Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī, Muhammad Ebn Baḥr

Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī, Muhammad Ebn Baḥr, a littérateur, lexicographer, grammarian, poet, kāteb, and Quran exegete of the 3rd/9th and 4th/10th centuries.

Some sources have erroneously recorded his teknonym and the names of him and his father as Ebn-‛Umar, ‛Umar Ebn Yaḥyā,¹ Abū-Muslem Ebn Yaḥyā,² and Abū-Salame.³ Certain authors have also confused him with Abū-Muslem Muhammad b. Ali b. Muhammad b. al-Hussein b. Mehr-Īzad Eṣfahānī (d. 1064/456) and attributed his works to the latter.⁴ No information is available concerning the first half of his life. According to some historical reports, Abū-Muslem was born in Isfahan in 868/254⁵ and began his studies in this city. Later, he traveled to Baghdad to continue his education.⁶ In a gathering at the Abbasid court, he eloquently claimed that his birthplace, Isfahan, was the most delightful spot on earth,⁷ and he identified the location of his residence as the Jarvāʾān quarter of Isfahan.⁸ He has been described as a discerning leader and a unique scholar from among the people of Isfahan in the caliphal gatherings of Baghdad.⁹ He attained mastery in the disciplines of literature, hadith, exegesis, and other sciences before the scholars of his time,¹⁰ although no information is available regarding his teachers.¹¹

Among the contemporaries with whom he maintained connections were Abū al-Qāsem Balkhī (d. 931/319), Buḥturī (d. 897/284), and Ali b. ‛Īsā (d. 946/334). Ali b. ‛Īsā, the well-known vizier of the Abbasid court, honored and esteemed Abū-Muslem and praised him.¹² Nevertheless, the exact dates of these associations are not known.

Before 900/287, Abū-Muslem served as the amanuensis of Muhammad b. Zayd, the Alid ruler of Ṭabarestān and Gurgān.¹³ There, he was in the company of Abū al-Qāsem Balkhī, the eminent Mutazilite scholar, whom he had probably met in Baghdad and perhaps accompanied to Gurgān. It appears that Abū-Muslem was influenced by the theological teachings of Abū al-Qāsem Balkhī.¹⁴ During the caliphate of al-Muqtader Bellāh, upon the recommendation of Ebn Abī al-Baghl to Ali b. ‛Īsā, the contract for collecting the taxes of Isfahan was entrusted to Abū-Muslem and another individual,¹⁵ after which he managed the financial affairs of this region.¹⁶ In 916/303, Abū-Muslem also held responsibility for accounting and supervising tax collection in the region of Fārs.¹⁷ His presence in Isfahan is attested in both 919/306 and 928/316.¹⁸ In 922/309, Abū-Muslem also served as the governor of Qum.¹⁹ During this period, he visited the notables of the city every Friday and occasionally engaged in discussions concerning doctrinal matters.²⁰ In 933/321, following the death of Ebn Rustam, the tax administrator of Isfahan, Abū-Muslem succeeded him; however, with the fall of Isfahan, Ali Ebn Būye dismissed him.²¹ Abū-Muslem died in late 934/322, approximately at the age seventy.²²  Ali b. Ḥamze Eṣfahānī composed verses in his elegy.²³ Reports concerning him indicate that he did not engage in formal study, and nothing is known about his possible children or students.

Intellectual Views

Abū-Muslem adhered to the Mutazilite school.²⁴ Some scholars have counted him among the eighth generation²⁵ and others among the ninth generation of the Mutazilite,²⁶ regarding him as an eminent figure²⁷ and one of the distinguished sheikhs of the Mutazilite tradition.²⁸ Āqā Buzurg Ṭehrānī, in mentioning his commentary, has suggested the possibility that his affiliation with the Muʽtazilite school may have served as a cover to conceal his actual doctrinal inclination,²⁹ and he considered Abū-Muslem’s explicit assertion of the superiority of Ali, over the other Companions as evidence for this view.³⁰

Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī, in addition to possessing scholarly stature and a wide range of knowledge, attained an extraordinary and remarkable level of eloquence,³¹ and some have described him with expressions such as “unique of his age” and “peerless of his era.”³² The use of the expression polemical theologian (mutukallem jadalī)³³ in reference to him reflects his engagement with doctrinal debates, for he strove to respond to theological objections and to invite adherents of other religions to the affirmation of divine oneness.³⁴ It has been said that Abū-Muslem was able to recognize, from a considerable distance, what someone was writing merely by observing the movement of the pen.³⁵

Written Works

Among his writings—none of which have survived—are the following as mentioned in the sources:

1. Jāme‛ al-taʾwīl le-muḥkam al-tanzīl.³⁶ Some have referred to Abū-Muslem’s commentary, which has also been mentioned under the title sharḥ al-taʾwīl,³⁷ as consisting of fourteen volumes,³⁸ while others have considered it to comprise twenty-seven volumes.³⁹ The 4th/10th century was a period of flourishing Islamic sciences and of extensive Quranic exegesis.⁴⁰ Within this context, his commentary was regarded as eloquent, and its subtle meanings were deemed superior to those of other commentaries.⁴¹ This commentary enjoyed particular renown and status among the Muʽtazilites,⁴² and Abū-Yūsuf Qazvīnī, a Muʽtazilite scholar, possessed a copy of it in his library.⁴³ Some explicitly described this commentary as Mutazilite.⁴⁴ His commentary was one of the four principal sources for the Muʽtazilite exegete Ḥākem Jushamī.⁴⁵

After Abū-Muslem, Ash’arite, Muʽtazilite, and Shiite exegetes made use of his commentary. From the 4th/10th century until the present, his views have consistently received attention.⁴⁶ Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī, apparently due to intellectual opposition, transmitted Abū-Muslem’s exegetical opinions,⁴⁷ and at times even expressed admiration for them;⁴⁸ for example, regarding the interpretation of Quran 2: 224, he stated that the best view is the one mentioned by Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī. Fakhr al-Rāzī held that the verse prohibits irreverence towards God through repeated oaths sworn in His name, for one who frequently employs the name of something in a specific meaning thereby exposes it to that very matter.⁴⁹ At times, he presented Abū-Muslem’s exegetical arguments only to reject them afterward,⁵⁰ and at other times criticized his bias in employing verses to support the Muʽtazilites; as in his interpretation of the word zaygh in Quran 3:7, where, after quoting Abū-Muslem, he remarked: “How astonishing! Why has he regarded the verses that conform to his doctrine as clear (muḥkamāt), and the verses that contradict his doctrine as ambiguous (mutashābehāt)? And why has he insisted on adhering to the literal sense of the verses that align with his school, while attempting to divert the verses that oppose his doctrine from their apparent meaning?”⁵¹ Al-Ṭabarsī, in Majma‛ al-bayān, also quoted from his commentary.⁵² Sheikh al-Ṭūsī, while praising his method of commentary, reproached him for lengthy digressions and for including unnecessary material,⁵³ and he transmitted some of his views⁵⁴ and occasionally refuted them.⁵⁵ Sharīf Raḍī likewise sharply rejected certain of his exegetical opinions, deeming them far removed from the linguistic and interpretive realities of the Quran.⁵⁶ Sharīf Murtaḍā (‛Alam al-Hudā) also cited numerous opinions of Abū-Muslem,⁵⁷ rejecting some of them on the basis of the verse’s contextual indication or its apparent wording,⁵⁸ considering some of them strange,⁵⁹ and others very peculiar (ṭurfe), and subsequently refuting them.⁶⁰

Ṭabāṭabāʾī, in al-Mīzān, rejected several of Abū-Muslem’s exegetical views;⁶¹ for example, according to Abū-Muslem, the meaning of Quran 11:118 is that “had God willed, He would have gathered all of you in Paradise; yet He has appointed for you a higher rank, so that you may enter it through earning reward for your deeds.” Ṭabāṭabāʾī stated that “the contextual flow of the verses does not support this meaning.”⁶² Abū-Muslem interpreted al-mawaddah fī al-qurbā in Quran 42:23 as expressing affection towards God Most High through obedience and seeking closeness to Him.⁶³ Ṭabāṭabāʾī perceived an ambiguity in this interpretation that renders the address unsuitable for the polytheists, for the polytheists did not deny this principle; rather, they believed that through worshipping their idols they were showing love to God and seeking closeness to Him.⁶⁴

In reconstructing the commentary of Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī, Sa‛īd al-Anṣārī al-Hendī collected portions of it from Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī’s mafātīḥ al-ghayb and published them under the title multaqat Jāme‛ al-taʾwīl le-muḥkam al-tanzīl in 114 pages.⁶⁵ An Egyptian scholar named Khedhr Muhammad Nabhā likewise extracted his exegetical opinions with a more comprehensive approach from five different sources.⁶⁶ Sayyed Muhammad-Reza Ghīyāsī Kermānī also compiled his commentary from ten exegetical works and organized it into a volume titled barresī-ye āraʾ va naẓarāt-e tafsīrī-ye Abū-Muslem Muhammad b. Baḥr Eṣfahānī, which he published in 1999/1378. He included Abū-Muslem’s interpretation of verses from eighty-five surahs of the Quran.⁶⁷ Mahmūd Sarmadī likewise gathered Abū-Muslem’s exegetical views from works of commentary—especially al-tahdhīb fī al-tafsīr by Ḥākem Jushamī—and published them under the title jāme‛ al-taʾwīl le-muḥkam al-tanzīl, with a preface by Muhammad-Hādī Ma‛refat, in Tehran by Sherkat-e Enteshārāt-e ‛Elmī va Farhangī in 2009/1388. Aḥmad Aḥmadī Malāyerīⁱ had also seen a manuscript of the original commentary of Abū-Muslem in the Library of Congress.⁶⁸

2. A work on grammar.⁶⁹ Abū-Muslem possessed mastery in Arabic literature, and his writing was eloquent and fluent. The expression kāteb mutarassel (elegant epistolary writer) reflects this skill,⁷⁰ and it has been said that the clarity of his style and his lexicographical precision are evident in his exegetical views.⁷¹ He was skilled in composing poetry in both Arabic and Persian, and he excelled in improvisation and in responding to the verses of others.⁷² Yāqūt Ḥamawī, in introducing him, included ten of his verses in his own work,⁷³ and it appears that the first three of them are translations of his Persian poetry.⁷⁴ Abū-Muslem also met with the poet Buḥtarī.⁷⁵ At times, the Alid ruler of Ṭabarestān would ask Abū-Muslem about the authorship of certain lines of verse.⁷⁶ Some of his own verses likewise reveal his subtle and allusive tone.⁷⁷
3. al-Nāsekh wa al-mansūkh⁷⁸. Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī held that no abrogation had occurred in the Quran. In his view, what appears to be abrogation in the Quran is, rather, specification of a general statement or indication of a temporal limitation.⁷⁹ Accordingly, he concurred with the rest of the Muslims that the word naskh does occur in the Quran; however, he interpreted the instance of this term in the Quran as referring to the abrogation of earlier religious dispensations.⁸⁰ He supported his position by appealing to the verse, “falsehood shall not come to it, neither from before it nor from behind it” (Q 41:42), arguing that if certain Quranic verses were to be abrogated, this would entail the invalidation of a part of the Quran.⁸¹ Various scholars have responded to his arguments,⁸² among them ‛Allāme Ḥellī, who rejected his reasoning and considered several verses to be abrogated.⁸³ Abū-Muslem denied the occurrence of abrogation in the Quran from a legal perspective, while affirming its rational possibility,⁸⁴ stating that abrogation may be permissible but does not in fact occur.⁸⁵ Some have reproached him for this view,⁸⁶ while others have maintained that the disagreement between him and the majority is merely verbal, for abrogation is among the necessities of religion and its denial cannot be attributed to a Muslim.⁸⁷
4. Majmū‛at al-rasāʾel,⁸⁸ probably a collection of his letters or treatises that had been compiled.

/Hossein Safareh/

Bibliography

‛Alam al-Hudā, Ali b. Hussein. amālī al-murtaḍā: ghurrar al-fawāʾed wa durrar al-qalāʾed. Ed. Muhammad Abū al-Faẓl Ebrāhīm. Cairo: Dār al-Fekr al-‛Arabī, 1998.

‛Allāme Ḥellī, Hasan b. Yūsuf. tahdhīb al-wuṣūl elā ‛elm al-uṣūl. Ed. Muhammad-Hussein Reḍwī Kashmīrī. London: Muʾassasat al-Imam Ali, 2001/1421.

‛Aqīqī Bakhshāyeshī, ‛Abdul-Raḥīm. ṭabaqāt-e mufasserān-e shī‛a. Qum: Daftar-e Nashr-e Navīd-e Eslām, 1992–1997/1371–1376.

Abū al-Faraj Eṣfahānī. al-aghānī. Beirut: Dār Eḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-‛Arabī, 1994/1415.

Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī. multaqat jāme‛ al-taʾwīl le-muḥkam al-tanzīl. Compiled and arranged by Sa‛īd Anṣārī. Calcutta: Maṭba‛at al-Balāgh, 1920/1340.

Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī. tafsīr Abī-Muslem Muhammad b. Baḥr al-Eṣfahānī. Ed. Khedhr Muhammad Nabhā. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‛Elmīyya, 2007/1428.

Āmedī, Ali Ebn Muhammad. al-eḥkām fī uṣūl al-aḥkām. Annotated by ‛Abd al-Razzāq ‛Afīfī. Riyadh: Dār al-Ṣamīʿī, 2003/1424.

Āqā Buzurg Ṭehrānī, Muhammad-Muḥsen. al-dharīʿa elā taṣānīf al-Shī‛a. Ed. Ali Naqī Munzavī and Aḥmad Munzavī. Beirut: Dār al-Aḍwāʾ, 1983/1403.

Baghdādī, Esmā‛īl b. Muhammad. hadīyyat al-‛ārefīn: asmāʾ al-muʾallefīn wa āthār al-muṣannefīn. Istanbul: Milli Eitim, 1951–1955.

Dāwūdī, Muhammad b. Ali. ṭabaqāt al-mufasserīn. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‛Elmīyya, 1983/1403.

Dhahabī, Muhammad b. Aḥmad. mīzān al-e‛tedāl fī naqd al-rejāl. Ed. Ali Muhammad Bajāwī. Beirut: Dār al-Ma‛refa, 1963/1382.

Ebn Amīr al-Ḥāj. al-taqrīr wa al-taḥbīr. Ed. ‛Abdullāh Maḥmūd Muhammad ‛Umar. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‛Elmīyya, 1410.

Ebn Esfandīyār. tārīkh-e Ṭabarestān. Ed. ‛Abbās Eqbāl Āshtīyānī. Tehran: Kalāle-ye Khāvar, [1941/?1320].

Ebn Ḥajar ‛Asqalānī. lesān al-mīzān. Hyderabad, Deccan 1329–1331; offset reprint Beirut: Muʾassasat al-A‛lamī le al-Maṭbū‛āt, 1971/1390.

Ebn Murtaḍā. ketāb ṭabaqāt al-Mu‛tazela. Ed. Susanna Diwald-Wilzer. Beirut: Dār Maktabat al-Ḥayāt, 1961/1380.

Ebn Nadīm. al-fehrest. Ed. Ebrāhīm Ramaḍān. Beirut: Dār al-Ma‛refa, 1997/1417.

Fakhr al-Rāzī, Muhammad Ebn ‛Umar. al-tafsīr al-kabīr. Beirut: Dār Eḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-‛Arabī, 1999/1420.

Ghīyāthī Kermānī, Sayyed Muhammad-Reza. barresī-ye āraʾ va naẓarāt-e tafsīrī-ye Abū-Muslem Muhammad b. Baḥr Eṣfahānī. Qum: Ḥuḍūr, 1999/1378.

Goldziher, Ignaz. madhāheb al-tafsīr al-eslāmī. Tr. ‛Abdul-Ḥalīm Najjār. Cairo: Maktabat al-Khānjī, 1955/1374.

Habībī Maẓāherī, Mas‛ūd. “Abū-Muslem Esfahānī.” In Dāʾerat al-ma‛āref-e buzurg-e eslāmī, ed. Kāẓem Mūsavī Bujnūrdī, vol. 6. Tehran: Markaz-e Dāʾerat al-Ma‛āref-e Buzurg-e Eslāmī, 1994/1373.

Madelung, Wilferd. “Abū Moslem Eṣfahānī.” In Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, vol. 1. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985.

Māfarrūkhī, Mufaḍḍal b. Sa‛d. tarjume-ye maḥāsen-e Esfahān. By Hussein b. Muhammad b. Abī Reza Āvī. Ed. ‛Abbās Eqbāl Āshtīyānī. Tehran: Sherkat-e Sahāmī-ye Chāp, 1949/1328.

Mahdavī, Muṣleḥ al-Dīn. A‛lām-e Eṣfahān. Ed. Ghulām-Reza Naṣrullāhī. Isfahan: Sāzmān-e Farhangī Tafrīḥī-ye Shahrdārī, 2007/1386.

Muskevayh, Ahmad b. Muhammad. tajāreb al-umam wa taʿāqub al-hemam. Ed. Abū al-Qāsem Emāmī. Tehran: Surūsh, 1998/1377.

Muṣṭafā Zayd. al-naskh fī al-Quran al-karīm. Manṣūra, Egyptian: Dār al-WafāʾLeṭebā’a wa Nashr, 1987/1408.

Qāḍī ‛Abd al-Jabbār b. Ahmad. Faḍl al-e‛tezāl wa ṭabaqāt al-Mu‛tazela. Ed. Fu‛ād Sayyed. Beirut: Das Deutsche Orient-Institute, 2017/1439.

Qumī, Hasan b. Muhammad. ketāb tārīkh-e Qum. Trans. Hasan b. Ali Qumī. Ed. Jalāl al-Dīn Ṭehrānī. Tehran: Ṭūs, 1982/1361.

Ṣafadī, Khalīl b. Aybak. al-wāfī be al-wafayāt, vol. 2. Ed. S. Dedering. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1974/1394.

Shafī‛ī, Muhammad. mufasserān-e shī‛a. Tehran: University of Pahlavi, n.d.

Sharīf Raḍī, Muhammad b. Hussein. ḥaqāʾeq al-taʾwīl fī mutashābeh al-tanzīl. Commentary by Muhammad-Reza Āl Kāshef al-Gheṭāʾ. Beirut: Dār al-Aḍwāʾ, 1986/1406.

Shawkānī, Muhammad b. Ali. ershād al-fuḥūl elā taḥqīq al-ḥaqq men ‛elm al-uṣūl. Ed. Abū Ḥafṣ Sāmī b. ‛Arabī Atharī. Riyadh: Dār al-Faḍīla, 2000/1421.

Subkī, ‛Abdul-Wahhāb Ebn Ali. ṭabaqāt al-shāfeʿiyya al-kubrā. Ed. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Muhammad Ḥulw and Maḥmūd Muhammad Ṭanāḥī. Giza: Hajr, 1992/1413.

Suyūṭī, ‛Abdul-Raḥmān b. Abī Bakr. bughyat al-wu‛āt fī ṭabaqāt al-lughawīyyīn wa al-nuḥāt. Ed. Muhammad Abū al-Faḍl Ebrāhīm. Beirut: Dār al-Fekr, 1979/1399.

Ṭabarsī, Faḍl Ebn Hasan. majma‛ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Quran. Ed. Hāshem Rasūlī Maḥallātī and Faḍlullāh Yazdī Ṭabāṭabāʾī. Beirut: Dār al-Ma‛refa, 1988/1408.

Ṭabāṭabāʾī, Muhammad-Hussein. al-mīzān fī tafsīr al-Quran. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-A‛lamī, 1971–1974/1390–1394.

Tanūkhī, Muḥassen b. Ali. neshwār al-muḥādhara wa akhbār al-mudhākara. Ed. ‛Abūd Shālchī. Beirut: Dār Ṣāder, 1995.

Ṭūsī, Muhammad b. Hasan. al-tebyān fī tafsīr al-Quran. Beirut: Dār Eḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-‛Arabī, n.d.

Yāqūt Ḥamawī, Yāqūt b. ‛Abdulāh. mu‛jam al-buldān. Beirut: Dār Ṣāder, 1397.

Yāqūt Ḥamawī, Yāqūt b. ‛Abdullāh. mu‛jam al-udabāʾ. Ed. Eḥsān ‛Abbās. Beirut: Dār al-Gharb al-Islāmī, 1993.

Zarzūr, ‛Adnān Muhammad. al-ḥākem al-jushamī wa manhajuhū fī al-tafsīr. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Resāla, n.d.

Zereklī, Kheyr al-Dīn. al-a‛lām. Beirut: Dār al-‛Elm le al-Malāyīn, 2002.

1. former director of SAMT Publishing[↩]

1. Ebn Amīr al-Ḥāj, vol. 3, p. 56.[↩]
2. Fakhr al-Rāzī, vol. 2, p. 310.[↩]
3. Ebn Ḥajar ‛Asqalānī, vol. 5, p. 89.[↩]
4. Baghdādī, vol. 2, p. 71; see also: Dhahabī, vol. 3, p. 655. Of course, he was also one of the great commentators, the author of jāme‛ al-taʾwīl wa muḥkam al-tanzīl in twenty volumes according to the Muʽtazilite school, and originally from Isfahan.[↩]
5. Māfarrūkhī, p. 44.[↩]
6. Habībī Maẓāherī, pp. 224–226.[↩]
7. Māfarrūkhī, p. 44; Madelung, vol. 1, pp. 340–341.[↩]
8. Māfarrūkhī, ibid.; regarding “Jarvāʾān,” see: Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1397, vol. 2, p. 130.[↩]
9. Māfarrūkhī, ibid.[↩]
10. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1993, vol. 6, p. 2437; Mahdavī, vol. 1, p. 361.[↩]
11. Madelung, vol. 1, pp. 340–341.[↩]
12. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1993, vol. 6, p. 2437; Madelung, vol. 1, pp. 340–341.[↩]
13. Tanūkhī, vol. 4, p. 107; Mahdavī, vol. 1, p. 361; Madelung, vol. 1, p. 340–341.[↩]
14. Madelung, vol. 1, p. 340–341.[↩]
15. Muskevayh, vol. 5, pp. 74, 113.[↩]
16. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1993, vol. 6, p. 2438; Mahdavī, vol. 1, p. 361.[↩]
17. Tanūkhī, vol. 8, p. 129.[↩]
18. Madelung, vol. 1, p. 340–341.[↩]
19. Qumī, p. 142.[↩]
20. Ibid., p. 218.[↩]
21. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1993, vol. 6, p. 2438; Zereklī, vol. 6, p. 50.[↩]
22. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, ibid.; Dāwūdī, vol. 2, p. 110; Madelung, vol. 1, p. …[↩]
23. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1993, vol. 6, pp. 2439–2440.[↩]
24. Ṣafadī, vol. 2, p. 244; Qumī, p. 218; Mahdavī, vol. 1, p. 361.[↩]
25. Ebn Murtaḍā, p. 91.[↩]
26. Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār Ebn Ahmad, p. 329.[↩]
27. Ebn Ḥajar ʿAsqalānī, vol. 5, p. 89.[↩]
28. Zarzūr, vol. 1, p. 158.[↩]
29. Āqā Buzurg Ṭehrānī, vol. 5, p. 45.[↩]
30. Ibid.[↩]
31. Qāḍī ‛Abd al-Jabbār Ebn Ahmad, p. 329.[↩]
32. Ebn Murtaḍā, p. 91.[↩]
33. Ebn Nadīm, p. 169.[↩]
34. Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār Ebn Ahmad, p. 329.[↩]
35. Ibid.[↩]
36. Ebn Nadīm, p. 169.[↩]
37. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1993, vol. 6, p. 2438; Āqā Buzurg Ṭehrānī, vol. 5, p. 44.[↩]
38. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, ibid.; Āqā Buzurg Ṭehrānī, ibid.[↩]
39. Goldziher, p. 135.[↩]
40. Shafī‛ī, pp. 94–101; ʿAqīqī Bakhshāyeshī, vol. 1, pp. 530, 567, 582; vol. 2, pp. 27, 34, 59.[↩]
41. Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār Ebn Ahmad, p. 329.[↩]
42. Ibid.[↩]
43. Subkī, vol. 5, p. 121.[↩]
44. Ebn Nadīm, p. 169; Ebn Ḥajar ‛Asqalānī, vol. 5, p. 89; Dāwūdī, vol. 2, p. 110.[↩]
45. Zarzūr, vol. 1, pp. 161–162.[↩]
46. Habībī Maẓāherī, p. 225.[↩]
47. For example, see: Fakhr al-Rāzī, vol. 2, pp. 273, 310; vol. 3, pp. 452, 522, 533; vol. 4, pp. 95, 121–122, 126; vol. 5, pp. 267, 533; vol. 6, pp. 389, 449, 463; vol. 7, p. 14; vol. 9, p. 528.[↩]
48. Fakhr al-Din al-Rāzī, vol. 6, pp. 424, 493; vol. 7, p. 14.[↩]
49. Ibid., vol. 6, p. 424.[↩]
50. Ibid., vol. 9, pp. 527–530.[↩]
51. Ibid., vol. 7, p. 144.[↩]
52. For example, see: Ṭabarsī, vol. 1, pp. 113, 121, 136, 323; vol. 2, p. 826.[↩]
53. Ṭūsī, vol. 1, p. 1.[↩]
54. Ibid., vol. 5, p. 54; vol. 8, p. 552.[↩]
55. Ibid., vol. 10, p. 48.[↩]
56. Sharīf Raḍī, vol. 5, p. 243.[↩]
57. ʿAlam al-Hudā, vol. 1, p. 367; vol. 2, pp. 99, 305.[↩]
58. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 13.[↩]
59. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 73.[↩]
60. Ibid., vol. 2, pp. 304–305.[↩]
61. Ṭabāṭabāʾī, vol. 4, p. 235; vol. 11, pp. 64–65.[↩]
62. Ṭabāṭabāʾī, vol. 11, p. 64.[↩]
63. Ṭabarsī, vol. 9, p. 43.[↩]
64. Ṭabāṭabāʾī, vol. 18, p. 46.[↩]
65. Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī, 1920/1340, p. 11.[↩]
66. Abū-Muslem Eṣfahānī, 2007/1428, introduction by Khedhr Muhammad Nabhā, p. 6, where it is stated that his sources in extracting the opinions of Eṣfahānī were: the works of Fakhr al-Rāzī, Ṭūsī, Ṭabarsī, Sa‛d al-su‛ūd of Ebn Ṭāwūs, and tanzīh al-anbīyāʾ wa al-aʾemma of Sharīf Murtaḍā.[↩]
67. Ghīyāthī Kermānī, pp. 81–365.[↩]
68. Ghīyāthī Kermānī, p. 7.[↩]
69. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1993, vol. 6, p. 2438; Suyūṭī, vol. 1, p. 59.[↩]
70. Ebn Nadīm, p. 169; Yāqūt Ḥamawī, ibid.[↩]
71. Fakhr al-Rāzī, vol. 3, p. 512; vol. 4, p. 139; vol. 5, pp. 21, 313, 354; vol. 6, pp. 366, 368; vol. 21, p. 568; vol. 22, p. 81; vol. 23, p. 323.[↩]
72. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1993, vol. 6, p. 2439.[↩]
73. Ibid., vol. 6, pp. 2437–2440.[↩]
74. Ibid., vol. 6, p. 2438.[↩]
75. Abū al-Faraj Eṣfahānī, vol. 21, p. 23.[↩]
76. Ebn Esfandīyār, p. 251.[↩]
77. Ṣafadī, vol. 2, p. 242; Suyūṭī, vol. 1, p. 59.[↩]
78. Yāqūt Ḥamawī, 1993, vol. 6, p. 2438; Suyūṭī, vol. 1, p. 59.[↩]
79. Ebn Amīr al-Ḥāj, vol. 3, p. 56.[↩]
80. Fakhr al-Rāzī, vol. 3, p. 639; vol. 5, p. 267.[↩]
81. Ibid., vol. 3, pp. 639–640; Ebn Amīr al-Ḥāj, vol. 3, p. 56.[↩]
82. Fakhr al-Rāzī, ibid.; Ebn Amīr al-Ḥāj, ibid.; Muṣṭafā Zayd, pp. 51–52, 236–241.[↩]
83. ‛Allāme Ḥellī, pp. 185–186.[↩]
84. Āmedī, vol. 3, p. 143.[↩]
85. Shawkānī, vol. 2, p. 788.[↩]
86. Ibid.[↩]
87. Ebn Amīr al-Ḥāj, vol. 3, pp. 56–57.[↩]
88. Ebn Nadīm, p. 169.[↩]