MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS (Al-Fark Bain al-Firak) Being the
HISTORY OF THE VARIOUS PHILOSOPHIC SYSTEMS DEVELOPED IN ISLAM BY
Abu-lulansir ~ A b d - a l - ~ i h i br n ~ a h i r a l - 6 a g h d a d i (d. 1087) PART II
Translated from the Arabic with introduction and notes by ABRAHAM S. H A L K I N
PORCUPINE PRESS Phihdeyhia
First edition 1935 (Tel Aviv: Palestine Publishing Co., Ltd., 1935)
Reprinted 1978 by PORCUPINE PRESS, INC. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107
Librar? of C o n g r ~ r sC a f a l o ~ i n gin Publication Data
Ibn T a i r al-BaghdPdi, 'Abd a l - W h i r , d. 1037. Moslem schisms and s e c t s = al-Farq b a i n al-Firak. (Studies i n Islamic h i s t o r y ; no. 1). Reprint of pt. 2, 1935 ed. published i n Tel-Aviv, Israel. O r i g i n a l l y presented as t h e t r a n s l a t o r ' s t h e s i s , Columbia, 1935. Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Islamic s e c t s . I. T i t l e . 11. S e r i e s : Studies i n Islamic h i s t o r y (Philadelphia) ; no. 1. BP191.12213 1977 297.8 78-3673 ISBN 0-87991-450-5
Manufactured in the United Stater of Ammica
To the M e m o r y of My Father.
PREFACE
The abrupt opening of the translation with Chapter Four of Section Three is due entirely to the fact that up to this point the present work was translated by Kate Chambers Seelye, New York, 1 y g . The selection of that particular point as a proper conclusion was probably influenced by the consideration that it completed the study of h e ouuight Mu'tazilite groups, whereas the remaining chapters of this section deal with groups which, while betraying poinu of contact with the "mother-sect", nevertheless display quite independent characteristics. Unfortunately, the book in its present form is still incomplete. The unique MS. which underlies the edition lacks two chapters at the end, as can be gathered from a perusal of the contents in Section Five on Page 158. T o offset the very serious shortcomings of the Printed Edition. - a fault which everyone who has referred to the book recognizes readily, - the translator has utilized the following supp1ementz.y material : a photostatic copy of the MS. which was of inestimable value in establishing the correct text; the epitome, again incomplete, of the present work of our author, edited by .Philipp K. Hitti ; the recently published edition of our author's lengthy study of orthodox theology, his Usul slain ; and finally, the Berlin and Paris MSS. of Isfaraini's study of heresiography which exploited our present work very generously. I n addition, use was made, wherever possible or wherever they seemed plausible, of the emendations suggested by Goldziher and Brockelmann in the Zeitcchrift d e ~devtschen nol-genliindirchen Geselkchaft, LXV (1911) and in Le monde oriental, XIX (1925). respectively, as well as of those by Casanova made in a private communication to Prof. Richard Gottheil. In preparing the notes for the text, the translator strove in so far as possible to verify all statements, whether historic or otherwise, by checking
a large variety of source material ; to clarify all obscure or vague remarks ; to illuminate mare definitely persons, places and events to whom reference was made ; and, in general, to mak,e the contents of the work meaningful for the reader who is less than a specialist in the field. Altogether a serious effort was made to employ a maximum of supplementary reference material. The Introduction, on the other hand, is not the product of meticulous research, but rather in the nature of a personal judgment based on a comparatively long period of study of Ash'arite theology. The method of transcription employed is the now generally prevalent one, found, e. g., in the Encyclopedia of Islam, with the exception of the j in place of the usual d j and dh in place of the d with a line under it. The reader will doubtless note that, owing to technical difficulties, all exact transcription bad to be dispensed with in the T a b k of Contents, the Introduction, the Bibliography and the Index. I t is sincerely hoped that this regrettable procedure will not prove a serious drawback. It is a pleasure to conclude these prefatory remarks with an expression of gratitude and thanks to Prof. Gottbeil who gave me of his time and advice, to Professor Gray of Columbia University and Professor Hitti of Princeton University who made valuable suggestions in the course of their reading of the work, and, finally, to my wife who was a source of encouragement while the work was in progress and participated actively and eagerly in the reading of the proofs and in the preparation of the Index. They are all entitled to a share in whatever merit the work may possess, without any responsibility ior its defects and faults.
TABLE OF CONTENTS. Introduction Section Three : . Chapter Four : The Sects of the Murjiyya and a Discussion of Their ... ... ... ... ... Doctrines. Chapter Five : The Docaines of the Najjariyya Sects. ... ... Chapter Six: The Jahmiyya, the Bakriyya and the Dirariyya and an Exposition of Their Doctrines. ... ... ... Chapter Seven : The Docmnes of the Kartamiyya and Its Character... ... ... ... ... istics. Chapter Eight: The Doctrines of the Anthropomorphists among the Various Sects. ... ... ... ... ... Section Four: An Inquiry into the Sections Which Claim to Belong to Islam but Do Not. ... ... ... ... Chapter One : The Doctrines of the Sahbahiyya and Their Exclusion from Islam. ... ... ... ... ... Chapter Two : The Bayaniyya among the Ghulat and Their Exclusion ... ... ... from the Sects of Islam. Chapter Three: The Mughiriyya among the Ghulat and Their Ex... ... ... clusion from All Islamic Sects. Chapter Four: The Harbiyya and Their exclusion from the sects of ... ... ... the Believing Community. Chapter Five : The Mansuriyya and Their Exclusion from Islam. ... Chapter Six : The Janahiyya from among the Ghulat and Their exclusion from Islam. ... ... ... ... Chapter Seven : The Khattabiyya and Their Exclusion from Islam. ... Chapter Eight: The G h u r a b i m Mufawwida and Dhammiyya and Their Exclusion from the Sects of the Community. ...
Chapter Nine : The Shurai'iyya and the Namiriyya among. the Rawafid. Chapter T e n : The Hululiyya and Their Exdusion from the Islamic ... ... ... ... Sects. ... Chapter Eleven : The Advocates of License among the K h u r r a m i ~ a and the Reason for Their Exclusion from the Category of ... ... ... ... Islamic Sects. Chapter Twelve : The Followers of the Doctrines of Metempsychosis among the People of Fancy and Their Exclusion from Islam. Chapter Thirteen : An Exposition of the ~ r r h r sof the Ha'itina among the Kadariyya and the Reason for Their Exclusion from ... ... ... ... Islam. ... Chapter Fourteen : The Himariyya among the Kadariyya and the ... Reason for Their Exclusion from Islam. ... The Yezidiyya among the Khawarij and the Reason Chapter Fifteen : ... ... for Their Exclusion from Islam. ... Chapter Sixteen: The Maimuniyya among the Khawarij and the ... Reason for Their Exclusion from Islam. ... Chapter Seventeen: Concerning the 8Batiniyya and Their Exclusion ... ... ... from All the Sects of Islam. Section Five : An Enquiry into- the Characteristics of the Saving Sect ... and Proof of Its Salvation and Attractive Features. Chapter One : An Enquiry into the Groups Composing the People of ... ... ... of Tradition and Consensus. Chapter Two : An Enquiry into the Proof of Salvation for the People ... ... of Tradition and Consensus. ... Chapter Three : The Fundamental Dogmas on Which the People of ... Tradition and Consensus Are Agreed. ... Chapter Four : The Doctrine of the People of Tradition on the Pious ... ... ... Ancesuy of the Nation. . . . ... ... ... ... ... Additional Notes. ... ... ... . . . . . . Bibliography. ... . . . . . . . . . ... Index.
70. 73
87. INTRODUCTION. gl.
99101.
102. 105.
107.
158.
'54
164.
171. 228.
230. 231.
241.
Abdal-Kahir al-Baghdadi is an adherent of the Ash'arite school of theology, the orthodox party of his day. There were indeed the Hanbalites, under whatever name they appeared, who were even more orthodox than the Ash'. arites, and minced no words in accusing the latter of heresy in matters of religion. But they constituted a minor group, of the sort which in all generations regards as its sacred duty the vociferous protest against the least semblance of compromise. I t boasted several capable exponents of its position even in the days of Bagbdadi, but altogether it was treated with disdain as a group of ignorant corporealists who arrogantly claimed to be the cultural heirs of the pious h a d b. Hanbal. Without question the Ash'arites were champions of Orthodoxy, "adherents of the straight religion and the straight path". More than that, they were practically the dominant group in Islam. The day of the Mu'tazila was over. After they had enjoyed a brilliant career. of some two centuries their star set, and subsequent defenders were only faint shimmerings of a more glorious past With the passing of time the extent of Ash'arite indebtedness to Mu'tazilism became more obscured and its protagonists were discussed and regarded as a practically extinct party of wanderers from that truth which in the eyes of the victors preceded the errors of the Mu'tazila as it did every other interpretation of Islam. There were also the philosophers who were beginning to see through the inadequacies of both the physies and the metaphysics of the M a r i t e s although at the time of our author they had not yet enounced the metamorphosed Aristotelian doctrine. But they were not at the time of Baghdad, nor were they ever destined to be, serious rivals of Ash'arism. Even though they challenged it, exposed its errors and discussed its deficienaes, they did not rare to undermine its position. .On the contrary, they preferred (for very telling
I
reasons) to leave those who were not endowed with higher understanding e n terrain the untenable dogmas to which they clung, while they and the few elect would aspire to the truth. T h e Sufis formed a substantial body ~ r i t h i nIslam in the days of our author. But they did not actively or officially oppose themselves as rivals of Ash'arite Islam. And while their starting point as well as their docuines were far removed from strait-laced orthodoxy, it was as if a secret understanding existed between the two groups not to be publicly hostile LO each other. Further, Sufi was a blanket term. By definition it could not really become a fixed creed, and as a resuit of that it included under its embracing title innumerable shades of opinion, some of which, i t must be added, were extremely unorthodox. However, these latter outraged not only Ash'arites but w e n Sufis of authority. With the exception of these the others were accepted, some with greater readiness than others. Altogether tile Sufis were regarded i n a spirit of tolerance if not actually with an inner respect and reverence. By the age of Baghdadi Ash'arism had become a fixed creed. T h e age of speculation was over. The formulators of the doctrine in all its aspects were deceased, and both physics and metaphysics, politics and ethics, eschatology and immortality were specific and exact concepts. It was still to he blessed with Gharali, who was to leave his indelible impress on its theology, but that contribution partook of the intangible, it belonged to the realm of the heart. It did not alter the theology, it regenerated it, - temporarily, - with the dew of Sufiism. And unfortunately the work of a Ghazali must by its very nature remain the gain of a few blessed souls striving for a more intimate communion. As for the mass of worshippers, the mystic strain of G h z a l i could accompiish as iittie as the intellectual principles of dogma in deepening and revitalizing their religious experiences. T h e philosophic method at first employedby Ghmali in his exposition of theology did not alter essentially, or even appreciably, the component parts of the creed, while his later reversal which amounted to a stern rebuke of rationalized religion passed unheeded by a people who were much more cognizant of the results of the rational precess, in themselves very close to the faith of the fathers, than of the process itself, or its justification. Even the Mu'tmfiite influences discernible in Fakhr al-Din al-Razi's
I (
1
i!
i
t
I
1
approach to some of the problems of Ash'arite theology, such as the Word of God and the immunity of prophets froin sin, did not inaugurate a new orientation in Kalam. T h e work of its early thinkers established the prinaples of Ash'arite physics, metaphysics and ethics, and the system appeared finished to its adherents. Baghdadi is decidedly an epigon. Ash'arism is no longer speculation, it is creed. Like Shafi'ism in Fikh, it is the straight road in Kalam followed by Muhammad and all good people since his time. Extremely orthodox i n the practices of Islam, our author maintains the same unswerving position on the theoretical side. I t has become with him an 'Akida, differing from the earlier ones only in that it includes even the corollaries of the main principles, thus becoming longer and more detailed. T h e meed is laid down i n imperative fashion : whoever disagsees is either an outright heretic, a sinner of one shade or another, or one steeped in error. Kalam had so caught up with Filih as to be able to redaim its ancient name of Fikh al-Akbar, major Fikh. Like the legal Fikh it could be formulated and made binding just as the various books of ritual law were designed, deliberately or unwittingly, to condnde the developmental period and to establish authoritative codes. Baghdadi lacks originality or depth even as an epitomist. He discovers
I
no new principles, reveals no new ramfications from the cardinal principles, but seems altogether contented with the conclusions reached by those of his predecessors who became authorities in the Ash'arite school. Not that his exposition of Orthodox Islam either in this book or in the much larger Usul alDin is devoid of argumentation. O n the contrary, the bulk of the latter is
1
mainly the result of a recital and a refutation of antagonistic views. But the &bre of the discussion is exactly what dampens the eagerness of the interested
i
l
I
i d
reader. I t is mediocre in the extreme. Where an idea appears it is generally taceable to anorher source. Baghdadi does not hesitate to utilize the works of Others, even as medieval writers generally had different standards by which to gauge an author's property. We meet with little philosophy in his pfesentation, which consists of a statement of the Orthodox position, a list of divergent views a i d a retort to the heterodox, on the whole annoyingly superfiaal. T h e result of comparing his work with those of some of his contemporaries is itnly dis-
tressing. Over against the keen analysis and ardent refutation of Ibn Hazm, the lucid presentation of Shahrastani and the profound treatment of Al-Iji, Baghdadi's handling of his subject appears ineffectual. If in the face of all this Baghdadi's work enjoyed such popularity that it was in turn abridged and recast, edited and translated, it is due in part to these very shortcomings. It is comparatively brief so that with easy effort a reader may obtain a conspectus of the vast field of Muslim heterodoxy and orthodoxy; it is elementary and superficial, challenging the readefs intellectual capacity to no great extent ; . it is factual rather than speculative and affords the reader a "catalogue raisonn6" of all the disputed points ; it is popularly written and only rarely falls into a cumbersome manner of expression. Perhaps in the same shomomings we can also find certain advanrages for the modern reader, since he too is eager to know the bare facts in addition to the philosophic back~ound. It is now generally accepted that in a sense the term Ash'arites for the Mutakallims of Islam is a misnomer. Ash'ari himself, a former disciple of Mu'tazilism who reverted to Orthodoxy, occupies a position which may only indirectly entitle him to the fatherhood of Orthodox Kalam. In his Ibana, a polemical confession of faith, he stands squarely in the temtory of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and makes an explicit avowal to that effect. The first temptation to treat that avowal as a means of escaping the charge of innovation, as we often find among earlier and later medieval thinkers, is hardly justified by a reading of the Ibana. It is composed in its entirety in a tone of unswerving Hanhalism, a restatement of the conservative Orthodoxy. And while in his large work on heresiography and on the orthodox physics and theology he does not display the ardor for polemics of the Ibnna, we seek in vain for points of contact between Ash'ari and the school subsequently bearing his name. Perhaps Ash'ari's mntrib~tionto Kalam and his right to be called its farher rest in the main on his methodand not on his condusions. Unlike the "salaf", the ancients, or his revered master Ahmad b. Hanbal, Ash'ari shows a readiness to argue and does not merely withdraw behind a blind adherence to text and tradition which allow of no argumentation. But the type of argument employed by him
is not characterized by a philosophic, speculative approach. I t is textual, deriving its decisiveness from the Holy Book or from tradition. Moreover, in adducing such textual proof Ash'ari insists on the plain meaning of the words. The Kur'an was revealed in Arabic for the benefit of Arabs, and the sole arbiter of the intent of any word or phrase is the interpretation common among Arabs. Ta'wil, or allegorization, is thus ruled out as uncompromisingly as by the Hanhalites. A statement in the Kur'an is adequate rebuttal, in Ash'ari's estimate, of a philosophic argument produced by the Mu'vuilites, a comparison of two verses apparently contradicting each other is a powerful enough challenge to a Mu'tazilite reconciliation of the verses. In truth, except for his willingness to argue, wen when the m a y of arguments is lamentably circumscribed, one finds little ground for honoring Ash'ari with the parentape of Ash'arite theology. I n its conclusions and even in its method his school obviously abandom his position. While he, a renegade Mu'tarilite, was able to embrace the doctrine of orthodoxy with the extremism and real of a neophyte, his s d e d disciples could not close their eyes to the trenchant criticism of the rationally minded Mu'tazilites, nor could they disregard the dictates of reason as fanatically as their master. ~ a t i o n d s mhad at least established the right of human reason to he consulted in the fornulation of theologic doctrine. If the group that regarded itself as intermediate between narrow-minded conservatism and devastating rationalism was to pretend that it could maintain its title, it had to placate reason, it had to perform just what the theory of compromise entitled one to expect : that i t would prove the orthodoxy of old tenable even from a rational standpoint. As a starting-point, therefore, they found it necessary to establish the right of reason to participate in the discussion, tolay down the conciliatory principle that intellect was not ab initio hostile to tradition ; that, on the contrary, as a creation of God i t could be utilized in behalf of God and His revelation. If, neverrheless, thexe was much in the Asharite theology which later philosophers regarded as puerile and senseless i t was due not to this premise but to the very idea of compromise ; a situation, may it be remarked, which was destined to repeat itself when the later philosophic position was submitted to the dissecting scalpel, and in other cases as well, wherever compromise was the working hypothesis. But of this later.
v
T h e movement of Kalam, both in the hands of Ash'ari and in the hands of his successors was perhaps primarily a reaction against Mu'tazilism, but one which conceded the very important premise that a theory could not he expected to thrive merely on an obscurantist attitude of defying experience and intellectual activity. Kalam therefore found it necessary to go over the same g ~ o u n das the Mu'tailites, to examine the physical world, to investigate the ethical bases of society, to inquire into the person of God and His revelation to man. However, the Ash'arites assumed the role of apologists for the faith, defenders of Orthodox Islam. This latter point is what became so decisive in their theologic speculation. They were out not to discover truth, but to establish i t ; n o t to investigate the compatibility of reason and faith but to erect their philosophy upon a presumed compatibility. And while in these efforts, in a large way, there is nothing particularly unique, since they are ever so common, one cannot fail to discover in the specific character of the Kalamistic approach an aspect which does render it unique, at least among Islamic movements. So far as was humanly possible and in so far as their knowledge qualified them, the Mu'tazilites gave unchecked freedom to their speculation. T h e philosophers of a later day, particularly Averroes, philosophised primarily, and sought to force theology into a philosophic mould. No one can deny that in the process of conciliation as effected by .4verroes or by Maimonides the theology of the ancients was treated more violently than their philosophy. But quite the contrary is to be found in Ash'arite Kalam. As apologists for Islam they strove most zealously to retain all accretions to the faith of the fathers, and it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that they manipulated the facts to suit the theory and juggled words to escape the necessity of formulating definite concepu or the discomfort of mutually contradictory premises. I n proof of the first charge their theory of knowledge and their theory of the physical universe may be briefly surveyed. Leaving aside. the various class,fitations of knowleage, its division into divine and human, the subdivision trf the latter into naturat, or axiomatic, and acquired, the further subdivision of the latter into intuitive and sensual, we may dwell specifically on his analysis
I,
!
i
of acquired knowledge, for it is there that Baghdadi exhibits his tendency to suit his theory to his theology. Acquired or mental knowledge is of four types : 1) Deductive knowledge, i. .e., the purely mental process whereby logic and its ancillary arts guide one to the affirmation of such truths as the creation of the universe, the nature of the Maker, the admissibility of prophecy, etc., e ) Empirical knowledge, and deductive knowledge based on experience ; g) Revelation, which, our author explains, belongs to mental knowledge since prophecy on which the validity of revelation rests is intellectually demonstrable; 4) Intuitive knowledge with which some are inexplicably gifted as an uneducated penon's appreciation of the technique of poetry. Still another source of knowledge is the reports of others. T h e Kalamists list three classes of reports. T h e first comprises those handed down successively through the ages by credible reporters. T h e conditions required for qualifying a report in this first group ( T a w a t u ~are ) that the veracity of the transmitters down the ages remain beyond suspicion and challenge, and that t h e first one to have told it has either seen it or heard it himself or that he has had positive knowledge of it. With these two requirements filled, a report of that kind is so certain a fact that our author does not hesitate to call it "necessary" because "doubt regarding it is as little justified as regarding knowledge derived intuitively or through the senses." Such knowledge obligates one not only to act in accordance with it if it is prescriptive, but to accept it as a fact. Examples of this type of knowledge are our information about lands which we have not visited or times which antedate us. T h e second type consists of reports (Ahad) whose transmitters are credible and whose contents are not contrary to reason, but lack an unintempted chain of transmitters through the ages. Such require action but not belief. We may cite as an example most of the derivative laws resting on reports of individuals. T h e third type (Mustafid) includes those which Bave had wide circulation, although they are not supported by an uninterrupted chain of authorities. If such a report is plausibe, it obligates both action and belief, but it is acquired and not necessary knowledge. I n this category will be included the reports of those whose miracles testify to their veracity such as prophets, or reports of those to whose veracity a prophet bears testimony, or reports told at first by trustworthy people and later circulated
by many, so that they assume the characteristics of Tawatur. As examples of the last we may adduce the stories about God's visibility, or the intercession of the Prophet on the Day of Judgment, or the Pool and the Balance, or certain principles of Fikb. With this scheme of knowledge Baghdadi succeeds in saving as gospel truth every shred of tradition and every bit of jurisprudence, every story of saint, every legend of the past incorporated i n the lore of Islam and wery miracle of the Prophet or prophets which imaginative minds throughout the ages have invented. In this alone we seem to feel the artificial nature of his philosophic set-up, the conscious effort to evolve a philosophy which will confinn faitb. This feeling is strengthened by the additional fences which Baghdadi consmcts ; by the numerous conditions he sets up to make sure that none of the beliefs current among other nations, which Islam has for one reason or another denied, will lay claim to being true since it fulfills the conditions set u p by our author; by the arbiuary rejection of opposing arguments. A few illustrations will make this dearer. A Tawatur report as we have seen, is one resting on authorities whom it is simply absurd to suspect of agreeing on a lie. Hence, Baghdadi continues to argue, the story of Jesus' crucifixion is false. T h e reasoning in establishing this is highly enlightening. Although the story about Jesus' crucifixion bas assumed the proportions of Tawatur it goes back in the final analysis to four people who were allegedly witnesses of the event. But if there were four people present the Jews would no doubt have abstained from the act. I t is told that thirty Jews were present at the crucifixion. Now deliberate agreement on this number is very possible and deliberate agreement on the weakness of the four against the thirty is certainly possible. Indeed, that there was someone crucified is m e , but the question is whether it was Jesus. This whole involved argument is explicable on only one ground : that the Kur'an denies that Jesus was crucified but adheres to the teachings of the Docetics that some one else was crucified i n his place. His virgin birth, his immortality - attested by the same book which bears witness to his aucifixion - are not questioned because the Kur'an and Muhammadan tradition have accepted them. Or consider the case of the ciaditionist Abu Huraira, one of the most fertile minds and most generous
mu
contributors to the Hadilh. Abu Huraira's veracity was contested in the generations immediately following his. That his traditions are accepted as the most practical expedient it is still within our power to understand. But when Abu Huraira, in company with all the Companions of the Prophet, is dedared to he honest beyond the shadow of a doubt, while he who still challenges his authority is dedared a heretic, vre are working with principles of knowledge which fall far short not only of our theory of philosophic principles, but even of those which the medieval periox evolved. Another illustration : Baghdadi establishes another strange law of knowledge: when a Tuwalur supporfs a story which is likewise intellectually demonstrable it no longer possesses the force of compelling knowledge and of making it axiomatic. This is the way Baghdadi explains why the Tawatur reports about Islam have failed to convince a l l the non-Muslims. (This is also a splendid illusnation of Baghdadi's naive conviction that he was operating with universals and of the genuineness of his orthodoxy.) Finally Baghdadi has laid down the thesis that Ahad reports are valid enough to compel action but not belief. Yet he immediately hastens to inform us that in matters of Fikh no attention is to be paid to the criticism or the divergence of the Dissidents. Why? Because such attention is to be paid in questions of Kalam but not of Fikb ! T h e philosophy of revelation may conveniently lead us into a discussion of his theory of the physical world. T h e Mu'tazilites dweloped a philosophy in which revelation became a necessary part of the order of the universe over which a just God interested in man's welfare holds sway. I t fits in with the logic of their premises, regardless of whether or not the premises themselves conform to our conceptions. Moreover, they made an.honest attempt to explain revelation, as indeed, miracles in gene@, without rudely disturbing the order of the universe. T h e ultra-Orthodox consistently denied any order i n this world other than the w e r active will of God, and for them it was not necessary to seek any other explanation for revelation than that God willed it and performed it. But the Ash'arites found themselves indisposed to join their forces either with the one party or the other. They did seek an orderly universe, they admitted the existence of one, and withal they strove to maintain their belief in the power of God to disturb the order and to interfere with its working, all on IX
the basis of a rationally understood hypothesis. Hence they developed a view of the physical universe which strangely laid as i u foundation the atomic conception of the ancients. Truly a wonder that the theory which served Epi-s and Luaetius adequ~telyenough in their denial of God and the affirmation of chance was utilized by Ash'arite Muslims centuries later as the best vehicle for interpreting their orthodoxy philosophically. They achieved it by admitting on the one hand the fortuitous nature of the physical components of the universe, but by recognizing, on the other hand, the order which reigns i n the universe. T h e result was a providential God such as Tradition had taught them to conceive. I t was all done thoroughly on the basis of certain principles which Maimonides summed up succintly. Briefly their conception of the physical world is as follows : T h e universe, which is a term for everything other than God, is composed of substances and accidents, or properties, the substance being the essential part of every object, and the property the additional element. Substances are divisible compounds and the lowest irreducible substance is the atom, although it is disputed whether the atom possesses dimensions or whether it is necessary to combine two or more atoms in order that they become dimensional. Although the accidents are properties added to the substance, the separate existence of the latter is entirely absuact. Actually n o body can be devoid of properties, especially of the categories of motion or rest, composition and color. Moreover, the apparent diversity of substance is due entirely to the properties. Stripped of those, there would be hmogeneity of matter and even the four basic elements of earth, water, air and fire are further reducible as can be shown through the transmutation of one to the other. T h e novel concept of Ash'arite physics is its view that properties possess only momentary existence. From instant to instant, - and, it may be remarked in passing, it regarded time in the same way as matter, namely, as reducible to an indivisible "atom': the instant, the properties attendant on the substance perish and new ones are created. What brought the Ash'arite school to this conclusion philosophically may be read in Baghdadi. But probably, as Maimonides has pointed out, a deeper cause underlay their premise: the denial of causality. For, since there is no natural law which necessitates the existence
-
X
of a property for as long as the object exists there is no other way of explaining why accidents should endure longer than an instant, - especially in view of the fact that some properties endure only an instant, - except by declaring that God creates a property of non-existence in the atom which makes it perish. But this possibility leads to an absurdity since it involves for at least a kaction of a second the simultaneous co-existence of the given property as well as its non-existence. According to Ash'wite theology it is not the substances which lead to the existence of properties but vice versa. Objects cannot exist without properties and the perishing of an object is due entirely to the cessation of creation of the attendant accidents. Now, having established the incontrovertible linking of properties and substances, and having, moreover, proved that properties are, and were, created i n time, they demonstlate, w their own satisfaction, that the substances too are aeated. Since the entire universe consists only of thpse two categories it is proved that the entire universe has been aeated in time. One is duly impressed with their argument against the upholders of the hylic hypothesis which predicates the existence of matter devoid of, and prior to, properties. "Tell us," Baghdadi says to them, was the hylic substance originally one or more ? If the answer is one, we can object: How did the one become many through the creation of properties? Properties change the quality, but do not change the quantity! If, on the contrary, the answer is more than one, then the objection is that substance cannot he devoid of agreement and differentiation both of which are properties." With that accomplished it becomes relatively simple, and convincing, that for a aeated universe a Creator is required, and thus the existence of God is established. T o return to the problem of cause and effect. T h e Ash'arites denied any relation between any two apparently interlinked incidents. T h e fact that two inadents always follow each other in time does not necessitate the conclusion that the second is the generated effect of the first. Pain follows a blow; falling follows a hurled swne; wetness follows the pouring of water. But in all these cases it is the Nstomary rather than the necessary that we observe. I n reality there is no inevitable relation between the three first actions and the three second actions, respectively. It is i n these cases, and in each m e , the result of an act of God, and it is admissible that at any time, if God should choose
XI
to disturb His iizposed order, a blow will not he followed by pain.
The principle of ad:?~issibilityis another of the important instruments in the Arh'xite creed. Any thing which is rationdly (although the philosophers have very loudly called it to the attention of the Kalamists that they mean imaginatively) admissible is a reality. Revelation now becomes exceedingly simple to prove. God disturbed His own universe. But with what violent treatment of nature and experience !
We have also accused the Ash'arites of playing with words and substituting them in place of a comprehensible concept, and it devolves upon us to subsrantiate this accusation. I t is true that in a general way words had a more real quality in Medieval days. They were realities, and as such, an expression carried a real weight as something existent either in the physical world or in the mind. One may cite in illustration some of the arguments offered against dissenters. In answer to the sceptics who deny reality, the following "formidable" argument is raised: Is the denial of reality a reality? If they say, yes, they have admitted one reality, and if they say, no, the retort is : Since your denial has no reality, it is not true, and its converse - the recognition of reality - n true. Or, take the gibe at a representative of a group which maintained that every one who disagreed with it was a liar : Am I right wheh I assert that you are an honorable man born of wedlock ? - No, you are lying. You are right. - But nevertheless a distinction ought to be made between sophistry and absurdity. And it must be admitted that in at least two docmnes - although more can be listed - they- maintain an attitude which, to all intents and purposes, is absurd. One is the problem of God's attributes. Whether out of poetic imagination or ignorance of logic, Muhammad did not hesitate to employ epithets and desaiptive adjectives in qualifying God. They did not disturb either his conception of God's unity with which he was no doubt intoxicated, or his peace of mind because of the contradictions which later minds, sharpened by contact with Christian theology and Greek philosophy, found to be "inherent" in such an attitude unless somehow explained. Even the first generations after Muhammad
did not appear to be upset by it. T o the numerous anthropomorphic expressions with which the Kur'an teems they liberally conmbuted their share of charming legends and other "traditions". But when people began to think they were compelled to define their tams more plainly. And when that tendency grew active it became evident that to apply rationalism to the problem of God's anthropomorphism and His attributes, and to carry through a consistent and honest analysis would involve a step tantamount to a break with the simple and direct language of the Apostle and the Ancients. Consequently the development of rationalism generated an articulate counter-movement sponsored by those who were the defenders and spokesmen of the early conception. This was in broad lines the array of forces prior to the rise of Ash'ari. The traditionists refused to discuss. They paid their respects to reason with the admission that there was no comparison between anything applied to God and anything applied to man but they insisted very emphatically that all the anthropomorphic expressions, the epithets, the descriptive adjectives and the legendary material were really and literally true. They did not know how and they could nbt explain it; so they decided that 'they would not explain but would faithfully adhere to, and repeat, whatever was found in the Book and in Tradition regarding God and His attributes without explanation and without qualification, but always with the understanding that tbq were not implying any parallel and comparison with any human atnibute or action. In consonance with their opinion ihese people frowned on translations of such terms into foreign languages. At the other end we meet the Mu'tazilites. As rationalists they could not afford to seek shelter in an attitude expressible in "It is true, but I cannot explain". A stand of this kind, while perhaps reasonable, is not rational. Yet reason dictates that God be conceived of as absolutely bee of any quality or qualification. For a quality, being something which desaWes, is added to the substance, and addition to the Person of God, Who is indivisible unity, is absurd unless we care to sink into the errors of polytheism. Moreover, description is delimitation and that again is equivalent to tampering with the infinite power of God. I n view of all this, ir was dear to the Mu'tazilites that thae could be no talk of atmbutes as realities, much less of sensations and
of physical acts or physical traits. If in the face of this presumption, a long series of verses appeared in the Kur'an which pointed to the contrary, confirmed and even augmented by statements and traditions of later generations, there were only two ways out: allegoriration, where the authenticity of the statement could not be called into question, and denial where the uncomfortable statement might be said to be spurious. Some of the extreme traditions which were examples of crass anthropomorphism unless rendered harmless by being characterized as poetry - a process not very popular in those days - were simply discredited. I n this act the Mu'tazilites were not really disreputable heretics since the struggle around the establishment of the canon of Padition is a historically established fact rendered even better known through modem investigation. Where denial was out of consideration there was the gentler treatment of "explaining away". Physical properties were spiritualized, antropomorphic allusions were interpreted, and God's unity and incorporeality were maintained ardently and thoroughly. Some things, of course, are true of God. He is living, He possesses power, He possesses will. But what this means is either - as some Mu'tazilites believed - that this is the way God's Person appears to human understanding, or - as others believed - that whatever can be predicated of God is not in any way distinct from Himself, indeed is Himself. They were often violent with regard to the verses of the Kur'an hut they defended themselves on the ground that since Islam was so monotheistic, *ere could be no thought of lending any other meaning to the plainly anthropomorphic words and phrases. I n this problem the Ash'arites attempt to play the role of conciliators, with geater respect for the requirements of tradition than for the dictates of reason. True, it must be remarked that in this issue, more than in any other, the Ash'arites renounced the teachings of their patron. His passionate arguments in support of the face and hands of Allah proved as unconvincing to them as to the Mu'tazilites. They, too, now took it for granted that even "bila kaifa" tactics could not rid the physical attributes of God of their unsavoriness to the intelligent persqn. They therefore followed the Mu'tazilites and explained those thing allegorically. Furthermore, while they did not utilize the critical apparatus of the Mu'tazila and were consequently confronted with a gream
number of tkaditions and statements, they applied the method of interpretation to these as well. There remained, however, seven atmbutes in which they could not follow the Mu'tazila but chose to adhere to the view enounced by Al-Ash'ari himself. The seven attributes of God are: Power, Knowledge, Will, Life, Seeing, Hearing, Speech. Al-Ash'& was rather consistent. These atuibutes, like the physical atmbutes, are realities. But a difficulty was encountered here which had not been present hitherto. What exactly were they? Were they separate entities distinguishable from one another, or merely different faces of the same coin? That al-Ash'ari preferred the first answer is a matter of course. And his socalled followers could not, if they were to remain faithful to their ideal, but defend the view of their predecessors. And herein lay their failure. Predicating the existence of attributes which were separate entities, while a t the same time they insisted on God's Unity and freedom &om composition and incorporeality, they were compelled to evolve the formula that "His attributes are neither He nor not He". What that formula means not even they could tell. It was an escape through words, which added little uedit to them.
!
1 i
,I
Finally there was the problem of human free will. Is man a free agent or are his hands tied and his acts only metaphoricilly performed by him? Both the implications and complications of the problem are not difficult to see. On the one hand the entire doctrine of reward and punishment ought to hinge on the solution of the problem ; only a free agent t i n be held responsible for his acts and given his retribution. On the other hand, the assumption of free will in man creates the difficulty of defining the respective domains of power of man and of God and the further complication of the apparent exclusion of divine foreknowledge. T h e Kdan, too, proves to be of little aid in unraveling the knot. It supports both views, and one cannot readily decide whither Muhammad tended, unless one grants here aiso, as has been suggested elsewhere, that it is historically wrong to seek exact definitions in the Kur'an. There on be little doubt that Muhammad was literally overwhelmed by the omnipotence of God and His participation in, let alone His awareness of, every human act. Yet Muhammad was not hindered from preaching the doctrine of human responsibility and of retribution.
right to exercise free will and it is in his capacity of being a h-ee agent that he can be held accountable for morality and ethical living.
m believed This stand of the Prophet guided the Orthodox. They t and were not bafned by the contradiction. Both theses are true. Even the will
to do good or evil is implanted by God in man, not as a general capacity for desiring the one or the other, but as a specific preference inspired by God now for a good act and nowfor an evil one. But just as God's power is a fact, so man's reward and punishment are a fact. This is the doctrine preached by Muhammad and this is the doctrine sponsored by his faithful followen. The Kur'an and tradition are the sole arbiters, just as they are the source in general for decisions of what constitutes good and evil. Only that is good which God
!
I !
i !
approves of, and evil is what God abhors. T o look for logic in the several component parts of this briefly sketched doctrine would be futile. Yet one cannot fail to be impressed with the compelling force of a kind of primitive logic underlying the entire structure : the inescapable necessity of bowing before the supreme power of an omnipotent and omniscient Creator. One can discover no other way than to accept what He offers, to believe what He
tells us, and to conduct ourselves as He guides us by standards set up by Him and according to directions which He has revealed to us. Tbe solution of the intricate thesis along logical lines was attempted by two parties, each upholding the premise with which it was more profoundly impressed. The Kadadtes, later developed into Mu'tazila, were the champions of h-ee-will. On their banner was inscribed the motto : God's Unity and
I
I
performs the human act. The full weight of this contention becomes even more compelling when it is remembered that the M n t a U s also deny cause and eftwt, or generated effects. I t therefore means that from the time the intention to do is created by God in man's mind up to the moment when the final results of the action become apparent through the act there are numerous single acts all of which are not only inspired but actually executed by God. They are thus faced by the dilemma of how man can be said to be the performer. And once again they rely on words. While creating the act, God creates along with it the power in with the act, nor is the author of both. clarify the point an
Justice, and in both cases comprehensible to mankind. We have already noted how thoroughly the concept of Unity forced them to deal with attributes. Similarly their concept of justice inspired them with courage and determination to premise certain axiomatic truths. God is just, and being just He cabnot deprive man of his. freedom and then hold him responsible for his acts. He can'not,,in jusuce, make man the powerless play-ball of a predetermined fate. Yes, God is the creator of the entire Universe, but He has willingly placed in the hands of .man. that domain of activity which consists in his deciding for himself what. he chooses to do .at one time and what at another. God knows beforehand all that will happen but He bas willingly consented to limit His knowledge in the case of human acts. Justice requires that man retain .the
Over against them we find the Jaharites, a comparatively small group impressed above all with the omnipotence of Allah and the parallel impotence of man. Only metaphorically may man be spoken of as the agent of any of the acts be performs, for in fact be is only the helpless insuument through whom God does what He chooses. When Asb'arite Kalam took the field, it subscribed fully to the docnine of the ancients. But unlike the ancients, it was urged to explain, to create a rational background for its stand So the Ash'arites assume the reality of akrab, of acquird acts, presumably perfomned by the one consequently held accountable for them. However, in order to avoid the uncomfortable pmition of granting to man the right to perform acts, they categorically deny that man is the creator and performer. Quite on the contrary it is God who really
'
I
man to perform that act. But that power is simultaneous the act traceable to that power created in man. God is What, then, is man's share in the act? In an attempt to illustration is given of a very heavy boulder which one
especially strong man is capable of carrying. Now, if this man is aided by a we& person, the result is that actually the strong man does all the work. Yet the weaker one feels that he too is c o o p t i n g . But in addition to thegeneral lameness of the example there is the further consideration that the .analogy is not consistent. I n the illustration the strong man is not the bestower of the weaker man's strength, whereas God is the performer not only in His own capacity but also in the capacity of the individual of whose power He is the
CHAPTER FOUR
Author. Essentially, therefore, the Kalamists are playing with words. Even if the explanation were restated to express the idea that it seems to man as if h e were the actual doer and in that sense he is a free agent, it would be evident that we are deceiving ourselves with words, just as the ordinary man usually deceives himself. And the same dilemma is confronted in the discussion of good and evil or in dissussing guidance or sustenance or the other topics which fall under the general heading of God's justice.
THE SZCTS OF THE MWJIYYA AND A DISCUSSION OF THEIR DOCTRINES
1
T h e foregoing does not pretend to serve as an exposition of Ash'arite theology or even as a systematic aitique. It is rather a summary of the impression$ carried away by a student of their theology. It must, however, be stated quite definitely that to the mind of the writer the failure of the Kalamists is only a matter of degree as compared with the efforts of the other rationalizing schools. More than i n the choice of a particular philtiwphy or process of reconciliation there lurks the initial question of whether a recouciliatiori of any kind may be looked to to harmonize two such divergent realms asteasbu and faith. That there is an almost natural yearning for that peace On the part of those who are torn between the two or are drawn to both is an almost established fact. But the wish does not always generate its frilfillment certainly not in such form as will prove onvincing even to an unbiased onlook'er. T h e doctrine of the Ash'arites has enjoyed a long life and a stable reputation in Islam. But it is dear that these are due mainly to the particular history of Ash'arite theology : to a gradual overshadowing of the pkiIosophic veneer, a religious garb covering the philosophic tenets, and an ever growing identification of Ash'arism with the religion of the ancients. I t was the religio& conservatism of the doctrine which saved the day for it rather than its philostiphic presentation. T h e turbulent minds of succeeding generations were compelled to go to other sources. Those who f o i d rest in Ash'arism were in the main neither great thinkers nor very seeking spirits. They were cut out tb foilow the religion of their fathers and were ;it ease i n the pursuit of it.
I I
i
!! I
The Murjites are divided into three classes'. One professes postponement in respect of faith and accepts the view of the Mu'tazilite Kadarites on free willB. Its protagcnisis are Ghsiliny, Abu Shimr and Muhammad ibn Shab;h of Baqm This class is included among those referred to in the tradition which bas come down regarding the curse on the Kadarites and the Murjitesb; it deserves the curse from both angles. Another class professes postponement in faith and determinism5 in works, following the views of Jahm ibn S&in6, and therefore belongs
I
to the Jahmiyya. The third rejects both determinism and the Kadarite doctrine. The latter forms five sects in accordance with their divergences from one another: the Yiinusijya, the Ghassiniyya, the Thaubbiyya, the TGmkiyya, and the M&siyyaI.
I
Shanr., 1, 104, lists h u r classes, adding to those here a gmap from the Khaw811j. The combination of Kh8tijism and Murjiism is odd and rests on a loose application of the tern. The reference is probably to Shablb b. Yezld ai-ShaibHni who withheld from pronouncing either SHlih or his opponents (two Khztijite groups; see Ash'ad, 120-3) tight, and was therefore
I
i
'
I
Ii j 'j
I
I
j
branded as a "Murjite KhBrijt", ib., 123. Shahr. himself calls Ohail& a KhHiijite, 106, and Maksri says that ThaubBn was also one. and was called Iimi' al-Nap,+ because of his stmultaneous adherence to Mu'taziiism. ' Reading all: with MS.; Ed. >u.La. ' On these Kadarites see below. n i s reading seems more coned than the one in Mukhtosor, 122, which punchiate3 behmen the two words %,*i and +,,since the author is dealing here parlicularly w?th yadarites who are also Mujites. isf. A,, 46 b, supports this reading.
' Reading &b, with MS.: Ed. $!,. ' On him and his adtierents see below,
13-15.
' Together with the four Kadarite Murjites and Jshm b. SahuBn, our author enumeizies
/
ten groups. Ash'ad, who identifies Abu ShimZs views with those of the Y6nusiyya, counts h~.elvc; Inciuding the N%YUua.Y e KanMiua. and the Vaniima (132-41).
l?ad'waiTa'&
na~z:es
They are called Murjites because they regard works of secondary importance to faith'. h j ?
(postpaiiement) is employed in the same sense as ~ a ' k h b(delay).
a confession aud nothing more.
The five sects which we have listed accuse
atiothcr of error a t ~ dthe other sects believe them all to be in error.
one
We shall
We say: 1 pcsiponed it ('a?jajaifu or 'arja'tt~hu), that is, delayed itz. It is reported
now treat of them in detail, God willing.
that the Prophet said: Cursed are the Mujites by the mouth of seventy prophets3.
are the followers of Yinus ibn 'Awn' who maintained that faith pertains to the heart and mouth and consists of a knowledge of, love for, and humility to God in the heart, together with a confession by word of mouth that He is one and there is nothing like unto Him? This is not dependent oa evidence of prophetsa. If, however, the evidence comes, then4 the recognition of their veracity and the general knowledge oi what came from them forms part of faitb but a detailed knowledge of what came from them does not constitute faith
are the Mujites,
-Who
kith consists
0
Apostle? he was asked, and replied: Those who say4
in a verbal confession, meaning those who maintain that f a i is only
the Raljashiyya (see Naubakhti, 9) the ZiyZdiyya, the Karrsmiyya and the Mu'idhiyya, V, 152-4. makrizi, 350, names seven sects. In a brief treatise on the sects published by Dedering in Le Monde Oriental XXV (1931), 35-43, and wriiten by one Al-KirmZni, whom the editor believes to have lived before 525 A. H., we also find ten groups, but in place of the Jahmiyya he includes the Hanifiyya. Ui, 359-61, cornis a sect Wbaidiyya in place of the Marlsiyy aid does not include the Jahmiyya.
The YGnusiyya -These
nor part of it called faith
'
Althongh the Murjites are treated here and 111 other discussiana as a dogmatlc d:vlslon ill lslam, the view is generally accepted that its rise is to be sought in the political deveiolmfats in early lslam when the undeserving 'Umayyads became the d e r s . Refusing to emdrmn Rem oumght, yet seeing the injustice of their usurpation, they chose to remz&i non-comnltidi. See Muk. Sf., 11, 89-92; Macdanald, Muslim Theology. 122-7: V o r i e a n Q p ~ ~W, i i Van Viaten, however, while not denying the patitical factor, would trace its of& k? %e &&%a between Arabs and Persians the jealousy between them is well known. ile aiso u(rees ihe
-
recopnition oi a dogmatic standpoint even in its early stages. See his article an I& in ZDbiSi. XLV (1891). 161-71. There is still an echo of the political basis of this group in ;hhhr!n report that "it is said that I r j z also signifies the ranldng of 'Ali fourth instead of Apt end for this reason the Mujites and Shl'ites are opposed to each other", 104. Definite proof of their early political program is afforded by the recently published Firat al-Shi'a of Naubakhti, 6, altho~ghhe also adds the dogmatic factor. To this explanation lji, MakGzi and Shahr. add the element of hope also hplidt in the verb. Makrki, 349 bottom, calls them "extremists in confirming promise and hope and in denying retribution" =dl s, +JI, -31 z?l j 8%. Shahr. places the Wa'idiyya in contrast to them, 16. Cf. Makhtasar, 12.3. note 1.
-
-
a This tradition without an Isnid? is recorded by lbn Kutaiha in a mer fonn: TWOdivisions among my people will not he benefted by my intercession. May they be w e d by the mouth of seventy Prophets: [they are] the Mudites and !$adadtes MIrRhfdif al-Hafftk, 97. In his article on Mutjite and Anti-M~itteTraditions in ZA, XXVl (1911). 169-74, Kern does not cite any tradition similar to this one.
' Arab. I + j , Galdziher remarks that this verb ,,!st, wie arabische Gelehrte sagen, ,we Kunya fiir den Begriff der Liige'." Muh. Sf.11, 51.
They hold that no single tenet among the tenets of faith ean be
or part of it, but that all of them together constiiute faith4 are the followers of Ghassin, the Mujite6, who
The Ghassiniyya. -They maintained that faith consists in
God:
a
confession of, love for, and reverence towards
and renunciation of pride before Him.
' Sam'ini
H e held that faith can
be increased
(603b) calls him,Al-Shamarl and Ash'ari (133) calls him Al-Samari.
There
are several places mentioned m Yakit, 111, 132-3, by the name Samara, but none of them is dted by the author as the native dty of Ycous. Shahi., ib., gives him the nisbrr Numatti and SO does Iji, ib., althoagh he makes him his (or its) son. In Makdri 350, he appears as Ibn 'Umar. ' Some of the other authorities such as Ash'ari, Shahr, and Sam'Zni mention as a spedfie lenet of Ykns the renunciation of pride, oniy implied by BaghdZdi in his word humility. ibiis. to Ykus, is guilty of non-belief oniy because of his insolence despite his coniession in God,
,A+-
"'
+
Adding with Mzkhfasar 123. Its conjectvre that the seeand clause should read & b6 now frnds its confirmation in MS. and Ash'ari, 134.
' Reading A d 6 with MS.: Ed. A d ! . ' AshCarl,ib., ascribes this view to his disciples, denying that YBns himself held it. ' He was a Kiliite and his followers had their centre there, Sam'gni, 408 b. Makrizi
makes him a disciple of Mubammad aidhaibZni and also informs us that he denied the prophetic character of Jess (ibd.
' The other authorities also
add the doctrine that belief In the Apostie and his law ir.
required. The statements cited Ash'ari, 138-9, Iji, 360, Sam'ani, ib., Shahr. 105, that a man is a beiiwer if, for example, he recognizes that Mubammad is a prophet, but does not lmow whether he was sent to the Ethiopians or the Arabs, serves as an iiiustration of their view.
191
but not drcreased'. He dillwed with the YGnusiyya in ceiling every of faith. In his book Ghassin states that his view on this question' that of Abu ~ a n i f a ~But . it is an error on his part4, because Abu Verily, faith is knowledge and confession of God and of His Apostles
tenet a part agrees with &":fa said: asd of what
has come down from God and His Prophets generally, not specifically. It cannot be increased nor decreased, nor can people excel one another in it, whereas Ghas192 six declared that it can be illcreased but not decreased. The Timiniyya -These are the followers of Abu Mu'idh al-Tumini-ho maintained that faith is what preserves one from non-belief, and it is a tern applied to certain tenets. Anyone who neglects them in whole or in part becomes an infidel. All of them together constiiute faiih, but no single tenet can be called faith or part of it. He said: Any commandment, the transgression of which the community is not agreed in terming non-helief, is part of the eanon-laws but is not faith. According to his claim, anyone transgressing a commandment which is
'
S o all authorities except Sam'ini who reads fib.) "can be increased and decreased". Makriri's reading "can neither be increased nor decreased" is an obvious misprint since he places it in contrast to Abu ~ a n i f a ' sview, as our author does. a
Reading r q i Wit11 MS.; Ed. ,i;ClI.
' With MS. Ed. misreads his name a s yannfiyyo both Umes. ' Our author, a thoroughgoing orthodox, is apparently eager to deny any similarity between the Hanifite and Mujite systems. Although he limits it only to this point, his silence abovt n similarity between Abu Hanifa and Ghassin is nevertheiess significant. S h a h m t L i , more philosophicaiiy-minded, makes an attempt to soften the iuii effect of branding the famous jurist a Murjite by modifying it to mean a Sunnite Murjite or by regarding it as a name which the Mu'taziia appiied to him because of his views on Kadai. Iji, 360, goes stiii further and calls this claim of GhasSin iibd, explaining it as a desire on hiS 'part ta attach himself to a great man. AI-Ash'zri. however, a frank opponent a: Abu Hanlfa, shows no hesitancy in discussing the two under the same heading (138-Q), and similarly, ibn Harm, hi3 dired opponeot tn Fikh, who does not hesitate to include a - ~ s h ' z r i as weii as ~ b Uanih, u Shiites, 1, 29 and u, 8. cf. Ghunyn, 103. For his docirines see Ma!urIdi, 9-10; Abu Hanifa, 33-5, and commentaries; these hilly justify the view that he is a Murjite. Evidence of the elasticity of the name Mujite is given by the f a d that Naubalihti includes both Milik lbn Anis and al Shafifi among the Mujites.
' TfimSn
is a village in Egypt. Yakfii, i, 897, mentions it specifically ,as the birthplace
of Abu Mu'idh. Matrid names him a philosopher, ib.
not faith is said to have sinned but is not called an outright siimer, since he did not transgress it as one who disavows'. He also held that one who strikes a prophet or kills him becomes an infidel, not by reason of the stliking or killing but because of the enmity aud hatred oi him and the disregard2 for his truth. The Thawbiniyya -These are tho fallomers of Abu Thawbin, the Murjites, who held that fdth is confession and knowledge of God and of His Apostles and of everything the doing of which is rationally obligatory. The knowledge of works, whose neglect is rationally admissible, does not form part of faith. They dissent from the Yunusiyya and Ghassiniyya in making a thing rationally incumbent even. before the revealed Law makes it binding. The Ma6siyya - They are the Murjites of Baghdid, adherents of Bishr al-Ma&% In jurisprudence he adopted the system of Abu YLsni al%adi5. But when he declared openly that the yur'in was created, Abu Yisuf severed relations with him. The Sifitiyya also accused him of error for it. When he 193 agreed6 with the Sifitiyya that God is the Author of the deeds of man and that the power to a d is acquired simultaneously with the performance of the act, the That is, the sin is in the attitude he takes to the iransgressian and not in the actual
act of commission.
See Ash'ari. 140; Shahr., 107; lji, 361. Ash'ari also report5 of him that the KuPSn. acc. to him, is an unoriginated and untreated occurrence-in-time; the same Is me of God's will and love, 300 and 583. a Ed. eiict, ((a non-existent verb); MS. not clear. The reading chosen here is supported by Al-Ash'ari, 140: irul,. "akrizi,
ib., names him successively Mujite, Khirijite and Mu'hziiite, adding that he
was called a coiledor of faults and shunner oi good guaiitles.
' Bishr b. GhaiySth b. Ahu Karima al-Marisi (Yakfit, IV, 515, reads it Al-MarrTsisi) is SaiC to have been of Jewish parentage. Marrisa is a village in Egypt, Yakut, ib. ikhaii, 1, 260, S e e m disinclined to accept this derivation since Marrisa acc. to him is inhabited by negioes. He cites a report &at Bishr was the son of a Jewish goldsmith in KEfa (M3;n. i, 150, makes him a fuiier and dyer). Bishr was a Hanifite, nevertheless his views on the ereation of the Vn<& necessitated his conceaiment during the Khaiifate of Hirim ai-Rashld and Al-Amin for a period of some hveniy years. Ibn Harm regards him as closest to the orthodox of aii the Mu'tariiites, Shiites, 1, 29. He was Bishfs teacher and author of the famous Kitnb ol-Kharaj. His full name is Abu Yfisuf Ya'kilb b. ibrahim (Makrlri, ib.; MirRhtnsar, 12, 125, note 2). Cf. ML&. Ib. Both Ed. and NLS. read 81%verb in
me plural.
Mu'tazila called him a heretic. He was thus an outcast from both the Sifitiyga and the Mu'tazilai. He used to say of faith that it is an avowal both within the heart and by word of mouth, just as Ibn Rawendi said that non-belief is disavowal and denialf. They both believed that kneeling before an idol is not abjuration but is merely evidence of i t These five sects-make up the Murjites who reject both determinismS and free will. The Kadarite Murjites, like Abu Shimr', Ibn Shabib5, Ghailiu6 and S2ih Rubba7 differ among themselves iu regard to faith. Abu ShimrQays that faith is a knowledge and confession of God and of whatever has come down from Him upon which the community is agreed, such as prayer, the poor-rate, fasting, the pilgrimage, the prohibition against the flesh of carcasses and against blood, and the flesh of swine, incest, and so on; also, a confession of the justice of G o o His unity, and a denial of any resemblance between Him and any creature, - all of which is rationally known. By justicelQe has reference to his views on free dl,and by unity he means divesting God of His eternal attributes. All this, he said, is faith. Anyone doubting it is a heretic and anyone harassed by doubts
'
1st 47a, relates that he lued m discuss with At-ShWi, 6ut when the latter learned that he was partly in agreement with the Sunnites and partly with the qadarite he said to him: You are half a believer and half a h e i e t i ~ * Ash'ari, 141. Reading 9 1 ; Ed. and MS. $1. This is the pranuneiatian given by Sam'&i, 3383. Although he calls him a yadadte, his views on faith are identical with those of the Mnuslyya, with whom Ash'arl, 134, classes him in the disnusion. Horlen, Systrme, 304-5, places his death in 860 A.D.
'
Mu$ammad ibn Shabib was a contemporary of Abu Shimr, Horten, I.C., 308. 360, names him either Mem% or Abu Memin ihn Ohailin, although s w e a lines below he also accepts the possibility that his own name was Ohailan, He was one of
' Iji,
the foremost theologians and reformen of his time and became a martyr for his doetdnes. Horten, l.c., 121-5. Nanbalrhti, 6, names his father M e w b . A disciple of Al-Naffh. Cf. Horten, LC.. 307. Ed. &.I; MS. not clear. The reading here is required by the conked Both Ed. and MS. read bli.9, Ju. But, aside from the fact that the terms fdsUtfee and unity are always applied to Allah, they fnake no sense with the MS. reading. Read iul J = . 'O Reading J d l , instead of @l:contra Ed, and MS.
'
'
.+
regarding the doubter 1s also a heretlc' and so on forever. He held that this knowledge does not constitute iaith save in conjunction vith a verbal confession. Despite this inilovation, Abu Shii!ir would not say of myone sharirig his views on free will who sinned that he is an outrizht sinner, but he would say that he is a sinner in this or that respectg. To the orthodox Muslims this group i s the most heretical among the Murjites sii~ceit coinbines' both errors of free will and posi- 194 ponement. The justice of God to which Abu Shimr refers is real polytheism because thereby he means to establish two great creators other than God The divine unity to which he reIcis is a denial of attributes because he wishes thus to divest God of His knowledge, His power, His vision, and His other eternal attributes. What he says about his opponents, that they are heretics, and that he who douhts their heresy is a heretic himself, dosely agrees with what the Sunnites say of him: that he himself is a heretic and that whoever doubts it is a heretic Ghailin, the Kadarite, combined free will and postponement3 and believed that faith consists in the secondary knowledge of God, love of and humility be!ore Him and a confession of belief in what the Apostle announced and in what has come down from God. The primary knowledge, he held, is innate and cannot be called faith4 In his History of Heretical Sects, Zurkins states that, according. to Ghailin, faith is a confession by word of mouth but that knowledge of God is inherent and is an act of God; it cannot be called faith. Ghailin also held that faith can be neither increased nor decreased, nor can people excel one another in it. Muhammad Ibn Shabib held that faith is a confession of God and a knowledge of His Apostles and of all that has been revealed by Him: prayer, the poor-rate, fasting and pilgrimage, which the Muslims have accepted, and everything else regarding which they do not differ6. Faith. he said, is compound
' Ash'art, a
'
152. Ash'ari, 134. In general he agreed with the doctrines of Abu Shimr, Ash'ari, 136. The first knowledge is that things are created and controlled, Ash'arl, ib.
' One of the disciples of al-Narfam. He is said to have been very well-versed lo Theology. Arnold, al-Mu'faziia, 35. Rilter in lalam, XVIII (1929). 38. With the exception of the greater stress laid by him on works, this creed is very much like that of Ymus. Asll'ari, 137.
'
arid people may excel one auother in it? A single tenet may be part of faith. He who transgresses it is a heretic because he renauncas part of faith; one can be a believer o n l y q y adhering to all oi i t Al-Silihi held that faith is solely 195 knowledge of God and heresy only ignorance of Him. A statement to the effect that Gad is one of three is not in itself heresy3, although it will be made only by a heretic. Whoever disavows the Apostle is not a believer, not because this is absurd but because the Apostle said: He who does not believe in ma is not a believer in God'. He believed that prayer, the poor-rate, .&sting and pilgrimage are acts of obedience but do not constitute worship; there is no worship except belief in Him, that is, knowledge of Him. Faith, according to him, is a unit, which can be neither increased nor decreased. In the same way heresy is a unit These are the doctrines of the Mnrjites in matters of faith, and they are called so because they make works secondary to faith.
' Ib., 133. * Reading Y l
although both Ed. and M. la& it. iH, 11, 3, attributes this view to Jahm h. SafwHn, Al-Karrim and AI-Ash'ari. Ash'ari, 132-3, ' The tradition is related by Anmad b. Hanhal, V, 382 top; TayXisi, No. 242.
See
CHAPTER FIVE
THE DOCTRINES OF THE NAJJ~RIWA' SECTS These are the followers of Al-Husain ibn Muhammad al-NajjLS They agree with us in some fundamental dogmas and with the Yadarites in others. On certain principles they maintain a unique position. They are of one mind with us in their belief that God is the Creator of the acquired a d s of mans, and that the power to act is acquired simultaneously with the act4; nothing comes into existence unless God wills it. They also agree with us on the question of retribution and the admissibility of forgiveness to sinners and on most problems concerning what 196 it is proper and what it is mong5 for God to do. They share the Yadarite views about divesting God of His knowledge, power, life, and His other eternal attributes; about considering visibility absurd' and about believing that the word of God is created The Kadarites call them heretics be-
' They
are called HusainWa by Ash'ari, 283,
' His fuii name is Husain (Makrlri, 350, IH, m. 2, Gkunya, 103:
Hasan) b. Muhammad b. 'AbdaiiHh al-Naliir Abu 'AldaliHh (Sam';ini also adds Al-Rhi, probabiy a mistake for Al-Rayyli.
He is said to have been a weaver or a maker ofbaiances. He had frequent discussions with A l - N a ~ l m ,whose disciple he was. In a serious discussion ACNauPm, angered by Al-Na]iii.s
..
reiusai to grant him a ceriain argument, kicked him and cursed anyone who would teach him anything. Al-Najiir ien heated, caught coid and died. Fihrirt, 179, and Makrizi, 350; (the lalter apparently from Fihrist), It is this question wMBb the heated discussion developed. Ash'sri, 283. Reading 3.41,. with MS.; Ed. ,.&I>.
'
' '
Ace. to IH, Ill. 2, Al-Najjlr taught that His visiblilty In the world to come was possible but that he was not convinced of it Ash'ari, 283, and Shahr., 262. explain that he thought it possible only if God should transfer to the eye the characteristics of the heart and then it could have a visible perception of Him.
cause of what they believe in common with us and we call them heret~csby reason of their padid agreement with the Kadarites. That which makes the Najjiriyya a distinct unit in religious matters is their opinion that faith consists of a knowledge of God and His prophets and those of His commandments upon which the Muslims are unanimously agreed, coupled mth humility before Him, and a coniession by word of mouth. He who shows ignorance of any of these h t h s after evidence in proof of them has reached him, or he who knows them yet does not confirm them, is guilty of Kufr (disbelief). They say: Every single article of faith is an act of obedience but is not faith; only d l of them together compose faith. But a single article isolated from the rest is neither faiih nor obedience. Faith can be increased but not decreased'. Al-Najjk held that the body is made up of an agglommeration of accidents, being those accidents from which a body cannot be disjoined2: color, taste, odor, and those other properties, or their opposites, of which a body cannot be divested No property, or its opposite, of which a body may be devoid, such as knowledge or ignorance, and the Like, can in any way be regarded as part of the body. He also maintained that the Word of God is an accident if recited, and a body if mittens. If it were mitten in blood, this blood shaped into letters would become the Word of God, although it was not a word when it was only shed blood4. These are the fundamental principles of the Najjcyya. Afterwards they split up into many sects because of the divergences among them as to the explanation5 191 of the creation of the Kur'in and to the proper attitude to the doctrines of their opponents; and they declared one anothes heretical. The best known among them Ash'ari, 136, Isf. 473 omit the negatlve before
A, but It is probably the copyist's error.
' This view is very similar to DirWs, see below 16, and
U . i l , 41. The latter adds that
nsc. to Al-NaJjir a thing may exist as a propem la one state and as a substance in another (in this he was no doubt influenced by his teacher AI-Naffim, see Harten,ZDMG, L)[m [19091, 180-1). Dirir's and Al-Najjir's views are expounded more fuliy, Ash'ari, 305-6. They are cadtious enough to explain that this process of agglomeration is to be conceived of as occurring at the beginning of the produnion of the accidents and not since their existence. Ash'ari, 594 (ascribed to Dirk, a s in the conception of bodies). Sam'Znl, 554a, brands this theory as utter heresy since it impUeO that unclean m b stances like blood or wood can become the Word of G a d "eading i,Ul with MS. and Id.; Ed. :,!+I.
'
are the Burghuthiyyq the Za'fariniyya, and the Mustadrikq-a subdivision of the second The Burghithiyye-They are the followers of Muhammad ibn %a, nicknamed Burghith (flea)'. He adhered to most of Al-Najj2s doctrines but opposed him with regard to terming the acquirer an agent; he abstained from this, while AINajjH afiirmed it without qualifications. He also assumed a contradictory position on generated effects, for he believed that they are God's acts by necessity in the sense that God formed the stone so that it must fly if it is hurledz, or that He endowed animals with a nature which must suffer pain when hurt Al-Najjir adopted our view on effects, maintaining that they are God's acts by choice, and not the result of a characteristic in the body, which is called the cause3. The Za'fariniyga -They are the foliowers of Al-Za'iarini4 who lived in Rai. He had a way of contradicting one of his statements' by another. He would say that God's Word is not of His essence, and whatever is outside God's essence is created. Yet despite this he said: A dog is preferable t o one who says God's Word is created" Some historians relate that this Al-Za'farini desired to be known everywhere. He therefore hued a man to go to Mecca at the time of the fairs to vilify and curse him so that his name would become familiar among pilgrims from distant landsb. The stupidity of his adherents in Rai is such that some of
' lH, ill, 22, calls him Al-Kitib. ' Reading with MS.; €A. ej. view on efiects see Ed. 328 (belav 194). Probably after a town Za'fariniyya (there are seveiai by that name, YikBt, 11. s. v3 From an incident recounted in Najim (see below), he probably lived in the second half of the third century A H., so that he was almost a contemporary of Ai-Najjir. One is tempted to identify him with Al-Hasan b. Muuammad (ai Ai-Fadi. Lisin a!-Mkin, 11, 244). a discredited a For the orthodox
Riwi, who died about 260. But Sam'Bni does not relate the sect to him (275b). Perhaps our a-Za'fararai Is fo be identified with a man of similar name a d similar views on the K I T I I ~ , mentbned by Goldziher, ZDMG, W I (1908). 7. This ideneiication supports the above dates. On chis 1st remarks: q l j Y .iir J ,x3r b~ U I ~ i r& -)LC aK 2 3 , 47 b. Shahr.
'
by his ambiguous j % Y I dl= I,*,i +I, (62), may perhaps mean that they sought to draw a distinction between God and the Kur'in, witiovt admiding its creation. Cf. Systrme, 148. This incident is related Ni+nr, 11, 226-7, and the one pronouncing the curseais given as Abu 'Abbis A-Sarrij, a famous traditionist, who died 312 or 313 (Sam'&, 295a).
them refuse to eat raisins in deference to Al-Za'farini; for they believe that he 198 relished them. "We shall not eat what he liked," they would say. The Mustadrika - They are a group of people among the Najjiiiyya who believe that they have clarified what was obscure to their forerunners, in as much as the latter had abstained from asserting unhesitatingly that the Kur'in is created. The Mustadrika maintain that it is created, but they have broken up into two divisions regarding this. One argues that the Prophet stated definitely that God's Word is created in so far as the arrangement of these letters goes, but he believed it, when saying this word, regarding his arrangerneut of its letters'. Whoever does not grant that the Prophet asserted as much is a heretic. The other division insists that the Prophet did not definitely state that God's Word is created in so far as the arrangement of letters goes, but that he was convinced of it and indicated it. Anyone believing that he actually said, in so many words, God's Word is credted is a heretic. There are some members of the Mustadrika in Rai who think that the views held by their antsgonists are all false so that if one of them said of the sun that it is the sun, he would still be lying. 'Abd-al-yihir relates: I once held a discussion with one of them in Rai and asked him: Tell me, what is your attitude to my statement that you are an intelligent person born of wedlock and not of fornication. Am I right? He said: You are lying. This answer of yours is correct, I told him. He kept silence in shame. Praised be Allah for it.
y,,-
This passage i~ altogether unclear. The Arabic tent is a foil ow^: Y Jii ii ?.,I 8 a, mi 4; &l A,.;,>I .i. +i Js iCjjr zl ,!K. Apparently it means
.+,-&
..+
thst the ward of Gad as recited and read is created, but that there is an eternal Kur'in existing which God revealed to Mu~ammad. Cf.Shahr. 62; qi. 361; Syitrme 148.
CHAPTER SIX
THE JAHMNYA, THE BAKRNYA AND THE D I R A R ~ AAND AN EXPOSITION
OF THEIR DOCTRJNES The Jahmipga are followers of Jahm ibn S h i n 1 who believed in the compulsory nature and inevitableness of our acts and denied altogether our power to act He held that paradise and hell will come to an end and perishP. He also maintained that faith consists only of a knowledge of God, while nonbelief is simply ignorance of Hims. He said: No act or deed belongs to anyone other than God. They are atbibuted to creatures only metaphorically4. We say, the sun went down and the mill turned. without implying that they are ageiits or that it lies in their power to do what they have been desaibed as doing. He further maintained that God's knowledge is something come-into-existence5. He
' Jahm b. Safw5n Abu Mthrar (ace. to Tab., IL 1924: Abu Muhriz), Mauia of the Ban" RZsib. and secretary to Al-HZrith b. Suraij (Wellhausen, Arnb Kingdom, 464) duiing the latter's governorship in KhurZsim, was a native of Baikh, but flnt made his views public in Timidh and for this reason he is frequently called Al-Tirmidhi (he is also called Ai-Sumarkandi). See iH, Ill, 129; Sam'ini, 145b; L i s i n nl-M&n, 11, 142. AsVan'. 289 and 148-9; Bad'wol-Tdrfkh. V. 154-5 (Ar. 146); Us& 333; Ijl, 362; Shahi, 61. His v i e m on Paradise are refuted IH, iV, 84. See Intisir, 12. ' Ash'ari 132 and 2i9: Shahr.. ib. As our author has painted out (Ed., 190. above) his views oil faith are those of a Muriite. ' Ash'aii. 279; Bod'-wol-Tn'r&h. ib.: Shahr., 60-1; lsf. 49a; Cf. IH, 111, 23 top, and the refutation of the Jahmiyya on the remainder of the page and foil.
' The reason far his theory is this: if we assume, that He knows entities before they came into existence, we shall have to assume one of two things about His knowledge when the entity is created: Either a change takes place, becoming a knowledge of something present and not future, as before, or He remains ignorant of it now that it is actual. Since both are absurd, we must giant a created knowledge. But to avoid change this knowledge must be created not
refused to define God as a Something, or as the Living, the Knowing or the Willing. His explanation is: I shall not qualify Him by an attribute which may be generally applied to others, such as the existent or the living, knowing or williug, and others like them1. But he described Him as the Powerful One, the Bringer into Existence, the Agent, Creator, Giver of life or death, because these attributes are exclusively His. Like the Kadariies he contended that God's Word is created and he did not call God the Spea!ier of that word. We condemn him as a heretic for 200 all of his errors and the Yadaiiyya declare him a Kifir for his assertion that God is
the Cre;tor of t!~e acts of mankiud. The several divisions of our community therefore coincide in charging him with unbelief. In addition to his blunders, which we have related, Jahm used to carry a weapon and make war on the ruler2 Together with ShuraihU ibn al-Hirith he proceeded against Nasr ibn Sayyir: but S a l m ibn Ahwaz al-Mizini3 killed him towards the end of the epoch of the 'Umayyad dynasty. At present his foiiowers are in Tirmidh'. In our time, Isms'~1ibn 1brah;m ibn Kabi~s al-ShirHzi al-Daili went foirh to preach to thertj the doctrine of our in Him but in another subied. Shahr., 60; Cf. lji, ib. and IH, 11, 127-0; Shahr. and 1bn Rawendl sce a similarity between this view and that of Hishim al-yakam, and a1 IUlayyic grants it, but denies that Jahm was a Mu't&zilile--Inti!& 126. Ash'ari, 280; U~iil, lii, Bad'wnl-Tm'&h, Shahr. ib.; in I b k a , 54-5, AL-Ash'ari charges that Jahm really meant to deny that God was knowing, living, de., but that fear for his iiie compelied him to employ this explanation. ' This refers to hi$ position in ihe service of ai-Hirith, who rebelled against the 'Umayyads. Cf. Wellhausen, I. e. 464ff. The name of this man is twisted. It should be Ai-Hirith Ibn Suraij (Ed. and MS. Shurai?) who ivas a rebei gaveriior of KhurkBn since 115 (ib), and employed ]ahm as hls KBtib, ib. Welihausen lays great stress cu ~ i d t h ' s Mu~Jitetheories. @'ars91). Nagr b. Sayyir, a famous general, was Reading SayyBi with ills.; Ed. >4
Sheikh Abu-l-ffasan al-Ash'ari, and a number of them have heeded his call and identified themselves with the orihodox. Praised be Allah for i t The Bakriyya.-They are the followers of Bakr ibn Ukht lAbd-al-W+d ibn Ziyidl. He agrees with Al-Ny+m in his asserfion that man is the spirit and not the body in which the spirit resides, but he agrees with us in rejecting the belief in generated eflects and in making God the producer of pain when the blow falls. He thinks it pessible for a blow to come with no consequent pain or nlf, in conformity with our atittude But he adhered to some unique errors for whi& the entire cemmuaity declares him a heretic Among them is his statement that God will be seen at the time of the Resurreetim in a form which He will create, and that He will address His creatures in that form2. He alw declared that deadly sins committed by Muslims8 are acts of hypoaisy and t h d the sinner is a hypocriteh and a mershipper of the devil, even though he a be Sunnite. He maintained that, in additieu to his being a hypocrite, the siilner is gieng God the lie and disavowing Him, and for that reason will be eternally condemned to the lowest depths of hell. Nevertheless, he is a believing Muslim. Then he pursued this 201 heterodox innovation still further and said that the sins of 'Ali, Talha and Al-Zubair were non-belief and polytheism but that they were forgivens in accordance with the transmitied tradition that God looked down upen the warriors at Badr and said: "Do what you please, for I have forgken you."' Another of his errors, and one in which he contradicts all rational beings, is his assertion that children in the cradle do not feel pain even if they are cut or burned7. He thought it possible that they experience pleasure while they are being hit or cut despite the apparent
'
With Mukhtear, 128; Ed. and MS. rj, Ace. to Ed., 16, he was a contemporary of W@il b. 'A!?. Goidziher points out the interesting fact that the Bairriyya wm a "one-man"
sent to queli the rebellious Khiiurisin and subdue HBritil. Having failed la bribe him reeourse was had to war. Welihaustn, I c. 474 i f , esp. 485-88. N q r was appointed governor of
sen. ZDMG, W (1907). 73. ' See int$cir, 144; Ash'ad, 287; MakGd, 349. ' AT.; Ahl aGKibla; it is a mare general term than Ahi al-Sunna and may
Khuririn in 125. Ed. L+; MS.
the Khawirij. ;lory, Szppldment, s. v. Kibla. ' Ash'ari, 286; IH,111, 229.
;el;
a brave soldier and faithful to the 'Umayyads. He
lent his assistance
to Nagr, and in the battle between Al-HBrith and Nasr, Sainl took Jahm pii9oner. His erecution in 128 is toid in Tab. 11, 1924, Lisan nl-MEzin, II, 142. From it Salm's great hatied for Jahm is apparent, no doubt because of his rebelliousness. Ed. Nahawend: MS. gloss. i-2. his is supported by ail authorities.
'
'
even include
IH, IV; 45, mentions only Talha and Zubalr in this connection; bnt see Ash'ari, 287 and 457, and Naubakhti, 13. Qbmad b. Hanbal, 11, 295-6.
' Ash'&,
288-7:
Maeid, ib.
crying and screaming. Finally he erred in introducing into law a prohibition against eating garlic and onions1 and he required an ablution alter mmbling had been heard in the bowelse. There is no notice taken of it in Fikh by the orthodox, contriry to the people of fancy. The DirHiyya-They are the followers of DiGr ibn 'AmrS who supported our stand that the acts of mankind are created by God and acquired by 'man and that the belief in generated effects is baseless. He agreed with the Muyazila that the power to act exists before the act. He even went further by maintaining that it persists before, during and after the act, and that it forms part of the one exerting i t He also followed Al-Naijir, since they both contelld that the body is an agglomeration of accidents such as color, tasfe, odor and others of which a body cannot be devoid'. Bui he stood alone in a number of impious statements. He said, for example, that o n . the day of resurrection God will b e seen with a sixth sense with which the faithful will behold God's essence5. He said: God's 202 essence is such as none other than He can know, but the faithlul will see it with a sixth sense. In this he was followed by Hafd al-Fard6. He also denied the Kur'inic readings of Ibn Mas'iid ind Ubai ibn Ka'b7 and he argued that God did not reveal them and he accused these two I m b s from among the Companions of Ash'ari, ib., informs us that he forbade a penan under such circumstances ia approach The law may be of Hindoo origin. CF. Shiites, 11, 76. ' ib. ' Like Bakr he was also a contemporary of the flrst Mu'tazilite. Usnl, 47; for further details of Pirb's view see Ed. 196 (above 10). "is view, for which all the Mutakallims condemn him, is quite acceptable to IH who, In stating that mankind will receive a special iaculty In the world to come, adds; Same of those who profess this view call it the sixtb sense, 111, 2, See Intislir, 133-4. ' He is described in Fihrisl, 180, as one of the staunchest Jabarites and similar in his views to Ai Najjir. I n t i ~ i r ib., , a s s e a definitely that he, as well as Dirir, was not a Mu'tarilfte The two are generally mentioned together. ' The editors of the two, respectively, out of the four pre-'Uthminic recensions of the Kur'i~.Ibn Mas'id's Ed. was adopted in K i i a and Ubai's in Damascus, For their lives as well as for a detailed discussion of the nature of their work see Noeldeke-Schwaiiy, Grschichte a mosque.
drs Qorons, 11 77-12.
error In their recensions1. Anather impiety was his suspicion of the common folk in the Muslim communitg, for he asserted: I do not know; perhaps the i:~ner thoughts of the common people are nothing but polpiheism and non-belief. He also declared that what we mean when we say that God is knowing or living is that He is not ignorant nor dead? and he drew similar p ~ a l l e l sfor all the .sther attributes of God, without establishing a meaning or deriving an advantage other than denial of the ~ualitiesby contradicilng them. -
' Shahr., 63. ' Ib
CHAPTER SEVEN
THE D O C T m E S AND CHARACTERISTfCS OF THE KARR~MIYYA The Karrarniyya in Khurisin form three groups, the Ijakakiyya, the Tara'ikiyya, and the Ishikina, These three divisions do not regard one another as heretical although the other sects condemn them as K s r s . For this reason we have counted them as one sect Its founder, known as M@ammad ibn Kaniml, was banished from Sijis6nP to Gharjis!ins. His followers in his time were the feebleminded of Sh6ramainL and Afsh:n, and they came with him5 to Nhhipilr 203 during the governorship of Muhammad ibn Tihir ibn 'Abdallah ibn Tihir6. A part of the population in the rural districts of NishiP% followed him in his innovations,
' He was born
in NhhZpBr where his father was a vintner (L*&
oGM&&
V, 354,
challenges this explanation of his father's name, claiming that it was rejected by the Kairhiyya themselves. See also Iji, 362). He grew up in Sijist5n and went from there to KhurisHn. Then he stayed in Mecca ior five years unUi h e was finally imprisoned there by TIhir b. 'Abdailah. After his release he went to Syria and from there to NlshZpfii, but was again arrested, this time by Mu@ammad ibn 'Abdailah ibn Tzhii, and was detained in prison for some eight years. When he obtained his freedom he went to Jerusalem where he died in 255. He was a pious and ascetic indiuiduai. The Sunilites descnbe him as a person whose exterior is fine but whose interior is vile. sam'zni, 476b-77% Lb%, 353-5; IA, VII. 149; N i ~ j i r n ,11, 24; Isf. 50a. 3
Ed. and MS. a&.
' The
common name tor GharjushZr, a distrltilct west of H e r 1 and south of Oharna.
Yakfit, 111, 785; Mukaddasi, 309.
Or Suramain which, together with Afshin, eonsiihlic the tvo important cities of GhaijushC. On the variants of the hvo names see Istakhd, 271 amd notes; and Mutaddasi, 309. See YabBt, ib.
' Reading w with Ms.;
Ed. r . He was appointed governor of Khur&Sn by Musla'in in 248, IA, Vii, 77. It was he
who imprisoned him, see first note.
and also a part of the weaversi and distressed ones' of the villages. The errors of his iollawers at the present day are so diverse that we cannot enumerate them by *oms or sevens but we should have to go thousands beyond thousands. We shall only mention the well-known among them, and these we shall relate with djsgust. Ibn Karrim urged his followers to ascribe corporeality to the Object of his Worship H e held that He is a body, possessing an end and limit below, where He comes i n contaa with His throne. This is similar to the doctrine of the Dualists, since their God, who111 they call Light, is limited on the side which borders on darliness3; but is not limited in the five other directions. In one of his books Ibn Karrim has described4 the Object of his Worship as a substance, just as the Christians believe that God is a substance. In this vein he wrote in the preface to his book, which is entitled The T o r t u r e s in the Grave, that God is a Unit of essence and a Unit of substance5. H& adherents at the present time d o not permit the -general public to use the word Lsubstance' for God,. fearing demaralization as a resuIt of its publication. But the application of the term body to. Him is more demoralizing than the use of the word 'substance'. Their refraining from calling Him substance, while asserting that He is a body, is like Shaitk alTake, the Rifidite, refraining7 from calling God a body while maintaining that He OF human fom~.No rule can be set as to the avoidance (of a term) when any one selected is bad.
' I.
e. the ignorani See ZDMG. LXY(IQII), 360. wnhMS.;.Ed. +dl,. Goidriher (ZDMG, ib.), reads 41,. 'Reading W e d i n g rYEJl with Mzkktosnr, 132 and Isf. ih.; MS. and Ed. &I!. Thls doctrihe has
been wpeciauy developed by the Manichearts, see Jacbon, Rescaichrs irr Mnnirhaeaism, 222-4. " A n exposition of his views nearly as full as our author's will be found in Shahr.,80-5. in. addition to the similarity behveen t h e Karrzmiyya and Christians which our author indicates, Sam'ini compares them to theJew& the Hishimiyya und JawHlikiyya (sec neM chapter) in their doctrine wliich ascribes a body to God, 477a. Reading +&I with MS. and 1st. 50b: Ed. #,+I: Shahr, 80. His real name is Muhammad ihn Nu'mk; IH, 11, 112 calls him ibn Ja'far, but see Inti?irr. 117, and Shiites, 11, 29. Naubalthti counts him, among others, as a svpponer of ~ s s a al-KZthim's clainls to the Caliphate, 66. '.Ed. adds the word i j before Shai!an which is not in MS., and is probably due to dittography.
' '
Ibn K m i m writes in his work that God touches Hii throne and that the throne is a place for Him. But his followers have substituted the word contiguity 204 (M%@&t) tor the word touching ( ~ u m a s a a t and ) explained: The existence of a body between Him and the throne is true only if the throne declines' downward9. This is the significance of touching, the use of which they avoid. His followus differ regarding the meaning of Istiw5 (firmness) which is used in His Word "the Merciful One sits firmly (Istaws) on His thronens. Some of them are of the opinion
' Reading k.with MS. and [is&, 77; Ed. e.. ' i. e., contiguity does not mean that there is another body
behveen
HLm and the throne,
unless the throne declines downward. Ufil,ib. On the distinction between touching and eonfiguiir, 1st ib., remarks: 'I wish I knew what Is the difference between them".
'
Sum 20, v. 5. This verse which Ooldriher has charaderllcd as "the sublecl of heated drsputes in Mnbammadan schools" (David Kaufmann Fetdehrift, 81) snves as an outstanding example of the cleavage between the literalists and rationalists. (A good illnstration of this is aiforded by the fact that in demonstration of the truth of literalism the six istiwa verses were pasted on the mosque in UamadBn. cited by Ooidziher, ZDMG, LXII [1908], 8). The attitude of the Hanballtes and MLlikites is simple. Refusing to go the full length of the Karramiyya they adopted the classic remark of M8ik's (see ibn Taimiyya, Rnsli'il 1, 432):
-
I know that God sits on His throne hut 1 do not h o w how (later adopted as a technical term: b i b haif=). This was adapted as the official stand of the more orthodox groups, esp. the Uanbalites; see Sabimi in Rasi'il Mun?riyya i, 110-112. It Is voiced most dearly by Al-Ash'ari, Ibina. 42-7. His adherents have more modified vim on the subject. Baidiwi, for example, 1, 327, vacillates between the two, explains "isfnwo" as "&tawla" but adds at the same time that "men who hold views consider i s t i w i as an attribute of God 'bila kaifd". Our author Baghdad1 is still more moderate. He transiarr "Istuwu 'ala 'Arshihi" to mean that the rule was h i y in Gad's conh~:, U:;!, 113. Ohaz8i (Greencia 103-4) Identifies 'arsh with God's power. F e n the Zahiiite ihn Harm forsakes his adherence to a literal interpretation and adopts the interpretation that God completed Hb creation with the throne 01, 125). This explanation
that the throne is a place for Him and that if He created many thrones alongside of the existing one and all corresponding with it, they would all become a place for Him, for He is greater than all of them. This view forces them to the conclusion that His throne at the present is equal to only i s width. But there are others who say that He is no larger than part of H His throne on the side where He touches it and no p& of Him overhangs it; this requires thai His measure be equal 80 the measure of the throne. There was one among the Karrimiyya in NishiPiu known as Ibrahim ibn Muhijii, who defended this opinion and took its side in discussions'. Ibn Karrim and his adherents hold that the Object of their Worship is a subject in which created entities exist They believe that His utterances, His will, His visual and auditorp perceptions, His contiguity to the uppermost surfaceP of the Universe, are all accidents originated in Him and He is the place for these creations which originated in Him4 His command to anything, "Be'', they term m act-of-creating that which has been created and of bringing-forth that which has been brought forth, and of causingdestruction4 to that which has perished &er existi~g. They refrain &om describing the properties originating in Him as wested or made or come-into-esistence. They also hold that no body or accident is originated in this world without the arising of many accidents in the essence of their Worshipped One, such as the will to produce that existence, His saying 205 to it "Be" in the manner in which He knows it is to exist eventually5. The utterance itself consista of many letters, each one of which is a pmpertg originating in Him. There is also the vision with which He will see the prc&tced object; if that vision were not created in Him, He could not see the object; also His hearing of what is created if it is audible. They likewise mainiain that no accident perishes in this world without the occurrence of many accidents in
Is also suggested by Matufidi, 17, th,ugh he himself prefers one similar to GhazUi's (ib,, 16). Abu Uanita also helive in the throne as interpreted by the pmviously clted theologians. iskandarl. 10-12. The Mu'tarila, of course, deny the IstiwV, explaining it to mean islawla, "made hlmstlf mastef' (Ash'ari, 157 and 211-12, UsiI,112; IH, If, 122, 123). The moat .piattsihle uplanation is probably Goldzlher's that it is b,rro!%,d from the Jewish idea that when the Sabbath came He rested and sat on his throne (1>laa t m 'm aw(1 n'mnpnrl naw UaW 'D). It seems therefare that Ibn parm comes nearest to lhc original meaning For a reiedon of the scvual metaphodcat illterpretations see lhn Tafml:ya, l. c., n, 31 If.
* The details of the discussion which took place in presence of MQmGd of Gharna (rho was their patron: ft. Macdonaid, Mzslim Theology. 170) between ibn Muhijir and Aha Ispak Isfamini are related, isf. 50h-51 a. ' Reading with Isf.; Ed. and MS. iip. See Shahr. 81 f. Reading il-13 wlth Doldziher; Ed. and MS. bl,. q.e., the words specifying what and how the substance is to be.
'
-
their Worshipped One. One is His will that it perish; another; His command to that whose extinction He desires "Become non-e8htentn or ''Perish". .This ut-.. terance also consists of many letters, every one oftwhich is an accident. origina*g: in Him. The weations originating in God's essence. 'we, from their stadpoinL, duplicates of the bodies and accidents in the Urivesel. The Karrimiyya diier regarding t h e possibiiity of the extinction of .thosg existences which. in their opinion, originate in God's substance. Some of them regard their non-existence as possible, but most of them consider it absurd2. However, both groups agree that God's essence will not become devoid, iq the friture, of .the creations inhering in Him, although it mas devoid of thtm at the beginning of time. This is similar. to the opinion of those who uphold me.Hylic hypothesis, tiiat primordial matter was eternally a substance devoid of properties until the accidents came to he in if; it shall henceforth not be devoid of them. The Karrimiyya differ regarding whether it is possible for the bodies in the Universe to perish, and most of them think it impossible, thus conforming to 205 those of the Dahripga and the philosophers who believe that the heaven and the
stars are a fifth element which is not subject to decay or destructiona. People are surprised at 'the assettion of the Mu'tazila of Basra that God can q u s e all bodies to perish all at once, but He cannot cause some to pecish while others survive But this surprise is naught in comparison with the view of the K&miyya that He is incapahle of causing a body to perish at all. Even more astonishing than all this is the fact that lbn Kqrim described his Worshipped One as possessing weight He has written in the Book of the Thures in the G a v e as a comment on God's Word. "when the heavens shall be cleft asunder"4 that they are rent asunder by the weight of the Merciful One pressing upon them.
'
Isf. accounts for this Strange theory by linking it with the theory of the Mqgians that when Yazdin contem&iiated that a rival might came forth in the UniversS H e took it to heart. As a result. of h Gormptton w a s created in His essence and He made Satan from it., 51 b., ' Reading JLl with Goldziher; Ed. and MS.; jl,f, both phrases, see U s i i 50 and the refutation of this view, 52; from isf. ib. we can gather that in general they held it to Se r.tmsd: R? objects that that will make an object existent and non-existentat the same time. See Shzkr. 52.-4. ' The Orthodox doctrine is stated Ed. 319 and 338 (below 181 and 208). Soia 82, v. I.
'
Ibn Karrim and the majority of his adherents believe that God has been eternally qualified by the names derived by philologists irom His acts, despite the absurdity of the eteinal existence of acts. He has been eternally a creator, sustainer and benefactor, even without the existence of acts of creation, sustenance and benefit He has been eternally a creator because of a creative faculty (gh2rlihiyya) in Him, and sustainer, because of a sustaining faculty (Riz%&a) in Him. They explain His creative faculty to mean His power to weate and His sustaining faculty as the power to grant sustenance This power is eternal, whereas the a d s of creating and sustaining originate in Him in time through this power of His. They say: By the act-of-creation the aeated object in the Universe becomes created, and by the ad-of-sustainiug the sustained one is sustained. Even more astonishing than this is their distinction between the Speaker (MutakaUim) and the Sayer and, similarly, between the Word and the Utterance. For they say: Verily, God has ever been a Speaker and a Sayer, but they distinguish between the meaning of the two names. They teach that He has always been a Speaker because of a Word, which is His power-to-utter, and He has been eternally a Sayer 207 because of a faculty-to-utter (K&liyya) and not because of the utterance1. Hir faculty to utter is His powerto-utter, but His utterance consists of ietters originating in Him. The utterance of God, according to them, is therefore created in Him, k t His Word is eternaly. relates: I discussed this point with one oi them and said to 'Abd him: Since you are of t l e opinion that the Word is ihe power-io-utter, and the silent person in his state of silence is, accoidiug .o you, capable of uttering, you are therefore forced to admit that the silent person is a speaker. He admitted i t Among the subtleties of the Xar~imiyy* in ihis connection is thcir following argument: We admit, generally speaking, that God h3s been eternally a creator and a sustainer, but we do not admit that He has never ceased to create the created and sustain the sustained in a particular relation. We rlcognize this relation only Srom the time when the created objects or the sustained ohjeds already existed. By analogy with this, they maintain that God never ceased to be worshipped but He has not been eternally worshipped by worskippers, becom-
P;L'il)
' Reading Jk with MS.; Ed. JA. ' Ld 52b.; See El, 11, 773.
ing so only when the worshippers and their worship came hlto existence. Ibn Kmam in his Book of the Tortuves in the G a v e prefiies a certain chapter of God". with an astonishing title, calling it "A chapier on the 'Qualitiness' The intelligent persos does not know what to wonder at, whether at his audaciip m accepting without reserve the word quality as an attribute of God or at his vileness in expressing quulity by quulitiness. He has a number of examples of this sort of usage, among which we find his statement in the section entitled Refutation of the Traditionists on Faith which reads as follows: "Lf their books (&g)should say, faith is word and deed, uze shall say to them so and so". In the same way he has designated in one of his books the place of the Objed 208 of his Worship by the term wbipuitousneas These ugly expressions match his ugly doctrine'. He and his followers, in discussing the objects of God's power, maintain that His power extends only over those created objects which are brought forth in His essence, such as His will, His utterances. His perceptions, and His contiguity to that with which He comes in contact, But the created bodies and properties in the world are in no way the objects of God's power, nor does His power extend over them all despite their created state. For He created every being in the world with His utterance "Be" and not with His power. In this innovation they have no predecessors. True, people before them have differed regarding the powers of God. Thus the Orthodox saya that every created being is the object of God's power before it was brought forth, He being the originator with His power, of all originated eutitiesa. Mu'ammar held that all bodies are the objects of God's pow- before He created them but that the accidents are neither created by Him nor objects of His power. Xost of the Mu'tanla assert that bodies, colors, tastes, smells, and the other types of accidents are objects of God's power, but they withhold from describing Him as possessiilg power over the objects of power ascribed to beings other than He4. The lahrniyyc say: All things brought forth are the objects of God's power and there is no poss?:nor
(%A)
(Gj,).
' Ib. 523: Irf. adds a few more camples. Adding JW after +li. with MS.; missing in Ed. Ed. 322-3 (below 185-6).
' Referring to the controversy over human a M 24
(#kS&);
of power and no agent other than He1. But no one before the KmHmiyya spoke about the limitation of God's power to weated objects which originate in His essence, according to them. Far be God from their views. In the field of God's justice and injusticea they have also proposed some astonishing theses. One of them is that the first entity which God created must have necessarily been a living body, endowed with reasons. They maintain that 209 if He had begun by inanimate objects He would not be wise. In this heresy they exceed the Kadariyya and their contention that there are certainly created beings for whom it is reasonable to assume understanding, but that the fird creation need not necessarily have been a living being endowed with reason. With this heresy they have repudiated true tradition to the effect that the first things which He created were the Tablet and the Pen; then He made the Pen trace upon the Tablet all that will take place on the day of resurrection4. They maintain that if God had created mankind while knowing that not one of them would believe in Him, His creation would have been a sport. But it pleased Him to create all of them because He knew that some of them would believe in Him The Orthodox retort that if He had created the unbelievers and not the believers, or if He had created the believers and not the infidels, it would still have been possible, and would not have impugned His justices. The KarrHniyya maintain that God's justice does not allow the deprivation of the lives of children about whom He knows that if He spared them to the time of their maturity they would be believersB. Nor is it right of -Him to bring death upon an infidel who, if he had been spared for a period of time, would have become a believer unless an a d of righteousness to someone else is involved in the premature death which he brings upon him 7. By this doctrine they are compelled to admit
' Ed.
199 (above 13).
' Reading >.+I>with
MS.; Ed. x,r;)!j. Vji, 336. This tradition which Ooldziher, who discusses it in ZA, XX11 (19081, 321, calls "ein sehr verbreitetes Hsdh" is recorded with various readings in Tab. 1, 29-38.
' This is See
Ed. 327-8
a Ashlati,
expounded more fully Ed 331 (below 198-9). 250.
' lb. and 249-50.
that God must have caused the death of lbrahh; the son of the Prophet, before his maturity, because He knew that if He had spared him he would not have been a believer'. In this way they slander all children of prophets, who died prematurely. Among their follies on the subject of prophecy and the apostolate is their belief that prophecy and apostleship are two attributes inherent in the prophet or 210 the apostle; they are no! the revelation to him, nor his miracles nor his immunity from sin. They hold that everyone who is affected by this attribute must necessarily be sent by God2. They distinguish between the apostle and the sent one in that the apostle is he in whom that attribute inheres, and the sent one is he who is charged with carrying the apostleship into execution. They next occupy themselves with the problem of the prophets' immunity from sin. They teach that they are immune from every sin which disqualifies them from giving testimony or which renders punishment necessary, hut they are not immune from lesser sins3. Some of them say that they cannot possibly sin while conveying the message, but others thimk it admissible. They believe that the Prophet was guilty of a lapse in delivering His Word: "And fiIanit is the third, the last",4 and in adding: "These are the exalted females whose intercession is to be sought after". The orthodox explain that this word was an interlocution by Satan who interpolated it between the parts of the Prophet's sermon. Our sheikh, Abu-l-Hasan al-Ash'ari, has asserted in one of his books that after the descent of prophecy upon them, prophets are immune from both deadly and minor sins. The K k i y y a also believe that when a prophers can is announced, it is incumbent upon everyone who hears it from him, or upon everyone whom a
' See Muh. Sf., 11.
105-6.
' 19. 53 a contends lhat by this definition they deny to
the Prophet the acquired acts on the merit of which he becomes worthy of prophecy and thus deny his reward. In Ibn KarrWs endre heretical conception d prophecy and apostleship Tor Andrae would recognize the 6sioC W@ms of the Pneumatles. Die Person Muhammeds, 292-4. ' On the question of the prophers' immunity from sin see Ed. 333 (below 201-2). ' Sura 53, v 20. The second half of the verse cited in tHe Text does not occvr in the Kt!.-&; but see Lane, s.7. ;t'.i. An elucidating discussion of the entire problem in cannemon With this Terse will now be found in Tor Andrae's recentiy published Mohammed scin Lebcn und Glaub.?, 14-19,
report of him reaches, to put his W t in him and to confess his belief in hinv without waiting for a recognition of his proof l. They stale this innovation from the Ibidiyya among the Khawirij whb argue that the prophet's utterance about himself: '1 am a prophet" is i n &selP proof which requires no other ,signa. The Karrim'iyya further hold that one whom the call of the prophet has not reached is bound to believe the rational axioms and to believe mat Godsends messengers 211 to mankind4. Most of the Radariyya have already anticipated them in the view regarding the necessity of believing in ceitaiIl rational principles, but no o n e before 'them has declared that it i i necessw to beliOve in the existence o r prophets before reports of their existence have arrived: The KmZmiyya also maintain that if God had confined the charge unto mankind to one messenger from the beginning of time to the Day of Jildgment, and conti-aged the law of the first messenger,He would not be ,just. The Sunnites reply that !i Qua had done this it would be admissible just as the law of the Seal of the Prophets to tiis communitv until the Day of Judgment is admissible. Ibn Karrim tackled nexf the question of the Imsmate. He allowed the incumbency of two Imims at the same time despite the ensuing qumcls, the engagements in battle, and the divergences in laws. He uses as psof tiie fact that both 'Ali and Mu'iwiya. were ImSms at the same tim"e4 'The adtierents of each of the two were obliged to obey the other even though one of them was just and the other a usurper. His followers say that 'Ali was the %im in conformity to the Sunna, while Mu'iwiya was an h i m in contradiction to the Sunna, yet it was the duty of the followers of each of them to obey the other. Is there anything more ,wonderful than the duty to obey something that contradicts the Sunna? The K k i y y a also attacked the problem of faith. They hold that it
' For the reiatiqns see Andrae, Pcrson
' Reading
++
between this view and a possible skeptidsm about prophede miracles Muhammcds, 115-16. with MS; Ed.
"'Ed. 86.
' Shahr.,
84.
' Shahr.. 85; Iji, 363; U?&, 274. For the Orthodox affltude to this phenomenon
see Ed.
342 (below 214).
consists only of a single confession made at the beginning of time. Its repetition is not regarded as an act of faith except from an apostate who confesses it afthis apostasy\ They maintain that it is the confession which was made for the iirst time by the offspring from the loins' of the Prophet when they declared: a12 Certainly? They believe that this declaration endures forever, becoming ineffective only in case of apostasy. They also believe that he who confesses in both parts of the Shahida is a believer even he is a convinced heretic with rerpect to the apostleship'. They also hold that the hypocrites, concerning whose disbelief God has revealed many verses in which He condemns them as infidels, are believers indeed and that their faith is as pure as that of the prophets and the angels4 Regarding the people of fancy who oppose their views as well as the views of the Sunnites they teach that their punishments in the world to come are not eternal. In truth, however, the people of fancy will witness the peqetuJ sufferings of the Karrimiyya in hell. Ibn Karrim further introduced stupidities without precedent in the fikh. Among them is his statement that it is sufficient for the traveller6 to say the Al&h &ac hdce without kneeling, bowing, standing, sitting or reciting the Shahida or the Salutation I ; also his declaration that it is proper to offer prayer in dirty clothes and on dirty ground and with a dirty body! Yet he required ablutions for ~ G t and h not for An&9 He also ruled that the washing of the dead and prayer aiter them are customs not ordained by law. What is obligdtOT
' Reading u,,
u! with MS.; Ed. u , y .
* Reading & with MS.;
' Referring to S u n 7,v.
Ed. .Jl.
171. See the traditions around this verse, Tirmidht, It, 180-81. See iji, tb ; Isf. 53a-b; The Prophet is apparenliy Adam. Ash'ari, 141; Shahr. 84; Isf. 53% iji. ib ; IH. 11, 112. Same sources as above. ' Reading JLwith Ed.: MS. kL. See J"ynbo11, 70, for the Sh3iiCite regulanon for a traveller; for the various technical terms, lb. 75-80; See M u r a (Umm,1, 121-30 margin). See Sh%Iciterequirements Juynboll, 71-2. Ahil~ithand Anj& are two types of impurity. The former includes smcnal mchargs. eontact with a woman to whom one Is not married, elf. The second is applied to contact with unclean obiecls. Jllynboll, 72-4, esp. 72, note %
' '
consists merely ~n shrouding and burying them1. He also recognized the validity of prayer, fasting, or the pilgrimage unaccompanied by concentration', maintaining that the devotion inherent in IsPm since its beginning compensates for the d e v a tion required with every commandment in k h . In o w time a sheikh of the Karrimiyga, ibrahim ibn Mnhiilr by name, has devised unprecedented errors. He believes that all of God's names are accidents in Him and, similarly, the name of anyone who is designated by it is an accident &him the bearer. He holds that the name A&& is an accident inhering in a primordial body, 81-Rahmin (the Merciful One) a second accideut, & R d i zm 213 (the Compassionate) a third, and ~ l - K k $ (the c Creator) a fourth. Thus every name of God is an accident distinct from the other. All.& in his view, is not A&Rdmin, and A&Rah&n is not 81-Ruh~m,and AZ-K&lik is not & - R i d (the Sustainer). He holds further that "adultere?' is an accident in a body to which adultery is attributed and, similarly, "thief" is an accident in one against whom a charge of theft is made. But the body is neither adulterer nor thief. The flogged or amputated person, according to him, is not the adulterer nor the thief. He also holds that motion and the mover are two accidents in the bo*; in the same way blackness and the black are two accidents in the body, and so knowledge and the knower, power and the powerful, liie and the living, are ail accidents but not bodies. Knowledge, to hi mind, does not reside in the knower but in him who is the place for the knower, and motion does not abide in the moving object but in that which is the place for the moving object. 'Abd-al-Kihu relates: I held a disputation on this question with this Ibrahb ibn Muhijir in the presence of N5$r al-Dawla, Abu-1-Hasan Muhammad ibn ibrahh ibn Simjer, General of the Saminid army, in the year 37OS. h it I to the ShWites all the foor Practices are required by Law, ib, 170. Niya (veq similar to Heb. Kawwini) A- to Mubarnmadan law, not only are an inner preparation and full-heartedncss required with external prachces but an actmi dedaratloll to the cflect See Hoghes, Dictionary of Islam, 434. He had held the generalship for a long time (the first record of it in the year 354, l.4, vll, 417; he had p d o u s l y been chief of KhurSs3n. was m o v e d , but reinstated) mtn he 1 Acc.
' Arab. '
raas flnaliy removed to 371. He is accused of having become too m n g and independent I& M, 7 He did not accept his removal and beams a rebel until he was killed in 372 Ib., 17-20. See also Wtbi, 95-11s
CHAPTER EIGHT
forced him to admitthat the perSon flogged for adultery is not the adulterer a n d that the person whose hand is amputated for theft. is not the thief. Then I forced him to admit that the Object -of his Worship is an accident since, according to him, the Worshipped One is aname, and the names of God in h i s view are accidents. inherent in a primordial body. He retorted : The Worshipped. One is
2x4
an accident in a primordial body but I worship the body and not the accident But 1.. m e r e d him% I n that case1 you do not worship Allah, because AUah. according to you, is im accident' and you maintain that you worship the body and not the accident. The ignomink of the Karrimiyya are very numerous. But we have cited n sufficient number. of them in this chapter, and Allah knows best -
' Reading F'!
with Ms; Ed.,
a.
123E DOCTRINES OF THE ANTHROPOMORPHISTS AMONG THE VARIOUS DIVISIONS Know, may God make you prosper, that the Mwlubbiha (anthropo~orphists) fall under two categories, one of which likens the eslrilce of the Crr.ator to the essence of others, and another which draws a similarity between His attributes and the atuibutes of others. Each of these two is split up into many snbdivisions. The Mushabbiha c hose enor consists in comparing His essence to that of others comprise a number of groups. The rise of the dochine of anthropomorphism is liilked with several groups among the Batti$idl. One of them is the Sabbibiyya who called 'Ali God and identified him ~ i t hthe essence of God. When he committed a number of them to the flames they declared: Now we know that you are God for none but God punishes with fire1. Another is the Bayiniyya, adherents of Bayin ibn S a m 5 who believed that his Worshipped One is a person of lighta and possesses limbs which have a human form; He will perish completely save His face. Still another is the Mugbhiyya, followers 01 Mughka ibn Sa':d al-'Ijli who believed that the Object of hi Worship possesses limbs and that they are shaped like the leiters of the alphabet. Then there are the Mansiriyya, followers of Abu M a n ~ t ral-Tjli, who likened himself to his Lord, believing that he was raised to heaven. He also thought that Gad patted him 215
' Ail the seeis of the Ghulit Rowif+ are treated mare fully in the n u t section and therefore no details will be given about them in this chapter. The tradition is related in Bukhirl, II, 352; the Prophet once sent a detachment with inslructions that if they found certain men they were to bum them. As they were prepadng to leave, he said ta them: I told you to bum them, but only God punishes with Are: if you find them kill them. Cf. Bnd'mal-TcrFkk, V, 131 (Arabic 125). Reading ~9with MS.; Ed. ,J.
'
on his head with His hand and said: 0 my son, convey a message horn Me. Among them are also the Khattibiyya who profess the divine character of the Imims and of Abu-I-Khaitib al-Asadi, also those who profess the divinity of 'Abdallah ibn Mu'iwiya ibn 'Abdallah ibn Ja'far. They include the Huliliyya who believe that God inheres in the person of the Imams, and who, in consequence of it, worship the Imims; the Huliliyya who are called Hulminiyya and are traced to Abu Hulm5.n1 al-Dimishki, who maintained that God inheres in every beautiful form; he used to prostrate himself before every beautiful form. Among them are the Mukanna'iyya Mubayyida situated in Ma-wars-n-nahr, who assert that Al-Mukanna' was a god and that he assumes a particular form in every age. There are also the 'Azikiraz who believe in the divinity of Ibn Abu-I-'Azskir who was executed in Baghdad. All of these groups which we have mentioned in this chapter are excluded horn lslam although they externally claim relationship with it. We shall specify in detailS the doctrines of each of these groups in the fourth section of this book when we get to it, God willing. In addition, there are sects among the Mushabbiha whom the theologians have included among the sects of Islam because they alfiim the obligatory character of the precepts in the Kur'in, since they recognize the binding force of the fundamentals of the Law of lslam such as prayer, fasting and the pilgrimage, and because they confirm the prohibitive nature of the forbidden things. hey regard them as Muslims despite the fact that they err and are heretics with respect to some of the intellective principles. This division includes the Hishimip 216 y a t which traces its origin to Hishim ibn al-Hakam al-Rifidi5. He compared his Worshipped One to a human being6 and believed as a result that He
' With
46-
MS.; Ed. and b L . Ed. i l l i l l ; MS.. doubffil, but see below 84.
Reading J 4 with Ed.; MS. &. Ed., 47-51 (Seeiye, 67-70). W i e d c. 200 A. H. He lived in KEfa and this fad is cited b+ Ibn Harm several times to strengthen the validity of his testimony (eg. Skiitcs, 1, 63 and 72). For more biagiaphical details see Shiites 11, 66-6 and inti?nr, 177-8. Acc to ln!isdr, 41, he was a friend of Abu ShiMr al-Daiqini, the father or grandfather of the founder of the Karmatian movement. See ~ d . ,266 (below 108). Hla antfopomorphie views are treated in detail, Ash'ari 31-3; Mabsri. 348 (He says that they are also called Hakamiyya).
measures seven spans by His o m span and that He is a body having ends and limits. He is describable in terms of length, width and depth and is endowed with color, taste and odor. It has been reported in his name that the Object of his Worship is like an ingot' of rilver or like a revolving pearl? It has been reported of him that he pointed out Mount Abu Yubais as being larger than H e 4 lt is also reported of him that he maintained that the rays emanating from his Worshipped One fall upon whatever He sees" A detailed account of his anthropomorphic views has already been given by us in the specials study of the doctrines of the imamiyya. lt includes the Hishimiyya who are associated with Hishgm ibn Silim al-JawiEki =.He was of the opinion that the Object of his Worship is cast in the shape of a human and that His upper half is hollow and the lower solidT. He has black hair and a heart hom which wisdom flows 4 Another one of them is the Yfinusiyya which owes its existence to Y k u s ibu 'Abd al-R@m& alKummis. He held that God is borne by those who bear His throne although He is heavier fhau they, just as the crane is supported by its two legs although it is heavier than they1% There are the Mushabbiha who are related to Daud
e.
W wiUl MS.; Ed. 33, calls attention to the fan that in one year he held five different damjna on the nature of God. See Shiitea, 1, 53. Reading
' Ash'ad,
' Abu Kubais is the highest mountain near Mecca, Yakit, I, lOlt
See E d 48 andAshCad,ib. explains that this is bow He bows what is under the earth and adds that if it were not for his idea of rays the doctrine would be orthodox Ed. &&; MS. ' Or Juwillkl (Shiites. 11, inden, s.v. H i s h i m ; Strothmann reads: Juwailiki, EI, N, 352b),
' AshCarl,33,
Acc. to TEsi, who cites a polemical work against him, written by Hishim b. al-~akam(Intirir, 176), he Lived in the second century. Naubakhti lists him, Hishsm b. a l - H b , 'Ubald b. Zursra [b. A'yun71 and others as J u p p o d e ~of MEsa al-@!him's claims to the Imamate, 66. ' This view is ascribell by Ash'arL 153 and Shahr., 97, to al-JawHribi (see below). Makrlzi, ib., agrees with our author. Ash'ari reports that he also ascribed the five senses to God, and so also Ma@Izi. Batk Fihiist, 220 and Ash'ad 35, name him Mawla of the family of YaGIn. On the family see Fihrist, 224. l o Ash'ari, ib.; Ed., 53 (Seclym, 72; boih Ed. .,-,dl and Seeiye (the throne) miss the point In the comparison).
al-Jawiribi'. He described his Worshipped One as possessing all the human organs except the pudenda and the bearde. There are also the IbAmiyya who trace their origin to !brahim ibn Abu YGya al-Aslamia. He belonged to a group of traditionisis but he erred in anthropomorphism and was therefore branded as a liar in many of his traditions. Another one of them is the Hi'i!iyya among the yadariyya. They are linked with Abmad ibn usfit who was one of the Mu'tazifites 217 who regarded themselves as disciples4 ot Al-Nazzim. .. He likened %a ibn M q a m to his Lord, believing him to be the second God, and that it is he who will call mankind to account on the day of resurrection. Still another one is the K m i miyga and its declaration that God is a body possessing an end and limit, that He is the place for all created entities, and that He is contiguous to His throne. We have already given an adequately detailed account of their doctrines. A!l of these compare God's essence to that of His creatures. As for the Mushabbiha who liken His attributes to the attributes of Hia created beings, they consist of a number of groups. One of them likens the Will of of God to the will of His creatures. This is the doctrine of the Mu'tazi!a Basra who hold that God wills the objects of His WiU with a created will. They believe that His Will is of the same genus as ours. However, they contradict this assertion by saying that it is possible for God's Will to be created not-in-asubject; the ereation of our wiU is possible only in a subject. This therefore
* This name appears In a number of variants but AI-Ash'ari's reading adopted above Is, doubt, the correct one, as it is supported by Shahr., 143, MSan, I, 326; Lwin ol-M&n, 11, 427 and Izti?ir, 67. Isf. B. also reads Jawsribi but lsf. P, Hawzd. See Shiifes, U, 67-8. -Midin and Lisa* abM%an, lb., relate that he is the chief of the antropomomhists and is condemned to hell. In a tradition he is dassed with Bishr d-MdsL Sam'Bni, s. v. Hishzmi; Shahr, 77. lbrahim ibn Muijammad ibn Abu Yahya (died 184 A. H) is a RBwi who was suspected of Mu'iaziiism, Jabarism, and RBfidism. Most traditiodlsts did not eredit his transmissions. When MSiik was asked about the authentidty of hts repom he answered that neither they are to be tmted nor his religious behavior. Others call him a liar outright. It is noteworthy hawever that Al-ShXi, who knew of his Kadarite views, heard and shldied his traditions and later utilized them although he mentions the R M by his Kvnya or memly by the name ibiahlm. See M Z n no
1, 71-9.
' Reading I-
with Ed.; MS. h,Ul.On the HYItiyya see Ed., 260-1 (below 99-100).
contradicts their doctrine that His Will is of the same genus as our will, because when two things are alike and of one class, then that which is possible for either of them is admissible for both and what is impossible for either is impossible for both. The Karrbipya exceeded the Muqazila of B w a in comparing the Will of God to the will of His creatures, by believing that His will is of the same genus as ours and that it is created in Him just as our win is ueated in us In consequence of this they maintain that God is the subject of all creation. Far be God horn this. Another group is represented by those who draw a resemblance between God's word and the word of His creatures1. They hold that God's speech consists of sounds and letters belonging to the same species as the sounds and letters which are ascribed to mankind They teach the creation of His Word, and 21s all of them, with the exception of Al-Jubbii, dedare the eternitg of God's speech to be absurd One of them, Al-Nazzb, .. said: There is nothing miraculous in the composition of God's Word just as there is nothing remarkable about the composition of the speech of mankLrd The majority of the Mu'taziliks believe that the Ethiopians, Turks and Khazarsa are capable of produdng a Kur'5.n similar to ours or even more rhetorical: only they lack the knowledge required for the compilation of such poetry. But this knowledge may we3 be within their power. The Karrimiyya joined the Mu'tazila in affirming the ueation of God's Word, but they distinguish between utterance and speech by declaring that the utterance of God, far be He from it, is of the same speaes as the sounds and letters produced by mankind, and that His speech is His capacity to originate the Word They esceed the Mu'tazila in their doetrine about the originated character of God's utterance in His essence, proceeding on the basis of their fundamental principle that God may be conceived as the subject of all created entities. Another group among them are the Zuririyp, followers of Z u k a ibn A'pn al-RScji4. They teach the creation of all of God's attributes and assert that they
' ed,325-6 'Ed.
(MOW
m;Shahr.,
78-9.
*$I.
' Inti+, 19; the author denies this charge against the Ma'tarfla. ' A c t to Fihrist, 220, his real name Is 'Abd Rabbihi and his father was a Greek (or Roman) slave. He is charadeslzed as one of the oatstamding ShFites In F&h aad Had&.
35
belong to the same genus as our attributes. They believe that God was not eternally living nor knowing nor powerful nor willing nor hearing nor seeing. He became entitled to these attributes only when He created for Himself lie, power, knowledge, will, hearing and seeing, just as one oi us becomes living, powerful, hearing, seeing and willing when life, power, will, knowledge, hearing and seeing are ueated in Hims. There is another group among the R a d d which 219 teaches that God does not know a thing until it comes into edstence. They therefore require that His knowledge be created just as it is necessarg for the knowledge of any knower among us to be ueated. If we should prolong this chapter it will become elongated and the tsain of its garments will innease. We have already given a detailed exposition of the doctrines of the M'ntazila and the Mushabbiha and of the other people of fancy in our book which is called Book of Religions and Dogmas. What we have related of these things in SIS chapter is adequate, and AUah knows best. nsh'aa, 36. He names his adherents
e. As Friedlander points out (Shiites. 11, 661
Zurira's view is adopted fmm Hisham b. ai-Bakam. Cf. Ed. 49 (Seelye. 68).
SECTION FOUR
AN INQUIRY INTO THE FACTIONS WHICH CLAIM TO BELONG TO ISLAM BUT DO NOT' The discussion in this section will center on the differences of opinion among theologians as to who is to be reckoned within the community and faith of Islam. We have already mentioned previously that some people think that membership within the community2 of Islam is granted to everyone who confesses the prophecy of Mlgammad and that everything which was revealed through him is true, regardless of what his views besides that may be. Thii is the systems of Al-Ka'bi in his treatisaL The Karemiyya think that membership in the community is extended to everyone who says: There is no God but Allah, Mulpmrnad is the Prophet of Allah, regardless of whether he is sincere in it or believes the contrary. These two groups are forced to include the isawiyya5 and the Shadhkiniyyae
' MS.
adds d bdore W; omitted in Ed. W with MS. Ed. -4.
' Reading
Reading with MS. .'+I; Ed. >&%I.For translation see Rizi, 161. Ea, 8 (Seaye, 27); for his biography see Sam'Hni, 485a. F~llowersof 'isa of Ispahi.. For hls system see Shahr., 168. Without eEteIing into the history of the long discussion around the identity of this group and its relation to the Yvdghhiyya (see e. g. REJ, IMM [18941, 207, and LX [1910], 311). a
it will be best to quote PomamIry, probably the best authority on this subjed; "Together with the Yudghsnilrga, the Xaraite Japhet b. 'Mi (and similarly other praites) ineludethe Shadgh~nifya Acc. to Oraetr they are the Mushkwyya, but I prefer the view of Schreiner (REJ, XXM, 207). that they are the SharMnlyya or the Shadghiniyya, concerning whose founder the Arabic author 'Abd-si-phir al-Bagbdidi relates that he maintained that Go# sent Muhammad to the A& and the other nations, revealed the i(ur5n to him and enjoined the fundamentals of the lslamie Law on him lo that case it is possible that the Shadghhiya are part of the Mushkiniyya. Japhet inMer relates that they also taught Oilre the Yudghaniyya) that we are not required to
m o n g the Jews within the communitg of Islam, because these affirm that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah, believing however that Muhammad was sent to the Arabs. They acknowledge that what he enjoined is true. Others among the jurists teach that inclusion in the Community of Islam can be extended to whomever believes in the obligatory character of the five prayers directed toward the Ka'ba. But this ia not true because most of the apostates who aposiasized by refusing to pay the poor-rate in accordance with the 221 Covenant of the Companions, nevertheless recognized the necessity of offering prayer in the direction of the Ka'ba. They only reverted from the faith by their denial of the compulsory poor-rate These are the apostates among the Banii Kinda and Tadm.' The apostates mong the Bani Hadfa and the Bani Asad have become heretics for two reasons. In the first place they rejected the compulsory pooprate, and in the second, they acknowledged the prophetic character of MusaiJima and TulaihaP The bani^ Hanifa rejected in addition the compulsory morning and evening prayers and heaped heresy on h e r e ~ y . ~ The approved view, according to us, is that membership in the Community of lslam is extended to everyone who &ms the creation of the Universe', the unity and pre-existence of its Maker, and that He is just and wise, rejecting at the observe the laws of Purity and impurity in the Diaspora and that festivals are celebrated only for commemorative reasant. Another -strange thing related of the Shadghsniyya is that in their vlew a sinner has to fast forty days because the meaning of 'he in to strike him forty' (Deut, XW, v. 3) is fasting; .......the fast must he observed in the month of Shebat. At any rate we may well consider the Yudghmiyya, the Mmhk2,niyya and the ShadghZniyya as one sect', Reskumoth, edited by Druaynov, 1, 215. See Shahr. 13. On the matter of the Ridda see Caetani, Annali daN'I.lnm, "01. n (sub anno It), 3 83 It
-
'
'
On these pmpheh see bdww (201). As Becker has pointed out their names were ldaslama and Talha, but were turned into diminutives as a markof smm. Cambridge Mediaeval History, 11, 336. On those apostate sects see MOUer I, 173-183; see a h Ed, 333 and 335 melow 101 and 204). A much more mended treatment of the orthodox aeed is afforded in Seetion V of this book See also Ibino, 7-13, and a translation from Al-Nasafl in MacDonald, Mvslim Tkaolopy, 308-315.
'
'
same time both ~ a s h b i h(anthropomorphism) and ~a'Gl(divesting of attributes). He must also acknowlege the prophecy of a l l His prophets and the veraciq of the prophecy and apostolate of Muhammad t o all mankind, and theperpetuation' of his Law; thal everything which was revealed to him is true and that the y d i n is the source of all the precepts of His Law. He must also recognize the duty of the five prayers in the direction of the Ka'ba, of the poo-rate, of the fast of Ram* and of the pilgrimage to the House, which are required of the communiiy as a whole. Whoever professes all this is included within the people of the community of Islam. Aftcr this he is to be obsemed; if be does not adulterate his faith with an abominable innovation which leads to heresy, then he is a Sunnite Unitarian. But if he joins to it some abominable innovation he is to be watched. If it is along the lines of the heterodoxy of the Bitiniyya,' the Bayiniyya, the Mughiriyya, the Mansidyya, the JaniMyya, the Sahbibiyya, or the WaGibiyya among the Rawiid; or if he follows the doctrine of the Uuliiliyya or the doctrine of the believers m metempsychosis or the rites of the Maimiiniyya or the Yez'diyya among the 221 Khawkij or the Himkiyya among the Kadariyya; or it he is of those who forbid in their own name anything whose la-wiulness the yur'5.n has indicated or of those who allow in their own name anything which the Kur'in has forbidden, he is not regarded as one of the Community of Islam4 But if his heterodoxy is of the type of the Zaidiyya or imamiyya Rawifid or of the heterodoxies of most of the K h a d j or the Mu'tazila or of the Najjariyya, the Jahmipya, the Diri~Iyya, or the Corporealists among the community, he is counted as one of the community of Islam with respect to certain laws; namely, he may be buried in the cemetery of the Muslims and he is to receive his share of the spoils if he makes a raid with Mnslims. He is not prevented from entering the mosques of the Muslims or from praying in them. In other respects he is excluded from the Muslim community. Prayers on his behalf or in his memory are not lawful; his meats may not be
4,
' Reading rb with MS ; Ed and so hrovghout the book wirere the word yt appears in Ed. I cannot see the reason why Hiffl plefen the reading of our Ed. to his MS, reading which eonforms to tha! of our Ms. Mukhtosmr, 140. All Of the seds listed here are treated in the foiio!wing chapters of this section. For the regulations governing the various pects of islam see ~ d . ,348 fi. (below
'
'
21s nj
eaten nor can any woman [following any of the above heresies] be married to a Sunnite nor may anyone of them many a Sunnite woman. The sects which pretend to belong to Islam externally, while in reality they are excluded from the community, are twenty in number. This is their list: Sahbih i p , Bayiniyya, Harbiyya, ~ u ~ G r i y y aMan~iriyya, , Janibiyya, Khatjibiyya, Ghuribiyya, Mufawwida1 [Dhammiyyax Shurai'iyya, NGriyya], Huliiliyya, the believers in metempsychosis, Ha'itiyya, Yirniriyya: Maanna'iyya, Ruzimiyya, Yddiyya, Maiminiyya, B i e y y a , the uallijiyya, the Az?&biyya4 and the Licentiom. Generally, 223 --. each of these seds has branched out into many sub-sects which we shall specify in detail in a separates chapter, God willing. -
' With
MS.: Ed., Mufawwidiyya. do not appear in Ed.
' The three sects in brackets ' With MS.: Ed., HimBdiyya.
With MS.: Ed, AdhSkiriyya.
' Reading z.4
with MS.; Ed. Z . 4 .
CHAPTER ONE
THE DOCTFUNE OF T F SABBABIYYA1 AND THEIR EXCLUSION FROM ISLAM' The Sabbibiyya are followers of 'Abdallah ibn Sabi'3 who exaggerated with respect to 'Ali, maintaining that he was a prophet. Then he exaggerated still further believing that he was a God'. He spread propaganda for this belief among the erring K5tes. The story of this group was reported to 'Ali who ordered a nnmber of them to be burnt in two pits5 so that one of the poets sang concerning it: May misfortunes hurl me wherever they will So long as they hurl me not into the two pits. However, 'M feared to burn the rest of them lest the people of Syria
' Generally and
more correctly Mied Sab5'iyya after its founder. The spelling Sababiyya
meaning to accosc or or SabbWiyya is explained in Shiites 11, 41, a s a derivative horn denounce and appiied to this sect because of its hostile attitude to the three Khaljfs who preceded 'Ali. Cf. also 2. c., appendix A,, p. 1 4 2 For a critical sNdy of ibn SabY as well as an appraisal c f t h e motives behind the various statements made by sect-historians see Friedixnder's article in ZA, m i l and XXiV, (19091910). In iannection with if Friedlander has translated most of this chapter XXIiI. pp. 308-313 and ediited it completely, as well as lsf., XXIV, 38-43. His full biography is given EI, I, s.v.; elso Friedl#ndcr, ZA, XXN, IOff. He relates him to the Felarhas of Abyssinia on the basis of his mother's name (SawdP-Black) and his teachings which are a mixture of Jewish and Christian views, 26 ff., erp. 27.
' He is reported to have said to 'Ali: i i l i i l (you are you), a manifestly Suflistic utierancc, ~sh'ari, 15, and Shahr. I, 132 (~aaibnicker ZOO). ~ccordingto ~ d ~ ~ l - ~ d r i k k , V, 131 (Arabic 125) he expressed himself even more fully: You are the God of the Universe, YOU are Our Creator and Supporter, you grant us life and send death upon us. Friedlander, ZA, XXXliI, 319, rejects this as definitely unauthentic. ' Despite all the authorities who report this auto-da-fe, Friedlander doubts its historicity svspecting it to be an Imamite invention (ZA, XXiII, 316 ff). '3. this view as upounded by Marsignori, Passion ba&HaUadj, I, 138 ff. and below, 83.
rejoice o v a his calamities' and, moreover, he dreaded the opposition of his adherents. So he banished ibn Sabi' to Sabbat-al-Madain.' When 'Ali was killed, ibn Sabi' held that the slain one was not 'Ali but a devil who appeared to the people 224 in the likeness of 'Ms. IAli himself ascended to heaven just as 'isa ibn Mariam had ascended there. He said: Just aa thc Jews and Christians lie4 in aWrming the execution of 'isa, so the Nisihss and Khawirij lie in alleging 'M's assassination. However, the Jews and Christians saw a crudfied person whom they confused with isa Similarly those who affirm the killing of 'Mi saw a slain person who resembled him, so that they were of the opinion it was 'M. Bnt 'Ali, in truth ascended to heaven, and he will surely come down to earth6 and take revenge of his foes. Some of the SabbZbigya believe that 'M ia in the clouds1, that the thunder is his voice, and the lightning his whipB. Whenever anyone of them h e m the sound of thunder he says: Peace be upon you, 0 Prince of the Faithfull It is told in the name of 'dmir ibn Shnri$lg alSha'bi1° that when Ibn Sabi' was told: Behold, 'Ali was killed, he replied: Even" ii you bring us his brain in a bag We This refers to the tivn w a n in progress at the time between 'All and the 'Uman'ads. Persia a b u t ten tarasangs from Ushasins, the birth-place of the famous general AI-Afsh?", and twenty farssangs from Samarkand, YakGt, Nt,, S.V. ' Thls belief is probably traceable to the Manichees who held the same about lesur. Shiite, U, 29-30 and ZA, ILXIY (1910). 1-2, and to the Gnostic docetic doctrine. with m. *if; MS.
' Town m
+. ' People who make a tenet of the hatred
for 'AH, including the KhawBlii generslw llld a number of Suonltes. They are the counterpm of the RawiH6 who venerate 'All and disparage Abu Bekr, 'Omar and 'Uthmin. See Ooidzihds m u n u s on them in Litrraturgrochichte, 491-95,
T$-&'Aris,
I, part 4. I t ; and Shiites, 11, 159. dxseusslan of the Raj'a (return), Shiites, U, 23-28,
' See Medlsnders
' lb. 42-3.
cap.
W
' Wim MS. 4.~: Ed ap. ' ed. &I>; MS. possibly c o m d 'O Resident of Kitfa, one of Mupammad's mast zealous adherents, a jurist and a Poet He is said to have transmitted traditions from 150 Companions of the Prophet Bom 20 Or 31
A. H, died 103. His hosdle attitude to the 'Umayyada la dted Muh. St., hausen. Oppositroruparfeicn. 77. MS. ;rl, which Wedlander sorrccla to (;I; Ed. 51.
a, 40.
See also Well-
shall not admit the truth of his death,' fora he shall not die until he descends from heaven and rules over the entire world.s This group holds that the expected Mahdi is in truth 'Ali and no one else. Regarding this group Ishik ibn Suwaid al-'Adawi4 recited his Kasdah in which he declares himself free from the KhawHrij and the Rawsd and the Kadariyya The following verses are taken from it: I declare myself bee from the Khawirij; I am not one of them; From the GhazAs among them and from ibn Bib;" And from the people who, when they mention 'Ali, Send greetings to the clouds But I love with all my heart - for 1 know that that is the truth The Apostle of God and al-Sidd;k: a love For which I expect in the future a goodly reward. Al-Sha'hi tells that 'Abdallah ibn S a ~ d i supported '~ the doctrine of the Sabbibibiyga Ibn Sawdi' was originally a Jew, a native of Herat9 but he feigned
-
' ZA, XXU, 321 ft where this ' With MS. d;omitted in Ed. ' ZA, 1 ,
anecdote is discussed.
xxlli, 321 ff The more usual phrase in general and in this conneetian la
;u
Y= j ~ Y W. l (until he fills the world with justice as it is now filled with injusece). Naubakhti. 19, Shahr, 132; Shitfe.9. 1, 45. On BaghdBdi's valiant see ib. 11, 30-31. Poet, member of the Kuraish (Mnnrj, n, 142-3, and al-Tanbrk (Ed. de Ooeje) 109, B both of whlch a similar verse is quoted in which the genealogy of the Niih tribe is traced ; . 1 .
'
+aIsaac son of Abraham. Tab. ll, 280 and 252 uses him as an authority for traditions related by Hubdra ibn Jtlbair so that al-'Adawi lived about 50 A. H. AUudlng to Weil ibn 'Ati, the first Mu'twilite, who was named thus because he would follow the spinning women ($9) to recognize the chaste among them in order to give them alms. Kamil (Ed. Wright) 546. W W s pupil 'Amr lbn 'Ubaid ib. 546. On the rdatiooshlp between the Khawsrij add these two Mu'tarilites, see ,?A, M[IIi, 311. Kamil ib. explains that it is because they and the KhawaU alike were bnovators (dpl", &I &I). L e. Abu Bekr, in mntrasi to the Rawsfid who rank 'AU above Abu Bekr. PrledlZnder points out that our author and his imitator 1st are the only two authorities Who munt ibn al-Sawd6' as an individual distinct from Ibn Sabx while in reality it is merdy
' '
Mothe1 name for the latter, after his mother. Shiifea, 11, 18-19; ZA, m i l , 21. Fllcdl&der In ZA,xxlB 23, records that BaghdFadi is the only one to hace him to HeraL M other historians regard him as Yemenite and some, even more speeiScally, as hailing from San'a.
us
blam, wishing to gain influence1 gnd authority among the people of al-KGta. He related to them that he discovered in the Torah that every prophet is given an heir2 and that 'Ali was the heir of Muhammad and that he was the most perfect heir just as Mvbammad had been the most perfect prophet. When the 'Alid party heard this from him they said to 'Ali: Verily he is an admirer of yours. lAli, therefore, raised his rank and seated him under the stairs of his Mimbar fin the MosqueY]. Then he was informed of Ibn Sawdi's extravagant attitude towards him and he planned to k i him, but lbn 'Abhis dissuaded him from doing it, saying to him: If you kill him, your supporters will part company with you, and since you are set on resuming war with the Syrians, you will have to honor your men. Since he feared the sedition which lbn 'Abhk foresaw as a result of his4 and Ibn Sabi's execution he banished the two into al-Madain. After the assassination Allah, Kida; scoop
of 'Ali, tiie riff-raff were seduced by them4 Ibn Saw&' said to them: By two springs will certainly gush for the benefit of 'Mi in the Mosque of alone of them will pour forth honey and the other oilB, and his party will up from both. The critical Sunnite scholars* say that lhn SawdZ felt deeply attached to the Mz&kMnBarmakes a note to the effect that it indicates the Jewish Influence on Muslim
sectartanism, but it appears that he bases his mnclusion on material which Friedlander repudiates. See above 41, n. 4.
' Other writers also inform us that as a Jew, Ibn SabP had believed Joshua to be Moses' heir arid then, as d Muslim, held the same view regarding MuPammad and 'Ali. On the paranel between Joshua and 'AU see ZA, XXIII, 320, and Nauba!ihti, 20. his is a mark of honor. See B e c k n in Oricnfalische Sfvdian Throdor Norldekr gcwidmet, 1, 335. This establishes beyond doubt that Baghdzdi thinks of two individuals.
But it Is
elcar mat he misuadeistood the sovrce from which he drew, where the hvo names were probably employed interchangeably. Use the sudden appearance of ibn SabP strikes us as unnatud. The argument against Ibn SabYs execution is recorded ako in Naubakhti, 19. See note 6 below Reading b. with Ed. and M u k h f ~ n r ,143.; MS. Ic. which Friedlander, ZA, XXIII, (1909), 313 tenlls "recht bolperic. ' On this belief in two toantaim see Shiites, 11, 38-39. Acc. to Naubahhti, ib., the appeal war made On the ground of Ibn SabPs devotion to 'Ali and his hatred of his opponents. 7 Friedlander uses this statement a. proof that the preceding material came from Shl'ih sources. This will strengthen the theory of l m k l t e influence.
Jewish religion and he sought to corrupt the Muslims and their religious principler by fanciful interpretations concerning 'Ali and his children s o that they might b e lieve in him as the Christians believe in He identilied himself with the Sabbihiyya among the Rawifid when he fou~ldthem most extravagant1 in the heresy of the people of fancy, and he stealthily introduced his blunders by means of degorization iAbd-al-Kihir says: How can people who claim that 'Ali was a god or a 226 prophet belong to the Islamic sects? Indeed, if it is possible to inelude these in the category of the Islamic sects, then it should he equally possible to admit into the n n k s of Islam those who proclaim the prophetic character of Musailima the Liar. We say to the Sabhibiyya: If he who was killed by 'Abd-al-Rahmb ibn MuljamE was a devil who appeared to the people in the likeness of 'Mi, why then do you curse Ibn Muljam? Ought you not much rather to praise him? For indeed, the killer of a devil ought to be praised for his deed, not censured for it. We say to them: How can your assertion that thunder is the voice of 'Ali and lightning his whip be hue when the sound of thunder was heard and lightning perceived in the age of the Philosophers prior to the period of Islam? That is why they discuss thunder and lightning in their treatises and differ regarding their causes. It may be said to lbn Sawdi': According to you and those Jews with whom you sympathize, 'Mi is not greater in rank than Mnisa and Hirnin and Ynishal ibn Nim, yet the death of those three is conceded and neither honey nor oil flows for their benefit in place of the sweet water which flowed from a hard rock for Mitsa and his people in the desert. What is it then that preserved 'Ali from death while his son sl-&win and his supporters died of thirst3 in Karbeli4 and no water flowed for them, let alone honey and oil?
' With
Goldziher
' 'Abd-al-Rabmb
>&;MS. and Ed. SF! which Friedlander foliows.
ibn Mullam al-Sariml. a Khsrili, assassinator of 'AU, EI, I, 282, s. v. 'At, and more fully Mudler, Istam, 1, 332-33. Although Husain's death amrally m e when he was decapitated, his resistance was nevertheless broken by the lack of water, hinee Yaid's forces made the Euphrates lnaceesslbie to him (Lammens. LC Cotifut de Ycrid Ier, 153 and 162-170). This incident has heen developed in the Shi'ite Passion Play into a malor motif.
'
'A IV, 249.
place on the border of the desert near KWa.
Its etymology Is not h m . Yahm,
CHAPTER TWO
THE B A Y ~ N Y AAMONG THE GH-T
1
AND THEIR EXCLUSION
FROM T I E SECTS OF ISLAM They are the followers of Bayin' ibn Sam'gn al-Tamrmi. It is they who believe that the Imimate passed from Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya to his son Abu Hishim 'Abdallah ibn Muhammad8, theu it passed horn Ahu Hishim to Bayin ibn Sam'in as his bequest to him.'. But they differed regarding the nature ol their chief Bayin. Some of them think that be was a prophet and that he annulled a part of Maammad's Revealed Law. Others u e of the opinion that he was a god. The latter relate that Bay5n told them that the spirit of God transmigrated5 through the prophets and the h i m s until it came to Abu Hishim 'Abdallah ibu Maammad ibn al-Hanafiyya, theu it was transferred horn the latter
'
shahr. counts this sect among the moderate Shl'a, although a few lines below he adds Ash'ari also lists them both m e n g the OhvliI that its founder was of the GhulBt, 113-14. and among the moderates. 5 and 23. BaySn (or Bansn or BuaBn. cf. Shiites, 11, 88; bot he is not right in hls g e n d f a t i o n as to the "consensus of opinion" about the reading ir4 ; add to h i referen- Bayin In Ash'ari, 5; Slm'Bnl 988; Bod' wnl-Ta'
of a certain Bayin who war a straw-gatherer, and was burned by Kh&ild aP-Kasri. Wtter Pmperiy identifies him with lbn Sam'&, but it is somewhat surprising that he dalmed the bequest tram Mubarnmad b. 'Ali b. Vusain, i. e, al-BHkir. Ed. 27-42, Seelye, 47-60; On Abu Hbhlrn compare Shiites, U, 89. Ash'ari adds dl b. efi 51 .1 & $ -1, (he had no posterity to bequeath it to).
+
On the relation between transmigration (Tanaukh) and the Return (Raj'3 see Shiites U, 26-28 (Friedl&ndcr takes issue with Wellhausen [Oppoxitionspartluirn, 031 who identinthe hvo).
to him, that is, himself. He thus claimed divinity for himself' after the manner oi the Wnifiliyya He further believed that it is he who is referred to in the &din in His words: 'This is a dear statement (Bayin) for man and a guidance and an admonition to those who guard against evilw'. He asserted: 1 am the clear statement and I am the guidance and the admonition. He maintained he knew [God's] Greatest NameS and thit he could rout armies with it, and that he could invoke Venus with it and she would answer 228 him. He thought that the eternal God is a man of light4, and that He will perish entirely save His face. In accordance with his view he interpreted His words: "Everything perishes but His iace",6 and His words: "Everyone on it must pass away and the face of your Lord will endure forever" 6. The story of Bayin was brought to Khilid ibn 'Abdallah al-Kasri7 while he was governor of k He employed cunning against Bayin until he seized and impaled hims. - -I Mfz&, ib. Shahr. 114, and Nauhakhti, 30 relate that he wrote to MuPammad al-Bimr asMng him to become an adherent of his. Shahr. and Naubakhti add that ai-BBmr made the messenger ('Umar b. Ahu '.ififai-Azdi) eat the paper on which the epistle was written. Sura 3, v. 132 In the theological work on Islam there is no single name which is identlned as God.. Greatest Ibn Madja 11, 227-28. brings a number of traditions according to which various apressions are styled God's Greatest Nme, including a number of prayers offered by slmple individuals. Similar haditions are couened by &mad ibn Hanbal (Cf. Wensinck, 175-6). Asin Palatias in his work on thn Massarra @. 156) states that the Ism A'thnm according to b-
' '
dition is the one hundredth name of Allah Pakhr al-Dln al-Rhi in his book Lawcirni' al-Bcyylnlit, on Allah's names, devotes a section to the Greatest (62-73) in which he reports a number of views, among them, that it is AUah or ?+c ;also the Sfific view, that any name may be an Ism A'tkarn ii the d e r rids himself of human Attachments and is absorbed entirely in Gad. There is also a theory that that name cannot be known.- It is a pretty safe assumption howwe: that we havc here a direct influence of the Jewish belief in the Shem Hameforash (m>man nw). Cf. Shiites, n, 82,87. ' US=&73, adds: and his organs are like hqman organa Cf. Shahr. 114. Sura 28, v 88.
'
Sura 55, w. 26-27. 6 A l . Died 126. Governor of under Hishim, El, 11, ,gv.
' Ed.
'IrlrHt during the
reign of Walid a d , later, again
' Tab. U, 1620, and IA, V, 154 and others state that he as well as MughTra (see below)
He said to him: II you can defeat armies with the Name which you know, then repel my men with it away from you. This sect is excluded from all the sects of Islam because it afiirms the divinity of its chief, Bayin, just as idol-worshippers are rejected by the Islamic sects. Those among them who maintain that Baygn was a prophet are comparable to those who believe that Musailima' was a prophet and both groups are rejected by the Muslims. It can be argued against the Bayiniyya: If it is possible for p a t of God to perish what prevents His face from perishing? As for the state ment: "Everything will perish save His face" its meaning is, every deed upon which God's face does not look with favor will turn into non-existencez. The words: "will endure" mean "your Lord will endure", for He says after it "the Lord of Glory and Honor" in the nominative case in apposition to "face". If "face" were in the construct state to ''Lord" he would say "Lord of Glory" in the genitive (dh;), because the qualifying adjective of a genitive is put in the genitive.3 This is perfectly clear. Praised be Allah for it. were burnt They also relate that the latter took his punishment like a coward, whereas Bay% grasped the pile in high spirits so that KhPlid exclaimed to the sectarians: "Woe to you, you do everything wrong; why Uid you choose Mughla as your head?' The same story is toid by Ibn Harm, Shiites. 1, 60. See above page 38. This particular explanation of the verse seems to be Baghdadi's original. Ibn Harm (Shiites, 1, 61) argues that since Ailah's face is identical with His essence and since only things on earth can decay it means that everything will perish an* Ood wiil remain. This is the accepted Orthodox uplanation. See a Simiiar argument. Us&, 76 and especially 110 (IH agrees with this view, U, 166). Al-Ash'ati however, accepts God% face as neither his essence nor not his essence, as he argues about ail of God's attribute*. See Ibona, 8, sad 43f
CHAPTER THREE
THE MUGH~RNYAAMONG THE G m T AND THEIR EXCLUSION FROM ALL ISLAMIC SECTS They are the followers of MughTra ibn Sa'id al-'lili'. In the early years of his career he evinced sympathy for the himiyya,z believing that after 'Mi, alHasan, and al-yusain, the Imamate belonged to his grandchild Muhammad ibn 'Abdallah ibn al-Hasan3 ibn 'Mi. He held that this one is the expected Mahdi, and he adduced as evidence for it the tradition which he cited, that the name of the Mahdi will correspond to the name of the Prophef' and his father's name will correspond to that of the Prophers fat he^.^ The Rawifid cursed him for
'
Mughira lbn Sa'ld (sometimer Sa'd) d-?lii, with the Kuaya Abu 'Abdaiiah, of the BPjUa Mbe was a resident oi KSa. The authorities ( e g. Tab. 11, 1619-20; [A, V,154-5; Mkin
-
aGl'tidiI 111. 191 Lwirn o l - M k i n VI, 75-8) emphasire his power as a wizard. They also report that he forbade the use of the waters of the Euphrates because of its undeanliness; he drank well water. The 'Alids disclaimed any association with him. L i s i n al M&n, ib. 76-7; i4,ib. 155 add that he came to both Muhammad a i d s t i r and ja'far al-SPUik to express to them his conviction that they h e w the mysteries of the world, but bath spurned him. For a simiiar report regarding his contemporary BayPn, see above, 47. ' It is likely that the author meant more spetificaliy the Muhammadiyya. Ed. 42-45 (Seelye, 62-64). Ed. has throughout this chapter the reading ibn d-Hasan ibn al-Husaln ibn ai-Hasan. Only in the first instance is il supported by MS., but it is obviously a mist&c. of the 'Alids, Shiites, U, 160. and NsubakhU, 115.
See geneaiopg.
'
Tab. (Zotenberg) 1, 70, cites a similar tradition. FriediPnder (Shiites, U, 53) rpcdfies it more particularly to be Shl'ite With Isf. and Makhtmar, 147; M. and E d both read *I. This reading probably came from a canfusion with the hansmission of the tradition by the ImPmlyya. See iforbun-
gen', 222 und 365 note 130. We may draw from this another proof of our authofs dependence on 1mSmite eourceS. For the corrected version sea Naubakhti, 54.
vrging them to await Mu$ammad ibn 'Abdallph ibn al-Hasan ibn 'Ali.
Later,
.Rer he acquired leadership over them, h e announced to them all sorts of extreme heresy, mch as his daim of prophecy,l and his pretension to know the most enlted Name,' with the aid of which, he believed, he could resurrect the dead and rout armien Another of his heresies was his exaggerated anthropomorphism. He h d d that the Object of his Worship is a man of light with a crown of light an his head, and that h e possesses organs and a heart whence wisdom flows. He also mainfained that his limbs have the shape of the lettus of the alphabet, thpt Alif is the counterpart of his leg, and the 'Ain represents the shape of his eye; the Ha he likened to his sexual organ. Still another was that he spoke no abusively of the beginning of neations He held that when God wished to create the llniverse he uttered His holiest Name. This name flew and placed itself on His head as a ma.' He interpreted accordingly God's words: "Glorifg the name of your Lord the most Highr',6 being of the opinion that the holiest Name was that m w n . A f k the crown had descended on His bead H e wrote the
actions of His ueatnres on His palm with His finger. Then He contemplated them and was provoked by their ado of disobedience and H e perspired6. Two
seas were formed bom His sweat, one dark and briny, the other sweet and lucid
* Ashsari I; M z h &Pfid& ib. (Laan 76); Shahr. 134. ACAsh'arf further rdam (p. 23) 1h.t the Mughitiyya believe that after 'All lhn at-ljusaln, hlr son Abu Ja'far Mubarnmad .I-Bwr wrr the him and that the latter beqoeathed it to Mughira wlth the understanding lhlt he was to hold the imrmate until the appearance of MelJmmad lbn 'AtdaUab. * Aaffari I. (he adds that the carlh d l burat open for its dead and they return lo we); Tab. n, 1619; IA, v, 154 Bad' wd-To'rikk, V, 130 repom that he made this daim h r M8bmmad ibn al-ljanafina. According to 'Ihd aI-Firi+, 1, 261 he amlbuted thls power to 'All ibn Abu TaUb. Cf. Shiites, 0, 83 and a 1. T h e dectrinc of Mughln as exposed h the following p a a g e Is annotated adequately FricdlBndar, Skiitrp 11, 80-85. The account Is Ieproduced by moat authoriHes. * On the IdenUfIcaHon of the Oreatest Name wlth the crown h other mystlc movements see Shiite, ll, 85 1 Snra 81, r. 1. At-M11ghln no doubt hanslated it: Olorify the most High Name ol gwr Lord Orammatidy both are posstble. In addltlon to the parallel sources collected h S k l h , n, 83-4, one may clfe a slmlIar itow of cnaHon out of sweat In Scandinavian and lranlan folk-lore Cf. Cbrlatenser Le8 Tppypa dm Pnnrier Hommr el Prmkr Roi, 35-6.
Afterwards He gazed upon the sea and observed His shadow; He went to seize it, but it flew away. He therefore plucked out the eyes of His shadow aqd created the sun and the moon from them'. The rest of His shadow He destroyed, for He said: It is not proper that there should be with me a God besides me. Then He created mankind from the two seas. The Shi'a He created out of the sweet and lucid sea; they are the faithiuL The infidels, namely, the enemies of the Sh?a, He formed from the dark and briny sea. He also believed that God created man before creating his flesh and blood Th.? first entity among them which He formed was the shadow of Muhammad%. This, he said, is the meaning of His statement: "Say, if the beneficent God has a son then I am the k t of those who worships." Then He sent forth the shadow of M*ammad to the shadows of mankind. He then besought the heaven and mountains to proted 'Ali ibn Abu Tdib against his wrongdoers, but they refused4 He then made the same request of mankid. 'Omar bade Abu BeLr
' Ash'arl, Lb., states that He only plucked one eye fmm which He created the mn ibn ljarm (Shi*la I, 59) relata that He made "the sun and another sun"; simUarly IA, lb. where .Ql should be corrected to &I. Shahr., ib, 111, 344 and Usul,74 agree with our text ' GoIMher in hls article on Nlo-Platonis and Gnoetic Elements in the F d a k (ZA, XXIl [19081 324-330) dlscoaaes the tradlHon about Muhammad's pre-existence and on page 326 dtes a Shi'ite tradition according to which God flrst created the persons of Mu?ammad, 'All, F5tima. Hasan and Husaln in the form of resplendent substances (J;i i;jt ~133 &, rb jrl, c+14'). In this traditon we no donM find the origins of Mughira's statement The twothousand-year period is a usual figure In Jewlsh and Christian time-divisions. It may be added that in traditions of this klnd even among the Sunnites, it is the "Ught-substance" bj) rather than his shadow, ib. q ~ r 53, a v 81. That Mughira's InteQremHOn has some foundation 1s evldent from the effortr which Arabtc commentators exwl to deny the inference of a son In the verse see BaidZwi, Zamakhshari, ad lor ' There is obvious confusion in the relaHon of this as written down by onr author. According to Baghdrdi who expanded and mlsundcrstood Ash'ad, 8, God seeks somebody to defend 'Ali. Abu Bekr and 'Gmar agree to pretect him but decide at the same. time to deprive him 0: the ImZmate. The clause regarding this betrayal is awkwardly inirodnced and the sense of the passage rs strange and unlikely. The mrrect venion has been preserved by Ash'ad, uj, ib. and Shahr., Ib. It is that Muhammad (he can be the only possible subject of the verb j2) sought the heavens and earlh to prevent 'Ali from pmcuting the Imhate but they refused. Abu
to take upon himseli to safeguard 'Ali and defend him against his enemies aad to betray him in this world He assured him that he would support him in h i s betrayall on condition that he bequeath the Caliphate to him after his death 231 Abu Bekr did so. This is the meaning of his words: Surely, we offered the trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountain and they refused to under take it and were afraid of it, hut man undertook it; verily, he was unjust and ignorant?"? He held thai the unjust and ignorant one is Abu Bekrs. To 'Omar he applied His words: "Like the devil when he says to man, Disbelieve, but when he disbelieves he says, Surely I am dear of you"'; according to him the devil is 'Omar. In addition to his blunders which we have related, MugGra 'ordered his adherents to expect Muhammad ibn 'Abdallah ihn al-Hasan ibn al-Hasan ibn 'Mi6. Khaid ibn 'Abdallah al-yasri heard about hima and his heretical views and he impaled him7. When Mughim was executed, his foUowers nevertheless persisted in their expectation of Muhammad ihn 'Abdallah ibn al-wasan ibn al-Hasan When this Maammad announced his pretensions in al-Mcdi-na, Abu Ja'far alM a n v i ~dispatched 'isi ibn M i s i there as commander of his troops with a large BeLT and 'Omar, however, accepted it with the conditions as stated in the text Thls account agrees fully with the Shpite views on the usurpauon by the first two Khalifs. That Muhammad Our aUshould desire to betray 'Aii is not sumrising fmm the extreme Shi'ite standpoirlt mistake is that he misundentaod the verb c;. assuming It to mean protrcl so Mat he inserted Me expression "against his wmng-doers". See Mukhta.?l?r, 147.
-
;A;
1
' '
Reading ? i d l with MS (pro Ed. &>dl. Sura 59, v. 16. M L i n , 111, 191 rema* that Mughfra wan the first to abnse Abu Belo. and 'Omar. Sura 59, v. 16. Mvbammad and his broths carried an secret propaganda in behalf of the 'Alida for
Ja'far MansGr, prior to their appearance in 145. Mubarnmad b described as of dark yeiiow complexion, courageow, pious and a good speaker. .... Lakahs were Mahdi and Nafs Zihiyn (pure heart) IA, V, 422-3. HIP With MS. .$.; Ed. .A. 11 read wilh Mahhtosnr instead of cUJ as MS. and Ed. As in the case oi a number of years during the Caliphate of Abu
.+
Sayan there is another version accoid$g to which he was burnt at the stake. See above 47-8. since Mughlra was executed in 119, it follow that his panisans adhered to Mukammad ibn '~bdallahfor twenty-six years, untll 145.
army, and they killed Mubammad, following his capiure of Mecca and al-Mednina' H i s hrothv Ibrahim ibn 'Abdallah had meanwhile conquered the [districts. of B w and his brother Idn's ibn 'Abdallah became master over] the Maghreb. Now Muhammad ibn 'Abdallah ibn al-Hasan was kiiled in battle in al-Medine tbrahims ibn 'Abdallah ibn al-Hasan was misled by ~ a s h kal-Rahhil ~ and his Mu'tazilite followers who had pledged their assistance to him against the army of al-Manpir. When the two cohorfs joined battle in Bakhmara5, which is sixteen farasangs from al-KZa, Ib&m was killed, and the Mu'tazila took to night But ill fate overtook them6 for the campaign against them was entrusted to %iibn MCsi and Salm ibn Kutaibq generals of al-Manvir. His brother Id&' died in the Maghrebs;
* For the story of his m o l t see Mulr, Tke Caliphate, Ed. 1915, 453-56; Mueller, Islam 1, 491. A detalied account will be found IA, V, 390-401 and 402-424, also ~ a b . Rotenberg) N, 382-421. The date of the uprising is 145 A. K Far the battle and his death see IA, Ib. 414-421, esp. 419. ' I Insert the passage within the brackets fmm Makhtnsnr, 149, whlch assumes rightly that the copyist of our MS. omitted a line. ' After a five-year period of wandering from Place to place, during which he camed on an active propaganda for his brother Muhammad and. after the lattefs death, for himself, he anally appeared In Bagra in 145 ([A, lb. 428-30). The inhabitants of the city soon turned the11 support to him. Abu Ja'far MansGPs army was operating at the time on three fronts, so that the Khallf was in a difficult position, ib. 432 ff.
' With MS., Tab. 111, 185, 311. and IA, V, 434; Ed. il-r. Abu Muhammad Bashir alRabhal was a nauve of B a ~ r awho. upon seelng the head of 'Abdaliah ibn al-Hasan, Mubarnmad's tather who was slain by the Khaiif ai-Man[iBi, became a partisan of lbrahlm, Tab. In, 185. But at the time of the encounter he either unwittingly or otherwise foiled several good suggestlons made by a KGfite to lbrahim which might have brought him success (Tab. ib. 310-11, JA, V, 434). The great mistake was that the rebel did not march on KGfa before Mansfir was prepared to meet him. The remaining events were a series of mistakes. Neither of the two sources identines BashIr as a Mu'tarillte.
' Ed.
Nakhmara; in the MS. the first letter is anpointed. See ib. and Ed. 4. With Ms.: Ed. Idds and his brother Yahya Joined the rehellion of al-Husain fbn 'Ali lbn al-yasan ibn 'AU In 169 (24 years after the uprising of their two older brothers). When Hurain was ldlied at Medina and the battle lost, Idris fled to Egypt and thence to the Maghreb and settled In walila in the district of Tanla (14 VI. 60-63; Yakut, N, 941).
' MS.
'
232
some say he was pozsoned'. A few lustorians report that Sultuman ibn Jair alZaiE' poisoned him and fled to 'Irak. After the death of Muhammad ibn 'Abdallah ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Ijasan the ~ u ~ h k i y ysplit a regarding a l - ~ n ~ h i r aOne . group declared itself freea from him, cursed him and proclaimed. Verily he lied in his contention that Mu$ammad ibn 'Abdallah ibn al-Hasan is the Mahdi who will hold full sway over the world, for he has been slain without ruling the earth or a tenth of i t The other group remained firm in their adherence to al-idughira and said: Indeed, he is right in his assertion that Muhammad ibn 'Abdallah ibn al-Wasan is the expected Mahdi; he was not killed but is hiding in one of the mountains of al-bijir4; biding his time until he will be ordered to come forth When he reappeen the oath of allegiance to him will be taken in Mecca between the Rukn and the Makims. He will restore to life seventeen men and give each of them one of the letters6 of God's Greatest Name and they will rout armies and possess the earth. These believe that the person slain by al-Mansur's troops in 8.1-Medna was Satan who appeared to people in the shape of MuPammad ibn 'Abdallah ibn al-Hasan. They are named the Muhammadiyya7 on account of their expectation of Muhammad ibn 'Abdallah ibn al-Masan ibn al-Hasan.
' This view is snpporled by most authorities, e. g. Tab. Ill 561; IA, lh. 69; Najua, 1. 542; Ya'kirhi, U, 488-9. Tahari, 1 , N u j m name as his assassinator one Shammakh ((t*) who war engaged
'
by the Khillif HarEn al-Rashld; he was later rewarded and given the rule over Egypt Strothmann, Das Stadrrccht dar Zniditen, 108, supports this view, but he places his death In the To's, apparently drawing on Yakut, ib. who states that he came to Wdila in 172 and lived there mtil 174. Wlth MS. sfSI; E d -A. A place in the vicinity d Nald; by the geographers it Is described as a spring, See the indexer to the works in de OoQe's Bibliothcca Geographnm. Naubafl, who cdis that
'
mountain 'Alamiyya, locates it on the I& of the road to Mecca, near Najd ill-HSJiz, 54. Yik6t, 111, n3 (he calls ii 'Alam).
See
Thla is Part of a tradition relating to the MahdL See Blochet, 25. Their views as those of a distinct sen among the Rawsfiiip are discassed E d 42-45 (Seeiye, 62-64). We find there a repetition of Mughira's views regarding the expected MahdLAccording to 1st B, 51, they arc identical with the Mirghidyya of his day. ' Ash'ari reads: $0 many letters ( O r UT, lq,which is preferable to our fed,
Jibii al-Jn%' adhered to this doctrine and pretended to be the heir of Muglira ibn Sa':d. When Jibir died Bekr al-A'wa (the one-eyed) d-fiilui' dKa6t claimed to have been a~paintedheir by Jibiu and he pretended that he would not die. For this reasan he lived on the wealth of the Mughiriyya, by d & g fools of them. But when Bekr died they knew that he had lied in hi. 233 d a m and they cursed him. 'Abd-al-Kihl says: How can a group of people be ceunted as one of the seds of Islam when they compare the Object of their Worship fo the -1 01 the alphabet and daim the gift of prophecy for their founder? R they fwm part of the believing wmmunity then the view of those wko mnintain that p m p h professing the prophetic character of Musailima and T a b can he mduded in the community is equally valid It may be said to the lllugh%yya; E you d k v 0 1 the death of Mu$ammad ibn 'Abdallah ibn aHjasan ibn 'Ali and hold that the slain one was a Satan who assumed his shape, how are you to be ~ ~ from those who believe that al-Ijusain ibn 'Hi and his companions were n d killed in Karbela, but hid, and Satans who appeared in their likenarses were Wed instead? Wait, t h d o r e , for Husaain, for he is higher in mnk than hi8 nephew Muhammad ihn 'Abdallah ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Hasan; or else wait for 'Ali and do not confimt his death, just as the Sabbibiyya await him. Indeed, 'Ali is nobler than his sons. In this particular than is noihing chmacteislic about Ulua
'
JHbir ibn Ytdd &jn¶, the tradltlonlst, is reported to have I m m 81tg tho& bow say seventy thousand) tradlliem Despite his Shrite views the Snnnihs were far hom MmE moos in quetloning hir authodty. See M&&, a v.; Nniim, I, 342 a h reports that "some fomd him we&? (+ u,). From the statement made by our author @d 44, Sabre 64 it may b wnduded that JiMr believed 1 a general Ral'a, so also Sam'ini 1.131 b. whcn as rehm of 'AU is predicted by him. Cf.Shiites, En 23. The dlfaculty In our b that JSbk who dled 128 or 132 muld hardly be said in w e d lhe return d Mqammsd. med Im I& wasihly Maehhab refem to a g e n d partisanship for Mvllammad 'See Ash'afl 8, and Shiites, I, 6a (he mds Hi@. N0 huther ildomutlon .bod bll ia available. It may be mentioned in passiag that Sam'Hni a v. H a j d repotia 8 tmditionld
named )-
*.I eIr.lJbl
who believed 1 the Raj'a.
He mtded b K61o
e
CHAPTER FIVE
CHAPTER FOUR
THE MANSilRIYYA AND THEIR EXCLUSION FROM ISLAM
M E H A R B W A AND THEIR EXCLUSION FROM THE SECTS OF THE BELIEVING COMMUNITY
These are the followers of Abu M a n ~ ral-ljli'
who held that the lmimate
circulated among the deecendants of 'Mi untii it reached Abu Ja% They are adherents of 'Abdallah ibn 'Amr' ibn Harb al-Kindly who was 01 the persuasion of the Bayiniyya and their belief that God's spirit passed through 234 the prophets and the Imims until it reached Abu Hishim 'Abdallah lbn Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya4 Thereupon the Harbiyya claimed that that spirit was transferred irom 'Abdallah ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya t o 'Abdallah ibn 'Amr ibn Harb.
he ijarbiyya claimed for their founder 'Abdallah ibn 'Amr ibn Harb what the Bayiniyya claimed for Bayin ibn S a m ' i l Both sects deny their Lord and are not among the Islamic divisions, just as the other Hnldiyya are rejected by Islam.
ibn 'Ali lbn al-ijusain ibb 'Mi, called al-Bikir.* Thii al-'ljli
Muhammad
claimed that h e was
successor t o al-Bikir;3 then h e forsook this pretension and maintained that h e had been taken up t o heaven and that God stroked his head with His hand and said":
0 son, convey a messagc from me. Then He sent him down t o the world. H e believed that h e was the Fragment4 fallen from heaven which is mentioned in God's words: 'li they should see a fragment of the heaven coming down they would say: Piled up clouds".5 This group denies the resurrection and the erlstence 23.1 of Paradise and Hell. They interpret paradise to mean the pleasures obtained in thii world and hell t o b e the misfortunes encountered in the world.@ In addition
' With Ms. ,,f; Ed. 3. ' On the variants of she name see Shiites, n, 124-5 and notes. ' Since Abu Hishim died in 78, we are right in concluding that 'Abdallah
Lived hefare the end of the first cenmry of the Hijra because of his recognition of Muhammad ibn dnanafiyye. Ash'ari lists this sect as one of the Kaiszniyya (p. 22). He air0 informs us thst they believed that Abu n%hlm appointed 'Abdaiiah ibn 'Amr as the Im&I in his piace. Ibn Harm (Shiitrs 1, 73) relates the very significant fact that the founder of this sect renounced his extreme views and became a pious Muslim. His followers then abandoned him
and turned to 'Abdailah ibn Mu'awiya (see chapter 6), but retained their original name. Shahr. confirms this fa& (113; Haaiorii&er misunderstood the passage; et Shiites.11. 126). It is noteworthy that in Usul, 332-3, Baghdzdi does not list this sect among the Ghulit Ash'ari's rema* a. JP 3. dl u ,ir 2 I+, iis a reference to same inddent which may have brought an this dentni, probably his-conversion; d. the word rlC employed by Shahr. and hi.
,,-
' He is thus a membet Of Ule same Mbe to which Mughira belonged as a Mawla. This is important in view of the fact that the practice of strangling opponents mentioned later on h charged by ihn Harm (Shiites, 1, 62) and Van Vloten in Worgcrs in Irnk to Mughh 33 weil (see note 1, betaw). Naubakhti informs us that he owned a home in KSa; he had hem brought up in the desert and was an illiterate, 34. ' He died 117 A.H. He is the fifth Imim of the Imimiyya and, more partimlarly, the Mahdi of the Bikiriyya, one of the groups within the ImZmiyya (Ed. 45-6, Seelye, 64-5). ' According to Shahr. 135-6 and lji, 345 he began to make pretensions for himself only after al-Bitir refused to have anything ta do with him. Their explanation is accepted by Goldziher (Streitschriff, introd. 4-5). Naub&hti ib., adds the curious detail that Gad's Command was given in Syriae. ' Iji and Shahr. ib. inform us that Abu Mangitr at first claimed 'All ibn Abu ?Bib to be the F r w e n t , but later asserted it about himself. Friedlander is therefore wrong in calling Shahfs account of the change of attitude a"contradiction with himself" (Slriitm, 8,. 89). ' Sua, 52, 7.44. Qnccording to Ash'ari, 9; Shahr. 135-6; lji ib; Shiites, 1, 62, Abu MangSr argued that Hell and all the prohibitions of the Law refer to men whom Muslims are enjoined to hate,
'.
CHAPTER SIX
to this heresy they thought it permissible to strangle their opponents.' Their heresy continued in practice among them until Yisuf ibn Yhnar al-Thakafiq governora of 'h& was informed about the ignominies of the M a n s i i y y a He seized Abu Manstir el-'ljli and impaled him. This sect too is not counted islamic because of its denial of resurrection, paradise and helL wheeas paradise and the pmepts are men whom they are bldden to I-.
The authorltles,
especially Ash'ad, relate a number of other views entertained by him. Thus he would caii the FamUy of MuPammad Heaven, and the Sh?B EaM. His oath was "No, by the Word" (Cf. Shiites, 1, 62 and 11, go). He also maintained that 'isZ ibn Madam was the flrst-born and that prophecy will cease. The latter view is also recorded by Shahr. On Ulls Oolddher comments that Abu Man=% d'mied Maammad to be the Seal of the Prophets and was thus the forerunner of the Bifiniyya who definitely rejected this view and i h e ~ b yaIomed the anger Of the Sunnltcs. ZA, XXlI (lsB8) 339, n 4. BsghdBdi doer not emphasw that they employed strangling ody .nd e d not p m f t the use of arms, maintalniw that only with the a p p e m c e of the Malldi fl the right to C d I I Y arms be granted to them. See Shiiias, 1, 62-4 and 92 f. In an amete on Str-ers (Wac =en, in Irak FeestbundeL aan Dr. P. J. Veth), Van Vlota &led and franslated 8 long passage from the KitBh ai-yayawzn by Jab?, describing a widegpread movement of atranguns which Van Vloten explains as a mixhue of rrligious fanandam and mgldshneas. The 'Iji and BijUa groups figure prominently among them as well as the Kinda Mbe. In a porn dted there Mughira Ibn Sa'ld ?he bund'' is a@ mentlomd Pa one of the stranglea. Do we
...----.....
not have in this a confused allusion to Mughim's second snccesor, Bekr al-A'watl Cf.above, 55. He was governor of 120-126 AH. Acc. to Naubakhit, ib.. punishment was meted He fInther informa us that 'Om= out to him by Khaid ai-yasri who disabled him ('a'yihu). whom he strangely surnames "the strangle (al-KltmPk) executed al-tius& b, A h Mw&,
'm
who claimed to have Inherited Ms lather'. ReadIng J's wlth MS.; Ed. 4%.
'
powers.
THE
JANAijWYA'
FROM
AMONG
THE 0HUL.i.T
AND THEIR
EXPULSION
PROM ISLAM are the followers of 'AbaUlah ibn Mu'iwiyaa ibn 'AbdaIlah ibn ]a% Mug&yya who had declared themselves free h o m Mughira ibn Sa'id after the death of 'Abdallah ibn a l y a s a n ibn 'Alis, went forth horn Kida to Md'na in search of an Imim. 'Abdallah ibn Mu'iwiya ibn 'Abdallah ibn Ja% met them and invited them to accept him, declaring that he was the h i m by dired descent a f t e ~'Ali and his They
ibn Abu Tilib. The reason for their allegiance to him is that the
' In Ghnnya, 99, they are called %&b after thelr foamier whom It calla at-rayyir. B ~ f l w d - T a r amisunderstands the meaning ol the name i&,and confuses the sect bearing this name with the Sabriyya, a s a i m g to the latter the chief characteristics of the sect undw dlsmsian, 135 (Arabic, 1291.-The name JanQlyya is derived from the Konya of the founder Of the famuy, JaYIr Ibn Abu Talib, brother of 'Ali and one of the first Muslim, When he lost both his hands in the battle of Muia, where he also lost his life. Gad gave hlm two wings, ibn Ku!aiba, K. al-~a'tirif,103, Nawiwl 194 (Ct Mukktear, 153, note 1). Iba Sa'd, W,part 125. does not report the loss of his hands, but only that Mubammed said: f see Ja'far flying about Paradise on two m.ngs. Prledlhder traces the name to his father Mu'Bwiya who was called ~ h u - ~ ~ a n i + (Shiites, ain 11, 44), but Ash'ad 6 and lli 345 give his genealogy aa follows: +Yl 6 3 name to ~a'far.
a. 31 +. s i+*. 31 *f
' He appeared In KWa In
80
that it is more correct to trace the
127 A H., after having canied on his aeditlous propaganda
secretly. Whm he was defeated by 'Abdallah ibn 'Omar, the 'Ummayjad general, he fled to the Ea~ternpmvincea holdlng under his control the district of Pars in which Ispahgu is Bltuated He was defeated there once agafn in 129 and lolled in prison by Abu Muslim. See UL, V, 262-4 and 282-5; Wellhansen, Arab Kingdom aM. its Pall, 384-6, 393-5; EI, I, 26.
Ed. 232 (akove, 54). Awrdlng to Aph'ad and Shiites, 1, 71. the people who chose 'Abdallah Ibn Mu'Mya were not former Maghldyya bat BarMyya who either repudiated, or m r e abandoned by their master. This is s u p p o a by Naubakha 29.
2%
chlldrenl. They recognized him as lmhm and returned to al-Kiifa and related to their followers that 'Abdallah ibn Mu'iwiya ibn 'Abdallah ibn Ja'far held hjmself a God and that the spirit of God was incarnate in Adam, then in SGt; then it circulated among the prophets and Imims until it reached 'Ali; then it circulated vamongz his three children: and finally passed to 'Abddah ibn Mu'iwiya4. They maintained that he said to them: Verily learning sprouts in his heart Like mushrooms and green grass. This division denied paradise and hell and &owed the use 01 wine, the eating of corpses, adultery, sodomy, and the other prohibitions. They did away with obligatory prayer and fasting and alms-giving and the pilgrimage5 They interpreted these acts of worship as allegotical ordinances for those members of 'Ali's family to whom it Is one's duty to display friendliness, and explained that the prohibitions mentioned in the ~ur'5n allude to certain people whom one is a a , al-Zubair and '&ha. obliged to hate, such as Abn Bekr, 'Omar, T
followers deny his dea& and maintain that he is alive in one of the mountains of Ispahint until he will reappear. One caa argue against this division: If there exists no paradise nor hell nor r e m d nor punishmen$ your opponents need have no fear about killing you or seizing your possessions or leading yqur wives astray nlu'lwiya seemed to Abu Muslim and his men to be foreign in the 'Aiid famlly and they therefore suspected him to be a pretender. IA, V, 284-5. Naubakhii and Asb'ari explain that his followers broke up into three groups: One admided his death. another maintained that he is alive in the mountaims of I s p a b k where he wiii sojourn until he will reappear and Lead the chief horsemen (7; Naubakhti: it^ chief men) to a man of the Banu Hlshim (it was through h:u?ammad and his son Ahu Hlshim that he daimed the divine spirit to have came to him. Yet N a u b a t i adds: of the ofispring of 'Ali and ~5tima). The third gmup also belie- that he is alive in ispahZn and -ens him to come
fOM and rule over mankind since he is lhe expected Mahdi.
Ibu Kuiaiba relates in his K i t h al-Ma'&f that 'Abdallih ibn Mu'iwiya made his appearance in the districts of Ears and ispahin at the head of his m y 6 . Abu Muslim al-Uurisini sent an anny against him and they slew him7, but his
'
ACC. to Naubakhti, his followers gave the following account of Ns rise: He recehcd the bequest from Abu Hlshim 'AbdallHh b. MuQammad b. ai-ganafiyya. But as he was still a
minor. Saih b. ~ u d d kwas appointed his regent, and he kept the bequest for him until the latter reached his maturity. The remainder ot this chapter as weu as the beginning of the neat are missing in both ed. and MS., and have been supplied from other 'sources. The rest of this Chapter is taken from Mnhhtnanr, 153-4. I. e. MvQarnmad ibn al-Hanafiyya, at-Hasan and ai-Husain.
' Ohunya, 99,informs us that they believed fully in metempsychosis, as follows: ~ $ 3 .
+
L
JI @
j g w 1 ~ W I ;+dl,
9 ;rij 41c,J pr
describing their views pi CIJ 8, p u b . GI&
A!
( J L J>I ~ B 3 I -;tP $1 ~ b b l A! c d l 51 . . . y e~ ~ ~ ~ , u ~ g u ~ , ; ; i l l , , ~ J ~ ~ k l i j ~ g ~ ~ + ~ k i ~
'
The person lnstrummial in introducing these doctrines was the father of 'Abdaillh b. al-,Hirith (al-Harb). He sscrtbed these domines to the tradltionists Jlbir b. A b d a l l l al-An? i d and Jlbir b. Y u l d al-Jr'.l. (Naubakhti, 31: see aiso 35-37 for a Lengthy discussion of their vloxs or TanLmkh.) he latter was a follower of the ~ughiriyya,above. Ibn I(u!aida, ed Wilstenfeid, 105. ibn Athir repoN that 'Abdailah made overtures to Ahu Muslim who was cawing On great activity in behalf of the 'Abb%ids and had already conquered KhufisZn but the name
Ahu-I-Kha#ib
CHAPTER SEVEN
THE K H A ~ A B ~AND A THEIR They are the adherents
of
d-Asadi',
divisions. They all maintain that the imbnate belonged to
and fall into five sub-
the
offspring of 'Ali until
it reached Muhammad ihn Ja'far al;Sidiks. They assert that the Imims are Gods. During his lifetime Abu-1-Khatjib used to say that the children of d-Hasan and al-Husain were God's children and favorites4. He also believed that Ja'far is s God. When this came to the knowledge of Jaqar h e cursed him and banished h i m 9 After that Abu-1-Kha+b claimed divinity for himself6. His followers dedare that Ja'far is a God, but that Abu-I-Kha$ib is superior to him. The Khagibiyya permit false testimony b y their partisans against their opponents7.
'
His full name Is Abu-GKhqtfib MuFammad ibn Abu Zninab aGAsndi a2-Ajda' (the aiple). Ibn Harm (Shiites, 1, 69) makes him a dient of the Ban" Asad; Makdzi, 352, glves as his father's name Abu T h a w ibn Abrr Yep12 For variants see ShiifES, n, 111-2. He is very highly esteemed by both Sunnites and 2 The skth Imam of the Tweivers. Shl'iies. He was bprn 80 A. H. and died in 148. NawBwi, 195: IKhall, 1, 300-01. Ash'ad 11, spediiea more clearly that he at first maintained they were prophets. The same version occurs in Shiites, I, 69 (emended by Ftiedllnded and most notably Ash'arl, 11, where only lju~ain'schildren are mentioned and thus coincides with Shahr. 136 and the original version of lbn urn: in Iji 343 the reading is31 I b similarly
' '
Ed. 24.2 reads
dl '+I +Y,IJ
@I) &-I.
q h a b r . and Iji lh.; Naubakhti, 37. The sources which do not report hfs repudiation by Ja'far atirlbute this vlew to hfs lou'owers. Ibn ijazm (Shiites, ! , 69) and Sam'inl, f. 203 a ascribe the view to Abu-1-Ktla!!Hb himself withgut mention of his banishment. Naubakhti, who doer not confirm BaghdBdi's itatemat, relates tha! Abul-KhaW claimed successively to be heir to Ja'iar, prophet, apostle, angel, 38. ' Naubalrhti, 38; Ash'&, 11; M u k h t ~ o r ,155; Iji, 346: Goldriher has !usfly characledred it as a form of Tswyya (ZDMC. UC [19061, 222). Massignbn, Stt~dicsE. G. Browne;
'
-8
the governor of
Kida in
the reign of
a-
The latter dispatched an army against him which took him prisoner, and al-Man& ordered his c m d k i o u in the slums of al-Kidax. His followers said: It is necessary that in every age there should live one articulate lmiun and another silent one? The imims are I30ds and they know the mysteries. They dedare that 'Ali was a silent one during the lifetime of the Prophet, while the Prophet was the & d a t e one, Aftw him 'Ali became the speaker. They profess the same about Man&.
EXCLUSION FROM I s m
Ahu-I-Khattib
sallied forth
the h i m s u p to the time of Ahn JaYar. In his time Abu-1-Kheb was a silent became. the articulate one after him. The followers of Ahu-I-Kha%h broke up after his execution into five groups: The Mu'ammarinitsThey believe that the l m i m who followed A h u - & K h a ~ b wss a man by the name of Mu'ammar4 and they worship him as they had worshipped I m h , but
330, dks a rullng by a Shs'lte a c m W g to which a Kha!!ibi is not to be aedited as a R i d . et Masllm, 1, 33 where NawM relates similarly about ShWPs affltude tothe tradltlo~reported by the KhattSblna in Lis& 01-M&im Y, 170, Abu-I-WagPb is llsted hut deflnltely Meded. See Bd. 351 I have not f m d the extcntion recorded by any of the historiaAccordfag to hh'arl, 11, It ~ c e o m dby order of al-MangEfs scneral, & ibn i MBa, probably while he was governor of Wfa, 132-147 A. H. (Zambaur, 43.). So also Naubakhti, 58-60; who desalbes the baffle In detail. Ash'arl reporis that Ahu-1-Khat!Sh himself propounded this theory (see also Gb1)nye 99). With the authorlly of d-Ash'arl behind this statement, the "reluctance" of Friedlander, (Shiites, 11, 112, n. 3) to accept this fact, surprlsin~as it may seem, is obviated. What Lends even greater weight to the trustworthiness of this statement is the general opinion of authorltie8 about the relation between Abn-I-Khatlsb and the founder of the Bqiniyya. Nan6nRhlr; 589; Makdzi, (Fagnan) 47: 1 4 VIIi, 21; Fihrist, 186. Masignon, ib. lists Abu-I-Kha!!a9s book iu the fint among "hxtes strldement qarmates" It Is also noteworthy that Naubakhti accuses them of allegoriring laws, 38. This too, they share with the B%iniyya,.see below, 135.
'
'
For the theory of the Speaklng and S k i t i m h see below p. 134-5. a Asb'ad 11, also dtea another name for them which cannot he identilled nor nren correctly read &>I sicl). CaUed by lbn Harm Y h e Cam-deal& and a reddent of Kfifa, Shiites, I, 64-69. Frledl~defs s u g ~ o t lthat Our Mu'ammar may possibly be i d m t i d with the Ma'tmite Mu'ammar a-'Abbid al-Sulaml (I. c. U. 114). can hardly be sustained aince the authorltia refer to him so indefinitely as above. Moreover, the founder of the AftaQiyya was a mte, 'Abdallah b. ~ a ! q ,acc to some. Naubakhti, 66-7. The similarity of opinion which he unds
Abu-I-KhaKib. They assert that the world will not perish', and they disavow the Resurrection and profess the Transmigration oi Souls. e ~ followers of Bazighs, who asserted that Ja'fu The ~ a z i ~ h i ~ ~ a ' . - T hare is a god, but is not the person people saw, for what14 people saw was an image like him They maintain that to every believes a revelation will be made, interpreting in accordance with this God's4. words: "And a Soul will not die except with the of God"; that is, a revelation will be granted him by G o d They quote further proof in God's words: ''And when I revealed to the disciples"< claiming for themselves that they are the disciples. They further cite God's word: "Your Lord revealed to the bee"8, and say: Since the revelation to the bee is admissible, the revelation to us should be admitted more readily. They are also of the opinion that there are some among them who are superior to JibGI and Gki7fl and Maammad. They also hold that they d l not die7 and that when one of them reaches his appointeds end he is raised to the invisible world4 not apparent. Gkunya lists two Mu'ammariyya sects, both Shl'ite; the founder of the second is 'Abdallah b. Ja'far al-Aftah (see Shahr., 126). 99-100 and 101. Al-Ash'a& ib., fn addition ascribes to them views similar to those of Manasriyya on Paradise and Hell, and to those of the Janibiyya on Precepts and Prohibitions. 1 On this sea see Ash'ad 12; Shahr., 137; lji, 346; Makdri, 3 5 2 Ash'ari calls him Ibn M k a . In Shiites, n, 112, he i s described as a weaver and is accused of having claimed divinity for himself. Id. B, 5 7 b calls him Aha-I-Barigh Osf. P. 76b: Abu-1-Rabi' and the sect Rabl'iyyal) Acc. to Naubakhti, ib, he rose during Abn-1-Kha!fBb's lifetime. The latter severed relations wifh him. 4 The passage from the beginning of the chapter to thb word, which is missing in both th. and MS., is t a k a from M. B. 57 a-b. '* Sam 3, v. 139.
' Sura 5, v,
111.
a Sura 16, v, 70.
'
Ash'ari 11, and MabrTzi 352, inform us that the Mu'ammariyya likewise believed that they will not die but rviil be lifted bodily to Malkii. Friedlander sees in this vies a preservatton of the old belief in a general Retam. Shiites, U, 24, n. L Arabic: 4,. m Badjw&Ta'riRh. V, 137, (Arabic 130-3I), relates in the name of the Bariehina
'
that God passed His hand over him and Put His sawa in his mouth; he also saw 'Ali sitting to the right of the Lord. that their foonder ascended to heaven,
They maintain that they see those who ascended from among them at daybreak and nightfall. of 'Omar The third division among them is called 'Omairiyyaz-folioaers Ibn Bayan al-'ljli.a They give the lie to those among them who claim that they will not die, and declare: Verily we shall die, but our descendants will never cease as Imams and prophets. They worship Ja'iar and call him Lord4 The fourth group among them is the Mufadddiyya, because they trace their origin to a certain man called Mufaddal al-Sairafi (the broker). They profess J a w s divinity but not his prophecy. They repudiate Abu-I-Khattab because Ja'far repudiated him. The fifth division among them is simply called KhaRibiyya. -It persists in its partisanship for Abu-1-Khattib and all his claims and it does not recognize the 237 Imimate of anyone after him. 'Abd-al-Kihir says: If the B a y i n i y y a k d MansGriyya and Jsllihiyya and Khaeabiyya have declared Abu Bekr and 'Omar and 'Uthman and most of the Companions to be infidels hecause of their eliminating 'Ali from the Imimate in their time, they themselves have wrenched the Imamate from the children of 'Ali during the age of their chiefs. One can say to them: Since 'Ali in his age had
' The lack of inteiiigence with which copyists of MSS. ai:en did their work is weii iilustrated in the parallel p a s a g e from isf. B, i+ z.fil Jl C(;. Bnd' wal-Te'rikh, ib. finds a parallel to this belief of the Bazighiyya among the Hindus.
*,
' With
Ms. i.&;Ed. tp.
"bn Harm (Shiites, 1, 61) names him &$St,the straw-dealer. On the basis of this Friedlander would regard our reading hi: as a cornpiion of h e , ti, 96. 1. view of the agreement among authorities (Ash'ari, 12; Shahr. 137 [h+]; iji, 346 [j';]: ~ a k r i z i ,ib.: IS. B, 5 1 b.) on his fathecs name, thls cannot be accepted. If anything, it i s ibn Hazm who is guiity of the conuption. The utterance "If I wanted to hlm this straw into gold" (1. 64) is not proof either way. Naubakhn 39 names a certain lbn Labban as a Kha!!ibi, probably our 'Omar. - His relation to tile i j i is noteworthy as Friedlander, ib. has already pointed out. ' Ash'ari and ~ a k r i z iboth report that they erected a ieni in the slums of Kilfa possibly on the site where Abu-1-Kha!!ib was executed and convened there to warship Ja'far.
-
-
Bat Yezid ibn 'Omar ibn Hubaira seized and lrilled -Omar, imprisoning some of his m'en. Makrizi reports that he was also banished by Ja'far far calling him God, ib.
" With
Ms.; Ed. -+411.
greater
CHAPTER EIGHT*.
to the Imamate than t h e other companions, his children were more
deserving of it in their time than t h e n chiefs. However, these blunderers are not to be wondered at.
he wonder is rather that some of the partisans of 'Ali kill
these, yet find themselves alone in their support of others for the Imamate.
THE GHURABiYYA, MUFAWWIDA, DHAMMIYYA AND THEIR EXCLUSION FROM THE SECTS O F THE COMMUNITY. T h e Ghurzhiyya
'
consists of a group of people who are of the opinion
t h a t , God despatched Jib61 to 'Ali but the angel went astray and came to Muhammad because the latter resembled 'AIi2.
They say:
He resembled him
more cioselythan a raven (Ghurib) does a ravena or a fly a fly*. They hold that 'Ali was the Apostle and that his children after him are apo&es. This sect greets" its adherenis by saying:
Cume the feathered one, meaning JibGI".
The heresy 238
of this s e d is viler than that of the Jews, who said to the Apostle of God: Who .~...
* Owing to the omission oi a ioiio in !he MS. on which a new Chapter began, this and the subsequent chapters are all numbere* in the Ed. one less than their actual number. ' The three sects mentioned in this chapter are, uniike tile othei sects hitherto treated. not tiaced t o any individual. Ibn Kutalba, 300, has called attention lo this in connection with the Ghursbiyya. ' it is interesting that ibn yazm (Shiites,1, 56-7) refutes this contention of the Ghurzbiyya by a campaiison between 'Ali and Muhammad, mentioning among Other facts that the former was some thiri). years older than the latter, and that Muhammad could be called tail, Whereas 'Ali was rather shori. :' A curious explanation of the name is quoted by Biochet, 148, lrom the Bnyin dAdyon to the effect that they are called so because they believe that 'Ali is in heaven in the form of a raven. * The expression "like raven to raven" is part of a standard expression in Arabic. more generally "like date to dale and raven to raven". Goidziher, ZA, XVII, (1903), 53. %S. and Ed. JPI. I base my translation on Ma?rizi, 353; I e I 13 p+! ,*I &I, (tr. de Saey, Introd., 54). ' in Shiites, 1, 56, we read that some of the Ghuribiyya exonerated JibrTi, since it was an enor.
brought you a revelation from God'?
and added: We do not like Jibnl because
If M i k h 8 l had brought the revelation to you - and he never announces anything but grace w e would believe in you. Now t h e Jews,
h e brings chastisement
-
despite their denial of the Prophet and despite their hostility to ~ i h d ,d o not. curs$ JibGI, but simply believe that h e is one of the angels of punishment and not of grace. But the Ghurabiyya among the Rawifid damn Jibzl and Muhammad. God, however, has said:
"Whoever is the enemy of God and His angels and
His apostles and Jibzl and Mik&l, s o surely God i s an enemy of the unbelievers? '* In this we fiud a confirmation of the name iniidel for anyone who bears hate to any of the angels. And it is not admissible to include within Islam anyone whom God has named infidel. Concerning the Mufaruu-ida among the Rawifid.
- It
is made up of a group
which maintains that God created Muhammad, ihen H e committed to him the management of the world and the disposal of its affairsP. It is he, and not God, who brought the universe into existence. the universe to 'Ali ibn Abu Tilib*.
Then Muhammad entrusted the rule of
H e is thus the fhird ruler.
This sect is more
ignominious than the Magians who think that God created Satan and that Satan created all evil things; the second ruler.
mare shameful indeed than the Christians who call 'isa
Whoever reckons the Rifidite Mufawwida among the Islamic
sects is o n one level with those who count the Magians and Christians as Muslims. Concerning the Dhammiyya.
- They
are a seciion which believes that 'Ali the
239 i s God and they revile Muhammad, claiming that 'Ali sent him to enlighten
' The following story is related in &mad ibn HanbaPs Musnnd, 1, 274, and by Tayalisi, 356-7 (N0.2731; he does not mention Michael but simply -2).Bukhari, 11, 331-2 has the same tradition but relates it a1 one jew, 'Abdallah ibn S a i i b . ' a Sura ii, v. 9 2 ' With MS. ; Ed. According to Ash'ati 16, 'Ali as ruler of the universe is not recognized by the same group which holds that view about Mubarnmad but by another section within the Mufawida. However, it may be that there was a harmonization behveen thae hvo views at a later date so that Baghdzdi's statement may be correct. Makriri, 353, counts a sub-sect among the'ulyzniyya (see below) which, while recognizing the divinity of born 'All and Mubarnmad, gave the iatier precedence, and it is on that account calied Mimiyya (abbreviated from Muhammadiyya, see Shiites, 1, 97, and 11, 102-3. ' With MS. &; Ed. & . O
I
~
,
world about him, but that h e employed the charge in his own interest'. This sect is excluded from Islam because it denies that Muhammad's prophecy was derived from God. -- -
' This see whose name is derived from ? ioi blame, also appears under other names. Ibn Ham, Shiifes, i, 66, and Makrizi, 353 call them 'Ulyiniyya, the latter tracing the name to 'ulyin ian ? ) h i 3 aldaditsi ar al-Asadi. Shahr. 134, names him 'llba or 'Ulba. Ash'ari, 14, in speaking of them does not call them by any name. - The groups cited in this chapter persisted for a good many centuries The Ghurabiyya are cited in i(umm i n the fourth century A.H. (EI, 11. 177). lbn Jubair (Italian trans. by Sehiapareiii, 272) found them in Damascus, 1184. The Dbammiyya exist to the present day under the name of 'Ali-'llzhi. See Muhhtafar, 158, n.3. and esp. MinorsWs article on this sect in Monde MusnLmnn, XUVXLV (1921), 205-302.
CHAPTER NINE.
believe that Ja'Jar al-Sidik entrusted to them a volume in which information can 240 be obtained regarding any knowledge'
of the Occult which they should seek.
They call this volume JaFr? They are of the opiliion that only he who professes their views can read what is in i t H i r h ibn Sa'd al-'ljli:' treats this in his song as follows: THE SHURAI'IYYA AND THE NAM~RIYYA' AMONG THE
Do you noi see the Rawifid split among themselves And each of them maliing a shocking statement regarding Ja'far?
RAWAFID?
The Shurai'iyya are followers of a man who was &own as al-Shurai'i.
It
is he who held that God was embodied in five corporeal beings, to wii: the Prophet, 'Aii, FitimqS al-yasan and d-Husain. They believe that these five are Gods and there exist five who are their converses'. But they differ regarding their opposites, some maintaining that they are praiseworthy because the excellence of a person in whom God inheres would not be known except through his opposite. Others maintain that the converses are to be condemned. It has bee11 related of al-Shurai'i that he claimed once ihat God dwelt in him. ARer him came one of his followers called al-Namiri. Of him it is related that he asserted God abides in his person. These eight Ghulit sects of the Rawifid are all excluded From the category of Islamic sects for recognizing godsE other than Allah. One of the most astonishing facts is that the al-Khanibiyya ~
~
~-
~
' i read the name of this sect Nainlriyya, instead of Numairiyya, guided by MS. Cf. also Massignon, El, ii, 333. ' lbn Hazm mentions both men as tricksters with a mule, IH, 1, 110 (trans. Asin PaiaCios, 11, 226). The translator disclaims any further howledge of them. According to Naubakhti, 78, the founder of this sect was calied Mubarnmad b. N u ~ a i r al-Namlri. He claimed p:ophecy, and asserted that he was sent by 'Ali ai-HBdi, the tenth lmim (Middle of 3rd century, A. H). and not his son ai Hasan ai-'Askari (Shiites, ii, 127). He attributed divinity to 'Ali, and was himself a believer in TanLukh. He abolished ail prescriptions and prohibitions. His partisans had been supporters of 'Aii. ' According to Makrizi, 353, who deals with the same group under the Dhammiyya they calied FHtima by a nlascuiine name, FB!im. He cites a poem in support of this, also quoted by Blochet, 51. N. 5. Ai-Ash'aii enumerztes them: ibn ai-'As. With MS. ili for i t l l ; Ed. dl.
' '
Abu
Beki,
'Omai.
'UthmHn,
Mu'8wiya
and 'Amr
Some &y a God,' while other groups Among them name him the Immaculate Prophet. But what causes my inexpressible astonishment is a volume Jafr5. I declare myself free before God from all the followers of the Jdr6; I declare myself free before God from every Rifidite Well-informed7 in matters of heresy, but ignorant of true faith.
' Inserting +=
with Goidziher: missing in Ed. Ed I*. See on this book Macdona1d.s article in El, 1, 1037. The meaning of this word and its etymology are not definiteiy established. Goidrihei, (Literntargesck. d. Scki'o, 456, n. 5.), and Friedlander, Shiites, 11, 106, n . 2, derive it from Ja'far.
' With
W. I & ;
Our iine I L L ? j. s e m s to support this assumption. The Jaii is said to be a work dealing with all past and future events. Guyard, 292, n. 3, who claims to have examined a Jaii with ibn al-'Arabi's commentary asserts that it is nothing but the alphabet explained Kabbaiisticaiiy. Cf. d e G o 4 e 116-17. - la'far's capacities as a magician are well known in Islamic literature. He is also credited with the composition of a work on the magic qualities of ?(urHnie verses. See Christensen Kkavns-i-ayaf, Notices, 4. khaii, Ii, 154 ff. in the Miran nl-I'fidnL iii, s, u, A,+, treme R2figite and his tiaditions are, of course, discredited.
he is descnied as an ex-
Friedlander, Shiites, ti, 106, has
justiy raised the problem of the authorship of this poem. It may however, be that H S r L as a moderate Zaidite will auow himseii to taik in this "arthodox" manner of extreme Shi'ites. The poem, with the same authorship is also to be found in Mzkkfnlif al-Hadifh, 85.
" Ikhaii, ib. reads the I m b and so also the oriental Ed. 1, 558 and Mukhfalif al-+dztk. There is no doubt, however, that our t& is the more coned one, since there is nothing extravagant in his being calied ImHm, unless the stress is on the second haif of the iine. ' With MS. " lkhall lsf. With MS.
A;
Ed.
,+.
and Makhtalif nl-~adFfkread @; I prefer our reading.
+.,for e: Ed. F..
When the adherents of truth abstain from an innovation they inciteL [To accept] it, and if they should follow buth it would fail. If they were told that the elephant is a lizard they mould accept it, Or iI they wexe told that the Ethiopian's complexion has turned fair. They are more stupid than the urinatingP camel far he, If he faces you, will turn his back. May abomination overtake the people who involve Him in impostures3 Of the kind of falsehoods which the ~hristianispread about 'isa.
' With ' With
MS.
I+;
Ed.
I+.
MS. Jr ; Ed. n. With MS. % A ,for +>: and in the' next hemistich
191: Ed. %% and $ 9 1
CHAPTER TEN.
THE HULUWYYA AND THEIR EXCLUSION FROM ISLAMIC SECTS. The Hulirliyyq' as a whole, consist of ten sects all of which have misell since the institution of k l m . Their common aim is the endeavor to undermine the tenet of the unity of the Maker. The distinct sects among them go back in the main to the Ghulit of the Rawsd, since the Sabbibiyya, the Bayiniyya, the Jan&iyya, the Khanibiyya, the Shurai'iyya* and the Ndriyya are all members of the HulGliyya In addition to these, the Mukanna'iyya appeared in the district beyond the river Jaihirn3; a group called the Ru5miyyq4 and another called the Berkikiyyi arose in Meme. Besides these, a section sprang up among the Huldiyya known as the Hulmkiyya, another by the name of Uallijiyyq which is to be traced to al-Husain ibn MangGr, known a s al-Hallij, and a third group, called the 'Azikiras, originating with ibn Abu-I-'Azikiri. These Huliliyya groups were followed by a division from the Khurramiyya who joined them in allowing
' H f z l i l , which has several technical meanings, is used here especially in the sense of incarnation which the orthodox reject unconditionally. See EI, 11, 333. The SunniteSSic paint of view on Yulll together with a polemical discussion of incarnation is found in aHuiwiri, Kapkf a C M a k j u b Niehaiso) 260-6. The name Huitliyja, rekiting to an abstract idea rather than a person, is not applied to the same sem or people by all historians alike. See below, esp. on al-Hallij.
(*.
' mg in
Ed. Tansoxania c a e d in Arabic Ma-wama-1-Nakr. BaghdZdi regularly adds Jaipfin (the name of a river coursing through KhurZsk, Yakitt, s. v.), which indicates that he did not regllrd it as a proper noun. ' Mast authorities (Shahr, [HaarhmckeGI 1. 173; Shiites, 11, 110; Iji, 347) name it WZmiyya and its founder Wzim. I follow MS. which carefully insem a Darnma over the Ra.
' With
MS. JJ.; Ed. Jy. With MS. i j l y ; E d ijlh, and similarly for the name immediately following.
the forbidden and in abolishing precepts.
We shall briefly mention their several
distinctions. The Sabbibiyya are included within the category of the Huliliyya because of their view that 'Ali became a God through the embodiment of God's spirit in him.
Similarly the Bayiniyya maintain that the spirit of God circulated among the
242 prophets and Imams uiitil it reached 'Ali.
From him it went on to Muhammad ibil al-Hmafiyya, then it passed into his son Abu *shim, and was embodied afier him in Bayin ibn Sam'hn. They therefore acknowledge the divine character of Bayin ibn Sam'in. By the same token, the J a n i h i ~ y a are Huliliyya because they declare that the spirit oE God circulated amoug 'Ali and his offspring and passed thence to 'Abdallah ibn Mu'iwiya ibn 'Abdallah ibn Ja'far. They are infidels because of their claim that God's spirit inheres in their chief, and, moreover, because they deny the Resurrection and Paradise and Hell. The Khattabiyya
Following al-Saffih, they held, the Imamate passed to Ab" Muslim', admitting, nevertheless, the execution and death of Abu hluslim. But one section amoug them, called the Abu Muslirniyyas, are absurdly extravagant about Abu Muslim believing that he became a God through the embodiment of God's spirit in him. They hold that he is better than JibGI and Miks'il and the other angels. They 243 also hold that he is alive and did not die. and they persist in expecting him. Those in M e w and Herit are called BarkKkiyya*. When they are asked whom al-Man*r killed they say: It was Satan who assumed the likeness of Abu Muslim in the eyes of the people. The Mukanna'iyya are the same as the Mubayyida4 in Ma-wars-I-Nahr beyond the Jaihin. Their chief, known as al-Mukannai3, was a blind fu1ler"n Merw, native of a village called Kaza Kaimun Dat7. He had acquired a smattering of engineering and mechanics and the art of incantations, and was of the persua-
are all Huliliyya because they assert that the spirit of God was incarnated in Ja'far al-Sidik and, after him, in Abu-I-KhaUib al-Asadi. This sect is guilty of heresy from this aspect and because they contend that al-Hasan and al-Husain
sion of the Ruzamiyya in Mem. Subsequently he claimed divinity for himself and concealed himself from people behind a silk veil. The people of Jabd
and their offspring are children and favorites of God. Anyone who pretends that he is of God's children is a greater heretic than the rest of the Khaflibiyya The Shurai'i.yya and the Namiiipya belong to the Huliliyya because they declare that the spirit of God was embodied in five persons, to wit: The Prophet, 'Ali, FHtima, al-Hasan and al-Husain, and because they claim that these five persons are gods. The RudmiyyaL are a division in Merw who went to extremes in aligning
al-SaflZb by bequest and, from him, to Abu Muslim.
themselves with Abu Muslim, the supporter of the 'Abbisid rulea. They transferred the Imamate from Abu Hishim to the 'Abhisids. Then they transferred it from Muhammad ibn 'Ali to his brother 'Abdallah ibn 'Ali al-SaffHh3. Following -
.
~~~
.
This sect is named after its founder Rwam (Ruzam ibn Sahib, ~ a k r i r i ,353.). the last chapter in Weiihausen's Das Arabische 1 on the history of the period van "loten, L~ ~ ~ ~ i n ~arabe, f i o ien Chiifisme et ies Croyances Messin.qeich, ,,ipzes. ~b~ ~ ~is frequentiy ~ known l ias @bib ~ al-Da'wa (master of the mission, Friedlander, ,no ~s ., I 1n21 ~ o s s i b l vorthodoxy prevented our author and the other historians from ..,. I
..-.
~~~
employing for the ' ~ b b a s i dm a i i f s the term Da'wa, generally accepted as heretical. The transfer is traced by MakJzi, ib. through 'Ali ibn Abu TOib, his son Muhamu x i ibn 'Abdallah ibn al-'Abb% by bequest, his son Muhammad, mad, his son ~ b Hashim.
Naubakhti correctly says of this party: +L 42. ' According to iji, ib, it went from Abu Ja'far ai-Manziu to Abu Mudim. Ash'ari. 21-22 calls the Ruzimiyya a branch af the Rawandiyya and similarly the Abu Muslimfyya. Ma&rizi is, therefore, right in his classification of the Basiamiyya (see next note) for which he is criticized. Shiite, ii, 119. FiiediHnder's contention, ib, is no doubt correct, t h a t M a k 6 3 s Basiamiyya ace wonhippen of Abu Muslim, and not Ahu Salma, and are, therefore, identical with the s e b under discussion. " i am tempted to identify this group with the lsbikiyya who, according to Fihrisf, 344-5, arose in Ma-wara-I-Nahr as a result of IshBk the Turk's activities. ' Lane, s. v., on the authority of the TA, identifies this group with the followen of 11-Mukanna' who chose this color in eontradictian to the 'Abb2slds who wore black. It probably done in protest, because of Abu Muslim's execution. See also the note on p. 533 of Wellhausen's Arnb Kingdom and Its Fa21 (Eng. Tr.).
-
' "The veiled one", so called from the fact that he wore a veil of silk (according to others a mask of gold) see Ikhall, 11, 105-6; IA, V1, 2 6 ; Albiruni, 194; Makrizi, 354. ' With
MS. I,,Ld (read I,@); Ed. ~,,tpj. 226 who calls it Kaza, describes it as a village near Mew. Mbiruni ib. writer Kawaklmardan.
' Yakut IV,
ilikl, and also some people from al-Sughdhaere deceived by him.
His seditton
against the Muslims endured for a period of fourteen years". He was aided against the Muslims by the infidel Turks of al-Khalj4 who sought to make a raid upon them, They routed many Muslim armies during the reign of al-1Mahdi ibn Massir. Al-Mukanna' had allowed unto his followers that which was prohibited and forbade them to believe iil prohibitions. He abolished prayer, fasting, and the other acts of worship.
He asserted before his followers that he was a
God and that he had once appeared in the shape of Adams, another time in the shape of l b r a h h . He then continued to manifest himself in the likeness of prophets down to the time of Muhammad. After .him he assu~ned the form of 'Ali. After that he was transmitted in the likeness of his children, then he as244
sumed the shape of Abu Muslim. He asserted finally that in the age in which he himself lived he appeared in the shape of Hishim" ibn ~ a k i m ,for his own
name was Hishim ibn H&'m.
He said: Verily I am embodied in shapes because my
worshippers cannot bear to see me in the form which is properly mine. Whoever sees me is consumed by my light'. He had a strong firm fortress in the vicinity of Kashsh' and Nakhshabo' in a mountain called Siyirn4. The width of the wall of its rampart was more than one hundted baked bricks and below it there was a wide f o s s e t He had with him the inhabitants of Sughd and the Turks from Khalj. Al-hlahdi dispatched against him Mu'idh ibn Muslim, general of his h ~ y , with seventy thousand of his warriors and he put them under the command of Sa'id ibn 'Amr al-Harashi'. The!, he singled out Sa'id to sita& and condud the battle'. He fought him for a numher of years. Then Sa'id prepared two hundred steps of iron and timber in order to set them across the width of MukannaC's
,.$.
'A!= (Ik)but disciaims knowledge of his tathefs name (Oriental Ed. 1, 573 adds w @;, cf. Nujum, ih). It is noteworthy that in discussing the transmission of God's spirit. IA, ib.
credits him with making the statement that "Hi5him, according to his dochine, is al-Mukanna'".
' With
MS.;
' In
Ed. Z)LI, It is a city not far from Shaph in the territory of Ma-
wars-i Nahr. Yakfd speaks of it as being one of the piea9antert cities; tts mountains contain deposits oi gold and silver. 1, 241.
'
The correct reading is d l : MS and Ed. d l . IA, ib. relates that the MubaFiida Came to help him from Bukhzra and al9ughd. Cf. Yakat, 111, 394. The agreed date for his downfall is 163 A. H. According to some it lasted from 149 to 161 (IA, i b ; although he dates the defeat in 161, he adds that al-Mnkanna's head, ac~ordlngto the version that he was poisoned, first reached the Khaiif in 163); amording to others it started In 160 or 161 (Tab. 111, 484) Ci. aiso Nujirn 11, 430: Abu-I-Feda, Oriental Ed., a, lo. The number in our text, aiso copied by 1st 59b, Includes perhaps the early sears of his rebellion before it assumed such large praporiions. * A town eeaF Gharna, YakBt, s. v. 8 The theory of G o d 3 revelations successiveiy in various persons is declared by
Goidriher, who attributes it to Christian influence, to have been first proposed by Mukanna'. ~ c e o r d i nto~ this theory ail prophets are redly identical. This, of course, is also the point Of view of the Bagtinifla, ZA, XXII, (1908), 337 if. The Mubayyida are Indeed counted as one of the sub-sects of the BiUnlyya. See below' 101. IA, Vl, 26, relates that their war-cry was: 0 HishHm help us i T o this Goldziher, ib, adds that in his epistles his views of himself as a God are apparent. With MS; Ed. ?C..Isi. 59b (?La, read $b): AiblrBnl, ib. agree with our author. Tab. ib, and IA, ib, as well as Ya'kBbi Bibliot. Ceogr., VII, 304) and BarwTni (ated by Browne, Lit. History of Persia, 1, 319. all call him ~ a k ~ r nikhail, . 11, 205 caiis him
further iiiusttation oi the claim - b y al-Mukanna',
it is worth citing the incident
reiated in isf, 59 6. His devotees pressed him to reveal himseii to them. Despite his warnings they insisted. He therefore placed a concave brass mirror against the sun on his mimbar so that It would reflect against the door of the Mosque. He called them to prayer at midday where he said he would reveal himself t o them. But as the first people stepped into the Mosque the suniight reflected by the mirror burnt them and they were convinced of the trnth of hls daim (see also, Makriri, ib). He is also raid to have manipulated a scheme by which he could bring the moon up whenever he wanted.
' Ed. and MS. g ;isf. B. and P. correctly attested by the various sources. a
MS. and Ed. &.; 1st. B.
near Karhsh.
4. it
+.'
Ikhall, i b ; Sinsset Nameh 290. That the town Kashsh is meant is
is the Penian name for Nasaf, a
civ
right
+
' IKhail ib. reads (Oriental Ed., ib.) Yakfit, 111, 155 mentions it speciacaily as the town u-here Nlukanna' had his fortress. Mukaddasi, 376; iA, ib., Abu-1-Feda all agree with our reading. "fth Ed. J*; MS. j.L. With MS. >>I; Ed. ' "in that year (161) Mu'idh ibn Muslim and a number of generals and armies marched against Mulianna' and Sa'ld al-Harashi as his superior (e- &).... Then jealousy developed behveen him (Mu'Sdh) and al-Harashi. The latter wrote to al-Mahdi slandering Mu'Mh and guaranteeing him victory if he should entrust the condud of the war entirely to him. AlMahdi yielded, and al-Harashi became the only commander". 1.4, V1, 34. Cf. also Tab, iii, 484.
sit.
fosse, so that his men could pass aver it. He ordered ten thousand buffalo skins from Multinl in India, stuffed them with sand, and levelled with them the fosse of al-Mukanna'. He then fought al-Mukannat's army beyond his fosse. He compelled thirty thousand of them to capitulate and he killed the rest. AlMukanna' set himself an tire in a furnace in his fortress in which he had dissolved copper with wines, s o that he dissolved within itz. His associates were seduced by this afterwards since they did not find either his body or his ashes and they thought that he had ascended to heaven. His followers at the present day in the mountain of ilik are the most detestable among the inhabitants. In everyone of their villages they have a Mosque, in which they do not pray, but hireS a Muezzin who calls to prayers. They permit themselves to eat carcasses 245 and pork. Everyone of them enjoys intercourse with other men's wives. If they get hold of a Muslim whom the Muezzin in their Mosque did not notice they kill him and hide him, yet they are not generally maltreated by the Muslims in their district. Praised be Allah for it. The Hulminiyya among the Huliiliyya originated with Abu Hulmin al-Dimishkii, a native of Pars, whose lace of upbringing was Aleppo? Iiui he promulgated his innovation in Damascus and for that reason is named after it. He is guilty of heresy for two reasons. In the first place, he believed in God's
' Yakfit lv, 688. None of the geographers in de Goeje's Bibliot. save Mukaddasi, devote much space to the town. Even M~kaddasi, however, mentions nothing about the presence of buffaloes in it, 480-1. Most authorities, e. g. Tab., 111, 494; Nujum, 1, 438: LKhall, ib. ; Ya'kubi, ib.; Abu-lFeda, ib. agiee that he poisoned himself and his adherents. IA, VI, 34 repotis both versions. ' Ftiedlsndefs remark on this word that "it gives no sense" (Shiites,11, 120, n. 2) 1% surprising, as the VIII. form of #/.makes very good sense indeed being synonymous with b , e L . employed by Isf. which Ftiedlsnder prefrrs; cf. Ed., 197. Massignon, al-Hallodj, 362, puts his death at about 340 A.H. By his two heresies (see text below) he recognizes him as an adherent of at-~aiiij but adds: -C'est la un resum6 pelAde de deux theses connues d'ai-Haii8dj~. Hujwlr1, Kashf nl-Mohjib (tr. Nichahon) 260, regards this sect as well as the kIalzjiyya as condemned by the Sfifis. But he adds that many consider Abu Huimb a worihy Sfiii. Tfisl in the 6 1 *W (ed. Nicholson, 289) calls him Abu HhlmSn a i - 5 s . Massignon, El, 11, 333 calls him a distiple of Sgim of B a j a (see below on the Slmiyya).
embodiment in handsome beings.
Whenever he and his followers saw a pretty
face they prostraied themselves before it, taking it into their heads that God
abides in it1. The second aspect of his disbelief was his advocacy of licentiousness, and his assertion that whoever knows Gad, in the way in which he (i. e. Abu Hulmin) believes him to be, is relieved of all interdictions and prohibitions, and can allow himself all that he delights in and craves. 'Ahd-al-Kihir says: I found one of these Hulminiyya citing, in proof of the possibility of God's incarnation in bodies, God's word to the angels regarding Adam: "So that when 1 have made him complete and breathed into him of my spirit, fall doru-n making obeisance to himnz. He held that God commanded the angels to bow down before Adam only because He had embodied Himsef in him and really abode in him because He created him in the most beautiful form. Therefore, He said: 'We have created man in the finest form"" I said to him: Tell me about this verse from which you bring proof that God commanded the angels to bow down before Adam, and about the eloquent verse that man is created in the finest form. Is all mankind meant hy these two 'verses? Or one particular individual? He inquired: What will follow from either of the two 246 interpretations which I may offer? I answered: If you state that what is meani by them is mankind in general, you are obliged to kneel before every man, even if he is ugly, since you assert that God abides in all men. But if you say that the allusion is to a particular person, then it is Adam and no one else. Why then do you bow before others who are blessed with beautiful faces, yet do not bow before a horse of noble breed4 or a bit-bearing tree, or handsome birds and beasts? Sometimes it is the flame of hell-fire6 which gleams in a face. fl you admit bowing to the flame then you have combined the error of the HulGliyya with that of the fire-worshippers. But since you do not kneel before fire, mter, air or the heavens, despite their fairness of form under certain circumstances, do not prostrate yourself before persons of fair appearance.
' Cf. Ash'ari, 214. ' Sura 15, v. 29. ' Sura 95, v. 4. ' Reading Fl, with
MS: Ed. c ~ j l .
RCading ~Lll!with Goidriher;
Ed. and MS : L&Il.
I further said to him:
Verily the fair forms in this world are numerous, and with respect to God's incarnation in them no single one is more desenillg than the other. If you maintain that God abides in all :air forms, is this embodiment like the existence of a property in a body, or like the existence of a body within a body? However, the location o f an accident in many subjects is absurd and the location of one being in many places is impossible. Since that is absurd, then that to
which it leads is also absurd. Concerning the Hallijiyya'. - They trace their origin to A b u - l - ~ u ~ h y t halHusain ibn Mansir, known as ai-Ijaliijl H.e was a native of the province of Fars, 247 of a city called al-Baida'?. In the early days4 of his career he was engrossed in
the philosophy of the Siiis. His manner of expression at that time was of the kind which the Sfifis call Shaths. It is the kind that lends itself to two interpretations: one, noble and commendable, the other viciousfi and blameworthy7. He pretended to possess both a detailed and a general knowledge of the several sciences. Some of the inhabitants of Baghdad and numbers of people from Talikin in KhuriGn A very exhaustive shldy oi the iaunder of this sect is contained in the large work by Massignon, La Pnssioiz Bal Hosoin ibn M a n ~ o n ra[-Hnlladj, Paris, 1922. The name means a carder. But whether it refers to an actual profession of woolcarding in which his father may have been engaged, or to some miracle, or is some metaphorical name is discussed by Massignon. I. c., 18-20 and 69. (ai-Haliij was born in 244). :' A city on the right bank of ~ height , farasangs irom Shiraz, I. r, 14.
I
were seduced by him'. The theologians, the jurists and the Sifis entertain various views regarding him2.'The majority of the theologians are inclined to condemn him as an infidel and to believe that he was of the persuasion of the Hulilimaa. But several of the Salimiyya Mutakallims of B q r a 4 accept him and class him with the mystical theorists of the Sifis5. The Kidi Abu Bekr ibn al-Taib al-Ash'ariR ranked him with those who are endowed with perspicacity and capacities for the preternatural7. hl his work, in which he demonstrates the incapacity of the Mu'tazila to establish the distinctive features of prophecy on the basis of their principle, he mentions the supernatural deeds of al-Hallij and the manner of his miracles. The jurists have also been divided in their attitude to al-Hallij. Abu-I-'Abbis ibn Suraij" abstained from pronouncing an opinion when he was asked for one
' On his work alld preaching in BaghdHd see Massignon, nl-Hallndj, 132 and 338-9. On T.!iikin see I. c., 77-80 and 337-8. iKhali says: "....and people are 9611 at variance- respecting his true character, some extoiling him to the utmost whilst others treat him as an infidelw, 1, 423.
' This contention is refuted by 'Omar si-'Ordi (d. 1024 A. H.) Massignon, 1. c. 395. In the discussion of his Sefiism, he takes up this question several times, 464.532. ' According to Huiwyri, KnshL 131, the Siiimiyya is one of tlie Huii~liyya sects. ist, 6 0 b identifies them with the Hashwiyya (see on them Houtsma's article, ZA, XXVI, 196.202 and my article, JAOS, iiv 11934). 1-28].
The fullest description oi the sect is given in Gki'nyrr, p. 61, upon which Gaidziher based his sketch, ZDMG, U1, '13-78. Among the heretical views are. I) that in the resurrection God will be seen by everybody, including
"These early days probably include the period from his adolescence to his fiideth year, i. c. 20-62. "cstatic, enigmatic phrases. I. c. 375. Nicholson, Kashf, 168 translates it simply as "ecsintic phrases". On its importance in Siific literature see Massignon 1. e. 923. With MS. &: Ed. d. ' This characterization is no doubt the prejudiced view of a raiianai Sunnite. A more
Massignon, I. c. 361, translates "to have realized the ideal set by sifiiiism". o n kika in the sense of mysticism ar inner redity see Kashf, 383-4, and Massignan I. c, 565-6. i owe my translation oi the phrase to Nicholson, Kmhf, 119.
objective and more sympathetic definition is one which Massignon gives in his Lexique techniqlre de l a Mystique Mmulmane, 99: that it is the recognition of "a divine element" in the "slightest action or phrases". It comes in a state of ecstasy where every word is realized
"ied, 403. He is generally surnamed al-BIkilini (iKhali, 11, 672). and he is called Ash'ati because oi his adherence to the Arh'arite doctrine or because he is a descendant of Abu Miisa ai-Ash'ati ( 8 0 Sam'ani, s. v. hh'ari). On his attitude to al-Haiiij see Masagnan,
in its fullness, so that the divine speech is heard in it, "au seuii de I'union mystique, intervient ie phenomene de Shath, i'afire de rechange, i'interuenion amoureuse des r8ies est pro-
I. r, 364-5.
posee: ].?me soumise est invitbe a vouioir, a exprimer, sari* r'en douter, -a la Premiere personnl*, le point de vue meme de son Bien-aim@: c'est Pepreuve suprime de Jon humilite,
Ed. and MS. e ~ He.died 306. his view3 Massignon 1. c. 165-7.
'
ie s e e m de son Ciection".
infidels and animals; 2) that Muhammad h e w the &"fin even before it was reveded to him: 3) that i m b (faith) is one oi God's names.
va-
I. c.. 136-8.
For his biography see IKbaii, 11, 46 ff. and far
regarding the forfeiture of his life'. Abu Bekr ihn D i u d Z pronounced himself in favor of his execution. The religious leaders among the Sifis have also disagreed about him. 'Amr ibn 'Uthmin al-MekkiS and Abu Ya'kib al-Akta' (one-handed)" and a number of others declared themselves free from him. 'Amr ibn 'Uthmin said: 1 was walking with him one day and recited something from the Kur'in. Thereupon he remarked: I can write compositions like it. It is reported that alHallij one day passed al-Junaidj and said to him: I am the Truth. Al-Junaid answered: You exist by the Truth. What a gibhet-you will smear with your blood*. What al-Junaid remarked about him came true, for he was afterwards impaled. 246 Another group of Sufis have accepted him. Among them are included Abu-I-'Abbis
ibn 'Ati" in Baghdgd, Abu 'Abdallah ibn ~ h & fin~Fars, Abu-I-Kisim al Nasrabidig in NishiPirr, and firis al-anawariLOin his province. Those who ascribe heresy
' Massignon, Murjite tradition.
I. c. 164, correctly expiains that this abstention is in accordance with the His Fatwa read: It is a man whose inspiration I cannot discern: there-
fore, I shall say nothing about him. Died 296, IKhaii, 11, 662-5 and Massignon, i. c. 167-82. He was a ZHhitite (see on his father Gaidriher's Zahiriten, p. 27-40). He was onen consulted together with ibn Suraij on legal matters. an his flash with al-Haiiij 1. c., 56-9. " Died, 297, Massignan I. c., 32-3; Ai-Hailij's lather-in-law and secretary to ai-Junaid (see following note); on his rupture with his son-in-law, ib. 62. Called by Marsignon HaiiHi's "spiritual directov, 59 and elsewhere (for a definition of the term see Knshf, 55-7). He is a very prominent SGN. See Kashf, 126-30 and 188-99 and Massianon I. c., 33-6. The ciash between the hvo is related, ib, 59-62. A curious anecdote is told ib, 52, that during their first meeting al-Junaid already predicted ai-Hali2j.s end employing the same expression. On ai-Junaidl capacity for pre-
' Died,
309.
He was a devoted orthodox who died from stripes he received for de-
For a fuller descdption of him and
his views see Kashf 247-51. Ib. 159-60. He is ihe same as 1brahTm Nasrabzdi cited in Massignon, I. c. 407. He died 372.
'. Died and 337, n. 7.
342.
state by obedience, and restrains himself fromz pleasures and lust, ascends to th,: sphere of the favorites of God. He shall then not cease to keep pure and he will mount on the steps of the purified until he will be freed from fleshly bonds. When there will not remain in him a particle of his material qualities, the spirit of God which was embodied in 'lsa ibn Mariam will become incarnate in him. In that state he will no sooner desire anything but it will be fulfilled as he desired it, and all his acts will be divine. They are of the opinion that al-Hallij claimed to have attained this rank.. They relate-hat some letters of his to his followers were seized, and in them the salutation read: "From Him who is Lord of Lords, who takes on any form, to His worshipper So-and-so''. They also obtained possession of some letters which his followers sent to him and in them the superscription
is: 0 Essence of pleasure and Object of the most Extreme Delights4. We testify that you are the One assuming some likeness at all times and in our time the likeness of al-Husain ibn MansGr. We seek your protection and hope for your grace', 0 knower of secrets". They tell that in Baghdad he gained influence over a group of the Khacf's
retinue and harem: so t L ~ tthe Khalif Ja'far al-Muktadir Billihii fearing the shame of his sedition, imprisoned him and consulted doctors
of the Law for their opinion on the inviolability of his person. He lent a ready ear to the Fatwa of Abu Bekr ibn Diud authorizing his execution. He ordered
' The following alleged statement by ai-Hail31 agrees very closely with the passage in IHauk, 209-10. ' Reading ' Reading
ji
with lsf.; MS. and Ed. & .
lbji,
with MS;
He was an active adherent of al-Hailij after the iatter's death ib, 334
Ed.
xi,.
&,
&=, j l i l l 2,;b; Ed. and MS. j l & l l 41; In this accusation against ai-Hali&j, called in Arable G*," ip., Massignon sees Shl'ite and not Sunnite influence. He even goes so far as to claim that Baghd8di.s list of Reading With 1st 61 a,
saging see K
and the beliefs of the Hululiyya to him relate that he said': He who mends his
Z'3l
V!
the Ghulit ssect is nothing but a copy of ImHmite heresiogaphy, I. e, 138 ff. The rather clumsy expression of our author is elucidated by the phrase in 1st. 6 i b; But see the same expression in iyauk, 210. - Even the KhaiFrs mother was impressed with him. See ai-Tanshi, Nishwir ol-Mrrhidam, ed. k g o l i o u t h , 83.
~ ' j.4+u:
' Khaiif from 295 to 320 A. H. See a vivid portrayal of him and his relation to the 'Abbaid rule, Massignon, I. c. 199-206.
Himid ibn al-'Ahbas'
to flay him a thousand strokes:
and to amputate his arms
249 and legs, and to i m p a l e 9 i m after that near the bridge" of Baghdad. This order
was executed on Tuesday at three o'clock, six days beforethe end of Dhi-I-Ka'da in the gear three hundred and nine. He was lowered from the scaHold to which he had been pinned and was committed to the flames. His ashes were thrown into the Tigris. Some of his devotees believe that he is alive and was not killed, but instead one on whom he stamped his likeness was executed. Those Sifis who cherish his mentory hold that the states of divine grace were bestowed upon him, but he made them public. He was punished, in that mastery over him was granted to those who disavow miracles in order that his state might continue to be concealed. These believe that the essence of Sfifiism is a state in which the exoteric is merely a disguise and the esoteric is sanctification. They cite in evidence of the sanctification of al-HallQ's inner life what has been told regarding him, that while his arms and legs were being cut, he pronounced: It is the aim of the ecstatic to recognize the divine essence in its When he was asked one day about his creed6, he began to say: It consists of three letters which have no diacritical points and two which have, and his remark vas cut shod. But he meant Unity (Tawhid)'. Concerning the [Azikirat - They are a faction in Baghdid, adherents of a I
Abu Muhammad Himid ibn a!-'Abbis
(223-311) was the vizier of al-Muktadir.
for
his character see ib, 211.13 and for his machinations in bringing about ai-HailSi's end, 274-90, esp. 287 f. With MS. bir : Ed. a p . Massignon points out, ib, 293, n. 4. that the story of his crucifixion is of Sfific origin. Over the Tigris, ib, 293, n. 5.
in both clauses, so that it reads . r - i j l -, u l j l ,!>'. i faiiow Massignon, I. c, 324-28 and Nicholson, Kushf, 311 in reading y l j l for the first. The tiazslation is aiso Massignon's; see ib., and for his criticism of NicholEd. MS. and Id. 6 i a use
u l j l
son's translation, 327.
' Reading
with irf. ib., q r ; our reading w i , if correct, may perhaps be a bit of
dry humor. ' See Massignon, ib., 127 for an explanation of the letters along the l i n e s of yabbali~ticinterpretation. He aiso completes the statement it is hard to determine whether MS. reads
ij,ji,or i j l i .
with Ed. But several lines
below the copyist definitely changed a doubifui reading into Z. and towards the end the is unquestionable.
man who made his appearance there in the time of al-Ridil ihn al-Muktadir, in the year three hundred and twenty two. He was known as ibn Abu-I-'Azikir, but his real name was Muhammad ibn 'Ali al-ShalmaghiniP. He pretended that God's spirit was embodied in him and he named himself the Holy Ghost. He left a book to his followers which he called "On the Sixth Sense". He advocated explicitly the abrogation of the Law, and permitted sodomy: maintaining that it was the communication of light from the superior one to the inferior. His followers allowed him to enjoy their wives, because of a craving for a communication of h i s light to them. Al-Ridi Billahi seized him4 as well as a group of his followers, among them al-Husain ibn al-Kisim ibn 'Ubaidallah ibn Sulailnin ibn W a h b b d Abu 'Imrin 1brah:m ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn al-Munajjim4 He discovered their 250 letters in which they addressed him as Lord and Master, and described h& by his attributes of power over what he wished7. They admitted writing them. They confessed in the presence of the jurists, among whom were Abu-1-'Abbis Ahmad
' Khalrf, 322-329. ' This is the correct
reading for the name which was given him after his town Shai-
maghin, near W k i t (IA, VIII, 215). I!, 115.
Our text reads i W i . On the variants see Shiites
1A. viii, 219-20. was =*ally s&ed by ibn Muklah, the vizier of al-Ridi, IA, Viii. 217 and Yakfit, Irshid, lii, s. v. Shaimaghb. On ibn Mulilah, who was vizier under Muvadir, Kihir and ai-Ridi see Miskawaih, Eclipse of the 'AbbGid KhaZifaifato (Tr. D. S. Margoliautb,) I,
' He
209-28, 272-300, 328-379. "Met under MuMadir, 319-30. His Kunya is Abu 'Ali (Nujnm 8. 286). IA, ib. caiis his grandfather 'Abdaliah. V a k a t , I. c., 206 calls him &I
&I
JY.
21;
1st. 61 b,
4 1 ;
He ' m s a writer of note
and the composer of a number of works. Yakfit's discussion of ibn Abu-I-'&air connedion with his biography of this author.
is given in
' TWO very interesting and a r i o u s tenets in the phiiosophy of ibn Abu-I-'Az5kir are: fist, that everyone in whom Ood is incarnate has a Satan who is his converse. so that his exceiiency may be more definitely demonstrated (Shiites, 11, 116). and secondly, that everyone is a lord over the one below him in rank. A line characterization of his views is given, IA, Vill, 218-20 and Yaet, ib An extract of the latter is fransiated in Miskawaih, I. c. part 1. of translation at the beginning of the book (unpaginated).
ibn 'Omar ibn Suraij' and Abu-l-Farah al-Maliki and a number of Imims. The one called al-Husain ibn 4-yisim iba 'Ubaidallah was ordered to disavow ibn Abu-lAzikir and' to slap him! He did s o and repented publicly. Ibn Suraij ruled in accordance with the code of al-Shifi'i, that the acceptance of his repentance was admissible'. But the MilikiteE issued a decision rejecting the repentance of the Zendik since he was seized against his will. Al-Ridi had him imprisoned until his case would be investigated'. He ordered the execution of ibn Abu-l-'Azikir and his companion ibn Abu 'Aun. Ibn Abu-l-'Azi!
' He is the same jurist who withheld From pronouncing an opinion in the care of al-HallSl. See above, 81. ' With MS. ~ L J ;Ed. A & . "A, ViiI, 217-18 tells that this was required of Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abdixs and of ibn Abu 'Aun. ibn 'Abdus did it, but ibn Abu 'Aun's hand trembled, so he kissed ShalmaghHni's head and called him "my lord' and "my bestawer". This will explain why he was killed together with his master. ' Umnl. 1. 227. "Milik is stricter with the Zendik than with the other apostates because the former apostasile secretly so that they cannot be trusted even when they repent unlegs the caniesston is voluntary. See Gdlddher, Mah. Sfud. 11, 215-16. Both Yakixt and iA, ib. report that an offer similar to the one made to the vizier was aiso extended to ibn Abu 'Aun, but that he refused (see note 2). They further relate that ihn
'
Abu 'ArHklr tried to disavow any connections with the letters in which he was called by divine names, but his testimony was proved false. - Friedisnder, Shiites, 1, 70, cites an edition of IH, which tells of the viziefs execution. but it is not substantiated. See I. e. 11, 117.
CHAPTER ELEVEN.
THE ADVOCATES OF LICENSE AMONG THE KHURRAMIYYA' AND THE REASON FOR THEIR EXCLUSION FROM THE CATEGORY OF ISLAMIC SECTS. These consist of two divisions. One of them was active before the Islamic Era. This was the Mazdakiyyae who permitted forbidden practices, holding that men are partnets in property and women. The faction endured until Anishirv6n killed them during his reign.= The second division4 consists of the Khurram&niyya5
' The signmcance of this term is not unanimously accepted. Van Vloten, in his work La dominntion ambe, le Chiitismq mentions that the Arabic scholars derive it from Persian which signifies pleasure. L. H. Gray connecLr the name with MazdaKs wife Khurrama, who fled to Rai after her husband's execution and carried on her teachings under the name Khorram-din (ERE, Wfl, s. v. Mazandaran; Justi, Iran. Namb. s. v. Khurrama, see below). The most probable explanation is that it is derived from the city name KhuriHm, far Yakixr 11, 427, informs us that BZb* probably hails from there, although he himself aiso cites the interpretation from the Persian.
' Either founded or propagated (Noeldeke. Parser u. Araber. 456-7) by Mardak. 1t is, of course, not surprising that our author stresses only what are t o him the abominations of MazdaYs doctrine. But it was deeply religious and had some noble motives. See Noeldeke I. c., 458-61; Mirkhond, tr. by d e Sacy, AnfiqaifLv de la Perse, 354; Shahr, 192-4. ~ h o s r a u ,a great Persian emperor who reigned 531-79 was called A n L h t r v h (the blessed one) as a result, so the Arabic sources state, of his vigorous campaign in which he destroyed the Mazdaklte heresy. Whether he did it as prince or as king is discussed by Noel-
Our author, like the other Arabic historians, is of the opinion that he acdeke. 1. c., 463-67. complished it after ascending the throne.
' The association between
these tuo divisions rests merely on the common charadetistics
of communism of property and wives. See Noeldeke, 1. c., 461, against Blochet, ch. 5. This name is used as an appellation for the s e d interchangeably with Khurramiyya. Cf. for example, Mukaddasi, 398, in which he identihes a mountain called Khurramdiniyya as the home of the Khurramiyya, adding, mriously enough, that they are Murjftes. chet, 44-6 and UsiI, 323; Siassef Nanreh, 298 and Asiiari 438.
See aiso Bla-
who appeared since. the institution of Islam. It split into two sects, the Babikiyya and Mizyiriyya, both of which are known as the Muhammira'.
Ibrahinll were seized and crucified in Surra-man-raa' in the reign of al-Mu'ta~im. Alfishln, the Chamberlain, was accused of lending assistance to Bibik during the
The B&&iyya are followers of B i b i k 2 al-Khurrami3 who appeared in Jabal al-Badain4 in the district of Adherbaijan, and gained many followers. They considered all the prohibitions permissible and slew many Muslims. The 'Abbisid Khalifs"
war and was, therefore, executed3.
equipped many armies against them under Alfish:nn' the Chamberlain, Muhammad ibn Yisuf al-Thughri ', Abu Dulaf al-'Ijli8 and their associatesq. The armies continued
the yaniarat al-MuhammiraI5 in Jurjin is named. 11, their mountain retreat the Bibikiyya-celebrate a festival-night when they gather over wine and song, and their men and women carry on promiscuously. When their torches and brands go
to face him for a period of twenty yearsx0, until Bib& and his brother ishik ibn I Lit. those apparelled in red dress. See Tab., Index. s. v., and Weilllausen, Arobisrhes Reich ( E O ~trans.), . 533. F'hrist, 324, eaiis the Muhammiia the earlier of the two Uurramiya (s~c!). iji explains the name as coming from the red dress which they wore during the time of
BHbHk, 349. The following biographical note is taken from Fliigel's article in ZDMG, XXlii (1869), His father, whose name was 'Abdaiiah, lived in Badain and was an oil deaier. He 537-42. also traveiied to Adheibuipin. BHbHk was the child of an illegitimate union. A story is told that when he was ten years old his mother noticed a blood spot on his body and realized that he w a ~destined to do great things. He was found by ]%widin b. SahrBk, a tribal leader in the mountains of al-Badain who enlisted him a$ one of his followers. When J M d i n died as a result of a battle with his opponent Abu 'imrln, Blbik was induced by JHwldln's wife to claim that the latter's spirit became incarnate in him. BIbHk did so and became his successor.
' With ' With
MS.: Ed.
The Mizy%~ya are the followers of Mizyii-' who proclaimed the rite of the 252 Muhammira [among the Bib&iyya in one of the mountains of Tabarktin. After them
I This is the name, not of his brother, who was caiied 'Abdaiiah ( M u $ , ViI, 131). but of the governor of BaghdHd who executed him. Tab. (Zotenberg) IV, 523 tells that he
fought tire Khurramiyya and defeated them previously and also participated in later attacks. it may be of course that a line fell out from our MS. but what argues against it is that Isf. B., 6 2 a has +I., a ;,r-i $1 r and that the same error reappears Ed. 2611. It is surprising to find that Mokhtnsnr, 173 not only repeats this mistake but even traces the Ishnkiyya to him. For lshik ibn lbrahlm see Shiites 11, 32 where the genealogy of the Mu9'ab family is outlined. %
This may be his native cily.
History relates that ai-Afshln was executed sfter the defeat of M h y i r whom he incited
See Mrrrij, VIi, 123.
They wire d-Ma'mso and d-.Mu'tasim. There was an attempt made to crush the rebels in 204 (Tab. 111, 1038). In 205 'is8 ihn Muhammad ibn 'Ali was sent against him but was defeated the following year (ib.). So vocalized in MS. See Muruj, VII. 132. It is the famous general ai-Affshin whose real name was Haidar ibn Klus. IA, VI, 182. Abu Sa'ld Mubarnmad b. YiIsuf had been sent previously against BHhHk and even dealt him a defeat (called the first one). I b . De Ooeje suggests that this general is perhaps the same as that mentioned Tab. 111,
lo rebel against 'Abdaliah ibn Tlhir, governor of KhurLin, whose position he coveted.
AIAfshin had already been provoked against the governor because the iatter had revealed some dishonest deals by AI-Afshln with moneys which he received. See IA, VI, 209 ff. and Browne, Lit. Hist. of Persia, 1, 330fl. Ourauthor, however, consistently iinks a:-Mshfn's act of trearion
with the BHblldyya so as to give it a religious motive. See Ed. 268 (below). He was executed 266 A.H. IA, vi, 212.
' His red name was Mubammad ibn KBren. IA, VI. 202. His sedition occurred in 225.
' The
798, who was urged by Muhammad b. isa to join him in the revolt against Ma'miIn. They are Muhammad ibn ai-B&th and Bugha ai-Kab'n.
IA, ib. and Nizjim, 1, 656.
It need not be gathered that fighting was carried on during all this time. Al-Afshin war first entrusted with the task in 220 IIA Q.) but, as stated above, B i b i p s revolt commenced as early as 204.
See Fagnan's note
' Oripinaiiy Samarra but called by this name when Mu'tqim rebuiit it. (Lit. everyone who sees it rejoices). Muir, Califate, 513, n.2. See aiso Mas'Bdi, Tm6Jk. 457.
&I.
MS. Ed. s i l l .
is curious that Makrizi (Fagnanj 48, speaks of this ishHk ibn ihrahim as participating in a
rebeifion with 'Abdallah ibn Maimfin ai-KaddP? in the days of al-Eula'miIn. ad loc.
:>I
ib;i
Muruj, VII, 137 and 414 n.
See aiso
passage in brackets is omitted in Ed. The Arabic reads as follows: :>I +ill
' Mllkhfmar,
jL+
Jb
&
p
YJUl.
163, aseiibes this celebration to the Mmlriyya, which is more reasonable, in view of their adoration of Shawl", (see below). Perhaps this is aiso the intention of Our author Who regards the BIbHkiyya as the mother sect of the MHzyBtiyya.
out' the men deflower the women, contending that it is a necessary practice'.
CHAPTER TWELVE.
The Bibikjyyas trace the origin of their cult to a king of theirs of pre-Islamic times by the name of Sharwin4. They believe that his father was Ethiopian and his mother a Persian Princess. They maintain that Sharwh was superior to Muhammad and to the other prophets. They have built mosques far the Muslims in their mountain%and in them the Muslims are called to prayer. They teach their children the Kuiin, but they do not pray privately nor do they fast in the month of Ramadan, nor do they concede the duty of making holy war on the infidels. The sedition of MizyPr took on large proportions in -his districtB until he, too, was captured in the days of al-Mu'tasim7, and he was cruciiied in Surra-man-raa next" to Bib& al-Khurrami? At present the followers of Mizyir in their mountain are composed of the peasantry ~vhich borders on the mountain from Sawid 81Jujan. They feign lslam but secretly practise the opposite. But it is God whose ,
help is to be sought against people of error and disobedience. Reading
A%
with M S ; Ed. S b , Since this sect is no dovbt derived from the Zo-
roastrians it is hardly likely that they would intentionally extinguish a light as Ed. implies. Isf. reads E,Jl j*., 62a. An identical charge, it is alleged by Justin Martyr, was made against the eariy Christians. Diulogve with Trypko, in Ante-Nicene Fefhrrs (Amer. Ed.). 1, 199. Arabic %p 3 %-- & . AS pointed o m in a preceding note it would be more correct to read M i q i r i y y a here. Justi. 1.c.. 290 identifier him with Sharwin b. Shurkhat, ispehbed of Tabaristin, 772-97, who defeated the Arabs in 783 with the assistance of Vendad Homusd. 1A. VI, 131. (He is named there as MSzyir's grandfather). But see Albiruni, 48. This notice is very curious. Any friendly relations between them and the Muslims shomld be excluded a priati.
We have in addition even better teJtimony of their enmity in a
statement b y abu-I-faraj who relates that B i b i K r adherents, wholever they caaght a man, woman or chiid who was a Muslim, would cripple and kill him. (cited ZDMO, XXIII, 541
n. 2). Fihrist adds &Ir, &.j j A l I 3 , 344. TabatistPn in K h u r i s b , IA, VI, 202. His trouble started as early as 201. Tab. Ill, 1015. ' He was caught by 'Abdallah ibn THhir, governor of K h u r i s b against whom he had waged war in 224 A. H. Muruj, Vn, 138-9: Isf., ib. With MS.; Ed. &I.
THE FOLLOWERS OF THE DOCTRINE OF METEMPSYCHOSIS AMONG THE PEOPLE OF FANCY AND THE REASON FOR THEIR EXCLUSION FROM ISLAM. Those who believe in metempsychosis consist of several divisions. One includes the philosophers, and another the Sumaniyya'. These two divisions existed before the rise of Islam. The two other divisions made their appearance since the institution of lslam: one from the Yadariyya and the other from the Ghulit Rawifid. The believers in transmigration among the Sumaniyya assert the pre-existence of the world and also reject deductive and inductive speculation9. They hold that n o t h i n ~can be known save through the five senses. Most of them dispute the existence of the world to come and the resul~ection after death. One faction among them believes in transmigration in diverse forms. They regard it as possible for the soul of a man to be transferred into a dog and the spirit of .a dog into a man. Plutarch tells of a doctrine similar to this held by some philosophers. They maintail? that whenever anyone commits a sin while in one body, punishment for it will place him in another body. They entertain a similar doctrine regarding reward. One of the most astonishing facts is that the Sumaniyya profess metempsychosis, which cannot be perceived with the senses, despite their thesis that nothing can be known except through the five senses. The Minawiyya also adhered to the doctrine of metempsychosis8, for . ..... ' Horten, Systenle, 93-6, classifies them as a Hindu group. See their views there. He identiiies the name with Shraman (a Buddhist Monk). Arch. f. Gesch. d. Pkilos., XYIV, (1910) 144, n. 1. The m d e PP. 141-66 give- a detailed study of their views. ' See Horten's article referred to above. U s 4 320 describes them as sceptics. A. V. W. Jacltsods article on the dodtine of metempsychosis in Manichaeirm, JAOS, XLV (1925). 246-68 proves conclusiveiy that the doubts expressed by same authorities hitherto,
--
as for example, Bevan in his article ERE, VIII, 399 and Kessier in the PRE, XI, 215 are not valid, particularly since there is no statement which must be necessarily interpreted as op-
254
Mini says in one of his works that the souls which leave their bodies are of two classes: the souls of the righteous, and the souls of those involved in error. When the souls of the righteous leave their bodies they travel with the Pillar of DawnL to the light which is above the heavenly sphere and remain in that world i n eternal bliss. The souls of the sinful people, when they leave their bodies and wish to reach the Supreme Light, are turned back the other way to the lower world and are transferred into the bodies of animals until they are purged of the spots caused by unrighteousnessy. Then they attain the Supreme Light The historians relate that Socrates and Plato and their disciples in philosophy professed me~empsychosisaalong the lines which we have explained in the Book on Religions and Dogmas4. Some Jews profess transmigration. They claim to have found in the book of Daniel that God transferred Bukhtanagar into seven animal forms and beasts of prey, and thus punished him, until finally He transformed him into a believer in one Goda. As for the adherents of the Doctrine of Metempsychosis since the era of Islam, the Bayiniyya, the Janihiyya, the KhaQibiyya, the Rawandiyya6 among the Rawitid who profess incarnation, all accept the doctrine of the transfusion of God's posed to the doctrine. Prof. Jackson has certainiy combed ail the extant literature and recently discovered Chinese, Turkish and Pehievi fragments. See I. c. 249, 261-8.
' Perhaps we should read +i A+ of praise) with Fihrisi, 335; Cf. Jackson, I. c., 246 and 251, note 1. "=me references as above. Ci. MI IT^^, iV, 65-7. ' Arabic KitPb al-Miial wai-NiQai. The statement in Seeiye, 9, that the book is preserved in a Constantinopie library, which she took from Goidziher, ZDhZO. LXV (1911) 350, has been denied by Goldziher himself and the error blamed on a careless reading of the title of the MS. by the cataloguer in the library. L. c., LXVI (1912). 165-6. Waniel, Ill. That this information was also known to the Arabs is apparent from the fact that Tab. (Zotenberg), 1, 571-2, relates that as a punishment far throwing Daniei into the Lion's den he was ;hanged into a beast and lived among animals for Seven yean. It is surprising that BaghdZdi always mentions this sect casually and indirectly, although it is of such great importance. Ash'ari, 22-3, describes it a s a mother s e b from which both the RuzPmiyya and Abu Musiimiyya branched out. For a fun discussion of this sect see Van Vloten,
La :ominafion Arabe, Ie Chiitisme, and Shiites, 11, 121-4.
spirit in the Imims. The first to teach this error were the Sabbzbiyya among the Rawifid, claiming that 'Ali became a God ever since God's spirit was incarnate m him. The Bayiniyya hold that the spirit of God was transmitted through the 255 Irnims' until it came to Bayin ibn Sam'in. The Jan&iyya make a similar claim regarding 'Abdallah ibn Mu'iwiya ibn 'Abdallah ibn Ja'far. The assertion of the Khattabiyya regarding Abu-I-Khat@b is similar to theirs and so also the claim of a group of people among the Raivandiyya concerning Abu Muslim, the supporter of the 'Abbbid Caliphate. These profess the transmigration of the divine spirit but not of human souls Far be He from any such extravagance. Among the Yadariyya a number of people accept the doctrine of transmigration. One of them is Ahmad ihn Hi'it who was a Mu'tazilite, a disciple of alNazzimz. He adopted the latter's innovation of the Leap: his denial of indivisible .. particles: and the denial of God's power to augment the pleasures of the inhabitants of Paradise or the tortures of the people in Hell. But he exceeded al-N?+m by his blunder about ttansmigration. Another among them was Ahmad ibn Apgib ibn Yantish? He was a disciple of Ahmad ibn Ha'it in the suhjed of metempsychosis but the two of them diiered later as to its manner. There was also Muhammad ibn Ahmad al:Kahtabi6. [He was a contemporary of al-Jubba'i and adhered to MuYazilism, but added to it his innovation of metempsychosis, and wrote a treatise in proof of it. Another was Abu Muslim al-HarGi' who cites al-Kahtabis] and glories in the fact
' Ed.
reads "through the Prophets and the ImZms". My reading faliaw~MS. For al-NaffZm's views see Ed. 113-32 (Seeiye 135-157). The doctrine of metempsychosis is really a coroilary to ai-Naffsm's thesis of Knmin (hiding) which our author does not recall here. C t Horten's artide in ZDMG, LXlll (1909). 780. 'Reading ;pWi with MS.:
Ed. 8 9 i .
See Ed. 124-5.
' Ed. and MS. read .divisible particis., but this is an ' See on the variants of his name Shiifes, Ti, 10 ff.
obvious mistake.
V d . W i ; Id., 63 a, caiis him Ahmad ibn Muhammad, Fihrist, 342 adds no further information about him. But see text towards end of chapter. See MS. passage in the next note. ' According to ibn Hazm as qnoted by Schreiner, Der Kalam i n der jiid Phil, 62-63. (see also Shiites, ii. 64) his name 13 Abu Muslim ai-KhuraHni; bat this reading is unacceptable in view af the tact that our author caiis him H-ni bath here and below. Further, Abu Muslim al-KhurHs5mi Is probably the iamaus general of the early 'AbbBsids and he was doubtless a Shi'ite and not a ifadarite. The parrage in brackets is omitted in Ed. In Arabic it is as foiiows:
bLj
j,'kj
that he shared their view on both problems of Mu'tazilism and Tanisukh (metempsy chosis). Finally there was '~bd-al-Kmym ibn Abu-l-'Awji", an uncle of Ma'an ibn Zi'ida2 He reconciled four kinds of heresies. In the first place he secretly preferred the tenets of the Manicheans among the Dualists'l Secondly, he beiieved in Tmisukh; thirdly, he favored the Rawifid on the question of the Imams; and, fourlhly, he held Kadarite views on the prohlems of justice and injustice'. He had invented 256 numerous traditions bearing Sanads with which he deceived those who had no
knowledge of the method of deciding between the. false and true:'. The traditions which he left are all blunders in anthropomorphism and divesting. In some ef them he aims to contradict the precepts of the La-. It is he who led the Rawifia to abandon the inauguration oi the fast of Ramadan with the coming of the new moon by means of a calculation which he provided for them. He ascribed this calculation to Ja'far al-Sidik. The story of this heretic was related to Aba Ja'far muh ham mad ibn Sulaimin, al-Mansur's governor at al-K;*fa', and he ordered him
p
r'
+, e W 1
21;)j *c'
d,
evJ1 j u+ JijzY\
y
A!;,
J I ~ Y I si
& jr,
*!-+I
& d i i ,<> $,L See on him below.
' A weii known general and governor who served under the 'Umayyads and went into hiding under the 'Abbisids. But when he saved the Khailf al-Mansir from the attacks of the Rawandiyya he was restored to their graces. He served respectively in Yemen and Kbuiisin where he si$m many Khitijites until he was finally assassinated by them deceitfully. EI, 111, 225
Fihrist, 338; Albirtnl, 80.
' Reading
i&l,
with MS.; Ed.
Even if2 you kill me I have already composed four thousand Hadiths in which I allow the forbidden and prohibit the allowed I made the Rawifid break their fast during one of their fast days and made them observe a fast on one of the non-fasting days". The following is a detailed expositio~t of the views of these people on met em psychos is^ Ahmad ibn Ha'it maintained that God originally made His creatures pure of heart", secure from evil, intelligent and mature, placing them in an abode other than the world in which they dwell at the present time.
He endowed them with perfect reason and created within them a consciousness and knowledge of Him, and bestowed His grace upon them in abundance. He held that the penon who was bidden and forbidden, the object of God's grace, is the soul which resides in the body; the bodies are frames for the souls. He was of the opinion that it is the soul which is endowed with life, power, knowledge and that all living beings ate of one genus. He also held that all species of I The circumstances in connection with this Statement are reported mare fully in both Tab. 111, 375-7 and IA, VI, 3. Both of these authorities relate that the Khalif wrote the
governor to wait for his decision in regard to the execution, but that the governor executed him before receiving the Khaiirs approval. in fact he lost the governorship as a result of this step. AI-Mansh's speciai care came from the fact that Abu-ib'Awj2 had influential friends at the court, ib., Aibiruni, ib.
' Reading ' Tab.,
ji with MS. ; Ed. j
.
ib., does not cite this story. IA, who tells it, does not refer it to the Rifidite,
however, Aibiruni, 76-80.
locates him at Basra. is confusion about the name of this governor.
Tab., IA, Nujzrjom do not
mention the Kunya Abu JaYar. Our author and Albiruni who seem to have used the same
source call him Abu Ja'fa,. (The persol1 mentioned by this name iKhaii, V, 85 lived much later). The confusion comes no doubt from the fact that the Khniif ai-hlansur's name was Abu Ja'far. Perhaps the translation should read : Muhammad ibn Abu Sulaiman brought the report to Abu Ja'far, but the construction does not allow it. hf. has Abu Ja'far ibn Suiaimin ai-Hishimi who was Mupammad's brother. (Tab. 111, 304, sqq.; Nujnm, 1, 471!. Copying from ai-Baghdadi, !sf. ib. carried the coniusion still further in an attempt to straighten it out his own way.
But 'Abd-al-Kan'm said:
nor does the Mlzin, I. e. which Is much btieler, making no reference to the fact at ail. See,
~FJ,.
MFzan 01-Ittidal, 11, 144 eaiis him a Zendik and a decelvei. He enoneousiy "here
to be executed'.
' The doctrine about to be described in detaii is ascribed by Naubakhti, with as much in view of the close relationship between the detail as here, to the Khurramiyya, 32-34. Khurramiyya and the Bltiniyya, it must be said that the former seem to have been logically the originators, or at least expounders of this theory. According to IH, i, 91 the believers in Transmigration adduced as proof the verse "and into whatever form He pleased He constituted you", (Sura 82, v. 8) and "He made mates for you from among yourselves and mates for the cattle too, multiplying you". (Sura 42, v. 9). Ibn Hazm's explanation of these verses which is the accepted orthodox One will be found on f. 91, bottom. On the whole be dismisses the Muslim believers in this doctrine briefly by saying that ijms' dedaies such people infideb. His argument ir devoted in particular to the pagans. Reading . k I with MS. ; Ed. ?lei.
animal life are charged with the duty of observance1 and upon all of them ordinances and prohibitions have been imposed in accordance with their diverse forms and methods of expression. He asserted thal when God bade them, in the abode in which He had originally set them, to feel grateful to Him for 257 the grace which He had hestowed upon them, some heeded Him in all that lie had commanded them, while others disobeyed Him in all that He had commanded them. [Still others complied with Him in part of what He had ordained for them and violated the restP]. Whosoever obeyed Him in d l that He had enjoined upou him was leit undisturbed in the pleasurable abode in which He had placed Him from the first". Whoever disobeyed in everything that He had ordained was banished from the abode of pleasure to the abode of eternal torture, that is, Hell. Whoever fulfilled pari of what He had commanded and violated the rest was brought forth to the earthly world and equipped with one of these bodies in the various forms of men, birds, animals, beasts, insects, ind so on, which are solid moulds, and are afflicted with suffering and difficulties, hardships and fears4, passions and pains, in proportion to their sins and disobedience and the former abode in which He had created them. Now, he whose obedience in that abode outbalanced his disobedience, exists in a comelier form in this world, but he whose obedience in that abode was less than his disobedience exists in a homelier mould in this world. He further believed that the living being, which consists essent~allyof the soul2, will continue to reappear in various moulds and forms as long as his obedience is adulterated with iniquity. The grades of his mould, whether in the human or in the animal world, will be determined by the relative of his merits and demerits. Moreover,
'
This domine is disputed at length by IH, 1 78-87 (part of it tr. in Asin. 11, 190-6). According to him, lbn H2i! proved his thesis by inference from two KufBnic verses in one of which (Sura 6, u. 38) ~e calls all beings nations and the other in which He states that He sent messengers to ail nations (Sura 35, v. 22). jJ ' This passage is missing in Ed. The Arabic reads as fallows: L
+.
'i
p' L u".! j .b, p,\.
' IH, I, 91, top. (Asin, 11, 199). ' Reading 'ii, with Mukhtasar, 165; "rahic: c,P r
96
3 631 *I+,
My
Ed. and MS.
'ki.
translation is confirmed by isf's reading: j j l + l
a messenger from God to every kind of living being will never cease to appear, and God's charge to the living being will always continue1 until his. works become pure obedience. Then he will be restored back to the abode of eternal bliss which is the abode in which he was created. On the other hand his works rnay become extreme disobediencez; then he is to be condemned to Hell and its eternsl tortores. These are the teachings of lbn Hi'ii on Tankukh. 258 Ahmad ibn Ayyib ibn YanCsh3 teaches that God produced the complete crearion with one fiat. Some of his adherents relate in his name that Gad first created the logical"articles, evetyone of which is indivisible. He held that those particles possessed intelligence and life, and that God made them uniform in all respects, so that none, of them could claim superiority over the others; nor was any of them guilty of evil deeds on account of which it would be reduced to a position inferior to that of the others. After He had amply bestowed His grace upon them, He offered them the choice between being tested by active obedience so that they might become deserving of reward lor them, since the rank of merit is nobler than the rank of graces, and between leaving them6 in this a b ~ d eas an act of grace to them. Some of them preferred the test; while others declined. Those who refused it were left in their first abode as heretofore. But those who preferred to be tested were tried in this world. When He tried those who preferred the trial, some disobeyed Him while others submitted. He reduced those who disobeyed Him to a station which is inferior to the grade in which He had created them. But those who obeyed He raised to a rank higher than the grade in which He had created them. Then He made them pass successively through persons and moulds until ' Maljrjzi, 347, cites verses in suppoit of this contention. Sehreiner, I. c., 63. states that Ahmad ihn HH'i! utilized certain verses. See also Oolddher, Richfungen d. Zslamischen Kor'nnnuslegung, 309.
+.
Reading with MS.; Ed F. "Ed. and MS. jji: iH. V1, 198 states that he claimed a gift of prophecy saying that h e was meant by the vene s l u l ~ u ? ,y i . ~ 4Jr4 I,+, (Sura 61, v. 6.)
' Reading 3 r d ' with MS; Ed. i i a I . " Reading with MS.; Ed. J4. ' Reading & MS. and Ed. notwithstanding;
' Reading -dl with MS.;
Ed.
GI.
they read
+.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN.
a number of them became humans while others became animals or beasts in proportion to their sins. Those of them who becsme enimal forms were relieved of the charge of obedience. He r a s at variance with Ibn Ha'it regarding the charge to animals. He said of beasts that they will be continually transformed' 253
into ugly forms and that they will suffer aiiliciion such as slaughter and the yoke until they shall have received in lull that retribution which they eamed for their sins. After that they will be restored to their ancient station. Then God
AN EXPOSITION OF THE ERRORS OF THE HAIWA FOR THEIR EXCLUSION
AND THE REASON
FROM ISLAM.
will oifer them a second choice of testiilg. If they select it He will reimpose upon them the task of obedience in the manner which we described. ~ u ift
They are the followers of Ahmad ibn Ha'i!' +he Kadarite, a dsciple of alNazzim in Mu'tazilism. We discussed his views on metempsychosis previously.
they abstain kom it they will be abandoned to their actual state unburdened with any charge. He held that if any of those bidden to obey should perform
In this chapter we shall relate his blunders about the Unity of the MlkerS Ibn Hi'it and Fadl al-Hadathi believed that the created universe contaiiis two lords and two creators. One of them, eternal is God, and the other, brought into existence, is 'Isa ibn Mariam4. They believed tha' Christ is the son of God by \ adoption,: and not by birth. They also maintained that it is Christ who will call mankind to reckoning on the Day of Judgment. He it is whom God meant when He said: "Thy Lord and the Angel came in ranksn%alld it is he who will come "in the shadows of the clouds"' It is he who created Adam in his image. This is the explanation of the tradition which has come down that God
deeds of obedience until he merited becoming a prophet or an angel he would have it granted by God. Al-Kahtabi: who was one of them, held that God did not propose to them the burden of obedience at first, but that they asked Him for ail elevation in their rank and for an opportunity to contend for superiority. He informed them that these characteristics could noi be granted to them until after the imposition of obedience and the trial, and that if they accepted the charge and then disobeyed they would incur chastisement upon themselves. They declined the test and this, he said, is the meaning of God's word: "Surely we oifered the trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they refused to be unfaithful to it and feared it. Man took it upon 'himself; surely he is unjust, ignorant3'Qbu Muslim al-Harrini thought that God created souls and charged those among them which he knew would obey Him but not those who would disobey Him. The latter disobeyed him i n the beginning and were punished alternately by metempsychosis and transformation into diverse bodies in proporiion to their sins. This is an exposition of the beliefs of the adherents of the doctrine of metempsychosis.
We have already destroyed their argument suf-
ficiently in the Book of Religions and Dogmas.
' Reading
=J1 with MS.; Ed. r?. With MS.; Ed. Mil. Sehreinei, 1. c., 66, n. 3, says: 'That DualtiJts adhered to the
doctrine of meternpsychosir we realize hom the care of ai-Kahtabi". that al-Kahlabi was a duaiist? ' Sura 59, v. 16.
98
Where did he discover
created Adam""
' On
His image?
H e i o believed ..la. :t is he whom the Proohet
the variants of the name of Ahmad% father see Shiites, 11, 10f.
In addition to his heresies listed in this and the previous chapten he is acc?aed by IH. iV, 197 and by MakrIzi, 3<7, of blaming the Prophet for his numerous marriages, claiming that Abu-Vharr al-GhifHri (£1, I, s. v.) was more abstentious than he. 1 . IllliSnr, 148, calls him r i i i (see p. 222). ' Makriri, 347; Shahr. 42. ' Reading 2 5 1 ' with MS.; Ed. d l . We no doubt have here the traces of the Adaptianist
heresy of early Christianity (Cf. ERE, I, 103-5,
esp. par. 1-4). For the influence which Christianity exerted on these men their doctrine bears evidence. See also Shiites, 11, i l . ' Sum 89, v. 23. The Orthodox translation of Maiak is as a coliedive. Baidawi, 11, 402. ' Sura 2, v. 206. With Goidziher; Ed. and MS. iAl. Maksri, 347. 'With Ed.; MS. u y . I have not been able to locate this tradition. Its Biblical source is obvious. genes^, 1, 27. '" I. e. Ahmad.
referred to when he said: You will see your Lord as you see the moon when it is lull'. It is he whom he meant when stating that God created the intellect 261 and said to it: Come forward, and it came forward. Then He said: Step back nnd it turned back. Then He said: I have not produced a nobler creature than you. Through you I shall give and through you I shall take9 They asserted that Christ became embodied, but before his embodiment he had been the Intellect 'Abd-al-yihir says: These tvo non-believers have identified themselves with the Dualists and the Magians by aErming the existence of two creators. But their doctrine is more heinous than the doctrines of the latter. The Dualists and Magians ascribe the origin of d' good to God and ascribe only the bad to Darkness or Satan. But ibn Hi'it and Fadl al-Hadathi trace the production of
aU good to Lisa and even credit to. him the reckoning with mankind in the world to come. The surprising point in their doctrine is that 'is* created his grandiather Adam. Is there anything more w o n d e h l than a branch p?oducing its root! Whoever includes these two erring sects within Islam is similar to one who counts the Christians among the sects of islam.
CHAPTER FOURTEEN.
THE JjW&IYYAL AMONG THE K A 5 A R m A AND THE REASON FOR THEIR
EXCLUSION FROM ISLAM. They f0r.n a group among the Mu'tazilites of 'Askar Mukram z. They have selected some peculiar errors from the heresies of the various Yadarite divisions, adopted from lbn w i t his dodrine of transmigration into bodies and frames, and subscribed to 'Abbid ibn Sulaimin al-Daimari'sS view that those whom 262 God transforms into monkeys and pigs become human after their transformation but turn infidelsL. From Ja'd ibn Dirham $ whom Khaid ibn 'Abdallah
' The mystery surrounding this name (our author sheds no light on its origin; d. Mt~khtqsar, 167 n. I), can be solved to my mind by tracing it to the k t 'Umayyad Khailf, M e m ~ n ibn Mnbammad, who was nicknamed al-Himir, and who, as Fihrisf, 338, relates, was
' The tradition is found in all the colleciions. See Wensinek, s. v. Allah. * Shahr.. 44 gives this tradition in neater detail. Golddher who quotes this
tradition
from OhazSii cites it as a definitely Neo-Platonic element in Islam, ZA, XXII, (1908) 318-9.
a Zendik. See aisb IA, V. 329. It is noteworthy that this Khaiif was a pupil of Ja'd ibn Dirham (see below) who p l a p a rcle in the formulation of the doctrine of the ~ i m z t i ~ ~ ~ . BaghdHdPs silence is doubtless due to his orthodoxy which restrained him from linldng thk heterodox sect to a Khalif. ' This is the reading according to YakPt, s. u. 'Askar, MakrTzl (Fagnan) 40, reads
Mukarram. It is a place near Khozista. While Yakm speaks of it as a place of learned men, Mukaddasi, 410, calls attention to their heretical teachings; . - e P pzb, .W OW,
+,
.
p, ...@
+.
~5 3- r L Y I @ Jl+Yk Igk, ,@I l lthj 3 yji Goldriher quotes a passage ace. to which the place was a Mu'tazilite nest in 1156. Islam, 111 (ig12) 219. It is significant that 'Ahdallah ibn Maimfin al-KaddZP, the &matian ieader, was also a native of this town. Blaehet, 67. ~,Jill
'
With MS. & d l ; Ed. =&I. 'AbbHd (and not UbZd ar Seelye, 147, reads or as Nyberg, Inlisar, 203 allows1 was a MuSazilite who armed that it is wrong to say of Ailah that He created the unbelievers dnce their unbeiiei could not have been ereatedby God. L i s a &-Miran, 111, 229-30 (he calls him 6 4 1 which resembles our reading and not that in Ed. 147 and Nyberg ib.) saw that he lived fn the days of al-Ma'mb.
' Makrirl, 347. ' The foilowinc biographical
information is recorded aboul him in Filrrist, 337-8: He was a teacher of MenvZn ibn Mqammad whom he converted to Zendikism. But Hishim ibn
roo
al-Kasri offered up as a sacrifice, they nave adopted the thesis that when de-
CHAPTER FILlEEN.
ductive proof leads to knowledge, that knowledge becomes an act without an agent. In addition they hold that wine is not a product of God but is the work of the vintner, because God will not what will be a cause for disobedience. They believe that man creates several species of animal life. For instance, when a man buries flesh or places it in the sun so that it breeds maggots, they h d d that these maggots are man's creation. Similarly the scorpions
THE YEZ~DIYYAAMONG THE KHATVARIJ.UiD THE REASON FOR THEIR
which appear in straw under baked bricks are believe to have been produced by the one who combined the baked bricks and straw'. They are more heretical than the Magians who ascribe the origin of serpents. creeping things and venomous snakes to Satan. Whoever counis them among the sects of the community is like him who counts the Magians among the sects of the community. 'Ahd-&I-Malik finally executed him after he had kept him in prison for a long time.
It is told
Ja'cs family brought the sialy of his imprisonment to HishHm and complained ahaut its lengthiness. HishHm was surprised io hear that he was still alive and ordered Khilid to kt11 him. The latter executed him on the Sacrifice Day after accusing him of Zendikism fro01 the pulpit. The editor of Ibn Kutaiba, Ikhtiiif fii-Lafth 56, n. calls him the first one to have asserted the created character of the Kutin. See also N z j z m , 1, 357 and IA; V, 196-7.
'
EXCLUSION FROM ISLAM. They are the followers of Yezid ibn Abu Unaisa' the Khirijite, a native of Basra Later he removed to TLn2 in the land of Persia, and followed the docrines of the Ibidiyya among the Khawirij. Then he renounced the faith of the entire communitys by preaching that God will appoint an apostle from among the Persians and will reveal to him a book from heaven, and will abrogate the Law of Muhammad with his new Law. He held that the disciples of the awaited prophet are the Sihians spoke^ of in the Kuiin. The people of Wasit and Harrin who go by the name of Sibians are not the Sabians mentioned in the y u i i n 4 . In addition to his error he befriended anyone among the People of the
Makrizi, ib.
' The
founder of the sect which $811 exists to this day is one Yezid whose personaiiq 2 g Sam'Hni s. v. YezT4 he is idenlical with
has not been determined. According to some,
the 'Umayyad Yazld ibn MemHn. But our author's statement is the more correct See rsya Joseph's D e v i l Worship.
' Near
KuhistHn in Persia, between Herat and NishHpBr, Isf., B. reads
,,- and
Isf.
(or >F). The probable reading is ,J. Both Tun and Khur are towns in this mauntainous region and Yezid may have gone to either of these two. Mukaddasi, 301 and more P.,
JF
fully 321;
Yawt, IV, 201 f s. u. KuhistHn.
Ash'ari and Shahr. do not include this group among the Ghulh but discuss it as a sub-sect of the lbzdiyya (Ashead 102, ff, and Shahr. 100-02.) ' Chwoison, in his study of the SHbians, also adopts this distinetian between the Sgbians who are discussed in the K u r l n and those of Hams", 1, 11-22. He states that the latter took this name on the advice of a jurist when the Khalif al-ManpEr persecuted those Ao exposition of the SHhians of the y u i g n who did not profess a revealed religion (13-14). a
will he found ib. chapter 5, and of the Harrznians, 139-541, esp. 158-180. Pedersen, who differs with Chwoison regarding the nature of the original SHhians does not want io recognize the two types. See his article in Oriental Studies t o E. G. Browne, 383-91.
Book who confirmed the prophetic character of Muhammad even if he did not
CHAPTER SIXTEEN.
join his Religion, and in view of that called them Believers. According to this theory the 'isawiyya and Ra'y$niyyal among the Jews are necessarily believers since they have acknowledged the prophetic character of Maammad, but do not join his cominunity. There is nothing which can allow anyone who regards Jews as Muslims to be counted as one of the sects of Islam.
How then can he
THE MAIMUNIYYA AMONG THE
be counted among Islamic sects who predicts the abrogation of the Law of Islam?
' The are meant,
reading is unmistakable, but rn ail probability the Yudghaniyya or ShadghPoiyya note 6. Galdziher's remark in his review of this book, in which he
sce above 37,
argues against the pasibility of the appellation to be derived from his name al-RL'i may give the clue to this name See Friedinndtps remarks in suprport of this reading, JQR, NS, Ill (1912-13) 284-5 aed m e s . AlbiNol, 18, lists Ma false prophets one of whom is Abu Kit'isa a-Isfahnni and the other al-RZi (no doubt YudghBn) see REJ, d i (1886). 259-60. kisnni relates ulat Yudgha was called "The Shepherds' by his followers. - Hebrew Union US
Collcgs Annrrol, vii, 328.
KHAWARIJAND
THE REASON FOR THEIR
EXCLUSION FROM ISLAM. They are the followers of a man among the Khawirij of Shihrl whose name was Maimen?. He belonged to the school of the 'Ajirida8 among the Khawirij. Later he contradicted the 'Ajirida in the matter of God's will, human free-will and the p o k to act, adopting on these three dogmas the doctrines of the Kadariyya who deviate from ihe truth. In addition to this, he held that children of polytheists dwell in paradise. If this Maimfin had satisfied himself with these heresies which we have related and had not added any other errors, we should have classed him with the KhawGrij for branding 'Ali, Taka, al-Zubair, '&isha and others as infidels" and for calling sinners inhdels; [we should have also classed him] with the Kadarites for his opinions on the problems of will, free-will and power to act, which conform to those of the Kadariyya. But he exceeded the Magians. He permitted men to marry the daughters of the chddren of common grandparents and the daughters of the children of brothers and sisters5. He argued:
' This
In the prohibitions against marrying certain women be-
rendering is somewhat d o u b W : MS. apparently reads +;-)!, which makes no ShiPr is a town in S. Arabia, Yakit, s. v. That there were Kha-
sense. Ed. reads
wsrij in that district is clear from ibn Haukal, 32. Yet Ash'ari, 95, locates him in Balkh. ' Shahr. 96, transmits his name as Maimfin b. KhBid. MakrirT, 354, and lji give his fnii name as Maimfin b. 'Amrh. Ed. 72-82
(Seelye 94-104).
As in the ease of the Yeridis, our author is mare
Conservative than the other authorities in classing them with the Ghul2t. Ash'ati, 93, 354 and Shahr. 96 enumerate them among the GZrijita.
' This
is a cardinal dogma with all KhSrijite sects. See Seelye, 75. These are forbidden relations according to the four most important orthodox rites see Syed Amer 'Ali Muhamnledan Law (1929) 11, 277; Ahmad Shakti, Mohammedan Law of Marriage and Divorce, 25.
cause of consanguinity, God specified only mothers, daughters, sisters, paternal 265
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN.
aunts and brothers' daughters and sisters' daughters'. But he did not specify daughters of daughters or sons, nor daughters of brothers' children, nor daughters of sisters' children. If he carried his analogy further to mothers' mothers and fathers' mothers and grandfathers' mothers, he would become a thoroughgoing' Magian. But since he does not pennit the rnarria~e of grandmothers, for he infers the rule governing grandmothers irom the prohibitions against grandmothers' mothers, he is compelled to apply the principle governing children of one's own loins to children of children. If he does not pursue his analogy this way, his argument is destroyed. Al-Kar5bisis relates that the Khirijite Maiminiyya disacknowledge the S i r a of Joseph as part of the yur'in4. But to disavow part of i t is like disavowing it all. Whoever permits to himself any of the prohibited laws adheres to the cult of the Magians, and Magians are not counted among the s e d s of Islam. - .. ~
Sura 4, v. 27. The Alif of & which appears in Ed. seems to be erased.
i therefore adopt the
CONCERNING THE B A T ~ I W A AND ~ THE REASON FOR THEIR EXCLUSION FROM ALL THE SECTS OF ISLAM. Know - may God make you prosper - that the damage caused by the Bitiniyya to the Muslim sects is greater than the damage caused them by the Jews, Christians and Magians; nay, graver than the injury inflicted on them by the Materialists and other non-believing sects; nay, graver than the injury resulting to them from the Antichrist who will appear at the end of time. For those 266 who, a s a result of the missionary activities of the Bitiniyya, have been led sstray ever since the inception of the mission up to the present time are more
reading &I renderiug it as above. Brockeimann's emendation Jk is not borne out by MS. Al-Husain ibn 'Aii ibn Yezid al-KarHbisi (and Karasi as in iH, IV, 190). He was a
Although our author is consistent in calling this sect BH!iniyya it is, nevertheless,
famous ShWite of the third century A. H. He died 244. See IKhaii. 1. 416 and IA, YII, 34. The information cited above is probabiy drawn from ui-Karibisi'r Xitib fil-MHkHlnt, characie-
blown by many other names, most of which, no doubt, date from the period later than Baghdsdi. Some of these names are connected with penons; others, like the Muhammira,
'
riled by Fakhr-si-Din ai-RHri's father as
'lpi'i j l l JL.,
ci'ji
Subki, Tabnkit, 1, 252. See Noeideke-Schwaily, Ceschichte dm Qorans, ii, 94.
'
& t i
ij,-
J
JF,
are not usually employed as epithets for this mystical s e a iji, 348, mentions rwen laknbs, with explanations: Bi!iniyya, Karhiia, Huramiyva, Sab'iyya, BBbHkiua, Muhammira, Isma'iiiyya. Ooldziher in Sfreitschrift, P. 37, lists the following ten names: BH!iniyya, Karimifa, Karma-iyya, Khurramiyya, Khurramdiniyya, (the last two are llat treated separately by our author; see above p. 87). isma'iiiua, Sab'iyya, BLbikiyya, Mupammira, Ta'iimiyya. Sfasset Nameh, p. ZFO, however, has the following ten: ismr'ili (Aleppo and Cairn), Karmat, (Bagdad, Ma-war=-i-nahr and Ghama), Mubareky (Kufa), Rawendi and Buiquoy (Basra), malefy (Rai), Muhammira, Uudan), Mubayyida (Syria), Saidy (Maghreb), Djenneby (Lahsa and Bahrein), Batiny (Ispahan). The Mubar* sect is mentioned by Shahrastani p. 128 and by Bashdndi p. 47 (Seelye p. 66) as an lmamiyya group, (the latter unnecessarily makea them adherents of Mubammad's children rather than of Muhammad himself). They are borne out by Naubakhti, 58. Baghdndi even mentions the lsina'?illlyya as a branch of the same main division (p. 39; Seelye p. SO), but in the discussion on Page 56 (Seelye p. 65) he relegates them to the GhuiHt. They applied to ihemselves the term Ta'iimy (on the meaning of this name see Streitschn'ft, p. 5 ft and page 38.)
numerous than ihose who will be led astray by the Antichrist when he appears, since the duration of the sedition of the Antichrist will not exceed forty days'. But the vices of ihe Bitiniyya are more numerous than the sand-grains or the raindrops. The heresiographers relate that a number of people laid the foundation for the Bitiniyya movement. One of them was ['Abdallah'ibn] Maimun ibn D a i ~ i n known j as al-Kaddsh, a mawla of Ja'far ibn Muhammad al-Sidik and a native of Ahwk. Among them was also Muhammad ibn Husain, surnamed Dhaidhin 3, [and several
' 1sf. 65a adds: And tile sedition of these appeared in the days of ai-Ma'mfin and it still endures. ' Despite the consistent use of the name Maimfin (see his add his san's biography in Massignon's article in Sfndies Presented f o E. C. Browne, 330-31) in our text here and elsewhere, which is generaiiy supported by isf., and despite the skitiful calculation of Cassnova in /A, 1915, pp. 5-17, esp. pp. 13-15, in which he credits this account, the correct reading in the particular instance under,conrideration is 'Ahdaiiah ibn Maimin as [sf. reads here. For even if Maimin, to judge by the account given of him in IA, Vlil, 21, may, in a sense, be regarded as the founder of the sect and, according to Casanova (ibd.; see below), may, together with his son, have hopedfor an overthrow of Arab rvle in 194 a . H . the details d the career in the fallowing passage do not at all tally with his biography as we lolow it from other sources, but agree well wiih the career of his son. The epithet ai-Kaddsh (the b ~ e .2r.l oculist) is applied by same authorities to the father (e g. f i h r i s t , p. 186, c ~ d and de Goeje p. 13 and p 15). by others to his son (e. g. IA, ib.). Even our author declares (Ed. p. 16. Seeiye p. 35) that 'AbdaUah was the founder af the sect. It may also be added that the alternatives upon which we are compelled to fali back, if we should adopt Casanova's conclusions in the said article are far-fetched. For one thing he asks us to recognize two ZaidHns or Dhaidzos or to pttaliy discern two individuals in the two variant readings. It is even more diificuit to assume as he does that the BB!iniyya
movement was made up of a series of affempts rather than a well planned conrpiraey which reached its successful dimax with the establishment of the FBtimid dynasty in 296, as it is described by most historian^. But the strongest argument against his view Is that Baghdsdi whom he eaiia "Bien infarme" @. 13) tells (Ed. 277 below p. 131 and in UsB p. 329) that were the favnders of the movement which commenced in the days of al-Ma'min (198-218) Uamdan Karma! and 'Abdaliah ibn Maimin al-Kadd@, grandfather of the chief of the BB!biyya in Egypt. Isf. B. -. 65 a. reads j ' u i . Isf. P, 86 b, jlul, Fikrisf, 188-222, i r l ~ t j ,1.4, 21, blur; editor mentions that one of his MSS. reads b'+s, Makdti (Fagnan P. 45) gwes his name ~~~
~
other people called descendants of Hamdan Mukhtar who met the one called Dhaidhin]' and ['Abdallah ibn] Maimiin ibn Dai& in the prison of the ruler of 'Irik. In that prison they formulated the religion of the Bitiniyya. Their doctrine appeared in public, after their liberation from prison, through the activities of the one called Dhaidhin. He commenced his missionary work in the district of al-laba12. Many of the Kurds of al-Jabal as well as the inhabitants of the mountain named e l - B a d a i n ~ o i n e d his religion. Then (1Abdallah ibn] Maimun ibn Daiqin journeyed to the province of al-Maghreb and there claimed to be d e s cended from 'Akjl ibn Xbu T?lib', pretending that he was an offspring of his. After a number of the Ultra-Ra-,ifid and the Hidiiliyya responded to his call, he pretended that he was one of the children of Muhammad ibn isma?16 ibn Ja'far al: Sidik. The simpletons6 accepted this from him despite the information' possessed by the genealogists that Muhammad ibrr Isma41 ibn Ja'far died leaving no progeny8. . . . ~
as Muhammad ibn ai-Husaili ibn Djlhan, Bakhter. According to Fihrist, 188 Dhaidhan was secretary to Ahmad ibn 'Abd-al-'Ariz ibn Abu Duiaf who ruled c. 265. But Masslgnon in his article on Karmatian Bibliography op. eif., p. 331. gives the following biographical notice of "Dindsn":
Abu Ja'far Ahmad fbn al-Husain ibn Sa'ld ai-Ahwhi, died at Kumm c. 250. He
was not 'Abdallah's accampiice, but his disciple. He was a famous traditionist, and before his canvenion belonged to the Khurramiyya. He wrote the K i i i b nl-Ihfijij. He may be *he same as Ahmad ibn al-Kaygii.
' The passage in brackets, missing in both Ed. and MS., is taken from Mokhtosnr, 170. 1 have not been able ta obtain any information regarding the clan of Hamdan Mukhtar. ' 1st B. reads jli while P. reads j9 &. According to Yakut s. v. al-jabal, it is the same district as the one now cilied Irak. The word Jabai is omitted in Ed.
.+
This IS a mountain in Azerbaijan and is the birthplace of B3bhk al-Khurrami as weU as the scene of his activity. See above p. 88 and note. See MakrTti (Fagnan), 40. For the genealogy of this family see ibn Kutalba, K i f B oi-Mdarifi 102-3.
'
' The allegiance !o
isma'ii ibn Ja'far accounts for the name lsma'lliyya by which this
sen is sametimcs known. Although Ja'far divested his eldest son of the Imamate because 6f the lattc+s addiclion to wine drinking, the isma'iliyya claimed that Ja'far, being infallible, could
not revoke what he once had granted. See Blochet p. 49 and Browne, Liferary H i s t o r y of Persin, I, p. 393. (Both of them draw h a m the same source), Cf. especialiy Naubakhti, 57-8.
' Read .WI
with MS; Ed.
.+I.
R e a d p r w i t h MS; Ed. & . Although our author makes the same statement Ed. p. 47 (Seeiye p. 66), there are.
Later there arose a man known as Hamdin yarmat' and summoned the people to the faith of the Bi~niyya. He w a s nicknamed thus because his handwriting w a s crabbed, or perhaps because he minced his step9. He had been a t no sources for it to my knowledge. Biochet 32, in speaking of hTuhammad rays "He had several chiidren who Red to Khoraaan". Wusienfeid in his genealogical tables (Gesrkichtr der Fnfimiden, 13) also lists several children, and similarly Hualt in his ariicle on the 'Alids in El. i s. v. and de Sacy, introd. p. 67. De Goeje taker it for granted that Mahammad ibn isma'ii had children (p.. 50-67, et passim), similarly Naubakhti, e. g., 90, (Fagnan) pp. 36-37. Perhaps our'author was misled by a and eisewhere, and statement in Tab. 111, 2218 (IA, vii, 353), regarding ibn Ziluwaih's spurious genedog)' to the @L-, j, ii , & j l &%,. in view of haubakhti's statement to that 4, Jr y-r
;
the contrary, it is improbable that Baghdidi's contention is of ImHmite origin. A similarly curious denial of the existence of the w i t h imam of the Tweivers is made by ibn Hazm and cannot be traced by Fiiedlhnder. See Shiites, 1, 48 and ii, 5 3
'
pa!ndan (Siasset Namek, 269, gives his name as Mvbaiek doubtiess a coniusion
with Mubkak, Mawia s f Isma'li b. Ja'far, and founder of the ~Muhirakiyya sect. Naubakhti, 58) garmat, after whom the Karma!ians, one of the mast important sub-sea in the BP!ini)ya movement, are called, was converted by Husaln ai-Ahwki (Makrizi, I. 396; Wilstenfeld, 7 : Biochet, 63, etc; yet $ Fikrist, 187), a missionary of Ahmad ibn 'Abdailah ibn Maimfin al-&addab, and later became active himself as a propagandist in 'irak, making his first appearance in 274 (de Sacy Introd., 166). or 277, iA, Vii, 309 ff. For a full biography of him and of his brother-in-law and associate, 'Abdan, see de Sacy, Introd., 166-200. De Goele, who, on the authority of ibn Haukai, believes with de Sacy that Hamdin and 'AbdL finally repudiated the secret conspiracy and agsin became loyal suppolters of the 'Ahbhids (p. 210). disagrees with him nevertheless about the cause of this defection, maintaining that it came as a remit of the establishment of the Fitimid dynasty by 'Ubaidailah, the former chiel of the Karmatians in Syria. Cf. 57-69. a
The meaning of the nickname Karma! is not ascertained. According to M a i d ('lbir,
Ill, 335,) and IA, VII, 311, it was the name of his Syrian employer who was red-eyed ( h r mite in Syriac), or of the one who carried him on his donkey when he lay ill on the road (IA, ib. 310). Massignon, (Bibliogr. 329) is.dso inclined to see in it a Syriac word but with the reading Kurmatn, which would correspond to the Arabic word ~ a d l z s ,(conceaiment), the sixth degree of initiation, see below p. 144. See de Goeie, 199-203. Our author's interpretation finds support in Sinsset Nameh, 269. Naubakhti, 61, simply relates that it was a nickname given to Hamdin, who was a Nabatean. He makes the significant remark that the Mubarakiyya group is earlier than the garmatians.
IIO
the beginning of his career one of the farmers of Sawid d-Ktiia'. To him the 267 Karmatians owe their name. After him, Abu Sa'id al-Jannibi2, who was one of the converts that had adhered to H a m d a n q e g a n his missionary activity ior this heresy. He sqhdued the country of Bahrain: and the Banu Sanbarj joined his cdl. Then, after a long time had elapsed, the one called Sa'id al-Husain ibn Ahmad ibn 'Abdallah ibn MaimGn ibn Daisin al-Kaddah appeared among them. He changed his name and his pedigree; he declared to his followers; I am 'Uhaidallah ibn al-Hasan ibn Nuhammad ibn isma'b ibn Ja'lar al-Sidik9 Then
' IA, Vll, 310, (also reproduced de Sacy, introd., 172 if.), tells of his rise to power from the farming profession. According to that report his occupation was only a ruse emPioyed by him to iurther his missionary activity. But W.Jstenfeid, i b , beiieves him to have been sincere in his edremeiy religious praedces.
Far a detailed account of the activities of this powerful leader and the eharacte&atian of his personality see de Goeje pp. 31-47 and p. 69 if.; de Sacy, Introd, 211-216, ~e war killed by a slave in 301 and was succeeded at first by one son (Ab6-i-K&im Sa'id) and by his designated successor Abu T B i r Sulaimin, when the latter became mahlre, in 305 A. H. (217). W e was convened by Yahya ibn ai-Mahdt (de Sacy, Introd. p. 2121. De Sacy himieii is inciined to t h e view that Abu Sa'id was sent directly by Hamdin Karma!, whereas de Gode, p. 31, attributes his appointment to 'Abdin, Kama!.s brother-in-law and a leading
figure in the plot (see on 'Abdin, de Sacy, 1. r. p. 154 ff.). Whether his first mission was lo Bahrain is fully discussed by de Goeje p. 37 if. " He married the daughter of ai-Hasan ibn Sanbar (de Go$= p. 37; iHauk, 210: Sunbur). The Banu Sanbar were an important family in ai-AbsC. See iHauk. p. 21. "ikrisf, 187, gives the foiiowiog order for the succession: 'Abdaliah, his son Mubarnmad, his son or brother Ahmad (eaiied Abu Shaia'ia', sometimer Shaiaghiagh) and Sa'id ibn ai-Husain ibn 'Abdailah tbn ai-Maim6n (ai-Husain having died before his father). De Goeje. 21. favors this order: 'Abdaiiah, his two sons Husain and Ahmad (Abu Shaiagh-
iagb) and Husain's son Sa'ld-'Ubaidaliah. Makiiti. i, 396, lists them as follows: 'Abdaliah, Ahmad, his sons Husain and Muhammad Abu Sha'la'la'. The entire problem of the credibility of the FZlimid ciaims to be descendants of 'Ait has not been and probably will never be definitely settied (Ci. ibn Hammid's Roip Oboiniter, tr. Vandenheyden, Arabic ii, Freoch 17). While some reject unhesitatingly any and ail of their claims, others are equally convinced that they are true descendants of FBIiina. But just as ihe former are probably prejudiced for religious reasons (or political, especially among the Shiltes) the ianer may have been influenced by some equally strong considerations. See iA,
his revolt broke out in the Maghreb'.
His descendants at present are rulers of
the Egyptian affairs of State? Then there came forth among them one called Z i k m a i h v h n Mihrwaih al-Dandini, a disciple of Hamdin Karmat4. Ma'mGn $, brother of Hamdin Kamat, arose in the land of Far% The Karmatians of Persia are, therefore, called Ma'm h i y y a A. A man from among the Bitiniyya known as Abu Hitim' penetrated into the land of d-Dailam, and a body of Dailamites heeded his call? among
them AsrZr ibn Shirwaih'. In N;shshapfir, a missionary of theirs, al-Sha'rini by name, made his appearance. He w a s executed while Abu Bekr ibn hluhtSj3 w a s governor there. Al-Sha'rini summoned al-Husain ibn 'Ali al-Marvrudi to join him. After him, Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Nasafi continued his mission, preaching to the people of .lfn-?rc~~.rt~-~infir,, and so-did Abu Ya'kub al-Sijizli who is known as Bandana" Al-Nssafi wrote ior them the "Book of the Sum and S ~ b s t a n c e " ~ . Abu Ya'hub compiled lor them the :'Book of the ~undamentals of the hlission" and the "Book of the Interpretation of the Precepts" and the ''Book of the
Vili, 14; MakrTli (Fagnan), 36 ff.; lkhaii. ii. 77; iKhaid (Macdonald), 24-30 and among modern scholars de Ooeje 4 ff. esp. 8 ff.; Blochet. 77; Zambaur, 95. He was invited there by Abu 'Abdailah al-Shi'i (wiled ai-Mubtessib, Sinsset .N,zmeh, 282) who had made conquests there to appear as the expected Mahdi. 'UhaideJlah later killed him as well as his brother. See Wilstenfeld, 8-10, 15-38 (where the oriental sources are enumerated) and 38-70 for a history of the reign of the first FItimid Khallf. me reference is to the F;!imid dynasty which held Egypt frnm 358 to 567 A ti. ' So MS; E d . v,* a, ' i d h!. This is "Zakroaya ibn Mahrorrya Salmaii" discussed at great length in de Sacy, Introd., 184 and 198-210, See aiso de Ooeje, 4 1 ff. According to Nuwairi, who places Hamdin's relinquishment of his missionary activity in the period of Ahmad ibn 'Abdallah, Z i h a i h became the di'i in place of HamdHn. " No other source to my knowledge mentions Ma'mitn. Both by his relationship to HamdHn and by his field of activity, I believe him to be identical with 'Abddn, Karma?s brother-in-law, and a very important figure in the propagation of the cult of the isma'iliyya,
-
who, unless my identification is tme, is nowhere mentioned by BaghdIdi a very strange omission indeed. Perhaps his r e d name was Ma'mitn, and 'Abd& only a k a n y a "Maizi (Fagnan, 58) and Fih*t, 186 mention a sect Maimuniyya which they relate to Maimitn ibn Dais&. nuegei in his note on page 77 identiiier this sPct with the KhawHrij Maimitniyya (see above, 105; see a l a o ~ a k r i r i (Fagnan), ih). The summary in IA ViiI, 21
of Maimun's views would support Flugel's contention, yet the entire hypothesis seems uniikdy. if the Ma'mitniyya are the same a s the Maimuniyya, perhaps the man Ma'mitn is a creation BaghdHdi's who for some reason confused him with Mairnitn b. Daisan. He was made ruler of JuijL in 315. IA VIII, 148.
Of
A missionary movement in Daiiam carried on by Abu HItim in the year 195, is reported by Blochet, 67. His full name is given there as Ja'far Makhzitm Abu HHtim AFmad ibn H a m d b al-Rai. See de Sacy, Introd, 210, Sinsset Nrrmeh, 273-4. Massignon, 1. c., 332 calls him "Abou HaIim ('Abd al9ahman?) d-Waisnani alrRazi': Cf. Fihrisf, 188; ddl
&
&.,2 ~ j r'i
b."
~4 iGg 86,
JLAI
?h.
Revelation of the Secrets". killed for their errors.
Al-Nasafi"ad
the one known as Bandana were "CO
The historians relate that the preaching of the Bitiniyya made its first appearance in the days of al-Ma'min ', and spread during the reign of al-Mu'ta$mR. I
Conqueror of the district of Rayy by order of N a ~ rb. Ahmad the Samanid, and rub-
sequently an independent r be1 ruler. See Mirruj, ix, 6-19: IA, viii, 138-144. ' Abu Sa'id al-Sha'idni is cited in Biochet 67. Sce also Fihrisf, 188, which dates him in 337, but this is hardly possible, ct. "next nate; AmnnIez Moslerniei, Ii, p. 295, nate N. The Sinsset N a m e h 211-2, tells that Husain ibn 'Ali al-Mervery was conveitcd by Ohiatb whose activities are described ih. pp. 271-2. See aiso Fihrist, ih. IA who tells of his rebellion and his fate in delail (Vlll, 48-91 does not relate his conversion. Abu Bekr Muhram ibn ai-Muzaffar ibn al-Mlul#Ij was governor of NishIpBr during ?he ?ears 320-326. Zambani, 43 and 204. %assignon, probabiy drawing his information in part from our author and in part from Albifini (tr. Sachau. 32) calls him Bandinah Abu Ya'kitb si-Sijri. Sachnu (ih.) translates the place-name as "of Sijisidn". Unfortunately the Lskab is missing in Albiritni (...$I).
,,+
He may perhaps be the ishat Sinjari of Blochet p. 68. His work cited as in Aibiruni is no doubt our ;irYI dc. Fiiiiist, 189, which does not mention this work (Ar: !,&I), ascribes three other works *I?= 8 eA' .'r 2 i--l .?.it. Massignon, L c., 332, lists the .Wahsil only. .. death of Muhammad ibn Ahmad came at the hands of Nth ibn NaSr ibn Ai!mad the Samanid, Emir of KhurHsPn, whose father had become a devout convert to the cause of , BiochR (66. note 1) the BIIiniyya (Fihrist, 188). The story of the rebellion against N a ~ r which very appropriately compares with An5shirvin's vengeance on Mazdak, is graphically told in
to him:
".dl
' The
the SLzsset Nanreh, 276-281.
See also Fihrist, 88, iine 4-9.
' This is the period of 'Abdailah ibn Maimitn's activities. See above, 108 note 2. " His Caliphate extended from 218 to 232 A. H. Like his brother and predecessor Ma'mitn, he was an intolerant Mu'tazilite.
Al-
man-ra'a in the year two hundred and twenty three. Then his brother Ishik'
They tell that al-Afshin, commander of the army of al-Mu'iagim, joined their movement, and dissimulatedl with regard to Bibik al-Khurrami. Al-Khurrami was the leader of a rebellion in the district of al-Baddein. The people of his moun-
i
tain were Khurramiyya alter the fashion of the Mazdak cult, and the Khurramiyya
i
joined forces with the Bitiniyya. A body of three hundred thousand men, made 3.p of the people of al-Baddein and of those of the Dailamites who joined them, ;athered around Bib&. The Iihacf sent al-~fshshin t o : wage war against them believing him to be genuinely devoted to the cause of the Muslims, where% he
i
i
f
secretly sympathized with Bibik. He, therefore, procrastinated in his war nith him and disclosed the places of concealment of the Muslim forces to him, so that many of them were killed2. Then reiniorcements reached al-Afshyn, and Muhammad ibn YGsuf al-Thughri' as well as Abu Dulal al-Kisim ibn 'Isa al-'ljli also joined him. Later on General 'Abdallah ibn Tihihir came to his aid, but- the valor of the Bibikiyya and the Karmaiians triumphed over the Muslim armies to such an extent that the latter erected, for themselves the city known as Berzend4 for fear of a night snack-y the Bibikiyya. The struggle between the two partits cangnued for many years until God granted victory to the Muslims over the Bibikiyys. Bibik =-as taken prisoner and impaled in Surra-
'1
have chosen the reading ;r'il of isf. B, f. 65 b, instead of the word 'b'r. of Ed.
and MS. which does not suit the context. It goes without saying that the wholesale accusation hurled against al-Affshln, and, to
a certain extent, perhaps even his heretical tendencies are chiifly the result of prejudice and have no historical foundation. All historians are unanimous in lavishing the highest praise on Afshin's campaign against Bgbslr Even the charge made at the tiiai about an attempt to save the Khurramt from execution was directed against Afshln's brother and not against the general himself. As for the suspicions about Afshin's concealed sympathies with his former faith, it is
Oriental, XIX (1925), 88. Ed. irk.
The historians tell that those who laid the loundation of the cult of the BQiniyya were descendanfs of the Magians who were still attached t o the religidn of their aocestors, hut did not dare to make a public avowal of it, dreadirlg the Muslim swords. The ignorant among them used to appoint all AsG3. who was eiitrusted by them with the teachings of their faith and who secretly preferred$ the precepts of the Magians. They interpreted the verses of the Kur'in and the traditions of the Prophet allegorically in accordance with their fundamenials.
!
i i
j
!
1
!
I
probably true that they were based on fact. But it is equally clear that his fail came not on account of his religious views, but much more probably for "purely political reasons" (Browne, Lit. Hist. 1, p. 334). See the full description of the trial in Tab. Ill, page 138, sqq. (tians. Brome, I. r., pp. 331-36). On these leaders of war see above, 88. j Berzend is a dly near Tifih where al-Afshin made his enMS.: j ; Ed.: campment. It had been a deserted place prior to that. YakBt, s. v. and IA, VI, 316. Reading 4 ; with Mirbhfasar, 173 and apparentiy m. See also Brockeimann, Monde
was seized and crucified in Baghdad together with al-Mizyir: commander of the al-Mnhammira in Tabaristin and Jurjin. Alter Bibik was killed Hie perfidy of al-~fshi'naud his treacherous behavior towards the Muslims during his wars with 269 Bibik became knonm to the l$h&f. He therefore ordered him executed arid impaled, and he was duly crucified.
The proof of this contention is that the Dualists maintain that Light and Darkness are pre-existent Makers, Light being the creator of the good and usefuiy and Darkness the creator of the evil and harmful. Bodies are blended of Light and Darkness. Each of the includes four humors, namely: heai, cold, moisture and dryness. The two primary Eources together with the four humors regulate this world. The Magians share with them the belief in two makers, but they maintain that one of the two Makers is pre-existent; he is God, the author of the Good. The other, Satan, a created being, is the author of Evil. Now, the spokesmen lor the Bitiniyya state in their books that God created the Soul; God is, therefore, the First Cause and the Soul is the Second5. These two regulate this wodd.
' His brothefs name was not irhH& but 'Abdaiiah. 89, note 1.
See a discussion of this above,
See above, 89. AsHs is a man whose task it is to instruct the members of his sen in the Nndamentais of the sectarian beliefs. Although the term properly bdangs to the beliefs of the Bainiyya, BaghdHdi has extended its meaning as in this ease. On the Asas see below, 134. Perhaps the reading in Mrrkhfnsar, 174, ought to be preferred: ,G'N I*.,
' The
' Reading
,
with MxRhfasur, ib. and Goldriher; Ed. #-. 147-8 (Haarbr., 222) explains that both the intellect and the soul are G0d.s creations, H e Himself being transcendental. But see Streitschriff, 44 where GhazPli s p e a k of
' Shahr..
They call these two the First and the Second, but generally they name them 'Akl (intellect) and Nds (Soul)'. They declare, in addition, that these two regulate this world through the regulatory powers of the Seven Planets and the Primary matterP. put%is is an acceptauce of the teaching of the Dualists, that Light and Darkness govern the world by the emanation of the primary matter']. Their view that the First and Second Causes regulate the world is exactly like the view of the Magians about aitributing all created substances toc two Makers, one of whom is pre270 existent and the other generatedb. Only the Bitiniyya designate the two Makers & U l (Universolintellek~ and JWi (Universolsecie) See also Guyard 185-6, 286, 295 Cf. esp. the long note below. ' Ivanow, Isnmilitta, 25 and note 6, recommends the translation "Living Powen" instead of our translation "Soul". ' The recurrence of the word J J ~below induces me to accept the reading of Ed. and MS. as the correct one ( ~ e r h a p smare probably &Yi) and to translate it as prima?. matter, one of the iive emanations of God. The seven planets may be interpreted as Space and the fifth
note 13 etc.
emanation-Tme-, which is ordinarily included, should be regarded as eliminated here, just as it is in the Salisbury Fragment UAOS, 11, 1849-50, pp. 299, 306). It is also possible, however, to read & with Mukhfosnr, 175 and isf., f. 66a, instead of J,Vi, rendering it "the roor elementss: and to consider all these as meta~hoticallyemployed for the primary matter
hom which they have developed. See, indeed, Guyard, ib. and Shahr, ib. d l 21 4 . 2 1 1 Jt' S+ The sentence In brackets is missing in Ed; MS.:
'
J,Y'
&!dl
'lu,
+>
+MI jl,.h. hanow, I . c., relates BaghdBdi's exposition ot the Bl!inite belid in two maken to their b&ef In the imam who Is an incarnation of the Godhead P. 11 note 37 and also p. 25.
' MS.
'
Jl; missing in Ed. it seems to me that Shothmann, after quoting this statement by BaghdHdt, raises an
unnecessary difficulty in attempting to solve the question as to who the two Maken could be (EI IV, p. 738, 5.". Thannwzyn). Massigoon, in the artide K a r m a t i o n (EI, il, p. 767 it), to which Strothmaon refers, speaks of an 'Akl and Nnfs, both of which are begotten. But, as already pointed out above, BaghdHdi, unlike Shahr., fails to make this disdnction and calls the 'AM God and the Nafs His creation, although it always remains an open question whether the
more elementry Baghdsdi or the more philosophic Shahr. is nearer to the actUai teaching of the sedatians. Of coune, in order to make Baghdiidi's statement sound more profound, it may be possible to identify the 'AkI with the nar shn'shn'nni as Strothmann does (ib.), but we h a m ao grounds for W11t1g the Nafs with him the n i r zularni. 'Besides, BaghdHdi's charge
does not neeessarib compel us to recogntse a principle of light and darkness in the docnine
as First and Second, whereas the Magians speak of them as Yazdio' and A h r h . This is the intrigue concealed' in the hearts of the Bitiniyp. They have appointed an Asis who is to initiate people into i t They could not practise the worship of Fire3 openly, s o they reso&d to ahfice by instructing the Muslims: It is proper that all Mosques be fumigated with incense and that an incense-burner be introduced into every mosque in which at least ambergris and aloe-wood be placed. The Barimika made a suggestion to al-Rashid in an enticing manner that he set an inceqse-burner in the interior of the Ka'ba in which aloe-wood should continually be burnt. Al-RasGd realized that with this they aimed at the worship of fire in the Ka'ba, desiring that the Ka'ba become a fire-iemple. of the reasons for al-Rashid's arrest of the Baimika4.
This was one
Of the BB!intyya, but merely two mafers. However, It is interesting that Browme in foilawfng the idea of Ood as distina from the 'Akl later comes across a difficulty in that "in the comespoiidence behveen the Grades of Being and the tsma'Di hierarchy there seems to be a l a ~ n s , Since God. the prime unknowable Essence, is represented by no class in the latter" Lit. Hist.,
1, 409).
Cerlainly, on the basis of Baghdsdt's presentation the lacuna would not occur. Ser also Guyard, 185-6 where Baghdsdi's standpoint is adequately explained. For. although the 'Ah1 is really begotten, it, nevertheless, "Ptimitivement se confondait avec iui (God). Aussi p u t on considerer la Raisan Universelle comme la veritable Divinite der lsma6lis...", 186. Cf. also 293 note 10. Curiously, an emanation of the 'Ah1 from God is also reported in a tradition in G h a ~ w ,
Ihya' and also above p. 100. See Golddber, Z A , XXLl (1908) p. 319-20. Yazaiin is the name for Ahuramazda. Shahr., 181 (Haarbr., 275). ' The rendition ?f as above is somewhat unusual; Bevan, in Strrdies to E. 0. Browne, p. 66, cites a vene ham the Kitab nl-Aghani where the phrase dl occurs in the sense of "suggested itself to me". Ms. &I+? ; Ed. A !.+ The religious taaor is nowhere put forth so definitely as by our author as a major c a w of the fall (187 A. H.) of the Barmecids, a powe~fvlPersian family that occupied a ment lrni P m n t positfon in the government from the rise of the 'Abbasids on (they were already muff
.I.
~
lavarites under the 'Omayyads, Bouvat, 36-7). On the contrary, owing to the lustre of thclt wealth and position (see, e. g., the life of Ja'far ibn Yahya ai Barmald in lWali [ti. de Slant, 1, 301-3151, himself a descendent of the Barmedds [Bouvat, 91), a Sunnite wen as orthodox as Tabati is very obviously displeased with their assassination by the command of al-Rashfd (Tab. [Zotenbergl IV., Ch. 100; see also Bouvat, 94 ff.). However, there is no doubt that their religious views were not in eonformily with islam (Bouvst, 81 and 83, note 1). Their ancestor
After the Biti,,itiniyya had interpreted the fundamentals of religion in polytheistic fashion1, they also employed artifice in interpreting the precepts of the Law in such a marnler as rvould entail the abolition of Muslim law or lead to the adoption o f tenets similar to those of the Magians. What corroborates the fact that this was their intention in their allegorical exposition of the Law is tlyt they allowed their adherents to marry daughters and sisters and they allowed wine-bibbing and, all otl~er sorts of dissipation. This is coilfimied with even greater certainty by the fact that the fellow who appeared in their midst in the Bahrein and in alinstituted the practice of sodomy among his followers i l d prescribed a death-sentence for the boy who relused to yield to one that ~ i s h e dt o have sexual relations with him. He decreed that a 'Ah$$' aiterSSulaiman ibn 4-VasanGal-Karmati
man's haud be amputated if he extinguished a fve with it and that his tongue be cut out if he e@ngu!shed it with a puft This youth is the one called ibn Abu 271 Zakaria al-Tammimi4who appeared in the year three hundred and nineteen. His Bamak's services in a B ~ ~ d d h i stemple t (mistaken by Arab authorities as Zoroasbian, e. g., BndJ~wni-T,7iikhVI, 102) is generaiiy atiested (Muruj VI, 414. See Barthoid in EI 1, s. v. Barmnkides, 691 and aiso El, ib. 693). LA, VI, 119, who offer3 several explanations for the fall oi the Bamecides does not mention their Zendikism. Tab., 111, 572 and 669 reports a
charge of heresy against the Barmecids, but by no means so explicit as that of our author, a parallel to which i have not been able to discover elsewhere. Their ruin is probably due primadly to the jealousy whlch the Khalif conceived on account of the tremendous power which they gained in his day (Bouvat, 75 fi.). On the story of ai-Rashid's love for his sister 'Abbisa and her marriage to ai-Baimaki in conformily wiih the Khalif but wiih the express command not to live with him eonjugaiiy, said by many to be lhe cause of the famiiy's fall, d. Bouvai, 113 ff. He himself does not Lend much credence to the story. ' MS. @ &; @ missing in Ed. ' The chronoiogy here is wrong, although it is in accordance with our authofs view that Sqlaimin was killed in 318 A. H., see below, 126 and note 9. The accepted view is that be died: in 332, de Goeje, 142. indeed, according to accounts reported I. c., 130 and 132, it war, ABu Tihir SuiaimHn whp was misled by him first. Maosignon, EI, 11, p. 769 also says 06 ibg A h p Zakaria that he was "enthroned by Abu Tihir". On Suiaimin son of Abu Sa'id al-Jannai see below p. 120 ff. With MS., ~ d Husain. . With MS., Ed. &MI. The depravities of ibn Abu Zakaria or Abu-'1-Fad1 ai-Zakari ai:T?m.m;rni
as he is called by Massignon who characterizes him
(EI, ib) as "a madman", "a
uprising Lasted until God granted mastery over him to the person who slew him in bed'. What confirms even more positively ail that we have asserted regarding the inclination of the Bitiniyya to the religion of the Magians is that we cannot discover on the face of the earth any Nlagian who does not sympathize with them, and does not hope for their conquest of the country, believing that the government will thereby be restore4 to them. The ignorant among them generally adduce proof for this belief from what the Magians tell in the name of Zaradusht, who ptedided to KushG.shp2 that the ~ l would e pass from the Persians to the Romans and Greeks; then it would be restored to Persia. Afterwards it would pass from the Persians to the Arabs and would finally be restored to Persia Jimispq the astrologer, sustained him in this prediction, holding that the kingdom would return to the Persians upon the completion of one tho&and five hundred years from the time of the appearance of Ziridusht4. Among the Bitiniyya there lived a man called Abu 'Abdallah al-'Aradi6 who boasted a knowledge of astronomy6 and w a s -kind of Heliogahulus" are reported in vimaliy the same words by Albirimi in his Chronology (Tr.Sachau), 196 who also adds &at "he wiled upon people to recagnise him as lord, and they ioiiowed him". De Goeje aiso cites other reports, 129 (His attempt to connect other accounts of a taise Mahdi with this strange individual is rejected by himself in his article in 1.4, 1895, 27.). Cf. Mas'ndi, Tanbih (tr. d e Vaun), 497. ' He was slain by order of Abu Tihir, see Albirirni, ib., and de Goeie who quotes him, 131, and gives a fuller accowt, 132-3. His uprising endured for eighty days, (ib.). With MS., Ed. -m.' I. e Vishtaspa, a Persian "king or princely ruler" who was the first convert to Zoroaster's faith in, what is generally agreed upon, the ciiy of BaIkh. See A. V. W. Jaebon, Zoroostrr Ch. 5, 56-68. Jimisp, said to be a son-in-law of Zaroaster (Jackson, 1. c., 21), was a counsellor to the king and an srdent di9ciple of the Prophet, ib., 76. *According to AibirBni, I. e., 196, the end of the period as predicted by JSmHsp fell in 1242, Seieueid Era (930-31).
'
AibirBni, ib., calls him a-'Adi. He is followed by Casanova, in JA, 1915, 10. Sackau's conjecture that he is to be identified with Abn 'Abdalioh a i d & can hardly be maintained of the reading in oar text. Sam'Hni lists both nisbns, but it is noteworthy that 'Adi in Is definitely Persian as can be judged by the several proper names in the article under this
kw
heading and the city of Nasaf (Nakhsheb) cited there. For the important role which astronomy and astrology piay in Mohammedan life as weil as for the interpretation of the conjunciions, d. de Goeje, il7-122. See also the very important discussion by Casanova, I r., 8 ff.
Simultaneously with that phenomenon a man will arise who will restore the Magian regime and will gain conirol over the entire land. He believes that that man
sumption, and he attacked the pilgrims to Mecca and he slew them nefariously. Later he entered Mecca, killed all those who were performing the circuit (Tawif), seized the veils of the Ka'ba, and cast the slain into the Zemzem weU He cmshed many Muslim armies, but in one of his battles he was forced to flee to Hajar'. He the11 addressed a poem (KaGda)' lo the Muslims in which he declared:
will reign lor a period of seven conjunctions'. They say; the imth of the prediction of Ziridusht and Jimisp has been demonstrated by the transfer of the kingdom of the Persians to the Romans and Greeks in tiie days of Alexander; then it returned to the Persians at the expiration of three hundred yearsR. Alternards the rule of the Persians was again transferred to the Arabs, but it will certainly revert
If my retreat to Hajar has deceived you regarding me, ThenY shortly news will indeed reach you. When Mars rises over the land of Babylon4. And the two stars5 will be in conjunction with him, then beware, beware! Am I not the one mentioned in all Ule Scriptures?
a fanatical Magian. He has written a work in which he s b k s that the eighteenth conjunction' after the birth of Muhammad corresponds with the tenth milleniuml which is also the period of the return of Jupiteri and Sagittarius. He saysa:
to the Persians at the end of the epoch which Jirnisp forecast. The time which they set coincided with the reigns of al-Muktafi and al-Muktadir', but the event Foretold by 272 them failed of realization and the government did not then come back to the Magians.
The Karmatiam had before this fixed date agreed. among other things that the expected Mahdi would come forth in the seventh conjunction in the fiery trigan? Sulaiman ibn al-Hasan from al-'Ahsi'Qame forthlo relying on this asThe eighteenth conjunction (the sixth in the fiery trigon) came in the year 298-9, A. H. Casanova I. c., 10. The tenth Milienium is doubtless an echo of the Persian belief in the woiid-ages, see ERE, V. 376. Alb!rOni'r statement disagrees to some extent with that in ERE. See AibIrOnl, 17 and esp. the seetion on the chronology of the Persians, 107ff. Acc. to ~ i b I ~ 0 ~197, 1 , the reading should be Snturn. " See this passage almost verbatim, though. a little more fuiiy ib., 197 (cited by Casanova 1. c., 10). ' Aib7iOni reads seven and a haif ib., line 8. ' Tlle ~ i r s i a nEmpire fell in 312 B. C. at the hands of the Seieucids, and was restored by the Sasrsnids in 226 A. D. so that 538 and not 300 years passed. See Huart, Ancient
'
Persic, 219 ff. Mhiflni, 121, also arrives at the same results, but he adds on line 31 that most authatitier believe it to Hdve been an epoch of some 300 years. ' Ai-Muktafi reigned 289-295, and ai-Muktadir 295-320 A. H. ' See Casanova, I c., 10 at the bottom. Brockeimann who changes 4 1 b to Lju (Monde Oriental, XiX I19251 198). and transiatff it "im m i t e n Dtittel", has misunderstood the passage ' With Goldziher and Mukhtosar 177 against Ed. and MS. which read +YI. ' O Abu-TShlr probably became chief of the Karmatians in 310 or 311 A.H. See a hill account of his activity in de Goeje, 75-142.
Am I not the one announced in the SGra of the Companies6? Verily, I shall rule over the people of the earth East and West As far as Kairuin of the Greeks, Turkey and the Khazars. By the two stars he meant Saturn and Jupiter7. This conjunction took place during the years of his activity, yet he did not hold sway over any part of the world save the town from which he hailed He coveted a r e i p lading for a 273 period of seven conjunctions, but he did not reign seven years, far, indeed, he was killed in Hit8 when from her roof a woman hurled a brick a n his head The capital of Baorain, which province b also aiten ealiea Hajar. See-below, 123 and de Goeje, 36 ff. and 4 3 ff. ' The verses below constihlte only a part of the poem. Nujam, 11, 239 contains a longer version, although it lacks our third couplet. But wen there we do not obtain Be complete text as is apparent froti the word !e, w h l h intempts the sequence of the quotadon Ovice. De Goeje in his translation combiner the sfamas of both Nujam and Albirhni. " MS. p; Ed. k . Both de Goeie's translation, 114, and Sacham's, 197, are based on a reading in Alhirki which I do not have before me. Judging from note 1. de Goeje, i b , AlbirBni's variant reads like Ed., but is declared by the Dutch scholar to be "ahsoiument fausse". Instead he renders it "Et que son influenee ne sera pas affaiblie par celle des d e w astres". See his argument against our reading an p. 123. ' MS. &+I\; Ed. & @ I . "Cra 39. De Goeie conjectures that the allusion may be to v. 38. 114. ' A conjunelion of these hvo planets is espeddly disastrous for Be 'Abbzsids, since it announces the victory of the Karmatians. De Goeie, 123. A town near Baghdsd, Yawt, IV, 8.". See below, 126 and note 8. Hlt w s stormed in 315 A.H.
and brained him. A mao slain by a woman is the lnost contemptible among the slain and the most despicable among those lost. At the end of the year one thousand two hundred and forty of the Alexandrial Era, one thocsand Iive hundred
of the Magians who believe that Jimisp predicted the restoration of that kingdom to them. But they suffered the evils of their enterprise, and the outcome of their desires brought extinction upon them with the glorp of God and- His providence.
years had elapsed since the age of Zaridusht'. Yet in that year the domination of the world was not restored to the Magans. On the contrary, the belt of Islam was
Then 'Ubaidallah ibn al-Hasan arose among the Bitiniyya in the province of Kaimin and beguiled a group among the Kutama, and a number of people among the Maemida, and masses of dull-heads' among the Berbers, with magicP and necromancy by which he, concealed under an upper and lower garments, coujured
extended over the eaith after that year, and God conquered for the Muslims the land of Belisighhn2 and the land of Tibethand most of the provinces of China. Then He furiher conquered for them all of the land of India, from Lamghin' to by its seashore all became part Kannawjt The land of India down to of the expanse of Islam in the days of Yamln7-al-Dawla Amh-al-Milla Mahmud ibn Subuktekin8. This sums up the aspirations of the chiefs of the Bitiniyya, and
' The
same fact is indicated by Aibirini, 196-7, though he places the completion of the
1500 yean in 1242 Alexandrian Era and relates it to the death of Abu Zakaria. More correctly Balsaghin (see Yakit, 1, 708 and de Goeje, BibI. Geogr. index s. v.j. It is in Central Asia (its location cannot be defined exactly, see BartVais. 1-3, hold, El., 1, 614). The latter, I. c, 615, does not fix a definite date for its conquest, hut in c. 340 A. H. a Mohammedan prince occupied its throne. In the 10th and 11th cent~ries of
the Christian Era it senred as the capital of the Khans of Turkestan. Arnold, Preaching of ZsIam: 216, note 2. ' With Goldziher and probabiy MS. Ed. 1. With MS.; a city in the Ghazna district, Yakilt, IV, 343. Lamghzn was captured by his father SubuMeKn in 366 A. H., IA. V11, 505. Ed. reads: am With Ms. and Goidzihei. A large town in Central India, west of the Ganges River. AlbirGni, (India, tr. Sachau, 199) speaks of it as bdng mostly in ruins, but possessing an iiittstrio~shistory during the period when the capital was situated there. On the other hand, etamri, 9, and ibn Haukal, 16, declare it to be stiii the capital city. Mukaddasi, 480, also describes it as a thriving town and summer resort. The conquest of india, resembling, to a large extent, the perilous expedition of Alexander the Great is narrated in Utbi, Kifnb-i-
Yamini, (tr. Reynolds), 449-62. 'See Ed:
I +
Goldriher's note a d Ioc. His reference to Yakit is unfortunately misprinted.
,+.
' With
MS. Ed.
3 1 .
In accordance with a custom instituted since the appearance of
the Buwaihid Dynasty, MaQmfid received these honorific titles from the Khaiyf 81-Gdir in 999 A D. (Yamin ai-Dawla was bestowed on him later). El, iii, 133. With MS. Mahmid of Ghama's career and deeds as well as his court are well portrayed in Milller, Der Islorn im Morgm-and Abendfonde, Vol. 11, 48-70. A very
up apparitions of images before them at night. The ignorant thought that they were miracles performed by him. In consequence of this they followed him in his heresy and he gained mastery over them in the land of Maghrebs. Then the one called Abu Sa'id al-Husain ibn Bahram issued from their midst against the inhabitants of al-Ahsi' and al-Katif and Mesopotamia He led an attack by his followers against his enemies, took their women and children captive, and burnt 274 copies of the Kufin as well as mosques. Then he captured Hajar, killed its men and enslaved their children and women. Then the one known as al-Sani&ki4 appeared in al-Yman and slew many inhabitants, killing even children and women. Another one, ibn al-Fad16 by name, joined him together with his followers but God detailed biography of him will be found in Utbi, I. c., his ofiicial biogiapher. See dso the artick in El, iii, 132-35. ' With MS. heie and passim where Ed. reads +I. Goidriher has pointed out that this word has no sectarian sting, being applied to Sunnites as well. ZDMG, xxxvi (1882), 281-2. Reading , + with MS: Ed. 2 l . This accusation hasbeen hurled against the entire family of maimi in, from whom 'Ubaidaiiah is believed to be descended. iA. VIII, 21. ' See above, 112. ' Under the ?ear 207 A. H., Nujim, 1, 595, mentions SanZdiki who appeared in Yemen, led people astray from Islam and finally perished in a plague, but he says nothing
'
about his affiliations with the Karma!ians. In the light of this information it will be surpming that OUT author passes in silence over the man who figured most prominently in the Karmalian movement in Yemen - Abu-l-Klsim al-Hasan ibn Farai tbn Hawshah ibn ZGdGn Ai-Mawir However, van Arendonk, Opkomst van he! zeidifische lmnmat i n Yemen, 110, n. 8, reports that ai-Manger is called al-Sanldiki by several authorities, and terms Nujinr's statement an anachronism. See a short account of al-SanZdikif activities in Maerzi's I f f i ' i z nf-hunnf;' bi-Akhbir nl-A'imma al-Khulaf2 (ed. Bum), 113-4. "ab. iii., p. 2256, reiates a victory over the defenders of San'a by a missionary 1 j r . According to Janadl's story of the whom marginal gloss= in hvo MSS. name JijJl 3
turned them and their followers over to the destructive power of gangreoe and the bubonic plague, and they died'. Then there came forth in Syria a grandchild of Maimin ibn Daisin, ca!led Abu-1-YHsim ibn Mihmaih', and these two:' said to %,hornever followed them: This is the time appointed lor our rule. This occurred in the year two hundred and eighty nine.
Subuk" a!-Mu'tadid's general, set out
against them. They sle* Suhuk in the field of battle, entered the city of al-Rusifa" and burnt its general mosques. Afterwards they directed their course to Damascus. Al-Hamimi', a slave of ibn T i l i n s faced them acd drove them to RakkaY. Then Muhammad ibn Sulaime, the secretary of al-hluktafi, sallied forth against them with one of al-Muktali's armiesc0 and routed them and killed thotisands of them. Al-Husain"
ibn Zikrwaih ibn Mihrwaih was forced to flee to al-Ramlahl: but the
Karmatians in Yemen as told in Kay, Omorah, Hisf. of Yoman, 191-212, 'Ali ibn Fadl, an associate of a l - ~ ~ was ~ ~ as ~depraved , individual who, aiter becoming paweriui, renounced his allegiance to tile Mahdi and was finally poisoned by a doctor in 303 A. H. in a recent work on the history of Yemen by 'Abd-ai-Wag? ibn YaQya ai-Yamani, ibn-Fad! is said
to have proclaimed himself a propheb asid to have abrogated the law. iA mbo tells his story mil, 22, calls him Muhammad. ' m k r f z i , op. cit., ib. This Abu-1:KZsim
ibn Mihwaih is Yahya ibn Z i k w d h (Tab. ili, 2218 and IA, Vli, 353)
whose genealogy N o ~ a i r it(aces to d-Kaddih (de Goeje, 60). ' The two spoken of in this passage are probably Yapya and his brother Husain. IA, ViI, 362 sqq. &dl IA, Vii. 353 reads j ; although he cites several Tab. iir, 2219, . MSS. with the reading A city in Syria near Rakxa, built as a summer home by the 'Omayyads, but some believe that Lf is pre-lriamic. Yakirt (1, 784. ' Tab., ib.; IA, ib. For the history of this uprising see de Ooeje, 47-50.
+-;
'
+-
' Badr d-Hamimi was one of the generals of the Egyptian Army which was sent to reinforce T;ghj ibn Jeff, governor of Damascus.
IA, Vil, 362.
Tab. 111, 2219 calls him Badr al-Kahir.
'
He was the slave of Abu Mirsa Hirfin ibn KhumPrawaih, died 292 A. H. Zambaur, 93. Ms. reads j+: Ed. a&. A town on the Euphrates, three days from HarrZn, Yakirt, 11, 802.
" 291 ,A. H., Tab. 111, 2137 " MS. and Ed: I,(j j & I .
sqq.
He was known as "the fellow with the Mole" i.Ul ,L. Tab. iii, 2224, passim. " Ai-Husdn was captured not at Ralniah but in Diiiaij, a town not far from Kirfa,
governor of a!-Ramlah seized him and conveyed him together with a troop of his followers' to al-.Muktafi. He executed them in Baghdad on the highway dter torturing them severely'. With their death, the power of the Kannatians was broken doon until the year three hundred and ten.
Afterwards the uprising of Sulaimin
ibn al-Hasan" took place in the year three hundred and eleven. It was then that he captured al-Ba.$ra6, killed its chief Subuk al-Mullihi' and carried off its booty into Mesopotamia. In the year three hundred and twelve, oil the tenth day before the end o! the month of al-Aluharram, he attacked the pilgrim caravan at al-Hab;r$ slew most of the pilgrims. and led their mives and children in captivity. He next 275 entered KG$' in the year three hundred and thirteen, put its inhabitants to death, and pillaged their possessions. In the year three hundred and fifteen he fought with ibn Abu Sij8, took him prisoner, and routed his men. In the year three hundred and seventeen, he entered chithe her he ilad hoped to escape unnoticed But the prefect of the town recognized him and deiivered him to the Khaiif in Rakka. See Tab. 111, 2237-46 and IA, Vii, 366-7. ' Acc. to Tab, Kama!ians resident in BaghdZd were also induded in this auto-da-fe. Aitogethei their number amounted to 320 odd, or 360. 2245. ' The crud manner in which they were executed is described fully Tab., ib.: !A, ib.
For a detailed story of Abu Tihir SulaimZn ibn Abu Sa'id al-gasan ibn BahrHm aiJannrbi, see de Ooeje, 73-143. QD Ooeje, ~ 79.
' A freedman of Muflih la favotite of hlubtadii. cf. ibn Miskawaihi, Eclipse of the Abbnsids, index, 8. v.) and governor of ai-Basra. The incident of his death is described 1. r.. !, 105 and 11'. (Engi. transl. 116-11.). The correct pronounciation of the governofr name is not estabiisiled. Carra de Vaun in his translation of Mas'irdi's Tanb;h, reads Soubk (the original bas no vmuei). Similarly the father of ManmBd of Ohazna is called Subuktekin. (see Barthoid's article on Mahmird, EI, 111, 8. v.).
" With Goidziher ' De Gaqe, 86. "
and probably MS. Ed.
A'. Cf. de
Goeje, 84-86.
Abu-1-Kasim Yirsuf ibn Diwdid ibn abi S q , born about 250 A. H., was called by the
vizier al-Khasibi to conduct the war againsl Abu Tihir. He had been governor of Azerbaijan. For his early relations with the Abbisids see Harold Bowen, 'AB ibn 'Isn, 154-156. His gelleiai attitude and his more than suspicious behavior iil preparation for the war with Abu THhir are described by de Gaeje, 88-95, esp. 91 ff. (cf. Bowen, I. c., 263). See also Mak&i (Fagclan), 82, on the homage paid by him to 'Ubaidaliai~. He was killed by the Kama(ian leader in 315 A. H. See Zambaur. 179, note 3.
Mecca and smote whomever he found performing the Tawsf'
It is reported that
he put three thousand to death, led away seven hundred maidens, abducted the Kufa and Black Stone and carried it to al-Bahrain2. It was returned thence""
later sent back from al-Kufa to Mecca with Abu lrhik lbrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Yahya al-Muzakki [the sheikh4 of] NkhipGrC in the year three hundred and twenty nine? Sulaimin ibn al-Hasan marched against Baghdid in the year three liuxidred and eighteen', but when he reached Hit" a woman hurled a brick at him from her roof and killed himg. Th& the power of the Karmatians was ' See the detailed report about the ravaging of Mecca in d e Goeje, 100-111. it goes without saying that the event aroused hot hiaod in aii the Arab histariaos, very obviously manifested in their accounts of it which abound in maiedictions and bristle with passionate hatred. The abduction of the Biack Stone aroused the anger of even the Fitimids. But de
Goeje, 83, argues with good reason that it was only feigoed anger, and that, in ail probability the act war perpetrated in the first pince by order of the FH!imid ruiei. " MS. & a>; Ed. id,>.
' This
phrase is supplied from Sam'ini, f. 526 b. A well known Rawi, died 362 A. H. Nujam, 11, 439; Y a k 3 1, 465. See esp. Sam'ini
f. 526 a-b.
None of the authorities consulted mentions this traditionist in connection with the restoration of the Biack Stone to Mecca, ail of them attributing it to Sanbar fe. g. de Ooeje, 145). He may perhaps have been merely an adviser in the matter. At any rate we can hardly reject the statement of Baghdidi who was born shortly after that event " According to d e Goeje, 145, and other sources, this event took place in 339, by order of the Fiiimid Khaiif ai-Mangi~r. On page 146, note 1, he quotes Hamza IspahZni in support of our author's date, but rejects that statement ' Bagdad was threatened by him in 315 A. H. before his pillage of Mecca. Mas'Bdi
Tmrblh [tr. de Vaux), 469, de Goeje 97, Bowen, 268 ff. The ana& an Hit also occurred in 315. Miskawaih, IV, 198 ff.,Mas'Bdi, I. c., 490. The confusion in our book may be due to the second rapture of Kiiia in 319, (de Goeje, 113). since it was the capture of Kfifa which in 315 had preceded his threat to Bagdad. From this statemeni one wovid be inclined to believe that he never reached Bagdad having been killed at Hit before that. As a matter of f a d he made his attack on HTt after Bagdad. (see note above). The grounds for this unsubstantiated story of Abu Tihir's death which really happened in 332 is the defeat suffered by hi at Hit, as related by Mas'Bdi, who was an eye-witness, I. c , 488.
broken. Following the death of Sulairnin ibn-al-Hasan, they extorted money from the pilgrims travelling to Mecca from al-KGfa and al-Ba~ra' by collecting escoris' fee* and guaranteed tribute:', until al-Asfar al-'Ukaili4 captured one of their towns. The control of Egypt and its dfairs had fallen into the hands of the Ikhshldiyya5. Some of them joined the son of 'Ubaidallah al-Bitini6 who already held sway over Kairuin and penetrated into E g k t in the year three hundred and sixiy three'. They built there a city which they named Cairos, and which the adherents to his heresy inhabit. But the population of Egypt clings firmly to the orthodox faith unto the present days, although they demomonstrate their loyalty to the governor of Cairo by remitting to him the tax levied upon them.
' This refers to the treaty which the Karmatians coneiuded with the 'Abbisids in 327 A. H. the terms of which guaranteed to them a fixed tribute and toil fee f a r esconing the pilgrims. De Ooeje, 140 ff. ' With MS. .Si+ . Ed. ' Arabic j,-h. IL ;
' Wiih MS; Ed. ~ Y I .See on him de Sacy, introd. 223, de Goeje, 193, FA, IX, 40. Ci also Kay's remari
indeed,
IA, IX, 221, in recording his death, characterizes him as the one @ . b J *% , j K $31 (who used to heaviiy tan the pilgrims on their journeys). The t o m he conquered was al-KacTf. "d., MS. %,CLl. A famiiy which ruled E m t (nominaiiy in the name of the 'AbbHsid Khaiil;) from 323 to 338 A H. ikhshid is a title and goes back to Farghina in Persia where their forefathers were said to have been rulers (Ei, 11. 458). See also Lane-Pooie, Hist. of Ecypf, 101-2.
' The son, or rather, the grandson of 'Ubaidaiiah is Abu Tamim Ma'add at-Mu'izr, fourth Fi!imid ~ h a i r f .who ruled 341 to 365 A. H. See Wiistenfeid, I, c. (1881) 3-37. Egypt was conquered by the Ficimids in 358 A. H. Wdstenfeld, I. c. 7-13;
IA, Wii,
435
The date in our text probably refers to Mu'izr's arrival in Egypt in 362. IA, 457, Nujzm, ii, 436. See on the name MakrFzi, 1, 377. The building of the city war commenced in 356 and completed in 363. it was named after Mars which was then in the ascendant and called &dl pli. See also Lane-Pooie, I. e., 103.
" This fact, besides demonstrating the steadfastness of the Sunnites during that period, testifies equally to the spirit of tolerance which generally distinguished the FHcimids. See Gold-
When his warriors went forth with Ule purpose of proceeding to Egypt, death claimed him and he went the way of all flesh. After Fanikhusraw departed this life, the chief of Egypt cast a covetoils glance upon the kingdoms of the
Abu Shuji' Fanahusraw' ibn Buweih had made preparations to march* 216 against Egypt and wrench' it irom the hand of the Batiniyya4. He enjoined his chiefs in al-Sawid in writing: In the name of Allah the Merciful, the Compassionate. Praised be Allah, Lord of the universe and may the Lord pray for Muhammad, Seal of the Prophets, Obedient to God, Prince of the Faithful. Enter Egypt safely, God Willing. He then composed a Kaada, the beginning of which is: Do yuu not see the fates obeying me
Eastern provinces. He communicated Riith them, exhoriing them to pledge allegiance to him. Kahis ibn Washiiikir made the following reply to his letter: I shall not mention you save in repcse. Nisir al-Dawla abu-I-Hasan Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn S h j G r 2 gave his answtr by writing on the back of his letter to
And clearly communicating to me as though it were ascertained information? And mankind bears witness to me that I am
him: 0, you infidels! 1 shall not worship that which you worship 3, down to the eild of the Sura. N i h q b n Mansir, governor of Khurisin, answered by killing
The one who is hoped for, and t h e o n e who is expected To aid Islam, and the summoner to The KhaEf of Allah, the Glorious Imim5.
the missionaries of his heresy. One of the rulers of al-Jurjin in the land 01 Khwarezm responded to his call. His conversion to his religion became for him a cause of adversiiy iu that his kingdom vanished and his men were annihilated3.
ziher, Streitsckrift (Introd), 7 and note 4: Fikrkt, 189; and Gottheii, ZA. XXVl (1911). 203.
' Generally called 'Adud-al-~awia (the support of the gaveinmeni), a title conferred on him in 351 A. H. by the nominal ruler, the Khaiyf Mu!? in accordance with a custom introduced at the time of the capture of Bagdad by the Buwaihis in 334 A. H. FanHkhusrau ruled over 'ir;k and almost the entire extent of Asiatic lslim fmm 367 to 373 A. H., and, before that. since 335 over other parts of the Persian Empire. Mliiler, I. c. ii, 43 ff. ' MS. wrongly. imai or i;.8 ; Ed; 4. MS. wrongiy, i.el;ll,; Ed: +
bl~l,.
The only reference I find to this planned attack is Wnstenfeid, Fotimirien, (188i),
47-48, who relates that 'Admd-al-Dawia must have been angered by the then of a lion from the entrance to his palace, perpetrated by order of the Fanmid a l - ' ~ z z , but he "war indess damals schon zu hrakiich... as er sick ernsilich darum hatte bekilmmern konnen" 145). Perhaps the mory Rnds its origin in 'Adud-ai-Dawia's demand of al-'~ziz that he produce his genealogy in order to confirm his claim of reiationship to Mu'?ammad ibn isma'ii. Stili another conjecture is that our author developed this taie on the basis of an encounter between the Turkish general, al-Aftakin and ai-'Azlz in 365 A. H. during which the general was urged by the.Fifimid Khallf to recognize his sovereignty (IA, WiI, 483-81): Ikhaii. 11, 483, adds that Aftakin turned to the Buwaihid mler for help. Cf. Wilstenfeld,-I. c., 40-46. ' in view of the fact that the Buwaihids were of Shi'ite Confession, it is Likely that the allusion is to the hvelfth imam, particularly since the Svnnite Khafif would rrl-lmim d-muftakkar. This in no way confiids with Fanikhusraw's 'AbbLids. Nor should we wonder at the readiness with which Baghdidi poem. We have already seen that he utilizes lmamite sources. See above, the entire story of the campafga may be of imsmite oorigin.
hardly be calied ailegiance to the cites the sectarian 102 n. 1. iudeed.
'
Later yamin al-Dada arld ~ m al-Milla h M a m i d ibn Subuktekin became master of their land and killed all of the Bitinite propagandists who were active there. Abu 'Ali ibn 8 m j i r R sympathized secretly with their views, so he attempted rebellion', but his eliot.ts in this undertaking miscarried. NGh ibn Mansir,
' With the surname Shams-ai-MaPii. of the Ziarid dynasty; ruled over Jurjin and TabarislHn from 366 to 403 A. H.. except far a period of 17 years (371-388) an account of a revoiution during which his son reigned in his Place. ikhall, 11, pp. 507-10; ibn isiandiyar, Yakit who gives a tuii biography of him in Irshrin: Vi, 6, 143-152, mentions nothing about his correspondence with the FEtirnids
Hist. of Titbaristin, (tr Brawne), 225-233. Ed. has
+,
as his father's name. Ms. correctly
s2,.
'
Commander of the armies in KhurHsZn; removed in 371, (IA, iX, 7), but reinstated in 372, ib, 17-18. "
Suia 109, vv. 1-2.
' Surnamed
al-Rida;
one of the Ssmanid rulers, 366-387
A. H.
'
i have not been able to discover whom our author refers to. It may possibly be one of the Ziatid mlers who heid sway over JujHn, although they were nominally dependent on the Samanids and iater the Ghaznavids, Hartmann,
EI, 1, 1065. Or perhaps it is one of the
rebels whom gHbGs finally crushed.
'
The fail account of Abu 'Aii's activity and struggle with NBQ are recorded in 'Utbi, I c., pp. 108-118. Also Kazwioi, Tnrikk G i ~ r i d a(tr. &"tin) 1, 43-53. None of the sources dealing with the rebellion of Abu 'Ali mentions his Bicinite sympathies. But it should be remembered that BaghdHdi, who lived in NishHPBr, NBhs center
217 govcmor of Khurisin, seized him and s a l t him to Subuktekin: he was executed in the province of G h a z ~ i a ' . Abu-l-I(isi:n
al-Hasan ihn M i ' ,
surnamed Dazsamand"
became the mis-
sionary of the Ei,ijiiyya clortrine by appoitltmci~t of Ah:, .,~,li itni SimjGr, but aaktizfinl, co,nmancier of a Samanid army, overcame him in Nishipiir and killed iiimj. He was buried in an uniinown place. An~Trak al-TGsi, governor of the district Thprwaih" had joined the mission of t h e BHtiniyya. He was taken captive, :arried to . Ghazna and killed there o n the same night as Abu 'Ali ibn Simjiir .
'.
Tile iohahit&ts of Multio it, the land ol India, had enrolled ir. the movel~?el~t of the R i iniyga. Mahmid s t t out against them with his army, killed thousands of them" and cllopped ofi the arms of thousaitds of them. the Bitiniyya vanished from their midst.
Thus the successes" of
In this we find clear proof of the ill-
fortune which the rite of the Biiiniyya brings upon its imitators; let those who will take heed. The theologians differ io their opinions regarding the ultimate aim sought by tlie PH$!iiyya ili the missionary activity in hehalf of their heresy. Most of them lean to'ihe
view illat the ohject oi the Bitiniyya was to convert [the Mus-
lims] to the religion of t h e Magians with the aid of the method of allegorization .
of actiuittes, far a nurnbei of ycan, may have collected some unrecorded data which circulated among the inhabitants of that cily. I According to Kazwini, I. r., 53, and 'Utbi, i. c., Abu 'Ali was killed by order of Nirh, either while bcing sent ta his protector, al-Ma'mrin rKazi,vini) or in prison CUtbi). tA, however, agrees with Saghdidi's report, except that according to him he died in piiron instead of being executed. IX, 76. "Tile brother of Abu 'Aii who took up the latter's efforts after his death. For his hisHis faii came in 388 A.H. tory see 'Utbi, I. c. 189-95, 218-24.
:' Casanova's conection; Ed. and
NS. d l , .
He wzs the general of the army under Mansfir, successor to Ed. j 1 .j NBQ. 'Utbi, I. c . 206, cailr him Lord Chamberlain. Cf. tA, IX, 91. According to ~azwini,TarIhh G z z i d a (ti. Gandn) 1, 59-61, he met his final defeat at the hands of Nagr ibn Subuktekin, Ma?mird's brother. 9 have "not been able to Identi@ this name. 'Utbi, I. c., 196. Ib., 326-329. "Whti Mj. .,;pi;Ed. .I,&.
by which they interpret the Ki~r'in and t h e Sunna. In proof of this they cite the charge that their founder Maimiin ibn Daisin was a illagian taken captive(?) at al-Ahwiz.
His son, '..\bdallah
ibn Maimtin
' invited
people to adhere to the
religion OF his father. They find further support in the fact that their missionary, al-Bazdahi' by name, states io liis book entitled rcb,l~ah~;l (Sum and Substance)
..
that the first Author originated the Soul (n!-LVufs). Since then the First and Second regulate the world by regulating the seven stars and t h e four elements % 218 This indeed is the essence OF the teachings o! the Magians, that al-Ymdin created Ahriman, and that He together with Ahriman manage theuniverse, except that al-Yazdin is the author of good deeds and Ahriman the author of evil. Others have linked the Bitiniyya to the Sibians who live in H-n.
They also find
confirmatiou of their view in this, that the S b i a n s keep their doctrines secret: and reveal them only to their adherents. Like them, the Bitiniyya do not reveal their doctrines save to one who becomes one of them after they administer" oath to him that he will not relate their mysteries to any one outside their group. 'Abd-al-Kihir
says: The most plausible explanation to my mind i s that
they are Zendik Materialists who profess a belief in the eternity oi the universe, and disackoowledge the apostles and all the precepts of the Law, bkcause they are disposed to permit everything to which one's natural desires incline? Proof that they are a s we have described them will be forthco~ningfrom what I have read in an Epistle of theirs entitled: Conduct, tie Most Txiltccl'
Coiiin~ui~ica-
I With the exception of a histotically comct sta!enlent Ed. 16, (Seelye, 35). this is the only time that our aulhor mentions 'Abddiuh, the man who played a far greater role in the Organization of the Bitiniyya than his frequently cited father. In Usul,329, he gives the same infarmation as In the citations above. Abu 'Abdullah Mubarnmad ibn Ahmad al-Nasafi mentioned above, 113, and caiied there Bandina. Massignon, BibIiogr. Q n m n t e , 332, calls him Baradha'i making him a native of Baradha'a, a town on the borders of Azerbaijan (Yakirt, s.v.). V e e above, 1 15-7, and notes. %hwolson, Die Ssabier, 161. ' MS. has the unused Vnl. form: pwl.
The same accusation is hurled against them by Nowairy in de Sacy, Introd. 127. Cf. also Streitschrift, Introd., 38. ' With MS. KYI; Ed. . i j Y I .
tion, and the Moost A7~thoritativeLam. It is a writing sent by 'Ubaidallah ibn al-Hasan al-Kainiini' to Sulaimin ibn al-Hasan Abu-a'id
al-Jannibi in which
he enjoins him as follows: Carry on your activity among the people by ingratiating yourself with them by way of showing sympathy with whatever they are ixclined to, and put the false idea into the heads of all of them that you are one of them. Aoy one of whose sincerity you are satisfied, - draw the veil aside for him. If you gain influence over a philosopher, hold on to him, for in the philosophers our trust resides. We and they are agreedS with resped to the 278
law-books of the prophets, and the belief in the eternity of the world. Only" some of them differ with us, believing that the world has a governing agent whom they do not acknowledge. He treats in this letter of the denial of the belief in the world-to-come and in retribution, and he declares in it that Paradise consists of the pleasures enjoyed in this. world, and that torture is simply the engagement of observers of the Law in prayer, fasting, pilgrimages and holy wan." He also states in that epistle: Verily, the followers of the Revealed Law worship a God whom they do not know and whom they attain only in name, cot in substance Further on i e writes: The most renowned materialists are of the same cast as we, and we as they." Herein we find proof of the relation between the Bitiniyya and the Materialists. What lends greater strength to this view is that the Magians profess the prophetic character of Zaradusht and the descent of a revelation to him from
' Massignon who characterizes the following epistle as being "d'un cynisme rare" apparently doubts its authenticity, LC., 332. It is, judging from the similarity to the extracts found in de Sacy, Introd. 148 it, the same letter as the one called i U 1 by Nowaiti. Casanova's
correction, contra "ibn" of Ed. and MS.
' 1 Omit the word LO, since our text seems to fallow almost verbally tile paragraph on p. 152 of de Sacy's Introd., so far as can he gathered from the translation. * Reading with MS.
Y j ; Ed. L j
For a more objecdvestatement of the BBtiniyyaviews on Paradise and Hell see Guyard, 191.
' It is in itself very doubthd whether the adherents of the BZtiniyya movement would readily identify their views with any existing. That it accommodated itself to any and every creed is me oniy of its preliminary stages.
God. The S i b i a ~ sclaim prophecy for Hermes
',
Wiis:
Dk: Taiyfis 4, ADi!un
and a number of philosophers. The believers in a Revealed Law, all communities alike, affirm the descent OF a revelation from heaven upon those, respectively, whose prophetic character they maintain, aod they assert that that revelation comprises commands and prohibitions and information regarding life after death, reward and punishment, and paradise received for-at
and hell, in which retribution mill be
deeds6. The Gtiniyya, however, reject miracles, disavow the
appearance of angels from heaven with a revelation and with commands and prohibitions; nay, they deny that there is an angel to be found in heaven. Instead, they explain angels allegorically as the missionaries for their innovation; they interpret the Satans to be their antagonists,
and the I b l ~ s e : the learned
among their antagonistss. They contend that the prophets are men who aspire to supremacy, and that they govern the general public by laws and artifice, seeking lordship by claiming for themselves prophecy and the Imimateg.
' The list in AiblrOni, 187, diffen quite substanlially from ours, mentioning of those in our text only Hermes and Waiis. Hermes whom AiblrOni, 108, identiiies with ldris, the Arabic for Enoch (but see Noeideke. ZA. XVII, 83-4) is merely a means on the pati of ihe Sibians to claim a prophet whom the Muhammadans will recognize. Chwaison I. r., 1, 627-37, and for a characterira~ionof both tlermes and id&, 783-02. ' He may Pernaps be LIJW mentioned by al-Wf!i as quoted by Asia l'aiacios, Abenhaznm, 11; 235, note 120. Chwolson, I. c., 800, prefers the reading j4.l in ibn Hazm's text and identifies him with Helien. ' I have not been able to identify him. ' He is probably Tatius (Tat), son of Hermes. a Syro-Egyptian God, inventor of.miting. ib. 704-5. ' With MS. & ; Ed. jr , ' These to a Muslim are the pre-requisites for any religion before it is toierat.ted. Chwolson, I. c., 627 it ' From this statement it appears that lbih is a higher type of demonic spirit than the Satans. While Wensinck and Gaudeiroy-Demombynes (El, 3. v. Ibl& and Shnitan, respediveiy) and the latter also in ERE, s. v. Demons and Spirits in Islam, all testify that the Satans are sometimes identifiable with Jinn, and 0.-D. also states that ai4hai!L or lblis is their head, it is a little astonishing to find our author talkine - of a number nf.. lhl7s~. ~~~~
#'*
.Q*; Ed. *k StrPitSchri/t, Introd., 38. With MS.
~
J.. The same expressions are employed U?il, 330.
280
Each one
of them is the master2 of a sevei~ialdcycle"
When the seven
accordance with the way he sees his desire tending. Whoever is converted to
in their cycle' are terminated they are followed by another ~ y c l e . ~When . they
his esoteric ii~terpretation is 011e of the pure angels I, but he who acts in accordance ~ i t hthe exoteric sense is one of the unbelieving S&tans. Furthemore, they allegorize every fundamental of the revealed law in such wlse as nrill
speak of the prophet and his heir" they declare: Verily, the prophet is the ATU~~+ (speaker) and the heir, his As&, is the ~ k t e '(possessor of command). On th.:
Fitik devolves the task of interpreting esoterically the speech of the Ng/ik8 i l ~~
' The
faiioiving, which sounds like an exposition of the views of the Bi!iniyya on f i r
prophetic cyiies, is hardly in place here among Baghdsdi's deprecatory arguments. The ji'-" is aiso known as the jL9I -,i, or LLji ( 6 . For the Karma!ians,
entail heresy. They maintain that the meani!~g of prayer is the patronage of their Imam, and that the pilgrimage is the visit to him and perseverance in his service'
By fasting the abstention from reveding the secret of the Imim is
intended, and not abstineoce from food. Harlotry according to them is the divulgence of their secrets contrary to the covenant and bonda. They hold that whoever knows the meaning of worskip is thereby freed of the duty of periorm-
Muhalnmad ibn isma'li is the master of the cycle sitice it is his teachings that hold sway at present, de Sacy, Infrod., 108, and n. 2. For other sectarians, e. g. the Druses, Nugairis, etc., the incumbent is another peison. a The wide extent to which they utilize the numeral seven which has given them the a Introd., 37, n. 7 ; lji, 348) is well illustrated in Sain'Bni, f. 229 b. name ~ a b . i y ~(Streitschrift, Although the group under discussion there is not excluded irom Islam by the Svnnitea since they recognize Mesa ai-Ki!him as the seventh Innam, there can be no doubt that many of the seven-groups listed there were adopted hy the Bitinipa. With MS. .>,i 3:Ed. omils 3.
knowledge of the esoteric. In fact, Al-Kairuini states in his epistle to Sulaimin ibn al-Hasanr Behold, I enjoin you to instil doubt inlo peooles' hearts regarding the Kur'in, the Torah, t. e Psalms and the Gospels, and to urge them to relinquish the p r e c e p t s G f the
The meaning behind this iaeonie statement is as foiiows: Since the world consists of a Series of emanations, each less perfect than its progenitor, there is a constant urge to attain the periection oi the Univenal intellect. Thisurge b aiieady shared by the Univeoal Soul. But in her effort the Saul "lust be aided by an agent sent by Reason which is the Active Intellect.
in angels in heaven, and to reject the belief in Jinn on earth. I bid you further to urge tiem to accept the view that a irultitude of people existed before Adam;
ing i i They interpreted in this sense His words: "Serve your Lord until you attain absolute certainty4. They stretched the words "absolute certain&" to mean
Law, to reject the dogmas of an after-life and resurrection', to reject the belief
this will be of assistance to you in teaching the pre-existence of the world. In
But the Reason and the Soul, in order to guide the wodd to saiuation, must be incarnated in two beings, the Nirik and his Asis. However, since man is mortal, the incarnation, although alwiys the same, is externally different, bring represented by seven Nitiks and, between each pair, by seven lmims who carry on while the Law of the MHIik is diifused, and the world is being prepaiedior the next speaker .Onyard, 187-9; de Goeje, 166 f., Shahr., 148, (Haarbriieker, 222-3). ' Reading with MS. &>I,:Ed. &)I,. The theory of the prophet and his heir is not altogether fareign to Shl.ite circles. Even the more moderate ImamiyYa consider the imims to be the hein of the prophets and destined to maintain God's proof on earth. See ibn Babuye,
Adam, the first Ni!ik, 288-9 and 299 n. 26.
Z z r Mahdi-Lehre des Isiams, Ed. Emst Moeiier, 24. BaghdMi is, to my howledge, the only authoiiiy who employs this term for the A*&, the fint oi tkie seven who form the cycle of a NitiR and who are called Sirnits (Silent). T h e seven NSiiks are Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, MuQammad and Muhammad ihn Lma'ii. The seven Asis are Seth, Sem, Ishmael, Aaron, Peter. 'Ali and 'Abdallah tbn al-Kadds?. See
See Ivanow, Isnaiiiticn, Passim. It is with this iater view that GhzHli has his main quarrel In the Streitschrift, e. g. "The SharT'a of the Prophet" is a veil of the Imim (p. 26). a The great stress laid on keeping the secret is emphasized in the severe oath administered to the novitiate, see below.
in this sense he is the Possessor oi it. Perhaps we could airo interpret the word (F&k) in its meaning of slitter, since he cuts open the secret, that is, he expounds the inner meaning af the Niliws words. Guyaid, 303 and 319, n. 5.
'
The proof is apparentis in the story of God's command to lhe angeis to bow before
' The
and the cune pronounced on Satan, Sura 38, vv. 71-6.
Cf. Guyard,
importance of the lmim grows in the system of the Bi!iniyya as time passes.
e. g. Guyard, 291. There was still another scheme of twelve Niwhs (heads) comparable to the
' Siira
Weive signs of the Zodiac, ib. 306 & 321, n. 20. It is the duly of the Asis to promulgate the Law newly revealed by the Speaker, and
' 16. line
15, v. 99.
' Sfreitsrhriff, Introd.,
38, lines 13-14. 21, Cf. aiso ib., 46, last line f.
this we find a corroborat~onof our claim that the Biiiniyya are materialists who teach the eternity of the world and disacirrjo~vledge the Maker I. What substan281 tiates our charge that they farror the abrogation oi the Law is that al-Kairuini also writes in his letter to Sulaimin ibn al-uasan: It is urgent that you Lnoroughly comprehend the tricks and contradictions of the prophets in their various declarations. For example, 'lsi son of Mariam said to tile Jews ! 1 shall not abolish the law of Moses?. Then he abolished it by consecrating Sunday in place of the Sabbath. And he permitted work on the Sabbath, and he reversed the Kibla of Moses in the opposite direction.
For this reason the Jews'' killed
him, as his words were contradictory. Then he writes to him: Do not be like the chief of the down-trodden nation" who, when asked regarding the spirit, replied: "The spirit comes by the command of my Lordq" because the answer to the question did not occur to him. Be not like Moses in his claim for which he had no evidence save lying supported by ine most magnificent artifices and juggling. As the Law-giver in his time [Pharaoh] did not find any testimony to confirm his claim, he-said to him: "Verily thou shalt not take to thyself a God other than me". He [Pharaoh)
because h e was the master said to his people: "I am your most exalted Lord':' of the time in his cycle8. At the end of his letter he declares: There is no wonder so great as the wonder over a person who pretends to be ietelligent, yet, if he has a beautiful sister or daughter, does not make one of them his wife by virtue of her beauty, but declares her uniawlui to himself and marries her to an outsider.
' Matthew, 5, 18; Luke,
16, 17. Veading with MS. >,J,: Ed. e,. 1st reads here: .Ir k ,1 & Y I 6, L I Jij uL; J $1 a . 3 $ * L j -L.
br%l+
title to his sister or his daughter than the stranger. The true aspect of this is simply that their master' forbade to them the enjoyment of the good and inspired into their hearts fear of a Hidden Being who cannot be apprehended This is the Cod in whose existence they believe. He related traditions to them about tile existence of what they will never witness, such as resurrection from the graves, retribution, paradise and hell. Thus he soon subjugated them and reduced them to slavery to himself during his lifetime, and to his offspring after his 282 death. In this way he arrogated to himself the right to enjoy their wealth, for he says: "I ask you no reward for it except friendliness to my relatives*." His dealings with them were on a cash basis, but their dealings with him were on credit.
He required of them an immediate exchange of their lives and property
for a future promise which would never be realized. Is Paradise aught3 save this world and its enjoyment? Or are hell and its torture any thing but the state to which the observers of the Law are reduced, namely: weariness and exertion in prayer, fasting, the holy war and the pilgrimage? Finally he declares to Sulaimin ibn al-Hasan in this epistle: You and your brethren are the heirs who will inherit Fidaus*, and in this world you have acquired its pleasures and luxuries which are forbidden to the ignorant, those held in check by the precepts of the law-givers. Congratulatioos to you upon the freedom from their power which you have attained. - In what we have related
' i.
e. Mui!ammad.
' Sura
Ib., 38, line 20.
+>>,
But if the stupid one possessed sense he would understand that he has better
&
+.
&.b.
42. 23. There is no distortion of meaning in this verse on the part of the BBIiniyya. Despite the contentions of the modern Arab translators of the Kurln, Mauivi Mupmmad 'Aii and Hafiz Ghulam Sawar, ad l o e , the old commentators agree wilh the interpretation as Eiven here. Baidiwi, 11, 230, even cites a tradition according to which the relations are 'Alt and FZlima and their offspring. Cf. de Sacy, Introd., 203, n. 2. See also Korannzslegang. 268-9. ' 01;there is no paradise etc. See Worreli's article on the Partide Jn, ZA, XXI (190% 116-150, especidly 131-2 and 149. ' Whether the alleged author of this letter meant by Firdarrs anything other than Paradise (which is the meaning given to it by Muhammad, E. I., s. v. Firdaus), It is difficult to say. Among the orthodox the word assumes a more specialized sense, referring to certain poriions of Paradise, ib.
one linds evidence that the goal of the Bitiiliyya is to teach the doctrine of the Materialists, to allow the things which are forbidden, and to relinquish works. In luring the dull-heads and converting them to their heresy, the Bifiniyya avail themselves of strategic devices according t o Degrees which they name:' Perception, Familiarization, Instilling doubt, Leaving in Suspense, liltaxicatioii,? Concealing, Laying the Foundation, Sealing the Bond by Oath and Covenant, and finally, Ungodliness and Renunciation. Concerning Tafarrus (Perception). - They say: It is a pre-requisite for a missionary of their heresy that he be skillful in dissembling and well-versed in the methods of int~rprpretingthe exoteric so as to give it an esoteric meaning. He must at the same time distinguishS between one whose conquest and seduction may4 be attempted and 283 one who offers no prospect. With this in mind, they make the following recommendations to their missionaries: Hold no discussions in a house where there is a light, meaning by the light one who knows dogmatic theology and the various ways of speculation and analogy. They further i~istrucitheir missionaries: Do not cast your seed into saline soil. They understand by this the abstention of their missionaries from disclosing their heresy to ~ e o p l eupon whom their evil teachings will produce no effect, just as seed in saline ground will produce nothing. They
' qi's
list Mawokif. (350-51)
is quite the same as ours except that the first degree is
eaiied &3i, and the eighth, instead of the covenant, is
+I
which our author joins with
$A as the last. GharZli agrees witil Iji, d. Sfreifschrift, Introd., 40-42. indeed, as will be pointed out later. the oath and covenant which should be discussed as the fifth degiee under Rabf is detached from its context and given later as a separate stage (Ed. 287, ff.),
thus leaving Rabf an empty term and forcing our author to identify It with Ta'l?!. De Sacy who devotes pages 75-147 of his Introd. to the degrees and the oath differs almost completely horn the other authorities in his discussion. While he also counts nine stages. he seems l o crowd into the first ail that the othen spread over the fint six, cf. 74-96. specially 94 f. His remaining eight degrees deal armally with a gradual initiation into the inner secrets of the movement. Although the consensus among the three authorities seems to confirm the exposition, it cannot be denied that de Sacy's system is more logical. Ma?rbi's venion, which de Sacy utilized, wiil be found In the Khftof, 1, 291-95. See below. a Reading ip with Ms; Ed. is. ' Reading with Ms. 21; Ed. 3 .
'
call the hearts of their stupid followers fertile soil, because they are susceptible to their doctrine. But this comparison ought rather to be reversed, since the fertile hearts are those which receive the orthodox religion and walk in the righteous path. They are the ones who do not swerve after the fashion of the blundering people, like pure gold which does not become rusty in water, is not consumed by the earth, and is not diminished by fire. The saline soil is like the hearts of the Bitiniyya and the other godless people whom sound sense does not deter, nor do laws restrain. They are the foul and the impure, the dead, not the livingL. "They' are nothing but as cattle, nay, they are furthest astray from the path", and the most easily deceived. He who has provided sustenance for swine in heir pasturages and provided food for lizards in their wasteland has apportioned to them their share of sustenance. "He cannot be questioned concerning what He does, and they shall be questioned4? They direct further: It is required of the missionary that he be acquainted with the various methods by which patties can be swayed. For the conrersiou of the groups is not dong one line; nay, every group of people promdes its own starting point from which it is to be invited to the doctrine of the Bitiniyya. If V t is one whom the propagandist sees inclining to ads of worship, he urges 284 him to devote himself to ascetic practices and good works. Then he inquires of him about the meaning of works and the underlying causes of the precepts, and he throws him into doubt with respect to them. Whomever he finds to be impudent and dissolute he tells: Religious acts are foolish and stupid, whereas intelligence manifests itself in the quest for pleasure. to him in the words of the poet$:
' An
He expresses his thoughts
allusion to Sura 16, verses 20, 21. 25, V. 44.
' Sura
" Reading
with Ms. 4 1 ; Ed. 4,. 21, v. 23. "he various methods of approach; including those to Jews and Christians are related much more fully in de S a q , Introd., 148 f f They probably draw from one source.
' Sum '
The foilawing couplet is from the pen of Salm al-Khkir (see his biography) Aghini, mi, i l o f f The anecdote about the line, which also involves his teaeher Bahshar b. Burd is related ib, 112-13 and op. fit, Ili, 49.
He who is mindfu! oi people dies
'Abd-ai-Kihir saps: We have made a reply to this singer in the following i;f
solicitude,
verses :
But the bold man acquires pleasure.
Do you entertain hopes of ei~teringthe Garden of Eden
When he sees one in a troubled :tate regarding his religion or regarding
While you are an enemy of Teim and of 'Adi?
after-life, reward or punishment, he speaks to him openly about discarding them,
Why, they have left you in a worse plight than ThamGd,
and urges him to enjoy the things which are forbidden, and comforts both him
They have left you more disgraced than a bastard son.
and himself with the words of the shameless poet:'' Shall I renounce the joys of the red wine Because of the meat and wine which they promise? Life, then death, then resurrection, Fictitious tales, 0 mother of 'Amr.
If it is one whom he identifies as a member of the Ghulit among the Rawifid, such as the Sabbibiyya or the Mughiriyya or the Man~ilriyya, or the Khat@biyya, he does not need' in that case to interpret the verses of the Kur'in or the traditions, because ail of them alike render them allegorically in harmony with their blunders. When he sees one of the Rawifid, either Zaidite* or imimite, disposed to challenge the traditious about the Companions, he makes his overtures to him by way of reviling the Campaxious, and elaborates on the hatred for the Banu Teim because Abu Bekr belonged to their tribe, and the hatred for the Banu 'Adi because 'Omar ibn al-Khat$b
was a member of their tribe. He exhorts
him to hate the Banu 'Umayya because 'Uthrnin and Mu'iwia came from them. Generally the Bilini of our age finds support in the words of isma51 ibn 'Abbid:" To be condemned to hell bpcause of affection for the rightIul heir 285
And because of preferring the family of the Prophet Is more attractive to me than the Garden of Eden
Verily, you will some future day roast in hell fire, Since the Friend of the Prophet1 regards you as an enemy. When the missionary discovers one who accepts Abu Bekr and 'Omar he eulogizes them in lhis presence and says: These two played a role in the interpretation of the Law. For this reason the Prophet sought Abu Bekr as his companion in the cave and later in Medina and communicated to him in the cave the true meauing of his law. When the person who is attached to Abu Bekr and 'Omar questions him regarding this above-mentioned interpretation, he engages him by covenants and bonds to keep secret whatever he reveals to him. Then he relates to him by degrees some of the explanations. If he agrees to them he reveals the remainder to him, but if he does not accept the first interpretation irom him, he u'ithholds the remainder and conceals it; but as a result of that the deceived one is thrown into doubt regarding the fundamentals of the Law. Those a m o ~ l gwhom the doctrine of the Bitiniyya makes progress fall into several divisions. First there is tile general public whose comprehension of the essentials of kno~vledgeand speculation is trifling2,like the Nabateans: or the Kurds,
or the descendants of the Magians. The second group includes the Shu'tibiyyab (Persian nationalists) who believe in the superiority of the Persians to the Arabs, s 1.
Where 1 would dwell eternally by recognizing Teim or 'Adi".
' ME. p-.18 See Additional Notes. ' De
Sacy, Introd., 148 if. 385-386 A. H. with the honorary title of al-Slhib. He war vizier to Mu'ayyid-alDawla Abu Man~irBvwaih ibn Rukn-a-Dawla, and, later, to his brother Fakhr-al-Dawla. He was of ShT'ite persuasion. Yakii, who gives a long account of him and quotes much O f his poetry (Irshad, 11, 273-343) does not cite our verses. See on his Shi'ite leanings, I. C., 328 if. ' The names Teim for Abu ~ e k and r 'Adi for Omar are terms of insult. Goldriher, Spottnarnen d . ersten Chnlifen bei den Schiaiten in WZKM, XV (1901) 326.
e. Abu Bekr, called al-Siddlk (the Friend).
' With
Ms. ;Li; Ed. s. On the rift between the Nahateans and Arabs see Goldzihei, Muh. St. 1, 156 if. " See Galdziher's masterly study of this gioup which he characierizes as "ein Kreis von SchriffStelleinund Gelehrten, nicht aber von unrufriedenem Volk und aufriihrischem P6bel" in Muh. St., 1, 147 ff. On their utilization bylhe Bi,iniyya see ib., 175. Cf. Streitschriff, Introd., 42, I. 9. The view was generally prevalent that a gap existed between the Arab and "on-Arab elements. See e. g. the account which makes the PXgimIds descendants of Jews as reported IA, ViII, 20. See also the convenation as cited from Baynn oI-Adyan in Biachet, 149. Cf.IH, in Shiftes 1, 35; 11, 16.
consists of the senseless among the Banu Rab?a owing to their jealousy of the
the law of Mudar will continue for a fixed limit of time. Its end is drawing nigh and after its termination the government wili come back to you. Then he expounds
A4udar because the Prophet came from them'. It is for this reason that 'Abdallah ibn Khizim al-SulamiP said in his inaugural sermon:' in KhurHio: The Rabi'a have always been embittered against God ever since He raised His Prophet from the Mudar. Because of the envy nurtured hy the Rab?a against the Mudar, the
to him the allegoricd interpretation of the fundamentals' of the Law of Islam step by step. If he accepts this from him, he becomes a godless person and a Khurrami2, finds works bnrdensome, and derives pleasure from allowing to himself the things which are forbidden. This is an exposition of the degree of Perception among them.
Banu Hanifa invested Musailimaqhe Liar, hoping that there would be a prophet
The stage of familiarization is closely relatedvto the stage consists in extolling to the utmost in the presence of the person trine to which he is attached4, and in asking him laters on about of that to whicl~ he adheres and instilling doubt into him about
and are eager for the restoratiqn of the kingdom to the Persians. The third group 28i
among the Banu Rabl'a as there had been among the Mudar. When the gullible Persian or the Rab?ite, envious of the Mudars, becomes more familiarized with the statementQf the Bitini: Your people have better title to the government than the Mudar, he inquires of him regarding the occasion when the poa-er will be restored to his people. When he asks him about it he answers him: Verily,
'
The Mudar and R a b h are both sub-divisions of the northern Arabs, known variouriy as
of perception. It that in his docthe interpretation the essentials of
his religion. When the novice asks him about that, he says: The knowledge of this rests with the Imam. 111 this way he attains the degree of instilling Doubth, when the initiate arrives at the conviction that what is aimed at by the apparent explanation (of the Kur'in) and the tradition is not their determined meaning in
NirBr, Ma'add or Adnsn, ail three of them ancestors. Besides the general enmity between these
the languaxe. As a result of that it becomes a light matter for him to transgress
iatter northern, or Kais, and the southem or Yemenite tribes (see Goidziher's article Der nmbischa Sfammwesen und der Islam in Muh. St., 1, 40 100 and particularly 78 If.),
the prohibitive laws and to relinquish xorks.
-
rivalry also existed between the two sub-divisions of the northern group which may well have had oilier causes than the iealousy over the Prophet's tribe. As O'Leary says about the "marked rivalry, onen leading to warfare, between the Rabi'a and Mudar" : "The rivalry of
' m.$6 L, for X 2 I ; Ed. ~ K j l . MS. is-; Ed. i?. Brockeimann's
' With
The degree of intoxication is with
emendation (''Hideous
infidel''), ib., is
obviously unnecessary.
:' With Ms. q.4;
the two may have been developed, if not actually started, by the jeaiousies bred by the spoil gained by the Muslim armies as they advanced into Asia': Arabia before Mohnmmed, 19. Indeed, in Basra we find the Rabl'a and the Azd (a southern tribe) making common cause against the Muwr. Wellhausen, Arabisches Reich, 248. * See ibn Hajais Biogr. of Persons who knew Mohammed, ii, No. 9010. He was
Pursued to win his confidence. Evening meetings are arranged in the house of a neophyte where a man with a good voice reads the Kui'sn, discourses and pleasing words are heard, condemnation of Present ruiers and uninformed scholars is pronounced and blessings promised
governor of Khur5sPn in 32 A. H. (it was gained dishonestly, i A 111, 106 and more iuliy 366-7.) and again 64-73, the second time as a rebel against the 'Omayyads. He was
to the few by the Prophet's Family. Ail this time the missianaly weeps wasionally, utters deep groans, aiiudes to divine secrets when he hears a verse of the Kur'h recited or a
killed in battle in 73, IA, Index, s. v. The statement reported here was not made in his
tradition reiated, which are revealed only to those whom God has chosen. Late in the night he stiii keeps awake praying, so that the owner of the house finds him in that state when
Khu!ba in KhurPsin, when he eagedy sought to iustify himself (FA, 111, 367). but at the time of his siege of the Rahi.a tribe In Herat in 64 A. H. LA, IV, 130. According to Tab. ili, 1242 these words were spoken by the Khalif a i - M d m b to account for his dislike of the Arabs (cited by Goidziher, 1. c. 149). a With MS. Ed.
+; +.
LA, 11, 261. In his defense see C z d i , Annali dell' Islam, 11. (Anno I t ) par. 168-9. Contra Ed. and Ms. +I, with Brockeimann, I. c., 286.
' With
Ms. J9.i Ed. J9..
' Ghaz8ii
Ed. ie>. in Streifsckrifi, Text No. 2 (Arabic part p. 4) describes in detail the way
he wakes. But as soan as he is discovered he din& away so as to create an impression of his eagerness to hide i t in this way he gains the person's confidence and amacts his attention to ail he says. According to 'iji, 350, Ule second stage comprises most of what our allfhor included under the first ' This part of the scntence is really the third degree as BaghdSdi goes right on to say. A full amount of the procedure f a r instilling doubt wili be found below 149 ff. Ed 291, ff. With MS. +; Ed.
a.
them the state of leaving the soul of the novice in suspense in its quest for the 287 true meaning of the fundamentals of $he law'. Now h e either accepts its interpretation from them in such wise as will induce him to discard it [the Law], or he remains in a state of doubt and confusion regarding it. The stage of falsification consists in telling the deceived one who is ignorant of the principles of deductive f n d inductive reasoning that the exterior meanings are chastisement and the hidden meanings are an act of grace? H e cites to him His words in the W i n : "Then separation would be brought aboutqbetween them, with n wall having a door in it.
The inside of it shall be mercy, and the outside of it, before it shall If the deceived one questions them regarding the meaning of
be chastisement5".
the "inside of the door", they say: God's Sunna abounds in cases of the conclusion of covenants and bonds with his apostles. Therefore He says: "And when we made a covenant with the prophets and with you and with N i h and ibrah;m and M i s a and 'Isa son of Mariam and we made with them a strong covenant"'. Slreitschrift, (Ted No. 4, p. 5) describes how the missionary is to persist in his refusai to reveal the secrets and in teiiing him that Gad's religion is too precious to be disclosed to any but the right people He even makes a pretense of sending him away. Our author becomes exceedingly vague and confused in the presentation of the foliowing degrees. He is quite alone in identifying rn6t with the fourth stage of suspense. Both Stieitsrhrift, 40-41 1
and 'iji 350, describe it as the oath-tzklng process and so does Baghdgdi several lines below although there it follows the sixth stage. Slreitschriff, Introd. 41, (Text No. 5. pp. 6-7), which sets forth this stage more wily charactedze? it as a procedure in which knowledge by the general public is denied, intellect and tradition and in particular the apparent meanings of the Kur'gn as criteria of knoaiedge are criticized. Penuasion is utilized that in adopting these views the novice will not be aione, and that the veiy finest people (some names of men who live far away are mentioned: cf. ~ e b r e wsaying tnlm p*nY 'pe5 mrw), entertain the same views. Cf. 'iji 350 iast line. ' The corred vocalization of the word is YP. Sure 89, V. 13. The ordinary meaning of this sentence is that the wail will separate between the righteous and the wrongdoers, the farmer finding grace inside the door within nearer reach of Paradise. See Baid. ad ioc. A good specimen of Bitinite interpretation of the Kur'Bn, believed by Guyard (315) to be part of a campiete commentary, will be found Guyard, 202-217 (trans. 302-318). ' Sura 33. V. 7, The same sentence is cited Bi 350, Streitschrift, Text M 4 , (p. 6) where the foilowing verses are dso quoted; de Sacy, Introd. 92-93.
They quote to him His words: "Do not break the oaths after making them fast and you have indeed made Allah a surety for yon1".
Once the beguiled one pledges
himself to them by means of strong oaths and by divorce and freeing of the slaves and by the dedication of his property to charity they bind him with them'. They expound to him that side of the interpretation of the external meanings which. they helieve, leads to abandoning them? If the fool accepts this from them h e joins the religion of the Zendiks secretly" and seeks shelter in Islam openly. But if the one engaged by oath shrinks from putting faith in the allegorization of the Zendik Bitiniyya he keeps it secret in accorda1,fe with the terms hecanse h e has sworn to them that he will hide whatever mysteries they reveal to him. If he is heedful they admioister an oath to him and strip6 him
of the religion of Islam and say to him at that time: Verily, the exoteric is like the husk and the esoteric like the kernel, and the kernel is better than the husk: 'Abd-al-Kihir says: One who had joined the mnvement of the Bitiniyya, but 288 whom God aided to regain His huth and guided him in loosening their bonds, related to me' that when they hound him by his pledges they said to him: Behold, those who are called prophets such as NG& lbrahim, Miisa, 'lsa and Muhammad and all those who claimed the spirit of prophecy were nornians and necromancers who aspired to chieftaillcy over the public, and they deceived them with iiicantations and enslaved them with their precepts? This narrator told me: Then the one who revealed this secret to me contradicted himself by declaring to me: It is importaet for you to know that Muhammad ibn 1sma':l
ibn Ja'far is he who
called M i s a son of 'Arnrin from the Bush and said to him: "Behold, I am your
' Sura 16, V. 93. ' a These are the fines for breaking the oath, see p. 147. The reading of Ed. &- ought perllaps to be emended to Je.. ' The mention of the oath in this particular place is unjustified. See above. " This may be !he stage of Ta'sis, also the definition which he gives above of TadiTs seems much more to accord with Ui's description of the seventh stage, 451, lines 1-2. From its Content this one appears to be the eighth. Cf Iji, ib. If this view shouid be accepted we ~houidnot find it necessary to combine Khai' and SalRh as BaghdBdi is campelied to. Reading with MS. b 4 ; Ed. Y b b . ' This is the iast stage of Salkh. This comparison is met with in all discussions of the BBfiniyya, e. g. Streitschrif, Ill, Sam'Bni, etc. Cf. REJ, L (1905), 34-5. ' Read 4 ; Ed. d. See above 133.
Lord, iake off your shoest". Then I said to him: May your eye be inflamed! You asked me to disbelieve in the Eternal Lord, Creator of the universe, urging me, nevertheless, to recognize the divinitg of a created human being; and you think that before his birth he was a gad who sent MGsa. Now, if MGsa, according to you, was a great deceiver?, then he whom you believe to have sent him is a worse liar. Then he said to me: May you never prosper, and he regretted having bared his secrets to me. I repented from their heresy.- This is an account of their technique wiih their followers. Concerning their oathss. -Their missionary says to the one who takes the oath: You have imposed upon yourself a covenant with Gad and an agreement with Him and a pledge to Him and to His apostles, and ahy or all covenants or agreements which God made with the prophets that you will conceal whatever you hear from me and whatever you know that concerns me or the Imam who is the master of your age or his pariisans and followers in this country and in the other coun289 tries or those who obey him, whether male or Female*. Do not reveal of this either nluch or little and do not bare anything which may lead to it, whether by writing or allusion, except what the Imam, master of the time, permits you or what the one to whom this permission was given3 in connection with his missionary activities allows you. You will then act in this matter to whatever limit he extendsVo you. You have now taken upon yourself the task of fulfilling your promise con-
' Sura 20, V. 12. W h d , the missionary meant of course is that it is the same incarnation as of the one whp called Moses. See Guyard, 193-95, and 275-77 and n. 1. @om the point of view of the later Isma'liiyya or Assassins). Ed. E.,l Reading with MS. i,; ' This oath is also repeated de Sacy, Introd. 138ff.. and Mak3zi. 1, 396-7. Substantiaily
the versions are similar, although the latter is more elaborate. "his extreme secrecy is held by fhem in common with the lkhwsn ai-Safa with whom they, are also closely related otherwise. Goldriher, Koranoasleyung, 191, n. 4. An iliustratian of it is afforded in the answer given by Abu-i-FawZzjs when the Khdjf ai-Mu'tadid inquired about the belief in the incarnation of God's spirit in man: iL- j l , B+. li U 41 V> il- 6 ) IA, VII, 354. Y U jj. Y) u. U &I =,>. According to iji, 349, (bans. JAOS, 11, [1849-501, 280), it is an official Arabic h,ifil. title of one of the missionaries whose function it was to act as negotiator with the candidates. Ed. j;>: MS. bib.
+.
cerning this, and charge yourself equally in states of good will or anger, desire or fear. Say', Amen. When he says Amen, he says to him: You further take upon yourself that you will proted me and those whom I will name. to you from whatever you will proted yourself by the covenant with God and your agreement with Him and your pledge to Him and to His apostles; and you will maintain a sincere relationship with them hoth openly and secretly. You will not act treacherously towards the Imam o r his patranizers or the members of his mission with respect to their lives or their property. You mill not apply to these oaths any casuistry 3 nor adhere to anything which will make them mvalid. If you should do anything of this you are severed from God and His apostles and His angels and from all the Scriptures which God has revealed. Further, if you should transgress anything of what we imposed upon you, then you owe it to God to make a hundred pilgrimages2 to His house on foot, regarding it as an obligatory vow. Everything which you possess during the period when you are in this state shall be Forfeited as charity to the beggars and needy. Any slave who is in your possession on the day when you have transgressed or thereafter shall be set free. Any wife of yours at present or on the day of your trespass or one whom you should marry aftenvards shall be divorced from you by a triple divorce: God is an adequate witness to your intention and your hidden beliefs about what you have sworn to. When he says Amen, he says to him: God is an 290 adequate witness between us and between you. When the vidim takes these vows he thinks that he cannot violate them, but the dupe does not know at all that from their standpoint their vow is neither valid nor inviolable. For they see no sin in making it or breaking it, nor blasphemy, nor shame, nor punishment in the world to come. How can an oath by God or by his Scriptures or by his messengers possess sacredness for them when
' With
MS. 3 ; Ed. JG .
MakrTzi, ib.; de Sacy, Introd. 145, and Sfreitsehriff, Introd., 41, read thirty.
' Sachau,
Muhammedanidzes Rechf, 13 (5 37) and 66-8.
The divorce is of the
i y p e where the man pronounces the required formula three times or actually divorces her three t i e s . it means that he cannot re-marry her unless she was in the meantime married to
Someone else, and fulfilled certain other requirements.
I47
they do not confess in an eternal God; nay, they do not' acknowledge the creation of the world and do not accept a boolr revealed from heaven or 9apostle to whom a revelatiou was made from heaven? Or haw can the oath of the Muslims have a sacred character for them ,when it is a tenet of their religion that the merciful,
disclose the secret of an lmim but that of an infidel and a Zendik. It has been transmitted in a well-authenticated tradition: speak of the infidel in so far as it will caution people. This is a description of their wiles with those who are ignorant of the faith.
compassionate God is merely their chief in whose behalf they make propaganda? Those among them who incline to the religion of the Magians maintain that God is Light and against Him stands Satan whom He overcame and dismissed from His kingdom. Furthermore, how can the votive pilgrimage or prescribed visit to Mecca possess aiiy meaning for them, when they ascribe no impoiiance to the Ka'ba and ridicule the person who makes a pilgrimage or pays the visit? Finally, what sanc-
misleading them to believe the opposite of their obvious meaning. Often they question about the physical world, creating the impression that profound learning
tity can a divorce-act have for them when they consider relations with every woman lawful without the marriage contract? This is a clear account of the law of
is involved therein which no one but their chief can comprehend Some of the queries put forth to the duped one by their f i i s s i o n q are as follows': Why is
oaths which obtains among them. As regards the law of oaths which is in force among the iMuslims, we teach: Every oath which the swearer takes initially by his own dictates is in accordance with his own intention'. Every oath taken by him in the presence of a Kidi or a Sultan who orders him to take it is to be considered. If it is an oath following a claim made by a plaintiff against him who denies it, in ~rhichthe plaintiff is acting unjustly towards the defendant, then the oath of a swearer is in accordance with his own intention3. But if the plaintiff is right and the repudiator acts 291
the public. His wives are not divorced, his slaves not set free and a compulsory act of charity does not become obligatory upon him. The chief of the Bitiniyya is not considered an Imam by the Muslims. Whoever, therefore, reveals his secret does not
wrongly towards the claimant, then the oath of the former is interpreted in ac-' cordance with the meaning of the judge or the sultan who administered it to him4. The oath-taker thereby becomes perlidious with respect to his oath. Since these premises are true, he who investigates the dogmas of the Bitiniyya is absolved of his oath in view of the fact that his purpose is to expose their heresy or he desires to do them harm; his vow is, therefore, at his own discretion. If he makes exception in his heart for the will of God then his vow is not binding upon him and he does not break it by revealing the secrets of the Bitiniyya to Supplying Y from MS., missing in Ed. i. e. he has the right to make some mental reservation. See Sachau, 731, 1. 5-6. i. e. if he swears the truth he may in this case also make a mental reservation. Ib., 1. 12-30.
Ib., 730, last line ff.
I48
Concerning their method of beguiling the simpletons by instilling doubt. It is achieved by way of asking them questions about the precepts of the Law,
man endowed with two ears and one tongue? why does man possess one penis and two testicles? Why are the nerves connected with the brain and the veins with the liver and the arteries with the heart? Why is man distinguished by growth of hair on both his upper and lower eyelids while the other animals have hair growing on their upper eyelids but not the lower? Why are the breasts of the human on his chest and those of other beasts on their bellies? Why does not the horse
have nodous lumps or paunches or ankle-bones? What is the difference between living beings which lay eggs and do not bear and between those 'which bear and do not lay eggs? How can one distinguish between fish from the river and fish from the sea? They ask many similar questions and make believe that the knowledge thereof rests with their chief. Among their questions on the Kur'in is the query regarding the meanil~gs of the letters at the beginnings of the Snras, as when He says: Al.Lf-Iamminz2 or R~-ha-mirn,~ or Ta-sin,& or Ya-sin,
or Ta-ha, "1
Kaf-haya-'ain-sad, r7
' Some of these questions may be found in de Sacy, I n t r o d , 74 ff. Many of those recorded there are not reported by our author. ' Suras 2, 3, 29, 30, 31. 32 and some others with additional letters. sums 40--45. Sura 27 and with final mlm, 26 and 28. Sum 36. ' Sura 20. " Sum 19.
' '
292
Generally they ask: What is the meaning of every single letter in the alphabet? Why does the alphabet consist of twenty nine letters? Why are some of them provided with points and others are wanting in points? Why is the joining of some of them with the following letter allowed? Usually they say to the beguiled ones: What is the meaning of God's word: "And above them eight shall bear on that day the throne of your Lord"?' Why did God make the gates of Paradise eight and the gates of Hell seven? U'hat is the meaning of His saying: Over it are nineteen2? What is the advantage of this number? Often they inquire about verses between which they allege discrepacies, maintaining that no one knows their explanation save their chief. For example, He says: "So on that day Yet he declares in another neither man nor jinni shall be asked about his sin 293 place: "So by your Lord we shall certainly question them all*." Other questions bear on the precepts, as for example: Why does the morning prayer consist of two rak'as, the mid-day prayer of four and the evening prayer of three? Why does every raic'a consist of one bow and two kneelings? Why is an ablution of water required for four limbs and of sand for two?? Why is washing required aiter a semenal discharge, although it is clean in the case of most Muslims, whereas no washing is required after urinating despite its uncleanliness in the case of
everyone" Why does a menstruating woman make good a-hatever fast-days she missed but does not make up whatever prayers she missed l? Why is the pu-
-
nishment for stealing amputation of the hand, for adultery - flaying? Why is not the penis cut off with which he committed the act of adultery in the same way as the hand is cut off with which he stole while committing theft? When the deceived one hears these questions from them and turns to them for their
' Sura 69, 17. Thls question finds its echo in Srific literamre. See ibn 'Arabi's Futnhit, 1, 191 (cited by Asin, ibn Masarra, 71). Ibn Harm also takes up this verse admitdng frankiy his failure to grasp Its meaning, although he deiiniteiy believes in it, and again lays down the following principle so frequently reiterated by him o ~ l 9 . PI 41, r 39 $1 d 9 &$I, &I GIJ! &I3 J g l IL 4 JL L J+ ss& +?,! 2+ka Aid .,I.?, at*. PI P, e p U i 38 (E6. j ul. IH, iL 125-6. Sara 74, V. 30. * Sura 55, v. 39. ' Sura 15, v. 92. a Juynboll, 73-4. 1 6 , 72, note 2. Ib., 80.
e,
...
e. ...+
elucidation they tell him: The knowledge of it rests with our Imim' and with the one u-ho was authorized to reveal our secrets. When it is established as a certainty in the mind of the duped one that their Imam or the one authorized by him are the individuals who know the explanations, he is convinced that what is meant by the external interpretation of the Kur'in and the Sunna is not the exoteric explanation. With this trickery they make him relinquish the fulfillment of the precepts of the Laa. Once he gets habituated to the relinquishment of aorship, and allows himself the forbidden things, they lift the veil for him and say to him: If we had an eternal God, free from want of anything, He would have no profit from the bowing and kneeling of mankind, nor from the ceremony of circumambulating a house of s t o n e , h o r from running between two mountains. When he accepts this from them, he is stripped by that time of a belief in the unity of his Lord and becomes a renegade and a Zendik. 'Abd-al-Kihir says: The retort to them in answer to the questions which 294 they propose with the aim of instilling doubt into the hearts of the ignorant regardjog the fundnmenfal dogmas of religion can be made from two angles. In the first place, it can be said to them: You cannot escape one of two conclusions. Either you admit the creation of the world and confirm to it a Maker eternal, knowing, wise, with the power to impose on mankind whatever charge He pleases in any way He wishes, or you deny this, and profess the eternity of the world and the denial of the Maker. Now, if yon believe in the eternity of the world and the non-existence of its Maker, wherefore you do not confess in a God who made anything obligatory or prohibited it, created it or fashioned it, there is no sense in your asking Why did God ordain this, or why did He prohibit that; why did He create this, and why did He create that after ihat pattern? Therefore, the discussion between us and you becomes like the discussion between us and the Materialisis about the problem of the creation of the universe. But if you aver the origination-in-lime of the universe and the unity of its Maker and you admit His power to demand whatever obedience He chooses in the form of worship, then this capacity of His i s an answer to you
' This attitude is called Ta'ilm and has given the sect the name Ta'ilmiyya. See Streitsckrift, Introd., 5 ff. ' This and the following rites are ceremonies connected with the pitgrimage.
when you ask: why did He ordain this and why did He forbid that? For you recognize His capacity to do this, once you believe in Him and in the possibility of His demanding obedience from people1. Similarly their queries about the sensible properties lose their value if they aifirm the existence of a Maker Who caused them to be. But if they deny a Maker then there is no point to their questioii: Why did God create this? seeing that they deny that it had an eternal Creator. The second way of replying to them and to their inquiries about riddles of creation is to say to them: In what way are the chiefs of the Bitiniyya specially giited with a knowledge of causes, wheu the doctors aud pllilosopheis have dis295 cussed them in their books? Aristotle composed a work on the natures of animals,
yet the philosophers have related nothing of this branch of knowledge which is not stolen from the Arab scholars who lived before the period of the wise men2, suck as the K*t$niyy% the Jarhamip~ia, the Tasrniyya, and the other Hin'yarite tribes. In their poems and.proverbs the Arabs discuss t h e various traits of the animals. Yet in their time no Bitini lived, nor any Bitini leader. Haiuever, Aristotle took the distinction between breeding animals and those that lay eggs from the Arabs who state in their proverbs: Every animal with slit ears3 is a breeder and those hard of hearing lay eggs. For this reason the bat4 among the birds is a breeder and does not lay eggs, because it has long ears. All those which are hard of hearing lay eggs, like the serpent and lizard and the egg-laying birds. Abu 'Ubaida Ma'mar ibu al-Muthanna3 and 'Abd-d-Malik ibn Kuraib al-
' This standpoint is fully in consonance wiih the theoiogicai views of the Ash'arites to which our author adheres almost blindiy. See the discussion below on orthodox Islam. This is a typical medieval claim. See ibn Kutaiba, 'Uyan al-Akhbir (ed. Brockeimann) 474, 1. 12-14. A1 hma'i's definition in Harrier, AbhnndLnnpen r. aiab. Lezikogiaphie, establishes the meaning beyond doubt: .US 4 j ; Y I & ji ;-i 21 <.%I, (135). The same statement occurs Usul, 29, but there the reading is 6; (lmg ears). Ai-Kazwini's Nuzhaf ul-Qulub (trans. Stephenson). 2, tells us that "those whose e a n project from their heads bting foflh their young and those whose ears d o not project lay eggs." This definition agrees with ' U y i n . ' See ' U y i n , 477-8. "om 107 A. H. in Basra of Jewish parents, died 210. H e was a KhBtijite and Shu'ibite. See Bro:kelmann, Gesch. d. arab. Lit., 1, 103-4; iKhail, ill, 388 if where numerous works on animals are credited to him. On his erudition see Goidriher, Muh. St., 1, 194-6.
Asma'i
'
relate that during the Age of Ignorance the Arabs taught on the basis
of their experience'
that all animals have lashes on their upper eyelids but
t on the lower, whereas the human has lashes growing on both the upper and the lower lidsA. They say: All animals will swim when thrown into water, except men, monkeys, and sluggish horses; these will drown, but man can acquire the art of srimming4. They tell that if a man's head should be chapped off and he thrown into the water, he will rise to an upright position in the water? They say further: All birds h w e their palms on their feet, but the palms of the human and the monkey are on their hands. All quadrupeds have their joints in their forelegs " (lit hands), but the joints of men are in the legs. They 296 say further: Horses lack nodous lumps, goitres, spleens, and udders, and the male ostrich has no brain' Seabirds and seaiish possess neither tongues nor brains,Qut the fish of the river possess tongues and brains. They state that all fish are devoid of lungs9 and consequentlyLo do not breathe. The Arabs taught as a result of their experiences that sheep produce once a gear1' and
' Born 122 A. H. died 216. Like Abu 'Ubaida he also was a pupil of Abu 'Amr ibn ai-'Aia. He was a pure Arab and wrote numerous worlts. See Bioekelmann, I. c., 104; IKhall, Ii, i 2 i if; Goidziher, Ablinndlongen r. nrab. Philologie, 11, 136 and Moh. Sf. U, 402; Damiii, 11, 295-6. MS. and M. read but marginal reading is Uju which can he allowed to
'
+,+,
stand or may be corrected to a word which is used further on. 'Uyiulm, 456, 1. 17-20. This sentence occurs verbatim, ib. lines 9-11, IO., iines ll-12.
+,
V b . , 457, 1. 18-19. He adds j <> j j l b g,, which is the same as our U->3 6. ' This Sentence seems to be part of a statement by Abu-'Ubaida and Abu-Zaid that "the h o n e has no spleen, the camel has no gail-bladder, and the osttich has no gain". Damlri, ii, 176. On, the same page, top tine, it is remarked that the sayings about the horse and the camel are proverbs for their speed and lack of boldness, respectively. i6., part of the above statement.
ib. Reading S.? . with Ms; Ed. D r . The following passage an sheep and goats is found ib. 491. 1. 19-492, also Damlti, ii, 155. 'O
"
1. 2. See
produce one, not two; but goats gestate twice a year and may produce one or two or tiuee ; yet quantity, prosperity and blessing are greater among the sheep than they are among the goats'. They said: When sheep graze on grass or green wheat they will grow again, but what the goat eats will not grow back because the sheep nibble it with their teeth and tlie goats root it out'. They declared: When the goat gestates, her milk passes down to her udders in the early part of her gestation, but the sheep do not secrete milk until the time of bringing forth4 They taught that the cries of males of all species are louder than the sounds of females except in ihe case of the goats, the voices of their females being louder than those of the males'. Among the proverbs of the Arabs an the subject of animals is their statemente: Every ox is flat-nosed and every donkey harelipped; and all mouths with molars in them are distended" They said by experience that a lion will not eat anything sour and rill not approach fire nor will it come near vinegar'. They declared that a bitch's period of bearing her young is sixty days, and that if she should bring forth in less than that they will not be able to survive8. They stated that the female of the dog begins to menstruate at seven months 297 and that her menskuation occurs every seven days; the symptoms of her mensSee Nuzhot, 7. The goat was generally spoken of disparagingly among the Arabs. See e. g. 'Uyjn,461, and at greater length, Dam%, ib.
truating are that her vulva1 is inflamed They said that the dog does not acquire any of his teeth save the molars 9 They remarked regarding the wolf that he sleeps with one eye and keeps vigil with the other. In view of this, Humaid ibn Thaur versified regarding him: He sleeps with one of the apples of his eye, but bewares Of death with the other, for he is a wakeful sleepers. The hare sleeps with both eyes open'. They said there is no animal with its tongue invertedi except the elephant Nor is there among the quadrupeds any with his breasts on his chest 6, except the elephant ?. They taught that the female elephant produces her young once in seven years,the sheass once a year; the cow resembles woman in this respect. They said that the peniss of the hare and the fox is a bone -. They said, every twolegged creature stands on orle leg and limps when one of the two is broken, but not the ostrich, for he, when one of his legs is broken, roosts in his place For this reason the poet sang regarding himself and his brother: For I and he are like the legs of the ostrich With regard to what we share with the rich and the poorlO, meaning by it that neither of them has any more than his fellow. They said of but that she selects the female osirich that she lays from thirty to forty egps, -
' Reading
bring forth soon because they begin to secrete milk in their udders at the time of
with Brokelmann; Ed. ir,wl. See 'Ujrrin, ib, i. 5-6. Ms. ,+I. The reading adopted here is eWl. foilowiog 'Uyin,26. 1. 8. " 'Uyiz,469, 1. 5, reads Crbwith the same meaning: Ed. and Ms. Damiri's reading is: , + s*YI i s+\ A.1, 312. ' I b , 470, 1. 6 ; Nuzhat, 11; 'Aji'ib, 11, 182; nCDamfri, I, 19. ' U Y 469, ~ 1. 10; Nzzhaf, 23, trans. crooked; Damlri, ii, 188. 'Uvin,469, 1. 13, reads .~4.3 This . guided me in the choice of the pronoun his. "Uyin, 16, adds: ~ L I Y I .
bringing forth)." According to
(5
Ib., 492, lines 15-16. Ib., 462, 1. 17-18.
He quotes the following vene in this conneclion sjdl zr,
2; 39 btd! u , , ji, j i i , which Lane, s. u, ji> and % ;> respectively translates: "The shegoats have secreted milk in their udders, but wait thou, wait thou (for the bringing forth, for they show signs but do not bring forth until after some time). The ewes have secreted prepare ihou the (for they will milk in their udders: therefore, prepare thou the $,I:
'Uyin)463,
1. 2, it is the female oi the ox which forms the exception
' Ed.
St.
'
' Arabic
Reading
$9
with Ms; Ed. $ 4. same information except for the last, where he reads
' Uyin gives the
(every beast of burden is ulcerous). I b , 465, iines 12-13; see also 'Aji'ib, ii, 183, 184. Ib., 467, iines 3-5.
'
6; g
4.which al-&ma7
4 . K.
defines as fouows: 4 al-Fark, ed. Mullet, SBWA, UW[III, 242.
'uyin,470,
me.
to this
b9l
#I;
P'
X,
i. 5-6.
Damiri. more speeinca~iy:+I
;,+
:,,,3l,
&I p 4
8
,
/X ~+IIIL3. ,rii~ 4,
A;, 1, 18. 'Uyin,471, 1. 14 reads 3,& 6s. The whole-passage about the legs cones-
iYI>
"
+ Y+
1
Ponds almost verbatim with ib., lines 11-14. Even the variant in line 12: aPpearJ to be related to our phrase +I YI E p ) . May it not be +I See also Damiri, s, 296, and 'Aj>ib, 11, 248.
.> CLl; & + l r j 2
+ &IS-,?
thirty of them and broods over them1 in a straight line like a stretched thread2 Often she abandons her eggs and sits on the eggs of another".
This is why Ibn
Like to her who leaves her eggs in the refuse And covers the eggs of another with her wings". They said that chicks and chickens are made from the white of the eggs, and that the yolk nourishes themz. They said that the sand-grouse lays only single eggs. Concerning the black eagie they told that it lays three eggs and hatches two, throwing one away. But the bird known as tlie Bone-breaker" hatches it.
For this reason the saying goes: More pious than the Bone-breaker.
They said
that the lizard lays seventy eggs, but s h e eats whatever hatch from the eggs Because of this t h e saying is curexcept those who speedily flee from her'. rent: More undutiful than a lizards.
A lizard does not approach water; that is
why t h e proverb says: More watered than a lizard!
' 'Uvin, 473, iines
Thcy said of the
serpent that it has two tongues2 and that its tongue is black, differing in color from the skin. All serpents hate the odor of rue and violet, but they are infatuated
Harama sang of her:
288
wo penises and the female lizard has two vaginas in front'.
They stated that a lizard has
5-6, relates that she broods aver fo* but hatches only thirty. Epif. The other sources (.Uyin, 478; Damiri 11, 105: Aji'ib, N. 234; Narkat, 78-9) relate that she throws away not her third egg but her third chick, because, Dam% adds (although an p. 273 he cites several other reasons), she finds it difficult to feed three, but the hone-breaker (Kisir-ai-'Ithim) raises it. Of the bird the authorities have little to say. 'Aji'ib mereiy mentions it; Damiri, who discusses it under idUCLl (the charged one), has nothing more to tell than to identify it as the bird which t&es care of the eagle's third chick " Damiti, ii, 65; A j 2 i b , 11, 280. 'Uyin, 460, 1. 9, where the same explanation is glven for the saying: Damiri, ib. ( 2 4 )k, and 66, toward the bottom, verbatim. is given with iidf(frog) 'Uynn, 461, 1. 6; DaDamiri, 11, 64. The saying j. #,,I mid, 11, 301, reads ijIcll 3 + I . Both authorities quote for the ilrard the proverb j. EL! + I t (more deceiving), 'Uyin, ib. 1. 7; Damiri 11, 66.
with the scent of the apple, the pumpkin and cucumber, the mustard seed, milk and wine.'.
Of the frogs they related that they do not croak unless they hold
water in their mouths1 and they will not croak in the Tigris at all, hut they do croak in the Euphrates and ihe other rivers".
The poet has sung of the frog: It takes into its mouth whatever it sucks, So that it croaks, hut the croakin!:
makes it perish:
meaning that its croaking calls to it the attention of the snake s o that h e catches it and devours it.
They said tnat the frog has no bones'. Regarding the dungbeetle they related that when it is buried amid flowers it becomes a s motionless as though dead, but when it is brought back to the dung it m o v e s t Now this and whatever else is correct of the properiies of living beings and others were known to the Arabs in the Age of Ignorance through their observations, without recourse to the leaden of the Biiiniyya, for they knew them a long, long time before the existence ol the Beiniyya. In this manner we have exposed the lie of the Biiiniyya in claiming that their heads are distinguished by a knowledge of the mysteries and peculiarities of things. We have accounted for their exclusion from all sects of Islam to a sufficient demee.
Praised be Allah for it.
' 'Uyin, 472, 1. 17. ' 1)amiti. 1, 238, battam, explains that
its tongue is split so that some think it is doubled.
'' 'Uynrr, 481, 1. 10-11. Brockeimann, ( M o d e Orientni, XIX, 1825, p. 195, is doubtless tight in Preferring Ed.% reading Clkllto ,&Y"in his edition of 'Uyun. However, his explanation of ,$I as a diftography for is unnecessary. The existence of the word in the language, even if its meaning is doubthi, cannot be challenged. Furthermore, a marginal gloss in the MS. explains it by ,L; (MS. & ,; )I &.,;I (cucumbers or watermelons!. The snakes' alfection for milk is also cited, Damiri, 11, 840. ' 'Uyrm, 481. iines 11-18. According to Damiri the frog wili croak if its lower jaw is in the water, but if any water should come into its mouth it wili utter no sounds, 11, 70. ' None of the other authorities records this peculiarity. "Uyin. 481. Correct &. there to read like our tent (Broekelmann, Monde OrienfaL, ib.). Damiti, 1, 70, cites these verses from 'Abd-ai-Kihir. Can he be possibly referring to our author? His mention of a specific snake comes perhaps from same other work of Baghdidi. ' Damiri, ib. '(iyrm, 482, iines 10-12; Damlri, 1, 170; Nurhat, 40.
2s8
SECTION FIVE.
AN ENQUIRY INTO THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAVING SECT AND PROOF OF ITS SALVATION AND ITS ATTRACTIVE FEATURES. This section comprises a number of chapters, with the following titles: 1. An Enquiry into the Groups composing the People of Tradition and Consensus.
300
2.
An Enquiry into the Proof of Salvation for the People of Tradition and Consensus.
3.
The Fundamental Dogmas on whlch the People of Tradition and Consensus are agreed.
4. The Doctrine of the People of Tradiiion on the Pious Ancestry of the Nation. 5.
God's Preservation of the People of Tradition from accusing one another of unbelief
6.
The Excellences of the People of Tradition, the branches of their Sciences and a list of their Leaders.
7.
The continued chain of Tradition of the People of Tradition in matters of Religion and Lie, and a statement of their glories in both fields.
These are the chapters of this section. We shall give an account in every one of them of all that is required, with the help of God.
CHAPTER ONE.
Know, may God plorper you, that the orthodox community comprises eight division . One class possesses a thorough knowledge of the problems of Unity, Prophecy, Dogmas of Promises an.1 Warnings, Reward and Retribution and the necesssry pre-requisites for (jtiJra,l', the lrnimate, and the exercise of Authority. In this theological subject-matter they tread the paths of the Sifitiyya among the MutakallimsZ who declare themselves free from anthropomorphism as well as irom divesting God of His attributes, and from the heresies of the Rawifid, the Khawirij, the Jahmiyya, the Najjiriyya, and the other sects of erring fancies. The second class consists of the chief j~lristsof both systems: those who apply the method of analogy and those who adhere to tracttion: people who accept the principles ol faith in accordance with the doctrines of the Sifatiyya on God and His eternal aitributes and steer clear of the Kadarite views and of Mu'tazilism. 301 They affirm God's visioni with an orcan of sight without falling into the error of 3'ashbilr (anthropomorphism) or of Ta'tll divesti in^.) They acknowledge the resurrection from R e grave, affirming at the same time their belief in the examination in the grave? and recognize in addition the truth of the Pool (of the Apostle), the Bridge, Intercession, and forgiveness of sins which are not of polytheistic
' Ijtihid is the right to make decisions which are to be followed by the community. Those who have this right are called Afrrjfnhids. See Macdonald's article, EI, 11, 448-9. Our author doubtless refers lo the school founded by al-Ash'ari. However it is i n u a d to employ the name Sifstitiyya as a synonym far Ash'ariyya, since it comprises other groups. Shahr., for example, aiso discusses the Mvshabbiha and KarrHmiyya under the SifZtiyya. pp. 95-127. ' The school of Abu Hanifa is an example of the first type; that of MHIik illustrate st^ the second. Al-Ash'ari.~credo is succinctly slated in his Ibina, 7-13. ' For the following beliefs regarding the fvhlre llfe see below, 209.
character.
They h o p e for t h e eternal bliss of Paradise t o its inhabitaots and
eternal tortures of hell t o unbelievers. 'Omar, 'Uthmai~ a n d 'Ali; nation.
They recognize t h e Imamate of A b u Beitr,
doctrines of t h e Silitiyya with respect t o the rational fundamentals, a n d d o not adulterate their l a v with any o f t h e heresies o f t h e people of erring fancies.
a n d they venerate highly t h e pinus ancestry of t h e
They realize t h e necessity of congregating for prayer oil Fridays u:ider
t h e leadership o f Imams who cut themselves loose from t h e people of erring
T h e third division is made u p of those who possess a comprehensive knowledge of t h e methods of the HadTth a n d S u n n a which are traced t o t h e Prophet, and call disceru t h e s o u n d from t h e faulty in them. They recognize t h e reasons for discrediting certain tradilions a n d for pronouncing others trustworthy, a n d
fancies. They realize t h e urgency of extracting t h e precepts o f t h e law iron, the Kur'in, Tradition and consensus of opinion a m o n g t h e Companions. They ccede
they d o not associate with their knowledge of this science any o f t h e heresies
t o t h e lawfulness of rubbing t h e dust off t h e .lootgear', a n d t h e incutnhency of
of t h e people of erring fancies. T h e fourth division consists ,of
divorce in three sentences.
They choose t o forbid marriage hy trial'.
They u r g e
obedience t o t h e Sultans in whatever does no! il~volvesinfulness. In this g r o u p are included the adherents of Milik, al-Shifi'i, al-Auzi'ii,
people who a r e 302
extremely well-versed in almost e v e ~ y t h i n g pertaining t o rhetoric, grammar a n d inflection.
They follow the course of t h e outstanding personslities in philology, Sibawaihiq al-Far$$
ai-
such a s al-Khala',
A b u 'Amr ibn al-'Ali"
Thauri" A b u HanTfa: ibn A b u Laila', t h e adherents of Abu Thaur", the followers
al-Asmati" ,-?-Ma&
5
o i Ahmad ibn Hanbal, t h e Zihirites a n d t h e other jurists who adhere t o t h e
the Kuiite School and t h e Basrian School, who d o not mix their pursuit of thjs
' A piactic? in place of the foalwash before prayer, allowed by the Sunnite; under certain circumstances. in consonance with the importance it receiver a i a cardinal point of dif:'erence between orthodoxy and heterodoxy, Strothmann has made it the subject of a characteiiratian of ~ k k f i l ibetween j the Sunnites and Shl'ites, more particularly Zaidites. See Kr~itnsd. Zuiditen, 21-46, esp. 21-26 and 44-46. See also V o r i ~ s n n ~ e 368-70 n, (note 147). The Shl'ite Naubalthti calls this practice of the Sunnites one of the Ahborn Abi Rekr wn-'Unmr, 12.
' AI-KhalT1 b. Abmad, fotlnder of the study of Arabic meter. Lived in Basra 100-175 Fluegel, Srholen, 37-38, 42; IKhal, I, 493ff.; Brockelmann, i. 100. ' One of the seven readers of the Kui'Pn, and founder of the school of phi lo lo^ at Basra. Fluegel, 32-34; iKi~ali,11, 39Qff.; Brockelmann, 1, 99. ' The foremost grammarian of Arabic, though himself a Persian. 'Amr b. 'UihmHn b. Kanbar died 180 a.H. and was cailed ;Mi rLI. Fluegel, 43-45; IKhall, 11, 396-98; Brockelmann. 1, 100-02. Abu Zakariya Yahya b. Ziy3d b. 'Abdaiiah b. Mansir al-Dailami (d. 20'1). a pupil of al-KisTi of the Kiific School. He was one of the mast famous philologists and some one even expressed the opinion that "without al-Fan? there would be no Arabic." Fluegel, 129-36; Sam'Bni, f. 420a; Brockelmann 1, 116. ' Al-Akhfash is the name of several noted grammarians. Our author may either have had them all in mind or he referred to ai-Akhfash nL-Akbar whose name is 'Abd-al-Hamid b. 'Abd-al-blajjd Abu-I-Khallib, a native of Hajar who died in 177. He collected dialectical erpressions among the Arabs. Fluegel, 61; IKhall, 11, 244; Nujim, 1, 485; E l , 1, s. u. See above, 153, note 1. ' Jahm b. Kbalai, a contemporary of al-Asma'i' He was well-versed in rare expressions and in poetry; he also wrote works on insects and reptiles. Fluegei, 50. Abu 'Ubald ai-Kisim b. Sallim al-Harawi was born In H e e t about 150 and died in Mecca or Medlna about 227. He studied under al-i\sma'i; lived in KhuiisZn and Tarsus; wrote a long dictionary and Other works. Finegel, 85-6; iKhall 11, 486-89; Brockelmann, 1. 106-7; EI, 1, 112.
' See
Ed., 314 (below, 175).
'Abd-ai-RabmPn b. 'Amr b. Yuhmid, one of the earliest jurists of isiPm (88-157 A.H.). He was lmHm in Syria and lived in Beirut. His code prevailed until it was replaced by the MHliIdte. Nawiwi, 382-4; EI, s.v Aurri'i; Sam'Pni, f. 5%. SuWn b. Sa'id b. Masrfih, a very famous Milhadditk of Kfifa (79-161 A.H.). Acc. to Goidziher, Muh. Sf., 11, 12, he was mare proficient in the me:hanicai memoiization Of the Hadlth than in the knowledge of its application in daily life. Yet see, in answer to Goldziher, IKhall., I, 577. Nawawi, 386 ff. sings his praises abundantly. He hid from the Khaiif ai-Mahdi (IKhall., ib.), Fikrist, 225. lvluhammad b. 'Abd-al-Rapman of Kfifa (74-148 A.H.). He is said to have been under sbained relations with Abu Hanlfa (LKhaii., 11, 584-5) whose predecessor he was in applying the method of Ra'i (Fikrkt, 203).
' ibiahim b. KhHiid XI-~albi,a disciple oi Sh~fi'i'i (converted to him after having been a Hanlfite) with whom he nevertheless disagreed on many matters and developed his own Madhhab which held sway in Azerbaijin and Armenia. He died 246 A.H. Fihrist, 211; IKhall., 1, 6.
al-Akhfashj,
A b u 'Ubaid8, a n d t h e other scholars in philology, hoth of
aH.
'
stiidy with any of the innovations of the Kadariyya. the Rankfid and the Khawirij. Ally o m of t l ~ e nwho ~ inclines towards any of the errinp fancies canuot be regarded ortl~odnx atid his teaching carries no weight
iil
matters of language
The fifth divisio~, c o ~ ~ s i s lufs those n:lo have gathered extensive hnorledge about the variant readings in the Kur'kn and the manner of expounding and verses of the Kur'in in accordance 'with the dogmas of the
ortl~odox,and not with the interpretations of the people ol erring fancies. The sixtli group is made up of the Sufi ascetics who indulge in study and abstain iron, pleasure, are r~ell-iniorcned and deliberate in reasoning, resigned to fate and content mith the obtainable. They know that the organs of hearing and seeing and the heart are all to be called to account for even the weight of a grain of sand. They make the most careful preparations for the world to come. Their discourses in the iields of ililerpretation and guidance pursue the course of the
T ~a - ~tioiltsts +' . and not of those who adopt a mocking attitude to tradition; they do not plilcti~cgoud for appearance's sake nor do they abandon it ior shame. In their religious philosophy they proclaim the Unity of God and divest Him of anthropomorphism; their way of life is that of committing tlieir care to 303 God, elitrusting theinselves to Him, submitting to His co.nmand, feeling satisfied
with
error are practised. We understand by this group of the general population only the public which attaches itself to that which is approved by the arkhodox learned men in relation to the problems of Justice and Unity, Reward and Punish-
and grammar.
iilterpretii~g ti=
papulatian of the provinces among whom the rites of the people of fantasy and
hat ever has been bestowed upon them and abstaining from any rebellious-
ness against Him. "That is the grace of Allah; fie gives it to whom He pleases, and Allah is the Lord of mighty praise"'. The seventh division consists of people who defend the Muslim frontiers against the iniidrls, fight the enemies of the Muslims and protect the illuslims. They repel them from their sacred precincts and their homes and observe the law of Onhodox lslail? at the front. It is they concerning whom God has revealed His Word: "And as for those who strive hard for Us, We will most certainly guide them in Our ways"'. excellence and benevolence.
May God increase their reward in His
The eighth is made up of the general population
of the cities among whom the practices of the orthodox prevail; but not the Sura 57, v. 21.
Sura 29, v. 69.
ment; who regard tnem as guide-posts in their faith and make them examples in the derived laws, in matters of the allowed and the forbidden. They do not attach themselves to any of the innovations of the people of erring fancies. They are the ones whom the Sijil call the padding of Paradise. These are the divisions of Orthodox Islam. Those included in them are adherents of the true religion and the straight path. May God make them endure with the permanent Word in the life of this world and in the future life. Verily in favorable response He is competent, and of it He is capable.
CHAPTER TWO.
AN ENQUIRY INTO THE PROOF OF SALVATION FOR THE PEOPLE OF
on account of his traditions in the name of the Prophet that he is prosperous who was destined to be prosperous while in his mother's womb, and he is unhappy for whom unhappiness was decreed in his mother's womb', and his tradition regapding the cleaving of the moon: This is his attitude only because he denies the miracles of the Prophet. He inveighed against the rulings of 'Omar because he inflicted eighty stripes for wine drinking3 and banished N-r ibn al-Hajjij to toss when he feared the disturbance' of the women of al-Medna because of hims. 305
TRADITION AND CONSENSUS.. We have already related in the first section of this book' that when the Prophet spoke of the schisms among his people to t'le number of seventy-three sects, and declared that one of these would be saved, he was asked regarding this sect and its characteristics. In reply to this, he pointed to those who followed his path and the path of his Companions. We cannot find in our day among the sects of the nation any which is in agreement with the Companions other than the Orthodox among the jurists of the nation and the Siiitite Mutakallims; not the Rawifid, nor the Kadariyya, uor the Khawirij, nor the Jahmiyya, nor the Najjiriyya, nor the Mushabbiha, nor the Ghulit, nor the HulCliyya As for the Kadariyya, how can they be said to be in agreement with the Companions when their outstanding man al-Nazzim attacked most of the Companions and denied the uprightness of ibn Mas'ud" He imputed error to him
'
at ail, and one af those in which he figures is not finally dependent an him but on 'Abdallah ib., 341-2. The same may he said of the traditions reported in Muslim V,
b. 'AbbHs. See also
356 (Nawswi's defence of the truthfulness of the tradition, ib., is vety interesting. Cf also Streitschrift, 65. for Ghadii's defence in approximately the same vein. Andrae, 107, Mukhtatif nl-Hadzth, 31). In Tirmidhi the tradition is reported without ibn Mas'ild at all, 11, 28. He however, adds: p- 3- +r ILL, ,A= >.I e, Jb. ".I 3 -411 J, & Sirniiarls. a variety of sources exists for the tradition about the decree. It is reported ultimately on the authority af AnHs b. Miiik (8ukh iV, 251, and APmad b. Hanbai, 111, 116). of tludhaiia (ib., 1V. 6 ; he, too, was attacked by al-N-Hm, Mukhtnlif a!-HndFth, 27). of Jibir b. 'A&
.-
daiiah (A. b. H, 111, 397), and of othen (Tirmidhi, 11, 20). On 'AbdaUah's caution in repalting Hadlths see Goldriher, ZDMG, LXi, (1907). 860.
' This
.-
tradition is reported in a different venion in the name of ibn Mas'Ed in Muslim,
k, ~ i+I3. w jb: J p 2 @I. The idea of the saying is supported by V. 271: the tradition unber Kadar in BakhHri, IV, 251; Muslim V, 2BW Cf. Ibano, 86. For other sources see above note. "or al-N-Pm's attack on ibn Mas'ild see Ed. 134 (reading Aba should be corrected
Ed. 4-5 (Seelye, 21-2). The error which gave rise to this tradition has been pointed out by Ooidzihei in Revve de l'Histoire des Reli,@ons, XXVI, 129-37, and in his study Beitriip z . Literaturpschichfe d. Schi'a unt. d Sirnnitischen Polentik in SBWA, It is interesting, in connection with this LXXVIII, (1874) 445. See also Seeiye, Introd.. 2-3.
to bna), Seetye, 155. (Her reading is lo 1.e corrected as well and her references are irrelevant since they do not concern our taditionists.) For his denial of the splitting of the moon, see MakrTzt, 11, 346 and Shahr. 40, and isf. f. 318. - Al-Nauim's objection to the two traditions .. is no surprise. His Kadarism could not endure either the dishirbsnee of the order of the world
tradition and The use made of it by our author, to cite its Mu'taziiite version as it is alleged to
Predicated by the tradition about the moan, nor the determinism implicit in the other. See Mnkhtalif nl-Hadzth, 25-6. %ec Kitab nl-Umm, Vi, 130-31; Mrzkhtalif a1 Hadith, 195-6. With MS. W ; Ed. 6 .
,.,
have been told by Suiym ai-Thauri in the name of Jibir b. 'Abdallah; jil, & ,k 8 1 $1 rk*+I a 1 bra), b..\ %> \Ju3 -&l +\ $1 ?1! \&, +L-Y Jk
+ 6
<.-
I
;
&
+
&
&
I
. 9
,
.
Arnold, Al-Mutaziln, 2-3.
'Abdallah b. Mas'ild is one of the most outstanding naditionists and one of Mubarnmad's most intimate friends. See his biography in ibn Hajar's Biogr. of Persons Who Knew Mohammed, 11, 890-893 (+9302). Bsghdidi's statement that in not crediting ibn Mas'ild aiN a f f h is guilty of denying the Prophet's miraeies is not clear to me. In BukhPri, 111, 26, the tradition of the cleaving of the moon has several sanndo in which ibn Mss'ild does not figure
'
It is related in ibn Sa'd, 111, 1, 204-5 and IKhali, 1, 359, that 'Omar was annoyed with the t a d that this handsome N q r was "celebrated by young females in the privacy of tbeir a~artments" and, deciding to send him away irom the city where he lived, he banished him to Basra. Shahr. ib., also mentions this incident. None of the major historians report it. ibn Hajar in bin biography of Nasr's father, al-Hajjij,b.
'Ili!,
(1, 642). promises us a biography of
sacred cities. He also assailed the ruling on the slave-mothers of childreo, made
as convincing proof. He thought it possible for the community to agree on an error'. Now, !how can he he considered to walk in the path of the Companions
by 'All, who said: "Verily my opinion is that they may be sold." Al-Nazzim .. demanded: Who is he to pronounce judgments based on his ouzn opinion?'.
and to imitate their ways who believes it a duty to contr~dictall of them, since his opinion is ihe converse af theirs?
He reprehended 'Uthmin because of his is to be divided equally into three parts the sister. He charged Abu Huraira traditions contradict the dogmas of the by way of Ijtihid issued by any one of
T'neir iounder Wisil ibn 'A@ questioned the integrity of 'Ali and his two sons, of ibn 'Abbis, a! Talha, of al-Zubair, of '&ha aud of all niembcrs of
But this can be explained on his part simply by the lack of zeal for the
this only for two reasons:
edict regarding al-KharkY2 that property among the grandfather, the mother and with falsification8 because many of his Kadariyya. He condemned the rolings the Companions. He said that they did
either because they did not know that they were not
permitted to do it, or because they wished to be chiefs and leaders of madhahih" which are ascribed to them. He characterized the traditionsGf the Companions as the result of ignorance or hypocrisy. In his opinion, any one who is ignorant of the precepts of the law is a non-believer, and he who believes contrariwise with no convincing proof is a hypocritical infidel or a wicked transgressor. He thus deemed eternal hell inevitable for the chief Companions; he himself belongs there more rightfully. He
@na' among the Companions, not considering it6
iurther rejected the validity of
the son but be seems to have fatied to keep his promise. See a fuller account of Nagr in Subki, Tnbakit, 1, 147-9. Cf. Caefani, Annnii delrlslam, Anno 23, 5 313-14, esp. note. ' In Ed. 134 (Seeiye 154-5; the passage is mistransiated) he challenges 'Ali's right to base judgements on his opinion in connection with the question of a cow that killed a donkey this is borne out by Mnkhtaiif ai-Hadlth, 25; on the question under discussion here 'Ali is said to have changed his mind, ib, 195. Ouz passage refers to the ease of a mother of a child born of concubinage-the term is Umm-Walad-and whether she can be sold after the death of her child's father. See Juynboii, 206, 236, and Sachau, 127, 168-75, where the law is t h d she cannot be sold. in defence of 'Ali's ruling cf. Mnkhfnlif al-Kndftk, 199-200. i have not been able to identify the name. For the ruling see Sachau, 248, and 252 sqq. Abu Huratra, one of the most intimate Campanions of the Prophet, is credited with more traditions than any one eise. On the ease with which he manufactured traditions see
ZDMG, L (l896), 4878. and W (1907), 860. See also Zehiriteg 78-9, unfer d, C h a l i f e ~trans. S. Khuda Bukhsh, 56 note. 'i. e. rites followed by sections of the community. W i t h MS. "eading
.a :
>i;l;
Ed
..
with MS; Ed.
3..
and Kremer, Orient
either party who participated in the Battle ol the Camel'.
Because of this he
declared: If 'Aii or Talha were to testify before me about a bundle of vegetab:es, 306 I would not pronounce judgment on the basis of their testinrony; for I know that one of them is a sinner but do not ktiow exactly who it is. According to his principle it is likely ihat 'Ali and his followers are sinners, condemned to eternal hell. It is equally possible that the other party known as the Party of the Camel is tortured in hell eternally. He doubted the rectitude of 'Ali, Talha and al-Zubair despite the Prophet's promise of Paradise to the three of them%d despite their joining the oath called B?st 81-Ridwin' and their inclusion within the entire group concerning whom God declared: "Certainly Allah was well pleased with the believers when t ey swore the oath of allegiance to you under the tree":. 'Amr ibn 'Ubaid6 agreed with the views of W i ~ i l on the tn.0 paties at the Battle of the Camel and even exceeded him by being convinced of the sinfulness of each of the two parties. For Wisil was ~ertainthat one of the parties sinned; he would not pronounce judgment on the basis of testimony giveu by two men one of whom was of 'Ali's party and the other of tile ?arty of the Came!, but he would accept the testimony of two men who were both members
' Ed. 129 (Seelye 149) hfi~klitalifo i - ~ n d z t h 21-2. , did not hold this view; al-Khans! attributes it to al-J$i?.
Acc to i~ztirdr,51, ai-Nau8m ..
n"
the Orthodox attitude to the participanb in this battie, see below. Timidhi, 11. 314; TayHitsi, 1236. The pledge of mutual loyalty by Muhammad's men taken under the tree at al-uudaibiyya, at which time a truce was arranged with the Kuraish (6 a.H.) see BukhBri, 111, (trans.
'
111, 144). The name Ynwm aGRidw& comes from the beginning word of the Kuranic verse quoted immediately in the text "sra 48, 7. 18. "ee on him Ed. 10i-2 (Seelye, 123-5).
of 'Ali's party or of two men who were both members of the party of the Camel. But 'Amr ibn 'Ubaid declared: I will not accept the testimony of any of them no matter whether they be all of one party or whether some of them are of 'Ali's group while others are of the Camel group. He maintained that both parties alike were transgressors. According to his premise, it necessarily follows that 'Ali and his two sons, ibn 'Abbis, 'Ammir, Abu Ayyib al-An~ki, Khuzaima ibn Thibit' al-Ansari whose testimony the Prophet ranked as highly as that of two 307 upright men, and the remaining associates of 'Ali, as well as Talha, al-Zubair, 'Aisha, and the other members of the Camel, with thousands of Companions in their midst, are all sinners doomed to eternal hell. There were aith 'Ali twentyfive heroes of the Battle of Badr and most of the participants in the Battle of Uhud, six hundred Ansin and a number of the first Fugitives. Abu-l-Hudhail and al-Jihif and most of the yadariyya were of the same opinion in this matter as Wisil ibn 'A@. But how can anyone be said to follow the foolsteps of ihe Compa~?ionswhen be declares most of them to be sinners and regards them as people condemned to hell? How can he who does not regard their testimony valid accept traditions transmitted by them? But whosoever rejects their traditions and rejects their testimony ceases to walk in their path and to follow them. Only he imitates them who acts in accordance with their traditions and accepts their testimony in the manner of the People of Tmdition and Consensus. The Khawirij also declare 'Ali and his sons, as well as ibn 'Abbas and Abu Ayyub al-Ansiri to be infidels. They also brand 'Uthmin, 'A'isha, Talha and al-Zubair as unbelievers, and everyone who did not secede from 'Ali and Mu'iwiya after the arbitrationz. They call any sinner in the community an infidel. But he who believes in branding most of the Companions as infidels cannot be on the right path trodden by them. As for the Ghulit among the Rawifid, such as the Sabbzbiyya, the Ba+niyya, the MugGriyya, the Man~iriyya, the Janihiyya, the Khattibipga and the
' See ibn Hajar, Biography, 1, 875-7, ness is related (876). 3 e e below 213-5.
where the same tradition abavt his trustwarthi-
other HulGliyya, we have already demonstrated their exclusion from Islam, and we have also proved that they are in the ranks of idal-worshippers or among the ranks of the Christian Huliliyya But neither the idol-worshippers nor Christians nor other ildidels can point to a pattern or model among the Companions. 308 Concerning the Zaidiyya. -The J s d i y y a among them declare Abu Bekr, 'Umar, 'Uthmin and most of the Companions to be infidels. He who declares most of them to be unbelievers cannot copy them. The Sulaiminiyya and the Butriyya' condemn 'Uthmin as an infidel or else they maintain a neutral attitude regarding him but condemn his defenders as sinners and brand most of the members of the Camel as heretics. As for the ImHmiyya, most of them adhere to the view that the Companions, with the exception of 'Ali, his two sons, and about thirteen others, apostasized alter the decease of the Prophet The Kimiliyya believe that 'Ali also became an apostate ai:d a heretic by refraining from making war upon them2. How can he be on the right path of the Companions who assats that they are infidels? Therefore we say: how can the RawZd or the KhaGrij or the yadariyya or the Jahmiyya or the Najjiriyya or the Bakriyya or the Dkiriyya be in concord with the Companions? All alike they do not accept as authentic anything which has come down by tradition on the authority of the Companions regarding the precepts of the law. For they refrain from accepting traditions of the ~ a d i t h and the Lives of the Prophet and the heroic deeds on account of their branding as infidels the authors of the Hadhh, who are the transmitters of the reports and the Atiii~.-traditions~,avd the narrators of the Histories and Lives; and on account of their condemning tile jurists of the community who have preserved the traditions of the Companions and have obtained by analogg the derivative institutions of the law from the opinions of the Companions. There has not arisen, by God's grace and favor, a leading jurist, or a leading traditionist, or an outstanding 309 rhetorician and grammarian, or a person aedible in transmitting deeds of heroism or Lives of the Prophet or histories, nor was there an lmHn for warning and exhorting, nor an authority in interpretation and exegesis of the &?in among
' With MS ; Ed
%,+It.
' Ed.,
60).
39 (Seelye
' See below.
the Khawirij, the Rawifid, the Jahmiyya, tlie Wadariyya, the Corporealists or the other people of erring fancies. But the leaders in these sciences, whether specialized or general, have all been from the Crthoaor group. Since the people of erring fancies reject the traditions which have collie down on the authority of the Companions with respect to their precepts and their lives, i~nitationof their ways is not possible inasmuch as they do u ~ regard t thein as witnesses, nor do they accept the traditions of those who trace them to the Companions. It becomes clear from this that those who emulate the Companions are those who act in accordance with what has been proved true by authentic traditions regarding their precepts and their lives. This is the tradition of the Orthodox and not of the Hypocrites'. By the truth which we h a v e established it is correct to confirm their salvation in accordance with the ruling of the Prophet regarding the salvation of those who imitate his Companions. Praised be Allah for it. MS., I
.
Literally a two-headed axe.
OrientaL, XIX [1925], 198) is not warranted.
Brockeimann's emendation &I
(iWo,ide
CHAPTER THREE.
AN EXPOSITION OF THE FUNDAMENTAL DOGMAS UPON WHICH THE ORTHODOX ARE IN MUTUAL AGREEMENT. The generality of Orthodox Muslims are agreed about certain principles of the essentials of religion, and a knowledge of the essence of every one of these. is binding on every understanding, mature person. Every essential consists of branches and they in turn comprise propositions about which there is a consensus of opinion among the Orthodox They accuse of error everyone who contradicts them regarding this. The first essential which they regard as one of the funda- 310 mentals of the faith is the confirmation of the realities and of knowledge, particularly and generally'. The second essential is knowledge concerning the creation of the universe including its parts, both accidents and bodies. The third is a cognizance of the Maker of the universe and His essential attributes. The fourth is to know His eternal attributes: the fifth is to know His names and qualities. The sixth essential is the knowledge of His justice and wisdom. The seventh is the knowledge of His messengers and Prophets. The eighth concerns itself with the knowledge of the miracles of the Prophets and the wonders of the Saints. The ninth is knowledge of the bases of lslamic law on which the community is agreed. The tenth is knowledge of the laws of bidding and forbidding and charging. The eleventh [is knowledge of the inevitable end of every being and his status in the future world. The twelfth] is knowledge concertring the Caliphate and the Imamate and the requirements for leadership. The thirteenth consists. of the principles of Faith and Islam in general. The fourteenth' is knowledge of the 1 i. e. whether they apply in general or to a particular instance On the distinction, esp. in its bearing on Fikh, see Zahiriten, 120-2. The passage enclosed in brackefs is missing in both Ed. and MS. but is inserted here
'
from the heading of the section in the text. See below.
171
status of saints and the grades of the pious lmims. The fifteenth is knowledge of the laws bearing on the enemies among the nan-believers and the people of erring fancies'. As for these principles, the Orthodox are agreed about their hasic character and they accuse of error anyone who contradicts them. Every essential involves fundamental propositions and derived propositions. They agree on their fundamentals but generally differ regardiiig some of their derived principles to an extent which does not compel mutual accusations of erring or sinning. Concerning the first essential: the conFirmation of realities and knowledge.Agreement prevails about recognizing knowledge a s inherent ideas in the learned, 311 and they believe those to be in error who deny the reality of knowledge and the other properties. They braad the Sophistsz as ignorant because they deny knowledge and the reality of all things, and regard them as opposing that which has long been incontrovertibly known. The same is true of the Sophists who maintain a skeptical view about the existence of realities, or of those who assert that the reality of things is based on belief, and who call all beliefs acceptable despite their mutual inconsistency and their incompatibleness? These three groups are all heretics for rejecting the incontrovertible, rational axioms. The Orthodox declare that the kinds of knowledge possessed by men and those possessed by other living beings are three; intuitive, perceptive, and inductive4. I
The same list wiii be found in
Fil, 1-2.
Our entire chapter is a concise digest
of the other work of the author, whose anificial character has already been painted out by Jo9ef Schacht in the OiZ, XXXll (1939), 506. In U?il, 6-7, BaghdSdi gives s hilier, though substantially similar derciiption of the three types of Sophists and also refutes their respective positiann. The sophistry to which he himself falls a victim is best illustrated in the following argument which seems to have been a stock-argument with the Muslim scholars, (it is employed by IH, 1, 8, and by Muriada; see Honen, Probleme, 48): They should be asked: Has the denial of realities a reality? If
they should answer yes, they aiflrm one reality.
But if they should say no, they can be toid:
Since the denial of realities has no reality therefore their denial is not admissible and the aifimiative is true. ( U s i t , 6.) "They are forced to admit that the world is pre-existent and created because some people believe in its creation and others in its e t e r n i y , ib., 7. ' UsGI, 8-9. These three sovrces are also enumerated by the Jewish Philosophers
BQya b. Pakma in his Farijid-ai-Krrlib (ed. Yahuda) 79, (Heb. trans., ed. Zifroni, 48). and Sa'adia In Eminotk We-dihk O(usaiot ed.), 43, f t Cf. Creencia, 5m.
They declare: He who disacknowledges intuitive knowledge or perceptive k n m ledge acquired through the five senses is an Oppositionist; he who denies speculative knowledge established by deductive or inductive proof is to be more closely observed. If he is one of the Sumaniyya' who reject speculative reasoning in rational knowledge, then he is a godless infidel. His status is like the status of tne Naterialists since he, like them, professes the eternity of the world and denies the existence of the Maker, while he goes beyond them in his demand for the abrogation of all religions. If he is of those who credit speculative reasoning in matters intellectual but reject analogy in the derived institutions of the law like the Zihiriyya': he is not an infidel as a result of his rejection of analogy in legal matters. They believe that the senses with which the phenomena are perceived are fives: vision, for perceiving visible sensations4; hearing, for perceiving audible 312 sensations; taste, for feeling tastes; smell, for detecting odors; and touch, for sensing hot and cold, wet and dry, soft and hard. They say that the perceptions coming from these senses are inherent in the organs which are chled senses. They accus: Abu Hishim ibn al-Jubbai of error because of his contention that the act of perceiving is neither an idea nor an accident nor anything else but the thing perceived5. They teach that indirect information which is handed down without interruption serves as a necessary recognition of the truth of what has been transmitted uninterruptedly, if that information is of the kind which can be attested or perceived either with the senses or axiomatically. Such, for example, is the convietion of the real existence of any country which one who obtains the knowledge6 by I
See above 91 note I; Us& 10-11. Ooldziher points out clearly in his work Zakiriten that that school is distind only in
its legalistic views (4pi) and not in its theological dogmas (&< p i ) ,131-3. may be added that ibn H z m is one notable enception in this respect.
It
UsGI, 9-10.
' Vision,
and not hearing, as the philosophers think, is the most excellent sense of all the five ucc. to the Mutakaliims, ib. 10. "d., 'I
183 (Seelye 204).
With MS. *jji
Ed.
yUI.
information has never visited, such knowledge having been transmitted unbroken; or our knowledge of the existence of prophets and kings arho lived before us. As for the veracity of the claims of prophets regarding prophecy it. is known to us by logical arguments. They declare as infidels those of the Sumaniyya who deny the admissibility of acquiring knowledge by way of unbroken traditions. They say: The reports which oblige us to act in accordance with them are of three kinds': a report transmitted without interruption (Tatvatu~),information reported by a few (Ahad), and the mean between these two -news whictf spreads (Mmtu@). A report transmitted without interruption, which it would he absurd to agree to manufacture, necessarily obliges us to recognize the truth of its contents. By this sort of communication we learn about the countries which we have not visited; by it we become acquainted with the kings and prophets and generations that existed before out time. By it a man knows his pareints to whom he is linked Information transmitted by a few, provided its Isnad is 313 trustworthy and its contents do not seem absurd to the mind, compels action in
accordance with it hut not acceptance of itz. It has the same standingd as the testimony of honest witqesses before the judge, in that it compels him outwardly to decide in accordance with it although he may not know their credibility with respect to the testimony.. By this kind of information the jurists have established most ofs the derived precepts of the law bearing on works and deeds and the other classes of the allowed and the forbidden. They accuse d error anyone who repudiates the duty of acting in accordance with that type of information as a whole, such as the Rawsfid, Khawirij and the other people of fancies. News which circulates, the mean between Tuu.atur and Ahad, shares a characteristic in common with Tawatur in that it imposes both recognition and action in accordance with it, but is distinguished from Tawatur in that knowledge resulting from it is acquired logical knowledge, whereas knowledge based on Tuu>~tu?. is necessary, not acquired. This source of information falls into several classes: one, the accounts of prophets about themselves and the account [about them] told by a person of whose trustworthiness the Prophet has told us; the recognia
U!isul, 12-14. This distinction is commonly accepted as orthodox. See Islim, 111 (1912), 230-33.
a
MS. adds 3 , which Ed. has omitted.
1
tion of its truth' is acquired. Another is the report which is spread by one person. When he relates it in the presence of a group of people who cannot be believed to have agreed on a lie, and dehands from them acceptance of that which he related in their presence, then if no one contradicts him we recognize his veracity regarding i t Through tliis type of report we learn of the miracles of the Prophet, such as .the cleaving of the moon, his making pebbles utter praises in his hand', the longing of the tree for him when he departed from ita, his filling many people with little foodi and similarly other miracles of his. But the Kur'in, whose composition is in the nature of a miracle [does not fall in this category]; for the confirmation of the yuirn and its revelation to him, and the 314 failure of Arabs and heathens to emulate it5, are known by Tawituv which obliges men to necessary knowledge. To this division belong the traditions current among the lmsms of the Had& and the Fikh about the tmth of which they are of unanimous opinion as, for example, the traditions about Intercession, the Reckoning, the Pool, the Bridge, the Balance, the Tortures in th'e Grave, and the Questioning by the two angels in the Grwe. Similarly the traditions which circulate among many doctors of the law, such as the fixing5 of a minimum wealth from which alms-giving is required and the traditions bearing on it: the punish-
' With MS.
6- ; Ed. 4 4 . This tradition does not appear in any of the colleetians examined by Wensinck, so that it is of a later date. It is cited in the Shigte biography of Mubarnmad, H>yot-ul-~zlirb, 161. It is also cited U s i ( , 182, with the additional comment: -;Jt & , Qf this tradition na mkntion is made by Wensinck. Nawhwi. 42, mentions &I and 4 1 r?j Cf. also iH, V, 3. There are ma* versions of this tradition. Fa* reference see Wensinck, s. v. Muhammad, 166 b. and 167 a. The stories agreeing most closely with the wording in ourtad will be found
+
Bukhiri, 111. 95, 493, 508 (trans. 111, 124, 656, 675). lei, see i1 Kings iV, 42-44.
Cf. Andrae, 46-1.
For a biblical pami-
q e e below 204; Andrae, 94ff.
' The
reading nr5ub is aitested by the MS.. and it is not necessaw to change it to
nPi6 as Brockeimann suggests.
' The words in the text Id'>GI,are difficult to interpret. Biockeimann's suggestion (ib. 199) that we read , . d l ,&I, "Zwang zum Verricht auf die Taiio" seems too fsr-fetched. Goidziher's emendsflon h;L;Ij is the one adopted here.
and
The Orthodox are agreed that God imposed upon mankind the duty of
others among the traditions which the jurists have agreed to credit and to a d in accordance with the contents thereof. They have accused of error any of the
knowing Him, and enjoined them regarding it and that He bade them know His
ment for wine-drinking, the tradition about rubbing the foot-gear, stoning:
people of erring fancies who conkadict them:
Messenger and His Book and perform whatever the Book and Tradition guide
the KhawGj for their denial of
them to do. They declare as iniidels any of the Kadariyya or the Rawifid who 315 maintain that no one was charged by God with the duty of knowing Him, as
stoning; those among the Najadit who deny the punishment for wine-drinking; I
those who deny the rubbing of the foot-gear. They accuse of heresy anyone who denies God's visibility, the Pool, Intercession, and t h e Tortures of the Grave.
By
the same token, they ascribe error to the Khawirij who cut off ?he hand%f
the
5
thief for petty and grand larceny, regardless of whether the stolen goods were well guarded or unguarded articless, because4 they rej:ct
Thumirna', al-Jihiz:
and a group of thc Rawifid believe. They agree that as regards any acquired speculative knowledge, it is possible for God to turn us
into possessors of a necessary knowledge of the fact known. They declare as KHfirs any of the Mu'tazila who maintain that our knowledge of God in the Future World will be acquired and not necessary. They agree that the sources of the precepts of. the Law are the y u i i n , the Sunna and consensus of opinion
the trustworthy tradi-
tions regarding the establishment of a minimum value and of protection, for punishment by amputation. Just as they declare anyone to be mistaken who
among the Ancients?
rejects the correct traditions, so they accuse of error anyone who persists in
that the Kur'in and Sunna possess no validity at the present time, owing to their
lending credence to a tradional precept about whose disavowal the jurists of the two schools of an20gy and tradition are unanimous. Thus they ascribe error to the Rawifid for maintaining the M*t'aj,
whose permissibility has been annulled
charge that the Companions altered pirts of the K u i i n and mistranscribed others*. I
<
' it
is one of the punishments for adultery, see below. ' T h e word .u. is missing in MS. a Acc. to the Orthodm law the stolen object must comply with the following two requirements before the thiers hand is to be cut off. it must have a minimum value and must have been stolen from a weii-guarded storage-place. Ses Sachau, 810-11, 825-31, and Arabic, 26. ' With MS. pJ;Ed. PrX. "ut'a refers to two practices both of which have been abolished by the Sunnites, while the Shilites adhere to them. One is concerned with the Pilgrimage; in that case Mufa means the utilization of the 'Umra for the vojj. 'Umra is a pious visit which a Muslim can make to Mecca during any part of the year. The Hajj or Pilgrimage is preferably to be made in the month of Dhu-I-Hijja and entails many more observances and prescdptions. Utiiiition (Ar. Tamnttn') is defined by Snouck Hurgranje in Het Mekkaonsehe Fest (Verspreide Geschriften, 1, 57) as foiiows: in that case (i. e. utilization), aithough intending to perform the Ha;, the I h r i m is taken on befare an 'Umra which is accomplished during the Hajj-months The person afiewards remains in Mecca, enjoys the same freedom as the Meccan inhabitants, and takes on the I+rinr again on the first Hajj-day (the 8th of Dhu-l-Hijya). Although traditions agree in reporting that Muhammad himself utilized this arrangement and ailawed others to do so, 'Omar neveltheiess forbade it. See ib. 57ff. See aiso Wensinck's article in El, Il, s. v. Hndjdj, esp. 456b; Juynboil,
They call a heretic anyone of the Raw%d who believes
They declare as infidels the Khawirij, who reject all the traditions which the transmitters have handed down, because they contend that those who transmitted.
.
them are infidels. They declare al-N-m . a Kiiir because he denies the validity of consensus and of unbroken tradition, and because of his opinion that it is possible for the community to agree on an error, and that it is possible that the members of a Tato~tzclctradition have agreed to establish a falsehood. This is an exposition of the theses of thesfirst essential on which the Orthodox are agreed
I
6
!
i
146-8. For the Shi'ites the Mut'a is not oniy allowed but even prescribed. Hiili in his Makhtalnf, 90, Lap, says: G Jsl ; , ; ,j . 3 @ I . He aiso quotes a hadition which states: =I (40 miles) .I, Jli ;rK ; ,4, . i i 4 yj h + I . Cf. Strothmann, K ~ N I Id. S laiditen, 69-70. The other case of MuI'o is in marriage where a man takes a woman for a specified period, and the union is autamaticaily dissolved when the period is over. This practice was aiso abrogated by 'Omar. Vorlesungen: 228-9. 1 Ed., 157 (Seelye, 1773. ' He teaches that ail knowledge "is an activity in which man hG no choice"., Ed., 160, (Seelye, 181). Therefore he aiso argues that oniy those who have God's knowledge as a necessary part of their nature will believe in Him while the othen are not required to do so. Usil, 11-20. in that work, h i y i s is also included as a source. " Cf. Koranausl8gung, 27Osqq.
+
f a h element which is not susceptible of becoming and perishing'. They accuse of error all the Dualists who assert: Verily, bodies are of two kinds, light and darkness. The source of all good is the light and the source of all evil is the dark. The Maker of the good and the true cannot make the evil and the false; nor can the Author of the evil and false produce the good and trues. We ques-
Regarding the second essential, which is the propositioll relating to the creation of the Universe, it has been agreed that by Universe we mean everything which is not God t. Everything which is other than God and His eternal attributes is created and made; but its Maker is neither created nor made, nor is He of the species of the Universe or of the species of any part in the Universe. They 316 are also agreed that the component parts of the Universe fall into two divisions:
substances and accidents: contrary to the teachings of those who deny accidents4 They agree that every substance consists of an indivisible atom, and declare alNazzbm .. and the philosophers to be infidels because they teach the divisibility of every atom into parts ad infinitum4. This would force us to conclude that its pads are not limited in God's knowledge. But this conclusion involves a rejection of His Word: "and He records the number of all things"?. They declare themselves for a firm belief in the existence of angels, jinns and devils as part of the various kinds of living beings in the Universe" They condemn as infidels the philosophers or Bitiniyya' who disavow them. They teach the homogeneity of substances and bodiesS and explain: Verily their differences in form, color, and odor are due only to the diversity of the accidents which exist in them. They
!
We, however, do not establish light and darkness as two primary Makers. For we say: Verily both of them are created and are not agents. The Orthodox are unanimous regarding the diversity of accidents, and they declare al-N&im an infidel for his view that all accidents are of one type4 all, .. t
in fact, being motion. This would compel him to admit that belief is in one class with non-belief, knowledge with ignorance, and speech with silence, and
*,
that deeds of the Prophet are of the same species as the actions of the accursed devil. It behooves him, in consequence 01 this principle, not to be angry with anyone who curses or reviles him, because the word of him who says: May God curse al-Nazzim, is in his opinion in the same class with the wish: May God be gracious fo him 5. They agree that the accidents are brought into existence in the bodies, and condemn as infidels the Materialists who believe that they are concealed in the
accuse of error all those whe say that bodies differ because of the differences in their elements? Similarly they ascribe error to those philosophers who profess that there are five elements, maintaining, as Aristotle did, that the heaven is a 1
U?;I,33; Creencin, 59.
Maimonldes, Guirie, palt i, Ch. 73, prop. Viii, (Munk, 1, 398). Li+, 35-7. ~ m o n gthose who deny the existence of accidents it lists Abu ~ e *I-k ~ Asamm and the Materialists. it aiso qffers the Kalamistic proofs for their existence. ' Ed., 123-4 (Seelye, 144-5); U+l, 36 with a logical refutation of a i - N ~ a m ' stheory; Ash'ad, 314-8. "ma 72, v. 28. ' Acc. to Usd,38 ththe reare two classes of living beings, one which we perceive in our present life and another which we may see in the future wofd. Besides the three mentioned "ee a
<
the view of the $?dl
,*I,
bodies &d that anyone of them appears only when its opposite becomes concealed Shahr., 318. See Us& 53-4 where he subdivides the Dualists into three groups: Manicheans, Daiganites, and Marcionites. Cf. Shahr. 188-96, where, in addition to the three listed by Us;/, he discusses the MazdaMyya (see above 87, note 2,3); IH, 1, 35-6 (Asin, L r , 130-1) enumerates the three as in U$i. 1
i
here he counts the "black-eyed maidens" (Sura 55, v. 72). " Ed., 280 (above 135). For the various views on this problem see U s d , 52-4. The proof of the Orthodox aiso RBzl, 5 top; Ash'ari 308. See point of view will be found 54.
' This is
tioned them3 regarding the status of a person who says: I am evil and darkness. Who is the one who makes this statement? If they say he is light, then he told a lie; and if they say he is darkness, then he told the truth. In this we find the destruction of their thesis that light does not tell a lie nor does darkness 317 tell the truth, which is a necessary conclusion for them in view of their principle.
The following qkestion is ascribed to al-Nazrlm in his discusslan with the Manicheans,
Inti?&, 30.
' Ed.. 121-2, (Seelye, 143); for a list of the elTom inherent In this view ' This refutation is repeated almost verbatim Ed., ib., and U+l, 48.
Usid,53.
see Usil, 48.
5
179
in its subject'. They all share the opinion that every property is created in a bearer and that the property does not exist independently2. They declare as infidels the MuSazila of Basra who believe in the creation of the Will of God not in a hearer, far be.it from Him'! And those who believe in the creation of the act-of-extinction of bodies independently of its subject. They declare Abu Hudhail a Kifir because of his teaching that God's saying to a thing, Be! is an accident created not in the subject4 They consent commonly that bodies are not devoid, and never were devoid, of the accidents which follow one another in them5. They declare as Kifirs the upholders of the Hylic hypothesis who maintain that 318 the hylic matter existed primordially stripped of accidents; then the accidents came to be, with the result that it assumed the present form of the Universe6. This view is the apex of absurdity, because the inherence of a property in a substance brings about a change in its quality but does not cause an increase in its quantity. If then the hylic matter of the world had been one substance it would not have been converted into many substances as a result of the inherence of the accidents in it. They are agreed that the earth is stationary and still' and that its motion really results from an occurrence which befalls it, such as a quake or something similar. This 'runs counter to the view of the Materialists who maintain that the earth swoops downward8 through the air perpetually, for, if it were so, it aould 5 The extent to which ai-NaffHrn in his philosophy is a disciple of the pre-Socratic philosophers and their views an Kurnin are well described by Horten in his stvdy in ZDNG, M i l (1909). 714-92. foy a refutation of al-Nsz~imsee U+I, 55-6. ' See Maimonides, ib., Prop. V; IH, 1, 14 bottom. U!il, 103; Ash'ari, 189-91 (he lists five views of the Mu'taziia on Will); Cremcio, 168 and 171-2, where the Mu'taziiite thwry ir combated. See below under the fourth essential.
' Ed.,
108-9
i
?
i
C
necessarily follow that a stone which we hurl with our hands should never oiwtake the earth, because a light object cannot overtake' a heavier one in its descent. They agree that the limits of the earth are finite in all directions1 and similarly the periphery of the skies is finite in its six directions. This is in contradiction to the opinion oi the Materialists who think that the earth is not limited below, on the right, on the lefi, behind, or in front, and that it is finite only in the direction where it is contiguous to the air above it2. They also think that 'the sky is finite only in its downward direction but is infinite on its five sides other thair the lower one. The refutation of their contention is obvious in view of the return of the-sun to its rising point every day and its circuit of the orb of the sky and what is above the earth in the course of a day and a night. But the crossing of limitless distances, through set places, in a limited time is not possible. They agree that the heavens are seven in number and are superimposed on each other, contrary to the opinion of those among the philosophers! and astronomers who think that they are nine in number* They also agree that they 319 are not spherical bodies revolving about the earth, contrary to the contention of those who maintain that they are spheres, one within the hollow of the other, and that the earth is in their midst as the center of the sphere is in its inside. Whoever professes this belief cannot recognize a throne above the heavens, nor angels nor. anything of that which the Monotheists4 recognize as existing above the heavens. They further agree that the annihilation of the entire world, considered as something within His abilitys and capacity, is admissible. But they h e lieve in the eternal6 existence of Paradise and its pleasures and in the perpetuation of Hell and its tortures as in a divine ordinance'. They also regard the annihilation of certain bodies and not others as possible They declare Abu Hudhail
I
(Seeiye, 131; her trans. fails to render the original correctly); Ash'ari,
ib., and 363.
ones, See Maimonides, ib., Prop. V1.
UscI,57, where the Contention is refuted as in our text; Creencia, 63ff. Us&/, 60ff where several anempts to account far ihe earth's firmness are listed. Cf. Ash'ari. 326.
U?&, 319-20; Aiblfini, 189.
Wsil,61-2 and 66. This opinion is refuted Ubil,62 ilnes 10-15. Us&, 64-5. Cf.the long discussion regarding the sphericity of the ezrth, the heavens, God's throne, etc in IH, 11. 97-105, esp. to 101. ' With MS. j,~.+l; Ed., j 9 ~ 4 l . With MS. ; ~ i j J l ;Ed., $ 3 1 . * With MS., u b and below; Ed., +ir. ' lH, IV, 83ff., esp. 85-6; Ufil,238; Ash'arl, 164. 1
U+l, 56. The expression ''that follow one another is in accordance with the Kaiami~ticview that all accidents have a momentary existence and are constanfly replaced by new
'
.L
an infidel for hi$ belief in the interruptions of the pleasure of Paradise and the tortures of Hell'. They declare those of the Jahmiyya as Kifirs who predict the extinction of Paradise and Hell! They declare al-Jubbii and his son Abu'Hbhim to be Kiflls because of their assertion that God cannot decree the extinction of some bodies while allowing others to survive, but that He can decree the destruction of d l of them by an act-of-destruction which he may create not in a subject? Regarding the third essential, which is the doctrine dealing with the Maker of the Universe and His essential attributes which it views as compatible with H i essence, they teach that all things crehted have undoubtedly a Creator and Maker' They declare Thumima and his followers among the Kadariyya to be heretics because of their view that generated acts have no Auihor4 They state that the Maker of the Universe is the Creator of bodies and accidents, declaring Mutammar and his followers among the Kadariyya infidels because of their contentiin 320 that God created no accidents, for He created only the bodies and it is the bodies which generate the properties in themselvesG. They profess that the originated things were before their beginning neither entities nor ideas nor subsfantes nor accidents, contrary to the view of the Kadariyya that the non-existents are entities during their state of non-existenceF. The disciples of the Basra School among fhem maintain that substances and accidents were substances and accidents
' Ed.,
104-5
(Seeiye, 127-8);
a Ed., 199 (above, 13); IH, i6.;
IH, i6.; Ash'afi, 163. Usil,i6.
' Ed., ' The
183-4 (Seeiye, 204-5). starting point of the Mutakaliims for ail proofs of the existence of God, -later criticized by the Aristotelians. i s that the world is created, as has been established by our author in the second essential. (For more detailed proofs see iH, 1, 9-21, esp. I4ff. (Asin
Paiacios, 11, 94-109); d. also the proofs of the Jewish Mutakaliims, as e. g. Sa'adia and the adequate summary in hIaimonides, Gzide, I, chap. 74). Once tho world is proved to be existent in time the demonstration of the existence of a Maker generally foiiows the same line as in our tent, see Ujd, 68-9; IH, 1, 21-3 (Asin, 109-113). The most philosophic proof, stiii contingent on "a world which comes into being", will be found Creenrie, 59-73. "d., 157-8 (Seeiye, 178); Ash'ari. 407. Cf. IH, V, 59-60. V d . , 96 (Seeiye, 118); Ash'ari, 303; Shahr., 46. Usil,70-1. This view is discussed and iefuted by IH, V, 42ff.
before their beginning. The view of these people leads to a belief in the eternity of the World1, and a view which leads to non-belief constitutes non-belief. They state that the Maker of the Universe is eternal and pre-existent: contrary to the assertion and belief of the Magians in .two Makers, one of whom, Satan, is created; and contrary to the opinion of Ghulit among the Rawifid who teach that 'Ali, a created and originated body, became a God and an originator, thanks to the dwelling of the spirit of God within him" far be God from their assertion. They affirm the denial of any limit or definition to the 'Maker of the universe: contrary to the opinion of Hishim ibn al-Hakam al-R&di that the Objeci. of. his Worship measures seven spanS'by his own spans5, and contrary to the view of the Karrimiyya who think that he is limited in the direction which is contiguous to the throne, but has no limit in the five other directions6. They agree that it is absurd to describe Him as possessing form and limhs7, contrary to the opinion of those of the Ghulit among the Rawifid and of the ~ O ~ ~ O Nof~ I DaGd al-Jawiribi8 who maintain that He has a human form. Hishim ibn Silim
S
al-Jawil&i and his followers among the RawKfid even thought that the Object of their Worship is formed in the image of a human, that He has black hair on 321 His head and He is a black light; His upper half is hallow but His lower half is solidg. [Their view] also contradicts the claim of the Mughiriyya among the ~ i w i f i dthat the organs of their Worshipped One resemble in shape the lerters of the alphabet. Far be God from this1 They are also agreed that no place can contain Him and that He is not 1 A variant in Usil,71 reads: As though they secretly beiieved m the pie-existence of the Universe but did not dare to publish it: so they professed what leads to it.
Us& 71-2;
' See the
Creencia, 74.
chapter on the Hulaliyya, E d , 241-50
Us;{,73; Creencia, 85-96; Ed., 215-6
' Ed.,
Razi, 20-1
(above, 73-86);
RZzi, 18-20.
and Tusi's note, ib. 21-2;
Bi, 12-3.
(above 32-4).
203 (above 19).
' 7Jf&
73-6.
Ed. and MS. Haw:";
see above 34 note 1. Ace. to Ash'ari: 153, ai-JawMbi is the one who divided God's body into an upper hollow haif and a lower solid ooe. Ed., 216 ( a b o ~ e33).
subject to time', contlaq to the opinion of the Hishimipya? and the Karrimiyya who think that He is contiguous to His Throne. Indeed 'Ali, the Prince of the Faithful, has explained: God created His Throne as a manifestation of His power,' not as a place for His essence. He said further: He already existed while no place existed yet, and He persists at present the same as He existed formerly3. They are unanimous in disavowing His experience of misforiunes and grievances, sufferings and pleasures4 and in denying to Him motion or rest5; contrary to the statement of the Hishgmiyya among the Rawifid regarding the admissibility of motion to Him and theit: claim that His place is an act of creation resulting from His motion; contrary t o the opinion of anyone who allows to Him the possibility of fatigue and repose, sorrow, joy and boredom as is reported in the name of Abu Shu'aib the Pious', far be God from this! They are agreed that God is independent of His creatures and does not obtain through His creatures m y benefit for Himself nor does He repel through them any h a m away from Himself. This is contrary to the contention of the Magians that God created the angels in order to defend Himself, with their aid: against the molestation of Satan and his assistanis. They also agree that the Maker of the World is one8 contrary to the belief U s i l , 76-8;
IH, 11, 172-3: Hilll, sect. 88-90. ' With MS.; Ed., 4 r ; l i ; see Ed., 47ff.(Seeiye, 67ff.). ' This ''tradition" is Cited in Browne, A Year Amongst fhe Persians (1893), p. 124. UsLt,79-81, where he explains an array of Kui'Bnic passages as well as traditions which Seem to support the claim that He is subject to these. For the proof of the Orihodax standpoint see RBzi. 25-7 and Hilli, 32-3 (sect. 91-3). IH, 11, 119-20; Creencio, 79. 1
'
"He was an anthropomoiphirt who taught that his Lord has a human form, fierh and hlaod, and that He rejoices and grieve? ails and recovers". Lisin nl-Miran, VI, 394
on the authority of ibn Hazm. He calls him ol-BaNal. Cf. in answer to Abu Shu'alb's teachings, Creeneia, 180-1. ' Us&, 82. Our author also indudes the Kadariter there as opposed to the Orthodox view, since they claim that God created mem in order that they express their thanks to Him. USUI,83-7, esp. 85-6; Creencia, 126-34 (133-4 are in answer to those who believe in a good and evil God); IH, i, 34-48 (Asin Palaeios, 11, 127-19) who polemitizes with all the proponents of another God: RBrl, 73-4. Hiiii, sect. 103-5. The elassicai proof employed by all the authorities cited, as well as by Jewish and Christian philosophers, is that
'
of the Dualists in two pre-existent Makers, one of whom is Light and the other Darkness; contrary to the belief of the Magians in two Makers one of whom, God, 322 preJexistent, is called Yazdinn' and the other, Satan, accursed, is called Ahraman; contrary to the opinion of the Mufawwida among the. Ghulit ~ a w i i i d that ' God committed the management of the Universe to 'Ali so that he is the second creatorx; contrary finally to the opinion of the Ha'itiyya among the Kadariyya, followers of &mad ion Hi'it, who a s e r t that God committed the management of the Universe to 'isa ibn Maryam and now he is the second creators. We have discussed at great length ,the various proofs of the Unitarians about the unity of the Maker in the Book o n Religions and Dogmas. Regarding the fourth essential, which is the doctrine bearing on the attributes which are of God's essence, they teach that God's Knowledge, Power, Life, WiU, Hearing, Seeing and Word are eternal attributes and everlasting qualities in Him4 The hluTaz11a have indeed divested Him of all the eternal attributes5, saying: He possesses neither Power nor Knowledge nor Life, nor Vision, nor means of perceivof mup~al obstmction: if they are Identical, unity is implicit: if one is inferior to the other, the doctrine becoines absurd. 1
Ed. add MS.
' Ed.,. 238
&I,>..
(above 68).
There is a disagreement between the statement here and above
see ib., note.
' Ed., 2.0-1 (above 99-100). ' T h e e reven are the constatant
number to which all Ash'ariter have bouod themselves
on the basis of their master's dassifleations; even Ohazili and Rizi adhere to i t It is interesting how in respect to attributes the Jewiih Mutakallims part very definitely from the Arabs. Sa'adia lists only three: Life, Knowledge and Power, and Babya counts Existence, Unity, Eternity. for the proofs adduced by the Orthodox, see Ibino, 54-9 (based almost entirely on final references to the Kur'inje text); Creerrcin, 201-13 (more phflosophic); see iH's attack on the Ash'arite point of view, 111. 1358. For his own view see ib., 1 3 0 4 (a summary in Zahirsen, 142ff.l. it is interesting that IH does not for a moment deny that he stands on Text and not Reason, adding on page 131: ':Our words are addressed to members of our religion who accept the gur'in. As for the other religions, we do not address them because they (the proofs) are the conseqrences of certain traditions, and the Consequence is valid only afler accepting the premises". "d.,
93-4
(Seelye 116-7);
esp. 548. Cf. Vorlesungen, 106ff.
Horien, Problems, 118s.; Galland, Mo'tmelitrs, 51-67,
ing the audible.
They even confirm created speech in Him'.
The ~Mu'tazila of
i
and his followers among the Kadariyya that the Power of God will reach a state
Eaghdid have denied Will to Him. Eut those oi Bajra have recognized tn k!inx a Will created in time, not in a substratum'. Eut \".re reply: A denial of the
in which it will perish with all its objects' and after that He will exercise no Power Over anything, nor will He at that time be Master over anyone for evil or
attributes implies a denial of the Possessor:' oi tlie attributes, just as in deuying action the author is denied, and in denying speech a deniel of the speaker is involved'. The Orthodox theologians agree that God's Power is one over all its
for good. He maintained that those who dwell in Paradise and those who inhabit Hell at that moment will remain paralyzed because of the absolute immobility of their essence? Far be God from their opinion! Al-Aswari and his followers among the Mu'tazila maintain that God possesses Power to do only that which
objects and by means of it He exerts His Pourer over all its objects in the way of an' absolutely new creation not of something acquired! si. is contrary to the declaration by the Karrimiyya rhat God's Power extends only over the originated 323 existences which belong to His essence", but the creatures which exist in the Uni-
He knew He would do, but that which He knew He would not do or which it was announced in His name that He would not do, He possesses no Power to d o 9 Far be God ffom this'!
verse God created only by means of His Words and not by His Power. This is also contrary to what Kadarites of the School of Basra say that God - far be it from Him - exercises no control over the acts which are the objects of the free
The orthodox are agreed that God's attribute of knowledge is one, and with it He knows aU its objects in detail, unaided by perception, intuition or inference4 Mu'ammar and his followers among the Yadariyya hold that it cannot be said of
will of mankind or of the other living beings'. T i e Sunnites are agreed that the objects of God's Power will not perish, contrary to the opinion of Abu Hudhail 1 The various Mu'taziiite views on the Kur'ie are collected in Ash'ari, 191-3. Cf. Gailand. I. r., 67-75. ' Ash'aii, 181-91 (rhe Baghdidian view, 190, line 1211): Usal, 90-1. - - The Statement about the Mu'tazilite view of God's attributes is not entirely correct. What they
denied was the existence of attributes as differing fiom His essence but not His actual Power or Life. That in, they denied that He possesses liie as something with which His essence is qualined but they granted for the most part that His essence means Life, Knowledge, etc. See Ash'ari, 164ff. and RZzi, 61. attributes, so in ibnna, 54-5.
One may of course deduce from this that they actually deny
' R e a d i n g .ip& with MS.; Ed., j r r l , . US;[, 90-3; Ashsari ib. ' What he means is that every act performed by man is dirediy created by Gad and not indirediy by virtue of the fact that God created man. See Cieencin, 152, note 1. V b n Karrim's views on Gad's Power are explained Ed., 208 (above 24). Acc. M Us&, 93, he classified ail the possible accidents which God can crem in Himself into five categories: His contiguity to the Throne, His Word, His Will, His perception of Hearing and His perception of Vision. See Ed., 208 (above 24).
' This thesis, the chid bane of contention between Mu'tatilism and Orthodoxy, is fully developed from the Orthodox point of view and defended against Mu'tazilife crfticism in Crcencia, 144-56.
1 Ed., 102-3 (Seeiye, 125-6); US&. 94; Ash'ari, 163. Intiprir, to have been Abu Hudhaii's teaching and also disavows the charge that stagnalion of Paradise (page 127: he aftribtttes this beiief to Jahm), adding cant and telling remark: "be repented of this dochine and its proof before
' See above
181;
8-9, denies this he believed in a the rather rignifihis death".
Us&, B.
' See the interesting report
of a discussion on this matter among the leading Mu'tari-
iites, Ed., 18Sff. (Seeiye, 206ff.); Asb'ari, 2-3.
Cf. also Horten, Systrme, 245ff.
' The contention of Aswgri which is really d i f 6 d t to set aside Gharsii answen in a highly phiiosaphic manner by distingvishing behveen Gad's Power as unrelated to His Knowledge which is, of course, not weakened by His Knowledge that the thing cannot happen, and between His Power in relation to His Knowiedge which are mutually exclusive and hence impossibie. Creencin, 141-4. The samp reconciliation is made inti?&, 20-1. Ace. to Ash'ari, 203, 'mi
al-Aswsri himself admitted that when unrelated to each other the two were possible. IH, 11, 183-4, also feels that either al-AswZWs view is to be accepted, which he opposes, or only his own: that God is capable of doing everything. Hlo pmof of it is that since the question which is raised about God's ability to do the absurd is itself a creation by Gad, He no doubt endowed that question with a meaning. U!GI, 95; Creerrcio. 162-3; Rhi, 54-8. Al-Ash'ari takes thls subjeSt of God's Knowiedge as an occasion to disprove the view af those who deny attributes, I b i n n , 54-9. See, however, IH's criticism of his stand, 11, 135-40..
God that He knows Himself'. It is a marvel indeed that One who knows others should not know Himself. Some of the Rawifid think that God does not know the dbject before it comes into being'. Zurira ibn A'yun and his Iollowers among
i
faithful in the world to come.
They declare: That He may be' visible in any state and to every living being can be rationally proved; and Hi appearance that f3e will certainly appear to the faithful in particular in the.world to come is
324 the R i w z d maintain that God's knowledge, Power, Life and other attributes are
created in time3 and that He was neither living, nor powerful, nor knowing until He created for Himself Life, Power, Knowledge, Will, Hearing and Seeing. They agree that his Hearing and Seeing encompass d l things visible and audible and that God has beheld Himself and heard His awn speech etenldly'. This is contrary to the opinion of the Kadariyya of Baghdad that God is not a Seer nor a Hearer in the real sense of the Word, and that the expression "He sees" and "He Hears" are employed merely in the sense that He knows the visible and the audible5; contrary also to the declaration of the Mu'tazila that God beholds objects other than Himself but does not behold Himself; It also contradicts the statement of al-Jubbii regarding the distinction between the hearer (&I) and between the beholder ( 4 1 ) and the beholding the hearing6 (CIWI), so that he could declare that He has eternally been a hearer-and a beholder but He has not eternally been hearing and beholding- (-I+, y3 LL). But he may reverse this distinction and yet not discover any difference as a result of its reversal'. The orthodox are agreed that God will be visible to the
(A\),
k)
(I-,
~-
established by Tradition2. This is contrary to the opinlon of those oi the Kadariyya and Jahmiyya who considlr His visibility impossiblea; contrary to the opinion of those who maintain that He will be discerned in the world to come with a sixth sense, u DirH ibn 'Amr was inclined to think': and contrary to the opinion of those r h o maintain that the non-believers will also see Him as lbn Sdim al-Basri believed4 We have already discussed the propositions regarding vision in detail in a special work4 325
The orthodox are agreed that the will of God is His Desire and free choice' arfd that His desire Lor something means His aversion for the lack of it, just as they believe that when He presuibes something he prohibits the neglect of i t They say further: Velily His Will realizes all its objects in accordance with His knowledge of them? He wills Ule coming-into-existence of things simuItaneously with the time when He knows they will come into being. Whatever He knows Reading j l r with MS; Ed. j l & . . See both the rational and the traditional prooh, (I+, 98-102, Crecncin, 110-26, where substantially the same arguments. although more philosophieaJiy, as in U s i l are em1
2
ployed.
-
1
Ed.. 141 (Seelye, 161); Crecncia, 162;
Usil,ib. Cf. Inti+,
53, where al-l(ha)niit
attempts to deny this. R e i , 56; Cf. Ash'ari, 158K ibn Rawendi accused the Mu'tarilite Hisham ai-Fuwa!i
'
of
maintaining the same siiitude, but ai-Khayyz! in denying this accusation claims that he confused him with Hisham b. al-Hakam, Intwir, 60. Ed., 52 (Seaye, 71-2); Ashbll, 36; Silahr, 142. C f . Inli+r, 5-6 and 8. in answer to alCrecneia, 176-81; U s i l , 96-8; Rizi, 48-9; Ibinn, 47-54.
'
Ash'ari, d. IH, 11, 140ff., esp. 141-2. Ash'arf, 173-4 and 183-5; IH, 11, 143.
'
Meaning that He eternally porSessed the attribute of Hearing but was not a Hearer until This view, however, is there were audibie things in the world, Us;/, 96; Ash'ari, 176-7. 1 (Sura 20, v. 48). C f . IH, 11, unorthodox in the light of the K~r'anic verse 69, e l iCu 9 144, and Creencia, 177 (GhazHii's adherence to text and tradition is much more evident in his dism~Siono f these attributes than elsewhere). The same criticism is leveled against him, Usdl, 96-7.
(GhazHli utilizes the example of the mirror to prove that a definite direciion o r piace
See Ihnna, 13-23 with the KufHnic venes as the starting p i n t ( C f . SuyB!i, Dnrnr al-Hisin; 25). it is interesting that the authorities (Us&, 99; Crcencia, 122ff.; Ibinn, 15) ail employ as an example Moses who asked for a vision of God, arguing that Moses would not have made the request if he knew that It could not he. C f . Vorleungen, 105. "h'ari. 153 and 213-7. is not required for vision).
" Ed.,
201 (Above 16-17);
Ash'ad, 216 and 282.
See an him ZDMG, LXI, (1907j, 77-8.
' Perhaps it is his KiGb ' It is surprising that, iil
nl-Sifit, Subld, iti, 239. discussing the adrihute of Will, Baghdidi does not list the dissenting opinions. Far a discissioll and a rehztatian of them, see Us&, 102-5; Crcencia, 165-75; Ibrinn, 60-7; Rbi. 42-8; Hiill, 22-4. IH, following his literalism and pdndple that names of God canndt be derived, grants that God wills because theie is textual proof for it, but sees no piace for atmbuling a will to Him or for calling Him Willing, 11, 176-7.
' The Will thus becomes a determining principle, which cannot be sdid of Power or Knowledge. See Creeneio, 173; Rid, 42ff.
will n o t come into existence, He wills that it should not become. They say: Nothing is created in the Universe save through the mediation of His Will; what He wishes comes into heing and what he does not wish i s not origmatedL. The Yadariyya of Basra believe that God wishes what does not come and that existences have come which He has not wished. But this opinion leads to the belief that GOd is coerced and compelled to create what He loathes to createe. Far be God from this'! The Sunnites are agreed that the Life of God is wilhout the medium of a soul' or of nourishment, and that all spirits are created, contrary to the assertion of the 'Christians about the pre-existence- of a Father, a Son and a Holy Ghost They are further agreed that Life is a pre-requisite to H i s Knowledge, Power, Will, Vision and Hearing, and that if one is not alive one cannot credibly be knowing, powerful, willing, hearing and seeing4, contrary to the opinion of al-Silihi and his followers among the Yadariyya that the existence of knowledge, power, vision and wiil in a dead person is possible5. They agree that God's Speech is an eternal attribute of His R, and that it is neither created-in-time nor brought-into-being, contrary to the contention of the Kadarites that God created His Speech in some body7; contrary to the opinion of
--
This tenet is directed against the MuSadlites who deny that God wiiis evil. cussion is developed Ibirnn, 63-4; Creencia, 174-5. Ibirna, 61-2. U s i l , 105, explains that life is an eternal attribute and soul a substance. I
The dis-
' Us&
105-6; Creencia, 164; R Z , 41: Hiiii, 21-2. IH attacks the Ash'aiite view, ii, 153ff., esp. 155ff. ' Horien, System$ 306, who aitributes this view to Siiihi, uses our autnor as his source. US;/, 106-8. GhazBii, agreeing with the Ash'arite doctrine, salves all the difficulties connected with it by distinguishing between the armai sounds and letters which, of coune, are temporal and between what he calls "verbum mentis", (Ar. j ?W), a something intermediate between the sounds and the ideas in the sounds.
It should not iherefare be coniused
with the Will or the Knowledge or the Power behind the words. Creenrio, 182-99. IH, ni, 4-15, repudiates both the Mu'tazilite and the Ash'arite view, (the latter for the same reason as all the other attributes), and maintains the literal interpretation of the untreated character of the Kur'Bn, granting oiiy that the voice which pronounced the words to Muhammad was created. The Ash'arite view is also rejected Hillt, 26-8. Cf. Vorlesungen, 109-13. ' Cremcin, 184. Acc. to Ibirna, 26 passim (except 32 where he attributes the view to Kadarites as weii) this is Jahm's doctrine and he accuses him 07 aping the Christian theory
the Karrimiyya that His Speech is an originated entity in His Essence'; contrary 326 to the assertion oi Abu Hudhail that His saying to something: Be! has no substratum but .that the remainder of His Speech is created in bodies2. We maintain that i t cannot be admitted that His Speech originated in Him in time because He is not the subject of created objects; nor that it originated outside of His Essence because that would force us to the conclusionthat one other than He speaks, bids, and forbidsS with it; nor that itoriginated independently because an attribute cannot exist in itself. The creation-in-time therefore becomes untenable aud it is true that His attribute is eternal in Him. They say regarding the fifth essential, which is the doctrine bearing on God's names and qualities4, that the way to find Gad's names is to determine them from the yur'k, reliable traditions, or by consensus of thc community. But it is not allowed to apply a name to Him from inference" This is contrary to the view of the MuCtazi!a of B w a about sanctioning the application of names to Him by inferencefi. Indeed, al Jubbii went so far in this matter that he named about the Logos in Mary's womb. But in Ash'ari, 191-3, he correctly atfcibutes the teaching. about a created Kur'in - whether as an accident or a substance - - to Mu'tariiites in generat. Cf. also 582-92 esp. 589 ff. and IH, 111. 5. See a diseusrian of the Mu'tariiite view in Goidzther's article, Islanr, iii (1912), 245-7.
-
1
Ed., 206f. (above 23f).
" Ed..
108-9
~Seeiye, 131-2);
Islam, ib, 246.
U s i l , 106-7; Ibinn, 26733 where he at the samr time proves his own doctrine. See Hiiii's attack on the Ash'arites and his defence oi the Mu'tazilite amtude, 27-8.
' Arab.: uL~,l,. Although Ash'ari identifies the significance of this word with Sifd, BaghdHdi explains the iatter as the attribute of any object from the standpoint of the object, and a W e f as the attribute hom the standpoint of the speaker, U+iI, 115. Acc. to U s i i , 115-6, the reason is that a slave cannot confer a name on his master, nor a son on his father. Lnwrimi' al-8ayyinit, 52, quotes Abu Khaiaf ibn 'Abd-al-Malikel-Suiami'~ work on God's names to the effect that God fixed the names at ninety-nine instead Of hundred in order to show that they must be determined and not inferred.
U?il, 116; Fakhr-al-Dln RBri, LowirmP ni-Bnyyinit, 18. Abu Bekr al-BHtilHni also ib. See also RHzi, 81-2. (Tisi, i b , points out that that is not the
agrees with this view,
Orthodox attitude).
OharHli distinguishes between attributes and names, restricting.the lalter
only to those mentioned in the tent, while permitling a free use of qualiing attributes.
CIP
God Obedient-to-Hii-creature when H e grants Him what he seeks, .arid he named But the comrnuni-
gives an idea of His eternal attributes uvhich are inherent in His Essence. Such are: the Living, the Powerful, the Knowing, the Willing,. the Hearing, the Seeing,
ty dedared him in error for this impudence, which will bring suffering to him?.
and the other descriptions derived from the attributes which are inherent in His
The Orthodox say: True tradition has it that God is known by ninety-nine names
Essence. God is eternz!ly qualified both by this group of names and by the group
Him Impregnator-of-women since He causes pregnancy in them'.
and that he who comprehends' them enters Paradise.
By comprehending them
we do not mean the count of their number and an explanation of them. The nonbeliever, too, may recite them by way of giving an account of them, yet he is not among those destined to enter Paradise.
By comprehending them are meant a
discussed above.
Both of them are
of
His eternal attributes.
The third division
is derived from H i s acts, such a s the Creator, the Bestower, the1 Just, etc. By all names derived from His acts He is not qualified before the coming-intoexistence of His acts2. There are some among His names which have a double
realization of what is contained in them and 'a belief in their iniplicit meaning'.
meaningz:
one of them an eternal attribute and the other an act of His.
For
This is confirmed by the usage: "So-and-so is a man of comprehension and seK
example, the Wise;
possession", if he is a person of knowledge and understanding5. They say: God's
with His Knowledge it is one of His eternal names.
names fall into three divisions6.
of the wisdom and stability of His acts, it is derived from His a d s and is not
One refers to His Essenee such as the One, the
Seli-sufficient, the first and the last, the Great, the Perfect, and the other descriptions of His Essence which are rightfully proper to Him.
The second divisioa
if we apply it in the sense of wisdom which is identical
one of His eternal descriptions. They teach regarding the sixth essential, which is the thesis of God's justice and Wisdom - far be He from any imperfection,
encia, 449-50. Even ai-ShSfi'i agrees that we are allowed to apply to Him names of created acts, but our author rejects this view, U s i l , ib. 1 Ed., 168 (Sedye, 188): Ash'ad, 194-5. A Snj' in Arabic : i>LLI r;,j $1 ;,UI .b. This tradition is reported in the name of Abu Huraira, Bukhari, iV, 450 Orans. Haudas, IV, 585); Muslim, V, 289-90. It is neither universally accepted nor uqantmously interpreted. Cf. Lawirni' d - B n y y i n i t , 49 who reports that Abu Zaid ai-bikht doubted its authentidty, Ghaziii, in reporting tbat ibn yam oniy listed some eigEly names, explains it Bn the ground that the latter either did not h o w the tradition or held it apocryphal, Creenzio, ib. NawSwi, in his commentaj to Muslim, ib., raises no doubt as to its authenticily but explains that the number ninety-nine is not exciugive and others may be added; hut it is these ntnety-nine which bring one to Paradise. This interpretation is the one that Laworni', 50, also accepts. - The number ninety-nine instead of one hundred is generaliy explained on the ground that God prefers the odd to the even, Creencia, ib.; Lnwimi', 53. .+I. ' Bukhari. ib., interprets the Arab. verb: N~WBW;ib., who cite: several interpretations also agrees with Bukhiri. Lawnmi', 56-7, cites four interpretations: counting, fixing it in the mind, ability to preserve the sacredness of the names, and, finally, tracing the source and implication of the names. Reading 2Li with Brockdmann, Monde Oriental, X M (1925). 199. MS. and Ed.. iibl. Lisan al-Arab, s. v. Li explains: 61ij & ~i ;Li, i l o ril JN,. u s i t , 121-6; Lawinail, 22 bottom ff., esp. 24 bottom t; Crcenein, 447-8.
But if we apply it because
- that
bodies and accidents, the good and the evil-alike.
God is the creator of
He is the creator of the
acquired a c t s h f mankind and there is no creator other than GodS.
This is
contrary to the belief, of those Yadarites who hold that God created none of
' MS. has an illegible word here beg.
.,.I\>. Cf.
USEI, 126, top.
' This is contrary to the view of the KarrSmiyya that God
war ~terndiiya Creator and Bestower. Ed., 206 (above 23); (if&,122. US^, 126-7. Arab. +UI. in @ i f ,133-4, Baghdidi gives the following definition of Aks6b: Let us suppose a heavy rock which one man is not capable of carrying while another is. I1 both should carry it jointly, the achievement is due to the more powerful one, yet at the same time the weaker one is not exciuded from being a carrier. In the same way man alone cannot perform his acts; if God should choose to be alone in executing what will be man's ad, He Possesses power to do it, so that it would be the object af His Power. Ifs exisfence is therefore due to God's Power, yet at the same time the aequirer (Mnkfasib) is not excluded from being author of the act. q f i i , 134-7; Creencin, 144-56 for a disnusian and refutation of the Mu'tazilite view. (Itis significant that he has no quarrel here with the Jabarites; d. indeed R h P s evaluaFor the discussion of the subject see Vorlcsuntion of Ash'aris view, 74); Ibnia, 67-11 gen, 82~-92,98-100; R&, 74-7.
the acquired deeds of humanity'; and contrary to the view of the Jahmiyya that 328 man neither acquires, nor has he power over, his deeds'. Whoever maintains that man creates his own works is a Kadarite e~~tertainingpolytheistic notions of his Lord in view of his assertion that in the spheres of knowledge, will, voices and sounds, men create accidents, such as movements and rests, similar to God's creation. In condemnation oi the adherents to this vie- God has made th6 statement: "Or have they set up with Allah associates who have created creations like His so that what is created became confused to them? Say: Allah is the creator of all things and He is the One, the Supreme"'. But if one maintains that man has no control over his ads and that he is neither a doer' nor an acquirer, then he is a Jabarite. Balanced Justices excludes both the principle of JabarA and the principle of yadar. He, therefore, who asserts that man acquires his acts, yet God is the creator of his acquired act, is a Sunnite with a balanced sense of justice, keeping away from both Jabar and Yadar. The Odhodox concur in rejecting the views of those who uphold the theory that man periorms a certain act in himseli from which an effect results in something other than himself '. This is contrary to the view of the majority of the Ash'ari, 199ff. and 227-42; Ushi,ib.; Creencia, ib.; Hiili, 4 2 4 ; IH, 111, 25-6. 1H assumes an intermed1a:e position behveen the varioudviews by recogniriilg for every act a double "Isfi(~'rr'':one which is a sod of pre-disposition, e. g., sanity of organs an6 regoval of llindrances, which precedes the act, and another, the pawer from God to effect the act, which is silnultaneous with the a& 26-35.
' See
the refutation of the Jabarites, IH, 111, 22 bottom-25
bottom; Ed., lg9 (above 13);
U?&, ib.
' Sura
13, v. 17.
' Reading &+ with MS.; Ed., ' Arab. 'Adl, doubtless chosen
,bL.
by BaghdHdi because of the fondness of the Mu'tazila
for the term and the ialter's use of the name
>&I
&I
(people who assert wrang-doing) as a
nick-name for their opponents. MatBddi, 4. Both Ed. and MS. read $1, which is meaningless.
'
' Usisill, 137-9; Maimonides, Gnidq I, ch. 73. Prop. VI. Tbfs, of course, is a denial of cause and effect. IH, in line with his views on lktirab, contends in connecdon with this problem that both views are right. The effect is God's creation, but since man has volition, the apparent relation of an act to a living being is true. In the case of an ilranimate agent without choice there is of course. no p e d o n a n c e of the act by him, V, 59-60.
Yadariyya t5at man performs deeds effecting other things which result from causes which he generated within himself and contrary to the opinion of those of the Yadariyya who think that the secondary actions are effects which have n o author, as Thumima wzs incliiled to think2. They agree that the performance by acquisition of acts of motion, rest, will; speech, knowledge, thought and whatever else follows the line of these accidents which we have mentioned, may be predicated of man, but that the production of colors, tastes, smells, and auditory percepts cannot be predicated of him. This is contrary to the opinion of Bishr ibn al-Muitamar and his followers among the Mu'tazila that man produces colors, tasies and 329 smells in the manner of effects'. They [i. e. Bishr and his adherents] also hold that even the inducing of vision in the eye and of auditory perception in the organ of hearing is predicable of man'. , More abominable than this is the assertion of iMu'ammars the Yadarite that God did not create any of the accidents and that they are all effects ~ r o d u c e dby the bodies. There is shame in plenty for him in this error. The Orthodox say: God's guidance manifests itself in two %.ays6: one, by giving clear expression. to the truth, summoning people to it and establishing proqfs for it. From this stsndpoint, it is right to associate guidance with the apostles and with everyone who calls people to the religion of God, because they point out to people, who are bidden to obey God, the right path to Him. This
',
BagbdZdi taunts them that For the various Mu'laziiite dactrtnes see Ash'ari, 400-15. i n accordance with their doctrine it cannot even be proved that G Q formed ~ the heavens or that He moves the stars: These occurences may be due to the action of angels or linns, U?d, 140. Ash'ari, 407; E d , 157-8 (Seelye, 178). Usi!,139-40; Ash'ari, 403; Ed., 143 (Seelye, 163).
U@l, ib.
' Ed.,
136-7 (Seelye, 157-8); Ash'ari, 405-6. the following discussion of the types of guidance, 43-6. Ai-Ash'ari does noi distinguish between the two Ends of instead that the Kur'Hn is for believers only, Ibono, 78-80; he dn'a to the general public, ib. 81. For his interpretation of Sura
" For
see U?il,140-2; IH, 111, Hada (guidance), isslsting allows, however, a Cali or 41, v. 16 which is one o l
the chief reasons for the Orthodox predication of a general Hada (d. Baidiwi, 11, 221), see ib. 8 3 4 . For IH's reiutation, see 111, 45-6.
is the meaning of the word of God to His Messenger: "And most surely you show the way to the right path"', that is, you summon people to it. The second way in which God's &&ice of His worshippers is manifested is by inducing in their hearis a willingness to be guided, as He has expressed it in His Word: "Therefore whomsoever Allah intends that He should guide him aright, He expands his breast for Islam, and whomsoever He intends that He should cause him to err, He makes his breast strait a d narrow"? Over this sort of guidance no one has any power cxcept God. The first guidance which comes from God is extended to all who have been bidden to obey, but the second guidance which is sent by Him is limited3 to those who have been preasposed to it. To confirm this, the Word of God has been revealed: "and Alrah invites to the abode 330 of peace and guides whom He pleases into the right path"'. Misguiding, according to the doctrine of the Orthodox, comes from God in the sense that error is injected into the hearts of those who fall into i t ? as He says: "And of whomsoever He pleases that He should cause him to err, He makes his breast strait and narrorv". They say: Whenever God causes one to Brr, He does it as an act of justice, and whenever He guides one, he does it as an act of grace. This is contrary to the view of the Khdariyya that guidance comes from God in the sense that He points out the right way and calls to truth but that no guidance of heart can be aitributed to Him? They [the Kadariyya] hold that leading astray is attributable to Him in two ways: one is in naming, that is, by calling the error misguidance, and the other in the sense of punishing people who err for their ermr. Now, if what they said were true, it would necessarjly follow that the Prophet' led non-believers astray because he called them misguided; it would Sura 42, v. 52. 6, v. 125. ' Reading with MS. L L r;Ed., ~ l 3. ; Cf. Usul, 140, lines 14-5. ' SuIa 10. v. 26. "In %hegeneialladon of the Call, and the limitation of guidance by desire, iiss the proof that the matter is not dependent on man's will, and that he who perseveres in enor does so because God 60s not will his going on the tight path: Baidswi, I, et Ibonn, 81. 413, line 6-7; "or the discussion of misleading (IdIiI), see U!i4 ib.; 1H. 111, 46-51; Ib&n, 81. ' Ash'ari, 259-62; U!iI, ib.; I b i n n , ib. IH, ib. ' Add &, I and read A1 with MS. Ed. &I Yl; see UfiI, 141, last line. 1
' Sura
similarly follow t5at 1bGs led the believing prophets astray because he named them erring'. They would also be compelled to admit that one who hflicts punishment on adulterers, thieves and apostates misguides thcm because he has punished them f3r their error. This is wrong and what leads to it is like it. The Orthodox teach regarding the ordained span of l i e (;\jil) that everyone who dies, whether naturally or by slaying, dies at tne appointed time which God designated as the end of his life. God has. the power to prolong his life for a ceriain period of time, but if he has not prolonged it that period by which his life h a s not been prolonged is not his appointed end. In th'e same way, the woman whom he does n o t h a r r y before his death does not become his wife even though God has the power to allow him to marry her before hi death. 331 This is contrary to the opinion of those among the yadarina who maintain that when a person is slain his life has been cut, and contrary to the opinion of those among them who hold that he who is killed cannot be called dead3; these deny the import of God's word: "Every soul shall taste of death"'. This is an innovation which al-Ka'bi followed, and there is enough shame for him in i t The orthodox explain the problem of the means of sustenance on the basis of the actual state5. Everyone w h eats ~ or dilnks something receives his sustenance, be it lawfully or unlawfully, contrary to the opinion of those of the Kadariyya who See al-Ash'arl's refutation from the linguistic angle, I b i n a , 80-1. word is missing in both Ed. and MS., but see U s d , 142, iines 14-5 where the analogy with Gad's power to add Liie is expressed more dearly: "and zs the woman whom he does not marry before his death does not become his wife although she cocid have become his wife had he not died... The example is taken from the Mu'tazilite argument that a man's span of life if he dies premahlrely is to be measured by God's knowledge of who would be his wife. Ibano, 16. 1
' This
USPI, 143. The view is said to be al-Ka'bi's and so also Ed.. 167 (Seelye, 187). where the M u k i i i t e views of slaying are recorded anonymously. The explanation of this thesis is that death comes from God whereas slaying is the effed of a human act. The Orthodox who deny cause and effect reply that man dies by God's a d and the slaying is an accident in the slayer. Sara 3, u. 182.
But see Ash'ati. 421-4
'
i. e. considering merely whom it is sustaining, regardless of where it tames from or by
what method it war procured.
maintain that man may sometimes enjoy the sustenance provided for another
'.
person They say conceri~ingthe inception of the charge imposed on man (Takl$) that if Gdd had not bidden His creatures to obey Him in any way it would still be an act of justice by Him? contrary to the opinion of those among the Kada-
the Yadariyya who maintail, that if He had done it; He would not be wise'. This according to them is forbidden to God. But we cai~notsee anything unlawful to 332 Him; nay, we say: To Him belongs the right to order ar.d forbid and to I-lim b$!ongs the Jucl_?ment. He does what He desires and rules as He wishes: Regarding the seventh essential, - the regulations bearing on prophecy and apostolism, - they aver the veracity of messengers from God to His creatures*, contrary to the opinion of the Barihima who disacknowiedge them despite their belief in the Unity of the Maker'. Co~icerningthe distinction between messenger
riyya who maintain that if He had not charged them He would not have been just? They assert that if He added to the task of His creatures over what He had imposed upon them, or if 'He reduced from the charge laid upon them, both of these could be possible, contrary to the opinion of those among the Kadariyya who reiect it4. Similarly if He had not produced creation, it could not be concluded that He therefore committed an outrage against justice6. The pre-
and prophet they teach that every one on whom a revelation has descended from God, spoken by one of His angels8 and who is confirmed by some miracles which run counter to the ordinary course of aifairs is a prophet. He in
ferable state in accordance with His knowledge in that case would be that He should not create. They declare: If God had created the inanimate objects and
whom this attribute has been realized and who is further distinguished by a new dispensation or by the abrogation%f-part of the precepts of a law which existed
not animal life, that too would be admissible, contrary to the opinion among those
before him is a messenger'. They say that there were numerous prophetss but the messengers are three hundred and thirteeii in number. The first is the Father
of the Yadariyya who say that if He had not created the living world He would not be wise. They say: If God had brought all of His creatures forth in Paradise, that would be an act of grace on His part, contrary to the opinion of those among
of all flesh, Adam, and the last one is Muhammad, contrary to the assertion of the Magians that the father of all mankind is Gayomaria who is surnamed
' Ash'ari,
The discussion hinges on the question of a person who steals food or marries a farbidden relation. According to the Mu'tZiite dochine that God can do no wrong, the food piocured In this way, or the wife taken against the law, cannot he the gift of God. The Or1
-
thodox, denyinn cause and effect, see no relation behveen the illegal act - which is a sin, and the growth af the body or the happiness which are boons from God. See Usif,144-5; Ash'ari, 257; and erp. Ibinn, 76-8 where he polemicires with the Kadarites and wards off their attacb. iH, 111, 86-7 cannot agree with the Ash'aiites to the full extent: God has nowhere said that He gives man the illegal wife. Nor can the Mu'tazillie view be accepted. He therefore argues that whlle God Is the source of the acts, man ir the real author of sin and that
248 -9. list of questions coming under 'Adi is much abiidged. For a fuller discussion, see Creeniiil, 245-302; IH, 111, 97-142 and, from the Mu'tariiite point of view,
' Baghdidvs
Hilli, 40-53. ' To the Ash'irites prophecy is a favor from Gad being "meieiy possible, neither :iecersary nor impossible". Cree,icin,293f. Acc. to tile htu'tarilites God is obliged to senil piophets since it Is His duty to guide men for their advanlage. Cf. Hilii, 54-6. "hey believe that a man is led by his sense and inteiiect to obey laws. See Usiil,154-5. In refutation of the Brahman view see, IH, 1, 69-70 (Asin, 11, 182-5); Creencin,293-300. ' Acc. to Majuridi, 26, it means an angel other than Gabriel; the latter reveals to apostles.
' Reading &.+
we are tested by these facts which are Illegal.
' Usil, 154.
' The
pivot of the problem is whether God is free to do as He pieases or not. To the Orthodox who afirm God's freedom above ail, it in therefore necessary to preface the discussion of Takllf with a ciear statement of God's will and freedom. Cf. Usil,145-9; Creencia, 264-8;
RBzl, 79. 252-3;
:' Ash'ari,
U?il,149-50; Usil, 150- I.
Hilli 45-50;
IH, 1, 69 (Asin, 183).
Ash'ari, 246-8 esp. 247 and 249-50.
with MS.; E,,
+
"CE. 10 U?cI,157, true tradition records 124,000. On the manner of their creation, H a y y j t nGg.ulEb, 5. With Brockelmann, L c., 199. MS. and Ed. ZJ&. For the Iranian legend of this first man, possibly conceived (definitely in later literature) as a prototype of man, see Christensen, Le-9 Types du Premier Hommr et Premier Roi, 11-63. The islamlc sources are collected and discussed ib.. 64-10!, Cf. also U+l, 159 and Justi, Irun. Nanre,~b., 108b.
3ee
Gilshih', and contrary to their belief that the l a s s of the messengers is Zaridusht; contrary also the opinion of the Khurmmiyya who think that messengers will succeed one another endlessly 9 They profess a bel:ef in the prophecy of Moses in his age, contrary to those of the Barihima and the Minawiyya who disbelieve in Him, the latter nevertheless accepting %a4. They recognize the prophetic character of %a, contrary to the opinion of the Barihima and Jews who deny hims. But they deny the 333 crucifixion of %a and affirm his ascension to heaven. They say thai he will come down to earth after the appearance of the Antichrisf slag the Antichrist, kill the swine, and pour out all intoxicating drinke; in his prayer he will face the Ka'ba and will confirm the law of Muhammad He will bring to life those to whom the Kufin granted life and he will kill everyone for whom ihe Kufin decreed death. They approve of considering a heretic everyone who falsely claims to be a prophet, whether he lived before the days of Islam, like Zaridushf Yudbaf', Meaning day-king. Christensen, I.c., 27, 72 2t passim. Among Muhammadans his l+nb is sometimes Garsha (king of the mountain). Cf. ib. 68-75. Us;/, 159 translates it Into Arabic. 1
' With
Goldriher and U?i1, 159 line 7: MS. and Ed.
r i p i
U?i! does not aecuJe the
Magians of this. a
U?il, 158: Ash'ari, 438.
' Usil, 160:
Jesus plays a very important role In the Manichean doctrine.
See BuMtt,
Manichees, 37-43.
' See his
polemic with the Jews, U?il, 150-1.
This last detail Is not mentioned in the traditions regarding Jesus; appearance, collected in Wensinck, 113. The mast common version is that "he will appear as a righteous judge, break the cross. kill the swine, dispense with the tax on Infidels; wealth will be so abundant that no one will seek it (e.g Bukhbri, 11, 40; Houdas, 11, 51j. Ibn Majlaja, Stlnan, 11, 269 who lists ail that Jesus will do on that day, citing Mpeclally his new function as a Muslim, does not mention the incident of the wine. A detailed description of the Sedition of the antichrist is found in SuyBtI, nl-Dnrar nl-Hisin, 12.
'A
name very early perverted from BudLaf (ci. Hommel, Vll. Odriental Congress, Semitic Section, 116-7). hero of the very famous collection of stories entitied Borlaoiri
and Jonsnph. Our author no doubt means Buddha described in Arabic sources as a Sibian prophet. See Murfij, 11, 11 1-2 and IV, 44-5; Alblrznl, 186-9.
Mini1, Daisin?, Marcion: and ivlazdsk4, or like Musailimaq Sajih6, al-Aswad al'Ansi: and later YezidB and the others after them who falsely claimed prophecy. They condemn as an infidel anyone who claims diviniiy for the prophets, and prophetic or divine character for the Imams of the successions such a s the Sabbibiyya, the Bayiniyya, the Mugh;riyya, the Khattibiyya and everyone who pursues their path. They think it right to attribute greater excellence to the prophets than to the angels1$ contrary to the teachings of al-Husain ibn al-Fadl as well as of the majority of the Yadariyya that the angels are of greater excellence than the prophets". Tney believe that the prophets rank higher than the saints in the communities" of the prophets, contrary to the opinion of those who maintain that among the saints there are some of higher excellence than the p r ~ p h e t s ' ~ .They teach the' immunity of prophets from sinM and account for those lapses which tradition reShahr., 188-192. 194-5. Contra Ed. and MS. > % j . Ib., 195-6. ib., 192-4: above 87. The foliawing prophets all arose during the period of apostasy fallowing Muhammad's death. On Musailima see IA, 11, 274-81; Tab. (Zotenberg) 11, 276-98; Wellha.usen, Shirrerr, VI, 16-19. " Daughter of H8rtth. of the Tamlmites, IN, 11, 268-72; Tab. (Zotenberg) 11, 257-69; Wellhausen, I.&, 12-15. 1
' ib.,
'
' His real name was 'Aihala b. Ka'b, IA, ll, 254-9: Tab. (Zotenberg), 11, 230-7: EI, 1, 502-3; Wellhausen, I. r., 31-7. M S and Ed. read &I a;. { ,yYI,; al-'hsi is misplaced probably through confusion with Unaisa, father of VezTd. That the reference is to b. Uneisa (Ed, 263 above 103-4) becomes apparent from U8u1, 162, line 9ff. Referring to the Shl'ite lmHms who are alleged by them to be the Khalifs of Islam. '"s.1, 295-6; Ash'ari, 439-40; Wzi, 89-90. Ash'ari, 48; IH agrees with them. The order according to him is: angels, apostles, prophets, and Companions of the Prophet, V, 20-2. Other groups atso ranked angeis above Prophets, Andrae, Person Mrlharnnreds, 360-61. Arab. reads here TI j. which is not clear to me. The translation is canjermral. U+l, 167, states definitely that the KarrZmiyya took this stand; Ash'ari, 47 asmibes the view to the Rawlid. See Shiites, 1, 34, where the reference is probably to Sifls; cf. 11, 13 llne 108. .ID
"
" U a i l , 167-9; R e 88-9; Hilli, 58-9. The lalter states that the Ash'arites allowed minor sins; this is also the standpoint gf Mafuddi, 26, who holds the view himself and maln-
ports about them by explaining that those were committed before they were elevated to prophecy1. This is contrary to the opinion of those who consider minor sins admissible to them' and contrary to the opinion of the Hishimiyya among the Rawifid who consider sinning possible to them although they profess the Imam's immunity from sins. Regarding the eighth essential relating to prophetic miracles and saintly wonders, they teach that a miracleVs a state of things which breaks in upon the ordinary course, brought about by a claimant of prophecy and coupled with 334 a challange6 to his people to emulate him and with failure on their part to compete with him" so that it will testify to his veracity during the period when God's charge to man is in force: They say: The prophet doubtless performs one miracle which d l indicate his truthfulness. When one miracle which points to his veracity has been manifested to him and they are incapable of vying with him, the proof which obligates them to believe and to obey him becomes binding upon them. If they demand another miracle of him, the matter is up to Goda: if He wills, He aids him in if and if He desires, He chastises those who tains that the distinction made by some between a minor sin and a lapse is merely verbal but that essentidiy they mean the same. Abu Han!fa also agrees with our author, 23, and so also IH, IV, 2-3. indeed he goes into a lengthy investigation in the foilowing sections to prove that wherever the Kui'in or tradition report allything in hiaine of the prophets it is not within the category of sin. Contraly to his usual iiteidism, ibn Harm is obliged to employ some hairSplitttng distinctions not easily separable from the Ta'miZ to which he is always so averse. 1 Us;!, 168; against this view Hiiii, 59-60. Cf. Goldriher's atticle in isiani,111 (1912). 238-45.
' The
Mu'tazilites allow minor sins, Ash'ari, 226-7;
Ma!urZdi
ib.
But see Andrae,
Perso= Mohnmmads, 140ff.
Andrae,
the deiinition see Us;I, 170-1; Person Mnhomrneds, 101-3.
demanded the miracle of him, since they failed to put faith in one, tho proof of whose truthfulness had already been made manifest1. This is contrary to the opinion of the Kadariyya who think that the prophet requires no greater miracles than the soundness of his law2, as Thumima believeds. They declare: When one makes honest claims to being a prophet, it is possible for him to perform a confirmatory miracle4 but (he appearance of a miracle in confirmation of a claimant who !alsely5 arrogates prophecy to himself is noi admissible. But it is possible for a miracle to occur which will demonstrate his falsehood8, like the speech of the tree or of one of hts limbs, giving him the lie7. They say: the appearance of wonders to saints is possible, and they establish them as proofs of their veracity with respect to their states just as the miracles of the prophets are evidence for the justness of their claim8. They assert that the duty rests on the performer of the miracle to make it manifest and to challenge others, but the performer of wonders challenges no one else and generally keeps them secret. The miracle worker is assured of the outcome, but the wonder-man is not secure against a reversal of the event9. Thus the outcome to Balaamlo son of Ba'Pa was reversed after the manifestation of his 1 Traditions from the life of Muhammad illustrating this principle are collected in Hayy i t - u l - K ~ ~ l i b112-20. , see our author's objections to it, 176; ct. Creencin, 295. UstiZ, 175-6 where he also lists the lbadiyya and Karrimiyya among those who deny the pre-requisite of a miracle (d.Kashf al-Mahjzb, 219). In the several accounts of Thu-
Lisa,
mima's heresies this one is not recorded. or the distinciions of where and when prophecy may occur, see UsGI, 173-4; Creencin, 297-9. Far the Mu'tazllite deniai of it see, Hilli, 58. Reading *,Ul with MS., missing in Ed. see 'Aii Tabari, At-Din wal-Dowta (ed. Mingana), 14 (trans. 11 bottom). Ghazili
'
Ash'ari, 48.
' For
1
Hilii, 56-7
and especialiy Iji 175-78.
Cf.
Croenein, 296-7; IH, who says that he read this requirement as i dldinction between prophet and saint or magician in Bikiiini's work, rejects it summarily, V, 2-3 and 7-8, and IV, 317. See Andrae, LC., 115. ' U!;I, 171. 'This Statement Is meant to exclude the miiacle on the Day of the Resurrection, U+l, 170. U s i S 173.
denies the possibilities of any miracle occurring through the mediation of a Liar. Creenein, 301-2. ' These incidents are probably culled from the experiences of same false prophet, but I have not been able to trace them. ; 300-1. IH denies the possibility of working wonders since ' .UsiZ, . 1 7 4 ~ 5 Creensio, the time of the Companions for whom there is written evidence. V, 10-1. ~ ~ 6 175; 1 , Knshf al-Mohjib, 220sqq. Cf. the Biblical aefount, Numben, XXXII-XXXIV.
335 wonders. The Kadariyya disacknowledge the wonders of saints because they have
II
not found anyone in their sect worthy of showing a wotlderl. They profess the miraculous character of the Kur'in manifest in its composition:
contrary to the view of those of the Kadariyya who think that there is
no inimitable excellence in the poetic style of the Kur'io, as al-Nazzim was in..
clined to believe" As regards Muhammad's miracles, they confess their belief in the cleaving of the moon, making the pebbles utter praises in his hand, the flowing of water from between his fingers, his feeding many people with little food, and many others similar to them. But al-Nazzim and his followers among the
..
i
i
Kadariyya dissent from this. Regarding the ninth essential, relating to the pillars of the law of Islam, they teach: Verily, Islam is erected on five fundamentals: the confession that there is no God except Allah and that Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah; the recitation of prayers; the contribution of alms; the fast of Ramadin; and the pilgrimage to the Holy House. They rule that anyone who reject$ the obligatoriness of any of these five fundamentals or allegorizes them to mean a patronization of certain people, as the Mansiriyya and the Janihiyya among the Ghulit Rawifid interpret them, is an infidel. They teach that the prescribed prayers are five in number4. They declare anyone who abandons the obligation of any of them to be a heretic. Musailima the Liar cancelled the need of the morning and evening prayers, making of their cancellation i~ wedding-gift to his wife Sajih who put forih a false claim to prophecy; he thus became an infidel and a de
U a g , 175. The bite in this statement is ail too obvious. The Yadariles deny these miracles because in their view it would impugn the claim of the Prophet. 1
U s i l , ib., and BPkilini, I?&? ol57: Greencia, 309-13. Kufan, 18-21 esp. 18-20 add to this lnimitability also the content of many mysteries in the Bonk which n o s can equal, and the perfect bowledge of history since the beginning of time dlspiayed in this Book which was revealed by a man who did not know how to write and who U?il, 183-4;.fiilli,
read only with difficulty.
i1
I
I!
i
j 1 I
famator'. They recognize the obligatory character of the Friday prayerP and condemn as Kifirs those among the Khanirij and the Rawifid who ruk that there is no Friday gathering at present until the re-appearance of the Imim whom rhey are expecting*. 336 They recognize the duty of the poor-rate from the choicest items, such as gold and silver, camels, kine and sheep', provided these three species of domestic animals graze at large5. They require it from nutritive soil-produds which people sow and later use for food';. They require it from palm-dates and grapes. Whoever maintains that there is no compulsory poor-rate on these listed products is a KiSir. But one who confirms the general principle of the compulsory poorrate, and whose disapproval of the rates is in line with the differences of opinion among jurists, is not a heretic. They accept the compulsory nature of the fast d Ramauin and forbid breaking it during that period except for reasons of minority of age, or being possessed, or sickness, or traveling, or a similar reason7. They declare that the observance of the month of fasting commences with the observation of the new moon of Ramadin or with the completion of thirty days in Shacbin\ They cannot break it at t@ end of the month except upon observation of the new moon of Shawwil or the expiration of thirty days in t h e month of Ramadin. They accuse of emor those among the Rawifid who commwee their fast one day before the appearance of the new moon and break it one day before the rigtit timeg. Tiie account of the wedding-gifi.is found in Tab. 1, 1917-19, IA, 11, 270-1.
repeated almost verbatim
' The evidence from the Kur'Pn and the traditions is cited in Umm, 1, 167. Cf. Juynboil. 85-9, and Usil,190. Droii Musulman, 1, 85: U s k , ib.
"uerry,
' Usnl,
191.
qi.e., if they were not sent to work and grazed on free land which did not cost the omer anything. Juynboil, 100-2.
!
US& 184; Ash'ail, 225-6. Most Mu'iariiites agree with the Orthodox. The accusation against al-NazfBm is aiso found in Intear, 27-8; al-KhayyH! denies it.
' ib , 99-100, ib, 121-2.
' ib.,
117-9.
' Querry, L c.,
U m n , 1, 59-60: Madau~wa,m, 1, 55-7; Juynboii, 66-71. !
1, 195.
They affirm the obligation of the pilgrimage and1 the pious visit at least vnce upon everyone who is able to perform it2. They, condemn those among
declare those among the Khawirij who reject the punishment for wine' and stoniog2 to be heretics. They state that the sources of the precepts of the law are the Book, Tradition, and consensus among the ancients! They declare anyone a heretic who does not regard the consensus of opinion among the Companions as evidence. They condemn the Khawirij as Kifirs for their rejection of the au-
the Bitiniyya who rejed the obligatory nature of both%% infidels, but they do not declare him a heretic who denies the need of making a pious visit, owing to the differences of opinion in the Community regarding its compulsory character". They teach that among the conditions required in order to make prayer valid, are to be reckoned the purification, the covering of the pudenda, the arrival of the right time, and facing the Kibla wherever possible? Whoever fails to comply with these requirements or part of them, despite hi ability to fulfill them, is an infidel.
I
i
1
They recognize the obligation of the Holy War against the enemies of I s l ~ m 337 until they become Muslims or until the poll-tax is paid by those among them
hom whom the accepta~~ce bf tribute is permittedb. They affirm the legality of trade' and the illegaliiy of usurys. ;They declare everyonc who legalizes usury generally to he in error?. n e y rule that sexual intercourse is not allowed save. by lawful marriage or rightful concubinage. They condemn the Mubayyidal', the Muhammira and the Khurramiyya as infidels because they rule adultery lawful. They also declare those people K s r s who interpret the forbidden relations to refer to persons whom they think it forbidden to befriend". They confirm the obligation to inflict punishment for adultery, theit': -1
Reading i.,il,
with Casanova; MS. and Ed. 5 4 1
' SUra 3, v. 91. ' Readlng b.;MS. and ' Ed., 280.
Ed.
!
1
c
II
wine and l i b e l l i n g ' b d they
4.
4.
UsiL, 193 where the general requirements for the other fundamentals are also listed. Cf. Juyr~boll,61-4, 68, 75. U?it, 194; Juynboll, 336-44, and below, under the fifteenth essential. UsiL, ib,; Juynboll, 261-3; Sachau, 271 and 275-9. a Us& 195; Juynboli, 270-6; Sachau, 271 and 279-81. Ace. to U?il, ib., he is a Kiflr. Cf. Juynboll, 270 and Saehau 279. '' With Goldriher; Ed. and MS. i k i l . On the group see above.
j I
thority of consensus and tradition, and they declare anyone among the R a d d a Kifir who says. that none of this serves as evidence because authority rests with the Imam whom they are expecting. These people are at present bewildered in their straying, and there is suificient shame far them in this. Regarding the tenth essential which is devoted to what is allowed and forbidden, they teach that the acts of the 4itrknllafs (those bidden to obey) fall under five categories: the obligatory, the forbidden, the commendable, the improper, and the allowedi. The obligatory is that which the Lord has commanded as a binding necessity. Whoever neglects it, incurs just punishment on himself for neglecting it. The forbidden is that which God has interdicted and its doer brings due punishment upon himself for doing it. The commendable is that for the performance of which one is rewarded but for tihose neglect one is not punished. The improper is that for the avoidance of which one is rewarded but for whose perlormance one is not punished. The allowed is that for the periormance of which one is neither rewarded nor punished, nor does one suffer punishment or earn reward for neglecting it. All this concerns the a d s of the ~Vl~rk,rliafs.As for the acts of the animals, the insane, or children, they cannot 338 be defined at all in terms of legitimate, obligatory or prohibiteds. They assert that everything, such as knowledge of God, confession, or works, which are binding on the i&t.kalluf are binding only because God enjoined them upon him. Everything which it is forbidden to do is so because of God's prohibition. But if
'
Referdng to the Bggniyya and some ultraJhi'ite seets. These crimes, to which may also be added hlghway-robbely, are discus~edfully in Juynboll, 300-6; Sachau, 809-12 and 815-37; UsEI, 197-9. '' It is limited to false charges of adultery. Juynboll, 303-4.
1
It is the Naiadit who annul this punishment, Ed.. 68 (Seelye, 90).
'A
punishment inflicted in certain cases of addtely, Juynboll, 301-2; Sachau, 809. Among the Khawirij, the Azzrika oppose stoning (Ed., 64, Seelye, 84). T s i L , 204-5; Juynboil, 39-54. It is to be noted that our author fails to indude the fourth source, K i y i a (analogy). Us&, 205, discusses it.
fl
"
i
Us& 149-200; Hilli, 40-1; Juynboll, 58-61. IH. 1, 78-81 (Asin, Ii, 190-4).
tne command or the interdiction had not come from God to His worshippers, nothing would be obligatory on them and nothing would be forbidden to them1. This is contrary to the opinion of those among the Barihima nnd*yadariyya who maintain that the charge is imparted to the intelligent person by two inclinations which stir in his heartE. One of them emanates from God Who exhorts him by means of it to apply reasoning and logic; the other comes from Satan who urges him through it to disobey, and prevents him thereby from following the first inclination. This forces them to the conclusion that Satan was also a iiiriknUaf by two inclinations3 one of which emanated from God and the other from another Satan. Thereupon the argument regarding the second Satan will be like that a b d the first, sb that an iqfinite series of Satans will be premised. But this is absurd, and what leads to absurdity is in itself absurd. Rkgarding the eleventh essential, which deals with the extinction of mankind and their judgments in the world to come, .they teach that God can annihilate the entire world summarily or destroy part of the bodies and allow the others to elrdure4. This is contrary to the opinion of those among the Kadariyya of Basra who hold that He is capable of destroying all bodies with an accident-of-perishing 339 not in a substratum which He will create: but that He is unable to destroy some of the bodies while others continue to exist. 'They assert that God will finally resurrect all mankind and the other living beings who died in the worlds, contrary to the view of those who maintain that He will resurrect only people but not the remaining living beings. They affirm the creation of Paradise and Hell contrary to the - belief of those who think that > ' U s i f ,202-3; U+f, 203-4;
Creencia, 284-92; IH, 1, 72-73 (Asin, 1, 161-4). Crcensin, ib. and 295; iH, 1, 69-70 (Asin, 11, 182-5).
The two in-
clinations are of course very similar to the X U YYr and Y? 7%' in Rabbinic theology. 6 Sdan in Arabic theology is a rebel angel who disobeyed, therefore the argument is here Us&, 204, adds that if they do not think him a rebel against orders he is not to be condemned.
U?/4 229-30; for further information see above 232-3 and notes. 231-2. See the protesta of our author as an orthodox Muslim against this view, Uris;l, 236-7; Creenria, 320-3; Hiiii, 82-3; REzi, 100-2; iH, IV, 79-81, where the problem is raised whether only the soul will be resurrected or the body as well. He'deddes in favor of the latter. Cf. U+, 235-6.
they were not created'. They believe in the perpetual enjoyment of Paradise by its inhabitants and the perpetual sufferings in Hell of the polytheists and the hypo%rites, contrary to the opinion of those like Jahm who believe that they will both perish, and to the opiniou of Abu-I-Hudhail the Yadarite that all the objects of God's power, both within these two places and elsewhere, will perishP. They say that only infidels are destined to Hell eternally, contrary to the teachings of the Kadariyya and the Khawirij that all who enter Hell will remain there eternally.
<
They assert that the yadariyya and the Khawirij will be condemned to Hell eternally and wiil not escape from it; how can God Iorgive those who declare that it is not up to God to forgive and deliver from Hell those who enter it? They declare that they confirm the examination in the grave4 and the tortures in the grave for those who deserve themc. They have decided that those who deny tortures in the grave will be tortured there. They believe in the Apostle's Pool" the Bridge' and the Balances.
j
-
1
i
p
~
Whoever disacknowledges them
~
U s i f , 237-8; Ash'ari, 475; Abu Hanlfa. 41-2; Malurldi, 28-9; IH, IV, 81-3. Usnl, 238; Ash'ari, 474-5; Abu Hanrfa, ib.; ibn lskander. 24; IH, IV, 83-6.
The latter mentions a Shi'ite sect which believes that the people of Paradise and Hell wili be created with their destinies. A fllli summary of the various views held on eternal Hell etc., wiil be found IH, N, He himself agrees with our author. See Us& 242; Ash'ari, 274; ibn Iskander, 22; Rbi, 102-3. 44-6.
'
This examination wili be canducled by the hvo angels NEldr and Munkar. For traditions and details, see Woiff, Mah. Eschdolo,qie, 71-3 (Arab. 40-1); Ghaziii, al-Drrmm, 20-3
(Arab. 23-7); Abu Hanila, 43. W o i f f , L e, 162-71 (Arab. 94-01; nl-Drrrra, 24-8 (Arab. 27-32). GhazEii argues that punishment is possible in the grave but IH, IV, 67 asserts that the examination and tarhlre will take place on the Day of Resurreciian and that until then there is no contact between the body and soul of a dead person. See also Ibino, 91-2. " Uski, 246; Hiiii, 83-4; IH, iV, 66; al-Durra, 70; I b k a , 90-1;
Ash'ari, 473.
' Same sources as above. Creenci5, 326-8,
For a description see Woiff. I. c. 147-54 (Arab. 82-6). Biving us a good insight into the realistic belief in it by a rational
philosopher; Hilli, ib.; M, IV, 65-6. The idea of the Balance, and probably Ule Bridge, is borrowed from the Persians who share it with the Hindus. See Goldziher, Islamisme et Parsisme, RHR, XU11 (1901), 11-2. for the Persian doctiiilu see A.V.W. Jackson's article on the Persian belief in the future life in Sneath, Religion and the Fatrrrc Life, 126-199.
will be forbidden to drink from the Pool and his foot will slip from the Bridge to the fire of Gehenna. They affirm the Intercession' of the Prophet and the pious people of the communiiy in behalf of Muslim sinners and of whosoever had in his head a speck of faith. But those who deny Intercession will have it 340
denied to them2. Regarding the twelfth essential relating to the Caliphate and the imimate:
(!+)
they teach that the lmimate is a duty incumbent on the community, because the appointment of an lmim establishes' judges and executives. He guards their frontiers, leads their armies in raids, apportions the booty among them, and vindicates the one wronged against the wrong-doer'. They say that the method of conferring the Imamate on the lmim in this community is selection, by seeking the most qualified person" They say there was no indication from the Prophet regarding the appointment of anyone in particular to the Imbnate", contra7 to I
U s i I , 244-5;
IH, iV, 63-5;
W0i.f. I.?. 177-85
(:Arab. 100-4);
"I-Durrcr; 56-8
(Arab. 66-9). The reference is to the Kadatiyya and the Khaw6rii who believed that Intercession would not prevail. IH, ib., agrees with our author in charging them with denial of it and so aim Ash'ari, 474, wiieie it is stated that some Mu'tazila denied it while others limited its effcacy only to believers. in Ibnnu, 89-90, al-Ash'ati, however, argues with them not about
'
its existence as he does in the case of the Pool and the tortures, but about whom it wUI be applied to. In Us;[, BaghdHdi counts this as the thirteenth essentid and lists Faith (our thti-
'
teenih) as thstweiflh. * Both this word "estabiishes" (4) and the word "guards" have a damma over the yo in the MS. to indicate either the pasoiiw or the 1V form. Yet neither suits here. The entire phrase is doubtfui and unf~rtvnateiy U!il's readings are aiso uncertain here, 271.
" f i t , ib.; IH, LV, 87; RHzi, 105-6 (TBsPs commentary as a Shigte is interesting, 110); Hiiii, 62-4, maintaining the view in common with the Mu'tariia that reason as well as ieveiation didate the appointment of an 1mHm; Creencia, 348-52; Ikhald. 1, 388-91. Cicenria, 352-5; U+i, 279.
' This queition of nnss (indication) is the pivot of the entire conflict behveen Sunnites and Shpires. From the 0nhddoa point of view see U+ 279-81; Ibana, 94 (Arh'ati maintains that there is a nass but it obviously points to Abu Bekr; the Khallfs named their successon); IH, IV, 96-105, esp. 96-8 and 102 (he aiso reco5Iires a nass but merely in the Kuraish); Creencia, 352-9, and finaiiy Streitsckrift, 63-6 (Arab. 36-9). The Shi'ite
the opinion of the Rawifid that he definitely indicated the Imamate of 'Ali, in a way which is absolutely trustworthy. But if it were, as they allege, on the basis of a tradition which has been transmitted', others similar t o it have been handed down'. Whoever makes this claim regarding 'Ali in face of the want of a continuous chain of authority in its transmission, cannot be distinguished from anyone who makes a similar claim for Abu Bekr or for someone else despite the lack of traditions to support it*. They teach that it is a condition of the Imamate that the incumbent be a son of the Kuraish', descendants of the Banu Nadr ibn Kinina ibn Khuzaima ibn Mudrika ibn Alyis ibn Mudar ibn Nizir ibn Ma'add ibn 'Adnins. This is contrary to the opinion of the Diririyya that the lmimate may be held by all Arabs, or by freed slaves, or by Persians', and is also contrary to t h e belief of the Khawirij . claims are recorded In Hilli, 64-78 a very fuil exposition; a refutation of most of it will be found IH, ib.: Strothmann, Stnotsrecht d. Zaiditen, 11-25; a refutalion of the Sunnite argument, ib., 13-4. 1 See two traditions (both characterized as "Mi~tnwiti?'- transmitted by a continuous ehain-in Hllli, 75-7; Hnyynt-nl-Kulzib, 335-47.
' C i Stieitschiift, 64 (Arab. 37-8); Strothmann, I. c., 29 and nate hvo; IH, IV, 91. I read the second word "nk? as a verb and not an accusative noun as Ed. does. U s i f , 280. The same argument is employed St-eitsckrift, 64-5 (Arab. 37-8). Ghar.ili answers the charge made by the Shr'ites that tile Companions suppressed the tradition because of personal interests. The Shi'ite answer to the question why 'Aii swore loyalty to the other Khallfs (Ibina, 95). that he did it because he feared to disclose his real feelings, is
'
repudiated by ibn e a r m as an insult to 'Ali's courage, N,g7. Us;[, 275-6 and 7; Ash'aii, 461; Crrencio, 353; iH, IV, 89; Ikha'd, 1 394-400. It is interesting to note that according to hiin the famous theologian al-BHWlHni dissented from this opinlon. " U s i f relates that some wanted to trace the Kuraishitic branch to an earlier ancejtor than Nadr go as io include tbemseiues, 276-7. LH, ib., ciaims that the Sunniks are agreed that the Kuraish are offspring of Fihr ibn miik, two generations later than Nadr. He has this on the authotiv of HishHm b. Mu?ammad. Cf. Tab., 1, 1106; IA, U. 18-9. Baghdsdi probabiy carries the genealogy no further because there is a tradinon that the Prophel forbade searching beyond Ma'add Murrij, N, 118 and 119. L4, ib., does not record this tradition, but also closes his account because of the great confusion beyond 'AdnHn, 23-4.
' DirHr said that a Penian man.
was even to be preferred to an Arab and a Mawia to a free U s i f , 275. Ash'ari, 462, explains that it is because they have less family protection
in the Imamate of their chiefs who sprang from the Rabpa and other clans, such as Nifi' ibn al-Azrakl al-Hanafi, Najda ibn 'Amir' al-Hanafi, 'Abdallah ibn UTahab al-Risibi: H u r k i ~ibn Zubair al-Bajali4, Shabib ibn Ye6d al-Shaibinij and their The lrnims are from the Kuraish6. They assert that learning, uprightcess and statesmanship are pre-requisites to the 1mimate7. They require learning of him to the extent of quali!ying as one
the Imam. In this wag they have permitted him to lie despite their belief in his freedom from lying'. They assert that the Imamate is bestowed by the act of one who confers it upon a person who is eligible for it, provided the person conferring it is a qualified jurist and an upright individualz. They rule that the Imamate can rightly belong
341 like, who deviate horn the sayi.lg of theprophet:
i
of those who can develop legal r u l i n g s v n the precepts of the law. They stipulate that he possess enough probity so that he can be included among those on the basis of whose testimony a judge may issue a decision; that is, he should be of a pious religious attitude, kindly disposed to his possessions and affairs, above
between the provinces, such as an ocean, an enemy that carmot bc coped with, when the people of the two districts are not able to lend each other aid. In that case it is legal for the people of one province to confer the lmimate on one of their men who is qualified for iti.
committing any deadly sin, nor addicted to minor sins, and above failing in manliness under the most trying circumstances But it is not one of the requirements that he be altogether immune from sins, conh.ary to the opinion of the lmimiyva who maintain that the Imam is immune from all sins". Yet they have believed it right for him to say in case of fear":
They recognize the Imamate of Abu Bekr the Righteous aiter the Prophet, contrary to the Rawifid who confirm it only for 'Alis, and contrary to the opinion of the Rawendiyya who confirm the ImHmate of 'Abbis after him 4 They approve of 342 grading Abu Bekr and 'Omar first in rank, respectively, and after them 'Ali, but
1 am not an Imam, when in reality he is adherence lo the views of the ruiing party in order to avoid dangers. See EI, 1% 628-9, and Goldziher's article in the ZDMG, LX (1906). 213-26. Aithougi~ sowti%nesutiiired by
and IH. =plains that it is because these are easier to remove. Naubakhti. 10, cites both reasons. Acc. to him, Mu'taiiiiter, other things being equal, preferred a Kuraishite. We no doubt find here echoes of the resentment felt against the 'Umayyadr. But most probabiy, it is due to Shu'Bbiyyu views. See M l l h St. 1. 157. For an echo of this controversy in tradition see Mzzhhtaiif oi-+d;flz, 149-51.
Sunnites, and more fcequently by the Khawjtij, it is essentially a SbXte characttiistic. I The Shfite answer will be that according to this reasoning prophels cannot be r c garded immune either, since even Muhammad dissembled. Cf. EI, ib.
W u r author follows ai-ilsh'ari's miing that the choice by one qualified individual is But titere are a number of other views ranging from two people to adequate, Ufil,280-1. the entire Muslim community. U?ii, ib.; Ash'ari, 460; IH, IV, 167-71; the latter agrees with ai-Ash'ari, ib. 169. In this miing we no doubt have another example of accommodation to circumstances which characterizes the Sunnites, confronted as they were with a phenomenon
E d , 62-6 (Seeiye. 83-7). ib., 66-70 (87-91). a ib. 71(92). ' ib ; I read &I with MS.; Ed., & d l . ib., 89-92 (111-5). The tradition in this version is reported TayHiisi, +926 and 2133, See aiso BukhSti, IV, 407; Tirmidhi, 11, 36 top; U s i l , 276; IH, iV, 89-90. 1
of dynasties that bequeathed the Caliphate from father to son.
'
' UsGi, 274-5; 88-9
(I+,
277; Creencin, 353; Slreilschriff, 82-9; Strothmann, I. c. 67-82; ilihaid, Aii of these include Kuraishitie origin as one of the necessary quaiiflcations. U ~ i l ,ib.; Strothmann, I. e., 70; Streitschrift, 86-9. Far a full discussion of titihid see EI, 11, 448-9. U+l, 278; Streitschrift, 66 (Arab. 39-41). Hiili, 64.-8; IH, IV, 95. Arab. Taki3'yc (with Ooidziher; Ed. and MS. +I). It is a principle, granting one the tight, and in Shi'ite circles the duty, to dissimulate, conceal one's true belief and feign
Ash'ati, 460-1
(he makes no exception far the emersency); 1H. IV,
(He also does not specify any cases where the ruling may be overstepped); IKhald.
1, 391-2.
1, 392-3.
11
to only one persol, throughout the entire land oi Islam', unless a barrier lies
* IKhaid, ib., specifies that this view w s held ~ by Abu lshik al-Tsfaraini. One is tempted to believe that unlike his customary application of the term Rawsfld
j
as synonymous with Shl'a. BaghdSdi discusses in this case the Imamiyya more particularly who, unlike the Zaidiyya, took a hostile stand to the "Wo Sheikhs" (i.e. Abu Bekr and 'Omarj. See Ftiediander's Appendix on the Rawifid, Shirtes, 11, 137-59.
' U f d , 281
and 284-5;
they are refuted by IH, IV, 91-2.
they diverge about the relative positions of 'Ali and 'Uthmin'. They affirm their loyalty to 'Uthmin and they steer clear of anyone who calls him an infidel'. They recognize the Imamate of 'Ali in its time"
They judge 'Ali rightful in his wars
in Basra', in Si%n5 and in Nahrawin" and they assert tliat Talha and al-Zubair repented and withdrew from warfare against 'Ali7 but that al-Zubair was slain by 'Amr ibn JurmhzB in Wadi Sibi' aiter his withdrawal from the battle. When Talha was about to leave, Merwin ibn al-Hakam, who was with the Party of the Camel, shot him with an arrow and killed him'. They say that '..'isha was aiming to set
' Ibinn,
94-5;
Creencin, 363-4
455, and sources an above. ' Against the Pariy of the Camel, i, e. '%isha, Taiha and ai-Zubair.
Tab. (Zotenberg)
Ili, 632-64. Against Mu'Hwiya, I. c., 670-83. Agantst the Secessionist KhawSiij. i. r, 687-91. account is sunported by the authorities. See Mzzrrzj, IV, 316-21;
' This
right was with 'Ali in the arbitration, yet the two judges did not sin hy depriving him of his office, which necessitated his dismissal, and by the deception which
1 i
one of the two arbiters practised against the other" They assert that the party of Nahrawin deviated from true religion The Prophet named them deviators6 because they condemned 'Ali, 'Uthmh, 'A'fsha, ibn 'Abbis, Talha, al-Zubair, and the others who followed 'Ali, after the arbitration, as infidels. They also call everyone among the Muslims who commits a sin an infidel. But whoever makes the
I
1
I
MS. and Ed. read u, which is meaningiess. The reading here is based oil U ~ i l ,
289, line 1 i (ih) The role 'A'isha played in fomenting the rebellion against 'Ali, .mham she hated ever
'
I
since he had urged the Prophet who sus~ectedher chastily to divorce her, under the pretext of avenging 'Uthmsn, whom she had likewise opposed, as well ar her central position throughout the Batiie of the Camel,-actually so called because it was concentrated around ilvr beast,-
are too well-known to aiiow anyone to suaiiow our author's statement unquestioningly. It is true that on the way to Bapra, when she parsed the place caiied ai-eawb and heard dogs barking, which recalled to her an ominous tradition of the Prophet connected with the barking of the dogs at ai-Hawb, she wavered for a time wishing to return (but ct Mnh. S f . ii, 126). But
I
she overcame that fear very soon and ied the batiie. Our author's plea that she went to make peace, told in different versions by pseudo-ibn Kuiaiba, I. r., 125-6 and Mnrij, iV, 335. is na doubt a fabrication by Sunnites. We find a sad example of her hostile tendencies in hzr first woids to 'Aii after the battie, Tab. 1, 3225. Our author's standpoint is also taken by Creencia, 361: IH, iV, 158 and U s i i , 289.
IA, Ill. 196-7
Tab. (Zotenberg). 111, 660 reads ~ o r m o u zand so also Us;/, 289. IA, 111. 196-7 and 199-200 (Acc, to him it is not certain that M e w i n killed him); Tab. (Zotenberg), 111, 655-60. The authorities tell nothing about Taipa's intention to ieave the battle. Only pseudo-ibn Kutaiba, oI-Siyhslr wal-[mama, 129 (On the authorship see Brockeimann, Cesch. d nrob. Lit., 1, 122 and de Goeje in Rivistn degli Stlrdi Orientoli, I (1907-08), 415-21) embellishes our author's account by adding that Tai\la mharled God to punish the Palty of the Camel in whatever way He would choose and that no sooner were the words spoken than p i h a was shot by Mews". Cf. Lbn Sa'd, v. 25, 2 i .
.-
A - ~
!
j
and 199-201; Tab. (Zotenberg) 111, 655-60; Ya'kiibi, 11, 212-3. ' Ed. and MS. b r r . But most scholars agree an tile reading jrz: Ya'kubi 11, 213; Murij, IV, 319: LA, Ill, 200-1; Tab. 1, 3218 (although de Goeje adds the note "Cod ut soiet
while Mu'Gwiya and his supporters wronged him by meaus of an interpretation' as a result of which they became sinners but not heretics'. They declare tliat
(his explanation thal the ranking is beyond the
human reason and that it is entirely within the ken of God is the struggie of an inteiiectuai Muslim to put up with the evident lack of justice in 'UthmHn's reign, whom he ranks before 'Aii): Ash'ari, 458-9; MaturTdi. 27; Abu Hanifa, 25-6. IH, IV, 112 ranks Muhammad's wives after the Prophet and then Ahu Bekr. 'Gmar, 'UthmHn, 'Aii. But he determines the rank only in accordance with what the Muslims have been told of thcir relalive position in Paradise, I. c. 111 fi. On the question of the relative rank of 'Aii and 'UthmSn ct End' walTa'rTkh, V, 149 and ibn ai-Jauzi, Mnnikib Abnnd b. Hnn6n1, 160-61. 1 Ash'ari, 454 and sources as above; U S ~ I286. , ' The controversy here is with the Ksmiiiyya and the KhawHrij. UsGI, 286-7; Ash'ari,
a
affairs right between' the two parties but the Banu Dabba and al-Azd overruled her opinion and fought against 'Ali without her permission, so that the s u c c e e d i ~ ~ g events occurred'. Regarding al-Si%n they rule that right was on the side of 'Ali,
!
* Referdiing to the pinning of the K u i i n on the swards and the arrangement for the arbitration. U+I, 290; IH, IV, 159-61.
jrr',).
Murij, IV, 321-2;
ib.
i
' Referring to the
i 1
i
i i
Khallf. '
decision reached by the two iudges to call for the eieMon of a new But when Abu M t s a ai-Ash'ari, 'Aif's representative, openly disavowed his aiiegiance
to 'Aii and demanded a new eledion, 'Amr ibn ai-'dpi contrary to his previous agreement, reasserted the Caliphate of Mu'Bwiya and carded the victory. Tab (Zottnberg), lii, 684-7. ' Bukhari, 11, 337.
calls the choicest Companions Kifirs is the one infidel
garding the leebmacy of slaying everyone who i s disobedient to God. If all the sinnafs were infidels tl~eywould become apostates from Islam. But if they had
Regarding the thirteenth essential relating to faith and Islam they teach: Verily the fundamental of faith is knowledge of God and an affirmation of this truth in the heart1, but they differ regarding whether to term the confession faith,
this status, it would become an obligation to kill them without inflicting any pu-
343 Muslims Kifirs and
among them.
as well as the external acts of obedience, performed by the external organs, des-
pite their unanimity as to the obligatory nature of all the prescribed commandments
i I
and the merits of pedorming the ordained, unwritten works2. This is contrary to the doctrine of the Karrimiyya that faith is confession only, regardless of whether it is sincere or feigned" contrary also to the opinion of those among the Kadariyya and the Khawirij who hold that the name Believer is not applicable to sinnersi. They (the Orthodox) teach that the term faith is not dropped as a result He whose sin is milder than non-belief is therefore a believer even though he transgresses by his disobedience. They say that the death-sentence on a Muslim is not legal except for one
j
U?;l, 248-51. The liberal attitude of our author is surprising in view of the fact that even Abu Hanlfa required confession as a conditioil 01 faith. But he probably stands on the same pialform as ai-Asb'ad Hi3 statement in (isif, 248, that al-Ash'ari defined faith as 1
I! i
I
from fsiim, autamaticaliy makes him an infidel. That this defence is weak becomes apparent from Ibonn, ib.: Isism is more inclusive than faith and not every tenet in islim is part of faith.
)
' Sachau,
812 and 843-6;
see under the fifleenth essential.
' Sachau,
809 and 815-7;
Juynboii, 301-3.
'
Reading a P . with Galdziher; Ed. and MS. 4'. The law is that reprisal ( f i r $ is allowed only on certain conditions among which is that the murdered one must be a Muslim if the murderer is. Ju)nboli, 294-6; Sachau, 762 and 774-4.
Regarding the fourteenth essential, relating to Saints and Imams, they asseri that angels are immune from sin' by the Word of God: "They (the angels) do 344 not disobey Allah in what He commands and do as they are commandede. The majority of them affirm that the excellence of the prophets is greater than that of
"an affirmation of God and His Messengers and their traditions, and this affirmation is valid only if accompanied by a knowledge of Him" is contradicted by I b i n n 10, where al-Ash'ari says: "faith consists of words and deeds: it can be increased and diminished". IH, ii, 111 and Ill, 188-9, confirms Usii, ib. But the editor takes exception there to this statement, maintaining that Abu-I-Hasan identified faith with l ~ l i mi o that any word or deed which would exdude one
' For these differences, see Usii, 248-9: IH. ib. * Ed., 211-2; Ash'ati, 141; IH, ib.; Usil, 250-1. ' U?isGi, 249-50; IH, In, 229-34; Ash'ari, 266-70.
than execution.
the angels, contrary to the opinion of those who attribute superiority to the angels over the prophets3. From this standpoint it would necessarily follow that the
of any sin except heresy.
of three crimes: apostasy? adultery after marriage6 and reprisal lor a murdered person when he is his equal'. This is contrary to the view of the Khawirij re-
nishment on them. T h e r e would thus be no purpose in requiring the amputation of the thief's hand, or the flogging of the libeller or the stoning of a person committing adultery after marriage. The apostate receives no other punishment
Zabaniya4 are superior in rank to those of the apostles who possess constancy, earnestness and patience. They believe in the superiority of the prophets to the saints of ail oations contrary to the opinion of those among the K h i y y a who rank some of the saints higher than some of the prophets5. The Orthodox diner regarding the legitimacy of the tenure of the Imimate by the less qualified of two contestants. Our Sheikh al-Ash'ari denied it, but al-Kaliaisi granted itR. They profess lave for ten of the Prophet's Com-
~bu-1- asa an
panions and they rule that they are among those who have entered Paradise7.
i I
i
1 See iH, iV, 32-5 and his denial of the angelic nature of H t a t and MBrilt or even Iblis, see also U ? d , 296-7. Sura 66, v. 6. ' Ed., 333 (above 201 and notes). These are the angels who torment the dead in Hell.
'
Ib.; U+l, 298. U+l, 304.; Ibinn, I I and 95. The Zaidirja and many Mu'tazlliteo shared his opinion. Ash'ari, 461.
' The tradition whteh lists the ten who are admitted to Paradise is recorded by Ahmad b. Hanbai, 1, 193. In another version, also on the authority of Sa'ld b. Zaid, and recorded ib., 187, and Tayilisi, 236, the Prophet is one of the ten, Abu 'Ubaida is eliminated and Sa'd ibn MBiik replaces ibn Abu Wakkis.
These include the four Kliafis, Talha, al-Zubair, Sa'd ibn Abu W a k k i ~ ' , Sa'id ibn
!
who adore Jamshid' or those who invoke Nimrid ibn Kana'ins or Fifarrn and
i
their like. Another worships all fonns which it considers beautiful, in accordance with the doctrines of the Huliliyya and their claim that the Spirit of God is embodied in beautiful forms, Still another worships the sun, or the moon, or the stars as a whole, or some one star in particular8. There is one which worships
Zaid ibn 'Amr ibn Nufail', 'Abd-al-Rdhmin". Abu 'Ubaida ibn al-Jarr$h4. They profess their love for all who were present with tne Prophet at the battle of Badr,
i
and are convinced that they are among the people who dwell in Paradise" Theg maintain a similar attitude to all who witnesssed with him the battle of Uhud, with
i I
the angels and calls them Daughters of God. With respect to these people God's
the exception of one man whose name is Kuzmin. He slew a number of the polytheists at Uhud, but then killed i~irnseli and was therefore classed with the hypocrites" Similariy all who were present at the Pledge of Good Will in. alHudaibiya are among the people who have eutered Paradise without a reckoning and everyone of them will intercede for s e v e ~ ~ t ythousand7. In this group 345 'Ukkisha ibn Mihsan is also included. They also teach us to love all who died while defending the religion of lslim, provided they were not, before their death, partisans of any heresy af the heresies of the people of erring fanciesa. Regarding the fifteenth essential, relative to the status of the emmies of the faith, they teach that the enemies of the faith fall under two categories. One existed before the rise of the reign ol Islam, and the other sprang up since the institution of islim. These take shelter in Islam outwardly, but they deceive the Muslims and pursue their own wickedness. Those which existed before IsPm
Word was revealed: "Most surely they who do not believe in the hereafter name 1
I
I
I
eomprise a number of groups with diverse characteristics'. One consists of the worshippers of idols and images. Another worships particular individuals like those
the angels with female names"'. Another worships the rebellious Satan. Another serves the cow; others worship fire. The law relative to these worshippers of idols, people, angels, and fire is to prohibit to Muslims the eating of their meats5 and 347 marriage of their women" But they differ regarding the acceptance of the polltax from them. Al-ShHfi'i rules: No poll-tax may be accepted from them; it may be taken only from the People of the Book or from those who possess what resembles a Book7. B U ~ MZlik and Abu Hanifa declare it lawful to take tribute from them, except that Milik excluded the Kuraishitess from among those whereas Abu ~ a n i f amade an exception for all Arabsn. Among the divisions which were infidels before the days of Islam are also included the Siifusti'iyya who deny realities; the Sumaniyya who teach t h e preexistence of the world and reject inductive and deductive speculation, contending that nothing can be known except through the five senses; the Dahriyya who believe in the eternity of the world; tlrose who recognize an eternal hylic matter .. .
A general who participated in many of tile wan of expansion of biZm. El. IV, 29-30. 1
' Contra
Ed. and MS. which read &-. He was a very early convert to lslZm and exceedingly pious, 1. c 66-7.
' Ibn 'A
'Awf, a Kuraishlte and early convert to IslZm, I. c. I, 44.
close Companion of the Prophet, I. e. 1, 112.
' Ugd,302.
11, 71; d. Wensinck, 182a and 1128.
UsiS 317.
' See 218
a similar list, with several divergencies, Makrizi, 344'5;
U s d , 318-24.
who reports that he also
i
claimed divinity; Albirirni, 200-3; Justi, Iran Nmenb,, 144. a Called by Other authorities i6n K w h The stories about him are collected IA, I.
1
67-72
and 81-4. The reference is to those who worshipped Saturn because he is- the highest of the
seven planets.
"uzmZn Is the man about whom the Prophet had previously remarked that he waul4 go to Hell. After displaying great valor on the baltleiieid he took hi! own life when his wovnd pained him. As the Prophet heard it, he exclaimed: I testify that I am in truth the apostle of God. Tab.. I 1423-4; IA, 11, 125; U+l, 302 (the reading JJ is hardly correct).
' Timidhi,
(Or Jimshid) one of the earliest Persian kings. IA, 1, 46-7,
U ~ i l321. ,
' Sura 53,
v. 28.
Umm, 11, 211; cl. Juynboil, 178. ' Sura 2 v. 220-1; ibn ai-Humam, 11. 506-9; Juynboll, 221: ' Urn- IV, 155-6 and 158; Heffenlng, Isianris~hesFremdenrecht, 44. In note
three he fails to include the MBlikltes with the Hanifitfs. Muwalia (ed. KazZn) 146 and commentary. ibn Humam, IV, 371; Abu YBsuf, Kito6 al-Khnrii (Cairo ed.), 153-4.
in the' Universe, while admitting the creatiou of t h e accidents; the philosophers who profess the eternity of the Universe and disncknowledge the Maker. This is the view of Pythagoras and Cadmus'. Among them are also the philosophers who confess in an eternal Maker, but n.ho maintain that His acts are co-eternal with Him, and teach the co-eternity of the Maker and His Universe. This was the doctrine of Empedocles?. They also include the philosopliers who profess the eternity of the four elments and the four bases:, earth, water, fire and air; those who believe in the eternity of these four, as well as of the heavens and stars. maintaining that the heaveus are made from a fifth element and that it is not subject to creation and annihilation either in its entirely or in part The Muslims 347 are agreed that they are not allowed to eat the meats and marry the womeu of the
above groups; but they disagree as to whether to accept the poll-tax from them. Those who would take it from the idol-worshippers will also take it from them. But those who do not take it from the idol-worshippers will not accept it from them. It is this latter vieas which al-Shifi'i and his followers supporta. Regarding the Magians they tell us that they are divided into four sects: Zarwiniyya: MasSkhiyya" KhurramdIniyya7 and Bihifir~dhiyyan. The meats pre1
Ed. and MS. ,~,,i,li. But cf. Fikrisf, 239 and note.
i j and Ed. 9L
323-4.
of them has been published by irvin Blue in Studies in honor of Dastzrr Darob Peckofan Sanjano, (1925), 61-81. Ed., ++; MS. 4;-- for +;Shahr., 185, These are the transformers, a
+-
transiormed and
became Darlmess"., ib. Ed., 251-2 (above 87-8). Dhalia, I. c., 218-9 c o ~ n t sthis sect as a heresy within ZoroasManism. Also called Sassinifla, followen of BihifirTdh b. Mahfurbdhin, a reformer who was a contemporary of Abu Muslim. He at first accepted idZm under pressure from the general and became an 'Abbisid (Arab. ,+), but later apostasized and was killed by him. AlbIrirni reports nothing abovt this previous conversion.
sh-
is right to take tribute From the Zarvaniyya and the MassIkhiyyal. But they disagree about the raiio af their blood-money. Al-Shifi'i said: The bloodwit for a Magian equals a 13th of the hloodwit for a Jew or a Christianz and the bloodmoney for a Jew or a Christian equals a third of the blood-money for a Muslim, so that the blood-money for the Magian amounts to a fiiteentl:' of the bloodmoney for a Muslim. But Abu ~atiTfarules that the bloodwit for the Magian, the Jew and the Christian is equal to the hloodwit for the Muslim'. From the Mazdakiyya among the Magians the acceptance of tribute is not allowed because they have dissociated themselves from the religion of the original Magians by permitting all the forhidden practices and by teaching that all men have an equal share in goods m d women, and because of the other licentious practices. Similarly. the poll-tax may not'be accepted from the BihifiGdhiyya, although their teachings are superior to the teachings of the original Magianss, because their religion was promulgated by their chief Bihifiridh during the era of Islam, and the acceptance of tribute from the adherent to any form of unbelief which has arisen since the institution of Isl5m is not permissible. The jurists differ regarding the Sabians among the infidelss. Most of them 348 rule that their status with respect to their meats, marriage of their women, and the
A Sect believing in Z n r w i n (lit.. time), at first probabiy an abstract idea, but iater a d i ~ n i t yirom whom Ahura Mazda and Ahriman are said to have sprung. See their account A longer study in Shahr., 183-5; ERE, XI, 346; Dhaila. Zoroostrinn Tkeolofly, 203-5.
sed which believed that "Light alone existed, pure light, then part of it was
pared by all of them are forbidden and likeivise marriage with their women. Alafr',. l, Milik, Abu Hanifa, al-Auei'i and ,al-Thauri are unanimous in ruling that it
See an account of him Albirimi, 193-4:
poll-tax is like the status of the Christians; they are ail permitted7.
But others
The name of the native district of Bihifiridh is KkowwiL near Nishipar. Fikiist, 344 places him in Rawa near Nishipiri (Abmshakr in Persian). See Holautsma.~ ariicle WZKM,iiI (1889). 30-37. 1 U m m , IV, 158; Mnwotfa, 146. Shahr., 187-88.
Us64 319; Umrn, VIl. 291 and 294. The diya (bloodwit) for Jews and Christians is 4000 dirhems, for a Magian 800, and for a Muslim 12000. Ci. Juynboll, 296, note two. Milik sets the diyn of the Jew and Christian at 6000, ibn Humam, VIII, 307. (itith). Ed. and MS. U s i l , 327; U m m , Vii; ibn Humam, ib.
2
Their practices according to Muslim authorities are nearer to isiim. wine and forbid illicit relationships. See Shahr. and AibTrfini, ih.
' ( i ~ i l 324-5. ,
See aiso Ed., 263 (above 103).
Umm, N, 158; V. 6.
They drink no
differentiate as follows: those among the Sibians who profess the eternity of the Hylic substance are subject to the same mlings as the supporters of the Hylic hypothesis whom we have discussed previously. However, anyone among them who believes in the creation of the Universe but disputes us on the attributes of the Maker enjoys the same status as the Christians? This is our view. As regards the Barihima, who disacknowledge all the prophets and apostles, the followers of al-Shifi'i are agreed that, although they conform to the Muslims in their belief in the creation of the Universe and the unity of its Maker, their meats may not be eaten nor may their women be taken as wives. The controversy about taking tribute from them follows the same lines as in the case of idol-worshippers. The jurists of Islam are unanimous in declaring the meats prepared by Jews, Samaritans and .Christians to be lawful', in permitting the marriage of their women: and in regarding the taking of tribute from them as lawful4. But they disagree on the rate of the poll-tax. Al-Shifi'i said; Verily the contribution by every mature' person amounts to one &nir as a ransom for his bloodE. But Abu Hanffa nnlled that the rich one is taxed forty-eight dirhems, the middle-class person twenty-four, and the poor twelve'. They also differ regarding the infliction of punishment on them. Al-Shifi'i says that their punishments are the same as those for the Muslims, and the adulterer among them is to be stoned if he is a married man8. But Abu ~an:fa mled that they are not subjed to stoninga. They also differ regarding their blood-money. Al-Shifi'i said that the bloodwit for a Muslim, and the compensation far one of their women is a third of the blood-money of a Muslim geographical distinction between the SHbianJ of Ijarian and those of Ba!iha is made by the Uanifite school. See ZDMG, m i i (1878), 391-2. Sara 5, v. 7; Umm, 11, 196 and IV, 187; ibn Humam, Wii, 52. Sura, 5, v. 7; Umm, v, 5-6.and IV, 187; ibn Humam, 11. 509. ' Sura 0, 3,. 229; ibn Humam, IV, 370 and commentaries. 9 1 a b . &h; ai-Shifi'i relates that the Dhimmis of Yemen employed this term for Umm, iV, 101. ' Urnm IV, 101; ibn Humam IV, 368; JuynboU, 351. ' Ibn Humam, ib.; K i t i b al-Kharij, 146. umm. Vl, 164 ff.; ibn Humam, IV, 132-3; MSiik agrees with Ahu HanIfa see MILwatta, 283 and commentary. ' lbn Humam, ib. 1A
24.
woman'. Malik ruled that the bloodwit for one of the People of the Book is half 349 the blood-money of the Muslim. Abu Hanrfa ruled that it is exactly the same as the compensation for a Muslim'. They differ regarding the application of the law of retaliation to them. Al-Shifi'i said that no believer is to be killed for an iniidel under any circumstances", hut Ahu Hanfla said that a Muslim is to be killed for murdering a / l i r i ~ : i n i i but not lor the murder of a 1lfist~r.'min4. They also differ regarding the exaction of the poll-ta;r from their aged Sheikh. Al-Shifi'i required it" but Abu Hanffa did not impose it save on one who is capable of leading in war". They disagree about the Thanawiyya, the Daisiniyya, the Markihiyya among the Minawiyya, who believe in the eternity of light and darkness and maintain that the world is composed of these two; the good and the beneficial come from light, and the evil and harmful come from darkness. Some of the legislators maintain that their status is like that of the Magians and they permit. the acceptance of tribute from them although they forhid their meats and their women. But the approved view among us is that their position as regards marriage, meats and tribute is like that of the idol and image-worshippers which we have already explained As regards the infidels who have arisen since the institution of Islam, who take shelter in the mteri~alpractices of I s l b but slay the Muslims sevefly, such as the Ghulit among tlie Rawifid: the Sabbibiyya, the Bayiniyya, the Mugh!riyya, Umm, VI, 92: ibn Humam, VilT, 307.
* For Abu Hanifa's
' Urn*,
and M liYs views see ibn Humam, ib. VII, 291 f.; 389-99 (margin): ibn Humam, VIIi, 255-7.
' With MS. j.i;lL: Ed., @-Il. The Musta'min is a member of those groups whom Musiims are cnloined to kill, who has procured security from the Muslims by a pledge or treaty. Heffening, Das lslnrnischa Frenrdenrecht, has made a historical study of the stahls of the Mustn'nrir~in 1sliim.- Far Abu Hangfa's ruling, see ibn Humam, ib. He bases himSelf an a tradition according to which the Prophel ordered the execution of a Muslim who had filled a Dhimmi. Al-ShHfi'i who also repons this tradition, Umm, VI, 259 (margin) and Vn, 389-99 refutes Abu Hangfa's standpoint See also Hetfening, L c. 37-42. Un'm, IV, 98 bottom. ' ibn Humam, IV, 372-3. For the general question of the taxation of infidels in Isl%m, see Tritton, The Khalifs and their nos-Muslim Subjects, 196-228.
the Mansiriyya, the Janihiyya, the Khattibiyya, the other groups of the Hulfiliyya, the Mukanna'iyya, the Mubayyida in the country beyond the river JaihGn, the Muhammira of Azerbaijan and the Muhammira of Tabaristin; those who profess metemphychosis, such as the followers of lbn Abu-I-'Awja', and those of the Mu'; tazila who accept the views of Ahmad ibn Hi'it; those the KhawHij who pro350 fess the opinion of the Yeadis, maintaining that the law or Islam will be abrogated by the promulgation of a law by a Persian prophet; those of the Khawirij who accept the views of the Maimuniyya and permit marriage with daughters of qne's sons and daughters; those who follow the dr .tines ~f the 'Az5kira in Baghdad, or profess the views of the Hallijiyya, extremists among the Hullliyya, or ;share the opinion of the Barkikiyya and the Ruzimiyya who hold extravagant beliefs concerning Abu Muslim, the founder of the dynasty of Ule 'Abbkids; those who adopt the attitude of the Kimiliyya who declare the Companions heretics because they failed to pledge allegiance to 'Ali, and condemn 'Ali as an infidel because he refrained from fighting them, - the status of these enumerated groups is that of apostates from religion; their meats are not allowed and the marriage of t-eir women is not permitted'. It is not permissible to grant them the right to dwell within the Pale of Islam in exchange for the payment of tribute2. It is neceesary to call them to repentance. If they repent, well enough, but if not, it is one's duty to kill themS and to seize their property as war spoils'. Opinion varies on the enslavement of .their wives and children. Abu ~ a n i f aand also a group of S h 8 'ites, including Abu Ishik al-Merwezi, author of the commentaryj sanction itF. 1
Umm, M, 155.
' Their
stabs is thus like that of the Hnrbis. Muwatta, 348 and comm.; ihn Humam, IV, 386-7; Umm, M, 148. ai-Shifi'i condemns apostate men and women alike to death (ib., and 149), hut Abu Hanlfa condemns only men. ibn Humam, 388-9. See al-Shifi'i's dispute with him, Umm, VI, 150ff. ' This is in accordance with the principle that a Muslim cannot inherit a K3ir. Milik and Ahmad agree wiih him; Abu Hanifa dissents, ibn Humam IV, .391. ' Ab" IshSk Ibrahlm b. Abmad ai-Marwazi, d. 340 a. H. He was the greatest Shifi'ite in his age. The commentary is on Muzini's Epitome of the Kit& el-Umm,- the real handbook of Shafi'ite law,- which appears in the margin 01 the printed edition. See IKhall, 1, 7: Yak!X.lV, 512; Fihrist, 212. Ybn Humam, N, 403. K. a[-Khorij, SO.
i
Some of them forbid it1.
Those who allow it cite in support of their view tne ..
fact that Khilid ibn al-W&d, when he fought the Banu Hanifa and succeeded in slaying Musailima the Liar, made peace with the Banu ~ a n l f ain exchange for the and silver' and in exchange for a quader of the prisoners among the women and children4 and he sent them to d-Me&na Khawla, the mother of Mubarnmad ihn al-Hanafiyya4, was one of them. Concerning the people of fancy, such as the Jirudiyya, the Hishimiyya, the Najjsyya, and Jahmiyya, the Imimiyya who condemn the noblest of the Companions as Kifirs, the Kadariyya who deviate From the truth, the Bakriyya who are 251 linked with W r ibn Ukht 'Abd-al-Wihid, the Diririyya, all the athropomorphist sects, and the Khawirij, we brand them as heretics just as they declare the Sunnites heretics. Prayer in their behalf or after their death is not allowed. But our scholars differ regarding the problem of inheriting their propertg. Some of them say, we may inherit from them but they may not inherit h.om us. They base it on an opinion by Mu'idh ibn Jabal that the Muslim may inherit from the KSir but the K%I may not inherit from the Muslim? The approved cowse among us is that their property is regarded as booty, for inheritance is not allowed between them and between the Sunnites! It has indeed been transmitted that our sage Abu 'Abdallah al-HGth ibn Asad al-Muhkibi did not7 take anything from the bequest of his father because the latter was a KadariteR. Al-ShSi'i has decreed that the -
1 MS. and Ed. read Clii,, which makes no sense and does not present the view of the Shifi'itey I therefore read Jkl,. See Umm, 1V. 137 bottom; Mwini, v. 165. ' Lit. yellow and white. Against al-Balidhurt (ed. de Goeie), 90, on whose avthority Brackeimann wants to insert the word half (Ld) before silver and gold, we have the authority of Tab. 1. 1952-3; LA, 11, 279; Ya'mbi, 11, 146-7, ail of whbm confirm our authofs account Tab., ib. tells us that Khilid at first asked for haif the women as prisoners but by a ruse ananged by Mujji'a, the Hanafite who turned traitor, Khilid agreed to a quarter. Ya'kGbi and Balidhurt, ib. agree with Tab. ' With MS.; Ed., ik;Li. See Bad' Wa-Ta'Zkk,v. 76 (Arab. 74). ' usif, 341. Muciwiya also maintained this rule. See Shifi'i's abiections, Umm, N, 14. On Mu'idh, see N a w i c 553-41. Umm, IV, 13-6. ' Adding pi wiih MS.; missing in Ed. , 4 . He was a pious individual, learned in theology and a renowned SS, d. 243. See Subld, C r , 11, 37-9, and Sam'ini, 509 b. Both sources assert that his father was
prayers offered f r r the soul of one who professes the creation of the K u i b and the denial of the Beatific Vision are to be declared void. Hishim ibn 'Ubaidallah al-R$zil tells that Muhammad ibn al-wasan ruled that anyone who prays for the soul of one wllo professes the creation of the Kur'in is to repeat his prayer: Yahya ibn Aktham3 reports that Abu Y b u f was .asked what he thought of the Mu'tazila and he answered: They are the Zendiks. Al-ShS'i had indicated in his book on Testimony that the testimony of people of fancy, with the exception of the Khatjibiyya who allow perjury by their followers against their opponents4, may be accepted. But in the book on Analogy he points out that he has altered his policy of accepting testimony from the Mu'tazila and the other people of fancy5. Milik rejected the testimony of the people of fancy, according to a tradition by Ashhab in the name of ibn al-Kisim and al3irith ibn Miskin in the name of Milik who ruled regarding the Mu'tazila: They are Zendiis, they x e not to be called to repentance, but are to he killed 352
As for those who transact business with them, selling and buying, the regulations bearing on it, according to the Orthodo% resemble the laws on the formation of partnership' by Muslims who live in the frontier districts with people whom it is a duty to fight, although one is allowed'to kill them. But a Muslim may not buy a copy of the K u i b from them, nor a Muslim slave, according to the correct ruling of d-ShS'i's madhha6. The adherents of al-Shifili differ regarding the status of the Yadariyya who have departedr from the truth. There are some who declare that their status is the same as that of the Magians because of the Prophet's saying about the Kadaa RZfidi although the former admits his possible Kadarism; Fihrist, 184. On his SGfism see Hniwiti, 176-83.
See Lisin a(-MZzin, VI, 195.
"+,
ib.
' 6.242.
He held a vely high porinon at Bqra under i-Ma'mun and was a highly distinguished KBdi. See the exceptionally long article on him in IKhail, IV, 33-49.
' See
above 62, note 7.
Usil. 342, informs
' Reading ij,GIi ' Arabic: iijsll.
us that he changed his opinion only with resped to the GhulBt.
with Ed.; MS.
ii,Ul.
riyya: They are the Magians of the community'. According to this view, the acceptance of tribute from them is lawful. But there are others who decide that their status is like that of aposhtes. Tribute, accordingly, is not to be taken from them but they are to be sunmoned to repent If they repent, well enough: but if nof it is a duty upon the Muslims to kill them. We have made a detailed study of the rules governing the people of fancy in our Book of Religion a n d Dogmas. In this book we have gathered tidbits of the rules according to the O f i o d o x to an adequate degree. But God knows best
CHAPTER FOUR
OUR VIEWS ON THE PIOUS ANCESTRY OF THE COMMUNITY. The Orthodox are agreed that the Emigrants and the Defenders among the Companions were believers'. This is contrary to the opinion of those Rawsid who maintain that the Companions are heretics because of their failure to swear allegiance to .'Mi, and contrary to the opinion of the Kimiliyya who declare 'Mi a K3ir because he refused to make war on them. The Orthodox are agreed that those who apostasized after the death of the Prophet, such as the tribes of Kinda, Hanifa, Fazira, the Banu Asad, the Banu Kushayr and the Banu Bekr ibn Wail were not among the Defenders nor among the Emigrants before the capture of Mecca. The law has specified the name Emigrants to designate those who emigrated to the Prophet before the capture of Mecca, and they with the grace and kindness of God, trod the road of the righteous law and straight path. Thc Orthodox agree that everyone who was present with the Apostle of God at the baffle of Badr inhabits Paradise, and similarly those who were present with him at Uhud, except Kuzmin whom tradition has excluded; also everyone who was present with him at the oath of good-will at al-uudaibiya. On the basis of a tradition which has come down they believe that seven* thissand members of the community of lslim will enter Paradise without a reckoning; among them is included 'Ukkisha ibn Mihsanz. Everyone of those will intercede in behalf of seventy thousand They cherish the memory of people whom tradition has assured of a place in Paradise and of the power to intercede for all' of the community,
1
well known. They have decided to condemn as K b all those who brand as infidels any of tne ten to whom the Prophet has pramised Paradise. They cherish the memory of all the wives of the Apostle and they condemn as heretics those who declare them or any of them to he infidels'. They love al-Hasan and alHusain and all the well-known cousins of the Apostle of God such as al-Hasan ibn al-Hasan, 'Abdallah ibn al-Hasan 'Ali ibn al-Husain Zain-al-'AbiGu, Muhammad ibn 'Ali ibn a1 Husaitt, who was called al-B*ir. It is he t o whom Jibir ibn 'Abdallah al-ilnw brought greetings from the Prophet. They love Jalfar ibn Muhammad known as al-Sidik, Mksa ibn Ja'far and 'M ibn Mnisa al Ridas. They have the same feelings for the other offspring of 'Mi such as al-'Abbis, 'Omar, Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya, and the remainder of those who follorved the traditions of their pious forefathers, but not those who leaned to Mu'tazilism or Rifidism, nor those who allied themselves with them, and displayed an extremely tyrannous conduct and oppression like al-BarkaCi who oppressed the people of B q a unjustly and tyraon~usly. Most genealogists are of the opinion that he made false pretenses to be one of them, hut was not really. They cherish the noblest followers cf the Companions in piety. It is they concerning whom God has revealed: "They say: our Lord! forgive us and those of our brethren who have precedence of us in faith and do not allow any spite to remain in our hearts toward those who belie~e"~.They affirm the same regarding those who accept publicly the fundamentals of the Orthodox, but they declare themselves free from the people of fancy who are excluded fromislim, and from the people of erring fancies who allege affiliation with islam. These are the Kadariyya, the Mujiyya, the RZda, the Khawirij, the Jahmiyya, the Najjariyya and the Corporealists. A study of the peculiarities of these groups has already been presented in the chapter preceding this one, and in it there is suEciency.
and among them they include Uwais al-Karania. The tradition regarding them is 1
1
US&, 298-303.
A fighter for 1slHm against the apostates in its early history. See his biography inEiuding his admission to Paradise, NawBwi, 427-8.
' One of the Followers, said to have been killed at al-Siffyn. Tab. 111, 2475. He is Mown as the "Sayyid ~Gtibi'in': N d m , 1, 127. MBlik b. AnPs doubted his existence, Mzh. St. 14 147.
IH, IV,117-21.
' For the various 'Alids see the genealogical table Shiites, 11, ' sum
59, v. 10.
160.
ADDITTONAL NOTES. by which the Khawirij are characterized
P. 105, note 1. The attribute may be related to the root
& (witchcraft)
and rendered "given to the art
of witchcrait". P. 140. The verses cited by Baghdidi from the "words of the shameless They are found in ibn Kutaiba's
poet" belong to the celebrated Abu Nuwis.
~ i & bd-Shi'~wal-Shx'ara' (ed. de Goeie), o. 5 10, in a variant version as follows:
.
Shahrastini, p. 433, who quotes only the last couplet, agrees in his reading
with
ibn Kutaiba except that he reads
*,
instead of
&I.
P. 155. On Humaid b. Thaur see ibn Kukibq 1. c., pp. 230-33.
The
line quoted in our text occurs on p. 231, line 12, and reads: *'<
&d;i%+4isz.
/-.tb- u \ 9-3; ,- & -
p,,
P. 156. On lbrahim b. Harama see ibn KuMba, b c., pp. 473-474.
The
line in our text is found on p. 474, line 9, and reads: '4, r, < . >
~kis;;~ ps :
c
~1y4 +". kjJd
P. 184. The declaration attributed in our text to 'Ali sounds very similar to the statement ascribed by Abu-1-Ma'ili 'Abd-a-Milik to al-Ash%:
/
SJI & j.i ;iL@-'GI Jl
c+
&G
;iLd Y>
&+
-6
9 3 JG==A
(Cited in Spitta, Zur Geschichte al-Ash'aks, p. 141). The saying in our version is also popular among the Stifis (Browne, Literay History of Persia, I, 438).
BIBLIOGRAPHY. T h e bibliography is divided into three parts. T h e first indudes titles of booh which appear i n the notes in abbreviated form; the second comprises the remaining more important bibliography, and the third contains encyclope dias and periodical literature. Works to which reference was made only once or twice are not generally listed. For the lack of correct transcription see the Preface. 'Aja'ib - Zakaria ibn Muhammad ibn Mahmpd al-Kazwini: Kitab 'Aja'ibal-Makhlukat. Printed on the margin of Damiri's Hayat al-Hayawan. See below. Albiruni - Albimni: Athar-ul-Bakiya. Chronology of Ancient Nations. Translated by G. Edward Sachau. London, 1879. Andrae, Muhammad - Tor Andrae: Die Person Muhammeds. Stockholm, 1918. Ash'ari - Abu-I-Hasan 'Ali ibn Isma'il al-Ash'ari : Makalat al-lsla&iyin waIkhtilafi-l-Mudillin. Edited by Hellmut Ritter. Two volumes. Istanbul, 1930. Bad'wal-Ta'rikh - Mutahhar ibn Tahir al-Makdisi : Bad'wal-Ta'rikh. Edited and Translated by C1. Huart. Six volumes. Paris, 1899-1919. Baid., Baidawi - Nasir al-Din Abu Sa'id Abdallah 'Omar al-Baidawi : Anwar al-Tanzil-Asrar al-Ta'wil (Commentary on the Kur'an) ; edited by 8.0. Fleischer. Two volumes. Leipzig, 1846-1848. Blochet - E. Blochet : Le Messianisme dam l'httdrodoxie murulmane. Paris, 1go3. Brockelmann - Carl Brockelmann: Geschichte der arabischen Literatur. Two volumes. U'eimar and Berlin, 1898-1902. Bukhari - Abu 'Abdallah Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari : Al-Jam? aL Sahih. Edited by Krehl and Juynboll. Leyden, 1862-1907.
Creenda - Algarel: El justo medio en la creencia. Compendia de teologia dogmdtica.. Traducci6n espafiola par Miguel Asin Palacios (translation of Abu Hamid al-Gharali's Kitab 01-Iktisad fil-I'fikad [Cairo. n.d.1). Madrid, 1929. Damiri - Kamd-al-Din al-Damiri : Hnyat nl-Hayawan al-Kubra. Two volu~nes. Cairo, 13x1 A. H. De Goeje - M. J. de Goeje : Mimoire sur it5 Carmathes du Bahrain et les Fatimides. Leyden, 1886. De Sac/ - Silvestre de Sacy : Expos4 de la religion des Dmzes. Two volumes. Paris, 1838. Al-Dutra al-Fakhira - Abu Hamid Muhammad 'd-Ghazali: Al-Durra AlFakhira (La perle pr4cieuse), Edited and Translated by Lucien Gautier. Geneva, 1878. Ed. - The Printed Arabic Text of Baghdadi's Kital, al-fark baina-1-firak. Fihrist - Al-Nadim : Kitab al-Fihrist, ed. Fliigel, (posthumously published by Johannes Roediger and August Mueller). Two vo1;mes bound in one. Leipzig, 1871 Fiqh al-Akbar - Abu Hanifa alNuman ibn Thabit al-Kufi : Al-Fiqh al-Akbar, with a commentary by Abu-I-Muntahi Ahmad ibn Muhammad alMaghnisawi al-Hanafi. Hyderabad, I g e l . T h e authenticity of the authorship of the Fiqh al-Akbnr has been denied. Fliigel, Schulen - Gustav Fliigel : Die grammatischen Schulen der Araber. Erste Abteilung. Leipzig, 1862. Guyard - Stanislas Guyard : ragm men ti relatifs a la doctrine des Ismatlis, texte. . . . . avec une uaduction complete et des notes. (Published in Notes et Extraits des ma?zuoits de la bibliotheque nationale), vol. XXII, 177-428. Paris, 1874. Hamilton's Hedaya - Charles Hamilton : T h e Hedaya 07 Guide. (Second Edition by Standish Grove Grady). London, 1870. Hilli Hasan ibn Yusuf ibn 'Ali ibn al-Murahhar al-Hilli: Al-Babu '1-Hadi 'Ashar (A treatise on the Principles of Shi'ite Theology) with commentary by Miqdad-Fadil al-Hilli. Translated by William McElivee Miller. London, 1928.
-
232
Horten, Probleme - M. Horten : Die philosophischen Probleme der spekulatiuen Theologie i m Islam. Bonn, 1910. Horten, Systeme - M. Horten : Die philosophischen Systeme dzr spekulativen Theologie i m Islam. Bonn, I g u . Hyat-ul-Kuloob - Hyat-ul-Kuloob: T h e Life and Religion of Mohammed ar contained i n the Sheeah Traditions. Translated from Persian by James L. Merrick. Boston, 1850. Hitti - Philip K. Hitti, Editor : Mukhtarar Kitab al-fark baina-1-firak (English Title: A1 Baghdndi's Characteristics of Muslim Sectr, abridged). Cairo, '924. IA - Abu-1-Husain 'Ali ibn Muhammad alahaibani ibn d-Athir : Kitab alKamil fil-Tarikh. Edited by C. J. Tornbeq. Fourteen volumes. Leyden, 1867. Ibana - Abu-1-Hasan '41i ibn Isma'il al-Ash'ari : Kitab al-Ibana 'an Usul al-Diyana. Hyderabad, 13x1 (?). Ibn Humam - Muhammad ibn 'Abd-al-Wahid ibn al-Humam: Fath al-Kadir. With supercommentaries. Eight volumes. Bulak, 1315. Ibn Iskander - Husain ibn Iskander al-Hanafi : Kitab al-Jawhara al-Munifa. Hyderabad, 1 3 ~ 1 . Ibn Maja - Muhammad ibn Yarid ibn Maja : Sunan. Two volumes. Cairo, 1313. Ibn Rosteh - Abu 'Ali Ahmad ibn 'Omar ibn Rosteh: Kitab ol-A'lak al-Nafisa, and h a d ibn Abu Ya'kub ibn Wadih d-Ya'kubi: Kitab al-Buldan. Edited by M. J. de Goeje (Bibliotheca Geographomm Arabicorum, Pars VII). Leyden, 1892. I H - Abu Muhammad 'ALi ibn Ahmad ibn Harm al-Zahiri : Kitab-al-Fisal fi-1-Mila1 wa2-Ahwa' wal-Nihal. Five volumes. Cairo, 1317-1347 (?) A H . IHank, I H a u M - Abu-1-Kasim ibn Haukal : Kitab al-Maralik wal-Mamalik. Edited by M . J. de Goeje (Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum, Pars 11). Leyden, 1873. I'jar - Abu Bekr Ahmad ibn 'Ali ibn-al-Tayib al-Bakilani : Kitab I'jax alKul'an. Cairo, 1315 A. H. IKhald - Abu Zaid 'Abd-Al-Rahman b. Muhammad ibn Khaldun : Proligom t m s (Arab : Mukaddima), French Translation by Mac Guckin de-Slane.
233
Published in Nates et extraitr des manuscrits de la bibliotheque impeliale, vols. XIX-XXI (Part one of each volume is the translation, part two the text). The references are to the Translation. Paris, 1862-68. IKhall - Abu-1-'tAbbas Ahmad ibn Ibrahim ibn Khallikan : Wafayat al-A'yan (Biographical Dictionary). Translated by MacGuckin de Slane. Four volumes. Paris, 1843-71. Intisar - 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn 'Uthman al-Khayyat : Kitab al-Intisar wal-Radd 'ala ibn Rawandi. Edited by H. S. Nyberg. Cairo, 1925. Is£. B. P. - Sbuhfnr ibn Tahir ibn Muhammad Al-Isfaraini : Kitab al-fark baina-1-firak. Ms. Ahlwardt's Catalogue of Berlin MSS., No. 2801 ; Bibliotheque Nationale, No. 1400. Irshad - Ahu 'AMallah Ya'kub ibn 'Ahdallah : I~shad al-Arib ila Ma'rifat al-Adib, edited by D. S. Margoliouth. Vols. I, 11, 111, V, VI. Leyden 1907-1913. (E. 1. W. Gibb Memorial, VI, 1-8, 5-6). Istakhri - Abu Ishak Ibrahim ibn Muhammad alFarisi al-Istakhri: Kitab Masalik al-Mamalik. Edited by de Goeje (Bibliotheca Geographorum A ~ a b i c o ~ u mPars , I). Leyden, 1870. Koranauslegung - Ignaz Goldziher : D i e Richtungen der islamischen Koranauslegung. Leiden, ~gzo. Kashf - 'Ali ihn 'Uthman al-Jullabi al-Hujwiri : Kashf al-Mahjub. Translated by R. A. Nicholson (E. J. W. Gibb Memorial, XVII). Leyden, 1911. Lisan al-Miran - Shihab al-Din Abu-1-Fad1 Ahmad ibn 'Ali ibn Hajar al'Askalani : Lisan al-Mkan. Six volumes. Hyderabad, 1 ~ 2 6 - ~ A. 1 H. Makrizi - Taki-al-Din Ahmad ibn 'Ali ibn 'Abd al-Kadir ibn Muhammad known as Makrizi : Kitab al-Khitat. Two volumes. Bulak, 1270 A. H. Unless otherwise stated the references are to vol. 11. Makrizi (Tagnan) - E. Fagnan : Nouueaux textes historiques relatifs a l'Afn'que du Nord et a la Sicile. 1. - La hiographie d'Obeyd Allah.. . . . . de Makrizi. Published in Centenario di Michele Amari, Palenno, ,910, vol. 11, 35-86. Massignon-Louis Massignon : La Passion d'al-Husain ibn Mancour al-Halladj. Two volumes. Paris, 1922. Maturidi - Kitab Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar . . . . . . . . . lil'Imam . . . . . . . . . Abi
Mansur Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Hana£i al-Matnridi a l 8 m a r kandi. Hyderabad, 1321 A. H. Maturidi's authorship of the work has been denied. Miskawaih - Abmad ibn Muhammad ibn Miskawaih : T h e Eclipse of the 'Abbasid Caliphate. Edited and Translated by H. F. Amedroz and D. S. Margoliouth. Six v~lumesand an Index. Oxford, 1920-1. M i r q - Shams al-Din Abu 'Abdallah Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Dhal abi : Miian al-Ttidal ma-Naknd nl-Riyal. Three volumes. Cairo, 1325. 74s. - Manuscript of Baghdadi's Al-Fark baina-1-firak. Ahlwardt's Catalogue of MSS. in Berlin, No. 2800. Mudawwana - Malik ibn Anas: Al-Mudawwana al-kubra. Cairo, 1323. Muslim - Muslim ibn LHajjaj. Sahih. With a commentary by Nawawi. Ff e volumes. Muh. St. 1-11 - Ignaz Goldziher : Muhamrnedanische Studien. Two volumes. Halle, 1889-90. Mukkad, Mukaddasi - Shams-al-Din Ahu 'Abdallah Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Mukaddasi : Al-Masalik fil-Mamalik. Edited by M. J. de Goeje (Bibliotheca Geogru~horurnArabicorum, Pars 111). Leyden, 1879. Mwuj - Abu-1-Hasan 'Ali ibn al-Husain ihn 'Ali al-Mas'udi: Kitnb Muruj alahahab wa-Ma'adin al-Jawahir. Edited and Translated by Barbier de Meynard and Pavet de Courteille (Under title Prairies 807).Nine volumes. Paris, 1861-77. Muwatta - Malik ibn Anas : Kitab al-Muwatta. Kazan, 1909. Naubakhti - Abu-l-Hasan al-Naubakhti: Firak al-Shi'a. Edited by Hellmut Ritter. Istanbul, 1933. Nawawi - Abu Zakariya Yahya Al-Nawawi : Biographical Dictionary. Edited by F. Wiistenfeld. GBttingen, 18qz-47. Nujum - Abu-1-Mahasin Taghri Birdi - Al-Nujunz al-Zahira [Annales]. Edited by Juynboll and Matthes. Two volumes. Leyden, 1855-61. N u h a t - Hamdullah al-Mustaufi al-Kazwini: T h e Zoological Section of Nuzhatu-1-Qulub. Edited and Translated by J. Stephenson. London, 1928. Razi - M. Horten : Die spekulatiue und positive Theologie des Islam nach j. I~IZ. Razi (1209) und'ihre Kritik durch Tusi ( z ~ ~ jLeipzig,
235
Sam'ani - 'AM al-Karim ibn Muhammad alSam'ani: Kitab al-Ansab. Reproduced in Facsimile by D. S. Margoliouth (E. J. W. Gibb Memorial, XX). Leyden and London, lgi?. Seelye - Kate Chambers Seetye : Moslem Schism and Sects (Part I of the Kitab at-Fark bain al-Firak of Baghdadi in Translation). New York, 1919. Shahr. or Shahr. (Haarbriickerj - Abu-1-Fath Muhammad al-Shahrastani : Kitab al-Milal wal-Nihal, edited by Cureton. Two volumes, London, 1842-46. - Religions-Partheien und PhilosophenSchulen. Tbeodor Haarbriicker. Two volumes. HaUe, 1850-51. Shiites I, I1 - Israel Friedlaender : T h e Heterodoxies of the Shiites i n the Presentation of Zbn Haim. Part one : Text and editorial notes. Part two : Commentary. Published in JAOS, XXVIII (Jan.-June 1go7), 1-80, and XXIX (igo8), 1-189, respectively. Also in a separate volume, New Haven, ,909. Streitschrift - Ignaz Goldziher : Streitschrift des Gazali gegen die Batiniyyn Skkte. (A detailed presentation of the contents of al-Mustarhiri, with eg excerpts in Arabic). Leiden, 1916. Tab. or Tabari - Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari : Ta'rikh alR w u I wal-Muluk [Annales]. Edited by M. J. de Goeje. Twelve volumes. Leyden, 1879-1901. Tab. (Zotenberg) - Chronique de Tabari. Traduite par Hemann Zotenberg. Four volumes. Paris, 1867-74. Tanbih - Abu-1-Hasan 'Ali ibn al-Husain ibn 'Ali al-Mas'udi : Tanbih - Le Livre de l'auertissement et de la reuision. Traduction par Carra de Vaux. Paris, 1896. Tayalisi - Abu Daud Sulaiman ibu Daud al-Tayalisi : Musnad. Hyderabad, lg2l A. H. Tirmidhi - Abu 'Abdallah Muhammad ibn Isa al-Timidhi: Sahih. Two volumes. Umm - Abu 'Abdallah Muhammad ibn Id11s al-Shafi'i : Kttab Al-Umm. With the Mukhtasar of Abu Ibrahim Isma'il ibn Yahya al-Muzani. Usul - Abu Mansur 'Abd-al-Kahir b. Tahir al-Tarnimi al-Baghdadi : Usul al-Dm. Volume One (Name of Editor not given). Istanbul, 1928.
Utbi - Abu-I-Utbi : Kitab-i-Yamini. Translated by James Reynolds. London, 1858 'Uyun - Ibn Qutaiba : Uyun alAkhbar. Edited by Brockelmann. Berlin, ,900. Vorlesungen - Ignaz Goldziher : Vorlesungen ueber dem Islam. Second edition by Franz Babinger. Heidelberg, 1922. Wensinck - A. J. Wensindr : A Handbook of Muhammadan Tradition. Alphabetically arranged. Leiden, 1927. Wiistenfeld: Gecrhichte d. Fatimidischen Chalifen. Gottingen, 1880-81. Ya'kubi - Ahmed ibn Abu Yakub ibn Ja'far ibn Wahb.: Historia. Edited by M. Th. Houtsma. Two volumes. Leyden, 3883. Yakut - Abu 'Abdallah Yakut ibn 'Abdallah : Kitab Mu'jnrn al-Buldan. Edited by F. Wuestenfeld. Six volumes. Leiprig, 1866-1870. Zamakhshari - Abu-1-Kasim Mahmud ibn 'Omar al-Zamakhshari : Karhshaf 'an Hakaik al-Tanril. Edited by W . Nassau ~e;s. Two volumes. Calcutta, 1856-9. Zambaur, E..: Manuel de g&zdalogie et de ch~onologie.Hanover, 1972. Section I1 Ahmad ibn Hanbal: Masnad. Six volumes. Cairo 1913 A. H. M. Asin Palacios : Abenmasarra y su escueln. Madrid, 1914. Ibn Hajar d-'Askalani: A Biographical Dictionaly of People W h o Knew Mohammad. Edited by Maulvi Abd-ul-Hai. Four volumes. Calcutta, 1856-1873. L. Bouvat : Les Barmecides. Paris, 1912. Harold Bowen: T h e Life and Times of 'Ali ibn Isa. Cambridge, 19x8. Browne, E. G. : A Literary History of Persia. Volume one. London, 1909. Idem : A Volume of Oriental Studies, Presented to. Cambridge, 1922. Rudolph Ernst Brunnow : Die Charidrchiten. Leiden, 1884. E. C. Burkitt : T h e Religion of the Manichees. Cambridge, 1925. Leone Caetani : Annali delP Islam. T e n uolumes. Rome, 1905-26. Arthur Christensen : Le pl-emier homme et le premier roi. Stockholm, 1918. Chwolson, D. : Die Ssnbier und der Ssabismus. St. Petenburg, 1856. Henri Galland : Essai sur les Motareliter. Paris. Ignaz Galdziher : Die Zahiden. Leipzig, 1884.
Willi Heffening : Das islamische Fremdenrecht.
Hanover, 1925.
A. V. W. Jackson : Zoroaste~,The Prophet of Ancient Imn. New York, 1899. Ferdinand Justi : Zranisches Namenbuch.
1 I
Marburg, 1895.
H. Lammens : Le Califat de Ydzid Ier. Beyrouth, lgzl.
Louis Massignon : Essai sur les origines du lezique technique de la mystique muulmane. Paris, ig22. Nuam oul-Moulk : Siasset Nameh. Transl. by Charles Schefer. Paris, 1893. William Muir : The CaEphate. Its Rise, Decline and Fall. Edited by T. H. Weir. Edinburgh, ~ g q . August Mueller : Der Islam im Morgen- und Abendland. Two volumes. Berlin, 1885-7. A. Queny : Droit Muuiman. Recueil de Lois . . . . . . Schiyites. Two volumes. Paris, 1871-2. Jalal-al-Din Suyuti : A1 Durar a1 Hiran fil-Ba'th a1 Na'im. Cairo, 1304 A. H. Jalal-al-Din Suyuti : Hirtory of the Caliphs. Translated by H. S. Jarret. Calcutta, 1881. 'Ali Tabari : The Book of Religion and Empire. Edited and Translated by A. Mingana. Two volumes. Manchester, 1922-9. A. S. Tritton : The Caliphs and Their Non-Muslim Subjects. London, 1930. J. Wellhausen: The Arab dingdom and Its Fall. Translated by Margaret Graham Weir. Calcutta, 1927. M. Wolff: Muhammed~nischeEschatalogie. Arabic Text Edited and Translated. Leipzig, 1872. r Abu Yusuf Yakub : Kitab al-Kharaj (Le Livre de I'impbt fonder). Translated by E. Fagnan, Paris, ,921. Jurji Zaydan: Umayyads and Abbasidr. Translated by D. S. Margoliouth. (E. J. W. Gibb Memorial). Leyden, 1go7. Part. 111 ERE - Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. E l - Encyclopedia of Islam. Islam - Der Islam. JA - Journal Asiatique. JAOS - Journal of the American Oriental Society.
I I
i
I
JQR - Jewish Quarterly Review. REJ - Revue des Etudes Juives. RMM - Revue d u Monde Musulman. Le Monde Oriental. ZA - Zeimchrift fiir Assyriologie. ZDMG - Zeitscbrift der deutschen morgenEndischen Gesellschaft
I N D E X
:
Aaron, Harun 4 5 ;
1%
Abdallah 13. Sallam 68 n ;
n.
Abbad b. Sulaiman al-Daimari lo, ; 10,n.
Abdallah ibn Saw& 43:
Abbas nz3 ; nzg.
Saba, 43 n : 44 ; 45.. Abdallah b. Tahir 89 n : go n: 114A b d a W b. Wahh al-Rasihi %I%.
Ahbasa (sister of al-Rashid) 118 n. ~ b b a s i d s60 n ; 74 : 75 ; 83 n: 93 n ; 44 n : IIO n: 117 n ; 121 n: 127 n ; 1x8 n; 2x0;
PP4.
AMallah (Baba!?~ father) 88 n : 89 n : 115 n ; Abdallah ibn Abbas qq: 165 n ; 167: 168:
'
Abd~al-Rahman ihn Muljam Ab&n
Abdallah b. Fatih 64 n . Abdallah b. a l - E t h (or al-Harb) 60 n. 229. Abdallah b . Maimun r g l ; 134 n. A W a h ibn Mss'ud 16: 16 n ;
95
Z ~ n P;
1%
nl
n:
(amain9
1%;
164 n :
ibn
Muawiya ibn
Abdallah
ibn
n.
Abu Abbss al-Sarraj
11
n.
Abu
Abdallah
aldal
Ahu Abdallah b. Hafif 8n. ~ b Ali u h. Simjilr lzg; 1x9 n ; ,go; 130 n . Abu Amr 1). ;rl-Ala 153n: 161 : 161 n. Abu A n u b al Ansari 168. Abn Bekr al~hhsamm 178 n.
Hasbim 46; 56: 56
n: 5 9 ; 61
n;
74;
74 n. Abdallah b. Omar 59 n Abdallah ihn Saba 41 ; 41 n ; 42 : 43 n ; 44 ;
44 n.
al-Muhtesib
n ; 119 " .
93. Muhammad a l - H a n a f i ~ , abu
119.
al-Shi'i
Ja'fargz: 56 n: 59-61: 6 0 ; 6 0 n ; 74; ~ b d a l l a h ,b.
45.
n.
112
Abu-l-Abbar h. Ata 8%
112
a.
Abdallah
;
n:
Al,u Abdallah 21-Ardi or al-Aai
Abdallah b. Kharim sl-Sulami 14%:1 4 ~n .
1
110
Abraham
Abdallah b. a1 H a m b. al Hasan 5% n: 59:
. 165
gjn:
Ahd-al-Malik b. Kuraih al-Asma'i 152; 153: 155 n ; 161; 161 n . Abd-21-Rahman b. Auf 218.
Abdallah b. Ali a l - S a M 74; 75 n. Abdallah h. Amr b. Harb al Rindi 56.
4I
Ahd-al Kahir 157 n. Abd~al~Karim b. Abu-l-Axvja gl:
AM Rabbihi 35 n (see Zurara ibn i n n ) .
9 -.>7. c
I
see Abdallah ibn
Abu Bekr b. Daud 8%; 82 n: 83. ~ b ~u e k rb. ~ u h m j113 ; Abu BeLr &*id&
I L n. ~
n : 43; 43 n: 51: 51 n ; 5 n ; g ~n: 60: 65: 7 o n ; 140: 140 n: 141 ; ~ 4 1n ; 160; 1%; *la n. in : PI^: 1 ~ n: 3 214 n. @
Ab" Dharr al~Ghifad99.
Abu Thaur, Ibmhim b. Kbalid al-Kalbi 160:
Abu-1-Farah al.Maliki R6.
160 n. Abu Ubaid al-Kasim b. Sallam al-Harawi 161 : 161 n. Abu Ubaida b. al-Jarrah 217 n. 218. Abu Ya'kub a1 Akm 82. Abu Ymuf Y a k b b. Ibrahim al-Kadi 5: zs6. Ab" Zaid 153 n.
Abu-I-Faraj go n. Abu-I-Fawaris 146 n. Abu Hanifa 4 : 4 n: nu n : 159 n : 160:
160 n ; POP n: 216 n: z1g: 2 2 212 n : PPQ;PPS n: 1x4: zs4 m. Abu Hashim b~al-Jubbai 173: 18,.
~ :an%;
Abu Hatim Ja'far Makhmm I l n : I L Z n. Abu-I-Hudhail 168;
1%:
181 : 186: 187 n:
'91: Pog. Abu Hulman al-Dimishki 3 % : 78: 78 n : ng. Abu Huraira 166: 166 n: 19% n.
Abu Zaid al-Balkhi 199 n. Abu Zakaria al-Tammami 118: n 8 n : 122 n. Abyrsinia 41 n. Adam 48 n : 60: 76; 79; gg: Im;
Abu Isa al-Isfahani roq n.
135: 135 n : 199. Adhakitifla 40; see Arakira. a1-Adi ,,g n.
Abu Ishak Isfuaini $ 1 n: 913 n. Abu-I gasim al~Hasanb. Ali Dasramand 130:
Adi, Banu 140; 140 n : 141. Adnan 14s n ; 211: % X I n.
130 n. .\l,u Khalaf b. Abd-al~Maiikal-Sulami lgl n.
Adoprianists 99 n.
Abu Imran 88 n.
Abu-1-Kharrab Muhammad b. Abu Zainab al-
Asadign;6n;6nn;63:63n:64:64n;
65 : 65 n : 74 : 93. Abu Kubais, M t 3 n ; 33. Abu-1-Ma'ali AM-al-Malik 184 n. Abu
%m Buwaih b. Rukn-al-Dawla, Mu'avyid alOawla 340 n.
Abu Mansur al-Ijli 31 : 57: 58. Abu Mu'adh al-Tumani 4: 4 n. Abu Muslim a l - m a n i 60 : 60 n; 74. 74 n. 75. 75 n. 76. 93. gg n. 98, LOZ-n: 220 n.
Mar"" 133. al-Afshi? 18: 18 n: 4s n; 88 n: 114: 1x4 n; "5. Afrahifla 54 n. al-Aftakin 1x8 n. AH-al-Bait 58 n. Ahmad b. Abd-al-Azir b. Abu Dulaf log n. Ahmad b. A p b b. Yannsh 93: 97-98. Ahmad b. Ha'it gp: gg: 95; 9 6 s : 97; 9.i n : 98: gg--loo; lo, : 185; nz4. Ahmad b. Hanbal 160: 2x7 n ; snq n. Ahmad b. al-gayyal log n. Ahmad b. Omar b. Suraij, Abu-1-Abbas 81: 82 n :
Abu-1-Rabi' 64 n.
118 n. Abu Shalrir al-Daisani $2 n. Abu Shalagblagh Ahmad b. Muhammad AhuShimr I , I n . 6 : 6 n : 7 : 7 n. Abu Thauban 6 (see Thauban). &'id a1 Jannabi
n;
Ahmad b. Muhammad b. AWua 86.
224.
Abu Mudimifla 75. 75 n. ' 9 n. A?"
1%
$ : 86.
Ahmad b. Tulun zn+ Ahraman, Ahdman 1x7 : ~ 3 :%1% : zzo a
111:
irl
n.
Al-Aha 1 1 1 n: 1x8; 1 s : 123. Ahuramzda 1.7 n: pro n.
Ahwar
108:
Z~I.
Aihala b. W b al-Aswad d - h i zol ; no, n. A ' i l a 60; 105; 167; 168; 214: 214 n : 2x5:
PI5
".
Ajarida 105. Al-ALhfash 161; 161 n. al-Akhfash al-Akbar, Abd-al-Hamid b. Abdal-Majid 161 ; 161 n. Akil b. Abu Talib
ALI
log.
116 n : "7
116;
n
Alamiyga 54 n. Albiruni i q n ;
L
L
n~ ; 120 n : mz n : IPP n :
n. Aleppo 78 ; ~q n. PPO
Ai-ndu
IZO; LX? n.
Alfishin 88 : Sg : 89 n : (rcc Abhin). Ali b. Ab" T d i b n n ; 15; 27; 4' : 41 ;
41 n : 4 s : @ n : 4 3 : 4 4 ; 4 4 n : 4 5 ; 4 5 n : 49; 5 o n : 51 n : 59; 59 n : 55; 55 n ; 57": 59: 5911: 60; 61n; 62; 63; e n : 65: 66: 6 7 : 6 7 n : 68: 6 8 n : 70: ? o n : 74 n; 93; 105; 111 n ; 1gp n ; 160; 166; 166 n ; 16,; 168: 1%: 183: 1%; 185: 2 1 1 ; 211 n ; 213: 214; %I4n ; Z15; 215 n : nn4: nn8; 229. Alids 49 n : 52 n: 60 n. Ali al-Aswari 187 : 187 n. Ali al-Hadi ?On.
Ali b. AbdaUah b. al Abbas 74 n. (Ali) h. al-Fadl ing; 123 n: ln4 n. Ali b. al-Husain, Zain al-Abidin 50 n ; zng. Ali b. MUM al-Rida 2x9. AB-mi
69 n
(see
Dhammiv).
Amr b. Jurmuz 214: ~ 1 4 n . Amr b. Ubaid 43 n : 168. Amr b. U t h t h al-M&i 82. Andrae, Tor 26 n. Anthzopomo'pbists, see Mushabbiha. Anushiman Chosrau 87: 6, n : 113 n. Arabia 105
n.
Aabssn;38:5~n;gnn;~~g:~xo;%g6n: 141 : 141 n: 142 n : 1 5 % ; 153; ' 5 1 ; 154 n : 157: 175; 185 n : PII: 21, n: 2'9. Arirtotle 252 ; 178. Arisfafeiiam 182 n. Armenia 160 n . h d , Banu 38; 6n n ; 2 ~ 8 . 115: 115 n : 117: '34; 1% n. Asbr b. S h i m i h us. Al-Asfar a l - u b i l i 227; In7 n. AL-Ash'ati, Abu-I-Hasao ;4 n : 5 n ; 8 n ; 14 n : 15: PO n ; n6; gg n : 50 n: 56 n : 58 n : 61 n: 6 2 n : 6 3 n : 6 4 n ; 6 5 n ; g n u ; log n : '59 n : '86 n ; 187 n: 19% n : 193 n ; 1 g 5 n : 19.i n: 1 9 8 n : 201 n ; PLO n : ZLL n : zlg n : n16 n ; 9.7. al-Ash'ari, Abu Musa 81 n : 215 n. Aswarlarites lgr n : 159 : 185 n ; xgo n ; ~ g nl : 198 n : 199 n: pa, n ; no1 n. Ashhab 2x6. Asia 12% n: 14Pn. krin Palados, M. 47 n. A s k Mukram 101 : lo* n. A l - m i see Abd-al-Malik b. Abu Kuraih.
Al-Amin 5 n.
Asassins 146 a
Amir b. Shurahil al Sha'bi bi; 43.
Al-Aura'i, Abd-al-Rahman b. Amr b. Yuhmid
A m i d al-Tusi 130.
160: 160 n :
22,.
Ammar 168.
Amkira 3s ; 40; 73 ; 8p--86; 2x4.
Amr 140.
llrariha no7 n:
Amr b. al-Asi 70 n. rr5 n :
&d, Banu L@
915.
B. Bab 43.
Bala'am b. Ba'ura 203.
Babak al-Khurrami 88 : 88 n ; 89 ; go ; go n :
al-~aladhuriprig n.
log n; 114; 1 4 n; 115.
Baikh zg n ; 105
n: 119 n.
Babakiyya 88; 89; 89 n; go: 107 n ; 114. Babylon 121.
al~Ballal,abu Shuaib (rbe Pious) 1%: Balsaghu, Belasaghun I - ; lep n.
at-Badain, Jabal 88; 8811: log; 114. Badr, Battle of 15: 168: 218: 228.
Bandana, abu Yaliub al-Sijirii 113. Baadha'a 131 n.
Badr al~Hamamial-Kahir 124: 124 n.
aldaradhai i3r n.
Baghdad, Bagdad 5 : 3%; 80 ; 81 n ; 82 : 83 :
84: 89 n : 107 n; n;: 121: 125: 1x5 n: 126: 126 n: 186: 188; Z P ~ . Al-Baghdadi, Abd-al-Rahir ibn Tahir
12 :2.3
n:
23 : 37 n ; 43 n ; qq n : qg ; 48 n ; 51 n : 55:56o:58n;62n:65;68n:73n:
1%
n. i-
(see Bandana).
+
Barahima 199 : 199 n: roo ; no8 : %as. Baamika, Barmecid 117; L Z n ~. al-Barka'i prig. Barkukiyya, Berkukiyya 73 ; 75 ; 2x4. Barlaam & Joasaph zoo n.
BaJlamiyya 15 n.
~ 4 4n : 145: 145 n ; '51; 157 n ; 164 n ; 172 n: 189 n; 191 n ; 193 n; 1% n ;
Basra s z ; 34: 35: 53; 53 n ; 85; gp n ; log; lq n : 125: 125 n; ~ 2 7 ;14% n ; 152 n ;
rlln:
21gn.
Bashshar b. Burd 139 n.
161 n: 165 ; 1 8 0 ; 18%; ,go:
L ~ : I
Bahrein 107 n : 1x1 n: 118: 121 n; ~n6. Bahya b. Pakuda 17z n ; 185 n. al%aida 80.
Batiniyya 39; 40; 58 n ; 63 n:-76 n: 95 n ; 107-157: 107 n: 108; 108 n : 1%: 11o; I%*; -3: 113 n : 114; "5; xr5 n:
n.
Bajila, Banu qg n: 58n.
116; ~ 1 n 6 : 117: 117 n: 1x8; xzg: 122; 123; 128: 199; 130; 131; 131 n: 132:
Bakhmara 53.
13%n : 133; 134 n ; 135
al-Bakilani,Abu Bekr b. at-Taib a t h h ' a r i 81;
138; 139; 140; 141 : 141 n; 142; LM n : 145: 145 n ; '48; rqg ; '52; 157: 178: 906 : 406 n.
81 n ; l 9 l . n : mn n ; z q Balririyya 57 n.
n:
211
n.
Bakr ibn ukht AM-al-Wahid ibn Ziyad 15 ; 16 n : 225.
175 n:
Buddhisr 118 n. Bugha al~Katin 88 n. Bukhara 76 n. a1-Bukhari ,gz n. al-Marisi or
Bukhtanarar 92. Burghurhiyya n.
195.
Burquoy 107 n.
Blmhef 110 n. Blue. 1rvin nso n.
Burriyya 169.
Cadmus zzo.
Christians ~ g ;lg n ; 4, n; q n : 45: 51 n :
Buwaihids IPP n : 128.
Bayan ibn Sam'an
il;
136; 157 n :
(al-Tamimi) 31 : 46-48 :
Cairn 'loin. 127.
68 ; 74 ;'76 n; gon; 99 n; loo; 107; 139 n ;
Camel, Battle of the 167 : 168 ; 2x5 n. carra de Vau* 125 n.
222
Casanol-a 108 n.
208:
214; 215 n : P P ~n : z*g : Batiha 222 n.
po
157 n ;
11:
Bihafiridh b. Mahfurudhin sxo n ; PPI ; ZPI n. Bihafitidhima t z o ; *no n ; 2s..
Baidawi
n;
Budasat zoo n. Buddha no0 n.
Berrerld 114; "4 n. Bevan, -4. g, n ; 117 n. Bi'ar at-Ridwan 167; 167 n. Bishr b. Ghayath b. Abu &ma
i2o
Barmak118n.
1% n: ~ 3 0n : 131; 134 n; 141: 143 n ;
on;
225 n. Broxne, E. G. 117 n.
Bidhr b. a1~Mu.t-I
al-~armaG,Jaa.Earb. Yahya 117 n; 118 Bashir al-Rahhal 53: 53 n.
w n ;
Brackelmann, Carl
6 q ; 64n; 65 n. Becker, Carl 38 n. Beirut 160 n. Bekr al-.Vwar ai-Hajari 55: 58 n. Berbers 1x3. hi,,=
al-Manisi 5 : 5 n ; $4 n.
79: 83 n : gn n ; 94 n ; ioo; lo1 n : 107 n ; 108 n: n o n: 1x2 n ; 115 n ; "6 n: "7 n : 1x6 n: ~ 2 8n :
195";
Bazigh (ibn Musa) 64: 64 n Baehi:
I
169: 184 n : 189: ,go n ; ZZI:
1.1
n;
:
China Inn.
Companions of the Prophet no, n : no3 n ; 211 n : 1 ~ 5 217; ; zz5: P P ~ P; P ~ :
Chrrolson, D. $03 n ; 138 n.
Comrantinople g* n.
Christ gg ; loo.
CorporedhU 170.
Dabba, Ban" 215.
Day of Judgment n i .
Dahriy)a (see Materialis*) zx : 107 ; 219. Daiiam, Dailamiter >TI: n a n : "4.
Dedering, Sven n n.
Daisan nor.
De Goeje. M. J. 88 n :
Dzis;miies 179 n: ssg;
IPL
Daliah ixq n : Damascus 16 n ; 69 n : 78 ;
De Lacy O ' L e q 14s n.
1%
: 1 ~ n. 4
110
n:
151
n ; 119 n;
n: 1x6 n : 914 n :
De Sacy 111 n ; 138 n. Dhaidhan, Muhammad b. Husain 108: 108 n:
Bahr b. Wall, Banu 228.
@ n ; 4 8 n ; 49 n: 5%n ; 56; 74; 93. Baya"iw 31 : 39 ; qo ; 4&48 ; 56 ; 65 ; 73 :
Damiri r g p n ; 155 n : 156 n ; 157 a Daniel gn.
~ o g: log n. Dhammina qo : 67 : 68-9 ; 70 n.
Bakriyya 15-16 ; 15 n: 169 ; zng. Bakmzun 130.
74 : gn : 9%; no1 ; 2.23. Bardahi IJL.
Daud-al-Jawaribi 39: $3 n: 188; 189 n:
Dhimmid azz n ; nzg ; PPS n.
Daughters of God 3,g.
Dindan (Ahmad b. al-Huaain)
1%
s greatest Name ( ~ 1 al-A'tha) ~ 1 ~ ~ 47; 141 n : 160 n ; 164 n: 173 n : 175 m. Graetz. Heinrich 37 n. 47 n ; 50: 50 n: 54. Goldriher, Ignv n n ; 15 n : zo n ; 25 n ; Gray, ..I H. 87 n. 51 n : 5 7 n ; 5 8 n : 6% n; 71 n : 761%; Greeiu l ~ g ;1 2 0 ; 191. Guyard, S. 71 n ; 144 n. 81 n : 92 n ; l o o n : 101 n ; 104 n ; 1x3 n :
W
Dirar ibn Amr, io n; 16-17: PI,
16 n: 189;
Druse~ ipl n.
n.
D i r a r i ~ a16-17:
Dualists g p ; 98 n: ~ w 115: : 116; 179: 179 ,g;
39: 169: 2x1 ;
~85.
ring.
Djenneby 107 n.
Dur 133.
E.
H. Harun b. Sa'd a1 Ijli 71.
Eden, Gardm of 141.
Enoch 133 n.
Habir 125,
Egypt 4 n: 5 n: 53 n ; 54 n : 108 n: n z ;
Ethiopians 35.
Hafd al-Fard
Euphrates qg n ; ~ $ 4 n : ~57.
Ha& Ghulam S-az
112
n : 127; 127 n ; 1 ~ 8 :1x9.
Empeddes PPO.
Harut n ~ 7n.
16.
Haan b. Ali qg: 51 n :
187 n.
Haitina 34: 34 n ; 40; p ~ m 185. ; Hajar F.
Fad1 al Hadathi 99; gg n ; ~ m .
Fatimid 108 n : 11, n ; 126 n : I P ~n ; 81.
F a r al-Darula alduwaihi 140 n.
Falrhr al-Din al-Rad 47 n; 106 n.
n:
1x9 n : 14, n. Ban" 228. Felashas 41 n. Fihr b. Malik
211
;
n ; 183:
1 ~ 1
161
n.
;
al-Hasan b. Muhammad farani
11
Hakaikina 18.
al-Wasan b. Sanbar
Hakamina gz n.
Hashim, Banu 61 n.
Abu-I-Mughith d-Husain b. Mansur
(or ~l-Fadi) al-Za-
n. 111
n.
al-Hawb 215 n.
Farghana 1x7 n.
Firaun 219.
Faris al-Dinawari 8%.
Firdaus 137: 137 n. Fliigel. Gusev 114 n.
73 : S 8 4 ; 80 : 80 n ; 81 ; 81 n ; 82 ; 8% n : 8%: 83 n: 84; 8421; 86 n. Hallajiyya 73 : 78 n ; 80--84 : nsq.
Friedlaender, Israel 41 n : 4%n : 43 n ; qq n :
Hamadan no n.
H m e s 133; 1% n.
Hamid b. al-Abbarj, Abu Muhammad 84: 84 n. Hamra Ispahani 126 n.
al-Hill1 179 n: 191 n. Himadiva qo n ; see Himarina.
Hanafiva 4 n.
Himarina 39 ; 40;
Al-Farra, Abu Zakariya Yahya b. Ziyad alDailami rgg: 199 n.
Fars 59 n ; 60; 78: 80: 82: 11%. Fat& 134; 1% n : 135 n. Fatima 51 n: 61 n : 70; 70 n: 74:
111
n.
46 n ; 49 n: 5 0 n ; 57 n ; 5 9 " : 6 z n ; 63 n : 6 4 n ; 65 n: 71 n ; 7511: 7 8 n : 86 n: n o n.
Hanbalited
90
n.
Gabriel zgg n. Ganges River 12%n. Gapmart 199. Gehenna nzo. Ghailan. M e m n or Abu Meman
6 ; 6 n ; 7. Gharjistan 18. Ghajushar 18 n. Ghaman 3 : 4 ; 4 n. Ghassanina 1 ; 3 ; 5.
PP~.
H a n i f i w ; Hanifitm L n: x n ; 4 n: 5 n: mg n; 922
Herar 18 n : qg ; 75 ; 103: ~ q pn; 161 n.
101-s
; lor
n.
al-Muhasibi, Abu
Hindoo 16 n; 65 n ; gl n ; zag n Hisham (Caliph) 47 n. Hisham al-Hakam iq n. Hisham b. Abd-al-Malik
n.
Harbiyp 40 ; 56 ; 59 n. al-Harith b. Miskin 226. Harith b. Asad
H&ming 2% n. Heliogobulus u g n.
Himyarife 15%
Hanifi, Ban" 38 : 142 ; 1x5 ;
Gaudefmy-Demombper 133 n.
62: 70; 14;
nsg.
a l ~ m a nb. al-Ha-
Hajj 119: 176 n.
Hallaj,
n
Hasan a1 Askari 70 n.
n.
Hajir 54. d-Hajjaj b. n a t 165 n.
F-ra,
F-khmu b.Buwaih, Abu Shuja, Adud alDaula 128: 1 ~ 8 n; LP~.
1.1
k,
2x9.
101
n:
104 n.
Hisham al-Fuwati 188 n. Abdallah
~25.
Hisham ibn al-Haam al-Rafidi 3%: 33 n;
Hatith b. Suraij 13 n ; 14: 14 n
183: 188 n. Hisham b. Muhammad
H a m n 103 ; log n ; 123; 114 n: 131 ; PP? n.
Hisbam ibn Salim al-Jawaliki or J u w d i i 33;
~arun b. ~humarawaih,~ b Musa u 124 n. H a m al-Rashid 5 n ; 54 n ; 1x5; "7
Hisham h. Ubaidallah al-Rad 226.
118n.
n.
83 n; 183. n;
Hishamima
n : 32 ; 33 : 184; xm ; ne5.
Kir
~ 2 6 ;1x6 n.
1 2 1 ; 1 x 1 11;
Hitti 39 n. Horten, M. 6 n ; gi
-1
; gg n.
Huiamiyya 107 nt
Ikhwan al-Safa 146 n.
Isanc son of Abraham 4 n.
Harkus b. Zahair al-Bajali n ~ p .
Uak, 76; 78. Ilba 07 Ulba &) n. Imamiyya or Imamite 93 ;. 39; 41 n; 44 n ; 49; 49 n ; 57 n: z q n ; 1% n; ~ 4 0 ; 169; n g n : zzg.
1sawiy)a 37;
India u o ;
Ishabyya 18: 76 n; $ n. Ishznnael 1% n.
Husain b. Ab" Manrur j8 n.
Houtima, T. 81 n.
Huiain
Huart C1.
60 n : 62 ; 62 n ; 70 ; 74: prg. Huaain al-Ahwd 110 n. Husain b. Ali b. al-Hasnn b. Ali 53 n. al-Hurain b. al-Fadl s o l .
110
n.
Hubaim ibn Jubair 4g n. al-Hudaibiya 167 n ; r18: 228. Kulmaniyya
an ;
ig ; 78-80
;
79.
(ibn Ali) 45 : 45 n : 49 ; 5% n ; 55 ;
i
Hulul 73 n.
Husain b. al-Kaaim b. Ubaidallah b. Sulaiman
Huluiiyya 3~ ; gg : 40 : 47 ; 56 ; 73-86 ; 74 ; 78; 79; 80; 81 ri : 83; log; 164; 169:
85; 85 n ; 86. Husain h. Zikwaih b. Mibrwaih 1%: Husainiyya g n. lh. Sahb, abu Ali
188 n: 219: m4. Humaid b. T h a w 155.
~ $ 2n;
~30.
Imk 46 n: 47; 47 n: 54; 58; 58 n ; log; log n ; 110 n ; 128 n.
n.
Isma'il b. Abbad &Sahib 140; 140 n.
'4. Isma'il b. J a ' k alSadik log;
n.
',
Ija
1
Isa al-lrpahani 37 n.
1
I s a b . M q a m ~ : ~ p ; q g ; 5 8 n ; 6 8 ; 7 % ; 8 8 ; Iama'iliyya
2; 1
Isa b. M u a 52 ; 53.
Ivanow V. 1r6 n.
Iblis g n : 183 ; 133 n ; 217 n. Ibn Abu-1-Awja 224.
Ibo Rawcndi 6 ;
Ibn Abu Laila. Muhammad b. Abd-al Rahrnan
Ibn Salim al-Basri 189.
Jabarita 16 n ; 193
Ibn Zikmaih ,lo n.
Jab-m
Ibn al-Arabi 71 n.
Ibrahim 76; 144: '45.
Jabir b. AMallah al-Ansri 60 n ;
Ibn Athir 60 n ; 214 n : p ~ g . Ibn Hajar al-Askalani 165 n.
Ibrahim b. Abdaliah' b. al-Hasan b. al-Haran
165 m. Jabir b. Yezid al Ju'fi 55 : 55 ZI ; 60 n.
14n:
53. Ibrahim b. Ahmad a1 Marwan/, Abu I s m
230.
n.
-
n.
20
J.
188n.
$24 ; **q n. n ; 3.z n ; Ibrahim b. Muhajir ; zr n ; pg. 4 8 n ; 51 n ; 5 6 n ; 57 n ; 6 n n ; 6 3 n ; Ibrahim b. Muhammad b. al-Munajjim. Abu 6 5 s ; 6 7 n : 7 o f i : 9 3 n ; 9 5 n ; Iron; Imran 85: 85 n. 150 n: '73 n ; 184 n ; 187 n ; 188 n: lbrahim b. Muhammad al-Mruakki. Abu Ishak 189 n ; 190 n ; 19% n ; 19%n ; x ~ n ; 126 ; L P n. ~ zoz n; 203 n: 208 n ; a 0 n ; * % I n ; Ibrahim al Nasmbadi, Abu-I-Kasim 8%; 82 n. n ~ gn ; 2 ~ 4 n ; 216 n. Ibrahim b. Yahya al.Aslami 34; 34 n. Ibn Jubair 69 n. Ibrahimiyya g4. Ibn al-Kasim zz6. Idris 133 n. l b h Khaldun ,,I n:. 2.g ., Idds b. Abdallah b. sl-Hsran 53; 53 n. Ibn Kutaiba 60; 61. al-Iji 138 n ; 144 n ; 145 n. Ibn Kutaiba, pseudo p q n. Ijl, Banu 58 n; 65 n. Ibn Labban 65 n. Ikhshidiyya ln7. 110
110
n; 117 n ; 146 n.
Ibn Mulilah 85 n.
160; 160 n.
Ibn Harm 4 n; 5 n; 16 n ;
lxp
62 n.
Ithnaasha*
Ibn Manama 47 n.
Ibn Ha"kal
g ; log;
Isa b. Muhammad b. Ali 88 n.
Ibadiyla n i ; 103 : '03 n ; 203 n.
Ibn Harama 156;
l q
Ispahan jg n ; 60 ; 61 : 61 n ; lo7 n.
99; zoo; 136; 144; 145; 185 : nm. I.
Isbak b. Suwaid alAdawi eg ; 43 n. Isbah the Turk 75 n.
Isnta'il b. Ibrahim b. gabus al-Shiran' al-Daili
Iranian 50 n ; 199 n. 1%
lop.
lrhak b. Ibrahim 88: 89 n; 115; 115 n. I a ~ ksinjzri 113 n.
n;
1%
Jamshid or Jimshid zlg; 219 n.
; 194 n.
Janadi IPS n.
~4 n.
164 n ;
al-Jannabi, Abu-1-Kasim Said 111 n. Janahiyya 39 : 40 ; g g b l ; 64 n: 65 ; 73 ; 74;
gz ; gg ; 169 : 2% : 424. Japhet b. Ali 37 n.
Jaduon, A. V. W. g? n.; 92. ~ a ' db. Diiham 101 ; 101 n: ,on n. Ja'far b. Abu Talib 59 n.
Jarhamima 15%. Jarudiyya 169; 225.
Ja'fir b. Muhammad alSadik 49 n : 64 ; 64 n ;
Jawalikiyya 19 n.
j&
64 ; 65 : 65 n ; 71 ; 7, n ; 74 : 94 ; 108 :
Jawidan b. Sahrnk 88.
log n ; 229.
Jerusalem 18 n.
(a book) 71.
al-Jahiz 58 n: 167 n ; 168; '77 Jahm b. Safwan t ; I n ; 8 n ; 13-15,
'3
m;
14 n : 18, n ; q o n ; nog. I ; 2 n ; 13-15; 15 n : 84: 39: 159; 164; 169; 170; 1 8 ~ ; 189; 194;
$.bmiWa
PP5: PP9. Jaihun 73 ; 73 n ; 75 ; 224. Jamasp n g : lzg n; 120; LPS.
Jesus 3 n ; 4 2 n ; n m ~ Jnuish, Jews 5 n ; lg n ; 38 ; 41 n ; 42 ; 43 : 44 n ; 45 : 45 n ; 47 n ; 51 n ; 67 ; 68 : gn : 104 : 107 ; 134 n ; 136 ; 139 ; 141 n ; 15%; 17% n ; 18e n; t84 n : 185 n : Mo: z m n ; PPL; ZZL n ; ~ n z . Jibril or Jibra'il 46 : 47 : 47 n : 68 ; 75.
Jinn 133 n ; 135. Joshua or Yusha b. Nun qq n ; 45.
J u i a n 89; 107 n ; I l n n ; 115; 129: t a g n.
ibn-al-Khayyat 14 n : 188 n ;
al-Jurjan, Sawad go.
Khazars $5 :
Jnrrin Martyr go n.
Khur 103 n.
121:
148: sm.
121
43 : gl ; 93 ; 93 n : gq ; QQ ; lo1 ; lo5 : 159; 162 ; 164; 166; 168; 169; 170: '77 ; 189; 1% n : 185; 186; 187: 187 n ; 188; 189; 190: 193: 1%: 195: 196; 197: 198; 198 n : 199; POI ; 203 : 204 ; no4 n ; so8 ;
n. ~ al-Kadir Billahi 85 11; Kahir al-Pal& I*? n. 110
n;
216: n29. Maimun 89 n: 101 n ; 109 n : 111 n ; IPA n. Abdallah b. Maimun
Kahtaniyya Kaiman
1
K h u m m (gedgr) $ 11.
12;;
30; 3 4 ; 35: 37: 159 n; 185; 184; 186; 191; rgg n ; not n ; nog n ; 816; *I,. Kashsh 77: 77 a al-Kasim b. Isa al-Ijli, Abu Dulaf 88; 114. al-Katif lz3; 127 n. Rawaliimardan 75 n ; rcc Kara Kaimun Dat. Kaza Kaimun Dat 75: 75 n. R a n z n.
122
Kumm 69 n :
**0.
14n.
Kur & n.
K h u r r a m i ~ a73 : 87-89 ; 87 n ; 89 n: 95 n ; 107 n ; 191 11; n q ; 114 n; 143; zoa;
Kuraish 43 n : 208 n : *lo n: 212 : 41P n : ll8 n : 219.
206.
Khulaima, Banu ZII.
Kurds 109; '41.
Khnzaima b. Thabir 168: 168 n.
Kuahayr, Ban" nn8.
111
n;
Kushtacp 119.
Khtlristan 101 n : lo3 n. ' Khwaram 129. Kinana
911:
Kufama 123. K m a n 418 : z18 n : 228.
211.
Kersler gl n. Khalefy
1q
n.
L.
59 : 58 n: 101 : 10s n. Khalid b. al-Wdid 225; 2x5 n. nl-Khalil b. Ahmad 16, ; 181 n.
n.
~ l g ;127.
Lahsa
ly
Lane, E.
n.
hla'add
al-Khasibi 1.5
Ma'add al-Mu'h, Abu Tamim 227 n.
n. K h a t t a b i ~g. ; $9 ; 40 ; 6n ; 63 n ; 65 ; 70; 73; 74: 92; 93; 140: 169; PO,; p e p ; 226. Rhawarij, M j , . W j i t e I n ; 5 n : 15 n ; 27; 39: 4 ~ e;. n ; 43; 45 n ; gq n: 10%: 305; 105 n ; 152 n: 159: 36,; 164: 168;
Kamiliyya 169 ; 214 n; 224 : 228. IPS.
Kantarat al-Muhammira
89.
al-Karabiri. al-Husain b. Ali 106: 106 n. Karaite~g j n. Karbela 45 ; 45 n : 53. Karmat, Hamdan 108 n : u o ;
110
n;
111:
1 1 1 n: I I Z : ' I I ~ n .
Karmatian, Karamifa 3% n ; lo1 n : 107 n: ~ n n2: : 114; I S ;
120
n;
169 ; 170 ; 174 ; 176 ; 177 ; 205 ; z q ; 207 n: 209; 210 n ; $11; 213 n: 2x4 n; 216: P P :~ 2 ~ ;5 PQI.
Khawla a l - W a f i y y n Khawwaf 221 n.
n;
1%
n
hl.
al~Khalj76: 77.
al-Kalanisi 2x7.
jj
Lsmghan ~ n n ;122 n.
K a i s a n i p 56 n.
1x0 n:
Kufite 3 n ; 41 ; gg n ; 64 n.
Khurramdiniyya 87 (see Khurramiyya): 107 n ;
al-liharka 166.
109 n:
n: 161 n.
I&
al-Kufa, Sarvad n o n.
Kais, Ban" 1 4 ~n.
Kannawj
j3:jSn; 55;57n:59;59n;63;63n; 65 n: 107 n ; I Z ~n ; 125; 126: 126 n;
W a l i d b. Abdallah al-&sri 46 n ; 47; 48 n:
%
L~P.
111;
1 n; n n : 18 f f ; 18 n ; 19 n; n ; n l ; n x ; ng; ~ 5 ~: 6 ~: 7 ~; 8 29; ;
n.
1
Kufa5n;16n:~1n:qnn;44:45n;49n;
XI;
K h u m m a $ n.
Kamamiyya to
Kadariies 6 n ; g ; so : 14 : 25 . ; 27 ; 34 ; 39 :
209; 210 n ; 115 ; al-Kaddah, Abdallah b. 108: 108 n ; I*; al~Kaddah. Ahmad b.
n; 123 n ; 124 n : 125; 1x5 n ; 1 ~ 6 ;
1 ~ n; 7 134 d.
Shams al~Ma'ali ing :
Kabus b. Washmkir, 1x9 n.
Kirkirani 104 n.
18; 18 n ; zg; 60 n ; 80: gq n ; zza n ; i13 n; xng; l%g n ; ~ p L; ~ ;P 1- n ; 161 n.
K.
z1~Ka'bi 37 : 197 : 19; n.
Kinda, Ban" 38; 58 n : 228.
n.
al-Kinnani
b r a s a n 13 n : 14
Ka'ba 38; 39; 117:
204
111.
2%.
I@
n;
211; sll
al-Milla 21 n :
1 x 2 ; 122 n : 125 n ; 199; go; >go n. Maimun b: Daisan 108 n ; 11%n : 123 n : 1 % ;~
n.
Ma'an b. Za'ida gq; 94 n. Maghreb 53; 53 n ; x q n ; 191: i z n ; 123. Magians
nz n :
68: 1-20; ion; 105;
206;
lq;
115: 1'6; "7; '18; u g ; 120: IPS: 1x3; 130; L S I ; 132; 141: 148; 149; 183; 184: 185 : 199; zoo n : nso ; : z m n : nng ; 227. Mahdiqg; llg n ;
s n ; 5 7 n ; 5 8 1 3 : 61 n ; 120.
hl-Mahdi b. Mansur 76 : 77 ; 77 n ; 160 Mahmud b. Subuktekin, Yamin al-Daula Amin
131. Maimun b. W
d or b. . b r a n
105: 105 n.
Maimuniyya 3 9 : 40: 105--6: 1x2 n ; ~ 2 4 . Maham 54 n. Malilid x n : 5 n ; 6z n: 64 n ; 65 n; 75 n: 9 0 ;gg n; l b 8 n ; ~ r s n . Malik b. A n a s q n ; z o n : $4"; 86 n ; 159 n ;
560; 165 n : nlg; 221; 222 n ; x q n: 226: 4 ~ 8 n. ,iraiikite PO n: 160 n : 2x9 a
P P ~ :P P S ~ ' ;
Malkui 64 n. Ma'mar b. al-Murhanna, Abu Ubaida
15% n; 153; 153 n. AI-Ma'mun 130 n. Al-Mamun, Caliph 88 n ; 89 n
;
15s;
r o ~n ; 108 ;
l l g ; 142 n : an6 n.
Mudar
Mazdak 87 n ; 113
Mufawxida or Mufawwidiyya 40; 40";
1,s
n.
M q a r , Muhammad b. Karen 89; 89 n ; go;
$ 0 ~ 223. ;
(see Mani-
&earn). Mani g. ; POL. Manicheans 19 n : qz n ; gl n : 94; ~ 7 9n ; n.
i21-Mamur (Fatimid Caliph) tn6 n. Al-Mansur, Abu Ja'far 5%; 52 n ; 53; 53 n ;
51: 63: 63 n: 75: 75 n: 94; 94 n ; lo3 n. Mansur b. Nuh the Samanid 130 n. Mmuriyya 31 ; gg; 40: 57-8;
64 n ; 65 ;
169 ; z q ; PP4.
Marcion no,. Marcionites or Markiuniter 179 n ; 293. Marisiyya
I;
x n ; 5.
Maryariyya 88 : 89 ; go ; go n.
n ; 53 ; 54: 1 n 1 ; ~ n 6; 1x6 n : I*,: 148; 161 n ; ~28. Al-Medina y ; 53 ; 58 n ; 54 : 59 : 141 : 161 n; 165 ; 225. ; 33
Meca
Merw 73 ; 74 : 75 : 75 a. Mewan b. al-Hakam 214; ~ 1 n. 4 Meropotamia 123; 125. Mihnvaih b. Zikwaih ,LO n.
55 ; 57 n ; 58 n ; 59. Mughilifla 31; 39; 40; 49; 50 n; 5 4 : 51 ": 59 ; 60 n ; 140: 169 ; *83 ; 201 ; 2 ~ 3 . M u h a m m a d 2 ; g n ; 1%; l z n ; 2 6 : ~ 6 n ; 3 7 ; 37 n : 38: 39: 4~ n: 43; 44 n ; 46; 49; 5 1 ; 5 & n ; 5 ~ n 5; 8 n ; 5 9 n ; 6 3 ; 64; 67; 67 n : 68: 69: 70: 76: 81 n : go;
Muhammad b. Abdallah b. al-Haan b. AB
M-
qp n ; 4.5:
LH
n ; '36:
189 n : ZM.
Mu'adhiyya
Marut $17 n. A l - M a m d i or M e r v q , Husain b. Ali xlg.
Mu.ammar 24: 187: '95.
Mary, mother of Jmus 191.
Mu'ammar b. Abbad al-Sulami 63 n.
Masamida LPQ.
Mu'ammaifla 63 ; 64 n.
83 n ; 8 4 n ; log n: 11%n; 113 n: 116 n ; ~ r n 8 ; 13, n ; 13s n.
67; 68; 68 n ; 185. M ~ f l i h125 n. Mughira b. Sa'id a1 Ijli 3~ ; 47 a ; 48 n ; 49;
11.
Muhammad b. Isma'il b. Ja'far 62; 107 n ;
log;
110
n ; 1x8 n ;
1%;
134 n ; 145.
J.fubiimmad b. Ja'far 19 n. Muhammad b. Karram 8 n ; t8 ; lg : no : 21 ; 22
; q : ~6 n : %7; 08 ; 186
;
n.
Muhammad b. Nu'man zg n. M~~hammnd b. Shabib
1
: 6 : 6 n ; 7.
Muhanlnlvd al-Shaibani 3 n. >I"bammad b. su1aiman. Ab" Ja'fafar 94; 94 n. Mnhammad b. Sulaiman 124. 3lubammad b. Tahir b. Abdallah b. Tahir 18;
18 n. Muhammad b. Ytisuf al-ThngM, Ab" Sdid
88; 88 n ; 1x4. Muhammad Ali, Maulvi 137 n. Muhammadans 133 n ;
2m n.
74; 74 n. Muhammad b. Ali b. Husain al-Balrir, Abu
76 : 76 n : 77 ; 77 n ; 78. Mukannn'iyyivya $2 ; 40 ; 73 ; 75 ; 78 ; 214.
Ja'far46n;47n;4gn;5on:57;57n; zng. Muhammad b. .4ii alQhalmaghani al-Azahiri. 3~:73;85;85n;86;86n. *
Lfukhrar, Hamdan 1 9 ; 109 n. al-Mukfadi Billahi, Ja'far 83; 84 n; 85 n;
hlubarakifla 1x0 n.
Muhammad b. al-Baith 88 n.
MulMn 130.
63 ; 63 n;
Mu'awiya b. Abddlah b. Ja'fir 59 n. Mu'asiya b. Sufyan 27; p
rz4.n;
015;
n; 140:
~ 1 5 n : ~z5n.
Mubar&, maula of Isma'il
110
n.
168;
46; 50 n ; 60 n ;
Muhammad b. d-Hanafiyya
Mataialisfs 131 : 13%: 138: '5s ; 173; 179;
Mubayyida 75 ; 76 ; 107 n ; no6 ; 2 4 .
74; 74 II ; P25 : PP9. Muhammad b. al-Hasan 226.
22'.
Aftahammad b. Iaa Burghuth
>zujja'a 225 n.~
Mubarrky LO? n.
nso n ;
b. Simjur. Abu-l-
98: 98 n. Muhammad b. AJi @. -4bdnUab.b. al-Abbas)
Mu'am-
Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Kahtabi 93;
n n.
Mubarek u o n.
220;
n.
Ibrahim
Muhammadifla 49 n; 54. 4 9 ; 4 9 n ; 5 0 : 5 0 n : 5 ~ ; 5 1 n ; 5 3 ; 5 3 n : Muhammadiyya 68 n. Muhammira 88 ; 88 n ; 89 ; 107 n ; 1 5 ; *a6 ; 54: 55 : 55 n. Muhammad b. Abdallah b. Tahii 18 n. ~24.
Mas'udi 1x6 n.
Massikhiyya
111
b.
Nasir al-Daula xng.
H-1,
Monomeisu 181.
Mu'adh b. Muslim 77 ; 77 n.
n (me Massikhiyya).
Mufaddaliyya 65.
214 n. hlubammad b. Abdallah b. Maimun
Marrira 5 n.
220
log n. Muhammad
Mufaddal al-~airafi 65.
Mika'iI or MiLha'il 64; 68; 75. Mimiyya 68 n.
Mu'adh b. Jabal zz5; z25 n.
Marlama 38 n. Marsignon, L. 62 n ; 63 n: 80 n: 81 n ; 89 n ;
Muhammad b. al-Hurain b. Djihan BaWltm
nkl.
111.
io3; 1 % ; 120; 128: 134 n : 135 n ; 136 n ; $40; 141; q ;t e n ; 143n: 145; , e n ; ,go n ; 199; loo; 208 n ; z q ; 213 n ;
M c m n b. Muhammad al-Himar loL n.
Mars IPL ; 1x7.
Maskhiyya
I@;
Mudrika, Banu
49 n: 50 n : 51 n ; 52; 5%n ; 54; 54 n ;
"5.
Manawiyya gs ; gl n ;
140;
POI.
**I.
AJ-Marini, Jahm b. Khalaf 161; 161 n.
Manat 26.
9 m
114;
11;
y a ~ d a k 87; i ~ 179 n:
Al-Mamun akhu K v m a i 1x8 ; Ma'muniyya 1 1 2 ; XIZ n.
14%n : 143:
180 ; 181. (sea Dahriyya). 11; no, u. Ma-x~ra.1-nahr at ; 75: 75 1 , : 76 n; xy n; "3. Maruridi, pseudo - no
Siuliallaf z y ; 208. a l - M u h n a . Hashim b. Hakim 32 ; 75 ; z n "i
120: 120 n ; '95 n ; al-M"kgfi ,no: ,no n :
Munliar
2 9
I*$:
'25.
n.
M u j i , ~ a , Murjita
I ; I n; 2 : zn; 4 n ; ' 5 ; 5 n ; 6 ; 7 ; 8: 13 n ; 82 n ; 87 n ; nng.
M-
144 : 145 : 146 ; 146 n.
Musa b. Ja'far al-Kathim Mus'ab
89
1%
n ; rzg.
n.
n: 9 % ; 2x5. Mushabbiha 31 : 9 % ; 33; 34: 36: ~ 5 9n ; 164. Mushlianip 37 n : 98 n. Murlims 7: 15: 17: gz: gg; 44 n ; 45; 48: 57 n : jg n ; "4: 115: L P L : I P P : ,go: 133 n : n ; 148; '49: ~ 5 9 ;'62; '71 ; z m n: ~ 0 6 ;208: PIO: PIS n ; x ~ qn ; 215; ~ 1 6 :216 n: n18: 219: zno: 221: XPL n: sns; ppg: pzg n: 224 n ; 225; na6; 2x7. ; no1
Mustadrika
1,
61 n : 6s n ; 63 n ; 64 n ; 75 n : PIP n.
: 146 n. MutaKallims 16 n : r;g ; 182 n; 185 n : al-Mu'rasim 88 n ; 89 ; 89 n ; go ; I U ; 114. Mu'mtila, Mu'mdlites 4 n : 5 n : 6 : 16 : 16 n :
al-Mu'mdid
Muwiilima al-Kadhdhab 38 ; 45 ; 48 : 55 ; 19;
no,
Mum 59 n. Mut'a 176: 177 m. Iy
24; 34: 35; 35": 3 6 i 4 3 n : 53; 53 n : 63 n : 81; 93: 101: lox n : 113 n: 177: '80: 180 n : 1 % : 185 n: 186 n: 187; 187 n: 188: 188 n: >go n : lgl: rgl n : 193 n; 1%: 1% n: 195: 195 n ; 197 n : ~ 9 8n : 199 n : 20% n : n q n: roq n: 210 n : 1 1 2 ; 217 n : 1 % : Po*:
22:
PP~.
Mu'ranliam
I
n: % n : 93: 94: 99:
Mu'tazilice Kadarite
; I*.
al-Musfa'in Biliahi 18 n.
al-Muti 128 n.
Muata'min 213: 223 n.
ai-Murani 224 n.
Nabateam i t o n : 141 ; 141 n.
Nalrhshab 77.
I.
XI-Nawawi64 n : 160 n ; 165 n
110
n;
: 115 n : 192 n
;
~ u b. h Nasr b. Ahmad the S-anid al-Numairl see Yunus ibn Aun.
2l7: 217 n : 228: 2x8 n.
Nakir tog n.
Petsia 9 n ; log; 103 n:
Nafr 116: 116 n.
d-Namiti, Muhammad b. Nusair 70.
Nafr Zalriya 5%n: (see Muhammad b. Abdallah
~ a m i r i y y a4o ; 70 ; 70 n : 73 : 74. Nasaf 77 n ; 1x9 n :
N&awend 14 n.
ai-Nasafi, Abu Abdallah Bandana
Nahrawan n u ; n15.
al-Kasafi, Muhammad b. Ahmad 113: 113 n.
L ~ In.
Najadat 176: 207 n.
Kasib, Nawasib 42.
Najd 54 n.
Nasir a1 Daula, Abu-1-Ham Muhammad ibn
~ = j dal-aaji, 54 n. Najda b. Amir 21s.
Simjur zg. Nasr b. Ahmad the Samanid i13 n,
Nasr b. al.Hajjaj 165; 165 n. d a l l a h g : g n : r o n : l 1 : 1 1 n : ~ 6 : ~ 6 n . Nasr ibn Sanar 14: 14 n. Nasr b. Subuktekin 130 n. N a j j a r i ~ a I n: g: lo; 1 2 ; 39; 159: 164; Natik 134 ; 134 n : '35 n : 169 : nn5 : nzg. Naubakhti lg n: @ n: gq n : 57 n: 58 n: Na*brnan 53 n (see Bakhmara)
al-Najja,, al-nusain b. Muhammad Ab" Ab-
113 n.
N u m a i r i p 70: see Namiri~w. Nur sha'r6a'ani 116 n.
Nur ruiami 116 n. Nusairis 134 n. Nvwairi IIZ n : In4 n.
0.
Omairiyga 65. Omar (Alid) nng. Omar b. Baym al-Ijli 65. Omar b. al-Khattab qe n: 51 : 51 n : 59 n :
Nag' b. al-Amak al-Hanafi *la.
b. al-Hasan b. al-Hasan).
".
93; 93 n : 99; 164: 166 ; 177: 178: 178: 179 n : 180 m i 204: n q n : -5 n. Nimmd b. Hana'm b. Kush 219. Nishapur 18: 18 n : nl ; 8n; 103; L I ~ :113 n : L P :~ 1.9 n ; 130 ; 221 n : Nizar 43 n : 142 n: 911. Noah 1% n.
Pedersen rog n.
n.
'29
al-Naaam 6 n; 7 n : g n : x o n ; r5: 84: 35;
Nakibs 134 n.
8 1 % : 211
zng:
Nuh b. Mansur al-Rida the S-nid
Paradisc 132 : 144 n ; 160 : 167 : 18, : 1% : 197 : N a b , Ban"
Nuh 144 : 145.
1 1 9 ; zn7 n. Persians r n ; 103; 137 n : '19: 1x9 n: IPO: ,no n : 128 n : 136 n : 14,; 145'; 161 n: rq) n ; p l r ; 2x1 n; nzg n: 224. Peter '54 a Pharaoh 136. Planets, Seven 116.
6 0 : 65; 70 n ; ~ 4 0 ;140 n : 141; 150:
165: 165 n: 169: 2l3; nl3 n : O m u d-Ordi 81 n. Omar (b. Yusuf ?) al-Khanoak 58 n.
214.
Rakashiyya
2
n.
Raklra ~ 2 4 ;124 n; 125 n. Ramadan, Fast of gg; go; nap:
Shabib b. Yerid alShaibani
Ririer, H. 46 n.
S h a d h k a n i ~ a or Shadhghaniyya 37; $7 n:
Romans l l g ;
24.
n;
Ridda 38 n. 120.
-
I
Sijistan 18; 18 n; 313 n. 38 n ; ~q n. a l J h a f i l q n ; 6 n ; ~ n ; 6 ~ n : ~ 6 o n : ~ g siyam, ~ n ; M t 77.
al-Ramiah 124; 124 n ; 125.
Rukn al-Ka'ba 54.
Ravra 411 R Rax'andiyya 75 n ; gz : 93 ; pl n ; ~q n ; 213. Ra'yaniyya 104. al-Rzi 185 n ; 186 n.
Rurafa 124.
nzg n ; nzl : n s p ; PPQ : 223 n: 224 ; ppq n;
Ruiam b. Sabik. 74 n.
PP~;
Ruzarniyya r x Rizamifla 40 ; 73 ; 73 n ; 74 ; 75 n ; 92 n ; nz4.
Sifatiyya 5 ; 6 ; 159 ; 159 n. 161 ; 1%. SifLin. Battle of n q ; 215; 2x8 n.
~ l p .
Snouck Hurgronje 176 n. Saoates 9%: 180 n. Sophisa 172; 172 n ; 419. Stmthmana, R. 54 n ; 136 n: 360 11. Subuk 124: 1n4 n. Suhuk al-Muflihi 125. Subuktekin 125 n: 130. Sufipz n ; 4 7 n; 7 8 n ; 8 0 ; 8 1 ; 8 4 ; 8 2 n ;
n ; 2x6.
Shafi'ircs xzp; 925
n
Shahrastani 4 n ; 10.8 n ; a l ~ s h a i m133 n.
115
n; 116 n.
Shairan al-Tak tg. Shalrnaghan 85 n. Sa'adya b. Joseph al-Falyumi 17s n: 18n n ;
185 n. Sabbabiyya 31 ; 3g : 40 ; 41-45 : 55 ; 73 i 74 ;
93 :
140 :
169 ; sol : nzg.
Salm b. Kutaiba 53.
Shammakh 54 n.
al-Sam'ani 55 n; 6n n ; 119 n.
al-Sh-ni,
Samanidr $9; 129 n ; 130.
Shamin 8g ; go.
d b u g h d 76 : 76 n ; 77.
Samara 3.
Sulaimae b. al-Hasan a1 Karmati, Abu Tahir
Abu Sa'id 1.3; 113 n.
Saba'iyya 41 n ; (ree Sabbabina)
S a m a m 89 n.
Shuh 76. S h a m d , month of 205.
Sabbath no n ; 136.
samaritans
Shem Hameforash 47 n.
Sabbar al-Madain 4%; 4.
Samarkand 42 n.
Sabians 103; 103 n ; 131 ; 133; 133 n; noo n ;
San'a eq n; 1x3 n. al-Sanadiki, a1-Hasan b. Faraj, A b u - l - K M
22,;
1 1 % ;212
n.
211.
Sachau. Edw. 113 n ; 1x9 n.
rn3 : 1x3 n ; ~ n qn. Sanbar 326 n.
Sa'd b. Abu Wakkar p17 n ; nt8.
Sanbar, Banu
Sa'd b. Miilik 217 n.
Sassanids iso n.
Saggitarius ,no.
Sassaniyya
Sab'iyya ,107 11 ; 134 n.
Sa'id b. Amr al-Harmhi 77 ; 77 n. Sa'id al~Hasan b. Ahmad
b. Abdallah
ai-
n. Sa'id b. Z e d b. Nufail 217 n ; 218. Saidy IQ n. Sajah b. Harith al-Tamim p o l : no, n ; a q . Salih Kubba I n ; 6 ; 8 ; (see al-Salihi). Salih b. Mudrik 6o n. al-Salihi 8 ; &go; ,go n. Sdhiy)-a 78 n ; 81 ; L n. Salisbury Fragment 116 n. Salm b. Ahal-Mazini 14: 14 a Salm al-Khaair y g n. Bddah
1x1;
111
1x1.
n. Satan PP n ; 86 : 54 ; 55 : 68 ; 75 ; IM ; 102 ; 1x5; 1.83: 133 n; ~ 3 5 ;139 n ; 148; 183: 220
184; 185; 208: no8 n ; n ~ g . Saturn IPO n ; 121 ; 219 n. al-Sawad 128. Sawda' 4, n. Sendinavian go n. Schacht, J. 172 n. Schreiner, M. 37 n ; 97 n ; 98 a Seleucids ,no n. Sem 184 n. Seth 1% n. Sha'ban, month of nos.
84: 150
n ; 118; 118 n; 119 n ; zno; 1.0 n ; 125; Z P n~ ; 1x6; 126 n ; 127; 132: 1%; 186; 137. Sulaiman b. al-Jarir al-Zaidi 54.
71 n ; 83 n: 93 n; 1 1 1 n ; , r a n ; 1 3 p n ; 140 n ; r h n ; 175 n ; 1 7 7 n ; 201 n: 209 n ; nro n : n ; P I P n; 213 n. Shihr 105; 105 n. Shirar 80 n. Shit (Seth) 60. Shraman 91 n. b
al-Harith
16n ; 163 ; sol n; $25 n.
111
Shi'a, Shi'ite2 n ; 35 n: 4 n ; 46 n ; 49 n ; 51; 51 n : 5%n ; 55 n ; 58 n ; 62 n ; 6 4 n :
Shuraih
n;
14 (see
Sulaimaniyya 169. Sumaniyya 9 1 ; gs n; 174; nlg. Sunday 136. Sunna 144. Sunnita 6 n ; 7 ; 15; 18 n ; 27; 28; ~ g 44: ;
n ; 5 5 n ; 5 8 n ; 6 z n ; 123x1; l 2 7 n 134 n ; 160 n ; 176 n ; 186; ,go; 1%; n ~ on ; 91% n ; 2x3 n ; 215 n ; 2 2 5 Sunnite Murjite 4 n. Sunnife Unitarian 39. Surra~man-ma89 : go : 114. Syria 41 ; to? o: n o n: ls4 n : 160 n. SFans a. 51
1 ~ 8 n;
al-Harith b.
Suraij). al-Sh~rail 70. S h u r a i ' i ~ a40 ; 70 : 73 : 74. Shuramain or Summain 18;
1813:
Shuhbiyya 143 n ; 152 n; 212 n. Sibaxvaih, A m b. Uthman b. kaobar 361: 161n.
Tabarisrnn 8g : go n ; 115 ; 129 Takiya 62 n. Taiyus 133.
" ; 2x4.
T.' Talha 15; 15 n ; 38 n; 5 i ; 60; 105; 167
168 : 214; 234 n : 115 ; 218. Talikan 80; 81 n.
Thumama b. al-.Ashras '77 :
Ta'limiyya 107 n. Tamim, Banu 98: 46 n:
20,
PO$
n.
Tibet 12%.
Tanja 53 n.
T i f l i ~,I4 n.
Tara'ikiyya 18.
Tigris Q : Q n ; 86 ; 157.
Tamus 161 n.
T i m i d h 13 n: 14.
POS
:
Wasil ibn Ata 43 n ; 167 : 168. Wellhauscn, J 46 n.
Tasmiyya 152.
al-Tirmidhi, Abu 'Isa 165 n.
Tam
Tramorania 73 n.
Tatius 13% n.
195 :
Wasir 85 n ; 149.
Tanasukh 46 n : 60 n ; 64 ; 70 n.
12%
L ~ ;P
0.
T u g h j b. JuE 1.4
IYeminck 133 n ; 175 n. WOsfenfeld ,,on :
I,,
n.
Y. 1,.
Yahya (b. Abdallah) b. al-Hwn 53 n.
Y e i d b. Menuan log n. Yezid b. Omar b. Huhaira 65 n.
T a ~ m i u r174; 175; $77.
Tulaiha 38 (see Talha).
Yahya 11. Aktharn n26.
Tayariyya 5g n.
Tuman 4 e.
Yahya b. al-Mahdi
Teim, Banu 140; rqo n : 141.
T u m a n i v ~ a i ; 4.
Yahya b. Zikwaih b. Mihnuaih, Abu-L-Kasim
Thamud 141.
T u n 103; 103 n.
124;
Thnawiyya 223 : see Dttaliss ;
T u r k e t a ~i~z n n.
Yakrin $3 n.
Yudghaniyya 37";
Tharwaih ,go.
Turkey
al~YaXubi225 n.
Yunu. b. Abd a l R a h m a n al-Kummi 33.
Thauban
I
n: 5.
Thanbanifla
1
znl.
Yakui
Turks 35.
; 5.
al-Turi lga n ;
al-Thauri, Sufyan b. SaPd
160 n ; 164 n ;
b. Masmh
160;
2x0
n.
Tir'ehem see Ithna'ashatiyya.
ilr
Ynidiyya ~g ; 40 ; tog-4 ; 105 n ; ~ 2 4 .
n.
Yudasaf z o o ; nso n.
114 n.
L P n~ ;
Yudghan (al-Ra'i)
117 m : 131: 185.
Yemen gq n: 123: 123 n: 124 n:
222
Yunu9 ibn Umar see Yunus ihn Ann.
n.
Yunusiyya I : 1 n : 3 ; 4 ; 5 : 6 n ; 33. Yumf b. Diwdad b. Abi Saj, Abu-l-Kasim 125 :
Semenile 142 n.
$21.
1x5 n.
Yezid I 45 n. Ynid h. Abu Unaisa 103-q: 201
Ubai ibn Ka'b 16; 16 n.
Umayya, Banu 140.
Ubaid ibn Zurara (b. A'jun?) 33 n.
Umay)a&,
Ubaidallah 0. Hasan b. .Muhammad b. lsma'il IIO
n;
112:
LZj; IP7
II:
xln
n:
ISQ;
g;
1x3 n : 125 n :
Umm-Walad 166 n.
Ubaidiyya a n.
Umra 176.
Uhud, Batile of 168; i z 8 ; 228.
U n a i ~ ae o ~n.
Ukail, Banu iq n. U k b s h a b. Mihsan
Urhrusana 42 n. 218
:
Uthman qz n : 65 ; 70 n ; rqo ; 160 ; 166 ; 1% :
228.
Ulyan b. Dhira' al-Sadui or el-Asadi 69 n.
PI^ i 114 n ; 1 1 5 : 2x5 n. Uirais a l ~ R a r a n i2 ~ 8 :218 n.
Ulyaniyya 68 n ; 69 n. Umar b. Abu Afif al.Azdi 47 n.
Venus 47.
2
n;
57";
58x1: 87".
201
Verh, P. J. 58 n. Vishtaspa. lrg n.
Yuruf b. Omar al-Thakafi 58.
;
n.
Z. Zabaniyya
Zendik 145 : 149 ; 151 ; 226.
P L ~ .
n. Zahirite 90 n : 1 6 0 ; 173. Zaidan 108 n : see Dhaidhan. Zaidiyya ~g : 71 n ; 140: 160 n ; 169 ; 2x3 n : 217 n. za1uouya b. Mahmuya Salmaalmai ll* n k d u s h f l a g ; mo; 122; 132 : 2m. Zaiwan 2.0 n. h a n i y y a 2.0 ; 220 n : 221. Za'faraniyya n ;
e-7.
v. Van Vloten
503 n:
Omayyads n n ; 14 ; 14 n : 42 n ; n; gq n ; 101 n: log n ; 117 n: ~ 2 n4 ;
L4P n ; n l z n.
I3P; 135.
1%".
Yunur ibn Aun 3 : 3 n ; 8 n.
140 n.
Yazdan nz n: 1.7:
n. 38n;
1%
Well In,.
11
Z i a r i d ~129 n. Ziyadiyya
2
n.
Zoroasra ,kg n. Zoroastrianism *no n. Zoroauians go n ; 118 n. alZubair 15 ; 15 n : 60 : 105 : 167 : 168 : 214 :
~ 1 n4 ; ~ 1 5 ~; 1 8 . Zurara ibn A'yun al-Rafidi 36; 188. Zurariyya 35. Zurkan 7 ; 7 n.
