reason, religion and power in ibn al-muqaffa c

Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hung. Volume 62 (3), 285–301 (2009) DOI: 10.1556/AOrient.62.2009.3.3

0001-6446 / $ 20.00 © 2009 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest

REASON, RELIGION AND POWER IN IBN AL-MUQAFFAC

ISTVÁN T. KRISTÓ-NAGY

H-1066 Budapest, Teréz krt. 18, Hungary e-mail: [email protected]

The goal of my research is to put together from scattered mosaics an intellectual portrait of Ibn al-Muqaffac, a complex and enigmatic thinker, and a key figure in the transmission of the late antique heritage to the Arabo-Islamic culture. This article is the third in a series. The first, “La Lumière et les Ténèbres dans l’œuvre d’Ibn al-Muqaffac” (Light and Darkness in Ibn al-Muqaffac) was pub-lished in AOH Vol. 61 (3). In that article, I set out the rationalist and anti-Islamic ideas presented in works attributed to Ibn al-Muqaffac. The second article, “On the authenticity of al-Adab al-ṣaġīr at-tributed to Ibn al-Muqaffac and the titles of the Kitāb al-ādāb al-kabīr, al-Adab al-ṣaġīr, al-Yatīma and the Polemic against Islam” was published in AOH Vol. 62 (2). This third article complements the picture of the rationalist and anti-Islamic Ibn al-Muqaffac that I have presented in the first article and shows another side of his attitude towards religion. According to the texts quoted here, the ra-tionality of people is not enough to secure the peace of the individual soul, much less the peace of the state. The welfare of society requires a well functioning state whose cohesion is best ensured by religion. The introduction is a short outline of the correlation between Ibn al-Muqaffac’s social status and his attitude towards power, reason and religion. In the first section, I will quote and analyse some views attributed to him that reveal an unusual but coherent approach towards religion. The second section will present his ideas and reasoning that links reason, religion and power. The con-clusion of this article will not end this series on Ibn al-Muqaffac, but will be followed by the next article entitled: “A Self-portrait of a Wise Jackal; Ibn al-Muqaffac’s Heroes: the Sage and the Sov-ereign.”

Key words: Ibn al-Muqaffac, reason, religion, political thought, Manichaeism, zandaqa, Islam.

286 I. T. KRISTÓ-NAGY

Acta Orient. Hung. 62, 2009

Introduction Ibn al-Muqaffac’s Social Status and His Attitude

to Power, Reason and Religion

According to our sources, Ibn al-Muqaffac was murdered with the consent of al-Man-ṣūr, the second cAbbāsid caliph, some time before dū’l-ḥiǧǧa 139/April–May 757,1 about seven years after the troops of the first cAbbāsid caliph, al-Saffāḥ, achieved a complete victory over the Umayyads (Jumādā II 132/January 750).2 Following the death of al-Saffāḥ, “the Blood Shedder”, his brother, al-Manṣūr (whose name means “he who was made victorious by God”) had to eliminate all opposing parties in order to establish his power. In this struggle for power, al-Manṣūr had to face even his un-cles who became his rivals. Unfortunately for Ibn al-Muqaffac, who happened to be the counsellor of one of al-Manṣūr’s uncles, al-Manṣūr considered his elimination nec-essary in order to weaken them. The caliph found him too clever to let him survive.3 The son of a functionary of Persian origin, Ibn al-Muqaffac belonged to the so-cial stratum of the kuttāb, secretaries and advisors of rulers, who formed the political intelligentsia of the early Islamic society. Because their skills were also needed by the conquerors, these qualified administrators were in the highest rank among the ma-wālī, people of non-Arab origin who were subjects of the Islamic Empire. Neverthe-less, they still remained mawālī and were regarded as “second class citizens” who had a similar client or dependent status as the semi-adopted aliens in an Arabic tribe.4 As the Roman Empire is the first complete synthesis of the achievements of Mediterranean civilisations, Sasanian Iran had similar import in the Near East during Late Antiquity. After the Arab conquest, the kuttāb played a key role in the survival and integration of Sasanian ideas and practices relating to government, the role of courtiers, taxation, and the military into Islamic civilisation.

1 On the reports about Ibn al-Muqaffac’s disappearance see Sourdel (1954, pp. 312–323).

The exact date is impossible to establish, but based on Sourdel (1954, p. 320, n. 5), the terminus non post quem is the above-mentioned date, that of the capturing of cAbd Allāh b. Alī by al-Manṣūr. See the next two notes.

2 The commander of the cAbbāsid army was cAbd Allāh b. cAlī, one of the uncles of the first two cAbbāsid caliphs, al-Saffāḥ and al-Manṣūr. See S. Moscati’s article on Abū ’l-cAbbās al-Saffāḥ in the EI2, Vol. I, p. 103. All the following dates in this article are from the corresponding articles of the EI2.

3 A. Marsham and C. F. Robinson (2007) recently discovered the complete text of the fa-mous amān (safe-conduct) that Ibn al-Muqaffac wrote for cAbd Allāh b. Alī, one of al-Manṣūr’s uncles, whose revolt against al-Manṣūr’s rule was defeated. The amān was so masterfully written that al-Manṣūr could not have found any stratagem to destroy his uncle if he had signed it. He did not sign, and his anger against Ibn al-Muqaffac led to the latter’s murder.

4 The similarity between the meaning of the Arabic term mawlā and the Latin term cliens is one of the interesting parallels that reveal the original tribal structure in both the Islamic and the Roman empires. The Arabic word šayh means an elder, and the role of sheikhs is very similar to the Roman pater familias, father of family. The sheikhs represent their family, clan or tribe in the šūrā, counsel which has a similar role to that of the Roman senatus, a term derived from senex, meaning old. The Arabic term murū’a, whose meaning comprises all manly virtues, is derived from the same three radicals as imru’, which means man, as the Latin word virtus is derived from vir, a man.

REASON, RELIGION AND POWER IN IBN AL-MUQAFFAC 287


This role is similar to the role played by the clerics in Western Europe who saved Roman heritage after the conquest by the Germanic peoples. However, the con-querors in Europe embraced the religion of the defeated empire, and as a conse-quence, the administrative offices were held by clerics. Conversely, during the Islamic conquests, conquerors led their invasions in the name of their new religion. The kut-tāb, who were originally non-Arabs and non-Muslims, formed a kind of “secular” in-tellectual élite in a historical period when religion was the only legitimate conscience of society. In Europe, both the administrative and religious power was in the hands of the Church, whereas in the Islamic world the intellectuals had no power with which to compete with their lords. They transmitted the legacy of the old empires to the new one, but they remained clients of their Arab lords. Those of Persian origin might have had ambiguous sentiments toward the Arabs who took the place of the Sasanian aristocracy. The kuttāb belonged to the van-quished, but as heirs of a glorious civilisation they considered themselves culturally superior. Nor did they lose their societal function as they continued the work they had done during the old empire. They might even have had the ambition to rise higher in status by becoming the first spiritual authority and taking the place of the Zoroas-trian clergy who had lost their position. At first, the intellectuals of non-Arab origin could have been reluctant to adopt the religion of the conquerors. We notice that Ibn al-Muqaffac, the kātib par excel-lence, tried to undermine the evolving authority of the muḥadditūn, the men of the new religion. This resentment of the non-Arab intellectuals was one of the most im-portant reasons why the number of the people who were labelled zanādiqa rose. Zanādiqa is the plural of zindīq, a term of Pahlavi origin, referring first to Manicheans and by extension to anyone having Gnostic or other religious ideas considered sus-pect by the majority of Muslims. I do not see any contradiction in the fact that Ibn al-Muqaffac, considered the most illustrious kātib, was also regarded as the most notorious zindīq. If he attributed such particular importance to reason and culture, it is because these formed his only capital. He had nothing else. He was born a non-Arab and non-Muslim. Because of his personal skills he became a client of the most powerful Arabs, yet his ambition was higher than simply serving them; he had the audacity to promote the values of his own people and sought to educate his masters and all society. Nevertheless, he still remained a Persian secretary and a dubious convert without any official power or religious authority in a state ruled by Arabs and Islam. His conversion to Islam and integration into the political structure of the Arabo-Islamic empire not only shows his personal aspiration, but it also offers an example of how non-Arab intellectuals be-came partisans of Islam, since they understood and emphasised the Qurān’s vision of the unity of the entire Muslim community regardless of the origin of its members.5

5 This vision appears in the verses 10 and 13 of the sura 49 of the Qur’ān:

The believers are brethren. Set things right between your brothers and fear God, so that you may receive mercy.



They played a key role in the fusing of both the vanquished and conquerors’ ancient concepts, which became a new synthesis, that is, the emerging Islamic state.

Religion is a Necessity

In spite of the rationalist and anti-Islamic ideas expressed in some of the writings at-tributed to Ibn al-Muqaffac and the general opinion of later generations who consid-ered him to be a zindīq (see Kristó Nagy 2008), he regarded religion as a necessity. We read in al-Adab al-ṣaġīr6:

And he said: He who believes in anything, even if it be sorcery, is better than one who does not believe in anything and does not hope for resur-rection. Repentance does not bring anyone to the Fire, and persistence in committing sins does not bring anyone to Paradise.7

This saying, as well as many of the aphorisms concerning religion in al-Adab al-ṣaġīr, cannot be found in any other Arabic text, but we read its two sentences sepa-rated in the Dēnkard VI:

They held this too: One who believes in advocacy for the sake of (his) soul (has) less evil than one who does not believe at all. (Shaked 1979, § 35) They held this too: From repentance there is no way to hell. From lack of repentance there is no way to paradise. This is repentance: one who is contrite and repentant of a sin committed and who will not commit that sin again. (Shaked 1979, § 50)

It may be the case that while the sections in the Dēnkard VI are simply pious proclamations, the version of al-Adab al-ṣaġīr (and Ǧāwidān hirad) reflects a curi-ous scepticism. In this form, this idea might be seen as a precursor of Jean Pascal’s “wager” (Pascal 1921, no. 233), but, I think, it lacks Pascal’s faith. It is much closer

———— O people, We have created you male and female

and made you races and tribes that you may know one another. The noblest of you in the sight of God is the most god-fearing.

Translation by Jones (2007, p. 476). On this vision in the ḥadīt see Ziadeh (1956, p. 508 with n. 25), Salam (1997, p. 174),

Malik (1981, p. 61). 6 In this article all titles are written in italic and the titles of Ibn al-Muqaffac’s writings in

italic and bold. On the authenticity of al-Adab al-ṣaġīr see Kristó Nagy (2009, pp. 200–213). As far as I know there is no any edited English or French translation of the al-Adab al-

ṣaġīr. A French translation with notes and comments will be published in my forthcoming monograph, La pensée d’Ibn al-Muqaffac, collection Disputatio, CNRS, Paris, 2009.

وقال المؤمن بشيء من الاشياء وان كان سحرا خير ممن 7 لا تؤدي التوبة احدا الى. لا يؤمن بشيء ولا يرجو معادا النار ولا الاصرار على الذنوب احدا الى الجنة . Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 2516 – 18).



to Burzawayh’s trans-religious thought, which we know through Ibn al-Muqaffac’s translation of the Kalīla wa-Dimna:8

Fearing that I might spend my time going in many confusing vicious circles, lurching from one thought to another, I decided to avoid anything or any idea that could harm me. Killing, fighting, harming others, anger, stealing, betraying, lying, duplicity, and defaming others are abhorrent actions that must be stopped immediately. So I promised myself never to hurt anyone, and not to reject the doctrines of the awakening and re-surrection after death, and the punishment and reward expected in the eternal home.9

Remarkably the modern translator omits what is perhaps the most important sentence in this passage:

I restricted myself to everything that the intellect10 testifies to be right-eous and the people of all religions agree on.

This omission seems to show that Burzawayh’s trans-religious thought is still offensive to some. Ibn al-Muqaffac’s attitude seems to reveal (or conceal?) similar thoughts according to an anecdote on Ibn al-Muqaffac’s conversion to Islam at the hand of his Arab master, one of the caliph al-Manṣūr’s uncles, cĪsā b. cAlī.

Muḥammad b. Qādim the grammarian referring to some of the Hāši-mites told me that cAbd Allāh b. al-Muqaffac visited cĪsā one night and said to him: – I want to convert to Islam. The love for it suffused my heart, and I have started to hate Zoroastrianism. [cĪsā] said to him: – In the morning I will gather my brothers and some of the illus-trious people to witness your conversion. cĪsā’s dinner arrived, and he called him to eat. But [Ibn al-Muqaf-fac] abstained from it, so [cĪsā] insisted. The food was clean and excel-lent, but [Ibn al-Muqaffac] only approached it murmuring a Zoroastrian prayer.

18 For the question of Burzawayh’s autobiography and Ibn al-Muqaffac’s religious thought,

see Kristó Nagy (2008, pp. 275–280.) 19 Translation of Sacadeh Jallad (2002, p. 70). The underlined ideas are missing or abridged

in this translation. فلما خفت التردد والتحول رايت الا اتعرض لهما وان اقتصر على كل شيء تشهد العقول انه بر , ويتفق عليه كل اهل الاديان, .

عن الضرب والقتل والسركة والخيانةفكففت يدي ولساني عن الكذب وعن كل كلام فيه ضرر لاحد, ونفسي عن الغضب, .وكففت عن اذى الناس والغيبة والبهتان وحصنت فرجي عن النساء . والتمست من قلبي الا اتمنى ما غيري, ولا احب له سوءا, ,

ولا اكذب بالبعث والحساب والقيامة [...]والثواب والعقاب cAzzām (1973, p. 367 – 11).

See also Cheikho (1986, pp. 4217 –434), and for a French translation, see Miquel (1980, § 78). 10 Or in Cheikho’s version .the souls” (1986, p. 4218)“ الانفس



.

[cĪsā] said to him: – Are you murmuring, yet you want to convert tomorrow?! He answered: – I would hate to spend the night without religion! And he converted in the morning.11

We find another version of this anecdote in Ibn Hallikān’s Wafayāt al-acyān, but Ibn Hallikān (b. 608/1211, d. 681/1282) refers to a different source, Haytam b. cAdī (b. ca. 120/738, d. 206/821, 207/822 or 209/824):

Haytam b. cAdī said: “Ibn al-Muqaffac went to cĪsā b. cAlī and said to him: Islam has entered my heart and I want to embrace Islam with your assistance. cĪsā said to him: – Let it be in the presence of the leaders and illustrious people, so come tomorrow! After that, the evening of that day, cĪsā’s meal was brought to them and Ibn al-Muqaffac sat down to eat, murmuring in the habit of the Magi. cĪsā said to him: – You are murmuring, and yet you have decided to embrace Is-lam?! He answered: – I would hate to spend a night without religion! And in the morning, he embraced Islam with his assistance.”12

According to this story, Ibn al-Muqaffac’s religion before his conversion to Is-lam would have been Zoroastrianism, since the term Maǧūsiyya means Zoroastrian-ism, the Magi (al-Maǧūs) are the Zoroastrians, and the term zamzama (murmuring) refers to the Zoroastrian prayer (see Sourdel 1954, p. 311, n. 1). This report tells us that Ibn al-Muqaffac’s conversion to Islam was more an act of formality than an act of devotion. It happened after the cAbbāsids rose to power and after he entered into cĪsā b. cAlī’s service. Hence we have no reason at all to discredit the many accounts of his anti-Islamic behaviour, as these accounts probably relate to his deeds before his conversion, even if this conversion was only an official one. It is also plausible that he wrote his Polemic against Islam before that. Nonetheless, his Mucāraḍat al-Qur’ān must be a late composition, because it refers to the overthrow-

عبد الله بن المقفع دخل على عيسى ليلا فقال له ان,فحدثني محمد بن قادم النحوي عن بعض الهاشميين 11 اني اريد :

الاسلام فقد خامر قلبي حبه وكرهت المجوسية اذا اصبحنا جمعت اخوتي ووجوها من وجوه الناس فشهدوا اسلامك: فقال له, . وكان نظيفا حسن المؤاكلة,وحضر عشاء عيسى فدعاه لياكل فامتنع فعزم عليه فلم يدن من, اتزمز : الطعام الا على زمزمة فقيل

وانت على الاسلام غدا؟ فقال اني اكره ان ابيت غدا على غير دين: فلما اصبح اسلم, . Al-Balādurī (1978, Vol. III, p. 21817 – 23). واريد ان ا, قد دخل الاسلام في قلبي: جاء ابن المقفع الى عيسى بن علي فقال له: قال الهيثم بن عدي 12 , سلم على يدك

فجلس , ثم حضر طعام عيسى عشية ذلك اليوم, فاذا كان الغد فاحضر, ليكن ذلك بمحضر من القواد ووجوه الناس: فقال له عيسىابن المقفع ياكل ويزمزم على عادة المجوس اتزمزم وانت على عزم الاسلام؟ فقال: فقال له عيسى, اكره ان ابيت على غير دين: ,

فلما اصبح ا .سلم على يده Ibn Hallikān (1968–1972, Vol. II, p. 1515 – 10).

.

.

. .



ing of the “Syrians” i.e. the Umayyads and their supporters by “those coming from East with tents”, alluding to the Hurāsānian army of the cAbbāsids (see van Ess 1981, pp. 156–158).13 The first scholar who noted the “sceptical and ironic tone” of Ibn al-Muqaf-fac’s answer to cĪsā b. cAlī (recorded by Ibn Hallikān) was F. Gabrieli: “[…] risposta di cui pare indubbio il tono di scettica ironia, non implicante nessuna reale intima adesione al mazdeismo avito (e proprio al mazdeizmo andrebbe applicata la critica di Burzōe su coloro che si attengono alla « religione dei padri »)” (Gabrieli 1932, p. 237, n. 5). I would add that Ibn al-Muqaffac’s zeal towards his new religion, Islam, does not seem to be more serious either. S. D. Goitein, who first noticed the version at Al-Balādurī, says: “This story, which bears the stamp of authenticity, shows – to my mind – not so much Ibn al-Muqaffac’s religiosity, as his conviction of the only relative value of any positive religion, a conviction disclosed in the Introduction to Kalīla wa-Dimna […]” (Goitein 1949, pp. 131–132, n. 4). M. Chokr does not see any ambivalence or irony expressed in the story (Chokr 1993, p. 192, note 39). I do, however, and I think this ambivalence towards religion is the link between the anti-Islamic and the Islamic stances found in the different works attributed to Ibn al-Muqaffac. In his rationalist texts, Ibn al-Muqaffac expresses the revolt of an intellectual against any kind of tyranny sanctified by religion. He saw the universe as a bipolar continuum between two theoretical extremities, Light and Darkness, reason and the absence of reason. However, we can see that this is not in contradiction with his texts supporting religion. According to them, reason and religion complement each other. So he writes in al-Adab al-ṣaġīr:

The distinction between religion and opinion is that religion is preserved by faith and opinion is confirmed by argument. He who makes religion an argument makes religion an opinion, and he who makes opinion a religion starts to make the rules. And he who makes rules for himself in religion has no religion. Religion and opinion are similar in some points. If there were no similarity between them, no distinction would be needed between them.14

We do not find this passage in the Ǧāwidān hirad, but the above-mentioned quo-tation from Ibn al-Muqaffac’s al-Yatīma by Yūsuf b. cAbd al-Barr15 is a variant of it:

13 This topic will be further developed in my forthcoming French monograph which will

include a translation of both the Polemic against Islam and the Mucāraḍat al-Qur’ān attributed to Ibn al-Muqaffac. These two texts were also discussed in Kristó Nagy (2008, pp. 272–288.) فصل ما بين الدين والراي ان الدين يسلم بالايمان وان الراي يثبت بالخصومة فمن جعل الدين خصومة فقد جعل 14

الدين رايا ومن جعل الراي دينا فقد صار شارعا ومن كان هو يشرع لنفسه الدي قد يشتبه الدين والراي في اماكن . ن فلا دين له لولا تشابههما لم يحتاجا الى الفصل . Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 2112 – 15).

15 On the question of the authenticity and the title of this work see Kristó Nagy (2009, pp. 210–211 and 214–216). My forthcoming French monograph will include a translation of al-Yatīma.



It is from a chapter of Ibn al-Muqaffac’s al-Yatīma. He said: By my life! Their statement that religion is fundamentally different from argu-ment is confirmed. They were right. Religion is not argument. If it had been an argument, it would have been entrusted to people who would confirm it by their views and conjecture. Everything entrusted to people is a lost pledge. If the heretics16 are hated, it is because they turn religion into a view, and this view is neither sure nor final. The view barely sur-passes the position of doubt and conjecture and does not reach a po-sition of certainty and confirmation. If one says that he is convinced of something and knows it for sure, you will never hear him explain it. I find that no one takes his religion lighter than someone who takes his view or any other man’s view as a decreed religion.17

We find among the aphorisms quoted in al-Adab al-ṣaġīr the famous Socratic idea:

Part of knowledge is knowing what you do not know.18

We read another very interesting thought in al-Adab al-ṣaġīr that is not found yet in any other Arabic source but in the Dēnkard VI:

A man’s religion is never constant, but is always growing or diminishing.19

Ibn al-Muqaffac’s writings reflect scepticism towards religion as well as to-wards rationality, but he did not reject either of them. Religion may require blind faith, but blind faith is necessary since the light of rationality is not strong enough to guide the people who are blind to it. Religion is not a matter of personal conviction but public law. Since people’s rationality is too weak, they need rules. Religion gives

:means innovation. Yet, innovation in religion, according to Islam, is a capital crime بدعة 16

heresy. Therefore the plural of بدع has the meaning of “heresies”, so we can translate اهل البدع as “the heretics”. ومن فصل لابن المقفع في اليتيمة قال ولعمري ان لقولهم ليس الدين خصومة اصلا يثبت وصدقوا 17 ما الدين . بخصومة؟ ولو كان خصومة لكان موكولا الى الناس يثبتونه بارائهم وظنهم وكل موكول الي الناس رهينة ضياع وما ينقم على اهل

البدع الا انهم اتخذوا الدين رايا وليس الراي ثقة ولا حتم ولم يجاوز الراي منزلة الشك والظن الا قريبا ولم بلغ ان يكون يقينا ولا ثبتا ولستم سام ين احدا يقول لامر قد استيقنه وعلمه اري انه كذا وكذا فلا اجد احدا اشد استخفافا بدينه ممن اتخذ رايه ورايع

. الرجال دينا مفروضا Ibn cAbd al-Barr (1928, Vol. II, p. 33). ومن العلم ان تعلم انك لا تعلم بما لا تعلم 18 . Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 2512).

A shorter version of this aphorism can be found in the Ǧāwidān hirad: ومن العلم ان تعلم انك لا تعلم . Miskawayh (1952, p. 7420).

Many of the maxims in al-Adab al-ṣaġīr have Greek origin. See Iḥsān cAbbās (1977, pp. 576–567). لا يثبت دين المرء على حالة واحدة ابدا ولكنه لا يزال اما زائدا واما ناقصا 19 . Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 269). They held this too: the soul of men never stands in one place, for it always only increases or diminishes. They said that “increasing” and “diminishing” is this: as long as a man has the desire of the soul, the soul increases. When he has the desire of the body, the soul diminishes (Shaked 1979, § 213).

.



rules which are above anyone’s personal opinion. Their soundness ensures the stabil-ity of the state. There must be no reasoning in religion!

Religion is a Political Necessity

While the authenticity of all the texts quoted above is dubious in one way or another, there is no doubt expressed about the authenticity of Ibn al-Muqaffac’s Risāla fī-’l-Ṣaḥāba ‘Epistle concerning the Entourage of the Caliph’. This letter addressed to the already mentioned caliph, al-Manṣūr, is a unique document from the first years of the cAbbāsid dynasty. It presents a concise political program proposed by Ibn al-Muqaf-fac for the building of the new state. Nothing could demonstrate his genius better than the way in which he actualised all the political theories and wisdom found in the ancient works translated by him or expressed in his own treatises. Like a flashlight aimed at this “turning point” of history (Goitein 1949), this missive illuminates and provides insight into the development of the Islamic state. While defining the ideological-religious basis of the new regime, Ibn al-Mu-qaffac deals with the issue of obedience to the Imam (caliph):

As for our affirmation that the Imām should not be obeyed when he dis-obeys God, that is one of the firm divine obligations and legal sanctions over which God has not given authority. If the Imām prohibits prayer, fasting, and the pilgrimage or forbids the legal sanctions and permits what God has forbidden, he has no authority to do that. When we maintain that [on certain points] the Imām should be obeyed and others should not [we are thinking of] judgments, regula-tions, and orders which God has left to the discretion of the Imām. […]20

Here Ibn al-Muqaffac gives a precise list of governmental areas in order to de-fine the Imam’s sphere of authority below God and above everyone else. Still in a practical perspective, he concludes his argument at a philosophical level linking the question of power and religion to the question of religion and reason:

These two categories can only be distinguished from one another by proof from God, Most High and Mighty. God has made the happiness of man and the proper condition of his life now and in the hereafter [con-sist of] two natural gifts: religion and reason.21

20 English translation by Lampe (1986, p. 94).

فاما اقرارنا بانه لا يطاع الامام في معصية الله فان ذلك في عزائم الفرائض والحدود التي لم يجعل الله لاحد ولو ان عليها سلطانا عن الصلاة والصيام والحج او منع الحدود واباح ما حرم الله لم يكن له في ذلك امرنهى الامام اما اثباتنا للامف . ام الطاعة فيما لا

يطاع فيه غيره فان ذلك في الراي والتدبير والامر الذي جعل الله ازمته وعراه بايدي الائمة […] Pellat (1976, §§ 16–17).

21 English translation by Lampe (1986, p. 95). وليس يفترق هذان الامران الا ببرهان من الله عز وجل وذلك ان الله ج عل قوام الناس وصلاح معاشهم ومعادهم في خلتين الدين

.والعقل Pellat (1976, § 18).



Ibn al-Muqaffac’s following train of thoughts is of high interest in the history of philosophy. God offered rationality to men, but since this rationality is not strong enough they need God’s other most important present, religion. Religion does not pre-scribe everything in their lives so that the rationality of men does not become useless. However, the responsibility to make decisions is given only to the holders of power. Common people have no other task in governing than:

[…] to make suggestions when consulted, to respond when invited, and to give sincere advice in secret.22

However no one, not even rulers have right to break the rules of religion be-cause their duty is to maintain them.23 The logical construction of the beginning of this passage is similar to the clos-ing paragraph of the section addressed to rulers (that is Ibn al-Muqaffac’s remaining non-personified Mirror for Princes) in the Kitāb al-ādāb al-kabīr:

In sum, what the ruler needs in worldly matters are two views: a view that will strengthen his authority and a view that will make it appear fine among the people. The former view, of power, is more appropriate to begin with and the more worthy to be preferred; the other view, of propa-ganda, brings more sweetness and produces more helpers. It is true, power comes from propaganda, and propaganda from power; but things tend to be ascribed to whatever is grander.24

In both, we read about two different notions that complement each other. In the Kitāb al-ādāb al-kabīr, Ibn al-Muqaffac defines “power” and “propaganda” as two in-terdependent pillars of the state, and this is the same in the case of religion and reason in the quoted paragraph of the Risāla fī-’l-Ṣaḥāba. Earlier in the same section of the Kitāb al-ādāb al-kabīr, Ibn al-Muqaffac makes it obvious that the main tool of propaganda which strengthens a ruler’s power is religion:

Know that there are three kinds of reign: one of religion, one of judi-ciousness, and one of arbitrariness. As for the reign of religion, if it ob-serves the religion of its people, and if their religion is such that it gives

22 English translation by Lampe (1986, pp. 96–97).

ليس للناس في ذلك الامر شيء الا الاشارة عند المشورة والاجابة عند الدعوة والنصيحة بالظهر الغيب. […] Pellat (1976, § 20).

23 For the whole chapter of Reason and Religion, see Pellat (1976, §§ 18–22), and for an English translation, see Lampe (1986, pp. 95–97).

24 English translation by van Gelder. رايان راي يقوي سلطانه وراي يزينه ف] من امر الدنيا[جماع ما يحتاج اليه الوالي وراي القوة احقهما بالبداءة واولاهما. ي ناس

بالاثرة وراي التزيين احضرهما حلاوة واكثرهما اعوانا مع ان القوة من الزينة والزينة من القوة لكن امر ينسب الى اعظمه . Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 543 – 6).

For a French translation, see Tardy (1993, p. 191, § 32). For a Hungarian translation, see Kristó Nagy (2005, p. 192, § 32).



them what is their due and that it inflicts upon them what they deserve, this will please them and it will turn the discontent among them into people who are pleased to conform and submit. As for the reign of judi-ciousness, its rule is stable; it will not be free of criticism and discontent, but the criticism of a lowly person will not be harmful if the judicious ruler is strong. As for the reign of arbitrariness, it means one hour of play and an eternity of ruin.25

I think that the majestic use of religious terminology and references to the Qur’ān in the Risāla fī-’l-Ṣaḥāba do not reflect Ibn al-Muqaffac’s true views, but his intention to accord his letter with the norms of an official document and to win his reader, the Caliph, over to his suggestions.26 Ibn al-Muqaffac’s reasoning on reason and religion in the Risāla fī-’l-Ṣaḥāba concludes with a definition of the caliph’s power received from God. According to Ibn al-Muqaffac’s opinion expressed here, the right to use his reason is the privilege of the ruler whose authority is reinforced by his religious leadership. This concept is very similar to the one found in the Letter of Tansar:

In the beginning of time men enjoyed perfect understanding of the knowledge of religion and sure steadfastness. Yet it is not to be doubted that even then, through new happenings in their midst, they had need of a ruler of understanding; for till religion is interpreted by understanding it has no firm foundation.27

The Letter of Tansar is a text of Sasanian origin. The original Pahlavi work was translated into Arabic by Ibn al-Muqaffac. Both the Pahlavi and Ibn al-Muqaffac’s Arabic versions are lost, but we have a translation from the Arabic into New Persian by Ibn Isfandiyār. According to M. Boyce, the origin of the text is a real political letter (see Boyce 1968, pp. 11–22) written by Tansar, or Tōsar (see Boyce 1968, pp. 7–8), who was probably a historical person (see Boyce 1968, pp. 5–7), the chief hērbed28 of the founder of the Sasanian

25 English translation by van Gelder.

اعلم ان الملوك ثلاثة ملك دين و ملك حزم وملك هوي فاما ملك الدين فانه اذا اقام لاهله دينهم وكان دينهم هو الذي يعطيهم . الذي لهم ويلحق بهم الذي عليهم ا راضهم ذلك وانزل الساخط منهم بمنزلة الراضي في الاقرار والتسليم واما ملك الحزم فانه يقوم.

به الامر ولا يسلم من الطعن والتسخط ولن يضر طعن الذليل مع حزم القوي. واما ملك الهوى فلعب ساعة ودمار دهر. . Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 496 – 12).

Van Gelder is probably right to translate “reign” ملك instead of “king” ملك since only one of the sources used by Kurd cAlī writes ملوك in the first sentence whereas all the others write ملك. For a French translation, see Tardy (1993, p. 188, § 17). For a Hungarian translation, see Kristó Nagy (2005, p. 190, § 17).

26 A sample of Ibn al-Muqaffac’s chancellery style is his already mentioned amān full with Qur’ānic quotes and references. See Marsham – Robinson (2007).

27 English translation by Boyce (1968, p. 37). For the New Persian text, see Minovi (1932, p. 12). For a French translation, see Darmesteter (1894, p. 517).

28 The hērbeds and the mōbeds formed the clergy of the Sasanian Iran.



dynasty, the king Ardašīr. His letter to Gušnasp, the king of Parišwār and of Ṭabari-stān, seems to me in many ways a model for Ibn al-Muqaffac’s letter to the caliph.29 But yet again, I consider the submissive posture of Ibn al-Muqaffac’s Risāla fī-’l- Ṣaḥāba more a stratagem than a true conviction. We should not forget that Ibn al-Muqaffac’s letter was directly addressed to the caliph al-Manṣūr. Ibn al-Muqaffac wanted his suggestions to be accepted, and he also wanted to survive this audacious act of advising the sovereign. He could not say what we can induce from his oeuvre: leaders of the state need advisors who lead them. As we have seen above, these advisors, like Ibn al-Muqaffac himself, are mentioned as people who have

[…] the right to make suggestions when consulted, to respond when in-vited, and to give sincere advice in secret.30

It is important to stress the fact that, according to Ibn al-Muqaffac’s statement, no special group, such as the priests or nobles, have the privilege to intervene in the decisions of the Commander of the Faithful. This right belongs to the people of reason as we understand from the section of the letter which serves as a captatio benevolen-tiae (see Pellat 1976, § 4).31 Ibn al-Muqaffac clearly despises immoral and useless careerists. Some of the most ardent passages in his different texts are written against them.32 Following so-cial conventions and realities, he recognises the privileges of the aristocracy. He states in the Mirror for Princes section of the Kitāb al-ādāb al-kabīr:

When examining the affairs of his subjects, the ruler must examine the needs of the free, noble people among them; let him make an effort to meet these needs and to quash the oppression they suffer from the lower class. Let him feel distressed by a noble man who is hungry and a base

29 It is difficult to grasp how much Ibn al-Muqaffac’s personality was modelled by the wise

sages of the texts he translated, and how much Ibn al-Muqaffac modelled their personalities. Ibn al-Muqaffac’s “interaction” with his ideal heroes and the question of the relationship between rulers and their advisors will be the topic of my next article: “A Self-portrait of a Wise Jackal; Ibn al-Mu-qaffac’s Heroes: the Sage and the Sovereign”.

30 See above, note 22. 31 For the English translation see Lampe (1986, pp. 86–87). 32 See some of these passages in the Risāla fī-’l-Ṣaḥāba, Pellat (1976, § 47) translated into

English by Lampe (1986, pp. 114–115), in the Kitāb al-ādāb al-kabīr, Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 558 – 14), translated into French by Tardy (1993, p. 192, § 35) and translated into Hungarian by Kristó Nagy (2005, § 35), in the Letter of Tansar, Minovi (1932, pp. 13–14), translated into English by Boyce (1968, p. 39) and into French by Darmesteter (1894, pp. 519–520), in two chapters interpolated by Ibn al-Muqaffac into the Kalīla wa-Dimna: in The Fable of the Investigation of Dimna, cAzzām (1973, pp. 101–124), Cheikho (1986, pp. 115–142), translated into English by Sacadeh Jallad (2002, pp. 119–131) and translated into French by Miquel (1980, §§ 250–320), and in The Fable of the Hermit and his Guest cAzzām (1973, pp. 297–299), Cheikho (1986, pp. 247–248.), translated into English by Sacadeh Jallad (2002, pp. 229–230) and translated into French by Miquel (1980, §§ 809–816). This topic will be analysed in my article mentioned above (see note 29).



man who is sated, for a noble man will be aggressive only when he is hungry, and a base man only when he is sated.33

In the Risāla fī-’l-Ṣaḥāba, Ibn al-Muqaffac speaks about the injustice against the aristocracy of his times – the Muhāǧirūn, the Anṣār, Banū Hāšim, the Qurayš34 – and he dedicates a separate chapter (though a mere one sentence long) to give some power to the young in the new dynasty:

One of the things of which the commander of the Faithful may be re-minded is the young men of his [own] family and the descendants of cAlī and al-cAbbās,35 for among them are men who, if they were pro-vided with important tasks and responsibilities, could discharge certain tasks and participate actively in others.36

Nevertheless, it is clear that for Ibn al-Muqaffac, personal merit is much more important than noble origins. In the Risāla fī-’l-Ṣaḥāba, he mentions the ansāb, people with inherited noblesse only once (Pellat 1976, § 48), whereas he uses the terms ḥasab, acquired noblesse five times (Pellat 1976, §§ 44, 45, 47, and twice in § 49) and the aḥsāb (people possessing this quality) one time further (Pellat 1976, § 48). In the Mirror for Princes section of the Kitāb al-ādāb al-kabīr Ibn al-Muqaf-fac highlights the importance of the men of religion:

Get to know the religious and virtuous people in every town, village, or tribe, so that they will be your friends, your assistants, your inner circle, and your trusted confidants.37


ن امور الرعية فاقة الاحرار منهم فليعمل في سدها وطغيان السفلة منهم فليقمعهليتفقد الوالي فيما يتفقد م وليستوحش. من الكريم الجائع واللئيم الشبعان فانما يصول الكريم اذا جاع واللئيم اذا شبع . Kurd cAlī (1954, pp. 5213 –531).

For a French translation, see Tardy (1993, p. 190, §§ 25–26). For a Hungarian translation, see Kristó Nagy (2005, p. 191, §§ 25–26).

34 Pellat (1976, § 47) on the Qurayš again in § 48. 35 In the Arabic text we read cAlī. Pellat, as well as Lampe, glossed these names in their trans-

lations as cAlī [b. Abī Ṭālib] and al-cAbbās [b. cAbd al-Muṭṭalib]. This seems to be obvious since cAlī b. Abī Tālib was the cousin and son-in-law of Muḥammad, and the partisans of his descendents often referred to as [بني علي] are the Šīca; and al-cAbbās b. cAbd al-Muṭṭalib was the brother of Muḥam-mad’s father and cAlī’s father and the ancestor of the new ruling dynasty, the cAbbāsids. However, I think that Ibn al-Muqaffac might be referring to cAlī, the father of the uncles of the caliph al-Man-ṣūr, who were Ibn al-Muqaffac’s lords and were also referred to as [بني علي]. In this case, the advice is more logical: the caliph should take care of the young of his family, his father’s offspring, his uncles’ offspring and the young in the entire cAbbāsid family, in general.

36 English translation by Lampe (1986, pp. 117–118). ومما يذكر به امير المؤمنين امر فتيان اهل بيته وبني ابيه وبني علي وبني العباس لو متعوا بجسام الامور, فان فيهم رجالا

والاموال سدوا وجوها وكانوا عدة لاخرى . Pellat (1976, § 50).

37 English translation by van Gelder. اعرف اهل الدين والمروءة في كل كورة وقرية وقبيلة فيكونوا هم اخوانك واعوانك وبطانك وثقاتك . Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 4510 – 11).




However, the manner in which he continues reveals that the main quality of an advisor is not being religious, but being a man of reason:

Do not make yourself believe that if you ask people’s advice you will ap-pear to be in need of other people’s opinions. For you do not want an opin-ion to boast of it: you want it in order to benefit from it. If at the same time you are thinking of your reputation, then the better of the two kinds of reputation in the view of virtuous people, is the one that one says: “He does not form opinions on his own: he consults those with sound views”.38

He continues his advice:

If you seek to please all people, you seek what cannot be achieved. How could the views of people with different opinions ever be in agreement? Why should you need to please those whose pleasure lies in injustice, or to approve of those who approve of error and brutal ignorance? You should seek the pleasure of good and intelligent people, and when you have obtained it you will not need to trouble yourself with anything else. Do not allow people who have behaved well towards you to be humiliated and do not empower others to be insolent to them and to de-nounce them.39

He concludes his recommendations with the following words:

Accustom yourself to enduring those sincere counsellors who disagree with you, and to swallowing the bitterness of their words and their cen-sure. However, do not make smooth this path except to intelligent, ma-ture, and virtuous people, lest some foolish person boldly take advantage of it when it becomes widely known, or a spiteful person will think light of doing so.40


لا تقذفنك في روعك انك ان استشرت الرجال ظهر منك الحاجة الى راي وانك لست تريد الراي للافتخار به ولكن تريده .غيرك ولو انك مع ذلك اردت الذكر كان احسم الذكرين افضلهما عند. للانتفاع به ان يقال لا يتفرد برايه دون ايتشارة ذو الفضلاهل

.الراي Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 462 – 5).


39 English translation by van Gelder. انك ان تلتمس رض تلتمس ما لا يدركسى جميع النا وكيف يتقف لك راي المختلفين؟ و ما حاجتك الي رضي من رضاه الجور .

والى موافقة من موافقته الضلالة والجهالة؟ فعليك بالتماس رضى الاخيار منهم وذوي العقل فانك متى تصب ذلك تضع عنك .مؤونة ما سواه Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 467 – 10).


40 English translation by van Gelder. عود نفسك الصبر على من خالفك من ذوي النصيحة والتجرع لمرارة قولهم وعذلهم ولا تسهلن . الا لاهل العقل والسن.يل ذلكسب

او يستخف به شانئسفيه به يجترئوالمروءة لئلا ينتشر من ذلك ما . Kurd cAlī (1954, p. 476 – 8).



By giving all power to the caliph and underlining the importance of the men of reason, the implicit meaning of Ibn al-Muqaffac words is that a reasonable person, even if he is only a Persian kātib like himself, has the right and duty to turn to the ruler. Al-Manṣūr was one of the most significant rulers in the history of the Islamic World. He was the founder of Baghdad and the real founder of the new cAbbāsid rule. Nevertheless, in order to establish his rule and the new dynasty, he had to be and was a ruthless tyrant. Ibn al-Muqaffac knew all too well that the success of the captatio benevolentiae at the beginning of his letter was a matter of life or death. This is a per-sonalised Mirror for Princes, an actualised version of this literary genre that Ibn al-Muqaffac introduced into Arabic prose. Hardly any scholar has realised that this intro-duction is not only an exercise of style, but a key designed to open the heart of the ca-liph to the message of the letter and to its author. If al-Manṣūr had been as convinced about Ibn al-Muqaffac’s humble loyalty as nearly all the researchers who have studied this letter are, then Ibn al-Muqaffac would have lived much longer.

Conclusion

Because of his understanding of the nature of power and his description of it, Ibn al-Muqaffac can be classified as one of the most eminent authors in the history of univer-sal political thought. However, he did not merely describe political and social behav-iour and deduce general truth from reality. In order to be of practical usefulness to present and future societies, he also adapted theory to reality within the given frame-work of the new Islamic empire then under construction. The pragmatic way he linked philosophy, religion and politics together is important not only for the study of the Early Islamic period, but also universally significant in the history of philosophy and religion. According to Ibn al-Muqaffac’s oeuvre, religion is first of all an indispensable political necessity because of the unsatisfactory rationality of men. People have some intelligence but not enough to live and work together in harmony. Because they do not have enough reason, they need rules and rulers.41 The role of the ruler, and the role of religion are interlinked. The rule of the ruler is best reinforced by religion. However, because rulers are humans and not always the most reasonable ones, their power has to be confined, “constitutionalised”, by the established rules of the state which are confirmed by religion, the same religion that confirms the power of rulers. “State and religion are twins” (see Shaked 1984). They ensure the harmony of the different components of society, and together form the framework of power that men need because people are not intelligent enough to live without them, following only their reason.

———— For a French translation, see Tardy (1993, p. 187, § 13). For a Hungarian translation, see

Kristó Nagy (2005, p. 189, § 13). 41 The construction of the state according to Ibn al-Muqaffac’s views will be the topic of

another article.



Ibn al-Muqaffac’s opinion of reason and religion is more sceptical than Ibn Rušd’s (b. 520/1126, d. 595/1198) famous idea of the veritas duplex (see Maróth 1999, pp. 203–213). As a result of Ibn al-Muqaffac’s pragmatism, his thought on the politi-cal role of the philosopher was less pretentious than that of Plato (b. 428 or 427 BC and d. 348 or 347 BC) and that of al-Fārābī (b. ca. 872 and d. 950 or 951). However, he was still more optimistic than Ibn Tufayl (b. in the first decade of the 6th/12th century, d. 581/1185–1186). Ibn al-Muqaffac knew that philosophers did not become rulers, and rulers did not become philosophers. Philosophers have to try to guide rul-ers, and rulers have to try to listen to them. Ibn al-Muqaffac’s views on the relation-ship between these two protagonists of the political stage are the topic of the next ar-ticle of this series.

Bibliography

Sources

Ibn al-Muqaffac’s Writings and Their Translations

cAzzām, A. W. (ed.) (1973): Ibn al-Muqaffac: Kalīla wa-Dimna. 2nd, revised edition. Beirut. Boyce, M. (English trans.) (1968): The Letter of Tansar. Roma. Cheikho (Šayhū), L. (ed.) (1986): Ibn al-Muqaffac: Kalīla wa-Dimna. 8th edition. Beirut. Darmesteter, M. (ed. and French trans.) (1894): Lettre de Tansar au roi de Tabaristan. JA mars–av-

ril, pp. 185–199 (introduction), pp. 200–250 (Pahlavi text), mai– juin, pp. 502–555 (French trans.).

Ess, J. van (1981): Some Fragments of the Mucāraḍat al-Qur’ān Attributed to Ibn al-Muqaffac. In: al-Qādi, W. (ed.): Studia Arabica et Islamica: Festschrift for Iḥsān cAbbās. Beirut, pp. 151–163.

Kristó Nagy, I. T. (Hungarian trans.) (2005): Ibn al-Muqaffac: A nagy útmutató. Fordítás és beveze-tő tanulmány. Függőkert Vol. II, pp. 175–212.

Kurd cAlī, M. (ed.) (1954): Rasā’il al-Bulaġā’. 4th edition. Cairo. Lampe, G. E. (English trans.) (1986): Ibn al- Muqaffac: Political and Legal Theorist and Reformer.

PhD dissertation. John Hopkins University. Washington D.C. Marsham, A. – Robinson, C. F. (2007): The Safe-conduct for the Abbasid cAbd cAllāh b. cAlī

(d. 746). Bulletin of SOAS Vol. 70, pp. 247–281. Miquel, A. (French trans.) (1980): Le livre de Kalila et Dimna. 2nd edition. Paris. Minovi, M. (1932): Tansar Name. Teheran. Pellat, Ch. (ed. and French trans.) (1976): Ibn al-Muqaffac : « Conseilleur » du calife. Paris. Sacadeh Jallad, S. (English trans.) (2002): The Fables of Kalilah and Dimnah. London. 2nd printing:

2004. Tardy, J. (French trans.) (1993): Traduction d’al-Adab al-Kabīr d’Ibn al-Muqaffac. Annales islamo-

logiques Vol. 27, pp. 182–223.

Other Sources

Al-Balādurī (1978): Ansāb al-ašrāf. Ed. cAbd ’l-cAzīz al-Dūrī. Wiesbaden. Ibn cAbd al-Barr (1946/1928): Ǧāmic bayān al-cilm wa-faḍlihi. Cairo.



Ibn Hallikān (written as Ibn Khallikān) (1968–1972): Wafayāt al-acyān wa-anbā’ abnā’ al-zamān, Biographies of Illustrious Men. Ed. Iḥsān cAbbās. Beirut.

Miskawayh (1952): al-Ḥikma al-hālida, Ǧāwidān hirad. Ed. by cAbd al-Raḥmān Badawī. Cairo. 2nd edition: Beyrouth, 1980.

Jones, A. (English trans.) (2007): The Qur’ān. Exeter. Pascal, B. (1921): Pensées. Ed. Léon Brunschvicg. Paris. Shaked, Sh. (1979): The Wisdom of the Sasanian Sages (Dēnkard VI) by Aturpāt-i Ēmētān. Boulder,

Colorado.

Modern Studies

cAbbās, I. (1977): Naẓra ǧadīda fī bacḍ al-kutub al-mansūba li-Ibn al-Muqaffac. Revue de l’Acade-mie Arabe de Damas Vol. 52, pp. 538–580.

Chokr, M. (1993): Zandaqa et zindīqs en Islam au second siècle de l’hégire. Damascus. Gabrieli, F. (1932): L’opera di Ibn al-Muqaffa. RSO Vol. 13, pp. 197–247. Goitein, S. D. (1949): A Turning Point in the History of the Muslim State, a Propos of Ibn al-Mu-

qaffac’s Kitāb al- Ṣaḥāba. Islamic Culture Vol. 28, pp. 120–135. Kristó Nagy, I. T. (2008): La Lumière et les Ténèbres dans l’œuvre d’Ibn al-Muqaffac. AOH Vol.

61 (3), pp. 265–293. Kristó Nagy, I. T. (2009): On the Authenticity of Al-Adab al-ṣaġīr Attributed to Ibn al-Muqaffac

and the Titles of the Kitāb al-ādāb al-kabīr, Al-Adab al-ṣaġīr, Al-Yatīma and the Polemic against Islam. AOH Vol. 62 (2), pp. 199–218.

Malik, M. I. (1981): The Concept of Human Rights in Islamic Jurisprudence. Human Rights Quar-terly Vol. 3, No. 3 (August 1981), pp. 56–67.

Maróth, M. (1999): Die Wurzel der Veritas duplex-Lehre. Acta Antiqua Hungarica Vol. 39 (4), pp. 203–213.

Moscati, S. (1960): Abū ’l-cAbbās al-Saffāḥ. In: EI2. Vol. 1, p. 103. Salam, N. A. (1997): The Emergence of Citizenship in Islamdom. Arab Law Quarterly Vol. 12, No.

2, pp. 125–147. Shaked, Sh. (1984): From Iran to Islam: Notes on Some Themes in Transmission, 1. ‘Religion and

Sovereignty Are Twins’ in Ibn al-Muqaffac’s Theory of Government. 2. The Four Sages. Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam Vol. IV, pp. 31–67. Reedited in Shaked, Sh. (1995): From Zoroastrian Iran to Islam: Studies in Religious History and Intercultural Contacts. Variorum.

Sourdel, D. (1954): La biographie d’Ibn al-Muqaffac d’après les sources anciennes. Arabica Vol. I, pp. 307–323.

Ziadeh, F. J. (1957): Equality (Kafā’ah) in the Muslim Law of Marriage. The American Journal of Comparative Law Vol. 6, No. 4 (Autumn, 1957), pp. 503–517.

reason, religion and power in ibn al-muqaffa c

Documents