Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:42:33.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A note on some Karaite copies of Mu'Tazilite writings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

H. Ben-Shammai
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

MS Or. 2529 in the British Museum contains three Karaite Judaeo-Arabic fragments written in Hebrew script. The first two fragments (folios 1–95) are, according to the catalogue, ‘copies of Mahommedan philosophical works in defence of Mu'tazilite doctrines’. No author's name is given. It appears that the only reference to one of these two fragments, in an attempt to identify their author, was made by A. Ya. Borisov in his article on the Mu'tazilite MSS in the State Public Library, Leningrad. In that article Borisov described in detail 13 fragments which constitute part of the Firkovich collection. The contents of all 13 fragments are of a distinct Mu'tazilite character, but in only two of them (nos. 2 and 11 in Borisov's list) are the titles and the authors' names explicitly stated: al-Muḥīṭ, by 'Abd al-Jabbāar, and Dhakhīrat al-'ālim wa-baṣīrat al-muta'allim by al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā. Contrary to Borisov's expectations, his article has apparently not attracted the attention of scholars, except for some short bibliographical references.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , June 1974 , pp. 295 - 304
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Excerpts from this MS are hereby published with the kind permission of the Trustees of the British Museum.

2 Margoliouth, G., Catalogue of the Hebrew and Samaritan MSS in the British Museum, III, London, 1909–1915, no. 894/I–IIGoogle Scholar.

3 ‘Mu'tazilitskiye rukopisi Gosudarstvennoy Publichnoy Biblioteki v Leningrade’, Bibliografiya Vostoka, 8–9, 1935, 69–95Google Scholar: the reference to MS Or. 2529 is on p. 79 of the article.

4 This collection seems to contain many more valuable treasures of Arabic literature: see ibid., p. 70, n. 3.

5 Unfortunately Borisov elected to describe only those fragments containing 30 folios or more, and thus omitted smaller ones (cf. ibid., 71, 78), which may be of equal interest.

6 Sezgin, F., Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, I, Leiden, 1967, 625Google Scholar, is apparently copied from El, second ed., I, 59.

7 See Sezgin, loc. cit., and Hourani, G. F., Islamic rationalism, Oxford, 1971, p. 4, nn. 1–2Google Scholar.

8 Cairo and Beirut respectively, both in 1965.

9 Further references to the printed text will be given according to 'Azmi's ed. only (except for cases where textual problems are involved).

10 cf. Borisov, 74.

11 As mentioned, the BM fragment is written in Hebrew script. There is no vocalization in the MS, and I have inserted vowels in the transliteration. Other adjustments made in the transliteration are indicated in the footnotes.

12 Read

13 MS .

14 MS .

15 MS .

16 For this paragraph cf. 'Azmī, 11–14.

17 MS

18 So MS : read and cf. 'Azmī, p. 14, 11. 13–14.

19 cf. ibid.

20 cf. MS or. 2529, fols. 72b–80a (the exact wording of the titles is given in Margoliouth's, Catalogue, see above, p. 295, n. 2Google Scholar).

21 cf. the title on fol. 4b in no. 7 of Borisov's list.

22 ibid., fols. 27a–33a, 37b–50a, 66b–67b.

23 MS

24 ibid., fols. 15a–22b, 53b.

25 cf. 'Azmi's ed., 19.

26 See above, n. 21.

27 MS .

28 For the topics enumerated in both this sentence and the following one cf. 'Azmī, loc. cit.

29 cf. ibid., 306–39.

30 Note especially Kitāb al-dawāī wa 'l-ṣawārif (for which cf. also below), quoted in all three of them. According to 'Abd al-Karīm 'Uthmān, Qāḍī al-quḍāt 'Abd al-Jabbār, Beirut, 1967, p. 66, no. 32, and p. 69, no. 50Google Scholar, this treatise, which 'Uthmān found quoted only in works composed after the death of 'Abd al-Jabbār, must have been written sometime between al-Mughnī and al-Muḥīṭ. The latter seems to have been one of 'Abd al-Jabbār's latest works.

31 cf. 'Azmī's introduction.

32 cf. ibid., 8; Vajda, G., Revue des Études Juives, CXXVIII, 2–3, 1969, 172Google Scholar. For the erroneous ascription of al-Muḥīṭ to Yuῡsuf al-Baṣīr himself (by Steinschneider) see Borisov, 74, to which one may add that , quoted in the Hebrew translation of al-Baṭīr's al-Tamyāz, is of course . Ibn Mattawaih died in 468/1075, and it is doubtful whether he had any personal contact with 'Abd al-Jabbār; for Ibn Mattawaih's recension see further 'Azmī, loc. cit.; Vajda, G., Revue de l'Histoire des Religions, CLXIX, 2, 1966, 194–5 (review of Houben' s ed.)Google Scholar.

33 I have not as yet been able to see the Leningrad fragments.

34 See above, p. 296, n. 11.

35 i.e. . The text of the title in the Karaite version, as well as the text of the first sentence of the chapter, may suggest tha t Houben' s reading is preferable.

36 cf. n. 35.

37 MS .

38 i.e. .

39 So MS ; it seems that this stands for cf. Blau, J., A grammar of mediaeval Judaeo-Arabic [in Hebrew], Jerusalem, 1961, 41 f.Google Scholar) and that the preceding was actually (and became during the transliteration from Arabic to Hebrew script), and belonged to the word , so that the original text had (which explains in the following sentence).

40 MS , cf. Blau, J., The emergence and linguistic background of Judaeo-Arabic, Oxford, 1965, 180 fGoogle Scholar.

41 Or. 2529, fol. 25b, 11. 15ff., while'Azmī,421, reads . However, the reading of the Karaite version seems preferable (Houben, 442, reads ), since the author is apparently driving at a precise identification of the Qadariyya referred to in several traditions. (It should be noted that 'Azmī has based his edition on two MSS only, out of the four available, and also has not apparently given all the information concerning variants and emendations; cf. his introduction, p. 6).

42 Bibliographically it is interesting that where Ibn Mattawaih's version ('Azmī, p. 422, 1. 3 from foot) reads … , the Karaite version, fol. 29b, ult., reads [GAL, Suppl., I, 249] … (This reference has already been quoted in Margoliouth's Catalogue.)

43 'Azmī, p. 423, 1. 7.

44 Presumably the original text.

45 'Azmī, p. 420, 1. 18.

46 fol. 23b, 1. 7–fol. 24a, 1. 17. Many more differences of this kind could be cited.

47 See no. 2 in Borisov's list.

48 There is no such reference in the parallel text of Ibn Mattawaih ('Azmī, 386).

49 For these references, and others to al-Mughnī, see Borisov, loc. cit., an d Margoliouth's Catalogue.

50 See Uthmāan, , op. cit., p. 65, no. 27, and p. 66, no. 32Google Scholar.

51 Some are quoted in Margoliouth's Catalogue, with the exception of as a ‘transliteration’ of . On the other hand phrases like (fol. 30b, I. 4) are unaltered.

52 See p. 298, n. 35, above. Another example can be found on fol. 22a, 11. 10–12: The correct reading is (cf. 'Azmī, p. 418, II. 8–9): (this reading makes Houben's vocalization, p. 437, 1. 8, unnecessary).

53 As correctly copied on fol. 26a, 1. 2.

54 It is my intention to undertake such in the near future.

55 The date of the BM fragment according to the Catalogue.

56 ibid., no. 894/11.

57 It is not unlikely that the BM fragment begins at the very point where the Firkovich fragment terminates.

58 i.e. not of the kind of jawābāt, amālī, and the like.

59 See twice in the Catalogue, loc. cit.

60 Apparently among the first, still missing, parts.

61 cf. 'Uthmān, , op. cit., pp. 49, 70 (no. 57)Google Scholar.

62 See ibid., p. 67, no. 40.

63 Al-Mughnī, XX, II, ed. Maḥmād, 'Abd al-Ḥalim and Dunyā, Sulaimān, Cairo, n.d., 258Google Scholar.

64 ibid., IX, ed. Taufīq al-Ṭawil and Sa'id Zāyid, Cairo, n.d., 8–9; and see Anawati, G. C., Caspar, R., and el-Khodeiri, M., ‘Une somme inédite de théologie mo'tazilite: le Moghnī du qāḍi 'Abd al-Jabbār’, MIDEO, IV, 1957, 297Google Scholar.

65 See no. 2 in Borisov's list; Margoliouth, Catalogue, no. 894/1; 'Azmī, 423.

66 Probably al-Ṣāḥib Ibn 'Abbād.