Two Unrecognized Karrāmī Texts

7/27/2019 Two Unrecognized Karrāmī Texts

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/two-unrecognized-karrami-texts 1/12

Two Unrecognized Karrāmī Texts

Author(s): Aron ZysowSource: Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 108, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1988), pp. 577-587Published by: American Oriental SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/603146

Accessed: 04/05/2009 08:55

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aos.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of

the American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/603146?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aos

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aos

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/603146?origin=JSTOR-pdf



TWO UNRECOGNIZED KARRAMI TEXTS

ARON ZYSOW

UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

In a recent monograph Josef van Ess has drawn attention to several works of apparentKarramT rigin, two of which Massignon had already examined. The Karramiprovenance of two

additional texts, both in print, has gone unrecognized. One is the introduction to the Qur'an

commentary K. al-MabdnT i-nazm al-macnl (begun in 425/1033), a major source of orientalist

research on the Qur'an since the nineteenth century. The author of al-Mabdn is unidentifiedbut

was associated with the same circles as the famous KarramTheologian Muhammad b. al-Haysam

(d. 419/1019). The other text of apparent KarramT rigin is al-Nutaffi'l-fatdwd, a legal treatise

attributed to the HanafTQad. al-qudat Abu'l-Hasan 'All b. al-Husayn al-SughdT (d. 461/1068).The Abu 'Abdallah whose legal opinions are reported throughout this work is none other than

Muhammad b. Karram (d. 255/869). Al-Nutaf is thus a unique source for the fiqh of the

Karramiyya.

WHEREAS CONTEMPORARYSCHOLARSHIP HAS COMETO

RECOGNIZEhe social and political significance of the

Karramiyya, the study of the place of the Karramiyyain Islamic intellectual history until recently remained

where Massignon left it.' However, in a recent mono-

graph Josef van Ess, with characteristic industry, has

assembled an impressive body of new information on

this sect.2 Following Massignon's lead, van Ess has

re-examined two works of apparent KarramT originand brought to light at least two others.3 This paper is

See particularly L. Massignon, Essai sur les origines du

lexique technique de la mystique musulmane, 2d ed. (Paris,

1954), 260-68. In recent years, the social and political role of

the Karramiyya has been examined by C. E. Bosworth, a

summary of whose work can be found in EI2, s.v. Kar-

ramiyya, and R. W. Bulliet, The Patricians of Nishapur: A

Study in Medieval Islamic Social History (Cambridge, Mass.,

1972), General Index, s.v. Karraml.2

Ungeniitzte Texte zur Karrdmiya:eine Materialsammlung,

Sitzungsberichte d. Heidelberger Akad. d. Wiss., Phil.-hist.

Kl., Jg. 1980, Abh. 6 ("Texte").3 CUmar al-Samarqandl, K. Rawnaq al-qulub, Bibliotheque

Nationale Ar. 4929 and 6674 (Texte, 30-41); the acephalous

Qur'an commentary, British Museum Or. 8049 (Texte, 41-

55); the collection of stories about the prophets of Abu'l-

Hasan al-Haysam b. Muhammad, Princeton, Yahuda 439

(Texte, 68-73); and the Qur'an commentary of Abu Bakr

'AtTqb. Muhammad al-Surabadi (d. 454/1101), of which

two facsimile editions have been published in Tehran (Texte,

73-74). The Karrami provenance of Abu Mutic Makhul al-

577

in the nature of an addendum to van Ess' study and

confirms the correctness of his observation that "the

KarramTya have left behind more traces than we have

hitherto believed." Unfortunately, van Ess is equallycorrect in stating that "everything remains to be done

before we can read these traces with understanding."4Of the two works that I propose to ascribe to the

Karramiyya, the first has been a mainstay of orientalist

research on the Qur'an since the nineteenth century.This is Berlin MS 910 (Wetzstein 103), K. al-MabanT

li-nazm al-macdnT, a Qur'an commentary of 273folios, extending to Sura 15; the loss of the first folio

has so far prevented identification of the author. The

introduction to this work, covering eighty-five folios,

was a major source for both editions of Noldeke's

Geschichte des Qordns and has continued to be used

in Qur'anic research.5 It was published by Arthur

NasafT(d. 318/930), K. al-Radd 'ala al-bida', Oxford, Bod-

leiana Or. 421, which van Ess also examined (Texte, 55-60),

appears highly doubtful. The text has since been published

by Marie Bernand in Annales islamologiques 16 (1980):39-126.4 Texte, 81.5 T. Noldeke, Geschichte des Qorins (G6ttingen, 1860),

xxx-xxxi and passim; T. N6ldeke, Geschichte des Qorans,2d ed., yols. 1 and 2, ed. F. Schwally, vol. 3, ed. G. Berg-strasser and O. Pretzl (Leipzig, 1909-38), 2:184, 3: Index,

s.v. MabanE.Al-Mabdan is frequently cited in J. Burton, The

Collection of the Quradn Cambridge, 1977).



Journal of the American Oriental Society 108.4 (1988)

Jeffery in Cairo in 1954.6 My discussion of al-Mabani

will be confined to the introduction, the unpublished

portion of the work having remained inaccessible

to me.

Despite the fact that Jeffery's edition contains a full

index of proper names, the Karrami provenance ofal-Mabanl appears to have gone undetected. The

strongest evidence for a Karrami attribution comes on

page 209 of the printed text, where the author briefly

quotes al-Imam al-Hadi Abtu 'Abdallah Muhammad

b. Karram (d. 255/869), the founder of the Kar-

ramiyya.7 Of other recognizable Karramis, the name

that appears with greatest frequency is that of the

famous theologian Muhammad b. al-Haysam, who is

quoted a number of times.8

6With the introduction to Ibn 'Atiyya's tafsir as Two

Muqaddimas to the Qur'anic Sciences. A second edition,with corrections, was published by cAbdallah Isma1TIal-

Sawl (Cairo, 1392/1972). This edition preserves the pagina-

tion of the first. The fullest discussion in print of al-MabdnT

is that of V. Cornell, "'Ilm al-Qur'an in al-Andalus: The

Tafsir Muharrar in the Works of Three Authors," Jusur 2

(1986): 65-72. Influenced perhaps by Jeffery's reference to

the "local Andalusian style of Arabic" used in al-Mabain

(English preface to Two Muqaddimas), Cornell (p. 66) writes

that "an examination of the literary style used in the text re-

veals a relative sophistication of vocabulary tempered by the

influence of Andalusian or Maghribi dialectical elements."It

is true that the unique Berlin manuscript is written in a

Maghribi script, but Ahlwardt, Verzeichnis der arabischen

Handschriften der koniglichen Bibliothek zu Berlin (Berlin,

1887-99, reprinted Hildesheim, 1980-81), 1:361, estimated

that this copy dated from about 700/1300, or nearly two

hundred years after the work was written. Apart from the

script of the manuscript, everything else about the text

points to an origin in the Eastern regions of Islam.

7 In this quotation Ibn Karram enumerates the contents of

the Qur'an by genre and warns against al-tafsir bi'l-ra'y.

The author of al-Mabanmadmits that he is not entirely sure

of Ibn Karram's intention, although he is familiar with the

full context of the citation (Mabdni, 209-10).

8 Mabadn,47-48 (Ubayy's mushaf), 170-71 (qira'at), 188ff.(tafsir), 194 (tafsTr),207-8 (traditions on seven ahruf), 217-

18(seven lughat), 240-41 (traditions on asbac al-Qur'in). In

some cases it is not clear where the quotation from Ibn al-

Haysam ends.

On Ibn al-Haysam, see Texte, 60-67. To the list of Ibn

al-Haysam's writings compiled by van Ess (Texte, 67), add a

work on faith (Tman)as consisting of the utterance of the

tongue (qawl al-lisdn) alone, seen by Ibn Taymiyya (d.

The identity of the author of al-Mabadn remains

elusive, although numerous clues exist. The work, the

author tells us, was begun in ShaCban of 425/1033.9

By the time that he wrote al-MabdnT, the author had

already established his mastery of the Qur'anic sci-

ences in a series of writings, of which he names nofewer than four,'1 and must have been of middle age,

728/1328)(al-Furqdnbaynal-haqqwa'l-bdtil,n Majmu'at

al-rasdailal-kubrd [Cairo, 1385/1966], 1:43) and a compila-

tion on the praises (mandqib) of Ibn Karram, which Ibn al-

Salah (d. 643/1243) saw in Nishapur and mentioned in his

Fawa'id al-rihla (Zayn al-din al-'Iraqi, al-TaqyTdwa'l-diidh

sharh muqaddimat Ibn al-Salah, ed. 'Abd al-Rahman M.

'Uthman [Medina, 1389/1969], 139 [al-'Iraqi's comment]).

This work of Ibn al-Salah's is likely to have been the

source from which later authors quote Ibn al-Salah on the

proper vocalization of the name Karram(al-DhahabT,MTzdnal-i'tidal, ed. CAllM. al-Bijawi [Cairo, 1382/1963], 4:22; Taj

al-Din al-Subki, Tabaqdtal-shfi'iyya al-kubra, ed. CAbdal-

Fattah M. al-Hulw and Mahmuid M. al-Tanahl [Cairo,

1383/1963], 2:305 (from majamTrof Ibn al-Salah). On this

philological problem, see the exhaustive discussion in Texte,

8-11.

It may be noted that Ibn al-Haysam's interest in the

Qur anic sciences is revealed not only by the quotations

from his writings that appear in al-MabanTand in the work

of his grandson al-Haysam b. Muhammad, identified by van

Ess (Texte, 68-73), but also by his activity in the field of

qird9at. As reported by Ibn al-Jazari, Ghdyat al-nihaya fi

tabaqat al-qurra', ed. G. Bergstrasser(Cairo, 1351-52/1932-

33), 2:274, Ibn al-Haysam's learning in this area, as trans-

mitted by Abu Muhammad Hamid b. Ahmad (Ibn al-Jazari,

1:202), was relied upon by Abu 'Abdallah Ahmad b. Abi

'Umar al-Khurasani (Ibn al-Jazari, 1:93) in his K. al-.dadh

on the ten qirda't. Since, according to Ibn al-Jazari, al-

Khurasani died after 500 A.H., he is probably not to be

identified with the Karrami expert on qir'adt Ahmad b. AbT

'Umar al-Misri known as al-Zahid al-Andarani (d. 470/

1077) (Ibrahim b. Muhammad al-Sarifini, al-Muntakhab

min k. al-siydq li-ta'rikh Ntsdbur, in The Histories of

Nishapur, ed. R. N. Frye [Cambridge, Mass., 1965], f. 33a).

In addition to Ibnal-Haysam,

al-Mabant (173-74) quotes

al-Shaykh Abui'Amr 'Uthman b. Baqiyya al-Mazini, who is

probably the Karrami Abui 'Amr al-Mazili or al-MazulT

(Texte, 77-79).

9 MabnT, 6.

'o K. al-Ghurar fi asami al-suwar (MabdnT,64); al-lbdna

wa'l-i'rdb (Mabdan, 116); al-ZTna i su'aldt al-qur'dn (Ma-

bdnT,116) (an unfinished work); al-Durar ft tarftFal-suwar

(Mabdnt, 172).

578



ZYsow: Two Unrecognized Karrdmi Texts

since he reports having heard traditions from Ibn al-

Haysam, who died in 409/1019.11Whatever theological tendency al-MabanTmay rep-

resent is kept well in the background.'2 The style

throughout is that of conservative Islamic learning,

rooted in the prophetic traditions. The work containsnumerous isndds, replete with names that are now

unidentifiable. Notable is the author's interest in fur-

nishing an isndd of his own for the traditions that he

cites from one of his chief sources, the K. Fihi mdfih

of Abui Sahl Muhammad b. Muhammad b. 'All al-

Talaqani an-Anmari.'3

Our present ignorance of the Karramiyya is such

that we cannot assign our author with definiteness to

any particular branch of the sect. We do not know,for example, what significance,if any, is to be attached

to the author's use of the epithet al-Imam al-Hadi for

Ibn Karram.14It is clear enough, however, that the

author of al-Mabanl stood in close relation to the

circles from which Ibn al-Haysam emerged, and one

of the author's teachers, Abu Ja'far Muhammad b.

Ahmad b. Ja'far is known to have transmitted tradi-

tions to Ibn al-Haysam.15

" MabdnT,07,240. On Ibnal-Haysam's ateof death,see

Texte,61-62.12 There s a briefdisparaging eferenceo the claimmade

by a Shliite imam n the mountainous egionsof Isfahan o

be in possessionof a fuller ext of the Qur'an MabanT,0).On the evolution of ImamT octrine on this issue, see E.

Kohlberg,"Some Notes on the Imamite Attitude to the

Qur'an," n IslamicPhilosophy nd the ClassicalTradition:

EssaysPresented.. to RichardWalzer, d. S. M. Stern,A.

Hourani and V. Brown (Oxford, 1972), 209-24.

13 Mabdan,16.14

See n. 20 below.

5 Al-'Iraqi, al-TaqyTdwa'l-Lda.h, 39. This scholar may be

the Muhammad b. Ja'far who was Ibn al-Haysam's teacher

(Texte, 28-29) and is perhaps to be identified with the

Hanafi uristand asceticAbu Ja'far Muhammad . Ahmad

b. Ja'far, who died in 413/1022 (Fasih Ahmad b. Jalal al-

Din KhwafT,Mujmal-efasLhi, ed. Mahmud Farrokh [Mash-

had,1339-41

solar/ 1960-62], 2:126). Another of the author'steachers, Abu'l-Qasim 'Abdallah b. Mahmashadh, also ap-

pears to have been older than Ibn al-Haysam, for he reportstraditions directly from Abui Sahl al-Anmari (Mabain, 8),the author of K. Fthi mafih, whereas Ibn al-Haysam reportsfrom Abu Sahl through Abu'l-Nadr Muhammad b. 'AlI

al-Talaqani (Mabani, 240), as does another of the author's

teachers, Abui 'Abdallah Muhammad b. 'All (MabanT, 8).On the Mahmashadh family, see C. E. Bosworth, "The Rise

The second of the works to which I wish to draw

attention is al-Nutaffi'l-fatawd, edited about a decade

ago by Salah al-Din al-Nahl, and attributedby him to

the Hanafi QadTAbu'l-Hasan 'All b. al-Husayn al-

Sughdi (d. 461/ 1068).16This is a work on Islamic law

and covers the standard topics in two volumes of over800 printed pages. It is characterized by a highlyarticulated presentation of the rules of law, with little

attention to legal argument. There is, however, con-

stant reference to the points of disagreement amongthe leading jurists such as Abui Hanifa, Abui Yiisuf,Muhammad al-Shaybani, al-Shafici and Malik.

If every book has its secret, as the saying goes, then

the secret of al-Nutaf is the identity of the jurist Abui

'Abdallah, whose opinions are as fully reported as

those of the famous jurists named in the preceding

paragraph, a fact which no attentive reader could fail

to note. In fact, the manuscript tradition of al-Nutaf,as presented by Professor al-Nahi's edition, providesno less than three suggested solutions to this problem.But of these only one was recognized as such by the

editor and discussed by him in the footnote that he

devotes to the identity of Abii 'Abdallah.17

According to the editor, a marginal note in the

Izmir manuscript of al-Nutafidentifies Abu 'Abdallah

as Abui 'Abdallah al-Bukharf (d. 546/1151). This

identification is rejected by the editor on the groundthat al-SughdT (d. 461/1068), whom he regards asthe author of al-Nutaf, died well before this Abui'Abdallah. The editor himself suggests, only to reject,

the identification of Abui cAbdallah with Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni, whose death date, 478/1085, isalso too late. He finally settles upon the identificationof Abtu Abdallahas one of al-Sughdi's teachers.

Although the editor fails to note it, the identifica-tion of Abiu'Abdallah as al-Juwayni already appearsin the text of al-Nutaf, in the form of what is clearly a

copyist's gloss that has worked its way into the bodyof the work, producing the otherwise unknown Abu

'Abdallah al-Juwaynl.'8 Since Imam al-Haramayn'skunya was Abu'l-Ma'al, it is not clear how the editorcame to consider the famous al-Juwayni as a possible

of the Karamiyyah in Khurasan," Muslim World (50) 1960,

reprinted in Bosworth, The Medieval History of Iran,

Afghanistan and Central Asia (London, 1977), 7-12. Texte,

33-35, furnishes an annotated family tree.16Baghdad,1975-76.17Nutaf, 1:8, n. 1.18 Nutaf, 1:79. The interpolated words are on the second

line from the bottom: al-JuwaynTmin ashab al-Shafi'T.

579




candidate for the solution of the Abii CAbdallahmys-

tery, unless this solution was suggested to him by this

reference in the text of al-Nutaf itself. But if so, it is

somewhat surprising that he was not disturbed by the

anachronistic (on his own view) appearance of Imam

al-Haramayn in the text he was editing.Another copyist's gloss interpolated into the text of

al-Nutaf, which the editor has again failed to note, is

the one that points in the right direction. This glossidentifies Abii 'Abdallah as al-KarramT.19n fact, Abil

CAbdallah s none other than Muhammad b. Karram,

the founder of the Karramiyya, and al-Nutaf is more

than simply a work of Hanafi fiqh, as the editor

thought, but a unique source for the fiqh of the

Karramiyya.20

19Nutaf, 1:372.20 In K. al-Siydq li-ta'rTkhNisdbur of CAbdal-Ghafir al-

Farisi (d. 529/1135) in The Histories of Nishapur, ed. R. N.

Frye (Cambridge, Mass., 1965), the Karramiyyaare routinely

referred to as ashab AbTCAbdallah,a usage already noted by

W. Madelung, "The Spread of Maturidism and the Turks,"

Actas do IV congresso de estudios arabes e isliamicos,

Coimbra-Lisboa 968 (Leiden,1971), 121, n. 32a, and by

C. E. Bosworth in an addendum to the 1977 reprint of his

"Rise of the Karamiyyahin Khurasan,"13.

The evidence presently available suggests that this usage

became prevalent in the course of the fifth/eleventh century.

Reports of Ibn Karram's teachings by his contemporaries

consistently refer to him as Ibn Karram, to judge by theexamples collected in al-Dhahabi, Ta'rTkh l-islam 241-350,

Leiden Or. 2363, f. 74a. In British Museum Or. 8049, which

van Ess dates to about 400 A.H., the reference is consistently

to Abu CAbdallah Texte, 55, n. 236). So also al-Haysam b.

Muhammad (first half of fifth/eleventh century) quotes a

legal work of Abu 'Abdallah (Texte, 72, n. 325). In K.

Rawnaq al-qulub (ca. second half of fifth/eleventh century)

the usage alternatesbetweenal-Imam al-Zahid Abu CAbdallah

and al-Zahid Muhammad b. Karram(Texte, 31).

The evolution in usage is evident in the writings of non-

Karramis. In CAbdal-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d. 429/1037), al-

Farq bayn al-firaq, ed. Muhammad Muhyi al-Din CAbd

al-Hamid (Cairo, n.d.), 215-25, the reference is exclusively to

Ibn Karram. The Zaydl al-Hakim al-Jushami (d. 494/1101)

in his Sharh CUyunal-masd'il (passages translated in Texte,

20-29) usually refers to Abu CAbdallah,sometimes to Ibn

Karram. The Imami Sayyid Murtada b. DaCi al-Razi (first

half of sixth/twelfth century), K. Tabsirat al-'awamm ft

maCrifatmaqalat al-anam, ed. CAbbasIqbal (Tehran, 1313),

64-74, almost always uses the form Abii 'Abdallah-e Karram.

Al-Shahrastani (d. 548/1153), al-Milal wa'l-nihal, ed. 'Abd

al-'Aziz M. al-Wakil (Cairo, 1387/1968), 1:108,112, refers to

Our knowledge of Karrami fiqh apart from al-

Nutaf is sparse to say the least, but sufficient to

corroborate that the legal doctrine attributed by al-

Nutaf to Abiu 'Abdallah is Karrami. The sources to

which we have to turn are not the standard works on

legal differences (ikhtilaf), but writings of othergenres.

In the first place stand the references to Karrami

fiqh found in Ahsan al-taqasTm (completed about

375/985) of the geographer al-Maqdisi, whose account

bears no signs of the hostility to the Karramiyyathat

we find elsewhere.21 Al-Maqdisi informs us about

several specific Karrami legal teachings. Like ashab

al-hadrth, the Karramiyya admit the wiping of the

headcovering ('imtma) as part of ritual ablution

(wu.du').22 On four points, al-Maqdisi tells us, the

Karramiyya differ from all others: in their leniency

(musamaha) with respect to the formulation of an

intention (niyya) for acts of worship,23 in allowing

mandatory prayers to be performed on horseback,24

in recognizing the validity of the fast of someone who

eats unwittingly after daybreak,25and in recognizing

the validity of morning prayerwhich is still in progress

when the sun rises.26A fifth point is found in one of

the manuscripts: the Karramiyya allow the jum'a

prayer to be conducted with fewer than forty persons

and outside of a settled town (misrjamiC).27For each

of these points of law we can find a teaching attributed

to Abu cAbdallah in al-Nutaf which is either directly

on point or which at least furnishes the basis for a

plausible explanation of al-Maqdisi'sformulation.28

Abui cAbdallah. In his K. Nihayat al-aqddm, ed. A. Guil-

laume (Oxford, 1934), 105 (Arabic), we find the ibn-less

Persian form Abui cAbdallah al-Karram (unless the proper

reading is al-Karrami).21 Al-MaqdisT says of the Karramiyya that they are ahl

zuhd wa-tacabbud wa-marjicuhum ild AbT Hanmfawa-kull

man rajaca ila AbT Hanifa ... fa-laysa bi-mubtadiC Ahsan

al-taqasfm fi ma'rifat al-aqalfm, ed. M. J. de Goeje, 2d ed.

[Leiden, 1906, reprinted Baghdad, n.d.], 365).22

Maqdisi, 40. Cf. Nutaf, 1:19.

23 MaqdisT,40. Cf. Nutaf, 1:56-57, and see discussion in

text below.24

Maqdisi, 40. Cf. Nutaf, 1:83(salat al-musayafa).25 Maqdisi, 40. Cf. Nutaf, 1:157(point 14).26

MaqdisT,40. Cf. Nutaf, 1:80.27

MaqdisT, 40. Cf. Nutaf, 1:90-93. This point is the only

one that is troublesome. According to Abu 'Abdallah the

jumca prayer may only be conducted in a town (qarya) that

contains at least forty men (Nutaf, 1:92), but the prayer itself

may be performedby two men (Nutaf, 1:93).28

See references in nn. 22-27 preceding.

580



ZYSOW:Two Unrecognized KarramTTexts

Other accounts of Karrami fiqh give us further

details, but at the same time raise problems of a new

dimension, since all come from sources with an un-

disguised hostility toward the Karramiyya. The briefaccount provided by the Ashcari Shafi'l heresio-

grapher 'Abd al-Qahir al-BaghdadT(d. 429/1037-8)of what he terms "the unprecedented imbecilities ofIbn Karramin law" is characteristicof these sources.29

Al-Baghdadi cites four points of law. Ibn Karram,he tells us, held the view that the prayer of a traveler

could be validly performed with two takbTrswithoutthe other elements that ordinarily constitute prayer.Ibn Karram further held that prayer could be validly

performed by someone in a state of personal unclean-

ness, since he required cleansing (tahdra) only on

account of ritual impurity (hadath). Ibn Karram also

taught that washing and praying over the dead were

only recommended, not obligatury like shrouding andburial. Finally, he taught that prayer and fasting,insofar as obligatory, required no intention (niyya),since he held that the intention of accepting Islam in

the beginning (niyyat al-isldm fi'l-ibtida') was suffi-cient to satisfy the requirement of an intention for all

obligatory rituals of Islam.30

Abu'l-Muzaffar al-Isfara'inT (d. 471/1078), wholike al-Baghdadi was an Ash'ari Shafi'i and whoseaccount differs but little from that of his predecessor,expands upon the role of intention in Karrami law.The "intention in the beginning," he tells us, is theintention expressed by all the future descendants of

Adam when they acknowledged God as their Lord, asreported in the Qur'an (7:172). This primordial inten-tion expressed by Adam's first progeny (al-niyya al-

sdbiqa fi'l-dharr al-awwal) obviates the requirementof any further intention with respect to obligatoryrituals, but not with respect to supererogatory rituals,since these the first progeny did not accept. "Wouldthat they knew," al-Isfara'inT adds, "on what basis

they say this and on what basis they say that all

obligations, in all their details, were set before themand accepted. If they base this on what is in the

Qur'an, there is nothing more in the Qur'an than the

offering to them of the formula of belief (kalimat al-

Tmfn)."3' This account of Ibn Karram's teaching on

29 Al-BaghdadT,al-Farq, 223: abdaa fi'l-fiqh hamaqat lam

yusbaq ilayha. Abu'l-Muzaffar al-Isfara?nT, al-TabsTr i'l-dTn,ed. M. Z. al-Kawthari (Cairo, 1359/1940), 69, speaksof khurafat, hamdqat and jahdlat. Ibn DgCi, Tabsirat al-

Cawamm,7,refers o the a.daih of theKarramiyya.30

Al-BaghdadT,al-Farq, 223-24.31

Al-lsfarainl, al-Tabsir, 69.

intention attaches it to the well-known Karrami doc-

trine that all men are believers by virtue of the original

allegiance to the lordship of God that they undertookin their pre-existence.32

Of the four points of Ibn Karram'sfiqh touched

upon by al-Baghdadi, two are in direct contradictionto the information supplied by al-Nutaf. The traveler's

prayer for Abu cAbdallah consisted of two completerak'as.33As for Ibn Karram's indifference to tangible

impurity, al-Nutaf expressly states that according toAbu CAbdallahprayer cannot be validly performedwhen tangible impurity greater in extent than adirham adheres to the clothing or the body.34On theother hand, al-BaghdadT'ssummary of Ibn Karram's

teaching on the obligations due to the dead appears tobe correct.35There is also some basis for al-BaghdadT'sreport on Ibn Karram's doctrine of intention. Thus

al-BaghdadT'saccount exhibits no more than afifty-percent correspondenceto the information in al-Nutaf,

and even less if we look closely at the doctrine ofintention presented in al-Nutaf.36

Al-Nutaf distinguishes between a "prior intention"

(niyya qadTma) and a "supervening, or subsequent,intention" (niyya hdditha, niyya jadida). The former

32Al-BaghdadT,l-Farq,223; al-Isfara'InT,al-Tabs[r, 69;

Abu'l-Yusr al-BazdawT, Usil al-dTn, ed. Hans Peter Linss

(Cairo,1383/1963), 11-12.33 Nutaf, 1:75.

3Nutaf, 1:34.

3Nutaf, 1:32(ghusl al-sunna).3The account of KarramT aw in Ibn DaCT, Tabsirat al-

'awamm, overssomedozen or so points,of whichonlytwoor threearecorroboratedby, or can be so construedas toaccordwith,al-Nutaf.Forexample, t is correctlytated hatIbnKarram id not regardhequcidand two tashahhuds sessential lementsarkdn) f saldt p. 67;cf. Nutaf, 1:47).

A numberof the teachingsattributed o Ibn Karram nTabsiratal-'awammare highlyshocking:homosexualrela-tionswithnon-Muslims rean act of worship cibadat) 68-69, withreference o Qur'an9:120and a verseby a KarramT

poet; cf. Nutaf 1:269[homosexualacts subjectto hadd of

zina]); intercoursewith emissionbut without penetrationdoes not makeghusl obligatory 68; cf. Nutaf, 1:29);un-natural ntercoursewitha menstruatingwoman s permitted(69;cf. Nutaf, 1:137).Needless o say, al-Nutafprovidesnobasisuponwhich o attribute uchteachings o IbnKarram.It maybe notedthatopinions avoring he permissibilityfanal intercoursewereattributed o both Malik(IbnJuzayy,Qawiinrn al-ahkdm al-sharT'iyya, ed. T. Sa'd and M. al-

HawwarTCairo,1395/1975], 2[slander]) ndal-ShaficTal-Amir al-SanCanTSubul al-saldmsharh buliighal-mardm

[Cairo,1379/1965], :138).

581




is defined as the "intention (irdda) to perform future

obligations as laid down by God at their appropriatetimes." The latter is the "intention to perform obliga-tions that one intends to perform at the time (fi'l-

waqt)." A prior intention obviates the need for a

subsequent intention, although a subsequent intentionmerits a reward of its own.37The doctrine of a prior

intention appears to have been designed to provide a

solution to certain technical problems of ritual law,

particularly prayer.38There is no trace in al-Nutaf of

any theological substructure for the legal doctrine.39

In fact, the language of al-Nutaf makes it clear that

not everyone will have a prior intention, which could

not be the case if the prior intention were common to

all descendants of Adam.40

The correspondence between the legal teachings

ascribed to AbuicAbdallahin al-Nutaf and the reports

on Karramifiqh in al-Maqdisi and the heresiographers

is sufficient to corroborate the identification of the

Abiu Abdallah of al-Nutafwith Ibn Karram. Another

question is the relative reliability of al-Nutaf and the

heresiographerswhere they fail to agree.It is, of course, possible to prefer the heresiogra-

phers. The doctrine of al-Nutaf, it might be argued,

represents a reformulation of Karram1 aw designed to

rid it of its more objectionable features, along the

lines of the reformulation of Karrami theology which

Ibn al-Haysam is supposed to have accomplished.4'

According to this hypothesis, al-Nutaf would be in-

accurately ascribing reformulated Karrdamiaw to Ibn

Karram, while the heresiographers preserve his origi-nal teachings. There is, however, evidence that runs

counter to such a theory. In the first place, al-Nutaf

carefully distinguishes between the teaching of Ibn

Karram and that derived from it.42 In the second

37Nutaf,1:56-57.A third ntention s labelled"discrimina-

tory" mumayyiza),ince t "discriminateshat s obligatory

(farTda) rom what is recommendedsunna) and what is

recommendedromwhatis supererogatoryfa.d'il) (Nutaf,

1:57).

38 Nutaf, 1:58-60 (saldt), 1:155(sawm); 1:207(talbiya).39 Nor is there any such trace either in Maqdisi, 40, or in

Ibn Da'!, Tabsiratal-cawamm, 67.

40 idhadkdnat lahu niyya qadima (Nutaf, 1:58, 11.12-13);

wa-in lam yakun lahu niyya (1:155, 1. 12).41 Al-Shahrastani, al-Milal, 1:112 (wa-qad ijtahada Ibn al-

Haysam fi irmdm maqalat AbT CAbdalldht kull mas'ala);

al-Shahrastani, Nihayat al-aqdam, Arabic pp. 105, 122

(tazwtratIbn al-Haysam . . . wa-innama huwa islah madhhab

la yaqbal al-islah wa-ibrdm mu'taqad la yaqbal al-ibrdm

wa'l-ihkam).42

See n. 59 below.

place, a theory of this sort fails to come to terms with

the agreement between al-Maqdisi's account and al-

Nutaf. It is surely simpler to posit carelessness or even

maliciousness on the part of the heresiographers than

inaccuracy on the part of the author of al-Nutaf.

Another possible course in upholding the accuracyof the heresiographers is to hypothesize a KarramT

esotericism which would not readily expose eccentric

Karrami legal teachings to the scrutiny of the un-

initiated. The possibility of Karrami esotericism is in

fact raised by a reference in the Persian heresiographi-cal Tabsirat al-'awdmm of the Imami Ibn Da'i (first

half of the 6/12th century) to a Kitdb al-Sirr among

the writings of Ibn Karram. "They call it secret," we

are told, "because they do not show it to any but the

inner circle (khawdss) of his followers." Somewhat

ironically, given the alleged laxity of the Karramiyya

with respect to purity, Ibn Karram is supposed to

have written in his own hand on the flyleaf of this

book, "Let none but the purified touch it (Qurdan

56:79)."43Without dismissing the existence of KarramTeso-

tericism out of hand, here again it is simpler to trace

the problem that confronts us to the heresiographers

than to the Karramiyya. The discussion of Karrami

law in the heresiographical sources is confined almost

exclusively to ritual law. This is hardly fortuitous. By

virtue of its relative imperviousness to rational analy-

sis, this area of the law is a touchstone of fidelity to

the Islamic revelation and the Muslim community.

Remainingwithin the

accepted parametersof ritual

law was thus of considerable symbolic importance,

and within ritual law, the laws of purity must have

been especially sensitive barometers of social cohesion.

These considerations emerge with particular clarity

in the account of KarramTegal practice furnished by

the Shafilc QadTAbu Ja'far al-Zawzani and preserved

by Ibn DaC'.44 Al-Zawzani portrays the Karramiyya

43 Ibn DaCT,Tabsiratal-'awdmm, 65. Ibn Da'Ts informant

here, as for much of his account, is QadT Abu Ja'far al-

Zawzani, for the identification of whom see the following

note. The problem of Karramiesotericism is raised not only

by Ibn Karram'sK. al-Sirr but also by al-Hakim al-Jushami's

reference to the secret teachings of the Karramiyya, which

they termed ahkdm (Texte, 25). The teachings al-Jushami

mentions are, however, unlike those quoted from K. al-Sirr,

exclusively theological.44

Al-Zawzani is surely to be identified with QadT Abu

Ja'far Muhammad b. Ishaq al-Zawzani al-Bahhathi (d. 463/

1071) a famous lampoonist, not the otherwise obscure

Muhammad b. Ishaq b. cUzayr, whom van Ess tentatively

suggests (Texte, 77), but whose kunya, Abu Bakr, is wrong.

582



ZYsow: Two Unrecognized Karrdmi Texts

as at one and the same time both lax and over-

scrupulous with respect to the laws of purity.45Their

perception of purity is thus seriously out of focus byIslamic standards. Ibn Karram, as already observed,

applied to his Kitab al-Sirr the standard of purity

appropriate to the Qur'an. Even more telling is IbnKarram'salleged teaching on the impurity of wine:

Should one drop of wine fall into the CaspianSea

and a sparrowdrinka drop of water from that sea

andflyoffandthenreach he oceansevenyears ater,and a bit of excrement rom that bird fall into the

ocean, the water of the ocean and the flesh of everycreaturen the ocean would be prohibited.So that if

someoneshould eat a bit of the flesh of a fishfrom

theocean,he wouldbe liableto the haddpenalty for

consumingwine].And shouldhe die, it wouldnot be

lawful o prayover him.But he shouldbe cast onto a

Magian ire-templeo that birdsmaydevourhim.46

For biographical references,see 'Umar Rida Kahhala,

Mu'jamal-mu'allifin(Damascus,1379/1960),9:41. Yaqutwrote of al-Zawzani, wa-ma taraka ahad min al-kubarda

wa'l-a'imma wa'l-fuqahd' wa-sd'ir al-asndf min al-nds illd

hajdhu wa-waqa'a fih (Mu'jam al-udaba', ed. A. F. Rifac'

[Cairo, 1936-38],18:18).Forone of hisvictims,Muhammad

b. 'Abd al-Rahman al-KanjarudhT(d. 453/1061), see al-

SarTfTnT,l-Muntakhab, f. 10a, where the text (1.9) refers to

al-QadTal-Zawzani. It may be noted that Ibn Abi'l-Wafa'

al-QurashT,al-Jawdhir al-mudiyya ft tabaqdt al-hanafiyya

(Hyderabad, 1332), 2:31, lists al-Zawzani as a HanafT.45 Ibn DadT, Tabsirat al-'awamm, 67 (prayer in unclean

garment), 68 (impurity has no effect on small amount of

water unless color, smell or taste is changed) (confirmed by

Nutaf, 1:9), 69 (personal uncleanness in prayer). Cf. the

description of the KarramT shaq b. Ahmad al-Muh.ammad-

abadT (d. 478/1085) as muhtdt fi'l-tahdra wa-nazdfat al-

thiydb in al-SarffinT,al-Muntakhab, f. 47a.

46 Ibn Da'T, Tabsirat al-'awdmm, 68. The ultimate source

for this quotation is Ibn Karram's son, who related it to al-

BazzazT,a KarramTeader contemporary with Abu 'Amr al-

Mazini (Ibn Dac', Tabsiratal-'awdmm, 65-66). The strikingname of Ibn Karram's son, CAbdal-Jasim, appears to have

gone unnoticed. Ibn Karram's forceful personality is still

discernible from the meager sources presently available, and

it is perhaps not surprising that he should have found this

provocative way of asserting his belief that God is a jism

(al-BaghdadT, al-Farq, 216). Ibn Karram's fondness for

theological neologisms was already a topic of medieval com-

ment (El2, s.v. Karramiyya, 4:668b).On the question of the original context of the quotations

from Ibn Karram in Ibn Da'T, see Texte, 16-19. Al-Nutaf

may in fact prove of assistance in corroborating the authen-

We therefore need not go so far as to suppose a

sustained KarramT sotericism to explain the absence

from al-Nutaf of the more provocative details of

Karrami aw suppliedby the heresiographicalaccounts.

These accounts are clearly the last place where we

would look for a balanced discussion of Karramlteachings, and we can fully agree with Bosworth when

he says that "theological prejudice in these writers

made them exaggerate the differences between the

Karamiyyah and the other legal and theologicalschools."47

The identification and reliability of al-Nutaf as a

repository of KarramTaw having been dealt with, the

tasks remain of eliciting what al-Nutaf can tell us

about Karrami law and of situating the work itself in

the Karramilegal tradition.

Al-Nutaf leaves no doubt that Ibn Karram's legaldoctrine was closely affiliated with Hanafism, but this

is hardly a surprise. In defending the Karramiyya

against the charge of being innovators, al-Maqdisi

already pointed to, among other things, their affilia-

tion to Abu Hanifa.48The problem lies in identifyingmore precisely the relation between Karramism and

Hanafism, and with respect to this problem, al-Nutaf,far from providing an obvious answer, only suggestsmore questions.

Al-MaqdisTtells us that the Karramiyya possessedboth a legal system and a theology (fiqh wa-kaldm)of their own.49 But other sources point to a more

complex situation. According to Ibn Da'T most of

ticity of some of these quotations. For example, in his K.

al-Sirr Ibn Karram is alleged to have posed the question of

why washing underwear is not prescribed for farting "since

the wind is no more free of dust (bdd-Taz ghobdr khali na-

bovad) than a fart of moisture" (Ibn Da'T, Tabsirat al-

'awamm, 67, translated in full in Texte, 16). This notion is

conceptually kin to IbnKarram's emarkableeaching hat

as a last resort tayammummay be performedby wavingone's handsin the air "since he air is not free of dirt" li-anna al-hawa' la yakhliumin al-turdb) (Nutaf, 1:39, which

identifies his teachingas the view of Wahbb. Sayyar).The

closestteaching o thatof Ibn Karram hatI havebeenable

to find s thatof theShafi'iAbuHamidal-Isfara'inTd. 406/

1016), who would permit tayammum in a blowing wind (al-

rThal-hdbba) (Ibn Hajar al-'AsqalanT,Fath al-bdrTbi-sharh

al-BukhdT[Cairo, 1378/1959], 1:450).47 Bosworth, "Rise of the Karamiyyah,"7, n. 5.

48 See n. 21 above. Ibn Karram is reported to have trans-

mitteda tradition oretellingAbu HanTfa'soleas a renewerof the Prophet's sunna (al-Dhahabi, Mizdn al-i'tidal, 1:106-

7. See Texte, 49).49 MaqdisT,7.

583




the Karramiyya had their own legal system, while

some of the Karramiyya in Ghur and Sind followed

Abi HanTfa.50The combination of Hanafi law and

Karrami theology also appears in the line of the poetAbu'l-Fath al-Busti (d. 400/1010): "the only true legal

system (fiqh) is Abu Hanifa's, just as the only truereligious system (din) is that of Muhammad b.

Karam."51The ShVite 'Abd al-Jalil al-RazT ca. 540/

1145) distinguishes among HanafTsaccording to their

theological affiliation: KarramT,Mu'tazili, Najjari or

orthodox HanafT.52

An interesting postscript to these sources comes

from Mas'id b. Shayba al-Sindi, a staunch Hanafi of

the 7th/13th century. According to Ibn Shayba, Ibn

Karram combined the theology of the anthropo-

morphists (usuilal-mushabbiha) with most of the law

(akthar furc') of Abiu Hanifa. In his own day, Ibn

Shayba tells us, "the Karramiyya are a small group

(shirdhima) living in the mountains of Ghur and the

suburbs (sawad) of Ghazna, whom the HanafTs shun

and whom on occasion some of them anathematize."53

Presumably Ibn Shayba's familiarity with Karrami

law was gained in those regions where, as we learn

from Ibn DaCi, the Karramiyya adhered to a more or

less standard variety of HanafT aw, which Ibn Shayba

simply attributedto Ibn Karram.

The positive information that al-Nutaf furnishes

with respect to the background of Ibn Karram's legaldoctrine and to the evolution of Karrami law can be

50 Ibn DaFT,Tabsiratal-'awdmm, 76, 90. In his account of

the troublesof 595/1199 nvolvingFakhral-Dinal-RazTnd

the KarramTbn al-Qudwa on whichsee C. E. Bosworth,

"TheEarly slamicHistoryof Ghur,"CentralAsiaticJournal

VI,no. 2 [1961]:131-32),Ibnal-Ward(d. 749/1349)speaksof the presence of al-karramiyya min al-hanafiyya wa'l-

shdficiyya (Tatimmat al-mukhtasar fi akhbar al-bashar

[Cairo,1285],2:114).But this is mostlikelydue to careless-

ness. Ibn al-Athir(d. 630/1233)in recountinghese events

mentions al-fuqaha' min al-karrdmiyyawa'l-hanafiyya wa'l-

shdfi'iyya (al-Kamilfi'l-ta'rikh, ed. Tornberg [Leiden, 1853,

reprintedBeirut,1386/1966],12:151).

5' The translation is that of Bosworth, "Rise of the Kar-amiyya," 8, which gives the sources. Al-Subki, Tabaqat al-

shdfi'iyya, 2:305, which Bosworth does not list, has ra'y in

place offiqh.52 'Abd al-Jalil al-Razi, K. al-Naqd, ed. Jalal al-Din

HusaynTUrmawi, n.p., n.d., 74.

53ya9naf minhum al-hanafiyya wa-rubbama yalcanahum

ba'duhum (Mas'ud b. Shayba b. al-Husayn al-Sindi, Muqad-

dimat k. al-taclim, ed. Muhammad 'Abd al-Rashid al-

Nu'man [Hyderabad, 1384/1965], 205).

quickly summarized. References in al-Nutaf to the

legal opinions of Ahmad b. Harb (d. 234/848-9),

already known as Ibn Karram'smaster in asceticism,

suggest that Ibn Harb may have played a role in Ibn

Karram's formation as a jurist as well.54Apart from

Ibn Karram, who is mentioned throughout al-Nutaf,there are frequent references to the legal views of a

54 On Ibn Harb's relation to Ibn Karram, see Massignon,

Essai, 259-60, 318. References to Ibn Harb's legal opinions

appear in Nutaf, 1:6(purity of water), 47 (prayer),and 501-2

(pre-emption). In the first reference Ibn Harb is reported to

have refined a classic HanafTproblematic. In the last refer-

ence, Ibn Harb and Ibn Karram are reported as in agreement

with a reported teaching (reading wa-riwayatin at 502, 1. 1)

of al-Shaybani (cf. 'Abdallah b. Mahmfid b. Mawdiid al-

Mawsili, al-Ikhtiyar li-taCll al-mukhtdr, ed. Mahmud Abf

DaqTqa[Cairo, 1951/1370, reprinted Beirut, n.d.], 2:44-45,

where this teaching is attributed to Abi Yusuf).

According to al-KhatiTbal-BaghdadT, Ta'rfkh Baghdad

(Cairo, 1349/1931), 4:118, the Karramiyya"claimed"(tanta-

hil) Ahmad b. Harb. Jacqueline Chabbi has suggested that

this association with the Karramiyya may have led to

Ibn Harb's being ignored in Sufi historiography until the

5th/llth Century ("Remarques sur le d6veloppement his-

torique des mouvements asc6tiques et mystiques au Khora-

san: iiie/ixe siecle-ive/xe siecle," Studia Islamica 46 [1977]:

30, 48, n. 3). It should be noted, however, that Ahmad b.

Harb appears at the head of the list of fuqahd' and sdlihuin

in the Persian translation of al-Hakim al-Samarqandi's

(d. 342/953) al-Sawdd al-aCzam(Tarjome-ye al-sawad al-

a4zam, ed. 'Abd al-Hayy Habibi [Tehran, 1348], 146) but is

missing entirely in the Arabic original (al-Sawdd al-a'zam,

n.p., n.d., 31). Since this translation is dated by its editor

to about 370 A.H., this pushes back the chronology for

Ahmad b. Harb's re-emergence put forward by Chabbi. The

Persian text is not otherwise favorably disposed to the

Karramiyya (Tarjome-ye al-sawad al-aCzam, 115 [Karrami

teaching on the Qur'an is kufr]).

It is possible that Ibn Harb had a role to play in Ibn al-

Haysam's attempt to trace Karriamdoctrine back to cAl by

way of Sufyan al-Thawri (d. 161/778) (Ibn Abi'l-HadTd,

Sharh Nahj al-balagha, ed. Muhammad Abu'l-Fadl Ibrahim[Cairo, 1379/1960], 6:371). See the report, transmitted by

way of Ahmad b. Harb and Sufyan al-Thawri, of 'Al's

being taught a supplication at the Kacba by al-Khadir, in

al-Khatib al-BaghdadT,Ta'rrkhBaghddd,4:118-19.

It is interesting to note that Jum'a b. 'Abdallah al-Balkhi,

who is supposed to have exposed Ibn Harb's Murji'ism (Ibn

Hajaral-'Asqalani, Lisan al-mizan [Hyderabad, 1329], 1:149;

Massignon, Essai, 259) appears in an isnad in MabnT, 17

(Jum'a b. 'Abdallah Abu Bakr al-Sulami al-BalkhT).

584



ZYsow: Two Unrecognized KarramTTexts

certain Muhammad b. Sahib, sometimes referred to

simply as al-Shaykh.55In the form Muhammad b. al-

Sahib this name also appears in one of the isnads ofthe Qur'an commentary British Museum Or. 8049,studied by van Ess.56On the basis of van Ess' dating

of this work to about 400, the place of Ibn Sahib inthe isndd in which he appears allows us to assign him

to about the first half of the 4th/ 10th century.57Ibn

Sahib appears to have been quite independent in

developing his own legal opinions and may have

stood to Ibn Karram in the same relation that Abu

Yusuf and al-Shaybani bore to Abu Hanifa.58There

is, moreover, language throughout al-Nutaf that indi-

cates that Ibn Karram's legal teachings underwent a

typical elaboration at the hands of his followers.59

Unfortunately, al-Nutaf does not ordinarily furnish

the arguments for the rules of law that it states.60Any

55 Sometimeswe findal-ShaykhMuhammad . Sahib e.g.,

Nutaf, 1:322).Muhammadb. Salih (Nutaf, 1:602,612) is

clearly a typographical error. That Muhammad b. Sahib is

thesamepersonas al-Shaykhs corroborated ytheappear-ance of the latter as a variant or the former Nutaf,2:622;and see editor's note at Nutaf, 1:164).The only difficultypresentedby the text againstsuch an identification s the

attribution o Muhammadb. Sahib and al-Shaykhof in-

compatibleopinionson a singlepointof law at Nutaf,2:699,1. 13. Possibly al-Shaykhhere is a misinterpretation y a

copyistof the abbreviationhTn or al-Shafi'c hat is usedinsome of the manuscriptsof al-Nutaf. But there is some

question whether the teaching at issue (consumingthepropertyof another ratherthan eating mayta) is to beattributed o al-ShaficT. heopposingopinionappearsn al-

Shafi'c, al-Umm (Beirut,1400/1980),2:277, but see Abu

Ishaq al-ShTrazi, l-MuhadhdhabCairo, n.d.), 1:250andthecommentaryf al-Nawawi, l-Majmic'(Cairo,.d.),9:46.

The otherwiseunknownAhmadb. Muhammadb. Hilal

al-Haddadimay also have been a KarramTurist (Nutaf,1:90, where the full name appears,171 [al-Haddad],385

[pairedwith Ibn Sahibagainstal-fuqaha'and Abu 'Abdal-

lah],2:702).See furthern. 78below.56

Texte, 44.57

Texte, 54.

58 He oftenappearsholdingan opinionopposed o that ofIbn Karram(e.g., Nutaf, 1:164, 216, 224, 385), but his

opinions are reported even when in agreement with those of

Ibn Karram(e.g., Nutaf, 1:403,447).59 Qiyas qawl AbT 'Abdallah (Nutaf, 1:154, 361, 2:699

[= qawl Muhammad b. Sahib]); ashbah bi-qawl AbT Abdal-lah (Nutaf, 1:156,202); riwdyatdn(Nutaf, 1:197,310); qawlan

(Nutaf, 1:418).60 For examples of argumentscited in support of the

opinions of Abui'Abdallah, see Nutaf, 1:14 (israf in wudui),

reconstruction of the missing argumentation must

depend upon general progress in the study of Islamic

law. But the study of Islamic law, to which al-Nutafhas a notable contribution to make, has not advancedto the point of making such a reconstruction feasible.

Still less are we in a position to attempt an overallassessment of Karrami law as contrasted with some

other Islamic legal system.As far as legal theory (usul al-fiqh) is concerned,

al-Mabian has more to tell us than al-Nutaf, which

has only a few suggestive remarks here and there.61From al-MabanTit is clear that the Karramitradition

represented by Ibn al-Haysam, which we can provi-

sionally regard as mainstream Karramism, embraced

a standard variety of legal theory, one that recognizedthe validity of rules of law that were only probable

(zann).62 But there is evidence that other types of

36 (sperm s purebecauseGod wouldnot createa prophetfromwhatis impure),39 (tayammumn air),75 (permissionto break fast of Ramadan [iftdr] is ikrdm from God of which

onetravellingor a sinfulpurpose s unworthy), 3 (khutba),128(tenreasons 'ilal) whyfuneral ervice s "prayer"saldt)in the strictsense).

Certainof Ibn Karram'segal opinions appearto bear

some relation o the circumstancesf his life. For example,IbnKarram'seniencywithrespect o theprayers f someone

kept in confinement (Nutaf, 1:84 [tayammum in air]) is

reminiscent f IbnKarram's wnlong imprisonmentnd his

repeatedpracticeof preparingo leaveforthejumCa rayer.

When stopped by the guard, he would say, "O Lord, I havetriedmy best.The obstacle s not of my making wa'l-man'min ghayrr)." (al-Subki, Tabaqdt al-shdfi'iyya, 2:302, quot-

ing al-Hakim al-Nisabuiri). Similarly, Ibn Karram's con-

siderablepowersas a preacher resuggestedby his opinion,in agreementwith that of Abu HanTfa,hat both deliveringand listening to the Friday khutba were obligatory (farTda)but could be discharged by a single word "since the point of

the khutba is in the moral lesson ('iza) and there can be a

powerful lesson ('iza baligha) in a single word"(Nutaf, 1:93).61 For example, Nutaf, 1:40 qiyds), 83 (taklif md l yutdq),

436 (istihsan), 490 ('awn 'ala al-ma'siya), 501 (Muhammadb. Sahib: ahwat). Ibn Karram's use of discordant traditions

(which are generally not cited in al-Nutaf) may reveal pat-terns discernible in other Islamic legal systems (e.g., Nutaf,1:8-9 [purity of water]), but this point cannot be entered

into here.

62 Mabdanl p. 47, 1. 13 (bi-khabar al-wdhid dun al-jamcalladh yulzim al-yaqTn),195, 1. 19 (bi-akhbdr tunqal ilayhim

cala alsinat al-ruwat mimmd la yanqatic (read yuqta) cald

mughayyabihTbi'l-yaqTn).The important passages on usul

al-fiqh in MabanT,200-206, are replete with the terminologycharacteristic of al-tahsTnal- aqli (hakTm,hikma, tajwz fi'l-

585




legal theory won support among the Karramiyya.63

Al-Maqdis? tells us that some of the Karramiyya

accepted general infallibilism (taswTb) and held that

every mujtahid was correct with respect to both the-

ology and law. This teaching, as al-Maqdisi notes, was

associated with the Murji'a.64 And Abu'l-Muzaffaral-Isfara'lni writes of a leading KarramT,who, wishingto elevate theology (kalam) above law, used to saythat the learning of al-Shafic" and Abu Hanlfa could

all be fitted under a woman's hems.65This attitude is

characteristicof legal infallibilism, which regardsevery

mujtahid as correct on points of law, since law is not

a discipline in which certainty is generally attainable.

Certainty pertains to theology, which is the learningworth acquiring. Legal infallibilism was widespreadin Mu'tazill circles and came to dominate cIraqi

Hanafism, so that it is not surprising to find that it

made headway among Karrami urists as well.66

The recognition of al-Nutaf as a unique source forthe fiqh of Ibn Karram calls for a re-examination of

the identity and legal affiliation of its author. The

editor of al-Nutaf, Professor al-Nahi, accepts the

attribution of the work to the Hanafi Qadi al-qudat

Abu'l-Hasan CAl b. al-Husayn al-Sughdi (d. 461/

1068), a teacher of al-Sarakhsl (d. 490/1096).67 But

this attribution is hardly free from doubt. Hajjl

Khalifa, in fact, lists the names of no fewer than four

authors to whom al-Nutaf was attributed, with al-

Sughdl standing in the first place, followed by a

'uqil) and thus confirm the Karrami espousal of this ethical

doctrine reported elsewhere (e.g., al-Shahrastani, al-Milal,

1:113).On this point see Texte, 17.63

It is not clear whether the denial that there is a category

of indifferent (muhmal, mubdh) human conduct attributed

to the Karramiyya in K. al-Iktisdbi'l-rizqal-mustatdb,d.

'Izzat Amin al-CAttar Cairo 1357/1938), 68, is meant as a

serious statement of legal theory. On K. al-Iktisdb, which

purports to be an abridgment by Muhammad b. Sama'a (d.

233/847-48) of a work of al-Shaybani (d. 189/-805), see

Texte, 75-76.

64 Maqdisi, 38-39.65

Al-Isfar'lnli, al-TabsTr,69.66 See Chapter 5 of my "Economy of Certainty: An Intro-

duction to the Typology of Islamic Legal Theory," Ph.D.

diss., HarvardUniversity, 1984.67

See the editor's discussion, Nutaf, 2:872-73, 877-78. A

biographical notice on al-Sughdl's teacher Abu Muhammad

CAbdallahb. Ahmad al-Kufini, which the editor was unable

to locate, may be found in al-Samcani, K. al-Ansab, ed.

D. Margoliouth (London, 1912), f. 485b, who gives Muham-

mad in place of Ahmad.

certain al-Ghaznawi, al-Timurtashi, and Sharaf al-

Dln Qasim b. Husayn al-Damraji (al-DamraghT)

(d. 854/1459).68 The manuscripts examined by the

editor, not all of which bear the name of an author,do actually exhibit the different attributions noted by

Hajji Khalifa, except for that to al-Timurtashi.69Tocomplicate matters, al-Nutaf appears to have also

circulated under the title Nutafal-hisdn Caldmadhhab

AbT HanTfa al-NuCmdn, a work for which HajjiKhallfa has a separate entry and which was attributed

to Abii Bakr al-Wasitl, a teacher of al-Sarakhsl, and

to Abii 'Abdallah al-Barqi, as well as to others not

named.70The foregoing makes it amply clear that the

identity of the author of al-Nutaf was no longerfamiliar to the Hanafl circles in which the work

circulated.

Internal evidence that could assist in the identifica-

tion of the author of al-Nutaf is very sparse. There is

no introduction or epilogue to speak of. Of the iden-tifiable jurists named in the work, most are early.7The latest jurist mentioned appears to be the HanafT

Abu JaCfar al-Hinduwani (d. 362/973).72 Unfortu-

nately our knowledge of the organization and techni-

cal terminology of Islamic legal texts hardly permits

68 Hajji Khalifa, Kashf al-zuniun, ed. 5. Yaltkaya and R.

Bilge Istanbul,1362/1943), :1925.69 See editor'sdiscussion,Nutaf,2:867-72,where heform

al-Damirji, nstead of al-Damrajl,appears,erroneously t

seems, throughout.The printededition is based on the

following manuscripts:1. Ukta'T,Fihrist-ekitdbkhane-yeastdne-yeqods-e radawTMashhad,1329),vol. 5, 884fiqh

(attributedto al-Sughdl); 2. Da'ud al-Chelebi, K. Makhtutit

al-Mawsil (Baghdad, 1346/1927), MS186 (Madrasat 'Abd al-

Rahman al-Sa'igh, without attribution); 3. Yeni Cami 500

(attributed o al-Qasimb. al-Husaynal-Damraji); . Izmir

36/312 (attributedo Abu 'Abdallahal-Qasimb. al-Husayn

al-Ghaznawi).70 Kashf al-zunfin, 2:1925. A. J. Arberry, The Chester

Beatty Library:A Handlist of the Arabic Manuscripts

(Dublin, 1955-64),lists al-Nutafal-hisdn,attributedo al-

Qasimb. al-Husaynal-Damraghi 2:96, MS3473) and al-

Nutaf CalamadhhabAbTHanifa, attributed o Abu Bakr

al-Wasiti (3:88, MS3697).

71 The HanafTAbu Ja'far al-Tahawi (d. 321/933) is in one

place referredto as bacdal-muta7akhkhirTnNutaf, 1:54). See

'Ala' al-DTn al-SamarqandT, Tuhfat al-fuqahda, ed. Mu-

hammad ZakT Abd al-Barr (Damascus, 1377/1958), 1:182,

and al-Mawsill, al-Ikhtiydr, 1:39-40, for the identification.

Al-Tahawi is elsewhere referred to by name (Nutaf, 2:700,

782).72

Nutaf, 1:191.

586



ZYsow: Two Unrecognized Karrdml Texts

the confident invocation of such criteria for the pur-

poses of dating.73The legal affiliation of the author is also uncertain.

Al-Nutaf does not, any more than al-Maban-, bearan obviously Karrami character on its face, and it

is not surprising that the editor, along with earlierHanafi scholars and copyists, should have regarded

al-Nutaf as a work of Hanafifiqh, insofar as the text,

given its comparativist character, represents any par-ticular school at all. Nonetheless, there are several

reasons for believing that the author was a Karrami

jurist. In the first place, the author, who, as observed,

rarely provides the reasoning behind the rules of lawthat he sets forth, seems to do so most often in thecase of Ibn Karram's teachings.74And on occasion heeven offers arguments of his own to bolster Ibn

Karram'sviews.75Secondly, Karramidoctrine is some-

times presented without attribution as theacceptedteaching.76But the strongest argument for identifying

the author of al-Nutaf as a Karrami is his interest inIbn Karram's fiqh. There is no HanafT work withwhich I am familiar that even remotely suggests a

comparable concern with Karrami law, and thereis evidence, that from Ibn Shayba, that orthodoxHanafis shied away from the Karramiyya. The attri-bution of al-Nutaf to al-SughdT, a Hanafi of im-

peccable credentials, is therefore highly doubtful. The

dating of the work to al-Sughdi's time, ca. 1050, is,however, not unreasonable in the absence of otherevidence.

If one has to hazard a guess, it may be suggestedthat al-Nutaf was written for Karramistudents of law,some of whom were Hanafis and some of whomfollowed Ibn Karram or his successors such as Mu-hammad b. Sahib. The author's constant concern to

7One exampleof an apparentlyunusualusageis khiyaral-Caqdor whatis commonlyreferred o as khiyaral-qabfil(Nutaf,1:433, ditor'snote).

74 Forexamples, ee n. 60 above.75

Nutaf, 1:41 wa-yuqawwTawlAbi CAbdallah),28(wa-awkadmindhalikakullihl).

76 The most strikingexampleof this is the teachingon in-tention Nutaf1:56-57)discussed bove.SeealsoNutaf,1:32

(washingof the dead is sunna; t is wajibfor the Hanafis

[al-Samarqandi,Tuhfat l-fuqahad, :378])andNutaf,1:497

(shuf'a available o khalltonly according o al-Shaykh;hestandardHanafiteaching,whichrecognizeseveral lassesofclaimantstartib),is notpresented ntilp. 502).Thepassageon qibla(Nutaf, 1:70) s alsonoteworthy.

present the views of Ibn Karram, even when IbnKarram is in agreement with the leading Hanafis,makes it clear that no attempt is being made toabsorb Karramilaw into mainstream Hanafism.77The

Hanafis represent a distinct group, of which Ibn

Karram is not a part.78 It was the author's well-

organized and lucid presentation of HanafTfiqh that

led to the popularity of al-Nutaf among generationsof Hanafi jurists who no longer knew the identity ofAbi CAbdallahor had any other reason to suspect thework's Karramirorigin.

77 It is possible that Ibn Karram'stransmittedlegal opinionsdid not cover all areas of law. This would account for the

absence of Abu 'Abdallah's name from various parts of the

text of al-Nutaf and would explain such a remark as that

made in connection with the discussion of -ld':hadhakulluhu

qawl Abi HanTfawa-ashdbihTNutaf, 1:370).78 The Hanafis as a group are sometimes referred to as

Abti Hanifa wa-ashabuhu (e.g., Nutaf, 1:54, 229, 385 [four

times]), but more frequently simply as al-fuqahd' (e.g., Nutaf,

1:16, 28 [as distinct from Malik, al-Shafi'T and Abi cAbdal-

lah]). At Nutaf, 1:75,the oppositionis betweenthe two

farlqs, that is, the fuqahai and the ShafiCis,with Abu

cAbdallah in the middle. The opposition of al-fuqaha' and

Abu 'Abdallah is frequent (e.g., Nutaf, 1:9 [wa-hddha qawl

al-fuqaha' jamlcan wa-fT qawl AbTCAbdallah],58 [twice]).

Similarly, the fuqaha' are opposed to Muhammad b. Sahib

(Nutaf, 1:404,427 [twice]) and to al-Haddadi (Nutaf, 1:385).

At Nutaf, 2:702, al-Haddadi is opposed to Abui Hanifawa-ashdbihT.

At severalpoints the authorof al-Nutaf refersto "our

jurists" (fuqaha'und), a term which may include both

Hanafis and Karramis(Nutaf, 1:106, 361, 436 ['ulama'una],2:702 [al-amr bi'l-maCrtf]). Nutaf, 1:503, is the strongest

argument for this interpretation. There the author contrasts

the opinion of some fuqahda that a minor has no right of

pre-emption (shuf a) with that of "ourfuqahd'," who give a

minor equal rights with an adult in this matter, and then

goes on to specify the teachings of Abu Hanifa, Abu Yfsuf,

al-Shaybani and Abu cAbdallah. On the other hand, the

antecedent of "our fuqaha"' at Nutaf, 1:374, 1. 7, is Abu

.Hanfa wa-ashabuhu (as opposed to al-Shafi'i), althoughthereis no indicationthat Abu 'Abdallahheld a different

opinion from that of the HanafTs on the question at issue,that yaauduna in Qur'an 58:3 refers to the resumption of

conjugal relations, not the repetition of the zihdr formula

(cf. al-Samarqandi, Tuhfat al-fuqahda, 2:320-21 [for al-

Shafi'i, 'awd is failure to pronounce talq; for the Zahiris, it

is the repetition of the zihdrformula]).

587

Documents

Two Unrecognized Karrāmī Texts