The present paper is an attempt to throw preliminary light on heretical Sufi groups in the Arabic-Islamic world in the early-modern period (sixteenth to eighteenth centuries). Previous scholarship on antinomian Sufism has tended to focus on earlier centuries and on Persian- and Turkish-speaking groups. Evidence suggests that there is also a history to be written of antinomian mystical groups in the Arabic-speaking world in later centuries. On the eve of modernity in the Arabic-speaking Middle East, groups and individuals existed who rejected or ignored the prevalent scholarly interpretation of Islam and challenged the authority of the class of religious scholars (ʿulamā'). A number of sources from the period, usually hostile and/or satirical, attest to the existence of such groups and allow us to reconstruct the overall contours of their outlook.

In the previous issue of BSOAS we published an edition and translation of an account of the war against al-Muqannaʿ (BSOAS 73/2, 155–77). Here we offer a detailed commentary and an analysis of what we can learn from it, mostly relating to the beginning of al-Muqannaʿ's revolt and his conquests of Samarqand. The value of the account lies mainly in the fact that its first half is focused on Samarqand rather than Bukhārā. We also offer some thoughts on how the narrative may have originated and how it relates to the Tārīkh-i Bukhārā and other sources.

This article argues that the opposition between Old Iranian *č and *ǰ was preserved in Manichaean Parthian not only word-initially, but also in postvocalic position, at least at the time of the introduction of the Manichaean script. The approach is phonological, and attempts to show that Pth. /č/ (< OIr. *č), written <c> and <>, and Pth. /ž/ (< OIr. *ǰ and *ž), written <j>, are consistently distinguished in the Manichaean script. Pth. /č/ may have developed a postvocalic allophone [ǰ] (not affecting the phonematic opposition), which might have been a motivation for the use of the letter <>. Transcriptions into Sogdian script and the cantillations suggest a coalescence of the Pth. phonemes, but it is not clear whether this is a later development of the Pth. language itself or a peculiarity of the liturgical pronunciation of Parthian as practised by Manichaeans in Central Asia.1

The Pratyabhijñā system, elaborated in the tenth and eleventh centuries by the Kashmiri philosophers Utpaladeva and Abhinavagupta, presents a rational justification of the metaphysical principles contained in the Śaiva nondualistic scriptures. However, contrary to what one might expect, many arguments to which Utpaladeva and Abhinavagupta resort when defending their idealism belong to Buddhist rather than Śaiva sources. This article examines the profound influence, in this respect, of the Buddhist “logico-epistemological school” on the Pratyabhijñā system. But it also shows that Utpaladeva and Abhinavagupta are not unknowingly or unwittingly influenced by their Buddhist opponents: they systematically emphasize this influence, thus taking full responsibility for appropriating their rivals' concepts. Moreover, they highlight their fundamental divergence regarding the way consciousness manifests a seemingly external and diverse universe, most notably by replacing the Vijñānavādins' traditional analogy: according to the Śaivas, perceived objects should not be compared to dreamt objects, but to yogins' creations.

It is a common supposition that to understand a philosophical writing, knowledge of the philosophical sources on which it draws suffices. Yet, abstract subtleties are often suitably dressed in poetic comparisons, whose threads are spun from a different source. While the body of logical argument appeals to the intellect, the dress of literary tropes allures the emotions. Philosophy is not simply mathematics, for it involves a sentiment, which in Mahāyāna Buddhism means susceptibility to its religious ethos embodied in its path, bodhicitta, and bodhisattvas. Through Candrakīrti's comparison of buddhas and bodhisattvas to the king of geese, I shall here examine the use of similes and metaphors in Indian Buddhist philosophical writing. The analysis illustrates the subtle influence that popular narratives eulogizing the deeds of saints had on such texts, and proposes to revisit philosophical texts as literary works.

In this article I provide a complete translation and analysis of the recently unearthed bamboo manuscript, Rong Cheng shi, from the Shanghai Museum collection. This manuscript presents a previously unknown version of China's early history from the time of legendary rulers Yao, Shun, Yu and their predecessors to the establishment of the Zhou dynasty. The narrative is critical of both the dynastic principle of rule and “righteous rebellion”, and advocates instead the ruler's abdication in favour of a worthier candidate as the best mode of rule; in addition, it hints at the unusually active role of “the people” in establishing the supreme ruler. Moreover, despite being associated with the southern state of Chu, the Rong Cheng shi presents a unitary view of the past, which rejects the multi-state world and promulgates the notion of the unified “All-under-Heaven” as singularly legitimate. The text has far-reaching significance in terms of both history of Chinese political thought and of early Chinese historiography.