Chapter XXVI: Appendix

P. xxii, l. 2. Arabic begins to appear in North Arabian inscriptions in the third century A.D. Perhaps the oldest yet discovered is one, of which the probable date is 268 A.D., published by Jaussen and Savignac (_Mission archéologique en l'Arabie_, vol. i, p. 172). Though it is written in Aramaic characters, nearly all the words are Arabic, as may be seen from the transcription given by Professor Horovitz in _Islamic Culture_ (Hyderabad, Deccan), April 1929, vol. iii, No. 2, p. 169, note 2.

P. 4 foll. Concerning the Sabaeans and the South Arabic inscriptions a great deal of valuable information will be found in the article _Saba’_ by J. Tkatsch in the _Encyclopædia of Islam_. The writer points out the special importance of the epigraphic discoveries of E. Glaser, who, in the course of four journeys (1882-94), collected over 2000 inscriptions. See also D. Nielsen, _Handbuch der altarabischen Altertumskunde_, vol. i (Copenhagen and Paris, 1927).

P. 13, note 2. Excerpts from the _Shamsu ’l-‘Ulúm_ relating to South Arabia have been edited by Dr ‘Azímu’ddín Aḥmad (E. J. W. Gibb Memorial Series, vol. xxiv).

P. 26 foll. For contemporary and later Christian accounts of the martyrdom of the Christians of Najrán, see the fragmentary _Book of the Himyarites_ (Syriac text and English translation), ed. by A. Moberg in 1924, and cf. Tor Andrae, _Der Ursprung des Islams und das Christentum_ (Uppsala, 1926), pp. 10-13.

P. 31. The collection of Arabic proverbs, entitled _Kitábu ’l-Fákhir_, by Mufaḍḍal b. Salama of Kúfa, is now available in the excellent edition of Mr C. A. Storey (Leyden, 1915).

P. 32, note 1. An edition of the _Aghání_ with critical notes is in course of publication at Cairo.

P. 52, l. 9 foll. The battle mentioned here cannot be the battle of ‘Ayn Ubágh, which took place between Ḥárith, the son of Ḥárith b. Jabala, and Mundhir IV of Ḥíra about 583 A.D. (Guidi, _L'Arabie antéislamique_, p. 27).

P. 127, l. 16. The ode _Bánat Su‘ád_ is rendered into English in my _Translations of Eastern Poetry and Prose_, pp. 19-23.

P. 133. As regards the authenticity of the Pre-islamic poems which have come down to us, the observations of one of the greatest authorities on the subject, the late Sir Charles J. Lyall, seem to me to be eminently judicious (Introduction to the _Mufaḍḍalīyāt_, vol. ii, pp. xvi-xxvi). He concludes that "upon the whole, the impression which a close study of these ancient relics gives is that we must take them, generally speaking, as the production of the men whose names they bear." All that can be urged against this view has been said with his usual learning by Professor Margoliouth (_The Origins of Arabic Poetry_, _J.R.A.S._, 1925, p. 417 foll.).

P. 145, l. 2. The oldest extant commentary on the Koran is that of Bukhárí in ch. 65 of the _Ṣaḥíḥ_, ed. Krehl, vol. iii, pp. 193-390.

P. 146, note 2. Recent investigators (Caetani and Lammens) are far more sceptical. Cf. Snouck Hurgronje, _Mohammedanism_, p. 22 foll.

P. 152, note 5. As suggested by Mr Richard Bell (_The Origin of Islam in its Christian environment_, p. 88), the word _rujz_ is in all likelihood identical with the Syriac _rugza_, wrath, so that this verse of the Koran means, "Flee from the wrath to come."

P. 170, l. 2 foll. This is one of the passages I should have liked to omit. Even in its present form, it maintains a standpoint which I have long regarded as mistaken.

P. 184, l. 4 foll. Professor Snouck Hurgronje (_Mohammedanism_, p. 44) asks, "Was Mohammed conscious of the universality of his mission?" and decides that he was not. I now agree that "in the beginning he conceived his work as merely the Arabian part of a universal task"--in which case _dhikrun li ’l-‘álamín_ in the passage quoted will mean "a warning to all the people (of Mecca or Arabia)." But similar expressions in Súras of the Medina period carry, I think, a wider significance. The conception of Islam as a world-religion is implied in Mohammed's later belief--he only came to it gradually--that the Jewish and Christian scriptures are corrupt and that the Koran alone represents the original Faith which had been preached in turn by all the prophets before him. And having arrived at that conviction, he was not the man to leave others to act upon it.

P. 223, l. 9. In an article which appeared in the _Rivista degli studi orientali_, 1916, p. 429 foll., Professor C. A. Nallino has shown that this account of the origin of the name "Mu‘tazilite" is erroneous. The word, as Mas‘údí says (_Murúju ’l-Dhahab_, vol. vi, p. 22, and vol. vii, p. 234), is derived from _i‘tizál_, _i.e._ the doctrine that anyone who commits a capital sin has thereby withdrawn himself (_i‘tazala_) from the true believers and taken a position (described as _fisq_, impiety) midway between them and the infidels. According to the Murjites, such a person was still a true believer, while their opponents, the Wa‘ídites, and also the Khárijites, held him to be an unbeliever.

P. 225, l. 1. The Ḥadíth, "No monkery (_rahbániyya_) in Islam," probably dates from the third century of the Hijra. According to the usual interpretation of Koran, LVII, 27, the _rahbániyya_ practised by Christian ascetics is condemned as an innovation not authorised by divine ordinance; but Professor Massignon (_Essai sur les origines du lexique technique de la mystique musulmane_, p. 123 foll.) shows that by some of the early Moslem commentators and also by the Ṣúfís of the third century A.H. this verse of the Koran was taken as justifying and commending those Christians who devoted themselves to the ascetic life, except in so far as they had neglected to fulfil its obligations.

P. 225, l. 6 from foot. For the life and doctrines of Ḥasan of Baṣra, see Massignon, _op. cit._, p. 152 foll.

P. 228 foll. It can now be stated with certainty that the name "Ṣúfí" originated in Kúfa in the second century A.H. and was at first confined to the mystics of ‘Iráq. Hence the earliest development of Ṣúfiism, properly so called, took place in a hotbed of Shí‘ite and Hellenistic (Christian and Gnostic) ideas.

P. 233, l. 4 from foot. In _Rābi‘a the Mystic_ (Cambridge, 1928) Miss Margaret Smith has given a scholarly and sympathetic account of the life, legend, and teaching of this celebrated woman-saint. The statement that she died and was buried at Jerusalem is incorrect. Moslem writers have confused her with an earlier saint of the same name, Rábi‘a bint Ismá‘íl († 135).

P. 313 foll. The text and translation of 332 extracts from the _Luzúmiyyát_ will be found in ch. ii of my _Studies in Islamic Poetry_, pp. 43-289.

P. 318, l. 12. Since there is no warrant for the antithesis of "knaves" and "fools," these verses are more faithfully rendered (_op. cit._, p. 167):

They all err--Moslems, Christians, Jews, and Magians;
Two make Humanity's universal sect:
One man intelligent without religion,
And one religious without intellect.

P. 318, l. 7 from foot. _Al-Fuṣúl wa ’l-Gháyát_. No copy of this work was known before 1919, when the discovery of the first part of it was announced (_J.R.A.S._, 1919, p. 449).

P. 318, note 2. An edition of the _Risálatu ’l-Ghufrán_ by Shaykh Ibráhím al-Yáziji was published at Cairo in 1907.

P. 319, l. 6. The epistle of ‘Alí b. Manṣúr al-Ḥalabí (Ibnu ’l-Qáriḥ), to which the _Risálatu ’l-Ghufrán_ is the reply, has been published in _Rasá’ilu ’l-Bulaghá_, ed. Muḥammad Kurd ‘Alí (Cairo, 1913).

P. 332, note 2. For rhymed prose renderings of the 11th and 12th _Maqámas_, see _Translations of Eastern Poetry and Prose_, pp. 116-124.

P. 367, l. 7 from foot. New light has recently been thrown upon the character of the Mu‘tazilite movement by the publication of the Mu‘tazilite al-Khayyáṭ's _Kitábu ’l-Intiṣár_ (ed. H. S. Nyberg, Cairo, 1926), a third (ninth) century polemical work directed against the Shí‘ite freethinker Ibnu ’l-Ráwandí (cf. p. 375 _supra_). It is now evident that this "heretical" sect played an active part as champions of Islam, not only in the early controversies which arose between Moslems and Christians in Syria but also against the more dangerous attacks which proceeded in the first hundred years of the ‘Abbásid period from the Manichæans and other "_zanádiqa_" in Persia and especially in ‘Iráq (cf. I. Guidi, _La Lotta tra l'Islam e il Manicheismo_ (Rome, 1927)). In order to meet these adversaries on equal terms, the Mu‘tazilites made themselves acquainted with Greek philosophy and logic, and thus laid the foundations of an Islamic scholasticism. Cf. H. H. Schaeder, _Der Orient und die Griechische Erbe_ in W. Jaeger's _Die Antike_, vol. iv, p. 261 foll.

P. 370, I. 3 foll. From what has been said in the preceding note it follows that this view of the relation between the Mu‘tazilites and the _Ikhwánu ’l-Ṣafá_ requires considerable modification. Although, in contrast to their orthodox opponents, the Mu‘tazilites may be described as "rationalists" and "liberal theologians," their principles were entirely opposed to the anti-Islamic eclecticism of the _Ikhwán_.

P. 375, note 2. Professor Schaeder thinks that Middle Persian _zandík_ has nothing to do with the Aramaic _zaddíq_ (_Z.D.M.G._, vol. 82, Heft 3-4, p. lxxx).

Pp. 383-393. During the last twenty years our knowledge of early Ṣúfiism has increased, chiefly through the profound researches of Professor Massignon, to such an extent as to render the account given in these pages altogether inadequate. The subject being one of great difficulty and unsuitable for detailed exposition in a book of this kind, I must content myself with a few illustrative remarks and references, which will enable the student to obtain further information.

P. 383. Massignon's view is that Ṣúfiism (down to the fourth century A.H.) owed little to foreign influences and was fundamentally Islamic, a product of intensive study of the Koran and of inward meditation on its meaning and essential nature. There is great force in his argument, though I cannot help believing that the development of mysticism, like that of other contemporary branches of Moslem thought, must have been vitally affected by contact with the ancient Hellenistic culture of the Sásánian and Byzantine empires on its native soil. Cf. A. J. Wensinck, _The Book of the Dove_ (Leyden, 1919) and _Mystic Treatises by Isaac of Niniveh_ (Amsterdam, 1923).

P. 384, l. 1. The identity of third-century Ṣúfiism with the doctrines of the Vedanta is maintained by M. Horten (_Indische Strömungen in der Islamischen Mystik_, Heidelberg, 1927-8). Few, however, would admit this. The conversion of Ṣúfiism into a monistic philosophy was the work of Ibnu ’l-‘Arabí (1165-1240 A.D.). See p. 402 foll.

P. 384, l. 5. The so-called "Theology of Aristotle," translated from Syriac into Arabic about 830 A.D., is mainly an abstract of the _Enneads_ of Plotinus. There is an edition with German translation by Dieterici.

P. 385, l. 11. All previous accounts of the development of mystical doctrines in Islam during the first three centuries after the Hijra have been superseded by Massignon's intimate analysis (_Essai_, chs. iv and v, pp. 116-286), which includes biographies of the eminent Ṣúfís of that period and is based upon an amazingly wide knowledge of original and mostly unpublished sources of information. A useful summary of these two chapters is given by Father Joseph Maréchal in his _Studies in the Psychology of the Mystics_, tr. Thorold (1927), pp. 241-9.

P. 386, l. 6 from foot. For Dhu ’l-Nún, see Massignon, _op. cit._, p. 184 foll.

P. 389, l. 12. _The Book of the Holy Hierotheos_ has recently been edited in Syriac for the first time, with English translation, by F. S. Marsh (Text and Translation Society, 1927).

P. 391. For Báyazíd of Bisṭám, see Massignon, _op. cit._, p. 243 foll. The oldest complete Arabic version of his "Ascension" (_Mi‘ráj_)--a spiritual dream-experience--has been edited and translated into English in _Islamica_, vol. ii, fasc. 3, p. 402 foll.

P. 396, l. 8. See my essay on the Odes of Ibnu ’l-Fáriḍ (_Studies in Islamic Mysticism_, pp. 162-266), which comprises translations of the _Khamriyya_ and three-fourths of the _Tá’iyyatu ’l-Kubrá_.

P. 399, note 1. With Ḥalláj, thanks to the monumental work of Massignon (_La Passion d'al-Ḥalláj_, 2 vols., Paris, 1922), we are now better acquainted than with any other Moslem mystic. His doctrine exhibits some remarkable affinities with Christianity and bears no traces of the pantheism attributed to him by later Ṣúfís as well as by Von Kremer and subsequent European writers. Cf. the summary given by Father Joseph Maréchal, _op. cit._, pp. 249-281, and _The Idea of Personality in Ṣúfism_ (Cambridge, 1922), pp. 26-37.

P. 402, l. 9. For Ibnu ’l-‘Arabí's theory of the Perfect Man, see Tor Andrae, _Die Person Muhammeds_, p. 339 foll., and for the same theory as expounded by ‘Abdu ’l-Karím al-Jílí († circ. 1410 A.D.), a follower of Ibnu ’l-‘Arabí, in his famous treatise entitled _al-Insán al-Kámil_, cf. _Studies in Islamic Mysticism_, pp. 77-142.

P. 456, l. 1 foll. Here, though he is out of place in such an academic company, mention should have been made of Ibn Baṭṭúṭa of Tangier († 1377), whose frank and entertaining story of his almost world-wide travels, entitled _Tuḥfatu ’l-Nuẓẓár_, is described by its latest translator, Mr H. A. R. Gibb, as "an authority for the social and cultural history of post-Mongol Islam."

P. 465, last line. For a summary of the doctrines and history of the Wahhábís, see the article _Wahhābīs_ by Professor D. S. Margoliouth in Hastings' _Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics_.

P. 469. _La littérature arabe au xix^e siècle_, by L. Cheikho (Beyrouth, 1908-10), which deals chiefly with the literature produced by the Christian Arabs of Syria, deserves mention as one of the few works on the subject written in a European language. The influence of Western ideas on Moslem theology may be studied in the _Risálatu ’l-tauḥíd_ of the great Egyptian divine, Muḥammad ‘Abduh (1842-1905), which has been translated into French by B. Michel and Mustapha ‘Abd el Razik (Paris, 1925).

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS BY EUROPEAN AUTHORS

The following list is intended to give students of Arabic as well as those who cannot read that language the means of obtaining further information concerning the various topics which fall within the scope of a work such as this. Since anything approaching to a complete bibliography is out of the question, I have mentioned only a few of the most important translations from Arabic into English, French, German, and Latin; and I have omitted (1) monographs on particular Arabic writers, whose names, together with the principal European works relating to them, will be found in Brockelmann's great History of Arabic Literature, and (2) a large number of books and articles which appeal to specialists rather than to students. Additional information is supplied by E. G. Browne in his _Literary History of Persia_, vol. i, pp. 481-496, and D. B. Macdonald in his _Development of Muslim Theology, etc._ (London, 1903), pp. 358-367, while the Appendix to H. A. R. Gibb's _Arabic Literature_ (Oxford University Press, 1926) contains a well-chosen list of books of reference and translations. Those who require more detailed references may consult the _Bibliographie des ouvrages arabes ou relatifs aux Arabes publ. dans l'Europe chrétienne de 1810 à 1885_, by V. Chauvin (Liège, 1892-1903), the _Orientalische Bibliographie_, edited by A. Müller, E. Kuhn, and L. Scherman (Berlin, 1887--), the _Handbuch der Islam-Litteratur_, by D. G. Pfannmüller (Berlin and Leipzig, 1923), and the _Catalogue of the Arabic Books in the British Museum_, by A. G. Ellis, 2 vols. (London, 1894-1902) with the _Supplementary Catalogue_, by A. S. Fulton and A. G. Ellis (London, 1926).

As a rule, titles of monographs and works of a specialistic character which have been already given in the footnotes are not repeated in the Bibliography.

I

PHILOLOGY.

1. _Die Semitischen Sprachen_, by Th. Nöldeke (2nd ed. Leipzig,
1899).

An improved and enlarged reprint of the German original
of his article, 'Semitic Languages,' in the _Encyclopædia
Britannica_ (9th edition).

2. _A Grammar of the Arabic Language_, by W. Wright, 3rd ed.,
revised by W. Robertson Smith and M. J. de Goeje, 2 vols.
(Cambridge, 1896-98).

The best Arabic grammar for advanced students. Beginners may
prefer to use the abridgment by F. du Pre Thornton,
_Elementary Arabic: a Grammar_ (Cambridge University Press,
1905).

3. _Arabic-English Lexicon_, by E. W. Lane, 8 parts (London,
1863-93).

This monumental work is unfortunately incomplete. Among other
lexica those of Freytag (Arabic and Latin, 4 vols., Halle,
1830-37), A. de Biberstein Kazimirski (Arabic and French, 2
vols., Paris, 1846-60, and 4 vols., Cairo, 1875), and Dozy's
_Supplément aux Dictionnaires arabes_, 2 vols. (Leyden, 1881),
deserve special notice. Smaller dictionaries, sufficient for
ordinary purposes, have been compiled by Belot (_Dictionnaire
arabe-français_, Beyrout, 1928), and Wortabet and Porter
(_Arabic-English Dictionary_, 3rd ed., Beyrout, 1913).

4. _Abhandlungen zur Arabischen Philologie_, by Ignaz Goldziher,