The Comparative Methodology of Reynold Nicholson and William Chittick in Sufism Studies

This survey, with a comparative approach, deals with criticism of Reynold Nicholson(1868-1945) and William C.Chittick chr('39')s (1943- ) methodology in Sufism (with emphasis on Rumi and Ibn Arabi). The purpose of the methodology review of these  western mysticists is not only the better cognition the rules and criterias of religious studies and specially sufism, but also to investigate the intellectual background and origin of the two scholarschr('39') viewpoints and to pave the way to discovery of subtleties of thought and their differences and points of view. The present article, in a descriptive-analytic method, has attempted to plug the gap of existing such approach, as much as possible. Analyzing the methodology of these two scholars in the field of Islamic mysticism reveals different information sources and distinct conclusions. In an analytical-critical approach, to Nicholsonchr('39')s idea, Chittick emphasizes the in-text analysis of the works of these mystics and in fact understands the intellectual angles of thinkers such as Ibn Arabi and Rumi in understanding theire world-view through their works and taking full advantage of their words and imaginary forms knows, though neglecting to some of Nicholsonchr('39')s works and perhaps the inconsistency of his views, has made Chittick a incorrect judgment.