ISIM anticipates tri-languages for the conference; Malay, English and Arabic either Oral or Poster Presenter.

: . :
: The last of the Nishapuri school of tafsir: al-Wahidi and his significance in the history of Qur'anic exegesis Author: Walid A. Saleh Year: 2006 Publication: Journal of the American Oriental Society Volume: 126

The last of the Nishapuri school of tafsir: al-Wahidi and his significance in the history of Qur'anic exegesis
by Walid A. Saleh stract:

When asked why he would not write a Qur'an commentary, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (d. 505/1111) is said to have replied, "What our teacher al-Wahidi wrote suffices." This story was first reported by al-Yafi'i (d. 768/1367), who did not divulge the identity of his source. (1) Yet there is no reason not to accept this statement as historical. We have supporting evidence from alGhazali's works which clearly shows that he admired the works of al-Wahidi. (2) Medieval biographers were certain that al-Ghazali borrowed the titles for three of his fiqh works from those of al-Wahidi's three Qur'an commentaries. (3) But a historian is nevertheless bound to ask if such praise was warranted and not occasioned by mere decorum: the writers were contemporary, both Shafi'ites from the same region, and both patronized by the same regime, the Saljuqs (and specifically by the vizier Nizam al-Mulk and his brother). (4) Even so, alWahidi's is a surprising name for al-Ghazali to choose, at least in light of what we know of the history of Qur'anic exegesis. Al-Wahidi does not come to mind when one conjures up names of illustrious medieval Qur'an commentators; his Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an (The Occasions of Revelations), the work that secured his reputation in the modern era, is not a book the author himself was proud of, nor could one entertain the notion that it was at the root of al-Ghazali's admiration. It is, however, reasonable to consider al-Ghazali's statement as his own judgment on the field of Qur'anic studies. Such an assessment by a figure like al-Ghazali forces us to look more carefully at al-Wahidi, to try to find what al-Ghazali found impressive. But can we assess al-Wahidi's legacy? This article will offer an intellectual biography of al-Wahidi, a survey of his surviving works, and an initial analysis of his hermeneutical method. It will also show that he was a towering intellectual figure of his time: both an exegete of pervasive influence and surprising originality, and a critic whose commentary on al-Mutanabbi's poetry is still a standard work. I. INTRODUCTION A major problem facing any scholar studying the history of tafsir is that many commentaries are

still unedited. In the absence of any systematic attempt at publishing what survives of this massive literature, one has to rely on a close inspection of what is available in various manuscript collections as well as in printed texts. (5) It is best to concentrate on a certain historical period and attempt a full description and analysis of the works produced therein. Scholars working on the early history of tafsir (the pre-Tabari phase) have recognized the significance of unpublished material for the history of this period. (6) Here we will call attention to other periods in the history of this genre. (7)

'Ali b. Ahmad al-Wahidi al-Naysaburi (d. 486/1076) was an important author of tafsir who has been neglected by western scholars and, to a lesser extent, in the Muslim world. My interest in al-Wahidi grew out of my work on his teacher al-Tha'labi (d. 427/1035) and my investigation of the reasons behind Ibn Taymiyah's (d. 728/1328) attacks on both writers. (He faulted both alTha'labi and, less so, al-Wahidi, for transmitting "weak" traditions.) (8) Having read extensive parts of al-Wahidi's as yet unpublished major work, al-Basit (The Large Commentary), I am convinced that it is one of the masterpieces of medieval Qur'an commentaries. Not only was it of crucial significance for the history of the genre, being widely influential--for example, Fakhr alDin al-Razi (d. 606/1210) used al-Basit as a major source for his Mafatih al-ghayb--but it promises to advance our knowledge of the language of the Qur'an itself, since it is one of the earliest exhaustive philological Qur'an commentaries to survive. (9) But al-Wahidi's achievements do not end here. He produced two other commentaries, al-Wasit (The Middle Commentary) and al-Wajiz (The Short Commentary). Al-Wajiz held sway for more than six centuries as the most accessible short commentary on the Qur'an, until the appearance of Tafsir al-Jalalayn in the 10th/16th century, which was itself based on al-Wajiz. (10) It continues to be popular and has been published repeatedly. (11) Al-Wasit was famously popular in the medieval period and has recently witnessed a comeback after being edited. (12) It has been wrongly assumed that al-Wasit is an abridgement of al-Basit, a notion first opined in the medieval biographical dictionaries. (13) This is not the case. Each commentary is an independent composition governed by different hermeneutical rules and assumptions. The relationship among the three is itself a fascinating story that documents the tortured response of a medieval mind to the problem of the meaning of the Qur'an. Fortunately all three commentaries are accessible, and together with their introductions they offer us a unique opportunity to examine al-Wahidi's varying hermeneutical approaches. Later, I will give an example from each commentary and show how they differ in their approach. If we add the introduction to Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an we have four explicit statements by al-Wahidi as to methods of Qur'anic interpretation. (14) That he saw the need to keep producing commentaries, each with a different approach, distinguishes al-Wahidi from most other classical exegetes. I know of no other scholar who wrote three independent commentaries that have survived. The other extant examples are by scholars who wrote epitomes of their own major works. What is perhaps most compelling about al-Wahidi is that he was at the center of the intellectual life of his age. He was an outstanding critic who produced what was considered the best commentary on one of the most important Arabic poets, al-Mutanabbi (d. 354/955). Thus his significance must be seen in the light of his total literary production. He was well aware of the intellectual concerns of the elite and responded to the two fundamental texts of the culture in which he lived: the Qur'an and the poetry of al-Mutanabbi. (15) In his works we witness a critical moment in the hermeneutical history of medieval Islam, where the compromises worked out in the first four centuries have become unraveled and must be reconstructed. Al-Wahidi's three Qur'an commentaries, with their different attitudes and conflicting methods of interpretation, foreshadow the agonized intellectual life of his younger contemporary al-Ghazali. His time was

one of unsettled certainties, profound anxieties, and widespread intellectual alienation, all of which were at the root of the creativity of the period. In this sense, the study of tafsir must be conducted within the wider realm of Islamic intellectual history; and any serious study of intellectual trends in Sunni Islam must take into account the contributions and articulations of the exegetes, who were central to the formation of Islamic identity. II. AL-WAHIDI, THE NISHAPURI SCHOOL, AND THE HISTORY OF QUR'ANIC EXEGESIS I have argued elsewhere that the three Nishapuri exegetes Ibn Habib (d. 406/1015), al-Tha'labi (d. 427/1035) and al-Wahidi (d. 468/1076) constitute one of the more influential schools in the history of medieval Qur'anic exegesis, which I have termed the Nishapuri school. (16) By calling it a "school" I do not mean to suggest that this group maintained a uniform approach to the Qur'an, but rather to characterize a concerted effort on the part of these scholars to come to grips with the problem of the Qur'an's meaning in the face of the conflict among traditional exegesis, philology, and kalam theology. I have argued that the influence of this school was so pervasive that the medieval exegetical tradition does not make sense unless we take into account the contribution of these scholars. In the introduction to his al-Burhan fi 'ulum al-Qur'an, arguably the most important Sunni assessment of the genre, al-Zarkashi (d. 794/1392) mentions the names of both al-Tha'labi and al-Wahidi as well as of the scholars who were influenced by their methods (al-Zamakhshari, al-Razi) when giving examples of different modes of interpretation. (17) There is rarely a classical assessment that fails to mention al-Tha'labi or alWahidi, even when the tone is hostile and intended to undermine their contributions. In his attempt to redirect the course of the medieval exegetical tradition, Ibn Taymiyah targeted alTha'labi and al-Wahidi above all for what he considered an unsound approach to the Qur'an. (18) Al-Tha'labi and al-Wahidi attempted to answer the perennial question facing classical exegesis: what place does philology have in this enterprise? I believe that the pressing issue in the history of classical Qur'an commentary was the challenge posed by the Arabic philological disciplines (the sum total of grammar, lexicography and rhetorical studies) to the integrity of the theological understanding of the Qur'an. The philological tools perfected by Arabic grammarians were used freely in analyzing poetry, especially pre-Islamic poetry, since no religious constraints were at work. (19) Pre-Islamic poetry was by definition a heathen corpus in which one expected to come across impieties, and religious scruples were hardly an issue in interpreting this body of literature. Philology was thus the sole and undisputed method for interpreting poetry. Using philology to interpret the Qur'an, and the pretence by Sunni exegetes that Qur'anic exegesis was primarily a philological enterprise, brought new problems for the exegetical tradition. Philology, though its initial impetus lay in the attempt to understand the Qur'an, grew to become an independent discipline that would pose grave danger to Sunni hermeneutics. (20) There could not be two philological methods, one for poetry and one for the Qur'an, and scholars trained in philology were keenly aware of this problem. (21) Muslim exegetes reacted to the rise of philology as an independent discipline by positing two axioms about the Qur'an. The first was to claim that theological and pietistic interpretations could be defended by philology, and that therefore philology was on the side of a Sunni understanding of the Qur'an. The second was to posit a miraculous linguistic element in the Qur'an--its i'jaz, its inimitability--as its characteristic feature. So viewed, the Qur'an was a classic like the pre-Islamic poetry of the philologists. We must see these commentators as actively seeking to replace the corpus of classicism in the emerging culture with their own corpus, the Qur'an. The Qur'an was Sunni when read using philology, and of equal significance, the Qur'an was as profoundly sublime as any of the pre-Islamic poetry, if not more so. Eventually, the

Qur'an would come to replace Jahili poetry as a mine for linguistic exemplars in the Arabic grammar handbooks. The doctrine of the Qur'an's inimitability would win the day, insofar as no Muslim sect would challenge this doctrine, despite the muffled complaints of some intellectuals.

The first part of this compromise, whereby philology was seen as the handmaid of Sunnism, would come under continuous strain, almost from the moment it was conceived, until it was eventually called into question by the time of Ibn Taymiyah. Al-Wahidi was one of the few medieval exegetes who attempted to salvage the integrity of the Sunni hermeneutical enterprise by siding with philology and dropping the pretence that a Sunni reading can consistently withstand the probing of philology. This was no doubt a bitter cup to drink, and all indications point to al-Wahidi's continuous intellectual crisis, as shown by his repeated publications in tafsir. His was a life spent writing commentaries, in which hermeneutics was the promised gate to salvation. Another important factor that tafsir had to deal with was the rise of kalam theology as an independent discipline and its integration into Sunnism as a component of its paradigm. (22) Tafsir responded to this trend by incorporating kalam elements and explicitly making theology a pronounced component of the genre. It is not that tafsir was not theological--it was primarily theological--but scholastic theology, with defined terms and concepts, began to make inroads into tafsir. The trend was started by al-Tha'labi, who attacked both the Mu'tazilites and the Shi'ites; al-Wahidi would see to it that theology became an essential part of his al-Basit, and would eventually be at the heart of al-Razi's commentary. Al-Basit, al-Wahidi's major work, came at a crucial moment in the history of Qur'anic exegesis. Sunnism, and to some extent Ash'arism as well, flourished as the Saljuqs gained momentum and Sunni scholars became more daring. Conceived when al-Wahidi was still young, impetuous, and resolute, al-Basit attempted to give the philological method as free a rein as possible. Coming to exegesis from classical Arabic philology, al-Wahidi seems to have been surprised by the amateurish approach of many exegetes before him. He proceeded to function under the presumption that philology supports a Sunni reading of the Qur'an which should not be undermined by allowing it to mingle with non-philological readings. There was an unprecedented resolve in al-Wahidi's attempt to discard what were, to him, unfounded methods of understanding the Qur'an; but his approach was eventually modified, as he seems to have decided that if the Sunni inherited traditions as to what the Qur'an means could not be jettisoned en masse, they could nevertheless be evaluated, and philology would be the judge. Al-Basit is in this sense a peculiar text, since in order to appreciate its significance fully one has to delve into the biography of its author and understand his intellectual background and training, and his intention. Moreover, one has to place this text in the history of Qur'anic exegesis in order to gauge its importance. And since al-Basit is at variance with al-Wahidi's later approach to the Qur'an, it must be understood in light of his other exegetical works. Eventually al-Wahidi saw his three commentaries as constituting a whole, which had not been his intent when he first embarked on the project. III. AL-WAHIDI'S BIOGRAPHY A. Modern Biographies There is no dearth of biographies of al-Wahidi by modern Muslim scholars; three of his edited works are each supplied with a biography, though with a tendency to rely on that by al-Sayyid Ahmad Saqr in his introduction to Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an. (23) The latest is that of Dawudi, the

editor of al-Wajiz. (24) We are also fortunate to have a detailed biography and a study of alWahidi's hermeneutical approach by Jawdat al-Mahdi (see n. 10). However, both these modern biographies and al-Mahdi's study suffer from a lack of historical perspective and a refusal to admit to development in al-Wahidi's career. In European languages we have Brockelmann's succinct entry, (25) a more extensive biography by Claude Gilliot, (26) and a sketch in an article by Asma Afsaruddin. (27) These biographies do not go beyond reporting what is available in the medieval biographical dictionaries, and their purpose is not analytical. Unfortunately, none of the scholars working in Europe or the United States seem to have taken note of the work of their counterparts in the Arab world. This is clear from Rudolph Sellheim's entry for al-Wahidi in the second edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam ([EI.sup.2]), which has factual mistakes that could have been avoided had he gone through the modern Arabic biographies and studies or, for that matter, taken the medieval biographical dictionaries at their own word. And although one might differ with the analyses in the modern Arabic sources, their authors have still collected all references as to the whereabouts of the manuscripts, have edited all but one of al-Wahidi's works, and have neglected no tidbit of information about al-Wahidi in any medieval biographical source. This is not the place to discuss the relationship (or absence thereof) between Arabic scholars and their counterparts in Europe and North America; but tafsir studies will remain heavily dependent on the work of these scholars, who are editing and making available this massive literature. Inattention to their work results inevitably in plowing the same ground. Little is gained from a biography of al-Wahidi that does not situate him in his intellectual environment. More important is to chart the intellectual development of his career, which can be reconstructed because of our ability to date his works. I will outline here the most important aspects of al-Wahidi's life, give a list of his extant works and a chronology of their publication by the author, and discuss their relationship with one another. In so doing I will offer a preliminary assessment of the significance of his works to the history of Qur'anic exegesis. B. Sources

There are three sources for reconstructing al-Wahidi's life. Two are independent accounts by fellow scholars who knew him well. The first, by 'Ali ibn al-Hasan al-Bakharzi (d. 467/1075), has survived in the abridged recension of his biographical dictionary. (28) The second is by one of al-Wahidi's students, 'Abd al-Ghafir al-Farisi (d. 539/1135), which survives in two versions. Yaqut al-Hamawi has preserved the longer version, which has a list of al-Wahidi's works compiled by al-Farisi not found in the abridged printed edition. (29) The third and most important source is al-Wahidi's own account of his educational history, an intellectual autobiography that is part of his long introduction to al-Basit. (30) Parts of this autobiography were reproduced by Yaqut in his entry on al-Wahidi. (31) Later biographical dictionaries have interesting information to add to these sources, such as al-Yafi'i's mention of al-Ghazali's story; I will refer to this information while reconstructing al-Wahidi's life. We are fortunate that al-Wahidi was in the habit of writing colophons to his works, which give us the dates of their publication. To my knowledge, three of these original colophons have survived. The first (never mentioned in the sources) I came across while collecting manuscripts of al-Basit; (32) the second is in a copy of Sharh Diwan al-Mutanabbi preserved in al-Mawsil in Iraq; (33) the third belongs to al-Wasit and appears in the new edition. (34) These colophons, along with internal evidence from al-Wahidi's remaining works, allow us to chart the chronology of these works and give us a rare opportunity to follow the development of his career and offer

an account of his intellectual growth. C. Al-Wahidi's Life One is first struck by al-Wahidi's early maturation. If we trust the dates given by medieval biographers, he must have started his educational and academic career early in his life. Most sources agree that he died in Jumada II 468/January-February 1076, when he was in his seventies. If we assume he died when he was 75, then he was born around 393/1003. His prosody teacher, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. 'Abd Allah b. Yusuf al-'Arudi, died after 416/1025, when al-Wahidi was around 23; (35) his famous teacher al-Tha'labi died in 427/1035, when alWahidi was around 34. His apprenticeship with al-Tha'labi marks the end of his student life. Soon afterwards he began working on al-Basit; in his introduction to that work he makes clear that he began writing it early in his life and after al-Tha'labi's death. (36) In his colophon to alBasit he states that he finished the work on 20 Rabi' I 446/29 June 1054; (37) the work thus took almost two decades to complete. Such was the impatience of his contemporaries for a publication on tafsir that he was forced to write al-Wajiz before finishing al-Basit, as the introduction to this work makes clear. (38) Between 446/1054, the year al-Basit was finished, and 462/1070, the year he finished his commentary on al-Mutanabbi, al-Wahidi finalized al-Wasit, whose colophon shows that it was completed in mid-Rajab 461/April-May 1069 (see n. 35). The introduction to his last work, Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an, refers to his three Qur'an commentaries as finished products. One cannot speak of a single period in al-Wahidi's life that was more productive than another; he produced two of his most important works at different periods, and was active throughout his life. Al-Bakharzi's Dumyat al-qasr, a collection of biographies of poets of the 5th/11th century which includes excerpts from their poetry, has, as far as I know, no entries for exegetes apart from that for al-Wahidi. The inclusion of al-Wahidi in a biographical dictionary on poets is an indication of his high standing. Al-Bakharzi, a Nishapuri and a friend of al-Wahidi, has left us a poignant reflection on his friend's career and aspirations, in which he comes across as a poet manque who realized he had the faculty to appreciate great poetry but was himself not gifted as a poet. Al-Bakharzi informs us that al-Wahidi refused to publish his poetry, and that what he himself was able to quote were pieces recited in public when the author was still young and, one would suspect, still hoping that the muse of poetry would one day oblige. It is a testament to alWahidi's literary taste that he spared himself the indignity of trying to be a poet, since what survives of his poetry is painfully mediocre.

Al-Bakharzi is the first to hint that al-Wahidi was an unhappy man who suffered from a sense of alienation and isolation from his contemporaries. This assessment is supported by the rather dark tone of al-Wahidi's introductions to his works. There he typically assesses his age, measures its corruption, laments the decline of knowledge, and upbraids his contemporaries for their banality. These topoi, although admittedly formulaic, should nevertheless be taken as reflecting al-Wahidi's state of mind. His contemporaries were quick to complain that he was only too happy to denigrate other scholars, and in his introductions he showered disdain on everyone. Indeed, in the introduction to al-Wajiz al-Wahidi is openly contemptuous of, and rude to, his contemporaries en masse. It is easy to see why he felt an affinity for the selfaggrandizing poet al-Mutanabbi. One is left with the impression that apart from writing al-Basit and Sharh Diwan al-Mutanabbi, his two major works, he was forced to write the others for less serious reasons: either to satisfy a mediocre audience, to put an end to shoddy scholarship, to try to mitigate the unease of his conscience regarding his hermeneutical position, or to ward off

accusations of rebelliousness from his contemporaries. D. Philology and al-Wahidi's Intellectual Formation Few medieval scholars have left us as much information about their intellectual formation as has al-Wahidi. His introduction to al-Basit charts the detailed history of his education, (39) first in grammar, literature and prosody, and lexicography, i.e., the sum of the Arabic philological tradition as perfected by the 5th/11th century. He spent his formative years with grammarians and rhetoricians, read most of the diwans of the Arabic poets, studied the dictionary of al-Azhari (d. 370/980), and left no major work of poetry unread. The influence of his prosody teacher, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. 'Abd Allah al-'Arudi (d. after 416/1025), on al-Wahidi's career is evident. As late as 462/1070, some four decades after al-'Arudi's death, al-Wahidi was still using the notes taken in classes with this teacher in his commentary on al-Mutanabbi's poetry. (40) Al'Arudi was a major influence on this commentary; and it was he who pushed al-Wahidi to study tafsir with al-Tha'labi. Al-Wahidi also informs us that he read all the works of the major grammarians with the outstanding teachers of his age. His pedigree in the philological sciences ensured him an entry in the most illustrious of medieval biographical dictionaries devoted to grammarians, Ibn alQifti's (d. 646/1248) Inbah al-ruwat. (41) From what al-Wahidi tells us, his grammar teacher, Abu al-Hasan 'Ali b. Muhammad al-Quhunduzi, took exceptional care in his education and was very fond of him. (42) Al-Wahidi suggests that this teacher recognized in him the greatness to come. (43) It is in relation to al-Quhunduzi that al-Wahidi mentions the word "happiness," an indication of the degree of his fondness for and personal attachment to this teacher. Al-Wahidi also studied with itinerant scholars who passed through Nishapur, such as the grammarian Abu al-Hasan 'Umran b. Musa al-Maghribi (d. 430/1038), who hailed from the western Islamic world. (44) He also studied variant Qur'anic readings with the leading scholars of the age. (45) He traveled through the eastern Iranian provinces in search of hadith knowledge. This can be confirmed from the isnads (chains of transmission) to many of the traditions cited in his works, in which he habitually mentions the year and the locale where he heard a certain tradition; they thus provide an invaluable source for reconstructing his travels. In his introduction to al-Basit, al-Wahidi claims that the years he spent studying literature, poetry, grammar, language, and prosody were all in preparation for his study of tafsir, and not (apparently) for a career in poetry. I see al-Wahidi's turn to exegesis as the result of his realization that he was not going to be the poet he aspired to be. But there is no denying that the study of philology shaped him intellectually. In this he is rather exceptional among medieval exegetes, since he entered into the study of tafsir after being formed by philology. This is perhaps the most important aspect of his intellectual formation; it also explains his initial distance from the exegetical tradition, which can easily be detected in al-Basit.

From the introduction to al-Basit we can determine that al-Wahidi spent the years from around 416/1024 to 427/1035 studying exclusively with al-Tha'labi, (46) with whom he read all the literature of tafsir as well as his teacher's own works. He thus had a formidable preparation encompassing both Arabic literary and philological works as well as tafsir. Yet he did not follow in the footsteps of his teacher al-Tha'labi, whose encyclopedic approach, which insured that tafsir became an integrative discipline that refused to admit contradictions about the different Sunni hermeneutical traditions (philological, pietistic, narrative, mystical, etc.), was rejected by his student. (47) Instead, each of al-Wahidi's commentaries attempted to solve the problem of

Sunni hermeneutics from a different angle. It is important to emphasize that al-Wahidi saw his preparation in philology as giving him an advantage over many, if not all, earlier exegetes. The introduction to al-Basit makes clear that he believed that grammar and literature were the foundation and the sine qua non of exegesis; (48) and insofar as they had not been used by previous exegetes, the works of the latter were lacking. Indeed, he claims that the early layer of tafsir was itself in many ways in need of explication, so as to make clear in what sense it was an explanation of the Qur'an. Moreover, alWahidi is impatient with non-philological interpretations and decides neither to cite them nor to refute them, insofar as they are neither defensible by philology nor, indeed, possible. (49) Thus, unlike al-Tha'labi, who sought to draw on the collective Sunni tradition to write his Qur'an commentary, using in the process at least a hundred works, (50) al-Wahidi claims that the works of his predecessors were only an approximation of what the Qur'an said and not a true explanation. The references in biographical dictionaries to a sharp-tongued al-Wahidi eager to attack and ridicule earlier authorities reinforce my reading of him as a dissatisfied author who felt alienated from his environment. Al-Farisi, in the longer version of his biography quoted by Yaqut, said that al-Wahidi deserved all respect and honor and more, if only he had not been readily "willing to ridicule and despise, sometimes all too subtly, the venerable preceding generations of scholars, and to unleash his tongue against people who deserve better; may God forgive him and them." (51) Al-Dhahabi gives an example of this tendency to defame; he quotes al-Wahidi as saying: "Abu 'Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami [d. 412/1021] wrote Haqa'iq al-tafsir; and should he claim that this book is a commentary on the Qur'an, then he is an unbeliever." (52) Haqa'iq al-tafsir, one of the most famous mystical Qur'an commentaries, was both ridiculed and rejected by al-Wahidi. This attack must have been proclaimed in one of his public lectures, for no record of it exists in his works; but there is no reason to doubt its veracity. Al-Wahidi, the champion of the philological approach to the Qur'an, was hard pressed to accept the traditional Sunni exegetical tradition, let alone the mystical approach. Al-Dhahabi would exonerate al-Wahidi, seeing no harm in so just an assessment against al-Sulami; however, al-Wahidi's scathing remarks were apparently not enough to ingratiate him with Ibn Taymiyah (see above and n. 8). In their assessment of this information modern Muslim scholars are eager to limit al-Farisi's general statement to the sole example of al-Wahidi's criticism of al-Sulami; (53) he is seen as simply attacking an indefensible method of interpretation. Yet to accept this analysis is to miss the true nature of what al-Farisi hints at. Al-Wahidi, in his disregard for the preceding generations of exegetes in the introduction to al-Basit, was seen by his contemporaries as making too harsh a judgment on the exegetical tradition and its authorities. Al-Farisi was all too aware of what his teacher was up to. His contemporaries must have mounted a counterattack, for al-Wahidi would eventually moderate his position. The degree of this moderation is the crux of the matter: was al-Wahidi convinced of the validity of his teacher's method, or was he simply submitting to a pious sentiment? I think both. IV. AL-WAHIDI'S WORKS

Medieval biographers state that al-Wahidi was fortunate because his works were popular (ruziqa al-sa'adah fi kutubih), highly praised, and often mentioned in lectures by professors in seminaries. (54) A quick survey of medieval exegetical literature confirms this assessment and shows that he was a well-known author and a highly regarded exegete. (55) Sellheim's entry on al-Wahidi, mentioned above, has produced some confusion as to which of his works have

survived and what exactly he composed, listing works and titles that do not now exist and for which there is no evidence for their existence. This confusion comes from Ahlwardt's catalogue of the Berlin Arabic collection, which Sellheim used as his main source. (56) Ahlwardt, writing in the late nineteenth century when none of al-Wahidi's works had been published, had limited resources with which to work. Moreover, he misunderstood a critical paragraph in al-Wasit, which I will discuss later. Modern scholars have inherited further confusion stemming from the medieval manuscript tradition. Medieval scholars referred to al-Wahidi's three Qur'an commentaries with the rubric "the one that contains the sum total of meanings" (al-hawi li-jami' anwa' al-ma'ani), (57) a phrase that found its way to the title pages of many manuscripts of alWasit and was eventually copied into modern biographies and catalogues as an independent title of yet another Qur'an commentary. (58) Some manuscripts have titles that are later additions, such as Jami' al-ma'ani, for al-Basit. (59) Mere reliance on catalogues of manuscript collections or, for that matter, on the title pages of manuscripts without inspecting the works themselves and comparing them to other confirmed works, has increased this confusion. Since I do not want to enter into lengthy arguments as to why certain non-existent works could not have been written by al-Wahidi, here I will discuss only those works that have survived in manuscripts and are attested by the tradition, whether in biographical dictionaries or as citations in other works, and which can be conclusively demonstrated to have been authored by al-Wahidi. Before turning to that task, however, I shall investigate the claims of some modern Arab biographers attributing certain works to al-Wahidi that have been published or are available in manuscript collections. After examining the short epistle Fi sharaf al-tafsir (On the Nobility of Exegesis) that survives in a unicum, it is clear to me that it is not by al-Wahidi. The attribution was the result of a mistake by one of the owners of the manuscript, which contains more than one work; the owner listed the manuscript's contents on the cover page, and states that one of the epistles was by al-Wahidi. He must have been misguided by the fact that the epistle is anonymous and begins with the phrase "al-Wahidi said." The manuscript is now housed in Cairo, Dar al-Kutub; on the cover page there is the note: "Risalah fi sharaf al-tafsir li-al-Wahidi." (60) On inspection of a microfilm copy of the manuscript, and on reading the epistle, it becomes clear that the latter is directed against al-Wahidi's position as to the best way to interpret the Qur'an, as expressed in his introductions to al-Wasit and Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an in which he claims that the only way to interpret the Qur'an is through received traditions. (61) The epistle is a fascinating document which shows that medieval scholars were aware of the contradictions between al-Wahidi's statements in this conservative introduction and in the introductions of his two earlier works. Whoever wrote this epistle was a well-read scholar, for he was quick to ridicule al-Wahidi's position in his later works by showing the impossibility of maintaining it while writing Qur'anic commentary. The incorrect information on the title page of this manuscript found its way into the first catalogue of Dar al-Kutub, where it was noted by Jawdat al-Mahdi, the first modern scholar to mention this epistle, (62) and from there it crept into all the other Arabic biographies of al-Wahidi. Al-Wasit fi al-amthal, edited by 'Afif 'Abd al-Rahman, has been shown by Dawudi and Sellheim not to be by al-Wahidi. (63) Ramadan Sesen's claim that the Kitab al-maghazi, a rare manuscript in Istanbul, is by al-Wahidi is impossible to verify, since neither does the manuscript contain this attribution nor does Sesen offer internal evidence to support his claim. (64) The only other works that might be by al-Wahidi are two short epistles housed in al-Maktabah alKhalidiyah in Jerusalem, which I have been unable to inspect. (65) A. Al-Wahidi's Extant Works

Both the available manuscripts and the biographical dictionaries, whether in entries on al-Wahidi or on later scholars who read and studied his works, are unanimous in mentioning only three Qur'an commentaries: al-Basit, al-Wasit, and al-Wajiz. That these have survived testifies to the high regard in which they were held. Adding to these the Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an and the Sharh Diwan al-Mutanabbi, there are only five surviving works that can definitely be ascribed to alWahidi. Readers interested in his lost works may consult any of the introductions to the printed editions. (66) Al-Wahidi has left us a categorization for his output in tafsir that explains his understanding of the genre and the reason why he wrote three different compilations. The paragraph, a mere 47 words, is, despite its deceptively simple language, not readily comprehensible; and has generated some confusion. I will offer my understanding of this paragraph, which is part of the introduction to al-Wasit, and was thus written with the confidence of hindsight and, one might add, with the intention to justify his scholarly output. (67) Here al-Wahidi states that he has divided and collected the exegetical material into three groups (majmu'at): first, that based on philological understanding, or what he calls "meanings" (ma'ani al-tafsir); second, material inherited from the early generations or which has come to be accepted because it is based on hadith methodology (musnad al-tafsir); and third, paraphrastic or abridged material (mukhtasar al-tafsir). These are to be understood as three different methods of exegesis, the result of three different hermeneutical approaches, and not, as Ahlwardt and the modern Arab editors took them, as titles of lost exegetical works. (68) The majmu'at (collections) are files which contain his notes on tafsir and are quite apart from his books; they are, of course, not available. (69) There is a correspondence between these categories and his books: al-Basit is for ma'ani, alWajiz for abridged material, and al-Wasit for musnad material. It is testimony to the medieval scribal tradition and its encyclopedic knowledge that it gave al-Basit the title Jami' [or Jami'] alma'ani, an epithet inspired by this paragraph.

What al-Wahidi does not tell his readers is that at a certain moment in his life, when he was young and less inhibited, he had refused to include inherited material (musnad al-tafsir) in his published writings if it did not withstand the tests of philology. Thus this paragraph must be understood as an attempt to rectify his earlier decision to neglect a certain part of the exegetical material, and to claim that his intention was always to produce three types of works reflecting three types of exegesis. Al-Wahidi is thus trying to understand and to harmonize his own intellectual career for both himself and his readers. He no longer claims that unsound interpretations of the Qur'an are to be rejected as belonging to a different order of interpretation, nor as corrupt statements (al-aqwal al-fasidah) and "base" interpretations (al-tafsir al-mardhul). (70) The impatience of al-Wahidi's youth is all but gone. One must then acknowledge that the current assessment of al-Wahidi by modern Muslim scholars, who use his later production to assess his whole career, is not their own invention so much as al-Wahidi's self-assessment at the end of his career. A reader of al-Wasit or Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an would hardly suspect that the author of these highly conservative works also wrote a scathing critique of non-philological readings. Having examined al-Wahidi's own characterization of his intellectual output, I shall now give a preliminary assessment of his extant works. 1. Al-Basit (The Large Commentary). This is al-Wahidi's magnum opus and a masterpiece of the Islamic exegetical tradition. Begun soon after 427/1035, it was finished nineteen years later, as its colophon indicates (contrary to Sellheim's speculation that it was not completed; cf. n. 39). I

have collected three different copies of the last volume of this work which include transcriptions of the original colophon. Another complete copy, Nuruosmaniye nos. 236-240, written by a single scribe, consists of five large volumes of around 1700 folios. (This copy was discovered by Shihab Ahmad of Harvard University.) Likewise, al-Azhar's copy was originally in five volumes, but is now missing the second volume. Medieval biographical dictionaries speak of a sixteenvolume division of the work. (71) The only copy to reflect this division is the San'a copy; unfortunately only three volumes of this magnificent copy survive. (72) Volumes of this commentary are also available in the libraries of Cairo, Basra, Damascus, Dublin, Istanbul, Rampur, and Rome. Al-Wahidi's introduction to al-Basit, and his colophon, are important documents both for their elucidation of his early hermeneutical approach and for the information they give about his life and education. Al-Basit represents the first attempt in tafsir to overcome the crisis facing Qur'anic exegesis by charting a more thorough philological reading; it is the first explicit refusal of the mainstream solution, the encyclopedic approach pioneered by al-Tabari and perfected and popularized by al-Tha'labi. Another aim is to give a consistently Ash'arite reading of the Qur'an's theology against the Mu'tazilite interpretation, a major goal of the Nishapuri school. AlRazi's kalamization (for want of a better word) of tafsir was a direct continuation of what alTha'labi and al-Wahidi pioneered. Jawdat al-Mahdi is the only modern scholar to study al-Basit as part of his general analysis of al-Wahidi's hermeneutics. However, he misses the significance of this work by refusing to see its radical position vis-a-vis the previous exegetical tradition. Al-Mahdi presents a synchronic analysis of al-Wahidi's literary corpus without admitting or entertaining the idea that this output might have been contradictory and occasioned by different concerns at different times in the author's life (although he was the first to offer an interpretation of al-Wahidi's career). Al-Wahidi is presented as the perfect Sunni commentator who followed the paradigm of Ibn Taymiyah even before Ibn Taymiyah! He overlooks or omits the crucial paragraph in al-Wahidi's introduction; (73) while quoting it in full, he never hints at al-Wahidi's attack on non-philological interpretations. (74) I have been collecting copies of manuscripts of al-Basit in preparation for a critical edition, in the hope that this will help to elucidate the history of the medieval exegetical tradition. It is an immense work and is difficult to characterize fully; more time is needed to describe its inner workings. Since it took almost two decades to complete, the question of inner development must be addressed, especially in view of al-Wahidi's constant intellectual struggle regarding the best method of exegesis.

2. Al-Wasit (The Middle Commentary). Conceived sometime during the writing of al-Basit, this work represents al-Wahidi's return to the fold of the classical method and its catholic hermeneutical approach to the Qur'an which his master al-Tha'labi had perfected. The material rejected from al-Basit forms the center of this work. The first reference to al-Wasit that I have found comes at the end of al-Basit, (75) where al-Wahidi refers the reader to another Qur'an commentary containing material omitted from the current work; thus sometime before finishing al-Basit, al-Wahidi must have begun work on al-Wasit, collecting material that did not make it into al-Basit because it was deemed non-philological. Al-Wasit is thus a compilation of reconciliation. The title itself can be read as a pun, both as the "middle" and the "go-between." Yet one can argue that the reconciliation is half-hearted, or at least a botched attempt to correct a previous position; al-Wahidi simply relegated musnad material to this work, and thus made clear what he had left out of al-Basit. His refusal to follow the encyclopedic approach is itself a

statement; his separation of different ways of doing tafsir in different works undermined the encyclopedic solution that the Sunni tradition--particularly the practice of his teacher al-Tha'labi-devised to save the coherency of the meaning of the Qur'an. Al-Wasit enjoyed widespread popularity among the medieval scholarly community. In less than two hundred years the manuscripts of this work had become so multiplied (and so corrupted) that one scholar, Isma'il b. Muhammad al-Hadrami (d. 677/1278), undertook to correct the copyists' mistakes in their transmission of the work. He wrote a sort of critical apparatus in the form of a book, (76) an honor not usually accorded to tafsir works. (For recent critical editions of al-Wasit, see n. 12; the introduction and the interpretation of Sura 1 have also been edited separately. (77)) It is unfortunate that the editors of al-Wasit did not use the incomplete copy of the work in Berlin (Spr. 415, Spr. 416). The significance of this copy is that it has a riwayat sama' (or chain of transmission), from the author to the scribe. 3. Al-Wajiz (The Short Commentary). Al-Wajiz is the first medieval short commentary on the Qur'an; it was explicitly written in response to popular demand for a handy work. Al-Wahidi was conscious of writing something new. (78) Al-Ghazali's decision to highlight the aptness of the length of this work also points to the scarcity, if not absence, of any such commentary. (79) AlWahidi was thus an innovator. The aim of the work is to present a mono-valent reading of the Qur'an, depending on Ibn 'Abbas's traditions or on those of others of his rank. In the case of a difficult word, which presumably would not have an interpretation from these early authorities, it also aims to supply a gloss. (80) 4. Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an (Occasions of Revelation). Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an is the last of alWahidi's works that has reached us. Undoubtedly this is the most popular, and also the most hermeneutically conservative, of his works. (81) Rarely does a year pass without a new printing. These are either plagiarized reprints of the critical edition of al-Sayyid Ahmad Saqr, without the critical apparatus, or reprints of al-Babi al-Halabi and other early Egyptian printings. (82) The significance of this work lies in its staunchly conservative introduction. Al-Wahidi is adamant that the information about when and where and why a verse was revealed is not a matter for speculation but of received knowledge. (83) One is not supposed to offer guesses or opinions on this matter. The bellicose tone is problematic; I take it to indicate al-Wahidi's ambivalence towards his earlier approach. Yet a conservative al-Wahidi does not imply a humble soul. He informs us that this work was meant for students and dilettantes who need a sort of elementary tafsir, in which an approach involving narrative and historical contextualization is used to guide them. He laments that he is forced to write such "works for beginners" since all efforts to raise the level of interest in the sciences of the Qur'an have been of no avail. (84) But the significance of Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an should not be overlooked; it was the first work of its kind that both popularized this form of tafsir and gave the genre a model to emulate. (85)

5. Sharh Diwan al-Mutanabbi. Al-Wahidi's Sharh Diwan al-Mutanabbi is considered the finest of the commentaries on this poet; (86) this assessment is highly significant, for commentators on al-Mutanabbi include the poet Abu al-'Ala' al-Ma'arri (d. 449/1058), the philologist (and the poet's student) Ibn Jinni (d. 392/1002), and a host of other illustrious names. Remarkably, there are no studies on this work. It is regrettable that Ihsan 'Abbas did not discuss this work in his study of Arabic literary criticism (see n. 15). It was first edited by F. Dieterici in 1861 (see n. 19), and this edition has been reprinted repeatedly in the Arab world. The work permits a reconstruction of a list of works of poetry read by al-Wahidi. The question remains as to why alWahidi, who spent his life commenting on the Qur'an, decided to write a work of literary criticism

so late in his career. In the introduction to his commentary, he recalls his early days, when he was the unsurpassed master of the art of prosody. The main reason he gives for writing the work is that there was no satisfactory commentary on al-Mutanabbi that merited reading. (87) I still believe that al-Wahidi's great love was poetry; unable to create it, he was unable to be far from it. V. AN EXAMPLE OF AL-WAHIDI'S HERMENEUTICAL APPROACH Here I will give an example of al-Wahidi's approach to the Qur'an from al-Basit, compare it to that of other exegetes, and compare how he dealt with the same verse in al-Wasit and al-Wajiz. The example is only crudely illustrative, but it will underline the importance of discarding the notion that medieval exegetes were mere copiers of one another without distinctive, or even radically different, methods of interpreting the Qur'an. The idea that this massive literature was motivated by mere compulsive copying, and not by profound intellectual concerns, is untenable. The development of philology meant that the exegetes were always at one remove from a theological catastrophe should they allow philology to dominate. There is a tension through the tafsir enterprise whose source is the ever-ominous ability of philology to dismantle suspicious readings at any moment. Qur'an 93:7--"Did he not find you [Muhammad] unguided [or "astray"; dallan] and guide you?"-has presented problems to exegetes by raising the issue of Muhammad's religious background before he became a prophet. (88) How exegetes responded to this verse may be the litmus test of their willingness to allow the language of the Qur'an to hint at possibilities not sanctioned by Sunni theology, which had moved to sanctify Muhammad and ascribe infallibility to his life and deeds. I have discussed elsewhere how al-Tabari, al-Tha'labi, and al-Zamakhshari dealt with this verse, and will here simply compare how al-Wahidi's approach differs. (89) The need to compare exegetes stems from the fact that tafsir is a genealogical literature, and must be studied in a synoptic fashion; in order to understand fully what a certain exegete was doing we must compare him to previous exegetes who influenced him, as well as to those who came after him. This type of synoptic study allows us to go beyond the impression of repetitiveness that many readers experience when dealing with tafsir, an impression that has impeded the scholarly appreciation of the richness of this genre and the awareness of its hermeneutical complexity. Al-Tabari and al-Tha'labi, despite their markedly different approaches to the verse, skirt the basic issue: what was the nature of Muhammad's belief before his prophecy? They refuse to address the question of Muhammad's pagan background. Though both are aware of the problematic word dallan, they never confront it head on. Indeed, one can document a trend to distance Muhammad from any taint of pre-Islamic religious affiliations. Despite the fact that both quote al-Suddi's famous interpretation of this verse--that Muhammad "was on the affair [or: followed the religion] of his people for forty years"--they refuse to tell us what this means. Al-Zamakhshari offers what has become the standard Sunni understanding of this verse: Muhammad was ignorant of the "science of divine law" ('ilm al-shari'ah) and that "which is based on received knowledge (sama')" before his prophecy. This interpretation appears to fully disclose the meaning of dallan, but in fact merely asserts historical truth about Muhammad that is not in dispute: He could not have been aware of the laws and revelation before they were dispensed to him by God. Nothing is said about his belief in one God or many before receiving revelation. After summarizing the stories related by al-Tha'labi that tell of episodes in which Muhammad was supposedly lost, al-Zamakhshari moves on to the crux of the matter: al-Suddi's (d. 127/745) phrase that Muhammad was "on the affair" of his tribe for forty years.

[For] those who stated that Muhammad was "on the affair of his tribe" for forty years, and mean that Muhammad was oblivious to revealed sciences ('ulum al-sam'iyah), as his people were, then this interpretation is valid; but if they mean that he was a follower of his tribe's religion and a pagan like them, then this is absolutely wrong (literally: "God forbid!"). For prophets should be infallible and free of sin before and after their call to prophecy, whether of minor or major sins--let alone the possibility of a prophet being an unbeliever (kafir) and ignorant of God. It would be a fatal disadvantage for a prophet to have been a pagan since this would undermine his position with the pagans when disagreeing with them. (90) Here we have an interpretation of an interpretation performed in order to preserve the sanctity and integrity of the doctrine of Muhammad's infallibility. Not only did al-Zamakhshari not discuss al-Suddi's interpretation; he mentions it only to refute it. Since a would-be prophet cannot be ignorant of the Creator, any verse in the Qur'an that points to the contrary must mean something else, regardless of what is actually says. How does al-Wahidi interpret this verse in al-Basit? I offer a full translation of his interpretation before discussing its main features: Ibn 'Abbas said: "God found you straying from prophecy (dallan 'an al-nubuwwah) and He guided you through prophecy to the best of religions and the most benevolent." Al-Hasan and al-Dahhak said: "God found you lost from the post-signs of prophecy and the rules of divine law, unaware of them and he guided you to them." This is supported by His statements "And before it (the Qur'an) you were one of the heedless" [12:3] and "You (Muhammad) did not know what the Book is nor faith" [42:52]. These interpretations are the opinions (madhhab) of the theologians (arbab al-usul) and the scholars of our camp ('ulama' ashabina); they believe that the Prophet, peace be upon him, was never an unbeliever (kafir). Abu Ishaq [al-Zajjaj; d. 311/923] opted for this opinion and stated that Muhammad did not know the Qur'an or the divine law and was guided by God to the Qur'an and the laws of Islam. We have already discussed these matters when we dealt with God's statement, "You did not know what the Book is or what faith is" [42:52]. Some exegetes, however, opted to choose the literal (or apparent) meaning of the verse (zahir al-ayah). Thus al-Kalbi stated: "He found you unguided, that is, an unbeliever (kafir) among unbelievers, and He guided you to monotheism." Al-Suddi said: "He (Muhammad) was on the affair of his tribe for forty years." Mujahid said: "He found you unguided, that is unguided from guidance (huda) and He guided you to His religion." People of our camp state that the meaning of this verse is elucidated and corrected through received knowledge (yustadrak bi-al-sama'). Yet reason ('aql) does allow the possibility that an individual who is an unbeliever may be blessed by God by bestowing on him faith and honoring him with prophecy. It is also possible

rationally that someone who is already a prophet might be divested of this rank. (91) First, it is important to emphasize that al-Wahidi preserved early material, like the quotation from al-Kalbi, that was either expurgated or simply never reported by earlier exegetes. This is rather surprising, given al-Wahidi's late date; but scholars working on tafsir should be prepared for surprises, given the colossal amount of material still unexamined. Late material--and one has in mind here the medieval glosses (hawashi) on the classical commentaries--might contain quotations from early sources not preserved elsewhere. Second, al-Wahidi admitted that the apparent meaning (zahir al-ayah), i.e., the philological meaning of the verse is that before his call to prophecy Muhammad was a pagan, a kafir. More important is that al-Wahidi violated a religious taboo by reporting that some exegetes believed that Muhammad was an unbeliever, and reported their opinion without recourse to euphemisms or showing any evident embarrassment. Further, al-Wahidi has to admit that for the mainstream Sunni position to hold, or, as he bluntly puts it, for this verse to mean what it does not mean, one may only have recourse to received knowledge (sama'), which overrides even scripture. Finally, he mentions reason ('aql) and what is possible and not possible according to rational thought. By contrast, the Mu'tazilite exegete al-Zamakhshari not only failed to admit the apparent meaning of the verse, but disputed it, to say nothing of his not mentioning reason in connection with what sort of individual a prophet could or could not be. One would hardly expect a Sunni exegete who never tires of attacking Mu'tazilite dogma to admit to rational possibilities contrary to his own position. (It should be kept in mind that one of al-Wahidi's main aims in al-Basit was to attack systematically that Mu'tazilite understanding of the Qur'an, and to present a coherently Ash'arite understanding.) Perhaps we have schematized Islamic intellectual history to the degree that we have lost sight of the nuances that characterize any complex intellectual tradition. Taking the interpretation of this verse alone, one could easily surmise that al-Zamakhshari was a staunch Sunni, al-Wahidi a calm Mu'tazilite. The discussion of Qur'an 93:7 as presented by al-Wahidi is thus centered on the admission that its manifest or apparent meaning contradicts the Sunni understanding. Sunni Ash'arite scholars were willing to concede that reason does not hold the supreme position in their system; but to admit that the apparent or literal meaning of the Qur'an contradicted Sunni dogma, without some safeguards, seems rather dangerous. Al-Wahidi, an Ash'arite, simply admits this fact. Thus, rather than performing unsound philological maneuvers to get rid of the problem, he boldly asserts that Sunni theologians have stated that received knowledge overrides the literal meaning of the verse. Al-Wahidi is the only Sunni exegete I know of who reports that there were Sunni theologians who tackled the challenge posed by a philological reading of the Qur'an to the Sunni understanding of what it means by placing explicit limitations on philology, despite the hitherto declared consensus among Sunni exegetes that philology is the enshrined tool for understanding the Qur'an. In this sense al-Basit is an ironic text; for while its declared intention is to read the Qur'an philologically, it ends up admitting, at least in what I call theological melting loci, that the tool of philology does not enjoy unlimited authority.

The genealogical nature of tafsir and the synoptic study of its history allow the investigator an opportunity to examine material which certain exegetes opted to omit. For certain exegetes we can postulate a direct lineage of influence--say a teacher-student lineage, as is the case with the Nishapur school--which permits us to make arguments from silence. We know that al-Wahidi read and studied al-Tha'labi's work with the author, and transmitted his Qur'an commentary to posterity. (92) We are thus in the position of being able to make conclusions based on the omissions and exclusions in al-Wahidi's own work. In the case of Qur'an 93:7 he opted to

discard the pseudo-philological and mystical interpretations supposed by al-Tha'labi. Thus he reported no episodes in which Muhammad was physically lost and gave no mystical interpretation. This is not surprising, since in his introduction to al-Basit al-Wahidi makes clear that he will not bother with interpretations that cannot be defended by using philological methods. It is in this light that we have to understand the resignation in al-Wahidi's tone regarding al-Zajjaj's acceptance of the Sunni interpretation of this verse. To al-Wahidi, al-Zajjaj was the paragon of the philological method, which meant refusing overt theological interpretations when manifestly wrong; hence his surprise regarding al-Zajjaj's position on this verse. Moreover, his disparaging attitude toward mystical interpretation is well known, as I have mentioned. The intricacy of al-Wahidi's interpretation can only be made meaningful through a total dismantling of the history of Qur'anic exegesis and a close examination of the assumptions from which he was escaping and by which he nevertheless remained shackled. His position toward the Qur'an in al-Basit would place him apart from the mainstream Sunni attempt to reconcile different hermeneutical approaches in fashion in each of the various currents of Sunnism. The integrative approach pioneered by al-Tabari and enlarged by al-Tha'labi was devised to allow exegetes the maximum possible space for both defending Sunnism and making it mainstream. Exegetes drew upon most of the available disciplines, both to normalize tafsir and to make Sunnism more palatable to the intellectuals. Thus the compromise that Sunnism offered in the classical form of tafsir was overturned in al-Basit. Al-Wahidi's insistence that philology can and should act as a judge of the validity of inherited interpretations forced others to accuse him of showing contempt and disrespect to earlier authorities. But al-Wahidi ameliorated his position as he matured, for in al-Wasit he gave the musnad, or traditional material, the dominant, if not the only, voice. His interpretation of Qur'an 93:7 in al-Wasit is as follows: He found you lost from the post-signs of prophecy and the rules of divine law, unaware of them, and He guided you to them. This is supported by His statement, "And before it (the Qur'an) you were one of the heedless" [12:3], and His statement "You (Muhammad) did not know what the Book is nor faith" [42:52]. Al-Zajjaj opted for this opinion and stated that Muhammad did not know the Qur'an or the divine law and was guided by God to the Qur'an and the laws of Islam. (93) It is clear that al-Wahidi has dropped the minority position--the possibility of Muhammad's polytheist past--and presented what one might call a reformed Sunni interpretation. It is true that he was hiding behind al-Zajjaj's endorsement, but this is hardly convincing; in al-Basit philology was the authority and not al-Zajjaj, dear as he was to al-Wahidi. Al-Wasit was thus not an epitome of al-Basit, despite the fact that the paragraph quoted above is culled from al-Basit. This is also an example of the paradox of the genre of tafsir: the same statement about alZajjaj's position has two different meanings because of the context. In the tafsir context it is what tells us what an author was trying to say and not merely what he was saying, another reason why a synoptic study of tafsir is obligatory. The interpretation of 93:7 in al-Wajiz is, as expected, shorter; it simply consists of the first three lines quoted above. (94) If we take alWahidi's position in al-Wajiz as representing his understanding of how this verse should be understood, since he wrote al-Wajiz before finishing any of his other commentaries, we have to admire his intellectual integrity, for he remained faithful to the principles of the introduction to alBasit and presented a philological reading of 93:7, despite his change of heart. Al-Wahidi's continuous output in tafsir reflects his hesitation as to the doctrinal validity of his initial solution: that philology is the only yardstick for tafsir. In this sense one could speak of the agony caused by grammar and the triumph of piety in al-Wahidi's later life. His output in tafsir cannot be read as the reflection of one position vis-a-vis the Qur'an, but as the result of a continuous struggle to

solve the problem that philology posed to the Sunni understanding of it. CONCLUSION The survival of a substantial number of al-Wahidi's works offers us a unique opportunity to study the intellectual formation of this medieval commentator and allows us to reconstruct his hermeneutical theories. It is rare that we have access to such a varied output on tafsir by a single author. This article has laid the foundation for further investigation into his works. It should also be evident that any study of this exegete must incorporate his commentary on alMutanabbi. The relationship between Qur'anic commentary and literary commentary has so far been little studied, a rather unfortunate omission since philology was the dominant form of discourse among the elite of medieval Islamic culture. The poignancy of al-Wahidi's life is that it started with a failed attempt to write poetry and ended instead with a commentary on the most admired of Arabic poets. There is also an irony in his scholarly life: he was caught in the classicism of high Arabic culture at a period when the cultural landscape was changing dramatically. Poetic creativity was moving away from an engagement with pre-Islamic and early Islamic modes to one with mysticism. Moreover, alWahidi's compatriots in eastern Iran had begun using the Persian language to write poetry. He was one of the last holdouts in a culturally transformed landscape. His radical attempt at reforming tafsir was itself thwarted by his later conversion to the method of his teacher. His influence on the later exegetical tradition was, however, profound. He should be considered one of the major intellectual figures of medieval Islam, and his output is worthy of a more sustained analysis than has been the case so far. WALID A. SALEH UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO I should like to acknowledge the financial assistance of the American Research Center in Egypt (ARCE), whose funding for my research in Cairo was essential for this study. The help I received from ARCE's dedicated staff was instrumental in obtaining materials from Dar al-Kutub and al-Azhar University Library. A trip to Istanbul and Egypt to collect copies of the manuscripts was financed by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). I am also indebted to Professor 'Abd al-Rahim Abu Husayn, chair of the History Department at the American University of Beirut, and Professor Ibrahim Kalin at Holy Cross College, for helping to obtain material from Istanbul. Special thanks go to Shihab Ahmed of Harvard University for taking the trouble to check some manuscripts on site in Istanbul, and who informed me of a copy of al-Basit that I did not know about. Finally I would like to thank the anonymous reader, who offered very helpful suggestions. 1. See Abu 'Abd Allah al-Yafi'i, Mir'at al-jinan (Beirut: Mu'assasat al-A'lami li-al-Matbu'at, 1974), 2:208; see also Jawdat al-Mahdi, al-Wahidi wa-manhajuh fi al-tafsir (Cairo: Wizarat al-Thaqafah, 1977), 403 for more references on this anecdote. 2. Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, Ihya' 'ulum al-din (Cairo: Matba'at al-Babi al-Halabi, 1957), 1: 40, advises the student who wants to know about the Qur'an to read al-Wahidi's al-Wajiz and alWasit. See al-Wahidi, al-Wajiz, ed. Safwan Dawudi (Damascus: Dar al-Qalam, 1995), 1: 45. 3. Al-Yafi'i, Mir'at, 3: 96; Shams al-Din al-Dhahabi, Siyar a'lam al-nubala', ed. Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut (Beirut: Mu'assasat al-Risalah, 1984), 18: 340.

4. See Yaqut al-Hamawi, Mu'jam al-udaba', ed. 'A. F. al-Rifa'i (Cairo: Dar al-Ma'mun, 1938), 12: 260.

5. In the last twenty years an attempt to edit the massive literature of tafsir has been launched in graduate programs in universities in Saudi Arabia and Egypt; many of the editions appearing these days were originally submitted as dissertations. 6. This process was begun by John Wansbrough in his Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1977). 7. Some modern Muslim scholars have offered cursory surveys of the genre, relying on both printed texts and manuscripts; unfortunately, these studies are neither comprehensive nor do they adopt a critical-historical approach. The standard survey of tafsir works in Arabic is Muhammad Husayn al-Dhahabi, al-Tafsir wa-al-mufassirun, 3 vols. (Cairo: Maktabat Wahbah, 1961). Jamal J. Elias has also studied the unpublished Qur'an commentary of al-Simnani (d. 736/1336); see his The Throne Carrier of God: The Life and Thought of 'Ala' ad-Dawla asSimnani (Albany: State Univ. of New York Press, 1995). See also G. Bowering, "The Qur'an Commentary of Al-Sulami," in Islamic Studies Presented to Charles Adams, ed. W. E. Hallaq and D. B. Little (Leiden: Brill, 1991), 41-65. 8. See my The Formation of the Classical Tafsir Tradition: The Qur'an Commentary of alTha'labi (d. 427/1035) (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 205-21. 9. The first to draw attention to al-Razi's dependency on al-Wahidi was Jawdat al-Mahdi in his pioneering work, al-Wahidi wa-manhajuh fi al-tafsir. See also Jacques Jomier, "Fakhr al-Din alRazi (m. 606H./1210) et les commentaires du Coran plus anciens," MIDEO 15 (1982): 158-59, who mentions al-Wahidi as a source for al-Razi. 10. See al-Wajiz, 1: 56; Dawudi, Tabaqat al-mufassirin, 1:100. 11. The first publication of al-Wajiz was on the margins of Muhammad al-Nawawi's Marah Labid (al-Tafsir al-munir li-ma'alim al-tanzil al-mufassir 'an wujuh mahasin al-ta'wil al-musamma tibqan li-ma'nah Marah Labid li-kashf ma'na Qur'an majid), 2 vols. (Cairo: Dar al-Kutub al-'Arabiyah, 1305/1887-88). The second is the critical edition by Safwan Dawudi (n. 2 above). Claude Gilliot mentions a 1955 edition by Mustafa al-Saqqa in his entry on al-Wahidi ("Textes arabes anciens edites en Egypte," MIDEO 24 (2000): 187). I have failed to find any trace of such an edition. The confusion may come from the fact that al-Saqqa himself wrote a Qur'an commentary called alWajiz. Gilliot's source for his information is Muhammad 'Isa Salihiyah, al-Mu'jam al-shamil li-alturath al-'arabi al-matbu' (Cairo: Ma'had al-Makhtutat al-'Arabiyah, 1995), 5: 318. 12. Al-Wasit, ed. 'Adil 'Abd al-Mawjud et al., 4 vols. (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyah, 1994). There is also an incomplete edition by Muhammad al-Zafiti (or al-Zufayti), 2 vols. (Cairo: 19861995), which only covers Suras 1-4. 13. See Ibn al-Qifti, Inbah al-ruwat 'ala anbah al-nuhat, ed. Muhammad Abu al-Fadl Ibrahim (Cairo: Dar al-Kutub al-Misriyah, 1952), 2: 223. Gilliot repeats the same information ("Textes arabes," 187). 14. This popular work has been published repeatedly. The standard critical edition is by al-

Sayyid Ahmad Saqr (Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an, Cairo: Dar al-Kitab al-Jadid, 1969); this is now rare. 15. Here I follow the assessment of Ihsan 'Abbas in his Ta'rikh al-naqd al-adabi 'inda al-'Arab: naqd al-shi'r min al-qarn al-thani hatta al-qarn al-thamin al-hijri (Beirut: Dar al-Shuruq, 1981), esp. 361-97. 16. See Formation, 1-22. 17. See Abu 'Abd Allah al-Zarkashi, al-Burhan fi 'ulum al-Qur'an, ed. Muhammad Abu al-Fadl Ibrahim (Beirut: Dar al-Ma'rifah, 1972), 1: 13. 18. See Formation, 295-321. 19. For example, al-Wahidi states, regarding the irrelevance of religious sentiments to the philological reading of a line of verse, that "opinions and doctrinal beliefs do not diminish the excellence of poetry" (Mutanabii Carmina cum commentario Wahidii [Sharh Diwan alMutanabbi], ed. F. Dieterici, Berlin: 1861), 331. 20. On the origins and rise of the Arabic philological tradition see C. H. M. Versteegh, Arabic Grammar and Quranic Exegesis in Early Islam (Leiden: Brill, 1993). 21. See Formation, 130-40. 22. For a theologian contemporary with al-Wahidi, Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni, see Tilman Nagel, Die Festung des Glaubens: Triumph und Scheitern des islamischen Rationalismus im 11. Jahrhundert (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1988). 23. Asbab, introduction, 5-38. 24. Al-Wajiz, 11-67. 25. K. Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Literatur (GAL) (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1943), 1: 411-12, Supp. 1: 730-31.

26. Gilliot, "Texte arabes," 183-87. 27. Asma Afsaruddin, "Constructing Narratives of Monition and Guile: The Politics of Interpretation," Arabica 48 (2001): 329-31. 28. 'Ali b. al-Hasan al-Bakharzi, Dumyat al-qasr wa-'usrat ahl al-'asr, ed. Muhammad al-Tunji (Beirut: Dar al-Jil, 1971-75), 2: 1017-20. 29. The abridged version is available in 'Abd al-Ghafir al-Farisi, al-Muntakhab min al-Siyaq, ed. Muhammad 'Abd al-'Aziz (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyah, 1989), 387. For the longer (and original) version see Yaqut, Mu'jam al-udaba', 12: 258-60. 30. I have used the Nuruosmaniye manuscript of al-Basit (tafsir 236, ff 1-7), as the basis for this study; I have also consulted the Dar al-Kutub manuscript (tafsir 53: 1), and the al-Azhar manuscript (Riwaq al-Magharibah 303: 1 ff 1-4).

31. Yaqut, Mu'jam al-udaba', 12: 257-70; for al-Wahidi's autobiography see 262-70. Yaqut's version is not a complete quotation of al-Basit's long introduction. 32. Three copies of the last volume of al-Basit have so far been located; all preserve the author's original colophon. The style of the colophon is highly literary, which ensured that it was copied by the scribes. This colophon should be viewed as a continuation of the introduction, since it elaborates on how al-Wahidi composed the work; any study of al-Basit must take this colophon into consideration. 33. It was Dawudi who drew my attention to the catalogue of the collection in al-Mawsil in his introduction to al-Wajiz (1: 35). See also Fihris makhtutat Maktabat al-Awqaf al-'Ammah fi alMawsil (Baghdad: Wizarat al-Awqaf, 1982), 1: 124. The whole of the colophon was transcribed by Hajji Khalifah (Kashf al-zunun, Istanbul: Wikalat al-Ma'arif, 1941, 1: 811). Dieterici's edition lacks the colophon. I have meanwhile received a photocopy of the last folio of Chester Beatty Ar. 3278 (a copy of al-Wahidi's Sharh) which does contain the colophon (fol. 263). We thus have at least one manuscript with the original colophon. I am grateful to the Chester Beatty Library for sending me the photocopy on short notice. 34. See al-Wasit, 4: 576. The manuscript containing this colophon is housed at the Dar al-Kutub al-Misriyah (for a description see ibid., 1: 38). The colophon's veracity is supported by the Berlin manuscript (Spr. 415), which reports the same date, which appears not in a colophon but on the title page (fol. 1) as a paraphrase of the colophon. Spr. 415 is perhaps the most important of alWasit's preserved manuscripts. For a description see W. Ahlwardt, Verzeichniss der arabischen Handschriften der koniglichen Bibliothek zu Berlin (Berlin: A. W. Schade, 1887), 1: 298-99. I am grateful to the authorities at the Staatsbibliothek in Berlin for allowing me to inspect this volume. 35. On this scholar see al-Farisi, al-Muntakhab, 186; see also al-Dhahabi, Siyar, 17: 389. For an exhaustive list of al-Wahidi's teachers (shuyukh) see Dawudi's introduction to al-Wajiz, 13-18. 36. Al-Basit, Nuruosmaniye, tafsir 236, fol. 6a. 37. Al-Basit, al-Azhar, Riwaq al-Magharibah 303/5, fol. 209b. 38. Sellheim (like Ahlwardt before him), in his entry on al-Wahidi in [EI.sup.2], states that alWahidi began al-Wajiz in 409/1018. This is impossible. Ahlwardt deduced this information from the dating of an isnad by al-Wahidi at the beginning of al-Wajiz (see 86); that al-Wahidi wrote down a prophetic tradition in 409/1018 does not mean that he was writing his book at that time. Moreover, he would have been around 16, which means that he would have begun al-Basit at an even earlier age. 39. I have used my own edition of this introduction (see n. 30). 40. See Mutanabbii Carmina, 825, for an example. 41. Ibn al-Qifti, Inbah, 2: 223-25. 42. For detailed references on al-Quhunduzi see al-Mahdi, al-Wahidi, 67; al-Wajiz, 13. 43. Al-Basit, Nuruosmaniye, tafsir 236, fol. 5b. 44. Al-Mahdi, al-Wahidi, 67.

45. On al-Wahidi's Qur'an teachers see ibid., 67-68. 46. Al-Basit, Nuruosmaniye, tafsir 236, fol. 6a. 47. For the encyclopedic approach see Formation, 14-23. 48. Al-Basit, Nuruosmaniye, tafsir 236, fol. 2b. 49. Ibid., fol. 4b-5a. See my forthcoming edition and translation of the introduction to al-Basit for more details on al-Wahidi's views on tafsir as presented in this commentary. 50. On al-Tha'labi's sources see Formation, 67-76.

51. Yaqut, Mu'jam al-udaba', 12: 260. 52. Al-Dhahabi, Siyar, 18: 342. The same story is told by al-Subki, if slightly differently; there it is clear that al-Wahidi's statement was made in an oral communication, a public lecture of some sort (al-Subki, Tabaqat al-Shafi'iyah al-kubra, ed. 'Abd al-Fattah al-Hilw, Cairo: Matba'at al-Babi al-Halabi, 1966, 5: 241). 53. Saqr, for example, wonders if there is any other position to take vis-a-vis al-Sulami's mystical "nonsense." He enlists the support of Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597/1201), who in his famous Talbis iblis also attacks al-Sulami (see Saqr's introduction to Asbab, 6-7). 54. "He was the master of his age in grammar and exegesis; he gained felicity in his writings, to the excellence of which all agreed, and which teachers cited in their lessons." Ibn Khallikan, Wafayat al-a'yan wa-anba' abna' al-zaman, ed. Ihsan 'Abbas (Beirut: Dar al-Thaqafah, 1978), 3: 303. Ibn al-Qifti (Inbah, 2: 223) states that "people sought him out for his knowledge." 55. See al-Wajiz, 1: 39-41. 56. Ahlwardt, Verzeichniss, 1: 298-301. 57. See, e.g., Hajji Khalifah (Katib Celebi), Kashf al-zunun, 2 vols. (Istanbul: Maarif Matbaasi, 1941-1956, repr. 1971), 1: 629: "the one that contains the sum total of meanings [al-hawi li-jami' al-ma'ani] titled al-Basit, al-Wasit and al-Wajiz, by-al-Wahidi." 58. An inspection of a manuscript with the same title from Dar al-Kutub in Cairo (Taymur Tafsir 117) showed that it is a volume of al-Wasit, which is written on the title page (fol. 3a). I compared fol. 3b of Taymur 117, which comments on Qur'an 4:94, with its counterpart in the printed edition (al-Wasit, 2: 101-2); they correspond exactly. Brockelmann (GAL, S I: 731) cites al-Hawi li-jami' al-ma'ani as an independent title. 59. Brockelmann, GAL, SI: 731. See, for example, the title page of Chester Beatty ms. 3731, where the title for al-Basit is given as Ma'ani al-tafsir al-musamma bi-al-Basit. 60. Dar al-Kutub. Majami' Mustafa 220, fol. 213a-b. See also Fahrasat al-kutub al-'Arabiyah almahfuzah bi-al-Kutubkhanah al-Khidaywiyah al-Misriyah (Cairo: 1308/1890-91), 7/2: 693, and see also 707.

61. The anonymous author of this epistle took issue with al-Wahidi's statement that "among the nobilities and glories of this science is that it does not allow argument by reason, opinion, or contemplation, without giving heed to those who bear witness to revelation through narration and transmission." See al-Wahidi's introduction to al-Wasit, 1: 47. 62. Al-Mahdi, al-Wahidi, 95 (in his reference to the ms. number he dropped "Mustafa"). 63. See Dawudi's introduction to al-Wajiz, 1: 37-38. Sellheim offered his refutation in "Eine unbeachtet gebliebene Sprichwortersammlung," Oriens 31 (1988): 91. 64. See R. Sesen, Nawadir al-makhtutatfi maktabat Turkiya, 3 vols. (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab alJadidah, 1975), 3: 75. 65. See Dawudi's introduction to al-Wajiz, 1: 33-34. 66. The earliest and most comprehensive list of al-Wahidi's works was compiled by his student al-Farisi and is preserved by Yaqut. Ten works are given there: (1) al-Wajiz, (2) al-Wasit, (3) alBasit (all Qur'an commentaries, we are told), (4) Asbab al-nuzul, (5) al-Da'awat wa-al-mahsul, (6) al-Maghazi, (7) Sharh al-Mutanabbi, (8) al-Ighrab fi al-i'rab wa-al-nahw, (9) Tafsir al-nabi, (10) Nafy al-tahrif 'an al-Qur'an al-sharif (Mu'jam al-udaba', 12: 259). Ibn Qadi Shuhbah gives the title of number 9 as Tafsir asma' al-nabi, Tabaqat al-Shafi'iyay, ed. 'Ali 'Umar (Cairo: Maktabat al-Thaqafah al-Diniyah, 1990), 1: 239, as does Ibn Khallikan (Wafayat, 3: 303). Since the earliest list does not group number 9 with the three commentaries I am inclined to take the title as given by Ibn Qadi Shuhbah as the most likely. 67. The paragraph states: "Before (writing) this book--with God's aid and help--I had compiled three compendia [majmu'at] on this science [exegesis]: the meanings of tafsir [ma'ani al-tafsir], inherited materials [musnad al-tafsir], and paraphrastic materials [mukhtasar al-tafsir]. Earlier I had been asked to compose a medium-sized [wasit] commentary, smaller than al-Basit (which is an extensive discourse) but more detailed than al-Wajiz, whose discourse is extremely brief." Al-Wasit, 1: 50; emended according to al-Zafiti's edition, 1: 6 (text). 68. Ahlwardt, Verzeichniss, 1: 299, a mistake copied by Sellheim. Editors in the Arab world take the categorization as referring to actual titles of exegetical works, and therefore claim that alWahidi wrote three works with the titles "Ma'ani al-tafsir," "Musnad al-tafsir," and "Mukhtasar altafsir." The first to introduce this confusion was Saqr, in his introduction to Asbab, 18. Al-Mahdi also understood these terms as titles; see al-Wahidi, 92. 69. Those who insist on reading this paragraph as al-Wahidi's reference to published works must explain why none of these works has survived, why no medieval author mentioned any of them, and why they are not part of the book list his student al-Farisi furnished. There is no shred of evidence for the existence of any other commentary besides the three that we have. 70. Al-Basit, Nuruosmaniye, tafsir 236, f. 7b.

71. Ibn Qadi Shuhbah, Tabaqat al-Shafi'iyah, 1: 239. Brockelmann (GAS, 1: 412) states that the work was in 17 volumes; the only possible source of this information is the wrongly attributed manuscript in Caetani's collection (Caet. Ms. 78b), which is not an al-Basit volume as the catalogue claims. The cataloguer was misguided by the title given for this manuscript, which is

not correct, nor is it the original title of the volume. On inspecting the manuscript it became clear that it belongs to a later work, as the author quotes extensively from al-Zamakhshari (d. 538/1144). The colophon of this manuscript (which neither mentions that it is by al-Wahidi nor gives the title) states that the next volume is the seventeenth and last. Brockelmann inspected the manuscript and took the attribution at face value. For a brief description of the manuscript, see G. Gabrieli, La Fondazione Caetani per gli studi Musulmani (Rome: Accadmia dei Lincei, 1926), 38, no. 78b. 72. Two are housed in Yemen (Sanaa manuscripts, Maktabat al-Jami' al-Kabir, tafsir nos. 51, 54), while the third is in Rome (Caet. ms. 78a). 73. Al-Basit, Nuruosmaniye, tafsir 236, fol. 7b line 11. 74. Al-Mahdi quotes the introduction to al-Basit in al-Wahidi, 70-72, 76, 209-10, 252-54. 75. Al-Wahidi refers the reader to a "lengthy story" about the people mentioned in Sura 85 in his "musnad al-tafsir" (al-Basit, Nuruosmaniye, tafsir 240, f. 457b). This story, related on the authority of Suhayb, is recorded in al-Wasit (4: 459-60). This shows that al-Wahidi considered al-Wasit to be the commentary concerned with musnad material. 76. Al-Hadrami, 'Umdat al-qawi wa-al-da'if lima waqa'a fi Wasit al-Wahidi min al-tabdil wa-altahrif, Cairo, Dar al-Kutub, tafsir 159. For details on al-Hadrami and his work, see al-Mahdi, alWahidi, 88-89, where he corrects Brockelmann's mischaracterization of this work. See also alZafiti's introduction to al-Wasit, 1: 45. 77. Mahdi Jasim and Nuhad Salih, "Tafsir al-Wasit bayn al-Wajiz wa-al-Basit ... al-Muqaddimah wa-al-fatihah," al-Mawrid 17: 4 (1988), 292-30. 78. Al-Wajiz, 1: 87. 79. See n. 2. I am discounting the Qur'an commentary of Ibn 'Abbas since it did not comment on all of the Qur'an. See Andrew Rippin, "Tafsir Ibn 'Abbas and Criteria for Dating Early tafsir Texts," JSAI 29 (1994): 38-83. 80. Al-Wajiz, 1: 87. 81. The conservative hermeneutics of this work foreshadows Ibn Taymiyah's polemical manifesto Muqaddimah fi usul al-tafsir. For an assessment of Ibn Taymiyah's work, see Formation, 215-27. 82. Asbab, ed. Saqr (see n. 15). A recent reprinting of this work was issued by Kamal Zaghlul (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyah, 2001). To his credit, Zaghlul is explicit about using Saqr's edition as the basis of his reprint. 83. Asbab, ed. Saqr, 5-6. 84. Ibid., 4. 85. See Andrew Rippin, "The Exegetical Genre asbab al-nuzul: A Bibliographical and

Terminological Survey," BSOAS 48 (1985): 4-5, 15. 86. Hajji Khalifah, Kashf al-zunun, 1: 809. 87. Carmina Muntanabbi, 2-4. 88. Uri Rubin has discussed this verse, and its interpretations, at length; see Rubin, The Eye of the Beholder: The Life of Muhammad as Viewed by the Early Muslims (Princeton: Darwin Press, 1995), 90-99. 89. See Formation, 142-49. 90. Al-Zamakhshari, al-Kashshaf (Cairo: Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1972), 4: 265. 91. Al-Basit, Riwaq al-Magharibah 303/5, f. 192a. 92. See Formation, 233-35. 93. Al-Wait, 4: 511. 94. Al-Wajiz 2: 1211. COPYRIGHT 2006 American Oriental Society

THE FATHER OF ISLAMIC RADICALISM?

Toynbee Hall in East London was the venue as Professor Yahya Michot from the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies launched his much awaited and debated book on Ibn Taymiyyah. by Emdad Rahman For leading enlightened Western academics, Muslim modernists and 'progressives', Ibn Taymiyyah is considered the godfather of uncompromising violent Jihadism. For the modern day 'Jihadi', the life and works of Taqi-Uddin Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728/1328) are regarded as sources of inspiration. Perhaps one of the most misunderstood and misquoted scholars, he and those claiming to follow his school of understanding today, have been accused of anthropomorphism, enmity towards people of spirituality or Tasawwuf, and creedal deviation from mainstream Sunni Islam. Ironically, Ibn Taymiyyah lived at a time very similar to ours, where Muslims in certain regions lived under non-Muslim rule, i.e. lands occupied by the Mongols and the Crusaders, and with various Muslim factions vying with one another to gain credibility with the Establishment. In his book 'Ibn Taymiyya: Muslims under non-Muslim Rule", Professor Michot

overturns this conventional and somewhat simplistic picture of Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah. During the book launch he examined the life, work and jihad, and present close and careful translations of the four 'Mardin fatwas' issued by Ibn Taymiyyah on how Muslims should respond when they come under non-Muslim rule. Should they fight or quit such rule? If they have to adjust to it, what form should this take and to what extent should this be? The inconsistent and oft unfair accusations of deviancy levelled against Ibn Taymiyyah were also addressed in a scholarly manner. I developed an interest in researching Ibn Taymiyyah through my research of Ibn, whereby I discovered many similarities between these two great personalities he said. He added Ibn Taymiyyah did not just split the world up into two parts; namely Darul Islam and Darul Kufr/Harb, but recognised a third type, and as in the case of Mardin. He further addressed the audience and elucidated the reasons why Ibn Taymiyyahs words are often taken out of context and used the assassination of Sadat and the Fatwa against Mongol invaders as examples. Ibn Taymiyyah was more open minded and as a progressive and broad thinker than he is given credit for. Professor michot exhorted the audience and those who study the works of Ibn Taymiyyah to broaden their readings rather than focussing on selected chapters. The book will be of huge benefit to a wide range of people, including those who adopt the Salafi methodology, those who subscribe to the Ash'ari school of theology, Muslims who consider themselves to be part of other 'groups' or none, secularists, Neocons, apologists, people involved in policy-making bodies and think tanks, and all people who would just like to understand what the fuss is all about. The Foreword by James Piscatori draws out the political implications of this stunning correction of the image of Ibn Taymiyya. It means that Islamic political activism need not be unintelligible, and response to it therefore needs to be more intelligent and nuanced than it usually is. Copies of the book were also made available for sale and signing during the free event.

* Professor Yahya M. Michot is one of the world's leading experts on Ibn Taymiyyah. He was director of the Centre for Arabic Philosophy at University of Louvain in Belgium where he has delivered courses in Arabic, History of Arabic Philosophy, History of Muslim Peoples and Institutions of Islam, and Commentary on Arabic Philosophical Texts. His main field of research is the History of Muslim Thought with special reference to Avicenna (Ibn Sina), his predecessors and his impact on Sunni thought and Ibn Taymiyyah. Professors Michot's interests also encompass the history of Muslim thought during the Mamlk and Ilkhn periods, as well as modern Islamic movements. He is currently a Fellow in Islamic Studies at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies and a Lecturer in the Faculty of Theology at Oxford University. He serves as member of various international scholarly societies, and is founder and director of the collection 'Sagesses Musulmanes'. Professor Michot held the position of president of the Conseil Suprieur des Musulmans de Belgique between 1995 and 1998. His numerous publications include several volumes on Ibn Sina and Ibn Taymiyyah. Research Interests: Classical Islamic theology and philosophy (Ibn Taymiyya, d. 1328; Avicenna, d. 1037; Ikhwn al-Saf, 10th c.; Rashd al-Dn Fadl Allh, d. 1318). Contemporary Islamic thought and inter-religious dialogue. Publications: . Textes traduits de larabe, annots et prsents en relation certains textes modernes. Prface de James Piscatori (2004, Beirut - Paris, Albouraq, xii & 176 p.). Ibn Taymiyya : Un Dieu hsitant ? Texte traduit de larabe, introduit et annot (2004, Beirut -Paris, Albouraq, vi & 37 p.). Ibn Sn : Lettre au vizir Ab Sad. Editio princeps daprs le manuscrit de Bursa, traduction de larabe, introduction, notes et lexique (2000, Paris, Albouraq, Sagesses Musulmanes, 4, 393 p.)."> A Mamlk Theologians Commentary on Avicennas Risla Adhawiyya. Being a Translation of a Part of the Dar al-Tarud of Ibn Taymiyya, with Introduction, Annotation, and Appendices, Part II, in Journal of Islamic Studies, 14:3, Oxford, 2003, p. 309-363. Ibn Taymiyya. Mardin: Hgire, fuite du pch et "demeure de lislam". Textes traduits de larabe, annots et prsents en relation certains textes modernes. Prface de James Piscatori (2004, Beirut - Paris, Albouraq, xii & 176 p.). Ibn Taymiyya : Un Dieu hsitant ? Texte traduit de larabe, introduit et annot (2004, Beirut -Paris, Albouraq, vi & 37 p.). Ibn Sn : Lettre au vizir Ab Sad. Editio princeps daprs le manuscrit de Bursa,

traduction de larabe, introduction, notes et lexique (2000, Paris, Albouraq, Sagesses Musulmanes, 4, 393 p.).

Ibn Taymiyya: Muslims under non-Muslim Rule [Paperback]

Modern Islamist ideologues often appeal to the authority of Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328) -- according to the Militant Ideology Atlas more than twice as often as to Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (of 'Wahhabism' fame). Many Western specialists also paint him as the godfather of uncompromising violent jihadism. In this book Michot overturns this conventional picture of Ibn Taymiyya. He presents close, careful translation of four fatwas by Ibn Taymiyya on how Muslims should respond when they come under non-Muslim rule: should they fight or quit such rule; if they should adjust to it, how and how far? Next, Michot translates passages from six modern authors reflecting on the same question, and referring to Ibn Taymiyya. Readers can judge for themselves how far modern militancy departs from the orthodox Islamic attitudes exemplified by Ibn Taymiyya. A detailed chronology of the life of this activist theologian shows that he practised what he preached. This book should be required reading for teachers and students of the overlaps between religion, politics, identity and culture in Political Science, Religious Studies/Theology, Middle East/ Islamic Studies, International Relations, CounterTerrorism. James Piscatori is a member of the Social Sciences faculty and the Centre for International Studies, Oxford University. Professor Michot, one of the Western world's leading authorities on Avicenna and Ibn Taymiyya, is a member of the Theology faculty. Both are fellows of the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies. The Foreword by James Piscatori draws out the political implications of this stunning correction of the image of Ibn Taymiyya. It means that Islamic political activism need not be unintelligible, and response to it therefore needs to be more intelligent and nuanced than it usually is.
Yahya Michot / James Piscatori (Author)

The Incoherence of the Philosophers, 2nd Edition (Brigham Young University - Islamic Translation Series) [Hardcover]
Although Abu Hamid Muhammad al-Ghazali lived a relatively short life (1058-1111), he established himself as one of the most important thinkers in the history of Islam. The Incoherence of the Philosophers, written after more than a decade of travel and ascetic contemplation, contends that while such Muslim philosophers as Avicenna boasted of unassailable arguments on matters of theology and metaphysics, they could not deliver on their claims; moreover, many of their assertions represented disguised heresy and unbelief. Despite its attempted refutation by the twelfthcentury philosopher Ibn Rushd, al-Ghazali's work remains widely read and influential.
Abu Hamid Muhammad al-Ghazali (Author), Michael E. Marmura (Translator)

Al-Maqasid: Nawawi's Manual of Islam [Paperback]

FAMOUS FIQH BOOKS like al-Maqasid have stood the test of time because of their sheer usefulness. Compact enough to be memorized by students becoming scholars, al-Maqasid contains hundreds of rulings of personal Islamic law distilled from the most commonly asked and answered questions in schools and mosques from the time of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) down to Imam Nawawi.
Nawawi (Author), Noah Ha Mim Keller (Author)

Widely considered the best medium-size handbook available in English for teaching the basics of Islam from a traditional perspective, this new edition has been revised and updated with a full complement of notes on a number of contemporary Muslim issues, and three major essays have been appended on why Muslims follow madhhabs, hadiths the mujtahid Imams lacked, and the place of Sufism in Islam.
Volume I: Tafsir: Gestation and Synthesis Part 1: History and Development 1. Claude Gilliot, Exegesis of the Quran: Classical and Medieval, in J. McAuliffe (ed.),Encyclopaedia of the Quran, Vol. II (E. J. Brill, 20016), pp. 99124. 2. Fred Leemhuis, Origins and Early Development of the Tafsir Tradition, in Andrew Rippin (ed.), Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Quran (Oxford University Press, 1988), pp. 1330. 3. Dimitry Frolow, Ibn al-Nadim on the History of Quranic Exegesis, Wiener Zeitschrift fuer die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 1997, 87, 6581. 4. Bruce Fudge, Quranic Exegesis in Medieval Islam and Modern Orientalism, Die Welt des Islams, 2006, 46, 2, 11547. 5. E. A. Rezvan, The Quran and its World: IX. The Triumph of Diversity: Muslim Exegesis,Manuscripta Orientalia, 1999, 5, 2, 3757. 6. Walid Saleh, Marginalia and Peripheries: A Tunisian Historian and the History of Quranic Exegesis, Numen, 2011, 58, 284313. Part 2: Dating Early Exegetical Texts 7. Claude Gilliot. The Beginnings of Qurnic Exegesis. In The Quran: Formative Interpretation. Edited by Andrew Rippin. Aldershot: Variorum, 1999. Pp. 1-27. 8. Kees Versteegh, Grammar and Exegesis: The Origins of Kufan Grammar and the Tafsir Muqatil, Der Islam, 1990, 67, 2, 20642. 9. Kees Versteegh, Zayd ibn Alis Commentary on the Quran, in Y. Suleiman (ed.), Arabic Grammar and Linguistics (Curzon, 1999), pp. 929. 10. Andrew Rippin, Studying Early Tafsir Texts, Miszellen: Der Islam, 1995, 31023. 11. Andrew Rippin, Al-Zuhri, Naskh Al-Quran and the Problem of Early Tafsir Texts, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 1984, 47, 8, 115.

12. Andrew Rippin, Tafsir Ibn Abbas and Criteria for Dating Early Tafsir Texts, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 1994, 18, 3883. 13. Harald Motzki, The Origins of Muslim Exegesis. A Debate, in Harald Motzki with Nicolet Boekhoff-van der Voort and Sean Anthony, Analysing Muslim Traditions Studies in Legal, Exegetical and Maghazi Hadith (E. J. Brill, 2010), pp. 231303. 14. Herbert Berg. Ibn 'Abbs in 'Abbasid-Era tafsr In Occasional Papers of the School of 'Abbasid Studies, Cambridge 6-10 July 2002. Edited by James Montgomery. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta. Paris: Peeters, 2004, pp. 129-146. 15. Harald Motzki, The Origins of Muslim Exegesis. A Debate, in Harald Motzki with Nicolet Boekhoff-van der Voort and Sean Anthony, Analysing Muslim Traditions Studies in Legal, Exegetical and Maghazi Hadith (E. J. Brill, 2010), pp. 231303. Volume II: Tafsir: Theory and Constructs Part 3: Procedural and Conceptual Devices 16. John Wansbrough, Majaz al-Quran: Periphrastic Exegesis, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 1970, 24766. 17. Wolfhart Heinrichs, Contacts Between Scriptural Hermeneutics and Literary Theory in Islam: The Case of Majaz, Zeitschrift fr Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften, 1992, 7, 25384. 18. Haggai Ben-Shammai, The Status of Parable and Simile in the Quran and Early Tafsir: Polemic, Exegetical and Theological Aspects, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 2005, 30, 15469. 19. Issa Boullata, Poetry Citation as Interpretive Illustration in Quran Exegesis: Masa-il Nafi Ibn al-Azraq, in Wael Hallaq and Donald Little (eds.), Studies Presented to Charles J. Adams (E. J. Brill, 1991), pp. 2740. 20. Leah Kinberg, Muhkamat and Mutashabihat (Koran 3/7): Implications of a Koranic Pair of Terms in Medieval Exegesis, Arabica, 1988, 35, 14372. 21. Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Text and Textuality: Q.3:7 as a Point of Intersection, in I. J. Boullata (ed.), Literary Structures of Religious Meaning in the Quran (Curzon Press, 2000), pp. 5676. 22. Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Quranic Hermeneutics: The Views of Tabari and Ibn Kathir, in Andrew Rippin (ed.), Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Quran (Oxford University Press, 1988), pp. 4662. 23. Muhammad Abul Quasem, Al-Ghazalis Theory of Quran Exegesis According to Ones Personal Opinion (International Congress for the Study of the Quran, Australian National University, Canberra, 813 May 1981) (Australian National University), pp. 6991. 24. Mesut Okumu. The Influence of Ibn Sn on al-Ghazzl in Qur'anic Hermeneutics The Muslim World (2012:102.2.1), pp. 390-411. 25. Ulrika Mrtensson, Through the Lens of Modern Hermeneutics: Authorial Intention in al abars and al-Ghazls Interpretation of Q. 24:35 Journal of Quranic Studies (2009:), pp. 20-48.

26. Kees Versteegh, The Linguistic Introduction to Razis Tafsir, in Petr Vavrousek and Petr Zemanek (eds.), Studies on Near East Languages and Literatures (Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, 1996), pp. 589603. 27. Hartmut Bobzin, Notes on the Importance of Variant Readings and Grammar in the Tafsir al-Galalayn, ZAL, 1985, 15, 3344. 28. Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Assessing the Israiliyyat: An Exegetical Conundrum, in S. Leder (ed.), Story-telling in the Framework of Non-fictional Arabic Literature (Harrassowitz, 1998), pp. 34569. 29. Roberto Tottoli, Origin and Use of the Term Israiliyyat in Muslim Literature, Arabica, 1999, 46, 2, 193210. 30. Walid A. Saleh, A Fifteenth-Century Muslim Hebraist: al-Biqai and his Defense of Using the Bible to Interpret the Quran, Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies, 2008, 83, 3, 62954. 31. Andrew Rippin, The Designation of "Foreign" Languages in the Exegesis of the Quran, in Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Barry D. Walfish, and Joseph W. Goering (eds.), With Reverence for the Word: Medieval Scriptural Exegesis in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Oxford University Press, 2003), pp. 43743. 32. Andrew Rippin, The Function of "Asbab al-nuzul" in Quranic Exegesis, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 1988, 51, 1, 120. 33. David Powers, The Exegetical Genre nasikh al-Quran Wa-manukhuhu, in Andrew Rippin (ed.), Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Quran (Oxford University Press, 1988), pp. 11738. 34. Suleiman A. Mourad. The Revealed Text and the Intended Subtext: Notes on the Hermeneutics of the Qurn in Mutazila Discourse as Reflected in the Tahhb of al-kim al-ium (d. 494/1101). In Islamic Philosophy, Science, Culture, and Religion: Studies in Honor of Dimitri Gutas. Eds. Felicitas Opwis & David Reisman. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2012. Pp. 367395. 35. Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Ibn Taymiya Treatise on the Principles of Tafsir, in John Renard (ed.), Windows on the House of Islam: Muslim Sources on Spirituality and Religious Life(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), pp. 3543. 36. Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Ibn al-Jawzis Exegetical Propaedeutic: Introduction and Translation of the (muqaddimah to Zad al-masir fiilm al-Tafsir) Alif, Journal of Comparative Poetics, 1988, 8, 10113. 37. Yusuf Rahman, Hermeneutics of al-Baydawi in his Anwar al-tanzil wa asrar altawil,Islamic Culture, 1997, 71, 1, 114. 38. Y. Goldfeld, Development of Theory on Quranic Exegesis in Islamic Scholarship, Studia Islamica, 1988, 67, 527. 39. Gregor Schwarb, Capturing the Meanings of Gods Speech: The Relevance of Usul al fiqh to an Understanding of Usul al-Tafsir in Jewish and Muslim Kalam, in M. M. Bar-Asher et al. (eds.), A Word Fitly Spoken: Studies in Mediaeval Exegesis of the Hebrew Bible and the Quran Presented to Haggai Ben-Shammai (Jerusalem, 2007), pp. 11156. 40. Peter Heath, Creative Hermeneutics: A Comparative Analysis of Three Islamic Approaches,Arabica, 1989, 36, 173210.

Volume III: The Scholarship of Tafsir Part 4: Commentators and Commentaries 41. Nabia Abbott, Studies in Arabic Literary Papyri II: Quranic Commentary and Tradition(University of Chicago, 1967), pp. 92106. 42. Mehmet Akif Koc, A Comparison of the References to Muqatil b.Sulayman (150/767) in the Exegesis of al-Thalabi (427/1036) with Muqatils own Exegesis, Journal of Semitic Studies, 2008, 53, 1, 69101. 43. Kees Versteegh, The name of the Ant and the call to Holy War: Al-Dak b. Muzim's commentary on the Qurn In The Transmission and Dynamics of the Textual Sources of Islam. Essays in Honour of Harald Motzki. Edited by Nicolet Boekhoff-van der Voort, Kees Versteegh and Joas Wagemakers. Leiden: Brill, 2011, pp. 279-299. 44. Ulrika Martensson, "The Persuasive Proof": A Study of Aristotles Politics and Rhetoric in the Quran and in Tabaris Commentary, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 2008, 34, 363420. 45. Walid A. Saleh, The Last of the Nishapuri School of Tafsir: Al-Wahidi (d. 468/1076) and his Significance in the History of Quranic Exegesis, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 2006, 126, 2, 22343. 46. Norman Calder, Tafsir from Tabari to Ibn Kathir: Problems in the Description of a Genre, Illustrated with Reference to the Story of Abraham, in G. Hawting and A. Sharif (eds.),Approaches to the Quran (Routledge, 1993), pp. 10140. 47. Meir Bar-Asher, The Quran Commentary Ascribed to Imam Hasan alAskari, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 2000, 24, 35879. 48. Azim Nanji, Shii Ismaili Interpretations of the Quran (International Congress for the Study of the Quran, Australian National University, Canberra, 813 May 1981) (Australian National University), pp. 3949. 49. Kristian Sands, On the Popularity of Husayn Vaiz-I Khashafis Mavalib-I aliyya: A Persian Commentary on the Quran, International Society for Iranian Studies, 2003, 269 83. 50. Suleiman Mourad, The Survival of the Mutazila Tradition of Quranic Exegesis in Sunni and Shii tafasir, Journal of Quranic Studies, 2010, 12, 83108. 51. Suleiman A. Mourad. The Mutazila & their tafsr tradition: A Comparative Study of Five Exegetical Glosses on Quran. 3.178. Part of a research paper from a monograph to be published by Mourad which studies the work of al-Jishum, 2012, pp 121. 52. Manfred Gtz. 'Mturd and his Kitb Tawlt al-Qurn', In Quran: Formative Interpretationedited by Andrew Rippin, pp. 181-214. This is a translation of Gotz, Manfred. Maturd und sein Kitb Tawlt al-Qurn, Der Islam, (1965:41), pp. 181215. 53. Jacques Jomier, The Quranic Commentary of Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi: Its Sources and Its Originality (International Congress for the Study of the Quran, Australian National University, Canberra, 813 May 1981), pp. 93111. 54. Gerhard Bowering, The Major Sources of Sulamis Minor Quran Commentary, Oriens, 1996, 35, 3556.

55. Jamal Elias, Sufi Tafsir Reconsidered: Exploring the Development of a Genre, Journal of Quranic Studies, 2010, 12, 4155. 56. Nicholas Heer, Abu Hamid al-Ghazalis Esoteric Exegesis of the Koran, in Leonard Lewisohn (ed.), The Heritage of Sufism, Vol. I (Oneworld, 1999), pp. 23557. 57. Annabel Keeler, Sufi Tafsir as a Mirror: al-Qushayri the murshid in his Lataif alisharat,Journal of Quranic Studies, 2004. 58. Sajjad H. Rizvi, The Existential Breath of al-ramn and the Munificent Grace of alram: the Tafsr Srat al-Ftia of Jm and the school of Ibn Arab. Journal of Qur'anic Studies(2006:8.1), pp.58-87 59. Jules Janssens, Al-Kindi: the Founder of Philosophical Exegesis of the Quran By: Yaqub b.Ishaq, Journal of Quranic Studies, 2007, 9, 2, 121. 60. Jules Jannsens, Avicenna and the Quran: A Survey of His Quranic Commentaries,Mlanges de lInstitut Dominicain dtudes orientales, 2004, 256, 17792. 61. B.T. Lawson Qurn Commentary as Sacred Performance: the Bbs tafsrs of Qurn 103 and 108, the declining day and the abundance," in Der Iran um 19 Jahrhundert und die Enstehung der Baha'i Religion. Edited by Johann-Christoph Bur gel & Isabel Schayani. Georg Olms Verlag, Hildesheim, 1998, pp.145-58. Volume IV: Tafsir: Topics, Themes, and Approaches Part 5: Topics and Themes of Exegesis 62. Anthony Johns, Solomon and the Horses: The Theology and Exegesis of a Koran ic Story, Sura 38 (Sad): 3033, Institut Dominicain dEtudes Orientales du Caire: Melanges, 1997, 23, 25982. 63. Andrew Rippin, The Muslim Samson: Medieval, Modern and Scholarly Interpretations,Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 2008, 71, 2, 23953. 64. Mahmoud M. Ayoub, Literary Exegesis of the Quran: The Case of al-Sharif al-Radi, in Issa J. Boullata (ed.), Literary Structures of Religious Meaning in the Quran (Curzon, 2000), pp. 292309. 65. Toby Mayer. Shahrastn on the Arcana of the Qur'an: a Preliminary Evaluation. Journal of Qur'anic Studies (2005:7.2), pp. 61-100 66. Andrew J. Lane, You Cant Tell a Book by its Author: A Study of Mutazilite theology in al- Zamakhshars (d. 538/1144) Kashshf. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies(2012:75.1), pp. 47-86. 67. Uri Rubin, Meccan Trade and Quranic Exegesis (Quran 2: 198), Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 1990, 3, 4218. 68. Stefan Wild, The Self-Referentiality of the Quran: Sura 3: 7 as an Exegetical Challenge, in Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Barry D. Walfish, and Joseph W. Goering (eds.), With Reverence for the Word: Medieval Scriptural Exegesis in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Oxford University Press, 2003), pp. 42236. 69. Gerhard Bowering, The Light Verse: Quranic Text and Sufi Interpretation, Oriens, 2001, 36, 11344. 70. Brannon Wheeler, Moses or Alexander? Early Islamic Exegesis of Quran 18: 60 65,Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 1998, 57, 3, 191215.

71. Mohammed Rustom, Forms of Gnosis in Sulamis Sufi Exegesis of the fatiha, Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, 2005, 16, 4, 32744. 72. Gordon Nickel, Early Muslim Accusations of Tahrif: Muqatil ibn Sulaymans Commentary on Key Quranic Verses, in David Thomas (ed.), The Bible in Arab Christianity (Brill, 2007), pp. 20723. 73. Jane McAuliffe, Christians in the Quran and Tafsir, in J.Waardenburg (ed.), Muslim Perceptions of Other Religions: A Historical Survey (Oxford University Press, 1999), pp. 10521. 74. Thomas E. Burman, Tafsir and Translation: Traditional Arabic Quran Exegesis and the Latin Qurans of Robert of Ketton and Mark of Toledo, Speculum, 1998, 73, 3, 70332. 75. Robert Morrison, Discussions of Astrology in Early Tafsir, Journal of Quranic Studies, 2009, 11, 2, 4971. 76. Karen Bauer. "I Have Seen The Peoples Antipathy To This Knowledge": The Muslim Exegete And His Audience, 5th/11th7th/13th Centuries. In The Islamic Scholarly Tradition: Studies in History, Law, and Thought in Honor of Professor Michael Allan Cook. Edited by M. A. Cook, Asad Q. Ahmed, Behnam Sadeghi, Michael Bonner, pp. 293314. Part 6: Modern Developments in Exegesis: Interpretation and Hermeneutics 77. Farid Esack, Quranic Hermeneutics: Problems and Prospects, Muslim World, 1993, 83, 2, 11841. 78. Abdullah Saeed, Some Reflections on the Contextualist Approach to Ethico-Legal Texts of the Quran, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 2008, 71, 2, 22137. 79. Erik Ohlander, Modern Quranic Hermeneutics', Religion Compass (Blackwell, 2009). 80. Massimo Campanini, Quranic Hermeneutics and Political Hegemony: Reformation of Islamic Thought, Muslim World, 2009, 12433. 81. Johanna Pink, Tradition, Authority and Innovation in Contemporary Sunn tafsr: Towards a Typology of Qur'an Commentaries from the Arab World, Indonesia and Turkey. Journal of Quranic Studies (2010:12), pp. 56-82. Tafsir Within the classical Islamic tradition, the field of Qur'anic exegesis, more commonly referred to as tafsir, occupies a revered place among the traditional Muslim sciences. Although tafsir encompasses various approaches to the explication of the Quran and these include legal, theological, rhetorical, linguistic, mystical, literary, and philosophical treatments, it is the technical tools and methodologies applied in Quranic exegesis and the history of their development which make the discipline so unique in its Islamic context. Given the significance of tafsir within the religious tradition, western academic scholars have devoted considerable attention to the field. This interest remains vigorous today and represents one of the key areas of research in modern Islamic studies. This collection of articles on tafsir provides a definitive overview of the tradition of tafsir in its early, medieval, and modern settings.

Tafsir: Interpreting the Quran includes works germane to the history and development of exegesis; materials which focus on the traditions great commentators and their commentaries; articles which look at the genres, themes and contexts of the tafsir tradition; research on exegetical ideas, sources, and constructs; and, finally, articles which examine the hermeneutic tools defined by scholarship for the explication of the sacred text. It is an essential work of reference destined to be valued by scholars and students as a vital onestop research resource

Interpreting the Qur'an

Edited by Mustafa Shah
Published 19th December 2012 by Routledge 2,152 pages

Series: Critical Concepts in Islamic Studies

The Islamic manuscripts remain a previous legacy inherited from early and medieval Muslim scholars who had devouted to the role of empowering knowledge. The wealth of the knowledge prevailes in the texts places them as primary sources and references in the field of Islamic Studies.

The manuscripts gain a furtile ground in research field. Precisely, the researches pertaining to the field are not attained particularly within theoretical approach. Moreover, there are attempts to apply the values on reality life. Hence, the researches done will be fruitful in contributing to the building of Ummah. Realizing that, The Department of Quran and Hadith steps to organize a seminar on Islamic manuscripts aimed to shed lights on concluded previous and current researches achieved in the field. Hopefully, through presentations and discussion the harvest we reap will be beneficial for Ummah as a whole.

....

 : . .
International Seminar On Islamic Manuscripts (ISIM) Theme: Empowering Islamic Manuscripts to the World" Organised by: Department of Al-Quran And Al-Hadith, Academy of Islamic Studies, University of Malaya and Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DBP) Date: 1 2 July 2013 ( Monday-Tuesday) Venue: Academy of Islamic Studies, University of Malaya
The objectives of seminar are as follows : 1- To disseminate findings of researches done in the field aimed to benefit Muslim nations. 2- To expose the various contemporary research methods pertaining to manuscripts at international level. 3- To search as a platform for research collaboration among local and international scholars in the field.

 .1 . . .2 . .3 .4 .
CONFERENCE: Date: 1 and 2 July 2013 (Monday and Tuesday)

Venue: Academy of Islamic Studies, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA. a. 30 March 2013 : Deadline for abstract
submission ( Notification of acceptance will be issued a week after the acceptance of abstract) b. 30 April 2013 : Deadline for the paper submission c. Late submission of paper will not be entertained

To all authors, please use the following format: 1. Abstract in English and in the language of the article is required (e.g: article in Arabic needs to provide abstract in Arabic and English; the same apply to article in Malay). Please also provide 5 chosen keywords.

2. The length of the article should not exceed 15 pages single spacing, including referencing and bibliography.

3. We prefers footnotes as a referencing system. It requires a complete citation--author, title, place of publication, publisher, and date of publication--upon first use of a source, and an abbreviated form of citation thereafter. 4. Footnotes references must follow the following format: a) Book: Full name of the author(s) (Year), Title of the book (italic), Place of publication: Publishing house, page number. Examples: John L. Esposito (2010), The Future of Islam, New York: Oxford University Press, p. 5 or pp. 3-7. b) Journal: Full name of the author(s) (Year), Title of the article, Name of the Journal (italic), number or volume and issue, page number. Example: Fadi Alarabi (2009), Islamicjerusalem: The First Qiblah, Journal of Islamicjerusalem Studies, Vol. 10, Winter, p. 16 or pp. 2-5. Frederick C. Conybear (1986), Antiochus Strategos Account of the Sack of Jerusalem in A.D. 614,The English Historical Review, Vol. 25, no. 99, p. 503 or pp. 513-516. c) Chapter or article in a book: Full name of the author(s) (Year), Title of the article or chapter, surname of the author(s) or editor(s) of the book, Name(s) and Initial(s). Title of the book (italic), City: Publisher, page number. Examples: Abdul Aziz Duri (1990), Jerusalem in the Early Islamic Period: 7th 11th Century AD, K. J. in Asali, (ed), Jerusalem in History, Essex: Scorpion Publishing, p. 105 or pp. 126-129. 3. The article must provide bibliography. Bibliographic references must follow the following format: a) Book: Surname of the author(s), Name(s) and Initial(s) (Year), Title of the book (italic), Place of publication: Publishing house. Examples: Esposito, John L. (1996), The Future of Islam, New York: Oxford University Press. b) Journal: Surnames of the author(s), Name(s) and Initial(s) (Year), Title of the article, Name of the Journal (italic), number or volume and issue, pages comprising the article within the journal. Example: Alarabi, Fadi (2009), Islamicj erusalem: The First Qiblah, Journal of Islamicjerusalem Studies, Vol. 10, Winter, 1-26. Conybear, Frederick C. (1986), Antiochus Strategos Account of the Sack of Jerusalem in A.D. 614 The English Historical Review, Vol. 25, no. 99, 502-516. c) Chapter or article in a book: Surname of the author(s), Name(s) and Initial(s) (Year), Title of the article or chapter, surname of the author(s) or editor(s) of the book, Name(s) and Initial(s), in Title of the book (italic), City: Publisher, pages comprising the article or chapter within the book. Example: Duri, Abdul Aziz (1990), Jerusalem in the Early Islamic Period: 7th 11th Century AD, in Asali, K. J. (ed), Jerusalem in History, Essex: Scorpion Publishing, 105-129.

To see the example of paper, go to this link:

http://myjurnal.my/public/issue-view.php?id=2782&journal_id=165

Attn: For paper, please send it to: smis2013@yahoo.com

Please download and fill the registration form below. http://www.suraualsyakirin.com/doc/RegistrationForm.doc Submit your registration form, abstracts and full paper by email to: smis2013@yahoo.com

: +603-79676157 / +60166586630 / +603-79676045 : +603-79676143 : smis2013@yahoo.com : :