Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

brill.com/jas

Al-Ji (d. 255/869) on adth Criticism

Ignacio Snchez

University of Warwick, United Kingdom

ignacio.sanchez@warwick.ac.uk

Abstract
The notable and distinguished adb and theologian of the third/ninth century, al-Ji,
is usually not associated with the study of adth. On the contrary, he has frequently
been considered a vitriolic critic of the experts on traditions and some of his works
have even been interpreted as a demolition of the science of adth. However, a careful
reading of his writings reveals a quite different picture. In this article, al-Jis treatises
on the imamate and especially the most extended one, the Kitb al-Uthmniyya
will be scrutinised and discussed in the light of the authors acquaintance with the
tradition of legal hermeneutics as described in al-Shfis Risla.

Keywords
adth hermeneutics imamate Mutazila al-Shfi

Introduction
Most scholars of Abbsid studies, even those who are familiar with al-Jis
work, hardly associate the distinguished adb with adth in scholarship, at
least not in a positive way. On the contrary, al-Ji earned fame as a severe
critic of the ahl al-adth. Two main factors seem to have contributed to this
reputation: on the one hand, al-Jis own vitriolic writings against ignoramuses labelled ashwiyya or nbita whom scholars often identify as the
ahl al-adth and, on the other, the critiques of Muslim authors such as Ibn

* I would like to thank James Montgomery for his insightful comments, and the two anonymous reviewers of the article for offering corrections and suggestions.

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 5|doi 10.1163/22142371-12340018

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

197

Qutayba accusing al-Ji of forging reports and contaminating the science of

adth with Mutazilite jargon.1 Moreover, his affiliation with the Mutazila has
strongly conditioned the way in which his writings have been read and the few
scholars who have discussed al-Jis engagement in adth have positioned
the author within a Mutazilite paradigm where adth has no place at all as an
authoritative source.2
A close reading of al-Jis treatises, however, reveals a quite different
image, not only of his attitude towards the experts on adth, but of his treatment of prophetic reports as well. On several occasions the works of al-Ji
praise the role of these experts, for instance, in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya:
Not everyone who wants to be truthful in similar things [i.e. the transmission of hadith] is in a position to achieve this. It comes only with
pre-eminence (al-taqaddum) in the frequent study of traditions (kathrat
al-sama) and the broadening of the meaning of reports (ittisa al-riwaya).3
No one, not even if he is sound of mind and reasoning, should speak
about what can only be acquired as knowledge by means of khabar until
he has become an expert in khabar (sahib khabar) and a seeker of reports
(talib athar). Only if he is of sound mind and has made an extensive study
of traditions, the trouble he imposes upon himself and his adversary is
lightened.4
Another example can be found in the ujaj al-nubuwwa, where al-Ji affirms:
It is surprising that the experts on fiqh have abandoned the scrutiny of
the reports (athar), and that the theologians (mutakallimun) have abandoned the discussions about the soundness of traditions (akhbar), for it
is by means of traditions that people know the difference between the
Prophet and the false prophet, between the truthful (sadiq) and the
liar (kadhib), the sharia and the sunna, between the religious duty and
the supererogatory act (al-farida wa-l-nafila), the anomalous reports
(shudhudh) and the widespread and accepted traditions.5

1 See Ibn Qutayba, Tawl Mukhtalif al-adth, 59-60.

2 See, Zahniser, The Uthmniyya of al-Ji, 18-19; Afsaruddin, Excellence and Precedence, 226.
3 The term ittis refers to the extension or broadening of speech beyond the grammatical
boundaries without distorting the intended meaning, see Gleave, Islam and Literalism, 89.
4 Ji, Uthmniyya, 135.2-6.
5 Ji, ujaj al-nubuwwa, 224.6-11.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

198

Snchez

Also in the ujaj al-nubuwwa, al-Ji states:

People do not benefit from dialectical discussions about traditions
(al-kalam fi l-akhbar) except when [they apply] criteria of authenticity;
and there is no authentication without frequent and extensive study
of the tradition (kathrat al-sama) and knowledge of the [primary] principles (usul).6
The respectful tenor of these statements casts doubt, at least, on a direct identification of the ignoramuses vilified by al-Ji with adth-experts in general.
One could argue that these assertions exemplify the proverbial contradictory
thought al-Ji shows in many of his works and that they only reveal the
inconsistency of the authors ideas. But both this argument and the contention that al-Jis thought would be inconsistent require further investigation,
especially by paying attention to the way in which the author addresses the
treatment of adth. Al-Ji not only praised adth-experts in some of his
works, he also engaged in the analysis of reports by applying the same hermeneutical tools described and used by contemporary legal scholars.
The list of works ascribed to al-Ji, which amounts to 245 items in Pellats
inventory, does not reveal any particular interest in adth.7 We know that
al-Ji wrote a treatise on khabar, which might also have addressed adth,
but those parts of the essay that have come down to us convey a discussion
on epistemology and do not seem particularly related to the theoretical study
of Prophetic traditions.8 The Kitb al-Futy is also lost, but in an extant letter
al-Ji refers to its composition and states that it is an epistle on legal responsa
and rulings dedicated to Amad b. Ab Dud.9 A third title relating to adth
stands out as an oddity in the Jiian corpus: al-Bqilln mentions in his Ijz
al-Qurn a treatise entitled Kitb f khabar al-wid that is ascribed to al-Ji
together with the Kitb f Nam al-Qurn and the Kitb f Radd al l-Nar.10
We do not know whether al-Ji actually wrote such a treatise, but the attribution of al-Bqilln is by no means an eccentricity because al-Ji was certainly aware of the problems and discussions concerning the acceptance of
6 Ji, ujaj al-nubuwwa, 265.12-13.
7
See Pellat, Nouvelle essai dinventoire.
8
The first part of this work has been edited and translated by Pellat in Kitb al-akhbr. Some
fragments of the second part have been edited in Van Ess, Ein unbekanntes Fragment.
9 Ji, Risla il Amad b. Ab Dud. Some of its content about al-Nams opinions is
quoted in later works and has been collected by Van Ess, Das Kitb an-Nak.
10 Bqilln, Ijz al-Qurn, 377.14. See also Pellat, Nouvelle essai dinventoire, 138 note 75.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

199

the khabar al-wid, a tradition going back to one single authority. He himself refers to a work bearing the title f khabar al-wid in his Fal Hshim al
Abd al-Shams, when commenting on the excellence of Al b. al-usayn on the
authority of al-Shfi whom he calls ib al-Risla f Ithbt khabar al-wid.11
This is not the only work in which al-Ji quotes and paraphrases passages
from al-Shfis Risla. Among his works that have come down to us one stands
out both for its sophistication and its dependence on al-Shfis interpretative
paradigms: the Kitb al-Uthmniyya.
The Kitb al-Uthmniyya belongs to a cycle of treatises on the imamate
that al-Ji wrote for an unidentified patron, most certainly al-Mamn; it
is, therefore, an early work probably written in the third decade of the third/
ninth century. The treatise conveys the discussion between the Uthmniyya
and the Rfia about the imamate of Al. Although it contains a typical discussion of the manqib of Al and Ab Bakr, the debate also focuses on the value
of the revealed sources adduced by the contenders to sustain their claims.
Some Qurnic verses are discussed in detail, but the majority of the sources
analysed in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya are akhbr, either adths or historical
reports.12 Based on the Kitb al-Uthmniyya I focus in what follows exclusively
on al-Jis discussion of theory, namely the categorisation of adths and the
hermeneutical techniques required for their evaluation.

Al-Ji and al-Shfi

The ascription to al-Ji of the ideas presented in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya

as well as the characterisation of the hermeneutical paradigm framing the
debate as Shfiite require explanation. Al-Jiz is well known for his ventriloquism and the structural complexity of his works, which usually adopt a
dialogic form. In the Kitb al-Uthmniyya he not only words the opinions of
the Uthmns but also takes sides with them against the Rfia. However, this
does not necessarily mean that he shares their critique of adth.
There are other works in which al-Ji, giving voice to varied inter
locutors or speaking for himself, uses different analytic paradigms to discuss
11 Ji, Fal Hshim, 106.9. The reference to Al b. al-usayn can be found in the Bb f
khabar al-wid of al-Shfis Risla; see Shfi, Epistle on Legal Theory, 323 (545).
According to some sources, al-Ji praised al-Shfi referred to, on this occasion, as
al-Muallib as the best writer of the ahl al-sunna, and stated that his tongue strings
pearls; see Ibn Askir, Tarkh Dimashq, V, 51, 370.
12 For the treatment of the Qurn in the Uthmniyya see Snchez, Shfiite Hermeneutics.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

200

Snchez

legal matters. For instance, in the Kitb al-Shrib wa-l-mashrb, the discussion
about the lawfulness of alcoholic drinks is predicated upon a critique of traditions that focuses on the existence of contradictory reports and the inability of the ab al-adth to deal with them. The question discussed in this
epistle is whether wine consumption should be considered lawful; the premise
that governs the debate is that only through clear Qurnic verses, the sunna
agreed upon, sound reasoning, and correct analogies can be determined what
is lawful and what is not (innam yuraf al-all wa-l-arm bi-l-kitb al-niq
wa-l-sunna al-mujtama alayh wa-l-uql al-aa wa-l-maqys al-muba).13
But the implied author who may or may not be identified as al-Ji
explicitly states that he abhors the blind reliance on discordant reports (wakarahtu ayan taqld al-mukhtalaf min al-thr) and asks: Who are those
Muhjir or Anar from whom they take reports to condemn date-wines and
not to declare them lawful?14 This formulation and the critique of ikhtilf
seem to follow early Mutazilite doctrines on adth, similar to those held by
al-Jis master al-Nam who was extremely critical of using traditions and
even denied the possibility of ijm.15
It would be wrong, therefore, to infer from the entire corpus of al-Jis
works the existence of a doctrine we could ascribe to the author, let alone
to explain differences by appealing to the proverbial Jiian playfulness or
inconsistency.16 The logic governing these texts depends on al-Jis rhetorical strategies and objectives which might change according to generic conventions, the nature of the topics discussed, and the identity of the interlocutors
addressed. That is why a proper identification of the voices and a contextualisation of the arguments are important to understand this kind of texts.
Al-Jis writings on the imamate, especially the Kitb al-Uthmniyya, the
Kitb al-Abbsiyya and the Risla f tawb Al, differ from his other works in
a variety of ways. Although these essays have survived in fragmentary form it
is possible to affirm that they are strongly coherent and, although they have a
dialogic form and convey the opinions of antagonistic interlocutors, they are
all based on similar theoretical premises. As far as I am aware, theoretical discussion of adth seems to occur only in these treatises and the hermeneutical

13 Ji, Risla f l-shrib, 277.2-3.

14 Ibid., 273.1-2 and 277.4-5 respectively.
15 See Van Ess, Ein unbekanntes Fragment.
16 On the scholarly use of humour as an analytical category to explain al-Jis works, see
Montgomery, Beeston and the Singing Girls.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

201

framework al-Ji employs to deal with traditions on the imamate has no parallel in Mutazilite sources.17
Why the dependency on al-Shfi then? Although we know next to nothing about al-Jis possible engagement in legal debates, we do know that he
was an active scholar who must have been aware of the discussions that were
taking place around him. In this context, it is very likely that al-Ji acquired
knowledge through both oral and written sources and that he as such became
acquainted with al-Shfis work, more specifically his Risla. It is not my intention to evaluate here al-Shfis role in the process of canonization of Islamic
Law and the reception of legal theories in the third/ninth century;18 my aim is
to discuss al-Jis engagement in adth criticism. In this respect, al-Jis
acquaintance with al-Shfi and, concretely, with his Risla is beyond doubt
central to our understanding of al-Jis treatment of adth and the debates
on the imamate and kufr.19
In what follows, I hypothesise that the discussion of reports in al-Jis
treatises on the imamate, and especially the most extended one, the Kitb
al-Uthmniyya, is based on a classification of ilm that was clearly inspired
by al-Shfis Risla. This does not mean, however, that al-Ji or the
Uthmns and other groups of scholars whose opinions are brought to the
fore adhered to Shfiite doctrines in general. On the contrary, the khabar
al-wid, for instance, one of the most important sources for al-Shfi, is systematically rejected. But the discussion of adth as authoritative source is, at
least in the debates on the imamate discussed below, consistently based on a
paradigm of source interaction similar to that described by al-Shfi.

Context: The Appointment of Al as imm

In order to understand the hermeneutic rules that al-Ji applies to the treatment of adth, it is necessary to take into consideration the overall context
of the polemic concerning the imamate of Al. In the Kitb al-Uthmniyya,
the Rfia reportedly argue that several revealed sources support their claim
17

18
19

On Mutazilite attitudes towards adth see Van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft, IV,
649-654; a recent and thorough study can be read in El-Omari, Accommodation and
Resistance. Regretfully, none of these studies discuss al-Jis works.
See Yahia, fi et les Deux Source; also El-Shamsy, Canonisation of Islamic Law.
Al-Jis relationship with al-Shfi was firstly noted by James Montgomery in his study
of al-Bayn wa-l-tabyn; see Montgomery, Al-Jis Kitb al-Bayn; also Lowry, Early
Islamic Legal Theory, 23-33.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

202

Snchez

that the Prophet explicitly appointed Al imam and that, as a consequence,

the Rshidn and all the aba who supported them should be considered
unbelievers, since they did not abide by Gods will whence the term Rfia,
the rejecters. For all the possible derogatory connotations that it might have
had already in the third/ninth century, the denomination Rfia is used in the
Kitb al-Uthmniyya essentially as a technical term. In this regard, it is the
Rfi contention that the first three caliphs should be condemned as unbelievers and the concept of kufr, rather than the notion of the imamate, that
which drives the discussion of the revealed sources.
By focusing on kufr, al-Ji frames the entire debate within an epistemological context inspired by al-Shfis conception of knowledge (ilm) which
al-Ji introduces with an almost verbatim quotation from the Bb al-ilm of
al-Shfis Risla. Al-Ji discusses what the common people (mma) and
the elites (kha) can and cannot know in the following terms:
If someone asks: What is the difference between what they [i.e. the
mma] can understand and what they cannot understand? The reply
should be: What they can understand is the revelation, plain and simple
(al-tanzl al-mujarrad), without explanation (tawl), and the generalities
of the revealed law (jumlat al-shara) without interpretation (bi-ghayr
tafsr), and those reports (m jalla min al-khabar) that are common and
widespread (istafa) and have been learned many times and repeated
in their minds.
As for what they cannot know, it is the exegesis of the revealed [word]
(tawl al-munzal), the interpretation of doubtful passages (mujmal) and
ambiguous sunnas (ghmi al-sunan) that have been transmitted by the
elite from the elite (al-khaw an al-khaw) among the transmitters of
reports (amalat al-athar) and the seekers of traditions (ullb al-khabar),
the knowledge of which imposes a moral obligation to be followed wherever it may be, [the kind of report] which does not assail its seeker (l
yahjumu al libihi), and does not invade the ears of him who refrains
[from seeking it] (l yaqharu sam al-qid anhu).20
Al-Ji applies this very same formulation to the classification of akhbr:
The khabar may be of two kinds:
A khabar [the knowledge of which does not imply] a privilege (fal)
for the intellectual elite (kha) over the masses (mma), such as the
20 Ji, Uthmniyya, 252.15-253.6.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

203

five prayers, the fasting in Raman, the ritual ablutions to cleanse major
impurities (ghusl al-janba), and the [zakt of] five [dirhams] in every
two hundred.
And a khabar [the knowledge of which does imply] that the intellectual elite (kha) is privileged over the masses (mma), such as the
sunna of the Prophet on the permissible and the prohibited (al-all
wa-l-arm), the categories of the missed ritual prayers (qa), divorce
(alq), the rites of the pilgrimage (mansik), sales (buy), beverages
(ashriba) and expiations (kaffrt).21
This typology for understanding the concept of ilm is, in fact, a paraphrase
of the corresponding categorisation in the Bb al-ilm in al-Shfis Risla.22
Al-Jis dealing with Qurnic verses and haths is to a great extent based
on Shfiite hermeneutics, but the concepts of ilm al-mma and ilm al-kha
are used here to frame the discussion of legal responsibility within a rigid epistemological categorisation.
It is worth noting that al-Ji uses the same categorisation of akhbr when
discussing the transmission of the qaiyyat iffn in the Risla f taswb Al f
l-akamayn, an epistle addressed to a certain Ibn assn who is described as a
mutazil nam. One of the arguments al-Ji adduces to reject the probative value of the document when claiming the imamate for Al or Muwiya is
that the matter it addresses belongs to the kind of khabar in which the kha
has a privilege over the mma (wa-laysa l-ilm bihi wa-bi-sihhatihi ka-l-khabar
alladhi laysat li-l-khassa fihi fadila ala l-amma).23
In the Risla f tawb Al, al-Ji resorts to this categorisation of akhbr
as well when discussing the accusation of kufr against Muwiya. The reports
referred to in this context are not prophetic sayings, but the hermeneutical principles on which he bases his analysis are similar to those used when
discussing adth. According to Ibn assn, Muwiya became a kfir when
he decided to adopt Ziyd as brother. Ibn assn invokes the principle of alwalad li-l-firsh, sanctioned by prophetic adths, and argues that Muwiya
acted against clearly enunciated rulings (al-ukm al-man) and changed the
meaning of a self-explanatory expression (badala hdha l-qawl al-mufassar);24

21
22

Ibid., 253.7-11.
Although a paraphrase, the text is very close to al-Shfis both in its formulation and
terminology, see Shfi, Epistle on Legal Theory, 259f (434-436).
23 Ji, Tawb Al, 453.10.
24 On early discussions of this principle see Rubin, Al-Walad li-l-Firsh.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

204

Snchez

therefore, he should be considered kfir.25 Al-Jis defence is based on the

critique of the reports on Muwiya: if Muwiya had acted against clearly
enunciated rulings (radda l-man), then the knowledgeable people of his
time, let alone his enemies, would have denounced this, but we do not have
any notice of such act. Moreover, the accusation should be based on an authorised khabar on Muwiya belonging to the category of widespread reports
(la-kna l-khabar bihi mashhr wa-la-kna marf mustaf), but for this
there is no proof.26 Such khabar would be required to sustain the accusation
because Muwiyas alleged contravention of clear legal principles that do not
need interpretation (al-man wa-m l yatamilu l-tawl) would have been
a case of kufr.27 These references are relevant not only for its wording which
is similar in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya and al-Shfis Risla, but also because
al-Ji seems to speak for himself on this occasion and holds an argument
with a Mutazilite.
Similarly, al-Jis aim in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya and that of the
Uthmns whose opinions he conveys is to demonstrate that the notion of
imamate defended by the Rfis can only be based on a source belonging to
the category of ilm al-mma, that is, the kind of knowledge that everybody
can understand. They do so by scrutinising one by one the revealed sources
that the Rfia allege as proof.
Consequently, the dichotomy ilm al-mma/ilm al-kha should be interpreted in terms of legal obligations and responsibilities. If the Rfia claim that
Muammad appointed Al with clear and unambiguous statements (na) and
that, by disobeying this decision, those who did not follow Al should be considered unbelievers, the Uthmniyya and al-Ji with them argue that
upon doubtful or unclear statements ignorance is always an excuse (udhr).28
Therefore, no one can be condemned as unbeliever on this basis, as they claim:
We have never seen anyone become a heretic (alhada) or an apostate
(tazandaqa) as a result of the errors in debating the imamate (min qibal
al-ghalat fi kalam al-imama) and divergences in this regard (al-ikhtilaf
fiha).29

25 Ji, Tawb Al, 448.10f.

26 Ibid., 449.3-7.
27 Ibid., 449.4-5.
28 Ji, Uthmniyya, 149.5-8.
29 Ibid., 270.20-271.1.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

205

This is the overall context that we need to bear in mind in order to understand
the discussion of adths in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya. The adths adduced by
the Rfia are scrutinised to see whether they can be considered ilm al-mma
and therefore convey the universal obligation of recognising Al as imam.
None of these adths fulfil the criteria of acceptance, but this does not imply
that the Uthmns or al-Ji for that matter reject prophetic traditions as a
whole, let alone the science of adth.

Classification of adths

The Kitb al-Uthmniyya is not a theoretical work, but al-Ji explicitly

engages in the discussion of legal and hermeneutic principles on several occasions. He classifies adths according to various typologies in different sections
of the treatise. The criteria change according to the context of the discussion,
but it is possible to divide them into the following two main groups:
1
Classification in Terms of Epistemic and Legal Implications
The division of akhbr into those belonging to the ilm al-mma and those to
the ilm al-kha discussed above is undoubtedly the most important typology to understand the discussion on adth in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya. For
al-Ji, this division is predicated upon human nature not all human
beings have the same cognitive abilities ,30 but in the context of legal theory the most important characteristic of this typology lies in its implications
in terms of obligation and legal responsibility, especially as to whether the
obscure formulation of a revealed source prevents any contravention of the
message it conveys from being considered an act of kufr.
2
Classification in Terms of adth Criticism
a
According to Their Transmission (isnd)
The typology of adths which is focused on the chain of transmission (isnd)
combines qualitative and quantitative criteria and can be also related to the
division of ilm. adths may be of two kinds according to the quality of their
chains of transmission: authentic (a) and weak (af). Those adths considered weak can also be classified quantitatively, according to the number
of its transmitters: the term shdhdh, which can be translated as anomalous,
refers to a adth that has been transmitted by a single individual from another
single individual like him (adth qad yatamilu l-rajul al-wid al-thiqa an
30

Ibid., 256.11f.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

206

Snchez

mithlihi).31 Since it has not been transmitted in the way of widespread adths
(mustaf), it is considered weak (af) even if the transmitter is trustworthy.32
The term shdhdh is a synonym for khabar al-wid and both terms are used
interchangeably by al-Ji. If, however, two or three individuals have been
involved in the transmission of a report and the adth has been rejected
because its transmitters were not trustworthy, the adth is no longer called
anomalous (shdhdh), but only weak (af).33
Additionally, al-Ji refers to a qualitative criterion when he differentiates
between, on the one hand, disputed and obscure reports that belong to the
ilm al-kha and are transmitted by experts on traditions (ghmi al-sunan
allt amalath l-khaw an al-khaw min amalat al-athar wa-ullb
al-khabar),34 and, on the other hand, widespread traditions (m jalla min alkhabar wa-stafa)35 that can be understood and transmitted by experts and
non-experts alike, and thus belong to the ilm al-mma. In practice, however,
this epistemological categorisation is only used in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya
when the content of a adth is discussed, not its transmission.36
b
According to Their Original Formulation (al)
The term al as it is used in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya refers to the original
formulation of the adth, which can be understood literally or subjected
to interpretation (tawl). In terms of their al, the adths are classified into
those upon which there is agreement (mujtama al alihi) and those upon
which there is disagreement (mukhtalaf al alihi; a more detailed discussion of this category will be taken up below). The agreement (ijm) invoked
by al-Ji is not the consensus of the whole community, but that of the specialists on traditions. The statement quoted above in which al-Ji vindicates
the role of the expert in this particular discipline (ib khabar, lib athar) is
exactly found in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya where the different types of adth
are discussed.37

31
32
33
34
35
36

Ibid., 115.15.
Ibid., 115.15-18.
See the complete discussion in ibid., 115.13-116.1.
Ibid., 252.4-5.
Ibid., 252.2.
These considerations are applied to the critique of transmission in another treatise when
al-Ji discusses the qaiyyat iffn; see Ji, Tawb Al, 453.10.
37 Ji, Uthmniyya, 135.2-6.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

207

Hermeneutical Tools

In the Kitb al-Uthmniyya, al-Ji explicitly discusses the application of

several hermeneutical tools related to source interaction and adth criticism. Although this treatise is the most important source for understanding
al-Jis dealing with legal theory, this is by no means the only work in which
the author engages in fiqh.38
The theoretical context in which al-Ji frames his argumentation is defined
by a notion of source interaction with clear Shfiite overtones. Although not
explicitly discussed in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya, al-Ji makes sporadic references to the principle of source interaction and it is evident that he takes
five kinds of sources into consideration: 1) self-explanatory Qurnic verses;
2) Qurnic verses that need to be interpreted with a supplementary source;
3) self-explanatory adths; 4) adths that need to be interpreted with a supplementary source; and 5) ijm, which al-Ji defines as a form of khabar, a
repository of common knowledge that comprises historical knowledge as well
as previously and unanimously accepted interpretations of the revelation.39
Both this categorisation and the definition of khabar broadly correspond to
al-Shfis treatment of the revealed sources and his concept of bayn.40
Al-Jis discussion of adth can be classified, therefore, according to the
rubrics jumla/na, mm/kh, nsikh/manskh (not discussed in the Kitb
al-Uthmniyya but in the extant fragments of the Kitb al-Abbsiyya), and,
additionally, also according to categories proper to adth criticism such as
isnd and ikhtilf.41
1 Jumla/Na
The definition of kha and mma found in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya is, to
some extent, the social translation of the hermeneutical differences between
two kinds of sources: on the one hand, ambiguous or complicated texts that
need further elucidation and can only be grasped by the kha; and, on the
38

See, e.g., the discussion of abrogation in the Kitb al-Abbsiyya discussed below. Another
example of al-Jis use of legal theory can be found in the Risla f l-qiyn; see Snchez,
Reading Adab as Fiqh. The Kitb al-ayawn also engages the discussion of law, see Miller,
More than the Sum of its Parts, 317-336.
39 Ji, Uthmniyya, 116.1-2.
40 See Lowry, Early Islamic Legal Theory, 23-33 (on bayn); 321-357 (on ijm). On al-Jis
engagement with al-Shfis definition of bayn, see Montgomery, Al-Jis Kitb
al-Bayn.
41 My discussion of these categories is mainly based on Lowrys analysis of al-Shfis Risla;
see Lowry, Early Islamic Legal Theory, 61-117.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

208

Snchez

other, self-explanatory texts that can be understood by the kha and the
mma alike.
The definition of these terms in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya is similar to the
one found in the Risla, where al-Shfi discusses and applies the categories
of jumla (non self-explanatory) and na (self-explanatory). The terminology
used in Jis treatise, however, is slightly different. In his definition of kha
and mma, the author uses the same terms that are found in the Risla: jumla
and mujmal are opposed to the term man, which in this case clearly refers
to self-explanatory texts.42 In the rest of the treatise, however, the verb naa
is almost exclusively used to refer to the Prophets designation of Al as imam.
The usual expression for reference to Qurnic verses or hadths that need or
do not need interpretation is a periphrasis including the verb itamala: either
yatamilu l-tawl or l yatamilu l-tawl. Other terms and expressions conveying the meaning of the category of self-explanatory texts include the verb
naaqa (to speak clearly) and the participle niq.43 The participle hir also
refers to Qurnic verses of which the meaning is evident and should be understood literally.44
The treatment of the category of self-explanatory vs. non self-explanatory
texts in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya always overlaps with a discussion of other textual characteristics, but the exposition of the adth of Hrn and Ms, also
called the manzila adth, aptly illustrate the application of this rubric.45 The
Prophet reportedly had uttered the manzila adth just before leaving Medina
to fight the Battle of Tabuk. According to the tradition, the Prophet left Al as
his deputy stating: anta minni bi-manzilat Harun min Musa, your status with
regard to mine is like that of Aaron with regard to Moses. For the Rfia, this
is a clear reference to the succession of Al that should be admitted as proof,46
but the Uthmniyya impugn the adth because it is a khabar al-wid.47
Nevertheless, they proceed to discuss the report as if it were admissible in
order to prove, first, the incoherence of the Rfi interpretation of its literal
meaning; second, that a figurative meaning cannot be proof of Als imamate.
The Uthmniyya argue that the meaning of this adth is by no means univocal. First, if Muammad had designated someone to substitute him while
42 Ji, Uthmniyya, 253.1 (jumlat al-shara); 253.3 (tafsr al-mujmal); 258.6 (jumal alsunan...jumal al-shara); 258.7 (kull al-man).
43 Ibid., 44.2 and 239.3 (naaqa bihi l-qurn); and 14.8 (kitb niq).
44 Ibid., 118.3 (amm hir al-kalm); 119.7 (man l-kalm an hir lafihi).
45 On this adth see Miskinzoda, Significance of the adth of the position of Aaron.
46 Ji, Uthmniyya, 153.8f.
47 Ibid., 158.17-159.3.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

209

being on a military campaign, it would have been known. But there are no
references whatsoever to Al, Ab Bakr, or Umar in this regard,48 so the Rfi
contention that Muammad appointed Al as deputy is not supported by historical evidence.49 Second, if the reference to the relationship between Hrn
and Ms was intended to designate a successor after the death of Muammad,
then the wording of the adth is absurd, because Hrn died before Ms.50
The Uthmniyya conclude that the adth is not self-explanatory and would
need a supplementary source, in this case ijm, for its interpretation. However,
the experts agree about the silence of the sources concerning the designation
of a successor during the life of the Prophet (khalfa) and also exclude the possibility that Al might have been designated as wazr.51 Al-Ji completes the
discussion as follows:
A adth with such a wrong interpretation as yours and such a defective
value as proof cannot be but of two kinds: either a false report (bil)
that was not uttered by the Prophet, peace be upon him; or a valid report
(aqq) the meaning of which is not what you say and the interpretation
of which not what you claim.52
The mere disagreement concerning the meaning of the hadth is reason
enough to discard it as proof of Als imamate, since the notion of imamate
postulated by the Rfia should necessarily be based on a revealed source with
univocal meaning that can be universally understood.
2 mm/Kh
Al-Shfi uses the terms mm and kh to describe the application of a rule
that seems to be general, but can be restricted in scope. According to this classification, a rule can be applied to the entirety of a class (mm, unrestricted) or
only to a subset (kh, restricted), even though its wording may seem to refer
to the entire class.53 This rubric is applied to both Qurn and adth and scholars need to know the particular sabab al-nuzl or the context of the tradition in
order to be able to clarify its meaning in terms of mm or kh.
48 Ibid., 154. 8-12.
49 The Uthmniyya discuss in this regard Muammads appointment of Usma b. Zayd as
commander of the army; cf. Ji, Uthmniyya, 165.10f.
50 Ibid., 154.18f.
51 Ibid., 157.12f.
52 Ibid., 155.15-17.
53 Lowry, Islamic Legal Theory, 69.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

210

Snchez

Several hadths are quoted in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya to explain this rubric,
the most illustrative of which is a saying of the Prophet affirming that Ab
Dharr, one of the earliest Companions, was the most truthful (adaq): m
aqallat al-ghabr wa-l aallat al-khar al dh lahja adaq min Ab Dharr
The earth does not carry nor the heavens cover a man more truthful than Ab
Dharr.54 The formulation of this report is unrestricted and seems to encompass
the entire class of Muslims, but al-Ji argues that it has a restricted meaning
despite its unrestricted formulation (kna makhrajuhu makhraj al-mm waannahu kh wa-in lam takun khuiyyatuhu mawjda f laf al-adth).55 In
such cases, a supplementary authority such as consensus (ijm) is needed to
know that the meaning of the hadth is restricted. In this particular example,
both the Rfia and the Uthmniyya would agree that Ab Dharr is not the
most sincere of the Muslims and, therefore, the hadth is unrestricted in its
formulation but restricted in its meaning, since it must refer to a sub-class. In
other words, Ab Dharr was the most sincere of a limited group of individuals,
but not of all humankind.56
This rubric often overlaps with the rubric jumla/n, but in some cases its
use is very specific, as when dealing with the problem of interpreting plurals.
In a discussion about abrogation, for instance a topic that is not discussed
in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya but is central in the extant fragments of the Kitb
al-Abbsiyya Ab Bakr is said to have quoted the adth: inn mashir
al-anbiy l nrithu m taraknhu fa-huwa adaqa We the Prophets do not
leave inheritance; what we leave behind is given in alms.57 Although the saying
contains the plural form nrithu, the caliph and his supporters interpret this as
a restricted formulation (kh l-khabar al-mm), thus rendering the adth
doubtful (mujmal) and therefore incapable of being an agent of abrogation.58
3 Nsikh/Manskh
Ab Bakr reportedly quoted the above mentioned hadth to underscore his
rejection of Fimas claim to her fathers inheritance. Al-Ji deals with
this subject together with the topic of Umars prohibition of temporary marriage (muta) within the context of a discussion about abrogation in his Kitb
al-Abbsiyya. The discussion on muta is not extant, but the comments on

54 Ji, Uthmniyya, 138.14-15.

55 Ibid., 138.18-19.
56 Ibid., 139.6.
57 Ji, Abbsiyya, 301.18-19.
58 Ibid., 303.15.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

211

abrogation, for all their brevity, are relevant enough to shed some light on the
debates on this topic during the third/ninth century.59
Qurnic rules of inheritance stipulate that Fima was like any other
woman the lawful heir of her father. The problem under discussion here is
whether the general rules from the Qurn should be applied to the particular
case of the Prophets inheritance the subject of a debate between Al and
Ab Bakr. Al-Jis report of this debate is only partial, but it can be completed with information from other sources. They tell that Al in his defence
of Fimas claim referred to two Qurnic verses to demonstrate that prophets do leave inheritances: wa-waritha Sulaymn Dwud Solomon became
Davids heir (Q 27:16); and wal yarithun Grant me a successor [said the
prophet Zachariah] to be my heir (Q 19:5-6).60 Al-Ji does not mention any
specific Qurnic verses, but he points to the claim of Fimas defenders that
the shara is quite clear about inheritance (al-hir min al-shara)61 and that
Ab Bakrs objection is based on one single hadth that reads: inn mashir
al-anbiy l nrithu We prophets do not leave inheritance.62
Fimas defenders argue that the adth quoted by Ab Bakr is invalid
as abrogating source both in terms of its transmission and its meaning.
Concerning isnd, they argue that the Prophets utterance of the hadth is not
impossible, but its transmission depends on the authority of an individual
related to the interested party Ab Bakr and this undermines its probative value. From the point of view of its content, the caliph interpreted the
adth as being restricted to the prophet Muammad despite its unrestricted
formulation with a plural. However, a adth with such characteristics does not
fulfil the required conditions to abrogate Qurnic verses and, consequently,
Fimas defenders claim that the abrogation of the Qurnic verse as argued
for by Ab Bakr and his partisans was mistaken because of a forced interpretation of the adth as a restricted report (nasakh l-kitb wa-kha l-khabar
al-mm).
It is most likely that al-Jis discussion of these passages was in the context of a polemic between the partisans and detractors of al-Mamn who had
restored the fief of Fadak to the Alids and legalised muta marriage. Despite
the fact that the defenders of Ab Bakr are accused of using invalid adths,
it is interesting to see how a discussion of the possibility of using a adth to
59

On this topic see Melchert, Quranic Abrogation, 75-98. Melchert does not deal with the
thesis reported by al-Ji in this article.
60 See the report of the discussion between Al and Ab Bakr in Ibn Sad, Tabaqat, II, 2, 86.
61 Ji, Abbsiyya, 302.17.
62 Ibid., 301.18-19.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

212

Snchez

abrogate the Qurn is formulated in the same hermeneutical terms as those

commented on above. In this case, however, and unlike in the Shfiite tradition, inter-source abrogation seems to be allowed. The contenders in the
debate on Fimas inheritance do not reject the possibility of abrogating the
Qurn with a prophetic report, but the abrogating value of the particular
adth adduced by Ab Bakr is questioned. Due to its formulation and in virtue
of the rubric mm/kh, the adth is proved to be one of those reports that
need interpretation and are not hermeneutically autonomous.
4
Categories Specific to adth: isnd and ikhtilf
In classifying reports in terms of their transmission, al-Ji discusses the different kinds of isnd. Ikhtilf is not discussed explicitly as a technique in the
same way as the application of the rubric mm/kh, but al-Ji refers to the
implications of disagreement on several occasions. The best example to illustrate the discussion of ikhtilf is the adth of Ghadr Khumm.
This adth was uttered by the Prophet as part of a sermon pronounced at
Ghadr Khumm in the course of the so-called farewell pilgrimage. The version
quoted by al-Ji runs as follows: man kuntu mawlhu fa-Al mawlhu Let
he who considers me to be his mawl, take Al to be his mawl.63 The Rfia
adduce a variant that affects the terms of the report reading: man kuntu waliyuhu fa-Al waliyuhu allahuma wali man walahu wa-adi man adahu Let he
who considers me to be his wl, take Al to be his wl. O God, love the one
who loves him [i.e. Al] and be the enemy of whomever is his enemy.64
The discussion of the adth focuses on the term mawl/wl, which is
understood by the Rfia as a reference to the wlaya of Muammad in favour
of Al. The adth is rejected by the Uthmniyya as proof of Als right to the
imamate for two reasons. First, they adduce a defect in the chain of transmission, since the adth was reported by al-Amash who was Rfi and therefore non partial; he was additionally known to be an untrustworthy reporter
(muaaf).65 Second, they argue that there is disagreement (ikhtilf) concerning the al of the adth, that is, the same adth was transmitted with a variant
concerning the terms wl and mawl. There is no agreement about the exact
formulation of the adth and the variant has notable implications. Moreover,
the Uthmns reject the second part of the adth as reported by their Shite
adversaries (allahuma wali man walahu wa-adi man adahu), since it has been
transmitted uniquely among the Sha.
63 Ji, Uthmniyya, 144.6.
64 Ibid., 144.14; and 144.6 for the additional sentence (man walahu wa-adi man adahu).
65 Ibid., 144.15.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

213

The Rfi strategy to corroborate that the adth of Ghadr Khumm was
addressed to Al using the term wl as in the version of the adth they
themselves transmitted consists of providing a supplementary report
(sa-natkum bi-mithl al-laf alladh ataytumn bihi att l yakna laf adalla
al l-ghya bihi),66 the so-called adth of the bird (adth al-ir). This saying (allhumma tin bi-aabb ibdika ilayka yakulu ma hdh l-ir) was
uttered by the Prophet when he invited Al to join him in eating a bird and
then he greeted him exclaiming allhumma wl.67 The supplementary source
not only fixes the exact wording of the report, but also clarifies the meaning
of the term wl. It is therefore intended to prove that Muammads words at
Ghadr Khumm should be understood as a literal reference to Al and not to
any other person addressed as wl. In this case, however, the Uthmns have
no need for a discussion of this tradition as supplementary source because
they directly dismiss the adth of the bird as a khabar al-wid,68 thus holding the adth of Ghadr Khumm to be invalid as a proof.

Criteria of Acceptance Particularly Applied in the Kitb

al-Uthmniyya

The discussion of the adth of Ghadr Khumm in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya

leads to a general debate on the conditions of acceptance of revealed sources
as proof of Als imamate. A prophetic report that fulfils all the requirements to
be accepted as authority is called mustaf. This term refers in principle to the
chain of transmission, but al-Ji uses the expression khabar mustaf generically to refer to a report that belongs to the ilm al-amma. Since these reports
are necessarily self-explanatory, this notion refers to the quality of both transmission and content. The term mutawtir, broadly corresponding to the notion
of mustaf as a widespread tradition, does not appear in al-Jis essay, but
at least on one occasion in the Tawb Al he employs the terms mashhr and
mustaf as synonyms.69 In general, al-Ji assesses adths in terms of transmission and content according to the following criteria.
As far as transmission is concerned, the soundness of a mustaf report
cannot be contested, for it is the kind of adth that has been transmitted
through different routes and is widespread (istafa), thus excluding an alleged
66 Ibid., 149.18.
67 Ibid., 150.2-6.
68 Ibid., 158.17-18. See the discussion on khabar al-wid below.
69 Ji, Tawb Al, 449.3-7.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

214

Snchez

fabrication. adths that have several lines of transmission but not enough
circulation to be considered mustaf, i.e., reports transmitted by and for the
kha, are valid if they are sound. Their application, however, is restricted to
the ilm al-kha.
Apart from references to the trustworthiness of particular transmitters,
there is no theoretical discussion of isnds in the Jiian corpus. The khabar
al-wid, however, is always rejected irrespective of its reporters authority.
The aforementioned adth of the bird is rejected, although it is transmitted
by Anas b. Mlik whose trustworthiness is beyond any doubt (Anas wadahu
laysa bi-ujja).70 The same holds for the adth al-manzila because it is only
transmitted by mir b. Sad and therefore cannot be accepted as proof (m
kna li-yakna wadahu ujja).71
In terms of its content, the hadth mustaf is hermeneutically autonomous
and its meaning can be understood by all people alike, both kha and mma.
adths that are obscure or disputed may be interpreted with the aid of a supplementary source such as ijm or another adth. It is necessary that such a
adth is mustaf, i.e., hermeneutically autonomous and transmitted through
different routes.
When particularly focused on the traditions adduced in favour of Als
imamate, the claims of the Uthmniyya about the soundness of adths are
based on ijm, here understood as the consensus of the experts both upon
transmission (isnd, makhraj) and original formulation (al). This is explicitly
discussed when dealing with the adth of Ghadr Khumm, and the possibility that the term wl refers to Al. The Uthmniyya scrutinise this tradition
by applying a criterion that accounts for both the soundness of its original
formulation (al) and its transmission (makhraj) according to four possible
categories:
a
adth mukhtalaf f alihi wa-f iat makhrajihi
If there is no agreement on the original formulation of the adth (al) nor on
the soundness of its transmission (makhraj) and, consequently, there is disagreement about its interpretation and implications (wa-mukhtalaf f tawlihi
wa-farihi), the adth should be rejected and cannot be adduced as proof
(ujja).72

70 Ji, Uthmniyya, 150.8-9.

71 Ibid., 159.2-3.
72 Ibid., 148.13-14.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

215

adth mujtama al alihi wa-f iat makhrajihi [...] kna

lafuhu mutamil li-urb al-tawl
If there is agreement on the original formulation of the adth and the soundness of its source, but the report might support various interpretations, it cannot be accepted as a proof.73
c

adth mujtama al alihi wa-f iat makhrajihi [...] kna l

yatamilu min al-tawl ill man wid m khtalafat f tawlihi
al-ulam
If there is agreement on the original formulation of the adth and the soundness of its source, its meaning is univocal (man wid), there is no disagreement among the scholars, and it is obvious to all of sound mind, it should be
accepted as a proof.74
d

adth mujtama al alihi [...] ghmi al-tawl, aw al-man l

yakdu yudrikuhu ill l-rsikh f l-ilm, al-bri f usn al-istikhrj
If there is agreement on the content of the adth but its interpretation is so
arduous that only the most expert scholars can grasp its meaning, it should
be rejected because the majority of Muslims cannot understand it75 and they
would be excused in this context for not recognising Als imamate.
This typology of adths is obviously based on a solid hierarchy that is specifically adduced to contest the Rfi contention that the origin of the imamate
was Muammads designation of Al (naa al imamtihi).76 All adths with
a sound chain of transmission are initially accepted (b), (c), (d) and those with
a disputed isnd are rejected (a). In light of the opposition jumla/na, a adth
with a sound chain of transmission may be of two kinds in terms of its content: it is either hermeneutically autonomous (kna l yatamilu l-tawl) and
unanimously accepted as proof (c); or ambiguous and in need of further elucidation (mutamil al-tawl) (b), (d). Ambiguous adths may have divergent
interpretations (b) or be complicated in such a way that only the best experts
are able to interpret them. In that case, they are not compelling for those who
are unable to understand their meaning (d). In the particular debate about the
legitimacy of Als imamate, these two last types of adths cannot be accepted
as proof according to the Uthmniyya.
73
74
75
76

Ibid., 148.16.
Ibid., 148.19-149.4.
Ibid., 149.5-8.
Ibid., 149.10.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

216

Snchez

Conclusions
The typology of adths and the conditions for their acceptance as formulated
in al-Jis work are extremely restrictive. For some scholars, like Zahniser,
this has been reason to argue that it is a typology that is entirely based on
Mutazilite rational criteria and constitutes a demolition of the principles
of the science of adth.77 However, if we contextualise al-Jis classification within the overall discussion of the concept of imamate defended by the
Rfia implying the condemnation of the opponents of the imamate as
unbelievers the conditions are entirely consistent with the categorisation
of ilm and its implications for legal responsibility and moral obligation. This is
explicitly stated in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya when the Uthmns claim:
If the reason for the imamate (al-sabab fi l-imama) would be what they
claim [i.e., a nass from the Prophet to Ali], they should have provided a
adth that would not have needed interpretation (la yahtamilu l-tawil),
and could have been accepted merely by the soundness of its content
(sihhat aslihi) and the trustworthiness of its source (sidq makhrajihi).78
Moreover, adths are accepted as a supplementary source when dealing with
problems of source interaction. For instance, when discussing Q 5:55: Your
true allies are God, his Messenger and those who believe (alladhna man),79
the Rfia claim that the expression alladhna man refers to Al and should
not be taken literally (hir al-kalm). The Uthmns reply to this:
We know that the literal interpretation of this expression (tawl hir
hdh l-kalm) differs from what they say, but we cannot accept it unless
we have a khabar from the Prophet peace be upon him or a consensus of the experts on its interpretation (ijm min ab al-tawl al
tafsrihi).80
When the arguments discussed by al-J are properly contextualised as
is the case with the rejection of the adths adduced by the Rfia in defence
of Als imamate in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya or by Ab Bakr to contest the
claims of Fima in the Kitb al-Abbsiyya they reveal themselves as the
77 Zahniser, The Uthmniyya of al-Ji, 89.
78 Ji, Uthmniyya, 201.16-17.
79 Quoted in ibid., 118.14-15.
80 Ibid., 119.2-3.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

217

sophisticated application of clear hermeneutical rules integrated in a coherent epistemological framework, and not a Mutazilite rejection of ath based
on the critique of ikhtilf. Al-Jis use of hermeneutical tools is extremely
precise and shows that he was obviously well acquainted with fiqh theory,
especially with al-Shfis Risla and the Shfiite model of source interaction,
despite the overall rejection of the khabar al-wid and the admission of intersource abrogation in the Kitb al-Abbsiyya.
The question as to whether the hermeneutic paradigms employed in these
treatises represent the opinion of al-Ji and not that of groups to whom
he gives voice cannot be answered conclusively. I am inclined to think it was
the case, at least with regard to the model of inter-source interaction and the
classification of ilm as adduced in works where al-Ji reports the opinions of
varied interlocutors as well as when he seems to speak for himself. The Risla
f tawb Al is especially relevant in this context, because it conveys a debate
with a Mutazilite and the discussion of reports is based on the same premises
that we find in the Kitb al-Uthmniyya.
It is important to note that the discussion of legal hermeneutics is perfectly integrated in the debates that al-Ji reports in his works. He might be
digressive, but at least in the treatises on the imamate he is extremely logical
and consistent. Moreover, accurate references and discussions to legal hermeneutics may be found in many other of his works besides those quoted in the
current study al-Uthmniyya, al-Abbsiyya, and al-Risla f tawb Al.
Major works such as the Kitb al-ayawn and even epistles considered pure
examples of adab such as the Risla f l-qiyn,81 include discussions of fiqh that
provide a structure to the entire work. In this respect, al-Js works show
that fiqh permeated the Abbsid cultural sphere to an extent that cannot be
determined by merely paying attention to works that we consider to be proper
to the disciplines of law and legal theory.
References

Primary Sources

Al-Bqilln, Ijz al-Qurn, ed. by Amad Saqr, Cairo: Dr al-Marif, 1981

Ibn Qutayba, Kitb Tawl mukhtalif al-adth, Cairo: Mabaat Kurdistan al-Ilmiyya,
1908
Ibn Sad, Kitb al-Tabaqat al-kabr, ed. by Carl Brockelmann, Leiden: Brill, 1904-40

81

See Snchez, Reading Adab as Fiqh.

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

218

Snchez

Al-Ji, Kitb al-Abbsiyya in: Rasil al-Jiz, ed. by asan Sandb, Cairo:
al-Maktaba al-Tijriyya al-Kubr, 1933, 300-303
, Fal Hshim al Abd al-Shams, in: Rasil al-Jiz, ed. by asan Sandb,
Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Tijriyya al-Kubr, 1933, 67-116
, ujaj al-nubuwwa, in: Rasil al-Ji, ed. by Abd al-Salm Muammad Hrn,
4 vols., Cairo: Maktabat al-Khnj, 1964-79, III, 223-281
, Risla f l-shrib wa-l-mashrb, in: Rasil al-Ji, ed. Abd al-Salm
Muammad Hrn, 4 vols., Cairo: Maktabat al-Khnj, 1964-79, IV, 262-281
, Risla f tawb amr al-muminn Al f l-akamayn, ed. by Charles Pellat, in:
Al-Mashriq (1958), 417-491
, Risla il Amad b. Ab Dud yukhbiruhu fh bi-Kitb al-Futy, in: Rasil
al-Ji, ed. by Abd al-Salm Muammad Hrn, 4 vols., Cairo: Maktabat al-Khnj,
1964-79, I, 314-19
, Kitb al-Uthmniyya, ed. by Abd al-Salm Muammad Hrn, Beirut: Dr
al-Jl, 1991
, Kitb al-Akhbr, ed. and transl. by Charles Pellat, al-i: les nations civilises et les croyances religieuses, in: Journal Asiatique 255 (1967), 65-105
Al-Shfi, The Epistle on Legal Theory by Muhammad ibn Idris al-Shafii, ed. and transl.
by Joseph Lowry, New York: New York University Press, 2013

Secondary Sources

Afsaruddin, Asma, Excellence and Precedence: Medieval Islamic Discourse on Legitimate

Leadership, Leiden: Brill, 2002
El-Omari, Racha, Accommodation and Resistance: Classical Mutazilites on adth, in:
Journal of Near Eastern Studies 71 (2012), 231-256
El-Shamsy, Ahmed, The Canonisation of Islamic Law: A Social and Intellectual History,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013
Gleave, Robert, Islam and Literalism: Literal Meaning and Interpretation in Islamic
Legal Theory, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2012
Lowry, Joseph E., Early Islamic Legal Theory: The Risla of Muammad ibn Idrs
al-Shfi, Leiden: Brill, 2007
Melchert, Christopher, Quranic Abrogation Across the Ninth Century, in Bernard
Weiss (ed.), Studies in Islamic Legal Theory, Leiden: Brill, 2002, 75-98
Miller, Jeannie, More than the Sum of its Parts: Animal Categories and Accretive Logic in
Volume One of al-Jis Kitb al-ayawn, New York: PhD Diss., New York University,
2013
Miskinzoda, G., The Significance of the adth of the Position of Aaron for the
Formulation of the Sh Doctrine of Authority, in: Bulletin of the School of Oriental
and African Studies 78 (2015), 67-82

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219

Al-Ji on adth Criticism

219

Montgomery, James, Al-Jis Kitb al-Bayn wa al-Tabyn, in: Julia Bray (ed.), Writing
and Representation in Medieval Islam. Muslim Horizons, Oxford: Routledge, 2005,
91-152
, Beeston and the Singing Girls, in: Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian
Studies 36 (2006), 17-24
Pellat, Charles, Nouvelle essai dinventoire de loevre ahizienne, in: Arabica 31 (1984),
117-164
Rubin, Uri, Al-Walad li-l-Firsh on the Islamic Campaign against Zin, in: Studia
Islamica, 78 (1993), 5-26
Snchez, Ignacio, Reading Adab as Fiqh: al-is Singing-Girls and the Limits of
Legal Reasoning (Qiys), in: Bulletin dtudes Orientales 60 (2011), 203-222
, Shfiite Hermeneutics and Qurnic Interpretation in al-Jis Kitb
al-Uthmniyya, in: Andreas Grke and Johanna Pink (eds.), Tafsr and Islamic
Intellectual History. Exploring the Boundaries of a Genre, Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2015, 187-221
Van Ess, Josef, Das Kitb an-Nak des Nam und seine Rezeption im Kitb al-Futy des
i; eine Sammlung der Fragmente mit bersetzung und Kommentar, Gttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972
, Ein unbekanntes Fragment des Nam, in: Wilhelm Hoenerbach (ed.), Der
Orient in der Forschung: Festschrift fr Otto Spies, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1967,
170-201
, Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. Und 3. Jahrhundert Hidschra: eine Geschichte
des religisen Denkens im frhen Islam, 6 vols., Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1991-1997
Yahia, Mohyddin, fi et les deux sources de la loi islamique, Turnhout: Brepols, 2009
Zahniser, Mathias, The Uthmniyya of al-Ji: An Analysis of Content, Method and
Sources, Baltimore, MD: PhD Diss., John Hopkins University, 1973

Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015) 196-219