Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Edited by
Hans Daiber
Anna Akasoy
Emilie Savage-Smith
VOLUME LXXXII
By
Reza Pourjavady
LEIDEN BOSTON
2011
ISSN 0169-8729
ISBN 978 90 04 19173 0
Copyright 2011 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing,
IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission
from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by
Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to
The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910,
Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.
CONTENTS
Preface ............................................................................................
ix
1
1
4
16
24
32
37
41
45
45
53
61
68
74
74
86
87
88
99
101
103
106
110
111
vi
contents
III. Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm wa-nihytih
wa-tabyn maqsid al-h arakt wa-ghytih ..........
IV. Rislat Ithbt al-wjib .................................................
V. Glosses on Suhrawards H ikmat al-ishrq and on
Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs Commentary on this
Work ..............................................................................
VI. Glosses on Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjns Commentary
on Adud al-Dn al-js al-Mawqif f ilm al-kalm
VII. Commentary on Nasr al-Dn al-T ss Tajrd
al-mantiq .......................................................................
VIII. Commentary on Nasr al-Dn al-T ss Tajrd
al-itiqd: Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid .............................
IX. Superglosses on Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjns Glosses
on Qtb al-Dn al-Rzs Commentary on Ktibs
al-Risla al-Shamsiyya .................................................
X. Superglosses on Qutb al-Dn al-Rzs Commentary
on Sirj al-Dn al-Urmaws Matli al-anwr and
on Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjns Glosses on the same
Commentary .................................................................
XI. Commentary on Sad al-Dn al-Taftzns Tahdhb
al-mantiq wa-l-kalm ..................................................
XII. Commentary on H asan b. Ysuf al-H illsTahdhb
al-ah km ........................................................................
XIII. Glosses on Jall al-Dn al-Dawns Unmdhaj
al-ulm ..........................................................................
XIV. Glosses on Jall al-Dn al-Dawns Nihyat
al-kalm f h all-i shubha kulli kalm kdhib .......
XV. Commentary on Jall al-Dn al-Dawns Rislat
Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda .............................................
XVI. Commentary on Suhrawards al-Alwh
al-Imdiyya: Misbh al-arwh f kashf haqiq
al-Alwh .........................................................................
XVII. Glosses on Jall al-Dn al-Dawns Commentary
on Suhrawards Haykil al-nr ................................
114
115
118
119
120
121
124
125
125
128
128
129
129
131
136
137
137
137
140
contents
vii
141
141
142
145
145
145
149
151
153
193
203
217
219
196
198
PREFACE
In the last few decades the significance of Post-Avicennan philosophy
has received the attention of many scholars of Islamic thought. Yet
some crucial historical periods in its development have remained in
darkness, particularly late ninth/fifteenth century. It was at this time
that a heated debate took place between two philosophers of Shiraz,
Jall al-Dn al-Dawn (d. 908/1502) and Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak
(d. 903/1498), which contained some innovative thought on both sides
and had a significant impact on the later development of philosophy
in the Muslim world. For decades afterwards, the discussions between
these two figures provided the main challenges that were taken up by
students of philosophy. Even centuries later, philosophers have referred
to this debate and supported one side against the other. Despite their
undisputed significance, our knowledge of these philosophical discussions has remained in a preliminary state, as most of the philosophical
works of this period have not been published and in some cases the
relevant manuscripts still await identification.
It is not only philosophy, but also theology (kalm) and, in particular,
the re-emergence of Sh theology in Iran in this period, that has been
in need of further study. At the beginning of the tenth/sixteenth century, the Safavids took power in Iran and imposed Shism as the state
religion (madhhab). So far, historiography of the early Safavid period
has focussed on the role of the scholars who migrated to Iran from
Jabal mil in Lebanon and especially on Al al-Karak (d. 940/1534),
a pioneering figure who was associated with the Safavid government.
Karak was a scholar of fiqh and throughout his career never showed
any particular interest in kalm and philosophy. Hence the picture
of the early Safavids drawn by modern scholarship shows a fiqhcentred period which lasted till the time of the Safavid Shah Abbs I
(r. 995/15871038/1629). This gives the impression that it was only
in the time of Shah Abbs that Sh theological discourse flourished,
and that theologians such as Bah al-Dn al-mil (d. 1030/1621),
Mr Dmd (1041/16312), and Sayyid Ah mad al-Alaw al-mil
(d. between 1054/1644 and 1060/1650) began to be patronised by
the Safavid government. In other words, no investigation has as yet
been made into whether or not the early Safavids, and particularly
preface
preface
xi
INTRODUCTION
1
See J. van Ess, Aod al-Din Iji, Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 3, pp. 26971; idem,
Die Erkenntnislehre des Adudaddn al-c. bersetzung und Kommentar des ersten
Buches seiner Mawqif, Wiesbaden 1966; idem, Neue Materialien zur Biographie des
Adudaddn al-g, Welt des Orients, 9 (1978), pp. 270ff.
2
On Jurjns life and his writings, see J. van Ess, Jorjni, Zayn al-Din Abul-Hasan
Ali b. Mohammad b. Ali al-Hosayni, Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 15, pp. 219; Mahd
Shakbniy and Reza Pourjavady, Kitb-shins-i Mr Sayyid Sharf-i Jurjn, Marif,
19iii (1381/2003), pp. 13492; Sadreddin Gm, Seyyid erf Crcn ve Arap Dilindeki Yeri, Istanbul 1984; idem, Crcn, Seyyid erf , Trkiye Diyanet Vakfi Islam
Ansiklopedisi, vol. 8, Istanbul 1993, pp. 1346.
introduction
death in 807/1405, Jurjn went back to Shiraz and stayed there until
his death in 816/141314.3
Jurjn is well known mainly for his commentary on Adud al-Dn
al-js Mawqif 4 and for his book of definitions, Kitb al-Tarft.5 In
these two works, as well as in numerous other writings, Jurjn showed
a great interest in kalm, philosophy and logic. He wrote glosses on
a number of theological, philosophical and logical texts by his older
contemporaries, such on Shams al-Dn Muhammad b. Mubrakshh
al-Bukhrs (fl. 733/1332) commentary on Athr al-Dn al-Abhars
Hidyat al-h ikma,6 on Shams al-Dn al-Bukhrs commentary on
Najm al-Dn al-Ktibs (d. 675/1277) H ikmat al-ayn,7 on Qutb al-Dn
al-Rzs (d. 766/1365) commentary on the section of logic of Sirj al-Dn
al-Urmaws (d. 682/1283) Matli al-anwr,8 on Qutb al-Dn al-Rzs
commentary on Najm al-Dn al-Ktibs al-Shamsiyya,9 on Shams
al-Dn al-Isfahns commentary on Abd Allh b. Umar al-Baydws
(d. c. 685/1286) T awli al-anwr,10 and on Shams al-Dn al-Isfahns
(d. 749/1348) commentary on Nasr al-Dn al-T ss (d. 672/1274) Tajrd
introduction
11
Jurjns glosses on the first chapter (maqsad) of Isfahns commentary were
edited as an MA dissertation by H riyya Shuj Bghn at the University of Qum, Qum
1379/2000. Glosses on the second and the third chapter were edited as an MA dissertation by Fahmat al-Sdt Bihisht at Tarbiyat Moallim University, Tehran 1379/2000.
For the extant manuscripts of this work, see Shakbniy/Pourjavady, Kitb-shins-i
Mr Sayyid Sharf-i Jurjn, p. 140.
12
This work has been edited several times, most recently by H usayn Muallim in
Naqd-i niyz, Tehran 1373/1994, pp. 13340). See Shakbniy/Pourjavady, Kitbshins-i Mr Sayyid Sharf-i Jurjn, p. 140. It has also been translated into Turkish
and Japanese. See Daiber, Bibliography of Islamic Philosophy, vol. 1, pp. 257, 626.
13
See above, p. 2, fn. 3.
14
See Shakbniy/Pourjavady, Kitb-shins-i Mr Sayyid Sharf-i Jurjn, pp.
15561.
15
For Jurjns known students, see Shakbniy/Pourjavady, Kitb-shins-i Mr
Sayyid Sharf-i Jurjn, pp. 1835 (Appendix).
16
Qawm al-Dn al-Kurbl was among the teachers of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak. See
below, p. 17. His name appears in the bibliographical works both as al-Kurbl and
al-Kulbr. Yet it seems that the correct form is Kurbl. According to Qsim Kky,
Kurbl is a village near the town of Zarqn in the north-east of Shiraz. See Qsim
Kky, Ashny b maktab-i Shrz: Mr Sadr al-Dn Dashtak (Sayyid-i Sanad),
Khiradnma-yi Sadr, 3 (1375/1996), p. 83.
17
The extant works of Sharaf al-Dn H asan Shh are (i) a Persian treatise on db
al-bah th (MSS Ilhiyyt 749 D (Cat., p. 378), Dnishgh 339 (Cat., vol. 3 (1), p. 4)), and
(ii) H shiyat al-fayyd, containing his remarks on the notion of fayyd (= overflowing)
used as an attribute for God in the beginning of Qut b al-Dn al-Rzs commentary
on Sirj al-Dn al-Urmaws Matli al-anwr (MS Majlis 3908/1 (Cat., vol. 10 (4),
pp. 19345)). Ghiyth al-Dn attributes to H asan Shh a commentary on Taftzns
Tahdhb al-mantiq and accuses Dawn of plagiarizing H asan Shhs introduction to
that commentary while writing his own commentary on the same text. Ghiyth al-Dn
moreover asserts that H asan Shh was the teacher of Dawn. See MS Majlis 3423/2
(Cat., vol. 10 (3), p. 1283).
introduction
son, Muhammad (d. 838/1434).18 While the first two were evidently
teaching philosophy in the schools of Shiraz, Muhammad b. al-Sharf
al-Jurjn, who wrote a commentary on Athr al-Dn al-Abhars Hidyat
al-h ikma19 as well as some short treatises on logic, is not known to
have actually taught philosophy.20 One generation later, Jall al-Dn
al-Dawn and Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak brought the philosophical
activity in the city to its height and actively engaged in promoting the
interest in philosophy.
II. Jall al-Dn al-Dawn21
Jall al-Dn Muh ammad al-Dawn was born around 830/1426 in
Dawn, a village near Kzirn in the southwest of the Iranian plateau.22
He was a descendent of a family that traced its genealogy back to the
first caliph, Ab Bakr al-Siddq,23 and because of that he sometimes
18
The honorific title of Muhammad b. al-Sharf al-Jurjn has been reported as Shams
al-Dn by some sources and Nr al-Dn by some others. See J. van Ess, Jorjni, Zayn
al-Din Abul-Hasan Ali b. Mohammad b. Ali al-Hosayni, p. 24. Van Esss speculative
solution that al-Sharf al-Jurjn might have had two sons of two marriages with both
of them named Muhammad is doubtful.
19
This commentary is entitled Tah rr al-qawid wa-taqrr al-fawid (known also
as H all al-Hidya) and completed in 819/1416 in Herat, the autograph of which is
located in the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Yale University (MS Yale
University L-265). See L. Nemoy, Arabic Manuscripts in the Yale University Library,
New Haven 1956, p. 147.
20
See Gm, Seyyid erf Crcn ve Arap dilindeki yeri, pp. 1134.
21
On Jall al-Dn al-Dawn, see Reza Pourjavady, Kitb-shins-i thr-i Jall
al-Dn-i Dawn, Marif, 15 i&ii (1377/1998), pp. 81138; Harun Anay, Celleddin
Devvn Hayati. Eserleri. Ahlk ve siyaset, PhD dissertation, Istanbul University, Istanbul
1994; idem, Devvn, Trkiye Diyanet Vakfi Islam ansiklopedisi, vol. 9, Istanbul 1994,
pp. 25762; Andrew J. Newman, Davni, Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 7, pp. 1323;
Stephan Pohl, Zur Theosophie im nachmongolischen Iran. Leben und Werk des alladdn
ad-Dawwn ( gest. 902/1502), Bochum 1997 [unpublished manuscript].
22
On the village of Dawn, see Hamid Mahamedi, Davn, Encyclopaedia Iranica,
vol. 7, pp. 12932. Hence, his name is Dawn (or Davn) and not Dawwn as has
sometimes been erroneously written.
23
In the colophon of a manuscript of Ab l-Abbs al-Lawkars Aws al-masil,
copied by Dawn (MS Marash 12388/7, f. 168), the latter presents his own genealogy as follows: Muhammad b. Asad b. Muhammad b. Abd al-Rahm b. Al b. Abd
al-Salm b. Ah mad b. Abd al-Samad b. Al b. Abd al-Salm b. Al b. Ah mad b.
Bihrist b. Majd b. Zakariy b. Atiyya b. Bakiyya (?) b. Ab l-Faraj b. Abd al-Qdir
b. Nasr b. Ab Zayd b. Jbir b. Muhammad b. Abd al-Rahmn b. Ab Bakr (cf. Cat.,
vol. 31, pp. 308, 840).
introduction
added the title al-Siddq to his name.24 His first teacher was his father,
Sad al-Dn Asad, who was qd of Kzirn and a scholar of h adth
and tafsr in the Jmi al-Murshid of Kzirn.25 Another early teacher
of his was Mazhar al-Dn Muhammad al-Murshid al-Kzirn. These
two introduced him to h adth literature, fiqh, tafsr, and the rational
sciences (aqliyyt).26 Through these two intermediaries, who were both
students of al-Sharf al-Jurjn, Dawn regarded himself as Jurjns
student and linked himself to the latters chain of transmission of philosophy, which goes back to Ibn Sn:
Jall al-Dn al-Dawn his father, Sad al-Dn al-Dawn & Mazhar
al-Dn Muhammad al-Murshid al-Kzirn al Sharf Jurjn Qutb
al-Dn al-Rz Qutb al-Dn al-Shrz (d. 710/1311) Nasr al-Dn
al-T s Fard al-Dn al-Damd al-Nshbr Sadr al-Dn al-Sarakhs27
Afdal a-Dn al-Ghln28 Ab l-Abbs al-Lawkar29 Ibn Sn.30
24
For instance, in the colophon of Rislat Jawbt Ab Sad Ah mad b. Al, which
he himself copied (MS Marash 12388, f. 185), Dawn writes his name as Muhammad
b. Asad b. Muhammad al-Siddq al-Dawn. Cf. the image of the colophon in the
catalogue of the Marash Library, vol. 31, p. 841. In his Nr al-hidya Dawn writes
that his title Siddiq is to affirm the principles and branches of Muhammads religion
(tasdq bi usl u fur-i dn-i Muh ammad) and has nothing to do with Ab Bakr. See
Nr al-hidya, Rasil al-mukhtra, ed. Sayyid Ahmad Tysirkn, Isfahan 1364/1985,
p. 109. However, it should be noticed that Nur al-hidya was most likely written when
Shh Isml was approaching Shiraz. More than anything else, the statement above
shows how much he was afraid of the Sh qizilbsh.
25
See Dawns ijza to Muayyadzde, MS Esad Efendi 3733, f. 44a; Dawn,
Unmdhaj al-ulm, Thalth rasil, ed. Sayyid Ahmad Tysirkn, Mashhad 1411/1991,
pp. 275, 2778. Dawn specifies that with his father he studied al-Jmi al-sah h of
Muhammad al-Bukhr. Al-Jmi al-Murshid seems to have been the mosque in which
Ab Ishq al-Kzirn (d. 426/1035), the famous mystic of the 4th-5th/11th century,
was buried. Nowadays it is known as aywn-i Murshid. See Manchehr Muzaffariyn,
Kzirn dar yna-yi farhang-i rn, Shiraz 1373/1994, pp. 1115.
26
See Dawns ijza to Muayyadzde, MS Esad Efendi 3733, f. 44a; Dawn,
Unmdhaj al-ulm, pp. 275, 2778.
27
On Sadr al-Dn al-Sarakhs and his place in this chain of transmission, see H asan
Ansr, Fakhr-i Rz u muktiba-yi b yaki az hukam-i musir-i khud, Marif,
18 iii (2002), pp. 1026.
28
Afdal al-Dn Umar b. Al al-Ghln is the author of H udth al-lam (ed. Mahd
Muhaqqiq, Tehran 1377/1998).
29
On Ab al-Abbs al-Lawkar (d. ca. 517/1123), see Roxanne D. Marcotte, Preliminary Notes on the Life and Work of Ab al-Abbs al-Lawkar (d. ca. 517/1123),
Anaquel de Estudios rabes, 17 (2006), pp. 13357.
30
See gh Buzurg al-T ihrn, T abaqt, vol. 4, pp. 134, whose source, as he himself mentions, is Dawns ijza to Aff al-Dn Abd al-Rahmn al-Safaw (issued in
893/1488). The credibility of this chain is doubtful, particularly when it comes to Lawkar
being a direct student of Ibn Sn. Since Lawkars date of death falls almost ninety
years after Ibn Sns. Evidently the part of this chain between Nasr al-Dn al-T s
and Ibn Sna has been invented prior to Dawn. It occurred in a copy of Nasr al-Dn
introduction
Dawni completed his studies with some other scholars after he moved
to Shiraz, namely Abd Allh b. Maymn al-Jl (al-Gl) al-Kirmn,33
Rukn al-Dn Rzbahn al-Wiz al-Amr, 34 S a f al-Dn al-j
(d. 864/1450) (his teachers in h adth),35 and Muhy al-Dn al-Kshkinr
al-Ansr (his teacher in h adth and kalm),36 who are mentioned in one
of his ijzas and also in the introduction to his Unmdhaj al-ulm.
In addition to his studies in the madrasa, Dawns interest in Sufism
attracted him to the circles of dervishes of the Murshidiyya silsila of
Kzirn, who were followers of Ab Ishq al-Kzirn (d. 426/1035).
He received a khirqa from the shaykh of this order, Jaml al-Dn Abd
Allh al-Balyn, known as al-Asamm, a pupil of the well-known Sufi
introduction
37
On Amn al-Dn al-Balyn see the relavant entries in Dnishnma-yi Jahn-i Islm,
vol. 4, pp. 1845 (by Imd al-Dn Shaykh al-H ukamy), and in Dirat al-marif-i
buzurg-i Islm, vol. 12, p. 542 (by Muhammad Jawd Shams Nayrz). Amn al-Dn
is said to have died in 745/13445. This seems to contradict Dawns statement that
he was a pupil of Amn al-Dn through only one intermediary.
38
See Dawns ijza to Muayyadzde, MS Esad Efendi 3733, ff. 45b6a. Most of the
names mentioned in this silsila are unknown to modern scholarship. Unlike Dawn,
Amn al-Dn al-Balyns direct students usually linked the silsila of their master to
Ab al-Najb Abd al-Qhir al-Suhraward (d. 563/1168). See Mahmd b. Uthman,
Firdaws al-murshidiyya f asrr al-samadiyya, ed. Iraj Afshr, Tehran 1333/1954, p. 8;
Ahmad Zarkb, Shrznma, ed. Isml Wiz Jawd, Tehran 1350/1971, p. 86. The
shaykhs mentioned in Dawns silsila are exclusively from the region of Kzirn and
it seems that they were deliberately arranged so.
39
Dawn was the first commentator of H fiz. Two ghazals and three lines (bayt) of
H fiz have been commented on by Dawn in five treatises. See Jall al-Dn al-Dawn,
Naqd-i Niyz. dar sharh -i du bayt u yak ghazal az khwja H fiz-i Shrz. He also wrote
a preface to the Dwn of H fiz (see Pourjavady, Kitb-shins-i thr-i Jall al-Dn-i
Dawn, pp. 904; There are some indications that his commentaries were used by
some later commentators of H fiz such as Ahmad Efendi, known as Sd Busnaw
(d. 1005/15967). See Akbar Thubt, H fiz u pr-i gul-rang, Dar h aram-i dst.
Ydwra-yi ustd Sdt Nsir, ed. Ibrhm Zri, Tehran 1370/1991, pp. 7988.
40
Awh ad al-Dn Balyns Rislat al-Ah adiyya has been edited, translated and
studied by Michel Chodkiewicz (Eptre sur lUnicit Absolue, Paris 1982). On Awhad
al-Dn Balyn see also Muhammad Jawd Shams, Balyn, Awhad al-Dn, Dirat
al-marif-i buzurg-i Islm, vol. 12, pp. 5434.
41
See Jall al-Dn al-Dawn, Sharh-i ghazal az H fiz bi mat la-i: Dar hami dayr-i
mughn nst chu man shaydy . . ., Naqd-i Niyz, p. 186.
42
This is according to the colophon to be found in one of its manuscripts, MS
Radaw 799 h ikmat (Cat., vol. 4, p. 177).
introduction
introduction
50
Jall al-Dn al-Dawn, Shawkil al-hr f sharh Haykil al-nr, Thalth rasil,
ed. Sayyid Ahmad Tysirkn, Mashhad 1411/1991, pp. 100261.
51
See Dawn, Shawkil al-hr f sharh Haykil al-nr, p. 109; for more information on Mahmd Khwja Jahn (known also as Mahmd Gwn) (d. 886/14812),
see Tj al-Dn Nsh bd, Mahmd Gwn, Dnishnma-yi adab-i Frs: Adab-i
Frs dar shibha qrrah (Hind, Pkistn, Bangildish), ed. H asan Anshah, Tehran
1380/2001, pp. 23069. The extent of Dawns contact with Mahmd Khwja Jahn
is not clear. Apart from Shawkil al-h r, Dawns Risla Ithbt al-wjib al-qadma
is also dedicated to Mah md Khwja Jahn. See below, p. 11, fn. 65. According to
Nr Allh al-Shshtar, this work once has been dedicated to an Indian authority
and another time to an Iranian one (vol. 2, 22526). The Iranian authority to whom
Dawn dedicated the work seems to have been Timurid Ab Sad (d. 873/1496); cf.
the description of MS Ridaw 866 in Fihrist-i Kitbkhna-yi stn-i Quds-i Ridaw 4,
Mashhad 1325/1947, pp. 1978.
52
Dawn wrote a poem in which he presented the date of his Ab Sads death
according to the abjad system. See Sm Mrz Safaw, Tadhkira-yi Tuhfa-yi Sm, ed.
Rukn al-Dn Humyn Farrukh, Tehran 1384/2005, p. 77.
53
Muslih al-Dn al-Lr in his Mirt al-adwr mentioned the name of the madrasa
in which Dawn had been teaching. See Muslih al-Dn Muhammad al-Lr, Mirt
al-adwr wa-mirqt al-akhbr. Fasl- dar sharh-i hl-i buzurgn-i Khursn u Mwar
al-nahr u Frs, ed. rif Nawshh, Marif, 13 iii (1997), pp. 91113, esp. p. 104;
Rml, Ah san al-tawrkh, p. 98.
10
introduction
Akhlq-i Jall), written around 879/1474,54 to Uzun H asan and his son
Khall.55 As the title of this work suggests the author sought to apply
the Illuminationist (ishrq) approach to the realm of ethics. However,
more evident in the text are frequent allusions to the Qurn and the
sunna of the Prophet, as well as the utterances of Muslim shaykhs and
philosophers.56
In the month of Mizn (Jumd II-Rajab) 881/September-October
1476, Dawn wrote down an eyewitness account of the review of
Khalls provincial army of Fars.57 In the introduction to this work, as
well as in the introduction to his Lawmi al-ishrq, Dawn refers to
the promise in the Qurn (30:24) of a victory at Rm in bid sinn
(literally, in a few years), and by taking the word bid according to
the abjad system to represent the year 872[/1467], he interprets this
Qurnic promise as an allusion to the victory of Uzun H asan in that
year.58
In 882/1477 or early 883/1478, Dawn dedicated to Khall another
of his works, namely his first set of glosses on Al al-Dn al-Qshchs
(d. 879/1474) commentary on Nasr al-Dn T ss Tajrd al-itiqd. By
54
At the end of this work there is a reference to a civil war in Shiraz, which corresponds to the events in this year. See Pourjavady, Kitb-shins-i thr-i Jall al-Dn-i
Dawn, p. 95; John E. Woods, The Aqquyunlu Clan: Clan, Confederation, Empire.
Revised and Expanded Edition, Salt Lake City 1999, p. 105.
55
See Jll al-Dn al-Dawn, Akhlq-i Jall, Lithograph Edition, Lucknow
1377/1956, pp. 317; Woods, The Aqquyunlu Clan, pp. 37, 101, 1158.
56
In the introduction to this work Dawn clarifies his intention by stating: pas
mimr-i tab-i n naqsh bar lawh -i khiyl kashd ki tadwn rawad ki b nki bar usl-i
h ikmat-i amal mushtamil bshad, dar shawhid u dalil iqtibsi az anwr yt-i
Qurn u mishkt-i ah dth h adrat khatmt manqabat wa- masbh sukhann sah bi
u tbin u mashikh u aimma-yi dn u lamat ishrt astn h ukam-i ilhiyyn
rawad. See Dawn, Akhlq-i Jall, p. 17. Despite its popularity, this work has so far
not been critically edited. It has, however, been published several times in lithograph
form (cf. my Kitb-shins-i thr-i Jall al-Dn-i Dawn, pp. 957). In 1839, W. F.
Thompson translated this work into English (Practical Philosophy of the Muhammadan
People, London 1839 [repr. London 1890, Karachi 1977]). For studies on this work see
E. I. J. Rosenthal, Political Thought in Medieval Islam, Cambridge 1985, pp. 21024;
Majid Fakhry, Ethical Theories in Islam, Leiden 1994, pp. 1436; Sayyid Jawd T abtab,
Zawl-i andsha-yi sys dar rn, Tehran 1373/1994, pp. 231253; Reza Pourjavady,
Bahth-i Msq dar kitb-i Akhlq-i Jall, Marif, 13 iii (1375/19967), pp. 3043;
Harun Anay, Celleddin Devvn Hayati. Eserleri. Ahlk ve siyaset.
57
This work, entitled Ardnma, has been edited by Iraj Afshr (Ard-i siph-i Uzn
H asan, Majalla-yi Dnishkada-yi Adabiyt-i Dnishgh-i Tihrn, 3 iii (1335/1956),
pp. 2666). Cf. Reza Pourjavady, Kitb-shins-i thr-i Jall al-Dn-i Dawn, pp.
1289.
58
See Dawn, Akhlq-i Jall, pp. 910.
introduction
11
that time Khall had already succeeded his father as ruler following the
latters death in 882/1477.59
When, following Khalls premature death in Jumd I 883/August
1478, Uzun H asans other son, Yaqb, took power (r. 883/1478
896/1490), Dawn was appointed as chief judge (aqd al-qudt) of the
province of Frs.60 He also accepted the sultans invitation to his court
and travelled together with one of his students, Mr H usayn al-Maybud
(d. 909/15034), to Tabriz.61 Later on, however, his relations with the
sultan deteriorated, as Dawn opposed the sultans centralization policy
during the last years of his reign.62
Most of the works that Dawn wrote during Yaqbs reign are
dedicated to authorities outside Iran.63 A close friend of the young
Ottoman Sultan Byazd II (r. 886/1481918/1512), Muayyadzde
Abd al-Rah mn Efendi (d. 922/1516), came in 884/1479 to Shiraz,
where he studied with Jall al-Dn al-Dawn until 888/1483.64 With
Muayyadzde as a student, Dawn established a connection with
Byazd II. At least three of his writings are therefore dedicated to
the Ottoman ruler, namely his Sharh al-Rubiyyt, his Rislat Ithbt
al-wjib al-qadma,65 and his second set of glosses (al-H shiya al-jadda)
59
The khutba of Dawn to this work, containing his dedication to Sultn Khall, is
extant in MS Gawharshd 851 (Cat., vol. 3, p. 1155).
60
See Muslih al-Dn Muh ammad al-Lr, Mirt al-adwr wa mirqt al-akhbr:
fasl dar . . ., p. 104; Nur Allh al-Shushtar, Majlis al-muminn, Tehran 1334/1955,
vol. 2, p. 221.
61
See Nur Allh al-Shushtar, Majlis al-muminn, vol. 2, pp. 2212.
62
Central policies of Sultan Yaqb necessitated the cancellation of fiscal and
administrative immunities on specific areas that had been granted to influential civilian
dignitaries in the provinces, many of whom were member of the religious intelligensia.
See Woods, The Aqquyunlu Clan, p. 145; cf. Newman, Davn, p. 132.
63
To our knowledge none of Dawns significant works are dedicated primarily to
Sultan Yaqb. However, it is said that his H shiya qadma al sharh jadd li-Tajrd
is dedicated also to Sultn Yaqb (after being dedicated to Sult n Khall). The same
work is dedicated later to Byazd II. See Al Sadry Khy, Kitb-shins-i Tajrd
al-itiqd, Qm1424/2003, p. 65.
64
He received an ijza from Dawn on 11 Jumd I 888/17 June 1483. See Dawns
ijza to Muayyadzde, MS Esad Efendi 3733, f. 47a; Muslih al-Dn Muh ammad
al-Lr, Mirt al-adwr wa-mirqt al-akhbr . . ., p. 104; Harun Anay, Devani, pp.
257, 261.
65
According to the colophon of MS Ragp 1457 (ff. 176b90a), f. 190a, this work
is dedicated to Byazd II in 894/1489. However, it seems to have been written years
earlier as in some manuscripts it is dedicated to Mahmd Khwja Jahn. See Tysirkns
introduction to Sab rasil, pp. 413. Tysirkn, however, thought that the work
apart from Mahmd Khwja Jahn is dedicated to Sult n Muhammad Ftih (instead
of his son Byazid II). Surprisingly, in his editing of this work he omitted either of
12
introduction
on Qshchs commentary on T ss Tajrd al-itiqad.66 In acknowledgment for having written Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-qadma, Dawn
received from Byazd II a letter together with five hundred filori (gold
coins).67 As an expression of his appreciation of the Sultans generosity,
Dawn composed in turn a Mathnaw in his praise.68
Dawn also enjoyed the patronage of some authorities in India.
Unmdhaj al-ulm and Tah qq-i adlat (or Risla dar bayn mhiyyat-i
adlat u ah km-i n)69 are dedicated to Sultan Mahmd I of Gujarat
(r. 863/1458917/1511), who subsequently awarded him the sum of one
thousand dirhams.70 In the opening section of his Unmdhaj al-ulm,
Dawn first praises Sultan Mahmd I and then introduces himself by
mentioning his teachers. In order to demonstrate his comprehensive
knowledge, Dawn discusses in this work ten issues relating to ten
different subjects, namely the methodological principles of h adth and
of fiqh (usl al-h adth wa-l-fiqh), fiqh, a controversial issue [of fiqh]
(bad al-khilfiyt), theology (usl al-dn), medicine (tibb), exegesis
these two dedicating notes, because he believed they do not have any scientific and
historical relevance.
66
The works of Dawn were enormously popular in Istanbul, particularly during
the late 9th/15th and early 10th/16th century. Apart from his student Muayyadzde
Abd al-Rahmn Efendi, Kaml Pshzde (d. 940/1533) evidently showed interest in
the works of Dawn. Kaml Pshzde wrote a commentary on Dawns Rislat Ithbt
al-wjib al-qadma. See Sayyid H usayn Sayyid Bghjawn, Ibn Kaml Bsh wa-ruhu
al-itiqdiyya, Phd Dissertation, Umm Al-Qura University, Mecca 1414/1993, p. 194.
The popularity of Dawns works is also evident from the numerous copies of his
works located in Istanbul and other Turkish libraries.
67
About filori, see the relevant article by H. nalcik in The Encyclopaedia of Islam.
New Edition, vol. 2, pp. 9145.
68
The letter sent by the Ottoman Sultan Byazd II to Dawn, together with the
Mathnaw that Dawn wrote, are edited by Abd al-H usayn Nawy in Asnd u
muktabt-i trkh-yi rn az tmr t shh Isml, Tehran 1341/1962, pp. 44855.
69
Dawn wrote two Persian treatises on the notion of justice: Risla-yi adlat (ed.
Najb Myil Hiraw, Majm-yi rasil-i khatt -yi frs, vol. 1, Mashhad 1368/198990,
p. 6072) and Tah qq-i adlat (ed. Najb Myil Hiraw), Mishkt, vols. 1819
(1368/198990), pp. 3547. The latter is dedicated to Sultan Mahmd I of Gujarat.
70
Nr Allh Shshtar explains that Dawns Unmdhaj al-ulm was given to Sult n
Mahmd I of Gujarat by Dawns student, Shams al-Dn Muhammad al-Jurjn. The
Sultan sent back to Dawn one thousand dirham, but nothing of that award reached
Dawn as the ship in which the money was conveyed sank. Dawn then dedicated
his Risla dar bayn mhiyyat-i adlat u ah km-i n to the Sultan and in its introduction implied that he did not receive the first award. Again the Sultan sent Dawn
the same amount along with some other presents. See Shshtar, Majlis al-muminn,
vol. 2, p. 226. Shshtars narration corresponds with the introduction of Dawn to
his Tah qq-i adlat (ed. Najb Myil Hiraw, Mishkt, vols. 1819 (1368/198990), pp.
3547), where praising the sultan, the author says kaf-i dary nawlash iqtid-i thr-i
mathir shar-i ilw farmda (p. 39).
introduction
13
14
introduction
79
introduction
15
16
introduction
al-tawrkh, ed. Ih sn Ishrq, Tehran 1359/19801, vol. 1, pp. 156, 160; Rml,
Ah san al-tawrkh, p. 248. He authored among other works glosses on Dawns
al-H shiya al-qadma al sharh Qshj li-l-Tajrd. See Al Sadry Khy, Kitbshins-i Tajrd al-itiqd, pp. 756. Rml also attributed to him a commentary on
H ills Tahdhb al-usl. See Ah san al-tawrkh, p. 248.
97
See Dawns Ijza to Muayyadzde, MS Esad Efendi 3733, ff. 41b7a.
98
See below, pp. 3740.
99
According to gh Buzurg al-T ihrn, Aff al-Dn al-Safaw received an ijza
from Dawn in 893/1488. See T abaqt, vol. 4, pp. 134.
100
See below, pp. 414.
101
See Dawn, Sab rasil, (introduction), p. 27; Qumm, Khulsat al-tawrkh,
vol. 1, p. 149.
102
See below, p. 51, fn. 33.
103
H akm Shh was a descendant of a family of doctors and himself excelled in
medicine. After studying in Shiraz he went to Mecca and spent some time there. He
was then invited to Byazds court in Istanbul on Muayyadzdes recommendation.
He wrote a work on tafsr, glosses on Dawns Sharh Aqid al-adudiyya, and a commentary on Jaml al-Dn Ibn H jibs Kfiyya (dealing with grammar). Tshkprzde,
E-aqiq En-Nomnijje, p. 216. Whelan Dunietz, Qd H usayn Maybud of Yazad,
p. 60; Dawn, Sab rasil, (introduction), pp. 278.
104
See below, pp. 74105 (Chapter Two).
105
On Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, see Dashtak, Kashf al-haqiq al-Muhammadiyya,
Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn Mansr-i H usayn-i Dashtak-i Shrz, vol. 2, pp. 735988;
Abd Allh Shakb, Barras-yi thr u afkr-i falsaf-i Mr Sadr al-Dn-i Dashtak, PhD
Dissertation, University of Tehran, Tehran 1355/1976; Kky, Ashny b maktab-i
Shrz: Mr Sadr al-Dn Dashtak, pp. 829; Ghiyth al-Dn Mansr al-Dashtak,
Tuh fat al-fat f tafsr srat hal at, ed. Parwn Bahrzda, Tehran 1381/2002, pp.
3450 (introduction); Muhammad Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz,
Shiraz 1383/2004, pp. 1732.
106
See Dashtak, Kashf al-h aqiq al-Muh ammadiyya, Musannaft-i Ghiyth
al-Dn, vol. 2, p. 982.
introduction
17
prominent Zayd family that had been living in Shiraz since the 5th/11th
century.107 Dashtak learned Arabic and studied Islamic law with his
cousin, Majd al-Dn H abb Allh al-Dashtak, and he studied h adth
literature with his father Sayyid Mansr and with another cousin of his,
Sayyid Nizm al-Dn Ahmad al-Dashtak.108 Sadr al-Dns son, Ghyth
al-Dn, presents his fathers chain of transmission of h adith as follows:
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak his father, Sadr al-Shar Mansr & his
cousin, Nizm al-Dn Ah mad b. Ish q b. Ibrhm b. Muh ammad
Sadr al-Shar Mansrs father Muh ammad his father Ibrhim
his father Muh ammad his father Ish q his father Al his
father Arabshh his father Amrn his father Amr his father
al-H asan his father al-H usayn al-Shir al-Arr his father his
father Al al-Nasb (or Nasnn) al-Shir his father Zayd al-Asam
his father Muhammad his father Al his father Jafar his father
Ahmad al-Sakkn his father Muhammad al-Sayyid his father Zayd
al-Shahd al-h arq (d. 122/740) his father al-Imam Zayn al-bidn Al
(d. 94/71213) his father al-Imam al-H usayn (d. 61/680) his father
Al b. Ab T lib Prophet Muhammad.109
107
According to Kky the first member of the family who moved to Shiraz was
Ab Sad Al al-Nasb (fl. ca. 400/1010). See Kky, Ashny b maktab-i Shrz:
Mr Sadr al-Dn Dashtak, p. 83.
108
See Dashtak, Kashf al-h aqiq al-Muh ammadiyya, Musannaft-i Ghiyth
al-Dn, vol. 2, pp. 9823.
109
Khwnsr quoted this isnd from an unspecified work by Sadr al-Dn Muhammad
b. Ghiyth al-Dn. See Muhammad Bqir al-Msaw al-Khwnsr, Rawdt al-jannt,
vol. 7, pp. 2412. This isnd is also mentioned by Sadr al-Dns grandson, known as
Sadr al-Dn II, in his ijza to one of his students. Prior to Khwnsr this ijza is quoted
by Majlis in his Bih r al-anwr (Beirut 1412/1992, vol. 105, pp. 803).
110
See Dashtak, Kashf al-haqiq al-Muhammadiyya, Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn,
p. 983. On Kurbl, see above, p. 3, fn. 16.
111
Ghiyth al-Dn does not consider his father as Kurbls student, but rather as
a colleague with whom he had some discussions and debates. See Dashtak, Kashf
al-h aqiq al-Muh ammadiyya, MS Majlis-i Sin 32, ff. 113b4a In the edition of this
text in Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn (vol. 2, p. 983), Kurbls name appears wrongly
as Kirmn. However, Sadr al-Dn was too young at that time to be considered as
Kurbls colleague.
18
introduction
introduction
19
been considerable, should be exempted from tax and that Sadr al-Dn
should be free to use it for whatever purpose he chose.117
Despite the support he received from Sultn Yaqb, Dashtak dedicated his most significant writings to the Ottoman Sultan Byazd II.
While still a prince, the latter wrote to Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, recommending his friend Muayyadzde to him as a student.118 However,
during his subsequent stay in Shiraz, Muayyadzde studied primarily
with Dawn, though he also had a period of study with Sadr al-Dn
al-Dashtak. Two years after Byazd II took power in 886/1481,
Muayyadzde returned to Istanbul. Dashtak dedicated his first set of
glosses on Qshchs commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd (completed by
888/1483) to Byazd II and asked Muayyadzde to take the work to
him.119 Later on, he also dedicated his second set of glosses on the same
commentary to this Ottoman ruler.120
Dashtak dedicated his last work, Risla f Ithbt al-wjib wa-siftih,
which he completed in Muharram 903/August-September 1497, to the
Aqquyunlu Sultan Ahmad Gwde b. Ughurlu Muhammad (d. Rab II
903/December 1497). The provincial ruler of Shiraz, Qsim-Bay Purnk,
who revolted against Sultan Ahmad, abolished the tax exemption originally accorded to the endowment income of the Mansuriyya madrasa,
and this caused Sadr al-Dn a severe financial loss.121 Between Rab II
903/December 1497 and Ramadn 903/ May 1498, Sadr al-Dn led an
uprising against Qsim Bey in Shiraz. The latter did not tolerate this
action and on his order a group of Turkemans killed Sadr al-Dn on
17 Ramadn 903/9 May 1498.122
117
See H jj Mrz H asan Fasy, Frs-nma-yi Nsir, ed. Mansr Rastigr Fasy,
Tehran 1367/1988, pp. 3514; Kky, Ashny b maktab-i Shrz: Mr Sadr al-Dn
Dashtak, p. 84.
118
Muslih al-Dn Muhammad al-Lr, Mirt al-adwr wa-mirqt al-akhbr . . .,
p. 104.
119
See Muslih al-Dn Muhammad al-Lr, Mirt al-adwr wa mirqt al-akhbr . . .,
p. 104; See Al Sadry Khy, Kitb-shins-i Tajrd al-itiqd, p. 85.
120
See H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Ftih 3025, f. 2a.
121
Rml, Ah san al-tawrkh, p. 28.
122
Dashtak, Kashf al-haqiq al-Muhammadiyya, Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn,
vol. 2, p. 985; in MS Majlis-i Sin 32, which contains this work and was copied by
the authors son, Sadr al-Dn II, the date of death is recorded as 12 Ramadn 903 and
corrected in the margin as 17 Ramadn 903 (f. 115a). The former date is mentioned
by other bibliographical sources, such as Fasys Frs-nma-yi Nsir (p. 359) and
Rmls Ah san al-tawrkh (p. 33).
20
introduction
This work is completed in Muh arram 947/May-June 1540. See below, pp.
289.
124
See Dashtaks prologue of Kashf al-haqiq al-Muhammadiyya, Musannaft-i
Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 2, pp. 9808.
125
See Shshtar, 2/229; Khwnsr, Rawdt al-Jannt, vol. 5, p. 189; Kky, shny
b maktab-i Shrz: Mr Sadr al-Dn Dashtak, p. 83.
126
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, Gawhar-nma (or Jawhirnma), ed. Manchihr
Sutdah, Farhang-i rn-zamn 4 (1335/1956), p. 186; cf. Woods, The Aqquyunlu
Clan, p.105.
127
See Dawn, H shiya al Sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1999, f. 5b; cf.
Shshtar, Majlis al-muminn, vol. 2, p. 223.
introduction
21
During his later life, Sadr al-Dn often consulted with his son, Ghiyth
al-Dn Mansr, on philosophical issues. Evidence for this is given in
the introduction to his second set of glosses on Qshchs commentary
on T ss Tajrd al-itiqd (al-H shiya al-jadda), where he explicitly
mentions that some achievements (nubadhan min tawfqt) of his
son Mansr are included in the work.128 Moreover, Ghiyth al-Dn
explains in his Kashf al-h aqiq al-Muh ammadiyya that his father
believed that human souls are free from matter, although his discussion
of that issue in his al-H shiya al-jadda al sharh al-Tajrd may be
understood to point to the contrary this, at least, is what one of the
people (a reference to Dawn) understood from it. The explanation
that Ghiyth al-Dn puts forward for the shortcomings of his fathers
discussion regarding this issue is the fact that he, Ghiyth al-Dn, was
in Azerbaijan (presumably Tabriz) and not with his father while the
latter was writing this section of the H shiya.129 This seems to imply
that, with the exception of the time when he was in Azerbaijan, Ghiyth
al-Dn used to be consulted by his father, whenever the latter composed
the glosses (and possibly other writings).
According to his son, Sadr al-Dn composed fourteen works, for ten
of which Ghiyth al-Dn gives the title:130
1) Glosses on Qutb al-Dn al-Rzs commentary and Sharf Jurjns
glosses on the Risla al-Shamsiyya of Najm al-Dn al-Ktib;131
2) Glosses on Qut b al-Dn al-Rzs commentary on the Mat li
al-anwr of Sirj al-Dn al-Urmaw. This work in fact consists of
two sets of glosses, the second one having been written in reply to
Dawns criticism on his first glosses;132
128
f. 1b.
129
Ghyth al-Dn writes: wa-bi-l-jumla kna f tajarrud al-nafs muwfiqan
li-jumhr al-h ukam, ill annah inda ghaybat an khidmatih fi al-zamn alladh
kuntu f bild dharbyjn kataba f h awshhi al al-tajrd kalman fahama minh
bad al-ns annah yunkir al-tajarrud wa-l-baq. See Dashtak, Kashf al-h aqiq
al-Muhammadiyya, Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 2, p. 984.
130
See Dashtak, Kashf al-h aqiq al-Muh ammadiyya, Musannaft-i Ghiyth
al-Dn, vol. 2, p. 984.
131
For the extant manuscripts of this work, see below, p. 75, fn. 10.
132
For the extant manuscripts of this work, see Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i
falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 245.
22
introduction
133
See Shshtar, Majlis al-muminn, vol. 2, p. 230. This work has not yet been
identified.
134
See below, p. 79, fn. 26.
135
Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak did not specify the author of this work, referring
to it as Taysr al-fiqh. Shshtar specifies that this work is on Shfi school of fiqh
(referring to it as Talqt bar Taysr fiqh-i Shfi). See Shshtar, Majlis al-muminn,
vol. 2, p. 230. Kky describes the work as glosses on Taysr al-wusl il jam al-usl
[by Ibn Dba al-Shaybn (d. 944/1537)]. See Kky, Ashny b maktab-i Shrz:
Mr Sadr al-Dn Dashtak, p. 86. However, this cannot be correct as Taysr al-wusl
is completed in 916/15101, thirteen years after Sadr al-Dns death. Taysr al-H w f
tah rr al-fatw by Sharaf al-Dn Ibn al-Briz al-H amaw seems to be the only book
on which the glosses could have been written.
136
For the location of some of the extant manuscripts of these two works, see Al
Sadry Khu, Kitb-shins-i Tajrd al-itiqd, pp. 857, 902.
137
For the location of two extant manuscripts of the text, see Barakat, Kitb-shins-i
maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, p. 32.
138
For the bibliographical reference to the edition of this work see above, p. 18,
fn. 116.
139
For the location of some of its extant manuscripts, see Barakat, Kitb-shins-i
maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 178. To this list should be added MS ehid Ali Paa
2761, ff. 89b106a.
introduction
23
To this list should be added the glosses that Sadr al-Dn wrote on Adud
al-Dn al-Ijs commentary on Ibn H jibs Mukhtasar al-usl.140
The list provided by Ghiyth al-Dn shows that Sadr al-Dn wrote
much less than his contemporary Dawn. Ghiyth al-Dn evidently
felt the need to explain this. He writes:
It was his noble habit to mention only his original ideas and to quote
from others writings only with reference to their respective authors with
the intention of commenting upon them. This was the reason he chose to
write most of his works in the form of glosses, since in glosses there is no
need to benefit others by repeating what has already been said in other
texts and the commentaries. Although he wrote fewer and shorter works
than other great scholars and noble philosophers, the number and quality
of the original points made in his writings exceed those of others.141
140
Ghiyth al-Dn in his own glosses on this commentary alludes to this work of
his father. See Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, p. 133.
141
Dashtak, Kashf al-haqiq al-Muhammadiyya, Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn,
vol. 2, p. 984.
142
The attribution of this work to Frb is doubted by some modern scholars; see
Shlomo Pines, Ibn Sn et lauteur de la Rislat al-fuss f l-hikma: Quelques donnes
du problme, The Collected Works of Shlomo Pines, iii (ed. Sarah Stroumsa), Jerusalem
1996, pp. 297300. Dashtak, however, regards the work as Frbs.
143
See Dashtaks H shiya al Sharh Jadd Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Ftih 3025, f. 1b,
where he says that apart from his own contribution, his glosses contain m wujida
min kutub al-qawm l siyyam Kitb al-Shif.
144
The manuscript is preserved nowadays in the Raza library of Rampur (MS Raza
h ikmat 112); see Cat., vol. 1, p. 397. After Sadr al-Dns death, his son Ghiyth al-Dn,
followed by his grandson Sadr al-Dn II, and eventually another member of the family,
Fath Allh al-Shrz, owned the manuscript. It was presumably the latter who took
it to India. I thank Sajjad H. Rizvi for having drawn my attention to this manuscript.
24
introduction
145
In one occasion in his commentary on Nasr al-Dn al-T ss Tajrd al-Itiqd,
Nayrz refers to this specific recension of Ibn Sns Shif by saying what is known
to us from al-Shif on the basis of the manuscript of my teacher (m ulima min
al-Shif wa-nuskhat ustdhin); see MS Majlis 3968, f. 205a:24.
146
MS Majlis 3944. The ownership statement of Sadr al-Dn can be found in the
front page of the manuscript.
147
According to Takprzde, Muzaffar al-Dn studied the Geometry of Euclid
with Sadr al-Dn. See his E-aqiq En-Nomnijje, p. 215.
148
See Taq al-Dn Frs, Fard Qsiml, Dnishnma-yi jahn-i Islm, vol. 6,
pp. 8802, esp. p. 881.
149
On Ghiyth al-Dn Mansr al-Dashtak, see Harun Anay, Mir Giyathedden
Mansur Trkiye Diyanet Vakfi Islam Ansiklopedisi, vol. 30, Istanbul 2005, pp. 1278;
Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 11370; Kky, shiny b
maktab-i Shrz: Mr Ghiyth al-Dn Mansr Dashtak Shrz (1), Khiradnma-yi
Sadra, 5&6 (19978), pp. 8390; Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak, Musannaft-i Ghiyth
al-Dn.
150
The date of birth is reported from Sadr al-Dn II, the son of Ghiyth al-Dn
al-Dashtak. See MS Majlis-i Sin 32 (front page, f. 3a).
151
Ghiyth al-Dn composed at least four works on medicine: 1) Malim al-Shif;
2) al-Shfiyya; 3) H shiya al-Shfiyya; 4) Tarjumat al-Shfiyya. See Barakat, Kitbshins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 137, 1523, 167.
introduction
25
152
As mentioned earlier, apart from the writings of Ibn Sn, Fuss al-h ikam attributed to Frb is also one of the prominent sources of Sadr al-Dn, particularly in his
Ithbt al-wjib. See above, p. 23, fn. 142.
153
The impact of Suhraward on Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtaks thought is evident from the latters supercommentary on Dawns commentary on Suhrawards
Haykil al-nr, entitled Ishrq Haykil al-nr li-kashf zulumt Shawkil al-gharr.
Ghiyth al-Dn also adopts some Suhrawardian terminology in his Mirt al-h aqiq
wa-mujl al-daqiq. See Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak, Mirt al-h aqiq wa-mujl
al-daqiq, Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 1, pp. 75132. The impact of Ibn Arabs
thought on Ghiyth al-Dn is evident from his commentary on Dawns al-Zawr .
On this work see below, p. 29, fn. 180.
154
Shshtar, Majlis al-muminn, vol. 2, p. 231. Unfortunately this work of Ghiyth
al-Dn al-Dashtak seems to be lost.
155
Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak, Ishrq haykil al-nr li-kashf zulumt Shawkil
al-gharr, ed. Al Awjab, Tehran 1382/2003. In his Mirt al-h aqiq wa-mujl
al-daqiq Ghiyth al-Dn refers to this work. See Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, vol.
1, p. 99. This shows that it had been completed before Mirt al-haqiq which was
completed in 895/14951.
156
In the edition of Mirt al-haqiq (Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 1, p. 76),
the name of the patron is mentioned in the introduction as al-sultn b. sultn Ghiyth
al-saltana wa-l-duny wa-l-dn, Ab l-Muzaffar Bahdur khn. These are the titles used
for Sultn Ahmad at that time. See for instance Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtaks introduction
to his Ithbt al-wjib, dedicated to the same Sultan (MS ehid Ali Paa 2761, f. 89b).
26
introduction
157
According to the author, the work was first written in 895/1490 and five years later
he made some additions to it. See Mirt al-haqiq wa-mujl al-daqiq, Musannaft-i
Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 1, p. 97.
158
MS Marash 9698, Cat., vol. 25, p. 62. The way the author refers to his father in
this text shows that the work was written while his father was still alive. Cf. Barakat,
Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 1256.
159
MS Dnishgh 1147, ff. 35b62a (Cat., vol. 3 (6), p. 2356). The way the author
refers to his father in this text shows that the work was written while the latter was
still alive. Cf. Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 1689.
160
See below, p. 41.
161
See Fard Qsiml, Taq al-Dn Frs, p. 881.
162
See below, pp. 546.
163
See Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 1502.
164
See Fasy, Frs-nma, p. 370.
introduction
27
See Abd al-H usayn H ir, Fihrist-i kitbkhna-yi Majlis-i shr-yi Islm, vol.
10 (4), Tehran 1352/1973, pp. 17589 (MS Majlis 3774/2).
166
See Shshtar, Majlis al-muminn, vol. 2, p. 232. This work seems to be lost.
167
See Shshtar, Majlis al-muminn, vol. 2, p. 233.
168
See Qumm, Khulsat al-tawrkh, vol. 1, pp. 149, 296. Rml, Ah san al-tawrkh,
p. 392.
169
See Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, p. 152.
170
Part of the introduction to this work is quoted by Nrn in the introduction to
his collection of Ghiyth al-Dn Mansrs writings. See Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak,
Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 1, pp. 1434. However, Nrn provides no information about the location(s) of the manuscript(s) of this work and his quotaion does
not even help to know even the subject of the treatise.
165
28
introduction
171
See Fasy, Frs-nma-yi Nsir, pp. 1901. On Sayyid Nimat Allh al-H ill and
his disputes with Al al-Karak (d. 940/1534), see Rula Jurdi Abisaab, Converting Persia.
Religion and Power in the Safavid Empire, London 2004, p. 17.
172
On the location of the extant manuscripts of this treatise, see Barakat, Kitbshins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 1678.
173
On the conflict between Ghiyth al-Dn and Karak, see Fasy, Frs-nma-yi
Nsir, pp. 1901; see also Andrew Newman, Towards a Reconsideration of the Isfahan
School of Philosophy: Shaykh Bahai and the Role of the Safawid Ulama, Studia Iranica,
15 ii (1986), pp. 16599, esp. pp. 1815; idem, The Myth of the Clerical Migration
to the Safawid Iran. Arab Sh Opposition to Al al-Karak and Safawid Shiism, Die
Welt des Islams, 33 (1993), pp. 66112, esp. pp. 99101; Abisaab, Converting Persia,
pp. 179.
174
Fasy, Frs-nma-yi Nsir, pp. 1901. The exact date of his death is based
on a note written by one of his family members, Nizm al-Dn al-Dashtak, in the
front page of MS Majlis Sin 32 (containing a copy of Dashtaks Kashf al-h aqiq
al-Muh ammadiyya). Nizm al-Dn specifies that his source was Ghiyth al-Dns son
Sadr al-Dn Muhammad.
introduction
29
30
introduction
introduction
31
190
32
introduction
introduction
33
(d. 896/1491), the sadr of Sultan Yaqb, appointed Maybud the chief
judge of Yazd and made him responsible for matters relating to endowment (waqf ) in that city.205
Aside from his occupation as qd, Maybud was during this period
teaching various subjects, including logic and geometry. That he was
teaching logic is indicated by one of the students of Maybud who composed a treatise on the subject.206 Among the texts on logic that he may
have taught is the Risla al-Shamsiyya of Ktib, since he wrote a commentary on this text.207 Moreover, in his Munshat Maybud explicitly
states that he taught geometry. He mentions that he was teaching most
of Nasr al-Dn al-T ss Tah rr usl al-handasa li-Iqldis to a certain
Muhammad Nakhjawn, and that at the request of the latter he wrote
glosses on this text.208 Sometime before Shabn 888/September 1483,
205
Dawn is said to have recommended Maybud to Qd s for that position.
Shshtar narrates a story which suggests the accidental nature of this appointment.
Maybud accordingly accompanied Dawn on his journey from Shiraz to the court of
Sultan Yaqb in Tabriz, which took place sometime after 883/1478. There, Maybud
found an opportunity to display his mastery in scientific debate. Once, in a majlis of
Sultan Yaqb, a dispute occured between Dawn and a gifted scholar by the name of
Ab Ishq al-Nayrz. Dawn was rightly rejecting his arguments but his opponent was
a master of rhetoric and by violating the rules of disputation, he nearly defeated Dawn.
Sitting at the lower side of the majlis, Maybud could not bear to see the humiliation of
his master and asked permission to take part in the disputation on behalf of Dawn.
From that moment, whenever Ab Ish q violated any of the rules of disputation,
Maybud drew attention to it and prevented him from changing the subject. Eventually,
Maybuds arguments convinced everyone in the majlis. The vizier of Sultan Yaqb,
Qd Saf al-Dn s, asked Dawn about Maybud. Dawn introduced him as one of
the notables of Yazd (az buzurg-zda-h-yi Yazd ast). Subsequently, following Dawns
request, Maybud was appointed judge of Yazd and became responsible for the issues
related to endowment (waqf ) in that city. See Shshtar, Majlis al-Muminn, vol. 2,
pp. 2212. Dunietz has rightly doubted the correctness of this account. See Whelan
Dunietz, Qd H usayn Maybud of Yazd, pp. 1135.
206
The author of Risla fi Tah qq slibat al-mah ml preserved in MS Dnishgh 3430
mentions that he studied logic with Maybud. See H asan Rahmn & Sayyid Ibrhm
Ashk Shrns introduction to their editions of Maybuds Sharh -i Dwn-i mansb bi
Amr al-muminn Al b. Ab T lib, p. 45.
207
See Mr H usayn al-Maybud, Sharh al-Shamsiyya, Lithograph Edition, Istanbul
Shabn 1289/October 1871. Without referring to her source, Dunietz mentions the
date of completion of this commentary as 886/14812. See Whelan Dunietz, Qd
H usayn Maybud of Yazd, p. 55.
208
See Munshat-i Maybud, ed. Nusrat Allh Furhar, Tehran 1376/1997, pp. 723.
For the extant manuscripts of this work, see H asan Rahmn & Sayyid Ibrhm Ashk
Shrns introduction to their edition of Maybuds Sharh -i Dwn-i mansb bi Amr
al-muminn Al b. Ab T lib, pp. 412.
34
introduction
209
This work must have been written before 5 Shabn 888/8 September 1483, the
date on which one of its manuscripts was completed (MS Majlis 1918, pp. 20513; Cat.,
vol. 5, pp. 4101). See H asan Rahmn & Sayyid Ibrhm Ashk Shrns introduction
to their editions of Maybuds Sharh -i Dwn-i mansb bi Amr al-muminn Al b.
Ab T lib, pp. 434.
210
Eds. H asan Rah mn & Sayyid Ibrhm Ashk Shrn, under the title Sharh -i
Dwn-i mansb bi Amr al-muminn Al b. Ab T lib. For the study of this work see
Whelan Dunietz, Qd H usayn Maybud of Yazd, pp. 65112.
211
Maybud, Sharh -i Dwn-i mansb bi Amr al-muminn Al b. Ab T lib,
pp. 1314, 268.
212
On Ibn Arabs school of thought, see William C. Chittick, The School of Ibn
Arab, in History of Islamic Philosophy, eds. Seyyed Hossein Nasr & Oliver Leaman,
London 1996, vol. 1, pp. 51023; Alexander Knysh, Ibn Arabi in the Later Islamic
Tradition: The Making of a Polemical Image in Medieval Islam, New York 1999.
introduction
35
36
introduction
218
See Maybud, Jm-i gt-num, ed. Abd Allh Nrn, pp. 9596. Referring to
Qsim as prince (shhzdah), Maybud in the introduction to this work implied that
he would attend the majlis of Qsim from time to time. Ibid., p. 95.
219
Mr H usayn Maybud, Munshat-i Maybud, pp. 823. On Shams al-Dn al-Lhj
see A. H. Zarrnkb, Lahdj, The Encyclopaedia of Islam (New Edition), vol. 5, pp.
6035.
220
Maybud, Sharh -i Dwn-i mansb bi Amr al-muminn Al b. Ab T lib,
p. 30.
221
Qumm, Khulsat al-tawrkh, vol. 1, p. 84.
222
See Dimitri Gutas, The study of Arabic philosophy in the twentieth century,
British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 29 i (2002), pp. 515, p. 7. Gutas does not
specify to which Dashtak he is referring.
223
Maybud, Sharh -i Dwn-i mansb bi Amr al-muminn Al b. Ab T lib,
p. 12.
224
See Maybud, Jm-i gt-num, ed. Abd Allh Nrn, p. 111; On Maybuds
discussion of Ibn Sns view on bodily resurrection, see below, p. 62, fn. 88.
225
See Maybuds Sharh -i Dwn-i mansb bi Amr al-muminn Al b. Ab T lib,
p. 12.
introduction
37
226
p. 23.
227
On Shams al-Dn Muhammad al-Khafr, see George Saliba, A Redevelopment
of Mathematics in a Sixteenth-Century Arabic Critique of Ptolemaic Astronomy, in
Perspectives arabes et mdivales sur la tradition scientifique et philosophique grecque,
Actes du colloque de la SIHSPAI (Socit internationale dhistoire des sciences et de la
philosophie arabes et islamiques), Paris, 31 mars-3 avril 1993, eds. Ahmad Hasnawi,
Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal and Maroun Aouad, Leuven/Paris 1997, pp. 10522; idem,
The Ultimate Challenge to Greek Astronomy. Hall m l yanh all of Shams al-Khafr
(d. 1550), in Sic itur ad astra. Studien zur Geschichte der Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften. Festschrift fr den Arabisten Paul Kunitzsch zum 70. Geburtstag, eds.
Menso Folkerts and Richard Lorch, Wiesbaden 2000, pp. 490505; Kky, shny
b maktab-i Shrz: Muh aqqiq-i Khafr, Khiradnma-yi Sadr, 4 (1375/1996),
pp. 719; Frzah Satchiyn, Shams al-Dn Muhammad ibn Ahmad Khafr. Faylasf
u munajjim-i nmdr-i maktab-i Shirz, Kitb-i mh-i falsafa, 13 (1387/2008),
pp. 69103; eadem, Muarrif-yi panj risla-yi Khafr dar elhiyyt u ithbt-i wjib,
Marif, 20 ii (1382/2003), pp. 98111; Shams al-Dn al-Khafr, Talqa bar sharh -i
ilhiyyt-i Tajrd al-itiqd-i mull Al Qshch, ed. Frzah Satchiyn, Tehran
1382/20034; idem, Martib al-wujd, ed. Reza Pourjavady, Dard-i falsafa dars-i
falsafa. Jashn-nma-yi ustd duktur Karm-i Mujtahid, eds. Muhammad Raszdah,
Bbak Abbs, Muhammad Mansr Hshim, Tehran 1384/2005, pp. 23957.
38
introduction
dan.
230
On the date of completion of this work, see Muhammad Karm Ishrq, Buzurgn-i
Jahrum, Tehran 1351/1972, p. 285. For a study of this work, see George Saliba, The
Ultimate Challenge to Greek Astronomy. Hall m l yanh all of Shams al-Khafr
(d. 1550), pp. 4912.
231
See below, p. 84. Ibrat al-fudal has been edited by Ahad Farmarz Qarmalik,
Khiradnma-yi Sadr, 1, 4 pp. 869. The edition is reprinted in Dawzdah risla dar
prduks-i durghg, ed. Farmarz Qarmalik in collaboration with T ayyiba rif
Niy, pp. 2659. Khafr later wrote another treatise on the same issue entitled H ayrat
al-fudal f h all shubhat jadhr al-asamm. This work has also been edited by Ahad
Farmarz Qarmalik in collaboration with T ayyiba rif Niy in Dawzdah risla dar
prduks-i durghg, pp. 265309.
232
On this work, see Frzah Satchiyn, Muarrif-yi panj risla-yi Khafr dar
elhiyyt u ithbt-i wjib, pp. 1057.
233
See Shshtar, Majlis al-muminn, vol. 2, p. 234; Khwnsr, Rawdt al-jannt,
vol. 7, p. 196. Saliba doubts the correctness of these reports, arguing that at that time
the religious persuasion was not always obvious. See his A Redevelopment of Mathematics in a Sixteen-Century Arabic Critique of Ptolemaic Astronomy, pp. 1134.
234
See Khr Shh b. Qubd al-H usayn, Trkh-i Ilchi Nizm Shh, eds. Muhammad
Rid Nasr & Koichi Haneda, Tehran 1379/2000, p. 60. Amr Sayyid Sharf al-Shraz
introduction
39
was one of the grandsons of Mr Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjn. He was killed in the battle
of Chldirn on 2 Rajab 920/23 August 1514. See Rml, pp. 145, 167, 195, 199200.
235
Khafr, Martib al-wujd, p. 247.
236
The date of his death is given in one of the manuscripts of Khafrs Muntah
l-idrk f madrak al-aflk (see Ishrq, pp. 275, 2856). However, gh Buzurg al-T ihrn
(and following him Saliba) gives as his date of death 28 Safar 957/17 March 1550. That
date would extend Khafrs career to sixty years and therefore is unlikely to be correct.
237
The letter of Shah T hir to Khafr is preserved in MS Danishgh 2591; cf. Ishrq,
Buzurgn-i Jahrum, p. 276; Kky, shny b maktab-i Shrz: Muhaqqiq-i Khafr,
pp. 719, esp. p. 78.
238
Khwndamr, Trkh-i H abb al-siyar, vol 4, p. 611. If this report is correct, it
must be assumed that the Arbaniyyt had been dedicated at different occasions to
both Shh Isml and Ahmad Khn Krkiy, the ruler of Gln, as the extant version
of Arbaniyyt preserved in MS Majlis 706 (6b80a, Cat., vol. 23, p. 20) is dedicated
to the latter (see f. 6b).
239
For a study on this work, see George Saliba, A Sixteenth-Century Arabic Critique
of Ptolemaic Astronomy: The Work of Shams al-Din al-Khafr, Journal for the History
of Astronomy, 25 (1994), pp. 1538.
40
introduction
240
This idea has been explored in Khafrs Risla dar Martib al-wujd, and in his
Tafsr yat al-kurs. For his discussion in the latter work, see Shams al-Dn al-Khafr,
Tafsr yat al-kurs, ed. Al Awjab, Ganijna-yi Bahristn. Ulm-i riwy u Qurn-1,
ed. Sayyid Mahd Jahrum, Tehran 1380/2001, pp. 12087.
241
Khafr wrote an independent treatise on the issue entitled Risla f tah qq
al-hayl. See MS Majlis 706. He also discussed this issue in his glosses on
Qutb al-Dn al-Rzs commentary on Ibn Sns al-Ishrt wa-l-tanbht. See Shams
al-Dn al-Khafr, H shiya al al-Muh kamt bayna sharh ay al-Ishrt, ed. Abd
Allh Nrn, Ganijna-yi Bahristn. H ikmat-2, ed. Al Awjab, Tehran 1387/2008,
pp. 13399, esp. pp. 18693.
242
See Satchiyn, Muarrif-yi panj risla-yi Khafr dar elhiyyt u ithbt-i wjib,
pp. 1025.
243
See above, p. 38, fn. 232.
244
See Satchiyn, Muarrif-yi panj risla-yi Khafr dar ilhiyyt wa ithbt al-wjib,
pp. 108110.
245
Ed. Muhammad Taq Dnishpazhh, Risla f ithbt al-wjib, Jwdn khirad,
(Autumn 1354/1975), pp. 426.
246
See Satchiyn, Muarrif-yi panj risla-yi Khafr dar ilhiyyt wa ithbt al-wjib,
pp. 100102.
247
Ed. Satchiyn, under the title: Talqa bar sharh -i ilhiyyt-i Tajrd al-itiqd-i
mull Al Qshch. For other works of Khafr and the location of their extant manuscipts, see Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 17297.
introduction
41
248
On Kaml al-Dn H usayn al-Ilh al-Ardabl, see Najb Myil Hiraw, Ilh-i
Ardabl, Dirat al-marif-i buzurg-i Islm, vol. 10, pp. 1114; Barakat, Kitbshins-yi maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 2346; Mrz Abd Allh al-Afand al-Isbahn,
Riyd al-ulam, vol. 2, pp. 98108. Ilh Ardabl, Sharh - i Gulshan-i rz, ed.
Muhammad Rid Barzigar Khliq & Iffat Karbs, Tehran 1376/199798, (introduction) pp. bist u shash-s u nuh.
249
In his ijza to Ilh, At Allh al-H usayn refers to his father with these titles
(see Mrz Abd Allh al-Afand al-Isbahn, Riyd al-ulam, vol. 2, pp. 1045).
250
See al-Afand al-Isbahn, Riyd al-ulam, vol. 2, p. 98.
251
Sultn H aydar was active in the rawda of Saf al-Dn in Ardabl. On Sult n
H aydar, see Michel M. Mazzaoui, The Origins of the Safawids, Wiesbaden 1972, pp.
7182.
252
See al-Afand al-Isbahn, Riyd al-ulam, vol. 2, p. 99; Sm Mrz Safaw,
Tadhkira-yi Tuh fa-yi Sm, pp. 778.
253
See al-Afand al-Isbahn, Riyd al-ulam, vol. 2, pp. 1034; Jall al-Dn
al-Dawn & Isml al-Khwjy al-Isfahn, Sab rasil, ed. Sayyid Ahmad Tysirkn,
introduction of the editor, pp. 224.
254
See al-Afand al-Isbahn, Riyd al-ulam, vol. 2, p. 99; Sm Mrz Safaw,
Tadhkira-yi Tuh fa-yi Sm, pp. 778.
255
See al-Afand al-Isbahn, Riyd al-ulam, vol. 2, pp. 1047.
42
introduction
256
introduction
43
263
44
introduction
CHAPTER ONE
1
H jj Khalfa, Kashf al-zunn an asm al-kutub wa-l-funn, Tehran 1387/1967,
vol. 1, p. 842.
2
H jj Khalfas quotation runs as follows:
.
Only the first part (here in color) is taken from Dawns al-Risla al-jadda, whereas
the remainder of the sentence is an abbreviation taken from the commentary of
Nayrz. The exact wording in Dawns and Nayrzs original is as follows:
[: ]
[: ] .
46
chapter one
3
See Nayrz, Sharh Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, MS ehid Ali 2761, ff. 4b-5a.
4
See Hellmut Ritter, Philologika IX. Die vier Suhraward, Ihre Werke in Stambuler
Handschriften, Der Islam 24 (1937), p. 271. In the manuscript itself the commentator
mentions his name only once in the introduction (f. 1b:134), stating yaql al-rj
rah mat rabbihi al-ghan al-wadd, Ibn Muh ammad al-Nayrz, H jj Mah md . . ..
Ritter evidently misread this.
5
Ritter adduced the two colophons of the MS Ragip 853 (ff. 276a, 272a) for the
following information: Als er ihn am 5. Rab II 930 beendete, standen Jupiter und
Venus in Konjunktion in den Fischen. Spter fand er in einer anderen Handschrift
des Werkes noch Zustze des Autors und verfasste auch dazu einen Kommentar (arh
dayl al-kitb). Als er diesen beendete, im Jahre 932h, standen die beiden Glcksplaneten nummehr in den Zwillingen. Ritter, Philologika IX. Die vier Suhraward, p. 271.
6
Ibid., pp. 2778 no. 16.
7
Ibid., p. 277, fn. 1: Vielleicht ist der 903 umgekommene Herrscher der WeiSchafe gemeint.
47
Ritter also mentions that the scribe attributes to the author of the commentary
glosses on Qd Mr H usayn al-Maybuds commentary on Athr al-Dn al-Abhars
Hidyat al-h ikma. This information is incorrect. Nayrz did not write glosses on
Maybuds commentary on Hidyat al-h ikma, but rather a commentary on Abhars
Hidyat al-h ikma. On this work see below, pp. 1114.
9
Due to technical problems, the 25 volumes of al-Dhara il tasnf al-sha were
published with years of delay and it was only in 1977 that the publication of the whole
work was completed. According to Etan Kohlberg, some volumes came out as early
as 1918 (see his al-D ara el tasnf al-a, Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 7, pp. 356.).
However, Brockelmann dates the first volume in 1355/1936, which seems to be more
plausible, as gh Buzurg there refers to the first volume of the catalogue of the library
of the shrine of Imam Rid, published in 1926. See below, p. 48.
10
See gh Burzug al-T ihrn, al-Dhara il tasnf al-sha 125, Beirut 1403
6/19836, vol. 3, p. 354 (no. 1278), vol. 13, pp. 1401 (no. 469).
11
Dhara, vol. 6, p. 54 (no. 271), vol. 13, p. 163 (no. 555).
12
Dhara, vol. 14, pp. 1756 (no. 2059).
13
Dhara, vol. 2, pp. 4067 (no. 1627), vol. 6, p. 26 (no. 102).
14
Dhara, vol. 7, pp. 767 (no. 409).
15
On Sayyid Nasr Allh Taqaw, see Ruqayya Rasl, Taqaw, Dnishnma-yi
jahn-i Islm, vol. 7, pp. 8067.
48
chapter one
49
50
chapter one
of the two names as referring to two different persons and to glean the
relevant missing links from gh Burzurgs Dhara that could have
enabled him to draw the correct conclusions.26
In 1976 Corbin delivered a lecture in Tehran entitled Trois philosophes dAzerbajan. The text of this lecture became one of the chapters
of his Philosophie iranienne et philosophie compare, which he published in the same year.27 By trois philosophes dAzerbajan Corbin
meant Shihb al-Dn al-Suhraward, Vadd Tabrz, and Rajab Al
al-Tabrz (1080/166970). On the basis of the passages of the commentary which he had translated earlier in his LArchange empourpr, Corbin tried to establish Wadd al-Tabrz as a follower of
Suhraward and in so doing reminded his readers that Wadd came
from Tabriz in Azerbaijan, the region that had produced Suhraward
himself.28
The next scholar to whom reference should be made is Muhammad
Taq Dnishpazhh (d. 1375/1996). In the introduction to his edition of Ibn al-Muqaffas (d. ca. 142/759) al-Mantiq and Ibn Bihrzs
(fl. 200/816) H udd al-mantiq, published in 1978, Dnishpazhh provides a list of Arab and Persian logicians and their works in which reference is made to Jaml al-Dn Mahmd b. Muhammad b. Mahmd
al-Nayrz.29 The works of Nayrz he mentions are those that had
been listed by gh Buzurg, yet Dnishpazhh provides more detailed
information on the location of some of the manuscripts. In addition,
he lists four additional titles, namely: (i) a commentary on Nasr al-Dn
26
In LArchange empourpr (p. 94), Corbin writes: Wadd Tabrz, inconnu par
ailleurs, nous apprend quil avait lui-mme galement comment le Livre de la
Thosophie orientale; cf. Philosophie iranienne et philosophie compare, Tehran 1977
[reprinted Tehran 2003], p. 95. Moreover, here it is clear that he assumes Nayrzs
glosses on H ikmat al-ishrq to be lost.
27
See Corbin, Philosophie iranienne et philosophie compare, Paris 1976, p. 84
(footnote).
28
Corbin states: Mais il faut nous limiter ce soir au bref rendez-vous que nous
avons donn un autre Ishrq de lAzerbadjan, rendez-vous dautant plus important que notre interlocuteur est rest peu prs inconnu jusquici. Son nom: Vadd
Tabrz. (Philosophie iranienne et philosophie compare, p. 94). Corbins emphasis
on Wadd being originally from Azerbaijan can be traced in his LArchange empourpr, where he says: Il est fort plausible que des hommes dAzerbadjan comme
notre Shaykh al-Ishrq et son commentateur Wadd Tabrz, aient eu sur place des
entretiens avec des thologiens chrtiens, et lon sait laffinit du nestorianisme avec
le christianisme judo-chrtien primitif (pp. 9596).
29
See Muhammad Taq Dnishpazhh (ed.), al-Mantiq li-Ibn Muqaffa. H udd
al-mantiq li-Ibn Bihrz, Tehran 1357/1978, pp. panjh u sa-panjh u panj.
51
52
chapter one
53
54
chapter one
Mecca sometime before 897/1491. At this date the place of his residence is unknown. Three years later he was certainly in Shiraz. The
evidence for this is his remark in his commentary on Abhars Hidyat
al-h ikma that he saw a rainbow in Shiraz in 900/149495.41 This must
have been around the time that he was studying in that city with Sadr
al-Dn al-Dashtak. He also tells us in one of his writings that rational theology (kalm) was his favourite subject.42 Indeed, in contrast
to some other scholars of Shiraz who studied in the same school,
namely Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak and Shams al-Dn al-Khafr,43 he
showed little interest in mathematics and astronomy, although he
was to some extent concerned with astrology.44 Nayrz was granted
an ijza by his teacher Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak that the latter issued
some few months before his murder on 12 Ramadn 903/4 May 1498.
In this ijza Dashtak shows great respect for Nayrz, as is indicated
by the honorific titles he employs when addressing him. This suggests
that Nayrz must have reached a certain age by that time. Dashtak
also mentions here that Nayrz studied with him his Ithbt al-wjib
and several glosses that he had written on different texts.45 Nayrzs
41
See Nayrz, Sharh Hidyat al-h ikma, MS Ridaw 175-h ikma, f. 97b.
In the introduction to his commentary on Taftzns Tahdhb al-mantiq wa-lkalm, explaining about his studies during his youth, Nayrz states: Then I found
that the science of kalm, which is the basis of all religions and religious laws and the
criterion for the principles of Islamic beliefs, is my favourite and the most significant,
since its questions are more important than others and its arguments are more certain
than others . . . so I made an effort to examine its principles and elaborate its branches.
For the original Arabic version of this passage, see below, pp. 1634 (Appendix I:
Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
43
Presumably Nayrz and other students of Sadr al-Dn, including Ghiyth al-Dn
al-Dashtak and Shams al-Dn al-Khafr, studied in the Mansriyya madrasa established by Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak in 883/14789. On this madrasa see above, p. 18.
44
At the end of his Misbh al-arwh f sharh h aqiq al-Alwh and Tah rr Tajrd
al-aqid, Nayrz mentions the astrological coincidence with the completion of
the respective works, see below, pp. 161, 1756 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs
Writings).
45
The original copy of the ijza is included in a philosophical codex copied by
Nayrz. gh Buzurg quotes this ijza in his T abaqt alm al-sha (vol. 7, pp. 243
4). According to gh Buzurg, the ijza is located in the codex following Sadr al-Dn
al-Dashtaks Rislat Ithbt al-wjib. The ijza runs as follows:
=]
42
55
46
See below, pp. 117, 1201, 123, 129.
47
A unique manuscript of this ijza has been preserved in MS Malik 956, f. 266a.
For the edition of this ijza, see below, pp. 1967 (Appendix III: An Ijza Given to
Nayrz by Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak).
48
On this work, see above, p. 25.
49
On this work, see above, p. 25.
50
On this work, see above, p. 25.
51
Two manuscripts of this work have been preserved: MSS Majlis 6320/2 (Cat., vol.
19, p. 310), and Ilhiyyt-i Mashhad 614/1 (Cat., vol. 1, p. 372). Cf. Barakat, Kitbshins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 1623.
52
It has been unknown until now that Ghiyth al-Dn wrote a commentary on
H ikmat al-Ishrq. No manuscript of this work has been reported to be extant and as
a matter of fact this is the only piece of information that we have about the existence
of this work.
53
On this work, see above, p. 30.
54
Presumably Ghiyth al-Dn is referring to a work he wrote on Sakkks Mifth
al-ulm and Jurjns commentary on it, of which a manuscript is preserved in Majlis
507 (Cat., vol. 22, p. 201). Cf. Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp.
1389.
56
chapter one
55
57
to accept Shism in 907/1501, the Shah and his qizilbsh were now
imposing this denomination on the population of Isfahan.61 It was
in particular the religious scholars of the town who were forced to
endorse Twelver Shism publicly. There is no indication that Nayrz
ever refused or even hesitated to do so. On the contrary, the fact that
he had been under the patronage of rulers who had been appointed
by the Shah (he may even have been sponsored by the Shah himself )
indicates that he was on good terms with the new government. He
was directly linked to the court, perhaps through Shh Mr, the son
of Malik Mahmd Jn, who had studied with Nayrz for a while and
was later on appointed by the Shah as vizier.62 Despite these favourable
conditions, Nayrzs stay in Isfahan was evidently unpleasant as he
bitterly complains about the way he was treated by the other scholars
of the city:
It then happened that I moved away from my town and went to a city of
seditions and troubles, where I could no longer see my true friends. There
I met people who were not graced by virtues, and who were of mean
disposition. If one of them should attain a certain level of knowledge by
the help of God, the others would consider that he lost his way . . . Yet
they regarded themselves at the level of mystics, who had attained the
knowledge that was never achieved by the scholars. However, they knew
nothing about the methodological principles (ilm al-usl ) nor about
mysticism.63
61
See Manchihr Prsdst, Shah Isml-i awwal: Pdishh b atharh-yi drpy
dar Irn u Irn, Tehran 1381/2002, pp. 289300.
62
See Sm Mrz Safaw, Tadhkira-yi Tuh fa-yi Sm, ed. Rukn al-Dn Humyn
Farrukh, Tehran 1384/2005, p. 92.
63
Nayrzs introduction to his Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq, MS ehid Ali 1780, f. 1b.
See below, p. 164 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
64
See MS Malik, 2614/1, ff. 1b, 22a. For a description of this work, see below, pp.
1145.
58
chapter one
65
The date of his residence in Gln (Biya Psh) is not explicitly mentioned in his
works. The two works that he wrote while living there are undated. The only safe
indication is his statement in his commentary on Dawns Rislat Ithbt al-wjib
al-jadda, completed in 921/15156, where he indicates that some ten years earlier,
i.e., around 911/15056, he had written a work on ithbt al-wjib at the request of
an authority in Gln whom he does not identify any further. See above, p. 45, fn. 2.
66
The Kr-Kiy Sayyids ruled the area from 769/13678 onwards. Before seizing
power, Shah Isml spent six years (899/1494905/1499) in this region as a refugee. In
appreciation of their rulers hospitality, he allowed them to retain control of the region
after he became Shah. With Shah Ismls support, Ahmad Kr-Kiy succeeded in
seizing power in Biya Psh following his fathers death on 4 Ramadn 911/29 January
1506. In his time, Gln and particularly Biya Psh became an important cultural center. See Khr Shh b. Qubd al-H usayn, Trkh-i Ilchi Nizm Shh, eds. Muhammad
Rid Nasr & Koichi Haneda, Tehran 1379/2000, pp. 2126.
67
Nayrzs praise of his patron Nsir al-Dn contains some indications that the latter was a physician and scholar of law. See below Nayrzs introductions to his Ithbt
al-wjib, p. 155 (Appendix I: Inventory of the Nayrzs Writings) and to his glosses on
Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs commentary on Suhrawards H ikmat al-Ishrq, pp. 17980
(Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
68
This is according to gh Buzurg al-T ihrn, who saw a copy of this work. See
Dhara, vol. 13, 141, no. 469. This work was not available to the present author.
69
Dhara, vol. 13, 141, no. 469.
70
See for eg. Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Majlis 3968, f. 294b: 20, where
he curses them with alayhim al-lana wa-l-adhb. Cursing the first three caliphs
seems to have been widely practised at the time among qizilbsh. In 916/151011,
al-Muhaqqiq al-Karak, who was the legal authority at the court of Shh Isml I,
wrote a treatise entitled Nafah t al-lht f lan al-jibt wa-l-tght, in which he legalized it. See Andrew J. Newman, The Myth of the Clerical Migration to Safawid Iran.
Arab Shiite Opposition to Al al-Karak and Safawid Shiism, Die Welt des Islam,
33 (1993), pp. 66112, esp. p. 79; Abisaab, Converting Persia, pp. 267. Cf. Dhara,
vol. 24, pp. 2501 no. 1297.
59
71
See Nayrzs colophon at the end of MS Carullah 1327 (f. 218b) as quoted below,
p. 171 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
72
See below, p. 193 (Appendix II: Philosophical Writings Copied by Nayrz).
73
This approbation note (taqrz) is to be found in MSS Marash 13793/8 and Ridaw
18410. See below, p. 165 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings). There is also a
brief note on the last leaf of Shams al-Dn al-Khafrs glosses on Qshchs commentary on Nasr al-Dn al-T ss Tajrd al-Itiqd in MS Majlis 1761, which runs as follows: al-Fdil al-Nayrz H jj Mah md shrih Tajrd tilmdh Sadr al-mudaqqiqn.
Abd al-H usayn H ir, the compiler of Volume Ten of the manuscript catalogue of
the Majlis Library, suggests that the note is written by Khafr (Cat., vol. 10 (4), pp.
21068). There is, however, no clear evidence to prove his assumption.
60
chapter one
61
82
62
chapter one
Under the assumption that he was following Ibn Sn, Nayrz suggests
that bodily resurrection is a necessary religious belief which is beyond
doubt, but that it is not the subject of philosophy since its nature is
beyond understanding. He was presumably unfamiliar with Ibn Sns
al-Adhawiyya, in which the latter explicitly opposed bodily resurrection. Nayrz bases his argument exclusively on Ibn Sns assertion in
his Shif.87
Nayrzs respect for Ibn Sn and Frb prevented him from criticizing them, even when his view differed from theirs. For instance,
instead of supporting their notion of the eternity of the world he promotes Nasr al-Dn al-T ss (theological ) position of the occurrence
86
Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Majlis 3968, f. 306b: 136. For the quotation in its original language, see below, p. 198, no. 1 (Appendix IV: Quotations from
Unpublished Sources).
87
Yahya Michot has pointed out the significance of studying the reception of Ibn
Sns al-Adh awiyya among later Muslim scholars. See his A Mamlk Theologians
Commentary on Avicennas Risla Adhawiyya (Part One), Journal of Islamic Studies, 14 ii (2003), pp. 149203, esp. pp. 1523. Like Nayrz, Ghiyth al-Dn Mansr
al-Dashtak argues that Ibn Sn believed in bodily resurrection, but he seems to have
been referring to al-Adh awiyya as a work attributed to Ibn Sn in which the latter
argues against bodily resurrection. He rejects this attribution as being in contradiction
with works whose attribution to Ibn Sn is certain. See Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak,
H ujjat al-kalm li-dh mah ajjat al-Islm, in Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 1,
pp. 153204, esp. 179. Another colleague of Nayrz, Mr H usayn Maybud, is explicit
about not knowing the nature of Ibn Sns statement concerning resurrection for
which Ghazl accused him of heresy. He assumes that perhaps Ghazl drew this
conclusion by inferring that bodily resurrection entailed opposition to the eternity
of the world, and therefore the philosophers argument for the eternity of the world
undermines bodily resurrection. See Maybud, Jm-i gt-num, p. 111.
63
88
Commenting upon Nasr al-Dn al-T ss argument for the occurrence of bodies in time, Nayrz asserts: fa-lam anna al-musannif qad akhadha madhhab jumhr
al-muslimn; see Nayrzs commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 3968, f. 173b:189.
89
See Nayrz, Sharh Hidyat al-h ikma, MS Carullah 1327, ff. 198a ff.
90
See Nayrzs introduction to his commentary on Abhars Hidyat al-h ikma
quoted below, pp. 16970 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
91
See Nayrzs introduction to his Misbh al-arwh f kashf h aqiq al-Alwh
quoted below, pp. 1723 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
64
chapter one
Our inadequate knowledge is too little about these spiritual wonders
(al-ajib al-rhniyya). Yet, contemplation and meditation on them
makes us experience some similar divine flashes (al-briqt al-ilhiyya)
and sacred lights (al-anwr al-qudsiyya), while all engagements of our
souls with other things diverted our attention and concentration.92
Here, Nayrz implies that one of his motivations for commenting upon
Suhrawards al-Alwh al-Imdiyya was to have illuminationist experiences. This mystical tendency is hardly evident in Nayrzs earlier works,
including his glosses on Suhrawards H ikmat al-ishrq. It is only in this
commentary that Nayrz pays respect to the Sufi masters, particularly
Ab Yazd al-Bast m (d. ca. 261/874) and H usayn b. Mansr al-H allj
(ex. 309/922).93 Henry Corbin, who was the first modern scholar to
study Nayrzs commentary on the Alwh, points to Nayrzs positive
attitude towards the Sufis. He refers also to the significance of Nayrzs
citing Socrates and Plato in his comment on a saying of H allj, which
Corbin regards as an indication of his illuminationist approach.94
Nayrz even approved of the Sufi idea of unification with God
(ittih d), which was a controversial issue and was rejected by the
mainstream philosophers, including Ibn Sn, and also accepted the
Sufis musical ceremonies (sam). However, references to Ibn Arabs
thought and terminology are conspicuously absent from Nayrzs
works. It seems that he deliberately refrained from applying Ibn
Arabs terminology. Nayrzs teacher, Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, had
manifested the same attitude towards Ibn Arabs thought and it is
likely that Nayrz inherited this view from him. Sadr al-Dns notion
of wujd in particular, as will be explained later on, was different from
that of the school of Ibn Arab, according to which God was referred
to as wujd.95 It is therefore not surprising that Sadr al-Dn and Nayrz
distanced themselves from Ibn Arabs terminology.
Another aspect of Nayrzs thought is his adherence to Twelver
Shism. This is shown fully in his commentary on Nasr al-Dn
92
Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh f kashf h aqiq al-Alwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 123b
4a. For the quotation in its original language, see below, p. 198, no. 2 (Appendix IV:
Quotations from Unpublished Sources).
93
Nayrz shows respect in his comments on the sayings of H allj and Ab Yazd
quoted by Suhraward in Lawh II of al-Alwh al-Imdiyya. See Misbh al-arwh f
kashf h aqiq al-Alwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 59a60a.
94
Corbin, Philosophie iranienne et philosophie compare, pp. 967.
95
See below, pp. 949.
65
al-T ss Tajrd al-itiqd (completed before 916/1510). In his introduction to this work, Nayrz explains that for a long time he had
wanted to comment on the Tajrd to free it from all misinterpretations
and sophistries of the previous commentaries. But the lack of fairness
and excessive aberration and tendency to envy and enmity in people
hindered him from doing so.96 Eventually Nayrz overcame his feeling
of vulnerability when Shh Isml I declared Twelver Shsm to be the
state religion:
Until the lights of Truth appeared from the horizon of certainty, illuminated the faces of regions with the lights of guidance, and cleansed
the deceit of their words about the idols, as well as the deadly dirt of
their actions. His noble house [contains] everyone whose religion corresponds to that of Ibrhm. He is specifically addressed with surely
thou art upon a mighty morality [Q 68:6].97 He is the right successor
of the prophet and God made a covenant with him and his father with
the following divine word: and We made a covenant with Ibrhm and
Isml: Purify My House for those that shall go about it and those that
cleave to it [Q 2:125]. He announced with decisive arguments the guidance of the saved sect (al-firqat al-njiyya) and removed the misguiding
traces of the perishing rebellious sects. Thanks be to God who kept His
promise, helped His servant, and made his army powerful, took away the
sadness from us, and put the enemies of the religion to all kinds of trials.
[Then] I pursued my purpose and firmed my intention to distribute its
[= Tajrd al-itiqds] benefits and its unique pearls to those who desire
[them].98
96
66
chapter one
.
101
This is much earlier than the time, which has been generally assumed namely,
the reign of Shah Abbs.
102
On Karaks migration to Iran, see A. Hourani, From Jabal Amil to Persia,
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 49 (1986), pp. 13340; Newman,
The Myth of the Clerical Migration to Safawid Iran, pp. 66112; Devin J. Stewart,
Notes on the Migration of mil Scholars to Safavid Iran, Journal of Near Eastern
Studies, 55 ii (Apr., 1996), pp. 81103; Rula Jurdi Abisaab, The Ulama of Jabal Amil
in Safavid Iran, 15011736: Marginality, Migration and Social Change, Iranian Studies, 27 (1994), pp. 10322.
103
To my knowledge the only study which deals with Sh theologians of the early
Safavid period in detail is: Erika Glassen, Shah Isml I. und die Theologen seiner
Zeit, Der Islam, 48 (1972), pp. 25468, which is however based on bibliographical
sources only.
104
See Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Princeton 70, f. 47a ff.
105
See Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Princeton 70, f. 36b ff.
106
See Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Princeton 70, f. 2a ff.
67
criticized the Twelver Sh doctrines of T s, particularly in the chapter on the imamate.107 Nayrzs opposition to Sunn doctrine becomes
most evident in this chapter. He explains there that some Ashars
argue that appointing an imam is obligatory (wjib) for the morally obliged (mukallafn), since some religious obligations (wjibt),
such as inflicting punishments (h udd) and waging jihd, can only be
authorized in the Muslim community by an imam. Therefore, there
must at all times be an imam present in the community. This can
only be guaranteed when the imam is chosen by the believers who are
under moral obligation. Nayrz rejects this line of argumentation by
asserting that inflicting punishments and waging jihd do not constitute religious obligations (wjibt). If they were obligatory, they would
not have been linked to a condition, namely the presence of an imam.
Nayrz maintains the Twelver Sh position that the designation of
an imam is not in the hands of men. One of the characteristics of an
imam is his being infallible (masm), i.e., immune from sin, a quality
that is granted to him by God. This criterion, he argues, cannot be recognized by anyone but God. Hence, only God can designate the imam.
When there is no imam, Nayrz continues to explain, there is nothing that Muslims can do about it. Of course, the community needs an
all-powerful sultan (sultn qhir), who takes care of the interests of
the community while stopping short of dealing with religious issues.108
To support his argument for the advantage of having an all-powerful
sultan, Nayrz reminds his readership of the difficult times they experienced before Shah Isml I seized power:
Because, I say, if the authorities become numerous in directing and handling affairs, it will cause fights and enmity, leading to a breakdown of
order and the corruption of this system. This would be just like what
we witnessed before as the result of empowering numerous authorities,
something which would not possibly be seen at any other time nor even
imagined by anyone [under any other circumstances]. This occurred
before the emergence of the Imam of this epoch and time, vicegerent
(khalfa) of the Compassionate [i.e. Gods deputy on earth], to whom
I referred by name in the beginning of this book, may God perpetuate
107
See Al al-Dn Al al-Qshch, Sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, Lithograph Edition by
Mulla Abbs Al, Tabriz 1301/1883, pp. 399 ff.
108
See Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Majlis 3968, ff. 282b3a.
68
chapter one
his shade of mercy over the believers of Islam and let his rule last until
the resurrection.109
69
113
Sm Mrz Safaw, Tadhkira-yi Tuh fa-yi Sm, p. 92. Nayrzs name, however,
appears erroneously as H jj Mhmd Tayrz.
114
Preserved in MSS Princeton 853 and 854 (Cat. (1938), pp. 2767).
115
Preseved in MS Marash 5471 (Cat., vol. 14, p. 256).
116
Preseved in MSS Dnishgh 5637 (Cat., vol. 16, p. 51), Majlis 2134 (Cat., vol. 5,
pp. 10810), Gulpygn 289 (Cat., vol. 1, p. 250).
117
See below, p. 165 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
118
Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak, Talqt al al-Sharh al-jadd li-l-Tajrd, in
Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 2, pp. 6434. See above, p. 60, and below, pp. 1101.
119
See Nasr al-Bayn al-Kzirn, Risla f Tah qq al-zwiya, MS Marw 877, ff.
43b8b. For the contents of this work and its other extant manuscripts, see below,
p. 154 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
70
chapter one
71
Istanbul 1989, pp. 3135; Muhammad Thurayy, Sijill-i Uthmn ykhd Tadhkara-i
mashhr-i Uthmniyya, Istanbul 1311/18934, vol. 3, pp. 1889.
124
See gh Buzurg al-T ihrn, T abaqt, vol. 7, p. 244.
125
See below, pp. 1934 (Appendix II: Philosophical Writings Copied by Nayrz).
126
See Muhammad Ashraf Alaw mil, Fadil al-sdt, Lithograph Edition, Tehran 1319/1901, pp. 112. For its original place in Nayrzs commentary on Dawns
Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, see MS ehid Ali 2761, f. 3b: 615.
72
chapter one
mil becomes even more evident when reading the latters Persian
commentary on Nasr al-Dn al-T ss Tajrd al-itiqd, entitled Ilqat
al-Tajrd. In this work, Alaw mil frequently quotes from Nayrzs
commentary on T ss Tajrd al-itiqd (he refers to it as sharh instead
of tah rr), referring explicitly to H jj Mahmd Nayrz or simply
H jj Mahmd.127 Among all the earlier commentaries on the Tajrid
to which he had access, Nayrzs commentary is one of his prominent
sources, if not the most prominent. Although Alaw mils commentary is written in Persian, he does not hesitate to include numerous
quotations from Nayrzs commentary in Arabic. Sometimes, however, he translates his words into, or summarizes his positions in Persian.128 Reading Alaw mils Ilqat al-Tajrd sheds light on specific
views of Nayrz that are expressed in his commentary on Tajrd, since
he juxtaposes them with the views of other major commentators of
the text. Alaw mils general attitude towards Nayrz is positive.
On many occasions he expressly supports Nayrzs views and prefers
them to those of others. Moreover, he informs us that his great-grandfather, Mr Dmd, held Nayrzs assertions in high esteem.129
The colophon of MS Princeton 70, which contains a fragment
of Nayrzs Tah rr Tajrd al-itiqd, shows that the copy was made
for Muhammad Ashraf al-H usayn, who must be identical with
Muhammad Ashraf al-Alaw al-mil.130 In his Ilqat al-Tajrd,
Alaw mil indicates that his manuscript of Nayrzs commentary
is poor, and that he hopes to be able to correct those quotations that
he included in the book with the help of a better manuscript.131 It is
therefore plausible that later on Alaw mil found another manuscript of the commentary and asked a scribe to copy it for him from
that recension.
Apart from Alaw mil, an anonymous later commentator of
Tajrd al-itiqd, who was alive in 1091/1680, also consulted the com-
127
For the locations of these quotations see Alaw mil, Ilqat al-Tajrd, ed.
H mid Naj Isfahn, Tehran 1381/2002, vol. 2, pp. 125960.
128
See, e.g., Alaw mil, Ilqat al-Tajrd, pp. 117, 130.
129
He writes: jadd-i d thlith al-muallimn h usn-i zann bi kalm-i dshti ast.
See Muhammad Ashraf Alaw mil, Ilqat al-Tajrd, vol. 1, p. 233.
130
For the colophon, see below, pp. 1623 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs
Writings).
131
He writes: n ast n-chi az nuskha-yi H jj Mah md ki nazd-i n jnib bd
mukhraj shud, in sh Allh az nuskha-yi asah h akmal shawad. See Muhammad
Ashraf Alaw mil, Ilqat al-Tajrd, vol. 1, p. 182.
73
132
See Cat., vol. 11, pp. 6970. According to Al Naq Munzaw, the author of the
catalogue, Nayrzs commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd is referred to there on f. 115b.
This manuscript was not however examined by the present author.
CHAPTER TWO
75
the time leaned either towards the thought of Jall al-Dn al-Dawn
or that of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak.
The two leading philosophers of Shiraz, Dawn and Dashtak,
held different views on a number of issues, each one criticizing the
other on these matters. This conflict is reflected particularly in the
following writings of these two philosophers: i) their glosses on Al
al-Dn Al al-Qshchs commentary on Nasr al-Dn al-T ss Tajrd
al-itiqd, ii) their superglosses on Mr Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjns
glosses (h awsh) on Qut b al-Dn al-Rzs commentary on Sirj al-Dn
al-Urmaws Matli al-anwr, entitled Lawmi al-asrr f sharh Matli
al-anwr,8 iii) their superglosses on Mr Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjns
glosses on Adud al-Dn al-js commentary on Ibn H jibs Mukhtasar
al-muntah,9 iv) their superglosses on Jurjns glosses on Qutb al-Dn
al-Rzs commentary on Najm al-Dn al-Ktibs al-Shamsiyya,10 and
v) their treatises on the proof of existence of the Necessary Existent
and His attributes ( f ithbt al-wjib wa-siftihi).11
These controversies attracted much attention during their lifetime and
continued to be hotly debated for decades after they had died. Despite
its evident significance, however, the conflict is not documented in
any independent source of the time, and our knowledge of it is mainly
restricted to allusions made to it by the two sides involved.
The most significant disagreement can be seen in their respective
glosses on Qshchs commentary on T ss Tajrd al-itiqd. Sadr al-Dn
al-Dashtak seems to have been the first of the two to write glosses on
76
chapter two
12
This is according to Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak in the introduction to the second set
of glosses on Qshchs commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd quoted below.
13
In his Kitb-shins-i Tajrd al-itiqd, Al Sadry Khy provides a list of
manuscripts of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtaks glosses on Qshchs commentary on Tajrd
al-itiqd (pp. 847, 902). Sadry Khy distinguishes two sets of glosses, both of
which were written in response to Dawns glosses. The one he suggests as the earlier
set is the one dedicated to Sult n Byazd, a copy of which was given to the Sultan by
Muayyadzde in 887/1482. But this cannot have been the first set of glosses, as the first
set had been completed by Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak before the completion of Dawns
first set of glosses on the same commentary, in 882/1477883/1478. Thus, none of the
manuscripts presented by Sadry Khy in his bibliography contains Sadr al-Dns first
set of glosses. Barakat follows Sadry Khy in his bibliography of this work of Sadr
al-Dn al-Dashtak. See Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 1923.
14
See above, p. 10.
15
For the manuscripts of Kaml al-Dn al-Lrs supplement to this work, see
Sadry Khy, Kitb-shins-i Tajrd al-itiqd, pp. 648. Only little is known about
Lr, although he seems to have been an outstanding figure in his time. It is to him
that Sadr al-Dn refers when in his introduction to his glosses on Tajrd al-itiqd he
mentions one of the greatest and most excellent students (bad min uzam fudal
al-tullb). Lr taught later on in Shiraz. His extant works are: i) a commentary on
Dawns al-Zawr, entitled Tah qq al-Zawr, completed in 918/15123 (MSS Mill
813/ayn (Cat. vol. 8, p. 316), Majlis 3914 (Cat. vol. 10 (4), pp. 19423)); and ii) glosses
on Shams al-Dn al-Isfahns commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd, entitled Tah qq al-Tajrd
(MS Ridaw 13953). In his commentary on al-Zawr, Lr refers to another work of
his, which he completed in 913/15078 on the uniqueness of the Necessary Existence,
entitled Tah qq al-tawh d. See the note on MS Majlis 3914 in Cat. vol. 10 (4), pp.
19423. Cf. Sadry Khy, Kitb-shins-i Tajrd al-itiqd, pp. 567.
77
venerable man among the people (bad ajallat al-ns) (i.e., Dawn) was
mistaken and confused about the text and the commentary, and had
altered the context of words in such a way that what was intended by
them is lost. Thus he had constructed flimsy conclusions like spiders
webs. This could deceive a weak student whose first consideration is the
speaker rather than what is spoken, and because of his noble position [that
student] accepts these unreliable words which are not worthy of attention.
I was [also] apprised of what has been written on the book by one of the
greatest and most excellent students (i.e., Kaml al-Dn al-Lr), [which
showed that] he was unable to distinguish the husk from the kernel or
the mirage from water. This motivated me to write for the second time
glosses [on that work], in order to do justice to the commentary and its
glosses. [In these latest glosses] I deal only with the issues discussed in
the commentary and the glosses, and try to explain complexities and
difficulties which have baffled scholars.16
Subsequently, a number of oral disputations between the two philosophers took place. In his Trkh-i H abb al-siyar, Ghiyth al-Dn
Khwndmr (d. 942/1536) explains that every new ruler of Shiraz made
it a practice to organize debates between the two, in order to become
acquainted with their respective philosophical positions.17 In his Sullam al-Samwt, Ab al-Qsim Kzirn (fl. 1014/1605) indicates that
one of these debates took place in the Jmi atq mosque of Shiraz.18
Kzirn also says that Dawn in his disputations used to explore
and elaborate, whereas Sadr al-Dn often based his arguments on intuitions (h adsiyyt), and contented himself with some concise allusions
and subtle statements (ishrt-i mjaz u ibrt-i latfa).19 As may
be seen from his introduction to his glosses on al-Sharh al-jadd li-lTajrd,20 Dawn regarded himself as the victor in these disputations.
Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak likewise confirms in his Kashf al-h aqiq
al-Muh ammadiyya that Dawn was a powerful disputant.21
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Ftih 3025, f. 1b.
For the quotation in Arabic, see below, pp. 199200, no. 5 (Appendix IV: Quotations
from Unpublished Sources).
17
Khwndmr, Trkh-i H abb al-siyar, vol. 3, p. 603.
18
Ab l-Qsim Kzirn, Marqm-i panjumi kitb-i Sullam al-Samwt: dar
sharh -i ah wl-i shuar u chakma-saryn u dnishmandn, ed. Yahy Qarb, Tehran
1340/1961, pp. 1267.
19
Kzirn, Sullam al-Samwt, vol. 5, p. 126.
20
See below, pp. 7980.
21
See Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak, Kashf al-h aqiq, in Musannaft-i Ghiyth
al-Dn, vol. 2, p. 986, where Ghiyth al-Dn says that the astrological sign of Dawn
supported his power of disputation (quwwat al-mujdala).
16
78
chapter two
22
The oldest known version of the liar paradox is attributed to the Greek philosopher Eubulides of Miletus who lived in the fourth century BC. On the origin of the
paradox and its development in Medieval European logic, see Paul Vincent Spade,
The Origins of the Mediaeval Insolubilia-Literature, Franciscan Studies, 33 (1973),
pp. 292309, reprinted in his Lies, Language and Logic in the Later Middle Ages,
London, 1988; Insolubles, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward
N. Zalta, Stanford, 2005 (URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2005/entries/
insolubles/). For a survey of discussions on the liar paradox in the Islamic lands until
the mid-seventh/mid-thirteenth century, see Ahmad Alwishah & David Sanson, The
Early Arabic Liar: The Liar Paradox in the Islamic World from the Mid-Ninth to the
Mid-Thirteenth Centuries CE, Vivarium, 47 (2009), pp. 97127.
23
Farmarz Qarmalik traced the discussions of this paradox in the writings of some
early Muslim philosophers and theologians, namely Frb, Abd al-Jabbr Hamadn
(d. 415/1024), and Abd al-Qhir al-Baghdd (429/1038). See Ah a d Farmarz
Qarmaliks introduction to Dawzdah risla dar prduks-i durgh-g, p. hashtd
u du.
24
According to Farmarz Qarmalik they were described as a mudhkira in the
earliest manuscript of the work, copied presumably close to the time of their composition (MS Ridaw 877). See Farmarz Qarmaliks introduction to Dawzdah risla dar
prduks-i durgh-g, pp. haftd u panj-haftd u shish.
25
These four fragments have been edited twice, first by H mid Nj Isfahn,
in Sadr al-Dn al-Shrz, Rasil-i falsaf-i Sadr al-mutaallihn, Tehran 1375/1996,
pp. 46776 (on the basis of MS Dnishgh 1257) and then by Ahad Farmarz Qarmalik
in Muktabah-yi Dawn u Dashtak dar h a ll-i muammyi jadhr-i asa mm,
Khiradnma-yi Sadr, 89 (1376/1997), pp. 95101 (on the basis of MSS Ridaw 877,
Marash 6025, Dnishgh 6616, Dnishgh 1257). The latter edition of these fragments
is again included in Dawzdah risla dar prduks-i durghg, ed. Ahad Farmarz
Qarmalik [in collaboration with T ayyiba rif Niy], pp. 1725, 93100.
79
26
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtaks treatise on the liar paradox, entitled Risla fi shubhat
Jadhr al-Asamm, is edited by Ahad Farmarz Qarmalik in Khiradnma-yi Sadr, 56
(1375/1997), pp. 7482. The treatise of Jall al-Dn al-Dawn, entitled Nihyat al-kalm
f h all shubhat kull-u kalm kdhib, is also edited by Ahad Farmarz Qarmalik in
Nma-yi mufd, 2, i (1375/1996), pp. 97134. Editions of both texts are again reprinted
in Dawzdah risla dar prduks-i durghg, ed. Ahad Farmarz Qarmalik [in collaboration with T ayyiba rif Niy], pp. 2762, 10155.
27
See Dawn, Al-muntakhab min h shiyatihi al l-sharh al-jadd li-l-tajrd,
Dawzdah risla dar prduks-i durghg, ed. Ahad Farmarz Qarmalik [in collaboration with T ayyiba rif Niy], p. 121, where Sadr al-Dn is referred to as al-mutarid.
28
The date of completion of this work can be estimated roughly on the basis of the
colophon of MS Ridaw 19827 (f. 268b), which contains a copy of this work transcribed
from the autograph of Dawn in 943/1537. The scribe states that Dawn completed
this work fifty years earlier.
29
See above, pp. 767.
80
chapter two
Then after a while I became ill, which prevented me from doing even
simple things, let alone carrying out discussions or disputations. He then
resumed those arguments and sophistries, taking up his earlier positions,
repeating the same arguments, criticizing [me] harshly and insisting on
his view. He thought that no one would later challenge what he said,
and forgot the subtle ways of destiny. These [reiterations of his views]
spread among a small number of savage sectarians, whom he gathered
around [himself] with his false promises. They covered their slates with
these words and wasted their quires. [But] he did not propose anything
new. Stripped of the viciousness of repetition, those harsh arguments
would have conveyed nothing but the same old invective. He combined
these false and incoherent sophistries like someone who makes clothes
from the reverse side of cloth and presents it for sale. However, it is
very unlikely that the camel passes through the needle of the tailor
[Q 7:40]. They [i.e., those sophistries] do not rise from the ground and
do not even move a jot.
My companions requested that I should present the truth, remove the
veil from the sight of observers and eliminate doubtful points from the
path of the students, particularly those who are innocently mistaken.
At first I was hesitant to waste my precious time on reading such poor
arguments this kind of investigation was for those with weaker minds.
Moreover, I am not like those people who only feel satisfied when theirs
is the final word [on a subject], regarding their own view as bringing the
matter to a close. Nonetheless, when they repeatedly persisted [in this
request], I began [to write] it, spending [only] some of my spare time
on it, regarding it as an entertainment and something to keep me away
from boredom.30
As is evident from the above quotation, the conflict between the two
had reached its peak at this point, for now Dawn no longer shows
any respect for Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, referring to him simply as
one of the people of the region (bad ahl al-balad) and dismissing
his criticism as sophistry based on taking words used by Dawn out
of their context.
Echoes of these disputations are also to be found in their respective
superglosses on Mr Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjns glosses (h awsh) on
Qut b al-Dn al-Rzs commentary on Sirj al-Dn al-Urmaws Matli
30
The translation of this quotation is based on MSS Ridaw 19827 (f. 1b) and Majlis
1999 (f.1b). For the quotation in Arabic, see below, p. 200, no. 6 (Appendix IV: Quotations from Unpublished Sources).
81
31
One of the topics of debate between the two, both in their respective glosses on
Qshchs commentary on T ss Tajrd al-itiqd and in their respective superglosses
written on Jurjns glosses on the commentary of Urmaws Matli al-anwr, is that
of mental existence (al-wujd al-dhihn). In his H shiya al l-sharh al-jadd li-Tajrd
al-itiqd (MS Majlis 1999, f. 107a), Dawn alludes to the way this discussion developed between him and Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak in their respective glosses on Jurjns
glosses on the commentary of Matli al-anwr. For detailed discussion of the views
of these two scholars on mental existence, see below, pp. 99101.
32
This set of glosses is preseved in MS Majlis 3908 (Cat. vol. 10 (4), pp. 19356).
33
MSS Ridaw 990 (Cat. 1/316), Dnishgh 6802 (Cat. vol. 16, p. 363), Marash
7312/3 (Cat. vol. 19, p. 103), Escorial 684 (Cat. vol. 1, p. 483) contain the superglosses
of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak on Jurjns glosses on Qutb al-Dn al-Rzs commentary
on Urmaws Matli al-anwr. According to the respective catalogues the beginnings
of all these treatises are the same, yet it is unclear whether they contain the first or the
revised version of the superglosses.
34
See Abd al-H usayn H irs description of MS Majlis 3728 (Cat. vol. 10 (4), pp.
170710). In the catalogue, however, the date of the completion of this work appears
erroneously as 986/15789, the correct date might be 896/14901.
35
I base myself here on Abd al-H usayn H irs description of MS Majlis 3728,
which contains this work (Cat. vol. 10 (4), pp. 170710).
82
chapter two
896/14901
903/1497
908/1502
83
36
84
chapter two
scientific question, with the intention of debating with him. But Dawn
refrained from answering. Amr Sadr al-Dn, the father of Mansr, became
angry and, addressing Dawn, said: My son is talking to you. Dawn
replied: You yourself answer, so that I may know what your position is.40
Following Dawns death, Ghiyth al-Dns animosity gradually subsided. In his Kashf al-h aqiq al-Muh ammadiyya, written nearly forty
years after Dawns death, he refers to him respectfully as al-mawl
al-fdil:
Ab al-b [i.e., my father], Sadr al-Dn Muh ammad, [who was] the
sayyid of the greatest philosophers, and al-mawl al-fdil Jall al-Dn
Muhammad al-Dawn, peace be upon them, had some disputations and
debates with each other on the sciences. Anyone who intends to know
which one of them was more correct and true should look into their writings carefully so that it becomes clear to him that my father was right. If
he is unable to do that, he should look into my evaluations of them. If
he is unable to do that either, there are other ways [for him to find out
who was right] such as by means of astrology (ah km al-nujm) . . . and
physiognomy ( firsa).41
40
85
44
See Abd al-H usayn H irs description of MS Majli 1736 (Fihrist-i kitbkhna-yi
majlis-i Shr-yi mill, 5/13940), which contains these superglosses. For other manuscripts of this work, see Barakat, Kitb-shins-i maktab-i falsaf-i Shrz, pp. 1823.
45
Nayrzs H shiya al l-Tajrd is mentioned by Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak, see
Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 2, pp. 6434. Otherwise, the H shiya al Tajrd
al-itiqd is unknown and seems to be lost. See below, pp. 1101.
46
See Nayrz, Sharh Hidyat al-h ikma, MS Carullah 1327, f. 177a:18.
47
See below, p. 129.
48
See below, pp. 1158.
49
See below, pp. 12931.
86
chapter two
again supports the views of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak on all the issues
where the latters views differed from those of Dawn. He also refers
at times to the views of Ghiyth al-Dn. Discussing the issue of Gods
knowledge, for instance, he explicitly mentions the view of Ghiyth
al-Dn by saying al m huwa madhhab al-Mansr f l-ilm.50
Many students and younger colleagues of Dawn refrained from
supporting his side in the controversies, at least in writing. Dawns
most renowned student, Mr H usayn al-Maybud, does not deal with
these issues in those works of his which have so far been identified.
Another of Dawns students, Ilh Ardabl, who refers to his master
as ustdh al-aqs wa-l-adn, does not hesitate to criticize him in his
own glosses on Qshchs commentary on T ss Tajrd al-itiqd and
in his commentary on Dawns Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda.51
II. The Main Subjects of the Dispute between the Two
Strands of Philosophy
The respective glosses of Jall al-Dn al-Dawn and Sadr al-Dn
al-Dashtak on Qshchs commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd cover only
the first two chapters of the book, i.e., those dealing with general ontology (al-umr al-mma) and with substances and accidents (al-jawhir
wa-l-ard). But the dispute between the two went beyond the narrowly
defined subjects of these chapters and covered various themes from the
fields of logic (such as the Liar Paradox), ontology (such as the issues
related to essence and existence), epistemology (such as issues related
to mental existence, al-wujd al-dhihn), and psychology (such as the
separablity of the soul, tajarrud al-nafs). A comprehensive study of
their dispute can only be undertaken once critical editions of all the
philosophical works related to the issues involved become available.
In the following pages, a brief outline of the most prominent issues
debated between them will be given.
50
See Nayrz, Sharh Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, MS ehid Ali 2761, f. 34b:5.
Neither Sharh Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda nor H shiya al sharh al-jadd
li-Tajrd al-itiqd of Ilh Ardabl were at my disposal. I therefore relied on Abd
al-H usayn H irs descriptions of MS Majlis 1762 (H shiyat sharh Tajrd al-itiqd)
(Cat. vol. 5, pp. 1402) and MS Majlis 1841 (Sharh Ithbt al-wjib) (Cat. vol. 5,
pp. 3012). Ilh Ardabls philosophical writings have yet to be studied.
51
87
52
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak and Dawn both took Taftzns solution from the
latters commentary on his own Maqsid. For Ktibs solution, both relied on his
Sharh al-Kashf, which is a commentary on Afdal al-Dn al-Khnajs (d. 646/1248)
Kashf al-asrr an ghawmid al-afkr f l-mantiq. Nasr al-Dn al-T ss solution is
taken by Dawn from T ss Tadl al-miyr f naqd tanzl al-asrr, whereas Sadr
al-Dns source for this solution was an unidentified work of Allma H ill. For Mr
Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjns solution, Dawn refers to his source as some folios (bad
al-awrq). Dashtaks source for the latters solution is an unidentified work of Shams
al-Dn Muhammad b. Al al-Jurjn. They both took Ibn Kammnas solution from
his correspondence with Ktib (which is lost). Samarqands solution is taken by both
from the latters commentary on his own Qists. See Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtaks Risla
fi shubhat jadhr al-asamm and Dawns Nihyat al-kalm, in Dawzdah risla dar
prduks-i durghg, pp. 2835, 10319.
53
See Dawn, Nihyat al-kalm, pp. 1368.
88
chapter two
54
55
See Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, Risla f shubhat jadhr al-asamm, pp. 556.
See Dawn, Nihyat al-kalm, pp. 1368.
89
prehend the meaning of this word that the fixed ideas did not [even]
catch the scent of existence, neither did they become manifest. Indeed,
they will never become manifest; what is manifest is merely their image
(al-ayn al-thbita m shammat rih at al-wujd wa-annah lam tazhir
wa-l tazhiru abadan bal innam yazhiru rasmuh).56
These two novel analogies suggest that Dawn was trying to explain
the relation between the cause and the caused in a manner that was
different from that of his predecessors. But from the text of al-Zawr
itself it is not entirely clear what Dawn intended to say. His likening the relation of the cause and the caused to a relation of substance
and accident in the case of the body and the colour black and to
a relation of matter and form in the case of garment and cotton
complicates the issue rather than clarifying it. In the autocommentary
on this text (entitled al-H awr), which he composed a year later, in
871/1467, the above passage is explained as follows:
This means that each one of the inner realities (al-h aqiq)57 when considered as an independent essence apart from the essence of its cause,
as by some narrow-minded people, is impossible in respect of existence
(wujdan) and in respect of [concrete] manifestation (zuhran). First,
nothing other than the True (al-h aqq), who is necessary in Himself, can
plausibly be called existent in the true sense (mawjdan h aqqiyyan).
Secondly, appearance originates from being related to the existence of
the True (al-wujd al-h aqq)58 and these [inner realities] are supposed to
have an essence other than His. Therefore, it is not conceivable that they
are related to Him. But if they are considered as being a consequence of
Him (tbiatan lah) and subsisting through Him (qimatan bih), they
are existent (mawjd) in the sense that they are related to the existence
(wujd), or they are apparent (zhir).
56
Jall al-Dn al-Dawn, al-Zawr, in Sab rasil, pp. 1745. In his commentary on
al-Zawr, Dawn treats the last sentence of the above passage as a quotation, although
he does not specify from whom it derives. See Jall al-Dn al-Dawn, al-H awr
[Sharh al-Zawr], in Sab rasil, p. 207. The first part of this quotation (i.e., The fixed
ideas did not [even] catch the scent of existence) is extracted from Ibn Arabs Fuss
al-h ikam (ed. Abu al-Al al-Aff, Beirut [1966], p. 76:123) and the rest seems to be
a clarification by one of Ibn Arabs followers.
57
H aqqa, which is translated in the above quotation as inner reality, is here and
often in the philosophical texts after Ibn Sn interchangeable with mhiyya (quiddity).
58
The edition of Tysirkn has al-mawjd al-h aqq instead of al-wujd al-h aqq.
The latter, which I prefer, is the reading of MS Majlis 1836, mentioned by Tysirkn
in the critical apparatus.
90
chapter two
The fixed ideas (al-ayn al-thbita), that is to say these inner realities
(al-h aqiq), when they are considered on their own by [the faculty of]
estimation (wahm), do not exist. For instance, the fixed idea of the human
being, which is a quiddity (mhiyya) separate from the True (al-h aqq),
who is described by specific attributes (al-muttasif bi-l-sift al-makhssa),
does not exist at all, [nor] does any inner reality attach to its impossibility
(l h aqqata li-istih latahu). That is not in the sense that it is related to
existence, since in this respect [i.e., conceived of as a separate, independent quiddity] it does not have any relation with existence. But it is as
if the True tinges ( yansabigh) it, in the sense that His image (rasmah)
appears in it. [Then] separate from its essence it is described as existent
(mawjd), in the sense that it belongs to the existence (yataallaqu bi-lwujd). The existent (al-mawjd) according to the truth-seekers is that
whose inner reality (h aqqa) is existence (wujd). Others do not exist
in the true sense, since existence is not a description to subsist through
others. Rather, it is a true essence. Of course there are existents other
than Him, [but only] in the sense that they depend on existence and their
appearance is through Him.59
In sum, in the above passage Dawn asserts that only the True
(al-h aqq), whose existence is His essence, is truly existent. Other beings,
given that they are all caused, are only existent in the sense that the
True tinges (insabagha) them. By using the verb to tinge he wants to
say that existence is not part of the essence of a caused being. Dawn
therefore disagrees with the Avicennan notion that what is contingent
in itself (mumkin al-wujd bi-l-dht) can be necessarily existent through
another (wjib al-wujd bi-l-ghayr).60 That is presumably the reason
why he explains the relationship as one of cause and caused and as
the True (h aqq) and inner reality (h aqqa), without having recourse
to necessity.
In his later works, such as his glosses on Qshchs commentary
on Tajrd al-itiqd and in his Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, this
idea appears in a more developed and sophisticated manner. In these
works he differentiates between the concepts of existent (mawjd) and
existence (wujd) and argues that whereas contingent beings are to be
called mawjd, the Necessary Existent is to be considered as wujd.
Mawjd as a term is derived from wujd, which is infinitive in nature,
so that the meaning of mawjd is based completely on its relation with
its root w-j-d. Contingent beings originate from existence and their
59
91
61
92
chapter two
63
93
The distinction between wujd and mawjd is in fact the core notion
of Dawns ontology. The most direct application of this idea is to the
philosophical problem of the uniqueness of God. This problem, which
Dawn himself derived from Ibn Kammnas al-Matlib al-muhimma
and which later on became known as Ibn Kammnas sophistry on the
uniqueness of God (shubhat Ibn Kammna f l-tawh d) results from
the rational possibility of two necessary existents, each being the only
representative within its own species, that is to say two completely distinct essences both of which are necessarily existent. Dawn claims that
no one prior to him had adequately solved this problem. He explains
that this problem only occurs if we consider the Necessary Existent to
be mawjd, for mawjd is the one whose existence is accidental (rid)
to its quiddity. This, however, holds true only for contingent beings,
whereas the Necessary Existent is not mawjd but wujd, with no
essence other than his existence.71
69
Wujd al-mah d ghayr rid [an] al-mhiyya. Dawn, H shiya al sharh Tajrd
al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1752, ff. 49b50a.
70
Dawn, Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, in Saba rasil, pp. 13940.
71
See Dawn, Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, in Saba rasil, pp. 12737. On this
sophistry and the philosophical discussions raised by it see Reza Pourjavady & Sabine
Schmidtke, A Jewish Philosopher of Baghdad. Izz al-Dawla Ibn Kammna (d. 683/1284)
and His Writings, Leiden 2006, pp. 3751.
94
chapter two
72
Dawn, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1752, f. 50b: 146. For
the quotation in Arabic, see below, p. 200, no. 8 (Appendix IV: Quotations from
Unpublished Sources).
73
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak refers to this idea as dhawq al-h ukama al-mutaallihn,
see, e.g., his glosses on the commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998, f. 68b:
202. Among the later philosophers, H jj Mull Hd al-Sabzawr (d. 1289/1878)
refers to Dawns view as dhawq al-taalluh. See H jj Mull Hd Sabzawr, Sharh
Ghurar al-farid or Sharh Manzma (Part One: Metaphysics), eds. M. Muhaqqiq &_T.
Izutsu, Tehran 1348/1969, pp. 5, 567.
74
Dawn states: wa-li-hdh sarrah a al-muallim al-thn wa-l-shaykh [Ab] Al
anna m tawahhamahu urf al-lugha min itlq al-mawjd alayhi tal majz; Dawn,
Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, in Sab rasil, p. 132.
75
See Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998,
ff. 67a74b.
95
From al-Shif:
Hence, everything that has a quiddity is caused. The rest of the things,
other than the Necessary Existent, have quiddities. And it is these quiddities that in themselves are possible in existence, existence occurring to
them externally. The First, hence, has no quiddity. Those things possessing
quiddities have existence emanate on them from Him. He is pure existence with the condition of negating privation and all other description
of Him. Moreover, the rest of the things possessing quiddities are possible, coming into existence through Him. The meaning of the statement,
He is pure existence with the condition of negating all other additional
[attributes] of Him, is not that this is the absolute existence in which
there is participation [by others]. If there is an existent with this description, it would not be the pure existent with the condition of negation,
but the existent without the condition of positive affirmation. I mean,
regarding the First, that He is the existent with the condition that there is
no additional composition, whereas this other is the existent without the
condition of [this] addition. For this reason, the universal is predicated
of all things, whereas [pure existence] is not predicated of anything that
has addition. Everything other than Him has addition.76
76
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998, ff.
67a:1967b:3. The translation of this quotation is based on Marmuras (Ibn Sn, The
Metaphysics of the Healing, pp. 276:27277:8).
77
Wa-man qawlun: mhiyyatuhu inniyyatuhu, annahu l mhiyya lahu. Sadr
al-Dn al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998, f. 67b:23. The
closest statement that I found in Abd al-Rahmn al-Badaws edition of Talqt (Cairo
1975 [reprinted Qum 1379/2000], p. 224) runs as follows: M h aqqatuhu inniyyatuhu
fa-l mhiyya lahu.
78
Al-awwal l mhiyya lahu fa-nafy al-mahiyya anhu mutlaqan. Sadr al-Dn
al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998, f. 67b:23. I was unable
to find this quotation in Abd al-Rahmn al-Badaws edition of Talqt.
96
chapter two
Sadr al-Dn implies that Dawns argument to the effect that the quiddity of the Necessary Existent is its existence is based on T ss mistaken
understanding of Ibn Sns assertions in the Ishrt, whereas for the
correct understanding of Ibn Sns position on this issue, the latters
explanation in his Shif should be consulted, for there he explicitly says
that the Necessary Existent is existence without quiddity. Although it
appears that Ibn Sn held slightly different positions in the Ishrt and
the Shif on the subject,82 it is noteworthy that Sadr al-Dn regarded
Ibn Sns philosophy in all his writings as a single coherent entity.
As for the contingent beings, Sadr al-Dn argues that their existence is
not added (zid) or accidental (rid) to their quiddity, as existence and
quiddity in the extramental world are always co-implied (mulzim) and
indispensably together. It is even more accurate to say that existence
has priority over quiddity. The existence of the thing precedes what
makes it distinct from others, namely, the quiddity. It is the existence
that determines the quiddity. In the mind, however, it is the other
way around. The intellect has the ability of first rendering an abstract,
conceptual version of the quiddity, to the extent that it is free from
existence, and subsequently ascribing existence to the quiddity. Yet,
79
See Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998,
f. 68a:25.
80
Kullu m l yadkhul al-wujd f mafhm dhtihi al m itabarn qablu fa-lwujd ghayr muqawwim lahu f mhiyyatihi. Ibn Sn, al-Ishrt wa-l-tanbht maa
al-sharh li-l-muh aqqiq, vol. 3, p. 57.
81
Nasr al-Dn al-T s, al-Ishrt wa-l-tanbht maa al-sharh li-l-muh aqqiq, vol.
3, p. 58.
82
In his Shif, Ibn Sn states that the Necessary Existent has no quiddity, whereas
his wording in the Ishrt seems to allow for Nasr al-Dn al-T ss interpretation that
His existence is His quiddity.
97
Moreover, Sadr al-Dn elucidates that existent and thing (shay) are
equally applicable (muswiq). Dawn, therefore, when he rejects their
true existence, is rejecting also that they are things:
. . . if the contingent beings are not to be included in existence and calling them mawjd is the same as calling water mushammas, calling them
mawjd in the absolute sense is not the common meaning understood
from it. For instance, the meaning of mushammas, which is in the
form of mafl, is different from madrb and mansr, as is said before.
See Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998,
f. 23b:623. Sadr al-Dns explanation here concerns mhiyya bi-shart l. For this notion
and the discussions about it among the philosophers after Nasr al-Dn al-T s, see
Toshihiko Izutsu, Basic Problems of Abstract Quiddity, Mantiq u mabh ith-i alfz
(Collected Texts and Papers on Logic and Language), eds. M. Mohaghegh & T. Izutsu,
Tehran 1974, pp. 125. Izutsus study covers the disputation between Sadr al-Dn
al-Dashtak and Dawn on this issue. However, relying merely on a secondary source,
namely Abd al-Razzq al-Lhjs commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd, Izutsu attributes Sadr
al-Dns investigations on this issue to the latters son, Ghiyth al-Dn (pp. 179).
84
Nasr al-Dn al-T ss exact assertion in his commentary on Ibn Sns al-Ishrt
wa-l-tanbht is as follows: wa-yalzamu taqaddum al-mhiyya al l-wujd bi-l-dht.
Nasr al-Dn al-T s, al-Ishrt wa-l-tanbht maa l-sharh li-l-muh aqqiq Nasr al-Dn
Muh ammad b. Muh ammad b. al-H asan al- T s, vol. 3, p. 57.
85
Nafs al-amr, literally meaning the thing of itself , i.e., regardless of whether
the thing exists in the mind or in the concrete, extramental world, is a technical term
which does not have an equivalent in English.
86
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998,
f. 24a:104. For the quotation in Arabic, see below, p. 200, no. 9 (Appendix IV: Quotations from Unpublished Sources). I was unable to find Sadr al-Dns quotation in
Masri al-musra, ed. Wilferd Madelung, Tehran 1383/2004.
83
98
chapter two
However, mawjd in its common meaning is equally applicable (muswiq)
as thing (shay). That is what has been asserted earlier in the text of the
book [i.e., Tajrd al-itiqd] and no one among the philosophers argued
against it. If on the basis of the insight of specialists in metaphysics the
contingent beings are not to be called mawjd, they are not to be called
things as well, and that is a contradiction. Thus, on the basis of the insight
of specialists in metaphysics the sensible reason of calling them mawjd
would be extremely hidden. Perhaps the divine philosophers perceive this
reason also with their taste.87
To explain why Farb and Ibn Sn stated that the use of the term
mawjd for the Necessary Existent is metaphorical, Sadr al-Dn argues
that mawjd primarily means m lahu l-wujd (that which has existence). He explains that the word m here means shay (thing) and that
Farb and Ibn Sn used shay to refer to quiddities. For them, according to Sadr al-Dn, the Necessary Existent is not a thing (shay) because
it does not have quiddity. Nevertheless, because of the limitations of
language, mawjd is also used for the Necessary Existent. Therefore, it
is asserted that its use is metaphoric.88
Following his teacher, Nayrz criticizes Dawns notion of wujd.
He argues that Dawns understanding of wujd is applicable to the
Necessary Existent only, whereas in fact wujd is equally applicable
to every single mawjd. Moreover, according to Nayrz, Dawn uses
wujd in its infinite sense for the Necessary Existent, which makes no
sense (ikhrj al-kalm an zhirih il m laysa yufham minhu). It is, in
contrast to what Dawn argues, his own invention since none of the
former philosophers used wujd with this meaning for the Necessary
Existent. Wujd, according to Nayrz, has two different meanings: The
first meaning is in its infinite sense, i.e., that which is purely conceptual
with no reality in the external world. He explains that Frb and Ibn
Sn usually used wujd with this meaning, as is the case in the following assertions of theirs:
87
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998,
f. 68b:1621. For the quotation in Arabic, see below, pp. 2001, no. 10 (Appendix IV:
Quotations from Unpublished Sources).
88
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, H shiya al sharh Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1998,
f. 72b:156.
99
89
100
chapter two
And because these [mental forms] are influences (thr) in the soul and
are not the entities of these things, nor examples of these things subsisting in either corporeal or psychological materials, these [influences] are,
hence, accidents in the soul.91
91
The translation of this quotation is based on Marmuras (Ibn Sn, The Metaphysics of the Healing, p. 110).
92
Dawn, H shiya jadda al l-sharh al-jadd li-Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1999,
f. 105b.
93
Dawn, H shiya jadda al l-sharh al-jadd li-Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis 1999,
f. 105b7a.
Sadr al-Dn argues that Ibn Sn did not find this statement contradictory and that indeed it is not so. A contradiction would have occurred if
both the external form and the mental form had a single existence. But
since it is established that each constitutes a distinct type of existence,
there is no contradiction in assuming each of them to have a distinct
quiddity. Evidence for the distinction between the forms of external
things and the forms in the mind is that the former are effective (mabda
al-thr) and the latter are not. It is, as Sadr al-Dn suggests, existence
which determines the quiddity. Thus, the form of a concrete thing,
regardless of the category it belongs to, is substituted (tubaddal) in its
mental existence with quality.95
Dawn rejects Sadr al-Dns explanation. He argues that taking the
mental existence of a quiddity to be distinct from the quiddity of a
concrete thing goes against the idea of unity between the two forms,
one substantial, the other intelligible. Moreover, he explains that Sadr
al-Dns argument is based on his principle that existence is prior to
quiddity, which is, according to Dawn, opposed to the view of Ibn
Sn. However, even if we accept this, it does not allow us to draw the
conclusion that existence is an accident of (rid an) quiddity, given
that accident (rid) cannot cause any transformation of its subject
(mard).96
II.iv. Gods Knowledge
For Dawn and Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak the discussion of mental existence seems to have had significant implications also for their respective
conceptions of Gods knowledge. Both believed in a similarity between
human and divine knowledge. Both also adhered to Ibn Sns idea
94
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, Hshiya al l-sharh al-jadd li-Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis
1998, f. 33ab. The translation of the quotation is based on Marmuras (Ibn Sn, The
Metaphysics of the Healing, p. 109).
95
See Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, Hawsh al l-sharh al-jadd li-Tajrd al-itiqd, MS
Majlis 1998, ff. 26a35a, esp. ff. 30b-1a.
96
See Dawn, Hawsh jadda al l-sharh al-jadd li-Tajrd al-itiqd, MS Majlis
1999, ff. 106a7a. For an analysis of the view of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak and Dawn
on mental existence, see Abdullh Shakb, Shinkht az ddgh-i Sadr al-mutaallihn,
Khiradnma-yi Sadr, 3 (1375/1996), pp. 617; idem, Barras-yi thr u afkr-i falsaf-i
Mr Sadr al-Dn Dashtak, pp. 195207.
102
chapter two
that Gods knowledge does not depend upon things.97 Dawn argued
that Gods knowledge, as mental existence, is self-sustained, whereas
Sadr al-Dn maintained that as mental existence His knowledge is not
self-sustained. Dawn explains that Gods knowledge is not produced
through cognitive forms being imprinted (murtasam) upon His mind,
since this contradicts Gods being simple. Instead of cognitive forms,
Dawn explains His knowledge to be existential, which he describes as
a cognitive existence (al-wujd al-ilm). That is to say, His knowledge
is the very wujd. 98 Therefore, wujd in itself is Gods knowledge and
the origin of all differentiating forms (al-suwar al-tafsliyya) in the
external world.99
Like Dawn, Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak opposes the idea of forms being
imprinted in Gods knowledge. But instead he suggests an explanation
with the help of the notion of cause (al-muqtad). According to Sadr
al-Dn, there are two ways of distinguishing things from each other. One
is on the basis of their forms, because of the correspondence (intibq)
and attestation (ishr) of the form to a specific thing. The concept of
writer, for instance, which is sustained in the mind and to which the
mind attests (mushir bihi), is identical with someone who writes in the
external world. The second way, however, is on the basis of the cause.
The cause necessarily determines the effects essence and its attributes
(al-dht al-muqtad wa-siftih). Sadr al-Dn argues that God knows
things because He knows the requirement (al-muqtad) of the whole
world. Although Sadr al-Dns idea relies heavily on Ibn Sns theory
of Gods knowledge, he made it distinct by referring to the process of
this simple knowledge as cognitive witnessing (al-shuhd al-ilm):100
When the form of something, which makes the thing distinct from others, is produced by the perceiver, knowledge of that thing is obtained.
Likewise, when its requirement (al-muqtad) by means of which the
thing is distinct is produced by the perceiver, knowledge of that thing
is obtained. Then, when the cause of the whole world as it is in and of
itself, is single without any multiplicity, and every atom of the existence is
distinct from one another by its necessity, it is not implausible [to say] that
97
On Ibn Sns theory of Gods knowledge, see Michael E. Marmura, Some Aspects
of Avicennas Theory of Gods Knowledge of Particulars, Journal of the American
Oriental Society, 82, 3 (1962), pp. 299312.
98
See Dawn, Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, in Sab rasil, p. 148.
99
Dawn, Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, in Sab rasil, p. 148.
100
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, Rislat Ithbt al-wjib, MS Sehid Ali Pasa 2761, f. 96:
126.
101
Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, Rislat Ithbt al-wjib, MS Sehid Ali Pasa 2761, ff.
96a:1797b:1. For the quotation in Arabic, see below, p. 201, no. 11 (Appendix IV:
Quotations from Unpublished Sources).
102
The controversy on this issue reportedly occurred in the glosses on Qshchs
commentary on T ss Tajrd al-itiqd written by Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak and Dawn.
However, I was unable to trace it in these glosses. The source which was used was
Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtaks Talqt al l-sharh al-jadd li-Tajrd al-itiqd and his
Kashf al-h aqiq al-Muh ammadiyya, where the views of both Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak
and Dawn on this issue are quoted from their respective glosses on Qshchs commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd.
104
chapter two
not its growing and sensitivity likewise when a human being changes
[through death] to a state which does not have magnitude, position, and
place, it is to say that it is changed to something abstract (mujarrad).
[Thus] the abstraction which was potential in it becomes actual and there
is no reason to refuse this.103
It appears from the above statement that Sadr al-Dn regards the human
soul as not separated before death and views the separated character
of the soul as being only potentially so during life. Sadr al-Dn further
elucidates that what is understood from the word I is a meaning to
which it is plausible to predicate at the same time both being perceptive of the universals as well as being in a sitting position (jlis). If
what was meant by I was merely the body, it would have been false to
predicate perceiver of the universals to it, since the body is material
and the perceiver of the universals is something separated (mujarrad).
If what was meant by I were either the soul alone or the composition
of the soul and the body, it would have been false to say I am in a
sitting position, because a separated entity does not sit. Nor does the
composition of a material entity and a separated one sit either.104
Contrary to Sadr al-Dn, Dawn maintains that the souls task is the
management (tadbr) and control (tasarruf ) of the body. Therefore
the two are not in a state of unity; rather, the body is in possession of
the soul. To Dawn, the argument from I am in a sitting position
which is used by Sadr al-Dn is just a customary extension of a term
(itlqt urf), which cannot be used as a basis to attain philosophical
truths (h aqiq falsafiyya). Moreover, Ibn Sn and other philosophers
used I only to refer to the separated soul. Dawn further argues
that it has been well established that the perceiver of the universals is
separated. If Sadr al-Dn is correct in his argument, the soul is only able
to perceive the universals after death, not while it is together with the
body.105 Dawn also criticises this idea from a religious point of view:
to him this belief would lead to denial of the resurrection.106
103
Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak, Kashf al-h a qiq al-Muh a mmadiyya,
Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, p. 975.
104
See Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak, Kashf al-h aqiq al-Muh ammadiyya,
Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, pp. 9746.
105
See Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtaks Talqt al l-sharh al-jadd li-l-Tajrd,
Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, pp. 65569.
106
See Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtaks Talqt al l-sharh al-jadd li-l-Tajrd,
Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, pp. 6356.
in
in
in
in
CHAPTER THREE
WORKS OF NAYRZ
Nayrzs career as an author evidently started some time before Sadr
al-Dn al-Dashtaks death in 903/1498 and lasted for at least thirty years.
This is attested by his commentary upon Suhrawards postscript (dhayl)
to al-Alwh al-Imdiyya, which is dated 932/1526.1 To our knowledge,
Nayrz wrote exclusively in Arabic. Nonetheless, he did not hesitate to
adduce quotations in Persian, taking for granted that most, if not all of
his readers, would be able to read Persian.2 With the exception of two
treatises, his writings take the form of a commentary or gloss on the
works of earlier thinkers. As was seen in the previous chapters, the writing of commentaries and glosses was common by the time of Nayrz,
particularly in the fields of philosophy and theology, as well as in the
sciences.3 Fakhr al-Dn al-Rzs commentary on Ibn Sns al-Ishrt
wa-l-tanbht seems to have played a significant role in regenerating
this genre in the field of philosophy, and it had become well established
through the numerous commentaries written by Nas r al-Dn al-Ts.4
Nayrz seems to have had different reasons for writing each of his
commentaries, depending on the text he was dealing with. Sometimes he commented on a text in order to endorse the basic system of
1
Among the works that Nayrz wrote during the lifetime of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak
were his glosses on Qshchs commentary on T ss Tajrd al-itiqd and his commentary on Abhars Hidyat al-h ikma. See below, pp. 1114.
2
In his commentary on Tahdhb al-mantiq, Nayrz included Persian quotations from Nasr al-Dn al-T ss Sharh al-Thamarat li-Batlamys (MS Majlis 3968,
f. 14b:13), Ibn Sns Dnishnma-yi Aly (f. 149b:25) and Frzbds Sifr al-sada
(f. 303b:158). In his commentary on Taftzns Tahdhb al-mantiq, he quotes from
Nas r al-Dn al-T ss Persian work on logic, Ass al-iqtibs (MS Ridaw 1088, ff.
104b5a).
3
According to George Saliba, this genre has to be viewed as the functional equivalent of todays periodical literature in the research, where new findings were made
public. See G. Saliba, Writing the History of Arabic Astronomy: Problems and Different Perspectives. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 116 (1996), p. 714.
4
Among the well-known commentaries written by T s in the field of philosophy
and theology are his al-Masri al-Musri (a commentary on Shahrastns al-Musri),
his Naqd al-Muh assa l (a commentary on Fakhr al-Dn al-Rzs al-Muh assa l otherwise known as Talkhs al-Muhassa l ), and his commentary on Ibn Sns al-Ishrt
wa-l-tanbht. For a bibliography of Nas r al-Dn al-T ss works see Muhammad Taq
Mudarris Ridaw, Ah wl u thr-i khwja Nasr al-Dn-i T s, Tehran 1379/2000.
works of nayrz
107
108
chapter three
) ( / ) ( )
9
)
(
10
See Dhara, vol. 2, pp. 4067, no. 1627, vol. 6, p. 26, no. 102.
This is the rhyming phrase he uses in the introduction to his glosses on H ikmat
al-ishrq and on Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs commentary (MS Laleli 2523, f. 2b), in the
introduction to and in the colophon of his Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm wa-nihytih
(MS Malik 2614, ff. 2b, 22a), in the introduction to his Risla Ithbt al-wjib (MS
Malik 688, f. 115b), in the introduction and in the colophon of his commentary on
Hidyat al-h ikma (MS Carullah, ff. 1b, 218b), and in the introduction to his commentary on al-Alwh al-Imdiyya (Misbh al-arwh ) (MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 2b).
9
This phrase has been used in the colophon of his commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd
(MS Princeton 70, f. 121a), and at the end of his commentary on al-Alwh al-Imdiyya
(Misbh al-arwh ) (MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 208a).
10
This phrase has been used in the introduction to his commentary Tahdhb
al-mantiq wa-l-kalm (MS ehid Ali 1780, f. 1b).
11
The authenticity of this sign is certain because of being used in his autograph
of his glosses on H ikmat al-ishrq and on its commentary (MSS Marash 4266). The
same sign is preserved in some later copies of his glosses, namely another copy of his
glosses on H ikmat al-ishrq and on its commentary (MS Laleli 2523) as well as a copy
of his glosses on Shawkil al-hr f sharh Haykil al-nr (MS Majlis 1887, copied by
the authors son).
8
works of nayrz
109
Two items written by the hand of Nayrz are known to have been
preserved: 1) A fragment from the beginning of his commentary on
Taftzns Tahdhb al-mantiq wa-l-kalm (MS ehid Ali Paa 1780)
[Fig. 1], and 2) a copy of Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs commentary on
Suhrawards H ikmat al-Ishrq containing Nayrzs glosses on the text
and Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs commentary (MS Marash 4266) [Fig. 2].
The latter also contains an example of Nayrzs seal [Fig. 3].
110
chapter three
12
See Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak, Talqt al l-sharh al-jadd li-l-Tajrd, in
Musannaft-i Ghiyth al-Dn, vol. 2, pp. 9857.
13
On this commentary see below, pp. 1214.
works of nayrz
111
1498. Thus, this work is one of his earliest writings, if not his very first
composition.
II. Commentary on Athr al-Dn al-Abhars Hidyat al-h ikma
When compared to his other philosophical works, Nayrzs commentary on Athr al-Dn al-Abhars Hidyat al-h ikma stays most faithfully
within the tradition of Avicennan philosophy. Completed in 904/14989,
this work was written during Nayrzs early life in Shiraz, when he still
had to establish himself as a scholar. This is indicated by the wording
of his introduction:
If your ears hear some secrets [in the commentary], which you have not
come across in their [i.e., the philosophers] books, and which do not
accord with the tradition of the scholars of the past, think about it first
and do not reject it simply because it disagrees with a tradition . . . You
should not consider who is saying it, but what is said . . . So if you find
that something in it accords with existence, it would cause extreme satisfaction to my expectation and intention. Otherwise, I hope you might
possibly correct it or simply efface and ignore it.14
112
chapter three
17
works of nayrz
113
it would have greatly extended the length of the book.24 Near the end
of the commentary, where Abhar refers to his more elaborate work,
Zubdat al-asrr, there is further evidence to confirm Nayrzs use of
Maybuds commentary. Maybud had recommended to his readers
to turn to the works of Ibn Sn and Suhraward rather than to the
Zubdat al-asrr. This suggestion is objected to by Nayrz, who states
that the reference is given to the authors Zubdat al-asrr and not, as
most of the commentators suggest, to the Shif, the Najt, or the
H ikmat al-Ishrq.25
In addition to Maybuds commentary (and possibly those others)
on this text, Nayrz consulted other sources, some of which are
explicitly mentioned in his commentary, such as the Uthljiy
(Theology), which he attributes in his commentary to Aristotle,26
Ibn Sns al-Shif, al-Najt and al-Ishrt wa-l-tanbht, and various
commentaries written on the Ishrt by Fakhr al-Dn al-Rz, Nasr
al-Dn al-T s (to whom he refers as al-Muh aqqiq) and Qutb al-Dn
al-Rz. Nayrz also used Bahmanyrs al-Tahsl and refers on one
occasion to Ibn Zaylas Talkhs al-Shif.27 There are also references
to Shams al-Dn al-Shahrazrs Rasil al-Shajara al-ilhiyya,28 Fakhr
al-Dn al-Rzs al-Mabh ith al-mashriqiyya,29 and Taftzns Sharh
al-Maqsid.30 No reference, however, is made to any other work by
Abhar, probably because no other philosophical works of Abhar were
available to him.31
24
114
chapter three
32
Nayrz, Sharh Hidyat al-h ikma, MS Carullah 1327, f. 177a:18. Dawn was still
alive in 904/14989 when Nayrz completed the first draft of this work. Therefore the
eulogy, qaddasa sirruh, equivalent to the English may he rest in peace, must have
been added later on, possibly by Nayrz himself in his revised version of the commentary, completed in 916/1510.
33
See Nayrz, Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm wa-nihytih, MS Malik 2614, f. 1b:12.
34
Nayrz, Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm, f. 1b.
35
See Nayrz, Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm, ff. 2ab. The arguments he presents
here are different from those of Ab l-Barakt in his Mutabar and it seems unlikely
that he used this work as a source. For Ab l-Barakt al-Baghdds discussion of
the issue, see his al-Mutabar f l-h ikma, Lithograph Edition, Hyderabad 1357/1938,
[reprinted Isfahan 1373/1994], vol. 2, pp. 807. Generally speaking, no evidence has
been found in Nayrzs writings which would indicate that Ab l-Barakt al-Baghdds
al-Mutabar was available to him.
works of nayrz
115
36
See Nayrz, Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm, ff. 4a9a. For these arguments, see
Ft ima Fan, Tanh abd, Dnishnma-yi jahn-i Islm, vol. 8, Tehran 1383/2004,
pp. 2468.
37
Nayrz, Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm, MS Malik 2614, f. 5b.
38
See Nayrz, Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm, MS Malik 2614, f. 7a.
39
Nayrz, Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm, MS Malik 2614, f. 6a.
40
Nayrz, Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm, MS Malik 2614, ff. 2b, 8b,15a.
41
Nayrz, Risla f Tayn jiht al-ajsm, MS Malik 2614, f. 16b.
42
See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, f 25a.
116
chapter three
Dawn] on most of these proofs and abstracted the arguments from the
irrelevant remarks.43
works of nayrz
117
For instance, he quotes Dawns comment on the argument of tadyuf for the
finitude of causes. See Nayrz, Risalat Ithbt al-wjib, MS Malik 688, f. 178a. Instead
of explicitly referring to Dawn, Nayrz structured the sentence in the passive (waqad yuqlu . . . ).
118
chapter three
48
With the exception of Qutb al-Dn al-Shrz, who consulted Shahrazrs commentary on H ikmat al-ishrq for his own commentary on the same text, no later philosopher is known to have used the commentary of Shahrazr. Apart from Nayrz,
Mr Dmd and Mull Sadr (d. 1050/1640) wrote glosses on Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs
commentary. For the glosses of Mr Dmd on Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs commentary,
see Mr Dmd, Musannaft-i Mr Dmd, ed. Abd Allh Nrn, Tehran 1381/2003,
vol. 1, pp. 5237. For the glosses of Mull Sadr, see Qut b al-Dn al-Shrz, Sharh
H ikmat al-ishrq, lithograph edition, 1313/18956; cf. Sajjad H. Rizvi, Mull Sadr
Shrz: His Life and Works and the Sources for Safavid Philosophy, Oxford 2007, p. 76.
works of nayrz
119
854 contains 840 of his remarks with his signature (). Most of these
remarks are brief, explaining the text of Suhraward.
VI. Glosses on Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjns Commentary on Adud
al-Dn al-js al-Mawqif f ilm al-kalm
Al-Mawqif f ilm al-kalm is a theological-philosophical work by Adud
al-Dn al-j consisting of six chapters (mawqif ). Chapter One contains
some epistemological preliminaries ( f l-muqaddamt), while Chapter
Two is devoted to some general ontology (al-umr al-mma). Chapter
Three is entitled On accidents ( f l-ard), Chapter Four, On substances
( f l-jawhir), Chapter Five, On Metaphysics (ilhiyyt), and Chapter Six,
49
Nayrz, H shya al H ikmat al-ishrq, MS Laleli 2523, f.2b. For the whole introduction of Nayrz to this work, see below, pp. 17980 (Appendix I: Inventory of
Nayrzs Writings).
120
chapter three
On the knowledge that is based on revelation ( f l-samiyyt).50 Completed in Shawwl 807/April 1405, Mr Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjns
commentary on this text became one of the most popular theological
works of the later Islamic period. This is indicated by the large number
of extant manuscripts and the numerous glosses that were written on
it.51 Nayrzs set of glosses on this commentary is probably one of his
relatively early writings. There are references to it in his commentary
on Tahdhb al-mantiq wa-l-kalm and in his Tah rr Tajrd al-itiqd.52
These glosses are apparently lost, and hence it is unclear whether they
cover the entire text or only some part of it. The two occasions on which
Nayrz refers to these glosses, which are to be found in his Tahrr Tajrd
al-aqid and his Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq, are both on the issue of the
definition of knowledge (ilm). This topic is discussed in the second section (marsad) of Chapter One of al-Mawqif. It is possible that Nayrz
may only have written glosses on this section of the commentary.53
VII. Commentary on Nasr al-Dn al-T ss Tajrd al-mantiq
In his Dhara il tasnf al-sha and his Tabaqt alm al-sha, gh
Buzurg al-T ihrn states that he had seen a manuscript of Nayrzs
commentary on Nasr al-Dn al-Tss Tajrd al-mantiq in a library in
Smarr.54 According to gh Buzurg, Nayrz started the commentary
in Isfahan, completed it in Qazvin on 23 Dhu l-H ijja 913/24 April 1508
and dedicated it to a certain Amr Nizm al-Din Mahmd. He further
informs us that the commentary is long, consisting of about ten thousand lines, and that in its introduction Nayrz explicitly mentions that
he made use of the glosses of his teacher, Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, on
50
In his study on j, Josef van Ess translates and analyzes the first chapter of this
book into German; see Die Erkenntnislehre des Adud al-Dn al-c: bersetzung und
Kommentar des ersten Buches seiner Mawqif.
51
For the extant glosses on this text, see Shakbny/Pourjavady, Kitb-shins-i
Mr Sayyid Sharf-i Jurjn, pp. 1456.
52
For his reference to this work in his commentary on Tahdhb al-mantiq wa-lkalm, see MS Ridaw 1088, f. 31a. For the reference in Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, see
MS Majlis 3968, f. 221a.
53
For the reference to this work in his Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, see MS Majlis 3968,
f. 221b:9, and in his Sharh Tahdhb al-Mantiq, see MS Ridaw 1088, f. 30a.
54
See al-Dhara, vol. 13, pp. 1401, no. 469, and vol. 3, p. 354, no. 1278; T abaqt,
vol. 7, p. 244.
works of nayrz
121
55
T abaqt, vol. 7, p. 244. The glosses of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak on the text are
extant in MS Marash 1707 (cat. 95/5). Cf. Al Sadry Khy, Kitbshinsi-yi Tajrd
al-itiqd, Qum 1382/2003, p. 16.
56
See Muhammad Taq Dnishpazhh, Fihrist-i kitbkhnah-yi Irq u Arabistn,
vol. 5, Tehran 1346/19678, p. 425. Dnishpazhhs entry to this manuscript in the
catalogue does not contain any additional information but its location.
57
Reference is given to this work in Nayrzs commentary on Taftzns Tahdhb
al-mantiq wa-l-kalm (MS Ridaw 1088, f. 117a), and in his note at the end of the
revised version of his commentary on Hidyat al-h ikma (MS Carullah 1327, f. 218b).
58
Instead of Tajrd al-itiqd, Nayrz calls the work Tajrd al-aqid. The latter
title seems to have become popular after Shams al-Dn Mahmd al-Isf ahn called his
commentary Tasdd al-qawid f sharh Tajrd al-aqid. However, earlier commentators such as H ill and Isfaryin refer to the text as Tajrd al-itiqd. See Al Sadry
Khy, Kitbshinsi-yi Tajrd al-itiqd, pp. 910.
59
For this note see below, p. 171 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
60
For the reference to this work in his commentary on Taftzns Tahdhb
al-mantiq wa-l-kalm, see MS Ridaw 1088, f. 108.
61
There is no particular evidence indicating that Nayrz revised the commentary in
the copy completed on 2 Rab I 919/8 May 1513. However, his wording in the colophon quoted below suggests that he had done more than a simple copying of the text.
122
chapter three
God allowed me here to complete this commentary on Tajrd al-aqid,
which contains all the true points in the works of earlier scholars and
the delicate points written by the later scholars, and some points which
have never been discussed or even thought about by anyone so far. I
have called it Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, consisting of a selection of kalm
disputations, based on the beliefs of the Imm Sha, the sect which will
attain salvation.62
Tajrd al-itiqd a work written by Nasr al-Dn al-Ts in his late carreer,
consists of six chapters (maqsid): Chapter One: On general ontology
(al-umr al-mma); Chapter Two: On substances and accidents ( f
l-jawhir wa-l-ard); Chapter Three: On metaphysics ( f l-ilhiyyt);
Chapter Four: On prophecy ( f l-nubuwwa); Chapter Five: On the imamate; Chapter Six: On eschatology ( f l-mad). The significant number
of commentaries and glosses written on this work shows its popularity
in the later period of Islamic thought.
By the time of Nayrz, the following commentaries had been written on this text: 1) Kashf al-murd f sharh Tajrd al-itiqd by H asan
b. Ysuf al-H ill (d. 726/1326); 2) Tard al-itimd f sharh Tajrd
al-itiqd by Shams al-Dn Muhammad al-Bihisht al-Isfaryin (fl.
741/1340); 3) Tasdd al-qawid f sharh Tajrd al-aqid by Shams
al-Dn Mahmd al-Isfahn, also known as al-Sharh al-qadm, on
which significant glosses had been written by al-Sharf al-Jurjn; and
4) al-Sharh al-Jadd by Al al-Dn Al al-Qshch.63 The only Twelver
Sh among these commentators was Allma al-H ill. The rest, all
Sunns, criticized and rejected T ss Twelver Sh doctrines.
The scholars of Shiraz showed special interest in Qshchs commentary. As discussed in Chapter Three, the controversy between Jall
al-Dn al-Dawn and Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak was developed mostly
through the glosses they wrote on Qshchs commentary. Some of
Dashtaks and Dawns students also wrote glosses on Qshchs
commentary, namely Kaml al-Dn H usayn al-Lr, Ghiyth al-Dn
Mansr al-Dashtak, Shams al-Dn al-Khafr, and Kaml al-Dn H usan
al-Ilh al-Ardabl.64 The glosses written by the above-mentioned
scholars all dealt with the first three chapters of the text, meaning that
62
Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Princeton 70, f. 121a. For the quotation in
Arabic, see below, p. 160 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
63
For the locations of the manuscripts of these commentaries, see Al Sadry
Khy, Kitbshinsi-yi Tajrd al-itiqd, pp. 3538, 424, 5962, 1724.
64
For the glosses and superglosses written on Qshchs commentary on Tajrd
al-itiqd, see Al Sadry Khy, Kitbshinsi-yi Tajrd al-itiqd, pp. 63160.
works of nayrz
123
none of them covered the chapter on the imamate. Nayrzs commentary is different from those of his Shirazian contemporaries in that
he comments on the text of Tajrd al-itiqd directly and covers the
entire text, including the chapter on the imamate. Nayrz explicitly
follows Nasr al-Dn al-T s on the latter issue and elaborates on it
with reference to T abars Trkh and the Nahj al-balgha, the collection of sermons attributed to Al b. Ab T lib compiled by al-Sharf
al-Rady (d. 406/1015), as well as some other Sh sources, like Majd
al-Dn al-Frzbds (d. 817/141415) Sifr al-sada.65 He also dealt
with the critical positions of Fakhr al-Dn al-Rz and Taftzn on
the imamate.66
In the introduction to the commentary, Nayrz acknowledged
three works as the most significant studies that had been done on
Tajrd al-itiqd: (1) al-Sharf al-Jurjns glosses on Shams al-Dn
al-Isfahns commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd, (2) Qshchs commentary, and (3) Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtaks glosses on Qshchs
commentary.67 But he maintained that despite all this scholarship
on the text, many of its precious ideas still awaited proper explanation. Some of the commentators, he believed, were too suspicious and
raised superfluous doubts regarding the authors arguments. Others
assumed that the author was completely misled and that his contribution was nothing but an attempt to epitomize the work and dress
it with allusions and metaphors. Hence, they interpreted it according
to their own desires and merely wounded the text when they thought
they were commenting on it. Nayrz seems to have included Jall
al-Dn al-Dawn among the latter group with an allusion to one of
the well-known persons (bad al-alm).68
Nayrzs method of commenting the text, as he explains it, was to
elaborate the authors ideas and then paraphrase some of the richest expositions of the commentators.69 To elaborate T ss ideas, the
latters other works are frequently cited by Nayrz. He explicitly
refers to T ss commentary on Ibn Sns al-Ishrt wa-l-tanbht,
65
Nayrz adduces a quotation from Frzbds Sifr al-sada. See Tah rr Tajrd
al-aqid, MS Majlis 3968, f. 303b:158. On Majd al-Dn al-Frzbd, see Muhammad
Taq Mr, Buzurgn-i nm-yi prs, vol. 1, pp. 497503.
66
For Nayrzs discussion on this issue, see his Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Majlis
3968, f. 283a ff.
67
See Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Ihy-i mrth 1849, f. 2a.
68
See Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Ihy-i mrth 1849, f. 2a.
69
See Nayrz, Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid, MS Ihy-i mrth 1849, ff. 2b3a.
124
chapter three
works of nayrz
125
74
Ktibs Shamsiyya, together with Qutb al-Dn al-Rzs commentary (Tah rr
al-qawid al-mantiqiyya f sharh al-Shamsiyya) and Sharf Jurjns glosses, have been
published repeatedly. See Daiber, Bibliography of Islamic Philosophy, vol. 1, pp. 266,
51920.
75
The only identified manuscript of this work (MS safiyya mantiq 58) was not
available to me. The quotation is according to the description of the manuscript of this
work in the Catalogue of s afiyya library (vol. 2, p. 519). For the quotation in Arabic,
see below, p. 178 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
76
See above, pp. 801.
77
See Nayrz, Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq wa-l-kalm, MS Ridaw 1088, f. 108a:5.
126
chapter three
78
Of the two parts of the text only the first is available in a critical edition, i.e.,
H asan Malikshhs Tarjuma u tafsr-i Tahdhb al-mantiq, Tehran 1363/1984. The
second part on kalm is only available in a lithograph edition, together with its commentary by Abd al-Qdir b. Muhammad al-Sanandaj al-Kurdistn (d. 1304/1887).
See Abd al-Qdir b. Muhammad al-Sanandaj al-Kurdistn, Taqrb al-marm f sharh
Tahdhb al-kalm, Lithograph Edition, Bulq 1318/1900. On Taftzns logical works,
see Wilferd Madelung, Al-Taftazan und die Philosophie, Logik und Theologie. Das
Organon im arabischen und im lateinischen Mittelalter, eds. Dominik Perler and
Ulrich Rudolph, Leiden 2006, pp. 22736.
79
This colophon is preserved
in MS Ridaw 1088 (261b) where Nayrz writes:
[. . .]
[. . .]
Elsewhere in the commentary (MS Ridaw, f. 108a), he states:
80
See above, p. 115.
works of nayrz
127
the truth (tullb al-h aqq) used to look at this work like a thirsty man who
reaches a mirage, amazed by the abridged language, and the delicacy of
its meanings, with no hope of catching the true sense of their meanings.
So I tried to further enhance its helpfulness for the seekers of truth . . . 81
81
Nayrz, Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq, MS ehid Ali 1780, f. 2a. For the quotation in
Arabic, see below, p. 164 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
82
See Insiyya Barkhwh, Tahdhb al-mant iq wa-l-kalm, in Dnishnma-yi
jahn-i Islm, vol. 8, Tehran 1383/2004, pp. 7035.
83
See Nayrz, Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq, MS Ridaw 1088, f. 122b (reference to
Taftzns commentary on Ktibs Shamsiyya), and f. 260a (reference to Taftzns
commentary on js al-Mukhtasar f l-usl).
84
See Nayrz, Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq, MS Ridaw 1088, f. 240a.
85
On H asan Shh Baqql and his commentary on Tahdhb al-mantiq, see above,
p. 3, fn. 17.
86
The autograph MS of this commentary is preserved in MS Laleli 2592.
87
See Dhara, vol. 6, p. 54. One of the manuscripts of this commentary is MS
Majlis 1834 (cat. vol. 5, p. 318).
88
A copy of this commentary is preserved in MS Malik 965 (Cat. vol. 1, 393).
128
chapter three
See Nayrz, Sharh Rislat ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, MS Majlis 1841, f. 190 a.
See below, p. 171 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs Writings).
91
See Abd al-Azz T abtab, Maktabat al-Allma al-H ill, Qum 1416/19956,
pp. 10911.
92
Ilh Ardabls commentary on this text is mentioned in his ijza to Kaml
al-Dn Ibrhm al-Safaw. See al-Afand al-Isfahn, vol. 2, p. 101. On Jall al-Dn
al-Astarbds commentary on this text see above, pp. 15, fn. 96.
93
See Dhara, vol. 2, pp. 4067, no. 1627, and vol. 6, p. 26, no. 102, T abaqt,
vol. 7, p. 244.
94
See above, pp. 612.
90
works of nayrz
129
95
96
97
98
130
chapter three
Nayrz points out that some of Dawns arguments in this work are
moderate compared to his previous works, such as his glosses on
Qshchs commentary on Tajrd al-itiqd.102 It can be assumed that
these moderations were the result of Dawns reconsiderations occasioned by Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtaks criticisms. Yet, even these moderated
arguments are not acceptable for Nayrz, as he criticizes a number of
them. At the end of the text, however, in an attitude that clearly differs
99
MS Majlis 1840 contains this commentary (Cat. vol. 5, pp. 2979). See also
above, p. 43.
100
See above, p. 81.
101
Nayrz, Sharh Rislat ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, MS Majlis 1841, f. 2b. For
Nayrzs whole introduction, see below, pp. 1678 (Appendix I: Inventory of Nayrzs
Writings).
102
See Nayrz, Sharh Rislat ithbt al-wjib al-jadda, f. 209b.
works of nayrz
131
132
chapter three
discussion of the legendary Iranian kings, their spirituality and manners, which in its detail is unique among the philosophical works of
Suhraward. The work consists of an introduction and four tablets
(alwh , sg. lawh ): Tablet One: on proofs for the finitude of dimensions, on the boundaries of the sky and the world, simplicity of the
elements and those that were made by them ( f ithbt tanh al-abd
wa-f taraf min al-sam wa-l-lam wa-f basit al-unsuriyyt wa-m
yah duthu minh); Tablet Two: on the Soul with reference to its faculties ( f l-nafs wa-ishra il quwh); Tablet Three: on the proofs for
the existence of the Necessary Being and on His attributes of greatness
and perfection ( f ithbt wjib al-wujd wa-m yalq bih min sift
al-jall wa-nut al-kaml); Tablet Four: on the order of the world,
the destiny and eternity of souls and their happiness and wretchedness and pain and pleasure and the influences of souls ( f l-nizm
wa-l-qad wa-l-qadar wa-baq al-nufs wa-l-sada wa-l-shaqwa
wa-l-ladhdha wa-l-alam wa-thr al-nufs).
Nayrzs commentary on al-Alwh al-Imdiyya is to our knowledge
the only commentary ever written on this work. By the time of Nayrz,
three other philosophical works of Suhraward, namely Talwh t,
H ikmat al-ishrq and Haykil al-nr had each been commented upon
twice: al-Talwh t by Ibn Kammna and Shahrazr, H ikmat al-ishrq
by Shahrazr and Qutb al-Dn Shrz and Haykil al-nr by Jall
al-Dn Dawn and Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak. Little attention, however, was paid to Alwh . One of the reasons for this was perhaps the
assumption, voiced by Qutb al-Dn al-Shrz,108 that Alwh was among
the works that Suhraward wrote in his youth. The indication of this
statement was that it was of less value than Suhrawards more significant philosophical works written later in his life. Nayrz correctly
rejects this assumption in his glosses on Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs commentary on H ikmat al-ishrq, arguing that Alwh s content indicates
that its composition took place after H ikmat al-ishrq and hence was
a work of Suhrawards maturity.109
In the introduction to his commentary on Alwh , Nayrz explains
why he chose to comment on the work as follows:
108
See Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs Sharh H ikmat al-ishrq, ed. Abd Allh Nrn &
Mahd Muhaqqiq, Tehran 1379/2000, p. 14.
109
See H shiya al H ikmat al-ishrq wa-al sharh ihi li-Qutb al-Dn al-Shraz,
MS Marash 4266, f. 7a. Nayrz must have noticed a reference to H ikmat al-ishrq in
Alwh , which leaves no doubt that the writing of Alwh must have taken place either
sometime after the composition of H ikmat al-ishrq or at least at the same time.
works of nayrz
133
110
134
chapter three
achieved with the help of frequent illuminative lights (al-nr al-shriq)
and glittering flashes (wa-l-wamd al-briq) and hence, although the
book was written a long time ago, the meaning of it was still concealed
from many of the students . . . As I was not happy to see these true matters and delicate points remain ambiguous and untouched by mental
comprehension, I decided to write a commentary which clarifies the
complicated points of the text, explains the intentions of the author,
unveils its ambiguous meanings, and eases the way of understanding
its intentions and its foundations. In addition, it properly explains the
complicated words and expressions, and the styles of writings used in
the text, but the main goal was to present the principles, interpret its
intentions, multiply its benefits, expand upon its succinct points, clarify
the enigmatic language, determine some unrestricted statements, and
elaborate the short explanations of the text with the help of other works
of the author and the early and later commentators of his books using
the experiences of the true seekers and the masters of the spiritual experiences (ahl al-h aqq wa-arbb al-kashf wa-l-mukshifn), intending to
call it after it is completed Misbh al-arwh f kashf h aqiq al-Alwh .111
works of nayrz
135
136
chapter three
121
The scholars to whom he refers in this manner are probably close to his time,
possibly even his contemporaries.
122
See above, p. 55.
CHAPTER FOUR
138
chapter four
3
The translation of this quotation is based on John Walbridge and Hossein Ziais
rendering (Suhraward, The Philosophy of Illumination, p. 53).
4
Nayrz, H shiya al H ikmat al-ishrq, MS Laleli 2523, f. 88a.
5
For a detailed study of Suhrawards view on this issue and its comparison to that
of Descartes, see John Walbridge, Al-Suhraward on Body as Extension: An Alternative
to Hylomorphism from Plato to Leibniz, Reason and Inspiration in Islam. Theology,
Philosophy and Mysticism in Muslim thought. Essays in Honour of Hermann Landolt,
ed. Todd Lawson, London 2005, pp. 23547. However, Walbridges efforts to connect
Suhrawards view with the Platonic idea of Receptacle are not very convincing. It is
139
noteworthy that before Suhraward, Abu l-Barakt al-Baghdd (547/1152) held this
view. See his al-Mutabar f al-h ikma, Haydarabad 1358/1939, vol. 3, pp. 196202.
6
Wa-l-jawhar alladh yatabaddal alayhi hdhihi l-suwar, huwa l-musamm bi-lhayl, fa-huwa idh ukhidha maa imtiddt tliyya wa-ardiyya wa-umqiyya, fa-huwa
l-jism. Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 50.
7
Suhraward, al-Alwh al-Imdiyya, in uvres philosophiques et mystiques iv.,
p. 46.
8
It is notable that about the same time as Nayrz, Shams al-Dn al-Khafr criticized Suhrawards view on prime matter in his Risla f tah qq al-hayl. See Shams
al-Dn al-Khafr, Tah qq al-hayl, MS Majlis 706, p. 80 ff. Whether or not the two
were aware of each others criticism is as yet unclear.
140
chapter four
I.ii. The Theory of Vision
Ibn Sn,Uyn al-h ikma, ed. H ilm Ziya lken, Ankara 1953, p. 32.
Suhraward, The Philosophy of Illumination, pp. 13840.
11
The translation of this quotation is based on that of John Walbridge and Hossein
Ziai (Suhraward, The Philosophy of Illumination, p. 139) with some modifications.
12
Nayrz, Sharh Hidyat al-h ikma, MS Carullah 1327, ff. 103a104b; idem, H shiya
al H ikmat al-ishrq, MS Laleli 2523, ff. 108b ff.; idem, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid
Ali 1739, ff. 68b70b.
13
Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 70b.
10
141
Nayrz further argues that the existence of the imaginary world is not
plausible in the way suggested by Suhraward, overlapping in some occasions with the sensible world. Instead he suggested a barrier (muh addid)
separate the two worlds from each other:
Were it not for fear of making the discourse long, I would have informed
you about it. It should be noticed that if these worlds are inside a single
barrier (muh addid), they should be part of this world. If they are not
inside a barrier, then either it necessitates a vacuum, which is definitely
false, or there is another barrier, which should be ruled out to consider
it to be outside of this world. This [barrier] which is not out of the world
is what we desired.16
142
chapter four
The most that one can say is that sound here is conditioned by it
[= vibration of the air]. However, it does not follow that if something is
conditioned by a thing in one place, its like is necessarily so conditioned.
A thing as a universal may have different causes in different instances,
and so it may also have different conditions in different instances . . . The
awesome sounds (al-aswt al-hila) heard by the mystics cannot be said
to be the vibration of air in the brain. Instead, it is an image (mithl) of
sound which is a sound. Thus, there may be sounds and music in the
spheres not conditioned on air or ringing.17
Nayrz argues against Suhraward that to make a sound requires the
vibration of a body ( jism), which is tender (ratb) and flowing (sayyl)
like water or air. This is the necessitating cause (al-sabab al-muqtad)
for having sound, and not simply, as Suhraward suggested, a condition
for it. In the spheres, where there is no tender and flowing body, there
cannot be any sound or music.18
17
The translation of this quotation is based on John Walbridge and Hossein Ziais
translation of H ikmat al-ishrq (Suhraward, The Philosophy of Illumination, p. 154)
with some modifications.
18
Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 66b.
19
Suhraward, al-Alwh al-Imdiyya, pp. 923. On Kiyn khurrah in Suhrawards
political thought, see Nasrollah Pourjavady, The Light of Sakina in Suhrawardis Philosophy of Illumination, Binghamton/New York 1998.
143
to be called good. Unless it is said that when the good is dominant over
evil it can become so prominent an accident that makes it plausible to
call some kings evil and some others not, or to argue that the necessary
coexistence of evil with these good things may have a single origin or
it may not have, similarly the great majority of good things may have
a single origin or they may not, making it correct to call one king just
and the other cruel.20
Nayrz further explains that Suhrawards concern is only with the wise
and just kings. However, the cruel kings may also be impressed by the
spiritual world. For instance, in Moses victory over Pharaoh, the souls
of the children that Pharaoh had killed were acting against the latter.21
Nayrz continues his remark by criticizing what he believed to be the
core of Suhrawards political thought. According to Nayrz, Suhraward
maintained that true philosophers have the right to attain kingship and
that he was perhaps himself ambitious to obtain such power:
To me, some of the perfect men in knowledge and practice had the illusion
that perfection in knowledge and in practice, and ruling and domination
and victory by force are indispensable, or there is a consensual necessity
between them. That was the reason that they were killed. It is also what
is said about the death of the author who was one of those philosophers
and saints (awliy), God bless their souls. The reality, however, is not like
that and anyone who has some knowledge of astrology and astronomy
knows that it happens sometimes that either knowledge and wisdom, or
ruling (al-mulk) would be bestowed upon one and not upon the other.
Do you not see that Noah, peace be upon him, with his perfection in his
prophecy and his knowledge, lived at a time when the ignorant people
excelled him in ruling and only a small group of them followed him for
a long time? Solomon, peace be upon him, had both. And both Shaddd
and Nimrd had only ruling without knowledge and wisdom. Then,
know that there is no necessity between these two and it is not possible
that your effort to reach the last stage of knowledge would lead you to
the ruling and governing (al- h ukma). The truth is that both are in the
hand of God.22
144
chapter four
23
At the end of his Partaw-nma he states: Every King who knows philosophy,
and continues to thank and sanctify the Light of Lights, will be bestowed with kiyn
khurrah and with luminous farrah, and as we have said elsewhere divine light will
further bestow upon him the cloak of royal power and value. Such a person shall
then become the natural Ruler of the Universe. He shall be given aid from the High
Heaven, and whatever he commands shall be obeyed; and his dreams and inspirations
will reach their uppermost, perfect pinnacle. (The Book of Radiance, ed. and trans.
Hossein Ziai, Costa Mesa 1998, pp. 845) with some modifications. For the original
Persian, see Suhraward, The Book of Radiance, pp. 8485; idem, uvres philosophiques
et mystiques iii., ed. Sayyid Hossein Nasr, p. 81. For detailed analyses of this passage
and the various versions of it in the manuscript traditions, see Nasrollah Pourjavady, Partaw-nma u tarjuma-yi ingils-i n, in Irfn u ishrq, Tehran 1380/2001,
pp. 387407, esp. pp. 4012.
24
Ibn Khallikn, Wafayt al-ayn wa-anb al-zamn, ed. Ihsn Abbs, Beirut
138892/196872, vol. 6, p. 272. This account was quoted from Wafayt al-ayn by
some later bibliographical sources including Ab Abd Allh al-Yfis (d. 768/1367)
Mirt al-jann wa-ibrat al-yaqz n (Lithograph Edition, Hydarabad (Deccan)
1338/191920, vol. 3, p.437). The account given by Yfi was evidently known to
Nayrz and he quotes it at the beginning of his copy of Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs
commentary on H ikmat al-ishrq (MS Marash 4266, f. 4b). For various hypotheses
on the reason for which the authorities executed Suhraward, see Hermann Landolt,
Suhrawards Tale of Initiation. Review Article, Journal of the American Oriental
Society (1987), pp. 47586; Hossein Ziai, The Source and Nature of Authority: a Study
of al-Suhrawards Illuminationist Political Doctrine, The Political Aspects of Islamic
Philosophy. Essays in Honor of Muhsen S. Mahdi, ed. C. E. Butterworth, Cambridge
1992, pp. 294334; Roxanne D. Marcotte, Suhraward al-Maqtl, the Martyr of Aleppo,
Al-Qantara 21 ii (2001), pp. 395419.
145
25
Suhraward seems to employ this saying in the sense that separation from the
body through death is the first step towards spiritual resurrection.
26
Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 183a187b.
27
This work has been edited twice, first by Muh ammad Najb Krkn [Necip
Grgn] (PhD Dissertation, Marmara University, Istanbul 1996) published with revisions in Istanbul 2004, and then by Najaf-Qul H abb (Tehran 20056). I refer to the
latter edition in the following.
146
chapter four
28
147
34
See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 45b46b, and compare it
with Shahrazr, Shajara, vol. 2, pp. 2756, 278. Some other instances in which the
epistle on physics of the Shajara has been used by Nayrz, are as follows: 1) Commenting on a passage of introduction of Alwh , where indivisible parts are rejected,
Shahrazrs rejection of the indivisible parts in Fasl One of Qism One of Risla Four
of Shajara, entitled On the rejection of the indivisible parts and the arguments of its
adherents ( f nafy al-juz alladh l yatajazza wa-h ujaj ash bih, vol. 2, pp. 279) is
adopted (MS ehid Ali Paa 1739, f. 22a22b). Reference to al-Shajara al-ilhiyya is
given explicitly in the respective passage of the commentary; 2) One of the arguments of
Shahrazr on the finitude of dimensions (tanh abd) is included by Nayrz among
his arguments in Lawh One of Alwh (MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 23a). This argument is
the fifth argument presented by Shahrazr on the issue in Fasl Five of Qism One of
Risla Four of the Shajara (vol. 2, p. 97); 3) Shahrazrs speculation on time in Fasl
Ten, Qism One, Risla 4 (vol. 2, pp. 1856, 18990, 1934) is adopted by Nayrz to
elaborate on Suhrawards discussion of the issue in Lawh One of Alwh (MS ehid
Ali 1739, ff. 32a35a); 4) In Lawh Two, where Suhraward explains the common faculties of human and plant, Nayrz quotes in his commentary (MS ehid Ali 1739, ff.
77a79b) several passages from Fasl One of Qism Six of Risla Four of the Shajara
(vol. 2, pp. 32832, 336).
35
See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 195a197b, and compare
it to the Shajara, ed. Najaf-Qul H abb, vol. 3, pp. 6323, 64252.
36
See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 161a165a, quoted from
the Shajara, ed. Najaf-Qul H abb, vol. 3, pp. 598607.
37
Another issue discussed by Shahrazr in the Epistle on Metaphysics of the
Shajara and adduced by Nayrz is the existence of evil in the world, for which he
offers an explanation. See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 146a ff., and
compare it with the Shajara, ed. Najaf-Qul H abb, vol. 3, p. 6117.
148
chapter four
38
See Nayrz, Misbh al-Arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 180a181a, and compare
it with the Shajara, ed. Najaf-Qul H abb, vol. 3, pp. 5103, 5202.
39
See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 155b156b, and compare it
with the Shajara, vol. 3, ed. Najafqul H abb, pp. 593596. For the views of Suhraward
and his early commentators on the issue of the transmigration of the soul, see Sabine
Schmidtke, The Doctrine of the Transmigration of the Soul according to Shihb al-Dn
al-Suhraward (killed 587/1191) and his followers, Studia Iranica, 28 (1999), pp. 23754.
40
See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff.79 ab. On the discussion
of this issue in the Shajara, see al-Shajara al-ilhiyya, ed. Najaf-Qul H abb, vol. 2,
pp. 3378.
149
This work has been edited by Sayyid H usayn Sayyid Msaw under the title
al-Tanqh t f sharh al-talwh t (PhD Dissertation: University of Tehran, Tehran
137576/19967). The part on physics has also been edited by Hossein Ziai and
Ahmad Alwishah (Al-Tanqh t f sharh al-talwh t. Refinement and Commentary
on Suhrawards Intimations. A Thirteenth Century Text on Natural Philosophy and
Psychology, Costa Mesa 2003).
42
See Nayrz, Misbh al-Arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 149b150b, and compare
it with Sharh al-Talwh t [al-Tanqh t f Sharh al-Talwh t], ed. Sayyid Msaw, vol. 3,
pp. 9036.
43
See Nayrz, Misbh al-Arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 154a156b, and compare
it with Sharh al-Talwh t [al-Tanqh t f Sharh al-Talwh t], ed. Sayyid Msaw, vol.
3, pp. 91625. Nayrz elaborated on Ibn Kammnas brief discussion on the Qurnic
arguments of the adherents of tansukh with the help of Shahrazrs al-Shajara
al-ilhiyya. See above, p. 148, fn. 40.
44
See Nayrz, Misbh al-Arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 157a158a, and compare
it with Sharh al-Talwh t, [al-Tanqh t f Sharh al-Talwh t], ed. Sayyid Msaw, vol.
3, pp. 92830.
45
See Nayrz, Misbh al-Arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 159b161a, and compare
it to Sharh al-Talwh t [al-Tanqh t f Sharh al-Talwh t], ed. Sayyid Msaw, vol. 3,
pp. 9346.
46
See Nayrz, Misbh al-Arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 179ab. The passage is
quoted from Sharh al-Talwh t [al-Tanqh t f Sharh al-Talwh t], ed. Sayyid Msaw,
vol. 3, pp. 9789.
150
chapter four
This use of Ibn Kammnas Sharh al-Talwh t on the issue of the soul
shows that Nayrz was aware of the strength of Ibn Kammna on this
issue. It is also to be noted that in all the issues on which he quotes Ibn
Kammna, he refrains from ever criticizing the latters position. There is
only one exception, namely Ibn Kammnas idea of the pre-eternity of
the soul (azaliyyat al-nafs), on which he adopts a distinctive position.47
Ibn Kammnas syllogism for pre-eternity of the soul runs as follows:
The soul is simple. (2) Everything originated in time (h dith zamn) is
not simple. Therefore, the soul is not temporally originated.
The first premise, the simplicity of the soul, was an idea agreed upon
by many philosophers including Ibn Sn.48 For the second premise,
Ibn Kammna again sets a syllogism:
The cause of everything originated in time is compound. (2) It is implausible that something compound causes something simple. Therefore, every
temporally originated thing is not simple.
Ibn Kammna argues that when the cause is complete, its effect is
inevitably there (al-mall yastah l takhallufihu an al-illa al-tmma).49
In the case of an effect that is originated in time, the completion of
the cause occurs at the very moment of the origination of the effect.
This is only plausible if part of the complete cause (al-illa al-tmma)
is also temporally originated at the same moment of the origination
of the effect. Therefore, the complete cause of something temporally
originated should be composed of two parts: a temporally originated
part and a continuously existent part (mawjd dim al-wujd).50
On the other hand, the emanation of the simple from the compound
is impossible. When a compound causes an effect, Ibn Kammna argues,
every part of the compound, in one way or another, influences the
effect. Hence, it is implausible for the effect to be simple. It follows that
47
Ibn Kammn discusses this issue in a number of his writings. See Ibn Kammna,
Sharh al-Talwh t [al-Tanqh t f Sharh al-Talwh t], ed. Ziai & Alwishah, pp. 43042;
Maqla f Azaliyyat al-nafs wa-baqih, Azaliyyat al-nafs wa-baqih, ed. Insiyah
Barkhh, Tehran 1385/2006, pp. 11021; eadem, Maqla f anna al-nafs laysat bi-mizj
al-badan, Azaliyyat al-nafs wa-baqih, pp. 15961; eadem, Risla f abadiyyat al-nafs
wa-baqih wa-bastatih, Azaliyyat al-nafs wa-baqih, pp. 198202.
48
On the view of Ibn Sn on this issue, see al-fann al-sdis min al-tabiyyt min
Kitb al-Shif, in Psychology dibn sn (avicenne) daprs son uvre a-if, ed. &
trans. Jn Bako, Paris 1982, vol. 1, pp. 22431.
49
Ibn Kammna, Maqla f Azaliyyat al-nafs wa-baqih, p. 110.
50
Ibn Kammna, Maqla f anna l-nafs laysat bi-mizj al-badan, p. 161.
151
51
For a detailed study of Ibn Kammnas arguments for the eternity of the human
soul, see Lukas Muehlethaler, Ibn Kammna (d. 683/1284) on the Eternity of the
Human Soul. The Three Treatises on the Soul and Related Texts, PhD Dissertation,
Yale 2009.
52
See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 81b, and compare with Ibn
Kammna, Sharh al-Talwh t [al-Tanqh t f Sharh al-Talwh t], ed. Ziai & Alwishah,
pp. 4304.
53
See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 176ab.
54
See Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, ff. 118a119a.
152
chapter four
The sages and the sovereigns of ancient Persia all concurred that each
species, among the celestial spheres and stars as well as the simple and
compound elements, has a lord (or angel) in the world of light, who is
a separate Intellect managing this species. It is the same thing that our
Prophet points to by saying that each thing has an angel and continues
that for each drop of rain an angel goes down. The sages of old Persia
professed the existence of the lords (or angels) of the species, and called a
great number of them by different names. They called the lord (or angel)
of water Khurdd, the lord (or angel) of the trees Murdd, the lord (or
angel) of fire Urdbihisht. It is this intellect which is regulator and guardian of the [members of] the species of fire, and which gives to them light,
regulates the cone of the flame, and attracts oil or wax towards the flame.
For each bodily species they determined an angel, who expresses for it an
extreme solicitude. It is he who makes it grow, nourishes it, and makes
it reproduce, as these various activities in the plant and in the animal
proceed through an unconscious energy. The process is also unconscious
in us; otherwise it should have come to our knowledge. The angel of
a species is a light in its substance belonging to the immaterial world.
These are the lights about which Empedocles spoke and others among the
metaphysical philosophers (al-h ukam al-mutaallihn) like Pythagoras.55
55
Nayrz, Misbh al-arwh , MS ehid Ali 1739, f. 192b. It is quoted from Qutb
al-Dn al-Shrzs Sharh H ikmat al-ishrq, pp. 357:22358:11.
56
See Corbin, Philosophie iranienne et philosophie compare, p. 98. Elsewhere, in
his LArchange empourpr, Corbin translates this passage into French (see p. 126).
Nayrz provides no further explanation concerning the nature of the Lords of Species
and the philosophical consequences of their existence. Similar to Nayrz, Mull Sadr
approves this idea. But unlike Nayrz he expounds it further. See Fazlur Rahman, The
Philosophy of Mull Sadr (Sadr al-Dn al-Shrz), Albany 1975, pp. 489.
APPENDIX I
...
...
154
appendix i
Manuscripts
MS Malik 2614/1, ff. 2b22a, copied from the autograph in Isfahan in
Rab I 1032/January 1623 (Cat. vol. 6, p. 71).
Criticism
Risla f Tahqq al-zwiya by Nas r al-Bayn b. Nr al-Ayn al-Kzirn,
completed in 950/154344, preserved in MS Marw 877 (ff. 43b48b),
consisting of three chapters: 1) on definitions of the angle; 2) on the
views of later scholars; and 3) the views of Khafr and Nayrz (who is
referred to as al-fdil al-kmil mawln al-H jj Mahmd al-Nayrz)
on the issue and the authors rejection of these. According to gh
Buzurg, two other manuscripts of this work are preserved in the private
libraries of Mrz Abd Allh Tihrn (copy completed on 13 Ramadn
950/10 December 1543) and Sayyid Rid Is fahn (copy completed on
13 Dh al-Qada 950/7 February 1544) (see Dhara, vol. 12, p. 12, no.
68; Tabaqt, vol. 7, p. 243).
1.1.2. Rislat Ithbt al-wjib/ Risla f l-wjib wa-l-mumtani
On the proofs for the existence of God, dedicated to Ns ir al-Dn, the
vizier of Sultn Ahmad Kr-Kiy.
In his commentary on the Rislat Ithbt al-wjib al-jadda of Dawn
[see below no. 1.2.4.], completed in 921/15156, Nayrz refers to this
work as follows (MS ehid Ali Paa 2761, ff. 4b5a):
155
.
Beginning (MS Malik 688/6, f. 115b):
156
appendix i
Manuscripts
Malik 688/6, ff. 115b148a, copied from the autograph in 918/15123,
with glosses on the margin (Cat. vol. 5, p. 148).
Copyists colophon:
.
1.2. Commentaries
Manuscripts
H akm 59, copied from the autograph by H usayn b. H aydar al-Karak
al-Amil, copy completed on 28 Ramadn 1021/22 November 1612
(Cat. vol. 5, p. 425; Dhara, vol. 13, p. 141, no. 469; Tabaqt, vol. 7,
p. 244).
Colophon of the scribe:
...
157
.
Private collection of Muhammad al-Samw library, copied by Abd
al-Fatth b. Mrz Muqm (Dhara, vol. 13, p. 141, no. 469).
Private collection of Sayyid Muhammad Bqir Isfahn; the present location of the manuscript is unknown (Dhara, vol. 13, p. 141, no. 469).
1.2.2. Tah rr Tajrd al-aqid/Sharh Tajrd al-itiqd
A commentary on the Tajrd al-itiqd of Nasr al-Dn al-Ts, completed
on 2 Rab I 919/8 May 1513 (Mudarris Ridaw, p. 430; Sadry Khy,
p. 175). The author refers to this work in his Sharh Hidyat al-H ikma
(MS Ridaw 175hikmat f. 169b), Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq (Ridaw
1088, f.108a), and Misbh al-arwh f kashf haqiq al-Alwh (MS Ragp
853, ff. 108a, 134b).
The beginning (MS Ihy-i mrth 1849, ff. 1b3a):
158
appendix i
159
.
- -
160
appendix i
[ : ]
: ]
.
. [
.
End (MS Princeton 70, f. 121a):
161
[ ]
.
Authors colophon (Princeton 70, f. 121a; Mill Frs 55, f. 260a):
Manuscripts
Majlis 3968, ff. 1b324b, with the name of the author mentioned on
the title page (Cat. vol. 10(4), pp. 21069; Mudarris Ridaw, p. 430;
Sadry Khy, p.175). Contains two fragments of the text written by
two different hands. The first fragment begins near the end of the
commentators introduction (f. 1b) and ends in the middle of Chapter
Three on ilhiyyt (f. 276b:2).
The beginning of the first fragment (f.1b):
...
[...]
162
appendix i
[...]
[...]
Princeton 70, ff. 1b121a (Cat. (1987), pp. 32930, no. 1460), corrupt and incomplete at the beginning and throughout, completed
on 1 Rabi I 1100/24 December 1688, copied by Sharaf al-Dn b.
Zayn al-Dn al-Nn at the request of Mrz Muhammad Ashraf
al-H usayn (d. 1130/1718) from the autograph. The manuscript
contains two fragments of the text. The first fragment starts at the
beginning of Chapter Three (f. 1b) and concludes near the end of
Chapter Four (f. 87a). It ends as follows:
...
The second fragment starts at the beginning of Chapter Six (f. 89a
[ff. 87b88b being blank]) and extends to the end of the commentary (f. 121a).
Copyists colophon (f. 121a):
163
...
Ihy-i mrth 1849, ff. 3b194b, incomplete at the end, extends to the
conclusion of Chapter One (Cat. vol. 5, pp. 2668).
1.2.3. Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq wa-l-kalm
164
appendix i
165
:
:
[...]
...
...
...
...
.
Manuscripts
Ridaw 1088, ff. 1b261b, containing the first part on logic only (Cat.
vol. 1, pp. 32930; cf. Dhara, vol. 6, p. 54, no. 271, vol. 13/163, no.
555). The front page contains the following note:
Another note in Persian on the same page written by the same scribe
states that the above note was written by Ghyth al-Dn Mans r
al-Dashtak on the first folio of the manuscript of the text he used.
166
appendix i
[...]
Yeni Cami 1181, ff.102b107b, containing a fragment from the beginning of the first part on logic; it ends abruptly as follows:
[...]
[...]
. .
Colophon:
...
.
Marash 13793/8, ff. 163189 (Cat. vol. 34, pp. 8323), containing a
fragment from the beginning of the first part on logic. It is undated,
167
[...]
The front page contains the same note by Ghiyth al-Dn al-Dashtak
which is extant in MS Ridaw 1088. According to the writer of the
catalogue (Cat. vol. 34, p. 833) this is not an autograph.
Gulpygn 293, ff. 1b-62b (Cat. vol. 1, p. 293), incomplete at the end.
It ends abruptly as follows:
[...]
168
appendix i
.
[...]
:
End (MS Majlis 1841, f. 156a):
Manuscripts
Majlis 1842/9, ff. 59a105b [pp. 117210, the text is actually paginated
and not foliated], copied by Jafar b. Bb b. Muhammad Bqir
al-Tabrz, probably in the 13th/19th century. The authors introduction is missing (Cat. vol. 5, pp. 3012). The text of the MS starts as
follows:
[...]
169
Majlis 1841, ff. 3a156b, copied in 1040/16301 (Cat. vol. 5, pp. 299
301). The scribe collated the copy of the text, which he used as the
base together with another recension of the text, as is indicated in
the margin of the text. The colophon reads as follows:
170
appendix i
: .
: .
:
! !
. ! :
171
[...]
172
appendix i
.
:
.
Manuscripts
Carullah 1327. ff. 1b218b, copied from the autograph, which was
completed in Isfahan in Safar 916/ May1510. On f. 218b, the date
942/15356 is given, indicating possibly the date of copying.
Ridaw 175, ff. 3b192b, incomplete at the end, covers the section
on physics and the beginning of the metaphysics section. It has an
endowment note dated 1067/16567 (Cat. vol. 1, p. 160; cf. Dhara,
vol. 14, pp. 1756, no. 2059). It ends abruptly as follows (corresponding to MS Carullah Efendi 1327, f. 176a:5):
173
:
.
:
: :
174
appendix i
175
.
End (MS ehid Ali Paa 1739, ff. 208a209a):
: .
176
appendix i
177
: :
[...]
End of the commentary on the postscript (MS ehid Ali Paa 1739,
f. 213a):
Manuscripts
Ragp 853, ff. 1b277a, copied from the autograph by Muhammad
al-Thir al-Badakhsh, copy completed on 1 Jumd II 1095/16 May
1684 (cf. Ritter, p. 271).
A microfilm copy of this MS is preserved in the Hellmut Ritter Microfilm Collection at Uppsala: M.F. Ritter/Uppsala 15:3040
3046a [The microfilm is apparently incomplete at the end and not
legible at the very beginning] (Cat. p. 107).
ehid Ali Paa 1739, ff. 2b213a, complete, copied by the son of the
author, Muhammad b. Hjj Mahmd, copy completed on 2 Rabi
I 943/10 September 1536 from the autograph that had been completed on 5 Rabi II 933/9 January 1527.
Copyists colophon (f. 209a):
178
appendix i
179
Manuscripts
safiyya 58 mantiq, ff. 6, 23 lines per page, copied by the authors son
(Ibn Hajj Mahmd), copy completed on 1 Jumd I 942/28 October 1535 (Cat. vol. 2, p. 519).
1.3.2. Talqa al l-Mawqif
Glosses on the commentary of Mr Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjn (d.
816/14134) on the Mawqif of Adud al-Dn al-j. Reference to the
glosses was made in the authors Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq (Ridaw
1088, f. 31a).
So far, no MS of the text has been discovered.
1.3.3. Talqa al l-h awshiyya al-Sharfiyya al sharh al-Risla
al-Shamsiyya
Glosses on the glosses of Mr Sayyid al-Sharf al-Jurjn on the commentary of Qutb al-Dn al-Rz on the Risla al-Shamsiyya of Najm
al-Dn al-Dabrn al-Ktib. References to the glosses were made in the
authors Sharh Tahdhb al-mantiq (Ridaw 1088, ff. 71a, 161b).
So far, no MS of the text has been discovered.
1.3.4. H shiya al H ikmat al-ishrq wa-sharh ihi
Glosses on the H ikmat al-ishrq of Shihb al-Dn al-Suhraward and on
Qutb al-Dn al-Shrzs commentary on the work. Dedicated to Nsir
al-Dn, the vizier of sultan Ahmad Krkiy (cf. Ritter, pp. 2778).1
Introduction (MS Laleli 2523, f. 2b):
1
Ritter rendered the name of the person to whom the glosses are dedicated as
Nas r al-Dn Sadd. However, it is more likely that his correct name was Nsir
al-Dn, as the name Nsir is repeated twice in the introduction (once in the beginning
as al-Ns ir li-l-haqq and the second time as Ns iran li-l-Islm). Moreover, Nayrz
dedicated his Ithbt al-wjib to a certain Nsir al-Dn in Gln. Ritters suggestion
that the sultan Ahmad Bahdur Khn mentioned in the text is perhaps the Aqquyunlu
ruler who was killed in 903/1497 (Sultan Ahmad Gwde b. Ughurlu Muhammad) is
also incorrect.
180
appendix i
181
.
The first gloss (MS Marash 4266, f. 7a):
...
.
Manuscripts
Laleli 2523, on the margins of Sharh H ikmat al-Ishrq of Qutb al-Dn
al-Shrz, distinguished from other glosses by the sign at the end:
On f. 3a, there are some notes, the first, in which the commentator
of the text and the author of the glosses are introduced, written
by someone who seems to have known Nayrz in person, since he
refers to Nayrz with the title, Najm al-Dn:
Note no. 1.
(
)
182
appendix i
Note no. 3.
" :
: . :
:
.
: .
". .
. : .
183
. .
Note no. 4.
The number of glosses amounts to 889. These appear on the following folios according to the foliation of the codex:
ff. 54a (1 gloss), 55b (10 glosses), 56a (4), 56b (3), 57a (3), 57b
(5), 58a (4), 58b (6), 59a (8), 59b (7), 60a (6), 60b (4), 61a (5),
61b (3), 62a (5), 62b (4), 63a (3), 63b (4), 64a (2), 64b (2), 65a
(2), 65b (5), 66a (3), 66b (3), 67a (1), 67b (3), 68a (3), 68b (4),
69a (5), 69b (1), 70a (3), 70b (1), 71a (2), 72b (2), 73a (4), 73b
(2), 74a (5), 74b (5), 75a (6), 75b (4), 76b (4), 77a(2), 77b (2),
78a (4), 78b (3), 79a (3), 79b (5), 80a (4), 80b (3), 81a (2), 82a
(1), 82b (2), 83a (2), 83b (2), 84a (3), 84b (3), 85a (3), 85b (3),
86a (4), 86b (2), 87a (2), 88a (2), 88b (4), 89a (4), 89b (1), 90a
(5), 90b (5), 91a (6), 91b (6), 92a (2), 92b (3), 93a (2), 93b (5),
94a (4), 94b (5), 95a (1), 95b (2), 96a (7), 96b (2), 97a (7), 97b
(5), 98a (2), 98b (6), 99a (3), 99b (4), 100a (2), 100b (4), 101a
(2), 101b (2), 102b (3), 103a (1), 103b (2), 104a (1), 104b (2),
105a (1), 105b (2), 106a (1), 108a (1), 108b (4), 109a (6), 109b
(3), 110a (6), 110b (3), 111a (4), 111b (2), 112a (1), 112b (1),
113a (3), 113b (1), 114b (4), 115a (4), 115b (3), 116b (5), 117a
(3), 117b (6), 118a (4), 118b (2), 119a (3), 119b (4), 120a (4),
120b (5), 121a (3), 121b (2), 122a (5), 122b (7), 123a (5), 123b
(5), 124a (8), 124b (4), 125a (3), 125b (4), 126a (3), 126b (5),
127a (5), 127b (2), 128a (2), 128b (3), 129a (4), 129b (3), 130a
(2), 130b (3), 131a (3), 132a (2), 133a (3), 133b (1), 134a (3),
134b (5), 135a (3), 135b (8), 136a (5), 136b (3), 137a (3), 137b
(3), 138a (4), 138b (3), 139a (1), 139b (3), 140a (2), 140b (2),
141a (2), 141b (1), 142a (2), 142b (5), 143a (2), 143b (4), 144a
(6), 144b (1), 145a (6), 145b (3), 146a (4), 146b (4), 147a (2),
147b (2), 148a (2), 148b (6), 149a (3), 149b (4), 150a (3), 151b
(2), 152a (3), 152b (1), 153a (3), 153b (2), 154a (4), 154b (2),
184
appendix i
155a (3), 155b (2), 156a (3), 156b (5), 157a (1), 157b (2), 158a
(5), 158b (3), 159a (2), 159b (1), 160a (2), 160b (4), 161a (2),
161b (4), 162a (5), 162b (2), 163a (3), 163b (2), 164a (5), 164b
(3), 165a (3), 165b (2), 166a (6), 166b (2), 167a (5), 167b (4),
168a (4), 168b (6), 169a (1), 169b (3), 170a (4), 170b (4), 171a
(3), 171b (4), 172a (6), 172b (3), 173a (1), 173b (2), 174a (4),
174b (7), 175a (5), 175b (4), 176a (2), 176b (3), 177a (3), 177b
(1), 178a (4), 178b (6), 179a (3), 179b (5), 180a (5), 180b (8),
181a (2), 181b (2), 182a (4), 182b (6), 183a (4), 183b (5), 184a
(3), 184b (6), 185a (6), 185b (4), 186a (4), 187a (3), 187b (4),
188a (7), 188b (5), 189a (5), 189b (5), 190a (2), 190b (2), 191b
(3), 192a (1).
Colophon at the end of the glosses (f. 193b):
...
185
(4), 69a (1), 70b (3), 71a (2), 71b (3), 72a (5), 72b (4), 73a (3), 73b
(3), 74a (3), 75a (2), 76b (3), 77a (2), 77b (4), 78b (4), 79a (5), 79b
(4), 80b (3), 81a (2), 81b (2), 82a (4), 82b (4), 83a (2), 83b (6), 84a
(3), 84b (3), 85a (2), 86a (1), 86b (1), 87a (3), 87b (1), 88a (4), 88b
(3), 89a (3), 89b (2), 90a (2), 91a (1), 92a (2), 92b (3), 93a (4), 93b
(3), 94a (2), 94b (5), 95a (6), 95b (5), 96a (6), 96b (1), 97a (4), 97b
(2), 98a (2), 98b (3), 99a (2), 99b (3), 100a (1), 100b (2), 101a (4),
101b (5), 102a (4), 102b (5), 103a (4), 104b (1), 104a (4), 104b (3),
105a (3), 105b (3), 106a (2), 106b (3), 107a (2), 107b (3), 108a (2),
109a (1), 109b (2), 110a (1), 110b (1), 111a (2), 111b (1), 112a (1),
112b (1), 113a (1), 115b (2), 116a (2), 116b (7), 117a (2), 117b (4),
118a (4), 118b (5), 119a (1), 120b (3), 121a (1), 121b (2), 122a (2),
123a (1), 123b (3), 124a (3), 124b (3), 125b (2), 126a (4), 126b (3),
127a (4), 127b (4), 128a (2), 128b (3), 129a (4), 129b (3), 130a (4),
130b (3), 131a (3), 131b (1), 132a (3), 132b (5), 133a (3), 133b (3),
134a (6), 134b (5), 135a (5), 135b (4), 136a (1), 136b (4), 137a (2),
137b (3), 138a (5), 138b (2), 139a (2), 139b (1), 140a (2), 140b (4),
141a (4), 141b (2), 142b (4), 143a (2), 144a (1), 144b (2), 145a (1),
145b (2), 146b (2), 147a (5), 148b (3), 148a (2), 149b (6), 149a (5),
149b (3), 150a (2), 150b (2), 151a (3), 151b (2), 152a (3), 153a (2),
153b (2), 154a (2), 154b (2), 155a (1), 155b (1), 156a (2), 156b (2),
157a (4), 158a (3), 158b (6), 159a (2), 159b (2), 160a (7), 160b (1),
161a (4), 161b (3), 162a (2), 162b (1), 163a (2), 163b (3), 164a (7),
164b (2), 165a (4), 165b (2), 166a (2), 167a (1), 167b (1), 168a (3),
168b (1), 169a (2), 169b (3), 170a (2), 170b (3), 171a (1), 171b (2),
172a (2), 172b (4), 173a (5), 173b (1), 174a (2), 174b (4), 175a (2),
175b (2), 176a (2), 176b (1), 177a (2), 177b (4), 178a (2), 178b (3),
179a (5), 179b (1), 180a (2), 180b (4), 181a (2), 181b (5), 182a (2),
182b (2), 183a (4), 183b (6), 184a (2), 184b (4), 185a (4), 185b (3),
186a (4), 186b (1), 187a (3), 187b (3), 188a (2), 188b (4), 189a (3),
189b (4), 190a (4), 190b (2), 191a (3), 192a (5), 192b (7), 193a (5),
193b (3), 194a (3), 194b (2), 195a (2), 196a (4), 196b (5), 197a (3),
197b (3), 198a (5), 198b (5), 199a (4), 199b (2), 200a (2), 200b (3),
201a (4), 201b (3), 202a (5), 202b (3), 203a (4), 203b (6), 204a (4),
204b (3), 205b (2), 206a (4), 206b (4), 207a (4), 207b (4), 208a (5),
208b (2), 209a (3), 210b (3), 211a (1).
Marash 4266, autograph, on the margins of Sharh H ikmat al-Ishrq of
Qut b al-Dn al-Shraz, copied by Najm al-Dn Mahmd al-Nayrz,
the copy of the commentary was completed on 14 Safar 897/16
December 1491(Cat. vol. 11, p. 268). The codex does not contain
186
appendix i
187
188
appendix i
al-wjib (see above, no. 1.1.2)is not mentioned. There are, however,
two signs pointing to Nayrz being their author: first, the glossist refers
to Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak as al-Ustdh al-muhaqqq and second,
189
Manuscripts
Majlis 1887, ff. 1a64a, containing Dawns Shawkil al-hr f sharh
Haykil al-nr, Dawns additional glosses )distinguished by the signature ) and Nayrzs glosses (distinguished by the signature ),
copied by Muhammad b. H jj Mahmd al-Nayrz, copy completed
on 28 Ramadn 943/10 March 1537, incomplete in the beginning
(precisely speaking, the first folio of the text and the glosses is missing). Altogether, there are 560 glosses distinguished by the signature
, which appear on the following folios: 1a (2 glosses), 1b (9), 2a
(6), 2b (6), 3a (6), 3b (5), 4a (4), 4b (7), 5a (3), 5b (5), 6a (4), 6b (4),
7a (5), 7b (8), 8a (3), 8b (3), 9a (5), 9b (5), 10a (5), 10b (5), 11a (2),
12a (3), 12b (6), 13a (6), 13b (1), 14a (1), 15a (1), 15b (1), 16b (5),
17a (1), 17b (2), 18a (2), 18b (5), 19a (4), 20a (8), 20b (3), 21a (3),
22a (5), 22b (7), 23a (4), 23b (6), 24a (4), 24b (4), 25a (3), 25b (6),
26a (7), 26b (6), 27a (4), 27b (9), 28a (6), 28b (3), 29b (5), 30a (5),
30b (9), 31a (3), 31b (10), 32a (6), 32b (6), 33a (6), 33b (3), 34a (6),
34b (1), 35a (2), 35b (3), 36a (3), 36b (9), 37a (6), 37b (4), 38a (1),
38b (12), 39a (6), 39b (6), 40a (7), 40b (6), 41a (9), 41b (5), 42a (7),
42b (6), 43a (8), 43b (2), 44a (7), 44b (4), 45a (8), 45b (5), 46a (6),
46b (4), 47a (6), 47b (3), 48a (8), 48b (3), 49a (6), 49b (5), 50a (9),
50b (5), 51a (8), 51b (8), 52a (5), 52b (4), 53a (6), 53b (5), 54a (4),
54b (6), 55a (7), 55b (2), 56a (2), 56b (1), 57a (1), 57b (6), 58b (4),
59a (3), 59b (1), 60b (4), 61a (3), 61b (5), 62a (3), 63a (1), 43b (3).
Colophon of the author (f. 64a):
190
appendix i
2. Works of Uncertain Authorship
2.1. Matin al-thaltha
[...]
Manuscript
Ilhiyyt 749 D/24, ff. 271b274b, incomplete at the end, copied in
Safar 1130/January 1718, as is evident from some other writings in
the same codex copied by the same hand. The codex contains some
works of the scholars of Shiraz from the 9th and 10th / 15th and
16th centuries. It ends abruptly as follows:
[...]
191
192
appendix i
...
...
...
Copyists colophon:
. .
APPENDIX II
194
appendix ii
6) Rislat al-Ars of Ibn Sn, Arabic (Dhara, vol. 15, p. 253, no.
1631);
7) Khutbat al-Tamjd of Ibn Sn, Arabic (Dhara, vol. 7, p. 184, no.
943, vol. 7, p. 202, no. 990);
8) Tafsr-i Srat al-Al of Fakhr al-Dn al-Rz (Chapter Two of K.
al-Tanbh), attributed in this codex to Ibn Sn, Arabic (Dhara,
vol. 4, p. 336, no. 1444);
9) Sharh Khutbat al-Tamjd of Umar Khayym, Persian (Dhara, vol.
7, p. 202, no. 990, vol. 13, p. 220, no. 779);
10) Anjm nma/ ghz u anjm of Afdal al-Dn al-Kshn, in this
codex attributed to Nas r al-Dn al-Ts, Persian (Dhara, vol. 2,
p. 264, no. 1479, vol. 1, p. 36, no. 173);
11) Jvdn nma of Afdal al-Dn al-Kshn, Persian (Dhara, vol. 5,
p. 77, no. 307);
12) Qurda-i tabiyyt of Muhammad Qin, in the codex attributed to
Ibn Sin (Nayrz is said to have doubted this attribution), Persian
(Dhara, vol. 17, p. 65, no. 352);
13) Risla f man al-harf of Ab Ishq Muhammad Ibn Abd Allh
al-Nayrz, Persian, copied in 908/15023 (Dhara, vol. 21, p. 274,
no. 5030);
14) H all mughlatat al-jadhr al-asamm of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak,
Arabic (Dhara, vol. 5, p. 92);
15) Ithbt al-wjib of Sadr al-Dn al-Dashtak, Arabic, copied in Rab
I 903/1498 (Dhara, vol. 1, p. 108, no. 384; Tabaqt, vol. 7, p. 244);
16) H all mughlatat al-jadhr al-asamm/ H all mughlata kullu kalm
kdhib (Nihyat al-kalm f hall shubhat kulli kalm kdhib of
Jall al-Dn al-Dawn, Arabic (Dhara, vol. 7, pp. 7677, n. 409);
17) H awshi al R. H all mughlatat al-jadhr al-asamm/ H all mughlatat
kullu kalm kdhib (Nihyat al-kalm f hall shubhat kulli kalm
kdhib) of Nayrz, Arabic (Dhara, vol. 7, pp. 7677, no. 409);
18) Unmdhaj al-ulm of Jall al-Dn al-Dawn, Arabic (Dhara,
vol. 2, pp. 4078, no. 1627);
19) Sharh al Unmdhaj al-ulm of Nayrz, Arabic (Dhara, vol. 2,
pp. 4067, no. 1627, vol. 6, p. 26, no.102; Tabaqt, 7/244).
According to gh Buzurg, Nayrz refers to himself at the end of the
codex as follows:
[...]
195
APPENDIX III
...
. :
197
APPENDIX IV
.1
.2
: .3
.4
199
.5
200
appendix IV
( )
.6
.7
.8
.
:
....9
:
:]
201
.10
.11
.12
.13
202
appendix IV
.14
+]
204
205
206
207
Gutas, Dimitri: The study of Arabic philosophy in the twentieth century, British
Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 29 i (2002), pp. 515.
H akm = Maktabat al-H akm, Najaf
Catalogue:
Muhammad Taq Dnishpazhh, Fihrist-i kitbkhnah-yi Irq u Arabistn, vol. 5,
Tehran 1346/19678.
H jj Khalfa: Kashf al-zunn an asm al-kutub wa-l-funn 12, Tehran 1387/1967.
Ibn Arab: Fuss al-h ikam, ed. Abu al-Al al-Aff, Beirut [1966].
Ibn Kammna, Izz al-Dawala: Kalimt wajza mushtamila al nukat lat fa f l-ilm
wa-l-amal, Reza Pourjavady & Sabine Schmidtke, A Jewish Philosopher of Baghdad.
Izz al-Dawla Ibn Kammna (D. 683/1284) and His works, Leiden 2006, pp. 13985.
Maqla f anna l-nafs laysat bi-mizj al-badan, Azaliyyat al-nafs wa-baqih,
ed. Insiyah Barkhh, Tehran 1385/2006, pp. 14977.
Maqla f azaliyyat al-nafs wa-baqih, Azaliyyat al-nafs wa-baqih, ed. Insiyah
Barkhh, Tehran 1385/2006, pp. 87138.
Risla f abadiyyat al-nafs wa-baqih wa-basta tih, Azaliyyat al-nafs
wa-baqih, ed. Insiyah Barkhh, Tehran 1385/2006, pp. 193208.
al-Tanqh t f sharh al-talwh t, ed. Sayyid H usayn Sayyid Msaw, PhD
Dissertation: University of Tehran, Tehran 137576/19967.
al-Tanqh t f sharh al-talwh t. Refinement and Commentary on Suhrawards
Intimations. A Thirteenth Century Text on Natural Philosophy and Psychology, eds.
Hossein Ziai & Ahmad Alwishah, Costa Mesa 2003.
Ibn Khallikn: Wafayt al-ayn wa-anb al-zamn 18, ed. Ih sn Abbs, Beirut
138892/196872.
Ibn Sn: The Metaphysics of the Healing: A Parallel English and Arabic text, translated
introduced and annotated by Michael E. Marmura, Provo/Utah 2005.
al-Talqt, ed. Abd al-Rahmn al-Badaw, Cairo 1975 [reprint Qum 1379/2000].
al-Fann al-sdis min al-t abiyyt min Kitb al-Shif, in Psychology dibn sn
(avicenne) daprs son uvre a-if 12, ed. & trans. Jn Bako, Paris 1982.
Uyn al-h ikma, ed. H ilm Ziya lken, Ankara 1953.
Ih y-i mrth = Markaz-i ih y-i mrth-i Islm (The Islamic Heritage Revivale
Center), Qum
Catalogue:
Sayyid Ahmad H usayn Ishkiwar, Fihrist-i Nuskhah-yi Markaz-i ih y-i mrth-i
Islm, vol. 5, Qum 1382/2003.
Ilh Ardabl, Kaml al-Dn H usayn: Kashf al-asrr, Majma rasil-i khatt -i frs,
ed. Najb Myil Hiraw, 1 (Mashhad 1368/198990), pp. 15167.
Sharh -i Gulshan-i rz, ed. Muhammad Rid Barzigar Khliq & Iffat Karbs,
Tehran 1376/19978.
Ilhiyyt = Kitbkhna-yi Danishkadah-i Ilhiyyt u Marif-I Islm Collection (held
at the Central Library of the University of Tehran), Tehran
Catalogue:
Muhammad Bqir H ujjat, Fihrist-i nuskhah-yi khatt -i Kitbkhna-yi Danishkadah-i
Ilhiyyt u Marif-I Islm 12, Tehran 134548/19669.
Ilhiyyt-i Mashhad = Kitbkhna-yi Danishkada-yi Ilhiyyt u marif-i Islm-i
Danishgh-i Firdaws, Mashhad.
nalcik, H.: Filori, The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition, vol. 2, pp. 9145.
Ishrq, Karm: Buzurgn-i jahrum, Tehran 1351/1972.
Izutsu, Toshihiko: Basic Problems of Abstract Quiddity, Mantiq u mabh ith-i alfz
(Collected Texts and Papers on Logic and Language), eds. M. Mohaghegh & T. Izutsu,
Tehran 1974, pp. 125.
al-Jurjn, Mr al-Sayyid al-Sharf: H shiya li-Mr al-Sayyid Sharf al-Jurjn al sharh
Shams al-Dn al-Isfahn li-Tajrd al-itiqd (al-maqsad al-awwal), ed. Shuj Bghn
H riyya, MA Dissertation, University of Qum, 1379/2000.
208
209
Ramazan een, Cevat Izgi & Cemil Akpinar. Presented by Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu:
Fihris makhttt Maktabat Kprl. Catalogue of manuscripts in the Kprl Library
13, Istanbul 1406/1986.
Kohlberg, Etan: al-D ara el tasnf al-a, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater,
vol. 7, London & New York 1997, pp. 356.
Khr Shh b. Qubd al-H usayn: Trkh-i Ilchi Nizm Shh, eds. Muhammad Rid
Nasr & Koichi Haneda, Tehran 1379/2000.
Lhj, Shams al-Dn Muh a mmad: Mafth al-ijz f sharh Gulshan-i rz, eds.
Muhammad Rid Barzigar Khliq & Iffat Karbs, Tehran 1371/1992.
Landolt, Hermann: Suhrawards Tale of Initiation. Review Article, Journal of the
American Oriental Society (1987), pp. 47586.
Lr, Muslih al-Dn Muh ammad: Mirt al-adwr wa mirqt al-akhbr. Fasl- dar
sharh-i hl-i buzurgn-i Khursn u Mwar al-nahr u Frs, ed. rif Nawshh,
Marif, 13 iii (Isfand 1375/March 1997), pp. 91113.
Lleli = Lleli Collection (held at the Sleymanie Ktphanesi), Istanbul
Catalogues:
Defter-i Ktphane-i Lleli. Istanbul 1311/1894. Rescher, Oskar, ber arabische
Handschriften der Llel-Moschee. (Nebst einigen anderen, noch unbeschriebenen
Codices), Monde Oriental 7 (1913), pp. 97136.
Malikshh, H asan: Tarjuma u tafsr-i Tahdhb al-mantiq, Tehran 1363/1984.
Madelung, Wilferd: Al-Taftazan und die Philosophie, Logik und Theologie. Das
Organon im arabischen und im lateinischen Mittelalter, eds. Dominik Perler & Ulrich
Rudolph, Leiden 2006, pp. 22736.
Mahamedi, Hamid: Davn, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, vol. 7, London
& New York 1997, pp. 12932.
Mahdaw, Yahy: Fihrist-i nuskhah-yi musannaft-i Ibn Sn. Tehran 1954/1333.
Mahmd b. Uthmn: Firdaws al-murshidiyya f l-asrr al-samadiyya, ed. Iraj Afshr,
Tehran 1333/1954.
Majlis = Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm Library Tehran
Catalogue:
Abd al-H usain al-H ir, [et al.], Fihrist-i Kitbkhna-yi Majlis-i Shr-yi Mill 1,
Tehran 130557/192678.
Majlis-i Sin = Majlis-i Sin Collection (held in Majlis-i Shr-yi Islm Library, Tehran)
Catalogue:
Muhammad Taq Dnishpazhh & Bah al-Dn Ilm Anwr, Fihrist-i kitbh-yi
khatt -i Majlis-i Sin, 1, Tehran 1355/1976.
Malik = Kitbkhna-yi mill-i Malik (National Library of Malik)
Catalogue:
raj Afshr & Muhammad Taq Dnishpazhh, in collaboration with Muhammad
Bqir H ujjat & Ahmad Munzaw, Fihrist-i nuskhah-i khatt -i Kitbkna-yi Mill-i
Malik 18, Tehran 135269/197390.
Marash = yat Allh Marash Najaf Library, Qum
Catalogue:
Ah mad H usayn & Mah md Marash Najaf, Fihrist-i Kitbkhna-yi Umm-yi
Hadrat-i yat Allh al-uzm Najaf Marash 134, Qum 135485/19752005.
Marcotte, Roxanne D.: Preliminary Notes on the Life and Work of Ab al-Abbs
al-Lawkar (d. ca. 517/1123), Anaquel de Estudios arabes, 17 (2006), pp. 13357.
Suhraward al-Maqtl, the Martyr of Aleppo, Al-Qantara 21 (2001), pp. 395419.
Marmura, Michael E.: Some Aspects of Avicennas Theory of Gods Knowledge of
Particulars, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 82, 3 (1962), pp. 299312.
Maybud, Kaml al-Dn Mr H usayn: Jm-i gt-num, ed. Abd Allh Nrn,
Tah qqt-i Islm, 1 i (1365/1986), pp. 93112.
Munshat-i Maybud, ed. Nusrat Allh Furhar, Tehran 1376/1997.
Sharh Hidyat al-h ikma, Lithograph Edition [by Karbalyi Muhammad H asan],
Tehran 1297/1879.
210
211
212
Catalogues:
Fihrist-i Kitbkhna-yi stn-i Quds-i Ridaw 121, Mashhad 130564/192685.
Muhammad sif Fikrat, Fihrist-i alifb-yi kitbkhna-yi markaz-yi stn-i Quds-i
Ridaw, Mashhad 1369/1990.
Ragp = Ragp Paa Collection (held at the Sleymanie Ktphanesi), Istanbul
Catalogues: Abdurrahman Necim Efendi, Koskada kin Sadr- Esbak Rgp Paa
Ktphanesinde mevcd olan ktb-i erifenin defteridir. Istanbul 1285/1868. Defter-i
Ktphane-i Rgp Paa. Istanbul 1310/1893.
Rahim, Ahmed H.: The Twelver- Reception of Avicenna in the Mongol Period,
Before and after Avicenna. Proceeding of the First Conference of the Avicenna Study
Group, ed. David C. Reisman with the assistance of Ahmed H. Al-Rahim, Leiden
2003, pp. 21931.
Rahman, Fazlur: The Philosophy of Mull Sadr (Sadr al-Dn al-Shrz), Albany 1975.
Rasl, Ruqayya: Taqaw, Dnishnma-yi jahn-i Islm 1, ed. Ghulm Al H addd
dil, vol. 7, Tehran 1382/2003, pp. 8067.
Rz, Amn Ahmad: Tadhkira-yi haft iqlm, ed. Sayyid Muhammad Rid T hir H asrat,
Tehran 1378/1998.
al-Rz, Qutb al-Dn: Sharh Matli al-anwr, Lithograph Edition, Istanbul 1277/1860.
Sharh Matli al-anwr, Lithograph Edition, Istanbul 1303/1885.
al-Rz, Qutb al-Dn: Tah rr al-qawid al-mantiqiyya. Sharh al-risla al-Shamsiyya liNajm al-Dn Umar b. Al b. Ktib al-Qazwn, Cairo [n.d.] [repr. Qum 1363/1984].
Reza library = Rampur Reza Library
Catalogue:
Mohammad Ajmal Khn, Fihrist-i kutub-i Arab-i mawjda-yi kitbkhna-i riysat-i
Rmpr 12, Rampur 190228.
Ridaw = stn-i Quds-i Ridaw
Catalogue:
Fihrist-i kitbkhna-yi stn-i Quds-i Ridaw, vol. 4, Mashhad 1325/1946.
Ritter = Hellmut Ritter, Philologika IX. Die vier Suhraward. Ihre Werke in Stambuler
Handschriften, Der Islam, 24 (1937), pp. 27086.
Ritter/Uppsala = Hellmut Ritter Microfilm Collection of Uppsala University Library
Catalogue:
Berhard Lewin & Oscar Lfgren, Catalogue of the Arabic Manuscripts in the Hellmut
Ritter Microfilm Collection of Uppsala University Library, including later accessions,
ed. Mikael Persenius. Uppsala 1992.
Rizvi, Sajjad H.: Mulla Sadra Shrz: His Life and Works and the Sources for Safavid
Philosophy, Oxford 2007.
Rosenthal, E. I. J.: Political Thought in Medieval Islam, Cambridge 1985.
Rml, H asan-Bay: Ah san al-tawrkh, Tehran 1357/1978.
Sabzawr, H jj Mull Hd: Sharh Ghurar al-farid or Sharh Manzuma (Part One:
Metaphysics), eds. M. Muhaqqiq & T. Izutsu, Tehran 1348/1969.
Satchiyn, Frzah: Muarrif-yi panj risla-yi Khafr dar elhiyyt u ithbt-i wjib,
Marif, 20 ii (1382/2003), pp. 98111.
Shams al-Dn Muhammad ibn Ahmad Khafr. Faylasf u munajjim-i nmdr-i
maktab-i Shirz, Kitb-i mh-i falsafa, 13 (1387/2008), pp. 69103.
Sadr al-Dn Mahallt = Kitbkhna-yi q-yi Sadr al-Dn-i Mahallt, Shiraz
Catalogue:
Muhammad Taq Dnishpazhh: Fihrist-i kitbkhna-h-yi umm wa khuss-yi
Shrz, Nuskhah-yi khatt (Nashriyya-yi Kitbkhna-yi Markaz wa-Markaz-i
Asnd-i, Dnishgh-i Tihrn) 5 (1346/1967), pp. 2714.
Sadry Khy, Al: Kitb-shins-i Tajrd al-itiqd, Qum 1424/2003.
Saliba, George: A Redevelopment of Mathematics in a Sixteenth-Century Arabic
Critique of Ptolemaic Astronomy, Perspectives arabes et mdivales sur la tradition scientifique et philosophique grecque, Actes du colloque de la SIHSPAI (Socit
internationale dhistoire des sciences et de la philosophie arabes et islamiques), Paris,
213
31 mars3 avril 1993, eds. Ahmad Hasnawi, Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal & Maroun
Aouad, Leuven/Paris 1997, pp. 10522.
The Ultimate Challenge to Greek Astronomy. H all m l yanh all of Shams
al-Khafr (d. 1550), Sic itur ad astra. Studien zur Geschichte der Mathematik und
Naturwissenschaften. Festschrift fr den Arabisten Paul Kunitzsch zum 70. Geburtstag,
eds. Menso Folkerts & Richard Lorch, Wiesbaden 2000, pp. 490505.
Writing the History of Arabic Astronomy: Problems and Different Perspectives,
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 116 (1996), pp. 70918.
A Sixteenth-Century Arabic Critique of Ptolemaic Astronomy: The Work of
Shams al-Din al-Khafr, Journal for the History of Astronomy, 25 (1994), pp. 1538.
Sm Mrz Safaw: Tadhkira-yi Tuh fa-yi Sm, ed. Rukn al-Dn Humyn Farrukh,
Tehran 1384/2005.
al-Sanandaj al-Kurdistn, Abd al-Qdir b. Muhammad: Taqrb al-marm f sharh
Tahdhb al-kalm, Lithograph Edition, Bulq 1318/1900.
Savory, Roger: Iran under the Safavids, Cambridge 1980.
Sayyid Bghjawn, Sayyid H usayn: Ibn Kaml Bsh wa-ruhu al-itiqdiyya, PhD
Dissertation, Umm Al-Qura University, Mecca 1414/1993.
Schmidtke, Sabine: The Doctrine of the Transmigration of the Soul according to
Shihb al-Dn al-Suhraward (killed 587/1191) and his followers, Studia Iranica,
28 (1999), pp. 23754.
The Influence of ams al-Dn ahrazr (7th/13th century) on Ibn Ab G umhr
al-Ahs (d. after 904/1499) A Preliminary Note, Encounters of Words and Texts.
Intercultural Studies on Honour of Stefan Wild on the Occaion of His 60th Birthday,
eds. Lutz Edzard & Christian Szyska, Hildesheim 1997, pp. 2332.
Theologie, Philosophie und Mystik im zwlferschiitischen Islam des 9./15.
Jahrhunderts. Die Gedankenwelten des Ibn Ab G umhr al-Ah s (um 838/143435
nach 906/1501). Leiden 2000.
ehid Ali = ehid Ali Paa Collection (held at the Sleymanie Ktphanesi), Istanbul
eyh Efendi, Mehmed: ekaik-i Numaniye ve zeyilleri. Vakayi l-fuzal, ed. Abdlkadir
zcan, Istanbul 1989.
al-Shahrazr, Shams al-Dn: Nuzhat al-arwh wa- rawdat al-afrh f trkh al-h ukam
12, ed. Sayyid Khurshd Ahmad, Hyderabad 1396/1976.
Sharh H ikmat al-ishrq, ed. H usayn iy, Tehran 1372/1993.
al-Shajara al-ilhiyya f ulm al-h aqiq al-rabbniyya, ed. Muhammad Najb
Krkn [Necip Grgn], PhD Dissertation, Marmara University, Istanbul 1996.
al-Shajara al-ilhiyya f ulm al-h aqiq al-rabbniyya 13, ed. Muhammad Najb
Krkn [Necip Grgn], Istanbul 2004.
al-Shajara al-ilhiyya f ulm al-h aqiq al-rabbniyya 13, Najaf-Qul H abb,
Tehran 13845/20056.
Shakb, Abd Allh: Barras-yi thr u afkr-i falsaf-i Mr Sadr al-Dn-i Dashtak,
PhD Dissertation, University of Tehran, Tehran 1355/1976.
Shinkht az ddgh-i Sadr al-mutaallihn, Khiradnma-yi Sadr, 3 (1375/1996),
pp. 617.
Shakbniy, Mahd & Reza Pourjavady: Kitb-shins-i Mr Sayyid Sharf-i Jurjn,
Marif, 19iii (1381/2003), pp. 13492.
Shams Nayrz, Muhammad Jawd: Balyn, Amn al-Dn, Dirat al-marif-i buzurg-i
islm, ed. Kzim Msaw Bujnrd, vol. 12, p. 542.
Balyn, Awhad al-Dn, Dirat al-marif-i buzurg-i islm, ed. Kzim Msaw
Bujnrd, vol. 12, pp. 5434.
Tarkh u farhang-i Nayrz, Tehran 1379/2000.
Shaykh al-H ukamy, Imd al-Dn: Balyn, Amn al-Dn, Dnishnma-yi Jahn-i
Islm, ed. Ghulm Al H addd dil, vol. 4, Tehran 1377/1998, pp. 1845.
Shshtar, Nr Allh: Majlis al-muminn 12, Tehran 1334/1955.
Spade, Paul Vincent: The Origins of the Mediaeval Insolubilia-Literature, Franciscan
Studies, 33 (1973), 292309.
214
Lies, Language and Logic in the Later Middle Ages, London, 1988.
Insolubles, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta,
Stanford, 2005 (URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2005/entries/insolubles/).
Stewart, Devin J.: Notes on the Migration of mil Scholars to Safavid Iran, Journal
of Near Eastern Studies, 55 ii (1996), pp. 81103.
al-Suhraward, Shihb al-Dn Yahy: al-Alwh al-Imdiyya, uvres philosophiques
et mystiques iv, ed. Najaf-Qul H abb, Tehran 1380/2001, pp. 178.
wz-i par-i Jibral, uvres philosophiques et mystiques iii, ed. Sayyid H usayn
Nasr, Tehran 1355/1976, pp. 20923.
Partaw-nma, in uvres philosophiques et mystiques iii, ed. Sayyid H usayn Nasr,
Tehran 1355/1976, pp. 181.
The Book of Radiance, ed. & trans. Hossein Ziai, Costa Mesa 1998.
The Philosophy of Illumination. A new Critical Edition of the Text of H ikmat
al-ishrq, ed. & trans. John Walbridge & Hossein Ziai, Provo/Utah 1999.
T abaqt = gh Burzug al-T ihrn & Al Naq Munzaw, T abaqt alm al-shia, vol.
7. Tehran 1366/1987.
T abt ab, Sayyid Jawd: Zawl-i andsha-yi sys dar rn, Tehran 1373/1994.
T abt ab, Abd al-Azz: Maktabat al-Allma al-H ill, Qum 1416/19956.
Tkprzde, Mustafa: E-aqiq En-Nomnijje, Verbesserungen und Anmerkungen
aus dem Arabischen uebersetzt von O. Rescher, Konstantinopel Galata 1927.
Thompson, W.F.: Practical Philosophy of the Muhammadan People [English translation of Jall al-Dn al-Dawns Akhlq-i Jall], London 1839 [repr. London 1890,
Karachi 1977].
Thubt, Akbar: H fiz u pr-i gul-rang, Dar h aram-i dst. Ydwra-yi ustd Sdt
Nsir, ed. Ibrhm Zri, Tehran 1370/1991, pp. 7988.
Hidyat al-hikma u Shurh-i n, Khirad-i jwidn: Jashnnma-yi ustd sayyid
Jall al-Dn shtiyn, ed. Al Asghar Muh ammadkhn & H asan Sayyid Arab,
Tehran 1378/1999, pp. 13550.
Thurayy, Muhammad: Sijill-i Uthmn ykhd Tadhkira-i mashhr-i Uthmniyya
15, Istanbul 1311/18934.
Van Ess, J.: Azod al-Din Iji, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, vol. 3,
London & New York 1989, pp. 26971.
Die Erkenntnislehre des Adudaddn al-c. bersetzung und Kommentar des ersten
Buches seiner Mawqif, Wiesbaden 1966.
Neue Materialien zur Biographie des Adudaddn al-g , Welt des Orients, 9
(1978), pp. 270ff.
Jorjni, Zayn al-Din Abul-Hasan Ali b. Mohammad b. Ali al-Hosayni,
Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 15, pp. 219.
Der Eine und das Andere. Beobachtungen an islamischen hresiographischen
Texten, Berlin 2011.
Walbridge, John: Al-Suhraward on Body as Extension: An Alternative to Hylomorphism from Plato to Leibniz, Reason and Inspiration in Islam. Theology,
Philosophy and Mysticism in Muslim thought. Essays in Honour of Hermann Landolt,
ed. Todd Lawson. London 2005, pp. 23547.
Wisnovsky, Robert: Avicennas Metaphysics in Context, London 2003.
Avicenna and Avicennian Tradition, The Cambridge Companion to Arabic
Philosophy, eds. Peter Adamson and Richard Taylor, Cambridge 2005, pp. 92136.
Woods, John E.: The Aqquyunlu: Clan, Confederation, Empire. Revised and Expanded
Edition, Salt Lake City 1999.
Al-Yfi, Ab Abd Allh: Mirt al-jinn wa-ibrat al-yaqzn 14, Lithograph Edition,
Hydarabad (Deccan) 1338/191920.
Yale University = Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Yale University.
Catalogue:
Nemoy, L., Arabic Manuscripts in the Yale University Library, New Haven 1956.
215
Yazd Mutlaq, Mah md: Iskandariyya talf-i Allma Mr Sayyid Sharf Gurgn,
Muh aqqiqnma: maqlt-i taqdm shuda bi ustd duktur Mahd Muh aqqiq, eds. Bah
al-Dn Khurramshh & Jy Jahnbakhsh, Tehran 1380/2001, vol. 2, pp. 1389447.
Yeni Cami = Yeni Cami Collection (held at the Sleymanie Ktphanesi), Istanbul
Zarkb, Ahmad: Shrz-nma, ed. Isml Wiz Jawd, Tehran 1350/1971.
Zarrnkb, A. H.: Lahdj, The Encyclopaedia of Islam (New Edition), vol. 5, Leiden
1986, pp. 6035.
Ziai, Hossein: Knowledge and Illumination. A Study of Suhrawards H ikmat al-Ishrq,
Altanta 1990.
The Illuminationist Tradition, History of Islamic Philosophy, eds. Seyyed Hossein
Nasr & Oliver Leaman, London 1996, vol. 1, pp. 46596.
The Source and Nature of Authority: a Study of al-Suhrawards Illuminationist
Political Doctrine, The Political Aspects of Islamic Philosophy. Essays in Honor of
Muhsin S. Mahdi, ed. C. E. Butterworth, Cambridge 1992, pp. 294334.
INDEX OF MANUSCRIPTS
Canada
Osler OL 478 (McGill University)
6 n.29
India
s afiyya 58 mantiq 51, 125 n.75,
1789
Raza hikmat 112 23 n.144
Iran
Dirat al-marif 359 75 n.10
Dirat al-marif 387 75 n.10
Dnishgh 1147 26 n.159
Dnishgh 1257 78 n.25
Dnishgh 2591 39 n.237
Dnishgh 3430 33 n.206
Dnishgh 4559 51 n.33
Dnishgh 5637 69 n.117
Dnishgh 6616 78 n.25
Dnishgh 6802 81 n.33
Dnishgh 7051 166
Gulpygn 293 167
Ihy-i mrth 1849 65 n.97, n.99,
123 n.67n.69, 15760, 163
Ilhiyyt 360d 32 n.204
Ilhiyyt 749d 190
Ilhiyyt-i Mashhad 614 55 n.51
Mahdaw 282 51 n.32
Majlis 184 107 n.6
Majlis 507 30 n.182, n.184, 55 n.54
Majlis 706 39 n.238, 40 n.241
Majlis 1736 85 n.44
Majlis 1752 92 n.64, n.65, n.66, n.68,
93 n.69, 94 n.72
Majlis 1762 43 n.270, 86 n.51
Majlis 1763 43 n.270
Majlis 1834 127 n.87
Majlis 1836 89 n.58
Majlis 1840 130 n.99
Majlis 1841 86 n.51, 116 n.43, 128
n.89, 130 n.101, 1679
Majlis 1842 168
Majlis 1887 61 n.82, 108 n.11, 189
Majlis 1918 34 n.209
Majlis 1937 51 n.33
Majlis 1998 94 n.73, n.75, 95 n.76,
n.77, n.78, 96 n.79, 97 n.83, 98
n.87, n.88, 101 n.94n.96
218
index of manuscripts
81 n.33
Turkey
Ahmed III 3197 187
Ahmed III 3212 187
Ali Emiri Arapa 1451 187
Carullah 1327 59 n.71, 61 n.86, 63
n.90, 107 n.6, 108 n.8, 111 n.14,
112 n.21n.23, 113 n.24n.26,
n.28n.30, 114 n.32, 121 n.57, 140
n.12, 146 n.30, 1702
Esad Efendi 3733 5 n.25, 15 n.90,
16 n.97
70 n.121
112 n.19
United States
Princeton 70 72, 108 n.9, 122 n.62,
160161, 162
Princeton 853 69 n.115
Yale L-265 4 n.19
220
221
18, 19,
222
701
30 n.189
223
224
Thompson, W. F. 10 n.5
al-Tihrn, Mrz Abd Allh 154
Tmr Lang 1
al-Turka al-Isfahn, Afdal al-Dn
Muhammad 52 n.33, 71, 193
al-Ts see Nasr al-Dn al-Ts
Tysirkn, Sayyid Ahmad 11 n.65, 89
n.58
Ulugh Bey (ruler) 24
al-Urmaw, Sirj al-Dn 2, 3 n.17, 18,
21, 30, 51 n.33, 55, 75, 80, 82, 125,
127, 178
Uzun H asan (ruler) 8, 9, 10, 20
Van Ess, Joseph
55