Claude GILLIOT Mujahid S Exegesis. Origi PDF

Tafsı̄r and Islamic
Intellectual History
Exploring the Boundaries of
a Genre
ED I T ED BY
Andreas Görke and Johanna Pink
3
in association with
T HE I N ST I TU TE OF I S MAI L I S T UD IE S
LON DON
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP
Oxford University Press is a depart ment of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s object ive of excel lence in research, scholarship,
and education by publish ing worldwide in
Oxford New York
Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi
New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
With offices in
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press
in the UK and in certain other countries
Published in the United States
by Oxford University Press Inc., New York
© Islamic Publications Ltd 2014
The moral rights of the authors have been asser ted

Database right Oxford University Press (maker)
First published 2014
All rights reserved. No part of this public ation may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmit ted, in any form or by any means,
without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press,
or as expressly permit ted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate
reprographics rights organiz ation. Enquiries concern ing reproduc tion
outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department,
Oxford University Press, at the address above
You must not circu late this book in any other binding or cover
and you must impose the same condition on any acquirer
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Data available
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Data available
Cover illustration:
‘The Great Abū Sa"ūd Teaching Law’. Folio from an illustrated manuscript ‘Divan of Ma#mūd
"Abd al-Bāqī’. Attributed to Turkey. Mid-16th century. © The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
New York, and Photo SCALA, Florence, 2014.
Cover design: Alnoor Nathani and Russell Harris

Index by Sally Phillips, Advanced Professional Member, Society of Indexers
Typeset by RefineCatch Ltd, Bungay, Suffolk
Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by
TJ International, Padstow, Cornwall
ISBN 978-0-19-870206-1
2
Mujāhid’s Exegesis: Origins, Paths of
Transmission and Development of a
Meccan Exegetical Tradition in its
Human, Spiritual and Theological
Environment
C L AU DE GI L L IOT
In memoriam Meir Jacobi Kister Hierosolymitae Polonii, obiit

yom sheni ( !" #$% ) VI (%) eloul (&%&') MMMMMDCCLXX/die
Lunae a.d. III non. Aug. MMDCCLXIII/die lunae XVI Aug.
AD MMX, in historia Arabum ante religionem Mahometae
viri doctissimi, historiaeque initiarum istius religionis, sive
narrationum aut fabu larum apud Mahometanos traditarum,
peritissimi. Requiescat in sinu Abrahae.
1 Introduction
A FTER THE EPOCHMAKING PAGES of Ignáz Goldziher (1850–1921)1

on certain features of Mujāhid’s exegesis, and particularly its
‘rationalist’ feature, we have had at our disposal since 1969 a good
study of the personality, environment and exegesis of this first/
seventh-century Meccan scholar,2 and two more on his exegesis
and its paths of transmission,3 to which we must add the important
sections on Mujāhid and the Qadarīs in Mecca by Josef van Ess.4
However, thanks particularly to two sources, the first of
which has been used not enough, and the second not at all, in
earlier studies on Mujāhid, recent editions of unedited Qur’anic
63
Published in: Tafsīr and Islamic Intellectual History: Exploring the Boundaries
of a Genre, ed. Andreas Görke and Johanna Pink. Oxford, Oxford University
Press in association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2014, pp. 63-111.
Copyright Islamic Publications Ltd 2014
Claude Gilliot
commentaries and other works, we can gain a better insight into

the origins and transmission of Mujāhid’s legacy, as well as the
Qadarī orientations of many of its transmitters.
The first source is the historiographer Ya*qūb b. Sufyān al-Fasawī
(d. 277/890),5 who collected information on domestic relations
(important for the transmission of Mujāhid’s legacy) directly from
A:mad b. Mu:ammad b. *Abd Allāh, the great-grandson of
Mujāhid’s pupil al-Qāsim b. (Nāfi* b.) Abī Bazza (d. 124/741 or
125/742, but 115/733 according to al-Bukhārī’s al-Ta!rīkh al-awsa#).6
The second source is Abū Nu*aym al-I;fahānī (A:mad b. *Abd
Allāh, d. 430/1038), in his notice on Mujāhid in $ilyat al-awliyā! wa
#abaqāt al-a&fiyā!, who deals not only with Mujāhid’s exegesis and
its transmission, but with his hadith transmission, and also with
the ascetic features of his life (ascetic in the particular manner in
which asceticism, zuhd, is understood in Islam).
The exegetical sayings of Mujāhid, or the Qur’anic interpreta-
tions attributed to him in the different versions or transmissions of
his tafsīr, are particularly important within the broader framework
of Islamic intellectual history because in many of these interpreta-
tions we find theological ideas in nuce which were developed by
the following generations of exegetes, not only by Qadarīs and
Mu*tazilīs, but also by predestinationists. We also find in it the style
of the storytellers (qu&&ā&), as well as a spiritual orientation which
is, in a way, a basis for later Sufi exegesis.
2 Elements of Mujaˉhid’s Life and Milieu

We will not give here a complete picture of Mujāhid, whose full
name was Abū’l-=ajjāj Mujāhid b. Jabr al-Makkī al-Aswad al-Qāri>
(d. 104/722 or 103/721), client (mawlā) of al-Sā>ib b. Abī’l-Sā>ib
al-Makhzūmī (or another of the Makhzūmīs),7 nor of the different
chains of transmission of his exegesis,8 as these subjects have been
dealt with in several studies, as mentioned above. In general, there
are divergences in matters as basic as the identity of his protector or
patron (mawlā): Qays b. al-=ārith, Qays b. al-Sā>ib, al-Sā>ib b.
al-Sā>ib or *Abd Allāh b. al-Sā>ib; but generally the Banū Makhzūm
are considered his tribe of protection, and he was their client
64
Mujāhid’s Exegesis: Origins, Paths of Transmission and Development
(mawlā). His fame in recitation of the Qur’an gained him the title of
al-Muqri! (Qur’an reader or reciter). He is considered a pupil of Ibn
*Abbās (d. 69/688, or other dates), whose reading Mujāhid is said to
have taken over, and with whom he collated his material ‘three
times’ (thalāth )ara*āt); some stories even recount that he recited it
twenty, twenty-nine or thirty times in the presence of Ibn *Abbās.
That he had a codex we know only from its listing by Ibn Abī Dāwūd
al-Sijistānī (d. 316/929).9
He is also considered Ibn *Abbās’s pupil in Qur’anic exegesis.
According to the Meccan Qur’an reader, muezzin and judge Ibn
Abī Mulayka (d. 117/735):10 ‘I saw Mujāhid questioning Ibn *Abbās
on the interpretation of the Qur’an; he had his tablets (wa ma)ahu
alwā+uhu) and Ibn *Abbās said to him, “Write!” In this way,
Mujāhid asked him about the interpretation of the whole Qur’an.’
Or, according to Mujāhid himself: ‘I recited the codex to Ibn *Abbās
in three collations ()ara*āt), from al-Fāti+a to the end. I stopped at
each verse, asking him about it.’11 However, the Kūfan al-A*mash
(d. 148/765)12 heard him saying, ‘If I had used the reading of Ibn
Mas*ūd [d. 32/652–3], I should not have needed to ask Ibn *Abbās so
many things concerning the Qur’an.’13
Mujāhid is presented as a very simple man, but also as a chryso-
stomos (a man with a ‘golden mouth’, an eloquent speaker).
According to A*mash: ‘Always, when I saw Mujāhid, I thought he
was a donkey driver (kharbandaj) whose donkey was lost, and that
he was grieved’;14 or ‘Always, when I saw Mujāhid, I thought he was
a camel driver or a donkey driver. But when he spoke, pearls issued
from his mouth.’15 His simplicity, and above all his capacity to
express the life of the soul and the spirit in apophthegms and in
exempla or parables, is attested in the sources, or books of classes
(#abaqāt), dedicated to the ascetics or Sufis.16 He was considered
one of the leading popular preachers or storytellers of Mecca.17
He was in close contact with those of the Murji>īs of Kūfa who
fled from this town because of al-=ajjāj b. Yūsuf in around 90/708,
taking refuge in Mecca. According to the orders of the governor of
Mecca, Khālid b. *Abd Allāh al-Qa;rī (d. 126/743),18 *Amr b. Dīnār
(d. 126/743), *A^ā> b. Abī Rabā: (d. 114/732),19 _alq b. =abīb
(d. c. 95/714)20 and Mujāhid were arrested along with the Kūfan
65
Claude Gilliot
Sa*īd b. Jubayr (d. 95/714),21 who had fought for Ibn al-Ash*ath, who
was from Ba;ra, although he lived in Kūfa. *Amr and *A^ā> were
released because they were Meccans; the others were sent to =ajjāj
at Wāsi^. _alq died during the journey (or in Wāsi^, or was executed
there with Sa*īd b. Jubayr); Mujāhid remained in jail until the death
of al-=ajjāj b. Yūsuf in 95/714, and Sa*īd b. Jubayr was executed in
Wāsi^. All five belonged to Ibn *Abbās’ circle of pupils, in which
could perhaps be found the origin of the concept of irjā! (suspending
judgement). Mujāhid, *Amr and *A^ā> do not figure in the lists of the
Murji>īs, but they were close to irjā!.22
Concerning the acquisition of his knowledge, Mujāhid was
later criticised for three reasons by the specialists in transmission
of Hadith and knowledge, who did not exist in his time. First
of all, they said, he is said to have used written materials, for
instance the notebooks (&a+īfa) of Jābir b. *Abd Allāh al-An;ārī
(d. 78/697), to transmit hadiths,23 that is, instead of having heard
it directly from the master. Such a practice seems to be attested
at this time and also after wards.24 Second, Mujāhid was blamed
for his ‘loose’ hadiths (marāsīl) from *Ā>isha and *Alī.25 The
third criticism concerns the suspicion that he took information
from the ‘People of the Book’.26 Nevertheless, only Ibn =ibbān
al-Bustī (Abū =ātim Mu:ammad b. =ibbān b. A:mad al-Tamīmī
al-Dārimī, d. 354/965) included him among the weak tradition-
ists.27 Be that as it may, Abū Nu*aym28 gathered a large number of
hadiths transmitted by Mujāhid29 and from him,30 with the chains
of transmission.
We will now call attention to some of Mujāhid’s pupils and trans-
mitters, as these give us information on their local and family
environment and are important for the ways in which his legacy
was collected and composed (that is, selected and put into writing)
by his pupils. Let us begin with Mujāhid’s son, *Abd al-Wahhāb
b. Mujāhid, who we might expect to have played a role in the trans-
mission of his father’s legacy. This was, however, not the case;
although he did indeed transmit some hadiths31 and exegetical
traditions from his father,32 Sufyān al-Thawrī (d. 161/778)33 called
him a liar. He is considered a weak transmitter, and it is said that he
never attended the lessons delivered by his father.34
66
Another pupil, Man;ūr b. al-Mu*tamir al-Sulamī al-Kūfī (d. 132/

749),35 is more significant, as he transmitted a large part of Mujāhid’s
legacy. He was a predestinationist; no wonder that the Ba;ran
specialist on traditions and traditionist Ya:yā b. Sa*īd al-Qa^^ān (d.
198/813) declared of him that he was ‘more reliable than the [Qadarī]
Ibn Abī Najī: in transmitting everything: the legacy of Mujāhid and
others (athbatu min Ibni Abī Najī+in fī kulli shay!in: Mujāhidin wa
ghayrihi)’.36
Fasawī collected directly from A:mad b. Mu:ammad b. *Abd
Allāh, the great-grandson of Mujāhid’s pupil al-Qāsim b. (Nāfi* b.)
Abī Bazza, information on family relations which is important for
understanding the transmission of Mujāhid’s legacy.37 This inform-
ation is as follows: the sister of *Abd Allāh b. Abī Najī: (whose house
was in ~afā),38 Fāîma (bt. Abī Najī:), married al-Qāsim b. (Nāfi* b.)
Abī Bazza,39 who was the only one to hear Mujāhid’s tafsīr in its
entirety. Qāsim and Fāîma had two sons, *Abd Allāh and Nāfi*,
who inherited from Ibn Abī Najī:, their grandfather. Ibn Abī
Najī: also had a daughter, who died as a young girl. *Abd Allāh
b. al-Qāsim inherited the share of his mother, coming from her
father Ibn Abī Najī:, and his father’s share, which he gave to him.
Both *Abd Allāh b. al-Qāsim and Nāfi* b. al-Qāsim also inherited
the house of Ibn Abī Najī: (that is, their deceased cousin’s share).
As they were still young, and orphans, they came under the protec-
tion of *Uthmān b. al-Aswad b. Mūsā b. Bādhān al-Makkī al-Juma:ī
(mawlā) (d. 149/766 or 150/767),40 the great-grandson of Bādhān,
who was the governor of the Sassanians in Yemen during the time
of the Prophet. Later, *Abd Allāh b. al-Qāsim married Umm Ya*lā,
Bādhān’s granddaughter. These details are not without importance,
especially for the transmission of Mujāhid’s tafsīr, as we will see
below.
3 The Versions, Recensions and Sub-recensions

of Mujaˉhid’s Tafsı̄r
There are several versions and recensions of Mujāhid’s tafsīr, for
which we refer, hereafter, above all to the commentaries of *Abd
al-Razzāq (b. Hammām al-~an*ānī, d. 211/827), Sa*īd b. Man;ūr
67
Claude Gilliot
(al-Khurasānī, d. probably 227/ 842),41 whose tafsīr is included in a

part of his Sunan, al-_abarī (Mu:ammad b. Jarīr, d. 310/923), Ibn
Abī =ātim al-Rāzī (Abū Mu:ammad *Abd al-Ra:mān Abū
Mu:ammad, d. 327/938) and al-Tha*labī (Abū Is:āq A:mad b.
Mu:ammad b. Ibrāhīm al-Nīsābūrī, d. 427/1035); and to the $ilyat
al-awliyā! by Abū Nu*aym, in his long notice on Mujāhid, to which
heretofore no attention has been paid.
Concerning Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī’s commentary, the edition by
As*ad Mu:ammad al-_ayyib was established on the basis of the
extant parts which cover from Q. 1 (Sūrat al-Fāti+a) to the end of
Q. 13 (Sūrat al-Ra)d), and from Q. 23 (Sūrat al-Mu!minūn) to the
end of Q. 29 (Sūrat al-)Ankabūt).42 For the rest of the Qur’an, the
editor has used later commentaries that quote Ibn Abī =ātim
al-Rāzī’s exegetical reports, but without referring to his sources. For
this part collected by the editor there are generally no chains of
transmission, but only the reference ‘)an Mujāhid’; the consequence
is that the different versions and recensions of his tafsīr cannot be
distinguished. This edition is full of mistakes concerning the names
of the transmitters,43 the order of the chains of transmission, their
numbering, etc. For that reason, ‘A lengthy article could be devoted
to the mistakes in this edition’, as Mehmet Akif Koç has written.44
So far we have no critical edition of Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī’s
commentary.
We have to begin our detailed discussion with the ‘complete’
version of Mujāhid’s tafsīr in the transmission of al-Qāsim b. (Nāfi*
b.) Abī Bazza.45 He was a Qur’anic reader and the muezzin of the
Ka*ba mosque.46 It is said that he was the only one who heard the
tafsīr directly from Mujāhid; more precisely, Mujāhid dictated it
to him.47
The important role of Ibn Abī Bazza in hearing Mujāhid’s exeget-
ical activ ity in comparison to the main transmitters of this tafsīr is
well expressed by Ibn =ibbān, who says, concerning some of the
most important transmitters of Mujāhid’s Tafsīr: ‘No one heard the
tafsīr directly from Mujāhid save (lam yasma) al-tafsīra min
Mujāhidin a+adun ghayru) al-Qāsim Ibn Abī Bazza. Al-=akam [b.
*Utayba al-Kindī al-Kūfī], Layth b. Abī Sulaym, Ibn Abī Najī:,48 Ibn
Jurayj and Ibn *Uyayna took his book [al-Qāsim Ibn Abī Bazza’s
68
copy of Mujāhid’s tafsīr] (akhadha . . . kitābahu), but did not hear it

from Mujāhid.’49 According to Ibn al-Madīnī (*Alī b. *Abd Allāh b.
Ja*far, d. 234/849), a slightly different assertion is attributed to his
master Sufyān Ibn *Uyayna: ‘No one heard it [the tafsīr] from
Mujāhid save al-Qāsim Ibn Abī Bazza. Mujāhid dictated it to him.
Then =akam, Layth and Ibn Abī Najī: took it from what he had
written (akhadha kitābahu).’50 Of the same transmitters (=akam,
Layth, Ibn Jurayj and Ibn *Uyayna), Ibn =ibban also writes that
they ‘looked into (na/ara fī) the book of Qāsim and made copies of
it; then they omitted his name and transmitted it on the authority
of Mujāhid (thumma dallasūhu )an Mujāhidin)’.51 In this context,
dallasa and tadlīs are sometimes translated by: ‘to misrepresent’,
‘misrepresentation’; French: ‘ fraude’.52
Unfortunately, we have only traces of this version, for instance in
the commentaries by _abarī and Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī.53 One of
the best known recensions of Ibn Abī Bazza’s version is that of Ibn
Abī Laylā, that is, Abū *Abd al-Ra:mān Mu:ammad b. *Abd
al-Ra:mān Ibn Abī Laylā al-An;ārī al-Kūfī, who was a judge and a
Qur’an reader in Kūfa (d. 148/765).54 This recension features in
_abarī’s commentary with the following chain of transmission: Ibn
=umayd (Mu:ammad al-Tamīmī al-Rāzī, d. 248/862)55 ← =akkām
(b. Salm al-Kinānī al-Rāzī, d. c. 190/805)56 ← *Anbasa (Abū Bakr
*Anbasa b. Sa*īd b. uray; al-Asadī al-Kūfī al-Rāzī, judge of Rayy)57
← Mu:ammad b. *Abd al-Ra:mān (i.e. Ibn Abī Laylā) ← al-Qāsim
Ibn Abī Bazza ← Mujāhid.58
The following recension is also given: =ajjāj b. Mu:ammad
al-Mi;;īsī al-Kūfī al-A *war (d. 206/821) ← Ibn Jurayj ← al-Qāsim
Ibn Abī Bazza ← Mujāhid.59
Al-Qāsim Ibn Abī Bazza’s version also has some traces in Ibn
Abī =ātim al-Rāzī’s commentary, in the transmission of =ajjāj
b. Mu:ammad al-Mi;;īsī al-Kūfī al-A *war, directly: =ajjāj ←
al-Qāsim Ibn Abī Bazza ← Mujāhid;60 or indirectly: =ajjāj ← Ibn
Jurayj ← al-Qāsim Ibn Abī Bazza ← Mujāhid;61 or in the transmis-
sion of others.62
Ibn Abī Bazza clearly collected answers given by several Muslims
of the first generations, such as Ibn *Abbās, *Ikrima, *Abd Allāh
al-Barbarī al-Madanī (d. 105/723, a client and transmitter of
69
Claude Gilliot
Ibn *Abbās), Mujāhid and Ibn Jubayr, to questions (masā!il) asked

by others, in Mecca or _ā>if.63 _abarī reports that Mujāhid
ordered al-Qāsim to ask *Ikrima about the meaning of a Qur’anic
passage. Ibn Abī Bazza did so and gave Mujāhid’s and *Ikrima’s
interpretations.64 In another report, Ibn Abī Bazza asked Sa*īd
Ibn Jubayr about the meaning of a Qur’anic sentence or word,
and Ibn Jubayr gave him the answer he had received from Ibn
*Abbās.65 Ibn Abī Bazza also collected answers given by *Alī b. Abī
_ālib from Abū _ufayl (*Amir b. Wāthila al-Kinānī, d. c. 100/718 or
after). Abū _ufayl claimed to be the last living of Muhammad’s
Companions. He was Kūfan and Shi‘i, in the meaning of the word at
this time, that is, belonging to the ‘party’ of *Alī and also to Ibn
al-=anafiyya’s. It is not certain whether he believed in the raja) (here
with the meaning of the ‘return’ of Ibn al-=anafiyya).66 Some of
these masā!il to which *Alī answers are in _abarī’s commentary, for
instance, at Q. 18:83: [. . . ] Shu*ba (b. al-=ajjāj al-*Atakī al-Azdī
al-Ba;rī, d. 160/776)67 ← al-Qāsim Ibn Abī Bazza ← Abū _ufayl: ‘I
heard *Alī when people asked him whether Dhū’l-Qarnayn was a
prophet. He said: “He was an upright servant of God; he loved God
and God loved him; he was sincere toward God and God was sincere
to him (wa nā&a+a’llāha, fa-na&a+ahu, or nā&a+ahu). God sent him
to his people and they hit him twice on his head, therefore he was
called the one with the two horns. Today, somebody like him is
among you.” ’68
In one of the versions of this tradition, the one who questions *Alī
is Ibn al-Kawwā> (‘the son of the coward’, i.e. the son of the genea l-
ogist *Abd Allāh b. *Amr al-Kawwā> al-Yashkurī who was the ‘chief
of prayer’ [amīr al-&alāt] of the =arūrī).69 The sources disagree on
his subsequent conduct within the Khārijī orientations, but
according to al-Mubarrad, he may have parted from the Khārijīs
after the murder of *Abd Allāh b. Khabbāb.70 It is said that he was
inseparable (lazima) from *Alī, ‘tiring him with his questions’.71 Ibn
Abī Bazza transmitted through Abū _ufayl other answers given by
*Alī to Ibn al-Kawwā>.72 In his Kitāb al-Ghārāt aw al-Istinfār wa’l-
ghārāt, Ibrāhīm al-Thaqafī (Abū Is:āq Ibrāhīm b. Mu:ammad b.
Sa*īd b. Hilāl al-Kūfī, d. 283/896) gathered a small collection of Ibn
al-Kawwā>’s questions to *Alī concerning Qur’anic passages73 in the
70
following transmission: Ibn Jurayj ← a man ← Abū *Amr (or *Umar)

al-Kindī (Zādhān mawlā of Kinda, al-Kūfī al-Bazzār al-arīr,
d. 82/701).74
However, since we have only traces of Ibn Abī Bazza’s version, we
have to refer to the following other versions:
(A) The version of Ibn Abī Najī:: Abū Yasār *Abd Allāh Ibn Abī
Najī: Yasār al-Thaqafī (mawlā of the Companion al-Akhnas b.
Sharīq al-Thaqafī) al-Makkī (d. 131/749 or later).75 He was a Qadarī.
This version is subdivided into several recensions. Before giving the
main ones, we mention that this tafsīr is found in *Abd al-Razzāq’s
edited commentary, with the following chain of authorities: Ma*mar
← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid,76 or *Abd al-Razzāq ← al-Thawrī
(Sufyān) ← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid.77 There are also traces of it in
Sa*īd b. Man;ūr’s tafsīr, which is partly extant in his Sunan: Sa*id b.
Man;ūr ← Sufyān ← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid.78
(A.1) The recension of Ibn Abī Najī:’s version by Abū Bishr Warqā>
b. *Umar b. Kulayb al-Yashkurī al-Shaybānī al-Kūfī al-Madā>inī
(d. 160/776).79 He was considered a Murji>ī by Abū Dāwūd al-Sijistānī
(d.275/889, according to Abū *Ubayd al-Ājurrī) and an adherent of
the Sunna by Ibn =anbal (d. 241/855). He had heard the tafsīr from
Ibn Abī Najī: in Mecca, where the school of Mujāhid was not
Murji>ī, but rather Qadarī. His recension exists in several
sub-recensions:80
(A.1.a) Shabāba b. Sawwār al-Fazārī al-Madā>inī (d. 204/819 or
206/821, in Mecca).81 This sub-recension is found, but not frequently
(in _abarī’s and Tha*labī’s commentaries).82 The fact that Warqā>
was Murji>ī seems well established by the case of his pupil Shabāba,
due to the latter’s attacks against the Shi‘is on the issue of the rela-
tionship between faith and acts.
This recension seems to be most frequent in the extant parts
of Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī’s commentary: [. . .] Mu:ammad b.
al-~abbā: ← Shabāba ← Warqā> ← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid.83 This
chain of authorities is repeated 681 times and occurs most
frequently in Q. 11 (Sūrat Hūd) and 12 (Sūrat al-Yūsuf ). Ibn Abī
=ātim al-Rāzī’s master for this isnād is, above all, Abū Yūsuf =ajjāj
b. =amza b. Suwayd al-*Ijlī al-Khushābī (or al-Khushshābī)
al-Rāzī.84
71
Claude Gilliot
(A.1.b) Ādam b. Abī Iyās Nāhiya b. Shu*ayb (but according to

Bukhārī the name of Abū Iyās was *Abd al-Ra:mān b. Mu:ammad)
Abū’l-=asan al-Khurāsānī al-Marrūdhī al-Baghdādī al-*Asqalānī (d.
220/835 or 221/836, at the age of eighty-eight).85 He was a client of the
Taym or Tamīm and went from Khurāsān to Baghdad for study,
then to Kūfa, Ba;ra, to the =ijāz, and lastly to Syria (al-Shām), where
he established himself in *Asqalān for the rest of his life. He was a
stationer and copyist (warrāq); he was considered an adherent of the
Sunna, and professed that the Qur’an is the uncreated speech
of God. He sent a message of support to Ibn =anbal when he was
in jail. Among his pupils were Bukhārī, Abū =ātim al-Rāzī
(Mu:ammad b. Idrīs b. al-Mundhīr al-=analī al-Rāzī, d. 277/890,
in Rayy),86 Abū Zur*a al-Dimashqī (*Abd al-Ra:mān b. *Amr b. *Abd
Allāh b. ~afwān al-Na;rī, d. 281/894) and Fasawī.
(A.1.c) al-=asan al-Ashyab: Abū *Alī al-=asan b. Mūsā al-Baghdādī.
He was from Khurāsān and went to Baghdad. Then he became a
judge in =im;, _abaris^ān and Mosul. He died in Rayy in 209/824.87
His sub-recension is transmitted by _abarī and others. _abarī, for
instance, quotes passages of this sub-recension from his own master
al-=ārith b. Mu:ammad b. Abī Usāma al-Tamīmī al-Baghdādī
(d. 282/895).88
(A.2) The recension of Ibn Abī Najī:’s version by *Īsā b. Maymūn
al-Jurashī al-Makkī Abū Mūsā, called Ibn Dāya (d. between 150/767
and 170/786),89 a Qadarī. His recension was transmitted by Abū
*Ā;im al-Nabīl al-a::āk b. Makhlad al-Shaybānī (d. 212/827 or
214/829).90 It is transmitted by _abarī in around 700 passages of his
commentary, through his master Abū Bakr Mu:ammad b. *Amr b.
*Abbās al-Bāhilī al-Baghdādī (d. 249/863).91 This recension is also
found in the Tafsīr of Sa*īd b. Man;ūr within his Sunan.92
(A.3) The recension by Abū Dāwūd Shibl b. *Ubād (or *Abbād)
al-Muqri> al-Makkī (d. 148/765 or later),93 who is considered to have
had a Qadarī orientation. This recension of Mujāhid’s tafsīr is called
by Tha*labī ‘the tafsīr of Shibl’.94 Like other collectors of Mujāhid’s
exegesis, Shibl probably chose from among his interpretations.95
This recension was transmitted by Abū =udhayfa Mūsā b. Mas*ūd
al-Nahdī al-Ba;rī (d. 220/835, or 221/836 or 222/837),96 a major
transmitter of Sufyān al-Thawrī.97 According to Ibn =ibbān it is
72
said that Sufyān, when he was in Ba;ra, married the mother of Abū
=udhayfa.98
Shibl’s tafsīr appears to be a branch of the version of Mujāhid’s
tafsīr in the recension of Ibn Abī Najī:, so in _abarī99 it is,
for instance, quoted as from al-Muthannā (b. Ibrāhīm al-Āmulī
al-_abarī)100 ← Abū =udhayfa ← Shibl ← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid. It
is also quoted in the Tafsīr of Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī:101 my father
(i.e. Abū =ātim al-Rāzī) ← Abū =udhayfa ← Shibl ← Ibn Abī Najī:
← Mujāhid. According to Mehmet Akif Koç, this sub-recension
is repeated there seventy-one times. Ibn =ajar al-*Asqalānī
(d. 852/1449) had a license to transmit this recension.102
(A.4.) The recension by Muslim b. Khālid b. Sa*d b. Jurja al-Zanjī
Abū Khālid al-Makhzūmī (mawlā) al-Makkī (d. 179/795, 178/794
or 180/796),103 who was from Syria. In Mecca he had some tafsīr
notebooks from Ibn Abī Najī:, especially related to juridic material.
After the death of Ibn Jurayj (d. 150/767), he was considered, like
his master Ibn Abī Najī:, the best counsellor (muftī) of Mecca in
Islamic law. He was a Qadarī. This version is known by Tha*labī and
by Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, who was one of his pupils: Sa*īd ← Muslim b.
Khālid ← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid;104 some elements of it are trans-
mitted by _abarī105 and others. A fragment of this recension is
extant in a manuscript in Damascus.106
(B) The version of Mujāhid’s tafsīr by Layth b. Abī Sulaym
al-Qurashī (mawlā) al-Kūfī (d. after 140/757).107 It is found in the
works of *Abd al-Razzāq,108 _abarī,109 Tha*labī,110 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr111
and Abū Nu*aym.112
(C) The version of al-=akam b. *Utayba al-Kindī (mawlā) al-Kūfī
(d. 115/733), who was a Shi‘i Butrī.113 This version is quoted in
_abarī114 and in Abū Nu*aym’s $ilyat al-awliyā!.115
(D) The version of Man;ūr b. al-Mu*tamir al-Sulamī al-Kūfī
(d. 132/749).116 This version is transmitted by Jarīr b. *Abd al-=amīd
b. Qur^ al-Kūfī al-Rāzī (d. 188/804). Jarīr was born near I;fahān,
was educated in Kūfa and established himself in Rayy.117 Jarīr said,
‘I saw Ibn Abī Najī:, but I wrote nothing from him [. . .]. Ibn Abī
Najī: professed belief in liberium arbitrium [free will, al-qadar].’118
He should not be confused with Jarīr b. =āzim al-Jahamī
(d. 170/786).119 Man;ūr’s version is found in Sa*īd b. Man;ūr’s tafsīr
73
Claude Gilliot
within his Sunan,120 and also in several recensions in _abarī.

Among the chains of transmission in _abarī’s commentary is the
following: Ibn Wakī* (Sufyān Ibn Wakī* b. al-Jarrā: al-Ru>āsī
al-Kūfī, d. 247/861) ← his father (Wakī* b. al-Jarrā:)121 ← Jarīr (b.
*Abd al-=amīd b. Qur^ al-Rāzī) ← Man;ūr ← Mujāhid;122 or Ibn
Wakī* ← his father ← Sufyān (al-Thawrī) ← Man;ūr ← Mujāhid.123
Man;ūr’s version occurs sixty times124 in the notice on Mujāhid in
Abū Nu*aym’s $ilyat al-awliyā!.125
(E) The version of Ibn Abī Ziyād, namely, Yazīd Ibn Abī Ziyād
al-Hāshimī (mawlā) al-Kūfī (d. 136/753 or 137/754),126 a supporter
of Zayd b. *Alī, who transmitted pro-*Alid hadiths, especially the
‘hadith of the banner’ (+adīth al-rāya). It is quoted by _abarī127 and
Sa*īd b. Man;ūr.128
(F) The version of al-A*mash Sulaymān b. Mihrān al-Asadī
al-Kāhilī (mawlā) al-Kūfī (d. 148/765).129 This Kūfan pupil of Mujāhid
had a certain Shi‘i orientation, and Murji>īs among his pupils
disturbed his lessons. He was also probably an anthropomorphist.130
He had a Qur’anic codex in the Kūfan tradition, based on the codex
of Ibn Mas*ūd.131 His version is transmitted by Sa*īd b. Man;ūr; there
are some exegetical sayings from it in Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī’s
commentary,132 in _abarī’s commentary,133 and in Abū Nu*aym’s
notice on Mujāhid.134
(G) The version of Ibn Jurayj Abū Khālid Abū’l-Walīd *Abd
al-Malik b. *Abd al-*Azīz b. Jurayj al-Qurayshī al-Umawī (mawlā)
al-Makkī (d. 150/767), whose grandfather was a Christian.135 He
was considered the ‘mufti’ of Mecca and a pioneer in the composi-
tion of organised writings (ta&nīf, tadwīn) in Hadith and law. This
version is found in *Abd al-Razzāq’s tafsīr.136 It is also given, for
example, in the transmission of =ajjāj b. Mu:ammad al-Mi;;ī;ī
al-Kūfī al-A*war,137 in _abarī,138 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī,139 Tha*labī,140
Abū Nu*aym and others.
(H) The version of Ibn Kathīr (Abū Ma*bad *Abd Allāh Ibn Kathīr
b. *Amr b. *Abd Allāh b. Zādhan b. Fayrūzān b. Hurmuz al-Kinānī
[mawlā] al-Dārī al-Makkī al-*A^^ār, d. 122/729, or according to
Ibn *Uyayna, who attended the burial, in 120). This Ibn Kathīr was
later considered the eponym of one of the seven canonical Qur’an
readings.141 His nisba, ‘al-Dārī’, is equivalent to ‘al-)a##ār’ (the
74
perfume-maker) in the =ijāz; it is supposed to have come from

Dārīn, a port (fur*a) of Bahrain, where musk was imported from
India,142 but other possibilities are given by the sources. He read the
Qur’an under the direction of Mujāhid. He was the master in
Qur’anic reading of the Qadarīs Shibl143 and Muslim b. Khālid,144 a
client of the Makhzūmīs.
This Ibn Kathīr should not be confused in this context
with another Ibn Kathīr: *Abd Allāh Ibn Kathīr b. al-Mu^âlib b.
Abī Wadā*a al-Sahmī al-Makkī (d. 120/738), who, according to
al-Dhahabī, is also supposed to have read the Qur’an under the
direction of Mujāhid.145 Elsewhere, Dhahabī underlines this possible
confusion.146
The transmission of Ibn Kathīr by _abarī is as follows: [. . .] Ibn
Jurayj ← Ibn Kathīr ← Mujāhid (thirty times), and Ibn Jurayj ← Ibn
Kathīr (twenty-four times).147
(I) The version of Abū *Awn Khu;ayf b. *Abd al-Ra:mān al-Khirī
al-Umawī (mawlā) al-Jazarī al-=arrānī (d. 132/inc. 20 August 749,
136/753 or 138/755).148 He had been the treasurer ()alā bayt al-māl)
of the Umayyads and had studied in Mecca, later going to Iraq
where he died. He was a Murji>ī; his version is given by _abarī,149
Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī,150 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr151 and Abū Nu*aym.152
Another Murji>ī, from Kūfa, who transmitted some exegetical
traditions, directly or indirectly (for instance from Man;ūr b.
al-Mu*tamir, or others) from Mujāhid was Abū Salāma Mis*ar b.
Kidām b. Zuhayr al-Hilālī (mawlā) al-A:wal al-Kūfī (d. between
152/769 and 155/772).153 Some of these exegetical sayings are given
by _abarī154 and Abū Nu*aym.155
Mujāhid’s tafsīr is also partly given in the tafsīr of Sufyān
al-Thawrī,156 which is quoted by _abarī,157 with seven recensions
transmitted from Ibn Abī Najī: and one from Man;ūr b. al-Mu*tamir;
as well as in Sa*īd b. Man;ūr,158 and in *Abd al-Razzāq’s tafsīr 159 which
is partly a collection of the tafsīr of Ma*mar b. Rāshid (d. 153/770),
also quoted by _abarī.160 It is also found in Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī’s
commentary in the following form: Sufyān ← Ibn Abī Najī: ←
Mujāhid.161
It also appears, in part, in the tafsīr of Sufyān Ibn *Uyayna b. Abī
Maymūn *Imrān al-Kūfī al-Makkī (b. 107/725, d. 198/814, at the age
75
Claude Gilliot
of around eighty-nine, according to some traditionalists, or

ninety-one, according to others).162 He was a client of Mu:ammad b.
Muzā:im al-Hilālī, the brother of al-a::āk b. Muzā:im al-Hilālī
(d. 106/724).163 The problem is that the two Sufyāns can be easily
confused.164
Now let us turn our attention to some of _abarī’s practices in
using the different versions or sub-recensions of Mujāhid. Mostly
he quotes them separately if they do not give the same interpreta-
tion, according to the different exegeses of the same Qur’anic word,
sentence or verse.
On other occasions he gathers them, one after another, within a
unity of meaning common to other exegetes or interpreters he
refers to. He usually does the same with other exegetes like
al-a::āk b. Muzāhim, Sufyān al-Thawrī; here we give a single
example concerning the tafsīr of Mujāhid: [. . .] *Īsā (b. Maymūn
al-Jurashī) ← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid. [. . .] Abū =udhayfa ← Shibl
← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid. [. . .] =ajjāj ← Ibn Jurayj ← Mujāhid.
[. . .] Ya:yā b. Abī Zā>ida ← Warqā> ← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid.165
In other cases he uses a kind of ‘collective chain of transmission’
for the same exegetical saying of Mujāhid: 1. [. . .] *Ā;im ← *Īsā (b.
Maymūn al-Jurashī); 2. [. . .] al-=asan (b. Mūsā al-Ashyab) ←
Warqā; 3. Shabāba ← Warqā; 4. Al-Muthannā (b. Ibrāhīm al-Āmulī
al-_abarī) ← Is:āq (probably Abū Ya*qūb Is:āq b. al-=ajjāj al-_ā:ūnī
al-Muqri>)166 ← *Abd Allāh (probably *Abd Allāh b. Abī Ja*far *Īsā b.
Māhān al-Rāzī)167 ← Warqā>; 5. Abū =udhayfa ← Shibl, ‘all of them’
(jamī)an) )an Ibn Abī Najī: )an Mujāhid.168
4 The Published Sub-recension of Ibn Shaˉdhaˉn

Version A.1.b was separately edited in the recension of Ibn Shādhān
on the basis of a single manuscript, but it is not always identical to
one of the sources _abarī uses when he quotes Mujāhid in his own
commentary.169 Its certificate of audition is as follows:
[. . .] Abū *Alī al-=asan b. A:mad b. Ibrāhīm b. al-=asan
Ibn Shādhān, called Ibn Shādhān al-Baghdādī al-Bazzār
[d. 425/1034]170
76
← [from here the same chain of transmission as in Stauth’s

study171] Abū’l-Qāsim *Abd al-Ra:mān b. al-=asan b. A:mad b.
Mu:ammad b. *Ubayd b. *Abd al-Malik al-Hamadhānī [al-Qāī,
called Abū’l-Qāsim al-Asadī, also called Ibn *Ubayd (d. 352/963).172
His lesson was delivered in Baghdad, in a quarter on the western
bank of the Tigris, ‘Sūq Ya:yā’,173 at the Wharf of the Fodder
Sellers (mashra)at al-tabbānīn),174 in the mosque, when the time of
pilgrimage was approaching, at the beginning (fī ghurrati) of
Dhū’l-Qa*da 349/960]
← [from here the same chain of transmission as in Tha*labī’s
commentary: Tafsīr Warqā!, where read: ‘bi-Hamadhān’, not
‘bi-Hamdān’175] Ibrāhīm [b. =usayn b. *Alī al-Hamadhānī al-Kisā>ī,
called Ibn Dīzīl, or Dabbāt *Affān, or Sīfanna, d. 281/894]176
← Ādam [b. Abī Iyās, d. 220/835]177
← Warqā> b. *Umar [d. 160/776]178
← Ibn Abī Najī: [d. 131/749]179
← Mujāhid.
Unfortunately, the editor of Ibn Shādhān’s sub-recension, al-Sūratī
(or al-Sūrtī), did not pay enough attention to the chain of transmis-
sion of this recension of Mujāhid’s tafsīr, and consequently did
not notice that al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī (b. 392/1001, d. 463/1071)
was a pupil and a friend of Ibn Shādhān; both were Ash*arī.180
Al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī obtained information from him, for instance
on the topography of Baghdad.181 This recension had a poor reputa-
tion because of the transmitter, Abū’l-Qāsim al-Asadī, called Ibn
*Ubayd, who once claimed, we are told, that he had transmitted
hadiths directly from Ibn Dīzīl, or Mujāhid’s tafsīr from Ibn Dīzīl,
which was not the case. When they told him that the lessons of
Ibn Dīzīl had taken place prior to 270/883, he answered, ‘I was
born in 270!’ And the consequence was that ‘his learning went away
(dhahaba )ilmuhu)’.182 As for al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, he obtained
a certificate for this tafsīr from Ibn Razqawayh (Abū’l-=asan
Mu:ammad b. A:mad al-Baghdādī al-Bazzār, d. 412/1021),183 his
first master, from whom he wrote traditions from dictation in
403/1012. It seems that he also got an equivalent certificate from Ibn
Shādhān.184
77
Claude Gilliot
Comparisons between the different versions show that ‘the defin-

itive written form of the works that transmit tafsīr )an Ibn Abī Najī:
)an Mujāhid must have taken place some time around the middle of
the second century AH’.185 That conclusion is identical with the
following statement by Fred Leemhuis about the Biography of the
Prophet by Ibn Is:āq (d. 150/767): ‘Whatever the role of writing in
the transmission of tafsīr may have been before that time, such
works, conceived as definitive and complete literary works, prob-
ably never existed. A living tradition precludes them.’186
It has been noted that several transmitters of the tafsīr of Mujāhid
were, like Mujāhid himself, clients of the Banū Makhzūm, who
were close to the Qurayshī ‘nobility’, and that they had a Qadarī
orientation.187 For that reason, it is not surprising that some Sunni
scholars expressed critical judgements regarding some transmitters
of Mujāhid’s tafsīr. Asked by his pupil Abū *Ubayd al-Ājurrī188 about
Warqā> and Shibl, and their transmissions from Mujāhid, Abū
Dāwūd al-Sijistānī answered, ‘Warqā> is an adherent of the Sunna,
although he has something of the irjā!; Shibl is a Qadarī.’189 Abū
*Ubayd al-Ājurrī (Mu:ammad b. *Alī b. *Uthmān, d. after 300/912)
transmitted his quaestiones and those of others with the responsa of
his master Abū Dāwūd.190 As for Ibn Abī Najī:, who never married,
he was considered a Qadarī or a Mu*tazilī191 by Ya:yā b. Sa*īd
al-Qa^^ān. He is supposed to have said to Ibn ~afwān (probably
Umayya b. ~afwān),192 ‘I summon you to adhere to the view of
al-=asan [al-Ba;rī; d. 110/728],193 that is, al-qadar’.194 This accusa-
tion was repeated by al-Bukhārī (*Alī b. al-Madīnī, d. 234/849)195
and others.196
The fact that transmittters of Mujāhid’s tafsīr like =akam, Layth
and Ibn Abī Najī:, Ibn Jurayj, Ibn *Uyayna, or some of them, made
copies of Ibn Abī Bazza’s version but omitted his name and trans-
mitted their exegetical sayings on the authority of Mujāhid, as we
have seen above, was not a sufficent reason for them not to be integ-
rated in Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī’s Tafsīr al-Qur!ān al-a/īm musnadan
)an rasūl Allāh wa’l-&a+āba wa’l-tābi)īn, or in equivalent comment-
aries. This is because at the time of Mujāhid and his pupils, and still
after, the rules of transmission of knowledge were not so strict as
those established in the third/ninth century and later by people like
78
Abū Zur*a al-Rāzī (d. 264/878),197 and his relative and friend Abū
=ātim al-Rāzī, that is Ibn Abī =ātim’s father, etc.198
5 Some Provisional Features of Mujaˉhid’s Exegesis

and Legacy
5.1 The question of the vision of God in the Hereafter199
The periphrastic exegesis200 of our Meccan exegete is mostly of a
lexical nature, such as on Q. 12:53: ‘Surely my Lord201 [that is] “my
Lord”, that is “my Master”.’ But we also find in it theological orient-
ations which are ‘rationalist’.202 We have to call attention to the
limits of the division of tafsīr into genres, here and elsewhere: here,
because the genre referred to as ‘periphrastic exegesis’ could mean
only lexical explanations of words. But in some versions of the
exegesis of Mujāhid or of some of his transmitters we also find theo-
logical orientations, especially in interpretations that were, prob-
ably, those of the Qadarīs or Mu*tazilīs. There is nothing surprising
about this because, in some sense, ‘Sunnism’ is one of the last ‘sects’
(firaq) to have appeared in the history of Islam!
Let us focus here on the question of the vision of God in the
Hereafter. We will examine the versions of interpretations attrib-
uted to Mujāhid concerning a phrase in Q. 75:23: looking towards
their Lord (ilā rabbihā nā/ira) and other Qur’anic sentences, as well
as sayings of the Prophet, which could be interpreted in favour of a
physical vision (‘bi’l-ab&ār’) of God in the Hereafter, which became
the ‘Sunni’ position, and particularly the doctrine of Ash*arī. This
doctrine was rejected by the Mu*tazilīs.203 Often the richest material
is given by _abarī, who also preserves the chains of authorities; the
examination of these is time-consuming but sometimes yields
results regarding the evolution of exegesis in relation to theology.
As is often the case, _abarī gives the most numerous interpreta-
tions for this verse and, for our present discussion, particularly
from those attributed to Mujāhid. The first interpretation we have
chosen is:204
Wakī* ← Sufyān ← Man;ūr [b. al-Mu*tamir] ← Mujāhid: ‘They
wait for the reward (thawāb) of their Lord.’205
79
Claude Gilliot
_abarī offers the same interpretation, but with a different chain of

transmission:
Abū Kurayb206 ← *Umar b. *Ubayd207 ← Man;ūr ← Mujāhid: ‘They
wait for the reward (thawāb) of their Lord.’208
The following interpretation has a Kūfan and partly familial chain
of authorities, and appears fairly often in the commentary of _abarī
(from Ya:yā b. Ibrāhīm al-Mas*ūdī to A*mash inclusive):209
Ya:yā b. Ibrāhīm al-Mas*ūdī210 ← his father [Ibrāhīm b.
Mu:ammad b. Abī *Ubayda (*Abd al-Malik) b. Ma*n b. *Abd
al-Ra:mān b. *Abd Allāh b. Mas*ūd al-Kūfī]211 ← his father
[Mu:ammad b. Abī *Ubayda (d. 205/820)212 . . .] ← his grandfather
()an jaddihi [who should be understood as Ibrāhīm’s grandfather]
that is Abū *Ubayda *Abd al-Malik b. Ma*n b. *Abd al-Ra:mān
al-Hudhalī)213 ← A*mash ← Mujāhid: ‘Waiting for His subsistence
and His favour (rizqahu wa fa*lahu).’214
Alternative traditions are:
[. . .] Jarīr (b. *Abd al-=amīd b. Qur^ al-abbī al-Kūfī al-Rāzī) ←
Man;ūr ← Mujāhid: ‘They await from their Lord what He has
ordered for them.’215
[. . .] Sufyān ← Man;ūr ← Mujāhid: ‘Waiting for the reward of
their Lord. Nothing of His creation sees Him.’216
[. . .] Jarīr ← Man;ūr: ‘I said to Mujāhid, “People were saying in
a hadith: ‘They see their Lord.’ ” I [Man;ūr] said to Mujāhid,
“People say that He can be seen.” Mujāhid said, “He sees, but
nothing sees Him.” ’217
Of the eight interpretations of Mujāhid given by _abarī in this
sense, five appear in the recension of Man;ūr b. al-Mu*tamir, and
one in that of A*mash. None of the transmitters of these exegetical
sayings was a Mu*tazilī. However, these statements of Mujāhid
could be accepted only by Mu*tazilīs or others who deny that God
can be seen in the Hereafter.
The only statement from Mujāhid quoted by _abarī which could
be understood in favour of the argument for the physical vision of
God is a tradition transmitted by him from Ibn *Umar:218
80
Abū Kurayb ← al-Ashja*ī ← Sufyān [al-Thawrī] ← Thuwayr ←

Mujāhid ← Ibn *Umar: ‘The lowest of the inhabitants of Paradise
in rank will be the one who looks (inna adnā ahli’l-jannati
manzilatan la-man yan/uru) towards his estate,219 his cushions
and his servants (ilā milkihi wa sururihi wa khadamatihi), to the
distance of one thousand years, seeing the most remote as he sees
the closest. [But] the highest of the inhabitants of Paradise in
rank will be the one who looks towards the face of God at morn
and at night (wa-inna arfa)a ahli’l-jannati manzilatan la-man
yan/uru ilā wajhi’llāhi bukratan wa )ashiyyatan).’
Let us examine this Kūfan chain of transmission. Thuwayr

(b. Abī Fākhita al-Hāshimī Abū’l-Jahm al-Kūfī)220 is described as
being a Shi‘i (‘Rāfiī’). Sufyān al-Thawrī considered him ‘one of
the chief pillars of falsehood (min arkān al-kadhib)’;221 however,
he transmitted this tradition from him. Sufyān al-Thawrī’s pupil
in this chain of authorities is al-Ashja*ī (Abū *Abd al-Ra:mān
*Ubayd Allāh b. *Ubayd [or *Abd] al-Ra:mān al-Kūfī, who went
to [nazīl] Baghdād, d. beginning of 182/798, in Baghdad),222 whom
his own pupil Uthmān b. Abī Shayba (d. 237/851) considered the
most reliable transmitter of Sufyān al-Thawrī (athbatu’l-nāsi
fī’l-Thawriyyi).223 Ibn Sa*d (d. 230/845) declared of Ashja*ī, ‘He trans-
mitted the writings of al-Thawrī as they were (rawā kutuba’l-
Thawriyyi )alā wajhihā); and he transmitted al-Jāmi) from him.’224
According to Ibn =anbal, ‘He wrote during the majlis (study
circle) [of Sufyān]; this is the reason why his Hadith is sound
(fa-min dhāka &a++a +adīthuhu).’225 We know that when al-Kha^īb
al-Baghdādī (b. 392, d. 463/1071) was in Damascus,226 he taught
Sufyān al-Thawrī’s al-Jāmi) in the transmission of Ashja*ī. He also
had the variants of this text in the transmission of *Ubayd Allāh b.
Mūsā b. Abī Mukhtār al-*Absī al-Kūfī (d. 213/828), who is said to
have been a ‘Rāfiī’.
According to Ibn *Adī (d. 365/976), who gives the incipit of this
tradition (adnā ahli’l-jannati manzilatan), ‘I do not know that
anybody other than Ibn Yamān227 has transmitted this hadith from
al-Thawrī.’228 However, as we have seen above, it was also trans-
mitted by one of the most reliable transmitters of Sufyān al-Thawrī’s
81
Claude Gilliot
hadith, Ashja*ī. As is well known, eschatological imagination has no

limit; that is the reason why we can still quote another interpreta-
tion attributed to Ibn *Umar:
=usayn b. *Alī [al-Ju*fī]229 ← Abū’l-=urr [sic. read: Ibn Abjar]230 ←
Thuwayr ← Ibn *Umar: ‘[. . .] the most excellent (af*al) of the
inhabitants of Paradise will be the one who looks towards the face
of God twice each day.’231
A similar report, a hadith of Muhammad this time, with slight
differences in the wording, is transmitted by [. . .] Isrā>īl [b. Yūnūs
al-Hamadhānī al-Sabī*ī al-Kūfī; d. 160/776, or 161/777 or 162/778]232
← Thuwayr ← Ibn *Umar.233 Or: *Abd al-Malik b. Abjar ← Thuwayr ←
Ibn *Umar.234 Al-Wā:idī (Abū’l-=asan *Alī b. A:mad b. Mu:ammad
al-Nīsābūrī al-Shāfi*ī, d. 468/1076), for instance, quotes it at Q.
75:22–3 in his al-Wasī# fī’l-tafsīr with the following chain of author-
ities: [. . .] *Uthmān b. Abī Shayba 235 ← *Abd al-Malik b. Abjar ←
Thuwayr ← Ibn *Umar. But he does not refer at all to Mujāhid.236
It would be interesting to examine the reception of Mujāhid’s
exegesis of Q. 75:22–3 by later exegetes. We will be content here with
Wā:idī, who, after his master Abū Is:āq al-Tha*labī, as Walid Saleh
correctly writes: ‘attempted to answer the perennial question facing
classical exegesis: what place does philology have in this enter-
prise?’237 There is no wonder in this if we remember that, according
to Wā:idī himself,238 he had begun his studies (on lugha, adab and
poetry) in Nishapur under the direction of a pupil of the lexico-
grapher and grammarian Azharī, who transmitted the latter’s
Tahdhīb al-lugha.239 This was Abū’l-Fal A:mad b. Mu:ammad
b. *Abd Allāh b. Yūsuf (b. Mālik al-Sahlakī) al-*Arūdī al-~affār
al-Nīsābūrī (d. after 416/1025).240
Wā:idī, as we have seen, does not refer to Mujāhid for these
verses in al-Wasī# fī’l-tafsīr. He does do so, however, in his al-Tafsīr
al-basī#, but without a chain of transmission, as is usual in this
commentary: ‘Mujāhid says: They await from their Lord what He
has ordered for them’ (cf. p. 80). He immediately then quotes Abū
~āli: (i.e. Bādhān): ‘They wait for the reward from their Lord
(tanta/iru’l-thawāba min rabbihā)’241 (cf. pp. 79–80). For verses Q.
75:22–3, these are the only interpretations Wā:idī gives which do
82
not support the argument for the physical vision of God in the
Hereafter, and his only concern is to support the latter interpreta-
tion and to reject definitively the interpretation ‘waiting for’
(inti/ār), explaining that ‘the Arabs do not say: “na/artu ilā’l-shay!i”
with the meaning of “I wait for it (inta/artuhu).” ’ To support this
conviction, he refers to Abū Man;ūr Azharī’s Tahdhīb al-lugha.242
However, Wā:idī acknowledges that the argument of language is
not sufficient, because na/ara could be understood in the sense ‘to
look with the heart’ (bi-ma)nā na/ari’l-qalbi). For Wā:idī, this
sense is possible, but the ‘look’ (na/ar) in the verse is said of the face
(wajh), so it cannot be said to have the meaning ‘the heart’s look’.
Wā:īdī is clearly combining here the method of a philologist and
that of a dialectic theologian who has an Ash*arī orientation.243
Thus he writes:
If the two meanings (i.e. ‘waiting for’ and ‘seeing with the heart’)
are untenable (ba#ala) for this verse, those who rebut the vision
have nothing more to object to (lam yabqa li-nufāti’l-ru!yati
kalāmun); moreover, the sound Sunna and the transmitted tradi-
tions buttress those who interpret ‘the look’ (al-na/ar) in this
verse as ‘the vision’ (bi’l-ru!yati), and we shall mention them in
Musnad al-tafsīr, God willing.244
In this argumentation, the first rank seems to be attributed to
language, but this is not the case. The first rank is actually attrib-
uted to the so-called Sunna and to the theological doctrine of
the so-called ‘pious first generations’ (salaf ): lingua ancilla sacrae
doctrinae!
If we compare Wā:idī with _abarī, we find that the latter prefers
(‘awlā’l-qawlayn fī dhālika )indanā bi’l-&awābi’)245 the meaning
‘They look at their Lord’, like *Ikrima (d. 105/723) and ‘masters of
Kūfa’ (ashyākh min ahli’l-Kūfa).246 Nevertheless, _abarī had previ-
ously quoted the interpretation of those, in particular Mujāhid,
who interpreted ilā rabbihā nā/ira as ‘waiting for’.247 He also
supported the doctrine of the vision of God with exegetical tradi-
tions and with the hadith transmitted by Ibn *Umar. Here he did
not argue as a dialectic theologian (pre-Ash*arī), although he had
done so before, especially at Q. 6:103.248
83
Claude Gilliot
Mujāhid interprets Q. 83:15 (No indeed; but upon that day they
shall be veiled from their Lord), in the following way: ‘They are
deprived of obtaining his generosity and his mercy ()an karāmatihi
wa ra+matihi mamnu)ūn).’249 This explanation, quoted from Mujāhid
by Qurûbī (Shams al-Dīn Mu:ammad b. A:mad b. Abī Bakr b.
Far:, d. 671/1273) and others, significantly, is not in the edited
recension of Ibn Shādhān, where it is replaced by an interpretation
in favour of the idea that God can be seen in the Hereafter, attrib-
uted to =asan al-Ba;rī (d. 110/728) with the following chain of
authorities:250
*Abd al-Ra:mān [i.e. Ibn *Ubayd] ← Ibrāhīm [i.e. Ibn Dīzīl]251 ←
Abū Ma*mar *Abd Allāh b. *Amr b. Abī’l-=ajjāj [al-Minqarī
al-Muq*ad al-Ba;rī; d. 224/838] ← *Abd al-Wārith b. Sa*īd [d.
180/796]252 ← *Amr b. *Ubayd [d. 144/761]253 ← al-=asan: ‘None of
His creatures who believe shall remain without seeing Him: the
unbelievers shall be separated from Him by a veil; but the
believers shall see Him. Such is the meaning of No indeed; but
upon that day they shall be veiled from their Lord [Q. 83:15].’
It is also said (in the recension of Ibn Abī Najī:) that Mujāhid
interpreted a surplus (ziyāda) in Q. 10:26 as ‘the forgiveness and the
agreement’ (of God),254 and not the vision of God in the Hereafter.
This interpretation of Mujāhid is an interesting piece of early evid-
ence, predating the so-called Sunni tradition of the vision of God.255
Not only were many of Mujāhid’s pupils Qadarīs, but al-Qāī
*Abd al-Jabbār (d. 415/1025) included Mujāhid in the ranks of the
Mu*tazilīs;256 however, according to a narrative transmitted by Ibn
Waā: al-Qurûbī (Mu:ammad b. Waā:, d. 287/900), Ghaylān
al-Dimashqī (put to death c. 115/734),257 when in Mecca, visited
Mujāhid, who is supposed to have said to the people (al-nās, i.e.
those who wanted to attend his lessons), ‘Do not sit down with him
(lā tujālisūhu); he is a Qadarī.’258 Both Qadarīs and Mu*tazilīs,
however, could agree with Mujāhid’s exegesis of Q. 2:7, God has set
a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, as transmitted by
A*mash. Mujāhid is said to have shown, using his hands and
fingers, that God seals man’s heart only gradually and as a result of
the sins committed.259
84
However, opponents of the Qadarīs and Mu*tazilīs could also use

Mujāhid’s name to obtain support if necessary, such as in the
following statement:
[. . .] Marwān b. Mu*āwiya [al-Fazārī al-Kūfī, d. 193/809]260 ← Rajā>
al-Makkī [i.e. Rajā> b. al-=ārith Abū Sa*īd b. *Awdh al-Barrād
al-Mu*allim]:261 ‘I heard Mujāhid saying, “The Qadarīs are the
Magi (majūs [i.e. Zoroastrians]) and the Jews of this community.
If they become ill, do not visit them; if they die, do not attend
their burial.” ’262
5.2 Is there ‘something for everybody’ in Mujāhid’s exegesis?

We should not conclude from Mujāhid’s interpretations on the issue
of the vision of God that he made no statements which were later
considered by many dialectic theologians, Mu*tazilī or not, as
anthropomorphic. For example, he is cited as saying: ‘On the Day of
Judgement, David will acknowledge his sin, and God will say to
him, “Take a place in front of me!” Then David will say, “O Lord, my
sin!” God will reply, “Take a place behind me!” Then David will say
again, “O Lord, my sin!” Thereupon God will say, “Take my foot
(qadamī)!”’263 We also find this text, in a slightly different version, at
the end of a long tradition on the sin of David, in the transmission
of Layth b. Abī Sulaym.264 In another version of this saying, trans-
mitted by Mu:ammad b. Sīrīn al-Ba;rī (d. 110/729), the following is
added: ‘Then God will draw near to David so that he will be able to
place his hand on [God’s] thigh (fakhidh).’265
On the other hand, Mujāhid is also reported to have condemned
the Qadarīs, as we have just seen above.
5.3 Mujāhid as popular preacher or storyteller (qā)

We will end this study with an insight into how Mujāhid used the
‘pleasure of the text’, or the pleasure of narrative, to edify his audi-
ence. That the features of a kind of ‘rationalist’ orientation in some
versions of Mujāhid’s tafsīr should not be seen to conflict with his
style as a popular preacher or storyteller (qā&&) in many, sometimes
long, stories or legends transmitted from him, nor with his personal
85
Claude Gilliot
interest in marvels, miracles and wondrous things, appears in a

statement of one of his pupils, the Kūfan A*mash: ‘Each time
Mujāhid heard of a wondrous thing (u)jūba), he used to go to see it.
He went to =aramawt to see Bi>r Barhūt.266 He also wanted to see
Hārūt and Mārūt,267 so he went to Babylon where there was a
governor (wāli), one of his friends, who ordered a Jewish magician
to show him Hārūt and Mārūt [. . .] They were suspended upside
down like two huge mountains’.268
The tale of Hārūt and Mārūt is reported in two different long
versions from Mujāhid, the first has the following chain of trans-
mission in _abarī (at Q. 2:102):269 al-Muthannā ← Abū =udhayfa ←
Shibl ← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid.270
The second tale of Hārūt and Mārūt is transmitted by Ibn Abī
=ātim al-Rāzī (also at Q. 2:102),271 with the following chain of
transmission: [. . .] Zayd b. Abī Unaysa (Abū Usāma al-Jazarī
al-Ruhāwī, d. 125/742 or 124/741)272 ← Minhāl b. *Amr273 and Yūnus
b. Khabbāb [al-Usayyidī, a client of the Usayyid, al-Kūfī]274 ←
Mujāhid: ‘I took lodgings (kuntu nāzilan )alā) one night with [*Abd
Allāh] Ibn *Umar’, who tells him the story of the two angels.
In another report given by _abarī, the narrator is not Mujāhid
but Nāfi* (mawlā of *Abd Allāh Ibn *Umar),275 and told during a
journey they made together.276 It should be noted that in Mujāhid’s
version, Ibn *Umar tells his unnamed servant or slave (ghulām) to
look at the sky to see if the ‘red star has risen (un/ur #al)ati’l-
+amrā!u)’. In the version reported by Nāfi*, Ibn *Umar says to him:
‘See, Nāfi* . . .’ Other versions of the same topos are also narrated by
Sālim (Ibn *Umar’s son) and Sa*īd b. Jubayr.277 There are further
forms of transmission: ten collected by Ibn =ajar,278 and around
twenty collected by Suyū^ī.279 This kind of topos is used to ‘inter-
pret’ or to illustrate the legend of Hārūt and Mārūt in the Qur’an:
and that which was sent down upon Babylon’s two angels, Harut and
Marut (Q. 2:102). We see here that there is not always a difference
between an ‘exegete’ and a ‘storyteller’; Mujāhid could be both.
Mujāhid the popular preacher or storyteller also appears, for
instance, in a ‘long narrative’ (+ikāya mu#awwila), so qualified by Ibn
Kathīr, who summarises the versions given by _abarī and Ibn Abī
=ātim al-Rāzī at Q. 4:78 (though you should be in raised-up towers).280
86
It is found in _abarī:281 *Alī b. Sahl (al-Ramlī b. Qādim or b. Mūsā

al-=arashī Abū’l-=asan, Nasā!ī al-a&l, d. 261/874)282 ← Mu>ammal
b. Ismā*īl (al-*Adawī al-Ba;rī, d. 206/822)283 ← Abū =ammām
(probably: *Isā b. =umayd, see below, the isnād of Ibn Abī =ātim
al-Rāzī) ← Kathīr Abū’l-Fal (Kathīr b. Yasār al-_ufāwī al-Ba;rī)284
← Mujāhid.
_abarī’s version is also found in Abū Nu*aym:285 Mu:ammad b.
Ja*far ← Mu:ammad b. Jarīr b. Yazīd (i.e. al-_abarī) ← *Alī b. Sahl
← Mu>ammal b. Ismā>īl ← Abū =āzim (sic – more likely: Abū
Hammām) ← Kathīr Abū’l-Fal ← Mujāhid. Abū Nu*aym’s full text
was included by al-Damīrī in his $ayāt al-+ayawān al-kubrā, in his
entry ‘al-)ankabūt’.286
In Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī:287 Abū Sa*īd b. Ya:yā b. Sa*īd al-Qa^^ān
(i.e. Abū Sa*īd A:mad b. Mu:ammad b. Ya:yā al-Ba;rī, d. 258/871,
grandson of Ya:yā al-Qa^^ān)288 ← *Īsā b. =umayd al-Rāsibī (Abū
Hammām; the Rāsibī are generally from Ba;ra)289 ← Kathīr al-Kūfī
(?) ← Mujāhid.290
In his unfinished book on the ‘occasions of revelation’, Ibn =ajar
gives two chains of authorities before exposing some differences
between the two narratives. Unfortunately these passages are at the
end of the extant manuscript and there are lacunae in the text:291
_abarī292 ← *Alī b. Sahl ← Mu>ammal b. Ismā*īl ← Abū =ammām (i.e.
Īsā b. =umayd al-Rāsibī) ← Kathīr Abū’l-Fal (Kathīr b. Yasār
al-_ufāwī al-Ba;rī); and Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī ← Abū Sa*īd b. Ya:yā
b. Sa*īd al-Qa^^ān (understand: A:mad b. Mu:ammad b. Ya:yā,
d. 258/871, the gandson of Ya:yā al-Qa^^ān al-Ba;rī)293 ← *Īsā (prob-
ably b. =umayd) ← =umayd al-Ru>āsī (?) [read both together: *Īsā
b. =umayd al-Rāsibī], and he is the one who said (wa’l-laf/ lahu) ←
Kathīr al-Kūfī (? probably the same as in _abarī above) ← Mujāhid.
However, in the narrative he relates, Ibn =ajar makes a distinction
between the version of Mu>ammal and the version of *Īsā.
This relatively long narrative of Mujāhid (one page in the text of
_abarī) is presented by him as the occasion of the revelation294 of
Q. 4:78 (Wherever you may be, death will overtake you, though you
should be in raised-up towers), a verse which is usually used by the
predestinationists to support their theological thesis against the
Qadarīs and Mu*tazilīs.295
87
Claude Gilliot
We summarise here the narrative of Mujāhid, according to

which, before the advent of Islam, a wife went into labour and told
her hireling (ajīr) to bring her fire. At the door he found a man (or
two men) who informed him that this new-born girl (jāriya) would
fornicate (tabghī or taznī) with a hundred men and after that marry
him. After that she would die because of the spider (or because of a
spider; bi’l-)ankabūt).296 The hireling went back into the house and
split open (ba)aja) the girl’s belly with a knife. Then he fled, think ing
that she was dead. But the girl was cured (or her mother stitched up
her belly and she was cured). A long time after wards, the girl made
a journey and dwelt near the sea-shore, where she used to fornicate.
The hireling came to this area and asked an old woman to provide
him with the most beautiful woman (abghīnī’mra!atan min
ajmali’mra!atin fī’l-qarya). She answered that she knew one, but
that this woman was a prostitute, having fornicated with 100 or 102
men (the count has to be precise, to suggest veracity!). Nevertheless,
he married her. After some time they recognised each other and
each related their own story, including the mention of the spider. To
protect his wife from the foretold death, the man built a very high
tower in the desert. One day, as they were together in the tower, she
saw a spider on the roof and wanted to kill it, so she crushed it with
her foot. But the foot became black because of the spider’s poison:
‘And the verse came down: Wherever you may be, death will over-
take you . . .’
This tale, given as the occasion of the revelation for Q. 4:78–9, not
only shows us Mujāhid as a storyteller (like many exegetes, such
as Ibn *Abbās, al-Suddī [al-Kabīr Ismā*īl b. Abī Karīma al-Kūfī,
d. 128/745 or 127], al-Kalbī [Mu:ammad b. al-Sā>ib al-Kūfī, d.
146/763] and Muqātil b. Sulaymān [d. 150/767 or after]), but also
features a theology in nuce, or an implicit theology expressed
through a narrative. It is an illustration of one of the well-known
‘predestinationist axioms’, as expressed, for instance, by the Qadarī
Qatāda (b. Di*āma al-Sadūsī al-Ba;rī, d. 118/736): ‘That what reaches
somebody could not possibly have missed him, and what misses
somebody could not possibly have reached him.’297
This legendary narrative is above all known through adab liter-
ature.298 It takes different literary forms and it is not always borrowed
88
from Mujāhid’s version. In orientalist works it has been called:

‘Le destin (L’araignée)’,299 ‘La prédiction réalisée’,300 ‘Die Geschichte
vom Tagelöhner und dem Mädchen’,301 ‘Story of the journeyman
and the girl’,302 ‘La femme et l’araignée’. We propose the following
long title: ‘The journey man, the girl, the raised-up tower, the spider,
and the ineluctable death’. It is rarely found in other commentaries
than those mentioned here. It was, however, included in full by
Ismā*īl =aqqī al-Burūsawī (d. 1237/1725) in his Rū+ al-bayān fī
tafsīr al-Qur!ān, who does not mention the ‘authorship’ of _abarī,
his evident source.303 This afterlife of the narrative demonstrates the
success of the ‘pleasure of the text’ in edify ing through adab and
other ways of transmission.
NO T E S
1 Ignáz Goldziher, Die Richtungen der islamischen Koranauslegung: an der
Universität Upsala gehaltene Olaus-Petri-Vorlesungen, 3rd edn (Leiden, Brill,
1970; 1st edn 1920), pp. 107–10.
2 Georg Stauth, Die Überlieferung des Korankommentars Mu4āhid b. 6abr’s:
Zur Frage der Rekonstruktion der in den Sammelwerken des 3. Jh. d. H.
benutzten frühislamischen Quellenwerke (PhD Dissertation, Universität
Giessen, 1969).
3 Fred Leemhuis, ‘Ms. 1075 tafsīr of the Cairene Dār al-Kutub and Muāhid’s
tafsīr’ in Rudolph Peters, ed., Proceedings of the Ninth Congress of the Union
Européenne des Arabisants et Islamisants (Leiden, Brill, 1981), pp. 169–80;
idem, ‘Origins and Early Development of the tafsīr Tradition’ in Andrew
Rippin, ed., Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qur!ān
(Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1988), pp. 13–30.
4 Josef van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert Hidschra:
Eine Geschichte des religiösen Denkens im frühen Islam, 6 vols (Berlin, Walter
de Gruyter, 1991–97), vol. II, pp. 640–3 and 644–55.
5 Only van Ess has used this source, particu larly for the Qadarīs in Mecca.
6 al-Qāsim b. (Nāfi* b.; or Yasār; or Nāfi* b. Yasār) Abī Bazza: Abū *Abd Allāh or
Abū *Ā;im al-Qāsim b. Nāfi* b. Abī Bazza (i.e. Bashshār al-Fārisī) al-Makhzūmī
al-Makkī, mawlā of *Abd Allāh b. al-Sā>ib b. ~ayfī al-Makhzūmī al-Qurashī;
al-Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl fī asmā! al-rijāl, ed. A:mad *Alī *Abīd and =asan
A:mad Āghā, revised by Suhayl Zakkār, 23 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Kutub
al-*Ilmiyya, 1414/1994), vol. XV, pp. 136–7, no. 5368, gives these three dates for
his death. Abū Bazza was a Persian mawlā of Hamadhān who submit ted to
Islam (aslama), in front of al-Sā>ib b. ~ayfī al-Makhzūmī al-Makkī; al-Bukhārī,
al-Ta!rīkh al-awsa#, ed. Mu:ammad b. Ibrāhīm b. La:īdān, 2 vols (Riyadh,
Dār al-~umay*ī, 1418/1998), vol. I, p. 422, no. 952.
7 Andrew Rippin, ‘Mudjāhid b. Djabr al-Makkī’, EI2, vol. VII, p. 295 (French ed.);
Fuat Sezgin, Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums (GAS), 9 vols (Leiden, Brill,
1967–84), vol. I, p. 29; al-Dhahabī, Siyar a)lām al-nubalā!, ed. Shu*ayb al-Arnā>ū^
89
Claude Gilliot
and =usayn Asad. 25 vols (Beirut, Mu>assasat al-Risāla, 1981–88), vol. IV,
pp. 449–57; Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XVII, pp. 440–4, no. 6374; Stauth,
Überlieferung; Claude Gilliot, ‘La sourate al-Baqara dans le Commentaire de
_abarī (Le développement et le fonctionnement des traditions exégétiques à la
lumière du commentaire des versets 1 à 40 de la sourate)’ (Unpublished first
doctoral dissertation [i.e. Doctorat de troisième cycle], Université Paris–III,
1982), pp. 252–5; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, pp. 640–4 et
passim.
8 Heribert Horst, Die Gewährsmänner im Korankommentar des >abarī. Ein
Beitrag zur Kenntnis der exegetischen Überlieferung im Islam (Dissertation,
Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhems-Universität Bonn, 1951), pp. 15, 21, 24; Idem,
‘Zur Überlieferung im Korankommentar a^-_abarīs’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen
Morgenländischen Gesellschaft (ZDMG) 103 (1953), pp. 290–307, at pp. 295–8
(chains of transmission of Mujāhid’s tafsīr apud _abarī); Stauth, Überlieferung,
pp. 70–229; Gilliot, ‘Baqara’, p. 255–61; Herbert Berg, The Development of
Exegesis in Early Islam: The Authenticity of Muslim Literature from the
Formative Period (Richmond, Surrey, RoutledgeCurzon, 2000), pp. 73–8 et
passim.
9 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāyat al-nihāya fī #abaqāt al-qurrā!, ed. Gotthelf Bergsträsser
and Otto Pretzl as Das Biographische Lexikon der Koranleser, 3 vols in 2
(Leipzig, Brockhaus, 1933–35), vol. II, pp. 41–2, no. 2659; al-Dhahabī, Ma)rifat
al-qurrā! al-kibār )alā’l-#abaqāt wa’l-a)&ār, ed. Tayyar Altıkulaç, 4 vols
(Istanbul, İslam Araştırmaları Merkezi, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 1995),
pp. 163–5, no. 25; Arthur Jeffery, Materials for the History of the Text of the
Qur!ān (Leiden, Brill, 1937; repr. New York, AMS Press, 1975), pp. 276–84;
Gilliot, ‘Baqara’, p. 254; Cornelis [Kees] H. M. Versteegh, Arabic Grammar
and Qur!anic Exegesis in Early Islam (Leiden, Brill, 1993), pp. 79–80, has
found one variant in the edited text of Ibn Shādhān’s version, and another
considered by Mujāhid to be the mistake of a copyist. According to Versteegh,
‘The remaining few variant readings derive from other authorities’.
10 *Abd Allāh b. *Ubayd Allāh al-Qurashī al-Makkī al-A:wal al-Mu>adhdhin;
Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. V, pp. 88–90.
11 al-_abarī (Abū Ja*far b. Jarīr), Jāmi) al-bayān )an ta!wīl āy al-Qur!ān, ed.
Ma:mūd Mu:ammad Shākir and A:mad Mu:ammad Shākir, 16 vols
(incomplete: to Q. 14:27) (Cairo, Dār al-Ma*ārif, 1954–68), vol. I, p. 90, nos 107
and 108 (for Q. 14:28 [vol. XIII, p. 219] onwards of _abarī’s tafsīr, see Jāmi)
al-bayān, ed. Mu;âfā al-Saqqā et al., 30 vols [Cairo, Mu;âfā al-Bābī al-=alabī,
1373–77/1954–57]); Anonym (now identified as Ibn Bis^ām al-_a:īrī [or
al-_akhīrī or _ukhayrī] Abū Mu:ammad =āmid b. A:mad b. Ja*far), Kitāb
al-Mabānī, in Arthur Jeffery, ed., Muqaddimatān fī )ulūm al-Qur!ān wa-humā
muqaddimat Kitāb al-Mabānī wa muqaddimat Ibn )A#iyya (Cairo, Maktabat
al-Khānjī, 1954), pp. 5–250, at p. 193, where read ‘alwā+uhu’, not ‘al-wāhid’;
See Stauth, Überlieferung, pp. 24–5, for more details.
12 For more on A*mash, see n. 129.
13 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. IV, p. 455.
14 Ibn Sa*d, al->abaqāt al-kubrā, foreword by I:sān *Abbās, ed., on the basis of
the edition by Eduard Sachau et al., 9 vols (Beirut, Dār ~ādir li’l-_ibā*a wa’l-
Nashr, 1957–59), vol. V, pp. 466–7; Stauth, Überlieferung, p. 19.
90
15 al-Dhahabī, Mīzān al-i)tidāl fī naqd al-rijāl, ed. *Alī Mu:ammad al-Bijāwī, 4

vols (Cairo, *Īsā al-Bābī al-=alabī, 1963), vol. III, p. 440 (pp. 439–40, no. 7075);
Stauth, Überlieferung, p. 19.
16 Abū Nu*aym al-I;fahānī, $ilyat al-awliyā! wa #abaqāt al-a&fiyā!, ed. *Abd
al-=afī Sa*d *Aîyya et al., 10 vols (Cairo, Ma^ba*at al-Sa*āda, 1932–38), vol.
III, pp. 279–310, no. 243; Ibn al-Jawzī, Xifat al-&afwa, ed. Ma:mūd Fākhūrī
and Mu:ammad Rawwās Qal*ajī, 4 vols (Aleppo, Dār al-Wa*ī, 1969–73; repr.
Beirut, Dār al-Ma*rifa, 1405/1985), vol. II, pp. 208–11, no. 208; Ibn al-Athīr
(Majd al-Dīn, d. 606/1210), al-Mukhtār min manāqib al-akhyār, ed. Ma>mūn
al-~agharjī et al., 6 vols (al-*Ayn, Markaz Zāyid li’l Turāth wa’l-Tārīkh,
1424/2003), vol. IV, pp. 284–6, no. 414.
17 Ibn al-Jawzī, Kitāb al-Qu&&ā& wa’l-mudhakkirīn, ed. and tr. Merlin L. Swartz
(Beirut, Dār al-Mashriq, 1971), § 101, with an exeget ical tradition on Q. 2:7
(transmit ted by A*mash); Also see section 5.3.
18 Gerald R. Hawting, ‘Khālid b. *Abd Allāh al-asrī’, EI 2 , vol. IV, pp. 958–60
(French edn).
19 GAS, vol. I, p. 31.
20 van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. I, pp. 158–60.
21 GAS, vol. I, pp. 28–9.
22 Wilferd Madelung, Der Imam al-Qāsim ibn Ibrāhīm und die Glaubenslehre
der Zaiditen (Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, 1965), pp. 232–3.
23 Ibn Sa*d, >abaqāt, vol. V, p. 467; Nabia Abbott, Studies in Arabic Literary
Papyri, vol. II: Qur!ānic Commentary and Tradition (Chicago, University of
Chicago Press, 1967), p. 98.
24 Abbott, Studies in Arabic Literary Papyri, vol. II, p. 98: e.g. *Abd Allāh b.
Mubārak (d. 181/797).
25 Ibn =ajar al-*Asqalānī, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, ed. Amīr =asan et al., 12 vols
(Hyderabad, Ma^ba*at Majlis Dā>irat al-Ma*ārif al-Niāmiyya, 1325–27/1907–
09), vol. X, pp. 42–3; Dhahabī, Mīzān, vol. III, p. 440.
26 Ibn Sa*d, >abaqāt, vol. V, p. 467.
27 Dhahabī, Mīzān, vol. III, p. 439.
28 Abū Nu*aym, $ilyat al-awliyā!, vol. III, pp. 301–10.
29 Proceeded by a select ive list of those from whom he transmit ted: Ibn *Abbās,
Ibn *Umar, Jābir b. *Abd Allāh, Abū Sa*īd al-Khudrī, Abū Hurayra, Rāfi* b.
Khudayj; See ibid., p. 300.
30 Thirty-three hadiths, among them twenty-seven Kūfan ones; ibid., pp. 300–1.
31 E.g. ibid., p. 303, ll. 2, 8 and antepenult.; p. 310, ll. 2, 7.
32 Ibid., p. 291, l. 17.
33 On Sufyān al-Thawrī, see n. 156.
34 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XII, pp. 152–3, no. 4188; Dhahabī, Mīzān, vol.
III, pp. 682–3, no. 5324.
35 al-Fasawī (Ya*qūb b. Sufyān), al-Ma)rifa wa’l-ta!rīkh, ed. Akram iyā> al-*Umarī,
3rd edn, 4 vols (Medina, Maktabat al-Dār, 1410/1991), vol. II, pp. 637–43; Mizzī,
Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XVIII, pp. 399–404, no. 6795; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. V,
pp. 402–12; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 647.
36 Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa, vol. III, p. 15. The same statement is attributed to *Alī
al-Madīnī (d. 234/849) in vol. II, p. 638, who probably took it over from Ibn
al-Qa^ân; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 647, ll. 1–5.
91
Claude Gilliot
37 Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa, vol. I, pp. 703–5; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol.
II, p. 645.
38 Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa, vol. I, p. 704.
39 On al-Qāsim b. (Nāfi* b.) Abī Bazza, see n. 6.
40 Ibn Sa*d, >abaqāt, vol. V, p. 491 (one line only); Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol.
XII, pp. 384–7, no. 4378; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 645 and
n. 3.
41 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, Sunan Sa)īd b. Man&ūr, ed. Sa*d b. *Abd Allāh b. *Abd al-*Azīz
Āl =umayyid, 2nd edn, 5 vols (Riyadh, Dār al-~umay*ī, 1420/2000).
42 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr al-Qur!ān al-a/īm musnadan )an rasūl Allāh wa’l-
&a+āba wa’l-tābi)īn, ed. As*ad Mu:ammad al-_ayyib, 10 vols (Mecca and Riyadh,
al-Maktaba al-*Arabiyya al-Sa*ūdiyya, 1417/1997); cf. Mehmet Akif Koç, ‘Isnāds
and Rijāl Expertise in the Exegesis of Ibn Abī =ātim (327/939)’, Der Islam 82
(2005), pp. 146–68, for his criticism of al-_ayyib’s edition, see pp. 146–7.
43 For instance, for ‘Ibn Abī *Alī’, read: Ibn Abī Laylā; Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī,
Tafsīr, vol. IX, p. 2961, no. 16804, at Q. 29:28. Al-Qāsim b. Abī ‘Murra’, read:
Bazza; vol. VI, p. 2035, no. 10904, at Q. 11:43.
44 Koç, ‘Isnāds and Rijāl Expertise’, p. 147, n. 3. The same wrote that: ‘Despite
these mistakes the publisher made no corrections in its second print ing
(1999), although this did include four-volume indices and takhrīj prepared by
Kāmil *Uwaya’, p. 147. See also Koç, İsnad Verileri Çerçevesinde Erken
Dönem Tefsir Faaliyetleri. İbn Ebî Hâtim (ö. 327/939) Tefsiri Örneğinde Bir
Literatür İncelemesi (Ankara, Kitâbiyât, 2003), p. 28, n. 98.
45 See n. 6.
46 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. III, p. 846, no. 4682, at Q. 3:199.
47 Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa, vol. II, p. 154.
48 On Ibn Abī Najī: personally, Ibn Qattān said: ‘He did not hear the whole
tafsīr from Mujāhid, but from al-Qāsim Ibn Abī Bazza’. See Dhahabī, Mīzān,
vol. II, p. 515, no. 4651.
49 Ibn =ibbān al-Bustī, Kitāb al-Thiqāt, 9 vols (Hyderabad, Majlis Dā>irat
al-Ma*ārif al-*Uthmāniyya, 1393–1403/1973–83), vol. VII, pp. 330–1; idem,
Kitāb Mashāhīr )ulamā! al-amsār, ed. Manfred Fleischhammer as Die berühm-
ten Traditionarier der islamischen Länder (Wiesbaden, Steiner, 1959), p. 146;
Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, vol. VIII, p. 310, gives only the first part of this
quotation. Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XV, pp. 136–7, no. 5368, who also
refers to Ibn =ibbān, does not quote this passage at all.
50 Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa, vol. II, p. 154.
51 Ibn =ibbān, Die berühmten Traditionarier der islamischen Länder, p. 146, no.
1156; Abbott, Studies in Arabic Literary Papyri, vol. II, p. 98; Gilliot, ‘Baqara’,
pp. 255–6.
52 On ‘misrepresentation’ (tadlīs), see Ibn al-~alā: al-Shahrazūrī, Muqaddimat
Ibn al-Xalā+, tr. Eerik Dickinson as An Introduction to the Science of the
$adīth. Kitāb Ma)rifat anwā) )ilm al-+adīth of Ibn al-Xalā+ al-Shahrazūrī
(Reading, Garnet, 2005), ch. 12, pp. 55–6; al-Nawawī, al-Taqrīb wa’l-tafsīr, tr.
William Marçais as Le Taqrìb de en-Nawawi (Paris, Imprimerie Nationale,
1902), pp. 45–53, ch. 12.
53 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. I, p. 477, no. 631, on Q. 2:30; Stauth,
Überlieferung, p. 131; cf. Gregor Schoeler, Écrire et transmettre dans les débuts
92
de l’islam (Paris, Presses universitaires de France, 2002); idem, The Oral and
the Written in Early Islam, tr. Uwe Vagelpohl and ed. James E. Montgomery
(London, Routledge, 2006), p. 32.
54 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VI, pp. 310–16; Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XVI,
pp. 496–8, no. 5995.
55 Claude Gilliot, Exégèse, langue et théologie en Islam: L’exégèse coranique de
Tabarī (Paris, Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, 1990), pp. 21–2.
56 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. V, pp. 77–8, no. 1403; Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa, vol. I,
p. 181; vol. III, pp. 83, 233.
57 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XIV, pp. 430–31, no. 5115; Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa,
vol. III, p. 83; al-Khalīlī, Kitāb al-Irshād fī ma)rifat )ulamā! al-+adīth, ed.
Mu:ammad Sa*īd b. *Umar Idrīs, 3 vols (Riyadh, Maktabat al-Rushd,
1409/1989), vol. II, pp. 664–5, no. 421.
58 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. I, p. 477, no. 61, at Q. 2:30; vol. IX,
p. 509, no. 11055, at Q. 5:3; vol. XI, p. 552, no. 13590, at Q. 6:94; p. 555, no.
13600, at Q. 6:96; vol. XII, p. 284, no. 14296, at Q. 6:162; vol. XIII, p. 464, no.
15871, at Q. 8:24; vol. XV, pp. 447–8, no. 18478, at Q. 12:86; p. 468, no. 18536,
at. Q. 12:99; ed. Saqqā, vol. XV, p. 126, at Q. 17:71; vol. XVI, p. 132, at Q. 19:97;
p. 226, at Q. 20:124; vol. XVII, p. 156, at Q. 22:32, etc.
59 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. II, p. 380, at Q. 2:93.
60 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. I, p. 283, no. 1523, at Q. 2:172; vol. III,
p. 2207, no. 12035, at Q. 12:106; vol. VIII, p. 2584, no. 14492, at Q. 24:33; vol.
IX, p. 2961, at Q. 28:22, after correction of ‘Ibn Abī *Alī’ to Ibn Abī Layla;
p. 2967, no. 46844, at Q. 28:26 (the same inter pretation is given in _abarī,
Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XX, p. 54, with the follow ing isnād: Waraqā> ←
Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid); p. 3052, no. 17661, at Q. 29:27: but here not from
Mujāhid, but from *Ikrima.
61 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. I, p. 110, no. 528, at Q. 2:53: Ibn Abī Bazza
has heard Sa*īd b. Jubayr and Mujāhid giving the same inter pretation.
62 Ibid., vol. VIII, p. 2562, no. 14317, at Q. 24:26.
63 Joseph van Ess, Zwischen $adī und Theologie: Studien zur Entstehung prädes-
tinatianischer Überlieferung (Berlin and New York, Walter de Gruyter, 1975),
p. 78.
64 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. IX, pp. 119–20, nos 10454–55, at
Q. 4:119; p. 218, no. 10468; p. 219, nos 10470, 10477.
65 Bukhārī, Xa+ī+, ch. 65 (Tafsīr), ch. 25 (Furqān), bāb 2, see al-Jāmi) al-&a+ī+, ed.
Ludolf Krehl and Theodor Juynboll as Recueil des traditions mahométanes, 4
vols (Leiden, Brill, 1862–1908), vol. III, p. 302, ll. 11–15, at Q. 25:68; Ibn =ajar,
Fat+ al-bāri, vol. VIII, p. 492–3, no. 4762 in the numbering of Mu:ammad
Fu>ād *Abd al-Bāqī, the only occurrence of a tradition transmit ted by Ibn Abī
Bazza in Bukhārī’s Xa+ī+; el-Bokhâri, Les Traditions islamiques, translated
into French by Octave Houdas and William Marçais, 4 vols (Paris, Adrien
Maisonneuve, 1977; 1st edn 1903–14), vol. III, pp. 405–6; Sahîh al-Bukhârî, tr.
Muhammad Muhsin Khan, 9 vols (Riyadh, Darussalam, 1997), vol. VI, p. 248,
no. 4762; cf. _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XIX, p. 42, without Ibn Abī
Bazza, but with Ibn Jubayr: *Abd al-Ra:mān b. Abzā al-Khuā*ī al-Kūfī orders
Ibn Jubayr to ask Ibn *Abbās about the same verse.
66 van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. I, pp. 292–4.
93
Claude Gilliot
67 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. VIII, pp. 344–56, no. 3723; Gilliot, Exégèse,
p. 116.
68 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XVI, p. 9; _abarī, ibid., also gives this
tradition of Abū _ufayl transmit ted by: Sufyān al-Thawrī ← =abīb b. Abī
Thābit ← Abū _ufayl, with a different text at the end; Brannon M. Wheeler,
Prophets in the Quran. An Introduction to the Quran and Muslim Exegesis
(London, New York, Continuum, 2002), p. 229: the last sentence is not in
Wheeler’s translation; Ibn *Asākir, Ta!rīkh madīnat Dimashq, ed. Mu:ibb
al-Dīn al-*Amrawī and *Alī Shīrī, 80 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Fikr, 1995–2001), vol.
XVII, p. 334, with a different text at the end.
69 Ibn al-Nadīm, Kitāb al-Fihrist, ed. Gustav Flügel, completed by Johannes
Rödiger and August Müller, 2 vols in 1 (Leipzig, F. C. W. Vogel, 1872), vol. I,
p. 90; ed. and tr. Bayard Dodge as The Fihrist of al-Nadīm: A Tenth-Century
Survey of Muslim Culture, 2 vols (New York, Columbia University Press,
1970), vol. I, p. 195; Ibn Durayd, al-Ishtiqāq, ed. *Abd al-Salām Mu:ammad
Hārūn (Cairo, 1958), p. 430. al-Shahrastānī, Kitāb al-Milal wa’l-ni+al, trans-
lated into French by Daniel Gimaret and Guy Monnot as Livre des religions et
des sectes, 2 vols (Louvain and Paris, Peeters and UNESCO, 1986), vol. I,
p. 367, n. 3. In _abarī, Annales quos scripsit Abu Djafar Mohammed ibn Djarir
at-Tabari, ed. Michael Jan De Goeje et al., 3 vols in 16 (Leiden, Brill, 1879–
1901), vol. II, p. 67: ‘Ibn al-Kawwā’s name was *Abd Allāh b. Awfā’, i.e. Awfā
with alif maq&ūra. But in the Cairo edition, al-_abarī, Ta!rīkh al-rusul wa’l-
mulūk, ed. Mu:ammad Abū’l-Fal Ibrāhīm, 11 vols (Cairo, Dār al-Ma*ārif,
1960–69), vol. V, p. 212: ‘*Abd Allāh b. Abī Awfā’; so a confusion has been
made with *Abd Allāh b. Abī Awfā *Alqama b. Khālid al-Aslamī, a Companion
who died in 86/705, 87 or 88; Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. X, pp. 30–31, no.
3154. In The History of al->abarī, vol. XVIII: Between Civil Wars: The
Caliphate of Mu)āwiyah, tr. Michael G. Morony (Albany, NY, State University
of New York Press, 1987), p. 72, follows the reading of the Leiden edition: *Abd
Allāh b. Awfā, and has the good identification of Ibn al-Kawwā>, p. 31, n. 132.
The confusion is, among others, in The History of al->abarī, vol. I: General
Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, tr. Franz Rosenthal (Albany,
NY, State University of New York Press, 1989), p. 244, n. 5.
70 Shahrastānī, vol. I, Livre des religions et des sectes, p. 365, n. 5.
71 Ibn =ajar al-*Asqalānī, Lisān al-mīzān, ed. Amīr =asan al-Nu*mānī et al., 7
vols (Hyderabad, Dā>irat al-Ma*ārif al-Niāmiyya, 1330–31/1912–13), vol. III,
p. 329–30, no. 1367.
72 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XIII, p. 220, at Q. 14:28–29, and two
others ibid., but without the mention of Ibn al-Kawwā>; vol. XXVI, p. 186, at
Q. 51:1; vol. XV, p. 49, at Q. 17:12: with Ibn al-Kawwā>, but not transmit ted by
Ibn Abī Bazza; _abarī, Annales, vol. II, pp. 74–5, on the same Qur’anic verse;
The History of al->abarī, vol. I, pp. 244–5.
73 Ibrāhīm al-Thaqafī, al-Ghārāt (aw al-Istinfār wa’l-ghārāt), ed. al-Sayyid
*Abd al-Zahrā> al-=usaynī al-Kha^īb (Beirut, Dār al-Awā>, 1407/1987),
pp. 103–5.
74 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. IV, pp. 280–1, and Ibn *Asākir, Ta!rīkh Dimashq, vol.
XVIII, pp. 278–91, no. 2223 have: Abū *Umar; al-Zabīdī, Tāj al-)arūs min
jawāhir al-qāmūs, ed. *Abd al-Sattār A:mad Farrāj et al., 40 vols (Kuwait,
94
al-Majlis al-Waânī li’l-Thaqāfa wa’l-Funūn wa’l-Ādāb, 1385–1422/1965–2001),

vol. XXXV, p. 142: Abū *Amr, like the edition of al-Ghārāt.
75 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VI, pp. 125–6; Stauth, Überlieferung, pp. 69–72; Gilliot,
‘Baqara’, p. 257; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, pp. 643–7.
76 *Abd al-Razzāq, Tafsīr )Abd al-Razzāq, ed. Ma:mūd Mu:ammad *Abduh, 3
vols (Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya, 1419/1999), vol. I, p. 290, at Q. 2:124;
p. 303, at Q. 2:178; p. 317, at Q. 2:196; p. 321, no. 246, at Q. 2:197; p. 351 (two
times); pp. 403 ()an Mujāhid wa Qatāda), 405, 448, 459, 465.
77 *Abd al-Razzāq, Tafsīr, vol. I, p. 261, at Q. 2:25; pp. 343, 360, 374, 435, 437,
438.
78 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, Sunan, vol. II, pp. 647, 701, 706, 711, 734; vol. III, pp. 793, 910,
960, 1062, 1075.
79 GAS, vol. I, pp. 37–8; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VII, pp. 419–22; idem, Mīzān, vol.
IV, p. 332, no. 9340; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 7.
80 For the transmissions of Warqā> in _abarī’s commentary, see Stauth,
Überlieferung, pp. 114–18.
81 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. IX, pp. 513–16; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol.
III, pp. 7–8.
82 In _abarī’s commentary, see Horst, Gewährsmänner, p. 12; _abarī, Jāmi)
al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XIII, p. 237: Shabāba ← Warqā> at Q. 14:43; vol. XIV,
p. 40, at Q. 15:54; p. 41, at Q. 14:63; p. 49 at Q. 15:79: Shabāba ← Warqā> ← Ibn
Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid; in Tha*labī’s commentary. See al-Tha*labī, al-Kashf wa’l-
bayān )an tafsīr al-Qur!ān, ed. Isaiah Goldfeld as Qur!ānic Commentary in the
Eastern Islamic Tradition of the First Four Centuries of the Hijra. An Annotated
Edition of the Preface of al-Tha)labī’s ‘Kitāb al-Kashf wa’l-bayān )an tafsīr
al-Qur!ān’ (Acre, Srugy Printers and Publishers, 1984), p. 28.
83 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. I, pp. 66, 86, 96, 157; vol. III, p. 1028, no.
5763; p. 1029, no. 5769, etc.
84 Koç, ‘Isnāds and Rijāl Expertise’, p. 151, no. III; idem, İsnad Verileri
Çerçevesinde Erken Dönem Tefsir Faaliyetleri, pp. 34–5, no. III; pp. 70–3, § 5;
Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. VI, p. 1995, no. 10683; p. 1997, no. 10648.
For =ajjāj b. =amza, see idem, al-Jar+ wa’l-ta)dīl, ed. Hāshim al-Nadwī et al.,
9 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya, n.d.; 1st edn, 8 vols, Hyderabad, 1371–
72/1952–53), vol. III, pp. 158–9, no. 679; Khalīlī, Irshād, vol. II, p. 672, no. 430;
al-Sam*ānī, al-Ansāb, ed. *Abd Allāh al-Bārūdī, 5 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Jinān,
1408/1988), vol. II, p. 327; Ibn =ajar al-*Asqalānī, Tab&īr al-muntabih bi-ta+rīr
al-mushtabih, ed. *Alī Mu:ammad al-Bijāwī and Mu:ammad *Alī al-Najjār, 4
vols (Cairo, al-Mu>assasa al-Mi;riyya li’l-Ta>līf wa’l-Anbā> wa’l-Nashr wa’l-Dār
al-Mi;riyya li’l-Ta>līf wa’l-Tarjama, Ma^ba*at Dār al-Qawmiyya al-*Arabiyya
li’l-_ībā*a (Turāthunā), 1964–67; repr. Beirut, al-Maktaba al-*Ilmiyya, n.d. vol.
II, p. 501.
85 GAS, vol. I, p. 102; Ibn Sa*d, >abaqāt, vol. VII, p. 490; al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī,
Ta!rīkh Baghdād, ed. Mu:ammad Sa*īd b. A:mad al-*Urfī, 14 vols (Cairo,
Ma^ba*at al-Sa*āda and Maktabat Amīn al-Khānjī, 1931–49), vol. VII, pp. 27–30,
no. 3482; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. X, pp. 335–8; Stauth, Überlieferung, pp. 80–9. He
seems to have expanded the version of Mujāhid’s tafsīr which he transmitted;
van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 641, n. 18, also pp. 67, 644, 652.
95
Claude Gilliot
86 See clande Gilliot, ‘Abū =ātim al-Rāzī Mu:ammad b. Idrīs’, EI THREE, vol.
2011–3, pp. 7–8.
87 al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. VII, pp. 426–9; Dhahabī, Siyar,
vol. IX, pp. 559–60, no. 4000.
88 See Gilliot, Exégèse, p. 29, and n. 5; _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol.
XIX, p. 134, at. Q. 27:8: vol. XXVIII, p. 96, at Q. 62:3; vol. XXIX, p. 57, at Q.
69:17.
89 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XIV, pp. 582–3, no. 5252; Dhahabī, Mīzān, vol.
III, p. 327, no. 6619.
90 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. IX, pp. 480–5. For this version see Horst, ‘Überlieferung’,
pp. 296–7.
91 See Gilliot, Exégèse, p. 29, and n. 4; Horst, Gewährsmänner, pp. 12, 15.
92 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, Sunan, vol. II, p. 548, no. 18; p. 606, no. 213; p. 609, no. 214;
p. 614, no. 218.
93 GAS, vol. I, p. 35; Dhahabī, Ma)rifat al-qurrā! al-kibār, vol. I, pp. 241–2, no. 57;
Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. VIII, pp. 269–70, no. 2671; Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb
al-tahdhīb, vol. IV, pp. 305–6; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II,
pp. 647–8; Gilliot, ‘Baqara’, pp. 257–8.
94 al-Tha*labī, ed. Goldfeld as Qur!ānic Commentary in the Eastern Islamic
Tradition, p. 44.
95 van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, pp. 647–8.
96 GAS, vol. I, p. 41; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. X, pp. 137–9; idem, Mīzān, vol. IV,
pp. 221–2, no. 8923; Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XVIII, pp. 508–10, no.
6894; Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, vol. X, pp. 370–1; Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa, vol.
I, p. 717.
97 For more on Sufyān al-Thawrī, see n. 156.
98 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. X, p. 139.
99 This recension of Shibl ← Ibn Abī Najī: ← Mujāhid’s tafsīr figures 680 times in
the exegesis of Sūrat al-Baqara (Q. 2) to Sūrat Yūnus (Q. 10) in _abarī’s
commentary; Horst, ‘Überlieferung’, p. 298; idem, Gewährsmänner, p. 15;
Gilliot, Exégèse, p. 22.
100 _abarī’s master in Āmul, when he was young; al-Muthannā remains uniden-
tified, and we do not know other pupils of this shaykh. Not a single notice on
him is found in the prosopographical literature. In his commentary, _abarī
transmits around 1,400 exeget ical sayings directly from him, coming from
twenty-seven masters or more; see Gilliot, Exégèse, p. 22.
101 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. I, p. 133, no. 672, at Q. 2:65; p. 144, no. 746,
at Q. 2:77; p. 213, no. 1129, at Q. 2:116; p. 239, no. 1277, at Q. 2:132; p. 240, no.
1284, at Q. 2:133; p. 252, no. 1372, at Q. 2:146; vol. VIII, p. 2613, no. 14684, at
Q. 24:39; vol. IV, p. 1144, no. 6437, at Q. 5:44.
102 Ibn =ajar al-*Asqalānī, al-Mu)jam al-mufahras, aw Tajrīd asānīd al-kutub
al-mashhūra wa’l-ajzā! al-manthūra, ed. Mu:ammad Shakūr et al. (Beirut,
Mu>assasat al-Risāla, 1418/1998), p. 117, no. 377.
103 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VIII, pp. 176–8; idem, Mīzān, vol. IV, pp. 102–3, no. 8485;
van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, pp. 650–1.
104 See Tha*labī, ed. Isaiah Goldfeld as Qur!ānic Commentary in the Eastern
Islamic Tradition, p. 27; Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, Tafsīr, within his Sunan, vol. II,
p. 606, no. 213; vol. III, p. 1069, no. 510.
96
105 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XIX, p. 94, at Q. 26:128.
106 Tafsīr, MS āhiriyya mağ. 95, f. 121r–126r, fifth century AH; GAS, vol. I, p. 38.
107 Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa, vol. II, p. 713; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VI, pp. 179–84; idem,
Mīzān, vol. III, pp. 420–3, no. 6997; Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, vol. VIII,
pp. 465–8; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 644; vol. IV, p. 753.
108 *Abd al-Razzāq, Tafsīr, vol. I, pp. 272, 355, 391: *Abd al-Razzāq ← Thawrī ←
Layth ← Mujāhid.
109 Gilliot, Exégèse, pp. 250–3; _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān: Ya*qūb ← Ibn *Ulayya ←
Layth ← Mujāhid; ed. Shākir, vol. V, pp. 96–7, no. 5106, at Q. 2:235; p. 105, no.
5134; p. 109, no. 5168; ed. Saqqā, vol. XXV, p. 117, at Q. 44:16; Abū Kurayb ←
Wakī* ← Sufyān al-Thawrī: ed. Shākir, vol. XVI, p. 331, no. 20067 at Q. 13:4;
p. 342, no. 20115, at Q. 13:4. Sufyān ← Layth ← Mujāhid: vol. V, p. 110,
no. 5169, at Q. 2:235; p. 114, no. 5174; p. 115, no. 5180; vol. VI, p. 402, no. 7045,
at Q. 3:43; vol. XVI, p. 331, nos 20068–69; p. 342, no. 20116; [. . .] Layth ←
Mujāhid: ed. Shākir, vol. VI, p. 402, nos 7041–2, at Q. 3:43; vol. XV, at Q. 11:
nos 18703, 18707, 18709, 18718, 18730, 18733–4. [. . .] *Āisha, the wife of Layth
← Layth ← Mujāhi: ed. Saqqā, vol. XXVII, p. 178, at Q. 56:24.
110 Tha*labī, ed. Isaiah Goldfeld as Qur!ānic Commentary in the Eastern Islamic
Tradition, p. 28.
111 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, Sunan, vol. III, pp. 837, 921, 971; vol. IV, pp. 1290, 1458, 1616.
113 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. V, pp. 208–13; Ibn =ibbān al-Bustī, Kitāb Mashāhīr,
p. 111, no. 842, adds the nick name ‘al-Na::ās’, probably a confusion with
another of the Banū *Ijl; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. I, pp. 242–3.
114 Stauth, Überlieferung, p. 127
116 On Man;ūr, see n. 35.
117 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. III, pp. 357–64, no. 901.
118 Ibid., p. 359.
119 Stauth, Überlieferung, p. 132, on the isnād Jarīr ← Man;ūr ← Mujāhid in
_abarī’s commentary, wrongly identifies Jarīr as Jarīr b. =āzim.
120 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, Sunan, vol. II, pp. 634, 638; vol. III, pp. 880, 1151; vol. IV, p. 1367.
121 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. VII, pp. 384–6, no. 2400; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol.
XII, pp. 152–3; Gilliot, Exégèse, p. 24: contrary to what we wrote at this time,
Ibn Wakī* is included in the books devoted to transmit ters of hadith.
122 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. XII, p. 378, no. 14463; vol. XIII, p. 489,
nos 15936–7, at Q. 8:29.
123 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XX, p. 146, at Q. 29:29: these two chains
with two others that also include Man;ūr; vol. XXX, p. 19, at Q. 78:34: Sufyān
← Man;ūr, and Shu*ba ← Man;ūr; vol. XXX, p. 249, at Q. 95:7: Sufyān ←
Man;ūr (twice).
124 Stauth, Überlieferung, pp. 130, 132.
125 Abū Nu*aym, $ilyat al-awliyā!, vol. III, pp. 281 ff.
126 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VI, pp. 129–32; idem, Mīzān, vol. VI, pp. 423–5, no. 9695,
not identified by Stauth, Überlieferung, pp. 119, n. 8 and 130, n. 4; van Ess,
Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. I, p. 255; vol. II, p. 472.
127 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. VI, p. 102, no. 6449, at Q. 2:284.
128 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, Sunan, vol. III, pp. 819, 986, 1004.
97
Claude Gilliot
129 See Brockelmann–Pellat, ‘al-A*mash’, EI2, vol. I, pp. 443–4; Dhahabī, Siyar,
vol. VI, pp. 226–48: ‘he had Shi‘i tendencies (fīhi tashayyu))’; Mizzī, Tahdhīb
al-kamāl, vol. VIII, pp. 106–14, no. 2553; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft,
vol. I, pp. 237–9.
130 van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. I, p. 238.
131 Jeffery, Materials, pp. 314–29.
132 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. I, p. 77.
133 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. I, p. 259, no. 301, at Q. 2:7; ed. Saqqā,
vol. XIV, p. 162, at Q. 16:88; vol. XXVII, pp. 134–5, at Q. 55:29.
134 Abū Nu*aym, $ilyat al-awliyā!, vol. III, pp. 282, 284.
135 GAS, vol. I, p. 91; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VI, pp. 325–36; Gilliot, ‘Baqara’,
pp. 149–60; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, pp. 644, 650, 653.
136 *Abd al-Razzāq, Tafsīr, vol. I, p. 355, no. 301, at Q. 2:240: *Abd al-Razzāq ← Ibn
Jurayj ← Mujāhid.
137 Gilliot, Exégèse, pp. 27–8.
138 Horst, Gewährsmänner, p. 18, isnād no. XV, and p. 24; idem, ‘Überlieferung’,
p. 295; _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. VIII, p. 213, no. 9131, at Q. 4:27;
vol. XVI, p. 268, no. 19889, at Q. 12:100; _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol.
XIII, p. 242 (Q. 14:44), p. 243 (Q. 14:45).
139 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. I, pp. 70, 82, 92.
140 Tha*labī, ed. Isaiah Goldfeld as Qur!ānic Commentary in the Eastern Islamic
Tradition, p. 28.
141 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. V, pp. 318–22; idem, Ta!rīkh al-islām wa #abaqāt al-mashāhīr
wa’l-a)lām, ed. Bashshār *Awwād Ma*rūf, 17 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Gharb
al-Islāmī, 2003), vol. III, pp. 263–4; idem, Ma)rifat al-qurrā! al-kibār, vol. I,
pp. 197–203, no. 37.
142 Zabīdī, Tāj, vol. XI, p. 334. The name is said to be of Persian origin.
143 Dhahabī, Ma)rifat al-qurrā! al-kibār, vol. I, p. 198; van Ess, Theologie und
Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 651.
144 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāyat al-nihāya, vol. II, pp. 297–8, no. 3601; van Ess, Theologie
und Gesellschaft, vol. II, pp. 650–1.
145 Dhahabī, Ta!rīkh al-islām, vol. III, pp. 264–5.
146 Dhahabī, Ma)rifat al-qurrā! al-kibār, vol. I, pp. 199–200.
147 Horst, Gewährsmänner, p. 15; idem, ‘Überlieferung’, pp. 295–7.
148 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VI, pp. 145–6; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II,
p. 459.
149 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. II, p. 195, no. 1206, at Q. 2:68; vol. XV,
p. 533, no. 18708, at Q. 11:118; ed. Saqqā, vol. XXI, p. 94, at Q. 32:7; vol. XXX,
p. 211, at Q. 91:9.
150 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. I, pp. 82, 91; vol. III, p. 1020, no. 5724, at
Q. 4:85; vol. VI, p. 1871, no. 10307, at Q. 9:101; vol. IX, p. 3069, no. 17361, at
Q. 29:46; vol. X, p. 3372, no. 18978, at Q. 69:36.
151 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, Tafsīr, in Sunan, vol. II, pp. 581–2, no. 205; pp. 605–6, nos
211–12; pp. 615–16, no. 220.
152 Abū Nu*aym, $ilyat al-awliyā!, vol. III, p. 291, l. 5; p. 299, antepenult.
153 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XVIII, pp. 51–4, no. 6497; Dhahabī, Mīzān, vol.
IV, p. 99, no. 8470; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. I, pp. 182–3.
154 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. I, p. 331, no. 2503, at Q. 2:175.
98
155 Abū Nu*aym, $ilyat al-awliyā!, vol. III, p. 287, ll. 5 ff.: Sufyān ← Mis*ar ←
Mujāhid; ll. 19 ff.: Mis*ar ← Man;ūr ← Mujāhid.
156 The full name of Sufyān al-Thawrī is Abū *Abd Allāh Sufyān b. Sa*īd b. Masrūq
al-Kūfī; GAS, vol. I, pp. 518–19; Fasawī, al-Ma)rifa, vol. I, pp. 713–29; Dhahabī,
Siyar, vol. VII, pp. 229–79; Hans-Peter Raddatz, Die Stellung und Bedeutung
des Sufyān a-aurī (gest. 778): Ein Beitrag zur Geistesgeschichte des frühen
Islam (Inaugural Dissertation, Bonn, 1967), p. 216; idem, ‘Sufyān al-Thawrī’,
EI2, vol. I, pp. 804–5 (French edn); van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. I,
pp. 221–8 et passim; Steven C. Judd, ‘Competitive Hagiography in Biographies
of al-Awzā*ī and Sufyān al-Thawrī’, Journal of the American Oriental
Society 122, no. 1 (2002), pp. 25–37; idem, ‘Al-Awzā*ī and Sufyān al-Thawrī:
The Umayyad madhhab?’ in Peri Bearman, Rudolph Peters and Frank E.
Vogel, eds, The Islamic School of Law. Evolution, Devolution, and Progress
(Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 2005) pp. 10–25.; Claude Gilliot,
‘Sufyān al-awrī (m. 161/778). Quelque notes sur son mode d’enseignement et
la transmission de son savoir’ in Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi, ed., Islam:
identité et altérité. Hommage à Guy Monnot, O.P. (Turnhout, Brepols, 2013),
pp. 169–89.
157 Stauth, Überlieferung, pp. 119–23.
158 Sa*īd b. Man;ūr, Sunan, Kitāb al-tafsīr, vol. II, pp. 548–50, no. 184, at Q. 2:30:
Sufyān ← Ibn Abī Najī: ‘or another’ ← Mujāhid; cf. _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed.
Shākir, vol. I, p. 478, no. 634: Sufyān ← a man ← Mujāhid.
159 *Abd al-Razzāq, Tafsīr, vol. I, p. 272, no. 59; p. 355, no. 300: both: *Abd
al-Razzāq ← al-Thawrī ← Layth ← Mujāhid; p. 343, no. 271, at Q. 2:225: *Abd
al-Razzāq ← al-Thawrī ← Ibn Abī Najīh ← Mujāhid; p. 355, no. 300, at Q. 2:235:
*Abd al-Razzāq ← al-Thawrī ← Layth ← Mujāhid.
160 Stauth, Überlieferung, pp. 123–4; _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XIV,
p. 52, at Q. 15:51: [. . .] Sufyān ← Man;ūr ← Mujāhid ← Ibn *Abbās.
161 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. I, pp. 60, 80.
162 al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. IX, pp. 174–84; Dhahabī, Ta!rīkh
al-islām, vol. IV, pp. 1110–16, 20th class, no. 109; idem, Siyar, vol. VIII,
pp. 454–75. Cf. _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. III, p. 33, no. 1991; Abū
Nu*aym, $ilyat al-awliyā!, vol. III, p. 290, l. 15, both in the recension of Ibn
Abī Najī:.
163 Claude Gilliot, ‘A Schoolmaster, Storyteller, Exegete and Warrior at Work in
Khurāsān: al-a::āk b. Muzā:im al-Hilālī (d. 106/724)’ in Karen Bauer, ed.,
Aims, Methods and Contexts of Qur’anic Exegesis (2nd/8th – 9/15th c.) (Oxford,
Oxford University Press in association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies,
2013), pp. 311–92.
164 For this reason, the study of Stauth should be used cautiously and veri fied in
its passages on Sufyān al-Thawrī.
165 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. VIII, p. 221, at. Q. 4:29: two chains of
transmission; vol. XVI, p. 167, at Q. 12:68, with four chains; ed. Saqqā, vol.
XIV, p. 53, at Q. 15:87: six chains of transmit ters for an exeget ical saying of
Mujāhid: al-sab) al-#uwal.
166 Is:āq b. al-=ajjāj al-_ā:ūnī was a pupil of Ya:yā b. Ādam and *Abd al-Razzāq
al-~an*ānī; Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Jar+, vol. II, p. 217, no. 745; Sam*ānī, Ansāb,
vol. IV, pp. 25–6.
99
Claude Gilliot
167 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. X, pp. 68–9, no. 31911: One of his pupils was
A:mad b. *Abd al-Ra:mān b. *Abd Allāh b. Sa*d al-Dashtakī (in his case,
Dashtāk is a locality near to Rayy; Sam*ānī, Ansāb, vol. II, p. 488, ll. 4–10).
According to Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Jar+, vol. II, p. 217, no. 745, ll. 11–13 (notice
on al-_ā:ūnī), *Abd al-Ra:mān b. *Abd *Allāh al-Dashtakī got the transmission
of *Abd al-Razzāq’s Qur’anic commentary from Is:āq al-_ā:ūnī by collating it
(kataba . . . tafsīr )Abd al-Razzāq )an Is+āq . . .) from the exemplary (kataba )an)
of _ā:ūnī. (On this method of receiving hadith, tafsīr, etc., see Marçais, Le
Taqrìb de en-Nawawi, pp. 126–7; Shahrazūrī, An Introduction to the Science of
the $adīth, p. 119: one of the types of ‘transference’, munāwala.) This informa-
tion is in favour of the possiblity of Is:āq’s and *Abd Allāh’s identification.
168 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XIV, p. 49, at Q. 15:79; ed. Shākir, vol.
XVI, p. 5, at Q. 12:19: five recensions of Mujāhid’s exegesis; pp. 14–15, at
Q. 12:20: also five, et passim.
169 Mujāhid, Tafsīr Mujāhid, ed. *Abd al-Ra:mān al-_āhir b. Mu:ammad
al-Sūratī, 2 vols (Qatar, 1976).
170 al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. VII, pp. 279–80; Dhahabī, Siyar,
vol. XVII, pp. 415–18; see Mujāhid, Tafsīr, vol. I, p. 67, ll. 5–6.
171 Stauth, Überlieferung, pp. 79 ff.
172 al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. X, pp. 292–4, no. 5428; Dhahabī,
Siyar, vol. XVI, pp. 15–16; idem, Mīzān, vol. II, pp. 556–7, no. 4852.
173 Yāqūt, Mu)jam al-buldān, published as Jacut’s Geographisches Wörterbuch, ed.
Ferdinand Wüstenfeld, 6 vols (Leipzig, DMG, in Commission bei F.A.
Brockhaus, 1866–70), vol. III, pp. 195–6: between al-Ru;āfa and Dār al-Mamlaka;
vol. III, p. 522, l. 11; Guy Le Strange, Baghdad During the Abbasid Caliphate
(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1924; 1st edn 1900), pp. 199–201, 206; Mu;âfā
Jawād and A:mad Sūsa, Dalīl kharī#at Baghdād al-mufa&&al fī khi#a# Baghdād
qadīman wa +adīthan (Baghdad, al-Majma* al-*Ilmī al-*Irāqī, 1378/1958),
pp. 114–15.
174 He was probably located near Qanârat al-Tibn; Le Strange, Baghdad, pp. 124,
126. We thank Professor Abdallah Cheikh Moussa, who has helped us with
this localisation and more.
175 Tha*labī, ed. Goldfeld as Qur!ānic Commentary in the Eastern Islamic
Tradition, p. 44.
176 Ibn *Asākir, Ta!rīkh Dimashq, vol. VI, pp. 387–92; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. XIII,
pp. 184–92; Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāyat al-nihāya, vol. I, pp. 11–12, no. 38.
177 On Ādam b. Abī Iyās, see n. 85.
178 On Warqā> b. *Umar, see n. 79.
179 On Ibn Abī Najī:, see n. 75.
180 Both were Ash*arī in theology. Ibn Shādhān used to to drink nabīdh, but he
abstained from it when he was old!
181 al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. I, p. 116, ll. 6 ff. et passim.
182 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. XVI, pp. 15–16.
183 al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. I, pp. 351–2, no. 278; Dhahabī,
Siyar, vol. XVII, pp. 258–9.
184 al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. VII, p. 279, l. 11.
185 Leemhuis, ‘Origins’, p. 21, in accordance with the study of Stauth, Überlieferung;
cf. Leemhuis, ‘Ms. 1075’, pp. 169–80; Berg, Development, pp. 114–18.
100
186 Leemhuis, ‘Origins’, p. 21; cf. Gilliot, ‘Baqara’, pp. 252–61; idem, ‘Les débuts de
l’exégèse coranique’, Revue du monde musulman et de la Méditerranée 58
(1990), pp. 82–100, at pp. 88–9; tr. Michael Bonner as ‘The Beginnings of
Qur>ānic Exegesis’ in Andrew Rippin, ed., The Qur!an: Formative Interpretation
(Aldershot, Ashgate Variorum, 1999), pp. 13–14; cf. the traditional Islamic
point of view in al-Khuayrī (Mu:ammad b. *Abd Allāh b. *Alī al-Khuayrī),
Tafsīr al-tābi)īn: )ar* wa dirāsah muqārana, 2 vols (Riyadh, Dār al-Waân li’l-
Nashr, 1420/1999), vol. I, pp. 87–137.
187 van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 652.
188 Abū *Ubayd al-Ājurrī Mu:ammad b. *Alī b. *Uthmān (d. after 300/912). No
information on him has yet been found in the sources. His ‘full’ name is given
by Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. XIII, p. 206, l. 13, in the list of the pupils of Abū Dāwūd;
Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. VIII, p. 9, l. 17–18, who adds: al-+āfi/, lahu
)anhu masā!il mufīda (the great memoriser, he has gathered the instruct ive
answers of Abū Dāwūd al-Sijistānī to his questions).
189 al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. XIII, p. 486, ll. 19–20 (no. 7336
on Warqā>); idem, al-Kifāya fī )ilm al-riwāya (Hyderabad, Dā>irat al-Ma*ārif
al-*Uthmāniyya, 1357/1938), p. 125; 2nd edn (1390/1970), p. 166.
190 Abū Dāwūd al-Sijistānī, Su!ālāt Abī )Ubayd al-Ājurrī li-Abī Dā!ūd Sulaymān
b. al-Ash)ath al-Sijistānī (202–275 H) fī ma)rifat al-rijāl wa jar+ihim wa ta)dī-
lihim, ed. *Abd al-*Alīm *Abd al-*Aīm al-Bastawī, 2 vols (Mecca, Maktabat
al-Istiqāma and Beirut, Mu>assasat al-Rayyān, 1997); ed. Mu:ammad b. *Alī
al-Azharī (Cairo, al-Fārūq al-=adītha, 1413/2010).
191 According to al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Kifāya, 1st edn, p. 125; 2nd edn p. 166, in
his list of Khārijīs, Ibāīs, Qadarīs, Mu*tazilīs and Shi‘is, Ibn Abī Najī: is
Mu*tazilī and Shibl b. *Ubād is Qadarī.
192 Umayya b. ~afwān b. *Abd Allāh b. ~afwān b. Umayya [al-Akbar] b. Khalaf
al-Qurashī al-Juma:ī al-Makkī al-A;ghar; See Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol.
II, pp. 315–16, no. 548.
193 =asan al-Ba;rī (Abū Sa*īd al-=asan b. Abī al-=asan Yasār al-Ba;rī); See
Helmut Ritter, ‘=asan al-Ba;rī’ EI (English edn), vol. I, pp. 234–5; EI (French
edn), vol. I, pp. 254–5; Gilliot, ‘Exegesis of the Qur>ān: Classical and Medieval’,
EQ, vol. II, p. 105; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, pp. 41–121;
Gotthelf Bergsträsser, ‘Die Koranlesung des Hasan von Basra’, Islamica 2
(1926), pp. 11–57; Hans Heinrich Schaeder, ‘=asan al-Ba;rī: Studien zur
Frühgeschichte des Islam’, Der Islam 14, no. 1 (1925), pp. 1–75; Helmut Ritter,
‘Studien zur Geschichte der islamischen Frömmigkeit. =asan al-Ba;rī’, Der
Islam 21, no. 1 (1933), pp. 1–83; ~ā:ib Abū Janā:, al-awāhir al-lughawiyya fī
qirā!at al-$asan al-Ba&rī (Ba;ra, Manshūrāt Markaz Dirāsāt al-Khalīj
al-*Arabī bi Jāmi*at al-Ba;ra, 1405/1985); Mu:ammad Hādī Ma*rifa, al-Tafsīr
wa’l-Mufassirūn fī thawbihi’l-qashīb, 2 vols (Mashhad, al-Jāmi*a al-Raawiyya
li’l-*Ulūm al-Islāmiyya, 1997–98), vol. I, pp. 371–85; Omar Hamdan, Studien
zur Kanonisierung des Korantextes: Al-$asan al-Ba&rīs Beiträge zur Geschichte
des Korans (Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz, 2005); Suleiman A. Mourad, Early
Islam between Myth and History: Al-$asan al-Ba&rī (d. 110H/728CE) and the
Formation of His Legacy in Classical Islamic Scholarship (Leiden, Brill, 2006).
194 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VI, p. 126, ll. 1–2; p. 125, l. 10.
195 GAS, vol. I, p. 108.
101
Claude Gilliot
196 Dhahabī, Mizān, vol. II, p. 515, no. 4651.

197 Gilliot, ‘Abū Zur*a al-Rāzī’, EI THREE, vol. 2010–1, pp. 33–35.
198 See Scott C. Lucas, Constructive Critics, $adīth Literature, and the Articulation
of Sunnī Islam: The Legacy of the Generation of Ibn Sa)d, Ibn Ma)īn, and Ibn
$anbal (Leiden, Brill, 2004).
199 For more on this subject, see Claude Gilliot, ‘La vision de Dieu dans l’au-delà:
Exégèse, tradition et théologie en islam’ in Mohammed Ali Amir-Moezzi
et al., eds, Pensée grecque et sagesse d’Orient: Hommage á Michel Tardieu
(Turnhout, Brepols, 2009), pp. 239–69. For _abarī’s point of view, see idem,
Exégèse, pp. 245–9.
200 Versteegh, Arabic Grammar, p. 107, notices that ‘in spite of his mani fest
interest in the etymology of words [. . .] Muğāhid uses very few technical
terms’. But see his list, pp. 107–11, and passim in pp. 114–30.
201 Translations of the Qur’an are from Arthur J. Arberry, tr., The Koran
Interpreted, repr., 2 vols in 1 (New York City, Macmillan Publishing Company,
n.d.; originally published London, Allen & Unwin 1955).
202 Goldziher, Richtungen, pp. 107–10.
203 Daniel Gimaret, La doctrine d’al-Ash‘arī (Paris, Cerf, 1990), pp. 329–44; van
Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. IV, pp. 411–15, and index, p. 1089b under
ru!yat Allāh.
204 al-_abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XXIX, p. 192, ll. 24–5; al-Wā:idī,
al-Tafsīr al-basī#, ed. Mu:ammad ~āli: b. *Abd Allāh al-Fawzān et al., 25 vols
(Riyadh, Jāmi*at al-Imām Mu:ammad b. Sa*ūd al-Islāmiyya, 1430/2010), vol.
XXII, p. 508: Abū ~āli: (i.e. Bādhān) and Mujāhid inter pret ‘the looking’
(al-na/ar) here as ‘waiting for’ (al-inti/ār); al-Suyū^ī, al-Durr al-manthūr fī’l-
tafsīr bi’l-ma!thūr, ed. Mu:ammad al-Zuhrī al-Ghamrāwī, 6 vols (Cairo,
al-Ma^ba*a al-Maymaniyya, 1314/1896; repr. Beirut, Mu:ammad Amīn Damj
Dār al-Thaqāfa, n.d.), vol. VI, p. 295, ll. 12–13: accord ing to Abū ~āli:, ‘They
wait for the reward of their Lord’, taken from Ibn Abī Shayba and _abarī;
Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XXIX, p. 193, ll. 7–8.
205 Cf. al-Dārimī (Abū Sa*īd *Uthmān b. Sa*īd), Kitāb al-Radd )alā’l-jahmiyya, ed.
Gösta Vitestam (Lund, C. W. K. Gleerup and Leiden, Brill, 1960), p. 57, ll.
16–17; Ibn =anbal, Radd alā’l-zanādiqa wa’l-jahmiyya in *Alī Sāmī al-Nashshār
and *Ammār Jam*ī al-_ālibī, eds, )Aqā!id al-salaf (Alexandria, Munsha>at
al-Ma*ārif, 1971), pp. 51–219, at p. 85./tr. Morris S. Seale, Muslim Theology: A
Study of Origins with Reference to the Church Fathers (London, Luzac, 1964),
pp. 96–125, at p. 112, not mentioning Mujāhid; Abū’l-Layth al-Samarqandī,
Tafsīr al-Samarqandī al-musammā Ba+r al-)ulūm, ed. *Alī Mu:ammad
Mu*awwa et al., 3 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya, 1413/1993), vol. III,
p. 427, quoting that interpretation but rejecting it on the basis of the ‘language’:
the Qur’an says ilā rabbihā nā/ira or na/ara (to look at); with ilā, and here
connected to wujūh (faces), the verb na/ara (to look at) is not used with the
meaning of ‘to wait’ (intizār), and cannot mean ‘waiting for’ (al-intizār).
206 Mu:ammad b. al-*Alā> al-Hamdānī al-Kūfī (d. 24 Jumādā II 248/28 August
862 or Jumādā I 247); Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. XI, pp. 394–8; Gilliot, Exégèse,
pp. 20–1 et passim.
207 Abū =af; Umar b. *Ubayd b. Abī Umayya al-_anāfisī al-Iyādī al-Kūfī
al-=anafī (d. 185/801 or 187); Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XIV, pp. 128–9,
102
no. 4866; al-Sam*ānī, al-Ansāb, vol. IV, pp. 73–5: him and his brothers; Ibn
Abī’l-Wafā> al-Qurashī, al-Jawāhir al-mu*iyya fī #abaqāt al-+anafiyya, ed.
*Abd al-Fattā: Mu:ammad al-=ulū, 2nd edn, 5 vols (Cairo, =ijr, 1413/1993;
1st edn (Riyadh, Dār I:yā, al-Kutub al-*Arabiyya and Dār al-*Ulūm, 1397–
1408/1978–88), vol. II, p. 654, no. 1058. For the different meanings of
#infasa/#unfasa, see Zabīdī, Tāj, vol. XVI, pp. 210–11; Edward W. Lane, An
Arabic-English Lexicon, 2 vols (Cambridge, The Islamic Texts Society, 1984),
vol. II, p. 1886c.
208 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XXIX, p. 192, ll. 22–3; Suyū^ī, Durr, vol.
VI, p. 295, ll. 13–14: the only inter pretation of Mujāhid quoted by him!
209 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, e.g. nos 84, 5379, 8811, 9744, 12829 and
others.
210 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XX, p. 7, no. 7371; Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb,
vol. XI, pp. 174–5.
211 We have no information on this individual.
212 Mu:ammad b. Abī *Ubayda b. Ma*n b. *Abd al-Ra:mān b. *Abd Allāh b.
Mas*ūd al-Mas*ūdī al-Kūfī; Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XVII, p. 39, no.
6040.
213 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XII, pp. 98–9, no. 4145, with A*mash among his
masters; Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, vol. VII, p. 425, where read ‘Ma*n’, not
‘Ma*īn’; Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, al-Jar+ wa’l-ta)dīl, ed. Hāshim al-Nadwī et al.,
9 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya, n.d.; 1st edn, 8 vols, Hyderabad,
1371–72/1952–53), vol. V, pp. 368–9, no. 1725; see also Mizzī, Tahdhīb
al-kamāl, vol. VIII, p. 110, penult. (notice on A*mash), where he appears as a
master of A*mash. Our identification is confirmed by A:mad Mu:ammad
Shākir, in _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. I, p. 81, no. 84, with this
family isnād.
214 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XXIX, p. 193, ll. 1–2. We find a similar
inter pretation given by the grammarian and mutakallim (dialectic theolo-
gian) al-Akhfash al-Awsa^ (d. 210/825, 211 or 215/830), Ma)ānī al-Qur!ān, ed.
Fā>iz Fāris, 2nd edn, 2 vols (al-~afāt, Kuwait, 1981; 1st edn 1979), vol. II, p. 518/
ed. *Abd al-Amīr Mu:ammad Amīn al-Ward, 2 vols (Beirut, *Ālam al-Kutub,
1405/1985), vol. II, p. 721; at Q. 75:23, ilā mā ya!tīhi min ni)amihi wa rizqihi
(‘waiting for what comes from His benefits and His subsistence’), one says
wa’llāhi mā an/uru illā ilā’llāhi wa ilayka (‘By God! I await only what is by
God and by you’); van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 182; vol. IV,
p. 414, n. 33.
215 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XXIX, p. 193, l. 5; Wā:idī, al-Basī#, vol.
XXII, p. 509, with no isnād, as is usual in this commentary.
216 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XXIX, p. 192, pentult.
217 Ibid., p. 193, ll. 3–4.
218 Ibid., ll. 8–10.
219 The translation here can be ‘his estate’ if we read ‘milk’, or ‘his possession/
dominion’, if we read ‘mulk’, as in A:mad Mu:ammad Shākir’s edition of Ibn
=anbal’s Musnad.
220 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. III, pp. 281–3, no. 848; Dhahabī, Ta!rīkh
al-islām, vol. III, pp. 325–6, 14th class, no. 37; Ibn *Adī, al-Kāmil li’l-*u)afā!,
ed. *Ādil A:mad *Abd al-Mawjūd and *Alī Mu:ammad Mu*awwa, 9 vols
103
Claude Gilliot
(Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya, 1418/1997), vol. II, pp. 315–19, 13th class,
no. 331: Mu:sin al-Amīn b. *Abd al-Karīm al-*Āmilī, A)yān al-shī)a, ed. =asan
al-Amīn, 11 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Ta*āruf li’l-Ma^bū*āt, 1406/1986), vol. IV,
pp. 26–8. He was a mawlā of Umm Hāni> bt. Abī _ālib or of her husband Ja*da
b. Hubayra. He transmit ted traditions from *Alī.
221 Ibn *Adī, Kāmil, vol. II, p. 316.
222 Ibn Sa*d, >abaqāt, vol. VII, p. 328; al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād,
vol. X, pp. 311–12, no. 5459; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VIII, pp. 514–17; Mizzī,
Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XII, pp. 236–8, no. 4246.
223 Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, vol. VII, p. 35, ll. 10–11; cf. Ibn Shahīn (Abū
=af; *Umar), Ta!rīkh al-asmā! wa’l-thiqāt, ed. ~ub:ī al-Sāmarrā>ī (Kuwait,
al-Dār al-Salafiyya, 1404/1984), p. 68/ed. *Abd al-Mu*^ī Amīn Qal*ajī (Beirut,
Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya, 1406/1989), p. 237, no. 911.
224 Ibn Sa*d, >abaqāt, vol. VII, p. 328.
225 al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. X, p. 313; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol.
VIII, p. 515. On the majlis, see Christopher Melchert, ‘The Etiquette of
Learning in the Early Islamic Study Circle’ in Joseph E. Lowry, Devin J.
Stewart and Shawkat M. Toorawa, eds, Law and Education in Medieval Islam:
Studies in Memory of Professor George Makdisi (Warminster, E.J.W. Gibb
Memorial Trust, 2004), pp. 33–44.
226 Al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī arrived in Syria or in Damascus in 445/1060; Dhahabī,
Siyar, vol. XVIII, p. 273; vol. IX, pp. 553–6. It is possible that a copy of this juz!
of al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī is extant in the āhiriyya collection in Damascus;
Miklos Muranyi, Beiträge zur Geschichte der $adī- und Rechtsgelehrsamkeit
der Mālikiyya in Nordafrika bis zum 5. Jh. d. H.: Bio-bibliographische Notizen
aus der Moscheebibliothek von Qairawān (Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz, 1997),
p. 9, n. 2: The Juz! fīhi Tasmiyat mā warada bihi al-Shaykh Abū Bakr A+mad
[. . .] al-Kha#īb al-Baghdādī Dimašqa min al-kutub min riwāyatihi min al-ajzā!
al-masmū)a, manuscript āhiriyya, 1260; Yāsīn Mu:ammad al-Sawwās, Fihris
Majāmī) al-Madrasa al-)Umariyya fī Dār al-kutub al-/āhiriyya bi-Dimashq
(Damascus, al-Majma*, 1987), p. 85 Majmū* 3755, majāmī* *umariyya, text no.
10, fol. 126–132, written by Mu:ammad b. Abī al-Mālikī al-Andalusī, has been
edited in the study of Ma:mūd al-_a::ān, al-$āfi/ al-Baghdādī wa atharuhu fī
)ulūm al-+adīth (Beirut, Dār al-Qur>ān al-Karīm, 1401/1981), pp. 281–301.
Indeed, Juz! fīhi Tasmiyat, p. 283, no. 20: Tafsīr Ibn Abī Najī+ )an Mujāhid; no.
25 is: Tafsīr Shibl )Ubād (or )Abbād). In fact, al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī spent
around eight years lecturing particularly at the Mosque of Damascus; Rudolf
Sellheim, ‘al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī’, EI2, vol. IV, English edn, p. 1111b.
227 Abū Zakariyyā> Ya:yā b. Yamān al-*Ijlī al-Kūfī (d. 188/803 or 189); Mizzī,
Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XX, pp. 267–9, no. 7547; Ibn *Adī, Kāmil, vol. IX,
pp. 91–5, no. 2137. This tradition with that manner of transmission is given by
al-Lālakā>ī (Abū’l-Qāsim Hibat Allāh; d. 418/1027), Shar+ u&ūl i)tiqād ahl
al-sunna wa’l-jamā)a, ed. A:mad b. Sa*d b. =amdān al-Ghāmirī, 5th edn, 9
vols in 5 (Riyadh, Dār _ība, 1418/1997; 1st edn 1405–09/1985–88), vols III–IV,
p. 536, no. 840.
228 Ibn *Adī, Kāmil, vol. II, p. 318 (notice on Thuwayr). Ibn *Adī adds (p. 318, ll.
9–10): ‘wa )an Ibn Yamān’: Ya:yā b. Sulaymān al-Ju*fī’ (al-Kūfī al-Muqrī;
d. 238); on him, see Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XX, pp. 118–19, no. 7436.
104
229 =usayn b. *Alī b. al-Walīd al-Ju*fī al-Kūfī al-Muqrī (b. 119, d. Dhū’l-Qa*da
203/819, or 204); Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. IV, pp. 509–12, no. 1306.
230 I.e. *Abd al-Malik b. Abjar. This is the mistake of a copyist and not corrected
by the editor. See *Abd al-Malik b. Sa*īd b. =ayyān b. Abjar al-Hamdānī
(al-Kinānī) al-Kūfī; Dhahabī, Ta!rīkh al-islām, vol. III, p. 918, 15th class, no.
279; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. IX, pp. 297–401; Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XII,
pp. 41–3, no. 4111; Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, vol. VI, p. 394.
231 Ibn Abī Shayba (Abū Bakr *Abd Allāh b. Mu:ammad b. Ibrāhīm; d. 235/849);
al-Mu&annaf fī’l-a+ādīth wa’l-āthār, ed. Mu:ammad *Abd al-Salām Shāhīn, 9
vols (Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya, 1416/1995) (bk. 30, Kitāb al-Janna),
vol. VII, p. 58, no. 33989; Lālakā>ī, Shar+, vols III–IV, p. 553, no. 866.
232 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. II, pp. 100–6, no. 396.
233 al-Tirmidhī, al-Jāmi) al-&a+ī+, ed. A:mad Mu:ammad Shākir, Mu:ammad
Fu>ād *Abd al-Bāqī, Ibrāhīm *A^wa *Awa, 5 vols (Cairo, Mu;âfā al-Bābī
al-=alabī, 1357–81/1938–62; repr. Beirut, Dār I:yā> al-Turāth al-*Arabī, n.d.)
(bk. 39, Xifat al-janna, ch. 17), vol. IV, p. 688, no. 2553; repeated in bk. 18, Tafsīr,
ch. 72 (at Q. 75:23), vol. V, p. 431, no. 3330; al-Ājurrī (Abū Bakr, d. 360/970),
Kitāb al-Sharī)a, ed. Mu:ammad =āmid al-Fiqī (Cairo, Jam*iyyat An;ār
al-Sunna al-Mu:ammadiyya, 1369/1950; repr. Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya,
1403/1983), p. 269, ll. 4–8; al-Dāraqu^nī (d. 385/995), Kitāb al-Ru!ya, ed. Ibrāhīm
al-*Alī and A:mad Fakhrī al-Rifā*ī (al-Zarqā>, Maktabat al-Manār, 1411/1990),
pp. 270–2, nos 170–2; al-=ākim al-Naysābūrī, al-Mustadrak )alā’l-Xa+ī+ayn fī’l-
+adīth, ed. Mu:ammad *Arab b. Mu:ammad =usayn et al., 4 vols (Hyderabad,
Dā>irat al-Ma*ārif al-*Uthmāniyya, 1334–42/1915–23) (Kitāb al-Tafsīr), vol. II,
pp. 509–10: in the transmission of Isrā>īl and that of *Abd al-Malik b. Abjar.
234 Ibn =anbal, Musnad, ed. Mu:ammad al-Zuhrī al-Ghamrāwī, 6 vols (Cairo,
al-Ma^ba*a al-Maymaniyya, 1313/1895; repr. Beirut, al-Maktab al-Islāmī,
1978), vol. II, p. 13/ed. A:mad Mu:ammad Shākir, =amza A. al-Zayn et al.,
20 vols (Cairo, Dār al-=adīth, 1416/1995), vol. IV, p. 333, no. 4623; Dāraqu^nī,
Ru!ya, pp. 272–3, no. 173; Lālakā>ī, Shar+, vols III–IV, p. 536, no. 841. These
three authors in the transmission of *Abd al-Malik b. Abjar.
235 Abū’l-=asan *Uthmān b. Mu:ammad b. Ibrāhīm b. *Uthmān b. Khuwāstī
al-*Absī al-Kūfī (al-mufassir) (d. 239/853), the brother of Abū Bakr Mu:ammad
(Abū Bakr is the author of the edited Mu&annaf ); al-Kha^īb al-Baghdādī,
Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. XI, pp. 283–8, no. 6054; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. XI,
pp. 151–4.
236 al-Wā:idī, al-Wasī# fī tafsīr al-Qur!ān al-majīd, ed. *Ādil A:mad *Abd
al-Mawjūd et al., 4 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya, 1415/1994), vol. IV,
p. 394. For another edition of al-Wasī# fī’l-tafsīr, see Claude Gilliot, ‘Textes
arabes anciens édités en Egypte au cours des années 1996 à 1999’, Mélanges de
l’Institut Dominicain d’Études Orientales du Caire (MIDEO) 24 (2000),
pp. 115–346, at pp. 183–7, no. 66.
237 Walid A. Saleh ‘The Last of the Nishapuri School of Tafsīr. Al-Wā:idī (d.
468/1076) and his Signi ficance in the History of Qur>ānic Exegesis’, Journal of
the American Oriental Society 126 (2006), pp. 223–43, at p. 226.
238 Wā:idī, al-Basī#, vol. I, pp. 417–19.
239 See more on this in Gilliot, ‘The Use of Lexicography in the Great Qur>ān
Commentary of al-Wā:idī (d. 468/1076)’ in S. R. Burge, ed., The Meaning of
105
Claude Gilliot
the Word: Lexicology and Qur’anic Exegesis (Oxford, Oxford University Press
in association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies, forthcoming).
240 al-Qif^ī (al-Wazīr Jamāl al-Dīn Abū’l-=asan *Alī b. Yūsuf, d. 646/1248), Inbāh
al-ruwāt )alā anbāh al-nu+āt, ed. Mu:ammad Abū’l-Fal Ibrāhīm, 4 vols
(Cairo, Dār al-Kutub, 1950–73), vol. I, p. 154, no. 57; al-Suyū^ī, Bughyat
al-wu)āt fī #abaqāt al-lughawiyyīn wa’l-na+wiyyīn, ed. Mu:ammad Abū’l-
Fal Ibrāhīm, 2 vols (Cairo, al-Khānjī, 1384/1964), vol. I, p. 369, no. 720. After
Wa:īdī had completed his studies with this master, Abū’l-Fal al-*Arūī
instructed him to go to Tha*labī to study Qur’anic exegesis. See Wā:idī,
al-Basī#, vol. I, p. 419.
241 Wā:idī, al-Basī#, vol. XXII, p. 509.
242 Ibid., pp. 510–11. Azharī’s full name is Abū Man;ūr al-Azharī Mu:ammad b.
A:mad b. al-Azhar al-Harawī al-Shāfi*ī (d. 370/980, in Harāt); Régis Blachère,
‘al-Azharī’, EI2, vol. I, p. 845; Yāqūt, Mu)jam al-udabā!, ed. I:sān *Abbās, 7
vols (Beirut, Dār al-Gharb al-Islāmī, 1993), vol. V, pp. 2321–3, no. 965.
243 See the editor’s introduction in Wā:idī, al-Basī#, p. 49–55.
244 Wā:idī, al-Basī#, vol. XXII, pp. 510–11.
245 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Saqqā, vol. XXIX, p. 193, l. 14.
246 Ibid., p. 192, l. 13.
247 Ibid., ll. 20 ff.
248 See Gilliot, Exégèse, pp. 246–9; cf. Wā:idī, al-Basī#, vol. VIII, pp. 330–5, on
the same verse.
249 al-Qurûbī (Shams al-Dīn), al-Jāmi) li-a+kām al-Qur!ān ed. A:mad *Abd
al-*Alīm al-Bardūnī et al., 2nd edn, 20 vols (Cairo, al-Hay>a al-Mi;riyya
al-*Āmma li’l-Kitāb, 1952–67; repr. Beirut, Dār I:yā> al-Turāth al-*Arabī,
1965–67), vol. XIX, p. 261. Such was the inter pretation of Ibn *Abbās, Qatāda
and Ibn Abī Mulayka, according to al-Zamakhsharī: The Qoran, with the
commentary of the Imam Aboo al-Qasim Mahmood bin ‘Omar al-Zamakhshari,
Entitled ‘The Kashshaf ‘an Haqaiq al-Tanzil’, ed. W. Nassau Lees et al., 2 vols
(Calcutta, Lees, 1856–62), vol. II, p. 1589, ll. 21–22/Idem, al-Kashshāf )an
+aqā!iq ghawāmi* al-tanzīl, 4 vols (Beirut, Dār al-Fikr, 1977), vol. IV, p. 232,
at Q. 83:15: ‘They are separated from His generosity’. Zamakhsharī also
mentions the inter pretation of Ibn Kaysān, i.e., the Mu*tazilī Abū Bakr *Abd
al-Ra:mān Ibn Kaysān al-A;amm (d. 200/816 or 201/817; see van Ess,
Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, pp. 396–418): ‘separated from His gener-
osity (karāma)’.
250 Mujāhid, Tafsīr, vol. II, p. 738
251 See this chapter, Section 4.
252 Abū *Ubayda *Abd al-Wārith b. Sa*īd b. Dhakwān al-*Anbarī (mawlā) al-Tannūrī
al-Muqri> al-Ba;rī; Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VIII, pp. 300–4. *Abd Allāh b.
al-Mubārak left *Amr b. *Ubayd, because the latter preached the doctrines of
the Mu*tazilīs; but he continued to transmit the traditions of *Abd al-Wārith;
See Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VIII, p. 302.
253 van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, pp. 280–310. On this Mu*tazilī
exegete and his transmission of the tafsīr of =asan al-Ba;rī, see ibid.,
pp. 298–300.
254 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. XV, p. 70, no. 17640; cf. Daniel
Gimaret, Une lecture mu)tazilite du Coran: le Tafsīr d’Abū )Alī al-Djubbā!ī
106
(m. 303/915) partiellement reconstitué à partir de ses citateurs (Louvain and

Paris, Peeters, 1994), p. 441.
255 See Gilliot, ‘La vision de Dieu dans l’au-delà’, pp. 260–61.
256 *Abd al-Jabbār, Fa*l al-i)tizāl wa #abaqāt al-mu)tazila, ed. Fu>ād Sayyid
(Tunis, al-Dār al-Tūnisiyya, 1974), p. 338; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft,
vol. II, p. 643.
257 Josef van Ess, Anfänge muslimischer Theologie: Zwei antiqadaritische Traktate
aus dem ersten Jahrhundert der Hi4ra (Beirut, Orient-Institut des DMG, and
Wiesbaden, in Kommission bei Franz Steiner Verlag, 1977, pp. 176–245 (III.
Exkurs: Die Nachrichten über Ġailān ad-Dimašqī); Idem, Theologie und
Gesellschaft, vol. I, pp. 73–85; vol. V, pp. 1–5.
258 Ibn Waā: al-Qurûbī, Kitāb al-Bi*a) (Tratado contra la innovaciones), ed.
María Isabel Fierro (Madrid, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas,
Instituto de Filologia, 1988), p. 194, ch. IX, 14.
259 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. I, pp. 258–9, no. 300; Ibn al-Jawzī,
Qu&&ā&, § 101; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. II, p. 643.
260 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XVIII, pp. 20–3, no. 6468. He dwelt for a time
in Mecca, and died either there or in Damascus.
261 al-Bukhārī, al-Ta!rīkh al-kabīr, ed. *Abd al-Ra:mān b. Ya:yā al-Yamānī et al.
(Hyderabad, 1361–80/1942–60; repr. 9 vols, Beirut, Dār al-Kutub al-*Ilmiyya,
n.d.), vol. III, p. 313, no. 1065; Ibn =ibbān, Thiqāt, vol. VI, p. 306; Ibn Abī
=ātim al-Rāzī, Jar+, vol. III, pp. 501–2, no. 2269: considered weak; Dhahabī,
Ta!rīkh al-islām, vol. III, pp. 1020–1, 15th class, no. 507; idem, Mīzān, vol. II,
p. 46, no. 2760; Ibn =ajar, Lisān al-mīzān, vol. II, p. 455, no. 1839.
262 Ājurrī, al-Sharī)a, p. 224, in his chapter on the refutation of the Qadarīs by the
Followers or others. On the different versions of the hadith attributed to
Muhammad: ‘Each community has (its) Magi; the Magi of this community
are the Qadarīs’, see van Ess, Zwischen $adī und Theologie, pp. 137–48.
263 Ibn al-Jawzī, Kitāb Akhbār al-sifāt, ed. and tr. Merlin L. Swartz as A Medieval
Critique of Anthropomorphism: Ibn al-Jawzī’s Kitāb Akhbār al-~ifāt (Leiden,
Brill, 2002), no. 112; Cf. al-Dārimī (Abū Sa*īd *Uthmān b. Sa*īd), al-Radd
)alā al-Marīsī al-)anīd, in Nashshār and _ālibī, eds, )Aqā!id al-salaf, p. 524,
with the isnād: Sufyān b. *Uyana ← al-A*raj (*Abd al-Ra:mān b. Hurmuz,
d. 117/735) ← Mujāhid, but a slightly different text; Ibn Fūrak, Kitāb Mushkil
al-+adīth aw Ta!wīl al-akhbār al-mutashābiha, ed. Daniel Gimaret (Damascus,
Institut Français d’Études Arabes de Damas [IFEAD], 2003), p. 194, no. 91,
gives a text that is also different, and shorter.
264 Ibn Abī Shayba (Abū Bakr *Abd Allāh, d. 235/849), al-Mu&annaf (bk. 33, Kitāb
al-Zuhd, ch. 2), vol. VII, p. 90, no. 34237.
265 Ibn al-Jawzī, Kitāb Akhbār al-&ifāt, no. 112.
266 Located at Wādī Bar:ūt, or Barhūt. In reality, Bi>r Barhūt is a cave and not a pit.
See George Rentz, ‘Barhūt’, EI2, vol. I, pp. 1076–7; Yāqūt, Jacut’s Geographisches
Wörterbuch, vol. I, pp. 598–9. According to Islamic legend, Bi>r Barhūt is
haunted by the souls of the ‘infidels’.
267 For the legend of Hārūt and Mārūt, see Georges Vajda, ‘Hārūt wa-Mārūt’, EI 2 ,
vol. III, pp. 243–4 (French edn); William M. Brinner, ‘Hārūt and Mārūt’, EQ,
vol. II, pp. 404–5; van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, p. 46, and index, vol. IV,
p. 1057a.
107
Claude Gilliot
268 Abū Nu*aym, $ilyat al-awliyā!, vol. III, p. 288.

269 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. II, pp. 434–5, no. 1689. Wā:idī,
al-Basī#, vol. III, p. 197, limits himself to saying: ‘As for the story of the two
angels, it is well known, and mentioned in numerous places.’
270 For this chain of transmission, see nn. 99–102.
271 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. I, pp. 190–1, no. 1007. An abridged and
slightly different version of this report of Mujāhid is given by Tha*labī,
al-Kashf, vol. I, p. 247; al-Tha*labī, Qi&a& al-anbiyā! al-musammā bi’l-)Arā!is,
ed. and tr. William M. Brinner as )Arā!is al-majālis fī Qi&a& al-anbiyā!, or:
‘Lives of the Prophets’, as Recounted by Abū Is+āq A+mad Ibn Mu+ammad Ibn
Ibrāhīm al-Tha)labī (Leiden, Brill, 2002) (full of mistakes), pp. 88–9; a better
translation is that into German by Heribert Busse, tr., Islamische Erzählungen
von Propheten und Gottesmännern: Qi&a& al-anbiyā, oder )Arā!is al-mağālis
von Abū Is+āq A+mad b. Mu+ammad b. Ibrāhīm a-a)labī (Wiesbaden,
Harrassowitz, 2006), p. 68; Ibn =ajar al-*Asqalānī, al-)Ujāb fī bayān al-asbāb,
ed. *Abd al-=akīm Mu:ammad al-Anīs, 2 vols (Dammām, Saudi Arabia, Dār
Ibn al-Jawzī, 1418/1997), vol. I, pp. 323–5; Suyū^ī, Durr, vol. I, p. 97, ll. 19–21,
abridged.
272 Dhahabī, Siyar, vol. VI, pp. 88–9.
273 Minhāl b. *Amr Abū *Amr al-Asadī (mawlā of Asa Khuzayma) al-Kūfī (d. after
110/728); Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XVIII, pp. 411–13, no. 6804.
274 He was considered a ‘liar’ and a Shi‘i (‘Rāfiī’), vili fy ing *Uthmān by the
Sunni criticism of Hadith; Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XX, pp. 533–6, no.
7768; Ibn *Adī, Kāmil, vol. VIII, pp. 515–19, no. 2080. He said one day in
Ahwāz to *Abbād b. *Abbād (b. =abīb) al-Muhallabī (Abū Mu*āwiya al-Azdī
al-Ba;rī, d. 181/797, or in 180; see Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, vol. V,
pp. 95–6): ‘*Uthmān has killed two daughters of the Messenger of God.’
[*Abbād said:] ‘He has killed the one [he meant Ruqayya, who became ill and
died] and he has married the other [Umm Kulthūm]’. [Yūnus b. Khabbāb]
said, ‘Go away from me; you are a heretic (&ā+ib hawan)’, narrated in Ibn *Adī,
Kāmil, vol. VIII, p. 515.
275 See Gautier H. A. Juynboll, ‘Nāfī*’, EI, vol. VIII, pp. 877–8 (French edn);
Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XIX, pp. 32–8, no. 6967.
276 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. II, p. 432, no. 1688; al-Kha^īb
al-Baghdādī, Ta!rīkh Baghdād, vol. VIII, pp. 42–3, who transmits this tradi-
tion in his notice no. 4099 on al-=usayn b. Dāwūd, called Sunayd (d. 226/840),
who features in the tradition of _abarī. [. . .] Mūsā b. Jubayr ← Nāfi* ← Ibn
*Umar also transmitted a tradition of Muhammad on Hārūt and Mārūt; Ibn
=anbal, Musnad, vol. II, p. 134/vol. V, pp. 413–18, no. 6178; Ibn =ibbān
al-Bustī, al-Xa+ī+, as organised by *Alā> al-Dīn *Alī Ibn Balbān al-Fārisī
(d. 739/1339), Xa+ī+ Ibn $ibbān bi-tartīb Ibn Balbān, ed. Shu*ayb al-Arnā>ū^, 18
vols (Beirut, Mu>assasat al-Risāla, 1404–12/1984–91; 3rd edn 1418/1997), vol.
XIV, pp. 63–4, no. 6186; Ibn =ajar al-*Asqalānī, al-Qawl al-musaddad fī’l-
dhabb )an Musnad al-Imām A+mad [with Dhayl al-Qawl al-musaddad], ed.
under the direction of Sharaf al-Dīn A:mad, 3rd edn (Hyderabad, Dā>irat
al-Ma*ārif al-*Uthmāniyya, 1400/1979), pp. 47–8, hadith no. 8.
277 al-=ākim al-Naysābūrī, Mustadrak, vol. IV, pp. 607–8.
278 Ibn =ajar, )Ujāb, vol. I, pp. 323–43.
108
279 al-Suyū^ī, al-La!ālī al-ma&nū)a fī’l-a+ādīth al-maw*ū)a, 2 vols (Cairo, al-

Maktaba al-Tijāriyya al-Kubrā, 1963), vol. I, p. 159, l. 12; idem, Durr, vol. I,
pp. 97–8.
280 Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qur!ān al-)a/īm, ed. *Abd al-*Azīz Ghunaym, Mu:ammad
A:mad *Āshūr and Mu:ammad Ibrāhīm al-Bannā, 8 vols (Cairo, Dār
al-Sha*b, 1390/1971), vol. II, pp. 316–17, according to versions given by _abarī
and Ibn Abī =ātim.
281 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. VIII, pp. 552–3, no. 9958.
282 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XIII, pp. 282–3, no. 4664; Gilliot, Exégèse, p. 45.
283 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. XVIII, pp. 526–7, no. 6913.
284 Bukhārī, al-Ta!rīkh al-kabīr, vol. VII, pp. 13–14, no. 928; Ibn =ibbān, Thiqāt,
vol. VII, p. 350; Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Jar+, vol. VII, p. 108, no. 884; Ibn
Mākūlā, Ikmāl fī raf ) al-irtiyāb )an al-mu!talif wa’l-mukhtalif fī’l-asmā! wa’l-
ansāb, 7 vols. Vols I-VI ed. *Abd al-Ra:mān b. Ya:yā al-Mu*allimī al-Yamānī
(Hyderabad, 1962–67); vol. VII ed. Nāyif al-*Abbās (Beirut, Mu:ammad
Amīn Damaj, 1976), vol. I, p. 318; Dhahabī, Ta!rīkh al-islām, vol. III, p. 954,
15th class, no. 366; Idem, al-Muqtanā fī sard al-kunā, ed. Mu:ammad ~āli:
*Abd al-*Azīz al-Murād, 2 vols (Medina, al-Jāmi*a al-Islāmiyya, 1408/1987),
vol. II, p. 14, no. 5011; Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, vol. VIII, pp. 430–1, no.
1535; Idem, Ta) jīl al-manfa)a bi-zawā!id rijāl al-a!imma al-arba)a (Hyderabad,
Dā>irat al-Ma*ārif al-Niāmiyya, 1324/1906), p. 349, no. 909. He transmit ted
traditions from =asan al-Ba;rī. On the origin of the name of the Ba;rian area
called al-_ufāwa, see Zabīdī, Tāj, vol. XXXVIII, pp. 497–9.
286 al-Damīrī, $ayāt al-+ayawān al-kubrā, 2 vols (Cairo, al-Maktaba al-Tijāriyya
al-Kubrā, 1378/1958; repr. Beirut, Dār al-Fikr, n.d.), vol. II, p. 165; a better
edition of $ayāt al-+ayawān al-kubrā (alone) is that by Ibrāhīm ~āli:, 4 vols
(Damascus), vol. III, p. 236–7; it can also be read in the English translation of
Lieutenant-Colonel Atmaram Sadashiv G. Jayakar (1844–1911): Ad-Damîrî,
$ayât al +ayawân: A Zoological Lexicon, tr. Atmaram Sadashiv G. Jayakar, 2
vols in 4 (London, Luzac and Bombay, D. B. Taraporevala Sons and Co, 1906–
08), vol. II/1, pp. 409–10.
287 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. III, pp. 1007–8, no. 5640.
288 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. I, pp. 262–3, no. 103; Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb
al-tahdhīb, vol. I, p. 80. He appears in several other places as a master of Ibn
Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, for instance in Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr, vol. IV,
p. 1085, no. 6069; p. 1173, no. 6614, at Q. 5:67; p. 1218, no. 6880; p. 1228, no.
6929.
289 Ibn Abī =ātim al-Rāzī, Jar+, vol. VI, p. 274, no. 1517. He heard lessons given
by al-=asan al-Ba;rī. He transmit ted at least one tradition from Maymūn
b. Siyāh (see Bukhārī, al-Ta!rīkh al-kabīr, vol. V, p. 339, no. 1459). Also from
=asan al-Ba;rī, according to Ibn Abī Shayba, Mu&annaf (bk. 3, Xalāt,
ch. 639), vol. II, p. 137, no. 7365. He was also a pupil of *Ikrima; Ibn =anbal,
Kitāb al-Ashriba, ed. ~ub:ī Jāsim al-Baqarī (Baghdad, Wizārat al-Awqāf,
Ma^ba*at Baghdād, 1396/1976), p. 49, no. 61; Abū Nu*aym al-I;fahānī, Ma)rifat
al-&a+āba, ed. *Ādil b. Yūsuf al-*Azzāzī, 7 vols (Riyadh, Dār al-Waân,
1419/1998), p. 1477, no. 3743: *Īsā b. =umayd al-Rāsibī ‘who was veracious
(&adūq)’.
109
Claude Gilliot
290 Suyū^ī, Durr, vol. II, p. 184, ll. 27–185, l. 8, refers to the three sources (_abarī,
Ibn Abī =ātim and Abū Nu*aym), but he quotes according to the version
of Ibn Abī =ātim.
291 Ibn =ajar, )Ujāb, vol. II, pp. 919–21.
292 _abarī, Jāmi) al-bayān, ed. Shākir, vol. VIII, p. 552, no. 9958.
293 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, vol. I, pp. 266–7, no. 103. Here there is an error
of the editor, who identified him as Mu:ammad b. Ya:yā b. Sa*īd al-Qa^^ān
(d. Ramaān 223/July 838 or 226), the son of Ya:yā b. Sa*īd al-Qa^^ān. Due to
this false identification, he writes erroneously that a chain is lacking, which is
not the case. The kunyā of this son is Abū ~āli: and not Abū Sa*īd.
294 On this occasion of revelation narrated by Mujāhid, see Versteegh, Arabic
Grammar, pp. 68–71.
295 Qurûbī, al-Jāmi), vol. V, p. 282: ‘This verse is a refutation of the Qadarīs
concerning the terms of death’ (hādhihi’l-āyatu taruddu )alā’l-qadariyyati
fī’l-ājāl), and of course also Q. 4:79 (Whatever good visits thee, it is of God;
whatever evil visits thee is of thyself. And We have sent thee to men a Messenger;
God suffices for a witness), Qurûbī, al-Jāmi), vol. V, p. 287; see van Ess,
Theologie und Gesellschaft, vol. IV, pp. 494–7.
296 In a hadith considered ‘unfa miliar’ (munkar) by the Muslim specialists, trans-
mit ted by Maslama b. *Alī al-Khushānī al-Shāmī: [. . .] *Abd Allāh b. *Amr b.
al-*Ā; (but probably *Abd Allāh b. ‘Umar b. al-Kha^^āb, as apud Dhahabī) ←
Mu:ammad said: ‘The spider is a devil muted by God (al-)ankabūtu shay#ānun
masakhahu’llāhu)’; Ibn *Adī, Kāmil, vol. VIII, p. 17; Dhahabī, Mīzān, vol. IV,
p. 111. Or in a ‘loose’ (mursal) hadith, from Yazīd b. Marthad al-Mad*ī
al-Hamdānī: ‘The spider is a devil; kill it (fa-qtulūhu)’; Abū Dāwūd al-Sijistānī,
al-Marāsīl, ed. Shu*ayb al-Arnā>ū^, 3rd edn (Beirut, Mu>assasat al-Risāla,
1418/1998; 1st edn 1406/1986), p. 342, no. 500; p. 344, no. 504.
297 *Abd al-Razzāq, al-Mu&annaf, ed. =abīb al-Ra:mān al-A*amī, 11 vols
(Johannesburg and Beirut, 1390/1970) (bāb al-qadar), vol. XI, p. 118, no.
20082. Or according to Ibn al-Dalaymī (the Follower *Abd Allāh b. Fērōz [or
Fayrūz] al-Shāmī al-Maqdisī; Ibn =ajar, Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb, vol. V, pp. 358–9)
← Ubayy b. Ka*b; see Arent J. Wensinck, The Muslim Creed. Its Genesis and
Historical Development (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1932),
pp. 107–8; W. Montgomery Watt, Free Will and Predestination in Early
Islam (London, Luzac, 1948), p. 19; van Ess, Zwischen $adī und Theologie,
pp. 79–81.
298 Hasan M. El-Shamy, Folk Traditions of the Arab World: A Guide to Motif
Classification, 2 vols (Bloomington and Indianapolis, Indiana University
Press, 1995), vol. I, p. 277, no. M3451.
299 Victor Chauvin, Bibliographie des ouvrages relatifs aux Arabes publiés dans
l’Europe chrétienne de 1810 à 1885, 12 vols (Liège and Leipzig, 1802–1922), vol.
VIII, p. 104–5, no. 80.
300 René Basset, Mille et un contes, récits & légendes arabes, 3 vols (Paris,
Maisonneuve Frères, 1924–26), vol. II, pp. 207–9; al-Ibshīhī, al-Musta#raf min
kull fann musta/raf, tr. G. Rat as al-Mosta#raf. Recueil de morceaux choisis çà
et là dans toutes les branches de la connaissance réputées attrayantes, par [. . .]
Šihâb-ad-Dīn A+mad al-Abšīhī, 2 vols (Paris, Ernest Leroux, and Toulon, Th.
Isnard & B. Brun, 1899–1902), vol. II, pp. 287–89.
110
301 Title given by Max Henning, Tausend und eine Nacht, 24 vols (Leipzig, Universal
Reclam Verlag, 1895–99), no. 195, according to Chauvin, Bibliographie, vol. IX,
p. 74.
302 John Payne, Tales from the Arabic of the Breslau and Calcutta (1814–18),
editions of the thou sand nights and one night not occur ring in the other printed
texts of the work, 8 + 3 additional vols (London, 1882–89), vol. XI, part II,
Breslau Text, pp. 17–21.
303 al-Burūsawī (Ismā*īl =aqqī), Rū+ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qur!ān, 10 vols (Istanbul,
1330/1912–27), vol. II, p. 241.
111

Claude GILLIOT Mujahid S Exegesis. Origi PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Claude GILLIOT Mujahid S Exegesis. Origi PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Tafsı̄r and Islamic

Andreas Görke and Johanna Pink

The moral rights of the authors have been asser ted

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Cover design: Alnoor Nathani and Russell Harris

In memoriam Meir Jacobi Kister Hierosolymitae Polonii, obiit

A FTER THE EPOCHMAKING PAGES of Ignáz Goldziher (1850–1921)1

commentaries and other works, we can gain a better insight into

2 Elements of Mujaˉhid’s Life and Milieu

Another pupil, Man;ūr b. al-Mu*tamir al-Sulamī al-Kūfī (d. 132/

3 The Versions, Recensions and Sub-recensions

(al-Khurasānī, d. probably 227/ 842),41 whose tafsīr is included in a

copy of Mujāhid’s tafsīr] (akhadha . . . kitābahu), but did not hear it

Ibn *Abbās), Mujāhid and Ibn Jubayr, to questions (masā!il) asked

following transmission: Ibn Jurayj ← a man ← Abū *Amr (or *Umar)

(A.1.b) Ādam b. Abī Iyās Nāhiya b. Shu*ayb (but according to

within his Sunan,120 and also in several recensions in _abarī.

perfume-maker) in the =ijāz; it is supposed to have come from

of around eighty-nine, according to some traditionalists, or

4 The Published Sub-recension of Ibn Shaˉdhaˉn

← [from here the same chain of transmission as in Stauth’s

Comparisons between the different versions show that ‘the defin-

5 Some Provisional Features of Mujaˉhid’s Exegesis

_abarī offers the same interpretation, but with a different chain of

Abū Kurayb ← al-Ashja*ī ← Sufyān [al-Thawrī] ← Thuwayr ←

Let us examine this Kūfan chain of transmission. Thuwayr

hadith, Ashja*ī. As is well known, eschatological imagination has no

However, opponents of the Qadarīs and Mu*tazilīs could also use

5.2 Is there ‘something for everybody’ in Mujāhid’s exegesis?

5.3 Mujāhid as popular preacher or storyteller (qā)

interest in marvels, miracles and wondrous things, appears in a

It is found in _abarī:281 *Alī b. Sahl (al-Ramlī b. Qādim or b. Mūsā

We summarise here the narrative of Mujāhid, according to

from Mujāhid’s version. In orientalist works it has been called:

15 al-Dhahabī, Mīzān al-i)tidāl fī naqd al-rijāl, ed. *Alī Mu:ammad al-Bijāwī, 4

al-Majlis al-Wa^anī li’l-Thaqāfa wa’l-Funūn wa’l-Ādāb, 1385–1422/1965–2001),

196 Dhahabī, Mizān, vol. II, p. 515, no. 4651.

(m. 303/915) partiellement reconstitué à partir de ses citateurs (Louvain and

268 Abū Nu*aym, $ilyat al-awliyā!, vol. III, p. 288.

279 al-Suyū^ī, al-La!ālī al-ma&nū)a fī’l-a+ādīth al-maw*ū)a, 2 vols (Cairo, al-

S-ar putea să vă placă și

following transmission: Ibn Jurayj ← a man ← Abū Amr (or Umar)

5.3 Mujāhid as popular preacher or storyteller (qā)