Ibn_kathir_(d._7741373)_his_

IBN KATH R (D. 774/1373): HIS INTELLECTUAL CIRCLE, MAJOR WORKS AND QUR

NIC EXEGESIS

A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Arabic and Islamic Studies

By

Younus Y. Mirza, M.A

Washington, DC April 20, 2012

UMI Number: 3505508

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3505508 Copyright 2012 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

Copyright 2012 by Younus Y. Mirza All Rights Reserved

ii

IBN KATH R (d.774/1373): HIS INTELLECTUAL CIRLCE, MAJOR WORKS AND QUR

NIC EXEGESIS

Younus Y. Mirza, M.A. Thesis Advisor: Felicitas Opwis, Ph.D. ABSTRACT This dissertation focuses on one of the most popular medieval Muslim figures in modern times, Ibn Kath r. I argue that Ibn Kath

o ks reflect a critical theological struggle in the history of

I lam be een ho e ho empha i ed he o iginal o ce of he Q

n and prophetic practice

(traditionalists) and those who insisted on the incorporation of scholastic theology and the accumulated experience of he comm ni

(A h a s). Previous scholarship considers Ibn Kath r

simply a student of the great traditionalist jurist and theologian Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328). Ibn Taymiyya was the symbolic leader of the traditionalist movement and was imprisoned multiple ime beca e of hi a emp

o challenge he e abli hed A h a social order. Ibn Kath

ardent support of Ibn Taymiyya led many Arabic biographers to subsume Ibn Kath r under the hagiography of Ibn Taymiyya. Modern Western scholarship builds off the Arabic biographical literature to the point that Ibn Kath i pe cei ed a he me e and his Q

poke pe on fo Ibn Ta mi a

nic exegesis a simple implemen a ion of Ibn Ta mi a Q

Yet, through examining Ibn Kath

in ellectual circle, major works, and Q

nic hermeneutic. nic exegesis, this

dissertation demonstrates that Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Kath r represent two different types of traditionalism. Ibn Taymiyya believed in an intellectualized traditionalism which delved deeply into philosoph and chola ic heolog

o a g e fo c ip

e

a ionali . Ibn Ka h r, on the

other hand, subscribed to a fideist traditionalism which was content with the superiority of the iii

transmitted sources and the use of rational tools to analyze scripture. Ibn Kath

Q

nic

exegesis, his most famous work, was thus less a product of Ibn Taymiyya than that of his fideist adi ionali m and hi a emp o e pond o he dominan A h a i m.

iv

To My Family, For their continuous love and support YOUNUS Y. MIRZA

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 Ibn Ka h and hi Taf

in the Eyes of Western Scholarship ......................................... 3

Connec ing Ibn Ka h

o T adi ionali m (Ahl- ad h) .................................................... 6

T adi ionali m and Q

nic Exegesis ........................................................................... 22

Thesis ............................................................................................................................. 24 Theoretical Considerations ........................................................................................... 26 Notes on Translation and Transliteration ....................................................................... 28 Chapter I. Ibn Ka h a a Sh fi Ibn Ka h and he Sh fi

adi ionali .............................................................. 29

adi ionali

........................................................................ 30

Al-Mi

(654-742/1256-1341) The Q in e en ial ad h Schola .......................... 32

Al-Bi

l : (667-739/1267-1339) The Historian of Syria ........................................... 37

Al-Dhahab (673/675-748/1274-1348) The Historian of Islam .................................. 38 Ibn Ka h (700-774/1300-1373) - The Junior Scholar .................................................. 44 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 60 Chapter II. Mo ing Be ond Ibn Ta mi a: Ibn Ka h and he Sh fi A h a

.......... 61

The R ling Sh fi Elite ................................................................................................. 62 Al-Zamlak n : (666/7-727/1267/8-1327) The Political Opportunist .......................... 62 Ta

al-D n al-S bk : (683-756/1284-1355) The Righteous Judge ............................ 67

T j al-D n al-S bk (727-771-72/1327-1370) The Privileged Son ............................. 78 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 92 vi

Chapter III. Making Sh fi adi ionali m Sh fi o hodo Ibn Ka h Majo Wo k ........................................................................................................................................ 94 History............................................................................................................................ 94 Jurisprudence ............................................................................................................... 109 ad h ........................................................................................................................... 119 Con e

ali ing Ibn Ka h

ok

i hin he Sh fi

adi ionali

......................... 123

Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 124 Chapter IV. Different Traditionalisms, Con a ing App oache o he Q

n .......... 126

Tension within the Traditionalism Movement ............................................................. 127 Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h

Con a ing T adi ionali m ..................................... 128

In e p e ing God Name and A ib e .................................................................... 134 Engagement with the Exegetical tradition ................................................................... 143 Traditionalist Exegetes................................................................................................. 151 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 156 Chapter V. Jonah: A Sinless, Repentant or Obedient Prophet? Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h con a ing Q nic hermeneutic and exegesis. ............................. 158 Differentiating between Hermeneutic and Exegesis .................................................... 159 Defining Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h

Q

nic Hermeneutic ............................. 160

Defining i ma of the Prophets .................................................................................... 163 Jonah: A Sinless, Repentant, or Obedient Prophet? .................................................... 170 Al-R

: Jonah - A Sinless Prophet ............................................................................. 170

Ibn Taymiyya: Jonah - A Prophet of Repentance ....................................................... 175 vii

Ibn Ka h : Jonah - A Prophet of Obedience ............................................................... 178 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 183 Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 185 Islamic History ............................................................................................................. 185 Theology ...................................................................................................................... 187 Taf

............................................................................................................................ 190

Areas of Future Research ............................................................................................. 192 Bibliography ................................................................................................................ 199

viii

Introduction: In the year 763/1362, a young student (sh bb) from Iran arrived in Maml k Damascus alleging that he memorized word for word the prophetic report ( ad th) collections of al-Bukh r and Muslim, the Q

nic exegesis of al-Zamakhshar , and other classic Islamic works. This was

a bold claim even in a scholarly culture that excelled at memorization. To test his claim, a large group composed of commoners, notables and ad h scholars gathered around the youth in the Umayyad mosque. The young man began to recite from memory the beginning of a

al-

Bukh r to the middle of the Chapter of Knowledge, two and half chapters into the text. The crowd was so impressed that they agreed to meet the following day to have the youth complete the chapter. On the second day, the audience had grown even larger, with the Chief Judge and even ome of he ci

notables joining the event. Unfo

na el , he o h memo

began o

fail him, and he skipped some ad h and mi p ono nced words. Nevertheless, he was heralded as a remarkable success. Crowds gathered around him after his reading, with some even trying to kiss his hand. To show their admiration, the ci

eli e and judges gifted the boy close to a

thousand silver dirhams. One scholar, the great jurist, historian and ad h chola Ibn Ka h (d. 774/1373), had follo ed he bo

eading i h e pe in e e . Reco ding he event in his history, he noted that

the youth read well, except that he mispronounced some words, mixing them with his native Persian. None hele , Ibn Ka h

a

a i fied eno gh o gi e he o ng

den a pe onal

license (ij a). Upon receiving this hono , he bo e claimed, I lef m co n

1

onl

i h he

intention of meeting you so that you might grant me this license. Your reputation (dhikruka) in o

co n

i g ea .

Ibn Ka h c

1

a mode fig e on he I lamic in ellec al land cape of he Maml k

period. Not as outspoken or controversial as Damascene compatriots like Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328), he is the detached recorder, not always seen as a participant in drama. Yet, this story emind

ha Ibn Ka h

a him elf a highl

e pec ed cholar during his own lifetime, and

his works spread throughout Muslim lands. Even students from as far as Central Asia sought him o

and a ked fo hi

amp of app o al. O e he pa age of ime, ho e e , Ibn Ka h

persona became subsumed under the hagiography of the great jurist and theologian Ibn Ta mi a. E en a Ibn Ka h

man

ok

e e ead, an c ibed and ci c la ed i h

consistency, he continued to be associated with Ibn Taymiyya, seen as his mouthpiece and not appreciated in his own right. This dissertation reconsiders the standard narrative of Ibn Ka h as a

poke pe on for

Ibn Taymiyya and that his Exegesis (tafs r) is a product solely of his relationship with the great scholar. 2 While Ibn Taymiyya had a significant impact on Ibn Ka h , he la e e p e ed a i ion of I lamic heolog Ka h

ha diffe ed f ndamen all f om he fo me

Exegesis . Ibn

Tafs r was more the product of a theological struggle between two contrasting visions of

Islam. One maintained the absolute primacy of scripture and revealed tradition over reason. The other stressed the accumulated wisdom and intellectual contributions of the Muslim community, asserting that the Q

nic revelation should be mediated through rational means. Ibn Ka h

sought to tie his legal school (madhhab) o he o iginal o ce of he Q 1

n and Prophetic

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a wa l-nih a, ed . Al M ammad M a ad and dil A mad Abd al-Ma j d, 15 ol . (Lebanon: D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 2009), 14:286. The o al o all de o he fac ha Dama c a an impo an h b of chola hip he e chola o ks were frequently sent to other parts of the Muslim world. 2 Kristina Zahra Sands, Sufi Commentaries on the Qur n in Classical Islam (London; New York: Routledge, 2006), 144.

2

practice but at the same time delicately negotiate his relationships with those who stressed the madhhab history and belief in rational disputation. To provide context to my argument, I will provide a brief overview of Ibn Ka h

i hin We e n Schola hip, his role within the historic

struggle between a scripture-based vision of Islam versus a more rational one and the role of his Exegesis within this ongoing debate.

Ibn Ka

and his Tafsīr in the Eyes of Western Scholarship:

The most important Western chola o

o k on Ibn Ka h i Hen i Loa

Ibn Ka h a a g ea hi o ian and impo an

ad h chola , b

entry in the Encyclopaedia of Islam, Lao

begin b

best-kno n hi o ian and adi ionali hi Sh fi

aining b

of S ia

chool.

4

an uninteresting exegete.3 In his

a ing ha Ibn Ka h

a

one of he

nde he Maml ks. He proceeds to discuss

hen men ion that he ne

influence of Ibn Taymiyya and hi

who presents

fell

While Lao

ongl , and very early, under the no e Ibn Ta mi a

infl ence on

Ibn Ka h , he does not overemphasize it, something that later scholars frequently do. Af e di c Ka h

ing Ibn Ka h

ela ion

i h he Maml k

o k and contends that b fa he mo

a e, Lao

comments on Ibn

impo an of Ibn Ka h

o k i hi g ea

history of Islam, al-Bid a wa l-nih a one of he p incipal hi o ical pe iod.

Lao

add ha al-Bid ya

success is not only in its own content but that it was the

basis of other historical works, such as Ibn ajar al- A qal n anb

o k of he Maml k

(d. 852/1449) Inb

al-ghumr bi-

al- umr.5

3

See Lao Ibn Ka i Hi o ien, Arabica 2, no.1 (1955): 42-88. Laoust has pioneered the Western study of traditionalism. 4 The e of he o d chool he e i no e clea , beca e i co ld be in e p e ed a a school of jurisprudence (madhhab) or movement. 5 Ibn ajar al- A al n , Inb al-ghumr bi-anb al- umr, ed. asan aba h , 2 ol . (Cai o: Lajna I al-T al-I l m , 1969), 1:39.

3

h

Lao

hen mo e

al o impo an and li al

o di c

Ibn Ka h

con ib ion o ad h

ome of hi mo impo an

(d. 643/1245) introduction to

ad h o k

ad h.6

ch a hi

hich he remarks i mma

of Ibn al-

He finally mentions Ibn Ka h

Tafs r

dismissively: hi Tafs r, essentially a philological work, is very elementary and foreshadows, in its style that which al-S

o ld

i e la e .

7

These are the only comments of Laoust

regarding the Tafs r suggesting that he did not look significantly at the text.8 Laoust

entry is significant because it represents the historical view that existed for most

the 20th century that Ibn Ka h

a p ima il

biographical sources frequently note that Ibn Ka h an e ege e (mufassir).

a hi o ian a he

han an exegete.

The

a a hi o ian (mu arrikh) before he was

Ho e e , once Ibn Ka h

e ege i was abridged and made a

standard part of many Islamic seminary curriculums, its popularity increased and its influence was impossible to ignore.9 A Ibn Ka h

e ege i became mo e ide p ead i generated a variety of reactions, the

most influential being that of Norman Calder who argues that Ibn Ka h restricts the exegetical tradition to focus solely on ad h to the exclusion of the polyvalent exegetical tradition of alabar (d. 310/923) and al-Qur ub (d. 671/1272).10 He further contends that Ibn Ka h acquires

6

I ill peak abo Ibn Ka h mma of Ibn al- al Introduction to the Sciences of ad th in Chapter Three. H. Laoust, Ibn Ka h , Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, eds. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. Van Donzel, and W.P. Heinrichs (Brill, 2012). This article was originally published in 1968. 8 Or Laoust could have read the Tafs r but not found it very appealing. However, even if one disagrees with Ibn Ka h s Q nic hermeneutic, his exegesis is essential in the history of his life and intellectual circle. 9 Fo on ho Ibn Ka h Tafs r was revived see Walid Saleh, P elimina Rema k on he Hi o iog aph of tafs r in Arabic: A His o of he Book App oach, Journal of Qur nic Studies 12, no. 1-2 (2010): 28. I hope to discuss he ecep ion and g ad al i e of Ibn Ka h pop la i in f e ok. 10 No man Calde , Tafs r from aba o Ibn Ka h : p oblem in he de c ip ion of a genre, illustrated with efe ence o he o of Ab aham, Approaches to the Qur n, eds. G.R. Hawting and A.A. Shareef (London: Routledge, 1993). Ja id Mojaddedi and And e Rippen belie e ha hi i No man Calde mo infl en ial a icle. See their introduction to Interpretation and Jurisprudence in Medieval Islam, eds. Jawid Mojaddedi and Andrew Rippin (Aldershot [England]; Burlington, VT: Ashgate/Variorum, 2006), XII. In another article, Rippin call Calde a icle imp e i e ; Q nic Studies, Part IV: Some Methodological Notes, Islamic Origins Reconsidered: John Wansbrough and the Study of Islam, ed. H. Berg (Berlin: Walter de Gryter, 1997). Referencing 7

4

hi

f ndamen ali m

11

from his teacher Ibn Taymiyya in that they both circumvent the

cumulative Islamic intellectual tradition in favor of its original sources.12 Calder thus represents the prevailing view that Ibn Ka h

Tafs r is simply one of ad h and that it originates from his

relationship with Ibn Taymiyya. Th o gho

he a icle, Calde

and speculative exegetes is apparent. For instance, he a e

bia of fa o ing mo e a ional

Thi g im heologian (Ibn Ka h )

could hardly have found any pleasure in the exuberant uncertainties of Qur ub , or in the visionary intellectualism of R z . imagina ion.

14

13

Fo

Calde , Ibn Ka h

lack

li e a

kill

and

Nevertheless, while Calder is highly critical of Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h ,

he raises important questions about Ibn Ka h

relationship with Ibn Taymiyya and how they

both interacted with the exegetical tradition.15

hi a icle, Sand a e ha he a k of iden if ing he fo mal cha ac e i tics of tafs r has been tackled with great skill by Calder ; Sands, 67. 11 As Ahmad Dallal explains, terms like fundamentalism can be attractive in many ways, primarily because it allows the student of modem Islam to analyze and understand a complex set of variables in the context of one cohe en hole ; Ahmad Dallal, The Origins and Objectives of Islamic Revivalist Thought, 1750-1850, Journal of the American Oriental Society 113, no. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1993), 342. 12 Calde al o a ha Ibn Ka h was an expert on ad h and a disciple of Ibn Taymiyya together adequate symbols of hi in ellec al affilia ion ; No man Calde , Tafs r from aba o Ibn Ka h , 121, 124. Calder belie e Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h a e f ndamen ali beca e he ci cumvent the intellectual tradition in favor of the original sources. In another instance, Calder calls Ibn Taymiyya a salaf because, In all mo emen designated, and especially in the works of Ibn Taymiyya and his followers, there was an attempt to reject tradition in favour of a return to earliest gene a ion . Calde i a e e o f ndamen ali and mode ni who he believes limit or reject tradi ion. See hi , Hi o and No algia: eflec ion on John Wan b o gh The Sec a ian Milie , Islamic Origins Reconsidered: John Wansbrough and the Study of Islam, ed. Herbert Berg (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1997), 19. Calder would influence future scholars who highlight the impact of Ibn Taymiyya on Ibn Ka h . See Robe o To oli, O igin and U e of he Te m I a ili a in M lim Li e a e, Arabica 46, no. 2 (1999): 193-210. 13 Calder, Tafs r from aba o Ibn Ka h , 124. 14 Calde concl de ha In Ibn Ka h ie , God ha con ide abl le li e a kill han he a e age h man being, and ve li le imagina ion ; Calde , Tafs r from aba o Ibn Ka h , 124. 15 Calde a icle ep e en he bia e i hin the Western study of tafs r which is more inclined towards rational, legal and mystical commentaries. Of the handful of monographs on tafs r, I am not aware of any on a traditionalist exegete. See, for instance, Bruce Fudge, Qur nic Hermeneutics: al- abris and The Craft of Commentary (New York: Routledge, 2011); Andrew J. Lane, A Traditional Mu ta ilite Qur n Commentar : the Kashsh f of J r All h al-Zamakhshar (d. 538/1144) (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2006); Ta i Jaffe , Fak al-D n al-R z (d. 606/1210): Philosopher and Theologian as Exegete, (Ph.D. di e a ion, Yale University, 2005); Gerhard Bowering, The Mystical Vision of Existence in Classical Islam: the Qur nic Hermeneutics of the f Sahl At-Tustar (d. 283/896) (Berlin; New York: de Gruyter, 1980). For sufi exegesis in general see Kristina Zahra Sands.

5

Connecting Ibn Ka

T ad

a

(Ahl- adīth):

Despite the standard narrative, Ibn Ka h

exegesis was less a product of his relationship

with Ibn Taymiyya than a result of the larger struggle in the history of Islamic theology and hermeneutics between traditionalism and rationalism.16 As Christopher Melchert defines them, traditionalist

e e ho e who would base their law and theology mainly on ad h as opposed

to a ional pec la ion. the Q

17

The traditionalist deemed that religion should be based primarily on

n and Prophetic practice (Sunna) and theological vision of the early Muslim

community. They insisted on the superiority of these original sources and that theology should not be mitigated by external means.18 In contrast, rationalists emphasized the importance of the rational sciences, such as philosophy, logic and scholastic theology, to better understand God and His message. While they paid allegiance to scripture, they felt that the rational sciences helped give them greater insights into he Q

n and he e ence of he P ophe

eaching. The rational sciences were

not a hindrance, as the traditionalists claimed, but a useful tool to help elucidate divine truth.

16

For more on the struggle between rationalists and traditionalists in Islam see Richard M. Frank, Texts and Studies on the Development and History of Kal m, ed. Dimitri Gutas (Aldershot: Ashgate Variorum, 2008); George F. Hourani, Reason and Tradition in Islamic Ethics (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985); George F. Hourani, Islamic Rationalism: the Ethics of Abd al-Jabb r (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1971); Nimrod Hurvitz, Formation of Hanbalism: Piety into Power (New York: Routledge Curzon, 2002). 17 Ch i ophe Melche , Ea l Ren ncian a ad h T an mi e , The Muslim World 92, no. 3-4 (2002): 407. A Jona han B o n f he e plain , adi ionali belie ed ha a na ci i ic ind lgence of h man ea on o ld enco age he agenda of he e and he emp a ion o a f om God e ealed pa h. Only by clinging stubbornly o he a of he P ophe and hi igh eo cce o co ld he p e e e he a hen ici of hei eligion ; Jonathan Brown, The Canonization of al-Bukh r and Muslim: the Formation and Function of the Sunn ad th Canon (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 50. Fo mo e on he defini ion of a adi ionali ee George Makdi i, A h a and he A h a i e in I lamic Religio Hi o I, Studia Islamica 17, no. 2 (1962): 48. 18 It is important to note that traditionalists did not entirely reject the use of reason, rather reason would be an important tool to analyze reports and to expand the use of the law through analogy (qi s). A traditionalist (salaf ) is furthermore not equivalent to a ad h chola (mu addith) who specializes ad h. A ad h chola co ld e well be a rationalist or traditionalist in creed even though many ad h chola e e adi ionali . For more, see Geo ge Makdi i, The J idical Theolog of Sh fi : O igin and Significance of U l al-Fiqh, Studia Islamica 59, no. 1 (1984): 5-47.

6

While traditionalist and rationalist composed of opposing camps, there was a wide spectrum between them and at times great overlap. Pure rationalists rejected scripture altogether while others incorporated it within their argumentation. At the opposite extreme, strident traditionalists condemned all forms of rational argumentation, while others used the rational sciences to defend their traditionalist creeds. Furthermore, even though they would not admit it, traditionalists and rationalists would frequently read one ano he

works and incorporate the

others arguments within their own writings. A key factor separating the two camps was the use of scholastic theology or kal m. As Marshall Hodg on e plain , a ionali

fel compelled o c ea e an o e all co molog which

they could claim as rational and with which they could claim ha he Q

n a in ha mon .

19

Rationalists wanted to present the religion as a rational system in order to defend the creed from its opponents. This system was called kal m li e all religious belief on he ba i of a ional c i e ia.

20

di c

ion o

di c

ion of poin of

The entire enterprise assumed that revelation

had a a ional ba i and ha a ional c i e ia co ld be

ed o p o e he eligion

alidi .

Traditionalists were skeptical of kal m because it increased the role of reason to the point that it became a criterion to judge scripture.21 For traditionalists, scripture should always play a superior role and not be subordinated to external methods. The development of kal m led to the second contentious issue, the use of ta w l or the figurative interpretation. In order to bring scripture into conformity with their rational systems, rationalists interpreted certain Q

nic words according to their derivative, figurative meaning

instead of accepting the most apparent one. Rationalists contended that their interpretations 19

Marshall G.S. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization, 3 vols. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 1:438. 20 Hodgson, 1:438. 21 Or, in the case of ad h , ea on became a means to authenticate scripture.

7

conformed to Arabic philology and to the understanding of the early Muslim community. Traditionalists countered by claiming that rationalists resorted to ta w l in order to fit scripture to their preconceived theologies. Instead of deriving theology from scripture, as traditionalist claimed that they did, rationalists manipulated the text to justify their heretical doctrines. The difference in theology between the rationalists and traditionalists led to the formation of two distinct communities.22 The rationalists gave emphasis to the intellect and the rational sciences and were thus more inclined to hierarchy.23 They were open to work with state powers that often patronized their work and funded their madrasas. The traditionalists, in contrast, stressed morality and ethics and upheld a more egalitarian view of society.24 They attempted to connect themselves to the grassroots and to seek employment within independent madrasas. Traditionalists were skeptical of government participation seeing it as comprising their intellectual independence and corrupting their piety and morality. These two communities developed different cultures that translated into contrasting mannerisms, social habits and activities.25

22

For more on traditionalist culture see Nim od H i , Biog aphie and Mild A ce ici m: A S d of I lamic Mo al Imagina ion, Studia Islamica 85, no. 1 (1997): 41-65; Christopher Melchert, The Piety of the ad h Folk, International Journal of Middle East Studies 34, no. 3 (2002): 425-43; Christopher Melchert, Early Renunciants as ad h T an mi e , The Muslim World 92, no. 3-4 (2002): 407-18; Christopher Melchert, Exaggerated Fear in the Early Islamic Renunciant Tradition, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 21, no. 3 (2011): 283-300. 23 For the hierarchical structures of Muslim rationalists see Louise Marlow, Hierarchy and Egalitarianism in Islamic Thought (Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 42- 65. 24 Melchert contrasts the structure of traditionalist communities to Sufi ones. As he explains, traditionalist comm ni ie ha e most of the earmarks of a contractual community, whose member-ship is voluntary and within which there is substantial equality. Voluntary membership and equality flow from a stress on morality, which continually makes the individual choose to do one thing and not another; it also tends to demand the same choices from all individuals. By contrast, mystics tend toward an organic conception of community, accepting hierarchy and specialization, for some will be fo nd clo e o God han o he ; Melche , Pie of he ad h Folk, 429. 25 For example, Melchert explains how traditionalists had a serious demeanor and did not approve of leaning: Fo example, it was considered excellent manners among diverse parties not to lean. (What better illustration could be asked of Islamic dignity?) To start with the ad h folk, A mad, although ill, sat up straight when someone mentioned the Khurasani traditionist Ibrahim ibn Tahman (d. 784- 85?) ; Melche , Pie of he ad h Folk, 433.

8

These two different communities had many confrontations, the most famous the mi na, literally the trial. The rationalist camp, often associated with the M

a il ,

26

allied

themselves with the Abbasid caliphs to impose their views on the populace, most notably that the Q

n was the created word of God as opposed to he

peech of God a he adi ionali

maintained. The rationalist contended that affirming that the Q of God a

n a he uncreated

peech

med ha God had an h opomorphic qualities such as human speech.27 Human

speech required organs, something which God did not have, so he created speech. The M

a il , in pa ic la , sought to affirm the absolute transcendence and unity of God and thus

argued that the Q

n was c ea ed in that it was not no c ea ed o co-eternal with God.28

The traditionalists, led by the great Ibn anbal (d. 241/855),29 eventually defeated the rationalists and in the process defended scripture and stood up to government attempts to impose theology upon the community.30

26

Fo mo e on M a ilism ee he o k of Geo ge Ho ani. Melche a g e ha he in i i ion i o be iden ified less with the M a ila than with the nascent anaf chool of la ; Ch i ophe Melche , The Ad e a ie of A mad b. anbal, Arabica 44, no. 2 (1997): 239. 27 Wilferd Madel ng, The Con o e on he C ea ion of he Ko an, Orientalia Hispanica, ed. J. M. Barral (Lugduni Ba a o m: B ill, 1974), 506. Fo mo e di c ion o e he Q n na e ee M.W. Wa , Ea l di c ion abo he Q an, Muslim World 40, no. 1 (1950): 27-40. 28 Wilfe d Madel ng e pand on he M a il po i ion in comparison to the traditionali : The e e, on he o he hand, rigorously opposed to the admission of anything co-eternal with God. They denied any independent existence to the essential attributes in God and strictly maintained the temporality of all attributes referring to his acts. They held, moreover, that the acts of God cannot subsist in his unchangeable essence, but must be created elsewhere. Since in affirming that the Koran is created they were chiefly concerned with its temporality, they accused those denying its creation of a e ing i e e ni and of de o ing God ni b he admi ion of ome hing co-eternal with him. That this was the thrust of the attack of those upholding the creation of the Koran at this time is confirmed by the letters of the Caliph al-Ma m n o de ing he mi na. There the traditionalists are not charged with anthropomorphism and ascribing organs of speech to God. They are polemically accused of putting God and the Koran on an equal level, of claiming that it is eternal and primordial, and that God has not created, originated (lam u dithu), or produced it. In denying the creation of the Koran, they have obliterated the distinction between God and all other things by his bringing them forth through his power and by his priority in time (al-taqaddum ala h bi-awwaliyyatih). They are thus like the Christians who claim that Jesus was not created because he was the o d of God. Thi a a fa o i e a g men of he M a il ; Madel ng, 516-17. 29 For more on Ibn anbal and the formation of the anbal madhhab see Nimrod Hurvitz, The Formation of Hanbalism: Piety into Power (London; New York: Routledge Curzon, 2002); Christopher Melchert, A mad ibn anbal (Oxford: Oneworld, 2006). 30 M. Hind , Mi na, EI2.

9

However, the kal m methodology did not die with the M A h a .31 The Ash ar

ejec ed he M

a il but continued with the

a il claim that God could not have the qualities of

speech and hearing.32 Nevertheless, they agreed i h he M tazil s that God was not confined to a particular place and could not have the anthropomorphic attributes of having human limbs. They thus employed ta w l to interpret scripture figuratively relating to God mounting his throne and having hands and a face. Even though the A h a

claimed to be traditionalists themselves

and followers of Ibn anbal, many traditionalists argued that the Ash a

e e he M

a il s in

a different guise since they continued to employ the same rational tools of kal m and ta w l. The struggle between the traditionalists and A h a s escalated in the 7th/13th century. Two groups of active and influential anbal chola , one fleeing f om Mongol in a ion in Baghdad and the other fleeing the Crusaders in Palestine, arrived in Maml k Damascus.33 The anbal

lo l began o

challenged he ci

e ion p ac ice ha he fel

e e heretical and in the process

A h a power structures. The influx of these new immigrants changed the

religious and social landscape of the city and thus caused resentment among the Sh fi A h a ruling elite. As Michael Chamberlain explains, one Sh fi madrasa endowment stipulated that no Je , Ch i ian, Magian, or anbal en e

i .34 Ano he Sh fi endo men made i a

condition that no Jew, Christian or anbal an h opomo phi ( anbal

31

ashw ) could enter into

Fo mo e on he A h a s see Montgomery Watt, Ash ariyya, EI2. I speak more about the differences between the Ash a s and Mu a il in Chap e Th ee. 33 For more on the Maml k ee Amalia Le anoni, The Maml k in Eg p and S ia, The New Cambridge History of Islam, ed. Michael Cook, 4 vols. (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 2:237-284. 34 Michael Chamberlain, Knowledge and Social Practice in Medieval Damascus, 1190-1350 (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 169. The f ll o e i : anbal po itions on theological issues varied from those of others to the extent that conflict was latent in their relations. On the issues of the created character of he Q n, he i i a ion of omb , and he di ine a ib e , he anbal of Dama c e po ed doctrines that were f ndamen all incompa ible i h he belief of Sh fi and of en he o he madhhabs as well. Examples of the suspect status of the anbal appea f e en l in he o ce . Some Dama cene ejec ed he claim of he anbal o be M slims. One madrasa waqf pecified ha no Jew, Christian, Magian, or anbal en e i . Sh fi who controlled madrasas in at least one instance tried to keep anbal f om en e ing o benefi ing f om hem. 32

10

its doors.35 The tension be een Sh fi

and anbal

36

intensified to the point that a death

warrant was issued for the great anbal j i Ibn Q d ma al-Ma di (d. 620/1223), who was able to escape to Egypt before the decree was able to be carried out.37 The en ion be een he adi ionali

and A h a

clima ed in he first half of the

following century, especially with the rise of the anbal Ibn Ta mi a. Following the line of other anbal , Ibn Ta mi a famil fled he Mongol in a ion f om a

n, S ia, when he

was only seven years old38 and settled in Damascus. Ibn Taymiyya would gain enormous popularity with the political leaders, traditionalist scholars and the masses,39 a confluence that Donald Li le call he Ibn Ta mi a phenomenon. h ea ened

41

40

The ruling A h a elite began to feel

by Ibn Ta mi a increasing influence to the point that they began to question

his poli ical ambi ion .

42

Ibn Taymiyya would be subsequently imprisoned six times between

693/1294 and 728/1328 totaling over six years.43 Ibn Ta mi a

adi ionali

ppo e

believed he was the new Ibn anbal, hile hi A h a c i ic deemed him a he e ic.

35

anbal A h a co ld ppo edl en e into the school; Abd al-Q di b. M ammad Al-N a m , al-D ris f t r kh al-mad ris, ed. Ja fa al- a an , 2 ol . (Cai o: Mak aba al-Tha fa al-D ni a, 1988), 1:267. 36 As Richard Bulliet explains, madhhabs often went beyond legal or theological schools but became political parties. In speaking about the anaf /Sh fi di ide in Ni h p , he states, In p e ie , ha gene al e m of anaf and Sh fi ha e a con i en do ble meaning . On he one hand, he deno e mode of legal in e p e a ion, as already explained, and, on the other, they stand for two political parties within the patriciate, vying for possession of key political posts within the city and ultimately for the city itself. The term political party is intended here to denote a political action group bound together by an essentially political ideology, a vision of the right ordering of ocie ; The Patricians of Nish p r: a Stud in Medieval Islamic Social Histor (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1972), 38. 37 Chamberlain, 170. 38 It is not inconceivable that the traumatic events of his childhood affected Ibn Taymiyya for the rest of his life. 39 A Li le a , Ibn Ta mi a a a i o pe onali among he oldie and he am , he me chan and nobles, and all the common people, who loved him because he always stood up for their welfare with his tongue and his pen ; Li le Did Ibn Ta mi a Ha e a Sc e Loo e? Studia Islamica 41, no. 1 (1975): 109. 40 Donald Li le, The Hi o ical and Hi og aphical Significance of he De en ion of Ibn Ta mi a, International Journal of Middle East Studies 4, no. 3 (1973): 321. 41 Li le, Did Ibn Ta mi a Ha e a Sc e Loo e? 109. 42 Li le, The Hi o ical and Hi og aphical Significance of he De en ion of Ibn Ta mi a, 322. 43 Li le, Did Ibn Ta mi a Ha e a Sc e Loo e? 109. Fo mo e on he ea on ha Ibn Taymiyya was imprisoned see Ha an Q. M ad, Ibn Ta mi a on T ial: A Na a i e Acco n of hi Mihan, Islamic Studies 18, (1979): 1-32 and Sherman Jackson, Ibn Taymîyah on Trial in Damascus, The Journal of Semitic Studies 39, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 41-85.

11

Yet, the tradi ionali challenge o he A h a o hodo but extended to a large group of traditionalists i hin he Sh fi

a no limi ed o he anbal chool, Ibn Ka h among hem.

As George Makdisi argues, that the biggest threat to A h a i m lay not with Ibn Taymiyya and the anbal s but with Sh fi

adi ionalists.

44

Western scholars have mistakenly held that

traditionalism was an insignificant minority and existed almost entirely in the anbal school. Makdisi asserts that by focusing on the so-called anbal traditionalist/Sh fi A h a di ide, chola mi ed ha he g ea

phea al be

i hin he Sh fi i e chool i elf.

45

een A h a i m and traditionalism was taking place

Contrary to the standard narrative, A h a i m had not

become the established orthodoxy by the 8th/14th cen

, i h a la ge con ingen of Sh fi

still

maintaining a traditionalist creed. The e Sh fi

adi ionalists were caught in a difficult position - while they were

traditionalist he belonged o he Sh fi legal chool which had a historic relationship with A h a i m.46 Thi

pec lia i a ion led man Sh fi

anbal again A h a i m since anbal had no school.47 Sh fi

aditionali

oppose the Sh fi A h a

ocal han

ch hi o ic ela ion hip i h he theological

aditionalists still wanted to maintain hei ie

they viewed as their colleagues and friends.48 Sh fi

o be le

i h Sh fi A h a

ho

adi ionalists further did not want to

overtly since they controlled the key judicial positions and teaching

posts.

44

See al o Makdi i A h a and he A h a i e in I lamic Religio Hi o II, Studia Islamica 18, no. 1 (1963): 19-39. 45 Makdi i, Pa II, 38. 46 For more on he hi o ic ela ion hip be een Sh fi i m and A h a i m ee Felici a Op i , The Role of he Biographer in Constructing Identity and Doctrine: Al- Abb d and hi Ki b aba al-f ah al- h fi i a, Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 11, no. 1 (2011):23-32. 47 Makdi i, Pa II, 37. 48 The diffe ence be een he Sh fi A h a and Sh fi adi ionalists will be e plo ed in Chap e One and T o.

12

While Makdi i in igh a e in al able in hedding ligh on he heological land cape of the beginning of the 8th/14th, he does not differentiate between the traditionalism of Ibn Taymiyya and the Sh fi traditionalists. Ibn Taymiyya belonged to an intellectualized traditionalism which saw ea on and adi ion a a

a ionali

complemen a . 50

ba ed on e ela ion and adi ion,

49

Ibn Taymiyya believed in

one that sought to understand the rational

nature of scripture. He made hi a g men again A h a claim ha ea on co ld a ime i mph over scripture or necessitate its figurative interpretation.51 To prove his point, Ibn Taymiyya delved deeply into the works of kal m and philosophy, even debating the works of the great Muslim philosopher Ibn S n (d. 1037).52 Throughout his writings, Ibn Taymiyya consistently argues that the traditionalist position is rationally superior to that of the philosophers and speculative theologians. Ibn Ka h and the Sh fi salaf, a mo al heolog

o

raditionalists, on the other hand, upheld he heolog of he

heolog of p a i

ha a oided pec la ion and di p a ion and

focused on the more practical sciences of ad h and law.53 Unlike Ibn Taymiyya who spent a large pa of hi ca ee compo ing heological ac , he Sh fi

adi ionali

de eloped the

sciences of ad h. The Sh fi traditionalists were more fideist than Ibn Taymiyya since they were content with affirming the superiority of scripture rather than arguing for its rationality.

49

Geo ge Makdi i ed he e m in ellec al adi ionali m b I choo e he e m in ellec ali ed adi ionali m since many fideist traditionalists e e al o in ellec al a ell. Fo mo e on he e m in ellec al adi ionali m, see George Makdisi, Ibn Aq l: Religion and Culture in Classical Islam (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1997). 50 M. Sai O e a li, The Q nic Rational Theology of Ibn Taymiyya and his Criticism of the Mutakallim n, in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, eds. Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010), 84. 51 I will speak in more detail about how Ibn Taymiyya refutes Ash a ie of he Q n in Chapter Four and Five. 52 Yahya Michot, A Maml k Theologian Commen a on A icenna Ris la A awiyya, Journal of Islamic Studies 14, no. 2 (2003): 149 203; A Maml k Theologian Commen a on A icenna Ris la A awiyya, Part II., Journal of Islamic Studies 14, no. 3 (2003): 309-363. 53 George Makdi i, E hic in I lamic Traditionalist Doc ine, in Ethics in Islam, ed. Richard G. Hovannisian (Malibu, Calif.: Undena Publications, 1985), 47.

13

Unlike Ibn Taymiyya, they strategically choose not to engage kal m and philosophy, believing that the harms of such a task outweighed the potential benefits. The great Sh fi tradionalist Shams al-D n al-Dhahab (d. 748/1348), who was one of the primary teachers of Ibn Ka h ,54 captures the the theology of the salaf in hi

o k Ba n aghl

al- ilm wa l- alab, a piece of advice to a potential student on which sciences to study and which to avoid. In his Chapter on Theology (u l al-d n), al-Dhahab differentiates between two types of creeds, the theology of the early community (salaf) and that of the subsequent one (khalaf). Al-Dhahab states that the theology of salaf is to believe in God, His revealed books, the Prophets, Angels, His divine characteristics and omnipotence. The salaf further maintain that the Q

n is revelation, the word of God and i hed God plea

e on all of the Companions. The

theology of the khalaf, in contrast, incorporated the rational sciences, such as philosophy and logic, something that the salaf would disapprove of. Al-Dhahab moves to condemn the theology of the khalaf, explaining that the incorporation of the rational sciences created tremendous dissention within the community and bred diseases within the souls. The theology of the khalaf is like a dangerous sword that excommunicates (yukaffir) and misguides.55 Al-Dhahab then transitions to shed light on the theological struggle of his day between the traditionalists and the Ash a . Al-Dhahab explains that the traditionalist theologian who stands by the literal meaning of scripture is considered by his enemy (i.e. A h a s) an anthropomorphist (mujassiman), ashwiyya56 and innovator (mubdi

an

). A h a

accused

traditionalists of anthropomorphism because they ead e e ela ing o God attributes literally, something which they believed that the early community had not done. On the 54

I peak mo e abo Ibn Ka h ela ion hip i h al-Dhahab in Chap e One. Mu ammad b. A mad al-Dhahab , Ba n aghl al- ilm wa l- alab, ed. Mu ammad Z hid b. al- asan al-Ka ha (Damascus: al-Q d , 1928), 22. 56 ashwiyya was a derogatory term referring to literalist anthropomorphists; Ed( ), ashwiyya ( ashawiyya, ushwiyya, or Ahl al- ashw) , EI2. 55

14

contrary, those who engage in ta w l, presumably the A h a , are considered by others (i.e. the traditionalists) to be M A h a , like he M

a il , Jahm ,57 and misguided.58 The traditionalists charged the

a il s and Jahmiyya before them, of prioritizing reason over revelation and

denying many of God characteristics and attributes. Al-Dhahab asserts that it is better to remain above these debates by maintaining one s moral integrity and well-being (al-sal ma wa l- fi a awl bika). One should not get caught up within these theological arguments and lo e one

elf in he p oce .

Al-Dhahab then makes it a point to warn the student not to take the middle way that attempts to balance reason and revelation or the path of Ibn Taymiyya. Al-Dhahab explains to his student that even if one excels in the rational sciences while holding firm o he Q

n and

Sunna in the hope of piecing together (laffaqa) reason and revelation, then one would not even come close to the level of the great Ibn Taymiyya. For al-Dhahab , Ibn Taymiyya was a brilliant scholar but it was not worth stooping down to the level of the rationalists and engaging in their games. Al-Dhahab knew Ibn Taymiyya before he attempted to reconcile the sciences, and he was a guiding light, leading people to the path of salaf. But then Ibn Taymiyya became dark and gloomy to some; an anti-Christ, liar and disbeliever to his enemies; a brilliant, erudite scholar to a group of intellectuals; the standard bearer of Islam, the defender of the religion and the reviver of the Sunna towards his supporters.59

57

I speak more about how the Jahmiyya a a code o d fo A h a ism in Chapter One. Al-Dhahab adds one more category of a theologian who affi m ome of God a ib e b hen fig a i el interprets others. To his opponents, he is considered to be contradicting himself. While al-Dhahab doe no a o, hi g o p i mo likel he A h a a ell. 59 Bori translates this passage a he follo ing: Wa eign among he heologian (u uliyya). They declare each other unbelievers or misguided. The theologian who sticks to the plain meaning of the words and traditions is declared by his adversaries to be an anthropomorphist, a ashw , and an innovator. In turn, the theologian who p omo e [allego ical] in e p e a ion ill be decla ed b he o he a Jahm and a M a il and o be in e o . [The theologian] who admits [the existence of] some [positive] attributes in God and rejects others and also permits [allegoric] interpretation in certain cases [and not in other cases] is called a person who contradicts himself. It would be better to go slow. You may excel in the basic principles [of religion] and its subordinated sciences 58

15

In sum, al-Dhahab advises his student to stick to the theology of the salaf, which avoids disputation and dissention. While Ibn Ta mi a me hodolog of combining reason and revelation was attractive, it was also damaging and polarizing. In al-Dhahab

ie , it was

better to maintain the moral high ground of the early community (salaf) by remaining faithful to the original sources and not responding to one s opponents. Delving into the theological struggle between the Ash a s and traditionalism was not worth ones intellectual time, as Ibn Taymiyya had done, and it would be better to preoccupy oneself with more important questions.60 The heolog of he salaf ha al-Dhahab o line

a no e ic ed o he Sh fi

traditionalists but extended to many anbal s such as the great Ibn Rajab al- anbal (d. 795/1392), the student of Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 751/1350), who in turn was the primary student of Ibn Taymiyya. In his work Bay n fa l ilm al-salaf al

ilm al-khalaf, Ibn Rajab

explains the importance of he theology of the salaf o e ha of

be

en one .61 Ibn Rajab

(taw bi uha), such as logic, wisdom (al- ikma), philosophy, and opinions of the ancients, and the speculative ideas connec ed i h [ ho e] p inciple . Yo ma , f he , hold o he Q n, the Sunna and the basic principles of the early generations. You may, moreover, combine the rational and traditional sciences (al- aql wa l-naql). Yet, I do not think that in this respect, you will reach the degree of Ibn Taymiyya. Indeed, you will not even come near to it. And you have seen how he was degraded, abandoned and considered to be in error, to be an unbeliever, and to be a liar, rightly or wrongly. Before he embarked upon this, he was brilliant and shining, with the mark of those early Muslims on his face. Then, he was wronged and exposed [to disgrace]. His face was blackened ( ala hi qu ma) in the opinion of some people, he was an imposter, fraud, and unbeliever in the opinion of his enemies; and excellent, correct, and outstanding innovator (mubtadi an) in the opinion of many intelligent and excellent men; and the bearer of the banner of Islam, the guardian of the realm of religion, and the reviver of the Sunna in the opinion of the great majo i of hi follo e ; Ca e ina Bo i, Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atu-hu: Authority, Conflict and Consensus in Ibn Taymiy a Ci cle in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, 38. Bori translates here al-sal ma wa l- fi a awl bika a I o ld be be e o go lo . M en e i ha al-Dhahab is arguing that it is better to say away from these debates and not get caught up in theological disputation. Bori also translates laffaqa bayna al- aql wa l-naql a combining he a ional and adi ional cience . I i impo an o no e he e ha laffaqa li e all mean o piece oge he which may better convey what al-Dhahab i ing to say in that Ibn Taymiyya was not successfully able to combine hem. Fo al-Dhahab , he adi ionali cience e e fficien o he e a no ea on o o reconcile them with the rational ones. 60 Thus, al-Dhahab criticizes not only the rational sciences but the culture that it breeds and the intellectual questions that it takes up. 61 Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf al ilm al-khalaf, ed. Mu ammad b. N ir Ajam (Bei : D al-Ba h i alI l mi a, 1995). Man of heme fo nd in Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf a e al o fo nd in he end of Ibn Rajab alRadd al man ittaba a gha r al-madh hib al-arba a; Ibn Rajab, al-Radd al man ittaba a gha r al-madh hib alarba a, ed . Ib h m I m l al-Q , al-Sa id I a al-M and M ammad Awa al-Man h (Cai o: D alaramayn, 2000), 82-89.

16

structures the treatise around defining beneficial kno ledge and non-beneficial kno ledge based on several ad ths in which the Prophet prays for the former and seeks refuge from the latter.62 After discussing the relative importance of studying genealogy, astronomy,63 arithmetic, and grammar, Ibn Rajab begins to speak about the rational sciences.64 He condemns kal m and philosophy, arguing that intrinsic to the sciences are values that are contrary to Islam such as disputation (jadal), argumentation (khi m) and showing off (mir ).65 These sciences came after the early community and it has no origins in the Q states A guided people will not go astray unle

n and Sunna. For instance, a ad h

[ he engage in] he p ac ice of di p a ion.

66

The Prophet warns here against needless speculation since it may take one away from salvation. Similarly, he Q

n condemns disputation in verse 43:58: They only give you the example for

the purpose of disputation (jadalan).

67

A characteristic of the disbelievers is that they provoke

the believers into debate, not for the purpose of seeking the truth but rather to ridicule. Excessive speculation is further denounced in verse 17:85: The a k o abo t the soul. Say that he o l i he affai of m Lo d.

The Q

n doe no gi e he an

e o he

e ione

inquiry and implies that one should avoid asking questions relating to metaphysics. For Ibn Rajab, the Muslim should not be concerned with disputation and speculation but rather with morality, ethics and spirituality. As Ibn Rajab elucidates, the scholars of the salaf

62

Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 35-40. Ibn Rajab differentiates between astronomy and astrology; Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 47. 64 Ibn Rajab begins by condemning excessive preoccupation with free will and predestination (qadr). For the traditionalists, qadr a a ec e ha will never be fully be understood by human beings; Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 54. This is a general condemnation of kal m which discussed qadr extensively, but it could also be that of Ibn Taymiyya who devoted many of his fat w to qadr. For instance, volume 8 of his fat w is devoted to qadr; Majm fat w Sha kh al-Isl m A mad b. aymiyya, ed. Abd al-Ra m n b. M ammad b. Q im al- im , 37 vols. (Beirut: Ma bi D al- A abi a, 1977-78). 65 Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 58. 66 Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 58. Ibn Ka h ci e a ia ion of hi ame ad th in his commentary of verse 43:58; I m l b. Uma Ibn Ka h , Tafs r al-Qur n al- a m, 12 ol . (Cai o: Mak aba A l d al-Shaykh li-T h, 2009), 10:5449. 67 Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 58. 63

17

ed o a

ha if God an good for his servant then he would open the door of action ( amal)

and close the door of disputation (jadal). If God wants evil for his servant he will close the door of action and open for him the door of di p a ion. Disputation and speculation were the antithesis of striving towards a more moral and ethical life.68 Ibn Rajab further adds that showing off one knowledge and speaking without certainty makes the heart hard and breeds rancor ( aghan). One should simply say that one does not know, as did Ibn anbal, rather than trying to conjure a response. Ibn Rajab also makes several statements that could be perceived as critiques of Ibn Taymiyya, such as advising his students not to write long explanations and to refute the scholastic theologians. Ibn Rajab explains that the later generations (muta akhkhir n) thought that excessive speech, argumentation and enmity made one more knowledgeable, but this was not true. Ibn Rajab gives the example that senior Companions such as Ab Bakr, Umar, and Al spoke less than more junior ones like Ibn Abb s but they were still considered more knowledgeable. Similarly, the speech of Successors (t bi n) was more than that of the Companions but nonetheless the Companions were thought to be more knowledgeable. As Ibn Rajab declares, knowledge is not many narrations or excessive speech, but a light thrown into the heart [by God] that allows the servant to understand truth and to distinguish between it and falsehood, and then to express that [truth] in concise expressions that relate (m ila) to [higher] objectives.

69

Ibn Rajab could very well be disapproving of Ibn Ta mi a

angen ial prose and

multivolume refutations.70

68

I ill peak f he abo Ibn Ka h mo al heolog in Chap e Fo . Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 63. 70 Ibn Rajab also mentions that the founding Im ms responded to their questioners with concise responses (waj ) and did not elongate their explanations (ish b); For Ibn Rajab, verbose explanations and refutations were the style of the scholastic theologians, not that of the salaf; Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 60. 69

18

Towards the end of the treatise, Ibn Rajab is forthright about the ign of beneficial and non-beneficial knowledge: Among the signs of beneficial knowledge is that its possessor does not claim that he [is knowledgeable] and does not boast over anybody else, and he does not ascribe ignorance to other than him, except those who oppose the Sunna and its scholars. He must speak [in disagreement] angry for the sake of God, not angry for himself or for the purpose of raising himself over anyone. As for the person who has unbeneficial knowledge, then he does not have any occupation except boasting about (takabbur) his knowledge over others, demonstrating (i h r) the extent of his knowledge, ascribing [his opponents] to ignorance, and highlight their shortcomings to raise himself over them This is the ugliest of qualities, the worst.71

Ibn Rajab could once again be criticizing Ibn Taymiyya who was thought by some, such as al-Dhahab , to be arrogant and polarizing.72 Ibn Rajab additionally explains that the great Imams, such as Ibn al-M b ak (d. 181/797), M lik, al-Sh fi and Ibn anbal did not engage in kal m altogether and the discourse of the science is not found in their writings.73 Ibn Rajab relates that it is said that whoever enters into kal m will be stained by its filth. As Ibn anbal is reported to have stated, one who looks into the books of kal m only becomes a member of the Jahmiyya.74 While Ibn Rajab treatise is not a direct condemnation of Ibn Taymiyya, it nonetheless advises students to avoid Ibn Ta mi a methodology of preoccupying oneself with the rational sciences.75 Ibn Rajab expands his defini ion of he heolog of he salaf and c i i

e of kal m in

his Radd al man ittaba a ghayr al-madh hib al-arba a. While the treatise focuses on the 71

Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 83. I will speak more about al-Dhahab ie of Ibn Ta mi a in Chap e One. 73 Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 56. 74 Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 70. 75 Ibn Rajab al o make ano he a emen ega ding an indi id al ho broke with the legal consensus: We have been tested with ignorance among the people who think that with some broad knowledge (tawassu ) in the sayings of the later generations that he is more knowledge than those who came before. And some of them think that [this] person is more knowledgeable than those who came before and after the Companions because of his clarifications (ba nihi) and sayings. And some of them say that he is more knowledgably than the famous authoritative jurists (al-fuqah al-mashh r n al-matb n) ; Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 65. Ibn Rajab could be referring to Ibn Ta mi a b eak i h the legal consensus. Ibn Rajab does provide a section in his abaq t al- an bila where he li Ibn Ta mi a unusual legal opinions; Kit b al-Dha l al abaq t al- an bila, 2 ol . (Bei : D alMa ifa, 1981), 2:404. 72

19

necessity of following one of the four established Sunni madhhabs, Ibn Rajab touches upon theology in the last part of the treatise. Similar to his Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, Ibn Rajab advises the student to refrain from responding to the rationalists with their methodology (jins), such as employing analogies and rational argumentations.76 Ibn Rajab explains that the leading traditionalist, Ibn anbal, disliked such a tactic.77 Rather the traditionalist should respond with the transmitted sources - he Q

n, Sunna and the sayings of the early community - otherwise it

was better to remain silent.78 The adi ionali , in Ibn Rajab belief, ho ld no en e into the game of the rationalist but hold firm to the original sources. To support his argument, Ibn Rajab cites the early ad h chola Ibn al-M b ak: Acco ding o

, i i no befi ing fo he

followers of the Sunna (ahl al-Sunna) to refute the people of heretical inclinations (ahl alhaw ), a he ilence [i p efe able].

79

The Q

n and P ophe ic adi ion e e ade a e fo

the community and there was no reason to engage those who choose the rationalist path.80 Ibn Rajab concludes the treatise stating that he knows that the people of disputation (jadal) will discuss and dissect his every word and ultimately reject them. Yet, when the truth becomes evident, then it is incumbent on its followers to turn away from disputation, enmity, and dissention. The path of Ibn anbal and his followers is sufficient for those who desire to be guided by God. 76

Ibn Rajab, al-Radd, 88. Melchert explains that Ibn anbal condemned kal m, even if it was used to defend the Sunna: The e i one report that A mad shunned al-Mu ib impl fo engaging in kal m, dialectical theological reason. Although vague, this agrees with A mad di of all kal m, even apologetic: with his excluding the practitioner of kal m from Ahl al-Sunna, and forbidding a follower to sit with practioners, even though they defend the Sunna ; Melche , The Ad e a ie of A mad Ibn anbal, 243. 78 Bo i an la e hi pa age a Imam A mad and the leaders of the ahl-al- ad th [ ] de e ed ef ing he innovators (ahl al-bid a) b pa aking in hei opponen di co e (bi-jins kal mihim), that is the use of analogy in matters of theology (al-aqyisa al-kal mi a) and rational proofs (adillat al- uq l). They deemed refutation app op ia e onl b he e of he Q n, of he S nna and b he o d of he Pio Ance o (salaf), if such were to be found. Otherwise they believed reticence (al-suk t) o be afe ; Bo i, 36. 79 Ibn Rajab, al-Radd, 89. 80 Ibn Rajab also praises silence in Ba n fa al ilm al-salaf al ilm al-khalaf; Ibn Rajab, Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf, 87. 77

20

Thus, both al-Dhahab and Ibn Rajab reject the intellectualized traditionalism of Ibn Taymiyya that went beyond the transmitted sources and delved into philosophy and kal m. By engaging the speculative theologian (mutakall m), the traditionalist lost the moral high ground and was sucked into the culture of disputation, argumentation and dissention. Instead of pondering how one could become more moral and spiritual, the theologian became preoccupied with proving their point and searching for others faults. Ibn Taymiyya was a case point of why traditionalists should avoid kal m, since once the great scholar engaged the science he became critical and polarizing. While Ibn Ka h ne e c i i

e Ibn Ta mi a, he does disapprove of the intellectualized

traditionalism of another great traditionalist scholar, Ibn azm (d. 456/1064). In his entry on Ibn azm in al-Bid ya, Ibn Ka h fo nd i inconsistent that while Ibn azm did not use analogy in law, he frequently engaged in ta w l of Q

nic verses and ad h in theology (u l).81 Ibn

Ka h blames Ibn a m extensive early studies in logic (man iq) for betraying the original sources.82 Years later, towards he end of hi life, Ibn Ka h

eco d ha he had an peculiar

dream where he asked he g ea Sh fi j i al-Nawaw (d. 676/1277) why he did not include more of Ibn a m works in his Muhadhdhab, one of al-Nawaw Nawaw responded that he did not like Ibn a m

legal commen a ie .83 Al-

o k . Ibn Ka h approved of al-Nawaw

response and added that Ibn azm tried (unsuccessfully) to combine two opposing elements: in

81

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:101. Goldziher demonstrates that in law Ibn azm was a literalists but in interpreting the anthropomorphic traditions he engages in ta w l: We ha e een ha in he e plana ion of he an h opomo phic passages of the Koran and the traditions, Ibn azm becomes unfaithful to his own system, and in his interpretation of the scripture he is guilty of the very same arbitrarine of hich he o dina il acc e he M a ili e i h me cile ep oache ; Ignaz Goldziher, The hir s; Their Doctrine and their Histor . A Contribution to the History of Islamic Theology, trans. Wolfgang Behn (Leiden, Bill, 1971), 154. 82 As Goldziher says of Ibn a m, indeed, he him elf ecommend A i o elian o k a o nd, ef l book g iding o a d mono hei m hich ad i e j i , a ell a dogma i , o e abli h co ec p emi e , o a i e a correct deductions, to formulate the right defini ion , and o e ec e o he logical ope a ion ; Gold iher, 143. 83 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:282.

21

law he stuck with the literal while in theology he was figurative.84 Ibn Ka h

hen pointed to a

barren piece of land and then exclaimed to al-Na a : Thi i he land ha Ibn azm cultivated. Do o

ee an

ee bea ing f i o an hing o benefi f om i ? Ibn Ka h no e

that while he spoke to al-Na a

he saw Ibn azm present, silent, not saying a word.85

These en ie make i clea ha Ibn Ka h oppo ed Ibn a m intellectualized traditionalism, which heavily engaged philosophy and logic. A close reading of Ibn Ka h works demonstrates that he did not occupy himself with the rational sciences and thus fit the traditionalism of al-Dhahab and Ibn Rajab, not that of Ibn Taymiyya.86 Similar to al-Dhahab , Ibn Ka h focused his energy on the transmitted sources especially ad h and history. An examination of Ibn Ka h

Q

nic exegesis further demonstrates that he chooses to present

his views rather than be engrossed by the debates of his opponents.87

Traditionalism and Q

c Exegesis:

While there have been excellent studies on traditionalism,88 there has been no work that studies how traditionalism carries into tafs r. Similar dynamics between the traditionalists and rationalists discussed above appear in tafs r, most apparently in the famous division between tafs r bi l-ma th r and tafs r bi l-ra . Traditionalists believed that the Q

n was best

understood through the traditions of the early community. Rationalists, on the other hand, felt that while tradition was important, he Q

n could be understood through Arabic philology and

rational methods of kal m. To counter the rationalist claim, traditionalists created the division

84

Ibn Ka h no e ha Ibn a m a imila o he I m l ec he Qa ma a which was known to have engaged in ta w l. For more on the various sects associated with the I m l ee W. Madel ng, I m li a, EI2 . 85 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:283. 86 I di c Ibn Ka h majo o k in Chap e Th ee. 87 I ill demon a e ho Ibn Ka h p e en hi e ege ical ie in Chap e Fi e. 88 See for instance the works of George Makdisi, Christopher Melchert and Merlin Swartz.

22

between tafs r bi l-ma th r and tafs r bi l-ra , one based on reliable traditions and the other ba ed on imple opinion. Walid Saleh captures the theological aim of this division: hi division of the tradition into two forms was meant to convey the notion that one part of the tradition was authority-based and hence authentic and reliable (tafs r bi-al-ma th r), and the other whimsical and capricious, using personal opinion as its guide and hence unreliable (tafs r bi-al-ra ).

89

Yet, what scholarship has neglected to show is how mo of he tafs r bi-al-ma th r is in reality a tafs r bi-al-ra .

90

Traditionalist exegetes articulated their opinion through ad th and

the early community. As we will see, Ibn Ka h presents his views through ad h, often choosing one variant over another or citing a particular ad h to the exclusion of a second.91 While Ibn Ka h

lists of ad hs may appear arbitrary, they are actually meticulously

constructed to portray the contrasting views within the ad h tradition and his personal vision of Islam. By constructing an exegesis based on ad th, Ibn Ka h had to balance between competing roles of a ad h chola (mu addith) and Qur nic exegete (mufassir). The tension between these roles is best articulated by Marston Speight: The mufassir was concerned primarily, if not wholly, with the elucidation of the revealed text, for whatever purpose that might serve, and to achieve that end, he was open to several possible sources of information. The mu addith, on the other hand, was concerned primarily with reporting the Sunna of Mu ammad, and

89

Saleh, Formation, 16. Saleh, Formation, 16. 91 In another sense, all of tafs r bi l-ra is tafs r bi l-ma th r. As Andrew Lane states in reference to alZamakhshar al-Kashsh f, tafs r flows over or around each part of the revealed text; it is characterized by multiplicity in the form of variant readings and interpretations. It is connected to its past by references to what others said, whether they are named or not in this sense, all tafs r, including the Kashsh f, is tafs r bi-l-ma th r ; Lane, 230. 90

23

when the reports he brought involved the Q the mufassir.92

nic text, his effort joined that of

Since the mufassir job was to explain the entire Q

n, he had to be open to a range of

material that would provide greater understanding. In contrast, the mu addith was primarily concerned with authenticity of Prophetic traditions and often discounted material that was not of prophetic value or did not reach their critical standards. Ibn Ka h presents us with a unique case where the roles of the mu addith and mufassir combine. Throughout this dissertation, we ill ee ho Ibn Ka h nego ia e between his roles as a mu addith and mufassir to present his theological views.93

Thesis: I will begin by redefining Ibn Ka h and he Sh fi scholars with their own intellectual projects. The Sh fi as di ciple

adi ionali adi ionali

as independent are frequently presented

of Ibn Taymiyya but a close look at the biographical sources demonstrates that the

various members of the traditionalist movement drew from one another and had their own intellectual interests. Ibn Ka h was within the Sh fi traditionalist contingent of the larger traditionalist movement and his primary teacher was he fello Sh fi al-Mizz (d. 742/1341) rather than Ibn Taymiyya. I will then present the oppo ing pole i hin he Sh fi

chool, the Sh fi

A h a s. While contemporary scholarship focuses on the traditionalist movement, it overlooks

92

Ma on R. Speigh , The F nc ion of ad h as Commentary on the Q n, as Seen in the Six Authoritative Collec ion , in Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qur n, ed. Andrew Rippin (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), 80. 93 For more on the difference between musnad and tafs r ma e ial ee Jona han B o n, E en if i i no T e I True: Using Unreliable ad ths in S nni I lam, Islamic Law and Society 18, no.1 (2011): 6.

24

that the movement represented a political minority.94 A h a i m dominated 8th/14th Century Maml k Damascus in which all of the chief judges and directors of the major educational institutions had to ascribe o he A h a creed. Unlike Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim who attacked Ash a fig e , Ibn Ka h fostered positive relations with many of his Ash a colleagues since they shared the similar Sh fi madhhab and were fair and righteous scholars. Ibn Ka h main ained these relations despite the fact that many of the Sh fi A h a

wrote

refutations of Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim and worked to imprison them. Ibn Ka h

ela ion hip i h bo h he Sh fi

in his major works. Ibn Ka h

adi ionali

en l a

me ha Ibn Ka h

poke pe on fo Ibn Ta miyya without examining Ibn Ka h

a he

various works. An overview

a e ha Ibn Ka h drew heavily upon p e io

particularly that of Ibn al- al

appea

in ellec al p ojec was to promote the pro-ijtih d traditionalist

strain within the Sh fi madhhab. Schola f e

of his writings demon

and Sh fi A h a

Sh fi

adi ionali

,

(d. 643/1245), al-Mizz and al-Birz l (d. 739/1339). His major

works must thus be seen a e en ion of he Sh fi traditionalists before him rather than a product of his relationship with Ibn Taymiyya. Although chola ha e no iced ha Ibn Ka h

i ing a e diffe en from Ibn

Taymiyya , no one has suggested that this difference derives from their contrasting traditionalisms. Ibn Taymiyya represented an intellectualized traditionalism which argued for the rational nature of scripture and maintained that reason and revelation were complimentary. Ibn Kath , on the other hand, held a more fideist position which argued for the superiority of the tradition and ea on

ole in anal ing adi ion . Their different traditionalisms resulted in two

different hermeneutical approaches and engagements with the Q 94

n. Ibn Taymiyya harshly

This is most likely because the traditionalist movement has become much stronger today and reads their dominance into history. For more on how the rise of the traditionalist movement affects our understanding of tafs r see Walid Saleh, Preliminary Remarks on the Historiography of tafs r in Arabic: A History of the Book Approach.

25

evaluates rationalist exegetes such as al-Zamakhshar (d. 533/1144) and Fakhr al-D n al-R

(d.

606/1209) because of their extensive use of kal m and their use of ta w l. In con a , Ibn Ka h largely ignores the rational sciences and focuses his attention to works of ad h and history, connecting himself with the previous generation rather than critiquing his opponents. Ibn Ka h , in fact, incorporates al-Zamakh ha and al-R

i hin hi e ege i and praises their scholarship

while presenting his objections. Ibn Ka h Q he Q

and Ibn Ta mi a diffe en

adi ionali m appea in hei con a ing

nic hermeneutic and exegetical writings. Both exegetes argue that the best way to interpret n is through the textual sources, but their actual Q

nic hermeneutic is best discerned

through a close examination of their exegetical writings. Ibn Taymiyya hermeneutic was to defend traditionalism from what he perceived as heretical ideologies, particular that of the dominant A h a i m represented by Fakhr al-D n al-R z . In contrast, Ibn Ka h built off previous traditionalist exegetes, such as that of al- abar and Ibn Ab

im al-R

, and

indirectly marginalized rational commentaries. The difference between Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Kath

hermeneutic and exegetical writings becomes clear when we examine the different ways

that they interpret the story of Jonah. While Ibn Taymiyya was inspired by a anbal tradition that stressed Jonah s sin and repentance, Ibn Ka h draws from an A h a tradition that emphasized his worship and obedience.

Theoretical Considerations: This dissertation will explore tafs r as a product of larger theological movements and struggles. While the tafs r literature frequently presents itself as timeless elucidation of God eternal word, the genre was intimately connected to their environments and authors intellectual 26

projects. I would thus like to explore Q climate in which tafs r a p od ced.

95

nic e ege i

a pa of he gene al in ellec al

Tafs rs should not simply be seen as a product of single

author, but as representative of greater theological trends. A Saleh e plain , Tafs r was part of an intellectual movement that was caught in fierce cultural wars.

96

Various theological

movements vied over power and authority throughout Islamic history and Q

nic commentary

became an indispensable tool to promote their doctrines.97 In pa ic la , Ibn Ka h scholar within his intellectual circle to write a f ll commen a

of he Q

a he onl

n. Hi e ege i thus

presents us with a unique window into one of the most influential intellectual circles in Islamic history. I will therefore not explore in great detail the c af of commen a

in i na a i e

structures, genre and so forth.98 While this approach is no doubt beneficial, my interests lie in explaining the various theological considerations that went into the composition of Ibn Ka h Tafs r. It is with exploring the theological dynamics behind and within the text that I hope to provide a better understanding of the Tafs r that plays such a prominent role in how Muslims view the Q

n oda .

95

Walid Saleh, Ma ginalia and Pe iphe ie : A T ni ian Hi o ian and he Hi o of Q nic E ege i , Numen 58, no. 2 (2011): 300. 96 Saleh, Ma ginalia and Pe iphe ie , 300. 97 For a similar approach that seeks to understand Mu a ili m h o gh tafs r see Suleiman A. Mourad, The Re ealed Te and he In ended S b e : No e on he He mene ic of he Q n in M a ila Di co e a Reflected in the Tahdh b of al- kim al-Jish m (d. 494/1101), in Islamic Philosophy, Science, Culture, and Religion: Studies in Honor of Dimitri Gutas, eds. Felicitas Opwis and David Reisman (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2012), 367-395. Mourad also understands tafs r as part of theological ggle : A final poin ega ding al-Jish m methodology and approach to tafs r is that he understands Q nic exegesis to be a battlefield, where the exegete fights his opponents over their misinterpretation of scripture. It is not a passive process in which the exegete simply proposes the meanings of the Q nic e e . Ra he , i i an oppo ni o alida e one po i ion and poin o he fallacie of one opponen . A he la e a e , Tafs r is therefore used as a vehicle for legitimi ing one belief and delegi imi ing ho e of one opponen ; Mo ad, 385-6. 98 For an example of the c af of commen a approach see Bruce Fudge.

27

Notes on Translation and Transliteration: All my Q Q

n translations will be drawing from M.A.S. Abdel Haleem

n.99 I at times made slight modifications to his translations to help elucidate certain points.

In terms of transliteration, I follow the IJMES transliteration system.

99

an la ion of he

The Qur n, trans. M.A.S. Abdel Haleem (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).

28

Chapter I Ib Ka

a aS

ad

a t

Introduction: Mo biog aphie neglec he a io

d namic a o nd Ibn Ka h

under the great Ibn Taymiyya.1 Ibn Ka h i of en po a ed a he

life and

poke pe on

b me him 2

for Ibn

Taymiyya, one who promoted his work and implemented his theo ie . Ibn Ka h i mo e acc a el de c ibed a a Sh fi

adi ionali

3

o a g o p of Sh fi

maintained a traditionalist creed.4 While he Sh fi Ta mi a, he

e e no impl hi

den

adi ionali

a he a e f e

ad h chola ee

ho

ppo e of Ibn

en l po a ed in he li e a

e.

Rather they were independent scholars who subscribed to a different legal school (madhhab) than Ibn Taymiyya and maintained a more fiediest stance towards scripture. Ibn Ka h was the most junior member within this group and was the primary student of its senior scholars, not Ibn Taymiyya.5 To be

nde

and Ibn Ka h

diffe en membe of he Sh fi

adi ionali

heological and ocial po i ion, e ill ace he and hei ela ion i h Ibn Ka h .

1

Many of the Arabic o k on Ibn Ka h acc a el de c ibe hi ela ion hip i h hi eache . See he important works on his Tafs r: Adn n b. Mu ammad b. Abd All h al-Shalash, al-Im m Ibn Kath r wa-atharuhu f ilm alad th riw a wa-dir a: ma a dir sa manhajiyya ta biqiyya al Tafs r al-Qur n al- a m (Amman: D al-Naf , 2005) and I m l S lim Abd al- l, Ibn Kath r wa-manhajuhu f al-Tafs r (Cairo: Maktabat al-Malik Fay al alI l miyya, 1984). Ano he impo an d ha foc e on Ibn Ka h hi o ical ork al-Bid a wa l-nih a is M.R.K. Nadwi, al-Im m Ibn Kath r: Siratuhu, wa-mu allaf tuhu, wa-manhajuhu f Kit b al-T rikh (Damascus: D Ibn Ka h , 1999). 2 Kristin Zahra Sands, Sufi Commentaries on the Qur an in Classical Islam (London; New York: Routledge, 2006), 144. A e ill ee, he idea of Ibn Ka h a he poke pe on fo Ibn Ta mi a o igina e i hin he A abic biographical literature. 3 I will be b ilding off Geo ge Makdi i e of he e m Sh fi adi ionali and Sh fi A h a . For more, see the Introduction. 4 I define adi ionali m in he In od c ion. 5 Thi i imila o Walid Saleh o l ing he Ni h p chool ha al-Tha lab and al-W id e e a pa of. See hi , The La of he Ni h p School of Taf : Al-W id and hi Significance in he Hi o of Q nic E ege i , Journal of the American Oriental Society 126, no. 2 (2006): 223-243.

29

Ib Ka

a d

eS

ad

a

:

While he e i no o k ha e amine Ibn Ka h impo an

in ellec al ci cle, he e i he

o k b Ca e ina Bo i ha e amine Ibn Ta mi a : Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atuhu:

Authority, Conflict and Con en

in Ibn Ta mi a Ci cle. Bo i challenge he idel held

no ion ha Ibn Ta mi a ci cle a Ibn Ta mi a.

6

a cohe i e ni g a i a ing a o nd i cha i ma ic cen e ,

Through a close reading of biographical sources, Bori demonstrates that there

were differences of opinion that at times led to tension within the circle among both its anbal and Sh fi membe . Among he mo impo an poin of diffe ence a heological deba e of whether to stick to the transmitted sources or engage the rational sciences. The Sh fi

adi ionali

e e among he mo po e f l membe of Ibn Ta mi a

circle.7 T adi ionali Sh fi

e i ed ince he beginning of he Sh fi

Sham

adi ionali Sh fi s moved into the emerging anbal chool

e plain , ome ea l

chool. A Ahmed al-

hile o he became Sh fi and ina g a ed an end ing adi ion of chola hip i hin he school - a adi ionali expertise in ad h.

8

he chool hi o

b

and of Sh fi i m - ha combined Sh fi j i p dence i h fi Thi

adi ionali

i had an e peciall

-rate

and of Sh fi i m o ld g o and ane h o gho ong pe iod in he fi

6

half of he 8th/14th century in

Ca e ina Bo i, Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atu-hu: Authority, Conflic and Con en in Ibn Ta mi a Ci cle in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, eds. Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010), 23. 7 While he e a e man e ample of he Sh fi adi ionali a ppo e of Ibn Ta mi a, he mo e iden i an appendix dated 756/1355 to a biographical work of Ibn Taymiyya which lists his supporters and opponents. The anbal c ibe a he li of Ibn Ta mi a ppo e i h he Sh fi adi ionali : al-Dhahab , al Mizz , alBirz l , and Ibn Ka h . He hen mo e o men ion other supporters, such as Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya. The anbal scribe may have p he Sh fi adi ionali fi o argue that Ibn Taymiyya was endorsed by more main eam chola ; he Sh fi traditionalists were widely respected, even among the Sh fi A h a s. The list also demon a e ha Ibn Ka h was an important figure by 756/1355, otherwise the scribe would not have put him in the li (Ibn Ka h a none hele behind al-Dhahab , al Mizz , al-Birz l ). More work needs to be done on what brought this group of Ibn Taymiyya suppo e oge he ; Umar b. Al Bazz r, al-A l m al- aliy a f man qib Shaykh al-Isl m Ibn Ta mi a, ed. Sal al-D n Munajjid (Beirut: D r al-Kit b al-Jad d, 1976), 79. For more di c ion on he c ibe ee Ba , 8. 8 Ahmed El-Sham , The Fi Sh fi : The T adi ionali Legal Tho gh of Ab Ya b al-Buway (d. 231/846), Islamic Law and Society 14, no. 3 (2007): 33.

30

Damascus. The Damascene Sh fi

adi ionali

e e infl enced b

he infl

of anbal in o

Damascus the century before who were escaping the Mongol invasions.9 The arrival of anbal into the city created tensions within the majo i The Dama c al o adi ionali

Sh fi

adi ionali

and came f om o

Sh fi

ho e e o n in o conflic ing camp .

iden ified with Ibn Taymiyya because they were

ide he poli ical eli e. The Sh fi

adi ionali

and Ibn

Taymiyya both stressed transmitted sources and were critical of scholastic theology (kal m). Ibn Taymiyya and the Sh fi

adi ionali

e e addi ionall mig an

o he ci

and poli ical

outsiders. They did not come from established Damascus families, such as the al-S bk ,10 who were successfully able to transmit knowledge and political positions to their offspring. Unlike he

ling Sh fi A h a

, none of he Sh fi

adi ionali

became pa of he

c

e of he

state with all of them teaching in independent madrasas. None hele , de pi e he imila i ie be een Ibn Ta mi a and he Sh fi

adi ionalists,

there were some important differences in terms of madhhab affiliation and creed. First and fo emo

he Sh fi

adi ionali

e e Sh fi

and no

anbal like Ibn Ta ami a and Ibn al-

Qa im. B being Sh fi , he had a diffe en in ellectual point of reference than their anbal colleag e . The Sh fi

adi ionali

Idris al-Sh fi (d. 204/820) and a century, Ibn al- al Sh fi

iden ified i h he epon m of hei chool M hem el e in he line of he g ea Sh fi

(d. 643/1245) and al-Na a

ammad

of he p e io

(d. 676/1277). Thei iden ifica ion i h he

chool addi ionall made hem lo al o man of hei Sh fi A h a colleag e

e e pa and pa cel of he Maml k poli ical

ho

em.

A second important difference was that they were a group of ad h chola (mu addith n) who ignored speculative theology (kal m) and philosophy. Unlike Ibn Taymiyya 9

Michael Chamberlain, Knowledge and Social Practice in Medieval Damascus, 1190-1350 (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 169. 10 I will speak about the al-S bk in he ne Chapter.

31

ho engaged e en i el in he a ional cience in o de o ef e hem, Sh fi

adi ionali

shied away from the sciences and focused their time on the various branches of ad h transmission, biographies and history. While Ibn Taymiyya maintained an intellectualized traditionalism that engaged in kal m, he Sh fi

adi ionali

b c ibed o a mo al heolog

which chose to focus on sciences that they believed had a concrete effect on the lives of belie e . The e

o diffe en

pe of adi ionali m ca ed en ion be

een he g o p ha

at times became embarrassingly public.11 Beca e of he Sh fi

adi ionali

madhhab affiliation and more fiedeist stance

o a d he adi ion, he canno be de c ibed a man of Sh fi

adi ionali

impl

den

d e f om Ibn Ta mi a, he

of Ibn Ta mi a. While

b c ibed o a diffe en fo m of

traditionali m and de eloped hei o n in ellec al p ojec . Man of he Sh fi

adi ionali

were around the same age as Ibn Taymiyya and they viewed him as a colleague and friend rather han a eache . Ibn Ka h p od c of i

enio chola . Th

d namic of he Sh fi

Al-M

a he mo j nio membe of he Sh fi o be

adi ionali

nde

and ho he fi

f al-Mi

. Simila o Ibn Ta mi

a, al-Mi

e need o e amine he

i hin hem.

(654-742/1256 1341) The Quintessential The mo infl en ial membe of he Sh fi

Y

and Ibn Ka h

aditionalists and was a

ad

Sc

a

adi ionali s a Jam l al-D n Ab a no f om he Dama c

came from the village al-Mizza on the outskirts of Damascus. Al-Mi Sh fi

ad h chola ,

ch a al-Na a

,b

eli e b

ajj j a he

died with great

also studied with a large number of anbal .12

11

I will speak about he en ion i hin adi ionali m below in the biography of al-Dhahab . Ibn Rajab (d. 795/1392) frequently mentions al-Mi , al-Bi l and al-Dhahab a ho e ho died i h anbal chola . See hi Kit b al-Dha l al abaq t al- an bila, 2 ol . (Bei : D al-Ma ifa, 1981), 2:300400. In one in ance, Ibn Rajab li mo of he Sh fi adi ionali - And died ad h (sami a) from him 12

32

Through studying with an array of elite ad h chola , al-Mi greatest rij l e pe

he M lim o ld had e e een.

13

Al-Mi

o ld oon de elop in o he had an e

ao dina

alen in

biographies and transmission, leaving behind the monumental work Tahdh b al-kam l f asm al-rij l, a biog aphic le icon linking all he an mi e of he isn ds occ canonical collections as ell a in ome o he mino ha i con i

adi ion collec ion .

ing in he i 14

Juynboll exclaims

e a mile one in he ilm al-rij l in that it is the first comprehensive lexicon that

aim a being e ha

i e, m ch mo e o han an of i p edece o .

15

The popularity of the

book is seen in its multiple abridgments which include those from al-Dhahab (d. 748/1348), Ibn Ka h and Ibn ajar al- A al n (d. 852/1449).16 While Bori calls al-Mi

one of Ibn Ta mi a

di ciple

17

he is more accurately

described as a close friend and colleague since they grew up with each other and shared many teachers.18 Al-Mi

had emendo

e pec fo Ibn Ta mi a e en going a fa a o a

omebod like him ha no been een in 400 ea scholars. Yet, al-Mi o ble i h he

19

or since the era of the canonical ad h

adi ionali leaning and ela ion hip i h Ibn Ta mi a led him o

ling Sh fi A h a

. In 705/1306, he ma o of Dama c

al-Afram was ordered to conduct a council on the orthodo

of Ibn Ta mi a

(n ib al-sal ana) heolog .20 To

(A mad b. Abd al-Ra m n) a la ge n mbe of ad h chola and o he ( chola ), ch a al-Mi , al-Bi l , alDhahab , and o eache Ibn al-Qa im ; Ibn Rajab, 2:336. Ibn Rajab doe no men ion Ibn Ka h mo likel because he was too young to be associated with this teacher. 13 G. H. A. J nboll, al- Mi , Djam l al-D n Ab l- adjdjj dj Y f b. al-Zak Abd al-Ra m n b. Y f alKalb al- u , Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition. 14 J nboll, al-Mi , EI2. 15 Juynboll, al-Mi , EI2. 16 I ill peak abo Ibn Ka h ab idgemen of Tahdh b al-kam l in Chapter Three. 17 Bori, 39. 18 Ibn Rajab mentions that al-Mi , al-Bi l and Ibn Ta mi a all died i h he ame eache ; Ibn Rajab, 2:308, 316. 19 Ibn Rajab, 2:393. 20 For more on the 705 AH co ncil ee She man Jack on, Ibn Ta m ah on T ial in Dama c , The Journal of Semitic Studies 39, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 48; Ibn Rajab, 2:396; Caterina Bo i, A Ne So ce fo he Biog aph of Ibn Ta mi a, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 67, no. 3 (2004): 335. Jackson suggests that al-Mi , al-Bi l and al-Dhahab e e no membe of he Co ncil ha in e oga ed Ibn

33

he di appoin men of he Sh fi A h a , he co ncil concl ded ha Ibn Ta mi a

heolog

was acceptable and that it belonged to that of the pious ancestors (salaf). Shortly afterwards, alMi

ead a ec ion of al-B kh

he e ical Jahmi a, a ec

chap e of he C ea ion of Ac ion

hich a acc ed of den ing God a ib e h o gh in e p e ing

them figuratively.21 Man of he Sh fi believed that al-Mi

Mi

, demon

chola in he a dience became p e beca e he

a implici l a acking hem.22 Al-Afram was absent from the city at the

ime, o he Sh fi A h a by imprisoning al-Mi

hich ef e he

complained o he chief judge Ibn a

(d. 723/1323) who reacted

.23 On hearing the news, Ibn Taymiyya went to the jail and released al-

a ing hi clo e ela ion hip i h he g ea

ad h chola and hi immen e

political power.24 When al-Afram returned, he became upset and worried about the rising tensions within the city to the point that he decreed that if anybody discussed theology they would be killed.25 The en i e epi ode ca ed a emendo

amo n of

e

on he Sh fi

o he poin ha

one of the examiners of the trial, al-Zamlak n (d. 727/1327),26 accused the leading Sh fi A h a Ibn al-Wak l (d. 716/1317)27 of poor leadership. Al-Zamlak n ema ked ha he

Taymiyya because they were too young. I would also add that the Council could be interpreted as a generational struggle between junior and senior scholars. See Jackson, 44. 21 A Jo eph Bell e plain , he o d Jahmi a a ed a a common polemic again ho e ho denied God absolute power and divine charac e i ic and a ib e : I i e ha he Hanbali e doc o a c ibe man of he e views to such groups as the Jahmites or the Qadarites, but long before his time these names had become little more than terms of abuse for those who denied the attributes of God or for those who advanced the doctrine of human free ill e pec i el ; Jo eph No men Bell, Love Theory in Later anbalite Islam (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1979), 59. 22 A mad b. Al b. ajar al- A al n , al-Durar al-k mina f a n al-mi a al-th mina, 4 ol . (Bei : D alKutub al- Ilmi a, 1997), 4:283. 23 Ibn ajar al- A al n , 4:283. 24 Wha i e iden in he o i ha Ibn Ta mi a did no eek an bod pe mi ion in elea ing al-Mi . I seems that the guards ac ie ced o Ibn Ta mi a demand o f ee him. 25 Ibn ajar al- A al n , 4:283. 26 I will speak about al-Zamlak n in mo e de ail in he ne Chap e . 27 For more on Ibn al-Wak l ee Abd al-Q di b. M ammad al-N a m , al-D ris f t r kh al-mad ris, ed. Ja fa al- a an , 2 ol . (Cai o: Mak aba al-Tha fa al-D ni a, 1988), 1:27; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a wa l-nih a, ed . Al

34

p oblem

ha occ

(ra sahum).

28

ed i h he Sh fi

a li le n il o became he head of hem

The Sh fi chief judge Ibn a

ho gh ha al-Zamlak n

a implici l

c i ici ing him and e igned feeling ha he no lacked confidence f om he Sh fi ba e. Ibn a

none hele

a returned to the chief justiceship by the powerful Cairo chief justice

Shaykh al-Manbij , a no ed A h a and Ibn al- A ab (d. 638/1240) Ibn Ta mi a and al-Mi

pporter.29

clo e ela ion hip con in ed e en a Ibn Ta mi a

ial

moved to Egypt.30 In a letter to his family, Ibn Taymiyya requests his relatives to seek alMi

help o find a book ha he

demon

a e Ibn Ta mi a

o e ega ding ch che in his library.31 Such a request in al-Mi

maintained. It further alludes to al-Mi

and he collegial ela ion hip ha he familia i

i h Ibn Ta mi a

o k and hi

personal spaces. A second problem arose in 718/1319 when al-Mi p e igio

D

al- ad h al-A h afi a. The in i

g ea Sh fi j i

a nomina ed o chai he

e had been a Sh fi

and ad h chola Ibn al- ala and al-Na a

Taymiyya lobbied to have al-Mi

onghold, i h he

holding he fi

a he di ec o ince he fel ha he a he mo

po

.32 Ibn

alified in

Mu ammad M a ad and dil A mad Abd al-Ma j d, 15 ol . (Lebanon: D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 2009), 14:79. 28 Ibn ajar al- A al n , 1:89. 29 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:38. Alexander Knysh speaks more about how Shaykh Na r al-Manbij and Ibn Ta mi a opponen o ked o imp i on him; Ale ande Kn h, Ibn Arab in the Later Islamic tradition: the Making of a Polemical Image in Medieval Islam (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999), 92. I will di c Ibn Ta mi a ie of Ibn A ab ho gh in Chap e Fo . 30 Ibn Taymiyya was in Egypt between the years 705-712 AH. 31 Ab Abd All h b. Abd al-H d , al- Uq d al-durri a min man qib Sha kh al-Isl m Ibn Ta mi a, ed. Ab Mu ab al a b. F d al- l n (Cai o: al-F al- ad ha), 223. 32 Ibn al- al was the first to hold the post, while al-Na a a he fourth. In the late 7th/13th century, it did not seem difficult for even anbal o each a he in i e; Ibn Rajab, 2:307, 321, 416, 418. B hi o ld change in the early 8th/14th century with growing anti- anbal en imen c lmina ing in he ial of Ibn Ta mi a. Fo mo e on D al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya see al-N a m , 1:19-47. Fo mo e on he in i e di ec o ee I m l b. Uma b. Ka h , abaq t al- sh fi i a, ed. Abd al-Haf Man , 2 ol . (Bei : D al-Mad al-I l m , 2004), 2:814.

35

ad h33 hile man Sh fi A h a ip la ion ha he di ec o m Mi

a g ed ha al-Mi

did no li e p o he endo e

phold he A h a c eed.34 To the dismay of his opponents, al-

p ofe ed A h a i m and a appoin ed a he di ec o .35 In a di pla of p o e , he ci

elite boycotted the inaugural ceremony causing anger among traditionalists.36 Responding to alMi

de ac o , Ibn Ta mi a boldl claimed, ha ince [D

fo nding, no one f lfilled he endo e [of he in i Al-Mi

di ec ed he in i

e fo 23 ea

al- ad h al-A h afi a ]

e ] condi ion mo e han [al-Mi

].

37

n il hi dea h (d. 742/1341) and was buried to the

west of Ibn Ta mi a g a e.38

33

Early on, Ibn Taymiyya had tremendous influence on the deci ion making p oce of ho di ec ed D al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya. In 703/1303-4 the mayor accep ed Ibn Ta mi a gge ion on ho ho ld head he in i e; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:28. 34 Madrasa appointments represented intellectual trends and shifts in power within Damascus. As Michael Chambe lain e plain , R ling ho ehold al o fi hem el e in o e i ing p ac ice of poli ical domina ion and ocial con ol. In pi e of hei poli ical dominance in he ci , N al-D n, he A bi , and he Maml k onl occasionally introduced intrusive state agencies. The d w ns rarely penetrated or coordinated even the ruling elite, much less the lower orders. Instead, rulers tried to gain control over the semi-autonomous (wa fa, pl. Wa if or man ab, pl. Man ib) hitherto in the hands of the a n. These included, in addition to the man abs of the shaykh (mashyakha) o a D al- ad h o he mudarris (lecturer) of a madrasa (place of reading or lecture), such offices as he a io j dge o is, the market inspector or mu tasib, the administrators of charitable foundations, the supervisor of the treasury, and the later included the administrator of the holy cities of the ij . Fe of he e offices in Syria were integrated into the d w ns, through the heads of the d w ns were also known as the holders of man abs and wa fas. The social power of the man ab - holder was not derived from the impersonal authority of the office, but from the prestige of the office-holder. When rulers made appointments to them it was not from within he b ea c ac b f om among he ci ilian eli e ho had eligio p e ige o poli ical capi al ; Chambe lain, 50. 35 Ab al-Fall Abd al- ayy b. al- Im d, Shadhar t al-dhahab f akhb r man dhahab, 4 ol . (Bei : D al- f al-Jad da, 1966), 4:136. The D al- ad h a fi applied o in i ion e e ed fo he eaching of ad h in Dama c in he i h/ elf h cen and hen p ead ac o he M lim o ld. D al- ad h ep e en ed he increasingly specialized discipline of ad h, that was more focused than mosque or madrasa studies. Al-Mi , alBi l , al-Dhahab , and Ibn Ka h all occ pied directed D al- ad h demon a ing hei de o ion o he sciences. For more on D al- ad h see Fuat Sezgin, D al- ad h, EI2. 36 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:87. 37 Ibn al- Im d, 4:136. Ibn Ta mi a make hi a emen ba ed on he endo e ip la ion ha if he in i e had to choose between a scholar who specialized in transmission (riw a) and one who specialized in knowledge of ad h ma e ial (dir a) hen he in i e ho ld choo e he peciali in an mi ion. Ibn Ta mi a and he Sh fi Aha e e empha i ing diffe en pa of he endo e ip la ion , he fo me he e i emen ha he director had to be strong in riw a and he la e in ha he had o be an A h a . Ibn Ta mi a a emen he e lead o a foo no e b he edi o ho a ha Ibn Ta mi a o d e e eckle ince he In i e a ho ed b g ea scholars such as Ibn al- al h, Ab Sh ma al-Ma da , and al-Na a . The foo no e demon a e ha man of he debates of the 8th/14th century Damascus still occur today. 38 Ibn al- Im d, 4:137. There are no Western studies on al-Mi i h hi Tahdh b being only used as a reference work in ad h a hen ici . Mo e o k need o be done on al-Mi infl en ial ole a a eache a ell a ha of a writer.

36

Al-B

: (667- 739/ 1267-1339) The Historian of Syria Alam al-D n al-Q im al-Bi

student of al-Mi al-Bi

39

l

a he econd of he g ea Sh fi

adi ionali

,a

and a colleague of Ibn Taymiyya. Similar to Ibn Taymiyya and al-Mi

l did no belong o one of he e abli hed Dama c

settling in Syria in the beginning of the 7th/13th cen

familie

,

i h hi g andfa he

. He a gh a he p e igio

N i a

madrasa and was particularly known for his strength in transmission (riw at), with an exceptional grasp over the teachers of his contemporaries.40 Yet, unlike al-Mi

, al-Bi

l

traveled considerably, moving to alab and then journeying throughout the Muslim world. He eventually passed away in the ijaz in a state of pilgrimage (i r m).41 Because of his travels, alBi

l

impac on Dama c Unlike al-Mi

a con ide abl le

han ha of he o he .

, ho a in e e ed in an mi e , al-Bi

branch of ad h cience, biog aphie and history. Al-Bi continuation (dhayl) of he biog aphical dic iona

l

a a ac ed o another

l was known to have written a

of he Sh fi

adi ionali Ab Sh ma (d.

665/1268), hich a ed in he ea Ab Sh ma a killed42 or the year that al-Bi born.43 Much of al-Bi

l

hi o

ha ei he been lo o i

l

a

ill in man c ip fo m,44 but

nevertheless much of his writings are incorporated into other historical works. Ibn Rajab alanbal (d. 795/1392), fo in ance, e en i el

o e al-Bi

39

l in hi biog aphical dictionary

Mu ammad b. A mad al-Dhahab , T r kh al-Isl m wa-wafa t al-mash h r wa l-a l m, 53 vols. (Bei : D alKi b al- A ab , 1987), 53:385. Al-Dhahab men ion ha al-Bi l a ained b al-Mi . 40 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:361. Al-Bi li died a al-Bukh r , J mi al-Tirmidh , Sunan Ibn Majah, Musnad al-Sh fi , Musnad Im m A mad, and the Musnad al- abar n . This list demonstrates al-Bi l e pe i e in ad h and hi familia i i h anbal o ce ch a he Musnad of Ibn anbal. I speak about the importance of the Musnad o Ibn Ka h in Chap e Th ee. 41 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:361. 42 Ibn Ka h de o e a i able biog aph o Ab Sh ma, men ioning ha i a aid ha he had eached he le el of ijtih d and highligh ing ha he a a a ina ed b hi opponen ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a,13:251. Fo mo e on Ab Sh ma ee Kon ad Hi chle k, Pre-eighteenth-century Traditions of Revivalism: Damascus in the Thirteenth Cen , Bulletin of SOAS 68, no. 2 (2005):195 214. 43 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:360. 44 Fo mo e on he man c ip of Bi l hi o ee M iel Ro abah Une di ion ina end e: le Ta'r k d'alBi l , Arabica 57, no. 2-3 (2010): 309-318. I peak mo e abo ho Ibn Ka h d a f om al-Bi l hi o ical works in Chapter Three.

37

on anbal chola .45 Ibn Rajab

e of al-Bi

l no onl demon

a e al-Bi

status as an historian but the connection between anbal chola and he Sh fi Al-Bi

l

l

g ea

adi ionali

.

clo e ela ion hip i h Ibn Taymiyya appears in his moving account of Ibn

Ta mi a f ne al p oce ion the tremendous event, al-Bi

al-Bid a wa l-nih a.46 After describing

o ed in Ibn Ka h

l concl de he acco n b e p e ing ha be een [Ibn

Taymiyya] and I there was a g ea lo e and companion hip f om a o ng age.

47

Al-Bi

l had

grown up with Ibn Taymiyya, was distraught with his death and felt deep remorse that he could no a end Ibn Ta mi a f ne al d e o hi Al-Bi

l

a el .

o n dea h caused al-Mi

a tremendous amount of sadness. As al-Dhahab

eco n , a group of scholars felt sad with [al-Bi and friend (raf quhu) Ab

ajj j (al-Mi

), o

l

] pa ing a a , e peciall hi companion

Sha kh. He cried [thinking about] him more

than once. Each one of them would praise ( u a im) the other and knew the others stature (fa l).

48

Al-Mi

o ld

cceed al-Bi

l a he di ec o of N i a.49

Al-D a ab (673/675-748, 1274-1348) The Historian of Islam Shams al-D n Ab

Abd All h al-Dhahab ep e en ed he econd gene a ion of Sh fi

adi ionali

. Simila o he Sh fi

anbal , b

al o

al-Mi

died ignifican l

adi ionali

befo e him, al-Dhahab

nde o he Sh fi

adi ionali

died i h man ch a al-Bi

l and

.

45

See Ibn Rajab Kit b al-Dha l al abaq t al- an bila. Ibn Ka h o e al-Bi l en of the funeral procession and prayer (jan a) even though al-Bi l a no present at the actual events. 47 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:134. Schola ha e mi akenl a ib ed hi a emen o Ibn Ka h . Ibn Ka h i quoting here from al-Bi l history. 48 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:361. 49 Al-N a m , 1:113. 46

38

Al-Dhahab e plain ha i

a al-Bi

al-Dhahab eco n , When [al-Bi e emble he hand me.

50

Al-Bi

l

l

ho fi

l ] a m hand

enco aged him o i ing he aid

i ing of he ad h chola (mu addith n). Hi in e e in hi o

i e iden on al-Dhahab

o

d

hand

ad h. A i ing

o d lef a ma k on

ho became one of he g ea e

historians of Islam. Al-Dhahab compo ed he mon men al T r kh al-Isl m, a history that begins with the genealogy of Mu ammad and end in Maml k ime ,51 and the astounding Siyar a l m al-nubal , an immense biographical dictionary that covers Muslim notables throughout Islamic history.52 Al-Dhahab e en all became a Al-Dhahab heap la i h p ai e on al-Mi

den of al-Mi

and one of hi mo a den admi e .

fo being bo h a fi

person. Al-Dhahab e claim , he a he g ea

-rate scholar and wonderful

ad h chola ( fi ) of the times, the ad h

scholar of Egypt and Syria,53 standard bearer of tradition, knower of the [different] types of reports, knower of our dilemmas (mu il tina), he cla ifie of o an ocean i h no coa

55

diffic l ie .

54

Al-Mi

a

because of his tremendous knowledge of transmitters, such as the

generation in which they belonged to and their strength in transmission. Al-Dhahab pen ome of his early education with al-Mi

,

d ing a

50

al-B kh

i h him among other works.56

Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:361. Al-Dhahab a bo n be een 673-77 AH making him a good ten years younger than al-Bi l . 51 Ibn Ka h al-Bid a wa l-nih a is more ambitious than al-Dhahab s T r kh al-Isl m since it attempts to capture the beginning of human history until his time. I will speak more about al-Bid a wa l-nih a in Chapter Three. More work needs to be done comparing the different historical works that were composed during the Maml k pe iod. 52 Al-Dhahab al o mma i ed T r kh Baghdad and T r kh Damashq. 53 Eg p and S ia encompa ed he domain of he Maml k . 54 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:382. 55 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:384. 56 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:385.

39

Al-Dhahab asm

e pec and admi a ion of al-Mi

led him o

mma i e hi Tahdh b al-kam l f

al-rij l, a book he says that every scholar needs.57 But most importantly, al-Dhahab

a a ac ed o al-Mi

him o be mode , fo bea ing and ole an , e e

pe onal cha ac e belie ing

emel kno ledgeable and i e: [al-Mi

spoke very little except when he was asked, then he would benefi , an Al-Mi

a e

emel good o hi

den and g e

e and accompli h.

] 58

, feeding hem o hi o n de imen .59

He further upheld the character of the salaf in ha he ab ained in a

in e en ial manne f om

disputation (jadal). S ch a tatement must be understood in opposition to Ibn Taymiyya, who engaged his adversaries. For al-Dhahab , he follo e of he salaf were confident in their creed so it was beneath them to engage in the polemics of their opponents.60 After al-Mi A h afi a, b

i

pa ed a ay, al-Dhahab a pi ed o a he Sh fi A h a Chief j dge Ta

secured the appointment.61 Similarly to al-Mi his colleag e ha he li ed p o he endo e Al-Dhahab

a a f iend of al-S bk b

ca ed him g ea di appoin men . D ad h in Dama c

and i

cceed him a D

al- ad h al-

al-D n al-S bk (d. 756/1355) ho

, al-Dhahab faced he p oblem of con incing ip la ion ha he di ec o m

being pa ed o e fo

be A h a .62

ch an appoin men co ld ha e

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya was the preeminen D

o ld ha e been a emendo

As he did with his other students, al-Mi

hono o

al-

cceed hi eache al-Mi

.

mo likel enco aged al-Dhahab o become

further acquainted with Ibn Taymiyya.63 Al-Dhahab no e ha 57

he e a a defini e

Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:299. Al-Dhahab e claim ha hoe e look a hi book Tahdh b al-asm knows his a e in memo i a ion. 58 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:384. 59 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:384. 60 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:384. For more on al-Dhahab heolog of he salaf ee the Introduction. 61 Bencheneb, Dhahab , EI2; al-N a m , 1:325. I ill peak abo Ta al-D n al-S bk in he ne Chap e . 62 Jal l al-D n al-S , Dha l al abaq t al- uff (Cairo: Wahba Book Shop, 1973), 522. Al-S men ion that there a alk (mutakallam f ) or doubt about whether al-Dhahab a an A h a . 63 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:385.

40

companionship ( u ba) between Ibn Taymiyya and al-Mi (sami a) oge he , di c

hich lead o

ion[ ] and ga he ing[ ], lo e and happine ,

al-Dhahab e plain , ho lobbied al-Mi

64

o ec e he po i ion a D

but the appointment was delayed because of al-Mi

d ing ad h

It was Ibn Taymiyya,

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya,

e ionable heolog .

Al-Dhahab oon became an admi e of Ibn Ta mi a, aken aback i h hi command of the textual tradition. Al-Dhahab e ified o Ibn Ta mi a e ha e e

ao dina

ad h ha Ibn Ta mi a doe no kno i no a ad h.

Yet, unlike al-Mi

o al-Bi

l , al-Dhahab

memo

and decla ed

65

a openl c i ical of Ibn Ta mi a

believing him to be polemical and polarizing. In his entry on Ibn Taymiyya in T r kh al-Isl m, al-Dhahab men ion ha he a among ho e ho lo ed Ibn Ta mi a b

a hi fla

:66 I

do not believe that he was sinless (had i ma), absolutely not (kall ), despite his vast knowledge, extreme courage, fluidity of his mind, his regard in the sanctities of religion, he was man among men.

67

Al-Dhahab fel ha Ibn Ta mi a became e ce i el ang

i h hi enemie ca ing

them to become obstinate in their opposition. If Ibn Taymiyya were gentle with his opponents, al-Dhahab belie ed, he o ld be able o b ing hem o e o hi Al-Dhahab

mo c i ical

ide. 68

i ing of Ibn Ta mi a i fo nd in al-Na

a al-dhahabiyya,

a piece of advice that al-Dhahab allegedl p o ide Ibn Ta mi a. In he ea i e, al-Dhahab i c i ical of Ibn Ta mi a and lack of ac .

69

pecificall again hi p ide, hi ob inac , in ole ance, cap io ne ,

Donald Little argues that the advice is authentic based on the fact that it

64

Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:386. Al-Dhahab , A Ne So ce, 332. 66 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:261. 67 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:261. Little translates a similar phrase found in another one of al-Dhahab i ing ; Li le, Did Ibn Ta mi a Ha e a Sc e Loo e, Studia Islamica 41, no. 1 (1975):104. 68 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:261. Part of al-Dhahab c i ici m of Ibn Ta mi a ma ha e had o do i h he fact that he saw al-Mi a he ideal chola - reserved, diplomatic, modest, subtle and discreet. Al-Dhahab doe no e an of he e a ib e o de c ibe Ibn Ta mi a b a he i c i ical of Ibn Ta mi a polemical one. 69 Li le, Did Ibn Ta mi a Ha e a Sc e Loo e, 100. 65

41

harbors the critical tone of al-Dhahab

o her writings on Ibn Taymiyya.70 In the piece of

advice, al-Dhahab e plain o Ibn Ta mi a ha hi engagemen

i h philo oph led him o

become exceedingly critical and obsessed with the mistakes of those before him. For alDhahab , hi

a again

he teaching of the Prophet Mu ammad who taught to speak only well

of the predecessors and leave what does not concern oneself.71 As al-Dhahab

a e , Oh f iend

(rajal), you have swallowed the poison of the philosophers and their compositions repeatedly, and i h he inc ea ed

e of poi on he bod become addic ed o i .

ha Ibn Ta mi a con an ind lgence

72

Al-Dhahab con end

i h he a ional cience made him lea e aspects of

the Sunna which advocated for the highest moral and ethical character. Similar to other fiediest traditionalists, al-Dhahab belie ed i

a be e o hold fi m o he S nna han o p eocc p

oneself with kal m.73 But despite any differences that al-Dhahab had i h Ibn Ta mi a, he was one of his supporters, abridging Ibn Ta mi a Minh j al-sunna and

cceeding him a D

al- ad h S k i a.74

70

Li le, Did Ibn Ta mi a Ha e a Sc e Loo e, 100. As Melchert explains, the traditionalists used the ad h of lea ing ha doe no conce n him a a c i i e of kal m; Ch i ophe Melche , The Pie of he ad h Folk, International Journal of Middle East Studies 34, no. 3 (2002): 433. 72 Mu ammad b. A mad al-Dhahab , Ba n aghl al- ilm wa l- alab, ed. Mu ammad Z hid b. al- asan al-Ka ha (Damascus: al-Q d , 1928), 33. Al-Na a al-dhahabiyya is attached to the end of the treatise. 73 For more discussion on the authenticity of the treatise see Caterina Bori, Ibn Taymiyya: Una Vita Esemplare (Pisa: Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali, 2003),142-8, 191-4. 74 Al-N a m , 1:78. Al-Dhahab c i ici m owards Ibn Taymiyya extend to his pupil Ibn al-Qayyim. AlDhahab men ion in hi al-Mu jam al-mukhta , a biographical dictionary of his teachers and students, that Ibn alQayyim studied with him and that he was involved in the spread of knowledge. However, al-Dhahab end hi en a ing b he a self-satisfied with his opinion[s] and hasty in affairs (jar al al-um r). May God forgive him ; The entry is fascinating because it both affirms the connection between Ibn al-Qayyim and al-Dhahab b then creates separation through the critical remark. Al-Dhahab c i ici m of Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn al-Qayyim revolves around the personality traits of them being stubborn, arrogant and polarizing. But the root of these criticisms may have been that Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim subscribed to a different form of traditionalism and took strong stances on issues that al-Dhahab did no f ll ag ee i h; Mu ammad b. A mad al-Dhahab , al-Mu jam al-mukhta (al- if, Sa di A abia: Mak aba al- idd , 1988), 269. In the footnotes, the editors mention that in the manuscript that they edited al-Dhahab a ha Ibn al-Qa im a sa i al- aql o poo of mind. The emo ed this phrase because later scholars quoting from al-Mu jam al-mukhta , such as Ibn Rajab, Ibn ajar, and alSha k n did no ela hi ph a e. The edi o e plain ha ch a ph a e o ld no be e pec ed of al-Dhahab af e he praised Ibn al-Qayyim in the entry. But a close reading of the entry demonstrates that al-Dhahab doe no p aise Ibn al-Qayyim excessively, at least not to the extent that he does with other scholars within the dictionary, which 71

42

Western literature has difficulty categorizing al-Dhahab , i h ome empha i ing hi Sh fi iden i

hile o he hi ela ion hip i h Ibn Ta mi a. D a ing f om he Sh fi abaq t al-sh fi i a al-kubr ,75 Bencheneb p e en

A h a T j al-D n al-S bk Aha

ie of al-Dhahab , a g ea

that al-Dhahab

ad h chola

ho had a p oblema ic heolog .76 He notes

died i h a ide ange of eache , among

.77 Bencheneb then mentions that al-Dhahab

al-Mi

di ec o of D

he Sh fi

a

he mo p ominent of them was

nable o

cceed al-Mi

a he

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya because of questionable issues regarding theology.78

Bencheneb concludes the entry explaining that some of al-Dhahab of al-Dhahab fo adop ing an h opomo phi

o n

den

e e c i ical

endencie .79 What is fascinating about the entry is

that it does not even mention Ibn Taymiyya and the fact that al-Dhahab

a one of hi

supporters.80 The literature, on the other hand, highlights al-Dhahab Ibn Ta mi a, once again f

he ing he end ha he Sh fi

h o gh hei connec ion i h he g ea chola . In he devotes a section on al-Dhahab Dhahab

a i de o a d

m l o adi ionali

ela ion hip i h a e p ima il kno n

Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atuhu, Bori

ela ion hip i h Ibn Ta mi a. She e plain ha al-

Ibn Ta mi a acilla e be een n

alified p ai e of hi in ellec

gives the possibility that the phrase maybe authentic. Other traditionalist scholars coming after al-Dhahab , co ld have omitted the phrase because it conflicted with what they believed of Ibn al-Qayyim. A more likely possibility is that the phrase was added by a scribe with negative feelings towards Ibn al-Qayyim. It is not inconceivable that a Sh fi A h a copied al-Dhahab o k and ha he lipped he ph a e in o he en . The ph a e poo of mind does not fit with other criticisms of al-Dhahab of Ibn al-Qayyim which focus on his stubbornness, not his lack of intellect. Al-Dhahab a imila l c i ical of Ibn Ta mi a ecalcitrance but never questioned his immense mind. 75 M Bencheneb, al- ahab , Sham al-D n Ab Abd All h M ammad b. U hm n b. m b. Abd All h alT k m n al-F i al-Dimash al-Sh fi , EI2. 76 The view of al-Dhahab a a g ea ad h chola i h a e ionable c eed i p e en ed b he Sh fi A h a T j al-D n al-S bk ho I di c in he ne Chap e . 77 Bencheneb does not mention the madhhab affiliation of these teachers, which would be important in situating alDhahab . 78 Bencheneb mentions that al-Dhahab had e ionable ie ega ding canon la . Thi i no en i el co ec with al-Dhahab ha ing imila p oblem o al-Mi in p o ing ha he a an A h a . 79 We will explore al-Dhahab ela ion hip i h he Sh fi A h a in he ne Chap e . 80 Thi den i T j al-D n al-S bk .

43

and ha p c i ici m of hi p blic cond c . Ta mi a diffic l pe onali how much of al-Dhahab

81

Bori details how al-Dhahab

and inabili

c i ici m

a f

a ed i h Ibn

o o k i h o he . In pa ic la , he highligh

e e connec ed o Ibn Ta mi a

heolog of combining

reason and revelation in theological speculation.82 De pi e Bo i

ong in igh , he con in e he heme ha he membe of he Sh fi

traditionalists were simply students of Ibn Taymiyya. She calls al-Dhahab a di cipline of Ibn Taymiyya and in an earlier work, she describes al-Dhahab a a clo e p pil of hi Taymiyya.83 Al-Dhahab student of al-Mi

a no do b infl enced b Ibn Ta mi a b

he a p ima il

. Unlike i h Ibn Ta mi a, al-Dhahab i ne e c i ical of al-Mi

to his comfort with the great ad h chola

pe onali

ma e

Ibn he

all ding

and adi ionali m.

Bencheneb and Bori present different sides of al-Dhahab , one hi p oblema ic Sh fi allegiance and the other his uncomfortable relationship with Ibn Taymiyya. More work needs to be done on the complexities of al-Dhahab

Ib Ka

Sh fi

adi ionali iden i .

(700-774/1300-1373) - The Junior Scholar Im d al-D n I m

l b. Uma b. Ka h

ep e en the youngest of the Damascene Sh fi

traditionalists. Unlike the others who studied significan l chola , Ibn Ka h

died p ima il

i hin Sh fi

i h bo h Sh fi and anbal

adi ionali ci cle .

In his acclaimed universal history, al-Bid a wa l-nih a,84 Ibn Ka h

ela

ha hi

family belonged to the Quraysh tribe and that his father was born and lived in the outskirts of

81

Bo i, Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atuhu, 37. Bo i, Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atuhu, 39. I ill peak of Ibn Ta mi a a emp o econcile ea on and revelation in Chapter Four. 83 Ca e ina Bo i, A Ne So ce, 328. 84 I will speak about al-Bid a wa l-nih a in Chapter Three. 82

44

Damascus.85 Hi dad ea l ed ca ion con i ed of studying poetry and anif j i p dence b he e en all became a Sh fi , olidif ing hi famil a a Sh fi one. Hi fa he

o ld become

a noted preacher (kha b) known for his eloquence, poetry and command over his audience. His fa he

oao

kill led him o be appoin ed a an official kha b in a small village. It is there

that he ma ied Ibn Ka h

mo he

in 703/1303-4 hen Ibn Ka h a a d eam. Ka h

87

ho a hi

a onl

econd ife.86 Ibn Ka h

father passed away

h ee. A he eco n , I ne e me [m fa he ] e cep

His father did not leave behind any works except some love poetry which Ibn

oe b

feel he need o a k God fo giveness for.88

Ibn Ka h e plain ha he a named I m acciden of falling off a oof. The olde b o he I m

l af e hi olde b o he l a

ho died in a agic

d ing in Dama c

a he ime,

and already finished much of his early education, which incl ded memo i ing he Q d ing in od c o

g amma , Sh fi j i p dence, and he cience of j i p dence (u l al-

fiqh). When he died, Ibn Ka h e e of poe

n,

. Ibn Ka h

fa he

a de a a ed and mo ned o e him i h man

a bo n ho l af e I m

l pa ed a a and hi fa he named

him af e hi la e b o he . Ibn Ka h e plain ha I a bo n o him af e [ he acciden ]; he named me I m

l af e him. Th

he olde of hi child en a I m

85

l and he la and

Ibn Ka h de o e a i able biog aph o hi fa he mo likel beca e one fa he dic a ed a chola f e ca ee . A Chambe lain e plain , But the most significant nonintellectual fact contributing to the success of an academic ca ee in Maml k Cai o a no ea he per se, b ha ing a one fa he a p ominen chola and eache . A he f he e plain , To a ce ain deg ee, hi ma be viewed as a thoroughly natural phenomenon: the son of a scholar was more likely to be introduced early and attracted to the academic profession, and indeed, fathers a e of en li ed in he biog aphical dic iona ie a he fi of an indi id al man eache ; Chambe lain, 119-20. Ha ing a fa he a a p ominen eache o chola co ld help be a ca al fo a den ca ee ; Chambe lain, 121. 86 We can ell ha Ibn Ka h fa he ei he di o ced hi fi ife o he had pa ed a a h o gh Ibn Ka h a emen ha bo n o [m fa he ] e e e e al child en f om [m ] mo he (al-w lida) and another before her (min ukhr qablih ) ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:32. 87 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:31. 88 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:33.

45

youngest of hi child en a I m e pec a ion fo Ibn Ka h

l.

89

Being named I m

l e

p impo an familial

o li e p o, mo impo an l con in ing on he pa h of

scholarship.90 A he age of e en, Ibn Ka h and hi famil cen e of he egion, Dama c . The famil Abd al-Wahh b, ho Ibn Ka h Ibn Ka h

h

a e

a no

and intellectual

ppo ed b Ibn Ka h

f ll b o he ,

emel clo e o and a ed hi ea l ed ca ion i h.

did no ha e he benefi of g o ing p in an eli e famil ,

al-S bk , i h hi famil being poli ical o Ibn Ka h

emendo

by (takharraja min) al-Mi

.92 Al-Dhahab li

, a igo o

ch a he A ki o

ide .91

i e o ld be p edica ed on hi abili

most prominent students of al-Mi

p oce

o become one of he

Ibn Ka h as one of the students trained

ha incl ded he

anbal, the six canonical ad h collec ion (al-B kh Na

eloca ed o he eligio

d of he Musnad of Ibn

, M lim, Ab Da

d, al-Ti midh , al-

and Ibn M jah), the ad h collection of al- aba n , M lik Muwa a and the Sunan of

al-Ba ha .93 Ibn Ka h al o abridged. Al-Mi

died al-Mi

mon men al Tahdh b al-asm

became o imp e ed i h Ibn Ka h

89

which he later

ha he allo ed him o ma

hi

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:32. Ibn Ka h died m ch of he ame c ic l m ha hi b o he I m l did. 91 Fo mo e on ho po e f l familie e e able o con ol Dama c ee Michael Chambe lain. Ibn Ka h relationship with the al-S bk ill be di c ed in he next Chapter. 92 The cce of Ibn Ka h co ld be ead a a cla ic ag o chola o of medie al I lam. The fac ha an o phan coming f om an ob c e famil became one of he mo impo an Maml k chola o ld no ha e been possible if it were not for the fluid system of Islamic education. For more on Islamic education during the Maml k period see Jonathan Berke The Transmission of Knowledge in Medieval Cairo: a Social History of Islamic Education (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992). 93 Al-Dhahab , T r kh, 53:385. What is interesting in this list is that it does not only contain the six ad h collections but the Musnad of Ibn anbal, which demonstrates al-Mi familiarity with anbal sources. I speak abo Ibn Ka h engagement with the Musnad in Chapter Three. 90

46

daughter Zaynab.94 Ibn Ka h became al-Mi

on-in-law and was incorporated into the

family.95 Ibn Ka h de eloped a emendo

e pec fo al-Mi

belie ing him o be among he

greatest ad h chola in he Maml k e a. In he ea 718/1319, Ibn Ka h Mi

a appoin ed he di ec o hip of D

he chola l eli e o ci a e , imila l in i

eco d hat al-

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya and then adds that none of

no able a ended hi ina g a ion. In a a e of f

a ion, Ibn Ka h

o Ibn Ta mi a, ha no one befo e him was more deserving of directing [the]

e han him.

96

Thi

a a da ing a emen coming f om a Sh fi , ince ome of he mo

e pec ed and infl en ial Sh fi ,

ch a Ibn al- al

and al-Na a , held he ini ial

directorships. Ibn Ka h of Sh fi j i

e e ence fo al-Mi

chola hip con in e in hi biog aphical dic iona

.97 A one poin , Ibn Ka h goe h o gh he li of all he di ec o of D

ad h al-Ashrafiyya and when he arrives to al-Mi

al-

name he p ai e him as a leader (im m),

ad h chola ( fi ), proof ( ujja), great scholar (jahbadha), teacher of the ad h chola (shaykh al-mu addith n), and ocean of benefit. He then prays for al-Mi

94

o ha e a long life

A student marrying hi eache da gh e was a sign of a close personal relationship and intellectual affinity. For in ance, Ibn Ka h notes in his abaq t al-fuqah al-sh fi i n that one of Ibn al- al (d. 643/1245) students became a companion of Sha kh Taq al-D n b. al- al , he served him, studied jurisprudence with him and married his daughter ; Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:837. In ano he in ance, Ibn Ka h a he was the Shaykh of the madhhab in his time, he studied jurisprudence with Shaykh Qutub al-D n al-Nishab and married his daughter ; Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:793. For more on the importance of marriages as religious and political alliances see Richard W. Bulliet, The Patricians of Nishapur: a Study in Medieval Islamic Social History (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972), 40. 95 I i no inconcei able o hink ha Ibn Ka h ie ed al-Mi as a father figure, especially since his father died when he was only three. 96 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:87. 97 I peak abo Ibn Ka h biog aphical dic iona in Chap e Th ee.

47

and die in a state of good deeds.98 Ibn Ka h r provides none of these titles to any of the previous directors showing his tremendous respect for his teacher and mentor.99 Ibn Ka h

defe ence o al-Mi

i f

he demon

a ed in hi Tafs r where he

references him 19 times, the most of all hi eache . Ibn Ka h f e en l pe on ing la ,

ch a

e

e b in he fi

I hea d (sami tu) him, I a li ening (asma u) o him, and I

p e en ed o him ( ara tu ala hi) all indica ing ha Ibn Ka h in e ac ed i h al-Mi significantly and in a a ie

of e ing . Ibn Ka h , fo in ance, men ion in he commen a

36:69 ha I a ked (sa altu) our teacher the great ad h chola Ab ad h100 and he said it is to be rejected (munkar). personally asked al-Mi

abo

hi

101

li ening. Mi

ajj j al-Mi

102

abo

hi

He e Ibn Ka h mentions that he

ad h, hich demon

a e ha Ibn Ka h

impo an efe ence. In e e 38:25, Ibn Ka h men ion ha o chola Ab

ajj j al-Mi

of

a him a an

eache he g ea

ad h

epo ed o me (akhbaran ) while it was recited upon him and I was

The quotation alludes to an audition where a student was reading a ad h o al-

and Ibn Ka h

a a pa icipan ob e e .103

We can also determine from the Tafs r that al-Mi

a ali e fo m ch of he o k

composition giving him the opportunity to consult his teacher. In his commentary of verse 21:104, Ibn Ka h a g e ha a pa ic la Ab D

d

104

ad h ho ld be ejec ed e en if i i in Sunan of

since a group of ad h chola ha e made clear that the ad h i fo ged,

among hem i o

eache (sha khun ), the great ad h chola ( fi al-kab r) Ab

98

ajj j al-

Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:814. This quote also demonstrates that al-Mizz a ali e d ing Ibn Ka h composition of this entry. 100 The ad h in question deals with whether the Prophet engaged in poetry. 101 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 9:5038. 102 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 9:5140. 103 This is an ij a setting where a student reads the entire isn d of the tradition while the others in attendance also receive the license since they are participant observers. For more on ad h and ij as see Eerick Dickinson Ibn al- al al-Shah a and he I n d, Journal of the American Oriental Society 122, no. 3 (2002): 481-505. 104 I will discuss Ibn Ka h ad h methodology further in Chapter Three. 99

48

Mi

, ma God iden (fassa a) his age, delay his death ( ajlihi) and give him an end in the best

of hi deed .

105

Ibn Ka h offe high p ai e fo al-Mi

(sha khun ) and decla ing him a g ea Mi

ad h chola

, calling him o (

eache

fi al-kab r). He then prays for al-

o ha e a long life and o die in a a e of good deed , hich mean ha al-Mi

have been ali e d ing Ibn Ka h

commen a

m

of 21:104, hich i a li le mo e han mid a

through the tafs r.106 I i h o gh Ibn Ka h with al-Bi

a ocia ion i h al-Mi

l and al-Dhahab . I i

ha Ibn Ka h became ac ain ed

nclea o ha extent al-Bi

l a gh Ibn Ka h b

hi

influence upon him is tremendous with al-Bid a wa l-nih a being a continuation (dhayl) of alBi

hi o .107 Ibn Ka h offe

l

ong p ai e fo al-Bi

l in al-Bid a calling him a

teacher (shaykh), leader (im m), great ad h chola ( fi ) and he hi o ian of S ia. He e claim

ha he had bea if l hand

i ing, bea if l cha ac e , he a

ell app ecia ed among

the judges and teachers of the students of kno ledge. I hea d Ibn Ta mi transmission of al-Bi

a a

l i like an engraving on one. Hi colleag e (a

g o p lo ed and hono ed him.

108

Ibn Ka h

a imp e ed i h al-Bi

l

he

buhu) from every o

anding

character which allowed him to be well-respected throughout the political and theological spectrum. Ibn Ka h had a mo e in ima e connec ion i h al-Dhahab

ho a one of hi p ima

teachers. Al-Dhahab men ion Ibn Ka h in hi al-Mu jam al-mukta , no ing ha Ibn Ka h had an outstanding memory which allowed him to memorize many texts. He then adds, as a 105

Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3903. Ibn Ka h was 42 when al-Mi passed away giving him a full 14 years more with al-Mi then with Ibn Taymiyya. 107 In al-Bid a, Ibn Ka h f e en l o e al-Bi l and then adds his own historical insights. I will speak more on ho Ibn Ka h b ild off of al-Bi l o k in Chap e Th ee. 108 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:184. 106

49

p (damaja) hi eading .

109

c i ical eache , ha he

o ld a ime mi

relation to al-Dhahab i

een in hi Tafs r where he mentions him seven times praising him as

our teacher (sha kun ) and as a great ad h chola ( fi ). He f e epo ed o me (akhbaran ) and

is our teacher the ad h chola Ab

Ibn Ka h

e he ph a e

he

e majo in , Ibn Ka h e en p omo e al-Dhahab

a ing and people ha e compo ed man

of] 70 majo in .

en l

clo e

ela ed o me ( ak l ), alluding to direct contact. In his

commentary of verse 4:31, hich di c wo k b

Ibn Ka h

o k on majo in (kab ir), among them

Abd All h al-Dhahab , ho e o k eached [ he n mbe

110

cceeded al-Dhahab a he eache of ad h a Umm S li

li iyya112 and was also passed over for the important post of di ec o of D A h afi a. Ibn Ka h

a appoin ed o he in i

111

and

al- ad h al-

e fo onl a co ple of eek

113

before it was

aken a a f om him and gi en o he Sh fi A h a T j al-D n al-S bk .114 Th o gh hi connec ion i h he Sh fi

adi ionali

, Ibn Ka h

a

oon in od ced o

Ibn Taymiyya and became closely associated with him. From an early period, anbal and Sh fi A h a

o ce o e empha i e he infl ence of Ibn Ta mi a on Ibn Ka h . Fo

in ance, in hi en

on Ibn Ka h , Ibn al- Im d al- anbal (d. 1089/1679)

ela ion hip i h Ibn Ta mi a and concl de

a ing ha Ibn Ka h

109

e e Ibn Ka h

a b ied ne

o hi

Al-Dhahab , al-Mu jam, 74. Fo a mo e comp ehen i e li of Ibn Ka h eache ee al-Shalash, 56. I m l b. Uma b. Ka h , Tafs r al-Qur n al- a m, 12 ol . (Cai o: Mak aba A l d al-Shaykh li-T h, 2009), 3:1356. I fo nd hi e ion of Ibn Ka h Tafs r to be the best since it compares the two oldest extant manuscripts and evaluates (takhr j) all of the ad h . 111 Al-N a m , 1:36. 112 Al-N a m , 1:326. 113 Ibn Ka h appoin men o D al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya demonstrates the prominence that he attainted towards the end of his life. Other examples include a manuscript dated 764/1363 of Ibn Kath Ikhti r ul m al- ad th which introduces him as our teacher (sha khun ), our leader (im m), e ceedingl kno ledgeable ( all ma) and later states that he is the teacher of ad h chola and tafs r specialists of Syria (shu kh al-mu addith n wa ahl al-tafs r bi l-Sh m). The c ibe m ha e fel ha Ibn Ka h a a g ea chola , e peciall in ad h and exegesis. This a emen al o gge Ibn Ka h o k p ead d ing hi life ime gaining him a la ge amo n of no o ie and respect; Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al-hath th: shar ikhti r ul m al- ad th, ed. Al a an Al Abd al- am d (Ri adh: Maktabat al-Ma if li l-Na h a l-Ta , 1996), 53. 114 Al-N a m , 1:36. I ill peak abo T j al-D n al-S bk in he ne Chap e . 110

50

teacher (shaykihi) Ibn Ta mi a.

115

Addi ionall , on a cop of Ibn Ka h

All h,116 the anbal c ibe in od ce Ibn Ka h a a leade kno ledgeable ( allama), Sha kh al-I l m (talm dh Ibn Taymiyya).118

117

anbal chola

b

(im m), e ceedingl

al o a he

o ld no do b

Mawlad al-Rus l

den of Ibn Ta mi a

an o empha i e he infl ence

that the anbal Ibn Ta mi a had on he Sh fi Ibn Ka h . Simila l , in hi biog aphical dictionary of Damascene madrasas, al-N a m (d. 927/1521) e plain ha Ibn Ka h g ea deal f om Ibn Ta mi a and al o end hi en teacher (shaykihi) Ibn Ta mi a.

119

Ta mi a infl ence on Ibn Ka h

no ing ha he a b ied ne

Some Sh fi A h a

o ce

an ed o

o a g e ha he did no ep e en he main

e

ook a hi Ibn

eam Sh fi

tradition. Thi con an empha i of Ibn Ta mi a infl ence on Ibn Ka h ha

eeped in o

We e n chola hip. In he b ief biog aphical

mma

ha , Ce ainl

teachers, and perhaps the one who influenced

he mo famo

of Ibn Ka h

of Ibn Ka h , Jane MacA llife ema k

him the most, was the anbal heologian and j i con l Ibn Ta mi Calde al o a e ha Ibn Ka h

ah.

120

Norman Calder

a an e pe on ad h and a di ciple of Ibn Ta mi a

together adequate symbols of hi in ellec al affilia ion.

115

121

Ye , a b ief

e of Ibn Ka h

Ibn al- Im d, 4:232. I i nclea hen he man c ip a copied b i m ha e been af e Ibn Ka h pa ing ince he c ibe men ion Ma God ble hi o l af e men ioning Ibn Ka h name. For more on the manuscript tradition of this work see Ibn Ka h , Mawlid Ras l All h, ed. al al-D n M najjid (Bei : D al-Ki b al-Jad d, 1961), 8-11. 117 This is the only instance in the pre-mode n o ce he e I ha e een Ibn Ka h gi en the title Shaykh al-I l m. 118 Ibn Ka h , Mawlid Ras l All h, 11. 119 Al-N a m , 1:36-37. I believe Al-N a m has an Ash a bia ince he call he Sh fi Ash a Taq al-D n alSubk Sha kh al-I lam hile he doe gi e he ame epithet to Ibn Taymiyya. Many A h a considered Ta alD n al-S bk he Shaykh al-Isl m while traditionalists referred to Ibn Taymiyya with the same title. I will speak about these two competing Shaykhs al-I l m in Chapter Two. 120 Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Qur nic Christian: an Analysis of Classical and Modern Exegesis (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 72. 121 No man Calde , Tafs r from aba o Ibn Ka h : p oblem in he de c ip ion of a gen e, ill a ed i h efe ence o he o of Ab aham, Approaches to the Qur n, eds. G.R. Hawting and A.A. Shareef (London: Routledge, 1993), 124. 116

51

references to Ibn Taymiyya122 demonstrates that while he was no doubt a supporter he was in no way a product of Ibn Taymiyya.123 Fo in ance, in o k e e e Ibn Ta mi a b

i en ea af e Ibn Ta mi a dea h, Ibn Ka h con in o l

efe encing hi

o k and calling him o

eache

(sha khun ) and

e ceedingl kno ledgeable ( all ma). In his Ikhti r ul m al- ad th, Ibn Ka h ci e Ibn Ta mi a opinion ha he comm ni B kh

has reached consensus that the ad h

and M lim a e a hen ic.124 Simila l , h o gh he

i hin al-

i ing chap e of Ibn Ka h

Kit b al-A k m al-kab r, Ibn Ka h ci e Ibn Ta mi a fatw that it is permissible for women who are planning on going to the public bath ( amm m) to combine their prayers.125 In another in ance, Ibn Ka h ci e Ibn Ta mi a ag eemen eci ed o

i h Ibn anbal that the basmala should be

lo d in a dible p a e onl in Medina. The a o info m he ci

did not read the basmala at all during Ibn anbal

ime, ha eading i

a

inhabitants, who anc ioned b

he

shar a.126 Ibn Ka h e en ci e an en i e fatw by Ibn Taymiyya that non-canonical readings of he Q

n a e impe mi ible in p a e .127

122

I ill di c Ibn Ka h majo o k in de ail in Chap e Th ee. Ibn Ta mi a e p ima den , Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 751/1350), is also subsumed under the great scholar. As Bi gi K a ie complain , he e i ha dl ano he M lim Maml k pol ma h of ch anding ho a he ame ime i be kno n a he den of omeone el e E en cen ie la e , he i ill p ima il kno n and defined by his relation and service to [Ibn Taymiyya], whose works he compiled and whose legal doctrines and hermeneutical and theological con ic ion he defended. Unfo na el , Ibn al-Qayyim is not known for his own important contributions but rather a he den of omeone el e ; Bi gi K a ie , Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyah: His Life and Works, Maml k Studies Review 10, no. 1 (2006): 19-65. 124 Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th, 1:127. 125 Combining ones prayers before going to the public bath ( amm m) is related to the idea that the bath is place of impurities and thus not suitable fo p a e . Fo mo e on Ibn Ka h ie on p blic ba h ee hi Kit b al-Adab wa l-a k m al-muta alliqa bi-dukh l al- amm m, ed. S m b. M ammad b. J d All h (Ri adh: D al-Wa an li lNa h , 1997). Ibn Ta mi a fatw on combining prayers before going to public baths is related to his larger belief in a pragmatic fiqh. Fo mo e on Ibn Ta mi a legal me hodolog ee Yo ef Rapopo , Ibn Ta mi a Radical Legal Tho gh , in Ibn Taymiyya and his Time, 191. 126 I m l b. Uma Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-A k m al-kab r: al-sh mil li-kutub al-adh n, al-mas jid, istiqb l al-qibla, ifat al- al t, ed. N al-D n lib, 3 vols. (Bei : D al-Na di , 2010), 3:29. 127 Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-A k m al-kab r, 3:243. 123

52

In al-Bid a wa l al-nih ya, Ibn Ka h offe one of he be

o ce fo he biog aphie

of the famous scholar128 detailing his interactions with the Mongols, the important events surrounding his trials, his numerous imprisonments and many supporters.129 Ibn Kath tremendous support and love for Ibn Taymiyya best appears in his obituary of the great scholar. After quoting al-Bi

l

en

on Ibn Ta mi a, Ibn Ka h

ecall ho he en o i i Ibn

Ta mi a af e he had died: I a among ho e ho e e p e ent with our Shaykh the great ad h chola ( fi ) Ab al- ajj j al-Mi

, ma God ha e me c on hi

o l (ra imahu All h).

I uncovered the face of the Shaykh (Ibn Taymiyya), gazed a him, and ki ed him. continues by describing Ibn Taymiyya face, he a ha hi hai had become hi e ince he la elling beca e i demon

ea ing a

ime e a him.

a e ha Ibn Ka h

Ibn Ka h

ban with a leather strap and

131

Ibn Ka h

na a i e i

a no in p i on i h Ibn Ta mi a, a claim ha

later biog aphical dic iona ie make. None hele , Ibn Ka h o i i him and among he fe

130

a clo e eno gh o Ibn Ta mi

ho a able o ge clo e eno gh o ki

him. Ibn Ka h

a

hen

na a e ha Ibn Ta mi a b o he Za n al-D n Abd al-Ra m n (d. 747/1347) explained that ince hei imp i onmen Ibn Ta mi a and him elf had ead he Q The had a ed eading he Q

n fo he eigh

a he end of chap e 54, The igh eo

fi

ime b

n eigh

ime (khatma).

he had onl

eached he e e

ill live securely among Gardens and rivers, secure in

the presence of an all-po e f l So e eign.

132

The scholars present agreed to finish the last

128

For more on Ibn Ka h di c ion of Ibn Ta miyya in al-Bid a wa l-nih a see Laoust, La biog aphie d'Ibn Taim a d'ap Ibn Ka , Bulletin d'études Orientales 9, (1942): 115-162. 129 All of the works that touch upon on the life of Ibn Taymiyya draw heavily on al-Bid a wa l-nih a. See, for in ance, She man Jack on, Ibn Taymîyah on Trial in Damascus ; Ca e ina Bo i, Ibn Ta mi a wa- Jam atuhu: A ho i , Conflic and Con en in Ibn Ta mi a Ci cle, in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times; Donald Li le, The Historical and Historiographical Significance of he De en ion of Ibn Ta mi a, International Journal of Middle East Studies 4, no. 3 (1973): 311-327. 130 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:136. 131 Rather, as Ibn Ka h and other sources make clear, it was Ibn al-Qayyim who was imprisoned with Ibn Taymiyya; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:138. 132 Among the implications here is that Ibn Taymiyya was given the glad tiding of being in paradise with his Lord.

53

Q

n eci a ion and

o of Ibn Ta mi a fa o i e Q

n reciters began reading from the

beginning of the 55th chapter (S r al-Ra m n) o he end of he Q la e

n. Ibn Ka h , onl in hi

en ie a he ime, in e jec and no e , I a p e en , li ening, and ob e ing. Ibn Ka h

hen e plain ha i

a decided ha he

133

ho ld pe fo m he i al cleaning

(ghusl) of Ibn Taymiyya before his burial. Ibn Taymiyya was carried to a mosque where only a elec fe

e e allo ed o en e , among hem a

o

eache (sha kun ) al-Mi

of famous righteous and great [scholars], and people of kno ledge and fai h.

134

and a g o p Ibn Ka h

a

a junior scholar at the time and he was not among the handful of notables who were allowed to perform the ritual cleaning. E en ho gh he acco n i abo relationship with al-Mi Ka h

. Ibn Ka h

Ibn Ta mi emembe

i i Ibn Ta mi a with al-Mi

and p ai e him h o gho

hai had become hi e ince he la

e indica e ha Ibn Ka h and al-Mi

m

ho

Ibn Ka h

clo e

he en i e e en in ela ion o al-Mi

teacher (sha khun ) and as a great ad h chola ( Ta mi a

a, i indi ec l

he en i e en

fi ).135 Ibn Ka h f

; Ibn

a o

her mentions that Ibn

ime we saw him (f raqn hu).

136

The use of

ha e een Ibn Ta mi a ome ime befo e hi

death together. The picture that emerges is one of al-Mi

and Ibn Ka h - father and son-in-

law, teacher and student - going out together on important occasions. Af e highligh ing he n mbe of people p e en a Ibn Ta mi a f ne al p a e and that he intended to write a biography of the great scholar,137 Ibn Ka h end he en 133

decla ing,

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:136. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:136. 135 Ibn Ka h hen add he ph a e ra imahu All h or may God have mercy upon him, which indicates that Ibn Ka h o e hi acco n af e al-Mi had died (d. 742/1341). This information is helpful in dating al-Bid a, since it indicates ha Ibn Ka h wrote abo e en ea af e he occ ed. In hi ca e, Ibn Ka h o e hi en o e 14 ea af e Ibn Ta mi a dea h. 136 Emphasis is mine. 137 Ibn Ka h men ion ha he planned o mma i e he different works that he had written on Ibn Taymiyya. But ch a o k, if e e i en, doe no i e; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:138. 134

54

[Ibn Ta mi a] a among he g ea scholars ( ulam ) who made mistakes and was correct, b

hi fla

in ela ion o hi co ec ne , i like a do in a emendo

Taymiyya was sometimes

ong, Ibn Ka h belie ed, hen he a

through the ad h, if a j dge (

ocean.

138

Even if Ibn

ill e a ded fo hi effo

kim) rules (performs ijtih d) and is correct then he has two

rewards and if he engages in ijtih d and make a mi ake hen he ha [onl ] one e a d. ad h i

imila o he famo

Mu ammad and a e hi g a e.

140

e e

o

of Im m M lik he e he poin

pe on

139

This

o he g a e of he P ophe

o d a e aken and di ca ded e cep he po e o of

Fo Ibn Ka h , Ibn Ta mi a made mi ake b

he would eventually be

forgiven.141 Ye , e en ho gh Ibn Ka h empha i e Ibn Ta mi a po i i e a ib e , hi fo him a no al a

ppo

ab ol e. A ime , Ibn Ka h defend Ibn Ta mi a igo o l b

other instances is conspicuously silent. Ibn Ka h

ambi alen

ppo ma be be

in

een in hi

description of the two issues for which Ibn Taymiyya was imprisoned for in Damascus, his views on divorce oaths142 and grave visitation.143 138

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:137. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:138. 140 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:138. 141 Ibn Ka h p aise for Ibn Taymiyya follows into his admiration for Ibn al-Qayyim. In al-Bid a, Ibn Ka h extolls his colleague (s ibun ) Ibn al-Qayyim as a teacher (shaykh), leader (im m), and exceedingly kno ledgeable ( all ma). Ibn Ka h e plain ha hen Ibn Taymiyya returned from Egypt in 712/1313 Ibn alQa im died i h him con in o l (l amahu) until the Shaykh (Ibn Taymiyya) died and [Ibn al-Qayyim] took from [Ibn Taymiyya] tremendous amount of knowledge ( ilman jaman). Unlike al-Dhahab , Ibn Ka h did not think that Ibn al-Qa im a bbo n o a ogan b a he had e cellen cha ac e : He had bea if l eci a ion and character, extremely loving, he did not envy anyone, did not wish them harm, did not try to find fault, and did not ha e an one. Ibn al-Qa im o anding cha ac e led Ibn Ka h o c l i a e a g ea f iend hip i h him o he poin ha Ibn Ka h claimed, I a among he clo e of people o him, [among] he mo belo ed o him ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:66, 230. Caterina Bori translates l ama a con an ph ical in imac ha ca ied i h i clo e in ellec al affilia ion ; Bo i, Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atu-hu, 31. 142 For more on Ibn Taymiyya and divorce oaths see Yossef Rapoport, Marriage, Money and Divorce in Medieval Islamic Society (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 89; Di o ce oa h e e f e en l ed in Maml k society as an instrument to have men fulfill various contracts. Men testified that they would fulfill particular obligations or they would triply divorce their wives. According to Islamic law, a man cannot marry his wife which he divorced three times unless she married and then divorced another man. Ibn Taymiyya challenged these divorce oaths and thus the societal structures that kept them in place. Ibn Ta mi a main a g men a ha condi ional divorces and oaths on pain of divorce form two distinct legal categories. Divorce oaths should be equated with 139

55

Ibn Ka h goe o

of hi

a in al-Bid a to defend Ibn Taymi a

i i a ion. In he ea 726/1326, Ibn Ka h

ie

on g a e

e pond o he Sh fi j dge ho con ended ha Ibn

Taymiyya believed that visiting the grave of the Prophet Mu ammad was a sin (ma iyya) by decla ing, Look no a hi delibe a e di o tion (ta r f) [of the opinion] of the Shaykh al-I l m (Ibn Taymiyya).

144

Ibn Ka h e plain ha Ibn Ta mi a did no hold he opinion ha

i i ing

the grave of Mu ammad or any of the other prophets was a sin. For Ibn Taymiyya, there are two types of grave visitation: the first is visiting the graves without the exclusive intention of doing so, such as visiting a particular city and then visiting the graves within that location. The second was visiting of the graves with the exclusive intention of doing so, such as traveling to a place with the sole purpose of visiting a specific grave.145 Ibn Taymiyya did not prohibit the first type of visitation but rather encouraged it and believed it to be praiseworthy.146 Ibn Ka h end he

oaths in the name of God, and therefore should have the same legal consequences. Since an oath in the name of God required expiation, a violation of a divorce oath requires a similar act of atonement, not the actual dissolution of a marriage ; Rapoport, 96. In other words, a man who violated his oath to triply divorce his wife did not have to divorce his wife but rather go through the process of expiation and atonement. More works needs to be done on ho Ibn Ta mi a fatw on divorce oaths challenged centuries of legal doctrine. 143 Ibn Ka h a a o h in Dama c d ing Ibn Taymiyya final imp i onmen so he describes these events from firsthand experience. Ibn Ka h in e ac ed i h Ibn Ta mi a be een he ea 712-728 AH or when Ibn Ka h a 12-28. 144 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:123. Ibn Ka h ma ha e copied pa of hi defense of Ibn Taymiyya from Ibn Abd al- d ho gi e an almo iden ical eb al; Ibn Abd al-H d , 268. 145 Christopher S. Taylor argues that the heart of the debate regarding grave visitation was the proper etiquette of supplication. He explains Ibn Ta mi a po i ion a follo : ha he onl place M lim a e ppo ed o eek out with the intention of praying there are mosques and sites connected with the rituals of the hajj. Accidental prayers uttered spontaneously while visiting or passing a grave are not a problem, but deliberately going to tombs in order to offer du is reprehensible. As is frequently the case in Islamic jurisprudence, the intention of the believer is the decisive factor in distinguishing between lawful and forbidden action ; Ch i ophe S. Ta lo , In the Vicinity of the Righteous: Zi ra and the Veneration of Muslim Saints in Late Medieval Egypt (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 1999), 173. 146 In o he o d , if one i i ed Medina i h he in en ion of i i ing he P ophe mo e hen it would be p ai e o h o i i he P ophe g a e. Ta lo de c ibe Ibn Ta mi a ie ega ding i i ing he P ophe Mu ammad g a e a , Al ho gh Ibn Ta mi a did no a e ha i i o he P ophe omb e e naccep able, he did take a strong stand against making any grave, including that of the Prophet, the object of travel. In defending hi po i ion, Ibn Ta mi a ci e he c om of he P ophe companion ho, he j i ell , ne e a eled o Medina for the sake of visiting Mu ammad g a e. While he e e in Medina, Ibn Ta mi a ela e , he companion ne e en o he ho e of i ha, he P ophe ife, he e he a b ied fo he p po e of g ee ing him. Instead they greeted Mu ammad during their prayers as well as while entering and exiting his mosque. As the P ophe mo e i one of h ee place o hich M lim pilg image i pecificall pe mi ed, f om Ibn

56

defense quoting the Q hei affai

nic e e 26:227: And oon ill he e ildoe kno

ha

ill ake, impl ing ha ho e ho imp i oned Ibn Ta mi a e e

ici i de

ongdoe and

that they will eventually be defeated.147 Howe e , Ibn Ka h doe no ho an divorce oaths.148 Drawing from al-Bi anbal j dge of Dama c

ppo fo Ibn Ta mi a anomalo

l , Ibn Ka h

ie

on

eco d ha in he ea 718/1318 he chief

gge ed o Ibn Ta mi a ha he ho ld op gi ing fatw s on

di o ce oa h , o hich Ibn Ka h add , So he Sha kh (Ibn Ta mi a) accep ed hi ad ice and responded to what he suggested (m ash ra bihi) out of respect for him and a group of muft .

149

After mentioning that an official decree was issued preventing Ibn Taymiyya from

issuing fatw

on di o ce oa h , Ibn Ka h no e again ha he anbal j dge and e e al

prominent muft s met with Ibn Taymiyya to advise him to stop giving fatw s on the issue. Here Ibn Ka h once again highligh

ha Ibn Taymiyya accepted their advice and is eager to note

that Ibn Taymiyya stopped giving fatw s on the dissentious issue for the greater societal good. A li le o e a ea la e in Ramadan 719/ No embe 1319, Ibn Ka h council convened o

ppo

impl

eco d ha a

he S l an dec ee ha Ibn Ta mi a ho ld op gi ing fatw s on

divorce oaths.150 Se e al mon h la e , in Rajab 720/A g

1320, Ibn Ka h ch onicle ha

another council was held in which it was determined that Ibn Taymiyya had not, in fact, stopped issuing fatw s on divorce oaths and that he should therefore be imprisoned.151 Ibn Ka h onl adds that the various judges and muft s from the different madhhabs agreed on the issue and that Ta mi a po i ion, if a belie e nde ake a el in o de o p a in he P ophe mo e, i i hen acceptable to visit Mu ammad omb and o g ee him ; Ta lo , 192. 147 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:122-23. For more on polemics directed at Ibn Taymiyya and his view on the visitation of he P ophe g a e ee El-Rouayheb, Ibn Taymiyya and His Times, 287. 148 Al-Dhahab , imila l , doe no endo e Ibn Ta mi a ie on di o ce oa h ; Bo i, A Ne So ce, 336. 149 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:85. Ibn Ka h copie hi a emen f om al-Bi l ; Alam al-D n M ammad b. Y f al-Bi l , al-Wafa t li l-Bir l , ed. Ab Ya Abd All h al-Kanda (K ai : Ghar li l-Na h a lTa a l-Di a a l-I l n, 2005), 463. Abd al-H d al o peak abo hi inciden ; Abd al-H d , 255. 150 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:92. 151 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:95.

57

Ibn Taymiyya was detained for five months and eighteen days. The subject of divorce oaths appea

hi

ea la e in Ibn Ka h

acco n of he ea 750/1349. He e Ibn Ka h

that a truce ( ul ) a eached be een Ta

eco d

al-D n al-S bk and Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya on

the dispute.152 Ibn Ka h is more concerned here that a truce was reached than the nature of the ag eemen . The final ime ha Ibn Ka h men ion he i Qayyim al-Ja

i a, he e he no e ha

e i in he biog aph of Ibn al-

he e e e ho ili ie (fu l) that are too long to

e pand on be een Ibn al-Qayyim al-Ja

i a and Ta

al-D n al-S bk ega ding di o ce

oa h . In all he acco n of di o ce oa h , Ibn Ka h ne e defend Ibn Ta mi a o Ibn alQayyim al-Jawziyya but is rather on the side of reconciliation. The permissibility of divorce oaths and the legality of a divorce resulting from such an oath were one of the topics on which the four Sunni madhhabs ag eed. Ibn Ka h leaned o a d a ni

of he madhhabs and the

Empire rather than with the controversial stance of Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim. In pa ic la o Ibn Ka h

Tafs r, i i e iden ha Ibn Ta mi a a no Ibn Ka h

primary teacher sine he is only referenced by name six times, a third of al-Mi

.153 Ibn

Taymiyya had an indirect influence on the Tafs r and mo likel pa ed a a befo e Ibn Ka h began

i ing. In all he efe ence ha Ibn Ka h gi e of Ibn Ta mi a, none of hem ha e

he ph a e in he fi hi d pe on pa

pe on ing la , ch a

ch a

Ibn Ta mi a aid.

I hea d f om o 154

The fi

in ance ha Ibn Ka h

Taymiyya is in the tafs r in od c ion he e he copie he la

152

I p e en ed o, b

a he in the o e Ibn

o chap e f om Ibn

Ibn Ka h r, al-Bid a, 14:228. Ibn al-Qayyim continued to issue fatw s on divorce oaths long after Ibn Ta mi a dea h. 153 Al-Shalash, 483. 154 Ibn Ka h does use the first person in regards to Ibn Taymiyya in al-Bid a. As we recall, Ibn Ka h says I heard Ibn Taymiyya say that the transmission of al-Bi l is like an engraving on one. Thi ma all de o he fact that Ibn Ka h might have begun writing al-Bid a when Ibn Taymiyya was still alive.

58

Ta mi a ha Ibn Ka h

In od c ion o he Science of Tafs r. a d a ing f om Ibn Ta mi a

155

The near word for word copying shows

i en o ce a he han o al one . In

ano he in ance, Ibn Ka h ci e Ibn Ta mi a in hi commen a

of e e 4:24 ega ding a

adi ion he e he Caliph Al allegedl allo ed a man to marry the daughter of his wife since he da gh e did no g o

p in he man ho e.156 Ibn Ka h ha

because it has a strong chain of transmission (isn d) o Al b consensus that a man i p ohibi ed o ma p in hi ho e o no . Ibn Ka h

hen efe

hi

o ble i h he adi ion

i con en goe again

ife da gh e , ega dle

of he he he g e

o Ibn Ta mi a h o gh al-Dhahab , O

(sha khun ) the great ad h chola (h fi ) Ab

he

eache

Abd All h al-Dhahab ela ed ( ak ) to me that

he presented this [tradition] to Shaykh al-Im m Ta

al-D n Ibn Ta mi a, ma God me c be

upon him (ra imahu All h), and it caused problems for him (istashkalahu), and he suspended judgment (tawaqqafa) on that [tradition], so God knows best.

157

The quote is fascinating

beca e i e abli he Ibn Ka h

ela ion hip i h al-Dhahab mo e han i doe

Taymiyya, since it is al-Dhahab

ho a k Ibn Ta mi a abo

ela

he an

i h Ibn

he adi ion and al-Dhahab

ho

e o Ibn Ka h .158 The quote also indicates that Ibn Taymiyya had passed away

sometime before 4:24, which is one sixth of a way through the tafs r, ince Ibn Ka h men ion ma God ha e me c on hi

o l af e men ioning Ibn Ta mi a name.159

155

I will be discussing Ibn Ta mi a Introduction to the Sciences of Tafs r in Chapter Four. Ibn Ka h f e en l di c ed legal i e in hi Tafs r. The relationship between tafs r and law needs to be further explored. One of the few scholars that discusses both is Norman Calder. See his Interpretation and Jurisprudence in Medieval Islam, eds. Jawid Mojaddedi and Andrew Rippin (Aldershot [England]; Burlington, VT: Ashgate/Variorum, 2006). 157 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 3:1310. 158 It is evident that both al-Dhahab and Ibn Ka h saw Ibn Taymiyya as a great ad h scholar since they both refer to him here. Al-Dhahab does include Ibn Taymiyya in his biographical dictionary of ad h scholars. For more on his biographical dictionary of ad h ee abaq t al- uff (Cairo: Maktab Wahba, 1973). 159 Ibn Ka h efe ence of al-Mi and Ibn Taymiyya overlap in that he viewed both scholars as authorities of ad h. However, Ibn Ka h also saw Ibn Taymiyya as an authority on the entire Islamic tradition by calling him Sha kh al-I lam ; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 3:1465. 156

59

Conclusion: There is a constant a emp o p e en Ibn Ka h a a i mo e acc a el de c ibed a a Sh fi ad h chola While he heolog

den of Ibn Ta mi a hen he

adi ionali . The Sh fi

adi ionali

e e a g o p of

ho follo ed Sh fi j i p dence and foc ed on he an mi ed ources. ee

ppo e of Ibn Ta mi a, he

b c ibed o a diffe en heolog , a mo al

hich foc ed on cience ha he belie ed had angible effec on he belie e

life

and avoided speculative theology (kal m). These different forms of traditionalisms at times led to public disagreements, most notably between Ibn Taymiyya and al-Dhahab . Ibn Ka h h Mi

no

he

den of Ibn Ta mi a b

. Ibn Ka h

a al-Mi

a he he di ciple of he Sh fi

on-in-la and Ibn Ka h

a

adi ionali al-

o mo impo an

o k , al-

Bid a wa l-nih a and his Tafs r, allude to close contact and affinity between the scholars. To be e

nde

and he

ggle ha he Sh fi

adi ionali Ibn Ka h

en h o gh,

we must now explore the other side of the equation that is neglected in the biographies of Ibn Ka h , hi ela ion hip i h he Sh fi A h a .

60

Chapter II M

Be

d Ib Ta

a: Ib Ka

a d

eS

A

a

The biog aphie of Ibn Ka h emphasize his relationship with Ibn Taymiyya, al-Mi and al-Dhahab but do not explore his connections with the Sh fi A h a .1 By shedding light on he ela ion hip be Ka h

een Ibn Ka h and he Sh fi A h a

pec lia i a ion of being ca gh be

e o ing o he e oneo Thi chap e

een

, e be e

o heological chool and a oid

imp e ion ha Ibn Ta mi a a Ibn Ka h

ill e plo e ho Ibn Ka h , claimed a

nde and Ibn

a ealo

p ima

infl ence.

ppo e of Ibn Ta mi a,

2

could have formed relationships with those who were systematically working to discredit Ibn Ta mi a. While Ibn Ka h

a no do b an a den

hi Sh fi madhhab and ie ed he Sh fi A h a

ppo e of Ibn Ta mi a, he a lo al o a colleag e . He further maintained strong

traditionalist ethical and spiritual values of personal piety, fair and just rule, and the separation be een he chola and a e. Ibn Ka h

connec ion i h he Sh fi madhhab and

commitment to traditionalist values made him form relationships beyond that of Ibn Taymiyya.

1

The mo comp ehen i e biog aph of Ibn Ka h in Engli h i E ik S. Ohlande Ibn Ka h , in Essays in Arabic Literary Biography, eds. Joseph E. Lowry and Devin J. Stewart (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009). The Arabic works that discuss his Tafs r include, Adn n b. M ammad b. Abd All h al-Shalash, al-Im m Ibn Kath r wa-atharuhu f ilm al- ad th riw a wa dir a: ma a dir sa manhaji a ta b qi a al Tafs r al-Qur n al- a m (Amman: D al-Naf , 2005) and I m l S lim Abd al- l, Ibn Kath r wa-manhajuhu f al-Tafs r (Cairo: Maktabat al-Malik Fay al al-I l mi a, 1984). Ano he impo an d ha foc e on Ibn Ka h hi o ical o k is alBid a wa l-nih a is M. R. K. Nadwi, al-Im m Ibn Kath r: siratuhu, wa-mu allaf tuhu, wa-manhajuhu f kit b alt rikh (Damasc : D Ibn Ka h , 1999). 2 Ca e ina Bo i, Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atuhu: A ho i , Conflic and Con en in Ibn Ta mi a Ci cle, in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, eds. Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010), 32.

61

T eR

S The

E e: ling Sh fi eli e ood in con a

o he Sh fi

adi ionali

ince he came f om

established scholarly families who were successfully able to pass down their wealth and cultural capi al o hei off p ing. The

e e almo al a

j dge and A h a

hich made hem mo e

inclined to kal m and philosophy. They thus were alarmed with the growing traditionalist movement that challenged the religious and social order. They began a well-orchestrated campaign o dimini h Ibn Ta mi a appeal b challenging man of hi con o e ial ance . Ye , hile he Sh fi A h a

ie

and

began o oppo e Ibn Ta mi a, Ibn Ka h

developed his own relationship i h he g ea chola . To be e heological and ocial po i ion, e ill

no hodo

e Ibn Ka h

nde and Ibn Ka h

and he Sh fi

adi ionali

a ocia ion i h h ee of he mo impo an Sh fi A h a : al-Zamlak n , Ta

al-D n al-

S bk , and T j al-D n al-S bk .

Al-Za

a

: (666/7-727/1267/8-1327) The Political Opportunist

Th o gho

hi life, Ibn Ka h main ained he adi ionali p inciple ha chola

ho ld

be independent of government structures.3 By becoming part of the state, many traditionalists feared that they would lose their intellectual autonomy and simply become government mouth pieces rather than spokespersons for moral and ethical conduct and the rights of the people.4 3

The great traditionalist Ibn anbal reportedly rejected being a judge, even after the encouragement of his teacher al-Sh fi . A Ch i ophe Melche e plain , Ibn anbal had o po e f l objec ion o being a . Fi he wo ld no i h o iden if him elf i h he ling po e (in he ea l nin h cen , e e ho gh o j dge a deputies of the caliph himself). Second, he would not wish to renounce the prerogative of answering questions ca io l , o a I don kno o I hope he e i no ha m in i , a he han ha ing o make deci ion i h immedia e and of en i e ocable con e ence ; Christopher Melchert, A mad ibn anbal (Oxford: Oneworld, 2006), 4. 4 In hi biog aphical dic iona , Ibn Ka h con i en l praises scholars who refused posts. For instance, Ibn Ka h men ion ha one Sh fi chola a p e en ed the supervisor of the treasury, prestigious directorships (mashyakat al-Shuyukh), and the chief judgeship but he refused [all of them] based on his asceticism (zuhd) and piety (war ) ;

62

While he e a e man e ample of Ibn Ka h

distaste for scholars becoming part of the state,

among he mo o e come in hi ch onicle of he ea 717/1317. Ibn Ka h no e ha a M lik j dge a emo ed ( azala) from his judgeship twenty days before his death leading him o ema k, hi i f om hi good ha he did no die a a j dge. adi ionali

5

Simila o he o he Sh fi

, Ibn Ka h li ed hi en i e life i hin independen mad a a and ne e became a

judge. Ibn Ka h fall o

belief ha chola

ho ld a oid go e nmen po i ion most likely led to his

i h he g ea Kam l al-D n M

of he mo no ed Sh fi j i

ammad b. Al b. al-Zamlak n . Al-Zamlak n

of hi ime, a aining e e al impo an go e nmen po

a one , mo

importantly the chief justice of Aleppo. Al-Zamlak n began hi ca ee clo e o he Sh fi traditionalists b

ended p in he Sh fi A h a camp. A She man Jack on e plain , O e all,

al-Zamlak n appea

o ha e had

an intense loyalty to the Sh fi Zamlak n in he en

ong adi ionali leaning b

chool, home of the leading A h a .

6

Ibn Ka h men ion al-

on hi fa he a one of hi eache (sha khun ) and exceedingly

kno ledgeable ( all ma).7 Al-Zamlak n ela ed o Ibn Ka h Na a

o ha e al o been bo nd b

(d. 676/1277) and Ibn Fi k

8

ha he G ea Sh fi scholars al-

(d. 690/1291) respected his father and informed him on

I m l b. Uma b. Ka h , abaq t al- sh fi i a, ed. Abd al-Haf Man , 2 ol . (Beirut: D al-Mad alI l m , 2004), 2:838. Fo Ibn Ka h , he ai of a ce ici m and pie e e in eg al pa of a ing no to prominent government positions. In another instance, Ibn Ka h men ion ha a chola accep ed he po i ion of j dge hip only on the condition that he would not take a salary, not accept any government intercessors and not change his civilian clothes. It was said that he never smiled when he judged, showing his discomfort with the post itself; Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:463. 5 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a wa l-nih a, eds. Al Mu ammad M a ad and dil A mad Abd al-Mawj d, 15 vols. (Lebanon: D al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya, 2009), 14:83. Ibn Ka h al o add in hi Shar al-tanb h that while it is acceptable to seek judgeship it is preferred not to pursue the position; Ibn Ka h , Irsh d al-faq h il ma rifat adillat al-Tanb h, ed. Bahja Y f amad Ab al- ayyib, 2 vols. (Bei : M a a a al-Ri la, 1996), 2:390. 6 She man Jack on, Ibn Ta m ah on T ial in Dama c , The Journal of Semitic Studies 39, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 48. 7 Ibn Ka h al o call al-Zamlak n one of hi eache in hi biog aphical dic iona ; Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:814. 8 Ibn Fi k o T j al-D n al-Fa co ld also be con ide ed a Sh fi adi ionali in ha he de o ed hi life o teaching in the Damascus madrasas, did not take any public office, had a liking to Ibn Taymiyya and was more

63

he c

ic l m hi olde b o he I m

acco n , Ibn Ka h

l

died in hi fo ma i e ed ca ion.9 In these early

alk of al-Zamlak n a a g ea cholar and family friend.

Al-Zamlak n pla ed an in

men al ole on he 705/1305 commi ee in ac i ing Ibn

Taymiyya of charges of heresy.10 Ibn Ka h

ela e ha al-Zamlak n e amined Ibn Ta mi a

without forgiveness (gha r mus ma a) but eventually accepted his creed. Al-Zamlak n

o ld

later be accused of being an Ibn Taymiyya supporter11 and even resigned from a position in 709/1309 based on the same accusation.12 Ibn Taymiyya and al-Zamlak n f

he held man of

the same legal opinions against religious innovation such as forbidding the long-standing popular p ac ice of ill mina ing he Uma ad mo al-Zamlak n poe

adi ionali leaning led him o p ai e Ibn Ta mi a in idel ci ed e e of

hich e ol Ibn Ta mi a

al-Zamlak n

e in he middle of he I lamic mon h of Sha b n. 13

n i aled lea ning and in elligence,

ned hi back on Ibn Ta mi

Zamlak n e en all

14

but this was before

a and became one of hi opponen .15 Al-

o e ef a ion of Ibn Ta mi a

ie

on di o ce oa h and grave

visitation, leading to several promotions.16

inclined towards ijtih d. Ibn Fi k was the teacher of al-Bi l and al o he den of he Sh fi adi ionali Ibn al- al and Ibn Abd al-Sal m al-Ma di ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:251, 325. 9 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:32. 10 Jackson, 48. 11 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:40. 12 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:49. 13 Ibn Ka h men ion ha he a o fatw s in the handwriting of Ibn Taymiyya and al-Zamlak n a g ing again the practice of lighting the Uma ad Mo e in he middle of Sha b n. Sha b n i he mon h befo e Ramad n and the day was thought to be laylat al-bar a o he nigh of deli e ance, he nigh hen he ga e of hellfi e e e believed to be closed. Even though many scholars were against the practice of lighting the mosque, Ibn Ka h men ion onl Ibn Ta mi a and al-Zamlak n fatw s suggesting their important stature as traditionalist jurists; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:230. 14 Yossef Rapoport, Marriage, Money and Divorce in Medieval Islamic Society (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 103. 15 Ibn ajar al- A al n , al-Durar al-k mina f a n al-mi a al-th mina, ed. Abd al-W i h Mu ammad Al , 4 ol . (Bei : D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 1997), 1:91. 16 Jackson, 48.

64

Al-Zamlak n

a a good f iend of Ibn Ka h

eache al-Dhahab

ho e pec ed al-

Zamlak n tremendously. In al-Mu jam al-mukta , al-Dhahab relates that he studied with alZamlak n and p ai e him a one of he emaining mujtahids and among the smartest people of hi ime.

17

In his T rikh al-Isl m, al-Dhahab admi e al-Zamlak n

in elligence and hen add ha al-Zamlak n

looks, eloquence and

o e man beneficial hing .

18

What al-Dhahab

does not mention is that al-Zamlak n wrote one of the most widely cited refutations of Ibn Ta mi a

ie

on di o ce oa h .19 Such an omission is significant because other

biog aphical acco n ,

ch a ho e b Ibn Ka h and al-S bk ,20 always mention the work.

Nevertheless, al-Dhahab ela

ha he and al-Zamlak n

affection (widd) and sincerity ( af ) be Zamlak n

a echoed b

he j dge hip of Dama c

he ma e b

nfo

een ho

emel clo e, he e a

. Al-Dhahab belie ed ha hi lo e fo ale e e ci ed o hea that al-Zamlak n was seeking

na el al-Zamlak n became sick on the way to Cairo and

passed away.21 In the end, al-Zamlak n not impede al-Dhahab

eee

n f om a

ppo e o a c i ic of Ibn Taymiyya did

ela ion hip with or opinion of the prominent jurist.

A contrasting account of al-Zamlak n i p o ided b Ibn Ka h , one ha begin respect but ends in disappointment. In al-Bid a, Ibn Ka h begin hi en Zamlak n a Zamlak n

he Sha kh of he Sh fi

of S ia.

22

Ibn Ka h

ih

p ai ing al-

a imp e ed i h al-

cla e e claiming ha he did no hea le on be e han hi and ha al-Zamlak n

17

Mu ammad b. A mad al-Dhahab , al-Mu jam al-mukhta (al- if, Sa di A abia: Maktabat al- idd , 1988), 246. 18 Al-Dhahab , T r kh al-Isl m wa-wafa t al-mash h r wa l-a l m, ed. Uma Abd al-Sal m Tadm , 53 ol . (Bei : D al-Ki b al- A ab , 1987), 53:385. 19 The issue of divorce oaths is discussed in the last Chapter. 20 These entries will be discussed below. 21 Al-Dhahab , al-Mu jam, 249. 22 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:130.

65

was extremely organized, brilliant and eloquent.23 While Ibn Ka h p ai e al-Zamlak n he teacher, he did not praise al-Zamlak n he pe on in he ame a . Ibn Ka h con ide ed alZamlak n

dea h befo e he a ained he j dge hip of Dama c

suspected that al-Zamlak n ha bo ed in en ion o

e he po

the widely known ad h ac ion a e ba ed on in en ion Whoe e

24

o be a good hing ince he o ha m Ibn Ta mi ya. Quoting

Ibn Ka h

e ed he la pa ,

mig a ion i o benefi (yu b) from this world or to marry a woman then his

mig a ion i fo ha p po e, impl ing ha he e i no e a d f om God. Ibn Ka h cle e l parallels the migration (hijra) mentioned in the ad h, hich a na a ed in he con e

of

migrating from Mecca to Medina, with the migration of al-Zamlak n o Cai o. Ibn Ka h concl de decla ing, I

a of hi

gly intention that if he returned to Syria with this post, then

he would harm Ibn Taymiyya, so it was prayed against him that his hopes and desires would not come o

face.

25

S ch a poignan l c i ical ema k i highl

ncha ac e i ic of Ibn Ka h

who is rarely attacks figures in his biographies. Ibn Ka h led him o be a

ha hne

eem o be oo ed in ha he fel al-Zamlak n

e fo po e

he adi ionali mo emen . Fo in ance, in he ea 704/1305, Ibn Ka h

notes that one of his Sh fi

adi ionali

eache B

23

n al-D n al-Fa

26

(d. 729/1329)

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:130 . The full ad h ead : Ac ion a e b b in en ion and e e man hall ha e b hat which he intended. Thus he whose migration was for All h and his Messenger, his migration was for All h and His Messenger, and he whose migration was to achieve some worldly benefit or to take some woman in marriage, his migration was for that for which he mig a ed ; Al-Na a , an-Nawaw 's Fort ad th: an Antholog of the Sa ings of the Prophet Muhammad, trans. Ezzeddin Ibrahim and Denys Johnson-Davies (Cambridge, UK: Islamic Texts Society, 1997), 26. 25 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:130. Ibn Ka h e this same ad h in the opposite way to praise a ruler who attempted to liberate Jerusalem but died before he was able to carry out he mi ion. A Ibn Ka h a Ac ion a e b in en ion , and he ecei ed he e a d of ha he in ended ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:312. 26 Like hi fa he Ibn Fi k , B h n al-D n al-Fa co ld be p in o he Sh fi adi ionali camp ince Ibn Ka h ob e e ha B h n al-D n al-Fa alked on he [ ame] pa h of hi fa he . Like he o he Sh fi traditionali , B h n al-D n al-Fa a a ppo e of Ibn Ta mi a, ne e joined he c e of he a e and was more inclined towards ijtih d. Ibn Ka h ela e ha , in a ho of ppo , B h n al-D n al-Fa and a g o p of Sh fi ulam continuousl i i ed Ibn Ta mi a g a e fo h ee da ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:325, 14:137. Ibn ajar al- A al n also highlights B h n al-D n al-Fa ela ion hip i h Ibn Ta mi a de pi e hi 24

66

refused to become part of the structures of the state by turning down supervision of the treasury (bayt al-m l).27 When the same offer was given to al-Zamlak n he accep ed i . Similarly, when B h n al-D n al-Fa

a offe ed he po i ion of the chief judge of Syria in 724/1324 he

refused in order to focus on his teaching. Al-Zamlak n befo e hi dea h. In hi obi a j i

of B h n al-D n al-Fa

a offe ed high po i ion b

judgeship of Syria after Ibn a

a eled o Eg p o eek he ame office

28

con i en l

, Ibn Ka h highligh ho

he g ea

ned hem do n: he a offe ed he chief

and the governor (n ib al-Sh m) and his assistants

personally insisted, but he did not accept. He was determined, he absolutely refused (imtana a ashadd al-imtin ).

29

Ibn Ka h p ai ed al-Fa

p incipled ance b p a ing Ma God

reward his moral integrity and sense of honor (mar a). al-D n al-Fa

30

Ibn Ka h

ep e en hi o n i ion of he ideal ela ion hip be

Ibn Ka h him elf ne e became a j dge and p ai e

chola

p e en a ion of B h n een chola and a e.

ho hied a a f om holding

posts.

Ta

a -D

a -S b : (683-756/1284-1355) The Righteous Judge

While Ibn Ka h e ol

chola fo

ning do n j dge hip , he ne e hele

p ai ed

judges who were pious and used their positions to stand for justice and fight against state diffe ence i h Sha kh Ta al-D n Ibn Taymiyya he did not disassociate [himself from him], and when he (Ibn Ta mi a) died he paid e pec o him a hi g a e ; Ibn ajar al- A al n , 1:36. Lao implie ha Ibn Ka h changed co e b fi d ing i h B h n al-D n and hen mo ing o Ibn Ta mi a: he had as his main teacher, in fi h, he Sh fi B h n al-D n al-Fa (d. 729), b ne fell ongl , and e ea l , nde he infl ence of Ibn Ta mi a (d. 728/1328) and hi chool. S d ing i h B h n al-D n and Ibn Ta mi a ma no have been mutuall e cl i e; Ibn Ka h die i h he Sh fi adi ionali B h n al-D n ma ha e led him to Ibn Ta mi a; H Lao , Ibn Ka h , Im d al-D n I m l b. Uma b. Ka h , Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition, eds. P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs (Brill, 2010). 27 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:34. 28 Jackson suggests that Ibn a a a Sh fi A h a ba ed on hi enmi of al-Mi and en e ela ion hip i h Ibn Taymiyya. He also came from a well-established family; Jackson, 46. For more Ibn a ole in he 705 AH trial see Chapter One. 29 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:144. 30 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:110.

67

co

p ion. Ibn Ka h

belief in he igh eo

j dge led him o

c i ic of Ibn Ta mi a, he g ea Sh fi j i Ta S bk . Ta

al-D n al-S bk

Maml k ime .

31

a f om he ill

io

ppo one of the most vocal

al-D n Ab al- a an Al b. Abd al-K f alal-S bk famil

He was among the most powerf l Sh fi j i

hich flo i hed in

of his generation, eventually

securing the post of chief judge of Damascus.32 Al-S bk

o e a e ie of ef a ion again Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn al-Qayyim that led

him to obtain several important promotions. As Yousef Rapaport explains, [Al-S bk ] ef a ion of Ibn Ta mi a pa ed hi a o highe office: he a e en all appoin ed chief Sh fi J dge of Dama c in 739/1338, g ad all ac i ing several other offices in the city, many of which he was able to pass on to his sons. Compared to Ibn Taymiyya, al-S bk , a a Sh fi Eg p ian ho ama ed official appoin men , ep e en he oppo i e end of he ocial pec m of Maml k ulam . 33 Rapapo

compa i on of al-S bk

i h Ibn Ta mi a i fi ing ince al-S bk

a in ested in

he Maml k e abli hmen , a a membe of he po e f l S bk famil , and pen he la

ea

of his life as the chief judge of Damascus.34 Ibn Taymiyya, on the other hand, was an immigrant to the city, a political activist and an outside critic who spent the last years of his life in jail. The common themes of al-S bk Qa im

ho gh i

community. Al-S bk

no hodo

ef a ion a e ha Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn al-

and ha he

ep e en a dange o he con en

of he

fea of he i ing traditionalist movement appears in al-Sayf al- aq l f

radd al Ibn Zaf l, a refutation of Ibn al-Qa im 31

adi ionali c eed hich a in

n de i ed

Jo eph Schach , al- S bk , EI2. B Ta al-D n al-S bk tremendous legacy seems to be lost in modern times in which he is primarily known as he fa he of T j al-D n al-S bk or the one who refuted Ibn Taymiyya. For instance, the editors of al-Ras il alsubkiyya have an exceedingly brief three-page biography of al-Subk followed by a sixty five page rebuttal of Ibn Taymiyya. The editors are less interested in understanding who al-S bk a hen ef ing the influential Ibn Taymiyya; Ta al-D n Al b. Abd al-K f al-S bk , al-Ras il al-subkiyya fi al-radd al Ibn Ta mi a watilm dhihi Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (Bei : lam al-Kutub, 1983), 9. 33 Rapaport, 101. Rapaport goes on to explain that al-S bk had e e al i e hile Ibn Ta mi a a celiba e. 34 Al-S bk e igned f om he po a mon h befo e hi pa ing in o de o ansfer i o hi on T j al-D n; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:216. 32

68

from Ibn Taymiyya.35 Al-S bk

o e he ea i e in 749/1348 hen he a he chief j dge of

Damascus and the refutation thus expresses the dominant theology of the time and the threat that the ruling elite felt from the traditionalist movement.36 Al-S bk fe ocio l a ack Ibn alQayyim repeatedly throughout the treatise, asking God to curse him, calling him ignorant and accusing him of not understanding those who he is critiquing. While the didactic poem is over six thousand verses long and covers a range of theological topics, al-S bk foc e on he ec ion

hich he pe cei e a e c i i

e of A h a

. Al-S bk i mo c i ical of Ibn al-Qayyim

when he believes that he is excommunicating (takf r) those outside his group and conflating Aha

i h he Jahmi a .37 Al-S bk

in od c ion o he ef a ion gi e

an oppo

ni

to see how he perceives the traditionalist movement and the danger he felt they posed to the social order. Al-S bk begin b p ai ing he adi ional cience

ch a Q

n, S nna, fiqh, u l-al-

fiqh, and grammar but then quickly adds that one should avoid sciences of kal m and the Greek philosophy.38 Al-S bk ho e e mo e o diffe en ia e be een he

o: G eek philo oph

e

only reason while the scholastic theologians (mutakallim n) attempt to combine reason and revelation. Al-S bk f

he di ide he g o p hich engages in both reason and revelation into

three categories. The first group allowed reason to dominate over revelation; they were the M

a il . The econd g o p allo ed e ela ion o domina e o e ea on; he

e e he

ashwiyya, a derogatory term referring to literalist anthropomorphists.39 The group that was

35

Mu ammad Khal l Ha comments on Ibn al-Qa im poem, Shar al-qa da al-n niyya: al-musamm alk fi a al-sh fi a f al-inti r li l-firqa al-n jiyya (Cai o: D al-Minh j, 2003). 36 A year la e , Ta al-D n al-S bk and Ibn al-Qayyim reached a truce on divorce oaths; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:228. 37 I define the Jahmiyya and explain how the label was a code word for the Ash a s in Chapter One. 38 Ta al-D n Al-S bk , al-Ras il al-subkiyya, 83. 39 Ed(s), " ashwiyya ( ashawiyya, ushwiyya, or Ahl al- ashw), EI2.

69

able o balance be een he

o a he A h a , he heological chool ha al-S bk

ill

vigorously defend. Al-S bk ne e hele

empha i e ha he be pa h i ha of he Companion and

Successors who were able to stay on the innate unadulterated path (fi ra sal ma). This is supported by al-Sh fi (d. 204/820), the founder of al-S bk

chool of la , ho enco aged

studying fiqh over kal m since fiqh incorporated reason with revelation. But unlike many of the traditionalists, al-S bk did no hink ha kal m was totally worthless.40 Al-S bk belie ed ha if people had remained on the creed of the Companions and Successors then it would have been best to avoid kal m altogether. Yet, intellectual challenges to the religion arose and kal m became a useful tool to refute the claims of the innovators and keep those with the correct creed on the right path.41 Al-S bk

m

p he ec ion b endo ing he A h a

: The A h a

ae

the moderates in [incorporating kal m and balancing between reason and revelation] and they are he majo i

of Sh fi , M lik , anaf and he e pec ed and e di e (fu al ) anbal .

42

In

other words, the overwhelming majority of the Sunnis adhere to the Ash a i m e cep fo ome intransigent anbal . Al-S bk

an i ion o di c

he po en ial dange ha each one of he i al ec po e

o A h a i m and he M lim comm ni . A fo he M

a il , al-S bk di mi e hei

influence by explaining that they had control of a state in the beginning of the third/tenth century with the assistance of some Caliphs, but in the end they were defeated and God erased their evil. 40

T j al-D n Ab Na Abd al-Wahh b b. Al b. Abd al-K f al-S bk , abaq t al-sh fi iyya al-kubr , eds. Ma m d M ammad al- an and Abd al-Fa Mu ammad al- ilw, 10 vols. (G a: Hajr, 1992), 10:139. His son T j al-D n o ld incl de mutakallim a one of hi i le along i h e ege e, j i , and ad h. 41 Ta al-D n al-S bk , al-Ras il al-subkiyya, 84. Ta al-D n al-S bk al o a ha logic i one of he be and mo ef l cience fo an kind of e ea ch. He f he condemn ho e, ch a Ibn Ta mi a, ho e e c i ical of logic o h: An bod ho claim ha logic i nbelief o ome hing p ohibi ed i a fool igno an of he ac al meaning of unbelief and of ha i allo ed and fo bidden ; Franz Rosenthal, The Classical Heritage in Islam, trans. Emile and Jenny Marmorstein (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, [1975]), 82. 42 Ta al-D n al-S bk , al-Ras il al-subkiyya, 84.

70

The M

a il no longe po ed a heological h ea o he M lim comm ni .43 Al-S bk al o

dismisses Greek philosophy by saying that the community knows its evil and deviances and stays away from their methods, once again alluding to the fact that the philosophers were not a danger o he Maml k ocial and heological o de . Al-S bk hen foc e on he p oblem of hi ime, he ashwiyya, a code word for the traditionalists.44 The ashwiyya ascribe themselves to Ibn anbal but al-S bk belie ed ha Ibn anbal has nothing to do with their heresies. Al-S bk a g e ha he ashwiyya did not properly understand the words ascribed to Ibn anbal during his inquisition (mi na) and falsely attributed their doctrines to him.45 The ashwiyya are further not only creating theological problems but starting social disturbances by creating alliances with members of the state, a po ible efe ence o Ibn Ta mi a

ela ion hip i h pa ic la

a h i a ha g o n o he poin ha he co

le .46 The influence of the

p ed an abe an , de ian g o p (shadh dh)47

43

Al-S bk f he e plain ha he A h a e e he mode a e beca e he a e he da gh e of a o nd in ellec and he p ima il o ce of he Q n and S nna. Thi i in oppo i ion o he M a l who prioritized reason over revelation. 44 Khaled El-Roua heb an la e hi pa age a he follo ing, A fo he ashwiyya, they are a despicable and ignorant lot who claim to belong to the school of A mad [ibn anbal] The ha e co p ed he c eed of a fe i ola ed Sh fi , e peciall ome of he ad h schola among hem ho a e lacking in ea on The e e held in utmost contempt, and then towards the end of the seventh century [AH Thirteenth century AD] a man appeared who was diligent, intelligent and well-read and did not find a Shaykh to guide him, and he is of their creed and is brazen and dedica ed o eaching hi idea He aid ha non-eternal attributes can subsist in God, and that God is ever acting and that an infinite chain of events is not impossible either in the past or the future. He split the ranks and cast doubts on the creed of the Muslims and incited dissension amongst them. He did not confine himself to creedal matters of theology, but transgressed the bounds and said that travelling to the visit the tomb of the Prophet is a in The chola ag eed o imp i on him fo a long ime, and he S l an imp i oned him, and he died in p i on. Then some of his followers started to promulgate his ideas and teach them to people in secret while keeping quite in p blic, and g ea ha m came f om hi . I agree with El-Rouayheb that al-S bk po a al of he an i-A h a s gives the impression that they were a political minorit a he han he main c en ; Khaled El-Ro a heb, F om Ibn ajar al-Ha am (d. 1566) o Kha al-D n al-Al (d. 1899): Changing Views of Ibn Taymiyya among nonanbal S nni Schola , in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, 296. 45 What is interesting here is that al-S bk a g e ha he ep e en Ibn anbal better than the anbal Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim. 46 Bori, 32. 47 El-Rouayheb translates shadh dh of Sh fi a i ola ed Sh fi hich fi i hin hi la ge a g men ha A h a i m a he dominan heological chool a he ime compa ed o adi ionali m. I p efe o an la e he ph a e a abe an Sh fi beca e he e e e man p ominen adi ionali i hin he Sh fi chool b , fo alS bk , he did no ep e en e Sh fi ism.

71

of he Sh fi

in pa ic lar some of the ad h chola

ho ha e a e age in elligence

(naqa at aq luhum) and [have allowed] those who misguided them to overcome their [intellects] to the point that they think what they say is ad h.

48

Al-S bk i di c

ing he Sh fi

traditionalists, many of whom where ad h chola and

ppo e of Ibn Ta mi a. Fo al-

S bk , he infl ence of he a h i a on fello Sh fi

a an ana hema ince he Sh fi

chool a he home of A h a i m. Al-S bk belie ed ha con empo a he ame po

Sh fi

hould take

e of he g ea Sh fi A h a Ibn A ki (d. 571/1176) ho ef ed o engage

with the ashwiyya and prevented them from attending his circles. Al-S bk hen hone in on he mode n leade of he a h i a: Then came in he end of the 7th [/13th] century a man who was intelligent and well-read (i l ) but who did not find a teacher (shaykh) to guide him and he follows their ( ashwiyya) madhhab.

49

Here al-S bk i

referring to Ibn Taymiyya. For al-S bk , Ibn Ta mi a migh ha e been smart and exposed to many ideas, but he did not have a teacher to explain to him his errors and keep him on the correct path. Al-S bk goe on o di c

he a io

a pec of Ibn Ta mi

a

no hodo

ho gh

such as his views on divorce oaths and that visiting the grave of the Prophet Mu ammad a in (ma iyya).50 For al-S bk , Ibn Ta mi ag eed pon b

he chola

a imp i onmen

a a good hing

a

hich a

beca e he ep e en ed a dange o he comm ni . Ho e e , e en

after his death, his heresies continued with his students (a

bihi). Al-S bk i efe ing o Ibn

al-Qayyim who he accuses of spreading harm to the people by teaching his heretical creed. Al-

48

Ta al-D n al-S bk , al-Ras il al-subkiyya, 85. Al-S bk i efe ing o he fac ha man ad h portray an anthropomorphic understanding of God. 49 Ta al-D n al-S bk , al-Ras il al-subkiyya, 85. 50 This was a common polemic against Ibn Taymiyya in that he believed that visiting the grave of the Prophet Mu ammad was a sin (ma iyya). I speak more in detail about Ibn Ta mi a ie on g a e i i a ion in Chap e One.

72

S bk pend he e of he ea i e ef ing Ibn al-Qa im

heological poem al-K fi a al-

sh fi a f inti r al-firqa al-n ji a. What is evident from the refutation is that al-S bk fel ha Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn alQayyim represented a dangerous sect which needed to be systematically refuted. They did not simply pose a theological threat but a social one as their appeal extended to the masses, state, and even members of al-S bk S bk

cii

S bk

o n Sh fi madhhab. Yet, it is important to emphasize that al-

e a no onl di ec ed o a d Ibn Ta mi a b

o e he ea i e

en

hi

den Ibn al-Qayyim. Al-

ea af e Ibn Ta mi a had died and he adi ionali

continued primarily with Ibn al-Qa im, no an of he Sh fi doe men ion ome abe an Sh fi

adi ionali

h ea

. While al-S bk

he i p ima il targeting what he sees as the root of the

problem, Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim. Yet, despite al-S bk

animo i

o a d Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn al-Qayyim, he was

killf ll able o main ain po i i e ela ion al-D n, eco n a onl

ha hi fa he al a

i h he Sh fi

a ked him a he end of he da

hen T j al-D n mentioned al-Mi

he is the Shaykh.

53

I

a Ta

adi ionali

ho he

on, T j

died i h.52 It

ha he nodded hi head in app o al and aid

al-D n al-S bk

cceeded him a hi eaching po a he D

.51 Al-S bk

ho led the funeral prayer of al-Mi

e,

and

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya.54

51

Ano he e ample of he cama ade ie be een Sh fi adi ionali and Sh fi A h a i he Sh fi Ibn R fi continuation of al-Bi l biog aphical dic iona . Throughout his biographical dictionary, he says that al-Mi and al-Dhahab e e hi eache (sha kun ). For one particular example where he mentions both of them as his teachers see Mu ammad b. R fi Sall m , al-Wafa t: Dha l al wafa t al-Bir l , ed. Abd al-Jabb Zakk , 2 vols. (Damascus: al-Jumhuriyya al- A abi a al-S i a, 1985), 1:165. The fac ha Ibn R fi , who was a student of Ta al-D n al-S bk , wrote a sequel to al-Bi l biog aphical dic iona demonstrates that there was congeniality between the two theological camp i hin he Sh fi chool. 52 Simila o he e ion ha did o do in chool oda . T j al-D n a 15 hen al-Mi died demon a ing that students started their studies at a young age. 53 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:399. 54 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:191. Unfortunately, al-Mi did no lea e behind a biographical dictionary of his contemporaries and much of al-Bi l hi o i still in manuscript form so we do not have direct statements of their views of al-S bk .

73

Ta

al-D n al-S bk al o had a po i i e ela ion hip ba ed on m

Dhahab . T j al-D n e plain ha

hen he chai of he D

after al-Mi

a ne

dea h, al-Dhahab

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya opened

ip la ion e i ed ha he di ec o be A h a and

that al-Dhahab clea l did not fit the requirement. Al-Mi

S bk B

o e and

o e i h hi o n hand

a con l ed abo

i h al-

in line o ecei e he appoin men .55 However, many

chola p o e ed a g ing ha he endo e

n il he

al e pec

he di ec o hip he

a onl appoin ed a he chai

i ing ha he a A h a . When Ta gge ed ha al-Dhahab

al-D n al-

a mo

alified.

membe of he Sh fi , anaf and M lik madhhab , all p e mabl A h a , di ag eed and gge ed ha Ta

al-D n al-S bk him elf ake he po i ion. Ta

al-D n al-S bk el c an l

accepted the nomination, most likely to quell any dissention.56 Al-Dhahab D n al-S bk i

een in ha he did no p o e

e pec fo Ta

he appoin men and a e en p e en a Ta

alal-

D n ina g al add e .57 Al-Dhahab mukta

admi a ion fo Ta

al-D n al-S bk i f

where he describes him as a judge, jurist, ad h chola , leade (im m), and exceedingly

kno ledgeable ( all ma). Al-Dhahab goe on o men ion Ta a ib e

ch a ha he a

al-D n al-S bk

days before al-Dhahab D n al-S bk

o e man

al-D n al-S bk

hf l, eliable, good, h mble and ell-mannered

served his office in Syria well.59 Al-Dhahab no e ha he Ta

he e iden in his al-Mu jam al-

e cellen compo i ion .

po i i e 58

and that he

died i h each o he and ha 60

It was further reported that several

dea h, he compo ed e e al line of poe

kno ledge in la , ad h, a g men a ion and g amma

hich compa ed Ta

al-

i h he g ea in hei

55

T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:200. Wha i e iden he e i ha hile he Maml k ocial o de ecogni ed diffe ence in la , i fo nd ni A h a heolog . Al-Dhahab ep e en ed a h ea o hi heological and poli ical olida i . 57 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:201. 58 Al-Dhahab , al-Mu jam, 166. 59 Al-Dhahab , al-Mu jam, 166. 60 Al-Dhahab , al-Mu jam, 166. 56

74

in a ha ed

respective fields.61 Al-Dhahab end he poem e claiming ha Ta

al-D n al-S bk

ill a ain

salvation by being given paradise. Despite al-Dhahab

and Ta

al-D n al-S bk

o e all co dial ela ion hip, he e a a

times tension. Ibn ajar al-A al n eco d ha al-Dhahab cen

ed al-S bk fo making a

negative remark about Ibn Taymiyya. Al-Dhahab e ponded o al-S bk p ai ing Ibn Ta mi a kno ledge, in elligence, ince i

ene .62 Al-S bk al o had e e a ion

and ni

about al-Dhahab , i h him no o all being e ci ed abo

hi

on

die

i h he g ea

scholar.63 Nevertheless, what is fascinating about the overwhelming majority of the reports of alDhahab on Ta

al-D n al-S bk i ha he a e all po i i e, ome hing ha

with his entries on Ibn Taymiyya.64 Al-Dhahab co ld ha e e Ta

al-D n al-S bk han he a

Ta

al-D n al-S bk

al-Dhahab

and in con a

ell been poli icall clo e o

i h Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn al-Qayyim. As with al-Zamlak n ,

ef a ion of Ibn Ta mi

a and Ibn al-Qayyim did not seriously impede

ela ion hip i h he g ea j i .

Unfortunately, no statements

i e of Ta

al-D n al-S bk

his opinions of the great ad h chola can be ded ced f om o he T j al-D n, ela

ha hi fa he belie ed that he a

A h afi a and one ab en f om Dama c .

65

al-D n al-S bk

of Ibn Ka h b

a emen . Ta cceed him a D

al-D n

ch a Ibn Ka h , a hi

on,

al- ad h al-

The a emen all de o he fac ha Ta

D n al-S bk did no ee o he chola in Dama c , None hele , Ta

i able o

ie

al-

cce o .

a able o ea n he admi a ion of Ibn Ka h .

Throughout al-Bid a, Ibn Ka h p e en a pic

e of Ta

al-D n al-S bk a a pop la , fai

61

T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 9:106. Ibn ajar al-A al n , 1:95. 63 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:399. 64 See the Introduction and Chapter One for more on al-Dhahab 65 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:209. 62

75

ie

of Ibn Ta mi a.

and mo al j dge. When Ta 739/1338-39, Ibn Ka h of Dama c

al-D n al-S bk

a appoin ed a he chief j

eco d ha he ma e

beca e of hi

ice of S ia in

e e ela ed and went to receive him at the gates

kno ledge, [ o nd] eligion, and

ag eed i h he fello Sh fi on man of hi legal opinion

(am na).

66

Ibn Ka h

ch a hi o de fo he p a e -

callers (mu adhdhins) to recite some prophetic supplications (adhk r) after the call to prayer (adh n)67 and killing of dogs if it was for the benefit of the community (ma la a).68 Ibn Ka h

a addi ionall imp e ed i h al-S bk

co age o and p again

he

oppressive structures of the state. In 743/1342, al-S bk

a cha ged i h mi app op ia ing

funds for the orphans and a fatw

e him. Ibn Ka h

a ci c la ing o cen

e e ho fe

scholars actually signed the fatw and how he was asked to sign but refused.69 When Ta D n al-S bk

a

al-

en o Eg p o and ial, Ibn Ka h no e ho man of he chola and

notables went out to bid him farewell, giving the impression that many within Damascus society believed he was innocent.70 In a similar incident a year later, Ibn Ka h

eco d ha he

l an co ncil (d w n al-

sul n) asked al-S bk fo a loan f om he acco n of ho e ho e e a a f om he ci (ghi b) in order to pay back its debtors. Al-S bk epea edl

66

ef ed o he poin ha he

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:183. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:192. 68 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:192. There seems to have been an overpopulation of dogs that were causing trouble to he ci inhabi an ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:223. For more on ma la a see Felicitas Opwis, Ma la a and the Purpose of the Law: Islamic Discourse on Legal Change from the 4th/10th to 8th/14th Century (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010). 69 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:202. The fac ha Ibn Ka h a a ked o ign he fatw demonstrates that he was considered to be a noted jurist at the age of 43. 70 In he ame ea , Ibn Ka h eco d ha e en ho gh al-S bk a a igned the Umayyad sermonship, the masses wanted to have their old kha b continue to give the sermons. Through a series of protests, the masses were able to pressure al-S bk o elin i h he po o hei old kha b. The protests were part of the masses fondness of their old kha b but also their dislike of al-S bk . O e all, Ibn Ka h main ain ne ali in na a ing he inciden and doe no ake ide i h he p o e e ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:203. 67

76

council forcibly took 50,000 dirhams from another fund devoted to the orphans.71 The incident ca ed

ch a commo ion ha Ibn Ka h ch onicle ha no hing imila o i e e occ Ibn Ka h e en eemed o ha e a pe onal ela ion hip i h Ta

Ibn Ka h

eco ded info ma ion f om him in hi biog aphical dic iona

Ibn Ka h no e ha he Chief J

ice Ta

nic exegesis.74 The

Ta

al-D n al-S bk and ha he Al-S bk

o e demon

igh eo ne

al-D n al-S bk ince of Sh fi

chola . 73

al-D n al-S bk men ioned o me (dhakara l ) ha

he chola Abd al-Ka m b. Al b. Uma al-An Q

ed.72

(d. 703/1303) was highly skilled in

a e ha Ibn Ka h had pe onal comm nica ion i h

ed him a a eliable o ce. led Ibn Ka h

o

i e a po i i e obi a

that stands in contrast with that of al-Zamlak n . Ibn Ka h

about him, something

a imp e ed i h ho al-S bk

did not allow his seventeen years as a judge to prevent him from being prolific and composing man ha he

beneficial compo i ion . Ibn Ka h end he en

a ing ha i

ed o and p [ o p a ] a nigh . Ma God ha e me c

statement demonstrates that he felt al-S bk

pon him.

a a ince e and igh eo

was a judge and ma ha e diffe ed poli icall and heologicall Ho co ld Ibn Ka h be o po i i e o a d

a men ioned o me 75

Ibn Ka h

final

pe on, e en ho gh he

i h Ibn Ka h .76

omeone ho ehemen l a acked Ibn

Taymiyya and his good friend Ibn al-Qayyim? First, al-S bk

a a Sh fi like him elf and he

felt loyalty o he Sh fi j dge, e en ho gh he did no ha e he g ea e admi a ion fo j dge in

71

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:207. Ibn Ka h i e aggerating here for affect. 73 I will speak about Ibn Ka h biographical dictionary of Sh fi j i in the next Chapter. 74 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:858. Ta al-D n al-S bk co ld j dge Abd al-Kar m e pe i e on Q nic exegesis because he was him elf a Q nic e ege e. I ill peak mo e abo Ta al-D n al-S bk e ege ical o k in Chapter Five. 75 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:247. Al-S bk on, T j al-D n, ma ha e been he one ho men ioned o Ibn Ka h hi fa he nigh p a e , ince he discusses them in his biographical dictionary; T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:205. 76 I ho ld be added ha Ibn Ka h obi a of Ta al-D n al-S bk i no a long o la ding a he one ha he writes of Ibn Taymiyya and al-Mi b i i emarkably positive nonetheless. 72

77

gene al. Ibn Ka h ag ee ha ed Sh fi

i h man of al-S bk

legal opinion

chool of he la . Secondl , Ibn Ka h

hich were derived from their

a no di ec ly attacked by al-S bk

since al-S bk foc e hi c i ici m o a d Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn al-Qa primary teacher al-Mi

. Al-S bk had he

mo

e pec fo al-Mi

im, no Ibn Ka h

and e en enco aged hi

own son to study with him. But most impor an l , Ibn Ka h fel ha al-S bk

a a ince e and

righteous person whose morality was evident in his courage to stand up against the oppressive structures of the state. Unlike with al-Zamlak n , he e i no en e ha Ibn Ka h fel ha alS bk

T

as compromising his principles for professional advancement.

a -D

a -S b

If Ta

(727-771-72/1327-1370)

The Privileged Son

al-D n al-S bk and Ibn Ta mi a ep e en ed oppo i e pec

ulama , han T j al-D n al-S bk and Ibn Ka h madhhab. While Ibn Ka h

m of he Maml k

ep e en ed compe ing ide of he Sh fi

a he on of a p eache , came f om he o

adop ed he adi ionali m of hi eache , T j al-D n al-S bk

ki

of Dama c

and

a he on of he chief Sh fi

judge of Damascus,77 came from the established al-S bk famil , and a in e ed in Sh fi A h a i m. The madhhab b

o ep e en ed no onl con a ing heological po i ion

i hin he Sh fi

al o ocial one . De pi e hei diffe ence , Ibn Ka h fel ha T j al-D n al-S bk ,

imila o hi fa he , a a ince e and igh eo

chola

hich l ima el led Ibn Ka h

o

publically defend him of erroneous charges.

77

Chamberlain discusses in depth how fathers were able to pass on positions to their sons, keeping power and p e ige i hin he famil : Ye , he ac i i ion of man abs a no me i oc a ic in an ef l en e of he e m. In understanding household strategies of survival, the question is how the a n inculcated into their young the di po i ion o ac i e he ocial and c l al capi al ha allo ed hem o pa icipa e in he ggle fo man abs ; Michael Chamberlain, Knowledge and Social Practice in Medieval Damascus, 1190-1350 (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 68.

78

T j al-D n al-S bk i be kno n fo hi didac ic u l al-fiqh work Jam al-jaw mi , his Mu d al-ni am wa mub d al-niqam which details trades, professions and offices of the author's own time, 78 and mo impo an l hi biog aphical dic iona sh fi i a al-kubr . Wi h T j al-D n, he campaign again

of Sh fi he Sh fi

chola

abaq t al-

adi ionalists entered a

ne pha e. Unlike he o he , T j al-D n ne e pe onall enco n e ed Ibn Ta mi a, being onl a ea old hen Ibn Ta mi a pa ed a a . T j al-D n ne e hele

became ell

acquainted with Ibn Taymiyya through his father and teachers, which included al-Mi Dhahab . B ilding on hi fa he anbal

mpa hi e

79

o k, T j al-D n began o c i ici e he Sh fi

and al-

adi ionali

,

as he calls them, within his biographical dictionary.

Geo ge Makdi i a g e ha T j al-D n biographical dictionary was an attempt to define Sh fi i m a an A h a Dn h o ble

heolog

ha balanced be

fo nd him elf in oppo i ion o he Sh fi ince he

o gh o e hink Sh fi i m

e plain , he e Sh fi

adi ionali

een a ionali m and adi ionali m.80 T j aladi ionali

ho ga e him he mo

ela ion hip i h A h a i m. A Makdi i

e e in an igen beca e he

e e oo

A h a i e o be on o e he ca e and e e ac i el b inging o he Sh fi T j al-D n hoped o i ola e he

ong adi ionali elemen

c ea ing a p chological ba ie be een hem and he Sh fi i e capable of changing camp . pec

m of Ibn Ka h

81

ongl an i-

o adi ionalism.

i hin he Shafi e chool, b ho a e e

ncommi ed o

ill

T j al-D n biog aphical dictionary could be seen in the opposite

hi o ical o k - hile Ibn Ka h men ion an a ocia ion i h Ibn

Ta mi a a po i i e, T j al-D n a e ha an link a en i el nega i e. T j al-D n

J. Schach , al- S bk , EI2. Geo ge Makdi i, A h a and he A h a i e in I lamic Religio 80 Makdisi, 60. 81 Makdisi, 59.

abaq t

78 79

79

Hi o

I, Studia Islamica 17, no. 2 (1962): 59.

al-sh fi i a al-kubr

a a e pon e o Ibn Ka h and he Sh fi

adi ionali

ho

ep e en ed an al e na i e i ion of Sh fi i m.82 T j al-D n in ellec al p ojec ma be be een in hi biog aph of hi fa he , Ta D n al-S bk . T j al-D n de o e o e

al-

o h ndred pages to his father and argues that he was the

Shaykh al-Isl m,83 a title used almost always by traditionalists to refer to Ibn Taymiyya. With hi fa he Sh fi

biog aph , T j al-D n a o follow. Aspects of al-S bk

ing o c ea e an o hodo Shaykh al-Isl m for other biog aph e en follo clo el

i en abo

Ibn Taymiyya. Fo in ance, T j al-D n a

ha hi fa he

science Ta

a ho gh ha he a a pecialist in that science.84

al-D n al-S bk poke abo , i

a

o ho e

o kno ledgeable ha

ha e e

A similar statement is said about Ibn Taymiyya by al-Zamlak n .85 In discussing al-S bk f ne al, T j al-D n empha i e he n mbe of people p e en a ing, Whoe e [Ta

al-D n al-S bk

(jan a) han i .

86

a p e en a

] f ne al e ified ha hey had not seen a bigger funeral procession

Fo T j al-D n, he onl f ne al ha hi o icall e

was that of Ibn anbal.87 Ibn Ka h make he ame analog be

aled ha of hi fa he

een Ibn

anbal and Ibn

Ta mi a f ne al p ocession in al-Bid a.88 What differentiated these two Shaykhs al-Isl m e e hei heological chool , A h a i m and adi ionali m.

82

The Sh fi adi ionali thus played a vital role in the de elopmen of A h a o thodoxy. T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:176. T j al-D n de o ion o hi fa he i also recorded by Ibn ajar alA al n ho e plain ha T j al-D n collec ed man of hi fa he o k , e peciall hi fatw collection; Ibn ajar al- A al n , 3:39. For more on Ta al-D n S bk collec ion of fatawas see Fat w al-Subk , ed. m alD n Q d , 2 ols. (Bei : D al-J l, 1992). 84 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:196. 85 Al-Dhahab men ion ha he a he e o d in al-Zamlak n hand i ing implying that they were not forged; Caterina Bo i, A Ne So ce fo he Biog aph of Ibn Ta mi a, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 67, no. 3 (2004): 332. 86 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:316. Al-S bk died 28 ea af e Ibn Ta miyya so many of those present at Ibn Ta mi a f ne al co ld ha e been a al-S bk . 87 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:316. 88 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:316. Ibn Ka h compa e Ibn Ta mi a f ne al o Ibn anbal b no e ha there were less people a Ibn Ta mi a f nde al beca e Damascus was a smaller city han Baghdad; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:136. 83

80

T j al-D n f

he p e en hi fa he a a mo al, igh eo

stands against corrupt governors. He explains that Ta

pe on ho ook co ageo

al-D n al-S bk had a gene al di in e e

of the world, and at first refused the post of chief judge of Damascus but on the insistence of the sultan, eventually accepted.89 Ta

al-D n al-S bk

o e mode clo he , a e pa ingl and was

exceedingly generous.90 He would be frequently seen riding a mule in the streets and upon eeing a andom pe on alking, he o ld a k hem if he needed a ide. T j al-D n fo nd hi e e iding oge her throughout the city.91 Ta

a oni hing in ha a chief (naq b) and a bo al-D n al-S bk had n me o

enco n e

of which he outlasted. In one instance, Ta go e no , A gh n Sh h, abo (am r) I ill die and o

ih

cce i e go e no of Dama c , he majo i

al-D n al-S bk emind one e peciall co

p

he he eaf e b g abbing and hen admoni hing him: O, leade

ill die.

92

T j al-D n implie ha beca e of A gh n Sh h enmi

o a d hi fa he ha God p ni hed A gh n h o gh being a a ina ed.93 T j al-D n doe no lo e an opportunity to highlight how his father successfully refuted Ibn Ta mi a. T j al-D n ci e a biog aphical epo where he exclaims that al-S bk made he pa h ea ie o i i he P ophe mention ha hi fa he

i h hi ef a ion of Ibn Ta mi a.94 T j al-D n i

i i ed he g a e of M

afa (Mu ammad)

e o

hen he en on Hajj in

716/131795 and on his return wrote his refutations of Ibn Taymiyya.96 In the section devoted to al-S bk

o k , T j al-D n once again empha i e ha hi fa he compo ed he g ea

ef a ion (al-radd al-kab r) of Ibn Ta mi a

ie

89

on di o ce oa h and hen men ion ha

T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:168. Ibn ajar al- A al n also emphasizes al-S bk a ce ici m b no ing ha he had fe clo he and the ones that he did have were plain and cheap, not worth more than thirty dinars; Ibn ajar al- A al n , 3:39. 91 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:208. 92 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:213. 93 The assassination of A gh n Sh is discussed in detail by Ibn Ka h ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:226. 94 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:149. 95 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:167. 96 I i al o a hi ime ha Ta al-D n al-S bk o e man of hi mo famo compo i ion ch a hi Tafs r and his commentaries on the Minh j of al-Na a . 90

81

he

o e ano he ef a ion of Ibn Ta mi a

n me o

ef a ion , T j al-D n epo

praised al-S bk

ie

of g a e i i a ion.97 Yet, despite the

f om n me o

eliable o ce

ha Ibn Ta mi a

o k and ha Ibn Ta mi a did no p ai e an bod of hi ime (ahl al- a r)

like he did for [al-S bk ].

98

T j al-D n claim ha e en Ta

al-D n al-S bk

i al ,

ch a

Ibn Taymiyya, had the utmost respect for him. T j al-D n had a mo e po i i e ela ion hip o al-Dhahab teachers. Much of T j al-D n in ellec al p ojec

ho a one of hi p ima

a a e pon e o hi Sh fi

adi ionali

teacher al-Dhahab , ho he deba e in hi biog aphical dictionary. As Makdisi explains, alDhahab mo

a a fo midable h dle beca e he a a highl

edo b able ob acle o he p og e

Dhahab became a

mbol beca e he a

po e f l adi ionali mo emen

e pec ed Shafi i e, and he efo e a

of A h a i m i hin he Shafi i e chool.

99

Al-

onl one Shafi i e among man o he in he

i hin he Shafi i e chool of la .

Al-Dhahab had an in en e liking fo hi

100

den T j al-D n, preferring him over others

and treating him like a son. T j al-D n quotes a statement from al-Dhahab ega ding hi ha e elin i hed o m

on Abd al-Wahh b (T j al-D n) my directorship of al-

hi i

ill, I a and I

know that he is deserving of it, but [his] young age prevented me from completing the transfer to him.

101

There were more senior scholars who would not have appreciated T j al-D n, who was

a mere twenty-one at the time,102 receiving the appointment over them. The quote is valuable because it demonstrates that al-Dhahab a T j al-D n as one his successors despite him being he on of he Sh fi A h a Ta

al-D n al-S bk and being a

97

iden A h a him elf.

T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:308. T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:194. 99 Makdisi, 71. 100 Makdisi, 72. 101 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:209. 102 Ibn ajar al- A al n al o ie ed T j al-D n al-S bk a a p odig exclaiming that he wrote in fiqh, u l al-fiqh and the Arabic sciences while he was just a youth; Ibn ajar al- A al n , 2:259. 98

82

In his Mu jam al-sha kh,103 T j al-D n de ail ha he

died i h al-Dhahab mo e han

anybody else.104 He studies with al-Dhahab incl ded man of his historical works such alDhahab

al-Mu jam al-mukta

parts of al-Dhahab

(which in no doubt influenced the writing of his own), large

Si ar a l m al-nubal , and even received a license to transmit his T r kh

al-Isl m. He also read large parts of ad h collec ion Ibn M jah and a

ch a he Musnad of Sh fi , Sunan of

al-Bukh r .105

In the abaq t al-sh fi i a al-kubr , T j al-D n begin hi en

on al-Dhahab b

praising him as one of his teachers (sha khun ), the ad h chola of the age, one who had no pee , and one ho a he gold of he age, fig a i el and li e all .

106

Al-Dhahab had a

phenomenal ability in rij l c i ici m, A if he umma was gathered in one plain, he looked at 107

them and then they began to report on who was p e en . Dhahab

T j al-D n e plain ha i

a al-

ho ained him and b o gh him p on he pa h of chola hip. T j al-D n a aken

aback with al-Dhahab

in en e eaching and p olific

i ing , he da and nigh i ed, b

hi

tongue and pen did not tire. The name [shams] was given to him, for he was similar to the sun e cep ha he did no fade if i ained and did no ecede if i became nigh . could not help from pointing out al-Dhahab anbal .

109

fla

in ha he leaned

T j al-D n belie ed ha al-Dhahab did no

103

ea he A h a

108

ongl

Ye , T j al-D n oward the

fai l in hi

T j al-D n al-S bk , Mu jam al-shu kh, eds. Mu ammad b. Ya Ma di , Ba h h A d Ma f, Ra d f Anbak , and M af I m l A am (Bei : D al-Gharb al-I l m , 2004). 104 T j al-D n al-S bk , Mu jam, 355. Or as al-S bk a e , he died ha canno be co n ed (yu ), i h alDhahab . 105 T j al-D n al-S bk , Mu jam, 355. All of these studies took place before the age of 21, since al-Dhahab pa ed away in 748/1348. For more on the age that scholars would start their studies in Medieval Islam see Richard Bulliet, The Age S c e of Medie al I lamic Ed ca ion, Studia Islamica 57, no. 1 (1983):105-117. 106 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 9:101. 107 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 9:101. 108 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 9:103. 109 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 9:103. Y

83

biographies leading him to state that al-Dhahab fini hed T r kh al-Isl m even though there was bias (ta a ub) in i .

110

But it is in the biography of al-Mi hea he mo abo

T j al-D n

ie

D n begin he en

p ai ing al-Mi

A ki .

113

of he Sh fi

adi ionali

and a ing ha

ad h chola of he ime,

he e a no one112 like him after Ibn

T j al-D n then quotes several statements of al-Dhahab f om Tadhkir t al- uff

and al-Mu jam al-mukta

discussing al-Mi

kno ledge of A abic, fiqh, u l al-fiqh, the

rational sciences and his expertise in narrators. T j al-D n ake i that al-Mi

nde ood he a ional cience , in pa ic la , hi

a a e of he ho coming of he a ional cience . think that our Shaykh al-Mi

kne

114

e e g eat ad h chola b

a emen ha al-Mi

fo : Ibn Da

115

a

a ing, I do no

Fo T j al-D n, al-Mi

and al-

hei kno ledge did no e end o kal m and philosophy. ha he a no be e

and he hea d al-Dhahab a , I did no ee a be e

al- d, al-Dim

ie

he a ional cience (ma q l t), let alone understood its

T j al-D n add ha he hea d hi eache al-Dhahab a scholar then al-Mi

e i h al-Dhahab

T j al-D n e pond b

shortcomings, so may God forgive our teacher al-Dhahab . Dhahab

e

and Ibn Ta mi a. T j al-

p of el calling him he 111

one of kind in hi age b con en

, hich i o a d he end of he dic iona , ha

, Ibn Ta mi a and al-Mi

110

.

116

ad h

ad h chola than

Of ho e fo

chola , T j

T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 9:104. Nevertheless, T j al-D n wrote a poem eulogizing al-Dhahab . In the poem, T j al-D n praises al-Dhahab ad h chola hip ch a hi knowledge of narrators, outstanding memory, ability to critique traditions, general reliability, and absolute trustworthiness; T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 9:109. AlDhahab nfo unately does not have an en on T j al-D n al-S bk , mo likel beca e T j al-D n was only 21 when al-Dhahab pa ed a a . 111 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:396. 112 T j al-D n al-S bk i p obabl meaning that there was no ad h scholar after Ibn A ki like al-Mi . 113 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t,10:396. 114 Al-Dhahab also mentions in T r kh al-Isl m that al-Mizz had some knowledge of the rational sciences; AlDhahab , T r kh, 53:383. 115 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:396. 116 T j al-D n al-Subk , abaq t, 10: 396. The list nicely demonstrates al-Dhahab Sh fi adi ionali leaning ince i incl de man Sh fi adi ionali ch Ibn Da al- d and al-Mi b al o anbal s like Ibn Taymiyya.

84

al-D n onl me al-Mi

, hom he con ide ed o be among he g ea e

time along with al-Dhahab , al-Bi

l and hi fa he . The la e h ee

defer to him, study with him, and recognized his superiority [in ad h After mentioning al-Dhahab Bi

l

f iend hip i h al-Mi

fel

a de e ed, and hei m

closeness to al-Mi

ela ion hip al-Mi

. Al-Bi

ad h chola of hi ed o p ai e al-Mi die ].

117

, T j al-D n begin o di c

l p aised al-Mi

den . Al-Bi

i e iden ha he defended hi appoin men a he di ec o of D an inciden in hich al-Bi

l had j

di ec o hip of he D

l ha he ho ld con ince al-Miz

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya. Al-Bi

119

Al-Bi

l

a

o o bled b

the Shaykh adr al-D n and p e en ed g e concluded to himself hi ci to al-Bi

a he

he

gge ion ha he co ld no e pond o

f om i i ing him fo an en i e nigh . He hen

ha a lo of fitna (kath rat al-fitan).

a conce ned i h he endo e

be A h a . When al-Mi a Aha b

a appoin ed di ec o , he

The student then responds

ho ha he a daci

T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:397. I will speak more about Ibn Ka h e of al-D a 119 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:398. 120 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:398.

85

i ed the director to i ing ha he

l eplied ha he kne

ha Sha kh

o a : al-Mi

n in he ne

place in e m

o e i h hi o n hand

117 118

120

condi ion hich e

he people did no belie e him. Al-Bi

adr al-D n a impl ing, b

kin began o

] i he leade of he ad h

l e plaining ha Sha kh adr al-D n al-M lik did no den al-Mi

of ad h b

e of he

n 118 lived then he would hesitate to

scholars (im m al-mu addidh n). By God, if al-D a each in hi place.

al- ad h

o e ign f om hi

l e claim ha , M

emble and m mind became ab en and I aid o m elf, [al-Mi

l

a i ed in o Dama c

when a beloved friend, Shaykh adr al-D n S la m n al-M lik , i i ed him. In he co visit, Shaykh adr al-D n ad i ed al-Bi

al-

emendo l , hich T j al-D n

al e pec led hem o each each o he

al-Ashrafiyya. T j al-D n ela

,

Chapter.

i no befi ing of D

al-

ad h [al-A h afi a]? B God, m limb (rukn ) canno bea he e o d . end hi

o

i h hi o n decla a ion: look a he a

e of al-Mi

121

T j al-D n

in hi (al-Bi

l

)e e

( indahu)! T j al-D n na a ion of he o , gi e he imp e ion ha he, and mo likel hi father, were not opposed to al-Mi

appoin men . While T j al-D n ecogni ed al-Mi

shortcomings in the rational sciences, he affirms his strength in ad h i able fo he di ec o hip a he D

die , making him

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya.

T j al-D n hen an i ion o p o ide al able info ma ion on hi pe onal in e ac ion with al-Mi

and al-Dhahab . T j al-D n ela e ha he

ed o

day, once in the morning and then in the afternoon, but for al-Mi

d

i h al-Dhahab

he onl

twice a week.122 T j al-D n a mo e inclined o al-Dhahab ince he

ice a

died i h him

a e ceedingl nice and

loving towards me. Whoever knew my relationship with him [knew] that [al-Dhahab ] did no lo e an one like he lo ed me.

123

T j al-D n a le

boy (sh bb) and ha [hi lo e] mean a emendo gloomy ( ab s) and intimidating (muh b), den . Ta

al-D n al-S bk

125

han 15 a hi ime hich mean , I a a

amo n o me.

124

As for al-Mi

, he a

characteristics that were not appealing to a young

an ed hing o be he o he

a a o nd: M fa he

i hed ha

the situation was reversed, I mean that I would accompany and study (l ama) with al-Mi more than al-Dhahab , beca e of he emendo D n nfo

[ e pec ] ha he had fo [al-Mi

na el doe no go in o h hi fa he p efe ed al-Mi

121

).

126

o e al-Dhahab b

T j alal-

T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:398. Studying with al-Mi ice a eek ne e hele allowed him to finish the ad h collection al-Ti midh i h him; T j al-D n al-S bk , al-Mu jam, 511. 123 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:398. 124 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:398. 125 The fac ha T j al-D n highligh ha he died i h bo h al-Mi and al-Dhahab demon a e ha hi reading audience would be familiar with the great ad h scholars. 126 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:398. 122

86

Mi

a defini el

Dhahab

he mo e enio chola and he ma ha e been le

con o e ial than al-

ho a a kno n c i ic of A h a i m.

T j al-D n eco n

ha he

ed o e ie hi dail le on

when I came back from [my studies] with a sha kh he o ld a learn, what did yo chola

ead, ha did o hea ?

e e eaching and ha hi

127

Ta

i h hi fa he : U all , ell me (h ti), what did you

al-D n a c io

o kno

ha he o he

on ook a a f om hi le on . T j al-D n e plain hen, I

would narrate to him my lesson with [the Shaykh] . hene e I came f om al-Dhahab he would a

Yo came f om o

o ld a

Shaykh. When T j al-D n men ioned ha he came f om al-Mi

o came f om the Shaykh.

128

, he

T j al-D n e en ecall ho hi fa he aid he o d:

He o ld en ncia e (yaf a ) he o d al-Shaykh and ai e hi voice. I am certain that he used to do that to fix in my heart [al-Mi study with him (mul amatuhu). T j al-D n the D

] emendo

a

e ( a amatuhu) and encourage me to

129

die p og e ed o he poin ha

hen a eaching po i ion opened p a

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya, his father nominated him for the post. Being less than fifteen at

he ime, T j al-D n a

p i ed b

he mo e ince he had ne e held a eaching po i ion of he

sorts, only being a teaching assistant with his father, and his father never put his children forward fo a po i ion n il he fel ha he

e e ead . When T j al-D n a ked hi fa he

127

h he

This verb sami a could also be referring to studying ad h. For more on how the word sami a is used in the science of ad h ee Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th: shar ikhti r ul m al- ad th, ed. Al a an Al Abd alam d, 2 ol . (Ri adh: Mak aba al-Ma if li l-Na h a l-Ta , 1996), 1:228-46. 128 Bori calls al-S bk a i al o al-Mi . Al-S bk and al-Mi co ld ha e ied o e imila po b I am inclined to view them as colleagues based on these statements in the abaq t and other biographical dictionaries; Bori, Ibn Taymiyya wa-Jam atuhu, 39. 129 The verb l ama does no only connote studying but also accompanying. Bori translates l ama a con an ph ical in imac ha ca ied i h i clo e in ellec al affilia ion ; Bori, Ibn Taymiyya wa-Jam atuhu, 31. For more on relationship between teacher and student in medieval Islam see Jonathan Be ke The Transmission of Knowledge in Medieval Cairo: a Social History of Islamic Education (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992).

87

nomina ed him, he e ponded, I i When these words reached al-Mi

aid ha

o a e a j i in he p e ence of al-Mi

, he o de ed o ha e T j al-D n name

advanced teachers. When al-S bk hea d he ne

he fel

nea

.

130

i en a one of he

and e o ed, No b God,

Abd al-Wahh b (T j al-D n) i a bo (sh bb) and he does not deserve this level right now. Write hi name i h he beginne [ eache ]. Al-Dhahab e ponded o al-S bk , B God, he i higher than that level, he is a good ad h chola . T j al-D n ake p ide in hi

a emen

in e ing in o he o , The e a e o d of al-Dhahab . Al-S bk fo nd the entire discussion am ing: [M ] fa he la ghed and aid: ma be he i among he in e media e [ eache ]. The anecdote highlights the collegial relationship between al-S bk , al-Mi T j al-D n Sh fi

m

al-D n a g e ha al-Dhahab did no kno to judge al-Mi

, and al-Dhahab .132

p he ec ion a ing ha this is what he knew of al-Mi

ad th scholar. As for al-Dhahab

claim ha al-Mi

kne

131

, a g ea

he a ional cience , T j

he a ional cience him elf o he o ld be nable

in that regard, since it is only known by the specialist (ahlahu).

Af e de ailing he ela ion hip be een he Sh fi

adi ionali

, T j al-D n canno hide

his displeasure of their inclination towards Ibn Taymiyya: There was closeness (rifqa) between al-Mi , al-Dhahab , al-Bi l , and man of hei follo e ho e e clea l nega i el affec ed b Ab Abb Ibn Ta mi a. He ca ied them to the worst of matters that were not suitable. He pulled them down when it would have been better for them to distance themselves from him. He stopped them at the pits of hellfire, [so] it is hoped that God will save them (al-Mi , al-Dhahab , al-Bi l ) f om he hell fi e and hei Companion . 133

130

T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:399. Al-Mi a aid o ha e onl died j i p dence fo a ho time; AlDhahab , T r kh, 53:383. 131 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:399. 132 The collegial relationship between al-S bk and al-Mi i f he e iden in ha al-Mi visited al-S bk ho e; T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:204. 133 The anecdote gives us a window into the Maml k c l e of lea ning. T j al-D n had a clo e ela ion hip i h hi father to the point that he felt comfortable reviewing his lessons with him and informing him who he studied with. Conversely, al-S bk ga e T j al-D n he f eedom to study with the scholars of his choice but nonetheless wanted to guide his studies and push him in the right direction.

88

Ibn Ka h co ld ha e been among he Companion ha e been he i an o

e Ibn Ka h

ha T j al-D n men ion . T j al-D n ma

name ince he a a con empo a

and al o li ed in

Damascus. T j al-D n clo e he en

b li ing Ibn Ta mi

as among the great scholars who studied with al-Mi a a book in he D

a, al-Bi

l , al-Dhahab and hi fa he

and e claim ha hi Tahdh b al-kam l

hich no hing like i ha e e been compo ed. T j al-D n no e ha al-Mi

died

al- ad h al-A h afi a b , nlike Ibn Ka h , he doe no men ion ha he a b ied

near Ibn Taymiyya.134 T j al-D n open c i ici m of he Sh fi

adi ionali

ma k an impo an hif in he

A h a campaign. T adi ionali m ook a e back i h he dea h of Ibn Ta imi a and Ibn alQayyim and it became easier to attack the theological school. T j al-D n began o compo e hi dictionary after the great figures of al-Bi

l , al-Mi

, and al-Dhahab had pa ed a a and he

felt more open to discuss their achievements and faults.135 Yet, the fact that he needed to warn o he Sh fi

of hei

anbal leaning

ho

ha

hile adi ionali m had declined i had no

disappeared. Th o gho and al-Dhahab

he biog aphical dic iona , T j al-D n main ained ha al-Mi e e g ea Sh fi

, al-Bi

l

ad h chola and e en men ioned hem, along with his

father, as the greatest ad h chola (huff ) of his age. Whether it was history with alDhahab , na a o

i h al-Mi

, o con empo a

biog aphie

i h al-Bi

l , he Sh fi

traditionalists distinguished themselves by composing some of the most important works of ad h and hi o

134 135

in he Maml k e a and a ac ed ome of he be

T j al-D n pplemen he en b li ing ome an e ha al-Mi ga e o T j al-D n as a mere 21 when the last of the three, al-Dhahab , died.

89

den ,

ch a T j al-D n.

e ion ega ding na a o .

The Sh fi

adi ionali

e e colleag e of he Sh fi A h a

ho had g ea e pec and

admiration between them to the point that they publically praised and studied with one another. Wha epa a ed he Sh fi

adi ionali

kal m. T j al-D n a g e ha hi fa he

f om he Sh fi A h a

e e hei po i ion on

a a peciali in kal m and that he studied the science

with him.136 On he o he hand, T j al-D n goe o

of hi

a

o a g e ha al-Mi

did no

have knowledge of rational sciences and is critical of his teacher al-Dhahab fo no o all nde anding i . T j al-D n a

e

m ch a a e ha he Sh fi

adi ionali

an agoni m

towards kal m attracted them to Ibn Taymiyya and anbal chola . T j al-D n fel ha Ibn Taymiyya took the group to areas which were theological dangerous and could have e comm nica ed hem f om he comm ni . T j al-D n c i ici m of he Sh fi was thus to encourage his readers to excel in ad h b be drawn into anbal T j al-D n nfo

no o neglec he a ional cience and

adi ionali m. na el doe no men ion Ibn Ka h in hi biog aphical dictionary, most

likel beca e he a oo m ch of a con empo a . Ye , he e i e idence ha al-D n incl ded info ma ion f om Ibn Ka h in hi den

adi ionali

gge

ha T j

o k. T j al-D n no e ha [al-Mi

]

i ne ed ha he o ld ome ime do e off while a student was reading to him.137

However, if the student made a mistake, al-Mi him p and co ec he

o ld

ddenl a aken a if omebod

oke

den . T j al-D n co ld ha e ecei ed hi info ma ion f om Ibn Ka h

because he mentions the same trait of al-Mi

in hi Ikhti r ul m al- ad th.138

136

T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:401. T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:397. 138 Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th, 1:341. Ibn Ka h add ha he den was amazed on how the sleepy al-Mi was more alert than himself and how al-Mi co ec ed him even though he did not have the text in his hand. I will speak about Ikhti r ul m al- ad th in Chapter Three. 137

90

Ibn Ka h doe men ion T j al-D n e e al ime in al-Bid a praising him as exceedingly eloquent139 and noting that he was popular with the masses.140 Similar to his father, Ibn Ka h defended T j al-D n again a ack of and M lik j dge b o gh

ongdoing. In he ea 767/1365, he anbal

p e e al acc a ion again T j al-D n, ho had b

become he chief Sh fi j dge, hich Ibn Ka h

a

he ime

e e oo ep ehen ible (munkar) o

mention. A council (majlis) of various judges and prominent scholars was set up to investigate he cha ge . Ibn Ka h

a one of ho e ho e e e

e ed o a end he ga he ing,

representing the important stature that he gained towards the end of his life. Ibn Ka h e plain that two opposing reports were composed - one c i ical of T j al-D n and ano he ha and p ai ed him. Ibn Ka h backed he p o-T j al-D n epo handwriting that I had only seen good in [T j al-Din].

141

o diffe en

chool, he belie ed ha T j al-D n a a mo al and igh eo

i ho

an cen Ibn Ka h

and o he ac of

ppo

a in

a ing in [ ha doc men ] a m

Wha i e iden in Ibn Ka h

ppo i ha e en ho gh he and T j al-D n ep e en ed

charges. Ibn Ka h

ppo ed

oice

i hin he Sh fi

chola and a innocen of he

men al in concl ding he e ion

e of T j al-D n.142 admiration and affini

o a d T j al-D n con in e in hi obi a

of

him143 where he states that T j al-D n a among he elite scholars of Syria when he passed a a . Ibn Ka h belie ed ha T j al-D n faced ial and ib la ion ha no o he j dge faced

139

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:295. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:287. 141 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:306. 142 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:306. Ibn Ka h al o ho e pec o a d he o he on of Ta al-D n al-S bk , Kam l al-D n. In Kam l al-D n obi a , Ibn Ka h e plain ha he ma e mo ned o e him because of his forbearance, cha ac e , and elfle ne . Ibn Ka h e en p ai e hi j dge hip: He did no i h e il ( ata add sharrahu) pon o he , he ed o le ell, fai l ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:245. 143 This obituary is preserved by Ibn ajar al- A al n in his entry on T j al-D n al-S bk in al-Durar al-k mina and is most likely an excerpt from al-Bid a wa l-nih a. The surviving editions that we have of al-Bid a wa lnih a end in 767 AH but T j al-D n died in 771 AH. This means that there was an edition of al-Bid a wa lnih a Ibn ajar al- A al n had access to that is now lost; Ibn ajar al- A al n , 2:260. 140

91

befo e. B

T j al-D n a able o indica e him elf h o gh hi co age and he o ical kill

which left his opponent he e

peechle . T j al-D n e empla

cha ac e

a demon

a ed hen

ned o hi po a chief j dge he fo ga e and pa doned ho e ho ood again him.

The en

ho

ha Ibn Ka h con i en l

144

ided i h T j al-D n again hi opponen because

he belie ed ha T j al-D n a a mo al and igh eo

chola .

Conclusion: Con empo a and hi p ima

eache

defining Ibn Ka h Sh fi A h a

o

al-Mi

and al-Dhahab . While he e connec ion a e e en ial for

in ellec al de elopmen , e plo ing Ibn Ka h

i nece a

heological pec ci

biog aphie of Ibn Ka h empha i e hi ela ion hip i h Ibn Ta mi a

o nde and he e Ibn Ka h fi

m of hi ime. The Sh fi A h a

a e J dge , and e e con e a i e

ela ion hip i h he

i hin he poli ical and

e e pa of the state establishment, often

in he en e ha he defended o hodo

and he

social institutions that preserved it. While they were proponents of ad h, he accep ed kal m and allowed for the figurati e in e p e a ion of c ip he Sh fi A h a

beca e he

e e Sh fi

ide a ack . B

Ibn Ka h

144

a

e ob e e i h al-

ong mo al fo nda ion hich made him highl c i ical of Sh fi

ho he fel comp omi ed hei po i ion fo poli ical po e . Th he Sh fi A h a

ih

like him elf and hi e pec fo hem made him

defend them, as we see with the al-S bk , f om o Zamlak n , Ibn Ka h had a

e. Ibn Ka h main ained ela ion

a no defined b Ibn Ta mi a b

allegiance o hi madhhab and hi

adi ionali

Ibn ajar al- A al n , 2:260.

92

Ibn Ka h

ela ion hip i h

a her was intimately connected with al e . While chola

ance

o a d Ibn Ta mi a e e impo an fo Ibn Ka h , i

a no he onl c i e ia in hich he

judged others and formed relationships. The comple i ie of Ibn Ka h

Sh fi

adi ionali iden i

works.

93

a e be e een in hi majo

Chapter III Making S

traditionalism S

Befo e del ing in o Ibn Ka h i hin he a ho b ief

Ma

W

Tafs r, it is important to contextualize his exegesis

la ge in ellec al p ojec o b oade in ellec al goal and objec i e .1 A

e of Ibn Ka h

a a Sh fi

orthodoxy - Ib Ka

majo

o k 2 will also allow us to understand his peculiar situation

adi ionali and ecogni e hi legac a mo e han a me e

Ta mi a. Ibn Ka h

in ellec al p ojec

poke pe on fo Ibn

a o p omo e a Sh fi madhhab which was

traditionalist, pro-ijtih d and less in conflict with the anbal chool. Fi ing i h hi heolog , Ibn Ka h did no compo e ef a ion b

mo al

a he foc ed on de eloping he mo e

practical sciences of law, history and ad h. A b ief

e of Ibn Ka h

demon

adi ionali s before him rather than that

a e ha he fell i hin he g ea line of Sh fi

majo

ok

of Ibn Taymiyya.3

History: Ibn Ka h

hi o ical o k

e e in e pon e o Sh fi A h a

ho

e ed hei

madhhab hi o ic ela ion hip i h A h a i m and ha kal m was an accepted Islamic science. The Sh fi A h a Ibn A ki (d. 571/1176), fo in ance,

o e he biog aphical dic iona

Tab n al-kadhab al-muftar f m nusiba il al-Im m Ab al- asan al-Ash ar to defend the Sh fi A h a

e of kal m leading T j al-D n al-S bk o a g e ha he o k was required

1

Fo mo e on he concep of he in ellec al p ojec ee Ahmad Dallal, The O igin and Objec i e of I lamic Revivalist Thought, 1750-1850, Journal of the American Oriental Society 113, no. 3 (1993): 343. 2 Fo a comple e li ing of all Ibn Ka h o k ee Adn n b. Mu ammad b. Abd All h al-Shalash, al-Im m Ibn Kath r wa atharuhu f ilm al- ad th riw a wa dir a: ma a dir sa manhaji a ta b qi a al Tafs r al-Qur n ala m (Amman: D al-Naf , 2005), 94, and the introduction to Ibn Ka h , J mi al-mas n d wa l-sunan al-h d liaqwam sunan, ed. Abd al-M lik b. Abd All h b. Duhaysh (Bei : D al-Kha r, 1998), 1:29. 3 The e ca ego ie a e helpf l in diffe en ia ing be een Ibn Ka h o k b man of hi writings take on multiple genres. His Tafs r, for instance, could be considered a work of ad h.

94

eading fo he Sh fi j i mo impo an 5

and a half.

.4 As Sherman Jackson explains, Tab n al-kadhab a he

o k ha had in la ed A h a i m i hin he Sh fi

ingle

chool fo o e a cen

Ibn Ka h , in con a , p e en a pro-traditionalist version of Islamic history,

emphasizing ad h chola o e he con ib ion of philo ophe and heologian . In oppo i ion o Sh fi A h a , Ibn Ka h a g ed ha he hea of he Sh fi madhhab was in fact traditionalism. Ibn Ka h make hi ca e b con ending ha he epon m of he A h a chool, Ab al- asan al-A h a (d. 324/935), actually died as a traditionalist and that a adi ionali

and can be aced in he Sh fi madhhab to al-Sh fi (d. 204/820) him elf.

abaqāt al-fuqahāʼ al-shāfiʻiyyīn6 Ibn Ka h

fi

biog aphical dic iona

majo hi o ical o k a he abaq t al-fuqah of Sh fi j i

a ing f om M

year 700/1300.7 Sherman Jackson sugge al-S bk

al-Sh fi

ha he o k a compo ed o co n e

p o-A h a biog aphical dic iona

examination of abaq t al-fuqah

ammad b. Id

al-sh fi i

al-sh fi i

p o he T j al-D n

abaq t al-sh fi i a al-kubr .8 But a close n indica e ha Ibn Ka h

o e he o k befo e

that of T j al-D n biog aphical dic iona . 9 T j al-D n al-S bk , in fac , ma ha e abaq t al- sh fi i a al-kubr

n, a

o co n e Ibn Ka h

4

i en

biog aphical o k.10

Geo ge Makdi i, A h a and he A h a i e in I lamic Religio Hi o I, Studia Islamica 17, no. 2 (1962): 58. She man Jack on, Ibn Taymîyah on Trial in Damascus, The Journal of Semitic Studies 39, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 53. Makdi i al o di c e hi o k in hi A h a and he A h a i e in I lamic Religio Hi o I, 53-57. 6 I m l b. Uma b. Ka h , abaq t al- sh fi i a, ed. Abd al- af Man , 2 ols. (Bei : D al-Mad alI l m , 2004). Ibn Ka h biog aphical dic iona a efe ed o b la e Sh fi chola ; Abd al-Q dir b. Mu ammad Al-N a m , al-D ris f t r kh al-mad ris, ed. Ja fa al- a an , 2 ol . (Cai o: Mak aba al-Tha fa alD ni a, 1988), 1:219. 7 For an an eceden o Ibn Ka h biog aphical dic iona ee Felici a Op i , The Role of he Biog aphe in Constructing Identity and Doctrine: Al- Abb d and hi Ki b aba al-f ah al- h fi i a, Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 11, no. 1 (2011):1-35. 8 Jackson, 53. 9 Ibn Ka h mo likel fini hed hi biog aphical dic iona befo e T j al-D n ince the earliest of extant man c ip of Ibn Ka h abaq t i da ed 749/1348, hen T j al-D n a onl 22; Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:10. The 5

95

The biographical dictionary in ol e Ibn Ka h in an ongoing Sh fi endeavor, as it constitutes a reformulation of Ibn al- al 676/1277)12 ea lie biog aphical dic iona

of he Sh fi

reason for writing the dictionary was that Ibn al- al

11

adi ionali

(d. 643/1245) and al-Na a

(d.

chool. 13 Ibn Ka h e plain ha he

and al-Na a

had no

fficien l

incorporated ( astaw ib) the names of their contemporaries prompting him to rework the biographical dictionary.14 Th o gho

hi biog aphical dic iona , Ibn Ka h empha i e he adi ionali and p o-

ijtih d ing of he Sh fi madhhab, one that favors ad h o e kal m and ijtih d over taql d.15 Ibn Ka h

e hink man of he majo Sh fi fig e in ela ion o adi ionali m and a g e ha

abaq t a mo likel one of Ibn Ka h ea l o k ince he doe no efe in hi abaq t to any of his later works, such as al-Bid a wa l-nih a. However, in al-Bid a wa l-nih a, Ibn Ka h con an l ci e he abaq t. 10 Makdisi presents the abaq t al- sh fi i a al-kubr as a counter to al-Dhahab : Fo S bk , Dhahab a traditionalism incarnate. In him, S bk a adi ionali m s stubborn resistance against, and crushing impact upon, the progress of A h a i m. Small wonder that al-Dhahab ho ld be al-S bk enem . Makdi i make hi ob e a ion beca e T j al-D n al-S bk di ec l c i ici e al-Dhahab in hi biog aphical dic iona ; Makdi i, 70. While I ag ee ha m ch of T j al-D n al-S bk c i ici m a e di ec ed a al-Dhahab , man ma ha e al o been le eled a Ibn Ka h . T j al-D n al-S bk ma ha e been he i an o criticize directly Ibn Kath a he a a contemporary who also lived in Damascus. In his In od c ion, T j al-D n al-S bk doe men ion Ibn al- al and al-Na a biog aphical dic iona , hich p o ide he ba i fo Ibn Ka h , b he doe no e plici l men ion Ibn Ka h ; T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t al-sh fi iyya al-kubr , eds. Ma m d M ammad al- an and Abd alFa Mu ammad al- ilw, 10 vols. (Giza: Hajr, 1992), 1:217. 11 For a biography of Ibn al- al see Ibn al- al , An Introduction to the Science of the ad th, trans. Eerik Dickinson (Reading, UK: Garnet, c2005), xiv-xxiii. 12 Frank Griffel explains that Ibn al- al and al-Na a ega ded A i o elian logic a a dange o inno a ion that would lead students to become receptive to the heterodox thought of the fal sifa ; Frank Griffel, Al-Gha l s Philosophical Theology (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 81. 13 The fac ha Ibn Ka h a ed he o k ea l in hi ca ee i e iden in ha he p a fo Ma ma Sha af al-D n (d. 738/1338) to have a long life, meaning ha Ibn Ka h m ha e a ed he biog aphical dic iona before he passed away; Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:833; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:181. Additionally, there is evidence that Ibn Ka h o gh o i e a con in a ion (dhayl) of Ibn al- al biog aphical dic iona b hen decided o e o k he en i e dic iona ince Ibn Ka h begin i h he la e pa of he abaq t and then returns to the beginning of the o k. While Ibn Ka h p a fo Ma ma Sha af al-D n (d. 738/1338) to have a long life towards the end of the dic iona , he a , ma God ha e me c on hi o l on al-Mi (d. 742/1341) (meaning ha he had died) in he dic iona ea l pa ; abaq t, 1:206, 211, 233. Ibn Ka h me hodolog of bo h con in ing and reworking a work is also evident in al-Bid a wa l-nih a, in hich Ibn Ka h continues al-Bi l T r kh Dimashq but amends earlier parts of the work. 14 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:826. Ibn al- al and al-Na a p obabl did no concei e of i ing a abaq t work that incorporated their contemporaries. 15 A Felici a Op i e plain , he a ho of a biog aphical dic iona i no me el a compile of p e-existing information. Instead, he has an important impact on shaping the identity, the doctrine, and the authority structures of he g o p ; Op i , 32.

96

e en he mo of he A h a

iden A h a

had adi ionali leaning . In hi en

chool of heolog , Ibn Ka h a g e ha al-A h a died a a adi ionali . Ibn en h o gh h ee pha e in hi life.16 At first, al-A h a

Ka h e plain ha al-A h a M

a il b

of al-A h a , he epon m

he la e deno nced ha chool belief a he e ical. Al-A h a

a a

hen an i ioned

to affirming the essential attributes of God such as his life, knowledge, power, will, hearing, li ening, eeing and peaking b

in e p e ed fig a i el o he ac i e a ib e

ch a God

face, hands, and feet. In his third and final stage, however, al-A h a affi med all of God a ib e and cha ac e i ic

ne i ocall (li e all

i ho

a king ho

also without anthropomorphizing God (tashb h). In the end, al-A h a

[gha r tak f]) but ook he pa h of he salaf

which is encapsulated in his final work al-Ib na.17 It is in al-Ib na, Ibn Ka h a g e , ha la e scholars such as al-B ill n (d. 403/1013) and al-J

a n (d. 478/1085) leaned o a d in

their own theological writing . Ibn Ka h make he adi ionali a g men ha he o-called Aha

of hi da

e e ac all

b c ibing o heological po i ion ha al-A h a and man

of his followers had disavowed. They should therefore follow the practice of the original Aha

, he a of he salaf.18 Ibn Ka h e en a g e ha man of he con mma e

adi ionali inclina ion ,

ch a Im m al- aramayn al-J

16

19

Sh fi A h a

a n . Al-J

a n

had a e pelled

Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:205. Ibn Ka h clo e hi en ela ing a adi ion ha p e en al-A h a a no a me e mutakallim but a jurist and ad h chola . Ibn Ka h na a e ha af e al-Ash a on a heological deba e i h ome M a al , an ob e e o he deba e a e , We ha e come o kno ha o a e e di e in ilm al-kal m, but I want to ask you something on a relevant issue in fiqh. Al-A h a eplie , A k ha e e o like. The man a , Wha do [ o ] a regarding the prayer without [reciting s rat] al-f tiha? Al-A h a an e ha ch a p a e in naccep able and then cites two ad h with full chains of transmission to bolster his argument and silence the questioner. The anecdote demonstrates that al-A h a co pled an kno ledge ha he had of kal m with the more acceptable sciences of jurisprudence and ad h; Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:207. 18 Makdi i cap e he adi ionali a g men in hi , A h a and he A h a i e in I lamic Religio Hi o I. 19 Jonathan Brown, The Canonization of al-Bukh r and Muslim: the Formation and Function of the Sunn ad th Canon (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 200. 17

97

from Nishapur during an anti-A h a pha e of he ci

Selj k

Ni m al-Mulk, who favored the theological school.20 Al-J

le and onl

a n

e

ned nde

o e a eminal o k on

Aha

heolog en i led al-Sh mil (the Comprehensive Book) as well as another book rebutting

the M

a ili e chool.

21

Ibn Ka h p e en

e e al

o e in hich al-J

a n di ance

himself from kal m and publically declares himself a traditionalist. A contemporary jurist of alJ

a n men ion ha he en e ed he

and hea d him decla e, Bea the salaf.

22

Ibn Ka h

d ci cle of al-J

a n befo e hi dea h (f mara ihi)

i ne , I ha e ecan ed f om e e

hen empha i e ho al-J

a emen ha conflic

a n p efe ed tafw

ih

over ta w l or leaving

to God issues relating to his divine essence rather than interpreting them figuratively.23 Ibn Ka h

o e f om al-J

e plaining ha i i

a n

al-Ris la al-ni mi a,24 a statement which supports tafw ,

be e no o del e in o he fig a i e in e p e a ion of diffic l e

al-mushkil t) such as the ve e

ha I c ea ed i h m

o hand

face ill emain (55:27), and [ he A k] ailed (tajr ) nde o ela e o God de cen in he la

e e

(38:70), and o

(ta w l lo d

(54:14) and ad h ha

hi d of he nigh (nu l).25

20

C. B ockelmann, al- J a n , Ab l-Ma l Abd al-Malik, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, eds. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, and W.P. Heinrichs (Brill, 2011). 21 Brown, Canonization, 201. 22 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:448. 23 Ta w l was not necessarily problematic unless it was perceived to contradict scripture or orthodox creeds: a long as ta w l, as it developed separately from tafs r, did not contradict the obvious literal meaning of the n or ad h, he g o ing S nn o hodo had no ea on o den i i igh o e i . Ho e e , hen i diverged widely from the traditional sources and various groups used it as a suitable device to justify their claims and doctrines by interpreting the nic e e , he i a ion a changed and ta w l became a technical term for the allegorical, esoterical exposition of the n, e peciall i h he Sh and he f , and fo med a al able and nece a supplement to the more external philological exegesis which now became distinguished as tafs r ; I. Poona ala, Ta l, EI2. 24 This work has been published as al- Aq da al-ni miyya; Abd al-Malik b. Abd All h al-J a n , al- Aq da alni m ya f al-ark n al-isl miyya, ed. Mu ammad Z hid Ka ha (Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya, 1992). 25 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:449. This quote from al-J a n seems to have been popular within traditionalist circles since Ibn Taymiyya and al-Dhahab bo h ci e i ; Ibn Taymiyya, Majm fat w Shaykh al-Isl m A mad b. aymiyya, ed. Abd al-Ra m n b. M ammad b. Q im al- im , 37 ol. (Bei : Ma bi D al- A abiyya, 197778), 5:101; Shams al-D n M ammad b. A mad al-Dhahab , Kit b al- Arsh, ed. Mu ammad b. Khal fa b. Al Tam m , 2 ol. (Ri adh: A al-Salaf ,1999), 2:363.

98

Ibn Ka h

ake a imila approach with al-J

a n

Gha l (d. 505/1111). Ibn Ka h empha i e al-Gha l studied the a

den , he g ea Ab

mid al-

die in ad h, men ioning ha he

al-Bukh r and parts of the Sunan of Ab Da

d, e en going a fa a

that if [al-Gha l ] had li ed longe he co ld ha e e celled in ad h.

26

a ing

Ibn Ka h ,

nevertheless, acknowledges that al-Gha l became an e pe in kal m and that he composed man p ominen

o k in he di cipline. B

Ibn Ka h i

ick o no e ha al-Gha l

ecan ed all of ha (kal m) at the end of his life, turning to ad h and he Bukh r , such that it was said that he died with it ( a engage in polemics against al-Gha l ,28 Ibn Ka h

d of a

al-Bukh r ) on hi che .

27

al-

Rather than

ought to appropriate the influential scholar

as a traditionalist who allegedly repented for his forays into kal m.29 The legacy of al-A h a once again appea in he en infl ence Sh fi A h a

on Ibn Ka h

of Ibn A ki , one of he mo

in ellec al milie . Ibn Ka h p ai e Ibn A ki

Tab n al-kadhab al-muftar f m nusiba il al-Im m Ab al- asan al-Ash ar the book and empha i e ha Ibn A ki men ioned al-A h a

26

adi ionali c eed fo nd in al-Ib na after he

Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:512. Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:513. In al-Bid a, Ibn Ka h al o e e that al-Gha l ene ed hi in e e in ad h no ing ha , i i aid ha [al-Gha l ] leaned in he end of hi life o a d he transmission of ad h (sam alad th) and the memorization of the a ayn (al-B kh and M lim) ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:190. By arguing that al-Gha l inc ea ed d ing ad h d ing he la ea of hi life, Ibn Ka h a drawing from o he adi ionali hi o ian ch a Abd al-Gh fi al-F i . Fo mo e on c i ici m and he ehabilitation of alGha l ee B o n, Canonization, 354-356. Fo mo e on Abd al-Gh fi belief ha al-Gha l studied ad h a he end of hi life ee G iffel, 56. F ank G iffel a g e ha he e i li le e idence fo al-Gha l becoming a traditionalist ad h- chola la e in hi life ; G iffel, 57. 28 Ibn Ka h h ook a mo e mode a e app oach o al-Gha l han hi eache al-Dhahab (d. 748/1348) ho a con ide ed one of al-Gha l mo o poken c i ic ; B o n, Canonization, 355. Other traditionalist scholars were much harsher in their criticism al-Gha l , going o he poin of b ning hi book beca e of hei eak ad h ; Delfina Se ano R ano, Wh Did he Schola of al-Andalus Distrust al-Gha l ? Der Islam 83, no. 1 (2006): 137. For more on critiques of al-Gha l ee Kenne h Ga den, Al-M a al-Dhak : al-Gha l Magh ib Adversary in Nishapur, Journal of Islamic Studies 21, no. 1 (2010): 89 107; Kenne h Ga den, Al-Gha l Contested Revival: I ul m al-d n and its Critic in Kho a an and he Magh ib, (PhD di ., Uni e i of Chicago, 2005). 29 Ibn Ka h no e ha he den and colleag e of al-Gha l , M lik J i Ab Bak Ibn A ab (d. 543/1148), was accused of the opinion[s] of the philosophers, and it is said that he entered into their innards (ajw fuhum) and he a no able o e i ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:251. 27

99

recanted his M

a il heolog .30 Ibn Ka h once again o gh o

e

al-A h a

final

traditionalist stage found in al-Ib na.31 Th o gho

he dic iona , Ibn Ka h

anda d pa of he Sh fi A h a c gge

ho

hi ho ili

o a d kal m which was a

ic l m of his day.32 In e e al in ance , Ibn Ka h

ha he cience ho ld be emo ed all oge he f om Sh fi

f om he Sh fi

d ci cle . Q o ing

adi ionali Ab Sh ma al-Ma di (d. 665/1268), Ibn Ka h no e ha he

chola Zak al-D n Ab al- a an (d. 598/1202),

ed o p e en people f om p eocc p ing

themselves (ishtigh l) with the books of logic and argumentation and banned their books in his teaching circle (majlis).

33

Similarly, in the entry on Ibn al- al , Ibn Ka h

a e , He stayed

steady on the path of the salaf creed. He hated the ways of philosophy and logic and preached against it.34 He did no allo

d ing i in [hi ] ci

and he

le obe ed him in ha .

35

The

Sh fi j i appa en l no onl p e en ed kal m from being studied in his study circles but also recommended that it not be taught in his city. Ye , e en ho gh Ibn Ka h belie ed ha kal m should be avoided, he did not leave out the possibility that someone could specialize in kal m but still maintain a traditionalist creed. In hi en

on Abd al- amad b. al-Mura

al (d. 691/1292), Ibn Ka h e plain ha he

30

died

Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:646. I i in e e ing o no e he e ha Ibn Ka h a g e ha he adi ionali c eed i ac all he mode a e one. A e ecall, Ta al-D n al-S bk a g e ha he A h a s are the moderates because they lay be een he M a al and ashwiyya. See Chapter Two ec ion on Ta al-D n al-S bk . 31 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:646. For more on the authenticity of the al-Ib na ee Richa d F ank Elemen in he Development of The Teaching of Al-A h a , in Early Islamic Theology: The Mu ta ilites and al-Ash ar , ed. Dimitri Gutas (Aldershot: Ashgate Variorum, 2005-2008), 141-190. 32 T j al-D n al-S bk men ion ha he died the kal m works of Fakhr al-D n al-R , ch a hi al-Arba n and his Mu a al; T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:198. 33 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:696. 34 Quoting from al-Dhahab Siyar al-nubal , Eerik Dickinson notes that Ibn al- al dismissed logic a pompo o d hich God ha made pe fl o fo all ane people ; Dickin on, i. 35 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:782. Ibn Ka h empha i e chola l a ho i he e in that he le obe ed he chola position that kal m should not be taught in the study circles.

100

kal m and u l al-fiqh b

de pi e ha he held on o he a of he igh eo

salaf.

36

Another

instance occurs in his biography of Sa da b. Ja fa al-Kawwi (d. 693/1294), in which he men ion ha he had a good in igh [ ] in he a ional cience (ma q l t) but despite that he had a sound belief in the way of the salaf.

37

Ibn Ka h ma ha e been open o he idea ha kal m

could be studied by traditionalist scholars as a communal obligation (far kif a), rather than as a mandatory subject for every scholar.38 In regards to ijtih d, Ibn Ka h empha i e ha al-Sh fi

a an ab ol e mujtahid by

spending half his entry discussing how his legal opinions were unique from the other madhhab fo nde . Ibn Ka h highligh

he

o e f om he Sh fi

adi ionali Ab Q im al-D ik (d.

376/986-87), who declared that a ad h f om he P ophe i mo e p efe able han aking f om the madhhab of al-Sh fi o Ab with the ad h.

39

an fa, fo di ag eeing i h hem i ea ie han di ag eeing

To a d he end of he biog aphical dic iona , Ibn Ka h call he fa he of

his primary fiqh eache B h n al-D n al-Fa the mujtahid . he g ea Sh fi

40

Ibn Ka h make adi ionali

(d. 690/1291), one of

e o highligh ha he mujtahid Ibn Fi k

befo e him

Sal m (d. 660-1/1262.41 Ibn Fi k

(d. 729/1329), Ibn Fi k

ch a Ibn al- al

and I

studied with

al-D n Ibn Abd al-

further taught many great pro-ijtih d jurists and, in

36

Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:848. Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:850. 38 For more on traditionalist scholars supporting the study of kal m as a far kif a see Khaled El-Rouayheb, F om Ibn ajar al-Ha am (d. 1566) o Kha al-D n al-Al (d. 1899): Changing Views of Ibn Taymiyya among nonanbal S nni Schola , in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, eds. Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010), 303. 39 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:306. Ibn Ka h epea hi o e in al-Bid a; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:327. 40 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:830. Thi i a ni e a emen fo Ibn Ka h o make ega ding po -fo ma i e scholars. I will discuss the issues of taql d and ijtih d in he ec ion dealing i h Ibn Ka h o ks on jurisprudence. 41 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:830. Ibn Ka h efe o I al-D n Abd al-Sal m as Sha kh Abd al-Sal m. 37

101

particular, transmitted his Mu jam al-shu kh o hi

on B h n al-D n, al-Mi

and Ibn

Taymiyya.42 Ibn Ka h

in e e in econcilia ion be een he Sh fi

and anbal i al o e iden in

that he includes Ibn anbal i hin he Sh fi biog aphical dic iona . Ibn Ka h empha i e the close relationship between al-Sh fi and Ibn anbal, highlighting that Ibn anbal studied with al-Sh fi in Baghdad.43 Ibn anbal a

o ed a

which I do not have evidence, I say what al-Sh fi

a ing ha on every [fiqh] issue on

aid.

44

Ibn Ka h p e en

he idea he e ha

there are only a handful of issues that separate the two madhhabs and that Ibn anbal frequently deferred to al-Sh fi . Ibn Ka h also mentions the famous quote attributed to al-Sh fi in which he praises Ibn anbal kno ledge and pie : I lef Bagdad and I did no lea e behind anybody more knowledgeable in jurisprudence (afqah), more ascetic (azhad) and more pious (awra ) han Ibn anbal. successors to al-Sh fi devotion to al-Sh fi b

45

According to this tradition, Ibn anbal was among the greatest

a he han a i al.46 Ibn Ka h f

he empha i e Ibn anbal

o ing he a emen of one of al-Sh fi

Mu ammad al-Za fa n , ha I did no

d a le e

den , asan b.

i h al-Sh fi e cep ha A mad was

present, and I did not go to a study circle (majlis) [of al-Sh fi ] e cep ha I fo nd A mad.

47

The quote gives the impression that Ibn anbal was a close disciple of al-Sh fi and ha anbali m a a de elopmen of Sh fi i m.

42

Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 2:830. Ibn Ka h highl p ai e Ibn Fi k and gives a prayer for him, asking God to have mercy upon him, and ligh en hi g a e. Ibn Ka h m ha e ac i ed mo of he info ma ion fo hi en f om Ibn Fi k on B h n al-D n ho a one of hi p ima fiqh teachers. 43 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:117. 44 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:117. 45 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:117. T j al-D n al-Subk lists this same quote in his abaq t; T j al-D n al-Subk , abaq t, 2:27. 46 In con a , he A h a T j al-D n al-S bk mentions a debate where al-Sh fi defea Ibn anbal regarding Ibn anbal con en ion ha he M lim ho abandons prayer is a disbeliever; T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 2:61. 47 Ibn Kath r, abaq t, 1:119.

102

Ibn Ka h end hi en al-Mi

49

on Ibn anbal by quoting a ad h48 ha Ibn Ka h

died i h

in hich M lik, al-Sh fi , and Ibn anbal are all in the chain of transmission in

succession. The ad h demon

a e ha he majo i

of epon m of he S nn madhhabs were

students of one another rather than opponents and that they were more interested in narrating ad h han pec la ion.50

Al-Bidāya wa’l-nihāya Ibn Ka h

econd major historical work was al-Bid a wa l-nih a. While he

composed the work throughout his life, early parts of the work, such as the section on stories of the prophets, may have overlapped with his composition of abaq t al-fuqah Henri Laoust considers al-Bid a wa l-nih a o be Ibn Ka h

48

magn m op

al-sh fi i 52

n.51

and b fa

This ad h a e : The o l of a belie e i a bi d hanging in a ee of pa adi e n il i i e ned o i bod on the Da of Re ec ion. Ibn Ka h r frequently cites this ad h throughout his biographical works. In particular, Ibn Ka h eco d ha he con e ed hi ad h at the ceremony where he replaced al-Dhahab a he chai of he Umm li mad a a. Ibn Ka h ma ha e decided o na a e his ad h as a sign of unity after the death of the controversial al-Dhahab ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid ya, 14:221. While T j al-D n al-S bk li e e al ad h which con ain M lik, al-Sh fi , and Ibn anbal in the isn ds, he does not list this particular ad h; T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 2:62. 49 Ibn Ka h f he men ion he e ma God ha e me c on hi o l af e al-Mi name meaning ha al-Mi had died (d. 742/1341) befo e Ibn Ka h had beg n i ing hi ea l po ion of he biog aphical dic ionary. See footnote 13 for a more thorough discussion on dating of the biographical dictionary. 50 There are five extant manuscripts of the biographical dictionary found in various locations: Chester Beatty Library, Tunis, Princeton, and Morocco; Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:10. The editor of another edition of the abaq t, Anwar B , iden ifie ano he man c ip in Mecca; Ibn Ka h , abaq t al-fuqah al-sh fi i n, ed. Anwar B (al-Man a: D al-Waf , 2004), 5. The number and different locations of the manuscripts suggests that Ibn Ka h biog aphical dic iona a circulated in the pre-modern period and could have been an alternative to T j al-D n al-Subk pro-A h a abaq t. This finding potentially questions the idea ha A h a i m a he onl established orthodoxy after the 11th century. Khaled El-Rouayheb, for instance, supports Goldziher against Makdisi ha A h a i m became he dominan o hodo af e he 5 th/11th century. See his F om Ibn ajar al-Ha am (d. 1566) to Khayr al-D n al-Al (d. 1899): Changing Vie of Ibn Ta mi a among non- anbal S nni Schola , 295. Mo e o k need o be done on he ela ion hip be een A h a i m and adi ionali m f om he 11 th century until modern times. 51 Ibn Kath f e en l ci e his biography of the Prophet (s ra) and Stories of the Prophets in his Tafs r. Di c ion o nding he o ce of Ibn Ka h Tafs r will be discussed in the next Chapter. 52 Laoust, Ibn Ka h , EI2.

103

he mo impo an of Ibn Ka h

ok.

53

Laoust makes this observation based on the fact

that al-Bid a i one of he p incipal hi o ical o k of he Maml k pe iod and i abili infl ence la e hi o ical o k

ch a ho e b Ibn Hijj (d.816/1413), Ibn Q

o

Sh hba (d.

851/1348) and Ibn ajar al- A al n (d. 852/1449).54 The tremendous work spans 14 volumes and covers history from the creation of Adam until 773/1371-72.55 A Ibn Ka h e plain in he In od c ion,56 he wanted to write universal history that would cover creation, the lives of the prophets, the era of the Prophet Mu ammad,57 the important events of Islamic history and Islamic eschatology. He points out that his history will rely on the six canonical ad h collec ion and he chola

ho a e he hei of he p ophe .

58

an mi ed epo

Ibn Ka h

ha a e accep able o

aining a a ad h chola i

evident throughout the work as he sorts through traditions, selecting reports which he finds authentic and consistent with his traditionalist view of history. Similar to abaq t al-fuqah chola

ok

in ance, hen

59

al-sh fi i

n, Ibn Ka h b ild

pon o he

adi ionali

but reformulates their writings to fit his theology and presentation style. For i ing on he Maml k pe iod, Ibn Ka h inco po a e he Sh fi

53

adi ionali

Lao , Ibn Ka h , EI2. Laoust also mentions that Ibn aja con in ed man of Ibn Ka h ok ch a hi commen a on a alBukh r and hi ni e al hi o ; Lao Ibn Ka h , EI2. 55 Modern editions of al-Bid a end in the year 767/1366 but Ibn ajar writes that his historical work Inb alghumr is a dhayl to al-Bid a and it starts in the year 773/1371; Ibn ajar al- A al n , Inb al-ghumr bi-anb alumr, ed. asan aba h , 2 ol . (Cai o: [s.n.], 1969), 1:5. 56 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 1:28. 57 Many of Ibn Ka h famo hi o ical o k a e aken f om al-Bid a wa l-nih a such his Stories of the Prophets, Characteristics of the Prophet and his S ra. 58 While Ibn Ka h a chola he e, he mo likel mean ad h chola ince he o ld be able to determine which narrations are acceptable. 59 One of he mo impo an adi ionali chola ha Ibn Ka h b ild off i al- aba (d. 310/923), which will be impo an in o di c ion of Ibn Ka h Tafs r. 54

104

Ab Sh ma T r kh Dimashq and Sh fi

adi ionali al-Bi

l

con in a ion of i . Ibn Ka h

considered the last portion of al-Bid a to be a continuation (dhayl) of al-Bi Unlike abaq t al-fuqah

al-sh fi i

o k.60

l

n, al-Bid a wa l-nih a presents a general

traditionalist history that goes beyond madhhab affiliation. Throughout the work, Ibn Ka h supports ad h chola and di ance him elf f om chola ic heologian (mutakallim n), philosophers,61 monist Sufis62 and Im m and I m Building on his abaq t al-fuqah ijtih d Sh fi

l Shi

al-sh fi i

.63

n, Ibn Ka h con in e o p omo e a p o-

adi ionali m. In hi biog aph of al-Sh fi , Ibn Ka h p e en him a a

member of the Ahl- ad th, favoring traditions from the Prophet over his own opinion or kal m.64 Ibn Ka h

o e al-Sh fi decla ing, If o [find an] a hen ic ad h f om he me enge of

God may peace and blessing be upon him, then take that opinion (q l bihi) and leave my opinion (qawl ). Ibn Ka h add ano he

adi ion he e al-Sh fi in

c hi

den no o

imitate him (l tuqallid n ) but rather to follow the sayings of the Prophet. Ibn Ka h moves to attack kal m, quoting al-Sh fi a f om hei ] him hen he

o ld

a ing, If people kne

n a a f om i a he

ha

hen

ha i in kal m [is

n a a f om a lion.

65

Ibn Ka h

bolsters this statement with a ruling from al-Sh fi , m j dgemen on he de o ee of kal m is 60

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:182. Ibn Ka h con in e al-Bi l work after the year 738/1337-1338. He also mentions that he finished using al-Bi l o k in he ea 751/1350 hich mean ha Ibn Ka h f e en l oe abo Maml k Dama c 10-15 years after the event occurred. For in ance, Ibn Ka h o e hi biog aph of Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328) after al-Mi (d. 742/1341) had pa ed a a ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:136. 61 Ibn Ka h i c i ical of al-F b fo holding he no hodo ie ha e ec ion ill be pi i al a her than co po eal. Ibn Ka h add ha , if he died i h ha (belief) hen he c e of he Lo d of all he o ld [be pon him]. Ibn Ka h clo e he en b a ing, I did no ee he ad h ma e ( fi ) Ibn A ki men ion him in hi history beca e of hi o enne and gline . And God kno be ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:239. 62 For instance, in his biography of Mu al-D n Ibn A ab (d 638/1240), Ibn Ka h men ion ha Ibn A ab book Fu u al-hikam ha man hing ha a e on their face value ( hiruh ) are clear unbelief ; Ibn Ka h , alBid a, 14:158. 63 Ibn Ka h i c i ical of Fa imid le ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:305. Ho e e , Ibn Ka h find h in Za di m in ha he do no peak ill of Ab Bak and Umar but he ejec hei belief ha Al i pe io o he fi o caliph ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 9:342. 64 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10:268. 65 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10: 269.

105

that they should be hit with a palm leaf (jar d) and they should be paraded throughout the tribes (qab il) and i ho ld be called o Q

again

hem, Thi i he e ard of him who leaves the

n and S nna and accep kal m o e hem.

66

The devotees of kal m should not simply

be avoided, but rather they should be publicly disciplined because they prioritize their reason over the original sources. Ibn Ka h

an itions to demonstrate al-Sh fi

p efe ence fo he peciali

by quoting several statements ascribed to al-Sh fi f om hi Buway (d. 231/846).67 Al-Sh fi i

o ed a

den , he Sh fi

of ad h

adi ionali al-

a ing, S ick i h he companions of ad h,

beca e he a e he people ho a e he mo co ec .

68

This is in contrast to the devotees of

kal m who are misguided. Another statement of al-Sh fi compa e he ad h chola P ophe

Companion : If o

o he

ee a man f om he companions of ad h i i a if o ha e een

a man f om he Companion of he P ophe .

69

The ad h chola

from the Prophet just as the Companions did. Al-Sh fi i e en

ela and p e e e adi ion o ed a p efe ing ad h

scholars over jurists, ma God e a d hem (companion of ad h), he ha e p e e ed fo the source ( ad h), o he a e (mo e) i

o

han

.

70

Here the ad h chola

ake

preference over the jurists because of their noble tasks of preserving the teachings of the Prophet. Ibn Ka h

m

p al-Sh fi

po i ion on kal m through several lines of al-Sh fi

o n

poetry: All he cience e cep he Q n a e a p eocc pa ion, except ad h and fiqh in religion, 66

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10: 269. Ibn Taymiyya also cites this quotation from al-Sh fi ; Ibn Ta mi a, Majm , 5:119. The fac ha Ibn Ka h and Ibn Ta mi a bo h ci e imila o a ion f om al-Sh fi demon a e ha traditionalists had common historical reference points. 67 See Ahmed El-Sham , The Fi Sh fi : The T adi ionali Legal Tho gh of Ab Ya b al-Buway (d. 231/846), Islamic Law and Society 14, no. 3 (2007): 301-341. 68 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10: 269. 69 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10: 269. 70 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10: 269.

106

The cience ha doe no ha e he narrated to us, and imila [ a ing ] o he like, i [ impl ] hi pe f om Sa an. The line he narrated to us, and similar [sayings] to the like

efe

71

o he me hod of he ad h

scholars who deal with narrations. Islamic sciences that are not based on scripture, such as kal m, are deemed satanic since they have the potential of leading the believer astray. Ibn Ka h concl de he ec ion b na a ing f om al-Sh fi Sh fi held a adi ionali creed in which he read the Q the attributes of God a he

e e, i ho

enio

den

ha al-

nic verses and ad h ha di c

a king ho (tak f), without anthropomorphizing

God (tashb h), without stripping him of his attributes (ta l), and without distorting the divine texts (ta r f).

72

Unlike the Sh fi A h a

, Ibn Ka h did no belie e ha al-Sh fi

o ld

have condoned kal m and engage in ta w l of scripture.73 Similar to his abaq t, Ibn Ka h empha i e he clo e ela ion hip be een al-Sh fi and Ibn anbal. After discussing Ibn anbal he oic in he mi na, Ibn Ka h Ba ha

o e al-

(d. 458/1066) no ing ha Ibn anbal studied fiqh with al-Sh fi and hen Ibn anbal

died among his belongings were both the Ris la that al-Sh fi compo ed in I a and he e ion composed in Egypt (ris lata al-Sh fi al-qad ma wa l-jad da).74 The implication here is that Ibn anbal in e e in al-Sh fi developments in al-Sh fi

fiqh reached the point that he was even aware of the

ho gh and ha he b il off al-Sh fi

Ibn Ka h con in e o

e

a he han oppo ed him.

ijtih d and traditionalist theology in the post-Sh fi e a. In

his entry of Ibn Khuzayma (d. 311/923-4), Ibn Ka h

e e ha he a among he mujtahid n

71

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10: 269. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10: 269. 73 Fo a Sh fi A h a ie of al-Sh fi , ee Fakh al-D n al-R al-Sa (Cai o: Mak aba al-Kulliyya al-Azhariyya, 1986). 74 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10:347. 72

107

, Man qib al-Im m al-Sh fi , ed. A mad ij

in he eligion of I lam.

75

He then goes on to quote from al-Shi

abaq t al-sh fi i a

hich ci e Ibn Kh a ma decla ing, I did no imi a e (uqallid) anyone since I was twenty years (old).

76

Ibn Ka h f

he main ain ha kal m was incompatible to the Islamic sciences. Ibn

Ka h no e in hi en

of I m

l b. Id

al-

li n (d. 385/995) ha he

ed o lo e he

shar a sciences ( ul m al-shar i a) and hate philosophy and what is similar to it from kal m and inno a i e opinion .

77

He e Ibn Ka h con a

he I lamic cience

i h he a ional ones

and sees very little difference between philosophy and kal m.78 Ibn Ka h e en goe a fa in stating that kal m a no a cience. In hi biog aph of he Sh fi A h a Wak l (d. 716/1317),79 Ibn Ka h men ion ha

adr al-D n had a ained a g ea amo n of

knowledge such as medicine, philosophy, and kal m. Ibn Ka h [kal m] i no a cience ( ilm).

hen in e jec and a e

Ibn Fi k . Ibn Fi k

and

80

It is also through al-Bid a that we can trace the pro-ijtih d Sh fi Ka h belonged. Ibn Ka h

adr al-D n b. al-

died fiqh i h B h n al-D n al-Fa

ain o hich Ibn

,81 the son of the eminent

opposed the call for taql d and believed that ijtih d could occur within his

ime . Ibn Ka h , fo in ance, ela e ha al-Bi

75

l epo ed o him ha T j al-D n al-Fa

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:160. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:160. 77 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:338. 78 Thi i diffe en han Ta al-D n al-S bk ho ee kal m a epa a e f om philo oph . See he ec ion on Ta al-D n al-S bk in Chap e Two. 79 For more on Ibn al-Wak l see Chapter Two. 80 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:79. Ibn Ka h eache al-Dhahab al o belie ed ha logic a no an I lamic cience: he benefi of logic i little and its harm disastrous. It is not one of the sciences of Islam. Al-Dhahab goes on to instruct a potential student to flee from the science since it is full of jargon, leads to unnecessary disputation and does not benefi one he eaf e ; Mu ammad b. A mad al-Dhahab , Bay n zaghl al- ilm wa l- alab, ed. Mu ammad Z hid b. al- asan al-Kawthar (Damascus: al-Quds , 1928), 24. 81 I a aid ha B h n al-D n al-Faz r liked Ibn Ka h a g ea deal and praised him considerably; Ibn ajar alA al n , Inb al-ghumr, 1:39. 76

108

held ha he Sh fi

adi ionali Ab Sh ma al-Ma di had eached he le el of a mujtahid.82

In hi biog aph of Ibn Fi k , Ibn Ka h men ion ha Ibn Fi k ha kh[ ] of he g ea e of o

ha kh . Ibn Ka h al o no e ha Ibn Fi k

Abd al-Sal m and a gh man of Ibn Ka h and B h n al-D n al-Fa

and al-Na a

Sh fi

adi ionali

e e he studied with Ibn

eache ,

ch a al-Bi

l

.83

Jurisprudence: Ibn Ka h

o k on j i p dence fall outside the trend of taql d that was predominant

a hi ime. A Wael Halla e plain , he p eocc pa ion of he a ho a e no a e a ion f om he Q dominated he chool. al , j i

n and he S nna, b 84

a he

i h he e

al

i h a ho i a i e p inciple ha ha e

Halla no e ha in he po -fo ma i e pe iod o he e a af e Ibn al-

e e no a conce ned i h

indica ing he legal p inciple ha had de i ed f om

the original sources but rather building the intellectual foundations of their legal schools.85 Ho e e , a look a Ibn Ka h

fiqh works suggests that taql d was not the only legal norm after

Ibn al- al . D a ing f om hi eache B h n al-D n al-Fa

, Ibn Ka h

a a

ong

p oponen of he Sh fi madhhab but he felt that law must be taught in conjunction with the

82

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:251. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:325. 84 Wael B. Hallaq, Authority, Continuity, and Change in Islamic Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 98. For more on views on ijtih d and taql d in his period see No man Calde , Al-Na a s Typology of M f and I Significance fo a Gene al Theo of I lamic La , Islamic Law and Society 3, no. 2 (1996): 137-164 and Wael B Halla , Ift and ijtih d in S nni legal Theo : a De elopmen al Acco n , in Islamic Legal Interpretation Muftis and their Fatwas, eds. M. K. Masud, B. Messick, and D. Powers (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996). 85 Hallaq, 103. Nevertheless, Hallaq argues that ijtih d con in ed h o gho I lamic hi o ; Wael Halla , Wa the Gate of Ijtih d Clo ed? International Journal of Middle East Studies 16, no. 1 (March 1984): 3-41; Wael Halla , On the Origins of the Controversy about the Existence of Mujtahids and the Gate of Ijtih d, Studia Islamica 63, no. 1 (1986), pp. 129-141. 83

109

original sources and that precedent should not be the dominant element in constructing law.86 Ibn Ka h con an l demon Q

a e ho

n and S nna. Ye , Ibn Ka h i

ha he Q

n and S nna

he Sh fi madhhab has the best understanding of the e

gge o he

illing o abandon he madhhab positions if he feels i e.

Shar al-Tanbīh87 Among Ibn Ka h

ea l

ok

88

is his Shar al-Tanb h, an explanation of the popular

didactic law text of al-Sh

(d. 476/1083) ha

Sh fi

ime.89 Foregoing a traditional commentary, the Shar al-Tanb h

li

chool a Ibn Ka h

e idence f om he Q

a he main a beginning e book in he

n and S nna ega ding he a io

a ho i a i e Sh fi po itions

found in the madhhab and p o ide a b ief commen a . Ibn Ka h e plain in he in od c ion that he had been blessed to memorize the Tanb h and ha I a no comple ed i ho

he kno ledge of i p oof e

.

90

ha he benefi [of he book] i

Ibn Ka h a g e ha fiqh rulings

should be studied along with the evidence on which rulings were based. Like other didactic fiqh works, the Tanb h ela h

he Sh fi

i ho

he a ho i a i e Sh fi po i ion

i ho

del ing in o all of he ea on

had agreed upon the rulings. Students would frequently memorize the text

nece a il kno ing ho i

ling

e e con

86

c ed. Ibn Ka h belie ed ha he

Ibn Ka h legal app oach i imila o he p e io Sh fi traditionalist Ab Sh ma al-Ma di . See Konrad Hirschlerk, P e-eighteenth-cen T adi ion of Re i ali m: Dama c in he Thi een h Cen , Bulletin of SOAS 68, no. 2 (2005):195 214. 87 The edi o Bahja Y f amad Ab al- ayyib calls this work Irsh d al-faq h il ma rifat adillat al-Tanb h based on how the work was later known by. I prefer to call this work Shar al-Tanb h follo ing ha Ibn Ka h call i in al-Bid a; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:137. While the work does provide evidences, it also gives a brief commentary of different aspects of the textbook; Ibn Ka h , Irsh d al-faq h il ma rifat adillat al-Tanb h, ed. Bahja Y f amad Ab al- a ib (Bei : M a a a al-Ri la, 1996). 88 Ibn aja men ion ha Ibn Ka h o e he o k a a oung age (allafa f ugh rihi); Ibn ajar al- A al n , Inb al-ghumr, 39. 89 The e a e man e ample of Sh fi chola d ing he Tanb h. Al-Na a , fo in ance, epo edl died and memorized the Tanb h in an astonishing four and half months; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:278. 90 Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 21. Ibn Ka h mo likel died he al-Tanb h i h B h n al-D n al-Fa .

110

evidence, particularly ad h, e e e en ial in nde anding he ba i of he madhhab. Ibn Ka h p ima il p o ide p oof e

f om he i canonical collec ion b

Musnad of Ibn anbal91 and the Sunan of al-D a Ibn Ka h famous ad h of M

oppo i ion o

there is nothing in the Sunna, M commen

ha

hi

ic taql d becomes apparent in his commentary of the

dh eplie ha he ill j dge b

con ain no e idence on he i

pon he

n .92

dh b. Jabal in hich he P ophe a k M

on ho he ill j dge. M

al o d a

dh befo e he e o

he Q

o Yemen

n. If he hol Book

e, hen he ill j dge acco ding o he P ophe

S nna, and if

dh a e , I ill do ijtih d i h m opinion.

93

Ibn Ka h

ad h i good and famo . The im ms of Islam have depended on it in

affirming the u l [al-fiqh principle] of analogy (qi s).

94

B

Ibn Ka h al o de i e ano he

point from the ad h: I i no pe mi ible fo he j dge o imi a e o he han him elf in hi ling.

95

Ibn Ka h make hi poin beca e M

dh did no a

ha af e he Q

n and

Sunna he will follow the sayings of the other imams; precedent is not one of the criteria that M

dh gi e a e en ial fo a j dge. Ibn Ka h , ne e hele , follo

91

hi

a emen

iha

Ibn Ka h anbal leaning appea in his frequent citations of the Musnad of Ibn anbal. Ibn Ka h defend the Musnad from Ibn a m claim ha he Musnad of Ab Abd al-Ra m n al-Andal a pe io o ha of Ibn anbal . Ibn Ka h a e and in [m ie ] ha [opinion] i e ionable (na ar). The evident is that the Musnad of Ibn anbal is superior to the [Musnad of Ab Abd al-Ra m n al-Andal ] and mo e comp ehen i e ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:62. Ibn Ka h al o men ion in hi abaq t that the Musnad of Ibn anbal, i among he g ea e book of I lam and ha he ecei ed a license (ij za) to teach the en i e o k; Ibn Ka h , abaq t, 1:117. For more on the Muslim discussion of the authenticity of Ibn anbal Musnad of ee Jona han B o n, Did he Prophet Say It or Not? The Literal, Historical, and Effective Truth of ad ths in Ea l S nni m, Journal of the American Oriental Society 129, no. 2 (2009): 281. For the more on the structure and content of the Musnad see Christopher Melchert, A mad ibn anbal (Oxford: Oneworld, 2006), 39-48. 92 Al-D a n li ed a he ail end of he fo ma i e age of ad h scholarship but nevertheless felt that he had the ability to critique earlier ad h collections. Many traditionists found inspiration in al-D a n in ha he oo sought to critique ad h found within the authoritative collections and authenticate ad h found outside of the canonical books. For more on al-D a n and hi legac in mode n ime ee Jona han B o n, C i ici m of he Proto- ad th Canon: al-D a n Adj men of al-B kh s and M lim a , Oxford Journal of Islamic Studies 15, no. 1 (2004): 1-37; B o n, al-D a n , EI3 (fo hcoming). Ibn Ka h p o ide a gene o biog aph of al-D a n in al-Bid a and quotes from al- kim al-Na b ha al-D a n did no encounter anybody like him elf ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:341. 93 Ibn Ka h , Irsh d al-faq h, 2:396. 94 Ibn Ka h , Irsh d al-faq h, 2:396. 95 Ibn Ka h , Irsh d al-faq h, 2:396.

111

adi ion in hich Uma command one of hi j dge o j dge b the Sunna, then what is agreed upon by the people, and then ijtih d. Ka h gi e mo e lee a

o j dging ba ed on he con en

he Book ( he Q 96

of p e io

n), hen

In this last tradition, Ibn chola b

necessarily to scholars who are authoritative in a particular madhhab. Ibn Ka h

h

no belie ed in

a madhhab that was not based simply on precedent but rather on the original sources of the Q

n and S nna.97 Ibn Ka h

de i e fo a middle g o nd be

his discussion on the permissibility of chess. maintained it was permissible.98 Ibn Ka h

een he anbal and Sh fi

i e iden in

anbal p ohibi ed he game hile he Sh fi ake an in e media e po i ion no ing ha he e a e

no authentic ad h ha fo bid he game. The P ophe co ld no ha e commen ed on he game ince i

a in od ced in o he M lim comm ni

e e al adi ion f om Al and

af e hi dea h. Ibn Ka h ne e hele

ci e

i ha ha ei he p ohibi o di app o e of he game.99

96

Ibn Ka h , Irsh d al-faq h, 2:396. The edi o Bahja Y f amad Ab al- ayyib notes that Shar al-Tanb h was copied in a anbal madrasa demon a ing ha f om an ea l ime man of Ibn Ka h o k e e app op ia ed b anbal chola . 98 In his Tafs r, Ibn Ka h men ion ha Abd All h b. Uma a che a o e han backgammon and ha Al saw it as a type of gambling (maysara). He hen no e ha M lik, Ab Han fa and Ibn anbal prohibited chess while al-Sh fi belie ed i o be onl di liked; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r al-Qur n al- a m, 12 vol. (Cairo: Maktabat A l d al-Shaykh li l-T h, 2009), 5:1907. Ibn Taymiyya condemns chess in his fat w and argues that many Sh fi s in fact prohibit the game; Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 32:216-246. Ibn Ta mi a di dain fo che abili to engross the believer and take him away from ritual worship led him to take direct action against the game. On his way to afternoon prayer, Ibn Taymiyya reportedly saw a group of people playing chess and could not help himself from flipping over their chessboard; Ab Abd All h b. Abd al-H d , al- Uq d al-durri a min man qib Sha kh alIsl m Ibn Ta mi a, ed. Ab M ab al a b. F d al- l n (Cai o: al-F al- ad ha), 226. It was also reported that in one of his imprisonments, Ibn Taymiyya transformed the prison cells from that of playing chess and backgammon to that of prayer, o hip and d ; Abd al-H d , 210. As Christopher Melchert explains, traditionalists were antagonistic to chess because it contradicted their view of life being that of seriousness: Singleminded devotion manifested itself in many ways - for example, in traditionalists ho ili o che ; Christopher Melche , The Pie of he ad h Folk, International Journal of Middle East Studies 34, no. 3 (2002): 428. T j al-D n al-S bk men ion ha hi fa he held he opinion ha i i impe mi ible fo a follower of the Sh fi school o pla che i h omebod ho belie ed i a p ohibi ed. In o he o d , i a no allo ed fo a Sh fi o pla chess with a anbal ; T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:258. T j al-D n al-S bk al o ci e hi fa he opinion on a Sh fi pla ing che i h omebod ho belie ed i o be p ohibi ed in hi compila ion of hi fa he fat w ; Ta al-D n S bk , Fat w al-Subk , ed. m al-D n Q d , 2 ols. (Bei : D al-J l, 1992), 2:635. 99 Ibn Ka h , Irsh d al-faq h, 2:319. 97

112

Kitāb al-A kām al-kabīr The Kit b al-A k m al-kab r fits into A k m al- ad th o k

o

from ad h. A Jona han B o n e plain , A k m al- ad th o k ad h eg la l

he la

de i ed

e e book ha li ed

ed in de i ing I lamic la along i h hei matns and the collections in

which they are found. A k m al- ad th works also included discussions on the ad h legal implica ion.

100

Early A k m al- ad th works were didactic, such as the famous Umdat al-

a k m of Abd al-Ghan al-Ma di (d. 600/1203), hich con i found in the a a io

of 500 legal ad h ha a e

ayn.101 Umdat al-a k m simply lists authoritative ad h a ocia ed i h

ling and p o ide minimal commen a . In con a

o Ma di

Kit b al-A k m al-kab r fits into the genre of A k m al- ad th ha eaching ool fo M lim chola of eligio

la .

102

ee

o k, Ibn Ka h eferences and

The Kit b al-A k m al-kab r is much

more comprehensive than traditional A k m al- ad th works, since it lists extensively ad h associated with different rulings, compares them to authoritative positions within the madhhab and hen p e en

he a ho

opinion.103

The Kit b al-A k m al-kab r a

i en o a d he end of Ibn Ka h

ca ee and

represents a development from his Shar al-Tanb h.104 Unlike the Shar al-Tanb h, which 100

Jonathan A.C. Brown, ad th: Mu ammad s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World (Oxford: Oneworld, 2009), 61. 101 Brown, ad th, 61. 102 Brown, ad th, 61. 103 I m l b. Uma Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-A k m al-kab r: al-sh mil li-kutub al-adh n, al-mas jid, istiqb l al-qibla, ifat al- al t, ed. N al-D n lib (Bei : D al-Na di , 2010). The e a e di c ion i hin he biog aphical li e a e on he he Ibn Ka h fini hed hi o k. The be ol ion i offe ed b N al-D n lib, he editor of Kit b al-A k m al-kab r, ho p opo e ha Ibn Ka h d af ed la ge pa of he o k b onl finished a complete draft (bayya a) of three volumes. N al-D n lib e plain ha hi ie i co obo a ed b Ibn ajar alA al n al-Majma al-mu assis, which mentions that only three volumes of Kit b al-A k m al-kab r ever surfaced. N al-D n lib e plain ha he hi d ol me i he onl i ing man c ip , he one ha he edi ed and p bli hed; Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-A k m al-kab r, 1:34. I am inclined o N al-D n lib opinion ha Ibn Ka h ne e fini hed Kit b al-A k m al-kab r a he o k i e emel de ailed. Ibn Ka h mo likel pa ed away before completing such a monumental task. Other late works, such as J mi al-mas n d, are also unfinished. 104 We can further determine that Kit b al-A k m al-kab r i a la e o k beca e Ibn Ka h men ion Ma God shower al-Mi i h me c nea he beginning of he e meaning ha al-Mi (d. 742/1341) had al ead pa ed

113

present he p oof e e idence fi Ka h f e

o e plain he a ho i a i e Sh fi po i ion, Ibn Ka h no p e en

and hen di c

e ho

en l goe in o long di c

he

he acco d i h he a ho i a i e Sh fi po i ion . Ibn ion anal ing he a io s ad h ha

en in o

constructing a ruling and then compares them to the opinions of al-Na a , al-R fi (623/1226)105 and even the anbal j i Ibn Q d ma (d. 620/1223).106 Analyzing the sources of en lead Ibn Ka h

o he majo i

po i ion i hin he chool. Ibn Ka h

Sh fi po i ion, but at times it leads him to take a minority confidence in engaging he p ima

o ce

ho

ha

he increasingly saw himself as a mujtahid towards the end of his life. Ibn Ka h

p efe ence fo ijtih d and his distaste for taql d appear in his discussion on

the prayer direction (qibla). As Ahmed El-Sham

e plain , fiqh debates about locating the

qibla were always loaded with the broader implications of the positions taken for the theoretical topics of ijtih d and taql d. Discussions on the qibla often mutated into theoretical arguments de oid of an appa en connec ion o he p ac ical i

e a hand.

107

Ibn Ka h e plain ha if a

trustworthy person (thiqa) relays from substantive knowledge then it is permissible to take from their word and pray. However, if a trustworthy person relays from ijtih d then he should not be imitated (lam yuqallidhu), ince a mujtahid does not imitate another mujtahid in this (determining the prayer direction) or in another [issue of fiqh].

108

Ibn Ka h cla ifie hi

position by stating that there is consensus that if someone is in the land of Muslims then they away. The only manuscript of the work mentions that it was copied in 770/1370-71, or towards the end of Ibn Ka h (d. 774/1373) life; Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-A k m al-kab r, 1:49. 105 Al-R fi had a high standing within he Sh fi chool, with al-Na a s famous legal text Minh j allib n being a compendium of al-R fi al-Mu arrar; A. A ioli, al-R fi , EI2. 106 Ibn Ka h d a hea il f om Ibn Q d ma fo de e mining he p a e di ec ion; Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-A k m alkab r, 2:246. 107 Ahmed El-Sham , Re hinking Taql d in he Ea l Sh fi School, Journal of the American Oriental Society 128, no. 1 (2008):14. El-Shams con in e o e plain ha he Sh fi chool con i ed of he adop ion of he opinions of the founder and subsequent generations of school members as binding interpretations of the sources, but not as sources in themselves. A consistent distinction between school opinions and the sources was maintained, and the voluminous works of positive law always argued and defended the former explicitl in e m of he la e . 108 Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-A k m al-kab r, 2:221.

114

should pray in the existing prayer niche and not engage in ijtih d. Nonetheless, there is disagreement on whether one should use the existing prayer niche but then adjust themselves to the right or the left if they feel the qibla is not entirely correct.109 Ibn Ka h lean o a d adjustment except if it concerns mosques which great Companions established such as those in Kufa, Basra and Damascus.110 Ibn Ka h

p e en a ion of ho

he p a e di ec ion ho ld be e abli hed i

his larger position on ijtih d and taql d. Ibn Ka h

mbolic of

p efe ence fo follo ing ad h i e iden

in his statement that if a reliable person (thiqa)111 relays where the prayer direction is then he ho ld be follo ed. Fo Ibn Ka h , he p oblem a i e pa ic la i

e. In hi

cena io, Ibn Ka h

hen he e i no a hen ic ad h on a

e e ha a mujtahid should perform his own

ijtih d and not engage in taql d of ano he pe on. Ibn Ka h implemen

hi p inciple

throughout his legal discussions by personally analyzing the sources and then comparing them to a ho i a i e opinion

i hin he Sh fi

chool. Ibn Ka h fel comfo able in adj

ing he

a ho i a i e Sh fi opinion o engaging in ijtih d within a madhhab if he felt the sources pointed otherwise.112

109

El-Shamsy, 20. As El-Sham f he e plain , he admi ion of ligh adj men h o gh ijtih d to the otherwise fixed qibla pa allel he fle ible bo nda ie ha Sh fi cholars saw themselves as bound by in their engagement with the opinions of their school and its founder. The possibility of ijtih d remained open, but within limits: on topics that had already received treatment by previous scholars (analogous to existing prayer niches), ijtih d could not be undertaken from scratch, but rather had to take place within the space created by established school precedent. Al-ta mun wa-1-ta sur is thus a metaphor for ijtih d f al-madhhab as practiced by the jurists of the es abli hed Sh fi chool a lea n il he e en h/ hi een h cen . Ibn Ka h a an eigh h/fo een h century scholar demonstrating that ijtih d within the madhhab did not totally disappear after the seventh/ thirteenth century. See al o Halla , Was the Gate of Ijtih d Clo ed. 110 Ibn Ka h dig e e here in o a pecial pa ag aph di c ing he impo ance of Dama c . Ibn Ka h highligh that great companions, such as Zubayr b. al- A m, p a ed in Dama cene mo e . Ibn Ka h had a pecial affinity towards Damascus since it was the city of his education and career. 111 Ibn Ka h e en e he ad h na a o g ade of thiqa or trustworthy in this discussion. 112 For a similar development in how fat w turned into substantive law see Wael B. Halla , F om Fa oF : G o h and Change in I lamic S b an i e La , Islamic Law and Society 1, no. 1 (1994): 29-65.

115

Ibn Ka h

po i ion on he p a e di ec ion i no ne , b

i i

ni

e fo hi e a

po -fo ma i e j ists who were expected to follow the authoritative opinions of the madhhab. T j al-D n al-S bk a g e in hi biog aph of hi fa he , ha i i no pe mi ible fo an one [in he Sh fi

chool] of o

ime o di ag ee i h [Ta

al-D n al-S bk ] beca se that person is a

master-im m (im m mu alli ) in deriving [opinions] from [the books of] al-R fi , al-Na a , the texts of al-Sh fi and he a ing of [hi ] companion .

113

Fo T j al-D n, he Sh fi

madhhab was built on the opinions of al-Sh fi , his Companions, al-R fi , al-Na a fa he Ta

al-D n al-S bk . Since o ing h o gh he

challenging a k, T j al-D n

i ing of he ea l Sh fi

gge ed ha lo e g ade Sh fi

who was able to reconcile he a io

opinion of he i an

evident in the Kit b al-A k m al-kab r ha Ibn Ka h

follo

, and hi a a

he opinion of hi fa he

i hin he Sh fi

chool.114 It is

ie ed him elf a a mujtahid,115 one that

bordered between an independent mujtahid and mujtahid i hin he Sh fi madhhab. Ibn

113

Ibn Ka h legal o k ne e became main eam and e e ci ed pa ingl b la e fig e . Onl one incomplete manuscript of Kit b al-A k m al-kab r i e , da ing f om Ibn Ka h life ime; Ibn Ka h , Kit b alA k m al-kab r, 1:49. Kit b al-A k m al-kab r mo likel did no make in oad in o Sh fi ci cle beca e of i anbal leaning . Ibn Ka h f e en l cites the Musnad of Ibn anbal and the authoritative opinions of the anbal j i Ibn Q d ma. The o k did no fi ell i hin he Maml k legal and madrasa structure which stressed madhhab affilia ion. See Yo ef Rapopo , Legal Di e i in he Age of Taql d: the Four Chief Q s Under the Maml k , Islamic Law and Society 10, no. 2 (2003): 210-228; She man Jack on, The P imac of Dome ic Politics: Ibn Bint al-A a and he E abli hmen of Fo Chief J dge hip in Maml k Eg p , Journal of the American Oriental Society 115, no. 1 (1995): 52-65. La e Sh fi chola and c ibe ma ha e no been inclined to copy the work because it drew too heavily from anbal o ce hile anbal chola did no an c ibe he o k beca e Ibn Ka h p ima il situates himself in the Sh fi madhhab. Nevertheless, the Ministry of Kuwaiti Affairs, which has distributed traditionalist works in the past, recently published Kit b al-A k m al-kab r. Unlike Ibn Ka h o he o k , Kit b al-A k m al-kab r recent publication may have to do with the work being incomplete and designed for specialists. 114 T j al-D n al-S bk belief ha Sh fi j i ho ld engage in taql d of his father is part of the reason why he spent much of his time collecting his fa he opinion ; Ibn ajar al- A al n , al-Durar al-k mina f a n al-mi a al-th mina, ed. Abd al-W rith Mu ammad Al , 4 vols. (Bei : D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 1997), 3:39; T j al-D n belief in taql d of his father is further evident in that he cites a didactic poem which contains all of the legal opinions ha e e o iginal o Ta al-D n al-S bk ; T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t, 10:260. Ideally, jurists were supposed to memorize this poem so they would be able to easily cite Taq al-D n al-S bk opinion . T j al-D n al-S bk also compiled hi fa he fat w ; Ta al-D n al-S bk , Fat w al-Subk . 115 I i nclea he he T j al-D n al-S bk ie ed Ibn Ka h a a mujtahid. T j al-D n al-S bk o ld ha e mo likel held ha all Sh fi j i , incl ding Ibn Ka h , ho ld engage in taql d of foundational figures.

116

Ka h fel confiden in di ec l engaging he p ima defe o Ta

o ce and did no feel ha he had o

al-D n al-S bk o an o he chola .116

In e m of Ibn Ka h

de i e o eek a middle g o nd be een he Sh fi and anbal

schools, Ibn Ka h a g e ha he i al p ac ice of bo h he Sh fi and anbal chool a e acceptable. In his discussion on whether the basmala should be recited out loud in an audible p a e , Ibn Ka h ci e he Sh fi between reciting the basmala o

adi ionali Ab Sh ma ho a g e hat one can choose load, hich i he majo i

Sh fi po i ion, o eci ing i

quietly, the majority anbal po i ion.117 Ibn Ka h a g e ha bo h po i ion can be

ppo ed

by authentic ad h .118

Ijtihād fī alab al-jihād119 Thi

ho

ea i e a

i en o a d he end of Ibn Ka h

Damascus governor Sayf al-D n Manjak in o de o di c outposts (rib ) on he S ian f on ie .

121

life120 at the request of the

he me i of manning he mili a

The treatise falls wi hin he con e

116

of he e en

I i impo an o no e ha hile Ibn Ka h e pec ed Ta al-D n S bk a a fai j dge, I have not found an in ance he e Ibn Ka h ci e him a an a ho i a i e Sh fi jurist. 117 Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-A k m al-kab r, 3:27. Ibn Ka h ake he ame po i ion in hi Tafs r; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:63. Commenting on these same ad h , he Sh fi adionali Ibn Da al- d (d.702/ 1302) lean o he anbal po i ion hat the basmala should be recited quietly; M ammad b. Al b. Da al- d, I k m al-a k m shar Umdat al-a k m (Bei : D al- azm, 2002), 301, 352. 118 For more on whether to read the Basmala silently or outloud in an audible prayer see Brown, Canonization, 25758. 119 Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-Ijtih d f alab al-jih d, ed. Abd All h Abd al-Ra m U a l n, (Ri adh: D al-Li , 1982). E ik Ohlande an la e hi o k a , The Book of U mo E e ion in P i of Jihad ; E ik S. Ohlande , Ibn Ka h , in Essays in Arabic Literary Biography, eds. Joseph E. Lowry and Devin J. Stewart (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009), 157. 120 Ohlande , 157. Ohlande a ha he e i li le do b ha hi ho ea i e ep e en he final independen work produced by Ibn Ka h . 121 Abd All h Abd al-Ra m U a l n, he edi o of Ijtih d f alab al-jih d, notes that he was only able to locate one manuscript of the treatise which may allude to the fact that the work was not extremely popular and used only for immediate consumption against the invading Crusaders.

117

o nding he ack of he Eg p ian po ci The governor wan ed Ibn Ka h

of Ale and ia b

o compile Q

he C

ade in 767/1366.

122

nic verses, ad h , and adi ion on manning

the frontier (mur ba a), to encourage people to take up jih d and o defend he Maml k Empire.123 The treatise discusses the relevant Q

124

nic verses and ad h

that commend jih d

and rib , outlines the history of the military relationship between Muslims and Christians and then commands belie e

o p o ec he Empi e. The o k nicel demon

expertise in fiqh, ad h, hi o

a e Ibn Ka h

and tafs r.

Similarly to the Kit b al-A k m al-kab r, the treatise focuses on Q ad h a he han p ominen fig e

i hin he madhhab . Ibn Ka h

nic verses and

empha i on he

original sources is indicative of his methodology in the latter part of his life, when he increasingly saw himself as a mujtahid. It also represents his audience who were primarily muj hid n who may have been more e pon i e o di ec

o a ion f om he Q

n and S nna

than citations from authoritative figures within the madhhab . Fo in ance, hen Ibn Ka h cites ad h , he onl ci e he p ima

na a o a he han he en i e chain of an mi ion, li

the most authoritative variant, and engages in minimal ad h c i ici m.125 The short treatise could have been read to a group of soldiers as a source of motivation and inspiration.

122

Ohlande no e ha he o k i imila o he one compo ed b Ibn A ki a he e e of N al-D n Zang over a hundred years earlier; Ohlander, 157. The fact that the Damascus governor requested Ibn Ka h o i e he ea i e demon a e he inc ea ing impo ance of Ibn Ka h o a d he end of hi life and hi infl en ial ole in Dama cene poli ic . Fo on Ibn Ka h ela ion hip i h a io Maml k le ee Hen i Lao , Ibn Ka i Historien, Arabica 2, no.1 (1955): 42-88. 123 Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-Ijtih d, 61. 124 Ibn Ka h , Kit b al-Ijtih d, 70. Ibn Ka h men ion ha he e eak ad h in the treatise but that using weak ad h is acceptable in encouraging righteous behavior. For more on ad h scholars using weak ad h to p omo e igh eo beha io ee Jona han B o n, E en if i i no T e I T e: U ing Un eliable ad h in Sunni I lam, Islamic Law and Society 18, no.1 (2011): 1-52. 125 The fact that Ijtih d f alab al-jih d engages in minimal ad h c i ici m i imila o Ibn Ka h , Mawlid Ras l All h, ed. al al-D n Munajjid (Beirut: D r al-Kit b al-Jad d). Ibn Ka h o e he o k o be read out loud to lay audiences. Ibn Ka h doe no ci e all of he isn ds of the ad h that he quotes, something that he does with his other works directed at specialists such as his Tafs r and J mi al-mas n d. Fo mo e on Ibn Ka h Mawlid see Marion Katz, The Birth of the Prophet Muhammad: Devotional Piety in Sunni Islam (London: Routledge, 2006), 54.

118

ad

: By the 8th/14th centuries, all of the major ad h collec ion had been compiled, and

ad h chola

ned hei a en ion o making he ad h co p

mo e acce ible, efining

ad h e minolog and p eading he cience o o he field . Ibn Ka h

ad h o k fi

i hin

this trend, focusing on composing abridgements, reference works and ad h e al a ion .126 Ibn Ka h

ad h o k further attempt to push back against a traditionalist wave that sought to

limit authentic ad h o he canonical collec ion . Ibn Ka h a g e ha a hen ic ad h can be found outside of the canonical collections through independent evaluations of the ad h chain of transmission (isn d) and text (matn).

Tu fat al- ālib li-mukhta ar Ibn al- ājib127 Ibn Ka h

ea lie

ad h o k128 was most likely the ad h e al a ion (takhr j) of the

popular u l al-fiqh text Mukhta ar Ibn alb

jib.129 The Mukhta ar ibn al-

he g ea M lik chola U hm n b. Uma o Ibn al-

126

jib was composed

jib (d. 646/1249) who was a colleague

Brown, ad th, 112. B o n call hi pe iod one of con olida ion, commen a , and c i ici m. Ibn Ka h , Tu fat al- lib bi-ma rifat a dith mukhta ar Ibn al- jib, ed . Abd al-Ghan b. umayd b. Ma m d K ba (Bei : D Ibn azm, 1996). Brown mentions Tu fa in his Introduction on ad th; Brown, ad th, 112. Ohlande an la e hi o k a , The S den Gif fo Kno ing he P ophe ic T adi ion Con ained in the Compendium of Ibn al- jib ; Ohlande , 150. 128 An early date can be determined since the first surviving manuscript of the work is dated 744/1343-44 by a Sh fi c ibe; Ibn Ka h , Tu fa, 59. We can also tell that the Tu fa i an ea l o k, a Ibn Ka h men ion he work in al-Bid a in his biography of Ibn jib; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:178. Other works that were written later in Ibn Ka h ca ee , ch a Ikhti r ul m al- ad th, are not mentioned in al-Bid a. The takhr j also shows signs of a young scholar at work since he constantly refers to al-Mi (d. 742/1341) and al-Dhahab (d. 748/1348), ho e e mo likel ali e d ing he o k compo i ion; Ibn Ka h , Tu fa; 144,145,178. The Tu fa could have been one of his earliest works since he discusses the issue of selling female slaves who have borne their master a child (umm al-walad) without referring to his early work on the subject Ju f ba ummah t al-awl d, ed. Uma b. S la m n af n (Bei : M a a a al-Ri la, 2006); Ibn Ka h , Tu fa, 144. Ohlander also dates the work as ea l no ing, I a compiled fai l ea l in hi ca ee ; Ohlande , 150. Ibn Ka h mo likel died he e ih his fiqh eache B h n al-D n al-Fa ho a belie ed o ha e i en a commen a on he Mukhta ar; Ma m d b. Abd al-Ra m n I bah n , Bay n al-Mukhta ar: wa-huwa shar Mukhta ar Ibn al- jib f u l alfiqh, ed. Al J m a Mu ammad, 2 vols. (Cairo: D r al-Sal m, 2004), 1:26. 129 Mukhta ar Ibn jab was a standard part of many madrasa curriculums; Al-N a m , al-D ris f t r kh almad ris, 1:247. For more on Ibn jab and he Mukhta ar see Ma m d b. Abd al-Ra m n I bah n , 1:15-25. 127

119

of he Sh fi

adi ionali

Sal m bo h p o e ed he

I

al-D n Abd al-Sal m.130 Ibn al-

jib and I

ende of he Cha ea de Bea fo fo

o he C

al-D n Abd alade leading o

their arrest and eventual expulsion from Damascus in 638/1240-41.131 In his Mukhta ar, Ibn jib impl men ion

ad h in elation to its content, transmitter or legal implication. A

takhr j was an evaluation of the ad h p e en in a pa ic la e . A Jona han B o n e plain , With the ad h canon fi ml e abli hed, ad h c i ic ned hei a en ion a a from ad h collections and towards the manner in which other areas of Islamic scholarship used ad h. In books of takhr j, a rash of which appeared during the 1300s and 1400s, a ad h chola ook a book f om ano he gen e and di c ed the status of the ad h it contained. Since few books outside ad h collec ion featured isn ds when they quoted ad h , takhr j books first provided all the ad h collec ion ha p o ided chain of an mi ion fo a ad h and hen discussed its reliability.132 Ibn Ka h

takhr j gave scholars a reference work to see where a particular ad h a fo nd in

authoritative collections, what their complete isn d was and their general grade. Similar to Shar al-Tanb h, the work primarily references ad h The o k al o ep e en Ibn Ka h

i hin he i canonical collections.133

la ge heme ha fiqh should be studied in conjunction

with its proof texts.134

Al-Takmīl fī ma‘rifat asmā’ al-thiqāt wa’l-ḍu‘afā’ wa’l-majāhīl This important work remains in manuscript form.135 The work is an abridgement of alMi

Tahdh b al-kam l f asm al-rij l 136 and also incorporates many of al-Dhahab

130

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:178. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:158. 132 Brown, ad th, 112. 133 Later works, such as his Tafs r and J mi al-mas n d, look at a larger range of collections. 134 Tu fat al-t lib li-mukhta ar Ibn al- jib eem o be mo e pop la han Ibn Ka h o he fiqh works. Ibn ajar al- A al n ci e hi e f e en l in hi o n takhr j of Ibn al- jib o k; Ibn Ka h , Tu fa, 56. There are also two complete extant manuscripts of the takhr j compared to a partial one of his Kit b al-A k m al-kab r; Ibn Ka h , Tu fa, 57. 135 Ibn Ka h , J mi al-mas n d, 1:49. 131

120

in igh . Ibn Ka h con an l

efe hi eade

o he Takm l in his Bid a for more extensive

biographies of ad h chola and narrators. The work most likely never gained wide readership because of more popular abridgements of al-Mi

Tahdh b, such as Ibn ajar al- A al n

Tahdh b al-Tahdh b.137

Ikhti ār ‘ulūm al- adīth138 Ibn Ka h

econd majo

ad h o k139 is his summary of Ibn al- al

introduction to ad h cience he Muqaddima li- ul m al- ad th. Ibn Ka h d a n o he Sh fi engagemen al

In od c ion b

Ibn al- al

a once again

adi ionali Ibn al- al , with the Ikhti r ul m al- ad th being his second

i h he chola

Ibn Ka h di ag ee

famo

o k .140 Ibn Ka h p e en a fai hf l

of Ibn al-

o hi

ad h me hodolog .141

regarding the definition of a a

(authentic) ad h.142

doe make ome impo an amendmen i h Ibn al- al

mma

argued ha , If e find ome epo in a ad h no ebook ha eem o ha e a a

isn d but is neither in the a

ayn nor indicated as a

136

in a book of the relied-upon, well-

Jam l al-D n Y f al-Mi , Tahdh b al-kam l f asm al-rij l, ed. Bashsh A d Ma f (Beirut: M a a a al-Ri la, 1984). 137 Ibn ajar al- Asqal n , Tahdh b al-tahdh b, ed. Mu af Abd al-Q dir At (Beirut: D r al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya, 1994). 138 Ibn Ka h o iginal o k i named Ikhti r ul m al- ad th but the original editor, the Egyptian scholar A mad Sh ki (d. 1958), enamed he book al-B ith al- ath th: shar ikhti r ul m al- ad th in order to give the book a h ming i le; Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th: shar ikhti r ul m al- ad th, ed. Al a an Al Abd al- am d, 2 vols. (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Ma if li l-Na h a l-Ta , 1996), 1:63. 139 Ikhti r ul m al- ad th was most likely written after his Tafs r and much of al-Bid a wa l-nih a, since he does not mention the abridgement in either of the two works. In his entry on Ibn al- al in al-Bid a, Ibn Ka h notes that Ibn al- al compo ed man beneficial book in he ad h cience hich all de o he idea ha e en ho gh Ibn Ka h liked Ibn al- al ad h works, he did not conceive of writing a summary of his Muqaddima at he ime; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:170. A later composition is further supported by a surviving manuscript of the o k igned b Ibn Ka h him elf ha no e ha he finished composing the text in 752/1351-2; Ibn Ka h , alB ith al- ath th, 1:49. 140 Ibn Ka h fi engagemen of Ibn al- al o k a abaq t al-fuqah al-sh fi i n. See above. 141 This demonstrates the importance of studying commentaries and abridgements since the commentator or abridger at times redirects the content of the work. For more on the importance of studying commentaries see Mohammad Fadel, Ibn aja s Hady al- : A Medie al In e p e a ion of the Structure of al-B kh s al-J mi al- a : In od c ion and T an la ion, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 5, no. 3 (1995): 161-197. 142 A e ill ee, Ibn Ka h e m ch of he e minolog anda di ed b Ibn al- al throughout his Tafs r.

121

kno n chola , e do no da e in i

ha i i a hen ic.

143

Ibn al- al

was thus hesitant to

declare ad h no fo nd i hin a ho i a i e collec ion a a hen ic ince he e a of he g ea canonical ad h

chola had pa ed and c ibal e o co ld ha e inc ea ed h o gh he pa age

of time.144 Ibn Ka h , on he o he hand, fit within the scholarly tradition that maintained that there were many authentic ad h ha

e e no fo nd in he canonical ad h collec ion . Th o gh an

independent evaluation of the ad h matn and isn d, scholars could determine the different degrees of a ad h a hen ici . Ibn Ka h did ag ee i h Ibn al- al ad h a fo nd helped de e mine he ad h a hen ici

b

that the collection a

e ed ha he p oce

of

ad h c i ici m ho ld con in e. Fo in ance, in ega d o he Musnad of Ibn anbal, Ibn Ka h a g e ha he e a e man

ad h

i hin i ha a e e

al in a hen ici

found in the six canonical collections.145 Similarly to his fiqh o k , Ibn Ka h

o he ad h a inclined o a

type of ijtih d within ad h cholarship that rejected a strict taql d of previous ad h scholars.146

Jāmi‘ al-masānīd147 Ibn Ka h collec ion

149

final majo

ad h o k148 J mi al-mas n d fi in o a

pe of mega

that makes an effort to capture canonical and non-canonical ad h in o a single

143

Brown, Canonization, 244. Brown, Canonization, 244. 145 Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th, 1:109. 146 Ikhti r ul m al- ad th has been incorporated in many modern University Islamic Studies curriculums; Mu ammad Mu af al-Zu a l , Ibn Kath r al-Dimashq : al-h fi , al-mufassir, al-mu arrikh, al-faq h (Damascus: D al-Qalam, 1995), 262. 147 Ibn Ka h , J mi al-mas nid wa l-sunan al-h d li-aqwam sunan, ed. Abd al-Malik b. Abd All h Ibn Duhaysh (Bei : D al-Kha r, 1998). 148 The edi o Abd al-Malik b. Abd All h Ibn Duhaysh convincingly argues that the work was most likely one of Ibn Ka h la e o k ince i i incomple e; Ibn Ka h , J mi al-mas n d, 1:40. There are also other aspects of the work that allude to a later date. First, Ibn Ka h on an mi he man c ip a ing, I an mi hi f om m 144

122

work. J mi al-mas nid attempts to provide a brief biography of all the Companions150 who narrated ad h and hen li

he ad h ha he

an mi ed f om he i canonical

collections, the Musnad of Ibn anbal, Ab Bak al-Ba

, Ab Ya l al-Maw il , and he al-

Mu jam al-kab r of al- aba n .151 In the J mi al-mas n d, we see a development from the Mukhta ar Ibn

jib, which primarily deals with the six canonical collections, to a collection

that incorporates non-canonical ad h collec ion . Ibn Ka h ne e fini hed he o k, p obabl because of its enormous scope and the fact that he began it late in his career. Like the Kit b alA k m al-kab r, the work did not have a wide circulation; it was incomplete and designed for specialists.

C

e

a

Ib Ka

Ibn Ka h

eS

o k clea l fi

adi ionali mo emen . Ibn Ka h Dhahab Ka h

ho bo h

ad

a

:

i hin he Sh fi

adi ionali con ingen of he

in e e

can be aced back o al-Bi

in hi o

o e majo hi o ical o k on Dama c

and he hi o

l and al-

of I lam. Ibn

hi o ical o k , ne e hele , diffe ed f om he e g ea hi o ian in ha hi book

foc ed mo e on he hi o

of Sh fi i m.152 Ibn Ka h

studies with famous ad h chola al-Mi

ad h o k are connected to his

and al-Dhahab , ho

o e anda d efe ence

father, May God have mercy upon him, f om hi (o n) hand i ing ; Ibn Ka h , J mi al-mas n d, 1:55. There is no o he o k of Ibn Ka h ha I ha e een ha ha one of his sons transmit the text suggesting that his sons were now older and scholars themselves. Secondly, in the introduc ion, Ibn Ka h efe hi eade o h ee o he of hi works - his Tafs r, Kit b al-A k m al-kab r, and the Takm l; Ibn Ka h , J mi al-mas n d, 1:60. These works were all i en in he middle o he la e pa of Ibn Ka h ca ee gge ing ha J mi al-mas n d was one of his last major works. 149 Brown, ad th, 59. 150 J mi al-mas n d lists the Companions in alphabetical order instead of other musnads which cite certain Companions first. For more on musnads see Brown, ad th, 28. 151 Ibn Ka h es this group of ten ad h collections extensively in his Tafs r. 152 Ibn Ka h a he onl Sh fi adi ionali of hi gene a ion o p od ce a Sh fi abaq t work. Al-Bi l and al-Dhahab p od ced gene al hi o ical o k ha e e no ied o madhhab affiliation but broader categories such as ad h peciali , Dama cene chola , and M lim no able . The fac ha Ibn Ka h a the only one to p od ce a Sh fi abaq t o k gge ha Ibn Ka h a mo e Sh fi han he o he .

123

o k in he cience. Ibn Ka h f e

en l

efe

o he e ad h ma e

an unclear ad h o

nkno n an mi e . Ibn Ka h

o hi ea l

i h B h n al-D n al-Fa

die

pon

e pe i e in j i p dence can be aced

. The p o-ijtih d Sh fi madhhab that Ibn

Ka h p omo e d e f om bo h B h n al-D n al-Fa

and hi fa he Ibn Fi k . While Ibn

Ta mi a infl ence i appa en , i doe no domina e Ibn Ka h Ka h doe no

hen he come

in ellec al p ojec . Ibn

i e an ab idgemen (mukhta ar), continuation (dhayl), or commentary (shar )

of an Ibn Ta mi a

ok. F

he mo e Ibn Ta mi a in e e

and anbal fiqh do no appea in Ibn Ka h

in heolog , pi i ality

i ing .

Conclusion: A b ief

e of Ibn Ka h

to promote a pro-ijtih d Sh fi

majo

o k demon

a e ha hi in ellec al p ojec

a

adi ionali madhhab. In his historical works, Ibn Ka h

o gh o empha i e he adi ionali

and i hin I lamic hi o

and e hink he Sh fi

chool hi o ic ela ion hip i h A h a i m. Hi j i p dence o k call fo ijtih d that engages both the original sources and the authoritative opinions of the madhhab. Ibn Ka h speaks out against taql d yet cites opinions of foundational figures and builds off their views. In the subject of ad h, Ibn Ka h al o main ain a

pe of ijtih d which argues that the process of

ad h c i ici m ho ld continue since authentic ad h collec ion . Th o gho

Ibn Ka h

o k , he infl ence of Ibn Ta mi

a i p e en b

in ellec al p ojec . Ibn Ka h

majo

indi ec and doe no d i e Ibn Ka h in line i h he g ea Sh fi

e e no onl fo nd in he canonical

adi ionali

o k a e mo e

befo e him han ha of he anbal Ibn Ta mi a.153

153

Ohlande make a imila ob e a ion in ha Ibn Ka h eem o ha e en i ioned him elf a follo ing in he foo ep of a line of g ea con e a i e-leaning Sh fi s to whom he saw himself as an heir: al-Ba ha (d. 1066), Ibn al- al , al-Na a (d. 1277) and, of course, his teachers al-Dhahab and al-Mi ; Ohlande , 153.

124

We will now turn to the work that Ibn Taymiyya most likely had the greatest influence on, Ibn Ka h

Tafs r.

125

Chapter IV Different Traditionalisms, C The

onge a g men fo he heo

Ta mi a i ha he copie he la

a

Ka h

ac e

ha Ibn Ka h

gge

eQ

a he

o ec ion of Ibn Ta mi a

in the introduction to his exegesis.1 Ibn Ka h him elf implemen a ion of Ibn Ta mi a Q

A

poke pe on fo Ibn

Muqaddima f u l al-tafs r ha hi Tafs r is an

nic hermeneutic. Yet, this chapter will argue that Ibn

a no he poke pe on fo Ibn Ta mi

a beca e he bo h ep e en ed

o diffe en

types of traditionalism.2 Ibn Taymiyya represented an intellectualized traditionalism which sought to argue for the rational basis of the transmitted sources. Ibn Taymiyya believed that reason and revelation were complementary and was influenced by the great anbal a ho ities befo e him

ch a Q

Ab Ya l (d. 458/1066) and Ibn A l (d. 513/1119) ho a emp ed o

incorporate rationalism within traditionalism.3 Ibn Ka h , on he o he hand, ep e en ed a fideist traditionalism that deferred to revelation and preferred not to delve into issues relating to

1

Fo a l cid mma of Ibn Ta mi a Muqaddima f u l al-tafs r treatise please see Walid Saleh, Ibn Taymiyya and the Rise of Radical Hermeneutics: An Analysis of an Introduction to he Fo nda ion of Q nic Exegesis, in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, eds. Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010), 123-162. I will be drawing on this article throughout this Chapter. 2 Scholars repeatedly emphasize the influence of Ibn Taymiyya on Ibn Kath r without highlighting the differences between them. For instance, Richard Curtis states, Ibn Ta mi ah and hi aq dah eligio pe pec i e e e among the leading if not the most influential components of Ibn Ka h life ; Roy Young Muhammad Mukhtar C i , A hen ic Interpretation of Classical Islamic texts; an Analysis of the In od c ion of Ibn Ka h Tafs r alQur n al-a m, ( PhD diss., University of Michigan, 1989), 1. Ibrahim Baraka also notes tha Ibn Ka h follo Ibn Ta mi a Q nic he mene ic: Hi den (talm dh) Ibn Ka h con in ed [Ibn Ta mi a Q nic hermeneutic] in his Tafs r af e (Ibn Ta mi a). [Ibn Ka h ] men ion [ he Q nic he mene ic] in hi introduction and stuck by it (iltazama bihi) ; Ib ahim Ba aka, Ibn Taymiyya wa-juh duhu f al-tafs r (Beirut: alMaktaba al-Islamiyya, 1984), 131. One of he an la o of Ibn Ka h Tafs r, M ammad Mahd Sha f, also emphasizes Ibn Kath r as an extension of Ibn Taymiy a: Ibn Ka h r was from among the best disciples of the grand Im m Ibn Taymiyya. He stuck to him for a long period, and graduated at his hands. He used to strive in defense of hi opinion and e dic in man ca e ; Ibn Ka h r, The Exegesis of the Grand Holy Quran, trans. M ammad Mahd Sha f, 4 vols. (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya), 1:4. 3 A Geo ge Makdi i a of Ibn A l, A an in ellec ali , he in i ed on he e of ea on and a ho i on an e al foo ing, main aining ea on impo ance in search of the truth, boldly enumerating its rights, in the face of the fideism of fellow T adi ionali ; Ibn Aq l: Religion and Culture in Classical Islam (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1997), 259. Nevertheless, many traditionalists believed that Ibn A l had gone too far and engaged in ta w l. See Ibn Q d ma, al-Radd al Ibn Aq l al- anbal , eds. Al-Fa l Sulaym n Ibn Sam n, A mad Far d al-Maz d and Ya y Mur d (Bei : D al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya, 2004).

126

God e ence. Ibn Ka h main ained a mo al heolog

o

heolog of p a i

ha engaged

sciences which he believed had influence over righteous conduct rather than kal m which he thought to be fruitless speculation. In hi ega d, Ibn Ka h traditionalists such al-Mi Ibn Ka h

diffe en

(d. 742/1341) and Ibn al- al

a infl enced b

he g ea Sh fi

(d. 643/1245).4 Ibn Ta mi a and

adi ionali m o e lap in ha he bo h in e p e he Q

n on its literal

and not figurative level but their interpretations and engagement with the exegetical tradition diffe ba ed on hei con a ing in ellec al backg o nd . Th , hile Ibn Ka h copie pa Ibn Ta mi a

ea i e in hi Tafs r, he interpre i ba ed on he Sh fi

of

adi ionali

intellectual circle that he was a part of.

Tension within the Traditionalist Movement: In he in igh f l a icle Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atuhu, Ca e ina Bo i keenl no ice ha he e a a pl ali

of oice

i hin he adi ionali mo emen ha did no lead o

universal support for Ibn Taymiyya.5 Among these differences was the theological debate over whether to engage in kal m or to focus solely on the transmitted sources. Ibn Rajab al- anbal (d. 795/1392) captures this debate in his biography of Ibn Taymiyya in his Dha l al al- an bila. Ibn Rajab e plain ha man

adi ionali

abaq t

did no app o e of Ibn Ta mi a

forays into kal m: The e a a g o p of ad h chola and j i , among he im ms of ad h, who loved the Shaykh and used to praise him ( u a im nahu). But they did not love [his] preoccupation with the specialists of kal m and philo oph .

4

6

Ibn Rajab continues to explain

I attempted to demonstrate this in Chapter Three. Caterina Bori, Ibn Taymiyya wa-Jam atu-hu: Authority, Conflic and Con en in Ibn Ta mi a s Circle in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, 23. 6 Abd al-Ra m n b. A mad Ibn Rajab, Kit b al-Dha l al abaq t al- an bila, 2 vols. (Bei , Lebanon: D alMa ifa, 1981), 2:394. Bori also quotes this passage; Bori, 34. She translates al-huff a he mo lea ned among hem b I am inclined o an la e he o d a ad h chola . 5

127

that these traditionalist ad h chola and j i al-Sh fi , A mad b. anbal, Is

preferred that Ibn Taymiyya take the road of

b. R ha a h and o he

ho did no engage in he a ional

sciences altogether. Ibn Ka h fi

i hin he adi ionali g o p ha cho e no o engage in kal m and

philosophy but rather focused on the transmitted sources, most notably ad h. While Ibn Ka h is never openly critical of Ibn Taymiyya in his writings, he most likely did not approve of Ibn Ta mi a engagemen law, ad h and hi o , b Ka h

Ib Ta

i h he a ionali

cience . Ibn Ka h onl

otes Ibn Taymiyya in

ne e in heolog . The diffe ence be een Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn

adi ionali m become clea e

a a d Ib Ka

C

hen e look mo e clo el a hei e ege ical

i ing .

a ting Traditionalisms:

While chola ha e no iced he a k diffe ence be een Ibn Ta mi ia and Ibn Ka h

e ege ical

i ing ,7 there has been no work that traces these differences to the two

e ege e con a ing adi ionali m . Ibn Ta mi a engagement with kal m and philosophy ned man of hi engagemen

i h he Q

n in o heological ac in hich he p o e he

irrationality of his opponents. Ibn Taymiyya consistently argues that heretical sects are not faithful to the Q

nic text since they engage in ta w l. In compa i on, Ibn Ka h

studies in ad h infl enced hi Q

e en i e

nic commentary to be one that evaluated (takhr j) the

e ege ical adi ion befo e him. Ibn Ka h i no conce ned i h heological ef a ion a m ch wi h p e en ing a hen ic adi ion ha help el cida e he Q 7

n.

For instance, I m l S lim Abd al- l compa e Ibn Ka h and Ibn Ta mi a e ege ical i ing and e p e e admi a ion fo Ibn Ka h aigh fo a d and conci e i ing le compa ed o Ibn Ta mi a tangential prose, which discusses random topics and unnecessarily delves into kal m. Abd al- l even goes to the poin of a ing ha he fea ha i co ld be aid abo [Ibn Ta mi a ] Tafs r what is said about al-R : in i i everything except tafs r. Abd al- l concl de hi compa i on b a ing ha Ibn Ka h implemen Ibn Ta mi a Q nic he mene ic be e han Ibn Ta mi a doe ; I m l S lim Abd al- l, Ibn Kath r wamanhajuhu f al-Tafs r (Cairo: Maktabat al-Malik Fay al al-I l miyya, 1984), 268-276.

128

Ibn Ta mi a Q

nic hermeneutic revolved around his traditionalist belief that the

li e al meaning of he Q

n ho ld be he o ce of heolog . A major theme of Ibn

Taymiyya Muqaddima f u l al-tafs r is that an exegete has to be correct about the language of he Q

n (al-dal l) and its meaning (al-madl l).8 Ibn Taymiyya believed that many exegetes

foi ed hei heolog on he Q

n making i a j

ifica ion fo heir views rather than the

foundation.9 In his Muqaddima, Ibn Ta mi a a ack Sh ,

f and e en S nn Q

interpretations that he did not believe corresponded to the Q

nic text.10

nic

While Ibn Taymiyya affirms the validity of the transmitted sources he nevertheless ad oca ed an in ellec ali ed adi ionali m hich a Ibn Ta mi a belie ed in a

a ionali

ea on and adi ion a

ba ed on e ela ion and adi ion,

11

complimen a .

one that sought to

understand the rational nature of scripture. In arguing that reason and tradition were complimen a , Ibn Ta mi a a deba ing again pa ic la l la e A h a

he philo ophe , M

a il and

ho a ime p io i i ed ea on o e e ela ion.12 Ibn Ta mi a

strong emphasis on rationality is one of the reasons why his exegesis frequently delves into deep theological and philosophical discussions.13 Ibn Taymiyya repeatedly argues that the traditionalist position is rationally superior to those who employ so-called

8

a ional me hod .

Saleh, Rise of Radical Hermeneutics, 140. Saleh, Rise of Radical Hermeneutics, 140. 10 Among most the colo f l of he e e ample i a ppo ed Sh in e p e a ion of e e 2:67 God command o o la gh e a co , which supposedly means to la gh e i ha, he ife of M ammad. I have not found a Sh tafs r ha in e p e hi e e in hi manne . The in e p e a ion ha God command o o la gh e a co being ha of i ha ma ha e been a a e Sh one that Ibn Taymiyya heard orally rather than read. Nonetheless, the interpretation does pla a ef l S nni polemical ole in acc ing Sh of wanton ta w l; Saleh, Rise of Radical Hermeneutics, 141. 11 M. Sai O e a li, The Q nic Rational Theology of Ibn Taymiyya and his Criticism of the Mutakallim n, in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, 84. Al o ee, Bin amin Ab ahamo , Ibn Ta mi a on he Ag eemen of Rea on and T adi ion, The Muslim World 82, no. 3-4 (1992):256-72. 12 This will be discussed further below. 13 Ibn ajar al- A al n notes that Ibn Taymiyya had a tremendous amount of knowledge (tawassu ) in both the transmitted and rational sciences (al-manq l wa l-ma q l); Ibn Hajar al- A al n , al-Durar al-k mina f a n almi a al-th mina, ed. Abd al-W i h Mu ammad Al , 4 ol . (Bei : D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 1997), 1:88. 9

129

Ibn Ta mi a belief ha

adi ion and ea on ere complementary appears on the onset

of his Muqaddima he e he define kno ledge a

ha

hich i

hf ll

an mi ed f om an

infallible [indi id al] o a a emen ha can be defended b an accep ed [logical] p oof.

14

Knowledge can either be transmitted from a prophet15 or deduced through rational deductions. As a traditionalist, Ibn Taymiyya consistently affirms the validity of the transmitted sources but as an intellectualist he stresses that revelation was rational. Ibn Ta mi a

e

on eason

continues throughout the treatise as he consistently employs analogies. For instance, one of the major arguments of his Muqaddima is that the Q

n ho ld be in e p e ed h o gh

understanding, practice and interpretations of the early Muslim community. The Companions had an essential exegetical role since the revelation was explained to them by the Prophet. To support his thesis, Ibn Taymiyya presents the rational argument that it is not possible for someone to study medicine or arithmetic without the science being explained to them, so how co ld he o d of God no been e plained hen i meaning i e en ial o a belie e

eligion

and salvation?16 Here Ibn Taymiyya argues against the dominant philological approach which hold ha he Q To f

he

n ho ld be in e p e ed p ima il

h o gh he A abic lang age.17

ppo hi belief ha he Companion opinion and in e p e a ion

ho ld be

a source of exegesis, Ibn Taymiyya contends that the differences between the Companions interpreta ion a e one of

a ia ion of a heme

word dhikr, fo e ample, co ld mean he Q

a he han ha of

b ance.18 The Q

nic

n, di ine book o emembe ing God.19 For Ibn

14

Saleh, Rise of Radical Hermeneutics, 127. The term ma m will be discussed further in the next Chapter. 16 Ta al-D n A mad b. Abd al- al m Ibn Ta m ya, Muqaddima f u l al-tafs r, ed. Adn n Za (Kuwait: D al-Q n al-Ka m, 1972), 37. 17 For mo e on he a g men ha he Q n should be interpreted primarily through the Arabic language see Saleh, Ri e of Radical He mene ic , 18 Saleh, Rise of Radical Hermeneutics, 133. 19 Saleh, Rise of Radical Hermeneutics, 133. 15

130

Ta mi a, all of he e in e p e a ion a e co ec beca e he a e of dhikr a he han m

a ia ion of he ame heme

all e cl i e. Ibn Ta mi a gi e he logical e ample ha he o nd

mind (al- aql al-sal m) comp ehend (yatafa an) variety just as it understands that a loaf is a type of bread.20 Similarly, many of the Companion in e p etations were variations of Q

nic

words.21 Ibn Ta mi a h

n

ejec A h a claim ha he P ophe did no e plain he Q

to the Companions and that their interpretations were not authoritative because they were contradictory.22 In con a , Ibn Ka h main ain a fidei

adi ionali m ha held ha eligio

knowledge should be based on scripture. Reason plays a subordinate role to tradition but it none hele

pla

a ole in anal ing adi ion . Ibn Ka h

fidei m i apparent in that he

spends a far greater time than Ibn Taymiyya in sorting through reports, listing different variants and p e en ing hi e al a ion. E en ho gh Ibn Ka h philo ophical di c

ion , hi

a a a e of heological and

heolog of he salaf led him la gel

o igno e heological

debates undertaken by Ibn Taymiyya.23 Ibn Ka h

fidei m appea in hi in e p e a ion of e e 7:12, in hich God

Sa an h he did no p o

e ion

a e o Adam: God aid: Wha p e en ed o f om bo ing do n as

I commanded o ? and He aid, I am be e han him: Yo c ea ed me f om fi e and him f om cla .

Rega ding Sa an decla a ion

cites two statements from al- aba

o c ea ed me f om fi e and him f om cla , Ibn Ka h

Tafs r, the first from the famous successor asan al-Ba

20

Ibn Taymiyya, Muqaddima, 44. Ibn Taymiyya, Muqaddima, 44. Ibn Taymiyya also presents the ad h scholars rationality that if a report comes from multiple directions and it is evident that the various parties did not conspire, then the report should be accepted as certain knowledge; Ibn Taymiyya, Muqaddima, 62. 22 Didin S af ddin, The P inciple of Ibn Ta mi a Q nic In e p e a ion, (ma e he i , McGill University, 1994), 99. The A h a Ab mid al-Gha l (d. 505/1111), fo in ance, no e ha Ibn Ma d and Ibn Abb e ege ical ma e ial did no come f om he P ophe b e e f om hei o n opinion ; Ab mid alGha l , I ul m al-d n, 4 vols. (Egypt: al-Maktaba al-Tij riyya al-Kubr , [19--]), 1:290. 23 For more on he heolog of he salaf ee he Introduction. 21

131

(d. 110/728) ha Ibl

pe fo med analog (q sa) and he a he fi

been be e fo Sa an o follo God o de Ka h follo

asan al-Ba

a emen

o do o. 24 It would have

a he han o engage in heological pec la ion. Ibn i h he ema k he isn d i a hen ic,

25

which

mean ha Ibn Ka h de e mined ha he e i an nb oken chain of an mi ion f om al- aba to asan al-Ba

. Ibn Ka h al o incl ded he adi ion beca e he belie ed ha e

adi ion i heologicall

o nd. The econd adi ion i f om he S cce o Ibn S n (d.

110/728) in hich he e plain , he fi

one o pe fo m analog (q sa) i Ibl , he

moon would not have been worshiped if it was not through analogy (qi s). adi ion, pol hei m i a e l of nnece a once again men ion af e he adi ion ha Ka h

of he

26

n and

According to this

e of ea on in heological affai . Ibn Ka h he isn d i a hen ic.

27

In both instances, Ibn

oice hi belief ha qi s had no place in theology by presenting authentic traditions

f om p ominen S cce o

ha

a e ha Sa an ho ld ha e impl obe ed God command.

While Ibn Ka h did no go a fa a Ibn Ta mi

a in a e ing ha ea on a e al o

that of tradition, he nonetheless employs rational methods in evaluating traditions. For instance, a long standing debate within the tafs r adi ion a ho

o e al a e he occa ion of

e ela ion (asb b al-nu l) literature. Occasion of revelation traditions helped hi o ici e he Q

n b p o iding con e

o hen and h pa ic la

e e

e e e ealed.28 Yet, the

traditions were problematic because they did not always reach the standards of ad h chola such as having incomplete chains of transmission (isn d) and containing anachronisms. They

24

I m l b. Uma Ibn Ka h , Tafs r al-Qur n al- a m, 12 vols. (Cairo: Maktabat A l d al-Shaykh li-T h, 2009), 7:2215. 25 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:2215. 26 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:2215. 27 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:2215. 28 Andrew Rippin, Occasions of Revelation, Enc clopaedia of the Qur n, ed. Jane Dammen McAuliffe (Brill, 2012). Fo mo e on Occa ion of Re ela ion ee And e Rippin, The Function of asb b al-nuz l in Qur nic Exegesis, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 51, (1988):1-20.

132

were further often multiple traditions associated with each verse that were inconsistent to the point of being contradictory.29 Ibn Taymiyya addresses the asb b al-nu l in his Muqaddima arguing that they are important exegetical source since they provide the context of revelation. Fitting with his overall theory of elevating the position of the early community, Ibn Taymiyya contends that asb b alnu l reports should be considered at the same level of other ad th rather than just simply e ege ical adi ion . al-nu l epo

a

30

Ibn Taymiyya even cites al-B kh

musnad adi ion

a a chola

ho con ide asb b

o ho e ha can be aced back o he P ophe .31 In

terms of the problem of numerous asb b al-nu l traditions associated with a Q

nic verse, Ibn

Taymiyya claims that the verses could have been revealed several times for different reasons. Verses could have multiple asb b al-nu l traditions associated with them, because they were revealed in variety of contexts.32 Ibn Ka h

ake a mo e c i ical app oach o asb b al-nu l traditions and at times rejects

hem ba ed on anach oni m and logical incon i enc .

33

Fo e ample, Ibn Ka h

ake i

with traditions relayed by al- aba and Ibn Ab

im al-R

26:224, onl

a e ealed conce ning he poe of he

An

ch a

ho e lo in e o follo

he poe

a an b. Th bi and Abd All h b. al-Ra

crying to the Prophet beca e he belie ed he Q

e

(d. 327/938) that the verse

a. In the tradition, the Poets come

n a cha i ing hem. The P ophe

assures them by reciting the last verse of the s ra, E cep ho e ho belie e and do igh eo

29

Saleh, Radical He mene ic , 134. Saleh, Radical He mene ic , 135. 31 Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th: shar ikhti r ul m al- ad th, ed. Al a an Al Abd al- am d, 2 ols. (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Ma if li l-Na h a l-Tawz , 1996), 1:144. Ab mid al-Gha l no e ha onl ome of he Q n ha musnad adi ion ela ed o hem; Ab mid al-Gha l , 1:290. 32 Saleh, Radical He mene ic , 135. 33 Jona han A.C. B o n, Ho We Kno Ea l ad h C i ic Did Matn Critici m and Wh I So Ha d o Find, Islamic Law and Society 15, no. 2 (2008): 183. Ibn Ka h engage in matn criticism throughout his Tafs r. 30

133

deed . The P ophe M

ammad e plain ha hi la

ha he e poe a e he igh eo

poe b

?

34

o hem. Ibn Ka h ag ee

a k : Thi s ra was revealed when the Prophet

resided in Mecca (Makkiyya) o ho co ld hi poets of the An

e e efe

e e

ea on of e ela ion be [ ela ed o] he

Ibn Ka h concl de ha he e adi ion a e questionable since their

chains are incomplete and they do not corroborate one another.35 In e e 23:14, Ibn Ka h c i ici e ano he of Ibn Ab b. Th bi na a e ha he P ophe

im

adi ion in hich Za d

a dic a ing o him he beginning of verse 23:14, which

discusses how God created the various stages of the human being. As he reached the end of the e e, he Companion M

dh b. Jabal p oclaimed Glo

c ea o . The P ophe began o la gh, leading M Me enge of God? The P ophe e ponded ha ended.36 Ibn Ka h fi

be o God, ho i he be of

dh o a k, Wha a e o la ghing abo ha M

dh had

e ed a ho

c i ici e one of he ad h na a o decla ing ha he i

Oh

he e e e

eak

( a f jiddan). He then adds that in this tradition there is a severe objection (nak ra shad da), in that the s ra is Makkiyya b

ha Za d b. Th bi

b. Jabal con e ed in Medina a

o e he e ela ion in Medina and ha M

ell. Fo Ibn Ka h , hi

adi ion i

e ionable because of

anachronisms. He also may have had a theological objection to a Companion preempting the revelation.

I e

e

G d Na e a d A

Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h

b e: con a ing adi ionali m ma be be

een in he

perennial challenge of in e p e ing God name and a ib e . Ibn Ta mi a belonged o a tradition that affirmed (ithb t) the attributes of God believing that figurative interpretations 34

Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 8:4382. Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 8:4382. 36 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:4034. 35

134

dh

undermine the shar a and lead to heretical theologies. Ibn Taymiyya critiques a host of sects which he believed engaged in unnecessary ta w l of God cha ac e i ic and in he p oce ejec ed God

e e ence. On he o he hand, Ibn Ka h

p efe ed o ead o e

God a ib e

Ta mi a, Ibn Ka h and a ib e

i ho

adi ionali m con i en l

engaging in interpretation (imr r). Unlike Ibn

adi ionali m con ended ha del ing in o he meaning of God name

a poin le

pec la ion and did no

a an one in ellec al ime.

Ibn Ta mi a po i ion on he di ine attributes stems from his criticism of the dominant A h a po i ion ha did no loca e God in a pa ic la loca ion (jiha).37 A he famo A h a Fakh al-D n al-R

Sh fi

(d. 606/1209) de ail in hi in e p e a ion of 7:54, i i impo ible

for God to mount his throne because that would entail that He has a body and is thus imperfect because He would be subjected to the conditions of time and space.38 The idea of God actually mounting his throne further led to the charge of anthropomorphism since the action of mounting and sitting is similar to those of humans. Al-R

belief ha i

a a ionall impo ible fo

God to be a body led him to declare in his interpretation of verse 20:5 ([God] the Most Merciful, established on the throne [al-Ra m n al al- arsh istaw ]): he necessa

o ake e e

o d an mi ed in he Q

le (q n n) is that it is

n on i li e al al e ( aq qatuhu) except if

there is a certain rational indicate (dal la aqli a qa i a) that requires a departure from [the

37

As Racha El Omari desc ibe Ibn Ta mi a in ellec al and poli ical en i onmen : Ibn Ta mi a heological opponen incl ded he M a ili e , he Jahmi e and he T el e Sh a, o name b a fe , b i a he A h a i e ho e e hi mo immedia e in ellec al and poli ical opponen . Unlike he M a ili e , ho e doctrines represented a threat to Ibn Taymiyya only in so far as they survived among the Twelver Sh a, mo importantly in the works of al- ill (d.726 /1325), he A h a i e e e he mo ib an , independent, and influential theological school in 13th and 14th- century Egypt and Syria. They included followers of the prominent late A h a i e Fakh al-D n al-R (d.606/1209), as well as of the monist Ibn al- A ab (d. 638/1240), and e e among the members of he ib nal a igned o cond c he Dama c ail. The mo no e o h of he A h a i e on hi tribunal was Najm al-D n Ibn a (d. 723/1323) who studied under Ma m d al-I fah n (d. 688/1289), him elf a student of Fakhr al-D n al-R . The A h arites were not only powerful opponents, but they also made equal claims to orthodoxy, namely to being themselves ahl al-sunna ; Racha el Oma i, The Theolog of he S nna and hi Polemic i h he A h a i e , in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, 102. 38 Fakhr al-D n al-R , al-Tafs r al-kab r, 32 vols. (Cairo: al-Ma ba a al-Bahiyya al-Mi riyya, 1934-62), 14:96.

135

le].

39

The Q

n ho ld be ead li e all e cep if he e a e particular verses that clearly

contradict reason.40 Simila o A h a

befo e him, al-R

belie ed ha ea on a no onl an

important criteria to accept scripture but also to evaluate it.41 Ibn Taymiyya condemns the idea that reason could trump tradition, since it opened a dangerous window of ta w l in which Q did no acco d o one defini ion of li e al o d of he Q Q

nic verses could be interpreted figuratively if they

ea on.

42

The entire shar a, which was based on the

n, co ld po en ially be undermined because increasingly more and more

nic verses could be interpreted contrary to their face value. Ibn Taymiyya expands on how heretical groups use ta w l to circumvent the shar a in

his al-Ris la al-tadmariyya. Ibn Taymiyya lists three groups in relation to how they interpret adi ion ela ing o God cha ac e i ic and he Da of Re

ec ion. The fi

g o p i he

salaf, who affirm both verses concerning resurrection and the characteristics of God while maintaining that he is distinct from creation. The second group is that of ahl al-kal m,

39

Fakhr al-D n al-R , Tafs r, 22:7. Nicholas Heer lays out al-R f ll a g men in hi he P io i of Rea on in the Interpretation of Scripture: Ibn Taymiyyah and the mutakallim n, in Arabic and Islamic Studies in Honor of James A. Bellamy, ed. Mustansir Mir (Princeton: Darwin Press, 1993). 40 Abd Subhan summarizes al-R po i ion a , Th , he long and ho of he di co e of al-Im m ar-R i ha God i abo e pace ; Abd S bhan, Rela ion of God o ime and pace a een b he M a ili e , in The Teachings of the Mu ta ila, ed. Fuat Sezgin (Frankfurt: Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, 2000), 1:240. For more on al-R heological and e hical ie ee Ayman Shihadeh, The Teleological Ethics of Fakhr al-D n al-R (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2006). 41 For more on the q n n al-ta w l ee Ab mid M ammad b. Mu ammad al-Gha l al, Q n n alta w l, ed. Mu ammad Z hid b. al- asan al-Ka ha (Cai o: al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya, 2006). 42 Ibn Taymiyya was critical of scholars and sects that placed reason over revelation. As Racha el Omari explains, Ibn Ta mi a objec to the possibility of a conflict between reason and scripture and of the superiority of the fo me o e he la e . Indeed, hi objec ion lie a he hea of hi di ag eemen i h he la e A h a i e , and i prompted him to write Dar ta ru al- aql wa l-naql, dedicated to refuting the general law (al-qan n al-kull ) of Fakhr al-D n al-R . Racha el Oma i mo e o e plain he A h a ea on o e c ip e p inciple: It not only places reason ahead of scripture as a source for religious knowledge but also at its foundation, so that whenever there is a conflict between the former and the latter, reason must have the upper hand and scripture has to be interpreted allegorically so as to correspond o i ; Racha el Omari, 107. For more on the traditionalist roots for Ibn Ta mi a a g men ee Racha El Oma i, Kit b al- ayda: The Hi o ical Significance of an Apoc phal Te , in Islamic Philosophy, Science, Culture, and Religion: Studies in Honor of Dimitri Gutas, eds. Felicitas Opwis and David Reisman (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2012), 419-51.

136

p e mabl

he A h a , ho ma affi m e e ega ding he af e life b

hen den man of

God cha ac e i ic .43 The hi d g o p i compo ed of he philo ophe , I m

l and o he

who deny both revelation concerning the hereafter and God cha ac e i ic . Thi la g o p conce n Ibn Ta mi a he mo beca e hei me hod lead o e o e ic in e p e a ion (ta w l t b iniyya) which contradict what Muslims know of the [the shar a] o i i one again

ch a

ajj being a travel

pi i al master rather than to Mecca.44 Yet, while Ibn Taymiyya is primarily

hi la g o p, he nde ood ha he A h a

emplo ed he a ional me hod of ta w l

and their methods could eventually lead them to deny other verses that set the moral and ethical underpinnings of the shar a.45 Moreover, Ibn Taymiyya contended that not locating God in a particular place could be e ploi ed b moni with God (itti

S fi ,

ch a Ibn A ab (d. 638/1240), ho claimed ha he had ni ed

d).46 Some of Ibn Ta mi a g ea e enemie ,

Manbij , e e Ibn A ab

ppo e and had eno mo

ch a Sha kh Na r al-

poli ical infl ence.47 Ibn Taymiyya saw

the danger in monism in that when someone claimed that God was within them, they were effectively transferring the authority of the shar a and the scholars who upheld it to themselves. As Alexander Knysh

mma i e , Ibn Ta mi

a bemoan he p ead of he doc ine of

oneness/monism (wa da) and unificationism (itti 43

d) among his contemporaries, many of

Ibn Taymiyya will ask in other instances why the A h a choose to interpret verses relating to the hereafter literally and then interpret figuratively many of God name and a ib e . 44 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm fat w Sha kh al-Isl m A mad b. aymiyya, ed. Abd al-Ra m n b. M ammad b. Q im al- im , 37 ols. (Beirut: Ma bi D al- A abi a, 1977-78), 3:29. 45 Ibn Taymiyya returns to discuss the importance of the shar a later in the treatise, he la (shar ) is that which distinguishes between actions that benefit and actions that harm. It is God justice in his creation and his light among his servants. It is not possible for humans (al- dami n) to live without the law which determines how they should act and what they should abandon. Fo Ibn Ta mi a, he shar a represents the moral and ethical principles of how to live a righteous life; Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 3:114. 46 A mad b. Abd al- al m Ibn Taymiyya, al-Tis niyya, ed. Mu ammad b. Ibr h m al- Aglan (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Ma rif li l-Nashr wa l-Tawz , 1999), 1:193. 47 Ibn Ka h records that in the year 707/1308 a council was held against Ibn Taymiyya because of complaints of Ibn A ab ppo e ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:45. Alexander Knysh speaks more about Shaykh Na r al-Manbij and those who worked to imprison Ibn Taymiyya; Alexander Knysh, Ibn Arab in the Later Islamic Tradition: the Making of a Polemical Image in Medieval Islam (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999), 92.

137

whom, in his view, are deluded by the smoothly speaking Sufi elders who claim to have received hei kno ledge di ec l f om God.

48

Ibn Taymiyya felt that when monist Sufis believed that

their speech was divine then they would claim that their power was absolute. Ibn Ta mi a p opo e hi o n ol ion o God name and a ib e , e peciall

he

difficult anthropomorphic ones: God does in fact mount his throne but his mounting is distinct from anything humans engage in.49 To argue his position, Ibn Taymiyya delves into philosophy and uses terminology that previous traditionalist did not use. As Sherman Jackson explains, Ibn Ta mi a claimed ha God a ib e abili

o ha e

e e al m

e e conno a i e (mutaw i ) in that they have the

all di inc en i ie .

50

Thus, God could mount on his throne or

have a hand but that his mounting on the throne or his hand was not like anything analogous to human beings.51 Ibn Ta mi a po i ion diffe ed f om o he ha God a ib e had conc e e in ead of ab

adi ionali s in that he argued

ac meaning . God did in fac mo n hi

throne or descend but these attributes existed in the believers mind and did not extend to the outside world.52 Ibn Ta mi a belief ha God a ib e ead li e all

e e ha A h a

e e conno a i e allo ed him to

fo nd p oblema ic.53 It also allowed Ibn Taymiyya to argue

48

As Knysh later summarizes, In a o d, he c of Ibn A ab eaching, a een b Ibn Ta mi a, lie in i failure to distinguish between the Creator and his creature ; Knysh, 101. 49 Ibn Ta mi a interpretation no doubt drew charges of anthropomorphism. Ibn ajar al-Asqal n remarks that Ibn Taymiyya was accused of believing God actually sits on his throne and literally has a hand, foot, calf and face; Ibn ajar al-Asqal n , 1:93. 50 I have not seen Ibn Taymiyya use the term mutaw i in his early theological treatises such as al-Aq da alw i iyya and al-Fatw al- amawiyya al-kubr . 51 Jackson continues to discuss how Ibn Taymiyya explains how God immanence e i i hin he mind of the belie e . A he a , mean hile, God an cendence i preserved in that this relationship between Creator and created exists only in the mind and does not extend to the outside world. In other words, God remains transcendent in that there are not existential likenesses to Him, while He is immanently conceived of in the mind of the believer ia he e men al a ocia ion ; Sherman Jack on, Ibn Taymîyah on Trial in Damascus, The Journal of Semitic Studies 39, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 56. Jon Hoo e al o di c e Ibn Ta mi a ie of he di ine a ib e ; Jon Hoover, Ibn Ta mi a s Theodicy of Perpetual Optimism (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 47. 52 Jackson, 55. Ibn Taymiyya makes this argument in the context of debating Greek logic and the philosophers of A i o le, Pla o and Ibn S na; Ibn Ta mi a, Majm , 5:203. 53 A h a al o claimed ha he affi m c ip e e en ho gh he in e p e ed ce ain e e fig a i el .

138

that God was not only transcendent but immanent.54 By claiming that God actually descended from his throne (in the mind of the believer), Ibn Taymiyya could argue that God was close and accessible to his servant and therefore there was no need to seek intermediaries in the cult of saints that was rampant during his time.55 Ho e e , e en ho gh Ibn Ta mi a ad oca ed fo he li e al

eading of

anthropomorphic passages, he also believed that they should be read in their contexts. In his alal-Fatw al- amawiyya al-kubr , Ibn Ta mi a in e p e o

he e e

he end of e e 54:4 [God] i with

o a e a God being kno ledgeable o e hi

e an ac ion , i ne ing hem,

knowing their every deed.56 This interpretation fits with the beginning of the verse which discusses God creating the universe and knowing what occurs on earth and what descends from the sky.57 Ibn Taymiyya further narrates that in the 705 AH council58 he was asked by the A h a e amine

ega ding e e ha he salaf read fig a i el

ch a 2:115, The Ea and

West belong to God: wherever you turn, there is the face of God (wajh All h).

59

The examiners

ela ed o Ibn Ta mi a ha he S cce o M j hid b. Jab (d. 104/ 722) and al-Sh fi in e p e ed he face of God a

he di ec ion o p a

54

o God (qiblat All h). Ibn Ta mi a

Jackson, 53. As Jackson further explains, Fo him (Ibn Taymiyya), right theological belief had at once to afeg a d God an cendence hile a he ame ime p o iding fo Hi immanence. Ibn Ta mi a affirmation of the anthropomorphic attributes should be seen as part of the anbal school more accepting stance towards anthropomorphism. See We le William , A Bod Unlike Bodie : T an cendent Anthropomorphism in Ancient Semi ic T adi ion and Ea l I lam, Journal of the American Oriental Society 129, no.1 (2009): 29-44. 55 Fo mo e on g a e i i a ion in Maml k ime ee Christopher S. Taylor, In the Vicinity of the Righteous: Zi ra and the Veneration of Muslim Saints in Late Medieval Egypt (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 1999). 56 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 5:103. Ibn Ka h in e p e hi e e in a imila manne ; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 11:5966. For more on how Ibn Taymiyya deals with the literal and metaphorical see Baraka, 155-62. 57 Ibn Taymiyya repeats this argument regarding 54:4 throughout his writing; Ibn Taymiyya, al-Furq n ba na awli al-Ra m n wa awli al-Shay n (Beirut: al-Maktab al-I l m , 1970), 96-7. 58 I speak about the 705 AH council in Chapter One and Two. 59 Ab Abd All h b. Abd al-H d , al- Uq d al-durri a min man qib Sha kh al-Isl m Ibn Ta mi a, ed. Ab Mu ab al a b. F d al- l n (Cai o: al-F al- ad ha), 192.

139

ag eed i h he chola and added ha he face of God

ho ld be ead in he con e

of he

first part of the verse which discusses direction, the East and the West.60 Ibn Ka h , in compa i on, main ain a mo al heolog

o

heolog of p a i

no in e e ed in del ing in o he deba e a o nd God a ib e b e pon ibili ie placed on he belie e . A oppo ed o Ibn Ta mi o e

an h opomo phic e e

i ho

a, Ibn Ka h

impl

he people on hi i

ha e man opinion and hi i no he place o e pand on hem.

61

pa e

ion . In e e 7:54,

Who c ea ed he hea en and he ea h in i da , and mo n ed he h one (istaw b e plaining ha

a

a he foc ing on di ine

engaging in philo ophical di c

arsh), Ibn Ka h begin hi commen a

ha

al ale (maq m)

E en ho gh Ibn Ka h

discusses theological material in his Tafs r, Ibn Ka h did no ee hi Tafs r as a theological treatise and seeks to avoid such di c

ion . Ibn Ka h con in e ha , in in e p e ing hi

e e,

he chooses to adhere to the theological school of the salaf, one that includes the traditionalists M lik b. Ana , al-A

b. R ha a and o he ,62 which is

, al-Sh fi , A mad b. anbal, Is

pa ing o e i (imr ruh ) as it is (kam j at) without asking how (tak f), anthropomorphizing God (tashb h), or stripping Him of his attributes (ta l). pa ing o e

63

Ibn Ka h

e e he impo ance of

(imr r) over that of affirmation (ithb t) of Ibn Taymiyya.64 While Ibn Taymiyya

e e affi ming he li e al meaning of God a ib e , Ibn Ka h i con en e ac meaning o God. Ye , e en ho gh Ibn Ka h 60

a

ha he

ppo

i h lea ing hei

imr r, he is

Ibn Ka h p e en a imila in e p e a ion ha he face of God mean he di ec ion to pray to God ; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 2:435. 61 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 4:2261. 62 This group of scholars is almost identical to the list that Ibn Rajab presents as the traditionalist scholars who Ibn Taymiyya should have followed. 63 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 4:2261. In al-Bid a wa l al-nih ya, Ibn Ka h a g e ha al-Sh fi held an almo iden ical position; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 10: 269. Pa ing o e he e e e a al o he opinion of Ibn Ab al-Faraj b. alJa ; Ibn Ab al-Faraj b. al-Ja , Kit b al-qu wa l-mudhakkir n, ed. Merlin S a (Bei : D al-Mashriq, 1971), 142. 64 Ibn Rajab states almost the exact same opinion in his treaties on the methodology of the salaf; Ibn Rajab alanbal , Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf al ilm al-khalaf, ed. Mu ammad b. N ir Ajam (Bei : D al-Ba h i alI l mi a, 1995), 55.

140

nonetheless hesitant to affirm the literal meaning of this verse, which would confine God to the e e, acco ding o he an h opomo phi ,65 is

h one: he appa en and e iden meaning of hi

denied b God ho i no imila o an hing of hi c ea ion. a g men b ci ing of en

66

Ibn Ka h backs up his

o ed ec ion of e e 42:11, and he e i no hing like Him. While

Ibn Ka h affi m he e , he doe no go a fa a Ibn Ta mi a in claiming ha God i on hi throne but his sitting is unlike anything of human beings. Ibn Ka h clo e hi in e p e a ion b situating himself squarely with the traditionalists such as the teacher of al-B kh amm d al-Kh

, Na m al-

, ho decla e :

whoever likens God to his creation has disbelieved. And whoever rejects (ja ada) how God has described himself has disbelieved. And whatever God and his messenger have described [God with] is not anthropomorphism. And whoever affirms God [in terms of] what has been transmitted from him, of clear verses and authentic reports, on the way tha he a e deemed i able b God maje , and refuses [to ascribe to] God imperfections - verily he has treaded the path of guidance.67 Like many of the great ad h chola befo e him, Ibn Ka h

ake he le

con o e ial pa h of

reading over anthropomorphic passages (imr r), without delving into their exact meanings. Th , Ibn Ka h di c

e in a pa ag aph an i

e ha Ibn Ta mi ya spends tens of pages on

and takes up in multiple works.68 Ibn Ka h mo al heolog

minimal commen on he di ine a ib e a e h

mo e in line i h a

o a heolog of p a i . A Makdi i e plain , Whe ea he Ra ionali

65

I.e. that God sits on a throne like human beings. Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 4:2261. 67 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 4:2261. 68 In one of his initial theological works al-Fatw al- amawiyya al-kubr , Ibn Taymiyya seems to support pa ing o e difficult verses; Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 5:39. However, Ibn Taymiyya develops this opinion in his later theological treatises and incorporates kal m terminology not used b o he adi ionali . Ibn Ka h men ion ha al-Fatw al- amawiyya al-kubr became a political issue in the year 698/1298-99 or when Ibn Taymiyya was only a o nd 37 ea old; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a wa l-nih a, ed . Al M ammad M a ad and dil A mad Abd alMa j d, 15 ol . (Lebanon: D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 2009), 14:4. For al-Dhahab acco n of he poli ic behind al-Fatw al- amawiyya al-kubr , see Caterina Bo i, A Ne So ce fo he Biog aph of Ibn Ta mi a, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 67, no. 3 (2004): 335. 66

141

concentrated on philosophical theology, kal m, the Traditionalists concerned themselves with la ; and la and legal heo , being no ma i e, e e clo e o e hic . p e io

chap e , Ibn Ka h foc e mo of hi ime on hi o

an la ed in o igh eo f om pec la ion abo co ld ne e be ade m

e

cond c . Makdi i f

a e o i objec .

70

befo e him,

adi ionali m

hie a a

a emp o ac i e a kno ledge ha

Kal m was considered a waste of time since the

of God e ence o ld ne e be ol ed. Ibn Ka h

adi ionali

As discussed in the

and la , cience he believed

he elabo a e ha

God, con ide ing i man f i le

69

adi ionali m i h

imila o

ch a Ibn Q d ma (d. 620/1223), ho in hi Ta r m al-na ar f

kutub ahl al-kal m a e , We ha e no need to know the meaning which God intended by His attributes; no course of action is intended by them, nor is there any obligation attached to them, except to believe them, and it is possible to believe them without the knowledge of the intended sense. Fo indeed fai h, i h igno ance, i

o nd.

71

Ibn Q d ma

e e ha he e i no mo al

obliga ion a ached o kno ing God e ence and fai h doe no e i e kno ing God particulars.72 Ibn Q d ma la e clo e hi book i h a a emen f om M lik b. Ana , A fo [speculative] speech (kal m) in our religion, I dislike it. The scholars of our city73 continue to abhor it, and I do not like speech (kal m) except when beneath it is action ( amal).

69

74

M lik, a

Geo ge Makdi i, E hic in I lamic Traditionalist Doc ine, in Ethics in Islam, ed. Richard G. Hovannisian (Malibu, Calif.: Undena Publications, 1985), 47. 70 Makdi i, Ethics, 47. 71 Makdi i, Ethics, 47. There is no surprise then that Ibn Qud ma mo al heolog p od ce one of the most authoritative anbal legal reference work. See Muwaffaq al-D n ibn Q d ma, al-Mughn f fiqh al-Im m A mad b. anbal al-Sha b n (Beirut: D al-Fikr, 1984-1985). 72 Makdisi nevertheless demonstrates in his article E hic in I lamic Traditionalist Doc ine that traditionalism inco po a ed philo ophical heolog in o i ank . 73 M lik b. Anas most likely meant his hometown of Medina. 74 Muwaffaq al-D n ibn Qud ma, Ta r m al-na ar f kutub al-kal m, ed. Abd al-Ra m n al-Dima h (Riyadh: D lim al-Kutub, 1990), 71. Ibn Qud ma al o peak o again ta w l in his other works such as Dhamm al-ta w l and Mun ara f al-Qur n al- a m. See Majm f hi ithb t if t al- uluw wa lum at al-i tiq d al-had il sab l alrash d wa dhamm al-ta w l, ed. Badr b. Abd All h al-Badr (Kuwait: D Ibn al-Ath r, 1995) and Mun ara f alQur n al- A m, ed. Ab Abd All h al- amm d (Kuwait: Maktabat Ibn Taymiyya, 1990).

142

well as other traditionalists, were not interested in theological speculation but rather law and praxis, which were tied to morality and ethics.

Engagement with the Exegetical tradition: Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h

diffe en

adi ionali m and madhhab affiliations

influenced how they interacted with the exegetical tradition.75 Ibn Ta mi

a in ellec ali ed

traditionalism drove him to be more critical of scholars that practiced kal m and engaged in ta w l. Ibn Taymiyya frequently refutes rational exegetes for not accepting scripture at face value and resorting to figurative interpre a ion . In compa i on, Ibn Ka h ha a mo e mode a e evaluation of rational exegetes, citing them in his Tafs r but also pointing out their flaws. Ibn Ka h

Sh fi backg o nd f

he made him

o edeem fello

Sh fi

ho he fel

overindulged in the rational sciences. Ibn Ta mi a ake aim a he e ege ical adi ion

ed b

he dominan A h a eli e,

which was more inclined to engage in rational and philological tafs r rather than that of ad h. Ibn Taymiyya is critical of the foundational exegete al-Tha lab (d. 427/1035) ho, a Walid Saleh

mma i e , was a man of righteous conduct; unfortunately he collected anything and

everything that came his way in previous tafs r works, just like a nocturnal wood gatherer ( al-layl) unable o di ing i h be een he good and he bad.

76

ib

For Ibn Taymiyya, al-Tha lab

Tafs r was problematic because it incorporated traditions that were unsound, especially those in relation to virtues of reading particular s ras. In terms of al-Tha lab (d.469/1076), Ibn Taymiyya notes that he teacher al-Tha lab , b 75

students, al-W id

a fa mo e kno ledgeable in philolog

han hi

al-W id was less sound in his theological outlook and more unlike the

As we saw in last Chapter, Ibn Ka h forays into kal m. 76 Saleh, Radical Hermeneutics, 139.

ied o eclaim Sh fi A h a

143

by arguing that they repented for their

salaf.

77

Similar to his teacher, al-W id cites problematic theological material into his Tafs r

making it also unacceptable to traditionalist circles. But the harshest evaluation of the philological tafs r goe o he M

a il al-

Zamakh ha (d. 538/1144), ho e al-Kashsh f was a standard work in he A h a mad a a curriculum.78 Ibn Taymiyya believed that al-Kashsh f should be completely avoided because its eade

o ld no be able o iden if i he e ical ie

. A Saleh an la e , Some of he e

exegetes have a nice turn of phrase, and are possessed of eloquence, and they insinuate their heretical views in their writing imperceptibly, such that most of the readers are unaware of this. An example of this is the author of al-Kashsh f (al-Zamakhshar ) and people of hi ilk. Taymiyya was concerned that al-Zamakhshar

elo

ence

79

Ibn

o ld o e ake hi eade and

they would unknowingly start advocating his heretical doctrines. Ibn Taymiyya was further a a e ha he A h a

e e a ac ed o M

a ili m, ince he al o emplo ed a ionalist

methods such as engaging in ta w l of p oblema ic

e e . In a elling ec ion of he

Muqaddima, Ibn Ta mi a men ion ha a g o p of ahl-kal m, b A h a , ha e he ba ic a ional me hodolog of he M belie ed ha he A h a

hich he mean he

a il . E en ho gh Ibn Taymiyya

e e clo e o he S nna han he M

a il , he ill main ain ha

they share in their heresies because they both foist a particular meaning on the text, a methodology which is not consistent with the salaf.80

77

Saleh, Radical Hermeneutics, 139. T j al-D n al-S bk men ion ha hi fa he Ta al-D n al-S bk a gh al-Kashsh f; abaq t al-sh fi i a alkubr , eds. Ma m d M ammad al- an and Abd al-Fa Mu ammad al- ilw, 10 vols. (Giza: Hajr, 1992), 10:198. Ibn Ka h al o no e ha he chief j dge of Dama cus between the years 727-729 AH, or the judge who pe i ed Ibn Ta mi a final imp i onmen , had a good kno ledge (ma rifa ja ida) of al-Zamakhshar alKashsh f; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:145. 79 Saleh, Radical Hermeneutics, 141. 80 Ibn Taymiyya, Muqaddima, 90. Ibn Ta mi a epea he idea ha he A h a a e he be M lim ec throughout his writings; Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 3:103. Ibn Taymiyya was thus more moderate than other anbal , ch a Ab Na r al-W il (d. 444/ 1052) ho con ide ed A h a o e han M a il beca e he claimed o 78

144

In terms of rationalist tafs rs, Ibn Taymiyya presents an entire chapter in his treatise attacking tafs r bi l-ra , or interpretation based on personal opinion. Reading between the lines, it can be assumed that Ibn Taymiyya was condemning Fakhr al-D n al-R

. In this chapter, Ibn

Taymiyya presents a host of traditions81 from the Prophet and Companions regarding being wary of in e p e ing he Q

n i ho

o nd kno ledge o he an mi ed o ce . Ibn Ta mi a

was most likely referring to kal m theologians, such as al-R on hei

opinion

, ho in e p e he Q

a he han ha of he a ho i a i e o ce of he Q

n ba ed

n and S nna.

Ibn Ka h , in con a , p e en a mo e mode a e e al a ion of he philological and rational exegetes, one that fi hi

pec lia i a ion of a adi ionali

i hin he Sh fi

madhhab. In his entry on al-Tha lab in al-Bid a, Ibn Ka h no e ha he fello Sh fi was a famous mufassir ho

o e a gigan ic tafs r and a book on he S o ie of he P ophe .82 Ibn

Ka h had a mo e po i i e ie of al-Tha ab

kno ledge of ad h han Ibn Ta mi a b

noting that al-Tha lab kne a g ea amo n of ad h (kath r al- ad th) and wide variety of ad h chola .83 Ne e hele , Ibn Ka h are a lot of odd things (ghar ib).

84

Unfo

ickl add ha fo nd in hi

na el , Ibn Ka h doe no elabo a e b

only assume that he means unreliable ad h. Ibn Ka h tradition from al-

died i h a

e

ok

e can

n o being po i i e and ci e a

kim History of Nishapur which praises al-Tha lab a a

o h

be Sunnis; Jonathan Brown, Canonization of al-Bukh r and Muslim: the Formation and Function of the Sunn ad th Canon (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 196-200. 81 The traditions in the last two chapters of the Muqaddima contain complete chains of transmissions, something that contrasts with the traditions in the first four chapters. This suggests that the first four chapters could have been written while Ibn Taymiyya was in jail where he did not have access to his notes and the last two chapters written when he was released. Another theory is that the two sections were written at different times and then combined together by himself, his students or later editors. Saleh also notes the discrepancy in the first four chapters and the last two and argues that the Muqaddima can be divided into two parts; Saleh, Radical Hermeneutics, 127. 82 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:44. 83 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:44. For more on al-Tha lab and ad h see Saleh, Formation, 191. 84 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:44. Ibn Ka h co ld al o be ing he e m ghar b in the sense that al-Tha lab cites ad h ha a e no ci ed b o he . Fo mo e on ho he e m ghar b i ed in he cience of ad h ee Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th, 2:460.

145

transmitter.85 Ibn Ka h end he en

a king God o ha e me c

that many people had positive dreams (man m t

pon al-Tha lab and no e

li a) about him after his death, meaning that

he was believed to be in paradise. Ibn Ka h onl ci e al-Tha lab once in hi Tafs r when critiquing a ad h ha alTha lab incl de in hi in od c ion o s ra Y that recites s ra Y

f. The P ophe epo edl

a , An M lim

f o eache i o hi family, or slaves, then God will make easy for him the

po of dea h and gi e him he abili

no o en

an M lim.

86

Ibn Ka h

ejec

he

tradition explaining that all of the transmissions are weak with some of the narrators unknown or known to have a bad reputation (matr k). Th , hile Ibn Ka h did no nece a il endo e Ibn Ta mi a e al a ion of al-Tha lab a a noc

nal oodc

e (

ib al-layl), he o ld

nonetheless agree that some of the traditions that al-Tha lab ela e in he beginning of s ras are inauthentic. Ibn Ka h al o had a mo e po i i e e al a ion of al-Tha lab Bid a, Ibn Ka h con

c a fa o able en

Ibn Khallik n (d. 681/1282). Ibn Ka h

den , al-W id . In al-

of al-W id with quotations from the historian

o e f om Ibn Khallik n ha al-W id

o e h ee

tafs rs: al-Ba , al-Wa , and al-Waj .87 Ibn Ka h doe no elabo a e on he e tafs rs which most likely means that he did not have much exposure to these works. After noting that alGha l d ew from al-W id , Ibn Ka h li

ome of al-W id

such as his Asb b al-nu l and hi commen a

on God bea if l name . B , a Ibn Ka h

85

mo famo

compo i ion

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:44. Despite highlighting al-Tha lab die in ad h, it is important to note that Ibn Ka h doe no call al-Tha lab an ad h scholar ( fi ) nor does he praise him like he does al- abar . Neverthele , Ibn Ka h e pec al-Tha lab s ad h studies and does not critique him in this entry for citing any weak narrations. 86 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 6:2931. 87 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:125. For more on al-W id life and major works see Walid Saleh, The Last of the Ni h p School of Taf : Al-W id and hi Significance in he Hi o of Q nic E ege i , Journal of the American Oriental Society 126, no. 2 (2006): 223-243.

146

explains, al-W id i mo famo

fo hi commen a

on D w n al-Mutanabb ince there is

none like it despite the many commentaries on [the D w n]. the quotation that al-W id

i ing

88

Ibn Ka h end he en

ih

e e pop la and, ha he people ha e come o

consensus that [the works] are of good quality ( asan), and that instructors reference [his works] in hei le on .

89

Unlike Ibn Ta mi a, Ibn Ka h doe no add an polemical no e b

focuses on praising al-W id . Simila l once in his Tafs r, noting tha al-wus

is the ish

o hi eache al-Tha lab , Ibn Ka h

Al b. A mad al-W id in hi famo

prayer.90 Despite praising al-W id

Tafs r

o e al-W id a

ha al-Sal

Tafs r a famo , Ibn Ka h doe

not draw from it significantly confirming that his Tafs r did not build off al-Tha lab W id

and al-

chool of e ege i .91 The mo

Ka h

a he

p i ing diffe ence be een Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h come in Ibn

e al-Zamakh ha and Fakh al-D n al-R

Maml k pe iod. In a b ief en

,

o of he mo pop la e ege e in he

in al-Bid ya, Ibn Ka h li

al-Zamakh ha

Tafs r first of all

of his works by mentioning that he was the author of al-Kashsh f and the grammar work Muf al, among o he

beneficial o k .

92

Ibn Ka h

training, since he hea d (sami a) ad h Kashsh f p oblema ic beca e of i M

hen ema k ha al-Zamak ha had ome ad h

an mi ed. a il leaning

88

93

But like Ibn Taymiyya, he found alhich a e e plici in hi Tafs r.

94

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:125. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:125. 90 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 2:816. 91 Al-Tha lab and al-W id Nishap r School contrasts greatly i h he Sh fi adi ionali . Al-W id , for instance, studied all of the d w n of poetry before starting his Tafs r, hile Ibn Ka h died all of he canonical ad h collections. Fo mo e on he Nishap r School ee Walid Saleh, The La of he Ni h p School of Taf . 92 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:125. 93 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:125. For more on how the word sami a is used in the science of ad h ee Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th, 1:228 - 46. 94 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:125. Ibn Ka h biog aphical en is similar to how other Sunni historians reconciled themselves to al-Zamakhshar . As Andrew J. Lane e plain , chola , hen, on he whole seem to have steered a middle course when it came to al-Zamakh ha . The had he highe p ai e fo him a an p igh h man being and 89

147

Ye , Ibn Ka h doe no

b c ibe o Ibn Ta mi a po i ion ha al-Zamakhsha

should be completely avoided because readers would be unaware of his heretical views. In fact, Ibn Ka h

o e al-Zamakh ha

95

e e al ime

in relation to Q

nic recitations (qir

t),

additional exegetical information and Arabic grammar and language. Ibn Ka h , fo in ance, notes that al-Zamakh ha

men ion in hi Kashsh f ha he s ra al-f ti a (opening) is also

named the s ra of prayer and treasure.96 A li le la e in e e 1:4, Ibn Ka h li Zamak ha

p efe ence fo he Q

al-

nic reading mulk over that of m lik.97 In verse 2:37, Ibn

Ka h ci e al-Zamakh ha a one of he chola

ho held ha Sa an poke o Adam and E e

from the earth rather than in the Heavens. Such an interpretation would solve the problem of how Satan could have encouraged them to eat from the forbidden tree after he was expelled from paradise.98 None hele , Ibn Ka h c i ici e he M 2:7, God ealed hei hea

a il al-Zamakh ha

e of ta w l. In verse

and hei hea ing, and on hei e e i a eil, Ibn Ka h e plain

that al-Zamakh ha in e p e ha God ealing a pe on hea

he e e fig a i el (ta awwala) beca e of hi M o ld p e en him f om being able o eali e

a il belief h. If God did

not allow his servants the opportunity to realize the truth, then this would be a violation of justice and be reprehensible (qab ). Ibn Ka h

ef e hi a g men b e plaining ha ealing he

a scholar. When it came to his Mu tazilisms, most passed over it in silence; the few that did not, tended to be mitigated in their evaluation of him although his doctrine was in no way accepted. Criticism of him was accompanied by praise or at least p a e fo God me c ; Andrew J. Lane, A Traditional Mu ta ilite Qur n Commentar : the Kashsh f of J r All h al-Zamakhshar (d. 538/1144) (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2006), XIX. 95 Sa d b. Abd All h Fanisan no e ha Ibn Ka h ci e al-Zamakh ha 22 times in his Tafs r; Sa d b. Abd All h Fanisan, Maw rid al- fi ibn Kath r f tafs rihi (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Tawba, 2006), 129. 96 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:40. 97 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:84. The editor notes here that the scribe of the A ha manuscript drops this quotation of alZamakh ha f om hi man c ip . The scribe consistently edits out long quotations from al-Zamakh ha alKashsh f ince he a mo likel in line i h Ibn Ta mi a Q nic hermeneutic that al-Kashsh f should comple el be a oided. The c ibe eem o ppo a Q nic hermeneutic that emphasizes ad h at the expense of philology. For more on the reception of Ibn Ta mi a Muqaddima ee Saleh, Radical He mene ic , 153. 98 Ibn Ka h also mentions this opinion in al-Bid a but entertains the idea that the garden that Adam and Eve inhabi ed a no he e e nal ga den ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 1:104-5.

148

di belie e

hea i an app op ia e ecompen e fo hei di belief, ince he pe i ed in

fal ehood and in en ionall lef

ha

a igh . A Ibn Ka h decla e , Thi i j

[God], the most high, good ( asan), not reprehensible (qab ).

99

ice f om

Thus, similar to Ibn

Ta mi a, Ibn Ka h i conce ned i h al-Zamakh ha p omo ing hi he e ical M

a ili m in

his Tafs r. B , none hele , Ibn Ka h feel al-Kashsh f is valuable enough to reference.100 Ibn Ka h i al o c i ical of tafs r bi l ra chapter condemning the practice but avoids cen his entry in al-Bid a, Ibn Ka h iden ifie

o ing in hi in od c ion Ibn Ta mi a ing he fello Sh fi Fakh al-D n al-R

i h al-R

. In

a an e ege e and j i highligh ing ha

he wrote a gigantic ( fil) tafs r and over 200 fiqh o k . Ibn Ka h

hen add ha al-R

had

ome odd [opinions] that were not agreed upon and there are ascribed to him things that are peculiar ( aj b).

101

Ibn Ka h co ld be efe ing o al-R

Ne e hele , Ibn Ka h

edeem al-R

b

a ing ha in hi

endle

ind lgence

i h kal m.

ill (wa iyya) he denied the

methodology of the theologians and returned to the way of the salaf. Al-R

epen ance i

captured in several lines of poetry where he admits that the best way of knowledge is that of the ad h chola : I ha e no benefi ed in my scholarship my whole life, except when I gather in ha

a

aid and he

aid (q la wa q l ). The la line Wha i

aid and he

aid

efe

the methods of the ad h chola

ho deal i h na a ion .102 Ibn Ka h concl de he en

with an alleged quote from al-R

, I ha e e ed he me hod of he philo ophe and I did no

99

o

Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:143. The scribe of he A ha man c ip once again drops this quotation from alZamakh ha . 100 The diffe en app oache of Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h o a d al-Zamakh ha ep e en a la ge debate within traditionalism on how to deal with his al-Kashsh f. Andrew J. Lane captures this ambivalence towards alKashsh f in his summary of Ibn ajar al- Asqal n entry on al-Zamakhshar : Ibn ajar says basically that the Kashsh f is off limits to all who wish to d i , he he ch a den i cogni an of he a ho in ig e ( rif bi-das isihi) or not. A little later, after commenting on a number of al-Zamakshar o he o k , Ibn ajar returns to the Kashsh f but this time he seems to allow some leeway, saying that those who have their feet planted firmly in the Sunna and who are aware of the Kashsh f s dangers may study it ; Lane, XX. 101 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:58. 102 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:58.

149

find i

enching a hi

, no healing an ailmen .

now affirms (al-ithb t) Q

103

Al-R

then continues to explain that he

nic verses such as 20:5 or the same verse in his Tafs r where he

presents his reason over revelation principle.104 Yet, while Fakhr al-D n al-R school,105 Ibn Ka h

ep e en ed he oppo i e pec

m of he al-Sh fi

o e him m l iple ime .106 Ibn Ka h call Fakh al-D n al-R

a

religious leader and great scholar (im m) and exceedingly knowledgeable ( all ma) in his commen a

of e e 2:23, If o ha e do b abo

he e ela ion We ha e en do n o O

servant then produce a single s ra like i . Ibn Ka h

hen ci e al-R

and hi verse as part of

his larger argument that both the long and short chapters are miraculous.107 Several verses later in 2:41-42, Ibn Ka h

efe hi eade

o al-R

Tafs r by explaining that previous prophets

foretold the coming of Mu ammad: A hi point [in his Tafs r], Fakhr al-D n al-R

li

man

premonitions of the prophets, may peace be upon them, of the coming of Mu ammad, may peace and ble ing be pon him. literally. In hi commen a

108

Ibn Ka h al o

ppo

al-R

effo

o in e p e he Q

of e e 2:74, Fo he e a e ock f om hich

eam

n

p ing o ,

and some from which water comes when they split open, and others which fall down in awe of God, Ibn Ka h

ide

i h he A h a

al-B ill n (d. 403/1013) and al-R

against the

fig a i e in e p e a ion ha he la pa of he e e o he [ ock ] hich fall do n in a e of God

ela e o no falling f om he k . A al-B ill n and al-R

103

bo h a e, Thi

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 13:58. See above. 105 The Sh fi A h a al-R e ege i f e en l n in o li of llogi m while he Sh fi adi ionali Ibn Ka h Tafs r often reduces into ad h . 106 Sa d b. Abd All h Fanisan a ha Ibn Ka h o e al-R 73 ime ; Fani an, 129. Reade s should be aware though that when Ibn Ka h mentions al-R in hi Tafs r it is usually the great ad h scholar Ibn Ab im al-R (d. 322/933-4) not the famous theologian Fakhr al-D n al-R . Sa d b. Abd All h Fanisan notes ha Ibn Ka h cites Ibn Ab im al-R 1744 ime in hi Tafs r, almost as much as al- aba ho i ci ed 2039 times; Fanisan, 129. 107 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:181. 108 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:240. 104

150

[interpretation] is departing from the literal meaning of the e e i ho Ka h Q

oice hi ag eemen

i h he A h a

heologian

an e idence.

109

Ibn

ho p efer the literal meaning of

nic verses to unnecessary ta w l. None hele , Ibn Ka h i c i ical of al-R

Tafs r. Ibn Ka h di app o e of al-R

fo

o ing he e ical opinion

fo ci ing he idea ha

i hin his

o hip i mo e hono able han

prophecy (al-ris la) because worship goes from the creation to God (min al-khalq il al- aqq) and that prophecy goes from God to the creation (min al- aqq il al-khalq).110 Ibn Ka h eb ff he idea ha inco ec , and i

o hip co ld omeho be

ea oning i al o eak, no

pe io o p ophec

a ing, hi

b ance [doe hi a g men hold].

a ing i 111

Similar to

Ibn Ta mi a, Ibn Ka h belie ed hat exegetes should not simply quote inauthentic ad h and heretical opinions without refuting them.112

Traditionalist Exegetes: Ibn Taymiyya lists a variety of traditionalist exegetes in his treatise113 but only provides a positive evaluation of two exegetes who were popular during his time. Ibn Taymiyya provides a lukewarm praise of al-Bagha

(d. 516/1122) whose Tafs r was an abridgement of al-Tha lab

but was able to guard itself from fabricated ad h and he e ical opinion .114 The only tafs r that Ibn Taymiyya endorses is al- aba

(d. 310/923) decla ing ha i i

tafs r adi ion and he g ea e in o h.

115

The mo e al ed of he

Yet, over four centuries had elapsed since al-

109

Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:320. The scribe of the A ha manuscript edits out this quotation from al-R Tafs r. Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:89. 111 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:89. 112 Ibn Taymiyya, Muqaddima, 101. 113 Ibn Taymiyya, Muqaddima, 79. 114 Ibn Taymiyya, Muqaddima, 76. 115 Ibn Taymiyya, Muqaddima, 90. Ibn Taymiyya also mentions his preference for al- aba Tafs r in his fat w ; Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 13:385 8. After discussing the Tafs rs of al-Tha lab , al-W id , al-Zamakh ha , al110

151

aba

ime, and Ibn Taymiyya envisioned a more complete tafs r that incorporated the

tremendous development of ad h Ibn Ka h

die .116

imila l doe no iden if

i h al-Bagha

and p o ide onl a b ief

biog aph of he Sh fi men ioning ha he a a mufassir, a commentator on the Sunna, and a jurist. Al-Bagha

also wrote ad h o k ela ed o al-B kh

categories of authentic ( a

) and good ( asan).117 Al-Bagha

and M lim and he ad h fi a imila p ofile o Ibn

Ka h e cep ha he had a mo e e ic i e ad h me hodolog . In hi Ikhti r al- ul m alad th, Ibn Ka h de o e a chap e o he e minolog authentic ad h. Ibn Ka h e plain ha al-Bagha one that was derived either by al-B kh le

canonical collec ion

ad h become an in (isn d).119 Al-Bagha

ha al-Bagha ad anced a heo

e in defining an ha a a

ad h a

and M lim.118 A asan ad h i one fo nd i hin he

ch a Ab D

d and al-Ti midh . In o he

men o de e mine i

eliabili

ad h me hodolog i h

o d , he o ce of he

a oppo ed o i chain of an mi ion

a odd

i h Ibn Ka h

authentic ad h o be de i ed h o gh independen e al a ion of no onl

hich allo ed an he i canonical

collections but any of the great sunan collections. Like al-Bagha , Ibn Ka h had g ea reverence for the collections of al-B kh pon b

he

o chola o ha i

and M lim, of en men ioning ha a ad h i ag eed

a fo nd in one of he collec ion . Ho e e , Ibn Ka h did

Qur b and Ibn A i a, Ibn Ta mi a a e , b he Tafs r of Ibn Ja (al- aba ) i he most authentic and comprehensive (a a ) of all of he e. Saleh summarizes this fatw in hi Radical He mene ic , 161. 116 Wha i fa cina ing in Ibn Ta mi a choice of al- aba is that early anbal s persecuted al- aba to the point that he was buried in his house because the anbal masses did not allow him to have proper burial. As time passed, there seems to have been a change of opinion regarding al- aba within anbal circles, a topic that deserves more research. 117 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 12:211. 118 Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th, 1:138. 119 Jonathan Brown, Canonization, 246. Brown summarizes the contents of al-Bagha o k Ma b al-sunna: The a ho di ide he ad h in each chap e in o o ec ion , a hen ic ( i ) and good ( is n). The authentic section consists only of reports from al-B kh and M lim, hile he le eliable is n ad ths come from the collection of al-Ti midh , Ab D d, al-Na and o he e pec ed compile . The eade h elie on the source of ad hs to know their reliability. Those coming from the a ayn are considered automatically authentic, whereas al-Bagha a e ha he ill ale he eade o an eakne e in he ad h in he good ec ion ; B o n, Canonization, 246.

152

not limit an authentic ad h o he a

ayn (al-B kh

reason did not draw heavily from al-Bagha

ok.

Ibn Ka h doe occa ionall ci e al-Bagha Bagha

o

ppo hi a g men ha i

in hi Tafs r.120 Ibn Ka h

a I hmael, no I aac, ho a

slaughtered by Abraham.121 Ibn Ka h al o

efe ence al-

ppo ed to be

o e an opinion f om al-Bagha

e ed he Sa anic e e , no he P ophe M Ibn Ka h had a m ch

and M lim) and most likely for this

ha Sa an

ammad.122

onge connec ion o al- aba

ho fi a imila p ofile o

himself since he was also a jurist, historian, and ad h chola .123 Ibn Ka h iden ified i h alaba

p o-ijtih d stances in jurisprudence124 and his inclusion of a wide range of traditions

that were not confined to canonical collections.125 Ibn Ka h b il

pon al- aba

methodology by evaluating his various traditions, corroborating them with other narrations, and critiquing their interpretation.126 Ibn Ka h

iden ifica ion i h al- aba i e iden in hi gene o

Bid a.127 Ibn Ka h e claim ha al- aba hich ha no hing like i .

128

Al- aba f

o e a emendo he

120

en

on him in al-

( fil) history and a tafs r

o e beneficial fiqh works in both the

Sa d b. Abd All h Fanisan notes that al-Bagha i o ed 59 ime in Ibn Ka h Tafs r; Fanisan, 1:129. Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 9:5101. 122 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3998. I will discuss the Satanic verses and the issue of infallibility ( i ma) of the Prophets in the next Chapter. 123 Sa d b. Abd All h Fanisan notes that al- abar i he mo o ed e ege e in Ibn Ka h Tafs r with 2039 citations; Fanisan, 1:129. I i m belief ha Ibn Ka h modeled him elf af e al- aba by emulating his immense contributions to history, tafs r and jurisprudence. 124 Al- aba teachings became a basis for a madhhab that does not survive; C.E Bosworth, al- aba , Ab jafa Mu ammad b. ja b. Ya d, Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition, eds. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, and W.P. Heinrichs (Brill, 2011). 125 A cursory reading of al- aba Tafs r demonstrates that ad h collections were not as authoritative or canonical a he e e in Ibn Ka h ime. For more on al- aba ad h methodology see Brown, Canonization, 145. 126 I will speak in mo e de ail on ho Ibn Ka h engage al- aba e ege i in he ne Chap e . 127 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:156. 128 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:156. 121

153

methodology of deriving law as well as its application.129 To emphasize al- aba Ka h

o e two statements130 from Kha b al-Bagd d (d. 463/1071) ha i

a elling o China j

o look a Ibn Ja

al- aba

Im m Ab Bak b. Kh a ma (d. 311/923) pen

Tafs r. ea

131

Tafs r, Ibn

o ld be o h

The second records that an

eading he Tafs r of al- aba and once

he fini hed decla ed, The e i no one on he face of hi ea h (ad m al- ar ) more kno ledgeable han Ibn Ja Ibn Ka h

(al- aba ).

hen criticizes lay anbal and hei

aba b acc ing him of being a Sh disbelief (il

132

and ome, o

mob (ra

ahum) for wronging al-

of hei igno ance, cha ging him i h

d).133 Ibn Ka h decla e ha al- aba i innocen of he e acc a ion and ha he

was one of the Im m of I lam, combing kno ledge and p a i , and follo ing he Q Sunna.134 Nevertheless, the anbal p e en ed

n and

den f om ga he ing a o nd al- aba and he

was even buried in his house because they did not allow him to have a proper burial.135 The anbal belie ed al- aba

o be a Sh

ince he allegedl adop ed e e al Sh

positions, such as wiping the feet in ablution (wu vigorously defends al- aba b kno

ha he e i e

a ing ha

a hing he fee .

137

j idical

) instead of washing them. 136 Ibn Ka h

ho e ha ha e looked o e hi Ibn Ka h e plain ha al- aba

o d in hi Tafs r e i e one o

wash his feet by rubbing it (dalk) but instead of using word for rubbing (dalk) he used the word 129

Ibn Ka h doe no incl de al- aba in his biographical dictionary of Sh fi j i , but it is clear that he identifies with him tremendously within his Tafs r and al-Bid a wa l-nih a. 130 This quote is from the jurist Ab mid A mad b. Ab hi al-Isfar n . 131 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:156. 132 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:157. These traditions on al- aba Tafs r are found in Ab Bakr A mad b. Al alKha b al-Baghd d , T r kh Baghd d aw Mad nat al-sal m, 14 vols. (Cairo: Maktabat al-Kh nj , 1931), 2:163-64. 133 For more on the early anbal ance o a d al- aba ee Ch i ophe Melche , The Ad e a ie of Ahmad b. Hanbal, Arabica 44, no. 2 (1997): 246-47. 134 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:158. 135 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:158. 136 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:158. Acc ing Sh of no a hing their feet in ablution was a common Sunni polemic. Ibn Ta mi a di c e hi ame i e in hi ef a ion on Shi i m Minh j al-sunna al-nabawiyya, ed. M ammad Ra h d S lim, 9 vols. (Riyadh: J mi a al-Im m M ammad b. Sa d al-I l miyya, 1986), 4:170. 137 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:158.

154

mas

hich al o conno e

iping: man people did no

nde and ha he in ended and

those who did understand transmitted from him that he requires washing with wiping (mas ), which is rubbing (dalk). 5:6 b

138

Ibn Ka h con in e hi defen e of al- aba in hi Tafs r of verse

a ing ha ho e ho did no eflec on hi

issue confused [al- aba Ibn Ka h

de ac o ] b

o d mi nde ood hi po i ion and his

[al- aba ] i e c ed.

139

ong defen e of al- aba i ela ed o he fac ha al- aba i he mo

o ed e ege e in Ibn Ka h

Tafs r. The f e enc

ha Ibn Ka h ci e al- aba ha led

many scholars to view his Tafs r as a ad h e al a ion (takhr j) of al- aba ning al- abar into a figure of the salaf.

141

M ch of Ibn Ka h

140

or as Saleh says

Tafs r is a takhr j with his

methodology similar to his other takhr j works such as Tu fat al- lib li-mukta ar ibn aljib.142 Ye , a

e ill ee, Ibn Ka h

Tafs r is closer to al-Bid a wa l-nih a in that it

builds off previous works but also adds a great degree of originality.143

138

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 11:158. Wha i fa cina ing he e i ha Ibn Ka h ci e al- aba Tafs r to clarify one of al- aba legal po i ion . Fo many medieval exegetes, tafs r was not understood simply as literature but also as law. The most famous example of how tafs r and law overlap is that of al-Qur b al-J mi li-a k m al-Qur n. While Ibn Ka h concei ed of tafs r as a separate discipline from law, as shown in his frequent referral of his readers to his Kit b al-A k m al-kab r when legal discussion become complex, he nevertheless conceptually viewed tafs r and law as overlapping. 139 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 5:1709. The acc a ion of being a Sh a a e io cha ge i hin Maml k ocie ince it a a ocia ed i h he in ading Mongol . Ibn Ka h eco d in al-Bid ya that a man was executed in the year 744/1343 for making pro-Sh statements, ch a acc ing Ab Bak and Uma of di belief, lande ing he i e of he P ophe i ha and af a, and belie ing ha he Angel Gab iel ho ld ha e been en o Al in ead of Mu ammad; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 14:208. 140 I believe the popularity of Ibn Ka h Tafs r may have led to the idea that al- aba Tafs r was historically the most important Qur nic exegesis. Wi h he p olife a ion of Ibn Ka h Tafs r, scholars may have noticed how of en Ibn Ka h o e al- aba and hen a med ha al- aba pla ed a cen al ole in he de elopmen of Q nic exegesis. For more on questioning the historic role of al- aba see Saleh, Formation. 141 Saleh, Radical He mene ic , 153. 142 I speak about Tu fat in Chapter Three. 143 Ibn Ka h o e hi Tafs r and al-Bid a wa l-nih ya around the same time.

155

Conclusion: Ibn Ka h canno be de c ibed a he

poke pe on fo Ibn Ta mi a beca e he

each represented different forms of traditionalism. Ibn Taymiyya believed in an intellectualized adi ionali m hich a

ea on and e ela ion a

complimen a

and o gh o p o e he

rationality of scrip

e. Ibn Ta mi a ele a ed ie of ea on led him in o in en e heological

deba e

I lamic ec , e peciall

i h a io

c i ici ed he A h a

ha of he dominan A h a . Ibn Ta mi a

fo no affi ming e e of God mo n ing hi h one beca e of their

rational concerns that God could not be a body. Ibn Taymiyya held that not locating God within the heavens made it challenging for the believer to connect with God and allowed for the spread of monist Sufism and antinomianism. Rather, Ibn Taymiyya argued that God did in fact mount his throne or had hands, but that these characteristics were not comparable to that of human beings. In this way, Ibn Taymiyya felt that he was able to affirm the Q

nic text while

a oiding cha ge of an h opomo phi m. Ibn Ka h , in con a , ep e en ed a fidei adi ionali m ha defe ed o e ela ion and d e f om he g ea Sh fi him. Ibn Ka h o gh o foc

pheld a mo al heolog

ha defe ed i

adi ionali

befo e

e ela ing o God e ence and

on cience ha he belie ed had conc e e effec on h man ac ion. Ibn Ka h

fiediesm led him to avoid speculative theology and focus on traditions which he believed had tangible implications fo he belie e . Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h

con a ing

traditionalisms appear in their different engagements with the exegetical tradition. While Ibn Ta mi a c i ici e he e ege i of he A h a eli e, e peciall al-D n al-R

ha of al-Zamak ha and Fak

, Ibn Ka h inco po a e hem i hin hi Tafs r. Both Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn

Ka h endo e al- aba , b

Ibn Ka h

iden ifica ion i h al- aba i fa g ea e beca e he

was also a historian, exegete and jurist. 156

The differences between Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h clearer when we look more closely at their exegetical writings.

157

Q

nic hermeneutic becomes

Chapter V Jonah: A Sinless, Repentant or Obedient Prophet? a a d Ib Ka c a Q c hermeneutic and exegesis.

Ib Ta Schola f e

en l do no diffe en ia e be een Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h

he mene ic and e ege ical

i ing . In hi infl en ial a icle Taf r from aba

Q

nic

o Ibn Ka h ,

No man Calde con end ha Ibn Ka h ac i e hi f ndamen ali m f om hi eache Ibn Taymiyya.1 Calder thus describes the prevailing view that Ibn Taymiyya was the teacher and o iginal hinke and Ibn Ka h Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h o he , con i

ing

he

den and implemen e . Thi chap e

ill a g e ha Ibn

he meneutic and exegetical writings are in fact distinct from each

o diffe en e pon e o he g ea e ege e A h a Fakh al-D n al-R

606/1209). Ibn Ta mi

a he mene ic and e ege i

(d.

e e ba ed on hi in ellec ali ed

traditionalism that sought to refute what he considered heretical ideologies, in particular the dominan A h a i m ep e en ed b al-R

. In con a , Ibn Ka h

Q

nic hermeneutic and

exegesis built on the traditionalist exegetes before him, such as al- aba (d. 310/923), and functioned by marginalizing rationalist commentaries such as al-R

1

.

Calde al o a ha Ibn Ka h was an expert on ad h and a disciple of Ibn Taymiyya together adequate symbols of hi in ellec al affilia ion ; No man Calde , Tafs r from aba o Ibn Ka h : p oblem in he de c ip ion of a gen e, ill a ed i h efe ence o he o of Ab aham, Approaches to the Qur n, ed. G.R. Hawting and A.A. Shareef (London: Routledge, 1993): 121, 124.

158

Differentiating between Hermeneutic and Exegesis:2 Bo h Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h a g e ha he be h o gh he Q

a

o in e p e he Q

ni

n i self, and then through the traditions associated with the Prophet, the

Companions, and the Successors.3 Ibn Taymiyya outlines this approach towards the end of his Muqaddima f u l al-tafs r, and Ibn Ka h copie he e chap e in o he in od c ion o his exegesis. Yet, one must be careful in assuming that both of the scholars actually followed this hermeneutic in their Tafs r . A Walid Saleh ob e e , he e i a ime a di onance be een the aims laid out in the introduction and the actual exegesis that the exegete produce. Speaking about al-Tha lab (d. 427/1035), Saleh e plain , The reason to this dissonance lies in the inescapability of the Islamic exegetical tradition. Original and innovative as his works are, al-Tha lab a confined b the heavy weight of the previous exegetical corpus which all exegetes were bound to revere and follow. Thus the aims announced in the introduction, ambitious and audacious though they are, are tempered by the already-established course of the tradition.4 Simila

a emen co ld be made abo

Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h . Rega dle

of ha he

state as their hermeneutic, they both had to engage the exegetical tradition that they inherited. 5 Thus, to understand their Q

nic hermeneutics better, we need to take a closer look at Ibn

2

Jame Dammen McAuliffe defines exegesis and hermeneutic: The p ac ice of in e p e a ion a e a ed i h ha e no e m e ege i , hile he e m he mene ic a ed o deno e he aim and c i e ia of ha p ac ice ; Jame Dammen McA liffe, Q nic Hermeneutics: The Views of al- aba and Ibn Ka h , Approaches to the Histor of the Interpretation of the Qur n, ed. Andrew Rippin (Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York, 1988):47. 3 This approach has been detailed by Walid Saleh, Ibn Ta mi a and he Ri e of Radical Hermeneutics: An Analysis of an In od c ion o he Fo nda ion of Q nic E ege i , in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, eds. Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010), 123-162. Also, see Jame Dammen McAuliffe, Q nic Hermeneutics: The Views of al- aba and Ibn Ka h , 46-62. 4 Walid Saleh, The Formation of the Classical Tafs r Tradition: the Qur n Commentary of al-Tha lab (d. 427/1035) (Boston: Brill, 2004), 77. 5 Saleh further explains that if scholars did not engage the tradition, then hei o k a di ca ded : Modifica ion and inno a ion co ld onl cceed if he pe mi ed a en e of con in i and harmony with the old way of doing exegesis. One could not afford to completely break away from the tradition totally, for the tradition would have certainly retaliated. To those adventurous scholars who did depart from the tradition, like the author of the British Library manuscript Or. 8049, the punishment came swiftly. Their work was simply discarded ; Saleh, Formation, 101.

159

Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h

e ege ical

i ing in o de

ded ce he

le implici in hei

approach.6

De

Ib Ta

a a d Ib Ka

Q

c Hermeneutic:

Ibn Ta mi a he mene ic a o defend hi in ellectualized traditionalism from what he pe cei ed a de ian ideologie , pa ic la l Fakhr al-D n al-R z .7 Yet, many Q writing resembles al-R

ha of he dominan A h a i m ep e en ed b

nic chola no ice ha Ibn Ta mi a e ege ical

, bo h in terms of style and content.8 Saleh, for instance, observes

ha Ibn Ta mi a app oach can onl be compa ed o he ma e R z.

9

hom he a el men ion , al-

Such a comparison is apt because even as Ibn Taymiyya refutes al-R z in many of his

works, he adopts much of his kal m e minolog and

i ing

le. Ibn Ta mi a e ege ical

writing is full of logical proofs and analogies and resembles more the writing of a theologian than a ad h chola . Man of Ibn Ta mi a

o k a e polemical and hi exegetical writings

carried out similar aims.10 Th , Ibn Ta mi a call o in e p e he Q 6

n h o gh he salaf,

Saleh further expands on the importance of comparing a chola he mene ic i h his actual Tafs r. Speaking once again about al-Tha lab , Mo eo e a heo of in e p e a ion i h no e al co olla , hich al-Tha lab presented in his introduction, is impossible to assess. He never gives an example of how he intends to interpret a given verse. The converse is also true in the body of his commentary. He never explains how his theory is directing any particular explanation he is offering. Thus we are left to deduce the rules that are implicit in his approach ; Saleh, Formation, 102. 7 In the 705 AH council set up to eval a e Ibn Ta mi a c eed, one of he chief A h a e amine efe ence Fakhr al-D n al-R ; Ab Abd All h b. Abd al-H d , al- Uq d al-durri a min man qib Sha kh al-Isl m Ibn Taymiyya, ed. Ab M ab al a b. F d al- l n (Cai o: al-F al- ad tha), 189. For more on the council see Chapter One and Two. 8 Abd al- l e en goe o he poin of a ing ha he fea ha i co ld be aid abo [Ibn Ta mi a ] Tafs r what is said about al-R Tafs r in i i e e hing e cep tafs r. See I m l S lim Abd al- l, Ibn Kath r wamanhajuhu f al-Tafs r (Cairo: Maktabat al-Malik Fay al al-I l miyya, 1984), 268-276. 9 Saleh, Radical He mene ic , 161. 10 Fo Ibn Ta mi a ef a ion of Ch i iani ee Thomas F. Michel, A Muslim Theologian s Response to Christianit : Ibn Ta mi a s al-Jaw b al- a (Delmar, N.Y: Caravan Books, 1984) and David Thomas Apologe ic and Polemic in he Letter from Cyprus and Ibn Ta mi a Jaw b al- a l man baddala d n alMas , in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, 247-265. Fo hi ef a ion of M a ili m and Shi i m ee Ibn Ta mi a, Minh j al-sunna al-nabawiyya f naq kal m al-Sh a wa l-Qadariyya (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Ri al- ad ha, 1983). This work has been discussed by Tariq al-Jamil, Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn al-Mu ahhar al- ill : Sh Polemic and he S ggle fo Religio A ho i in Medie al I lam, in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, 229-246.

160

which he details in his Muqaddima, was not as much aimed at limiting Q

nic interpretation to

the early generation as it was defending the theology that he believed that they represented. For Ibn Taymiyya, anbal heolog Ibn Ka h

Q

a he c eed of he ea l M lim comm ni .

nic hermeneutic, on the other hand, built off traditionalist exegetes

before him, particularly that of al- aba and Ibn Ab

im al-R

his moral theology and larger intellectual project,12 Ibn Ka h Sh fi

adi ionali m in he line of o he

643/1245) and al-Mi

adi ionali

(d. 742/1341). Ibn Ka h

great tenth-century scholar promoted novel Q

(d. 327/938).11 Fitting with

o gh o p omo e a p o-ijtih d

chola ,

ch a Ibn al- al

al ed and iden ified i h al- aba

n h o gh he Q

ince he

nic interpretations by quoting a wide variety of

traditions not confined to the mainstay ad h collec ion . Th , Ibn Ka h in e p e ing he Q

(d.

ie of

n, he S nna, he Companion , and S cce o

a

mediated by his engagement with tradition-based exegetes before him. In pa ic la , Ibn Ka h of Ibn Ab H im al-R

he mene ic o gh o e al a e (takhr j) the traditions cited by

and al- aba b c o

efe encing hem i hin a ho i a i e ad h

collec ion . Ibn Ka h con i en l p io i i e p ophe ic ad h o e Companion and S cce o traditions and other interpretive tools such as philology. Previous exegetes had drawn and reworked foundational exegeses such as that of al-Tha lab

. Fo in ance, al-Zamakh ha (d.

Fo hi ef a ion on A h a i m ee hi Dar ta ru al- aql wa l-naql, ed. Abd al-La f asan Abd al-Ra m n (Beirut: D al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya, 1997). This work has been discussed by Racha el Omari in her, The Theolog of he S nna and hi Polemic i h he A h a i e , in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, 101-119 and M. Sait Ozervarli in his, The Q nic Rational Theology of Ibn Taymiyya and his Criticism of the Mutakallim n, in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, 78-100. Yahya Michot also discusses Dar ta ru in hi A Maml k Theologian Commen a on A icenna Ris la A awiyya, Journal of Islamic Studies 14, no. 2 (2003): 149-203 and hi A Maml k Theologian Commen a on A icenna Ris la A awiyya, Pa II. Journal of Islamic Studies 14, no. 3 (2003): 309-363. Ibn Ta mi a al o c i i e A h a i m in hi al-Tis ni a, ed. Mu ammad b. Ibr h m al- Agl n, 2 vols. (Riya h: Maktabat al-Ma rif li l-Na h a l-Tawz , 1999) and Ba n talb s al-jahmiyya f ta s s bida ihim alkal mi a, 2 vols. (Mecca: Ma ba a al-Huk ma, 1971). 11 Al- aba and Ibn Ab im al-R a e he mo o ed e ege e in Ibn Ka h Tafs r, with Sa d b. Abd All h Fan s n recording that al- aba is directly quoted 2039 times and Ibn Ab im 1744 times; Sa d b. Abd All h Fan s n, Maw rid al- fi ibn Kath r f tafs rihi (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Tawba, 2006), 129. 12 I attempt to define Ibn Ka h in ellec al p ojec in Chap e Th ee.

161

538/1144) drew heavily on al-Tha lab o con (d. 671/1272) also pulled from al-Tha lab b al o no e ha Bagha

c hi philolog ba ed tafs r while al-Qur b emo ed hi p o-Sh

(d. 516/1122) e ege i

a mo e o le

ma e ial.13 Ibn Taymiyya an ab idgemen of al-

Tha lab .14 However, no scholar had reworked the exegesis of al- aba and c o -referenced his traditions within authoritative ad h collec ion .15 We e n chola ha e been c i ical of Ibn Ka h

app oach di mi ing i a

of ad h .16 Ye , ha he e chola ma no eali e i ha Ibn Ka h

li

impl li

of ad h a e

carefully crafted to present particular theological messages. As Jane MacAullife clarifies, While he Tafs r al-Qur n al- a m contains much traditional material, it is not simply a collection uncritically accumulated. Rather it is most thoughtfully ordered and e al a ed.

17

Ibn

Ka h de o e a con ide able amo n of ime in elec ing ad h ha ep e en he ange of he ad h adi ion and he heological me age he an To el cida e he diffe ence be

een Ibn Ta mi

o con e .18 a and Ibn Ka h

hermeneutic, we

will compare their exegetical writings regarding an important theological debate in 8th/14th cen

Maml k Dama c , he infallibili

( i ma) of the prophets. We will then demonstrate

how their different definitions produce contrasting interpretations of the Prophet Jonah.

13

Saleh, Formation, 209-15. As Saleh says of al-Zamak ha engagemen i h al-Tha lab , The ela ion hip i one of dialectical conversation, of adding, adapting, refuting and excising material from al-Tha lab . 14 Ta al-D n A mad b. Abd al- al m Ibn Ta m a, Muqaddima f u l al-tafs r, ed. Adn n Za (K ai : D al-Q n al-Ka m, 1972), 76. 15 This may be because al- aba did no occ p ch a cen al ole in he hi o of tafs r. For more on questioning the historic role of al- aba ee Saleh, Formation. 16 Calder, 129. 17 McA liffe con in e o a e, A ch i bea fi ing e imon o a pe iod in I lamic hi o ha a conservative in the positive sense of the term - an era that sought to identify and preserve the best of its received tradition, albeit an era that, in modern times, has often been dismissed as mechanical and uninspired, repetitive and o ine, if no ac all e ging on decadence. See he Qur anic Christians: an Analysis of Classical and Modern Exegesis (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 76. 18 For more on how mu addiths articulate their legal opinions through ad h ee Ch i ophe Melche Traditionist-Jurisprudents and the Framing of Islamic Law, Islamic Law and Society 8, no. 3 (2001): 383-406.

162

Defining ‘i ma of the Prophets: Bo h Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h deal ignifican l

i h p ophe

i hin hei

i ing

but differ substantially regarding the concept of the i ma of the prophets. To contextualize their po i ion , i i nece a

o p e en ome backg o nd ega ding he dominan A h a defini ion

of i ma represented by Fakhr al-D n al-R

i h hich bo h Ibn Ta mi

a and Ibn Ka h had

to contend. Al-R

di c

e i ma in a variety of works, but he most explicitly defines the term in

his al-Arba n,19 or forty theological principles. Al-Arba n was an important didactic text in Maml k Dama c . The g ea Shafi A h a chief j 756/1355), for example, a gh he o k o hi ela i e Bah

ice of Dama c

Ta

al-D n al-S bk (d.

on T j al-D n al-S bk (d. 771/1370) and hi

al-D n al-S bk (d. 777/1375).20 Ibn Taymiyya even wrote a commentary on parts

of the text and taught it to some of his students. 21 Many of the arguments in al-Arba n appear in al-R

tafs r, which was the most dominant exegesis of the era.22 Al-R

de o e he 32nd

p inciple o he i ma of the prophets23 and takes the position that it is not possible for the prophets to commit minor or major sins intentionally, but they are allowed to commit mistakes

19

Fakhr al-D n al-R , al-Arba n f u l al-d n, eds. A mad ij and A mad Saqqa (Cairo: Maktabat al-K lli al-Azhariyya, 1989). 20 T j al-D n al-S bk , abaq t al-sh fi iyya al-kubr , eds. Ma m d M ammad al- an and Abd al-Fa Mu ammad al- ilw, 10 vol . (G a: Haj , 1992), 10:198; Abd al-Q di b. Mu ammad al-N a m , al-D ris f t r kh al-mad ris, ed. Ja fa al- a an , 2 vols. (Cairo: Maktabat al-Tha fa al-D ni ya, 1988), 1:38. 21 Abd al-H d , 37, 58, 256. 22 In his chapter on the science of tafs r, al-Dhahab observes that in his day he Q nic e ege i i h he ide readership was Fakhr al-D n al-R z . He hen goe o c i ici e the Tafs r saying that the work contains theological problems and unnecessary speculation; Mu ammad b. A mad al-Dhahab , Ba n aghl al- ilm wa l- alab, ed. Mu ammad Z hid b. al- asan al-Ka ha (Dama c : al-Q d , 1928), 19. 23 Al-R z chap e on he i ma of the prophets seems to be reworking of al-Q I d chap e Ref a ion of Those Who Allow [the prophets to commit] Minor Sins ( agh ir) ; Al-Q I d, Kit b al-Shif bi-ta r f uq q al-Mu af , ed. Sa d Abd al-Fa , 2 vols. (Egypt: Hi h m Al fi , 1995), 2:231. Al-R chapter on the i ma has been published as a separate work; Fakhr al-D n al-R , I ma al-anbi , ed. Mu ammad ij (Cairo: Maktabat al-Tha fa al-D ni a, 1986).

163

unintentionally (sah ). 24 Prophets are essentially free of sin (dhanb), since they had to perform their mission of conveying their message which required them to be models of righteousness and moral conduct. After presenting his definition of i ma, al-R ambiguous issues (shubha) ela ing o he

in

pend he e of he chap e foc ing on

of he p ophe . He ein e p e Q

ha highligh P ophe ic impe fec ion b a g ing ha he

in

nic verses

of the prophets were actually

leaving the preferable (tark al-af al) rather than engaging in acts of disobedience (ma iyya).25 Throughout these entries, al-R

i conce ned i h he p ophe

abili

o deli e hei me age,

so he takes the opinion that i ma is not necessary before prophecy26 and allows for transgression to occur before they are officially anointed as prophets.27 In he ne

cen

, he A h a Ta

al-D n al-S bk 28 takes al-R

defini ion a ep

further and argues that prophets did not commit minor or major sins intentionally or unintentionally.29 In hi commen a Ta

al-D n al-S bk

ae ,

ha

of Solomon p a e 38:36, Oh m Lo d, fo gi e me, e belie e (nakht r) is that the prophets, may peace be upon

them, are protected from major and minor sins [which are committed] intentionally or

24

Al-R z , I ma, 40. Al-R z structures the chapter around presenting all of the views within Islamic theology regarding i ma, putting forward his own definition of i ma, outlining 15 arguments in favor of this principle, and then confronting ambiguous issues related to the i ma of the prophets. 25 Al-R does allow for minor sins (sagh ir) for prophets. See his interpretation of verse 48:2. Al-R , however, does not discuss in de ail mino in of he p ophe in hi di c ion of i ma. 26 For instance, al-R argues that Adam committed the sin of eating from the forbidden tree before his Prophecy; Al-R , I ma, 50. 27 Al-R , I ma, 40. Al- R definition is thus slightly different than al-Q I d ho belie e ha p ophe are protected (ma m) from sin before their Prophecy; al-Q I d, 2:171. I i impo an o no e that al-Q I d i p ima il peaking abo he P ophe M ammad in his work al-Shif but generalizes Mu ammad inle state before prophecy to the other prophets. Al-R also argues that the Prophet Mu ammad was never a disbeliever (k fir), even before revelation. See his commentary of verse 93:7. 28 For more on Taq al-D n al-Subk and his relationship with the Sh fi adi ionali ee Chapter Three. 29 Ta al-D n al-S bk defini ion of i ma is thus more in line with that of al-Q I d ho a g e ha he p ophe a e f ee of e e impe fec ion ( a ib) ; Al-Q I d, 2:219. I co ld no find an in ance he e Ta alD n al-S bk peak abo the state of prophets before their Prophecy.

164

nin en ionall .

30

A fo Solomon p a e a king God o fo gi e him, Ta

al-D n e plain

that this is part of the proper etiquette that the prophets use in addressing God, part of their humility or politeness.31 Ta

al-D n al-S bk

not believe that Jacob became blind.32 Thi S bk , p ophe

e e no onl

pi i all

on, T j al-D n, f

he added ha hi fa he did

a a ela ed opic beca e, fo Ta pe io b

Drawing from an established anbal

al o ph ically sound.33

adi ion,34 Ibn Taymiyya takes aim at the above

A h a defini ion of i ma arguing that they distort Q

nic verses that clearly state that the

prophets sinned (dhanb).35 Ibn Taymiyya believed that, in hi ca e, he A h a (ta r f) he

e meaning of he Q

nj

al-D n al-

di o ed

a he di o ed he meaning of God name and

attributes.36 A Ibn Ta mi a empha icall decla e , Thi open he doo fo di o ion of a word from its proper meaning (ta r f al-kalim an maw

i ihi). One of them intends to praise

the prophets, but he ends up denying them. He wants to believe in them but he ends up di belie ing in hem.

37

Ibn Ta mi a fel ha he A h a

30

38

imposed their view of the prophets

Ta al-D n S bk , Fat w al-Subk , ed. us m al-D n Quds , 2 ol . (Beirut: D r al-J l, 1992), 2:106. T j al-D n al-S bk epea hi opinion of i ma in his biography of his father; abaq t, 10:295. Unfortunately, only parts of Ta al-D n al-S bk Tafs r are published so we are unable to make a full comparison between him and Ibn Taymiyya. For more on his exegetical writings see Ta al-D n S bk , Fataw al-Subk , 2:1-125. 31 Ta al-D n S bk , Fat w al-Subk , 1:116. 32 Jacob was thought to have lost his sight out of his sorrow for missing Joseph (verse 12:84) but it was miraculous e o ed hen hi face o ched Jo eph hi ( e e 12:94); And e Rippin, Jacob, ed. Jane Dammen McAuliffe Enc clopedia of the Qur n (Brill, 2012). 33 T j al-D n S bk , abaq t, 10:307. Al-R main ain a similar interpretation that Jacob did not become literally blind con ending ha e e 12:94 and e ned o him igh (ba r) ac all mean ha Jacob o o cea ed and his excitement began to increase since he would be soon reunited with Joseph. Al-R no e ha hi in e p e a ion is preferable to him since it removes any doubts of imperfection (nuq n) being associated to Jacob. 34 See Ibn Q d ma al-Ma di , Kit b al-taww b n, ed. George Makdisi (Damas; Institut français, 1961). Ibn Q d ma structures the work by first discussing the repentance of the Angels and the prophets and then that of other c ea ion (men and jin). Ibn Q d ma ho no he i a ion o incl de p ophe in he ca ego of ho e ho in and plead to God for forgiveness. 35 Ibn Taymiyya wrote a treatise on he i ma of the prophets which does not survive; Abd al-H d , 43. 36 In the Arabic text, Ibn Taymiyya uses the word Jahmiyya here a a code o d fo A h a s. 37 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm fat w Sha kh al-Isl m A mad b. aymiyya, ed. Abd al-Ra m n b. M ammad b. Q im al- im , 37 ols. (Beirut: Ma bi D al- A abi a, 1977-78), 10:295. 38 It is important o no e ha Ibn Ta mi a c i i e o diffe en fo m of i ma, the Ash a i ma which he takes up primarily in this treatise and he i ma of the Sh s which he attacks in Minh j al-sunna. For Ibn Taymiyya, the

165

on the Q a ionali

nic text and in the process rejected who the prophets really were.39 By foisting their on he e , he A h a

In opposition to al-R p ophe

and Ta

e e p o ec ed (ma

once he had commi ed i .

e e in effec den ing pa of e ela ion.

40

al-D n al-S bk , Ibn Ta mi a define i ma as that

m) from remaining, continuing or persisting in sin and error Ibn Taymiyya believed that prophets could sin, but what made

them different than others was that they were protected from persisting in sin.41 God would not allow his messengers, whom he trusted to convey his message, to continue to commit sins but o ld e en all co ec hei mi ake . Ibn Ta mi a a e ed ha hi defini ion of i ma was more consistent with Q

nic verses and ad h in hich he p ophe admi hei

an g e ion

( ulm) and ask for forgiveness. Ibn Taymiyya also directly refutes al-R

claim ha he p ophe

ho ld be f ee of in

because they are models of emulation by arguing that prophets should be followed only in the actions that they affirm. This follows the u l al-fiqh principle that prophets should be obeyed in the actions that they consistently perform rather than those that were abrogated. Ibn Taymiyya stresses that sins followed by sincere repentance (tawba) should not be frowned upon. Rather, he

ho ld be een a pa of an indi id al belie e

pi i al de elopmen . The p ophe

ho

repented after they sinned had advanced to a spiritual state superior than the one they occupied

i ma defined b he Sh s is more extreme and problematic but he his keen to highlight that the Ash a and Sh definitions overlap. 39 Ibn Taymiyya repeats this claim that the Jahmi a o A h a di o Q nic texts later in the treatise such as interpreting the verse 48:2 o God ma fo gi e o as not relating to the Prophet Mu ammad but to Adam and the Prophet s umma; Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:313. Al-Q I d al o men ion hi in e p e a ion in hi al-Shif ; Al-Q I d, 2:233. Ibn Taymiyya additionally wrote on the issue of the status of a prophet before his prophecy; Abd al-H d , 61. 40 Shahab Ahmed, Ibn Ta mi a and he Sa anic Ve e , Studia Islamica 87, no. 1 (1998): 86. 41 As Wilfred Madelung observes, Schola i h adi ionali leaning e e mo e e e ed in affi ming he sinlessness of the prophets, since this conflicted with a literal acceptance of passages in the n and ad th. See W. Madelung, I ma, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, ed. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. Van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs (Brill, 2011).

166

before their mistake.42 In contrast to al-R

, Ibn Ta mi a main ained ha he p ophe

inle

state should not be a source of emulation as much as their sincere repentance and striving to become better believers. Ibn Ta mi a and al-R

defini ion of i ma overlaps in that they both allow for

prophets to commit sins and mistakes before Prophecy but do not allow prophets to engage in major sins after they began their prophethood. However, they differ greatly in terms of emphasis al-R

a g e ha p ophe did no in ince ha diminished their ability to convey their

message and be models of righteousness, while Ibn Taymiyya stresses that they did sin so they could be examples of repentance. While al-R S bk

and Ibn Ta mi a defini ion of i ma o e lap, i i Ta

defini ion of i ma ha i comple el a odd

believed that prophets were protected (ma S bk held ha he p ophe

i h Ibn Ta mi a . While Ibn Ta mi a

m) in con e ing hei me age, Ta

e e p o ec ed (ma

m) in their essence.43 Ta

does not give any rational reason as to why prophets were ma prophets.44 Ibn Ta mi a ma ha e been compelled o beca e of p ominen A h a ,

ch a Ta

al-D n al-

al-D n al-

al-D n al-S bk

m other than that they were

i e on he i ma of the prophets

al-D n al-S bk , con ending ha p ophe

ee

essentially perfect.45

42

Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:293. Ibn Taymiyya, Majm ,10:289. 44 I have not found an instance e e Ta al-D n al-S bk explains why prophets were ma m. 45 The discussions over the definition of i ma was not a philosophical exercise but had eal implica ion in Maml k society. In Minh j, Ibn Taymiyya begins critiquing the Sh defini ion of i ma but then subtly moves to condemning grave worship; Minh j, 2:440. For Ibn Taymiyya, the issues of i ma and grave worship were intimately connected since he felt that those who held that humans were protected by God from sin were more likely to engage in practices of visiting tombs and seeking in e ce ion. Ibn Ta mi a final imp i onmen in hich he passed away was a result of his view that it was prohibited to travel with the exclusive intention of visiting a tomb, even that of the Prophet Mu ammad. Ibn Ta mi a ie of i ma could have very well cost him his life. For more a more in depth discussion on Ibn Ta mi a ie of g a e i i a ion ee Chap e One. 43

167

Fi ing i h hi

mo al heolog , Ibn Ka h ne e compo ed a ac on he heological

e of i ma of the prophets.46 Ne e hele , Ibn Ka h doe define i ma in his Tafs r, and

i

his definition is closest to al-R

in ha he belie e ha he p ophe

e e e en iall f ee of

sin because they were constantly aided by God.47 In verses 21:78-80, he Q

n na a e ha

David and Solomon both judged on an agriculture dispute in which a shephe d ca le de o ed hi neighbo

c op. The Q

Solomon j dgmen

n hen a e ha

a mo e j

e made Solomon nde

and impl ing ha

han Da id . Af e na a ing he de ail of he o

behind

the verse and a ad h ega ding he he a judge who rules incorrectly will go to the hellfire, Ibn Ka h in e jec and a e , I hold (aq l) that the prophets are protected (ma um n) [and] aided by God, the most powerful and majestic, and there is no disagreement in this in terms of the true scholars (mu aqqiq n) from the early scholars (salaf) to the later day ones (khalaf). hen con in e ha fo o he han he p ophe

he e i he ad h, If a j dge

le inco ec l

the hellfire. But citing this in ad h in efe ence o o he han he p ophe

Ibn Ka h

le co ec l

then he is rewarded twice, but if he rules and is incor ec hen he ha one e a d. argues that this ad h ef e ho e ho claim ha if a j dge

48

49

Ibn Ka h

hen he ill go o gge

ha Ibn

Ka h believed that prophets do not make mistakes.50 46

Unlike al-R z and Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Kath r did not write extensively on theology. Fo mo e on Ibn Ka h mo al heolog ee Chap e Fo . 47 Ibn Ka h i he i an o a ha he prophets engaged in repentance (tawba) since that implied that they had sinned. 48 I m l b. Uma b. Ka h , Tafs r al-Qur n al- a m, 12 vols. (Cai o: Mak aba A l d al-Shaykh li-T h, 2009), 7:3866. 49 I have not found an instance he e Ibn Ka h discusses whether prophets were protected from sin before their prophecy. In his commentary of verse 93:7, which mentions that the Prophet went astray ( l) before his Prophecy, Ibn Ka h only comments that the Prophet was not theologically astray but rather lost his way when he was a child; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 12:6649. For more discussion on verse 93:7 see Walid Saleh, The La of he Nishapuri School of Tafs r: Al-W id and his Significance in the History of Qur nic E ege i , Journal of the American Oriental Society 126, no. 2 (2006): 223-243. Ibn Ka h al o takes the position in his biography of the Prophet (s ra) that the Prophe did no o hip idol befo e hi P ophec ; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a wa l-nih a, eds. Al M ammad M a a and dil A mad Abd al-Ma j d, 15 vols. (Beirut: D al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya, 2009), 2:311-312. 50 In his commentary of verse 66:10, Ibn Ka h e en goes as far as saying that the wives of the Prophet are ma m from committing adultery even if they were disbelieve ; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 11:6212. We also see through his Tafs r

168

The e i no do b ha Ibn Ka h

in ellec al milie and ela ion hip i h hi A h a

colleagues influenced his definition of i ma. Ibn Ka h di c

ion of i ma such as al-Q i I

oe A ha

o ce in hi

(d. 544/1149) infl en ial Kit b al-Shif

Mu af . Ibn Ka h , fo in ance, ci e al-Q i I

opinion ha

uq q al-

e e 3:39 did no mean ha

the Prophet John was impotent, as other exegetes claim, but rather protected (ma committing adultery.51 Ye , ha diffe en ia e Ibn Ka h f om al-R

f

m) from

i ha he doe no make

it a point to argue for the sinless nature of the prophets but rather presents narratives of the prophets as models of righteousness. Unlike al-R

and Ibn Ta mi a, Ibn Ka h i no

interested in the questions of prophetic sin and does not get drawn into the theological debates of hi opponen . Ra he , Ibn Ka h foc e on con e ing ha he belie e i he

e image of he

prophets, one of righteousness and obedience. The chola

defini ion of i ma were not only connected to their intellectual tradition

but their social and political contexts. Ibn Taymiyya was part of a anbal mino i

ha o gh

o e hink Maml k ocie . B a g ing ha p ophets made mistakes, Ibn Taymiyya could contend that the great Companions and authoritative scholars were also at times in error and that their opinions needed to be revised. 52 Ta

al-D n al-S bk , in con a , a he chief j dge of

Damascus and he wanted o main ain he in i

ion ha p e e ed Sh fi o hodo . Th o gh

that i ma is an important principle that differentiates Sunnis from other sects and religions. Ibn Ka h affi m ha the Sunn principle that the Umma of the Prophet Mu ammad is protected (lahum i ma) from agreeing on error; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 3:1534. This makes Sunnis in conflict with extremist Sh s who maintain that their leader has to be ma m; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 1:211. Christians, additionally, hold their leaders to have i ma and are thought to follow them in whatever they say; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 3:1622. By maintaining that only the prophets are ma m, Ibn Ka h further marginalizes other types of knowledge, such as biblical traditions, since they do not come from a eliable o ce; Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3851. 51 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 2:988. 52 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:294. Ibn ajar al- A al n records that the famous grammarian Ab Ha n (d. 745/1344) recalls that when he was in a debate with Ibn Taymiyya on the Arabic language, he cited the acclaimed A ab g amma ian S ba a h . Ibn Ta mi a e o ed ha S ba a h a no a p ophe in g amma no a he protected from error (ma m) b a he he made 80 mi ake in hi g amma e book al-Kit b; Ibn ajar alA al n , al-Durar al-k mina f a n al-mi a al-th mina, ed. Abd al-W i h Mu ammad Al , 4 ol . ( ayderabad: Majli D i a al-Ma if al- U hm n ah, [1929-32]), 1:153. Walid Saleh also mentions this story; Saleh, Radical He mene ic , 123.

169

arguing for the potential perfection of man, al-S bk co ld a g e ha chola Sh fi i m e e di inel g ided and p o ec ed. E en ho gh Ibn Ka h traditionali poli ical mino i , he a none hele

pa of he majo i

ho pheld

a pa of a Sh fi

chool. Hi

ie

could also represent a desire to preserve the social order.

Jonah: A Sinless, Repentant, or Obedient Prophet? To illustrate how the Exegetes define i ma, we will examine how they apply their definitions to the Prophet Jonah. The story of Jonah provides an ideal opportunity to see how the scholars deal with prophetic infallibility since he was one of the few prophets who was explicitly punished by God.

Al-R

:J Al-R

a - A Sinless Prophet c

e hi in e p e a ion of he o

of Jonah a a eb

al of e en claim

that Jonah was a sinful prophet.53 He emphasizes throughout his commentary that Jonah was most likely swallowed by the whale before his Prophecy, which would put the scope of transgression outside of his prophetic message.54 Nonetheless, al-R

con end ha an

wrongdoing ( ulm) that Jonah committed was not disobedience (ma iyya) but rather leaving what is preferable (tark al-af al).55

53

Fakhr al-D n al-R , al-Tafs r al-kab r, 32 vols. (Cairo: al-Ma ba a al-Bahiyya al-Mi riyya 1934-62), 25:200. Al-R la e a es that Jonah did not intentionally perform an act of is obedience (ma iyya). See his commentary on verse 37:145. 54 Al-Q I d al o gge ha Jonah an g e ion a befo e he a a P ophe ; al-Q I d, 2:164. 55 Al-R eem o be d a ing f om al-Q I d al-Shif in his commentary of Jonah; al-Q I d, 2:163-4, 240-41.

170

Al-R

begin hi ef a ion b p

ing fo

a d e en claim ha Jonah a a inf l

prophet.56 He starts with the dispute on whether Jonah left his people upset at God, noting that the majority of early exegetes take this opinion, incl ding he Companion Abd All h b. Ma Abd All h b. Abb

d,

and he S cce o al- asan al-Ba . He al o add ha he la e e ege e hi opinion.57 If Jonah left upset with God, al-R

al- aba al o adop

asks, this would make

his transgression amongst the greatest of sins since he directly disobeyed God. Second, there is the problem of Jonah not believing that God was capable of punishing him which relates to the ne

pa of e e 21:87, and he did no hink ha God a capable of (p ni hing) him (lan

naqdira ala hi).

58

According to al-R

, a p ophe

o ld no do b he po e and capabili

of

God. Third, Jonah was a wrongdoer ( lim) based on his plea to God in last part of 21:87, Ve il I am among he

ong doe ( lim n).

59

If Jonah committed ulm then he deserved the

curse of God, hich i ded ced h o gh a eading of e e 11:18, Ve il pon he

ongdoe

he c

e of God i

(al la natu All h al al- lim n).60

Fourth, if Jonah did not commit any sin then why did God punish him by having the whale swallow him? God punished Jonah exactly because he committed a transgression. Fifth, Jonah a

blame o h

(mul m) ba ed on e e 37:142 he hale

allo ed him hile he

(Jonah) was blameworthy (mul m). Jonah co ld no be blame o h (mul m) if he did not commit any sin. Sixth, God directly instructs the Prophet Mu ammad not to emulate Jonah in e e 68:48, Do no be like he Companion of he hale. God p o ide hi in

c ion o

Mu ammad for the precise reason that Jonah was a sinful prophet. Seventh, Jonah is not

56

Al-R Al-R affect. 58 Al-R 59 Al-R 60 Al-R 57

, Tafs r, 25:200. , Tafs r, 25:200. Al- aba doe no a g e ha Jonah lef , Tafs r, 25:200. , Tafs r, 25:200. , Tafs r, 25:200.

171

p e a hi lo d b

li

ome na a ion o hi

included in the select category of prophets who persevered ( l al- a mi min al-rusul) such as the Prophet Moses. Al-R

ef e he e claim a g ing ha Jonah a a inle

p ophe and ha an

mistake he committed was not disobedience but rather leaving what was better.61 Al-R

ejec

the idea that Jonah left his people upset at his Lord since that implied him being ignorant of God e ence and neglec f l of Hi ole a a legi la o . Being p e befitting for a believer let alone a prophet of God. For al-R di ine command ince e e al e e

i h one Lo d i no

, a p ophe canno di obe a

a e ha me enge m

obe God,

ch a 33:36, I i

not fitting for a believing man or believing woman, when God and His Messenger judge on a matter, to ha e an deci ion in he ma e . ang

a ome hing o he han God

argues that the verb (gh

62

Instead al-R

a g e ha Jonah m

ch a hi o n people. Al-R

eo

ha e been

o philolog and

aba) could also imply that Jonah made his people angry when he

departed from them.63 Drawing on al-Zamakh ha , al-R

supports this interpretation by citing

a reading that Jonah left in a state of making others angry (mugh iban) rather than being angry himself. But even then, some may protest, Jonah should not have given up on his people. Jonah ho ld ha e been mo e pa ien , a en e of the whale (

ib al-h t). Al-R

engaged in something prohibited (ma

ppo ed b 68:48: and do no be like he Companion he o icall a k , doe hi ra)? Al-R

e e no

gge

ha Jonah

e pond ha Jonah a no e plici l

commanded to stay with his people: God ordered [Jonah] to convey the message to [his people]; He did not order him o a i h hem fo e e . Fo he appa en meaning of [God ] o der [to convey 61

Al-R doe no ema icall ef e all of he e en poin but rather the ones that he feels are most problematic. 62 Al-R , Tafs r, 25:200. 63 Al-Q I d makes a similar argument that Jonah left angry at his people, not his lord; Al-Q I d, 2:163-4.

172

the message] did not necessitate repetition and continuity. Thus his leaving [his people] was not disobedience (ma iyya). As for his anger, we do not concede that it was disobedience because [leaving the city] was not prohibited to him so he thought it was permissible. Whereas he only [left the city] angry on the behalf of God the most high, pride for his religion, repulsed of disbelief (kufr) and his people. It would have been more preferable for him to be patient and wait for permission f om God, he mo high, in abandoning hem. A fo he e e, and do no be like he Companion of he hale i a a if God an ed fo Mu ammad the most virtuous and highest of positions.64 Al-R

e e ha Jonah ange

pe fo med hi d

a no di ec ed o a d God, b

of con e ing he me age b

a f

a he hi people. Jonah

a ed i h he o n di belief

causing him to depart prematurely. By leaving early, Jonah did not commit an act of disobedience but left what was preferable (tark al-af al). A fo he e e and do no be like he Companion of he hale, God an ed he P ophe M

ammad to have the highest stature

and thus the verse is not a condemnation of Jonah.65 As for rebutting the second claim, that Jonah believed that God did not have the ability to punish him, al-R

decla e ha , We a

ha

hoe e belie e God o be incapable ( ajaza), is

a disbeliever. There is no disagreement that it is not permissible to ascribe that [belief] to any of the believers, so how about the prophets, may peace be upon them? Thus, it is necessary to engage in ta w l.

66

Al-R

ejec

he con en ion ha Jonah belie ed hat God was not capable

of acting against him since this would mean that a prophet did not comprehend the nature of God. Similar to al-R

in e p e a ion of he an h opomo phic di ine a ib e ,67 the literal

meaning of e e 21:87 and he did no hink that We were not capable of (punishing) him (lan naqdira ala hi)

68

is problematic so it is necessary to move to a secondary meaning through

64

Al-R , Tafs r, 25:200. Al-R , Tafs r, 25:200. 66 Al-R , Tafs r, 25:200. 67 I discuss al-R in e p e a ion of istaw 68 Al-R , Tafs r, 25:200. 65

al al- arsh in Chapter Four.

173

ta w l. Al-R

ci e

e e al e e ha all de o a diffe en meaning of qadara such as verse

30:37, God e pands his wealth to whoever he wills of his servants and restricts (yaqdir) and e e 65:7

ho e e

eal h ha been e ic ed (qudira). Al-R

e plain ha he e e e all

demonstrate that meaning of naqdir here means to restrict (nu ayyiq) in that Jonah thought he had the choice to stay and continue to warn his people or the right to leave.69 Jonah did not believe that God would hold him accountable for leaving early even if it was better to remain and warn his people.70 Al-R

hen mo e o he final issue of Jonah being a wrongdoer ( lim) based on the

ending of he e e, Ve il I am one of he

ong doe ( lim n). Al-R

con end ha if

we hold that this [prayer] was before revelation then there is no issue (fa l kal m), but if we maintain that this was after [Prophecy] then it is necessary to engage in ta w l. al-R

bia ha Jonah a

allo ed b

71

Here, we see

he hale before his prophecy since a prophet could

not engage in wrongdoing ( ulm) for the reason that those who commit ulm deserve the curse of God. Nonetheless, al-R P ophec , hen he lef

ol ion i ha if Jonah a ha

allo ed b

he hale after his

a p efe able: he e i no do b ha [Jonah] abandoned (t rik) the

most virtuous with the ability to attain the most virtuous (act), in that way it was injustice ( ulm).

72

Jonah did not commit ulm in the sense of committing a sin but rather leaving the

superior act of staying and warning his people. As for the claim that Jonah was swallowed by the whale as a punishment ( aq ba) from God, al-R

69

belie e ha p ophe a e no p ni hed

Al-Q I d makes a similar argument that naqdir here means nu ayyiq; Al-Q I d, 2:163. Al-R , Tafs r, 25:200. 71 Al-R , Tafs r, 25:200. 72 Al-R , Tafs r, 25:200. Al-R doe e he o d repentance (tawba) in reference to Jonah but does not emphasize the word. Al-R a g men a ion ega ding ulm i imila o ha of al-Q I d; Al-Q I d, 2:241. 70

174

but rather put through a trial (mi na).73 God punishes disbelievers but tests believers in order to enhance their spiritual state.74 In sum, al-R

p e en Jonah a a inle

prophet, one that either committed his

transgression before his prophecy or abandoned the preferable by leaving his people. Al-R argues his points through the science of kal m which includes citing Q

nic verses, employing

philology, using rational arguments and resorting to ta w l. While al-R

ci e

ad h

throughout his Tafs r, they are not given same priority as theological disputation or philology.

Ibn Taymiyya: Jonah - A Prophet of Repentance Ibn Taymiyya discusses Jonah in a lengthy treatise entitled Kal m al da wat Dh alN n75 devoted to his Q glo

nic p a e fo nd in he la pa of 21:87, The e i no god b

be o Yo , e il I am one of he

ongdoe .

73

76

Yo ,

While Ibn Taymiyya does not directly

Al-R , Tafs r, 25:200. Al-R doe no add e he e en h claim implici l ecogni ing ha Jonah was not one of the persevering Prophets ( l al- a mi min al-rusul). 74 Unfortunately, al-R does not expand on this point. 75 Abd al-H d specifically mentions Kal m al da wat Dh al-N n as one of Ibn Ta mi a man works; Abd al-H d , 56. 76 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:238-335. Shahab Ahmad looks at this same treatise in his influential and meticulous a icle Ibn Ta mi ah and he Sa anic Ve e . While the Satanic Verses is mentioned in the treatise, it is only directly dealt with in 2 pages of the 100 page fatw . Proving the validity of the Satanic verses was not an end goal of Ibn Taymiyya as much as encouraging the believer to engage in repentance (tawba). As Ahmad mentions, he had o econ c he o of he a anic e e h o gh Ibn Ta mi a a io i ing beca e there is no single work dedicated to it. Ibn Taymiyya, however, devoted many treatises and fat wa to the importance of tawba and its implica ion o he belie e . Th , Ahmad final a emen in his article ho ld be modified, o he o hodo of Islamic modernity, the Satanic verses incident poses a fundamental problem; to Ibn Taymiyya it was a fundamental part of the solution. Fo Ibn Ta mi a, i a no he a anic e e a ch ha a a f ndamen al pa of he ol ion b a he he need for believers to realize their shortcomings and repent for their sins. Ahmad further a g e ha Fo Ibn Ta mi a, hen, he Sa anic e e inciden con i ed he prime example of the process of prophetic transgression and subsequent repentance. For him this incident, more than any other, proves that there is no basis for objecting to the idea of a prophet who is susceptible to sin and error ; Ahmad, 98. I am inclined to belie e ha o of Jonah a Ibn Ta mi a prime example of prophetic transgression and subsequent repentance since Ibn Ta mi a de o e an en i e ea i e o Jonah call and ci e he a anic e e a pa of hi larger argument that Jonah was a great prophet. Nonetheless, Ibn Ta mi a p ime e ample of p ophe ic transgression is not as important as his larger belief in the imperfection of man and his need to consistently repent.

175

take up al-R

in he reatise, Ibn Taymiyya shows great awareness of al-R

a g men a ion

and refutes many of his points.77 Ibn Taymiyya begins the treatise admiring the way in which Jonah praises God and disassociates Him of any negative qualities. The treatise reaches its climax when it discusses the la pa of Jonah p a e

e il I am among he

ongdoe ( lim n). Unlike al-R

, ho

find Jonah admi ion of ulm p oblema ic, Ibn Tami a affi m Jonah p a e a one of repentance that should be followed by every believer.78 Ibn Taymiyya argues that through his prayer of repentance Jonah became a better person and that his station with God increased.79 Ibn Taymiyya justifies this argument through 68:48-50, Be pa ien

i h he dec ee of o

Lo d and

do not be like the Companion of the whale (Jonah) when he called out in agony. Had the Grace of his Lord not reached him, he would indeed have been cast off on the shore, in disgrace. [But] hi lo d cho e him and made him among he igh eo . Unlike al-R he fi

, ho ha

ec ion do no be like he Companion of he hale, Ibn Ta mi a

o ble i h

e e ho

he

e e end, God cho e Jonah and made him among he righteous. Ibn Ta mi a poin o that after his transgression and subsequent repentance God enhanced his spiritual state and made him among the elect. Ibn Ta mi a f

he a g e ha he Q

the whale he was mul m or blameworthy.80 B

n a e ha hen he a

77

hen Jonah a

allo ed b

h o n pon he ho e God doe

Ibn Taymiyya may have been in jail during the composition of this treatise and not been able to access al-R works. Nevertheless, it is evident throughout the treatise that Ibn Taymiyya was well-aware of al-R z argumentation. 78 Ibn Taymiyya had an intellectual interest in prophetic wrongdoing ( ulm). Abd al-H d notes that Ibn Taymiyya wrote a treatise on the prayer that the Prophet Mu ammad taught Ab Bakr, Oh m Lord, I have wronged ( alamtu) myself tremendously ( ulman kath ran ) ; Abd al-H d , 69. 79 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:294. Ibn Taymiyya does not focus on the first part of the verse and thus does not discuss the issues relating to the meaning of lan naqdira ala hi. 80 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:299.

176

not say he was mul m but rather saq m or sick.81 Ibn Taymiyya contends that Jonah was not mul m following his release from the whale because he had already repented through his prayer, The e i no god b ai ed Jonah

Yo , glo

be o Yo , e il I am one of he

ongdoe . This prayer

pi i al a e and made him in o a model of em la ion. Fo Ibn Ta mi a, Jonah

should not be judged by his initial sin but by his final position;82 con ide a ion ho ld go towards the completeness of the end not the deficiency in he beginning.

83

Ibn Taymiyya gives many examples of how imperfection should not be seen as a deficiency; among them is the rational example of human development. Just as humans develop physically from a sperm, to a blood clot and so forth, humans develop spiritually. It was wrong to judge a human through its early developmental stages; rather, one should judge a human when he ha

a ained comple ene . Ibn Ta mi a

84

emendo

belief in epen ance (tawba)85 leads him to assert that

Jonah call of repentance was after he became a Prophet.86 Ibn Taymiyya rejects the idea that Jonah

in came befo e P ophe hood, hich implie ha in and p ophec a e incon i en . Ibn

Ta mi a di mi e hi opinion decla ing, [We] do no need hi (l

81

a t j il h dh ).

87

Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:299. Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:299. 83 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:304. 84 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:300. Ibn Taymiyya also gives the example of how the Companions are considered better than the Successors even though Companions were at one time disbelievers while the Successors were raised as Muslims. Ibn Taymiyya argues that the person who experienced both good and evil is potentially better than the person who only knows good. Since the later never experienced evil, he is not in a position to identify what is incorrect, and may inadvertently fall into it or not be able to stand up against it. 85 The Prophet Jonah fi i hin Ibn Ta mi a larger belief in the concept of repentance (tawba). See, for instance, Ibn Taymiyya, Kit b al-Tawba, ed. Ab Abd al-Ra m n Fa A mad Zam al (Bei ; D Ibn azm, 2004). 86 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:309. 87 Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:309. 82

177

In ead, Ibn Ta mi ho, did no dela

a main ain ha Jonah ac ion a e in ha mon epen ance (tawba), b

Similar to al-R

, Ibn Ta mi a

ha ened o a d i . e Q

i h he o he p ophe

88

nic verses, rational arguments and philology

to argue his positions.89 Yet, Ibn Taymiyya questions the reasoning that a Prophet could not be a wrongdoer ( lim) or be blameworthy (mul m). He further rejects his use of ta w l, which for Ibn Taymiyya, implicitly accepts the notion tha he e i God. Rather, Ibn Taymiyya strives to affirm the Q

Ib Ka

:J

ome hing p oblema ic

i h he peech of

nic text and argue for its rational value.

a - A Prophet of Obedience

Unlike the theologians al-R exegetical writings as a kal m

o Ibn Ta mi

a, Ibn Ka h r does not structure his

le ef a ion. In ead, Ibn Ka h p e en tafs r as a type of

ad h e al a ion (takhr j)90 that reworks the traditionalist exegetes before him, most notably alaba and Ibn Ab

im al-R

.91 Th o gh hi e al a ion , Ibn Ka h

e

adi ion o

construct a narrative of Jonah as a prophet of worship and obedience.92 In contrast to al-R

and Ibn Ta mi a, Ibn Ka h

ie

he o

a one of o hip in

which Jonah was released from the whale because of his prior obedience. He begins his commentary on 21:87 by giving a brief historical background to the story, such as mentioning 88

Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:309. Ibn Taymiyya gives a long list of Q nic p a e ha he prophets used to seek forgiveness. These Prophets include Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and Solomon; Ibn Taymiyya, Majm , 10:296. 89 Ibn Ta mi a i ing le i imila o al-R e cep ha al-R i mo e foc ed. Ibn Ta mi a f e en l goes off into tangents and then returns back to his original argument after several paragraphs or pages. Nevertheless, al-R and Ibn Taymiyya both employ kal m style refutations that seek to expose the irrationality of hei opponen . Fo complain on Ibn Ta mi a angen ial p o e ee Ibrahim Baraka, Ibn Taymiyya wajuh duhu f al-tafs r (Beirut: al-Maktaba al-Islamiyya, 1984), 112. 90 Ibn Ka h had i en ea lie takhr j works such as Tu fat al- lib li-mukhta ar Ibn jib. Ibn Ka h e pe i e in ad h appea h o gho he Tafs r in that he uses specialized ad h terminology and cites traditions outside of he canonical collec ion . Fo mo e on Ibn Ka h ad h works see Chapter Three. 91 In hi a , Ibn Ka h Tafs r resembles al-Bid a wa l-nih a in that he draws on a several key sources, abridges their writings and adds his own material. 92 Ibn Ka h e of adi ion o a g e hi heological poin demonstrates that mo of he tafs r bi l-ma th r is in reality a tafs r bi l-ra ; Saleh, Formation, 16.

178

Jonah f ll name, he name of people he a Here we see Ibn Ka h

en o, and ho he a h o n in o he ocean.93

e pe i e a an hi o ian, ome hing hich i ab en in al-R

and Ibn

Taymiyya. Ibn Ka h

hen mo e o commen on 21:87. He ci e onl one of al- aba

in which Jonah left his people angry at them.94 Ibn Ka h

h

omi

adi ion

e e al of al- aba

traditions that report that Jonah abandoned his people because he was angry with God.95 Ibn Ka h , for instance, forgoes a biblically inspired tradition that Jonah became upset with God because God rescinded his promise to Jonah that he would punish his people. The people of Nineveh eventually repented after Jonah had left the city, leading God to forgive them. On hearing that God did not punish his people after his promise, Jonah became upset and declared b God I am ne e going o e

n o m people a lia .

96

Ibn Ka h mo likel did i ho

these traditions because of theological issues of God not fulfilling his promise and a prophet showing his displeasure with God. Ibn Ka h

an i ion o in e p e lan naqdira ala hi and argues, similarly to al-R

,

that these words mean lan nu ayyiqa (not to restrict).97 To back up the opinion, he cites the Companions and Successors Ibn Abb , M j hid b. Jab and ahhak b. M records that al- aba p efe

hi la e opinion and gives evidence that naqdir means nu ayyiq

based on the verse 65:7, one of the verses that al-R Ibn Ka h

opinion he e i

him.98 Ibn Ka h

imila o al-R

al o

, Ibn Ka h

93

e o

ppo hi a g men .99 While

i a e he a ho i

fo he meaning

Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3879. Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3880. Ibn Ka h i e plici in hi Stories of the Prophets that Jonah left upset at his people; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 1:275. 95 Ab Ja fa M ammad b. Ja al- aba , J mi al-ba n f tafs r al-Qur n (Beirut: D al-Ma ifa, 1972) 17:61. 96 Al- aba , 17:61. See Book of Jonah 3:10 for the biblical roots of this tradition. 97 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3880. 98 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3880. 99 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3880. 94

179

of naqdir fi

i h Companion and S cce o and hen i h philolog . While Ibn Ka h

e

philology as an interpretative tool throughout his Tafs r, the transmitted sources are given p io i . Ibn Ka h

e of philolog i f

he appa en in ha Ibn Ka h ci e an opinion f om

A iyya al- A f , hich i no fo nd in al- aba ,100 that naqdir means to judge (naq iya) and follo

i h a e e of poe

o

ppo

hi a g men . Ibn Ka h ci e he e e e of poe

despite the fact that his preferred opinion is that naqdir means to restrict (nu ayyiq), which demon

a e ha Ibn Ka h

a open o various readings of the text.101

After citing traditions about the meaning of Jonah calling out in the darkness ( ulam t), Ibn Ka h p e en

e e al adi ion ha all empha i e Jonah obedience and o hip. In he

first tradition, Jonah enters the belly of the whale and thinks that he is dead.102 He then moves hi leg and eali e ha he i

ill ali e. He immedia el p o

ae

pplica ing, O, God! I

have made a place of worship (masjid) in a place he e no one e e ha . po a

Jonah a a pi i al pionee

ince he i he fi

103

This tradition

o o hip God in a bell of a hale!

This tradition is not found in any of the canonical ad h collections and is briefly mentioned by al- aba . Ye , Ibn Ka h incl de he adi ion beca e i demon

a e Jonah

o hip and

obedience. Ibn Ka h

hen ci e a ad h f om Ab Hurayra that narrates that when God decided to

confine Jonah in he bell of he hale, he in

c ed he hale no o ea f om Jonah fle h o

break his bones.104 When the whale settled in the bottom of the ocean, Jonah heard some noise 100

Schola ha e a g ed ha Ibn Ka h o k i impl a takhr j of al- aba . Ho e e , Ibn Ka h does not limit himself to al- aba and uses a plethora of sources throughout his commentary. For more on many sources that Ibn Ka h d a on in his Tafs r see Sa d b. Abd All h Fan s n, Maw rid al- fi ibn Kath r fi tafs rihi and Sam M ammad I m l, al-Mift al-kab r li-Tafs r Ibn Kath r (Cairo: D al-M addi h n, 2008). 101 Calde implie ha Ibn Ka h doe no emplo e ege ical ool o he han ad h; Calde , 121. Fo a di c ion on Calde a icle ee he In od c ion. 102 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3880. 103 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3880. 104 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3880.

180

and he began to ask himself what it was. God inspired Jonah that this was the supplication (tasb ) of the sea creatures, leading Jonah to reflect and make his own prayer. The Angels then hea Jonah p a e and a , Oh God, e hea a eak oice f om a e pond , Tha i f om m

e an Jonah, he di obe ed me o I kept him in the belly of a whale

(in he ocean). The e claim, He i a igh eo da and nigh ! Ka h

105

ange land. God

e an

ho e good deed o e o o e e

God replies in the affirmative and then orders the whale to release Jonah. Ibn

hen ie o demon

ate the authority of this tradition by noting that it is cited by al-

aba and i fo nd in he Musnad of al-Ba

.106 Ibn Ka h i once again unable to locate this

tradition within the canonical collections but he nevertheless cites the story because it promotes his view that Jonah was a prophet of obedience.107 Ibn Ka h add ano he in

ad h ha empha i e Jonah obedience in which the Prophet

c : I i no pe mi ible fo a e an o a : I am be e han Y n

praised (sabba a) God in he da kne .

108

b. Ma a (Jonah), he

Ibn Ka h no e ha he e a e adi ion ha do no

ha e he addi ion he p ai ed God in he da kne

b

none hele

he choo e o

o e hi

e ion beca e i empha i e Jonah de o ion. Ibn Ka h end hi commentary with another tradition that supports the idea of the Angel in e ceding on behalf of Jonah, hi ime f om Ibn Ab

im al-R

.109 This ad h

switches the dialogue in which God asks the Angels if they recognize the voice of Jonah. They reply ques ioning, Who i i ? God e pond , I i m 105

e an Jonah. The

e pond in

Al-R ci e this same ad h in his commentary of 37:145 but unlike al-R , Ibn Ka h ci e he en i e chain of transmission and locates it within authoritative collections. Ibn Ka h distinguishes himself from other exegetes in that he cites the source of prophetic traditions, includes their full chains of transmission and lists variants. 106 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3881. Ibn Ka h no e ha onl hi first tradition has a complete chain of transmission back to the Prophet. Nonetheless, the editors of the Awl d al-Shaykh edition grade this tradition as weak. 107 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3881. 108 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3881. Ibn Ka h incl de a ec ion in hi Stories of the Prophets that lists variants of this ad h; Ibn Ka h , al-Bid ya, 1:278-79. 109 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3881. This tradition only goes back o M lik b. Anas, not to the Prophet Mu ammad.

181

a oni hmen , Yo an

e an Jonah, ho e deed

e e con in o l accep ed and p a e al a

e ed? The Angel hen in e cede on hi behalf pleading, Will o no ha e mercy on the

one ho did good (in a ime of ea e) o e can a e him in ha d hip? God e pond , Ye , ab ol el

he hale o elea e Jonah.110

and o de

These traditions all acknowledge that Jonah made a mistake: he should have obeyed God and not fled hi people. Ye , he all empha i e Jonah obedience and worship. The Angels exclaim that Jonah is a righteous servant whose good deeds were well known before his transgression and the Prophet declares that no one should condemn Jonah because he praised God in a time of difficulty. Ibn Ka h

o

of Jonah con in e in hi Qa a al-anbi

e e 37:143, Ibn Ka h doe men ion ha if i

e e no fo Jonah

.111 In his explanation of epen ance and e

God hen he o ld ha e a ed in he hale n il he Da of J dgmen . B no d ell on hi poin . Ra he he empha i e he fi

n o

Ibn Ka h doe

pa of he e e, If he e e no one of

those who praised God (musabbi n). Fo Ibn Ka h , Jonah a one of he musabbi n because he was one of he obedien ( e an ), o hipe , and emembe of God. Ibn Ka h this interpretation through the ad h f om Ibn Abb

ppo

he e he P ophe a , Oh m Son, le

me teach you a few words, preserve (the rights) of God and God will preserve you. Preserve (the rights) of God and you will find him guiding you, acquaint yourself with God in times of goodne , hen he ill emembe

o in ime of ha d hip.

112

The implica ion i ha Jonah

prayer was answered because he was a devote servant before his act of transgression Similarly to al-R

, Ibn Ka h i he i an o

e he o d in (dhanb) to describe

prophets and he views them as models of righteousness and obedience rather than that of 110

Ibn Ka h , Tafs r, 7:3881. Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 1:273-80. 112 Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a, 1:276. 111

182

repentance. However, unlike al-R

and hi A h a colleag e , Ibn Ka h doe no p io i i e

philology nor resort to ta w l in diffic l e ege ical i a ion . Ra he , Ibn Ka h a emp locate ad h in a ho i a i e collec ion ha

o

ppo hi heological ance . Ibn Ka h i

similar to Ibn Taymiyya in that he emphasizes the transmitted sources and avoids ta w l. Yet, Ibn Ka h p e en hi heolog

h o gh ad h e al a ion (takhr j) rather than the rational

argumentative style of Ibn Taymiyya.

Conclusion: Through an analysis on al-R

, Ibn Ta mi a , and Ibn Ka h

e ege ical

we see both similarities and differences in terms of their style and content. First, al-R

i ing and Ibn

Taymiyya overlap regarding style, they both structure their writings as theological refutations and deal with similar issues of whether Jonah was swallowed before or after he was a prophet and how a prophet could be a wrongdoer ( lim) and blameworthy (mul m). Al-R

ha

o ble

accepting Jonah as a wrongdoer ( lim) and blameworthy (m lim) since that would affect his abili

o be a model of igh eo ne . He h

a g e ha Jonah

an g e ion a befo e hi

Prophethood or he left the preferred in staying and warning his people. Ibn Taymiyya, on the o he hand, affi m Jonah

in a g ing that it was part of his spiritual journey, intimately

connected with the importance of repentance (tawba). In con a , Ibn Ka h

c

e hi e ege i a a ad h e al a ion (takr j). Ibn Ka h

carefully sorts through al- aba and Ibn Ab

im al-R

elec ing adi ion

hich can be

corroborated through the authoritative ad h collec ion and he feel a e a hen ic and theologically sound. In terms of issue of i ma of he p ophe , Ibn Ka h i clo e o al-R position in that prophets do not sin because they are constantly aided by God. He presents 183

Jonah as an obedient prophet who was released from the whale because of his prior worship. Ho e e , fi ing hi mo al heolog , Ibn Ka h doe no engage in kal m style debate and avoids being drawn into theological discussions of how Jonah could be a wrongdoer ( lim) or blameworthy (mul m). Ibn Ka h i no in e e ed in he i

e of p ophe ic in b

a he foc e

on presenting a compelling narrative on how Jonah is a model of righteousness and obedience.

184

Conclusions: Of all of he man f om him.

1

ime ha I mee

So said Ibn ajj b. M

i h [Ibn Ka h ], I al a

lea ned (akhadhtu) something

al-Sa d (d. 782/1380-81), one of the students of Ibn

Ka h . Some hing imila could be said of myself. On the many instances that I engaged Ibn Ka h

o k , I al a

lea ned ome hing f om him and he helped me each impo an

conclusions regarding the study of Islamic history, theology, and tafs r.

Islamic History: This dissertation contests the framework that views Islamic history as the product of a handful of charismatic and erudite individuals. This theory proposes that, if we study the major Muslims scholars then we have understood the larger Islamic intellectual tradition. As George Makdisi explains, We tend to represent religious movements in Islam as monolithic entities, juxtaposed to each other like blocks of stone, and thus opposed to all other movements. We then set about looking for the characteristics of each movement based on the attitudes and views of a number of its representatives. The results are dubious at best, for they tend to violate the individuality of Muslim scholars who, like all thinkers, refuse to be reduced to a common denominator.2 To bet e

nde

and he salaf o he I lamic f ndamen ali

ha e made Ibn Ta mi a in o i chief mo emen ,

ep e en a i e. O he g ea M lim chola

ch a Ibn Ka h , a e hen ed ced o Ibn Ta mi a

The e label gi e he imp e ion ha Ibn Ka h p omo ing hi

mo emen , We e n chola

ie

a

poke pe on.

impl an e en ion of Ibn Ta mi a,

and chola hip. Thi di e a ion demon

1

den o

i hin hi

a e ha Ibn Ka h

a hi o n

Abd al-Q di b. Mu ammad al-N a m , al-D ris f t r kh al-mad ris, ed. Ja fa al- a an , 2 ol . (Cairo: Maktabat al-Tha fa al-D ni ya, 1988), 1:36. 2 George Makdisi, Hanbalite Islam, in Studies on Islam, ed. Merlin L. Swartz (New York: Oxford University Press, 1981), 240.

185

scholar, with his unique intellectual project and important contributions to Islamic history, ad h and e ege i . Ibn Ka h

life and o k

died on hei o n e m .3

ho ld be con in ed o be

The ma e -di cipline pa adigm f

he igno e he fac ha chola

e e pa of

intellectual circles and broader political and theological movements. These circles had their own dynamics that extended beyond simple hierarchies; junior scholars studied with several senior ones, and senior scholars drew from one another. The fluid system of classical Islamic ed ca ion, e peciall eache

ha of he Maml k pe iod, enco aged

hich led o he c ea ion of independen hinke

den

o

a he han

d

i h a a ie

of

poke pe on . Man

scholars did have one primary teacher, but they often studied with a host of other scholars that infl enced he di ec ion of hei

o k. In ho , a

den did no al a

e end a eache

intellectual project. Ibn Ka h , in pa ic la , did ead m ch of Ibn Ta mi a

o k and mo likel

attended many of his public lectures.4 Ibn Ka h ci e info ma ion f om Ibn Ta mi a in alBid a wa l al-nih a and consistently references him in his legal and ad h o k . Ibn Ka h co ld h

be een a

a

den of Ibn Ta mi a. Ye , hi did no mean ha Ibn Ka h

con in ed Ibn Ta mi a in ellec al p ojec , e peciall hi con o e ial heological doc ine o legal

ling . Ibn Ka h ne e

o e Ibn Ta mi a di en io the primary student of al-Mi eache . B Ka h

o e Ibn Ta mi a in heolog and p efe ed econcilia ion ance on di o ce oa h . In fac , Ibn Ka h i be de c ibed a

, p ai ing him he mo and efe encing him mo e han an o he

e en hen, he e e e impo an diffe ence be een Ibn Ka h and al-Mi

ha ed al-Mi

in e e in ad h, b

hi

3

. Ibn

peciali a ion e ended o tafs r, history and

This project doe no claim o be a comp ehen i e d of Ibn Ka h and hopes that more studies are written on Ibn Ka h life, major works and tafs r. The same should go for the other great scholars discussed in this dissertation such as al-Dhahab , al-Mi , al-Bi l , Ibn al-Qayyim, and the al-Subk s. 4 I ha e no fo nd an in ance he e Ibn Ka h a ha he died a pa ic la book i h Ibn Ta mi a.

186

la . Ibn Ka h

a mo e of a j i and hi o ian han al-Mi

b o he Sh fi

adi ionali

ch a al-Dhahab and al-Bi

and a

ignifican l infl enced

l.

Theology: Thi di e a ion confi m Makdi i con en ion ha A h a i m a no he ndi p ed orthodoxy by the 8th/14th cen po

. While A h a

domina ed he ke poli ical and ed ca ional

of Maml k Dama c , he adi ionali mo emen po ed a serious threat to the social and

political order. Ibn Taymiyya was imprisoned several times because of his growing influence which drew popular appeal as well as attracted he inclina ion of Maml k number of the major educational in i

ion ,

ch a D

S li , were directed by traditionalists like al-Mi

le . Addi ionall , a

al- ad h al-Ashrafiyya and Umm

, al-Dhahab , and Ibn Ka h .5

Makdisi is further correct that traditionalism stretched beyond the anbal chool. The simple anbal /Sh fi di ide doe no cap

e he comple i ie of he heological

ggle

between traditionalists and rationalists. Traditionalism appealed to members of a variety of legal chool , mo impo an l

he dominan Sh fi madhhab. F

alludes to, many anbal

e eA h a

and did no

he mo e, a Ta

al-D n al-S bk

b c ibe o he c eed of Ibn Ta mi a.

Thus, the struggle of 8th/14th Damascus was less a rivalry between madhhabs than of competing theologies.6 The dissertation further challenges our u age of he ca ego ie of

adi ionali m and

a ionali m. While he e e m a e beneficial in ma king di inc heologie and comm ni ie , it is important to realize that there was great overlap between the groups and diversity within hem. T adi ionali

and

a ionali

of en fo med diffe en ocial-intellectual groups, but

5

See Chapter One. De pi e Makdi i ong in igh , he a ime o e empha i e he impo ance of madhhabs. My research suggests that while madhhabs were important, the primary debates were theological. 6

187

he li ed i hin imila ocie ie and e e a a e of one ano he eg la l

ead each o he

i ing and inco po a ed he o he

their own works. Moreover, there were debates within

a g men a ion. The idea and me hodologies within

a ionali m and

adi ionali m ha

continuously sought to redefine theological boundaries. These inner community struggles were at times more intense and had greater implications than those between groups. Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h , in pa ic la , a e ca ego i ed oge he a o

adi ionali

, b

f ndamen ali

he e e e ignifican diffe ence be een hem. Ibn Ta mi a

intellectualized traditionalism saw reason and revelation as complimentary, and he believed in the rationality of tradition. To prove his belief, Ibn Taymiyya delved deeply into theology and scrutinized kal m and philosophy for the roots of heretical ideologies. Ibn Taymiyya felt that if he exposed the weakness of the rational sciences, he would defend traditionalism and potentially bring his adversaries over to his side. Yet, in the process, Ibn Taymiyya adopts much of the writing style, methodology and even mannerisms of his adversaries. His writing style and me hodolog a e f e en l mo e imila o he adi ionali

a ionali

al-R

a he han he

Ibn Ka h .

In con a , Ibn Ka h held a fidei

ance o a d

c ip

e. Unlike Ibn Ta mi a, Ibn

Ka h did no feel ha he had o ationalize the transmitted sources and was content in using a ional ool o anal e hem. Ibn Ka h

heolog of he salaf f

he led him o p e en hi

views without directly engaging his opponents. This was not part of a lack of intellect or imagina ion on Ibn Ka h he di co

pa b

a he beca e hi heolog main ained ha e ponding in

e of one opponen legi ima ed hei me hodolog . Ibn Ka h belie ed ha del ing

into the rational sciences could gradually lead even the most sincere traditionalist to apply the rational tools of ta w l. It was therefore strategically better to ignore the theologians and to 188

ma ginali e hem b p omo ing he S nna. Ho e e , e en ho gh Ibn Ka h similar to that of ad h chola , he agrees with the theologian al-R infallibili

on he i

app oach i e of p ophe ic

( i ma).

Ibn Ka h f

he con a

han heolog . Ibn Ka h

i h Ibn Ta mi a in ha e hic pla

mo al heolog

a mo e impo an ole

foc ed on he p ac ical ciences of ad h and la

and he j dged people of en on hei cha ac e a he han hei c eed. Ibn Ka h p ai e A h a ,

ch a Ta

a

al-D n and T j al-D n al-S bk , beca e he fel he

adi ionali p inciple . The S bk

pi i ali , fai ne

i h a he han oppo e hem. Fo Ibn Ka h , a

and mo ali

illing o

ood b

made Ibn Ka h iden if

ell a he o he Sh fi

adi ionali , heolog

was important but not always the determining factor in evaluating others. The ca ego ie of

a ionali m and

adi ionali m become inc ea ingl complica ed

when we examine the outcome of the 8th/14th cen

heological

ggle be

een he A h a

and traditionalists. While traditionalist biographical literature presents Ibn Taymiyya as the new 7

Ibn anbal and hi imp i onmen a ano he

mi na,

g o p o ca e a if imila o ha of he M

a il and adi ionali

ch a Ta

al-D n al-S bk

respected ad h chola

befo e.8 A h a

ho e e able o po a

hem el e a

adi ionali

died i h al-Mi

den of he A h a c i ic al-Dhahab . T j al-D n al-S bk

shafi i a al-kubr reflects his expertise in ad h a

and follo e of and a one of he

mon men al abaq t al-

ell a hi commi men o man

traditionalist principles.

7 8

chola

e e chola ic heologian (mutakallim n), but they were also

Ibn anbal. Simila l , he A h a T j al-D n al-S bk fa o i e

there was too much overlap between the

Ibn Ka h , fo in ance, compa e Ibn Ta mi a f ne al o Ibn anbal . See Chap e T o. Fo mo e on he M a il and adi ionali ggle see t Ientroduction.

189

On the other side, traditionalists were not always in full support of Ibn Taymiyya. While many rallied to his cause, others were suspicious of his aims and skeptical of his controversial views. Al-Dhahab , fo in ance, con ended ha Ibn Ta mi a be a ed adi ionali p inciple by becoming polemical and polarizing. Al-Dhahab Aha ,

a mo likel pe onall clo e o

iden

ch a T j al-D n al-S bk , han o Ibn Ta mi a. Simila l , Ibn Ka h a oid

engaging Ibn Ta mi a

heological o k and p efe

econcilia ion o e hi con en io

views on divorce oaths. In

m, d a ing he line be een

a ionali

and

adi ionali

i no al a

en i el

clear.

Ta

: Tafs r is consistently neglected in the study of Islam, seen as unoriginal, repetitive and a

barrier to the Q

nic text. Yet, if we understand tafs r as an extension of other Islamic

sciences, than it becomes an essential genre to better understand the various intellectual debates that raged throughout Islamic history. As Walid Saleh argues, tafs r is an invaluable means to study intellectual history since it does not only represent individual scholars but intellectual ci cle and mo emen . Ibn Ka h

a he onl

chola

i hin he Dama cene adi ionali t

movement to write a complete Q

nic commentary, and his exegesis thus gives us a unique

opportunity to understand one of the most influential intellectual circles in Islamic history. Schola ha e gene all di mi ed Ibn Ka h ad h . B

a clo e eading demon

Tafs r as simply a list or evaluation of

a e ha Ibn Ka h meticulously sorts through traditions to

p e en hi pe onal i ion of I lam. Ibn Ka h delica el nego ia e be exegete (mufassir) and ad h chola (mu addith), el cida ing he Q 190

een hi ole a an n h o gh he

boundaries of ad h cience. Ibn Ka h

ppo

adi ion b ci ing imila na a ion ,

authenticating the chain of transmission and cross referencing them within authoritative collec ion . On he o he hand, Ibn Ka h c i i

e

adi ion ha he find p oblema ic b

detecting anachronisms, locating questionable theological material or identifying questionable na a o . Ibn Ka h , ne e hele , a emp

o be a balanced ad h chola and of en c i i

e

traditions that he agrees with or admits that certain traditions that he is uncomfortable with are authentic. The fac ha Ibn Ka h p e en hi

ie

h o gh ad h

b an ia e Saleh claim ha

tafs r bi l-ma th r is a type of tafs r bi l-ra .9 Traditionalists situated their opinion within the authority of ad h gi ing hem he abili

o c i ici e o he a

him ical and cap icio . In

the struggle for interpretative authority, traditionalists attempted to marginalize rational tafs rs by pointing out their deficiencies in the transmitted sources. Yet, it is important to stress that while traditionalists employed ad h o a ic la e hei opinion , he acc m la ed adi ion of ad h cience infl enced he di ec ion of hei ad h c i ici m fo hi F

o k. Ibn Ka h had o ope a e i hin he bo nda ie of

o k o be accepted as scholarly and objective.

he mo e, hile m ch of he li e a

e

gge

ha Ibn Ka h

Tafs r was a product

of hi ela ion hip i h Ibn Ta mi a, hi di e a ion a g e ha Ibn Ka h outcome of a larger theological

ggle be een A h a

specialization of ad h. Man of Ibn Ka h

ok

and adi ionali

Tafs r was an and he inc ea ing

e e in e pon e o Sh fi A h a

ho

argued for the practical value of the rational sciences and incorporated them within madrasa c

ic l m . Wi hin hi ne f ame o k, Ibn Ka h

Tafs r could be seen less as a product of

Ibn Ta mi a han a e pon e o he Sh fi A h a Fakh al-D n al-R 9

. A al-Dhahab no e ,

Walid Saleh, The Formation of the Classical Tafs r Tradition: the Qur n Commentar of al-Tha lab (d. 427/1035) (Boston: Brill, 2004), 16.

191

al-R

Tafs r was the most popular exegesis of his time, referenced by teachers and taught

within madrasas.10 Ibn Ka h mo likel

an ed o eplace he dominance of al-R

Tafs r

with that of his own. Ibn Ka h

Tafs r was also a product of a general trend of takhr j or ad h e al a ion.

Ibn Ka h lived after the canonical ad h collec ion in hich chola ad h co p

mo e acce ible and e pand he cience o o he field .

already evaluated al-Tha lab scholars moved to al- aba

and al-Zamakh ha . Ho e e , Ibn Ka h

ad h chola hip had

e ege i and i

a a ma er of time before

Tafs r was not a simple ad h e al a ion

but a reworking of much of the material found in al- aba and Ibn Ab to al-Bid a wa l al-nih a, Ibn Ka h

o ked o make he

im al-R

. Simila

Tafs r draws on previous authorities but then revises

them to fit his traditionalist understanding of Islam.

Areas of Further Research: One of the major questions left unanswered in this dissertation is why the traditionalist mo emen e i ed in Maml k Dama cus during 8th/14th century. A possible reason for the adi ionali

e i al co ld be he c i e

in he Maml k M lim comm ni

e

of he C

ade and Mongol in a ion

hich e l ed

n back o he fo nda ional o ce . Dama c

faced

both the incursions of the Crusades from the West and the Mongols in the East making it more susceptible to feelings of siege. As a result, more Muslims may have been inclined to renew Islam by emphasizing the Q

n and the legacy of the Prophet Mu ammad.11

In term of heolog , mo e o k m

be done on he hi o

of he A h a / adi ionali

conflic . I i e iden ha Ibn A ki (d. 571/1176) wrote his Tab n al-kadhab al-muftar f m 10

Mu ammad b. A mad al-Dhahab , Ba n aghl al- ilm wa l- alab, ed. Mu ammad Z hid b. al- asan al-Ka (Damascus: al-Q d , 1928), 19. 11 A similar traditionalist revival could have occurred in modern times with the advent of colonialism.

192

ha

nusiba il al-Im m Ab al- asan al-Ash ar in response to traditionalists who argued that kal m a an illegi ima e cience and did no belong i hin Sh fi madhhab. A Ta all de o, Ibn A ki p e en ed

a ha

al-D n al-S bk

f om a ending hi ci cle .12 Yet, the full dynamics

of he ea l A h a and adi ionalist conflict and why it climaxed in the 8th/14th century needs further investigation.13 After the 8th/14th cen

, ini ial e ea ch

gge

ha A h a i m a no di placed b

traditionalism. A clear leader of the traditionalist movement did not appear following the death of Ibn al-Qa im and Ibn Ka h

a no able o ec e he p e igio

po of D

Ashrafiyya. Later historical works and biographical dictionaries, such as Ibn aja al-k mina, allude to a pro-A h a bia .14 The O oman pe iod a

al- ad h alal-Durar

he i e of A h a /Ma

id

theology and the studies of logic and philosophy continued.15 Nevertheless, a traditionalist strand continued throughout the pre-modern period16 and was eventually revived in modern times.17 Yet, exactly how traditionalism existed after the 8th/14th century and by what means it was renewed requires further study. E en ho gh A h a i m con in ed, i Ta

al-D n and T j al-D n al-S bk

o ld fo e e ca

he infl ence of adi ionali m.

infl ential works came in response to the traditionalist

movement and they exhibit a strong expertise in ad h. The al-S bk

12

e e no like ea lie

See Chapter Two. An impo an a i Kon ad Hi chle k Pre-eighteenth-century Traditions of Revivalism: Damascus in the Thirteenth Century, Bulletin of SOAS 68, no. 2 (2005):195 214. 14 Ibn ajar al- A al n , for instance, contains stories within his entry on Ibn Taymiyya that are quite critical of the great scholar. See Chapter Five. 15 Khaled El-Rouayeb, S nni I lamic Schola on he S a of Logic, 1500-1800, Islamic Law & Society 11, no. 2 (2004): 213-32. 16 A mad b. Abd al-Q di al-R m , Against Smoking: an Ottoman Manifesto, trans. Yahya Michot (United Kingdom: Kube Publications, 2010). 17 Ba hee M. Nafi, Salafi m Re i ed: N m n al-Al and he T ial of T o A mad , Die Welt des Islams 49, no. 1 (2009): 49-97; Khaled El-Rouayheb, F om Ibn ajar al-Ha am (d. 1566) o Kha al-D n al-Al (d. 1899): Changing Views of Ibn Taymiyya among non- anbal S nni Schola , in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, eds. Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010), 269-318. 13

193

scholastic theologians, such as af al-D n al-Hind (d. 715/1315),18 who were experts in kal m but had limited knowledge of the traditional Islamic sciences of law and ad h. Ra he , he alS bk

e ej i

and ad h chola

hem el e

ho had ained i h he be

ad h chola

of he field. Ho A h a i m a able o claim he adi ionali man le demands more examination. Specifically, more work needs to be done in understanding the genealogy and reception of he o k of Ibn Ta mi a and Ibn Ka h . Ibn Ta mi a had o g o nd hi in ellec ali ed traditionalism within the broader traditionalist movement for it to be legitimate. Recent scholarship suggests that Ibn Taymiyya sought to find examples of his intellectualized traditionalism within the mi na itself, such as with Abd al- A

al-Kin n (d. 221/836) ho

critiqued the theologians with their own arguments.19 How Ibn Taymiyya connects with other intellectualized traditionalist scholars such as Ibn a m (d. 456/1064), Q 458/1066) and Ibn A l (d. 513/1119), a an mo e

Ab Ya l (d.

d .

Nevertheless, while many traditionalists were cri ical of Ibn Ta mi a app oach, o he saw him as the Shaykh al-I l m. T adi ionali

p n il he mode n pe iod con in ed o ie

Ibn Taymiyya as the figure head of their movement and representative of Islamic orthodoxy. Ibn Taymiyya was able to appeal to both intellectualized traditionalists, such as al-Sha k n (d. 1255/1839), but also many fideist traditionalists as well. Particular attention should be played to hich of Ibn Ta mi a

ok

e e ci ed and copied. Hi ea l

heological o k

ch as

Aq da al-w i iyya promote more of a fidiest traditionalism, while his later works such as Dar al-ta ru demonstrate an intellectualized traditionalism. As the writings of Calder and others 18

She man Jack on, Ibn Ta m ah on T ial in Dama c , The Journal of Semitic Studies 39, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 47. 19 Racha El Oma i, Kit b al- ayda: The Hi o ical Significance of an Apoc phal Te , in Islamic Philosophy, Science, Culture, and Religion: Studies in Honor of Dimitri Gutas, eds. Felicitas Opwis and David Reisman (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2012), 447.

194

suggest, Ibn Taymiyya is frequently understood more as a fideist traditionalist rather than a philosopher and theologian. In ega d o Ibn Ka h , i i e iden ha he d e f om hi eache Dhahab

ho in

history of Sh fi

n p lled f om al-Na a

he chool hi o

nce ain he he he Sh fi died o

and al-

and Ibn Abd al-Sal m. Yet, the

adi ionali m f om Ibn Abd al-Sal m to early traditionalists such as al-

Buway (d. 231/846) emain h o gho

, Ibn al- al

al-Mi

ag e. Ho

hi Sh fi

ho ld be he adi ionali

af e hi dea h. Wa Ibn Ka h

adi ionali

and a ed and aned

bjec of addi ional e ea ch. Furthermore, it is and con in ed af e Ibn Ka h

he la Sh fi

adi ionali o

life o

he he i

a he able o in pi e

others to follow a similar path?20 Mo impo an l , m ch mo e o k need o be done on ho Ibn Ka h

Tafs r was

received by later generations and how it has reached near canonical status. It is evident that Ibn Ka h

Tafs r was well-received by the traditionalist movement during his lifetime. A

man c ip of Ibn Ka h

Ikhti r ul m al- ad th da ed 764/1363 in od ce Ibn Ka h a he

eache of he eache of he ad h chola and tafs r specialists of Syria (shaykh al-shu kh al-mu addith n wa ahl-al-tafs r bi-Sh m).

21

B 764/1363, Ibn Ka h

a in hi ea l 60 and

his Tafs r was most likely in circulation for several years. In al-Bid a wa l-nih a, a student of Ibn Ka h ch onicle ha in he ea 767/1366 he Dama cene ma o endo ed a chai of tafs r studies in Ibn Ka h

hono . The chai

ip la ed chola hip fo 15

20

den a

ell a a

Mo e o k need o be done on he he he Sh fi al(d. 911/1505) follo ed a imila pa h o Ibn Ka h . Aldid con in e Ibn Ka h ad h-based Q nic he mene ic and a c i ical of he a ional cience . See Walid Saleh, Ibn Ta mi a and he Ri e of Radical He mene ic : An Anal i of an In od c ion o he Fo nda ion of Q nic E ege i , in Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, eds. Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010), 153-4; Wael B. Hallaq, Ibn Taymiyya against the Greek logicians (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993). 21 Ibn Ka h , al-B ith al- ath th: shar ikhti r ul m al- ad th, ed. Al a an Al Abd al- am d, 2 ol . (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Ma if li l-Na h a l-Ta , 1996), 1:53.

195

salary for a teaching assistant and scribe. The inaugural lecture at the Umayyad mosque was well-attended with many chief judges and government officials present at the event.22 These e ample e abli h ha Ibn Ka h

ecei ed accolade a a mufassir and that his Tafs r gained

wide-range appeal. Yet, it is uncertain how the Tafs r fared after his death. In a recent article, Walid Saleh a g e ha Ibn Ka h p elimina

Tafs r was not part of the pre-mode n A h a mad a a c

a chi al e ea ch confi m Saleh claim and

gge

ha

ic l m.23 My

hile Ibn Ka h

Tafs r

continued to be relevant it was by no means dominant. In a recent trip to the Suleymaniye mosque in T ke , I co n ed 13 man c ip of Ibn Ka h

Tafs r, five of which were complete.

This is a stark difference to the 250 manuscripts that Andrew J. Lane examined of alZamakh ha

al-Khashsh f in the same library.24 The difference in number suggests that al-

Zamakh ha

Tafs r a pa of he O oman mad a a c

ic l m

hile Ibn Ka h

as a ad h efe ence. Ibn Ka h , in fac , de ign hi Tafs r a an enc clopedic tafs r, designed for ad h peciali ad h

a 25

ed

one

ince i incl de f ll isn ds, lists multiple variants, and locates

i hin a ho i a i e collec ion . Ibn Ka h addi ionall ne e

mma i ed hi

enc clopedic tafs r in o a mad a a tafs r a o he e ege e had done.26 Ibn Ka h did compose didactic works, such as his Ikhti r ul m al- ad th, but it is clear that his Tafs r was not one of them.

22

Ibn Ka h , al-Bid a wa l-nih a, ed . Al M ammad M a ad and dil A mad Abd al-Ma j d, 15 ol . (Lebanon: D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 2009), 14:311. The scribe highlights how the students were f om all he legal schools (madh hib). 23 Walid Saleh, P elimina Rema k on he Hi o iog aph of tafs r in A abic: A Hi o of he Book App oach, Journal of Qur nic Studies 12, no. 1-2 (2010): 28. 24 Andrew J. Lane, A Traditional Mu ta ilite Qur n Commentar : the Kashsh f of J r All h al-Zamakhshar (d. 538/1144) (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2006), 61. 25 These terms were coined by Walid Saleh; Saleh, Formation, 16. 26 Al-W id , fo in ance, compo ed h ee diffe en pe of tafs rs to serve different purposes. See Chapter Four and Walid Saleh, The La of he Ni h p School of Taf : Al-W id and hi Significance in he Hi o of Q nic E ege i , Journal of the American Oriental Society 126, no. 2 (2006): 223-243.

196

A Saleh de ail , Ibn Ka h onl began o become mo e main

eam hen Ra hid Rida

published the Tafs r in 1924 from the funds of the aspiring Saudi King al-Im m Abd All h b. Sa d. The edi ion a Tafs rs of both al-R

l

io l p in ed

i h he ad h-based Tafs r of al-Bagha . The

and al- aba had o ai

ea befo e being p bli hed in a imila

manne . Saleh con incingl a g e ha one of he majo aim of he Salaf mo emen eclama ion of he Q of Ibn Ka h

n f om he chola ic A h a S nn

a a conce ed effo b

adi ion.

he adi ionali mo emen o

27

a he

The early publications

pplan he p ominence

of A h a tafs rs and to rethink Islamic orthodoxy itself. Ye , mo e empha i need o p a ing i h ha of Ahmad Shaki

on he ab idgemen of Ibn Ka h

(d. 1958), that propelled the Tafs r into a household name.28

Shakir played an instrumental role in transforming Ibn Ka h mad a a tafs r b

commen a ,

enc clopedic tafs r in o a

emo ing he isn ds and summarizing the content. Although Shakir never

finished the project, his work spurred several other abridgements and translations.29 With the new abridgements, Ibn Ka h

Tafs r would be incorporated into madrasa and university

curriculums, something that never had occurred before. While chola ha e been c i ical of Ibn Ka h

lack of pec la ion, i ma be fo hi

exact reason why his Tafs r gained so much appeal. Ibn Ka h

p e en a ion of compelling

narratives instead of complex syllogisms made his Tafs r relatively easy to abridge and translate. The new abridgements and translations made the Tafs r accessible to lay audiences who could connect to its ad h and nde and i Ibn Ka h

aigh fo

a d p o e. Wi h he po e of globali a ion,

Tafs r has arguably become the most popular tafs r. Yet, the exact trajectory of how

27

Saleh, P elimina Rema k , 10. Ibn Ka h and Ahmad Shaki , Umdat al-tafs r an al- fi Ibn Kath r, 5 vol. (Egypt: D r al-Ma rif, 1956). 29 Ibn Ka h , Tafs r Ibn Kath r: (abridged), ed. Safi al-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri, 10 vol. (Ri adh: D al-Sal m, 2003). 28

197

this process occurred, especially with the rise of Islamic book market, needs to be further explored.

198

Select Bibliography: Primary Arabic Sources Abd al- l, I m l S lim. Ibn Kath r wa-manhajuhu f al-Tafs r. Cairo: Maktabat al-Malik Fay al al-I l mi a, 1984. Al- A al n , Ibn ajar. Al-Durar al-k mina f a n al-mi a al-th mina. Edited by Abd alW i h Mu ammad Al . 4 ol . Bei : D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 1997. -. Inb al-ghumr bi-anb al- umr. Edited by asan aba h . 2 ol . Cai o: Lajna I alT h al-I l m , 1969. -. Tahdh b al-tahdh b. Edited by Mu af Abd al-Q di A . Bei : D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 1994. Ba , Uma b. Al . Al-A l m al- ali a f man qib Sha kh al-Isl m Ibn Ta mi a. Edited by al al-D n M najjid. Bei : D al-Ki b al-Jad d, 1976. Al-Bi l , Alam al-D n M ammad b. Y f. Al-Wafa t li l-Bir l . Edi ed b Ab Ya Abd All h al-Kanda . K ai : Gha li l-Na h a l-Ta a l-Di a a l-I l n, 2005. Al-Dhahab , Shams al-D n Mu ammad b. A mad. Ba n aghl al- ilm wa l- alab. Edited by Mu ammad Z hid b. al- asan al-Ka ha . Dama c : al-Q d , 1928. -. Kit b al- Arsh. Edited by Mu ammad b. Khal fa b. Al Tam m . 2 ol . Ri adh: A alSalaf, 1999. -. Al-Mu jam al-mukhta . Al- if, Sa di A abia: Mak aba al- idd , 1988. -. T r kh al-Isl m wa-wafa t al-mash h r wa l-a l m. 53 vols. Bei : D al-Ki b al- A ab , 1987. Al-Gha l , Ab mid M ammad. I ul m al-d n. 4 vols. Egypt: al-Maktaba al-Tij i a al-K b , [19--]. -. Q n n al-ta w l. Edited by Mu ammad Z hid b. al- asan al-Ka ha . Cai o: al-Maktaba alAzhariyya, 2006. Ha , M ammad Khal l. Shar al-qa da al-n ni a: al-musamm al-k fi a al-sh fi a f al-inti r li l-firqa al-n ji a. Cai o: D al-Minh j, 2003. Ibn Abd al-H d , Ab Abd All h. Al- Uq d al-durri a min man qib Sha kh al-Isl m Ibn Taymiyya. Edi ed b Ab M ab al a b. F d al- l n . Cai o: al-F al- ad ha. Ibn Da al- d, M ammad b. Al . I k m al-a k m shar umdat al-a k m. Bei : D alazm, 2002. Ibn al- Im d, Ab al-Fall Abd al- ayy. Shadhar t al-dhahab f akhb r man dhahab. 4 vols. Bei : D al- f al-Jad da, 1966. Ibn al-Ja , Ab al-Fa aj Abd al-Ra m n. Kit b al-Qu wa l-mudhakkir n. Edited by Me lin S a . Bei : D al-Mashriq, 1971. Ibn Ka h , I m l b. Ab af . Al-B ith al-hath th: shar ikhti r ul m al- ad th. Edited by Al a an Al Abd al- am d. Ri adh: Mak aba al-Ma if li l-Na h a l-Ta , 1996. -. Al-Bid a wa l-nih a. Edi ed b Al M ammad M a ad and dil A mad Abd alMa j d. 15 ol . Lebanon: D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 2009. -. Irsh d al-faq h il ma rifat adillat al-Tanb h. Edi ed b Bahja Y f amad Ab al- a ib. 2 vols. Bei : M a a a al-Ri la, 1996.

199

-. J mi al-mas nid wa l-sunan al-h d li-aqwam sunan. Edited by Abd al-Malik b. Abd All h Ibn D ha h. Bei : D al-Kha r, 1998. -. Kit b al-Adab wa l-a k m al-muta alliqa bi-dukh l al- amm m. Edi ed b S m b. Mu ammad b. J d All h. Ri adh: D al-Wa an li l-Nashr, 1997. -. Kit b al-A k m al-kab r: al-sh mil li-kutub al-adh n, al-mas jid, istiqb l al-qibla, ifat alal t. Edited by N al-D n lib. 3 ol . Bei : D al-Na di , 2010. -. Kit b al-Ijtih d f alab al-jih d. Edi ed b Abd All h Abd al-Ra m U a l n. Ri adh: D al-Li , 1982. -. Mawlid Ras l All h. Edited by al al-D n M najjid. Bei : D al-Ki b al-Jad d, 1961. -. abaq t al-sh fi i a. Edi ed b Abd al- af Man . 2 ol . Bei : D al-Mad al-I l m , 2004. -. abaq t al-fuqah al-sh fi i n. Edited by Anwar B . Al-Man a: D al-Waf , 2004. -. Tafs r al-Qur n al- a m. 12 ol . Cai o: Mak aba A l d al-Shaykh li-T h, 2009. -. Tafs r Ibn Kath r: (abridged). Edited by Safi al-Rahman al-Mubarakpur. 10 vols. Ri adh: D al-Sal m, 2003. -. Tu fat al- lib bi-ma rifat a dith mukhta ar Ibn al- jib. Edi ed b Abd al-Ghan b. umayd b. Ma m d K ba . Bei : D Ibn azm, 1996. Ibn M , I d al-Q . Kit b al-Shif bi-ta r f uq q al-Mu af . Edi ed b Sa d Abd alFa . 2 ol . Eg p : Hi h m Al fi , 1995. Ibn Q d ma, M affa al-D n Abd All h b. A mad. Majm f hi ithb t if t al- uluw wa lum at al-i tiq d al-had il sab l al-rash d wa dhamm al-ta w l. Edi ed b Bad b. Abd All h al-Bad . K ai : D Ibn al-A h , 1995. -. Mun ara f al-Qur n al- A m. Edi ed b Ab Abd All h al- amm d. K ai : Mak aba Ibn Taymiyya, 1990. -. Al-Radd al Ibn Aq l al- anbal . Edited by al-Fa l S la m n Ibn Sam n, A mad Fa d alMa d and Ya M d. Bei : D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 2004. -. Ta r m al-na ar f kutub al-kal m. Edi ed b Abd al-Ra m n al-Dima h . Ri adh: D lim al-Kutub, 1990. Ibn Rajab, Zayn al-D n Abd al-Ra m n b. A mad al- anbal . Kit b al-Dha l al abaq t alan bila. 2 ol . Bei : D al-Ma ifa, 1981. -. Al-Radd al man ittaba a gha r al-madh hib al-arba a. Edited b Ib h m I m l al-Q , al-Sa id I a al-M and M ammad A a al-Man h. Cai o: D al- aramayn, 2000. -. Ba n fa l ilm al-salaf al ilm al-khalaf. Edited by Mu ammad b. N ir Ajam . Bei : D al-Ba h i al-I l mi a, 1995. Ibn Taym a, Ta al-D n A mad b. Abd al- al m. Ba n talb s al-jahmi a f ta s s bida ihim al-kal mi a. 2 vols. Mecca: Ma ba a al-H k ma, 1971. -. Dar ta ru al- aql wa l-naql. Edi ed b Abd al-La f asan Abd al-Ra m n. Bei : D al-Kutub al- Ilmi a, 1997. -. Al-Furq n ba na awli al-Ra m n wa awli al-Shay n. Beirut: al-Maktab al-I l m , 1970. -. Kit b al-Tawba. Edi ed b Ab Abd al-Ra m n Fa A mad Zam al . Bei ; D Ibn azm, 2004. -. Majm fat w Sha kh al-Isl m A mad b. aymiyya. Edited b Abd al-Ra m n b. Mu ammad b. Q im al- im . 37 ol . Bei : Ma bi D al- A abi a, 1977-78.

200

-. Minh j al-sunna al-nabawi a f naq kal m al-Sh a wa l-Qadariyya. Riyadh: Maktabat alRiya al- ad ha, 1983. -. Muqaddima f u l al-tafs r. Edited by Adn n Za . K ai : D al-Q n al-Ka m, 1972. -. Al-Tis ni a. Edited by Mu ammad b. Ib h m al- Aglan. Ri adh: Mak aba al-Ma if li lNa h a l-Ta , 1999. I bah n , Ma m d b. Abd al-Ra m n. Ba n al-Mukhta ar: wa-huwa shar Mukhta ar Ibn aljib f u l al-fiqh. Edi ed b Al J m a M ammad. 2 ol . Cai o: D al-Sal m, 2004. Al-J a n , Abd al-Malik b. Abd All h. Al- Aq da al-ni m ya f al-ark n al-isl miyya. Edited by Mu ammad Z hid Ka ha . Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya, 1992. Al-Mi , Jam l al-D n Y f. Tahdh b al-kam l f asm al-rij l. Edi ed b Ba h h A d Ma f. Bei : M a a a al-Ri la, 1984. Al-N a m , Abd al-Q di b. M ammad. Al-D ris f t r kh al-mad ris. Edi ed b Ja fa ala an . 2 ol . Cairo: Maktabat al-Tha fa al-D ni a, 1988. Al-R , Fakh al-D n. Al-Arba n f u l al-d n. Edited by A mad ij and A mad Saqqa Cairo: Maktabat al-K lli al-Azhariyya, 1989. -. I ma al-anbi . Edited by Mu ammad ij . Cai o: Mak aba al-Tha fa al-D ni a, 1986. -. Man qib al-Im m al-Sh fi . Edited by A mad ij al-Sa . Cai o: Mak aba al-Kulliyya alAzhariyya, 1986. -. Al-Tafs r al-kab r. 32 vols. Cairo: al-Ma ba a al-Bahiyya al-Mi riyya, 1934-62. Al-R m , A mad b. Abd al-Q di . Against Smoking: an Ottoman Manifesto. Translated and Edited by Yahya Michot. United Kingdom: Kube Publications, 2010. Al-S bk , T j al-D n Abd al-Wahh b b. Al . Mu jam al-shu kh. Edited by Mu ammad b. Ya Ma di , Ba h h A d Ma f, Ra d Y f Anbak , and M af I m l A am . Bei : D al-Gharb al-I l m , 2004. -. abaq t al-sh fi i a al-kubr . Edited by Ma m d M ammad al- an and Abd al-Fa Mu ammad al- ilw. 10 vols. G a: Haj , 1992. Al-S bk , Ta al-D n Al b. Abd al-K f . Al-Ras il al-subkiyya f al-radd al Ibn Ta mi a wa-tilm dhihi Ibn Qa im al-Jawziyya. Bei : lam al-Kutub, 1983. -. Fat w al-Subk . Edited by m al-D n Q d . 2 ol . Bei : D al-J l, 1992. Al- aba , Ab Ja fa M ammad b. Ja . J mi al-bay n f tafs r al-Qur n. Bei : D alMa ifa, 1972. Secondary Sources Abd S bhan. Rela ion of God o Time and Space a Seen b he M a ili e . In The Teachings of the Mu ta ila, edited by Fuat Sezgin. Frankfurt: Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, 2000. Ab ahamo , Bin amin. Ibn Ta mi a on he Ag eemen of Rea on and T adi ion. The Muslim World 82, no. 3-4 (1992): 256-72. Ahmed, Shahab. Ibn Ta mi a and he Sa anic Ve e . Studia Islamica 87, no. 1 (1998): 67124. Baraka, Ibrahim. Ibn Taymiyya wa-juh duhu f al-tafs r. Beirut: al-Maktaba al-Islamiyya, 1984. Bell, Joseph Norment. Love Theory in Later anbalite Islam. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1979.

201

Berkey, Jonathan. The Transmission of Knowledge in Medieval Cairo: a Social History of Islamic Education. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992. Bo i, Ca e ina. A Ne So ce fo he Biog aph of Ibn Ta mi a. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 67, no. 3 (2004): 321-348. -. Ibn Taymiyya: Una Vita Esemplare. Pisa: Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali, 2003. -. Ibn Ta mi a wa-Jam atu-hu: Authority, Conflict and Consensus in Ibn Taymiy a s Ci cle. In Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, edited by Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed, 23-52. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010. Böwering, Gerhard. The Mystical Vision of Existence in Classical Islam: the Qur nic Hermeneutics of the f Sahl At-Tustar (d. 283/896). Berlin; New York: de Gruyter, 1980. Brown, Jonathan. The Canonization of al-Bukh r and Muslim: the Formation and Function of the Sunn ad th Canon. Leiden: Brill, 2007. -. E en if i i no T e I T e: U ing Un eliable ad h in S nni I lam. Islamic Law and Society 18, no.1 (2011): 1-52. -. ad th: Mu ammad s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World. Oxford: Oneworld, 2009. -. Ho We Kno Ea l ad h C i ic Did Matn C i ici m and Wh I So Ha d o Find. Islamic Law and Society 15, no. 2 (2008): 143-184. B llie , Richa d. The Age S c e of Medie al I lamic Ed ca ion. Studia Islamica 57, no. 1 (1983): 105-117. -. The Patricians of Nish p r: a Stud in Medieval Islamic Social Histor . Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1972. Calder, Norman. Hi o and No algia: eflec ion on John Wan b o gh The Sec a ian Milie . In Islamic Origins Reconsidered: John Wansbrough and the Study of Islam, edited by Herbert Berg. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1997. -. Interpretation and Jurisprudence in Medieval Islam. Edited by Jawid Mojaddedi and Andrew Rippin. Aldershot [England]; Burlington, VT: Ashgate/Variorum, 2006. -. Al-Na a T polog of M f and I Significance fo a Gene al Theo of I lamic La . Islamic Law and Society 3, no. 2 (1996): 137-164. -. Q nic S die , Pa IV: Some Me hodological No e . In Islamic Origins Reconsidered: John Wansbrough and the Study of Islam, edited by H. Berg. Berlin: Walter de Gryter, 1997. -. Tafs r from aba o Ibn Ka h : p oblem in he de c ip ion of a genre, illustrated with efe ence o he o of Ab aham. In Approaches to the Qur n, edited by G.R. Hawting and A.A. Shareef. London: Routledge, 1993. Chamberlain, Michael. Knowledge and Social Practice in Medieval Damascus, 1190-1350. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994. C i , Ro Yo ng M hammad M kh a . A hen ic In e p e a ion of Cla ical I lamic e ; an Anal i of he In od c ion of Ibn Ka h Tafs r al-Qur n al-a m. PhD di ., University of Michigan, 1989. Dallal, Ahmad. The O igin and Objec i e of I lamic Re i ali Tho gh , 1750-1850. Journal of the American Oriental Society 113, no. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1993): 341-359. Dickin on, Ee ick. Ibn al- al al-Shah a and he I n d. Journal of the American Oriental Society 122, no. 3 (2002): 481-505.

202

El Oma i, Racha. Kit b al- ayda: The Hi o ical Significance of an Apoc phal Te . In Islamic Philosophy, Science, Culture, and Religion: Studies in Honor of Dimitri Gutas, edited by Felicitas Opwis and David Reisman, 419-51. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2012. -. The Theolog of he S nna and hi Polemic i h he A h a i e . In Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, edited by Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed, 101-119. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010. El-Rouayheb, Khaled. F om Ibn ajar al-Ha am (d. 1566) o Kha al-D n al-Al (d. 1899): Changing Views of Ibn Taymiyya among non- anbal S nni Schola . In Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, edited by Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed, 269-318. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010. -. S nni I lamic Schola on he S a of Logic, 1500-1800. Islamic Law & Society 11, no. 2 (2004): 213-32. El-Sham , Ahmed. The Fi Sh fi : The T adi ionali Legal Tho gh of Ab Ya b alBuway (d. 231/846). Islamic Law and Society 14, no. 3 (2007): 301-341. -. Re hinking Taql d in he Ea l Sh fi School. Journal of the American Oriental Society 128, no. 1 (2008): 1-23. Fani an, Sa d b. Abd All h. Maw rid al- fi ibn Kath r f tafs rihi. Riyadh: Maktabat alTawba, 2006. Frank, Richard M. Texts and Studies on the Development and Histor of Kal m. Edited by Dimitri Gutas. Aldershot: Ashgate Variorum, 2008. Fudge, Bruce. Qur nic Hermeneutics: al- abris and The Craft of Commentar . New York: Routledge, 2011. Garden, Kenne h. Al-M a al-Dhak : al-Gha l Magh ib Ad e a in Ni hap . Journal of Islamic Studies 21, no. 1 (2010): 89 107. Griffel, Frank. Al-Gha l s Philosophical Theolog . Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Hallaq, Wael. Authority, Continuity, and Change in Islamic Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. -. Ibn Taymiyya against the Greek Logicians. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. -. Ift and ijtih d in S nni legal Theo : a De elopmen al Acco n . In Islamic Legal Interpretation Muftis and their Fatwas. Edited by M. K. Masud, B. Messick, and D. Powers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996. Hee , Nichola . The P io i of Rea on in he In e p e a ion of Sc ip e: Ibn Ta mi ah and the mutakallim n. In Arabic and Islamic Studies in Honor of James A. Bellamy, edited by Mustansir Mir. Princeton: Darwin Press, 1993. Hi chle k, Kon ad. P e-eighteenth-century Traditions of Revivalism: Damascus in the Thi een h Cen . Bulletin of SOAS 68, no. 2 (2005): 195 214. Hodgson, Marshall. The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization. 3 vols. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974. Hoover, Jon. Ibn Ta mi a s Theodicy of Perpetual Optimism. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Hourani, George. Islamic Rationalism: the Ethics of Abd al-Jabb r. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1971. -. Reason and Tradition in Islamic Ethics. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985. H i , Nim od. Biog aphie and Mild A ce ici m: A S d of I lamic Mo al Imagina ion. Studia Islamica 85, no. 1 (1997): 41-65. 203

-. Formation of Hanbalism: Piety into Power. New York: Routledge Curzon, 2002. Ism l, Sam M ammad. Al-Mift al-kab r li-tafs r Ibn Kath r. Cairo: D al-M addi h n, 2008. Jackson, Sherman. Ibn Ta m ah on T ial in Dama c . The Journal of Semitic Studies 39, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 41-85. -. The P imac of Dome ic Poli ic : Ibn Bin al-A a and he E abli hmen of Fo Chief J dge hip in Maml k Eg p . Journal of the American Oriental Society 115, no. 1 (1995): 52-65. Jaffe , Ta i . Fak al-D n al-R (d. 606/1210): Philo ophe and Theologian a E ege e. Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 2005. Katz, Marion. The Birth of the Prophet Muhammad: Devotional Piety in Sunni Islam. London: Routledge, 2006. Knysh, Alexander. Ibn Arab in the Later Islamic tradition: the Making of a Polemical Image in Medieval Islam. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999. K a ie , Bi gi . Ibn al-Qayyim al-Ja i ah: Hi Life and Wo k . Maml k Studies Review 10, no. 1 (2006): 19-65. Lane, Andrew. A Traditional Mu ta ilite Qur n Commentar : the Kashsh f of J r All h alZamakhshar (d. 538/1144). Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2006. Lao , Hen i. Ibn Ka i Hi o ien. Arabica 2, no.1 (1955): 42-88. Le anoni, Amalia. The Maml k in Eg p and S ia. In The New Cambridge History of Islam. Edited by Michael Cook. 4 vols. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Little, Donald. Did Ibn Ta mi a Ha e a Sc e Loo e? Studia Islamica 41, no. 1 (1975): 93111. -. The Hi o ical and Hi og aphical Significance of he De en ion of Ibn Ta mi a. International Journal of Middle East Studies 4, no. 3 (1973): 311-27. Makdi i, Geo ge. A h a and he A h a i e in I lamic Religio Hi o I. Studia Islamica 17, no. 2 (1962): 37-80. -. A h a and he A h a i e in I lamic Religio Hi o II. Studia Islamica 18, no. 1 (1963): 19-39. -. E hic in I lamic T adi ionali Doc ine. In Ethics in Islam. Edited by Richard G. Hovannisian. Malibu, Calif.: Undena Publications, 1985. -. Hanbali e I lam. In Studies on Islam. Edited by Merlin L. Swartz. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981. -. Ibn Aq l: Religion and Culture in Classical Islam. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1997. -. The J idical Theolog of Sh fi : O igin and Significance of U l al-Fiqh. Studia Islamica 59, no. 1 (1984): 5-47. Marlow, Louise. Hierarchy and Egalitarianism in Islamic Thought. Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. McAuliffe, Jame Dammen. Q nic Hermeneutics: The Views of al- aba and Ibn Ka h . In Approaches to the Histor of the Interpretation of the Qur n, edited by Andrew Rippin. Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York, 1988. Madelung, Wilfe d. The Con o e on he C ea ion of he Ko an. In Orientalia Hispanica, edited by J. M. Barral. Lugduni Batavorum: Brill, 1974.

204

Melche , Ch i ophe . The Ad e a ie of A mad b. anbal. Arabica 44, no. 2 (1997): 234253. -. A mad ibn anbal. Oxford: Oneworld, 2006. -. Ea l Renunciants as ad h T an mi e . The Muslim World 92, no. 3-4 (2002): 407-418. -. E agge a ed Fea in he Ea l I lamic Ren ncian T adi ion. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 21, no. 3 (2011): 283-300. -. The Pie of he ad h Folk. International Journal of Middle East Studies 34, no. 3 (2002): 425-443. Michel, Thomas. A Muslim Theologian s Response to Christianit : Ibn Ta mi a s al-Jaw b ala . Delmar, N.Y: Caravan Books, 1984. Micho , Yah a. A Maml k Theologian Commen a on A icenna Ris la A awiyya. Journal of Islamic Studies 14, no. 2 (2003): 149 203. -. A Maml k Theologian Commen a on A icenna Ris la A awiyya, Pa II. Journal of Islamic Studies 14, no. 3 (2003): 309-363. Mo ad, S leiman A. The Re ealed Te and the Intended Subtext: Notes on the Hermeneutics of he Q n in M a ila Di co e a Reflec ed in he Tahdh b of al- kim al-Ji h m (d. 494/1101). In Islamic Philosophy, Science, Culture, and Religion: Studies in Honor of Dimitri Gutas, edited by Felicitas Opwis and David Reisman, 367-395. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2012. M ad, Ha an Q. Ibn Ta mi a on T ial: A Na a i e Acco n of hi Mihan. Islamic Studies 18, (1979): 1-32. Nad , M. R. K. Al-Im m Ibn Kath r: Siratuhu, wa-mu allaf tuhu, wa-manhajuhu f Kit b alT rikh. Dama c : D Ibn Ka h , 1999. Nafi, Ba hee M. Salafi m Re i ed: N m n al-Al and he T ial of T o A mad . Die Welt des Islams 49, no. 1 (2009): 49-97. Ohlande , E ik. Ibn Ka h . In Essays in Arabic Literary Biography. Edited by Joseph E. Lowry and Devin J. Stewart. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009. Opwis, Felicitas. Ma la a and the Purpose of the Law: Islamic Discourse on Legal Change from the 4th/10th to 8th/14th Century. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010. -. The Role of he Biog apher in Constructing Identity and Doctrine: Al- Abb d and hi Ki b aba al-f ah al- h fi i a. Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 11, no. 1 (2011):1-32. O e a li, M. Sai . The Q nic Rational Theology of Ibn Taymiyya and his Criticism of the Mutakallim n. In Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, edited by Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed, 78-100. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010. Rapopo , Yo ef. Legal Di e i in he Age of Taql d: the Four Chief Q s Under the Maml k . Islamic Law and Society 10, no. 2 (2003): 210-228. -. Marriage, Money and Divorce in Medieval Islamic Society. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Rippin, And e . The F nc ion of asb b al-nuz l in Q nic E ege i . Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 51. (1988): 1-20. Rosenthal, Franz. The Classical Heritage in Islam. Translated by Emile and Jenny Marmorstein. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, [1975]. Ro abah, M iel. Une di ion ina end e: le Ta'r k d'al-Bi l . Arabica 57, no. 2-3 (2010): 309-318.

205

R ano, Delfina Se ano. Wh Did he Schola of al-Andalus Distrust al-Gha l ? Der Islam 83, no. 1 (2006): 137-156. Saleh, Walid. The Formation of the Classical Tafs r Tradition: the Qur n Commentar of alTha lab (d. 427/1035). Boston: Brill, 2004. -. Ibn Ta mi a and he Ri e of Radical He mene ic : An Anal i of an In od c ion o he Foundations of Q nic E ege i . In Ibn Taymiyya and his Times, edited by Yossef Rapoport and Shahab Ahmed, 123-162. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2010. -. The La of he Ni h p School of Taf : Al-W id and hi Significance in he Hi o of Q nic E ege i . Journal of the American Oriental Society 126, no. 2 (2006): 223243. -. Ma ginalia and Pe iphe ie : A T nisian Historian and the History of Q nic E ege i . Numen 58, no. 2 (2011): 284-313. -. P elimina Rema k on he Hi o iog aph of tafs r in Arabic: A History of the Book App oach. Journal of Qur nic Studies 12, no. 1-2 (2010): 6-40. Sands, Kristina Zahra. Sufi Commentaries on the Qur n in Classical Islam. London; New York: Routledge, 2006. Shakir, Ahmad. Umdat al-tafs r an al- fi Ibn Kath r. 5 ol . Eg p : D al-Ma if, 1956. Al-Shala h, Adn n b. M ammad b. Abd All h. Al-Im m Ibn Kath r wa-atharuhu f ilm alad th riw a wa-dir a: ma a dir sa manhaji a ta biqi a al Tafs r al-Qur n ala m. Amman: D al-Naf , 2005. Taylor, Christopher S. In the Vicinit of the Righteous: Zi ra and the Veneration of Muslim Saints in Late Medieval Egypt. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 1999. To oli, Robe o. O igin and U e of he Te m I a ili a in M lim Li e a e. Arabica 46, no. 2 (1999): 193-210. Wa , M.W. Ea l Di c ion Abo he Q an. Muslim World 40, no. 1 (1950): 27-40.

206