^{page 527 note 1} His full name is usually given as Abū Ja'far Muḥammad b. Muḥammad b. Ḥasan (or Ḥusayn) aṭ-Ṭūsī, but he is briefly called Khwāja Naṣīr, or Khwāja Naṣsīr-i-Ṭūsī, or (by Shi'ite writers) Muḥaqqiq-i-Ṭūsī. He was born the 11th Jum. I, 597 a.h., i.e. the 17th February, 1201, and died at Baghdad the 18th Dhi'l-ḥijja, 672 a.h., i.e. the 25th June, 1274. His family was originally from Jahrūd, a village in the district of Sāwa (between Ṭihrān and Hamadān) in the province of Ray.

^{page 527 note 2} There is hardly sufficient ground to speak about the “first” and the “second” edition of the Akhlāq-ī-Nāṣirī (cf. Browne, E. G., Lit. Hist, of Persia, vol. ii, p. 220)Google Scholar, because, as Ṭūsī himself mentions in his introductory lines, the alteration was made only in the initial passage, and the whole of the text of the treatise was left unaltered. We therefore may think that the changed passage was simply the doxology and the dedication.

^{page 527 note 3} Most probably this abandoned doxology contained the pedigree of the Ismailite Imams which is referred to in the Dabistān-i-madhāhib (lith. Lucknow, 1321, p. 275).

^{page 527 note 4} Ṭūsī's biography is briefly summarized in Browne's, E. G.Lit. Hist, of Persia, vol. ii, pp. 484–6Google Scholar, and based on the accounts found in the Ḥabību'ssiyar, Rauḍatu'ṣ-ṣafā, Ta'rīkh-i-guzīda, Ibn Shākir, etc. The information given by Nūru'1-lah Shushtarī in his Majālisu'l-mu'minīn gives a version substantially differing from these. Mujmal-i-Faṣīḥī gives nothing beyond the date of Ṭūsī's death. The modern work, Rauḍātu'l-jannāt, adds nothing new. Cf. also Ethé, H. in Grundr. d. Ir. Phil, ii, pp. 344, 348, 363Google Scholar.

^{page 528 note 1} E. G. Browne (op. cit., ii, p. 456) uses even the expression “kidnapped” by Muḥtasham of Qā'in, apparently on the authority of Rashīdu'd-dīn's great Jāmi'u't-tawārīkh (which is not accessible to me at present). In any case the story of Ṭūsī's being forcibly retained in Alamūt could not be thoroughly false, as it could be easily verified by the Mongols.

^{page 528 note 2} So according to the version preserved in the Ḥabību's-siyar and its sources. The Majālisu'l-mu'mīnīn (p. 329 of the old Tabriz lithograph) states that the transactions with 'Alqamī preceded Ṭūsī's entering the service of Muḥtasham, who attracted him “by a ruse”.

^{page 528 note 3} It is very significant that the author of the Dabistān-i-madhāhib (ibid., p. 275) uses an expression plainly implying Ṭūsī's being, or pretending to be, an Ismailite (dar hangāmī ki khūd-rā Ismā'īlī mī-namūd, yā, būd).

^{page 529 note 1} There is no doubt that the relations between the “orthodox” Shi'ites and the Ismailites were rarely very unfriendly, especially in those sections of both communities which entertained somewhat extremist views. It would be sufficient to mention as an example the friendly tone in which such a jealous Shi'ite as Nūru'1-lah Shushtarī speaks about the Ismailis where he deals with Ṭūsī's biography. The rapid spreading of Shi'ism after the Mongol invasion and the destruction of the political power of the Ismailis may perhaps be attributed to a large extent to the drifting of the persecuted Ismaili communities under the shelter of the kindred sect which gained influence at that time.

^{page 529 note 2} His Arabic works are mentioned in Brockelmann's, C.Gesch. d. Arab. Lit., ii, pp. 508–12Google Scholar.

^{page 530 note 1} Cf. my catalogue of the Persian MSS. in the “Curzon”, or “Government” Collection in the library of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta, 1926, No. 462 (7).

^{page 530 note 2} So in the lithographed edition, Bombay, 1333.

^{page 530 note 3} Some of the chapters are obviously incomplete, or pass abruptly from one matter to the other. Besides, there are many repetitions, some subjects are dealt with in different places, etc. The general impression is that the work was written in a hurry, and not carefully finished, “worked through.”

^{page 530 note 4} Ṍūsī's Persian, however, is remarkably uneven, and the style varies much in his different works. For instance, the style of the Awṣāfu'l-ashrāf is quite different from that of the Akhlāq-i-Nāṣirī. This, perhaps, may be explained by the difference in the time at which these works were compiled.

^{page 531 note 1} So the Ismailites in India, Badakhshān, and Persia read his name.

^{page 531 note 2} There are many references to this doctrine throughout the treatise, but the clearest mention of it is found in taṣawwur xxvi, in which it is stated that the Qā'im had proclaimed this dogma himself forty years after “the first blast of the trumpet” by Sayyid-nā, i.e. Ḥasan Ṣabbāḥ. This coincides fairly well with the historical sequence of the events.

^{page 531 note 3} Cf. St. Guyard, , “Fragments relatifs à la doctrine des Ismaélis,” Not. et Extraits, Paris, 1874Google Scholar, based on some manuscripts in the Bibliothèque Nationale; Ivanow, W., “Ismailitic Manuscripts in the Asiatic Museum of the Russian Academy of Sciences at St. Petersburg” (in Russian), in the Bulletin de I'Académie Susse des Sciences, 1917, pp. 359–86Google Scholar. This paper has been reviewed at length in the JRAS. 1919, pp. 429–35, by SirRoss, E. Denison. One of the items described in that paper was edited and translated by Ivanow, W. in the “Ismailitica”, Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1922, vol. viii, pp. 1–76Google Scholar. Several short poems of the Ismailis living on the Upper Oxus were recently published, with Russian translations and commentaries, by A. Semenov in Iran and in the Zapiski of the Russian Orientalistic Society.

^{page 532 note 1} It forms the first part of the “Ismauitica”, in the Memoirs of the Asiat. Soc. of Bengal, Calcutta, 1922, vol. viii, pp. 1–49Google Scholar.

^{page 532 note 2} All such cases of coincidence are noted in the corresponding places in the summary.

^{page 532 note 3} It was printed at the Kaviani press, Berlin, under the patronage of the Trustees of the Gibb Memorial Fund, in 1924.

^{page 532 note 4} The Raushanā'ī-nāma was edited and translated by the late Ethé, H. in ZDMG., vol. xxxiii (1879), pp. 645–65Google Scholar, and vol. xxxiv (1880), pp. 428–64 and 617–12. The Sa'ādat-nāma was ed. and translated by Fagnan, E., “Le livre de felicité,” ZDMG., vol. xxxiv (1880), pp. 643–74;Google Scholar notes to both by Teufel, F., ZDMG., vol. xxxvi (1882), pp. 96–114Google Scholar. Both were lith. in Bombay (1333 ?). The Zādu'l-musāfirīn was printed in Berlin in 1922.

^{page 533 note 1} See Ivanow, W., “Ismailitio MSS. in the Asiatic Museum,” Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1917, pp. 362–5Google Scholar. The work in its present form has little to do with Imam Muḥammad Bāqir, and most probably represents the product of a long evolution of the local tradition, perhaps ascending to some early sources.

^{page 533 note 2} The literature of the Bohra sub-sects is fairly large, consisting chiefly of collections of prayers and poetry in Arabic. There are, however, also books in Gujrati, Hindustani, and even in Persian. Amongst these books there are: Dīwān of Sayyid-nā al-Mu'ayyid Hibatu'1-lāh b. Mūsā b. Dā'ūd ash-Shīrāzī Ḍiyā'u'l-baṣā'ir, by Sayyid-nā Idrīs; Kanzu'l-wuld, by Sayyid-nā Ibrāhīm; Mūḍaḥatu'r-rushād, by Sayyid-nā. Muḥammad b. Ṭāhir; Kitābu'l-iṣlāḥ, by Sayyid-nā Abū Ḥātim ar-Rā'ūsī (); Ta'wīlu'z-zakāt, by Sayyid-nā Ja'far b. Manṣūr al-Yamanī; al-Maḥajjatu'lbayḍā', by 'Abdu'1-lāh b. Zaid al-'Anasī; aṣ-Ṥaḥīcfatu'l-Yamāniyya, by Malik Najmu'd-dīn b. ṭayyib ‘Alī; Uṣūlu'd-dīn; Majālisu'l-ḥikmat; Sīratu'd-du'āt, etc. The Mawsim-i-bahār, by Muḥammad ‘Alī, is in Gujrati; also the Majālis-i-Sayfiyya; the Akhbār-i-Sulaymānī tea āthār-i-withānī is in Hindustani (lith.). Several other works are mentioned in the article on the Bohras in the Encyclopedia of Islam, i, 738, where the scanty bibliography on the subject is cited.

^{page 533 note 3} The followers of the Agha Khan in India, the Khojas, rarely read in Persian or Arabic; they use in their writings either Gujrati or Sindhi; even the Qur'an is transcribed in these alphabets, and translated literally into both languages. Their literature is, I was told, very poor, consisting of a few collections of sacred hymns and of prayers; there are some works of historical contents. The real dogmas and teachings have never been dealt with adequately, and all information to which writers on Ismailitic subjects usually refer is derived from the summaries of the legal proceedings at the Bombay Court in 1866 and 1908. There are, however, many divergencies between the different sections of the community. While the more educated accept the works of the Persian and Upper Oxus Ismailis as genuine and belonging to their own doctrine, the less educated Indian followers, whose connection with Hinduism is still very strong, entertain many Hinduistic beliefs.

^{page 534 note 1} See Ivanow, W., Ismailitic MSS. in the Asiatic Museum, pp. 368–71 sqqGoogle Scholar.

^{page 534 note 2} He was the author of several works, cf. the Fuṣūl arba'a referred to in the Kitābu'l-milal wa'n-niḥal by Shahrastānī. There are references to Ra'is Ḥasan in the text published by me in the Ismailitica, and quotations from his poetry. It is difficult, however, to find whether Ra'Is Ḥasan is the same as Ḥasan ṣbbāḥ. It is obvious that his works were in no way “monumental”, and probably were in the form of “epistles”, or small treatises, because they have left very few traces in the controversial literature and tradition of the sect.

^{page 534 note 8} There is no doubt that there was some difference between the doctrines of 'Abdu'1-lah b. Maymūn and the teachings of Ḥasan Ṥabbāḥ, i.e. between the maqālāt qadīma and maqālāt jadīda, as emphasized by Goldziher, I. in the preface to his Streitschrift des Gazali gegen die Batinijja Sekte (Leyden, 1916, p. 12)Google Scholar, who refers to Shahrastānī (Cureton, 150–2) and Ibn Khallikān (i, 168).

⁴ See Browne, E. G., Lit. Hist, of Persia, vol. i, pp. 410–15Google Scholar, and O'Leary, , A Short History of the Fatimid Khalifate (London, 1923, pp. 21–9)Google Scholar, who refer to de Sacy's, S.Exposé de la religion des Druzes (Paris, 1838, vol. i, pp. lxii–cxxxviii)Google Scholar, which is not accessible to me at present. It seems quite certain that the nine degrees into which Nuwayrī divides the progress of the spiritual education of Ismaili converts, are his own invention, an attempt at presenting things schematically in accordance with the medieval fashion of Muhammadan literature. They have nothing to do with either the ancient or the modern ranks of the initiated, and there is no trace of them either in the sectarian or in the controversial literature except Nuwayrī's work.

^{page 536 note 1} The ideas and scientific theories on which the present work is based form a system of philosophy similar to that of the famous Rasā'il of the Ikhwānu'ṣ-ṣsafā' which were rendered accessible to Western readers by the works of the late F. Dieterici, and therefore some acquaintance with them may be taken for granted. It may be mentioned that the Rasā'il are still very popular amongst the Ismailis in Persia.

^{page 536 note 2} It would be desirable to abandon for ever the (unfortunately far too familiar) sweeping generalizations as to the “idealistic” East, with its particular predisposition to mysticism, as an eternal antithesis to the “materialistic West”. There is no superstition and misbelief which does more harm than this. A close study of different Eastern religions and civilizations reveals frequently, as in the case of Ismailism and many other Islamic sects, a decided predilection towards a flat, superficial and formal, rationalistic or logical materialism, a materialism so uncompromising and primitive that it leads often to complete atheism and amoralism. What appears to the twentieth century European as “mystic” is often simply childish “science”, of the most materialistic nature. How many statements of Western science as it stands at present will be regarded as “mysticism” or superstition in a couple of centuries! Such things as cabalistic calculations, divination, magic, astrology, etc., are, and always have been, treated as sciences, on a perfectly equal footing with other disciplines which have retained their right to the title of “science” even nowadays.

^{page 537 note 1} It is remarkable that the system of revealing the religious doctrine gradually was always emphasized by the enemies of the sect as a special proof of its wickedness, while Sufism, in which exactly the same method is adopted, with its “stages” and “positions”, seems never to have been subject to accusations of this kind.

^{page 537 note 2} It must be noted that in this treatise, as usually in the sectarian literature, the words Allah, Khudā, etc., are used only in quotations, and the Absolute is called invariably ū ta'ālā, i.e. “He, the Allhigh”. It may be added that this doctrine of strict tanzīh was entirely an outcome of a struggle which lasted for many centuries, especially in circles inclined to mysticism, about the real meaning of the tawḥīd, i.e. belief in the absolute unity of God; the early Sufis were especially pre-occupied with this.

^{page 537 note 3} This rendering of the term Logos by kalimatu'l-Ḥaqq was most probably a concession to the orthodox Muhammadan teachings about the world being created by the verbal command of Allah. Instances of such concessions, or involuntary reminiscences, are very numerous in this work.

^{page 537 note 4} The author systematically avoids the use of the term which is frequently employed in similar contexts, i.e. 'Aql-i-kullī. It may be added that the word “reason” does not adequately render the term 'aql, which in this case has a distinctly verbal sense, and thus may be rendered by “reasoning”, or even with “reasonability”, or “logic”, or “logical order”.

^{page 538 note 1} The author apparently is not a pantheist of Sufic or Neo-Platonistic type, nor does he recognize the doctrine of evolution in the ordinary sense, as may be seen further on. His evolution of the Universe does not proceed in time, but is apparently inherent in the same single act of creation, and is, therefore, pre-eternal. It is difficult under these circumstances to see why he separates the first links in its chain from the subsequent phases of it.

^{page 538 note 2} It is remarkable that the author carefully avoids using the term emanation (tajallī) which is so common in the pantheistic systems of Sufic writers; here it is not found at all. This cannot be attributed entirely to occasional omission.

^{page 538 note 3} The difficulty of finding a term which may render adequately the meaning of this expression is here accentuated by the wide sense in which it is here used. The term nafs comprises here not only different functions of a living organism, such as metabolism, the activity of sensory and motor nerves, with their conscious and reflexive action, but also higher forms, of instinct, memory, perception, etc., in short, different functions of mind except its reasoning power and self-consciousness.

^{page 538 note 4} The ma'ād is explained philosophically in the text as the Neo-Platonistic “ascension” of imperfect things to more perfect ones, and has apparently nothing to do with the orthodox doctrine of resurrection of bodies.

^{page 339 note 1} The doctrine of the naṣṣ is much obscured by the different meanings given to this term by different authors, and by different sects of Shi'ism. It appears as if the correct meaning of the term in Ismailism is succession by “the Mercy of God”, and not due to personal nomination of the Imamfather, as one often hears. The miraculous powers, which it is supposed to carry with it, are obviously of the same nature as, for instance, the supernatural powers attributed sometimes by superstition to kings; they are due to the “office”, not to the person of the Imam. Cf. f. 86:

^{page 539 note 2} The term ḥaqq is used in so many different senses, and is so confusing, that it is very often difficult to find an adequate expression for it in English. Here ḥaqq obviously means something like a “correct and consistent line of action”.

^{page 539 note 3} See taṣawwur xxiv:

^{page 540 note 1} The treatise published by me in the Ismailitica gives much more information on this subject. It appears as if the author of the present work purposely dealt with the matter in an evasive manner, dismissing it in common allegories about the Moon which takes the place of the Sun after the latter sets.

^{page 540 note 2} At present there is no Ḥujjat. After the death of the last one who was still an infant at that time, it is supposed that Ḥujjat-ship has been transferred to, and united in one person with, the Imam, i.e. H.H. the present Agha Khan.

^{page 540 note 3} See the Ismailitica, pp. 32–6. His rôle is exceptionally emphasized in the mystic treatise Ummu'l-kitāb, where Salmān, who was a Ḥujjat, is regarded as the real creator of the world. Cf. also Dar shinākht-i-Imām, pp. 17 and 33.

^{page 540 note 4} It is difficult to see why the author has called the chapters of his work taṣavrwur. This term is particularly often used in logic, in the sense of “conception, idea”, as opposed to taṣdīq, “judgment.” It seems probable that it is intended here in this sense, and not in that in which taṣawwur means simply “imagination”, fantasy. Or was it a cunning, “diplomatic” ambiguity, purposely introduced in order that afterwards it might be used as a “way out” from accusations of heresy?

^{page 540 note 5} There is no indication as to who this Ḥusayn really was.

^{page 541 note 1}

^{page 542 note 1} The author completely disregards the fact that by predicating to the Primal Cause the “consciousness” and “creatorship” he destroys his doctrine of the tanzīh, or “attributelessness” of the Deity.

^{page 542 note 2} This principle, whioh greatly occupied the Neo-Platonist philosophers and all those who followed them, appears to be invariably accepted by different systems in spite of its being unprovable. The present treatise devotes to it a special chapter (taṣawwur iii), with not much success, indeed.

^{page 542 note 3} In this sense the term 'aql may be explained as a sum of forces (rūḥāniyyāt) working consistently in accordance with a logical order, i.e. “law of nature”.

^{page 543 note 1} Cf. above, taṣawwur ii.

^{page 544 note 1} As the author writes: .

^{page 544 note 2} It must be recalled that the doctrine of “spirits” as equivalent to the more modern idea of “forces”, was much in vogue in the Middle Ages, and such theories were regarded as quite up-to-date “scientific truths”.

^{page 546 note 1} It is remarkable that though this term is so written in the present work, and in the treatise Dar shinālcht-i-Imām, published by me in the Ismailitica, the sectarians always pronounce it tartīb.

^{page 548 note 1}

^{page 548 note 2} .

^{page 548 note 3} Fantastic theories of this kind, with amazingly elaborate details, are very popular in Persia. They are usually attributed to the revelation of the Imam Ja'far Sadiq, and are supposed to be all contained in a “large book” by him. In spite of careful search for this book, I was unable to procure it.

^{page 549 note 1} It is not clear whether the proclamation of the Qiyāmatu'l-qiyāmāt by Ḥasan 'Alī dhikru-hu's-salām, on the 17th Ramaḍān, 559 a.h., i.e. the 8th August, 1164, at Alamūt, was intended as the beginning of this 50th millennium.

^{page 549 note 2} He is often mentioned under this name in the Ummu'l-kitāb (though his name is usually given as 'Azāzīl, or even Ahrimān). This designation, however, is not peculiar only to Ismailism; in some Sunnite works on rijāl, such as the Tahdhību'l-asmā'l by an-Nawawī (ed. Wüstenfeld, Göttingen, 1847, vol. i, pp. 137–8), his name is given as Iblīs Abū Murra.

^{page 549 note 5} It is remarkable that some sectarian extremists believe that the last sūra of the Qur'ān, “say: God is one, etc.,” contains the words of Satan.

^{page 551 note 1} Cf. the Ismailitica, pp. 42–3.

^{page 552 note 1}

^{page 554 note 1}

^{page 554 note 2}

^{page 555 note 1} Cf. the Qur'ān, iii, 30.

^{page 555 note 2}

^{page 555 note 3} Cf. the Ismailitica, pp. 15, 28–9, where almost the same expressions are used as in the present text.

^{page 555 note 4} So it is written also in the treatise Dar shinākht-i-Imām (see the Iimailitica, p. 15 and note 36 on p. 29). Most probably we may read simply Musta'lī, the name of the ninth Fatimide caliph (487–95/1094–1101), who is not recognized as an Imam by the Persian Ismailis.

^{page 556 note 1} Cf. the Ismailitica, pp. 14–15 and 27–8, where again the passage resembles very much in its wording the corresponding place in the present work.

^{page 556 note 2} The text in this passage is somewhat mutilated.

^{page 557 note 1} Cf. the Ismailitica, pp. 15 and 28.

^{page 557 note 2} These degrees are not exactly the same as those mentioned in the book Dar shinālcht-i-Imām (Ismailitica, pp. 13, 25), and as they are still used by the sectarians; the latter probably are a later development. It is clear, however, that neither these older nor the newer degrees are anything like masonic degrees, and that they are not connected with the progressive revelation of the “mystic” knowledge. In the Ismailitic community recognizing the authority of the Agha Khan there are special honorary degrees, or rather ranks, which are bestowed upon the followers for exceptional services, etc. Such are the following nine ranks in their descending order: wārith, rā'ī, ‘ālī-jāh, i'timādī, ḥuḍūr-muk'hī, nā'ib muk'hī, muk'hī,ḍ ḥuḍūr-kāmaḍ1iyā, and kāmaḍiyā. All of them are connected with special offices in the community, which are concerned with administration, finance, etc., but not particularly with any religious duties.

^{page 558 note 1}

^{page 558 note 2} The doctrine about the Ḥujjat occupies the central place in the Dar shinākht-i-Imām (Ismailitica, pp. 16–23 and 31–42). In substance, however, both versions agree quite well.

^{page 558 note 3}

^{page 559 note 1} Cf. Browne, B. G., Lit. Hist, of Persia, vol. i, pp. 408 and sqqGoogle Scholar.; also O'Leary, , A Short History of the Fatimid Khalifate, London, 1923, pp. 25 sqqGoogle Scholar. Both accounts, as also those given in other works dealing with the matter, give different versions, representing, most probably, local or temporary teachings on the subject; besides, many of them are, indeed, obviously adulterated by the hostile authors whose principal aim was purely controversial. The version in the present text coincides with that in the Haft bāh.

^{page 559 note 2} So also in the Haft bāh. Ma'add, which was adopted as personal name by several Fatimide khalifs, was probably the name of some pre-Islamic Arab deity.

^{page 561 note 1} . (This is a Persian translation; the Arabic passage is full of mistakes and misspellings.)

^{page 561 note 2}

^{page 562 note 1} The copy is written on ordinary foolscap paper, 15 by 8 inches. The text, 14 lines to a page, occupies 9 by 5 inches. Large, unelegant Bukhārā nasta'līq. There are 120 leaves, but every page is numbered, with several mistakes in numeration. Dated the 26th Ramaḍān, 1342 a.h., i.e. the 1st May, 1924. The orthography is very bad in Persian parts, and Arabic passages are often so mutilated as to become almost unintelligible.

^{page 563 note 1} This prefix most probably is the same as har- which is common in Kurdish and in some Central Persian dialects. It is often, in fact, pronounced simply as ha- or hā-, and is used in exactly the same sense as in this text, i.e. as an equivalent of the ordinary Persian verbal prefix bar-.