^{page 267 1} Called here A.Ḳ. for brevity. F.M. stands for Ibn 'Arabī's Futūḥāt Makkiyyah.

^{page 271 1} MS. Bodl. Laud. 304, foll. 241–244.Google Scholar

^{page 276 note 1} Either omit or read

^{page 277 note 1} Insert

^{page 278 note 1} MS.

^{page 278 note 2} Read

^{page 280 note 1} Sometimes written

^{page 282 note 1} MS.

^{page 282 note 2} MS.

^{page 282 note 3} MS.

^{page 283 note 1} In the Ḳalā'id omitting these words.

^{page 284 note 1} Sūrah xciv, 5, 6.

^{page 284 note 2} Ḳalā'id, , p. 38Google Scholar;

MS.

^{page 287 note 1} Perhaps

^{page 288 note 1} The filiation varies considerably in the different authorities. The probability is that the father's name was Jangī Dōst, with the Kunyah Abū Ṣāliḥ: and that the names Mūsā and 'Abdallah which we find early in the series are attempts at getting rid of the obviously foreign name Jangī Dōst, or explaining it away. That the Shaikh's own kunyah was Abū Muḥammad seems certain: Sha'rānī therefore is mistaken in calling him Abū Ṣāliḥ. That he was a foreigner is evident from some of the stories which will be told later on: as when the Shaikh refuses to preach in public, for fear of giving offence to the natives of Baghdad by his foreign Arabic. It is certain that there could have been no such cause for alarm in the case of a descendant of 'Alī. In the Bahjat al-asrār (p. 88) the pedigree is given on the authority of Abū Ṣāliḥ Naṣr, the Shaikh's grandson by his son 'Abd al-Razzāḳ; and writers on the genealogies of the 'Alids suppose that it was Abū Ṣāliḥ NaṢr's invention. The fiction must be due to one of five persons, either the author of the Bahjah himself, his informant 'Alī Ibn Aḥmad al-Hilālī al-Baghdādī, or the Shaikh, his son, or his grandson.

It has been suggested that Ṣūfic theory required that the great Shaikh should descend from 'Ali; and this view seems to be confirmed by the endeavour which we find in the Futūḥ al-ghaib to make him an 'Alid on the mother's side also, she being traced to Ḥusain. On the other hand, the tastes of orthodox Moslems were consulted by showing that the first two Caliphs were also among his ancestors. And to this too some chapters are devoted in the Futūḥ.

The list of the descendants of Ḥasan is quoted by Ibn al-Wardī, who comments on the names of all.

^{page 288 note 2} A difficult Ṣūfī term, which, however, is explained by Ḳushairī, whose words are thus paraphrased by his super-commentator (ed. Cairo, , 1290, ii, 27):Google Scholar “a Maḳām is an epithet applied to the devotee, and acquired by him through practising that morality which can only be achieved by search, practice, and labour, together with the assistance of divine gifts.” Ḳushairī adds that a man's station is that which he is occupied in training for, and that he cannot aspire to attain one that is higher till he has exhausted the rules of the first. As illustrations of ‘stations' the super-commentator gives ‘content,’ ‘reliance on God,’ ‘resignation.’

^{page 288 note 3} The country south of the Caspian is meant. The Natījah gives the name of the village as Nīf or Naif. Rinn, etc., are mistaken in thinking the village near Baghdad is meant. All doubt is prevented by the testimony of Sam'ānī.

^{page 288 note 4} The Ghibṭah tells us that this year was inferred from the statement of the Shaikh that he came to Baghdad when he was 18, in the year in which al-Tamīmī died. This Tamīmī was identified as Rizḳ allah Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhāb, ob. Jumādā i, 488.

^{page 289 note 1} His name was Mubārak, and we shall hear of his school later on. Mukharrim was a place in Baghdad, where the palace of the Būyids was situated: see Le Strange, Baghdad, Index. In several texts it is corrupted to Makhzūmī. It seems clear that this person must have died in or before 528.

^{page 289 note 2} From the Bahjah we learn that this person's full name was Muḥammad Ibn al-Ḥasan Ibn Aḥmad Ibn al-Ḥasan. Possibly he was a descendant of the famous Ḳāḍī Abū Bakr Muḥammad, of whom a life is given by I.Kh. i, 609; for this person, dying in 403, left a son, al-Ḥasan, who might have been the great-grandfather of Abu Ghālib. He taught in the Jāmi' al-Ḳaṣr.

^{page 289 note 3} The Bahjah adds the names 'Alī Ibn Aḥmad of Karkh. A brief notice of him is given in Tāj al-'Arūs, thus: 'Alī Ibn Aḥmad Ibn Muḥammad Ibn Dāwūd Ibn Mūsā Ibn Bayān heard tradition from Abu'l-Ḥasan Muḥammad Ibn Muḥammad al-Bazzāz; he is distinguished from another Razzāz (Sa'īd Ibn Abī Sa'īd), 501–572, who must have been later than the Razzāz mentioned in the text.

^{page 289 note 4} The famous author of the Maṣāri' al-'usshāḳ, I.Kh. i, 139. His erotic tastes may have affected 'Abd al-Ḳādir in the direction of Ṣufism.

^{page 289 note 5} In the Bahjah this name is given as Muḥammad Ibn 'Abd al-Karīm Ibn Khunaish. The correct form is doubtless Ibn Khanbash.

^{page 289 note 6} His name was 'Abd al-ḳādir Ibn Muḥammad Ibn 'Abd al-Ḳādir Ibn Muḥammad Ibn Yūsuf.

^{page 289 note 7} The well-known author of the work on Nisbahs, of whom I.Kh. (i, 378–9) gives a fairly full account. His life lasted from 506 to 562. He heard more than 4,000 shaikhs, of whom he made a dictionary for his son's benefit.

^{page 289 note 8} Mentioned by Yāḳūt (iv, 121), who calls him Ḳāḍī, and states that he composed a dictionary of his shaikhs.

^{page 289 note 9} A brief account of him in the Bahjah, p. 114. He took the titles Tāj al-dīn, Sirāj al-‘Irāḳ, Jamāl al-A'immah, and Fakhr al-Ḥuffāẓ, etc. He is said to have remained thirty years without raising his head to heaven.

^{page 289 note 10} Called Ḍiyā al-dīn Abū Naṣr. He went to Egypt, and thence to Damascus, where he died.

^{page 289 note 11} His name was Abū Muḥammad 'Abd al-Ghanī Ibn 'Abd al-Wāḥid of Jerusalem. Many of his family were Ḳādirīs. He was called ‘Commander of the Faithful in Tradition.’ Yāḳūt (Geogr. ii, 113) gives the following account of him: Jammā'īl, village in the mountain of Nāblūs in the land of Palestine, birthplace of 'Abd al-Ghanī Ibn 'Abd al-Wāḥid Ibn 'Alī Ibn Surūr Ibn Nāfi’ Ibn Ḥasan Ibn Ja'far Abū Muḥammad al-Maḳdisī: he took his nisbah from Jerusalem because Jammā'īl is near it, and because Nāblūs and the territory appertaining thereto all are attached to Jerusalem, and there is only a day's journey between them. He was brought up in Damascus, whence he went in pursuit of tradition to Isfahān and other places. He was keen in the pursuit of knowledge, and went to Baghdad, where he heard Ibn al-Nakūr and others in the year 560: then he departed to Isfahān, and returned to Baghdad in the year 78, where he taught tradition: thence he migrated to Syria, and thence to Egypt, where he was successful, and got together a following of Hanbalites. In Damascus he had been accused of openly avowing his belief in the bodily nature of the Deity, and this accusation being signed by various jurisconsults he was expelled from Damascus, and even in Egypt, whither he went, he underwent some trouble from this suspicion. He wrote various excellent books on Tradition, such as al-Knmāl fi ma'rifat al-rijāl: he died in the year 600 in Egypt. Suyūṭī, Ḥusn al-Muḥāḍarah, i, 165, gives the name of another book of his, the ‘ Umdah: he adds that he had the title Taḳī al-dīn, and died at the age of 59. He was therefore 20 years of age when he read with A.Ḳ.

^{page 290 note 1} Muwaffaḳ al-dīn Abū Muḥammad 'Abdallah Ibn Aḥmad Ibn Muḥammad Ibn Ḳudāmah of Jerusalem. He was also of Jammā'īl, and YāḲūt, loc. cit., gives an account of him. He was a voluminous author.

^{page 290 note 2} Abu'l-Faraj Ibn Abi'l-Sa'ādat Ibn al-Ḥusain Ibn Muḥammad al-Takrītī, said to have been an author.

^{page 290 note 3} Abu'l-Ḥasan, . A lengthy account of him is given in the Bahjah, pp. 227–230,‘most of it in superlatives, according to the manner of this book. His nisbah refers to a place called Bā'kūbā at a distance of ten parasangs from Baghdad: the nisbah is regularly corrupted to Ya'kūbī in MSS. and printed books. He was also called Rauḥānī, from Rauḥā, a village near Bā'kūbā. He died 619.Google Scholar

^{page 290 note 4} His kunyah was Abu'l-'Abbās. Bājisrā is near Baghdad.

^{page 290 note 5} His names are thus given in the Bahjah (p. 113): Muḥammad Ibn Abi'l-Futūḥ al-Azajī al-Dīnārī, the Blind, known as Ibn al-Wasṭānī. Dīnārī is a nisbah from the name of a street in Baghdad.

^{page 290 note 6} The Bahjah (p. 94) adds Ibn 'Umar.

^{page 290 note 7} The Tāj al-'Arūs mentions this man as a famous Traditionalist. In the Bahjah (p. 113) his nisbah is given as Ibn al-SaḲaṭi, and we are told that he lived first in Ḥalwān, and then in Baghdad, and was a dealer in jewels. Ḳubbaiṭī should mean ‘dealer in a sweetmeat called nāṭif.’ He is also mentioned by Kutbī (ii, 224) as teacher of a man who was born in 610.

^{page 290 note 8} Mentioned by Dhahabī again in his life of Ibn Shāfi’.

^{page 290 note 9} The word Ḳuṭb is largely used by the Ṣūfīs, and is the subject of considerable discussion in the F.M. Flügel (Z.D.M.G. xx, 39) gives an extract from Sha'rānī, whose work is based on the F.M. It would be interesting to know when the Ṣūfīs first took to employing it. In the Bahjah, p. 81, A.Ḳ. has an eloquent sermon on the subject, which is not very clear. Since Ḳushairī does not explain the word in his Technicalities, it probably came into use about this time; and very likely Yūsuf of Hamadhān (note 1, p. 303) was the first person so called.

^{page 290 note 10} Perhaps this person was the great-grandson of the Shaikh: 'Abd al-Salām, son of Abū 'Abdallah 'Abd al-Wahhāb, son of 'Abd al-Ḳādir: this 'Abd al- Salām died in 611 (Bahjah, p. 115).

^{page 291 note 1} I.e. the Shaikh al-Muwaffaḳ; see note 1, p. 290. There follows a specimen of a tradition taught by A.Ḳ. Other examples are to be found in the Bahjah (pp. 125–131).

^{page 291 note 2} Al-Ḥasan Ibn Aḥmad Ibn Ibrāhīm Ibn al-Ḥasan Ibn Muḥammad, ob. 420, according to Wüstenfeld, Index to YāḲūt. The Tāj al-'Arūs speaks of al-Ḥusain Ibn Muḥammad, ob. 417.

^{page 291 note 3} Mentioned in Tāj al-'Arūs with death-date 340. He was called al-Bazzāz al-Baghdādī.

^{page 291 note 4} Not mentioned in the dictionary of the learned of Ḳazwīn (Brit. Mus. 21,468).

^{page 291 note 5} Called al-Maṣlūb, ‘the crucified,’ with nisbah al-Azdī (Tāj al-'Arūs, i, 338). According to Nisā'ī (cited in I.Kh. iii, 410, of de Slane's translation) he was a notorious liar.

^{page 291 note 6} Probably Simāk Ibn Ḥarb Ibn Aus al-Dhuhlī al-Bakrī, called Abū Mughīrah, ob. 132. “He made many mistakes” (Tāj al-'Arūs).

^{page 291 note 7} Zaid Ibn Aslam Abū Usāmah, ob. 136. There is a life of him in Nawāwī's Tahdhīb.

^{page 291 note 8} The purpose of this appears to be to emphasize the dignity of labour.

^{page 292 note 1} This is probably the son of Abū Sa'd, mentioned above: indeed, since Abū Sa'd himself died the year after 'Abd al-Ḳādir, he could scarcely talk of 'Abd al-Ḳādir's “time.” This son of Abū Sa'd, called Abu'l-Muẓaffar 'Abd al-Raḥīm, lived 537–614: he is often quoted for traditions. In his father's work on Nisbahs 'Abd al-Ḳādir is mentioned, and a space left for a notice, which apparently was not filled up. The following notice (according to the Ḳalā'id) occurred in the Appendix to the History of Baghdad, and may have been inserted by the writer's son. The Cambridge MS. of a continuation of the History of Baghdad has no notice of 'Abd al-Ḳādir (Mr. Nicholson's communication).

^{page 292 note 2} See below, note 3, p. 298.

^{page 292 note 3} An inner gate in East Baghdad, shutting off the Ma'mūniyyah Quarter. See Le Strange's Baghdad, map viii.

^{page 292 note 4} As we have seen, the followers of 'Abd al-Ḳādir reckon Sam'ānī among his disciples. If that statement rests merely on this passage, it comes to very little.

^{page 293 note 1} This description, which would apply very well to Ibn 'Arabī's works, seems strange as applied to 'Abd al-Ḳādir's, which contain no difficulties.

^{page 293 note 2} 508–597 A vivid account of this person's public discourses is given by Ibn Jubair, p. 222. Apparently (in Dhahabī's opinion) he was unable to acquire a reputation as great as that which 'Abd al-Ḳādir had enjoyed, and thence endeavoured to depreciate him. The volume of the Muntaẓim containing this notice is not accessible to me. As the statement of a contemporary it is of value.

^{page 293 note 3} The word ṭarīḳah, which is ordinarily used in this context, signifies a system of Ṣūfism. So in Harīrī's last Maḳāamah Ḥasan al-Basrī is said to have the best ṭarīḳah. The meaning of Ḳādirism in the present day is elucidated in the works mentioned at the head of this article; it undoubtedly enjoins the induction of a hypnotic state by the repetition of formulæ and other methods; but it also appears to preach charity to all men. According to some authorities a Jew or Christian may be a Ḳādirī without changing his religion. Toleration of this sort was scarcely a principle of A.Ḳ himself, since he proselytized on a great scale. A confession of faith ascribed to him is given in the Futūḥ al-ghaib (margin of Bahjah, p. 177), which differs little, if at all, from ordinary Moslem orthodoxy. A brief summary of his ṭarīḳ is given in the Bahjah itself (p. 84). The leading doctrine of the Fatḥ Rabbānī is doubtless that of Fanā, or personal extinction in the Deity: and he probably recommended a period of asceticism wherein the devotee could be weaned from the world, to which afterwards he should return, only, however, to take a minimum share therein. The period of asceticism in his own case is put at 25 years (Bahjah, p. 59), but this can scarcely be reconciled with the dates given above. Palgrave seems right in deriving such ideas from India, yet the systematic division of life into periods which Indian theorists reached is not found in A.Ḳ.'s writings. If the word rendered ‘silence' (ṣamt) be anything more than a jingle with the other, it must signify a negative as well as a positive system.

^{page 293 note 4} In the Ḳalā'id (p. 15): “I used to sit in the oratory at the Ḥalbah Gate: then it grew too small for the people, and they brought the pulpit inside the wall between the furnaces and people used to come at night with torches.“

^{page 294 note 1} 600–690; otherwise called 'Izz al-dīu Ibrāhīm Ibn Muḥammad Ibn al-Suwaidī. He was a personal friend of Ibn Abī UṢaibi'ah, who has an appreciative notice of him and his works (ii, 266, 267).

^{page 294 note 2} See note 1, p. 290.

^{page 294 note 3} 550–600, according to the Bahjah (p. 115). He would have been 11 years of age at this time.

^{page 294 note 4} I.e. the MukhtaṢar of Ḥanbalite law by Abu'l-Ḳāsim ‘Umar al-KhiraḲī, ob. 334.

^{page 294 note 5} See note 11, p. 289.

^{page 294 note 6} A Ḥanbalite Hidāyah is mentioned by H.Kh. as the work of Ibn al-Khaṭṭāb Maḥfūẓ al-Ṭūbādī, which is probably to be corrected Abu'l-Khaṭṭāb al-Kalwādhī, 432–515, a Ḥanbalite jurist, grammarian, and poet, of whom Yāḳūt has a notice (iv, 302).

^{page 294 note 7} In the Ghibṭah (p. 47) this story is ascribed to al-Sharaf, i.e. Sharaf al-dīn Ibn al-Majd, ‘Isā Ibn al-Muwaffaḳ, i.e. son of the person mentioned in note 1, p. 290.

^{page 294 note 8} A Rukn al-dīn al-Marātibī is mentioned in the Bahjah (p. 112) as one of those who claimed to be disciples of A.Ḳ. The Ghibṭah has al-Murā'ī, clearly a corruption. From Dhahabī's Mushtabih, p. 471, we learn that this person's title was TaḲī al-dīn, that he was head of the Ḥanbalites in Damascus, and a special friend of al-MuwaffaḲ.

^{page 295 note 1} Perhaps identical with the Shaikh Abū Bakr 'Atīḳ or Ma'tūḲ al-Bandanījī of the Bahjah (p. 110) and ‘Imād al-dīn Ibn Kamāl al-Bandanījī of Yāḳūt (i, 745).

^{page 295 note 2} In the Bahjah (p. 136) a Mājid Ibn Muḥammad Ibn Khālid al-'Irāḳī is mentioned whose kunyah was Abū Muḥammad. Perhaps this was a brother.

^{page 295 note 3} 583–678. There is a life of him by Dhahabī, anno 678, MS. Laud. 279, fol. 110. He was also called Ibn al-Ḥabashī. He was born in Ḥarrān, went to Baghdad in 607, where he heard, among others, Omar al-Suhrawardī, then to Damascus, and thence returned to Ḥarrān: he taught at all these places, and numbered Ibn Taimiyyah among his pupils.

^{page 295 note 4} 538–616. 'Abdallah Ibn al-Ḥusain Ibn 'Abdallah al-’Ukbarī al-Baṣrī, the blind grammarian and commentator on Mutauabbi. I.Kh. has a short notice of him. The story told in the Bahjah, p. 110, is somewhat different. Al-'Ukbarī, passing by A.K.'s lecture-room, said to himself, “I will enter and hear the talk of this foreigner.” He entered; A.Ḳ. stopped his discourse and said, “O blind of eye and heart, what have you to do with ‘this foreigner's’ talk?” Al-'Ukbarī went up and demanded the khirḳah, which A.Ḳ. gave him. This story and that in the text are mutually exclusive.

^{page 296 note 1} 661–728. The famous controversialist. A biography of him is given in Kutbī, i, 35, and at the end of his “Refutation of the Christian Religion,” Cairo, 1905, where reference is made to a work called Jalā'u'l-'ainain.

^{page 296 note 2} 614–673. His name was Abu'l-'Abbās Aḥmad Ibn Ibrāhīm; he was preacher at the Muayyad Mosque (in Damascus?), and wrote on Tradition, etc. (Appendix to I.Kh., MS. Poc. 331). “Fārūth is a large village with a market on the bank of the Tigris, between Wāsiṭ and al-Madhār, of which all the inhabitants are Rāfiḍīs” (YāḲūt).

^{page 296 note 3} 539–632. Abū 'Abdallah 'Umar Ibn Muḥammad. I.Kh. has a notice of him. His visit to A.Ḳ. is dated 560 in the Bahjah, p. 235. Ibid., p. 32, this story is told with the variation that A.Ḳ. passed his hand over 'Umar's breast, in consequence of which he entirely forgot the books on the subject that he had learned. Suhrawardī mentions A.Ḳ. occasionally in his 'Awārif al-Ma'ārif, see above, p. 274, and p. 301, note 1.

^{page 296 note 4} See note 8, p. 294.

^{page 296 note 5} We should probably read Ibn Shāfi', who is cited twice in Yāḳūt's geographical dictionary. The death-date 560, given in “Wüstenfeld's index, is due to an oversight of the editor. He is probably identical with Abu'1-Faḍl Aḥmad Ibn Ṣāliḥ Ibn Shāfi' al-Jīlī (Ghibṭah, p. 30, Bahjah, p. 89); ob. 565 (Ibn al-Athīr). And, indeed, Dhahabī, in his life of this person, states that these two persons studied tradition with him.

^{page 297 note 1} See note 7, p. 294. He meant, then, that miracles wrought by A.Ḳ. prevented their benefiting by the other's instruction.

^{page 297 note 2} Kuṭb al-dīn Mūsā Ibn Muḥammad, ob. 726, author of an abridgment and continuation of Sibṭ Ibn al-Jauzī's Mir'āt al-Zamān. He wrote a biography of A.Ḳ. called Manāṭib. His nisbah comes from Yunln or Yūnīn, near Baalbek, and he had two brothers, Sharaf al-dīn 'Alī and Badr al-dīn Ḥasan, and a sister, Amat al-Raḥīm (Tāj al-'Arūs).

^{page 297 note 3} 577–660. 'Abd al-'Azīz of Damascus. There is a life of him by Kutbī (i, 287), who mentions Yūnīnī among his pupils. Yūnīnī himself (MS. Poc. 132) has a long account of him. See too Ibn lyās, i, 94, 95, etc.

^{page 297 note 4} The meaning appears to be that a man is not bound to hold doctrines that follow logically from other doctrines that he holds. Great offence was given by the saying attributed to A.Ḳ that his foot was on the neck of every saint of God; the author of the Rauḍāt al-Jannāt is very bitter about it. A treatise explaining away this utterance, called Makhāzin al-Ḳādiriyyah (in Persian), by Isḥāk Ibn Muḥammad, is in the British Museum (Or. 248). The author, after making the necessary exceptions, quotes in favour of A.Ḳ.'s pretension Ibn 'Arabī in the F.M., and al-Insān al-Kāmil, by Yāfi'ī (ob. 755), a work apparently unknown to the bibliographies, though Yāfi‘ī’s apology for A.Ḳ., called KhulūṢat al-mafākhir, figures in them. Ibn 'Arabī (loc. cit., i, 262) apparently states that A.Ḳ. was commanded to govern the world, and calls him the Ḳuṭb of his time; he has also respectful references in ii, 24 and iii, 44. Apparently Ibn 'Abd al-Salām rejected the argument that because he believed in A.Ḳ.'s miracles he was bound to accept his pretensions.

^{page 297 note 5} His name was 'Alī (Bahjah, p. 106). H.Kh. states that he died in 513, and enumerates various works of his, among them an encyclopædia in 470 volumes (!).

^{page 297 note 6} Maḥfūẓ Ibn Aḥmad al-Kalwadhānī, ob. 510 or 515. (Note 6, p. 294.)

^{page 297 note 7} Abu'l-Ḥasan Muḥammad, son of the Ḳāḍī Muḥammad Ibn Ya'lī, who died in 438. The son is mentioned (with the kunyah Abu'l-Ḥusain) among the teachers of Ibn Hubairah (I.Kh., de Slane, iv, 115). So anxious are the Ḳādirīs to make their founder the teacher rather than the taught, that the Bahjah (p. 107) makes the father of this person (ob. 438) declare himself the disciple of A.Ḳ. (born 470), and that on the authority of Ibn al-Akhḍar (b. 524).

^{page 298 note 1} Ob. 502.

^{page 298 note 2} He professed to have wandered in the desert twenty-five years (Bahjah, p. 85).

^{page 298 note 3} Ob. 525. There is a brief notice of him in Lawāḳiḥ al-Anwār (i, 180), where an attempt is made to show that he was the pupil, not the master. Sibṭ Ibn al-Jauzī (MS. Marsh, 658, anno 625) gives some more details: he used to give all who were suffering from the fever almonds and dried grapes to eat, and this remedy was effective. He used at first to accept vows and distribute them; afterwards he refused. The Bahjah (p. 53) makes A.Ḳ. associate with him in 499 and 508, when Dabbās professed to have 12,000 disciples (murīdīn), whose names he recited every night. In 523 (p. 20), when A.Ḳ. had already become a preacher, he is represented as warning the latter against taking too high a tone. In 529, on 27 Dhu'l-Ḥijjah, A.Ḳ. with a great following visited his grave in the Shūnīzī cemetery, where he had a vision of Dabbās, otherwise bedecked with gold and jewels, but unable to move the right hand which smote A.Ḳ. The latter, however (with the aid of 5,000 dead walīs), interceded, and his right hand was restored. When A.Ḳ. announced this, all Dabbās's followers in Baghdad came to A.Ḳ.'s school, and asked for evidence. They agreed to refer the matter to Yūsuf al-Hamadhānī and 'Abd al-Raḥmān Ibn Shu'aib al-Kurdī. People offered A.Ḳ. a week, but before this proposition was accepted the two shaikhs came running to the school to confirm what A.Ḳ. had said from their own revelations. Probably an alibi could be proved for Yūsuf.

^{page 298 note 4} I.e. Mukharrimī's, which was enlarged by public subscription.

^{page 298 note 5} His work Ghunyah is rather in the style of Ghazāli's Ihya. A work called YawāḲīt al-Ḥikam mentioned by H.Kh. was probably homiletic. Some other works (enumerated by Le Chatelier) are forms of prayer.

^{page 298 note 8} According to the Bahjah (p. 110) all the jurists of Bandanījain, a district near Nahrawān, professed to be followers of A.Ḳ. A story is told on his authority in the Ḳalā'id (p. 48), where he is associated with Jamāl al-dīn Ibn al-Jauzī.

^{page 298 note 7} See above, note 7, p. 290.

^{page 299 note 1} Ob. 605, according to YāḲūt and Dhahabī, Mushtabih (p. 84), where we are told that he came from Jubbah, in the district of Ṭarābulus, and went to Isfahan. This person is called in the Bahiah (p. 109) with its usual superlatives “chief of the Musnids and jurists.” His written communications to Ibn al-Najjār form perhaps our chief source of information about A.Ḳ. Besides those copied by Dhahabī, there is one given in the Bahjah (p. 102), according to which Bishr al-Ḳuraẓī recovered four camels in the desert by invoking A.Ḳ.'s name. He saw a man in dazzling white raiment pointing out where they were.

^{page 299 note 2} The same story is told in the Ghibṭah (p. 8).

^{page 299 note 3} Author of a work called Anwār al-nāẓir. In the Ghibṭah (p. 8) this story is told as part of a narrative given by Ṭalḥah Ibn Muẓaffar al-'Althi, ob. 693, of whom Yāḳūt (iii, 711) has a brief notice.

^{page 299 note 4} According to the Ghibṭah the Mosque of Yasin; according to the Ḳalā'id, in the SụḲ al-Raiḥāniyyīn.

^{page 300 note 1} This person's praises are recounted by Ibn al-Wardī, and indeed A.Ḳ.'s mother and aunt are made out to hare been saints.

^{page 300 note 2} I.e. of animals that have died a natural death.

^{page 300 note 3} In the Ghibṭah a similar story is given on the authority of 'Abdallah al-Salamī, with considerable variations; the same is told ibid., p. 10.

^{page 301 note 1} In the Ghibṭah (p. 33) Ibn al-Najjār is quoted for the statement that A.Ḳ. was the owner of land which was cultivated for him by disciples, while others undertook to grind his corn and bake his bread. At a later time he (like other saints) lived largely by vows, i.e. money vowed by persons who were desirous of obtaining something, and obtained it. In the Bahjah (p. 104) there is a case quoted in which a vow of this sort amounted to 30 dinars; ordinarily they were of far less value. A.Ḳ. kept open house on these receipts. According to Suhrawardī (loc. cit., ii, 71) all his four wives “spent money on him cheerfully and gladly.”

^{page 301 note 2} This phrase is a rather interesting confession on Jubbā‘ī’s part that the only miraculous part in the story is a romance of his own.

^{page 301 note 3} Ibn 'Arabī makes (if I remember rightly) the same confession.

^{page 301 note 4} “The present Bāb al-Ṭilsam” (Le Strange, Baghdad, p. 291).

^{page 302 note 1} “Took its name from the Garden of Ẓafar, one of the chief servants of the Caliph, though of which caliph, or when Ẓafar flourished, is not stated“ (Le Strange, ibid., p. 288).

^{page 302 note 2} I.e. the Ruṣāfah Mosque (Ghibṭah, p. 13; Bahjah, p. 53). The chronological difficulty in the latter is noticed above.

^{page 302 note 3} This title implies that in another form of the story Mukharrimī was the culprit.

^{page 303 note 1} 440–535. A life of him is given by I.Kb., after Ibn al-Najjār and Sam'ānī. According to this he was born in the village of Buzanajird, came to Baghdad, where he studied with Abū IsḥāḲ al-Shirāzī and other eminent jurists, and travelled to Isfahan and Samarcand, where he acquired further knowledge, and also devoted himself to piety and asceticism. Afterwards he returned to Baghdad in 515, where for a time he taught and preached in the Nizāmiyyah College. After this he spent his life at Merv and Herāt, aud died at Bama'īn on the Merv road. In the LawāḲiḥ al-Anwār we are told that his body was afterwards transferred to a sanctuary at Merv. Some of his miracles are recorded in this work; among them that he released a captive lad at Constantinople, and brought him through the air in the twinkling of an eye to Hamadhān. Further details about him are given in the Ḥadā'iḲ al-wardiyyah fi ḥaḳā'iḳ al-Naḳshabandiyyah (Cairo, 1308, p. 109), where we learn the names of some of his books—Khuṭbat al-ḥayāt, Manāzil al-Sā'irīn, Manāzil al-Sālikīn.

^{page 303 note 2} It was a form of asceticism to dwell under ground; in the Bahjah (p. 31) a certain Ibn Ḳā'id is said to have lived thus fourteen years.

^{page 303 note 3} Bahjah, , p. 49.Google Scholar

^{page 304 note 1} Bahjah, , p. 104, where the passage goes on: “nor would he touch it with his hand. And when his servant came, he would say to him, ‘Take what is under the carpet, and give it to the baker and grocer.’” The expression ‘under the prayer-carpet’ is used in Cairo now for secret commissions and profits.Google Scholar

^{page 304 note 2} Bahjah, , p. 96, where this citation from al-Jubbā'ī is followed by examples of such conversions, which, however, were not effected by A.Ḳ.'s eloquence, but by mysterious voices or dreams. Similar stories are told of other saints, e.g. Abū Sa'īd.Google Scholar

^{page 304 note 3} The 'ayyārūn are frequently mentioned in the histories of this time. The form mashāliḥah = shulūḥ; is not apparently registered in the dictionaries.

^{page 304 note 4} Sūrah xciv, 5, 6.

^{page 304 note 5} Bahjah, , p. 87, where we learn that the Shaikh would continue his sermon after such news had been brought him, and after it had finished go and bury his offspring.Google Scholar

^{page 304 note 6} Since the last citation implies that many of them died, Carra de Vaux is probably mistaken in supposing some of these to have been spiritual descendants, Rinn (p. 178) gives the names of nine sons: ‘Isā (died in Cairo, 573), 'Abdallah (b. 508, d. at Baghdad 589), Ibrahīm (d. at Wāsiṭ, 592), 'Abd al-Wahhāb (d. at Baghdad, 593), Yaḥyā and Muḥammad (both d. at Baghdad, 600), 'Abd al-Razzāḳ (b. 528, d. at Baghdad, 603), Mūsā (b. 539, d. at Damascus, 613), 'Abd al-'Azīz (532–602, Ḳalā'id, , p. 54;Google Scholar migrated to Jiyāl, a village of Sinjār, Bahjah, , p. 114Google Scholar). Depont et Coppolani add the names 'Abd al-Jabbār (ob. 575, Ḳalā'id; mentioned Bahjah, , p. 114Google Scholar, but without details), 'Abd al-Ghaffār, 'Abd al-Ghanī; “'Abd es-Settan” (perhaps 'Abd al-Salām) and “Salah” (probably Ṣāliḥ), who, they further add, were grandsons. To this list of twelve we may add from the Bahjah the eldest son, 'Abd al-Raḥmān, 508–587. Perhaps the most interesting figure is 'Abd al-Salām, son of 'Abd al-Wahhāb (ob. 611), who (says Ibn al-Athīr) held several important posts, but was suspected of being a philosopher; he was imprisoned in consequence, and his books burned at the Bāb al-'āmmah, but he was himself released presently by his father's intercession. Further details are given above. The India Office (MS.) Catalogue mentions a treatise on the family of A.Ḳ., but I have been unable to see it. Though the forty-nine children were not all by one mother, it is not clear that the saint (though he married late, 'Awārif al-Ma'ārif, § 21) had more than one wife at one time, since the youngest, Yaḥyā, was born 550. Their births therefore cover a period of forty-two years, and there may have been some twins. It is, however, to be observed that with the Ṣūfīs, as interpreted by Sha'rānī, polygamy was rather a merit than the reverse in a saint. The Ḳalā'id gives full details of the family for many generations.

^{page 305 note 1} Probably the Ḥilyat al-awliyā of Abū Nu'aim (ob. 430).

^{page 305 note 2} 467–550. Abu'1-Faḍl Muḥammad Ibn Nāṣir al-Salāmī. A short life by I.Kh. i, 618.

^{page 305 note 3} I.e. al-Dubaithī, 558–637. I.Kh. has a life of him. He wrote a continuation of Sam‘ānī’s Supplement. For ‘the Witness’; the Ghibṭah (p. 44) has ‘the General’ (al-Ḳā‘id); probably both are corrupt for al-Dubaithī.

^{page 305 note 4} In the Ghibṭah Abu'l-Baḳā. Probably the former is right, but the person meant is unknown.

^{page 305 note 5} This was actually asserted by A.Ḳ.'s servant (Bahjah, , p. 86).Google Scholar

^{page 306 note 1} Bahjah, , p. 94Google Scholar; Ghibṭah, , p. 44, where, however, for al-'Ikrimī we should read al-'Ukbarī, this Abu'l-Baḳa being the same as that of note 4, p. 295.Google Scholar

^{page 306 note 2} Not to be confused with the author of Subul al-Kḥairāt, a Spanish writer who died 422.

^{page 306 note 3} Apparently this Was a symbolic act, signifying that the person was let go free (cf. Jacob, , Beduinenleben, 137,Google Scholar and I.Kh., de Slane, ii, 382).

^{page 306 note 4} We had a similar story above. Another form of it is given in the Bahjah, p. 32.

^{page 306 note 4} Ob. 563. See I.Kh., de Slane, ii, 150.

^{page 306 note 6} 524–611. His name was 'Abdallah Ibn Abī Naṣr Maḥmūd Ibn al-Mubārak al-Junābidhī (Bahjah, p. 110). Yāḳūt, however (ii, 121), calls him 'Abd al-'Azīz, and states that he lived in Darb al-Ḳayyār in the district of Nahr al-Mu'alla in East Baghdad. YāḲūt was his pupil and praises him highly. The story is told in the Bahjah (p. 83).

^{page 307 note 1} Originally a skull-cap worn under the turban, according to Dozy, Noms des vêtements, who was not then aware that it formed part of the Ṣūfi livery. In the Bahjah (p. 69) a certain Khalaf Ibn 'Ayyāsh al-Shāri'ī, al-Shāfi'ī, being sent to Baghdad to buy a copy of the Musnad of Ibn Ḥanbal, determines to visit 'Abd al-Ḳādir, and arranges in his mind a number of things that the saint should do; among them that “he should put on me the ṭāḳiyah before I ask him.” The saint reads his thoughts exactly and does all that had been in Khalaf's mind. Similarly (p. 43), “then A.Ḳ. placed on my head a ṭāḳiyah. and when it touched my skull I felt a coolness spread therefrom to my heart.” In Lawāḳiḥ al-Anwār, i, 192, we read of the two khirḲahs, the garment and the ṭāḳiyah. And so in the Bahjah (p. 133) the converted brigand Abū Bakr al-Batā'iḥī receives both from Abū Bakr the Caliph in a dream.

^{page 307 note 2} See note 11, p. 289.

^{page 307 note 3} 492–567. 'Abdallah Ibn Aḥmad. I.Kh. has a life of him.

^{page 307 note 4} 497–560. Yaḥyā Ibn Muḥammad Ibn Hubairah. I.Kh. has a full biography. He was a Ḥanbalite like most of the persons mentioned in this text. According to I.Kh. he left two sons, 'Izz al-dīn Muḥammad and Sharaf al-dīn Muẓaffar. The first of these is brought twice into A.Ḳ.'s lecture-room by the Bahjah. In the first case (p. 30) we have a story told by Abu'l-Khair Muḥammad Ibn Maḥfūz Ibn 'Atīmah at his house in the Azaj Gate, Baghdad, on Rejeb 3, 592. He and the following persons were all present in the lecture-room of A.K. on a certain occasion: Abu'l-Su'ūdal-Harīmī (lived till 579, p. 75; F.M. i, 243, 323; ii, 24), Muḥammad Ibn Ḳā'id al-Awānī (F.M. i, 243, 262), al-Ḥasan al-Fārisī Jamīl, “the man of the step and the thunderbolt” (his story told p. 83), 'Umar Ibn Mas'ūd al-Bazzäz (lived till 592, p. 100), 'Umar Ibn Abī Naṣr al-Ghazzāl, Khalīl Ibn Aḥmad al-Ṣarṣarī (lived till 631, p. 82), 'Alī Ibn Ghanā'im al-Batā'iḥī (ob. 573), Ibn al-Khiḍrī, Muḥammad son of the Vizier Ibn Hubairah, 'Abdallah Ibn Hibatallah, and 'Alī Ibn Muḥammad Ibn al-Ṣāḥib. The Shaikh offered to give them anything they wished for; all the others desired spiritual gifts, but the vizier's son wanted to be deputy vizier, 'Abdallah Ibn Hibatallah wanted to be ustādh al-dār (mayor of the palace), and 'Alī Ibn Muḥammad to be chamberlain. All these wishes were granted. In the second case we are told by Mas'ūd Ibn 'Umar al-Hāshimī that the three statesmen, with a fourth, Amīn al-dīn 'Alī Ibn Thībit, were so roundly rated by A.Ḳ. that they “died,” i.e. were thoroughly humiliated. Ḳutbī (i, 198) has a life of Ẓafar son of Ibn Hubairah, who should be the person mentioned in the text; but the death-date 652 seems too late; perhaps we should read 562. And since Ḳutbī states that Ẓafar was imprisoned in his father's lifetime, was released after his death, and then executed for trying to quit Baghdad, we see why Aḥmad asked his grandfather's leave. In the Ḳalā'id (p. 50) Aḥmad is called Abu'1-Fatḥ.

^{page 308 note 1} This person is mentioned by Yāḳūt (iii, 711) as a teacher of al-'Althī. In the Bahjah (p. 116) the nisbah is given as Marfaghani. Neither is explained in Lubb al-Lubāb.

^{page 308 note 2} The story that follows in the Ghibṭah is to the effect that A.Ḳ. took great trouble with the instruction of a dull foreigner, and, being asked why he did so, explained that the man would die within a week, a prophecy which was fulfilled.

^{page 308 note 3} Ibn al-Jauzī, Sibṭ, 583–654.Google Scholar

^{page 308 note 4} Clearly a gross exaggeration.

^{page 309 note 1} 530–556. According to one of A.Ḳ.'s servants (Muḥammad Ibn al-Khiṭr al-Ḥusain al-Mauṣilī, Bahjah, , p. 86)Google Scholar he used to receive visits from caliphs and viziers, and when he wrote to the Caliph his letter was as follows: “'Abd al-Ḳādir writes, bidding thee do this or that; he has a right to command thee, and thou art bound to obey him; he is thy pattern, and evidence against thee.” The Caliph, when he received such a missive, would obey at once. Al-Mustanjid (555–566) was also severely rebuked by A.Ḳ. (pp. 61, 77).

^{page 309 note 2} One of the first acts of Mustanjid (555) was to cashier this Ḳāḍī, whose wickedness partly consisted in his possessing philosophical books, such as Avicenna's Shifā and the Ikhwān al-Ṣafā, which were burnt in the marketplace. (Ibn al-Athīr.) His name was Wafā (Yāḳut, Udabā, fol. 122b).

^{page 309 note 3} Similar boldness was displayed by Ibn 'Abd al-Salām, (note 3, p. 297)Google Scholar, according to Kutbī, , i, 288. He was in consequence deprived of the office of Khaṭīb.Google Scholar

^{page 309 note 4} Ibn Balankri, vizier of the Sultan Mas'ūd the Seljūḳī, who, on his death in 547, set his son Malikshāh on the throne (Ibn al-Athīr, anno 547). Presently he deposed Malikshah and made his brother Muḥammad successor, with the object of deposing him also; he was, however, forestalled by Muḥammad and killed. The story that follows is not fit for translation. We learn from it that his name was Zubair.

^{page 309 note 5} This person figures as A.Ḳ.'s servant in the Ḳalā'id (p. 10). Ibid. (p. 97), there is added

^{page 309 note 6} It is not clear who is meant.

^{page 310 note 1} See Lane, col. 400a.

^{page 310 note 2} Bahjah, , p. 74.Google Scholar

^{page 310 note 3} See al-Fatḥ al-Rabbānī, forty-third discourse.