The figure of Muḥammad has received unparalleled attention from Muslim scholars, who have scrutinised every aspect of his life, public and private, in order to reconstruct a viable uswa ḥasana, a âgood modelâ for believers.1 Major collections of ḥadÄ«th can be considered to be fragmented accounts of the Prophetâs life, narrated and classified according to the various points of view of the transmitters. In sÄ«ra texts (a notion often translated as âbiographyâ), which deal with the Prophetâs life and actions, the variability of perspectives is limited by the author, and the chronological arrangement of events shifts the focus of such texts away from the potential legal relevance of Muḥammadâs actions to their exemplary and exceptional character.
A narrower approach to the figure of Muḥammad can be found in ShamÄʾil literature, which centres on the physical appearance of the Prophet and on the perfection of his character. One of the fundamental texts of this genre, written by TirmidhÄ«,2 covers every aspect of the physical existence of Muḥammad, from his birth to his death, including a final section on the ruʾyat al-NabÄ«, the Messengerâs vision, which took place during a dream. His acts and decisions are seen through the lens of description, because he is an exemplum for the believers. Strictly legal aspects are not discussed, and the description is designed to offer the reader a lively image of the absent Prophet.
MaghÄzÄ« literature3 could be said to stand on the opposite side of the spectrum of literature about the Prophet from works of ShamÄʾil. It is focused on the actions, military expeditions and raids of the newly established Muslim community. Here, description is functional, serving a chronological narration of the military events that occurred during Muḥammadâs life.
His function as Godâs Messenger, and related proofs, are discussed by DalÄʾil al-nubuwwa texts, âProofs of Prophecyâ, in which miraculous deeds and episodes are seen as signs confirming the genuine nature of Muḥammadâs mission.4 This genre started as a form of apologetics, defending developing Islamic (sunnÄ«) doctrine from the challenges of IsmaʻīlÄ«s and Christians.5 The structure of these works is fairly consistent: following the path of the Prophetâs life, they enumerate miracles and their varying contexts and circumstances. Among these, miracles linked to the QurâÄn and its inimitability occupy a prominent place. The apologetic attitude is clear in the frequent comparisons between Muḥammad and other messengers, where their miracles are considered as more tenuous versions of those granted by God to His beloved. In this sense, the DalÄʾil can be seen as a development of the sÄ«ra, focusing on specific aspects of Muḥammadâs life.
In this study I propose to analyse the development of the literature dealing with a slightly different set of exceptional aspects of sÄ«ra, called khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ nabawiya. I will try to show how this genre evolved from niche works of jurisprudence into spiritual and devotional poetry. Starting from early juridical texts, the attention of fuqahÄʾ has been on the identification of reliable traditions and methods of interpretation that would allow judges and rulers to govern a society that was becoming more complex and stratified. Establishing guidelines for the interpretation of primary sources was an intellectual task performed by a restricted élite of specialists in Prophetic tradition. The consequences of these interpretations, on the other hand, involved a far larger public, ideally the entire Muslim community. In this perspective there is a distance between the approach to traditions within dalÄʾil (where the discussion relates only to miracles performed by Muḥammad and other prophets) and that of jurists, which would primarily refer to traditions valid for the whole umma, with the aim of deriving general rule of conduct and laws.
In any case, there is a small number of normative ḥadÄ«th in the latter domain that define rules that are valid only for the Prophet, and not suitable for or applicable to any other member of his community. These few traditions have no practical relevance to believers, applying as they do only to the Prophet, but they are still discussed in earlier sources as khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, âexclusivities of the Prophetâ.6 The interaction between the status of these traditions and the dalÄʾil al-nubuwwa texts is the starting point of this study. Here I will try first to show how khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ literature developed, starting from pure juristic discussion and ending with a specific genre focused on the figure of Muḥammad, and on his community, as exceptional in religious world history. In the late MamlÅ«k period, this genre saw the unprecedented development of new collections of traditions, and of commentaries on and re-writings of these works. The nature of this second step deserves specific attention, as it is characterised by a shift from a legalistic approach to a more devotional one. The figure of Muḥammad becomes the focus of the attention of Sufi practices; the prayer on the Prophet played a central role in the rituals of Sufi brotherhoods (á¹uruq, sing. á¹arÄ«qa). In the background of this shift lies the progressive involvement of Ê¿ulamÄʾ with Sufism, which has deeply influenced the way authors represented Muḥammad. In this analysis I will try to show how khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ literature can serve as a platform for scrutinising the increasing influence of Sufism on the construction of thematic collections of ḥadÄ«th and akhbÄr.
The sources used for this study cover almost ten centuries of Islamic history and therefore cannot be considered exhaustive. I have given preference to earlier sources that have been quoted by later authors as main references. For Mamlūk-period sources, I gave precedence to those from which other texts derived, but also consider less prominent ones as evidence of the diffusion in the genre in that period.
1 The Origins of the Discourse in Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£
The legal discourse in khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ has its roots in ShÄfiÊ¿Ä«âs KitÄb al-umm (d. 204/820) and MuzanÄ«âs (d. 264/878) commentary thereon. The latter gives, at the beginning of the KitÄb al-nikÄḥ, a short summary of what ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« considered to be an exclusive prerogative of the Prophet, solely concerning marriage. MuzanÄ« introduces the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, saying:
When God the most high chose Muḥammad for His revelation (waḥy) and made clear which were the duties of His creatures, i.e. to obey Him, [He] made incumbent [on the Prophet to perform] some actions that were not compulsory for His [other] creatures; [He decreed this] to draw Prophet near to Him, and [He] made lawful to him things that He prohibited to His creatures â¦7
This can be considered the first discourse about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ in Islamic literature, and it already mentions the main criterion of classification that will be the basis of later literature on the same topic: rules specific to Muḥammad alone, due to his peculiar status as last of the Prophets. In this passage, MuzanÄ« identifies two sub-categories: obligations and prohibitions. Another element that will become central in later discussions is the merit ascribed to these acts, seen as a favour God has bestowed specifically on his beloved.
MÄwÄrdÄ« (d. 1058) in his KitÄb al-ḥÄwÄ« al-kabÄ«r fÄ« fiqh madhhab al-imÄm al-ShÄfiÊ¿Ä«,8 which is a commentary on al-MuzanÄ«âs Mukhtaá¹£ar, goes a bit further in the organisation of the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. Discussing some of ShÄfiÊ¿Ä«âs assertions about the wives of the Prophet, he associates some of their characteristics with miracles (karÄmÄt) performed by Muḥammad. One example is MÄwÄrdÄ«âs commentary on ShÄfiÊ¿Ä«âs affirmation that the wives of the Prophet were called âmothers of the believersâ (ummahÄt al-muâminÄ«n) and that, because of this, for anyone else to marry them after the Prophetâs death would imply committing incest. For this reason, it was prohibited for believers to marry the Prophetâs widows. In al-ḤÄwÄ«, MÄwÄrdÄ« says that this counts among the Prophetâs miracles, because the women are Muḥammadâs wives, and so associated with him. The merits of being ummahÄt al-muâminÄ«n come to them only through having married Muḥammad, and their daughters were given in marriage to other Muslims, despite (arguably) being their âsistersâ. The theme of nikÄḥ (marriage) and specifically of the number of wives, is of paramount importance in the earlier discussions of the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. Indeed, the fact that Muḥammad could marry more than four women constitutes one of the clearest exceptions to the Islamic norms that were valid for the rest of the umma. Almost all later authors followed MÄwÄrdÄ« and tried to find further traditions related to the special status of the ummahÄt al-muʾminÄ«n.
BahyaqÄ« (d. 458/1066), for instance, in his al-Sunan al-KubrÄ,9 devotes an entire chapter to this topic. The focus remains on the nikÄḥ, and he gives accounts of several details not analysed in previous literature, such as the fact that the Prophet did not need witnesses for his marriages. This list of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ is also the first to include Prophetic prerogatives not connected to marriage, such as the possibility, for him, of entering Mecca without being in state of iḥrÄm,10 or the right to kill someone who offended him; whatâs more, it mentions only things that are exclusively permitted to the Prophet, omitting any exclusive prohibitions and miracles. An interesting example, which already demonstrates the broadening of the scope of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, is that the Prophet is permitted to omit ablutions after sleep.11 The tradition quoted as a proof of this exception is the well-known saying, âMy eyes sleep, but my heart doesnât.â12 The theme of wuá¸Å«â (ritual purification) is part of the basic discussion of fiqh (jurisprudence) and, as purity is a compulsory condition to perform prayer, it involves all believers. It is also related to specific physical and spiritual features of the Prophet that recur in the literature of ShamÄʾil.13 This intersection between two different genres is not uncommon and can be considered a consequence of the fact that all collections of traditions related to the Prophet and his function draw from a common set of primary sources. The same Prophetic tradition can be read from different angles: as simply describing Muḥammadâs conduct, or as considering specific examples of that conduct to be exceptions to common practice based on Islamic law. In this way, literature about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ introduces different readings of traditions that were already used in other contexts.
It must be noted that in these earlier works (and in many of the later ones) there is no definition of khaṣīṣa, whether formal or simply delimiting the domain of these exclusivities. This relates to the objection among some Ê¿ulamÄʾ that expending much effort in examining questions that have no practical advantage for the umma is rather pointless. Only later authors, such as Ibn al-Mulaqqin (d. 804/1401) in his GhÄyat al-sÅ«l fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-rasÅ«l,14 report the opinions of predecessors who tried to justify discussing these topics.15
Ibn al-Mulaqqin reports that Ibn KhayrÄn (d. 431/1040) prohibited (manaÊ¿a) the discussion of traditions related to khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ about marriage and imamate (nikÄḥ wa-imÄma). The same opinion was shared by MÄwardÄ« (d. 449/1058)16 and his master á¹¢aymarÄ« (d. 386/996): the latter maintains that these legal dispositions do not affect the community, as the Prophet is not alive anymore, and that therefore there is no point in discussing them. Ibn al-Mulaqqin also reports another opinion from GhazÄlÄ« and JuwaynÄ«. The latter says, in his NihÄyat al-maá¹lab fÄ« dirÄyat al-madhhab: âIt is not permissible to establish the exclusive dispositions and characteristics of the Prophet â peace be upon him â based on comparisons that are used to derive general legal dispositions.â17 In this perspective, further research in the direction of adding new khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ is then discouraged. Later authors, such as Ibn á¹¢alÄḥ al-ShahrazÅ«rÄ« (d. 643/1245), considered the study of such exclusivities permissible only for the general public, but not for specialists who were actively occupied in deriving legal dispositions to be used in actual juridical practice.18 NawawÄ« (d. 675/1277) seems to have allowed the discussion of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ with no restrictions. According to Ibn al-Mulaqqin, NawawÄ« even considered it almost compulsory to analyse them, giving as his reason that establishing what was permitted or prohibited only to Muḥammad was necessary in order to avoid allowing anyone else to act according to those rulings.
From a more general point of view, it is noteworthy that Ibn al-Mulaqqin is the first to report any information about previous authorsâ attitudes towards the genre and its permissibility. Later authors rely mainly on his GhÄyat al-sÅ«l and pay little or no attention to this topic, either considering it licit in itself, or framing it in the context of faá¸Äâil or tafá¸Ä«l al-nabÄ«, as KharkÅ«shÄ« did in Sharaf al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ 19 or Ê¿Izz al-DÄ«n b. Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm in BidÄyat al-sÅ«l.20
As is evident from the texts mentioned so far, the discourse on khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ seems to have started in the circles of ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« schools and, as we shall see, it remained mostly in this domain. It is not clear, at this early stage of research, if there is a specific penchant in the ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« approach to jurisprudence that led them also to focus on legal dispositions specific to the Prophet. It seems more likely that discussion of the topic only in sources belonging to a single juridical school means that this concern was confined to adherents of that school. This may have been caused by other factors, such as the limited practical utility of the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, and doubts concerning their legitimacy.
2 KharkÅ«shÄ« and QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄá¸
Literature on the figure of Muḥammad evolved significantly during the tenth and eleventh centuries, in parallel with the progressive adherence of Ê¿ulamÄʾ to Sufism, which brought about the incorporation of some Sufi spiritual doctrines into general Islamic religious science; this process culminated with GhazÄlÄ« (d. 504/1111). Also in this line of development, we find AbÅ« SaÊ¿d al-KharkÅ«shÄ« (or al-KhargÅ«shÄ«, d. 407/1016). He was a ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« jurist from Nishapur, known as a wÄÊ»iẠ(preacher) and as the author of a collection of early Sufi sayings, TahdhÄ«b al-asrÄr.21 He also composed a lengthy work on the Prophet, Sharaf al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ,22 gathering every kind of information about Muḥammad, his figure and his functions. This text combines sÄ«ra, maghÄzÄ«, dalÄʾil and faá¸Äʾil and aims to be comprehensive, but without placing too much emphasis on isnÄds (chains of transmission of Prophetic traditions), which places it outside the bounds of proper scholarly literature. Nevertheless, this is one of the earliest examples of literature that looks at Muḥammad from more than one angle (not merely biography, description of his physical appearance, or examination of the legal relevance of his sayings and deeds). Collections of ḥadÄ«th report traditions about all these topics, alongside chains of transmission and variants. In the Sharaf al-Muá¹£tafÄ these are left to one side, making room for a more complex construction of discourse about Muḥammad, where the intervention of the author in organising and defining topics is both more relevant and more evident.
Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ are first discussed, sparingly, in two chapters called JÄmiÊ¿ abwÄb Sharaf al-NabÄ« [â¦] fÄ« l-QurʾÄn al-karÄ«m and JÄmiÊ¿ abwÄb faá¸l al-NabÄ«.23 In the former, al-KharkÅ«shÄ« lists several verses of the QurʾÄn that explicitly or implicitly grant Muḥammad a special position within humankind. Some are obvious, such as Godâs forgiveness of all his sins past and future. Others include the comparisons with other prophets, as in the case of QurʾÄn 33:7, where, al-KharkÅ«shÄ« comments, âMuḥammad was the last to be called to prophecy, but [in this verse] he is mentioned before the othersâ.24 The rest of the chapter proceeds in the same way, using QurʾÄnic quotations to prove Muḥammadâs excellence.
The sections devoted to the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£25 are of interest because they do not deal with fiqh-related topics. In fact, they appear only as a reiteration of arguments already presented, without stressing comparisons with other prophets. One element that appears here for the first time, and that will become a topos of later khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ literature, is the separation between the characteristics that make Muḥammad exceptional in this world and those that relate to the afterlife (Äkhira).26
The general aim of al-KharkÅ«shÄ« is to show how God had favoured (faá¸á¸ala) Muḥammad over other prophets. The argument is clear in a chapter whose complete title is BÄb jÄmiÊ¿ fÄ« faá¸l al-NabÄ« á¹£alla llÄhu Ê¿alayhi wa-sallam wa-mÄ warada [sic] min al-á¸alÄla Ê¿alÄ tafá¸Ä«lihi Ê¿alÄ sÄʾir al-anbiyÄʾ wa-l-mursalÄ«n (Chapter on the merit of the Prophet and the reported proofs of his excellence over the other prophets and messengers).27 The proofs proposed are the same as those used in the dalÄʾil section. Among them is the classical uÊ¿á¹Ä«tu khamsa narrative,28 in which Muḥammad affirms that he has been given five (or seven, or more) things that were given to no other prophet.
At the beginning of this section, al-KharkÅ«shÄ« says: QÄla baÊ¿á¸uhum khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-NabÄ« Ê¿alayhi al-á¹£alÄt wa-l-salÄm ghayr muḥṣÄt (âSome say that the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ of the Messenger cannot be countedâ).29 This can be interpreted as a reference to earlier literature on the topic, seen from a perspective that is not merely legalistic, because that would imply a limit to the number of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. Thus, KharkÅ«shÄ«âs work appears as part of a pre-existing trend, of texts that consider khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ as a topic separate from jurisprudence, and as part of a discourse about the Prophet himself. Here, the countless prerogatives of Muḥammad become a reason for increased love and admiration for him, regardless of their legal relevance.
Another text that marks a similar turning point, and has known more success than the Sharaf al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ: QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄá¸âs (d. 543/1149) KitÄb al-ShifÄâ bi-taÊ¿rÄ«f ḥuqÅ«q al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ.30 The two works and their authors differ in several respects: KharkÅ«shÄ« lived in the east of the Islamic world, while QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄḠwas active in the Maghreb. The former belonged to the ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« Islamic school, the latter was a MÄlikÄ«. Al-KharkÅ«shÄ« was a preacher, and was acquainted with Sufism (or he was himself a Sufi), while QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄḠwas a judge and was even related in some sources to have approved the burning of GhazÄlÄ«âs IḥyÄâ Ê¿ulÅ«m al-dÄ«n.31
As for the aims of the two works, their introductions contain particularly important differences. Al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄḠsays, in the introduction of the ShifÄʾ:
You have repeatedly asked me to write something that gathers together all that is necessary to acquaint the reader with the true stature of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, with the esteem and respect that is due to him, and with the verdict regarding anyone who does not fulfil what his stature demands, or who attempts to denigrate his supreme status, even by as much as a nail-paring. I have been asked to compile what our forebears and Imams have said on this subject, and I will amplify it with Äyas from the QurʾÄn and other examples.32
Here the reasons adduced by QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄḠare mainly legal: he wants to define the boundaries of what it is permissible to say about the Prophet, giving a complete account of the sources exalting his status and function. On the other hand, in the introduction of the Sharaf KharkÅ«shÄ« states: âWhat urged me to compose the Sharaf al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ is love for Muḥammad the Messenger and affection in speaking of him, because a person who loves something speaks of it quite oftenâ.33
The difference between the two is quite patent: in the case of QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄá¸, the necessity for such a composition is presented as coming from outside himself; for KharkÅ«shÄ« it is his inner spiritual state that urges him to write a book about the Prophet. This, however, is not reflected in the actual success and readership of the two works. The Sharaf al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ has circulated mainly among learned men of ḥadÄ«th, and we find it mentioned by later authors, such as al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«; very few manuscript copies are extant. Compare this with the enormous success encountered by the ShifÄʾ, which enjoyed a steady diffusion and was credited with miraculous properties, such as it protecting ships carrying it from sinking, or it healing the sick.34 Its transformation from a legal text into one of the most copied and sold works on the Prophet Muḥammad was an unsought and â possibly â unexpected consequence for QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄá¸.
The section of the ShifÄʾ about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ is not structured on the basis of juridical categories, revolving instead around miracles. After a list of traditions about the Prophetâs principal miracles, and an analysis of the use of the term muÊ¿jiza, al-QÄdÄ« Ê¿IyÄḠdevotes an entire section to the iÊ¿jÄz al-QurʾÄn (inimitability of the QurʾÄn),35 followed by an analysis of the inshiqÄq al-qamar (splitting of the moon),36 of the water flowing from Muḥammadâs fingers,37 and other miracles. Then the discussion moves to cover the Ê¿iá¹£ma (immunity from error and sin) of Muḥammad, and to other âexplicitâ (bÄhira) miracles. To indicate miracles QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄḠuses muÊ¿jiza in most cases, along with karÄma and dalÄ«l, without any distinction in meaning, while the terms denote different phenomena. This lack of proper functional distinction implies that the authorâs aim is to discuss the exceptional character of certain events as part of a more general description of the Prophet. The analysis of legal or doctrinal subtleties is avoided in most cases, as it is any contextualisation of the episodes narrated. For example, there is no discussion at all, in the section devoted to the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, of questions regarding the wives of the Prophet.38 Little of QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄdâs ShifÄʾ, then, can be counted alongside books of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ nabawiyya, except for the discussion of the miraculous events that characterised the life of the Prophet. The author also avoids any form of comparison with other prophets, focusing only on Muḥammad as the main character of his work.
Neither the ShifÄʾ nor the Sharaf al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ belongs to the genre of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. Nonetheless, these texts played a fundamental role in defining a different approach to literature about Muḥammad, one that exceeded the boundaries of collections of ḥadÄ«th or sÄ«ra. Here, different genres are included, and transcended, in a multi-faceted description of the Prophet, including many (if not all) aspects of his personality and functions. This shift in writing about Muḥammad would inspire later authors of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ works, giving legitimacy to an expansion of the set of sources on which they drew, and of the number of characteristics examined.
3 Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ Literature at the Dawn of the MamlÅ«k Period: Ibn Diḥya and Ê¿Izz al-DÄ«n Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm
As far as our information can allow us to reconstruct the diffusion of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ texts, it seems that the MamlÅ«k period witnessed an extraordinary flowering of this genre. Its development appears to have started just before the formal beginning of MamlÅ«k rule in Egypt and Syria (648/1250). These texts seem to continue the tradition started in ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« circles, as all their authors â with one significant exception â belong to this madhhab.
The first text we know of is Ibn Diḥya al-KalbÄ«âs (d. 633/1235) NihÄyat al-sÅ«l.39 Its author was born in al-Andalus, lived part of his life there, and was a pupil of Ibn BashkuwÄl (d. 578/1183).40 He travelled to the east and became head of the AyyÅ«bid DÄr al-ḥadÄ«th in Cairo. We have no information about his affiliation to any specific madhhab. His Andalusian origins and sojourn in the Maghreb suggest that he may have belonged to the MÄlikÄ« school, but itâs also possible that he adhered to local áºÄhirÄ« circles. During his travels he probably met ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« scholars and read books from this school, becoming acquainted with their legal approach to khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ issues. He is also the author of the text considered to be the very first mawlid, the TanwÄ«r fÄ« mawlid al-sirÄj al-munÄ«r,41 together with other works, about the miÊ»rÄj and the Names of the Prophet.42 His NiḥÄyat al-sÅ«l fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-RasÅ«l is not conceived as a work of devotion, as the others, mentioned above, have often been considered. In his introduction, Ibn Diḥya states that the book is about âthe exclusive aspects of the Messenger of Godâ,43 clearly defining the thematic boundaries of his discourse. As he came from al-Andalus, he was probably acquainted with the ShifÄʾ, and we have no information as to whether he knew, and drew inspiration from, the Sharaf al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ. The only possible reference in Ibn Diḥyaâs text to the context in which KharkÅ«shÄ« lived and wrote is the mention of Khorasan and Baghdad at the end of his introduction,44 suggesting that Ibn Diḥyaâs text could have been written during or after his eastern trips.45
The text itself starts with some khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ about Muḥammadâs wives, and continues by listing khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ touching on different points: from God swearing by the Prophetâs life46 to more technical ones, such as the possibility (for Muḥammad) of judging without referring to the QurâÄn itself. Almost every khaṣīṣa is followed by a long discussion based on QurʾÄnic and ḥadÄ«th quotations. For example, the section about Muḥammad having been assigned the Kawthar river in paradise47 appears to be a lengthy commentary on sÅ«ra 108, giving etymologies and cases of previous uses for words, and precise definitions of the nature of the river. Legal decisions (aḥkÄm) are considered from two points of view: those that apply only to the Prophet and those that apply only to the umma (with the exception of other communities in the past).48
The section on miracles49 is separate from the rest of the discourse, but it nevertheless maintains the same attitude as the rest of the text. Here, Ibn Diḥya analyses the nature of miracles, comparing those of Muḥammad to miracles performed by other prophets. The approach differs from that of al-KharkÅ«shÄ«; here the tafá¸Ä«l argument stays in the background of the discourse, and the author uses the similarity between miracles as proof that they are genuine. For example, the fact that water flowed from a stone that Moses struck with his staff confirms the truth of the episode of water flowing from Muḥammadâs fingers.50
In this section, as in many others, Ibn Diḥya digresses several times, sometimes on subjects only remotely connected to the main topic. Concluding his work, he discusses the merits of making supplications to God (duÊ¿Äʾ), including a tradition about dhikr circles.51 This in itself does not suffice to support a postulation that he was involved with Sufism and Sufi practices, but it at least shows that for Ibn Diḥya they could be included in the discourse about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£.
Ê¿Izz al-DÄ«n b. Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm (d. 660/1262) was the last author of texts about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ to have been active before the advent of MamlÅ«k power in Egypt and Syria. He was a ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« jurist and an AshÊ»arÄ« theologian, considered the mujtahid muá¹laq of his age.52 He was acquainted with ShihÄb al-DÄ«n al-Suhrawardi (d. 632/1234) and the circles of the Egyptian ShÄdhiliyya, whom he joined in samÄÊ¿ sessions.53 Sources are unclear regarding his formal affiliation to a á¹arÄ«qa, but his approval of ṣūfÄ« practices is undoubtable.
His BidÄyat al-sÅ«l fÄ« tafá¸Ä«l al-RasÅ«l is a short collection of traditions that consider the faá¸Äʾil (merits) as a specific form of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. At the beginning of the work, commenting on the fact that Adam will be under Muḥammadâs banner on the Day of Resurrection, Ê»Izz al-DÄ«n b. Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm says that âThose khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ point to the height of [Muḥammadâs] degree over Adam and the other [Prophets], considering that tafá¸Ä«l (preference) means being characterised (takhṣīṣ) by miraculous deeds (manÄqib) and degrees (marÄtib)â.54 This idea clearly deviates from the legal character of other works on the same topic, and marks the passage of the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ from a jurisprudential to a more devotional outlook by discussing the spiritual stature of Muḥammad. In the analysis of the last of the forty traditions55 regarding the status of jawÄmiÊ» al-kalim,56 Ibn Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm states that no one knows the nobility of the Prophet unless they are favoured by Muḥammad himself, echoing a typical Sufi attitude.57 Here the believer is put into a direct relationship with the Prophet, who is granting specific knowledge of purely spiritual issues.
From this point on, in part because of the fame of Ê¿Izz al-DÄ«n b. Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm, we see a flowering of texts about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ nabawiyya; these texts share with the BidÄya an attention to the spiritual aspects of the figure of Muḥammad. These works also often make use of the tafá¸Ä«l argument as part of the discussion of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, reflecting the assumptions made by Ê¿Izz al-DÄ«n b. Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm.
4 SuyÅ«á¹Ä« and Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ Literature in MamlÅ«k Egypt
The adoption of a more spiritually aware attitude towards the Prophet does not automatically imply that khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ were considered only to be manifestations of the unique metaphysical status of Muḥammad. This genre would always remain rooted in the domain of jurisprudence and ḥadÄ«th. For instance, attention to variants of the same tradition, and discussion of the isnÄd, would not disappear during the MamlÅ«k period. What we observe is the shifting of primary focus, from the determination of legal dispositions valid only for Muḥammad to the depiction of his exceptional status among other prophets and the rest of humankind.
To improve our understanding of this shift in works on the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, from a legalistic to a spiritual approach, it is necessary to consider the social conditions under which Ê¿ulamÄʾ produced their scholarly works at that time. As has been clearly described by Yaacov Lev,58 relationships between Muslim scholars and MamlÅ«k amÄ«rs were symbiotic. On the one hand, political power needed religious legitimisation that could only be provided by the class of scholars who preserved and elaborated the Muḥammadan tradition. On the other, Ê¿ulamÄʾ needed public jobs in order to support their lives and studies. This symbiosis found its most obvious expression in the institution of the waqf, which allowed MamlÅ«ks â who were formally slaves, and thus not allowed to inherit according to Islamic law â to preserve the goods that they obtained in return for their services to the state, and pass them on to their progeny. The profits of their fiefs could be allotted to the benefit of a mosque, a madrasa, or other pious institution. Their family members and descendants were appointed as supervisors of their waqf, with significant remuneration. Ê¿UlamÄʾ could then aspire to play a role in the growing system of awqÄf (pl. of waqf) and, more generally, in the expanding apparatus of the MamlÅ«k state.
The competition for these positions was fierce. The ability to establish relations with key figures among the MamlÅ«ks was essential. Also, fame and public favour played an important role in establishing the pre-eminence of one Ê¿Älim over his colleagues. This part of the battle was fought through public debates, polemics such as the one that arose around Ibn al-FÄriá¸âs verses,59 and the publication of books that demonstrated the vastness of oneâs knowledge in one of the many fields of Islamic science.
From this point of view, the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ constituted a perfect battlefield, as they had virtually no doctrinal or juridical implications (not in an almost totally sunnÄ« environment, at least) and were thus open to the addition of new traditions, as well as some traditions of relatively dubious authenticity. This does not imply that the bulk of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ works produced during the MamlÅ«k period must be considered as merely the result of academic competition, because if that were the case, the whole corpus of Islamic literature of this period would have to be considered in the same way. The tendency to amass more traditions has to be considered alongside the growing importance of Sufism among Ê¿ulamÄʾ.60
Polemic pamphlets against Ibn al-FÄriá¸âs poems and doctrines61 addressed theological issues that were also relevant to discussion of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. On the other side of the polemic, al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä« and others continued to publish works in defence of the orthodoxy of Ibn al-FÄriá¸âs verses.62 The initiation of polemics was one of the strategies commonly used by MamlÅ«k Ê¿ulamÄʾ to discredit adversaries and gain credibility with the general public and the amÄ«rs. Such a strategy could be hazardous, turning against the person who set the polemic in motion. Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ were a more neutral field than Sufi poetry, and battles in this field were fought over the increasing number of traditions that showed facets of Muḥammadâs figure that had until then remained unexplored. This matched the growing importance that the figure of the Prophet had gained in MamlÅ«k Sufism. The expansion of the doctrine of the âMuḥammadan wayâ (al-ṬarÄ«qa al-muḥammadiyya)63 as the core of the Sufism of the á¹uruq is already reflected, though often vaguely, in the work of Ibn Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm. His reference to the mediation of the Prophet in his own acquisition of knowledge of his degree of nearness to God was clearly inspired by the Sufi doctrine of spiritual stations (maqÄmÄt) and shows how the idea of tawassul (intercession) started to be considered a necessary means of obtaining metaphysical knowledge.
Judging from the list reported by ḤÄjjÄ« KhalÄ«fa, it seems that the BidÄya was the starting point for the expansion of the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ genre. This coincidence of timing does not imply a cause-and-effect relationship. It seems more plausible that the work of Ibn Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm responded to the exigencies of the Ê¿ulamÄʾ, who wanted to have a new and fertile battlefield in which to compete, one that also had a certain social resonance in Sufi milieus. The Kashf al-áºunÅ«n, in the passage devoted to SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ,64 lists a number of similar works by other authors of the MamlÅ«k period. Some of these seem to be lost, such as those of YÅ«sÅ«f b. MÅ«sÄ al-MasadÄ« (d. 663/1265), JalÄl al-DÄ«n al-BulqÄ«nÄ« (d. 824/1421), and KamÄl al-DÄ«n Muḥammad al-ShÄmÄ« (d. 874/1470). ḤÄjjÄ« KhalÄ«fa also mentions a work attributed to Ibn Ḥajar al-Ê»AsqalÄnÄ« (d. 853/1449), al-AnwÄr [bi-khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-mukhtÄr], that is attested elsewhere in the Kashf al-áºunÅ«n.65 To these works, all lost, should be added others that are still extant and could help to trace a possible path for the development of the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ genre in the MamlÅ«k period.
While it is not a work devoted solely to our topic, it is nevertheless worth mentioning the shorter version of the SÄ«ra, written by Ibn KathÄ«r (d. 774/1373), called, in its printed edition, al-Fuṣūl fÄ« sÄ«rat al-RasÅ«l.66 A section of this biographical work on Muḥammad, written by one of Ibn Taymiyyaâs most influential disciples, is devoted to ShamÄʾil and khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£.67 The latter are divided into two main groups: those distinguishing Muḥammad from the other prophets, and those defining his difference from his umma. The latter grouping is, in its turn, divided into books on different topics (kitab al-Ä«mÄn, kitab al-á¹ahÄra), organised according to the usual order of fiqh treatises. The book on marriage includes three sections about what is permitted, prohibited and compulsory for the Prophet in this respect. This organisation by topic is discussed in the introduction of the section: Ibn KathÄ«r defends the legitimacy of writing about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, reporting that this is the opinion of jumhÅ«r al-aṣḥÄb, the majority of the followers of ShÄfiÊ¿Ä«.68
Ibn KathÄ«r69 follows previous authors of jurisprudence books by putting the discussion of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ in the chapter devoted to marriage. Other authors pay less attention to nikÄḥ and related issues, focusing more on miracles. In this regard it is noteworthy that Ibn Kathir does not use the word muÊ¿jiza (miracle) at all in this section, preferring the more neutral faá¸Äʾil (merits), used in the sense of Godâs favours, and not in the context of the tafá¸Ä«l argument. Considering Ibn KathÄ«râs tepid attitude towards Sufism, and towards devotional practices in general, which he probably derived from his master, Ibn Taymiyya, this is anything but surprising.
The first work of the MamlÅ«k period devoted exclusively to khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ was Ibn al-Mulaqqinâs GhÄyat al-sÅ«l fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-RasÅ«l. The assonance of the title with the those of works by Ibn Diḥya and Ibn Ê»Abd al-SalÄm clearly expresses the authorâs desire to inscribe his text in the line of an established tradition. Ibn al-Mulaqqin also benefited from Ibn KathÄ«râs notes on the organisation of the topics. In the GhÄya he extends the distinction, dividing every section into two parts: one reporting characteristics related to marriage and one to those that are not so related. His interest in Sufism70 is not reflected in specific attention to miracles, but can be seen in his discussion of the possibility of seeing the Prophet in dreams. Starting from the famous tradition saying that the devil cannot take Muḥammadâs form,71 Ibn al-Mulaqqin continues by describing different types of visions that were said to have occurred under various conditions. Ibn al-Mulaqqin is not the first writer to deal with this topic; Ibn Diḥya72 had already briefly discussed a similar tradition. The difference lies in the approach, because Ibn Diḥya did not consider visions to be part of the discourse on karÄmÄt. This is certainly not a definitive argument for a clear influence of Sufi doctrines and debates on khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ literature. However, the inclusion of spiritual experiences in the domain of jurisprudence and ḥadÄ«th criticism is a phenomenon that is clearly visible in the development of works of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£.
Ḥayá¸arÄ«âs (d. 888/1483) al-LafẠal-mukarram fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-NabÄ«73 is part of this trend, despite the fact that its author was not himself a Sufi.74 He was a prominent, though controversial, judge and muḥaddith, of Damascene origin, who developed his career in Cairo under the guidance of his master, Ibn Ḥajar al-Ê»AsqalÄnÄ« (d. 852/1448). The Lafáº75 is subdivided into different anwÄÊ¿ (types of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£). Every section is divided into two parts, according to the usual subdivision: one devoted to traditions regarding marriage, and one to other traditions.76 The whole is preceded by a long introduction in which the author follows Ibn al-Mulaqqin in justifying having written about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. The first section, about wÄjibÄt, opens with a discussion of the famous ḥadÄ«th al-nawÄfil used by al-Ḥayá¸arÄ« to justify the large number of acts made compulsory for the Prophet in the light of the higher reward granted for farÄʾiḠ(religious legal obligations).77 The fact that this tradition is commonly used by Sufis to urge murÄ«ds (disciples) to consider the importance of obligatory Ê¿ibÄdÄt (acts of worship) shows how this point of view played a certain role in a text that is primarily a work of fiqh and ḥadÄ«th criticism. For instance, the discourse on miracles related to marriage,78 discussing in detail all the merits of Muḥammadâs wives, is purely legalistic, avoiding any reference to their spiritual stature or their roles as intermediaries for the community of believers.
All the works discussed up to this point appear to have maintained a focus on jurisprudence, and they seem to have considered khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ as a sub-topic of fiqh, one that was worthy of discussion among specialists. The appearance of some relatively unimportant references to Sufi themes does not imply a full shift of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ from legalistic to devotional literature. In any case, the broadening of the scope of jurisprudence is evident in these texts through the shift from the presentation of the Prophet as a model for Muslim society to the presentation of Muḥammadâs life as the occasion on which Godâs favour manifested itself in its fullest and most perfect form. It is this broadening that allowed khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ to become a preferred genre for authors for whom spiritual awareness was important.
For an assessment of the increasing influence of Sufi discourse on khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ we can refer to SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs (d. 911/1505) works. SuyÅ«á¹Ä« is a crucial figure in the development of the Islamic literary and intellectual tradition.79 His involvement in taá¹£awwuf was not publicly advertised, but it is clear from many of his works; for example, TaʾyÄ«d al-ḥaqÄ«qat al-Ê¿aliyya fÄ« tashyÄ«d al-á¹arÄ«qa al-ShÄdhiliyya,80 or his fatÄwÄ on Sufi doctrinal points, such as the existence of the hierarchy of saints.81 SuyÅ«á¹Ä« wrote three works on khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, the most famous being the KifÄyat al-á¹Älib al-labÄ«b fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-ḤabÄ«b,82 better known as al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ. The work was abridged by its author in the UnmÅ«dhaj al-labÄ«b fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-ḥabÄ«b.83 A third work, textually independent from the other two while maintaining the same approach, is the Ṭarḥ al-saqaá¹ fÄ« naáºm al-luqaá¹.84
The simple fact that he devoted three of his many works to the same topic is quite significant in itself. Each of the texts has a different structure, responding to different exigencies. The major one aims at being an all-encompassing text about the Prophet, using the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ as a theme to guide the reader from a section devoted to sÄ«ra and military campaigns85 to a list of Muḥammadâs miracles, signs (ayÄt) and invocations (adÊ»iya).86 Only after this point does SuyÅ«á¹Ä« start the discussion of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. The change of paradigm from previous works is evident in the different subdivisions of the topic, extending the tafá¸Ä«l argument to the whole domain of the specific characteristics of the Prophet. SuyÅ«á¹Ä« starts by listing the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ that make Muḥammad different from other prophets,87 and also from his community, because of the duties only he has to fulfil (wÄjibÄt).88 A further distinction is made between the Muslim umma and the communities of all the other prophets.89 This subdivision excludes other juridical categories, such as permissions and prohibitions (or does not explicitly include them); these are merely interspersed among the other khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, following the example of the sÄ«ra, and the book ends with the fact that Muḥammad is living in his tomb, and with the signs connected with his death.90
The scheme used in the Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ is essentially preserved in the UnmÅ«dhaj.91 The sÄ«ra-related part, which constitutes the bulk of the KifÄya, is completely absent in this abridgement.92 The work focuses on the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, organised in two main chapters: one on the character traits that distinguish Muḥammad from other prophets, and one that relates the differences between him and his community. The first93 is divided into four sections on the essence of the Prophet and his community, in this world and the hereafter. The second chapter deals with the Muslim community only,94 including sections on duties, prohibitions, permissible acts and miracles.
The third text is the shortest. Internal evidence clearly shows that it was written after the other two,95 and it focuses on clarifying issues connected with the tradition that the Prophet was sent with both the law (sharÄ«Ê¿a) and the spiritual reality (ḥaqÄ«qa). The Ṭarḥ al-saqaá¹ begins with some khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ distinguishing Muḥammad from the other prophets, such as the fact that the QurâÄn encompasses all previous revelations.96 The discussion is organised as a dialogue with a fictitious97 opponent, who denies that the unity of sharÄ«Ê¿a and ḥaqÄ«qa is a proper khaṣīṣa. The opponentâs question is based on the argument that saints also have knowledge of both law and spiritual reality, so this knowledge is not exclusive to Muḥammad. This characteristic of the Prophet is absent in all works written before SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, and in the Ṭarḥ al-saqaá¹ we see clearly how the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ themselves, and the issues they raised, were part of an environment in which Sufism and the spiritual facets of Muḥammadâs figure played an essential role. SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, quoting Ibn Diḥyaâs NihÄya,98 mentions the fact that the Prophet could, without clear proof, kill anyone who committed adultery, while this was prohibited to anyone else. He then reports that a saint killed his parentsâ servant because it was revealed to him (kushifa) that the latter might become an unbeliever. The reference to the episode about al-Khiá¸r, narrated in the QurʾÄn, is quite clear,99 and this constitutes the final argument allowing SuyÅ«á¹Ä« to distinguish between Muḥammad, the other prophets, and Muslim saints. Acknowledging this, SuyÅ«á¹Ä« also accepts knowledge acquired through kashf as a hermeneutic category in the field of jurisprudence.
Towards the end of this brief text SuyÅ«á¹Ä« clarifies his position regarding the meaning of ḥaqÄ«qa. He says that he refers to the notion elaborated by Sufis, with one major difference: quoting Ibn Ê¿Aá¹ÄʾAllÄh al-IskandarÄ« (d. 708/1309), he states that prophets have knowledge of the inner reality of matters (ḥaqÄʾiq al-umÅ«r), while saints only look at their imaginal aspects (mithÄl).100 This affirmation has specific doctrinal implications that are beyond the remit of the present chapter, but in any case, its existence confirms the shift of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ literature, from a purely legal domain to one that is spiritual and metaphysical.
These three works by SuyÅ«á¹Ä« reflect three different stages in the evolution of the genre. In the KifÄya he re-links the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ to the domain of the sÄ«ra, broadening the scope of inquiry: here the context of the khaá¹£aâ ʾiá¹£ is no longer the exceptional character of some legal dispositions regarding marriage,101 but the figure of Muḥammad in its entirety. In the UnmÅ«dhaj, with its alteration of the usual structure of legal argumentations, the emphasis is on the relationship between the Prophet, the other anbiyÄʾ, and the Muslim community. Marriage issues, and events relating to Muḥammadâs birth and death, are almost all in the karÄmÄt section at the end of the work,102 which changes the model for such discussions: the central theme of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ is now the Prophet as a unique event in the history of creation. In the third text, the Ṭarḥ al-laqaá¹, we see how a specific issue, such as the possibility, for Muḥammad, of judging according to his own knowledge of the hidden reality of things, already mentioned in earlier works, is now the point of departure for a discussion of the different degrees of knowledge possessed by Muslim saints and other prophets. This centrality of Muḥammad is not new in Islamic literature and it is possible to see a similar attitude in such works as QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄá¸âs ShifÄʾ. Whatâs interesting here is the evolution of a genre that has moved from a strictly legal framework to a discussion of the spiritual status of Muḥammad. From this point of view, such texts may be considered a form of devotion expressed through legal argumentation and ḥadÄ«th criticism. These texts are not lyrical or inspiring, like the poems of Ibn al-FÄriá¸, or the prayers of the ShÄdhiliyya and the Aḥmadiyya, but are rather the expression of a diffused tendency to consider the Prophet as the centre of an Islamic religious experience. SuyÅ«á¹Ä« defended the practice of mawlid,103 but did not write any devotional works as such, always maintaining the scholarly attitude that he considered fitting in his own role as the mujaddid,104 the reviver of Islamic tradition. Thus, we can consider these works as the expression of SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs own attitude towards Muḥammad, a way for him to help establish once and for all the exalted stature of the Prophet of Islam. This attitude was shared by his contemporaries, and by Ê¿ulamÄʾ of subsequent generations, to the point that almost all other works on khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ in the Ottoman period were re-elaborations of SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs.
5 Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ after SuyÅ«á¹Ä«
The UnmÅ«dhaj and the KifÄya were particularly influential texts, despite the polemics that surrounded them and their author. SuyÅ«á¹Ä« accused Qasá¹allÄnÄ«âs (d. 923/1517) MawÄhib al-laduniyya bi-l-minaḥ al-muḥammadiyya of containing plagiarism of some of his (SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs) works on khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£.105 The structure of Qasá¹allÄnÄ«âs text is clearly inspired by al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs KifÄya: it starts with sÄ«ra and then moves on to more specific topics. However, the section about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ is quite incidental in the general plan of the work.106 In the MawÄhib, for example, the different names of the Prophet are listed and commented on,107 and there is also a chapter devoted specifically to the miÊ»rÄj.108
Qasá¹allÄnÄ«âs Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ chapter opens with a discussion of miracles, followed by a discussion of wÄjibÄt that, as in the KifÄya, includes a number of other issues. The final section is devoted to the umma, which is distinguished from other religious communities by virtue of its Prophet. Neither the structure nor the content of this section has any novel characteristics in comparison with the KifÄya. Qasá¹allÄnÄ«âs overall attitude can be grasped from the presence of chapters about the compulsory nature of love for the Prophet (wujÅ«b maḥabbatihi),109 which include a substantial section about the prayer on the Prophet.110 In this section we find lists of different ways of practising the taá¹£liya and of the best moments for performing it (at the end of ritual prayer, during the visit to Medina, when one has forgotten something, or even during sexual intercourse). Prayer on the Prophet had been a subject for khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ since Ibn Diḥya,111 but not in the context of love for Muḥammad. The practice was simply considered commendable in earlier times, but its importance grew to the extent that Qasá¹allÄnÄ«, despite his aversion to taá¹£awwuf, devoted an entire chapter to the taá¹£liya. It should to be noted that, like Ibn Diḥya, he considered only prayers that were attested in more or less sound prophetic traditions, avoiding those used in Sufi rituals, such as were established by NÅ«r al-DÄ«n Ê¿AlÄ« al-ShÅ«nÄ« (d. tenth/ sixteenth century).112
The work ends with a number of chapters113 on the fiqh al-Ê¿ibÄdÄt (legal regulation of acts of worship), based on the exemplum of Muḥammad; this work aims to be an all-encompassing treatise on Muḥammad. What matters for our purposes is that the MawÄhib also includes references to devotional practices, such as the prayer on the Prophet, that are clearly separate from the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£; these thus gain their own independent status.
Although the MawÄhib deals only partly with khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs works also inspired other authors to write about this topic. Chronologically, the first of these was the famous historian Shams al-DÄ«n Ibn ṬūlÅ«n (d. 943/1546).114 In his Murshid al-muḥtÄr fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-MukhtÄr115 he clearly stated his debt to his teacher, saying that the work is a talkhÄ«á¹£ (lit. a précis) of the UnmÅ«dhaj.116 Ibn ṬūlÅ«n repeats the justifications of khaá¹£aâiá¹£ from earlier works such as Ibn al-Mulaqqinâs GhÄya, and subdivides the work strictly, following SuyÅ«á¹Ä«. Even the discussions of some specific topics are taken verbatim from the UnmÅ«dhaj or the Ṭarḥ al-laqaá¹. He clearly consulted the latter text when discussing the issue of ruling according to the sharÄ«Ê¿a and the ḥaqÄ«qa, as both he and SuyÅ«á¹Ä« quote the same tradition from Ibn Ê»Aá¹Äâ AllÄh al-IskandarÄ« (d. 709/1310).117 Ibn ṬūlÅ«n elaborates on the topic, expanding the discussion presented in the Ṭarḥ al-laqaá¹ with quotations from al-ṬabarÄ« (used as a counter-argument) and other earlier sources such as AbÅ« Ê¿Umar al-DimashqÄ«,118 who acknowledged the parallel between the prophetsâ miracles and the karÄmÄt of the saints.
A confirmation of the interest inspired by SuyÅ«á¹Ä« comes from a work that may be the most interesting elaboration of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ derived from his works, the Durar al-ghÄʾiá¹£ fÄ« baḥr al-muÊ¿jizÄt, by Ê¿Äiʾsha al-BÄÊ¿Å«niyya (d. 922/1517).119 The authorâs father YÅ«suf was a ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« jurist and chief judge in Damascus, where she was born. Despite being a woman, she was admitted to study the traditional curriculum for the sons of prominent families, studying QurʾÄn, ḥadÄ«th, and poetry. Her family was also linked to the UrmawÄ« QÄdirÄ« Sufi order, and she wrote a large number of works in different branches of the spiritual sciences, both in poetry and prose.120 Her commitment to Sufism is evident from the opening of the Durar, where, after the ritual praises to God and the Prophet, she invokes blessings on her master in taá¹£awwuf; she defines al-UrmawÄ« as: tÄjÄ« wa-minhÄjÄ« wa-shaykhÄ« wa-qudwatÄ« / wa-nÅ«rÄ« wa-miÊ¿rÄjÄ« li-ḥaá¸rati man barÄ âmy crown, my pattern, my master, my model, my light and my ladder of ascent to the presence of the Creatorâ.121 She describes her work as being based on SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs book,122 which she chose to put into verse after falling in love (shughiftu) with the UnmÅ«dhaj while reading it (á¹ÄlaÊ¿tuhu). In this poem, Ê¿Äʾisha aims to present the contents of the UnmÅ«dhaj in a more succinct way (lafẠwajÄ«z), so that readers might understand it more easily. The Durar are part of a long tradition of versification of scholarly works123 with the specific aim of creating a tool for study and memorisation. In the text, BÄÊ¿Å«niyya defines her work as naáºman yustaladhdhu samÄÊ»uhu / wa-yaghdÅ« li-ḥifáºi l-nÄsi sahlan muyassarÄ, âa poem that will be a delight to hear, becoming easy and simple for people to memoriseâ.124 The text continues with Ê¿Äʾisha al-BÄÊ¿Å«niyya invoking the madad (spiritual support) of the Prophet and of her Sufi master,125 relying, for the rest, on SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs words and on his selection of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, without adding any new khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ or specifications of her own.
What makes Ê¿ÄʾishÄ al-BÄÊ¿Å«niyyaâs work special is not its content, but the framework in which she placed the theme of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£: the switch from fiqh to taá¹£awwuf and devotion is complete here. This can be demonstrated by quoting a verse that closes the introduction and opens the versification: bi-jÄhi lladhÄ« anshÄ l-wujÅ«da li-ajlihÄ« / wa-awjadahÅ« li-l-faá¸li wa-l-jÅ«di maáºharÄ, âBy the rank of the one for whom He made existence begin and brought him to existence as a manifestation of (His) favour and generosityâ.126 Here, the accent is more akbarian, connected to a vision in which the ḥaqÄ«qa muḥammadiyya is the first thing brought into existence by God. At the end of the poem the theme of love appears. In the final supplication for blessings on the Prophet and his family, she asks God to grant that her love for him should continue throughout eternity (sarÄ l-ḥubbu muʾtharÄ | madÄ al-dahri).127 This accent is completely absent in previous works on khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. Unfortunately, it seems that the literary and spiritual heritage of Ê¿Äʾisha al-BÄÊ¿Å«niyya did not find the echo it deserved, and the genre of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ subsequently followed a more scholastic evolution.
6 Later Developments of the Genre
In the seventeenth century other works were inspired by the KifÄya, both in their structure and in their approach to the figure of Muḥammad as a whole. The well-known traditionist Ê¿Abd al-Raâ ʾūf al-MunawÄ« (d. 1031/1621)128 devoted a commentary to the UnmÅ«dhaj, called Fatḥ al-raʾūf al-mujÄ«b fÄ« sharḥ unmÅ«dhaj al-labÄ«b,129 and later, aiming to clarify his previous attempt, wrote a super-commentary called Tawá¸Ä«á¸¥ fatḥ al-raʾūf al-mujÄ«b.130 Both works are of limited originality, being word-by-word explications of lexicon and grammar. Nonetheless, the fact that al-MunÄwÄ« says that his first commentary was not well-received, and was considered to be narrow and shallow, could imply that khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ were still popular in early Ottoman Cairo.131
To this commentary should be added at least the al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ attributed to Muḥammad b. IbrÄhÄ«m al-RaḥmÄnÄ« al-ḤanafÄ« (fl. 1039/1630).132 We know very little about this author, but the fact that he is classified as ḤanafÄ« implies that the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ genre had exceeded the boundaries of the ShÄfiÊ¿Ä«s by the seventeenth century. The work survives in a single manuscript,133 and probably did not become well-known in its time. He structured his text on the model of the sÄ«ra, leaving more space for his personal views on the topic, and using the expression aqÅ«lu (lit. âI sayâ). After the introduction,134 RaḥmÄnÄ« discusses faá¸Äʾil, such as God swearing by the name of Muḥammad,135 or the fact that Muḥammad was recognised as (a) Prophet by Jewish Ê¿ulamÄʾ.136 While the parts of the introduction that are still legible do not say this, al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs KifÄya provides the background of the text; for example when, in a discussion of the Prophetâs intercession, it says, after listing many references to his work: qÄla al-JalÄl [al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«] wa-hÄdhÄ fÄ« ghÄyat al-ḥusn fÄ«hi, âAs al-JalÄl [al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«], said, this is extremely good.â137
An interesting feature of the al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ, part of the more evident presence of its author in the text, is the frequent insertion of poetry, mainly by RaḥmÄnÄ« himself. He even mentions the title of one of his dÄ«wÄns, al-Madīḥ fÄ« l-NabÄ« al-malīḥ, and the titles of two poems, Madḥ al-muḥkam Ê¿alÄ á¸¥urÅ«f al-muÊ¿jam and Qaṣīdat al-isrÄʾ.138 The internal organisation of the text is event-oriented rather than being formally structured, and is not based on the usual division of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. It is possible to identify only four main sections. The first (up to f. 111v) roughly follows the biography of Muḥammad. The second is focused on miracles, and the third on the death of the Prophet; in this section, interestingly, RaḥmÄnÄ« defends the permissibility of visiting the tombs of saints,139 a typical Sufi theme. The final section deals with the Companions, considering also their khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, and the obligation for believers to love them.140 Here al-RaḥmÄnÄ«âs sources are mainly early Sufis such as al-QushÄyrÄ«, Junayd, or even al-MuḥÄsibÄ«.
As a product of later literature on the Prophet, written in a period when Sufi orders and practices were fully acknowledged as part of the Muslim tradition and shared way of life, al-RaḥmÄnÄ«âs Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ represent the ideal accomplishment of the scholarly tradition of the genre. Some later authors, such as Ahdal (d. 1241/1825),141 were still to devote their efforts to delineating the sources of al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs KifÄya, confirming the fact that this work, with its abridgements, had become a watershed in the evolution of the genre.
7 Instead of a Conclusion, a Different Evolution
We have shown how the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ nabawiya passed from being a matter of legal discussion, considered to be of dubious utility, to a promising field of literary competition for Ê¿ulamÄʾ with a strong attachment to Sufism. In the MamlÅ«k period these texts acquired a more spiritual character, and the figure of the Prophet moved to the centre of a search for new topics that would be suitable to help increase the believerâs love for him. As far as this aspect of such texts is concerned, Ê¿Äʾisha al-BÄÊ¿Å«niyyaâs versification of the UnmÅ«dhaj represents the acme of this process. She expressed her spiritual aspirations clearly, and she found in SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs words the best means to represent the exceptional aspects of her spiritual lover.
But there is a final twist in the development of the genre, that shows how the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ became the form Ê¿ulamÄʾ used to express devotion to Muḥammad. The TanbÄ«h al-anÄm fÄ« bayÄn Ê»uluww maqÄm sayydinÄ Muḥammad142 is a collection of some five thousand prayers on the Prophet, in the form of reiterations of AllÄhumma á¹£alli wa-sallim Ê¿alÄ sayyidina wa-mawlÄnÄ Muḥammad wa-Ê¿alÄ Äl sayyidina wa-mawlÄna Muḥammad,143 to which phrases referring to an episode or a characteristic of the Prophet is added. The work was composed in the first half of the sixteenth century by the Tunisian Ê¿Älim, Ibn Ê¿AáºáºÅ«m al-QayrawÄnÄ« (d. 959/1552). He belonged to a well-known family of local qÄá¸Ä«s, and in the scanty biographical data we have there is no mention of his being affiliated with any Sufi order.144 This work is novel in the landscape of literature about the Prophet, combining sÄ«ra, mawlid, shamÄʾil and khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ in a compendium that, according to the author, had to be recited and memorised.145 Prayers are not in sajÊ¿, but tend to follow a certain rhythm. Starting from the chapter on khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ and aḥwÄl, the text focuses on topics that are clearly taken from such works as SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs KifÄya. The flow of arguments seems to be dictated by Ibn Ê¿AáºáºÅ«mâs inspiration, as the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ begin with a description of Muḥammad being informed that his mosque would be burned, and continue with an enumeration of the diverse merits of the Prophet and his community.146
The similarities to books of khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ are limited, as Ibn Ê¿AáºáºÅ«m does not organise the prayers in his text according to the usual subdivision. What matters here is that all the legalistic aspects have completely disappeared, giving way to a lengthy section about Muḥammadâs birth and his pre-existence before the creation of Adam. The only relationship to the genre is the fact that miracles are placed in the chapter directly after the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£. For the rest, here we see the three genres of mawlid, á¹£alÄt Ê¿alÄ al-NabÄ« and khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ converge. The latter has at last become part of the bulk of literature written solely to express a form of devotion to the Prophet, completing its process of transformation. Finally, it is remarkable that, in the two cases in which this transformation is most evident (the Durar by Ê¿Äʾisha al-BÄÊ¿Å«niyya, and the TanbÄ«h), the authors both had a background in Islamic jurisprudence and, in the case of Ibn Ê¿AáºáºÅ«m, there was not even a clear affiliation to any Sufi order.
The Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, then, show how devotional attitudes towards the Prophet have progressively found their way into the domain of fiqh literature, gradually changing the shape of the genre. In addition to this development, which can be regarded as internal to the genre itself, there is also a change in the intended readership of the works, which moved from learned fuqahÄʾ (finding its final, sterile, version in al-MunÄwÄ«âs works) to pious men who wanted to express their love for Muḥammad and know more about his exceptional nature. Finally, the merging with the prayer on the Prophet did not occur by chance, as that genre had followed a similar path, developing from discussions on the merits of taá¹£liya to such complex works as the TanbÄ«h. Further studies in this direction will probably shed more light on this part of Islamic religious literature, one that has too often been relegated to the popular (and consequently not fully literary) domain.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Ahdal, M. b. A. Ê¿A. B., al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-nabawiyya al-musammÄ bi-Fatḥ al-KarÄ«m al-QarÄ«b sharḥ UnmÅ«dhaj al-labÄ«b fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-ḥabÄ«b, Jeddah, Maktabat Jidda, 1406.
BahyaqÄ«, A. B. A., al-Sunan al-kubrÄ, ed. M. Ê¿A. Q. Ê¿Aá¹Äʾ, Beirut, DÄr al-Kutub al-âIlmiyya, 2003.
ḤÄjjÄ« KhalÄ«fa, Kashf al-áºunÅ«n Ê¿an asÄmÄ« al-kutub wa-l-funÅ«n â al-juzʾ al-awwal, ed. Şerefeddin Yaltkaya et al., Istanbul, Matbaâat Vekalet al-Maâarif, 1941.
Ḥayá¸arÄ«, M. b. M. b. âA., KitÄb al-lafẠal-mukarram bi-khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-NabÄ«, 2 vols, al-MadÄ«na, M. A. al-JakanÄ« al-ShinqÄ«á¹Ä«, 1995â96.
Ibn Ê¿AáºáºÅ«m al-QayrawÄnÄ«, TanbÄ«h al-anÄm fÄ« bayÄn âuluww maqÄm NabiyyinÄ Muḥammad âalayhi al-á¹£alÄt wa-l-salÄm. Ṣīghat al-á¹£alawÄt wa-l-taslÄ«mÄt. ed. I. A. Ḥ. a-QÄdirÄ«, and M. Dh. A. al-QÄdirÄ«, Pakistan, n.d. al-Maktaba al-QÄdiriyya, n. d.
Ibn BashkuwÄl, Kh. b. Ê¿A. M. KitÄb al-qurba ilÄ rabb al-Ê¿ÄlamÄ«n. El acercamiento a Dios, ed. transl. C. de La Puente, Madrid, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientÃficas Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional (Fuentes arábico-hispanas), 19, 1995.
Ibn Diḥya, M. D. NihÄyat al-sÅ«l fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-RasÅ«l. ed. Ê¿A. Ê¿A. al-FÄdanÄ«, M. M. al-Aá¹£far, Qaá¹ar, IdÄrat al-Shuʾūn al- IslÄmiyya, WizÄrat al-AwqÄf wa-l-ShuâÅ«n al-IslÄmiyya, 1995.
Ibn KathÄ«r, al-Fuṣūl fÄ« sÄ«rat al-RasÅ«l, ed. M. ʿĪ. al-Khaá¹rÄwÄ«, M. D. MittÅ«, Dimashq, Beirut, al-MadÄ«na, Muʾassasat Ê¿UlÅ«m al-QurʾÄn, Maktabat DÄr al-TurÄth, 1402/1982.
Ibn al-Mulaqqin, A. Ḥ. Ê¿U. al-Aná¹£ÄrÄ«, GhÄyat al-sÅ«ll fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-rasÅ«l, ed. Ê¿A. B. Ê¿AbdallÄh, Beirut, DÄr al-BashÄʾir al-IslÄmiyya, 1993.
Ibn al-Mulaqqin, A. Ḥ. Ê¿U. al-Aná¹£ÄrÄ« (1994): ṬabaqÄt al-awliyÄʾ, ed. N. D. b. Shurayba, Cairo, Maktabat al-KhanjÄ«, 2nd ed. 1994.
Ibn ṬūlÅ«n, M. b. Ê¿A. al-DimashqÄ« al-á¹¢Äliḥī al-ḤanafÄ«, Murshid al-muḥtÄr fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-NabÄ« al-mukhtÄr, ed. A. F. al-MazÄ«dÄ«, Beirut, DÄr al-Kutub al-âIlmiyya, 2007.
Ê¿Izz al-DÄ«n b. Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm, BidÄyat al-sÅ«l fÄ« tafá¸Ä«l al-RasÅ«l, ed. A. F. al-GhumÄrÄ«, Cairo, Maktabat al-QÄhira, 4th ed. 2012.
KaḥḥÄla, Ê¿U. R. MuÊ¿jam al-muʾallifÄ«n. TarÄjim muá¹£annifÄ« al-kutub al-Ê¿arabiyya, 4 vols, Beirut, Muʾassasat al-RisÄla, 2015.
KharkÅ«shÄ«, A. S. Ê¿A. M. al-NÄ«sÄbÅ«rÄ«, [ManÄḥil al-ShifÄʾ wa-manÄhil al-á¹£afÄʾ bi-taḥqÄ«q kitab] Sharaf al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ, RiwÄyat al-ustÄdh al-qudwa AbÄ« al-QÄsim âAbd al-KarÄ«m HawÄzin al-QushayrÄ«, ed. A. âÄ. N. al-GhamrÄ« Äl BÄ âAlawÄ«, 6 vols, Beirut, DÄr al-BashÄʾir al-IslÄmiyya, 2003.
KÄ«nÄnÄ«, M., TakmÄ«l al-á¹£ulaḥÄʾ wa-l-aÊ¿yÄn li-maÊ¿Älim al-Ä«mÄn fÄ« awliyÄʾ al-QayrawÄn, Tunis, Maktabat al-âAtÄ«qa, 1970.
MÄwardÄ«, A. al-Ḥ. Ê¿A. al-ḤÄwÄ« al-kabÄ«r fÄ« fiqh madhhab al-imÄm al-ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« raá¸Ä« AllÄh âanhu wa-huwa sharḥ Mukhtaá¹£ar al-MuzanÄ«, 19 vols. Beirut: DÄr al-Kutub al-âIlmiyya, 1994.
MuzanÄ«, A. I. I. Mukhtaá¹£Är al-MuzanÄ« fÄ« furÅ«Ê¿ al-ShÄfiÊ¿Ä«yya, Beirut, DÄr al-Kutub al-Ê¿Ilmiyya, 1998.
QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄḠb. MÅ«sÄ al-YaḥṣubÄ«, al-ShifÄʾ bi-taÊ¿rÄ«f ḥuqÅ«q al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ, ed. Ê¿A. M. al-BijÄwÄ«, Beirut, DÄr al-KitÄb al-Ê¿ArabÄ«, 1984.
Qasá¹allÄnÄ«, A. b. M., al-MawÄhib al-laduniyya bi-l-minaḥ al-muḥammadiyya, ed. á¹¢. A. al-ShÄmÄ«, 4 vols, Beirut, al-Maktab al-IslÄmÄ«, 2004.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., al-Khabar al-dÄll Ê¿alÄ wujÅ«d al-quá¹b wa-l-awtÄd wa-l-nujabÄʾ wa-l-abdÄl, Cairo, Maá¹baâat al-ḤijÄzÄ«, 1932.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ. al-juzʾ al-awwal, ed. M. KhalÄ«l HarrÄs, Cairo, DÄr al-Kutub al-ḤadÄ«tha, 3vols. 1967.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ, al-juzâ al-thÄnÄ«, ed. M. Kh. HarrÄs, Cairo, DÄr al-Kutub al-ḤadÄ«tha. 3 vols. 1967.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., al-RiyÄḠal-anÄ«qa fÄ« sharḥ asmÄʾ khayr al-khalÄ«qa, ed. A. H. M. ZaghlÅ«l, Beirut: DÄr al-Kutub al-âIlmiyya, 1985.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., Ḥusn al-maqá¹£id fi âamal al-mawlid, ed. M. Ê¿A. Q. Ê¿Aá¹Äʾ, Beirut, DÄr al-Kutub al-âIlmiyya, 1985.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., UnmÅ«dhaǧ al-labÄ«b fÄ« khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-ḥabÄ«b, ed. Ê¿A. A. á¹¢. al-ḤusaynÄ«, DÄr al-Bayá¸a, Maá¹baâat al-NajÄḥ al-jadÄ«da, 1995.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., al-FÄriq bayna al-muá¹£annif wa al-sÄriq, ed. H. NÄjÄ«, Beirut, âÄlam al-Kutub, 1998.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., TaʾyÄ«d al-ḥaqÄ«qa al-Ê¿aliyya fÄ« tashyÄ«d al-á¹arÄ«qa al-ShÄdhiliyya, Beirut, DÄr al-Kutub al-Ê¿Ilmiyya, 2006.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., ThalÄth rasÄʾil li-l-imÄm al-ḤÄfiẠJalÄl al-DÄ«n al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«: al-BÄhir fÄ« ḥukm al-NabÄ« bi-l-bÄá¹in wa-l-áºÄhir; Ṭarḥ al-saqaá¹ wa-naáºm al-luqaá¹; ShuÊ¿l al-nÄr, ed. Ê¿A. A. á¹¢. al-ḤusaynÄ«, and Ḥ. M. Ê¿A. ShukrÄ«, Beirut: DÄr al-Kutub al-Ê¿Ilmiyya, 2010.
Suyuá¹Ä«, J. al-D., al-Barq al-wÄmiḠfÄ« sharḥ yÄÊ¿iyyat Ibn al-FÄriá¸, ed. H. al-ShuwaykÄ« and G. Scattolin, Cairo, DÄr al-Kutub wa-l-wathÄʾiq al-qawmiyya, 2011.
TirmidhÄ«, A. ʿĪ. M., al-ShamÄʾil al-muḥammadiyya wa al-khaá¹£Äʾil al- muá¹£á¹afawiyya, Beirut, DÄr al-Kutub al-Ê¿Ilmiyya, 1996
Secondary Literature
âAbd al-RaḥmÄn, D. S. âA Critical Edition of KitÄb Sharaf al-Muá¹£á¹afÄ by Abu SaâÄ«d Ê¿Abd al-Malik b. AbÄ« Ê¿UthmÄn b. Muḥammad al-KharkÅ«shÄ« (died 407 A. H./1016 A. D.)â, PhD diss., University of Exeter, 1986.
Addas, C. La maison muhammadienne: Aperçus de la dévotion au Prophète en mystique musulmane, Paris, Gallimard, 2015.
Brockelmann, C. and Lameer, J. History of the Arabic Written Tradition, Leiden, Brill, Supplement vol. 2, 2018.
Ebstein, M., âThe Organs of God: ḤadÄ«th al-NawÄfil in Classical Islamic Mysticismâ, Journal of the American Oriental Society 138, 2 (2018), 271 (DOI: 10.7817/jamerorie soci.138.2.0271).
Geoffroy, E. Le soufisme en Ãgypte et en Syrie sous les derniers Mamelouks et les premiers Ottomans. Orientations spirituelles et enjeux culturels, Damascus, Institut français dâétudes arabes de Damas, 1995.
Ghersetti, A., ed. Al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, a polymath of the MamlÅ«k period. Proceedings of the themed day of the First Conference of the School of MamlÅ«k Studies (Caâ Foscari University, Venice, June 23, 2014), Leiden, Brill, 2017.
Gomez-Rivas, C. âQÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄḠ(d. 544/1149)â, in O. Arabi, D. S. Powers, S. A. Spectorsky, eds. Islamic Legal Thought: A Compendium of Muslim Jurists, Leiden, Brill, 2013, 323â338.
Hallaq, W.B. âOn the Origins of the Controversy about the Existence of Mujtahids and the Gate of Ijtihadâ, Studia Islamica 63 (1986), 129â141.
Hamdan, A.S. âLa vie et lâoeuvre du Grand Soufi Ãgyptien: Ê¿Abd al-Raʾuf al-MunÄwÄ«â, Oriente Moderno 64, 3 (1984), 203â214.
Hofer, N. âIbn al-Mulaqqinâ, in K. Fleet, G. Krämer, et al., eds. Encyclopaedia of Islam, Third Edition, Leiden, Brill, 2018.
Homerin, Th E. From Arab Poet to Muslim Saint: Ibn al-Farid, His verse, and His Shrine. Cairo and New York, American University in Cairo Press, 2nd ed. 2001.
Homerin, Th. E. The Principles of Sufism: On the Science of Sufism, New York, Library of Arabic Literature, 2014 (Available online at http://gbv.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=1593776).
Homerin, Th. E. Emanations of Grace: Mystical poems by âÄâishah al-BÄâÅ«nÄ«yah (d. 923/ 1517), Louisville, KY, Fons Vitae, 2011.
Homerin, Th. E. Aisha al-Baâuniyya: A life in Praise of Love, London: Oneworld Publications, 2019.
Ê¿IyÄḠb. MÅ«sÄ al-YaḥṣubÄ«, al-QÄá¸Ä«, Muḥammad Messenger of Allah: Ash-Shifa of Qadi âIyad, trans. A. A. Bewley, Norwich: Diwan Press, 2011.
Jones, J. M. B. âThe MaghÄzÄ« literatureâ, in A. F. L. Beeston, ed. Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Histories Online, 2012, 344â351.
Katz, M. H. The Birth of the Prophet Muḥammad: Devotional Piety in Sunni Islam, London, New York, Routledge, 2007.
Knysh, A D. Ibn Ê¿Arabi in the Later Islamic Tradition: The Making of a Polemical Image in Medieval Islam, Albany, State University of New York Press 1999.
Koertner, M. âDalÄʾil al-Nubuwwa literature as part of the medieval scholarly discourse on prophecyâ, Der Islam 95/1 (2018), 91â109.
Lev, Y. âSymbiotic relations: ulama and the Mamluk sultansâ, MamlÅ«k Studies Review 13, (2009), 1-26.
Loimeier, R. Between Social Skills and Marketable Skills: The Politics of Islamic Education in 20th-Century Zanzibar, Leiden, Brill. 2009.
Melchert, C. âKhargÅ«shÄ«, TahdhÄ«b al-asrÄrâ, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 73, 1 (2010), 29â44.
Reynolds, G. S. A Muslim Theologian in the Sectarian Milieu: Ê¿Abd al-JabbÄr and the Critique of Christian Origins, Leiden, Brill, 2004.
Ruano, D. S. âWhy did the scholars of al-Andalus distrust al-GhazÄli? Ibn Rushd al-Jaddâs fatwÄ on AwliyÄʾ AllÄhâ, Der Islam 83, 1 (2006), 137â156.
Safran, J. M. âThe politics of book burning in al-Andalusâ, Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies 6 (2), (2004), 148â168.
Sanni, A. The Arabic Theory of Prosification and Versification. On Ḥall and Naáºm in Arabic Theoretical Discourse, Stuttgart, Steiner, 1998.
Sartain, E. M. Jalal al-din al-Suyuti, Volume 1, Biography and Background, Cambridge: University of Cambridge Oriental Publications, 1975.
Schimmel, A. And Muḥammad Is His messenger: The Veneration of the Prophet in Islamic Piety, Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press, 1985.
Skreslet Hernandez, R. The Legal Thought of JalÄl al-Din al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«: Authority and Legacy, Oxford University Press, 2017.
Stroumsa, S. âThe signs of prophecy: the emergence and early development of a theme in Arabic theological literatureâ, The Harvard Theological Review 78, 1/2 (1985), 101â114.
Tottoli, R. âSegni della Profeziaâ, in G. Filoramo, ed. Carisma profetico. Fattore di innovazione religiosa, Brescia, Morcelliana, 2003, 191â205.
Winter, M. Egyptian Society Under Ottoman Rule, 1517â1798, London, New York, Routledge, 1993.
Translation of this expression does not express its full lexical complexity, that alludes not only to the exclusive aspect of some legal dispositions, but also to the khÄṣṣa as an élite, and to the exceptional character of the one marked by a khaṣīṣa (pl. khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£).
TirmidhÄ«, ShamÄʾil.
Jones, âMaghÄzÄ« Literatureâ.
Koertner, âDalÄʾil al-Nubuwwa Literatureâ; Tottoli, âSegni della Profeziaâ; Stroumsa, âSigns of Prophecyâ.
Reynolds, Muslim Theologian, 80f.; Tottoli, âSegni della Profeziaâ.
Translation of this expression does not express its full lexical complexity, that alludes not only to the exclusive aspect of some legal dispositions, but also to the khÄṣṣa as an élite and to the exceptional character of the one marked by a khaṣīṣa (pl. khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£).
Muzanī, Mukhtaṣar, 218f.
MÄwÄrdÄ«, al-ḤÄwÄ«, IX, 18â20.
BayhaqÄ«, Sunan, VII, 86â120.
IḥrÄm, the state of purity that believers must respect when entering the sacred site.
Bayhaqī, Sunan, VII, 99.
BukhÄrÄ«, á¹¢aḥīḥ, 3376.
al-TirmidhÄ«, ShamÄʾil, 164.
Ibn al-Mulaqqin, GhÄyat al-sÅ«l, 68f.
See, for example, Ibn Kathīr, Fuṣūl, 279ff.
Who, as we have seen, discussed them anyway, in al-ḤÄwÄ«.
Ibn al-Mulaqqin, GhÄyat al-sÅ«l, 69.
Ibn al-Mulaqqin, GhÄyat al-sÅ«l, 69. It must be noted that this opinion contrasts with those of the many who denied the usefulness of writing about khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, and opens up the possibility, for the more general public, of looking at the Prophet from a different angle, more focused on the miraculous and exceptional features of his personality.
KharkÅ«shÄ«, Sharaf al-muá¹£á¹afÄ.
Ê»Izz al-DÄ«n b. Ê»Abd al-SalÄm, BidÄyat al-sÅ«l.
Melchert, âKhargÅ«shÄ«â.
Ê¿Abd al-RaḥmÄn, âCritical Editionâ; KharkÅ«shÄ«, ManÄhil al-shifÄʾ.
KharkÅ«shÄ«, ManÄhil al-shifÄʾ IV, 191.
KharkÅ«shÄ«, ManÄhil al-shifÄʾ IV, 95â6.
KharkÅ«shÄ«, ManÄhil al-shifÄʾ IV, 208â34.
KharkÅ«shÄ« distinguishes only the ones related to the Äkhira: KharkÅ«shÄ«, ManÄhil al-shifÄʾ IV, 213.
KharkÅ«shÄ«, ManÄhil al-shifÄʾ IV, 191.
KharkÅ«shÄ«, ManÄhil al-shifÄʾ IV, 193â97; BukhÄrÄ«, á¹¢aḥīḥ, ḥadÄ«th no. 335 reports one of the many different lists of these five (or more) gifts from God to Muḥammad: âThe Prophet said, âI have been given five things which were not given to anyone else before me. Allah made me victorious by awe (by frightening my enemies) for a distance of one monthâs journey. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due. Booty has been made lawful for me, yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection). Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only, but I have been sent to all mankind.ââ
KharkÅ«shÄ«, ManÄhil al-shifÄʾ IV, 208.
Gomez-Rivas, âQÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄá¸â.
Gomez-Rivas âQÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄá¸â 329. For the complex history of the introduction of the IḥyÄʾ in al-Andalus, see Safran, âPolitics of book-burningâ; Ruano, âWhy Did the Scholars of al-Andalus Distrust al-GhazÄlÄ«?â.
Ê¿IyÄá¸, ShifÄʾ, vi.
KharkÅ«shÄ«, ManÄhil al-shifÄʾ.
See Gomez-Rivas, âQÄá¸Ä« Ê¿IyÄá¸â.
Ê¿IyÄá¸, ShifÄʾ, 358â96.
Ê¿IyÄá¸, ShifÄʾ, 396â401.
Ê¿IyÄá¸, ShifÄʾ, 402â10.
Ê¿IyÄá¸, ShifÄʾ, 511â15.
On him see EI2, III, 747.
This connection is particularly intriguing, as Ibn BashkuwÄl is the author of a fundamental work on the prayer of the Prophet, KitÄb al-qurba ilÄ Rabb al-Ê»ÄlamÄ«n; see Ibn BashkuwÄl, Qurba.
Schimmel, And Muhammad Is His Messenger, 152.
The text is not extant. See Katz, Birth of the Prophet Muhammad, 51.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 34. This edition of the text presents several inconsistencies and allows only for a more general discourse, as details of the text (such as its subdivision into chapters, and the order of the topics) seem to have been re-elaborated by the editor.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 37.
It should be noted that this period precedes Ibn Diḥyaâs trip to Erbil in 1207, when he was present at a mawlid festival and wrote his TanwÄ«r. See EI2, III, 747.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 39â42.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 144â69.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 280, 353.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 169.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 182.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 483.
EI2, IX, 812â13. For the notion of mujtahid and ijtihÄd, see Hallaq, âOn the Originsâ. The mujtahid muá¹laq is the jurist who is able to derive the positive doctrines of Islamic jurisprudence directly from primary sources.
He often visited both the founder of the á¹arÄ«qa, AbÅ« al-Ḥasan al-ShÄdhilÄ« (d. 656/1258), and his successor, AbÅ« al-Ê¿AbbÄs al-MursÄ« (d. 685/1287).
Ê»Izz al-DÄ«n b. Ê»Abd al-SalÄm, BidÄyat al-sÅ«l, 8.
Ê»Izz al-DÄ«n b. Ê»Abd al-SalÄm, BidÄyat al-sÅ«l, 23ff.
This expression refers to the fact that the QurʾÄn is considered to epitomise and contain all previous revelations.
The doctrine of the so-called á¹arÄ«qa muḥammadiyya appeared quite late in the Islamic world. On the other hand, the mediating role of the Prophet was recognised from the time of the early development of taá¹£awwuf; see Addas, Maison muhammadienne.
Lev, âSymbiotic Relationsâ.
Homerin, From Arab Poet to Muslim Saint.
Geoffroy, Le soufisme en Ãgypte et en Syrie, 89â101; 149â50; 452â74.
Knysh, Ibn Ê¿ArabÄ«, 210â224.
Suyuá¹Ä«, al-Barq al-wÄmiá¸.
Geoffroy Le soufisme en Ãgypte et en Syrie, 101â105; Addas, Maison muhammadienne, 104â108.
ḤÄjjÄ« KhalÄ«fa, Kashf, 706.
ḤÄjjÄ« KhalÄ«fa, Kashf, 195.
Ibn Kathīr, Fuṣūl.
Ibn KathÄ«r, Fuṣūl, 278â332.
Ibn Kathīr, Fuṣūl, 280.
Ibn KathÄ«r, Fuṣūl, 278â79.
He composed a work on the generations of Sufis, Ibn al-Mulaqqin, ṬabaqÄt al-AwliyÄʾ. In biographical sources there is no mention of his affiliation to any Sufi order, while Hofer reports that he was buried in the Sufi cemetery outside BÄb al-Naá¹£r, in Cairo; see Hofer, âIbn al-Mulaqqinâ.
Ibn al-Mulaqqin, GhÄyat al-sÅ«l, 290.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 344.
Ḥayá¸arÄ«, al-LafẠal-mukarram.
But apparently he wrote a work about the prayer on the Prophet, al-LiwÄâ al-muÊ»allam bi-mawÄá¹in al-á¹£alÄt Ê»alÄ l-NabÄ« Ê»alayhi al-á¹£alÄt wa-l-salÄm, mentioned in Khayá¸arÄ«, al-LafẠal-mukarram, 38.
Brockelmann and Lameer, History of the Arabic Written Tradition, Suppl. II, 120; GAL II, 98, S II, 116; Reynolds, A Muslim Theologian, 271.
It seems that Ibn al-Mulaqqin used karÄma instead of muÊ¿jiza without sensing the distinction made between the miracles of the saints (karÄmÄt) and those of the Prophet (muÊ¿jizÄt). This would prove that, for Ibn al-Mulaqqin, the discourse about sanctity was not related to the one about prophecy.
The text of the ḥadÄ«th is as follows: âAllah has said: Whoever treats a friend (walÄ«) of mine with enmity, I declare war on him. There is nothing by which my servant draws close to me that is dearer to me than that which I have imposed (iftaraá¸tu) upon him; and my servant does not cease to draw close to me by supererogatory works (nawÄfil) until I love him, and when I love him, I become his hearing (samÊ») by which he hears, his sight (baá¹£ar) by which he sees, his hand by which he forcibly seizes, and his leg by which he walks. If he asks me, I give him, and if he seeks my refuge, I grant it to him. There is no action of mine in which I waver more than [taking] the soul of a believer: he hates dying, and I hate doing him wrongâ. For a discussion of the importance of this tradition in Sufi milieux, see Ebstein, âOrgans of Godâ.
The last chapter, about miracles, seems to be incomplete in the printed edition, as two sections are announced (one about miracles related to marriage, and one about the others), but only one is present.
See Sartain, Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti; Ghersetti, Al-SuyÅ«á¹Ä«; Skreslet Hernandez, Legal Thought.
Geoffroy, Le soufisme en Ãgypte et en Syrie, 150â52; 337â39; 391â96; 516; Suyuá¹Ä«, TaʾyÄ«d al-ḥaqÄ«qa.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, al-Khabar al-dÄll.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, UnmÅ«dhaj.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, ThalÄth rasÄʾil.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ, I, 5 â II, 213.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ, II, 214 â III, 102.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ, III, 125.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ, III, 251.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ, III, 338.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, al-Khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£ al-kubrÄ, III, 403.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, UnmÅ«dhaj al-labÄ«b.
The printed edition is one hundred and twenty pages long, much shorter than the one thousand two hundred pages of the KifÄya.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, UnmÅ«dhaj al-labÄ«b, 11â52.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä« does acknowledge some overlap with the previous chapter: Suyuá¹Ä«, UnmÅ«dhaj al-labÄ«b, 53.
The work makes explicit reference to the UnmÅ«dhaj (Suyuá¹Ä«, ThalÄth rasÄʾil, 71; 86).
Suyuá¹Ä«, ThalÄth rasÄʾil, 70. It is interesting to note that this khaṣīṣa is quoted directly from the UnmÅ«dhaj.
Considering SuyÅ«á¹Ä«âs numerous opponents, it is possible that the whole work is a response to an objection coming from one of his contemporaries.
Suyuá¹Ä«, ThalÄth rasÄʾil, 74.
SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, some lines below, considers him among the prophets who have been sent to rule according only to the ḥaqÄ«qa, while Moses could rule according only to the sharÄ«Ê¿a.
Suyuá¹Ä«, ThalÄth rasÄʾil, 87.
In fact, nikÄḥ-related issues are scattered throughout the text.
Suyuá¹Ä«, UnmÅ«dhaj al-labÄ«b, 77â89.
Suyuá¹Ä«,Huá¹£n al-maqá¹£id, 1985b.
Sartain, Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, 24; 70â1.
Qasá¹allÄnÄ«, MawÄhib. SuyÅ«á¹Ä« discussed this plagiarism in his maqÄma called al-FÄriq bayna al-muá¹£annif wa-l-sÄriq, Suyuá¹Ä«, al-FÄriq. Qasá¹allÄnÄ« does mention his sources for the khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, including al-Ḥayá¸arÄ« but not SuyÅ«á¹Ä«; see Qasá¹allÄnÄ«, MawÄhib.
Qasá¹allÄnÄ«, MawÄhib, II, 490â735.
Qasá¹allÄnÄ«, MawÄhib, II, 9â72. It should be noted that SuyÅ«á¹Ä«, too, wrote about the Names of the Prophet.
Qasá¹allÄnÄ«, MawÄhib, III, 7â118.
Qasá¹allÄnÄ«, MawÄhib, 267â392.
Qasá¹allÄnÄ«, MawÄhib, 319â56.
Ibn Diḥya, NihÄyat al-sÅ«l, 205â10.
He was one of the masters of Ê¿Abd al-WahhÄb al-ShaÊ¿rÄnÄ«, and he established the practice of reciting a large number of prayers on the Prophet on Friday night, in the mosque of al-Azhar; see Winter, Egyptian Society, p. 157; Geoffroy, Le soufisme en Ãgypte et en Syrie, 101â4.
These occupy the entire fourth volume of the printed edition we consulted.
EI2, III, 957f.
Ibn ṬūlÅ«n, Murshid al-muḥtÄr.
Ibn ṬūlÅ«n, Murshid al-muḥtÄr, 11.
Ibn ṬūlÅ«n, Murshid al-muḥtÄr, 234.
Possibly to be identified with TaqÄ« al-DÄ«n ibn QÄḍī al-ShuhbÄ« al-AsadÄ« al- DimashqÄ« al-ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« (d. 852/1448).
I want to thank prof. Emil Th. Homerin for drawing my attention to this manuscript and for sharing a digital copy of it with me.
For a complete biography of Ê»Äâisha BÄʻūniyya, see Homerin, Aisha al-Baâuniyya. Homerin also translated a selection of her poetic works, Homerin, Emanations of Grace, and her Sufi manual, Homerin, Principles of Sufism. The manuscript is DÄr al-Kutub 558 ḥadÄ«th, 70 folios, acephalous. It is not dated and the colophon reads:
DÄr al-Kutub 558 ḥadÄ«th, f. 3r. Foliation is based on the microfilm.
DÄr al-Kutub 558 ḥadÄ«th, f. 3v.
See Sanni, Arabic theory of prosification.
DÄr al-Kutub 558 ḥadÄ«th, f. 3v.
DÄr al-Kutub 558 ḥadÄ«th, ff. 4râ4v.
DÄr al-Kutub 558 ḥadÄ«th, f. 4v.
DÄr al-Kutub 558 ḥadÄ«th, f. 67r.
For more on him, see Hamdan, âLa vie et l âoeuvreâ.
I have knowledge of this work only from its commentary by al-Mūnawī.
Still unpublished. I have consulted three manuscripts: Michigan 954, dated 1074/1664; DÄr al-Kutub ḥadÄ«th 206 muḥÄfaáºa, dated 1272/1856; DÄr al-Kutub ḥadÄ«th 852, acephalous, ends ex abrupto, n.d.
Michigan 954, ff, 1vâ2r; DÄr al-Kutub 206, ff. 2vâ3r; DÄr al-Kutub 852, ff.
The only extant manuscript, up to now, is al-Azhar, 907 ḥadÄ«th. The colophon (f. 266v) states that the copy was made on the 7 Muḥarram 1039/27 August 1629 (al-farÄgh min tabyīḠhÄdhihi al-nuskha li-muʾallifihÄ). What was originally written in red ink is completely unreadable in the microfilm. Frequently entire pages are blurred, and hence impossible to read. The manuscript presents frequent writing mistakes, such as the exchanging of sÄ«n with á¹£Äd, that may possibly mean that it was dictated to an ill-educated copyist. The text, too, seems to be the result of an interpolation, as at f. 26r the work seems to end with a final formula of istighfÄr, unless it reprises with the discussion of faá¸Äʾil. About the author and the attribution to him of the work see KaḥḥÄla, MuÊ¿jam, III, 28.
See previous note.
F. 8. Previous folios are almost unreadable.
Al-Azhar, 907 ḥadīth, f. 8r.
Al-Azhar, 907 ḥadīth, f. 10v.
Al-Azhar, 907 ḥadīth, f. 16v.
Al-Azhar, 907 ḥadīth, f. 24r.
Al-Azhar, 907 ḥadÄ«th, ff. 187râ216v.
Al-Azhar, 907 ḥadÄ«th, f. 242vâ256r.
Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. Ê»Abd al-BÄriâ al-Ahdal, a member of a prominent family of Yemen. He was better known as a commentator of the ÄjurrÅ«miyya. For more on him, see GAL II, 652, and the introduction of the edition of his work on khaá¹£Äʾiá¹£, al-Ahdal, Muḥammad b. Aḥmad Ê»Abd al-BÄrÄ«â 1406, 5â13; Loimeier 2009, 190.
This work has been published and edited several times, starting with the 1912 edition from DÄr al-Kutub al-Ê¿Arabiyya and the 1927 edition from the Maktaba wa-MatbaÊ»at Muḥammad Ê»AlÄ« á¹¢ubayḥ wa-AwlÄdihi, both in Cairo. Presumably still in the 1920s (the date is based on a guess, as the book itself is not dated) the DÄr IḥyÄâ al-Kutub al-Ê¿Arabiyya printed another version of the TanbÄ«h, followed by al-Maktaba al-TijÄriyya. All these editions report the same text exactly, with slight variations in print and typeface.
âOh God pray and give peace to our master and lord Muḥammad and his familyâ.
KaḥḥÄla calls him a Sufi, see KaḥḥÄla, MuÊ¿jam, II, 49; KiÌnaÌniÌ, TakmÄ«l al-á¹£ulaḥÄʾ, 23â25.
Ibn Ê»AáºáºÅ«m, TanbÄ«h al-anÄm, 8.
Ibn Ê»AáºáºÅ«m, TanbÄ«h al-anÄm, 159.