Even after the achievement of the scholar-süfi Abü Hãmid alGhazãli (1058-1111) in 'largely removing the tension between Süfism and the "Islamic sciences'",2 diverse other Muslim scholars have continued to view Süfism with the deepest suspicion.3 The culamã° have frequently pitted themselves against the süfi shaykhs and pirs, each group often seeking religious control, power and authority by virtue of bookish or gnostic learning.4 Professor Michael Gilsenan, while doing research on the süfi mystical brotherhoods in Egypt between 1964 and 1966 was assured by shaykhs at the Azhar University in Cairo 'that these brotherhoods had nothing to do with Islam at all and that [he] was not only wasting [his] time but giving a false impression of what the true religion is.'5 With others, suspicion has given way to a bemused, and perhaps surface, tolerance. As Ronald Eyre put it in his book On the Long Search: 'The orthodox Muslim community, after a great scholar arose to allay their more extravagant fears [surely a reference to al-Ghazãll?], appear to have accepted the solitary quest, but only as an extension of community worship. And they are alert for signs of morbid inwardness in those who undertake i t / 6

The suspicion from mainstream Islam comes in many forms as do the süfi orders themselves. In the course of Islamic history süfis have appeared in nearly every corner of the globe where the message of Islam has been preached; indeed, they were

often responsible for bringing that message to what had been non-Islamic lands, in the first place.