Last Updated on October 1, 2024 by Kittredge Cherry
Rumi is a 13th-century Persian poet and Sufi mystic whose love for another man inspired some of the world’s best poems and led to the creation of a new religious order, the Whirling Dervishes. He was born Sept. 30, 1207 in Afghanistan.
With sensuous beauty and deep spiritual insight, Rumi writes about the sacred presence in ordinary experiences. “Love is the bridge between you and everything,” he wrote. His poetry is widely admired around the world and he is one of the most popular poets in America. His work may have influenced John of the Cross, a 16th-century Catholic saint and mystic who lived in Muslim-ruled Spain.
One of Rumi’s often-quoted poems begins:
If anyone asks you
how the perfect satisfaction
of all our sexual wanting
will look, lift your face
and say,
Like this.*
It includes this stanza of special interest to followers of Christ who seek to unite sexuality and spirituality:
If anyone wonders how Jesus raised the dead,
don’t try to explain the miracle.
Kiss me on the lips.
Like this. Like this.*
The homoeroticism of Rumi is hidden in plain sight. It is well known that his poems were inspired by his love for another man, but the queer implications are seldom discussed. There is no proof that Rumi and his beloved Shams of Tabriz had a sexual relationship, but the intensity of their same-sex love is undeniable.
Some of his more homoerotic poems were not published in English until The Forbidden Rumi: The Suppressed Poems of Rumi on Love, Heresy, and Intoxication was released in 2006. The volume was forbidden both because of its homoerotic content and because it promotes the “blasphemy” that one must go beyond religion in order to experience God.
A rare portrait of Rumi as an LGBTQ icon appears at the top of this post. Rumi has a rainbow halo in the painting by North Carolina artist Jeremy Whitner, a gay Christian mystic and ordained minister with the Disciples of Christ. He has a master of divinity degree from Union Presbyterian Seminary.
Rumi’s life changed when he met a man called Shams
Rumi was born Sept. 30, 1207 in Afghanistan, which was then part of the Persian Empire. His father, a Muslim scholar and mystic, moved the family to Roman Anatolia (present-day Turkey) to escape Mongol invaders when Rumi was a child. Rumi lived most of his life in this region and used it as the basis of his chosen name, which means “Roman.” His full name is Jalal ad-Din Muhammad Balkhi-Rumi. He wrote mostly in his native language, Persian, but he occasionally used Arabic, Turkish and Greek in his poetry.
His father died when Rumi was 25 and he inherited a position as teacher at a madrassa (Islamic school). He continued studying Shariah (Islamic law), eventually issuing his own fatwas (legal opinions) and giving sermons in the local mosques. Rumi also practiced the basics of Sufi mysticism in a community of dervishes, who are Muslim ascetics similar to mendicant friars in Christianity.
Rumi and Shams together in a detail from “Dervish Whirl” by Shahriar Shahriari (RumiOnFire.com)
On Nov. 15, 1244 Rumi met the man who would change his life: a wandering dervish named Shams of Tabriz (Shams-e-Tabrizi or Shams al-Din Muhammad). He came from the city of Tabriz in present-day Iranian Azerbaijan. It is said that Shams had traveled throughout the Middle East asking Allah to help him find a friend who could “endure” his companionship. A voice in a vision sent him to the place where Rumi lived.
 |
| Meeting of Rumi and Shams 16th-17th century folio (Wikimedia Commons) |
Rumi, a respected scholar in his thirties, was riding a donkey home from work when an elderly stranger in ragged clothes approached. It was Shams. He grasped the reins and started a theological debate. Some say that Rumi was so overwhelmed that he fainted and fell off the donkey.
Rumi and Shams soon became inseparable. They spent months together, lost in a kind of ecstatic mystical communion known as “sobhet” — conversing and gazing at each other until a deeper conversation occurred without words. They forgot about human needs and ignored Rumi’s students, who became jealous. When conflict arose in the community, Shams disappeared as unexpectedly as he had arrived.
Rumi’s loneliness at their separation led him to begin the activities for which he is still remembered. He poured out his soul in poetry and mystical whirling dances of the spirit.
Eventually Rumi found out that Shams had gone to Damascus. He wrote letters begging Shams to return. Legends tell of a dramatic reunion. The two sages fell at each other’s feet. In the past they were like a disciple and teacher, but now they loved each other as equals. One account says, “No one knew who was lover and who the beloved.” Both men were married to women, but they resumed their intense relationship with each other, merged in mystic communion. Jealousies arose again and some men began plotting to get rid of Shams.
One winter night, when he was with Rumi, Shams answered a knock at the back door. He disappeared and was never seen again. Many believe that he was murdered.
Rumi grieved when Shams disappeared
Rumi grieved deeply. He searched in vain for his friend and lost himself in whirling dances of mourning. One of his poems hints at the his emotions:
Dance, when you’re broken open.
Dance, if you’ve torn the bandage off.
Dance in the middle of the fighting.
Dance in your blood.
Dance, when you’re perfectly free.
Rumi danced, mourned and wrote poems until the pressure forged a new consciousness. “The wound is the place where the Light enters you,” he once wrote. His soul fused with his beloved. They became One: Rumi, Shams and God. He wrote:
Why should I seek? I am the same as he.
His essence speaks through me.
I have been looking for myself.
After this breakthrough, waves of profound poetry flowed out of Rumi. He attributed more and more of his writings to Shams. His literary classic is a vast collection of poems called “The Works of Shams of Tabriz.” The Turkish government refused to help with translation of the last volume, which was finally published in 2006 as The Forbidden Rumi: The Suppressed Poems of Rumi on Love, Heresy, and Intoxication.
“Rumi of Persia” by Robert Lentz (Available from TrinityStores.com)
Rumi went on to live and love again, dedicating poems to other beloved men. His second great love was the goldsmith Saladin Zarkub. After the goldsmith’s death, Rumi’s scribe Husan Chelebi became Rumi’s beloved companion for the rest of his life. Rumi died at age 66 after an illness on Dec. 17, 1273. Soon his followers founded the Mevlevi Order, known as the whirling dervishes because of the dances they do in devotion to God.
The many translations of Rumi’s work include “Love’s Glory: Re-creations of Rumi” by Andrew Harvey, editor of “The Essential Gay Mystics.”
A 2020 music video explores and restores the queer aspect of the love between Sufi poet Rumi and his soulmate Shams. “Love is on Our Side” was created by singer-songwriter Collin Clay Chace and the Juha Music Crew.
Links related to Rumi and LGBTQ Sufis
Rumi and Shams: A Love of Another Kind (Wild Reed)
Ramesh Bjonnes on Rumi and Shams as Gay Lovers (Wild Reed)
Another Male’s Love Inspired Persia’s Mystic Muse (GayToday.com)
Love Poems of Rumi at Rumi.org
Woman Sufi saint inspires Badr Baabou, an LGBTQ activist in Tunisia (Religion News Service)
دعای مسیح رنگین کمان (Rainbow Christ Prayer in Persian)
___
To read this article in Italian, go to:
Rumi: poeta e mistico sufi ispirato dall’amore omosessuale (gionata.org)
___
*“Like This” is quoted from The Essential Rumi
___
Top image credit:
“Rumi” by Jeremy Whitner
___
This post is part of the LGBTQ Saints series by Kittredge Cherry. Traditional and alternative saints, people in the Bible, LGBTQ martyrs, authors, theologians, religious leaders, artists, deities and other figures of special interest to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender and queer (LGBTQ) people and our allies are covered.
This article was originally published on Q Spirit in September 2017 and was expanded with new material over time and most recently updated on Oct. 1, 2024.
Copyright © Kittredge Cherry. All rights reserved.
Qspirit.net presents the Jesus in Love Blog on LGBTQ spirituality.
I found this article a couple of years ago and noticed it’s been changed. Is there a reason why you omitted the parts about Shams marrying Rumi’s daughter?
I can’t find much info about Rumi marrying his step-daughter to Shams. I don’t think that was ever part of this article. I can’t include everything, so I mostly focus on their same-sex love relationship, its context and impact. However thanks for bringing this up because Sham marrying into Rumi’s family is an interesting possibility.
I think the writer herself is a gay person that’s why all she can see sextual relationship between both Rumi and shams. your writing shows, lack of knowledge in understanding Spiritual relationships. Love is not limited to the notion of sextual inclination. True love take place between parents and children and that love is not based on sex. You need more exposure to understand Rumi and shams.
This is the beauty of poetry and the magic of Persian language. Farsi is a non gender base language there is no He or She or it, all are the same. Therefore Farsi is the language of sexual ambiguity and imaginations. Clever Rumi used this tool and created a work enjoyable for all lovers regardless of their sexual orientation. It is very unfortunate that English, French or German translations totally missed this aspect of Rumi’s creations because they are all gender based languages.
agree with amina. “writer”s misleading… She doesn’t understand SOUL. Beloved Rumi says about such people: “It does not matter how many languages you know.
To know the language of the HEART makes you worthy…” May God help her
please don’t listen to the hateful people in the comments!! i’m a lesbian muslim and i’ve always been fascinated by this part of our history – you did a great job covering it !!
people’s unwillingness to recognize queer themes in islamic art has always irritated me, especially because it is very obviously present in many works. like you’ve shown, it’s present in rumi’s work, as it is in hafiz and yunus emre’s poetry as well. “it happens all the time in heaven” textually mentions male-male and female-female couples.
there are many ways to find divinity, i’ve always admired how sufis found divinity in those they loved.
i wish you luck in your studies!! xoxo
Thank you! I appreciate your support and your information about queer themes in Islamic art. I looked up “It Happens All the Time in Heaven,” and it is so wonderful that I will add the link to my main article and share it here: https://songsofpoetry.weebly.com/hafiz–it-happens-all-the-time-in-heaven.html.
I’d just like to note that “it happens all the time in heaven” is actually the work of Daniel Ladinsky, an American poet that uses Hafez’s name and says he is “inspired” by his works but they’re not translations at all. They’re frequently misattributed to Hafez but are unrelated to him entirely! https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/6/14/fake-hafez-how-a-supreme-persian-poet-of-love-was-erased
Thank you so much, ERD, for pointing out that this poem was not written by Hafiz! I double-checked and you are absolutely correct. “It Happens All the Time in Heaven” appears in the book “The Subject Tonight is Love” by Daniel Ladinsky. I still love the poem, but I will remove references to it on my Q Spirit website except for here in the comments section.
Thank you for the knowledge
I have recently found out souls can be female or male
I always felt like a boy but I’m a Muslim girl and attracted to girls so I stay alone don’t want to make Allah mad
A blanket response to commentary (the article needed no response other than well-done, in my opinion:)
None of this, indeed, is about sex or a common, disposable “love” between people (which, by Love’s very essence should not be called Love at all.) However, the historical and religious connotations of whose and what kind of sexuality–an umbrella term for so much more than stimulation of genitalia– is “moral’ or “appropriate” or “blessed by God” factors hugely in the lives of humans who have been abused and neglected by religious institutions, and I believe the intentional focus on sexual/gender/racial/in a word “identity” diversity–perceived, verified, or otherwise–in the lives of Saints is nothing more or less than affirmation of ‘acceptable’ humanity in pursuit of divinity despite, or I dare say, enriched by these diversities. Like any ego-driven identity, it’s simultaneously nothing and everything. Like I tell myself constantly: “Don’t get stuck on the thing. Look past the thing.” However, I don’t think that means while striving for divinity we can’t also revel in our humanity, celebrating and enjoying the thing, particularly when it’s a thing we find to have in common with others as to cultivate community.
What makes anyone qualified to tell others how to ‘understand’ poetry (or, for that matter, what constitutes Muslim-hood or religiosity?) Being an art form, it’s my supposition that one of the qualities granting its wide, universal appeal (unlike religious traditions which are specific to time, place, and culture) is its open-ended interpretability (not a word, but then again, words don’t exist until we create them with our own intentions and with no control over how they are received, processed, or understood. We entrust that to divinity, or “that which is beyond logical comprehension…”)
I feel that an artist (a creator in the same rite as the Creator) uses poetry not only to express themself but to encourage the receivers’ contemplation and own expression regarding ideas contained therein in the context of a “conversation” not specific to time, place, or culture. The only ‘understanding’ of it that can be asserted with any certainty, like humanity itself, is that it exists. There is no (nor should one expect to find) a static, one-size-fits-all ‘understanding’ of any art form, or by the same token, religion. Again, we leave that to Divinity. With open heart and intention, one uncovers as much or little as they are able to access, aided by the unique trove of thoughts, feelings, acknowledged truths, and experiences which are unique to the individual human part of the divine whole. I have a nagging suspicion that’s why Art (like religion) is so omni-pervasive. The assumption of one superior perspective of understanding of Truth is futile and, in my opinion, the end to intelligent spiritual endeavor leading to true awakening. It’s when dogma and superstition swoop in to subvert universal Truth for the benefit of subjective institutional authority. It puts power in the hands of those least divinely qualified to wield it and most humanly likely to weaponize it.
In the same vein, if any one interpretation of Truth doesn’t suit one’s own journey, I would encourage finding something which does and express or, as I feel I’m doing at present, defending that. You’ll be doing others and yourself a service, I’ve found, in spending your time contemplating, being grateful for, and expressing connection to that which ‘vibes on your level’ as opposed to arguing insignificant points regarding a perspective You are actually the one failing to ‘understand.’ We’ve all been there. it’s okay. I wouldn’t advise getting stuck there, however. It’s miserable and conducive only to self loathing and cynicism. I like to think of it as the difference between ‘awake’ and ‘woke’.
In -that- same vein, this resource and someone’s vocation–their life blood– is water in the drought of oppression for some of us. It’s a life-preserver to a human drowning in a sea of negativity, doubt, oppression, violence, misunderstanding, error, hatred, vice, and so many more iterations of fear. Quarreling over minutia doesn’t by any means diminish its priceless value, but it may discourage and defeat the purposes of a fellow human who’s intention is to be that which religion is failing to provide: Love, plain and simple. Affirmation and grace. Belonging. To know that the God-given bodies and feelings and thoughts–the humanity–we have is valid and acceptable by our simultaneous communion with God. To rise above cultural fear and self-loathing which projects on us a dissociation or “split” between human body and divine mind/consciousness.
Many of us need and deserve to hear about the mythologies (regardless of historical facts, of which there are plenty of substance in support of the ability to be both queer and in communion with the divine) which include and accept us to imagine and thus make manifest our destinies or ‘”callings.” Marketing wouldn’t be such a lucrative business nor religion a lucrative entity to market nor religion a market itself of various agendas if this wasn’t so. That’s a tangential though relevant and interesting point to ponder, I think…
I may be wrong but I feel like we are, as a global society, in the habit of being utterly careless and haphazard with our words and the intent/ideas behind them and utterly quick to use them with negative (I’ll not touch on the misguided imperative which really tickles me) implications and connotations when what is needed universally- now as much as or more than usual- is the aspiration of mutual inspiration (and vice versa) to find Divinity through our own and others’ humanity, which is at least my perception of this particular gracious advocate’s mission.
I don’t know. I guess the comment about “don’t have such strong convictions” line really moved me and I needed to sit with it and use my chosen Art (rhetoric) to address how it came across in light of a world that I feel is dying precisely because of its lack of strong convictions and their calls-to-action.
May we see more than whether or not someone who became one with their higher nature in service to others was gay or lesbian or queer or trans or intersex or anything different than a perception of God’s idea of non-existent human perfection.
One misses so much of the Truth in Love when they—not us pejoratively “sex-obsessed, westernized, liberals” with “family-hating and child-indoctrinating agendas”—can’t seem to move beyond one aspect of a beautifully unique and complex persona (which ironically each and every human has, and apparently about which many humans are in utter denial, actually rather than merely socially blocking them from the divine.
Others’ hang-ups about ones own human expression are non-issues to God. Hard-hearted obstinance against oneself or against others within oneself, however, is an actual deal-breaker. Note: Please never confuse oneself into thinking that telling someone their humanity or expression is a mistake “to save them” because one thinks it “says so” in any particular scripture is a “loving” thing to do. Oh, Lord… I’ll digress…
Sacrificial love is NOT about denying yourself; it’s about dying unto your Self. (I think I may have just had an epiphany! Join me!) Hallelujah! This is God. Allah. Vishnu. Consciousness. the Universe. the Source! as modeled by Jesus. Mohammad. Krishna. Buddha. and Rumi! The One that lives in and beyond all of us regardless of any one of us and made perfectly complete by each imperfect individual’s unique participation! Holy Me aka You aka __insert Saint here__! Pray for Us!
Thank you all, dear commenters, for your unintentional invitation/motivation to further my own journey of conversion/enlightenment/awakening by addressing the misunderstandings I see around me and within myself through the art of virtual rhetoric.
Yes, I am and will always be “too much.” The prophets, saints, and mystics remind me daily through this blog that that’s more than okay. It’s the goal.
Love, D. Light
Mx. Cherry,
I would like to take a moment to say Thank You and I See You.
You are brave and relentless in pursuit of inclusive universal Truth, and humanity is enlightened and bettered by your unique completion of it.
I have so much yet to learn and experience; my words certainly don’t equate to much or command respect (believe me.) But, from my perspective, our (and kindred souls’) spirituality is transcendent of what religion is (or, I should say, is not) for so painfully many, and I feel impassioned (why is passion and its conviction-to-action so ironically hated that we qualify it as mental illness? Nay, I say this is an integral quality of the most mentally-well minority in the face of a mentally-ill majority. Hm. What a novel revelation…) to affirm, support, and defend rare, real Truth-telling whenever a fellow human is audacious and loving enough to preach it (especially as a Southerner where the antithesis of Truth is spewing perpetually from the self-professed and appointed ‘pastors.’ [I thought a pastor was supposed to be a shepherd leading a flock with an evolved consciousness rather than a bigger, louder ‘sheep leading the sheep.’ My mistake, again, I’m sure…] )
We live in oppressive times, but then, we always have; it is precisely the kind of integrity that you demonstrate through your work that has preserved, nourished, and resurrected our communities throughout the ages.
Thank you for embodying and giving voice to the Grace and Wisdom of the Christ. You inspire me to be the best, most loving version of myself when I feel like being anything but, and you restore courage where it has been diminished to near hopelessness.
Thank you; Thank God; Thank God for You; Thank You for God.
P.S.
Your articles are provokingly thoughtful, clearly well-researched, and wonderfully-written. I wish the commentary was so just as often.
Thank you for your expressing your support, understanding and gratitude! You inspire me to continue writing and sharing about LGBTQ spirituality across religions and throughout history.
First of all, Shams was probably a wise woman, but I think you can assess for yourself, why that character was portrayed as being a man.
Secondly, none of this is about sex, or even the kind of love that 2 ppl usually have for each other.
Thirdly, if you read Rumi, and really understand it, you will immediately know that he couldn’t possibly be a muslim.. or any other religion for that matter.
Yes, he grew up as such, and yes, of course he had to choose his words wisely in that day and age – but obviously he discovered the only true source of enlightenment, by searching at exactly the right place – which was within himself.
… and I suspect that Shams might have initially guided him a bit in the right direction =)
Please don’t have such strong convictions, that you hold beautiful poetry hostage, to accommodate it 😉
Rumi was certainly not gay, the love that he had was for a spiritual and mystical purpose. Rumi was inspired by Shams for the love he had for God, which is called ‘Divine Love.’ You cannot associate spiritual love with homosexuality. LGBTQ is mostly about lust and not love. Love is a sacred word and can be for a spiritual purpose as well. Sufism is about the spiritual and mystical inner dimensions of Islam that focuses on finding God. First do research about Sufism then you will understand what it means.
what about when Tebrizi disappeared (most likely was killed) there were two other men (Salahuddin Zarkup and Hussam Chelebi) in Rumi’s life. Why he only has love of God when men around him!
Sounds gay.
@Jacob’s Ladder it’s clear that you viewed the love that that was clearly mystical-spiritual love revolving around GOD as a sexual one. This is the problem with you, your worldview of love have been to much being centered around sexual and platonic love, to the point that you can’t view other types of love as what they really are. You claim that we “can’t really know the love they experience with each other”. This is just plainly wrong, because we CAN know if we actually take into account the cultural and philosophical background of Rumi. As the guy explain before, Rumi and Sham’s cultural and philosophical background is that of the devout Sufis, Sufism being the inner mystical-spiritual dimension of Islam. So, Sufism, like other aspects of Islam like the Aqeedah(creed) and the Sharia (laws, moral guidelines, etc) are all GOD-centered. So, with this background we can deduce that that the love they experience to each other is that of a mystical-spiritual love centering around GOD, not a “same-sex sexual relationship”.
This type of love is well-known in Islam, but you, due to your ignorance of cultural and philosophical background of Sufism, project your western sex/”intimacy” worldview of love, and didn’t take into account the Muslims like Rumi and Sham’s worldview on “love”. You’re just another example of a Westerner failing at understanding other people’s worldview in the way that they themselves understand it. Our own religious text speaks of this type of love, like these Hadiths (reported Sayings of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ:
The Messenger of ALLAH ﷺ said: ALLAH TAALA Said:”Those who love each other for the sake of MY GOLRY will be upon pulpits of light, admired by the prophets and the martyrs.
Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 2390, Grade: Sahih
Another hadith:Mu’adh ibn Jabal reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:
قَالَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ وَجَبَتْ مَحَبَّتِي لِلْمُتَحَابِّينَ فِيَّ وَالْمُتَجَالِسِينَ فِيَّ وَالْمُتَزَاوِرِينَ فِيَّ وَالْمُتَبَاذِلِينَ فِيَّ
ALLAH ALMIGHTY said: MY love is assured for those who love each other for my sake, who sit together for MY sake, who visit each other for MY sake, and who spend on each other for MY sake.
Source: Musnad Aḥmad 21525, Grade: Sahih
Another one:On the authority of Abu Hamzah Anas bin Malik (may ALLAH be pleased with him) — the servant of the Messenger of ALLAH (peace and blessings of ALLAH be upon him) — that the Prophet (peace and blessings of ALLAH be upon him) said:
None of you [truly] believes until he loves for his brother that which he loves for himself. [Al-Bukhari] [Muslim]
I just would like to start by saying that I don’t mean this as a purpose of hate and that it is solely a critic against the article. So first of Shams and Rumi never had a sexual relationship their love for god is what connected them both in a one spiritual way.People who have read Rumis poems will know that he talks about the inner peace that comes with believing and trusting in god. So therefore showing the art and works of Jalaluddin Rumi and portraying him as this ,,Queer icon” he obviously isn’t is really disrespectful against him but also his work. Rumi is foremost one of the best and most important represantors when it comes to being in peace with your own mind soul and body. I wish this would’ve been an article that was researched better and not thrown of with interpretations that don’t follow the artists path or values. Very poor done.
I hope you do more reading and understand how you can share the love for god with someone of the same sex, even love the person deeply because he/she showed you the truth to god without being “Sexual”
please stop trying to westernize everything with you sex crazed societies.
Namaskar
Rumi was speaking of love for GOD, which was awaken on the personal level ( vs the impersonal love for GOD), through his association with another DEVOTEE of God – Shams. Shams was like the spiritual master of Rumi. NOT a gay lover.
When we are deeply entrenched in a material mindset it is natural to associate love with love for a material temporary being; as we seek to relate with the SUPREME love with through the lens of that which we have experienced in our current state of consciousness.
But only when one TRANSCENDS the material and connects with the Eternal can one truly understand Rumi and his undying over flowing expression of love. Because GOD (Allah, Vishnu, etc. he has many names) is the RESEVIOR of True Love.
Those who connect with him (not a material him, but HIM as in the originator) become conduits of his endless love and seek to speak about perpetually; sharing with the world until death.
Namaskar
“Love Is On Our Side (the Ballad of Rumi & Shams)” is a music video I did, inspired by ‘The Forbidden Rumi.’ Bless you for this article, and here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvf_FCGkDxE
Believe me you are in danger, it is wrong path, I am not religious scholar but spent whole life to know right and wrong with that knowledge I can help, it is not religious scholar , we have to do research what is the purpose of life why God has sent us to this world
I understand and appreciate your concern that we don’t make assumptions about the nature of relationships between lovers of god and those who were important to them. I share that concern. From some of your comments, though, it seems (1) you define gay too narrowly, (2) may not have studied the complexities of Rumi’s own biography, and (3) might not be aware of the rich theological traditions in many faiths — not just the Christian tradition — of romantic and erotic theology.
(1) “Gay” — and “LGBTQ” (especially the Q) does not refer only to sexual orientation — it includes the full spectrum of romance, intimacy, affection, and friendship as well, and a rich diversity of gender expression. It’s not just about who had sex with whom; it’s about love in all its forms — including sexual — and gender expression and identification.
(2) From this perspective, Rumi was indeed gay — his relationship with Shams, and by identification, with God, was specifically romantic, as his own poetry and biography clearly and repeatedly indicate. He went to extraordinary — and ill-fated — efforts to legitimize Shams’ presence in his life, and draws comparisons between his own love for Shams, with that of Layla and Majnun, and Joseph and Zulaikha, those star-crossed lovers in the poem by the great Persian poet Jami. It was, deeply and profoundly, the highest form of romantic love.
(3) Finally, in mystical traditions throughout the world, metaphors of erotic love are often used to express the highest form of relationship between the soul and God: in the Song of Songs, Wisdom literature, canonical parables of the new testament, and rich apocryphal traditions of Christianity; in the lives of countless saints, such as Bernard of Clairvaux, Symeon the New Theologian, San Juan de la Cruz, and Francesco di Assisi who spoke of their union with Jesus in overtly erotic and romantic language; in the troubadors’ gorgeous mystical texts; in many of the greatest Sufi poets and mystics; in the traditions of Krishna and Radha, Ram and Sita, Ram and Hanuman and countless others. Before you say that a particular saint — beloved to so many LGBTQ people as an integral part of their faith — is not gay, please strive to understand that “gay” is more than you have imagined, life is more complex than you might understand, and the ways of experiencing God are so much deeper and richer than any of us can fathom. Peace and all good to you.
In our asian culture specifically in islamic society….friendship is so so much sacred and has given so so much importance …that its very very common in our society to prays our friends their features their habits through poetries….in order to understand the real spiritual relationship between Shams tabrez and maulana Rumi u should first learn what friendship means to us muslims and in our region ….it is a platonic love which is not only confined to opposite sex that envolves sexual realtion but we roumanticise every relation without getting sex involved….
“The day your love touches me
I’ll become so mad
that lunatics will run away.
The words of a master poet
could never capture the spell
that your eye lashes cast upon my heart.”
Mevlána’s love for Shams was clearly unabashedly and unashamedly all-embracing and all-consuming.
Omg this is the most ridiculous article I ever read whoever wrote this show you have no idea who Rumors was or what Sufism is plus you are not from Central Asia or Middle East so you don’t understand our culture to have a friend in life is necessary whether for girls or boys you can love a man but that dont mean you have to engage in sexual activities it’s like I love my car but I’m not going to stick my willie in it’s exhaust like we can agree that most young people love Elon musk dose that make them gay?
Rumi’s love for shams is like the love of a beloved master, you clearly don’t understand Sufism and turning spiritual love into physical animalistic lust.
Rumi’s past has never been in questioned. Judging a person from their past has always created negative connotations in this country. Pointing out his sexuality will create ripples in the Christian faith. What was the point? So what! Religion has always been a controlling construct for the church and countries to control man. Being a spiritualists I honor has poems as insightful and lifting. And I make it a point to post one on Facebook everyday.
Oh my God, are you kidding? You don’t know anything about Rumi, Shams Tabrez, Islam or mysticism..
Please don’t misguide people. Atleast go through the books of Rumi and Holy Quran before you write anything about Islamic mysticism and If you still don’t understand, consult an Islamic scholar ..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XFgW0O30H0
Homo sexuality is forbidden in Islam and Jalaluddin Rumi was a
Muslim Saint. Shams Tabrez was his spiritual teacher (Murshid)
I understand what are you trying to achieve here,you are supporter or LGBT,but please don’t drag Rumi into this …
so what you know about islam ??
i`m an persian . and in Iran baing muslim is forced .
so we all learn about islam in all the steps of scool and know if u ask any persian i can just say 90 percent of them hate islam .
shams and rumi were openly gay and not now and not even in past or future noone can change this .
homosexuality is forbidden in Islam ; just because of the population of humans and now that we are existing in this century , there are lots of Unattended babies anywhere , being gay is not perilous.
..
Iranian here, he was gay but not in a sexual way and that’s fine. Homosexuals are allowed to enter heaven as long as they haven’t practiced it in this world. They’ll get their male huri in the afterlife or will be finally allowed to get united with who desired in this world.
We’re going to change these homophobic views in my country soon inshallah. But first we’ll have to defeat the shia Khalifa.
In the West, the idea of Murshid/Master and disciple relationship with pure love between a perfect Master and his disciple in mysticism is, for the most part,unknown and rare. In the Western world the searh and emphasis has always been materialistic and outward into the world of the senses. Here, they cannot comprehend anything like a lifelong search for the inner truth and spiritual quest within. So they see only exterior, sensual pursuit in mystic relationships. Even now, some ignorant people here in the West vclaim a homoerotic relationship existed beyween the Lord Jesus and his belovéd disciple John. We are not as evolved in Spirituality as in the East.
I can only pray to God, please help them to come out from this they are in danger, their conscience is dead , Satan is dancing their, dancing is haram but some Sufi mystics did it but you have to follow their path then they can understand why they are listening music sometimes why they are dancing, it is mystery for these people
Did i just really read an article about describing Shams-Rumi relationship as same-sex ?
You Western people need to grow up and learn about other cultures before manipulate things just to fit your agenda
So now your next Article what? Prophet Muhammad & Abu-Bakr may have been erotic in the Cave of Hera’a?
God!.
I have recently began a friendship with another male which is open honest and intense. Loving each other is our mark of bonding. Thank you for your courage in writing what you truly believe to be true.
It is about becoming more integrated with the subtle states. What applies to one group applies to the other. Biologically at the physical level we are animals and to integrate the higher with the lower makes us mystics straight or gay. Both the Bible and the Koran are read incorrectly. And , lol, look more closely at the personalities who have done the writing .
Hi Kittredge, I understand your urge to call the relationship between Shams and Rumi as “same-sex” love. Maybe you need it for self-justification or some other psychological issue related to your sexual orientation .. However strongly you might wish it to be homosexualism, it was not. Their relationship is a typical Master-disciple relationship. Also probably you are an American, which is almost synonymous with “over-sexualised”. It happened that I am a woman and I also have a female spiritual Master. My love for her is beyond description. Our relationship is intense and incredibly intimate. As intimate as you would not be able to imagine. And yet, there is no cheap sensuality in it, there are no “queer implications” in it, it is merging and melting into each other, but has nothing to do with lust and lowly desires. Your “gain” from calling it “homoeroticism” is quite transparent. You want to prove yourself right, you want to fight, you want this and that… but you are not in the least interested in discovering the truth. For understanding what that relationship was, you would have to stop indulging in your ideas and sexual obsessions and become a disciple. But it is not why you are paying attention to Rumi. You just twist and misuse the situation for your little personal problems. Probably, it is time to grow up?
Premal it is you who needs to grow up since you basically do not know anything about Science and Biology and just conform to the brainwashing your religion gives you. Humans as well as all animals are SEXUAL BEINGS! If you deny your sexual desires you deny yourself. You can be all “mystical” and “religious” but at the end of the day all that is bullshit so you can go to your little corner and pray your life away to your invisible imaginary friend.
You are right.
what you need to understand is that being gay is NOT only about sex… ive known i was gay since i was a child. did i want to have sex when i was a child? NO! i truly believe that it doesnt matter whether they had sex or not. they probably did not. what matters to me is the love they felt for each other; maybe it did not have to be defined back then, but i believe it is important to recognize this connection as something more than friendship, or a teacher-student relationship. their love for each other was transcendent… they saw god in the face of the beloved. if modern lgbt scholars want to classify this relationship as gay, then let them. it is not your place to take this away. if the only transcendence we can reach these days is through romanticism, then let it be. this is how we can understand, by connecting our own lives to the deeper meanings and truths of rumi’s poetry.
Thank you for writing what i had in my mind, they are trying to self justify their over sexualized culture… they might think we are against gay people, not at all… but i would stand firm and defend the love for god, when someone tries to veil it with their own guilt and agenda.
As “Setting Records Straight” aptly begins through his expressed thoughts above:
“…it is necessary to understand that in Persian [S]ufi poetry, the word “lover” [`âshiq] means being a lover of God.”
Pursue this, and grow to a fuller knowing of what an aching Love for God truly Is.
David…beautifully expressed!
First of all, it is necessary to understand that in Persian sufi poetry, the word “lover” [`âshiq] means being a lover of God. And in the paths of sufism that view the mystic seeker as the lover and God as the Beloved, it means a true dervish. Therefore, “the lovers” are the lovers of God. So in this sense Mevlana and Shams certainly were “(spiritual) lovers.”
Next, its necessary to consider how much the words “love” and “lover” have become sexualized in the English language. Only thirty years ago, for example, “making love” in popular songs meant no more than hugging and kissing. Now it always means “having sexual relations.” Similarly, “lovers” now always means “people who have or had sex together.” There is no longer any concept of lovers who don’t engage in sex with each other: such as “unrequited lovers,” meaning people in love who are unable to be sexual; or “Platonic lovers,” who are in love, but choose not to have a physical relationship; or “spiritual lovers,” such as the celibate Catholic nuns who view themselves as “married” to Christ. Next, it is necessary to recall how much homosexuality has increasingly become accepted and viewed as natural in our culture. As a result, it is more common to think/assume/suspect that men who are exceptionally close to each other and enjoy spending time together might be homosexuals or bisexuals.
As a result, when we read that when Mevlana and Shams first met, they were so enthralled with each other that they spent several months secluded together [actually, in the prayer-retreat cell of Mevlana’s disciple, Husamuddin]. For the Western reader, the thought is almost irresistible to wonder if they might have had a sexual, as well as a deeply spiritual, relationship. After all, we know how sexual energy builds up over time, and they were so happy to be together, etc. Andrew Harvey, an openly gay author of books on Rumi, is said to have proclaimed this in public lectures as a fact (at least in lectures he gave while on the faculty of a private graduate school in San Francisco during the 1990’s; see also about his “Teachings”).
And distorted versions of Rumi’s poetry (not only his) are largely responsible for giving a false impression of “Rumi’s sensual side,” such as references to “nudism”– in which he is depicted as becoming so ecstatic that he would tear of all his clothes. (But public nudity is forbidden in Islam and this “tearing” was done by dervishes during samâ` [sema] and involved tearing one’s cloak [khirqa] into pieces, or tearing the upper part of one’s shirt or — something done in a symbolic way in the Mevlevi samâ` when the shaykh turns in the center while holding the cloak as if just “ripped” from the collar to the lower chest.)
However, there is no evidence of a “physical relationship” between these two great sufi saints, and it is a suspicion or assumption with no basis. And it is a also Western misunderstanding of Persian poetry and Persian culture in the context of Islam and Islamic mysticism. In Islamic societies there has been a general segregation of men and women for over a thousand years. As a result, men are closer to each other than we can readily understand– and they are so without being any more homosexual (in a religion that strongly condemns it). When my wife and I were in Istanbul many years ago (1977), it was common to see pairs of men walking and holding hands (but this custom had nothing at all to do with homosexuality). Yet after the markets closed, and there were no other women on the streets in a conservative neighborhood, and my wife felt insecure about this and held my hand, there seemed to be many disapproving stares–because (as we were later told) it is discouraged for men and women to hold hands in public in places where conservative Muslims are the majority (however, such areas are much diminished in today’s very cosmopolitan city of Istanbul).
In terms of traditional themes and imagery in Persian sufi poetry, it is very common for the beloved to be praised as having beautiful tresses of hair, eyes, cheeks, moles, eyebrows, etc. And when Mevlana used such images in his poems expressing his spiritual love for Shams, this can be mistakenly interpreted as some kind of “evidence” of homosexual love. However, this was a centuries-old convention in Persian poetry that was long adopted by sufis who understood the various imagery in praise of the beloved as symbols of mystical love.
In the context of Islam, Mevlana and Shams were both very pious Muslims. Mevlana was a religious authority who inherited the mantle of religious scholarly authority from his father. He also earned income to support his family as an Islamic teacher and judge. He was a Sunni Muslim who followed the Hanafî school of Islamic law. We have more information about Shams now, from his “Discourses” [Maqâlât], a collection of excerpts from his talks written down by his disciples. We know that he was not an uneducated, “wild”, or “heretical” dervish. He was a Sunni Muslim, with a solid Islamic education in the Arabic language, who followed the Shâfi`î school of Islamic law. There are translated quotes from Shams in which he criticized other sufi teachers as “not following” the example of the Prophet sufficiently. We know that Mevlana was married during the time he knew Shams. And we know that Mevlana arranged for Shams to marry a young woman raised in Mevlana’s household, Kîmiyâ (= “Alchemy”).
It is also helpful to understand their relationship in terms of the sufi teaching of the stages of “passing away” or “annihilation” [fanâ]. In this particular sufi path, the disciple is encouraged to cultivate love for the spiritual master within the heart, to visualize the master in the heart or seated in front of one, and to remember the master frequently. This practice is said to lead to mystical experiences of seeing the spiritual master (or “beloved”) everywhere and the master’s beauty expressed in all things waking or dreaming). Mevlana seems indeed to have been in this type of “passing away in the spiritual presence of the master [fanâ fî-sh- shayk], because he wrote thousands of verses expressing his spiritual love for Shams in his Divan. Part of this particular teaching is that if this closeness with the spiritual master [shaykh] goes on too long, it can become a barrier to “annihilation in God” [fanâ fî ‘llâh]. And Shams suggested directly to Mevlana that he might have to go away for Mevlana to progress further. After Shams disappeared permanently, and after Mevlana recovered from his loss, it is said that Mevlana found Shams in his own heart. And in his last years, Mevlana composed thousands of couplets (the Mathnawi) in which he describes many unitive mystical experiences (usually spoken by one of the characters in a story), and rarely mentions the name of Shams. This is very much like “annihilation in God” following “annihilation in the master.”
Also, in the context of mystical Islam, the dervishes obviously loved to spend time with each other, doing ritual prayer, zikru ‘llâh, etc. Although Islam strictly condemns homosexual behavior, yet homosexual relations would occur sometimes between men and adolescent boys, due to the segregation of unmarried males together (and this continues down to the present day, as described in a recent news report about the revival of this centuries-old practice in the Afghan city of Kandahar). Mevlana condemns homoxexuality among dervishes (see below). And Mevlana, Shams, and Mevlana’s father have all been quoted as condemning a practice engaged in by some sufis involving homoerotic gazing at attractive young adolescent boys (a type of “Platonic love” in which the gazer contemplates Divine Beauty in a lovely “beardless youth”).
Mevlana condemns sodomy and effeminate behavior in numerous places in the Mathnawi. He said, “The (true) sufi [Sûfî] is the one who becomes a seeker of purity [Safwat]; not from (wearing) garments of wool [Sûf] and sewing (patches) and sodomy. With these vile people, sufism [Sûfiyî] has become stitching and sodomy [al-liwâTa] and that is all” (V:363-64). This contrast between purity and sodomy would appear to echo one of the passages in the Qur’an which mentions the Divine punishment of the people to whom the Prophet Lot was sent. When he confronted them (“Would you commit this abomination with you eyes open? Must you approach men with lust instead of women?”), they responded with sarcasm by urging that Lot and his followers be expelled, “For they are a people who would stay pure” (Qur’an 27:54-58). There are five references in the Mathnawi to the fate of the people of Lot. (The Arabic word used in Persian for sodomy, “liwâTa,” is derived from these same “people of Lot,” or “LûT” in Arabic.)
In a related story, a group of attractive women chide a man, saying that despite the multitude of women, men “fall into sodomy [liwâTa] because of the (supposed) scarcity of women” (VI: 1727-32). See also the story of the eunuch and the homosexual (V: 2487-2500), and the story of the beardless youth who tried to protect himself from a homosexual in a sufi gathering place (VI:3843-68). Most illegal sexual behavior of this kind occurred between men and “beardless youths,” a behavior which Mevlana clearly condemns. Also, in Aflâkî’s book of stories (completed 70 years after Mevlana died), according to one account: “Similarly, when HaZrat-é Mawlânâ made (his son) Walad the disciple [murîd] of Mawlânâ Shamsu ‘d-dîn Tabrîzî– may God sanctify their spirits– he declared, ‘My Bahâ’ ud-dîn (Walad) doesn’t consume hashish and never engages in sodomy [liwâTa], since, before God the Most Bountiful, these two behaviors are greatly disapproved and blameworthy.'” (Manâqibu ‘l-`ârifîn, IV:32 (see also the translation by John O’Kane, “The Feats of the Knowers of God,” p. 436).
Professor Franklin Lewis has given an excellent rebuttal to Western fantasies of the relationship between Mevlana and Shams in his excellent book (which recently won an award), “Rumi– Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalâl al-Din Rumi,” 2000, in his section “Modern Myths and Misunderstandings,” pp. 317-326. He points out that Mevlana was about 37 when he met Shams, and that according to Mevlevi tradition Shams was 60 years old. He described how the homoeroticism in the Persian culture of Mevlana’s time was very different from the homosexuality in ours. The penetrated boy held a socially inferior status. “A stigma attached to being penetrated, and a self-respecting mature male would not allow this to happen to himself.” [Lewis, p. 322] A dominant male, who had been attracted to androgynous boys also desired women and would eventually marry and have children. “When a boy passed a certain age and grew facial hair, he himself became a member of the sexually dominant class and would no longer submit to penetration. Violation of these social norms led to scandal and legal prosecution. [Lewis, p. 323]
“The suggestion that the relationship between Shams and Rumi was a physical and homosexual one entirely misunderstands the context. Rumi, as a forty-year-old man engaged in ascetic practices and teaching Islamic law, to say nothing of his obsession with following the example of the Prophet, would not have submitted to the penetration of the sixty-year-old Shams, who was, in any case, like Rumi, committed to following the Prophet and opposed to the worship of God through human beauty. Rumi did employ the symbolism of homoerotic, or more properly, androgynous love, in his poems addressed to Shams as the divine beloved, but this merely adopts an already 300 year-old convention of the poetry of praise in Persian literature.” [Lewis, p. 324]
If, having read the following up to this point, your mind continues to nag you with suspicious questions about Rumi and Shams spending long periods of time together, read something that Hazrat-e Shamsu ‘ddîn-e Tabrîzî himself said about this (as recorded by his disciples):
“(Regarding) me and Mawlânâ, if (the time for the ritual prayer) becomes lost for us, without (our) intending (it during) a time of being occupied, we are discontent because of that and we make up (the missed prayer) alone (together). And when I don’t go (on) the day of Jum`ah (the day of the Friday congregational prayers), there is sadness for me, (feeling) that, “Why didn’t I join that (gathering) with this spiritual reality [within me]? Although it is not real distress, yet it is (there).” –from “Maqâlât-e Shams-e Tabrîzî,” pp. 742-43 (see William Chittick’s translation of selections of this important work of Shams’ “Discourses,” not previously available in English, “Me and Rumi: the Autobiography of Shams-i Tabrizi,” (Fons Vitae, 2004, p. 80). [NOTE: The interpretation in parentheses, “(the time for the ritual prayer)” is correct because the word translated as “make up (the missed prayer)” [qaZâ] is a technical term in Islam for a ritual prayer that is missed during one of the five daily prayer times and is done afterwards.]
“The intended aim [maqSûd] of the world’s existence is the encounter of two friends (of God) [mulâqât-e dô dôst bow-ad], when they face each other (only) for the sake of God [jehat-e khodâ], far distant from lust and craving [dûr az hawâ]. The purpose is not (for) bread, soup with bread crumbs, butcher, or the butcher’s business. It is such a moment as this, when I am tranquil in the presence of Mawlânâ [ba khidmat-e mawlânâ âsûda’êm].”
–from “Maqâlât-e Shams-e Tabrîzî,” p. 628 (see Refik Algan’s translation of selections from this work, from Turkish with final Englishing by Camille Helminski, “Rumi’s Sun: The Teachings of Shams of Tabriz”, 2008, pp. 269-70.)
Hope this helps to resolve popular misconceptions about the relationship between Hazrat-e Mevlana and Hz. Shams. As Mevlevis, we should defend the honor of the great saints of God [awliyâ ‘ullâh] such as these, who were the founders of our tradition. (And may Allah forgive us for our own suspicions!)
I am continually shocked by responses like this. Do you know any gay men? You equate men loving men with the sexual act. That is an immature notion. Whether or not there was physical intimacy between the two men there was an undeniable spiritual intimacy. True love is always about the spiritual and not the carnal. Your lengthy descriptions of sexual acts/traditions at that time between males only prove the point: the world has an incredible amount of hatred and intolerance towards men who love men. It is an historic hatred that continues to ruin the lives of young men around the world who, no matter the magnitude of their spirits or the magnificence of their souls, will be hated for being born at all. Many religious leaders and their followers believe that homosexuality, particularly male homosexuality, is equal to murder. This is not logical, that a man who’s natural desire to be close to/love/cherish/care for another man would be considered equal to the most violent act we as humans can participate in, the taking of another’s life in violence. You have an historic bias/hatred that you have inherited, one that a logical and discerning mind can see through. How can love/devotion to another be the same as hatred/violence? Whatever the relationship was between these two scholars, we cannot fully know or understand because we were not there. We did not know them. We were not privy to their personal thoughts or private conversations. What we are left with is the writings of a human heart that felt the highest level of transcendence through connection to another. Most of us will never know that experience. So we can accept the gift of it, and not squabble or qualify it. The question I leave you with is this: if there was irrefutable proof that these men were lovers, physical or spiritual, would you reject these writings? Would the beauty of these writings, the deep truth of them, become an abomination? Would the books be burnt and these names stricken from the human record because they loved eachother? I hope not.
Islam forbids homosexuality. We obey Quran not rumi. http://www.pravdareport.com/opinion/columnists/12-05-2016/134394-homosexuality-0/ An article by HARUN YAHYA in PRAVDA
Sooooooo! This above is why in Islam, women are so diminished? And in the Afghanistan (Pashtun) areas bacha bazi is so highly practiced. It seems to me that in Islam, a hell on earth is created by laws that forbid gay loving relationships, yet as a double standard turn-a-blind-eye to boy rape (which is OK because there is no love there). Sorry, as a Christian your argument is just so much nonsense, and false justification. The reason the Sufi sect is so discouraged in Turkey is because they are the only part of Islam that recognizes a Holy Spirit. And this threatens the religious establishment which claims that Allah is only one- declaring it on the dome of the temple mount in Jerusalem. God is three in one, and the Sufis have more of this right than all the rest of Islam. Islam is a copy-cat failed imitation of Judaism and Christianity, is a late comer (seventh century) to the world. Lots of luck when you stand before your fickle Allah, at your judgement. The true God of Christians make your false god look pathetic. I apologize as a Christian for not doing a better job of helping you see the light, of the Way/Truth/Life of Jesus, Gods true son. I am praying for you!
Rumi also drank wine – did he really mean water?
Islam also forbids WINE. But then I assume you have brainwashed yourself to believe that in Rumi’s quotes about wine he was really talking about water?
Words have meaning. Through his words he expressed often he was not a strict Muslim.