HISTORY OF TABARI VOLUME 1 PART 8

HISTORY OF TABARI

VOLUME 1

General Introduction

Translator's Foreword

 

The Life and Works of al-Tabari

A Remark on the Sources

His Early Life (lanjutan)

 Irshad, VI, 447,1.11-448,1.7, ed. Rifa'i, XVIII, 73,1.8-74,1. 10, describes Latif as follows:

  His book entitled Kitab Latif al-qawl fi ahkam shara'i' al-Islam. It is the sum total of his legal school and is relied upon by all its followers. It is among the most valuable of his own books and those of other jurists as well, because it is the best and most instructive of any textbook of a legal school. God willing, this will be obvious to everybody who reads it carefully.

  Abu Bakr b. Ramik [394. Ibn Ramik remains to be identified] used to say: No better book on a legal school has ever been produced than the Latif of Abu Ja'far on his legal school.

  In the beginning of the work, Tabari much apologized for its brevity. The books of Latif exceed those of Ikhtilaf by (!) three, namely, Kitab al-Libas "on clothing," Kitab Ummahat al-awlad "on slave girls giving birth to children by their masters," and Kitab al-Shurb "on drink." [395 It is understandable that $afadi , Wafi, 286, f., thought of independent treatises] Latif is one of the very best books. Tabari is unique with respect to it. Nobody should think that by calling it al-Latif (" slim" or "subtle"), he meant to imply that it was of small size and its content of light weight. He wished the title to be understood as referring to the subtlety of the ideas expressed in it and the numerous critical discussions (nazar) and indications of reasons (for points of law) it contains . It is about 2,500 folios . It includes a good book on shurut (document forms ) entitled Amthilat al-'udtil from Latif [396. See above, under Amthilat al-'udul. Hapi Khalifah, ed. Yaltkaya, II, 1046, refers to Tabari's "exhaustive treatment of shurut in a book according to the legal principles of al-Shaft i," which was "plagiarized " by Abu ja'far al-Tahiwi ( see Sezgin, GAS, I, 441) when he wrote on the subject. Al-Tahiwi outlived Tabari by only a few years. Wakin, Documents, 23, n. 6, doubts the correctness of Hajji Khalifah's statement . It may be noted that Ibn Kimil also wrote on shurut (see Ibn al-Nadim, Fihrist, 32,1. 14). He would seem to be a more likely candidate for dependence on Tabari . It was, of course , a common topic]. The work has a risalah in which there are discussed the principles of jurisprudence, consensus (ijma'), traditions going back to only one transmitter (ahad) [397. See Tahdhib, Musnad Ibn 'Abbas, 770],marasil traditions [398. See above, n. 358.],   abrogation as they affect the legal situation, and traditions (akhbar) and commands and prohibitions which are summary and require explanation (mujmal) and which are interpreted (mufassar), the actions of the messengers, ( passages with) general and specific (application, al-khusus wa-al-'umum), and independent judgment, the invalidity of expressing unsupported legal opinions (istihsin), and other debated matters.

  Some information on Latif is provided by cross-references inother works of Tabari. It is, however, not always clear which section of Latif is precisely aimed at. All the references in Ikhtilaf (ed. Kern, II, 29, 79, 83, 90 f., 103, 115) concern.certain aspects of kafalah "surety bond, bail." This, however, need not mean that they all go back to the same book of Latif. The discussion of surety bond in cases of contractual manumission (mukatabah, ed. Kern, II, 79, 83) may have had its place in that context. In fact, a Kitab al-Rahn "On surety deposits" and a Kitab al-Ghusub (?) "On laws concerning robbery/rape by force" (ed. Kern, II, 103, 115) are indicated as sources in connection with problems of kafalah [399. See above, n. 360.]. he situation with regard to the remaining citations is more ambiguous.

  Tafsir often refers to the introductory risalah of Latif for problems of the general and specific (al-khusus wa-al-'umum) [400. Tafsir, 1, 276, 11. 24 f., ad Qur. 2:69, expressly refers to the subject of al-'umum wa-al-khusus. Further references in Tafsir, 1, 404,1.4. ad Qur. 2:116, II, 269, 1. 1o, ad Qur. 2:228, V, 7, 1. 16, ad Qur. 4:24.],abrogation (al-nasikh wa-al-mansukh) [401. See Tat sir, II, 222, 1. t5, ad Qur. 2:221,111,12,1.14, adQur. 2:256 possibly referring to al-'umtim wa-al-khu$u$j, VI, 159, 1. 19, ad Qur. 5:142, VIII, 79, 1. t1, ad Qur. 6:159. The passage Tafsir, VII, 200,1.15, ad Qur. 75:22 f., referring to the beatific vision, may also have to do with abrogation . Discussions of abrogation, such as, for instance, Tafsir, IX, 135, 1. 17, ad Qur. 8:16, or X, 58, I. 5, ad Qur. 9:6, are quite likely to belong to the introductory risalah, even though they occur unassigned.], command and prohibition (al-amr wa - al-nahy) [402. See Tafsir, X, 29J. 27, ad Qur. 8:66, XVIII, 99,1. 15, ad Qur. 24:33 Idealing with contractual manumission) . A connection with a1-'umum wa-al-khusus may

exist in Tafsir, XV, 59, 1. 21, ad Qur. 17:33],  and , possibly, consensus (ijma') [403. See Tafsir, II, 31, 11. 1 f ., ad Qur. 2:158] and analogical reasoning (qiyas)[ 404. See Tafsir, VIII, 16, 1. 7, ad Qur. 6:121 , listed in the following paragraph]. The reference in Tahdhib, Musnad Ibn 'Abbas, II, 770, concerns the permissibility of acting on the basis of a tradition transmitted from a single authority (see above, n. 397) and thus goes back to the risalah.

  References to other parts of Lati f are usually more difficult to assign : Tafsir, I, 37,11. 13 f., on the "seven verses" of the first surah and the inclusion of the basmalah in the count (possibly from the risalah ?), II, 252, 1. 17, ad Qur. 2:226, on oaths (or on intercourse), II, 264, 11. 11 f., 289, 1. 11, ad Qur. 2:228 and 229, on divorce, (II, 352,1. 16, ad Qur. 2:238, on prayer, to be dealt with in the planned larger work, above, n. 3901, V, 134, 1. 13, ad Qur. 4:94, on blood money, VI, 44, 1. 16, ad Qur. 5:3, on the meat of dead animals, VII, 28,1.31, ad Qur. 5:9 5, on hunting (in the Sacred Territory), VIII, 16, 1. 7, ad Qur. 6:121, on the meat of properly slaughtered animals (see above, n. 404), XIV, 93, 1. 8, ad Qur. 16:67, on intoxication, thus probably from Kitab al-Shurb, and XVIII, 68, 1. 12., ad Qur. 24:9, mentioning bib al-li'an [405. See E12, V, 730-2, s.v. 11'an.] the chapter on the li'dn40s formula of divorce."

[Al-Libas "On clothing": See LatifJ

[Al-Mahadir wa-al-sijillat "On records and documents": See Basit]

[Al-Manasik "On the pilgrimage ritual": See Adab al-mandsik]

[Maratib al-'ulama' "On the classification of scholars": See Basit]

Al-Mujaz fi al-usul "A concise treatment of the (legal) principles"

Irshad, VI, 453, 1. 3, ed. Rifai, XVIII, 81, 11. 5 f.:

  Kitab al-Mujaz fi al-usul. He began it with a treatise on  moral behavior ( risalat al -akhlaq), but then discontinued (lecturing on it).

  The title is also listed in safadi, Wafi, II, 286, 11. 6 f . We do not know whether Tabari stopped work on it because of old age or because he had other projects to which he gave priority. See also above, al-Adar (?) fi al-usul.

  Mukhtasar al-fara'id "A short work on the religious duties"

  No more than the title is known about this presumptive monograph mentioned in Irshad, VI, 453,11. 1 f., ed. Rifa 9, XVIII , 81,11. 3 f.

  [Mukhtasar Manasik al-hajj "A short work ( abridgment of the work ?) on the ritual of the pilgrimage": See Addb al-Manasik]

  [Mukhtasar Ta'rikh ... "The short work on the history of...": See Ta'rikh ]

  [Musnad Ibn 'Abbas "The Prophetical traditions transmitted by Ibn 'Abbas": See Tahdhib]

  [Al-Musnad al-mukharraj "The Prophetical traditions made public".

  Ibn 'Asakir mentions Tahdhib but also refers in another place (Ibn 'Asakir, LXXXII) to this title and describes the work as "unfinished and containing all the traditions, sound or unsound , transmitted by the Companions on the authority of the Messenger of God." It is, however, reasonable to assume that the work is identical with Tahdhib, and the title derives from another bibliographical tradition.]

  [Al-Mustarshid "The seeker of guidance"

  Ibn al-Nadim , Fihrist, 2 35, 1. 4, has this title among the works of Tabari . However, as discovered by Goldziher, "Die literarische Thatigkeit," 359, Tusi, Fihrist, 187, states that the author of  Mustarshid was, in fact , not the historian but a certain Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. Jarir b. Rustam al-Tabari [406. See above, 13.].

  Sezgin, GAS, I, 540, lists Kitab al-Mustarshid on the imamate of 'Ali b. Abi Talib ra as existing in manuscripts and having been printed in al-Najaf (not available to me). He further lists as works of the same Ibn Rustam two more titles, Dala'il al-imamah and Bisharat al-Murtada. According to Sezgin, the author of all three works probably died in the first quarter of the fourth/tenth century. However, the published text of  Dala'il al-imamah dealing with the twelve imams (al-Najaf, 1369/1949) cites al-Mu'afa among its authorities. This precludes a composition of the work in its present form before the end of the century at the earliest. On the other hand, the text also refers to its supposed author (?)  Abu Ja'far as having, among his authorities, Sufyan b. Waki' (d. 247/861) [407. See below, translation, n. 66] - his father, an isnad much used by Tabari. Our admittedly defective knowledge of Dala'ii al-imamah suggests that it was a compilation of post-Tabarian date.

  The situation with respect to Bisharat al-Mustafa li-Shi'at alMurtada is equally uncertain. The title was listed erroneously by Brockelmann among Tabari's works (see GAL, Suppi. I, 218, no. 7). Modern scholars ascribe its authorship to various unknown individuals. In the edition al-Najaf, 13z83/1963, the name of Muhammad b. Abi al-Qasim b. Muhammad b. 'Ali is found. Ibrahim, in the introduction to his Tabari edition (ed. Cairo, I,20) (see also Hufi, 253) refers to al-Dhari'ah ila musannafat alShi ah, III, 117, for the information that the author' s name was Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. 'All b. Muslim al-Tabari al-Amuli. Agha Buzurg al-Tihrani, Tabaqat a'lam al-Shi ah, 242, names Muhammad b. al-Qasim b. Muhammad b. 'Ali 'Imad al-din alTabari al-Amuli. Only one thing is clear: Tabari had nothing to do with the work.

  Reference to the present title, al-Mustarshid fi al-imamah, wasalso made by Najashi, Rijal, 266. Najashi informs us that he received the Mustarshid, as well as other works by Ibn Rustam, through Ahmad b. 'Ali b. Nuh-al-Hasan b. Hamzah al-Tabari, who died in 358/968[9] [408. See Najashi, Rifal, 48. Ahmad b. All b. Nuh is mentioned in Rijal, 63, but without a date.]. This isnad would seem to confirm that Mustarshid was, in fact, written early in the fourth/tenth century. Ibn al-Nadim might have seen the work and, perhaps, considered it a work of Tabari, provided he had not read it or had mixed up his notes [409.Old uncertainty as to the authenticity of the one or other title ascribed to Tabari will come up in connection with Ramy, below].

  See, further, the discussion of al-Radd 'ala al-Hurqusiyyah, below.)

[Fi al-Qira'at "On Qur' an readings ": See Fasl]

[Al Qit 'an "The two sections (of History, dealing with the dynasties of the Umayyads and 'Abbasids) ": See Ta'rikh ]

Fi al-Qiyas "On analogical reasoning"

  This is not a title but a description of the contents of a work on the principle of analogical reasoning which Tabari thought of writing but never did. See Irshdd, VI, 453,11.4-8, ed. Rifa'i , XVIII, 8i, 11. 7-13:

  He wanted to produce a book on analogical reasoning but did not do it. Abu al-Qasim al-Husayn b. Hubaysh, the copyist/bookseller (al-warraq), said : Abu ja'far had asked me to collect for him scholarly works on analogical reasoning, and I collected some thirty books. They remained with him for a short while. As is known, he then discontinued lecturing on traditions, several months before his death. When he returned the books to me, I found red markings he had made in them. [410. See above, n. 200.]

  Al-Radd 'ala Al al-asfar "A refutation of the one with the tomes [?] [411.Asfar here means presumably "books," and not " travels ". It is not clear whether this is an allusion to donkeys carrying books (Qur. 62:5), or what else may be behind it, except that it obviously refers to Dawud, perhaps, as the author of the many fascicles mentioned(?)].

  

  This is the work which Tabari wrote against the founder of the Zahirite school, Dawud b. 'Ali al-ISbahani (see above, 68 f.). The only circumstantial report available is that preserved in Irshad, VI, 450,1. r6-452,1. 11, ed. Rifa'i, XVIII, 78,1. i-8o,1. 9 [412. The title is mentioned in $afadi , Wafi, II, 286, 1. 5.]. It goes back, in part or in its entirety, to Ibn Kamil:

  His book entitled al-Radd 'ala dhi al-asfar, his refutation of Dawud b. 'All al-Isbahani. The reason why he wrote this book was as follows: Abu ja'far had been in close contact with Dawud b. 'Ali for a while and had written down many of his books. In his inheritance, we found eighty fascicles from his books in his [413. See above, n. 259. I understand the pronoun to refer to Tabari, here and in connection with "his inheritance."] fine hand. (This material) included the problem debated between Dawud b. 'Ali and the Mu'tazilite Abu Mujalid al-I)arir in Wasil on going out to alMuwaffaq when there was dissension about the createdness of the Qur'an [hardly meant . Probably, on one of his frequent stays in Wasit, al-Muwaffaq convoked a disputation on the subject].

  Dawud b. 'Ali possessed some knowledge of speculative theology (nazar), traditions, disagreement (among jurists?), and (religious) laws (?, sunan) but not very much. He was eloquent and well-spoken and in full control of himself. He had colleagues and students who were strongly inclined to levity and developed a certain approach to employ in discussions (nazar), so as to cut off their adversaries. It sometimes happened that Dawud b. 'Ali debated (with someone about) definite proofs for a legal problem. When he saw that (his adversary) [415. According to a footnote in Rifa ' i's edition, the meaning would be: " saw himself deficient." It seems , however, that Dawud was the one who cleverly did the switching to another subject when he noticed that his adversary had a weakness in it] was deficient in traditions, he would steer (the discussion) to it. Or, when he would discuss traditions with him, he would steer him to jurisprudence. Or, when he saw that he was (not?) deficient in both (traditions and jurisprudence, he would steer him) to logical disputation (jadal) [416. The science of jadal is Aristotle's topics]. He himself was deficient in grammar and lexicography, even though he had some acquaintance with these subjects. Abu Ja'far, on the other hand, was well informed in every discipline that came up in a debate. To his dying days, he disliked and refrained from behavior that was unbecoming for scholars. He preferred seriousness under all circumstances.

  One day, a problem was discussed by Dawud b. 'Ali with Abu Ja'far, and the discussion stopped Dawud b. 'Ali (short, so that he was unable to make a retort). His colleagues and students were chagrined, and one of them made acerbic remarks to Abu Ja'far. The latter left the meeting and produced the book under discussion. He made public successive portions of it, amounting eventually to a fragment of about one hundred folios. He started with an invocation (khutbah), which, however, he did not lecture on (min Qhayr imla'). It is among the best and most eloquent of Abu Ja'far's works, containing  [417. The text as printed defies grammar and sense and requires correction.].

  After the death of Dawud b. All, he discontinued (working and lecturing on) the subject. Only as much of the work as was written down by his outstanding (muqaddamun) colleagues and students got into the hands of his [418. Possibly, the pronoun refers to (Abu Bakr b.) Dawud b. 'A1i's people, but it seems rather Tabari who is meant] colleagues and students, and (the material) was not passed on (to others). Among those who wrote down this book were Abu Ishaq b. al-Fadl b. Hayyan al-Hulwani - Abu Bakr b. Kamil said that we studied (sami'nah) it with him -, Abu al-Tayyib al-Jurjani, Abu 'Ali al-Hasan b. al-Husayn al-Sawwaf [419. With the exception of al-Sawwaf ( se above, n. 237, the individuals mentioned still await identification.],  Abu al-Fadl al-'Abbas b. Muhammad (b.?) al-Muhassin, and others. Al-Ru'asi, one of Dawud b. 'All's outstanding colleagues, said that Dawud forbade that man who had made the (offensive) remarks to Abu Ja'far to participate in discussions for one year as a punishment for the incident he had caused.

  Then, Dawud b. 'Ali's son Muhammad undertook to respond to Abu Ja'far's refutation of his father. He did so in a particularly harsh manner with respect to three problems and took to slandering Abu Ja'far. This was the book of his addressed to the refutation of Abu Ja'far b. jarir.

  Abu al-Hasan b. al-Mughallis [420. See above, n. 199.] said: Abu Bakr (Muhammad) b. Dawud b. 'Ali said to me: Abu Ja'far's attack on my father was always on my mind. When I came one day to Abu Bakr b. Abi Hamid [421. Unidentified],  Abu Ja'far was there, and Abu Bakr b. Abi Hamid said to him: This is Abu Bakr Muhammad b. Dawud b. 'Ali al-Isbahani. Being aware of my position (in scholarship), Abu Ja'far welcomed me cordially when he saw me. He started to heap praise upon my father and complimented me in a manner that completely disarmed me.

(Al-Radd 'ala al-Hurqusiyyah "A refutation of the Hurqusiyyah" )

  This title was brought to the attention of scholars by L. Massignon in a particularly impenetrable footnote of his immortal Passion [422. See Massignon , Passion2, III, 154, n. 5, English trans ., III, 142 n. 140.]. Massignon' s source appears to have been Tabsir at al-'awamm of Abu Turab Murtada b. al-Da'i [423. See Brockelmann, GAL, Suppl. I, 711.], which unfortunately has remained inaccessible to me. Without further specifying his sources, Massignon assumed that Hurqusiyyah referred to a certain tribal group, Zuhayr b. I;lurqus, as ancestors of Ibn Hanbal. According to Sezgin, GAS, I, 328, n. 2, the prominent early Kharijite Hurqus b. Zuhayr [424. See E12, 119, 582 f., s. V.] might be meant . Brockelmann, GAL, Suppl. I, 218, furthered the discussion by adducing Najashi, Rijal [425. See Najashi, Rijal, 225 ( m 246 in the later edition cited by Sezgin, 1, 328, n.2).]. There, it is stated expressly that a non-Shi'ah ('ammi) Abu ja'far Muhammad b. jarir al-Tabari was the author of al-Radd 'ala a1-hurqusiyyah, in which he mentioned the recensions (of the reports) on the Day of the Pool I. Ghadir Khumm). Al-Najashi's authorities were Abu Ishaq Ibrahim b. Makhlad (al-Baqarji) – his father (Makhlad b. Ja'far). Both belonged, it seems, to Tabari's circle (see above, n. 252). Thus, the work could indeed have been by Tabari. It may, however, be noted that Makhlad became "confused" in his later years. His son persuaded him to claim (being an authorized transmitter of?) a number of works, among them Tabari's History, while, in reality, he just relied upon purchased copies. This casts doubt also on his reliability with respect to alRadd 'ald a1-Hurqusiyyah but not sufficiently so as to justify rejecting the attribution to Tabari out of hand.

  The connection with Ghadir Khumm suggests that I.Iurqusiyyah could have served as a nickname for Abu Bakr b. Abi Dawud al-Sijistani (above, nn. 229 and, especially, 326), but no evidence for this assumption is available . For the time being, it is not implausible to suggest that al-Radd 'ala a1-Hurqusiyyah was part of Fada'il. J

  Fi al-Radd 'ala Ibn 'Abd al-Hakam 'ala Malik " A refutation of Ibn 'Abd al- Hakam('s statement on certain views of) Malik [426. The member of the Ibn 'Abd al -Hakam family meant here is no doubt Muhammad b. 'Abdallah ( above, n. 1o4)]

   Irshad, VI, 453, 11. z f., ed. Rifa'i, XVIII, 55, 11. 3-5, lists this title (which, however, was not a real title), adding that the work "did not reach his students and colleagues." Irshad, VI, 434, 11. i-4, ed. Rifa'i, XVIII, 5 5, 11. 1-4, explains further, apparently relying on Ibn Kamil:

  We have heard that he was asked in al-Fustat to refute Malik on some point, and he did so in connection with something that Ibn 'Abd al-Hakam had discussed. (Tabari's) work has not come into our hands. Perhaps it was one of the things that the adversaries (al-khusum) prevented from being circulated (nashr).

   It is not quite clear who the "adversaries" were and why there was opposition to the work. The Malikites may have objected to it, even though Ibn'Abd al-Hakam would not have attacked Malik in an unseemly manner, and Tabari himself is unlikely to have attacked Ibn 'Abd al-Hakam (but may have been critical of Malik) [427. The Hanbalites are certainly not meant in this context.].

  Since the work originated during Tabari's stay in Egypt and presumably was made public at the time, it can claim to be his earliest publication of which we have notice, seeing that the earliest publication dates of Latif and Ikhtilaf cannot be precisely established.

(A1-Ramy bi-al-nushsab "On arrow shooting"

  Irshad, VI, 453,11.8-11, ed. Rifa'i, XVIII, 81, 11. 14-18, declared the work to be supposititious:

  'Abd al-'Aziz b. Muhammad said: A small book on arrow shooting has come into my possession. I know of nobody who studied it with him, nor of anybody to record and confirm his authorship or attribute it to him. I am afraid that it is wrongly ascribed to him.

  If it was a legal treatise, Tabari might have been the author, since the subject of shooting was of great concern to jurists [428. Among others, Muhammad b. 'Abdallah b. 'Abd al- Hakam wrote a book on (horse) racing and shooting; see Ibn Farhun , Dibnj, 232. Tabari himself paidattention to the prowess in archery of some early Muslims , see Dhayl, III, 2301, 2312, 2362, ed. Cairo, XI, 497, Sob, 543•] However, Tabari's biographer 'Abd al-'Aziz b. Muhammad knew the contents of the work, and we do not. Thus, we ought to accept his opinion. If it was a technical treatise on archery, Tabari's authorship is indeed most unlikely. The assumption of a confusion with Kitab al-Wadiri fi al-ramy bi-al-nushshab by a certain 'Abd al-Rahman b. Ahmad al-Tabari seems farfetched, even if this author did not live in the seventh/thirteenth century but in or before the historian's time [429. See Brockelmann , GAL2, 1,149, no. 8, Suppl . I, 906 . The work is preserved in a number of manuscripts . It was quoted extensively by Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, Furusiyyah , tuo ff .; its authorities , as quoted in Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah , cannot easily be identified for dating purposes.].

[Salat al-khawf "The prayer of fear ": See Basit ]

saris al-sunnah "The essence of orthodox Muslim belief"

  The work was also known as Tabari's "Creed" (al-'Aqidah, see above, 85) and, it seems mistakenly , as Sharb al-sunnah " Explanation of ...." Ibn 'Asakir, LXXXII, refers to it as " a slender (latif) book, in which Tabari explained his (theological) views (madhhabahu) and religious theory and practice in the service of God ( wa-ma yadinu Allaha bihi) [430. Allaha" also appears in the manuscript used for the edition of Sarih, text, 199, n . i. Irshad may have omitted it for simplification. Note further that Dhahabi, Nubala', XIV, 274, 1. 4; reads Shari al-sunnah following Ibn ' Asi kir. $afadi, Waft, 11, 286, 1. 6, has $arib al-sunnah.] .430 Irshad, VI, 452, 11. 14-16, ed.

  Rifa 'i, XVIII, 80, 11. 13 - 15, echoes this description with only slight differences : " Also, his treatise known as Kitab Sarih al- sunnah in several folios . He mentioned in it his ( theological ) views, religious theory and practice, and beliefs."

  See Brockelmann, GAL, Suppl. I, 218, no. 6, and Sezgin, GAS, I, 328, nos . 6 and 8 . Sarih was edited on the basis of an Istanbul manuscript and translated by D. Sourdel ( see Bibliography, under Sarih).

[Al-Salah "On prayer": See Basit]

[Al-Sariqah "On theft": See Latif]

Sharh al-sunnah " An explanation of orthodox Muslim belief": See .aril J

  [ Al-Shudhur  is a title listed by Hajji Khalifah , ed. Yaltkaya, 1429, who ascribed it to the historian whom he calls a Hanbalite (!), no doubt a meaningless misattribution ]

[Al-Shurb "On drink": See Latif ]

(Al-Shurut "On document forms ": See Basit and Latif ( above, n. 3961)

  Tabsir uli al-nuha wa-ma'dlim al-hudd "An instruction for the intelligent and directions toward right guidance"

  This is the title as it appears in the Escorial manuscript, 1514, fols. 81a-I04b. Elsewhere, it is plain Tabsir, at times enlarged with fI usul al- din or ft ma'alim al-din.

  Ibn 'Asakir, LXXX, quotes al-Farghani:

  Also completed is his book entitled al-Tabsfr, a treatise (risalah) addressed to the inhabitants of Amul in Tabaristan. He comments in it on the principles of the religion of Islam (usul al-din), which he has been following (yataqallad). [431. Yataqallad is doing the opposite of what innovators do. Dhahabi, Nubala', XIV, 273, 11-14 f., has a shortened version of Ibn'Asikir . Both $afadi, Waft, II, 286, 1. 7, and Subki, Tabaqat, III, 121, 1. 11, list the title of the work as Kitab al-Tabsir fi usul al-din]

  Irshad, VI, 452, 11. 10-14, ed. Rifa'i, XVIII, 8o, 11. 10-13, shows an obviously incorrect al-Bair:

  Among Abu ja'far's writings is his treatise entitled al-Basic fi ma'dlim al-din addressed to the people of Tabaristan concerning the disagreement that had arisen among them on (matters such as the identity or non-identity of) name and thing named (al-ism wa-al-musamma) [432. This intensively discussed problem of speculative theology was considered a sort of touchstone showing whether religious scholars had the correct attitude. They were strongly warned against paying attention to it. Tabari's Egyptian authority Yunus b. 'Abd al-A15, for instance, is supposed to have said: "I heard alShafi i say: When you hear someone say that the name is different from the thing named or the name is identical with the thing named , testify against him (and say) that he is a Mutakallim and has no religion ...." See Subki, Tabaqat, II, 174. Tabari himself refers to the ism-musamma problem in the introduction of Tabsir (fol. 82b) among the abominable indications of unbelief current at the time in Tabaristan. See also Sarih, text, 198, trans., 192] and the doctrines (madhahib) of innovators  [433. The "innovators" were mainly the speculative theologians, the Qadariyyah/ Jahmiyyah. Their scandalous heretical views were gaining the upper hand in the region , which also suffered under the dominance of incompetent troublemakers (tara " us al- ruwaybidah , " dregs of the population" [see trans ., Vol. XXXII, 55, n. 1771, an allusion to the Shiite sectarian rulers? ), see Tabsir, fol. 82b] It is about thirty folios.

  The work is partly preserved in the mentioned Escorial manuscript; [434. I wish to thank the authorities of the Biblioteca de El Escortal for providing me with a microfilm of the work] see Brockelmann, GAL, I, 143, no. 2, Suppl. I, 218, no. 5, and Sezgin, GAS, I, 328, no. 5. Attention was first drawn to it in 1901 by Becker, "Tabari's sogenannte Catechesis Mahometana." In the introduction, Tabari says that the people of Tabaristan had asked him to write such a treatise because of the large number of confusing, sectarian, and divisive views that were causing trouble among them.

  Without indicating a title, Ibn Hazm quotes Tabsfr, fol. 85b, for the need of Muslims at an early age to know about names and attributes in order to avoid being branded as unbelievers. [435. See Ibn Hazm , Fisal, IV, 35, as mentioned by van Ess, Erkenntnislehre, 49.]

  Dhahabi, Nubala', XIV, 279, 1. 6-280, 1. 4, and'Uluww.

  150 f., has a somewhat shortened and mangled quotation from the chapter on divine attributes known through statements of the Qur'an and the hadith. It appears on fol. 87b of the Escorial manuscript.

[Al-Tafsir " Qur'an commentary ": See jami' al-bayanj

[AI-Taharah " On ritual purity ": See Basit]

Tahdhib al- athar wa - tafsil ma 'am al- thabit ' an Rasul Allah min al-akhbar " An improved treatment and detailed discussion of the traditions established as going back to the Messenger of God"

  Tabari's most ambitious work on traditions is more commonly referred to as Tahdhib al-atharor, simply, al-Tahdhib [436. See also above, al-Musnad al-mukharraj..] . It is mentioned by all Tabari biographers. It remained unfinished but apparently began to circulate rather early in Tabari's career. The fact that Latif is quoted in it does not help very much to fix the time of the first appearance of parts of it [437. See above, 117]. Tahdhib was possibly meant to rival Ibn Hanbal's Musnad. In fact, though, it was much more than a more collection of traditions. Its singular conception was to provide an exhaustive and penetrating analysis of the philological and legal implications of each hadith mentioned and to discuss its meaning as well as its significance for religious practice and theory. Thus, it contains what amounts to monographs on a number of important topics.

  Al-Farghani's ijazah as quoted in Irshad, VI,, 426, 1. 20-427, 1. r, ed. Rifa'i, XVIII, 45, 11. 2 f., mentions that he studied the Prophetical traditions transmitted (musnad) by the Ten [438• For the Blessed Ten, the ten old Muslims who were assured of Paradise, see Eli , 1, 693, s. v. aI-'ashara al-mubashshara] and by Ibn 'Abbas down to the traditions on the Prophet's heavenly journey (mi'raj) from the Kitab al-Tahdhib.

  It was presumably Ibn Kimil who used the long title of the work. According to Irshad, VI, 448,11.12-18, ed. Rifi'i, XVIII, 74,1. 17-75, 1. 6, he said:

  Kitab Tahdhib al-athar wa-tafsil al-thabit'an Rasul Allah min al-akhbar. It is a work, the like of which it would be difficult for any other scholar to produce and complete. Abu Bakr b. Kamil said: After Abu Ja'far's death, I have not seen anyone who possessed more religious knowledge, knew more about the works of religious scholars and the disagreements of jurists, and had a greater command of all scholarly disciplines. (I know) because I tried hard to produce a work on the Prophetical traditions transmitted (musnad) by 'Abdallah b. Masud in the way Abu Ja'far had done (with the musnads) of others. I was unable to do a good job, and it did not come out right.

  Ibn al - Nadim, Fihrist, 235, 11.4 f., states his intention to mention the published parts of the unfinished Tahdhib contains a blank space.

TB, II, 163, 11. io f., called Tabari's unfinished work entitled Tahdhib al-athar unequaled in the treatment of its subject, as far as he knew. His remark was quoted by nearly all later biographers [439. For instance, Sam'ini, Ansab, IX, 41; Ibn al- Jawzi , Munta$am, VI, 171; Irshad, VI, 424, 1. 12, ed. Rifa'i, XVIII, 41,11. 14 f.; Safadi , Wafi, 1I, 285 ; Ibn al-Jazari, Ghaya, Ii, 107; Dhahabi, Nubala', XIV, 270, fl, I f.; Subki, Tabagat, III, 22, 11. 9 f.; Ibn Kathir , Bidayah, XI, 145; Ibn Taghribirdi, Nujnm, III, 205, 11. 13 f].

  Ibn 'Asakir, LXXX f., quotes al - Farghani at length to bring out the importance of the work:

  He started on the composition of Tahdhib al-athar. It is one of his most remarkable works . He began with the traditions of Abu Bakr al – Siddiq ra that in his opinion [440. Read 'indahu, as in the quotation from Ibn 'Asakir in Subki, Tabaqat, III, 121, 11. I2-16] were transmitted with sound chains of transmitters. He discussed each one of them with their weaknesses ('ilal) [441. As understood in Tahdhib, 'ilal are the illnesses, affecting practically exclusively the chains of transmitters , which are potential reasons for considering a given tradition as "sick (saqim)."], their recensions, and their contents as to law, the practice of the Prophet sunan ), and the disagreements and arguments of scholars. (He also discussed) their contents with respect to meanings (ma'dni ) and their rare words , and (he reported ) the attacks of heretics on them and refuted them and explained the corruptness of their attacks . He made public of the work the Prophetical traditions transmitted by the Blessed Ten, the people of the House , and the mawlds as well as a large fragment of Prophetical traditions transmitted by Ibn 'Abbas. It was his intention to report every last sound tradition of the Messenger of God and discuss them all in the way he had started , so that nobody would ever be able to attack any part of the knowledge of the Messenger of God. He also intended to report all that is needed by religious scholars , as he had done in Tafsir. Thus, (if he had been able to complete the work ), he would have dealt with the (entire ) science of the religious law (al-shari'ah) on the basis of the Qur'an and the traditions and practice of the Prophet ( sunan ). He died before the completion of the work . Thereafter, there was nobody to interpret and discuss a single one of those traditions the way he had done.

  After repeating most of this information , Dhahabi, Nubala', XIV, 273,11. 15-20, expressed what appears to be his personal opinion: "If the work had been completed as planned, it would have to come to a hundred volumes ." This, of course, was an offhand guess, but it is hardly an exaggeration.

  See Brockelmann, GAL, I, 143, Suppl . 1, 217 f ., and Sezgin, GAS, I, 327. The preserved fragments of the Musnads of 'Ali and 'Abdallah b . al-'Abbas were published in three volumes in 1982 by Mahmud M. Shakir . The Musnad of 'Umar b . al-Khattab ra remains to be published.

  Al-Ta'rikh " The History"

  Because of its fame, the work was commonly referred to simply as Tabari ' s History. Its most authentic title is the one indicated by Tabari himself in the colophon of one of the manuscripts. It is Mukhtasar ta'rikh al-rusul wa-al-muluk wa-al-khulafa' "The short work on the history of messengers , kings, and caliphs." [442. See translation below, Vol. XXXVIII, p. xvii]

  Similarly, Tabari refers to it as Mukhtasar ta'rikh al-rusul wa-almuluk [443• See Dhayl, III, 2358, ed. Cairo, XI, 540].  It seems that Tabari had a predilection for "short work" as an expression of modesty and an indication that a subject required a much longer treatment than the one it was receiving from him.

  We also find titles such as "History of the messengers, prophets, kings, and caliphs" (al-Farghani) or "History of nations and kings" (TB), as well as "History of the messengers and kings" expanded to "and their historical record and all those who lived in the time of each one of them" (Ibn Kamil) [444• A rather similar title appears in a Leiden manuscript and seemed to Kosegarten, the first editor of large portions of History, who used a Berlin manuscript , to be the authoritative title of the work: Ta'rikh al- muluk wa-akhbaruhum (Kosegarten : a'maruhum !) wa-mawdlid ( K. wa-mawalid) al-rusul wa-anbd'uhum wa-al-kd'in alladhi ( K. deest ) kan ft zaman kull wahid minhum . See Hamaker, Specimen , 19, and Kosegarten , 1, IV and 3] Scribes who copied the work for a patron presumably often preferred some impressive title to put on the title page, but the simple Ta'rikh really needed no amplification. There could never be any doubt as to which work was meant.

  According to Irshdd, VI, 427, 11. 17 f., ed . Rifa'i , XVIII, 44, 11. 16-18, al-Farghani referred in his ijdzah to:

  Kitab al-Rusul wa-al-anbiya' wa-al-muluk wa-al-khulafa' and the two sections (al-qit'an, on the Umayyads and 'Abbasids) of the work. However, I did not study it (with Tabari directly) but used it by (written ) permission (ijdzah). Ibn Kamil 's full and perceptive description of the work appears in Irshad, VI, 443, 1. 17-445, 1. 6, ed. Rifa'i, XVIII, 68, 1. 6-70,1. 9:

  Among his works is his great History entitled Ta'rikh alrusul wa-al-muluk wa-akhbaruhum wa-man kdn fi zaman kull wdliid minhum. He began with an invocation (khutbah) that (briefly) summarizes the significant aspects of its contents (ma'ani) [445. See above, n. 336. The general accuracy of Ibn Kimil 's analysis of the contents of History can easily be verified by the reader of this translation.]. He then discussed what time is and the duration in time (of the world) according to the divergent opinions of the Companions and others and the nations opposed to our view on the subject. A chapter like this can be found only in his work [446. The correct wording of the text cannot easily be established, but there is no doubt about its meaning].

  Abu al-Hasan 'Abdallah b. Ahmad b. Muhammad b. alMuqhallis, the jurist [447. on Ibn Mughallis, see above , n. 199 . Although this paragraph refers to History only in the second of its three statements , it is obvious that all of it goes back to In Kamil and, presumably , his Tabari bibliography.], said: Of all the scholars we have ever seen , he possessed the best understanding and had the greatest concern for knowledge and research. Because of his concern with scholarly research, he had his books all laid out on one side of his residence [448. Ed . Rifai suggests to read hd 'ir with the putative meaning of "quiet (corner)," but this seems dubious . Hdratihi in the text may have its ordinary meaning of "residential quarter of a town " ( and hence, residence ?!],  then went through them for the first (time) one by one, in the process carrying them to the other side, until he was through with them; then he studied them again and returned them to their original place [449. See above, n. 199.]. (Ibn al-Muqhallis) said one day: Nobody has ever done what Abu Ja'far did with respect to writing and giving a full presentation of history (ta'rikh al-zaman). (Ibn Kamil) continued: Abu al-Hasan b. al-Muqhallis said to me one day while we were talking about scholarship and the excellence of scholars: By God! I do think that Abu Ja'far al-Tabari forgot as much of what he knew by heart till his death as so-andso-naming an important scholar-ever knew by heart all his life.

  Abu Ja'far continued in History with the discussion of the creation of time as days and nights and (argued) that God alone created them. He mentioned the first (thing) that was created, namely, the Pen, as well as everything (created) thereafter one by one according to the traditions (athar) on the subject and the different opinions of scholars about it.

  He then mentioned Adam and Eve and the accursed Iblis as well as Adam's descent (fall to earth). He continued with brief histories of each prophet, messenger, and king, down to (the time of) our Prophet, including also the history of minor successor kings (muluk al-tawa'if) and the kings of the Persians and the Rum. He then mentioned the birth of the Messenger of God, his genealogy, his male and female ancestors, his children, his wives, (the origin of) his Prophetical mission, his raids and expeditions, and the situation of his Companions. Then he mentioned the rightly guided caliphs after (the Prophet's death). He continued with the history of the Umayyads and the 'Abbasids in two sections, one devoted to the Umayyads, and the other to the 'Abbasids, with the historical comments he made in History (wa-ma sharahahu fi Kitab al-Ta'rikh). This (portion of History) was made public by way of ijazah down to the year 294/906[7). He did not continue with the subsequent years, because the reign of al-Muqtadir (which extended throughout Tabari's remaining years) fell into them. He had been asked to comment on the two sections (dealing with the Umayyads and the 'Abbasids), and he complied and called (this portion of History) the "two sections ( at-qit'an)."

  This work is of unique excellence and distinction in the world. It brings together many religious and worldly disciplines. It is about five thousand folios.

  Ibn al -Nadim, Fihrist, 234, 1. 24-235, 1. 2, adds information on continuations of History and ends with a remarkable statement on the necessary qualifications for writing history:

  Kitab al-Ta'rikh, with the two sections (on the Umayyads and the 'Abbasids). He finished dictating it in 302/915 and stopped there.

  A number of people have abridged the work and omitted the isnads, among them a man known as Muhammad b. Sulayman al-Hashimi [450. Unidentified.], and another one, a secretary known as.... Among Mosulites, Abu al-Husayn al-Shimshati al-Mu'allim [45 1. Possibly , Abu al-Hasan ' Ali b. Muhammad al-'Adawi al-Shimshati , a teacher of Nayir al-dawlah ' s son Abu Taghlib ? See Ibn al - Nadim, Fihrist, 15 4,11.22 -28, and the index of Dodge's translation, II, 1099 f] and a man known as al-Saul b. Ahmad [452. Possibly, the informant of the Ibn Jinni mentioned in Yaqut, Mu'jam, II, 490, 1. 3, as suggested in the index of Dodge' s translation of Fihrist.]. A number of people have made additions covering the period from where it ends to our time . Their additions are not reliable, because (the men who wrote them) were not connected with the government (dawlah), nor did they have knowledge  [453. In other words, they were neither government officials nor scholars of religion and laws and thus had no access to important historical information and no understanding of the processes of history. See also below, n. 455.].

  Since the work was so well known, many biographers felt no need to say much about it. TB, II, 163, 1. 9, merely mentions Tabari's famous work, Ta'rikh al-umam wa-al-muluk. As in the case of Tahdhib, TB was quoted by most later biographers. This was also the title cited by Hajji Khalifah, ed. Yaltkaya, 1, 297, and from there, it became known in seventeenth-century Europe through d'Herbelot, Bibliothaque, 866b, s. v. Tarikh AiThabari; see below, 138 f.

  Ibn 'Asakir, LXXIX, used as usual by Dhahabi, Nubala', XIV, 273,1. 8, merely mentions as completed his "Ta'rikh that extends down toTabari's own age." And Qifli, In bah, III, 89,1.6, described the Kitab al-Ta'rikh as the greatest work in its field. In another work, al-Qifti has a passage on the continuators of Tabari. It was inserted in his biography of Thibit b. Sinan and was, perhaps, derived from al-Qifti's monograph on Tabari [454. See Rosenthal, Muslim Historiography2, 81-83].

  More information on History will be found in the following pages and, of course, in all the volumes of this translation.

[Ta'rikh al-rijal "The history of personalities": See Dhayl]

[Tartib al-'ulama' "The classification of scholars": See Adab alnufus and Basit]

[Ummahat al-awlad "On slave girls giving birth to children by their masters": See Latif ]

[Al-Wasaya "On last wills": See Basit]

[Al-Zakah "On charity taxes" : See Basit]

CONTINUED