The Constitution of Madina: The Beginning of Muslim-Jewish Relations

The City of Madinah - Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)'s final resting place and where the 'Constitution of Madinah' was written.

The City of Madinah – Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)’s final resting place and where the ‘Constitution of Madinah’ was written.

By Hamid Mahmood

The Constitution of Madina:  The Beginning of Muslim-Jewish Relations

ھذا کتاب من محمد النبی [رسول اللٰہ] ۔ انھم امۃ واحدۃ من دون الناس ۔[1]

This is a prescript (kitāb) of Muḥammad [2]…. Verily they constitute an ‘ummah’ (political unit) as distinct from all the people (of the world).[3]

و ان یھود بنی عوف امۃ مع المومنین ۔ للیھود دینھم و للمسلمین دینھم۔۔۔[4]

And verily the Jews of Banū ’Auf shall be considered as an ummah (community) along with the Believers, for the Jews being their religion and for the Muslims their religion…[5]

 

Introduction

 

In contemporary society one is bewildered and bemused at the arguments and sources presented by Islamists and puritans in order to justify their hate for the ‘other’.  I always believe it significant to understand the historical context for ascertaining the meaning of the Qur’an and Ḥadīth, however for puritans it is the ‘atomistic’ approach to the text that is more appealing.  Hence, I intend on analysing the text and historical background of a forgotten and not so appreciated document – ‘The Constitution of Madina’.  I will initiate the analysis by exploring the authenticity of the text and thereafter examining the historical background to the document.  I will then analyse the word umma and the Jews in the text of the document: and conclude by examining some aḥādīth (pl. of ḥadīth – traditions of the Prophet) from ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī regarding the Prophet’s relations with the Jews of Madina.

 

Authenticity of the Document, and its source – ibn Ishaq

 

It is immensely significant to analyse the authority of any text within Islam before any importance is given to it.  Hence, I will begin by looking at the isnād (chain of narrators) from the text of the Constitution:

و قد ذکرہ ابن ابی خیثمۃ فاسندہ: حدثنا احمد بن جناب ابو الولید ثنا عیسی بن یونس ثنا کثیر ابن عبد اللٰہ بن عمرو المزنی عن جدہ ان رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم کتب کتابا بین المھاجرین و الانصار فذکر بنحوہ[6]

And indeed Ibn Abī Khaithamah mentioned (the text of the constitution) and hence illustrated the isnād: Ibn Abī Khaithamah > ‘Aḥmad ibn Janāb Abū al-Walīd > ’Isā ibn Yūnus > Kathīr > ’Abdullāh > ’Amr al-Muzaniyy >The Messenger of Allah.  The purpose of illustrating the text is of great importance here as there are many texts, which remain short of providing an isnād.  As in mainstream Islam isnād plays a significant role in ḥadīth authority, as Ibn Mubarak said, لو لا الاسناد لقال من شاء ما شاء, that if there was no isnād then one would merely say what they desired.

 

However, Denny contends that, ‘There is little doubt among scholars that it is authentic, and that it, like the Qur’an, is intimately connected with Muḥammad’s thought and activity.  W. Montgomery Watt has summarized the strong reasons which J. Wellhausen had earlier adduced in favour of its authenticity:

“No later falsifier writing under the Umayyads or ‘Abbasids would have included non-Muslims in the ummah, would have retained the articles against Quraysh, and would have given Muhammad so insignificant a place.  Moreover the style is archaic, and certain points, such as the use of “believers” instead of “Muslims” in most articles, belong to the earlier Medinan period”.[7]

I see Watt’s evidence for the authority of the document to be quite cogent.  Because, as it is known within ḥadīth isnād, there were many mauḍū’ ḥadīth (fabricated traditions of the Prophet) being created after the demise of the Prophet. And the men that fabricated ḥadith did so for political reasons, hence why would there be a need to interpolate into the texts just so that Jews could be a part of the ummah.

 

However, Sergeant has also located verses in the Qur’ān which maybe referring to the Madina document:

“…And remember the blessings which God has bestowed upon you: how, when you were enemies, He brought your hearts together, so that through His blessing you became brethren; and [how, when] you were on the brink of a fiery abyss, He saved you from it.   … that there might grow out of you a (umma) community [of people] who invite unto all that is good, and enjoin the doing of what is right and forbid the doing of what is wrong: and it is they, they who shall attain to a happy state!  (Qur’an 3:101-104).

The struggle and strife between them referred to in these verses are the tensions and wars between the Aus and Khazraj, and those who allied with them, which could include the Jews.  The bringing together before falling into the ‘brink of fiery abyss’ here could ultimately refer to the constitution.

 

Background to the kitāb (Constitution)

 

It is of significance to note the geo-politics that were taking place in Madīna at the time. The tribes in Madina (specifically Aus and Khazraj) were surrounded by sustained conflict and desired an end to the wars their forefathers had instigated.  However, once the Prophet, alongside his ṣaḥāba (companions / disciples), had migrated to Madīna,[8] and including Yathribī converts, the Muslims were no more than a few hundred.  Similarly Ḥamīdullāh believes the total population of Yathrib at the time is estimated to be approximately ten thousand (10,000), of which the Jewish community contributed nearly a half (50%) and according to Yildrim, Christians formed from 1% to 4% of the total population of Yathrib.[9] [10]

Hence,     superficial statistics of the population  of Madīna was approximately 4500 – 5000 Jews; 4000 – 4500 polytheists (Arabs); 400 – 500 Muslims (Muhājirīn and Anṣār); and 100 – 400 Christians.

The most significant question as to why the Prophet was chosen to unite and lead the citizens of Madīna as opposed to the leaders of majority tribes.  For instance a sizeable portion of the Yathribis had made preparations to enthrone ’Abdullāh ibn ’Ubaiyy ibn Salūl, and according to the narrations of ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī ‘a crown had already been produced for the occasion’.[11]  But why, at this stage, did they give precedence to an ‘outsider’ despite him being from a minority group.

 

To understand why the Prophet was chosen to lead this diverse community, it is significant to explore the notion of ‘mediation’.   Yetkin Yildirim, in his article ‘The Medina Charter: A Historical Case of Conflict Resolution’, focuses on this aspect within the Madina Charter.  I believe some aspect of mediation or another plays a role in most societies and cultures of the world.  Yildirim contrasts the Western and Islamic approaches to mediation, he believes, ‘the Western approach to mediation frequently emphasizes the role of the individual through its dependence on legal procedures and settlements that defend individual rights and compensate individuals for their losses.  On the other hand, the Islamic approach, like other non-Western approaches, [I believe here specifically the Jewish community, as they emphasise the society over the individual] tends to emphasize the need to repair and maintain social relationships, framing conflict as a communal matter rather than an individual event’.[12] Here it is evident that Yildirim points to the difference in Western and Islamic approaches to ‘mediation’, the former focuses on the ‘individual’ whereas on the contrary the latter on ‘community’ – which could be felt throughout the Charter text, specifically through  the word ‘umma’.

 

However, also in the historical context of the constitution, ‘mediation’ was a widespread phenomenon among the people and tribes of Arabia.  Yildirim also points towards the very notion from the Talmudic law, ‘Mediation was a common practice among the Semitic peoples at the time of the Hijra.  The Jews followed the practises of p’sharah (arbitration) and bitzuah (mediation) in the Talmudic law and it was also a common practice of Arabs to defer their conflicts to foreigners’.[13]  It is for now evident the methodology used in ascertaining the leader of Yathrib, but again why Muhammad ibn ’Abdullah (the Prophet) was to be the arbitrator.  I believe, alongside Ḥamīdullāh and Yildirim, that it was the akhlāq (mannerism) of the Prophet that made him the most likely candidate for the leadership of Madīna.  I also believe two aspects of the Prophet’s life were most likely the reasons: that even before and after Prophethood, the Prophet was known as al-Amīn (the Trustworthy) and  al-Ṣādiq (the Truthful).  Secondly, he was famous for playing crucial roles in conflict resolving and mediation: one such incident is also recorded in ibn Ishaq, when the rebuilding of the Ka’ba took place, and in its final stage – the placing of al-ḥajr al-aswad (the Black Stone) – all the tribes within Makkah began to quarrel till swords were drawn and it was at this stage that the Prophet being the first to enter through the doors of the ḥaram (sanctuary) that he was called upon to resolve the conflict.  He did so by placing al-ḥajr al-aswad (the Black Stone) on a sheet of cloth and the leaders of all tribes held the cloth and then it was put in its place on the corner of the ka’ba by the Prophet himself.[14]  So I believe it was incidents like this which spread throughout Arabia, and it was also due to his truthfulness and trustworthiness in business that influenced Khadīja to propose to the Prophet.  And finally when he migrated to Yathrib – and later changed its name to al-Madīna – he gained initial trust by consulting the leaders of all the tribes when setting out the constitution of Madīna, in doing so he won over the hearts of the people by showing his capacity to listen.  Hence, came what we know today as the ‘constitution of Madina’ and how the Prophet related to the Jews.

 

Understanding Umma and Jews in the text of the constitution

 

The most significant of articles concerning the Jews are 25, 26-31 and 45/a:

  1. 25: And verily the Jews of the Banū ’Auf shall be considered as a community (ummah) along with the believers, for the Jews being their religion and for the Muslims their religion ….[15]
  2. 26-31: And verily the Jews of the Banu’nNajjār; Banu’lḤārith; Banū Sā’idah; Banū Jusham; Banu’l – Aws and the Banū Tha’labah shall [all] have the same rights as the Jews of the Banū ’Auf [mentioned in article 25]….[16]

Article, 45/a: If they [the Muslims] ask the Jews to make peace with any ally of theirs, they shall make peace with them; and if they ask us for a similar thing, the same shall be incumbent upon the Believers, except one who fights for the cause of religion.[17]

It is clear from article 45/a that the Jews were not just merely another tribe in Madina, but rather a political force: however, what stands most significant in the text is the attribution of the term ummah to the Jews.  This is a notion which majority of the Muslims have not heard of.  However, Denny argues that, ‘Serjeant believes that they [Jews] constituted a separate ummah alongside the Muslim ummah, and  [article] no.  25  may  be  interpreted in  that  way.  However on the contrary Watt  contends,  ‘that  the  Jews  are  included in  the  ummah,  although  he  admits  the  other [referring to alongside the ummah notion] possibility  too.  The  dating  of  this  article  is  an important concern:  if  the  Jews  are  allowed to  practice their  own religion  within  the  one  ummah,  then  this  ummah  is  no longer  a religious  community in  the  exclusive  Muslim  sense’.[18] Ahmad takes the position of Peters, ‘ Peters outlines the role of ummah in text is more to do with the purpose of salvation, ‘… the concept of the ummah as a political confederation of tribes and clans, including non-Muslims, Jewish ones, had inevitable to yield to Muhammad’s original understanding of a body whose foundation may be ethnic but whose reason for being is shaped by the divine purpose of salvation.  The Jews were such an ummah, and in Medina they were more than just a historical and literary illustration of a theological point:  they were a political reality’.[19]  However, I believe that this argument leads to a vast subject of literacy and the historic context behind the meaning of ummah, regardless of the three interpretations of ummah, all are positive and a way forward in contemporary Jewish – Muslim relations.

 

The Prophet’s relations with the Jews of Madīna ‘subsequent’ or ‘prior’ to  the Constitution

 

There is much debate regarding the dating of the document, but from an analysis of academic writing I believe the document was not all written in one place and time.   Rather articles were added as the need arose through community relations and consultation.  I am of firm conviction that the articles regarding the Jews came later, subsequent to the decisive Battle of Badr and Aḥzāb (Battle of the Trenches) and the reason for my conviction is logical, and I believe it to be of utmost importance to date the articles regarding the Jews.  My conviction comes from the fact that Banū Nazīr and Banū Qurayza, the two Jewish tribes who had allied with the polytheists of Makkah in the war, are not mentioned within the document, hence assuming that they had already migrated to Khaibar.  Barakat is also of this opinion.

 

Now, keeping in mind the dating and context of the document it would be interesting to explore different books of ḥadīth and how the Prophet related to the Jews and vice versa.  I therefore believe it significant to illustrate some examples from ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, a ḥadīth text, the authority of which is unshakeable within mainstream Islam, and including the puritan theory.

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah : A funeral procession passed in front of us and the Prophet stood up and we too stood up. We said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! This is the funeral procession of a Jew.” He said, “Whenever you see a funeral procession, you should stand up”.[20]  In the following reminiscent ḥadīth of al-Bukhārī, the Prophet adds, “Is it not a living being (soul)?”.[21]

The Prophet clearly teaches his ṣaḥāba to view others as humans, and not merely to oppose them on the basis of their faith and religious views.  Due to this notion I believe the Jews of Madina found the Prophet an approachable man.  This is also evident from the fact that Jews would frequent his gatherings and he in return would visit them, which is also clear from the following tradition:

Narrated Anas: A young Jewish boy used to serve the Prophet and he became sick. So the Prophet went to visit him. He sat near his head and asked him to embrace Islam. The boy looked at his father, who was sitting there; the latter told him to obey Abu-l-Qasim [the Prophet] and the boy embraced Islam. The Prophet came out saying: “Praises be to Allah Who saved the boy from the Hell-fire”.[22]

The Prophet had financial dealings with the Jews of Madina:

Narrated ‘Aisha: The Prophet purchased food grains from a Jew on credit and mortgaged his iron armour to him.[23]

Despite there being no contemporary interfaith dialogue,  there was something similar – a neutral exchange of scriptural understanding:

Narrated Abu Huraira: The people of the Scripture (Jews) used to recite the Torah in Hebrew and they used to explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. On that Allah’s Apostle said, “Do not believe the people of the Scripture or disbelieve them, but say:– “We believe in Allah and what is revealed to us”.[24]

From this ḥadīth  it is unambiguous that there was a respectful and tolerant inter-faith scriptural dialogue taking place 1400 years ago in Madina between the Jews and Muslims.  Also the Prophet’s statement, “Do not believe the people of the Scripture or disbelieve them, but say:– “We believe in Allah and what is revealed to us” is a well suited model for a plural society co-exiting peacefully.  This ḥadīth of the Prophet also brings to mind Muhammad Iqbal’s thought, and strengthens his idea regarding the Prophet and his prophethood.  For Iqbal believed,

‘The Prophet of Islam seems to stand between the ancient and the modern world. In so far as the source of his revelation is concerned he belongs to the ancient world; in so far as the spirit of his revelation is concerned he belongs to the modern world’.[25]

Again, I believe as far as relations between the Jews and Muslims are concerned have always been peaceful, but always fragmented through political strife.  As again the world witnesses and begs for change.

 

The utmost reason for my examination of this document was to bring to the forefront; that an atomistic approach to verses and ḥadīth in isolation is one which invites difference.  Hence, the purpose was to feel the historical context in which the document was composed and treat it as an axis to see other verses related to ‘People of the Scripture’.   I therefore initiated by illustrating the authenticity of the document, a method which at the forefront in Islamic traditional methodology and then examined the political historical context to the document.  I then portrayed some of the academic debate around the word ‘ummah’ in the document and also the place of Jews in the polity of Madina.  I concluded by bringing some aḥādīth forward, that have usually been disclosed by puritans despite being part of the most authentic collection of ḥadīth to date.  I lastly looked at a ḥadīṭh which illustrated some form of pluralism in inter-faith dialogue and scriptural reasoning 1400 years ago.

 

 

Bibliography

 

The Qur’an: A New Translation by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem

 

Ahmad, B. (1979).  Muhammad and the Jews: A Re-Examination.  Vikas Publishing House PVT LTD: New Dehli

 

Ahmad, K. (2000).  A Short note on the Medina Charter.

Accessed online [05.04.2011]:

http://kassimahmad.blogspot.com/2007/03/short-note-on-medina-charter-by-kassim.html

 

Al-Ahmar, F.  (2010).  The Prophet Muhammad and Constitution of Medina in comparison with the British Magna Carta.

Accessed online [05.04.2011]:

http://www.masjidma.com/2010/12/04/between-constitution-of-medina-british-magna-carta/

 

Denny, F. M. (1977).  ‘Ummah in the Constitution of Medina’.  Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Jan., 1977), pp. 39-47.

 

Faizer, R. S. (1996).  ‘Muhammad and the Medinan Jews: A Comparison of the Texts of Ibn Ishaq’s Kitab Sirat Rasul Allah with al-Waqidi’s Kitab al-Maghazi’.  International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 28, No. 4 (Nov., 1996) pp. 463-489.

 

Hamīdullāh, M. (1994).  The First Written Constitution in the World: An Important Document of the Time of the Holy Prophet.  3rd Revised ed. 1975.  Sh. Muhammad Ashraf Pulishers: Lahore, Pakistan

 

Ibn Ishāq (no date). Sirat Rasoul Allah: The Earliest Biography of Muhammad (An Abridged Online Version).

Accessed online [12.04.2011]:

http://ia600404.us.archive.org/32/items/Sirat-lifeOfMuhammadBy-ibnIshaq/SiratIbnIahaqInEnglish.pdf

 

Iqbal, M. (2008).  The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam. 10th ed.  Kitab Bhavan: New Delhi, India.

 

Lecker, M. (1995).  Wāqidī’s Account on the Status of the Jews of Medina:  A Study of a Combined Report.  Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 54, No. 1 (Jan., 1995), pp.15-32

 

Qadrī, M. T. (No date).  Selected Articles from the Constitution of Islamic State of Madina: The First Written Constitution of Human History.

Accessed online [05.04.2011] in PDF:

http://www.theiceproject.sdsa.net/uploaded/files/Constitution.pdf

 

Sayyid al-Nās, M (1977): Uyūn al-athar fī funūn al-maghāzī wa-al-shamā’il wa-al-siyar  (عـيـون الأثـر في فـنـون الـمـغـازي و الـشـمـائـل و الـسـيـر)Dār al-Āfāq al-‘Arabīyah: Beirut, Lebanon

Accessed [11.04.2011] and downloaded as e-book [pdf] from:

http://www.al-mostafa.com/

 

Serjeant, R. B. (1978).  ‘The “Sunnah Jāmi’ah, “Pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the “Taḥrīm” of Yathrib: Analysis and Translation of the Documents Comprised in the So-Called ‘Constitution of Medina’.  Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1978), pp. 1-42.

 

White, S. W. (2009-2010).  ‘Medina Charter and Pluralism’.  Fountain Magazine, issue 76, July – August 2010

Accessed online [05.04.2011]:

http://www.fountainmagazine.com/article.php?ARTICLEID=1151

 

Yildirim, Y. (2009).  ‘The Madina Charter: A Historical Case of Conflict Resolution’.  Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, Vol. 20, No.4, pp. 439-450, October 2009.

 

Full Text of the Madina Charter.  Khilafa al-‘Alam al-Islami

Accessed online [05.04.2011]:

http://www.constitution.org/cons/medina/macharter.htm

 

 

 

[1] Hamīdullāh, M. (1994).  The First Written Constitution in the World: An Important Document of the Time of the Holy Prophet.  (p. 55)

[2] In all instances of a Muslim’s speech and traditional writings the phrase ‘Peace Be Upon Him (PBUH)’ (صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم) is followed by the name of the Prophet,  but in this article I intend the phrase, hence on the understanding  that it is intended and assumed no disrespect is intended.

[3] ibid., (p. 41)

[4] ibid., (p. 60)

[5] ibid., (p. 48)

[6] Sayyid al-Nās, M (1977): Uyūn al-athar fī funūn al-maghāzī wa-al-shamā’il wa-al-siyar  (p. 141 – 142) under chapter الموادعۃ بین المسلمین و الیھود))

[7] Denny, F. M. (1977).  ‘Ummah in the Constitution of Medina’. (p. 39) quoted from: Watt, Muhammad at Medina, p. 225

[8] Whilst the Muslims anxiously waited the Prophet’s arrival in Madīna it was a Jewish man who noticed him first and shouted as the Muslims were returning home, “O you ‘Arabs! Here is your great man whom you have been waiting for!” (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī: book No. 58, ḥadīth No. 245) Accessed online [14.04.2011]: http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=58&translator=1&start=0&number=245

[9] ibid., (p. 12 – 13)

[10] Yildrim, Y. (2009).  ‘The Madina Charter: A Historical Case of Conflict Resolution’.  (p. 447, Note No. 4)

[11] Hamīdullāh, M. (1994).  The First Written Constitution in the World: An Important Document of the Time of the Holy Prophet.  (p. 14)

[12] Yildrim, Y. (2009).  ‘The Madina Charter: A Historical Case of Conflict Resolution’.  (p. 442)

[13] ibid.

[14] For complete incident refer to: Ibn Ishāq. Sirat Rasoul Allah: The Earliest Biography of Muhammad (An Abridged Version). (p.17). Accessed online [12.04.2011]:

http://ia600404.us.archive.org/32/items/Sirat-lifeOfMuhammadBy-ibnIshaq/SiratIbnIahaqInEnglish.pdf

[15] Hamīdullāh, M. (1994).  The First Written Constitution in the World: An Important Document of the Time of the Holy Prophet.  (p. 48)

[16] ibid. (pp. 48-50)

[17] ibid. (p. 53)

[18] Denny, F. M. (1977).  ‘Ummah in the Constitution of Medina’. (p. 44)

[19] Ahmad, B. (1979).  Muhammad and the Jews: A Re-Examination. (p. 37)

[20] Choosing āḥādīth from only the ṣaḥīḥ of al-Bukhārī is significant to be mentioned here, as in traditional and majority, which includes the puritan and wahhābī ideology, this Canonical work of ḥadīth is accepted as ‘the most accepted authoritative book under the skies after the Qur’an.

Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, (Book 23, Hadith 398) .  Accessed online [13.04.2011]: http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=23&translator=1&start=64&number=392

[21] Ibid., (Book 23, Hadith 399).  Accessed online [13.04.2011]: http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=23&translator=1&start=64&number=392

[22] Ibid., (Book 23, Hadith 438).  Accessed online [13.04.2011]: http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=23&translator=1&start=109&number=437

[23] Ibid., (Book 34, Hadith 282).  Accessed online [14.04.2011]: http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=34&translator=1&start=19&number=281

[24] Ibid., (Book 60, Hadith 12).  Accessed online [14.04.2011]: http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=60&translator=1&start=10&number=10

[25] Iqbal, M. (2008).  The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam. (p. 126)

Advertisements

Hasidism and Sufism: Spirituality in Judaism and Islam

Hamid Mahmood

Image

Hasidism and Sufism: Spirituality in Judaism and Islam

(Hamid Mahmood)

Introduction

In an era when media and politics over-shadow relations between Muslims and Jews, maybe there is a solution – spirituality. I will initiate by defining Ṣūfism and Ḥasidism, alongside the definition process I will analyse and contrast between the two. Thereafter, I will focus my attention on the Pīr (sheikh) / Tsaddik and murīd / ḥasidim, and examine their centrality in both spiritualities using Arabic, Persian and Urdu poetry. I will examine the notion of the Tsaddik through four channels as approached by Rachel Elior. I will conclude by briefly analysing individuals, Abraham Maimonides and Baṣīr, who in the medieval period were inclined towards Islamic mysticism – taṣawwuf. And alongside the medieval, I will also look at similar examples in the contemporary modern period – Pīr Ināyat Khan and Rabbi Zalman Shalomi.

Defining Ṣūfism

View original post 5,044 more words

Conscience, ḍamīr (ضمیر) and Muhammad Iqbal’s concept of ‘khūdī’ (خُودی).

Hamid Mahmood

Conscience, ḍamīr (ضمیر) and Muhammad Iqbal’s concept of ‘khūdī’ (خُودی).

خُودی کو کر بلند اتنا کہ ہر تقدیر سے پہلے
خُدا بندے سے خود پوچھے بتا تیری رضا کیا ہے۔ [1]

Raise thy Selfhood (khūdī) so high that before each (taqdīr) dispensation,

God Himself may ask thee what thy wishes are.[2]

Is there a similar concept of conscience in Islamic philosophical thought? I will begin to answer this question by initially looking at modern and traditional Arabic semantics of the word conscience. I will then explore a modern understanding of the ‘inner-self’ – khūdī, a concept expounded by Muhammad Iqbal, a Poet philosopher and the thought behind the creation of Pakistan. Again, I will begin exploring the semantics of khūdī and by explaining what khūdī is not and how it contradicts the ṣūfī notion of self-denial. Thereafter I will explicate khūdī from…

View original post 4,800 more words

Understanding the World of Ibn al-Athīr – Hamid Mahmood

Hamid Mahmood 

Picture by Hamid Mahmood

Understanding the World of Ibn al-Athīr

 Ibn al-Athīr, ‘Izz al-Dīn Abū al-Ḥasan ‘Alī al-Jazarī (1160-1233) the historian of Mosul has been put in first place alongside his contemporary Ibn Shaddād for the study of Saladin’s life.  But on the contrary Gibbs also accuses Ibn al-Athīr of giving a ‘malicious twist’ to the history of al-Isfahānī.  Can both statements be justified without contradicting the other; I believe it of great significance to try and understand the ‘mind’ of the author alongside the surroundings he finds himself in.    I will therefore analyse from the muqaddima (foreword) of al-kāmil, what Ibn al-Athīr believes to be the objective of History and its worldly benefits.  I will focus on the account of Saladin’s death in order to understand the medieval traditionalism at work in al-kāmil and contemporary works and explore the dualism in Ibn al-Athīrs description of Saladin.  Finally I will briefly mention some criticism of Gibbs’ understanding of Ibn al-Athīr by Yaacov Lev.  My main objective throughout, however, is to explore whether Ibn al-Athīr is wholesome negative of Saladin or is his analysis more complex in nature than what is generally thought.

I believe it is greatly significant to analyse a text through its ‘rootedness’ in ‘time’ and ‘place’.  This metaphor of the ‘rootedness’ of texts comes from Friedrich Schleiermacher, who argued that meaning and interpretation began with the intention of the author of a text, with due regard also to the historical context and situation out of which the author wrote.  Thiselton elaborated on what Schleiermacher meant by ‘intending’ as opposed to a simplistic understanding of it, ‘the goal and purpose behind and within a text that signal an author’s desire, will, and action as evidenced in and by the text and its surroundings.  Meaning and interpretation include more than these; but these remain his [Schleiermacher’s] starting point’.[1]  Yaacov Lev in his book ‘Saladin in Egypt’ illustrates such an approach and suggests,

Saladin’s historians were a product of their age and their attitudes and perceptions were shaped by the political and cultural values of the twelfth century… They have much in common in their educational and cultural backgrounds as well as in their professional careers… their world was shaped by the new institutions of learning that spread throughout the middle East from the second half of the eleventh century’.[2]

This analysis, despite it being for Saladin’s historian admirers, also includes Ibn Athīr because he too was influenced by the politics and culture of the time.  Hence, it is important to understand the role a madrasa would play and how it may influence the writings of the author.

The politics and culture in that period were intertwined.  Lev explains that, the cultural and religious life of the period was marked by traditionalism combined with mysticism, and focused on three institutions: madrasa, khānqā and dār al-ḥadīth’.[3]  From these institutions the former and latter were certainly influenced by the state and rulers, due to the system of patronage coupled with a social life that was overshadowed by a ‘zealous adherence’ of people (ta’assub).  Ibn al-Athīr’s work ‘asad al-ghāba fī ma’rifa al-ṣaḥāba’, which gives an alphabetical account of approximately 7500 companions of the Prophet shows ibn al-Athīr to be very much part of the traditional landscape of the madrasa and dār al-ḥadīth.  Secondly al-kāmil, according to Douglas Patton, was commissioned under the patronage of Badr al-Dīn Lu’Lu’.[4]  Hence I will examine al-kāmil, while fully aware of the cultural traditionalism and the patronage that Ibn al-Athīr owed his book to.

Furthermore, it is of equal importance to have in mind the ‘intent’ of the author as explained himself.  In this case we can deduce some points from Ibn al-Athīr’s illustration of the objective of History, which he describes under ‘fā’ida al-taṣnīf fī al-tārīkhfawā’iduhū al-dunyawiyya… al-fawā’id al-ukhrawiyya’ the benefit of authoring in [the subject of] History… its worldly benefits… benefits of the next world…’.  Ibn al-Athīr elaborates under ‘its worldly benefits’ the following points:

“The instructiveness of history has many aspects and its usefulness, both in this world and the other world, is very great.  Here, we shall mention only as much of that as we see fit.  We shall leave it to the natural intelligence of the student of history to make himself acquainted with the rest.

As to the usefulness of history for this world, for instance, it is no secret that human beings like to remain alive and prefer to be among the living.  Would that I knew what difference there is between things seen or heard yesterday and things read in books which contain historical information about the men of the past.  Reading about them is like being their contemporary, and knowing events is like being present when they took place.

Furthermore, kings and persons in authority may find the biographies of oppressors and tyrants treated in books which circulate among the people and which are transmitted from generation to generation.  They look at the ill fame and disgrace that were the consequence of oppression and tyranny, the resulting destruction of countries and human lives, the financial loss and the general corruption.  Thus, they come to disapprove of and avoid practises of oppression and injustice.  Likewise, they may see the biographies of just governors.  They read about the good reputation that survived them after their death, and the development and financial prosperity of their countries and realms.  Thus, they come to approve of their example and to desire to practise permanently what they did as well as to omit all that works to the contrary.  Kings and persons in authority derive an additional advantage from the study of history.  They learn through history about the wise counsels that served (their predecessors) to avert damage at the hands of enemies, to escape disasters, and to protect (?) rich cities and great realms

If such were the only useful aspect of history, it would be glorious enough`…’[5]

Here Ibn al-Athīr points towards three main benefits and also reasons for him writing texts on the subject of History, and his main readership he suggests is ‘men of authority and power’.  For ease of understanding I term each notion as follows: 1) faḍā’il (virtue), the readership approves and implements the ‘good reputation’ that survives the virtuous leaders; 2) mawā’iẓ (admonition), they disapprove of the oppression and tyranny by reading about the ill consequences that befell them and lastly; 3) ma’rifa al-ārā’ al-ṣā’iba (acquaintance of pertinent and wise counsels),  they learn through wise counsels and build awareness of imprudent ones.  Also interesting, I believe, the first two are a direct influence of the traditional background of the author, which could be understood from the Qur’anic verse chosen to conclude the introduction: ‘[We have destroyed even mightier generations before these disbelievers, who travelled through many lands – was there any escape?] There truly is a reminder in this for whoever has a heart, whoever listens attentively’.[6]  This attention to the purpose of History has also been addressed by ibn al-Khaṭīb (1313-1374):

و یری العاقل من تصریف قدرۃ اللہ تعالیٰ ما یشرح صدرہ بالایمان و یشفیہ، و یمر علیٰ مصارع الجبابرۃ فیحسبہ بذلک واعظاً و یکفیہ’ [7]

…and that the intelligent may witness the vicissitude of the omnipotence of God: which enlightens his heart with faith and cures it.  And that he may journey through the falls and ruins of [once] mighty [rulers] and that should be sufficient for him as an admonisher and warning’.

And this is then further systemised by Ibn Khaldūn, which Muhammad Iqbal summarises in his famous poem:

ميں تجھ کو بتاتا ہوں ، تقدير امم کيا ہے

شمشير و سناں اول ، طاؤس و رباب آخر[8]

The destiny of nations I chart for you:

at first: The sword and spear;

the zither’s, the lute’s soft sighs at last.[9]

So, from the outset Ibn al-Athīr’s analysis of history is influenced by the theological trend present in medieval madāris (pl. of madrasa).  However, I will experiment with texts from al-kāmil with these notions for a creative insight into the mind of Ibn al-Athīr or whether he writes with a ‘malicious twist’ to al-Iṣfahānī’s al-barq al-shāmī as argued by Gibbs.

An analysis of the death of Saladin is significant in trying to understand the traditional medieval world of Ibn al-Athīr by merely scrutinizing the titles and benedictions attributed to the Sulṭān.  When comparing Ibn al-Athīr’s text on the account of the death of Nur al-Dīn compared to Saladin there are striking differences, which affirm the influence of ‘zealous adherence’ of people (ta’assub) suggested by Lev:  a notion that influences ibn al-Athīr’s writings and also that of his contemporaries.  Ibn al-Athīr begins with the title:

ذکر وفاۃ نور الدین محمود بن زنکی رحمہ اللہ

ثم دخلت سنۃ تسع و ثمانین و خمسماءۃ  ۔  ذکر وفاۃ صلاح الدین و بعض سیرتہ[10]

‘Account of the death of Nūr al-Dīn Maḥmūd ibn Zankī (God have mercy on him)

The Year 580 [1193]  –  Account of the death of Saladin and a little about his character’.[11] When mentioning Nūr al-Dīn the benediction ‘raḥimahū Allāh’ (God have mercy on him) is clearly cited in the title.  But on the contrary for Saladin it is omitted and only mentioned within the text but not title.  Even within modern Muslim societies such a notion would raise eye brows.  When comparing the accounts of the deaths of both leaders in al-Nawādir and kaitāb al-fatḥ al-qussiyy there is benedictions for both Nūr al-Dīn and Saladin:

ذکر وفاۃ نور الدین محمود بن زنکی رحمہ اللہ

ذکر وفاتہ رحمہ اللہ و قدس روحہ[12]

Account of the death of Nūr al-Dīn Maḥmūd ibn Zankī (God have mercy on him)

Account of his death (may God have mercy on him, sanctify his spirit and give the Muslims a good successor).[13]

ذکر وفاۃ السلطان رحمہ اللہ بدمشق  ۔

جلس لیلۃ السبت سادس عشر صفر فی مجلس عادتہ  ۔  و مجلیٰ سعادتۃ  ۔  و نحن عندہ فی اتم اغتباط ۔  و اتم  نشاط  ۔  و ھو یحدثنا و نحن نحدثہ ۔۔۔[14]

Account of the death of the Sultan (may God have mercy on him) in Damascus –

It is evident from these two that Saladin is more highly revered, as due to the cultural respect he is not mentioned by name: either he is referred to with a  pronoun (huwa – he) or a title (al-sulṭān). This additional reverence suggests the notion of ta’assub for Saladin and is very much similar to that of the Prophet in the Qur’an whereby he is mostly referred to by a qualitative title and his name Muhammad only appears four times in the entire scripture – adding to the idea of a cultural traditionalism prevalent in the madrasa thought process.  And this further suggests a transformation also of the sufi notion of tashakhuṣ (high reverence of the saint) into one that now begins to take precedence when speaking of the political leadership, which Lev also suggests from Ibn al-‘Asākir when ascribing to Nur al-Din an aura of holiness by saying that Nur al-Din’s baraka (blessing) saved people from hardship and brought prosperity to his subjects.[15]

One other factor that is at play in the mind of Ibn al-Athīr is his view of History and reason for the rise and fall of nations and dynasties.  Despite inserting a benediction for Saladin in the text he eagerly mentions Saladin’s conversation with his son al-Afḍal and brother al-‘Ādil, which suggests a greed for land.  Ibn al-Athīr mentions, ‘He [Saladin] said, ‘We have finished with the Franks.  There is nothing to occupy us in this land.  Which region shall we attack?’… [al-‘Ādil then proposes to attack Khillāṭ] because Saladin had promised him, if he took it, that he would hand it over to him…’.[16]  This endless greed for land and power for Ibn al-Athīr is punished by God and he elaborates:

‘I have perused histories and seen many events of Islamic history that can be reliably documented.  I have seen in the case of many who start a dynasty that power is transferred from their immediate offspring to other family and relatives’.[17]

Ibn al-Athīr gives the example of Mu’āwiya ibn Abī Sufyān (602-680), who ‘usurped’ power from Muḥammad’s cousin and son-in-law ‘Alī, from whom power was denied to his descendents and passed onto the Banū Marwān.  Lev points out that, ‘Ibn al-Athīr implies that the establishment of rule is associated with the shedding of blood and violence and therefore the founders cannot enjoy the fruits of their endeavours.  The roots of this concept are Biblical, but it serves Ibn al-Athīr’s purpose well’.[18]  It is interesting to note – despite this concept of punishment – that throughout his al-kāmil Ibn al-Athīr manages to conceal and circumvent this notion for his patron Badr al-Dīn Lu’Lu’, who according to Patton commissioned this work.[19] But, again one is perplexed of Ibn al-Athīr’s praise of Saladin subsequent to the conversation he had with his brother and son:

‘Saladin (may God have mercy on him) was a generous, forbearing, of good character, humble, ready to put up with something that displeased him, much given to overlooking the faults of his follower… as for his generosity, he gave away much, not hesitating about anything he gave away…when he died, he left only one Tyrian dinar and forty Nāṣirī dirhams in his treasury…’[20]

And Ibn al-Athīr continues to describe more virtues of Saladin, which include his humility when Sufis would attend on him; his adherence to the sharī’ah; transmission of ḥadīth and his might in Jihad against the infidels.  Ibn al-Athīr, I believe, divides his description of Saladin between that of Saladin the ‘ruler’ and Saladin the ‘religious’ personality.  This indicates how Ibn al-Athīr had no problem with viewing Saladin as a religious man but his political environment imprisons his thoughts on his leadership and forces him to term him a usurper.  This is similar to Mu’āwiya ibn Abī Sufyān, whose descendants too were deprived of the ‘fruits’ of power but under religiosity he too is highly regarded, also for being the companion of the Prophet the unique benediction ‘raḍiya Allāhu ‘anhu’ is placed besides his name, which means ‘God is pleased with him’.

 

However, as a resident in Mosul under the Zangids and constantly under their patronage, with the Ayyūbids Ibn al-Athīr conceals naught as opposed to curtaining Lu’Lu’s usurpation, and hastens to portray the transfer of power from Shīrkūh to Saladin and then from him to his brother’s descendents:

‘Finally take this Shīrkūh:  as we have mentioned, power was transferred to the descendants of his brother Ayyūb, and from Saladin too, after he had established and exalted the dynasty and become its founder, power passed to the offspring of his brother al-‘Ādil and in the hands of his own offspring there remained only Aleppo… what I think to be the reason for this is that the person who is the first of a dynasty takes ‘extreme measure’[21] and seizes power, while the hearts of his predecessors are deeply attached to it.  Therefore God, as a punishment for him, denies it to his descendents and those for whose sake he acts’.[22]

Clearly when Ibn al-Athīr was writing this only Aleppo remained under the hands of Saladin’s descendents.  However, it is slightly obscure to what Ibn al-Athīr means by ‘punishment’ and the reason for its importance determines the influence of theology present in medieval traditionalist madāris (pl. of madrasa).  For indeed Ibn al-Athīr, when narrating the incident of the death of Saladin, inserted into the text the benediction of ‘raḥimahu Allāh’ God have mercy on him.  This seems to be a contradiction between the ‘punishment’ of God on Saladin to ‘mercy’ of God, this transformation illustrates Ibn al-Athīr’s dual approach – of viewing him as a sulṭan and separately a religious figure.  By that I mean Ibn al-Athīr portrays Saladin as ‘Saladin the usurper and villain, greedy for power and wealth’ in relation to his usurpation of power from the Abbasids but then provides balanced evaluations in relation to the Crusaders and does not shy away from commending his religiosity.

 

An example of his balanced evaluations can be seen within his analysis and portrayal of the council of doctors.  Ibn al-Athīr mentioned in the introduction to al-kāmil as a benefit of History ‘ma’rifa al-ārā’ al-ṣā’iba’ recognition of pertinent counsels.  Ibn al-Athīr narrates:

‘His emirs attended him and advised him to move from that place and to abandon close pressure on the Franks.  They presented this to him as the best course, saying, ‘We have pressed the Franks hard and even if they wanted to leave their position, they could not.  Our best plan is to move away so that they can pack up and leave.  If they do depart – and this is the likely outcome – then we are spared their trouble and they ours!  If they stay, we can return to the battle and get back to where we were before.  Moreover, your health is bad and your pain intense.  If any rumour of that got abroad, our men would be lost.  By every calculation our best plan is to withdraw from them.’  The doctors concurred in this, so he accepted it to do what was God’s will’.[23]

Despite Ibn al-Athīr being a contemporary to these events he was not an eye witness and uses ‘Imād al-Dīn’s text for this incident at Acre.  It is significant to note that following Saladin’s great victories at Ḥiṭṭīn and Jerusalem, here was a chance for Ibn al-Athīr to launch the most subtle criticism and there was no need to ‘maliciously twist’ the situation either – as Gibbs argues – as it was failure in all aspects of warfare.  But, instead Ibn al-Athīr decides to shield Saladin and bring the ‘councils and their counsels’ at the forefront of his criticism.  I view this as Ibn al-Athīr’s view of the incident through  ma’rifa al-ārā’ al-ṣā’iba or lack thereof and perhaps intends this counsel to be a lesson for future kings.  However, he only comes with this conclusion with hindsight otherwise strategically at the time that was perhaps a better option as strongly argued by the doctors.  Ibn al-Athīr here is trying to portray Saladin’s lack of leadership, autonomy, and a faltering passion for jihād.  It is also felt as though he is covering Saladin and shifting the blame onto his council.  But, he also credits Saladin when he opposes the council in Haṭṭīn, who suggest to avoid a large scale battle for constant raids and he opts for the all out attack, which earns him his greatest victory.  Hence, I agree with Lev that ‘each account that deals with Saladin must be examined on its own merits.  In many cases Ibn al-Athīr’s bias against Saladin is not evident and neither detectable to us because of our restricted understanding of the system of values which guided twelfth / thirteen century historians’.[24]

 

So is Ibn al-Athīr’s understanding of Saladin merely shrouded by and influenced by political powers or is the matter more complex?  In response to Gibb’s ‘all out attack’ on Ibn al-Athīr Lev suggests for a consideration of the following points to illustrate the complexity of dealing with al-kāmil.   I) Since both historical works of Ibn al-Athir (al-bāhir and al-kāmil) were written after the conclusion of ‘Imad al-Din’s the Syrian Lightning, there is no valid reason to accept Gibb’s assumption that Ibn al-Athir’s account of the years 1169 – 1171 is independent of ‘Imad al-Din. Ibn al-Athir could have used ‘ Imad al-Din for the years 1169 – 1171 too.[25]   2) Ibn al-Athir did collect information and sources quite independently of ‘Imad al-Din. In both works of Ibn al-Athir there are many accounts based on oral information.  For example, the man who was instrumental in the proclamation of Friday sermons in Egypt in the name of the Abbasids was personally known to Ibn al-Athir.  And the account of Nur aI-Din’s death is related on the authority of his personal physician.  Therefore, the divergence between the works of ‘lmad al-Din and Ibn al-Athir is not necessarily a reflection of Ibn al-Athir’s distortion of ‘Imad al-Din; it could have been a result of different and independent sources’.[26]    Also to overlook a culture of study based very much on the oral tradition is erroneous.

3) Hostility to Saladin does not discredit outright Ibn al-Athir’s commentary on Saladin’s deeds and motives.  For the modern student of Saladin a non-partisan account might prove very valuable. 4) A comparison between Ibn al-Athir’s accounts in the history of the Atabegs and the universal history reveals that the narrative in the universal history is more hostile to Saladin. In the universal history Saladin is always portrayed in a worse light than in the history of the Atabegs.

And lastly and most significantly, 5) hostility to Saladin did not permeate the whole of Ibn al-Athir’s writings. The following example can serve as an illustration for the different ways Saladin is treated by Ibn al-Athir. In his account of Shirkuh’s third campaign in Egypt, Ibn al-Athir quotes Saladin as saying: “Allah gave me a possession of what I had not coveted”. Ibn al-Athir’s informant was a person very close to Saladin, and here this illustrated Saladin’s early reluctance to participate in the third campaign to Egypt and the results were beyond imagination.  Lev rightly notes that, ‘Saladin’s aim is to portray himself as a man who is not avid for power.  His fortunes were ordained by God in spite of his own reluctance and  he is merely a tool of God’s will.[27]  By using this account, Ibn al-Athīr propagates in fact Saladin’s self created image, which contradicts that of the power-obsessed leader.  Once again it becomes unclear of why Ibn al-Athīr’s views change throughout the book.

In conclusion I found through a constant focus on the traditional landscape of the then medieval Islamic world that Ibn al-Athīr is shrouded by complexity and by no means is completely dismissive of Saladin’s career.  However, through the focus on the account of Saladin’s death I found that Ibn al-Athīr maybe has a duality in viewing the sulṭan as a leader who usurped but at the same time a man of commendable religiosity.  Hence, he draws a line between his criticism of his usurpation – and any matter related to it – and his religiosity, which includes his jihādī valour against the might Crusades.  I have come to learn that the general view of Ibn al-Athīr as a zangid historian twisting history to stigmatize Saladin, maybe correct in relation to the account of his usurpation and must be dealt with additional care, but throughout al-kāmil there are passages which prove otherwise.

Bibliography

The Qur’an: A New Translation by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem

Primary Sources

Al-Iṣfahāniyy, ‘I. D. (1935).  Kitāb al-fatḥ al-qussiyy fī al-fatḥ al-qudsiyy ‘کتاب الفتح القدسی فی الفتح القدسی’.  Full text available in Arabic online:

http://ia700807.us.archive.org/14/items/AlFat7AlQ/Fah7Q.pdf

Ibn al-Athīr, (D. 630) – (2003).  al-Kāmil fī al-Tārīkh: min sana 489 li ghāya sana 561 li al-hijra – al-mujallad al-tāsi’ (Part 9) (الکامل فی التاریخ: للامام العلامۃ عمدۃ المورخین أبی الحسن علی بن أبی الکرم محمد بن محمد بن عبد الکریم بن عبد الواحد الشیبانی المعروف ‘با بن الأثیر’ الجزری المقلب بعز الدین المتوفیٰ 630 ھ ۔ من سنۃ 489 لغایۃ 561 للھجرۃ).  Notes by M. Yūsuf al-Diqāqa. 4th ed. Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah: Beirut, Lebanon

Ibn al-Athīr, (D. 630) – (2003).  al-Kāmil fī al-Tārīkh: min sana 562 li ghāya sana 628 li al-hijra – al-mujallad al-tāsi’ (Part 10) (الکامل فی التاریخ: للامام العلامۃ عمدۃ المورخین أبی الحسن علی بن أبی الکرم محمد بن محمد بن عبد الکریم بن عبد الواحد الشیبانی المعروف ‘با بن الأثیر’ الجزری المقلب بعز الدین المتوفیٰ 630 ھ ۔ من سنۃ  562 لغایۃ 628  للھجرۃ).  Notes by M. Yūsuf al-Diqāqa. 4th ed. Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah: Beirut, Lebanon

Ibn Shaddād, B. (D. 632 A.H.) – (1317 A.H.).  Kitāb Sīra Salāḥ al-Dīn al-Ayyūbiyy al-musammāt bi al-Nawādir al-Sulṭāniyya wa’l-Maḥāsin al-Yūsufiyya – (کتاب سیرۃ صلاح الدین الأیوبی المسماۃ با لنوادر السلطانیۃ و المحاسن الیوسفیۃ ۔ تألیف القاضی بھاء الدین المعروف بابن شداد ۔ المتوفی سنۃ 632 ھجریۃ). Notes on side by Tāj al-Din Shāhanshāh ibn Ayyūb.  Maṭba’at al-aādāb wa al-mu’ayyad: Cairo, Egypt

Nicholson, H. J. (2001).  Chronicle of the Third Crusade: A Translation of the Itinerarium pereprinorum et gesta Regis Ricardi. (Crusades Texts in Translation).  Ashgate Publishing Limited: England.

Richards, D. S. (2010).  The Chronicle of Ibn al-Athir for the Crusading Period from al-kamil fi’l-Ta’rikh. Part 2: The Years 541-589/1146-1193: The Age of Nur al-Din and Saladin. – (Crusades Texts in Translation; 15).  Ashgate Publishing Limited: England.

Richards, D. S. (2007).  The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin or al-Nawādir al-Sulṭāniyya wa’l-Maḥāsin al-Yūsufiyya by Bahā’ al-Dīn Ibn Shaddād.  (Crusades Texts in Translation).  Ashgate Publishing Limited: England.

Secondary Sources

‘Āshūr, S. A. F. (1994).  ‘Al-kāmil fi al-tārīkh li ibn al-Athīr.  Maktaba al-Asurra (mīrāth al-insāniyya): Egypt   [Arabic]

Asbridge, T. (2010).  The Crusades: The War for the Holy Land.  Simon & Schuster UK LTD: London, UK

Gabrieli, F. (2009).  Arab Historians of the Crusades.  Translated from the Italian by E.J. Costello.  Routledge: New York, USA

Gibb, H. (1935).  ‘Notes on the Arabic Materials for the History of the Early Crusades’.  Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London, Vol. 7, No. 4 (1935), pp. 739-754

Gibb, H. (1973).  The Life of Saladin: From the Works of ‘Imād ad-Dīn and Bahā’ ad-Din.  Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK

Gillingham, J. (1989).  Richard the Lionheart.  2nd ed.  Weidenfield and Nicolson LTD: London, UK

Hillenbrand, C. (2002).  The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives. Routledge: UK

Lev, Y. (1999).  Saladin in Egypt.  (The Medieval Mediterranean: Peoples, Economies and Cultures, 400 – 1453, Vol. 21).  Leiden; Boston; Koln: Brill.

Lyons, M. C. and Jackson, E.P. (1997).  Saladin: The Politics of the Holy War.  Canto ed. Cambridge University Press: UK

Phillips, J. (2002).  The Crusades, 1095 – 1197.  Pearson Education: UK

Richards, D. S. (2002).  The Annals of the Saljuq Turks: Selections from al-kāmil fī’l-Ta’rīkh of ‘Izz al-Dīn ibn al-Athīr.  Trans. and annotated by Richards.  RoutledgeCurzon: London, UK

Riley-Smith, J. (1999).  The Oxford History of the Crusades.  Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK

Rosenthal, F. (1968).  A History of Muslim Historiography.  2nd ed.   Brill: Leiden, Netherlands.

Setton, K. M. (1969).  A History of the Crusades (Volumes 1 – 6).  2nd ed.  The University of Wisconsin Press: USA

Thiselton, A. C. (2009).  Hermeneutics: An Introduction.  William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company: Michigan, USA

Websites and Internet Sources

http://www.allamaiqbal.com/


[1] Thiselton, A. C. (2009).  Hermeneutics: An Introduction. pp. 20-22.  See ‘The Rootedness of Texts Located in Time and Place’.

[2] Lev, Y. (1999).  Saladin in Egypt.  pp. 1-2

[3] ibid., p. 2.  In the madrasa, Sunni law and other auxiliary subjects were taught. Dār al-Ḥadīth was an institution of a more narrow scope devoted to the study of the Prophetic traditions. The

khānqā served the mystics (Sufis) as a focal point of their social and religious life.

[4] ibid., p. 36

[5] Ibn al-Athīr, (D. 630) – (2003).  al-Kāmil fī al-Tārīkh: min sana 562 li ghāya sana 628 li al-hijra – al-mujallad al-tāsi’.  Vol. 1,  p.9-11.  Translation taken from: Rosenthal, F. (1968).  A History of Muslim Historiography.  2nd ed.  pp. 298-300

[6] Qur’an 50:33-37

[7] Quote taken from ibn al-Khaṭīb of Granada (1313-1374). Al-iḥāṭa fī akhbār al-gharnāṭa. see muqaddima (introduction)

[8] Taken from Iqbal’s ‘bāl-e-jibrīl’ – available online: http://www.allamaiqbal.com/

[9] Translation from ‘Gabriel’s Wing’ by Taseer, M.D in Pakistan Quarterly, Karachi. April 1947

[10] Ibn al-Athīr, (D. 630) – (2003).  op. cit., Vol. 10, p.589

[11] Richards, D. S. (2010).  The Chronicle of Ibn al-Athir for the Crusading Period from al-kamil fi’l-Ta’rikh. Part 2: The Years 541-589/1146-1193: The Age of Nur al-Din and Saladin. p.408

[12] Ibn Shaddād, B. (D. 632 A.H.) – (1317 A.H.).  Kitāb Sīra Salāḥ al-Dīn al-Ayyūbiyy al-musammāt bi al-Nawādir al-Sulṭāniyya wa’l-Maḥāsin al-Yūsufiyya.  p. 249

[13] Richards, D. S. (2007).  The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin or al-Nawādir al-Sulṭāniyya wa’l-Maḥāsin al-Yūsufiyya by Bahā’ al-Dīn Ibn Shaddād. p. 243

[14] Al-Iṣfahāniyy, ‘I. D. (1935).  Kitāb al-fatḥ al-qussiyy fī al-fatḥ al-qudsiyy ‘کتاب الفتح القدسی فی الفتح القدسی’. p. 454

[15] Lev, Y. (1999).  op. cit., p. 8

[16] Richards, D. S. (2010).  op. cit., p.408

[17] Richards, D. S. (2010).  op. cit., p.178

[18] Lev, Y. (1999).  op. cit., p. 40

[19] ibid., p.36

[20] Richards, D. S. (2007). Al-kāmil  op. cit., p.408-9

[21] Richards interprets this to mean taking extreme measure: to acquire and remain in power by killing many people.  He comes to this conclusion because one manuscript mentions explicitly mentions ‘yukthir al-qatl (kills many people).  See al-nawādir, p.179, footnote no. 14

[22] Richards, D. S. (2010).  op. cit., p.179

[23] Richards, D. S. (2010).  op. cit., p.369

[24] Lev, Y. (1999).  op. cit., p. 40-41

[25] ibid., p. 38

[26] ibid.

[27] ibid., p. 39