T he I denT I T y

of The

S abI anS : S ome I nSIghTS *

Hag gai Ma zuz

Introduction

In the third part of he Guide of the Perplexed, Moses Maimonides mentions

the Sabians frequently. He believed that by studying Sabian ritual he would
gain insight into the logic behind the commandments (Heb. taamei hamizvot) and their meanings.1 Maimonides ascribed many variant beliefs
and customs to the Sabians. As a result, some scholars have argued that, for
Maimonides, the name Sabians was simply a general term for idolatry. 2
To justify his arguments regarding the Sabians, Maimonides
cited the various sources he used. One of these sources was he Book of
Nabatean Agriculture (kitb al-Fila al-Nabaiyya), ascribed to Amad
b. Washiyya,3 who claimed to have translated the book from Chaldean
into Arabic. Modern scholars disagree as to the authenticity of the book,

I would like to thank Professor Dov Schwartz, Professor Raphael Jospe, and Professor David
Powers for their invaluable comments.

I shall now return to my purpose and say that the meaning of many of the laws became clear
to me and their causes became known to me through my study of the doctrines, opinions,
practices, and cult of the Sabians, as you will hear when I explain the reasons for the
commandments that are considered to be without cause. See Maimonides, Dallat al- irn,
3:29. Translation taken from Moses Maimonides, The Guide for the Perplexed, translated and
with Introduction and Notes by Shlomo Pines (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963).

E.g., Shlomo Pines, The Philosophic Sources of Maimonides, in Idem (ed.), Studies in the
History of Jewish Philosophy: The Transmission of Texts and Ideas (Jerusalem: Magnes Press,
1977), 103-173, at 164.

I shall mention to you the books from which all that I know about the doctrines and opinions
of the Sabians will become clear to you so that you will know for certain that what I say about
the reasons for the laws is correct. The most important book about this subject is the Nabatean
agriculture translated by Ibn Wa shiyya. See Maimonides, Dallat al- irn, 3:29.

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

234

with some claiming that it is genuine while others hold that Ibn Washiyya
himself composed it in the tenth century. 4
According to Maimonides, most of the sources dealing with the
Sabians are lost, and only a small part of the remainder was translated into
Arabic. Nonetheless, he held that the extant literature contained a great
deal of information on the Sabians and their religion. 5 He concluded that
despite his eforts, there were many details of the Sabian religion that he
had yet to discover: To sum up: Just as, according to what I have told you,
the doctrines of the Sabians are remote from us today, the chronicles of
those times are likewise hidden from us today. Hence if we knew them and
were cognizant of the events that happened in those days, we would know
in detail the reasons of many things mentioned in the Torah. 6
he Sabians identity and religion were subjects of investigation
among Muslim scholars prior to the time of Maimonides. Among those

Etienne Marc Quatremre believed it to be a translation of a Chaldean work of the period of

Nebuchadnezzar II (605-562 BC). E. Meyer dates it to the first century CE. Daniel Chwolson went
so far as to claim that the book is an authentic work written at the beginning of the fourteenth
century B.C. This theory has been subject to a great deal of criticism. By contrast, scholars such
as Alfred Von Gutschmid and Theodor Nldeke have argued strongly against authenticity. For
a detailed discussion, see Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition [Henceforward EI 2] (Leiden:
Brill, 1986-2004), s.v. Ibn Wa h s hiyya (T. Fahd). For a criticism of Chwolson, see Pines, The
Philosophic Sources of Maimonides, 163.

All the books that I have mentioned to you are the books of idolatry that have been translated
into Arabic. But there is no doubt that they are but a very small part of this literature if compared
to the writings that have not been translated and are not even extant, but have perished and
been lost in the course of the years. However, the books extant among us today contain an
exposition of the greatest part of the opinions and practices of the Sabians; some of the latter
are generally known at present in the world. See Maimonides, Dallat al- irn, 3:29.

Maimonides, Dallat al- irn, 3:50. See also, In the case of most of the statutes whose
reason is hidden from us, everything serves to keep people away from idolatry. The fact that
there are particulars the reason for which is hidden from me and the utility of which I do
not understand, is due to the circumstance that things known by hearsay are not like things
that one has seen. Hence the extant of my knowledge of the ways of the Sabians drawn from
the books is not comparable to the knowledge of one who saw their practices with his eyes;
this is even more the case since these opinions have disappeared two thousand years ago or
even before that. If we knew the particulars of those practices and heard details concerning
those opinions, we would become clear regarding the wisdom manifested in the details of
the practices prescribed in the commandments concerning the sacrifices and the forms
of uncleanness and other matters whose reason cannot, to my mind, be easily grasped.
Maimonides, Dallat al- irn, 3:49.

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

who pursued the subject were Al b. al-usayn al-Masd (896-956), Abd

al-Jabbr al-Asadbd (935-1025), Muammad al-Brn (973-1048),
Al b. Amad b. azm (994-1064), and Muammad al-Shaharastn
(1086-1153). Muslim scholars also continued to investigate the issue ater
Maimonides death. We ind, for example, a short treatment of the subject
in fourteenth-century historian Abd al-Ramn b. aldns (1332-1406)
Muqaddima.
he irst Muslims lived side by side with non-Muslims, and as a result,
the issue of how to relate to non-Muslims appears as early as the Qurn itself.
Most Qurnic references to non-Muslims refer to Jews and Christians, who
are usually called People of the Book (ahl al-kitb). he Qurn also refers,
albeit only once, to the Zoroastrians (Qurn [henceforth Q.] 22:17), who
resided in Persia. In addition to the People of the Book, the Qurn also refers
to the non-monotheistic religion of the idolatrous Quraysh tribe, which had
settled in the city of Mecca and persecuted Muammad. he subject of this
paper is another religious sect that is mentioned three times in the Qurn
the enigmatic people referred to as the Sabians (Q. 2:62, 5:69, 22:17).
he paucity of details provided by the Qurn led to a great deal of
speculation on the identity of the Sabians by medieval Muslim scholars.
While the Muslim scholars theories on the subject are plentiful, they are
also confusing and oten contradictory.7 As a result, the question of the
Sabians and their religion has also plagued modern western scholars of
Islam, who have profered numerous opinions on the subject.8 For the
7

See Sarah Stroumsas summary, The Sabians of arrn and the Sabians of Maimonides: On
Maimonides Theory of the History of Religions, Sefunot 7/22 (1999): 277-295 [Hebrew].

The scholarly literature on the Sabians is very rich and varied. Although not the subject of this
article, a brief survey of the most prominent scholars on the subject follows: Daniel Chwolsohn
argued that the Sabians were Mandaeans, a Christian sect that emphasized baptism. The
Mandaeans were based in Mesopotamia and included aspects of Jewish and Persian religion
in their belief system. Certain scholars have proposed that the Syriac word s b , which
means to baptize, indicates a connection between the Sabians mentioned in the Qurn
and the Mandaeans, who worshipped John the Baptist. See Shlomo Dov Goitein, The Islam of
Mu ammad: How a New Religion Came Into Being in the Shadow of Judaism (Jerusalem: The
Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1975), 86 [Hebrew].
According to Franois De Blois, the Sabians were Manicheans (zandiqa sg. zindq) who lived
among the Quraysh tribe. see EI 2, s.v. b (F.C. De Blois). De Blois criticizes Chwolsohns
theories and laments that, for years, students in the West unquestioningly accepted his
baseless conclusions. See Franois De Blois, s.v. Sabians, in Jane Dammen McAuliffe (ed.)

235

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

236

most part, modern scholars have concluded that the Sabians described by
Muslim scholars of the Abbsid period are not the Sabians mentioned in
the Qurn.9 here has been no major scholarly research, however, into the
earliest period of Muslim scholarshipbeginning with Abd Allh b. Abbs
(d. 688), known as the father of Qurnic commentary, and continuing
through the tbin (the second generation of Muslim authorities) and tbi
tbin (the third generation of Muslim authorities)and their opinions on
the Sabians. To the best of my knowledge, the only modern scholar who has
researched the issue of the Sabians in the Muslim exegetical tradition is Jane
Dammen McAulife.10 In her article on the subject, McAulife presents the
writings of various interpreters of the Qurn (mufassirn) on the subject
of the Sabians identity; though she does not cite any of the earliest Muslim
scholars by name.

Encyclopedia of the Qurn (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 4:511.

In the second century AD, a Jewish-Christian sect sometimes referred to as Sabians resided on
the east bank of the Jordan. There are some indications that they eventually immigrated to an
Arab country. According to Shlomo Dov Goitein, This was probably a tradition that continued
up till the days of Mu ammad, that is, a tradition of baptizers who believed in Judaism and,
in some ways, in Christianity, who practiced baptism just as Mu ammad insisted upon doing
at the beginning of his journey. See Goitein, The Islam of Mu ammad, 86-87; Charles Cutler
Torrey, The Jewish Foundation of Islam (New York: Jewish Institute of Religion Press, 1933), 3.
J. Pedersen adopts both De Bloiss and Chwolsohns theories on the basis that both Manichaeism
and Mandaeism included elements drawn from Gnosticism, especially a dualistic worldview.
See Stroumsa, The Sabians, 279. Judaism has generally regarded Gnosticism as a religion
based on emotion and imaginationboth of which are considered misleadingand as
a threat to the basic principles of Judaism. During the first century C.E., a special prayer
against heretics and informers was added to Jewish liturgy by Shmuel ha-Q a an (literally:
little Samuel). It appears that the concept of heretics referred, in part, to various Gnostic
sects, which are also described as heretical in Rabbinic literature. It is possible that, during
the earliest period of Christianity, the Rabbis did not distinguish between Gnosticism and
Christianity, and may have believed that Christianity was a Gnostic sect. The early Muslim
commentators appear to have had similar difficulties in regard to the Sabians.
9

The city of arrn, close to the Euphrates river on the border between Syria and Asia Minor, was
home to a syncretistic sect that combined worship of the stars and constellations with Hellenistic
philosophy. During the medieval period, members of the sect succeeded in convincing Muslims
that they were the Sabians referred to in the Qurn. As a result, they were permitted to practice
their religion. See EI, s.v. b (F.C. De Blois). The Sabians of arrn fall outside the scope of this
article. For more about them, see the article by Stroumsa mentioned above.

10 Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Exegetical Identification of the

bin, The Muslim World 72

(1982): 95-106.

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

In this article, I intend to examine the opinions that are attributed

to Ibn Abbs and his students as well as to their immediate successors, on
the question of the Sabians identity. his is not a simple task, for several
reasons: the earliest Qurnic commentators were not in agreement on the
identity of the Sabians; the Islamic sources oten present their ideas on the
subject in a cryptic and self-contradictory manner; and, sometimes, the
sources combine separate theories on the Sabians into a synthesis, which is
then presented as a theory in its own right. As we shall see, the problematic
nature of the early Qurnic commentaries on the Sabians exercised a
detrimental inluence on attempts by later Muslim scholars to deal with
the subject.
Maimonides stated that he had read many monographs on the
Sabians and claimed that a great deal had been known about the Sabian
religion in the past; but this knowledge had since been lost. Modern
scholars have examined Maimonides sources in depth,11 but I believe that
research into the opinions of the earliest Qurnic commentators might
expose another, very early, source of information on the Sabian religion;
a source that has been relatively unexamined thus far and which may help
to clarify Maimonides views on the subject.
A comparison between the third part of he Guide of the Perplexed
and the various partial descriptions of the Sabians given by Maimonides
to the opinions of the earliest Qurnic commentators reveals some
interesting parallels. his raises a question I will attempt to answer below:
was Maimonides familiar with the opinions of the earliest Qurnic
commentators on the subject of the Sabians?
The Earliest Quranic Commentators

Islamic literature cites the early Qurnic commentator Ab al-ajjj

Mujhid b. Jabr al-Makk (Mecca, 642-722) as the source of several
contradictory opinions on the Sabians. According to one citation, Mujhid

11 For example, see Dov Schwartz, Amulets, Properties and Rationalism in Medieval Jewish Thought

(Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 2004), 22-34. For details on the sources Maimonides
used, see Idem, Astral Magic in Medieval Jewish Thought (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University
Press 1999), 99-101; Stroumsa, The Sabians, 285-292; Pines, The Philosophic Sources of
Maimonides, 103-173.

237

238

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

claimed that the Sabians were a religious sect that mixed Zoroastrian and
Jewish practices (al-bin: bayna al-majs wal-yahd).12 Mujhid wrote
the same in his tafsr and added that the Sabians had no religion,13 by which
he meant that the Sabians had no religion unique to themselves.14
According to a diferent citation, however, Mujhid reported that the
Sabians combined Zoroastrianism with Christianity rather than Judaism,
though he maintained his claim that they had no religion of their own (qawm
bayna al-nar wal-majs, laysa lahum dn).15 Mujhids description of
Sabian rituals in the latter citation, however, indicates that they were similar
to the rituals of Manichaeism. Mani (216-276), the founder of Manichaeism,
tried to combine the teachings of previous prophets, especially Zoroaster
and Jesus. Despite Manis attempt at syncretism, the Manichaean religion
was primarily based on Zoroastrianism, which embraced dualism and saw
the world as the scene of a metaphysical battle between good and evil.16

12 Ab Jafar Mu ammad b. Jarr al-abar, Jmi al-Bayn f Tafsr al-Qurn, (Cairo: Dr alMarif, 1953), 2:146; Ab Abd Allh Mu ammad b. A mad b. Ab Bakr al-An r al-Qur ub,
al-Jmi li-A km al-Qurn, 10 vols. (Beirut: Dr al-Turth al-Arab, 1965), 1:434; Imd alDn Isml b. Umar Ibn Kathr, Tafsr al-Qurn al-Karm, 4 vols. (Cairo: Dr I y al-Kutub

al-Arabiyya, 1950), 1:104.

13 Ab al-ajjj Mujhid b. Jabr al-Makk al-Makhzm, Tafsr Mujhid, 2 vols. (Beirut: al-

Manshrt al-Ilmiyya, n.d.), 77.

14 Modern scholars have demonstrated that Judaism and Zoroastrianism share many

characteristics, especially in regard to issues of impurity and purification. See e.g. Haggai
Mazuz, Qurnic Commentators on Jewish and Zoroastrian Approaches to Menstruation,
The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 15/1 (2012), 89-98. Some of the scholars have concluded that,
for the most part, these similarities are the result of Persian influence on Judaism. George
William Carter claims that, just as Greek culture influenced Judaism during the period of the
Hellenistic empires, the same was the case during Persian rule. See George William Carter,
Zoroastrianism and Judaism (New York: AMS Press, 1970), 34-35. For a detailed study of Persian
influence on Judaism, see Shaul Shaked, Iranian Influence on Judaism in The Return to Zion
Under Persian Rule, ed. Haim Tadmor (Jerusalem: Am Oved Press, 1983), 236-250 [Hebrew].
For further information, see James Barr, The Question of Religious Influence: The Case of
Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Christianity, Journal of the American Academy of Religion 53/2
(1985), 201-35.
15 Abd al-Ra
mn b. Al b. Mu ammad Ibn al-Jawz, Zd al-Masr f ilm al-Tafsr, 9 vols. (Beirut:
al-Maktab al-Islm lil-iba wal-Nashr, 1984), 1:92; Abd Allh b. Umar al-Bay w, Anwr

al-Tanzl wa-Asrr al-Tawl, 2 vols. (Osnabrck: Biblio Verlag, 1968), 12; Ibn Kathr, Tafsr, 1:104.
16 A.V. Williams Jackson, Researches in Manichaeism 13 (Columbia University Indo-Iranian Series.

New York: Columbia University Press, 1965), 102, 165.

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

Mujhids description of Sabian customs as essentially Manichaean is

supported by Yazd b. Ab al-Ziyd (667-753), who claimed that the Sabians
believed in the teachings of all previous prophets, fasted thirty days a year,
and prayed ive times a day facing the direction of Yemen, i.e., south.17 his
is in accord with Mujhids description of Sabian rituals and beliefs.18 Yet
another tradition holds that Mujhid described the Sabians religion as a
mixture of Judaism, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism.19
It is possible that all three descriptions of the Sabian religion attributed
to Mujhid are accurate. Mujhid may have observed a Sabian ritual that,
in addition to Zoroastrian elements, contained remnants of Jewish customs
that had not yet been removed from Christianity. If Mujhid had doubts
about which religion the Sabians were imitating, he may have ascribed their
rituals to both Christian and Jewish origins.
Nonetheless, it seems clear that Mujhid was certain that many Sabian
customs were of Zoroastrian origin. A mixture of Zoroastrianism and
Judaism would be similar to Mandaeism; while a mixture of Zoroastrianism
and Christianity would be similar to Manichaeism. he issue becomes
still more complicated when we consider another statement attributed to
Mujhid: he Sabians are not Jews and not Christians and they have no
religion.20 If this statement is accurate, then the only possible answer to the
question of the Sabians religion is that they were Zoroastrians. However, it
is unlikely that the Qurn intended to identify the Sabians as Zoroastrians
because, as mentioned above, the Qurn clearly refers to the Sabians and
the Zoroastrians as separate religious sects. (Q. 22:17).
Yet another theory is attributed to both Mujhid and Wahb b.
Munabbih (Yemen, d. 728). It states that the Sabians did not follow the
customs of the Jews, the Christians, the Zoroastrians, or the idolaters.21
17 Ibn Kathr, Tafsr, 1:104.
18 On fasting among the Manichaeans, see Shlomo Dov Goitein, Studies in Islamic History and

Institutions (Leiden: Brill, 1968), 92.

19 Mu ammad b. Al al-Shawkn, Tafsr Fat al-Qadr, 5 vols. (Cairo:lam al-Kutub, 1964), 1:76.
20

Al-abar, Jmi al-Bayn, 2:146.

21 The sects referred to in this list include practitioners of pure monotheism (Judaism), a more

controversial form of monotheism (Christianity), dualism (Zoroastrianism), and polytheism

(idolaters). Thus, Mujhid and Wahb b. Munabbih included all religious beliefs known to them
at the time.

239

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

240

Instead, the commentators assert that the Sabians were remnants of the
ira and had no ixed religion (l dn muqarrar lahum yatbanahu).22
he ira is a term mentioned in the Qurn23 that, according to Qurnic
commentators, is a divine religion imprinted on man at the moment of his
creation (dn Allh alladh faara khalkatan).24 his interpretation of ira is
based on a quote from Muammad that is cited in the adth, Every infant
is born in the state of ira (kull mawld yladu al al-ira).25 According
to many opinions that appear in the Islamic tradition, the ira is the religion
of Islam; that is, every human being is given the potential to become
a Muslim at birth, and only because they are taught to adopt other religions,
they become non-Muslims.26 Most commentators, however, assert that
ira is simply the recognition of God (al-iqrr bi-Allh wal-marifa bihi).27
According to Mujhid and Wahb b. Munabbih, then, the Sabians practiced
a primordial form of monotheism.
A diferent opinion as to the identity of the Sabians is given under the
name of Abd al-Ramn b. Zayd b. Aslam al-Adaw al-Madan (Medina,
d. 798). Although Islamic literature presents Abd al-Ramn b. Zayds view
of the Sabians as independent of other commentators ideas on the subject,
it in fact elaborates on the opinions of Mujhid and Wahb b. Munabbih.
Abd al-Ramn b. Zayd claims that the Sabians were members of a religion
that was common in Mosul (jazrat al-mawil), Iraq.28 he practitioners of

22 Ibn Kathr, Tafsr, 1:104.

23 So set thy face for religion, being upright, the nature made by Allh in which He has created
men (fi rata Allh allat fa ara al-ns). There is no altering Allhs creation. That is the right
religionbut most people know not (Q. 30:30). The Arabic root f. .r. has a number of

permutations, such as having a certain inborn characteristic, natural, and ancient.

24 E.g., see Ab al-asan Al b. Mu ammad al-Mward, Tafsr al-Mward: al-Nukat wal-Uyn,

4 vols. (Kuwait: Wizrat al-Awqf wal-Shun al-Islmiyya, al-Turth al-Islm, 1982), 1:266

25 Ibn al-Jawz, Zd al-Masr, 6:300.

26 For example, see Ab Zakariyya Ya
y b. Sharaf Mu y al-Dn al-Nawaw, a Muslim
bi-Shar al-Nawaw, 10 vols. (Beirut: Dr al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1990), 1:212. One can assume

that, if the Sabians were Muslims, the Qurn would not have described them as a separate
sect.
27 Ibn al-Jawz, Zd al-Masr, 6:301.
28 Yqt b. Abd Allh al-amaw al-Rum al-Baghdd, Mujam al-Buldn, 7 vols. (Beirut: Dr

al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1990), 5:258-59.

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

this religion were monotheists who believed in a single, unique God, and
referred to him with the phrase: here is no other God than Allh, alone
(faqa).29 his concept of Allh is considered acceptable to Muslims.
According to the adth, members of the idolatrous Quraysh tribe
would become confused when Muammads Companions (aba) would
pronounce the testament (shahda, i.e., here is no other God than Allh
and Muammad is Allhs messenger), thinking that the Companions had
become Sabians. It appears, then, that one of the major diferences between
the Muslims and the Sabians was the Muslims recognition of Muammad
as Allhs messenger and prophet, the acknowledgement of which composes
the inal part of the testament.30 In addition, the Sabians were diferent
from the Muslims in that they had no unique religious customs (amal),
book (kitb), or prophet (nab).31
Abd al-Ramn b. Zayds description of the Sabians matches
the traditional Islamic depiction of the ira. he Sabians, like the ira,
recognized the uniqueness of God but lacked any unique customs, book,
or prophet. According to Islamic tradition, then, the Sabians practiced
a primitive monotheism identical to that of humanity when it was irst
created. Abd al-Ramn b. Zayds description of the Sabians also indirectly
negates the possibility that the Sabians were Mandaeans, Manichaeans,
or People of the Book, because all of these groups had unique customs,
prophetic books, and prophets of their own. As we shall see, he was not the
only one who thought so.
Another theory regarding the Sabians was expressed by al-Khall
b. Amad (d. 787), who claimed that the Sabian religion was similar to
Christianity. Al-Khall b. Amad also states that the Sabians practiced the
religion of Noah (dn N) and prayed facing the way the wind blew

29 We can conclude from this that the Sabians did not recognize Mu ammad as a prophet. See

al-abar, Jmi al-Bayn, 2:146.

30 This is expressed in the following story by Raba b. Ubbd: I saw the All hs messenger (i.e.,
Mu ammad) when I was a pagan. He was saying to people, If you want to save yourselves,

accept there is no god but Allh. At this moment I noticed a man behind him, saying: He is
a Sabian. When I asked somebody who he was he told me he was Ab Lahab, his uncle. See
Ibn anbal, A mad b. Mu ammad, Musnad al-Imm A mad Ibn anbal (Beirut: al-Maktab
al-Islm lil-iba wal-Nashr, 1969), 4:341.
31 Ibn al-Jawz, Zd al-Masr, 1:92.

241

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

242

in the middle of the day (inna qiblatahum nawa mahabb al-janb iyl
muntaaf al-nahr ).32
he expression religion of Noah refers to Q. 42:13, which states,
He has made plain to you the religion which He enjoined upon Noah.33
According to Islamic tradition, Noah was the irst prophet to receive laws
from Allh.34 Among other things, these laws prohibited marriage to
sisters and mothers (i.e., incest), stipulated that God is unique, and banned
idolatry (tarm al-khawt wal-ummaht wal-tawd wa-tark al-shirk).35
According to Muqtil b. Sulaymn (Balkh, d. 767), he Sabians are
a cult which separated from the Christians because of a desire to practice
the religion of Noah (ab il dn N), but they erred and were not
successful because the religion of Noah was like the religion of Islam (wazaam annahum al dn N alayhi al-salm wa-kh li-nna dn N
alayhi al-salm kna al dn al-Islm).36 If this description is accurate, it
appears that the terms ira and religion of Noah actually refer to Islam.
his raises the question, however, of why Islamic tradition identiied the
Sabians as an independent group in the irst place? One possible answer
is that the Sabian religion was not Islam but, as other arguments suggest,
a religion that existed at the dawn of humanity.
According to Islamic tradition, the pre-Islamic era can be divided
into two sub-periods. here are two schools of thought on the irst of these
pre-Islamic periods (al-jhiliyya al-l). According to one of them, this
period began with Adam and continued until Noah. he second school
of thought holds that this period began with the life of Noah and ended
with Idrs (generally identiied as the Biblical Enoch).37 According to
32 Al-Mward, al-Nukat wal-Uyn, 1:117.
33 Translation taken from Mu ammad Al Maulana, The Holy Qurn: Arabic Text, English
Translation and Commentary (Lahore: The Lahore A madiyya Movement in Islam, 1998 [First

Edition, 1917]).

34 Jall al-Dn Mu ammad b. A mad al-Ma all and Jall al-Dn Abd al-Ra mn b. Ab Bakr alSuy , Tafsr al-Jallayn (Cairo: Muassasat al-Mukhtr, 2004), 465.
35 Ibn al-Jawz, Zd al-Masr, 7:276.
36 Muqtil Ibn Sulaymn, Tafsr Muqtil Ibn Sulaymn, 3 vols. (Beirut: Dr al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya,

2003), 1:312.
37 Ignaz Goldziher, Muslim Studies, ed. S.M. Stern, trans. C.R. Barber and S.M. Stern (Piscataway,

NJ: Aldine Transaction, 2006), 202.

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

both theories, however, the life of Noah demarcates the irst pre-Islamic
period, and only Noah and his family survive it; making Noah the father
of a new humanitythe generation born ater the Flood. As a result,
Islamic tradition sees Noahs personal behavior, together with the laws he
received from Allhespecially regarding the uniqueness of Godas the
irst religion in human history. It appears, then, that according to many of
the Qurnic commentators, the ira is recognition of the existence of one
God and is therefore synonymous with the religion of Noah itself.38
As mentioned above, according to Abd al-Ramn b. Zayd, the
Sabians lived in Mosul, Iraq. A b. Ab Rab (Mecca, 647-732) and his
student Abd al-Malik b. Abd al-Azz b. Jurayj (Mecca, d. 767) also indicated
the geographic location of the Sabians, but claimed that they lived in the
Sawd, an area south of Mosul.39 Ibn Ab Ziyd, citing his father, reported
that the Sabians lived in Kth, Iraq. According to the geographer Yqt b.
Abd Allh al-amaw al-Rm al-Baghdd (1179-1229), there were three
diferent places referred to as Kth. One of these three was a Kth located
in the Sawd in Iraq. here appears to be agreement, then, between A
b. Ab Rab, Ibn Jurayj, and Ibn Zayd as to the Sabians location.40
he river Kth is named ater one of the sons of Arfashad (Heb.
Arpakhshad), the son of Sham (Heb. Shem), who was, in turn, one of the
sons of N (Noah) and grandfather of Abraham. Yqts claim, as well
as the fact that he takes the trouble to point out that Kth belonged to
the family of Noah, the father of the new humanity, appears to conirm
al-Khall b. Amad and Muqtil b. Sulaymns statement that the Sabians
practiced the religion of Noah. Yqt also writes that Abraham himself
was born and buried in Kth, and it was there that Abraham was
miraculously saved from the iery furnace into which he was thrown by
Nimrod.41 herefore, according to the commentators mentioned above, the
homeland of the Sabians in Kth is directly connected to both Noah and
Abraham. Muslims believe that Noah was the irst man to receive a direct
revelation of Gods uniqueness; and that Abraham was the irst man who,
38 Ibn al-Jawz, Zd al-Masr, 7:276.
39 Yqt, Mujam al-Buldn, 3:309.
40 Ibid., 4:553-54.
41 Ibid., 4:554.

243

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

244

ater the many idolatrous generations that followed the life of Noah, chose
to return to monotheism (Q. 3:76; 37:84).
Another commentator, Qatda b. Dima al-Sads (Bara, d. 736),
rejects the opinions of al-Khall b. Amad and Muqtil b. Sulaymn regarding the Sabians by claiming that the Sabians were actually the Chaldeans
(kaldnyn),42 from whom Abraham was descended. he Chaldeans, he
claims, worshipped the heavens (alk) and the stars. Astrology, he tells
us, was not only widely practiced among them but dictated their lives.
Abraham, however, rejected these beliefs, which eventually led him to leave
the Chaldeans and embrace belief in Allh.43
It seems, therefore, that although the commentators mentioned
above agree that the Sabians lived in Iraq, this has not helped us clarify their
identity. While the commentators agree on the location of the Sabians, they
do not agree on the characteristics of their religion. Ibn Jurayj states that the
Sabians were not Zoroastrians, Jews, or Christians, but does not mention
any religious characteristics that would help identify them.44 Similarly,
Ibn Zayd claims that they had no religious customs, book, or prophet.45

42 An Aramaic tribe residing in Babylon during the seventh century BCE. had the city of r

Kadm as its capital, from which Abraham set forth. See Gen. 12:32. While the Torah states
that Abraham set forth from r Kadm, al-Rz used the word Chaldeans. The Chaldeans
are not referred to in the Bible, but the Talmud mentions them as Kelday, which means
seeing in the stars (Heb. rm ba-kkhavm). See BT, Sanhedrin, 95a; BT, Yevamt,
21b; BT, Shabbat, 119a, 156b; BT, Berakht, 64a. It appears that worship of the stars and
the practice of astrology was fundamental to Chaldean culture, as was the case in many
surrounding cultures. The Talmud states that Abraham, the first monotheist, continued to
practice astrology until God forbad him from doing so: Abraham pleaded before the Holy One,
blessed be He, Sovereign of the Universe! One born in mine house is mine heir. Not so, He
replied, but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels. Sovereign of the Universe!
cried he, I have looked at my constellation and find that I am not fated to beget child. Go
forth from [i.e., cease] thy planet [gazing], for Israel is free from planetary influence. See BT,
Shabbat, 156a.
43 Fakhr al-Dn Mu
ammad b. Umar al-Rz, al-Tafsr al-Kabr, 17 vols. (Tehran: Dr al-Kutub

al-Ilmiyya, n.d.), 3:105.

44 abar, Jmi al-Bayn, 2:146.
45 The claim that the Sabians lived in Kth was eventually combined with Ibn Zayds

suggestion that they practiced a primordial form of monotheism. As mentioned above,

however, Ibn Zayd originally argued that the Sabians lived in the region of Mosul (jazrat
al-Maw il).

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

Ibn Ab Ziyd, on the other hand, does give us a few indications as to Sabian
customs, claiming that they believed in all the prophets, fasted thirty days
every year, and prayed ive times a day facing Yemen.
asan al-Bar (Medina-Bara, 642-728/737), appears to have been
open to several possibilities regarding the identity of the Sabians. According
to some sources, asan al-Bar believed that the Sabians practiced
Zoroastrianism (qawm kal-majs).46 Qatda quotes asan al-Bar as
saying that the Sabians combined Jewish beliefs with Zoroastrianism and
that they had no religion.47 Abd Allh b. Ab Naj (Meccan, d. 749) agreed
with this,48 as did Mujhid, as mentioned above.
In contrast to Mujhid and asan al-Bar, who emphasized Zoroastrianism as the primary element in Sabian ritual, other commentators emphasize the Christian and Jewish aspects of the Sabian religion. he greatest
of the Qurnic commentators, Ibn Abbs, reported that the Sabians were
Christian pilgrims who shaved the centers of their heads (al-sin almuallaqa aws rusihim), a common identifying practice among Christians; while Sad b. Jubayr (Kfa, 665-714) claimed that the Sabians mixed
Judaism and Christianity.49
As noted above, the Qurn mentions the Sabians three times. Each
time, the Sabians are referred to in relation to believers (i.e. Muslims), Jews,
and Christians. In Q. 2:62, the Sabians are mentioned ater the Christians;
while in Q. 5:69 and Q. 22:17, they are mentioned ater the Jews and before
the Christians. his variation in the Sabians order of appearance caused
certain diiculties of interpretation, and a study of the tafsr shows that the
Qurnic commentators found it confusing.
As we have seen, many of the early Qurnic commentators believed
that the Sabians were a sect of Judaism or Christianity. We can assume
from this that the commentators considered the Sabians to be People of the
Book. For example, a story is told about Isml b. Abd al-Ramn al-Sudd
(Kfa, d. 745), who was asked about the Sabians and replied that they were

46 Ibn Kathr, Tafsr, 1:10; Ibn al-Jawz, Zd al-Masr, 1:92.

47

abar, Jmi al-Bayn, 2:146.

48

Qur ub, al-Jmi, 1:434.

49 Ibn al-Jawz, Zd al-Masr, 1:92.

245

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

246

People of the Book.50 Ab al-liya Rufay b. Mihrn al-Riy (d. 709) also
held that the Sabians were People of the Book because, he claimed, they
used to read from the Book of Psalms (yaqrana al-zabr).51
Ibn Abbs, however, who believed the Sabians were a group of
Christian pilgrims (inf min al-nar) who shaved the centers of their
heads,52 stated that it was forbidden to eat from the Sabians sacriices or
to marry their wives.53 his indicates that Ibn Abbs did not believe that
the Sabians were People of the Book. Moreover, if we cross-reference Ibn
Abbs statement with the Qurnic verses marry not the idolatresses until
they believe (Q. 2:221) and forbidden to you is that which dies of itself,
and blood, and lesh of swine, and that on which any other name than that
of Allh has been invoked . . . and that which is sacriiced on stones set
up for idols (Q. 5:3), it appears that Ibn Abbs considered the Sabians
idolaters. If true, under Islamic law the Sabians would have been given
a choice between death and conversion to Islam.54
It is possible that Ibn Abbs excluded the Sabians from the People of
the Book because they shaved the centers of their heads. his opinion may
have been based on an order given by Muammad just before embarking
on a military campaign in the year 630 CE. Muammad instructed his army
not to harm monks who were hermits, but to decapitate those who shaved
the centers of their heads because, he claimed, they worshipped Satan.55
Ziyd b. Ab Sufyn (i.e., Ziyd b. Abhi. d. 672),56 who served as
governor of Iraq under the irst Umayyad caliph, rendered an opinion

50 Al-abar, Jmi al-Bayn, 2:146.

51 Ibn al-Jawz, Zd al-Masr, 1:92.
52 Ibid., 1:92.
53 Qur ub, al-Jmi, 1:434.
54 This law was derived from the following verse: So when the sacred months have passed, slay

the idolaters, wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in
wait for them in every ambush. But if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate,
leave their way free. Surely Allh is Forgiving, Merciful (Q. 9:5). This verse is referred to in
traditional Islamic sources as the verse of the sword (yat al-sayf).
55 Mu
ammad b. Umar al-Wqid, Kitb al-Maghz, 3 vols. (London: Oxford University Press,

1966), 2:310.
56 The literal meaning of Ziyds name is Ziyd the son of his father. On the identity of Ziyds

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

that may help explain the early commentators confusion regarding

whether the Sabians were People of the Book. According to Ziyd b. Ab
Sufyn, Muammad discovered that the Sabians prayed ive times daily
while facing the qibla (i.e., Mecca). Because this was similar to Muslim
practice, Muammad agreed to include the Sabians in the People of the
Book in exchange for payment of a poll tax (jizya). At a later date, however,
Muammad was informed that the Sabians worshipped angels. As a result,
he removed them from the People of the Book.57
Qatda gives a similar opinion on the Sabians. He claims that the
Sabians worshipped a number of beings and that their rituals included
customs from ive diferent religions. Of these ive religions, four of them
are from Satan (al-shayn) and one of them from the Merciful One (alRamn, one of the ninety-nine beautiful names for Allh). According
to Qatda, the Sabians worshipped the angels and practiced the rituals
of the Zoroastrianswho worship ire (wa-hum yabudna al-nr);
[the rituals] of the idolaters who worship graven images (wa-alladhna
ashrak yabudna al-awthn), [the rituals] of the Jews, and [the rituals]
of the Christians.58 It appears that these four religions (Judaism and
Christianity were considered a single religion) are from Satan, while that
of the Merciful One, let unmentioned in the text, is Islam. If Qatdas
description is correct, then it seems that the early Muslims found it diicult
to understand the Sabians and their religion because the Sabians practiced
a mixture of rituals drawn from all the major faiths of the time Islam was
founded.
Al-Qurtubis Confusion

he question of the Sabians and their identity continued to concern later

generations of Qurnic commentators, who struggled with the issue throughout the Middle Ages. Ab Abd Allh Muammad b. Amad b. Ab
Bakr al-Anr al-Qurub (d. 1237) interpreted Q. 22:17 as indicating that

father, see Uri Rubin, Al-Walad lil-Firsh: On the Islamic Campaign against Zin, Studia
Islamica 77-78 (1993), 5-26, at 13-14.
57 Al-abar, Jmi al-Bayn, 2:147.
58 Al-Rz, al-Tafsr al-Kabr, 3:105.

247

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

248

the Sabians worshipped the stars (qawm yabudna al-nujm).59 In his

commentary on Q. 5:69, however, he held that they converted to Judaism
(qad dakhal il-yahdiyya).60 It may be possible to reconcile al-Qurubs
statements if we posit that the Sabians began as a pagan sect, but later
embraced Judaism. his theory becomes problematic in light of al-Qurubs
commentary on Q. 2:62, in which he claims that the Sabian religion was
not that of the People of the Book (qad kharaj min dn ahl al-kitb). If
the Sabians did accept Judaism, as al-Qurub stated in his commentary on
Q. 5:69, they should have been considered People of the Book.61
Al-Qurubs commentaries on the Sabians may also be reconcilable
by examining the Qurnic passages in which they appear according to
the order of their appearance. Qurnic commentator A al-Khursn
(d. 757) claimed that the three Qurnic chapters that mention the Sabians
were revealed to Muammad during his time in Medina. he irst chapter
to be revealed was Chapter 2, followed by Chapter 22, and inally Chapter 5.62 Examining al-Qurubs commentaries in the order set out by A
al-Khursn appears to conirm the theory that the Sabians originally
worshipped the stars, but later embraced Judaism. However, this does not
answer the question of why the Qurn does not identify the Sabians as
Jews, or why the Sabians are consistently described as an independent sect.
Possibly, the answer may be found in Muammad b. Al al-Shawkns
(1759-1839) opinion on the matter. Al-Shawkn sought to establish the
order of things regarding the Qurnic chapters referring to the Sabians,
and thus alleviate the confusion surrounding the issue. In his commentary
on Q. 2:62, he reversed the narrative described above, and stated that the
Sabians were a sect of Judaism or Christianity that began to worship angels.
As a result, they were no longer considered People of the Book (wa-samm
hdhihi al-irqa bia, li-nnah kharajat min dn al-yahd wal-nar waabad al-malika).63

59 Al-Qur ub, al-Jmi, 12:22.

60 Ibid., 6:246.
61 Ibid., 1:434.
62 Mu
ammad b. Ayyb Ibn al-urays, Fa il al-Qurn (Damascus: Dr al-Fikr, 1987), 33-34.
63 Al-Shawkn, Fat
al-Qadr, 1:76.

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

Al-Qurub and other commentators attempted to reconcile these

contradictions through an etymological examination of the Sabians
Arabic name, speciically the Arabic root .b.., which, they argued, means
converting religion. As a result, these commentators argued that a Sabian
was someone who changed his religion in favor of another (man kharaja wamla min dn il dn). As evidence for this claim, the commentators cited
various traditions according to which Muammad, ater he abandoned
idolatry, was referred to as a Sabian.64
Other commentators attempted to analyze the individual verses
that refer to the Sabians instead of comparing the verses to each other.
Mamd b. Umar al-Zamakhshar (1074-1144), for example, analyzed
Q. 22:17 by dividing the religions it cites into two groups: the believers
[i.e., Muslims] and the Jews in one group, and the Sabians and Christians
in the other. According to al-Zamakhshar, Allh referred to the Sabians
and the Christians as a single group because the Sabians were a sect of
Christianity (juila al-bin maa al-nar li-nnahum nawun minhum).65
In their commentaries on Q. 2:62, Jall al-Dn al-Maall (13891459) and Jall al-Dn al-Suy (1445-1505) argue that the Sabians were
a sect (ifa) of Judaism or Christianity.66 By contrast, their commentaries
on Q. 5:69 and Q. 22:17 identify the Sabians as a Jewish sect (irqa).67 he
commentators divided the religions mentioned in Q. 22:17 into three
groups: the believers in one group, the Jews and Sabians in a second
group, and the Christians in a third group. he diferences between the
commentaries of al-Jallayn seem to indicate that the Christians they refer
to were actually an early Judaizing sect of Christianity that still followed
many Jewish customs.68
64 Al-Qur ub, al-Jmi, 1:434.
65 Ma md b. Umar al-Zamakhshar, al-Kashshf an aqiq al-Tanzl wa-Uyn al-Tawl f
Wujh al-Tawl, 3 vols. (Egypt: Mu af al-Nt al-alab wa-Awlduhu, 1948), 1:343.
66 Al-Ma
all, Tafsr al-Jallayn, 13.
67 Ibid., 157.
68 It is interesting that many of the late Qurnic commentators argued that the Sabians were

a Christian sect, while some of the above mentioned early Qurnic commentators specifically
stated that they were not Christians. The argument according to which the Sabians are not
Christians can be found among later scholars such as the Mutazilite theologian Abd al-Jabbr
al-Asadbd (935-1025). He argued that we can not deny the possibility that the Sabians

249

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

250

The Sabians According to Maimonides

A study in the third part of he Guide of the Perplexed, as well as the various
partial descriptions of the Sabians given by Maimonides, along with a comparison to the opinions mentioned above, reveals some interesting
similarities. We have seen that in all the opinions given by Mujhid, he
mentions a Zoroastrian element in the Sabians religion. asan al-Bar
also claims that the Sabians practiced Zoroastrianism (qawm kal-majs).
In the forty-seventh chapter of the third part of he Guide of the Perplexed,
Maimonides describes the Sabians as the remnants of the Zoroastrians
(baqiyyat al-majs).69
Qatda, as we saw above, claimed that the Sabians were the Chaldeans
(kaldnyn), Abrahams ancestors. his view was shared by Maimonides
view as well.70 he Chaldeans, according to Qatda, worshipped the
heavens and the stars, and used astrology to dictate the course of their
lives. Some of Maimonides references to the Sabians also accuse them
of practicing astrology and witchcrat.71 Ibn Ab Ziyd, citing his father,
reported that the Sabians lived in Kth, Iraq. Maimonides wrote that the
Sabians believed Abraham had been raised in Kth.72
Maimonides claimed that his research into Sabian ritual relied
extensively on Ibn Washiyyas Book of Nabatean Agriculture.73 In ancient
times, according to Maimonides, agriculture was intimately connected
with idolatrous rituals. When they discussed the Sabians, the early Qurnic
commentators also dealt, albeit indirectly, with the subject of agriculture.
his appears to be revealed by studying the details given in separate Qurnic
commentaries. A b. Ab Rab and his student Ibn Jurayj claimed that
the Sabians lived in the Sawd, a large and fertile center of agriculture in
mentioned by Muslim jurists had become extinct. See Abd al-Jabbr al-Asadbd, Kitb
al-Mughn f Abwb al-Taw d wal-Adl (Cairo: al-Dr al-Mi riyya lil-Talf wal-Tarjama,
1961), 5:152-154. Translation taken from Schwartz, Amulets, 283-285.
69 Maimonides, Dallat al- irn, 3:47.
70 Ibid., 3:47.
71 Ibid., 1:63; 3:37.
72 Ibid., 3:29.
73 Ibid., 3:29.

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

Iraq. Ibn Ab Ziyd, for his part, held that Kth is in the Sawd. Qatda
and Maimonides agreed that Abraham originally came from Kth, a place
of idolatry. Kth, as we have seen, is in the Sawd. Ater the Muslims
conquered the Sawd they allowed the original residentswho, according
to some of the above mentioned commentators, were Sabiansto remain,
so they could work the land and provide the conquerors with tax payments.
A second claim ascribed to Qatda holds that the Sabians worshipped
a number of beings, and that their rituals included customs from ive
diferent religions. hey worshipped the angels and graven images, and they
practiced rituals taken from Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Christianity.
Maimonides claims that the Sabians built a statue for the stars, golden
statues for the sun, and silver statues for the moon.74 He also asserted that
some of them worshipped demons.75
Ibn Abbs argued that the Sabians were Christian pilgrims who
shaved the centers of their heads. Yet he forbade eating from the Sabians
sacriices because he did not believe that the Sabians were People of the
Book. As we have seen, this opinion may have been based on an order
given by Muammad that called on Muslim soldiers to decapitate those
who shaved the centers of their heads because, Muammad claimed,
they worshipped Satan. Maimonides wrote that even though the Sabians
considered blood to be highly impure, they ate it because it was the food of
the devils.76
Despite the apparent similarities between Maimonides and the earliest Qurnic commentators views on the Sabians, there is one aberration.
Muqtil b. Sulaymn and al-Khall b. Amad argued that the Sabians practiced the religion of Noah, or at least tried to. Maimonides claims that the
Sabians condemned Noah because he never worshipped an idol.77
Based on the similarities cited above, can we argue that Maimonides
was familiar with the literature that cited the earliest Qurnic commentators

74 Ibid., 3:29. It is noteworthy that the well-known Cordovan Qurnic commentator Mu ammad
b. A mad al-Qur ub (d. 1237)more than fifty years after Maimonidesalso claimed (and

he was not the only one) that the Sabians worshipped the stars (qawm yabudna al-nujm).
75 Ibid., 3:46.
76 Ibid., 3:46.
77 Ibid., 3:47.

251

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

252

on the Sabians identity? In his missive to the sages of Provence, Maimonides

declares that there is no monograph in Arabic that deals with astrology
(an art ascribed to the Sabians) that he has not read and fully understood.
According to Dov Schwartz, It is likely that if Maimonides troubled
himself to read negligible monographs, as he testiies of himself, he also
read common theological monographs that contained heresiographic
descriptions of diferent forms of idolatry.78
Schwartz mentions the Jewish and Islamic sources that might have
shaped Maimonides perspective on the motives of idolaters79 and points
out that, as opposed to other scholars and philosophers, Maimonides cites
his sources. Indeed, Maimonides cited various sources on the subject, such
as Ibn Washiyya, but he did not mention the Qurnic commentators.
hus, we cannot say for sure that he was familiar with their views regarding
the Sabians. It is interesting, however, that so many of the opinions ascribed
to the early Qurnic commentators are collected in chapters forty-six andforty seven of the third part of he Guide of the Perplexed.
Sara Stroumsas article, he Sabians of arrn and the Sabians of
Maimonides, includes a possible explanation:
Maimonides knowledge of Arabic opened before him a world
of philosophic and heresiographic literature, through which he
knew about the Sabiansnot those being searched for by modern
research, but the confusing myth of the Sabians as a collective
name that includes various familiar nations of the twelth century,
a myth in which Maimonides believed he discovered the essence of
idolatry.80
Conclusion

As we have seen, the early and late Qurnic commentators provided

many answers to the question of the Sabians and their identity. Sometimes

78 Schwartz, Amulets, 22-23. For details on the sources that Maimonides used, see Schwartz,

Astral Magic, 99-101.

79 Ibid., 24-32. Possible influences are discussed until 34. See also Stroumsa, The Sabians, 285-

292; Pines, The Philosophic Sources of Maimonides, 103-173.

80 Stroumsa, The Sabians, 290.

The Identity of the Sabians: Some Insights

Haggai Mazuz

there was agreement and synthesis between them, sometimes profound

disagreement. As a result, Islamic tradition presents the Sabians as
everything from monotheists to idolaters to syncretists, to a sect lacking
any religion at all.
Muslim scholars were scattered throughout the Muslim empire, from
Khawarizm and Bara to Cordova. he day-to-day life of these scholars was
taken up with religious polemic and discussion, as well as studying with their
teachers. As a result they were rarely in the ield, so to speak.81 herefore,
it appears that they based their ideas about the outside world on reports
they received from wanderers, merchants, and Islamic missionaries, all of
whom traveled in the lands of the Sawd, which comprised an enormous
territory.
Because of the Sawds great size, it was quite religiously and
ethnically diverse. he tbin and tbi tbin, therefore, would have
received extremely varied reports about the various religious sects
and peoples living in the region. Although it is not possible to arrive at
an unambiguous conclusion to the question of the Sabians identity, the
description which is likely closest to the truth and combines all the ideas
and interpretations presented in this article regarding the identity of the
Sabians is that of historian Ab ayyn Al b. Muammad al-Tawd (d.
1023). Al-Tawds description of the Sabians matches Qatdas second
description of the Sabians mentioned above, and may help explain the
varied opinions expressed by Mujhid. According to al-Tawd, he
Sabians, more than anybody else, are interested in diferent religions and
the study of them and they try to achieve knowledge of their truths.82
We have seen that Maimonides believed the Sabians to be an ancient
nation that had existed since the days of Shet, the son of Adam. During the
three millennia between the time of Shet and the appearance of Christianity
(and then Islam), Judaism was the only non-idolatrous religion in the
world. hus, the world in that era was divided between the Children of
Israel and the idolatersus and them. Maimonides referred to idolaters

81 Mujhid is exceptional in that he was known to be willing to go to great lengths to discover the
true meaning of a Qurnic verse, and was considered a well-traveled man (ra l).
82 Ab
ayyn Al b. Mu ammad al-Taw d, Kitb al-Imt wal-Mnasa, 3 vols. (Cairo: Lajnat

al-Talf wal-Tarjama wal-Nashr, 1939), 81.

253

J e w i s h P h i l o s o p hy
Pe r sp e c t i ve s a n d R e t rosp e c t i ve s

254

of all kinds as Sabians. he Sabians, then, were the antithesis of Judaism.

hrough opposition to and diferentiation from the Sabians, the Jew
deines his identity.83 his theory, it seems, was the reason Maimonides was
so eager to discover the truth about the Sabian religion.
he early Qurnic commentators ascribed to the Sabians all the
religions and beliefs that were common to the Semitic territory of their
era: Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, a pure monotheism unrelated
to any religion, and, inally, idolatry. According to one of their theories,
the Sabians prayed ive times a day facing Mecca, fasted thirty days a year,
and believed in a single, unique God, referring to him with the phrase:
here is no other God than Allh. his is half of the Muslim testament
(shahda). he other half recognizes Muammad as Allhs messenger. he
prayer, the fast and the testament are three of the ive pillars of Islam
(arkn al-Islm).84 hey are also the most frequently practiced of the ive
pillars. his description appears to indicate that Sabian practice was almost
totally Islamic. Yet in all of the various opinions given by the early Qurnic
commentators, the Sabian is everything but a Muslim. It appears, then,
that in addition to the apparent similarities between Maimonides and the
earliest Qurnic commentators views on the Sabians, both of them had
the same perception of the Sabians. hey used them as a tool to deine their
own identity regarding the other and as a symbol of all outside and exterior
beliefs and perceptions.
83

It is worth pointing out that the Muslims had a similar principle. Islamic sources indicate that
Muslims often sought to distance and differentiate themselves from other religions such as
Judaism, as well as Christianity and Zoroastrianism. This principle was called mukhlafa, i.e.,
doing the opposite of those around you. On Islams desire to differentiate itself from other
religions, see Haggai Mazuz, Menstruation and Differentiation: How Muslims Differentiated
Themselves from Jews Regarding the Laws of Menstruation, Der Islam 87 (2012), 204-223;
Idem, Menstruation and Its Legislation: The Evolution and Crystallization of the Law of Menses
in the Islamic Juristic Tradition. With an introduction by Moshe Sharon (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan
University Press, forthcoming) [Hebrew]; Idem, The Relationship between Islam and Judaism:
A Neglected Aspect, The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (Forthcoming).

84 The other two pillars are the pilgrimage to Mecca ( ajj) and alms-giving (zakh). The

pilgrimage to Mecca is a pillar that the Muslim has to perform only once in his lifetime. If he
can not perform itphysically or financiallyhe is not required to do so. We have seen that,
according to one of the opinions mentioned above, the Sabians prayed towards Mecca. In other
words, the city had a ritual and a mystical significance for them; just as it did for Muslims.