ISTANBUL
For almost sixteen centuries, Istanbul
enjoyed a unique status as the capital city of two great civilizations: the
Byzantine empire and the Ottoman empire.
The first settlements in the peninsula date
from the late third or early second millennium BCE. In 330 CE, Constantine moved
the seat of the Roman empire to Byzantium and created a new state. Its name
eventually became ‘‘Constantinople,’’ meaning the city of Constantine. The name
had currency among even the Turks, whose documents and coins frequently
referred to the capital as ‘‘Konstantiniye’’ for centuries. In addition, it was
used alternately with ‘‘Istanbul’’ in official documents. Constantinople gained
some of its most famous architectural landmarks under Justinian (527–565). The
Roman construction ingenuity meshed with the Hellenistic design legacy to
produce a new synthesis in Justinian’s buildings. Aya Sophia (532–537) is the
culmination of this synthesis.
Through the ages, the city had seen several
sieges of Arabs and a dramatic Latin invasion (1204). On May 30, 1453, Mehmed
II made his ceremonial entry into Constantinople and declared it to be his
capital. He then inaugurated a new era of building activity aimed at making the
city the economic, administrative, cultural, and religious center of the
empire. In creating a Muslim city, the process started with the conversion of
Aya Sophia into the Great Mosque and seventeen other churches. After the
conquest, at the eastern end of the peninsula, almost the entire structure of
the Topkapı Palace had been built.
The Topkapı Palace remained the official imperial residence until the construction
of the Dolmabahce Palace across the
Golden Horn in 1856.
The sixteenth century was a time of great
building activity. During the reign of Su¨leyman (1520–1566), Istanbul was
endowed with many monuments, and it was the work of the great architect Sinan (1490–1588).
Sinan’s ku¨lliyes brought the ultimate Islamic and Ottoman definition to
Istanbul’s urban form.
During the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries Istanbul continued to develop, but the scale of the building activity
was by no means comparable to that of previous centuries due largely to the
gradual decline in the economic power of the empire. The population continued to
escalate between seven hundred thousand and eight hundred thousand. This was
almost twice the size of the population in 1535. The seventeenth century
contributed two monuments to the capital: theku¨lliye of Ahmed I and the Valide
mosque. The eighteenth century brought no significant monuments to Istanbul but
nonetheless marked an important first step toward embracing European architectural
fashions. Many foreign architects and artists were invited to Istanbul. The
architectural language they introduced to Istanbul developed into the ‘‘Ottoman Baroque.’’ Western influences
began to be apparent from the early eighteenth century, new forms and dynamic
profiles of the Nuruosmaniye and Laleli mosques attesting to the influence of the
French and Italian Baroque and Rococo on traditional Ottoman building types.
However, the nineteenth century saw an unparalleled stylistic eclecticism, as
well as the introduction of a great diversity of new building types: banks,
office buildings, theaters, department stores, hotels, and multistory apartment
buildings.
Further Reading
And,
M.istanbul in the 16th Century, The City, The Palace, Daily Life.Istanbul,
1994.
Bator,
Robert.Daily Life in Ancient and Modern Istanbul.Minneapolis: Runestone Press,
2000.
Celik,
Zeynep.The Remaking of Istanbul: Portrait of an Ottoman City in the Nineteenth
Century. Seattle: University of Washington, 1986.
Freely,
John.Istanbul: The Imperial City. London: Penguin Books, 1998.
Goodwin, G.A
History of Ottoman Architecture. London, 1971.
Inalcik, H.
‘‘I˙ stanbul: An Islamic City.’’Journal of Islamic StudiesI (1990): 1–23.
Kuban,
Dogan.Istanbul, bir kent tarihi: Bizantion, Konstantinopolis, Istanbul.
Istanbul: Turkiye Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakfi, 2000.
Lewis,
Bernard.Istanbul and the Civilization of the Ottoman Empire. University of
Oklahoma, 1963.
Runciman,
Steven.The Fall of Constantinople, 1453. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1990.
‘IZZ AL-DIN ABU ‘ABD ALLAH MUHAMMAD
B. ‘ALI
‘Izz al-Din Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. ‘Ali (sometimes
confused with Baha’ al-Din Abu ’lMahasin Yusuf b. Rafi‘) was a Syrian
administrator and author of topographical and historical works. He was born in
Aleppo in AH 613/1217 CE, and subsequently served in the government of the city.
After an unsuccessful attempt to negotiate an agreement between the Mongols and
the ruler of Aleppo in AH 657/1259 CE, he fled to Egypt where he prospered in
the service of the Mamluk ruler Baybars I and the latter’s successors. ‘Izz al-Din
died in Cairo in AH 684/1285 CE.
‘Izz al-Din wrote a historical topography of
greater Syria, Palestine, and the Jazira called al-A‘laq al-khatira fi dhikr umara’ al-Sham wa-l-Jazira (Precious
Things of Moment in the Account of the Princes of Syria and the Jazira), as
well as a life of Baybars I al-Bunduqdari.
Primary Sources
al-A‘laq
al-khatira fi dhikr umara’ al-Sham wa’l-Jazira. (a) Bk. 1, pt. 1 (Aleppo).
Edited by D. Sourdel. Beirut, 1953. (b) Ta’rikh madinat Dimashq. Edited by Sami
al-Dahhan. Damascus, 1956. (c) Ta’rikh Lubnan wa’l-Urdunn wa-Filastin. Edited
by Sami al-Dahhan. Damascus, 1963. (d)Ta’rikh al-Jazira. 2 vols. Edited by
Yahya ‘Abbara. Damascus, 1977–1978.
Die
Geschichte des Sultan Baibars. Edited by Ahmad Hutait. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner
Verlag, 1983.
Further Reading
Ibn Shaddad,
‘Izz al-Din.al-A‘laq al-khatira fi dhikr umara’ al-Sham wa’l-Jazira. Translated
by Anne-Marie Edde ´-Terrasse asDescription de la Syrie du Nord de ‘Izz al-Din ibn
Saddad. Damascus, 1984.
JA’FAR AL-SADIQ (D. AH
148/765 CE)
Ja’far al-Sadiq was born in Medina in 80/699
or 83/ 703 and became one of the foremost exponents of the teachings from the Prophet’s
family. He is the most frequently cited authority on points of law and
tradition, transmitting his family’s wisdom to Muslims of diverse backgrounds
and advocates of other religions, theosophists as well as gnostics who
frequented his house in quest of knowledge.
Ja’far al-Sadiq is a central figure in Shi’i
tradition, and he is the last common imam recognized by both the Ithna’asharis and the Isma’ilis. His
contribution and influence, however, are far wider than his Shi’a. He is cited
in a wide range of historical sources, including al-Tabari, al-Ya’qubi, and
al-Masudi. Sunni, Sufi’ and Shi’i sources all give testimony to his influence.
Al-Dhahabi recognizes his contribution to Sunni tradition, whereas Abu Nu’aym
and Farid alDin Attar see him at the head of the Sufi line of saints and
mystics. Ithna’ashari writers like al-Kulayni and Isma’ili scholars such as
al-Qadi al-Nu’man record his monumental contribution to their respective Shi’i traditions.
Ja’far al-Sadiq inherited his position as a
Shi’i imam from his father, al-Baqir. His versatile personality is, however,
beyond clazssification, and his family perhaps saw him as a last attempt for
reconciling the diverse groups of Muslims, since he was the greatgreat-grandson
of ’Ali ra on one side and of Abu Bakr ra on the other. He remained distant in
the power struggle that ensued from extremist Shi’is, with the Zaydiyya and the
’Abbasid movement of the Hashimiyya unfolding from the Kaysaniyya. He faced
doctrinal difficulties from individuals who exaggerated his position, who were
later known in history as theghulat. Like his father before him, he repudiated
them. Ja’far’s detachment from politics gave him more time for scholarly
activities, holding sessions at home as well as following his family’s
practice.
Law and Thought
Following the foundations laid by his father,
al-Sadiq developed an extensive system of law and theology so that the Shi’i
community had its own distinct ritual and religious doctrine. His traditions
represent a range of subjects involving the ’ibadat and the mu’amalat,
incorporating themes such as faith, devotion, alms, fasting, pilgrimage, and
faith (jihad) as well as food, drink,
social and business transactions, marriage and divorce, inheritance, criminal
punishments, and a number of issues dealing with practically all aspects of
life. Law in Islam, as is well known, is an all-embracing body of commands and
prohibitions consisting of ordinances governing worship and ritual in addition
to a proper legal system. Ja’far al-Sadiq is the most frequently quoted
authority in Shi’i tradition. The Ithna ’ashari legal school is called the
Ja’fari madhhab after him. Ismaili fiqh (jurisprudence) as codified by al-Qadi
al-Nu’man is also primarily based on al-Sadiq’s traditions and those of his
father, al-Baqir. Besides guiding his own followers, he was widely regarded as
a central reference point for many who sought his advice.
Amidst the theological issues of his day,
such as those beliefs held by the Murji’a, the Qadariyya, the Jahmiyya and the
Mu’tazila, Ja’far had his own distinct position. For example, he taught a
middle position on the question of determinism and followed his father’s views,
which portrayed human responsibility but preserved God’s autocracy. Knowledge
was a central theme in his teaching, a duty for all Muslims to acquire through ’aql (intellect), a supreme faculty through
which God is worshipped and the knowledge of good and evil acquired. Thus, his
views on the imamate as well as those on ’aql,
’ilm, a’mal, and iman were geared toward self-actualization. The personal
ethics, morality, and individual communion with God that are discussed in his
teachings are used to obtain receptivity in the heart and mind, which he refers
to, at times, as ma’rifa (this is not
to be confused with the later usage of that word).
Imam and Teacher
In addition to disseminating knowledge of
Shi’i law and theology, Ja’far al-Sadiq played the role of a spiritual guide;
he was imam and teacher for his Shi’a, initiating them into the inner wisdom
that could be experienced in their hearts. The search for haqiqa in the revelation
is thus an important aspect of Ja’far’s thought. The imam undertakes the amana (trust) from God, rendering him a
guarantor (hujja)and a link (sabab) with the celestial world for
those who accept his authority. This is part of the universal history, beginning
with the pre-creation covenant (yawm
al-mithaq) and manifested through the prophets and the imams.
The imam’s task is therefore, man’s
purification, preparing receptacles for the haqiqa(truth),
which is the raison d’e ˆtre of history: restoring man to his original home.
This was his role as an imam: to help others achieve ma’rifa qalbiyya (cognition of the heart), channeled through the
imam to his followers. The vision of men’s hearts perceiving realities of faith
does not delegitimize the authority of the intellect or hat of the community. In
fact, self-sufficiency, which is a serious sin in the Qur’an, can easily become
intellectual pride; consequently, man’s ’ilm is subordinated to God’s gift of
ma’rifa, according to Ja’far. It is the prophets and the imams who form the
point of contact between man and God, and it is in this respect, perhaps, that
Ja’far refers to the sirr (secret) that
is discovered through transconscience and for which he possibly advocatedtaqiyya
(precautionary dissimulation) as a principle. Ja’far’s ideas also became
pervasive in the development of Sufi thought, where identical issues were raised,
although in a more individualistic manner.
His theology was especially significant in
that it made use of experience as a hermeneutical principle. Paul Nywia (1970) emphasizes
this contribution of Ja’far al-Sadiq, referring to his esoteric interpretation of
the Qur’an collected by al-Sulamı´(d. 412/1021). He emphasised that Muslim
conscience is not to be found in the world of imagination but rather in the
experience of life itself and that the external symbols have to be transformed
by experience to become the truth. It is therefore important to internalize the
letters or symbols of the Qur’an through experience. Ja’far thus read the Qur’an
discerning a merger between the inner and the outer meanings, and he presented a
new exegesis that involved no longer a reading of the Qur’an but revisiting the
experience in a new interpretation of it (ta’wı´l).
Ja’far al-Sadiq is linked to other
disciplines as well: divination, including alchemy; the science of jafr, which
includes letter–number correspondences; the occult arts, including pulmonancy
(divination from body pulses); and hemerology (the study of calendars of
auspicious and inauspicious days). These were popular among the Turks and
Persians and have been reported in works known asfalnamas. In the Indian subcontinent,
these also played an important role in the popular life of Muslims and Hindus;
evidence of this is found in Sindhi pothis
(private religious manuscripts). In South Asia, Ja’far al-Sadiq is credited
with writing khab-namas
(interpretations of dreams), which are sometimes known asrisala orbayan in Sindhi
literature.
The plurality of Ja’far’s teachings, his
magnetic personality, and his spirituality have influenced subsequent generations
in more ways than one. His influential contributions to Shi’i thought provided
a momentum for the development of law, theology, and mysticism that is apparent
in the impressive literature reserved in his name.
Further Reading
Amir-Moezzi,
M.A.The Divine Guide in Early Shi’ism, transl. David Streight. Albany, NY,
1994.
Attar, Farid
al-Din.Tadhkirat al-Awliya’, part 1, ed. Nicholson. London, 1905.
Al-Dhahabi.Tadhkirat
al-Hufaz, vol. 1. Hyderabad, 1375/ 1955.
Ebeid, R.Y.,
and M.J.L. Young. ‘‘A Treatise on Hemerology Ascribed to Ga’far
al-Sadiq.’’Arabica23/3 (1976): 296–307.
Fahd, T.
‘‘Ga’far as-Sadiq et la Tradition Scientifique Arabe.’’ InLe Shi’isme Imamite
Colloque de Strasbourg. Paris, 1970.
Al-Isfahani,
Abu Nu’aym.Hilyat al-Awliya’, vol. 3. Cairo, 1352/1933.
Al-Kulaynı´,
Muhammad b. Ya’qub. Al-Usul min al-Kafi. Tehran, 1388/1968.
Lalani,
Arzina R. ‘‘Ja’far al-Sadiq.’’ InEncyclopaedia of Religion, 2nd ed., 4760–2.
Detroit, 2005.
Nywia,
Paul.Exegese Coranique et le Language Mystique. Beirut, 1970.
Al-Qa˚a˜ı
´al-Nu’man, Abu Hanifa.Da’a’im al-Isla˚m,2 vols., ed. A.A.A. Fyzee. Cairo, 1950
and 1960. (See also Ismail K. Poonawala’s revised translation of the first
volume, The Pillars of Islam. Oxford, 2002.)
Sells,
Michael A. ‘‘Early Sufi Qur’an Interpretation.’’ In early Islamic Mysticism,
75–89. New York, 1996.
Al-Tabari,
Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarı´r.Ta’rikh al-Rusul wa al-Muluk. Annales, ed. M.J.
de Goeje. Leiden, 1879– 1901
Taylor, John
B. ‘‘Ja’far al-Sadiq, Spiritual Forebear of the Sufis.’’Islamic Culture40/2
(1966): 97–113.
———. ‘‘Man’s
Knowledge of God in the Thought of Ja’far al-Sadiq.’’Islamic CultureOctober
(1966): 195–206.
Al-Ya’qubi,
Ahmad b. Ibn Wadih.Ta’rikh, vol. 2. Beirut
JAHIZ, AL
Abu ’Uthman ’Amr ibn Bahr ibn Mahbub al-Kinani al-Fuqaymi
al-Basri al-Jahiz (‘‘Goggle-Eyes’’) was a ninth-century intellectual(mutakallim)of
conceptual subtlety who composed some 200 works (of which sixty are at least
partially extant) dealing with the major religious, political, and theological
issues of his day. These works have later been understood as prime examples of
the belletrist and encyclopedic style (adab),
and they are universally prized for their command of the ’Arabiyya (the Arabic
of the Qur’an). For his immediate contemporaries, al-Jahiz’s works were
examples of dialectically informed theological speculation(kalam)in the
tradition of the Mu’tazilite school of thought.
Born in Basra into an obscure family
(possibly of Abyssinian origin) of vassals of the Kinana tribe around 776 CE,
he received but scant formal education, attending the elementary Qur’an school
and perhaps at one time earning a living selling fish. Through frequenting the
congregational mosque of Basra and the caravan stop, the Mirbad, where
philologists quizzed the Bedouins on the Arabic language, he was exposed to
significant trends in contemporary thought and developed his mastery of the
Arabic language. Several works on the imamate earned him the favor of the
Caliph al-Ma’mun (r. 813–833), who had him brought to Baghdad. Little is known
of his employment thereafter, apart from brief spells in the chancellery as a
bureaucrat (katib)and later,
fleetingly, as tutor to Caliph al-Mutawakkil (r. 847–861). His most prominent
patrons included the following: the vizier and master architect of the Mihna
(the caliphal ‘‘inquisition’’ designed by
al-Ma’mun to establish the caliph’s sole right to religious leadership
of the community), Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Malik al-Zayyat, (d. 847) to whom he
dedicated the first version ofnThe Treatise of Living Creatures (Kitab al-Hayawan, an early Islamic investigation
of the ‘‘argument from design’’); the Hanafite Chief Qadi Ahmad ibn Abi Da’ud
(d. ca. 854), the dedicatee of his distinctive theory of communication (bayan), The Treatise on Clarity and
Clarification (al-Bayan wa-l-Tabyin,
a survey of Arabic rhetoric and an inquiry into the nature of language, set
against the controversial doctrine of the createdness of the Qur’an)and of an
early exercise in legal reasoning,The Treatise on Legal Verdicts, and for whose
son, Muhammad (d. 854), al-Jahiz had written some works of ethical instruction
(such asThe Treatise on the Here and the Hereafter: On Aphorisms, Managing
People and Ways of Dealing with Them); and al-Fath
ibn Khaqan, al-Mutawakkil’s vizier (d. 247/861), at whose request he revised
his work On the Virtues of the Turksfor the caliph (Turks having become a
significant component of the caliphal army). For most of his mature career,
al-Jahiz was engaged in the harmonization of the speculations of his master in
speculative theology (kalam), Ibrahim
ibn Sayyar al-Nazzam (d. between 835 and 845), and the natural philosophy (falsafa) of the Greco-Arabic translation movement in an
attempt to synthesize a theologically, religiously, emotionally, and
intellectually satisfying system of thought that remained faithful to the
tenets of the Qur’an. He died in 868 or 869 in Basra, a hemiplegic who was
crushed, according to one authority, by a pile of books. Because of their length
and difficulty, al-Jahiz’s two main works, Living Creatures andClarity and
Clarification, have not been translated, but there are translations of some of the
shorter essays and of two satirical works, the Book of Misers and the Epistle on Singing-Girls.
Further Reading
Al-Jahiz.Abu
’Uthman ibn Bahr al-Jahiz. The Book of Misers. A Translation of al-Bukhala’,
trans. R.B. Serjeant. Reading, 1997.
———.The
Epistle on Singing-Girls of Jahiz, trans. A.F.L. Beeston. Warminster, 1980.
Montgomery,
J.E. ‘‘Of Models and Amanuenses: The Remarks on theQasidain Ibn Qutayba’s Kitab
al-shi’r wa-l-shu’ara’.’’ In Islamic Reflections, Arabic Musings: Studies in
Honour of Professor Alan Jones, eds. R.G. Hoyland and P.F. Kennedy, 1–49.
Oxford, UK, 2004.
———.
‘‘Al-Jahiz’sKitab al-Bayan wa-l-Tabyin.’’ InWriting and Representation in Medieval
Islam: Muslim Horizons, ed. J. Bray. London and New York, forthcoming.
———.
‘‘Al-Jahiz.’’ InThe Dictionary of Literary Biography Volume 311: Arabic Literary
Culture, 500–925, eds. M. Cooperson and S.M. Toorawa. Columbia, SC, forthcoming.
———.
‘‘’Every Man Speaks in Accordance with his Nature and Ethical Disposition’:
Al-Jahiz, Bayan 2.175–207.’’ In Arabic Theology, Arabic Philosophy. From the
Many to the One: Essays in Celebration of Richard M. Frank, ed. J.E.
Montgomery. Leuven, forthcoming.
———.
‘‘Al-Jahiz’sKitab al-Tarbi’ wa-l-Tadwirand the Reception of GreekFalsafa.’’ In
The Libraries of the Neoplatonists, ed. C. D’Ancona. Leiden, forthcoming. Pellat,
Ch. ‘‘Al-Djahiz.’’ InThe Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition, vol. ii, 385a.
———.The Life
and Works of al-Jahiz, Translation of Selected Texts, transl. D.M. Hawke.
London, 1969.
———.
‘‘Al-Jahiz.’’ In The Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ’Abbasid Belles-Lettres,
ed. J. Ashtiany, 78–95. Cambridge, UK, 1990.
JAMI
Nur al-Din ’Abd al-Rahman Jami was born in
Jam (in Khorasan) in 1414 CE, and died in 1492 in Herat, where he had spent
much of his life as a valued dependent of the local Timurid court. He was
honored in his own lifetime as a poet, a Nakshbandi Sufi, and a prose writer. His
conscious attempt to surpass his poetic predecessors, his enormous facility as
a writer of both didactic and lyrical verse, and the fact that, with the
accession of the Shi’i Safavid dynasty to power in 1501, the cultural life of
Iran changed radically within a few years of his death, have together led to
his work being traditionally seen as the culmination of the ‘‘classic’’ period
of Persian verse.
His major work in verse is the Haft Ourang (Seven Thrones), a collection
of seven masnavis (long poems in couplets) that was written in emulation of
Nezami’s five masnavis (his Khamseh).
The best known of the seven are Yusof o
Zuleikha and Salaman o Absal; both use stories of carnal desire as
allegories for the necessity for the soul to reject the world of the flesh and aspire
to the divine. His most famous prose work, the Baharistan (The Garden in Spring), a collection of didactic tales
interspersed with gnomic verses, was written in imitation of Sa’di’sGolestan;
predictably, Jami claims his work is superior to Sa’di’s. As compared with his
predecessors’ productions, Jami’s works undoubtedly ‘‘smell of the lamp,’’ but
his immense rhetorical mastery is never in doubt and has ensured their
survival.
Further Reading
Burgel, J.C.
‘‘The Romance.’’ InPersian Literature, ed. E. Yarshater. New York, 1988.
Safa,
Zabihollah.Tarikh-e Adabiyat dar Iran (The History of Literature in Iran), 5
vols. Tehran, 1366/1987.
JAVA
Unlike the more westerly, trade-oriented
Malay lands, largely agricultural Java appears to have attracted little direct
interest from Muslim shippers until the late twelfth century CE, when its
states began to play a more assertive role in the region politically and as a corollary
to increased dealings with the southern Song dynasty of China.
Java has been the site of several major
kingdoms, reflecting its diverse terrain and three major ethnic groups: the
Sundanese in the west, the Javanese majority, and the people of the neighboring
island of Madura, many of whom live in East Java. The most famous of Java’s early
kingdoms was ruled by the Sailendra dynasty, which was active in central Java until
the middle of the ninth century and to which the great Buddhist stupa of
Borobudur is attributed. There is also evidence that this dynasty was linked to
that of Srivijaya in Sumatra. After the ejection of the Sailendras, most of the
successive rulers in the east and central plains were Saivite, including the thirteenth-century
kings of Singasari, who raided and claimed suzerainty over the ports of Sumatra and the Malay Peninsula. Singasari
collapsed as Mongol forces, sent to Java on a punitive mission by Qubilai in
late 1292, took sides with the rival court of Majapahit, which emerged
victorious in 1293 and took Singasari’s place as regional hegemon, reaching its
apogee under Rajasanagara (Hayam Wuruk) (r. 1350–1389).
Over the course of the fourteenth century, Islam
planted strong roots in the western part of the archipelago. By the fifteenth
century, it was represented in some of Java’s coastal ports, starting with
Demak, Gresik, and Jepara, where it appears to have been introduced by local
strongmen, who were recorded in the indigenous literature as being of mixed
Chinese and Javanese blood.
Writing from Malacca between 1512 and 1515,
the Portuguese apothecary Tome´ Pires observed that, although coastal Java had
been Islamicized, the major kingdom at its heart remained non-Muslim. However, there
was already a Muslim presence at this court. In addition, although Demak is
known to have been the first Muslim kingdom on Java, the first hard evidence of
Islam on the island is to be found in fourteenthcentury gravestones from near
the site of Majapahit at Trawulan and Tralaya, which suggests a Muslim presence
at court there, perhaps even among the royal family.
According to some Javanese traditions, the
Majapahit capital was sacked in 1478 by a force from Demak, with the hero of
these raids later founding his own capital at Kudus (named after Jerusalem
[alQuds]). Although the actual course of events linking the rise of Islam to
the fall of Majapahit and the foundation in its place of the Sultanate of Mataram is still unclear (1527 is the more
likely date for the Demak attack), Java certainly became a more noticeably
Muslim island over the course of the coming centuries. By the seventeenth
century, the related sultanates of Banten and Cirebon (said to have been Islamized
by a saint from the Sumatran kingdom of Pasai) had emerged and played a role in
maritime trade with the Atlantic powers. Banten in particular had excellent
access to holdings of pepper and maintained close links with the court of Aceh
in northern Sumatra. In addition, as they were in Aceh, links were cultivated with
the wider Muslim world. The Bantenese king, Pangeran Ratu (r. 1596–1651), sent a
mission to Mecca in 1638 to obtain the title ofz sultan, reigning thereafter as
Mahmud Abd al-Qadir Abu ’l-Mafakhir.
The teachings of the mystical orders
associated with the courts—particularly the Shattariyya and Qadiriyya orders—were
also fostered. The cult of ’Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani was particularly prominent, and
Javanese, Sundanese, and Malay literature contain adaptations of the stories of
his life, especially those compiled by the Yemen-born hagiographer ’Abd Allah
b. As’ad al-Yafi’i (1298–1367). Furthermore, these stories appear to have been
seminal to the very transmission of Islam. Some of his miracles are paralleled
in some of the conversion stories found in the wider region. In addition, as
G.W.J. Drewes once suggested, Sultan Mahmud Abd al-Qadir Abu ’l-Mafakhir of
Banten even appears to have chosen a regal title in 1638 that harmonized with
that of a work of al-Yafi’i (Asna al-Mafakhir fi Manaqib ’Abd al-Qadir)and
his favorite saint al-Jilani, who is still seen as the primary intercessor for
southeast Asian Sufis.
Further Reading
Jones,
Russell. ‘‘Ten Conversion Myths from Indonesia.’’ InConversion to Islam, ed.
Nehemia Levtzion, 129–58. London: Methuen.
Prapan˜ca,
Mpu. Des´awarnana (Naˆgarakrtaˆgama), ed. Stuart Robson. Leiden: KITLV Press,
1995.
Pigeaud,
Theodore G. Th., and H.J. de Graaf.Islamic States in Java, 1500–1700. The
Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1976.
Ricklefs,
M.C.A History of Modern Indonesia Since c.1200. London: Palgrave, 2001.
The Suma
Oriental of Tome´ Pires (...) and the Book of Fransisco Rodriguez (...),
Cortesa ˜o, Armando, trans. and ed., second series no. 89. London: The Hakluyt Society,
1944.
JERUSALEM
Jerusalem in medieval Arabic literature is
known as Ilya (from the Latin Aelia
Capitolina), Bayt al-Maqdis, al-Bayt
al-Muqaddas, or, simply, al-Quds.
The latter three names all derive from the pure Arabic rootsb.y.t.andq.d.s.,
meaning ‘‘home’’ and ‘‘holy’’; hence, ‘‘The Holy House.’’ The form of the
appellation, however, is an exact Arabization of the Hebrew Beyt HaMiqdash, the common Jewish
designation for the ancient Israelite at Temple Jerusalem. The particular
Hebrew locution,Beyt HaMiqdash, is not biblical, but it first appears in the
Mishnah (c. 200 CE).
The sanctity of Jerusalem predates even
ancient Israel; it was a Jebusite (and probably a pre-Jebusite) holy site, the
tribal or ethnic name of which has been lost (Genesis 14:18–20). However, as
Oleg Grabar has observed, memories can be released from the spaces they occupy,
and new memories can fill them. Associated with the great Israelite kings David
and Solomon, the Jerusalem Temple on the eastern hill of the city was destroyed
by the Romans in 70, a symbolic act that ended any semblance of Jewish
political and religious hegemony. Jerusalem would not become a national center
again until the twentieth century, but it would nevertheless play an occasional
role in the politics of nation and empire.
The city was largely destroyed and then
rebuilt under the Roman Hadrian (mid-second century), and its biblical memories
were replaced with the standard pagan imperial themes associated with Roman
monumental structures. Only after the Christianization of the city under
Constantine and his successors (fourth century onward) was Jerusalem refilled
with monotheistic sanctity. However, this sanctity was Christian rather than
Jewish, and its center of gravity moved westward to the Holy Sepulchre Church,
in which the memories of the Crucifixion and Resurrection were linked. The
eastern hill, upon which the Temple once stood, was left in ruins as a sign of
God’s abandonment of the Jews for the new dispensation of Christianity.
Not only did historical and pious memories
infuse the city, but there were also ‘‘memories’’ of the future: the eschaton
or end time, when humanity will be finally judged. Jerusalem became the
‘‘gateway to heaven,’’ and the pious made their way there in pilgrimage or
burial in hope of resurrection and eternal life. This infused the city with a
psychological quality of expectation and hope, but it also suggested that its
political control might improve one’s merit for salvation. Individuals made
their way to Jerusalem to die and be buried there, and Crusades and
counterCrusades would radically increase the number of the holy dead.
When Jerusalem was conquered by the Arabs in
637 or 638, the center of holiness returned to the Temple Mount, now called the
Sacred Precinct (Haram al-Sharif). At
this early period of Arab conquest, the religion of Islam was in its infancy,
and it is not clear how ‘‘Islamic’’ the conquest led by the forces of the second
caliph, ’Umar Ibn al-Khattab, actually was. This may account for the
ambivalence reflected by the sources regarding the sanctity of Jerusalem in
relation to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. In any case, tradition credits
’Umar with constructing a simple mosque on the Haram. On the same raised
earthworks but further to the north, where the Solomonic Temple once stood, the
Umayyad caliph ’Abd alMalik constructed the oldest surviving Islamic monumental
structure (ca. 691), the Qubbat al-Sakhra
(the Dome of the Rock). Within a few decades, he or his son Walid built the
mosque called Al-Aqsa (‘‘the distant mosque’’),
which became associated with the night journey of Muhammad s.a.w from Mecca to Jerusalem.
Unlike Christian Jerusalem, which preserved the
memory of prior religions only as archaic ruins, Islamic Jerusalem allowed for
Christians to maintain their religious monuments and shrines, and Jews were allowed
their synagogues. Only occasionally, such as during the reign of the Fatimid
Caliph Hakim during the early eleventh century, were churches and synagogues
sacked and destroyed.
Medieval Islamic Jerusalem reflected the
‘‘memories’’ of both the past and the future Day of Judgment. In these memories,
the new Dome of the Rock represents the Solomonic Temple and the gateway to heaven
of past sacrifice and future salvation. At the end time, the rock under the
dome will be the stronghold of Muslims
against al-Dajjal (the Antichrist)
and the place to which the Mahdi (the Messiah) will come in triumph to restore
justice to earth. Both Mecca and Medina will be brought to Jerusalem on the Day
of Judgment.
However, the primary memory of Islamic
Jerusalem is the isra (night journey)
of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w to Jerusalem and his mi’raj(ascension) from the al-sakhra (rock) to heaven. In heaven,
beyond the Lotus tree, he meets God and receives the wisdom that guides him and
forms the authority for his leadership and pious behavior. The Prophet’s
behaviors and aphorisms make up the sunna, and the sunna forms the most sacred
religious literature of Islam after the Qur’an. The authority for the sunna
derives from Muhammad’s infallibility, and that infallibility derives from his
journey through the gateway to Heaven in Jerusalem to meet the Creator.
Further Reading
Asali, K.J.,
ed.Jerusalem in History. Essex: Scorpion, 1989.
Canaan,
Tewfik. ‘‘Mohammedan Saints and Sanctuaries in Palestine.’’ Journal of the
Palestine Oriental Society (1927).
Levine, Lee,
ed.The Jerusalem Cathedral, vols. 2 and 3. Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institute, 1982
and 1983.
———,
ed.Jerusalem: Its Sanctity and Centrality to Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
New York: Continuum, 1999.
Al-Wasiti,
Abu Makr Muhammad b. Ahmad.Fada’il alBayt al-Muqaddas, ed. Isaac Hasson.
Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 1978
JEWS
The word Jew can be traced back to the Hebrew
Yehudi,a word that comes originally from the tribe of Judah (Yehudah), named
for the fourth son of the patriarch Jacof (Ya’aqov). After King Solomon died and
the kingdom of Judah was split into two kingdoms, the northern kingdom was
called Israel and the southern Judah. From the period of the biblical figure Ezra,
the name Israel (Yisra’el) is used in all Hebrew literature, with a few exceptions
during the time of the Maccabees. In the Christian Gospels, the Jews are recorded
as having mocked Jesus by calling him ‘‘King of Israel,’’ whereas Pilate the
Roman and his soldiers refer to him as ‘‘King of the Jews.’’ For early Christians,
the figure of Judas Iscariot was early conflated with the gospel story about
him as being linked with the devil (Luke 22:3), and there became an evil triangle
of ‘‘devil—Jew—Judas’’; the word Judaeus helped to establish the pejorative
meaning of Jewin popular usage.
The Pentateuch became sacred scripture no
later than the fifth century BCE, whereas the later works of the kings, prophets,
and other important figures were finally part of the Jewish Bible, or TaNaKH, Torah
(Pentateuch), Nevi’im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Hagiographia). By the second
century CE important civilizations of the East (Persians, Greeks, Zoroastrians,
and Romans) influenced several Jewish usages and beliefs.
From early usage in Aramaic and Persian
names, there came the Greek name Ioudaios and the Latin Judaeus. These later developed
into early English, and the word can be found from about the year 1000 C.E. in
various forms, such as Iudea, Gyu, Iuw, and Iew, which developed into Jew.
During the nineteenth century, to avoid the
unpleasant association and connotation of the word Jew as mentioned above,
among many Jewish organizations it became usual to use the terms Hebrews and
Israelites. However, these new names quickly became as pejorative as the usage
of ‘‘Jews’’ in many nineteenth-century novels and other written works. More
recently, in the twentieth century (especially during the years before the Nazi
period and more so during World War II), many millions of Jews—even thousands of those who had left
Judaism—suffered from the efforts to rid Europe and other parts of the world of
all the Jews.
Further Reading
Grabbe,
Lester L.A History of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period. London,
2004.
Peters,
F.E.The Children of Abraham: Judaism, Christianity, Islam. Princeton, 2004.
Trachtenberg,
Joshua.The Devil and the Jews: The Medieval Conception of the Jew and its
Relation to Modern Anti-semitism. Philadelphia, 1993.
JUDAH HA-LEVI
The poet and religious philosopher Judah
(Abu’lHasan) ben Samuel Halevi (c. 1075–1141) was one of the outstanding
figures among Andalusian Jewry during the first half of the twelfth century.
Hailing from Tudela or Toledo, he came to Cordoba at the invitation of the poet
Moses Ibn Ezra. Although Halevi was a practicing physician, he also engaged in
commerce and was apparently quite prosperous. His fame, however, derived from
his Hebrew verse. According to Judah al-Harizi (c. 1165–1225), Halevi was the
most versatile of Hebrew writers, a virtuoso in every genre of secular and
sacred poetry and rhymed prose. He pioneered the Hebrew girdle song (muwashshah)and also produced Hebrew
renderings of Arabic verse. The superscriptions to his poems indicate warm relationships
with other members of the Jewish elite. Much of his verse was gathered
posthumously into a diwan (collected
poems), which has survived in two recensions. Many of his liturgical compositions
are preserved in the rites of Sephardic and oriental Jewish communities.
Deeply immersed in Greco-Arabic culture,
Halevi commanded a fine Arabic prose style and was thoroughly conversant with
Islamic philosophy. Shi’i and Sufi influences have also been detected in his
writings. However, he came to repudiate the truth claims of speculative
knowledge while adopting a conservative, particularist conception of Judaism.
He expounded his views inThe Book of the
Khazar (Kitab al-Khazari),a platonic dialogue between a rabbi and a pagan
king seeking religious enlightenment. The work draws upon the etiological legend
of the conversion of the Khazar kingdom (located in southern Russia betweenthe
Black and Caspian Seas) to Jud aism during the eighth and ninth centuries. The
book’s alternate title, The Book of Argument
and Proof for the Despised Faith,aptly
expresses its apologetic character. The rabbi
argues for the intrinsic superiority of the Jewish religious tradition, the Jewish people, and the land of Israel
while rejecting the claims of other religions (Islam and Christianity), other intellectual systems (Greek and Islamic philosophy), and heresies (Karaite Judaism). Because of its engaging form and powerful, positive
message, the Book of the Khazarwas soon
translated into Hebrew by Judah Ibn Tibbon
(Provence, 1167); Sefer ha-Kuzaribecame one of the classic works of Jewish thought.
Toward the conclusion of the Khazari,the
rabbi asserts that he must leave the diaspora for the land of Israel, which is
the noblest place on earth. In fact, as an old man, Halevi himself finally
abandoned his comfortable life in
Andalusia and traveled east to the Holy Land. This journey is documented in a remarkable
series of poems that describe his longing for Zion, his planned pilgrimage, his
parting from family and friends in Andalusia, and his voyage. This final
chapter of Halevi’s life has been
illuminated by documents from the Cairo Geniza relating to his stay in Egypt
(1140–1141) before his final departure for the Holy Land. He died in August
1141, apparently after reaching his destination.
Primary Sources
Brody,
Heinrich, and Nina Salaman.Selected Poems of Jehudah Halevi. Philadelphia:
JPSA, 1924.
Halevi,
Judah.The Kuzari: An Argument for the Faith of Israel, transl. Hartwig Hirschfeld.
New York: Schocken, 1964.
Further Reading
Goitein,
S.D.A Mediterranean Society, vol. 5, 448–68. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press, 1988.
Lobel,
Diana.Between Mysticism and Philosophy: Sufi Language of Religious Experience
in Judah Ha-Levi’s Kuzari. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press,
2000.
Silman,
Yochanan.Philosopher and Prophet: Judah Halevi, the Kuzari, and the Evolution
of His Thought. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1995.
Tanenbaum,
Adena.The Contemplative Soul: Hebrew Poetry and Philosophical Theory in
Medieval Spain, 174–94. Leiden: Brill, 2002.
JUDEO-ARABIC
Since antiquity, Jewish communities have
adopted local vernaculars as well as literary languages. German and Spanish,
for example, have Jewish forms known respectively as Yiddish and Judezmo (sometimes Ladino). Written in Hebrew
characters, they possess a traditional Hebrew and Aramaic vocabulary, which varies
in size and scope according to situation and speaker/writer. Judeo-Arabic
conforms to this pattern. As far back as the seventh century CE, Jews in the
Arabian Peninsula spoke a dialect of Arabic called al-yahudiyain the hadith (tradition) literature. With the Islamic
conquests, Jews throughout the Near East, North Africa, and the Iberian
Peninsula began to acquire Arabic, the newlingua franca;by the late tenth
century, it had largely replaced Aramaic as the language of Jews in Islamic
lands. For the most part, they reserved Hebrew for sacred and secular poetry.
Judeo-Arabic was their primary language of communication and technical writing
in all disciplines, including the religious sciences (biblical exegesis, Hebrew
grammar and lexicography, homiletics, law, theology, and philosophy) as well as
astronomy and medicine. Sa’adyah’s Kitab
al-Amanat, Moses Ibn Ezra’s book on Hebrew poetics, Maimonides’ Guide, and
the great Karaite Bible commentaries were all written in Judeo-Arabic.
Judeo-Arabic is a variety of Middle Arabic, a
stage of the language that often deviates from classical usage and includes
vernacular, ‘‘neo-Arabic’’ features. The Middle Arabic corpus includes
Christian religious writings, Muslim literary works (e.g.,The Thousand and One Nights), and Jewish texts of many different types.
Aside from its Hebrew and Aramaic lexical component, Judeo-Arabic preserves all
of the typical Middle Arabic features found in Christian and Muslim texts.
These include the following: (1) the disappearance of case endings; (2) the
replacement of the ending -unawith-uin the imperfect indicative tense of verbs;
(3) the interchange of certain consonants, such assin andsad;(4) the interchange
of verbal themes, such as I for IV and vice versa; (5) the use ofmato negate
the imperfect; and (6) asyndetic syntax. Most characteristic are the numerous ‘‘pseudocorrections,’’
or failed attempts at classical usage that result in incorrect or even
nonexistent forms (e.g., akhyar, ‘‘better/best’’; Classical Arabic:khayr).
With the exception of some Karaites who
preferred to use Arabic script even for Hebrew texts, most Jews wrote Arabic in
the Hebrew alphabet, which all Jewish children learned. This loyalty to Hebrew
characters had two important consequences. First, Muslims and Christians could not
read Jewish writings of any kind unless they had been specially copied in
Arabic letters. The Hebrew alphabet, therefore, constituted a boundary between
religious communities in Islamic lands. Second, because the Jewish veneration
for the divine name precludes the intentional destruction of any text upon
which it may be written, Jews discarded all unwanted documents by placing them
in special repositories, such as the Cairo Geniza. This trove of manuscripts
contains Judeo-Arabic texts in a range of linguistic registers and in many
different genres, from theological treatises to legal documents and personal letters.
It attests to the great richness of Jewish scholarship in the lands of medieval
Islam.
Further Reading
Blau,
Joshua.The Emergence and Linguistic Background of Judaeo-Arabic. London: Oxford
University Press, 1965.
(Revised
edition, Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute, 1981.)
———.Studies
in Middle Arabic. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1988.
———.A Handbook
of Early Middle Arabic. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2002.
Fenton, P.B.
‘‘Judaeo-Arabic Literature.’’ In Religion, Learning and Science in the ’Abbasid
Period, ed. M.J.L. Young et al., 461–76. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press, 1990.
Halkin, A.S.
‘‘Judaeo-Arabic Literature.’’ InGreat Ages and Ideas of the Jewish People, ed.
L.W. Schwarz. New York, 1956.
JUHA
Juha, a pseudohistorical character, is the
most prominent protagonist of jocular prose narratives in the entire Islamic
world. The first securely datable anecdote about Juha is narrated in both al-Jahiz’s (d. ca. 255 AH/869 CE) al-Qawl fi l-Bighal (Remarks About Mules)and
hisRasa’il (Epistles). Substantial anecdotal material about Juha is available
in the large adab compilations of the tenth and eleventh centuries, such as the
works of al-Tawhidi (d. 414/1023) and al-Abi (d. 421/1030). By the eleventh
century, Juha had already been firmly established as a ‘‘focusee’’ of a cycle
of jocular prose narratives, and a booklet devoted to these narratives is
listed in Ibn al-Nadıˆm’s Fihrist (The Index;a late tenth-century Baghdad bookseller’s
bibliography of works he knew or believed to be extant). During the following
centuries, the character attracted ever more material. The only monograph
collection of his tales surviving from premodern Arabic literature, a booklet
called Irshad Man Naha ila Nawadir Juha (The Guidance of Those Who Feel Inclined
to the Stories of Juha), was compiled by Yusuf ibn al-Wakil al-Milawi in the
seventeenth century and contains a total of seventy-four tales. The modern
image of Juha was shaped by nineteenth-century print tradition. Printed
editions of Juha’s tales present an amalgam of traditional Arabic material
about him, together with tales that had originally been attributed to the
Turkish jester Nasreddin Hodja and anecdotes derived from traditional Arabic literature.
Similar to the expansion of the narrative
repertoire attributed to him, the depiction of Juha’s character has also
undergone considerable development. The traditional repertoire presents him
mostly as an adolescent with a certain preference for sexual, scatological and
otherwise ‘‘obscene’’ matters. Even so, the early anecdotes already imply some
of the more charming traits of character, such as when he buries his money in
the desert and remembers the position of a specific cloud so as to locate the
place later. These traits were elaborated by later compilers, who established
Juha in modern tradition as a naive philosopher and social critic.
Further Reading
Farraj, ’Abd
al-Sattar Ahmad.Akhbar Juha. Cairo. Marzolph, Ulrich.Nasreddin Hodscha. Munich,
1996.
Marzolph,
Ulrich, and Inge Baldauf. ‘‘Hodscha Nasreddin.’’ InEnzyklopa¨die des Ma¨rchens,
vol. 6, cols. 1127– 51. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 1990.
JURJANI, AL
Abu Bakr ’Abd al-Qahir ibn ’Abd al-Rahman ibn
Muhammad al-Jurjani (d. 1078 or 1081 CE) was born, raised and educated in
Jurjan and was known during his lifetime primarily as a grammarian. Although
his additional identities as Shaf’ite jurisconsult and Ash’arite theologian
precluded any great official recognition or support, al-Jurjani’s scholarship
was sufficiently well known for him to attract a steady flow of students and
disciples to his home town. He is best known for his two seminal works on
Arabic rhetoric, Dala’il i’Jaz al-Qur’an
(Indications of the Inimitability of the Qur’an) and Asrar alBalagha (The Mysteries of Rhetoric).
Indicationsis first and foremost a work of
stylistics, in which al-Jurjani elaborates on ideas that are implicit in the
work of earlier philologists and provides them a philosophical foundation that
is consistent with his theological views. In the centuries old debate as to
whether eloquence derives from the lafz
(wording) or thema’na(meaning), al-Jurjani champions the supremacy of meaning
and, in particular, the thinking with which it is associated. This, he claims,
is the source of excellence in discourse, and, to appreciate it, we must look
at how the meanings are connected with each other. The vehicle of these
relationships among the individual ma’ani(meanings)
is the various features of grammar, which reflect the way things are ordered or
constructed in the mind of the speaker or writer. Word order, for example,
takes on new rhetorical significance for al-Jurjani, who examines the various
possible combinations and what they imply about the intention of the speaker
and the context of
the
discourse. Al-Jurjani thus amplifies the notion
of nazm (ordering, construction), which was mentioned by earlier
grammarians and scholars of Qur’anic style such as Abu Sulayman al-Khattabi (d.
996 or 998). Rejecting the simplistic understanding of meaning that had
traditionally permitted the facile accusation of plagiarism, al-Jurjani
emphasizes the individual nature of the conception or intellectual prototype (sura) that discourse is based on.
Manipulation of the subtleties of syntax and of figurative language result in a
change in the meaning and form (sura) of the discourse. A poet who in this way
adds nuances to a hackneyed poetic conceit cannot be said to have plagiarized
another poet’s ma’na, for he has thus created a new one with its own
particularities that make it distinct from the original.
Al-Jurjani’s emphasis on the intimate
connection between the intellectual processes at the origin of discourse and
the linguistic entity itself—especially his notion
of sura (form, shape)—derives from his attempt to reconcile Mu’tazilite epistemology with
Ash’ari theological views of the Qur’an. His frequent quotations from and responses
to the work of the later Mu’tazilite theologian Abd al-Jabbar al-Asadabadi (d.
1024) provide clear indication of this interconfessional debate. Through his
emphasis on the abstract intellectual form (sura) of a particular discourse, which
in turn is reflected in the way the linguistic system is put into play, al-Jurjani
is able, when treating the text of the Qur’an, to remain faithful to the
Ash’ari concept of God’s ineffable kalam
nafsi (internal speech) as distinguished from its external expression in
sounds and letters while preserving, in good Mu’tazilite fashion, a means of
appreciating the text as text.
In similar fashion, it is al-Jurjani’s
concern with important theological issues (e.g., the debate surrounding human
agency [championed by the Mu’tazilities] versus determinism [as argued by the Ash’aris];
the debate about the attributes of God) that is at the heart of his distinction
between two types of majaz(figurative expression) - majaz ’aqli
(figurative
expression that is intellectually based) and
majaz lughawi (figurative expression that
is linguistically based). It is noteworthy thatisti’ara (metaphorical
borrowing) does not fall under the rubric of majaz for al-Jurjani. The
rationale for this is once again theological in origin: because the Qur’an, the
ultimate source of knowledge, is replete with metaphors, metaphor must be, in
every sense, haqiqa (truth). Intent
on so distinguishing between metaphorical discourse that is ontologically true
and that which is imaginative, al-Jurjani establishes a distinction between ma’ani ’aqliyya (intellectually
verifiable conceits) and ma’ani
takhyiliyya (imaginative conceits), thus also finding a way to accommodate
the kind of figures found in badi’ (new style) poetry, which is renowned for
its abundance of rhetorical features. Al-Jurjani’s two works on i’jaz greatly
influenced later generations’ discussions of stylistics and rhetoric. Both Jar
Allah al-Zamakhshari (d. 1144) and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 1209) made
extensive use of al-Jurjani’s texts, and the works of Jalal al-Din Abu ’Abd
Allah al-Qazwini (d. 1338) and Siraj alDin al-Sakkaki (d. 1229), who were
responsible for the tripartite division of rhetoric that has dominated up until
the present day, relied primarily on the works of ’Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani.
Primary Sources
Al-Jurjani,
’Abd al-Qahir.Asrar al-Balagha The Mysteries of Rhetoric), ed. Hellmut Ritter.
Istanbul: Government Press (Matba’at Wizarat al-Ma’arif), 1954.
———.Die
Geheimnisse (Asrar al-Balaga) des ’Abdalqahir al-Curcani, trans. Hellmut
Ritter. Wiesbaden: Bibliotheca Islamica, Band 19, 1959.
———.Dala’il
i’Jaz al-Qur’an (Indications of the Inimitability of the Qur’an), ed. Mahmud
Muhammad Shakir. Cairo: Maktabat al-Khanji, ca. 1984.
Further Reading
Abu Deeb,
Kamal.Al-Jurjani’s Theory of Poetic Imagery. England: Aris & Phillips,
Ltd., 1979.
Abu Zayd,
Nasr Hamid. ‘‘Mafhum al-Nazm ’Inda ’Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani: Qira’a fi Daw’
al-Uslubiyya.’’ (The Concept of ‘‘Nazm’’ according to ’Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani:
A Reading From the Perspective of Stylistics.’’)Fusul5 (1984): 11–24.
Cantarino,
Vicente.Arabic Poetics in the Golden Age. Leiden: Brill, 1975.
Larkin,
Margaret. ‘‘The Inimitability of the Qur’an: Two Perspectives,’’Religion and Literature20.1
(1988): 31–47.
———.The
Theology of Meaning: ’Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani’s Theory of Discourse. New Haven,
CT: American Oriental Society, 1995.
JUWAYNI (AH 419/1028
CE–478/1085)
An Ash’arite theologian and a Shaf ’ite
jurist, Abu’lMa’ali Rukn al-Din Abd al-Malik b. Abdullah alJuwayni was born in
Nishapur in northern Persia. Also known as Imam al-Haramayn, he received his primary
education from his father. He later studied under Al-Bayhaqi, Al-Iskafi, and
Abu Nu’aym alIsfahani, the well-known scholars of the region, and he became a
teacher (mudarris) in his twenties
after the death of his father. He had to leave Nishapur in 450/1058 and stay in
Mecca and Medina for four years as a result of the discriminations of the
Seljuki Vizier al-Kunduri against the Ash’arites. Soon after his return to his
hometown, he was appointed the head of the Nizamiyya Madrasa, a higher
educational institution built by the new grand vizier Nizam alMulk. Among his many
students at Nizamiyya were famous Islamic scholars such as Al-Ghazzali, Kiya al-Harrasi,
and Ali b. Muhammad al-Tabari. He died in Nishapur in his fifties.
Most of Juwayni’s works address theological
and legal theories; his al-Shamil, al-Irshad,
and al-Burhan are major source books in these fields. He also wrote books
about governance, dialectics, and inter religious polemics. Because he did not
necessarily follow his own school of thought in all theological and legal issues,
he represents the period of transition between the early Ash’arite theology and
the post-Ghazzalian synthesis with logic and philosophy. Contrary to the previous
Ash’arite thinker al-Baqillani, for instance, Juwayni did not hesitate to
include philosophical terminology and use logical premises in his theological arguments.
He also tends to partly accommodate the Mu’tazilite theory of ahwal (modes) with regard to the relationship between
divine essence and attributes within the Ash’arite system. Although he supports
the possibility of ta’wil (rational
interpretations) of certain verses in the Qur’an when the literal meaning of
the text raises difficulties, he considers it to be applicable only when
necessary. The sources of religious knowledge, according to Juwayni, are primarily
scriptural; therefore, God’s will and authority identify good and bad. Regarding
the question of divine justice, he rejects the Mu’tazilite theory of the
intrinsic nature of the moral act, instead defending the Ash’arite idea of
subjectivity.
Juwayni was also interested in and wrote
about Islamic political thought. Under the patronage of Nizam al-Mulk, he dealt with the principles
of governance in his book al-Ghiyasi.
According to alJuwayni, some of the qualities required for governing are essential,
whereas the others are advisory only and could be ignored depending on time or
conditions. For example, the capability for the leadership and full control of
authority are always necessary; however, characteristics such as belonging to a
certain family (i.e., Kuraysh) or being a mujtahid
(scholar) or a pious person are not to be weighted as heavily. Because the
main responsibility of the governing body is the protection and public service
of society, Juwayni thinks that, to avoid a potential problem, the head of
state and other important officials should excuse themselves from, for example,
the performance of hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca) for the sake of unity and stability.
Hajj is an individual duty, whereas public interest is a collective obligation
and should therefore be given priority.
Further Reading
Al-Juwayni,
Imam al Haramayn.A Guide to the Conclusive Proofs for the Principles of Belief:
Kitab al Irshad ila Qawati ’al-Adilla fi Usul al I’tiqad, transl. Paul Walker. Reading:
Garnet Publishing, 2001.
Allard,
Michel.Textes Apologetiques de Guwaini. Beirut: Dar al-Mashriq, 1968.
Bernand, M.
‘‘Abu-l-Ma’ali al-Guwayni: al-Giyati,’’Bulletin Critique des Annales
Islamologique3 (1986): 46–7. Dib, Abd al-Azim.Fiqh Imam al-Haramayn. Cairo: Dar
al-Wafa, 1988.
Gilliot,
Claude. ‘‘Quand la The´ologie S’Allie a L’Histoire: Triomphe et E´chec du
Rationalisme Musulman a Travers L’Oeuvre d’al-Guwayni.’’Arabica39 (1992): 241–60.
Harfush,
Ashraf.Falsafat al-Kalam Inda Imam al-Haramayn el-Juawayni. Damascus: al-Hikma
li-al-Tiba’a wa’l-Nashr, 1994.
Hourani,
George F. ‘‘Juwayni’s Criticisms of Mu’tazilite Ethics.’’The Muslim World65/3
(1975): 161–73.
Jah, Omar.
‘‘Preliminary Remarks on De Facto Government and the Problem of its Legitimacy:
Imam alJuwayni’s Theory of al-Shawka.’’ al-Shajarah 6/2 (2001): 229–51.
Nagel,
Tilman. ‘‘Al-Guwaini’s Kitab al-Burhan un die Theologische Begrundung der
Scharia.’’ InActas del XII. Congreso de l’Union Europeenne des Arabisants et Islamisants,
647–56. Madrid: UEAI, 1986.
Saflo, Mohammad
Moslem Adel.al-Juwayni’s Thought and Methodology with a Translation and
Commentary on Luma’ al-Adillah. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz, 2000.
KABBALA
Derived from the rootqbl,which is a cognate
to the Arabic, the termqabbaˆla ˆh(reception, initiation) designates the Jewish
esoteric tradition, but it is not synonymous with all of Jewish mysticism. It
is specifically based on the system of the ten
sefırot (powers) through which the Divine Being progressively manifests
itself in the existential realm. There existed pre Qabbalistic forms of Jewish
esotericism, some of which like many of the later major developments of Qabbalah itself flourished in an Islamic
environment. Several points of contact and similarity (not only external) exist
between Islamic mysticism and Qabbalah, although they are far from being
variations of an identical doctrine, as early comparatists suggested. The ten
sefırot of the Qabbalistic system have no immediate equivalent in Sufism.
Despite their independent developments, significant parallels exist between
them. Certain Qabbalists distinguish three levels of the sefirotic world: the
highest and most recondite aspect of the Divinity is called keter (crown); the intermediate level
extends until the lowest sefırah and is called malkhuth (kingship), which is the interface (much like the Sufi
notion of barzakh) between the
metaphysical and the lowest level, which is the phenomenal world. These three
levels roughly correspond with the Sufi designations of‘alam al-jabarut, ‘alam al-malakut, and‘alam al-mulk. Some scholars assign
a post-Islamic date to the two great classics of Qabbalistic literature, the Book of Creation (Sefer Yesirah) and theBook
of Splendor (Sefer ha-Bahir).
The Provenc¸al Qabbalists and even the
Ashkenazi pietists saw as their spiritual forebears the sages of the Ge’onic
period in Baghdad, whose mystical speculations form the ancient strata of
Qabbalistic literature. Their early writings, such as the contemplation of the
Heavenly chariot (O`oˆfey ha-Merkabah),
bear a striking resemblance to the O `ufıˆ accounts of spiritual ascension,
such as that of al-Bistamıˆ.Sufis also see Baghdad as their spiritual cradle,
and it is there that Sufism’s formative period evolved in the shadow of the
great Eastern wellsprings of Jewish spirituality. Although recognized in early
studies of comparative religion, the connections between Jewish and Islamic
mysticism in Spain are still unclear. Both were imbued with prophetic and
messianic aspirations, which were later transported to Egypt, a land where the
two mysticisms developed into institutionalized brotherhoods. R. Abraham
Maimonides’ (d. 1237 CE) attempt to legitimize his Sufi-type Jewish pietism
parallels Sufism’s efforts to shed itself of the suspicion of heresy by
espousing strictly orthodox norms, as exemplified in the works of al-Ghazzaˆlı
ˆ(d. 1111).
Just as Sufism integrated philosophical
elements from the Neoplatonist and Aristotelian systems, so too the thirteenth-
and fourteenth-century Spanish Qabbalists in particular undertook to reconcile
the doctrines of Qabbalah and philosophy. Some, such as Judah Ibn Malka and
Joseph Ibn Waqaˆr, composed their esoteric writings in Arabic. The ‘‘science of
letters’’ plays a central role in the speculative and contemplative methods of many
Sufis, such as atTustarıˆ and Ibn ‘Arabıˆ (d. 1240), just as its Hebrew equivalent
permeated the works of Qabbalists, such as R. Abraham Abuˆ l-’Afı ˆyah (d. ca.
1291). Indeed, the latter’s ‘‘balance of letters’’ and his meditative technique
known as hazkarah recall both by
their names and methods the doctrine of Jaˆbir ibn Hazyyan and the Sufi
dhikr ritual. The speculative and cosmological system embodied in
Muhyıd-Dın Ibn ‘Arabıˆ’s Mekkan Revelations (al-Futuhat
al-Makkiya) completely revolutionized Islamic mysticism, as did the teachings
of R. Isaac Lurya (d. 1574), which reached maturity in the Muslim East. Just as
all previous Sufi theory was reinterpreted through the prism of Ibn ‘Arabı ˆ’s system, so too in Judaism was
the Spanish Qabbalah; even its crowning work, the Zoˆhar, was reconstructed in
the light of Luryanism.
Analogies can also be observed in the
literary domain. The listing and clarification of is tilahat (technical terms) used by Sufis are essential components of
their manuals, as are the technical lexicons (kinnuyım) that are found in Qabbalistic textbooks. The formation
of Sufi brotherhoods around their shaykhs affords yet again an instructive
analogy to the various Qabbalistic groups centered around the charismatic saddıq.
Finally, the modern politicization of Sufi
fraternities and the involvement of their spiritual leaders in the public areas
of politics and academia (e.g., the Khalwatis in Egypt) parallels the
activities in prewar Poland and contemporary Israel of Hasidic dynasties, whose
ranks have furnished not a few public figures and academic scholars. The most
significant influences of Sufism on the development of the Qabbala came in the
period of the latter’s expansion at the time of Isaac Lurya, who lived in
Safed. Safed was a center of Muslim mysticism, and several practices were
adopted by the Qabbalists, such as the
visitation of tombs. Influence was felt too in the musical domain, where Qabbalists
and Sufis often shared the same melodies and developed spiritual concerts known
as baqashhshot that were based on the
structure of the Sufi samas. At the time of the pseudo-messiah, Sabbatay Zebi, close
relations were established between the Bekatshis and his disciples, some of whom, as doenme
(converts), became Mevlevi shaykhs.
Further Reading
Cohen, G.
‘‘The Soteriology of Abraham Maimuni.’’Proceedings of the American Academy for
Jewish Research35 (1967): 75–98; 36 (1968): 33–56.
Fenton, P.B.
‘‘Some Judaeo-Arabic Fragments by Rabbi Abraham he-Hasid, the Jewish Sufıˆ.’’
Journal of Semitic Studies26 (1981): 47–72.
———.The
Treatise of the Pool, al-Maqaˆla al-I ˆawdiyya by ’Obadyah Maimonides. London,
1981.
———. ‘‘The
Literary Legacy of David II Maimuni.’’Jewish Quarterly Review 74 (1984): 1–56.
———.Deux
Traite´s de Mystique Juive. Lagrasse, 1987.
———. ‘‘La
Hitboˆdeduˆt Chez les Premiers Qabbalistes d’Orient et Chez les Soufis.’’ In
Priere, Mystique et Judaı¨sme, ed. R. Goetschel, 133–58. Paris, 1987.
———.
‘‘Shabbatay Sebi and the Muslim Mystic Muhammad an-Niyaˆzi.’’ Approaches to
Judaism in Medieval Times3 (1988): 81–88.
Goitein,
S.D. ‘‘A Jewish Addict to Sufism in the Time of Nagid David II Maimonides.’’Jewish
Quarterly Review 44 (1953–1954): 37–49.
———. ‘‘A
Treatise in Defence of the Pietists.’’Journal of Jewish Studies16 (1965):
105–14.
———.
‘‘Abraham Maimonides and his Pietist Circle.’’ In Jewish Medieval and
Renaissance Studies, ed. A. Altmann, 145–64. Cambridge, Mass, 1967.
Goldziher,
I. ‘‘Ibn Hud, the Muhammadan Mystic, and the Jews of Damascus.’’Jewish
Quarterly Review6 (1893): 218–20.
Idel, M.
Abraham Abulafia and the Mystical Experience. New York, 1988.
Maimonides,
David.Al-Murshid ila t-Tafarrud, ed. P.B. Fenton. Jerusalem,1987.
Rosenblatt,
S., ed.The High Ways to Perfection of Abraham Maimonides. New York and Baltimore,
1927–1938.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar