca. Everyone is under
obligation to visit it once a year at least; and, in addition to this,
they give a sum of money through the šeiḫs to obtain satisfaction
(that Šeiḫ ‘Adî may be pleased with them). Whoever does this not is
disobedient.
Moreover, it is said that the reason why the pilgrimage to his tomb
is regarded as excellent by us and by God is that in the resurrection
Šeiḫ ‘Adî will carry in a tray all the Yezidis upon his head and take
them into paradise, without requiring them to give account or answer.
Therefore they regard the pilgrimage to his tomb as a religious duty
greater than the pilgrimage to Mecca.
There are some domes, huts, around the tomb of Šeiḫ ‘Adî. They
are there for the purpose of receiving blessings from the tomb.
And they are all attributed to the great Šeiḫs, as the hut of
‘Abd-al-ḳâdir-al-Jîlânî;[61] the hut of Šeiḫ ḳadîb-al-Bân; the hut of
Šeiḫ Šams-ad-Dîn; the hut of Šeiḫ Manṣûr-al-Ḥallâj, and the hut of Šeiḫ
Ḫasan-al-Baṣrî. There are also some other huts. Each hut has a banner
made of calico. It is a sign of conquest and victory.
Eating of deer’s meat is forbidden them, they say, because the
deer’s eyes resemble the eyes of Šeiḫ ‘Adî. Verily his virtues are
well-known and his praiseworthy qualities are traditions handed down
from generation to generation. He was the first to accept the Yezidi
religion. He gave them the rules of the religious sect and founded
the office of the ṣeiḫ. In addition to this, he was renowned for his
devotion and religious exercise. From Mount Lališ, he used to hear
the preaching of ‘Abd-al-ḳâdir-al-Jîlâni in Bagdad. He used to draw a
circle on the ground and say to the religious ones, “Whosoever wants to
hear the preaching of Al-Jîlânî, let him enter within this circle.” The
following custom, which we have, began with him: If we wish to swear to
anyone, a ṣeiḫ draws a circle, and he who is to take an oath, enters
into it.
At one time, passing by a garden, Šeiḫ ‘Adî asked about lettuce; and,
as no one answered, he said, “Huss” (hush). For this reason lettuce is
forbidden and not eaten.
As regards fasting, they say about the month of Ramaḍân that it was
dumb and deaf. Therefore, when God commanded the Moslems to fast, he
likewise commanded the Yezidis, saying to them in the Kurdish language,
“_sese_,” meaning “three.” The Mohammedans did not understand it;
they took it for “_se_,” “thirty.” For this reason, they (Yezidis)
fast three days. Moreover, they believe there are eating, drinking,
and other earthly pleasures in the next world.[62] Some hold that the
rule of heaven is in God’s hands, but the rule of the earth is in Šeiḫ
‘Adî’s hands. Being exceedingly beloved by God, he bestowed upon him
according to ‘Adî’s desire.
They believe in the transmigration of souls. This is evinced by the
fact that when the soul of Manṣûr-al-Ḥallâj parted from his body when
the Caliph of Bagdad killed him and cast his head into the water,
his soul floated on the water. By a wonderful chance and a strange
happening, the sister of the said Manṣûr went to fill her jar. The soul
of her brother entered it. Without knowing what had happened, she came
with it to the house. Being tired, she felt thirsty and drank from the
jar. At that moment the soul of her brother entered her, but she did
not perceive it until she became pregnant. She gave birth to a son who
resembled Šeiḫ Manṣûr himself. He became her brother according to birth
and her son according to imputation. The reason why they do not use
drinking-vessels which have narrow mouths, or a net-like cover, is that
when one drinks water from them they make a sound. When the head of
Šeiḫ Manṣûr was thrown into the water it gurgled. In his honor they do
not use the small jars with narrow necks.
They assert that they expect a prophet who will come from Persia to
annul the law of Mohammed and abrogate Islam. They believe that there
are seven gods, and that each god administers the universe for ten
thousand years; and that one of these gods is Lasiferos, the chief of
the fallen angels, who bears also the name Melek Ṭâ´ûs. They make him
a graven image after the form of a cock[63] and worship it. They play
the tambourine and dance before it to make it rejoice with them. They
(_ḳawwâls_) travel within the Yezidis’ villages to collect money, at
which time they take it into the houses that it may bless and honor
them. Some say that Šeiḫ ‘Adî is a deity; others that he is like a
Vizier to God. To him all things are referred. This is Melek Ṭâ´ûs
age. The ruling and administrative power is in his hands until the
thousandth year. When the time comes to an end he will deliver the
power to the next god to rule and administer until another thousand
years shall be ended, and so on until the seventh god. And yet there is
accord and love among these gods, and none is jealous of the one who
may rule and administer the world for a period of ten thousand years.
They have a book named Al Jilwah that they ascribe to Šeiḫ ‘Adî, and
they suffer no one who is not one of them to read it.
Mention is made in some of their books that the First Cause is the
Supreme God, who before he created this world, was enjoying himself
over the seas;[64] and in his hand was a great White Pearl, with which
he was playing. Then he resolved to cast it into the sea, and when he
did so this world came into being.
Moreover, they think themselves not to be of the same seed from which
the rest of mankind sprung, but that they are begotten of the son
of Adam, who was born to Adam of his spittle. For this reason they
imagine themselves nobler and more pleasing to the gods than others.
They say they have taken fasting and sacrifice from Islam; baptism
from Christians; prohibition of foods from the Jews; their way of
worship from the idolaters; dissimulation of doctrine from the Rafiḍis
(Shi‘ites); human sacrifice and transmigration from the pre-Islamic
paganism of the Arabs and from the Sabians. They say that when the
spirit of man goes forth from his body, it enters into another man if
it be just; but if unjust, into an animal.
THE POEM IN PRAISE OF ŠEIḪ ‘ADÎ
_Peace Be unto Him_
My understanding surrounds the truth of things,
And my truth is mixed up in me,
And the truth of my descent is set forth by itself,
And when it was known it was altogether in me.
And all that are in the universe are under me,
And all the habitable parts and deserts,
And everything created is under me,
And I am the ruling power preceding all that exists.
And I am he that spoke a true saying,
And I am the just judge and the ruler of the earth.
And I am he that men worship in my glory,
Coming to me and kissing my feet.
And I am he that spread over the heavens their height.
And I am he that cried in the beginning.
And I am he that of myself revealeth all things,
And I am he to whom came the book of good tidings
From my Lord, who burneth the mountains.
And I am he to whom all created men come
In obedience to kiss my feet.
I bring forth fruit from the first juice of early youth
By my presence, and turn toward me my disciples.
And before this light the darkness of the morning cleared away.
I guide him that asketh for guidance.
I am he that caused Adam to dwell in Paradise
And Nimrod to inhabit a hot burning fire.
And I am he that guided Aḥmed the Just,
And let him into my path and way.
And I am he unto whom all creatures
Come for my good purposes and gifts.
And I am he that visited all the heights,
And goodness and charity proceed from my mercy.
And I am he that made all hearts to fear
My purpose, and they magnify the majesty and power of my awfulness.
And I am he to whom the destroying lion came
Raging, and I shouted against him and he became stone.
And I am he to whom the serpent came,
And by my will I made him dust.
And I am he that struck the rock and made it tremble,
And made to burst from its sides the sweetest of waters.[65]
And I am he that sent down the certain truth;
For me is the book that comforteth the oppressed.
And I am he that judged justly,
And when I judged it was my right
And I am he that made the springs[65] to give water,
Sweeter and pleasanter than all waters.
And I am he that caused it to appear in my mercy,
And by my power I called it the pure.
And I am he to whom the Lord of heaven hath said,
Thou art the just Judge and Ruler of the earth.
And I am he that disclosed some of my wonders,
And some of my virtues are manifested in that which exists.
And I am he that caused the mountains to bow,
To move under me and at my will.[66]
And I am he before whose majesty the wild beasts cried;
They turned to me worshiping, and kissed my feet.
And I am ‘Adî aš-Šâmî, the son of Musâfir.
Verily the All-Merciful has assigned unto me names,
The heavenly throne, and the seat, and the (seven) heavens,
and the earth.
In the secret of my knowledge there is no God but me.
These things are subservient to my power.
O mine enemies, why do you deny me?
O men, deny me not, but submit.
In the day of judgment you will be happy in meeting me.
Who dies in my love, I will cast him
In the midst of Paradise, by my will and pleasure;
But he that dies unmindful of me
Will be thrown into torture in misery and affliction.
I say I am the only one and the exalted;
I create and make rich those whom I will.
Praise it to myself, for all things are by my will.
And the universe is lighted by some of my gifts.
I am the king that magnifies himself,
And all the riches of creation are at my bidding.
I have made known unto you, O people, some of my ways.
Who desireth me must forsake the world.
And I can also speak the true saying,
And the garden on high is for those who do my pleasure.
I sought the truth and became a confirming truth;
And by the like truth shall they, like myself, possess the
highest place.
THE PRINCIPAL PRAYER OF THE YEZIDIS
Amen, Amen, Amen!
Through the intermediation of Šams-ad-Dîn,
Faḫr ad-Dîn, Naṣir-ad-Dîn,
Sajad ad-Dîn, Šeiḫ Sin (Ḥusein),
Šeiḫ Bakr, ḳâdir ar-Raḥmân.
Lord, thou art gracious, thou art merciful;
Thou art God, king of kings and lands,
King of joy and happiness,
King of good possession (eternal life).
From eternity thou art eternal.
Thou art the seat of luck (happiness) and life;
Thou art lord of grace and good luck.
Thou art king of jinns and human beings,
King of the holy men (saints),
Lord of terror and praise,
The abode of religious duty and praise,
Worthy of praise and thanks.
Lord! Protector in journeys,
Sovereign of the moon and of the darkness,
God of the sun and of the fire,
God of the great throne,
Lord of goodness.
Lord! No one knows how thou art.
Thou hast no beauty; thou hast no height.
Thou hast no going forth; thou hast no number.
Lord! Judge of kings and beggars,
Judge of society and of the world,
Thou hast revealed the repentance of Adam.
Lord, thou hast no house; thou hast no money;
Thou hast no wings, hast no feathers;
Thou hast no voice, thou hast no color.
Thou hast made us lucky and satisfied.
Thou hast created Jesus and Mary.
Lord, thou art gracious,
Merciful, faithful.
Thou art Lord; I am nothingness.
I am a fallen sinner,
A sinner by thee remembered.
Thou hast led us out of darkness into light.
Lord! My sin and my guilt,
Take them and remove them.
O God, O God, O God, Amen!
SEVEN CLASSES OF YEZIDIS
They are divided into seven classes, and each class has functions
peculiar to itself that cannot be discharged by any of the other
classes. They are:
1. Šeiḫ. He is the servant of the tomb, and a descendant of Imam Ḥasan
al-Baṣrî. No one can give a legal decision or sign any document except
the šeiḫ who is the servant of Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s tomb. He has a sign by which
he is distinguished from others. The sign is a belt which he puts on
his body, and net-like gloves, which resemble the halters of camels. If
he goes among his people, they bow down and pay him their respects. The
šeiḫs sell a place in paradise to anyone who wishes to pay money.
2. Emir. The emirship specifically belongs to the descendants of
Yezîd. They have a genealogical tree, preserved from their fathers and
forefathers, which goes up to Yezîd himself. The emirs have charge of
the temporal and governmental affairs, and have the right to say, “Do
this and do not that.”
3. ḳawwâl. He has charge of tambourines and flutes and religious hymns.
4. Pîr. To him appertain the conduct of fasts, the breaking of fasts,
and hair-dressing.
5. Kôchak. To him appertain the duties of religious instruction, and
sepulture, and interpretation of dreams, i. e., prophecy.
6. Faḳîr. To him appertain the duties of instruction of boys and girls
in playing on the tambourines, in dancing and religious pleasure. He
serves Šeiḫ ‘Adî.
7. Mulla. To him appertain the duties of instructing children. He
guards the books and the mysteries of religion and attends to the
affairs of the sect.
ARTICLES OF FAITH
At one time (A. H. 1289; A. D. 1872), the Ottoman power wanted to draft
from among them an army instead of taking the tax which was its due.
They presented to the government all the rules that prevented them from
complying. These all pertain to religion and are moral obligations upon
them. They are as follows:
ARTICLE I
According to our Yezidi religion every member of our sect, whether big
or little, girl or woman, must visit Melek Ṭâ´ûs three times a year,
that is, first, from the beginning to the last of the month of April,
Roman calendar; secondly, from the beginning to the end of the month
of September; thirdly, from the beginning to the end of the month
of November. If anyone visit not the image of Melek Ṭâ´ûs, he is an
infidel.
ARTICLE II
If any member of our sect, big or little, visit not his highness Šeiḫ
‘Adî bn Musâfir—may God sanctify his mysteries! once a year, i. e.,
from the fifteenth to the twentieth of the month of September, Roman
calendar, he is an infidel according to our religion.
ARTICLE III
Every member of our sect must visit the place of the sunrise every day
when it appears, and there should not be Moslem, nor Christian, nor
any one else in that place. If any one do this not, he is an infidel.
ARTICLE IV
Every member of our sect must daily kiss the hand of his brother, his
brother of the next world, namely, the servant of the Mahdi, and the
hand of his šeiḫ or _pîr_. If any one do this not, he is regarded as
an infidel.
ARTICLE V
According to our religion it is something intolerable when the Moslem
in the morning begins to say in prayer, God forbid! “I take refuge in
God, etc.”[67] If any one of us hear it, he must kill the one who says
it and kill himself; otherwise he becomes an infidel.
ARTICLE VI
When one of our sect is on the point of death, if there be no brother
of the next world and his šeiḫ, or his _pîr_ and one of the _ḳawwâls_
with him to say three sayings over him, viz., “O servant of Melek
Ṭâ´ûs, whose ways are high, you must die in the religion of the one we
worship, who is Melek Ṭâ´ûs, whose ways are high, and do not die in
any other religion than his. And if some one should come and say to
you something from the Mohammedan religion, or Christian religion, or
Jewish religion, or some other religion, do not believe him, and do
not follow him. And if you believe and follow another religion than
that of the one we worship, Melek Ṭâ´ûs, you shall die an infidel,” he
becomes an infidel.
ARTICLE VII
We have something called the blessing of Šeiḫ ‘Adî, that is, the dust
of the tomb Šeiḫ ‘Adî—may God sanctify his mystery! Every member
of our sect must have some of it with him in his pocket and eat of
it every morning. And if he eat not of it intentionally, he is an
infidel. Likewise at the time of death, if he possess not some of that
dust intentionally, he dies an infidel.
ARTICLE VIII
Regarding our fasting, if any one of our sect wish to fast, he must
fast in his own place, not in another. For while fasting he must go
every morning to the house of his šeih and his _pîr_, and there he
must begin to fast; and when he breaks his fast, likewise, he must go
to the house of his šeih and his _pîr_, and there break the fast by
drinking the holy wine of the šeih or the _pîr_. And if he drink not
two or three glasses of that wine, his fasting is not acceptable, and
he becomes an infidel.
ARTICLE IX
If one of our sect go to another place and remain there as much as one
year, and afterward return to his place, then his wife is forbidden
him, and none of us will give him a wife. If anyone give him a wife,
that one is an infidel.
ARTICLE X
Regarding our dress, as we have mentioned in the fourth Article that
every one of our sect has a brother for the next world, he has also
a sister for the next world.[68] Therefore if any one of us make for
himself a new shirt, it is necessary that his sister for the next
world should open its neck band, i. e., the neck band of that shirt,
with her hand. And if she open it not with her hand, and he wear it,
then he is an infidel.
ARTICLE XI
If some one of our sect make a shirt or a new dress, he cannot wear it
without baptizing it in the blessed water which is to be found at the
shrine of his highness Šeiḫ ‘Adî, may God sanctify his mystery! If he
wear it, he is an infidel.
ARTICLE XII
We may not wear a light black dress at all. We may not comb our heads
with the comb of a Moslem or a Christian or a Jew or any other. Nor
may we shave our heads with the razor used by any other than ourselves
(Yezidis), except it be washed in the blessed water which is to be
found at the shrine of his highness Šeih ‘Adî. Then it is lawful for
us to shave our heads. But if we shave our heads without the razor
having been washed in that water, we become infidels.
ARTICLE XIII
No Yezidi may enter the water-closet of a Moslem, or take a bath at a
Moslem’s house, or eat with a Moslem’s spoon or drink from a Moslem’s
cup, from a cup used by any one of another sect. If he does, he is an
infidel.[69]
ARTICLE XIV
Concerning food, there is a great difference between us and the other
sects. We do not eat meat or fish, squash, _bamia_ (okra), _fasulia_
(beans), cabbage, or lettuce. We cannot even dwell in the place where
lettuce is sown.[70]
For these and other reasons, we cannot enter the military service, etc.
The names of those who affixed their signatures:
THE HEAD OF THE YEZIDI SECT, THE EMIR OF
ŠEIḪÂN, ḤUSEIN.
THE RELIGIOUS ŠEIḪ OF THE YEZIDI SECT OF THE
DISTRICT OF ŠEIḪÂN, ŠEIḪ NAṢIR.
THE CHIEF OF THE VILLAGE OF MAM REŠÂN,
PÎR SULEIMÂN.
THE VILLAGE CHIEF OF MUSKÂN, MURAD.
“ “ “ “ ḤATÂRAH, AYYÛB.
“ “ “ “ BEIBÂN, ḤUSEIN.
“ “ “ “ DAHḲAN, ḤASSAN.
“ “ “ “ ḤUZRÂN, NU‘MÔ.
“ “ “ “ BÂKASRA, ‘ALI.
“ “ “ “ B‘AŠÎḲA, JAMÔ.
“ “ “ “ ḤÔŠÂBA, ILIAS.
“ “ “ “ KREPAḤIN, SAĠD.
“ “ “ “ ḲABÂREH, KÔCHAK.
“ “ “ “ KASÔ.
“ “ “ “ SINÂ, ‘ABDÔ.
“ “ “ “ ‘AIN SIFNI, GURGÔ.
“ “ “ “ ḲASR-‘_I_ZZ-AD-DÎN.
“ “ “ “ ḪEIRÔ.
“ “ “ “ KIBERTÔ, ṬÂHIR.
AND OTHERS.
These are they whose names were in the petition above mentioned, and
from which we copied a few things.
The result was that when they presented this petition, they were
exempted from military service, but they paid a tax in money as did the
Christians.
NOTES ON PART I
[31] A. H. 295 (A. D. 807-8). This is the date of Al-Muḳtadir’s
accession, who reigned till A. H. 320 (A. D. 932); cf. W. Muir, _The
Caliphate_, p. 559.
[32] The life of Manṣûr-al-Ḥallâj is given in Fihrist (ed. Flügel), p.
190.
[33] The life of ‘Abd-al-ḳâdir of Jîlân is given in Jami’s _Nafaḥat_
(ed. Lee), p. 584.
[34] The Hakkari country is a dependency of Mosul, and inhabited
by Kurds and Nestorians; cf. p. 104. Ibn Ḫauḳal, Kîtâb al-Masâlik
wal-Mamâlik (ed. M. J. De Goeje), pp. 143 f.
[35] Yaḳût, IV, 373, calls it Laileš and says that Šeiḫ ‘Adî lived
there.
[36] Presumably Yezîd bn Mu‘âwiya, the second caliph in the Omayyid
dynasty, who reigned, A. D. 680-83; cf. W. Muir, _The Caliphate_, p.
327.
[37] The life of Ḥasan al-Baṣrî is given in Ibn Ḫallikân. He is not
to be identified with Ḥasan al-Baṣrî (died 110 A. H., who, according
to Mohammedan tradition, first pointed the Koran text, with the
assistance of Yaḥyâ bn Yamar.
[38] In Menant’s _Yzidis_, 48, the names of these seven angels are
somewhat differently given. According to Mohammedan tradition Zazil or
Azazil was the original name of the devil.
[39] By the “throne” here is meant the throne of God, and by the
“carpet” the earth; cf. Sura 60: 131.
[40] According to Moslem belief, wheat was the forbidden fruit; see
Baiḍâwi on Sura, ii, 33.
[41] Kunsiniyat is an obscure term.
[42] ‘Ain Sifni is about five miles from Ba‘adrie; cf. Layard,
_Nineveh_, I, 272.
[43] Yaḳût (III, 158) mentions a similar tradition.
[44] These are indications of Mohammedan influence and censorship, for
no Yezidi will ever write in his sacred book such words as Šeitân,
Šar, etc.
[45] That is, those of other religions.
[46] Sanjaḳ is a Turkish word, meaning banner; it is the name by which
the Yezidis generally designate the sacred image of Melek Ṭâ´ûs.
[47] See note 27.
[48] The Harranian New Year fell on the first day of April, and on the
sixth day they slaughtered an ox and ate it; cf. Fihrist, 322.
[49] A similar practice is found among the Parsees of India, who
hang a string of leaves across the entrances to their houses at the
beginning of every New Year.
[50] According to Babylonian mythology, human destiny was decreed
on the New Year’s day and sealed on the tenth day; cf. the _Hibbert
Journal_, V, January, 1907. And according to Talmud (Mišna, Roš
hašana, I:2), New Year’s is the most important judgment day, on which
all creatures pass for judgment before the Creator. On this day three
books are opened, wherein the fate of the wicked, the righteous, and
those of the intermediate class are recorded. Hence prayer and works
of repentance are performed at the New Year from the first to the
tenth days, that an unfavorable decision might be averted; cf. _Jewish
Encyclopedia_, “Penitential Day.” R. Akiba says: “On New Year day all
men are judged; and the decree is sealed on the Day of Atonement;” cf.
_ibid._, “Day of Judgement.”
[51] Ibrîḳ al-Aṣfar means “the yellow pitcher.”
[52] Bakbûḳ is a pitcher with a narrow spout.
[53] Mar Mattie is a Syrian monastery about seven hours’ ride east
of Mosul, generally known by the name of Šeiḫ Mattie, in accordance
with the general custom of sheltering a Christian saint beneath a
Moslem title. Elijah is known as Al-Ḫuder, “the green one.” Aphrates
was bishop of Šeiḫ Mattie. The church of this monastery is a large
building, chiefly interesting as containing the tomb of the great
Bar Hebraeus, known as Abu-l-Faraj, who was ordained at Tripolis,
and became in 1246 A. D. Metropolitan of Mosul. He lies buried, with
his brother Barsom, in the “Beth ḳadišeh” (sanctuary) of the church,
and over them is placed the inscription: “This is the grave of Mar
Gregorias, and of Mar Barsome his brother, the children of the Hebrew,
on Mount Elpep” (the Syriac name for Jabal Maḳlûb).
[54] _Kani_ in Kurdish means a spring; _zarr_, yellow. In Kurdish,
as in Persian, the adjective usually follows the modified noun; cf.
Tartibi Jadid, Ta‘alimi Faresi, _The New Method for Teaching Persian_
(in the Turkish language, ed. Kasbar, Constantinople, A. H. 1312), p.
18.
[55] Jawîš is a Turkish word, signifying a sergeant.
[56] This ceremony, as well as the names ‘Arafat, Zamzam, etc., seems
to be a mere copy of the Meccah Pilgrimage. ‘Arafât, “The Mount of
Recognition,” is situated twelve miles from Mecca, a place where the
pilgrims stay on the ninth day of the day of the pilgrimage, and
recite the midday and afternoon prayer. The Mohammedan legend says,
that when our first parents forfeited heaven for eating wheat, they
were cast down from the Paradise, Adam fell on the Isle of Ceylon,
and Eve near Jiddah (the port of Mecca) in Arabia; and that, after
separation of 200 years, Adam was conducted by the Angel Gabriel to a
mountain near Mecca, where he found and knew his wife, the mountain
being then named ‘Arafat, “Recognition.”
[57] The god Nisroch of Scripture, II Kings 19:37; Isa. 37: 38.
[58] A superstitious name signifying an ill omen.
[59] That is, public prayers like those of the Mohammedans and of the
Christians; cf. Al Mašrik, II, 313.
[60] The text has “her hand.”
[61] While the Yezidis venerate ‘Abd al-ḳâdir of Jîlân, the Nusairis
curse him; cf. _J A O S_, VIII, 274.
[62] This belief is taken from Mohammedanism.
[63] The Arabs worshiped a deity under the form of a _nasr_ (eagle),
Aš-Šahrastânî, II, 434; Yaḳut, IV, 780; _The Syriac Doctrine of Addai_
(ed. George Philips), p. 24.
[64] Cf. Gen. I: 2, and the Babylonian Creation Epic.
[65] That is the spring of Šeiḫ ‘Adî.
[66] The reference is to Jabal Maḳlûb, which, according to the Yezidi
belief, moved from its place near Lališ to enable every Yezidi,
wherever he may be, to direct his morning prayers toward the tomb of
‘Adî.
[67] The Moslem begins his prayer by cursing the devil.
[68] That is a person of the same faith, a Yezidi.
[69] A Nuṣairi, on the contrary, may become a Mohammedan with a
Mohammedan, a Christian with a Christian, and a Jew with a Jew; cf. _J
A O S_, VII, 298.
[70] The Sabians did not eat purslane, garlic, beans, cauliflower,
cabbage, and lentils; cf. Bar. Hebraeus, At-Târîḫ, ed. A. Ṣalḥani,
Beirut, 1890, 266.
PART II
THE CRITICAL DISCUSSION OF YEZIDISM
CHAPTER I
THE RELIGIOUS ORIGIN OF THE YEZIDIS
The origin of the devil-worshippers has been the subject of much
controversy; but aside from an expression of views, no satisfactory
solution of the problem has as yet been reached. The different
theories which have been advanced may be classified under four general
heads: The Myth of the Yezidis themselves; the tradition of Eastern
Christians; the dogmatic idea of the Mohammedan scholars; and the
speculative theory of the western orientalists.
I
THE YEZIDI MYTH
The Myth of the Yezidis concerning their origin may be derived from
three different sources: from their sacred book, from the appendix of
the manuscript, and from actual conversation of travellers with them
or with natives dwelling among them. One noticeable fact is that this
tradition assumes the religion of the sect as existing long before
the time of their chief saint, Šeiḫ ‘Adî. Al-Jilwah begins with the
statement that Melek Ṭâ´ûs sent his servant, _i. e._, the Yezidis, that
they might not go astray. Starting from this assumption, the writer of
the revealed book goes on to trace the origin of the “elect” to the
very beginning of human history. He asserts that from the start God
created them as a peculiar people of ‘Azazil, _i. e._, Melek-Ṭâ´ûs. In
the main, this idea finds expression in the oral traditions. But here
we have a mass of material so clouded by superstition and ignorance
that it is next to impossible to come to any conclusion as to the
history of this interesting people. One point the myth repeatedly
emphasizes, as an explanation of the origin of the sect, is that it
was descended from Adam alone; while the other sects were descended
from Adam and Eve. For this reason, the same tradition implies, the
Yezidis are nobler than the others. But how they have come to be such
unique descendants is a question not easily answered. One account
has it that when Adam and Eve disputed as to the generation of the
human race, each claiming to be the sole begetter of the race, they
finally agreed to put their seed in separate jars and seal them with
their own seals. After nine months they opened the jars, and in Adam’s
jar they found two children, a male and a female. From these two
the Yezidis were descended. Another explanation is that from Adam’s
essence was born Šeher bn Jebr, of whom nothing is known; and of
him, a separate community, which is the sect of Melek Ṭâ´ûs. We have,
moreover, the tradition that the Yezidis are descendants of a son born
to Adam of his spittle. Now whether this son be identical with Šeher
bn Jebr is not certain. Writing in one of the oriental periodicals,
an eastern scholar quotes a Yezidi šeiḫ in a statement which seems
to corroborate the tradition that the Yezidis are a noble progeny of
Adam; but the quotation differs from the instance previously cited in
stating that the quarrel which took place between Adam and Eve led to
their separation to places distant from each other a journey of forty
days.[71] There, it is said, Adam miraculously gave birth to a son.
Distressed by this incident, Eve asked God that she might find favor in
her husband’s eyes by giving birth to a child. Thereupon, it continues,
she begot a very pretty daughter. Attracted by her beauty, Adam married
her to his son. Now, the Yezidis, we are told, are the blessed seed of
these two children.[72]
Not only when the tradition, tracing the origin of the Yezidis as a
race, asserts that, as a religious body, they come from a very ancient
time; but also when it speaks of them as a nation, it points out their
antiquity. On this latter, as well as on the former point, their book
and their oral tradition agree. The Yezidis are said to have sprung
from a noble personage, the King of Peace, whose name was Na-‘umi, but
whom they now call Melek-Miran.[73] The rest of mankind, however, are
from the seed of Ham, who mocked his father. Whom they signified by
Na-‘umi or Miran it is hard to say; but it is likely that they regard
him as one of the other two sons of Noah. They claim also that the
ancient Assyrian kings were members of their race, and that some of
the Persian, Roman and Jewish kings were appointed for them by Melek
Ṭâ´ûs. They likewise seem to trace their origin to the prophets and
other personages of the Old Testament; as Seth, Enoch, Noah, etc. Their
religion furthermore, they assert, antedates Christ.[74]
There is still another tradition that traces the devil-worshippers to
a different origin. I refer to the statement which Masehaf Reš makes
regarding Mu‘awiya, Mohammed’s servant.[75] Mu‘awiya was asked by
his master to shave his head. While performing the duty, he cut the
prophet’s scalp, and began to lick the bleeding spot. When he was told
that this act would result in his giving birth to a nation which would
oppose the followers of his master, Mu‘awiya declared that he would
not marry. He was afterwards, however, bitten by a serpent, and was
told that he would die unless he married. He therefore consented to
marry, but chose an old woman in order not to have children. But she
miraculously became a young woman of twenty-five. And from her the God
Yezid was born. The story, of course, is a myth, and it is of such a
nature that no historic fact can be derived from it. It is further
complicated by the fact that this Yezid is identified with Melek Ṭâ´ûs;
and, in another myth, is represented in form as being half angel and
half man and as remaining a bachelor long after the marriage of Adam.
He was, however, finally possessed of a desire to marry, and, unable
to marry a mortal’s daughter, being himself half angel, sought the
assistance of Melek Ṭâ´ûs, who presented to him an ḥouri, and from this
union there sprang a pious people, the Yezidis.
But the devil-worshippers have still another story, which goes to show
that Yezid bn Mu‘awiya is not their founder. This myth asserts that
they are the progeny of Adam’s son who was married to Eve’s daughter;
that the descendants continued worshipping God and Melek Ṭâ´ûs without
bringing a foreign element into their religion; and that, at first, the
sect did not bear the name Yezidis, which, in their own opinion, is
a comparatively new appellative. As to how they came to be called by
this new name, it is explained that when, in the course of time, some
corruption entered the Yezidi religion, there arose a certain Calif by
the name of Yezid who wrought miracles. Since then, his followers have
been called Yezidis. This Yezid, it is said, is the son of Mu‘awiya
bn Sufian, and his mother was of Christian origin. To accomplish his
desire, bn Mu‘awiya went to Šeiḫ ‘Adi, who was a learned and devout
but cunning person, and had instituted a religious innovation. Yezid,
the tradition continues, learned ‘Adi’s religion and taught it to his
followers; and, from that time on, the sect came to be called after
him.[76] But while some, considering this legend as authoritative,
venerate the man bearing the name, others deny all connection with
him.[77]
The testimony of some travellers offers another explanation of the
origin of the sect in question, an account which has perhaps more
historical significance than the preceding theories. It is stated that
the Yezidis have a tradition to the effect that they came from Baṣrah
and from the country watered by the lower part of the Euphrates; that
after their emigration they first settled in Syria, and subsequently
took possession of the Sinjar Hill and the district now inhabited
in Kurdistan. As to the date of their settlement in Mesopotamia, no
positive information can be obtained. Some scholars infer that it took
place about the time of Tamerlane, toward the end of the fourteenth
century.[78] It is related that the devil-worshippers hold that, among
their own number, the ancient name for God is Azd, and from it the name
of the sect is derived;[79] that the conviction that they are Yezidis,
_i. e._, God’s people, has been their consolation and comfort through
the ages in their tribulations;[80] and that they have taken many
religious observances from different bodies—Mohammedans, Christians,
Jews, Pagan Arabs, Shiites, and Sabaians.
Besides these different explanations of the origin of the
devil-worshippers as descendants of Adam, of Yezid bn Mu‘awiya, as
being of the colony from the north, as taking their name from Azd, God,
there is another account. I refer to a myth which is current among the
people of Seistan, an eastern province of Persia, where there are a
considerable number of these Shaitan parasts (devil worshippers):
“In former times there existed a prophet named Ḥanalalah, whose life
was prolonged to the measure of a thousand years. He was their ruler
and benefactor; and as by his agency, their flocks gave birth to lambs
and kids miraculously once a week, though ignorant of the use of money,
they, with much gratitude to him, procured all the comforts of life.
At length, however, he died, and was succeeded by his son, whom Šatan,
presuming on his inexperience, tempted to sin by entering a large
mulberry tree, when he addressed the successor of Ḥanalalah, and called
on him to worship the prince of darkness. Astonished, yet unshaken,
the youth resisted the temptation. But the miracle proved too much
for the constancy of his flock, who now began to turn to the worship
of the devil. The young prophet, enraged at this, seized an axe and a
saw, and prepared to cut down the tree. He was arrested in this by the
appearance of a human being, who exclaimed, ‘Rash boy, desist! Turn to
me and let us wrestle for the victory. If you conquer, then fell the
tree.’
“The prophet contended and vanquished his opponent, who, however,
bought his own safety and that of the tree by the promise of a large
weekly treasure. After seven days the holy victor again visited the
tree to claim the gold or fell it to the ground; but Satan persuaded
him to hazard another struggle on the promise that, if he conquered
again, the amount should be doubled. This second encounter proved fatal
to the youth. He was put to death by his spiritual antagonist, and the
result confirmed the tribes over whom he had ruled in their worship of
the tree and its tutelary demon.”[81]
According to this legend, the Šatan parasts are the victims of their
young prophet who, as long as he was actuated by a disinterested zeal
for religion, was victorious over the principle of evil; but failed as
soon as that zeal gave place to a sordid cupidity for earthly treasure.
I have dwelt upon the superstitious theories of the Yezidis themselves
regarding their religious origin, not because these theories have an
importance in themselves, but because of their bearing upon the views
advanced by modern scholars. The scholars have based their theories on
some of these conflicting stories without sufficient criticism. I shall
dwell upon this more at length later on.
II
THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
But the myth of the Yezidis is not the only account that attempts to
trace their religious origin; the eastern Christians have a tradition
that gives a different interpretation. It is to the effect that the
people in question were originally Christians, but that ignorance
brought them into their present condition. The tradition runs that
the shrine of Šeiḫ ‘Adi was formerly a Nestorian monastery which was
noted for the devotion of its monks, but that these were tempted by the
devil and left their convent. The Church of the Monastery was dedicated
to St. Thaddeus or Addai,[82] one of the seventy-two disciples who,
after the ascension of our Lord, was sent to King Abgar of Edessa. It
is said that the temple of ‘Adi has a conventicle resembling that at
Jerusalem.[83] The story of how the cloister was deserted is as follows:
On a great feast day, while the hermits bearing the cross went in
procession around the church, they saw, hanging on a tree, a piece of
paper with this inscription: “O ye devout monks! Let it be known to you
that God has forgiven all your sins, great and small; cease to undergo
religious exercises; leave your hermitage; disperse, marry and rear
children. Peace be unto you!” On the second day they observed the same
thing, and were led to dispute among themselves whether this were a
device of God or of a devil. When on the third day the same incident
was repeated, they agreed to leave the abbey and follow what seemed to
them a divine order. Šeiḫ ‘Adi, the legend goes on, had foretold to the
Yezidis of that district that the monks of this monastery would desert
their place, would become Yezidis, would marry and beget children; that
he would die during that time; and that he wishes his followers to pull
down the altar of the church in that priory and bury him there. Shortly
after the fulfilment of his prophecy, the Šeiḫ died, and was entombed
in the place of the altar. And since that time, it is asserted, the
spot has become the sanctuary of the devil-worshippers. In support of
this statement, it is argued, that there was a Syriac inscription in
the temple mentioning the name of the founder of the monastery and
the patriarch in whose time it was built; that some of the Yezidis
themselves bear testimony to this fact, and say they have removed the
writing from its former place and have hidden it at the entrance to
‘Adi’s temple, a spot the whereabouts of which only a few of them know.
The reason why this record is hidden, it is explained, is the fear that
the Nestorians may see it and reclaim the church.[84]
Such is the eastern Christian’s tradition relative to the origin of the
Yezidis. It is, of course, merely a legend; but its character is such
as to require careful examination and critical study. It may embody a
measure of truth that will indirectly throw some light on the subject
in hand.
One noticeable thing regarding this current view is that it is not a
recent invention; else it might be said to be the creation of ignorance
at a time far removed from the event which it records. Assemani,
himself an oriental of distinguished scholarship, in that part of
his book wherein he treats of the religion of Mesopotamia, according
to the natives of the country, says that the Yezidis were at one
time Christians, who, however, in the course of time, had forgotten
the fundamental principles of their faith.[85] This statement is
incorporated in the writings of all western orientals that have
travelled in the East.[86]
Another thing worthy of notice is that the Christians should have such
a sacred regard for his tradition as to hand it down to posterity at
the risk of their own reputation. Certainly the Christians are not
cherishing this theory with any expectation of receiving honor by
assuming relation with the Yezidis. The devil-worshippers are utterly
despised by all their neighbors. Nor do they do it out of love, that
they may arouse the sympathy of the dominating race for this degraded
people. Oriental Christians themselves despise the Yezidi sect. They
would not, and could not, help them. There must then be some truth in a
legend that leads the church to regard a despised people as having been
at one time co-religionists.
Were the antiquity of the tradition, and the unfavorable result which
its entertainment causes, the only two reasons for its consideration,
we might just as well dismiss it. But there are other things which
go to point out some historic facts underlying the current theory.
One such fact is that the family name of the Yezidis around Mosul is
Daseni, plur Dawasen. The Christians and the Mohammedans know them by
this name, and they themselves also use it, and say it is the ancient
name of their race, existing from time immemorial.[87] Now Daseni,
or Dasaniyat, was the name of a Nestorian Diocese, the disappearance
of which is simultaneous with the appearance of the Yezidis in these
places.[88]
It is stated, moreover, that all the people of Sinjar were formerly
Christians, belonging to the ancient Syriac Church and having a very
prominent diocese, which was called the diocese of Šaki, _i. e._,
Sinjar; and that the diocese continued to exist till the middle of
the eighteenth century: What goes to verify this tradition is that,
at present, there is a library at Jabal Sinjar, under the control of
the Yezidis, that consists of ancient Syriac books. They are kept in a
small room guarded by a Yezidi. On Sunday and Friday of every week they
burn incense and light lamps in honor of the manuscripts; and once a
month they take them out in the sun to dust and to preserve them from
destruction by dampness. After the door is locked, the key is kept by
the Šeiḫ, besides whom and his son no one else is allowed to touch the
books. What is more interesting, the people of Sinjar say they have
inherited the library from their forefathers, who were Christians.[89]
It is pointed out, furthermore, that the names of the principal towns
of the Yezidis are Syriac. Ba‘šika comes from “the house of the falsely
accused, or oppressed”; Ba‘adrie from “the place of help or refuge”;
Baḥzanie from “the house of visions or inspiration”; Talḥas from “the
hill of suffering,” where many Christians were martyred by Persians.
These are a few of many Yezidi villages having Syriac names.
The Yezidis have religious practices which are to be found only in
the Christian Church. I mean the rites of baptism and the Eucharist.
It is true that the use of water as a rite is practised by other
non-Christian sects, such as the Mandeans; but it is argued that this
ordinance as observed by the Yezidis is so similar to that of the
Christians that its origin is to be traced back to Christianity, rather
than to any other system. Like their neighbors, the Dawaseni must if
possible baptize their children at the earliest age. In performing
the rite, the Šeiḫ, like the Christian priest, puts his hand upon the
child’s head. In regard to the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, it is
strictly Christian in character. The Yezidis call the cup the cup of
Isa (Jesus); and when a couple marry, they go to a Christian town to
partake of Al-ḳiddas (the Eucharist) from the hand of a priest, a
custom which prevails among eastern Christians. What requires special
note is that this practice is observed where the Yezidi influence is
not very strong, a fact which seems to indicate that the Apostate
Nasara, who lived remote from strongly Yezidising influences, were able
to retain some of their originally much favored practices, and vice
versa.[90]
Finally, the Dawaseni entertain great reverence for Christianity and
the Christian saints. They respect the churches and tombs of the
Christians, and kiss the doors and walls when they enter them; but
they never visit a Mohammedan mosque. In the Black Book a statement
is made that on her way to the house of her bridegroom, a bride
should visit the temple of every idol she passes by, even if it be a
Christian Church.[91] They have also professed reverence for ‘Isa
(Jesus). They affect more attachment to An-Naṣara than to Mohammedans.
Such a religious affinity cannot be fully accounted for on any other
ground than that of their sincere respect for Christianity, a feeling
which clearly indicates that these people must at one time have had
a very close connection with Christianity. This intimate relation
cannot be explained by their ignorance, or by kindred experiences, as
some scholars seem to think.[92] It is true the Christians have been
co-sufferers with them; both have lived for generations under the same
yoke of bondage and oppression and under similar circumstances. But
this alone could not create sympathy between them. Such an assumption
cannot be verified by the facts collected through our observation of
the Yezidis’ character as a religious body. They are sincere in their
beliefs, and never compromise in religious matters. History has shown
again and again that they have suffered martyrdom for their faith,
in which they have been as sincere and unshaken as have been the
heroes of any religion. No matter how uneducated they may be, they
are not hypocrites in their faith. The theory is also refuted by our
understanding of the nature of the affinity in question between the
Yezidis and the Christians. It is not a matter of sympathy but of
religion. They believe in some forms of Christianity; and when they
visit a church, they want to exercise their faith and not to express
their sympathy. What is more, the eastern Christians have no sympathy
for the devil worshippers, at least, not more than they have for any
other religious body. Such an affinity is wanting between the Jews
and the Christians or the Yezidis, yet they all live under the same
conditions.
I am not here advocating the theory, or implying, that the Yezidi sect
is a corrupt form of Christianity, but am simply aiming to show that
if the similarity of a certain religion with another in some phases
be taken as a ground for the explanation of its origin, the Christian
tradition can be regarded as a more probable theory to account for the
rise of Yezidism than any other view: And, hence, to point out, what
seems to me to be the best position, that the explanation must be found
ultimately in some historical document which will give us a reasonable
clew in the tracing of the sect in question to its founder.
III
THE SPECULATIVE THEORIES OF WESTERN ORIENTALISTS
Thus far we have been dealing with the different theories regarding
the origin of the Yezidis held in the East: the myth of the
devil-worshippers themselves, the Christian tradition. Now we turn
our attention to the West, which also has expressed itself on this
subject. The degree of interest shown in this particular case, however,
differs with different nationalities. The English-speaking scholars
come first; next come the French; then the Russians; and finally the
Italians. The German scholars seem to be interested mainly in certain
words and festive events. And, in the discussion of these, they go
so far in their unbounded speculation that one cannot tell whether
the people they deal with are the Yezidis in question, Assyrians,
Babylonians, Canaanites, Greeks, Romans or Jews. The German writers do
not seem to be interested so much in the problem of the origin of this
people as a sect, unless they regard the question as settled on the
ground of the Yezidis’ own statement that they are the descendants of
Yezid bn Mu‘awiya.
To tell the truth, the rise of the interest in the inquiry about the
founder of this sect on a scientific basis, is due, without question,
to the scholarship of the West. And any solution of the problem (and
it does not matter who does the work), in the last analysis, must be
accredited to the influences emanating from these scholars and these
scholars only. Nevertheless modern orientalists have been far from
approaching the solution of the question. This may be due in part to
the extreme interest which they have taken in the matter, an interest
which led them to accept the phenomena without critical examination.
But the inductive study of their respective writings tends to show that
this is due to their method of procedure rather than to anything else.
They have employed the philosophical and not the historical method.[93]
I do not mean to deny the value of such a course of investigation in
questions pertaining to religion, but what I do mean to say is that
the method of the scholars in question is almost purely speculative,
and they do not seem to appeal to historical facts in support of their
assumptions. The inevitable consequence has been, therefore, that in
their theories there exists an uncertainty and indefiniteness that
puzzles the student of history.
Another fact which the inductive study of the views of the western
scholars reveals is that their theories are nothing more nor less
than the expression of the Yezidis’ tradition in terms of modern
scholarship, without, however, the showing of reasons for so doing.
This fact will be proved presently when we shall examine their
respective writings.
Western orientalists are divided into three schools of opinion on the
question of the religious origin of the Yezidis. There are those who
hold that the sect takes its rise from Yezid bn Mu‘awiya. This view
is advocated by a modern writer, who says, “The Arabs who accepted
Mohammed called those who did not Al-jahaleen, _i. e._, the ignorant
ones. Among the latter was Yezid bn Mu‘awiya who refused to accompany
Mu‘awiya, his father, as an attendant upon his person. Many of the
ignorant ones rallied around Yezid, and he became the nucleus of the
sect that appropriated his name. The Yezidis possess a genealogical
tree by means of which they trace their religious origin back to
him.”[94]
Now, the ground for this assertion, the writer does not give; he is
entirely silent as to the source of his information. It is evident,
therefore, that he is regarding the superstitious theory of the Yezidis
as a fact without making any reflection upon it. He also seems to
be confusing this Yezid with his uncle of the same name, who, with
Mu‘awiya his brother came in company with their father Abu Sofian, to
Mohammed to receive presents from the Prophet. But the Arab historians
tell us that not only Abu Sofian and each of his two sons received a
hundred camels but that they were each presented with forty ounces of
silver.[95]
Then, too, many scholars deny that the name Yezidis is the original
appellation. Some assert it was put upon them by the Mohammedans as
a term of reproach.[96] Others maintain that the sect adopted the
name Yezid, son of Mu‘awiya to secure toleration at the hands of the
Mohammedans.[97] But the scholar quoted may entertain the view of those
who say that the Yezidis are really the followers of Ibn Mu‘awiya;
but that they deny it for fear of persecution on the part of Shiites.
These latter hate Yezid, because he murdered ‘Ali’s son, Husein, who is
regarded by them as their true Imam. This inference is founded on the
theory that the Mohammedans of Persia consider the people in question
as descendants of the Calif whose name is odious to them.[98] But it is
not certain that the followers of ‘Ali entertain such a view regarding
the origin of the Yezidis. And, if they do, they have no historical
facts to justify them in their opinion. Their hatred of the sect can be
better explained on the basis of the relation of the devil-worshippers
to Yezid bn Unaisa. For he was one of those who most bitterly hated
‘Ali; see pp. 121, 122, 128 of this book.
Furthermore, the theory of this school is neutralized by the fact that
none of the Arab historians mentions the son of the first Calif in the
Omayyid dynasty as a founder of any heretical sect. On the contrary,
they all agree that he was not only a Mohammedan but a successor of the
prophet, being the second calif in the Omayyid dynasty. Ibn Ḫallikan
mentions his name two or three times, and says that his works were
collected. He says nothing, however, as to his founding any religious
schism.
There is still another school among the western orientalists. I mean
those who hold that the religion of the devil-worshippers is of Persian
origin. They are of two wings. There are those who take their method
of procedure from the name Yezid or Yazd. They argue that this term in
Persian, Yazd (pla Yazdān), Avestan Yezata, ‘worthy of worship’, means
God, or good spirit, over against Ahriman, the evil principle. Hence,
the name Yezid, according to them, indicates the people that believe
in this good god. To the objection that the Yezidis worship the evil
spirit, answer is made that Yezid Ferfer is the name of the attendant
of the evil spirit among the Parsees.[99] Others believe that the
word “Yezid” signifies God. It indicates in the plural the observers
of superstitious doctrines as may be seen by the idol Yezid, which
the Bishop of Nagham overthrew.[100] Still others say that in the
tradition of these people Yezid must have been an abbreviated form of
Aez-da-Khuda, that is, created of God. In support of this theory, it is
claimed that in reality the Yezidis worship God and not the devil. It
is thought by many, too, that the Yezidis derive their name from Yazd,
or Yezid, a name of a town in Central Persia, of which the Parsees form
the principal part of the inhabitants.[101]
The other wing of the second school attempts to trace the origin of
the devil-worshippers to a Persian source on the basis of certain
resemblances between the two religions. Conspicuous among the
representatives of this school is Professor A. V. Jackson, of Columbia
University. This distinguished scholar is considered an eminent
authority on Iranian religions, and particularly an eye-witness
authority on the Yezidi question. His views, therefore, not only
deserve careful consideration, but they demand their full share in
solving such an important problem as the one under discussion. I have
preferred his discussion of this theory to that of others because he
has expressed himself clearly and consistently and without rendering
himself liable to misapprehension on the part of the reader. Briefly
stated, Dr. Jackson’s position is as follows: “The Yezidis may actually
show some surviving traces of old devil-worship in Mazandaran, which
Zoroaster anathematized so bitterly,” and “some old reminiscences
of common Iranian faith.” To verify this hypothesis, he proceeds to
point out many instances. One example he cites is that “the Yezidis
are shocked if one spits upon the earth, because they interpret this
as an insult to the devil.” He traces this abhorrence to “Zoroastrian
prescription, forbidding the earth in any way to be defiled.” “The
Daevayasna or devil-worshippers in Avesta,” he goes on to say, “may
indirectly have had a kindred notion, _i. e._, not mentioning the name
of Satan.” Moreover this American critic is informed that the Yezidis
“believe in a father primeval, that lived before Adam, and did not
fall into sin.” And this information leads him to think that such a
notion helps “the Zoroastrian student to recognize at once a far-off
reminiscence of Avestan Gaya-Mashai, the Iranian Adam and Eve.”[101]
One noticeable thing in favor of the two schools is that their method
is strictly scientific, in the modern sense of the term. It is a
posteriori and not a priori; it is inductive. Yet however scientific
their method may seem to be their conclusions cannot be accepted
as final. For the inductive method, according to the great French
scientist, Poincaré, cannot give us exact knowledge because its
experiments do not cover all the instances in a given case. There
can be only a partial verification. There will always remain some
phenomena that cannot be brought within the sphere of a particular
observation.[102] Now, this is exactly the case in the subject under
consideration. Only in some phases does the Yezidi religion resemble
that of the old Persians. There are other beliefs which do not come
under this category, and which seem to bear the traces of some other
religions. What are we to do with these?[103] The advocates of the
theory in question admit that such is the case, but they assert that
“the resemblances of the Yezidi religion to Christianity and Islam are
accidental”; that “owing to the residence of the Yezidis among the
Mohammedans, the sect naturally has much in common with Islam.”[104]
But why are the resemblances to Iranism not to be accounted for in
the same way as those to other religions? Why may not equally strong
inference be made from the likeness to Christianity? And what is
the basis of such a discrimination? On these questions we are left
entirely in the dark. Now, it is this lack of ground for their method
of procedure that leads one to seek the solution of the problem on some
other verifiable hypothesis.
There is still another school among the western orientalists. I refer
to those who maintain that the Yezidi sect was founded by Šeiḫ ‘Adi.
A modern writer who holds this theory, after critically reviewing the
views held by the different scholars, proceeds to advance his own idea.
To emphasize it, and leave no room for further criticism, he claims
that the theory has been “generally” accepted. To quote:
“It is generally agreed upon that the sect of the Yezidis was founded
by Šeiḫ ‘Adi. He is a historical personage, but it is exceedingly
difficult, and almost impossible, to establish any historical facts out
of the mist of very fantastic stories current about him.”[105]
He supports his notion by an appeal to an Arab author, Kasi Ahmad
ibn-Ḫallikan, from whom, according to this writer, an extract relating
to Šeiḫ ‘Adi was published by one who for years was a resident of
the city of Mosul.[106] This statement that Ibn Ḫallikan gives the
biography of ‘Adi is a fact that cannot be questioned; but that ‘Adi
founded the Yezidi sect is a theory that is by no means “generally
agreed upon.” Nor can it be substantiated. To justify this position,
let me quote in full what the Arab biographer and two other Mohammedan
scholars have to say on the problem.
1 What Ibn Ḫallikan has to say on Šeiḫ ‘Adi:
“The Šeiḫ ‘Adi Ibn Masafir Al-Hakkari was an ascetic, celebrated for
the holiness of his life, and the founder of a religious order called
after him Al-‘Adawiah. His reputation spread to distant countries,
and the number of his followers increased to a great multitude. Their
belief in his sanctity was so excessive that, in saying their prayers,
they took him for their ḳibla; and imagined that in the next life they
would have in him their most precious treasure and their best support.
Before this, he had as a disciple a great number of eminent šeiḫs and
men remarkable for their holiness. He then retired from the world and
fixed his residence among the mountains of the Hakkari, near Mosul,
where he built a cell (or a monastery) and gained the favor of the
people in that country to a degree unexampled in the history of the
anchorites. It is said that the place of his birth was a village called
Bait Far, situated in the province of Baalbek, and that the house in
which he was born is still visited (as a place of sanctity). He died
A. H. 557 (A. D. 1162), or as some say A. H. 555, in the town where
he resided (in the Hakkari region). He was interred in the monastery
that he had erected. His tomb is much frequented, being considered
by his followers one of the most sacred spots to which a pilgrimage
can be made. His descendants continue to wear the same distinctive
attire as he did and to walk in his footsteps. The confidence placed
in their merits is equal to that formerly shown to their ancestor,
and like him they are treated with profound respect. Abu Ibarakat
ibn Al-Mustawfi notices the Šeiḫ ‘Adi in his history of Arbela, and
places him in the list of those persons who visited that city. Muzaffar
Ad-Din, the sovereign of Arbela, said that when a boy he saw the Šeiḫ
‘Adi at Mosul. According to him, he was a man of medium size and tawny
complexion; he related also many circumstances indicative of his great
sanctity. The šeiḫ died at the age of ninety years.”[107]
2 What Mohammed-Amin-Al-‘Omari has to say on Šeiḫ ‘Adi:
“They say that the šeiḫ ‘Adi was one of the inhabitants of Ba‘albek;
that he transported himself to Mosul, and from thence to Jabal Laš, a
dependency of this city (Mosul), where he resided until his death. They
also say that he was from Ḥawran, and that his lineage goes back as
far as Marwan bn al-Ḥakam, also that he is Šaraf ad Din Abou´l Faḍail
‘Adi bn Masafir bn Isma‘il bn Mousa bn Marwan bn al Ḥasan bn Marwan bn
Mohammed bn Marwan bn al Ḥakam, who died in the year 558. His grave,
which is well known, is the object of pious pilgrimages.”
“God tried him by a calamity, to wit, the appearance of a sect of
apostates, called the Yezidis, because they claim to be descended
from Yezid. They adore the sun and render worship to the devil. The
following are some of the precepts of their faith that I found in a
small tract made by one of the inhabitants of Aleppo, who knows their
religion:
I. Adultery becomes lawful when committed by (mutual) consent.
II. They pretend that when the day of judgment comes, the šeiḫ ‘Adi
will put them into a wooden basin which he will place on his head
in order to cause them to enter into Paradise while uttering these
contemptuous words: ‘I do this (or, I make them do this) by compelling
God or in spite of him.’
III. The visit which they pay to the tomb of Šeiḫ ‘Adi is for them a
pilgrimage which the devotees accomplished no matter how far distant
the country is that they inhabit, and without being concerned about the
expenses that the journey carries with it.”[108]
3 What Yasin Al-Hatib-al-Omari-Al-Mausili has to say on Šeiḫ ‘Adi:
“In this year 557 died the saint and the pious devotee ‘Adi bn Musafir,
who performed miracles. His death took place in the city Hakkariya,
one of the dependencies of Mosul. His origin is from Ba‘albek, which
he left in order to come to Mosul, that he might consecrate himself to
God. He passed a solitary life on the mountains and in caverns where
lions and other wild beasts visited him often.”
“It is said that he was descended from the family of Omayyids, and
this is the lineage which he attributed to himself: ‘Adi bn Musafir bn
Isma‘il bn Mousa bn Marwan bn al-Ḥasan bn Marwan bn al-Ḥakam bn Al-‘Ass
bn Omayya.”
“He was versed in the knowledge of the divine law. God tried him by a
calamity by raising the Yezidis, who pretended that this šeiḫ is God,
and who have made his tomb the object of their pilgrimage. They arrive
there every year at the sound of drums in order to give themselves to
games and debauchery.”
“The Christians of the land, and especially the partisans of the
Nestorians are far from having the same opinion of the Šeiḫ ‘Adi as
have the Moslems or the Yezidis. The following passage which one reads
in a Chaldean manuscript entitled ‘Awarda’[109] and which I saw some
time ago in the Church of Karmalis,[110] proves this sufficiently. This
is the translation of the passage which I have extracted from a song
composed by a bishop of Arbil, in honor of Rabban Hormuzd[111] and
other saints, and in which the author makes mention of ‘Adi in these
terms:
“‘Great misfortunes have followed, falling upon us; a formidable enemy
came to torment us. He was a descendant of Hagar, the slave of our
mother. This enemy who made our life unfortunate was a Mohammedan,
called ‘Adi. He deceived us by vile tricks, and has finished by taking
possession of our riches and of our convent, which he consecrated to
things that are illicit (to have a strange worship). An innumerable
multitude of Mussulmen have attached themselves to him and have
vowed to him a blind submission. The renown of his name, which is
Šeiḫ ‘Adi, has spread down to our days in all the cities of all the
countries.’”[112]
These are the accounts which we have of Šeiḫ ‘Adi in his relation to
the Yezidis, and they deserve our special attention. For not only
are the writers scholars of the highest authority, but they are to a
certain extent eye-witness authorities. The last two are from the city
of Mosul, which is the only city in the Mohammedan world whose widely
spreading scholarship has acquired for it the name “Dar-al-‘Ulum,”
_i. e._, the home of sciences. Moreover, they come from a family
whose members are known as ‘Olama, highly intellectual, broad-minded
Mohammedan gentlemen. While at Mosul, I had the honor of calling often
on Ḥasan Efendi al ‘Omari, and especially on Suleiman Efendi al ‘Omari.
Ibn Ḫallikan as a trustworthy biographer needs no further introduction
than the mere mentioning of his name. What adds to his reputation as a
scholar is the fact that, being a resident of Arbila in the province of
Mosul, he had at his command firsthand information.
Another noteworthy fact is that all three of these scholars agree in
their account of Šeiḫ ‘Adi, in their tracing of his genealogy, in
describing him as the most perfect model of hermits, in praising him
for his manner of life, which they regard as a life of holiness. They
agree also in their definition of the common people’s attitude toward
the Šeiḫ: that he was deified and that his tomb has been made the
object of pilgrimage. And finally they are silent about his supposed
founding of the sect in question. There is no intimation that he was a
heretic, or that he established such a schism. To be sure, Ibn Ḫallikan
makes mention of a religious order which was called after the Šeiḫ’s
name, but he designates them as ‘Adawia and not as Yezidis. This might
have been such an order as the Brotherhood of Assanusi, called after
Mohammed ibn ‘Ali as-Sanusi, or as many other orders of dervishes and
šeiḫs of mystical type, that have taken rise from time to time in the
religious history of Islam. The other two speak of the appearance of
the Yezidis, but they look at the incident as a calamity to the šeiḫ
because they deified him and worshipped at his tomb. Their remarks
tend to show that the Yezidi sect were known as such before the time
of ‘Adi; that their appellation was based on the pretension that they
were descendants of Yesid; that they were apostates from Islam; that
they were some of those who were attached to ‘Adi by reason of his wide
reputation as a saint, and were led by their ignorance to take him for
a god; and that they were worshippers of the sun and the devil. It is
inconceivable to us, if we apply the principles of modern criticism to
what we know of the character of the Mohammedan historians, that they
should write the life of one who is responsible for the rise of a sect,
the foundation of whose religion is the devil, and not curse him and
the devil with him a hundred million times.
Such are the theories that have been advanced in the discussion
relating to the religious origin of the Yezidi sect, and we have found
not only that they are far from reaching the solution of the problem,
but also that the method that they employ does not seem to be the
proper one for solving such a question. The tradition of the Yezidis
that they are descended from Yezid bn Mu‘Awiya which has been accepted
as the fact by some western scholars is only a myth, without historical
justification. As to the Christian tradition, all that can tell us is
that some Yezidis might have been at one time Christians; but as to who
was the founder of the sect it gives us no light. Likewise, all that
we can learn from the theory advocated by the second school is that
some phases of the Persian religion might have survived with that of
the devil-worshippers. We may admit, I think, that some Yezidis are
Persian in their origin. But as to who was the originator of their
religion this theory helps us not a whit. So also we have found that
the relation of Šeiḫ ‘Adi to this sect is not that of a founder. He is
only one of many whom their ignorance led to class as deities.
IV
THE DOGMATIC VIEW OF MOHAMMEDAN SCHOLARS
While the Yezidi myth regards the sect as descendants of Adam, of
Yezid bn Mu awiya, or of a colony from the north, while the Christian
tradition of the East traces them to a Christian origin, while among
the western orientalists some say that they were founded by Yezid bn
Mu awiya, others that they are of Persian origin, etc., the Mohammedan
dogmatics, on the other hand, assert that they are _Murtaddoon_, that
is, apostates from Islam. To understand the significance of this term,
I must mention the several words used for those who are considered as
infidels according to Mohammedan theology. _Kafir_ is one who hides
or denies the truth; _Mushrik_ is one who ascribes companions to God;
_Mulhid_ is one who has deviated from the truth; _Zandik_ is one who
asserts his belief in the doctrine of dualism; _Munafik_ is one who
secretly disbelieves in the mission of Mohammed; _Dahri_ is an atheist;
_Watani_ is a pagan or idolator; and finally _Murtadd_ is one who
apostasizes from Islam. The Yezidis are put in the category of those
who, after once accepting the religion of Islam, later rejected it.
One author, of those to whose writings I had access, in an
explicit statement regards these people as apostates. I refer to
Amin-al-‘Omari-al Mausili (of Mosul). After praising Šeiḫ ‘Adi,
the Mosulian goes on to say, “God tried him (_i. e._, ‘Adi) by a
calamity, to wit, the appearance of Al-Murtaddoon, called the Yezidis
because they pretended to have been descended from Yezid.[113]
Another Mohammedan scholar that mentions these people is Yasin
Al-Ḫatib-al-‘Omari-al Mausili. Writing on Šeiḫ ‘Adi, and praising him
as the former writer does, he says, “He was versed in the knowledge of
the divine law. God tried him by a calamity by raising up the Yezidis,
who pretend that this Šeiḫ is God, and who have made his tomb the
object of their pilgrimage.[114]
While these authors throw some light on the subject that the sect in
question derives its appellation from a historic person, they leave us
entirely in the dark as to who that person was, as the Arab historians
mention many prominent men who bore the name Yezid.
This obscurity regarding the person of the founder of the sect is made
clear by one whose work is equally, if not more, authoritative than
that of any other Mohammedan scholar on matters pertaining to religious
and philosophical sects. This authority is Mohammed Aš-Šahrastani.
He is the only Mohammedan writer that I could reach that, in a clear
language, traces this most interesting sect to its founder.
“The Yezidis are the followers of Yezid bn Unaisa, who [said that
he] kept friendship with the first Muhakkama before the Azariḳa, and
he separated himself from those who followed after them with the
exception of Al-Abaḍia, for with these he kept friendship. He believed
that God would send an apostle from among the Persians and would reveal
to him a book that is already written in heaven, and would reveal the
whole (book) to him at one time,[115] and as a result he would leave
the law of Mohammed, the Chosen One, may God bless and save him!—and
follow the religion of the Sabians mentioned in the Koran. But these
are not the Sabians who are found in Ḥaran and Wasit. But Yezid kept
friendship with the people of the book who recognized the Chosen
One as a prophet, even though they did not accept his (Mohammed’s)
religion. And he said that the followers of the ordinances are among
those who agree with him; but that others are hiding the truth and give
companions to God and that every sin, small or great, is idolatry.”[116]
It is clear, then, that Aš-Šahrastani finds the religious origin of
this interesting people in the person of Yezid bn Unaisa. He calls them
his _Aseḥab_, _i. e._, his followers, a term by which he designates the
relation between a sect and its originator. Al-Ḥaraṯiyah he describes
as “Aseḥab al-Ḥareṯ,” and “Al Ḥafeziyah Aseḥab Hafez,” and so on. We
are to understand, therefore, that to the knowledge of the writer, bn
Unaisa is the founder of the Yezidi sect, which took its name from him.
Mohammed Aš-Šahrastani states also, in a logical way, the theological
views of the head of the Yezidis. Yezid, he says, is on the positive
side, in sympathy with the first Muḥakkamah before the Azariḳa.
Now, the first Muhakkamah is an appellative applied to the Muslim
schismatics called Al-Ḫawarij, because they disallowed the judgment of
the Hakaman, _i. e._, the two judges, namely ‘Abd Mousa al-Aš-‘Aree
and Am ibn-al-‘As; and said that judgment belongs only to God. And
Al-Azariḳa were a heretical Muslim sect called Al-Ḫawarij or Ḥeroriyah,
so named in relation to Nafi‘ ibn-Al-Azraḳ. They asserted that ‘Ali
committed an act of infidelity by submitting his case to arbitration,
and that the slaying of him by Ibn Muljama was just; and they declare
that the companions (of the Prophet) were guilty of infidelity. Yezid
moreover, is said to have been in sympathy with Al-Abaḍiyah, a sect
founded by ‘Abd-Allah ibn Ibad, who taught that if a man commits a
kabirah or great sin he is an infidel and not a believer.
It is evident, therefore, that according to this exposition the Yezid
in question was one of Al-Ḫawarij, and their principle is expressly
attributed to him: every sin, small or great, is idolatry. According
to this it might be inferred that the Yezidis were originally a
Ḫarijite sub-sect. They still hold to the Ḫarijite principle. (Cf.
their position to the Ottoman Government, pp. 71-74). As we said some
Mohammedan writers other than Ashahr-Astani also (pp. 118-119) regard
them as apostate Moslems, Aš-Šahrastani himself classes them with the
Moslem heretics. Now Al-Ḫawarij were the first to rebel against ‘Ali at
Ḥaroora, a certain suburb of Al-Koofa, from which it is distant two
miles. They are called also Al-Ḥeroriyah, because they first assembled
there and accepted the doctrine that government belongs only to God.
And one sect of Al-Ḫawarij was An-Nâṣibiyah who made it a matter of
religious obligation to bear a violent hatred to ‘Ali. Such is the
place of bn Unaisa among the Moslem heretics, but this is only one side
of his religious system.[117]
There is another side to Yezid’s doctrine. He held that God would
send an apostle from Persia, to whom he would reveal a book already
written in heaven. This apostle was to be an opponent of the prophet
of Islam in that he would leave Mohammed’s religion and follow that of
the Ṣabians mentioned in the Koran. These are referred to by Mohammed,
together with the Christians and the Jews, in three different places in
the Book. One such reference is in Surah 2, 59: “They who believe as
well as Jews, Christians and Sabeans, whoever believeth in God and in
the Last Day, and do that which is right, shall have their reward with
their Lord.”
Surah 5, 73, also:
“They who believe as well as Jews, Christians and Sabeans, whoever of
them believe in God and the Last Day, and do what is right, on them
shall no fear come; neither shall they be put to grief.”
And Surah 22, 17:
“They who believe as well as Jews, Sabeans and Christians and the
Magians, and those who join gods with God, verily God shall decide
between them on the Day of Resurrection.”
* * * * *
In these passages Mohammed seems to regard the Sabians of the Koran as
believers in the true God and in the resurrection. And in Surah 22,
17, he seems to distinguish them from Magians and polytheists. Hence,
we are to infer that the Apostle of whom Yezid bn Unaisa says that he
will come from the land of the ´Ajam (Persian), will identify himself
with the religion of the Ṣabians. This implies that he will believe in
the true God and in the Day of Resurrection. But from some Arab writers
we learn more of these Ṣabian beliefs than the Prophet of Islam has
mentioned. According to some the Ṣabians were a sect of unbelievers who
worshipped the stars secretly, and openly professed to be Christians.
According to others, they were of the religion of Ṣabi, the son of
Seth, the son of Adam; while others said they resembled the Christians,
except that their _ḳiblah_ was toward the South, from whence the wind
blows. In the _Kamûs_ it is said that they were of the religion of
Noah. Al-Baiḍawi says that some assert that they were worshippers
of angels, and that others say that they are the worshippers of
stars. Al-Bertuni calls the Manichaeans of Samarḳand Sabians. Bar
Hebraeus[118] asserts that the religion of the Sabians is the same as
that of the ancient Chaldeans. In commenting on Surah 2, 59, Zamaḫšari
(Al-Keššaf) says that the name Ṣabian comes from a root meaning one
who has departed from one religion to another religion, and that the
Ṣabians were those who departed from Judaism and Christianity and
worshipped angels. On this same verse, Šams Ad-Din Mohammed Al-Ḥarrani
(Jami Al-Bijan fi Tafsir Al-Koran) says: “The Ṣabians, _i. e._, those
who departed from one religion to another religion, stood between the
Magians and the Jews and the Christians without having any revealed
religion of their own. According to some they were people of the Book;
according to others they were worshippers of angels; while others
say, they believed in one God but followed no Prophet.” This same
commentator on Surah 5, 73, says: “The Ṣabians were a Christian sect;
some say that they were worshippers of angels; others assert that they
worshipped God alone, but had no revealed religion.” On this same
verse Zamaḫšari remarks, “The Ṣabians were those who departed from all
religions.”
Now what Mohammed Aš-Šahrastani really means by the Ṣabians of the
Koran, I am unable to state. In his general discussion of Ṣabianism
however (vol. 2, pp. 201-250), he seems to speak of two main Ṣabian
sects. He refers to one together with the ancient philosophers; and
declares that the Ṣabians followed rational ordinances and judgments
which originally they may have derived from some prophetic authority,
but that they denied all prophecy. The philosophers followed their own
devices and took their system from no prophetic source. The authority
we are quoting calls this sect “the original Ṣabian sect,” and
says that it followed Seth and Enoch. In another place (vol. 1, p.
24) he writes, “The Jews and the Christians follow a revealed Book;
the Magians and the Manichæans, a like Book; the original Ṣabian
sect, ordinances and judgments, but accepts no Book; the original
philosophers, the atheists, the star-worshippers, the idol-worshippers,
and the Brahmans believe in none of these.”
The other main Ṣabian sect is mentioned together with the Jews, the
Christians, and the Moslems. The difference between these religious
bodies, according to Aš-Šahrastani, is that “the Ṣabians do not follow
the Law (of God) or Islam; the Christians and the Jews believe in
these, but do not accept the Law (religion) of Mohammed; while the
Moslems believe in them all.
Aš-Šahrastani, moreover, derives the name Ṣabian (p. 203) from a root
meaning one who turns aside, deviates; and declares that the Ṣabians
were those who turned aside from the statutes of God, and deviated from
the path of the prophets. He seems to regard the notion that man is
incapable of approaching God, and that therefore he is in constant need
of intercessors and mediators, as a controlling idea in Ṣabianism. This
belief, the writer points out, has manifested itself in three different
forms: in the veneration of angels among what he calls the followers of
angels; the adoration of stars among the followers of stars; and in the
worship of idols among the followers of idols, heathens (pp. 203, 244).
The last two, we are told, are polytheists, and referred to in the
Koranic statement:
(“When Abraham said to his father, Azar, ‘Dost thou take idols
for gods?’—Surah 6, 74. Said he—Abraham—‘Do ye serve what ye hew
out?’—Surah 37, 93. When he—Abraham—said to his father, ‘Oh my sir!
why dost thou worship what can neither hear nor see nor avail thee
aught?’—Surah 19, 43.”)
And in the following references:
(“And when the night overshadowed him he saw a star and said, ‘This is
my Lord.’ And when he saw the moon beginning to rise he said, ‘This is
my Lord.’ And when he saw the sun beginning to rise he said, ‘This is
my Lord, this is greatest of all.’”)—Surah 6, 76, 77, 78.
But Mohammed Aš-Šahrastani makes mention of another Ṣabian sect which
he names Al-Ḫarbâniyah (pp. 248-250). Its distinctive feature, he says,
is the belief that the Creator indwelleth in other beings. They held
that God is one in his essence, but many in his appearances. He dwells
in the seven planets, and in the earthly beings that are rational,
good, and excellent in righteousness. Human body is his temple; he may
abide within it and live and move as a man. He is too good, we read,
to create anything evil. God is the source of good, and evil is either
an accidental and necessary thing, or related to the evil source.
They believed also, our authority informs us, in the transmigration
of souls, and taught that the Resurrection of which the prophets had
spoken was only the end of one generation and the beginning of another
here on earth. This doctrine, the Mohammedan critics affirm, is alluded
to in the passages:
(“Does he promise you that when ye are dead, and have become dust and
bones, that then ye will be brought forth? Away, away with what ye are
promised,—there is only our life in the world! We die and we live and
we shall not be raised.”)—Surah 23, 37-39.
Now I cannot say which of the Ṣabian sects are those that “are
mentioned in the Koran,” which Yezid bn Unaisa says, the Persian
Apostle will follow; nor can I say which are those that “are found
in Ḥarran and Wasit.” One thing, however, is clear: according to
Aš-Šahrastani the Ṣabians of the Koran differ in their faith from
those of Ḥarran. The Ḥarranians were remnants of the old heathen of
Mesopotamia; they were polytheistic, and star-worship had the chief
place in their religion, as in the worship of the older Babylonian and
Syrian faiths. They were regarded as such by the Mohammedans, so that
under Al-Mamûn, they sheltered themselves under the name, Ṣabians, that
they might be entitled to the toleration which the Ṣabians of the Koran
have because they were considered among the people of the Book.[119]
Another thing to be noticed is that there is a close resemblance
between the belief of the Ṣabian sect which Aš-Šahrastani calls
Al-Ḫarbâniyah and that of the Yezidi sect.
Such is, in the main, the religion of the Persian Apostle and is
logically the religion of Yezid bn Unaisa which announces the coming
of such a messenger. We may conclude, therefore, that the founder
of the Yezidi sect believed in God and in the Day of Resurrection;
that he, perhaps, honored the angels and the stars, and that he was
neither polytheistic nor a true believer in the Prophet of Islam. This
last point is referred to also explicitly in the statement quoted,
that Yezid associated himself with those of the people of the Book
who recognized Mohammed as a prophet though they did not become his
followers. This is the negative aspect, so to speak, of bn Unaisa’s
religious views. He is also said to have claimed that the followers of
the ordinances[120] agreed with him. This statement tends to indicate
that he might have accepted some phases of the Muslim faith. And the
fact that he belonged to _Al-Ḫawarij_ implies that he was one of those
who were “condemning and rejecting ‘Ali for his scandalous crime of
parleying with Mu‘awiya, the first of the Omayyid line, and submitting
his claims to arbitration.” Such are in brief the fundamental elements
in the religious system of one who may be held responsible for the rise
of the sect in question.
There can be no doubt, it seems to me, that the Yezidis are the
followers of Yezid bn Unaisa. The statement of our authority, Mohammed
Aš-Šahrastani (see pp. 119-120), is so clear that it can bear no
other interpretation. And what is far more important, it comes from
the pen of one who is considered of the highest authority among the
Arab scholars on questions relating to philosophical and religious
sects. In his bibliographical work Ibn Ḫallikan speaks of his profound
scholarship in the highest terms: “Aš-Šahrastani, a dogmatic theologian
of the ‘Ašarite sect, was distinguished as an Imam and a doctor of the
law. He displayed the highest abilities as a jurisconsult. The Kitab
al-Milal wa n-Niḥal (treatise on religions and sects) is one of his
works on scholastic theology. He remained without an equal in that
branch of science.” Now, Mohammed Aš-Šahrastani (A. H. 467-549) A. D.
1074-1133 was a contemporary of ‘Adi (A. H. 465-555) A. D. 1072-1162,
yet he makes no allusion to him when he refers to the rise of this
most interesting sect; nor does he make mention of any other supposed
founder except the one he records. For these reasons I accept the
historical assertion of this distinguished author.
I am of the opinion, therefore, that the Yezidis received their name
from Yezid bn Unaisa, their founder as a kharijite sub sect in the
early period of Islam; that, attracted by Šeiḫ ‘Adi’s reputation, they
joined his movement and took him for their chief religious teacher;
that in the early history of the sect and of ‘Adi many Christians,
Persians, and Moslems united with it; and that large survivals or
absorptions of pagan beliefs or customs are to be found in modern
Yezidism. In other words the actual religion of the Yezidis is
syncretism in which it is easy to recognize Yezidi, Christian, Moslem,
especially sufism and pagan elements.
Like the master they believe in the true God and in the Resurrection,
honor the angels and the stars, disbelieve in the mission of Mohammed
and ignore ‘Ali, regard every sin, small or great, as idolatry or
infidelity, and expect the appearance of a prophet from Persia. The
fact of their connection with such a religious leader explains the
reason why they are hated by both the Sunnites and the Shiites. The
followers of bn My‘awiya can only be despised by the latter; but the
believer such a heretical one as the son of Unaisa are necessarily
condemned by the former also. For he was, as I have already stated,
anti-Mohammed and anti-‘Ali. And it is worth remembering also that the
fourth Calif is more honored among the Moslems of Persia than his son
Ḥusein is; and consequently any contemptuous attitude toward the father
will give rise to more bitter feeling on the part of his followers than
the murder of the son would occasion.
There is one question, however, which does not appear to be very
easy to answer; namely, how the Yezidis came to trace their origin
to Yezid bn Mu‘awiya and not to Yezid bn Unaisa. Three explanations
may be given. One is that their ignorance led them to mistake the
former for the latter, as they have identified many of their šeiḫs
with angels and deities. Among ignorant people, as these are, without
record and without any one who can read, the occasion of such an
error is not strange. Another answer is that they intentionally made
the identification in order to escape the persecution of the Sunnites,
among whom most of them lived. Though specious, this idea is not
tenable, for it is not their habit to deny their origin for the sake of
safety. Even in that case, they would still be hated by the Shiites.
The third theory is that they have a notion that they are descended
from a noble personage, and the second Calif being such a personage,
their ignorance led them to take him for their founder. And the
identity of the two names, of course, helped much toward the formation
of the legend.
It is to be noticed that the religion of this Yezid contained, from
its inception, a fundamental doctrine which appealed to the pagans of
Persia more than it did to Al-jahaleen of Arabia. In its very structure
it insulted the latter country by despising its prophet. On the other
hand, it expressed its sympathy with a prophet from Persia and with his
religion. This declaration magnified Persia and its inhabitants and
gave them preëminence, thereby making an impression on the attitude
of the people toward Yezidism. Therefore they looked on it not as
a foreign but as a native cult. The entertaining of such a view,
consequently, led many fire, or devil-worshippers and the followers of
Zoroastrianism to embrace the new religion (Al-mašrik, vol. 2, p. 35).
And if the predicted teacher arose, we can imagine the great success
which he must have had among his countrymen. This fact not only
accounts for the existence of traces of old Persian religion, but it
gives the reason why the Kurdish predominates over the Arab element in
Yezidism.
The new sect appears to have existed as a very loose organization after
the death of its founder: this looseness put them in a condition to
follow any one who would exhibit some qualifications for leadership.
Therefore, when they heard about ‘Adi they naturally flocked to him.
And it is very likely that, entertaining the idea of a coming prophet
as they still do, they might have thought him the promised one. What
might have added to the confirmation of this notion was his fame as a
saint, to whom a number of miracles were attributed. Even the lions
and the serpents which lived in his neighborhood and paid him frequent
visits were endowed, it is said, with supernatural sweetness.
From what we know of ‘Adi’s movement, we have sufficient reason to
conclude that many Moslems and Christians followed him. The historians
of both faiths bear witness to the fact that ‘Adi’s reputation was
widespread, and that people of every condition followed him (see pp.
111-115). The Nestorian bishop of Arbela, whom Yasin Al-‘Omari quotes
(see p. 114), asserts that innumerable multitudes flocked to him,
deplores the situation of the Christian church resulting from this
uprising, and complains of the possession by the Šeiḫ of a monastery
belonging to his denomination. Moreover, as has been shown, there
exist among the Yezidis certain Moslem and Christian practices which
cannot be accounted for on any other ground, since, so far as we know
their character, they make no compromise in matters of religion.
Not only Yezidi, Persian, Moslem, and Christian elements are to be
found in modern Yezidism, but there are many remains of the old pagan
religions which find expression in the devil-worshippers of to-day.
Such is the notion of the sacredness of the number seven, an idea which
belongs to the common stock of the ancient inhabitants of Mesopotamia.
The Yezidis have seven sanjaks, each has seven burners; their cosmogony
shows that God created seven angels or gods; their principal prayer
is the appeal to God through seven šeiḫs; the sceptre engraved on the
front of the temple of their great saint has seven branches. This
reminds us at once of the Ṣabians who adored seven gods or angels
who directed the course of seven planets; the seven days of the week
were dedicated to their respective deities. Moreover, we note in the
Babylonian-Assyrian poem, the seven gates through which Ištar descended
to the land without return. Likewise, the number seven played an
important part in the religious system of Israel.
Further, like the Ḥarranians, the modern _Šatan-parast_ worship the
sun and the moon at their rising and setting. The sun was worshipped
also in Canaan, I Sam. 6: 9. The horses of the sun were worshipped
in the temple at Jerusalem, II Kings 25: 5, 11. The worship of the
host of heaven (the sun, the moon, the planets), were found in Judea.
In Babylon, there were at least two shrines to sun-god Šamas, one at
Sippar, and the other at Larsa.
Other survivals of the ancient religions found in Yezidism are the
worship of birds (see p. 150); the special importance attached to the
New Year because of its bearing on individual welfare by reason of the
good or evil decision of the gods rendered them (see pp. 46, 174); and
the belief in occurrences of nuptials in the heavens (see p. 174).
Moreover, many religious beliefs of the Pre-Islamic Arabs survive among
the modern Yezidis. Such is the belief in sacred wells in connection
with sanctuaries found in all parts of the Semitic region, the most
conspicuous of which is that of Mecca. Gifts were cast into this holy
water of Zamzam, as they were cast into the sacred wells of other
places. When the grandfather of Mohammed ‘Abd Al-Muttalib cleaned out
the well, he found two golden gazelles and a number of swords. The
water of such holy springs was believed to possess healing power, and
was carried home by pilgrims, as the water of Zamzam now is (Yaḳut I,
434).[121] An impure person, furthermore, dared not approach the sacred
waters. A woman in her uncleanness was afraid for her children’s sake
to bathe in the holy water at the sanctuary of Dusares. According to
Ibn Hišam “A woman who adopts Islam breaks with the heathen god by
purifying herself in this pool.” This was taken to mean that her act
was a breach of the ritual of the spot. And all the pilgrims changed
their clothes when they entered the sacred precinct.[122]
Another common heathen practice in the time of Al-jahliya was the
worship of holy trees. According to Tabari there was a date-palm tree
at Nejran. It was adored at an annual feast, when it was hung all
around with fine clothes and women’s ornaments. A similar tree to
which the people of Mecca resorted annually, and hung upon it weapons,
garments, ostriches’ eggs, and other things, is spoken of in the
tradition of the prophet under the name of “dhat anwat,” or “tree to
hang things on.”[123] The Goddess Al-‘Ozza was believed to reside in a
tree. According to Yaḳut (III, 261), the tree at Hadaibiya, mentioned
in the Koran (sura XLVIII, 18) was visited by pilgrims who expected to
derive a blessing from it, till it was cut down by the Calif Omar lest
it should be worshipped like Al-Lat and Al-‘Ozza. It was considered
deadly to pluck a twig from such sacred trees.
The prevalence of stone-worship is another sign of paganism existing
before Islam, and noteworthy is the theory advanced by the Mohammedan
writers to account for its origin. According to Ibn Hišam[124] the
beginning of this idolatry was that “the Meccans when their land
became too narrow for them spread abroad over the country, and all took
stones from their sanctuary, the Kaaba, out of reverence for their
temple, and they set them up whenever they formed a settlement; and
they walked around them as they used to go about the Holy House. This
led them at last to worship every stone that pleased their fancy.”
It is to be noticed, furthermore, that poly-demonism, _i. e._, the
belief in divine powers, in spirits, is the most characteristic feature
of the old nomad religions. Many traces of this belief have been
preserved in the Old Testament, and also in the popular religion of
the Syria and Palestine of to-day. There are many instances in the Old
Testament of the belief in divine powers inhabiting springs, trees,
stones. We may refer to the sacred wells at ḳadeš (Gen. 14: 7) and at
Beeršeba (Gen. 21, 28, 30, 31); to the sacred oracular tree at Shekem
(Gen. 12, 6; Deut. 11, 3); to the sacred stone of Bethel, which gave
the place its name, as it is called “a house of God” (Gen. 28, 22).[125]
Now, the traces of all these religious beliefs are found in modern
Yezidism. In connection with the temple of Šeiḫ ‘Adi, there is a sacred
spring, and there are similar ones in different parts of the Yezidi
districts. The water of these springs is held to have healing power,
and is carried by pilgrims to their homes. In these pools, especially
in that of ‘Adi’s, the Yezidis cast coins, jewelry, and other presents,
which, they think, the chief saint takes from time to time; and to this
day no one may enter the holy valley with its sacred fountain, unless
he first purify his body and clothes.[126] The devil-worshippers adore,
likewise, sacred trees. They make pilgrimages to them, hang things
on them, and entertain the belief that whoever unties or shakes off a
shred of cloth will be afflicted with disease. Again, the Yezidis kiss
the stones that satisfy their imagination, and make vows to them (see
pp. 41, 50). Nor is this all. The shouting of the Yezidi pilgrims, as
they reach the sacred territory, and the noisy ceremony of their ḥajj,
with its dancing[127] and its excitement—a rite which has brought
against them all sorts of accusations[128]—are nothing but the remnants
of Pre-Islamic paganism.[129]
Such, then, are the steps which the religion of Yezid took before it
came to shape itself into its present form. It is made up of five
different elements, pagan, that contributed by the founder, Persian,
Mohammedan, and Christian. Does not such a state of affairs find
a historical parallel in some other religions? Take, for example,
Christianity. In it we find that the distinctive characteristics of the
founder have been wrapped up in many foreign elements brought in by
those who came from other religions.
NOTES ON CHAPTER I
[71] This may be traced to the Mohammedan myth that when the primal
pair fell from their estate of bliss in the heavenly Paradise, Adam
landed on a mountain in Ceylon and Eve fell at Jiddah, on the western
coast of Arabia. After a hundred years of wandering, they met near
Meccah, and here Allah constructed for them a tabernacle, on the site
of the present Kaaba. S. M. Zwemer, _Arabia_, p. 17; Aš-Šahrastani,
II, 430.
[72] Anistase: _Al-Mašrik_, vol. 2, p. 33.
[73] Cf. p. 35.
[74] Cf. p. 34.
[75] Cf. p. 37.
[76] _Al-Mašrik_, vol. 2, p. 33.
[77] Scottish Geog. Mag., vol. 14, p. 295.
[78] Layard: _Nineveh and Its Remains_, vol. 11, p. 254.
[79] Layard: _Nineveh and Babylon_, p. 94.
[80] S. G. M., vol. 14, p. 300.
[81] Fraser: _Mesopotamia and Persia_, p. 287.
[82] Fraser: Ibid., p. 147.
[83] Rich: _Residence in Kurdistan_, vol. II, p. 69.
[84] _Al-Mašrik_, vol. II, p. 396.
[85] Ibid, vol. III, p. 493.
[86] Fraser: Ibid; Rich, ibid.
[87] Badger: _Nestorians and Their Rituals_, vol. I, p. 111; Fraser,
ibid., p. 285.
[88] _Al-Mašrik_, ibid, p. 36.
‘Abdišŭ was at one time bishop of Sinjar; cf. Fardaisa de ‘Eden, ed.
by B. Cardaḥi, Beirut, 1889, p. 5.
[89] Ibid, pp. 56, 110, 832.
[90] Ibid. This rite is practiced by the Yezidis of Ḫalitiyeh, a
dependency of Diarbeker, where the Yezidis are few in number.
[91] Southgate: _A Tour Through Armenia_, etc., vol. II, p. 179.
[92] See p. 42 of this book. Badger, ibid, p. 128.
[93] I mean by the philosophical method the attempt to prove certain
assumption by theorizing, and by the historical method the endeavor to
verify a theory by obtaining data from historical sources. The former
method is based on speculation; the latter on historical inquiry.
[94] The Enc. of Mission, p. 797. In his letter to me of date August
6, 1907, the Rev. A. N. Andrus, of Mardin, says: “The Yezidis may be
related in religious cult with the Guebres of India.”
[95] Muir: _Life of Mohammed_, vol. IV, p. 151.
[96] Fraser: ibid, p. 205.
[97] Badger, ibid, p. 129.
[98] S. G. M., vol. 14.
[99] Eugene Bore: _Dict. des Religions_, T. IV, _Art. Yezidis_,
Southgate, ibid, p. 317.
[100] Fraser, ibid, p. 289.
[101] Jackson: _Persia, Past and Present_, p. 10; J. A. O. S., 25, p.
178, New Int. Enc. “Yezidis.”
[102] H. Poincaré: _Science and Hypothesis_. Trans., G. B. Halsted, p.
5 seq.
[103] The fact that the importance of the method of comparative
religion has been generally recognized in the scientific world
has led to the danger of rushing into the other extreme of paying
attention exclusively to points of similarity and resemblance, and of
entirely disregarding, or at any rate thrusting into the background as
unimportant that which is dissimilar.
[104] Southgate, ibid, p. 317; Jackson, J. A. O. S., vol. XXV, p. 171.
[105] Victor Dingelstedt, S. G. M., vol. XIV, p. 295.
[106] Siouffi, who was for about twenty years a French vice-consul in
Mosul.
[107] Ibn Ḫallikan, vol. I, p. 316.
[108] Manhal Al-Uliya wa Mašrab-ul-Aṣfia, “Šeiḫ ‘Adi,” quoted by M. N.
Siouffi, Journal Asiatique, 1885, p. 80.
[109] Warda, “the rose,” is the name of a collection of hymns composed
by George Warda (1224 A. D.), Bishop of Arbila; cf. Bar Hebraeus,
Chron. Eccl., vol. II, p. 402. Warda is one of the most conspicuous
writers of hymns in the thirteenth century which was the age of song
with the Nestorian church. His poems have entered so largely into the
use of the Nestorian church that one of their service books is to this
day called the Warda; Badger, _The Nestorians_, vol. II, p. 25. Some
of his hymns speak of the calamities of the years 1224-1227. A few
specimens are given by Cardaḥi in _Liber Thesauri_, p. 51. Badger has
translated one in his _Nestorians_, vol. II, pp. 51-57. Warda’s poems
have been edited by Heinrich Hilgenfeld, _Ausgewählte Gesänge des
Giworgis Warda von Arbil_, Leipzig, 1904, and by Manna, Mosul, 1901.
[110] The village Karmalis is about twelve miles distant from Mosul,
and is inhabited by Chaldeans, that is, Romanized Nestorians.
[111] Rabban Hormuzd is a Chaldean monastery at Alkoš, a village about
twenty miles north of Mosul.
[112] Al-Der-Al-Makn‘un fi-l-Miater Al-Maḍiyat min Al-ḳerun, “Šeiḫ
‘Adi,” quoted by M. N. Siouffi, Journal Asiatique, 1885, p. 81.
Yaḳut (vol. IV, p. 374) also regards Šeiḫ ‘Adi an orthodox Mohammedan;
“Šeiḫ ‘Adi bn Musafir Aš-Šafe‘e, šeiḫ of the Kurds and their Imam.”
‘Adi’s orthodoxy is seen also in his writing. He wrote ‘Itiḳad
Ahl Al-Sunna “Belief of the Sunnites,” the Wasaya “Consuls to the
Cailifs,” and two odds both of them mystic in their conception. They
are all preserved in the Berlin Library; cf. Clement Huart, _History
of Arabic Literature_, p. 273.
[113] Manhal-al-Uliya wa Mašrab ul Aṣfiya, “Šeiḫ ‘Adi,” quoted by
M. N. Siouffi, Journal Asiatique, 1885, p. 80.
[114] Al-Der-Al-Makn‘un fi-l-Miater Al-Maḍiyat min Al-ḳerûn, “Šeiḫ
‘Adi,” quoted by M. N. Siouffi, Journal Asiatique, 1885, p. 81.
[115] Contrary to Mohammed to whom, according to Moslem belief, the
Koran was revealed at intervals.
[116] Kitab Al-Milal wa n-Nihal, vol. I, p. 101 seq.
Ḥarran was a city in the north of Mesopotamia, and southeast of
Edessa, at the junction of the Damascus road with the highway from
Nineveh to Carchamish. The moon-god had a temple in Ḥarran, which
enjoyed a high reputation as a place of pilgrimage. The city retained
its importance down to the time of the Arab ascendency, but it is now
in ruins. Yaḳut (vol. II, p. 331) says: “It was the home of Ṣabians;
that is, the Ḥarranians who are mentioned by the authors of Kutub
Al-Milal wa n-Nihal.” As to Wasit this same Yaḳut (vol. IV, p. 881)
mentions about twenty different places bearing this name. The most
prominent one is that built by Al-Hajjaj in 83 A. H. It is called
Wasit “the intermediate” because it was situated midway between Kufa
and Basrah. Another place Yaḳut (p. 889) mentions is Wasit ul-Raḳḳat,
a town on the western side of the Euphrates, and about two days’
journey from Ḥarran. Perhaps this is the Wasit that Aš-Šahrastanî
means.
[117] On these sects, see Aš-Šahrastanî, ibid, vol. II, pp. 85, 87,
89, 100 (42). His history, ed. Sachau, Leipzig, 1878, p. 207.
[118] At-Tarih, ed. Alton Salhanî, Beîrut, p. 266.
[119] Fihrist, p. 320. The Arabs used to call the Prophet Aṣ-ṣabi,
because he departed from the religion of the Koreish to Al-Islam; cf.
Al-Keššaf on Surah XXII, 17.
[120] Hudud, pl. of Hadad, restrictive ordinances, or statutes, of God
respecting things lawful and things unlawful. The Hudud of God are of
two kinds: First, those ordinances respecting eatables, drinkables,
marriage, etc., what are lawful thereof and what are unlawful.
Second, castigations, or punishments, prescribed, or appointed, to
be inflicted upon him who does that which he has been forbidden to
do. The first kind are called Hudud because they denote limits which
God has forbidden to transgress; the second, because they prevent
one’s committing again those acts for which they are appointed as
punishments, or because the limits thereof are determined. See Lane’s
Arabic Dictionary in Loco.
[121] Cf. also W. R. Smith, _Religion of the Semites_, p. 167, and
D. B. Stade’s _Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments_, pp. 111 and
290.
[122] R. Smith, ibid, p. 49; cf. Ex. 3: 5, “And he said, Draw not nigh
hither; put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon
thou standest is holy ground”; and Josh. 5: 15, “And the captain of
the Lord’s host said unto Joshua: Loose thy shoe from off thy feet,
for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so.”
In idolatrous days the Arabs did not wear any clothing in making
the circuit of the Kaaba. In Islam, the orthodox way is as follows:
Arrived within a short distance of Mecca, the pilgrims put off their
ordinary clothing and assume the garb of a hajjee. Sandals may be worn
but not shoes, and the head must be left uncovered. In Mandeanism,
each person as he or she enters the Miškana, or tabernacle, disrobes,
and bathes in the little circular reservoir. On emerging from the
water, each one robes him or herself in the rasta, the ceremonial
white garment.—_The London Standard_, Oct. 19, 1894. Prayer Meeting of
the Starworshippers.
[123] Cf. R. Smith, ibid, p. 185, and Stade, ibid, p. 111 seq.
[124] Weil’s translation, p. 39.
[125] Cf. R. Smith, ibid, pp. 203-212; S. I. Curtiss’ _Primitive
Semitic Religion To-day_, pp. 84-89; Stade, ibid, p. 114, seq.; see
also II Sam. 5: 24, and John 5: 2, 3.
The original idea might have been that the waters, the stones, and
the trees themselves were divinities. In Jud. 5: 21, we have the
statement: “The river Kishon swept them away, that ancient river, the
river Kishon.” Now Kais was the name of an Arabian god in Pre-Islamic
time. In Num. 5: 17 seq., an accused woman is tested by a sacred
water. In Deut. 32: 4, “He is the rock,” “rock” is as much a term for
God as El, or elohim; cf. verses 15, 18, 30, 31; II Sam. 23: 3. In Ps.
18: 2, the word rock is used of God, “the Lord is my rock.” Jacob took
the stone which he had put under his head as a pillow, and raised it
up as a pillar, poured oil upon it and called it the “house of God,”
Gen. 28: 18, 19, 22. “The sound of a going in the tops of the mulberry
trees” (II Sam. 5: 24), for which David was to wait, was nothing less
than the divine voice speaking to David in accordance with ancient
conceptions.
[126] Layard: _Nineveh and Its Remains_, vol. I, p. 280.
[127] Dancing might have been also a religious ceremony in the
Pre-Kanaanitic religion of Israel.
[128] The people in the East are under the impression that the
Yezidis violate the law of morality during their festivals. According
to Hurgronje (vol. 2, pp. 61-64), immorality is practised also in
the sacred mosque of Mecca. This practice may be a survival of the
institution of Kadeshes, who offered themselves in honor of the Deity
in the sacred places where license usually prevailed during the
festivals (Gen. 38: 21, and Deut. 23: 18).
[129] Cf. R. W. Smith, ibid, p. 432.
CHAPTER II
THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS IN YEZIDISM
Although comparatively few in number, ignorant, and practically without
a literature of any sort, the followers of Yezid are not without
definitely formulated doctrines of faith which bind them together as
a sect, and distinguish them from every other religious body. They
cherish two fundamental beliefs. They believe in a deity of the first
degree, God; and in a deity of the second degree, who, they seem to
think, is composed of three persons in one, Melek Ṭâ´ûs, Šeiḫ ‘Adi and
Yezid.[130]
I
THE YEZIDI VIEW OF GOD
It is not easy to discover whether the conception of God, which exists
to-day among the Yezidis, however shadowy, has come from Mohammedan or
Christian sources, or whether it comes from that primitive stage where
the worship of God and of inferior deities exists side by side. One
thing, however, is apparent, and that is that the Yezidi notion of God
does not seem to be influenced by any “positive religion” which traces
its origin to the teachings of a great religious founder, who spoke as
the organ of a divine revelation, and deliberately departed from the
traditional religion. The Yezidis’ idea of God is rather an image left
on their mind than the result of any reflection. Hence, simple as it
is, this conception is not so easy to define. The notion, so prominent
in Greek philosophy, of God as an existence absolute and complete in
himself, unchangeable, outside of time and space, etc., is unknown
in Yezidi theology. So also the theocratic conception of Jehovah in
Judaism is foreign to the dogma of this sect. Not even the Mohammedan
idea of God as an absolute ruler, and the distinctive notion which the
Christians have of God as Christ-like in character, are to be found in
the religion of the devil-worshippers. And we have accustomed ourselves
to think of the Supreme Being in these conventional terms. There is
one element, however, which may be traced to Judaism, Christianity
and Islam, namely, the belief in a personal God. But Yezidism holds
that this deity is only the creator of the universe and not its
sustainer. Its maintenance, according to this system, is left to the
seven gods. Another element which may be said to be a remnant of some
other religions is the idea of a transcendent God. But in this point,
as in the other, the notion of transcendentalism in the religion of
the devil-worshippers is not of the same degree as that of the other
religions. The former conceives of the Almighty as retiring far away,
and as having nothing to do with the affairs of the world, except
once a year, on New Year’s day, when he sits on his throne, calls the
gods unto him, and delivers the power into the hands of the god who
is to descend to the earth. To sum up, the Yezidis’ conception of a
personal God is transcendental and static of the extreme type. In this
it resembles somewhat the Platonic idea of the absolute. They call God
in the Kurdish Khuda, and believe that he manifested himself in three
different forms; in the form of a bird, Melek Ṭâ´ûs; in the form of an
old man, Šeiḫ ‘Adi; and in the form of a young man, Yezid. They do not
seem to offer him a direct prayer or sacrifice.
II
THE DEITY OF THE SECOND DEGREE
1. MELEK Ṭ´ÛS
A distinguished modern scholar (see the printed text, p. 80, lines
12-35) argues that Ṭâ´ûs is the god Tammuz. His argument is that the
word Ṭâ´ûs must embody an ancient god, but owing to the obscurity in
which the origin of Yezidism and the being of Melek Ṭâ´ûs are wrapped,
it is very difficult to say which god is meant. And to determine this,
he assumes that the term does not come from the Arabic word Ṭâ´ûs,
but was occasioned by some “folk-etymology,” and that we must look,
therefore, for some god-name which resembles the word Ṭâ´ûs. Taking
this as a starting point, the critic calls attention to the fact that
in Fihrist, p. 322, l. 27f, which treats of the feasts and gods of the
Ḥarranians, we read that the god Tauz had a feast in middle of Tammuz.
He infers from this that the god Tauz is identical with Melek Ṭâ´ûs.
And to the question who this god Tauz is, he answers it is Tammuz. To
justify his explanation, the writer contends that the Yezidis speak in
Kurdish, and according to Justi’s _Kurdische Grammatik_, p. 82ff, the
change of meem to waw in this language is frequent.[131]
However plausible this process may seem to be, philologically it
cannot here yield a satisfactory conclusion. For it is based on wrong
premises. It is not true that the word Ṭâ´ûs signifies an ancient
deity. It denotes the devil and nothing else. This is so clear to
the Yezidis, or to anyone acquainted with their religion, as to
leave no need for further discussion. And to question the religious
consciousness of a sect is to engage in pure speculation. Likewise,
the method of determining this supposed god by the name of some deity
resembling it is objectionable. There are many such names. One might
also infer that the sect worship Christ under the form of the devil.
This theory has actually been advanced.—_Theatre de la Turquie_,
364. The statement that in Kurdish the letter meem is changed to waw
frequently is untenable, if one would set it up as a grammatical rule
to explain such phenomena. What is more, the Kurds pronounce the
name tammuz, and nothing else, unless some one has a physiological
difficulty which will not permit him to close his lips, so that instead
of saying tammuz, he would mutter taouz. The following are a few of
many instances to show that meem is not changed to waw in Kurdish,
even in words of Arabic origin: ‘Amelie ṣaliḥ (good works), zamanie
aḫerat (the last day), the well of Zamsam, Mohammed, and Mustafa (the
chosen one), when applied to the prophet, Melek (king), when applied to
Ṭâ´ûs. Further the assumption that Ṭâ´ûs does not come from the Arabic
Ṭâ´ûs is unverifiable. Unquestionably the attempt to trace this term
to tauz, then to Tammuz, was suggested to Professor Lidzbarski by the
fact that ammuz was the name of an ancient Babylonian god, and that
Abu Sayyid Wahb ibn Ibrahim, quoted by an-Nedim, an Arab author of the
tenth century, states that the god Tauz has a feast in his honor on the
fifteenth of Tammuz (_Fihrist_, p. 322). But according to the author of
“_Die Sabier und Sabismus_” (p. 202) the original form of this word is
unknown.
Not only the inference which identifies Ṭâ´ûs with Tammuz is based on
wrong premises; but, in the Yezidi conception of Melek Ṭâ´ûs, there are
no traces of the notion which is held respecting Tammuz. The latter
was originally a sun-god, and son of Ea and the goddess Sirdu, and
the bridegroom of the goddess Ištar. The legendary poems of Babylonia
described him as a shepherd, cut off in the beauty of youth, or slain
by the boar’s tusk in winter, and mourned for long and vainly by the
goddess Ištar. The god Tammuz made his way to Canaan, Cyprus, and
thence to Greece. “He had ceased to be the young and beautiful sun-god,
and had become the representative of the vegetation of spring, growing
by the side of the canals of Babylonia, but parched and destroyed by
the fierce heat of the summer. Hence in Babylonia his funeral festival
came to be observed in the month of June, and in Palestine two months
later. Tammuz had changed his character in passing from country to
country, but the idea of him as a slain god, and of his festival as
the idealization of human sorrow, a kind of “All Souls Day,” was never
altered wherever he was adored.”[132] Such beliefs are not found in the
Yezidi view of their King Peacock. On the contrary his festival is for
them the occasion of joy and pleasure.
I conclude, then, that Ṭâ´ûs is the Arabic word meaning peacock, just
as Melek is the Arabic word meaning king or angel. The sect write it,
pronounce it, and believe it to be so. The faith of the sect finds
expression in the fact that they represent their angel Azazil in the
form of the peacock.
It seems to me that the real question is not what Melek Ṭâ´ûs is, but
how the devil-god came to be symbolized by the image of a bird. This
question finds an answer in the fact that the worship of a bird appears
to have been the most ancient of idolatry. It is condemned especially
in Deut. 4: 16, 17: “Lest ye corrupt yourselves and make a graven
image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of any winged fowl
that flieth in the air.” And Layard, in his _Nineveh and Its Remains_,
vol. II, p. 462, gives the sketch of a bird from one of the slabs dug
up at Nimrud. He remarks that the Iyuges, or sacred birds, belonged to
the Babylonian and probably also to the Assyrian religion. They were
a kind of demons, who exercised a peculiar influence over mankind,
resembling the feroher of Zoroastrianism. The oracles attributed to
Zoroaster describe them as powers anointed by God.
Their images, made of gold, were in the palace of the king of
Babylonia. According to Philostratus they were connected with magic.
In Palestine the dove was sacred for the Phoenicians and Philistines.
The Jews brought accusation against the Samaritans that they were
worshippers of the dove. Sacred doves were found also at Mecca. Nasar
(eagle) was a deity of the tribe of Ḥamyar.[133]
A question suggesting itself is how the Yezidi god came to be
designated by the form of a peacock. This bird is a native of Ceylon,
and not of Mesopotamia or Kurdistan where the Yezidis live.[134] The
answer may be found in the Muslim tradition[135] that when the first
parents forfeited heaven for eating wheat, they were cast down upon
earth. Eve descended upon ‘Arafat; Adam at Ceylon; the peacock at
Gabul, and Satan at Bilbays. In this myth the devil and the peacock
are figured as sharing the same penalty at the same time. According to
Surah 2, 28-31, the crime of the former was pride, but nothing is said
about the guilt of the latter. We learn, however, from other sources,
that the bird in question is thought of as a symbol of pride. In his
article “Peacock,” in the Enc. Brit., vol. 18, p. 443, Professor A.
Newton says: “The bird is well known as the proverbial personification
of pride. It is seldom kept in large numbers for it has a bad
reputation for doing mischief in gardens.” Hence we may infer that the
notion of the peacock as a symbol of pride together with the Koranic
idea of Satan’s sin led to the formation of the myth; that this story
was current among the followers of Yezid bn Unaisa; and that, under the
influence of the devil-worshippers of Persia the old tradition lost
its original significance, and came to be understood to represent the
peacock as a symbol of the god-devil.
Among the three branches of the deity in the second degree, Melek
Ṭâ´ûs holds an important place in the theology of the Yezidis. The
language used in his praise is so elevated that one is led to think
that he is identical with God. Some scholars deny this theory on the
ground that the principal prayer of these people is directed to God
and no mention is made of King Peacock. Hence they contend also that
no direct worship is offered to the latter deity.[136] It seems to
me that such a contention is not justifiable. In the first place,
the people themselves confess their loyalty to the chief angels.
Moreover, the expression in this prayer, “Thou hast neither feather,
nor wings, nor arms, nor voice” (see p. 74) is more applicable to the
symbol Peacock than to God. There can be no doubt, I think, that in
the conception of the sect ‘Azazil appears to be identical with God.
This fact finds definite expression in the Book of Jilwah. In Chapter
I he is represented as being from eternity to eternity, as having
absolute control of the world, as being omnipresent and omnipotent and
unchangeable. In Chapter II he is said to appear in divers manners to
the faithful ones; and life and death are determined by him. And in
Chapter III he is declared to be the source of revelation. While this
is true, there are other phrases which refer to Ṭâ´ûs as being inferior
to the great God, but superior to all other gods. He was created, and
is under the command of God; but he is made the chief of all.
It is not quite easy to understand the underlying idea in worshipping
the devil. Some[137] explain this by supposing he is so bad that he
requires constant propitiation; otherwise he will take revenge and
cause great misery. For this reason, it is claimed,[138] they do
not worship God, because he is so good that he cannot but forgive.
This is the usual interpretation, and it is confirmed by the nature
of the religious service rendered. It seems to partake much more of
a propitiatory than of a eucharistic character, not as the natural
expression of love but of fear. This reminds us at once of the
Babylonian religion. According to this religion, when any misfortune
overtook the worshippers, they regarded it as a sign that their deity
was angry, and had therefore left them to their own resources or had
become their enemy. To be thus deserted was accounted a calamity
because of the innumerable dangers to which the soul was exposed from
the action of the powers seen and unseen. So that as a matter of
precaution, it was well to maintain a propitiatory attitude. Hence
the great object of worship was to secure and retain the somewhat
capricious favor of the deity.[139] This is in accord with the natural
feeling of man in his primitive state, which leads him rather to dread
punishment for his sin than to be thankful for blessings received.
Others[140] hold that the Devil-worshippers believe that their Lord is
a fallen angel, now suffering a temporary punishment for his rebellion
against the divine will because he deceived Adam, or because he did not
recognize the superiority of Adam as commanded by God. But it is not
for man to interfere in the relations of God with his angels, whether
they be fallen or not; on the contrary man’s duty is to venerate them
all alike. The great God will be finally reconciled to Ṭâ´ûs, and will
restore him to his high place in the celestial hierarchy.
Still others[141] assert that the sect does not believe in an evil
spirit but as a true divinity. This theory is not generally accepted,
but seems more probable than the preceding ones. For there is nothing
in the sacred book to indicate that Melek Ṭâ´ûs is an evil spirit or
a fallen angel. On the contrary the charge that he was rejected and
driven from heaven is repudiated. The mentioning of his name is looked
upon as an insult to and blasphemy against him because it is based, the
Yezidis think, on the assumption that he is degraded. Finally, he is
declared to be one of the seven gods, who is now ruling the world for a
period of 10,000 years.
It is interesting to note that, in the history of religion, the god of
one people is the devil of another. In the Avesta, the evil spirits are
called daeva (Persian Div); the Aryans of India, in common with the
Romans, Celts, and Slavs gave the name of dev (devin, divine, divny)
to their good or god-like spirits. Asura is a deity in the Rig Veda,
and an evil spirit only in later Brahman theology. Zoroaster thought
that the beings whom his opponents worshipped as gods, under the name
of daeva, were in reality powers by whom mankind are unwittingly led to
their destruction. “In Islam the gods of heathenism are degraded into
jinn, just as the gods of north semitic heathenism are called šĕirim
(hairy demons) in Lev. 17: 7, or as the gods of Greece and Rome became
devils to the early Christians.”[142]
The Yezidis’ veneration for the devil in their assemblies is paid to
his symbol, the sanjaḳ. It is the figure of a peacock with a swelling
breast, diminutive head, and widespread tail. The body is full but
the tail is flat and fluted. This figure is fixed on the top of a
candlestick around which two lamps are placed, one above the other,
and containing seven burners. The stand has a bag, and is taken to
pieces when carried from place to place. Close by the stand they put
water jugs filled with water, to be drunk as a charm by the sick and
afflicted. They set the sanjaḳ at the end of a room and cover it with a
cloth. Underneath is a plate to receive the contributions. The ḳawwal
(sacred musician) kisses the corner of the cloth when he uncovers
Melek-Ṭâ´ûs. At a given signal, all arise, then each approaches the
sanjaḳ, bows before it and puts his contribution into the plate. On
returning to their places, they bow to the image several times and
strike their breasts as a token of their desire to propitiate the evil
principle.
The Yezidis have seven sanjaḳs, but the Fariḳ (Lieut.-Gen. of the
Turkish Army), who tried to convert them to Mohammedanism in 1892,
took five of them. Some deny, however, that they were real ones; they
say they were imitations. Each sanjaḳ is given a special place in the
Emir’s palace, where it is furnished with a small brazen bed and a
vessel in the form of a mortar placed before it. They burn candles and
incense before it day and night. Each sanjaḳ is assigned a special
district, the name of which is written on a piece of paper and placed
on its shoulder. On the shoulder of the first the district of Šeiḫan,
which comprises the villages around Mosul, is indicated; on the second
Jabal Sinjar; in the third the district of Ḫalitiyah, which is one of
the dependencies of Diarbeker; on the fourth the district of Ḫawariyah,
_i. e._, the Kocḥers; on the fifth the district of Malliah, the
villages around Aleppo; on the sixth the district of Sarḥidar, which
is in Russia; and the seventh remains at the tomb of Šeiḫ ‘Adi.
When sent from village to village of its respective district, a sanjaḳ
is put in a hagibah[143] (saddle-bag) and carried on a horse that
belongs to a pir (religious teacher). On nearing a certain place, a
messenger is sent to announce in Kurdish “Sanjaḳ hat,” “the Sanjaḳ has
come.” Then all the people don their fineries and go out to welcome
it with tambourines. As the representative of Melek Ṭâ´ûs reaches the
town, the pir cries out in Kurdish language, “Sanjaḳ mevan ki sawa?”
(literally: “Whose guest shall the sanjaḳ be?”). On hearing this, each
person makes a bid for the privilege of entertaining it. Finally he who
bids the highest receives the image. At that moment the accompanying
pir takes the hagibah off the horse’s back and hangs it on the neck of
the person who is to keep the symbol of the devil over night.
The Yezidis say, that in spite of the frequent wars and massacres to
which the sect has been exposed, and the plunder and murder of the
priests during their journeys, no Melek Ṭâ´ûs has ever fallen into the
hands of the Mohammedans. When a ḳawwal sees danger ahead of him, he
buries the Melek Ṭâ´ûs and afterwards comes himself, or sends some one
to dig up the brazen peacock, and carries it forward in safety.
Besides revering the devil by adoring his symbol, the Yezidis venerate
him by speaking with great respect of his name. They refer to him as
Melek Ṭâ´ûs, King Peacock, or Melek al-ḳawwat, the Mighty King. They
never mention his name; and any allusion to it by others so irritates
and vexes them that they put to death persons who have intentionally
outraged their feelings by its use. They carefully avoid every
expression that resembles in sound the name of Satan. In speaking of
shatt (river) they use the common Kurdish word Ave, or the Arabic ma
(water). In speaking of the Euphrates, they call it Ave ‘Azim, or ma
al-kabir, _i. e._, the great river, or simply al-Frat.
2. Šeiḫ ‘Adî
Next to the devil in rank comes Šeiḫ ‘Adi. But he is not the historical
person whose biography is given by the Mohammedan authors. He is
identified with deity and looked upon as a second person in a divine
trinity. He is sent by Melek Ṭâ´ûs to teach and to warn his chosen
people lest they go astray. He is conceived to be everywhere, to be
greater than Christ; and, like Melek-Ṣedek, has neither father nor
mother. He has not died and will never die. In verse ten of the poems
in his praise, he is distinctly said to be the only God. His name
is associated with all the myth that human imagination can possibly
create about a deity. To express the Yezidi dogma in terms of Christian
formula, Šeiḫ ‘Adi is the Holy Spirit, who dwells in their prophets,
who are called kochaks. He also reveals to them truth and the
mysteries of heaven.
The entertaining of such views has led some modern critics to think
‘Adi the good and Melek Ṭâ´ûs the evil principle. In the poem (30-32),
he is represented as the good deity and the source of all good. Others
identify him with Adde or Adi, a disciple of Manes or Mani. Still
others regard his name as one of the names of the deity. In this
case, his tomb is a myth and the prefix “Šeiḫ” is added to deceive
the Mohammedans, and thus to prevent them from desecrating the sacred
shrine, just as the Christians call Mar Mattie, Sheikh Mattie, and the
convent of Mar Behnan, ḫuder Elias.[144] But the most ingenious theory
is that advanced by the Rev. G. P. Badger. He queries whether the
Yezidi ‘Adi be not cognate with the Hebrew Ad, the two first letters
in the original of Adonai, the Lord, and its compounds, Adonijah,
Adonibezek. The writer is aware, however, that “This derivative is open
to objection on the ground that the Yezidis write the word with ‘ain
and not with alif.” But he explains: “They write so only in Arabic,
of which they know but very little, and not in their own language
(Kurdish) in which they do not write it at all. Moreover, they may have
assimilated the mode of expressing the title of their deity in bygone
days to that of ‘Adi, one of the descendants of the Merawian Califs,
with whom, from fear of being persecuted by the Mohammedans, they
sometimes identified him.” Having thus expounded his own view, this
English scholar proceeds to repudiate the suggestion that Šeiḫ ‘Adi “is
the same Adi,” one of the disciples of Mani, since there is no proof,
according to him, that Mani himself was deified by his followers.
So far as the application of the method of comparative philology is
concerned, Badger’s theory is more reasonable and tenable than that of
Lidzbarski, who, by the same method, attempts to identify Melek Ṭâ´ûs
with Tammuz. Nevertheless, the inference of the former is beyond any
possible justification. For such a starting-point is misleading when
it is not supported by historical proof. A failure to support it thus
cannot be regarded as other than deficiency in treatment. Now, while
one may be misguided by the Yezidi myth surrounding the personality
of Šeiḫ ‘Adi, the critical mind can find much in it to aid him in his
efforts to discover the true identity of the man. In verse fifty of
his poem, for our critic draws his conclusions in the light of this
poem, the Šeiḫ receives his authority from God who is his lord; in
verse fifty-seven he is a man, ‘Adi of Damascus, son of Musafir; in
verse eighty he declares that the high place which he had attained is
attainable by all who, like him, shall find the truth. To justify my
criticism, I need only ask the reader to recall the description by the
Mohammedan biographers of the person in question.
The Yezidis offer their worship to Šeiḫ ‘Adi, usually when they
assemble at his shrine. This is his tomb within a temple. The latter
lies in a narrow valley which has only one outlet, as the rock rises
on all sides except where a small stream forces its way into a large
valley beyond. The tomb stands in a courtyard, and is surrounded by a
few buildings in which the guardians and the servants of the sanctuary
live. In the vicinity are scattered a number of shacks, each named
after a šeiḫ, and supposed to be his tomb. Toward sunset these sacred
places are illuminated by burning sesame oil lamps, putting one at the
entrance to each tomb in token of their respect; the light lasts but a
short time. There are also a few edifices, each belonging to a Yezidi
district, in which the pilgrims reside during the time of the feast; so
that each portion of the valley is known by the name of the country of
those who resort thither. On the lintel of the doorway of the temple,
various symbols are engraved,—a lion, a snake, a hatchet, a man and
a comb.[145] Their mystical meaning is unknown. They are regarded as
mere ornaments placed there at the request of those who furnished money
for building the temple. The interior of the temple is made up of an
oblong apartment which is divided into three compartments, and a large
hall in the centre which is divided by a row of columns; and arches
support the roof. To the right of the entrance are a platform, and a
spring of water coming from the rock. The latter is regarded with great
veneration, and is believed to be derived from the holy well of Zamzam
at Mecca. It is used for the baptism of children and for other sacred
purposes. Close by there are two small apartments in which are tombs
of the saints and of some inferior personage. In the principal halls a
few lamps are usually burning, and at sunset lights are scattered over
the walls.
The tomb of Šeiḫ ‘Adi lies in the inner room, which is dimly lighted.
The tomb has a large square cover, upon which is written Ayat al-Kursi,
that is, the verse of the throne, which is the 256th verse of
surat-al-Baḳarah, or Chapter II of the Koran.
“God. There is no God but He, the Living, the Abiding. Neither slumber
nor sleep seizeth Him. To Him belongeth whatsoever is in heaven and
whatsoever is on earth. Who is he that can intercede with Him but by
His own permission? He knoweth what has been before them and what shall
be after them; yet naught of His knowledge do they comprehend, save
what he willeth to reveal. His throne reacheth over the heavens and the
earth, and the upholding of both burdeneth Him not. He is the High, the
Great.”
It is related (in the Mishkat, Book IV, 1. 19, Part III) that ‘Ali
heard Mohammed say in the pulpit, “That person who repeats the Ayat
al-Kursi after every prayer shall in no wise be prevented from entering
into Paradise, except by life; and whoever says it when he goes to his
bedchamber will be kept by God in safety together with his house and
the house of his neighbor.” Šeiḫ ‘Adi might have been in the habit of
repeating this verse; and this, perhaps, led to its inscription on the
tomb.
In the center of the inner room, close by the tomb, there is a square
plaster case, in which are small balls of clay taken from the tomb.
These are sold or distributed to the pilgrims, and regarded as sacred
relics, useful against disease and evil spirits. It is said that there
are three hundred and sixty lamps in the shrine of ‘Adi, which are lit
every night. The whole valley in which the shrine lies is held sacred.
No impure thing is permitted within its holy bounds. No other than the
high priest and the chiefs of the sect are buried near the tomb. Many
pilgrims take off their shoes on approaching it, and go barefooted as
long as they remain in its vicinity.
Such is the sanctuary of ‘Adi, where they offer him their homage. Their
worship may be divided into two kinds, direct and indirect. The former
consists of traditional hymns sung by the ḳawwals, the sacred musicians
of the sect. They are chanted to the sound of flutes and tambourines.
The tunes are monotonous and generally loud and harsh. The latter kind
consists in celebrating their religious rites with great rejoicing on
the feast day of their great saint. And their ḳubla, the place to which
they look while performing their holy ceremonies, is that part of the
heaven in which the sun rises.
The great feast of Šeiḫ ‘Adi is held yearly on April fifteenth to
twentieth, Roman calendar, when the Yezidis from all their districts
come to attend the festival celebration. Before entering the valley,
men and women perform their ablutions, for no one can enter the sacred
valley without having first purified his body and his clothes. The
people of the villages are gathered and start together, forming a
long procession, preceded by musicians, who play the tambourine and
the pipe. They load the donkeys with necessary carpets and domestic
utensils. While marching they discharge their guns into the air and
sing their war cry. As soon as they see the tower of the tomb, they all
together discharge their arms.
The šeiḫs and the principal members of the priesthood are dressed in
pure white linen, and all are venerable men with long beards. Only the
chief and the ḳawwals and two of the order of the priesthood enter the
inner court of the temple, and they always go in barefooted. They start
an hour after sunset.[146] The ceremony begins with the exhibition of
the holy symbol of Melek Ṭâ´ûs to the priests. No stranger is allowed
to witness this ceremony or to know the nature of it. This being done,
they begin the rite. The ḳawwals stand against the wall on one side of
the court and commence a chant. Some play on the flute, others on the
tambourine; and they follow the measure with their voices. The šeiḫs
and the chiefs form a procession, walking two by two; the chief priest
walks ahead. A faḳir holds in one hand a lighted torch, and in another
a large vessel of oil, from which he pours into the lamp from time
to time. All are in white apparel except the faḳirs, who are dressed
in black. As they walk in a circle, they sing in honor of Šeiḫ ‘Adi.
Afterward, they sing in honor of ‘Isa (Jesus). As they proceed the
excitement increases, the chants quicken, the tambourines are beaten
more frequently, the faḳirs move faster, the women make tahlil with
a great shouting, and the ceremony comes to an end with great noise
and excitement. When the chanting is ended, those who were marching
in procession kiss, as they pass by, the right side of the temple
entrance, where the serpent is figured on the wall. Then the emir
stands at this entrance to receive the homage of the šeiḫs and elders
who kiss his hand. Afterward all that are present give one another the
kiss of peace.[147] After the ceremony the young men and women dance in
the outer court until early in the morning.
In the morning the šeiḫs and the ḳawwals offer a short prayer in the
temple without any ceremony and some kiss the holy places in the
vicinity. When they end, they take the green[148] cover of the tomb
of Šeiḫ ‘Adi and march with it around the outer court with music.
The people rush to them and reverently kiss the corner of the cloth,
offering money.
After taking the cover back to its place, the chiefs and priests sit
around the inner court. Kochaks at this time bring food and call the
people to eat of the hospitality of Šeiḫ ‘Adi.[149] After they have
finished their meal, a collection is taken for the support of the
temple and tomb of their saint. All people that come to the annual
festival bring dishes as offerings to their living šeiḫ. After he has
indicated his acceptance of them by tasting, these are given to the
servants of the sanctuary. When the feast comes to an end, the people
return to their several abodes.
(3.) YEZID
The third essential element in the religion of the devil-worshippers
is the belief that their sect has taken its origin from Yezid, whom
frequently they call God and regard as their ancestral father, to whom
they trace their descent. No other worship is offered him. He is given,
however, a place of honor in the court of the temple, where, on one
side, there is the inscription “Melek Yezid, the mercy of God be upon
him”; on the other side “Šeiḫ ‘Adi, the mercy of God be upon him.” In
the corner of this court a lamp is kept burning all night in honor of
the two.
NOTES ON CHAPTER II
[130] P. Anastase: _Al-Mašrik_, vol. II, p. 151; Bedrus Efendi
Ar-Riḍwani, his letter to A. N. Andrus, April 22, 1887.
[131] Lidzbarski, Z. D. M. G., vol. LI, p. 592; he is followed by
Makas, _Kurdische Studien_, p. 35.
[132] See “Tammuz” in Jastrow’s Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, and
Cheney’s Dictionary of the Bible.
[133] R. W. Smith: _Religion of the Semites_, p. 219; Aš-Šahrastanî,
vol. II, p. 434. Yaḳut (vol. IV, p. 780) says: Originally nasr was
worshipped by the people of Noah, and from them was brought to the
tribe of Ḥamyar. According to the Syriac doctrine of Addai (Ed. George
Philips, p. 24) the people of Edessa worshipped “the eagle as the
Arabians.”
[134] So far as I am aware no writer on the Yezidis has ever raised
this question.
[135] Hughes: _Dictionary of Islam_, p. 21.
[136] Victor _Dingelstedt_, SGM, vol. XIV.
[137] Badger: _The Nestorians_, vol. I, p. 125; Layard, Nineveh, vol.
I, p. 297.
[138] P. Anastase: _Al-Mašrik_, vol. II, p. 152.
[139] The Hibbert Journal, vol. V, No. 2, Jan., 1907, p. 337.
[140] Layard: Ibid; _Victor Dingelstedt_, Ibid, p. 299.
[141] Dingelstedt: Ibid.
[142] R. W. Smith: _Religion of the Semites_, p. 120; Fihrist, p. 322,
326, calls the gods of the Ḥarranians devils.
[143] _Hagibah_ is a Turkish word, meaning a saddleback.
[144] Badger: Ibid, p. 247. (137) Ibid, p. 112.
Mr. Badger seems to contend that the Kurdish-speaking people do not
pronounce the letter ‘ain. This is not true, the Kurds pronounce
this letter as well as other gutturals. They sometimes even change
the Arabic Alif to ‘ain. This is to be said, however, that in some
localities the ‘ain is pronounced alif, just as the ḳaf is changed to
alif, but this is not confined to the Kurds, such changes are made by
the Arabic-and the Syriac-speaking people also.
[145] The figures of the bull and of the serpent, or of the bull and
of the lion were placed at the right and left of the palaces of the
Assyrian kings to protect their path. Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, p.
162; Nineveh, vol. II, p. 315; B. F. Harper, Assyrian and Babylonian
Literature, pp. 139, 148, 153. The lion was both an ornament and
support in the throne of Solomon, Layard, Nineveh, vol. II, p. 301.
The hatchet was among the weapons of those who fought in chariots, and
carried in the quiver, with the arrows and short angular bow, Nineveh,
vol. II, p. 343.
[146] The Mandeans, the star-worshippers, also begin their rasta
ceremony after the sunset, and continue it through the night.—_London
Standard_, October 19, 1894, Al-Mutaḳtataf, 23, 88.
[147] The kiss of the peace is a regular part of the church service in
the East.
[148] In Mohammedanism, green is the color of šeiḫs.
[149] This is a communal meal.
CHAPTER III
OTHER DEITIES AND FESTIVALS
I
THE SO-CALLED SEVEN DIVINITIES
Besides their great saint, the Yezidis believe in seven other šeiḫs
through whose intermediation they invoke God. These are also deified
and assigned places of honor at Šeiḫ ‘Adi’s side. In their case as in
that of their chief, the tradition has led some critics to believe
that they are archangels; others, different attributes of God; and
still others, the seven Amshaps of Zoroaster, or immortal spirits of
the Avesta. The last conjecture is made by Victor Dingelstadt.[150]
Cholsohn goes a step further in making the assertion, “Der Tempel des
sheikh Shams ist ohne allen Zweifel ein Sonnentempel der so gebaut
ist, dass die ernsten Strahlen der Sonne so häufig als möglich auf ihn
fallen.” The ground for this positive statement is, we are told “Layard
berichtet.”[151] Now, the English scholar seems to base his contention
on the fact that the building is called the sanctuary of Šeiḫ Šams;
that the herd of white oxen which are slain on great festivals at Šeiḫ
‘Adi’s are dedicated to Šams; “that the dedication of the bull to the
sun” was generally recognized in the religious system of the ancients,
which probably originated in Assyria; and that the Yezidis may have
unconsciously preserved a myth of their ancestors.[152] To my mind the
ground for such a view is the apriori assumption that the religion of
the devil-worshippers is the remnant of an ancient cult, and that every
phenomenon in it is to be regarded, therefore, a survival of the past
system. For certain reasons I hold that such is not the case.
One reason, as Badger rightly remarks, the Yezidis so designate the
place for the sake of brevity, is the entablature over the doorway
records the name in full, “Sheikh Shams Ali Beg and Faris.” Two persons
are mentioned in the inscription.[153] In like manner, the word Šams
frequently enters into the construction of Mohammedan names. The most
celebrated one that bore this name was Šams ud-Din of Tabriz, the
friend and spiritual guide of Jalal ad-Din, who flourished during the
first half of the 13th century of our era.
Moreover, round about the tomb of Šeiḫ ‘Adi are many such abandoned
shrines, each of which is dedicated to a similar deified šeiḫ. Many of
these šeiḫs are known to be historical personages. Take for example,
Šeiḫ ‘Abd al-ḳadir of Gilan. He is Šeiḫ Muḥiyy ud Din ‘Abd al ḳadir of
Gilan in Persia, the founder of the ḳadiri order of dervishes. He was
born in A. H. 471 (A. D. 1078-9) and died A. H. 516 (A. D. 1164-5).
So also Šeiḫ ḳaḍib al-Ban. He was from Mosul, and was a contemporary
of Šeiḫ ‘Adi. In giving the life of Muḥi ad Din aš-Šharnozuri, Ibn
Ḫallikan (v. 2,651) says, “His corpse was removed to a mausoleum built
for its reception outside the Maidan Gate of Mosul, near the tomb of
ḳadib al-Ban, the celebrated worker of miracles.” Further, Manṣur
al-Ḥallaj was a celebrated mystic, revered as a saint by the more
advanced sufis. He was put to death with great cruelty at Bagdad in A.
H. 309 (A. D. 921-2) on a charge of heresy and blasphemy, because he
had said in one of his ecstacies, “Ana-l-Ḥaḳḳ, I am the truth, God.”
All biographers of sufi saints speak of him with admiration.
There are still others who are mentioned even among the seven šeiḫs
enumerated in the principal prayer. Šeiḫ Ḥasan (written also Šeiḫisin)
was from Baṣrah. He was a celebrated theologian and died in A. D. 728.
His life is given by Ibn Ḫallikan. He was noted for self-mortification,
fear of God and devotion. And Faḫr ad-Din is ibn Abd Allah Mohammed Ibn
Amar al-Ḥuṣain Ibn al-Ḥasan, Ibn ‘Ali Al-Taim al-Bakri al-Taberstani
ar-kai-zi (native of Kai in Tabarestan), surnamed Faḫr ad-Din (glory
of faith). He was a doctor of the Shafite sect, a pearl of his age, a
man without a peer. He surpassed all his contemporaries in scholastic
theology, and preached both in Arabic and Persian. He would draw floods
of tears from his eyes. His virtues and merits were boundless. He was
born at Kai, 25th of Ramadan, A. H. 544 (A. D. 1150), and died at
Ḥerat, the first of Shawal, A. H. 606 (March A. D. 1210). (See ibn
Ḫallikan in loco.)
In the light of these facts, I conclude, then, that those who cannot
be identified—for many bear the same name, and we do not know which is
which—are also historical personages.
This is what I mean by the statement that in order to yield
satisfactory results the inductive method must be supported by
historical investigations.
In a question like this, however, the philosophical method also, when
carried on critically, may yield a satisfactory result. Accordingly,
observations should be made in the sphere of religious consciousness.
Now one of the characteristics of the human mind is the tendency
to defy man. This is shown in the titles which men gave to their
superiors. In the Tell-al-Amarna tablets, we find various kinglets
of Syria, in writing to the king of Egypt, address him as “my gods”
(ilani-ia). Thus Abimilki of Tyre writes: “To my lord, the king, my
son, my god.” What is more, a superhuman character is attributed to
the dead. This appears from the attitude which the primitive mind
entertained towards the deceased. At first, the relation to the dead
was hostile, hence their spirits were feared. Gradually, the relation
became familiar, so that their association was sought and sacrifices
and gifts were offered to them. They came to be looked upon as elohim,
who knew the future events. Thus we find that in the Old Testament,
worship was offered to the dead, and that the tombs of ancestors and
heroes frequently appear as places of worship, as, _e. g._, the grave
of Miriam at Kadish (Num. 26: 1). Even to-day tombs of saints are
common in Arabia, and thousands of people visit them annually to ask
the intercession of the saints. Likewise, the Nuṣairiyeh of Syria have
deified ‘Ali, the Drus their chief Hakim, the Babis their Beha, and the
Christians their saints.[154] We cannot, therefore, be surprised that
the Yezidis have deified their šeiḫs and heroes. They have only shown
that common trait of the mind—the tendency to deify man.
It is to be noticed, further, that in the historical development of
religions we find that when the stage of the mere belief in spirits is
past, individual deities stand out from the great mass of the spirits,
and these are plainly imagined to be personal gods, such as Astarte and
Ba‘al by the side of Hadad and Aschirat.[155] Now this is practically
what we find in the evolution of modern Yezidism. Out of many šeiḫs and
murids, seven, next to šeiḫ ‘Adi, stand out as individual divinities.
Yearly festivals in honor of these šeiḫs are commemorated in April at
different villages with the same rites as those observed at Šeiḫ ‘Adi’s
tomb. Lamps are nightly lighted and left to burn in the shacks called
after the names of their respective šeiḫs; and in those to which a room
is attached, ḳawwals assemble at sunset every Tuesday and Thursday,
when they burn incense over each tomb; and after watching a short
time, and smoking their pipes, they return home.
An interesting festival is that of Šeiḫ Mohammed, celebrated by the
people of Ba‘šiḳa, where his tomb exists. They say that they are
solemnizing the nuptials of Šeiḫ Mohammed, whom they believe to be
married once a year. The men and women dance together while the
ḳawwals play on their flutes and tambourines. They bring Melek Ṭâ´ûs
in procession from Baḥazanie to Ba‘šiḳa amid rejoicing and sound of
music. Two pirs precede the bearer of the sacred peacock, carrying in
their hands lighted candles which they move to and fro. As they pass
along the bystanders bow in adoration and, immersing their hands in the
smoke, perfume with it their arms and faces. They carry the image of
Melek Ṭâ´ûs to the house of the one who is the highest bidder for the
honor of entertaining it. Here it remains two days, during which all
profane festivals are suspended and visits are paid to it.
II
THE DAY OF SARSAL
In addition to the festivals mentioned above is the one observed on
New Year’s day, the first Wednesday in April. On this day, the Yezidis
say, no drums are to be beaten, for God sits on the throne, holding a
conference at which he decrees the events of the year. They also stick
wild scarlet anemones to the entrance of their houses. The refraining
from the sound of instruments of pleasure on the part of orientals
signifies a state of contrition. Hence, it is very likely that the
Yezidis entertain the view that on this day God is decreeing their
destiny for the coming year; that they must now, therefore, adjust
their relation to him with sincere sorrow for sin. If this is so, the
significance of the hanging of the flowers at the entrance of their
houses can be taken as intended to propitiate the Evil Principle,
and to ward off calamity during the coming year. Such a belief has a
parallel in many religions. According to Babylonian mythology human
destiny was decreed on New Year’s day and sealed on the tenth day
thereafter. It was therefore necessary to placate the deity, or at
least to make sure of one’s relation to him, before this particular
day. The New Year period was held, therefore, to be of special
importance because of the bearing on individual welfare by reason of
the good or the evil decision of the gods. Our modern custom of wishing
our friends a Happy New Year has perhaps some connection with this
idea.[156]
The Day of Atonement (Lev. 23: 27; 25: 29) had a most important place
in the Jewish ecclesiastical year. This was the occasion of a thorough
purification of the whole nation and of every individual member thereof
in their relation to Yahweh. It was designed to deepen afresh the
national and individual sense of sin and dread of the judgment of God.
According to Talmud (Mišna, Roš hašana, vol. I, 2) Roš hašana is the
most important judgment day, on which all creatures pass for judgment
before the Creator. On this day, three books are opened wherein the
fate of the wicked, the righteous and those of the intermediate class
are recorded. Hence prayer and works of repentance are performed on the
New Year from the first to the tenth that an unfavorable decision might
be averted (Jewish Ency., art. Penitential Day). R. Akiba says: “On New
Year Day all men are judged; and the degree is sealed on the Day of
Atonement (Ibid, art. Day of Judgment).
Moreover, the red lilies of the doors of the Yezidis remind us at
once of the blood sprinkled on the doorposts of the dwellings of the
Israelites in Egypt as a sign for the Destroying Angel to pass over.
This notion is found also in a similar practice among the Parsees of
India, who hang a string of leaves across the entrances to their houses
at the beginning of every new year.
In the light of what has been said, the Yezidis’ idea in giving food
to the poor at the grave on the day of Sarsal (New Year day), is to
propitiate God on behalf of the dead, who are, according to their
belief, reincarnated in some form or other.[157]
NOTES ON CHAPTER III
[150] S. G. M., ibid.
[151] _Die Sabien_, I, 296.
[152] _Nineveh and Its Remains_, vol. II, p. 239.
[153] _Nestorians and Their Rituals_, vol. I, p. 117.
[154] S. J. Curtis: _Primitive Semitic Religion To-day_, p. 96;
J. A. O. S., vol. 8, 223.
[155] Cf. Marti’s _Die Religion des A. T._, pp. 28-29.
[156] The Hibbert Journal, ibid.
[157] For different interpretation of the Yezidi New Year, see
Brockelmann in Z. D. M. G., vol. 55, p. 388.