Book reviews / Religion 39 (2009) 299–315 307

of Pakistani national identity’ (p. 90). Rozehnal attempts to connect several aspects of postcolonial Pakistani identity as they are rejected andappropriated by such Chishti Sabiri shaykhs as Wahid Bakhsh Sial Rabbani, whose writings depict Sufism as a ‘science’ (p. 110) that iscompatible with and necessary for Pakistani nationalism. Wahid Bakhsh Sial Rabbani was the principal ideologue of the Chishti Sabiri orderin the 20th-century and his books, Islamic Sufism and The Magnificent Power Potential of Pakistan (Pakistan ki azim ush-shan difai quwwat),outline his call for the integration of Islam into the Pakistani public sphere. Rozehnal observes that, ‘Throughout the text, the shaykh utilizesa scholarly voice to place Pakistan in its historical and geopolitical context. In a subtle, subversive twist, however, he places Sufism at thevery center of both Islamic thought and practice and Pakistani national identity and ideology’ (p. 113).

Wahid Bakhsh Sial Rabbani clearly understood the necessity of a rapprochement between Pakistani national identity and ideology withan Islamic orthodoxy mediated by Sufi spirituality, yet it is questionable how influential his writings have been on the Pakistani public, espe-cially considering the low literacy rates amongst its population. These publications target Pakistan’s small middle class, of which much of theChishti Sabiri order is comprised. According to one Chishti Sabiri disciple, ‘Our silsila is for the elite [khas].Our publications are a responsefor the future, to preserve the teachings. It is meant for a few, not for the general public [a m]’ (p. 122). This limited audience for the writingsof the Chishti Sabiri shaykhs calls into question the ability of the ‘postcolonial subject not only to speakdbut to think, read, and write, crit-ically and creatively, as well’ (p. 127). Perhaps this is the privilege of the elite (khas), yet for many in Pakistan, such discursive freedom tocritically engage with modernity in order to define a postcolonial, Muslim Pakistani identity is not a possibility.

For all Chishti Sabiris, regardless of nationality, social class, or gender, the relationship of the disciple to the teaching master provides thefoundation for the development of individual and collective spiritual life. The final two chapters of Islamic Sufism Unbound examine twointerrelated aspects of Sufi practice and ideology, namely the relationship between spiritual master (shaykh) and student (murid), andthe ritual practices that bring Chishti Sabiris together as a community to reinforce religious and national identities. In Chapter Four,‘Teaching Sufism: Networks of Community and Discipleship’, the role of the shaykh in developing three aspects of Chishti Sabiri identityis defined through the fact that the silsila has a ‘spiritual pedigree’ that must be preserved through his teachings, which are disseminatedthrough a ‘network of teachers’, ultimately creating a ‘social nexus’ of disciples who share a common spiritual orientation and goal (p. 130).In this chapter, Rozehnal’s ethnographic research is amplified through the voices of the many disciples that he interviews regarding theirrelationship with the teaching shaykh. Many of the disciples that he interviews employ technological vocabulary to describe their spiritualdevelopment. One male murid describes Sufi saints as being similar to computer data: ‘It is like the Internet, you log on from anyplace andthe same information is available’ (p. 147). ‘Digital discipleship’ connects Chishti Sabiri devotees across vast geographical spaces to theteaching shaykh, who, like Shaykh Siraj, dispenses spiritual teachings and guidance online (p. 158). The role of the Internet in Chishti Sabirispiritual practice and ideology is fascinating and more description and analysis of this integration of modern technology with piety ismissed.

Islamic Sufism Unbound makes a number of important contributions to the study of Islam and Sufism in postcolonial South Asia. Rozeh-nal’s extensive field research, numerous interviews with Chishti Sabiri devotees and observation of ritual practices in Pakistan and Malaysia,as well as his critical engagement with the silsila’s deep textual tradition, enables the reader to enter into a worldview that is simultaneouslyglobal, pious, nationalist, and modern. Despite the great number of Chishti Sabiris interviewed by Rozehnal, whose voices are brought intohis analysis, the reader does not get much of a sense of who these people are. A related ambiguity in the author’s analysis lies in his frequentassertions about the prominent roles given to female disciples in the Chishti Sabiri order. Rozehnal endeavours to emphasize the number offemale disciples that Wahid Bakhsh Sial Rabbani and Shahidullah Faridi have had, yet in Chapter Five, ‘Experiencing Sufism: The Disciplineof Ritual Practice’, many women complain about their unequal treatment and lack of access to sacred sites during the annual death anni-versaries of the saints (`urs). Women are often not allowed to enter into the tomb and, ‘Significantly, the mahfil-i sama’s ritual space isgendered as well.This is in sharp contrast to the dynamics of everyday experience where many women play integral roles in the ChishtiSabiri order’s social and ritual life’ (p. 217). This observation raises more questions than it answers, and more sustained analysis of genderroles within the silsila would enhance Rozehnal’s assertion that the Chishti Sabiri order is modern.

Another concern resides with the author’s use of the terms ‘alternate’ or ‘alternative modernity’, both of which are frequently invoked todescribe the ideology and practices of the Chishti Sabiri order. A more nuanced definition of the concept of ‘alternate modernity’ wouldclarify and bring more tangible meaning to the term ‘modern’.

Despite these few shortcomings, Islamic Sufism Unbound makes a significant contribution to the study of Islam in postcolonial andmodern contexts. Islamic Sufism Unbound will be of interest to scholars of South Asian studies, anthropologists, Islamic studies scholars,and historians. The lively writing style and use of the voices of Chishti Sabiri disciples make this an appealing book for both advanced under-graduate and graduate-level courses.

Karen G. RuffleUniversity of Miami (U.S.A.)

E-mail address: kruffle@miami.edu

doi: 10.1016/j.religion.2009.01.011

Terry Rey, Bourdieu on Religion. Imposing Faith and Legitimacy. London, Equinox, 2007, 181 pp., $65 (hardback), ISBN 9781845532857,$24.95 (paperback), ISBN 9781845532864.

The French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu is considered one of the heavyweights of sociology. It is therefore unsurprising that scholars ofreligion have an interest in utilizing the Bourdieuian approach to religion. Some Bourdieuian or Bourdieu-inspired works have appeared, buta more full acquisition of Bourdieu has been blocked – partly at least – by the poor availability of Bourdieu’s key writings on religion and thelack of reliable translations. Interpretations of the Bourdieuian approach to religion can be quite contentious, as shown by a 2004/5 inter-change in Method and Theory in the Study of Religion, where one scholar’s readings of Bourdieu on religion are dismissed by another as

Book reviews / Religion 39 (2009) 299–315308

‘fundamental misreadings’ of the Bourdieuian position (Bradford Verter, ‘Bourdieu and the Bauls reconsidered’, Method and Theory in theStudy of Religion 16/2004, 184). The scholar in question replied that it was in fact his position that was ‘misread and/or misrepresented’(Hugh Urban, ‘Spiritual Capital, Academic Capital and the Politics of Scholarship: A Response to Bradford Verter’, Method and Theory inthe Study of Religion 17/2005, 168). Terry Rey’s book on Bourdieu and religion will not of course put an end to all discussions on the correctinterpretations of Bourdieu. Nevertheless, as the first book-length introduction to Bourdieuian approaches to religion, the volume providesa basic foundation for discussions (for instance clarifying how much Bourdieu actually did write about religion, a theme which is alsoaddressed in the above-mentioned interchange) and a good stepping-stone for future debate on this topic.

Chapter one presents Bourdieu’s life and work. Although this is also described in many other introductions to Bourdieu, Rey adds newnuances of particular interest to the scholar of religion. Chapter two is a well written and fairly standard account of Bourdieu’s key notions ofpractice, fields, habitus, capital and symbolic capital. Other important concepts like doxa, misrecognition and illusio and collusio (a concept‘most scholars have left in the Bourdieuian thinking toolbox, in part surely because Bourdieu himself only rarely picked it up’ (p. 87), butwhich according to Rey ‘holds great potential for thinking about race, ethnicity, class and religion’), are postponed to chapter four, becausethey ‘are better illustrated through application to substantive examples’ (p. 43).

Chapter three, ‘Bourdieu’s Writings on Religion’, is an ample and meticulous summary of the ten essays that, according to Rey, ‘dealcentrally (or more or less centrally) with religion’ (p. 58). Anyone aiming to discuss Bourdieu and religion is well served by starting thereading here. Chapter four, ‘Outline of Theory of Religious Practice: Eternalizing the Arbitrary in Colonial New England’, presents colonialreligious history in New England to illustrate the usage of the notion of the religious field. Rey argues that colonial history providesa very good example of a situation where a religious field will occur, as colonialism is exactly about imposing the kinds of social distinctionsand inaugurating the struggles that religious fields are all about. The arrival of English Puritans in Martha’s Vineyard, who attempt to enforceChristianity on the native population, meant an uprooting of the traditional Wampanoag way of life and led to physical as well as symbolicstruggles between competing religious institutions (p. 85). When the natives lost the power to consecrate and to make the world meaning-ful, Puritanism became established as a ‘de facto monopoly’ (p. 94).

Chapter five: ‘Using Bourdieu to Interpret Religion: Applications and Limitations’, reviews five different studies utilizing the Bourdieuianframework on religion. Otto Maduro has used the notion of a religious field to explain the transformation of the pre-Columbian into thecolonial and post-colonial religious fields of Latin America, and how religion has been used to legitimate the dominance of political andreligious elites (p. 108). Catherine Bell has used the Bourdieuian emphasis on processes and power to save the notion of rituals from dichot-omies of thought and action emphasizing ritualization (p. 111). Thomas Csordas’s work on charismatic Christianity has, along the same lines,gained from the Bourdieuian emphasis on embodiment, while Joan Martin’s womanist work on the Christian work ethic of enslaved womenin the United States profits from Bourdieuian notions of field and habitus to understand the strategies and interests of the women. Rey’s ownwork on Afro-Atlantic religion focuses on the syncretism of a charismatic prophet as a message attuned to and operating through Kongolesecollective religious habitus (p. 117). The survey of these different approaches leads to a discussion of what the authors consider to be thelimitations of the Bourdieuian approach.

Although Rey does propose that not all the criticisms are entirely valid, (for instance Martin’s claim that the Bourdieuian approachdoes not make enough room for conscious decisions) he admits that there may be limitations to its usefulness. These limitations areperceived by Rey as a flawed understanding of the prophet, the dichotomous nature of Bourdieu’s model of the religious field dividedinto dominant and dominating, reduction of lay people to mere consumers (according to Rey the most serious inadequacy), emphasison institutional religion over popular religion (the critique of which should, however, be seen in the light of the limitations of detractors’reading of Bourdieu (p. 126)), and the inability of the Bourdieuian approach to address issues like single congregations and nationalism(p. 126). Although Rey does not completely agree with the last critiques, he finds them helpful because they ‘are very well informed andquite intelligently developed’ and therefore ‘cautions [us] against any ‘heady’ forays into Bourdieuian interpretations of religion.’ (p.126). The book ends with a conclusion, where Rey wonders why rational choice theories have not engaged with Bourdieu’s (economicmodel) of the religious field, warning against reductionism and oversimplification in both camps. Rey’s final words are a plea for thenotion of habitus, which according to Rey may provide ‘nuanced ways to approach some of the most fundamental questions that onecan ask about religion.’ (p. 137).

The book aims at undergraduate and introductory graduate teaching, and it appears indeed to be immensely useful in the classroom. Icannot imagine any student who would not appreciate Rey’s concise and precise outlines of Bourdieu’s occasionally very dense and compli-cated writing. Rey’s use of tables of ‘Bourdieu’s life and work’ (p. 32) and ‘Writings on Religion’ (p. 60) and his summaries of key elements ofseveral of the chapters (p. 38, p. 78, p. 108) must similarly be a treat for any student. Additionally, Rey never misses a chance to help thestudent to memorize or comprehend Bourdieu’s work and intentions, for instance by adding descriptive remarks on his books: Distinctionas ‘the most famous’, The Logic of Practice as the ‘theoretical flagship’, La Misere du Monde [Weight of the world] as the bestseller (in France,hence Rey’s use of the French title at this place), and Pascalian Meditations as Rey’s personal favorite among Bourdieu’s many works. Rey’stext is in this way often personal (‘one can only wonder what Pascal would have thought!’), and his frequent use of exclamation marks (‘onceagain!’) makes the text lively. It is – like all good text books – authoritative in the word’s best sense. It settles the discussion on what Bour-dieu has written on religion, provides a good overview of different approaches utilizing the Bourdieuian approach and presents the maincritiques of Bourdieu’s work on religion. It is comprehensive and includes not only summaries of Bourdieu’s work on religion but also – whatappears to be – an almost complete coverage of published Anglophone works using Bourdieu on religion. Although the bulk of the literaturediscussed is in English, there are also references and discussion of material in French and an interview with Bourdieu on his views on reli-gion published only in German (p. 6).

Bourdieu on Religion. Imposing Faith and Legitimacy accomplishes the aim of a compact introduction well and is not only useful forteaching, but also very valuable for the scholar of religion who wants to become more acquainted with the Bourdieuian approach. Rey pres-ents summaries of Bourdieu’s main readings on religion and substantial lists of primary and secondary literature, mentions in footnoteswhenever Rey’s reading differs from other readings (pp. 151–152), and makes suggestions on how to forward research.

If any critical remarks should be made, one may find chapters four and five a little disappointing. Whenever Rey locates problems in theBourdieuian approach, there are few suggestions for solutions. For instance, when Rey argues that the willingness of the Native Americantribe Wampanoag to submit to Christianity cannot alone be explained with reference to political interests (maintaining land for instance),

Book reviews / Religion 39 (2009) 299–315 309

but must include the ‘rich stores.of spiritual capital’ in terms of faith healing, protection from sorcery and communality (p. 97), he makesno attempt to integrate this insight into the Bourdieuian framework, although this could easily have been done (Bourdieu simply ‘overem-phasizes issues of power in this regard’ according to Rey). Similarly, when Rey asserts that Bourdieu, like most sociologists, does not seea role for religion in modern societies, Rey has little to say about how to study religion in a pluralistic society, where religious voluntarismis the order of the day and where the boundaries of the religious field are dissolving into ‘broader fields of power, healing and consecration’(p. 127). Rey advises the reader to read Bourdieu’s work ‘against the backdrop of his larger body of work’ (p. 136). Yet many of the points ofcritique raised against the Bourdieuian approach resemble issues also relevant for the study of other fields. The relationship between reli-gious experts and laity, for instance, resembles the relationship between politicians and voters, and insights could have been gained fromsuch a comparison. I do also miss a discussion of the relationship between fields and the way the religious field relates to the overarchingmeta-field, the field of power, where the currencies of the different forms of capital are settled. All this is, however, less a criticism of Rey’sbook and more a call for further discussion of how to include Bourdieu’s work in the study of religion in colonial as well as modern andpostmodern societies.

Lene KuhleUniversity of Aarhus (Denmark)

E-mail address: lk@teo.au.dk

doi: 10.1016/j.religion.2009.01.012

William Harmless, S.J., Mystics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008, xv D 368 pp., $18.95 (paperback), ISBN 978 0 19 530039 0.

With Mystics William Harmless, a Jesuit priest and professor of theology at Creighton University, opens a door to the understandingof mystics and mysticism, mainly through Christian mysticism. Drawing on many years of classroom experience, Harmless begins hisstudy with theory and ends by reconciling that theory with history and literature on spirituality. His initial theoretical exposition isrooted in the work of French theologian Jean Gerson (1363–1429) and American psychologist William James (1842–1910). Harmlessexplores the tensions between theological considerations of the operations of grace and secular considerations of psychology. Harmless’end d the concluding chapter of the book d is to reconcile these apparent opposites by summarizing the principal factors to be consid-ered in the mystics encountered along the way, who in his presentation have encouraged us to believe that we, too, can be touched bythe mystical.

Harmless concludes:

They [the mystics] have learned to peer into the divine darkness long and hard enough to see a God-drenched world, dizzying in itsbeauty. They remind us that we too have eyes to see those fragile ephemeral beauties where drops of dew glisten like sapphires for a fewfleeting moments in an inbreaking dawnlight through which most of us routinely sleep (p. 269).

In between theory and summation, Harmless introduces us to major figures in Christian spirituality d Thomas Merton, Bernard of Clair-vaux, Hildegard of Bingen, Bonaventure, Meister Eckhart, and Evagrius Ponticus d as well as to Muslim Rumi and the Zen Buddhist D�ogen.The arrangement of the chapters is not wholly chronological, but Harmless’ approach suits those thinking in comparative terms. He beginswith Merton, whose life ended at a Buddhist–Christian monastic conference. Harmless’ final Christian chapter reveals the writings of EvagriusPonticus, one among many desert fathers who so influenced Merton and whose desert stillness reflects or echoes, in Rumi and D�ogen.

Harmless weaves his study on several levels, noting that the literature of mysticism falls into many genres (autobiography, letters,journals, sermons, essays/treatises, scripture commentaries, theological summae, poetry, proverbs, dialogues, and hagiography), each ofwhich has its own internal pitfalls. But the overarching approach is that of dialogue, and the reader is quickly drawn into the conversation,much as one would be engaged in lively classroom debate.

Each of the eight chapters devoted to a major figure begins with biographical information designed to set the figure in time and space. AsHarmless stakes out the individual’s personal history and relationships, he quickly and judiciously presents his (or, the singular case of Hil-degard of Bingen, her) spiritual constellation of ‘self–self’ and ‘self–others’ relationships. Harmless’ careful analysis then displays how thesecombine and react with the individual’s relationship with God.

For example, Harmless’ first ‘content’ chapter, on the prolific popular spiritual writer and Cistercian monk Thomas Merton, begins witha question any student might ask today. In recounting Merton’s acceptance of a request for an essay about contemplative life by a studentmagazine at the University of Louisville, not far from Merton’s Abbey of Gethsemane, Harmless reports Merton’s opening lines: ‘What doesthe contemplative life or the life of prayer, solitude, silence, meditation, mean to man in the atomic age?’ (p. 20). The question haunts thecareful reader throughout. What, after all, is the point of all this? What is the point of Merton’s life-long investigation of desert fathers, and ofhis attempts at inter-religious dialogue at the end of his life? What does it matter that Bernard of Clairvaux wrote a spectacular exegesis ofthe Old Testament canticle, the Song of Songs? What is the point of studying Hildegard of Bingen, and her writings? Why trouble with Bona-venture’s map of the soul’s journey into God? How is the theology of Meister Eckhart applicable to the world today? And why march throughthe desert with Evagrius Ponticus and other desert fathers? Why, finally, should one try to understand the Sufi Rumi and the BuddhistD�ogen?

The question is at once ancient and modern. The quest for certainty is unending, but contemporary attacks on religious answers blur themodern mind’s ability d and desire d to search for answers among those who subscribe to a particular religious and theological construct.Except for Merton, every Christian mystic in this volume belongs to the history of the whole of Christianity; they are each and all pre-Reformation. Only in the 20th century does Catholic Merton’s inter-religious dialogue inform and elucidate the other search for the other,understood in the terms set forth by Rumi and D�ogen.