The Zahiris

THE ZAHIRIS

THEIR DOCTRINE AND THEIR HISTORY

A CONTRIBUTION
TO THE HISTORY OF ISLAMIC THEOLOGY

BY

Dr. IGNAZ GOLDZIHER

TRANSLATED AND EDITED BY

WOLFGANG BEHN

LEIDEN

E. J. BRILL

1971

CONTEXTS

Foreword xi

Preface xiii

Introduction: The position of the problem in the literature 1

Chapter one

Contrast of ahi al-hadilh with dhl al-ra'y 3

The position of the four orthodox schools among the ahl al-ra'y ... 4

Chapter two

The beginnings of the application of ray and opposition to this .... 6

Changes in the meaning of the word ra'y 10

Qiyds (analogy), its twofold character 11

Ta'M ■ klihmn 12

Abn Hanlfah and his predecessors 13

Unfavourable reception of Abu Hanlfah's system among his contemporaries.
— Idle sophistry is falsely attributed to the exponents of the new

system. — Casuistry 13

'Ilm al-hadilh and fiqh in opposition 18

Changes in the meaning of the word fiqh 18

Chapter three

Imam al-Shafi'I 20

Opinions of theologians about al-Shafi'i's activities 22

Conciliatory position of al-Shafi'i's system 2-t

Representatives of extreme traditionalism in the Shafi'ite school ... 26

Da wiid b. 'Ali 27

His system in contradistinction to predecessors 30

Differences of opinion on ijma' 32

Beginnings of the anti-Zahirite literature 34

Dawud's necessitated concessions to analogy 35

Literature on the science of difference of opinion among the legal schools

and recognition of the Zahirite tenets in this literature .... 36

Alleged tenets of Dawud 38

'

Chapter four

Viewpoints of the Zahirite legal interpretation in contradistinction to the

rest of the legal schools 40

1 . Examples of this from the field of Koranic interpretation 43

VIII

CONTKNTS

CONTENTS

IX

2. I'^xamplos or this fiinn the field of scienco of tradition . r i2

Mircildc elmngo in thfH.ernnnology of jurisprudence Ii|

Chapter five

Tim five categories of Islamic laws 03

Different opinions of the legal schools on die possible classification of laws

into oiio of these categories aa

The teachings of bhe {Whirls and oxaraploB from;

1. the field of Koranic interpretation 70

2. the soioneo of ImilUh 72

3. ewnan 'tiiliyttk; .nirmn zd'irlah; Huiuin id-luula 7(5

Chapter six

Relation of the jSShirite tenets to those of the Hanhalikw HI

Chapter seven

1. Arguments of the exponents or ra'y for thoir dootrines from tho Koran,

and their refutation by their opponents 85

2. Jkiiiilaf umrnnti ruhmnii and the practical consequences of this view. —

Altitude of the gdhirls and the Mu'tazilitos towards this viow ... 89

8. Traditional arguments of the speculative Sohool and its opponents . . 07

Chapter eight

1. The position of the ftihiriio school in the historical literature .... 103

its attitude to ijmS' iao

The earliest spreading of the school 105

Beginnings of the ?ahirlyah in Andalusia. — Faithful traditional inter-
pretation in Western Islam ]07

2. 'Alt b. Ahmad Urn Hazm '.'.'. Km

a) His antagonistic approach towards the Malikite and Hanafito schools . 1 10

His exceptional position within the IjStthirite school. — al-Razmlyah,

a branch of (ho Zahirito school ' 2 1 1

Ibn I.lazm applies tho tenets of tho JiShirite school first to dogmatics . 112

KliuxUs and 'li-mTim • ■ •>

Ibn Hazm's oxegotic principles H7

h)The ?ahirtyah is madhhab fu/hl and not madhliab knldnu 123

Position of the oldest imams towards dogmatic questions .... 124

DSwQd's particular position towards individual dogmatic controversies 120
Ibn flazm'e opinion of speculative theology. — Mu'ta/.ilitos and Ash-

'aritos 12 s

Dogma of the nature of tho Koran 130

I bn l.lazmV criterion for dogmatic definitions 133

Its application to the tenets of tho attributes and tho namos or Ood . 133

Disapproval of qiyfa in dogmatics 14 g

Characterization of the Ash'adtes 147

?,ahirito principles of ethics 1.11

8. Failure of Ibn 5azm's endeavours inn

Direct studonts of, and successors to, Ibn r.lazm lfiS

al-Mbhad movement inn

The two Ihn Dil.iyah 101

Relation between theosophy and the tfahirito school 1(15

al-GhazBU's views on fiqli and giyite K!7

iMuhyi ol-Dln ibn ol-'Arabl hid

4. Some seventh century representatives of the ^ahirilo school .... 171

AbO l.la,yya.n, his ^.rdiirite tendencies. Relation to Ibn Taymlyah . . 172

5. The ?5hirito movements of the eighth ooatury 177

li. al-MaqrlzI. His relationship to tho ^aliirito school and to Ibn I.lazm's

writings 180

7. Diverse meanings ol" the appellation: al-JJfdiirl 1HI!

Extended sources of jurisprudence. — 'Vrf 187

Supplements i-V 100

Annotation (1) Stt'y and giyis in poetry 208

Annotation (2) 'llmal-ikhtilSfal 210

Bibliography 212

Index 217

FOEEWOED

Gone is the time when Islamic studies were the domain of "un-
hurried eccentrics with a wide and deep background in the conventional
humanities". Despite our improved communications, the ability to
read German profitably is rapidly becoming a phenomenon of a past
era. "While the fruits of the coryphaeus of the discipline were always
a living legacy for our teachers, a younger generation has often only
a second-hand acquaintance with the writings of Ignaz Goldziher.
The fiftieth anniversary of his death seems a fitting occasion to
present the English translation of a widely quoted, fundamental
work on Islamic jurisprudence.

Since Goldziher himself was aware of some of the shortcomings of
the work, it would not have been fair to his scholarship merely to
translate it. Yet, although I have corrected all the errors that I could
detect, I cannot claim to have done more than he would have done
if he had worked under more favourable conditions. What I have
done, then, is to indicate the foot-notes, in cases in which they were
omitted (e.g. p. 69), and to correct incorrectly quoted passages (e.g.
p. 21) and those which were outright wrong (e.g. 139 n. 5). Incor-
porated in the translation are also Goldziher's corrections from his
preface and those from his other works. May it be mentioned here
that, in at least one instance, this edition is more complete than the
1967 reprint in which the foot-note on p. 131 is omitted. The marginal
pagination refers to the original 1884 edition.

In order to facilitate the work of the printer, as much of the Arabic
which appeared in the German edition in the Arabic script has been
transliterated. In passages in which both the Arabic original and its
transliterated form occurred, the former has been omitted. The spelling
of the Arabic names and terms conforms to current English practice
and is not always identical with that of Goldziher, e.g. Batalyawsi.
These inconsequential corrections are not indicated; all other changes
or additions have been marked by triangular brackets.

Goldziher's choice of name has been retained in the text, while in
the index an attempt has been made to list persons under that part
of their name under which they are now generally known. However,
since many of them were identified only at the time of compiling
the index, these fuller names could not always be incorporated iu

XII

1'OKKVVORT)

the text. Usually, more complete forms such us these appear in the
index only. But in these instances, cross-references have been provided.
The bibliography lists only those editions used by Goldzihcr; in many
cases, better ones arc now available. Index and bibliography suffer
from some minor inconsistencies since both were prepared after the
type was set. I trust it will cause no serious inconvenience if, for
example, the foot-notes refer to Abu al-Mahfisiu when lie is actually
listed as Ibn Taghrl Birdi in the bibliography. The point did not
seem to warrant major changes from the printer.

When now, at the end, I come to thank my many friends, parti-
cularly Mrs. Anne Bembenek and Miss Jane Fletcher, for thoir help,
it is more than a routine courtesy. I had to wait a long time to ac-
knowledge publicly their assistance and encouragement. As a matter
of fact, if it had not been for Mrs. A. Bcmbcnck, who during one
summer helped me with indefatigable regularity, I would not have
brought the task to a finish. However, if there are faults, they are
entirely my own, since I often stubbornly insisted on my version
contrary to their better judgement.

Toronto

W.H.

PREFACE

VI

When I was compiling a coherent scries on the evolution of the
Muslim religion, I had to exclude some areas concerning the theology
of Islam. Some of these problems just did not seem suitable for the
general public but are quite important for a thorough knowledge of
Islam. With the present work I present to my fellow scholars a detailed
treatise, an abstract of which has been submitted to the Islani'c
section of the Sixth Congress of Orientalists in Leiden. I have been
led by the conviction that investigation of the so-called fiqh, parti-
cularly if one desires to understand its historical development, has to
constitute an indispensable part of our studios on Islam.

This importance is to be attributed not only to Islam's canonical
law and its positivism, i.e. to bo so-called furit,', but also, to a far greater
extent, to the methodology of this discipline, the rules of deduction
of the fiiru' from the canonical sources of the law. We would have
only an imperfect knowledge of the institutions of Islam if we were
to investigate those merely to see how the Prophet's followers judged
individual incidents of religious and social life. In order to appreciate
the spirit of Islam, we must evaluate the relation of its development
to its sources so as to recognize to what extent this development is
governed by freedom or the slavish mind, a tendency toward progress
or adherence to the obsolete, an active, intellectual preoccupation or
indolent thoughtless behaviour. In the series of investigations on
which such an evaluation must be based, the investigation of usfd
al-fiqh in its historical development occupies an important position
next to the internal history of Koranic interpretation and had'ith. Based
on such convictions, I hope my colleagues will show some interest
in my monograph since the greater part of it deals with usul al-fitjh.

First of all in this preface, may I mention details concerning the
external aspects of the work to follow.

Together with the manuscripts and editions quoted, a more specific
designation has been given wherever possible. In regard to more
frequently cited works, with which this has not been done, particulars
are listed below:

"Mafdtlh" = Fakhr al-Din al-Razi's Mafatlh al-ghmjb, Biilaq 1289
in eight volumes. — "al-Nawawi" = this scholar's commentary on
Muslim's HiiMh) text and commentary are quoted according to the

XIV

PREFACE

VII

Cairo edition of IU89 in five volumes. The work of the same author,
published by Wustenfeld, I shall quote according to that edition as:
"Takllnb". ••■ "al-Qastalliini" = this author's work Irshdd al-nurl
li-.sliar/i mink al-Iiulcltdn, Biilaq 1298 in ton volumes. — "al-Husri"
= the author's Zahr al-ddiib (a work which has not yet been suffi-
ciently utilized for the history of literature), marginal edition to the
Kitab al-'iqd, Bfilaq 1293 in three volumes. — "al-Sha'rani" = this
author's Kitob al-nuzdn, ed. Cairo, Castelli 1279 in two volumes. —
Al-Damm's llaydl al-hayawdn is listed according to the second Bflllq
edition of 1284 in two volumes. — "Ibn al-Mulaqqin" = this scholar's
(abaqSt of the Shiifi'ite school with the title al-'Iqd al-mudhnhhab fi
tabaq&t hmualat al-madhhab (MS. Leiden University Library Log.
Warner no. 532). — "al-Jahiz" = Kitab al-hayawdn of this Mu'tazilite
(M.S. Imperial Kofbibliothek Vienna, N.F. no. 161), — "WaraqBt?' =
Imam al-Haramayn's work on uml with Ibn al-Firkuh's commentary
of tlic same title (MS. Horzogliche Bibliothek Gotha no. 922).

The designation "Ibn Hazm" refers to this author's Kitdb al-milal
iva-al-nihal (Leidon MS. Leg. Warner no. 480). "Ibtal" designates
Ibn Hazm's Ib(dl al-qiyas wa-al-ra'y ■wa-al-istihmn wa-al-la'lU (MS.
Herzoglicho Bibliothek Gotha no. 640). Since I thought it expodient
to offer here a description of the theological and literary peculiarities
of Ibn Hazm, the most startling representative of the school with
which this work is concerned, the reader will find on the following
pages ample oxcorpts from these two works. Often I had considerable
difficulties in quoting these works from a single manuscript. If the
manuscript of the Milal lacks diacritical marks, often to dangerous
proportions, then this is even more evident in the Ibtal. Portsch has
described the graphic style of this manuscript as "interlaced Naskhl
which is devoid of diacritical marks except for some rare exceptions".
Under such conditions it was in many cases a truly difficult task to
arrive at an acceptable text. Sometimes it could not bo avoided,
particularly in the Ibtdl, that passages have remained either unclear
or had to be explained by plausible conjectures '. At other times,
additions to the apparently deficient text became necessary (in square

1 I like to indicate hero that there is only an apparent Contradiction botwoon my
conjectures on p. 101, n. 11 and p. 197, I. 12. In tho ibrmor passage, not ahu'bah him-
self is called i/u'if but only the faet that this saying is quoted on tho authority of his
name. It can he noted that this particular statement is transmitted by Shu'biih on tho
authority of "Asim (ef. Tub. huff., IV, .1U) ami of I-lajjaj. It would bo impossible to read
al-hijilj.

PREFACE

XV

brackets). However, curved brackets indicate that a word should be
omitted from the text. Despite these shortcomings of the material
at my disposal, I thought it suitable to provide lengthy excerpts from
the Ibtal since they offer a thorough insight into the dispute between
the traditionalist school and their opponents. For these reasons, I pre-
ferred to let the original speak for itself so that in the relevant passages
of my treatise, I generally refer only briefly to the contents of these
texts, or paraphrase them freely. In view of my potential readers,
I could disregard a literal translation, especially as it does not suit
the elaborate scholastic style of the author. I discovered that Ibn
VIII Hazm employs less formal syntax particularly in passages in which
ho indulges in a lengthy art of presentation. I. have made no corrections
where I might suspect a freer expression of Ibn Hazm and not obvious
mistakes by tho copyist. Some necessary corrections havo been made
tacitly; I wish to mention tho faulty readings in several passages
in the footnote, ' but in instances where I am, perhaps unnecessarily,
reserved with regard to the actual text of the MS, I have outlined
my emendations of certain phrases below.

The characteristic features of Ibn Hazm's jurisprudence could be
sketched moro fully at the present time than was possible when the
work went to press. Among the Arabic treasures brought to Leiden
from Medina by the Muslim scholar Shaykh Amin (who will long bo
affectionately remembered by the participants of the Sixth Congress
of Orientalists) is a volume of Ibn Hazm's monumental work al-
Muhalld, which is unique — at least in Europe ,J . (These treasures,
through the munificence of tho Dutch Government, now adorn the
Islamic collection of the Leiden University Library). Thanks to the
kindness of my friend Dr. Landberg, who, at the time, happened to bo
occupied in cataloguing these manuscripts, I was able to consult
that particular MS during my stay in Loiden and to excerpt whatever
seemed to mo of importance. This work is a legal analogue to tho
Kitab al-mihl ; its stylo and method of presentation, oven the author's
abrupt, inconsiderate way of dealing with Hanafites and Malikites,
roveal at first sight the valiant Ziihiii polemic who heaped on his
antagonists the same keen epithets and abuses familiar to readers

1 <Tho corrections which appear in the Gorman edition as a footnote are incorporated
in the text).

2 C. Landberg, Gatuloyitc <lc manu.w.rili timbes provr.iiant d'uiu: bibliothijUt privic
a cU Medina, p. 177, no. 010.

XVI

PHMACB)

of the Milul. Again and again lie. repeats the same theological principles

IX and arguments which wo encounter con.stuiil.ly in liis dogmatic polem-
ics. I do not intend to overburden this preface with excerpts from
this book — no matter how interesting these might be to complete
our presentation — I only wish to accentuate that the individual
remarks produced in my work on llm Hazm's position on jurisprudence
are endorsed by the MuhtUa and that, generally, tho characteristics
of Ibn Hazm's method of fiijh which I. have established here, find
their substantiation in particulars which can be drawn from the
Miihidld. Some of what has been described here as Ibn Hazm's
principal attitude according to the Milul (e.g. p. 117), I have found
repeatedly stated in the Mu/jaMa.

The conditions under which I have been working must excuse
some of the shortcomings of this treatise and also a. certain amount
of carelessness in correcting it. In this regard, I trust I can count
on the indulgence of readers and reviewers '.
X Since theological selections aro normally not to be found in our
Arabic chrestomathies, I thought it useful to offer suitable texts
in the original, especially from Bfllaq publications to which reference
is made in this work, and which aro not always readily available.
This is intended to give studonts a chance to acquaint themselves
with the peculiar parlance, and tho scholastic nature of the Islamic
sciences, and to acquire further a knowledge which is important
in dealing with secular Islamic literature where often reference is
made to theological concepts.

Finally, I have to express my deep gratitude to Professor Pertsch,
(lotha, to Professor de Goejo, Leiden, and to Professor v. Rosen,
St. Petersburg (he communicated to me the excerpts from al-Sam'ani),
for enabling me to use freely manuscripts material used in this work.
Professor J. Derenbourg, Paris, has been kind enough to have copied
for me the passages of Ibn .Shuhbah which I used, and l)r. Noubauer,
Oxford, has troubled himself with copying and collating for me Dawud
al-Zahiri's biography from the Oxford manuscripts of Subki. Professor
Fleischer has endeavoured to correct the first five and a half pages,
and it docs not need to be emphasized how much this part of the work
has profited through the care of my esteemed teacher.

Budapest, November, L883,

Ion. GOLDZIHBB.

1 <Tlio corrections which follow horo in tho Gorman odition liavo boon incorporated
in tho toxt).

INTRODUCTION

The legal school which is the subject of the following study is known
in the theological literature of Islam as mad/tltub al-zdldr or mndlilmb
Dawud. The individual who adheres to its principles is called Zahiri
or Dawudi; the school, as a whole, is called nlil al-zulrir rd-zahirrya/i '.

At the beginning of our century -, European orientalists still knew
very little about the nature and tendency of the ma&llhab <d-ztl/ii.r.
In this regard, it is sufficient to point out. that Silvestro do Sacy,
the scholar who, at that time, represented the embodiment and sum
of all knowledge about the Muslim East in Europe, quite frankly
confesses in his Arabic chrestomathy on the occasion of his editing
Maqrizi's biography: "Je ne saurais dire precisement ce quo e'est
que cetto secto nominee madhab al-zahir". However, in his translation
of the passage in which MaqrTzI is accused of Zahirito. tendencies,
ho is attempting the following interpretation: "On lui attribua les
dogmes de la sccte, qui fait consister toutc la vertu dans les pratiques
exterieures." He contrasts this "doctrine exterieure" to tho madluib
<il-bd/in, i.e. "doctrine interieure" :i , an antithesis which, as it has
been found since, belongs to a, fundamentally different concept of
theological teaching. In 1835, Freytag seems to have borrowed his
"madhhab td-zXiliir, cogitandi ratio eorum, quibus externus religionis
cultus praccipuk res esse videtur" from this reference by de Sacy
without giving the source. Even in 1877, the faulty interpretation of
the old Freytag is still reproduced in Adolf Wahrinund's II audit* urter-
Imch der araln.sr./icn and deutschen Spraclte as "mndli/mb ziiJ/ir, iiusser-
licher Wandel", externalism.

1 Not. nl-yViiruiiu like I loutHnm, De strijd over /»■' dogma in </>'« Inlaw /"/ op tl-AelCari,
1>. 88.

■ To avoid K"'"^ bftok to an earlier period. Wo montion only one dnto of prOTlOUfi

times in order to show tho oonfusion which prevailed oonaornlng tho fundamentals
of our qiu'Hiion. Mournilgou d'OliHHon [Tableau tjhii'ml tic I' Umpire olhoman, I, Parte

I7SS, |i. 17) niunoH Duvoiid 'I'nyi Elba Kulcyinun "mort on 165/781" besides Sufyiin

ul-Tlniwri iiH founder of a sixth orthodox school. About the Connor, ho ean relate only
this mnoh: "Oomme lis n'ont on Pun et 1'autro qu'un oertaln nombre d'adherens, lours
opinions partiouliores ovonoulront prosque ii lour naisaanoa* 1 . Hon', Dawud ul-Tii'i
(Ibn Qutaybah, Ma'Srif, p. 2. r ,7) in oonfased with DawQd aMflhirl,
3 Ohreeiomathie arabe, lnt od., II, p. 411, 422 ff.; 2rd ed,, p. 118, 122 ff.

2

INTRODUCTION

If wc disregard Reiske'a translation of a passage from Aim al-Fida',
then Quatremere (1840) was the first among the European orientalists

who tried to shed some light on the ahl al-zahir with one of those
numerous comments and discussions which advanced considerably
our knowledge of the Muslim world, and which make his treatment of
Maqri/,1 an invaluable source for the knowledge of Oriental languages
and affairs '. Quatremere states that "ce qui concerne cette secte"
is "encore fort obscure". He presents in his widely known method a
formidable number of passages from manuscripts in the Bibliotheque
Nationale, Paris -, in which mention is made of the Zahiritc school
and of some of its adherents. This remark by Quatremere should have
given the first incentive to investigate more extensively the nature,
system, and history of the Zahiritc school. (To call it a sect would be
just as wrong as if wo were to use the expression "sect" when referring
to adherents of any of the four orthodox schools in their relation
to each other). Quatremere's stimulus did not cause any one of the
students of Islam to conduct special investigations. In more recent
times, expert writers in the field, who have produced either compre-
hensive or specific works on the development of Islam, have mentioned
the Zahiritc school in a few words. We cito v. Kromer 3 , Houtsma 4 ,
and Spitta °. However, they offer only limited comments on the
theological school under discussion. An exhaustive presentation of
the school, of its doctrine, and the position of its representatives
within orthodox Islam has not appeared until now. The following
pages attempt to fill the gap in our knowledge of the history of Islamic
theology.

1 Biitoirt den Sultana Mamlouka ie VBgypte, vol. i, pt. 2, p. 200-270.

a After re-examination wo Imvo utilized in chapter VI II the passage of the Arabia
manuscript no. 087 of this library for the history of the Iflhirito movement in the eighth
oontury.

:| OvUurgttchiehle See Orient) tmter den Ohalift.ii, f, p. coo, n. 3.

1 Op. eft., We shall come baok to Houtama's version below.

G 7mr Oencliic/Ue. Alm-l-IJasun Al-AA'arVs, p. 80.

UHAPTKK ONK

3 The following saying has been transmitted by Abu Bakr b. 'Ayash,
a Muslim traditionist of the second century (d. li).'J): "The adherents of
tradition in avary age are (in relation to the rest of the scholars) liko
the adherents of Islam in relation to the followers of other religions" >.
This saying is aimed at a method of dealing with Islamic jurisprudence
according to which not only the written and orally transmitted sources
are authoritative — namely, the Koran and the traditions of Muham-
mad and his companions — but also, in recognition of what is valid
according to the principles of Islam, what the individual insight of a
legist or judge, in real or apparent depondance on those indisputable
sources, recognizes as truth emanating from their spirit. The repre-
sentatives of the latter view are known by the name ahl or ashdb al-ra'y.
The origins of this dissension in the earliest history of Islamic juris-
prudence have boen dealt with so comprehensively by v. Kromer -
and Sachau ' that it would be idlo to attempt to find new aspects for
this chapter of Islam's history of evolution. According to the researches
of the latter scholar, i t cannot bo doubted that the two des ignations aid
al-luuMh ..and aid. al-ra'y originally ...referred t° branches of legists
occupied with the investigation of Islamic law: the former were
concerned with the study of transmitted sources, and the latter with
the practical aspects of the law. It is only later that the two terms
indicate the contrast between the methods of legal deduction, a
contrast which, as we have been able to observe, was quite common
already in the second century.

The so-called orthodox schools (mmlhahih al-fiqh) differ from each
other in the earliest stages of their evolution in the extent to which
they permit ra'ij to bo a determining factor in establishing Islamic
law in a given caso. The two extremes in this respect are Abu Hanlfah

4 and DiiwQd al-Zahiri. The former made considerable concessions to

1 al-Sha'ittiii, I, p. 03: Jjh I m »%J)}\ J* 6" d^j [ft \j OJ-bM JaI
(j4 IGLJI Jibl J^Li L j^S J> ojjJ-I jAb j|_dlj fcJljiVI

Ujl/U. l_jJ_j5C) i (jlj iiL^JJiJI

2 OvUwgeadhiehte dot Orient* unlr.r den Ohalifen, I, p, -170-500.

:i Xitr tiiteeten QeeekMhte dee tmihammedanisolien Ilechu, Wien 1870. (Akodemie dor
Wisaenao h a ft en. Phllosophiseh-liiitorisebe BJaasc. Sitzungsberiehte. Vol. 05).

CHAPTER onio

ra'y while tlic latter, at least in his early teachings, refutes any justifi-
cation for this. Mali 1c li. Anas, al-Shfifi'T, and Ahmad l>. Hanbal have
taken the position between these two, not just chronologically, but
also with respect to their recognition of ra'y. In the courso of the
development of these schools, this difference diminished through
gradual concessions so that wide-spread confusion whether to consider
a school as belonging either to aid al-hadlih or to alii al-ra'y dominates
the historical literature Jbn Qutaybah takes into account among the
as/idb al-ra'y all tlio founders of the legal schools with the exception
of Ahmad b. Hanbal, whom he does not mention, and Dawfid, whom
he could not have known yet; among the whab al-haiBth lie lists
famous traditionists only '. Al-Maqdisi considers AJjmadJj^JJanJjal's
followers, together with, those. of lshfu| b. liahwayhj, a famous Shil-
i'i'ite, as a$hab al-hmHth and not at ulLaaJicI oncdng to the madhahi b
g Ufitfh to wh ich Hanafites, Malikites, Sklfi'ites, and Z&hiria » belonp ; ».
In a different passage, the same author mentions the Shafi'ites in
contrast to the followers of Abu HanTfali as ashab id-Iiml'Uh ■', and
to complete the confusion, in a. third passage", al-Shdfi'I and Aim
l.lanlfah are considered as belonging to ra'y in opposition to Ahmad
b. Hanbal. By excluding Ahmad b. Hanbal from among the founders
of madhahib al-fiqh, al-MaqdisI seems to conform to older opinions.
We know, for example, that the famous Abu Ja'far al-Tabarl had
to endure considerable animosity since, in his Kitdb ikhlilaf al-fuqahd' ',
he did not consider the teachings of the Imam Ahmad. The reason for
this attitude was that this imam was considered a traditionist but not a
jaqlh «. In Ibn 'Asiikir, we find: "Ahmad I). Hanbal wa-yha.yruhu min
aid al-hadtth." ; the other schools arc classified not according to the
type of the legal methods but according to their regional affiliation 7 .
In al-Shahrastfini we find Malik, al-Shilfi'i, Ahmad, and Dawfid

1 Kitdb al-ma'arif, p. 2-18-2S], of. Suohuu, op. til., p, III.

- Unjustly, I think, do Goojo concluded from thin in (llo.wariuiit zitr ISM. geogr.
arabimrum. |>. 243, that the Dawudis WOW a«lnVi al-ra'y. Nothing more opposing ooulil
be imagined than madlihah al-rfihir and ra'y. AI-Maqdisl la no longer familiar with thu
identity olfiqli and ra'y.

3 Deseriplio imperii iiaislcmiti, od. do Ciooje, p. :17, I. fi-7.

•' About Abu Muhammad al-SIrafi, ibid., p. 127, I. It.

» Ibid., p. 112, I. II.

" Abu nl-Fida', Aiiuaktt. od. Koisko, II, p, ."Ml. Among tlio older authorities of tho
Bolonoo oi' tradition!, [bn tjanbal in considered tho one who bust utilized traditions for
jurisprudence! ofqahvhumftJii Abfl al-Mahttain, AtauUa, od, Juynboil, I. p. 710.

' Bttpoti dc la rt'furmu dr. VlMammmr., p. ()l, 1. 16.

C'HAI'TKH ONIQ

classified as a shah td-haili/h while from among the legal schools which
survived their founder, only Abu IJanlfuli is listed among the as/tab
al-ra'y '. Ibn Khuldun accepted this division, but with the difference
that he. places Dawud b. 'All at tho top of a separate third class 2 .
First of all, it is necessary to make note of the position ra'y occupies
in Islamic jurisprudence. This will enable us to define, the position
taken by Dawud and the school founded by him, and named after
him, in the controversy between the r.igicL..toulilaim)3]isni and tho
sect whose adherents v. Kremer appropriately calls the speculative
legists (ashah al-ra'y) '■', a branch which was constantly gaining greater
influence.

1 Kitnb al-milal. oil. (iurofon, p. KiO-IOI ; of. Suehau, op. til., p. 16,
" ifiujaddivifi/i, od. Bftliiq, p. .'172 IT. All throe olas.xos tngothor aro madhfihih al-jmnhUr.
3 Some oiirioiiH translations or thin expression from varioiiH poriodH might bo mon-
tionod horo. Job. J'"r. flmolin, in Iuh translation of Alexander and Patriot Russell's
Nachrirht.ru van ilr.m Xustand dr.r CdrhrMiithU zti Alrppii (flottingon 171IS). gives "Vr.r-
liiiiijl,igliinbigr.", irton of roaHon, iih equivalent of .hi: fonn whioh, however, WOS not
properly recognized at tho timo. Wo I'iuil thin oh "emixitiari" in Kliigol'n Hiljjl Khalifali,

IVi p. 41i t$\j*\ i)i* I i— - '■& , J *Sj Lj i puts in libris contiliariorum ocowrv.nl.

Yot, tho .strangest interpretation of all i» offered by Ad. VV'abrmun<l. the Gorman Arabio
lexicographer, with his oruolo: a.fhiib al-ra'y, mofuphyaists, idealists. (Consistent with
this would be: anhub al-hadith, natural scientists, materialists !)• And this after tho oorreot
definition of tho form hail already penetrated the lOurnpean Arabic lexicography, at
least flinoo Lano'H arfiele of IS07!

CHAPTER TWO

The application of ra'y developed in Islamic jurisprudence as an
inevitable postulate of the realities of practical legal affairs in the
practice of judgeship '. The theoretical canonist could quite easily
dismiss the validity of ra'y as a justifiable source for legal affairs,
for he studied the written and orally transmitted word and was not

concerned with the turbulent affairs of daily life. But for a practising
legist in Iraq or any other province under the dominion of Islam, it
was not sufficient for the discharging of the obligations of his office to
rely on sources from the Hijaz alone since these could not possibly give
satisfactory answers to all sorts of problems arising daily in the dif-
ferent countries. Al-Shahrastfini's observation "that written texts

. are limited, but the incidents of daily life unlimited, and that it is
impossible for something infinite to lie enclosed by something finite" a
gave the init iative toward tho introduction of speculative elements in
the deduction of law. One example may suffice. In the newly conquered
Islamic territories, there prevailed civil laws which differed consider-
ably from those in the l.fijiiz; they were either rooted in the agrarian
traditions of the country or created through the reality of the conquest.
How could a codex, derived from entirely different conditions, have
given answers to legal problems which arose under these new circum-
stances? This and similar aspects — predominantly the problem that
the existing sources of law were not complete and offered only occa-
sional solutions which, however, wore insufficient for all legal problems
even for the country in which they originated — imposed the obliga-
tion on practising legists to consider themselves competent to exercise
their subjective good sense, their insight, in the spirit of the existing
sacred materials and in agreement with them, as legitimate instance
for concrete cases for which the transmitted law provided no solution.
How deeply the. need for extending the legal liases was felt can lie
seen from the fact that evon stern traditionists, unwillingly, but
conforming under the pressure of realities, had to admit to ra'y.

1 <For 11 modern Interpretation hoo Joseph Sohaoht, The origins of Muhammadan

jiiriaprmlcncr, Oxford, 1880, p. i)S ft'.).

2 al-SlmhniH(iIni, p. Ifi'l: i-fc U^j j\£. ^UjJIj ILfc U^j cJU" I ill ^j-^ijJ \j

OIIAI'TKR TWO 7

However, they went to tho utmost extremes of their system so that,
in order to have ready for every concrete caso a judgement from the
traditions which was to be followed in practice, they often did not
require the attestation of the tradition if it was a question of supplying
an authority from the traditions for a legal decision. With this self-
delusion, satisfaction was intended to be given, at least as a matter
of form. Abu Daw uil, so we learj),_adqpted the ''weakest" tradition
mjus. collection jf for a_cfrfcain legal paragraph there existed no better-
attested tradition. Many .a fabr ication of traditions mightjiavojts
origin in tiiis_fundnmcntal.CJad£aypur to shun ra'y, at least ostensibly,
for as long . as possible. Yet those fabricated quotations from the
traditions were nothing but ra'y clothed in traditions. The following
saying is attributed to Sha'bl: "Ra'y is like a carcass; it is used as
food in an extreme emergency only" '. Indeed, we notice, now and
then, that even practising legists are obstinately opposed to applying
ra'y. In any case, the number of people cannot have been large who,
like Hal's b. 'Abel Allah al-Nlshaburi (d. 209), could claim to have
held office as judge for twenty years without passing a singlo judge-
ment on the basis of ra'y 3 .

The exponents of m'y derived the legal basis for the introduction
of subjective motives in the deduction of law from the spirit of the
transmitted divine law. For example, they base their claim — and it
cannot be ascertained whether or not this was done also in an earlier
period — on the fact that divine law recognizes the testimony of two
witnesses and the oath as legal evidence. Now, it is conceivable that
the witnesses may make a false statement, bona fide or mala fide,
or that an oath is given to support a false claim. Nevertheless, tho
legal case in question is determined on such bases to the best apprehen-
sion of the judge ". Then, instances are quoted from the earliest

1 I4X&I L4JI Ojjk^l lil 'izA\ 'JJyX_ tsfjJI- Cf. the toxt of Jurjani
from which Hi" preceding remodel have bean extracted. JAOS, vol. 7, p. 116. ("Opinion
ih carrion — when need roquircN, oat it")'.

2 fabaqBl aUutfJCn. od. Wiistcnfckl, VI, no. 40.

'■' ibitV, fol. flu. ihn Hn.7.111 rofutea this interpretation as follows) "God did not. main
it. our duty to pam judgement 011 witnoasoH' evidence and on oath. A judge i"h not obliged
to invoHtigato whether they are true or false. If ho were to do this, indeed, the dour
would be wide opened lei hi) individual interpretation in legal deolslonS. May God protect
iih from tliiH ! Let US ASSUme that there are two quarrelling parti™ before US, the one a,

pious, God-fearing, trustworthy Muslim, the other, however, a Christian who recognizee

three persons in the deity and who im Unown to fabricate lien about God and people and

8

CHAPTER TWO

8 history of Islamic Legal practice — although traditions of often doubt-
ful reliability — that, in the absence of transmitted decisions, ra'y
was accepted as an unchallenged expedient. All the companions
confronted with legal practice are .supposed to have reacted in this
fashion, and yet, no one will question their piety or suspect them of
the introduction of innovations prohibited by God. Thus, it is related
I hat, even at that time, Abu Bakr would first consult the divine book
if two quarrelling parties sought his legal advice; if he found an answer
to the case in question in it, he would pass sentence as revealed by
God ; if he did not, then he would seek- this in the mima/i of the. Prophet ;
if he failed to discover a pertinent decision there too, he would ask
the companions whether they wen- familiar with a decision of the
Prophet which could bo applied to the case in question. If even this
attempt failed, he would consult the leaders of the community and
make a decision according to their general agreement. 'Umar, too, is
supposed to have acted in this manner. Likewise, it is reported about
Ibn Mas'iid ' that in cases in which judgements cannot be derived
from either the Hook, or from the mnnah, or from the sayings or
actions of tlio pious, a judge reasons independently "without saying:
'this is my attitude, but I am afraid to assert it'; because what is
permitted LS clear, and also what is prohibited, but in between those
two there exist dubious cases ; ho let the things you doubt be determined
by those things which you do not doubt" 2 . Yet, most important and
wide-spread are those instructions which already the Prophet, and
later, 'Umar arc supposed to have given to judges sent to conquered
territories. These instructions are the most weighty arguments of the
defenders of ra'y, who endeavoured to fabricate for its validity an

who, in private lifc, is a volai He, frivolous individual. Now, the Muslim demands from (he
( 'hriniinn payment of a debt, no matter how large or small, the title to which the Christian
denies: or, euiivcTMoly, l.lie Christian worn the plaintiff and the Muslim the defendant
protesting the claim of the Christian plaintiff. If things wore to bo decided according
to the judge's personal view which does not agroo with the foots, then the Muslim is
to bo awarded right over Win Christian. But thorn is no argument that, wo must not ho
guided by our view of the situation, rather that we must make a decision on the basis
ol evidences an decreed by God according to which the plaintiff must assert his claim
by producing orodiblo Witnesses, and the dofendont his denial on oath. 'Conjectures',
however, wo must dismiss altogether", Ilitiil, lol. 18b.

1 Contrary to his custom, Ibn l;la/,m approves the validity of this tradition, but
interprets the words fal-yajlaJiid ra'ydh that one must search diligently for authentic

traditions if they are not easily available at first sight.

- /bird, Fol. 5b.

CHAI'TKR TWO

9

old tradition, and an authority going back to the earliest time of
Islam. Mu'adh b. Jabal, whom the Prophet sent to Yemen, replied
to him, when asked on what principles he would administer law in
I his province, that he would rely on his own ra'y in all cases for which
\he could not find an answer either in the Book or in the traditions.
1) The Prophet consented to this with the following words: "Praise be
to God that He helped the messenger of the Prophet of God to an
insight that pleases the Prophet of God" '. 'Umar is supposed to have
given the following instructions when Shurayli was sent out as a
judge: " If you l'ind_so n ictljjng vn AllaJi ^g_B&oJ^c»nsidJi..n.o-^)jje_ - cjse ;
i f yqn, &TO rint, fllqnr skmli anmAJihlng in AMy«f RnnTf , then follow
I.Jii;-aiutiU(A;-how.cyux,-.sh_mihlyou not_fin_d thi s in, the xuwiuili. isU.her,
tlien follow your own judgement independently" 3 . One could mention
other instructions to judges, in all appearances apocryphal ones,
which arc associated with the name of 'Umar, but in particular,
one in which Abu Mfisa ul-Ash'arT is encouraged to exercise qiyds,
although in a way formulated by the schools which reconciled the
rigid traditionalism and the Speculative branch. There it says: "Your
thoughts, your thoughts (collect them) if you arc indecisive in your
mind and when you do not find anything about, them either in Cod's
Hook or in the traditions of His messenger. Consider the analogies and
similarities, and compare things in your mind; then follow what
seems to be the most probable, and what Cod and Mis Prophet like
best" ». In those words, cited in a lengthy instruction for a. judge, wc
discover the terminology of t/i.t/as as it became current only in a later
period. If the accounts in which judges were encouraged to apply
ra'y were authentic, the opposition of conservative traditionists to
ra'y, and to the authority of the Prophet and 'Umar, would bo

C(l

1 Cf. the passages in Saeliau, ibid., p. 0. In al-Mawardi, (.'mint it lit inn ex pnlilirur.
id. Engor, p. 1 1 1, I. I, rnsiV Alliili ought to ho corrected to rttniil mxiil Alliih. Ili[iil, lol. lia
seems to have been endowed with the oldest version of this story. There, MuTidh says:
ajliiliidu rn'i/i im-lii dlw, the last two words are missing in the other versions of the
account.

" Kiiab al-agMut, XVI, p. 32: i_.Li" a aJ-A^j L JU' -J Lj>tt -U o~«jj

«kLjl «jJU «U>1 i_>lif ^3 |)wJ ^ L_J 1-U.I -U£. J~wJ "fa dill

.lISCJj j^U iLJI ^j ^ J. jlj

3 -./-'/./,/, I. p. 88! t£SC*Lj L L &jX^ ^9 t^I^j U -Vl£- rt-fl-aJI rtrgiJI
jj-A'l ^j oL-iVlj jLuS'l iJ^c! rt-»iva -uJ aL, V_j .oil s- 1 ^ *J

10

fiirAI'TKIl TWO

incomprehensible. But the very fact that their authenticity is disputed,
Hi and the verification that the jsndd of tlie particular reports do not
conform to the laws of tho science of tradition are the main weapons
With which its opponents fight the conclusiveness of these accounts,
indeed, a critical examination of those instructions must also lead to
the conclusion that they arc spurious. They contain concepts and
terms in which, in this precise definition, belong only to a later period.
In Baliidhurl (p. 69-75), in which the instructions accompanying
Mu'adh b. Jabal arc quoted at length, the instruction mentioned
above is not cited. Bccauso of the insufficient documentation of these
arguments of the exponents of ra'y, their opponents were able to
foster awareness of the unfavourable meaning of the word ra'y as a
theological term. In ordinary Arabic usage, al-ra'y is a word of favour-
able meaning ' unless qualified by an adjective abrogating this mean-
ing. In the sense of a good, ■prudent, correct, and reasonable viow,
it is juxtaposed « to hawan, a rash decision, prompting misguided
passion. For the conservative traditionist, however, al-ra'y is a word
of decidedly derogatory connotation, :l and in the theological sense,
11 it is almost equal in meaning to this lia.wan *. This much was admitted
also by the representatives of the traditional branch: al-ra'y had
already been applied by the companions in the first generation of
Islamic history, during the patriarchal period, although with the stipul-
ation that "whoever applied ra'y was firmly opposed to admitting

1 B.g. -'Iff'"'"''. X. p. 100, 1. 18, in ono of Abu 'All al-'Abll's panogyrifl pooum aboul. the
Umnyyad mliplm: ^_j^JL -r^IJ <J_^-<J { j^-lj (^l^b jl^lll Q_ybh .

'•' ffl,g, n. proverb ^^Al Jji i£\jl\ j^aj 131 al-Maydani (od. BQlftq), I, p. 51.

:| <j;ljJI ■ heretical view, al-BukMrl, Kitib al-tulnb, no. 70 ^Ij jJ J^-j Luij;
arbitrary viow. Tafatr, no. lfi to II v. i»2 Lublxij jjjl i_)Lb j ILxiil IvjI cJ\j
Jlii oL ( ju* -ut -^j U -\J"y^ jly t]yj U pA^o JJJl <J_^j «_.

. cLi L Aj \y_ (J^-J

4 Cf. nl-fllin/.iili, Iln/il', f, p. 27B; in elucidating the woll-known tradition j*i& {j*

,jUJI t j-> o^fcJLj IJl^JJ .*_> I y^ tjl Jul, ha voiooa the opinion that Hi" word

(_gljJI, oonsidored lexioally, can bo understood either in n favourable or unfavourable

HdiiHc, but, Mini theological linguistic USOgO gives preferenOO to Mm phrase in malum partem:

•il^^'l 6j^> i£j&! (Jil_j-U J-.UJI iS\ji\ (5^b .il^il dj&j
{ j^--r^ •& cS^U ,_jiljilj -U,UJ1j ^pc^JI JjLuli (S'^J 7=~*w^\

tlS U\

r*

U, Of, aleo n. I.

CHAPTER TWO

II

12

its conclusiveness and rejected this allegation on his part" '. In this
first phase of Muslim history, judgement was still totally undefined,
without positive administration, without any proper direction or
method, and was passed on the basis of individual insight. It was
Ottly i" the following period that ra'y took a certain shape and began
to move in a prescribed direction. Ra'y assumes now the. logical form
of an analogy, qiyds. Formerly, it was said that a judge, when dealing
with an unprecedented case, might use his own judgement in eases
for which no transmitted or written positive law existed. Now it is
said that personal judgement must be applied within the analogical
framework prescribing the direction of the subjective discernment
within which this judgement may be exercized.

With regard to the definition and application of qiyas, two methods
developed side by side, according to Ibn Hazin's account. Both
methods agree that cases which cannot be judged on the basis either
of written or of transmitted law must be decided by way of a
comparison with a judgoment as it appears in one of the two recog-
nized sources. Tho two methods diverge only with regard to tho
reaching of the terbium coinparationis through the speculative method.
The one method tries to prescribe the searching for a material simi-
larity of the written, and lately emerged laws to the cases which
arc being considered. The other method requires investigation of the
motive, the ratio (HUak) of the transmitted law resorted to for the
purpose of comparison, and inquiry into the, spirit of the Inw, as well
as an examination of whothcr or not the independently discovered
relationship of cause and effect which exists between the law and
tho unwritten principle encompasses the newly arisen case too. In
another chapter, concrete examples demonstrating this method in
its practical application will bo seen. One point should lie noted here :
later theology was very actively concerned with the question of
whether or not it was permissible to search for the motivos of divine
law, and oven those legal schools which inclined toward analogy did
not always answer this in the affirmative a .

" lh(<tl, fol 2b. 8a.

2 itl-Talwih i!<i huilif liai/a'iq al-tamiih by Sn'd al-DIn nl-Taft.iizani (MS or the Kois.

Bofbibliothek Vienna, AJT. 167 [251] fol. 181a)' < (JJ-*^I f-^- L fy^\ ^ J-vVI
JL J-Ldl ^ J^.^1 J-Ss i_-aI.L. iojl Jc ti53i> ^j lyk^l
SUl^ ^JU ~J^>3 [)& JJ^I J-v^'l J~i$ ' J-J-^l JJ- 5 fjrt
JA*^I J-^'l Ol JJj ( ^ixJI 0* £ U •**& J~ ***' f^ -1

12

OHAPTBB TWO

Even thoug h the introduction of ft* put a formal Iin.it to the india .
o'-mmnte application of ra% Mfato cancelled this effect in ^our of
uncontrolled ,„•,. The word i^« n iWf defines the su , c Talr

« Mbw. .,. h abandonmg ^ in consi(lcra|;ion oJ . wJmt . 8 easicr

In view of the dearth of non-partis,,,, sources for the hjstorv of
l.o Oiliest development of [s.amie jurispmdenee „„ u , ' ,/
'-^ry could ,, ,„„,, in vi| . w offc|i cn,,,unn„ ,,

Jlnch were, to a large extent, ad koc fabrications it is i ! „ t
determine precisely the date when the above^ntio* 1

M son,,, were introduced. Furthermore, it can har be

KK22?? 1 U ™'°«° «•"■ ^ decision had deveW.
n Abfl Ha* „H h s tame, and what were the new facts which he added
o s,,me junnprudnnoo in order to define the spheres "
Jf CI ° 6Ven P roV!llk ""certainty concerning how Abu Hantfah
n ...dthesp eo^tive component of legaldSonZdlfC

'< '" Bta ol bJS legal system are inclined to maintain that he did not

,~ j ■ , * """"'"""i rawer tJint

prc«h>n : ,nantly the application of free speculation in l,,: „,.,„,,;, ,
They cite minutely the small number of traditions which he us , Z

( o! • Onee the Imam ,s supposed to have said to his son: "He who
^^"" , '«•• WW-g «b in legal proceedings is no leg^ *

i> J^VI 61 *U^l o- u ill ^T ?. °^ -*

p. «< '::"!;;."" ^ * ***• * »^ w^c^r*;

■ T„l„//,ib, p. 008,

OHAPTBB TWO

18

It would require a deeper insight into AbQ Hanifah's classrooms than
IB possible in view of the state of the sources, to decide for either one
ol these parties. However, we have two facts in our possession.

Kirst, speculative jurisprudence, which acknowledged no dominant
importance to the traditional source material, reached its apex even
before Abu Hanifah's time. Abu Hanifah's immediate predecessor in
Iraq seems to have been Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman (d. 119 or 120)
He was considered the greatest legist in Iraq, and it is said about him'
that he was the first "to gather around him a circle for the pursuit
ol knowledge". Among his pupils, Abu Hanlfah is also mentioned '
I.btmmad's knowledge of traditions was very weak, but lie was said
to be ujqah, i.e. the most important of his contemporaries in juris-
prudence -.

Secondly, after these preparatory works, Abu Hanlfah made the
first attempt to codify Islamic jurisprudence on the basis of qwtis.
Up to his time, this had not been done. Just as a systematic presenta-
tion of Islamic jurisprudence, built on the fundament of analogy
was now feasible, it was also only from this time on that a systematic
opposition to the principle of qiyds and its application' in legal
Positivism became possible. Ibn 'Uyaynah is supposed to have said,
" Tl "'™ "■>•" l-w« tlmigs which 1 did not expect l.o spread beyond the
M bridge in Kufa: Hamzah'fl way of reciting the Koran, and Abu Ilanl-
lah s jurisprudence; indeed, both spread all over the world" ».

Indeed, Abu Hanifah's scholarly achievement received a very poor
reception from his conservative contemporaries. The following account
is typical of his contemporaries' views of how the teachings of the
»"«>« of the analogists disseminated. When Abu Hanlfah sent out
Zufar, one of Ids two disciples, from Kufa to the neighbouring Basra
<n order to propagate the new branch of jurisprudence, Zufar encount-
ered indifference everywhere. As soon as he presented the new teachings
m l the name of Abu I.lanlfah, people even turned away from him.
W hen he reported this to his teacher, Abu Hanlfah is supposed to
have made the following remark: "You are little versed in the method

1 Abfl al-Miiimiiin. Annates ed. Juynlioll, I. p. 816,

* Tab,,,,,-,, al-hnSfn;, IV. no. 12. 1 1, i'„ Slid also about unoM 1OT „f Abfi I fonlfob'B teuol.ors.

about A!„v b. Abi Muslim (,l. 186) who represented jurlsprudanoa h. Kinnr.^n. i„ Abfl

TnlmqCU «/./,„//.. it,,;/., 110 . 37. ~^ "^ 1>*J UQ

■ Abfi a[-Mii.l.iaNiii, I, p. 405.

14

CIIAI'TIOK TWO

15

of propaganda. JuBt go back to Basra, present to the people the
teachings of their own imams and, at the .same time, expose the weak-
nesses of the same. Tell them afterwards that there exists yet another
teaching which consists of this and that, and which is based on sueli
and sucli arguments. Now, if the new matter lias rooted in their souls,
tell them only then that this is Abu Hanifah's teaching. After this
they will be embarrassed to reject it" '. Even a poet like Musawir '-,
a contemporary of Abu Hanlfah and like the imam, a citizen of Kufa,
used the system for the purpose of epigrammatic ridicule. This is a
symptom of public opinion, for the poetical Muses did not concern
themselves so soon with the casuistry of the law ". In later periods,
apocryphal stories wore fabricated in order to represent the opposi-
tion of the learned and pious contemporaries to Abu Hanlfah. The
following is probably the most remarkable of these fabrications,
which is preserved in al-Damhi •'. It is based on an older source »
and reported at great length and in detail. Ibn Shubrumah who
was inclined towards fiqli, but with little concern for the traditions ,
relates:

"I and Abu llanifah once visited Ja'far b. Muhammad al-Sadiq ;
1 introduced my companion as a jurist from Iraq. Then Ja'far said:
'Would it be he who in religious matters produces analogies based on
his own ra'yl {yaqlsu al-dln bi-ra'yh). Would it be al-Nu'man 1).
Thiibit?' — 'I myself, adds the informant, 'learned his name only
from this question'. — 'Yes', ropliod Abu Hanlfah, 'that is I, may
God grant me success !' Then Ja'far said: 'Fear God and apply no
analogy in religious matters based on your arbitrary opinion, for it
was Iblis who established analogical reasoning first' ". Now, remarks
follow that purport to show the inadequacy of speculation in juridieo-
religious matters.

' MaJMih, VIII, p. 017.

- KilSb nl-agliiliif. XVI, p. 1(1!). Of. iiIho my Ihitrligc zur Litrraturqteahichtt drr St'a,
p. 05.

3 Wo encounter rIho poelioul oulugiuti for Abu Ilanifiil), Fihrul, p. 202; also for Malik
ibn Amu in iil-Ilimii, I, p. 01); for the pool, "Abd Allah b. Siilim, culled Ibn al-Khayyuj,
in al-Jahr/,, fol. IShi; ami for hovoii fiii/alin' of Medina in u love poem in Aylmnl, VIII.
p. 03.

•' Hiii/iit iil-liai/uivun, II, p. 12-1 H.v. _Ji.

5 Ibn J.Iazm, too, lcnowH thin account, Iblfil, fol. lfib.

11 AM ul-MahSHin, I, p. 890.

CHAPTER Two

15

id

"Just tell me which, in the eyes of God, is the more serious crime,
homicide or adultery?"

"No doubt, homicide is a, greater crime", replied Abu llanifah.

"Yet homicide is judged on the basis of two witnesses' evidence
while adultery is proven only by statements from four witnesses.
How does your analogy apply in this case ? And what is more merit-
orious before God: fasting or praying?"

"Prayer is definitely more moritorious", replied Abu llanifah.

"Nevertheless, a. woman must interrupt fasting during menstru-
ation although she is not forbidden to pray in this state '. Fear God,
servant of God, and do not produce arbitrarily analogies in religious
matters, for we and our opponents may be summoned before God's
tribunal to-morrow. Then we. on our part shall say: 'Allah has said;
the Prophet of Allah has said". You and your companions, however,
shall say: 'We have heard such ; we have guessed such'. But Allah
shall treat us and you as Ho wills".

At times idle casuistry, too, has been falsely attributed to the founder
of the "speculative" school. Thus it is related that at the time when
the traditionist Qatfulah — who was particularly versed in Biblical
legends — came to Kufa, a large crowd gathered around him in order
to meet the famous Basran. Upon his offer to explain any question
ex abrupto, Abu llanifah, who at that time was still a youth, came
forward with this question: "What might have been the sex of Solo-
mon's ant?" (Surah XXVI 1). This embarrassed the learned Qatadali
and he confessed to be unable to answer this question. Then the youth-
ful questioner himself gave the reply: "It was a female ant because
it says in verse 18 '(/dial, (she said) an ant'. If it had been a male, then,
the masculine form (qtlla) ought to have been used because namlah is
gen. epic" -. Also typical of attitudes towards Abu flanlfah's school
shortly after its establishment is the following anecdote which Ham-
mad b. iSalamah relates: "In the time of ignorance, there was a highway
robber who used to take the possessions of pilgrims with the aid of
a cane. When accused of robbery, he would use the excuse that not
he but the cane had acquired foreign property". Ilammad comments:
"If this man were still alive to-day, he would certainly be one of the
followers of Abu llanifah" ■'. The following verdict is cited on the

1 This objection to analogy in also onoountwod in al-Bukh&rl's KUfih nl-mwm, no, 41.
- al-Damlrl, II, p. 482.
a nl.JiU.ii?, fol. 181a,

L6

I'llAl'TKR TWO

17

authority of Hal's b. Ghiyatli (il. 177): "Abu Nanifah is tho best-
informed person about tilings that never existed; he is most ignorant
about things which have really occurred" i.e. he is a shrewd casuist
but no learned jurist '. As we can see, all these accounts ' anil opinions
ridicule to a greater or lesser extent the casuistic spirit of Abu HanT-
fah's legal method anil his legal school. While the schools of tradition
directed their attention to existing and concrete facts, which they
judged on the basis of concrete, existing, anil historical legal data,
the exponents of ru'y dwelt on casuistries that were void of any
current interest. Also those theologians who subscribed more to the
ethical side of religion turned reluctantly away from legal casuistry.
I'Yom among the many accounts that could be cited to point out this
contrast, I mention only the statement of a. pious theologian from
Kufa, 'Amr b. Qays al-iVlalii'I (d. 110): "I prefer one tradition which
edifies my heart, and which brings me closer to Cod, to fifty of Shu-
rayh's legal decisions" '•'.

The standard approach to questions of legal casuistry seems to
have been: "<t-m'aylti" (from rii'd as verbum cordis: Videhmir. litri?
Quid iiiti vitletur? But in this application it means: What do you
thiltk with regard to such and such a given case?). The traditionists,
therefore, frown upon this standard formula, common among the
casuists. For example, the traditionists cite the following account
on the authority of Ibn Mas'fid: "Beware of 'a-nt'ayta, a-ra'ayla', for
those who came before you perished because of 'a-m'ayUi, a-nt'uytti '.
Do not compare one thing with another (by analogy) so that your
fool; may not stumble after standing firm. If one of you is asked about
something about which he does not know anything, then let him say:
'I do not know', for 'this is one third of knowledge' " •'. A curse
is transmitted against this a-m'ayta by al-Sha'bi " beside other most
derogatory remarks about ru'y, although it could be proved that this

1 al-Jahr/., foli 62M J^ '*-*~ > - (ji' *& ij* "— J ^A if ij" 3 ^ J-"-"?

a Alto A thousand and one night, night 206-7, muni, bo considered as part of thin.
There, the oxocmoH of (.lie Hiiiiafiio casuistry mill aubtlotios in the person of AdD 7usuf

lire niacin Mm Hiilijeot of humourous OOmlo. (BQl&q, 1271), II, p. 159-160),

:| Abfl ol-MahSain, I, i>. :nm.
< ihiru, ibl. 18b.

< Ibid., fol. 101.: -L^, o"

gJl*

\sj i^-jIjI jjoI (jjJ (_jr*-~" U^

o"

-UJU—J /ji ^~«_^JI cJUu

CIIAITKK TWO

17

formula also came from the lips of the Prophet himself ' and his pious
companions '-. From the following remark attributed to Masrfiq, it
becomes evident how much aversion the strictest traditionists enter-
tained towards pure casuistry which threatened to prove that many
a legal problem, although logically feasible, was not treated in the
traditional sources and could be decided only by speculative moans.
Whenever a question was put before Masritq, he would ask the quest-
18 ioner: "Has this case really already occurred ?" When he received
a negative reply, Masrfiq would say to the questioner: "Pardon me
if I do not answer until such a case does in fact occur" il . Abu Thawr
ul-BaghdadI, who must be mentioned in the next chapter as being
favourably disposed towards ru'y, and consequently not a fully
recognized Shafi'ite, put the. following question before another jurist:
"Some one takes an egg from each of two persons and puts both eggs
into his sleeve. Now, one of the eggs is crushed completely and be-
comes totally valueless. Which of the two owners has to be com-
pensated?" The jurist was very annoyed with Abu Thawr and said:
"You have to wait until compensation is demanded". — "So you
admit", countered Abu Thawr, "that you have no answer to this".
— "I say", replied the other, "go away, for we have to pass legal
judgements; we do not have to satisfy the curious" •'.

Besides such objections against the speculative branch which were
made mockingly rather than with the intent of criticising the principles,
wc meet the serious accusation in the period following the establish-
ment of Abu Hanifah's system that the speculative branch destroys
the bases of the law through arbitrary negligence of the positive legal
sources in favour of speculative innovations (Irid'afi), and that it

' ./«;«' a(- W /(/(Bukh.). no. 22: J^-^U' J^ I rjO il5Cl J* (J& jJ £*tty
but this ih no question requiring explanation. In Magh&ssf, no, 12, Mlqdttd I). Ami al-
Kimli puts a casuistic question to the Prophet storting it with tl-rJiJ (jl ^i'j'
7cj\ ~j<*-j. In the corresponding passage Diyttt, no. 1, this <^-jI_)I in missing, It»
occurrence in the other passage, so argues al-Qastalllnl (X, p. 48) against opponents,
shows that it oonoernod 11 casuistic (jmwtion, not 11 real one.

» JTflai al-wiufiV, no. H (88)1 6U* i>. 6lr* (Jl- (jJLi i>. -^j) *>'

. ^\ <y4 pM J»_JI £>L lil C*Jj)l

3 al-Sha'ranl, I, p. 03: Jjl™U J_ji ili^-. ^ JjU 131 (jjj~-> jbj

* Ibn ol-Mulaqqin, fol. 2a.

IH

CHAPTER TWO

offered legal justification for adultery and fornification contrary to
the Koran and sunnah '.

The method to which the earliest ra'y circles adhered and which
Abu Hanlfah subsequently incorporated into his system, namely, the
inclination not to be content with establishing, treating, and applying
(die existing transmitted materials, but to go beyond this and to follow
up all the real and casuistically imaginable requirements of legal
practice, was given the special name fiqh in contradistinction to 'Urn
al-hadith. Sachau explained the genetics of this contrast, and at
this point, I refer to his pertinent exposition -. Fiqh is a synonym of
ra'y; in its original meaning, however, the former also carries the
19 meaning: discernment, comprehension a . But before the word fiqh
became contrasted to hadlth in the theological terminology it passed
the stage of general meaning. The general meaning becomes evident
from a passage from the traditions, the oldest passage, I believo,
that can be cited for the theological application of the word:
llfc jLi« Jlsj Q>_^j o_^c. cjvij -U (JI ~^ tlil ^J i_-4>JI AJj lil
eX* \Jjhj Ij.o.o.Ji tL> Ij^jcJ' Ji JLo «dJI Jji -Ujjo *2i)|, In
this passage •', al-fiqh is used in this sense: authorativc interpretation
according to the Koran, the one to be applied in practice, precisely
the one that follows the Koran literally without other considerations
for the decision; consequently, it carries also the meaning of proper
religious law °. It is only later that fiqh becomes contrasted to hadith
so that wo find in the older literature at every step the remark: N.N.
was the greatest faqih in his country ; he was insignificant in hadtth ;

I): Jj

I*

1 Ibn Qulaybah, Kitub al-ma'arif, p. 211): J^-l i_jL9.fi •UyisI rji ^

- Znr filte.itcn (lcse.liie.hlc du muhammnlimincheii Reohlt, p. 15 IT.
!1 Muslim {SifC,lal-munCtfiqhi),V, p. 340: jQ/ jti X£AJ C~J\ -Uc «*X».|
pQjhj n^c^ j*2j p£3jJ3 Ais (_y^ <*""J*-9 (jLiJu J)l Jiiu J. Nol.cwort.liy iaaIno

Uio following tradition J-^JI *2» (V 822 o^aJI J_jl»J ■Ua?JI _ r¥ =i in Ibn
al-Silddt, Kitab al-alft? (Loidon MS. Wornor), no. 507, p. 414. Attention must bo drawn
to Ibn Hishiim cd. Witetonfeld, p. 1014, 1.0: IgJ Is UjL> jJil *_UiJ" { J^. J-S-ili

jrJI ^U! tJl^lj AiflJ! ,JjSi b ^^alicjj dLcJI jl.i hero, o/i( «(-/i'<//i oan bo
interpreted an reasonable people or also iih pooplo who uro familiar with religious law.

However, the context of the pa™ago pnrappoaoa a time in which ooneern for tradition

VDI already well developed.
•' al-Bukliuri, Wui/fl', no. 88.

8 E.g. ttl-Baladhurl, p. .-177. I. 2: 6Tji3lj AiiJI t _y^i\ «Jju ^ oJy?J-

OHAI'TKJt TWO

19

and vice versa. Ahmad b. Sahl (d. 282) said: "If I were qddl, I would
have imprisoned both him who is concerned with hadlth without
fiqh and him who is concerned with the latter without the former.
The expression aid al-hadith wa-al-fiqh refors to the canonical scholars
in their entirety. Oidy after the rivalries of the two schools has sub-
sided docs this antithetical relationship of the two terms disappear
so that fiqh assumes the meaning of jurisprudence in general '. Thus,
when the traditional branch of jurisprudence was to be indicated,
20 it had to be referred to as fiqh al-hadith. Indeed, it was said about
a person who followed jurisprudence in its most extreme colouring
of the anti-analogistic branch: tafaqqaha 'alu madhhab Duwud al-
Zahiri.

1 AIho law, oven pbilology. The book title Fiqh al-lughah in known from Ibn Filris
and al-Tha'fdibi. CI'. Ibn Ya'ish, od. John, p. 71, 1. 3, relating to diptotos: <LJ Aiillj
oUjii L* => the rulo for thin id what wo havo mentioned. In tbo proverb AJuUI __/>^.
«U O„ob>. L» nl-Maydiini, I, p. 213, fiqh carries tho gcnoral moaning: knowledge,
Hoionoo.

CHAPTER THREE

Islamic jurisprudence acknowledges al-Shfifi'I as the imam wliosc
most remarkable work consists of creating a corrective which — on
account of the spreading subjective trend otjHqh vis-a-vis the tradit-
ional point of view which accompanied Aim HanTfali's system — proved
to be of urgent necessity. In this respect, quite apart from the services
of Malik b. Anas ', Muslims rightfully consider Imam al-Shiifi'I as the
vindicator of traditionalism. It is from this school, too, that the last
vigorous reaction of traditionalism against al-ra'y and against its
consequences has arisen. "I best compa.ro Abu Hanlfah's ra'y to a
sorceress' thread which, according to the direction in which it is pulled,
appears cither yellow or reddish". With these words, al-Shiifi'I is sup-
posed to have riduculod the arbitrary application of al-ra'y as it was
21 practised by the/«//t-school prior to his time 2 . However, on account of
Abu Hanlfah's endeavours on the one hand, but more so because of the
force of circumstances, qiyds became a factor in jurisprudence which
could no longer be eliminated from the legal sources. Al-Shafi'i had
not intended to do this, but even if he had wanted to do so, he would
not have been able to achieve anything as futile attempts of later
followers of his school indicate. What he could do, and actually did,
was to discipline the application of the newly introduced legal source

1 The followers of tradition persistently reckon Malik among the followers of ra'y.
Ahmad l>. Ilanbal says about 'Abd Allah l>. NiU'i' (<1. 206): "Ho was not sahib iuttlUk
but u follower of Malik's ra'i/" {Tulttlhib, p. :i7'i). Very Instructive for the relation of

the early iShiifi'ilc BflhOOl to Malik is the following account. Muhammad b. Nam- (d. 294

in Samarqand) originally did not think much of ol-ShSf II. In Medina he had a vision
in which ho asked the Prophet: "Shall I study Abu Ilanifuh's rut/'!" — The Prophet
negated thin. — "Malik's ra'y'l" — Tho Prophet replied: "You may retain of it what in
in agreement with my tradition". — When united whether lie hIiouIiI study al-.Shafi'i'n
l>(ty the Prophot angrily shook bin head and Haid: "What are you saying, al-Shafi'i's
ra'y V Thin jh not rn'ij but the refutation of all who contradict my Huuiiah" (Tiihilhib,
p. 121!). Strangely enough, the name account in related with reference to Abu Ja'l'ar
al-Tirmidhi too. {Ibid., p. 083).

s Thin, at least, m the quotation from bin pupil Ahmad b, Siuan ul-Qiittiin (d. 2110):

■>1S\ L Jli jJUUI J! ojL^b. asmkjT jJ 'O'Uj j jl~- i>l <£jj

0l_/>9 1 Ai O-UJ'j yjy->l 0l_/^ \M OJ-C OJ Uc»« -l 3 ^* 1 Jl *£*«»• i^.l iS'J

jfr\ Ilm ol-Mulaqqin, fol. 10Gb.

CIIAl'TEIt TURKIC

21

without curtailing the prerogatives of the scripture and tradition
and to restrict its free arbitrary application by means of methodical
laws with respect to its usage. This is both the purpose and the result
of the science of usfd al-Jiqh which al-Sluifi'I founded ' and which
is associated with his name. If the tract had survived in which al-
Shafi'I justified this new discipline which is revolutionary for Islamic
jurisprudence, and which, in particular, introduces it to the branches
of sciences, researchers of the history of Muslim thought would be
enabled to determine in every detail al-ShafiTs position in the contro-
versy of traditionalism versus the partiality of qiyas. For lack of this,
wc arc dependent on excerpts from al-ShafiYs fundamental writings,
and on the Muslims' own judgement of the activity of the great imam.
Characteristic of the fundamental concept of his system is a state-
ment • attributed to him and relating to the uml founded by him:
"No matter what statement I made, no matter what principle {ad)
I might have established, if there exists anything transmitted by the
Prophet that contradicts this, then whatever the Prophet has said
remains the deciding matter. I am of the same opinion". And, so our
source adds, he repeated this saying several times 11 . It may bo noted
in passing that this statement seems to have been misunderstood
22 by the American orientalist Prof. Salisbury •'. He translates this as
follows: "Whatever I declare as a saying of the Prophet ..., or lay
down as a principle, by tho expression: 'on the authority of the
Messenger of God ...', at variance with something otherwise said by
mo, the true saying is that of the Prophet ..., which I hereby make
my declaration, to the refutation of anything so said by mo [to the
contrary]" s .

I It must bo noted, howevor, what is transmitted from al-Tbawri: "Ibn Lahi'ah
(d. 1 7-1 in Egypt, thirty yearn before al-Shafi'i) in competent in usiil, and we in fur il'"

{Tahdhtb, p. 364, 1. 10).

" Cf. also al-Shahranfani, p. 1(10.

II In al-Jurjani: £* C-iv'l _jl JjS ^ cJi ^J-. ^j jjiJUUI jjij

* Edward Salisbury, "Contributions from original souroos to our knowledge of the
SOienoe of Muslim tradition!', Journal of the American Oriental Socir.li/, vol. 7 (18(12),
p.<U(i>.

5 It is to be regretted that hucIi mistakes are not uncommon in this useful and iuspir-
ing study of the Hcienee of Muslim tradition. I shall use thin opportunity to make yet

■J-l

CUAFTER THRBB

23

lb is juat as indicative of al-Shiifi'i's thinking that ho does not
recognize al-istihsan, a concession made by the Hanafite school which
questions the methodological element in applying qiyas altogether,
and that, according to some people, lie also rejects ta'lil '. Against the
application of al-istihmn, tho most arbitrary point of the Hanafite
method, al-Shafi'i wrote a pamphlet of which only the title has sur-
vived »; But in his school — and it cannot be ascertained whether it
was on his own initiative — arose a sound, new legal principle which
was givon the significant name al-istishab (approximately: associating).
For many legal probloms and questions of ritual, it supplied a positive
principlo for solving many a complexity.

Al-Nawawi, himself a follower of al-Shiifi'i's school, is the most
prominent of all Muslim theologians to whom wo are indebted for an
exposition of al-Shiifi'i's legal system and for tho best characterization
of his ideas. "Ho appeared when the systematically arranged legal
books had already been complotcd, and the laws already determined
and scrutinized. He studied the legal attitudes of his predecessors
and learned from the outstanding inulms; ho disputed with the most
able and most profound mon ; he smoothed (nahata) their teachings,
examined them, and from all material thus gathered together he after-
wards produced a system which incorporated the Book, tho sunnah,
consensus, and analogy; yet he did not restrict himself to the one or
the other among these sources as Others have done" ■, Another Sha-
fi'ite, Abu Bakr al-Ajurrl (d. 360), characterizes al-ShafiTs relation

another correction. The following passage from al-.Turjilni iH cited: ^J Jalc- .yjj

J-jJkj ^Ai _^uJ! ^j Ac o& lil C\j .jUjJI 4*3 Ac jlf lil IJ*

.tcJI )Lya_ejl o-A& J i_j*UJl iJS°jC-\ Tho sentence closos with fa-li'i, and
tadhyil (-= appendix) in undoubtedly a heading. Tho translator, howovor, considers
fa-la tatlliyU as belonging together and arrives at tho following moaning: "Ibn al-Ralah
HayH ho doeMMo in tho way of opposition or of oaptiousnesa in discussion. But, to out tho
matter short, men in these times treat with Slight ...", instead of: "Ibn al-Salab HayH:
This il valid only [i.o. a porson who knowingly adhered to a faulty tradition jeopardizes
his credibility only in tho case] if ho insists on tho mistake bocauno of stubbornness J
but if ho docH bo bocauno his investigation has led him to this version then (ho does)
not (Ioho bin credibility) — Appendix. In more recent times people have ..." <Kdward
Salisbury, "Contributions from original SOUXOes", JAOS, vol. 7 (1S02), p. 70-71).

1 Of. above p. 11, n. 2.

a FiliriM, p. 210, 20 Kilfib ibfill al-intih/n'm.

' Talidhib al-aamtl', p. 02, 12.

CHAPTER THRBB

23

to the rest of tho imams as follows — although on tho authority of
an unknown person: "In Abu IJmufah's school, neither (substantiated)
ra'y nor hadith is to be found ; in Mfdik's school, there is weak ra'y
and sound hadith ; Ishaq b. Rahwnyhi has weak hadith and wealc ra'y;
in al-Shiifi'i's, there is sound ra'y and sound hailith" '. According to
this, al-Shafi'i would have been an eclectic who united rivalling
partialities to a higher synthesis by equal consideration for their prin-
ciples. The basic tenor of this reconciling endeavour was traditionalism,
and to tho extent that in Iraq, the center of qiyas, al-Shafi'i could
be called the protector of tradition (ndsir al-hadith), while in
Khurasan, his followers wcro called kclt egoxr/v, ashab al-kadtth 3 .
The most ardent advocates of tho traditional view praise his faith-
fulness towards tradition and celebrate tho influence which he exerted
in subduing anti-traditionalism. Al- Hasan al-Za'farani says about him:
"Tho exponents of tradition were asleep; al-Shafi'i woke them;
so they awoke". Ahmad b. Hanbal, the imam most faithful to tradition,
said: "We intended to refute the exponents of ra'y, but wo did not
succeed ; then al-Shafi'i came and led us to victory" 3 . Ahmad b.
Hanbal is so completely convinced of al-Shiifi'i's faithfulness towards
tradition that he refers questions which arc not decided in the tra-
ditions Without hesitation to al-Shiifi'i's judgement. Ahmad b. Hanbal's
attitude was that "at no time was there anyone of importance in
learning who erred less, and who followed more closely the sunnah,
of the Prophet than al-Shafi'i", and Ishiiq b. Iliihwayhi concurred
with this praise A . This can also be scon from the fact that the appear-
ance of al-Shafi'i in Iraq diminished the popularity of the Hanafite
school considerably. Learned men like Abu Thawr (d. 240), who formerly
followed ra'y, abandoned this branch when they came to realize that
al-Shafi'I knew how to combine fiqh and sunnah (jama'ahu bayna al-
24 fiqh wa-al-sunnah) 5 . When al-Shafi'i appeared in Baghdad, the twelve
seminars expressing tho views of the a/d al-ra'y, which were being
given in tho western mosques of Baghdad, were reduced to three or
four «. Most characteristic of tho dominant spirit of the Shafi'itc school

1 ol-Sha'ranl, I, p. 70 top.

2 Tah&htb, p. 04 penult, f. **-* 1~>

3 Ibid., p. 03 penult., 70, 0.

4 Ibid., p. 70 penult, ff., 78, 8.
Ibid., p. 080.

n Ibid., p. 82.

U

should read

u*r--

.

24

CHAPTER TinwiK

2fi

is the fact that this school produced the man who appealed aa the
reviver of the old traditionalism, the man who, beginning with [mam
al-Shlfil's reaction against the partiality of the Iraqi school, took the
consequences of this reaction and, surpassing all the master's inten-
tions, completely rejected the justification of ra'ij and qii/as and all
that this implied. This man was Dawiid b. 'AIT al-Zahiii, the founder
of the branch of jurisprudence with which this treatise is concerned.
One must not forget that among al-ShuTi'i's works there is one entitled:
al-Kildh (d-huhii, bi-al-zahir, "On judging based on the apparent
meaning of the word" '. This is a work in which the Imam clearly
stated his relation towards the speculative legal sources and it might
have served Abu Dawiid as a starting point for his own theory. It is
noteworthy, however, that we first meet zahir in this book title in its
terminological meaning. But this is not yet the zahir of the Dawiidi
school, for Sh&fi'iteS understood by this term an interpretation of
a given legal passage which, for internal and external reasons, is the
most probable of all by reason of the weight of the arguments sup-
porting it. It is consequently something which would ordinarily be
called riijih. -, but not zahir according to Dawud's interpretation of
the word. In this respect, the term zahir is used in contradistinction
to that kind of exegesis which does not tolerate any different inter-
pretation of a textual passage when there is clear evidence prohibiting
any other interpretation, for instance, when obvious numbers aro
concerned.

Dawiid did not feel that with his denial of analogy, which he forced
to the utmost limits, he was challenging the conciliatory inclinations
of the school whose off-spring he considered himself, and whose
founder he glorified in two of his works 3 . For him, al-Shafi'i was
"a torch for the carrier of traditions and for those who transmit

> Fihrhl. p. 210, 28.

- WaraqBt, fol. Mai ^J-l ^j *Ij"I 2S$S ,»L*si JLJ AJjJ " l y>^\ Jli->j
i'j^jJI \js- L J*2s6 V llgi 'iL.fc' 'ij^s. tiSQj rt,:>->-j lil ajl~,j
C*ii ^_J [yii \f>y£j 2 — o.il_j lii"5^l JJu. ilJieVl &£•— I d&JSj
yL^\ ^ j£\ |aJl».| t> '^\ J«^J L, y^UiJIj o_AC. J*Jji ^ J-U

3 llin l.ln/.ni condemns the exponents of the simfi'itn school and of tho Ijfanbalite

mihool from liin point of vlow too. Ih(iii, fol. I On.

CHAPTER TintKB

25

traditions", and his merit resulted from tho fact "that he uncovered
and ruined fabrications and impostures of rivals, and that he disproved
and shattered their trifles" '.

As we can see from all these opinions, a.l-ShdfiTs teachings consist
of two aspects. On the one hand, he is making concessions to Abu
TTanifah's starting-point — naturally, ho docs not go so far as ho does.
It is this limitation which represents the other aspect of his system;
namely, above everything else, consideration for tradition. He concedes
to Abu Hanifah justification for qiySs as a legal source only insofar
as it is based on written and orally transmitted sources. As it is
well-known, Abu Hanifah, whose strongest side was not exactly the
science of tradition, was not so scrupulous in this. Muhammad b.
al-I;Iasan — so says Abu al-Fida* — once said to al-Shafi'i: "Who was
the more learned of the two: our teacher (Abu Hanifah) or yours
(Malik)?" — "Am I supposed to answer this question to tho best of
my knowledge V asked al-Shafi'i. — "Yes, indeed !" replied the other.
— Now, al-Shafi'i began asking questions: "By God, I am asking you,
who was more versed in tho Koran, our teacher or yours?" — The
Other replied: "By God, yours was better versed in it". — "And in
the HunnnhV — "By God, in this also, it was your teacher!" —
"And who was better versed in the sayings of the Prophet's com-
panions?" — "In this, too, it was your teacher". — "Now", said
al-Shafi'i, "only analogy remains, but it can be based only on those
throe" -. This antagonism against Abu Hanifah, in spite of following
qii/as, remained alive in al-ShafiTs school for a long time 3 . The true
representatives of the Shiifi'ito principles also opposed any attempt
to practise idle casuistry, or to concern themselves with questions
20 of no real interest (23 yata'aUaqu bi-hi hukm iwjiz tamassx al-hajah
ilayh). They carried this to such an extent that they even rejected
as idle talk the inquiry into the special laws (mam'il al-k/iam'if)
relating to the Prophet ■'. On the other hand, the followers of the

' TaMhtb, p. 81.

2 Al>fi nl-KiiliV, Annal™ Aftutlr.miri. orl. Retake, II, p. 0(1. Retake doCS not. relate qnilo

correctly p. 00.

3 Still in tho sixth conlury, tho famous Shafi'ito Fakhr ttl-DIn nl-Rii/.I in, on tho ono
hand, an outspoken polemic against AM l.lnniiiih (al-Sha'rlnl, I, p. 70), but, on tho
other hand as we shall see in the following ohaptor, he to tho ono who advances the
strongest dialeotic arguments In support of j»yto. En bis gnat inf.vr work he continually
polemizes against tho nvftU abgiy&t,

■' Talidhtb, p. fifi.

26

(JIIAI'THH TURKIC

27

System developed by al-Shiifi'I were unable to define theoretically
the subtle amalgamation of the two elements of positive legal practice
which the imam of the school achieved and which, one would
assume, exclude one another. There were very few who, like Ahmad
b. Raid (d. "282), an eye witness of the controversies of the extremists,
were really aware of the conciliatory role at which al-Khafi'i's school
was aiming. Ahmad b. Said said: "If I were qadl I would have im-
prisoned both the one who searches for hulttk without concern I'orfu/h
and also the one who practises the opposite partiality". From the
aurea media on which al-Shafi'i's followers stood they soon plunged
into extremes. Soon wo find among them true nshab al-ra'y. Among
them we mention, for example, one of the first persons to spread
al-ShiLfiTs carlior teachings, the so-called qadlm, Abu Thawr al-Kalbl
al-Bnghdiidi (d. 240) who, despite his assertion to have abandoned ra'y
(see above, p. 17), is expressly called a follower of ra'y '. Still another
Was al-Husayn b. 'All al-Karabisi al-Baghdadl (d. 245), a contemporary
and compatriot of Abu Thawr al-Kalbl al-Baghdadl. His legal decisions
reflect the arbitrariness of the ra'y school to which he is supposed
to have belonged in his earlier life =. Also Sirhiib b. Yfisuf Abu Tahir
nl-Tibrizi, a pupil of Abil 'Abd Allah al-Mahamili, is called min aM
al-ra'y 3 . However, several of the Shfifi'itc exponents carried tins
specific traditional aspect to extremes. We can easily gather their
names from the l.abaqdl of this mndhhab. I just mention here one
Shiifi'ito who displayed perhaps the largest degree of independence
vis-a-vis the madhhab. This is Abu al-Hasim al-Dariki (d. 375). Al-
Nawawi relates the following about him: When he was asked for an
opinion, he would ponder at length, and would often make a decision
not only contrary to Abu Hanifah's teachings but also to that of al-
Shafi'i. When called to account for this, he would reply: "Here is the
tradition of A on tho authority of B on the authority of C ... down
to the Prophet ; it is better to follow this tradition than to act according
to what Abu llanilah and al-Shafi'T have taught" ■'. The most remark-
able of the Shafi'ites of the third century of the Hijrah who, within

J~

1 In Ihii nl-MuInqqin, fol. 2n, it in fluid about, Uiin Sliiifi'if.c: -»j JuiJI oljj

J> (^LJI ^J.*: *L< ^ Jlij aJ pi'U y\ c~Ui'j fl^-Vl} *LI

3 /bid., fol. 8a.

3 Ibid., fol. li)7n.
< Tahilhlb, p. 7f>2.

CHAI'TBK TURKIC

27

28

this madhhab, pushed this traditional point to tho furthest extreme
was imam Abu Sulayman Daw fid b. 'All b. Khalaf, tho founder
of the school which became known by the name Dfiwficli or Ziihirl.

His family originated from Qfishan in tho vicinity of Isfahan whero
his father had boon secretary to the qadl 'Abd Allah b. Khalid al-'K fill '.
Dawud was born in Kufa 3 ; accounts about the year of his birth vary
between 200 and 202. He spont his years of learning mostly in Baghdad.
Among the tcachors whose lectures he attended, the following famous
theologians and experts of tradition are mentioned: Abu Thawr,
Sulayman b. Harb, \\ mr b. Marzfiq, al-Qa'nabi, Muhammad b. KathTr,
and Musaddad b. Musarhad. At that time, the famous Ishaq b. Rfih-
wayhi (d. 233) was teaching in Nishapfir. Dawud left Baghdad to
complete his years of learning by hearing Ishaq's lectures. There he
seems to have boen very much stimulated by that branch of thought
to which he adhered later in his theological method. We have seen
above (p. 4) that this Ishaq was reckoned to be of the traditionist
school. Ho practised that aspect of al-Shiifi'I's teachings which con-
trasted to ra'y. It was he who transmitted the view that those tradit-
ional statements which the exponents of ra'y used to quoto as argu-
ments for their position, and in which "the scholarly search for the
opinion" (ijt.ilind al-ra'y) is recommended, are' not to be interpreted
in such a way that in doubtful cases, in which neither the Book nor
the tradition supplies a decision, tho advice of the learned is to be
sought. According to this interpretation, it is not tho opinion of the
individual person that can claim a decisive vote in legal decisions;
rather it is the opinion of all of them 3 . Dawud displayed much in-
dependence of, and courage against Ishaq, whom his contemporaries
held in high esteem; Dawud alone dared to refute bis views and
teachings *. Speaking about Dawiid's teachers, we want to mention
just one more thing, namely, that some biographers want to make
him a direct pupil of al-Shafi'T. This, however, is a chronological
impossibility which is rightfully refuted. Dawud was four years old

1 Ibn al-Mulaqqin, fol. 5b.

- Tfij al-Dln al-Sukl, fabaqal al-ShlJi'hjali (MS of (ho Bodloian in Oxford, March,
no. 185) f6L 175.

3 ISffll, fol. 11a: *jI_£ JjJu jl V JjJI Jj&I ojjULj _yt> cS'^l -^U^'

4 TalidIM, p. 238.

28

CHAPTER THREE

at the most when al-Shafi'I died '. The reason for this conjecture was
probably the circumstance that Dfiwiid was the first 2 writer to
concern himself in literature with tho Imam's virtues (manSaib), He
wrote two pamphlets on this matter, and his opinion about al-Shafi'I
(already mentioned p. 24 above) is probably derived from these
eulogies. Dawud, who occupies a glorious position in the biographical
categories (tabaqiit), is generally described by his biographers as a
fanatical follower (muta'assib) :| of al-Shafi'I. For this he must be
given special credit since from his youth on, he was brought up a
Hanafite, the legal school to which his father belonged ■'. After ho
returned from Nishapiir, he settled in Baghdad to tench. His bio-
graphers illustrate the remarkable number of his pupils by the assertion
that at his place of residence '100 taylumm (according to some, green
tat/lasans) could bo seen n . One of the most outstanding scholars of
tradition of his time, whom al-Bukhiiri, too, recognized as an authority,
the great Shafi'ito scholar Muhammad b. Ibrahim b. Sa'Id al-'Abdi
(d. 29.1), is mentioned among those who attended his lectures, Dfiwiid
said about him to his followers: "There is one person present from
whom one can profit, but who cannot profit (from us)" '. iSoon Dfiwiid's
reputation spread beyond the borders of Baghdad, 7 and from the most
29 distant centres of Muslim scholarship people were approaching him
with theological queries B about doubtful cases. All biographers un-
animously praise his pious, honest character, and everywhere we

' Ihn al-M

Vlulaqqin, I.e.: ^ A^lsj ^_J Jli' c~o. )yf^-> y\ .ik^Vl Pjj

*fj| ^*sUJI ol/Ai ^ lit s 3 \s 61 "jcJ-\ ^L»vJ-l d\ -v- ^i
AijZ i'jJdL ^Ijl *I*Jj L^jj jl IIjjI ^sl^JI o_^ alc oyf- jls'

.|H-^-t '^J'z * tT'W'-" ojl5ol_j AeUI jj-.
= Pajji Khallfah, VI, p. 140.
a Ihn Khallikan, no. 222 (oil. Witateufeld, III, p. 21).

4 Ibn al-Mulaqqin, I.e.: Ltt^a- ojjI (jlij.

5 Tabaqiit aUtuffaj, IX, 44 ; of. Roiiiko to Aliii al-Kidii', IT, p. 720. A Similar maimer
of bdioating a largo number, of listeners in found in the aooount about Sab.1 al-Su'lOkl
(il. ;tS7) where it i« stated that there were more than SOO Ink pots in his leoture room.
Tahdhib, p. 307.

8 Ibn al-Mulaqqin, fol. 0a: XJu^i yj A-flj ^ ^ yr-

7 al-Subkl says about him [fabatflt, I.e.): l^a)! i'lAfcj 0\»1«1! Alii As. I

,lk»

\S

" Fihriiit. p. 217, 18 ff.

Ijw^J

u ju9

J ft« ^*ikJi

CHAPTER THROB

29

SO

encounter praise of his ascetic way of life. The humble sentiments
which Dawud could display in his prayers were supposed to be insur-
mountable in his days '. Only with regard to his dogmatic belief do
we encounter some doubts — he is supposed to have believed in the
creation of the Koran. This will be treated in a later chapter (VIII, 2a).
The following account is characteristic of Dawud: Ibrahim al-Muzanl -
once said during a conversation with Dawud b. Khalaf (sic) al-Isbahfml:
"If some one speaks in this manner, then he has abandoned the religion,
praise be to God !" (fa-in quia hulhd fa-qad k/iaraja 'an al-milluh wa-al-
hamd lilluli). Then Dawud questioned him about this and refuted
him by saying: "Shall we praise God by excluding a person from tho
religion ? Bather, this is an occasion for an istirja (i.e. the formula:
anna, lilldh 'wa-annd ilayhi riiji'un which is used in cases of mishap,
while praise is fitting for joyous occassions)" :| .

The founder of the Zfihirite school was not particularly highly
regarded as a scholar of tradition, perhaps precisely because of his
special position. Although his works contain many traditions, it is
rare that a tradition is quoted on his authority. Al-Subki relates
a single sentence which was spread in particular by Dawud. This is
tho statement that whoever dies of a broken heart is to be considered
a martyr *. Some scholars have tried to belittle Dawud in other fields
too. Abu al-'Abbas Tha'lub thought that Dawud possessed more
brain than solid scholarship. This verdict is surpassed by the Muta-
kallim Muhammad b. Zayd al-Wftsitl. This satirical dogmatic said:
"Whoever aims at the non plus ultra of ignorance, let him follow kalum
according to Nashl, f'tqlt according to Dawud, and grammar according
to Niftawayhi" 5 . Incidentally, tho latter himself was a follower of
Dawud's teachings. -- Dawud died 270 A.H. in Baghdad.

1 Abu al-Kidii', Aiiimle.1, II. p. 2(10; nl-.Siim'ilni (866 Supplements); al-Subki, I.e.;
and others.

2 This in probably Abu Ibrahim Imna'il b. Ibrahim al-Muznni (d. 204); bud Fihfist, I,
p. 212; of. II. p. 80.

;l al-'Iqd iU-fand.il. p. 2ir,.

•' Titbaqiit al-Sliilfi'ii/ali, I.e.: A^j I _Uj; _>5C y\ oljj U 2j\i iioiU.1 ^J

obUI

Lc US Aoc^

i_ip=ij fj^s. ^ pA^o Jill Jj^j J Is J IS trLc- C/\ frz AfcUl fo*
c^jaJ-1 Ia* jV* l_-^=jo'I aUI Aj* _jjI *^U-I Jtf Ju^»i j^i ol^ ~£i

.tJCjU 'UjIj Jjbj i«J A-j<-4, i>. Jtf*** ij* *i 'i'J** j. Ail*
b Fihriat, p. 72, 18.

30

CHAPTER THREE

The imposing number of Dawud's works, which arc listed minutely
in the Fi/irist, but which disappeared very early from Muslim circula-
tion, served entirely that theological view which he, among all thoolog-
iana, could express most clearly, although he was not the first * to
support it. (This struggle against the rivalling view goes back to the
earliest time of Islamic theological confrontation). Dawud was trying
to transform his system into a comprehensive one, supplementing
al-Shiifi'i's system, and juxtaposing it to Abu Hanifah's. Diiwud's
aim, although molded by al-Shafi'I's initiative, was to go beyond al-
Shafi'I by banning qiyas as one of the legitimate sources of canonical
legal deduction.

The titles of his works, which arc all that have survived in their
authentic version, show us the bias of his teachings which Ibn Khaldiin
characterizes with the following words:

"They (Dawud's followers) reduoed the sources of discommon!; of the law

exclusively to explicitly defined points in the Koran mid the traditions, and
to the consensus as representing all that which the laws wore supposed to
contain. Thoy also tracod back to tlio IJook tiie apparent qiyun (not the qiyaa
to ho determined through speculation), and the causality of the law, oven in
eases in which the causality as such is explicitly stated in the scripture This
moans that Diiwud's followers did not allow the application of analogy and
causality beyond tlio incident mentioned in the scripture, for, so thoy said,
the written, stated causality, wherever it occurs, is nothing but tlio determin-
ation of a concrete law (but not tho determination of a legal principle)" 2 .

Besides qiyas and ta'til, Diiwud rejected also taqUd, i.e. the uncondition-
al following of the teachings of a certain imam, or of a certain school, in
questions that were not clearly explained in the valid legal sources.
81 "The indiscriminate imitation of the teachings of a fallible person
(■ma'xuin) is objectionable and evidence of narrowmindedness". Tins
saying, directed against taqlid, is attributed to him. "Shame on any-
one", he is also supposed to have said, "who is given a torch with which
to illuminate his paths, but who blows it out to walk around supported
by someone else", i.e. — as our source adds by way of an explanation —
there is no need to follow a human authority blindly if one can use
the legal sources oneself. Someone asked Dawud which legal school
he should follow; Dawfid replied: "Take tho laws from where they

1 Against Spitta, Zur Ocmliichle. Aliil-'l-IIiumn nl-AA'arin, p. 80, n. 1.
y Ahi<liitfdimtth, vd. Hrduij, p. 1172. (For a different translation of this passage son
Ihn Khahlun, MuijiMimuh. Ed. Fran/. Rosenthal, Loudon 1008, vol. 3, p. G>.

CHAPTER THREE

31

themselves derive them ; follow neither myself nor Mfdik, Awzfi'I,
nl-Nakha'i, nor anyone else slavishly" *, At this point, our source
cites statements that arc consonant at least with tho spirit of Dawfid,
who himself composed a book against taqlid a .

With these tenets of a partial elaboration and development of al-
Shfil'i'i's teachings, the fanatical Shafi'ito wont over to a camp in
which neither al-Shiifi'i himself would have wanted to stand, nor
al-Shafi'i's school, which had written on its flag the taqlid of this ividm
and which adhered to the following principle based on the science of
tiHul as introduced by al-Slulfi'i: "Afuq'ik is not he who collects the
statements of peoplo, and favours one of them, but he who establishes
a principle (ad) based on the scripture and on the traditions, which
was not established before him, and who derives a hundred branches
from this root" a . This freedom of thought met with open disapproval
from the Ziihirito school. We are, therefore, not surprised to find
among Diiwud's opponents Abu al-'Abbiis ibn Surayj (d. 305), truly
the first great representative of the Shafi'ito school. He composed
polemic writings against the aid al-ra'y and the aid al-zahir * in order
to clarify the point of view of the Shafi'ito school. During oral dis-
putations with Dawud and his son, Abu al-'Abbiis ibn Surayj hurled
many a poignant dart at their system 5 . The theological literature of
Islam was generally enlivened soon after Dawud's appearance by a
32 number of writings which refuted "the condemnation of qit/us" ".
Yet the opposition of tho Dawudi method to that of the prevailing
legal schools was restricted not merely to tho condemnation of the
speculative sources. In the application of tho sources, which were
recognized by Dawud and the rivalling schools alike, Dawud's legal
branch often differs fundamentally from the schools which preceded.
Farther on, in .specific instances, there will bo several ocassions to draw
attention to the mutual differences in the application of tlio written
legal sources. Basically, as regards tho written sources, the most

1 al-ShaVmi, I, p, fll.

» jjixji jil] v bT ^ v jji cjiss;

3 Talidhib, p. 80.

4 Ibid., p. 739: Ja I j <£f_JI Ja I ^ (^ill^l ^e. J^ll ^J L5" <_il*sj

.ytlkJI
8 Fihrist, p. 213, 0; Tahdhib, p. 7-10; Ibn Klinllikun, no. 20 (I, p. 31).
" Muhammad nl-Qashiim (himself previously a follower of Dawud), and Mu'alu
al-iS'ahrawiini, a pupil of al-'fabari, composed such refutations. Fihri.it, p. 23(1, 8.

32

OHAMEB TintElO

far-reaching difference is probably their respective attitude towards
khusvs and '■um-um in the canonical texts. Below, in the chapter on
Ibn Hazm, we shall go into details. As wc could see from Ibn Khaldfln's
afore-mentioned passage, ijmu', too, is a common legal source both for
the Zahirite school and for the rival schools. But only the concept
of ijmu' is common to them, i.e. the concept of the consensus of the
competent scholars of the church with regard to legal questions that are
not commented upon in the written sources. However, the opinion
of the Zahirite school ' differs considerably from the one prevailing
in the rival schools as to who these authorities are and who ought to
be considered for establishing ijmu'. This difference was to deepen
with the passing of time so that the clear formulation of the difference
could evolve only in later generations. We may assume, however,
that the views of later Zahiris on the extent, and on the competence,
of ijma" found their first substantiation in a book in which the founder
of the Zahirite school treated this legal source B . Generally, we must
33 consider the fact that with regard to the importance of ijmu' in Islam
— and wc do not confine ourselves hore just to the beginnings of the
history of the evolution of Muslim theology — the most contradictory
opinions evolved. Yet, there are also theologians who deny its validity
altogether. They say that with regard to no matter what generation,
it is impossible to determine the agreement of all competent author-
ities. Who could possibly know of the existence of each and every one
of theso authorities? Quite often a simple woman in her room might
rise to the level of mtijtahid without the contemporaries' knowing
of her existence. But even if we assume it to be possible to obtain a
suffrage unwersel of all learned contemporaries, who can guarantee
that what they expressed as their opinion was really their true inner
conviction ? And finally, so say those who reject ijma', would not the
Prophet have mentioned consensus as a. legal source when he instructed
Mu'adh (v. above, p. 8), had he been at all inclined to recognize
it as such ? The Prophet's silence is evidence that ijmu" has no validity

1 And within tho Hohool it was Again Ilm I.Iazni who, iih WO shall anticipate at thin
point, challenges the common interpretation of ijmu' with tlio following argument:

Wince there wero ilIho jiniiH among tho 1'rophot'H pioiiN companion}*, and since it in im-
possible to investigate their opinion, tlio pretention of a "eoiiHciiHUH of tlio companions"
in a pack of lies. (11m l.lajar, Isiibuh, I, p. 7, cd. Calcutta). Wo ahull hoc. however, that
Ibn l.la/.m ih drawing heavily on ijmu'. Consequently, he must have had bis own opinion
about it which can no longer bo determined from our HourcoH.
- Fihrist, p. 217, 12 Kitab ul-ijmS'.

CilAI'TlSK TIIICICIC

33

as a basis for law '. But not even those legists arc always in agreement
on the definition of this legal source who recognize ijma as a legal
basis, and who quote in its support various traditions — although
34 not always unchallengeable and authentic ones 2 . Malik b. Anas,
as is well known, considers only the conformable teachings of the
scholars of Medina, and in this sense, he should really be classified
among those who reject what is ordinarily understood by ijnuV a . Even
those legal proponents who dismiss territorial limitations when de-
termining ijma', as required by Malik, are at variance among each
other when it comes to laying down chronological restrictions. By
ijma, they understand: "Agreement of the learned of the church of
Muhammad in a specific ago with regard to a legal problem", ittifdq
al-mujtahidin min ummat Muhammad salld Allah 'alui/hi wa-satlam.
ft 'asr 'aid huhn shur'l (Imam al-llaramayn: ittifdq '■ulwmd' aid ul-'asr
'aid hulcm al-hddithah). Now what is meant, the agreement of the
preceding generation of mujtahidvn, or that of the present generation ? *
Let us express this in their terminology: is inqinld al-'asr shart. ul-ijma",

l Waraqut, fol. 33b: jU &j>_ J& ^ ^A-U.1 l>_,~<b fl?-^'' 3j&~> Tf^'j
.ll^Vl JaI £^>. <J>J j)j l& jj2y Nj -il^Vl l*j* C^ bbjOi.

jl ^Jtfj -U-ii ij U iJ}U. pAJ^-l jlfiJil jl_jf: r^'^'l rtX*i *

- Tho most frequent traditional proof iH tho Hoiitoneo: •U^\ T 7 l \c- ,<^->l /"-"f 1 "'
or in tho full version in which Diiwiid in roprcHoiitcd to have transmitted it from Malik

al-Ash'arl: y- Jo ^ jl (JU=^- dM ,j-< ^Ul «u)l jl p*^> «UJl Jj-J J^'

oij jpJl j*i u jLui JaI j4& V ob ijfl*=» ?&i rS^-

i]^.^> Lt lojLoJ^ii'^. Other, Ionh relevant, statements, too, aro UHually quoted in usill
works, It was extremely difficult to find support in tho Koran. Nevertheless tHrnh IV:
11B was quoted an authority ( £f~*}i.\ J^ j-f- £->-?)• 0t,1,or theologians eon-
aider tho validity of ijmu an the postulate of common koiiko and mako no attempt to
search for written proofs for consensus.

3 Kiemer, CititwgisoMdUe dtt Orient*, I, p, 'iss.

4 The main controversies with regard to ijmu are summarized in the Dictionary
of the technical terms used in the sciences of the Mnmilmaiw, s.v., I, p. 2:iS-2'IO. However,
difference between (a) ijmu ul-qmvl, (b) ijma al-fi'l, and (o) ijma ul-snkiU is not dls-
OUSSed, Cf. on ijma' now alao 0. SnOUolt ilurgroujc's treatise A'iYhm: bijitriificn tot Ac
tennis van den Isldm. (Uijdr. tot do Taal-, Land en Volkonliiindo v. Nod. Indie, 4o
Volgr., VIdo deol, 1883), p. 43 ff. of the off-print. This excellent work had not yet appear-
ed at tho time of tho writing of the present uluily.

34

UllAI'TKU TURKIC

or is it not? For the Ziihirite school, this question does not arise.
The school says, and it probably imitates its founder Dawud who
endeavoured to produce a tradition referring to this (v. above, p. 33,
note 2), that ijvitV cannot mean anything but agreement among the
Prophet's companions (ijma al-mhdhah), and that legil.inui.te is only
that which is taught with due regard to the authentically documented
consensus of the Prophet's companions. Furthermore, the school
held that the consensus of following generations, indeed, even the
88 consensus of the tabi'in, is completely irrelevant and that no doctrine
can, or may, be derived from it >, for, so they argue, the determin-
ation of the agreement of all competent authorities was possible only
in the time of the companions who formed in one place a circle whose
members and numbers were familiar to every one of them. But after
the generation of the companions, the learned bocamo dispersed
throughout all countries and regions, and became so numerous that
they could not be enumerated, nor could any single settlement encom-
pass them. Therefore, it would be impossible to determine what they
taught in complete agreement.

We sec from this that in the schools of Abu Hanil'ah and of al-tiliiifi'I,
a teaching based on ijma', which the Zahirite school could dismiss
as lacking all basis, could arise very easily. But Dawud and his school,
too, recognized the principle of ijma ; their polemics arc directod for
the most part only against the application of these legal sources —
against the application of the speculative sources which they dismiss
as inadmissible on principle.

Duwud's opposition to qiyas and ra'y, and the very existence of
his writings dealing with this opposition, can be grasped in their
historical and literary context only when we relate them to the literary
endeavour — manifested in Abu Yusuf's school — which aimed at
an over more extensive, theoretical justification of the speculative
sources, although, for nil practical purposes, they had already attained
their justification in Abu Rainfall's system. The Kittlh iblfd al-qiyds,
and others, arc to be considered as pamphlets against Hanafite works

1 W armpit, fob 84a: 4j y£f>\

r w

J Oi**^ 1

• IfVl l>)tf pg\i y»ikJi j*V \i-te.

(JlyL ILL.U.^1 <j\ ^ Jj IjJu^lj AjUiyaJI c.\a.\
SOAc (cod. jl^jj-lj) jU=jilj bUjJI jl^S-iV &L$Co_,> cJtf AjUiyJI

jUaiVI J Ijibilj jU.^1 J IjJ^u |>M] til* X*U»*JI J* £l»

(JHAITKIl TIIIIKK

35

such as Ithbat (d-i/iyus, and the Kitdli ijlihud al-ra'y which Abu Yusuf's
pupil, Abu Musii 'Isa b. Aban b. Sadaqah (d. 220), put into circulation
in order to dismiss the theological scruples of the reaction inclined
towards traditions '.
:iii But Dawud, too, was to experience something from which the ushub
(d-had'ilh of the pre- Hanafite epoch wore not spared. Practice also
proved to him that his theory was actually insufficient. It was one
thing to insist on the exclusive right of scripture and tradition, but
quite another to reject analogy and ra'y. Legal practice always had
to take recourse to other sources when written and orally transmitted
sources failed. The exclusive traditionalists were always forced to
fall back on tho ultima ratio of Sha'bl (above p. 7). The same was to
happen to Dawud. Praxis denied him the possibility of a complete
application of his own theories. He himself was obliged to apply
tjiyCui in the practice of jurisprudence and to recognize it as "evidence" a .
This, however, is nothing but a return to al-ShitfiTs point of view.
Yielding to this practical pressure, Dawud's school had to abandon
the outright rejection of independent judgement unrestrained by
tradition ; but, at the same time, there always remained a small
band of ideologists who adhered to the rigid negativism. Al-Mawardi
mentions these two types of people who deny qiySs (mtjat al-qiyas)
in his discussion of whether legal positions may be entrusted to such
theologians:

"There are two kinds of people who reject analogy. Some reject it, follow
the text literally and ore guided by the sayings of their ancestors if there is
no coiit.nidiet.ion to the text in question They reject completely tho inde-
pendent ijliluid and turn away from individual contemplation and free in-
vestigation. No judgeships may bo entrusted to Buoh persons sinoe they apply
the methods of jurisprudence insufficiently. The other category of people
does reject analogy, but still USOB independent judgement in legal deduction.
through reliance on the meaning (spirit) of the words anil the sense of the
address. The aid id-jiihir belong to tho latter. Al-Shafi'I's followers are divided
OS to whether or not BUOh theologians may bo entrusted with a judgeship" *.

1 FIflgol, Uebe.r die. Chi.ine.it tier hanejiiiaclirii liechlatjrlehrte.it, p. 288.

2 Aba al-FidS', /lH«afc», II, p. 202: 1j ixJj^J! ,J lT 1 ^" tSj^ Ai'^ OlSj
^Jj oll^i aJ| jk,M i.e. he included it among the adaltat at-altar' like kiliih,
■sit it ii ti It, mid ijniii'. KuInIco reads tlhtdilait and orriviw at the following meaning: ' et
qimiiiviii ( !) ah Ipso rcnim umi et indole cogcrctur dcinccpii Himilitudinix rationcm habere,

miiilmiiiium ( !) tamen appellabat cum ferondae sententiae modum itjuobikm". Cf. on
this also id-!Saiii'iiiii (Supplement V).

3 OonttUtUionu poKlieae, ml. Engor, p. ill.

36

CHAPTER THREE

37 It goes without saying that Diiwfid yields to gij/os only as a last resort;
fanatical pupils like the later ibn Hazm retracted the concession of
calling it dalil.

It was inevitable that Dawfid's system differed in many points
from that of the common schools because in his system he accorded
a very limited scope to the speculative aids of which all his predecessors
had availed themselves frcoly. It would be invaluable for a comparison
of the earliest Islamic jurisprudence if we possessed the complete list
of differences between Dawikl and the Zahirls. However, as wo shall
see in the last chapter, the tenets of the aid al-zdhir were soon entirely
excluded from consideration in determining the consensus. It is
because of this that in comparative studies of the differences (Ichild-
f%y&t) of the orthodox schools ', the tenets of the aid al-zdhir either

38 remain completely without consideration, or arc not mentioned and
thus, are inconsequential for the consensus. I know of only two authors

i This literature, which must not bo confused with the miionoo of the ikhlil&J 'tA-qakBtiah
(v. Annotation 2), deserves to In treated hibliographieally in detail. It ha.i iln origin,
no I believe, in al-Shafi'I'B Ikhtiluf al-'lrSffiyfn (Bd. F. Kern, Cairo 1002), in which he
gathers together the points of difference of Abu I.lanifah and Muhammad ibn Abi Layla
(Tahdhib, p. 770). According to Flugol, (Jbcr die Klataen der hanrfiliachcn Jitchtagclchrten,
p. 801 1 this 'ilm ul-kliiluf woh established by Aim Zayd 'Abd Allah al-Dabum (middle

of the fifth century) with his Tct'tfB ul-mijur fl ikhtiluf ul-u'immuli. But the beginnings
and treatments of thiH problem can be documented certainly in the third and fourth
conturioH. Abu Hitler ibn nt-M tnxlUir (d. 809/810) in called a famous writer in thiH field
('I'nhtlhib, p. 07S); hiS contemporary al-'I'abari (d. 810) wrote Kit&b ikhtiluf al-ftiqnhii'

{FihrUt, p. 280| 5) (Das konstantinopltr Fragment du Kit&b ihtiluf al-fwjaluV den Abu
Sa'far Muhammad ibn Qarir at-TabarS, Ed. J, Sohaoht, Leiden 1033); cf. above p, 4;

Later Abu Tialtr ol-Uii/.i al-JaHsfi.M (d. 1170) produced oxcorpU from al-Tabawi'H work on
iklitiliif al-'nlama (or ikhtiluf ul-fmiuhu', Ibn Qutliibugha, p, 0, 17). In this context
mention must be made of tho Khiifi'ito Zakariyfi b. Yahya al-Saghi (d. 1107) with liiH
Kit&b ikhtiluf al-fitt/alia. It iH said about al-Ihmayii b. al-Qdtiim Abfl 'AH al-'j'abarl
(d. 800) in Ibn ol-Mulaqqta (fol. 12b) djlysj i_J!A=U ij»- .Vo (Jjl J^j.
Cf. the same statement in Abu al-MabBsln, II, p, ;tr>7. Furthermore, it must be mentioned

that ilm ul-khiluf wan applied in later tirucH exclusively to the Knowledge of tho BOiOttOC
Of differences of the nehool.1 of Abu Manifah and of al-Shafi'i. Consequently we find in
Ilm al-Firkilh, Waruqul, fol. 521), to the woi'cIh of Imam al-llaramayn bjj£ ^J

LiciA.jj is'^S. \s-j3j j^.p\ AJicJ Ij ULc (j_j5o ol ,<^ill Hi" following remark
of the commentator: tULJI i_j}Vxil> ULc <jj5o (jl tJi*j l»5^»- **$*J

Vj JSUjU ^J (JuobJI_J AjUr^nJI (Jljil ^ J_£J_yU1 -jl»_jj| ,»lSC*.l ^j

OX (J^J-I pit jaj 6*1 tJ^y-l p-J jiko ,y> p&u L. { jSii_

.JaiJ JUftfati <<^J ^jisUlJI (^y-iU-Vl

CHAPTHR THREE

37

38

who concern themselves with this and who have acted differently:
first, the Hanafite Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Rahmiin al-Samarqandl
al-Sinjiiri (d. 721) who composed a work which belongs to this literary
genre, 'Umadal al-tdlib li-ma'rifat al-madliahib. In it the tenets of
the Shl'ah and the Dawiidls arc prcsonted point by point along with
those of the four orthodox schools ', but this work has not survived.
Then, secondly, mention must be made of the famous theosopher
(Thcosojt/i) = 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha'riinl (d. 973) who, because of
the peculiar tendency of his Scale, of the truth (Mlzdn lil-haqq), treats
the differing tenets of both the aid al-zdhir and the orthodox schools
equally ;1 . In this work, 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha'rfm! is attempt-
ing to demonstrate theoretically that the notion of the equality of
all divergent teachings of the legal schools represents an insignificant
formality for the spirit of Islam. Al-Sha'rairi composed the Mizdn
after he had already adopted Islamic theosophy. But even before
he subscribed to this school of thought, he wrote a book on a similar
topic entitled Kit&b al-minhdj (or al-minhaj) a.l-mulnnfi, baydn adilLut
al-mujUthidm ■'. This book — if I may deduce • this from the state-
ment that it is concerned with "existing and extinct" madhahib —
considers besides the orthodox schools tho Zahirite school too. This
work, which is cited frequently both in the Mizdn and also in other
works ", must probably be considered identical with a certain Kit&b
adillat al-madlidhib which al-Sha'ram, too, claims as his work 7 . Apart
from this, reference is made to the Zahirite school in some more
detailed works on ktf.slr, and in commentaries on traditions. The
peculiar interpretation of these passages indicates a special dogma

' Ibn Qujilubugho, p. '12, no. ior>.

- <Thi« torm hiiK a much wider meaning in Gorman. It Is used here in its 19th century
meaning).

•'■ Besides the passages Which will be Cited below in this work there nro aim tho
following: I, p. 188, 134. 137. 138, Ml, 144, 151, 152, 150, 228: II, p. 34, 45, 47, 53, 58,
00,02.71, 02, 110,223,232.

* A fragment can bo found in a Gofha omnibus MS. Cf. Pertiicli, Arabi.iehe. I/and-
«rliriflcn, I, p. 21, no. 123.

r ' Mlz&n, I, p. 74: (y ^Jk^Sfi I 'Vj.il jLj 9 ^A\ 7j^-lb { j^~-~ II (j^J
a . i-tl. VI _•• II «l*ill _ ","\-\ a S ... - _ JtJ .ifl'ii UK"

•L/jJjIIj IlUjo:

1—oS.

lill

e~

aJ.>! aJ

J[s il&J^ JilS"

.rt*>.UJL.j o;J4^l «_fca. Jlyl La-"-j f-y^t

" Liiln'if al-mitiiui (MS of the Hungarian National MiiHeuin, no. XV), fol. l7Sa.
7 Miziln, I, p. 70.

38

CIIAI'TUR TIIIHCK

•II)

of the Zaliirite school. Occasionally, even the lino of thought of the
particular argument is presented. These works were to a large extent
the 8011X06 for this work on the tenets of the Zfihiritc school.

We may assume that Dfnviid's followers enlarged on his teachings
continuously and that they extended the results of his principles to
different circles; in short, from their point of view, they attempted
and effectuated the completion of the Zaliirite jurisprudence. We
cannot undertake to determine which of the points that we call the
tenets of the Zfihiritc school belong to individual generations of
successive Zahiris. Even for the most important of all questions in
this respect, namely, "what did Dawiid himself teach on jurisprudence
that diverged from the teachings of the rest of the imams V, wo rely
on scanty data. We cannot accept it as established fact when the
sources on which we rely in the following chapters quote either one or
the other of the tenets of the Zaliirite school as being derived from
Dawud himself. All that is definite in this case is that we are dealing
with a Zfihiritc tenet; whether or not this was actually formulated
by Dawud remains uncertain. In the course of the treatise on l)a-
wfid's tenets, some of them are treated as being from Dawud himself
and particularly typical of his system. At least with regard to these,
it seems very probable that they really do originate from the founder
of the Zaliirite school. Such points are: Dawud's tenet to restrict
the prohibition of using golden or silver containers to drinking from
such containers l ; to restrict the prohibition of usury to the six com-
modities Specifically mentioned in the tradition 2 ; Dawud's tenet
which contrasts with the other schools, namely, that the freeing of a
slave afflicted with dcficienccs is sufficient in cases for which the
law prescribes the freeing of a slave as atonement :i . — This is a view
which prompted the famous Imam al-Harainayn to pass the severe
judgement that for this simple reason, al-Shifi'i would have deprived
Dawud of being called a, scholar - had he been Dawud's contemporary.
And finally, there is the point of Dawud's tenet that the official
Friday prayer may be performed not only in the so-called large

1 Abfi nl-Kidii', Annul™, II, p. 202.
- TiilulhJIi td-n.imu, p. 238, S. Tn tho commentary to MiiMlim, al-Nawawi mentions
yot Other ^.iihirilo tenets in the namo of Diiwiiil.

:i JJu "yJUJI (jlj ijlIsOl ^i (5j3i ILoJI aJJ\ l)1 ijb Jjj

t£j£ V LgJl v-lf^-Vl in nl-NawnwI. ibid., p. 230.

ClIAl'TKR TURKIC

39

jamlini (cathedrals <sic>) but also in smaller local mosques i. The
following teaching transmitted from him characterizes most clearly
Dawud's sophistry. This teaching is of the casuistic genre, discussion
of which was usually indignantly dismissed by strict followers of
tradition (see above p. 8): "If A has two wives and says to them,
'If you bear a child, my slave N will be freed ipso eventu' ". Now
Dawud insists that both women must bear a child before A can bo
made to release, tho slave, since he had said, "If you, etc.", using the
dual. Other canonists lay down that, no matter who of the. women
bears a child, the slave will have to be freed. But there were also
sensible jurists who called the whole question idle absurdity a .

Now, let us consider the legal system of the Zaliirite school as a
complete whole, and learn from concrete examples how tho principles
governing this system are applied to jurisprudence.

1 ril-Siibki, /.'■., I'dI. 17M>. Sec cm difference of opinion with regard to this id-.Hlwi'rii.ni,
I, p. 228.

■■ Ilmnl-Miiliuiqin, Ibl. 5b: jl Ai'ljL^.1 ^J Jls -G'UJa ^S ^LxJI »j£aj

t Jlai Aj| cj^ jl^-lj (j^- OjJj (cod. |(_)l) IpjXil { _jj»l\ jl^-'j

•

CHAPTER FOUR

41 No tenet of the Zahirite school can serve as a more plastic illustration
for illuminating its relationship to the other orthodox schools than
its tenet concerning usury. In the traditions which elaborate upon
the laws concerning usury, six commodities are mentioned with which
it is prohibited to practise usury — in the manner prohibited by
Islamic law. They arc: ai-dhahab, al-fiddah, al-lmrr, al-sha'lr, al-tamr,
and iii-znlnb, gold, silver, wheat, barley, dates, and raisins respectively.
The analogical schools now teach that these six commodities are
listed in the traditions as examples only, and that they do not com-
prise exclusively the whole field of commodities subject to usury.
In order to decide for what the afore-said commodities serve as an
example, the analogical schools search first for the cause ('Mali) ' of
the prohibition for each group according to the method of ta'lil, and
secondly, for the aspect under which these commodities fall with
regard to this specific law — they search for the next higher classes
of which these commodities arc a subdivision. From this, their reason-
ing, follows that not only the subdivisions, but also the classes to which
they belong are subject to the prohibition of usury. Certainly in very
early timos, Rabi'ah, a Medincse jurist and teacher of Malik b. Anas,
to whom the name Rabi'ah of ra'g (RabTal al-ru'g) was given, made
the assertion that the prohibition of usury is applicable to everything
which is subject to the alms-tax (zakdt). It would follow from this
that domestic animals and riding animals also are included in this
prohibition -. The legal schools made still more specific distinctions.
Thus, for example, the school of Abu Hanlfa.li says that the first
two commodities are nothing but examples for the entire genre which
can bo. defined (mawzun) by weight, and whose sub-classes they are.
Al-Shafi'i's school regards these commodities as representing every-
thing of value (jinn al-athmdn), and the fruit mentioned merely as
examples of food (nuU'uwttt), etc. Therefore, even according to these

42 schools, the prohibition of usury is applicable not only to those com-

1 jaSk}] AXt which iil-A.ili'nrl dlBOUSSOS with a MSJIkitO thoologltm iH l.hc "ratio
nf the prnliiblt.ioii of wind" mid not. "(lie piirpnm of tlio wino" iih SpiUn nl.utfla in Zur
<lrnekirJile. Atm-l-IJamn al-AA'art'*, p. SI, no. OH.

CHAI'TER FOUR

41

moditics enumerated in the traditions, but to everything that belongs
to such a category. These schools, as can be seen, tolerate analogy, and
extend the written sources by applying analogy to material not
explicitly recorded. The Zahirite school is unable to consent to this
extension of the written law since this is based on speculative arbitrari-
ness; if the Prophet had meant those classes, he would have, most
certainly used the more concise expression, and used the name of
the class rather than enumerating individual kinds '. As fur as the
Zahirite school is concerned, the law of usury can refer only to those,
six commodities which arc specifically mentioned in the traditions.
A person does not transgress this law if he trades with objects that
arc not included in these six kinds in a way regarded as usurious by
Islamic jurisprudence a .

In this example, wc recognize the dominant attitude of the juris-
prudence of the Zahirite school in contradistinction to other orthodox
fi</li. Now orthodox fhjh always keeps in mind the question: what is
the reason that something is legislated for a certain individual or a certain
thing? The more important the constitutional validity accorded to
ra'y, but particularly to analogy, the move systematically this principle
415 is applied. The orthodox schools, then, apply such a law beyond the
case explicitly stated in the scripture and tradition to everything
that, according to such legal causality, is analogous (cf. p. 30 above).
The Zahirite school, on the other hand, views such syllogism as an arbi-
trary notion which is falsely and arbitrarily attributed to the purpose
of the legislator. It delimits the law (hubm) exclusively to the personal
or non-personal cases (al-mansm) enumerated in the law. According
to the view of the Zahirite school, one must not search for the cause

1 MafiUih, II, p. 630: oly'Vlj oL^kllj COLSQl ^ [ja±. cjUUI 6'

r ^kiL mjM\ !>*-* V ju- ji ^ifcrf j-scib jjai \y^i v juj

.JaJii l&If. jjfv.a* "L*ji-\ -X>. 61 L^k. i*Jj^' J^ J-i ^^ cj-^

" al-Nawawi, IV, p. 51: ^J b_,JI Mj*- (J* li-J^Vl "1a ^J ^^1 u^Jj

jj. i bj ^ y>lkll Jjbl Jlii t^JI ^.allj c^JJI e.t~£l £L

^l_j- clLJI *~*a Jli (j-LaJI ^Jl ^s j^ivsl ^c- tU; a£~)I «-**

tJI aLJI ^ IjpiL^-lj. Cf. in still greater detail al-Slia'i-Hnl. II, p. 77-78.

42

CHAPTER FOUR

of any of God's laws, just as the cause for the creation of any of God's
works must not be investigator]. The only cause for their creation is
God's sovereign will ' ; exactly the same applies to law.

Tn the tradition which prohibits the believer any kind of luxury,
the text mentions only "drinking from golden or silver vessels":

J^S*t l^ *&"■* -j' c_-AJ _j-> Jit J lytj& ^y ffr »ivs djjl Jj-j J'tt

*££a. (j-. 1 j U jJij jJ "he who drinks from n golden or silver
vessel, sips (with this draught) liollfiro into his stomach" -. However,
it is true that in some parallel versions of this tradition eating from
such vessels is mentioned besides drinking (jl JS" L ^JJI
*JI J s-O-"^)- But tne above-cited version is the more authentic,
and Dawiid and the Zahiritc school adhere to that one, since they
teach that the prohibition refers merely to what the literal meaning
of the words implies. Drinking from gold and silver vessels is exclusively
forbidden ; any other usngo, even eating from them, is allowed :I . This
44 teaching of Diiwfid is quoted by the historian Abu al-FidsV as an
example of the method of the Zahiritc school •'. In this caso, too,
the qiyas schools search for tho spirit of the law according to their
method of investigation which is based on tho purpose of the laws
and on the deduction from analogies. Since tho usage of gold and
silver, as explicitly stated in the tradition, could have been prohibited
solely because tho legislator condemned luxurious usage, in order to
dampen arrogance and pride (khuyaUV), any detail which is stated
by way nf an example consequently must encompass every kind of
use. For example, they also prohibit tho usage of such vessels for the
ritual ablution (wi/du'): » some codices oven mention that the small

Ihn J;[iw.m, I, fol. 27h: Jjloj JU «J|j aI*J U_i J^ V A US aJ|
OtT c^i. t£\ '-LS^.j J.U j* Jl*j L "jS jlj ctij L; of. lbfiV, fol,

:t.i, Mn.

- iMiwliiii, KitSb ol-lilmn, no. 2.

:i al-NawnwI, IV, p. 410: &D I J l-i^'JIj JS" Vl *ij£ Ac dj'

cr

0*1 dSOi uUUg )}j *yi Acj J»JI Ac. '&JJ\ ctlj «_-*JJI

Jl U-& Vj* ^uoi oi j^vi bu^i «&. u VI *M .y
JfVI jlj*j v.A 1 ' frtj** tgjAlkJI djb ^ ijiCj *,* Vj oj5s>

4 Ahfi ul-Fiilil', Aiiiiiilr.i Mimlrmiri, ad, Howlco, II, p, 2(12.

» al-SliaVfuii, I. p. 128: t_-A jj| ^jljl J|^wl jl ^j"^' aL'VI (jjJ

CHAPTER FOUR

43

probe used for applying IciiM must not be made of gold or silver '.
It will be clear from these examples what is meant when we say that
the main distinction between tho law, according to the view of the
Zahiritc school and applied Jiqh (fiiriT), as developed by the qiyds
schools, lies in tho fact that in the former, the literal wording of legal
texts recognized as authoritative is the exclusively determining factor,
while the latter goes beyond the strict wording in elaboration of the
law. The basic difference in tho elaboration of the law of the two
schools, as just pointed out, refers both to the written authoritative
source of Islamic law, i.o. to tho kitdb, and to the sunnah. Let us
examine some concrete examples of this distinction from both fields.
1. In surah 11:283, Muhammad issues the following decree from God:
After he orders that in ordinary commercial dealings, security of the
creditor's property is requited by means of a written receipt from the
debtor for tho sum borrowed, he says: IjAjJ °J5 __iL Ac *^S* jlj
i^jJLo jU, J UU' "But if you aro on a journey and cannot find
45 a scribe, then a pledge is obtained". Certainly in the early period
of Islam, some jurisprudents — particularly Mujahid (d. 100/4) from
Mecca during the first century A.H., and al-Dahhiik (d. 212) from
Basra during the second century — interpreted the vorsc according to
the letter of tho word so that they restricted the right of pledge to
travelling. But if the two parties aro cither at home or at regular
permanent places of residence of human society (ft al-ljadar), then,
according to these interpreters, the pledge is not applicable for business
transactions. Under such conditions, the creditor must secure his
claim by drawing up a bond a . The legal schools rejected this literal

VI cLJIj JUJ1 _> f l__* v^lj JfSl j£. J J~ A^iJIj
,ijj L, ja. Ac \JS[) iJuute ly^'j *<)&■* ujVlj

1 Itm-lifi.ii ill-Din ill- Hirmriwi'ii aupOTOOmmantttry to Abii nl-QiiNim al-GhftZZl'fl •Sliurli

ai-ghiyah, Bfllttq 12S7, p. 17.

Moffituj, II, p. BOS: /Jl Jl ,j*~J\ jl Ac *_>JI

• J

aj_j2. J^' Vj l$\ yhlkj iL-T yUl J i\ jj*« N ^jJI "jl Jl
^Ji ^0^ (_JUJI Je;*, J^ _^kJI _/Jl> aj^I OJuSJ |Jlj |»_jJI

tj-i __,.* i_jji-l ,)*Jj [t ^A ri . j| ii^-y=JI ^ Ij^^vaiJ' jl r"L^- rt^-r^*

44

CHATTER FOUR

interpretation and practical application of the Koranic letters of the
law for obvious reasons. The rejection of the literal interpretation
went ho far that al-Bukhari could feci justified in acknowledging the
validity of the pledge in circu instances which seem to be excluded by
the Koran in the very heading of the relevant chapter of his work
on tradition. Thus he gave the following sub-heading to the chapter
on the pledge: i, 9 1 ^ jjj J US aJjSj j*JA J &*J\ J v^
The traditional communications of the contemporaries and companions
of the Prophet collected in that chapter show, indeed, that the Prophet
made pledges to his creditors in Medina, i.e. in tho ka/lar. Only Dawfid
nl-Zahiri and his school espouse this forgotten teaching of Mujahid
and al-I)ahhak ' and do not conform to the general view according
to which the circumstances of the journey are mentioned in tho Koran
only a potiori, without intending to express a restriction. We find in
the note that Fakhr al-Dln al-RazI finds in surah IV: 102 evidence for
46 the fact that for certain Koranic laws certain cases arc givon a po-
tion only ('nla mbil al-ghdlib), without this indicating that the law
in question refers exclusively to this specific case. But also with regard
to the law contained In this evidential passage do Dawiid and his
Zahirite school cling to the letter of the word. The fact is that, in this
case alone, the rival schools are the ones who, among the proponents
of the literal meaning, deduct a restriction from the spirit of the law.
The Zahirite school, on the other hand, again opposes the inclination
of the qiyas schools to generalize. Concessions to the so-called mint
al-khawf and saldt al-mvsafir are based on this verse. In it Muhammad
says: ^ \ 3j ^ «J| ^ ^ ^Ji ^| J ^ |$|j

\jJS &j&\ jJuxL' <j[ pgfc jl oji^JI iSurak IV: 101 > "And when
you are travelling in the country you will not be blamed for shortening
your prayer if you fear you might be afflicted by tho unbelievers".
In this case, the common legal schools a lay down certain geographic
limits for tho application of this concession which is made for tho
purpose of shortening the prescribed prayer of travellers. For example,
both Mfilik and al-Shtifi'i stipulate that this "travelling in the country"
must extend to no less than the distance of four courier stations

1 ftl-QiiHtnlliLni, IV, p. 233: Jkjb Jli (liflk^Jlj Jub Ui J»4J ,<^>) -^J
jA UaJI Jjb Ij ; o£ iil.NhiiViini, II, p. 85.

2 Shfite law, too, presorlboa preoisoly tho typo and comlitioiiB of (ho journey under
whioh the shortened mint nl-mu.wjir booomea applicable, Quorry, Droit muatitman, I,
p. 120-132.

CHAPTER FOUR

45

counted from tho place of residence — the courier station of four farsalch
each, three mil to tho parasang, i.e. 12000 foot or 3000 k/ia.tivnhs to
the mil (for <four> feet, aqddm, constitute one khatioah). Some give
different rules with regard to the distance, but all of them take as
authority traditions which tho Zfihiritc litoralists reject as insuffi-
ciently documented (dhdd). Short distances from the place of residence
cannot be considered adequate travelling to permit a Muslim to avail
himself of the concession for the short mldt al-khaivf. Tho aid al-zdldr
want to have no part of this exegotic restriction. They adhere to tho
literal words of the Koranic law and say: This Koranic verse contains
a conditional sentonco; whenever the case stated in the protasis
occurs, namely, every time that there is "travelling in the country",
47 i.e. when there is absence from the ordinary place of residence, the
short prayer is permitted. The stipulation about the required distance
from the usual place of residence is an arbitrary innovation of those
traditionists whom tho rival schools quote and of no importance
vis-a-vis tho explicit nass of tho Koran '. But it is always assumed that
the other conditions which aro mentioned in the Koranic verse arc also
fulfilled — namely, threat from hostile unbelievers — a secondary
condition to which tho other schools attach no importance so that they
recognize the short prayer also in different circumstances. In a Sha-
fi'ito codex, I find, for example, mention of the following casos in
which the short prayer of fear is permitted: in any authorized fight,
or when fleeing from such a fight, for instance, when tho just person
is fighting the oppressor, or tho rich man is fighting against a person
intending to deprive him of his possessions; when some one is fleeing
from cither flood or fire, or from a wild boast from which one cannot
escape in an other way ; or when some one is leaving a country where
tyranny reigns ; oven when a debtor unable to pay is fleeing his cre-
ditor 3 . Thus, sentences introduced by the conditional particles tn and

» Majallh, III, p. 444: «_^~LJ j*~JI Js^ <■*' y^J' J*t> Ajb (**j

IjJUj aj^l jhlkJI 6*1 ljStf».l .... i^.ji\ jlj* fj cTj-
b Jl jb &o iCU Jl *U o- 6UJVI

2 Burhfin ol-DIn nl-BlrmawI, p. 121.

XS- ilya^-^l

4G

OHAi'TKK l'-OUR

id/id are meant to mean that whenever the conditions stnted in such
sentences exist, the statement contained in the subordinate clause
becomes applicable ; yet those sentences do not indicate that the latter
condition is exclusively bound to the condition in the main clause;
rather, this condition is valid in all similar or related cases. It goes
without saying that the Zahiril.e school opposes this generalization '.
48 Also the following difference between the rival legal schools is
based on the scope of the Koranic statement introduced by a condit-
ional particle. Surah~V:8 ijJJ^JI JJ JlJ |j>| \^~\ ^jj| l^"| L

(jsl^ll J I rt^Ci-Uj p£jc>y>.j \jLJc-ti "0 you who believe, when you
stand up to pray wash your faces and your hands etc." One frequently
meets the totally erroneous view that it is one of the ritual obligations
of the Islamic way of life to perform the ritual ablution (al-wudu)
before every of the five canonical prayers. Indeed, this follows from
the afore-mentioned Koranic verse, and also from the actual custom
of pious Muslims. Yet on the other hand, no difference of o pinio n
prevails among the four recognized legal schools about the fact that
this pious custom is indeed commendable (mustahabb) 3 , but that it is
by no means obligatory (Jard wa/jib). A single ablution alone is obli-
gatory for ail five prescribed daily prayers. The validity of this single
ritual act extends to the period of these five pray ers so long as"t £e
status. puriUdis is not invalidated by an action which, according
to-Islamic, religious law, requires ablution. It has been transmitted
that on the day of the conquest of Mecca, the Prophet himself performed
all five pray©18 with one ablution. He specifically mentioned to
'Umar that he was acting in this way deliberately, and that he
considered this to be proper. On the basis of this tradition, the four
recognized legal schools, who display comp lete OOm&nsUB in this respect,
interpret this Koranic verse — the contents of which arc in complete
contradiction to their teachings — as presupposing the existence of
the above-mentioned circumstances before yet another ablution, prior
to a prayer, becomes necessary 3 . People did not hesitate to introduce

' MnfWh, p. 4-10: J-yaJi L^UI (Jj-^>- JJs. j| JJu lil '-U& U| i^tTijI

- Altii Su'ficl cilcH the following tradition in support of thin interpretation of the
Jmiiilm in liin Taf«ir, marginal ed. BQllq, in, p. fi28: i_^5" j^h As- UX$J ^
Ou-™». j£s- jJ jjol. TiiiH statement shows that the repeated mmln' in on ojnt»
tuptrerogationit in ttahu pwitatit,

'•' al-llayijilwi, I. p. 248, II, to 111" passage, UiiH in awkwardly dllOUSSed,

CHAPTER l'-OUR

•17

this interpretation into the text of this verso by inserting wa-antum
•lit niii/jriddit/iun between the words al-saldt nndfa-iylisilu. A story related
also in the biography of the impious poet al-Uqayshir al-Asadl makes
it quite clear that wutlu' used to be much neglected before the indivi-
dual prayer, certainly in early times, so that very soon the most
unrestrained custom prevailed. The pious aunt of this poet intended
to have her nephew observe the prayers at all cost. "Your importun-
ities have started to bother me !" said the poet finally. "Now, choose
between two possibilities. Either I perform the ablutions without
praying, or I pray, but without performing the preceding ablutions".
"Well, if there is no other choice", the aunt replied, "I lien pray
without witdv" '. It is reported explicitly that several pious Muslims
of the first conturies used to perforin the evening prayer and the
following morning prayer with one ablution 3 . This shows — it can
be observed quite frequently also on other occasions in this field —
that the jurisprudents made concessions to less stringent practice;
by means of tricks of interpretation they adapted the law to the freely
developing life which they wanted to harmonize at all costs with the
requirements of the law. This process of assimilation is a phenomenon
which runs like a red thread through exegesis and literature of tradi-
tion. However, we encounter this also in non-Islamic religious litera-
ture. It is easy to understand that Dawiid's school rejected such an
attitude and, in agreement with the teachings of the Shi'ah advocating
the lettor of the Koran and nothing else, required that, beforo every
canonical prayer, wudu be performed in all circumstances. The
r— school considered this act strictly obligatory. The traditional accounts
\ that differ from this view 3 are considered not entirely authentic
\ and too weak to modify the sense of the scripture. Indeed, even
\ if supposing they were authentic •', they would not be able to
GO I weaken the Koranic decree because of the axiom to which the
Zfihirite school adhered: illlill aJ^jJI Ah (^Jl a1)J.cJI jJV-UI Jjl

1 h'itiih til-ayliiiiu, X, p. 91.

,J Abfl al-MablsIn, Annates, I. p. isss, r>07, r>2:t, and others,

3 Tim dociirivo passago is Kitdh al-wuifil', no. fifi (. r >0) in which Anas relates that the
Prophet performed thO innliT before every prayer, but an lor the companions: iSj^T.

,l ul-.Sha'rfint does not mention Huh controversy among the ntn.iu'U itf-ifchtil'if. hut
in his introduction tO Alizaii, I, p. SO, he gathers together traditions which — contra-
dieting each other — can serve to support either of the two teachings.

50

CHAPTER FOUR

Ibn Hazni's great rcligio-polemie work in which the author discusses
the question of the extent to which the Koran is to bo considered the
word of God, our Koranic verse is used as evidence in such a way as
if this passage referred to the written Koran.

Among all exegetic differences encountered in the Zahirite camp,
none is more radical in relation to the generally accepted exegesis
than theoneof.sw«/i LVIIL4 oj^_jjo «j £ & LJ ^ OjjQ&i i>-Ulj

L,L^> (j| JJi ^4 Aa'j y.,j>£3 l_jJ La U. The correct interpretation of
the words: |_jJU U Oj$_yo ^j caused the canonists a great deal of
difficulties. "Those who renounce their wives with the formula zihar
(i.e. the formula of renouncement of the Jahillyah, anti 'alaya ka-zahr
umnij), and then later return to what the// said, must free a slave before
these couples are permitted to touch each other". Now, what is the
meaning of "and then later return to what they said" ? In this caso, the
interpretation vulyata points to the exact opposite of the meaning of
the words. In the sense of this general interpretation, the passage
states that the husband, after the completed, formal renouncement,
regrets it and intends to take back his wife. This interpretation has
also been adopted by our European translators of the Koran. For
example:
63 Maraccius: "Qui autem vocant dorsum matris suae aliquam ex
uxoribus suis; deinde. ■poenitet eos ejus quod dixerunt: poena eorum erifc
liberatio cerviics, etc.".

Savary and Kasimirski: "Ceux qui jurent, dc no plus vivro avec
lours fcinmes, et qui .ie repentent de leur serment, no pourront avoir
commerce avee ellcs avant d'avoir donne la liborto a un captif".

Ullmann (p. 470): "Diejenigen, welche sich von ihren Fraucn trennen
mit der Erklarung, dass sic diessclbon wie den Riicken ihrer Mutter
betrachtcn wollen, spiiler aber das, was sie ausyesproehen, yern ivieder
zurueknehmen mochten u.s.w.". (Those who separate from their wives
with the statement that they are going to regard them like their
mothers' backs later, however, intend to recant what they have said,
etc.").

Palmer: "But those who back out of their wives and then would
recall their speech, — then the manumission of a captive before etc.".

The Muslim canonists among the proponents of the interpretation
vulyata, holding different views on this word ya'uduna all agree on the
general meaning of the Koranic quotation; namely, that this concerns
both a regret of the divorce, and the wish of the husband to annul

CHAPTER I'OUH

51

the pronounced formula of renunciation and return to his wife. This
is the interpretation of this verse as it is recognized by the Slu'itc
deduction of Islamic law too. The Shi'ites, as the Bunnite schools,
base an entire chapter of ordinances concerning ziharou this interpreta-
tion '. We find the different conceptions of ya'uduna compiled in the
original commentaries. Most remarkable is the view of Sufyan al-
I'hawrl: - "Those who (as heathens before Islam) used to dismiss their
wives with the customary zihar formula at that time ;| , and who later,
as professors of Islam, have recourse to this formula., must submit
to tho prescribed atonement". It cannot bo denied that this inter-
pretation comes much closer to the wording of the Koran than all
54 attempts of elaboration within the circle of the interpretatio vulgata.
Still closer to this is tho explanation of the Zahirite school. It interprets
the law as contained in the Koranic verse as follows: When the husband
has used the zihar formula once and repeats the same later on, then
he must submit to tho prescribed atonement. Al-Bayclawi, to the
passage, hints at this interpretation with the short words: bi-takrarihi
lafzan wa-huwa qawl al-zdhinyah ; tho same can be found, as usual
clearer and more elaborate, in Fakhr al-Din ul-Ka/.T ■', In this instance,
too, it becomes evident what we could observe in the case of the law
on the pledge, namely, that the Zahirite exogetic endoavours which
leave the trodden path of ordinary interpretation occasionally re-
juvenate oldor opinions which have disappeared from practice. Finally,
it cannot be overlooked that inherent in tho interpretation of this
Koranic verse there is a theoretical, exegetic moment. Yet, this
interpretation has considerable influence on the shaping of the
legal practice because, in the sense of the Zahirite interpretation,

1 In Quorry, limit imnmlmmi, II, |>. (12-05.

^ in ul-iiiiycjiiwr, to the passage, It, i>. :ii7. 21i jl Ji >^Vl ^ jl^Jillj jl

a Kitilb al-arjlmiri, VIII, p, 50. Ill, Htivk'H tho following ubont the origin of thin formula

as formula of divorce among the pagan Arabs! it was used first by Hlshlm ibn ol-
Mughlrah against bis wifo Asm!'. It was then taken over by the Quraysb as formula

Of divOMO. — Tho first Use of the jihar from tho tinio of Mum iH reported U!08B Awh
ibn Awh (d. :12), Tahdhlb, p. 108.

•' Ma/Stlli. VIII. p. 150: ^ L j^5o L jlj jU Xtf jl&kll Jail j'J \'i\

OjJjjo lj dJjS j&\li ok •>^- \j***-\j jAlkll JaI Jy IAaj l,ij*
If »j^5CJb "bf| OjSs V IJA_j ejiiJ L SiUI J* U-b |>Jl» U

62

CHAPTER KOUit

he who regrets the repudiation of hi.s wife and intends to revoke it
does in no way conduce the execution of his intention by pcrforminrr
tlu; prescribed atonement.

2. The Zfihiria are just as meticulous in deducing a, law from the
jfl*tt as when they arc using the wording of the Koran as a basis
lor their jurisprudential deduction. It is in that field too, that they
follow unswervingly their basic doctrine of the relationship of the
jurisprudent to the words of the law-giver. They consider it unjustifi-
able to try and to guess the intention of the law-giver on the basis
oi subjective judgement and to draw an analogy from this intention
and give to legal practice a direction which, under the pretense of
folowmf, the spirit of the laiv, departs from the objective meanina
ol the text. °

Musaqdt indicates in Islamic agricultural affairs a contract falling
under the jurisdiction of social contracts. It states "that a landowner
guarantees the cultivator a certain share of the yield in exchange for
r>o the care and management of fruit trees, vineyards, and vegetables" »
There IS a great deal of difference of opinion among the Islamic
theological schools as regards the admissibility of such contracts »
In the .whole field of commercial, rental, and contract law, Islamic
law follows the principle that for every contract and purchase there
must prevail complete clearness eliminating any doubt and deception
concerning price or rent respectively. Business deals and contracts
winch later turn out to deceive one of the contracting parties can be
invalidated, and indeed, very often become null and void, since the
later-evolving fact that it involved a premeditate deception makes
the contract illegal to begin with. The uncertainty about the yield
and the possibility of deception of the sharecropper in the case of
musuqat and similar contracts, raised serious doubts about the validity
and legality of such contracts among the legists. As for the share-
cropping contract in particular, the opinions diverge as follows:

1 Sco , Kremor, CuUurgnckichta its Orient*. I. p. 614. Van den Berg, Dc contractu
*« dtt jur, inohammedano, p. 67. Dt licgimchn van M Mohmmncdaanschc Scgt,

2 One gets a good impression of the singular mdooisivonoss which prevail* among the
leg.sla ,v„ Muslim circles concerning the entire category of social contract, when one
roads the traditions on muklmbarah, muxOn'th. etc. Became of laclc of space. 1 can
merely refer to then; al-Bukoffirl, BMb aU>arth m-ai-muzartah, no. 8-10, but portlonl-
Wl, no. 18-10 (of. with thi« al-«a«|,alla,,I, IV, p. 109-202) and Muslim, Kim al-lu.yn'.

m

CHAITER FOUR

58

Abu IfanlfaJi considers it completely inadmissible « — a proof of what
little regard he had for the explicit words of the traditions when his
notions of social ethics inspired him with something different The
'■xact oppo.it,, (,, this are Mfdik's Cachings, lie considers the mluSaSt
apphcable to the whole field of gardening. Al-Shafi 1 ?, on the other hand
restricts applicability of the contract to date-trees and vineyards'
But it is important to know the tradition from which the mvsaqfa
derives its legal basis. When Khaybar was conquered, the Jews
asked the Prophet to let them continue living there on the condition
that they cultivate the land for the price of half the yield of all dato-
trccs and produce. Then the Prophet said: "On this condition I permit
you to stay as long as you want" -. This shows that Malik and al-
SlialV, considered the contract about the date-trees which was con-
cluded with the Jews as example and basis for further analogies
binco vine and date-trees are subject to the same regulations in many
other aspects, al-Shafi'I puts them on the same level even as regards
the musaq® — the permissibility of which is documented by this
tradition. Malik searches for the general reason of the admissibility
and concludes that the economic requirement inevitably led the
legislator to the conclusion of the contract with the former owner of
the land. Starting from this point of view, naturally no distinction
can be made between the two kinds of fruit. We observe in this instance
two kinds of qvy&s as bases for legal deduction. It goes without saying
that Dawiid s, frowning upon any kind of extension of the lata arrived
at by a speculative method, adheres strictly to what the letter of the
IM> permits or prohibits. Dawfid does not examin the reasons for pro-
hibition or permission, does not concern himself with investigating
the points of view of the law-giver, for him, nothing but the written

» His school, however, abandoned his original teachings at a later ti.no ; see v. Kromer.
«.C„ I, p. Gil.

' Muslim, Kim al-nmmgm, no. 1.

3 al-NWwI. IV. ,,.30: jb^iVl £, iU'Lil ^ j^ ^ j^ibtlj

s^Jij j^ji j* ^iui JUj &u jaji >"j^" ijb jui

, U-io I J* o j-*.l.ll« :;_ iJ i •! ±i it-. ,^-.i i-i . hi

J*4> 1^j> A^ailj Iu.U-1 jlj^i

J IS ii£JL C\j vU^I

.J-lc o"^h? AS*5*"'

54

CHAPTER KOUU

material alone is the determining factor. In the written text, lie saw
nothing but a document supporting the admissability of the mumqnt
contract as applicable to dates. Therefore, lie decided to pronounce
this one kind of* fruit as the exclusive, permissible subject of this
contract.

Indeed, in no part of the material in question can the purely external
orientation of bhe Zahirito school's interpretation of the law in
its contrasting relationship to the deeper motives of the analogy
schools bo better observed than in the interpretation of legal texts,
where, with reference to a single aspect of religious life, ritual practice,
or social intercourse, specific details are mentioned. Everywhere in
Such passages, the Zahirito. school will exert its coercive, view. Besides
the previous example, let us select yet another, one which seems to
be rather unimportant fundamentally, but which is formally a, splendid
example from the ritual part of Islamic tradition of the point of view
taken by the school, namely, its teaching about sadaqdt (or zakat)
57 al-fitr '. After completing the fast of Ramadan, and before indulging
in the joys of the "minor festival". Muslims must make this offering
which, in the opinion of theologians, is, as it were, a general atone-
ment for transgressions possibly committed against the law of the
fast. According to the opinion of sonic theologians, this tax, introduced
prior to the alms-tax (al-zakdl) which took its place, is supposed to
have lost its obligatory character after the institution of the latter one,
but Muslims as far as Central Africa, still give it readily. The Awlacl
Sulayman, deep in the Sudan, give the J.Iiljj 'Abd al-'Atl at the end of
Ramadan a mvdd dukhn as mdaqah -. The following tradition is the
main legal source as to what this offering must consist of, and as
to which persons are obliged to give it: "The messenger of God ordered
as compulsory zakat al-fi/r one sd' dates or one §&' barley; (this obliga-
tion is applicable) to slaves and free men, to men and women,
to young and old Muslims. He ordered that this offering be made
before people leave for the prayer (of the following holiday)" 8 . In
this case, Ibn Hazm arrives at the most extreme consequence of the

1 Cf. Krclil, Vlier dm. rltilitlt dtt Buchdrt, p. 10. On the origin (if this nliim lnw MM
Sprongor, Dti-i Lcbni uvri ttlt: Lt'Jire tlr.t Mahamtntttl, III, p. 57.

- Naohtigol, Sahdrd nml SUM*, II, p. 275.

3 al-Bukhilt'i, Kittib al-ziikut, no. 70: £U« jliiJI oljj ^^p «Ul1 u_J*«J \jf j>
_^irfj|j ^^Ij _^'JJ1j jJ-\j -UJI J^- _£*-£ ^ &lp jl ;£ fy

t!IIAITKIl I'OUIt

55

Zahirito system by teaching that the zakat al-fitr must be paid in this
commodity exclusively and that it has no validity if a different kind
of produce of equivalent quantity is given '. In this he is in complete
disagreement with the rest of the schools who sec in the sd' dates or
barley nothing but a specification of the obligatory minimum offering
which could also consist of a different kind of produce not particularly
mentioned in the tradition =. With this example, the peculiar Zaliirite
interpretation of the tradition in question is by no means exhausted.
The tradition stipulates that zakat al-fitr is incumbent upon slaves.
From this the four schools conclude that the owner has the duty to
make the offering on behalf of his slaves since they have no personal
property. Dilwiid, however, adheres obstinately to tho wording 'aid
al-'abd: the slave himself is obliged and responsible to make this
fast offering; in this respect, his master has no other obligation than
to supply the slave with extra means of earnings from which he can
defray the expenses of the offering which are his 'personal obligation 3 .
Indeed, Ibn Hazm goes further than this. Although the tradition
mentions young ones, but without conclusively stating that born
children are concerned, he makes it the duty of tho father to pay
the prescribed mdaqah even for an embryo once it has passed 120 days
of its embryonic stage •'. It must not be overlooked that the Nanbalite

l nl-Qiistiilliiiif, III, p. 07: '(£}£ Vj l^Us cli L^Il (j-t rj* Ail o/> Qi

._P-I o-L^.1 Jh t£>J obljj ^ ijj ^ fjp. i>_l J IS LiSOJjj {*>_&■

s ul-Uinniiwi, p. 142, enumerate! tho following types according to their value:

wheat (burr), spelt (mill), barley (tTui'ir), durra (dhwaJi), rloo (anutt), ohiolcpoa (hinimif),

Indian pea (mfah), lentil {'ados), beans (fill), dates (tamr), raisins (xabtb), oIiochc from

ourdled millt (aqif), milk (Uii>au), oheeso (jubn). A rhyme of their order attempts to

facilitate memorization. The first letters of tho flat line ore the rir«i letters of the typos

enumerated! ^kjiJI o&j ilSy jy ^ "^h-* tS^~ j-'j iS* ^~" U-" *&4

"fee- (jl ji?all olij CjjS c\~\ 'kSj-' OeX>- lAjl <-3jj>- tA^a. jJ

3 al-NawawI, III, p. S: Ju^kj Jl-jJI ^£- Lg-^jU «yi Ikj JS.\ lj\± t)U

« al-Qostalianl, ibid., p. 103: ii*^. *y>. i> # "V li}U. £&4-\ J* ""j * *

(jV JU _^v=-il J* y^i\ jj-> UU j\ ■dj* ^J^-* ^rl^-Ji ^
CfjLi-j 'ijL J-oi'l IJ.IS _^jLyaJI rt-^.1 -tic mM A^l ,2^aj ^ Oi~f"'
•'■' ' "UJ ^ _^>uij| c.\X^l\ JJ Jul ^kj J) L.JJ

,Jai)l tSXfi «u*

t5ijJ 6!

J^JI

00 CIIAI'THK FOUlt

r>!) codex stipulates that making the fast offering for an embryo is a pious,
desirable action, .suniuili, although not. obligatory '.

From what has preceded, wo realize the role the famous dogmatist
Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm played in the development of the school of
Dfnvud al-Ziihiri. He drew consequences from the scriptual word
that did not occur to the few representatives of the school. In concert
with Ibn Ilazm's other views, with which wc shall acquaint ourselves
in chapter eight, it can easily be understood that he. was inclined to
urge the strict letter of the word in instances in which the rigid
relationship towards believers of other faiths was concerned. It is a
remarkable achievement of the traditionalists and the founders of
tho Islamic legal systems — possibly with the exception of Ahmad
b. Hanbal and his school — that they often, and without, justification,
introduced traditions expressing liberal views; they, then, interpreted
opposing traditions that were recognized as authentic for practice
in such a way that, because of this interpretation, the obstinacy and
severeness of the text in its literal interpretation was broken. The
science of tradition and the art of interpretation have achieved suc-
cesses For humanity in this field which put the proceedings governing
pia frans, on the one hand, and the philologic-excgotio enormities,
on the other, in a favourable light. By the wa)', these arc achievements
which, because of wide influence, are still not properly appreciated.
The Zahirite school which rejected these interpretation tricks was
deprived of these humanistic blessings. No one would have been less
inclined to apply them in this direction than Ibn Ilazm who distinguish-
ed himself by his fanatical enmity against everything non-Islamic.
The question of whether a Muslim is permitted to eat meals prepared
by followers of other faiths has occupied Muslim theologians on
numerous occasions. The spectrum of the attitudes and teachings
which have evolved concerning this problem represents almost all
shades of opinion towards the adherents of other faiths - from the
most barbaric to the most liberal. To the scope of this question belongs
yet another one: whether or not a Muslim is permitted to use utensils
belonging to Christians and .lews for tho preparation of his own meal.
The traditions offer the following information: "The Prophet was
asked by a. Muslim who had frequent opportunity to come in contact
with non-Muslims in Syria.: '0 Messenger of Cod, we live in a. country

ClIAi'TKH. FOUR

57

of people who belong to the ahl al-kilnb, and we use their dishes.

CO Furthermore, we live in a land where there is game. I hunt both with
my bow and also with the assistance, of trained and untrained dogs.
Now, inform me which of these things arc permitted'. Upon this,
the Prophet replied: 'As for the first question, you are not supposed
to eat from their dishes if you can find dishes other than those of the
ahl al-kitdb ; however, should you find none but theirs, wash them ;
then you can cat from them' " '. All Muslim theologians deduce
from this that the use of utensils of non-Muslims is basic-ally not
prohibited, for were this the case, then such vessels would not be
permitted to be used even in cases when others could not bo obtained',
for something prohibited does not become permissible simply by the
absence of the latter one. Rather, the form of the prohibition in the
above-mentioned tradition (we shall give more examples in tho fifth
chapter) is interpreted as the wish of the Prophet. This is in some
measure what Christian theology calls consilium cvanr/rlicum, com-
pliance to which is well received, negligence of which, however, does
not constitute a transgression 3 . Indeed, bhcfittja/ia restrict the com-
mand expressed in tho tradition to the case where such vessels have
been used by non-Muslims for purpose which, according to Islamic
law, arc considered nnjas. In other cases their use, without prior

til cleansing, does not even belong into the maknVi category. As a matter
of fact, we learn from tho tradition — although Ibn 'Asakir has
excluded it from his edition of Bukhiirl — that 'llmar performed
his ritual ablution in a vessel fetched from a. Christian house :l . Quite

1 Shoykh Mai'i. Dalfl al-lSlib H-myl aUma'&rib, I. BfllBq, LS8S, i>. 7fi: ( Jx. t j~J'j

o^-i-

1 nl-Hiilcliiiri, Kit/lb trt-dhnbn'ih, 00,10: «^i) -U^.PrJI J-Jjo LI iJUto."
Jjil »y> u^ju til «U)I (Jj— j ti otiis **Iy» «Ull Jj-"j C-^J'I (JjJu

JA\ lJ J5C j-^Ij (_y»3Ju -w>l ±vfi ufjLs fti-a-/!" \j JS - U i->\^i\

pj'-^j O^ p4~^ <J> (JS" IS vt^Cll J-*' i*y U*J^ ^>l *£>£*

...l^J \J6 '*£ U>jl~x-li IjJaS 1 (jlj I4J IjiS'ti' $4 f^X-jT jf-

"• al-QBHtJillrml, VIII, p. 280: ^ J*^ *Swl»l Ob <JU ,y S-"^'-?

iLlpJ tyiUwSw'SlI L=. l)j^< J— AJb j->^\ ijti <L-h{Bi)l ,Jp»cXJ

^1 jlIsOl yjjjl JLo^.1 jj aaIjJ" V jl OjJj-'JJ fr&i^ cI&mH L^lj
J-~AJI Jj^l (jir jlj &Xs- J-~AJ' 1 _jJj 1L.UJ1 ^J '*LjC~~4 c~~J

3 Kildb nl-wmfii; no. U (rd. Krohl). no. IB (BttlHq).

58

CIIAITHR FOUR

Ii2

differently Ibn Hazm: lie quite willingly takes the opportunity to
Rive an example of his intolerance, and to substantiate a law which,
in addition, serves to impede free intercourse with non-Muslims.
Quite consistently, he deduces from the letter of the tradition the
validity of the following law: "Usage of vessels of the aid al-kitdb
is generally not permitted except in circumstances in which lawful
vessels cannot possibly be obtained, and even in this case, only after
they have been washed" '.

This, Ibn Hassm's opinion, is a logical conclusion of his teachings
of the ritual unclcanliness of believers of other faiths, and is identical
with the SbJ'ite view. The Shi'ites, as it is well known, have taken
the extreme consequences of the Koranic teachings (.lurah IX:28) 2 .
They reach the utmost rigorism and intolerance with their legislation
on (.ahdrah and najdmh a . They have included in their dah najdmh
the body of the unbeliever and tho heretic, and they extended this
judgement to everything tho unbelievers touch. Ghardin * has related
many a curious thing about his travel experiences concerning this
aspect of the ritual life of the Persians; its codification can be read
in Querxy's exhaustive book °. Sunnito Islam ", on tho other hand,
has displayed in this point a splendid example of its perfectibility,
its possibility of evolution, and also the ability to adapt its rigid
formalism to the requirements of social intercourse by modifying the
Koranic tenets of the impurity of unbelievers through its own in-
terpretation, until, it reached the point when it abandoned this

I al-QuH|allfuii, p. 200: A-jT J^*xJ ]yfi- H (JL» »Jp- (j\ y> Uij jj.\
L&U&hb j*)1\j J-~AJb L^'jL^ J^ cjl-i \*>j¥- -^ -^ ^J-~v .r-Vl

■ ^ jy^ii pi,

" Of, above p. 49.

4 Olmrdin, Vai/ngr.i en. l'ersc, VI, p. 321 ff.

5 Querry, Droit mundman, I, p. 17, art. 207 ff.

II For ii histories! study of this question it in not to bo oberlookod that 'Amm b.
Tbfibit'u plodgo m mentioned an a rare exooption in Ibn Ishttq's traditional louroea:
LJ»cii' \m gyLj ^lc Vj dijJL. *!»£ V Uli tbn ETJeham, p. C07 and

031); of. however ibid., p. 807: ^c [J Xc. (jl L-»l Ji u^ <£%j&»* J^-J clJlj

CHAPTER FOUR

59

83

doctrine '. Al-NawawT says this quite frankly in his commentary
on this tradition in which the purity of the Muslims is stated '-: "This
is the law for tho Muslim, but as for the unbeliever, as far as purity
and impurity are concerned, he is to bo judged from the same point of
view as the Muslim" !1 . Falclir al-Dln al-RaZl decisively rejects the
right of the intolerant tenet to consensus for the interpretation which
is contained in the Koran and which is adduced by the Zaydls (Shi'ites)
— in agreement with the older interpretation to be found in al-
Baydawl too — by reforring to the traditional account which presents
the Prophet as having drunk also from vessels of non-Muslims. "How
could it be possible", so he concludes, "that the mere embracing
of Islam should causo the state of impurity to change into a pure
one on the body of a single person?" 4 . Concerning this point, and
contrary to tho more liberal opinions spreading already during his
time — we find Ibn Hazm in the camp of those who are not satisfied
with considering the ritual najdmh of the unbelievers as an accessory

1 Tlie throe more liberal of the legal aohooln represent in their Interpretations of thin
Eownlo vorso one stage each of this gradual progress. Al-Slmfi'i's school jh of the opinion
that nothing can be deduced from this vorso but the prohibition for unbelievera to enter
the holy territory in Meeen; the MuliUito school extends this prohibition to all the mos-
ques of Mecca; according to the view of the tliuial'ito/i, holicvcrn of oilier faiths are not
oven barred from entering tho holy haram territory of Mecca for a provisional stay
(al-Miiwardi, p. 2110). The latter interpretation jimt about abrogates the validity of tho
Koranic prohibition I

- Muslim, KilCih al-talulrah, no. 00: p*Lp Jill Jj-j jl AJu-^- <y-
jl Jli Ll>. cj£ J12J J* "J jl^c-U Al* J>Ui i^». y-3 *j2J

;l al-NawawI, I, p. -112:
i_iLJI ^ _£*^J-I

t

< Mdjriirii. IV. p. 614;

i_^saj^ij LuaXj \Ja «v-wl «j>

J&SOl

Ju^rei

r^ui

^ i>.' 6*

■ •ii- ii . • I Ml u.l

^uU! £^1j

j^u aj o^lNi 61 iL a aj ^Vl cU^i

60

CHAPTER FOUR

which tlioy observe less scrupulously than Muslims who follow in this
respect precisely prescribed laws, but who label the substance of the
unbeliever impure. Ibn l.lazm adheres faithfully to the exclusive point
inherent in tlio science of tradition inna al-mu'min Id yanjux, ' while
nil the rest of the Muslim teachers extend this attitude to unbelievers
too. I believe that what was responsible for this attitude was not only
Ibn Hazm's method of deduction, but also his personal fanaticism
against followers of other religions. I have shown on other occasions
how malicious his language is when ho speaks about non-Muslims;
also in the excerpts from his main work which I quote in this treatise,
wc shall have an opportunity to observe this. Let it be also mentioned
that Ibn Hazm extends this apcllation to all non-Muslims, contrary
to Abii Hanifah who does not include the Jews in the expression
muxhrik. This point of viow has the most serious consoquences in
applied jurisprudence 3 .

Finally, one more example may be cited which, on the one hand,
shall prepare us for the development of the legal interpretation
treated in the following chapter, and on the other hand, can demon-
strate how the common legal schools, in contrast to the Zahirito school,
rise to the utmost level of distortion when faced with reconciling the
text of the law to the practice of daily life, if daily usage has departed
from the requirements of the rigid law. In such instances, the repre-
sentatives of the Zahirite school appear as rescuers of the true meaning
of the scripture; the objective claim to represent the correct exegesis
is in such cases undoubtedly on their side. Such a case is the following:
64 Muslim tradition prescribes the true believer to perforin a complete
ablution {ghusl) before the Friday prayer; it is well known that it is
entirely different from the wudu'. The toxt of the tradition expresses
this in the following words: "The ablution on Friday is necessary (i.e.
obligatory) for all who have reached the age of puberty" », To indicate
the degreo of this ritual obligation, the word wajib is used here, a
word which indicates in the terminology of Islamic law the highest
degree of unconditional obligation. Nevertheless, although all the
variations of the tradition emphasize unanimously and undoubtedly

1 al-BukhSrl, KUiib al-ghud. no. 23; also al-QasfcftllfoJ, I. p. 889.
- For o detailed treatment o£ this Important question of Islamic inter-donominational
Legislation of. Ilm Ijlas-.m. KtiCth td-inilal. It, fol. 17-18.

3 al-Hukhiiri, Kililb nl-jiim'ah, no. 2: Kiliih id-Hltitliiiilfil., no. IS: .»jj i\m£>

CHAPTER FOUR

01

the "wajib" of this law, the orthodox schools now say — ■ and even the
rigid Hanbalite school makes no exception of this > — that the duty
prescribed in this law is not in the nature of an obligation, but merely
a suggested, pious custom (sitnnah), the negligence of which is by no
means equal to tho transgression of obligatory duty -. Slu'ite juris-
prudence, too, considers this custom among the ai/hsul inasnunah '■'.
To justify this view and to reconcile this with the explicit word wajib,
all kinds of tricks had to be applied. Some representatives of the anti-
traditional view think that the above-mentioned law in this form has
been abrogated (munsukli). This, however, is not recognized by all,
since no authentic tradition could be found to prove the alleged
abrogation (ndsi/ch). Others tried to read the prevailing custom into
the text of the law by means of a grammatical laqdir. They claim
that the word wajib stands for Ica-al-wdjib "if necessary" and seems to
indicate the high esteem in which the Prophet held this pious custom,
05 but without considering it obligatory '. Another interpretation, whose
author is the famous Hanafite canonist al-Quduri, shows us tho
highest efflorescence of violent sophistry of the epigones of Muslim
jurisprudence; he claims that wajib in this case has the meaning of
falling off (from wajaba to fall) and that 'aid stands for 'an so that
into "indispensable (incumbent upon) for everybody", tho following
is read: "dispensible for everybody" i.e. omissible, unnecessary for
people in general; in other words, the exact opposite of the literal
meaning 5 . In this question, too, the Zahirls are the only ones who

1 Khaykh Mar'i, I.e., I, p. 17: j£s- £L« (i~>cX~il JL^c-jl i^i ) c5*-J

iU«6. o^aJ l*Ji I
" E.g. Shafi'ito law according to Abu al-Qdsini al-Gha'/./.i, HAlitc), 1287, p. 30 with

tho addition: jjjb Vl u-^ V J •
3 Querry, Droit iiuumlmaii, I, j>. 30.
•' al-QaetallttrJ, II, p. 179; of. IV, p. 402: x£\2 J> l-^-IjJIT i£\ 4->-Ij

luLSOl J j I IvilkJIj J^VI f/j jL^I J t^lj jl aIjJI

rtXJ-l jj ^i; al-Qudiiri: ^ ^* J: . ^J ^^~" lJ**, V?l> *^-

In the related TalmudiO literature, 1 find an interesting analogy to tho terminol-
ogical change In jurisprudence supported philologiually in al-Qudfui's treatment 01 tho
term wajib. Among tlio dedUOtions marie from Biblical law, Leviticus xx:32, wo
find in the Ifaliylonian Qiddilshln, fol. 33a: »T»ftVfl *1BS "nnir? I'NtsT nToniN 'bua ]'K
DnsKina D'pDiiic nswa own i.e. that craftsmen are not permuted to Interrupt

their work as a visible sign of respect (getting up) to which scholars aro other-
wise entitled. This law is related to tho great moral importance which tho Talmud
attributes to craftsmanship and to honest enterprise in general. The expression used

G2

CHAl'TISU FOTJB

hold this view, espousing also on this occasion the opinion of some
authorities of the earliest period which has been since rejocted l .

in this nin<> wi is n term for permitted, the meaning of which is certain. Some later
intorpretors of t-liiH touching (of. Tosufot, on the pussage, iitrip. ytt), find, however,
th&t it would bo n restriction of voluntary pioly t„ prohibit craftsmen outright tlio
voluntary interruption of their work as an expression out of respoot for scholars. They
Imvo changed (lie established interpretation of the term ism and Identified it in this
0U80 with another term of this Hoionoo, niimoly, with a"n — comjnihmij (identical
with i__ -a-lj) ill order to arrive at the following meaning: workers aro not compelled
to Interrupt their work, but a voluntary interruption is permitted. Thus Maimonides,
Talmud 'lorilh v:2, paraphrases the Tftlmudio law with those words: ji_«n nvwiK >to_ )'K
i2i thmV; later oodifien follow him in this Interpretation. Rabbi Moses from Coney
(wo Gob., no. 18) justifies this ohange with a philologloal argument, lie finds in Targflm,
Exodus xxii:24, Isaiah xxiv:2, and still others, the Arumaio K'«n for Hebrew ?ll»: debtor;
the mm of the Tulniudio passage, therefore, ought to belong to this group — guilty.
1 ul-Qastullilnl, ibH., '•L J &\l±i\ i__.aJl.jAj i_j_».jJL Ji vj Jo t£5wC" -&J

CHAPTER FIVE

00 In the opinion of Musliin theologians, not everything that appears
in the form of prescriptions and prohibitions in the transmitted
sources of Islamic law is commanded or forbidden, nor does it carry
the same imperative or prohibitive force. Many statements are re-
presented in the external — linguistic — form of a prescription or
prohibition without their transgression entailing the divine or secular
punishment decreed for transgressions of the law.

From this point of view, Islamic jurisprudence recognizes generally
five categories:

1. Al-wdjib or id-fard ', obligatory actions, the absolute duty,
commission of which is rewarded and omission, punished, ma yutlidlm
'aid fi'lihi tva-yu'dqaba '(da tarkih.

2. Al-mandub, commendable actions, i.e. what is decreed not as
obligation, but as pious action, the performance of which God reciproc-
ates, but the omission of which does not entail punishment, ma, yuthdba
'aid fi'lihi wa-la yu'dqabu 'aid tarkih '-. In the sense of the latter de-
finition, mavdub is identical with that category of religious practices
which, in contrast to the first category, is designated as sunnah ,J .

07 The exact theological terminology does not always recognize this
complete identity; rather, it attempts to find differential aspects.
In this context, the definition of the concept of sunnah which is most
widely recognized is the one which states that this concerns such pres-

1 The Hanafilo school distinguishes between til-fard and nl-wajib with regard to the
degree of evidence of a certain law as the term ul-fnnl m applied to such actions tlio
OOmpulsory nature of which can be proven by a compelling argument (ilalU qnt'i or
liiirhi'iii). The compulsory nature of iil-wfijib, on the other hand, is supported merely by
probability arguments (tlttlil tOttNi or aniarah). ■ — Both cIuhscs are further Subdivided.
a At this point, 1 call attention to al-i.lariri, Moffttitah 82, p. •102, 2 (de Sacy"s 2nd od.).
<uLc ___rf jj aJI i_jJJ (J 1} t -Cliil f^j^ll 7=-~-CJ J t_s»_ In the analog-
ous field ofTalmudic jurisprudence the two degrees nain and SlVM are to be noted
(ltabyl. Yebhfinioth, l'ol. (15b).

3 It may bo mentioned as characteristic for the tradition of pagan Arabian poetry
that these two terms aro transmitted in a pie-Islamic panegyrical poem to the 'Adwiin
tribe by al-Asba' al-'Adwani (Aghiini, III, p. 2, lii; Ibn llislidm, p. 77, penult.): ,*4^-»_9
i^jjDIj lU™Jb _}■» LJI j^C. >y4. However, even Arab critics doubt the authen-
ticity of a large part of this poem (Agh., ibid., p. 5, 20).

CI

CHAl'TISR 1'IVK

ecipts or prohibitions, the obligation of which is baaed on one of two

things: either cm a scriptual passage, the interpretation of which does
not necessarily, or exclusively, indicate this obligation, but also can
be seen differently, or else on traditions with defective or insufficiently
attested isndd. '.

3. Al-mubuh or id-haWd, permissible actions, i.e. acts, the perform-
ance or omission of which the law views with total indifference.
Certain it is that the performance of such actions is neither prohibited
nor frowned upon, and the omission, neither decreed not suggested ; the
former Stipulation entails no reward and the latter, no punishment.
ma Id //niJidliii 'aid fi'lihi wa-ld yu'agabu 'aid tarkih,

-1. Al-makruh, reprehensible actions. As for ritual considerations,
there are inoro weighty arguments for their omission than for their
OS admissibility, md kdua, tarkuhu rdjih 'aid, fi'lihi fi na.zar id-shar'.
This category is divided into two sub-divisions according to the degree
of foreefulncss of their arguments: (a) al-viakruh kardhat lanzlh, i.e.
an action which is reprehensible only in so far as its omission is re-
commended to everyone who aims at a pious way of life, but without
such practice being punishable, and (b) al-makruh kardhat tahrlm
which is reprehensible to such a degree that it is almost identical with

5. al-hardm or al-mahzur, the plainly forbidden actions, the per-
formance of which is punished and omission of which is rewarded.
ma Id yuthdbu '(da fi'lihi bal yu'dqalnt ■wa-ld yn'dqalm 'aid tarkihi
bal yuthdb.

For different reasons, two classes arc appendixod to these five
categories; they are designated by the correlative terms 'azlmah and
rukhmh. Literally, 'azlmah is a "summoning", i.e. the law fer se
without considerations for possible impediments to its compliance.

' Cf. Snouok-Hurgronje's opinion of Vim den Berg's edition of MinMj al-f&libSn.
(Iiul. Gidi of April 1888, p- il of the off-print). — For a definition of the concept of
the ■lunnah taws X ooneidor the following old passage to be of importance: Cy\ A^j
JZJ.\s i->\&l yJ-\ Lie mj*. tu JO) I o! ajj-S^I «_)kf ,J i_3
JJi V -v~> "^ }ta >_>biCJb CjZ okf |<9 'ix*J J_i jUj aLJIj

^fojljill tlijb!) l^ijlJ' il)1 uyu ~}ks Ax** \&j y*H\ i_s~~)3 yjr' *«r" 1 *
^vajiJIj j j I i 11 /_) {(il-'h/d ill. p. 409, whore many exoerpts from this book by Ibn

QuUybah can bo found.

CHAPTER BTVE

(Therefore not leges neeessario obsrrvandae in Corano latue as Freytag
states in al-Jurjani because of a misinterpretation of this particular
article). For instance, the law to fast during the mouth of Ramadan,
or to perform the daily prayers are a 'azlmah from God to man. On the
other hand, rukhmh is a concession by God which, in certain canes
of impediment, dispenses from compliance with a given law without its
becoming generally abrogated. For example, God prohibited con-
sumption of various foods, but in the case of an emergency (fl niakli-
mamh, for instance, if in certain circumstances nothing but prohibited
food can prevent Starvation), God ordered a rukhmh with regard to
this law (.surah V:4-!>). But the concession is valid only in cases of such
04) an emergency '. Ibn 'Abbas says: "Rukhmh is alms which God offers
to you; do not refuse it" (i.e. utilize it as often as you arc in such a
situation and do not believe that in such cases it would be better to
obey the original decree) *,

The more detailed discussion of all these concepts 3 on which the
different schools are generally in complete agreement — aside from
the individually determined sub-stages and intermediate stages 4 —
forms the main content of the first part of the instructions on Islamic
jurisprudence known as 'Urn usul al-fii/h. The definitions of those miiin
concepts just discussed, as recognized by the Islamic theological
schools and in Muslim works, are graphically described in the articles
of the excellent Dictionary of the technical terms used in the sciences
of the Musalmaw of the "Bibliotheca indica" B .

Although the orthodox schools do not diverge greatly in distinguish-
ing these categories, there prevails in their definition " a much larger

1 Cf. ill- liayijiiwi, 1, p. 217, II, who paraphrases tho woi-iIh of the above-mentioned

Koranic passage rt-> j i_jub>cX-i _^c. hh follows: J v -i ->■ J I -Xa. IJJ^-
- al-Ilwjrl, I, p. 01: JusU^a \jdj ~fc isJ^j J-Ul ^ ■L f s.>-ji\.
■' The concept of rukhjtlh might bo Uiulorntood cimier if it in compared to I Corinthians

vii: (1 Kara ouyyvmiapi °" KaT ' tm/mf^h

4 For instanoo, a controversial class besides mandflb in mvstaiabb; the western
MiilikitcH iiiiiko iiiin a Hcpiimio class while the eastern followers of this school olassify
It In category 2. /^ ^_^£.j i__^uUlj ajuJI (ju (jjjjy > Q^\yu\ ijl
I41-) OjSyLi LjUilj <_ij_Ldlj i~ji_pi Shaykh akldwl's glossary to the
Maliklte codex of 'Abd al-Bfiql al-Ziiri|fini. II. Ilfilii<| 12SI), p. 107.

cf. also Monradgoa d'Ohsson, Tableau giniral de V Umpire otlioman, I. p. 81-80.
The above definitions are mostly derived from the WaraqlU.

Apart from tho gonorally rcoognizod olaBglfioation, individual UiooloftinnH, departing
from their personal (moral, theosophio, eto.) prlnoiplos, dovised other olosses ol haw

and Imram; I inoution only ul-(lha7.ali, IhyiV, H, p. 80-86.

GG

CHAPTER FIVE

CHAPTER FIVE

G7

difference of opinion as to the possible classification of a given action
or its neglect in the above-mentioned categories. This depends cither
on the traditions that each school produces, or on the particularly
favoured interpretation of the quoted texts, or lastly, on the different
analogical deductions to which they have recourse if the texts arc
silent on a certain question. To give just ono example: Consumption
70 of horse meat is considered mubali according to al-Shafi'I and to
Ahmad b. Ilunbal, makruh kardhat tahrim according to Abu Hanlfah,
makruh kardhat tanzih according to Malik, etc. l . The most important
section of the. ikhlildfdt al-madhdhib is concerned with these questions
of legal qualification which the different schools, setting out from the
same premise, answer in different ways.

The disagreement of DawQd al-Zahhi, whoso school frequently
opposes the unanimous view of all orthodox legal schools, is based
on a matter of principle. In this chapter, let us approach one of these
principles since this will demonstrate the conflict between the Zahiritc
school and the prevailing orthodoxy in ono important question of the
science of usfd upon which there is unanimous agreement among the
latter. For instance, we can observe that the Zahirito school concedes
a far greater scope to the absolute wdjib and mahzur than the rest of
the legal schools. At first glance, it might bo thought that the Zahiritc
school is led to this kind of interpretation of the legal commissions
by its endeavour for sweeping rigorism. Indeed, it cannot be denied
that wherever possible, this school raises the "consilia evani/dica",
and the daily habits of the Prophet, attested as authentic, to religious
duties. By the same token and in agreement with Ibn Kahwayhi,
but in opposition to the consensus of all important teachers a , the
school also intended to institute as wajib the habit o! xiwak, the clean-
ing of the teeth before prayer as recommended by the Prophet.
Others, however, doubt the authenticity of the tradition.

The striving for rigorism is nothing but an automatic consequonce
of strictly following certain Zahiritc principles in the practical applica-
tion of legal toxts. In these questions, too, we generally have the
impression that their practical application is determined by tho literal
interpretation. In such passages in which the Koran or the text of a
tradition states a decree of God or Muhammad in a philological version

which includes the imperative or prohibitative nature of the statement
in itself, the followers of the Zahiritc school arc always inclined to
see in it a law belonging to category (1) or (5) or, respectively, to

71 category (4b). The four orthodox schools, on the other hand, adopt
a less literal view towards the law and classify the command or pro-
hibition in question as ono of the intermediate categories. According
to this prevailing orthodox legal interpretation, the texts may say
explicitly amara ranul Allah i.e. "tho Messenger of God gave the
order", without this formula's requiring the indispensable obligation
(wujub) of the particular command, as ought to be deduced from its
wording. A command uttered in this definite form, according to
their interpretation, can mean something that the law-giver merely
recommended. Not infrequently, wo find such commands accompanied
by the words of the commentator amr lil-nadb '. With regard to the
strictest of the imperative and prohibitive forms respectively, it is
the canonical scionco of the orthodox schools that has characterized
this point of view most clearly. The grammatical form of the impera-
tive, uqtid — so they say — indicates in jurisprudence an obligatory
law solely when tho circumstances under which such a law appears
do not indicate that this is to be understood oidy as a recommendation
of the legislator, or his consent to perform an action. The imperative
form can be considered a binding command only if detached from
such accompanying circumstances. There arc two kinds of accompany-
ing circumstances: cither such as are inherent in tho command itself,
be this the wording of the text or the inherent circumstances under
which it was decreed or performed, or such as are independent of the
text itself. To tho latter kind belong commands such as contained in
Koran, surah 11:282 "take witnesses when you conclude purchase
contracts". Here, the imperative ashhadu is used; nevertheless, tho
majority of tho imams teach • that this represents a wish only, not
an obligating command, and this, because the tradition testifies to the
Prophet's custom of concluding purchases and sales without witnesses.
This custom, then, represents the most reliable commentary to tho
intention of the law. This is a circumstance which, although indepen-
dent of tho text of the law, is nevertheless an external circumstance

'2 which influences the meaning of the same, and which abrogates the

1 This particular question togothor with tho ooxuploto line <>i' argument <>f tho indivi-
dual opinions in al-CamlrJ, II, p. 256 £f.

a al-NitwnwI. I, p. :i2fi, detailed.

1 nl-Iiuklifiri, Kitub ai-Uiiiiq, no. 43.

» Cf.also*l-BaydRwI,I,p.l«,8: i->\*&mjd AjVI oJj» .J ^1 ^JjVlj

,£)l Slftl _#l Ma

68 CHAPTER FIVE

obligatory character of the wimmand. To the first category belongs
for instance, surah V:3 "When (after completing the htljj) you (once
again) enter the secular state, then go limiting". In spite of the usage
of the imperative (fa-is/ddit) in this sentence, this can never be inter-
preted as a command that "you must go"; rather, in this instance,
hunting, which was prohibited for the believers in their state of ihram,
is simply permitted once again >. Cirou instances inherent in the te.xt
proper point to this interpretation — that is either according to the
rule that a command following antithetically upon a prohibition
cannot be considered a command but a permission, or, if we do not
recognize this principle, then according to the analogy of surah 11:232.
Also in surah LXIL10 (And when the prayer is over you may disperse
in the land and seek (benefit from) God's grace) the imperative fa-
intasharu and 'wa-iht.au hu must be considered permissive because of
the preceding prohibition of doing business during prayer.

According to the explanation of Ibn Qutuybah who dealt with our
73 question in one of his responses -, the context of the speech cannot
determine whether an imperative expresses command or recommen-
dation; rather, this is a. matter of instruction and investigation in
each individual case.

The representatives of the science of the principle of jurisprudence
are certainly those most interested in enumerating the different
functions fulfilled by the imperative in order to decide from case

1 Cf. ftl-BnyiJiiwi, I, p. 240, 3; ibid., II, p. 333, 14: jwVl J*>- ^ *j %X*lj

- Kiliib al-mu.m'il (tttobisoho llnniliiiihrifl. dor horzogliohon llililiollmlc in (lotlm,
no. 030) fol. 5b: J^U* (J-*** tS-*J I rt*<Vl ,J V^' <-JJjJ^ J-* (JiJlwJ

/•Jjcii Lc L^JU-j Lc (Jjx«j ylj iLa*jj\ ol_j5 i_i_j_p-l o-iA *e«*»
J I j^-Uj. jr-b?n-i tlSJJj Jxu^j 1 ^jjj ^bj »">V£Jl y I4LJ

£%*jia\ UN blijj' j I JJu V (j^jillj <_j-UI_9 U^sl'l

^1 y cL-il oTyJI <_/_? **k> Jj~yJI ^150J OW f^ ^ " U 'j SV^
ltV 3* s" W^ l ^ l * i ' «-«* ^-^ ^ ^ J , ^ , - J ^J* £^ ur^'- 5

[_*J>U _jA j-il Ifl^-Jj ojijJI IjJ'lj ojliv=JI l_j*Jllj iJ^-J V* Ajjji

■a.Qj.1 ^ ^j'^fj pKL JjS £sjp IjJ^SIj "J^-j J^c jjy&

OHAPTBR FIVE

69

to case whether a saying in the form of a command or prohibition
has to be declared as such, or whether such a saying has to be classified
in a different category. The famous Shafi'ite theologian Imam al-
Haramayn treats this question very conclusively. "At times", so he
says, "there appears in the text the form of command ; meant, how-
ever, (a) either as a permission (see the examples above) ; (b) as a threat
("therefore do whatever you want" surah XII:40 ', al-Baydawi, on
the passage, tahd'ul sliadid) ; or (c) as an expression of indifference to the
action of the person addressed (e.g. "May you burn — in hell-fire —
regardless of whether or not you can bear it", literally, bear it or do
not bear it, surah LII:16; or as a secular example: "Thunder and make
lightning, Zayd"; this cannot bo a command, but = no matter
whether you thunder or make lightning). Even in cases in which the
creation of a thing or a state is announced, the decision to create it
is expressed in the form of a command, although, because of the
inability of the creature to comply with it, a command is in this case
ill-timed (e.g. "Become monkeys" surah 11:61 ; "0 fire I turn to
coolness and become salvation for Abraham" surah XXL69 ".
Naturally, these latter points are treated in more detail in grammar;
theology is concernod with them because the form of command serves
to express other categories. By the same token, the use of the command
as an expression of permission strictly speaking belongs to the scope
of jurisprudence 8 .

It is the orthodox schools who make the most extensive use of the
concession to declare the form of command Ul-istihhdb. lil-nabd, lil-
ibdhah. Whoever reads carefully any commentary, cither of the Koran
or the traditions, will not have overlooked how those terms so often
74 follow the imperative in the text by way of explanation. Naturally,
the followers of the Zahirite school could not always avoid the accept-
ance of such an interpretation. But as a rule, they oppose it in cases
of strictly legislative texts. We have seen one example of this above
(p. '17); for a closer illustration of this idiosyncracy in tho present
chapter which deals particularly with this point of fiqh of the Zahiritc
school, we might add to the examples of the Zahiritc legal interpretation

1 <It moat certainly is not xi'imli xil:40; it in probably not oven from Mm Koran).

~ nl-BuydiiwI, to tho piuwago, I, p. 64, 2f>: "^ il j-Xi ^*J IjJjJ **jfj
Cj^j&Sji >it_ r u, jj 3\jl\ \j\j aAc pb ojJj. (This footnote in not indicated
in the text of the Gorman edition).

:| Waraifii, fol. 12a, 17a (In our Supplements).

70

CIIAI'TKH FIVE

75

already presented in thia respect .some others from the Held of the Koran
and the tradition. Even with rcspoct to this point of their inter-
pretation of tlie law, the Zahirite sehool applies its methods of inter-
pretation equally to both sources of Islamic law '.

I.

There is the example of Koran sH/rdh IV:3: fa-inhihu mil (aha la-
hum min al-nisa'. Although the common interpretation is that every
Muslim is free to marry, or, at the most, that God recommends married
life to Muslims, the Zahiris deduced from the imperative fa-inkihu
that He makes it obligatory for them -, and that this contains a
binding obligation, wujub, for those who meet the condition to fulfil
this command ', To what extent the Zahiris are concerned with merely
asserting the text can be seen from the fact that, according to their
point of view, the requirements of the law are met with a singlo ■'
marriage, for it is not the continuous state of marriage that is recom-
mended in the above-mentioned verse, rather, tlio single act of con-
cluding a marriage ".

1 Some fOftt represent the extreme opposite to this view with their Interpretation

of tho categories of tho individual Islamic lawn. They Hay Hull, oven in 00808 in which
it iH I'xpliriily Hinted in the traditions thai, a prohibition belongs to tho mttkrith category,
very often liuriiw is actually meant. Such a prohibition ought, to ho interpreted in thia
manner since the early Islamic theologians, because of modesty and good manners,
hesitated to use the Koranic term of prohibition for a prohibition which they deduced.

Al-Sha'rllnl, I, p. 136 cites this attitude in the name of his teacher All al-KhawwiiH
and gives a detailed explanation.

" There are also legists who cited traditions supporting oolebaoy ; cf. on this difference
of opinion Qucrry, limit- mumdman, vol. 1, p. 039.

;l This restriction ToIIowh from the words of the tradition, Nilcdh 2: c. U??iJ /-*

1 al-SluiVani, II, p. 122: ^J of^llj J^-jJI ^ Ulk* -M^jj ^\$ (Jji
L i'J^.I_^JI a'^Xi J-ya^ c.jUJI ja\ (JlixJ "jl _^»jJI ^j 'a^*

5 Characteristic is in this oonnoct.ion the following motivation: (_)-*> I (J"i

^^1 jt.\ki IjiLu'j cJ^jJI J^ij,L ~}Ks Lis r-jj-^l "^jk l>' _/>lk)l

iio AJ-I I Jj» ^i i.e. of the tradition cited in nolo 3. — al-Nawawi, III, p. 30(1.

I

CHAPTJ3U FIVE

71

70

Surah VL121. Wa-la ta'kulu minima lam yudhkar ism Allah 'alayhi
wa-innahu la-fisq: "Do not eat from that over which God's name has
not been pronounced, for this is sin". It cannot be denied that an
objective examination of this verse will discover in this law a matter
which Muslim theologians classify in the first and fifth of the fore-
going categories respectively. Nevertheless, the orthodox schools found
that this was not exactly a prohibition — with the exception of
Ahmad, but only according to one version of the law transmitted by
him — and encouraged a loss stringent custom, namely, that it was no
absolute condition for the ritual legality of food to pronounce the
name of God before its preparation. This principle is of practical
importance particularly with regard to slaughtered animals because,
according to this interpretation, Muslims can consume meat of animals
that were killed without mentioning God's name beforehand l . How-
over, excluded from this leniency is the case that tho name of other
gods might have been mentioned. The so-called lanmiyah, then, is
according to these schools a pious custom, just as Muslim tradition
generally insists that it should not be omitted beforo any major
action *. It is well known how carefully this principle is observed in
every day life. Ibn 'Abbas is represented as having heard the Prophet
make tho statement that the devil is riding with anyone who mounts
an animal without mention of tho formula bismillah n . However,
all this is simply pious custom and not at all obligatory. The four
orthodox schools, in tho interest of harmonizing the law with the lax
daily practice (cf. p. 47), are attempting to reduce tho law as con-

1 ol-Qast&llanl, VIII, p. 270: ^^IJO (jUj 'jji ^j IL»-^J1 ILcj^Lj aJ6
^J **!<*" J ^*i^l 4-a-^ JS" Nl "J^ J J^i yft J* iyL^-1

-Uj>-1 i_-AOj A-»-^l tlSj 7-JZi ^Ai aLJ\ (J I -Ua-lj li£L)L ^ 'bljj

.^Jl -Ufi jl>=M ,J I jj^J-lj d&Lj iUji* jjI
- A quite frequently encountered saying of Muhammad: J Jo (£3 j^\ jji

a ol-Damirr, I, p. 300: CjI_j£AJI i-jbi' ^J ^l_^k)l ^1^)1 jjl t£jjj
XjJI l_-5J lil Jls Ail pjlp ^Jl tf. |^j ,^-llt |>J ^ cfkc tf-

!>-* V d& (jl» ~Cfu JUi jlla-iJI Aijj «uil ~J £'s* U lvTl-0 1
i}yj [ Ja a£1jI ^J Jljj ^j "^ Aj (Jli ctiJI. Also (^Ua. ought to bo
preceded by .L-^— >J. al-Bukhiirl, Kitub al-viudil', no. 8.

VI

CIIAI'TKU KIV10

tained in the afore-mentioned Koranic verse to the same level, although
not to the same degree. They cite traditions that purport to show the
superciliousness of the outward mention of Allah '. Strictest of all
is Abu Hanifah who elevates the dhikr Allah to an obligation, adding,
however, that when this custom has inadvertently been omitted, this
neglect has no bearing on the legality of the food =. Also the Shl'ite
interpretation of Islamic law distinguishes between deliberate and
involuntary omission 3 . Dawiid al-Zfihirl protests against all of these
concessions; lie advocates the prohihitie.e te.rl of the Koranic law and
77 declares any food absolutely prohibited (h/trdm) over which Allah's
name has not been mentioned, regardless of whether or not this was
done purposely or simply inadvertently'. Ahmad ibn Hanbal,
whose tenets, as we shall see, correspond most closely to that of the
Zahiritc school, is represented as having taken the same point of view,
although according to a version that has received little consideration.

Let us proceed to examples that are connected with statements from
the traditions. For the purpose of transition, wo choose a statement
from the tradition, the interpretation of which is closely related to
a Koranic verse from which it is actually derived. It shows us in full
light the Zahirite method of adhering to the literal text. There is a well-
known tradition which usually serves as an example in grammar to
demonstrate the dialectic usage of am as an article (in place of al):
lai/sa min al-harr al-mi/dm, Jl al-safar "Fasting on a journey is not,
part of piety" ". This statement from the tradition must be viewed
with relation to surah II: ISO fa-man folna minhtm mand aw 'aid
st/.far fa-'iddali min a ////dm iikhar "But he of you who is sick or on a
journey (for him is prescribed) a. (equal) number of other days". The

1 Miijnuh. iv. p. 202oitoa the following tradition: d_j-« ^1.^11 *-* «u)l jii

Jjb 1 j\ (Jllj ftl.UiiyfJuwI. 1, |). 807, 7: J)°JJ l ijlj J")^. J-J.1 SpiloJ

. J_Jji .ill I -^,1

rt-" 1

2 Of. iil-.SIm'riinl, II, p. 60.

;1 Quarry, Droit miuulman, IT. 2ifi, art, 87,

,l al-BiiytJiiwi, I.e.: aJIj UL»J jl \'xf- li.«....,:JI dSj_/L. p}.j£ .J y*> ll

. jli* 0*3.1 ^j jjb i_-4J

1 nl-Iiiiklmn, Kitiib nl-sinrni. 00, 30,

LL;

ClIAI'TKK KIVK

73

generally accepted view of the orthodox legal schools about these
passages from the Koran and the tradition is that it is left to the discre-
tion of the sick and the traveller to break the fast of Ramadan, and
to make up for the omitted days of fasting when more settled circum-
stances prevail. Their opinions on this vary only concerning the point
of whether it be more meritorious for such people to make use of the
divine suspension as revealed by the Prophet, or. if it be better for them,
to forego this exemption despite the difficult circumstances under
which they are living, and to perform the fast of Ramadan. All agree
that the statements of the Koran and the tradition ought to be con-
78 sidcred as only optional '. under no circumstances imperative or
prohibitive, respectively. However, it is transmitted from some
teachers who flourished beforo the legal schools had crystallized that
they subscribed to the latter opinion '■'. This difference of opinion also
entails certain practical consequences. If breaking the fast is obligatory
under certain circumstances, then he who does not comply with this
Command and continues to observe the general fast will have to fast
again for the respective days once he reaches his place of residence,
or once he is healthy again, .since his previous fast cannot be considered
in calculating the number of obligatory days of fasting. Dawfid's
legal school, contrary to the consensus as it evolved later, associates
itself with these old authorities to which Abu ITurayrah also belongs ".
"ft u not pieti/" is an expression which means literally "a pious person
docs not do something like this" ; and thus, the Koranic verse, accord-
ing to its simple wording, must lie considered imperative.

Quite frequently we find Abu Hurayrah among the authorities of

1 The tradition ibid., no. :17, NeoniH to have boon fiilirinuti'il in Hiippnrt of thin inter-
pretation! 1— -jo *ii rt-*U= (j-JI M _^5LJ lb (J Is tiSJL £? ^1 ,j*

2 MnfrilTIi, II, p. 174: La i_^ AjI J I AjU^aJI cLJj=- ^ |»jJ 1— «* J
iy\ (Jji* jjbj _pJ .ill ^ aJs. Uj-^aJJ l^^ia-aJ (jl yL-Uj u^iy-*

*ll jg- o-.l y JjjaJI C -U\ J J^WU J-Hij y- d-.b cr^

^ i>. Ajb jL^-l IJ^J j**=-\ ^J ,_jT^ _^a>JI (J |»U> jl J^

A-^i.j jlkiVl 61 ijl ctfiJUJl J$\ u_-ajj rjLji^VI. 0£ al-Sha'rflnl,
II, p. 20; nl-Niiwiiwt, III, p. 03.

:l al- Hiiyijiiwi, I, p. 101, 21 to Uioabove-niimtioiH'il Knriuiiu verm 1 (J-^— iJ- 6 'J»*J
, i'j^jA _jJ 1 J ll Ajj '^ij& Llii I 1 A i >tJ 1 j l»Jj*. J 1 A& ,_)-».} *.tfi A - j l 1

74

CHAPTER five

CHAl'TIOR FIVE

75

the Zahiritc .school. The legal tradition which he represents is often
in disagreement with the tenets of the exponents of ra'y, and it is
cited as an objection against them. This is probably ono reason that
traditions from Abii Hurayrah, even such as arc incorporated in the
canonical collections, are often rejected as authorities for legal deci-
sions by jurists. Al-Damlrl's article on the "snake" supplies us with
interesting information about this from older works. There is un-
fortunately no space here to elaborate on this '. A typical remark
of Abu Hanlfah is taken from an alleged dialogue between Abfi Muti'
al-Balkhl and Abu Ilanilah. "What would happen", asked Abu Muti',
79 "if your view were contrary to that of Abu Baler?" — "I would",
replied the imam, "abandon my opinion in favour of his and that
of 'Umar, 'Uthmiin, 'All, and even, indeed, in favour of the rest
of the Prophet's companions with the exception of Abu Hurayrah,
Anas b. Malik, and Samurah b. Jundab" a . It is reported that
"Umar b. Habib (d. 207) almost forfeited his life because he defended
Abu Hutaytah against attacks from Haifa al-Kashid's court
scholars a . A passage in al-A/.raq! * cannot be overlooked which
proves that Abu Hurayrah was considered capable of false information.
One tradition says literally the following: "A male Muslim who
wants to bequeath one of his possessions has no right to spend two
nights without having his written will on him" °. The legal schools
see in this an encouragement for the institution of making a will and
recognize this as a command of the Prophet, but only as a command
belonging to the second category of the commandments. Only Dawiid
and his school sec in the categorical form of the. statement a clue that
the Prophet has made a binding command which is not to be trans-
gressed and is to be complied with by everybody. Consequently, every
Muslim has the duty to make out an early will • if he possesses property.

i ui-Dam;n, I, p. 350-851.

2 In nl-Sha'riinl, I, p. 71.

3 'J'aliilluh, p. 440.

4 aiiroiiih-n dr.r Sl/ull Mrkka, I, p. 185, 12.
• MiiHliin, Kitiib al-wtixii/iilt, no. I: Ja y

1 lT

.aXs- Ajjl5C< '^~^>_JJ VI O^J C~?J (jl ^J iffji O'

nl-Nivwawi, IV, p. Si: ^\ Jj; jjj_.il ***.\ Jij Xl^yJI An <iJ-l AJ

ijb JUj 'L».\j V aj_jJ_^ LJl _aa|(J-I i_-aJ~.j LaJu ^50 I^j

. l^j bib tcJj^oj AJ ^yJi

It is known that points connected with this question play an important
role in the disputes between Sunnites and Shi'ites.

In the chapter on assignations, l we read the following statement
of the Prophet: "Delaying (payment of debts) on the part of a rich
person is injustice; given the case that a person (instead of payment
in cash) receives a draft drawn on a rich man, he ought to accept
80 it (in order to compel the rich person to discharge his liability to
pay)" a . The Zahirls, in agreement with some followers of the IJanhalite
school, find in this a command of the first category because of the
linguistic form in which Muhammad made this statement, i.e. the
assignor is in no circumstance permitted to refuse the assignation and
to demand payment in cash. The rest of the schools are content to
see in the foregoing tradition an optional recommendation of the
Prophet which docs not purport a binding, compulsory law :1 .

For the Zahirls, the employment of the imperative suffices to
determine a command of the first category, and this, oven when the
tradition expresses no general law, but represents merely a casual
decision because of the inquiry of an individual. "Sa'd b. 'Ubadah
questioned the Prophet concerning a vow his mother made but did
not discharge because she had died beforehand. The Prophet said:
"So you discharge it on her behalf" l . Only the Zahiritc school sees hero
an opportunity to deduce from this the cowjmhory law that the heir
must discharge the vow of the devisor on his behalf. The rest of the
schools do not consider this a legal obligation but only a pious act,
unless, of course, the vow has bearing on the bequest of part of the
property and can be discharged from the estate. In no other case

1 Cf. Kramer, GullttrgMchiclitn dm Oric.nl.i, I, p. OUil-filO.
- iiUluklmri, Kilab iil-lmuiVali,

Oh, no. 2: J^ Jfi £j| ^J |JJ0 l jJA\ jl*->
.wQi [another Torsion: JiiscJi ^J-i ^J-t ^J^-l (J-~»-l i^'jL

nl-QuBHIani. IV, p. 10.'): JUj c_U^ J*$\ '■** t)' (J* '^ JJ4*?J

.»Jll J* UjJ lj-»ji» v.**^ iNitoJ-l (y* u Wj j*^ i>'

■' Miniliin. Kitub al-nadhr, no. 1; al-Bulchiiri, Kilab al-ivafayii., no. 101 -***• tjl
l&lcj cuJ'L ,JJ| ol J ^9 rtJ«I^ «uil (Jj—j LS ^iJ -^j Siu* i>J
Igrp A_iif J lis )Jo. In Ibn Sa'd, whom quite a number of different VOreioM
of Sa'd'e request to tho Prophet are related in Sa'd b. Tbtdah's biography, It ia entirely

different. Only our. MS eontaiiiH the request 08 reported in tho eotleotlOM of traditions.
See Loth, Dim Chwmibnch del llm Sad, p. 74.

SI

76

CHAPTER 1'IVJS

can the heir be made responsible for discharging a vow which lie has
not; made himself '.

3.

From what lias just been discussed follows yet another basic point
of view that causes the Zahirite school to increase the number of
wajibat. and vvihzunll contrary to the identical teachings of all other
orthodox schools. No disagreement exists among the different theolog-
ical schools of Islam as to whether every sunnah of the Prophet consti-
tutes a binding law. The Prophet testified himself that his conduct
was only of individual importance and that no generally applicable
law for the Muslim community ought to bo deduced from it. Khalid
b. al-Walid, commonly called "the Sword of God", tells Ibn 'Abbas
that he, together with the Prophet, visited the Prophet's wife May-
miinah, his aunt. Maymiinah treated her guests with roasted lizard
(dabb mnhmWi) that her sister Hafidah bint al-HSrith had brought
from Nnjd. This dish was put before the Prophet who never touched
food without first mentioning the name of God over it. When the
Prophet was going to help himself to the food offered, one of the
women present said -to the lady of the house: "Why do you not tell
the Prophet that what you have put in front of him is meat of a
lizard"? When the Prophet heard this, he abstained. Khalid, however,
asked: "Why, is this food prohibited, Messenger of God ?" — "No !"
replied the Prophet, "but where I come from this food is unknown
and T refrain from it". — "As for myself", so Khalid continues,
"I cut up the roasted lizard and ate from it while the Messenger of
of God was watching me '■'• [and did not stop me, Muslim]". In Muslim,
traditions are given according to which the Prophet gave the following
decision from the pulpit when questioned about the meat of lizards:

1 al-Nawawl, IV. p. 00: Ojl_^!l <j\ J>6-°-f-1 l-^aJ-jJ L-jb 3-> 61 rtJ-C-lj
IJI Vj cj^ jg* 6^ 131 i£^U [> 4-fW J"^' cL ^ **$* ^

jAtkJi j*. i jiij &i jj z^^ui {f$ asy L-iii ij lll jit

ii~l-X=M ^ ij^3 *J f~ J? j' Ij^" (j* oU=ii Ail (J" "" 3 ? "**■*" '^■'■"J

.ii5Gi .uljJL r-jts^

- KilCih nl-nfi malt. no. 10. Cf. other versions in al-Damirt, II, p. 05.

CIIAPTIOK I'MVK

77

"I myself do not eat it, but I do not prohibit it for you" '. Prom these
82 traditions it follows that the Prophet did not consider his own habits
relating to the field of religious law to be of binding importance either
for general practice or for abstention. The same is valid for the Prophet's
statements transmitted in the traditions. No matter how highly
regarded were the meritorious and pious endeavours to imitate every-
thing that the Prophet had said or done, even to the point of asking
first in minute matters of ordinary life how the Prophet and the
companions had reacted under similar circumstances 2 — a tendency
that, as is well-known, many Muslim authorities have stretched to
the utmost limit of scrupulosity 3 — it was also noted that not every-
thing that was transmitted as an authoritative statement from the
Prophet entailed an obligatory command. The Prophet made binding
laws, i.e. he interpreted God's will, only as regards questions of din ;
he gave advice in secular matters, but compliance with it, although
meritorious, was by no means intended to be tho indispensable duty
of every Muslim. In a tradition in Muslim •', the Prophet himself
differentiates between the two classes of statements. In Medina, he
once watched people fecundate palm trees. So he asked them: "What
are you doing?" — "Wo havo always done this", they replied. Upon
this the Prophet said: "It might be hotter if you would not do this".
On account of this, they discontinued their old method, but the trees
obviously deteriorated. Somoono mentioned this fact to the Prophet,
who then said the following: "I am just human; if I order something
related to your religion, then obey, but if I order you to do something
s:t on my behalf , then I am no more than just a human being (i.e. in

1 Kitiib (il-xui/tl, mi. Ci (commentary edition V, p. Illlfi).

- (.T. for instanco an example in Abii lU-Mahiinin, I, p. 816,

3 It in reported about Ibn 'Umar that ho always bod his Blosta (eft) under one partic-
ular tree between Mecca anil Medina because Oho Prophet UBod to do thin. — Ahmad
l>. I.laubal, throughout his lifo, abstained from watermelons bceaiiBo there was no
tradition instructing him how tho Prophet used to oat them, (ftl-Sha'rtol, I. p. 07).

In al-Maqqatl, I. p. 810, a very interesting piece of informal ion in found that bIiowh
how. under changed OlrOUmitanoOB, people made it a point to resort to standards applied
by the Prophet.

Ul Li I

U |_jjir3

4 Kiliih al-fitiln'il, 00.81: rtivL 5 /j-i t.j-^ rtF^r'' '<*' j~*t

'• This passage as well as the following are very informative for the meaning oi the
word ra'y. Al-Nnwuwi interprets thia word in our passage: LJJJi j-*> iJ lS'

l'i

■j^i oljj)

pr****

o-il^b AJU' L Cli f±j£zi\ J^ V L>£ol*-iJ

84

78

OHAPTBB FIV1B

such cases I am not the messenger of the divine will but I am simply
giving you my own opinion)". Later Muslim theologians consistently
followed this principle of tho Prophet. "During his gatherings", says
al-Bata.lya.wsi, "the Prophet used to make statements in a narrative
form intending neither command nor interdiction, nor least of all, to
elevate the contents of these statements to Islamic principles" '. Ibn
Khuklun makes tho same remark on the occasion of tho Prophet's
statement on medicine (al-tibb (d-v.abti.wt) in order to show that such
advice by Muhammad cannot havo obligatory character, for "the
Prophet was sent to us to teach us the laws of religion, but not to
inform us on medicine or on other matters belonging to daily affairs" a .
A Muslim theologian from tho ninth century A.H., Rajab b. Ahmad 3 ,
says with reference to the following tradition:

"Wo wore once travelling with 'Umar b. nl-Khaurib when wo noticed thai, at
a certain point on (.ho way ho middeuly turned off th« road, vvhon questioned
whether or not he was doing this deliberately he said; M havo seen the Prophet

doing the .111.1110 tiling, no I jn.it imitate him' ".

that "such swnnahs arc called nl-xunnuh ai-'udlyuh 'concerning every-
day practice' or also al-sunnah al-zuidah 'superfluous' (supererogatory)

•U (J-»-«JI i—-*. Of. also the following passage! Tho Prophet consulted Sa'd 1).
M uTiclh nml Sa'il b. 'Ubiiiliih about tho reward to bo OOOOrded to tho I'V/.arito 'Uyaynah

in return for his oasistonoe against tho tribes. Tho Prophet had offered the ohief of the
Pazfirites one third of the yield of the dates, but ho wanted to supply tho troops only
on the condition that he wan guaranteed half tho yield of the dates. There upon tho
Prophet asked the two Sa'd who replied! "If you received an order for this (limn God)

then act accordingly and move, but If you did not receive a divine order then, by God,
wo iihall have no other recompense for tho Fazarah than the mvord !" Then the Prophet
Said: "I havo received no order; if this were the OOSO, I would not. have Sought your
Counsel. I inn merely submitting mi opinion to you". 0_^il jjj c. J^i j^jl i
pO-C J^i^fcl <£lj jA \j\j ^xj'jjLi L c { Jli (Sa'd b. 'Ubadah'ii biography
in M. .1. Miiller, Beititlge. zitr Oescliirldr. tier we.itlichr.ii. Amber, p. 104).

i In al-Bamlrl, IT, p. 282: jL^-Vl J-~Jl?i ,i j5jo O^ «JS Ail

- M iiqtitldimah, ed. Ifuliiq, p. 412.

•' Of. on Iiih work I.liijji Kbiilifab, VI, p. 101. Thin book laden with information wan

printed in Istanbul 1201/1848 in two quarto volumes. This edition, however, m not

at my disposal.

OHAPTBB FIVE

79

— cf. sunnat al-huda '. Their omission is not sinful but their perform-
ance, a pious act; their omission is reproachable, but without entailing
divine punishment. Inherent in this is merely an encouragement to
follow the sunnah in general, regardless of whether it purports to
provide divine guidance or whether it belongs to the so-called 'super-
fluous ones' " -.

This is the generally accepted view of Islamic theology which
prevails also in the best documented interpretations of the collections
of traditions. There have always been extremists, either individuals
or groups, who, in their evaluation of the religious, practical aspects
of individual traditions, went beyond the limit determined by the
majority, but their views have never achieved canonical validity.
The Zahirite school is one of those. Prom the examples of their inter-
pretation of a number of the so-called "traditions of custom" which
we have examined, we can conclude that the Zahiris adhere to this
literal point of the linguistic expression. They sec obligatory commands
or interdictions (1. and 5. category) in passages in the traditions
which contain the Prophet's advice on actions towards which religious
law is totally indifferent. I shall give an example from each of the two
mentioned categories. In a statement from tho tradition, Anas b.
85 Malik reports: "Domestic sheep (xhtT dajin) in Anas b. Malik's house
wore milked for the Messenger of God, and tho milk mixed with water
from the well on Anas' property. The cup was offered to the Prophet
who emptied it with one draught, Sitting on his left was Abu Bakr
and to his right a bedouin. Then 'Umar who was afraid that the
Prophet would offer tho cup to the bedouin said: "Give it to Abu
Bakr next to you !" But the Prophet offered it to the bedouin and
then said: "Always to the right, always to tho right" ' J . Legists infer

1 Mountdgoa d'OliKion, Tablrmi. gin&ral, vol. 1, p. 84

'- al- Warn/ah id- Ahmtttli tilth wti-id-tllmrl'uh td-mirmiiilii/tili ft .ihtirh ftirikal til-Mv/tam-
mtidhjah (MS of the Hungarian National MiiHeiim, Orientt. no. XVI) fol. Ilia: (J^iJ
Jj l^y ,i r_f N_9 o-b'l^l aLJIj ij'jUJI aI-JI 1u*JI t>J& Jil
aLJI c.LJ| Jji ^ Vj 'O3JJI "aaIjIT ojj£L> \4fyj o~-*- ^**
lJUS -UJl <JU Jj'IjUI ^ jj-. _jl (^oAl i>.* ^ oils' c- 1 [*•» ^ 2 - J

yf- (f\ {jC jiy Kj^-^J &UW*. oj-J Jill Jj-"J ^ rt^ Oo •&

.d53S J*i olS' ^

a al-liukhari, Kilnb ul-hibtih, 110, 4; Aehribuh, no. 18; Mitttiltftt, no. 2.

80

OHAI'TEH PIVK

from this tradition that it is a rooomniendablc custom for proper
living and superior etiquette to pass food or drinks cte., always in a
circle from left to right, and generally, to give preference to the right
side l and to practise this in all actions a . No one but the Zahirl Ibn
llazm sees a ■rclii/ioiix law in this, and he takes the consequences from
this view »,

By the same token, the Zahirls make use of the mere linguistic
form of an interdiction ■- even where it is intended to give only
advice on proper custom to establish a religious interdiction
(tahnvi), while the other schools see in this nothing but a disapproval
(kiimliiit tanzih). "The Prophet prohibited (vnf/d) the it/ran or the (jiran
unless it wero done with special permission of the companion" ■'. The
foregoing expressions refer to tho custom of holding two dates side by
side and then of eating from both at the same time. The commentators
agree that this statement intends to teach only that one should not
exhibit voracity and gluttony in front of one's guests and tablo com-
panions, since this creates an offensive impression and gives tho
8<S eating companions the impression of wanting to bo first. Only the
followers of tho Zahirito school see in this a, religious law equal to
other interdictions, on account of the word vahii. This is their inter-
pretation of 4i.Il passages in which they find the word: "he prohibited"
or synonyms of it \

1 G'f. Kiinli nl-lihii.i, mi. lis, 77. A mosque i.i to be entered from the eight) KitSb at-
.mini, no. -17, mid others more,

2 Kiliib nl-wiiilu', no.Sli ■&*-j'j dJjL^' i Cf^-~^\ *^?=*J («jJ-v3 ,<~J1 oU'

«U5 AJUi ij oj j-ijij ; of. Kiliib al-u('imnli, no. 5. Cf. for tho Greeks Iliad, I,

.ids, Q&ymy, XVII, 418; for tho Jaws jw -pi k^k w k^> nam nmv trout 5>a (Talmud
Babyl, Sot&, Ibl, 15b).

a al-QuHlullnni, IV, p. 217: J-o "ill J& iljLui ]yl V J Us »j». i>.l jUU.

•' aUBukhOrf, Kiliib at-mw/SHm, do. 14; Ai'inmk, no. 44; Slmriquk, no. l. Muslim,

Kiliib (il-ii.ihribiili, no. 23.

11 iil-QiiBtivllanl, IV, 11.205; nl-Nii.Hii.wi, JV, p. 402: jl ^yx^ii ,<&^\ iJ*J

CHAPTER SIX

It has already been emphasised that in the rigorous interpretation
of the judical sources, Ahmad b. Hanbal's school approaches most
closely the method of the Zahirito school. It was shown in the last
chapter that in disputable legal questions, the founder of the Hanbalite
school decides according to the same principles which guide tho Zahiritc
school. There would have been more numerous examples if, in the
selection of examples for decisions of the Ztihirite school, wo had not
been led by the principle to consider only points in which the Zahirlyah
demonstrates a special position vis-a-vis all other canonical schools '.
Tho Hanbalite school permits the literal application of statements con-
tained in tho tradition also in instances for which we have, in any ease,
no certain proof that the Zahirito school would have taken the same
position on the practical application of ritual law and canonical
law in the particular questions.

It is reported that Anas, the companion of the Prophet, reported
the following: "We got up early for the Friday service and had our
siesta after it was finished" -. All legal schools interpret this to mean
that tho Prophet's companions hurried to hold the Friday prayer
in time to finish with it before the siesta. The Hanbalitos oonelude
87 that the Friday prayer can bo legally performed also in the morning 3 ;
this, as it is well-known, is contrary to all Islamic practice.

In tho book on legal decisions (Krehl's edition had not yet been
published), we read: "Abu Bakrah wrote to his son (who was a judge)
in Sijistan: Do not pass judgement on two (parties seeking legal
advice) if you are in anger, for I have heard the Prophet say: 'A judge
ought not pass judgement when he is in anger' " *. This statement is

1 Suob dissenting rotes from tho goneral consensus art- oallod mufraddi.

a uMiukliiiri, Kildb al-jum'uli, no. Ifi: ^X~) Ui ^ji <j£- -^^ "

» al.Qnetall&nl, II, p. 198: <£C«J Jsj lU_ji_i)l JJ \^%^i j^ cS'

« Kitub al-ahhlm. 110. 18: j^ (jl^=~J 6&J ^1 ij ' *j*i _^' "-r~^
"i/ Jjju rt-^iya ^Jl Cou- jJU jL-^c- c-jlj ^CjI u;j ^j^ *

.(jL^ui jAJ <J\J'I &o p5v». OW^i

82

CHAPTER SIX

generally regarded as wise instruction, as wcll-rneant advico for
judges ". Sonic jurisprudents go quite far in their application of this
instruction. For instance, the Shafi'itc Abu al-Fayyad al-Basrl dis-
approves of a judgo who concerns himself with his private, practical
affairs — e.g. the expenses of his household — since this would in-
fluence his judgement more than anger would "-. In spite of this scru-
pulous caution, no one except a few Hanbalites see in the Prophet's
declaration a prohibitive statement. They conclude from this that
"a judge who is in anger is not permitted to pans judgement" and con-
sequently, that a judgement passed in this state has no legal validity
at all, since the judge was prohibited to pass it in the first place.
How far the hair-splitting casuistry of t\ic fuqaha' went is apparant:
evon those who hold this view differentiate between whether the
judge was completely clear about this legal decision before he became
angry, or whether the occurence of this psychological effect precedod
the sound judgement in the pending legal case a .

An example from the legislation on slaves provides an apt conclusion
to the above argument. "Mudabbar" * designates in Islamic law a slave
who, during his master's life time, is promised freedom ipso evenlu '
after the latter's death. For example, it is said of the favourite Fawz
"that one of the Barmakite youths bought her as a, ahiv a (fa-dabbarah ft)
and promised her freedom in the case of his death" °. Now, the question
arises whether such a slave, sold before gaining his freedom, i.e.
before his master's death, may really be sold by him, or whether the
master forfeited his right over the person of the slave on account of
his formal pronouncement of the formula of tadlnr. The tradition 7
cites the concrete case that someone promised his slave freedom in

1 Qurry, Droit mwmliiian, II, p. 392, art. 40.

- Ibn al-Miilaqqin, fol. i)5u: <J2 ^^j-ypj *i* I ■&" .J Ji-Jl -^IJUI oivj

3 ul-Qiii4allilni, X, p. 200: i_^ijj| JU. J f0 5C=S-1 JlILj ^ iUabJ-l | ^uu .yij
<j' Oy f frfl^r'j J-^'J .il—ill t^^t (_jd-^b *** i<4--" Cj Jr-'

j4* "y'j y'M ^ r>*^-' ^ ol~J jl Juo j-Ic \j? <_—-^--Jt djSZ

* From ilnlir, purs posterior, for. death i» relation to lift iH duhr al-^aySh. Other*
dorivo this word from ilubimru, (so make arrangement!.

5 Van dun Burg. Dr. contractu eto., p. 38, note 2; Quorry, Droit mumdman, II, p. 11!) IT.
" KitSb td-ayhuiri, XV, p. Ml, from bulow.
' ul-JJulchuri, Kitdb al-'utq, no. 9.

CHAPTER SIX

k:i

the form of tadbir and that the Prophet himself bought this slave
during the master's life time from him. Many of the early legists
decide that a imtdabbar slave may legally be sold by referring to
the authority of the tradition and the Prophet's practice as attested in
it. Abu Hanii'ah alone, although according to some reports, Malik,
too, applies the tradition to one specific case ' ; however, they generally
teach that a mudabbar may not be sold. The Prophet himself did not
purchase the personal freedom, but bought only the services of the
89 purchased mudabbar slave '-. The practice of the Islamic society
adopted the latter view. The female slave Bad hi, famous by a host
of poetical transmissions which she made, belonged to Ja'far b. Miisii
al-IIadl. Muhammad b. Zubaydah, who was told about her merits,
intended to buy Bud hi from Ja'far. He, however, refused to comply
with Muhammad's wish. "People like myself do not sell the girl",
he said. — "Well, then give her to me", Muhammad asked in turn.
Upon this Ja'far replied: "This, too, is not possible, for she is a mu-
dabbarah". In order to obtain tomporary possession of the learned
girl, Muhammad rented her from Ja'far. This way of acquisition was
not explicitly prohibited for mudabbar slaves 3 .

We can observe the Hanbalite school's rigid adherence to the literal
text also in this question of mudabbar. According to a version re-
cognized by Ibn Hazm, the Imam Ahmad b. Haubal is represented as
having limited the permission to sell a mudabbar slave to male slaves
only, sinco the tradition mentions only slaves of this sex. We do not hear
of the Prophet's consent to the sale of a mudabbarah by setting an
example himself. Ibn Hazm who, on his part, reports this vorsion calls

• ul-Nawawt, IV, p. 117: "^iUJI i_-jaJd i)V.i iiJ^J-1 \i& J>j
elkfij ^jlbj i^JU ojjj*. jj^-Jj C-I^Vb Aj^J j_j^ AjU a£jo \jPyA

Jlsj p&s. aoiI ^j aj'aj jy _#b tj»l*««!j -u^-lj -^a^j u~^"'-5

OjjllUlJlj 0^jb>"J-l ^yj i_iLJIj cLAjJI j_^o^>.j d50Lj -»-^=- jJl
^Jl JlcL £lj \ji\s jIjJI «-j j_jsi V (JI*j Mi\ rt-fr^»-j £$j&\3

,««C, Jx- (jlT LT-i <j? f**k»
» al-Qu4iillanI, IV, p. 353: XLtJS. S. U |Jlj -UJj *~> J. Ajb ui~>jJ-l IjJjfaj
3 Kitdb id-ng/iuiii, XV, p. 1-15 top.

84-

CIIAl'TKU SIX

it "n differentiation for the reliability of which there is no proof" '.
In this question, then, Ibn Hanbal's school surpasses the followers
of the Ztihirite school in extreme sophistry a .

iL)

1 iil-Qasfalliliil, ibid,: _

A,n..., o^ «j

yi

>-•-- --- fj* t>J *j (•>?•-? - u *' cr

8 On this chapter of tho Hanbulito legal code see Slmykh Mm-':, ibid,, II, p. 37.

CHAPTER SEVEN

(I)

In tho struggle of the legal sources for recognition, the exponents
of "analogy" and "opinion", as well as their rivals, were oxtrcmely
anxious to produce for their point of view of the methods of Islamic
jurisprudence weighty arguments from the Sacred Book, from tho
traditions of tho Prophet, and from the words and actions of tho
companions. However, the sober, impartial exegosis resisted all at-
tempts to read into tho Koran statements on methods of investigation
00 which developed later, and which still lay entirely outside the scope of
Islamic relcvation K But scholastic exegesis was strongly inclined
to meddle with the problematic meaning of the most naive Koranic
passages. Attempts were also made to derive a. special legal basis for
ijma" from the Koran. This, however, could not be achieved easily.
It is reported about the Imam al-Shafi'i that when he was questioned
about the Koranic sanction of this legal source, he read the Holy Book
no less than thrco hundred times until he found in surah IV:ll5 a
support — although a very weak one — for tho derivation of tho
authority of tho consensus ecclcsiae: "Whoever breaks with the Prophet,
after guidance has become clear, and then follows a way other than the
believers' (i.e. the way of tho ontirety of the, believers) we shall turn
away from him and feed hell-fire with him" '-.

People were most ardently searching for Koranic versos that could
serve to support the very disputed ra'y and qiyus. Koran IV:80, which
is concerned with independent investigation (yastanbituna) of tho

i In al-Zoraakhaharl tr> sumk LXVIIslo JJUJ _jl ~>-J Hi ji wo rond
the following remade; i_^fc.l* ^ US ji Jl_dl cl)l _,-y«^l f-^ i><J
.... [ncM. J^o] tS'^JI (J-fcl <_^*Ju ^C j\ [noil. £~«J] viJ-^-l J*'

^J^~cj -Ui\ Jjii Ji a-J^^Wj i_-aIHI i-jbt^l. Aooordtog to nl-Shah-
rut&nt, p. 168 penult., qiySi derives its title from tho oonaensuB which in turn is defined

us authority hy tho Scripture.

8 ihifntlh. III. p. -102: Jjj' S&\ •—>\£ { J AjT ^ Ji^, J-Jij JyiiUJI jl tSjJ

.lb>l aJA J^.j { 1>. 'oja iuljdi' oT>i)l tyi '&*■ c-La.'i/l <j}\ ^

86

CIIAPTKll SEVEN

laws ', was readily quoted — yet also surah LTX:2, fa-i'tabir/i. yd ii.ll.,
al-ttbsdr "Take heed, o you who possess reason", Al-Baydawi makes
tho following remark about this passage: "This verse is cited in support
of the argument that qwjas is valid as legal evidence, for it contains
the order to judge one state of affairs by departing from another,
01 and, in view of the prevailing mutual points, to apply the one in judging
the othor, just as we have stipulated in the works on usul". People
pretended to have found all four legal sources conveniently united
in a single Koranic verse, namely, in surah 1 7:62, "0 you who believe !
Obey Allah [Koran as Allah's revealed word] and obey the Prophet
[snnnali] and those who command authority among you [consensus
of the imams]; if you are of different opinion about a thing, refer
it to Allah and tho Prophet [analogy on tho basis of decisions that
follow from those sources], if you believe in Allah and the Last Day.
This is good for you and beneficial for your soul" 2 . Of course, argu-
ments like, this are of no use against the followers of the rival schools.
Ibn Ha/.m keeps asking: "If all these methods are specified by tho
Koranic revelation how, then, can it be explained that none of them
is called by its proper name, and that all terms for thorn are innova-
tions?" 3 Furthermore, it would, indeed, bo absurd to assume that
it was God's will that a law be deduced according to methods defined
by these expressions, although the sources of His religion neither know
these expressions nor specify how they are to be interpreted, nor how
these methods are supposed to bo applied. In this caso, God would
have asked us to do something that we could not possibly do. It is
true — he continues — that examples could be cited from the Koran
to the effect that in certain casos, God's actions are based on certain
causes. But God and the Prophet, alone, are entitled to determine such
causes; the jurist has no further authority to go beyond this and to
contrive causes; if ho does so, he surpasses the limits sot forth by
God. Thereforo, when someone teaches that, because God has com-
manded or prohibited something, tho command or interdiction of
another thing follows from this on tho basis of common causes, as
contrived by that person without God's explicit command or inter-

' Ibtiil. fol. 18a.

2 Mnfiinh, III, ]>. ;i, r >(l-:j(i I in grout detail. Al-Haydfuvi, too, to tho pmwugo, briefly

indicates this application of tho Koranic verso; also Abu Su'Qd, marginal edition of
liiilfi.il, p. 868.

3 IbtSl, fol. 4b.

CHAPTER SEVEN

87

diction of the same, he professes to teach arbitrarily and contrary to
God's own will 1 .

02 It goes without saying that the opponents of the speculative school,
more so than its followers, were eagerly attempting to justify their
respective views on the basis of the Koran. If the latter were searching
for passages which permitted the supplementing of the legislation laid
down in the Koran and in the simnah in case of need, the formor were
bent on proving the inadmissibility of such a complement from the
Holy Book itself. Ibn Hazm, besides quoting his own polemical
refutation of the evidence of the exponents of qiyds, naturally continu-
ally quotes passages conducive to the consolidation of his tenets too.
On the side of those loyal to qiyds, the great dogmatist, Fakhr al-Dln
al-BazIj busies himself with refuting the argumentation by the so-called
"nvf&t al-qiyds" of each individual Koranic passage which they produce
for the justification of their view. We arc indebted to the scholarly
scope of this writer for a great deal of the knowledge about the applica-
tion of the Koranic passages in question a . Let us examine briefly

03 what has been gathered together in support of the anti-analogy theses
from Koranic passages.

i IbfSl, fol. 19o! JJ=>UI jUl ^ jl j^j Uul £oU j^\ ijjSj

(^uib u^l joii jjX jl aJLji jjja y t£JJI ( 5_^l»JI

J_Ldl Lj ^Lill L U c*J. V "^ J^teJlj J* (Sfyk J 1 J^^ jl
^^Ji! c^ y ^j dSOi "^ jj5Ci L_i;ij» cSlpI L»J jL-^-Vl Uj

.UJu ^j ,JJiJ ^ i^ljj ^-u ^ jL~>i£^Uj JJ-kJ c^'i t£uj

jl jTyiJI ,J 'Jl fr* ojjli U "jiO UijIj l \_fi£ -U=LI iJUi' <&J
ljl>u aJU' L J5" rtri JlJy All* ('""I. j>.\ ^^i ^ 4~~o J-j) j^-\ l _ f ij

L L ^1 *4* L JSj i]yl Aj_j jj». j^i r>J J^. jJj-jj d5oi &t

y$3 [yii j-Jo j^\ rt^C=i LLJ Aj ^l\ r^XoiCa. L Jij ^aJ *j Ob

JO) I *j* l"J Ajli p&-j jljSlj JU3 Jil *jjJ- 3uS AjV JtUI
l>l ,y4 lu>j >T l>l pk Uj».jl liTl^.1 ^jlj IJS" IjJ JUi-
V |jjbj (Jbu - jO)I J-.I _^c- _j* Iaaj Jj jUi' a-Ul _>J L j^4 >il

I. 18, in MS: tjIXw .(3^1 |JUS -UlljJ ^w' J<
2 il/^Jh-A, III. p. 25; IV, p. 198, CCO, 740; VII, p. 301.

88

CHAPTER SEVEN

EM

Most strongly emphasized is the principle that in the direct manifest-
ations of God's will, i.e. in the written law transmitted by the Prophet,
nil, Islamic, law is contained, and that beyond this, no religious law is
possible, and consequently, no source from which to deduco such
laws can be recognized. The nufdt id-qiyds mainly quote as authority
for this siirah V1:I38 ma fnrra.t.nd fl al-kitab min shay' '. Apart from
this, they have a decided liking Cor siirah XVl-AG,fa-su'nlu aid al-dhikr
in kunt.tim la, tu'lammi in which, so they say, it is shown to the believers
on what to rely in doubtful cases. Now the niifal, al-i/ii/as follow that,
if analogy was a legitimate basis of deduction, it would have boon
decreed that in doubtful cases the particular problem ought to be
chocked for analogical cases, and that uncertainties be solved in a
speculative manner by means of qiyds. The greatest importance,
however, is attached to surah VI:116 in which it is said about the
disbelievers that they follow conjecture, in yntlabi 'una ilia al-mnn,
and it is shown in an elaborate exposition that even judgement based
on analogical reasoning belongs to this category. They also cite
surah XLli:8 in which it is decreed that, as far as contested questions
are concerned, their judgement belongs to God (wu-mtl, iklit.alaft.um
fi-hi (,min shay"? fa-hnbumuhu ila Allah). Tins cannot refer to
analogy, but to the explicit meaning of the divine texts (al-nusns)
because they offer equal legal bases for all Muslims. Application of
analogy, however, encourages a difference of opinion, rather than
discourages it because analogical reasoning, practised by different
individuals, leads to different results, and because deductions from
qiyds concerning one and the same question do not necessarily
result in the same laws. It is from this point of view that surahs
111:98 and VJI:4S are cited. It is emphatically stated that the
application of qiyfis endangers the unanimity of the Muslim com-
munity: "Recognition of qiyds leads to a difference of opinion.
This, however, is frowned upon in the Koran. Thereforo, it follows
that it is prohibited to base one's daily life on laws deduced by qiyds.
It is obvious that this is a necessary conclusion since we see that the
world is full of differences of opinion as a consequonco of the application
of qiyds in jurisprudence" -. This is a reference to the mndhdhib.

' Ibi,!!. M. 8b.

* MqfBtfy, 17, p. 580s eJtgi «Uj«£ AfjtuJIj ie-jLdl ^i^h a"^^ <J_jJill

,,^-UiJI >_. -__.j ols^^^-Vl (y oc_}L>-. OjU> Lj-01 ol \Sy lili

OHAPTEK SEVEN

89

or.

(2)

We shall arrive at an important conclusion concerning the Islamic
religious attitude if we stop for a moment or two at this theological
principle and scrutinize its position within Islamic theology. The fore-
going view of the nnfnl id-qiyds is contrasted to a. long established
Islamic principle: ikhtildf winmnR rahmah, i.e. difference, of opinion
in my community is (a, result of divine) favour". This statement is
presented as being from the Prophet, and on different occasions.
we encounter it as if it were a well-known, authentic statement.
The way it is applied demonstrates best how the theological authorities
want it to be understood. Let us examine some examples. On the
occasion of the caliph Hariin al-Rashld's pilgrimage, the following
is reported: The caliph gave Malik b. Anas 3000 dinars which lie
accepted but did not spend. When al-Ilashid (after the completion of
the pilgrimage) prepared to return to Iraq, he said to Malik: "You
must come with us, for I am firmly committed to lead people to your
al-MuwnUa' just as 'Uthman led them to the Koran". The Imam
replied to this: "With regard to the latter statement, this is hardly
possible, for the companions of the Prophet dispersed into all directions
after his death and spread the traditions so that, now, the inhabitants
of each region have their (own method in the) science. Moreover, the
Prophet has said: 'Difference in my community is a favour'. My
going along with you is hardly possible, for the Prophet has said:
'Al-Madlnah is best for them if only they knew it'. Here, then, are your
dinars, just as they were; if you want, take them, but you can also
leave them here" '. in other words: in different countries, varying
versions of the Prophet's traditional statements became established;
this is no work of the devil, but a blessing from God. Therefore, in the
future, the law should not be confined to precise words; rather, free
development of tradition ought to continue. Rightfully, I think,
Dugat says: "On pourrait en Orient si lc progres avait chance de s'y
aedi mater, s*appuyer sur cc hadith de Mahomet pour amener les

1 I havo given thin account, according to al-Damlri, II, p. 383 wlioro it in quoted
from al-Oha/Jili. Ihya', Kituli itl-'ilm. sixth ohaptor. However, I looked for it to no
avail. We find tin) game account from another HOiirco and in a different context in Dugat,

Bietoin dm pMloaophu ri da tMohgitnu mm/hum, p. 2«c. <Acoording to Goldzlhor,
MuhammedmtUohe Studien, II, p. 7-i, n. .1, the following sources are to bo added: Q l, l-'>

al-Din, Pir Chronikm drr Nluill Mvkkn. vol. .'I, p. 210 3 IT. The name principle in extended
to dogmatic differences too, al-Tahari, II, p. Ill nit. (attributed to Mu'awiyah)).

90

90

CHAPTER SEVEN

Musulmans a adopter des id6cs plus largos, plus tolerantcs que cellos
qu'ils ont". — Another example of the application of the alleged
tradition: In al-Bukharl, as well as in Muslim ', we find the following
traditional account of Jbn 'Abbas in different versions and with
different sanad: "When tho Prophet was close to death, there were
people in tho houso among whom was also 'Umar b. al-Khattab.
Then the Prophet said: 'Come here, I want to give you something
written so that you need not err afterwards'. 'Umar said to this:
'Indeed, pain has gained control over tho Prophet! You have left
the Koran ; this suffices us as The Book from God'. But those who
were around him were of a different opinion; some of them said:
'Fetch something so that the Prophet can write down something
for you that you need not err afterwards'. Now, when indecisiveness
spread among them in tho Prophet's presence, he said: 'Get up !'
'Ubayd Allah said (that Ibn 'Abbas spoke): '0 what misfortune !
what a great misfortune it is that their talking and arguing is
preventing the Prophet from writing' ".

I have already mentioned that this account exists in different
versions, but the meaning of all of them corresponds to the foregoing
version, which has been selected ad libitum. Muslim theologians have
understandably consumed much ink to interpret and justify 'Ulnar's
incomprehensible behaviour. The Prophet wants to give testamentary
instruction, and to provide his trusty followers with something
written as guidance so that they know what to do after his death, and
the one who, on other occasions, has been his zealous and trusted
follower, opposes the will of his revered master. He wants nothing
written from him but the Koran ! Among the numerous explanations
given for this fact, several commentators list the following: 'Umar
deemed the Prophet's condition so uncertain that he feared that the
Prophet, subject to woakness of the flesh as any other mortal, was
now going to make a mistake. In this case, we arc interested in what
al-Khitiibl adduces for answering the above questions. He cites the
Prophet's statement on ikhtilaf al-ummah and thinks that 'Umar
considered the opinion inherent in it so weighty that he did not want
to see orders decreed which would prevent the rise of differences
of opinion, for, in the sense of this statement, differences of opinion
in religious matters were a blessing for the Islamic community s .

1 iil-liulihiiri, Kililb nl-'iliii, no. -10; ilfardu, no. 17. MuhHiii, ])'asTi/iili, no. 5.

« nl-N.iw.iwI, VI, p. 01: JU *fl [*ftl*0 r^-AJI ^ c£jj JJJ ~<J.^~\ J^

1)7

CHAPTER SEVEN

91

Consequently, this view invaded large segments of orthodox Islam,
and Muslim literature, up to most recent times ', is infused with it a .
This is the basis for the kind of toleration and mutual recognition which
the madhdhib display towards each other and which seems to puzzle the
superficial observer. This has dominated Muslim life since time im-
memorial. Everyone knows how this mutual recognition is always
manifested externally in the groat Islamic houses of worship. The
one-sided sectarian fanaticism (ta'assub) is viewed by orthodox theolog-
ians as being contrary to Islamic teachings. None of the four rites is
permitted to claim to be the only soul-saving one ; every one of them
must recognizo tho title of the others, even in cases of diametrically
opposing views. When al-Mahdmill published his famous book al-
Muqni K in the fourth century, his teacher Abu Hiiinid al-Isfarayini
censured him for presenting in it the teachings of only one madhhab,
and for isolating it from the contradictory teachings of the other rites.
He evon prohibited him from continuing to attend his lectures so that
nl-Miihn.mil! had to resort to tricks to hear the shayM's lectures without
attending them personally n . Nevertheless, isolated cases of madhhab
fanaticism have occurred and arc still occurring. But in particular,
the reaction of orthodoxy vis-a-vis such excesses shows us that Sunnitc
teachings cannot bo identified with them. Wo read, for instance,
that the Hanafito qadl Abu 'Abd Allah al-Daniaghilni (d. 506) is
supposed to have said: "If I wore givon a governorship in my province,
I would impose on the followers of al-Shfifi'i tho jizyah imposed on
Jews and Christians". But immediately next to this account, we read
that he was reprimanded because of this statement *. When the

1 Al.im.ul al-Dayrabl al-Ghanlml writes in his { J=^. J- -i^-^l «S> \c- v"
r=JI ljlx}\ Bfll&q, 1207, p. :i: i>_Dl luJVI cVjA <_~aJ-> J^ ■uLf-j
aJ^ i*>.j rt^i'5^ I Jj^-j illl aj li- rt* bAc All 1 ^y . This work was
written in M2.'t and oont.iiiiH the Islamic marriage law according to tho four BchonlH.

3 Cf. ol-MaqdisI, cd. do Goojo. p. 38, 10 ft: Ji' *J&0 ^i\ t-.^ 5 ' ^' tSJ 1 *'

^_x*\ ^.03 1 ^l Jlij iu^j ^^-1 J^-j 1_^ik=U : nr. ibid.,

p. :WG whoro it ought to rend in lino 22 A-»V I instead of Aj "^ I ( i_i}^Xi. I )

•i Talitlhtb, p. 001.

J Yiiqiit, I, p. 70S. Tho Shiifi'ito Muhnmmnd al-TQgl (<1. 570) miulo tho name remark
with rofnronco to tho Hunbnlit.es. On ftCOOUnt of this ho wiih pnitmnod l>y a fiiiiiiticnl

Nuiilmlito: 1^1 J ij\ ji (Jjju (JIT C-— 1 : WjkJ-l (J^ J- 1 ^ *S^ <J^J

-fl'.'l.fl.-y i)-a.xJ A*_*j Aj_^J-| rta.-J c C**»*»J| Il'ii ivl-Mulaqqin, fol. Mia.

08

92

CHAPTER HKVUN

qd(U 'Alxl al-Wahhab b, Nnsr al-Baghdadihad finished bis great work,
in which he lias the Malikito rite triumph over tlic other orthodox
rites (al-Nusrak lil-mnd/ihab amuma dwf al-hijrah), a fanatical Shsifi'ite
qdd't, from Cairo threw it into the Nile. As punishment for this act of
intolerance — so our source reports — this fanatic, whom Timor had
taken prisoner on his Egyptian campaign, was drowned in the Euphra-
tes. "Punishment is always in relation to the transgression" ". In the
same historical work from which this information has been taken,
a didactic poem of Abu 'Alxl Allah al-Ra'I from Granada (VHItli
century) can bo read in which the equality of the madhdhib is explained,
and ta'assub, - condemned 3 . Again, when the Egyptian theologian
Taq! al-Dln Muhammad came to the West, he reported that in Egypt,
men of sound scholarship and knowledge would never give preference
to one niitdhliab over another' 1 . These manifestations, which could
be considerably extended, represent the dominant view of Islam:
they all must be viewed in relation to the tradition, ikhtilaf ummofi,
etc., from which they emanate.

The authenticity of tins particular tradition is indeed weak. A wcll-
dooumenkd proof that it is a statement from Muhammad cannot bo
produced. There is no trace of the statement in the two canonical
"corpora". In place of this — apart from Koranic passages, e.g.
aurali XI: 120 from which can be seen that those are free from a differ-
ence of opinion who arc blessed by God wa-lu yazfdima mukhtaliflna
ilia man rahima rabbuka — we encounter another statement, better
documented, that teaches exactly the opposite. This one is attributed
to 'All and runs as follows: It is reported about 'All that he said the
following: "Make your legal decisions as you have clone previously,
in order that, there lie agreement among people, for I dislike, differences
of opinion" '. Ho is represented to have said this on the occasion
of a concrete legal problem — namely, whether it is permitted to
sell a female slave who has borne children — which he had formerly
judged differently from "Uniar; however, in order to avoid a difference

1 ftUdjwjqarl, t, p. 814.

2 Noteworthy is hero the form

-y2.xj lor

: ' dl-Maqqarl, ibid,, p. 987.
« Ibid., II, p. 101.

11 ul-Biilchiiri, FiultVil al-ii» l/fib, DO, 10: pZ& \f Ij^aJ'l Jll Ail A^>j Ac /-ft
.S*^. tr&l jj5C f Jj». O^Ii.Vl oj>\ ^JU dy^Zi

OHAPTBB SEVEN

93

of opinion, he then turned towards the generally accepted view '.

When wo consider that We have here two exactly contradictory views,
we cannot overlook that these traditions represent different move-
ments which have come to prominence in the earliest time of Islam.
Each of them tried to legitimize itself and, at the same time, preserve
its canonical sanctity by producing hallowed statements. The one
— and this movement seems to have legitimacy on its side — wanted
to see the expression of individual difference of opinion banned as
being harmful to Islam — (" Dispulandi pruritus ecclesiae scabies").
The other movement saw in mental freedom and independence no
threat to Islam, and even saw in it a blessing. Traditional sayings
of the kind of ikhtilaf unmudl rahmah have probably originated,
if not from circles to which later Islamic religious history applied
the name of ashdb al-qiyds, then at least, from circles which abandoned
the rigid traditional view. To this movement also belongs the inter-
pretation of the shu'ab tradition according to which the diversity of
the. religious sects within a religious system is evidence for its excellence.
Years ago, I had a chance to treat this at groat length in a different
place and to prove that this interpretation is faulty and docs not
correspond to the original intentions of the text *.

We have seen that the nufdt al-qiyds rejected this method of de-
duction (qiySs) because it led to differences of opinion. Naturally
we find the most important representative of the Zfihirite school,
Ibn Hazm, leading those who frown upon differences of opinion. He
states this idea forcefully in the very introduction to his pamphlet
against qiyds. God, through Muhammad, — this briefly, is his train
of thought — sent to humanity everything necessary for the perfection
of religion and for propor guidance. God in His omniscience has forscen
and determined all the differences of opinion that occurred later,
but not without singling them out as deviations from the proper path.
Ibn Hazm quotes Koranic passages 3 attesting to this view. It will

1 Ike OOmmontotor al.QaateJMtnf, VI, p. 122, doiw not fail to notico tho contradiction
of 'All's opinion to tho other apparent tradition an rovoalud hero. Ho to attempting to
reconcile (lie two in the manner common among Oriental eoinmentatorH: OjJ I (_£>"

£JLJI J I (s'fy iSJJI o^-Vi j\ o^UI J* J}^VI

'- Jleilr&gc zur Lilcralurgcachichtc iter St'a, p. 0.

3 JbfSl, Introduction: (^Jutb *£■ «U_^jj aA-C \jjfi c~*j "^J y- Jll (j^

jUI ^ AiaJJ aI?dU AOjll ,JJ_^2-)I lJI Aj iSM* J>^l9 t3*"l Cf„*J

'.)•!

OHAPTDB SEVEN

100 be interesting to Bee how a truly famous Arab historian, wJio.sc Zahirite
tendencies shall occupy us in the course of this treatise later, reacts
towards this question. It is al-Maqrizi ' who, after presenting the views
of the different theological schools concerning the anthropomorphic
passages of the Koran, concludes his presentation with the following
observation: "Each of these parties advances its arguments ... and they
will not cease having different opinions, with the exception of those on
whom your God has mercy, and for this Ho has created them ". On the
day of resurrection, God shall judge among them according to that
about which they contradicted each other". As we can see, al-Maqrizi,
as a trusted follower of the old Koranic view, considers not the differ-
ences of opinion as an emanation of divine favour, but the agreement
and the uniformity of views.

But opposition to the authenticity of the liberal statement of
ikMildf etc. came not just from the orthodox-traditionist sido.
The same al-Khitabl, who cites this principle as an explanation for
'Umar's strange behaviour in the case of the Prophet's death-bed
incident, docs not let this occasion pass without protecting its cre-
dibility from the extreme left of the Muslim liberals.

iL (JS* l& ASMi\ j^\ aj£c_ Jklj lL «o1_^ Ajl ya-jl l_c bjjcj

JUi' Jlij t( yi fr* <_>LS3l ^9 \xL>"j L (jUi' Jl2i jLJI <4 t^jIj

ii50i J* IjJIj;_ pji o->Lc ^ oJJjIj 4iU ^ dill o_^L Iji&Ts
i^jJI aj ^J| osj )V d v5 jJlj^ijj a£a- Jl JbJ ajj| a^J jl Jl
•uU ,J (JjUJI ^j J^. Ji)l c.I^i ^ jfo O^—JI <M LS^'- 9

dSOJUj dCj p^j ^ i\ o^iki o^Jljri Vj <JU jl Jlxi- Jo U^-l ^Ul

Li diJj>c~, ci^XiVl jl Ja-J _^fc «UJ| j^L dkyaj &jli rt^i)^-

l*-^>. -VAJ i J^ Ij^^alclj Jjlii ^ ^fi JUj a^c iJUj -Ull LiL^ij
Ojo ^ l_jikil_9 ly_^iS' LT^iS"" l_jJ_>5Ci' Vj ,Jl>u Jlsj l^9J *i/_9
^ d& j)j Jl*i' Jl9j (»Jic i_J.a* ^ d5iJjlj oLuJI 2>t». L

pj<l*3 (j~JI ,j* ejf.^* Jjl ... I_£"i li^A^i-l A-J lj-U._jJ -Ull _£C- -iLt

^^ci-lj i^L'L^. Sj£ p^CLi ^ t> -JJ1 ^It, $\j p&ji L> ^jji

&,LJl lc

1 A'At'frif, II, p. 320.

■ Quotation from Koran, .mmk XI:120.

CHAPTER SEVEN

95

"Two men have raised objections to the tradition 'Difference of
opinion in my community in a favour'. One of them is ill-reputod
in relation to religious matters, namely, "Aral b. Bahr al-Jahiz, and
101 the other, Ishaq b. Ibrahim al-Mawsili, is known for his jesting and
frivolity. After the latter edited his book on songs and distinguished
himself with these trifles, he insulted the traditionists in his book
and expressed the opinion that they were transmitting things about
which they knew nothing. He and al-Jahiz say: if difference of opinion
were a blessing, it would follow that agreement ought to be considered
a curse. Besides this, he thinks that a difference of opinion could
have been regarded as a blessing only during the Prophet's life time,
since, at that time, people could question the Prophet and have things
explained. In face of these poor objections, the following must bo said:
from the fact that a certain thing is regarded as a blessing, it docs not
follow that the converse is regarded as a curse. Such reasoning can
come only from an ignoramus or some one who purports to be
ignorant. We find, for example, in the Koran: Through His mercy,
Ho makes for you day and night so that you may rest, etc. Here,
night is considered a result of the divine compassion without justifying
us to conclude that day is a divine curse. This is obvious and cannot
be doubted. As regards religion, a throe-fold difference of opinion is
possiblo: First, as regards tho existence of a creator and his uniqueness:
to deny this would bo disbelief; secondly, as regards His attributes
and His will: denying this would bo heresy; thirdly, as regards tho
laws deduced from the principles of the Faith which endure different
opinions. As regards the latter category, God conceded to scholars
a difference of opinion, as a token of His compassion and favour.
This is how the words of the tradition in question must be inter-
preted" K

Others havo gone still further in tolerating the difference of religious
opinion. We meet their point of view in an anecdotal, rather than
dogmatic form in a story in Ibn 'Abd llabbih. The caliph Ma'niun
once questioned a Khurasan! renegade about the reason for his relapse
into heathendom after he had previously taken a liking for Islam.
"I was alienated from Islam", replied tho renegade, "by tho fact that
you have so much variety in your religion". Tho caliph remarked to
this: "The differences that you observe among us are of two types.
There are differences in tho rite, as for example in the formula of tho

al-Nawiiwi, IV, p. 91. <TliiH footnote m not indicated in tho text of tho Gorman cd.)

9G

CHAPTER shvkn

uilkfln, in the prayer during burial, in the prayer of the two high
102 holidays, in the profession of faith, in the salutation of the Prophet
at the end of the obligatory prayer, in the readings of the Koran, in tho
decisions on ritual inquiries, etc. These are not actual differences;
they apply only to what has been loft to individual discretion. This
is the utilization of a wide scope and of tho facilitation that the
traditions offer, i.e. it makes no difference whether a person practises
one form or tho other since they are all equally recognized. Another
type of difference has a bearing on the interpretation of tho holy texts
of the Koran and the snnna/i ; this prevails although we aro all in
agreement on the dogma of the revelation and the essence of the
traditions. If these are the differences of opinion that have alienated
you from our religion, then you ought to know that they aro also found
in other religions. If there were not differences in tho interpreta-
tion of the Bible, there would be no difference between Jews and
Christians who are otherwise in agreement in recognizing the dogma
of revelation. If it had been God's will, He would have revealed His
books in a well-commented way, and no argument would have arisen
concerning the interpretation of the words of His prophets. Nothing,
however, will come to us, neither in the religious nor in the secular
sphere, except after long study and continual zeal and reflection.
If this wero not tho case, there would be neither pains nor temptation,
nor any difference of opinion, nor discord ; there would be no difference
between capable and incapable persons, between the learned and the
ignorant". After tho renegade had listened to this exposition, he once
again professed the Islamic creed K

Tho Mu'tazilite al-.hihiz is not the only one among his fellow sectar-
ians to condemn tho tradition of ik/diUif. We must not depict this
attitude as tho view of the Mu'tazilites; wo lack sufficient literary
authorities to do this. But it is a fact that there is yot another Mu'ta-
zilite who has questioned the validity of this alleged statement from
the traditions. It; is reportod about Abu al-Hudliayl Muhammad air
'Allaf (d. 227), one of the most important members of the early Mu'ta-
zilah, that he replied to the question of what was more advantageous for
the Islamic community, agreement or difference of opinion: "Agree-
ment". When people confronted him with events from the Prophet's life
that wero in contrast with this principle, he was shrouded in deepsilonce 8 .

1 al-'Ji/il ul-furiil, I. p. 266.

- ul-Diimiri, I. p. mo, oitos this Information from Ibn Khallikttn, but It oannot be

found at UiiH ptUWOge (no. 017, od. Wimtoni'dd, VI, p. 144).

CilAl'TIOR SIOVHN

97

(3)

10:{ Islamic tradition, rather than the Koran, must supply the proofs
for each of the two parties. Here, it is appropriate to comment on
the extent of the objectivity of the collections of traditions. A com-
parison of the two collections of traditions that are considered canonical
(al-Bukharl's and Muslim's) leaves one with the impression that the
latter compiler, as regards the form of the information of the traditional
data and statements collected and incorporated in his "corpus", does
not easily abandon the impartial objectivity of an editor and a collector
of material. lie leaves it to his reader as to how to utilize the material
presented, and what conclusions to draw from it. His rival, al-Bukharl,
quite frequently incorporates his subjective judgement and exhibits
a personal interest in tho direction of tho result to be arrived at.
Al-Bukharl, at times, takes up a personal position in disputed questions,
the solution of which is necessarily related to the interpretation and
application of the particular tradition. Just as we find in his collection
linguistic remarks and annotations to tho transmitted statements,
wc also find subjective expressions of opinion and concrete remarks
Unrelated to the text of the tradition. His chapter headings, in which,
at one point, he records in detail the opposing legal views of the
I.lijazi and 'Iraqi schools ', afford him ample opportunity to mold
the opinion of the leader towards his view on the practical application

of the particular tradition. With the heading: <jlcVl <J' J^

LT"

jJI jJ\ '£3-\ ii£)Jj Jl^' J-Ul JyJ J^jJI _^t> which lie places at the
dead of the statement, Kihlb iil-vindn no. 1G, lie gives the reader an
unmistakable hint to which thesis of orthodox dogmatics the tradition
following this heading is supposed to apply as proof of evidence in
the dispute over the definition of tho expression, vindn. Even Muslim
commentators have discovered this tendency behind the timid mask
of the words, man qala an 2 . Just how determined al-Bukharl is to
l (|, l supply particular evidence by means of traditions, or to supply proof
of evidence for specific theses, can be seen from the fact that he
Occasionally introduces a paragraph with the words: "As evidence

1 Kitiib ul-tuliii/, mi. 21.
- nl-QjiMUllfini. I. p. 127:

,\J\

JJL.U V JuwJI jl cM; a- J.

AJI

Ia* ^ ^j

UrJI

u-VJ

98

CHAPTER SKVKN

105

for ..., the following may serve" '. Wo have noted above (p, 44)
how, by inserting a single word in the chapter heading on the law of
pledge, al-Bukhari takes a particular position on a disputed question
in this chapter. This procedure reminds one of phenomena that occurred
in analogous canonical materials of other religions *, Muslim did not
make use of such headings in his collection "in order not to increase
the size of his work or because of other reasons"; (al-Nawawi, p. 13) only
later commentators and glossators have attempted to add headings
(tardjim) to the paragraphs of Muslim's collection.

It was to be expected that the greatest traditionist of the Muslim
world sympathized with the school of the ashdb al-hadith, and even
if he does not exactly reject ra'y and analogy as legal bases, he reduces
their importance to narrow limits. His attitude becomes evident
from the way in which he relates some of the traditions which he
conceives to be directed against the speculative method. We can see
from this, at the same time, how much subjective judgement al-Bukhari
could put into his dry chapter and paragraph headings. Now we want
to look at these statements from the traditions that arc hostile to
analogy:

Kitab al-i'tisam no. 7 :| : ^UsJI i_ilsd'j c£l^l >i y J&* L. cjU

Lcljylil <5jAjS>Uicl (jl -Uj f-jri J &\ Ol UJ*i (»*£**

i jjl^jj jjl^4i rt-gjlj', j>^s I" tn ' 8 instance, a judgement
arrived at on the basis of ra'y is discouraged; however, we see
what far-reaching modes of thinking al-Bukhari conjures with
the title heading. He goes still further in the same book, no. 9:

iJU -UJl aAc iL. cL-Jlj JU^JI y ^ nA-p " { j^>\ |*si« s->^.

6*

* J-'ard uUcltums, no. i; U; 10: pJI l _y^-\ <jl ,J* JJjJI yj,
a Cf. generally Sohulto, Die Gcnchiehtc da- QutUm mid Littratur dci Oanonttchm
Rethln, I, p. 7-1 and K. Hobo, Hamlbuch dcr protcitaiitinclicn Polemik, 1st od., p. 404.
3 This passage has not yet, boon published in the edition by Erehl, <i.o. in 1884>.

Our text cornea from tbo 10 vi>l. liultui commentary, 12815.

•' The words (JjST Jl would appear to bo a variant of tho preceding i_iiij jj.
They are lacking, therefore, from Abu Dharr'a text of ISukhari.

ClIAl'TKU SKVKN

99

olj-.f ocL>. j^ ^1 ^ olyfj, ^JL=, <>.l o* ^JL^VI u-J

fj£ il^J ^SCu L, Jls ^J JbJ a_Ul jJ!c lL» ^»l*i rt-^. Jjl
Sf^l cJUi jUI ^ bb^ U jtT ^1 XJ5W Ujjj ^ L^Ja oy

i^jJIj . Without bias towards the school of ra'y, al-Bukhari could
not have drawn from this tradition the conclusion implied in the title
(undoubtedly based on the words: he taught them what God had
taught him) a . Al-Bukhari's bias can also be seen from the fact that
ho cites the following statement in Kitab al-sawm, no. 41. It is not
at all from the Prophet, but a general, tendentious deduction from the
traditions: J^ I^^S" Ji\ii jj-| 0J ^jj ^CJI j| jilij^JI _^j 1 JU'
^jU-I jl ci5Cli> y L^clil y l!b OjJl*JI o=i 1,9 (^I^l o^
100 o^A-^aJI ig^aij' Vj aU^cJ! Lj-^JJJ' '- e - dear cvidonce that analogy is
misleading as far as deciding religious questions is concerned.

Following is one of the important proofs — usually mustered

against ra'y — drawn from the literature of tradition which best

demonstrates the nature of the arguments for dealing with later

theological questions.

al-Bukhari, Kitab al-faraid, no. 2: 'Lie Jlsj ^ASK/DI *Jjo i_ib

Ijll ,j£ "^0 1 ^ (_)-jli> ij-J bjAa. i -A J UjJls. ,_)— ito— I (^ (j"^-"

^id^i-l 4jJ5"I yDI 6li ^lj -XlTl ~A*> <U)I Jj-j JU' JU oj_j&

lilj^-l AjJl ^Lfi l_jJ_^)J Ij_/Jjj' Vj l_j-^aX-Lj' Nj l_j^«~>ci' Vj I_j-JLj>cj *JJ

Hero we see that purely moral teachings ', warning pcoplo of insinu-

1 A variant: 0*>-j|j)l.

2 al-QuHtalluni. X, p. 80S: d\Z~ VI *JjJ J 'L^J^ii .iojJ-l iilk-.j

401 JJ ^ VI [Jjy V ^LijS j^Vl la* "6V jbJI ^ uV lA

.J^C" Vj c^U V .yJ I«i'

3 Ah booomcH evident aliio from oorroaponding paBaagou; of. al-liukhari, Nikah,
no. Ar>; MiiMlim, Kitab al-birr, no. 8 (V, p. 234).

100

CHAPTER SEVEN

aticms again8t their fallow humans, arc re-coined to warn them of
u juridical method (sunn = opinion in the sense of ra'y). Because
of this, one of Muhammad's statements on ethics was incorporated
into the law of inheritance. This is typical of the editing of al-Bukliaifs
collection. Apart from these traditions, many more directed against
the school of ra'y are found, but a great many of them cannot lie
identified in the canonical collections '.

Even worse is the situation concerning those passages from the
literature of tradition from which the ra'y school attempted to derive
the arguments for its title. There arc no direct statements in the
authentic collections in which the believers are commanded to apply
analogy as a method of deduction for their judgement. However, in
the caso of some traditions from which it can be concluded that the
Prophet applied analogical reasoning in his judgements, the theolog-
ians of the analogical school pointed out that the legitimacy of this
method of deduction for jurisprudence may follow from this.
Al-Bukharl himself is careful not to express these conclusions, but his
107 commentators, favourably inclined towards qiyiix, rcacli for these
supports of their theories so much more eagerly. This becomes evident
from the following:

£w J-v^L L^l*-> ~j^=\ 'C^ (j-j v^

J^jtw /jC j£»i .jl ^ iiljji jjI bJ'-U.

jl cJllii n*U? I j^\ ijl Oct*. o\j^\

ifjl l&s. JSp* J J IS [qiz ghtil g* jl
( 6 %JU 'Jja.l <&l "d\i *J (5JJI U^iU JU j^o cJU *Xa*l» c*£\
In this caso, the Prophet decides the question of whether the daughter
must fulfil the pledge of the deceased mother to make the pilgrimage
by referring to a law applicable to an analogous caso, namely, that the
heir must indeed redeem the liability of the testator. Hence it follows
that the Prophet considered legal decisions, passed on the basis of
analogical reasoning, as justified 2 .

Another passage is in Kitdb al-lmyu' no. 103. There, it is the question
of whether or not a Muslim may engage in the sale of wine, jl yf- »1j

««JL* 4011 J>~j jl pi*. /■! ^ *Ul JJM J^ L>** fcj* U ^>

Kitab ul-i'lisCim, no. 12:
iXv^l iiiJim.

J' U*^ 6 L^' IJ* -fe? &.

JJI CJ'ljS g~£ jl CjjM ^

ui'j <iCl Jc- JK' jJ L

1 Many PttSaagOl im> OOllootod in ul-Nhii'miii, 1, |>. 61-01.

2 iil-QiiHlJilluni. X, p. 370.

CHAPTER SEVEN

101

*J*'M l*_ji»^=9 *jj>tiJI rt4~Lfi i2**ja. -ij-fcJI jI)I JjU J Is 'Ulnar de-
cides this question by referring l.o an analogous decision of the Prophet.
From the fact that the Prophet reproved the Jews for trading in food
prohibited to them, 'Ulnar follows that no trade in illegal produce
(in this case wine) is permitted.

Also, other legal decisions of the asluih are cited by the analogists
as evidence that tho highest Islamic authorities applied analogy in
their legal decisions 1 . 'Ulnar, 'All, and Zayd b. 'f habit — so the
analogists relate — decided the following, and other legal ordinances
on the basis of qiyas: the inheritance claims of a testator's grand-
father over the other heirs; the liability of compensation of a person
who has violated the interdiction of shedding blood in the sacred
108 territory by killing a. rabbit during tho pilgrimage; the interdiction
of bartering different qualities of fruit belonging to the same class;
the amount of compensation which a person must pay who has knocked
out a, tooth of his fellow-man. Tho opponents of analogy, however,
do not recognize the data which support these facts as genuine or
sufficiently documented traditions, so that Ilm Hazm devotes much
zeal to their refutation.

"A companion is represented to have said that tho grandfather and
the brothers of tho testator arc like two channels branching off from
one and the same river; another person is supposed to have compared
the. degreo of relationship to two branches of one and the samo tree.
Therefore, God supposedly favours the companions' disposition
towards such a deduction. How conclusive is the branching off of
channels, or are the branches of a tree, with regard to a grandfather's
claim to inheritance over the inheritance claim of the testator's
brother whether the former inherits one sixth or one third, or whether
he is the sole heir? Everyone must understand this, but how much
more tho person who, as far as reason and intelligence are
concerned, was the most perfect man among the people next to
the Prophet! These accounts are nothing but false news, fabricated
by the exponents of analogy for their parrots among whom the accounts
were widely circulated afterwards" =.

In the same spirited vein, Ibn Hazm rejects all arguments of tho

1 Fakhr al-JDln nl-liii/.i, nno ol'lJio zoiUcuih prop<m<ml.n of i/Iii'ii, ipioloH in l.ho mnny
|iiiHHiig<).H ill' I.I n - Mnfiilih cimwnincl wilh Mm iipnlnfiy of f/i'i/i/.v "till iithor l.nidil.ioiiM which

are not pari, of the Suhih.f, of. also al-Qastallttnl, ill. p. 421.
» Ibtnt, f..l. :tii.

102

OHAl'TKK SEVEN

109

analogists which they derived from alleged traditions, but, because of
insufficient documentation and the impossibility of the statements in
question, he rejects in particular the proof of spuriousness that is
based on the rules of the science of tradition. For the comprehensive-
ness of our material, 1 have included the pertinent passages from Ibn
Ilazm's Ibldl ul-qiyus, from which al-Sha'rani, on his part, seems to
have drawn, in Supplements I-III, too.

Even scholars of the schools of qiyas have often challenged the
authenticity of those traditions and accounts from which their
fellow-partisans used to derive justification for qiyas as a legal basis.
Indeed, even concerning the famous Mu'adh tradition (see above
p. 9), but still more, as regards the alloged circular from 'Umar to
al-Ash'ari — the main pillars of the exponents of qiyas — many
scholars of the school of qiyas do not express any more favourable
opinions than Ibn Hazm, the enemy of qiyas, and his Zahirite follow-
ers '. For them, the canonical support of the validity of qiyas is the
tacit consensus of tho companions of the Prophet with regard to the
legality of this legal source. Since in that patriarchal epoch of Islamic
law, too, every companion passed judgement on obscure questions
on the basis of individual analogy without the other companions'
raising objections to this procedure, tho position of qiyas in the oldest
consensus of tho Islamic religious authorities was decided in their
favour 3 .

' WaraqM, fol. 16b.

8 Ibid., fol. 46n: c.L».b ti£L

oJ-LC olj LC ^>-lj ,_p -ii-l Ijjiix*.

CHAPTER EIGHT

no

(I)

The material at the disposal of the researcher for a clear exposition
of the history and the influence of the Zahirite school is scarce indeed.
Since we do not possess labaqdt of the scholars of this legal school,
we lack some of the best resources for studies on the history of the
Zahiriyah.

It seems that Muslim historians did not attach much importance
to Dawud's reaction against the prevailing method of the canonical
law. Abu al-Fida' is the only one among thorn who treats Dawud's
teachings in some detail. In Abu al-Fida"s works we find at least
a short analysis of the Zahirite system illuminated by a concrete
example l , Al-Mas"udl 3 , a writer who, in other instances, exhibits
an open mind and a profound interest for everything important for
cultural history, and later Ibn al-Athir a — the latter merely
under tho heading "miscellaneous events" — simply list the death
of the founder of the Zahirite school under the year 270 without even
mentioning a single word of the significance of his teachings and
writings. His writings seem to havo been completely lost. Wo do not
even find direct quotations from them in later writings. Although
Dawud's teachings aro, at first, still consirlorcd an independent system
within orthodox Islam (madhhab mii-staqill) which need bo considered
for obtaining consensus on a certain question, later, thoy loso all
authority and recognition even in this respect. Scholars who took
a lonicnt attitude toward tho Zahirite school do consider their separate
vote in"cases in which the school does not reject the explicit qiyas
(al-qiyds al-jall), but there are othors who do this only in the field of
iisill, excluding the school's deviation in deduced, special legal questions.
The famous al-Juwaynl, known by the honorific title Imam al-Hara-
mayn, says, for example, that those who deny qiyas cannot even
be reckoned among the "learned of the Islamic community" ('ulamd'
al-ummah) or "tho bearer of the law" (hamlal al-shari'ah), but must

1 Annates MuthttnM, II, ml. Retake, p. 260.
= MwVj, Vm p. 64.

3 al-Kamil, VII, oil. BOl&q, p. MS under lioljj.

;ac.

Mil

CIIAl'THll KtdllT

I

CIIAI'TKR EIGHT

105

III

simply lie equated with the ignorant rabble '. Already al-lS r nwawi
can state that those who strive for truth and grasp it, are of the opinion
that in a. ease, in which Dawud raises a. tenet which departs from that
of the four orthodox schools, this contradiction does not invalidate

an existing consensus ■'■.

We have at our disposal a number of historical and literary-
historical data on the spread and decline of the Zfihirite school which
provide us with solid information on the course which the school
followed within tin; fold of the Islamic world. The first spread of the
Zfihirite school occurred naturally in Iraq among the circles from which
it originated. The learned representatives of the Zahiriyah whom the
compiler of the Fihrixl. (in the yoar 377) mentions ;1 , and who, still
under the influence of the founder and his son, had turned toward
the Zahiriyah, are mostly from Iraq. To the names which Ibn al-Nndim
lists as the representatives of this school in the first century of its
existence, some others can bo supplemented: 'Abd al-Mii'miu b. Tufayl
al-TamTini al-Nasafi ' (d. 346), famous for his piety, is mentioned as
Dawud's pupil— and explicitly as Zahiri; Abu al-Mahfisin calls the
Basra n 'Abd Alhih b. "All al-Wardirl, who held office as qfidi (d. 1570),
the "shayhh of the aid al-zakir" 6 . Other representatives arc listed
by name in al-Sam'atti in the account included as Supplement no. 5
(to which I refer for this purpose). After Dawud's death the mndhlmb
of the Zahiris was led by his son Muhammad who was not only a
theologian — he issued fat.wahs — but made himself a name also as
poet and liUi'ralnir ". From the fact that the author of the Film's/,
uses the following words: "On him fell the position of leader of the
Dfiwudis in his time"' in a, note about the Zahiri Ibn al-Mughallis,
we can conclude that after the death of Muhammad the position of
leader of the young Zfihirl community was always renewed.

I Of. mi this question in dotal] TcMhib, p. 239ff.; p. 2:17: y'L (.Sjl.5 i_9*)U-)
^Loul Ouj of Uio dililiiin in to Ixj vorrootod to J Luj.

8 Commentary on Muslim, IV, p. 418i l <^*j) -^ -£*j j 0>J_jJy <j^J&-^

Cf. to the. expression e-^wl .J -Ax*j: Tninlliib, p. 71)1, Off.

II Filtriil, I, p. 210-211). Cr. <i. Il'liigiil. (Hire Mnlmmnmd ibn [lldh'a PiliHrt til-'uhim,
p. fllfi.

•' Tirlm,,/-,! n/-/««//.3;, XT, no. 68.

•'■ QnnliviniTo, lliiilitirv. ilrn Stmtlanti Miiitihmki. I.e., p. 270.

11 ul-.Snni'iini, no. 2.

I

112

From Iraq the Zfihirite school spread by means of students from
all countries to other parts of the Islamic world. Certainly Dawud
himself had to reply to theological enquiries from the most remote
countries. Collections of replies to enquiries from Isfahan and Khvva-
rizm arc enumerated among his works K The inducement for these
expert opinions seems to indicate that Dawud's authority stood in
high esteem in Central Asia already during his lifetime. From Iraq
the Zfihirite school seems i.o have spread to Iran where Khiraz, espe-
cially, was a centre of the Zahiris ,J . A remark in Yaqfit, which is not
entirely clear to me, scorns to indicate that around Sliahrzfir about
341 the fanatical observance of "the literal meaning of the texts"
gave reason for killings and looting a .

Already in the early phase of the Zahiritc school, some followors
of Islamic thoosopliy ' joined in figh the school of Dawud which
categorically dismissed servile imitation of one particular ritual sect.
In the course of our exposition we shall become more acquainted
with this phenomenon. The first mystic among the Zfihirls seems to
havo been the Baghdad? Ruwayin l». Ahmad Abu Muhammad (d. 303) •'■.
Among his pupils we find the Khlra/I Muhammad b. Khaflf b. Isfikshiid
al-Dabbl (d. 371 at the age of more than a hundred years) whose
teacher \nfi.qh was the IShafi'ite Ibn Surayj. I suspect that this "Sliaykh
of the Sufis in the cities of Faris" " was not without Zfihirite velleity.
I by no means conclude this from the descriptions of this scholar as
the sources al. my disposal suggest, namely, that he was one of the
most learned skaukhs hi- 'it In m al-zulnrit/it/i (Yfujut; al-zahir, Ibn

' FifaiHt, p. 217, 18. Cf. above, p. 28.

8 AM Xty'Sq al-SllbM (d. 476) fabaqnl, in RilTi'ali Iicg iil-Tal.il/nvi (u learned Cuireno

olvil aorvant who died in 1873) In his work -ta Ji3t£) Ij ^l^-,->- j I .-9 JjX~J\ ij_yiJl
Cairo, VViiili al-Nil Press, 1287, p. Hi. This work, written from the oloaaio [slamio point
of view, Iiiih nppi'iuocl tin .scholarly mipplumont, In llie |ieilngogieal review Itmnlttl al-
maddria, yoar I, no. 0.

3 YiiqiH, III, p. :t!0: AAjjll oAA Jjb L \y£j cS'jj' fW* J*' ^ "^

.XjojJUI jA\k 0-jJI ^J IC-^jO) jLJb £y>s>-\j &J-J fj^J
These words are not quite oloar. Does it say in this passage that the inhabitants of

Kim Azniy. Ihitoumh tln-y followed the literal moaning of the law, murdered and robbed

the infamous neighbours, or did the Inhabitants of \~i follow the "external sense oi
the law"? By the way, they are designated as Shl'itos.

11 (,'l'lieoKopliir., win p. .'17. n. 2>.

'• Abu al-MaliiiHin, Amialvn, II. p. 198.

" YiU|(lt. Ill, p. :t50.

106

OBAPTBB KlCiflT

113

al-MuIaqqin). This is not the normal way to indicate a scholar's
affiliation with the Zahirite school '. Rather, this must bo interpreted
that the mystic, who had specialized, above all, in the science of the
interior ('Urn, al-bdtin), was at home also in "the science of the ex-
terior", i.e. in Jiqh and its branches. That Muhammad b. Khafif
was inclined towards the system of the Ziihiris which, in his case,
as companion of Ruwaym, cannot be suspected from the outset,
I conclude from a piece of information about his attitude in ritual
matters. One of his biographers happens to relate that in his old days
he could no longer stand and was forced to perform his prayers in a
sitting position. This induced him to perform twice the number of
the prescribed obligatory bowings (raka'dt) at each prayer, for it says
in the tradition that the prayer of a person sitting has only half the
value of a person standing up. Muhammad b. Khafif interprets this
tradition literally, contrary to ordinary practice 2 ; this is typically
Ziihirl.

Al-Maqdisi, the geographical writer with profound theological
interest, supplies us with some very valuable pieces of information on
the spread and influence of tho Zahirite school in tho fourth century.
We gather from his description that not only did learned men espouse
the Zahirlyah, but that this legal school had followers among the
ordinary people, too, and that the sect formed a closed society and
made propaganda to spread its teachings 3 . At that time, tho Zahirlyah
was not what it became later, a, weak fad of individual theologians
who opposed the legal recognition of qiyus theoretically, rather it
was a wide-spread religious party which had in its midst scholars who
possessed an ondeavour for influence and spread, who wore bent on
enlarging the influence and scopo of the sect. It was especially wide-
spread and influcncial in Iran. There, its adherents were called to
administrative positions and judgeships; its theologians taught and
provided scientific substantiation for the mmlhhab '. Its most out-

1 Although WO alno find ytllaJI .^Lfc with thin meaning, Abu nl-Mahitain, II,
p. 279, 6.

3 Ibn al-Mulaqqln, fol. 108b: Ji Jjj JjOcS *LiJ1 tf- ayf- _p-l ,J i_i**ij

r~* i_i,ya-JI At -LcliJI e^K^ _^&U lAcU' O^-'J a-^Jjl (x 1 **V
3 nl-Muqdim, p. .'17.

•' Ibid., p. -no, II ; of. p. -mi. note (a). In thin passage aid al-hndnh seems to Indioate
followers of Ahmed b. Ilanbal.

OHAPTBB mo irr

107

standing representative in Khurasan at that time is the Dawfidi
qiltli Abu al-Qasim 'Ubayd Allah b. 'All al-Nakha'i (d. 376) '. He was
a pupil of Mahamili who is mentioned among the few people who,
although not agreeing with Dawiid's tenets, recognized them, never-
theless, as valid expressions of the Islamic spirit -. From Iran tho sect
seems to have spread to Sind 3 — - whero, as it were, there prevailed
juridical principles in harmony with those of the Zahirlyah — and to
'Umiin '. In Sind the qd(j,i Abu Muhammad al-Mansurl is mentioned
as excellent representative of the Zahirlyah; he spread this legal
school through verbal teaching and through a number of writings.
There was no trace of the Zahirlyah in Syria " ; and also in al-Maghrib,
where the two analogical schools of Abu Hanifah and Malik prevailed,
and where there were considerable antipathies towards al-Shafi'i's
legal branch, the influence of tho traditional branch which rose to
prominence later, does not scorn to have been anticipated n . Of great
interest are the terse but fitting character descriptions made by the
excellent obsorver of the Zahirite customs. They possess — so ho says —
four characteristics: pride, sensitive irritability, talkativeness, and
ease '.

We have just scon that al-MaqdisI, who notes the existence of
the Zahirlyah in the different countries, docs not find a trace of it
in Andalusia and especially not in al-Maghrib. Its spread to those
Islamic provinces belongs indoed to a later poriod. But already in
tho fourth century wo find in Andalusia one important representative
114 of tho Zahirite school, chronologically the first to be verified in al-
Maghrib. He is Mundhir b. Ziyad al-Bnlliitl (d. 355) tho chief qadl
of C6rdoba, famous for his energy and love for justice. In public
practice he applied Malik's system — after all, the judge had to
dispense justice according to the prevailing legal code — but in his
private attitude and in his family affairs ho was guided by the system
of Diiwfid ibn 'All whose tenets he also upheld in scholarly endeav-
ours. It is reported that Mundhir collected the works of the founder

' al-Sam'ani (Supplement, V).

3 Talidlub, p. 237.

3 nl-MnqdisI, p. 481, S.

* Ibid., p. 00, 10.
8 Ibid., p. 170, 20.

• J bid., p. 23(1 f.
' Ibid., p. 41, 5.

I OH

CIIAl'TKK EIGHT

of the Zahirite school ' nnd that he also defended the tenets contained
in them against rival attacks -. It follows from this that indeed at
that time the teachings of the, Ziihirlyah were considered among the
theological investigations in Andalusia, for, how else, could Mundhir
have indulged in apologetic activities in the interests of the sect?
It follows also that statements of the historian of the Alniohad dynasty,
'Abd al- Wahid al-Marr6kuflhi, that there had been no famous represen-
tatives of the Zahirlyah before Ibn Hazm 3 , are not reliable.

One may say that the countries of western Islam were the most
fertile ground for the spread of these teachings. It is true that the
inhabitants of these countries professed to belong to the analogical
schools of Islamic theology, but the victory of Millikite jurisprudence
brought to them those men who had strayed only very little from the
ground of strict traditionalism. Al-MaqdisI characterizes the theolog-
ical branch of the Andalusians with these words: "There, Malik's
legal school prevails, and Nafi"s way of Koran recitation; they say:
'We recognize only the Book of God and the Muwa(.l.a' of Malik'.
If they meet a person who follows Abu HaiiTfah or al-Shafi'I, they
banish him" '. Thus they kept exclusively to the traditional Islamic
sources, as did the Ziihirlyah, which movement they resemble in their
intolerance towards other vmdhahib. Consequently, western Islam
exhibited more interest and inclination for the study of the traditions
than the East which was inclined towards juridical and philosophical
speculation •'■. Pious veneration for the collections of traditions ex-
hibited stronger external forms in al-Maghrib than in the eastern
Islamic provinces. Still in the eighth contury A.H. a Maghribi noble
115 copied in his own hand writing the six famous collections of the canonic-
al traditions which were carried in a great parade on the Mawlid
festival behind the alleged Koran of 'Uthman «. Connected with this

I nl-.\liic|<|!iii, I, p. 474.

= lliiil., II, p. 110. Ibn Hazm, KilCth iil-iiiihf, 1, fol. KiOa, citon Mundhir'H opinion
thai, the aflilk (Hphurra) are not identical with tho Iiuivvuiih. Ibn ilu/.rn argnoH inn! rufulc-H
MiiH opinion in bin accustomed manner.

II The history of the Alniohuiln, ml. Doxy, p. 35, 3.
'■ nl-MiU|(liHi, p. 230.

r ' iil-l\TiL<|([iiri, I, ]). 405.

" Soo Barges, 'J'lrinrr.ii, p. 3S2; 433. The same reverence for the works on tradition
linn been perpetuated in t.liti Maghrib until most recent limes. Hunt. Nnr.hrir.hten von
MardkOB mid Fes, p. 238, relates tho following: "Whenever Mawlay IminVil really
wunfi'il to achieve something with bis ni'iny, bo 1ul<1 thin book (al-ltukhiiri) accompany
them to tho Field in procession and with great pomp, junt as tbo Arc of fin; <Woun.nl.

CHAPTER BIGHT

109

is the fact that in North Africa an oath sworn on al-Miikhari's collection
of traditions is considered most sacred l .

Much credit for establishing a sense of fidelity towards the tra-
ditions must bo attributed to the famous Koranic commentator
BaqI b. Makhlad '- al-Qurtubl. This great commentator did not join
any one of the enrrowt fiqlt. branches of his time (he died 276), but based
his legal deductions exclusively on the traditions. In other words, he
followed the principle brought to prominence by his 'Iraqi contem-
porary Dawiid. The aid al-ra'y were quite enraged about this, but the
favour of his sovereign, Muhammad b. 'Abd al-Eahman, compensated
him for the hatred of the guild ;l . It is easy to understand that Ibn
Hazm •' has high regard for Qurtubi, that he hails his commentary
us an unsurpassed masterpiece, and that he prefers his commentary
to the great exegctical work of al-Tabari. Ibn Mazm praised Qurtubi
especially because he proceeds according to tho intentions of the
traditions; incidentally, Ibn Hazm considers Qurtubi's legal inter-
pretation as the one that approaches most closely that of Ahmad
b. Hanbal.

(2)

We can consequently claim that, although the exclusive manner
with which Ibn Hazm wanted to help the rigid traditionalism of the
Zahirite school to victory met determined opposition in Andalusia,,
it was, on the other hand, precisely the specific manner of Auda-
lusian Islam which was tho actual prerequisite for developing a theo-
iiii logical personality like 'All b. Ahmad Abu Muhammad Ibn Hazm.
Among tho champions of tho Dawudi school this remarkable man is
known as the most famous by far. Those of his works that have reached
us represent for us the theological literature of the Zahirite school.

in tho Old Testament. ThiH i« still praoWsed. Tho hook is always kept in a beautiful

container and has its own little tent in which it is placed near the king".

' Walsh) Kstcrhnzy, lie. la domination lim/ue ilaim I'unr.irnnr. reijcnne d'Alyer, p. 213,
222.

- <Cf. Miilmmmrdankehe Sludien, II, p. 100, n. 4>. Bttql h. Makhlad ul-Qurlubt'B
Tiifnir is only known from citation!).

3 al-Muqcjurl, I, p. 811-812.

- 1 Of. '/'almi/ut al-huffi'i;, X, no. 2; Tuliiiijat at-wiiftinmnii, ml. Moiirsiiigo, no. 25;

al-Maqqarl, i.e.

117

110

CHAl'TKR EIGHT

I did not lcsirn wlicthcr, except for the few volumes of Ibn Ilazm's
works extorted from the Islamic autos-da-fe, anything of the specific-
ally Ziihirito literaturo has como down to us independently.

We know about his life and his literary activities from the excellent
contributions of Dutch orientalists. The bibliography of his writings
could bo further perfected by some minor details. In the annotation '
I supply remarks on individual Ibn Ilazmica, which, according to
my knowledge, have not been listed, and which I discovered during
my preoccupation with this remarkable writer.

a.

Ibn Hazin represents in his own time the Ziihirito opposition against
the prevailing Muslim orthodoxy; he represents it, and this is the
new point which he introduced to the circle of the Zilhirite school,
not only as regards jurisprudence, but also as regards dogmatics. In those
parts of this study in which we deal with the positive fiqh of the
Ziihirito school in its relation to the prevailing qiyds schools, we have
come across the name Ibn Ilazm more than once. His point of view
is that of a person who rigidly denies qiyds (nafi al-qiyds), he repudiates
all concessions made to the legal interpretation como to prominence

1 Tho riu&jflt traditions contain ountrniliolary data on (.ho circumstances of tho

Prophet's pilgrimage and 'ummh. Cf. Snouok-Hurgronje, lid Mekhaantolu Feat, p. Hfi ff.
Ibn Ilazm wrote a Bpeolol work in which ho reconciled those contradictions: a*- 3 - -^J

c~oL.VI ^y'b (Jju'j Ujli olf rt-»iv *jl (<*<i|j "&U., (nl-Nftwiiwi,
ill, p. 168). Ibn Hii/.m who, ftH wo oiin boo again and again, wm frequently engaged in
personal, verbal controversy with Ash'ariton, Mu'tazilitos, Christians, .Tows, and free-
thinkers, also produced several writings dealing with particular polemics. Bis pamphlet
against the .low Urn Nagdela lias already boon ontablishod (of. my article "l'roben
muhommodanisoher Polomlk gegen don Talmud", I, in Kobak's Juchwvn, VIII (1872),
\i. 8i)Thore is alsoa political pamphlet against the book ,^J j I f»J-><JI l>y the physician
Muhammad al-Rii/.i, directed particularly against tho claim that houI, space, and time
are eternal (jt>ilj ^^iJI 61 Vl JjJ 1 l_y"ju. jJ jlj oli 1UJ1 Ijl
■U-. J)j 1 ,_jikll ObjJIj ^.il jAj (jikll (Mildl, I. fol. 2a; of. ibid.,
foL 18a, whore this pamphlet iH quoted). lie also wrote a "groat" pamphlet against the
dogmatist Mikhtfif i>. DQnfts in Qayrow&o who dofendod tho thesis that faith oonsists
merely of inward confession: o-k& A^i ( Jjb I -Lj 1 : ,,n a'\ j^J oa UJj

,_j-ljj^ i>_ olkk i^-^i L£l£dl (x 4 <J^-J (J* •lijsS" o-uUJI aJUII

KkJ\ O'j _£» J 1 *' (V (vol. II, fol. 10a).

CHAl'TKR MIGHT

111

since tho establishment of the Ziihirito school. He frowns upon both
alike, the school of Mitlik and of Abu Hanifah. The account following
is transmitted by Ibn Hazm about Malik, the founder of the former
school, a scholar whom, following von Kremor, we arc used to consider
as tho representative of the traditional methodology in jurisprudence,
as the antipode to Abu Ilanifah's speculative branch. The story shows
us sufficiently the opinion which the intransigent Ztlhirl held of the
representative of the traditional jurisprudence: "When the Imam
Malik felt that death was approaching ho said: 'I wish, now, that I
could be punished with one lash for each question which I decided
on the basis of my own ra'y, and that I would not have to appear
before the Prophet of God with things that I added to his laws on my
own account, or with cases in which I decided against tho literal
moaning of his law' " '. This, Millik's alleged self-criticism, is in reality
tho Zahirl's critique about the life- work of the person who is usually
reckoned among the most faithful observers of tradition. Ibn Ilazm
deals more severely with Abu Hanifah as the actual originator of the
analogical fiqh. The following epigram of his, directed against Abu
Hanifah's school, is transmitted:

"If you reported lies to mo, thou tho guilt of Abu Hanifah and Zufar rest

on you,
Who in unfaithful manner indulged in analogy, and who turned away from

obnorving tho traditions".

This epigram resulted in tho following reply on the part of a Hanafite:

"It wan not right, o 1 bu l.Inzm, to censure him who comprehended nil knowledge,
118 and who wan excellent in virtue, and famoiiN;

"For Abu l.lairiTali's virtue linn been recognized in the course of generations

and comparable to this in bin companion Zufar;
"If thoHO words do not convert you, thon, I think, you do not stand far from

hell fixe.
"Abu Ilanifah's analogy was not applied when there was other ovidonco from

tho .Scripture or tradition,
"But in tho abxonco of such ovidonco, analogical reasoning may bo appliod

as Mu'ftdh a proscribed" 3 .

1 110, fol. 12b; ul-Sha'ranl, I, p. 05; in tho same work wo find on p. 09 also tho
following OOOOUnt in the name of VValid b. MuHlim (d. KM) from Damascus. Malik asked
mo: "Do people in your country mention Abu Hanifah ?". — When I answered in tho
affirmative, ho laid to mo: "Thon no one ought to reside in your country".

- Of. above, p. !>.

3 1 have quoted those polemic versos on tho authority of Itifu'ah Bog al-TahtiiwI ;
soo above p. 10fi, n. 2.

LIS

CHAPTER BIGHT

Except for iv few passages from tho Muhalld, none of Ibn Hazm's
works on fiqli. has come clown to us, not even the one in which he
developed his position in relation to the prevailing methods of legal
deduction. This is a work to which lie refers often in his surviving
main work '. We are to some extent compensated for this by his tract
Ibi/d dl-qiyas wa-al-ra' 'y ■wa-al-isiihsan. wa-al-taqUd wa-al-la'lU in which
he discloses in a sharp manner his polemic position against the qiyds
schools and their methodology. Ibn Ilazm took a free, independent
stand in the practical conclusions of the Zilhirite school ", and in
some questions he disregarded even Diivvud's arguments ;l . Ibn Hazm's
followers, who wore found predominently in al-Maghrib, formed
consequently a separate division among the Zahiritc legal branch,
differentiated from the main line of the Zfdiirls by the special name
of al-IIazmiyah '. This is how it must be interpreted if it is said of
some followers of the Zahiritc school that they follow it according
to the manner of Ibn Hazm ('aid lanqat Ibn Ilazm). He demanded
consistent application of those principles which Dawfid had established
before being compelled to come to a compromise with qiyas °. We have
110 previously seen (p. 32, n. 1) the kind of sophism employed by Ibn
Hazm to incite scepticism even with regard to ijmd' — a legal
BOUXCe to which he appeals on innumerable occasions. Then too,
and this was his own idea, he was lint first to apply the ■principles of the
Z&Mrite school to dogmatics. The latter point is tin; dominant concept
of the Kitab al-milal wa-al-nihul. In this work, we also find points
of direction for an understanding of Ibn Hazm's concepts of the
basic questions of canonical law. In this important work, he concludes
his exposition of Muhammad's prophetic mission with thanksgiving
to God

1 al-llifahn ft n-pil al-iiljb'im, l.lajji Klmlil'ah, 1, p. 170. no. 166. With regard to Ihu

question i_-j LU I Ac Jja UU b J^ J^J)1 1 ll>n Hazm colors to it vol. 1, fol. 203 l>;

vol. II, fol. 60tt on uAgCj jA (Jj* o_ji^JI AjiLj 1 ^j-i.

' Muslim Boholnra generally refer to Ibn Hazm an tho authority lor the admissibility
of the UBO of inimical instruments and tOVB (i_-oU|lj _J-fl-UI ^ Ji).

a Ibn Khaldun. Muqaddimah, p. 87Sl AJ r&-*J jAUiJI i__-it>J^> <J I jU»J
. Jjb -„£->L.I i_t)U-J [ti>l_^'l ^ **Pj ->b^»-b

•' Ibn al-Athir, XII, p. (II: aLj^J-1 «Ja (_)bu _^ii ,_jLi. ^^-o Vj*-^ O&J

o Hoe above p. :i5.

CIIAl'TKIt I'UlillT

113

"firstly for what, wo have achieved through His help with regard io the islamic
religion; Hoeondly, for His iixHiHluneo through the orthodox (literally: catholic.
Corresponding to total agreement) faith based on the sicimuli; then, thirdly,
for llix teaching US to delormino our religious confessions and our daily lives
according to the literal meaning of the Koran, and the xiiimuh of His Prophet
which undoubtedly orginatos from its extolled Sender. (Furthermore, ho ex-
presses (hanks to God> that lie did not have us belong to those who blindly
follow their ancestors, and their learned authorities without important ovidenco
and without coueluxive agreement, neither to those who follow their erroneous
whims wbieh are in opposition to tho words of Clod and His Prophet, nor
to thoHO who judge aeeording to their ra'y and their personal opinion
Without guidance from either God or His Prophot. O God, just as wo luivo
started with this glorious blessing, continue it (until the end of our time),
let it accompany us, and do not deprive US of it until You call us to You so
that wo adhere to it in order to appear before You not us forger and twister
of Your law" '.

120 In a different passage, when dealing with the question whether God
Himself creates the actions of men (khalq al-af'dl), Ibn Hazm dem-
onstrates how the school of the Mu'tazilites tinkers with those
Koranic verses that are generally cited in support of the old orthodox
teachings. Thon also surah LIV:49 is discussed (innd hull shay' khalaq-
■nuhu bi-qadar), a phrase which the Mu'tazilitcs will not recognize
as a general, comprehensive statement ('inii iim) ; rather, they consider
it as relating to a certain specific fact (takhsis) according to the familiar
treatment of such Koranic passages in which, as in the foregoing ono,
a statement is introduced by a generality (e.g. in this case, hull shay').
Al-Ash'ari, too, permitted this kind of scriptural interpretation, and
he defended it, so it seems to me, in the special writings El inna al-

1 Kitab al-milal, I, fol. I27a: ,<v?JJ *2L* J-^ tJ^J-xJI <— >J JJi -UJ-lj

aIAI a* aJ Lisj L Lt mys" .ilJ-ij J-iy; (cud. iijj) XJjj *u-i>
Js "J ;uLJI lCttJ-1 ib*JI ^ aJs. tij^i L Ji- J^ iCoL.^1

jjs. XsjIsJI iulJI _>*Ulj oT/JI j*,\k> J-jJIj i>"-^l <y ^ ^'•** ^

Aj_jiJ iiJIiil A.L^.11 JjA'i'l *J$ JL4 Vj o^U' A^.j ^U' jU.^
djjl ,y> t5^A jjj AJlij Aj\f_ n£=Z : ^^ ^J prtL^ aIj J_^iJj

Ul^lj b_U l^li'U aLU-| IujuJI »j^ lilJil \f I4AII < aJj^jj
L&j jjiC..^— . ^j tl5CJI Lyk-iJ' L». \js- I^j lJJI^ Vj IaIjI

114

ciiAi'Tioit BIGHT

qiyds yukliassisu zdhir al-Qur'dn and Kitdbfi, al-akhbdr 'wa-l.akhfi.dhd.
I, for my part, translate the latter title not as Spitta did "liber die
tradilionen und Hire spcciclc eiyenlhUmlichkeit" J (On traditions and
their particular characteristics), but "Uber die Traditional, und Hire
Spczialisicrung" (On traditions and their specialization). The question
of 'umum and khmus is known to be important both for the inter-
pretation of the Koran and the traditions, and for jurisprudential and
dogmatic chapters of Islamic theology. Can a generality in the Koran
be deprived of its universal applicability and its interpretation be
restricted to a specific case ? What is the basis for the permissiveness
or the outright necessity of such specification ? Can a saying from the
traditions, can analogical reasoning justify the specific application
of a generality derived from the text? Does the form of the expression
in itself necessarily offer a criterion for a general interpretation of
a verse, or not ? — These and related questions and their relation to
121 this chapter of oxegetic methodology arc dealt with in considerable
detail in the usul works. Some theologians have put the axe to the root
of the whole investigation by saying that the linguistic expression
simply docs not offer 'umum at all; language docs not have any
form which in itself should always be interpreted as being universally
applicable. If a statement is intended to have universal applicability,
then evidence independent from the linguistic expression must be
supplied to show that the statement in question does not refer to a
specific caso. Al-Ash'arl is cited as the leading exponent of this opinion,
the adheronts of which are called al-m.uwdqipiyah. -.

Ibn Hazm joins those who find in this exegetic principle an un-
justifiable arbitrariness and he refutes this with his customary strong
language. Ho is probably enlarging on ideas laid down by Dawud

1 Spltto, Zur OcmJiir.li.lr. Alm-l-JIn-mii, p. 88, no. 4; p. 04, no. 12.

2 Waraqat, fol. 18a: JlS «J| J^y<-iVl ^J-l ,jl ys-JJI ^ ^S^-3

(cod. •ti~ w aJI) A~y=JI 0-^* (jl *U* tJ^-J S-L/^' *"J iJ ^-i-T^ ft3**^ lY^

uATJlL J>ll ^J-\ pJj r ^JIj ut% d£d1 jU>JI ,h.VI j^.]
J> ~<sb J**j ^ U» Us J-^m o*** i>^ ^-s^' tL™Vlj |.^JIj

j % pi^i^^i j \^j jl_>ji j JZj oisai j efts ^*J-i

(jj ti^Vl JaI <y* icL*. A*Jj J^aiA.* JJ-Aj i\J.\ pill LJ x=-

.(j^AJaVl ^^ (i^V^I "-^ dl^JLI (^ (tr&^J-^ yijil |>»~J «_->»^ll IJA

OIIAPTKll KtllUT

115

al-Zahirl in a work known to us by its title only '. Ibn Hazm empha-
sizes the exegetic law that runs exactly counter to the canon of the
Ash'aritcs; namely, that every Koranic statement must be interpreted
as having general applicability unless, of course, another passage
abrogating tlie general validity, justifies its particular application
to a specific case. The schools of qiyds — without paying homage,
to al-Ash'arl's destructive exegotic principle — are precisely the ones
who, in their interpretation of the laws, be it from Koranic or traditional
texts, (laws which arc interpreted by the followers of the Ztihiritc
school as commands of general applicability) interpret them as being
122 occasioned by a special, individual, or accidental case, and to be
applied to this case only. At times they are led to such interpretations
by more analogical reasoning, according to the principle: al-qiyds
yukhassim al-nass. Ibn Hazm recognizes in this a threat to the relia-
bility of legal deductions: "If it were possible", he says, to "delimit
a generality to something specific, or even to abrogate a traditional
law, then the definite truth of none of the transmitted divine statements
and laws could bo determined, for the possibility could never be
excluded that someone would cancel tho general validity, contrary to
the clear wording, and in opposition to the general version of the law.
This, however, is puro sophistry, it is disbelief and foolishness. May
God protect us from misguidance !" s . This is connected with Ibn
Hazm's exegetic canon, repeated emphatically in many parts of his
major work, namely, that "it is the duty to interpret God's word
literally. This may be abandoned only when another written word
of God, or the consensus (of the companions of the Prophet) or a
compelling fact based on logical conclusion " supplies conclusive
evidence that a particular word of God should not be understood
literally. The word of God and communications and laws issued in

i /,',

'ihriil, p. 217, 14: />_5*j«JIj ^fj^sJ-l obS",
- lliii Hazm, ibid., fol. 108b: t!)l*JJ {J*! .J^- e^AUs A*i »yf- Ji Jj
U I3a_^c- (itf _jJ_j r-j^^> Ail _jl \jfyfik* '*-ib

*U LJto»

yn.

V *i^ lJb.1 Ibo

Vj JU JJJI jUI

w

v 5 <J

KtyP A;. v 3."c) L> (cod. u>a*j) \jJM (i^J ej&Ui y-£- .Le- «*J"°- 9 j; 0>
.O^-^-l <j-» Jib ijJOJ AJ'^J-lj ji&\j ikLJI &.■?■ I-^J
3 iy^ ojjj*' '" another poatage (fol. 185a) la wtiioli this oaaon in wpoatod, it
lays Instead of these words: ,_)Jic ojjj^> "logloal neoessity".

110

CIHAiTIOR EICI1T

His name are not subject, to change; the consensus does not claim
anything but the truth, and God says nothing but the truth, but
whatever is refuted on the basis of conclusive evidence challenges
123 the truth". By "conclusive evidence", it must be admitted, Ibn I.Iazm
does not understand speculative arguments. As we shall soe, in both
disciplines of theology, in jurisprudence as well as in dogmatics, he is
leading a continuous battle against the introduction of speculative
points for settling theological questions. Let us add that Ibri Hazin
enunciates the afore-mentioned canon on the occasion of his exposition
on the nature of divine knowledge. This is directed particularly against
those dogmatists who separate knowledge as an attribute of God from
the essence of God and who, in support of their argument, quote
surah 11:256: "They comprehend nothing of //is- knowledge except
what He wills". They conclude from this that God's knowledge is
divisible, therefore a created accident. As against this, Ibn Ha/.m
puts the explanation of the literal meaning of the words min 'ilmilr.
"knowledge about him" (genitivm otijcctivus), in other words, "man
can know about and comprehend God's nature only as much as God
Himself permits for their comprehension '. We can see from this that

i Vol. I, ibl. m:)I>: Vj "J^-j y- -J-U I Jji yj'J*-* J'Js-\ Ols
^jJ^xj Vj uJi~*im ^ jl J Us &Li |(j *y\ -vjs. fo* c^Ij 'JjW'n
jj| J*. JbJ «UJ I lyii Ssj o.u: jy^-C Vl J^ Vj ijjli Vl

jjtj A-ykx-J JPUt Ai"i ijj^*- AjJ-fc jl L--~»-j9 A*i* ,j-o cLi \i Jabi
jl U*»-lj liL*J' «Ull f^S jl ij^j^l (Jl*J -*-U L> j i_i|jJ-U .j-ai^

c.1^1 jl [ysl Jili jl Vl a!j| «j*U» ,y ^H: Vj oj&\li J^ Jifi

iys Jju As aJIj sysUe J-c ^J a_^ li~i 6' J* J*, °jj^ jl
Jj^JI tlJGii ^ '*-^-jl U Lit i_-=-lj •iL/uVU j±.\ j^ Jl oy^Ui

,j)j£S N e^ljlj «jU-lj L«J -oil *5*JT jV ijj^Jl jl aI^VI jl
4ik*l l "j& "of I VI J>j V JW jjjIj j* VI yilj V ^le-Vlj
pic jl L^J .% °jjj-J> LJi IjT IIa ili j--£ (j^Ji c^jj^ JL_/_
(J*j y- cSjV _#=• «•(«« .$* Vj t** 1 ?" *J ^^* o*^ ti^ *^'

A^J-c ^ ft,JS«J Jj-krr Vj J*J Vc *JjJ (jr ^*-> jl ftiju o; Jj^iJ bs
V 1-ifcj <oL& ^ cft^ 1 ^ J'j*- J* tP^I iJA 1 -' |«W ^W £'
^jl Lj "J*j > J_Ul JU LJL L VI bJ J* V AiV *4 &&*
.o^Lc |j l&Lj j»jLJI ^ ijLi U ijbo" J^jj, ")VJji "i/l *LJI ,j-o

CIIAI'TKU HICIIT

117

124 what Ibn I.Iazm calls the literal meaning of the scriptural text is often
no more literal than what he dismisses as departure from the literal
textual meaning, and that, in these matters, it is often a question of
exegetic taste only.

Very closely connected with this, his canon, is what we actually
must consider its prc-requisitc; namely, Ibn I.Iazm's principle that the
words used in tho legal texts must bo interpreted strictly according to
their lexieidlg defined meaning. "Whoever makes any changes in tho
established sense of the words used in the language without a scriptural
text or without the agreement of all legal authorities justifying this,
has renounced the rules of sensible and humble men and has entered
tho company of those with whom one cannot speak. If this were
possible, indeed, it could easily bo said: What is ordinarily meant
(in religion) by the word prayer is not what you usually understand
by it, rather, it is something entirely different, and that the word
water means wine. This, however, would entail abolition of all truth".
Also, in this instance, he emphasizes that it is prohibited to change the
meaning of the word on the bas's of one's own rag '. It goes without

125 saying that this lexicographical argument is applied especially in
dogmatic polemics in which it is often a question of minute squabbles.
Ibn Hazm advances, for instance, the lexicographical argument with
almost the same above-mentioned words against those Mu'tazilites
who want to give to the expression ada.Ua an interpretation differing

or. fni. iooa for lii« refutation of those theologians who do not want, to recognize mrah
LXXV:22 oyi\i Lgjj J I ... e*»J na proof ihiil, tho righteous people shall
Hex Oral iii Uhi hcri'iilW hoonuNK they iiiterprul. Mm wonl iiiijirah motiiphorioally:

*JIj-UIj t LflB" jJlSJ-l -u-sl <iS3i> j& J*j & "jV ftj^l j\ "a^ VI

.aET J>dlj [$

1 Pol. I70li: I^Aj^m ,jt L^jUII JililVl fr* l~i J^l j- 1 -?

o i u ^ii a_«j

L»J

ij~"

jAl

U"

c-'^b Vj U. (J-ji \jai jfJii Ai-Ul if

C_

3?»J Vj A-*-. J&l V (y* t-»W»J J> jU--J b.LJ-Ij JjixJI J* I ^SC^
ctllj 1.0 _,_.! i fj|_j Uvj j^Ju' L C—J o^sJI JjJU jl I J* I

Ji_ r ^j jl j^.)i ^^Jj L^^iy.! j">Uu Ija ^j j*3-l ^

j~L fy* Aj|_^_ IvjLU I ^5 Lj*j^< ,j£ (soil S»lku«Vl) AJiiUl o^»

.IOjI frbu "t^vsj lj (JjUJ-I cJJiJ l^t> jU. jjj c.L».| Vj u^J

cr. r..i. i sea.

118

OHAl'TKH BIGHT

from the generally accepted one in order to evade the idea that God
leads mankind astray. (This expression is repeated again and again
in the Koran concerning God's relation to man). (. -U-j ,« a ■>"•.' (J^J
iJUj j^JU. rt-fijl *£»J O^^p p^L*— JUj' -Ull ol <£&}
iSjry". d-il J_^2J l^-^iJj'l rt-gi^l ^j^ _^iju) "This is the correct
dalfil, namely, that their obstinacy, their blind adherence to a principle
the falsehood of which is clear, and their servile following of had
authorities among their ancestors leads them to pretend to be unable
to understand what it is: misguidance, seizure (of the disbelievcrs's
hearts). God has explained all this in sufficient detail — and then
these are, after all, Arabic, words of known meaning, in the language
of the Koran. No one is permitted to apply linguistic, meaning to some-
thing else, etc." '.

It would lead too far if we wcro to produce an extonsive anthology
of passages in order to better illuminate this lexico-theological principle
of Ibn Hazm. Tho principle ought to have become evident from what
has been quoted above. However, before we start to present the
Zahirite basis of Ibn Harm's dogmatics, we want to allow for an
observation that belongs in this context. His judging the literal sense
12(1 °^ wor( ' H that entor theological questions docs not start from the same
point of view as does the lexical assessment of a given word among
linguists. In determining tho scope of any expression the consideration
is not how tho meaning can be documented from the old poets, the
classical authorities of Arabic, rather what meaning follows from the
linguistic usage of the Koran. The former cannot be cited in support
of defining dogmatic terms. Among the passages in which Ibn Hazm
expresses this idea, the most remarkable is tho one in which ho treats
the definition of the concept of iman, faith. The representatives of the
different dogmatic schools differ in their opinions with regard to the
scope of this the most important principle of all dogmatics. Some

1 Fol. 189b: a'^LJIj o")\-^JI •^J-t CfrJ (that in, In the sentences _^~~ i J^
_7^cAJ ^^il (JUj «U)I jWjjS y* ,_j-i_jJlj i£.X&l 61 (*J ij^- U
,Jjil_j-. jAj a2L», [«J] (^jJI "jiJi ^lill jjwi'j tibS. Jj (_5JJI

Ojix-il Jx"i/lj oXg&UI aAs. Qj aILuJI lu J j_ r ^JI o\aI_^JIj jTyillj *iD

r

UUir kLiUUI u^jLoJl

6. Li 1 1

cr*

^ > *D1

CilAl'TISR EIGHT

119

people see in faith an inner recognition of God (ma'rifat Allah ta'dld
bi-qalb) without consideration for its manifestation in word and action
(.Tahm b. Safwiin al-Samarqandl and al-Ash'arl) ; according to another
opinion, iman consists of professing God with the tongue (a.l-iqrar
bi-al-li.mn) without consideration for inner belief and external mani-
festation (Muhammad b. Kiram al-Sijistam); still others combine
both, inner belief and profession with the concept of iman, but dis-
regard external compliance with the divine laws (Abu Ilanifah and
other jurisprudents). Ibn Hazm takes the position that the concept of
vman comprises all three points, faith, profession, and actions and that
no one deserves the name of believer (mumin) who docs not fulfill the
three factors of iman which consequently exist in a person to a larger
or lessor degree depending on the extent to which these factors are
manifested in the individual '. Ibn Hazin's line of thought in refuting
the rival viow is briefly the following: the opponents quote as authority
127 the Iwjhah in which the word amana has the moaning: tatsdtq. Now
however, the meaning of the latter is recognition as truth of no matter
what. The Arabs who coined this word had no idea what Islam under-
stood by "faith". Indeed, when Islam first appeared in their history,
they rejected Allah and the Prophet. It is futile to take the Ivghah
as an authority in matters of dogmatics. Not the lexicon, but solely
God has the authority to determine what is the meaning of the IVth
form of the verb ama.na in religious affairs ; and in textual passages,
the divine origin of which cvoryono must acknowledge, good actions
are included in the scope of iman. God is the creator of language and
of those who use it; Ho has the power to change it and to give its
expressions whatever turn He wants. How surprising is it that a person
should find the usage of a word in prosaic or poetical speech in Imru'
al-Qays, or Zuhayr, or Jarir, or al-Tirimmah, or al-Hutay'ah, or al-
Shaminakh, or another Arab from the tribe of Asad, or Sulaym, or
Tamim, or other Arab tribes, and then let this usage be the binding,
irrefutable rule for the usage of these words ; but if God, the Creator
of languages and of those who use them, creates an expression, such

1 Kilfib nl-milnl, U, (ol lb: jl^'lj lT-XJUj <__l5J Ij A3_,«il _j* JLc.jl

Aiiu ji oir &y _^ j>j x*u» "j>" oij QjiJM cMj <j lui1 *

( _ J ^c L "J5} UUI abjl jji J> jUiVl abjl L, "j5j» d^J j&
jJlc I ,j^5J. Q£ for this fundamental question of Mamie dogmatic* tin- lucid exposi-
tion of tho souroo material in al-Ghozlil, iliu<V, vol. i, p. nsff.

120

niAiTKK BIGHT

ft person would not want to abide by it nor recognize it as evidence,
but rather would twist and turn it. Ho would proceed in exactly the
same manner if lie found an expression of the Prophet. By God,
Muhammad b. 'Abd Allah b. 'Abd al-Muttalib I). Hashim, even in
the time he fore (lod distinguished him with his mission, and before
lie became his people's Prophet in Mecca, was in the oyes of anyone
who possessed a spark of intelligence more familiar with his people's
language and more gifted with eloquence, and more competent in his
usage of the language which was to be valid as argument, than the
foremost Khinda.fi or Qaysi, or Raba'i, or lyadi, or 'AkkT, 01 Himyari,
or Thahalani, or Quda'i. Mow much more so was this the case after
God appointed him warncr, and selected him as mediator between
Him and all of His creatures, and let emanate from his tongue Mis
word, and entrusted him with preserving it. Is there a graver error
than to recognize as evidence for fcho meaning of rare Arabic words
the hapar. legomena of Labkl b. Rabi'ah, Abu Zayd al-k'albl, and Ibn
Ahmar « ? Is it wrong for determining the scope of the word Im/'m
to adhere to the usage made by God Himself, and by His Messenger
from the tribe of the Quraysh who was nursed among the Banii Sa'd
128 b. Bakr b. Hawiizin -? This, then, is how Ibn Ifazm argued his prin-
ciple of the differences of lexical and dogmatic linguistic usage. In
the field of philology, this view is espoused by the lexicographer anil
philological teacher Ibn Paris in one section of his Fiqh ul-lughah !1 .
Al-Suyiitl, in an instructive chapter of his philological encyclopaedia
which is excellent for the study of Arabic philology, has elaborated
upon this view and supplied it with considerable evidence from litera-
ture < after, much earlier, the famous al-Jahi? had given the first
incentive for similar investigations in a remarkable excursus in which
he, as the first person, explained how new meanings of words developed
in this literature through the influence of Islam \ The exhaustive
treatment of this important chapter of Arabic philology offers so
many instructive points also for the religious history of the Arab
people, in particular for a comparison of the moral and religious

1 Hi'iii, Mir ruli-vnnl. vimwn are oiloil in ilclnil.

- Ibid., fed. .'tl>. Tin- oonoludlng sentence acorns to be on allusion to the alleged words

of Wio L'ropliefc _^o j<_ Jjt~, Jj J C~*-vi_A"lj i«^J* 1*1 p^'j^' ^'

Ibn llinliiiiii, Leben Muhammad's, p, 100.

3 CI', my Hrilriiye. zur flwrliieltlf tlrr Kpeitrhijtir.hrmmkeil , no. :S. p. 17.
•' til-Muz/iirfi'vlilm iil-lufi/mli. I, p, Iff] IT.
* KUnb nl-hiujnmlii, I'ul. fiSli IT.

fUlAPTKIl lOICMIT

121

concepts of the pro-Islamic Arabs with those, of the Muslim Arabs,
that it deserves to be treated in detail from the point of view of our
philological knowledge. This, however, is not the place for expositions
on this field which require independent treatment. Mince at this point
of our work, we arc particularly interested in Islamic fiijh, it may be
stated that the reality of a difference between the lexicographically
determined usage and that recognized by the science of religion,
has become generally acknowledged in the hitter one. In view of this
fact, the following important principle of the 'ilm tt-ml, al-fit/h is gener-
ally accepted: Jc *ii* J* *!^ 21*^1 XSJiA-l J* Jail! I jli
i)_jiL)l iLliJ-l i.e. "whenever there is a. conflict between the religious
linguistic usage and the usage determined lexicographically, then (in

jurisprudence) preference is to be given to the former". If in judging

controversies the definition of a word's meaning has bearing on the
129 judgement, only the religious, but never the lexicographical linguistic
Usage is to be considered. The following related example will show
that this rule was practised most subtly in the field of applied juris-
prudence. With regards to the Islamic law on divorce (al-l.alrit/), it
may be assumed as known that a marriage is considered finally dis-
solved (td-tidm/ al.-bd'in) only after pronouncement of the divorce
formula three times in legally defined intervals. After the divorce
formula has been pronounced three times, only tdhlll makes a. new
union of the spouses possible. It is also known that the husband is
legally prohibited to carry out the divorce when the woman is men-
struating {(d-hai/d). Now the following question arises: "When one of
the three legally required divorce declarations was made, while the
woman was in the state of hai/d, is this declaration counted as valid,
or is the view advanced that, since this stato stands in the way of the
final divorce, the preceding declarations also shall lie regarded as null
and void" '( The four orthodox schools endorse the first decision and
say with al-Bukhiirl: id/id, l.idiqat al-haid yu'taddu bi-iU/dl.ika. td-lulaq;
the Zahiriya.h. on the other hand, and this in agreement with Shi'ite
law, decides for the opposite. The tradition, the interpretation of
which is important in this controversy runs as follows: "Abd Allah.
'Ulnar's son, declared his wife Aniina.li divorced when she was in state
of Ijai/d. 'Umar, then, questioned the Prophet about the validity 01
this action. The Prophet decided: "Order him (your son )([(d-t/uraji'lia)
that ho return to her". The lexical usage indicates that the completed
act of divorce was declared invalid; raja a means: to return to that

122

I'HAI'TIOR KIOIIT

place or state in which the person was previously, in this case to the
state of not being divorced (al-raj'ah al-hujliaicii/ali hii/a al-radd ila
haliliu). The jurists, however, say that a return (rnju') is possible only
if it is preceded by a divorce, i.e. if the divorce act is considered valid.
130 And indeed, the first and second divorce that precede the laldq ba'in
nre called laldq raj'l. In jurisprudential matters this legal linguistic
usage must bo preferred over the lexical definition '.

We must come back once moro to Ibn Hazm. His fanatical zeal rises
to the utmost limits when he refutes the philological line of argument
of the school which teaches that Imdn means no more than pronouncing
the formula of the profession of faith. In order to prove this, some, one
referred to a verse of the Christian Arab poet al-Akhtal as lor/an pro-
bans. "We, however, reply to this line of argument: cursed, cursed
is the author of this line, and cursed, cursed is he who advances this
Christian as argument in matters of Allah's religion. This does not
belong to the field of philology in which you may base your opinion
on a Bcduin even if he be a unbelievor; rather, this is a question of
common sense. Reasoning as well as sentient experience proves that
that unbeliever has lied. Furthermore, this is a. religious question:
but in these matters, God, the exalted, is more reliable than that
Christian) for God says: 'They say with their lips what they do not
believe in their hearts' (surah 111:161). This is in complete opposition
to what al-Akhtal claims in his verse. But we consider God's saying
as truth and say al-Akhtal is lying. May God curse him who cites
al-Akhtal as evidence in order to refute the word of God" ". Incident-

1 Kilub al-laluq, no. 2; of. no. •!■! ami wil.h it al-(Jm'|.iilluni, VIII, p. 143.
- Kililh al-milal, II, fol. ir>l>: Jjaa-^l Jjjjj \jja ^A r*%^-*^. Tf-^'-J

. .Oil JJjJ "J,\j^\

d& jls J>\j*y^. %j& J^\ AiAll ^\i fr, \Ja ^Jj ^*j j^c JUS
SI (jvx.AII " J il_ rV 3-JI ,y> (jA^I "tj^-j y- 4I1U %»&/•£ A—r^J tS* a «JI

CIHAI'TKK KK1IIT

123

ally, for tho history of the controversy of whether Imdn represents
i:tl the simple tasd'iq, as it is claimed on the basis of lexicography, or
whether this expression of dogmatics implies the actual practice
it is interesting to see how fabrication of traditions penetrates this
controversy also, and draws it into its sphere. We find in al-Mas'fidT I
a tradition introduced with considerable emphasis according to which
the Prophet is represented to have dictated to 'AH the following:
In tho name of God, etc. "Faith (iman) is what the heart honors and
what is made meaningful by man's religious actions; Islam is what
comes from the lips (the literal confession) and by which marriage
becomes valid (in so far as it is indispensable for the spouse to be
Muslim)": ^ L jOL-^lj JI^V! «ft*.j <->jll}\ tijj L jLc^l
1Ub5 Lll ^j cJ.».j (JL.UII Jj. The connecting of tasdiq with a'mnl,
I suspect, is intended to express the combining of the loxical definition
with the tenet of the indispensability of the bona opera, and this
apocryphal, tendoncious tradition probably owes its origin to the
tendency towards this combination.

b.

In the preceding paragraphs, it was not very well possible to isolate
Ibn Hazm's point of viow in jurisprudence from his dogmatics so
that wo were consequently obliged to touch tho field of dogmatics.
But arc there really separate Zdhirilc. dogmatics in the same sense
as we could speak of a ZaMrite fiqh1 The Ziihirito rite is never called
anything but madhhab figh, that is, a branch of Islamic orthodoxy
which differs from the rest of the orthodox schools only in practical
jurisprudence. Wo do not find the Ziihiritc school among the madhahib
Icaldnm/ali. Indeed, whon we make a comparative study of the Zahirite
132 school's known coryphaei of tho different periods for their dogmatic
point of view, we shall soon find out that tho most divergent, dia-
metrically opposed dogmatic branches could be combined as belonging
to the Zahirite fiqh school. We find there, for example, next to Ibn
Hazm, who condemns as heresy the tenet of the existonco of divine
attributes, al-Maqrtzi who admits tho attributes, but only in the
sense of the pre-Ash'aritc orthodoxy of the imams of the school faithful
to the traditions. But al-Maqrlzi, together with Ibn Hazm, reject
ta'wll, i.e. allegorical interpretation of the scripture. Then, besides

1 Murilj, Vlt, Turin od., p. 383. <T'lii« footnote in Omitted in the 1067 reprint of
Die '/Jliirilcii}.

124

(MI A 1 TICK Kl CUT

188

the Almohades who, for reasons of tho state, lind raised the Ziihiiiyah
to the ruling religious rite — and, at the sumo time, protected al-
Ash'ari's dogmatics ' — we find onco more Jim Hazm who directs
his intense enmity more against the system of the Ash'aritos than
against that of the Mu'tazilitos. Therefore we find among the Zahirls
important representatives oftheosophy next to Ilm Hazin who rejects
Mftfis anil the worshippers of 'All alike, because of la'wll which is
characteristic for l>ol'.h of them ". Can one imagine a more enormous
contrast in dogmatics than the literal exegesis aimed at by Ilm Ilazin
and the exegesis which confronts us in the two tafnr volumes by the
writer of the Fv.ms and the Fuluhat printed in Bulftq ;l ? Common
to both of them is only the rejection of the anthropomorphism of (.'oil,
that is, precisely an aspect which, strictly speaking, separates them
from the zahir proper. This phenomenon can serve as a demonstration
of the historical endorsement as we find it in Muslim accounts with
regard to the school founded by Dawud. According to them, his school
was simply a madliliab fujln and not a madhlmb kalihm*, i.e. a school
which adopts a definite attitude only towards the. juridical branches
within Islam, but is totally indifferent towards kaldm. Houtnma is
therefore entirely wrong when he finds the emphasis of the Zahirito
school in the literal interpretation of the anthropomorphical passages

1 IJn/.y, Etsai «nr I'lihltiirc it t'ixliiniisiiii: (runnl. V. Ohauvin, p. 877 IT.

" KilCih nl-mllnl, ll.fol. MOb: -OL-Vl <jO J I ^^ ^ Jj5" &\ l>»J*|j

&j**Aa yis ^jj_PI i£y-S (j< UjS3 jjJI llio-UJI cJ\y£l\ eJ^j

v_il»ev»l OCilUaUl jtiflSil S^JI i^iLj (ood, *ft«UI) m&JI

0^°- WS$ i>*-J SJUwliJI rt^ijLcOj olyJI j&\]i ^s. r3j*-3 CO^JJU

j|j A-fcj^JI jLf-jl -U£ cjJaJL, J.3.J -jS- .0)1 kJ^C ^> ol ■Lij^a-i I

jL».j 'jS- AAI L (J-v^J I J rt j nflJ*j . Lino 2, ood. hdilhihi. The emendation in-
corporated in tho toxt waH miggoKtod by Prof. Floiachor.

:l Muslim freethinkers have UlO OUBtom of citing the following poom by lliin myHfie.
II. strongly cominda of Aim ul-'Alii' ul-Ma'am and 'Unmr Kliuyyuin. I cannot, guarantee
Uio authenticity and include it. merely OB a curiosity from my travel notes;

^Sb t^i Jl ^j jjJC i 151 ^-t->-^ j53l |»jJI J-» c-w" " :;

_UU J_-_j(i'i C~A»-»J ,jl i_-»JI ij-J-*-; jj-J -i'

^^.b y^i-J i>;- uu *-h*ISj c*£»»j? JJ

4 al-Maqdial, p. 87. Ibn Khaldfln, ifuqaddimaJi, p. 872.

CIIAI'TKK KKII1T

i as

134

of the sacred writings '. Apart from the fact that the Zahirls protested
energetically against such an cxegetie-dogmatic branch, it is precisely
not the dogmatic exegesis but their view and treatment of the canon-
ical law that represents their characteristic difference from ordinary
islam. The anthropomorphists belong to quite a different group and
must not be confused with the Zahirls. This, however, docs not exclude
our treating of the following question: What was the point of view
adopted by the founder of the Zahirito school in questions of dogmatics
which moved tho theological consciousness of his time, without this
point of view prevailing as one of the characteristics of that school
which differed from tho other schools only with regard to their fiqh ?
If we were to believe unconditionally al-Bhahrasl.anl's historical
presentation in this case, we must claim that, with respect to dogmatics,
Dawud b. 'All adopts a purely passive or, if we want, negative position
in agreement with other imams like Malik b. Anas, and Ahmad b.
Hanbal. This position is characterized by rejecting both tho metaphor-
ical interpretation of tho anthropomorphic passages of Koran and
sunnah, and also by dismissing just as vehemently their literal inter-
pretation in accordance with lujsim or taxhblli, namely, the physical
aspects of the divine nature and attributes. No attempt is made to
penetrate the meaning of the anthropomorphical expressions,
with one word, it represents the position which Malik b. Anas defines
with the familiar words: "God's sitting on his throne is known, but
how this is to bo understood is unknown; believing this is a duty,
questioning it heresy". The imam al-Shafi'I, too, with his anathema
against Icalam" seems to have belonged to this school '■'. This method
of being altogether cautious in dogmatic questions is called: tanij
cd-sdl&mah, i.e. the method of noli me tangere. This attitude does not
take a positive formulated position among tho dogmatic controversies

1 lie lirijd over hi'l dogma, p. 80. Houtema probably thought to bo following Abu
al-Fida'. II, p. 2(1(1.

- Quito rolovimt lor thin I'ant treated by Spitl.ii (Zur Umehkhle Aliii-l-IJa«un, p. C2-CII,
and particularly in tho excerpt from the text, p. 121) in al-G'hii'/.ftli, Ihtjii', I. p. iKllf.
lntcrcHfing cimtrilnifioiiH are alno to bo found in al-l)ainiri, I, p. 14-17, H.v. J-J In
Uicho pusHiigea valuable material can bo found for an evaluation of the position ol
the nld iiHniihi with reaped, to apcoulafivo tbeolngy.

:l al-HliuhniHtfi.nl, p. Oil; 7fi. Among Uicho iiii/im* it was Ibn Hanbal who nionf force-
fully advooatod refuting phUosophioal spooulotlon. Al-Uaritb ol-MuhllBlbl (d. 248),

liiiuHii for bin iiHceticiiiiu. wan forced to hide from the funul.iciani of the liiifun and liiH

followers bocauae ho wan also occupied with questions of fotUlm. Only four persona

attended al-Muritb ol-Muhttalbl'B funeral. Abu Ol-Fidl', 11, p. 201).

12G

CHAI'TKR EICIHT

of the Islamic schools, a position which in itself might provide the
nucleus for n sect. Yet for a school whose emphasis lies not in dogmatic
speculation, but in canonical law this point of view might be just about
sufficient.

Nevertheless, there are indications that with regard to two specific
questions of dogmatics Dawud ibn 'All ibn Khalaf al-Isfahanl has
formulated his own view, however, without representing it as an
integral part, of his so-called Zahirite system. I do not know how
much importance is to be attached to al-Sani'anl's (d. 5G2) account >
according to which the imam Ahmad b. Hanbal '- refused to roccive
Dawud b. 'All — probably immediately after his return from Nlshiipur
when lie settled in Baghdad — bocause he had heard about his holding
heretical views on the creation of the Koran. Ahmad had received
this information from Nisliapur by way of Muhammad b. Yahyii.
Even the assurance of Ahmad b. Hanbal's son that Dawud was free of
heresy did not ensure him access to the Imam. Certain it is, that
this, Dawud's confession — provided he adhered to it even beyond
his youth — was not binding on his school which, witli respect to
dogmatics, displayed considerable indifference. We learn from Ibn
Hazm that Dawud took a positive position on the question how far
the attributes of hearing and seeing can be applied to God, and how
135 it is to be understood when it is said about God in the Koran that He
is the Hearer and the Seor. On this point, al-Aah'arl, in agreement
with many orthodox, and several Mu'tazilite theologians, says that
God is seeing with the agency of sight which emanates from Him, and
is hearing with the agency of hearing emanating from Him. Dawud
joins those who sec in the above conception an anthropomorphism
of the God-idea and who say instead: God is a Seer and a Hearer
because of His immanent powers of seeing and hearing that cannot
be separated from His nature as separate actions. It could not be said
of Him: lie .sees or lie hears, for Ho is not seeing with the agency of

1 KilSb iil-annuh, fdl. :;soa (Supplement, V).

- This imiim who, in the time of Mn'mfiii'H terror of rationalism, unyieldingly adhered
to the old orthodox teachings, displayed considerable severity against those theologians
who, under the pressure of terrorism, wore willing to make concessions. Onu of them
was the pious traditlonist *Aod al-Malik i>. 'Ahd al-'Aziz al-Tammdr (d. 228). For
this reason Ahmad l>. i.iunlml prohibited hii pupils to accept traditions of al-Tammar.

Aliii iil-Mnhaiiiii, I, p. (177.

CHAPTER KKIIIT

127

sight or hearing '. In this verbal controversy Ibn Hazni follows his
teacher in jurisprudence.

Simply the last fact indicates sufficiently that Dawud has developed
a conscious position with respect to dogmatics beyond the simple
fiqli, and it would be extremely improbable to assume that, in the
wide field of dogmatics, he was occupied especially with this contro-
versy which is closely related to many other questions of kulam.
Fortunately, one general quotation has survived from which we
may conclude that Dawud's preoccupation with dogmatics extended
further than al-Shahrastani's characterization of Dawud's position
seems to indicate. The fact that al-Ash'ari — probably during his
Mu'tazilito period — directed a pamphlet against the founder of the
Zahirite school in matters of dogmatics al-i'liqdd, (by the way, a tract
130 which the author refuted after his conversion to orthodox Islam) a
. is sufficient evidence that Dawud's teaching activities were not
restricted merely to fit] It, and that he was not at all content to hide
behind the easy mlamah of the old imams, but that he cast his vote on
religious questions that moved his time. Yet in the list of his writings
in Ibn al-Nadim we find only works from the field of jurisprudence.

But even if Dawud arrived at his dogmatics on the basis of the
afore-going data, this did not penetrate the Zahirite school; Dawud's
dogmatics had nothing in common with bhcfiqh that was the essence
of this school. Ibn Hazm was the first who attempted the next step
within the Zahirite school, namely, to incorporate dogmatics in it.
This attempt, which Ibn Hazm performed ingeniously in his work
on dogmatics, failed. Furthermore, after Ibn Hazm, dogmatists of
various colourings were accommodated within the Zahirite school.

1 Ibn Ha/.ra, I. fol. 140b: lC

L^JUi ljilXa.1 rtJ _/-rOJ .-^

Jjill L j^J-JI «~Jj(

CT

*1

Jli

uJUi' ail ~o\ ^> jlyiJI J^ai *j cL-

aIL&j aJ_/^J-I ^j_. v^ o 1 . j^t-3 ^.y-"^^ 8i«JI Jjtil ,j-j XijUs

CU-jb ij jy-i.; _Av=J /v^-*" <&' O' iu3jH 4^_L^=I *-z*^-3 (^'^

SLb'U.

<y. >0*^ -V^ ci* &• ■ iJ ' :iJ y**^l r 9 ^-* *^^ J*' i>*

J Liu Vj _^v=j /vr"— <JL*J' «uil l)1 ti' £jS*^J e*&*J ^^^' [**** * *

Ia^jj .Usi _^j I Jli «LJ'|Jo _av=j jj'IJj > L z°-" [j^Jj .r- 2 -^ *J <u- wj

,a*J6 ^ _/Jz i lc «U£ j^f- jl }j£ V ,jUi" Ail <y.
2 Sou Spltta, op. cit., j). 70, no. 84.

128

niAI'TIOR KKillT

Wo may suspect tliat it was Duwiid's dogmatic leanings and principles
which Ihn Hazm preserved and developed in Ids polemical work.
Indeed, in all religions it was polemics that contributed to a conscious
development, to a strict definition, of the religious belief; even more
so, it was polemics by which this became possible. Wc are perhaps
not uttering a hollow hypothesis when we declare that the accusation
that Oawud professes the creation of the Koran x should be taken to
mean that I (awful taught that the external elements of the written
Koran and the physiological points of the recital Koran arc not eternal.
This thesis is developed extensively by Ibn Hazm.

No matter how tempting this occasion might be, it cannot be our
task to make a systematic presentation of Ibn Hazm's dogmatic
system at this point. This is an obligation which is expected of those
whose, special field of study is the presentation of the dogmatic-
philosophical movement in Islam. Our task can encompass only one
part of this chapter, namely, the question on which point of dogmatics
and philosophy of religion does Ibn Hazm's Zahirite attitude prevail,
and how does it manifest itself. We shall attempt to answer this question
in the exposition following. We hope the reader will appreciate that
wo cite passages from Ibn Hazm's main works in a disproportionate
137 prolixity, and that we seize the opportunity to bring to light character-
istic oxorpts from the writer that characterize his line of thought
and his method of presentation — the work is too extensive for a
complete edition. Right here, lot us anticipate this much in order
to determine Ibn Hazm's general position towards the rcligio-
philosophical schools in Islam: This dogmatist is as hostile towards
the Ash'arites, who aro generally considered orthodox, as he is towards
the anthropomorphists, on the one hand, and the Mu'tazilites, on
the other-. When we compare the Mu'tazilite confession of faith with
al-Ash'ari's — now available in two good oditions based on Ibn
'Asiikir's information — they would lead us to believe that al-Ash'ati's
position presented no reason for opposition from the Zahirite dogmat-
ist. But when we learn that al-Ash'arl appendixed to his confession an
interpretation that tended towards the speculative school, an inter-
pretation in which he made his teachings of the attributes to a con-

1 It. in known Mini, the HHmo uiu'iiHiilion in ni'ido against uMtuklmri [no (of, Krehl,
tfbtt (kn StthUl tie* llitrlmri, |>. (I).

- Spttta, "/'. Bit., p. L28-187; Mohron, Bxposiitla riformt, p. 11(5-124. <Thi» footnote

in nut. indicated in tho tuxb of the German edition).

lilfAl'TIOIl ISrtlHT

I2<>

cilintory element in the controversy of the spiritual concept of (»od
against adherence to the literal wording of the Koran, then wo shall
realize that Ibn Hazm who, in this matter of conciliation, condemned
any influence of speculation, had to be hostile towards Ash'arism
138 — he consistently challenged its place in Islam 1 . His polemics,
in view of the severity and the lack of consideration for polemical
procedure, is much more severe towards the Ash'arites than towards
the followers of the Mu'tazilah. About the latter he states explicitly
that they must bo considered Muslims in spite of their errors (that
they attribute to God jawad and mkluV), a fact which might be excused
on the basis of their ignorance. This, however, is an excuse that saves
them from being considered unbelievers without sparing them
reprimand (on the part of the believers); but they can still learn" ".
In this and other questions, Ibn Hazm's treatment of the Ash'arites
is completely different. Wo intend to cite one example only, tho
dogmatic tenet on the differences of Opinion with regard to the Koran

1 [inter on we shall hoc the position whioh he assigns to speculation in the doduotion
of dogmatics. Also his touohings on the position of reasoning in faith are generally quite
Interesting, but particularly if oomparod to those of other theologians. In order to
indicate this I quote tho following passage, vol. II. Ibl. Mai /»^ U-jJ-» Oj^st J-*

c SJ.wu.1 &, i\ |^_ lL> ojJo y J JVjju.1 ojj f%M\ asxftl
Li

w

*^.^l & fr* !t$jrjk)l JUj llL_ Cij^i *i *Jl Jl ^jLu-JI j**^-
•Ull o/u lj cl~JI fo* g^s^l Al? cL-JI.} Jl*-jJI Cr" j^-^'Ij
J^U. J'^a _j4J J'jfJXwVl tjij* Cr" ^^J •"■« H, I £o*?£ J^-J J*
tr *j cr~» n» : V>j^' jl (OUJI (k 1*1 *Jl J u 'j J u, j r^ 1
Cj_ A*£ i>_ J~*-l lijJaL d50i U JV-A^Nl J* WJ-^'j U*4*J'
^jyjjJI a\j& Cj 1 ) J^aaJI i>. -U»»l /^ jj! J J*' (?) jj— =-'

"Ji' m%^\ J* I y'L, Jtf Jil*s y\ Jtf ( f-jJJI J** *i\ dSOS J*
ob *k\ Vl *JI H AJLi* JUj v tiSCfi $ bl&el *J3o J&»\ &*

.Jlf-Vl Vl tiJOj jji a-U ^ ^> ,J-^ <3U J**

« Vol. 1, fol. 102a: jfJjcj l_>lc- J-^J-^ OjjJ-ij" XJjS*ll ^j^Oj
O^ ILoUl p^xz JaLu* Ijj* V (jLcVl ^ f«4»y«S ^J > 5 ^ 1 a*

,JUS djil ^1 ^ cs-^ 5/ u^- J -5 6^*-* o*«>** r^ f*^'

L39

130

OlIAl'TKIl KKII1T

as the "word of God". It ia known that the conception of the Islamic
term kalam Allah led to extreme difference of views. The Mu'tuzilites
assert that "God's word" is an attribute of an agency of God come
into being in time (sifal.fi'l makhluq), i.e. not eternal; whenever God
spoke He always produced His words in a creative manner. Ahmad
b. Hunbal and other imams consider God's word uncreated and
eternal, and consequently, identical with His etornal knowledge
(kalam Allah 'azza wa-jalla hutva 'ilmuhu lam yazul). The Ash'aritcs
state their position most clearly by saying that God's word is eternal
and uncreated, although different from God as being an attribute of
His nature, but nevertheless, unique and indivisible; i.e. God's word
is one, and no matter how often Ho spoke, it was always the same
word of God that was manifested L

jj, yaj lJUj «UJ1 i_£A^-_9 A bu AAJ
J*lj fi& "tfl JU al ^
says the following:

oli '&*> Ij^-j "y- -uM m^S

•Vilj (JW

Ac. Abu Muhammad

ai)

"The tenet of the Ash'aritos is in decisive opposition to God Himself and to
nil who profess Islam, for God says in the Koran; 'Say ! if the sea wore all ink
for the words of my God, verily, the huh, would bo spent before tl>o words of
my God aro spent' (sUrnh XVI 11:10!)), and in teUruh XXX 1:20 it Hays: 'Though

all the troos on earth were all pens, and should the sea after that swell to
seven seas, the words of God would not bo exhausted'. There is no greater
misguidance, no greater look of consideration, no greater stubborness, and no
greater denial of God than what in manifested by those who hear words which
every Muslim doubtlessly recognizes as the words of God which show that
there aro innumerable words inherent in God, and who, nevertheless, Kay on
the basis of their own, contemptible opinion that there is only one word in-
herent in God. But if they were to say that thoy made this claim only so as to
associate God with any kind of multiplicity, then they aro cursed with lies
by their own teachings because, according to them, there are fifteen things,
(the attributes), different from God and existing apart from Him, all of which
aro eternal with God. Furthermore, this sect, following al-Ash'arl, claims that
it was not God's word that Gabriel revealed to Muhammad's heart, rather,
that what he revealed jh (.'ailed God's word only metaphorically ; therefore,
nothing that is recited from copies of the Koran, or written in it, oan bo re-
garded as God's word. It is always attached to God Himself and never separ-
ated from God to be attached to Komothiug olso. God's word cannot appear
at places which it has left in order to appear later at other places, and also,
that it does not consist of connected letters. Not one of God's words can be
bettor, more superior, or more important than another one. The Ash'aritcs
idso say: God does not cease to say to hull: 'Are you already filled ?' (ntlrah
L:2B) and to the unbelievers: 'Bo silent in it and do not speak !' (tttlnth XX 111:
110) and that God always says to that which Ho decided to create: 'Bo!'.

140

CHATTER BIGHT

131

This iH pure disbelief which cannot bo denied. We, howovor, would like to ask
them: 'Is the Koran God's word, or not V. Now, if they say no. then according
to the unanimous opinion of all Muslims, they are unbelievers, but if they say
yes, wo start asking: 'Is the Koran that which is recited in mosques, written
in maffyafs, and known by heart, or is it something else {'. If thoy say no,
then according to the unanimous opinion of all Muslims, they aro accused of
disbelief, however, if they say ya, then thoy are contradicting their own bail
teachings and profess the tenet of the Islamic community" '.

1 Vol. I, fol. 170a: uT^a -Ulj m^S *§ I J Lu ajj ^ J A?J Ay C\j
jj Ji" JjAi 'A&.J "y. Jill jN/ .^L/Jll JaI £»J-J J bo all Sji.

(J_jJuj jjjj o^tj Jjixi ijl 'JJ^S »***' -*j£J (<?j ol^lxJ IjI-Lo y*Z)\ olS'

o-iiJ jj-i o-LC yxA\~j Aj^l oJ?cJl £j4 Ij^jjl |J L ijf jjj jj bu'

"Ai\ (_b^ Vj jIss jjI J IS ( .oil oyf cj'jJu L, js| "ix^u,
Iaa «*— ^t Aas-\ di c_-jJ5Ci' "i/j A>\ »j*U> Vj ,»-^l tb». "i/j
JLUI *JL V ^JJI JbJ AUl J-A Jilt A^ dK^ V t^JJI r ^SGl
(cod. 0-^-j) O-bLL) J ^J^O i_jbo all cjb aJii. ^ JJ Aj-^! L£J Cr*
CJIJ _k»-1j A~}£ Vl (J bo' ajj jmJ AJl ,v»-^i-l «U Tj ^ _J* JjJU *J
bbU, jl rt^Jj! rt^jli I ail *-j lj_^5Ci ij\ (j* \/j (fr^il lj*il
Jji" 1 l^ jO|| o")U.j aJJl _^& L^3 *J*.te-* US' IV s >»* *~- *»■

.jJlSj Oltf jjI J IS i !_^r IjU jjllkll J^b lie «UJ| J bo' aij| fcj

Jyj L ^>._j ,Jbo' jJUl |»!3^S"t)l t5^»-i^l Jl ^xdl ILb'lkJI aift. L^ul
ojLc _jA _^i.T t(_j^ J J-t J_>J ^lj f»jdv> -U.-£ i_Jj' ^ J^'-^- *i
ifA I4J <_-s^Jj i_i*.U=il (J fyb (^Dl (jlj (jbJ alll A~yS {jC

OjJZj % I4J ljiij.1 jlIsCu rAJlij eo^l J* r^f 1 - ^' u J 1 * 3

IAaj j1s£ jjI Ji < "^T" aL^' ^Ijl L JiO ^j'IS Jbo - Ju Lt
J aO)| m^S jA\ OT^JI ,yi (^J^J III ii5GSj Jjjb" ^*o j?j£ j&
ja Jj l_jJb" jlj a^VI P-l^-b UjjiS" ail *"$£ y> ,jJ> IjJ'U obS ^
^s c,*!^ J^-LJI ^i J^ c^JJI j*t jTyUI ^ ^UL AAll ^

d\j J-,^/1 c-l^b IjyS' V IjJIS jU ^ *f JjJiyaJI ,J Jiisij fc Jft Li nU

uifJ.ya.ll ^9 ,JUi' aUI »3^ ol IjjSlj -uUJI JL^J Ij5y' **j IjJ'lI

{ »^>L«i'l JA I j»~fca. (JjA> V JJ-V=JI ,<9 Jijiiij clyiJI ^ c.j*«-j_J
rt^il aj-JI Jjlil t_i I Ij-j-^JJ iJljJiJb JajLUl ^J fji (Jb"_j -llii jjI J l*

132

CHAPTER BIGHT

141 Since we arc on this subject, let US add Ibn Hsmn's own tenet. Accord-
ing to the guidance of the relevant Koranic passages lie teaches:

First, that the Koran and the word of God are two synonymous
expressions of the same idea.

Secondly, that the Koran itself was transmitted to Muhammad by
Gabriel.

Thirdly, that "Koran" and "God's word" is said about fivo different
(.lungs: (a) about the revelation issued to Muhammad, (b) about the
audible, spoken sound of the recited Koran, (c) about the contents
of these spokes words, e.g. about individual passages and command-
ments, (d) about the written copy of the Koran, (e) about the text
committed to memory. All this follows from Koranic quotations and
from the traditions cited by Ibn Hazm at great length.

Finally, fourthly, that not all parts of the Koran are of equal value.
God Himself has told us that the Fatihah, the ilcldas formula, and
other passagos of tho Koran are more exalted than other parts of the
Sacred Book. Now, to the question: is tho Koran, as defined by Ibn
Hazni, created or uncreated, the author gives the following reply:
Of course, tho sounds are explosions of the organs of speech, just as
Arabic and all the other languages in which they arc manifested are
created things. Also that which is written is created, becauso the
written mashaf in front of us consists of skins of animals and ink
which, in turn, consist of different materials; created, too, arc the
movemont of the hand of the writer, the movement of the tongue of
the reciter, and the fixing of everything, be it written or read, in the
soul. But the infinite knowledge of God, indivisible from God, called
by us "Koran" and "God's word", is uncreated. We have five designa-
tions for the Koran, four of which arc created and one of which is
uncreated. Now, since the attribute on one part does not apply to the
totality, it must, consequently, not be used to define the totality.
Therefore, one may not say the Koran is created. Rather, in relation

142 to the wholo, this partial attribute must be negatod. The Koran is
consequently neither creator nor created >. This definition clashes

J*J-'I jlj (JJ>^ J& c-Tj-S-J I J& cS-^l £jj-^i\ jl ni-^~i J2J' J Is Lj ,_)l>b
1 Fol. 172a: (jjJil Vj (jJU- V jT/JI jl J^> jl °JJj*> "-r^JJ

i

i-i:t

riiAi'TKii. lomiiT

133

with Abu HanTfah's assertion of tho creation or non-creation of the
divine Book as stated in his Fii/h akba.r >. Now, if a person, who is
just reciting the Koran, were to say: what I have just recited is not
the word of God, he would be. guilty of denying God ; by tho same
token it would be a lie if a person, because of modesty and good
manners, were to say about a just performed action recommended
by the sunnah: "This is not the action of tho Prophet".

As we have seen, the reason for the strange phenomenon that
Ibn Hazm treats the followers of the Mu'tazilah much gentler than the
Asli'arite orthodoxy is to be found, according to my view, in the fact
that he could approach the Mu'tazihih in a main point of dogmatics
and, in concert with them, oppose the Ash'arites; namely, in the tenet
of the existence or non-existonco of divine attributes (fiffit). Naturally,
it was a different kind of reasoning by which the representatives
of extrcmo rationalism arrived at tenets in Islamic dogmatics vis-
a-vis which the representatives of the extreme orthodoxy, who
considered al-Ash'ari a heretic, could display tolerance. For Ibn Hazm
it is not reasoning at all that determines his dogmatic convictions.
For him there is always only one, quostion, reply to which determines
his reaction to individual dogmatic tenets: whether the, texts of the
scripture and the, tradition (i.e. not their spirit but their wording)
■permit this or that formulation of a, principle of faith. His reply to this
question determines the lute of individual, dogmatic controversies.
Ibn Hazm says: "If wo were asked: 'You do state that God is living,
but not in the senso in which it is said about living creatures; that
Me is knowing, but not in the sense in which it is said about knowing
creatures; powerful, but not in the sense in which it is understood
about the mighty ones', why, then, do you prohibit saying tho follow-
ing: 'God is body, but not in the sense as created bodies arc'? To this,
we would reply as follows: 'If the text of the Koran had not attributed
to God the names tho Living, the Knowing, and tho Powerful, we
would not use a single one. of them when referring to Him. It is also a

ajjt

JUS

:A5\1* V.

01 j>^ Vj uh>Ue jf. ^ULI ,jA\ "j^j (jpU- pJ

ji s-^j J* : ^^ J| «£50j &** y tgjji "j-oi j* ^^1

(JiCll Lc (j-i'-JJ jjXJI •LLyoJI cl53j _j5J (jilsj . It i" probably required
to adil iv noun — perhaps [ c.L-i^/11 — between tho words tixJJ and «jU] jl. The

(mini) wnU'iiw would mulct) more wnirio if mivliii were rrplnrnl by bi-lii.
1 Kromer, Qeechiehle. ilrr liemrjimden Ideal ilea Ixlam, p. 41.

134

CHAPTER BIQHT

religious duty to adhere to whatever is explicitly stated in the text.
But nowhere in the holy texts do we find that God is called "body",
and no argument exists to give Him this name; rather, the only valid
argument forbids us to apply this name to Him. If a textual passage
could be found in which it is said of God that He is both/, then it would
be our irremissable duty to follow the text ami say: God is body, but not,
like other bodies" '. Docisive for Ibn Hazm's refutation of such names
is therefore chiefly the point of the deviation from the textually
determined appellation- of God besides the point of anthropomorphism a .
144 These qualifying names given to God in the Koran arc not attributes,
the oxistencc of which could be recognized in the essence of God
through speculative investigation of this essence, rather, they are
proper navies which God has given Himself. To say God has attributes
is an absurdity. Expressions like "attribute" or "attributes" are used
neither by God Himself in His revealed words with reference to His
essence, nor do we find that the Prophet did so in relation to God;
besides, none of the companions or their followers, or the followers
of the latter have ever used these expressions in relation to God.
Therefore, neither are wo permitted this usage nor may we profess
the belief inherent in it. We can rightfully say about it that the con-
sensus of the rightly-guided companions has rejected it, and that,
consequently, this usage is a reprehensible innovation. God says
"These are nothing but names invented by you and your fathers,
but God has not authorized this; they follow merely their opinion

1 Vol. I, fol. 138u: ^ "y.. ^j 'jc -Oil t)l OjJjai' «£!! U IjJU' jU
a:.»,«>.j /y^ ajU (jU>_^JI Jj \**^. *£$» m gj <jl*_^JI *li> V_j If^a- JLxj

(J^ill Lit L-^-ji \~^ tJLxJ' AJU*^J^ ^ai lilj'l _jjj d50Jb (J bo

= Fol. 130a: l$^Li lJ ^i .Lo.'iJlS' V *>~^>. J US jll t <jl <JU ^J
A_^jij Aj rtr>^; 1 [i (J.3.J j* olLu, 31 (J^-J 3* "Si c l"' (<* ,J ''^"' J -*^-'
tJUj' dill fi LJ ,J J&cL* j^i »U«*jl5 JUj Ail JU' ,y» ulj

*^—»WJJ) (_2 I

CHAPTER EIGHT

185

and that which their souls desiro". (Surah LITI:23) '. The word sifat
was devised by the Mu'tazilitcs. They wore followed by a party of
mulakallimun who thereby entered a path which deviates from the
path of the pious ancestors. It cannot serve as an example and model.
But ho who oversteps the bounds set by God commits injustice against
himself. It cannot be excluded that this expression was brought into
circulation by jurists of the following generation, that is, by those
who did not consider the proper meaning of it. Thus it would be a
case of error and straying by a learned person. In religious matters
true is only what is explicitly stated either by God Himself, or by the
Prophet in statement attributed to Him, or what the consensus of the
rightly-guided community recognizes as true. Everything that goes beyond
this is error. We might be confronted with a tradition from Sa'id b. Abi
Hilal according to which someone was reciting the following verses
with each bowing (during the canonical prayer): Say He is Allah, the
Only One, etc., in combination with another surah. The person explain-
ed to the Prophet that these verses contain a description (sifah) of the
Compassionate which ho likes. The Prophet is represented to have
replied to this that he, too, liked those verses a . To this we would
reply that the unique tradition from Sa'id is not sufficiently docu-
mented, indeed, that several authorities consider it untrustworthy
and that, consequently, it doos not supply sufficient evidence for
145 the legitimacy of tho expression sifat Allah '■'. But such argumentation
of the opponents would not even correspond with their own tenets,
for they, too, do not recognize traditional communications basod on
the authority of a single person as irrefutable source of sound know-
ledge" •'.

' <Not Lni:88 U in the Gorman edition).

2 <ThiH iH the oorreot postage for 6he rii-ni. correction on p. x of the German edition).

a Wo notice, however, that, al-Bukharl profanes ono chapter ofhiH work on tradition

ns follows: dil ,<->LJ_9 OjjCJIj OlJJl ^j J> Jj L t_ib (Kili'tb aUawhid,
no. II). Ah ul-Qiuitnlliinf, X, p. 429, to tho panmgo, observes, al-Bayhaql ovon iihoh in
i ho corresponding ohapter heading the expression oli^.

* Ibn Hiram, ibid., fol. 139a: ^Jj-j "y- «U) oLLyoJI Jail lJD^I LjIj
Jc Syl\ a-0^>' J £s ^xl> 1 "Ju».j> "y. &\ jV jj^ ^ JU*J
«oi "jb. p*Lf [^i\ yi Jas cU ^j aVJI ikiJ Vj oLLyJI Xk«J

A;U>w=JI ^ Aa-I £jC li&i Jai tU. ^J «JO CjU^ j\ ii^J J bu

I :u;

ClIAl'TKlt MIGHT

140 Therefore, no one is entitled to attribute to God anything on his
Own account, not oven in the case that through logical deduction
the existence of this attribute to God could bo proven. Ibn Hazin
asserted this principle against the Mu'tazilite Abu al-lludha.yl al-
'Alliif who churned to have proved philosophically the identity of
the divine knowledge with the divine essence.

"You cannot attribute to God a quality or a name on the basis of your reason-
ing, for God is the antithesis of His creatures. Therefore! none of the qualities,
or names, of His creatures must be attributed to Him on the basis of reasoning,
for this would be ii comparison between the Creator and the creature, on the

one liiuid, and deviation from what He HiniHelf has stipulated with regard to
His nn me. on the other hand; in other words, it would be fabrication. Wo
may give or attribute to God only such names iin Mo applied to Himself iii
His Hook or which came through the lips of the Prophet, or upon which the
consensus of the rightly-guided community has agreed in a reliable manner.
Other names may not he applied, not even when the moaning of such appellu-

Lii _Jj Aj (jk^j jl _uV IjjA ^.i IJjCs 61s' Lj O^S^I is**^'
JaiL JjSJI jj& y^i bjj^oj ikLUl -Ja <£$y Lc JLl Ji p^-VI jl

l^* ^1 ck"J V *^' Ul» tJXU ACJj j* Jj o^lixl Vj OlU_JI
jj*". *-)l j"-l-« (j* U^ <U)I J_>il l-> rtr^tLlj rt-XJl lftj^Ji.-»>. cl^-l VI

_jj| J Is < tsaAl ^j ^ »ftU. j._Jj ^Vl i$y£ Uj yaJI V'l
v_jU_*j1 ^j *ji rs-^U-w i-l5CJ~._3 2J/U1I olU--J1 JiiJ y._/o-l |,jlj -C»i
i'jJs Vj pj*iI ^3 t yJ 7JU2_.II !_iLJI cl5CL™. _^c. l^iCL. f~j&$\
Ic jj A*ii JJ; Ji-s -Ull jjJo. JjCj ^j J--V" r^J *^' U~»..^j

JiJI (3^ J- (j-* fclj-UJI ^j-J «UjVI (_£^p.l-U ^-i lilLLUl oJj* (jibl

JUS .uj| ^ _.U L i^jjl yi "JjJ-l ^ r lj LU ijjj iU 5 ^s UJ

tjj J^ j^j oLjju t£JJ1 li^JcA-L lj.j>_/ltl jls ( (j^yv^ij Ija Ij_c Lj

jli' i£JJ1 j^- Jl ^J luiJU ^ .y=- aJ jji ^-^Jl -^ i>_ J^L;
A.UI Jj-«j jlj i£_p-l -jj- /i-j a*5j Jj .J Jj-I a_u I _jfc Ji 1^
»jft£.\i I4I-.I Uti j**-^! '*&* i/> JUJ -iiOj ,^fi jLo jl ^1 rtuJlj

-i_— ii 1 -UiiLUl -Ai-> jl L^ij-JI i_JUj 'UJbj i_j|_^J-U -C=i jj.1 jl -_t

J**lj ^5* iaJirXJb tjft 0» I^j-ilb ^j J^A ^ I i>_ J-*-. LftJ

_U-lj _,-^>- Aijl *ij-^l Lc i-j~j j l-'-ftj L-ijv=-»- Tf^?- 3 -! iNU U>j I
'JjJI *Jj_s ---j-jj V. Of. also fol. 164a.

(•IIAI'TKIt ICICIIT

187

M7

tion is more appropriate. For example, we know for certain that God is the
creator of heavens; nevertheless, it is not allowed to call Him "Imililrr" or
"dyer" in spile of our knowledge that lie produces the colours of plants and
animals" '.

This, by the. way. is a point of view which is adopted, particularly
with relation to the names by which God may be addressed, by non-
Zahirite theologians too. They completely exclude the justification for
analogy in this field. "Analogies arc applied only in the field of the
technical ritual", says Imam nl-IIaramnyn Abu al-Ma'ah", "but one
must not apply them when naming or describing God". JL»JVl jl
*i jfc« j fJ ^j tlx»^«.xJI \j£ Vj (J.--*JI oL-^.xjLj ^j ilc^JI

( -ciysj ,Jliu rtiil -■ Setting out from tlie foregoing attitude, Ibn
Hazm also frowns upon applying to God the name of /il-Qiidlm a,
name which particularly the iiiiitiihdliiiiun. like to apply to Him —
for, firstly, no Koranic verse can supply evidence that this name
refers to God, and secondly, we find that this by-name is applied
also to the moon (xft.mh XXXVI:.'S9), i.e. to a created tiling with which
God would be associated if wo were to give Him the same name.
In linguistics the word qad/im LB used of the concept of temporal
priority when, in relation to the time of beginning, one thing precedes

1 Fol. M5b: -WW**-" -Jls ^Ull jA jjjl JlC jl Jj-UI ,>l (JjS Lolj
fJLmji jl Vj (JUJ *UJ| ^VjJ jl jjf^ "-'j AJVj-i-.lj ijlxi' iCjU) Airf

A^^J V?^ <-r^- ^ <^ LL ^ J "J" 5 ' "-^7 *W *V (JV-iS-wli

i_ivjJ jl j J w»

. ,«^*o i <~ c *" *

■J, w .j u - - (jr - -o, y r. y«l tlWI 5>* ',_J^

l-JJ i_iv?jJ A-i*=J J bo' AjL^Jj /j*.S AJUL-- /j-j a, -Ji I4J i_J-i^jJ. AiviJ

Jt Wj^-I 42L..

j jJ-I

iSj3(j ocL

^ ft^JS Aj

-/U ol«-w 3 1

;j_ / wij, U ui<-.i ,» -^-lj AiJi- JUJ' A^l.'. Jjis Aii-i. ^i A»-j ^-J -iSJ..
JL. Lj VI «UA _?J£ jl Vj JUi' Ajjl |JL*uj jl jj^ Vj l_jJ53I
AjJLl aJj-j JUJ jLfi jl AjIS j i — U £* Aj _^i. I jl **J6 Aj

OfcT Jb JLj Aty Vj o^ 11 f"^-^ 1 J* I ^^ f b-l *^ "c^ 5 -? 1

L-Sj L^-l-t JJj J-uUJb JLo' aJ-c ijllaj jl jjai ^s U_~>=v ^•»i'

c.U^.1 3L-. JLo' AjIj cIIj ^Lj jl jjjfi Vj cU-JI clll 1JL0' Ail

Aj |^«J 1 t^-i J.J 1J5C&J Ic-ll^ ,JL-J jl jj-tf Vj jlj-J-lj oLJI

, A-^ii

- In ii|.|)ai)iifi, I, |i. iA6, h.v. jJJI in an extremely iiitoivHting and relevant excursus,
the most Important opiniona of the Simnito UioologiaiiM are clearly gathered together.

138

OHAPTBB BIGHT

148 the other by a definite time. But such a name cannot be applied to
God, rather, God established for His relation to time the name al-awwal,
a concept which no creature shares with Him, and which makes any
designation deduced by mere reasoning, like qadl.m, superfluous.
It does not mattor whether a person calls God qadUm in order to express
His eternity and to exclude His beginning, or whether he would call
Him body to thereby indicate positively His oxistence and to exclude
His non-existence, for neither of the two expressions can be documented
by a textual passage '. Written evidence and, at the most, justification
through consensus is consequently the sole criterion that justifies
names and expressions used with reference to God. It is sclf-ovident
that even the synonyms of all the names that qualify in this manner
arc excluded. It is permitted to say that God is al-lmnm, but not
al-mkln or al-jawdd ; He calls Himself al-zdhir, but we may not call
Him al-bdcl,l or al-mu'lin -. Even the fact that a certain quality is
praiseworthy, deserving of God, is of no consequence, because as long
as it cannot be documented by the scripture, its use is forbidden,

140 while, on the other hand, what to our senses appears to be inglorius
(e.g. to associate God with stratagems) may be said about God, if the
authority of the scripture warrants this. I quote here the text of those
passages of Ibn Hazm's boolc in which ho draws, so to speak, the
consequences from his dogmatic view of the names of God. I hope
I may be permitted to refrain from further explanation of this passage:

1 Ibn pram, I.e., fol. 15In: ^ *'>^5vJI (Jjfcl AjJiLl ll-jj -UsI _jjl JU
J^.£. jjI J IS rt^Jill Jbo' JL» ol Jbo' -Ull tLJ ^J ol-A^Vl
•Ull .JLj (jl jj£ ^j AxJI lyil Aj "*^a_> 1 Aj^ AXJI jj£ N IJifcj
iXc ,-i. (JjCu olijJj 'Jaji}\j Jbo J IS JSj Ahmu aj rt~J 1 y Jbo

'L,Xci\ ^ AjUJI ^J nrJ-^JI tJjJO £lj d5Cl-b ^_U»._J "y- "Ull Jf~^>

{ J&* IAaj ojj^l£ o^j: \Jjc ^ aJS\ c^-^JI l-u> 61 csl «i^j Ljj^I

Jjl iliiJj A.....M.JI t,JA tf- J^._j ^t «U)I (^1 -ASj Jbo' -Ull ^c
<Jjj L Aj| (^joi-. y>j 6jKC- aJ Jbo' a^Uj "i 1 t5JJI rtr^Vl jA lifti
3J ^J JVax^Vb JL«j jl j_jai V Jbo' -III (jl jbbjUb US JSj

iJnjj ,».W] liL'j •i^-J^I ISljJI If^- Jbo Ajj l5 «-^J Ail (Jli ^* ££i

L (J^H ^ oSf OjO*OJ lliij J^ i aJ^' u'UI Lc-kS oC- ^

. ijaj Aj Cju
' Pol. Ifi. r >l>; of. the Himio, fol. Kiln.

CIlAl'TKR ICIfiHT

139

Fol. 156a J^j y. Jii\ (jA^J' (jl (J^r 5^ ^*sJ '•** "r^-^ -aj JU

jjuli Vj jsyi ^ ^ui v* SjXji % oini Vj 6HJ-I y. ^m

Vj j*JI ^ 3 cs^l Vj dSjill Vj £»U! s Jj jWIVj ^JUJI ^
Vj j»WI Vj d^ui Vj ojiyi % jaUJI Vj pKxil -jij oL.ui

^j cjll ^j ^1 Vj jAii Vj *VVI "ifj gJoJI % Jaid-i

liJ^fi ?-jII AjU- (JK' (jlj ^»1 AlLfli Aj "^j, 1 c^^J "i/_j ■ c-h=l_l11

UjSa (5JJI lift !^)5o Ai* _^ii 61 "^1 ij^' '^ lj, Jl tr" 1'^-a^> 6^'jl
IJ4J ALi ,y» jL~i^lj (J^~>-) uitojJ'l /« j^i Lj Jl li\j>H\ J*

i_^-jL)I lLfi c.,^-i (J^o J-Lc ollaJcJI Lie :l Oj2i (jl j^?^ -^Ua. v»l».
As. j^liiJI lift _y* jl { jib fr "^ i_Jbi o^l Ac- ._Jlc- i'^Lft^Jlj

UjJob L "J50 Jz^Ul l^Ifi ^j ^jVl kiyb ^jM y^ 1 ^ 1 c1 ^ L
^TU-I ocUjI Jl ,yji| AjiU Jc ^1 Uj^ L ^ U c^*ljJI

JjxJI ocUjV ^iUI aclJ^V "J^JI Aj JLxll AiUi- tfJull "o^-b

^t jUUl oVI o*J^b oljlpjl ^Jj aJjS y» o^UaJI A-»iC^ yi
150 l^jo-bj IjjSjJI j^b JJ; t y-. i_iy=Ill c.U-^1 c^-^ ^jyb ^L^-^l

7-L_i |A*J Jbo" Ai*i ^ft jL».l I3j& 6^ ^^ '^* J^J ^Sri"J~^-3
IJuT^jLJ Jl (jl Jjju ii5C]3ij) ( j^j Vl aJLJ (jl L) tJ *J_j f-lrj-b U
^j *j Luj Ij-i IIa Jj Lu-j ^J t-jII ^ life ( _ r Jj ^^_7H3 lj^- J J
*iS*ij U*J c-bi.^J aIcj iubtJij 5^s* Jbo' Jl jl '' (Jjiu 6' <_H:

jUi' aaiI j^ aj jCl y ^\j_ of JJv Lu^ W r-^l ^^ , - u '-?

Jbo' Ajjbj Jais [j-aJI Jj \jJJS- *i j* L jl LiO^c 7-J-1 _^A L*
jl Jls pA*, aO)I (Jj^,j 61 lis. Ac. 61* _^JI ^j < (jsij^l

AxJ-l (J^"^ b^Ua,->.l ^ Jl»-I_J _^£. AjL If-I (^Ji^j'j A*-~i' (Jbo

.lU

1 ( i) Probably repeated Inadvertently.
a Cod. aJ-I.
3 Coil. U54!-
■' Cod. (Jail.

8 nl-Bukhfirl, A'»7«6 al-daawul, no. 73; SftttTfifc no. 18: Tawhid, no. 12. Muslim,
A'iMfc al-'iliii, no. (1. mill, in thi» ooiniooliion, nl-Niiwinvi, \', ]>. 281). The literature on the

MO

(-•IIAI'TKK KIOHT

CJ150 ^ jl sir.. > |;JU l^ju btU yid| c^Vl *J* C^iiT j\i
**W> All I Jj^j JjS jV jJalj II49 uiSj WL ,Vl j£S"l (Jlo' J_U e.L.1

«i£)i jU. jJj viSCli ^ jjfl Oj5Cj 61 ,>> ,oL _uU jms 2JU

JUj Jli>j (Jri^JI nSlliJ ejL.1 ^^ ^iT |Juj LAi' Hf£. aJUs jfc£l

Ijl^. JUS -UJl Jfi I_jjJ5" Ljkil yb J3JU jli oli^JI fr UaUl
1 «u^ aU)L i_jj<j rtr-Jit l-Usj «u»ij £jC (Jbu - Jj _^ji L \i <u* \j_/~^-\ i\
161 The Koranic pannages on the "beautiful names of God" (surah
VI 1: 179 and XX:7), together with the related statements from the
traditions in which the 99 names of God (100 minus 1) are mentioned,
are therefore the corrective against the tenets of the attributes of
the dogmatists, mainly against the Ash'arites who helped introduce
the concept of the divine attributes to orthodox dogmatics. According
to the Ziihirito tenets, these 99 proper names must not be considered
as "attributes" of God, for an attribute presupposes a subject which,
as bearer of tho attribute, is different from it. Wc must not adopt such
a conception of God, unless, of course, a scriptnal passage can bo
cited to justify it, but in our case, this possibility is excluded. Then,
on the basis of this, the Ash'aritc dogmatists say that this denotes
attributes of God; in other words, those words applied to Him in
Koran and sunnah, are names, proper names of God, the justification
for which can be derived from the authority of written words only,
but not by speculative means. Thus wc may not say: God is called
the Living, because action cannot be imagined to emanate from
anything but from a living being. Those who argue in this manner
contradict very much their own tenet that "God's life is different

"bt'imUfiil names" lum always been cherished in Islam. Al-Niihib ibn 'Abbttd wrote

ASliftJ J*J y- 'UJl i\mi\ j^aSk. i^lxSiJWii,]). 135, 7. Of. for the position

of the iiiiiiiihillimilii the detailed excursus in Kakhral-Din al-Rii/.i, Majiilik, IV, p, 'I":! IT.
.1. W. KOdhouHo'H article "On the iiiimt. comely names" is probably the latest work on
the BUbjeot. Itedhooso lists fiiiS names. II must also bo mentioned that Mm Mazm him-
self composed I a pamphlet on "tho names of God" in which he enlarges upon the views
developed in the abovo-mentionod excerpts. Al-Ghn.y,iili has seen this pamphlet, (al-

Maqqarl, 1, p. B12). Of. also al-Mawtiqif, p. 159 ff,

1 This is bow l.ho .MS I'eads, or rather I y U.. However more appropriately, Ibis
should bo changed I.o tho nominative. It is a ease of a preceding Uinhnr of a now nominal

sentence ( 1 ■ Ji^J^I _)jU-).

OHAPTBB BIGHT

I'll

102

from all other living creatures", since they implicitly admit by their
appellation that life, in tho sense in which it is predicated of creatures,
need not necessarily be identical with that life from which an action
emanates. Tho same applies to calling God the Knower and the Power-
ful '.

Rather strange is one logical argument particularly preferred by
Ibn llazm to prove that the mimes of God do not stand for qualities.
"We know", he says -, "that God is called 'the. most Compassionate

1 Ibn Ha'/.m, fol. 154a: *~*j* ^Jj -^j^^ J_iJJ 1 ,j di^JI AliaJ Clj
lii^OI (JUw V U\j iJj^ll ^ Jj^i ^*-> <y- ojLc ^ Ijls oLUJl

jl *i T l IcJI JUJ' J..UI Jl A#t>l )y£ ^ ^1 IJl*J a!J| lift j^.
AiUs- (_Cj Jj'j MP Ljiiijp i~vJo {j£- A} J Uj' <U] I _^i. I J^aJ Ji' U
*ljt ^ JL*J' -U*: _?S. *J(j 5^1 ii^. ^ "^jit^ ^ Ac -^| all

(J I i_-3c*JI J^ i_-PcjJIj -UJl c\j*» (Jl 4JU f^-J,. J J (J^-J J* -^^ *4

&jjj Ij-^-jl 1^1 (»^V ojJ~.9U p-sUi A I IjjUi c.Lo.Vli' ^ -"il
"bf ,j*-i (cod. JijJI) Jj>iJI f-yj (Vj) _^j !)M -5JJ4* L ui^^aj

2 Ibn Ilazni, fol. lnfiu: Ito. (^*s-l^!l **.jl (JUS Ajjl jl Lulc Jiij

JUL.Nl Jx-j JUi' jjsj aJUj a-.J (J^a. Jfc _j49 lib _^ol jj-. IjU V

(^* ^-b i^y„ j^- ^fjVij a^ajij, "^ij jfij^b tsj,iu

al^.Vlj oUU^I ci50JiS t L,Nb J;N1 ^iij d50J5" l_j:>C
U^iVjIj _,-JaJI liSJ-kij l^>.jj ^)V5Ci' l_jxl-3J L ^>- ir^-ri f» fl '1 ^ ''S

JUj' -UJl ,<*•■- C^/l Lgjl L-JL) 7C-V=.S l~;J Aa^>-JI .Uy3 o^A c~~Jj

.tlxJj jj^ «0 ^jiU-j J Uj' J-s jjtpkii Aj^s /.j £&£~4 jr^£- J_™jii L^j
Ibn lla/.m likes to come back to the Inst point; for example, fol. I (12a. in the middle

of proving that God must not he called i J^w '■ ,J < j-i jb ^ JLjI i_ «i^ Jj

V j_^J -Jic *Ul>j jJI ^-b* ^j _^U <_.A£. t L aJ l^f jl ^j J.UJI
OjX «-^-t ^0 \xs- _jl [j-UJI i_r^j^ ^ ^"-J cS'jJ " "^ a>-U-

i^-JiJU "tc^JIj JpcJI ILilc. i alls -UjJjI *i/_g ■kiwJ Ji Ulkcj Uj^-

jjjy;. (^hjJULI ^ Nul-lj .oLc ^ l_^iS' cs^ JUj' «UJlj A)ii\j

pb^y.. Vj u^'j'i'l J>\j±-3 Oljlfjl ^jUl o^u:j li^>.j Like

^ dSOJJ lJ^-jj Nj dJGJi'' lyy: ^ *Ui. i».iJ "^ & L ik>^

jkJ ^U^ ^^ |^ ,*Jj50l (^--^1 _jA JJ i_j~J Vj ^ Vj J^7 Nj

.jaUJI J* £>a^ I_JUJI

oL^JI

U

9 J*,UMI rtr^— y>

142

CHAPTER BIGHT

of the Compassionate' in fact and not. in a metaphorical manner;
the blood and property of whoever denies thi.s would be outlawed.
It is precisely God, who afflicts children with smallpox, cancer, do-
153 nioiis ', diphtheria, with painful diseases by which they are rapt away,
and with hunger that also causes their death. Thus He afflicts fathers
and mothers with horror through tlio children, and friends through
tho harm that He inflicts on others so that they arc grieved because
of the pain over the loss of children and friends. In the same manner,
He afflicts birds through their young. This does not agree very well
with the attribute of compassion as we understand it. It surely follows
from this that those appellations arc proper names which God gave
Himself, and that they aro derived from qualities whose bearer Ho is".
Ibn Hazm's inclination to raiso appellations describing God to
proper names has a parallel in a different field ; namely, Ibn Hazm's
teachings that in traditions which mention a rajul sahdbl, an anonym-
ous companion of the Prophet, this rajul does not indicate "anyone",
but a person named Rajul a . This is the result of pedantic application
of the Zahirite dogma. How strict the Zahirite school, following in
Ibn Hazm's steps, proceeded in following up its tenet of the names
befitting of God, becomes evident from their attempt to admit al-dahr
among the names of Allah because of the following tradition spread
by Abu Hurayrah: "The Prophet said: 'thus said Allah: man is insult-
ing me if he abuses eternity (or fate) — al-dahr — for I, Myself, am
fate, command is in My hand, and I change day and night' " '■>. This
poetic identification of God with al-dahr is supposed to have caused
the Zfihirls to consider "fate" as one of God's beautiful names •'. Ibn

1 It probably refers to Muslim superstition that demons practise kidnapping!
In a tradition In ol-Bukh&rl, Muhammad teaches the following: i-JV! 'jr^*-
ojL- (j^U O^ j^xil™^ Ijjiij <_iljjj| IjjL»J_9 1LjL.:/I I_jAjIj

2 In Ibn Hajar al-'Asqaliini, Imbah, I, p. 1102.

" al-Bukharl, Kilub al-uilah, no. 1(10; Kiliili al-tajmr, no. 240 to XLV:23 .J I £C

.jW^b <_MI 4-fil jaH\ iS^tA '»JJI

'' The following statements of Muhammad an also transmitted. However, thoy

have not gained a place in tho oanonioal collections: c^^jCs UjJI Ijl^J ^,

_jUl ^4 jx£> I^jj luJ-l aLj l^le- ^Jll S^kn al-Domlrl, II, p. 882 (bo-

(JIIAl'TISK BIGHT

143

154 Hazm is listed as an authority of this view «, but I have found nothing
of the like in Ibn Hazm. Certain it is that the Zahirls were occupied
with the consequences that ought to be drawn from this tradition
on the basis of their own principles. To avoid these consequences,
the son of the founder of the Zahirite school suggested roading tva-ana
al-dahr in the text of our tradition, thus avoiding the necessity of
recognizing those consequences, and arriving at the meaning: "As
long as eternity lasts, I shall, etc.". This is a version to which also
other traditionists subscribed, among them Ibn "Abd al-Barr whom
we shall later meet as a Zahirl a . I may be permitted to express my
own opinion with regard to this doubtful tradition. I boliovo it belongs
to those statements of Islamic traditions that have their origin in the
ancient Arabian aphorisms. Its pagan model is the following proverb:
man 'ataba 'aid al-dahr (Mat nia'tabatubh 3 . We find a trace of this also
in an elegy of Labid to his brother Arbad *. The Islamic version of
this proverb is supplied by the dahr tradition. To cite yet another
oxample, also the following tradition belongs in this context: ansur

155 akhaka zuliman aw mazluman, help your brother whether he be right or
wrong, although with the implication that, in the latter case, assistance
should be manifested by leading the brother from tho path of wrong
to the path of right •'•. However, the pagans had taught the former
dictum, but without giving it tho moral direction which evolved in
Islamic times. Moreover, they taught that the brother and his aim must
be supported ovon if ho is doing wrong °. In both cases, Muhammad,

sides other versions). j^c-j A^- ,jfc3»JI t**W 1 Vj liJJU 7*i_yi j U~»«J' J
ibid., vol. I) p. 18; the above-mentioned Statement on dahr probably belongs to
this family.

1 al-Q.mil.ul lu ni, VII, p, 378: £-. ejji \J- ^J »y>. {f\ lAc. _j^S £j»J <Jls

2 ul-Niiwiiwi, V, |). (II) to the Corresponding passage Of Muslim, Adah, no. I : «J I (J 15_J

_^JI Xs- &\ ^J^-J ojl^jj 4JJ i_Jj| ysjJI o'Il. Ul iS\ cJjiiJI
i£\ i_~yaJI jj£ Lr-l^JI Jlsj j^jJI JaI u^jo {jC- ij!j_pi «■**

3 al.Mii.yclii.nl, II, p. 210.

•' Kitab al-aghani, XV, p. 141,2: i_-^«-C ,-J O-J'U (jl ySijJIj
n al-BukhArl, KitSb nl-ma$5lim, no. 4; Muslim, Kitfib ai-birr, no. 16 j and ef. tho
commentators.

« al-Maydanl, II, p. 243.

•II

eilAlTIOll 10KSIIT

or Islam, adopted pagan Arabian teachings literally, and lias simply
given them an Islamic, cloak '.

Jbn l.iazni carries his demand that only such qualities of God lie
mentioned that are explicit)' stated as such in the written authorities,
and that nothing ought to he added to the. essence of God by speculative
means, to the extent that he insists on these terms even for non-Muslims
by referring to their own sacred scriptures. Ibn Ha/.in counters the
view of those Christian dogmatists who identify the son with God's
knowledge, and the Holy Ghost with His life, by arguing that they
could not produce evidence for this from the Gospels and their other
religious books ". Incidentally, he also advanced philological reasons
150 for this view. In dogmatical matters, in cases in which attested tra-
ditions do not provide textual clues, he generally recognizes besides
the scriptual evidence only i.jina (consensus) as authority. It could not
be said about God that He is the "resurrector of the dead" and "the
killer of the living" unless the admissibility of these linguistic ex-
pressions, and some others, arc supported by consensus '■'. (These

1 Tlio following attempt of explanation by tho Hiihi'iiii theologian 'Alul ul-ltiibiiiii.ii
I). Mnhdl (il. I oh) shows that tho dd&r tradition was considered objootiwiablo from a
dogmatic point of view certainly in the oarlioat time. Attempts were mode to cooonolle
this with tho spirit of InIhih by means of Interpretation: I v— -J' j *^j* ^*lj

UJj _ycJJI Vl USCL&j L_j IjJIS »yi\ jl U-Ufi 1-kA A».j Jls t5J^
i<L*l (jgjJI jl ( _ f jo AAll tiSCJi pjl? ^Jl Jli ci50i »y}\ Jli
ysjJI Jji f~y\S3\ «ij (Jl all *jsll aj_* pfj ^U.j 3* <UJl _^a djy}\
al-Jahi?, fol. 00b.

- llni Iluv.ni, I, fol. 20a: <5jUI 6j5o 61 i_-=-_J CD (Jtf .fr^ya-JO 6l ii503j

Ijjtj -U_-i _jjI (J lii < LjI ^5*-™^ t£-*JI _j^ **i*J (__>—-■ -J^iaJ I 7-jj (<*~^

J^j V JUJ c5jUI 61 \UJ3 Uft g^VI 3- 6j£> L, &A| ^

^^Jj A^sU. «~JI JjJ_J» (j-J (jXJ tjV-^— *i! \ (ji-r 3 lT" '•** lT" & (J^

^J

L)l

550!

6- "J^- 6- J ^J r^f 1 0- ^ Js , - J r*^ "t^ 4

61 [»**»■** l^"- 1 -^j «jl j^ «UJl ^ 61 f^A— 1 (^ Vj Ujl ^*- j

.J Jl2j LbJI Jji 6' !>< ity^jkUl iilll J^i^' IJu
3 Fol. I Ml): jjri *As jbo *J Lt«M*)l

(read: OjUl ^.s) (Jj^ 6*"J J* J -" J °'

ood. obBoures < j VlVl) o~i> aJV Vl cL-^1 c~«-ij ^^11 ^ JLo' aj

Cr 4

i_iv»jJI oLJ'l Qj

of

CHAPTIOK KKiliT

115

expressions occur neither in tho Koran nor in the traditions in these
participial forms; there they are found only as verlmrn fim'tmn).
Indeed, we have really seen enough examples of how Ibn Hazin

applied the jurisprudenta] tenets of the ZaJbirite school to dogmatics,
and how he recognizes for its authority only the written religious
sources and consensus. Since the Ziihirite school rejects analogical
evidence (i/ii/as) in /«///, Ibn llazm would like to see it banned also
from dogmatics. He produces extensive evidence that no qualities
must be attributed to God that are deduced from the negation of
another quality which He docs not posses (e.g. that He be called a
hero because He lacks cowardice, etc.), unless, of course, such appella-
tion of God can be documented by explicit passages from the Koran
or the traditions. We may call God the Living, the Knowing, and the
Powerful, not because He is not dead, ignorant, or powerless, but
because He is given these mimes in passages of the scripture. If this
were not the case, no one would be permitted to call God by these
names, for this would mean that one woidd compare God with such
a creature. This applies especially to the namo /km/// which indicates
157 in one Koranic passage both he who comprehends the truth and he
who recognizes God's essence as true. "One more thing must be
remarked", Ibn llazm continues ' "namely, that the Ash'arites claim
to frown upon any comparison of God with creatures, although they
themselves succumb completely to this sin. Indeed, they say: since
only a living, knowledgeable, and powerful person can be an effica-
cious person among men, it follows that the Creator also, who brought
forth everything, must possess these qualities. This is the line of their
analogical reasoning; but God is far beyond created things and beyond
similarity with them ! I'lven those who recognize analogy, yield to

eould pOBHibly bo rond C~l> JjJ) J_jJ_9 i-i>Ji Aj c -i<" ^*"4J iJ f"Vf"\
.oUj^l L LfcU ii£).i ^jiuo J5M»I Xtel{1 J* M^l
1 Pol. 108b: lil ^yfj„ *J A~^JI 6j^5o *4*l ily-\ p4^* U4L9
61 i^*j Ijili CJU if* i\ Ujj^ JUiJI ^C i CJ djlyj v^j
JUS ^.U l^i |Ja>j [j At! UU ['^ J>->*J J^UJI «5jUI 6^C
(j^JJUJI jjs- jjf- *^j I4J ,jUj' A^lid'j oliyj=l ^Lc (cod. aJ) dill
Jt n^tJI o-ISj 61 C\j ■.jki Jx. VI C(jr iJI o" 1 ^ 61 t/'la^lj

.jj«5 V J^^. *fe*p*L««Jlj lJJC» Jtt»| a^t 5^«l jj-*:

V L IJ^i UHJI

in

146

CHAPTER BIGHT

it only in such cnses in which a deduction is bo be drawn from the
analogy of two similar things. But no one permits the comparison

of two diametrically opposed things which are similar in no point.
Besides, the qiyils method is altogether invalid". While Ilm Hazm
is continually declaiming qii/us and istidlul, and any arbitrary introduc-
tion of speculative elements into theological investigations, it is by
logical arguments, as wc could sec, that he attempts to dismiss as
ad ulmirtlum even the procedure of the opposing schools. Indeed,
he himself recommends Aristotelian works as "sound, useful books
guiding towards monotheism" which advise jurists, as well as dog-
matists, to establish correct premisses, to arrive at correct deductions,
In formulate the right definitions, and to execute other logical opera-
tions. The Aristotelian books are indisponsible for \\w. fiufik miijlaldd
1G8 both for his own interest and for that of his co-religionists l .

The same points of view which provide the Zahiritc dogmatist with
the main thought for his religious belief in the question of the divine
attributes, tell him also in other aspects of dogmatics the direction
to follow, both for the establishment of his own positive system, and
also for his polemics against rival schools. An example is the answer
to the question whether it is permitted to speak of God as possessing a
■will and as one who wills. In conflict with the view of dogmatists
who, affirming this question, call the will an eternal attribute of the
divine essence, Ibn ilaztn advances the philosophical argument that,
in this case, the thing that God willed ought to bo eternal too, since,
according the Koranic statement, God's acts of volition arc always
accompanying the existence of what is willed (sG/rah 11:111, 111:42,

I Pol. I28b: l^j^ ^1 c_-~xS3l ,Jjo) l^C t_-x50l aJUj xLsS _jj I (Jli

X*.jl jjc ijb oJ~L, IUL, i_J.y (z.^501 .ij-Xp. ^J ^iLlk^jl

JiAj ajLJI ,vr«^- ^UxJl jJ iniill i«Jifi ^J'jJjj J^j "y. <UJl

'Zs.jZJ>\ X*."i\ jJLw ^Js, jjaJ-I ^j UjS'i ^1 c_^50l ixi^,

I j.-iO.'U liLaJ^il cl^j

_ r Oll l y.

(U^\j fLdl <j-> o^li-l '-1/4 i-^-LS

liXJj £yt 7z^aJ Lj 7tjb^JI ^--blj l_J CjL^21I rtJJJ" lJSj ij^i (J-

JaVj A~Jci x^\ j-iUl "j£ y ll~. ui503 _-jij Jy^Vl (JJ^j

CHAPTER EIGHT

147

and others). But the main issue in his argumentation remains his
insistence on the explicit expression of the scriptual texts (««•>••>•)
as authority. There wo never find anything but the forms of the verbi
fitliti in the perfect and imperfect which express the divine act of
Volition. But never, cither in the Koran or in the sunnah, do we find
that the (masdar) nomen vcrbi, iradah "the act of willing" or the
participial form mwrld "the one who wills" is usod in relation to God.
Therefore, wc must not say more about God than He states about
159 Himself: He wills, He does not will, He has willed, Ho has not willed,
but not: God's volition or will, Ho is who wills,

"for the latter expression OOOUrs noithor in the text of tlio Koran, nor in any
statement of tlio I'rophot or uny of tlio pious ancestors. This objectionable
usage was introduoed only by some mutukallimftn for whoso solvation there
is nioro fear than hope Thoy havo — so Ibn l;lu/.m satyri7.es against the
ABtt'arites 1 — progressed neither in Islam nor in piety, nor in striving for

1 Pol. 160b: 1 IjJUj olJJI oli^ (j-j »y l^X-JI J2i oi\j s j\ C\j

iLi. lift J Jilsi jjI cJU - < LgJ Ijjj-j Jlxj' JlUI J_)j lj eOljVl (J_U

)}j -b^ «U| Ae. " £l^, 1 jLu' «U|I jl LtJo.1 OteJJj* Oyl*_r^
jj iJLj' -ml jV o^lj'b'l cJU U=jIj i'^ljl ^J (jl (J-*

|/| "j».j -j6 -Uj! ttf jTyJI ^aii J>> I »\J\ 6(>J J> 1 CJ^
^l_jl lil aJ| JbJ _r^U djSis (Vf aJ (JjJu jl li_i ^Ijl IJI «_>Il

cojl cLi Li Jli> j^j Jjj' L^j-raJ ( Lc (J j .>A.. mI I ^o.=-lj (jb t l _5~*J'
t-^-ljJI jl L^J ii>Ci V ikya Li^i y "^yiS SaIjVI ^ iis*ilj 6IT

p^jjji '_^k. jl -UJ| ^ *J (>.JJl li5 ^ J jf J 1 ^' Jl» "^-ill («5s

j-j-Sj '*J-%i 61 <iJJl i^ "^j-J iJL"J' J^J \cj~> MjSi aM\ .iljl \Mj
JjJy ^yt^i ^_^- bil^ oj-Ws i_r*fn AW'ri 61 ijj, Jj-jJ a5^*>5^ oj-Cs

ojIjI aJ 61 J^ Vj ^. Nj ij;, ij Jij^j iljl J.US a_u 1 Jli ^

rt^A^ *Jj«j ^ ^j Ll$3Jb JUi' &\ fyt [joi oL 1 AS*} Oj^ Ail "bfj

igjil j^Afi uifci-l u>^^l i>> -»y (ji^-LiJI (35^»VI U* o^l
(jjltoj *^50l ^jJ^ "^j <J l^ab^-l Lc_ *^j 6j-J-^it a-1c «^-l

148 CHAPTER EIGHT

right, nor in the Boienooa of the Koran, and the Prophet's traditions, nor in

100 that upon which the believers agree, nor in that upon which they disagree,
nor in i In- definitions of knhini, nor in the investigation of nature and the
quality of oreated things; rather, they follow what is deceptive and plunge
headlong into doom without guidance from God. We beseech Qod for pro-
tection from this throat. God lnw said in tho [Coram 'If they wore to refer it
to the Prophet and to those in command among them, those of them would

know who inform themselves thereof i'roni lliom' ("limit. l\':S. r )). In this state-
ment God miido id clear that whuovor (loos noi, refer problems oithor to the
Book of God, or to tin 1 sayings of tho Messenger of God, or t.o l.ho ooiihoiisuh
of tho learned among the companions and the followers and those who followed
their path, does not oven know what ho deduced on the basis of his own

101 OOnjeOtttre and opinion '. We ourselves do not condemn the endeavour that
truth be established and that if bo clour; rather, wo say that this is an excellent.
beautiful action. We only reject the following: the drawing of conclusions
in religious matters under the exclusion of arguments from the Koran, tho
Kunuah, and the consensus, particularly since this type of argument is cogently
required because of the perceptive faculty of the senses, because of the mind's
intuition) and because of the deductions that follow from their sound pre-
misses- — ■ such as the validity of monotheism and prophefhood. Now, when
wo consider what we have mentioned, it necessarily follows that we adhere
to what wo were told by the Prophet whom God lias sent, that we comply
with what, he commissioned, and prevent fallacious conjectures, false opinions,
ridiculous analogies, and ruinous servile imitation (of the opinion of the
schools) to obstruct this".

LiS3lgil jj^SaXJUJ ^A i£cTy L> 6>*~! «r& LjJ'l^J CjlSjJi^l Ollfc Li
jij ,JL>u (JlS -Aiij liSCS ^ aliL i_jjo Jj-j ~\c jjjl y, (50i,>\j
'JJI J.JjJ rt^, jj^\ ijjl Jlj (Jj^jJI <J I aj'Sj

Jj-Ji.

f»4—

,Jlj Jjlxi ij! aJ i — ciiL^- 1 L if 1 ^ j| ^c JUj' lyx.i ~_u_>
•UJl ^>j (_^joLJIj LIpc-^JI y, tL.LJI p-L^I lJIj «jJi*» aJ^u.j .O^i

-u^'j JpLI £fc~> i_i ' JLy«*3Jl |J-c i».L=l ^5oLuJ_j "Viljj aIbu
_^jo |> h JJ| J> *\&i\ j&> $\j t>«J-l J-^L«JI J-^l y> I- 1 * Jj
Jib (j*^-l ol*_y_ '^j' o' ^*i f-\r?\ j' S»** jl o'y i>° ol*x

.."•*

A~A^-

U^^Ijo ^ jlj AXtliu U^Ij UJl JUi' -Oil Ai>o (^JJI Jj^JI U
.il&^-JI -UJixJIj iLi=.JI oL,LaJlj oJ^UJI JjVlj JjilSCll jyJilL

1 It would malic more hcmihc if wo could amend the text as I'iiIIowh: }' 1 f»L*J r** 3
pci\ \-4 "lie knows only what he oliolta IVoiu his own etc.".

102

CIIAI'TKR I0IC11T

149

lhii liuzin nifties in precisely the same literal manner with the
Mu'tazilites: for instance, in tin; question of whether God created
the sinful actions of men. The Mu'tazilites, a.s it in known, reject
this belief of the orthodoxy.

"They raise tho following objections against flic speculative' school: If (!<><!
created disbelief and sinful actions, it would follow that He would bo angry
with whatever He Himself did, that He would not be pleased with what He
created, and that Ho disapproved what He Himself practised. His anger and
disapproval would consequently lie dirootod against what Ho commanded
and decided Himself. Such objections — ho Ibn Hazm says — aro invalid
jugglery. We do not dispute -- for Cod Himself has told us so — that He is
angry with disbelief, injustice, and lies, and (.hat lie derives no pleasure from
this, and that on the contrary, He disapproves of all this, and that He punishes
it With His wrath. In this respect, we must simply conform to the divino word.
Hut lot us put the sumo question to tho Mu'fa/.ililes and say: 'Was it not God
Himself who created I bits, Pharaoh, wine, and the unbelievers V. They cannot
but answer in the affirmative. Then, wo go on asking: 'Is God pleased with
them or does He direct His wrath against them ?'. — Everyone must probably
answer this in the affirmative. But then we say: "Phis is precisely what you
refuted just then, namely, that God is angry with His own command, dis-
approves His own action, and repudiates and curses His own croiition !'.
If they do not agree with Ibis and say that God did not repudiate the unbelie-
vers, per w,, and that He was not angry with the person of Iblis himself anil
did not disapprove of wine Itself, thou we cannot make this concession to thoni,
for God stales explicitly in the Koran that He cursed Iblis and the unbelievers,
and that they are repudiated and cursed, and that His wrath is upon them.
Tho same applies to wine and idols" '.

1 Pol. Ii)7b: JLJ *J| IjJIs Ob _,kJI (jjjj fr, ^^l^lc! Clj
L_.> t_-^2jO_J Jjj CL) i_-~p=-ij jil J-S-9 (jvslxil.3 _^£J1 ,jLi. GtS" O'
i_— ^s_*J Jj|_j ,_L«-aJ Lj OjXjj (J_*i L Jaic^jj *^> L ^jp^ J J (Jj^* -

JaM&wd '>Jl l*_#il -^' iJUj' [_y. ilj] dSCJAj 'j^-j "y- 'Ull L'_r^-I

•U-o l-^ljoj ii53i JS* -s_^o JjIj ol^ *i'_j ^jJ5lll_J fJJillj jiSCJI

^Vs jliSOlj _j.iL I j (jjj^yj t# -Jjl (jLi- -Ull tr 5l jfri J_ji.j J— ii
(I4* 6 U*b J5* c^rM d^c- *A ojS' jj> JaiU .ul y, a. >Vi ^

jj-) L_— yi-CJ 0_/O Jj Ja?n». |_j Lu' «U I /_J |^J ' jXJ I Ll ,}*-" I lAft rt^ UjA" 3

V_j (l. jlSOJ) ^a50l cry- «^j i IjJU oU .UjJj jjU. L Cj ij '^""J

J Uj' JJi il5Cli> rt.i rt-LJ I j*=-\ &;£■ aji ^j /r^LI !jjsJ>zJ^ Japt-

150

CilAITlOR KICIIT

ion

Ilm Hazm's Zdhirite method in tlio religious sciences must have
been, inevitably, of important influence for the definition of his ethical
concepts. In this case, too, he recognized nothing but the written
evidence as basis. In this field) Ibn Hazm dismisses deduction com-
pletely, bo it derived either on the basis of a priori sentences, or from
empirical PactB. An action is good or bad not according to its nature
and its ethical or religious value, but solely because it has been design-
ated as such by the divine will as revealed in the Koran and the
traditions. According to this, the identical action can have been good
for a certain time, but then, suddenly, can have been changed to a re-
prehensible action by God's sovereign will. In this case, however,
Ibn Hazm can choose his examples only from among Islamic ritualism.
The turning of the face in prayer towards Jerusalem had formerly
been a "beautiful gesturo and proper faith". But later, God described
the same gesture as a reprehensible action, as a sign of disbelief.
Hence Ibn Hazm follows "that there is nothing in the world that
in itself is cither good or bad. Good is only what God designates as
such, and the samo applies to bad things. God's creation alone is
absolutely good, God himself says this. Man's actions, created in him
by God, arc modified exclusively by God's independent will" '.

"Therefore there is no action in the world that could be called
vice per 86, for it becomes this only through its relation to God's will.
Killing Zayd is vice if God forbad it, but virtue if God commanded it.

CHAl-I'EU BIGHT

151

Ibn Hazm, fol. 190a; A^~o- 'iSj»-

OjAJjSZj tJjiy*Lj <jjhy>s~^i rt-gj Ij j UxJ Ij l) *Jj I l j*J **J I L j^ ^yij Ji
.jljjVlj yJ-\ d50J5j j^ic t-j^ijL, JUi' «U|I ,y

4j| "r^aS IfrtuJU -i5^>-1 ciMj eJ&j \"y" ^z 1 ? iJ I** l*W*» "*$ ULC I
sL- L> ^jSo -U;jJ ^-Ji tjj-i j j ^~^ ij^- 3 - c (<*" }•**}> (J i_y^)
O I (_J L«j' J 15 ,j~.s£ -vie- Uj ,j~-^- j-&9 L...->- ,_j bu
-Oil all*. Uj £)L*^ll H\ jL^-^l bT)» Ja (JW (Jlsj ^JwuV
^S c^j-i ^JiO AJiLi. (JaJ j£- ( <**» -^J ^ =, =rr^ *5p. j^i U~5 J Uj

4111

.y 4 d50i> fr £j L JLj l j r ^ J US jail ^ -Us"^ Lu^ |L

UJI

1 jAkjj iV~»- j-gi 'U^*^. l15oJ ir^J fs*ji j-o-' A*vJ iiSJ^ <j^**? ft ^~
-j -ul~». dSCJi l _ r i>uj tj— =- (»j Uc~5 ol>9 -u!L^. -j -vj=3 ii£Ji>
JjU lLUw>. -L*50l |JI a"^aJI CjjU-. \$ pJl -j L~o- 0^3 **<3

.-4-5 ,JUj' -ujl I&aU, .jdl o-LJI JUil *gh» ul5TJJ5j 'tec~3 c-ilS^ol

Cf. to this nl-Tji, (d-Matniijif. p. 187 ff.

Howevor, it can be said that something is a lie in itself, namely, when
a person makes a statement contrary to facts. But this point alone
does not make him either a liar, or subject him to slander; he becomes
this only insofar as God has designated in an explicit manner this
act to be sin and a reprehensible action" '.
104 In one much disputed question in Islamic theology Ibn Hazm was
forced to repudiate tho exegetic rules which he had established. The
anthropomorphic expressions of God which we find in the Koran and
in the traditions presented the Zfihirite religious philosopher with a
problem that was destined to deal his Zfihirite confession a staggering
blow. In this instance, only the anthropoinorphists ((d-vuijiissintii./i)
are faithful to the scripture since they adhere to the wording of the
holy scripture, and confess without fear that God has a face, hands,
fingers, and feet, etc. This is how it is explicitly stated in the books
and no interpretation will change this. Ibn Hazm repudiates this
view with sharp, abusive words, but he repudiates just as sharply
the explanations of the Ash'arites and the Mu'tazilites who see meta-
phors in these expressions. In order to exert his Zfihirite views in
both directions, he must resort to one of two things, either to lexiea
and find meanings which arc compatible with the spiritual view of
God for those words which apparently denote bodily limbs, or, ho must
argue away completely the anthropomorphic expressions, and, taking
linguistic usage as authority, view them as superfluous additions.
For example, for him ■icnjh Allah and ijail Allah, etc., are nothing but
superfluous expressions for Allah. For yet other expressions, lexical
interpretation is attempted, e.g. for rijl (God's foot) the meaning:
assembly jama'ah ; for finger (isba') tho meaning: hands; grace (ntfvndh),
etc. In other cases, grammatical justification is given. Wo have already
seen an example on page 116 where Ibn Hazm rescues complicated
textual passages for his own theory by excercising idiifat al-mvlh.
He supplies evidence for this in this chapter too. "God creates Adam
in his form" does not mean that man has been created in God's form,
so that it follows that God might have shape, rather, it means that

J UJI

^ *n

1 Pol. 200a: $|j X£j| *j|jj Vj A^oJ JJi *.— . ^
j*\ |il Ak5j IjUo Aifi -till ^ lil Joj J.3 6j£j SU'UVlj fiAkJI

_^J -v *A& aj'IJjj a^jJ ejji' _^gj i_ij$31 Gj ^J* *1s2j -ml
.L25 " r UU ^*VI *4 JUS -ail v-o' &+. VI

152

CHAI-I'KII UHillT

KW God created him in a form that lie chose for liiin. All forms belong
to God (as the possessor). From among the many forms in His
possession He chose one and set His stamp upon Adam. What
follows is the main passage in Ibn liazm's relitfio-philosophioal work
which refers to this, and which also clearly demonstrates his relation-
ship to the dogmatic schools:

FoL 157a: J^U-I jj d£y A»j JL>j j^-j "yt Jjl (Jli x*A ^1 Jls

"4-J Ojj^\ Jlsj r»4-*^ ,J IJ* p^B&fcVl Jl A*I~-I C~&^3 |»l^')/lj

(5-01 ^_xJ-l ^a IAaj j./o;_jjI J Is J^-j _>c <u>1 Aj J>l_^ Ijjl JUJ' -UJl
^jiiij ijl ^^-v. "if IJaj -Uj; _^jI J 15 i ulil ja *A)| ^>-j (Jj-^I

•U)l -Lj-J JjJii L50_J Lt<**3 "Vl j_y^f; "j (JIM W i~o_^'_J S**-«J jjV

{){*>£ JUj' *M' <-£>- *i<«* lJ' ' u - g /••J' J J JUS «u»l _?■£■ y> ^^J
J_Ul «u.jJ rtfSCijJaJ Ull jJjs ^ij ^ Li'U. JLJ' -Ul1 Jjs d$3S
yllj Jjui j-^-j j* AjJ J **S *JM _A^ l_9-Wa% ,1 ffr^jl LuHj r-^=J
ll_. (JL»J' Jlsj i^-Co C**la» U JUS Jls'j *4j^jI j)ji *JJl J J JUS
,»*L> AAJl J>"j Jl5j olxLjl-p »|j£ JJ JUS Jls_j LlXil 11; jJl cJ^
L-. U^j L J I A*Lj>c1I C~Jt>Ji (j;JT -u-b Lbj j*- 3 -^' C%£ o c -
jaj lu^JI .U1 (jl J I aJj^jJI ^i— Aij -us p&ji o")Uu i_jL« Jji
iljil jl ^Cjj^Nl JUj 61*^, 5^ t5j*^ *W *J i^'-' V W=jJ

«UiU |Jl t^fiVI _/i jl_J jlojl oL\*-i Ijl LjJjI JUS .Ull J_jju
jLsU IjA jl J^HJ Jj ILl^l Jail 9 J-a.J.0 jjab lj*j jL~£

|£ JUS Jij JUS dj* c^ J I -U1 /j ^ ^ V JUS *AI| ^
jL ^j "y- -uil LiviJ jl a^V j_^ Vj Ua**^ iiSols JUi' Jlsj

b'^Ti L ^JiG ^Ul jl Jjiij ^SGJb oL 1 ^aJ.JI "jV (J^Ufi jJ

HID

L J Is Jj'ls Jji ^ Li U. J 'US Jlsj »_^A e.,^ V ^J^-j _J6

L5-
.. I.

.ujl

J~-

«UJl Jl «u J-AJJJ ^s eb>-j IAaj <U)I t_~;S.

j»vij ^-3- ^jA=L| l-Ua i %-fiJ *->-^5 UjJ A.UI ^ij ^a. t | J^c" V

JU

LS'

« J^-J >*

Ji

AiL Jj Li I Ait L ^*"'J Al»j

U^

_^i. I tio Ai. 3 rtpilL= Ajj I Uj—J

rt-a-Lcii Uu. (JjJJs A-«JjiJl »_jj -bo JUS jU)I 2)1 ^us

fMi\ (j^«.»-9 UjL, |($Cl-i i'Jo-lj jSOj jLAJj 'Up=i) J^iu JUo' jjIj luJ-l

CIIAI'TKH BIGHT

153

i_jJL. Jjjj jt-a-jj -u^. (jo^. jTos JUS Jli l,i'_j* Ijl j_j5"Hl «±-jJitL| j

L j ;jl - J J (H- 1 -*^ Ui J^« A -'' lJ^' **!* ^J i»-^' ^1 "t*3fl «LjvJ (jj^,
3^1 3u&y-1 LjJ *^ i£l Ull! ^s X*|,i.| Jp-jJI "jV rfXJi y *Uj

7=~>n^=JI OJ.Ai-1 liSOAij LjJ rtJ^a. JAX **->! JLo' 'Uit jj ^j^.^ Si

.Ull joLal ,j-. Cr^vl Oy i>«jil s-15 II)' J I* ru-^-v -Ull Jj*,j jl
A^j J»j j^t Jjjl jjjjJS ^ C^r^b Cf*JM' i * CXJ I-5 1 J^J yt
1UAII ^s «->*jIj -ul* (ood. o^p-) Li^i. L)^>\j Clj oj^_ iLUS LjI

OJ_J-^j| J\ft ^9 a^-fiJI »jj /V*J*J J-^! JLu' -Ull jl rtrC _^-lj >UjCJI
J_jAI ^g JL— I oj_^j> jj^_ rt-^jl jAJ tjy ^lii 1-U>_} l&j.9yi ^Jl

jjjj' J_jiJI Lu A.^. jUjj_j UjJI ^ jj.Jjj jJI _^i. isLtllj

i Li I jJjO ojJ^^iJbj LjJ 0_yA3yi ^Jl jKC. jjSJll OJ.U-1 9 rtf£

LJa oLijii L "t=v=J "jw\ i>)yp y^' (V J Lxj' j-^-j Jft jIi ^Lo
li^i &)yp ^U *jT 401 1 J|U. CaliJI o.j.jJ-1 ^s JjiJI tliCJ^j
*£• *il j_^J J^-j _>£• Aill U_^ii jJtll OJJ.V2JI Ojji_ lISCL. i)L>|

i_iLajj JLj' AAll J I c_-~uj -Gli -Ufl-i. ^ J-i'lJ "j^j Lj-Li Ijjvi-!
•UJ I o_j_j LjH ^j^J '-? *L*Xl I ^ -Ul I cu-j J^" '^ (J^"-3 J^ *^ '

Sill -x tJL» Ai'U i JjJSJd^s (ood. U) -U d^L JUS' <ul Lj"

( j«.^ll 0j_^y9 J^ J^j' l jA\ lOA J^S J>.J _Vt .ill U/fcf iJi^b au I

"i7 dijj.3 j-V c-jIj Jlj < <U tjLij ^U lL5CL y* JLo au) Igjj" jj*aJ\j

^J^ IjJU rtr^Jl C-ojJ-l liA» ^9 •'5^501 ^J lG_y-iVl ,j-i o_^-j

i^ ^oj-^I "U-s Lc ^it yl Aj'j^j Lc »^l jjL-L -Ull jl «.£■ -Oji'
1CC5L -0 Ji>B«lj -us J^OI oLLs f-L^-b g )lJ*?*5'|j ,*UJIj -= l ~*- 1

JS* «U1 JIT ^' «iji J* (j^'j J-»^' *J J*y.J A«ii] *JiJu.l 1^
-Li._5._i (ji "j'Lu_J| _^^- jjjl |»*Ai j^iJ IJ^, JmZ y\ Jli 1 tl^JJ
(V (*'*'J JUj A-Ui (j^j t£j~» ■Aj'i 1 -U9 iij^^ V i'jf, yo 1-kAj ls_,>- l9_,a.

jli i^Lc jj.stu, JUJ' jI> foj&* jl !<sj jl^a^lj J-»Jlj o'L^-l
y?i\ jl yi J> I j "J z'jA Liiy: IJ49" jJ 'ioLc »^ I_jAp=^ IjllS'
* jj tlik *if ciT^ IAa_j JUi' Ji _jj& |,S -ujji ^Lc »iV ijw^'j
J^-j 2-° *J" Ol : LUa)I ^ ^ -h^ yftll (_»* ?*«* L. i£53J5j)
jl_pil| yl Jj-j _j* dlil Jli 1^' |j^i Upilw jj^ic-i jjL, ^jt ujL'^j
oJ-i /j£- _)l~»-J l-A* u'Ij j_jj>s»*JI J I jj^-bj LjL« a* i_iu;.x.> |»_jj

154

CHAPTER F.riUIT

jl-. c-~?=jJI_s l^sL. {jC- V^"' C*j**» «tf JjJiJ' 1^ v_ji$jll dj&j ^Vl

^jSuj lv=J oT/JI -V & ^- {'. o«.Ui Ijilj t-U^=JI jUial oJa _ ; 5uj
I_jj"J6" ^Jj Jl2s lib -Ull v 1 ^ ^sj -M aJ Jo: "^ L _^ol -uk JjU. ^

Jl>_jb ^'b' Uj -uLu Ijivr J-

Ibn Hazm is not oven frightened by ta'pBr, the literal meaning of
which would indicate God's corporeity. He declares — supported by
the authority of passages from Ahmad b. Hanbal, like wa-ja'a- rabbuka,
"your God came" -- with the following restitution: it came God's
command wa-ja'a auir rabbika, -. We have seen that in the explanation
of the anthropomorphic passages of the Koran and the traditions,
108 Ibn Hazm becomes unfaithful to his own system, and in his inter-
pretation of the scripture he is guilty of the very same arbitrariness of
which he ordinarily accuses the. Mu'tazilites with merciless reproaches.
In view of the numerous anthropomorphic passages in the Koran,
Ibn Hazm could not dismiss the passages of the traditions in this
case as false or as insufficiently documented simply because they were
inconvenient for dogmatic reasons, and because their interpretation
would be harmful to his Ziihirito literalism. As wo have repeatedly
seen, he loved to apply this method of refutation ordinarily as ■ultima
ratio to deflate his opponents' arguments.

On the other hand however, attempts were not lacking from the
part of the spiritual dogmatists to remove anthropomorphical ex-
pressions from the text of the collections of traditions. This fact which
emerges from the adduced apparatus criticus in the commentaries,
is of such importance for the history for the Islamic canonical texts
that we shall illustrate it with some examples:

In Kitab al-lafsir, no. 253 (to surah XLVII:27) it says: aAJ I ijU.

rJI -l_> iU JUi l ^>-_pl J&; CiA^-ll |V»v" C**l* 4.U z.j> Ui jjJJ-l

(var. (£t&BH "After God completed croation, kinship rose and

seized God's loin. Then God said: 'Back !' But it said: 'This is the
refuge of him who seeks protection from perfidy of faith, etc' "
For spiritualists the loin of God might have sounded objectionable
so that attempts were made to remove the offensive words from the
texts. In al-Qastalhlnl, VII, p. 382, in which the apparatus criticus
is reported in admirable detail, wo find textual criticism in which

CHAPTER BlflHT

155

the objectionable words aro marked with the sign "deleatur" (kashl).
In Abu Dharr's text these words are missing altogether. Ibn Hajar
notes in his commentary (Fath al-burl) that in many editions the object
of the verb akhadhat is missing (oli.1 J^L. _aO*J oAa.) although
the sentence does not make much sense without this object. Abu
Zayd did not read the words v*^. Jl iSy*- although they existed
in his text. — A similar passage is Tafsl.r no. 264 (to surah L:29).
There it says that hell shall not be filled until God puts His foot on it;
then hell says: "Enough, enough!" -^ !o. 'A^Ui }Vi jUI Qs

Jas Jai Jii JoJixs »d^.}. In Muslim we find in the corresponding

passage the words: .vUj jJJ| *-kj i-

and in another version of

this tradition in which al-Bukharl transmits the words a^Js

(J

<jr~

1 Pol. 157a, I. M. OOd. li-nininliii; I. M, 0O(3./f.

• Fol. 150a.

109 Muslim reads '-LJ3 ojjJI Lit **a-i ( J&.. AI-QastalliinT {ibid., p. 395)
makes the following remark ^& cSJj^iJl i>.1 Jlsj *L>.j isil -^j_>9 i>.l j&\j
•i-c^f-b cu)jlj Ujj tj^pc-jc^JI Xjljj* U^-" 1 *>JJ »'j^i o^i Cr* l »*Si/S
I suspect that already the omission of the subject Allah and rabb al-
'izzah in al-Bukharl must bo attributed to the effort to soften the
anthropomorphical expression — even if only externally. Ibn Furak
and Ibn al-.Tawzi considered the word rijlahu as an interpolation or as
distortion on the part of a transmitter.

Also in the field of tqfslr — excluding allegorical interpretation —
attempts were made to mitigate objectionable anthropomorphisms
through exegesis on the basis of grammar. Al-P>ukharl's Kitab al-zakdt,
no. 8, represents an example of this: "Ho who donates from rightful
acquisition the value of a date ... verily, God shall accept it from him
with His right hand and increase it for the donor, just as if one of you
were to raise a foal, until it reaches the size of a mountain I" (jl^aj* ^

L^lli^i ^uil olj <_. -Ik) I ^1 ^' J-^i ^J 4*8^ S— -^ Cf* '"-^' ^^**
J^jJI Jio jjiCi' JL. i_jii ^.u.1 J,y__ \$ A-*UJ l^Jjj, f$ -v~<~i
In some, versions it even says: Jicl tjj& ,j^- |V*V^ "-* k^ JiJ^
J-J-l /_ j# Traditionists mid theologians have made many futile
attempts to explain tho significant expressions in this tradition.
In al-Damiri, II, p. 265, a.v.fihv, one finds an interesting compilation
of tho views in question. Hero wo arc particularly interested in the
one according to which bi-yamtnihi is not to bo understood as the right
hand of God, but as the hand of the ono to whom it was donated:
God receives the alms, as it wore, through the hand of the needy person

156

CIIAI'TIOH KIOIIT

to whom it was donated; at the time, when lie receives tho alms, God
too receives it. Considerable textual critical, and exegetic arbitrariness
was employed to purge tlio tradition of (.lie accusation of Uvjsim with
which Muslims customarily charge the Jews and their holy scriptures '.

(3)

170 Let us repeat: Ibn Hazm carried on the idea of the Zfihirite scliool in
so far as he aimed at asserting a new methodology in the field of
Islamic, dogmatics, namely the Zfihirite methodology. He treated and
judged questions of religious belief from exactly the same point of
view as the school to which he belonged in matters oifiqh viewed and
treated questions of jurisprudence. The system of Ibn Ilazm's dog-
matics is entirely consistent with his fitj/i. Until his time no attempt
had been made to establish Zfihirite dogmatics.

But also Ibn TIazm did not succeed in asserting his dogmatics
within the Zfihirite school. Even later, the attitude toward dogmatic
controversies remained completely inconsequential as a. qualification
for a theologian to be recognized as an adherent of the Zfihirite school.
The only criterion which determines membership to the school of
Dawud al-Zahirl continues to be the. position in juris prudence, and the
attitude towards the legitimate and illegitimate sources of legal
deduction.

The fate of Ibn Hazm and his writings is sufficiently lenown from
the Moor's story in Andalusia. Fanaticism, irroconciliability, offensive
rccklcssnoss, a mania that attempted to stamp as heresy all rival
opinions, those traits, which represent the dominant features of the
literary image of our Ibn Hazm, were not conducive to his endeavours
in attracting friends or followers from the opposing camps. Posterity
characterized his unsparing, literary manner, and his inconsiderate
slander of the greatest authorities of the past and the present by the
proverb: "The sword of Idajjaj and the tongue of Ibn Hazm" «. His

1 Grata, Alonalmrlirift, ISSO. p. ,'100, foul note. Pot tbo above-mentioned piiKNiigeH
of. ol-Iji. til- M,iwr,(,if, p. 77 rr.

'•'• ll)n nl-Mulnqqin, fol. 22n, h.v. Aim Itakr ibn Ffirak relaloa QD fchfl authority of
Ibn Hnzni that Knltiui .Mahmml ibn iSulmkligin bad thin dogmatist executed booiuiKO
bo taught Unit Muhammad irnn the Prophet of (ioil lull, no longer i« ho at tlio present.

.ill I Uj-*-J (Jb '^J fjd* U_J-"_) J* ,y~' iV^V l~J L)' Olio reader

who noticed bho anoohronism undo the following marginal note: \Jj& 7r.,r* i j
la* LiiCi^zi o> J-J' CjL dijji u-_l 6ls AylsJI ■^~ : - Cr*

JJUJI

CllAl'TKIl KKiHT

157

171 harsh manners in daily affairs and in science must have had a still
more revolting effect on his contemporaries. When Abu al-WaUd
al-Baji returned from the East, during whose absence from the country
Ibn Ilazm's most important writings had appeared in, and stirred up
Andalusia, Abu al-Walld al-Baji discovered

"niiicli elegance in Ibn Ilazm's speeches except for tin.- fact that in them lu>
departs from the prevailing madhkab. Thus no one in Andalusia was oonoernod
with Iuh erudition. Theologians abandoned oven polemic exchanges with him;
only some ignorant persons followed bin views. Ho settled on the island of
Malloroa where lie lived as the head of a group of followers, and the inhabitants
of tlic island followed Iuh loacliingfi".

Al-Baji, who himself had some leanings towards a literal interpretation
of the traditions ', then went to Ibn Hazm and refuted his thesos in
the course of personal confrontation a . Abu Bakr Muhammad b.
Haydarah, a pupil of al-Baji who died in 500, also composed a pam-
phlet refuting the famous Zahirl 3 .

Thus, if we are to believe the representation of al-Baji, Ibn Ilazm's
mighty tenet was forced to flee the Andalusian mainland ■ — where
it was considered even unworthy of refutation — and falsely to scrape
an existence far from the theological currents on the island of Mallorca.
But the gloomy description which al-Baji [mints of the complete in-
efficaey of Ibn Ilazm's theological endeavours seems to be exaggerated.
We find some famous names among the representatives of the Zaliiritc

J-Jis •AJ'cl_^ Jill c_J_,J> tlSClJJj A-*J_)^I '■Uj^\ ^j [ Jj>- -U^.-. }Vj

.jUx™il -UILj < |.jp. l>I jLJj r-l^J-l k-^—

1 11(5 doduoeil from l.hc fanmua Hudayliiynh traditiun (Noldeko, (ImchirMr. dm Knrann,
p. S) that tint Prophet knew bow to write Tho fanatical fittfi h Abfi liakr al-Kii'igh called
him for MiiH rciiHon a kiifir. liven the ignorant iiiiihhch mimed excitement against this
strong orthodox theologian who weakened the miraoulous powers of bho Prophet by
attempting to erase tho Prophet's name from the list of tho illiterate persons by moons

of OonoOSSlon to the literal oxegeuiH. (The I'rophot'H iniraciiloiiH power radiatoH the

brighter, the less knowledge he brought to his prophothood). It iH well known that
orthodox theology in milking strong endeavours to keep tlio Prophet nn nmiiii by mciuiH
of violent interpretation oftbe wotdafa-kataba in that tradition. The Prophet's inspira-

lion was bound to bo the more iiHtoundiiig, the more ignorant, be liimHclf wan. ('[. on

BfijI's disputation! besides al-Maqqarl, ateo Spronger, Mohammad, II. p. 898.

- al-Mnqqarl, I, p. 505.

:l Tubaijat id-hnffas, XV, no. 28:

*fj»

o-i

US

u

*J.

108

(JHAP'J'KIl BIGHT

school iii Ilm Hazm's time, unci wo may assume that it was his influence
that IimI them into tho Zahirito camp. There, in the forefront, we find
tlic great traditionist Ibn 'Abd al-Barr Abu 'Umar Yusuf al-Ninirl
from Cordoba (d. 403), the (/mil of Lisbon. He sliared the sympathies

172 of tho founder of the Zahirito seliool for the Imam al-Shafi'i '. Ibn
Ilazm speaks highly of the qadVs work al-'J'amldil and says that it
cannot be equalled, let alone be surpassed, in the field of fiqh as
established on the ground of the tradition ". By traditional fiqh {fiqh
ul.-hadllh) Ibn Ilazm means precisely his Zaliirite system of juris-
prudence. One of his own juridical works is entitled al- It Usui ft. fiqh
ul.-ljndV.h '■'. The term itself, however, we certainly find in some fabric-
ated traditions •'. Ilm 'Abd al-Barr later left the Ziihirlyah and became
a Malikite; as a qadi he was probably obliged to belong to the pre-
vailing school.

Abu 'Abd Allah b. Muhammad al-Humaydl (d. 188), whose name is
quite familiar to readers of al-Maqqarfs historical work, also belongs
to this group. He is indebted to Ibn 'Abd al-Barr and Ibn Hazm for

173 his theological training. He continually associated with the latter s

l fab. al-hufftlz, XIV, no. L2.

■■ al-Moqqorl, H, p. 118s u«~Q !A*»I •&-< c-ojJ-l -Oii ,J *UI "i 1 i^hfjAj

i -K^l (^-3-1

» fahiupl al-hnffr,;, XIV, no. 15.

• This iH n. term which dofincH tho legal ilifforonoo between tlio ordinary tradition
favourably diapoMod to qiijan and tho tradition based on pnro tradition which Ih hostile
l.o qiyit. I find in tliiH a Himilarity to n. tradition which, liltn much of tho apocryphal
materia], i» borrowed from Muhammad's farewell pUgrimaga ( c-IJjJI ^^>-). At that
time, tho Prophet i« represented to have made tho following statement not included
in the «(iIjiIih: May God make radiant a man who hears a statement from me and who

heedl it, for many a currier uCJli/h ia no representative of fiqh of tradition. All I JJsJ

kiojj-l AJUj ,a~i aM ,J-*U- t_i_,i haLcji L5 ^JlJi-> a«-" IjA ['I'ulidhib,

p. 22; al-Qiihtnllan:. .Introduction, p. 4). Other versions of this statement, too, wore

transmitted and, on the basis of thorn, wo should become suspicious of tho ago of tho
expression i±*j.aJ-1 J_Ja. Among thorn in the following: «-* lw*l >Ull j^zl
iXt Jjisl jA |j-> u>' *S (_)->L>- i-^ji bl j|_j bu Lftjj I jwnaj ^^^1 lc->
or: iwL •—> ,J-3' AJ— j S-Lr 1, '''' |0HC lost words, alone, are to be found m the
traditions recognized an authentic They are taken from id- Bukh&rl, KitSb ul-'ilm, no. :

of. alSO A**-u) A^ ir"i iV> ic^J' 0>Sj tjl -VjOuJ /j-j |]i«J (J-"J-9 A'llii/i
iil-maijlifizi, no.77i Tamhid, no. 24 ; shorter, l''Utin, no. 8.

6 al.Maqqart, I, p. 534.

ClIAI'TKK MIGHT

159

among whose most important pupils he is counted '. He studied Ibn
Hazm's works under tho author's personal guidance and also recognized
his madhltab as correct, but would not oponly display this, for it
would probably have been a handicap) to his career.

So long as the Zaliirite school depended upon tho goodwill and
animosity of theologians, its propagation did not reach beyond the
studies of a few individual theologians. At that time it was most
likely only a negligible community that still upheld Dawud al-Ziihirl's
banner, and even among those few there were some who, besides their
personal Zaliirite conviction, proclaimed another, official one, that
of the ruling majority. We shall see immediately that at this time
the Zaliirite school had forfeited its existence as a society, as a school,
independent of tho other orthodox mmlhuhib, and that it was merged
in the prevailing Malikite school. It can easily be understood that
tho theologians did not allow efforts to materialize which aimed
at making superfluous tho marvels of their casuistic refinements.
Quito to tho contrary, they repelled them, ignored their representatives,
and took care to screen their activities. In opposition to tho interest
of the profession, the powerful Ibn Ilazm, too, was condemned to
impotence when he ventured among the theologians. However in the
century after Ibn Ilazm, the Zaliirite school was to get satisfaction
for all past defeats. We are talking about a theological reform, guided
not by the theologians, but by the princes, a reform that led the
Zaliirite system to triumph, and saw its principles raised to a kind of
state religion. Although we do not think that past, activities of Ibn
Hazm and his pupils were of direct influence on this strange reaction,
because the historian of tho movement makes no mention of cither
Ibn Hazm or of his writings within the course of events that contri-
buted towards victory of his school, it is, on tho other hand, un-
thinkablo that a radical movement, such as the one about which we
are about to speak, be without connection to its historical premisses
and to predecessors who aimed at the same goal. Again it was Ibn
Hazm's dogmatics that wore to separate the Almohad movement,
which in dogmatic matters stood on Ash'arite ground, from its Zaliirite

predecessor.

Under the third ruler of tho Almohad dynasty in Spain and North

Africa, Abu Yusuf Ya'qiib (at tho end of the Vlth century A.H.),

171 who nurtured a particular liking for traditions and traditionists, the

fabagia ai-iw/fr^, xv, no. o.

Mil)

CUAI'TKR 101(1 NT

17".

Ziihirite brmicli became independent, indeed, the officially preferred

school in Islamic practice. Ibn al-Athir relates that:

"Ik; publicly professed to belong to the ZahirTyah and turned away from the
Miilikifo branch '. Consequently, the cause of the ?&hirls received a great
impetus during bin time. In the Maghrib llioy wore represented by many
exponents who. with I'oferouen to lbn l.lit/.m, are called by the imnie Hiiz-
iniyiili -, however, they were merijed in the MiVikitv. wJiatil (mitijlimurrtim bi-nl-
Mulikh/uh). Hut in bin time, tbey lieenme independent once again n.nd wide-
spread. Vol., towards tho end of his days, the Khafi'itc school attained qndiships
in Home countries and the prince, too, was inolined towards them" 3 .

We can clearly .see from this account how the Ziihirite school lost, its
independent importance after the time of Ibn Hnzin and was merger]
in the prevailing school, and how close, at that time, the exponents
of the Ziihirite school still felt towards the Shafi'ite school. The most
detailed account of the nature of Abu Yusuf Ya'qfib's reforms is given
by the contemporary historian of the Alniohad dynasty:

"During his time the Heienee of/ltrO' collapsed : the jurists were afraid of the
rider; lie bad tho books of tho prevailing school of the Malikitos burnt after
be had extracted the Komnie and traditional passages contained in them and
quoted in them ... I myself was a. witness when whole loads of these books
were galberod in Fez and given over to the flames. Under threat of heavy
punishment, this ruler charged the people to refrain from preoccupation with
the science of m'y. On the other hand, he commissioned some of his court
scholars to edit o collection of laws on prayer and related matters, similar
to lbn Tumiirt's collection of traditions on ritual cleanliness, from tho ton
WOXks Of the tradition that are classed according to chapters; namely, from
tho >?«(!»?» of al-Hukhari, and of Muslim, from tho work of al-Tinnidhi, from
tlio Muionllu' of Malik, as well as from tho collections of traditions of Ahu
Dawud, al-Nasii'i. al-lia///.fir, Ibn Abi Sbayliab, al-Paraqutnl, and al-Bayhuqi.
So they obeyed and compiled the collection requested. The ruler, then, dictated
ibis work personally to his subjects and obliged them to study it. This compil-
ation spread throughout the Maghrib; high and lowly people memorized it.
Those who knew it by heart could expect a valuable reward in terms of clothing
and other valuables from the ruler. The ruler attempted lo expel Malik's school
altogether from tho Maghrib anil to lead people towards the zahir in Koran
and tradition. Already his father and his ancestors hail aimed at this, but
had not openly come out with it '. When Hfifi/. Abu Bakr b. al-Chadd had
bis first, audience with Va'qub's father, he found in front of him Yunus' work

1 The identical minis, Ahii ul-l''iila', IV, p. 1 7-1 .

- Cf. above, p. 1 12.

■' Ilm al-Athir, K&mil, XII, p. 111.

■' 'Abd al-Mu'iiiin patronized the Mfdikilc school; iil-Dainiri, I, p. 2111.

(JHAI'TKlt 10IG11T

1G1

170

on tho canonical law. Must look, Abu Baler !' so bo addressed tho scholar
'1 am looking hero at these divergent opinions which developed later in
Allah's religion. You find four, five, and more different interpretations for
one and the same question. Where, now, is the truth, and which of the divergent
opinions must the worshippers follow?'. Now, Abu Hakr began to solve the
ruler's problems. But he interrupted tho scholar with the following words:
'0 Abu Baler, there is only this hero — ho, then, pointed to a copy of the
Koran — or this there — pointing to Abu Dawud's work on tradition on his
right — or tho sword' 1 . However, in Vu'qfib's time all omergod that had
remained hidden during his father's and grandfather's lime"-.

Al-Dainiri, who also briefly mentions this very important event
for the history of the Zahiritc school a , adds that the branch inaugur-
ated by the Alniohad ruler found eager followers in the two brothers
Ibn Dihyah, Abu al-Khattiib and Abu 'Ami - , and in Muhyi al-Diu
Ibn 'Arab!.

The elder Ibn Dihyah became known in the theological world of
Islam through his opposition towards a pet idea of tho orthodox
who, in spite of Muhammad's own protests ", would not see the
Prophet second to Jesus with regard to miracles. Theologians
were much inclined to support the belief of naive Islamic orthodoxy
that Muhammad raised his deceased parents from the dead so that
they, who had been pagans during their whole life, might acknowledge
their son's prophcthood, so as to enable thern to share in the Muslim
paradise which they would forfeit without this profession of faith.
Al-SuyutI composed no less than six works supporting this belief
and refuted opposing arguments which, based mainly on the literal
meaning (zu/iir) of the traditions 5 , are represented by our Ibn Dihyah °.
This Andalusian theologian is especially famous as a great compiler

1 A similar statement is transmitted by Ahu al-Tlasan al-Judhttml about Sulji&n

Ahu al-Widid in M. J. Miillcr, lieitrihje zur (lesehiehte tier weslliehen Amber, p. 128.

- 'Abd al-Wahid iil-Miirrilkushi, KitiVi al-mu'yliib, ed. Dozy, p. 201-203.

a lltujul al-huijum'm, I, p. 1C>7.

4 Cf. my Cultc dtt saint) ehez lea mimuhiidnH, p. :i ff.

In KiU'ib lU-iiylianl, XVI, p. 10(1, a saying of Muhammad is related according to
which the following persons are in hell: the virtuous l.Iiitim, as well us his father, and tho
father of Abraham.

" These data are now compiled in the Ilimltth commentary of the contemporary
Shaykh of the Azhur Mosque Ibisan al-'Idwl <idso known us Hasan, al-'Adawi al-
liamziiwi), nl-Niifuhu/ td-Xhuttliiliytih, I, p. 06 ff (This work consists of three volumes,
the first two were published as lithograph, tlio third volume printed. To this effect, the
information in WiMwiwclmfllieher .1 'ahrcnhcriclU tier DMO, 1S70, p. 100, n. 177 is to lie
corrected).

11

1G2

CHAPTER BIGHT

177

of traditions, but at the same time, he is also accused of having put
into circulation much that was not documented, perhaps in order
to avoid admittance of qiyas (see abovo p. 7). He seems to have
been very liberal in his criticism of the reliability of the traditions.
Jbn 'Aral.il objected, for example, to the soundness of a tradition
upon which Ibn Dihyah remarked: "How strange it is, that Ibn 'ArabI
rejects this sentence in his book KiUlb al-ghawumid ■wa-al-'aim.siiii
although it is better known than dawn?" > Ibn Dihyah travelled in
many countries to complement his knowledge of the science of tradi-
tion ; he was recognized as a, great authority in philology too -. After
much travelling he took residence in Egypt where he became the
tutor of the prince who became later known as al-Malik al-Karnil who
bestowed great honours on him. After being enthroned, this prince
founded for his tutor in tho uowly established school of traditions a
special chair for the science of tradition. With this school, the Ayyubid
prince, a patron of the sciences, attempted to rival Nur al-Din Mahmud
al-Zaugl's model of a professional school for tho science of hiidlih in
Damascus :I . The thankful scholar dedicated his work Tanblh al-
Ixml'ir Jl asma' umm al-kahair to his patron who never, not oven as a
mighty prince, ceased to bestow the. highest honours on his former
teacher •'. Tho work is a synonymy of tho appellations of wine in which
the author lists no less than 190 names of the odious drink, outdoing all
predecessors. The following dedication to his patron shows how
thankfully he acknowledged the benefits of his princely pupil:

U^ -UJI [uo] ilf- fUVl oLc. ftA^Vl oU^~ ^_>-> ^b A^ij
jlkLJI J-.UJI 1UII l£i\ juJI &JI ^ hajl] ^U :u</l

0^411 j^\ _^ ojiouij d^ui > o:.jJ|j ljjji >u J-U3I s:\i\

<Ota JJib^JI -Kc-L^, i Si>L«JI Js-\j$ Ac «UJ| *bl and so on, in

the most lavish expressions of glory and flattery that we find so
frequently in scholarly dedications of Muslim writers to their patrons
and princes. His indebtedness becomes particularly evident from
the panegyric poem that follows these boastful words ° and which

1 iiI-Diunlii, I, p. 248.

a Hl8 biography in Ibn Klmllikuii, IV, p. Ill, BO. 608, ril. WflBtOttfcldj 'i'alMiftl

ul-httffa;, .will, no. 16. Both write™ do not mention what al.Moqqarl, I, p. r>2. r > ompha-

Hi/.CM, viz. Unit Ibn Dihyiih in al-?,i~iliiri al-muilhliali iil-Andaltm.

:| al-MaqrM, Khifat, .11, p. 375.

1 al-Maqqarl, II, p. 1)4.

MiS »f University Library Leiden, Cod. Warner, no. 681, fol. 8b.

OlIAI'TKIt KIliUT

Ifilj

abounds in gratitude. As a fanatical orthodox Muslim — the theolog-
ical method of tins Zahirls offers more reason for this assumption than
any other branch of orthodox Islam — he did not miss a chance,
not even in this lexical work, to prove himself to be an orthodox
Muslim. We are strangely affected by his polemical attack's against
etymologies of names for wine which depart from a favourable, sym-
pathetic view of this "mother of all mortal sins" l . He often goes so far
as to flatly deny justification of traditional names for wine when these
names state a good trait of this abominable drink. To save space
I simply refer to the articles in which he displays this tendency;

namely, ,_iL<JI oj-j^JI ^i'Jjlkll 1CJj_^JI .XflOjJI ^3"JJI .Wpl
.i^UI fU JU\ f l$A\ ,lL»>ai ^M jt Ul£)l JyUJI. As a taste of
the spirit emanating from this book, and in order to acquaint tho
reader with the general aim of the author, let me relate what he says
about the appellation al-laluf. Ibn Dihyah asserts that this name,
meaning homage, has been attributed to this abominable object (wine)
by malignant people who ignore God's commands. Because of pure
178 fanaticism he oven goes so far as to derive al-khusrawain, one of tho
secondary names for wine, from the verb khanara for no othor purpose
than to deprive the odious drink of an honorific name a . Closely
connected with his dogmatic confession is a certain slanderous remark
about the Mu'tazilito al-Nazzam in an anecdote about the encounter
of the dogmatist with a porter. Because of lack of spaco, we can only
refer to it :| .

This Ibn Dihyah eventually succumbed to his enemies' jealousy
who envied his fame and his prominent position in Egypt, and who did
their very best to unmask him as a forger. The efforts of the enemies
had at first no influence on tho friendly disposition of the prince.
One scholar, Abu Ishiiq Ibrahim al-Ranhuii, who travelled to Andalusia
for the purpose of gathering data to prove that Ibn Dihyah had never

l Ibn Dihyah aUo wrote h book Wahaj iil-janir ji inhrlm al-klmiiir which ho quotes
a low tunes in the synonymy.

- Tdiilnli al-lm.}u'ir, I.e., h.v. i^ihi and "Jl_jj~~»..
• Ibid,, h.v.: (JjjJI r-Jj

ill-, ,V nr-^ V I i9b>t~.l

— clSOi ^i plj L_>A9 liGJb U^

J* I J

U-il

V J 1 * a- J* ] Cr'J J 1

.i*— ^ ^ ,J_3~. tSj-^r" ti.p'-N JSJ1\ fULlb lJjjA\ Of. tho vorao oitod
on tho hiiHiHijf MiM,niiclitHrou!iori,iii Iloul.mna,^r.,p.82,oii tlioaiillmiil.yofllmQiiUybali.

164

chapter rciairr

heard the lectures of the shai/klis whose pupil he pretended to be,
succeeded in demonstrating the mendacity of the princely favourite on
the basis of a document drawn up by all those shaykhx. This informer
was, nevertheless, imprisoned by order of the prince, and led through
the streets on a donkey, while town-erycrs publicized the reason for
this punishment '. He was then expelled from the country. Al-Malilc
170 al-Kamil ignored also the accusation by al-Sanhfirl that Ibn Dihyah
falsely traced back his genealogy to al-Husayn and to the Kalbito
Dihyah who died without offspring '-. One poet, Abu al-Mahilsin b.
'Unayn, remarks on this occasion with devastating satire against the
fraudulent pedigree of the problematic court scholar that, as regards
his Kalbite genealogy, it may safely be assumed that he is not a
descendant of Kalb, but most probably of htlb (dog). — On tin's
occasion it may bo recalled that in a similar manner the appellation
Ibn al-Kalbl is used of the non-Arab postmaster (or polico chief) of
the caliph al-Mutawukkil " because his father carried the nickname
"watch dog of the caravan station" ". — Later, however, the sultan
had a chance to satisfy himself of the fraudulence of his learned
favourite. He deposed him and appointed as successor to the chair
in the school of traditions his brother Abu 'Ami 'Uthnian (d. 634) ''. This
scholar, too, is mentioned among the followers of the Zahirite school,
but I could not ascertain any particulars on his scholarly activities.
Again, we must come back to what we have already pointed out on
page 123 above that the dogmatic position was of no consequence for

1 jl=- ii* j***' " f - A, ' r ' *U&W<toi Hi P-183 alt.} of. ibid., p.190, Iff; al.
Muborrad, K8rm.il, p. 881] Dozy, 3vq>$llinml, I. p. 186a, 798a j tl, 69a; Ibn llni.rit.iili,
I, p. 220. From the nontax literature, 'Antar, IX, p. 144 (Cairo); cf. ibid., XVIII, p> 61,
unci others. Cf. also Quatromero, Himoitea giographiguea el hUtorirpuB dr. VEgyplt, II,
p. 200.

2 On the title page of Cod. Wamor, no. 681, ho is called 1UJI *Ujl -C~JI
j^^ij'l .jjiJI ^^jL. £M»Ut.| 1U 0;.i'J_-i| jlkL, ilU-l l!5CL J^-jVI
(^wJ-lj ^^-i Oy L> <y, tftUaJI tyC-^j\ _ji e'L^wl, The title

(JjuDI Jla.j indicates that Ibn Dihyah did not. take n definite stand with regard

to a specific orthodox legal school.

2 Thin particular passage iH an interesting support for Kromor, CulturgucMoMt, I,
p. 198, bottom.

* Kitab al-agliaiii, IX, p. 28: jrjf |Jl <-V-" Cr* '-^ (*f^' l>. 1 (J^. j-J

JJOl ^J ,1-JJi (L*."^)! i -t) <— — "J "ojI. <The play Oil worrlH Kail) - kalb (dog)

in nob infrequent. Of. Ooltl/.ihcr, Muslim studies, I, London, 1007, p. I02>.

11 al-Maqqarl, I, p. G2:5, r,25 ff. ; II, p. 04.

CHAPTER EIGHT

165

membership in the Zahirite school. This fact inevitably suggests
itself when we consider that exponents of Siifism were so easily ac-
commodated within tho frame of the Zahirite school. Ono of the oldest
of Dawud's followers was the Sufi Ruwaym b. Ahmad ' who died
in 303. I suspect that this is no accidental phenomenon, rather, it
finds its explanation in the particular view of the Sfifis with regard
to the Islamic religious laws. The mystic-theosophical school of Islamic
theology rejected the juridical casuistry of the canonists which they
considered the science of hypocrisy. The peculiar attitude towards the
merit and the importance of the law was incompatible with an inter-
pretation of the law manifested by a meticulous membership to one of
tho four orthodox firjh schools in particular, as opposed to the fellovv-
180 madhdhib. Since the ritual manifestations arc for them nothing but
insignificant means for achieving profound religious goals, oven the
different ways of achieving these forms within Islam, as specified
by the madhdhib, must be completely inconsequential for them.
This, then, is the reason for their rejection of taqlld ; it is a negative
principle, with regard to which — although in varying significance —
the Zahirls agree with the mystics. It is known what the mystic
school thinks of the differences of the four orthodox schools, and how
completely worthless the dry, purely formal view of the science of
fiqh ,J seems to them. The mystic school considers tho orthodox
madhdhib's different interpretation of tho formal religion as the
theological aspect which is the most contradictory to their own.
In the third century wo hear tho following address to the "scholars of
the world" from Yahya b. Mu'adh al-RazI (d. 258): "Your castles are
qaysari, your houses Khusraw-like, your clothing l,dlvli, your foot-
wear Goliath-like, your containers pharaonic, your riding animals
QarunT, your tables jdhill, your theological madhdhib Satanic:
Where, then, is tho Muhammadan portion ?" :I So the madhdhib al-fiqh
are called downright Satanic ! This condemnation of the madhdhib

1 Abu al-.Wahfi.Hin, IT, p. 108.

2 In more reeent times, we find tho following statement in a Muliltito theologian

of particular l^ufi colourings: ij oj^aj" r^j ^jjILaj JJii i_jj-.. a .-j J-J <*jiiu (j*

(jpyi Xci i <J-i-"j Jiiii' .\~>j ti-^y J2I "^i^. 'AM dl-BSql oI-ZurqBnl, II.
p. ior> (text). The statement is made by someone who is a lawyer himself.

:l al-Damiri. I, p. 461; -^So^-jj 'Xlj^aJ) Jj)^,a3 rtl*JI i—ibn*?! Li

ffr 5C5'l_ r .j Alijx^j rtiColjlj £ojla- .^LL^Ij XlijJllo -^GIjjIj 'ajjj^S

Kid

(WAITER EIGHT

differences is tlic general attitude of the mystic school which is clearly
revealed in all their writings. May it suffice to refer to ul-Qushayri,
one of the most outstanding authorities of this school '. Al-Sha'rfuii
183 built his complete theological system on this basic idea of the nuulhtl-
hib - and expressed this view in many passages of his extremely
interesting autobiography. By the way, the latter thcosopher belongs
to that group of Sufi theologians who consider complete investigation
of canonical jurisprudence as an indispensable prerequisite for Siifism
so that, on occasions of polemics, they might successfully resort to
tho weapons of the enemy's arsenal. He notes, however, that already
in his time Sufis trained in such a way were as rare as "red sulphur" n .
Al-Slia'ranI requires thorough knowledge of jurisprudence merely
for purposes of successful party politics and not for reasons of tho
pious nature of the science. Furthermore, we can sco from this how
little esteemed is the value of the science as taught in tho legal schools

' JlimVuh (MS <>r University Library Budapest, no. II), fol. 277a: -b_J,b ?»«2jJ

.... ■ , • r , . • • ....

li-tij^aJI tiujb (Sj** iyJl^=\ i__~aIXj /j-j i_^-U ij I jJj-^J

j&)\j J2.JI v bj! Clj yNlj J5JI V U^I LI j-bJIj l _^bl, "JS"
rt-^ii i_~£ (_j-LUJ (^JJls SLfci-l «jjb ^ lj£T}l iijlkJI oJ* /-_j~-J
(JIjo'j ajLse-^, ,jp-l ^j ^gJi ^j^aJLi i_ijUil (j-i (jbJcAJ t5-ulj j_j4^
JjUUI JU £" £, J^J^NI Jjbl o-LJIj JL^JI JaI ptJ j.^^
jL, (j-bJI ^s -u^Jij ijyi-o dJC^»._jj ,JJ
.jl^ill tji^ ^ ^j >^kll Jjw ,J ^.UU

3 Cf. above, p. 1(7.

3 Liild'if iil-miiMii, MS of tho Hungarian National Museum, no. XV, fol. 18b:

l^'^'Tj ixj^LJl ^s 6^Bji* jjo ^"l Cy.-kJ^ $i&J3 j-^Ji -^.N jjrf

clkfr |>_ Cr_jJI r\j y^Jli\j |<*"J«JI Osllfl (i^-^J i_j"J^-" p*L*JI

^SbJ _Uj "i"! (Jj_^JI jJ 1-As.l ojLljj V *$*£ (JLo' jjjl ^j rfSil

l^uiljJI 7=^nJ-b i'_y& Liill ^b-i .j t LUI Jail ii-^7 <Ugj*tJl >j.U yl
jLp Jj ^Vl I Jjbj I Jul -UU J^jJI Oj|.ii.b. V ii50Ji _pc-~> 1 liU

CHAPTER ETOHT

167

in the eyes of the truo Sufi, who, ns we see in al-Qushayri, diaiiKitrically
juxtaposes the "science of drawing near to God" with the science of
the "dialctic reasoning" of the canonical theologians, the tradilionists,
and also the speculative school.
182 A similar view as regards/wy/;, we also find exprcssod in the Muslim
theologian who produced the best combination of formal jurisprudence
and spiritual insight in Islam: in al-Ohazall. Just as Yahya al-KazI
called the scholars of fiqh and tlu-ir mudlidhih in tho third century
"secular scholars" (\ilamd' al-dunija), al-Ghazfill, too, considers their
science as tho secular sciences ('ulum al-dtmyd). It is profitable fco read
the words with which al-Ghazall expresses his opinion on the evalua-
tion of the science otftgh in the most daring passage of his remarkable
book l . He crowns his detailed exposition with the. following epilogue:
"What makes you think that tho science of the laws on divorce,
marriage procedure, transactions with anticipated purchase price,
rental agreements, payment of cash, etc., is a science that prepares
for the hereafter? He who studies these things to get closer to Allah
is downright mad". Ho considers the theological components in fu/h
— like the possible mathematical, medical, gra.mmal.ical, etc, compo-
nents of those studies — as something accidental that cannot possibly
define this concept. This qualification ot fiqh - is in sharp contrast,
possibly intended so, to tho viow that is represented as defining fiqh
predominately as 'ihn al-aklnrah ". Al-GhazalT commented also on the
method of legal deduction:

"Jurisprudence has four roots: the Divino Book, the sumnah of the Prophet,
ls.'t the consensus of the community, and the words and actions transmitted about

the companions (ruhiir nl-aiihabith). The consensus constitutes buod coot,
provided it leads to the trunnah; it in consequently a root of tho third degree.
In the same uonse, the traditions of tho companions nlno must bo viewed as
a root of jurisprudence, for the companions witnessed the revelation, and

understood much of tho circumstances accompanying tho revealed things
that others could not perceive with their own eyes. The linguistic expression
Often does not include everything that can lie understood through knowledge
of tho circumstances that accompany Bin event. It is for this rennon that scholars
wero ordered to follow the companions and to bo guided by what has boon
transmitted by thorn".
___^_

I IIii/iV, I, p. 17-18. To this must bo compared an opinion on tho prooocupation with
fir/h in the same author's admonition Son.

- Ibid., Ill, p. IS, where in a different context he uonios back to tho cla.inificat.ion
of the HoicnccH and does not explicitly mention flijli.

II Cf. Sachaii, Znr ilUi'xtni Or.^rli irtilr. t/rs iiiiihaimiu'.ihiiuni'hcn Urchin, p. 10.

168

CHAPTER EIGHT

184

The "branches" of jurisprudence are the things that can be derived
from those roots, not according to their literal expression, hut through
the fact that reason considers the deeper meaning, and, as a con-
sequence of this, enlarges upon the understanding in such a way that
from the recorded word a thing might bo deduced that has not been
explicitly stated. It follows from the word of the tradition — for
example: "the judge must not pass sentence when he is in a state of
anger" — that ho must not pass sentence even when afflicted by
indigestion, or when subject to hunger or pain" '. The latter is what is
properly called qiyas. It is very strange that al-Ghazali, who treats
the sources of Islamic legal deduction only in this one passage of his
Ihya', avoids naming analogy on the one hand, and, on the othor hand,
treats the "atl/ar of the companions" as a separate category in the list,
of the primary sources (roots) which are otherwise usually included
among sunnah or ijmil'. This has the superficial appearance that he
did it to enable him to preserve the quaternary number of the usill
al-Jiqk or tho arkan (rtl-ijli/iad) among which qiyas is ordinarily re-
cognized to belong. It cannot be overlooked that al-Ghazali departs
in this passage from the ordinary way of the analogical theologians.
Even if he concedes justification of analogy to the Zahirls he docs
not concede to them equal right and status with the traditional sources.
Either he himself never really realized this contradiction or he did not
have the courage to profess it consistently. It is probably one of those
concessions (see the introduction to the Ifiya') to the system of tho
fttqaha" purporting to be conducive to the success of his work, that
he recognizes analogy as an equal element of practical theology in a
different passage. This he docs in the special pamphlet on the per-
missibility of instrumental music (mas'idal, al-sama) contained in his
Ihya where he explains in tho introduction:

"Knowledge about the things falling within the framework of jurisprudence
(nl-xliar'iytii) i.n provided by the explicit word of the text and by analogies
deduced from the words of the text. I understand by the former that which
the Prophet demonstrated in words or actions; I understand by gh/iis the

doopor moaning to bo deduced from his words and actions" -.

In any case, al-Ghazali underwent a change with respect to qiyas
during his eventful theological career. It is reported, for example,

CHAPTER BIGHT

109

that in agreement with the Khurfisanian .Shafi'ites l , he did not,
initially, want to recognize a certain form of analogy, called qiyas
al-l.ard- (usually the material discussed on p. 40 ff. is cited as an
example of this) but that in a later work he demonstrated the necessity
of recognizing this kind of qiyas a . — From tho above-mentioned
185 passages from the Ihya' we can at least follow one fact; namely,
in the period of his theological activity during which he was trying to
reconcile his own thcosophical inclinations with the science of tho
Jii.qa.ha, al-Ghnzall found it quite difficult to equate the qiyas of the
fuqalid' with the traditional sources of tho law.

The preceding exposition must have made it clear that the basic
tenets of the Ziihirite school offered more than ordinary attraction for
the followers of theosophy. Among the Muslim theologians who joined
the fiqh of the Ziihirite school, which during the rule of the Almohadcs
had achieved official recognition, the famous mystic Mul.iyl al-Din
Ibn 'ArabI (d. 638) is also mentioned. Ibn 'ArabI was "a Zahirl with
respect to the ritual part of religion, but a Biitinl with respect to the
articles of faith" «. The following observation is interesting for the

i /A.v«'. I. p. 15.
= ibid., ir. p. 848,

* Tho Shftfiito school is split into two divisions, the Khutasanians who recognize

AbO 1,1 amid al-lHfarayin! OS their iiiidm, and Hi" Inii|i.s who roongiiizo (Jaffa lal-Marwazi.
Scholars arc mentioned who arc recognized authorities Tor both brunches of tho Shiifi'ilo
nohonl, for example, al-NawawI (see preface to Tahdhib), ,'amiil al-Dln nl-Kulqini,
and others; of. Ibn al-Mulaqqin, Tel. 108b.

a It would bo too much for tho Hcope of thin work to explain also Hi" different forms
and types of i/ii/'m. The reader will find tho immt important data, and the definition of
giy&t til-tnnl in contradiHtinotion to i/ij/iii al-'illnh, qiijiw al-dalalali, and qiy&t til-nhnlihah
in the liiclionary of technical term*, p. 110(1.

* WaraqSk, fol. 48a: dj~)L> _^i- aJI i£j aj^s ±Jzi\ ^\J yJj ^j

J> J>"j^J all JUj ijzl\ (j-Ls ^Lt J*^UI JjbS' ^J (cod. _^CUI)
cli-i ell** cS JJI «bL£ ^J JjjUI \1a ^ «*.jj JJj _^Jo c.j2Js\

pfrtj ILU^JI Jj J> Jjj JlU i V *j!kl\ Q*\ji Jjlll JllJ rj*l*)l

*\ x L iy "Ji' jlfj l&i bjjl -Jl* J ZjUyaJI U^.\ Wj4* V 1 *
JJOIj ^Ukll J^ L"j> cJU-jl *tfl p ^3 &JI J £A-

•' al-Maqqari, I. p. 507; ibid,, p, 589: obLJI ^J i_~*JAI ~(£j&Ui jlij

I NO

170

GHAPTBR KJCIHT

Zahirito view of this mystic. In his work Futuhul, lie .speaks, among
othei things, about the arrival of the mahd'i,, about; his signs and about',
events that, accompany this. It is known that the mahM is represented
as bringing justice to a world filled with injustice, and sitting in
judgement over all of mankind. The Zahirite mystic, now, imagines
this in the following manner. "Ho shall judge on the basis of* religion
unobscured by ra'y, and shall lie in disagreement with the teachings of
the scholars in most of his judgements" '. In another passage of this
work he says again about the ma/uti: "The words of the tradition: 'the
mahd'i- follows my path in order not to err', prove that he is following
Islamic tradition and that, he does not practise untraditional things ...
and that the application of analogy is forbidden for him when explicit
divine statements exist which he receives through the angel of inspi-
ration — just as in the view of some scholars, application of analogy-
is generally prohibited for all believers" -. Thus, also the mahd'i himself
is a Zahirl. Moreover, according to al-Maqqari's report, I ha 'ArabI
studied Ibn Hazm's works which ho enumerates in his ijdzn/i. It was
he, too, who edited extracts from Ibn Hazm's thirty volumes Kitiib
al-mahalUl under the title Kilab itl-mv'alla*. The codox which the
Horzoglicho Gothaor Bibliothok possesses of Ibn Hazm's treatise
on the. invalidity of ifiyiix and ra'y etc., is attributed to Ibn 'Arabl's
transmission. Thus we arc indebted to him for the preservation of
this comprehonsivo basic work on the principles of the Zahirito school.
In the introduction to this little work he relates the following dream:
"I saw myself in the village of Sharaf noar Seville ; there I saw a plain
on which rose an elevation. On this elevation the Prophet stood,
and a man, whom I did not know, approached him; they embraced
each other so violently that they seemed to interpenetrate and become
one person. Great brightness concealed them from the eyes of the
people. 'I would like to know', I thought, 'who is this strange man'.
Then I heard some one say: 'This is the traditionalist 'All ibn Hazm'.
— 'So great', I thought after I woke up, 'is the value of traditions'.
I had never heard Ibn Hazm's name before. One of my shaykhs, whom
I questioned, informed me that this man is an authority in the Field

1 Cited in al-'Tilwi, Commentary to Bu/rdoh, T, p. 181: a* ,jiaJy-l ij'JJu f»>-^

. c|LJ1 (_-.&lJU •ul'Xa.l |_Jli ^J uiJlsij (S\ji\
a Ibid., p. 18C.
a In nl-Sliii'ifuii, T, p. 84, both works are enumerated among those studied by oJ-

Sim 'rfuii,

187

C1IAPTKR RIGHT

171

of the science of tradition". Thus the ardent champion of the Zahirito
school, branded and frowned upon by his contemporaries, was clothed,
with the halo of legend by the greatest mystic of a later era who him-
self was a Zahirl '. All these incidents sufficiently illuminate the fact
that the groat theosopher followed the ZdhirTs in matters of juris-
prudence. In this connection it is not surprising to learn that Ibn
'ArabI transmits with direct imdd statements which support this
doctrine and in which ra'y, even from Abu Nanlfah. is condemned -.
In the same year as Ibn 'ArabI died, another also quite remarkable
exponent of the Zahirite school died in Andalusia. This was Abfi
al-'Abbas Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Umawi Ibn al-Rfinilyah from
Seville. He is called al-Nalmti :l at one time, and al-'Ash,shab 4 at
others; both names because of his excellent knowledge of botany
of which al-Maqqari gives some examples. This botanist was equally
well versed in the traditions; in theology ho followed Ibn Hazm whose
fanatical adherent he was. Because of this he carries also the name of
al-'I.Iazmi.

(4)

Tho period between the sixth and the seventh century seems also
to have been tho prime of the Zahirite school in Andalusia. We lack
any kind of information on their position in other countries at this
period °. In Andalusia, too, the power and influence of the Zahirite
system disappears with the Almohadcs. Later, we hear only of individual
scholars who followed the Zahirite school. So wo find, for example,
the renowned scholar Abu Bakr ibn Sayyid al-Nas from Sovillc, preacher
in Tunis, who is described as Ziihiri, and who died in <731> ". Wo havo
from him a biography of the Prophet in which Ibn Hazm is frequently
cited. This work is likely to contain material on tho Zahiriyah by
which our exposition could be supplemented. Then thcro is also

I Arabia M.S of the Horzogliohon Bibliothok Gotha, no. ill", fol. la.

'- Dictionary of technical term*, T. p. 800, flth from tho bottom, b.v. jL~>£»J

falmqr.l ai-huffij, XVUI. no. 18.

■' al-Maqqari, I. p. 871.

II Tlio Andalimian Aba 'Amir Miilmmnmrt b. Sa'dfm al-'Alidarl (d. 154) wan
Jj Jcllill clgjijj JillA-l ijLtl /h. Ho did not live in Ilia homeland but in
Baghdad {'/''il«"l"l al-hnffilj, XV, no. 40). By tho Name token, tho traditionint Abu
'Abel Allah al-BayyasI, who was from Granada anil whose Zahirite leanings are empnaas-
od, was living in Cairo where be died iii 708. al-Maqqari, I. p. BOO.

11 fuhwfit ,il-lu(ffilj. XIX, no. 4.

172

CHAPTER BIGHT

188

mention of Athir al-Diu Abu Hayyan (d. 7415), who, for his part,
mentions other Zithirite contemporaries whom lie encountered: Abfi
al-'Abbiis Ahmad al-Ansfiri, the ascetic from Seville, and Abu al-Fadl
Muhammad al-Fihri from Santa Maria '. As for Abu Hayyan's faith-
fulness to the traditions and his profession for the Zahirlyah which,
by the way, he later changed in favour of the Shafi'ito school, it is
illuminated in ail interesting way in his biography which al-Maqqaii
transmits, and which contains details which arc related to this. For
example, Abu Hayyan says in a short poem: a

"If it wore not for tho lovo of three things, T would not. want to bo counted
among (ho living"

and among these things:

"My adherence to hmluh while people forgot the nmncA of the ohosen one

and follow ra'y.

"Will you. then, leave the explicit text (now) that originates from the Prophet,

and will you follow tho guidance of ordinary people? Vorily, (whon you do

thin) you exchange misguidance for true guidance",

Who does not recognize in this the eternal eclcrum censv.o of
the Zahirls? Abu Hayyan expresses his preference for traditions also
in a eulogistic poem for al-Bukharl:

"Is religion really anything but what the groat men havo transmitted to us
who handed down the traditional Statements of him (tho Prophet) who wan
full or graco 1" Etc. ».

In his will he warns of speculating about the nature of God, about
His attributes, and about other matters that constitute the field of
investigation for Ash'aritcs and Mu'tazilitcs ■'.

Ibn Hnjar al-'Asqalani, who devotes a separate article to this out-
standing representative of the Islamic sciences of that period in his
biographical work on famous Muslims of the seventh century, says
about him: Even in grammar he was a Zahin r \ This remark could
easily be interpreted to mean that Abu Hayyan remained aloof from the

1 nl-Maqqari, ibid., p. S.'!7.

» Ibid., p. 840, 13-17.

a Ibid,, p, 853, v. 4.

1 Ibid., p. 848.

'• MS of the KaiHorliolion Hofbibliothck Vienna, Mixt., no. 245, vol.1, bl. 101b:

jj>cJI ^J ^jl*. Liy>lli u£». jjI (3lw

OHAI'TER EIGHT

173

18!)

linguistic 'philosophical treatment of grammar ' which was already
in vogue in his time, and which was practised among others by his
contemporary Husayn b. Muhammad al-Qurtubl a . However, the
following version of the opinion citod seems to me to bo more likely:
Just as the Zahiris were basing lAwirfiqh on the transmitted collections
of traditions, Abu Hayyan was striving for the restoration of the
exclusive authority of the transmitted basic works on grammar,
particularly the book of Sibawayh and Ibn Millik. We arc actually
informed that Abu Ilayyim propagated the works of the latter, and
that he commented upon the obscure passages in them. On the other
hand, however, he repudiated Ibn Hajib's grammatical work: "This
is tlie grammar of tho jurists (nahw al-fuqahd')" . He never presented
anything to his students but Sibawayh's basic work or Ibn Malik's
Tasini '■'. Abu Hayyan's respect for the former becomes apparent from
the following episode from his biography: Abu Hayyan had much
respect for Taqi nl-Dln Ibn Taymlyah, the most remarkable character
of seventh century Islam •'. Tho entire theological movement in Syria
and Egypt revolves around the person and teachings of this Hanbalito
whose name was, so to speak, the battle-cry of tho theological parties.
Adhering to no dogma tn particular, ho was, so to say, Muslim of his
own. His contemporary, the traveller Ibn BatQtah, who provides us
with a short biography of this scholar, characterizes him tersely with
the words: "He was an important man and could speak about the
most varied fields, but he had a bee in his bonnet" 5 . His teaching,
although odd at times, commands respect because of its ethical
view on marriage He had the courage to condemn, in a separate
writing, the revolting institution of tahl'd after the third divorce a .
From among the teachings proclaimed, which were strange from tho
point of view of the Islamic orthodoxy, I point out the following:

1 See my evidence in ZDMG, vol. 31 (1877), p. 515-510.

2 Ibn Hajar ul-'Anqalitnl, I, fol. 3411): AjLoJI Jj_Li I Jut. *LcJI [ j~. >■ (jbj

i_jujLoJI jJ ILiiUL iSj*-* (jjlidl Js-\jS ( Jx- _p=JI Js-\y iM'j~i

.l_lljj-lj "}J\j o-isUjilj

:l al-Maqqaii, I, p. 828.

'' Cf. iStoiiiHelmoidor, J'ulrminclii: mid apologelinchc Lileralur, p. 33-34.

11 lliu lial.iit.ali, Voyages, I, p, 210,

" MiS of tho University Library Leiden, Warner, no. 511. Catalogue, vol. IV, p. 134.
Cr. the tradition in ol-Duiuiri, I, p. 207: ~J" jLil jA j LcJI ,^-Jb S _/S.\ ?\

174

CIIAiTKR BIGHT

he disapproved of appealing for help from the Prophet ', and pro-
hibited visiting the Prophet's grave -. He is represented as having
made harsh, irrespoctful remarks about the first caliphs, and in his
lectures he generally assaulted important and unimportant, old and
modern scholars 8 , He accused 'Uinar of errors, and remarked of 'All
that he made wrong decisions in seventeen questions. Ho was just as
unrestrained and merciless with the rest of the caliphs. Me abused al-
Ghazall and the other Ash'arites (this liberty almost cost him his life)
and he reviled Jbn 'ArabI and mystics alike •'. In his dogmatics ho
taught tajs'tm, the literal interpretation of the anthropomorphic
passages of Koran and tradition. He did not cense to profoss these
views even after, having been put before an inquisition, he hud signed
a documentary refutation of his teachings °. In one of his sermons,
190 he quoted a passage from the tradition in which the words occur
that "God descended from his throne". While he wus reading these
words he descended a few steps from the pulpit and said: just as / am
descending here (ka-mtzull. luldliFi) ". In fiqli he followed none of the
orthodox schools in whose doctrines ho was better versed than the
most learned representative of each individual madhhab. He claimed
for himself complete liberty to apply ijtihCd and ho doduced his judge-
ments mostly from the traditions and the athar ', but he wus no

I Ibn Ilajar iil-'Atiqivliini, fol. 70a: ^xL? .^b 6iwi ^ <Jl» Ail.

- ul-Q.imUlliliii, II. p. 800i jj-* jAj **Lp i<r~" J$ °J^J Cx* C~*

. Axe- Ajjldl JJLJI jJiol

II If I may ohango tho words *4jA»j rn&.j* of tll ° P oor ooAox at ™y disposal

to *Q i i< i t »j *4&&

4 Ibn Mitjai' al-"Aii<|alani, fol. Slla f.

5 Ibid,, fol. 84a: 4l> XtlJia. Cilv -K^-jilj (jLJIj »Xi)\j -Ul jl

dill oli .J _^^JI J^£- UyJu **»j ft3^"« — Tho refutation, foi. 70a.
u Ilin Unl.fil.iih, I, p. 217.
' ThiH foot in repeatedly stated in tlm apology for Ibn Taymlyah: _^'_jJ' ?>y*

J& _^i *%*^\ ^ <L»J o-.l JL» Cr 1 «J' r^J 6- ii*« MS of
the KCnJgllohon Blbliothok Berlin, Wotwtoln, I, no. 107, containing remarks about
Ibn Taymlyah by famous contemporaries! f">" example, al-Dhahabl, fol. 17b: .jju j
1^a^\ aLJI j^aj Xiij o-u* jJj; JJjJI *li Lc Jj o^. c-«*jj:

OlIAI'TKK lOlCIIT

175

Zuhiri, for it is expressly stated that he recognized (fiijas '. He was
an irreconciliablo enemy of Aristotelian philosophy. In a pamphlet
directed against the latter (Ntmlud aid al-vma>i ft ul-radd 'alu mmdiq
al-Yuvun) from which al-Suyuti prepared an extract, he says (among
other tilings): "These philosophers, us far as their teachings and living
is concerned, are among the lowest people. The disbelieving Jews and
Christians are to be preferred to them; the entire philosophy of these
philosophers is not even on the level with Jews and Christians after
101 accomplished falsification of their religious writings, much less does
it attain tho lovel before this forgery" s . Because of this and other
teachings, Ibn Tayiniyah was frequently imprisoned and had to suffer
much persecution from the officially recognized theologians. Yet,
he had a considerable number of admirers among the Hanbalitcs and
other Muslims both during his life and after his death. On account of
his opposition to ul-AsIutri's philosophy of religion, and his independ-
ence of the orthodox legal schools, the one party condemned him as a
heretic who left the consensus (kliurvj 'an ipmV al-ummah), while others
considered him worthy of the highest honours and called him the
greatest Muslim of his time '■'. Among his admirers wo find our Abu
Huyyiln who met Ibn Taymlyah in Egypt. How highly ho thought
of the much persecuted man becomes evident from a laudatory poem
which the once improvised before a scholarly meeting assembled
around Ibn Taymlyah: ■>

L^JI jjl«j y j_y^J cjLjjj->j t^ofc I_^j IA 7=~=>-l_5 AtALJ I iibyaJlj
l^-le yt> < r«>a>J Ijjhtj Oj^-Nlj (jjJjVl Lgix- pv*=-l OljL* ijf"»b
ojJi^jj AAe -^Jr" J L>Li *l£Jlj j^a-i c|(l-G jj-J ij^>- " i ^r Sm f" is""* -

* Ibn IJajar oVAsqalanl, fol. 81b: (y»J$J 0*^b ^-^b &\j&k fr^r.

- MS of the University Library Leiden, Warner, no. 474. Fol. 86b of tho Buyflfl

nxuorpt. In thin passage alio the following poem by al-Qimhayri against philosophy in

oited (espeoially Ibn Slna's):

U&JI

6—

a—

ft*

Ukyoll 'iS >

AJJI

Jl

■*J

i— '•*—*-■ * (j— ' i>J-».jll

ic- rt^il »j$ Li c
-=-a--:^'.' IjJL,j_x_.

I llii

3 al-MaqrM, £7nM II, p. 309.
1 al-Maqqari, I, p. sr>7.

LJLk

"J Cr*'

U

I4J

j'loi

17(> OHAl'TKU EIGHT

"VV'lion wo came to Taqi ill- Din a inim approached uk who was culling ]»:o]ilo

to Alliih'n way, a solitary person without blemish;
11 is face revealed the eharaotor of a person who was the companion of the

best of creatures, o light eclipsing the moon;
A scholar on account of whom his contemporaries may clothe themselves

in happiness; an ocean whose waves spout out pearls;
In the protection of our religion llm Tiiymlyah takes the position of the lord

from the tribe of Taym when the Mudar fought against him;
lie brought truth to light when its trace began to he effaced ; ho extinguished

the fire of evil when its sparks began to fly;
Formerly we talked about a scholar who was to arise ; and see ! You aro the

iiiitim for whom thoy were all waiting".

Ibn Rajab aaya in his Kitub al-Utbtiqat that this was the most master-
ly poetical achievement of Abu Hayyan '. But soon this high admir-
102 ation was reversed. Abu Hayyiin, an opponent of tajsim, had to turn
away from Ibn Taymlyah who advocated views in his book on the
"throne of God" (Kitab al-'ursh) which in Abu Hayyan's oyes could
not pass as orthodox -. Abu Hayyan made this break before the year
737, for wc learn that when lie arrived in Mecca for the pilgrimage
in that year, and a certain Muhammad b. al-Muhibb wanted to hear
Abu Hayyan's poems from the poet personally, he kept postponing
the recitation of the laudatory poem on Ibn Taymlyah. Finally,
he produced it at the end of his other poetical works and mado excuses
for reciting this poem in such a sacred place :| . In al-'Askalani we even
find that Abu Hayyan rejected this laudatory poem with the words:
qad kmhattuha win dlwam wa-ld adhktiruhu bi-khayr "I have removed
tins poem from my duvuu and do not like to consider the dhvdn among
the good ones". There is yet another reason why Abu Hayyan with-
drew his admiration for the master whom he had formerly admired
so much ; and it is this reason which I like to quote as being character-
istic of his relationship to SIbawayh's Book. Abu Hayyan — so we are
told in Ibn Taymiyah's apology — was discussing a grammatical
question with Ibn Taymiyah. Shnykh Ibn Taymlyah disagreed witli
Abu Hayyan and demanded proof for his assertion. Abu Hayyan
CfUOted as authority Sibawayh. "There, Sibawayh is talking above
his head; is Sibawayh the prophet of grammar, sent by God so that
we ought to consider him infallible'!! With respect to the Koran,

l al-Ilwtd al-mlfir, fol. 33b: Jj*il Vj l^-i
- al-Maqqari, I, fol. 860, 11.

:l al-liiul<l ul-wiifir, fol. 33b.

Ulafl J2» J. O^ M Ol

CIIAI'TKtt EIGHT

177

Sibawayh was wrong in eighty instances which neither you nor he
understand" '. Ibn Taymlyah is represented as having used such or
similar expressions. "Ho was a fearless man, merciless when it con-
corned truth" -. It was this statement that caused the break between
103 Abu Hayyan and Ibn Taymlyah. Abu Hayyan looked upon it as
"a sin that can never be pardoned" iUakhadhtihu dhwnbun la yughjfar.
Al-'Asqalfim could not have characterized Abu Hayyan's attitude
towards the grammatical literature more acutely and precisely than
by stating that Abu Hayyan was a Zahirl in grammar also, i.e. that he
recognized the old authorities of grammar, particularly Sibawayh,
ftS inviolable bases, corresponding to the haiRlh collection in the science
of religion.

(6)

With Abu Hayyan we readied the eight century of the Islamic era.
At that time, a theological spirit that was decisively unfavorable
for the Zahiris had aspired to power in Andalusia. How the ruling class
regarded the literal observance of tradition, which was contrary to
general practice, is beat illustrated by the following information.
A Zahirl scholar, Ahmad b. Silbir .la'far al-Qaysi, in Zahirite fashion,
followed some of the traditions that he recognized as authentic.
Contrary to orthodox practice, which undoubtedly prohibited this
because of deeper theological reasons ;l , he used to raise his hands
during the obligatory prayer. The sultan who learned about this
threatened the Zahirl scholar with cutting off his hands if he were to
continue raising them during prayer. Then Ahmed said: 'An atmos-
phere that kills the sunnah of the Prophet to such an extent that
he who obsorvos it is threatened with cutting off of the hands, deserves
to be shunned". Ho consequently left Andalusia for Egypt shortly
after the year 700 «.

1 Li^yajt-j lj_jXj ( J^>. Jj Mi\ Aluyl jJcJI t5~i J-)j«~l •U_j-~. j-£-SJ

y> ^j cjI Ifla-a fti V l*^-i tiy$ (ji (jljill (^9 Ikil Aj>~"
In the corresponding passage in Tint llajar al-'Asqalani it says .J <_>uXJI ^9 Uia.
tJI Ovilc . The copyist seems to have interpreted nl-kiuVi as referring to the Koran,

but it probably refers l,o id-Kiit'ib by Sibawayh.

- iil-IUidit (d-UHifir, fol. 34a; of". al-Maqqari, p. 857, B.V., bottom, briefly; Ibn '.Injur
al-'Ast|iilani. fol, 82b.

a Cf. on this question my evidence in Grata' Monatsehrift, I SSI), p. 313.

•' al-Maqqari, I, p. !)()!). In connection with U^JJI ,*9j Of. also the teachings of

Ahmad b. Sasyts (d. 208), Tahdlub, P . 147. c

178

CHAl'TKll 10KSIIT

Shortly afterwards, still in the eight century ', the great historian
llin Khaldun can state that, with the disappearance of the Zahirite
imams, and as a consequence of the disapproval of the Islamic public
Opinion ((d-jwiihfir) which opposed this theological branch, the school
of the aid al-zahir has ceased to exist, and that it exists now in hooks
194 only, to be studied like monuments of ancient times. But if some one,
.stimulated by these dead studies, were to adopt the doctrines of the
Zahirite school, he would bo regarded as a heretic, as understood
by current theology, who opposed the prevailing agreement 2 .

I suspect that Ibn Khaldun meant by these harsh words a contem-
porary, religious movement which, instigated by a Zahirite agitator,
aimed at a revival of the defunct Zahirite school ;| . For information
about this strange movement we are indebted to Abu al-Mahasin
Taghrlbirdl. 1 shall let my informant speak for himsolf: *

"Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Iamft'Il b. 'Abd al-Rahim b. Yiisuf, fcho learned
/jd/iirl slmi/kh and imam, also sailed Shihfib ol-Dln Abfl llashhn, known by
the titlo ul-Bnrhn.il, was horn in Riilii' nl-Awwal of the year 701 between Cairo
and FiihIhI. (Miyr). Ho belonged to those who rebelled against nl-Malik nl-
'/iibir l!iu-(|fi<|. Mis father was a. juror. Ahmad grow up in Cairo and was a
companion of Sa'Id al-Mushulr who infused in him a sympathy lor the '/iihirito
Sohool of the systom of Ibn I.la'/.m and of others, lie distinguished himself
also in this school and disputed against people who challenged bis confession.
Later, he travelled, traversed the most distant countries, and summoned
people to recognize as u model in religious practice the Hook of God and the
tradition of tho Prophet exclusively. Many people from Syria to Khurasan
accepted bis call. He and many of his supporters were finally arrested in .Minis;
chained, they were all led to Egypt. Barqfiq summoned Ahmad and reproved
aim in a harsh manner; his companions, however, ho had chastised. After-
wards he was imprisoned for some time until he waH released in the year 71)1.
From this lime until his death on Thursday, the 26th of •himiidd I, he lived
in oblivion. Hhaykh TaqI al-Dln al-MaqrM praises him excessively, for he
was a Spllhir! himself. Nevertheless, in nl-ftlaqrlzl's biographical article some
details of bis oblivion appear; namely, that he was so poor that be lacked his
daily bread. Verily, <!od is not unjust toward mankind, but it is typical of

1 There is a remark from tho eighth century that a certain Ibn BlshBm Ahmad b.

IsnuVll al-Zdhiri issuod u Jiilwd against the sultan. Abu uI-Imm.II Siiluyniiiii ftl-MuqaddlsI
ul-Yiisiifi al-Dimashq!, who also belonged to the circle of Ibn Tayiniyali ((1.72:)), is
mentioned among his followers. nl-Riidil al-inlfir, fol. 62a.

~ Aliujtitlilimali, p. :!7.'t.

3 <|i'nui7. Rosenthal thinks that this seams rather improbable. Ibn IChuldiin, The
Muiiinlilimnli, 2d eil., Princeton. 111117, vol.3, p. 0, n. 174).

■' al-AIanhal id-m~ifl, M.S of tho Kiiiiicrlichon llol'liililiotlicl; Vieiiiia. Mixt., no. ! 829,
vol. 1, fol. 0Gb.

(111AITKII HHillT

17!)

these '^ilhirls to have a loose tongue about the learned imams, the leaders of
li). r > tlie orthodox schools. — This is tho way they are rewarded in this world;

in the hereafter, God deals with them".

The historian Jamal nl-Dlri Ibn Qfi.di Shuhbah refers to this Zahirite
movement in Syria, and, as a contemporary, mentions among the
events of tho year 788 a "revolt of the, ZahirTs" (fitnal al-zahinyah)
It was instigated by Khalid, a certain l.lanbalite from [Jims who was
living in Aleppo and who wont to Damascus whore ho joined his
companion, the leader of the ZahirTs, Ahmad al-Zahirl '. This move-
ment, whose originator was an Egyptian, and which spread to Syria,
seems to have had strong folio wings also in Egypt, Miisa, b. al-Amlr
Sharaf al-Din nl-ZnngT (d. 788), Ayitmish's steward of the palace is
mentioned as one of them. He belonged to the leaders of the. aid al-
zahir and was a fanatical opponent of the orthodox Sunnitos a . To the
same school belonged at the end of the eighth century the philologist
Muhammad b. 'AIT b. 'Abd al-Razzfiq, a student of the Malikite school.
It is related about him that he had Zfihirite Leanings but that he did
not profess them publicly ;i . Another Egyptian ZfihirT of the same
period is the grammarian Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Mansfir b. 'Abd
Allah called Shihab al-Din al-Ashinuni, the Hanafite. "Ho was",
so says Abu al-Mahasin, "an excellent jurist and outstanding in gram-
mar on which he composed several works ; but he was at homo in other
disciplines also. Al-MaqrTzT says: 'He was inclined towards tho aid al-
zahir, but later broke with them and frequently attacked them;
I myself was for many years his follower'. So much for al-MaqrizI;
yet I say: Ho found a peaceful end for he entrusted himself to the
guidance of a man who was better acquainted with the Book of God
and the sunnah of the Prophet than the rabble of the ZahirTs (<d-awl>ash
al-zdhirlyali) who attach great importance to the hadilh without
understanding its meaning" *, This scholar died 809.

To the samo period helongs M. Nasir al-Din al-.Jindl (d. 797), a

Zahirl of vacillating charactor. We describe him as such becauso of the

106 remark in our source that, in spite of his Zahirite disposition he was a

strong admirer of tho Hanafite shaykhs because of the power of their

1 .MS of the BibllOtheqUe Nationals do Paris, no. (187, fol. lfia.

" Ibid., foLSlbi £LJ1 Jot. I J^ t.-JU^j j&\ki\ JjS.1 ^jj fr Ail Jbu

" Ibid., fol. 1081): As r^. Vj AjyblkJI c^Jl. J I J~C ijlij

* al-AIanhal al-fiji. I.e., fol. 68a.

180

CHAPTER EIGHT

11)7

reasoning '. From what we have seen so far, it became clear that no
more, opposing pules can be imagined than the Ziihiriyah and the llana-
fito .school. This theologian IS considered among the Ziihirm probably
only because of some habits and peculiarities connected with his
zealous adherence to the traditions. He shaved his mustache • (probably
because of a literal interpretation of the law from which Muslims
derive the custom of brimming the end of the mustache qnss al-shnrib) '•',
and he raised his hands in prayer ■'.

(G)

In the aforegoing excerpts we find the famous historian al-Maqrlzi
labelled as follower of the Zahirite school. He seems to have been
the last representative of this system worth mentioning. Let us close
this historical panorama by substantiating the Zahirite resemblances
of his theological mode of thinking. "Taqi al-Dln al-Maqrlzi (d. 845)
was — so relates Abu al-Mahiisin TaghrlbirdI — an excellent, versatile,
thorough, and conscientious scholar, religious, beneficent, caring for
the people of the sunnah; lie was greatly inclined towards tradition
which he observed in his daily life so that he was associated with tho
Zahirite branch. Ho possessed some unjustified prejudices against
scholars of the Hanafitc branch which become evident from his
writings" ". I must state the strange phenomenon that al-MaqrM, in
the passage in which he deals with the ritual and dogmatic branches and
sects, does not mention a single word about the madJihab of Dawfid,
possibly inteid.iona.lly so, in order not to have to define openly his
point of viow towards this religious branch. That Abu al-Mahasin's
vordict on al-Maqrizi's position towards the different ramifications

i Ibid., II, fol. 334b: l^jcJI J& (S£ cSybUsJI -Ufc-Al *L-i £*J C-li
" Jj j Li J&-. Thin iH also minted about the Prophet ho thud the Zabh'i might have

oonourrod with bhis tradition, in lhu Ijujar al-'AsqalSnl, WWi, IV, p, 982) «UII Jj-j
AjjLi { J^ n^-P- Ahu ril-MnUfiHin. I. p. 490, fifth lino from tho bottom miyu it
Hay« about tho Imam Malik b. Anas: '•&-, »1j»J Ajj Li ic^Z * Obj: '''•
Landborg, I'wmrbcn el dictions dn peirple. arulic, p. 2. r >(S.

' Abraham iH supposedly the originator of this oiiHtom, Tuhdhib, p. 129.

4 ajlyi.M i »9jJ Jal*. J^ ,j -IijJj *9jJ_ I find no explanation for
Jiia. jji s. Possibly! when reciting tho Koran by heart. Cf. alao abovo, p. 177.

■ Silvorttro do Saoy, ClireMoimilliie amlie. If, 1st. od., p. 411-413; p. 415.

OHAPTBB BIGHT

181

198

of orthodox Islam is not unwarranted, can be shown. This is true for
both aspects, the ritualistic, as well as the dogmatic. When we read
al-Maqrizi's short description of tho spread of the four orthodox
branches of fiqh in tho different Islamic countries ', it cannot eludo
our observation that the author was led by a certain distaste for
them, and favour for, the puritanic traditionalism. Al-Maqrizi's
characteristic cold objectivity in his historical presentation does not
let his sympathies come into view, but for the informed reader of the

relations of the Islamic legal schools, his position among tl:

ese

will

bo explicit nevertheless. "Tho true believer — so al-Maqiizi says —
must believe everything that the law revealed and this in the manner
intended by God Ilimnelf. without profound interpretation according
to his (man's) own thinking, and without interpreting it on the basis
of his own opinion (m.in yhayr Ut'n'd bi-fikrihi wa-la tahakkum fi-hi
bi-ra'yhi), for God revealed the laws only because the human intellect
is nob sufficiently independent to grasp the truth of things as bhey are
in God's recognition" ,J . In this passage, the antithesis between "law"
i.e. transmitted law (ma ja'a bi-hi al-shan'ah) and ray is unmistak-
able. Also when speaking about the schools of Malik b. Anas and of
Awzii'I, he employs the expression: ra'y of Malik and Awzii'I ;l . Al-
Maqrlzl describes in the same passage how, because of the domineering
personal influence of Abu Yfisuf on the one hand, and of Yahya b.
Yahyii on the other — both of whom occupied the department of
judgeships in their respective countries — everybody was following
tho madhimb of these scholars. Al-MaqrM closes with the following
words: "The office of judge has remained now for some time the domain
of the companions of Sahnun. They fell upon the secular advantages
(contending with each other for them) just as stallions fall upon fomalc
camels « until the offico of judge became hereditary in the family of
tho Banu Hasliim. They inherited the judgeship from one another
just as property is bequeathed in a family" 5 .

This is as if we were hearing the echo of Ibn Haztn's words who,

i Khilaf, II, p. 331 ff.
3 lUi., p. 881, 4-5.

3 Ibid., p. 333, 20.

« 0£ Ibn Ilislmni, p. 714, B for (jLo Vlth form.

» al-Macp-izi, KhiM, II, p. 333. 25: V_j^ jj^w <_>U^I ^5 fll^ill j L»J

.c.LvaJI ojl_jZi' ^ tlvkiJI \yj\jZ9 LuSClL IjJbj f»-iLci _j^j Ljj

182

CHAPTEB DIGHT

says in his analysis of tho theological state of affairs in Andalusia:
"There are two mudJid/db that spread through power and domination.
First, Abu Hanifali's madhhab, because, when Abu Yii.suf was appointed
quill, the appointment of judges from the extreme East to the most
remote borders of the African provinces depended on his counsel ;
he, however, had only such men appointed as professed his madhhab.
Then, secondly, Malik's ma&Jlhab here in Andalusia, for Yahya b.
Yahya was influential with the sultan and only his opinion was heeded
when appointing judges. No judge was appointed in the provinces
of Andalusia except on his recommendation ' and by his choice,
but he recommended only his companions and men of his mudhhub.
People, however, are attracted by material advantages and consequent-
ly many surrender to such a person from whom they could hope for
realization of their aspirations" -. Al-MaqrI/,1 was more disinclined to
the Hanafite school which ho had followed in his youth ;1 than to the
Malikite school. In this respect. Abu al-Mahasiu has interpreted al-
MaqrM'8 inclination quite correctly. His main work (Khtiul) reveals
that the reason for his embitterment against Abu Manlfah's contempor-
ary followers was that this branch in particular consented to the
government's confiscation and secularization of all those old buildings
in Cairo about which two witnesses testified that they were a danger
to the safety of either neighbours or of passers-by (id-jilr wu.-al-mdrr).
The consoquences of this action took such proportions that even large
mosques were sold when the surrounding buildings became dilapidated.
Many remains of the Islamic antiquity in Cairo were probably destroyed
through the irreverent action of a generation void of all historical
feelings. "Thus perished — laments al-Maqrizi — the sepulchral eluip-
10!) els of the two qardfahs in Cairo, magnificent buildings, and grand
houses as there are ..." (here, tho historian lists some prominent
examples). This must have distressed the antiquary al-MaqrM con-
siderably and he expresses this quite freely in this peculiar treatise •'.
This act of vandalism was sanctioned by the legal decision of the
Hanafite chief qdd'i. Kama! al-Dln 'Umar ibn al-'Adlm » who was
appointed in the year 435. Such personal feelings explain Maqrlzl's
following casual words: "Malik's madhhab spread more generally in

1 CT. Dozy, flmchicltlc Act Mmirvn in Sjmiiim, I. p. :i"~.

2 nl-Mnqquri, I. p. 400.

:l Fliigol, Anim'i'luingc.n 7.11 llin Quldfibiigliii, p. 70.
* al-Maqrfc!, J<lii(<tl. If, p. 25)0.

<< ibn QuI.liilHiKlm. i«l. l''liiK"l, p. 117. 111). 110.

UIA1TI0K Knurr

183

Egypt than Abu Hanifali's because of the respect that Malik's followers
enjoyed in Egypt; Abu Hanifali's madhhab was previously not known
in Egypt ... Isma'Il b. al-Yasa' from Kufa was appointed qtldl after
Ibn Lalu'ah; he was one of our better qudix except that he subscribed
to Abu Hanifali's teachings, whose madhhab the Egyptians had not
known. His teachings contained the destruction of the chapter-houses.
This annoyed the Egyptians and for this reason they rejected his
■mudlihub. Therefore, up to al-Shafi'i's arrival, the Malikite branch
was the most widespread in Egypt" '.

What we know about al-MaqrizI's view of Islamic dogmatics endorses
our assumption that he was closest to the profession of the Zahiritc
school also in this aspect of Islamic theology. Headers of llin I.lazin
will sense al-MaqrizI's affinity to the argumentative Zahiris from
the brief exposition of his view in dogmatics. His dogmatic position
is also completely independent of the philosophical controversies of
the schools; he has as little contact with the school of al-Ash'arl
as he has with that of the Mu'tazilah. The only thing that separates
him from Ibn llazm's strict orthodoxy is the usage of the term "attri-
butes of God". From his treatise on al-Ash'arl and from his teachings
one gets the impression that he is describing the life and teachings of a.
man to whose school he does not subscribe It was probably not done
unintentionally, for many passages of this treatise emphasize that
al-Ash'arl's dogmatics became the prevailing doctrine in lsla.ni through
actions of violence and bloodshed.

What interests al-Maqrizi in these questions most of all is, because
of his traditional training and because of his Zahiritc inclinations,
the absolute acceptance of what the traditions contain about the
200 nature of God. Now, it is certain "that all Muslims agree that it is
permitted to transmit those ahdd'dh which are concerned with the
attributes of God, and that it is permitted to spread them and to
communicate them to others". In this question there exists no differ-
ence of opinion. But those among them who profoss the truth, agree
also that these traditions do not bear the interpretation that God is
similar to creatures for it says in the Koran: "Nothing is similar to
Him and He is the Hearer and tho Seer" (surah XLII:9), and "Say:
Ho is God, the only One, God tho Eternal, He docs not beget and is
not begotten and no one is equal to Him" (surah CXII). Those tradi-
tions are not in conflict with these Koranic verses, for "their trans-

u|..Mi«|ii/.i. Khifat, II, p. 884, 6.

I SI

2(11

CMAI'TKR Kicirr

mission servos no other purpose than to negate ta'fil. In being called
nature by one and cause ('iUttli) etc., by another, the enemies of the
Prophet gave God names by which they denied His sublime attributes".
It is solely for this polemical purpose that God assumed attributes
in tlio Koran, and that attributes arc mentioned about Him in the
traditions. The reconciliation of the incomparn I lioness of God with the
anthropomorphic passages of tho sacred documents must not bo
attempted by popular means of interpretation (al-ta'ml). "It is un-
known to us whether any of the companions, or the followers, or the
followers of the followers, over interpreted these traditions by means
of ta'wll. They refrained from this type of interpretation because they
glorified God Whom they considered to be above being an object
of proverbial (symbolic) expressions. Whenever a physical attribute
is given to God, as for instance that 'His hand is on their hands',
or 'that His hands are stretched out', anyone will understand tho
proper meaning upon mere recitation of those passages". Metaphorical
interpretation of such passages includes a comparison of God with
creatures. "Those who permitted attributes, removed God's glory by
comparing Him with substances, no matter whether in actual sense
or metaphorically. In doing this they were aware that this parlanco
contained words which are applied to the creator and the creature
alike, but they hesitated to call those words "homonyms" (muslitara-
kah), for God has no companion (shartk). This is the reason why the
forefathers did not interpret any of these anthropomorphic traditions,
although we know for certain that, in their opinion, these traditions
were far from the meaning hastily attributed to thorn by the ignor-
ant" i.

At the end, al-Maqrizi summarizes his dogmatic confession as
follows:

"Tim tenth that cannot l>o doubted in that the religion of God is a conspicuous
matter containing nothing hidden, is « public matter (according to the Bulaq
edition, a substance) that hides no secret *j its totality is obligatory for every-
one without, exception. The Prophet has not bidden a single word of tho law;

i latitat. Hi I'- 861-302.

8 In Goldziher, 'Mi 4. Mejmmn al-Mayribl, p. 80S, n. 2, tt has boon pointed out that

tho differentiation between 'dm al-yibir and "dm ai-b&Hn i« certainly to bo found in the

tradition. In support of this view also xilrtili, XVI 11:50 was quoted {imtjmu td-bahrapi).

Theoommenttoal-Bayd&wI.I.p.WW, IB, to thepassagos A* j=^ Ob ^y <J1>

■,LL)I Jts. y- j-^-j jftUaJI is attributed in another passage to Ibn 'Abbas.

(iiiAi-TKit BIGHT

185

everything wbioh he told to his most Intimate oirolo, be it wife or eolations ',
bo would have also told to any white or black man, or ony ordinary herdsman.

Flo bud no microt, no mystic allusion (rtiniz). nothing esoteric (billin) ; ho

summoned all of mankind to bis teachings, if he hod kept anything secret,

he would not, have completed l.bo mission with wbioh bo was charged. Whoever
mokes such claims in Spite of it, mil kilfir according to the concurrent I caching
of the whole community. '/'Ac oriyiit of Kiivrij lie.re.si/ (td-bid'alt ft nl-dtii) is the
departure from ilir. words of the forefathers awl deviation, from tin! conviction
of tin; first Muslim genaralion" '-.

These last words are the testimony of a theologian who, to say the
least, was deeply influenced by tho sentiments prevailing in the
Zahirite school. Tied in with this is yet another observation that
throws a peculiar light on al-Maqrizi's literary character. Hence
it follows not only that al-Maqrizi had occupied himself with Ibn
202 Haztn's works, mention of which I certainly do not reea.ll in al-MaqrM,
but also that he did not hesitate to adopt literally, or more precisely,
plagiarize, tho words of the famous Ziihiri. He could confidently do
(his in view of the minimal circulation of Ibn llazni's works, especially
in Egypt. The forcible resume with which al-Maqrizi closes his present-
ation cited above, I found almost, b'deraliy in Urn Ilazin. This can he
scon from the juxtaposition following:
al-Maqrlzi, K/dla(., vol. II, p. 362:

j&j*-j <ui <jl>b V _^*>lk JUJ -Oil (jO jl AJ (_-jj V tgJUl IjJ-Ij

A..UI

J^j px5C U aJ lUtL- )1 JU.1 \}S *jV &y.j *^ "r- y

**JJ u-

Jj

U"

Ul

LT 3 -'

*&l Nj luT^j

AjO

J I

ij~~' LT*

pV*i-l^

Vi\ *\#.k jtf ^ ija J is ^j jJ ]$ £> u M ^ y3 *J\

(J3VI J-U=JI itfcfil

1 Cf. Muslim. KiWib at.-ndrilii, no. 8: U4**l d5CJ 1

u

-ff

JJUUI

«J| J_ji AZ*+m -uSOj ^Ul -u^f li~i J jL.1 L JUi p*i~p ^
Another versions U 0^* *tg™i r*-"^ 1 l( -^' uyj fP * fi A \ [J* (J - **

t+\J J 6b" L 1\ W o-LJI

Aj *U

i f »u^

j-Ul

uyj

i'Ik- same

»|JI L^-i i_ij.x5Ci lU-^Lyj j7_^-li IJ* 15^". ''• A'/MZi nt-bttjj, no. 82. Th

bins is reflected in the aorroHponding tnulit.ions in ul-liiikhnn, Kitiib itl-'iliu, no. 40;

./i/iiii/, no. USD; Jitsyah, no. 10; Dli/ilt, no. 24.

« ol-MaqrlsJ, KltiM, II, p. :i(!2.

186

CliAPTIOR MIGHT

Ibn Hnzm, Kilab al-mibd, vol. I, fol. 137a, following a short descrip-
tion of the characteristics of the Khiirijitc and Shi'itc sects:

jl 1_j_<Jl£.|_3 <_ijlij tSjLeo ^i LJaLj lj*» iiL-UJ jl ,,

*i

LT"

«U»| Vj l*9>> ^ A*^ i«Jj^JI |j- f*S^J 1 p-J^ AJUl Jj-j

»uT efr

l*

.1*

(•* U*.l J 1 rt* J 1

•Ui]

J I ^jj £«i Jj (_^U

Ul

Vj -»l~u. o^ )■ Jy "j^s [«j k^ j& s& '- 1 * J 1 -* u^-5 jA v $

(7)

2i>:i Willi al-Maqrizi vvc have completed our panorama of the more
important representatives of the principles of the Zahirite school of
the third to ninth centuries. We have included in our list only such
theologians who, on the basis of reliable reports about their life and
teachings, can be identified as Zahiris. The appellation al- Ziiliir?'- !
did not always lead us to hastily consider a particular scholar among
the school of Dawfid b. 'All ". The reason for this is that this nisbah
docs not indicate a theological affiliation behind every name, but is
very often a nisbah referring to Egyptian princes who received the
title al-nutlik nl-zahir. Tins, for example, is the case with a theologian
from the period of these princes, called Jamiil al-l)Jn Ahmad b. Mu-
hammad al-Zahiri, and with another, Shihab al-Dln Ahmad al-Zahiii;
the one was a Shiifi'ito, and the other a Ilanafito 4 . Fox the same
reason, the father of a certain Ibn al-Zahiri ' must probably be ex-
cluded, and the same applies to a great number of people who bore

' Cod. Ij^Jj.

2 In WiiHU'iifolu'H edition of Yilqfit the printing error iil-'|Tiliiri is to bo corrected to
nl-^nhiri, I, p. 031, 3; 003, 14 ; II, p. 082, 20; and VI. p. 315, I .

:l Fihritt, p. 153, 3 IT. HhIh among the liumoroiiB writers of the third century Abfl
al-QfiHiin ibn nl-Nliiih ii!-%i~ilrin. The titles of Iiih works are mentioned too. I am not

dour about the moaning of nl-'/iihiri in this Instance.

4 Of. Weijors in Meurslnge, Sojitlii libtr '/•• iiUerpreUbua Kordni, p. 66.

» falni/tV. ol-linffoz. XX, no. 8.

CHAl'TER KIOHT

187

this name which was particularly frequent in the period covored by
Abu al-Mahasin's biographical work rd-Manhnl al-mfl,. Abu al-Mahil-
sin's father, too, carried the additional name al-Zahiri for this reason,
although he was far from being an exponent of the Zahirite school.
His name al-Zahiri originated from the fact that the father of the
fattOUS historian was purchased as a slave by al-Malik al-Ziihir I5:irquc| 1 .

From the tenth century on, the mmlhlmh aid rd-zaliir seems to have
died out. We can meet the characteristic elements of its theological
view in later times also, and even among modern Muslim theologians,
204 particularly among those, for whom theological science is of no pratical
concern, but merely a theological study. We still find people who
seem to echo the old principles of the aid al-hiuRth. hostile to ra'y a ,
but none of them calls himself a Zilhiri. They belong mostly to the
tiny group of Hanbalites or, if they belong to another of the four
rites, they are traditionists with little concern for the so-called furu'.
But while the majority of contemporary Muslim theologians pursue
the practical studies of the furu', specialists in the science of had'ilh are
diminishing from flay to day, yet, it was the hudUh which was the soul
of the Zahirite school.

Thus the four sources of legal deduction: kilab, sunnah, ijnuT,
and qii/ax aro indisputably recognized in Islamic theology. Indeed, we
may say that attempts were really made from time to time to add
other equally valid sources to them. We find, for example, a note that
QadI Ilusayn (d. 462) put consideration for 'urf — called now common
usage :| and at other times what could best be called common seme —
as an important factor in legal decision besides those four canonicnl

I For the S0>me reason one nuiHt not hastily assume the name al-DawOdl to mean
that its holder in a follower of Diiwfid'x twlinol.

- It remains unsolved whether those scholars of the early period must indeed be
reckoned among the ^fthirito school beoause their biographers relate that they belong
to no particular ttut&HMb, but that they relied solely on the traditions and the mluf.

II In this meaning it w also called 'Sddli and distinguished from nlmn'uh, the canonical
law whieh iteoniil not supplant, as being the common low as practised In some countries
prior to their aoooptanee of Islam. In this oonneotion one should rend up the interesting
passage in Ohordin, Voyage* m Penc. VI, od. L. Langles, p. 70-75. Information on tho

Hprend nVudali iiihoiir the MiiHliniM ill nrighiatan ean be found in (i. Kennan, Tin: moult-
laiii« anil mountaine-cn of the Ettrte.rn Caueamm, p. 184. Among the Malayan Muslims,
too, 'ful'ili in recognized in many instnncCB of juri.Hpnidenee until the pre«ent day. Of. van
don Berg, Ilcahimlmi mm lirl Mt>litiiii»mlriiu,.irlic Ha-I,l, p. 120. To tho same category
lielnng almi the aeenlar lawn (sflnfln) of the Kabyle Muslims in the Mozttb whieh are
rocognized lienide the religioim law handled by tho azziih (/mi/i/Aii'). B, Mnnipieray DOB
recently reported OH this in "l,o Mozub, II", Journal ilm Ih'lml.i, 12 January, ISS.'t.

188

nitAI'TKIt KIIIHT

legal sources '. ('Urf had really survived in many important chapters
of Islamic law as an individual peculiarity of many countries, and it
occupied a position comparable to that of the qdnuns in present day

205 Islamic states). The Qadl expressed with this view probably nothing
but older attempts of Muslim jurists who, on the one hand, attempted
to reconcile in this way the secular with the religious law, and, on the
other hand, wanted to safeguard justification for tho individual
peculiarities of individual parts of the Islamic state within the universal
nature of the Islamic law. Wo hear already in the third century that
'urf was preferred to qiyiis '-. Among the legislation on oath, pledges,
measures, etc., wc often meet tho opinion that, in those instances,
semantics and customs are decisive, and that they ought to be pre-
ferred to deductions that would havo to be drawn from what has boon
traditionally fixed '. 'Ilrf'w supposed to represent in the system of the
Islamic institutions the changeable element, subject to change and
to alternation, corresponding to the spirit of the time and the require-
ments of tho locality ■'. Wo have a Jewish report from the tenth century
A.[-[. which reveals that in Egypt of that period 'urf was applied by
those courts that were independent of the organs handling canonical
law, and that those courts were even free to pass the death sentence °.
In his article Ober die Klasscn der hmicfitisehen Rechtsgelr.hrtcn, Fliigol

200 wrongly identified 'urf with qii/iis ". However, attempts woro made

1 iil-QiiH|jilli"ini, IV, p. 103: -Ul cJ/Ol (J I M*^ll L/.r"*- 15^^' (J^ "^J

. -OiAJ! IgjjlO i^-ri (j^l i^**^"' -U-ljJLlI

a al-Maqdiui, p. 272, 0: (J-La3I A& bJJU liJJX i_9jbcJI jiT £J.

n Of. ill- Dunlin, 1, p, •KM: II, p. 80] : evidence of how this point of view gave
rise to casuistry in al-Qii.i|«liruii, I, p. ■!(!!) (to SaliV, no. 20). See tho main passages in
al-Maqdisi, p,810 mil oLcVI Jj'L-. Jj^ ' I J~4 ... uijbcJI, «W., p.llBf,:

tJI OjUxil ^& b.As- Ujja.1 lib. Also tho fliuihnlito codex Dalil iii-irillh,

II, p. 136 teaohos: (j|>*J I U U-^ j lo U.

4 Of. ifaw&rpf Commentary, p. 231) whero tho author is 11ll.iMnpi.ing 1.0 provo Hint.
pi-o.iljil.inn {(tl-xiijiii/) in tho 'urf of tho angels him the Niinio meaning 11s salutation (at-
.lalfini) in till) 'urf of humans: i_£)\^».b L^J^Xa-l jjzi Hij£ A~jiS oJA ijj

.fcujVl

• It. Dilwid b. Alii 'ZJmra, BOA, no. 201! (eel. Venioe, I, fol. 53a): ira 'JO nnh wo

Rim 5>TTW! BDW!> lion Kin VHVn DDonm (,Jj^) WW 11W1 (^j") WW "ins DDira

iwi ruinn ■«>!> Tioa sin noi? rnmn ma teem Wfflffl BBWaHl uDcan m»»!> msn 1OT1 J*"ffl pOW

131 iron uown nun'' ktal pill 1» n^p lS»BK VHRI '03 Win!'
' Kliigul, 06rr liifl KIiumku der Imiii'filiiclirii ItcrltLigrtrltrtcii, p. 27!).

CHAPTER, EIGHT

189

to add to the four legal sources besides 'urf ixtihuan, or, as it was
called in the Malikitc school, ul;isld/i (above p. 12). In this context
it is noteworthy that the Shafi'ite al-Suyiiti, who applied the method
of the theological disciplines to the philological sciences >, lists among
the sources of philological knowledge - besides the four theological
sources of knowledge also the ixtis/iill) of his own school. As far as
theological investigation is concerned, Fakhr al-Dm al-Itazi is protest-
ing against any attempt to add anything to the four generally re-
cognized legal sources. He bases this on sumh IV:62 (in which as we
have seen on p. 80, reference to the four legal sources was thought
to be found):

"Those who are obliged bo obey tho divine commands must keep to these
four legal sources exclusively. If one won; to refer to either Abu l.lnnifali's
ixtiltxaii or to Malik's iilirfiili it would merely bo a ease or a misinterpreted
terminological expression whioh is of no consequence. However, if these two
terms are different from tlioHe lour sources, their teaching would serve 110
meaningful purpose" •,

Thus any attempt to go beyond those four sources was rojectcd,
and the attempt of the Zfilurite school to shake the validity of a single
one of them was also destined to fail.

1 See my article '/jitr Olmmclr.riMk al-Nvjlit!.',i, p. 1-1 IT.

' J Sprunger, Die Schulf/tcher mid dit ScMastik dr.r M udime, p. 7. In this passage
(BO. 8) uI-iikiiii/UI is not traimmbrd but tniimmilliil.
■■> M«fatilj, III, p. 861.

207

SUPPLEMENTS

I.-III. From Ibn Hazm, Iblul al-qiyus etc. (Cf. p. 4-19; p. 85ff.).

?_U) (j^9 ^JjT c^ij l05Ci,J Aj J»U __££. A^> fc£j$<U rfr^-^ D^ 1 *-^-'

Jui

l£JS\ (^IjJI iki] ( J J ^ A2JL»j ( IJift UiLij Jl

*J'| *J>*^I ^ jAclj Ayl.1 j^Xail olj> L; jjiOj ^aj _a« |>_jj| ^y

l^i^JI ^*_> L iJyj jJ-l lift As. i_isj ^J S- 1 ^'' j' l)^ 1 ^'

< jUt>_^ 5^} d>* _j* *'l iJIaj". _^*j **« ^1 V^' (V ***** '

fijiiu «jft\j r*& s - ' °. *J J^J l_S^' Oj^l it* lT^' vijJa. 'Ij

(jl < »si l_jJls rt^Jl jA A_s UAlX a . I <£-UI ij-Ljill Alia J [<--*-»J A -~° 'jj-^J

«^J L^i j| IjU aJ [J p£M JJiC_ i^O) I j>. aJ ^aJ ^ Li piCi
aIg ^s Lji'Laj'V "^^JlUa. JlSs ljiki.1 ^ i>-*JI »\£*.\ y. A_Lc
a!^l9 ajjb {ji- Ujj A^'lJI ^.j A»j ^| ^gl'tujl rtr4-^"0 [J^J rtr^J-l
11 aL»». >j_U_j I.AjfcJ A_i ^j-2J J Ij-i r»J>j£ IaJls.1 K^Ay* Ailj ,J '' iULb

Ifoittj A-ic ^j^i^. A5(>,-^lj uiil ljO (j* u^ 'V Jj^J ^ L. Jl

[cod. ojjb] |JuS> [jj] j-ai A_i y ^jCi4 (j| jU U Ji»J _p Aj| it~=-
aLs )ij f£J-\ klfi J LjJ'Ui'V " j^JjS IftjJttj jU.^ ^J (jgjJSi

( oU.^ ^>Vj J_^i' ilSOi ^J aLJI i£j£-5 SI 4Jil >|Ja-I ^ c^^U
t)U»2*.Vl Aki) L y>-.j dSOJi'cJhJI 7 jjiJI ,J jLw>=Xu,Vl iiJ*- *J

1 Pol. 21).

» Kul. 8a.

a Cod. p4Jl-U..
« Cod. JLL.
Cod. aL^>..
" Mutilated word.
' Cod. Jj«JI.

HUl'I'LEMIllNTS

191

^ Jyj tSjll c-Lj'1 Aj'i/ (Jjab llfcj Jaiis Lu^. olj;_ ^ { sJu ,j| ^

^ ol _^a aJiJIj «j|jj'| o_pUI ^J JJj^Ij -AJjixJI «*jju. ^
^aj ^ Ljj ^1 c-^UJI U^i jl IUJI U^i c3V • L^ i>.jJI J
tikij iJj ° 6[Iaj<, 5^] i>„>*JI ^y Jji aJ^ JiL IJlaj iiSOi. j
c.Lj'^L (J_jl rt-g-^jo Jjc». (^IJI [J i!5CJi> ^ cDjJIj OjjuIxJIj ajL^JI
t^JJI rt,5CJ-l aIc (j^ll r^ 11 -^ <J! 3*J J^*^' L«l_9 « u^ju ^

^il A.jf JLu' Jjl /jfi jL^-J AiV (^j\JLj jisL lAAJ jjilJI Aj t L-
£* jUilj ijUo' dill J^ lyjjif IAaj aLJI liSL" J*,J ^y *Xa,
" [ l!5G |Jj lAlkil ^2 ( ii I ajj*jJI oJa AJLto. o^ t yi Aj _^ L ^ ujj|

ijl^ill y L^J'jMu ^ iuiU Oj*ljO!j i-iJCj (jlaj)_ tJ«l5vJ - OjJ

ojJj. ^j U^j L ijLa^ i (Jfj>»jS)1 dllLj lu (J^JuJI yj n | i±-o A=Ll ]j
UAJI ^^^ Aill ^j XjU^JI ,y jp' p 'g* JS aJ| "[^LiJI]
i}yi\ -1-3-^. A».| ^ JaS ol> Lj tsl_pL ijjl_^ll JjUJI ^yuq jJ
c._jv>_j-> _,-»-=-j A_Lt dlil ^.j ^ Jl ib j -t w UI aJLujJI i >l |_>-L5JL

>-h* a 1 o-ls*ll Jl* *** **ll ^j y* a* f^ u u^ ^ L^ (>*
200 ^UJ-lj lJ~^ [jftj] " A^i Ajj^ iUl clii " [|*I^-U] J5U.I

jj^^l ^j LjJ jU y 1 ^ JJUjJI Clj Jj#f " [iL«]Vlj JaSL
dl Jl L^lj -jJ-L UVjl Jl JmrI p JbuVU « l r i ^ 1 ^j*t>

'^vxj' V aJL.j oJUij (J\JL) oLoi-o IJjb L^i" jl Aj j-ai'U "U^-j _>*

a^j| "j* cidii j^t (jij* ix* oc -^- ^1 W^ *** **J' o^j y 1 6*

jAj jLjtu, ^1 i>_ Ajjl '- Xs- rjijt ,j-*J d^jJ-l ^J_^> Ic* 1 ^} Jftlpl
> Ail I jUl; i\ Jjq V JUS -Ull J I cLjiVl 4-*U ^-^

1 L -U)L l_jS^' (jlj JUS aUI Jli LliyJL Oj^ I^A J "J^-J

C-j_jj Jj ijjtf jU I jiJju' N L Ajjl Jt l_jjjjij' jlj lilkLw Aj Jyj

y^j c-jL a 0- ojjj LjJJs ^l i>. r/*y v 1 ^-' iJ". ^ a 6 ^^

" Cod. iS^aVIj of. Qoldzihor, Spitta'a Orammalikduarabisohen Vvlg&ritoUetet von
Agyplen, p. 021.
» Cod. Lju.
'" Cod. JjjwJI.

11 Cud. A_ju Aj_jo. I Ihihc my oniijuol.11111 lL»~'i on l.h" IVcu|iii'nt ooourronoo of
r-UcJ-l t j£. m*jL& (if. 'I'ahwfd ul-lmffris, V, no. 24.

u FoL :ib.

192

SUPPLEMKNTK

JUS AAll cjl lT^* 6-J (j* iSjjj •^Lfr-J ljW 6^2 <y (*^* *-Ul
,yy «,|j* d_^ LftJjtc ^L-^U "J/T <£SQi _^> i jJ 6U-5H ob^

^ jj-i .Ci *o».l 61 *VW <^ y» ^ *3I (^ -^^ y 5 -? p 4 -*-'

IJu, JiC rt^J-C- »U)I ^j AjUc^JI (j*»JJ, 61 -Hi u^^-J "_f^ <j-'

ol_^lL DJ-1 il^Jl J* jl a-^l (J I jl «iJ*»l J I »>0W "-M-I

C.LJN! JlXJ ^9J ^2fi |^*U3I *j"l J* vJJo J»l J* j^; V lit

210 JJX c/"W^' v^v' Ulcol Ajj,iC( jLi-l ■«* Ijilj |OV~J1 *feLfi
Je r <J-l ^LS " LU JLL Ud^l ^j yfcj jgUic c^lli ^Jlft*

V pj^ ul oJj" *1 tfl r <- N IjJU His j^Jfe^l 2bjjjj-l Jl

U-" ^cT"

(J U^" i.*Vl ^ 0*1 oy lj'

jJ (<9 S^W ^*b 2jikU A^ts. jl>J IJ^J O-LjiJI JUsjI ^9 Jj«
j'bf l153jj ^9 *1 ^ga. ^.9 clj- U^j^ ^L^VIj ^"1 <l50i> _^j i

«^i| ^i r SCJ-l ^ aJ (JisAuOl r <^ 61 jl A*!* u^j-^ll LS »

^^1 ^ ajj yr 6ii«vi yi ^ij "o^Jij >9i > 1*^*1 ltI%

" Cod. <_JuJli Lya-JI.

M Fol. -lit.

U I.c.:[^JI £.

HUPI'LIOMUNTS

193

J IS i Aj a^.ti e,Tj*i U^ «J UV I
cSJj ^Sj "Ij-o 6Lu«Vl

0-*^ U^ ^^^ y^ ^ ( _ r l_ r i s jL j-o-L^-t Ul Jli j^I^I c^^ij
"AjJJI c~y=U y sX,aJ ,J A^ pill i_-~^l _^ii -U^, JU ,,„,^
ij-l^ijl (J i^-L«^>. Ul c~^> _jJj iLjJJI o^lj AjjUm tl^ii jJ i—^i-l Jj

y- 6l i_-^~«ll O 1 , -U«— jJJ-J ( i-lLtr Aj_0 1 il5Cl^9 L/_/;JO 1>_A*J

I^U jjtu-jJI ^j lyU ajL-JI (jij o^U u *»i pl^l ^ J*»
211 61 f'j s ~ (-)! -^-- c uw "^-J [<*■*■ ~ MI J r rfl ~ : '~' ( <'J LcmiJ waJvJI J_j
61 Upjl >_^>. J I t_ibl) ^9 Aoji jj|

(j-lJu e-l^l ajL^VI (J 6_^> 61 J-tv cTj^, L^g" 6l*«Vl io
J IS pxi^> ajjI (Jj*,j "61 o-"^* t>.l ^ ij^J' l"*b oLu^^l -^It

cl«-« oJAJ oAft c.lft*u |_y"w,iJlj IH '*~ill cl o~/ 6^-*"jl clj-u ^jLr> jl

61 %^> JkS» 61^-^1 6jj g^V'l p-C- ^ [^1 6j^J 61 J-M

lL>j_JU 6^**»Vlj /«iU»VI (J-c- ^-Jl a-^-t 6tT il **ey lT^* iJ*.!

^JsU *i50 /oU»^l Jc 6U-VI cr^. 61 «i50i aJ_^ J=s ^ 1 jjl»
^j J^iixJI -b._^j ajL^VI cy t5>«^ 6I$j jljj-* JjJiJI ci5Jjj
JJ-r^JIj i>j-jVI cj\j (jj^xll <l1c _,5oU LjjiilLg 6^^ O^jI
U» ltW 1 J I rls* V -Ul yj lj^U Vj lUi o-"^ 1 JUajl fj*j
i_-iycJI Jt "Si iL)l Mj N Vj^' '^ 15* j l~fi*if lj < (jai AJ
6-.I OAsi jl (.Ml 1U ^ cT^ill IJiA JaS V^l ^^ Uj j£iJI_j
ya^aj D^i Jji»« lioJ^. Ulj "— 'j*)l U^i^ju' j iw^^iJI ^J Ail U 1 "™

6li "^ ji pj 6j*? J*-? lT 11 ^ ls*' "HJ O^^ 3 !>• ^JJ ^' ^^
AA)I (^j -ij^-u. Jjjij 6>?^ '-^-'J O"^' iliOAJ JJ^t-j p^JS^-

j^e ltUJI Ja2»» $\j c-UJU d^-JI 3^ -^Ej jJ 6>»JUi pj -ut

Aj JLS IOa.1 UJx Lj cJlill 6>^l (jS OUwAdUirVI 6J> *J

111 I'i'olialily I_/jo l_^-«J uiiIosh, of oourac, urn7ro rcc/o iH implied.

" Fol. tl).

» Cod. JuJI.

"• Fol. Bo.

IS

194

SUPl'hffiMKNTS

i t£$0i <_s}U. t y^> t cJ llsd lif aJjuJI oJa .J ^rUUI

212 J5" O-ki.1 Ajls i^d^-jJI 6^.-^ V^"' iiy»> (<9 .Xl&JI 0-k»- 'Ij

Ajjbi CiolLi.1 jlj «_££■ J I oIJji^J' V L^U? ^ c5jj L AjuIL.
^S Xl£j| 6i> "n$ t (JsXjuUJI .Oy'L J^s -U.I ^jt I.U. i_9_^u 3j
c."i/jU jl Lc AybJ iioLojj -Uljil c-iLi.1 olj "j<iLJI i-jL^I
IUjU. "jiCj |»4^J £ LDLcs £»jJl2j £fi i^gj Js 4jJ1 *4*a»j ct&iaJI

< l$-»»U» JljSl ,y u-'J 1 *^' j- 3 ^'
cjTpUl ^s iojLJI JLj' *J)I xjIjmJ 1j^->^ <J' 3*" Jo^l Hb

L*C "^ I4L.1 ^ iu-L p-aO* ^lj*JI *i£lJ> ^IT 5^ *I~Jb
>JI p&» |,j d£)S ^ f£M ^j OJ*j " |&». jUl dSOj jl
^ _ r ^x. Jji L> Jil< _jjI J Is ( aLJI tiCLS aJ L^JcxJ 15JJI ^j

O^ ,y. *4J"J«P jls (5^1 JaI Hi alsi jjI JU> tsfjJI j}Vk
Ijl Jls Aj| rtjJ^. AJJ I Jj^y ^ aLL *"l c~>w." Jls «slj i>_ «uil
ajL^-JI t)l !>ll»J »y<S V J* J>u 1 |(-J "yjlj* (t^d ( _ J ^»I

P-j-ij JO oljj»l j^ftj jjJjiS V (Ota-Vl Ac l£o-&X-> _^- ffr^J
*J (JyiJI (jl NjJJ cSljJb LJls j^Jl jbv» OSj JUS «0J| Aj <jiL 1
(Jj^yaJI J>ii y\ j^ Jls JL4-* o 1 . Oy*tr* ^i^" 'jj^-^J *>J^ ^ JH^-
^vijb L A-i J^.j (jli «ull i_ibi ^ _>ki rt V - ^ *«** -^JJ lil ^J
jli pjjtiva alll Jj—j A^, ^s _,]£) «UJ| i_ilxi ,J ^ 1 Jb ^/^ *i
rt^«ic Jji tyUI JL, ii$3i oLfil ISIS y^aS Aj ^jjaJU, L. I4J Jo-J

- u According to the Dictionary of the. ttolminal term*, p, :ioo, Utihsdn h a &(2C also
according (.<> the Intorpretation of the I.liuiliulito Bohool. But tbiB purtioulor artlola also
demoDBtcatcs thnt tho dlfforont. Hcholars of iv/Bl givo quite different iriterprottttlona of
IhiH torm which, a(. times, dowright oxeludo onu auotltcr.

« Cod. L c^...

m Cod. Aj jWJ^

' Fol. fib."

= Cod. (S\j,-

SUPI'LKMHNTS

195

218 OjJjnli j»j5JI aJI . . . y & l^ aJ ^S pA*, A0|| J^j -y

cL,Jj Mk j»*iyS ^~JI l^Iui Xiu, Orfi 1 jls c5-6j c^ASC Aj „.?

iJlT J^ Jli" £uj|j c_.ls50l jJ liSOi Jj6 jl oLftl lili ii?3i A^
i3*J a^-j < «4 lj^j «-1^ls _>5G ^V j^" jls il^a jJ (jr ^i _^C jj|
jLj Lie jji'L Jji All Jlis .jj, oli ^uU :| lj_^l Jls Jjji™,
jj/ U LiL JbJ 4BI "jl J»j ... ■>(?)d50Lo», LJj ^k^ LuJ

j.j| oc.1^. jls dill t_ibi ^S ^_j (j-iJiJi i»_jJ' •*•} cL,aJ' Aj (j-^wC yj
jji-U=JI Aj ^^^ls" y (j^pj ** AJL] AJ ( _ ?Y aii Vj dill t-jli" jj ^J

aj j^SJ 3j j^c A9J Aj ^^ij' "bfj ^ul i-ibi" ^s ^ _^| ocL. jls
J5U-I "jli lJU.1 ^.Ij ^jl J 1 '! ji, Vj Ajjj a^x^cJj j^J-UJI
V U Jl ^~iy.. L* ^Aj cjI^jU^l. Li^3i (^jy ^ |»l_^-lj d^

(J\*JI jl o-JaUJU *5S-I iUJlj 1j^._5 ^6 Ajjl ^1 J3 I^Jls'j ( ti5Cjj;
j_yXjJ (j\LijLi J I iiJi ^jg^.ll jjiC Ji il |jij-ll aJx. Ijjti \j\j

Jl Aiiu Jl „jS^> aAII J^,j jl jU^ Li~>-U. IjjS'ij ( <4>lf* u;^l
yi 44 1 jU ,jll <ii)l i-jl^^j y j^iil Jl2s .-£2! lilc aJL j^JI
J_^~.j aL. yi Atf 1 jls Jls pAy? Ai)| Jj*,j aI^J Jls Ajjl cjli"
J>-J (jlj t£JJ1 ^ J-J-l cJlHs jJT ^j yjfj J4X*I Jls -^jI^p aJJI

_^jf| yj f»*jjUj JL^' Ajjj' IjjSij dill Jj-j y^ li Ajjl Jj*,j

c-ja» LI .-Hji'-^f - o-i* HsS_jjI Jls ( *4~j c5j3-^ i^j-*Ij JUS «0j5j

Jjj i>. aLLI ajjIj j*if "Wyaj V aj'I Lijl «jj-_J Jss'Li aLL, ^1

j_ aLLI jl LS ~All -bj i>_ aLLI j^ ^cuLVl T,l v_i^-^ _j*j

L r"J_j ^^ &_jl2ij 'J^- ' aAII Jj^-j t?lj jl i^LIIj 1 nLJ (>_ Jjj
Jlsj Ai|| tii'ljf ^ (j-lIJI ^ "JS$ JUS AOJl JU' ilSO Ji" oJjj; c5b

214 jl JLj' cj*\j (_j^-jj ^j j I j* jl i5^AI (>=■ ijim ^J JUS

jj* VI L-i Jj^i > (fr* *jI fB^aJ J I ,<»-jJ L y| «-J'l jl Jji

V)jUj J Li' AjjS Llj AD I oljf y Vl ^O V Ajlj ^J
j^jiLj Ajj^j j^I J Li' Ajjl jl i£j] Aj %^-l ^ JLj ills _ r > K $\ ^

» Cod. Ij_aTI.
* FoL On.
Pol. Ob.

196

oU

.SUPPLEMENTS

JIVNI \s\ J>3 6%"j}\ ($*}i (*i (>»J j»U^ ^ iSb **$) |As
JjjSi t^J>3* '^ W 6U W»jIj <i5>***« _/lT _>-si ifli jjjjj» ^

*jj g^ij i>jiuui j i [V] ^ ;>ji ji >fli Sjj *sf j6

J-.VI ft* jjST ^i j^j JjU^.1 ts!_P a^as -^U* <>■ J, US -UJl £~s

Jfi v^jf J 1 ^' «UII 61 (Jyy 61 j~?™! (**—•* |Ll*JI ^ 1^ U^jIj
JaI J_^S Ijllj jiS J_jii)l \J&J ,»-«iv? >uUiy?1 (_5lj itUs |*£ djj^j
LU^aJI Ji 4-*b OV " p^> «U)I J>-j **ik 61 {%*$\

Jfc. Vl £y&J| ^ &(J -i "^pfljl Ujj> "j»S ^Ij ^

iVI

cr

«>*

^A^JI oj_jU.x_ c-yLlI "i&ya,) pi [K-4-r^ fJ«U l^ --^ f^tr^ JJ^

J:A^ji jw Ijji rt^*^* SjjUxe, Vi %v=j V i_jJU ju jjAnJi jj-i

V.ys.j lulls' jlj r^J-l i_iJ5Ci' rt^jjULo-j i_ijJI o!_^5~t «-&! j J^-Ij

jo £, tur s W> U U^i jt^ >b 61* j» !A> |*AjJ 61 ^=-9 -^-b

ljli.1 |^| tSjlA "jN rt^J-c ^9»- *^U U^jIj ui^Vi. %. Jo Iaaj

215 l&j 6^" U iU^JI ^ ,JI ojjUJI 8 <^Jrf ax, [61] jU y ^
(jjlj J^ dill |jJa».J dSOLj Sl^a. ^1 (S\J g^J 5 " Wa» u*^ ^ ^V-

'^ V y* U 5 u* 6U^I yJ ojjLUIj ^ft-U A5e» ^ ^>j\C-

e.UiVl y'L jyj i^-l Jj^! i>.b <^» Cfil Jb J>^' 0- H-^J'/

ijjUUI d-j-Uj "^Lt bji**' •■bUi^V J lii 6Lj— ^1 JlJl **-«^ 11
!> OjlJ-l ,%» 45*51 Tn^v? u, jj*' ■^ > ^- j ^-^ ^>b '"j-^ lSjI—I ^

« Fol. 7ft,

' Cod. iSf^ ■

» Cod. ^J». ; possibly lu. !

o Cod. J I.

111 Perhaps [ij fl »- -f] should bo added.

" Fol. 7b.

SUITI.KMION'I'H

197

2l(i

cSfjlA °^ J*l (jfjjj Vj J^iiJI ioui (>, i'_Aill yi.1 u-.l Jiil J^
Jsu^jVl *s6jUf yi '[ctjUc-JI djQi ji'j ooJcLl IAa jjjA aJ ^L^ "^

^l^i i_jUt^I ^ u^j- J* | ^ JU.J jj£. L^ljI _jA 1j olLkJI ;
J -^-il (J* ,-trJ-l (jiJ'l -lSJ 0\Sjyd1 oliiJI *j* li-jj ,J| (>jj|j

obl^iJI _t6 I ,y. Sil^S d-j-kJ-l Jiij aJU <5jJj V JL< Js.$>
JaL^xj jl ^Jji ^.s **E^ -jJ^j J^j J»,j ~\£. .jjl U ol^i L^JV

yijsii jjjj o*^ s j ^'' '^*j yb^'i (j« j_^-j -^i (»_js jis'j ii5Gi j

ii-jjj. IJjbj .uL_j J I JJJ^i ^ lyljJU | )*a* j^ («• *1^ 6j^j 61
L5^' -^ t^V^I lV ^J ^^v=-ll lV° - Va - 1 *J^ Vj k^' <-*j*i f
^J '" *^«*W^J f**' 1 ^'' (J' ">>iJls jj^.U.1 'U jjUS ^yL jy;
(jj| j^* lLxJj ^-> oljjj i_ %xv •^f-^ jj LA- J - l 'i-ll lV ■^ >- ' *i T?*^'
Ijii^AC- ojj>^ j. Jas "JL_iJI j_J_^S lV jUJ— lS^ 11 "' Jib * l ~*" j^c-
j^c ^1 j^j* d^x-i l&.t 3 ^ »I~>JJJ *d> liixi.lj JisU. li2J ^a^j
UlJ J^ 1 Li~iJil jiij (j^io^- Jjtil ^j-i iiU-> i—jUi^I ^y. ,j-L" ^
J Is "iC;»iil!l J.laC i>. -^3-1 I^j Ujlbsi "JL.:UI lS^" 1 "' (5^1 ^ibj
-,jiL|ij «UJ I (Jj-«j tioo IXJ J II j^c _jj I _jA In Uj'_l>.

Jil lyjlsS'yl y jj^ilil (Jls y^JJ *j iL>w L aJ J Is ^yJI Jl li'Uk*

■CJ ^U l - s a» ^J Lsf 1 **' tJ^ *®' V» y' L>*^ J^' liittf- jls JU
^^ U jIJ -b ^jiii lj j_l)| L-jbi" ji (J *J j_jI liSftt*. jli JU rtX

Jj-.^. lS-^" -<JJ JuJ»l rt-C- JlJis c5-%^ i3*r (Jj-' JU j_jJ-U^JI aj
J^i>.l La U. _^Jj rtis JjJl oj-^j 'U ^ji^j y (j*"^ *"U' J>"j Jj-*j

Jll LjbS" ^ Osl i jl jlxl AAll J_j^j Jjjy jl JWI (J^J jJlj
U^ ^ Jjil U Jlis ^*=L-I ^ Jiw Jj p^c _j&j J~i SXw ,J 2J

lV^ yC '-^^ *j^ tJ^-° lP^ j*^ ll -^uji aj^i oIa ^1 t!^

l^Ljl rtpSCi **lv» «UJl J>"J I^J f»£=^ rt^ oj".. I"pi «J^ JlSL J--~

L° ^ UaJ I A-b^ -*Jj (V 1*12T I Jjis «_^»-l Ll5oi j^ ui,x9 (j^-j-ll _^*J
^Vs rthfl-ll J>' ^ lT^ oi:~ :J A-b^J t-fjb lV V^l l/ ^"J* ^

Jj^j Igi—i ij i_jIxSC1I fi L4L _^i JLo iij <Ujjh2 ^j^-j ii I J^r"

jl _jjji ^*J j^e. jj "J pt -Oji jl j_j3l i \JA jl "^yaS f^J^ «Ull

'-' Dofucliivo, llio rrinniiis mi^jjoHi. l-lii' word abovo.

1:1 l)\tl. Sil. Iliii'ii followH n<ii ismlfl which I liavo aiiiiU.cil in onlrr l.o hiivo Hpaco.

** Cod. Si UJl.

L98

SUITUCMF.NTS

«w-Ot> o-U-j AJ jl}" JLs _£ J *-i9 A.) jl 16 oJ^-J .iLid. l^rrr' Jj^S!

aLi^ J Nj iL^ tffj Jjh^ V ^ Ik^- J* c5^l " [v^l]
l150L (^Ij j_^5Cjlil *^.j AjLj^>. ^1 t£lj Oj^iJ-l «*£; l^lj o'-kJj
[jjI] u *Ji o_/^Jj -0 JIT jlj A&lj jl iL«-> cfflj ^-i >_iJl-i- Ja&

ye^aj ^ Ail LfcJj».l (Jvjj».jJ Aj rt-A '" I *i?»-J ^ *Jl» I^J /«-Cj _^>J

u^ y- Vj .£j U "' [u^t^ U j*j] jlj^- i>. jj*^ ^j'j *W
_Uj _j itu* (V^rSay ^^ ' ' .... j5o ^ I Cjyi -i*j o>*jj I aa« o jjj-j

217 jl ^ii jl ^Jji ^ -Ul ^LiJIj Ifcjsi j' ■&» Sj*m* fc—} ./^ °J-*

L^ Jls-jI SjujI i*.| ,j-. ^ V ci50jj "j*j ^c <u)l L^c^o 1
Ac "^ai jSj rt-xL|tf> Ajjl (Jj-"J ^Lj c (<~' Ml j^J a J~' 0"*" 1 «**"'

c. ^ j I ojJiii^J ira, ^U*t*dl ^L^l J-t Jj°J J I ojJ^J l?tt M**»ei AX^i

J* y^j c^-S jl ej^ycJ vm ^U^pci A^J^ tf. c£ jl aLL£ Jfi \ya
6v>.jJI oJui. jj o_j-^._tJ " ,l ^LloJeS AjUM ,j£- <JU5w J I Ajja-J Jajjw

Eo**-W] J 1 'J- 5 o» 1*0* '<-& '" * So,ljl jl (° W* i^ 1 "^ uH"^

-X^l^lj f»5Cllj-.lj ^Li ol p*I*> Jlij >U)I aj o^tj 1 U i>„aJI ^
iU^JI l^ij yj jSJJ yjl *!». ^£j ■ |L jli (.1^- r Cit ^jUofj

Aj Oj5C> (^y ^U-^ jl Jk; -V29 °j^->" °^* Cr* *i^ li* f»**J
dSy s *^-U a ' Aj jj S J *JU UuIj < d5Ci ^j jkJ i>.-^l ^
dSClLj Ji^.>. ^1 (5Ij uiJLi lil _^fj j& ^jI j«So. ^ t&vo ■& L,

t*J

' /»

'i Fol. SI).

10 Or, according to aomo traooa oftho mutilated t,oxi;. i «.L

W Mutilniiifl AXC -U) I ^-i) I

l7 " foil. j^JLfcStl.

'» Cod. i* Li I.

W Cod. <JU.

-J0 Tlio word i_iL«i| follow.'! on fol. LSaoftho MS. The oonneotion Boonu to bo elm
froni (ho oontoxt iih wi'll iih from the Identity of penmanship and paper. Fol. 8b and ISa
nro diHtingiiiHliablo liy newer ink and paper nnd liy " younger handwriting.

3 > Cod. Ajy .

RUPI'IiEMlSNTS

199

l^'liL-ij lUkLlll frij hyd\ lij£ ^ \&j,j jf-j JZ ^1 u^L^aST
c'tull I cLJ I I J I ^s La Jjjc™Sj ,-«-«~> (J^- 1 _,a& iJ I jui. Lt |
»40 jJ *jJjs iSe*. _^il lltj llu jjSS" yj lis jjXJUl y_ Lj
•U_jj j Oj lj Tc-JiiyaJ ^j.^^^) l/ I vio -Xj. Lj I j < yr .,n J ^/ jj6 j i_i^Cj
LiS3i t)L*J> ojjjtil iLjl i_JJa ^j ti5Ci ^ jA 1/1 -U IjJ^Siii

iiUijJ-1 _p.T ^ -Ojij lJU.1 ^Ij cSjl ^1 JJj "j!j 5^^-. <Uji'

jl o^JI CJ5U-I 'V "Jl t^" V d\j ^j.. V L Jl ^ x L V>'

218 ^^Jlj ^^iJL ^b ^Vl ^y ej/i L Llj * j^JI Jji-I J

ja Ljl \J& jlj Lj(i' CA*^b jjUi-. jl jjjJIT Jj^uJI "JjJj

u_^l - !i (^JJi "j^ji o:^ VI «tS3i o- r 5 ^ u ck "o^ 1 M* J^

j_^DI S'UI^ (JL^>' -UJl LtiLCi lj *L*« d-OJ yj (^_^c_ V Aj aaiI

l-Ub ijli' jLl LglX^i J I Oi*JI V—iJj AS^ywi 2 J (j-XyaJlj I_jj50l J

rtri-"-

Ul

rt^axil lil LlSO ciSGS ,v <iSlj Jjilj ^jJI i JUi

^yl_yy=JI j5C;U jSTjl Iji U^i aJlc JmvII (_jt"^L4 ,^-L ajU. (j-LJI
oI^Oj jJI JuJil ^^liu (jl 4-».jJ f»LJI jSJlj Jylj^aiJI yftil jl
"^ilj^aJlj (j^LyaJI _^A O^' fJ 3 ^ t£JJI ^Jill i_Jx.| ^i AJJ

O^lj ^O Jj tiSClJ Jjuii ^ Lu'l ^J 1J5U1 V jj50 cj^l^l ^*

^ulc

L^

ill

(^uj jl U-U* aLuJI 'UlJL; jL«j' Ajjl ^1

^jJj.xJI aDLj *iL*a. /jkJ'l

^4^4 aJjJ2_£Lj i>„^J I s '' aDJo ^>.j "y. aJjJ Ij^i TSj Alii _^ I J IS
/'if Jj 1 (J'j Jj^l Jl oj'^j jJj lijl oV ftt^J^ a^ a A&j
c-Ux^l J^ Joj u[p. oT^JI Lgj dy ^1 «_>j*" **J e/ >L9 r^S- 1 -'

t^l^L; LLj^ui'il Jlkjl jJ A?ii AjVI jl %-^i a_^C- c. L^.^ £,_j^JI

SX«J1 jAj *4JU J^VI Jjl Jlj Jj— _PI J I Oj->J jJ rffril '?***

Lj clS_i ^)\j iaL^wjl ,Jl?.J <Jj-»i-«J J- rt-^il %-A» [ojJjJ I c-ljaolj

.aUIj ji^Jl Jl SJI VI o^

»* Cod. (J^J-b.
»» Fol. 18b.

« Cod. 1&J....I.

200

SUPPLEMENTS

III.

218 ,,^ J«. ^Juf JJJS p^Ls *J}| J_^j JUJ JlS ^*»s-SVl tfClU
jjl^J (•*!'>. jj-**' 0>»«a% fjS j^il J-* «k«i laJj.ftl iSji Oy-r"-5

aLIjUI ^ i_ilii=L-l i>_ ^ ^^J JlS iaU {j£- *4^j LUiyaJI ulj
oJjo (5JJ!j Vl [»Lft ^^-J Zy~~> ijf) Jlij ( lUuUll ^ a&Li Jtf
__^l V.} »lt ^ i_ iCu.1 *U V_j |»Lt jV jJi-'l i»U JjSl V ai-. ^-il

(jj^_„JL> »aS l£j.A* r^ f»^ 6 lr*'-3 r*~J SJ*" <^-»l* -i lt^J >/**' (V* _^* -

pi' III ijjw- i>l (J Uj ( :| pli^j OU#l - |»^fes (»4sU J_9-«*5"
Ij-i-ai" Vj C*iljl <^-j[)4 *XL* OSS' ^ dSGjn |Jli coljl fcS-jljb

rtri-iu ^ 11* rthiJ^.1 J^-» 1-ilj. 1^j_j-o -Vjo ajS •' oy.i c i<"-i U*fyw
JJ-^I 61 *J /i Ail *^^VI ^ < fJbJI kill *JU pUI t JiJi

AjjI*-. Jj» (j-bl {jt. aAi-l IJjfc "jiwVI J 15 jJsb J*L2JI Jjia L)b"
-U* Vv JS US _pcJI .i jO-jj JJj-l jlT J-i (jli (j-*^! J*
iULiS .j lJ *-Jii t/"Lil (JIT JJi (jls « Us jJjii. b/lj Aj «iaJu L Ail

aj l JaS i L VI J-wi V oylb JjV^j D-&H ^ £' JM l ^ i "

13 1 j-i ju * J-J-^-i o* r^ 15 * 1 '"' ^

IJ*J

l^ti-

Or"

220

•»■ O" w- i_r.. i_r jTi , ■- ■ -> -o (_r

1 Hero ii long imiiid.
» al-.SIm'miii, I, p. (12 ^J^A-i.

;| 'I'hn "alienation Hiooiy" oited hero iH manifoBted In bettor uttestod traditional
Btatoinvnta l"i>. 'J'lic main piiHHiign mcuiiim l.o In- iil-liiiKliuri, KilSb nl-filnn, no. 6.

Ij_^*l iJUi — l?cJ-l ^j_i ^2)J U aJI U_}5C;ui tix^^s tixJL ^ ^1 LuJ'l

i rtiCj Ij^JJ JL. jj-o yS o-Uj c^JJI VI i3L.j *Q* uJ'^ V aJIs
Thin wiih pi-iiliniily iiIho tlm philosophy of the pre-Ifllartlio ArnliH. Durnyil 1). ul-Himmiih
uays in an nddiviw: _^J. i_iL« ^a. Ji} JJi _^a- t3b rt^JJI t3l c VjA u
LJliLI ^ .!.//»;«.- XVI. p. 1-12.2.

■■ Pol. 1-ia.

n ('ml. i^-Ll'l o_/^3\ without. k_j. If the reading of the eadox were to ho uphold,
then cbta would represent a roforenoo to sflrah LIX:2 \j_/^c-\s, well-known ovidonoo

for the oxpononlii of analogy; m-i> aliovo p. 8(1.

SUI'Pl-KMKNTS

201

1 oljJI iy *«» • Uabi.1 tSJJI ^LiJI 13V a^ blj oK' W. jij

aSJ^j. J J IS J IS 7i~>ii~=JI ^Jjj^. ^jlicJI J_x^«,| ^j» J^; ^»

■^3 i>. >,l» Jj« tiSlSB^JI £* ILic 6-.I ,j* ^.^ i>. JjjCmI ,y
i^iffi >Vi j±3 i'j^aJI cl^s ^ (£531 jt ( U Lj Jl«J y 1 |>J t _ f LJU Jls
o^ 1 JjJI J IS A»1 _^ i>.l ^c-j ( 1L»»L iL. jl (jJpU v^y Vl

i ' cSjAl Vj a^L SLj jjkUJl j-UI i^lsT"

(j-uji uUvi ^j-j v esJJi (JJjcji «mi a*>.j oi*s _^i j is

&• ^ °^J olyiJI ^ A^ a^i 0=.^ jl (^ V aJj: Vl p^LS

iij4r' Jj^ ^. ^jbJ- luijj v-^ j^-l Ij*j *»M "Uil Jj-»j

^ L^T C-XUJJ JUg (Jjli jls '">lT Vj ^jlj J^J^-I SU-g ^

*^lj f^ljls (**£*' ^-Dl J>"j aL, ^ Vj "j^-j Jjs -UJ I v bi" ^

'is-jj aLji ^j Vj c)1j2)i ^j j^._jj v L 6N 'U*y^i} icjo aIu

Oji*}- 1 f^^J ^UivJI i>» ^Vjl^i ail A*3-j "JlC JlS f AJtA<ij
^>.| ^t 7t;j>c^> -j I J*._^j Vj ajU^JI ^ ^.i ^JJlk V_j <j*l*2,U
0^._^" (>. -^-^ C»***» JlS .UA ^1 t>. (?) ijlS' (ji-3 i all J-oJ-lj rt-3-^>
__,-JiJlj ^^a-^JI Oli Ijilj ,j^l (J-IS ,j_. Jjlj *_}-i (J-LaJI JjJJJ

< pX—LS c-Ji-" A-LJI JlS (ji^liJI l^j-i 61 TJ- 6 u". 'i»J-^j a*j < (j^LjjJL

JlS *X Aj ci» c^ li_i o*rJ'l V JlS Jjjj . tf. ^~JI ^J

^^Jl jl <JU-I ^Jl ijj_ r ~. JlS JlS l^iJI ,y-j f [J».j JjJ j' >-jU-l
Jj-j^UI «w Ail ^-^c- yj| ^ ^^s. ^j < UJ'j^' -*«j \J*J* JjP
221 ^jIscU HhjUIIj pj'lii jl «j-j ^^ii (.gjJljJ SLwjlSllj pi 'IjI Jj-f)
pjdvs Alii Jj—j IwjU-^I ^jt p5CiL L jjSOj J^VJ-I ^^JlxJj |»l_^-l
*j>y i aLJI JlS (^-"^Jl (jC- rt^JLi t>_ *Ji?"' U^J ' oj.kia.li

!>_ ^ i^jllo ^ ^i L jji^ " L An -C.£. jjl JlS f ju^Uilj

o Cod. liki.1.

' Cod. Oj4.

a Cf. the intoroating romarita by legists and philologists about this in ul-Kuyut-i,
Muzliir, II. p. 168. (According to Mvhammcdanitehe Sktdien, If. p, 17, n. -i, q&#fyah

in linos (1 and 7 wan changed to wii'lii/ahy

o Pol. Mb.
'" Cod. IjJI.

11 Col. Ida.

202

HUITLKMUNTK

(_j*r^ cT^I J^M ^ ^jc**^" <J>* '^*J ^-* t5j**'j (j~*-*J'
VI LU^JI c^JU £* ^jj L '-dSl^j 1 *J| I^Jjhu jl ffr3 l^l Jt

^jtj < i&Jju ,jslj IJI IJa J-^ 6>l_>Jy L _a^ aj_* c£j5l ja Ic

-JJsailj jtfVI *sJ/ uy f^^ [^ \j*^\ ui J'tt Jls pJ—" i>. JCUs

Jjbl iu/US" ^ ,JI ^jAiil _j^ii l8 j««**l l-U> J jAAj Jjjj ^j^-jljillj
iaslxvaJI .<-*-> (jt J-"-=-l O". i»U*i fciJtw J.lii _Jj| (J lii iHiU^aJI c. ^jl*
6j*»c2~> oZja£. _£C- ojlri' jjjJjcXj l/.-^I rfr&J I *U»W L"}*l> ,J Jltt
l>. £J_J"I J (J 1 * J 1 * L-JUI l>. tlkt ^J ( i>jj ^J (JjI-^II ^

*A6 ^1 j\ u *Jj+ 4Jil 61 ft,^«J J*yJI Jj2j 61 pS'ljl f»^-

(Ja-I «U)I 61 Jji jl AA* *Jl |lj A^^aJ J- u^-J-0 J^-J 'j£- «U)I J_^ii

,&£ _>jI Jls < aj ^T Lj "Mla-I J. ojJi' dlil Jjii <u ^1 jl II*
/ytj i iu. _jl 6I_^ jV o°* ~f?°. ltI^Ij (J- 3 -' _s' fj*- L* a<v> oJjii

,JI (J 15 ja- jl |»jJlj «U)lj 6j-^JJ f«^J 61 J>"jJlj -JJjt i_i' "j^y
" ,_j9 6'^-» 6". 6j*^ (j*J ' rtr-^V AJj^,j AU» ij'j uJku «Ull V^

Jj^_pi ,Jlj -UJl t^ls? Jl Jls aJj-jj au! ,JI oj!i_/ jUi' •0y
ij* ^yixa. 61 i-i_^-i (j*,' [j*J < a^Lui ij li |j-iJ' lili L>- j»l^ L»
222 \j\j t _ r -HJ' Vj Jil ijj'l ii^a. ^V Jls Oy»J-l i>. ^U i>. J'*^
,JUj' «^.Ul Jl! J_y& iJUj" 4I1I tS^j £/$ blJU. ^j ^c I Ac- i_i2J
•UJl Jj^ bjfjj Lx^« ilSoU^lj c-Jl J_jiJ'j *«J^ 'U)l Jj- j JUj
^jjJI ^l^.l (>, 6ijl& jj* lSj>JI 6Li^ ^j « =-Lio L« f*^SJ ^i
jujI ^oj 1 J I J 15 Jls '"y 1 i>. auI Jut 6". <i5l -V i_~»*- Jls
JU l^j^i J^-j >t -UJl Jls \p ''U_j 6>5o 61 [si] *^jj jl ^
aJj-jj (JUj' 'Ull Jl> L Lj Jl5 1*5" j^s rt-t aJj^j J 15 Lj

Aj| 7-l^f-l L)* a^>J jVC-J ' ,7 Alt l_j_>t-j' ^J «U»^>.jj «».Ul _J**cS /**

is Cod. addit: Vl.

" Doubtfldi ood. Juail.

" Cod. aj*..

m Pol. I V.l).

'» Cod.y- (> J-t i> 'UJl J--t.

" Cod. I4IC..

SOPPLBMBNTS 203

J^2j ii-^. U c-~- J'ls c^fjJI jJul y>UjJ| ^=.JU j> ( ^^ ju

1 -Oil) 1 ftl^ill ^^U yi t^- 1 ^ 1 £k I Cr* y Jl»
IV.

From Inuun al-^aramayn, Waraqdl fi nsul al-fiqh with the com-
mentary of Ibn al-Firkiih. (Cf. p. 67-69).

a) Fol. 12a: ILiyiJI ,y- ^^Jlj Jj^^l JXt "jjJI :U_^j

a^lvi ji v*ii ^ j| ^' oi j* jjjji u^ l vi i *ir^

^ o^>^< C-i^" lilj J-»il Vj-^" A*^i J-**' ^*!W* (<~^i ' A-lt 6*^

Ai4 i\J.\ 61 Jt JJjJI "Ji L VI ^0_jsj ^Vl J* cJ-i. ^'IjSJI

Ji U 6ls U *-J-I Jl* rV* cUt--^! A_lc J-aJcls ia.L'i/l _jl l_.jj|

•A^JLj cLixJ j_j^j jl (j5Cr.j b^t j*J _ r »Vl t>> as^ J* JJjJI

" J-^JL. JJjj jJjo 61 Vl ^^J ZijpL\ iiLuflJI 61 yul'l 63S0J

22:i iplillj aIIU-I (^SIjSJI ^ «i^ AjL^sJI dj& A5j a_c l^jji

^-Jl iO^I Ai~yJI JbUj J^aiUl JJjJ jJLij j^Vl (y» 'U~y=JI AijUaJI

oJju *XojUj lil IjJ^-ilj JUj' ±}j$ :1 J..^J.;.j JJJj ^Vl (jt 1-Ua.y.
<_>j,JI ^ tLgJiiJI 1&L-*. ^jU^. ^ '■ oi^i oil^-UL _^\ 'VjLs^

J^ij lj tlj **L*> J^j-JI 61 j»Aj5 jA_j ^^1 j|j* aJ UjUa ojlj Lc_
lilj (J Uj' -^jSj t i_jjj| Ac jjL-yaJI Uimftj J-4-^! i-J t5_A"'J
llrf : ' 'Ub^VJ JaJ-\ Jjo ijljJI _^*Vl tSX If* "^^ ljJilK*»U f*4*
(^_^ i "ji jj-J tolj o^j-^ A«S j^VI 'VjL^- juJi A-)_pu t_ijj-jJI ^ i_9^v3
IjJLgJIitj (JUS aJjS c_jL ^ oJut JjU ia-L - )^ _^J-| Jjo i_jl_jJI _^Vl
>*VI A* l^ijy*. J -,.-. a :,.^ J^JAj CJ'_^ '^"j^ Aju^ (*?*iV '^1
t_Jj*.J /.At Jt J-»JI J^l ljUll J* J^aiXll JJAJIj lUUVl ci 1

u^-j'i/l ^s ly^i-iU i^JI ' c. w a» lill lJL^- jjy cisO:^ 1 jlJa^Vl

3 Cod. J,yi c:-..
3 Cod. J-viL.
* Cod. i^i.
» Cod. IUIj^.
» Cod. ,t^il.

U.

201

SUPPLEMENTS

l^Sl^Jul Jm jUUSlAj ^VU 6%ai\ cUill JJi C\j*. j|f jUWSfl jU
< 1j.ilk^>li rt4y»- blj (J^ *Jji >^ |*-^> bi ***^ jJiJ-l ->->o ja\

b) Fol. 17a: j| JoJi^xJIj X*.bVl I4J .iljllj _^l ^L^> a£j

i—.Ui'i/i _^c. ^juc, j*i\ '^^ -^jjj jy < ^a^jij &^j&ji ji ^>>«^ji

_£*^JI ^Juj uk)U »j!.l*il »^>" [cr*] *?*J J^ V^'l uk

jSjlj jl yJUiJ jfcaj iisvaJl (J I bj AS^U jj^J ^Nl J' OtP^ (J*

^ *jju Lc \J&\ *2&J ojj-s-^l IMl [>* *il» uj^UI ^Nl ^jjj
^il JjL.,^ AjjJ iVO ' <^jjx1\j i__^».ljJI <jLj ^ J-JI ojLiVI

' 0*J^' ls* lij*^»y o^aJI c4^ bU J bo -Ujij Ij^lk^li -AUS.
Ajj,.JJIj rt^i-i L> 1_ji^1 J bo -UjS OjA^UI j->y\ i^v 5 AjijJ ij-'j

•OftSj aiji I^J^i J bo -Ujj' ^ii £j_j£JI yJW, j-jVI "U^ ■ijjj

< boL«j lij> (^-J^ J^ ^ Lilj J bo

V.

From Abu Sa'd 'Abel al-Karim al-Sam'ani, Kitab cd-anmb. MS of
the Asiatic Museum, St. Petersburg'. (Cf. p. 26-30; 104-7).

First article: ^jjIjJI ".

1UL^- t r -Jb_dl CU ijb rtr"\ (Jlj ijb i_-~*J-j (Jl <L>jJ I a-\*

yiUill Jjb! *LI Jl^-sJ^I ( i* i>. &j\& jU_L* ^1 i_-~*A_. I_^>r^j|

i>. (>-J-l i>. .J* lj*. ^l -^ {»-4jJI _jjI f «-s- : - j °_a> («4aij [< aar." j
£&" t^^jlJJI is^^JI ls"*"*" l/^" AsJI i>. liSOL Cr. J*« (>. [»««*

«a— _^V=-Jj (j'j^^ Ji-^' (iJiW-l A»—J L)L.ly«7 O^-^L* ^ XiAjlJJl ^a

t fC*S\ LI X»j53bj J->l^l J»«*J i>, O^-l *^l V ^' ■ il - u ^

' Should probably l«> ohonged to ^>-y _j-

a Cr. Ilm ilislirim, p. 674, 1. II: ftj-ul V ^y-J (_S_^>J JU^J,-
1 Sn> Not inn Hommairei ilrs nmwUBrttS ttfabes, p. Mil.
« l' - »[. 1021).

SUPPLEMDNTS

205

JiiU-l

c5Jj lT^I Ur^J JiljDI JMld-l <u)I Jus jjI Jiil aAc. ^.^^il
(_j9jj'j c)U4JU*»l tS^^iix-JI j-UjJI jjIj jbtoOl jjjl j^c w| a^.

225 3 rvn^ ii-3^ 1 tS-aU*. ^J Jijj jl J I l^5C ai jlsj IjU^

!>_ j.Li _^5G jjI ^jLc (>. -Jjb uj.L J* ^ u^JJI ajjjjIoJI ^j
u 5 ^- ob^i J* I £* 'j\jj^\ isijUl ajuii ySdi «>. ^-^
-Lf. p^sJI U ( ^ u , ^U ,>_ ijb l_-*j^. ,J* !)LJ I4JJ3 jls' jIjoo
<U)I 0-£ _^5Cj blj t£j-UJI "^Js- Cf, {yM •V*' kU (5j*JI J*^ «uil
*^ ^J ' l^^ 1 -^-" • A '° ji ^ • A * J "' jN ^' *** ^JJ -'jb ^jI 0*.l
U cJL, u_-— ki-1 jSo _jj| Jli' ^ilj^^l ^jj (>. ^ 6". !>~J"' -^'
jl <u* Jj: "bfl Jjju jJU. otf L Jba is? jfr'f dO£ ^J1j_^JI _^o
ix~. Jlj-i ^i AjJ»Vj l^JISj I_^~j l~i ajx c-Jil^ Jls ^ Jlii ^

Second article: ^yaUill '.

i_^jlij-. jji?!^) AilLa. 2>J _^».UiJI i_jUi^.| J I ILw-JI oAa . . .
Jx ,_r>aJb jj^ ^U ^Ikll t.^V [yl^vpVI ^U t>_ Jjb

1^y>lkJI tSj^aJI o^-~J-l lt; Jltf cr~J-l jjI n&" °J& r^h bs>ysUi
l$±j\si\ T-LvaJI (>. l j-~J-l Cf. -A*^ (j^ OOa. ^jl^ i_wfc.L» j^bi jli'
_^j| j49 ijli Clj ( t5Jl_7^'JI 'il -V 1 ls>' J 1 , r^ Ji' *■** t^JJ
^jC* J-^>Vl "^L^-^l '^slkH *v_JiAJI i_i)i- i>_ J^Lt i>. -ijb oL-J-u,
ij"_ (j^-iu/ [(V> I a-v." tjb^-^l J^c o'jL (jLiU Jj* I ^ obj J»l«Uj
6-. i«Lw*j ^J-jJI ^^ i>_ >&4j ^-^Jlj l5jJj-» ^ jy 1 -? Vj*
_^-^j^jIj Ji««ll -VjjA 1 1) 0^ (_^t^,l !Y» ,^*-"J jjJ^-wJ (J I (J-=-j Ja_^~<
lijj ijbj _/t> UaJI c-jI^c-^I *UI jAj Lgj J-^i i_iVj ^ I Aij aJ3 pS

220 l!u i'_>j>t j^c ajIjJI jl VI oj£ oj^UI .^ ^jjj IjaIj IsCli

i_j^flju (*j^ i_jLu_jjj "^.UJI ^si (3» ( b_^jj ijb (^ Alsi >Uc <_5jj

:l lloiii follow different i£ijb wIiomo ninlmh doM not, indiunlo the Dilwudi //'/A

Interpretation, but cofera to some anoeatow liy the name of DlwUd.
1 Pol. 280a.

206

KlII'l'I-lCMKNT.S

^Ca. Jjj Aj^s>I_jj j^mB. ,j» a^Lj l?"* 3 - 1 U&iy ^ i^=4 (J* (i*J

x^l Jl2j o_^jj IJ* ,>> (j5 ^. * *ll * col Jli ^jyj !A» oJoi
JU < J I _jyA\ J aJ c)$ts V «U* o-lJ ^Jfi 0-. && Jr^ !>.'

L aJ cifli f-Ull ^ yjl C-i'J (J 1 * AjlA l>„ >&* *^\ ^J^-3 %)*
Jli dCiL, rtr*s ii50 _^A cJi ^Loj J ye. Jli ui5C aAII Jjo

lio^UI ojAjJI ^ -Oj lij^ \'jcl2.j Lj^l ll3Lc jU' o_^>ll v^
227 Jjo a^I ° asU iJ ^J^- IDj jjJlLj (5jjJJI iXl* c>. u-^* ^y 1

" 6jfU& 7*J-> (j->J <* *UJI (j-J "W-J-J f»^*J ^^

2 Ood. jSjdl ; oould not boj^Ail «iii(io in tliis paBSBge tliia 'AbbaH hna not yot
boon mentioned.

3 Cod. Cj 1 I •

* Cod. Aj I , perhaps Aj i .
a Fol. 280b.

o Cod. Aili..

7 Cod. j-j.

8 Cf. AbQ i.l'-MiibuHin, II, p. 170.

11 Hero u poem, ouch in cjuotcd.

SUPI'I.ICME.NTX

207

O) lAjil "AL>j>. ^j-Jj Lg^.~J- OJ J} ,]j ,.>.-! A™.j l_lL»OJ ^f- j I

Vj^ i>. >-i«ijJ j^lSJIj cSy'Lk" t ^ l 4rv^l *jl* a 1 . J^> _jjI oL

_jj!j < iu_JI ^ Jlj-i _^-i ^ Ojii «j*J ijb o 7 . iXuS oL JJj
Jj t^^lkll AJLiJI JJ±\ lu (>! Jli (>_ .Ua.1 t>. -Ult -La l ^J-[

^5C ^j| ^ ^_jLJ| Oil " l^-HI ^.li 33? j|^j ^L^JI ■ui! J^c

111 Miastag in the oodex; of, Fihrial, \i. 218, 1. 4.
11 Cod. I4J.
'» Cod. ^yi.

220

ANNOTATION 1
To pages 10, and 14, note 8

Ra'y and qiyus in poetry

Nothing can better demonstrate the lively character of theological
disputation about ra'y and traditional theology tlian the fact that
during the second century, when these disputations were current
among thoologians, oven the poetess 'Ulayyah bint al-Mahdl (d. 210),
tho sister of the caliph Hariin al-liashid, refers to theso theological
topics of the day in a love poem:

The mutter of love is no easy matter,

No export can inform you about it;

Love is not regulated by ra'y, analogy, and speculation '.

In different words, this poetess expresses the same idea in a short
poem, tho main idea of which is "that love is based on injustice"

Not appreciated in matters of love is a lover who is versed in present-
ing arguments ".

The various applications of tho expression ra'y in ordinary linguistic
usage, on tho one hand, and in theological usage, on the other, will
become clear from an examination of the two short poems following.
I do think that they aro quite interdependent, although I cannot
decide on a relative age because of the uncertainty of their authenticity.
In al-Slia'ranl, vol. 1, p. 02 we read: al-Sha'bi and 'Abd al-Rahman
b. Mahdl reprimanded anyone who espoused ra'y. They would then

1 Aulu'tm, IX, i>. 95, oontalns thorns two lines only. I found a more oomplotc version
in hI-HuhiI. HI, p. 11):

j^S..lsJ\ 3 crU-i- 11 -; % iS V^U 'J.'4 tS^ ^ ir^

- AgMnX, IX, p, 8!i: o ^ f

p.yJ-1 uijJti" (j^, (j-iLc cS>a-JI f»X». yi & > *& ** ^-J

A similar allusion bo </'>'» and MAOU i" mattow of love is made by tho poet 'All b.
IliHlmm, Ayluliu, XV, p. HO, 0:

ANNOTATION 1

209

recite the following poem:

jirtfi ,^u) 33*11 j^j

iiy

U

J^~ •£« yjj| ^

*Ulj d^OJ-l ^ "^y vj

The religion of the Prophet Muhammad has been chosen; what n

excellent mount the traditions are for a man !

Do not turn away from tradition and its representatives, for ra'y

is the night, and tradition is day.

In Iblnl (fol. 13b) the same verses are quoted in the name of Ahmad
b. Hanbal (however, in tho first line it reads alchtdru, I choose, instead
of mukhtdr) but added is a third lino:

jfjJl l*) icjb ^^Jlj S M y\ j&\ j^ 0^

Quite often man fails to recognize the way of the right guidance,

although the sun is brilliant and shedding light.

Now Ibn "Abd Rabbih in Kilab al-'iqd al-fand, I, p. 25 quotes
verses of an anonymous poet who expresses the same idea, namely,
that ra'y is comparable to tho night, but with quite a different meaning:

r-L^L

C^

L^

c_yp J Ay

ii-C

i'J C-

1--|H J

J I JUJI JjT r^l

-y3_J

r*

ili

Opinion (or advice) is like the night, its edges are sombre,
but night shall not be illumined except by dawn;
So add, then, the light of other people's opinion to your own:
then brightness of the lights will bo increased for you.
I.e. your opinion alono is darkness, if you desire illumination, then,
do not rely on it alone, rather, obtain the opinion of other people.
In this case it is unmistakable that the two verses are related to
each other, and that either the theological JJ ^i J| was applied
by the secular poet to the ordinary, and older usage of the word ^fj,
or vice versa.

ANNOTATION 2

To page 30.

'Ilm al-iJchtildfat,

A particular distinction must be made bctwoon the science of differ-
cncc of opinions in the legal .schools and their imams, on the one hand,
and knowledge of the "differences of opinion of the Prophet's com-
panions", on the other hand — in so far as such distinction finds
230 expression in the literature of tradition. It can be observed on first
glance in no matter which chapter of the literature of tradition that,
with respect to one and the same question of canonical law, different
traditions offer contradictory solutions in the name of different
Companions. Since from the Ziihirite school's point of view the main
emphasis in legal questions is put on the teachings of tho traditions,
it must of necessity concern itself seriously with the criticism of such
contradictory traditional data, in order to avoid the arbitrary tendency
towards the one or the other of the conflicting traditional data. If this
criticism is to bo successful and to be applied in practice, it must be
based on the pragmatic acquaintance with the divergent data, of tho
tradition (ikhlilaf fit). Ilm Hazm praises Muh. I). Nasi- from Marw(d. 2!)l)
as tho most perfect master of this science l « Ibn Hazm, too, places
much emphasis on this science and he cites several statements from
old authorities in support of its recommendation. One says: "He who
docs not know ikhlilaf shall not succeed" and the other: "... we shall
not consider a scholar". According to Malik, a person who is not
familiar with the science of ikhlilaf ought not be permitted to pass
judgement. This statement by the famous Medincso scholar is re-
presented to refer neither to the science of the differences of opinion
nor to the points of difference of the prevalent legal schools, but to
the acquaintance with the divergent data of tho traditional author-
ities and of the abrogated and abrogating passages of tin' Koran and
the traditions in cases in which ono of the contradicting data is ex-
plicitly invalidated in favour of another one. Concern for this science
of difference of opinion and for the points of difference of the legal

Tahdhib, p. 12(1, fabaqut al-lmffn;, X. no. 19. of, Al>ii iil-Miilifiiiin, It, p. 170.

ANNOTATION 2

211

schools — as we have seen — is displayed in a rich literature. Since
in this instance — so Ibn Itazni maintains the imams Abu Hanifah
and al-Shafi'I agreed with the opinion expressed by Malik, it follows
that the judges and mvflis of these schools were at variance with the
founders of the schools to which they unconditionally adhered.

Ibtal, fol. 19a: juJ "Ai o'^.'i'l »*~j i ft* Ljy. ^1 Cf. -^ Jlsj
i_J_jii iUk. l>J IL^L-i c~*»— J 13 cSjjaM -C-£ <>_ o"^ ftt-j ( lllLc

J*} jvJv* ajjl Jj*.j i— iUiwpI iJ")*CU.| (JU ^Ijil Jjbl O^L^T 4j

SjZMJ prOr*^ J*~M ui"Ai. "Aj ^jJUiJIj ia~L=- ^ I Jji 1,1b j J&£
Ijijl L» I^jjUU. JJii tiSO-0 lj-~J IjilT jU V *1 ^ &&? aJ*! *jj|

JO

BIBLIOGRAPHY

213

BIBLIOGRAPHY

"Ahd ul-Wii-hid nl-Marmkushi. al-Mn'jib fi lalkhis akhbCtr al-Mtighrib. Ed. R. P. A. Dozy.

Lstod. Leiden, 1817.
'Aliil al-Waliid al-Marrfikushi. al-Mn'jib fi tulkliis akhbtir til- Maghrib; l,ho history oftho

Almohada, prooedod by a sketch of the history of Spain. Bid. it. P. A. Dozy. 2d ed,
Luidon, 1881.
AbO al- li'iuiij iil-lHNthiini. Kiliib al-ughaiti. 20 vols. BOlSq, 1284-96.

AbQ al-PidiV, Isinfi'Il il)ii 'Alt Miiklitamir tn'rikh al-btislinr. Annales rnuslcinioi nrabieo

ot latino. Ed. J. J. Retake, c vols. Hofhiao, I78D-01.
AbO HuTiil, Muhammad Ibn Muhammad al-lraidl. Tafsir AbS al-Su'tid, 2 vols. BOl&q,

I27fi.
"Antarah Ibn Slmddad, al-'Absi. Shut 'Anlarah, 32 vols. BOWq, 128I1-87.
al-A'zraqi, Muhammad ilm 'Alid Allah. Akhbtir Mitkkah. (lesr.liir.Iitr. and Jlcsclircibviig

for Slailt Meklca. [Die Chronikon dor Stadt Meltktt, Bd. 1]. Ed. F. Wfletenfeld.

Leipzig, LS68.
al-HaliUlhuri, Ahmad il>n Yahya. [Piduh iil-bnUliin]. Liber uxptignutionia rogionum.

Ed. M. it, do Ooojo. Leiden, 1803-00.
Barges, .loan Joseph Leandro. 'Vlrmr.ru, anetenne capitulc. da. royavmt dr. cc nom, su topo-

graphir, son histoirc, description dr. ses principalis iminiimrnls, iiiti-rdtitrs, ttgcudrs

rt ricils divers . Paria, 1850.
al-Iiaydiiw!, 'Abd Alln.li ilm 'Unmr, [Tafsir, full titlo Anwar id-ltinzil tva-iisriir id-la'wU],

Jlridliait'ii Cuuimr.nla.rins in Curaniint rx rotld. parirusibiis,dresdr.iisi.biisrl.lipsirusibiis

rdid.il 11. 0. Fleischer. Lipsiae, 18-10-18.
van don 1'org, l.odowijk Willom Cliriatiaan. Or. brginsrlrii van. Iir.t Muhanimrtliiaitsr

reeht, volgr.ns dr. imdm's Abac Itanifttt en asj-Sjdfr't. 's-Gravonhago, 187-1.

van den Borgi Lodowljk Willom Ohrlstlaan. Di contractu "do ut dm" jure, moharnmtiant.

Leiden, 18(!8.
al-liiiiniiwi, Muhammad ilm 'A lid ul-Dil'im. Ift'isltii/ah ... 'alii Mttirli al-ijIuiiitiliUl-'tdtamah

Ibn Qiisim al-CihazxI. Bflllq, 1287.
al-Hukhiiri, Muhammad ibn Ismail, td-.lumi' al-sahih tra-bi-hiimishihi sharhihi al-

■miistimmti bi-ul-Niir ttl-siirt, by llasim al-'Idwi al-Ilamzfuvi. 10 vols. Cairo, 1270.
Chardin, Jean. Voyages ... tn Pent rl entires lie-ax dr VOrirnt. 10 voIh. Paris, 18! 1.
al-DabuHl, 'Umax ibn "Mi. Ta'sis ul-nttztir fi ikhlildf al-ii'inintuli. Cairo, 18 — .
al-Dayrahi, Ahmad ilm "Uinar. Ohaijtd al-maqsiid li-man yata'ifS al-'aqrtd. Buliiq, 121)7.
al-l>luihabi, Muhammad ilm Ahmad. [Tiibaiinl al-liuffiiz]. Liber rltissium vivoritm qui

Koran! H Iradiliomtm rogii.il itmr. cxccUucrunt. Ed. I 1 '. W listen fold. QottingOO, 1888-84.
Dozy, Kcinharl Piolor. Ksstii stir I'hisloire de. t'islamismc. Trad. Victor Chauvin. Leiden,

1871).
Dozy, ltoiuluirt Pictor. Oesehirhle for Maureii. in iKpiiitic.n bis zur Iirobcru.il g A iiilal aniens

dvrcli die Al moriwidr.n (711-1110). DouIhuIio AUBgabe mil. Original boiLriigen doa

Vocfaeaori. 2 Bdo. Leipzig, 1874.

Dozy, Koinharl, 1'iel.er. Snp/ilt'.nii ul aux diclionnairrs arabrs. 2 voIm. Leiden, I SSI.
Dugali, <luHiave. llisioirr. des pliilosoplirs rl des the'.alogir.ns •inusiduians de Gil'~ it J2G8
dr. J.-C. Paria, 1878.

Krman, Adolf; F. PraoloriiiH ; A. Midler. "Arabien und dor Mam". Deutsche Morgan-

liindisehe. (Irselheltnft. Jtihrr.sbrrir.hl, 187!), 189-67.
EstOrnOZy, WttlBin. Da In domination, lun/ite dans I'anrieiiiie. rhjiic d' Alger. Paris L840
I'Miigel, QuatftV. "Ubor die KIonsoii der baneni.i«olien KoohUigolobrlon". XiichsisrJte.

Akadr.mic tier Wisst-.nsrlitiflr.n, Leipzig. I'hilologim-h-historisr.hr. Klasse, Abhtind-

lungm. Bd. 3 (1801), 200-:iG8.

Flugol, OubUv. "Ubor Muhammad bin Isblk'a Fihriat al-'uMm". ZDMO, Bd. ill (lsr.o),
fir,o-050.

al-lilianiiui, Ahiuail al-Dayrabi. Set al-l)ayrabi, Ahmad ibn 'Ulnar.

al-(lliazali, Abu Hainid Muhamiuail ibn .Mubainmad. Ihi/tT 'tdniu. al-din. i voIh. BulttQ,

12S0.
Jil-(lliazali, Abu l.liiinid Muhammad ilm Muhaniinad. [Ai/i/u/m al-walad\. () Kindl

Dio boriihmto etbjaoho Abluuidlung Clhnwnli'H. Arabiseli und duutaoh, von Joseph

von llammor-PiirgHtiill. Wien, 1838.
do Cloojo, .Michael .Ian. Olossiirium zar llibliatlirai. grogrtiphoriini arabirorum. Loiden,

1870-!)l.
Ooldzlher, tgnoz. "'All b. Mejmfln ol-Magrihi und Bein SiHuimpiegol des uHblichon

Mam". ZDMO, Bd. 28 (187-1), 203-330.
Goldzihor, Ignaz. "Aiih oinem Uriolb don llerrn Dr. (loldziher an Prof. FleiHuhor".

ZDMll, Bd. 31 (1877), 5-15-1!).
Goldziher, Ignaz. "Beiiriige zur Lil,eral,urgeHehiohl:o der Sl'fi und dor Biiiiniliselien

Polemlfc". Akadrinir. tier Wisseiisrlttiften, Wien. I'liilosopliisrh-historisehe. Klasse.

SUzuagslierichti!, Bd. 78 (1874), 430.52.1.
(loldziher, ignaz. "lieil.riigo -zur (ioHehiohto der SpruohgolehrHnmlccit boi don Arahorn,

1-111". Aktidr.niir. tier Wissciiscliufte.it, Wien, I'hilosophiseli-liisloriselie. Klassr.

SUzungsberir.hle.. Bd. 07 (1871), 207-51; 72 (1872), 587-031 ; 73 (1873), 511-52.
(loldziher, Ignaz. "Uo OUlto doa Hainl-H ohez Ioh Musulmaim". Jicvne. dc Vliistoirc des reli-
gions. Vol. 2 (1880), 257-351.
Goldziher, Ignaz. "Proben muhaniniedauiseber Polemik gogon den Talmud". Jesclturum,

Zcilsc/irifl f-il-r die Wissciischuft ties Judenlums, VIII (1872). 70-104.
(loldziher, Ignaz. "Kpit.ta's (Jraiumat-ilc <1oh arabiHelien Vulgiirdialeokw vou Agyjilon".

'/jOMII, Bd. 35 (1881), 51-1-520.
Ooldzlher, Ignaz. "Zur Cliarakl,orislik (lelal ud-din us-Sujuli's und seiner lilerarisohen

Thtttigkeit". Aktidcmic, der W issctiscliaflen, Wiru. I'liilosophisch-hislorisrlir. Klasse.

mzungsbe.rir.blc. Bd. 00 (1871), 7-28.
(loldziher, Ignaz. "Zur Lit-oraturgoBehiolile doN <•/»!/«.' al-(immS". ZDMO, Bd. 35 (1881),

117-52.
I.liijji Khalilali. Kttshf al-'Annun. I.rxiam hihiiographicum rl cne.ijrlopacdirum. Ed. and

tr. G. inOgul. 7 voIh. Leipzig and London, 1836-68.
al-l!nriri, QOslm ibn 'All. ill- M 'aqiiimV . Les Hianrcs dr. Hariri. PublieeH on arabe avou

eommentairo eboisi par Silvestro do Haoy. 2o 6d. revue Bur les inaiuiHeritH ol; aug-

montuo par J.-T. lleinaud ot II. Derenbourg. 2 voIh. Paris, IS17-G3.
von Hase, Cai'l August. Jlandbuch der prolrsta.ntisr.lirn Polemik gcgen die Kiimisr.lt-

Kidholisr.hr. Kirclic. 1. Aufl. Leipzig, 1802.
Host, tieorg lljei-siog. Niir.hrirlilrn von Mart'ikos und Pes, im. Laiide. selbst gesainnielt,

■in den Jiilirrn J7G0 bis 17GS. Alia dein Danisoben iiborHOtzt,. Kobenhavn, 1781.
Iloiiliima, Matth) Theodor. Dr. strijd oer.r hrt dogma in dr.n Jslihii lot op el-Aslt'iiri. Leidon,

1875.

214

IllIil.lOCHAl'IIV

llurgroiijo, Christiuan Kumiek. flel Mr.kkimnnr.hr, Feral. Loidon, 1880.

I iui-f-rc>iij<', Cliristiaaii Knouok. Nieitwe, bijdrtigen lot dr. kennia van den Julian. VGravon-

luige, 1882.
Iltn nl-AiliTr. \al-lutmil fi al-la'rikh]. Ilm-ICl-Alhiri ckrtmiam quod perfe.cliiiimuni.

Kd. C). .). Tornbcrg. I'l vols. Liigduni BaUvorum, 1851-70.

Ibn nl-Niuliin. aUWwtW. Bteg. G. Fliigol. 2 Bdo. Leipzig, 1871-72.

Il>n 'Abd Rabhih, Ahmad ilin Muhammad, al-'lqd nl-fiirld. :t viiIh. llfdiiq, L298.

Mm llatiilah, Muhammad ilm 'Abd Allah. Voyitgn d'lliii liatuittali, toxto nrabo, iiooom-

pagne d'une traduction, pat C. Dofreraery ot 15. it. Sauguinotti, •! vols. Paris,

1874-70.
Ibu l.lajar al-'Asqalfuii, Al.mmd ilm 'All. al-Iidbaltfi tuniyiz al-iahiilnili . Ed. A. Sponger.

4 voIh. Calcutta, 1800-88.
I bii I Iishum. 'Abd al-Malik. | AT™/ lla.ii'tl A Hull]. Dni Lr.br n Miihamined'i niir.lt Mithiiinined

Ibn lilidk bunrboitut von Abd el-Malik Ibn Iliaohiini. Hrsg. I 1 '. WiiHtonfcld. 2 Bdo.

GuUingon, 1808-00.
Ibn Kliiildiin, 'Abd nl-ltal.imaii ibn Muhammad, al- Mvqiuldiimili. 7 voIh. Buliiq. 128-1,
Ibn Klmlliltiln, Al.iiuad ibn Muhammad. [Waftty&t al-a'i/an]. Ibn Vhidlilcani vitar. iltiii-

Irium ■iiiriirnm. Kd. V. Wiislcnfold. QottingOB, lS:t5-C().
Ibn Qutnybiih. 'Abd Allah ibn Muslim. [al-Ma'i'trif] Ibn Cottiiba's llamlbitch der Oe-

nr.ltie.lilr.. ETrsg. 1°. Wiistoiifold. Gbttingcn, 1800.
Ibn Qul.lubuglia, al-Qttsim ibn 'Abd Allah. Taj al-liijiirini. ft (tibaqtlt al-llaiiitfiyah.

Dill Krone der Lcbntibnclircitmngcn eiilhallcnd die. ( Ha.iir.it dr.r llitnifiteii. Leipzig,

1SI12.
Ibu Toghrl Birdi, Abfi al-Mahii.Hin Yusuf. Abit'l Maht'i.iin I bit Taghri tiurdii Aiinalei,

i|iiilniH titulus est al-Nujilm. al-ztViirah ft ninlilk Miir im-itl-Quliirttli. Kd. T. (!.. I.

.liiynboll, B. F. Mattb.es, S. L. Fleischer. 2 vols. Loidon, 1866-01.

Ibn Ya'iBll. See al-Zaniiikhshsri, Mahmiid ibn 'Umnr.

al-'ldwi, Hasan. id-Niifalu'd al-ihiidliiliyah fi iharlt al-Ilitrdah al-ltftiir!yah. 3 vols.

Cairo, 1208.
Kciinuii, Qoorgo. "Tho mountains and mountaineers of tho Eastern Caucasus". American

Geographical Society of New York, vol. C (187-1), 189-198.
Kciiiiii. Translations.

Marrucoi, Ludnvioo. Padua, 1008.

Palmer, Edward Henry. Oxford, 1880.

Saviiry, Claude lOtienno. Paris, 1821.

Ullinaiui, L. Krefold, 1810.
Krohl, Ludoir. "Cher don Sabili doH Buohiiri". 7A)Mfl, ltd. 4 (1850), 1-32.
von Kromer, Alfred. Ctdittrycicliichtr, das Oriode unter dm. cimlifm. 2 Bdo. Wion, 1875-

77.
von Kronirr, Alfred. Ce.ie.liic.htc dr.r herrsclir.iiden Idrrn dm Idnm.i; dor GoUosbogrilT,

dio Prophetic and die Staatsidoo, Leipzig. 1808.

von I.andborg, Carlo. Catalogue, dr. wiuin.ir.riti arabn provcnanl d'ltitr bibliotlt>quo privit
it ri-Medina el appurtenant a In Million K. ./. [trill. Loidon, 18K!t.

von Landberg, Carlo. Proverbn rl Dirloiii dit pr.nptr. arabe; lnatoriaux pour sorvir ii la
ooiniaiH.sanoo dOS dialootos vulgaircs, roouoillis, IraduitB Ot nimotes. I'aris, .18811.

Loth, OttO. Dan Chwsenbuch dm Ibn Sa'd. Leipzig, 1809.

al-Maqdisi, Abu 'Abd Allah Mul.iainmad ibn Ahmad. Ali.itln, aUaqalim fi niti'rifal al-
utjtilim. IJosoriplio Imporli moslomlol, Kd. M.J. do Goojo. Loidon, 1870-77.

nim.iDCRAi'iiv

215

al-Ma<|(|iiri. Al.iinacl ibu Mul.iainmad. [Nnfli al-(ib mill qhitin al-Andtdni td-rajib]. Ana-

lootcw Miir I'liistoiro ot la lil.loraturo dos arabos d'KH])ii|I"o. I'M. B. f. A. Dozy rl. at.

2 vols. I.oidon, 1800-01.
al-Maqrr/,i, Abiiiad ibn "All. fliilnirr. tin Xnllani Mandonki dr. I.' Hgyptr., eorito on arabo

par Taki-oddiii-Aliinod-Makrizi, l.ruduite on fi'iini;ais, ot aOOOmpagnee do notes

pliiloloKiquoH. liiHtoriquos. gooKrapliiquos par IO.-M. Quatroiniiro. 2 torn. Paris,

18:17-10.
al-Maqrlsl, Ahmad ilm "AIT. al-MawSHy wa-al-i'tibSr ft dhikr id-kliiin.i. wa-al-SthSr.

2 vols. Bulii.<|. 1270.
Mar'i ibn Yfisiif (Sluiykli). /Itdil td-lulib li-nayl id-nm'iirib. Bi"dai|, 1288.
ul-MiiH'fldi, "AH ibn lliiHiiyn. Murtij at-tllialiit.lt iiiti-ma'adin. td-jinrliar fi la'rik/i. 2 vols.

Bfllttq, 128:t.
nl-Mii.wardi, "AIT ibn Muhammad. [al-Ahkdm ttl-iitlliiitit/nltl Congtitutionos politlooe,

13d. M. linger. Bonnao, 1803.
al-Miiydfuii, Ahmad ibn Miil.iniiiiuad. Mnjniit at-anitliul. 2 voIh. lirdlq, 1281.
Molirou, AugiiHt Fordinivnd Minliaol. Eupoti tie In ri'formr dr I.' Iilnmiiinr. mmmcnr.t'e. an

I llr. litirlr. dr. I'lli'girr. par Abtm-'l-lltiian All rl-Aili'ari ti mnlimu'e par ion. I'ealr..

Leiden, 1878.
Mouradgoa d'ObsHini, Igimoo dr. Tableau tli'tu'rid dr V Umpire Olhmnitn. 7 torn. Paris,

1787-1824.
al-Muliarrad. Miil.iainiiiad ibn Yir/.Id. al-Iulmil. Ed. W. Wright. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1801-02.
Miillor, MarciiH .losoph. lieilrdge zitr fle.ie.ltir.litr, dr.r ioritl.ir.lien Araber. Miluohon, 1800-70.
Muslim ilm iil-llajjiij. al-QiiHlinyii. Jnnu" al-mhili. 1.8 Vols. C'uluuttii, 1200.
Naobl.igal. Gustav. Salulrd mid Sitdtln; UrgobnisHo oinor BocliBJlhrigen Hoiso. Berlin,
1870-80.
n.l-Nabrawali. Muhiiiiiniiul ibn Abinad. al-I'lfim bi-a'lam Bayl Allah al-haram . Orirhichle

tier Sladl Mekka mid iltrei Tentprh. [Dio Chronilcon dor Sludl; Mokka. Bd. 8]. Leipzig,

1808.
al-Niiwinvi. YahyiL ibn Sharaf. Minliiij td-liilibin. Cairo, 1207.
al-Nawawi. Yabyii, ibn Hlianif. [Tahdliib al.-aima']. Tho biographical dictionary of

illustrious men ohlofly at the beginning Of Islamism. Ed. F. Wiistonfold. Loudon,

1842.
Noldoko, 'I'liondor. (Irirhiehte tin luirani. Gottiiigon, 180(1.
Portsoli. Wilbolm. Die arabiichrit Ilaiidicliriftrn tier herzoglichen ISibliotlir.k zu (lollia.

6 Bdo. Gotho, 1878-02.
Quatremete, Etienno-Mare. Mtlnmira gcntjraphiqitn e.l Itiiloritiite.i dr. l.'ICgypte. el «nr

qticlnnn ronlrA'i voiiinn. 2 torn. Paris, 1811.
Qiierry, Am6doo. Droit mmmlmmt-; recueil do lois oonoornant los musulmans Bohyites.

2 torn. Paris, 1871-72.
al-Qusliayri, 'Abd al-Karim ibn llawazin. al-Uiiuliili. Hfdiiq. 12S7.
Etedhouso, .lames William. "On 'Tho Most Comely Names', iil-a.iiniT ItnunV'. JSAS,

N.S., vol. 12 (1880). pt. 1. 1-00.
Rila'sh llan" al-Talilawi. itl-Qiurl at-iadid fi ii.l-ijti.ltiid al-tajdid. Cairo, 1207.
von Rosen, Victor. Nolicci lonimttirr.i tin nitiniiirriti itraliei da Mitii'e. Aiialiipie. St.

Policrsbourg, 1881.
ItiisHcll. Alexander; and Patrick .UubsoII. Narlirirhten run dim Zniltiiid tier (,'rlr.liriamkril

zit. Aleppo. TraiiHl. .loliann I'Viedricli Gnielin. Giitlingen, 1708.
Sacliau, Hduard. "Zur altesten Gesoliiobto dos muhaniinodaiiisi'lioii RoobtH". Akademie

216

BIBLIOGRAPHY

der Wiiiarnacliaflen, U'icn. I'liiloaiiphi'teli-hialoriae.Iie. Kltiaae. fiilzungalieriehlr. lid. 05

(1870), (i(m-72:i.

■Sulmhury, Kdward. "(.'iiiil.rihiil.ionH from Original snurcos to the knowledge of Muslim

tradition". JAOS, vol. 7 (1862). 60-112.
von Sohulto, Johaii Friedrioh. Die (lracliir.li.lr, tier QnMe.it unil LUcmtur ilea eaiiiiiii.irlir.il.

Jlechla von (Indian bin an/ die. (legcnwart. 3 Bdo. Stuttgart, 1875-80.
al-Shahran|.aiu, Muhammad ilm 'Abd al-Kariin. al-Milal un-al-nilitii. ICd. William

Oureton. 2 vols, London, 1846.
Sllvostre do Saoy, Marie- Alfred. Qhrcalomathie arabs, on oxtraita da divers eariv&ins

arabca taut un pram! qu'on vora. Iro M. Paris, 18(16. 2i> fid. Paris, 1826.
Spitta, Wilholm. Xur each i elite. Abii'l-Ilaatm al-Aa'arVa. Leipzig, 1875.
Kprongor, Aloya. Das Lelirii, und die Lelire. dm Mohammad illicit lii.ihrr (iriijjlciileih mi-

be.ttulzlcn Qnclkn bearbeitel. l.Aufl. 3 Bdo. Berlin. 1801-05.
Sprenger, Aloys. "Die Sohulfftoher and dio SohoJastdk dor Mnxlinio". SSDMfl, Kd. :i2

(1878), 1-2(1.
StcinHohnoidor, Morilz. I'tilrmi.iehc und apottigcliachc Lileralur in arabiarher Nprtichc.

zwiachen Mimlimen, Chriale.it and J mien ne.lial Anltiiinjeii vrrmindlrn Inhnlln. Loipxig,

1877.
nl-Kuyfi|i, 'Abd nl-ltahmaii ibn Abi Bakr Jatiil al-DIn. ttl-Jltplii ft 'iiliim nl-Qnr'aii.

Ed. Oastelli. 2 vols. Cairo, 1278.
al-.Suyii|,i, "Abd al-Rahman ibn Alii Bakr .lalal ai-DIn. al-Muzliir Ji 'iililm al-lngliah.

2 vols. Bfilaq, 1282.
al'Siiyfil'I. 'Abd al-Rahman ilm Abi llakr .lalal nl-Din. \Ttilmtfil al-mufamnn]. Specimen

o littoris Oriontalibus, oxhibenn Sojutii librum do intorprotibus Koranl. I'M. A. Mour-

singe. Lugdunl Bavatorura, 1888.

al-Tiihanawi, Muhammad A'la" ilm "All. Kanhahiif ia(ilalnV al-fiiiiiin. |A dictionary of

the toolmiual turins lined in (ho Heioncea of the MiiHalman.s]. 2 voIm. Calcutta, 1853-02.
VValinnund, Adolf. Ilandit'iirtrrliiirli de.r ttrabi.iclini mid. ileiitachc.n Sprache. 2 lido. Clio/bin,

1870-77.
Yuqul ilm 'Abd Allah al-l.Iainawi. [illit'jaiii iil-biildan]. Jnout's goographiHchcH YVortor-

bueli. H»g. F. WiiHtoufcld. Bdc. Leipzig, 1860-70.
al-ZaniakliKharl, Mahinud ibn 'Wniar. al-Ktiali.thiif 'an littqii'itj al-liinzU. 2 vols. lifiliiq,

1281.
al-ZamalcliHliiiri. Mahnifid ibn 'Ulnar. Ilm. Ja'ia I'tmtinenlar zii 7Mintirhstiri'a M njaaatil,

11 ikk. CI. Jahn. 2 Bdo. Leipzig, 1882-86.
nl-Zurqfiui, 'Abd al-Biiql ilm YfiHiif. Sliarh al-Ziirijiiiu 'alii M-uim.Ha' til-imam MtVil:.

Suporeommoiitary by liasan al-'ldwl. Cairo. 1280.

INDEX

English terms refer t>o the Arabic, equivalents if they occur in Arabic passages and

nice reran. CVoas-roforonccH bavc not always boon provided.

al-'Ahbas ilm Al.nnad al-Mudhakkir 206
'Abbas ibn Miil.iaininad al-f>uri 206, 211
"Abd Allah ibn Ahmad ibn flanbal 207
'Abd Allah ibn "All al-Wardirl 101
'Abd Allah ibn Khiilid al-Knfl 27, 200
'Abd Allah ilm Na.fi' 20 n. I
'Abd Allah ibn Rafi' 194
"Abd Allah ibn Sa'id 101
'Abd Allah ilm Hiilim nee. Ilm al-Khayya|.
'Abd al-'Aziz ibn Muslim al-Kinfini 127

n. 1
'Abd al-Malik ibn 'Abd al-' Axlx al-Tammitr

126 n. 2
'Abd al-Mu'min ilm '('ufayl iil-'l'aininii ill-

Nosafl 104

'Abd al-Rahman ilm Mahdi are. Ibn Malidi.

'Abd al-Rahmiin
'Abd al-Rahmii.n ibn Zayd ilm Allium 102
'Abd al-Wahhab ilm Nai.ir al-Ilagdiidi 02
'Abd a.l-Wiihid al-MarrfikiiHhi 108
al-'Abdari 171 n. 5
Abraham 180 n. II
Ahfi al-'Abbaa Ahmad al-AiiHiiri 172
Abo iil-'Ali!ia« Ahmad ibn .Muhaininiid ibn

'Uqdah 204
AbO al-'Abbaa Ahmad ilm Miiliaimnail

al-Umawi al-Rumlyah 171
Alio nl-'Abbaa ibn iShurayh 206
Abfl al-'Abbaa al-MiialiiRbfiri 205
Abu al-'Abbaa Tha'lab 21). 206
Abu "Abd Allah al- llayyaai 171 n. 6
Abfi "Abd Allah al-Urtiiiiigluinl 111
Abo 'Abd Alllh al-fihanjar 205
Abu 'Abd Allah ilm Muhammad al-

Iliiniaydi 158
Abu 'Abd Alllh al-Mahamili 20, 01, 107,

204, 206
Abu 'Abd Allah al-lla'l 02
Abu al-'Ala' al-Ma'arri 121 n. :t
Abu 'Alial-'Abli 10 n. I

Abu 'Amir Muhammad ibn iSa'diin al-

'Abdari are. al-'Abdari
Abu 'Amr 'Ul.hiuiin 164
Abu 'Anim al-Xaliil S88 al-],)ahhii.k ibn

Makhlad ilm Siiiau al-Sliaybani
AbO 'Awn Shu'bah XII n. 1, 1117
Abu 'Ayyttsh, Zayd lflil
Abu Bakr 8, 74, 70, 194f, 108f
Abu llakr 'Abd Allah ibn Abi DawQd 205
Abu llakr Ahmad ilm al-r'adl ilm llaliniin

al-l)iiiawari 120 n. I
Abu llakr Ahmad ibn Kainil ibn Khalaf

200
Abu llakr Ahmad ilm Muhammad al-

Barqinl 205
Abu Bakr Al.imad ibn Sulaynian ibn
Ziyail al-Dimashql 205
Abu Bakr ibn "Aylsh 8,
AbO Bakr ibn al-(.lhadd l«0f
Abfi Bakr ibn al-Mundbir 86 n. 1
Abu llakr al-Kliivflb 205
Abu llakr Muhammad ilm Dawud 207
Abu llakr Muhammad ibn Ilaydarah 157
Abu Bakr Muhanimad ilm MuKii ibn al-

Miil.hanna 205
AbO Bakr al-Sa'igh 167 n. 1
Abfi Bakrah 81
Abu Dharr 186

Abu al-l''ai,ll M\ihammail al-.l''ihri 172
Abfi al-l''ai,ll Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah

al-Slmybiini 207
Abfi ol'Fadl Sulayman al-MuqaddisI al-

YaHfifr al-Dimashql 178 a. I

Abfi al-Kayyad al-Hnsri 82

Abfi a!-KiihV 2, 21. 108

Abfi l;[amid al-lBlarayini 01. 100 n. I

Abfi Ilanifah :!. I. 5, 12, lllf, 15, 16f,
18, 20, 25, yo, 36, 40 n. 4. 63, 60, 72
74. 83. Ill, 110. 133, 171, 104. 100.
108. 203. 211.

218

INDEX

Al.fi nl-Hii.Mii.il 'Mid Allah ibn Ahmad ilui

Muhammad ibn al-Mughalllfl Hfl I l»n III-

MughiilliH
Abfi al-lliiKan ilui 'Ulnar ilui Rfih ai-

Nnlinmani 205
Abii al-rjasan iil-.liidhaini 1(11 n. I
Abfi al-ITiman ul-Rhiidhili 1,08 n, 3
Abu al-HaHim al-Darilvi 20
Abfi llalim 26 n. 1
Abfi llnyyan. AMiir al-Din 172f, 175ff,
Alia ii.UIIuilhii.vl nl-'AlliU' 00, 136
Alifi llurayrah (12 n. 2, 78f, 98 B. 8,

99. 1 42

Alifi al-MiiHiiyn Muhammad ilm a)-iltiHayn

al-Bnsri ul./.ahiri 205
Alia IhI.umi Ibrahim ibn Niiyyilr nee al-

NiiKKiim
Alifi laliiiii Ibrahim al-Ranhiiri Bit al-

Sanhflrl
Abfi Miac| nl-ShlriizI 105 n. 2,
Abfi tahaq Siilayinaa ilm IftrQ/. al-Rhay-

ban! 11)7

Alia -la'l'ai' Ahmad ilm Mtil,inmiiin<l ilui

Siilain ul-Tahilwi 205
Abfi .la'l'ai- nl-Samnaiii 1511
Abfi ul-Mnhaniu MS Ibn Tallin Birdi
Abfi al-Muhanin ibn 'Unayn 104
Abfi Man'fid 195
Aba Muhammad al-Maiuifiri 107
Aba Muhammad al-Siriil'i 4 n. 4,
Aba MOwi al-Anli'iin 0,
Abfi Mi'mii. 'Tml Ibn Ahii.ii ibn Radiu|iih 35
Abfi Muli" nl-Balldii 7-1
Abfi NiiMr ibn Abi 'Abel Allah al-Rhha/.i

205
Abfi (Jallabab al-Raqqlshl 207

Abfi Htl-QftSlm (?) 'Abil Allali Muhammad

ol-Baghaw! 205
Abfi nl-QTwim al-fiha/./.I 01 n. 2,
Aba nl-QaHiin ibn al-Hliii.il al-'^abiri 186

n. :i

Abfi al-Q/isiin 'Uhuyd Allah ibn "All al-

Nakha'i 107
Abfi al-Rijiil Muhammad ilm 'Abil al-

Rahman I. '15 n. 4,
Aba Sa'iil iil-Maiinii ibn 'All al-'lilwi 205
Aba Knlyfin 100
Abfi Nu'iid 1(1 ii. 2

Abu Tha'labah al-KliiiNliaui 57 n. 1
Abu Thawr ul-Knlbi nl-ltaghtludl 17. 23,

20. 27, 89 n. 2, 88 B. I.
Abu 'Ulnar Yfisuf Miil.hbnl.ah 207
Aba Yamil' (d. LSI) 34, ISlf
Abfi Zny.l al-Kalbi 120, 155.
T,dnh 187
adatla 117, KM n. 1
Adam 15IIT
ttdMn 96
adultery 15. is

'Adwan. biinil. Oil n. I!

afUUt I os n. 2

iifi/tili 4 n. 0, I.'!

Africa, Central 51

nyli.wl main fi mah. (II

iil/ail 46

nlil. at-fiqli 18 n. 3f

nh\ ' al-liadWi 3,4, 1!)

ahl al-lcitiib B7f

aid al-m'u 4, 8 n. 8, 2:t, 20, III, 80 n, 1.

100. 211
aldnl-jalnr 81,88,86,87, 1781"
Ahmad ibn Ilanlml 4. 20, 211. 50. 72,

77 n. 8, Sit, 109, 125 I'. 1110. 151, 20(1, 209
Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Husflr 129

ii. 1
Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn l»ma'il ibn

'Ahd ii.l-i;.nl.iniiin ibn YiiHiil' I7S
Aliniail ilm Muhammad ibn ManHfir ibn

'Abil Allali. wShihabal- Din al-AHlinifini
Ahmad ilm Muhammad iil-Tii.liuiia.nUI 197
Ahmad ibn Qiinim 200
Ahmad ibn KiUiir Abfi .la'l'ai' id-(,>ayni 177
Ahmad ibn Raid 19. 2(1
Ah naid ibn Snyyar 177 n. •!
Ahmad al-I^rdiiri 179
'A'iKhah 83 a. I. 1115 n. .1,
al- Ajurri. Abfi liakr 22
al-AI(li(.al 122
"Aids, tin nil 120

Aleppo 179

'All ibn Abi piib 71. 92. 911 n. I. 101,

128, 171. 191
'All ibn DiUvfid id-Qanfai-I 207
'All ibn HishSitn 208 ft. 2
'Ali ibn Kludal' 200
'Ali al-Kliawwiia 70 n, I

INIJRX

219

Almnhiulw 108, 124, IfiOf, 109. 171

llll]IH-1,UX Btt zttkiit

am 72

amilriih 68 n. 1

Aminah 121

'Annuar ibn Yawlr 02 n. I

'Ami' ibn ul-I.Iaril.h 1115 a. I,

'Ami' ibn Mnr/.fiq 27, 205

'Ann- ibn Q.ayn al-Mala'i 10

analogy tee sij/as

Andalusia L07f, 109, LS6f, 159, 171. 177.

182
ongela 40. 168, 188 n. 4
iiiiUiinpfiimii'i.liiHm 1211'. 12(1. 128, lOliT,

174. 184
a-m'ai/la 10, 17 n. I. 200
Arabic llSf, 120. 198, 199. 201, 2011
Arbad 143
Aristotle 140. 175

Amid, banm 119

uI-AhImi' al-'Adwani (III n. II

a.?lml> ut-lmdilh 4. 5. 115. 98

imlmh nlt/iutl* 93, 201

axhiih al-m'i/ II, 4, 5, 20

nl-AHh'nriyah 1 02, 1 1 HIT, 1 10, 1 24, 1 271T,

130, 133, 110. 145, 147, 151 r, 168, 169

172, 174f, 183
al-'Adlishab 171
Aiiia, ('(inlral 105
"Ajjini ibn ThSbit 58 n. (I
„4 11 n. 2. 21. Ill
aasiRiiationH 75,
'A(.a' ibn Abi Hanil.i 202
'AW ibn Abi Muslim 13 n. 2, 811 n. I.
'A|a" ibn al-Sa'ib 202
r?//i«r 108, 171

atonement 54

attributes («ifal) 95, 110, 125, 128, 129

n. 1, 130, 132 ff, 135 n. 4, lllllff, II 4 IT.

172, 1831', 202
aurra media 20
'Awl' ibn Malik al-A«hja'i 200
Awlild Sulayman 54
Awh ibn A«a 51 n. II

al-awwal 1 38

al-A\v/.a'i 31. 181

'osfmn/t 64 E

al-A/.i'ai|i 7.|
ast&b 187 n. 3

Itiidhl, slave ill' iil-llnill 83

Baghdad 211. 27. 28, 29, 120, 171 n. 5.

204 rr

al-BujT, Abfi al-Wali.l 157
nl.llilliidlnu'i III.

al-ltallfi|.i. (probably Mundhlr ilm Sa'ld

ibn 'Ahd Allah ilm "Abil al-liahinan

al-NalV.i al-Qnriulii Is meant) 107

llanfi lliinhini 181

ltai|i ilm Makhlml al-Qui|.ubi 100

barley 40, fill'

Bormoklte 82

Hai'i|fiq, id-'^ahir Sayfivl-DIn 178, 187

ItaHi-a Kir. 43

ivl-Ha|,alya«'.si 78

b&lin 1. 100, 184 n. 2, 185

al- Buydiiwi 49, 51, 50, 89

al-ltiiyhaf|I, Abfi Baltr 135 n. 3, 100

al-!lir/,7.ar. Abfi Bnlci' Ahmad ibn 'Amr

1(10
beans 66 n, 2

brduin 122

Bible on

m'ah 17. 135 n. 4, 185. 201

bona fide 7,
Bukhara 205

al-lliikhari 44. 90. 97f, 108 n. 0. 100.

121, 128, 135 n. 3, 155, 100. 172, 107,

201
al-Bulqlnl (oUJulqaynl), .lanifd al-Uin

109. n. I
nl-Biii'liaii ,«: Ahmad ilm Muhiunniad

ibn tania'il ilm 'Ahd id-U.ahiiian ilm

Yiisur
burlmn 03 n. I. 113. n. I. 153. lOOf,

19(1, 199

Cairn 92. 171 n. 5, 178. 182,205

casuistry 15, I Of. 25, 39, 82, 105. 188

ci'lchaciy 70 n. 2

r.iirrum mum (Oaiihiainan. ctm drlrndam)

172
Chardin. .Ii'iin 58
nliocHti 55 ii. 2

220

TNI) EX

INDEX

221

chickpea C5 n. 2

Christians 7 n, :t, 66, 91, 90. no n. I,

122, Ml, 175. I!)!)
companions 8, 6, 10, 17, 44, 80, 85, 80,

lOlf, 118 n. 1, 184, 188 n. 4, 107, 101.

104, 1001T, 200
conditional sentence 45
contsntiu tecletiaa 85

ctmnilinm e.vmiyctinm 57. 66
onnlracts 62f
Cordoba 107, 158
courier station 44
creditor 43, 45

al-DabfiHi, Abfi Znyd 'Abd Alln.li :!0 n. 1

DaghistBn 187 n. :i

tltth iinjunah 58

nl-l.>ahbillc Ibn Mivkhlnd ibn .Sinan al-

Nlinybani, Abfi 'Aijim al-Nabil 431
ilalir 142fr, 144 n. 1,
ija'if XII n. 1, 107
t/ahU 118, 136 n. 4. 108

ilnhUuh 83 n. 2. 47, 74 n. (1, 83 n. I, 201
dnin 1 1 n. 2, 86 n. 2, 30 ,48 n. 2, 59 n. 4,

03 n. I, 111 ii. 2, 14(1 ii. I. 194 n. 20.

203, 20(1
Damascus III o. I, 162, 170, 205
al-Damiri 14, 74, 166, 161
al-Diliatiutni 100
datos 40, 54f, 77 n. 6, 80
DA wild ibn 'All ibn KhalofaUijftthEnl l,

3-5, 7, 10, 24, 27-30. 34-30. 38f, 42, II.

40 n. 4. 53, 551, 00, 72f, 73 n. 2, 74. 83

n. 1, 108f, HI, mat, lOOf, 204, 200

Dawfid nl-'JVi I n. 2

devisor 75

dhikr Alliih 72

differenoo of opinion 66, 88ff, 01, 210

disbelievers 44f, 50f, 88, 122, 120, 140,

157 n. 1
divorco 50, 51 n. 3, 121f, 107, 173, 100
droit 75
dnbr 82 n. I
Dugat, (i. 80
ilnkhii. 54

Diirayd ibn Simmali 200 n. 8
ilurrii 55 n, 2

Egypt 02. 102. 173, 175. I77IT. 183, 188.

204
embryo 55
Euphrates 02
Fakhr id-Din al-Hil/.i 25 n. 3, 41. IS,

51, 50. 87, 180

farif 63, 08 n. 2,
fard. tmjih 40, 190

Paris 105
fareahJi 45
fasting 16, 72r, 89,
Ptttibah 132
Fa-was, slave 82
I'V/ilrnb, Imnil 77 n. 5
Fez 100

FihriM 30, 104

Jiqh 3f, 14, 18r, 19. 23, 20, 29, 41, 43, 09.
I06f, lOOf. 121, 123. 125, 127. 145, 150,
158, 105, 167, 109, 173f. 181
Flitgel, (I. 6 n. 3. 188
Freytag, Qeorg l, 66
Friday prayer 38. 00. HI
fimV XI, 21 n. 1, 43, 100, 187
Puejftt 178

Gabriel 130. 132. 153

nl-Gliaaili 130 n. 5, 1071", 109 n. 3, 174

ghunl 57 n. 2, 58 n. 1, 00

Qod 42f, 50, 04 n. I, 05, 07, 72, 77,
80, 80, 93f. 101, 113, 110. lisrf, 122,
120, 120IT, I44rr, 103, 181, 183. 190

do flotijo, M.J. 4 ii. 2.

gold 88, 40, 42f

Granada 02, 171 n. 6

titular 131". 73 n. 2

al- 1 bull 83

litulilli (see alio traditions) lSf. 23, 28

I.lal'idab bint, nlllilril.h 70

liars Ibn 'Abd Allah ttl-NIehabOrl 7.

I.lafs ibn (iliiyilt.li 1(1

liajj 24 n. 2, 08, 101, 110 n. I

Hiljj 'Abd al-'Al.i 51

al-l.lajjaj XII n. I, 15(1

IIAjji Klinlilali 5 n. 3,

halul (II, 66 n. 0, 200f

llaniniild ibn Abi Snlayinan 13

llaniniild ibn Saliunn.li 15

lliiinasiili ibn Mabib 13

Hiinnfitm 221". 31. 40. 69 n. 1. 180, 182f

HnnbnliloH (II, 75, 81 f, 187

litiptix If.ynmcna 120

litimm 59 n. I. 04. 66 ft. 6, 70 n. I, 72,

I (HUT.
al-Hariri (13 n. 2
jil-l.lnrit.il ibn 'Ami- al-lliulliali 190
al-I.Iaril-li al-Midiilsibi L28 n. 3
IIArfin ilm Ibnlliiiii nl-lliidri 202

IIArfm al-KashW 74. 80, 208

al-l.la.Mnn ibn "All al-Mu'ammiri 207

II ill i in 101 ii. 5

lititmn, 10

lmt/tl see menstruation

Iiiii/i/ 145

liai/i/tiv (12

llaziniyab 100

heir 76, 100

hell 85, 130

l.lijil.7, 0,

l.liinam ibn Ahmad 202

Hims 178f, 197

i.liinyar. Imnil 120

lli.sli.lm Al.iinail ibn laniil'il al-7/diirT 178

n. 1
Minimal ibn nl-I.Iaknm 127 n. 1,

lliHbain ibn al-Mughlrah 51 n. .".

Holy Ghost 144

homloide 16

horse moat 0(1

MonlMina. M.T. 1 n. 1. 2. 124

hovtth (13

Hudnybtyah 157 n. 1. 101)

liitkm 41. 82 n. 3. 88, 100IT, 104

al-IliiNayn 104

l.liisnyn ibn Muhammad al-Q.iii'l.ubi 173

al-MiiKiiyn ibn al-Cjiisini Abil 'All al-

Tabnri 86 n. I
nl-Hutny'idi 111)
ibi'ilinli 69
IbllS 14. 140, 201
Ibn 'Abbas 20 n. 4, 50 n. 4, 05, 73 n. 2.

7(1, 90, 100, 184 n. 2, 192f
Ibn 'Abd iil-ltiiiT, Abu' Ulnar Yilmil' al-

Nimrl 113. 158

Ibn 'Abd Habbih 05. 209

Ibn Abi l.ayla, Muhammad ibn "Abel al.

liahniiln 30 n. 1
Ilm Abi Shay bah 100
Ibn Abi Zimrii, Dawid 188 n. 5
Ibn Ahmar 120
Ibn 'Arab!. Mul.iyl ul-Din Kill", lOllff.

171
Ibn "AsiLlcir 4. 57. 128
Ibn al-Athtr 103. 100
ibn Itul.iUnli 173
Mm Dihyah, Al.fi 'Ami- 101
Ibn Dihyah, Abfi al-KliaUab 1011". Mil

n.2
Ibn Fans II) n. I. 120
Ilm al-Firkilh 30 n. I
Ibn FQroJt, Abfi Baler 153, 155, 156 n. 2
Ibn Hnjar ol-'Asqalttnl 155. 172, 170f
Ilm Hfijih, Abfi "Amr 'Uthmttn ibn 'Ulnar

173
Ilm Ilanluil IU Al.imad ibn Manbal
Ibn Ha/.m 7. 8. 24 n. 3, 32 n. 1, 30, 50,

54 IT, .18 f, 60, 80, 83,80r,1)3,10ir,108IT,

12(irr, 132IT, 1371". I4IIT, 149. 154, 15(irr.

I70r, 178, 181, 183, 185, 210
Ibn Hibban 20 n. 2
Ibn MiHliilm All mild ilm Ismail al-/,ilhiii

178 n. 1
Ibn al-Jaw/.i 155
Ilm Khaldfiu 5. 30. 32, 78, 178
Ibn al-Khayyilj- M n. 3
Ibn l.abi'ali 21 n. 1, 183
Ibn Mabdl, 'Abd al-Rabm,ln 144 n. I,

208
Ilm M.lliU. Jamil al-Din 173
Ibn MiihTkI 8, 10. 109f
ibn al-Aliighallis, Abfi al-IIasan 104. 207
Ibn al-Mughallls, Muhammad 207
Ibn al-Nadini 104, 127
Ilm ftagdela no n. i

Urn Qadi Sli.ilibnli 170

Ilm Qtilayl.ah 4, 04 n. I, 08

Ilm Kilhwnyhi net. Inha<| ibn Kaliwayhi

Ilm Rajab, Abfi al-Faraj "Abd al-Rahman

170
Ibn al-Salal.i 21 n. 5
Ibn Salamali. I;lamnwld »•■•■ llaniniild ilm

Salamali

222

INDEX

tbn Kayyid ill-Nan 171

Ibn al-SliAh al-^iUiiri, Abii al-Qiinim Sit

Aliii al-Qamm il)n al-Shiili al-#ahiri
Ilm Nliubriimah, 'Alxl Allah 14, 202
llm al-81kklb is n. :i
Ihii Sinii 175 n. 2
llm Kurayj, AbO al-'AbbiiH 31, LOS
Ibn Tttghri BirdI KM. I7sf, I so, 182, IS7
llm Tnymlyah L7S if
Ibn Tiimart 100
Ibn Wnhb L36 n. I
Ibmliiiii al-Muzanl see al-Muzaal, Ibrahim
iililfat ai-vmlh 151, 1511
idlitl 40, 48
ilirum 08
ijmtV 22, 110, :i2fr. 30, S5f, 102, 103, 112.

110, 135 a. •!, 137 n. I, 138, Ml, 1071",

187, 102, 101). 200
ijmii id-iialifibidi 34, 115
ijlilmd 35, 108. 171
iklilii.? 132
iklililuf (.sec nl,m difference of opinion) 30

n. 1, 88. n. 2. 801". 1)1 n. 1, 021", 03 n. 3,

00, 210
Iliad 80 n. 2

■illah 11,40, 184, 100IT, 201
Him ttl-liadith 18, 187
Imam al-Ilaraiiiayn 33. 30 n. 1, 88,

103, 137
iiimn 07, llSff. 122T, 129 n. 4, 188 n. 3,

100
imperative 071". 70. 75
hum' iil-QjiyH 110
in '15

in malum, partem 10 n. 4
Indian pea 55 n. 2
inheritance 101

inter priiidion imlgatu 501"
iqran 80
Iran I05ff

Iraq 0, 13I", 23. 80. 1041". 204,
'IsiL 153, 101
'lei ibn AM 'Tnii 201f
"Ibm. al-Klmyyaf. 192
iHlalian 27,105,205
IhI.iimi ibn Ibrahim al-Mawgili 95
lHba.| ibn Itilhwayhi 4, 23. 27. 00.
205

IminVil, Miiwlay 108 n. (I
iHiinVil ibn tahftq al-Qiidi 207

l:ini;'i'il ibn iMfiHa 201
luma'il ibn al-Yawi" I S3

itnSd 10. no

istidiCd 112 n. 1, 129 n. 1. 137 n. I, 138

n. I, 140. 208 n. 2
inlilibi'ib (ill
isliljmn 12. 22. 87 n. 2. lSDff, 103, 104

n. 20,
Lilirjn 2!)
i«ti»lmb 22, 189

;,« 189

lyad, Iiiiiih 120

lyfiH ibn Mu'fiu-iyiih 200

Jttbir ibn Zayd 201
al-.Iabrab ibn MuqaruMin 201
.la'far ibn Ilarb 127 n. I
.la'far ibn Muhammad ibn "All ibn al-
ii iiHiiyn II, 202
.la'far ibn Muhammad ibn Shiikir al-

5&*igh 207

al-.Iii.hi/., "Amr ibn Kahr 951", 120

J ah m ibn Kafwiin 1 10

■In null al-l)iii Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-

flahiri 180
.larir ibn 'Aliyiih 1 19
al-Jowity nl-ltii/.i, Abfi Uakr Ahmad ibn

'All 30 n. 1
jaii'iiil 129
Jerusalem 150
Jews 53, 50, 00, 01. 00. 101. no n. i.

150, 175, 188
jiniiH 32 n. I
jinn al-allimiin 40
jizi/ali 91
judge 3, 7-9, II, 19, 20, 1 82

al.Jurj8.nl 7, 05

al-.luwuyni, 'Abel al-Malik ibn 'Abd Allfi.li

gee liniiin ul-Murumuyn
folfir IS5. 190
folium 29, 124f, 127. 130. 131 n. I, 148,

153
Kalb Mil

Kamal al-Uin 'Ulnar ibn al-'Adini 182
al-KarabiHl. al-lhwayii ibn 'AH 20

knriBuU tanzih so

INDEX

223

Klmlid ibn al-Walid 70
khalq al-afSI 113
KharijiteH 180

Majmth '15

Kbaybar 53, 190

klii!rifii,iV 30

Khi.ulif. bana 120

al-Khi|iibI 00, 94

Khurasan 18 n. 2.23, 107, 178,204

kliiwruiatiu 103

al-liliir?ii-? iva-al-'nmilm 115 n. I

khiii/ida 42

Koran 3, 8-10, 18, 2 If, 25, 27, 301", 33
n. 2, 35. 41. 43-52. 59, 04 n. I, 00-73,
85-90, 108, ll.'tr, IIS, 12-1 n. 2. 1251",
127 n. I, 129-33, 145-50, 1541'. 107,
174. 170, 1831", 187, 191, 1941", 199, 201,
200, 2ior

Koran, creation of 29, 120, 128, 132

v. Kromer. A. 2, 3. 5. Ill,

Kula 13f, 15f. 27. 183, 204

till, I 4:3

la'b ii2ii.2

Labld ibn liiibi'ah 120, 143

fai» 112 n. 2

Lane. I'l.W. 5 n. 3,

lafaf 103

lainh iilidifuz -19

lentils 55 n. 2

Levitioim 01 11. 5

Lisbon 158

lizard meat 70

mailliiiliib al-jnmliiir 5 n. 2,
nl-Ma K lirib 107IT, 112, 159f
al-Mabainili Ut Abu 'Abd Allah al-Mal.m-

mili
undid! 170

mafrfBr 04. 00, 70.
Molmonldoa 81 a, 5

niiii-liniii.mil 05

makriili 57, 04, 66, 70 n. I. 79 n. 2.
Mulik al-AHli'iiri 33 n. 2
Malik ibn Anas 4. 14 n. 3, 20, 25, 31,
32, 40, 44, 47 n. 3, 49 n. 4, 03. 73 n. 1,

74, 79, 83. 89. 111. 125, 180 n. 2, 181,

190, 198, 200 n. 3. 211,
al-Malik al-Kaiuil I Naijir al-Din 102, 104
iil-iiiallk al-zilhir 180
al-Malik ul-y.iihir BarqQq lee BarqCq, ui-

Ziihir Sayf al-l)in
MiilikitcB 50 n. 1. 108, 1501', L82f

Molioroa 157

al-Mii'iiifni 95, 120 II, 2, 200

maiiH(|ib 28

maiidnb 03, 05 n. 4, 204

maimlkh 01, 211

al-Mimsur, Abu YOmif Ya'qOb 100IT

iiian-filx 4 1

manumission 00

al-Maqdlsl 4, lOOf

ol-Maqqarl 158, 170IT

ol-Maqrlrf L, 2, 04, 12:1, nsr, isof, i82f,

1 84 IT
Moroooius, L, 50

marriage 70
Marw 210

niii.iii'U aUkhag&'ig 25
mafdar 147

muslin} 49, 13 1 r
Ma.ilamab ibn 'Ali 201
MaH(pieray, 14. 187 n. 3

Masrttq n, 201

al-MimYuli 103, 123

iiia'-mni. 30

mafilmCd 40

al-Mawardi 9 n. I. 35

maidid 1 08

iiiaiKiln 40

Mayniiin ibn Mihran 104, 198, 202

Maymunah 70

Mecca 50 n. I. 120. 170

Medina It n. 3. 20 n. 1, 33, 44, 77, SO

meiiKlnial.ioii 15, 121

Mo/.ab 187 n. 3

Mikbi/if ilm DQn&a no a, I

mil 45

milk 55 n. 2

ttl-MlqdSd ibn 'Ami- al-Kimli IV "• '

mistirtdi 03

Miihch. Kabbi from Coucy 01 n. 5

nioHque 12, 39

22-1

1MIKX

Mouradgoa d'Obsson, I. l n. 2,
Miiadh ilia Jabftl I). 10. :!2, 102, 111,

195IT, 201
ul-HuTila al-NahrawanJ 81 n, o
Mu'ttwiyfth 193
iiiithi'iit (i'l, (Hi
mvdabbar 821", 84 a. L,
Mudar, baii.Ti 170
imnld 54
mufrad&t si n. I

al-Mugliirah ilin iSlui'liiili al-Thaqafl li)7
Mulmlla 112
Muhammad 8, (), 10 a. :t, 17, 21, 32 n. 1,

33, 41 n. 2. 42f. 14, fi:ir, nor, 68, 01,
<mi", 7:t n. i,74iT, s:t, 88, sor, 92ir, m,

120, 130, 1321T, 148, IH7 n. I, 101,

170, 172, 174, 1951
Muhammad I, CJmayyad of Qdrdoba 109
Muhammad ilin "All ibn 'Alid al-Razsifiq

179
Muhammad Ibn Dawiid, Aim Unltr 101,

2051

Miiiuniiriiinl ilm iil-llnHiin (moat probably

iil-.Sliayliii.ni i: meant) 25
Muhammad ilin al-HfltHUl ilin al-iSabhiih

al-Dilwiidi 205
Muhammad ilm Ibrahim ilm Said al-'Abdi

28
Miil.iaiuniad ilm Kathlr al-'Abdi 27, 205
Muhammad ibn Khftflf lOOf
Muhammad ilin Kini.nial-SijiHl.ani 119
Muhammad ilin al-Muhibb 170
Muhammad ilm MiiHlim 202
Muhammad ibn NaST al-Murwazi, Abu

'Abd Allii.li 20 n. 1, 210
Muhammad ibn Sinn 201
.Mtil.iiiiiuiiad ibn Yabyii. al-Dhulmli 120,

200
Muhammad ilm Zayd al-VVmiili, Abu 'Abd

Alltth 29
Muhammad ibn Zubaydoh 83

Muhammad Noglr al-l>in Jil-.l inct ■ 179

Muhammad al-Qiuiliiiiil 31 n.

Muhammad al-Rii/.i no n. 1

Muhammad al-Tu.'ii 91 n. 4
Mujiihid 29 n. 4. 43f, 83 n. 1, 200
iititjluliiil 321"
mukhiibarak 52 n. 2

Miuidbii' ibn Sa'id ibn 'Abd Allah ibn

'Abd al-Rahman ul-NalV.i al-Quij.ubi

.iir al-liallii|i
Miii/adtliiniili 5 n. 2,
Mfi.Ma ilm al-Ainir Shunif al-l)in ul-Zangl

17!)
Mtlsfl ilm Ibrahim 99
MiiHiuldad ibn MiiHiii'liad al-AHudi 27,

99f, 205
mundgiU 521'!
MiiHiiwir 14
muslirik 00, 190
mitslittiritkuli 184
Muslim ilm al-Ilajjiij 70f, 90, !)7i, 155,

100
niiiHtaeho BBC 1/ttBt ul-shnrib
murtitlmbb 4(1. 05 n. ■!
mu(uhhnrilu 49
■niutiikiUiiiii-Ru 147,
al-iMulawalckil 104
Mu'lazilah 90, 110 n. 1. 113, 117, 124,

120, 128IT, 188, 1351', 149, 151f, 154,

172, 183
mmmiiifhjak 114
al-Mnwalla' 89, 108. 100
al-Muzani, Ibrahim 29
lini'/.iirii'iiii 52 n. 2

al-NabiiU 171

nadb 87, 08 n. 2, 01), 75 n. 3, 203

Nfi.fi' 108

Nallawaylii BBt Niijiiwaylii

nii/iil 80, 153, 202

iitijitH 57

niijusuli 57 n. 2, 58f

Najd 70

al-Nalclia'i, Ibnihiiu 31

al-NaHa'i 100

Nashi 29

villi kh 01

■hum II n. 2, 45, 88, 147, 152, 172, 1901',

ui.'tr

ul-Nawawi 22, 59, 104

al-Nazzam 103

Nil'tawayhi 29

Nilo 92

Nim Azriiy 105 n. 3

Niiihapfir 27, 28, 120, 205f

IN DUX

225

iimheh 02

iiufiit ul-ijiiji'iH 25 n. 3, 35, K7-9, 93,

110, 200
Niir al-DIu 102
nutty ace naif

oath 7, 195, 199
Odyssey 80 n, 2
npiin Biipersrogalitmis 40 n. 2

Palmer, B.H. 50
p&rasang 45
pin front 50

pledge 431', 51, 100

prayer 15, 38, 43 n. 2, 44, 4flf, 54, 05,

(18, 99, 100, 117, 177, 180, 195, 302
puberty 00

rjadam 45
(/<!(/," tee Judge

Qildi lliwayii 1871'
i/adim (xifnli) 1371'
Qnl'lTd al-Murwazi 109 n. 1
al-Qa'nabi 27, 205
gOnttn 187 n. 3, 188

qariijnh 1 82
QaHliau 27
i/asi/ al-nharib 180
al-QaHtallaiii 155

Qatldoh 15

al-Qalliln, Ahmad ibn Sinan 20 n. 2,

Qayrawiiii 1 10 n. 1

QayH, bcmH 120

•/imtiJi 13,49 ii. 4,90, 108

i/iran 80

qiyOt 9, 11-13, 20-25, 80f, 34-30, 41, 53,
08, 83 n. 1, 85-80, 103, 100, 112, 115,
1451, 148, 158 n. 4, 102. 1081. 175, 187f,
190-94, 200-2, 200, 208f

i/ii/itK id-liird 109

Quatremero, E.-M. 2

Qudaah. bmiti. 120

al-Qudiiri, Abii al-I4imayii Ahiiuid ibn
Muhammad 01

Quarry, A. os
Quraysh 61 n. 3, 120
ol-QuBhayrl loisf, 175 n. 2,

al-Kabi' ibn Kbulaym 202

Babl'ab ilm Barrflkh 40

minimi 40, 55 n. 2,
Riijab ilin Ahmad 78
Tajik. 2-1, 01
rnk'uli 100, 190
Ramadan 54, 04, 73
mm; I85f
ranhai 02

h'mritiii al-mad&rit 105 n, 2

ta'tj 3-12, 10-18, 20, 23f, 201, 311', 11,
74, 77 n. 5, 85, 98-100, 111, 113, 117,
100, I70f. 181, 187, 190, 104-203, 208I -

Redhouso, J.W. 130 ii. 5

Roisko, J. J. 2, 25 n. 2

rice 55 n. 2

Ril'a'ali Beg al-'|'ah|avvi 105 u. 2

rillun tee pledge

Rosenthal, Fr. 30 n. 2, 178 n. 3

ruhhtah 45 a. I. 53 n. 3, 04 r, 73 o. 2.

Russell, A. 5 n. 3,

Ruwaym ilm Ahmad l()5f, 105

sa' 64f

Suehaii, 10. 3,

Sa*d ibn Abi Waqqft? 192

Ka'd ibn Hiikr, olau of the llawa/.iu 120

Su'd ibn MiiTulh 77 n. 5,

Sa'd ibn 'Ubudah 75. 77 n. 5

Hiidur/nh 54f, 05 n. 2,

al-.Sfulic[, .la'liir Btt Ja'far ibn Miil.iammad

ibn "All ilm lU-lliiHiiyn
al-Saghi 30 n. 1
al-Siihib ibn 'Abbud 139 n. 5
Said al-Kii'lfikl 28 n. 5
Sahnfui 181

Sa'id ibn AW 'Arubah 211
Sa'id ibn Abi HUM 135
Said ibn Jubayr 100
•Sa'id ibn al-Mimayyib 1921'
Sa'id ibn Tulid 98
Sa'id al-Mashflll 178
mkluV 129

aaty 135 n. 4, 187 n. 2,
Mtlum 188 n. 4
BuUmah 127
.mliit m-.K prayor

22G

IN'DIOX

faint iil-h'lmwj 441"

fdlSt al-miiMfir 44
Kfdib ihu AI.imud 200
Sillil.i Mm Muslim 111 n. 5
Salisbury, K. 21,

iil-Siiin'iiini 12(1

Suiiiurqiuiil 20 n. I

Siiiiiiinili iIm IuihIiiIj 74

al-Naiiliiirl Hill I'

Sunlit Maria 172

iil-SnnilcliHl 12

Savory, O.E. 50

Suyyidi Alifi ii 1 -*A lilijiM iil-MiiriiHi 100 n. 3

SayyidJ Yiiiiiii al-'Arshl mo a. 3

Sohaoht, J. it ii. I

Seville I7IHT

iil-Sliu'bi 7, 10, 35, 11)21", 201 T, 208

al-Shafil -i. ii ii. 2. 201', 22f, 2if". 26ff,

80ff, 34, 85, 86 n. 1. 38, 44, 49 n. i.

53. 85, 125, 127 n. 1, 158, 183, 201, 211
Nliiifi'ilc'M 231', 20, 31, 31, 40, 5i), 83 n. 1,

100, 109
ul-.SliiilimHl.ruii •!, 0, 125, 127
Sli;i nr.'.tir 105
iil-Slniinniiildi ilm I.)iiiii' L 19

Sharaf 170

iil-Sliii'i'iini 37. 100, 208
nhari'ali 187 n. 3
Sl.nrili ilm iil-Ijaiitll 103

aharfh 184

iil-Sliuyliuni, All" 'Aliil Alliili Miihiiminuil
ilm iil-I;lawtn It! Muhammad ilm id-

HllMllll

sheep 70

Slii'ah 37. II n. 2, 17, IS), 51, 58, (II.

72. 75. 121, ISO,
Sliiliii.li al-l)in Aliii lliinhiiii ,wr. Ahmad
ilm Muhammad ilm IhiiuVM Mm 'Aliil ul-

Uiiliniri.il Mm Yiimif
Shihiib al-Din Ahmad al-Ziihiri 180
Shihttb ul-DIn al-Ashmflnl 170
Shlrit/. 106
ahu'ab 03

Shurayl.i, jurigu 1), 10
Slbawuyh 173. 1701"
Hiiwtii 77 n. 3, 81
.jiffil Sit attributes

SUlst&n hi

silver 88, 40, 42i"
Silveatre de Saoy, M.-A. 1

Sind 107

ri.l-SiriJM.ri, Muhammad Mm 'Alid al-Rah-

niii.il Mm Muhammad al-Siimarijiiiidi

37
Sirl.iiib Mm Vflaiif Aim Tiihir nl-'l'ilirl'/.I 20
liwOh (ill

slaves 381", 50, 541", 821",
Solomon 15

sophistry 89, 84, 116

spelt 55 n. 2

Spfttft, W. 2,114

ataltui pnritatiH 40

ul-Subki, Taj al-Din 20

Subuktigln, 1 1! ih mi 150 n. 2

Sudan 54

suffrage wdvtrtd 32

Sufism 70 n. 1, 105f, 124, 105IT

Siil'yiin Mm 'Uyiiynuh 13

.Siifyiin al-Tliawri 1 n. 2, 51, 202

.viji'id 10 n. I. 153, 188 n. I

Siiliiyrn, lianil 110

Siiliiymn.il Mm Kai'li 27. 205

eunmh 8f, IS. 20 11. 1, 22f, 25, 43, 50,
01, 03, 04 n. I, 05 11. 4, 70, 781", 801",
00, 113, 125, 133, 140, 1(171", 177, 170.
187, 104ff, 201

Sunnltes 75, 01, 179

Kuwayil ilm Sn'icl 20 11. I

al-Suyu|.i 120, 101, 175, 189

Syria 107, 173, 178f

law/tub 28, 91f, 105 n. 3, 180 11. 1.
fabagph 103

iil.Tabari 4, 31 n. (I. 30 n. I. 100, 120

11. I.
tabi'iln 34, 30 n. 1, 118 n. 1, 134, 135

n. 4, 191, 1»7
ladlnr 82r. 153
tafair 37

al.Tiirt.ii'/.iiiii, Sa'il al-Din 1 1 n. 2
laluirah 58, 59 n. 4.
Iiihlil 121, 173, 100, 198
luh n in. 80, 190, 198
ITij ul-DIn 'At.a' Allah 100 n. 3
lajmrn 125, 150, 174, 170
takheb 113

INDKX

227

laklif 87 11. I

faliiii sat divorce

Ui'lil 1 1 n. 2, 22, 30. 87 n. I. lOOf. 1931",

201
Talmud (ii n. r>
Tiunim, ban ft 1 10
al-Taniiuilr .w 'Abd al-Malik Mm 'Abd

al-'A/.i/. al-Tiininiiir
taqdtr 01, 154
Taql nl- Din Muhammad 1)2
laqlid 301'. 87 n. 1, 105, 1001", 11)1. 211
lariijini. 08
Uiylhl 111), 123
laililiilt 125
taemiyah 72 n. 4, 152
ta'til 184
la-wil 1231", IS4
jtii/lu.mii 28
Taym, buiift 170
li'rliam cnniparitlimiin II
testator loor
testimony 7

Tha'lab urn Abu nl-'Abbuii Tha'lab
al-Thii'alibi 1!) 11. 1
llH'OBopby 37, 105, 124, 100
.1 thouiand and wm night 10 n. 2
Timur 112

al-Tiiiiiiiniili 111)

al-Tirmidhi 20 11. 1, 100

TiihiiI'oI. 02

l.mclil.ioniHlH •!. KIT. 23, 95

traditions 3. Sf, 12. is, 21. 24 r. 27, 29.

301", 35, 41f, 44. 47. 52-00, 00. 77, 70.

81, 89, 03, 90-102, 1081", 114, 157, 102,

172, 174, 183, 101, 210
traditions, fabricated 7. 73 .1. 1. 101, 123,
Tunis 171

"Ulayyah bint ul-Malidl 208
I'lliiiiiiin. Ludwig 50

nil i ma ratio 35, 154
•Umiiii 107
'Ulnar Mm Ilnbib 71.
'Dinar Mm al-KhaMiib SI', II). 57, 74,
78f. 90. 92, 94, lOlf, 174. 1911", 193,

iokit

'Uniar Khayyam 124 11. 3
Umm Salamali 194f

n mm!. 157 n. I

'nmriili 1 10 n. 1

'ttinftm 32, IS 11. 2, I Kir, 115 n. 2.

'Uniiyiiiili. Kii/.iiril.ti 77 n. 5

al-TTqoyshir al-Asadl 17

'«/•/ i87ri'

(T&omah Mm Zayd Mm Aslam 105

UHiImali Mm Zayd nl-Layllii 105
iimV al-fu/li 21, 05, 121, 108

usury 38, 40f

'Ulliitiiin Mm 'Allan 17 n. 2, 74, 89, 108

vow 75

Wahriuund, A. I. 5 11. 3,

wsjib oorr, on, 70, 20-1

VViiUi" Mm nl-.Iii.mili 202
Wnlid Mm Muslim HI n. 1.

watermelons 77 n. 8

wheal. 40, 55 n. 2,

will 74. 140f

wiuo 1 00 1". 117. 149. I02f

witnesses 7. 10

mdff 18. 42, 466 87, 80

wujftb 07, 71), 73, n. 3, 75 n. 3, 203

Yahyii, Mm Mu'iidh al-RfizI 105, 107
Yahyii. Mm Sillih a]-Wal.""''<-i 203
Yiihyii ibn Yal.iya 181 f
JTaqflt Mm 'Abd Allali al-llnminvi 105
Yi'ini'ii !l

yflnus (meant in probably) Ibn 'Abd al-AlS

100
Yu.iiil' ilm Yu'iifib Mm Milinui ul-Dawfiili

205, 207

iil-Zii'miiini 23
i&Ttir 1, 24

nl-lf,niiiii I80f

ZnUuriyn. ilm Yal.iya al-SiijI 205

znh'd 40, 08 n. 2. 196

zalcSt al-filr 541"

f<Mm 88, 09f. 135 n. 4. 117 n. 1, 190

Zayd Mm Khiilid 17 n. 2

Zayd ibn Tliilbit. 101. 1 91

Zaydis 59

jilin,- 50f

Znliir. l,linml"ili' 13. Ill

Zulmyr 1 1 9