Taẕkira-navīsī: imagining histories

There is little doubt that works usually called 'biographical dictionaries' are invaluable historical sources for the ways in which collectivities imagine their group affiliation, identity and history. Practically every group in the world of Islam engages in them. Now those working on South Asia have known for some time that Nuzhat al-khawāṭir wa-bahjat al-maṣāmiʿ wa-l-manāẓir of Sayyid ʿAbd al-Ḥayy al-Ḥasanī al-Lakhnawī (1861-1923) is an invaluable source and includes Sufis, Sunni and Shiʿi scholars arranged by hijri century. Those interested in the study of Shiʿi intellectual history in the subcontinent should pay attention to this - and of course to the famous Taẕkira-ye ʿulamāʾ-ye Hind [Tuḥfat al-fuḍalāʾ fī tarājim al-kumalāʾ] of Raḥmān ʿAlī (Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Shakūr, recently re-edited by Majmaʿ al-zakhāʾir al-islāmī in Qum in 1391 shamsī/2012) - as well as to a number of significant Sufi works.

But what about texts that deal just with Shiʿi ʿulamāʾ. Here is a partial list that I've come up with (in chronological order) - and I honestly don't know if all of these are even published and available:

1. Mirʾāt al-aḥwāl-i jahānnumā of Aḥmad Bihbahānī (d. 1819) writing in Patna in 1809; a scion of the Majlisī family who sought patronage in Avadh it includes biographies of his family but also of important figures in the circle of Sayyid Dildār ʿAlī Naṣīrābādī (d. 1820). There is an Iranian edition, as well as an Indian one (Khuda Bakhsh Library in Patna in 1992). 
2. Āʾyīna-ye ḥaqqnumā written by an anonymous student of Sayyid Dildār ʿAlī in 1819 - the autograph was in the Nāṣirīya library in Lucknow.
3. al-Maqāmiʿ al-Ḥaydarīya by Sayyid ʿAbd al-ʿAẓīm Ḥusaynī, another student of the circle of Sayyid Dildār ʿAlī as a gloss on the Āʾyīna. There is a manuscript in the British Library. 
4. al-Ḥiṣn al-matīn fī aḥwāl al-wuzarāʾ wa-l-salāṭīn by Sayyid ʿAbbās Ardistānī, an Iranian émigré in the circle of Sayyid Dildār ʿAlī. There is a very clear 20th century manuscript in the National Archives in New Delhi.
5. Shudhūr al-ʿiqyān fī tarājim al-aʿyān of the scholar and bibliophile Sayyid Iʿjāz Ḥusayn Kintūrī (d. 1870, who also wrote a bibliography Kashf al-ḥujub wa-l-astār that was widely used before Āqā Buzurg's al-Dharīʿa) a good manuscript of this is in the National Library's Buhar collection in Kolkata; apparently there is a lithograph but I've not seen it.
6. Tadhkirat al-ʿulamāʾ fī āthār al-fuqahāʾ wa-l-mujtahidīn wa-l-muḥaddithīn of Sayyid Mahdī b. Najaf ʿAlī Riżavī ʿAẓīmābādi, another figure of the circle of the khāndān-e ijtihād, which is widely cited and seems to be extant in a number of manuscripts. 
7. Awrāq al-dhahab of Muftī Sayyid Muḥammad ʿAbbās al-Jazāʾirī (d. 1889) which is primarily a biography of Sayyid Muḥammad, the eldest son of Sayyid Dildār ʿAlī, most recently published in 2010 by the Kufa Academy.
8. Nujūm al-samāʾ by Mīrzā Muḥammad ʿAlī Kashmīri Lakhnawī completed and printed in Lucknow in 1303/1886 and a useful source on Indians and Iranians especially in the shrine cities; it was published by the Marʿashī library in 1978, along with the takmila by Mīrzā Muḥammad Mahdī Kashmīrī.
9. Tarājim al-ʿulamāʾ al-kāmilīn of Sayyid Abū-l-Ḥasan Kashmīrī.
10. Tārīkh-e mashāhīr-e ʿulamāʾ-ye Hind of Sayyid ʿAlī Naqī b. Abī-l-Ḥasan Lakhnawī.
11. Warathat al-anbiyāʾ of Sayyid Aḥmad Naqavī Hindī (d. 1947), a member of the khāndān-e ijtihād, lithographed in Lucknow in 1918, and recently reprinted in a new edition in Iran in 2010.
12. Taẕkira-ye bē-bahā of Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn Navgānvī written in 1931 with a takmila by his son - this was published in 2010 in two volumes by the Iran Culture House in New Delhi. 
13. Maṭlaʿ-ye anvār of Sayyid Murtażā Ḥusayn Fāżil-e Lakhnavi, published in Karachi in 1982 is probably the one work most widely cited. 

There are probably many other modern works published in India and in Pakistan with which I am not familiar. 

The importance of such texts lies in their structures, absences and presences: who is given much space, who is quickly glossed over, who is left out, what is the focus. Numerous issues and questions arise as one reads the text - which language to write in, which register to strike, what to assume, who is the reader and so forth. The simple fact that practically none of these texts is in print suggests the rather niche nature of the works and so perhaps indicates the decline in scholarship in the subcontinent. 

Shiʿi exegesis in South Asia

While there is still much to do on the Shiʿi intellectual tradition in South Asia - and the late Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi's two volume survey is an excellent starting point - exegesis is certainly one area to consider. The most famous work in Urdu seems to be Sayyid ʿAlī Naqī Naqavī's Faṣl al-khiṭāb, originally published in seven volumes but more recently in 3 large volumes.

However, another work that is much praised is Lawāmiʿ al-tanzīl wa-sawāṭiʿ al-taʾwīl, a large multi-volume work in Persian started by Sayyid Abū-l-Qāsim b. Ḥusayn b. Taqī Riżavī Qummī (1833-1906) who had only just got to sūrat al-Yūsuf when he died and completed by his son Sayyid ʿAlī al-Ḥāʾirī (1879-1941). It was planned as a 30 volume work, one for each juzʾ of the Qurʾan. Sayyid Abū-l-Qāsim was responsible for the first 13, and then his son continued it until volume 27. Of these 10 (or perhaps 12) were published in Lahore - especially volumes 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16. The Marʿashī Library in Qum supposedly has autographs of volumes 7, 8, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27. The Āstān-i Quds library in Mashhad has some volumes - links are given below.

Sayyid Abū-l-Qāsim was born in Farrukhābād in Avadh into a family of Riżavī sayyids originally from Qum. He studied in India, primarily with Sulṭān al-ʿulamāʾ Sayyid Muḥammad b. Dildār ʿAlī Naqavī Naṣīrābādī (d. 1867) and came to the fore in the Shiʿi religious establishment of Avadh after the events of 1857. He received his licenses (ijāzāt) from Sulṭān al-ʿulamāʾ and his brother Sayyid al-ʿulamāʾ Sayyid Ḥusayn Naṣīrābādī (d. 1856). Later, he entered the service of the brothers Nawāb Nawāzish ʿAlī Khān (1828-1890) and Nawāb Nisār ʿAli Khān Qizilbāsh (d. 1896), taluqdars of Nawabganj in Bahraich district in Avadh with holdings in Lahore, whom he guided through the ḥajj pilgrimage and visitations to the shrines in Iraq and Iran. On this trip, he met and debated leading scholars including Shaykh Murtaḍā Anṣārī (1781-1864) who apparently bestowed upon him the title of Fāżil-i Hindī. Given the dates concerned, and the loyalty of the Qizilbash family to the British in 1857, this trip probably was around 1860. On returning to India, he settled in Lahore, and established the Madrasa Imāmīya where he taught. He also established mosques and made the Mochi darvāza area a Shiʿi centre with a congregational prayer mosque all on the expenses of the Qizilbash nawabs [Of course, this claim seems exaggerated since one assumes Shiʿi presence in Lahore much earlier].  Sources attribute the major development in the commemoration of Muḥarram rituals in Lahore to him, and especially the famous procession that leaves from the Qizilbash mansion (Niṣār ʿAlī havēlī as it's called) at Mochi darvāza on the night of ʿĀshūrā. He taught a generation of important ʿulamāʾ of Punjab including Sayyid Ḥashmat ʿAlī, Sayyid Muḥsin ʿAlī, Shāh Sabzavārī and others. When he died in Muḥarram 1324/1906, he was buried in the Karbala Gāmay-Shāh Imāmbargāh Lahore with his father. At that time he had completed 13 volumes of the exegesis. 

According to the Taẕkira-ye bē-bahā of Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn Navgānvī (which was written in 1931), he wrote the following works: 

1. Maʿārif-e maktaba-ye nājiya (Persian)
2. Nāṣir al-ʿitra al-ṭāhira (Persian - link given below)
3. Burhān al-mutʿa (Persian)
4. al-Bushrā sharḥ muwaddat al-qurbā in 2 volumes in Persian
5. Ḥaqāʾiq-e ladunnī sharḥ-e khaṣāʾiṣ-e Nasāʾi in Persian
6. al-Shaqq wa-l-qamar (Arabic)
7. al-Ḥajj (Arabic)
8. Siyādat al-sāda (Arabic on nasab especially the Riżavī sayyids)
9. Ibṭāl al-tanāsukh (Persian refuting metempsychosis)
10. A number of shorter treatises on polemics defending various Shiʿi positions such as the prohibition on eating the meat slaughtered by the ahl al-kitāb
11. Anvār-e khamsa (Persian on fiqh)
12. Hidāyat al-aṭfāl (Persian on beliefs)
13. Taklīf al-mukallafīn (2 volumes on beliefs and practices - his risāla ʿamalīya)
14. Khulāṣat al-uṣūl (uṣūl al-fiqh in Arabic)
15. Taʿlīqa on Sharḥ jadīd li-l-Tajrīd (Arabic kalām)
16. Zubdat al-ʿaqāʾid (Persian)
17. Taʿlīqa on Miqdād al-Siyūrī's Sharḥ al-bāb al-ḥādī ʿashar (Arabic kalām)
18. Taʿlīqa on Mabādī al-wuṣūl of ʿAllāma al-Ḥillī (Arabic on uṣūl al-fiqh)
19. Sharḥ al-tabṣira of al-Ḥillī (Arabic)
20. Lavāmiʿ al-tanzīl (Persian exegesis under discussion)

Sayyid ʿAlī was born in Lahore in 1879 and after his initial studies with his father, he went to the shrine cities to study. In Iraq - and his residence in Karbalāʾ accounts for his nisba of al-Ḥāʾirī - he received licenses from Ākhūnd Khurāsānī (1839-1911) and Sayyid Muḥammad Kāẓim Ṭabāṭabāʾī Yazdī (d. 1920) as well as Mīrzā Ḥasan Shīrāzī (1814-1896) in Sāmarrāʾ and Mīrzā Ḥabībullāh Rashtī  (d. 1894). His main teachers were probably the former two since the latter two died when he was still rather young - between 15 and 17 years old. He was responsible for establishing a number of Shiʿi institutions: Anjuman-e Isnāʿasharīya in Lahore, Anjuman-e Murtażavī in Amrtisar, Anjuman-e Imāmīya in Peshawar, and Anjuman-e Taẕkirat al-maʿṣūmīn in Ferozpur. In 1914 he also became the president of the All-India Shia Conference; this body was primarily the expression of the taluqdars of Avadh and other notables in Punjab involved in welfare works in communities, and significantly included representation from Ismailis (from Bombay and elsewhere). He continued the exegesis until sūrat al-Qamar when he also died. So the exegesis remains incomplete - but is voluminous and recognised as such. He seems to have been a prominent writer in the press on Shiʿi and more generally Islamic affairs. He is credited with helping the famous poet Muḥammad Iqbāl find the Shiʿi way. He died in June 1941 and was buried with his father and grandfather. 

According to Taẕkira-ye bē-bahā, his published works include:

1. Ghāyat al-maqṣūd (4 volumes, Arabic on beliefs)
2. Minhāj al-salāma (Arabic on beliefs)
3. A number of disputational works defending Shiʿi faith and practice
4. Fatāwā in 8 volumes 
5. A number of his disputations and responses to objections were published in 1922 and 1923

In terms of the exegesis, one large volume (402pp) was lithographed by Sayyid Khurshīd ʿAlī in Lahore in 1299/1882. Volume two (345pp) also published in Lahore by Sayyid Rajab ʿAlī Shāh. Another volume (the third, 295pp) was published in Lahore in 1325/1907. Volume eight (253pp) published in 1899. Volumes 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 13, 15, 16 are available here.

Another work entitled Nāṣir al-ʿitra l-ṭāhira is available here.

There is still so much more work to be done on the intellectual and social history of the Shiʿa in Northern India including Punjab that goes beyond the networks of ʿulamāʾ and notables. One needs to pay attention to the institutions established, the discourses developed, and wider cultural contributions, both within the region but also through the transnational networks going into Iran and Iraq. In the era of nationalist defined historiographies, we need to realise that merely focusing on Shiʿi communities in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan or India is quite insufficient and does not recognise the movements and networks that existed in the pre-independence period and which continue to play a role in politics and intellectual developments today. Luckily we have some new studies - Justin Jones' work on the ʿulamāʾ and notables particularly in Avadh as one response to the impact of 1857, and a number of studies emerging on Pakistan such as Andreas Rieck's much awaited monograph, and Simon Fuchs's Princeton doctoral dissertation which has been published as In A Pure Muslim Land. 

Some more notes (and modern studies) on walāya takwīnīya [ولاية تكوينية]

Reformism and debates over what constitutes the authentic core of the Shiʿi tradition have brought the issue of walāya takwīnīya to the fore: whether the Imams possess the authority to manipulate the cosmos as they wish since they have been given that dominion by God. Usually reformists - since they tend to reduce the status of the Imams to 'righteous' teachers who were fallible (ʿulamāʾ abrār) denying along the way infallibility (ʿiṣma) - deny walāya takwīnīya (WT) whether 'kullī' (as a general principle) or juzʾī (pertaining to some issues). Most famously in recent times, Sayyid Faḍlallāh (d. 2010) has a short piece that is online denying WT and especially criticising the validity and authenticity of those texts that express the doctrine (such as famously the ziyāra jāmiʿa al-kabīra) - his more extensive discussion is the polemically entitled نظرة اسلامية حول الولاية التكوينية.

Most recently Sayyid Kamāl al-Ḥaydarī has started a number of online sermons critiquing WT. His earlier book الولاية التكوينية حقيقتها ومظاهرها published in 1431 H in Qum was broadly in favour of WT: in five chapters he discussed WT in the Qurʾan and ḥadīth followed by affirming it for the Imams and distinguishing it from ghulūw or extremist deification of the Imams, probably because WT is often associated with the Shaykhīya (whom Ḥaydarī has recently condemned in a video). Here is a video criticising it which starts with Ḥaydarī's attack (which is full of basic historical and intellectual mistakes such as arguing that Aḥsāʾī was Akhbārī). [In this, Ḥaydarī's position is not different to most in the ḥawza - what is interesting has been the rehabilitation of the Shaykhīya, perhaps because of the influence of the Iḥqāqīya; here is an interesting discussion]. He does not adopt an 'academic' and historical approach: nowhere in the book do we see when the term WT emerged. In taking care in distinguishing it from ghulūw, he provides three definitions from three periods:

1) al-Shaykh al-Mufīd (d. 1022) in Taṣḥīḥ al-iʿtiqād of al-Shaykh al-Ṣadūq (d. 991), p. 109: G is 'transgressing the limits when speaking of the Imams'.

2) al-Majlisī (d. 1699) in Biḥār al-anwār XXV, p. 246: G is deification of the Imams and Prophets or considering them to be partners to God, or inhering in God or being united with God, or being the creators or sustainers (independently of God), or knowing the unseen without revelation or inspiration, or holding that the Imams are Prophets or believing in metempsychosis between them, or believing that they are not subject to the ritual law.

3) al-Ṭabrisī (d. 1153) in his exegesis when glossing 4:171 that G is deification or holding that someone is the son of God. 

Another work is الولاية التكوينية فيض الهي وعطا رباني published in 1424 H in Beirut by Shaykh Ismāʿīl al-Ḥarīrī al-ʿĀmilī. The very title gives it away. This work begins with a definition of WT and a series of ḥadīth that demonstrate it and shows how WT holds for the Prophets and the Imams. Interesting the sources he uses include Nahj al-balāgha, Baṣāʾir al-darajāt and Miṣbāḥ al-sharīʿa - the last one of these is attributed to Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq but that does not seem very sound. The second half of the text includes the views of Shiʿi scholars who affirm WT starting with al-Ṣaffār al-Qummī and the classical tradents, then jumping to Majlisī and then finally including contemporary jurists who are widely following including Sayyid Khumaynī (d. 1989), Sayyid Khūʾī (d. 1992), Shaykh Bahjat (d. 2011) and Sayyid Taqī Qummī. Bahjat, for example, is cited as arguing that WT is the volition of the Imam (mashiʾa) expressing divine volition and intervening in the normal course of phenomena - what one might normally call a miracle. This is then followed by recounting a number of objections to WT and responses. There is no sense of the historicity of the concept or the term - and the ability to perform miracles that was commonly held to be a proof of prophecy (min aʿlām al-nubūwa) and hence something inherited by the Imams is conflated with the cosmic role of the Perfect Man (al-insān al-kāmil). The position of Khumaynī is well known in his very works including Miṣbāḥ al-hidāya. 

A useful summary is by Sayyid Jaʿfar Murtaḍā al-ʿĀmilī entitled الولاية التكوينية والتشريعية published last time in 2007 in Beirut. Given al-ʿĀmilī's antipathy to Ibn ʿArabī, it would be difficult to argue that he is influenced by his tradition in ʿirfān. It starts with a question on what constitutes WT especially since there are two possible problems: on the one hand, does WT not entail falling into tafwīḍ, the notion that some of the ghulāt held that the act of creation had been delegated by God to the Imams, and on the other hand, the Muʿtazilī rejection of the performance of miracles. In effect, he argues in favour of some of the narrations on tafwīḍ especially insofar as it is by God's leave and engages with the various narrations that primarily are drawn from al-Ṣaffār. 

From the ʿirfān tradition, one finds a series of studies of the Sayyid Muḥammad Muḥsin Ḥusaynī Ṭihrānī son of Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn (d. 1995) the student of ʿAllāma Ṭabāṭabāʾī. This is a conceptualisation that mixes the ḥadīth with the Ibn ʿArabi tradition (whom he considers to be a crypto-Shiʿi anyway in his famous biography of Sayyid Hāshim al-Ḥaddād entitled Rūḥ-i mujarrad) and draws heavily upon the Safavid tradition in the form of questions and answers. Sayyid Muḥsin's discussions that draw on these traditions are here.

A good, scholarly account is given in a work written first in 1424 H by Sayyid Ḍiyāʾ Sayyid ʿAdnān al-Khabbāz al-Qaṭīfī entitled الولاية التكوينية بين القران والبرهان that demonstrated an understanding of the philosophical and ʿirfān tradition. The study is divided into seven sections. The first provides a definition of WT, the relationship between the walāya of God and that of the Imams, and suggests the originator of the term. While acknowledging that the concept is a classical one, he argues that the term was coined by the famous philosophically-minded jurist Shaykh Muḥammad Ḥusayn Iṣfahānī (d. 1942) in his al-Anwār al-qudsīya, a poem in praise of the Imams, and in his marginalia on al-Makāsib. This strikes me as rather late since one finds attestations of WT in later Qajar texts.  The second examines what WT means and how it relates to the concept of tafwīḍ. The third considers the significant question of who or what is the efficient cause (using the Aristotelian term) for WT. The fourth discusses the link between WT and knowledge (including of the unseen). The fifth tries to delimit what WT means. The sixth moves onto the proofs with reference to the positions of various scholars starting with jurists from Nāʾinī onwards, and then discussing what previous scholars starting with the classical tridents held about the excellence and superiority of the Imams in every aspect including knowledge. The final section as with most studies focuses on objections and their responses. 

The Brethren of Purity - a new series of publications

The significance of the epistles on a range of intellectual disciplines by the group of scholars known as the Brethren of Purity (Ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ) has been known for some time, although one might argue that their significance for a proper assessment of Islamic intellectual history has been neglected. The first two epistles published here by Nader el-Bizri in one volume are part of an exciting new project initiated by the Institute of Ismaili Studies in London to re-edit the whole text with critical, analytical translations and annotations undertaken by a number of specialists around the world. For those of us who specialise in Islamic intellectual history and need texts to use in the classroom, this is an excellent development to be welcomed, especially since the volumes that I have seen are well rendered into English. The companion volume edited by el-Bizri that attempts not only to make sense of who the Ikhwān were but also assess their impact demonstrates that their significance was recognised by later traditions even when it was occluded - and even when they were severely misunderstood as the contribution on Ibn Taymīya in that volume suggests. One small quibble about the whole project – it would have been good to see the Arabic and English on facing pages, which may have been logistically problematic. As it is, it makes the comparison of the original text with the English a bit more difficult. In this way the Islamic Translations Series at Brigham Young University is a much better and user-friendly method of presenting the text.

The two epistles translated here are the first in the sequence, and constitute part of the first section of the Rasāʾil on the mathematical and propaedeutical sciences (al-ʿulūm al-riyāḍīya [wa-]l-taʿlīmīya). [Note: it may well be that riyāḍī and taʿlīmī are just two different translations for mathemata and hence it might not be useful distinguishing the two; the mathemata are what constitute the quadrivium] The translator, who happens to also be the editor of the whole series, Nader el-Bizri is a historian of philosophy and science in the world of Islam and has in recent times focused on the history of geometry, mathematics, and optics, publishing widely on Ibn al-Haytham (d. 1040). El-Bizri has also written on Avicenna and written a pioneering Heideggerian study of Avicenna and the Seinsfrage. The two epistles form part of the ancient quadrivium that constituted a more advanced stage of study associated with Boethius (d. 524) and based upon the mathematics of Nicomachus of Gerasa, a Neopythagorean of the first century CE: training in arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy considered to be the very heart of a scientific education. After the first two epistles, epistle 3 deals with astronomy, 4 with cosmography, 5 with music (published in a masterful edition and translation by the eminent musicologist Owen Wright) and 6 with proportions (that ties the quadrivium together) – and that is before they move onto the next set of propaeduetics, namely the logical organon beginning with epistles 7 and 8 on the theoretical and practical arts that provides a classification of the sciences on which the approach to holism is based. From these latter epistles, we can clearly see where the Ikhwān differ from their contemporaries who had a greater impact on later Islamic philosophy such as al-Fārābī (d. 950). The volume comprising the organon has been published by Carmela Baffioni and is a real contribution which has one surprising blindspot: the absence of a serious discussion of the Hellenic background and the role of both the commentators on Aristotle and the early reception from Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ (d. c. 757) onwards. Incidentally it is worth commenting here that because the Hellenic legacy is important - although I certainly would not wish to reduce the achievements of those in the ʿAbbasid period to mere transmission - it is a serious desideratum to have a proper database of what was translated, by whom, when and where and for whom and include multiple versions of translations, paraphrases, Galenic epitomes and so forth. Given that there is hardly anyone out there who masters all the relevance languages and fields of inquiry such a collaborative database would help us all. 

El-Bizri provides a scholarly introduction that locates the work of the Ikhwān in the historical context of the creative 'school of Baghdad' that developed the mathematical ideas of Nicomachus, and the wider tradition associated with Archimedes of Syracuse (d. 212 BCE) and Apollonius of Perga (d. 190 BCE), analyses the contents of the epistles (he does a sterling job of tracing influences and noting lacunae thereof) and comments on the manuscript tradition and the process of editing and translating. I note later the main manuscript upon which much of the editions are based. The introduction and the translations are well supported by scholarly annotation that indicates lines of research for those interested. His own tastes for Ibn al-Haytham are clear – and he points out some of the gaps in the work of the Ikhwān, notably the neglect of algebra that was well established through the work of al-Khwārazmī (d. c. 846) and Qusṭā ibn Lūqā’s reception of the arithmetic of Diophantus of Alexandria (3^rd century CE). The explanatory summary of the epistles focuses on the historical contextualisation of the ideas – but only briefly touches upon the question of the Neopythagorean influence of theological and mathematical mysticism, although he suggests that there might be a link with Iamblichus’ approach to mathematics, philosophy and mysticism. If there were any evidence (finding Iamblichus in Arabic is notoriously difficult apart from possibly the commentary on the so-called Golden Verses and perhaps some docta in the doxographical literature), it would be worth engaging. El-Bizri also suggests that the approach to mathematics is more Platonist than Pythagorean – again one would like to see what that means. The conceptualisation of the relationship of mathematics to metaphysics to natural philosophy seems to be based on the homologies between the human as the microcosm and nature as the macrocosmic manifestation of the human but this certainly needs some further analysis as most previous specialists on the Ikhwān have stressed the importance of this theme. The epistle on geometry draws heavily upon Euclid – as one would expect and we know his work became canonical throughout the empire – as well as Pythagorean readings of works such as Plato’s Timaeus. It also indicates other applications of geometry such as magic – and refers to epistle 52 (which has already been translated and published in the current series). A number of earlier specialists such as Ian Netton pointed to the influence of Pythagoreanism; however, the volumes in this series that I have read suggest the actual citation and influence of Pythagoras is far lesser than specialists have thought so far. Given the commitment of the Ikhwān to theosis, the notion that the practice of philosophy as a way of living entails a desire to become ‘god-like’ (the locus classicus is in Plato’s Theaetetus 176), it would be interesting to see how that relates to their consideration of mathematics. The further interesting question for historians looking for the transmission of ideas and networks would be to consider whether the organisation and constitution of the epistles actually denoted the pedagogy and curriculum for a group of thinkers in southern Iraq in the period. And if that were the case, why did it die out? Was it because of the success of alternative methodologies and pedagogies at the imperial centre in Baghdad?

The introduction to each of the epistles shows the awareness of how the sciences link together to form an epistemic whole and the role of the two particular disciplines within that process. Epistle 1 begins with a statement that the aim of the Ikhwān is to study all the sciences that pertain to existent things (mawjūdāt) and into their arrangement, order and principles. One has to start with the propaedeutics – and the first step is arithmetic (using a transliteration of the Greek term), on the path to acquiring wisdom following the way of the Pythagoreans. Given this last statement, the translator might have wished to comment further on this. The classic fourfold division of the sciences follow – propaedeutics (arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy), logic, natural sciences, and theological-metaphysical. This is the arrangement of the Rasāʾil on the whole. This is prefaced by a key statement about the nature of this quest: ‘The beginning of philosophy is the love of the sciences, the middle of it is the knowledge of the true nature of existent things by virtue of human ability and the end is speech and action that is in accord with knowledge’ (p. 66). That is to say: one begins with a desire to learn, then one acquires theoretical understanding of reality, and then one acts ethically based on what one knows. I would therefore take issue with part of this phrase translated – the phrase bi-ḥasabi l-ṭāqati l-basharīya should be ‘insofar as is humanly possible’ as it is a standard formulation of the limits of knowledge that goes back to the ancients. The remaining 23 chapters of the epistle deal with different aspects of the Ikhwān’s number theory.

The epistle on geometry that is broadly based on Euclid’s Elements is divided into 27 chapters. Although the earliest translation of the Elements seemed to have been completed by the early ninth century, the translation of Ḥunayn b. Iṣḥāq (d. 873) in the edition of Thābit b. Qurra (d. 901) are probably the ones available to the Ikhwān [Note: it has been pointed out to me by Sonja Brentjes whose critical review I look forward to that it is more likely that they had one of the version done by al-Ḥajjāj b. Yūsuf b. Maṭar (d. c. 830)]. The introduction to this epistle repeats the description of the propaedeutics and defines geometry as the ‘science that inquires about magnitudes, distances, and the quantity of their kinds’ (p. 104). Although much of the epistle deals with axioms and their like, a few chapters stand out for their implications on applications and also on a more reflective approach to geometry. Chapter 15 on surveying makes it clear why the theoretical study of geometry is useful in the wider world. Chapters 16 and 17 that follow then stress the need for a collaborative approach to the study of the sciences in order to avoid errors that might arise out of individual calculations. Collaboration for the good is necessary for humans to transcend the illness and crisis that humans face in this world as a result of ‘the offence committed by our father Adam’:

‘To secure your success and salvation from this world, which is the realm of generation and corruption, and from the sufferings of hell and the company of demons and Iblīs’ soldiers, and by way of ascending to the domain of the celestial spheres and the vastness of the heavens, to the abode of the lofty ones, and by way of neighbouring the angels of the Compassionate One who abide in His proximity, you need the help of those who are brothers to you, who are counsellors to you and virtuous friends, and who are knowledgeable about the articles of the faith and are knowers of the truths of things…They will guide you on the pathway of the afterlife and the way to reach it, in order to be saved from what has entrapped us all because of the offense of our father Adam!’ (pp. 138-39).

The echoes of the Platonic tradition especially the very first chapter (mīmar) of the Theologia Aristotelis on this text seem very clear – as well as the explicit reference that follows to the Kalīla wa dimna, another major cultural artefact of the time. The relationship between the circle of the Brethren and the Kindī circle in Baghdad that produced the Theologia would be worth investigating further in detail. The final two chapters of the epistle indicate further uses of geometry: given that numbers and their arrangements and quantities have an effect on the soul, they describe briefly the use and construction of talismanic squares and refer the reader to epistle 52 for further detail. So in some ways the propaedeutics already refer the initiate to magic that is part of the theological and metaphysical sciences that lie at the culmination of one’s education.

Overall, this volume is a major contribution to Islamic intellectual history – scholarly, supported and judicious. The translation on the whole is fluent and the edition and its principles clear.

Turning to the volume on the natural sciences: one does not need to repeat the oft-stated observation that this project to edit and translate the epistles of the Brethren of Purity (Ikhwān al-ṣafāʾ) is a major undertaking to be welcomed and will greatly enhance our understanding of the intellectual history of the philosophical sciences in the pre-Avicennan period. Baffioni, senior research fellow at the Institute of Ismaili Studies the sponsors of the project, is one of the leading specialists on the Brethren, having spent an illustrious career at Naples (twenty-five items in the bibliography constitute her major contributions to the study of the Brethren alongside the editions and translations that she has contributed to this series). She has already edited and translated the epistles on logic in an earlier volume of this series – those epistles come immediately before the seven that are published here (out of the seventeen epistles that comprise the second section on the natural sciences) and are the culmination of the first section on the mathematical sciences. The volume immediately after on epistle 22 on animals has been published many times and is arguably one of the most famous of the Epistles: The Case of the Animals versus Man before the King of the Jinns (published in this series in the translation of Lenn Goodman and Richard MacGregor). With this, another highly useful and impressive volume, she has made a major contribution to the project. This large volume (around 1,000 pages of English and Arabic) comprises a foreword by the general editor of the project, Nader el-Bizri, an introduction that does an excellent job of contextualising the work, a technical introduction that discusses the manuscripts especially Atif Efendi 1681 which is the oldest existing manuscript, followed by the translation of the five epistles along with 3 appendices that include material added from some manuscripts on epistles 15, 20 and 16. The Arabic editions of the epistles come after at the end – something I have commented on before: surely it would be better for a user of the volume to have the Arabic facing the English translations. Alongside some of the early kalām works, these epistles constitute some of the earliest Arabic investigations into natural philosophy taken up not just themes in Aristotelianism but also elements of their more Ismaili angelology and cosmology.

The introduction, as if to compensate for the absence of any discussion of Greek antecedents in her volume on logic, engages the Hellenic background extensively: the influence of Aristotle’s De Caelo, doctrines on matter and form, the four causes, the spherical nature of the earth, motion, the Platonic notion of the human as microcosm as well as philosophy as the imitation of God (theosis), and Hippocrates. She also introduces the elements that are taken from scripture. The real question is, of course, what constitutes the Brethren’s own conceptualisation of natural philosophy starting with the important Ismaili elements in the text; she stresses creationism, the idea that God created the cosmos in space and time, their eschatology which tends towards the spiritual, a belief in cosmic sympathy as an expression for the divine plan, and the importance of astrology. Given the privileging of the spiritual over the material, the study of natural phenomena are supposed to reveal spiritual realities that lie beyond them. Baffioni notes that elements of the Brethren’s cosmology seems to prefigure the later Ismaili philosopher Ḥamīd al-Din Kirmānī (d. 1021), and that their notion of the evolution of the human anticipates the idea of substantial motion and transformation (ḥaraka jawharīya) in the thought of the Safavid thinker Mullā Ṣadrā Shīrāzī (d. 1635). The latter would not be surprising not least because Carlos Steel’s study of late Neoplatonism of Iamblichus, Priscianus (d. 518) and Damascius (d. c. 538) among others presents a picture of a soul in transformation that seems to be similar to Mullā Ṣadrā some centuries before the Brethren already. There are strong parallels in the forms of Pythagorean Neoplatonism found in the work of the Brethren and those much later in the Safavid period including Mullā Ṣadrā. This discursive introduction is then followed by the technical introduction that presents the codicological details of the manuscripts used especially the base Atif Efendi and outlines Baffioni’s editing method with an extensive list of corrected readings in order of the epistles. She also notes mistakes, ellipses and particularities in orthography. The critical apparatus on readings and variants in the footnotes to the Arabic edition supplement and clarify this method.

The translations of the epistles are clear and supplemented with scholarly footnotes that identify passages in Aristotle, for example, from which the Brethren are drawing as well as commenting further on the material in the text. Epistle 15 on matter and form (al-hayūla wa-l-ṣūra) comprises 14 chapters on issues of hylomorphism and constituents of natural bodies. It also discusses the nature of place, motion and time and ends with a section that explains the subject matter of the epistles that follow (since this is the first of the section on the natural sciences). An overarching theme of the epistle is the idea of alchemy as a process of transforming bodies, both natural and celestial and especially souls, as well as the notion of spiritual and cosmological hierarchy that places Prophets and successors above the generality of those in the world of generation and corruption as more perfect manifestations of the universal soul. Epistle 16 moves onto their De Caelo and includes the Brethren’s argument for creationism against the eternity of the cosmos and comprises 29 chapters, the longest epistle in this volume. It introduces the theme of the homology of the human and the cosmos – the latter as a ‘macroanthropos’ and the former as a microcosmos. The celestial bodies are spheres in rotation, types of motion are discussed as well as heliocentrism. Two chapters are of particular theological significance: chapter 19 on the analogy of the circumambulation (ṭawāf) of the Kaʿba during pilgrimage applied to the rotation of the spheres, and the (symbolically important) final chapter on resurrection of souls at death that are linked to the higher celestial souls. Epistle 17 is on generation and corruption (al-kawn wa-l-fasād), features of this world and includes 14 short chapters. The final chapter here again is theological poignant dealing with the nature of the human body as one of those things that undergo generation and corruption: they repeat their refrain to ‘arise from the slumber of ignorance’ and recognise one’s innate spiritual nature that transcends the body. Epistle 18 comprising 17 chapters is on meteorology and includes some of their presentation of astrology, broadly following books I-III of Aristotle’s Meteorology. It ends with a chapter that recalls the Qurʾanic notion of the spheres and the celestial bodies as signs on which to ponder. Beginning with an affirmation of the Qurʾanic account of creation ex nihilo, they move onto discussing the horizontal hierarchy in the world. A key chapter 12 returns to the theme of eschatology that runs throughout and the spiritual nature of those perfected in the afterlife. Epistle 19 on minerals includes 13 chapters and follows book IV of the Meteorology. Epistle 20 moves onto a discussion on nature but not in the Aristotelian sense of ṭabīʿa/phūsis and is relatively short including 13 chapters; in fact it discusses angelology and prophetology. Much of this epistle is taken with an affirmation of astrological principles of how the higher bodies and souls affect the lower ones and how the angels associated with the spheres have a spiritual power. A central chapter 7 returns to the motif of the symbolism of the pilgrimage and the circumambulation of the Kaʿba. Epistle 21 discusses plants in three chapters, on which no work of Aristotle’s has survived. It includes descriptions and uses of various plants including palms, figs and almonds. The appendices deal with additional material: appendix A deals with some issues on motion and place that supplements epistle 15 and includes the Arabic edition and translation with a brief commentary; appendix B supplements epistle 20 by discussing the nature of physicians and how they are similar to and different from prophets; and finally appendix C supplementing epistle 16 demonstrates the Ismaili cosmology of the Brethren.

Baffioni has produced a serious, academic and worthwhile contribution that is a pleasure to read and use and testifies to the value of the series. Once read alongside the early translations of Aristotle, Galen and other Hellenic authors and the production of the Kindī circle and the Baghdad Peripatetics, it will allow us to understand the different trajectories of thinking on the natural sciences that were inherited by the classical period starting with Avicenna and moving onto the medieval period. It demonstrates to us that from an early period one finds a holistic approach to the sciences that means that when we encounter the occult in the medieval period as a science, we should not be surprised and realise that the juxtaposition of astrology, alchemy and magic with physics, logic, and mathematics has a long pedigree. This volume is a major achievement worthy of the highest praise. On the whole, this series continues to produce contributions that will radically inform our intellectual history of the course of philosophy in the world of Islam. 

Mullā Ṣadrā on the cosmic authority (ولاية تكوينية) of the Friends of God

In a recent piece that is about to be published on walāya takwīnīya in the Safavid period, I discuss various thinkers including Mullā Ṣadrā focusing primarily on his discussion in al-Shawāhid al-rubūbīya. Now, of course, one could have looked at other texts – and the most obvious lie in his extensive and still little studied exegesis. I recently realised I had seen an article - a useful indexical one - on Mullā Ṣadrā on the concept of walāya:

ʿAbd al-ʿAlī Shukr, 'Vilāyat dar andīsha-yi Ṣadr al-mutaʾallihīn', Khiradnāma-ye Ṣadrā, no. 66 (winter 1390 sh/March 2012), pp. 39-52

After a introductory section outlining senses of walāya, the author points out two schemes of walāya. The first distinguishes between a common sense (ʿāmm) that is open to all believers, and the second is for the select (khāṣṣ) friends of God whose selfhood dissolves in the very essence of the divine. This is indicated in his commentary on the Light Verse and in other places and clearly draws upon the Sufi exegetical tradition (probably from Ghazālī). The second scheme is found in his exegesis on the Throne Verse - God's walāya for believers means one of three things: i) his assistance in the completion of his proofs and his guidance, ii) his help for them to overcome their enemies and to manifest their faith and make it emerge above all others, and iii) his assistance for their accomplishment of their moral obligations and supererogatory acts that draw them near to him [Tafsīr, āyat al-kursī, ed. Muḥammad Khājavī, Tehran: Bunyād-e Mullā Ṣadrā, 1389 Sh/2010, V, p. 254]. Thus walāya involves both push and pull factors: acquired by the performance of spiritual exercises, but also free gifts of grace. 

Ok so what about the concepts of walāya takwīnīya and tashrīʿīya that arise from the school of Ibn ʿArabī? It's clear that the former links an early Shiʿi insistence in hadith upon the cosmic role of the Imams as the manifestation of the divine (wajhullāh) to the Akbarian idea that links to this of the Imam/Walī as the totality of the divine names, as the one who comprehensively manifests divine attributes. Once the Imam/Walī has the rank, he can act at the level of the cosmic order (al-amr al-takwīnī) - such a person is the perfect human that mediates between the divine and the cosmos [al-Asfār al-arbaʿa, ed. Aḥmad Aḥmadī, Tehran: Bunyād-e Mullā Ṣadrā, 1381 sh/2002, VI, p. 252; Mafātīḥ al-ghayb, ed. Najafqulī Ḥabībī, Tehran: Bunyād-e Mullā Ṣadrā, 1386 Sh/2007, I, p. 345]. 

The authority to define what the sharīʿa is - walāya tashrīʿīya - is a continuation of the prophetic function and is discussed in his commentary on the hadith collection al-Kāfī. In his engagement with the controversy over the seal of walāya, he sides with the Shiʿi tradition of the school of Ibn ʿArabī (starting at least with ʿAbd al-Razzāq Kāshānī d. 1336) that insists on the seal's identification with the Mahdī [Sharḥ uṣūl al-kāfī, ed. Muḥammad Khājavī, Tehran: Pazhūhishgāh-e ʿulūm-e insānī, rpt., 1383 sh/2004, II, pp. 476 and see pp. 467-68].

The real question is whether beyond the particularities such as this latter point whether Mullā Ṣadrā's concept is really a Shiʿi one or a Shiʿi version of a concept in the school of Ibn ʿArabī. The obvious place to look further more carefully is the commentary on the kitāb al-ḥujja of al-Kāfī. But beyond that, as I indicate in my article one needs to look elsewhere such as the work of his student Fayż Kāshānī (d. 1680), not least in his Kalimāt-e maknūna and other works for a more seamless bringing together of the Akbarian and the Shiʿi strands, and perhaps to figures like Qāḍī Saʿīd Qummī (d. 1696) whose magnum opus is a glorious Shiʿi Neoplatonic commentary on the hadith collection al-Tawḥīd of al-Shaykh al-Ṣadūq (d. 991). I realise that I still need to return more extensively to discuss the question of what makes Mullā Ṣadrā a Shiʿi thinker beyond the obvious. And then one slowly and surely gets entangled in the debates on the nature of authentic Shiʿi discourse..