Two recent articles discuss the conversion to Islam of the French scholar Eva de Vitray-Meyerovitch (1909–99). They are Doha Tazi Hemida, “Another Orientalism? The Case of Eva de Vitray-Meyerovitch and Rumi,” Interventions: International Journal of Postcolonial Studies 25:4 (2023), 521-539, available here, and Samir Abdelli, “’Je ne reniais ni la Thorah ni l’Évangile.’ Eva Meyerovitch (1909-1999), devenir musulmane et rester chrétienne ?” L’Année du Maghreb 34 (2025), available here (open access).
De Vitray-Meyerovitch was brought up in France as a Catholic, abandoned Catholic practice as various doubts crystalized, and married a Jew in a civil marriage. She turned to Islam through Louis Massignon (1883-1962), reading Muhammad Iqbal (1877–1938), and translating Rumi, who she came to see as her true shaykh. In addition to this she joined the Boutchichiyya, which discovered through the Traditionalist Boutchichi Faouzi Skali (born 1953).
Tazi Hemida and Abdelli both note the similarities between de Vitray-Meyerovitch and the Traditionalists. She does not, so far as I know, ever cite the Traditionalists, however, and differs from them in that she was not a critic of modernity (she even welcomed Iqbal’s modernity), and did not refer to esotericism, despite her Sufism. Her universalism was in some ways in the tradition of what might be termed Massignon’s spiritual sensibility, and also followed Iqbal. In her own words (following a citation by Abdelli)
You have to be prepared for a meeting or a book to turn your life upside down. I was already on a path of free inquiry, personal interpretation, and individual research, and I found all of that concretized in a great thinker [Iqbal]. And then I was happy to realize that I was not alone, lost on a side road, but that I was, without knowing it, part of a great tradition. And that without having to renounce anything. I did not renounce the Torah or the Gospel. I simply left aside what had always annoyed me: the conciliar, dogmatic decisions of gentlemen gathered in Rome to decide that God is this or that.
De Vitray-Meyerovitch was more of a universalist than a perennialist, then, arriving at a similar destination by a different route.

No comments:
Post a Comment