Opening the Gate of Verification: The Forgotten Arab-Islamic Florescence of the 17th

Century
Author(s): Khaled El-Rouayheb
Reviewed work(s):
Source: International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 38, No. 2 (May, 2006), pp. 263-281
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3879973 .
Accessed: 18/08/2012 18:10
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
International Journal of Middle East Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

Int. J. Middle East Stud. 38 (2006), 263-281. Printed in the United States of America
DOI: 10.1017.S0020743806382050

KhaledEl-Rouayheb
THE GATE OF VERIFICATION:
OPENING
THE
FORGOTTEN
ARAB-ISLAMIC
FLORESCENCE
OF THE 17TH CENTURY

Little research has been done on the intellectual life of the Arab-Islamic world between the 15th and 19th centuries.This scholarly neglect almost certainlyreflects the
widespreadassumptionthat intellectual life in the Arab-Islamicworld entered a long
period of stagnationor "sclerosis"after the 13th or 14th century.This state of affairs
is often believed to have lasted until the 19th century, when Europeanmilitary and
economic expansion awakenedthe Arab-Islamicworld from its dogmatic slumber,and
inaugurateda "reawakening"or "renaissance"(nahda). An influential statement of
this view of intellectual life in the Arab provinces of the OttomanEmpire before the
19th century is to be found in Gibb and Bowen's Islamic Society and the West. Although they noted that "the barrennessof the period has been greatly exaggerated,"
they still statedthatArabic scholarlyculturehad degenerated,on the whole, into a rote,
unquestioningacquisition of a narrowand religiously dominated field of knowledge.
No "quickeningbreathhad blown" on Arab-Islamicscholarshipfor centuries.Isolated
even from Persianand Turkishinfluences, it was reducedto "living on its own past."'
The intellectual "sclerosis"that has been thought to characterizethe Arab-Islamic
world between the 15th and 18th century is often portrayedas one aspect of a more
general decline. The period between 1516 and 1798 was also supposed to have been
markedby economic decline andurbandecay,as a resultof Ottoman(mis)ruleand/orthe
Europeandiscovery of the Cape of Good Hope and subsequentchanges in international
trade routes. The research of economic historians,in particularAndr6 Raymond, has
underminedthis view. Despite periodic crises and depressions, the Arab provinces
of the OttomanEmpire seem, on the whole, to have experienced both economic and
demographicgrowthin the period, and this is reflected in the substantialgrowthof the
major Arab cities of the Empire. Cairo, Aleppo, and Damascus were all substantially
largerand more populous in the late 18th centurythanthey were in the early sixteenth.2
This new view of the economic history of the Arabprovinces duringthis period should
invite a reconsiderationof the thesis of intellectualdecline or sclerosis. Sadly, this has
not yet happened.Raymondhimself contraststhe urbanand economic expansion with
what he supposes was the prevalent"culturalapathy"in the Arabprovinces.3

KhaledEl-Rouayhebis BritishAcademy PostdoctoralResearchFellow at The Facultyof Divinity,University

of Cambridge,CambridgeCB3 9BS, U.K.; e-mail: ke217@cam.ac.uk.
? 2006 Cambridge University Press 0020-7438/06 $12.00

264 Khaled El-Rouayheb

In recentdecades, therehas been some dissatisfactionamong historianswith this idea
of intellectualstagnation.Hitherto,there seems to have been two majorlines of attack.
MarshallHodgson, in his influential The Ventureof Islam, argued that the traditional
notion of a post-Mongol decline of Islamic civilization does not do justice to the intellectual and culturalflorescence in 16th and 17th century OttomanTurkey,Safavid
Persia, and Moghul India.Influencedby Hodgson, EhsanYarshaterhas arguedrecently
that the theory of "decline"is "Arabocentric"in equating the decline of Arab-Islamic
civilization with the decline of Islamic civilization as such.4The second line of attack,
representedby scholars such as John Voll, Peter Gran,and ReinhardtSchulze, argues
that the 18th century witnessed an indigenous intellectualrevival or "Enlightenment,"
before the onset of westernizationin the 19th century.5Welcome as they are, I believe
that these revisionist argumentsconcede too much. They typically do not contest the
idea that the Arabic-speakingpartsof the Islamic world entered into a long period of
stagnation after the 13th or 14th century.They merely insist that this stagnationdid
not extend to, say, Safavid Persia or Moghul India, or arguethat the revivaldatesback
to the 18th ratherthan the 19th century,and was due to indigenous factors ratherthan
to Europeaninfluences and challenges. Indeed, insofar as they accuse the theory of
decline or stagnationof being "Arabocentric,"
or insofaras they speak of a "revival"or
"enlightenment"(concepts which suggest a precedingperiod of dormantor benighted
intellectuallife), both approachespresupposeratherthanchallenge the received theory
of stagnation.
In the present article, I would like to challenge this idea of intellectual apathyand
stagnationby drawing attention to some hitherto neglected intellectual developments
in the Arabic-speakingparts of the OttomanEmpire in the 17th century.One of these
developmentswas the introductionof a range of new handbooksin the fields of grammar,semantics-rhetoric,logic, andtheology,mostly of eitherPersianor Maghribiorigin.
Contemporarywitnesses believed thatthis developmentwas significant,becausePersian
and Maghribischolars were imbued, or so it was believed, with an ethos of "verification." Another major development was the spread of originally non-Arabicmystical
orders such as the Shattariyya,Naqshbandiyya,and Khalwatiyya in the region. This
developmentappearsto have had the effect of strengtheningsupportfor monist,pro-Ibn
'Arabidoctrines,which had hithertobeen regardedwith suspicionby most Arab-Islamic
scholars (ulama).The two trendswere distinct,but at times coalesced, as in the case of
two of the intellectualgiants of the 17thcentury,Ibrahimal-Kurani(1616-90) and'Abd
al-Ghanial-Nabulusi(1640-1731).
"THE WAY OF THE PERSIAN

AND

KURDISH

VERIFYING

SCHOLARS"

In the first decade of the 17th century, the Shi'ite Safavids under Shah 'Abbas (r. 1588-

1629) managedto wrest Azerbaijanand Shirwanfrom the Ottomans,thus sparkingoff

a westward exodus of Sunni Azeri and Kurdish scholars. One Kurdishscholar who
settled in Damascus at precisely this time was Mulla Mahmudal-Kurdi(d. 1663-64),
who went on to teach in the city for around sixty years. He seems to have gained
a considerable reputationas a teacher, and several of his local students went on to
become prominentteachersin theirown right. One of their students,MuhammadAmin

Opening the Gate of Verification 265

al-Muhibbi(d. 1699), included an entry on Mulla Mahmudin his biographicaldictionary of Muslim notables who died in the 11th century of the Muslim era (i.e., 15911689 AD). Al-Muhibbiwrote:
He mostlytaughtthebooksof thePersians(kutubal-a'ajim),andhe was thefirstto acquaintthe
studentsof Damascuswiththesebooks,andhe impartedto themthe abilityto readandteach
them.It is fromhimthatthegateof tahqTq
in Damascuswasopened.Thisis whatwe haveheard
ourteacherssay.6
The meaning of the word tahqTqin this context is clear from a story involving another
Easternscholar who settled in Damascus in the 17th century,'Abd al-Rahimal-Kabuli
(d. 1723). The Afghan scholar was once approachedby a local studentwho wished to
studythe commentaryof the EgyptianscholarZakariyyaal-Ansari(d. 1519) on Isaghuji,
an introductoryhandbookon logic by Athir al-Din al-Abhari(d. 1265). Al-Kabuli had
not seen this particularcommentarybefore and was reportedlyunimpressedwhen he
discoveredthatZakariyyaal-Ansarihad merely explainedthe text, "ratherthangoing the
obviouslymeantdoing morethanmerelyexplainingthe
way of the muhaqqiqTn."'7
TahqTq
contents of the handbookcommentedupon. As an Ottomancontemporaryof al-Kabuli
stated,tahqTqis to give the evidentialgrounds(dalTi)of a scientific proposition.8
If it is relatively straightforwardto understandwhat al-Muhibbimeant by speaking
of tahqTq,it is somewhat more difficult to ascertainwhat he meant by "the books of
the Persians."One clue is offered by an 18th century biography of the Damascene
scholarand mystic 'Abd al-Ghanial-Nabulusi(1640-1731), in which it is statedthathe
studiedlogic, semantics-rhetoric('ilm al-ma'amnwa-l-bay-in),and grammarwith Mulla
Mahmud al-Kurdi.9Another Damascene scholar, Abu al-Mawahibal-Hanbali (16351714), also statedthathe studiedlogic andthe sciences of languagewith Mulla Mahmud
al-Kurdi.10He also mentioned some of the books that he had studied with the Kurdish
scholar:the earliermentionedIsaghujiby al-Abhariwith its standardcommentaries,and
Talkhisal-miftah,a condensedmanualon semantics-rhetoricby Jamalal-Dinal-Qazwini
(d. 1338) with the shorter and longer commentarieson the work by Sa'd al-Din alTaftazani(d. 1390). Al-Abhari,al-Qazwini, and al-Taftazaniwere all of Persianorigin,
and their works could easily be referredto as "the books of the Persians."However,
the mentioned works were hardly unknown in Damascene scholarly circles in the
16th century.For instance, the Damascene scholar Hasan al-Burini (d. 1615) studied
the semantic-rhetoricalworks of al-Taftazanibefore the arrivalof Mulla Mahmud.'1
Al-Burinihimself went on to teach al-Taftazani'scommentarieson Talkhisal-miftah,as
well as al-Abhari'sIsaghuji with the commentaryof Husamal-Din al-Kati(d. 1359). If
al-Muhibbi'scommentsaboutMullaMahmudal-KurdiintroducingDamascenestudents
to new worksareto be takenseriously,thenhe musthavebeen referringto worksby other,
and presumablylater, Persian scholars. The identity of at least some of these scholars
may be gauged from a work by Ibrahim al-Kurani(d. 1690), another 17th century
Kurdish scholar who settled in the Arabic-speakinglands, listing the works he had a
certificateto teach. Kuranimentionedthe standardworks of al-Taftazaniand al-Sayyid
al-Sharifal-Jurjani(d. 1413) on semantics-rhetoric,grammar,logic, and theology. He
then went on to mention other works in these fields by later Persian scholars such as

266 KhaledEl-Rouayheb
Jalal al-Din al-Dawani (d. 1501) and 'Isam al-Din al-Isfara'ini (d. 1537).12 Some of
these new works were the following:

1. The supercommentaryof al-Isfara'inion Sharh al-kafiya (on grammar)by the well-known

Persianscholarand poet 'Abd al-Rahmanal-Jami(d. 1492);
2. The lengthycommentaryof al-Isfara'ini,entitledal-Atwal,on Talkhisal-miftah(on semanticsrhetoric);
3. The commentaryof al-Isfara'inion Risalat al-wad' (on the theory of conventionalreference)
by 'Adud al-Din al-Iji (d. 1355);
4. The commentaryof al-Isfara'inion al-Risalafi al-isti'arat (on metaphors)by Abu-al-Qasim
al-Samarqandi(fl. 1488);
5. The commentaryof al-Dawanion the creed ('aqa'id) of 'Adud al-Din al-Iji (on theology);
6. The commentaryof al-Dawanion Tahdhibal-mantiqby al-Taftazani(on logic).

The cited works were widely used handbooks in Ottoman scholarly circles from the
17th century, as attested by the bibliographer Katib Celebi (d. 1657).'" Older Damascene
scholars such as the previously mentioned Hasan al-Burini (1556-1615) and Najm al-Din
Muhammad al-Ghazzi (1570-1651) do not seem to have studied such works.14 Younger
Damascene scholars such as al-Muhibbi (1650-99) and Ibn al-'Imad al-Hanbali (162379), by contrast, were well aware of the later Persian scholars' "useful works in all the
disciplines."'" There is thus some reason to believe that the works of the later Persian
scholars were indeed introduced to the scholarly milieu of Damascus in the early 17th
century by Mulla Mahmud al-Kurdi. The supposition is strengthened by the fact that
some of the Damascene pupils of Mulla Mahmud, such as CAbd al-Qadir ibn 'Abd
al-Hadi (d. 1688) and 'Uthman al-Qattan (d. 1704), are known to have taught the works
of al-Dawani and al-Isfara'ini.'6
In the somewhat more cosmopolitan atmosphere of the two Holy Cities of Mecca
and Medina, the works of al-Dawani and al-Isfara'ini may have become known at an
earlier time than in Damascus. A grandchild of 'Isam al-Din al-Isfara'ini, Qadi 'Ali
al-'Isami (d. 1598-99) settled in the holy cities, and he and his nephew 'Abd al-Malik
al-'Isami (d. 1627-28) are known to have taught the works of al-Isfara'ini there."7From
western Arabia, the works of al-Isfara'ini seem to have spread to Egypt. The Egyptian
scholars Ahmad al-Ghunaymi (d. 1634) and Ahmad al-Khafaji (d. 1659) both studied
his works while they were in the Hijaz.'8 Egyptian scholars of the 17th century went
on to write commentaries and glosses on some of the "works of the Persians." For
instance, al-Ghunaymi wrote glosses on al-Isfara'ini's commentary on al-Samarqandi's
al-Risala fi al-isticarat. Al-Ghunaymi's student, Yasin al-'Ulaymi al-Himsi (d. 1651)
wrote glosses on the commentary of the Persian-born Transoxanian scholar 'Ubaydallah
al-Khabisi (fl. 1540) on Tahdhib al-mantiq by al-Taftazani. These glosses reveal that
al-'Ulaymi was acquainted with the commentary of al-Isfara'ini on the same work.19 The
Moroccan scholar 'Abdallah al-'Ayyashi (d. 1680), who passed through Egypt on his
way to the hajj, asked a local specialist in semantics-rhetoric what handbooks he used
to teach the subject. The Egyptian scholar replied that the standard handbook had long
been al-Taftazani's longer commentary, called al-Mutawwal, on Talkhis al-miftah, but
that there was now a more recent and longer commentary by 'Isam al-Din al-Isfara'ini,

Opening the Gate of Verification 267

called al-Atwal, which offered a synthesis of the most importantscholia written on
al-Taftazani'swork.20
Most of the works alluded to by al-Muhibbi were written in Arabic, but this was
not always the case. For instance, 'Isam al-Din al-Isfara'iniwrote a work in Persianon
figurativeuse of language (majaz)that was translatedinto Arabic in the 17th century.
The Egyptianhistorian'Abd al-Rahmanal-Jabarti(d. 1825-26) attributedthe translation
to one of his father'steachers,the EgyptianscholarAhmad al-Mallawi (1677-1767).21
However,he was almostcertainlymistakenaboutthis. Survivingmanuscriptsof thework
mention the translator'sname as Ahmad al-Mawlawi (i.e., of the Mawlawi mystical
order), not al-Mallawi (i.e., from the Egyptian town of Mallawi).22Furthermore,a
student of al-Mallawi, in a work in which he consistently refers to al-Mallawi as "our
teacher the commentator(shaykhunaal-sharih),"also referredto the translatorof alIsfara'ini's work as "al-Mawlawi."23
The translatorseems ratherto have been Ahmad
ibn Lutfallahal-Mawlawi, also known as MunajjimBashi (d. 1702). Originally from
Salonica, Ahmad al-Mawlawi served as court astronomer/astrologerfor Mehmed IV
(r. 1648-87) in Istanbulbefore retiringto Cairo and Mecca, where he died. His other
works include a universalchronicle;a commentaryon a work on ethics by 'Adud al-Din
al-Iji; a treatiseon logical predication(haml); and a work on the medical propertiesof
Europeanherbs.24
Whatwas the significanceof the introductionof the new "booksof the Persians"in the
late 16thandearly 17thcentury?Most of the worksmentionedhavenot receivedmodem
scholarly attention,and it is thereforedifficult to answer the question with confidence.
Even many of the authorsremainlargely unknown.For instance, the Encyclopaediaof
Islam has no entry on 'Isam al-Din al-Isfara'ini,whose works on semantics-rhetoric,
grammar,theology, and logic remainedstandardtextbooksfor centuries.Its shortentry
on Dawani focuses on his Persian work on ethics (which has been translatedinto
English), ratherthan on his Arabic theological, logical, and philosophical works that
were much more influentialin scholarlycircles in the OttomanEmpire.25It seems clear,
however, that the commentariesand supercommentariesof al-Isfara'iniand al-Dawani
did not simply consist of an explication of the meaning of the texts. For instance, the
OttomanbibliographerKatibCelebi statedthatal-Isfara'ini'sglosses on al-Jami'sSharh
al-kafiya were highly critical and that "he argued against him [i.e., al-Jami] on most
points."26Even allowing for some exaggeration,such a comment would make no sense
if al-Isfara'iniwere simply expoundingthe meaning of al-Jami'swork. For his part,alDawani's widely studiedcommentaryon the creed of al-Iji is prefacedwith an emphasis
on the need for tahqiq ratherthan taqlid in creedal matters,and a declarationthat the
work will not merely catalogue views but pursue the trutheven when it goes against
currentopinion.27 Although explicitly writtenfrom an Ashcariperspective,al-Dawani's
commentaryrepeatedly adopted an irenic stance towardpoints that had traditionally
divided Ash'aris from Mu'tazilis and Islamic philosophers.For example, he statedthat
on many central theological points, such as the correct understandingof the divine
attributes,the argumentsof the Ash'aris and the Mu'tazilis were both inconclusive, and
he emphasizedthat the latter should not be consideredunbelievers.28He also went out
of his way to arguethatmany of the accusationsoften levied at the Islamic philosophers
by theologians-for example, that they believed that God did not know particularsAl-Dawani was also sympatheticto the ideas of the
were based on misunderstanding.29

268

Khaled El-Rouayheb

Andalusianmystic Ibn 'Arabi, such as "theunity of existence" (wahdatal-wujfid),and

his argumentson this point were invoked by later supportersof Ibn 'Arabi's theory.By
contrast,earliertheologians such as al-Iji and al-Taftazaniwere explicitly hostile to the
idea of wahdat al-wujiid.30

Al-Muhibbi linked the teaching of the "books of the Persians"to the "opening of
the gate of tahqTq."To understandwhy he did so, it should be kept in mind that the
full significance of the introductionof "the books of the Persians"may not become
apparentmerely by looking at the contents of the works themselves. The new works
were not mere additions to librarycollections but were taught initially by scholars of
Kurdishor Persianorigin.Thereis some evidence thatPersianand Kurdishscholarshad
a distinctive mannerof teaching. Al-Muhibbi described one of the scholars he met in
Istanbulas "followingthe way of the PersianandKurdishverifyingscholars(muhaqqiqT
al-'ajam wa-l-akraid) in adhering to the principles of dialectic (iadiib al-bahth)."31 A

17th centuryMoroccan scholar has left a vivid descriptionof a contemporaryKurdish

scholar'sway of conductingclasses:
for he
His lectureon a topicremindedone of discussion(mudha/kara)andparley(mufawada),
wouldsay:"Perhaps
thisandthat,"and"Itseemsthatit is this,"and"Doyou see thatthiscanbe
like that?."Andif he wasquestionedon eventhe slightestpointhe wouldstopuntil
understood
thematterwasestablished.32
Indeed,workson dialectic (adaibal-bahth)were almostcertainlyamongthe new "books
of the Persians"that came to be taught in Arab-Islamiccircles from the 17th century.
One of the numerousworks of al-Isfara'iniwas a commentaryon a tracton dialecticby
'Adud al-Din al-Iji.33
Remarksby the earlier Egyptianscholar Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d. 1505) offer some
further indication of the significance of the "books of the Persians."Al-Suyuti was
notoriously opposed to logic and philosophy, and repeatedly condemned these disciplines as inimical to religious faith. He also condemned the-in his view mainly
Persian-scholars who introducedlogical concepts and argumentforms into the study
of theology, the principles of jurisprudenceand grammar.He prided himself in mastering jurisprudence,grammar,and rhetoric "accordingto the principles of the Arabs
and the erudite, not according to the way of the Persians and philosophers."34 The
grammatical,semantic-rhetorical,and theological handbooksto which al-Muhibbialluded were writtenby Persianscholars who also wrote on logical and/orphilosophical
topics. Apparently,the logically and philosophically informed methodology that alSuyuti despised received renewedimpetus in Arab-Islamic scholarlycircles in the 17th
century.
MAGHRIBI

SCHOLARS

IN THE EAST

The 18thcenturyEgyptian-basedscholarMuhammadMurtadaal-Zabidi(d. 1791), like

al-Suyuti, was more comfortablewith the tradition-relating(naqliyyah) sciences such
as hadith, as opposed to rational ('aqliyyah) sciences such as logic or philosophical
theology. Like al-Suyuti, he considered the latter fields to be pernicious, althoughhe
was well aware that his view was far from being typical of the Islamic scholars of his
time. Indeed,he regrettedwhat he saw as an inordinateenthusiasmfor logic amonghis

Opening the Gate of Verification

269

Egyptian contemporaries. This enthusiasm, according to al-Zabidi, had been imparted

by incoming scholars from the Maghrib, that is, present-day Morocco, Algeria, and
Tunisia. Such scholars, according to al-Zabidi, had "delved into it [i.e., logic] until they
became leaders in the field who are singled out for their proficiency."35 In an arresting
passage, al-Zabidi described how Maghribi scholars coming to Egypt a few generations
before his time had spread this enthusiasm for logic:
Thus you see that those of them who came to Egypt in the times of the teachers of our teachers
had few hadithto relate, and due to them it [logic] became popularin Egypt and they [i.e., locals]
devoted themselves to studying it, whereas before that time they had only occupied themselves
with it occasionally to sharpentheir wits.36
As I have shown elsewhere, al-Zabidi is in this passage referring to several Maghribi
scholars who settled temporarily or permanently in Egypt toward the end of the 17th
century and the beginning of the 18th, and taught logic, among other things, to local
students.37 Many of these scholars were students of the prominent Moroccan theologian
and logician al-Hasan al-Yusi (d. 1691). They brought with them a number of logical
handbooks that were of Maghribi provenance, such as the following:
1. al-Sullamal-munawraq,a didacticpoem introducingthe basic principlesof Aristotelianlogic,
by 'Abd al-Rahmanal-Akhdari(d. 1546), often read in conjunctionwith al-Akhdari'sown
prose commentary,and the glosses of the Maliki mufti of Algiers, Sa'id Qadduraal-Tunisi
(d. 1656).
2. al-Mukhtasarfi al-mantiq, a somewhat more advanced work by Muhammadibn Yusuf alSanusi (d. 1490), often readin conjunctionwith al-Sanusi'sown commentary,and the glosses
of al-Hasanal-Yusi.
3. al-Jumal, by Afdal al-Din al-Khunaji(d. 1249), a yet more advancedwork commentedupon
by various Maghribianscholars such as Muhammadal-Sharif al-Tilimsani (d. 1370), Ibn
al-Khatibal-Qusantini(d. 1409), and Ibn Marzuqal-Hafid(d. 1439).38
In addition to these logical works, the students of al-Yusi taught the theological
works of the earlier mentioned 15th century scholar Muhammad ibn Yusuf al-Sanusi,
particularly his longer creed 'Aqidat ahl al-tawhid and the shorter Umm al-barahin, along
with the commentaries of the author and various glosses by later Maghribi scholars such
as 'Isa al-Suktani (d. 1651/52), Yahya al-Shawi (d. 1685), and al-Yusi. Like al-Dawani,
al-Sanusi repeatedly emphasized the unsatisfactory nature of imitation (taqlTd)in matters
of creed, and the need for tahqTq.39In al-Dawani's case, the emphasis led to a more
reconciliatory position vis-h-vis the claims of the Mu'tazilis and Islamic philosophers
on several points. By contrast, al-Sanusi-whose works have been described as marking
the apogee of "intellectualism" in Muslim theology--evinced a firm confidence in the
possibility of demonstrating the truth of the Ash'ari creed and relied heavily on the
modal concepts and argument forms of Aristotelian logic in expounding and defending
the principles of the Islamic faith.40 Although staunchly opposed to the Mu'tazilis and the
Islamic philosophers, al-Sanusi was also disparaging of what he called the hashwiyya,
that is, fideist and literalist groups such as anti-Ash'ari Hanbalis. Such people, he
argued, are led astray in theological matters by their ignorance of rational sciences
such as semantics, logic, and rhetoric. They do not heed the necessary truths of reason,
oblivious of the fact that to undermine reason is to undermine the basis for religious
belief.41

270 KhaledEl-Rouayheb
Al-Sanusi's disparagement of taqlTdwas shared by his later Maghribi commentators.
Al-Yusi, who wrote influential supercommentaries on al-Sanusi's theological and logical
works, was no less intent on "going the way of the muhaqqiqTn"than his Persian and
Kurdish colleagues. For instance, in his extended treatise on the difference between
the proprium (i.e., distinct but nonessential attributes, like laughter to man) and the
differentia (i.e., essential attributes, like rationality to man), he wrote:
There will occasionally be things we write that you will not, O reader,find elsewhere, so do not
hastento disapproveof it, being misled by those who take it upon themselvesto relate whatothers
have said andpiece it together,and for whom the ultimatein knowledge and mentalexertionis to
say: so and so has said. No by God! ... For thereis no differencebetween an imitator(muqallid)
being led and an animalbeing led, so know O readerthatI have only includedin my treatmentof
this and othertopics what I believe to be true.., .and heed the words of the Imam [Fakhral-Din
al-Razi (d. 1209)]:Whatthe Prophethas said we acceptwholeheartedly,and what his companions
have said we accept partially;as to what others have said: they are men and we are men.42
The Maghribi students of al-Yusi were not the first scholars from that region to make
an impact on the Arabic-speaking parts of the Ottoman Empire. A number of Maghribi
scholars went eastward during the 17th century, many presumably seeking to escape the
political turmoil that had engulfed Morocco after the break-up of the Sa'dian dynasty in
1603. The scholar and belletrist Ahmad al-Maqqari al-Tilimsani (d. 1632), who settled in
Damascus and Cairo, is well known for his literary history of Islamic Spain, Nafh al-tib
fi ghusn al-Andalus al-ratib.43 Another Maghribi scholar who was no less renowned in
his day was the polymath Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Rudani (d. 1683).44 He was both
a specialist in hadith and an accomplished logician, grammarian, jurist, and astronomer.
A contemporary Moroccan scholar wrote that al-Rudani traveled far and wide in search
of prominent teachers, particularly those who could impart anything relating to the
philosophical sciences (al-'ult-m al-hikmiyyah), such as astronomy, mathematics and
logic, for which al-Rudani had a particular aptitude. Al-Rudani's search eventually took
him to Algiers, where he studied with the earlier-mentioned supercommentator on alAkhdari's didactic poem on logic, Sa'id Qaddura al-Tunisi.45 He then traveled further
East, to Egypt, Turkey, the Hijaz, and Damascus, where he died. A Damascene scholar
who studied with al-Rudani is quoted as saying the following:
His knowledge of hadith and of the principles of jurisprudenceis unequalled by anyone we
have met. As for the science of belles-lettres (adab), he is the ultimate authority.And in the
philosophicalsciences: logic, physics andmetaphysics,he was the teacherwhose knowledgecould
not be acquiredthroughnaturalmeans. And he was proficient in the sciences of mathematics:
Euclid, astronomy,geometry,Almagest, calculus, algebra,arithmetic,cartography,harmony,and
geodesy. His knowledge of these fields was unique,otherscholarsknowingonly the preliminaries
of these sciences, ratherthan the advancedissues.46
Some of al-Rudani's major works include the following:
1. Jamc al-fawa'id min jamic al-usul wa-majmac al-fawa'id; an extensive topical collation of
hadith recognized by Sunni Muslims, based on two earlier partialcollections.47There has
been some interestrecentlyin the issue of whethertherewas a reinvigorationof hadithstudies
in Mecca and Medina in the 18th century.In this regard,it is significantthat al-Rudani,who
earnedthe epithet"themuhaddithof the Hijaz,"was the principalteacherof one of the central
figures in this purportedrevival, 'Abdallahibn Salim al-Basri (d. 1722).48

Opening the Gate of Verification

271

2. Bahjat al-tullabfi al-'amal bi-l-asturlab;a shorttreatiseon the astrolabe.49

3. Qala'id al-la'alifi 'amal al-ayyamwa-l-layali, a didacticpoem on chronology('ilm al-awqa-t),
with a lengthy commentaryin prose, entitled Maqasid al-'awali bi-qala'id al-la'ali. According to a contemporary,al-Rudani'swork was based on the "new"astronomicalobservations
made at the observatoryof Ulugh Beg (d. 1449) in Samarqand,on the basis of which al-Rudani
correctedthe informationcontainedin earlierworks on chronology.50
4. Al-Nafi'a 'ala al-'ala al-jami'a, a description of, and user's guide to, an astronomicalinstrumentinvented by al-Rudanihimself. Al-Rudani was a skilled craftsmanas well as an
astronomerand made copies of the instrumenthimself and sold it to interestedbuyers. The
Moroccan scholar 'Abdallah al-'Ayyashi, who met al-Rudani in Medina, wrote that "the
like has not previously been made, ratherhe inventedit with his acute mind and sophisticated
skills.""'The Damascenebiographeral-Muhibbi,who visited al-Rudaniwhen the lattersettled
in Damascus, noted: "he inventeda sphere (kura) that was superiorto previous spheres and
astrolabes, and which spreadto India and the Yemen and the Hijaz."52Charles Pellat, who
has edited and translatedRudani'streatise,has noted that his astronomicalinstrumentwas an
armillarysphere adaptedto also allow topographicalmeasurements.53

SHATTARIS,

NAQSHBANDIS,

AND

KHALWATIS

A few years before Mulla Mahmud al-Kurdi came to Damascus and started teaching
"the books of the Persians," an Indian mystic of the Shattariyya order settled in Medina.
Sibghatallah al-Barwaji (d. 1606) quickly gained renown as a Sufi master and initiated
several local scholars into his order.54He brought with him several books written by
Indian Shattari mystics such as al-Jawahir al-Khams by Muhammad Ghawth Gwaliori
(d. 1562). Al-Barwaji translated this work from Persian into Arabic, and a commentary
on it was later written by his leading disciple, the Egyptian-born Ahmad al-Shinnawi
(d. 1619). Al-Shinnawi became the successor of al-Barwaji and was in turn succeeded
by Ahmad al-Qushashi (d. 1661), who in turn was succeeded by the Kurdish-born
Ibrahim al-Kurani (d. 1690).55 Al-Shinnawi, al-Qushashi and al-Kurani were all outspoken adherents of the controversial idea of the "unity of existence" (wahdat al-wujfid),
associated with Ibn 'Arabi and his followers. Indeed one of the major Shattari texts
studied in their circle was al-Tuhfa al-mursala ila al-nabi, a work by the Indian Shattari
mystic Muhammad al-Burhanpuri (d. 1619-20) defending the idea of wahdat al-wujtid.
Ibrahim al-Kurani wrote a commentary on Burhanpuri's work and also several independent treatises expounding and defending wahdat al-wujuid. Al-Kurani's student and
disciple Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Rasul al-Barzinji (d. 1693) translated from Persian into
Arabic a work by the Persian mystic Abu al-Fath Muhammad al-Kazaruni, also known
as Shaykh Makki (fl.1518), defending this and other controversial ideas of Ibn 'Arabi.56
This open adherence to monism marks a contrast with the Arab mystics of the 16th
century whose works have come down to us, such as 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha'rani
(d. 1565), Muhammad ibn Abi-l-Hasan al-Bakri (d. 1585), and 'Abd al-Ra'uf al-Munawi
(d. 1622). All of these writers seem to have been uneasy with the idea of wahdat al-wujiid,
and tended to explain away the claims of earlier monist mystics as excusable ecstatic
utterances (shatahait). To be sure, such mystics defended Ibn 'Arabi against the charge
of heresy, but they did so apologetically, claiming that the Greatest Master's language
was difficult to decipher for the uninitiated and should not be judged at face value and
that many heretical statements had been interpolated into his works.'57The attitude of alShinnawi, al-Qushashi, al-Kurani, and al-Barzinji seems to have been much bolder and

272

Khaled El-Rouayheb

to have consisted of an open espousal of controversialideas associatedwith Ibn 'Arabi

and his school, such as wahdat al-wujiid and the idea that the Pharaohwhom Moses
had challenged died as a believer (Tman fir'awn). The Moroccanpilgrim 'Abdallahal'Ayyashi, who studied with al-Kuraniin Medina,thus related that al-Kuranirepeatedly
would urge him to accept the ideas of Ibn 'Arabi. Al-'Ayyashi, however, preferredto
remain uncommitted,arguingthat this position was in accord with the Shadhili order
into which he had first been initiated.58
Another example of the new boldness of the Shattarimystics of Medina is evinced
in the famous commentaryby MuhammadMurtadaal-Zabidi (d. 1791) on Ghazali's
Ihya' 'ulumal-din. In the firstvolume of his extensive commentary,al-Zabidiwrotethat
Ibn 'Arabi had never meant to maintainthe thesis of Imanfir'awn. Rather,Ibn 'Arabi
should be interpretedallegorically,Pharaohbeing a symbol of the human soul.59 In the
second volume of his commentary,however,al-Zabidiretractedhis earlierinterpretation
that-he wrote-was inspired by the interpretationof 16th century Egyptian mystics
such as 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha'rani and 'Abd al-Karim al-Khalwati (d. 1578). Al-Zabidi

had since looked at Ibn 'Arabi's works and came to the conclusion that the allegorical
explanation was untenable. He then informed the reader that there were nevertheless
scholars who defended Ibn 'Arabi's thesis understood literally, such as Jalal al-Din alDawani and Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Rasul al-Barzinji in his translation of Kazaruni's
Persian treatise.60 It is clear that the position of al-Dawani and al-Barzinji on the issue
was much bolder and less apologetic than Sha'rani's.
This straightforward espousal of the more controversial ideas of Ibn 'Arabi was apparently not received with enthusiasm by all local scholars. For instance, some indication of
resentment may be gauged from the following biographical entry on the Yemeni mystic
Muhammad al-Habashi (d. 1642):
He was preoccupiedwith the works of [the uncontroversiallyorthodox Abu Hamid] al-Ghazali
[(d. 1111)], and hence was nicknamed "al-Ghazali."Then he left for the two Holy Cities and
frequented al-Sayyid Sibghatallah and [Sibghatallah's disciples] al-Sayyid As'ad [al-Balkhi
(d. 1636)] and Shaykh Ahmad al-Shinnawi, and regularly read the works of Ibn 'Arabi and
followed his way, and would at times make ecstatic statementsand some jurists would censure
him.6'

The passage suggests that al-Habashi's enthusiasm for Ibn 'Arabi and his ensuing
problematicstatementswas a resultof his coming into contact with Sibghatallahandhis
Medinan disciples.
A similar outspoken adherence to the theories of Ibn 'Arabi seems also to have
been characteristic of a branch of the Khalwati order that spread in Damascus in the
17th century. It was introduced into the city by a Kurdish immigrant, Ahmad al-'Usali
(d. 1639), a disciple of a Khalwati master from Gaziantep.62 Al-'Usali's Damascene disciples went on to initiate a substantial number of local scholars, including the previously
mentioned scholars Muhammad Amin al-Muhibbi and Abu al-Mawahib al-Hanbali. The
latter wrote a work enumerating the scholars with whom he had studied, and included a

separatesection in which he gave the chain of transmitterson whose authorityhe related

the works of Ibn 'Arabi.63One of the most prominentlocal disciples of al-'Usali was
Ayyub al-'Adawi al-Khalwati(d. 1660), who left behindseveralmystical works. Ayyub

Openingthe Gate of Verification 273

al-Khalwatiwas an outspokenand controversialadherentof the views of Ibn 'Arabi,and
was on good termswith the Shattaridisciples of Sibghatallahal-Barwajiin Medina.64
Another Indian mystic who settled in the Hijaz in the early 17th century was Taj
al-Din al-Naqshbandi(d. 1640), a rival of the more famous IndianNaqshbandimystic
Ahmad al-Sirhindi(d. 1624).65Like his contemporarySibghatallahal-Barwaji,Taj alDin translatedsome of the influential works of his orderfrom Persian into Arabic, in
particularthe hagiographicalcollectionsNafahat al-Uns by Jami(d. 1492) andRashahat
'ayn al-hayat by 'Ali Kashifi (d. 1532-33). He also wrote a treatise in Arabic on the
principles of the Naqshbandiorder.The Naqshbandiorderhas often been portrayedas
hostile or lukewarmto the monism of Ibn 'Arabi, but this view has been shown to be
simplistic. Although some Naqshbandis,most famously Taj al-Din's rival Ahmad alSirhindi,were criticalof the idea of wahdat al-wujuid,otherprominentmembersof the
orderexplicitly defendedit.66This seems to have been the case with Taj al-Din and his
disciples, who areknownto have taughtIbn cArabi'scontroversialworkFusus al-hikam
in the holy cities.67
Another Naqshbandiwho openly espoused the more controversialaspects of the
teachings of Ibn 'Arabi was the Damascene scholar cAbd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi
(d. 1731). Al-Nabulusiwas initiatedinto the Naqshbandiorderby a certainAbu SacidalBalkhi, a second-generationdisciple of the prominentCentralAsian-bornIndian-based
NaqshbandiMahmudKhawand(d. 1642), yet anotherNaqshbandirival of Ahmad alSirhindi.The first task Nabulusi was set by his masterwas to write a commentaryon
Taj al-Din al-Naqshbandi'streatiseon the principlesof the order.68Al-Nabulusi, along
with al-Qushashiand al-Kurani,was perhapsthe best-known defender of the ideas of
Ibn cArabi in his time. He wrote influential commentarieson the classics of monist
mysticism, such as the Diwan of Ibn al-Faridand the Fusus al-hikamof Ibn cArabi.He
prefaced these mystical commentarieswith the remarkthat he had not consulted any
other work while writing them, and instead relied entirely on divine inspiration(fath).
This deliberatereliance on inspirationratherthan books was a recurrentfeature of the
mystical and illuminationisttraditionsand was also referredto as tahqTq,although in
this case the "verification"was affordedby mystical experience ratherthan reason.69
Al-Nabulusi also wrote a series of polemical works defending controversialmystical
practicesandideas suchas listeningto music, adoringhandsomebeardlessyouths,veneratingthe tombs of saints, and wahdatal-wujiid.70 In these exoteric writings,al-Nabulusi
often did cite other works, either to criticize them or to buttresshis own views. In his
major apology for wahdat al-wujiid, entitled al-Wujudal-haqq wa-l-khitabal-sidq, he
repeatedlysupportedhis position by citing passages from al-Dawani'sSharhal-caqa'id
al-'adudiyya,a workthatwas presumablyfirsttaughtin Damascusby Nabulusi'steacher
Mulla Mahmudal-Kurdi.71
Ibrahimal-Kuraniwas also well acquaintedwith this work by Dawani and wrote a
supercommentaryon it.72 He also taught such straightforwardlyphilosophical works
as the commentaryof Muhammadibn al-Sharifal-Jurjani(d. 1434-35) on Hidayat alhikmaby al-Abhari(d. 1265);Hikmatal-Ishraqby the illuminationistphilosopherYahya
al-Suhrawardial-Maqtul(d. 1191); and the metaphysicalsections of Sharh al-Mawaqif
fi 'ilm al-kalam by al-Sayyid al-Sharif al-Jurjani(d. 1413).73Before his initiationinto
the Shattariorder,al-Kuranihad been trainedin philosophy and philosophicaltheology
by his Kurdishteacher Muhammadal-Sharif al-Kurani(d. 1676), who wrote, among

274 Khaled El-Rouayheb

other things, a supercommentaryon the commentaryof Nasir al-Din al-Tusi (d. 1274)
on Avicenna's condensed epitome of philosophy al-Isharat.74Al-Kurani's works in
defense of wahdat al-wujfid tend to be more philosophically involved than those of
al-Nabulusi,who in general seems to have representeda more fideist strandof mystical
thought.75
The Damascene scholarMuhammadKhalil al-Muradi(d. 1791) wrote that students
came to studywith al-Kuranifrom all cornersof the Islamicworld.76Some of al-Kurani's
treatiseswere explicitly writtenat the request of scholarsand studentsfrom Fez in the
west to Javain the east.77Other18thcenturyscholarsin TurkeyandEgypt, writingbefore
the notion of pre-19thcenturydecadencetook root, treatedal-Kuranias a thinkerof the
same statureas the now better-knownPersian philosophersMir Damad (d. 1631) and
Mulla Sadra(d. 1640/41).78The Moroccanpilgrim 'Abdallahal-'Ayyashi,who studied
with al-Kuraniin Medina,has left a description-already quotedearlier-of al-Kurani's
teaching style:
His lectureon a topicremindedone of discussion(mudhakara)
forhe
andparley(mufdwada),
wouldsay:"Perhaps
thisandthat",and"Itseemsthatit is this",and"Doyou see thatthiscanbe
understood
like that?."Andif he was questionedon eventhe slightestpointhe wouldstopuntil
thematterwasestablished.79
Al-'Ayyashi's Damascenecontemporary,the biographeral-Muhibbidescribedal-Kurani
as "the Imam of tahqTq."80
With scholars such as al-Nabulusi and al-Kuranithe 17th century trends toward
tahqlq and toward an open espousal of wahdat al-wujaidcoincided. Both scholars,
to be sure, were conservative thinkers in the sense that they were to a large extent
concernedwith defending,expounding,anddevelopingtheoriesthathadbeen articulated
centuriesearlierby Ibn 'Arabiand his followers. This characteristiccorrespondsto what
MarshallHodgsonhas describedas the "conservativespirit"of the 17thcenturycultural
and intellectual florescence in Persia and India."' Having said this, it is important
to emphasize that both scholars did much more than merely repeat old maxims. For
instance, both had to address the metaphysical objections to the idea of wahdat alwujuidthathad been formulatedby Sa'd al-Din al-Taftazani(d. 1390), perhapsthe most
influentialSunnitheologianof the "post-classical"period.82Both of themalso responded
to problems and currentsof thoughtthat were peculiarto their times. Al-Nabulusi,for
example, intervenedin the debate concerning the religious permissibilityof tobacco,
introducedinto the Middle East in the early 17th century.83He also arguedagainst the
moralist vigilantism of the violently puritanKadizadeli movement that spread in the
OttomanEmpirein the 17thcentury.14Al-Kurani,for his part,got involved in a dispute
with the followers of the controversialIndian Naqshbandimystic Ahmad al-Sirhindi
in Medina.85He also got involved in scholarly disputes because of his acceptance
of the historicity of the Satanic verses and of his elaborationand defense of a nonAsh'ari position on the issue of free will. On both issues, he was strongly opposed by
contemporaryMaghribitheologiansin the traditionof al-Sanusi,such as al-Hasanal-Yusi
and Yahya al-Shawi.86These scholarly disputes have yet to be studied thoroughly,but
their very existence belies the predominantimage of the lethargic,moribundcharacter
of intellectual life in the Arabic-speakingparts of the Ottoman Empire in the 17th
century.

Opening the Gate of Verification 275

CONCLUSION

The fact that al-Kuraniand prominentMaghribitheologians were at loggerheads is a

salutaryreminderthatthe scholarlytrendspresentedin the presentarticle were distinct
and did not necessarily agree on substantialissues. An emphasison verification,logical
demonstration,or Aristoteliandialectic in scholastic culturedid not necessarily lead to
the same conclusions. Maghribitheologians in the traditionof al-Sanusi, for example,
were staunchAsh'aritesandtendednot to sharethe moreirenicattitudetowardMu'tazilis
andIslamicphilosopherscharacteristicof al-Dawani.Mystics of the Ibn 'Arabitradition,
such as al-Nabulusi, could at times strike a fideist note and criticize excessive preoccupation with rational sciences such as logic, semantics, and philosophical theology.
The point of the presentarticle has not been to suggest that the new intellectualtrends
formed a united front sharing common ideas that may be capturedby a single term
such as "revival"or "reawakening"or "enlightenment."Such termsare problematicand
best avoided, partly because they tend to elide significant differences between various
thinkersandtraditions,andpartlybecause-as statedat the outsetof the presentarticlethey suggest, without adequatesupportin the sources, a previousperiod of dormantand
benighted intellectual and culturallife. This idea of centuries of intellectual darkness
needs, I believe, wholesale questioning,and it has not been my intentmerely to quibble
aboutthe date at which it came to an end.
WhatI have triedto do in this articleis to questionthe received pictureof intellectual
life in the Arabic provinces of the OttomanEmpire in what is often assumed to be a
dormant,"prerevival"period. I should emphasize that I do not claim to have presented
a full account of each of these developments.My aim has ratherbeen to drawattention
to them and to suggest some lines for furtherresearch,unencumberedby preconceived
ideas of an Islamic "darkage." The sources of the period do not supporta picture of
unmitigatedintellectual stagnationor "culturalapathy"that stands in contrastto the
economic and urban expansion of the period. There is also no basis for saying that
Arabic scholarly culture was isolated from more general trends in the Islamic world
and feeding off its own classical past. Nor is it true that scholarly culturewas mired in
rote acquisitionof the religious sciences. On the contrary,the figures usually presented
as 18th century "revivalists"and "reformers"such as MuhammadMurtadaal-Zabidi
(d. 1791), Muhammadibn 'Abd al-Wahhab(d. 1792), Shah Wali Allah al-Dihlawi
(d. 1762), and Muhammadal-Shawkani(d. 1834), despite their differences, all shared
a much dimmer view of the value of the rational sciences than Maghribi and
Persian-Kurdishscholarsin the traditionsof al-Sanusiandal-Dawani.87They can indeed
be seen as revertingto the traditionof hostility to such sciences representedby earlier
scholarssuch as Ibn Taymiyyaand al-Suyuti.
Formany of the "revivalists"of the 18thand 19thcentury,the emphasisfell on ijtihad,
ratherthan on tahqTqin the sense of rational or mystical-experiential verification of
received scholarly opinions. As has been pointed out by R. Peters, the call for renewed
ijtih-d in the 18th and 19th centuriestendedto go hand in hand, not with "rationalism"
or "modernism"as is often supposed, but with "fundamentalism,"that is, a radically
scripturalistand antischolastic stance.88The prevalent scholastic traditionwas found
wanting,not because it was insufficiently"rational"or "flexible,"but precisely because
it was believed to have been too flexible and rationalthroughthe ages and had ceased

276 KhaledEl-Rouayheb
to be sufficiently grounded in the Qur'an and the Sunna. The 18th and 19th century
"revivalists,"naturallyenough, tendedto portraytheiropponentsas rigid andunthinking
imitators.Less understandably,a host of modernhistorians,both Westernand Eastern,
have uncritically adopted this partisanview. Consequently,the very existence of an
alternativeto both scripturalistijtihad and unthinkingimitationwas lost to sight. The
age before the 18th and 19th century "revivalist"ijtihatdmovements was accordingly
viewed as marredby rigid and unthinkingimitation.
The Damascene biographeral-Muhibbi would hardly have recognized the picture
of pervasive intellectual apathy and unthinkingimitationin the 17th century.He was
initiated into the Khalwati order that, apparentlyfor the first time, gained popularity
with Damascene scholars and promoted a bolder and more enthusiastic espousal of
the theories of Ibn 'Arabi. His teacherstold him that a Kurdishscholar who settled in
Damascusin the firstdecadeof the 17thcenturyhadintroducednew scholarlyhandbooks
by Persian scholars, thus "opening the gate of verification."He was also personally
acquaintedwith a host of intellectualluminaries.The polymathAhmadibn LutfallahalMawlawi, who wrote a universalhistory,translatedfromPersianinto Arabicthe treatise
on figurative language by Isfara'ini, and wrote a work on the medical propertiesof
Europeanherbs,was a personalacquaintance.When the MoroccanscholarMuhammad
al-Rudanisettled in Damascus, al-Muhibbiand al-Mawlawivisited him and noted the
strong impression he made on local scholars with the breadthof his knowledge and
his new astronomicalinstrument.89Al-Muhibbialso met the renownedliteraryscholar
'Abd al-Qadir al-Baghdadi (d. 1682), the authorof a still esteemed compendiumof
early Arabic poetry Khizanat al-adab, and of an Arabic commentaryon the versified
Persian-Turkishdictionaryof Ibrahimal-Shahidi (d. 1550).90The towering reputation
of the mystic and scholar Ibrahimal-Kurani,the "imam of tahqtq,"had also reached
him from Medina, and he was well aware of the intellectual standing of his fellow
Damascene 'Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi,"our teacher,our relative, and our blessing."91
Indeed al-Muhibbihimself was a considerable scholar, whose writings belie the idea
that Arab-Islamic scholars were parochial and feeding off their own classical past.
Al-Muhibbi's anthology of contemporarypoets, Nafhat al-rayhana is an impressive
testimony to the opposite. Not only did al-Muhibbigo to great lengths to gatherpoems
from all corners of the Arab world, but he also included contemporaryTurkishand
Persian poets in his survey and he translatedseveral of their poems into Arabic.92AlMuhibbi also wrote one of the most extensive premodernworks on foreign loanwords
in Arabic:Qasd al-sabil fimafi lughat al-'arab min dakhil.93
For some time, it has been conceded that a scholar like al-Nabulusiwas a luminous
"exception"in a dark age of "imitationand compilation."94Al-Rudani has also been
portrayedby a recent Arab historianas a lone genius in a civilization that had passed
its prime and descended into "ignorance"(jahl wa-ghafla) and "resignation"(ya's).95
More recently, Ibrahim al-Kuranihas been presented as a "revivalist"in a century
otherwisemarkedby "extremist"Sufism and a "trivializedulema discourse"that"could
no longer go any further."96
It is tempting at this point to make use of the historianof
science ThomasKuhn'sconceptof an "anomaly,"thatis, an acknowledgedfact thatdoes
not fit comfortablywith the overall assumptionsguiding a community of scientists or
scholars.As Kuhnpointed out, the multiplicationof anomaliesputs additionalpressure
on the guiding assumptions-what he calls the dominant"paradigm"-of a community

Opening the Gate of Verification 277

of scholars, and may well lead to a "revolutionary"situation in which this paradigm
is widely challenged.97It may perhaps be plausible to representa single scholar as
an "exception."However, as more and more "exceptions"are conceded, the standard
interpretationof the period comes under pressure. Rather than increasing the list of
exceptions,it may be morefruitfulto ask whetherthe culturalandintellectualflorescence
that is often thoughtto have occurredin the Safavid and Moghul Empires in the 17th
century was a more general phenomenonin the Islamic world. From this perspective,
scholarssuch as al-Hasanal-Yusi,Muhammadal-Rudani,Ibrahimal-Kurani,and 'Abd
al-Ghanial-Nabulusiappear,not as "exceptions"but as contemporariesandcounterparts
of 17thcenturyPersianand Indianscholarssuch as Baha' al-Din al-'Amili, Mulla Sadra
al-Shirazi,Ahmad al-Sirhindi,and 'Abd al-Hakimal-Siyalkuti.

NOTES
Author'snote: I thankProfessorMichael Cook, ProfessorRob Wisnovsky,Dr. Basim Musallam,and the
anonymousreferees of IJMESfor their helpful remarkson earlierdraftsof this paper,as well as Dr. Kate A.
Bennison for kindly takingthe time to teach me how to readMaghribiscript.I also thankthe BritishAcademy
for fundingmy research.
1H. A. R. Gibb and H. Bowen, Islamic Society and the West(London: Oxford University Press, 1957),
vol. 1, partII, 159-64.
2A. Raymond, "The OttomanConquest and the Development of the Great Arab Towns,"International
Journal of TurkishStudies 1 (1980): 84-101; A. Raymond,TheGreatArab Cities in the 16th-18th Centuries:
An Introduction(New York:New YorkUniversityPress, 1984), 5-9; A. Raymond,Cairo (Cambridge,Mass.:
HarvardUniversity Press, 2000), 216-25; See also A. Abdel Nour, Introductiona l'histoire urbaine de la
Syrie ottomane,XVIe-XVIIIe(Beirut:Publicationsde l'Universit6Libanaise, 1982).
3Raymond,"The OttomanConquest,"97-98.
4M. Hodgson, The Ventureof Islam (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), vol. 3. See also
E. Yarshater,"ThePersianPresence in the Islamic World,"in The Persian Presence in the Islamic World,ed.
R. Hovanissianand G. Sabbagh(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1997).
5See N. Levtzion and J. O. Voll (eds.), Eighteenth-CenturyRenewal and Reform in Islam (Syracuse:
SyracuseUniversityPress, 1987); J. O. Voll, "Foundationsfor Renewal andReform,"in The OxfordHistory of
Islam, ed. J. Esposito (Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress, 1999);ReinhardtSchulze, "Das islamische achtzehnte
WeltdesIslams 30 (1990): 140-59; ReinhardtSchulze, "Wasistdie islamische Aufklhrung?",
Jahrhundert,"Die
Die Weltdes Islams 36 (1996): 276-325; P. Gran,TheIslamicRoots of Capitalism:Egypt 1760-1840 (Austin,
Tex.: Universityof Texas Press, 1978).
6MuhammadAmin al-Muhibbi,Khulasat al-athar fi a'yan al-qarn al-hadi 'ashar (Cairo: al-Matba'a
al-wahbiyya,1284H), 4:329-30.
7MuhammadKhalil al-Muradi,Silkal-durarfi a'yan al-qarnal-thani 'ashar (Istanbul& Cairo:al-Matba'a
al-miriyyaal-'amira, 1291H-1301H), 3:10.
8KaraHalil (d. 1711), MehmedEminHagiyasi (Istanbul:Matbaa-iAmire 1258H), 7. For the translationof
tahqfqas "verification,"and its juxtapositionto taqlfd, see D. Gutas,Avicennaand the AristotelianTradition
(Leiden:E. J. Brill, 1988), 188-91.
9Kamal al-Din al-Ghazzi, al-Wirdal-unsi wa-l-warid al-qudsifi tarjamatal-'arif bi-llah 'Abd al-Ghani
al-Nabulusi (MS: BritishLibrary:Or.11862) 54a-b.
10Abu-al-Mawahibal-Hanbali,Mashyakha,ed. MuhammadMuti' al-Hafiz (Damascus:Dar al-fikr, 1990),
86-87.
" Al-Burini studied the semantic-rhetorical works of al-Taftazani and al-Jurjani with Isma'il al-Nabulusi
(d. 1585) and 'Imad al-Din al-Hanafi (d. 1578), see Hasan al-Burini, Tarajim al-a'yan min abna' al-zaman,
ed. Salah al-Din al-Munajjid (Damascus: al-Majma' al-'ilmi al-'Arabi, 1959-63), 2:65, 2:303.
12Ibrahim al-Kurani, al-Amam li-iqaz al-himam (Hyderabad: Matba'at majlis da'irat al-ma'arif alnizamiyya, 1328H), 104-10.

278 Khaled El-Rouayheb

13KatibCelebi,Kashfal-zununCanasami al-kutubwa-l-funun(Istanbul:MaarifMatbaasi,1941-43), 2:1372
(al-Jami'scommentaryon al-Kafiyaandthe glosses of Isfara'ini);1:477 (Talkhisal-miftahandits commentary
by Isfara'ini); 1:898 (al-Iji's Risalat al-wad' and the commentaryof al-Isfara'ini);1:845 (al-Samarqandi's
Risalat al-isti'ara and its commentaryby al-Isfara'ini); 1:516 (al-Taftazani'sTahdhibal-mantiq and its
commentaryby al-Dawani);2:1144 (al-Iji's 'Aqa'id and its commentaryby al-Dawani).
14Thisis of course an argumentthatis difficultto proveconclusively,but we have quitedetailedinformation
on the educationof both scholars,andthe worksof al-Dawaniandal-Isfara'iniarenot mentionedin thiscontext.
On al-Burini,see the references above, which show him to have studied the rhetoricalworks of al-Taftazani
and al-Jurjani.On al-Ghazzi, see al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 4:189-200.
15Ibnal-'Imadal-Hanbali,Shadharatal-dhahabfi akhbarman dhahab (Cairo:Maktabatal-qudsi, 1351H),
8:291 (on al-Isfara'ini)and 8:160 (on al-Dawani).See also al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar,3:87. Ibn al-'Imad's
biographicalinformationon al-Isfara'iniand al-Dawaniis scanty,and his dates of deathare wrong. However,
it is significantthathe still felt the need to include a referenceto the two scholars.By contrast,Najm al-DinalGhazzi, in his biographicaldictionaryof Muslimnotablesof the tenthcenturyof the Muslim era (1494-1591),
did not provide an entry on either scholar; see Najm al-Din Muhammadal-Ghazzi, al-Kawakibal-sa'ira fi
acyan al-mi'a al-'ashira, ed. J. Jabbur(Beirut:AmericanUniversityof BeirutPublications,1945-58).
16IbncAbd al-Hadi taught al-Isfara'ini'sSharh al-risala al-wadCiyyato the biographeral-Muhibbi,see
al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 2:438. Al-Qattantaughtal-Dawani'scommentaryon the creed of al-Iji to the
chronicler Ibn Kannanal-Salihi (d. 1740), see Ibn Kannanal-Salihi, al-Hawadith al-yawmiyya min tarikh
ihda 'ashar wa-alf wa-mi'a, ed. AkramHasanal-'Ulabi (Damascus:Dar al-Tabbac,1994), 84.
17Al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 3:147-48, 3:87-88.
18Al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 1:313 (on al-Ghunaymi)and 1:332 (on al-Khafaji).
190n al-'Ulaymi, see al-Muhibbi, Khulasat al-athar, 4:491-92. He was accused by a later scholar of
plagiarizingfrom al-Isfara'ini'scommentary,see Ibn Sa'id al-Tunisi,Hashiya cala Sharh al-Khabisi [printed
on the lower marginsof Hasanal-'Attar,Hashiya cala sharh al-Khabisi (Cairo:MatbaCat
Bulaq, 1290H)],3.
20'Abdallahal-'Ayyashi,Rihla (Rabat:Dar al-Maghrib,1977 [reprintof lithographededition of 1316H]),
1:140.
21'Abd al-Rahman al-Jabarti,'Aja'ib al-athar fi al-tarajim wa-l-akhbar (Bulaq: al-MatbaCaal-'amira,
1297H), 1:287.
221 have consultedthe manuscriptof the translationin the Berlin Staatsbibliothek(MS: Sprenger1093), in
the preambleof which the translator'sname is given as Ahmad al-Mawlawi (fol. 2a). Anothermanuscriptof
the work, extant in the BiblothequeNationalein Paris,also give this as the translator'sname, see M. Le Baron
de Slane, Catalogue des Manuscritsarabes (Paris:ImprimeriesNationale, 1883-95), 4429.
23Muhammadal-Sabban,Hashiya 'ala Sharhal-Sullam (Cairo:al-Matba'aal-azhariyya,1319H), 10 (lines

3-4).
24MehmedStireyya, Sicill-i Osmani (Istanbul:Matbaa-iAmire, 1308-15H), 1:232; Mehmed TahirBursali, Osmanl Miiellifleri (Istanbul:Matbaa-iAmire, 1333-42H), 3:142. Carl Brockelmann,Geschichteder
ArabischenLiteratur(Leiden:E. J. Brill, 1937-49), Supplement2:637.
25Encyclopaediaof lslam, 2nd ed. (Leiden:E. J. Brill, 1954), s.v. "Al-Dawani"(A. K. S. Lambton),2:174.
26HajjiKhalifa,Kashf al-zunun,2:1372.
27Jalalal-Din al-Dawani,Sharhal-'aqa'id al-Cadudiyya(Istanbul:'Arif Efendi, 1316H), 2.
28A1-Dawani,Sharh al-Caqa'idal-'adudiyya,27.
29Al-Dawani,Sharh al-'aqa'id al-Cadudiyya,28 ff.
30See A. Knysh, lhbn'Arabi in the Later Islamic Tradition(Albany, N.Y.: SUNY Press, 1999), 141-65. It
should be noted, however, that Knysh relies heavily on the tract Fadihat al-mulhidinthat has been falsely
attributedto al-Taftazani.The authorof the tractis rather'Ala' al-Din al-Bukhari(d. 1438), as shown by Bakri
Aladdin in the introductionto his edition of 'Abd al-Ghanial-Nabulusi,al-Wujudal-haqq (Damascus:Institut
Francaisde Damas, 1995), 16-30. The hostility of al-Taftazanito the theory of wahdat al-wujtd is not in
doubt, however,and is attestedby his other works.
31Al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 2:242 (line 5).
32Al-Ayyashi, Rihla, 1:333.
33See Carl Brockelmann, Geschichte der Arabische Literatur [henceforth GALJ (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 193749), 2:208-9.
34Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, Sawn al-mantiq wa-l-kalam 'Canfannay al-mantiq wa-l-kalam, ed. 'Ali Sami alNashshar (Cairo: Maktabat al-Khanji, n.d.), page lam of editor's introduction, citing Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti,

Opening the Gate of Verification 279

Husn al-muhadarafi akhbar Misr wa-l-Qahira, ed. MuhammadAbu al-Fadl Ibrahim(Cairo: 'Isa al-Babi
al-Halabi, 1967-68), 1:338.
35MuhammadMurtadaal-Zabidi,Ithaf al-sada al-muttaqinbi-sharhIhya' 'ulumal-din (Cairo:al-Matba'a
al-muyammaniyya,1311H), 1:179.
36Al-Zabidi,Ithaf al-sada al-muttaqin,1:179-80.
37See my "Wasthere a Revival of Logical Studies in Eighteenth-CenturyEgypt?",Die Weltdes Islams 45
(2005): 1-19.
38Thefirsttwo works(andtheircommentaries)were taughtby Yusi'sstudent'Abdallahal-Kinaksito Ahmad
al-Damanhuri(d. 1778), see al-Jabarti,'Aja'ib al-athar, 2:25-27. The thirdwork (and its commentaries)was
taughtby Maghribischolars such as 'Isa al-Tha'alibi(d. 1669) and Yahyaal-Shawi (d. 1685), both of whom
settled in the easternArab lands, see al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 2:240-43, 4:486-88.
39Muhammadibn Yusuf al-Sanusi, Sharh ummal-barahin [printedwith the Hashiya of Muhammadibn
'Arafaal-Dasuqi (d. 1815)] (Beirut:Dar al-kutubal-'ilmiyya, 2001), 70 ff.; Muhammadibn Yusufal-Sanusi,
'Umdatahl al-tawfiq bi sharh 'aqidat ahl al-tawhid (Cairo:Matba'atjaridatal-Islam, 1316H), 11 ff.
40See M. Horten, "Sanusi und die griechische Philosophie," Der Islam 6 (1915): 178-88, and
A. J. Wensinck,The MuslimCreed (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1932), 248.
41Al-Sanusi,'Umdat ahl al-tawfiq, 140 ff., 276-77.
42Quotedin 'Abbas al-Samlali, al-I'lam bi-man halla Marrakushwa-aghmat min al-a'lam, ed. 'Abd alWahhabibn Mansur(Rabat:al-Matba'aal-malakiyya,2001), 3:162.
43A1-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 1:302-11.
44A1-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 4:204-8.
45Al-'Ayyashi,Rihla, 2:30.
46A1-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 4:207.
47Thiswork was printedin 1961 in Medina (Matba'atal-Sayyid 'AbdallahHashim al-Yamani).
48OnBasri, see J.O. Voll, "'Abdallahibn Salim al-Basri and 18th century Hadith Scholarship,"Die Welt
des Islams 42 (2002): 356-72. Al-Rudaniis describedas muhaddithal-Hijaz in Muradi,Silk al-durar, 4:27.
'Abdallahibn Salim al-Basri'sson wrote thathis fatherstudied"all the sciences" with al-Rudani,"especially
the science of Hadith,"see Salim ibn 'Abdallah al-Basri, al-Imdadbi-ma'rifat'uluww al-isnad (Hyderabad:
Matba'atmajlis da'iratal-ma'arifal-nizamiyya, 1328H), 68.
49SeeR. Mach, Catalogue of the ArabicManuscripts(YahudaSection) in the GarrettCollection,Princeton
UniversityLibrary(Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversityPress, 1977), 4950.
50Al-'Ayyashi,Rihla, 2:42. For an extantmanuscriptof the work, see Mach, Catalogue, 5017.
51Al-'Ayyashi,Rihla, 2:38.
52Al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 4:206.
53SeeC. Pellat (ed.), "Muhammadal-Rudani:al-Naqi'a calaal-'ala al-naficah," Bulletin d'etudes orientales
26 (1973): 7-82. C. Pellat (trans.), "L'astrolabespherique d'al-Rudani,"Bulletin d'etudes orientales 28
(1975): 83-165. I follow MuhammadHajji in amendingthe title of al-Rudani'stract given by Pellat on the
basis of manuscriptsnot availableto Pellat, see Muhammadal-Rudani,Silat al-khalafbi-mawsulal-salaf, ed.
MuhammadHajji (Beirut:Dar al-Gharbal-Islami, 1988), 13, n. 9.
54A1-Muhibbi,Khulasat al-athar, 2:243-44. See also A. Copty, "The Naqshbandiyyaand its offspring,
in the Haramaynin the 1lth/17th Century,"Die Weltdes Islams 43 (2003):
the Naqshbandiyya-Mujaddidiya,
321-48. Although al-Barwaji,vocalization given in al-Muhibbi,ibid., 2:243 (line 19-20), was also initiated
into the Naqshbandiorder,his primaryallegiance seems-pace Copty--to have been to the Shattariyyaorder.
He was a disciple of Wajihal-Din al-'Alawi (d. 1609), a disciple of the prominentShattarimystic Muhammad
GhawthGwaliori, see J. S. Trimingham,The Sufi Orders in Islam (Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress, 1998),
97-98; and A. Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam (Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina
Press, 1975), 355. In giving the Sufi chains into which he was initiated,Barwaji'ssecond-generationdisciple
Ahmad al-Qushashi gives the Shattarichain first. See Ahmad al-Qushashi, al-Simt al-majid (Hyderabad:
Da'iratal-ma'arifal-nizamiyya, 1327H), 67. The Naqshbandichain is given much later,on page 78.
55Onal-Shinnawi,see al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 1:243-46. On al-Qushashi,see al-Muhibbi,Khulasat
al-athar, 1:343-46. The vocalization al-Qushashi is given in al-'Ayyashi, Rihla, 1:408 (lines 23-24). On
al-Kurani,see al-Muradi,Silk al-durar, 1:5-6; A. Knysh, "Ibrahimal-Kurani(d. 1101/1690), an apologist
for wahdatal-wujud,"Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 5 (1995): 39-47; Encyclopaediaoflslam, 2nd ed.
(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1954), s.v. "Al-Kurani"(A. H. Jones), 5:432-33; B. Nafi, "Tasawwufand Reform in
Pre-ModernIslamic Culture:In Searchof Ibrahimal-Kurani,"Die Weltdes Islams 42 (2002): 307-55.

280 Khaled El-Rouayheb

56Thetranslationis extantin the BritishLibrary(MS: Or.9039). On the Persianoriginal,see Brockelmann,
GAL,Supplement1:794, and O. Yahia,Histoireet classification de l'oeuvre d'Ibn 'Arabi(Damascus:Institut
Francaisde Damas, 1964), 1:119. Secondarysources usually give the vocalizational-Barzanji,but I presume
the scholarhailed from the present-dayIraqiKurdishtown of Barzinja.
57See Muhammad ibn Abi-al-Hasan al-Bakri, Tarjuman al-asrar wa-diwan al-abrar, MS: Berlin
Staatsbibliothek:Wetzstein II 227: 3b-4a; 'Abd al-Wahhabal-Sha'rani,al-Yawaqitwa-l-jawahirfi bayan
'aqa'id al-akabir (Cairo: Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1959), 7, 13; 'Abd al-Ra'uf al-Munawi, al-Kawakib
al-durriyafi tarajimal-sada al-sufiyya, ed. MuhammadAdib al-Jadir(Beirut:Dar Sadir, 1999) 2:421, 2:503,
2:515. On al-Sha'rani'sapologetic attitudeto the work of Ibn 'Arabi, see also M. Winter,Society and Religion
in Early OttomanEgypt (New Brunswick,N.J.: TransactionBooks, 1982), 165-72.
58A1-Ayyashi,Rihla, 1:417.
59Al-Zabidi,Ithaf al-sada al-muttaqin,1:256.
60A1-Zabidi,Ithaf al-sada al-muttaqin,2:245-46.
61Quotedin al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 4:80.
Khulasatal-athar, 1:248-50. Al-Muhibbigives the vocalizational-'Usali on 1:249 (line 16).
62A1-Muhibbi,
63Abual-Mawahibal-Hanbali,Mashyakha,p. 106-7.
64A1-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 1:428-33. Ayyub's admirationfor al-Qushashiis apparentfrom a letter
partlyreproducedin Ibid., 1:244-45.
65Al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 1:464-70.
66HamidAlgar, "A Brief History of the Naqshbandiorder,"in Naqshbandis: cheminementset situations
actuelle d'une ordremystiquemusulman,ed. M. Gaborieau,et al. (Paris:EditionsIsis, 1990), 21.
67A1-Muhibbi,Khulasat al-athar, 4:203-4 (a studentof Taj al-Din teaches the works of Ibn 'Arabi) and
4:442 (a scholarfrom Hadramawtstudies the Fusus with Tajal-Din).
68A1-Ghazzi,al-Wirdal-unsi, 56a.
69For the use of the word tahqTqin the mystical and illuminationisttraditionsto denote inspirational
knowledge or gnosis, as opposed to scholastic rational knowledge, see E. Kohlberg,"Aspects of Akhbari
Thoughtin the Seventeenthand EighteenthCenturies,"in Eighteenth-CenturyRenewaland Revival in Islam,
ed. Levtzion and Voll, 139-45; W. Chittick, The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn 'Arabi's Metaphysics of
Imagination(Albany,N.Y.: SUNY Press, 1989), 166-68.
70See his Ghayatal-matlubfi mahabbatal-mahbub,ed. S. Pagani(Rome: Bardi, 1995); Idah al-dalalatfi
sama' al-alat, ed. A. Hammush(Damascus:Dar al-Fikr, 1981); Kashfal-nur 'an ashab al-qubur(Princeton,
N.J.: MS: PrincetonUniversityLibraryYahuda3977), 157-66.
71Al-Nabulusi,al-Wujudal-haqq, 25, 69, 98, 140.
72Passagesfrom these glosses are quoted in Khayral-Din Nu'man al-Alusi, Jala'al-'aynaynfi muhakamat
al-Ahmadayn(Beirut:Dar al-kutubal-'ilmiyya, no date), 339.
73Al-'Ayyashi,Rihla, 1:333-36. Al-'Ayyashi studiedthe three works with al-Kuraniin Medina.
74Al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 4:280-81.
75Thisis suggested by comparingal-Nabulusi'sal-Wujudal-haqq and al-Kurani'sMatla' al-jud bi-tahqiq
al-tanzihfi wahdatal-wujud(MS: ChesterBeatty4443), 15-39.
Silk al-durar, 1:5.
76A1-Muradi,
77For example, his al-Jawabat al-ghurrawiyyaCanal-as'ila al-Jawiyya (mentioned by al-Muradi)and
Nibras al-inas bi-ajwibatsu'alan li-ahl Fas (MS: SuleymaniyeLaleli 3744).
78See for example Raghib Pasha (d. 1763), Safinat al-raghib (Beirut: MaktabatLubnan),279, 296, 339,
857; Ibrahimal-Madhari(d. 1776), al-Lumcafi tahqiq mabahithal-wujud wa-l-huduthwa-l-qadar wa-af'al
al-'ibad (Cairo:Matba'atal-anwar,1939), 24, 34, 54, 57.
79Al-'Ayyashi,Rihla, 1:333.
Khulasatal-athar 2:122 (line 33).
oAl1-Muhibbi,
81Hodgson,The Ventureof lslam 3:14-15.
82A1-Nabulusicounteredthe argumentsof al-Taftazaniin his al-Wujudal-haqq, 36-8, 121-48. Al-Kurani
arguedagainstal-Taftazaniin his commentaryon al-Tuhfaal-mursala-at least this is whathe states in another
work Tanbih al-'uqul 'ala tanzih al-sufiyya 'an i'tiqad al-tajsim wa-l-'Cayniyya wa-l-ittihad wa-l-hulul (MS:
Chester Beatty 4443), 45b-46a.
83Al-Sulh bayna al-ikhwanfi hukm ibahat al-dukhkhan (Damascus: al-Matba'a al-salafiyya, 1924).
84Michael Cook, Commanding the Right and Forbidding the Wrong in Islamic Thought (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2000), 325-28.

Opening the Gate of Verification 281

85Al-'Ayyashi,Rihla, 1:404. Al-Kurani'spupil and disciple al-Barzinjiwrote a tractdenouncingthe ideas
of Sirhindi,see Y. Friedmann,ShaykhAhmadSirhindi(Montreal:McGill Instituteof Islamic Studies, 1971),
97-99; Copty,"TheNaqshbandiyya,"331-45.
tracton the Satanicverses has been studied and edited by A. Guillaume, see his "al-Lum'at
86A1-Kurani's
al-saniya by Ibrahimal-Kurani"in Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 20 (1957): 291303. It provokeda virulent attackby Yahya al-Shawi, and a defense by al-Kurani'sstudent al-Barzinji,see
P.K.Hittiet al., DescriptiveCatalogof the GarrettCollectionofArabicManuscriptsin thePrinceton University
Library(Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversityPress, 1938), 460-61. Al-Kurani'sworks on free will provoked
rejoindersfrom severalMaghribischolars,includingal-Hasanal-Yusi,see Muhammadibn al-Tayyibal-Qadiri,
Nashr al-mathanili-ahl al-qarn al-hadi cashar wa-l-thani, ed. MuhammadHajji and Ahmad Tawfiq(Rabat:
Maktabatal-matalib,1986), 3:9-10.
87A1-Zabidi'soppositionto logic has been noted above. For the lukewarmattitudeof al-Shawkaniand Shah
Wali Allah to the rationalsciences, see, respectively,B. Haykal,Revival and Reformin Islam: TheLegacy of
Muhammadal-Shawkani(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 2003), 86, 104; and B.D. Metcalf,Islamic
Revival in India: Deoband, 1860-1900 (Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversityPress, 1982), 38.
88R.Peters, "Idjtihadand Taqlidin 18th and 19th CenturyIslam,"Die Weltdes Islams 20 (1980): 132-45.
89Al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 4:204 (line 21).
Khulasatal-athar,4:453. Al-Baghdadi'scommentaryon Tuhfatal-Shahidi is extant(British
90A1-Muhibbi,
LibraryMS: Or. 13880).
91Al-Muhibbi,Khulasatal-athar, 1:52 (lines 13-14).
92MuhammadAmin al-Muhibbi,Nafhat al-rayhana wa-rashhattila' al-hana, ed. 'Abd al-FattahMuhammad al-Hilu(Cairo:Darihya' al-kutubal-'Arabiyya1967-69), 3:3-138 (Turkishpoets) and 3:214-38 (Persian
poets).
93'UthmanMahmudal-Sini (ed.) (Riyad:Maktabatal-tawba, 1994).
94Gibband Bowen, Islamic Society and the West,vol. 1, partII, 164.
95See Muhammadal-Hajji's comments in the introductionto his edition of al-Rudani's Silat al-khalaf
bi-mawsulal-salaf, 13.
96Nafi,"Tasawwufand Reformin Pre-ModernIslamic Culture."
97T.S. Kuhn,TheStructureof ScientificRevolutions,2nd ed. (Chicago:Universityof Chicago Press, 1970),
chap. 6.