537

Bu çalışma, Mağrib'de (9/15 - 11/17. yüzıllar) Muhammed b. Yûsuf el-Senûsî'nin doğrudan
öğrencisi Ebû Hasan el-Yûsî (Fes, 1040/1630- 1102/1691) ile genel kabule göre sona eren
kelâm mirasını oluşturan alimlerin ve eserlerin izini sürmeyi amaçlıyor. El-Senûsî'nin
kelam eserlerinin yayılmasının incelenmesi, 15-17. yüzyıl Mağrib'inde teolojik tartışmalara
da konu olan halkın inanca dair konularda farkındalığın anlaşılmasını hedefliyor. Kelâmi
kavramların felsefi bir incelemesinden ziyade, Senûsî'nin kelâmî mirasına esasen akide,
kelâm ve fıkhî metinlerde görülen yeni bir dini eğitim biçiminin ifadesi, gelişimi ve
yaygınlaşması olarak bakılıyor.
Anahtar Kelimeler: ağ analizi, betimleyici, Erken Modern Çağ, kelam, taklit, yatay

This study aims to trace the scholars and works in the Maghrib (from the ninth/fifteenth
to the eleventh/seventeenth century) that comprise the theological legacy of Muḥammad
b. Yūsuf al-Sanūsī (Tlemcen 839/1436 - 895/1490) and, by convention, ends with the direct
students of Abū Ḥasan al-Yūsī (Fes, 1040/1630- 1102/1691). The study of the dissemination
of al-Sanūsī’s theological works is a quest for the development and understanding of
creedal literacy among non-elites which seems to mark the theological debates in the 15-
17th Century Maghrib. Rather than a philosophical study of theological concepts, we
attempt to look at al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy within the Maghrib as the expression,
development and consolidation of a new mode of religious instruction, one which is
manifested primarily in Islamic creedal, theological and legal literary works.
Keywords: Horizontal learning, Islamic theology, taqlīd, pre-modern societies,
descriptive network analysis
XI

❦
VIII
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The best of trades are those that indebt you to people whose company is a valuable lifelesson
in itself. My debts are too numerous to sum up here hence I will suffice with a few
but intending the whole. I would like to express my gratitude to the my fellow-students,
teachers and staff-members of the Alliance of Civilizations Institute for establishing a space
where thought, ihsān and imān are nourished with care. In particular I would like to thank
Recep Senturk for convincing me to join his newly established institute, and Esra P. M. for
het unwavering administrative support and assistance. As well as my companions Ayaz
Asadov and Abdurahman Mihirig for they are truly lions of reliance and trustworthiness.
Lastly, my supervisor Bruce Lawrence for showing me—through practice— the
characteristics of an excellent mentor, a diligent homo academicus with an infinite
curiosity. Not a letter would have made sense without them and not a letter would have
been written if not by the illuminated companionship of my dear wife and our children,
for I am but the product of their generosity that fills my days. Even though I benefitted
immensely from all my teachers who shaped this thesis all mistakes and faults are my own.
XI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ÖZ ................................................................................................................................................... V
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................... VI
DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................. VII
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................................................. VIII
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................... IX
CHAPTER ONE: METHODS AND CONCEPTS PERTAINING TO THE STUDY OF THE MAGHRIB ............ 13
1.1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 13
1.2. SCHOLARSHIP ON THE MAGHRIB AND THE STATE OF MAGHRIB HISTORIOGRAPHY ......... 18
1.2.1. Historiographical unit of analysis ............................................................................................ 19
1.2.2. The geographical argument ..................................................................................................... 20
1.2.3. National sentiments and Maghrib historiography ............................................................ 27
1.2.4. Claims of ethnogenesis .............................................................................................................. 29
1.2.5. In Memoriam Defunctorum: the Maghrib as a historical and cultural construct ...... 31
1.2.6. Making a case for mobility as defining factor for the Maghrib as a unit .................... 32
1.3. ‘ORTHODOXY' AND THE MAGHRIB: AN INTELLECTUAL TREND AT STAKE ........................... 35
1.3.1. Contending ‘Orthodoxy’: The vantage point of Christian theology ............................. 35
1.3.2. The social historian’s vantagepoint ....................................................................................... 37
1.3.3. Sharia-mindedness: Hodgson’s approach as an anomaly ................................................ 40
1.4. THE NORMATIVE PROJECT: TAKING THE CONFESSIONAL SERIOUS AS AN OBJECT OF ............
STUDY .................................................................................................................................................. 42
1.5. METHODOLOGY: PERCEIVING LEGACY AS COMMUNITY ......................................................... 44
1.5.1. Navigating ṭabaqāṭ and maṣādir ............................................................................................. 44
1.6. MAKING SENSE OF COMMUNITY AS A METHOD ......................................................................... 45
1.6.1. First contention: reconsidering the relational approach towards community ......... 45
1.6.2. Second contention: delimiting the boundaries in a classic network analysis ............ 46
1.6.3. Third contention: against a solely ideational approach to Community ...................... 47
CHAPTER TWO: AL-SANŪSĪ & THE DERS KALĀMĪ IN MAGHRIBI CONTEXT ..................................... 48
2.1. THE LEGACY OF AL-QĀDĪ AL-BĀQILLĀNI: ASHʿARISM WITHIN THE MĀLIKĪ FRAMEWORK
............................................................................................................................................................... 50
X
2.2. AL-JUWAYNĪ AND THE MAGHREBI IRSHĀD TRADITION: KALĀM IN AN USŪLĪ .........................
FRAMEWORK. .................................................................................................................................... 52
2.3. ABŪ ʿUMAR AL-SALĀLIJĪ: FRAMING THE IRSHĀD IN THE FRAMEWORK OF SUFISM ......... 55
2.4. INHERITORS OF AL-GHAZĀLĪ: REVISING THE APPROACH OF THE MAGHRIBI DERS
KALĀMĪ ................................................................................................................................................ 57
2.5. THE GENERATIONAL WAVES OF ASHʿARĪ CONSOLIDATION IN THE MAGHRIB .................. 59
2.6. INTELLECTUAL BIOGRAPHY OF MUḤAMMAD B. YŪSUF AL-SANŪSĪ ...................................... 61
2.7. MUḤAMMAD AND THE SIGNS OF SAINTHOOD .......................................................... 63
CHAPTER THREE: A STRUCTURE ANALYSIS OF AL-SANŪSI’S CREEDAL WORKS ............................... 68
3.1. THE STRUCTURE AND PURPOSE OF THE MAJOR CREED (AL-KUBRĀ) ................................... 68
3.1.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Major Creed from
al-Sanūsī to the 17th CE Maghrib ............................................................................................ 70
3.2. THE STRUCTURE AND PURPOSE OF THE MIDDLE CREED (AL-WUSṬĀ) ................................ 72
3.2.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Middle Creed ........
from al-Sanūsī to 18th CE Maghrib ......................................................................................... 74
3.3. THE STRUCTURE AND PURPOSE OF THE PRELIMINARIES (AL-MUQADIMĀT) .................... 76
3.3.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Preliminaries .......
from al-Sanūsī to 17th CE Maghrib ........................................................................................ 79
3.4. THE STRUCTURE AND PURPOSE OF THE MINOR CREED (AL-SUGHRĀ) AND ITS RELATION
TO THE PRELIMINARIES, THE MAJOR AND MIDDLE CREED. .................................................. 80
3.5. SCHEMATIZATION OF THE CORE BELIEFS AS EXPRESSED IN THE SUGHRĀ: .............................
REQUIRED BELIEFS REGARDING THE DIVINE AS PER MODAL QUALIFIER .......................... 82
3.5.1. Necessity as the modal qualifier: ............................................................................................. 82
3.5.2. Impossiblity as the modal qualifier ........................................................................................ 82
3.5.3. Possibility as the modal qualifier ............................................................................................ 83
3.5.4. Required beliefs regarding prophethood as per modal qualifier ................................... 83
3.5.5. Necessity as the modal qualifier .............................................................................................. 83
3.5.6. impossibility as the modal qualifier ....................................................................................... 83
3.5.7. possibility as the modal qualifier ............................................................................................ 83
3.5.8. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Minor Creed from
al-Sanūsī to 17th Century Maghrib .......................................................................................... 83
3.5.9. Variations on the Minor Creed in the Maghrib 15-17th century and setting the scene
for 18-19th century Egypt. .......................................................................................................... 86
XI
3.6. THE STRUCTURE AND PURPOSE OF THE MINOR MINOR CREED AND THE DIFFERENCES
WITH THE MINOR CREED. ............................................................................................................... 88
3.6.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Minor Minor Creed
from al-Sanūsī to the 17th Century ........................................................................................... 89
3.7. THE STRUCTURE AND PURPOSE OF THE BENEFICIAL CREED (AL-MUFĪDAH) AND THE
DIFFERENCE WITH THE MINOR MINOR CREED ......................................................................... 90
3.7.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on this text from al-Sanūsi
to 17th CE Maghrib ........................................................................................................................ 90
CHAPTER FOUR: GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND STRUCTURE OF AL-SANŪSĪ’S CREEDAL TEXTS ............ 91
4.1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND STRUCTURE OF AL-SANŪSĪ’S CREEDAL TEXTS .......................... 91
4.2. THE INTER-TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIPS OF THE CREEDAL WORKS ......................................... 94
4.3. TEXTUAL DIFFERENCES WITH THE PRE-SANUSI KALĀMĪ LITERARY GENRE ....................... 98
4.4. THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF AL-SANŪSĪ’S THEOLOGICAL LEGACY IN THE MAGHRIB 100
4.5. CONCLUDING REMARKS: AL-SANŪSĪ’S THEOLOGICAL LEGACY AS A COMMUNITY OF
PRACTICE ........................................................................................................................................... 104
4.5.1. The Role of Horizontal Learning in al-Sanūsī’s Theological Legacy ........................... 104
4.5.2. Al-Sanūsī's Community of Practice ...................................................................................... 106
FIGURES …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….108
5.1. FIG. 1. AL-SANŪSĪ’S SCHOLARLY OUTPUT PER SUBJECT .......................................................... 108
5.2. FIG. 2. THE INTER-TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIPS OF AL-SANŪSĪ’S CREEDAL WORKS ............ 108
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................... 108
6.1. AL-SANŪSĪ’S TEACHERS .................................................................................................................. 108
6.1.1. Abu Yaʿqūb Yūsuf al-Sanūsī (fl. 1420?) ................................................................................ 108
6.1.2. Nasr al-Zawāwī (fl. 1430?) ....................................................................................................... 108
6.1.3. Abū ʿAbd Allah Muḥammad b. Qāsim b. Ṭunazt al-Ṣanhājī (fl. 1420) ........................ 109
6.1.4. Abū al-Ḥaṣṣan ʿAlī b. Muḥammad al-Basṭī al-Qarshī bil-Qālṣādī (d.891/1486) ........ 109
6.1.5. Al-Ḥassan b. Makhlūf al-Mazīlī al-Rāshidī (d.857/1453) .................................................. 110
6.1.6. Abu al-Qāsim al-Kinābshi al-Bajāʾī (fl. 1440?) .................................................................... 110
6.1.7. Abu Zayd b. Muḥammad b . Makhlūf al-Thaʿālabī al-Jazāʾirī (d. 876/1471) ................ 110
6.1.8. Ibrahīm al-Tāzī al-Wahrāni (d. 866/1463) ............................................................................ 111
6.1.9. Al-Qāḍī Abū ʿAbd-Allah Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Maghīlī ( d. 850/1446). ................ 111
6.1.10. Abū ʿAbd-Allah Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Ḥabbāk al-Tilimsānī (d. 867/1463) ......... 112
XII
6.1.11. Muḥammad b. al-ʿAbbās al-ʿUbbādī ( d. 871/1467) ........................................................... 112
6.1.12. Abū Ḥassan ʿalī b. Muḥammad al-Tālūtī al-Anṣārī al-Tilimsānī ................................... 112
6.2. AL-SANŪSĪ'S STUDENTS ................................................................................................................... 113
6.2.1. Abū al-ʿAbbās b. Aḥmad al-Fāsī al-Burunsī; Zarrūq ( d. 899/1494) .............................. 113
6.2.2. ʿUmar al-Mallāli (fl. 899/1494) ................................................................................................ 113
6.2.3. b. Ṣaʿd al-Tilimsānī (d. 901/1496) ............................................................................................ 113
6.2.4. Muḥammad b. Abī Madyan al-Tilimsānī (d. 915/1509). ................................................... 114
6.2.5. Ibrahīm b. ʿAbd al-Jabbār al-Fajījī (d. 920/1514) ................................................................. 114
6.2.6. Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. al-Ḥāj al-Warnīdī al-Manāwī (918/1511) ............................... 114
6.2.7. Abū ʿAbd Allah Muḥammad b. al-ʿAbbās al-Tilimsānī (d. 915/1509) ........................... 115
6.2.8. Mohammed b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Ḥawḍī al-Tilimsānī (d. 910/1504) .......................... 115
6.2.9. Muḥammad al-Qalʿī (fl. 1510) .................................................................................................. 115
BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................... 116
CURRICULUM VITAE ................................................................................................................... 131
13
1. CHAPTER ONE: METHODS AND CONCEPTS PERTAINING TO THE STUDY
OF THE MAGHRIB
So much has been written in recent years about these limitations on
“Scientific” objectivity as to obscure the plain, outstanding principle that the
historian’s basic task is one of presenting a corpus of ascertained fact. This is
the hardest thing to get across to students today, especially to those who
have been to the so-called progressive schools. Somewhere along the
assembly-line of their education, these students have had inserted in them
a bolt called “points of view,” secured with a nut called “trends,” and they
imagine that the historian’s problem is simply to compare points of view and
describe trends. It is not. The fundamental question is, “What actually
happened, and why?
Samuel Eliot Morison, Faith of a Historian1
1.1. Introduction
This study aims to trace the theologians and works in the Maghrib (from the ninth/fifteenth to the
eleventh/seventeenth century) that make out the theological legacy of Muḥammad b. Yūsuf al-Sanūsī
(Tlemcen 839/1436 - 895/1490) and, by convention, ends with the direct students of Abū Ḥasan al-Yūsī
(Fes 1040/1630- 1102/1691). The theological trend that is expressed by these scholars forms into a
prominent Sunni Islamic theological discourse that not only shapes the intellectual climate of 18-20th
century Egypt, with as epicentre the Azhar madrasa system, but finds itself also taking up a prominent
role in the theological, spiritual and pedagogical discourse in West-Africa, the Malay-Archipelago and
1 Morison, Samuel Eliot. “Faith of a Historian.” The American Historical Review 56, no. 2 (1951): 261–75.
14
to a certain extent the 16th and 17th century outskirts of the Ottoman Empire. Through tracing al-Sanūsī’s
theological legacy in the Maghrib we aim to illustrate a shift in the purpose of authoring creedal texts
gives a visualisation of the development and consolidation of a new mode of religious instruction in the
region.
The historical timeframe we intend to investigate provides a couple of interesting cross-sections and
areas of transition on different intellectual, social and cultural levels: Firstly, from the general
perspective of global history the 15th century is considered as the end of the late Middle Ages of the postclassical
era that shifts into the early modern period. While from the perspective of the study of
Islamicate intellectual history, the 15-17th century allows us to add additional weight to the plethora of
arguments against a specific premise of the general decline theory, which Khaled El-Rouayheb aptly
describes as “the intellectual “sclerosis” that has been thought to characterize the Arab-Islamic world
between the 15th and 18th century.”2 Thirdly, from the perspective of the history of philosophy and
theology these centuries are the middle – sometimes subjectively referred to as a peak – of what is
considered the post-formative era (11-19th century) of the so called doctrinal development within Islamic
history.3 Much of the theological and intellectual debates that will occur in these few centuries will
ultimately serve as the fertile soil for many of the 20th and 21st century debates revolving around the
politics of confessional identity, when claims on who falls within and who falls out of the fold of
confessional Islam make up the crux of the popular theological literature. Contemporary ideological
discussions on concepts such as ‘ahl al-Sunna’, ‘orthodoxy’ —and thereby implicit or explicit
2 El-Rouayheb, Khaled. “Opening the Gate of Verification: The Forgotten Arab-Islamic Florescence of the 17th Century.” International Journal of Middle
East Studies 38, no. 2 (2006): 267.
3 Wisnovsky, Robert. “The Nature And Scope Of Arabic Philosophical Commentary In Post Classical (ca. 1100-1900 Ad) Islamic Intellectual History: some
Preliminary Observations.” Bulletin - Institute Of Classical Studies 47, No.83:2 (2004): 149-91
15
accusations of heterodoxy— are often based upon shallow expressions and readings of these medieval
theological debates.
The study of the dissemination of al-Sanūsī’s theological works is a quest for the development and
understanding of creedal literacy among the non-elites which seems to mark the theological debates in
15-17th Century Maghrib. Rather than a philosophical study of theological concepts we attempt to look
at al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy within the Maghrib as the expression, development and consolidation
of an intellectual phenomenon which is manifested primarily in Islamic creedal, theological and legal
literary works. To the extent that one could raise the question if these works can be considered as the
emergence of a new or distinct genre in Islamic theological literature based upon a specific mode of
religious instruction that focuses on horizontal learning. By a descriptive study of the succession of
scholarly texts that are based upon al-Sanūsī’s theological works, we aim to display the immense
amount of innovative scholarship produced as a response to al-Sanūsī’s theological works . The scope
of the study would suggest a network analysis being the appropriate tool for this endeavour. However,
we will illustrate that the conceptual tools from memory studies – particularly the concept of perceiving
legacy as community – serve the purpose of this study better. As we will illustrate later on Sanūsī’s
creedal work is a layered project of thirteen texts aimed to cater to all layers of a confessional society.
This efflorescing intention not only pervades the texts itself as well as al-Sanūsī’s pedagogical vision,
but ignites a historical trend of commentaries and glosses on his work, as well as abridgements and
creative literary works outside the strict confines of theology. All based on the communal realization
that a different mode of religious instruction is necessary for the preservation of authentic faith. Despite
being a contemporary of the towering prolific Jalāl al-Dīn al- Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505) it is al-Sanūsī whose
16
theological works stand the test of time and ignite a renewed approach to creedal literacy by
investigating and opening up the debate on the social foundations of creedal literacy rather than just
the intellectual foundations (the position of classic authors such as Abu Ishḥāq al-Isfaʾraynī, d. 418/1027;
al-Ashʿarī, 324/936) or the epistemological (Juwaynī d. 478/1085) or psychological foundations (al-
Ghazālī d. 505/1111). Al-Sanūsī develops these foundations under the banner of his commitment to the
‘avoidance of taqlīd’ as being the axis upon which his own works as well as his subsequent theological
legacy progresses. One of the conclusions I will argue for in this study is that this has much to do with
the fact that the consolidation of the understanding of Sunni normativity in the modern period is
indebted to the consolidation of Ashʿarism and Malikism in the Maghrib where a focus on creedal
literacy and the establishment of a profound holistic world-view for the theologian and educator to
transmit— via education or companionship— to the nominal Muslim. It is in al-Sanūsī’s historical
scholarly network of the 14-16th century, and in his region, that Ashʿarism as a methodology, originally
embedded in the science of kalam, experiences a transition from ʿilm al kalām to fiqh al-kalām.4 This
transition seems to be primarily accelerated, or perhaps even caused, by the theological legacy of al-
Sanūsī. And so it is al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy that ought to be studied and analyzed in order to
sustain the aforementioned conclusion.
On the one hand, the influence of al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy on the formation of an ahl al-Sunna
identity and the archetype of the Sunni scholar5 in the subsequent centuries and particularly in 18th-19th
century Egypt cannot be underestimated. Yet at the same time, on the other hand, to understand its
4 See: Khālid Zahrī, Min ʿilm al-Kalām ilā Fiqh al-Kalām: Muqāraba li-Ibrāz Maʿālim al-Tajdīd al-Kalāmī ʿind fuqahāʾ wa-ṣūfiyat al-Maghrib.
5 Spevack Harun, The Archetypal Sunnī Scholar : Law, Theology, and Mysticism in the Synthesis of al-Bājūrī, 6–31.
17
effect this communal Sunni identity—i.e., ‘orthodoxy’— we must first inquire into the nature of
orthodoxy as a concept and its validity for the study of Islamic theological thought. Lastly, we need to
consider al-Sanūsī as very much a product of his time and region. As a native of the legendary, often
mystified town of saints and scholars Tilimsān (Tlemcen), we find his legacy spreading rapidly east and
westwards over the whole Maghrib region as well as West-Africa. Through al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy
we find an opportunity to illustrate the richness and vividness of the intellectual landscape in the
Maghrib; a region that is often neglected due to being reduced to its colonial past. In what follows we
wish to commence by conceptually clearing the grounds, i.e., by a proper understanding of pivotal
concepts within our study. Prior to discussing al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy we will commence with a
short analysis of the concept of the Maghrib, which allows us to discuss the state of Maghrib
historiography and the Maghrib as a (civilizational) unit of analysis. Secondly, in order to set the ground
for the taqlīd debates that dominate al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy we will briefly discuss the concept of
orthodoxy and argue for normative authority as a more viable conceptual substitute which will set the
grounds for a discussion on network analysis and perceiving legacy as community.
18
1.2. Scholarship on the maghrib and the state of maghrib historiography
Any book about medieval North Africa, and this one is no exception, confronts at least two sets of related
problems from the outset. First, the prevailing modes of scholarly interpretation incorporate multiple layers of
conceptual difficulties. Second, so do the historical sources. In both cases the issues are often connected but not
always in the same way, with the same effect, or for the same reasons. All historians who confront the
relationship between their own notions and those of the sources they seek to elucidate share these two problems.
However, when it comes to the study of medieval North Africa, modern history has engendered such
entanglements that it has become very difficult to explain all the intricacies and complexities involved.
Ramzi Rouighi6
A quick survey of the titles produced by academic publishers such as Cambridge University Press,
Harvard University Press, E.J. Brill or Walter De Gruyter illustrates the plethora of literature on a wide
range of topics and historical events and periods for the Middle-East, Far-east Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa
and Southern Europe. The Maghrib as such seems to be a curiosity reduced to its colonial past. Most of
the literature and publications focus on the early-Modern Maghrib whereby ‘early-modern’ denotes the
advent of colonialization rather than an intrinsic value of the societies within the Maghrib itself. The
ancient and medieval history of the region seems to likewise barely receive any focused attention. Of
course, this is not an exhaustive survey nor a formal argument but serves as an anecdotal illustration of
a deeper issue at hand within the scholarship on the Maghrib as succinctly pointed out by Laroui7
(ʻArwī) and Rouighi8. The issue at stake here is the pervasive view and understanding of the Maghrib as
of peripheral importance not only on the world-stage of civilizations but even within Islamicate history,
where it ranks beneath the rich literature of other major areas of Islamdom. Granted, recent scholarship
6 Rouighi, The Making of a Mediterranean Emirate, 12.
7 ʿArwī, L’histoire Du Maghreb: Un Essai de Synthèse.
8 Rouighi, ‘The Mediterranean between Barbaria and the Medieval Maghrib: Questions for a Return to History’, 308.
19
has aimed to break free from this unjustified silence. Yet there still remains much to be studied and reevaluated.
In order to analyse al-Sanūsī’s legacy and role within the (intellectual) history of the Maghrib,
we have to contextualize al-Sanūsī within his particular time period. For this we require three
historiographical questions to be explored: 1) what is the unit of analysis for the Maghrib exactly, and
2) is the concept of ‘the Maghrib’ truly the most effective unit of analysis and concept for what we aim
to study? Lastly, how do we deal with the chronological division of our civilisational unit of analysis?
By exploring these three questions, we aim to set the grounds to understand al-Sanūsī’s legacy within
the Maghrib in order to illustrate and explain how the mobility existing within and through his legacy
is both textual and scholarly. Both manuscripts and the scholars who produce and use them speak for
the dynamics and characteristics of the region and its influence on the surrounding civilizations and
intellectual traditions.
1.2.1. Historiographical unit of analysis
Scholarship on the concept and historiography of the Maghrib can be divided into several categories
based upon the preponderance of a certain characteristic of the field over other characteristics. The
Maghrib is either considered through its 1) geographical characteristics, or 2) through a comparative
analysis of the modern national units that make up this geographical area, or 3) contextualised as the
extension of the i.) Middle East, ii.) the Arab-world or iii.) the African continent in one way or another.
If not east- or southwards then north-westwards by iv.) considering the Maghrib an appendix to the
overseas Mediterranean societies. Finally, when all geographical directions are depleted, the Maghrib
20
can be considered as 4) a historical and cultural construct that therefore must be studied and
considered from an exclusively historical and social vantagepoint.
1.2.2. The geographical argument
The geographical argument maintains that the distinctiveness of the region is due to the geography of
it being an unique island surrounded by seas of water and a ‘sea’ of sand. With the Atlantic Ocean in
the West of the region, the Mediterranean Sea and the Sahara extending as a full border from the
Atlantic Ocean, these served not as borders but rather as highways into neighbouring civilizations. As
such, early geographers, like Yāqūt Ibn ‘Abd-Allāh al-Ḥamawī (d.626/ 1229) would often refer to the
region as Jazīrat al-Maghrib.9 The geographical argument defines the region based on the unique
mobility within the territory and towards other regions, caused by the geographical constitution of
either the mountains, the surrounding bodies of seas the deserts, or its ‘islandness’.10 In that sense they
would also refer to it as Atlas land(s) due to the Atlas Mountains configuring the inhabitable limits of
the whole region and thereby adding the accentuation that the original inhabitants of the region lived
in pockets in and around the feet of these mountains while the foreigners, predominantly Arabs, dwell
in cities further away from the mountains and more often on nodes of the aforementioned natural
highways. This imagery and connection between the mountains and the nature of the natural
inhabitant of such surface and climate is pervasive during the late Roman Empire period as can be
9 For an overview of the different geographical opinions on the religion see Hunwick, John O. “a Region of the Mind: Medieval Arab Views of African
Geography and Ethnography and Their Legacy.” Sudanic Africa 16 (2005): 103–36.
10 Broadly refers to the social, political and geographical qualities of an ‘island’ that are distinct from continents. See: Casey, Edward S. “Between Geography
and Philosophy: What Does It Mean to Be in the Place-World?” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 91, no. 4 (2001): 683–93.
21
found in the writings of Tacitus and Sallust; it also gets picked up by the early Italian colonial literature.11
Though the devastating effects of that imagery are fully championed by the Colonial French through
their usage and ideological reading of Ibn Khaldūn (d. 1406), it is the latter who uses a similar, yet not
as far-reaching argument when describing the Maghrib and its inhabitants. Hence we will shortly
discuss the necessary distinction between the historical ibn Khaldūn and the colonial ibn Khaldūn.
The fundamental problem with the geographical argument is its reliance on a trope within the
histography of the Maghrib. The geographical determinants of the region are in the relevant literature
swiftly intertwined with what Brown calls ‘partisan controversies’12 – which he traces back to the
writings of ancient Roman historians such as Tacitus (fl. 56 -117) and Sallustius Crispus (BC 87-35) – and
peaks particularly in the French, colonial propaganda machinery and their reading of Ibn Khaldūn’s
magnus opus on the history of the Maghrib. It appears to be that the foundational text for the colonial
ideological apparatus to understand the region is the French —rather creative— 1852 translation of Ibn
Khaldūn’s Kitāb al-ʿibar wa-dīwān al-mubtadaʼ wa-al-khabar fī ayām al-ʿArab wa-al-ʿAjam by the Irishturned-
French orientalist William McGuckin de Slane (d. 1878). It is on the basis of this translation that
Slane would later on translate Ibn Khaldūn’s work as Histoire des Berbères et des dynasties musulmanes
de l’Afrique septentrionale (1852–1856)13, which would, within the shortest timespan, serve as the
standard reference for all things related to the medieval Maghrib as pointed out by Rouighi.14 The
qualifier ‘medieval’ here serves solely to describe the period of the Maghrib that is “pre-civilization” i.e.,
11 Pietro Romanelli in his Storia della Province Romane D’ell Africa recycles imageries of the region, also of relevance is Davis, Diana. Resurrecting the Granary
of Rome. Ohio University Press, 2007. "Introduction." Where he examines the way French colonialists used Roman history to support their colonial claims.
12 L. C. Brown, “Reconnoitering the Terrain Maghrib Historiography: The Unit of Analysis Problem” in The Maghrib in Question : Essays in History and
Historiography. Texas University Press: 1997.
13 Ibn Khaldūn and Slane, Histoire des berbères et des dynasties musulmanes de l’Afrique septentrionale. 32
14 Rouighi, ‘A Mediterranean of Relations for the Medieval Maghrib’. 7.
22
that which exists before French rule.15 Hence assessing the status of the Medieval Maghrib and
subsequently the early Modern Maghrib requires an understanding of the Khaldūnisation of knowledge
pertaining to the region. This Khaldūnisation centres mostly around the contested and mythologized
invasion of Banū Hilāl into the North-African region, and Ibn Khaldūn’s premise of attributing the
bedounization of the local cultures and settlements of the Maghrib to the Hilālian invasion in the 11th
century. Burke aptly illustrates how studies on Maghribī history and historiography are perpetrating
two forms of revisionism based on their interpretation of this invasion. They either hold on to the
French-Khaldūnian imperial revision, i.e., a colonial Ibn Khaldūn, or they are shaped by the local
revisionist struggles of the national entities that inherited the colonial wreckage. Both approaches,
despite being on two sides of the spectrum, rely on narratives centred around their conceptualization
and reading (into) the events surrounding the allegedly historically crucial events of the entry of the
Banu Hilāl into the Maghrib, also known as the Hilālian invasion controversy.16
Those who are pro-Hilālian, 17 such as the colonial readers of Ibn Khaldūn, interpret this event as the
symbol of the absolute opposition between the native inhabitants of the region and the invading Arabs.
The Hilālian invasion marks for them the civilizational battle for the region’s future development into
cities and the subsequent flourishing of economy and culture instead of remaining a society of primitive
towns and villages. The entry of the Banū Hilāl is, according to them, to be considered a dramatical
15 Rouighi makes a compelling argument illustrating the evidence for its popularity and effect on scholarship and understanding the region see Rouighi,
‘The Mediterranean between Barbaria and the Medieval Maghrib: Questions for a Return to History’, 18.
16 Note that the Banu Hilal is a standard reference to a confederation of tribes which is mostly the Banu Hilāl tribe but also includes the Banu Sulaym,
amongst other fractional tribes that meandered from Yemen through the Arabian Peninsula to settle in north and west Africa, see Idris, AL-SANŪSĪ. R.
(1971). "Hilāl". In Lewis, B.; Ménage, V. L.; Pellat, Ch. & Schacht, J. (eds.). The Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition, Volume III: Iram. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 385–
387.
17 The pro-Hilālian stance is explicitly stated and justified in R. Idris, 'De la realite de la catastrophe hilalienne, Annales (1968), pp. 390-96 and 'L'Invasion
hilalienne et ses consequences', Cahiers de Civilization Medievale (Juillet-Septembre 1968). See also, Roger Le Toumeau, 'Ibn Khaldūn laudateur et
contemptateur des Arabes, R.O.M.M. No. 2 (1966), 155-168.
23
catalyst for the region that exposed the absolute tension between the (semi-) nomadic and the
sedentary lifestyle. From this approach only one of these lifestyles leads historically to the development
of a civilization while the other does not. A tension which from then on will define the ongoing history
of the entire region. As previously mentioned, this narrative is most famously described by the historical
Ibn Khaldūn. Yet it is crucial to note that on the historical Ibn Khaldūn’s perception of these events the
colonial French scholarship adds an extra layer, i.e., a form of utilitarian racialization.
The pro-Hilālian scholarship that is of particular interest regarding our question on the medieval and
pre-modern maghrib derives from the French reading of Ibn Khaldūn and the added layer of
racialization, used as a justification of certain colonial policies. As earlier mentioned, it is Slane’s
ideological translation and subsequent work on Ibn Khaldūn’s Kitāb al-ʿibar that opens up the discourse
of race, regarding the native inhabitants of the Medieval Maghrib, who are referred to as Berbers.18 This
categorisation carries a racial connotation that is not self-evident in Ibn Khaldūn’s work itself. Roughi,
for example, argues that Ibn Khaldūn understands the term ‘barbar’, similarly to early geographers of
the region, to simply refer to the inhabitants of the Mediterranean coast-line on the African continent,
rather than being a denotation for the inhabitants of the whole region.19 The colonial French extension
of the term to denote all inhabitants of the Maghrib as Berbers is the first component of the layer of
racialization brought into existence through the colonial reading of Ibn Khaldūn. A second component
can be exemplified by Georges Marçais’s (d. 1962) Les Arabes en Berbérie du XIe au XIVe siècle (1913), or
18 For a conceptual analysis of the connection between berberness and barbarism see for example Collingwood’s New Leviathan where he pervades the
same anti-Hilālian idea by a threefold categorization of barbarism: 1) Arab barbarism in North Africa; 2) Turk barbarism; and finally German barbarism
during the second World War.
19 Rouighi, ‘A Mediterranean of Relations for the Medieval Maghrib’, 7.
24
the French geographer Jean Despois’ (1972) early works. Both are inspired by the orientalist Slane and
his work on the Maghrib. Take for example the following quote from the work of Georges Marçais:
Taken in its entirety, this history [of the Berbérie] lacks almost any unity. We will not discover
here anything comparable to the unconscious and laborious effort, sometimes so hesitant
about its goal and so often upset in its march, which seems to lead Europeans towards the
realization of a social ideal or a greater state. The Berbérie does not seem capable of progressing
by its own means; it must latch itself onto someone else… In the grand duel between barbarism
and civilization, how many times the latter was defeated … [This] Reservoir of resources
without cohesion, [the Berbérie] needs to receive these directing influences from outside, from
Phoenicia or Rome, or from the Islamic Orient or Spain [i.e. al- Andalus]20
Rouighi aptly points out that “Marçais’s “duel” as described in the citation betrays Ibn Khaldūn’s more
complex attitude towards the Bedouin civilization. Yet to be fair, Marçais’ idea that a Bedouin Maghrib
is civilized from the outside is not completely alien to Ibn Khaldūn. On several occasions Ibn Khaldūn
remarks that when compared with 11-12th century urbanized al-Andalus, the Maghrib can indeed
considered to be lacking.21 Though, the conclusion of such relative comparison cannot be extrapolated
to an absolute statement. Claiming that Ibn Khaldūn found the Maghrib as a region in itself lacking in
20 Translation by Rouighi from the introduction of Georges Marçais’, Les Arabes en Berbérie du XIe au XIVe siècle (Paris: E. Leroux, 1913), 1–2., in Rouighi,
A Mediterranean of relations for the medieval maghrib: Historiography in question, 8
21 Ibid., 8-9
25
terms of civilization remains as much as the claim unsubstantiated as the claim that the religion did
not have an authentic sense of civilization.
Slane’s translation, Marcais’ essays, as well as Jean Despois’ geographical and historical notebooks share
the common idea of colonial Khaldūnian thought that these medieval natives of this Mediterranean
region—despite being part of the Mediterranean geographically—already witnessed foreign
contamination from neighbouring civilizations prior to the Hilālian invasion. For them the
Mediterranean is already a ‘foreign element’. Hence the dwellers of the land, i.e., the Berbers, despite
inhabiting the Mediterranean coast and being part and parcel of Phoenician, Roman and Greek history
are not to be considered Mediterranean per se. For them the medieval Mediterranean relates to the
Mediterranean only through its original whiteness which stems from the European civilizations that
once were settled there. Whatever little remained of these civilizations and their cultures throughout
the centuries was obliterated firstly by the invasion of the Banu Hilāl and secondly by the following
‘violent’ waves of Islamization and Arabization that these tribes brought to the north-African coastline.
One can already read in this approach the forms of justification that will be presented as arguments for
colonizing these lands, as well as for why certain forms of disciplining the inhabits of the land into a
more civilized manner of living (imperial) became commonplace. Both French and Italian colonization
of parts of the north African coast line were undertaken in the name of the civilizing mission. The
French translations of Ibn Khaldūn shaped, denoted by Hannoum as the colonial imaginary22 whereby
26
it absorbs and transforms local knowledge and understanding into colonial knowledge, i.e. the
translation does not aim to represent the historical ibn Khaldūn but rather the colonial ibn Khaldūn.23
Another example can be found through a look at the early Andalusian sources that refer to the
(medieval) Maghrib as the bilād al barbaria, intending thereby a neutral reference of what was on the
other side of the Gibraltar without the racial component to it. This can be found in the geographical
observations of Abū ʿUbayd al-Bakrī24 (d. 1029), the travel stories of Yāqūt al-Ḥamawī25 (d. 1229) and to
a certain extent one could argue that even as late as Ibn Khaldūn himself, geographers and historians
did not necessarily denote with the term Maghrib only that specific region of bilād al-barbaria which
resonates with the ancient Greeks usage of Barbara.26 For these early natural scientists and historians,
the denomination of the Maghrib is not limited to the north African Mediterranean coastline but also
to its northern fringe.
To reiterate, these early modern French works are a striking example of the second racial component
that gets introduced into Ibn Khaldūn’s thought. There is the colonial assumption of the ancient or
medieval Mediterranean societies on the north-African coastline as somehow being part and thereby
parcel of Mediterranean western civilizations, whether Greek, Phoenician or Roman. The claim is then
that this primitive society by their essence showed no signs of civilization or the desire to civilize.
Therefore the impulse for civilizing the region becomes a civilizational urgency from an exterior force.
This also would illustrate why using a term such as the Islamic Mediterranean or the Islamicate
23 On the notion of translation as transformation within historiography see Hannoum, Abdelmajid. "Translation and the Colonial Imaginary: Ibn Khaldûn
Orientalist." History and Theory 42, no. 1 (2003): 61-81.
24 Bakrī, Kitāb Al-Masālik Wa-al-Mamālik. 82-93
25 Yāqūt b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥamawī, Kitāb Muʿjam Al-Buldān.
26 such as in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea for the same region along the North African coastline with several city-states
27
Mediterranean for this region would be out of the question, since it would reflect contemporary and
Euro-centric understandings of the Mediterranean as well as its relation to the Maghrib as a region.
1.2.3. National sentiments and Maghrib historiography
Earlier we looked at the proponents of the pro-Hilālian camp whom we characterized as the first of two
revisionist approaches with regards to the Maghrib as a region. The second revisionist approach comes
forth from the anti-Hilālian camp, but is not limited to it. While the other party, those who are anti-
Hilālian27 will rightly claim that the Hilālian invasion and its radical importance with regards to the
development of the region is distorted by the ideological ink of French historians. This camp consists
predominantly of decolonial scholars, local nationalists and activists who desire to escape from beneath
the yolk of the oppressive and racial categorization of Arab and Berber that dominated the oppressive
regimes and policies of French and Italian rule in the region from 1830 till the Evian Accords in 1962 and
its aftermath at the beginning of the sixties. Even from within the French Académie, a generation of
elite historians started to explicitly debunk the idea that the opposition between nomadic and
sedentary lifestyle served as the dramatic catalyst for the region. Claude Cahen28 as well as Jaques
Berque, for example, illustrate in their work that the historical evidence – supported by Goitein’s
ground-breaking research on the Cairo Geniza manuscripts – points more towards an interdependency
and a gradual shift from one form of societal behaviour towards the other.29 The Hilālian invasion as the
27 Among the critics, see Jean Poncet, 'Le mythe de la catastrophe hilalienne,Annales XXII (1967), pp. 1099- 1120; Yves Lacoste, Ibn Khaldūn ou la naissance
de l'histoire (Paris, 1966), and Muḥammad Sahli, Pour Decoloniser l'histoire (Paris, 1966)
28 Cahen, ‘Quelques Mots Sur Les Hilaliens Et Le Nomadisme’, 130–33.
29 Goitein, ‘XVI. Medieval Tunisia The Hub Of The Mediterranean’, 308–28.
28
dramatic catalyst for the Maghrib seems to have been based upon ideological assumptions rather than
historical facts.
Despite the many benefits of the decolonial movement a few critical observations have to be made.
Perhaps the most pertinent issue with this, ultimately revision approach lies in the fact that the history
of the Maghrib is here reduced to the revisionist struggle of each of its national units in the pursuit not
of truth but the justification of (national) identity. This means that the ‘contemporary’ nationalist
struggle influences and shapes the perception of the nation’s past and their perception of historical
facts. The past is here not a history of the region but ‘their history that is required to be reconstructed in
order to legitimize, coalesce, and authorize the particular nation-state in itself. The society, culture and
religious habits, basically the region’s lived experience, ought to be reconstructed and retraced in the
nation’s history. Here the act of history as an academic activity becomes enmeshed with the quest for
the symbols of that nation. History is politicized for the sake of retrieving symbols in name of the (re-)
construction of a nation-state that supposedly was present or discernible throughout the centuries. The
issue with the national units becoming politicized history is, of course, part of a larger problem with the
periodization of the region. Classically the chronological division of the Maghrib follows either the
conceptualization of a Roman then Arab then (partly) Ottoman then (colonial) French/Italian then
(independent nation-state) independency pattern. This is the most general division but comes to be
inordinately problematic since its ultimately based on the principle of dynasties and their succession
as the standard reference; or to put it more bluntly it is based upon a racial criterium. As such, it not
only accentuates a racial criterium as the most distinctive element of the region but it also fossilizes the
dynamics of the historical events of the region itself by elevating the invasion, consolidation and defeat
29
of a foreign entity that then becomes the region’s ruling dynasty as the red thread of the region’s history.
The second kind of periodization that can be utilized is the classical tripartite ancient-medievalmodern
with the occasional introduction of a pre-modern period. The issue with this second form of
periodization is its imprecise and generalizing character as well as the transfer of the observer’s, —i.e.,
the cultured historian who in this case is often the Eurocentric scholar— cultural and intellectual
framework. Both forms of periodization share in their lack of historical precision and the staggering
absence of a way to deal with the overlap, i.e., the continuity, between the proposed units of their
division. There is, for example, a significant and flourishing overlap between the Roman and Arab
civilization in the early Islamic period. The transition from colonial to nation-state, i.e., the struggle for
independence, becomes itself a significant period that falls between the static periodic division of precolonized/
colonized/independent. This illustrates the strength of the geographical element that ought
to be considered for the historiography of the Maghrib.
1.2.4. Claims of ethnogenesis
The scholars that consider the Maghrib – as a unit – solely as an extension of the Arab world often will
propose considering it to be merely an extension of that world due to a proclaimed ‘arabness’ or
‘islamicness’ of the dominant culture in the region. The result,of course, is to marginalize the diverse
pre-existing traits and local cultures within the north African region. These claims to a certain
ethnogenesis could also mark a plea to go beyond the Maghrib-Mashriq bifurcation 30 of the Islamicate
world. However, this would be again too broad to account for the diversity of customs, languages and
30 G. Calasso sketches the conceptual genesis and historical development of both the Maghrib and Mashriq and their relation up to the 13th century in
Maghrib in the Mashriq see: Fierro, Maghrib in the Mashriq : Knowledge, Travel and Identity, 35–78.
30
the different historical collective memory that exists in the region. The desire to go beyond the
bifurcation of the Maghrib-Mashriq, however, contains a strong argument, since it’s a bifurcation
constructed on several tropes developed by a web of imperial policies of British and French rule in their
battle against the Ottoman Empire. However, the strongest argument against the annulation of this
bifurcation would —almost ironically— also be the dominance of the Ottoman empire over the eastern
(Shām) region and urban Egypt to a certain extent in terms of cultural and political cross-pollination.
The historical legacy of the most western part of the Maghrib, which coincides with contemporary
Morocco, the Sahara and Mauritania, is that it has never been part of the Ottoman Empire; the cultural
and social influence of the Ottoman style and administration has been minimal. The absence of a full
dominance of the Ottoman empire over the complete geographic territory of the Maghrib becomes
clear when taking a cursory view of the dynasties that dominated the region and are distinct from the
dynasties in the Mashriq. The Andalusian Umayyads follow a radically different track from their eastern
predecessors. Similarly, the Zirid split from the Fatimids colours their history rather differently. 31 On
the Islamicate level perhaps one of the most eye-catching differences between the Mashriq and the
Maghrib in their historical development is the role of Christianity. As a practiced religion, Christianity
in all its local variations witnessed a steep decline and ultimately end of its native presence in the
Maghrib whereas the influential role of Christianity in the Mashriq cannot be overlooked. 32
31 Regarding the proclaimed role that the Fatimids played in the disruptive arrival of the Banu Hilal in the Maghrib, see King, Matt. "Reframing the Fall of
the Zirid Dynasty, 1112–35 CE." Mediterranean Studies 26, no. 1 (2018): 1-25.
32 See the work of Nsiri, Mohamed A. (2019), "Between Jerome and Augustine of Hippo: Some Intellectual Preoccupations of Late Antiquity", in: John Tolan,
ed., Geneses. A Comparative Study of the Historiographies of the Rise of Christianity, Rabbinic Judaism, and Islam, London–New York: Routledge, 98-113.
31
1.2.5. In Memoriam Defunctorum: the Maghrib as a historical and cultural construct
The fifth possibility for the historiographical unit of analysis maintains that the Maghrib as a concept is
a historical and cultural construct that therefore must be studied and considered from an exclusive
historical and social vantage point. This comes forth in the more recent scholarship of scholars such as
Vincent J. Cornell, Alfred Bel and Bulliet. Cornell’s position contains both a critique on the prevalent
view on the region as well as the decision to go for this fifth form of the Maghrib as a historiographical
unit. In his Realm of the Saint Cornell writes:
North Africa was never the backwater that many orientalists and social scientists have assumed.
While Muslim Spain (Ar. Al-Andalus), with its sophisticated intellectual life and “civilized”
ways, is often highlighted in surveys of Islamic civilization, the premodern Maghrib is still
dismissed as either an appendix of Islamic Iberia or a mere sub region of peripheral and
marginalized Islamic Africa. But the historian who looks at North African primary sources
without prejudice finds that such an extreme center-periphery approach distorts reality. Rather
than making a peripheralized North Africa dependent on Muslim Spain, it is better to view the
entire Islamic West, —Al-Andalus, the Maghrib, Muslim Sicily, and parts of West-Africa—as a
singular, relatively unified, cultural entity.33
The appeal of this approach is the opportunity to highlight a relative unity within the cultural sphere.
Yet as a social construct it’s not immediately justified as such in the historical understanding of the term
33 Cornell, Realm of the Saint : Power and Authority in Moroccan Sufism, xxiv.
32
and thereby leaves ample room for an ambiguous usage of the term. Roughie illustrates that before the
7th century Northern Africa was not considered a singular entity, nor did the Arabic ‘Maghrib’ became
part of local wisdom a few centuries later based upon a historical and natural development of the
conceptualization of the region34. When referred to something as happening in this region, or to
someone from the Maghrib this could, depending on the author’s historical context, refer to Sicily and
southern Italy as well as Spain, or Ifriqiyya and its surroundings in Tunis, or at a later stage a reference
to Fez, current Morocco, and its surroundings.
Another argument against using the term Maghrib to denote a social construct is that there has never
been a political unified power that could serve as the unifying element for the region as we’d see for
example for the Ottoman empire, the Sassanian Empire or the Indo-Timurid empire. Even in the longest
empire that survived in the region (Almohad 1062-1269), one could hardly argue that there was a sense
of unity and identity that could be considered connected to a term such as Maghrib. The dynamism
that seemingly unified the region must then be sought elsewhere.
1.2.6. Making a case for mobility as defining factor for the Maghrib as a unit
So far, we have analysed the different arguments for and against the concept of the Maghrib as a
historiographical unit of analysis and enumerated the weaknesses and strengths of each position. The
question remains: what then is the mechanic, the unifying thread that binds the region and defines its
collective memory? Perhaps it’s a little of all of the above? In this study I want to argue that the high
level of mobility that existed throughout the region, constituted by its geographical characteristics, the
34 Rouighi, ‘The Mediterranean between Barbaria and the Medieval Maghrib: Questions for a Return to History’, 316.
33
relative ease of transport and established trade routes, ought to be considered a strong conceptual
candidate to claim to be the dynamism of the Maghrib as a region. The argument would then be to
consider the concept of the Maghrib as a multiplexity of actual regions with each region having its own
set of unique political, cultural and economic traits. Attention must be paid to the continuities between
the periods and cultural societal nodes within the history of the Maghrib. The unique geographical
character of the region seems to have stimulated an intense mobility and interaction. Taking that in
consideration I follow the impetus of Scott L Montgomery35 in that knowledge is one of the most —if
not the most— mobile form of cultures and societies in the formal sense. It is a commonplace that the
transfer of knowledge and of learning has been pivotal in the development and evolution of cultures
and societies. Once a body of knowledge reaches a different society and culture the weight of that
society’s culture, norms and habit will allow the engagement with the body of knowledge to be one of
transformation. Montgomery’s approach is a rather Hodgsonian way36 of looking at the modality of
knowledge in that it lends itself to the study of historical and societal continuities rather than singular
events or systems. For Hodgson historical context and not succession is of methodological essence
when studying Islamicate societies. Rather than considering static forms and blocs such as dynasties,
economic and political systems as the subject of historical inquiry, the focus on the mobility of
knowledge eloquently accentuates the overlap between societies without erasing the unique feats and
identity of each particular culture and society. Here the transfer of knowledge through its mobility
defines this critical historical process. What scholars call the influence that one society has over another
society – by its literature, cultural habits, norms, and texts– is exactly an expression of that mobility of
35 Montgomery, Science in Translation : Movements of Knowledge through Cultures and Time, 37.
36 Burke, ‘Marshall G. S. Hodgson and The Hemispheric Interregional Approach to World History'. 9
34
knowledge. Montgomery specifically argues that the mobility of knowledge is within the historical
movements of translation, since it is translation that allows knowledge to be mobile. One could argue
that translation ought not to be limited to the transformation of an idea from one natural language to
another. Surely, translation can topically be understood as the (literal) interpretation from one natural
language to another natural language such as from Greek to Aramaic, or from Arabic to Amazigh. But
it can also include vertical translation, i.e., to contextualize the language used to one’s own intellectual,
cultural and societal framework. In that regard the commentaries (shurūḥ), glosses (ḥawāshī), poems
and prose that are produced based upon Sanūsī’s theological works are a fascinating demonstration of
that principle. Tracing these texts will illustrate and visualize the mobility of a particular body of
knowledge and its spread throughout the region.37 Mobility of knowledge can grosso modo be
considered as arising from an imperial impetus be it for the sake of military, scientific, economic
progress. But it can also have another impetus, and it is this second iempetus that of interest in this
research, for the sake of preservation and authentication of a body of knowledge or beliefs, i.e., religious
or spiritual conviction. Hence the mobility of creedal knowledge and theological knowledge, which we
earlier referred to as the dissemination of creedal knowledge, pertains to the dissemination of authority
or ‘orthodoxy’.
37 For example, within the discussions on a highly philosophical and juridical topic, the authenticity of faith, we witness this vertical translation in the
commentaries and glosses. Here the engagement of the commentary is not with al-Sanūsī as the author but is immediately a conversation of the societal
context and related issues of the commentator. Only an analysis of the proportional relationships between the different chapters can visualize the vertical
translation that occurred in the authorship of the commentaries on his work particular to a specific region and century. see Zakaria El Houbba,
“Authenticity and Faith in the 17th century commentaries on al-Sanūsī”, Kalam Journal vol. 2, Dubai: Kalam Research and Media, forthcoming, 7
35
1.3. ‘Orthodoxy and the Maghrib: an intellectual trend at stake
1.3.1. Contending ‘Orthodoxy’: The vantage point of Christian theology
In order to understand the role of al-Sanūsī and his theological legacy within the Maghrib we ought to
reflect on what the 15th-17th century meant for the overall development and consolidation of Sunni
theology, particularly the development of Ashʿarism in the region, since al-Sanūsī is a pivotal element
of that tradition. Even more, the intellectual history of Islam inevitable requires a reflection on the
binary opposition and tension between what or who falls within the fold of creedal Islam and what or
who does not. This is often depicted as the opposition between the terms ‘orthodoxy’ and ‘heresy’, such
as described in the works of Watt38 or the binary opposition preferred by Gibb39 where Islamic
intellectual history is put forward as the everlasting tension and struggle between scripturalist and nonscripturalist
Islam in several fractions; which finds a similar perspective in social anthropology where
the tension is defined as one between a lettered tradition and the popular version and variations upon
that lettered tradition as in the works of Clifford Geertz and Shahab Aḥmed, and more recently Bauer40.
Especially this last dichotomy of a lettered tradition vis-à-vis a vulgarized tradition is hard to make in
the case of medieval and early modern Islamicate societies. We will go over the arguments against these
three conceptual dichotomies and put them in light of al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy and period.
38 William Montgomery Watt, Islamic Philosophy And Theology (1987
39 Taylor, John. "An Approach to the Emergence of Heterodoxy in Mediaeval Islām." Religious Studies 2, no. 2 (1967): 197-210.
40 While in Al-Sanūsī’s era it shifts to creedal literacy and creedal illiteracy away from state’s creed and taqlid and a focus on authenticity rather than
authority
36
The fundamental question that arises here concerns the validity of the concept ‘orthodoxy’ to approach
Islamic thought and history. One could argue that the concept of orthodoxy carries an excess of
conceptual baggage, or as Marshall Hodgson aptly describes it as “the historian’s pre-commitments”41,
to be able to be considered as an analytical starting point to talk about Islamic creedal thoughts and
developments. Despite being a century-old term that can be traced back to ancient Greeks, its
popularity within academic literature finds its roots in the crisis 19th century Judaism faced through
modernization in northern Europe. To express the fraction that wanted to go against any reforms this
these Jews would refer to themselves as haredi and distance themselves from – even physically –the
more “liberal” reformists by creating a Jewish society within the larger Jewish society within a European
society.42 The academic notion and connotation of orthodoxy hence is confined to its modern usage
and within the academic framework carries certain pre-commitments to a Judaic tradition. On the
other hand, the theological connotations of (Jewish) orthodoxy differ radically with and within
Christianity and adds ample proof of the impossibility of the term to be utilized univocally. For the
Eastern Orthodox Church, for example, orthodoxy is predominantly liturgical, while in Roman
Catholicism it connotes institutional authority which is then later on substituted by a strict adherence
to Luther’s approach in Lutheranism.43 Secondly, the notion of orthodoxy, even if abstracted from its
relation to Judaism, inherently presupposes the existence and validity of a universal definition of
religion which is a presupposition that is yet to be proven.
41 Hodgson, The Venture of Islam Vol. 1, p28, p. 58
42 Samet, Moshe. "The Beginnings of Orthodoxy." Modern Judaism 8, no. 3 (1988): 249-69
43 Davidson, James D., and Gary J. Quinn. "Theological and Sociological Uses of the Concept "Orthodoxy"." Review of Religious Research 18, no. 1 (1976): 74-
80
37
The practical question then remains: Is it necessary to understand the different ‘sects’ in Islam as
heresies in the light of one sect that has been appointed the golden —orthodox—standard? This would
more be an imposition of western or Christian theological categories on religion than it would discuss
the nature of the different sects within Islam, for example. It actually confirms, what Hodgson brilliantly
described as the jamāʿa-sunnism bias, where the standard is decided based on the existing geographical
majority of a sect44. Surely, even if that’s the case ,does that mean that whoever is not orthodox, i.e. unorthodox,
is thereby un-Islamic? This would mean that Ghazali’s usage and intellectual alliance with
the ideas and arguments brought forward in the theology of the bātiniyya, the Twelvers or the Muʿtazila
could be judged as much unorthodox as it is un-Islamic?45 The overall issue here, of course, is the
interpretation of history based upon a category or concept that is defined and developed in a later era.
Unorthodox does not necessarily mean un-Islamic; the confessional is more ambiguous and dynamic
than a binary static interpretation.
1.3.2. The social historian’s vantagepoint
The scholarly output of Ashʿarī scholars in the Maghrib is often depicted being limited to the authorship
of catechism46; this is reflected in the general description of the kalāmī landscape of Ashʿarism in the
15-16th century and onwards as stagnating. Here Ashʿarism is perceived as a system of thought, a product,
rather than a method. The problem with this perception is the social historian perspective that forsakes
the undertaking of Ashʿarism as a normative project; while it’s exactly this subsequent normativity that
44 For an exhaustive analysis of all the issues at stake see M. Brett Wilson, ‘The Failure of Nomenclature: The Concept of “Orthodoxy” in the Study of Islam’,
Comparative Islamic Studies 3, no. 2 (2009): 169.
45See the introduction of al-Ghazāli’s Tahāfut al-falāsifa, 27-31
46 See for example these early 20th century works on a particular work of al-Sanūsī’s legacy: J.-D, Les Prolégomènes Théologiques de Senoussi / Texte Arabe
et Traduction Française, Par J.-D. Luciani; Faḍālī, Muhammedanische Glaubenslehre : Die Katechismen Des Fudālī Und Des Sanusi; Barny, ‘Creed of Al-Sanūsī’.
38
shapes the Ashʿarī project has consequences on how this project historically developed and how
develops and behaves in contemporary debates. First and foremost, as a theological system that
attempts to elucidate the rational framework for the Islamic tenets of belief it is not static, but rather
dynamic by nature since the societal and cultural framework that challenges it is ever-changing. From
a normative perspective, if someone in 7th, 12th, 17th or the 21st century would write a theological work
that attempted to construct the rational framework upon which the Islamic religious beliefs are basedwithout
the usage of any of the typical technical terminology or even without reference to any of the
foundational Ashʿarī scholars or works –the authored work can still be considered Ashʿarī in nature if
it adhered to a few central principles of Ashʿarism.47 It is exactly because it still falls within the
framework of the same normative project that is the core of the general kalāmī inquiry – an inquiry into
the conclusive proofs of the foundational religious beliefs, al-ʿaqāʾid al-dīniyyah. This is fundamentally
different from a social historian’s approach where the kalāmī project is perceived and understood as a
social historical phenomenon. When perceived as a historical phenomenon, a certain stasis is imposed
on the normative project. Hence certain secondary-order elements will be considered as first-order
elements; a work that does not adhere to the jawhar-‘arad distinction will be considered outside the
scope of Ashʿarism. Or, it will be concluded that Ashʿarism must always adhere to a certain theory of
atomism. These perspectives lead to gross misunderstandings of what the purpose of Ashʿarism, as a
normative project, aims to fulfil. More importantly they induce a stasis to the normative project that is
not part of its nature. The social historian, holder of the observer’s bias, will dwindle down into a series
47 An analysis of the central principles upon with the theological system is based is outside the scope of this study but can be found in Gimaret, La Doctrine
d’al-Ashʻarī.
39
of false consequences. Knysh’s evaluation of Ashʿarism as a project is a striking example of the
consequences of the social historian’s bias:
Thirdly, as has already been pointed out, Ashʿarism, with its emphasis on metaphysics, simply
could not serve as a comprehensive religious creed that would meet the variegated needs of its
followers. It was, in fact, one, predominantly speculative, allegiance that did not encompass a
number of others, conceivably, no less important (e.g., those related to legal religious practice,
political and social ideals, personal piety and spirituality, etc.48
Knysh’s understanding of Ashʿarism is built upon the notion of a timeless a-historical notion of
orthodoxy and the assumption that a system of belief such as Ashʿarism has such lofty aspirations to
which it historically fails. Ultimately these conclusions emerge from his understanding of Ashʿarism as
a static singular project. Knysh’s statement is a general observation regarding the development of
Ashʿarism within the Islamic intellectual history but in a similar vein we find observation that focus on
the intellectual history of the Maghrib; Gellner’s study on the saints of the Atlas49 shares the premise
that all local societies experienced this fundamental and constant struggle of a scholarly understanding
of the Islamic Law and more non-scripturalists understandings, habits, cultural expressions. Even in
Geertz’s monumental work Islam Observed the general premise of the book assumes this tension to
exist. Geertz, however, avoided an absolute commitment to the idea of a constant struggle by shifting
away from perceiving the religion of the local people as either falling into genuine or a corrupt form of
48 Knysh, 54
49 Gellner, Ernest. 1969. Saints of the Atlas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40
religion. In a similar vein Shahab Aḥmad and Bauer vouch for a margin of ambiguity as to fall into the
Hodgsonian ʿulama-bias or a static understanding of what Islamic orthodoxy means. Their approach
could best be understood as defining ‘orthodoxy’ as something that’s in the making; a product of
collective efforts that is highly localized and inherently multiple. Though, ultimately Geertz and
Shahab’s work still depends on the assumption of the existence of the binary opposition of the lettered
tradition of Islam versus the vulgarized tradition of Islam, Shahab, more than Geertz, favours privileging
the essence of Islam to the former while Gellner, and Touati50 are more inclined to the latter. Even the
literature on the vulgarization of the theological scholarship51 – where postclassical scholarship is
considered a mere accumulation of abridgements and summaries – is a consequence of reading the
intellectual tradition through this binary opposition. When al-Sanūsī, like many other scholars in the
15-17th century, are derided as merely reiterating and recycling ideas of predecessors in commentaries,
versifications and abridgements, the critics are mistakenly interpreting a shift of pedagogical
commitments as a downwards trend in intellectual efforts.
1.3.3. Sharia-mindedness: Hodgson’s approach as an anomaly
Hodgson’s alternative for the notion of orthodoxy lies in his concept of Shari’a-mindedness. For
Hodgson the conjunction of the state of the noun ‘minded’ to the proper noun ‘Sharia’ safeguards from
the conventional readings of Islamicate history that consider orthodoxy and Sharia to be
interchangeable. For Hodgson the Islamic Sacred Law (Sharia) remains the core of normativity but by
50 Touati, Entre Dieu et Les Hommes : Lettrés, Saints et Sorciers Au Maghreb (17e Siècle), 78–96.
51 For an enumeration of this literature and a critique see Ismail Warscheid. 2017. “The Persisting Spectre of Cultural Decline: Historiographical Approaches
to Muslim Scholarship in the Early Modern Maghreb.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 60 (1/2): 142–73.
41
adding the ‘mindedness-’ to it a certain sense of historical subjectivity and multiplicity is allowed, even
encouraged. Rather than persisting in the idea of a binary opposition between scriptural or nonscriptural,
or the lettered versus the popular, this concept allows us to consider the various particular
expressions of Islam as the ephemeral consequence and creative synthesis brought forth from its core
which is what Hodgson defines as sharia-mindedness:
an ethical orientation constituting the inner conscience of Muslim piety, and expressing
opposition to the hierarchical and despotic systems of power that characterized the Mughal,
Safavid and Ottoman empires (Hodgson 1974). It was the pious and learned scholars (ulama)
who developed the religious activities that cultivated this Sharia-mindedness as the major
religious impulse in Islam against the corrosive consequences of bureaucratic state power.52
As such shariʿa-mindedness is automatically detached from any theological or sectarian reference and
at the same time it is detached from the societal and political implications and force majeur (formal
authority) that attempt to hegemonize and monopolize the extension of orthodoxy. This brings us to
the core of the debate: can the confessional, the normative project, be taken serious as an object of
academic study?
52 Bryan S. Turner, ‘Revisiting Weber and Islam: Revisiting Weber and Islam’, The British Journal of Sociology 61 (14 January 2010): 161–66
42
1.4. The Normative Project: taking the confessional serious as an object of study
Hodgson’s innovative approach sheds light on a pivotal characteristic that is absent in most
interpretations of orthodoxy and its relation to culture and society. Let me expand on it. As an ethical
orientation it reveals its priority and primacy over other concerns. Normativity is always prior. Any
endeavour be it a scientific, i.e., a scholarly, cultural or social activity is a human voluntary activity. Each
human act is embedded within a framework of normative assumptions. It is this normative framework
which governs the activities any human being -be they religious or not. There are reasons, mental drives,
for why they are engaging in those specific acts. If we focus on scholars, we can even state that there are
specific normative assumptions that shape the ‘why’ of an inquiry. An inquiry is never ex nihilo in a
conceptual vacuum; it is born out of normative, moral and social concerns. A scientific inquiry, whereby
science is taken in the most general sense of the term, suffers the same fate. The aforementioned
objections against the understanding of orthodoxy and the binary oppositions within the work of Gibb,
Shahab and Geertz provide an example of laying bear the normative assumptions of an inquiry. A claim
to academic objectivity is often a claim for the superiority of certain interpretive categories from a
certain local epistemological or scientific framework, but it remains contingent and doesn’t necessarily
fit the same framework of the study of object. While not insinuating a mal-intent of these
aforementioned scholars, this objection does serve as a stepping stone to a further consideration. Any
scientific endeavour ought to be preceded by a reflection on the normative assumptions and drives for
that inquiry. An inquiry for the sake of an inquiry is a century-old topoi that has not much scientific
basis to it. Normativity precedes any form of objectivity, since the normative not only includes personal
reasons but also economic, pragmatic and political drives. Transparency regarding normativity is a key
43
element of the Islamic intellectual tradition; the major crystallisation of this is the idea of the ten
principles of a science (mabādi al-ʿashra), which precede the activity of any science. Hereby the
inquirer- the scholar- lays bare the normative framework of his intellectual inquiry, or of the science –
a systematized and consolidated set of inquiries – in order to be transparent with regards to the
subjective starting point of the inquiry but more importantly as a consequence it unveils the conceptual
framework that is used to interpret that science, in this case, that part of the religious science, of
religion. These principles (mabādi) contain the subjective purpose of the inquirer’s inquiry and of the
science in question. When we take into consideration that kalam as a scientific inquiry is the attempt
of a person to make coherently sense of how to think and rationalise the wonders of this created world,
then we can say that Ashʿarism, as a method, constitutes the normative assumptions of how these
scholars want to pursue their scientific inquiry; it provided the normative framework by which they
want to make sense of the wondrous reality of creation, the creator. A specific set of norms drive that
activity. When Ashʿarism is considered a normative project, we ought to consider all norms within that
project as sharʿī obligations; they don’t derive from a purely rational obligation. The mind cannot
discover obligations (rational obligations) but can be given them as conventional obligations. There are
no obligations to be found in the world independently of any law-giver. The convention of obligation,
of permission and prohibition is either man-made or divine-made. And this is where Ashʿarism as a
normative project already shapes the way that al-Sanūsī understands his normative and pedagogical
project. If we are to follow divine-made obligations, one must first have a certain understanding of, and
agreement on, the existence of the Law-giver.
44
1.5. Methodology: Perceiving Legacy as Community
1.5.1. Navigating ṭabaqāṭ and maṣādir
In the second part of this study I aim to survey the available biographical and sources from 15th to 17th
Century Maghrib that focus on theological scholars (mutakallimīn) of that period as well as the
biographical work on al-Sanūsī, which includes the scholarly climate around al-Sanūsī himself53; as well
as the literature that informs us regarding the commentaries written on Sanūsī’s theological texts and
the (theological) texts that were inspired by al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy.
Ultimately, al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy relates to al-Sanūsī’ in two ways: through Scholars (ʿulamā)
and through Texts (nuṣūṣ). Tracing the former will be done through the biographies written on al-
Sanūsī and the ṭabaqāt and riwāya literature of those centuries. The latter will be achieved through an
additional survey of a selection of the masādir literature for the region which condenses the major
manuscript collections of the region per science, textual cross-references, and the perception within
the scholarly networks of those appraised texts. 54
I will focus on the scholarly network around Sanūsī and to a certain extent on the (professional)
mobility of his students and their students but this will be a rather ephemeral effect of a larger concern.
Rather than focusing on the scholars and the scholarly network within al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy,
we focus on the perspective of considering the proponents of his legacy (scholars and texts) as a
53 al-Mallālī, Al-Mawāhib al-Qudusiyya Fī Manāqib al-Sanūsiyyah; Bājī, Idāra Al-Shumūs ʿalā Hayāt Wa Aʿmāl al-Sanūsī; Tarjamat Al-Imām al-Sanūsī Ṣāḥib
al-Aṣl Wa-al-Sharḥ Mulakhkhaṣah Min al-Imām al-Sanūsīyah Li-Sīdī Aḥmad Bābā al-Timbuktī Raḍī Allāh ‘anhu.
54 The main works consulted are:Bājī, Idāra Al-Shumūs ʿalā Hayāt Wa Aʿmāl al-Sanūsī; Bin-Farḥī, Al-Nubūgh al-Maghribī : ʻAbd Allāh Kannūn Namūdhajan;
Dabbāgh, Maʻālim Al-Īmān Fī Maʻrifat Ahl al-Qayrawān,; Ibn al-Shaykh, Taʻrīf Al-Khalaf Bi-Rijāl al-Salaf; Ibn Maryam al-Sharīf al-Malītī al-Madyūnī al-
Tilimsānī and Bin Abī Shanab, Al-Bustān Fī Dhikr al-Awliyāʼ Wa-al-ʻulamāʼ Bi-Tilimsān; Iḥnāna, Taṭawwur Al-Madhhab al-Ashʿarī Fī al-Gharb al-Islāmī,; Qādī
ʻIyāḍ ibn Mūsá, Tartīb Al-Madārik Wa-Taqrīb al-Masālik Li-Maʻrifat Aʻlām Madhhab Mālik; Zahrī, Al-Maṣādir al-Maghribīyah Lil-ʻaqīdah al-Ashʻarīyah:
Bibliyūghrāfiyā Wa-Dirāsah Bibliyūmitrīyah; Zahrī, Al-Maṣādir al-Andalusīyah Li-ʻilm al-Kalām : Al-Masār Wa-al-Taḥawwulāt Wa-al-Khaṣāʼiṣ; Zahrī and Bū
ʻAnānī, Al-Taṣawwuf al-Maghribī Maṣdar Ishʻāʻ Wa-Tawāṣul : Aʻmāl Muhdāh Lil-Ustādhah Nafīsah al-Dhahabī; Zahrī and Bukārī, Fihris Al-Kutub al-Makhṭūṭa
Fī l-ʿaqīda al-Ashʿariyya.
45
‘community of practice’. This allows us to disregard the standard limitations of a scholarly network
analysis and focus on the practice of horizontal learning as the pivot that binds the diverse proponents
of al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy. Clearly this will steer us away from performing a network analysis in
the conventional sense of the term. This kind of analysis is characterized by its focus on the underlying
concepts of ‘social networks’ and ‘professional mobility’ of its scholarly proponents. The study of al-
Sanūsī’s legacy as a community of practice rather than a network of ʿulamā is done for several reasons:
1.6. Making sense of community as a method
1.6.1. First contention: reconsidering the relational approach towards community
Despite the plethora of studies on the ʿulamā in medieval Muslim society there’s no consensus on how
to exactly define the subject of this niche – ulamology – within the study of Islamic history. Precisely
because these scholars “seem to cut across almost every possible classification of groups in Islamic
society, playing a multiplicity of political, social and cultural roles.”.55 In the case of al-Sanūsī’s legacy,
we find that a majority of the scholars are Asharites, but not all.56 Some of them are considered fullfledged
expert theologians (cf. al-Yūsī and al-suktāni) while others are categorized as fuqahā ( cf. Ibn
ʿĀshir) or the Sufis (e.g. Zarrūq) or a combination of two or more of these categories (Zarrūq, Yūsī);
while some fall out the folds of the ṭabaqāt for not having authored any scholarly works despite their
fame as teacher of these texts (cf. ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Jazāʾirī57), while others are have managed to stay out
55 Stephen Humphreys, Islamic History: A Framework for Inquiry, Revised Edition (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1991), 187-208
56 Granted this is mostly the case in the reception of al-Sanūsī in the Ottoman lands such as in the works of al-Nābulsi and al-Maqdisī al-ḥanbalī
57 There is mention in some later biographical entries that he was of the habit to teach the Sughrā and the Kubrā and has atleast one commentary on the
Sughrā. See Abū Qāsim Saʿd Allah, Tārīkh al-Jazāʾir al-Thaqāfī. Vol 7, 173
46
of the tabaqat literature altogether and remain part of oral history with no written trace except
anecdotes in the biographies of their importance in the legacy of al-Sanūsī (cf. Kunābshi). Even within
those categories there’s a variety of denominators that make it difficult to pinpoint a common
denominator for all.58 By focusing on the legacy of Al-Sanūsī’s theological works, our research is not
limited by a certain definition of a scholar (ʿālim) or a theologian (mutakallim) since we consider any
historical person in 15-17th Century Maghrib, who has written– and thereby contributed– to and on al-
Sanūsī’s theological legacy, a viable proponent of that community. This will allow us to include for
example poets that wrote and dedicated eulogies (Qaṣāʾid) in honour of al-Sanūsī or his work, as well
as Sufi’s whose manuals on spiritual refinement are based on al-Sanūsī’s methodology, or core parts of
his creedal texts, as well as texts that are written as part of the basic tenets faith and worship curriculum
which are developed in spirit of the methodology and pedagogy utilized by al-Sanūsī in his creedal texts
(cf. Maqqari’s idāḥ al-dujunnah).
1.6.2. Second contention: delimiting the boundaries in a classic network analysis
This brings us to our second contention which is that the study of social networks by default assumes
the underlying understanding of a scholarly network as limited by geographical boundaries and related
relative time-frame. While observations regarding al-Sanūsī’s legacy will resist to adhere to those
limitations precisely because the ‘network’ that is created through Al-Sanūsī’s scholarship pervades
58 Note how this difficulty is one of the questions scholars of Islam have tried to conceptualize. This same process of a shared theological core resulting in
a vibrant variety of intellectual and spiritual creativity is what scholars attempt to conceptualize when discussing Islam and the local cultures that are
reinterpreted in order to bring Islamically sound and meaningful patterns of creative syntheses. Hodgson brilliantly points this out in his Venture of Islam
out by coining the term ‘Islamicate’ conceptualizing this process by stating what binds the diverse historical expressions of Islam by people of different
societies, races and cultures is a certain theological core. This, of course, is a conscious decision of Hodgson to conceptually distinguish between the cultural
and the religious yet in reality there is no dichotomy between the two in Islamic(ate) societies since the terms themselves as contrasting elements is modern
in origin, as also in application, with ‘secular’ often substituted for ‘cultural’.
47
centuries, professions societies and cultures. Rather than focusing on the concept of ‘network’, and its
prosopographical method to inquire into their subjects social background and relationships, we prefer
to consider Al-Sanūsī’s legacy as the development of a community with a focus on horizontal learning
for itself (al-ʿulamā) and the nominal Muslims surrounding them (al-ʿawāmm).
1.6.3. Third contention: against a solely ideational approach to Community
Thirdly, because the classical approach to understanding a community in the academic study of
medieval and early modern societies focuses on community as the manifestation of tools (texts, rituals,
language) that were pivotal to inquire a collective identity for that community it relies on the
assumption of that particular community perceiving the experience of –communal–homogeneity as a
sine qua non. A shared consensus becomes thereby a necessary precondition for the existence of that
community which is a rather strong claim that neutralizes our reading of any diversity that arises or
could arise within that community. In that regard the concept of a Community of Practice centred
around a text –which is based on the principle of horizontal learning– aids in its approach to
understanding Al-Sanūsī’s legacy as a community by considering it a “practice-based social group
whose identity is based on shared performances of a repertoire that is in constant flux” through a
communal learning.59
59 Community & Horizontal learning Article notes of Tjamke Snijders, Consensus, Conflict and the Community of Practice
48
2. CHAPTER TWO: Al-SANŪSĪ & THE DERS KALĀMĪ IN MAGHRIBI
CONTEXT
Tlemcen in the 15th century is one of the main nodes of intellectual activity. Al-Sanūsī does not write
within a vacuum or starts from scratch, but brings forth his own scholarly discretion (ijtihād) in the
kalāmi tradition, building on the effort of regional predecessors to adapt the mode of religious
instruction to the needs and requirements of their societies that will accelerate in especially 16th
century Maghrib.60 In hindsight, al-Sanūsī is especially pivotal for the dissemination and consolidation
of Ashʿarism as part and parcel of the religious mode of instruction that will dominate the pre-modern
Maghrib. In order to understand al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy in the Maghrib, we will give a general
overview of the development of Ashʿarism in the region but we will also provide a specific focus on the
development of the ders kalāmī upon which al-Sanūsī’s theological scholarship is built and will later
on have a radical impact.
The first introduction of Ashʿarism into the Maghrib is centred in around the tenth century intellectual
and political node of al-Qayrawān in Tunis. Scholars such as Abū Isḥāq al-Qalānasī (d. 359/ 971), Abū
Maymūna b. Ismaʿīl al-Fāsī61 (d. 357/968), and b. Abī Zayḍ al-Qayrawānī (d. 386/996) seem to have been
the main proponents of the Ashʿarī scholarship of that period.62 Especially the leading Māliki scholar of
60 Abi-Mershed’s study on the biographical dictionary of Ibn Maryam illustrates the dynamics and concerns of the generation right after al-Sanūsī. See Abi-
Mershed, Osama. “The Transmission of Knowledge and the Education of the ‘Ulama in Late Sixteenth Century Maghrib: A Study of the Biographical
Dictionary of Muhammad ibn Maryam.” In Mary Ann Fay (ed.) Auto/ Biography and the Construction of Identity and Community in the Middle East (New
York: Palgrave, 2000), 19–36.
61 Originally from al-Qayrawān he travelled to Baghdad and Basra to study. He returned to al-Qayrawān where he was teaching; relocated to Fez in the last
years of his life.
62 Dabbāgh, ʻAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Muḥammad, Qāsim ibn ʻĪsá Ibn Nājī, Muḥammad ibn Ṣāliḥ ʻĪsá Kinānī, and ʻAbd al-Majīd Khayālī. Maʻālim Al-Īmān Fī
Maʻrifat Ahl Al-Qayrawān, Bayrūt: Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah, 2005, 12-15
49
his region b. Abī Zayḍ al-Qayrawānī63 is of importance as he had close ties with the major Ashʿarī Malīkī
fuqahā of Baghdad such as such Qādī Abū Bakr al Bāqillānī (d. 403/1013) and his student Qādī ʿAbd al-
Wahhāb (d. 433/1031) – who will also be one of the first commentators on Abī Zayḍ’s legal work al-
Risāla. There’s also evidence of correspondence between Abī Zayḍ al-Qayrawānī and Mujāhid ʿAbd-
Allah al-Shāfiʿī. The latter is a direct student of Abū Ḥassan al-Ashʿarī the eponymous founder of this
school of theological thought. Al-Qayrawāni, often referred to as Mālik al-Ṣaghīr in reference to the
eponymous founder of the Māliki school of law, authors al-Risālah al-Fiqhiyya; which is written as an
abridged textbook in Mālikī fiqh but with a clear audience in mind:
I want [hereby] to instruct children in the same way as they are instructed and taught the letters
of the Qur’an in order that an understanding of what this religion is and what God’s decree is
[al-sharīʿa] can be instilled in their heart before they reach the age where they are blessed with
it [i.e., reach the physical age where it become a moral responsibility].64
With this audience intended, al-Qayrawāni adds to his legal text a short primer on the creedal matters
that are deemed necessary to understand prior to delving into legal matters. As such his Risala is often
considered as the first textbook example of a creedal text embedded in a juridical context on the axis
of Ashʿarism-Malikism. Even in terms of the content of the first chapter, it has the basic structure of
what a classical theological Ashʿarī text looks like by starting his endeavour with a discussion on the
63 For an academic study on the role of Abu Zayd’s Risalah see the legal and theological thought of Abi Zayd al-Qayrawāni, Phd Dissertation, Yale University,
2009
64Al- Qayrawānī, al-Risāla, 13.
50
necessity of reflection (naẓr) and proceeding with a brief discussion on the ṣifāt, samʿiyāt and nubuwāt.
However, it was not considered a definitive text on the subject nor was it studied as such in the region.65
2.1. The Legacy of al-Qādī al-Bāqillāni: Framing Ashʿarism within the Mālikī
framework.
In the 11th and 12th century the development of Ashʿarism in Maghribī scholarship peaks through the
emergence of Qādī al-Baqillānī’s (d.403/1013) students in the region. Al-Bāqillānī is not only a pivotal
figure in the dissemination and development of the Ashʿarī normative project for the Maghrib but he is
first and foremost a faqīh and authority of the Maliki-school of law; which will have a tremendous
influence on the Maghrebi approach to Ashʿarī kalām in the subsequent period. As the—almost
unanimously agreed—Sunni Mujaddid of his time, al-Baqillāni enjoyed a significant following of
students that would come and sit in his gatherings where he’d teach primarily fiqh but was known to
dive into creedal matters and connect them with the general principles and philosophy of Māliki Law.66
Most of the direct students who are known originate from Baghdād, Khurasān, and Mekka or Medina;
while there are only a few formally known Maghrebi students among his following that will effectively
return to the Maghreb and disseminate al-Baqillānī’s theological teachings67 and methodology of
tackling creed through the lens of the philosophy of the Māliki school of jurisprudence. Among these
direct students are Abū ʿAbd-Allah al-Adharī, who settled down in al-Qayrawān and gathers a large
65 The heated debates on the creedal part of the Risālā are a later event that pertains to confessional identity debates if he was to be considered an Ashʿarī
or not. A partial explanation for this tension can be found in Sayeed Sajjadur Rahman, The legal and theological thought of Ibn Abī Zayd al-Qayrawānī (310–
386 A.H./922–966 C.E.), Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University 2009,
66 Thiele, Discussing al-Bāqillānī’s Theology in the Maghrib: ‘Abd al-Jalīl b. Abī Bakr al-Dībājī al-Raba‘ī’s al-Tasdīd fī sharḥ al-Tamhīd, 8
67 Naṣīr, Muḥammad, “Dawr al-Bāqillānī fī talqīn al-asānīd al-Ash‘ariyya bi-bilād al-Maghrib”, in Jamāl ‘Allāl al-Bakhtī (ed.), al-Fikr al-Ash‘arī bi-l-Maghrib
khilāl marḥalatay al-ta’sīs wa-l-tarsīm: al-mu’aththirāt al-Mashriqiyya wal- makhṣūṣiyyāt al maḥalliyya, Tetuan, al-rābiṭa al-Muḥammadiyya li-l- ‘Ulamā’ /
Markaz Abī l-Ḥasan al-Ash‘arī, 1438/2017, vol. 2, 83.
51
following, as well as Abū al-Tāhir al-Baghdādī. 68 Their students, such as ‘Abd al-Jalīl b. Abī Bakr al-Dībājī
( also known as b. al-Ṣabūnī) will go on to proceed disseminating and engaging the theological works of
al-Baqillānī in the region. The other two influential figures of this period are Abū Ḥassan al-Qābasī
(d.402/1013) and his direct student Abū ʿImran al-Fāsī (d. 430/1039). Al-Qābasī is originally from the
Andalusian peninsula but studied extensively in Baghḍad and Khuraṣan where he mastered the Ashʿarī
creed.69 His student, Abū ʿĪmrān al-Fāsī is considered one of the last, i.e., youngest, students of al-
Bāqillānī who as his teacher was impressed by the impeccable memory of this young student of his own
senior student, al-Qabāsī70. Hence one of the main sources for the Ashʿarī kalāmī tradition is not
necessarily through a mutakkalim pur sang but through a faqīh whose method and understanding of
the underlaying framework for fiqh was based upon the Ashʿarī normative project. The effect al-
Bāqillānī had on the development and dissemination of the Maliki school of Law in the Maghrib is in
direct correlation with his influence on the creedal approach of these fuqahā.71 As much as the Maghrebi
students took al-Bāqillāni’s legal opinions and juristic framework through his legal works back to the
Maghreb for the creedal opinions, they were dependent on their memory or their notes and some of al-
Bāqillānī’s references within his own legal and theological works. There was no formal compendium in
which this mesh of fiqh and kalām was expounded but with Abī Zayḍ’s Risāla a major step in that
direction was taken. It is only with the emergence of al-Juwaynī, “the spokesman of the fuqahā and the
mutakallimīn”,72 that the next step in that process commences.
68 ʿIn al-Qāḍī ‘Iyāḍ, Tartīb al-madārik, 3:430
69 Authors al-Risālah al-Mufaṣillah li-Aḥwāl al-Mutaʿalimīm which does not become a textbook in the region.
70 Abd-Allah kinūn, al-nubūgh al-Maghrabi fiī al-adab al-ʿarabī, 52
71 Iḥnāna, Yūsuf, Taṭawwur al-maḏhab al-Ashʿarī fī al- Gharb al-Islāmī, 2nd ed., Rabat: Wizāratal-Awqāf, 2017,283
72 Muḥammad al-Thaʿālabī al-Fāsī, Al-Fikr al-Sāmi fi Tārīkh al-Fiqh al-Islāmī, Dār al-Turāth, Cairo, vol.2, 115
52
2.2. Al-Juwaynī and the Maghrebi Irshād tradition: kalām in an usūlī framework.
Imam al-Ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī (d. 478/1085) plays a decisive role in the doctrinal and methodical
progression of Ashʿarism in the Maghrib.73 His kalāmī works were the dominant text books for the study
of kalām –and to a certain extent for the study of usūl al-fiqh – of 12-14th century Qayrawān, Fes and
Tlemcen. What characterizes al-Juwaynī’s Kalamī works such as the Niẓamiyyah and the Irshād is his
innovative utilization of the modal qualifiers as the structure for his theological inquiry.74 This decision
to use the modal qualifiers as overarching structure for theological enquiry is the effect of his analysis
and acceptance of the modal qualifiers as a better tool to classify knowledge, and thereby the sciences.
When discussing the subject-matter and relation of Usūl al-fiqh to kalam, al-Juwaynī brings forth a new
conception of the subject-matter of kalām as a science:
kalām means (yaʿnī) the knowledge (maʿrifa) of the world and its parts, and its core-essences
(ḥaqāʾiq), and its being temporally originated (ḥadath), and the knowledge of the one who has
originated it (muḥdith), and those attributes (ṣifāt) which are necessary for Him (yajib ʿalayhi)
and those which are impossible for Him (yastaḥīlu ʿalayhi), and what is possible concerning
him (mā yajūzu fī ḥaqqihī) And the knowledge (ʿilm) of prophecy, and how it is distinguished
by miracles (muʿjizāt) from the claims of forgers (daʿawā al-mubṭilīn) and the judgments
(aḥkām) relating prophecy, and speaking about which universals of religious law (kulliyyāt al-
73 For a discussion on the reception of Al-Juwaynī’s method see Mokdad Mensia, Regards d’ibn Rushd sur al-Juwaynī; questions de methode, Arabic Sciences
and Philosophy, vol. 2 (2012), 199-216
74 On the transition from the traditional theological enquiry to the enquiry structured around the modal qualifiers, see Eichner Heidrun, ‘The Post-
Avicennian Philosophical Tradition and Islamic Orthodoxy: Philosophical and Theological summae in Context’, Habilitation Thesis [unpublished], Martin-
Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, 2009, 182-189
53
sharāʾiʿ) are possible or impossible. What is aimed at (al-maqṣūd) in kalām does not fall under
a definition. It is supported (yastamidd) by the distinction (mayz) between knowledge (ʿilm)
and other kinds of convictions (iʿtiqādāt), and the knowledge of the difference between proofs
and shubah, and reaching the procedure of rational deliberation (darak masālik al-naẓar). 75
In sum, al-Juwaynī’s conception of usūl al-fiqh pushed a new paradigm for the religious sciences and for
ʿilm al-kalām in general. This shift made it possible for the later Maghribī tradition, of which al-Sanūsī
is a crucial part, to continue this development and utilize analytic tools drawn from logic as part of their
theological inquiries and also to draw the domain of fiqh into their theological inquiry. If Juwaynī’s
conception of the theological inquiry is constituted in his Kitāb al-Burhān and his Kitāb al-Talkhīṣ, then
the implementation of it is expressed in his ʿAqīda al-Niẓāmmiyya and brought to its full philosophical
extent in his Irshād. 76 For the purpose of our focus on al-Sanūsi the importance of the Irshād in the
Maghrebi context will be most significant77, given that the Irshād served as textbook for advanced
studies in creedal matters in zawāya in Tunis, or madāris in al-Qayrawan.78 When a scholar would be
considered an expert in creedal matters, they would often be referred to as someone who had “baṣr of
the Irshād”79. Hence the plethora of versifications, abridgements, commentaries and glosses on this
specific text come as no surprise. Of the early Maghrebi commentaries on the Irsḥad we might mention
al-Mihād fī sharḥ al-Irshād by the Alexandrian Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad al-Māzarī (d. 530/1135), al-
75 Al-Juwaynī, Kitāb al-Burhān 1:77, 11-78,5 the translation is by Eichner in Eichner Heidrun, ‘The Post-Avicennian Philosophical Tradition and Islamic
Orthodoxy: Philosophical and Theological summae in Context’, Habilitation Thesis [unpublished], Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, 2009, 173
76 Muḥammad ʿAyshūn, Al-Rawḍ al-ʿIṭr al-Anfās, Casablanca, 1997, 1:193
77 See Eichner on the influence of usul on the debates and textbooks in Eichner Heidrun, ‘The Post-Avicennian Philosophical Tradition and Islamic
Orthodoxy: Philosophical and Theological summae in Context’, Habilitation Thesis [unpublished], Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, 2009, 152-
171
78 For a detailed reference see Muḥammad Mannūnī, waraqāt ʿan al-haḍāra al-maghribyya fi ʿasr banī Maryam, Rabat Royal College: 1996. 310
79 This is mentioned of Ibn al-Ishbīlī as well as al-Salālijī, see al-Rawd al-ʿItr 194, for Salālijīji see al-Tashawuf. 200
54
Isʿād fī sharḥ al-Irshād by b. Bazīza (d. 662/1264), and the commentaries by the Alexandrian Taqī al-Dīn
al-Muqtaraḥ and his Tunisian student al-Sharīf al-Idrīsī al-Tilimsānī entitled respectively sharḥ al-
Irshād and Kifāyat ṭālib ʿilm al-kalām fī sharḥ al-Irshād. The additional commentaries worth mentioning
here are the ones that have an indirect relation to al-Sanūsī; either by being authored by his direct
teachers or their teachers. Abu Hajāj b. Mūsā Al-Ḍarīr (d. 520/1126) 80 for example, authors al-Tanbīh wa
al-Irshād fi ʿilm al-iʿtiqād81 a versification of 1589 lines that simultaneously serves as al-Ḍarīr’s
commentary on the text. It is one of the first—if not the first— commentary on the Irshād where the
commentator, Al-Ḍarīr, brings forth his own emphasis on the legal aspect of creedal matters; which is
in line with Juwaynī’s shift from making ‘the creation’ the crux of theological inquiry to making ‘the
relation of the individual’ vis a vis the divine and the divine order integral.82
One of al-Ḍarīr’s most important students, al-Mahdī b. Tumart (ca. 473-525/1080-1130), becomes the
future political and religious leader of the Muwahidūn.83 Aside of spearheading the movement of the
muwaḥidūn and a region-wide attempt to institutionalise Ashʿarism as the formal creed for the state,
he also stands out as one of the first to focus on teaching creedal matters in the local tribal languages in
an attempt to consolidate Ashʿarism and Malikism as the Almohad’s ‘Creed and Law’. One way through
which he aimed to do this is via his succinct and short work the Murshida. Given the influence of his
teacher and spiritual guide, al-Ḍarīr, the work can be considered a – rather condensed – ode to
80 Another major figure who is considered of the mutakalimin but also known as a Murshid, and Saint of God to whom many miracles have been attributed.
His sufi approach is explicitly mentioned in the beginning of his versification of the Irshād, see Iḥnāna 284
81 This versification is hitherto unpublished but available in Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya, no. 12369 [f. 216-219]) which is accompanied by another
commentary of al-Sakūnī (n. 12995 [f. 1-79])
82 Note that this already occurs in al-Juwaynī’s Niẓamiyya where taklīf is central in the opening chapter. However, within the Maghribi tradition the
argument gets deepened further through the discussion and connection of taklīf within the framework of taqlīd and the particularities of the cultural,
political and social unrest.
1118 Ibn Tumart traveled extensively in the pursuit of knowledge. He studied in Granada, Baghdād and Alexandria. His teacher, Abu Hajāj b. Mūsā al-Ḍarīr
is a student of Abū Bakr b. Ḥassan al-Marādī al-Khaḍrāmī (d. 489) who is considered by the historian al-Zayyāt as one of the first scholars to formally
introduce kalam as a literary genre to the Maghrib.
55
Juwaynī’s Irshād.84 Another teacher of b. Tumart85 is the scholarly saint Abu Ḥassan b. Khalīd al-Lakhmī
al-Ishbīlī (d. 567/1171) who will also be one of the main teachers of al- the scholarly saint Abū ʿUmar al-
Salālijī (d. 594/1198), whose abridged critical commentary (ikhṭiṣār) on the Irshād commentary of his
teacher introduces a new phase in the kalamī tradition of the Maghrib. A regional shift whereby Fez
becomes the main node of theological activity, and al-Salāliji the established authority and entry for
reading the Irshād and reception of its chains of transmission (asānīd).86
2.3. Abū ʿUmar al-Salālijī: framing the Irshād in the framework of Sufism
In the aforementioned section we discussed how Juwaynī’s epistemological shift allowed for the late
medieval Maghribī scholars not only to utilize more analytic (logical) tools in their text-production but
it also brought forth a focus completely on the individual’s responsibility which brings us unto the
borders where theology and juristic rulings (fiqh) regarding taklīf (moral responsibility), i.e., taqlīd and
tahqīq meet. Through Juwaynī’s conception of kalām – within a revised epistemological framework –
the notion of taklīf brings the necessary coherence to the utility of the modal qualifiers which brings
the debate back from a theoretical aspect to a practical aspect. The conception of knowledge receives
a practical component (ʿamal) that needs to be considered. The moral responsible (al-mukallif) is
envisioned as someone who puts in the work, i.e., reflects on their relation to the divine order. Evidently
the theologian will focus on the content that is required for this form of reflection. But simultaneously
this form of reflection brings in the problem of the human psyche. One can imagine a person ‘knowing’
84 Iḥnāna, 168
85 For references with regards to their relationship see Ibn al-Qāḍī, Jadhwat, 479-480, Bakhtī, Salālijī, 124-6,
86 See for example Ibn Rashīd, Malaʾ al-ʿAyba, dar al-Tunis, 1982 who refers to receiving his ijāzah of the Irshād through his Ijāza on the burhāniyyah
56
the required set of creedal matters that is prescribed by the theologians but that does not mean that
they ‘believe in them as a truth’. This becomes the core question regarding taqlīd— i.e., imitation with
regards to a set of beliefs—and tahqīq— i.e., to make a set of beliefs one’s own. The axis of these two
concepts can be better understood as the moral obligation to avoid inauthenticity in belief, opening up
the realm of Sufism which will be the focus of the next series of commentaries on the Irshād through
the innovative work of al-Salālijī.
From the late 12th century onwards al-Salālijī’s Burhāniyyah87 becomes the textual standard for the
education in creedal and kalamī matters as an entry to the Irshād, but with its own characteristics; this
to the extent that al-Bakhtī considers the Salālijī interpretation of the Irshād a proper movement in
itself starting in Fes where al-Salālijī resides and teaches.88 The distinguishing characteristics of this subschool
are not just in al-Salālijī opting for a different textual order of the creedal inquiries (masā’il), or
other rather minor disagreements with certain kalāmi positions taken in the Irshād. It is his explicit
disagreement with al-Juwaynī on the issue of human freedom and free will and his interpretation of the
theory of human acquisition (kasb) that reveals the more spiritual concerns in his commentary.
According to al-Bakhti, al-Salāliji’s response and alternative provide a more rigid interpretation of God’s
Potency (qudra) and absolute dependence of the individual upon God, while al-Juwaynī leaves room
for the attribution of human acts to their own potency. This is revealing as the burhāniyya is considered
as the element bringing the Irshād into the realm of Sufism; where Sufism is considered the science that
occupies itself with the methods rectifying the individual’s perception and position vis-à-vis the divine
87 al-Bakhtī, Jamāl ʿAllāl, ʿUthmān al-Salālajī wa-madhabiyyatuhu al-Ashʿariyya: Dirāsa li-jānib min al-fikr al-kalāmī bi l-Maghrib min khilāl al-Burhāniyya
wa-shurūḥihā, Rabat: Wizārat al-Awqāf, 2005, 559-65
88 Jamāl ‘Allāl al-Bakhtī, Al-Salījī wa madhabihi, Tetuan, Markaz Abī l- Ḥasan al-Ash‘arī, 2004. 38
57
order. Al-Salāljī is considered not only the Imam of the people of the Maghreb in creedal and legal
matters—as was the title for Al-Juwaynī (Imam al-Mashriq)89— but he was also referred to as al-Ṣālih,
the murshid of many scholars and important figures on the spiritual path. 90 It is in al-Salalijī that the
first explicit methodology of marrying the science of Sufism, Maliki Fiqh and Ashʿarī creed in the
Maghribī intellectual landscape comes to fruition in a standard textbook for the Maghrebi kalāmi ders.91
2.4. Inheritors of Al-Ghazālī: revising the methodological approach of the
Maghribi ders kalāmī
Another track worth mentioning that flows back to al-Juwaynī but this time not through the Irshād, but
through the works of his student al-Ghazālī and the reception of al-Ghazali in the Maghrib via his
student Qādi Abū Bakr b. al-ʿArabī al-Mālikī (d. 543/1148), who is not only a direct a student of al-Ghazālī
but the main disseminator of the works and methodology of al-Ghazālī in the Maghrib. Evidently, al-
Ghazālī is the pivotal interpreter and intellectual successor of his teacher al-Juwaynī and carries on the
intellectual project that al-Juwaynī had ignited by revising the classification of the religious sciences
based on a shift of their shared epistemological structure.92 Though, al-Ghazālī adds his own
particularity to this shift through the lens of his spiritual background and concerns. The influence of al-
Ghazālī and his direct student Qādī Abu Bakr is not perse perceived in the ders kalāmī since their books
89 Ibn Abī Zarʻ al-Fāsī, ʻAlī ibn ʻAbd Allāh, Kitāb al-anīs al-muṭrib bi-rawḍ al-qirṭās fī akhbār mulūk al-Maghrib wa tārīkh madīnat Fās, Dār al-Irfān, Rabat,
1993, 349
90 Bakhtī, 151, 179-183; pivotal spiritual figures within this movement are al-Ṣamaḍ b. Nimrī (d. 614/1217) and al-Kharrījī (d. 603/1206)
91 Our focus is here on the Irshād commentaries that have a direct influence or reference in the al-Sanūsī works or of his teachers but there are many more
pivotal commentaries not mentioned such as the commentaries of Ibn Dihāq (d. 611/1214), al-Māzirī (d. 529/1135), Ibn Bazīza (d. 662/1264)
92 With regards to how al-Ghazālī develops Juwaynī’s epistemological project see Eichner, 171-213
58
were not studied that much in the region, but it is rather the attractiveness of Ghazali’s methodological
approach which provided a synthesis of the three sciences that the Maghrebi scholars were keen to hold
together in their educational and theological approach.
59
2.5. The generational waves of Ashʿarī consolidation in the Maghrib
By the 13-14th century the Maghrib witnesses a progressed emphasis on studying the rational sciences
and especially ʿilm al-kalam, based upon local commentaries on the Burhāniyya and the Irshād and to
a lesser extent Baqillāni’s Tamhīd. While the central node seemed to have been al-Qayrawān (Tunis)
and Fez for the 12-13th century, in the 14-1th century the emergence of commentaries and scholars in the
Tlemcen seems to indicate a shift of the node of intellectual activity. Ultimately, as mentioned before,
the Burhāniyyah serves as a gateway to a mastery of the Irshād but with the Maghribi characteristics of
how this science ought to be approached and studied. Worth mentioning are Abū Zayd ʿAbd al-Raḥmān
al-Imām (d. 743/1342) and his brother Abū ʿĪsa al-Imān (d.749/1348).93 These brothers are the main
teachers of al-Ābilī (d. 757/1356) and Muhammad Sharīf al-Tilimsānī (d. 772/1370) both of whom will be
the direct teachers of b. Khaldūn94, b. ʿArafah, and Saʿad al-ʿUqbānī. This generation of influential
students of the brothers al-Imām, and in particular of Abū ʿĪsā b. al-Imām, will end up teaching and
influencing the Maghrebi pillar of the Māliki school — and pivotal node in the network of Maghribi
theologians—b. Marzūq al-Ḥafīd (d. 843/1439), who stands as the major source for Sanusi’s teachers;
whose senior students95 in Tlemcen are Naṣr al-Zawāwī, Akbarkān, al-Thaʿālabī and b. al-ʿAbbās al-
Tilimsāni. All of them are direct teachers of al-Sanūsī while the last two mentioned also have a
commentary on the Burhāniyya.
93 All of the reports mentioned here are found in the work of their student al-Maqqarī, Kitāb al-Muḥāḍarāt, 132-133. It is important to note that al-Sanūsī
himself does not appear to be engaged with any of Ibn Taymiyya’s works or opinions. there is only a sporadic mention of Ibn Taymiyya in an anecdote on
Ibn Zikrī in the Kubrā – the fact that he is mentioned there is an accident by virtue of the relevance of the quote cited from al-Maqqarī’s work with respect
to Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, rather than a judgement on Ibn Taymiyya’s work.
94 Nassar, Nassif. “Le maitre d’Ibn Khaldūn: Al-Ābilī”. Studia Islamica 20 (1964): 103–14.
95 Another younger student is the brilliant contemporary of al-Sanūsī Ibn Zikrī.
60
In sum, the generational waves of the ders kalamī in the Maghrib start with the works and students of
al-Bāqillānī, while the second wave focuses on al-Juwaynī’s Irshād. This second wave also brings forth
the Burhāniyya of al-Salālijī which consolidates into being the first Maghribi textbook for the ders
kalāmi that is also a standard textbook for the study of ʿĀqīda. A third wave of more advanced and
intensified studies in kalām occurs through the commentaries and critical abridgements (ikhtiṣār) of
the works of Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 607/1210) primarily his maʿālim fī usūl al-dīn with the commentary
of b. al-Tilimsāni96 – and to lesser extent with al-Bayḍāwī’s (d. 719/1319) Matāliʿ al-Anwār through the
critical abridgement by the Tunisian scholar b. ʿArafah (d. 803/1401).97 So by the time al-Sanūsī
commences his early studies in Tlemcen the main works in the ders kalāmī in the Maghreb are al-
Salālijī’s Burhāniyyah with the Maghrebi commentaries and Al-Juwaynī’s Irshād with particularly the
commentary of the Alexandrian Taqī al-Dīn al-Muqtaraḥ98 (d. 612/1215) playing a central role for the
theologians of Tlemcen, as well as Razi’s and Bayḍāwī’s work. The landscape of the ders kalāmi in the
Maghrib hence focused on the Irshād tradition with its various intra-movements, while the more
advanced authorship and scholarship extended the landscape to engage with al-Rāzi and al-Baydāwī’s
theological works.
96 Ibn al-Tilimsānī, Sharaf al-Dīn ʿAbdallāh b. Muḥammad. Sharḥ Maʿālim uṣūl al-dīn. Edited by Nizār Ḥammādī. Beirut: Dār Maktabat al-Maʿārif, 1432/2011.
97 Ibn ʿArafa, Abū ʿAbdallāh Muḥammad b. Muḥammad. al-Mukhtaṣar al-kalāmī. Edited by Nizār Ḥammādī. Tunis: Dār al-Imām Ibn ʿArafa, 1435/2014.
98 al-Muqtaraḥ, Taqī al-Dīn Muẓaffar, Sharḥ al-ʿAqīda al-burhāniyya wa al-fuṣūl al-Īmāniyya, ed. Nizar Hammadi, Kuwait: Manshurāt Maktbakat al-Sunna,
2009
.
61
2.6. Intellectual biography of Muḥammad b. Yūsuf al-Sanūsī
Al-Sanūsī’s biography and general overview of his legacy has been established in several primary works.
The earliest reference is the biography written by his direct student al-Mallālī (fl. 899/1494), which
served as the foundational text for later biographies99. For the purpose of this study I will provide a
concise overview of al-Sanūsī’s intellectual achievements and the historical intellectual context as well
as some elements from al-Sanūsī as a person; often these anecdotes and observations give a revealing
perspective on how personal traits affect one’s approach to scholarship, the relationship to the locale
and trends within scholarly circles, while also unveiling which elements for a normative project receive
more attention based on their perception of the societal needs and scholarly lacunes. This certainly aids
to understanding the concept of the scholarly saint which becomes the archetype and standard of
excellence that is aimed for in these centuries. Al-Sanūsī lived during the Saadian Sultanate (1510-1659).
Tlemcen had already been established as the epicentre for the Islamic intellectual elite of the region
and the continent. The reign of the first sharīfian dynasty – and the subsequent implied legitimacy since
the Idrisids– as also the sultanate’s passion and patronage of the sciences – all made it the capital for
refugees, scholars Christian100, Jewish101 and Islamic, all of whom had been expelled from the Andalusian
Peninsula. Al-Sanūsī was born into a family of respected scholars on the outskirts of Tlemcen. His father,
Yūsuf al-Sanūsī (d. 844/1440), was known in Tlemcen as a pious and knowledgeable man who devoted
99 The subsequent biographical literature, primarily based on Mallāli’s work, are al-Bustān by the historian Muḥammad Ibn Maryam (d. 1014/1605) which
focuses on the scholarly saints of Tlemcen, Nayl al-Ibtīhāj by Aḥmad Bābā al-Tinbuktī (d. 1036/1627) which is an appendix of his Dibāj with a focus on Maliki
scholars, and Muḥammad Ibn ʿAskar’s Dawḥat al-Nāshir (d. 986/1578).
100 Tarek Ladjal, John Caruana. The Christian presence in North Africa under Almoravids Rule (1040–1147 CE): Coexistence or eradication?, Gent: Cogent
Arts & Humanities, 2017. 4:1,
101 Ageron Charles-Robert. Chemouilli (Henri) : Une Diaspora méconnue : les Juifs d'Algérie. In: Revue française d'histoire d'outre-mer, tome 64, n°237, 4e
trimestre 1977. pp. 548-549 and Schwarzfuchs, Simon. 1995. Tlemcen: mille ans d'histoire d'une communauté juive. Paris: La Fraternelle, Union nationale
des amis de Tlemcen.
62
his time offering instruction in the Quranic sciences at the local madrasa. Certain later sources102 suggest
that he instructed at the famous Yaʿqubiyya madrasa, considered the most prestigious madrasa of
Tlemcen, where his son Muḥammad b. al-Sanūsī would also receive his early formal instruction.
(However there’s no concrete evidence of this element in the early biographies.) Al-Sanūsī’s father was
also his first teacher (shaykh al-taʿlīm) of the primers of the foundational sciences, and it’s reasonable
to assume that Sanūsī’s aptitude for educating the class of nominal Muslims is inspired by his father’s
legacy. Al-Sanūsī is considered a sharīf, descendent of the prophet Muḥammad صلى الله عليه وسلم from his paternal side
through Muḥammad b. Idrīs, the progeny of Rahmūn al-Qāṭanūn from Banī Asnūs, with several
branches all across the Maghrib, The branch in the desert around Tlemcen became most famous for
bringing forth the “reviver of the sunnah, the killer of innovation, and author of works in creed that have
benefitted all corners of the world”103 From his mother’s side al-Sanūsī has an older (half-)brother by the
name ʿAlī al-Tālūtī al-Anṣārī (b. 895/1489) who instructed al-Sanūsī at an early age into several sciences
but at a later stage of al-Sanūsī’s life al-Anṣārī became his travel- and study-companion during the
classes (ḥalaqāt) and suḥba with several pivotal teachers. In his biography on al-Sanūsī al-Mallāli
mentions that al-Sanūsī had a sister who passed away at a young age during al-Sanūsī’s youth. Al-Mallālī
also notes that al-Sanūsī was in the habit of frequently visiting and honoring her grave.104 As far as the
sources inform us, al-Sanūsī was married to a certain ʿĀʾisha who was of similar age, and a woman of
saintly nature. Despite her absence in the biographical entries and literature, she is a valuable source of
102 al-Bustān, 87
103 see ʿAbd-Allah Ḥashlāf al-Mustaghānamī, Silsila al-Usūl fī Sajara Abnā al-Rasūl, Maktaba Babylon, Libanon, 2004, 87. Note that the attribution of a
prophetic lineage via his father is contested even amongst the biographers. Al-Mallālī for example brings the lineage back through the mother of his father
whilst Ibn Maryam opts for the aṣl to be his mother, which is then picked up in later biographical entries such as al-Zarkalī without historical assessment.
104 Unfortunately her grave is unmarked on the premises of the sidi Sanūsī graveyard in current Tlemcen. The premises of the graveyard are named after al-
Sanūsī whom was considered a Saint of God ( Walīy-u-Allah) already during his lifetime and remained to be revered as such after his passing.
63
conversation and information for al-Mallālī’s biography of al-Sanūsī. One of the pivotal events in al-
Sanūsī’s education, especially with regards to the rational sciences (al-ʿaqliyyāt), is known through her
narrations of the event. Somewhere prior to his authorship of the Kubrā al-Sanūsī hosted the mysterious
scholar Abū Qāsim al-Kanābshī al-Bijā’ī105 (fl. 1460?) 106 for a whole lunar month at his private quarters
in the outskirts of Tlemcen. In attendance was his fellow-student and half-brother ʿAlī al-Tālūtī al-
Anṣārī. On the final day of the lunar month they reportedly completed the study and reading of “a book
in Tawḥīd”107, which, according to al-Mallālī, must have been Juwaynī’s (d. 478/1085) Kitāb al-Irshād ilā
Qawāṭiʿ al-Adillah fi Uṣūl al-Iʿtiqād (A Guide to the Conclusive Proofs for the Principles of Belief). Though
we do not have a lot of information on al-Kanābshī it is clear that the private tuition and residence of
Kinābshī in Tlemcen had a profound impact on al-Sanūsī.
2.7. Muḥammad al-Sanūsī and the signs of sainthood
Al-Sanūsī’s student-disciple— and first biographer/hagiographer— al-Mallālī, offers a fascinating
insight into al-Sanūsī’s upbringing and character with a particular focus on the saintly characteristics
displayed by al-Sanūsī from a young age.108 Already as a young child he was known for his shyness, his
sincerity and calmness, to the extent that al-Mallālī mentions that al-Sanūsī —against the grain of usual
pedagogical methods— was never physically punished during his classes, since his teachers foresaw
and feared in him the signs of sainthood (wilāyah). As the traditional curriculum prescribes, his early
105 Al-Kinābshī would be an interesting figure to study yet his scholarly life seems to have fallen between the cracks of the tabaqāt on North-African saints
and scholars. For a reference see Mawāhib, 70 who only mentions his name; while Tinbuktū classifies him as bijāʾī in Nayl, 372
106 Since there’s no reference or dating in any of the biographical entries on the scholars of Beja or Tlemcen we based this date on the publication of the
Wusṭā (anno 1471) and the note of Mallāli that al-Sanūsī wrote his Kubrā and other commentaries in a short period of time after having benefitted from all
his teachers: Mawāhib, 278
107 Mawāhib, 349, Nayl, 187
108 It is interesting to note that the early biographies up untill Ibn Maryam refer to al-Sanūsī as Muḥammad al-Sanūsī while in later biographies and
commentaries on his work it is reduced to al-Sanūsī. His theological legacy weighs on his name.
64
intensive training focused on the various Quranic recitations with his ijāza coming from a double
complete reading of the Quran with Abu al-Hujāj Yusuf b. Abū al-ʿAbbās. In a similar vein his
companionship and studies, at a very young age, with the saint Muḥammad al-Ḥassan b. Makhlūf,
known as Abarkān al-Rāshidī (d.857/1453) suggest the potential that was witnessed in the young al-
Sanūsī’s character and intellect. Abarkān, ‘dark-skinned’ in the Amazigh dialect, was already in his own
lifetime considered one of the major saints of Tlemcen and in the subsequent years to be considered as
one of the great saints of the Maghrib in general. It is a recurring anecdote that through the
supplications (duʿā) of this saintly teacher that Muḥammad al-Sanūsī ended up being known as al-
Sanūsī, writer of the Sanūsiyyah, and defender of the Sunni Creed. In comparison with his
contemporaries and the earlier generation of scholars of the region, al-Sanūsī is atypical in his limited
scholarly travels. Most of his teachers, if not all, are known for their travels to the East for the sake of
retrieving knowledge. The main reason for this seems to be the constant upheaval, wars and news of
the Spanish Reconquista progressing with violent strides in Andalusia; as well as the subsequent surge
of tribal raiders on travel routes due to the political instability109 which not only slowed down
professional mobility but also caused the fleeing bands of senior scholars to take up residence in or near
Tlemcen. Al-Mallāli considers only two travels noteworthy of mentioning in his biography of al-
Sanūsī.110 First, a trip to Algiers to visit ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Thaʿālabī (b. 785/1385) and secondly a trip to
visit Ibrahīm al-Tāzī (d. 866/1462), who resided in Oran at the time. Both figures are not only scholars
in their own right but are also pivotal disseminators of the Maghribī Sufi tradition. It comes to no
109 Aḥmad b. Khālid al-Nāṣirī, Kitāb al-Istiqṣā’, v. 8, 15.
110 Mawāhib, 288. Karimullah in his unpublished MA thesis on Zarrūq (2007, p.108) mentions that al-Zarrūq might have studied and met al-Sanūsī in Cairo
which is highly unlikely since the early biographies do not mention a trip to Cairo and on the contrary make note of a short stay by al-Zarrūq in Tlemcen
prior to heading to Cairo.
65
surprise that these two visits prove influential in shaping al-Sanūsī’s spiritual life and his pedagogical
approach when authoring his kalāmi works. As a young, already established scholar and teacher, he was
known for his meticulous discipline and routine. Mallāli narrates:
Al-Sanūsi would pray his five congregational prayers in the mosque, often leading the prayer
himself, and would study and busy himself with litanies till breakfast. Afterwards he’d free
himself for an hour to stand in [front of] his courtyard greeting and conversing with the people.
Fellow-residents would to request supplications, legal opinions or spiritual advice. The
remaining of his day would be devoted to deep reading (muṭālaʿa) up until Maghrib. After the
final congregational prayer he would busy himself with copying manuscripts (naskh) or study
for an hour after which he’d be found in prayer till sunrise, with only a few hours of sleep.111
There are several anecdotes of royal visitors, including Abū ʿAbd-Allah the Sultan of Tlemcen, wanting
to meet al-Sanūsī or read a particular hadith collection or tafsir with the “Master of Tlemcen”. Al-Sanūsī,
displaying a pietistic phobia for involvement of scholars with sultans, would anticipate their request
and arrival by sending out a message that — due to shyness before their majesty— he would not be
able to speak or teach in front of him; hence in order to not be put to shame in front of a public he had
to kindly refuse lecturing them. We notice similar convictions expressed in al-Sanūsī’s hagiographical
work al-Tayqīd fī al-Manāqib al-arbaʿa.112 Throughout the Mawāhib al-Mallalī, as well as Ibn Maryam in
his Bustān, praise al-Sanūsī’s resolution and active avoidance of any association with men of political
111 Mawahib, 73
112 Manāqib, 76-88
66
stature. His attitude stands in stark difference with major scholars in the region. Al-Sanūsī’s resolution
even went to the extreme that whenever invited to a wedding celebration (walīmah) of influential
families he would often hide and discontinue lecturing a few days prior to the celebration in order to
ensure he was not invited. A similar trend is noticeable in his oeuvre, of which not a single one is
dedicated to a sultan or any political figure of importance. This is a rather stark contrast with the Ishrāqī
kalāmī tradition where these works are often dedicated to the political patron or Sultan.113 Obvious
examples that are implied by these scholars are the laudatory remarks in Īji’s introduction to the
mawāqif, or to Jurjānī’s commentary on the Mawāqif, and even al-Juwaynī’s Nizāmiyya. It’s the interplay
of being commissioned, ordained and remaining close to the patronage, thereby dedicating the
production of a certain work to a patron in power, for scholars in volatile societies— which is rampant
in the Maghrib too under the Almohad dynasty— that seems to be halted in the post-classical Maghrib
tradition around the time of al-Sanūsī. Al-Sanūsī ‘s introductions to his work are actually an excellent
example of the complete opposite approach. In the introduction of his auto-commentary on the Kubrā,
and to a certain extent in the introduction to his Wusṭā, he explicitly states that what motivated him to
author these creedal works and explain them is solely his compassion (shafaqah) for the wellbeing of
the Islamic Community (Umma). This declaration connects with the principle that drives all of al-
Sanūsī’s theological works. A little further in the introduction of the commentary on his Kubrā, as well
as in the Sughrā, he points out that it is not the conventional problem of taqlīd that is the main issuehe
wants to address —because he will even state that’s a too optimistic conclusion of the state of the
commonfolk (al-ʿawāmm); but al-Sanūsī observes that most people in his locale are not even able to get
113 Khālid Zahri considers this point one of the main tendencies of the later Sanūsī tradition, see Khālid Zahrī, Al-Fiqh al-Mālikī Wa-al-Kalām al-Ashʻarī :
Muḥāwalah Li-Ibrāz Baʻḍ Malāmiḥ al-Ibdāʻ al-Kalāmī Wa-al-Ṣūfī ʻinda Fuqahāʼ al-Maghrib, (al-Dār al-Bayḍāʼ : Dār al-Rashād al-Ḥadīthah, 2011), 74–91.
67
to a form of taqlid that could be considered an externally correct —but internally problematic— taqlīd,
i.e., a taqlīd sahih mutabaʿ lil-wāqiʿ114 since they are merely imitating their ‘correct’ beliefs from a source
that itself is not even aware if these beliefs are correct. As mentioned earlier these anecdotes, while
seemingly trivial for discussing al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy, are a treasure trove for understanding the
raison d'être, and the context in which he authors his creedal works. In the same vein his education and
educational environment reveal that we cannot sum up his creedal works and the positions he takes,
nor can we limit al-Sanūsī to being a dry rationalist theologian, rigorously trained in the theoretical
sciences in order to defend the faith against foreign arguments and reasoning, as he is often depicted
in modern and contemporary literature.115 It suffices to note that there was a holistic education through
the gatherings and sitting with the saints and scholars of Tlemcen. In a similar vein the information in
the biographies does not limit itself to informing on which books he studied with which scholar, but
are also providing fascinating material on the scholarly dynamics – i.e., the immaterial culture and
product of scholarly circles – through these anecdotes. In what follows I want to briefly introduce his
main teachers, point out the unique relationship with them and how his main teachers instil in al-
Sanūsī the Maghribī conceptualisation of the purpose and direction of creedal works.
114 Kubrā, 141
115 With the development of Wahhabism, the salafī movement and the identity politics of the 21st century al-Sanūsī is often reduced to a static image stripped
from his spiritual and fiqhī scholarly contributions and framework and merely a component and instigator of the cultural decline. Similar ideas are
expressed in Halverson, J. 2010. Theology and Creed in Sunni Islam :The Muslim Brotherhood, Ash'arism, and Political Sunnism. 1st ed. 2010.
68
3. CHAPTER THREE: A STRUCTURE ANALYSIS OF AL-SANŪSI’S
CREEDAL WORKS
3.1. The structure and purpose of the Major Creed (al-Kubrā)
It is clear from the structure of the Kubrā that it is greatly inspired and affected by al-Sanūsī’s reading
and mastery of Juwaynī’s Irshād. To the extent that the Kubrā can even be considered a critical
abridgement (mukthaṣar) on the Irshād, where theological and philosophical engagements on creedal
matters remain dominant over the concern of taqlīd, and the subsequent content of religious
instruction, which characterises Sanūsī’s later work from the Sughrā onwards. In terms of works cited,
it seems al-Sanūsī was mostly familiar with the gloss of Taqī al-dīn al-Muqtaraḥ and Sharīf al-Dīn b. al-
Tilimsānī, as well as the commentaries on the burhāniyya. These recur as the most frequent used
sources in the Kubrā alongside the works of al-Rāzī and al-Taftazāni
0. The commentary starts with the a lengthy introduction regarding the first necessity or
obligation for the morally responsible (mukallaf).116
116 This sets the tone for the subsequent works: “What we have gone over in this creed – i.e., that the first obligation is inquiry – is the position of a group of
scholars including al-Shaykh al-Ashꜥarī. Meanwhile, the ustādh and Imām al-Ḥaramayn held that the first obligation was the intend to inquire, that is,
directing the self toward inquiry by eliminating obstacles to it, such as arrogance, envy, and hatred for the scholars who call to the path of God the Exalted,
and purifying the heart of these vices is the first guidance from God to His servants. The Qāḍī stated: the first obligation is the first part of inquiry. It has
also been said that the first obligation is knowledge, and it is attributed to the Shaykh; but in reality, it does not differ from what was mentioned prior,
because this view is in regard to the first obligation that is sought in itself, and the other is in regard to what is the first act of obedience and performance.
I only selected from these positions that the first obligation is inquiry due to the repeated exhortations to reflect in the Book and the Prophetic norms, to
the extent that it almost became an end in itself in contrast to all other mediums, for those [obligations] are derived only from the principle that states: the
imperative to perform an act is the imperative to do all that this act is dependent upon from the actions of the moral agent, and on this principle there is
disagreement. Lastly, reflection is sufficient for knowledge of God even without a teacher, against the Ismāꜥīliyya; indeed, without a teacher it may be very
difficult.” Kubrā, 183 translation kindly provided from the unpublished translation by by A. Mihirig. A very long footnote; reason?
69
1. [Necessities and Impossibilities] Description of the several ways through which a nominal
believer can authenticate their faith (khurūj min al-taqlīd) by observance of the mawjūdāt and
reach the (binding) conclusion regarding the existence of God [i.e., God’s Essence]
2. Necessity of the belief in the Eternality of God
3. Necessity of the belief in the Permanence of God
4. Necessity of belief in the attribution of absolute Will and Power to God
5. God’s Divine Knowledge
6. The divine attribute of Life
7. The necessity of belief in God as Knowing , Hearing, Speaking, Seeing which are to be relied on
through revealed evidence.
8. The necessity of the subsistence of the Real Attributes (sifāt al-maʿānī) in God’s Essence.
9. Affirmation of the (eternality) of the Real Attributes
10. Against the Falāsifa on the question of the Attributes
11. Unity of the Attributes [which al-Sanūsī connects with the impossibility of the human power
(qudra) as having any causal effect (ta’thīr) via the theory of human acquisition (Kasb)].
12. [Possibilities] the beatific vision
13. On the Freedom of God’s actions [includes the creation of mankind and their acts and relating
to it the classic Ashʿarī principle that God is not bound in his actions (lā yajibu ʿalayhi shay)]
14. Illustrating the invalidity of Universal Moral Goods and Evils (taḥsīn and taqbīḥ)
15. God’s choice of sending Messengers and providing divine assistance to their Message with
Miracles
70
16. [The necessities of Prophethood] The necessity of the sincerity (ṣidq) of the Messengers
17. The prophethood of Mohammed, the Final Messenger, and his Miracle of the Quran
18. The necessity of belief in the sincerity of the prophet Muḥammad and thereby in the Quran and
whatever else he ordained and came with.
19. Here al-Sanūsī finishes the chapter on Prophethood and offers a series of remarks (tanbiḥāt)
that do not fall under the modal structure he intended to adhere to. These remarks include
elements such as the belief in the corruption of previous revelations, the ḍawābiṭ of taʾwīl, and
some elements of the discussions regarding the matters of the unseen (ghaybiyāt)
20. The text ends with a supplication that centres around a plea to God for making the Kubrā a
means for strengthening the faith.
3.1.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Major Creed from al-
Sanūsī to the 17th Century
In what follows we describe a non-exhaustive list of the commentaries on the Kubrā in 15-17th
century Maghrib, with a focus on those that often mentioned in the ṭabaqāt literature and in the
commentaries on the text in particular.
1. Auto commentary of al-Sanūsī117
2. Ibrahīm b. ʿAbd al-Jabbār al-Fajījī (d. 920/1514). This is the earliest commentary on the Kubrā
that is known since al-Fajījī is a direct student of al-Sanūsī
117 The list is sorted by the death date or estimation of the author since we don’t have exact author details for most of these commentaries and glosses.
71
3. Marzūq al-Kafīf reportedly has a mukthaṣar titled ‘Aqīdah ahl al-Tawḥīd al-Mukhrija min
Ḍalmat al-Taqlīd.118
4. Shorter gloss on the Kubrā by Abū al-ʿAbbās b. ʿAlī al-Manjūr al-Maknāsī al-Fāsī (d. 1587/995)
5. Advanced Comm. on the Kubrā by Abu al-ʿAbbās b. ʿAlī al-Manjūr al-Maknāsī al-Fāsī (d.
1587/995)
6. Taqyīdāt al-Kubrā by ʿAli b.Aḥmad al-Rasmūkī (d. 1049/1639)119
7. b. ʿAbd-Allah b. Yaʿqūb al-Samlālī, a prominent Nāsirī scholar from Marrakech (d. 1058/1648)
8. Gloss on Comm. Kubrā by Aḥmad b. ʿAlī Sulaymān al-Raḥmānī (d. 1065/1655)120
9. Gloss on Comm. by Abū Ḥassan al-Yūsī (d. 1102/1691)
10. Muḥammad B. Ibrahīm (ca. 1097/1685) titled: ʿAqīda tukhriju min Ẓulmāt Ṣamīn al-taqlīd ilā
ḍawʾ al-dalīl.121
11. Comm. by Abu Ḥafṣ ʿUmar b. ʿAbd Allah al-Fāsī al-Fihrī (d. 1188/1774)122
12. Gloss on Comm. by Abu Abd Allah Muḥammad b. Saʿīd al-Manṣūrī al-Salwī (d. 1142/1729)123
13. Several glosses by ʿAlī al-ʿAkārī. His glosses can be considered an advanced exposition and
engagement with the Kubrā,124 was also known for teaching from the Kubrā during his advanced
classes in Egypt.
118 Khālid Zahrī, Min ʿilm Al-Kalām Ilā Fiqh al-Kalām: Muqāraba Li-Ibrāz Maʿālim al-Tajdīd al-Kalāmī ʿind Fuqahāʾ Wa-Ṣūfiyat al-Maghrib, 157.
119 Hassaniyya mss 7699 [f.1-48]
120 Mentioned by al-Maqqarī in his Rawḍat al-ās, high probablity that Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya, MS no. 4673 is this commentary but has not been
verified as of yet; Or could be a Gloss of al-Fāsī’s work on the Kubrā see Maṣādir, 678.
121 MS Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya, no. 14033, folio 232-236
122 Ṭalāʾiʿ al-bushrā fīmā yataʿallaq bi-Sharḥ al-ʿaqīdah al-Kubrā
123 Al-munzaʿ al-laṭīf by Abd al-Rahman al Zaydān mentions this gloss.
124 Aḥmad b. Muḥammad Wallālī, Mabāḥith al-anwār fī akhbār baʻḍ al-akhyār, ed. ʿAbd al- ʿAzīz. Bū ʿAṣṣāb (Rabat: Jāmiʿat Muḥammad al-Khāmis,
Manshūrāt Kulliyyat al-Ādāb wa-l- ʿUlūm al-Insānīyah, 1999), 208
72
3.2. The structure and purpose of the Middle Creed (al-Wusṭā)
If the Kubrā can be considered as al-Sanūsī’s theological engagement with the Irshād then the
‘simplification’ of the Kubrā into the Wusṭā –upon demand of his community – gives a first glance into
the pedagogical method for religious instruction which he has in mind and which comes to full fruition
in the Sughrā.
The introduction of the text, like in the Kubrā, frames the problem that this book attempts to resolve:
the blind-acceptance of creedal matters, when a form of correct reasoning would illumine the reality of
faith in the heart of the believer. The text continues the usage of the modal tripartite division to
categorize all propositions that a believer is required to understand.
1. Arguments for the existence of God
a. Limiting the rational proofs to a discussion on the argument from the world’s incipience
(hudūth)
2. The Essence of God and His necessary attributes
a. Proofs for the knowability of God’s essence based on the ḥudūth argument
3. Negative attributes
a. Rational proofs for the necessity of God’s eternality
b. Rational proofs for the necessity of God’s Permanence
c. Rational proofs for the necessity of his absolute Transcendence (mukhālafatuhu li al-
ḥawādith)
4. The Real attributes
73
a. Arguments against the existence of substantive attributes (refutation of the Muʿtazili
position), against the absence of attributes (refutation of the Falāsifa)
b. God’s Power
c. God’s Will
d. God’s Knowledge
e. The possible attributes affirmed by revelation as necessary: Hearing, Sight, Speech
f. The attribute of Life (or Giving Life, muhyi?)
g. Arguments for the unity (waḥdāniyya) and eternality (baqā) of these divine attributes
5. [possibilities]
a. Beatific vision
b. God’s absolute freedom and independence towards human actions
6. Prophethood and Prophecy
a. Proofs for the veracity of prophetic miracles and their conditions
b. The necessary attributes for Prophethood to be valid
c. The justification and elucidation on Abrogation in time of revelation (naskh)
7. Prophethood and Prophecy of the Final Messenger
a. Proofs for the Quran as miracle
b. Proofs from previous revelations
Here al-Sanūsī finishes the chapter on the particular Prophethood and prophecy of the Final Messenger
and offers a lengthy series of remarks (tanbiḥāt) that do not fall under the modal structure he intended
74
to adhere to hence get collated in the end. These remarks include elements such as the belief in the
corruption of previous revelations, the reality of the (Saint of God) Walī and what a Saint’s miracle
(karāma) entails, the reality of magic (siḥr) and the occurrence of the evil eye (īṣaba al-ʿayn). Al-Sanūsī
then devotes several pages to the need for repentance (tawba), the only way to redeem oneselves from
a disobedience (fisq) towards God’s commandments. Finally, he discusses the principle of ‘enjoining
what is right and forbidding what is wrong’ (Amr bi al-maʿrūf wa al-nahī ʿan al-munkar). It is interesting
to note that al-Sanūsi’s ending (khātima) for the Wustā is a lengthy supplication of several pages
invoking the Names of God and pleading for his assistance in aiding the followers of Muḥammad in
maintaining on the Straight Path (?). The Wustā expresses al-Sanūsī’s concern regarding the nominal
believer and providing them with a general framework in which to understand creedal matters. The
actual matn and subsequent commentary provide this ‘guidance’ through their strict adherence and
application of the tripartite modal skeleton, while the tanbihāt are a mixture of uṣūlī, fiqhī and
secondary theological observations that ought to be considered the fleshing of the skeleton in order to
present a whole weltanschauung.
3.2.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Middle Creed from al-
Sanūsī to 18th Century Maghrib
75
There seem to be no well-known commentaries on the Wusṭā up till the 17th century. A few
manuscripts have been found with anonymous authorship.125 The reason for this might be indeed that
the Wusṭā ultimately is perceived as an abridgement of the Kubrā, Sanusi’s major work in kalām. As
such the audience for both are the scholars who in their theological engagement would prefer the
original work over an abridgement. It is interesting to note that by early 18th century this changed; a
trend in Wusṭā commentaries particularly in and around al-Qayrawān can be discerned. The most
prominent commentaries of that trend are:
• The gloss al-hība wa al-ʿaṭā fī sharḥ ʿaqīda al-Wusṭā by Abu Isḥāq Ibrahīm al-Sarqasṭī al-Tunsī
(d.1180/1710)
• Naẓm ʿalā sharḥ ʿaqīda al-Wusṭā by Ahmād b. Qāsim al-Bayūnī (d. 1139/1723)
• Gloss by Muhammad b. ʿAbd-Allah Zaytūna al-manastīrī (d. 1138/ 1725)
• ḥāshiya āla al-ʿaqīda al-Wusṭā, Maḥmūd Maqdīs al-Ṣafāqsī al-Tūnisī (d. 1228/1772)
• Sharḥ al-Wusṭā, Ḥamūda al-Tunsī (d. 1202/1788)
125 Wisnovsky in his enumeration of the post-classical kalam sources mentions several commentaries on Sanūsī’s work but not a single commentary on the
Wustā. See: Wisnovsky, Robert. 2004. “The Nature And Scope Of Arabic Philosophical Commentary In Post-classical (Ca. 1100-1900 Ad) Islamic Intellectual
History: Some Preliminary Observations.” Bulletin - Institute of Classical Studies 47 (S83PART2). 185-186; for the mention of the commentaries with
undisclosed authors see: al-Zahrī, Maṣādir, 497.
76
3.3. The structure and purpose of the Preliminaries (al-Muqadimāt)
With the Muqadimāt we reach the fork in al-Sanūsī’s writing. Where the Kubrā, the Wusṭā, and their
commentaries focus on a kalāmi engagement – in line with the Maghribi Irshād tradition –, the
Muqadimāt is the first work that displays al-Sanūsī’s shift and focus on establishing his unique mode of
religious instruction. Prior to instructing the nominal Muslim on the path of knowledge Sanusi’s
emphasis is on the building of virtuous character as a prerequisite. When once asked why the science
of tawḥīd matters and takes precedent over the study of fiqh he replied:
And of the apparent (dhāhir) sciences there is none that enables the knowledge and awareness
(muraqabatihi) except ʿilm al-Tawḥīd and by it one receives the grace of understanding in the
other sciences. And depending on the level of ma’rifa of Him, Exalted be He and awareness of
Him - will one’s awe of Him increase and thereby also the proximity of the servant to their
Lord.126
With his response al-Sanūsī illustrates not only the classification of this science as the first science but
also its importance for the development of a relation to God, hence bringing it back to the intimate
existential level. It is also in this context, of the pedagogical aim for the student of knowledge, that al-
Sanūsī often advices the abstinence—for the non-scholar—from creedal works that are steeped a little
too much in the arguments and words of the philosophers. The argument is that this mixture of creedal
126 mawāhib, 277
77
terminology and creedal-oriented arguments with philosophical arguments and terminology will leave
the novice confused and unable to build a coherent and strong worldview.127 There’s a practical and
spiritual concern at stake here for al-Sanūsī.128 Ultimately, what Sanusi is aiming to achieve is the
establishment of fundamental cognitive frameworks or a Weltanschauung that is firmly set prior to
exploring the horizons of other Welts. The Muqadimāt concerns itself primarily with establishing the
definitions and terminology upon which the next text, i.e., Sughrā, will rely on. In the classic sense one
could say that the purpose of the Muqadimāt is the conceptualisation of the terms (taṣawwur) while
the Sughrā aims to exclusively focus validating these terms and their relations (taṣdīq) through rational
and revelational proofs.
In terms of structure it consists of eight preliminaries that ought to suffice the nominal Muslim to
commence the (correct) reasoning with regards to the creedal tenets of his faith. They are a
combination of epistemological concerns—often found in the uṣul al-fiqh literature—and
differentiating terms that are often conflated in their epistemic value (e.g. the common misconception
that innovation (bidʿa) is a theological matter instead of a legal (fiqhī) matter.
• 1st preliminary: The division of the concept of ‘judgement’ (ḥukm) but rather than limiting the
focus on the rational judgement, as maintained in the Kubrā and Sughrā he expands on the
127 Al-Sanūsi refers to the books of Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, al-Bayḍāwī as examples of this mixed methodology. Howeve,r this does mean they ought not be
studied or engaged. As we’ve illustrated above, his Kubrā relies heavily on Razī’s works and has the occasional reference to Bayḍawi’s work. It is the clear
purpose of a text and the targeted audience which al-Sanūsī makes the basis for his statement.
128 Sanūsi’s mode of religious instruction is impregnated with elements of his spiritual background and education. In his own pedagogical approach he
reprimanded students for taking a teacher in whom they did not discern the qualities of virtue. Tthe transfer of knowledge requires the sincere
companionship (suḥba) of a person. Since the companionship of a person, despite their extensive knowledge, who is steeped in vice will naturally rot the
companionship and do more harm than good. Rasā’il, 68.
78
remaining two forms of judgement in the classic tripartite division of the rational, natural and
conventional.
• 2nd Preliminary: On the nature of human acts, free will, and the three different dominant
interpretations on free will within Islamic thought, i.e., the jabariyya, the qādiriyyah and the ahl
al-sunna.
• 3rd Preliminary: on the nature and different types of Shirk
1. The shirk of independence (istiqlāl): against the conception of the Magians
2. The shirk of associating multiple (tabʿīdh): which is to compose one god out of
many, such as the polytheism of Christians.
3. The shirk of proximity (taqrīb): against the understanding of the pre-Islamic Arab
culture.
4. The polytheism of imitation (taqlīd)
5. The shirk of holding on to proximate causes (al-asbāb): which is to attribute to
empirical or nomic causes. Against the understanding of the Philosophers and the
material scientists.
6. The polytheism of hypocrisy (al-aghrād): which is to perform acts for other than
Allah.
• 4th Preliminary: Seven categories of disbelief (kufr) and [blameworthy] innovation (bidʿa)
1. Necessary causation (al-'ījāb al-dhātī):
2. Rationalization (al-tahsīn al-'aqlī)
79
3. Blameworthy imitation (al-taqlīd al-radī’)
4. Empirical correlation (imān bi al-asbāb)
5. Compound ignorance (al-lahl al-murakkab)
6. Literalism (fahmʿalā al-dhawāhir)
7. Ignorance of evident principles and knowledge: e.g., grammar, axioms of
logic
• 5th Preliminary: The four categories of existent things with regard to the substrate (al-maḥall)
and the determinant (al-mukhaṣṣis)
• 6th Preliminary: The six contrary correlatives (mutaqābilāt) of contingent things (mumkināt)
• 7th Preliminary: On the eternality of certain Divine attributes
• 8th Preliminary: Elucidation on the definition of trust (amānah), and betrayal (khiyānah) which
prepares the ground for understanding the necessary attributes required for prophethood to be
successful.
3.3.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Preliminaries from al-
Sanūsī to 17th Century Maghrib
1. Al-Mawāhib al-ladhuniyya fī sharḥ ‘alā al-muqadimāt al-Sanūsīyyah; Abu Isḥāq al-Sarqasṭī al-
Andalusī (d. 1091)
2. Risalāh fī ʿaqāʿid ahl al-Sunnah; Abū ʿabd-Allah al-Ghumārī al-Tunsi.(d. 1119). This seems to be
an organic commentary on the muqadimat and the Sughrā where the preliminaries are
80
integrated in the first chapter and where he dives into the same terminology and definitions as
in al-Sanūsī’s muqadimāt.
3.4. The structure and purpose of the Minor Creed (al-Sughrā) and its relation to
the Preliminaries, the Major and Middle Creed.
The Sughrā can be considered as the work that received the highest number of commentaries, and
enjoyed the widest global reception while igniting an array of intense discussions on some of the
theological positions it supports. This is not only for the Maghribī intellectual landscape but for the
Sunni landscape of 17-20th century in general.129
The first part of the Sughrā has a similar pattern to the Kubrā and Wusṭā in that it highlights the
importance of authenticating one’s faith (khurūj min al-taqlīd) through a better —more correct and
intimate— understanding of the tenets of belief. It then continues in the same line by introducing the
tripartite modal framework as guideline to understand divinity and prophethood. Al-Sanūsī proceeds
then with the four categories of divine attributes that make up a total of twenty attributes. These are
the same as in the Kubrā but due to the smaller structure of the Sughrā as well as delaying the proofs
for each attribute for the second part of the Sughrā make it a much clearer structure. It’s this
categorization of 20 attributes that becomes dominant in the theological legacy of al-Sanūsī with local
particularities such as the Malay-archipelago tradition where the eight sifāt maʿnawiyya are considered
129 Wisnovsky, Robert. 2004. “The Nature And Scope Of Arabic Philosophical Commentary In Post-classical (Ca. 1100-1900 Ad) Islamic Intellectual History:
Some Preliminary Observations, 7
81
identical to the ṣifāt al-maʿānī and thereby this tradition propagates a 13-sifat tradition.130 Notice how
the proofs for the attributes are not mentioned with each issue but preceded by the summation of the
creedal statements and only afterwards an expansion on the rational proofs is provided. This seems to
be done as a methodological concern where one could suffice with reading the creedal statements first
and then relate to their rational proofs.
In the second part of the Sughrā, al-Sanūsī brilliantly illustrates how all the rationalized tenets of belief
are found in the testimony of faith; which he succintly illustrates to then remind the reader of the crucial
importance of the Shahada and its meanings and that the dhikr of the shahādah and the contemplation
on it will increase understanding of the pivotal creedal matters that authenticate belief. It shows again
how al-Sanūsī’s theological approach remains embedded in a spiritual concern for the nominal believer.
The Sughrā is the first text where the core beliefs are summarized and organized without too many
addenda. In overall one could schematize the core beliefs and structure adhered to in the Sughrā, and
thereby the structure, which is based on the modal qualifiers, adhered to by most commentators of al-
Sanūsī’s theological legacy.
130 Philipp Bruckmayr, “ The šarḥ/ḥāšiya Phenomenon in Southeast Asia”, (MIDÉO, 32 | 2017), 27-52.
82
3.5. Schematization of the core beliefs as expressed in the Sughrā: Required beliefs
regarding the divine as per modal qualifier
3.5.1. Necessity as the modal qualifier:
20 attributes in four categories: (essential attribute) Existence, (negative attributes) Unicity,
Self-Subsistence, absolute transcendence, Permanence, Eternality, (Real attributes)
Knowledge, Power, Life, Will, Speech, Hearing, Seeing, (Grounded attributes) Being All-
Powerful (qādiran), Being All, Willing (murīdan), Being All-Knowing (‘āliman), Being Living
(ḥayyan), Being All-Hearing (samī’an), Being All-Seeing (basīran) Being a Speaker
(mutakalliman)
3.5.2. Impossiblity as the modal qualifier
the 20 opposites for the necessary attributes: non-existence (ʿadam), contingency (hudūth),
anihilation (fanā), similitude (mumāthala), dependence (iḥtiyāj), multiplicity (taʿaddud),
powerlessness (ʿajz), compulsion (karāhah), ignorance (jahl), death (mawt), deafness (saman),
blindness (āmā), muteness (bakam), incapability (ʿājiz), compelled (kārih), ignorant (jāhil),
dead (mayyit), deaf (aṣamm), blind ( aʿmā) and mute (abkam)
83
3.5.3. Possibility as the modal qualifier
to act or not act upon all that falls under the modal qualifier of possibility, which is thereby a negative
proposition of the aforementioned stipulations.
3.5.4. Required beliefs regarding prophethood as per modal qualifier
3.5.5. Necessity as the modal qualifier
the four attributes of truthful (ṣidq), trustworthy (amānah), intelligence (faṭāna) and being propagator
for the ordained revelation (tablīgh)
3.5.6. impossibility as the modal qualifier
the four attributes of falsehood (kadhib), breach of trust (khiyānah), concealment (kitmān) and
stupidity (balādah)
3.5.7. possibility as the modal qualifier
to be attributed with human traits that are not flaws, nor contradict their stature. Human
attributes such as suffering an ailment are thereby possibilities for a Messenger
3.5.8. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Minor Creed from al-
Sanūsī to 17th Century Maghrib
1. Auto commentary of al-Sanūsī.
2. Commentary by his direct student al-Mallālī. There’s no reference to this commentary in
Mallāli’s Mawāhib so it’s safe to assume that he wrote his commentary afterwards.
3. Al-Fajiji al-Tūzarī (d. 1048/1698) has a simplified commentary on the Sughrā (unpublished).
84
4. Most popular gloss on Comm Sughrā in the centuries around al-Sanūsī is by ʿUmar b.
Muḥammad al-Kumād al-Anṣārī al-Qunsanṭīnī known as ʿUmar al-Wazzān (d. 965/1557-8)
5. Ittiḥāf al-Maghram al-Mughrī comm. on the Sughrā by Shihāb al-Dīn al-Maqqarī al-Tilimsāni
(d.1041/1632). Written in Fez in 1021/1612.
6. Commantary Itiḥāf al-mūridīn by Abu Bakr al-Ghadamāsī (1094/1682).131
7. Iʿānah al-mājidin fi Tashiḥ al-ḍīn bi Umm al-barahīn by Aḥmad ʿArafah al-Shādili al-Maliki.132
8. Gloss by Abū al-ʿAbbās Aḥmad al-Manjūr (d. 995/1587)
9. Commentary of al-Ḥafṣī al-Marākshī al-Tunsī (d. 1037/1628) who mentions also in the
introduction that he authored it for beginners and not for those who are steeped in this science.
10. Commentary by al-Samlālī al-Jazūlī (d. 1093/1682). Again a very simple commentary with an
explicit mention that the focus is on the commonfolk.133
11. Commentary on the Sughrā by Abu ʿAlī al-Ḥassan al-Hidājī al-Maʿdānī (d. 1598/1006). Again a
very pedagogical focused commentary.134
12. Comm. on Sughrā by ʿAbd al-Qādir b. Aḥmad b. Khuddah al-Rāshidī135
13. Comm on Sughrā by Abu ʿAbbas Aḥmad b. Aqdār al-Rāshidī (d. 1532/939). These two scholars,
b. Khuddah and b. Aqdār, are two junior students of al-Sanūsī to whom the spread of Sanusi’s
work in non-Arabic tribes is attributed.136
14. Ghāyat al-Ṭalibīn commentary by Muḥammad b. Muḥammad al-Maṣrī (d. 1066/1655)137
131MS Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya,, no.3223, 4509
132 MS Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya, no. 7508
133 MS Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya, 7286; al-Maktabah al-Azhariyya, no. 8348
134 MS Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya, no. 8989; 6071
135 MS Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya, no. 4927, 9588; MS al-Maktabah Sayda Zaynab, no 1739
136 Mallālī, Mawāhib, 348
137 MS Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya no. 9964; Sayda Zaynab, 864
85
15. Fath al-Raḥmān li-Aqfāl Umm al-barahīn, comm. by Abu ʿAbd-Allah Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-
Salām al-Bajūrī al-Maknāsī (circa 1149/1736) commentary also known as al-Marqaṣ al-Muṭrab.138
16. Al-farīdah al-gharāʾ fī Naẓm al-ʿaqida al-Sughrā, versification in 137 lines by Abu al-ʿAbbās
Aḥmad b. al-Hāj warayandi [or waraybādī].
17. Poem on the subject of tawḥīd that is an indirect commentary on the Sughrā by ʿAbd al-Salām
b. Nāṣir. The introduction and ending of the poem are marked by laudatory remarks for the al-
Sanūsī, the protector of Tawḥīd.139
18. The West-African scholar Ahmād Baba Tinbuktū (d. 1036/1627) produced a critical abridgement
on the Sughrā. Interesting to note is his abridgement of Mallālī’s biography of al-Sanūsī titled
al-lālī al-sundusiyya fī al-faḍāʾil al-Sanūsiyyah.140
19. Gloss by Abū al-Ṭayyib al-Ḥassan b. Yūsuf al-Zayyātī al-Fāsī (d. 1023/1614). The gloss is written
as a Sufi commentary and interpretation of al-Sanūsi’s commentary on the Ṣughrā.141
20. Gloss by Mahdī ʿĪsā b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Rajājī al-Sūsī al-Suktānī (d. 1062/1653). A student of
Ḥassan al-Yūsī who emigrates to Cairo. His work will be become of the major influences on the
al-Sanūsī commentary movement in 18th-19th century Azhar circles.
21. Gloss by ʿUthmān b. Ibrahīm al-Ifrīqī al-Jazāʾirī, known as Qudūrah (d. 1061/1656)
22. Gloss by Yasīn b. Zayn al-Dīn abī Bakr al-ʿUlaymī al-Ḥumṣī (d. 1061/1656)
23. Gloss by Abu Zakariyāʾ Yaḥyā b. Muḥammad al-Shāwī al-Milyānī al-Jazāʿirī (d 1096/1685)
24. Gloss by Saʿdī b. Abd al-Raḥmān al-Wajhānī
138 See ittiḥāf al-aʿlām al-nās, vol. 4, 132-136
139MS Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya no. 12095, (f. 129-130).
140 Aḥmad Baba Tinbuktu, (Ed. Ibrahim Mahmud), al-Laʾāliʾ al-Sundusiyya fī al-faḍāʾil al-Sanūsiyya, Enag, Algiers, 2011
141 MS Rabat, al-Maktaba al-Ḥasaniyya no. 10382 (f. 1- 60)
86
25. Gloss by ʿAlī b. Muḥammad al-Sufyānī (d. 1029/1619) who is a direct student of Abū al-ʿAbbās
Aḥmad b. ʿAlī al-Manjūr.
26. Gloss Al-farāʾid al-sanniyah wa al-fawāʾid al-sirriyah by b. Muhammed al-Fāsī, al-ʿArif bi-Allah
(d. 1036/1612).
27. Commentary on the Sughrā by ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Akhḍarī142 whose father was a disciple and
student of Aḥmad al-Zarrūq (d. 888/1493). He’s particularly known for his didactic poems in the
rational sciences and primers in Maliki fiqh.
3.5.9. Variations on the Minor Creed in the Maghrib 15-17th century and setting the scene for
18-19th century Egypt.
1. Al-Durra al-farīdah fī sharḥ al-ʿaqīdah, ʿAlī al-Ḥamwī (d. 932/1526)
2. Al-Fatḥ al-Nabawī bi-Sharḥ ʿAqīda al-Ḥamawī; Muḥammad Fatḥullah al-Baylūnī a direct
student of al-Ḥamwī (d. 1042/1526)
1. Al-Murshid al-Muʿīn ʿala al-Ḍarūrī min ʿūlum al-din by ʿAbd al-Wāḥid b. ʿĀshir (d. 1039/1629).
This is one of the exemplary methodology examples that synthesises the core teachings of the
three aforementioned sciences into one didactic poem to instruct the nominal Muslim. The
creed introduction is based completely on the modality approach of al-Sanūsī as well as his
commentary on the shahada as sufficient for the creedal matters that are necessary for
authenticating belief and fulfilling the moral responsibility of taklīf.
2. Iḍā al-dujunnah fi iʿtiqād ahl al-sunnah by Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Maqqarī al-Māliki (d.
1041/1631). Another pivotal didact text based on al-Sanūsi’s mode of religious instruction and
142 One extant manuscript is mentioned in the catalogues situation in the maktabah al-Wattaniyyah al-jaza’iriyyah no. 1426.
87
elements of the Sughrā and the Muqadimāt. A didactic poem of around 500 lines starts with
the modality approach and expands on the mumkināt. Interesting to note that his text contains
his ijazat on the books of al-Sanūsī; that go through al-Zarrūq. Al-Maqqarī’s text becomes
popular in 18-19th century Egypt with the most famous commentary written by the Azharite
scholar and Maliki Mufti of Egypt in 19th century Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-ʿillīsh (d. 1299/1822)
3. Jawhar al-Tawḥīd by Ibrahīm al-Laqqāni (d. 1040/1630) technically outside of the scope of this
study but worth mentioning since this becomes the standard textbook and reference in Egypt
with a multitude of commentaries and glosses. The style and structure of the texts follows al-
Sanūsī’s Sughrā closely with some additional inquiries.
4. Sibal al-maʿarif al-abbāniyyah wa as-wārihā al-fāʾiqah al-ḥaṣīniyah by Muḥammad b. ʿUmar al-
Ghadamāsī (d. 1080). This text follows the structure of al-Sanūsī’s Sughrā with a focus on
unfolding the meanings of the shahādah. However, al-Ghadamāsī brings in highly philosophical
debates in epistemology as well as more fiqh oriented matters concerning what brings one out
of the fold of faith.
5. Al-ʿaqīdah al-munawwarah fī muʿtaqad al-sādāt al-Ashāʿira by Abū al-Hassān al-Nūrī al-Ṣafaqāsī
al-Tunsī (d.1118/1706). A pseudo-commentary and abridgement of the Sughrā with some
amendments to the proof. The title is telling on the consolidation that happened with regard
to al-Sanūsī’s creed as the representative of the Ashʿarī school altogether.
6. Risalāh fī ʿaqāʿid ahl al-Sunnah by Abū ʿabd-Allah al-Ghumārī al-Tunsi. (d. 1119/1707) This seems
to be an organic commentary on the Muqadimāt and the Sughrā where the Muqadimāt are
integrated in the first chapter in which he dives into terminology and definitions. The structure
88
tends to be more creative and personal and less a commentary than a creative attempt to
categorize and figure this out in an easier way. Again the notion to present these kalāmī
positions as the preponderant position (muʿtamad) of the Ashʿari school in general takes more
and more prominence.
3.6. The structure and purpose of the Minor Minor Creed and the differences with
the Minor Creed.
The Sughrā al-Sughrā is also referred to as Saghīra al-Sughrā due to its limited size.143 This is clearly an
abridgement of the Sughrā with a focus on maintaining the elementary creedal matters to authenticate
belief. According to Mallālī, it was his father who was attending al-Sanūsī’s classes on the Sughrā but
reached the age he could not make the trip to the mosque who sent a request via his son to al-Sanūsī to
send him something tangible that he could memorize to heart and repeat it daily as a litany (dhikr) in
order to realize the realities of tawḥīd and be reminded of God daily. In structure it follows the first part
of the Sughrā with the omission of the proofs and three prophetic characteristics— ṣidq, amānah and
tablīgh for prophethood, as well that the attribution of their conceptual opposites is impossible for
Messengers. In this text the 4th category of divine attributes is also omitted. However, contrary to the
13-sifāt tradition that is dominant in the Malay-archipelago, this omission is not a change of opinion but
based on the assumption that this kind of attributes, in a simplified sense, are naturally understood as
143 Al-Mawāhib, 487
89
a consequence of understanding the sifat al-ma’āni. Adding them would complicate the matter for the
targeted audience.
3.6.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on the Minor Minor Creed
from al-Sanūsī to the 17th Century
1. Auto-commentary by al-Sanūsī
2. Al-Suktānī al-marākshī (1062/1652) writes al-tuḥfa al-mufida fi Sharḥ al-ʿaqīdah al-ḥafīdha
3. Commentary by Abu Ḥāmid Muḥammad al-ʿArabī al-Fāsī (d. 1051/1641)
4. Muḥammad b. al-Ḥassan b. al-ʿArḍūn al-Zijlī al-Ghumārī (d. 1012/1603)
5. Commentary by Abu ʿAbd-Allah Muḥammad al-Māmūn b. Muḥammad al-Ḥafṣī al-Marākshī
al-Tunsī (d. 1089/1678)144
6. Sabk al-Jawāhir fi isthikrāj mā taḍamanahu qawl lā ill-Allah min al ʿAqaʾīd by Muḥammad
Sālih al-Awjilī (d. 1093/1682). Can be considered a variation on the hafīda since the proofs
are not mentioned and the primary focus is on unpacking all necessary creedal matters
from the shahadah.145
144 MS Rabat, al-Maktabah al-Ḥassaniyah, no. 13583 (f. 39-42)
145 Zahrī, Thalath `aqaid Ash`ariyah, 39–42.
90
3.7. The structure and purpose of the Beneficial Creed (al-mufīdah) and the
difference with the Minor Minor Creed
There is some contestation about this work, with some considering it another version of the al-hafīda.
Al-Zahrī deems that there is sufficient proof to consider it a separate, rather late, work of Sanūsī. It is
often referred to as ʿaqīdat al-Nisāʾ and is not more than 1-2 pages. It did not receive an autocommentary
which may indicate that al-Sanūsī did not consider it part of the series of texts and
commentaries he had in mind.
3.7.1. Network description of commentaries and glosses written on this text from al-Sanūsi to
17th CE
There are only few works that can be considered variations of this work:
1. ʿAqīdah ahl-al-Īmān by Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Qādir b. ʿAlī al-Fāsī (d.1091/1680): (2-3 folios)
wherein he expresses that he specifically wrote it to teach women and children.146
2. Sharḥ Naẓm ʿAqīda al-Nisāʾ , by Muḥammad b. Abi al-Ghayth Dhakhān (d. 1056/1646)
a. Commentary of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Jāmiʿ (d. 1032/1622)
b. Versification of Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. Qāsim b. Muḥammad b. Sāsī al-Yūnī
(1116/1704)147
146 The focus on women as the target audience is not from an emancipatory principle such as expressed in Ahmet Celik but rather the Maghribī
understanding that authoring (taʾlīf) is of two kinds: the authoring of books and the authoring of rijāl, i.e., the ʿulāma of the next generation. Men are
through the Islamic-arabic climate pushed to become scholars while women are considered responsible for the good upbringing of their young children
and for that a minimal understanding of creedal matters is pivotal.
147 Iḥnāna, 323
91
4. CHAPTER FOUR: GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND STRUCTURE OF AL-SANŪSĪ’S
CREEDAL TEXTS
4.1. General principles and structure of al-Sanūsī’s creedal texts
Al-Sanūsī’s scholarly legacy contains more
than 75 works148, of which the works in
ʿaqīdah and kalām make up only 27% of his
scholarly production (fig.1). While his
scholarly output in Fiqh —and the subgenre
of fatāwa— takes the second place
with around 15%; his scholarly output with regards to the science of Taṣawwuf — including litanies,
adhkār and spiritual admonitions— makes for another 18%. These three domains that interest us the
most in our analysis of al-Sanūsī’s legacy culminated that an estimated 60% of his scholarly output is
part of his theological legacy in the broader sense of the term. While in a stricter sense his theological
legacy makes up more than half of his scholarly output (fig. 3).149 Given the dominance of his theological
148 For an extensive analysis of his – published and unpublished – works see Idāra al-Shumūs, 119-301 which offers a categorized enumeration of works of
al-Sanūsī and the location of the manuscripts in the collections of Algeria and partly for the collections of Tunis and Morocco.
149 These numbers are based on Bājī ʿAbd al-Qādir, Idārah al-Shumūs, 101-119 in which he provides an overview of al-Sanūsī’s works based on his extensive
research on the available manuscripts and mentions in the literature regarding the titles al-Sanūsī produced. Khālid Zahri was kind to assist me with a
revision based on his more recent discoveries (see Maṣāḍir, vol. 2/130) regarding the al-Sanūsī manuscripts. The percentages we found confirmed Bāji’s
finding with a (negligible) margin of 0.9- 1.3% percent.
Figure 1: Al-Sanūsī’s scholarly output per subject
92
output it comes to no surprise that he receives the laudatory name of “al-Tawḥīdī”150 by al-Tinbuktu. Of
his kalāmī works our focus is particularly on a series of works written with a certain organic inter-textual
dependence and with a different audience in mind. These works are the Kubrā (Major Creed), the
Wusṭā (Middle Creed), the Muqadimāt (Preliminaries) the Sughrā (Minor Creed), the Sughrā al-Sughrā
(Minor, Minor Creed) and the mufīda. Except the mufīda each of these foundational texts (matn) has
been provided with an auto-commentary. If we consider these commentaries as separate texts then we
can account for thirteen texts that encompass his theological legacy of al-Sanūsī151. The first in line is
the Kubrā which is the first work authored in the series152 and so provides a clear insight not only into
the structure and purpose but also the spirit of the text. In that regard the title of the first creedal text
(al-Kubrā) and its adjacent commentary set the tone of what the text aims for:
When God the Glorified and Exalted had aided the completion of the creed known as the Creed
of the People of Divine Unity which by God’s Aid Emancipates from the Darkness of Ignorance and
the Yoke of Imitation and by God’s Favour Crushes Every Adamant Heretic, some of its readers
have asked me to produce a short commentary on it that will complete its aims and ease the
approach to the pleasures of its meanings. Thus, I have answered their request; and from the
Generous Lord I seek His beautiful assistance and His aid in achieving the truth both in the
outward and the inward which is so prone to deficiencies; and I have named it The Reliance of
150 Nayl al-Ibtihāj, 78
151 The remainder are texts such as Wāsita al-Sulūk, Sharḥ al-Jazāʾriyyah, al-Ḥaqāʿq. Since our focus here is on the scholarly production that is based upon
the theological legacy of al-Sanūsī we omitted those due to not receiving as much attention as the aforementioned theological texts.
152 See the introduction of the Wusṭā where al-Sanūsī makes a reference to the Wusṭā being written on a request to simply the matters he discussed in his
Kubrā. See also Mawāhib, 218 for a reference of al-Mallāli to al-Sanūsī’s authoring of the Kubrā as the first text and the subsequent texts as the result of
several requests from within his community.
93
the People of Success and Truth in Explicating the Creed of the People of Divine Unity. I ask God
the Exalted to make it and its basis a means of benefit, and to bestow all those who study seek
to understand it the stations of the people of intimate knowledge and the achievement of
perfection in the Two Abodes, by His Power and Might. And blessings and peace be upon our
Master and Patron Muḥammad, the Greatest of the World, both its parts and its whole.153
Al-Sanūsī’s concern for writing the Kubrā, and the subsequent commentaries, stems from his concern
regarding the ‘yoke of imitation’ that has run rampant in the region.154 This concern translates into a
revisiting of the approach pertaining to the removal of the yoke of imitation, i.e., a revisit of the
approach on how to authenticate fundamental religious beliefs (taḥqīq al-imān,) through the steering
away from the stagnating epistemic state of taqlīd, since that particular state of—inauthentic—belief
does not guarantee a safe consideration as a true believer (muʾmin haqqan). Hence the main principles
and focus that shape the structure as well as the content of his commentaries on his own theological
works centers around this concern. The Wusṭā seems to be written immediately with its commentary.
The earliest references to the text keep the title as al-ʿAqīda al-Wusṭā wa Sharḥuḥa, which Joseph
Kenny155 assumes to indicate that, contrary to the traditional approach, the commentary and the matn
were written simultaneously. This is an argument in line with al-Sanūsī’s own explanation156 in the
introduction of the commentary when he mentions that some people came to him with difficulties
153 Kubrā, 122; the translation is from the unpublished draft translation kindly provided by Abdurrahman Mihirig, 2021
154 El-Rouayheb, Islamic Intellectual History in the Seventeenth Century, 175–87.
155J. P Kenny, Muslim Theology as Presented by M.b Yusuf as-Sanusi- Especially in His al-’Aqida al-Wusta. (Dissertation, University of Edinburgh, 1971), 52.
156 Al-Sanūsī, Wustā, 87
94
understanding the Kubrā and found the commentary lengthy hence the Wusṭā is written to be fit their
needs and easier to grasp (akhaṣṣ wa aqrāb).
4.2. The inter-textual relationships of the creedal works
These serial kalāmi works are hence authored in a top-down approach based upon the principle of
tahqīq al-imān, i.e., the removal of inauthentic belief (taqlīd) but the removal of inauthentic belief is
deemed by al-Sanūsī to be different depending on the intellectual needs of the person in question.
Especially the mutūn seem to be catering to different levels of intellectual understanding, which is
mentioned explicitly in the beginning of each matn. methodological structure of religious instruction
in the mutūn is based upon the taqlīd concern, while the commentaries display in their titles that they
are written for scholars in training or people of intellect who fulfil a pedagogical role in their
community. We could state that the matn on each level of instruction has a specific audience in mind
while the commentaries have the scholars or teachers in mind that ought to provide religious
instruction on creedal matters for the targeted audience. The theological texts thereby seem to fork into
a branch for the commonfolk, while considering the internal degrees, and a branch for the scholars. As
we will see this differentiation of audience becomes explicit when al-Sanūsī writes the Sughrā which
breaks with the general structure of the previous written mutūn and primarily focuses on an elucidation
for local teachers.
95
Fig 2. The inter-textual relationships of al-Sanūsī’s creedal works
96
The visualization illustrates clearly that the tradition of the Irshād as the basis for an advanced
theological engagement remains a Maghribī tradition respected by al-Sanūsī. However, the practical
concern of his locale motivate al-Sanūsī to write a more concise version of the Kubrā which results in
the Wusṭā and its commentary. the Muqadimāt, written as the descriptive preliminaries for the Sughrā
makes explicit mention of the Wusṭā and the Kubrā —and their commentaries— in its introduction.
With no exact date of publication given by al-Mallāli or ibn. Maryam we can only confidently state that
the Kubrā and its commentary is written prior to 875/1471, while the Wusṭā was written on the Day of
ʿArafah of that same year157 while the remaining works are written somewhere (shortly?) after 875/1471.
This means that al-Sanūsī was in his late thirties or early forties when writing the bulk of these
theological works. The Sughrā can then be considered as the first creative work of al-Sanūsī where he
focuses on distilling his pedagogical concerns regarding taqlīd within the modality framework as the
religious mode of instruction that will suffice the nominal believer in their quest to authenticate their
faith. The Sughrā al-Sughrā (Ḥafīdha) and the Sughrā Sughrā al-Sughrā (Mufīda) are then even shorter
abridgements or simplifications that reiterate the same core principles of the Sughrā but will suffice
with solely enumerating the—necessary, impossible and possible—propositions regarding God and
Prophethood, without mention of rational proofs, that are required to be understood for the tahqīq al-
Imān. If taken from the bottom, we can consider the Mufīda as the bare minimum for the novice
nominal Muslim, i.e., children, that is required for a nominal Muslim for his faith to be considered as
valid up till the Sughrā, which can then be considered as the minimum for any nominal Muslim of
157 Based on Joseph Kenney’s reading of 1Ms. El, f. 83a (Algiers) in Kenny Joseph, ‘Muslim Theology as Presented by Yusuf As-Sanusi- Especially in His al-
’Aqida al-Wusta’, 49.
97
adult-age with a healthy intellect. The commentary on the Sughrā is then the transitory realm to the
more advanced works, i.e., Wustā and the Kubrā and their commentaries. All of them are now focusing
on the nominal Muslim with an intellectual appetite for theological concerns. The audience intended
here are current or future instructors of the tenets of faith, i.e., ʿulamā and ṭullāb al-ʿilm.
98
4.3. Textual differences with the pre-Sanusi kalāmī literary genre
It’s also noteworthy to observe the theological issues that al-Sanūsī does not tackle nor mention in these
kalāmī works. Since his works initiate a whole movement shift in literary and methodological style of
writing creedal works in the Maghrib, it will indicate that these topics in the theological legacy also
barely receive any attention.
• Absence of a separate chapter in the Sughrā line of works, on the types of proofs and the various
tools of reasoning (istidlāl) such as we see in Juwaynī’s Irshād and in al-Baqillānī’s Tamhīd for
example. Again, this does not mean that al-Sanūsī does not mention the issue but they come
up rather sporadically while discussing arguments and this genre as a whole is absorbed into
his modality framework that frames al-Sanūsī’s kalāmi inquiry. This is in line with the Maghribī
logician’s trend to more comfortably integrate the tools of logic within their normative
projects.158
• The (political) issue of imāmah, which still plays an important role in the works of al-Sanūsī’s
sources such as al-Juwaynī’s Ghiyāth, or his Nizāmiyyah, a reference to Nizām al-Mulk (d.
485/1092) as well as the final chapter of al-Ghazāli’s Iqtiṣād. With the focus on the modality
framework to extract the foundational tenets of faith (uṣūl al-dīn), topics such as Imāmah,
which are then classified as furūʿ al-dīn are shaved off. Note, that al-Sanūsī discusses it rather
topically in the Irshād line of works, such as his commentary on the Kubrā towards the end ,but
158 Joseph Kenny, ‘Muslim Theology as Presented by Yusuf As-Sanusi- Especially in His al-’Aqida al-Wusta’, 49.
99
already in the commentary on the Wustā and especially from the Sughrā onwards it disappears
completely.
• Discussions on the status of certain contested companions of the Prophet Muhammad are
considered as non-essential to the usūl of one’s faith. Hence the intra-Islam debate only emerges
during the argumentation in the Kubrā, Wusṭā and the Sughrā; while some basic references are
made in the preliminaries.
• The disappearance of the classic Ashʿarī question on the increase and decrease of faith as a
central topic of discussion.
• The absence of the classic Ashʿarī argument against the Muʿtazili notion of God’s justice (ʿadl).
In conclusion, the absence of these classic kalāmi inquiries (masā’il )is not perse based on the avoidance
of political controversies and heated debates in highly philosophical matters, but derives from the core
principle that drives al-Sanūsī’s work (i.e., khurūj min al-taqlīd) where these masā’il don’t necessarily
need to concern the nominal believer who requires knowledge on the content of his faith rather than
on the dynamics of the shared faith in prior history.
100
4.4. The general principles of al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy in the Maghrib
The theological legacy of Sanūsī, expressed in poems, didactic poems, commentaries and glosses, shares
a large framework of agreement in the mode of religious instruction that best fits the nominal Muslim.
One could summarize the theological textual legacy of al-Sanūsī as based on 8 general principles:
1. The modal qualifiers— necessary, possible, and impossible— provide the structure for the
theological enquiry and for the religious mode of instruction: It is in fact through relating these modal
qualifiers to the divine and to prophecy that an organized and firm sense of one’s creedal beliefs can be
achieved.
2. The problem of taqlīd as a direct admonition to the reader: It serves almost an existential
confrontation where the nominal Muslim ought first and foremost to be pushed to realize the
importance of the actual tahqīq of one’s faith over taqlīd fī al-imān. Even when one’s inauthentic beliefs
are identical in form with the original creedal tenets, for example believing in the veracity of the Quran
and the Final Messenger only because one’s elders did so. These ‘beliefs’ can still be problematic
because their motivating force is not authentic. There arose a staunch response against this rather hard
approach which al-Sanūsī takes in the Kubrā and the Wustā. It falls within the historical debates
regarding the fate of the commonfolk in a time and region where the religious and military diversity of
the ruling class left its mark on the common believer. Works such as radd al-tashdīd fī masala al-taqlīd
by Abu al-ʿAbbās al-Sijilmāsī (d. 1156/1743) and al-jaysh wa al-kamīn li-qitāl man kafara ʿāmata al-
Muslimīn by Muḥammad Shaqrūn al-Waharāni (d. 1156/1743) engage with this issue. Nevertheless, the
general shift to focus on authenticating the faith of the nominal Muslim remains central.
101
3. The fourfold conceptual division of the Divine attributes resulting in 20 attributes. Though
this division is present in the Ashʿarī kalāmi literature prior to al-Sanūsī, it’s only with al-Sanūsī’s
scholarly contribution that this becomes the established exposition of the Divine attributes in the postclassical
tradition. This, of course, does not mean that there is an absolute consensus on this division.
In the later post-classical tradition that is building upon Al-Sanūsī’s, quite a few scholars will take a
stand against the addition of the sifāt al-maʿnawiyya based on their complete rejection of the theory of
aḥwāl. By the rejection of any notion of aḥwāl the conceptual difference between the ṣifāt al-maʿānī
and the sifāt al-maʿnawiyya remains to be only semantic with no metaphysical implications. This
decision is not explicitly mentioned in the later educational creedal texts but it is discernible through
their introduction of the sum of necessary attributes being 13 rather than 20. This understanding
becomes the dominant ṣifāt tradition in 17-18th century pre-modern Egypt, and by a networkconsequence,
becomes the Sunni tradition in the Malay-archipelago through the influence of the Azhar
and the Hijāz scholarship of the 17-18th century.159
4. Interpolation of God’s acts such as the creation of the world, the creation of human acts, the
sending of prophets and revelation, the beatific vision, as qualified by the modality of ‘possible’.
5. the modular qualifiers for Prophethood and prophecy in terms of what is necessary for these
concepts, and what is possible and impossible. While the earlier commentaries would maintain all
attributes as stipulated by al-Sanūsī (necessary: amāna, ṣidq, tablīgh, faṭānah, impossible: khiyāna,
khadhib, kitmān, baladah, possible: human faulty traits such as diseases, physical specifications,
marriage), the later tradition reduces these by focusing on what is necessary and impossible for Prophet.
159 See Philipp Bruckmayr, “ The šarḥ/ḥāšiya Phenomenon in Southeast Asia”, (MIDÉO, 32 | 2017), 27-52.
102
Even among the necessary attributes we see in the later post-classical reception of al-Sanūsi’s work that
al-faṭanah and balādah are omitted.160
6. All matters regarding the unseen that are part of creedal belief are first and foremost
integrated into the concept and belief in Ṣidq al-anbiyā under the modality of (onto)logically possible
but epistemologically necessary if conveyed by a prophet. Those are events such as the Resurrection of
corporal bodies, the events of the End of Times, the scales of Justice. They are considered important
information but they ought not to worry the believer too much as long as long as he affirms his belief in
their reality. The existence of these matters is given priority over the quality of these theological
secondary matters (al-kayf)
This is the general set of principles along which the theological legacy of al-Sanūsī in the Maghreb is
developed. Of course, there will be significant textual differences with the al-Sanūsī kalāmī literary
genre in its reception. There will be additional kalamī issues that receive attention in the later tradition
such as 1) the ta’liqat al-sifāt such as in the work of Sijilmāsī161, and al-Fasī and the post-classical Maghribī
persistence on refuting any form of causal dependency in natural causes (tabʿ) which is the expression
of another pedagogical concern and societal observation where one creates the habit of trusting in
causes; if not reminded of their non-causal ontological nature this habit might consolidate into a belief.
The conflation of an habitual assumption with a belief which goes against the Ashʿarī principle of
tawḥīd al-afʿāl has been expressed by al-Sanūsī in his Kubrā and in the Muqaddimāt.
160 See for example the gloss by Abu Zakariyāʾ Yaḥyā b. Muḥammad al-Shāwī and the commentaries on the Sughrā by Aḥmad al-ʿAlīysh and Ghadamāsī.
161 Aḥmad b. Mubārak al-Sijilmāsī, Risalah fi taʿliqāt sifāṭ Allah, Tetouan: Dār al-ʿirfān. 2013
103
104
4.5. Concluding remarks: Al-Sanūsī’s theological legacy as a Community of
Practice
4.5.1. The Role of Horizontal Learning in al-Sanūsī’s Theological Legacy
Horizontal learning leans itself to al-Sanūsī’s methodology in his creedal oeuvre. Ultimately, the creedal
works are introduced to educate all segments of society. All texts except the Kubrā and the Wusṭā and
their commentaries are catered for different levels of nominal Muslims while the aforementioned two
texts and commentaries are directed to those who have more intellectual appetite for the theological
and philosophical discussions (ṭālib al-ʿilm and ʿulamā) upon which the creedal texts are based. Again,
one should keep in mind that al-Sanūsī wrote the Kubrā and its subsequent commentary first and then
wrote each subsequent matn with its conjoined sharḥ to accommodate a demand within his societal
circles for that level of creedal explanation which is an internal pattern of horizontal learning as we will
discuss shortly. Al-Sanūsī’s texts are written to develop knowledge of God, the necessary knowledge of
God in order to commence a path of worshipping and polishing the interior spiritual life; they are a
means and not an end and thereby the creedal texts are presented in a pattern of horizontal learning.
Al-Sanūsī’s creedal works are not just theological (kalāmī) texts enunciated with theological ‘facts’ and
arguments but are subtly sprinkled with statements regarding the necessity of sound thinking (logic),
the philosophy of fiqh such as in his statements on taklīf and the two types of taqlīd–theological and
legal. They include ss well references to an individual’s relationship to God through spiritual formation;
personal appeals and reflections, and anecdotes of Islamic intellectual history. Despite commonly being
105
categorized as a creedal work, it has significant elements of a narrative text woven within it, further
solidifying our argument that Sanūsī’s text are written in the patterns of horizontal learning.
This form of learning that is displayed in and through Al-Sanūsī’s texts has been coined as a “top-down
perspective on the learning processes where the learning is transmitted and acquired not necessarily
by means of traditional categories”162 such as ‘teacher’, ‘student’, ‘murshid’ and ‘murīd’ but is
characterized by horizonal interactions such as between peers, through commentaries and didactic
poems and more importantly the intellectual – and spiritual- formation that is intended by the creedal
texts to be found in spiritual companionship (suḥba), and relationships of friendship that mark an
important part of al-Sanūsī’s legacy. Al-Sanūsī is promoting a different conception of literacy; rather
than superseding the written discourse of theology his texts create an innovative interdependence
between written and oral forms of literacy.163 The creedal texts of al-Sanūsī are promoting creedal
literacy as a practice164 shifting away from normative authority to normative authenticity; and
highlighting self-formation and individual conscience of the common folk. Thereby he introduces and
accents the idea of creedal knowledge as practical knowledge where it is seen as a necessary spiritual
exercise on the path of the Believer.165
162 Long, Snijders, and Vanderputten, Horizontal Learning in the High Middle Ages : Peer-to-Peer Knowledge Transfer in Religious Communities, 8.
163 This argument is in line with Brian Stocks thesis for the Medieval European societies during the 11th and 12th centuries see Stock, Implications of Literacy:
Written Language and Models of Interpretation in the 11th and 12th Centuries.
164 Similar to the aforementioned idea of ʿilm al-kalām to fiqh al-kalām as suggested by Khālid Zahrī, Min ʿilm al-Kalām ilā Fiqh al-Kalām: Muqāraba li-Ibrāz
Maʿālim al-Tajdīd al-Kalāmī ʿind fuqahāʾ wa-ṣūfiyat al-Maghrib.
165 The idea of taking a text as creedal practice is not new at this point. It can be found in Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazāli’s (d. 1111) work Bidāyat al-Hidāyah which is
written in the form of a daily regimen including litanies, legal routines and forms of prayers. The difference with al-Sanūsi is the exclusive dedication of the
text , as a practice, to creedal knowledge. Both authors are play a pivotal role in the development of learned Sufism For Ghazālī see for example Keyvan
Boland hematan, ‘Spiritual Education in Islamic Tradition: Revisiting Ghazali’s “Deliverance”’, Religious Education 114, no. 2 (2019): 110–29,
https://doi.org/10.1080/00344087.2018.1560585.. Nothing exists as of yet on the methods of spiritual education in Sanūsī’s work but some references are
made in works on his student Aḥmad al-Zarrūq such as in Kugle, Rebel between Spirit and Law : Aḥmad Zarruq, Sainthood, and Authority in Islam;
Karimullah, ‘Aḥmad Zarrūq and the Ash`arite School’.
106
4.5.2. A Community of Practice
Al-Sanūsī, through his theological works, starts a legacy in the 15th century; it is best understood as a
community of practice regarding creedal knowledge. Traditionally a community is defined as the
continuous interactions between people with a shared consensus. However, when we consider the
notion of horizontal learning that is pivotal in Al-Sanūsī’s work and his later legacy, we can interpolate
and understand it as the form of interaction that binds the community that ultimately makes out al-
Sanūsī’s legacy in the Maghrib 15-17th Century. Horizontal learning in this context can be “understood
as a form of interaction that took place on all levels of the community and created the repertoire, joint
enterprise and mutual engagement of that community.” So while a focus on al-Sanūsī’s legacy as a social
network would inevitable divert our attention to the historical how and why members were integrated
in that community (authors of commentaries, student-teacher relation) through the concept of
horizontal learning, we can and should focus more on the constitution of the community, i.e. al-Sanūsī’s
theological legacy, as a community of practice . We illustrated that the rich textual tradition emerging
out of al-Sanūsī’s creedal texts constitutes a community of practice by shifting away from the notion of
formal authority towards authenticity (khurūj min al-taqlīd) whereby the focus is shifted from the state
or the scholar constantly informing the confessional subject, i.e., the believer, of his faith towards the
confessional subject being pushed to self-formation and individual conscience. Especially the latter, the
focus on the individual conscience of the common folk, consolidates the idea of creedal knowledge
being the pivot of the normative project and thereby must be considered as practical knowledge. A
community of practice such as the one developed via al-Sanūsī’s text can then opt to do this via the
constant teaching and providing simplified creedal texts and poems, or through the establishment of
107
creedal hymns as spiritual litanies or even through the permeation of basic education in fiqh. Through
whatever means the proponents of al-Sanūsī’s legacy deemed the goal achievable they kept a thread of
continuous interaction and intellectual dynamics between themselves as scholars and as members of
their locale, striving for the continued existence of both communities. No scholar is an island and no
(common) folk shall be left stranded…
108
5. FIGURES
5.1. Fig. 1. Al-Sanūsī’s scholarly output per subject
5.2. Fig. 2. The inter-textual relationships of al-Sanūsī’s creedal works
6. APPENDIX
6.1. Al-Sanūsī’s teachers
6.1.1. Abu Yaʿqūb Yūsuf al-Sanūsī (fl. 1420?)166
The father of al-Sanūsī known as a pious man, loved in his community for his reverence and good
character and – as his son will be later on– often remembered through the ease with which they cried
out of reverence. His grave is a place of frequent visit at the outskirts of Tlemcen. He devoted himself to
teaching the Quran to children.167
6.1.2. Nasr al-Zawāwī (fl. 1430?)168
Al-Zawāwī or Zwāwī was Sanūsī’s primary teacher for the Arabic linguistic sciences and al-Sanūsī seems
to have been spending a lot of time in general with him throughout his youth.169 Al-Zawāwī was one of
the main students of Muḥammad b. Marzūq (d. 1379), a 14th century scholar renowned for his legal
works and close affiliation with the Marinid sultan Abū al-Ḥaṣṣan b. ʿUthman. Al-Zawāwī seems also be
166 Abū al-Qāsim Muḥammad al-Ḥafnāwī, Taʿrīf al-Khalaf bi-Rijāl al-Salaf (Algiers: Pierre Fontana, 1906), v. 1, 179.
167 Mawāhib,20
168 Bustān, 283
169 Mawāhib, 193
109
the first Andalusian teacher for al-Sanūsī since al-Zawāwī was the official Friday preacher of the al-
Hambra mosque in Granada for a few years prior this migration to Tlemcen.
6.1.3. Abū ʿAbd Allah Muḥammad b. Qāsim b. Ṭunazt al-Ṣanhājī (fl. 1420)
Al-Sanusī used to attend his formal gatherings in the famous lodge zāwiyyah Ibn al-Bannā, where al-
Ṣanhājī taught calculus, and ʿilm al-faraʾid170 to al-Sanūsī and al-Zikrī. The young Sanūsī was one of the
daytime formal students attending these gatherings. However, Ṣanhājī – noticing the difficulty al-
Sanūsī had with the material and being too shy to admit– would offer him private tuition after the
formal instruction ended at the lodge. Al-Sanūsī would bring his own dinner from home and share it
with his teacher after which they’d continue studying till the early hours of dawn, resulting in al-Sanūsī
at a later age becoming the local reference for any legal issues regarding inheritance.
6.1.4. Abū al-Ḥaṣṣan ʿAlī b. Muḥammad al-Basṭī al-Qarshī bil-Qālṣādī (d.891/1486)171
Emigrated from Baza, a southern town in the province of Granada, to Tlemcen in order to study with
Ibn Marzūq al-Ḥafīd. He was considered the authority in ḥisāb in Tlemcen. Of importance are his
extended stays Granada where he studied with Abū Isḥaq b. Futtūḥ and Abu ʿAbd Allah al-Sarqaṣṭī. In
Tlemcen he studied with Qāsim b. ʿUthmān al-ʿUqbānī and the sufi Abū ʿAbbāṣ Aḥmad b. Zāghū. In
Tunis, prior to his stay in Tlemcen, he studied with Ūqqāb al-Jadhāmī, an important direct student of
Ibn ʿArafa. He emigrated from Tlemcen to Beja where he passed away.172
170 The legal rules on how to calculate the division of inheritance among the rightful heirs and agnates.
171 `MB 25, Bustān 237, nayl 553. Note that this is a most likely a local variation of Abu al-Qalsadi
172 Al-qaṣādī, ʿAli b. Muhammad. Rihla. Ed. by Muhammad Abu al-Ajfan. Tunis: al-Shirkah al-
Tünisiyya li'l-Tawziʿ, 1978.
110
6.1.5. Al-Ḥassan b. Makhlūf al-Mazīlī al-Rāshidī (d.857/1453)173
Also known as Abarkān, an Amazīghī reference to the darkness of his skin. He studied with Ibrahīm al-
Maṣmūdī and Ibn Marzūq al-Hafīd in Tlemcen. In al-Bājah (Béja in current Algeria) the other major
intellectual node of the Maghrib he sat with ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Waghlīsi while in 14th century
Constantinople he studied with the famous mufti Abū ʿAbd-Allah al-Marākshī. Al-Sanūsī’s scholarly
relation with Abarkān is mostly centred around Maliki Fiqh (al-Mudawwanah) while his effect as a
spiritual guide on al-Sanūsī must not be neglected.
6.1.6. Abu al-Qāsim al-Kinābshi al-Bajāʾī (fl. 1440?)
Al-Kinābshi was a temporary resident or visitor of 15th century Tlemcen who taught, and authorized,
al-Sanūsī and his half-brother al-Talūtī the Irshād of al-Juwaynī. Aside from the reference to him by al-
Mallālī in the Mawāhib there seems no additional information or reference in any of the biographical
entries on al-Kinābshi. Even the specification that he is from Beja is a later addition by Tinbuktū in his
entry on the teachers of al-Sanūsī.
6.1.7. Abu Zayd b. Muḥammad b . Makhlūf al-Thaʿālabī al-Jazāʾirī (d. 876/1471)
Al-Sanūsī studied with him the Saḥīhayn (Saḥīḥ Bukhārī and Saḥīh Muslim). Al-Sanūsī travelled to
Algiers specifically to study with him. He and his half-brother, al-Talūtī, received their ijaza in the books
of hadith from al-Thaʿālabī. Al-Thaʿālabī himself is a student of the dominant scholarly circles of 8th
173 Bustān, 74-93
111
century Bāja, of which Abū Zayd ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Aḥmad al-Waghlīsī and the circle around Aḥmad
b. Idrīs, which included major scholars such as ʿUthmān al-Mānjalātī, Sulaymān b. al-Ḥassan, al-Buzaydī
al-Tilimsānī, Ibn Khaldūn. and Abū al-ʿAbbās al-Naqāwasī174. In Tunis he studied with Abū al-Qāsim al-
Birzilī (b. 844) and Abū ʿAbd-Allah Muḥammad b. Marzūq al-Ḥafīd who granted him the permission to
teach all the sciences (ajāzahu bikulli mirwayatihi). He is considered the main teacher of not only al-
Sanūsī, but also for al-Zarrūq, al-Maghīlī and Ibn Marzūq al-Kafīf.
6.1.8. Ibrahīm al-Tāzī al-Wahrāni (d. 866/1463)
Al-Tāzī s a prominent student of the Meccan scholar Ṭaqī al-dīn b. al-Fāsī and a student of Ibn Marzūq
al-Ḥafid. Referred to as shaykh al-shuyukh wa farīd ʿaṣrihi175 He took the ceremonial cloak (khirqa) from
the hands of Ṣāliḥ b. Muḥammad al-Zawāwī with a sanad to Abu Madyan, one of the foundational
figures of early Sufism in the Maghrib, in what seems to be a Silsila of the Qādiriyya path; he also took
the ways of Abū ʿAbd-Allah al-Huwārī for whom he will become the spiritual successor. He is a main
murshid for al-Sanūsī, Ṭalūtī, Ibn Saʿd and al-Zarrūq.176 Al-Sanūsī spent 25 days with him in at his private
quarters and lodge after which he was given the khirqa.177
6.1.9. Al-Qāḍī Abū ʿAbd-Allah Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Maghīlī ( d. 850/1446).
Often referred to as al-Qāḍī al-Jallāb. He was one of the main teachers of al-Wansharīshī as well as of al-
Sanūsī and seems to have been the main source of fiqh teachings for al-Sanūsī. He has a commentary
174 Rihlat al-thaʿalabi p 107-108
175 Bustān, 58; taʿrīf al-khalaf, 1/11
176 Nayl, 61, Bustān, 60
177 mawāhib, 45
112
on the Jumal of al-Khūnajī, an advanced work in logic, which later biographers consider a work al-
Sanūsī also studied with him. While the earlier sources limit the books studied under al-Jallāb to the
mudawwanah.
6.1.10. Abū ʿAbd-Allah Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Ḥabbāk al-Tilimsānī (d. 867/1463)
A master of astrolabe and astronomy in which he instructed al-Sanūsī. He’s mostly known particularly
as the teacher of Ibn Fahhām and as a maker of hydraulic clocks.
6.1.11. Muḥammad b. al-ʿAbbās al-ʿUbbādī ( d. 871/1467)178
Ibn. ʿAbbās al-Tilimsāni is Considered by Zarruq as shaykh al-shuyukh of his time in Tlemcen.179 He is a
student of b. Marzuq al-Hafid and Qāsim al-ʿUqbānī. Among his notable students are al-Māzūnī, b. Zikrī,
b. Saʿd al-Tunsī, b. Marzūq al-Kafīf, al-Sanūsī, and al-Wansharīsī.
6.1.12. Abū Ḥassan ʿalī b. Muḥammad al-Tālūtī al-Anṣārī al-Tilimsānī
Al-Talūtī is the half-brother of al-Sanūsī from his mother’s side. He taught him at young age the risālah
of Abu Zayḍ al-Qayrawānī and was known to have memorised b. Hājib’s seminal work in Maliki fiqh.
He was a close companion and disciple (murīd) of Abarkān. These two facts describe best the anecdotes
around his figure which all centre around his knowledge of fiqh and his pious character.
178 Bustān, 237
179 Sakhāwī, M. A.-R. (1966). al-Ḍawʼ al-lāmiʻ li-ahl al-qarn al-tāsiʻ. Bayrūt: Dār Maktabat al-hayāt vol 7. 276
113
6.2. Students of al-Sanūsī180
6.2.1. Abū al-ʿAbbās b. Aḥmad al-Fāsī al-Burunsī; Zarrūq ( d. 899/1494)
Perhaps the most famous or most studied student of al-Sanūsī. Originally from Fez he came to study
with al-Sanūsī and other spiritual giants in 15th century Tlemcen. Although he does not have a –known–
commentary on any of al-Sanūsī’s works the influence of al-Sanūsī can be seen in his usage of the
tripartite categorization of judgements and the condensation of all necessary creedal matters into this
categorization; as well as in a his commentary on Waransharīsī’s textbook which resembles al-Sanūsī’s
commentary on it. Yet his focus is more on the synthesis of the three core sciences via the methods
displayed in al-Ghazālī’s works181; and the subsequent development of learned Sufism in the region. 182
6.2.2. ʿUmar al-Mallāli (fl. 899/1494)
Considered the closest student to al-Sanūsī. Known mostly for his travels to West-Africa, the
hagiography of al-Sanūsī and a commentary on the Sughrā that was studied actively.183 Throughout his
biography on al-Sanūsī he mentions to have personally received several handwritten works and letters
from al-Sanūsī.
6.2.3. b. Ṣaʿd al-Tilimsānī (d. 901/1496)184
180 Nayl 324, Bustān 139
181 See Karimullah, Karimullah, ‘Aḥmad Zarrūq and the Ash`arite School’, 107–13.
182 For the understanding of Sufism developing into the genre of learned sufism see: Belhaj, ‘Legal Knowledge by Application: Sufism as Islamic Legal
Hermeneutics in the 10th/12th Centuries’.
183 It was for example the standard text in the curriculum for beginners for the Nāsiryya see Matthew Conaway Schumann, A path of Reverent Love: The
Nāṣiriyya brotherhood across Muslim Africa, 2020, 161
184 Bustān,247
114
Known particularly for his book al-najm al-thāqib fīmā l-awliyā Allah min Manāqib and Rawḍa alnasriyīn
fi manāqib al-Arbaʿa al-mutaʾkhirīn185, a hagiographical work where he describes the pious and
scholarly lives of the foundational saints of the 14-15th century. Which are respectively Muhammad b.
ʿUmar al-Huwārī al-Wahrānī, Ibrahīm al-Ṭāzī, Abarkān and Ibrahīm Aḥmad al-Ghumārī. All, except al-
Ghumārī, are part of al-Sanūsī’s core teachers. Bin Saʿd emigrated to Egypt where he is buried; and can
be considered the earliest student, along with Zarrūq, to reside in Egypt; although his focus was
predominantly on the dissemination of the spiritual learnings of his teacher, according to the Shādhilī
ṭarīqah.
6.2.4. Muḥammad b. Abī Madyan al-Tilimsānī (d. 915/1509).
The biographers mention him as extremely talented in the ma’qūlāt and especially Kalam. Supposed to
have commentaries on Al-Sanūsī’s theological works but so far have not been traced.
6.2.5. Ibrahīm b. ʿAbd al-Jabbār al-Fajījī (d. 920/1514)
Known for his extensive travels and student of Wansharīsi and al-Sanūsī. Has a gloss on al-Sanūsi’s
Kubrā (unpublished), as well as a work the Sughrā that covers the basic tenets of fiqh, learned sufism
and creed.186
6.2.6. Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. al-Ḥāj al-Warnīdī al-Manāwī (918/1511)
185 See Yaḥyā bū Aziz, ANEP, 2004, Algeria
186 Tarif al-khalaf, vol. 1, 8-9
115
A prominent student of al-Sanūsī’s contemporary b. Zikri with whom he studied most of the sciences.
He has a commentary on Sanusi’s Sughrā. According to b. Maryam– who was a student of al-Warnīdī –
he was referred to by his contemporaries as Aḥmad al-Jiblī.187
6.2.7. Abū ʿAbd Allah Muḥammad b. al-ʿAbbās al-Tilimsānī (d. 915/1509)
Originally from Oran but emigrated at a young age to Tlemcen where he studied with al-Sanūsī and b.
Zikri. Travelled to Fez where he studied with b. Ghāzī and was known for the large gatherings at his
creedal classes. Al-Manjūr is one of students to whom he taught the Sughrā. He returned to Tlemcen
where he was buried.188
6.2.8. Mohammed b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Ḥawḍī al-Tilimsānī (d. 910/1504)
Authors a creedal poem as a commentary on the Murshida creed by Ibn Tumart (d. 524/1130) with a
focus on the spiritual aspects and benefits of creedal knowledge. On request of his student al-Sanūsī
writes a commentary on the poem.
6.2.9. Muḥammad al-Qalʿī (fl. 1510)
Considered one of the strongest students of al-Sanūsī. Of particular interest are the students al-Madyūnī
al-Waharānī (b. 951) and Musā al-Magrāwī al-Tilimsāni al-Rāshidī, and Abū Yaʿqūb Yūsuf al-ʿAṭāfī. They
reportedly brought al-Sanūsī’s creedal works to banī Rāshid and ignited the Amazīghī translations of
187 Bustān, 23
188 Tarif al-khalaf, 2/42
116
these creedal works.189 An anecdote worth mentioning in terms of the spiritual and scholarly legacyal-
Sanūsī had and his impact on his student. It’s mentioned that a young student Yaḥyā b. Muḥammad al-
Madyūnī, together with his teacher al-Qalʿī, accompanied al-Sanūsī for several years, and studied the
inward and outward sciences with them. After the death of his teacher he was known to have ‘camped’
for several years at the grave of al-Sanūsī selling his household items in order to sustain himself.
7. Bibliography
Abū Dharr al-Harawī, ʻAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad, Jamāl ʻAllāl Bakhtī, Aḥmad ʻAbbādī. Fikr al-Ashʿarī Bi al-
Maghrib Khilāl al-Marḥalāt al-Taʼsīs wa al-Tarsīm: Al-Muʼaṭṭirāt al-Mashriqiyya wa-al-Khuṣūṣiyāt al-
Maḥalliya: Travaux du premier Forum International Sur La Pensée Asha’rite Organisé Par La Rabita
Mohammedia Des Oulémas. Rabat: al-Rābiṭah al-Muḥammadīyah lil-ʻUlamāʾ, 2017.
Antrim, Zayde. Routes and Realms : The Power of Place in the Early Islamic World. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2012.
Arfa Mensia, Mokdad. “Regards d’ibn Rushd Sur Juwaynī: Question de Methode.” Arabic Sciences and
Philosophy : A Historical Journal 22, no. 2 (2012): 199–216.
Bābā, Aḥmad ibn Aḥmad, Ibrāhīm ibn ʻAlī Ibn Farḥūn, and Ḥamāh Allāh Wuld al-Sālim. Nayl Al-Ibtihāj Bi-
Taṭrīz al-Dībāj. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah, 2013.
Bājī, ʿAbd al-Qādir. Idāra Al-Shumūs ʿalā Hayāt Wa Aʿmāl al-Sanūsī. Algeria: Dār Kardādah lil-nashr wa altawzī
ʿ, 2011.
189 Al-Bustān 276; the banu rashid tribe is notorious for their (sporadic) alliance with the Spanish military forces in order to expel and counter the
Ottoman expansion over the lands.
117
Bakhtī, Jamāl ʻAllāl. ʿUthmān Al-Salalijī Wa Madhabihi al-Ashʿariyya: Dirāsa li-Jānib min al-Fikr al-Kalāmī Bi
al-Maghrib Min Khilāl al-Burhāniyya Wa Shurūḥihā. Rabat: al-Mamlakah al-Maghribīyah, Wizārat al-
Awqāf wa-al-Shuʼūn al-Islāmīyah, 2005.
Bakrī, ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-. Kitab al-Maghrib [= Description de l’Afrique Septentrionale].
Description de l’Afrique Septentrionale. Alger: Imprimerie du Gouvernement, 1857.
———. Kitāb Al-Masālik Wa-al-Mamālik. Masālik Wa-l-Mamālik. Tūnis: al-Dār al-ʿArabiyya li-al-Kitāb,
1992.
Barny, Frederick J. “The Creed of Al-Sanūsī.” The Moslem World 24 (1934): 44.
Bauer, Thomas. A Culture of Ambiguity: An Alternative History of Islam. New York: Columbia University
Press, 2021.
Belhaj, Abdessamad. “Legal Knowledge by Application: Sufism as Islamic Legal Hermeneutics in the
10th/12th Centuries.” Studia Islamica 108 (January 1, 2013): 82–107.
Bellver, José. “‘Al-Ghazālī of al-Andalus’: Ibn Barrajān, Mahdism, and the Emergence of Learned Sufism on
the Iberian Peninsula.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 133, no. 4 (2013): 659–81.
Bin-Farḥī, al-Saʻīd. Al-Nubūgh al-Maghribī: ʻAbd Allāh Kannūn Namūdhajan. Casablanca: Idīsiyūn Blūs, 2017.
Bolandhematan, Keyvan. “Spiritual Education in Islamic Tradition: Revisiting Ghazali’s ‘Deliverance.’”
Religious Education 114, no. 2 (2019): 110–29.
Brockelmann, Carl. Brockelmann in English: The History of the Arabic Written Tradition Online. Leiden: Brill,
2017.
Brown, Leon Carl. “Maghrib Historiography: The Unit of Analysis Problem.” The Maghrib in Question Essays
in History and Historiography. -, 1997.
118
Bruckmayr, Philipp. “The Šarḥ/Ḥāšiya Phenomenon in Southeast Asia.” MIDÉO. Mélanges de l’Institut
Dominicain d’études Orientales, no. 32 (May 15, 2017): 27–52.
Burke, Edmund, and Robert J. Mankin. Islam and World History: The Ventures of Marshall Hodgson. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 2018.
Cahen, Claude. “Quelques Mots Sur Les Hilaliens Et Le Nomadisme.” Journal of The Economic and Social
History of The Orient - J ECON SOC HIST ORIENT 11 (March 1, 1968).
Casewit, Yousef. The Mystics of Al-Andalus: Ibn Barrajan and Islamic Thought in the Twelfth Century.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Casey, Edward S. “Between Geography and Philosophy: What Does it Mean to Be in the Place-World?”
Annals of the Association of American Geographers 91, no. 4 (2001): 683–93.
Çelik, Ahmet. “Muhammed b. Yûsuf Es-Senûsî’nin Kelâm Anlayışında Mârifetullah-Akıl İlişkisi.”
Cumhuriyet Ilahiyat Dergisi 21, no. 2 (2017): 1355–82.
Chemouilli, Henri. Une Diaspora Méconnue: Les Juifs d’Algérie. Paris: Imprimerie Moderne de la Presse,
1976.
Collingwood, R.G. The New Leviathan, or Man, Society, Civilization and Barbarism. Revised ed.by David
Boucher. New Leviathan. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992.
Cornell, Vincent J. Realm of the Saint: Power and Authority in Moroccan Sufism. 1st ed. Austin: University of
Texas Press, 1998.
Dabbāgh, ʻAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Muḥammad. Maʻālim al-Īmān Fī Maʻrifat ahl al-Qayrawān. [second edition].
Cairo: Maktabat al-Khānjī, 1968.
119
Davidson, James D, and Gary J Quinn. “Theological and Sociological Uses of the Concept ‘Orthodoxy.”
Review of Religious Research 18, no. 1 (1976): 74–80.
Davis, Diana K. Resurrecting the Granary of Rome: Environmental History and French Colonial Expansion in
North Africa. Athens: Ohio University Press, 2007.
Diakhaté, Khassim. “Al-Sanûsî, Un Africain Asha’rite Au 15ème Siècle,” Paris: Presse Universitaire, 2001.
Eichner, Heidrun. “The Post-Avicennian Philosophical Tradition and Islamic Orthodoxy: Philosophical and
Theological Summae in Context.” Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, 2009.
Eliot, Samuel. “Faith of a Historian.” The American Historical Review, January 1951.
El-Rouayheb, Khaled. Islamic Intellectual History in the Seventeenth Century Scholarly Currents in the
Ottoman Empire and the Maghreb. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
Faḍālī, Muḥammad b. Muḥammad. Muhammedanische Glaubenslehre: Die Katechismen Des Fudālī Und Des
Sanusi. Bonn: Marcus und Weber, 1916.
Fāsī, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Muḥammad and al-Sanūsī, Muḥammad b. Yūsuf. Al-Ḥawāšī al-Fāʾiqa Ḏāt al-Taḥrīr
al-Rāʾiqa, Ǧamʿ Abī Zayd ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al- Fāsī al-ʿĀrif, Muḥallā Hāmišuhā Bi-Šarḥ Abī ʿAbd Allāh al-
Sanūsī ʿalā Ṣuġrāhu Fī al-ʿaqāʾid. ʿAqīda Al-Ṣuġrā. Fez: al-ʿArabī al-Azraq, 1890.
Fierro, Maribel. Maghrib in the Mashriq : Knowledge, Travel and Identity. De Gruyter 2021.
———. “Original Islam. Malik and the Madhhab of Madina.” ILS 16, no. 2 (2009): 231–33.
Fierro, Maribel, and Mayte Penelas, eds. The Maghrib in the Mashriq : Knowledge, Travel and Identity. Berlin,
2021.
Geertz, Clifford. Islam Observed : Religious Development in Morocco and Indonesia. [Phoenix Edition].
Religious Development in Morocco and Indonesia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971.
120
Al-Ghazālī, Ḥāmid al-Iqtiṣād Fī al-Iʻtiqād. Miṣr: Maktabat al-Jundī, 1972.
al-Ghazāli. Fayṣal Al-Tafriqah Bayna al-Islām Wa-al-Zandaqah Maʻa al-Risālah al-Waʻẓīyah Wa-Kitāb
Mushkāt al-Anwār Wa-Risālat al-ʻAqāʾid wa-al-Waʻẓ Ilá Malik Shāh Wa-Risālat al-Tawḥīd. Wa-Yalīhum
Kitāb al-Tajrīd Fī Kalimat al-Tawḥīd Li-Aḥmad Ibn Muḥammad al-Ghazzālī. al-Astānah: Jamālī wa-
Khānjī, 1907.
Gimaret, Daniel. La Doctrine d’al-Ashʻarī. Paris: Cerf, 1990.
Goitein, Shelomo Dov. A Mediterranean Society : The Jewish Communities of the Arab World as Portrayed in
the Documents of the Cairo Geniza. Berkely: University of California Press, 1994.
Graf, Gunhild. “ʿIlm Al-Kalām in Mauretanien Anhand Maurischer Kommentare Zur Iḍāʾat Ad-Duǧunna Fī
Iʿtiqād Ahl as-Sunna von al-Maqqarī (St. 1041/1632).” Asiatische Studien 72, no. 3 (2018): 751–94.
Ḥāmidī, Ismāʻīl ibn Mūsá. Ḥawāshin ʻalá Sharḥ Al-Kubrá Lil-Sanūsī. Ḥawāshin ʻalá ʻUmdat Ahl Al-Tawfīq
Wa-al-Tasdīd Sharḥ ʻAqīdat Ahl al-Tawḥīd al-Kubrá. Cairo: Maṭbaʻat Muṣṭafá al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī, 1936.
Hannoum, Abdelmajid. “Translation And The Colonial Imaginary: Ibn Khaldûn Orientalist.” History and
Theory 42, no. 1 (2003): 61–81.
Ḥasan, Jamāl al-Dīn Būqalī. Imām Ibn Yūsuf al-Sanūsī wa- ʻIlm al-Tawḥīd. Algeria: al-Muʼassasah al-
Waṭanīyah lil-Kitāb, 1985.
Ḥashlāf, ʻAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad. Silsilat al-Uṣūl fī Shajarat Abnāʼ al-Rasūl. Tunis: al-Maṭbaʻah al-
Tūnisīyah, 1929.
Hodgson, Marshall G. S. The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization. 3 vols. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1974.
121
Ḥubayshī, Ṭāhā al-Dasūqī. Aḥmad Zarrūq: Sirah Wa-Masīrah. al-ʻAjūzah, Cairo: Maktabat al-Īmān lil-Nashr
wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2013.
Humphreys, R. Stephen. Islamic History: A Framework for Inquiry. Princeton University Press, 2020.
Hunwick, John Owen. “A Region of the Mind: Medieval Arab Views of African Geography and Ethnography
and Their Legacy,” 2005.
Hurvitz, Nimrod. “Theology, Law and Social Configuration: Views and Attitudes towards Theological
Innovators (Mubtadiʿūn).” Al-Masaq 33, no. 2 (2021): 205–18.
ʻAbd Allāh, Muḥammad Ramaḍān. Al-Bāqillānī Wa-Ārāʼuhu al-Kalāmīyah. Baghdād: al-Jumhūrīyah al-
ʻIrāqīyah, Wizārat al-Awqāf wa-al-Shuʼūn al-Dīnīyah, Iḥyā, al-Turāth al-Islāmī, 1986.
Ibn Abī Zarʻ al-Fāsī, ʻAlī ibn ʻAbd Allāh. Anīs Al-Muṭrib Bi-Rawd al-Qirṭās Fī Akhbār Mulūk al-Maghrib Wa-
Tārīkh Madīnat Fās. Rawḍ Al-Qirṭās. al-Rabāṭ: Dār al-Manṣūr, 1972.
Ibn al-Zayyāt. al-Tashawwuf ilā Rijāl al-Taṣawwuf waAakhbār Abī al-ʿAbbās al-Sabtī. Rabat Manshūrāt
Kulliyyāt al-Adab wa-l-ʿUlūm al-Insāniyya, 1984.
Ibn al-Shaykh, Muḥammad al-Ḥifnāwī. Taʻrīf Al-Khalaf Bi-Rijāl al-Salaf. Al-Ṭabʻah 1. Bayrūt : Tūnis:
Muʾassasat al-Risālah, 1982.
Ibn al-Tilimsānī, ʻAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad. Sharḥ Lumaʿ Al-Adillah Fī Qawāʿid Ahl al-Sunna. al-Kuwayt:
Dār al-Ḍiyāʼ lil-Nashr wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2018.
———. Sharḥ Maʿālim Uṣūl Al-Dīn. al-Qāhirah: al-Maktabah al-Azharīyah lil-Turāth : al-Jazīrah lil-Nashr
wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2011.
Ibn ʻArafah al-Warghamī, Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad. Al-Mukhtaṣar al-Fiqhī. Bayrūt: Dār al-Madār al-
Islāmī, 2003.
122
Ibn Khaldūn, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Muḥammad. Al-Muqaddimah. Al-Ṭabʻah 1. al-Dār al-Bayḍāʼ: Khizānat Ibn
Khaldūn, Bayt al-Funūn wa-al-ʻUlūm wa-al-Ādāb, 2005.
———. Histoire Des Berbères et Des Dynasties Musulmanes de l’Afrique Septentrionale. Nouv. éd. publ. sous
la dir. de Paul Casanova et suivie d’une bibliographie d’Ibn Khaldoun. Paris : Geuther, 1925.
Ibn Maryam al-Sharīf al-Malītī al-Madyūnī al-Tilimsānī, Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad, and
Muḥammad Bin Abī Shanab. Al-Bustān Fī Dhikr al-Awliyāʼ Wa-al-ʻulamāʼ Bi-Tilimsān. Al-Jazāʼir: Al-
Maṭbaʻah al-Thaʻālibīyah, 1908.
Idris, Roger. “De La Réalité de La Catastrophe Hilâlienne.” Annales Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales 23,
no. 2 (1968): 390–96.
Iḥnāna, Yūsuf. Taṭawwur Al-Madhhab al-Ashʿarī Fī al-Gharb al-Islāmī,. Rabat]: Wizārat al-Awqāf wa-l-
Shuʾūn al-Islāmiyya, 2003.
Imām al-Ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī, ʻAbd al-Malik ibn ʻAbd Allāh, Aḥmad ʻAbd al-Raḥīm, and Tawfīq ʻAlī
Wahbah. Kitāb Al-Irshād Ilá Qawāṭiʻ al-Adillah Fī Uṣūl al-Iʻtiqād. Al-Ṭabʻah 1. al-Qāhirah: Maktabat al-
Thaqāfah al-Dīnīyah, 2009.
Imām al-Ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī, ʻAbd al-Malik ibn ʻAbd Allāh, and Abū ʻAbd al-Raḥmān Ṣalāḥ ibn
Muḥammad Ibn ʻUwayḍah. Al-Burhān Fī Uṣūl al-Fiqh. Bayrūt, Lubnān: Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah, 1997.
Jan Thiele. “Facing the Mahdī’s True Belief: Abū ʿAmr al-Salālijī’s Ashʿarite Creed and the Almohads’ Claim
to Religious Authority.” Al-ʻUṣūr al-Wusṭá 26, no. 1 (2018).
J.-D, Luciani. Les Prolégomènes Théologiques de Senoussi / Texte Arabe et Traduction Française, Par J.-D.
Luciani. impr. P. Fontana (Alger), 1908.
123
Karagöz, Nail. “Senûsî’ni̇n Ümmü’l-berâhi̇n Adli Ri̇salesi̇nde Peygamberleri̇n Sifatlarinin İspatinda
Kullanilan İsti̇dlâller.” Kader (Online) 16, no. 1 (2018): 113–28.
Karimullah, Kamran. “Aḥmad Zarrūq and the Ash`arite School,” MA Thesis, Mc Gill University, 2007.
Kenny, J. P. “Muslim Theology as Presented by Yusuf As-Sanusi- Especially in His al-’Aqida al-Wusta.”
University of Edinburgh, 1971.
King, Matt. “Reframing the Fall of the Zirid Dynasty, 1112–35 CE,” 2018.
Kugle, Scott Alan. Rebel between Spirit and Law: Aḥmad Zarruq, Sainthood, and Authority in Islam.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006.
Laroui, Abdallah. The History of the Maghrib. Translated by Ralph Manheim. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 1977.
Long, Micol, Tjamke Snijders, and Steven Vanderputten. Horizontal Learning in the High Middle Ages : Peerto-
Peer Knowledge Transfer in Religious Communities. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2019.
———. Horizontal Learning in the High Middle Ages : Peer-to-Peer Knowledge Transfer in Religious
Communities. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2019.
Macmillan, Palgrave, and Mary Ann Fay. Autobiography and the Construction of Identity and Community in
the Middle East. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016.
Majdūb, ʻAbd al-ʻAzīz. Al-Qāḍī Abū Bakr al-Bāqillānī Wa-Ārāʼuhu al-Kalāmīyah Wa-al-Falsafīyah. Al-Ṭabʻah
1. Bayrūt: Dār Ibn Ḥazm lil-Ṭibāʻah wa-al-Nashr wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2009.
Mallālī, Muḥammad al-. Al-Mawāhib al-Qudusiyya Fī Manāqib al-Sanūsiyyah. Edited by ʿIlāl Burbīq. Algeria:
Dār kardādah lil-nashr wa al-tawzīʿ, 2011.
124
Mallālī, Muḥammad al-, and Muḥammad Baskar. Sharḥ Al-Mallālī al-Tilimsānī ʻalá Umm al-Barāhīn al-
Maʻrifah Bi-al-ʻAqīdah al-Ṣughrá Lil-Shaykh Muḥammad Ibn Yūsuf al-Sanūsī, t 895 H. Al-Ṭabʻah al-Ūlá.
Bū Saʻādah, al-Jazāʼir: Dār Kardādah lil-Nashr wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2013.
Manjūr, Aḥmad ibn ʻAlī, and ʻAbd al-Razzāq Daḥmūn. Mukhtaṣar Naẓm Al-Farāʼid Wa-Mubdī al-Fawāʼid Fī
Sharḥ Muḥaṣṣil al-Maqāṣid Li-Ibn Zakrī al-Tilimsānī, 900 H. Al-Ṭabʻah al-Ūlá. Bayrūt: Dār Ibn Ḥazm lil-
Ṭibāʻah wa-al-Nashr wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2014.
Maqqarī, Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad. Nafḥ Al-Ṭīb. Miṣr: al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī, 1936.
Marçais, W. Les Arabes en Berbérie du XIe au XIVe siècle. Constantine: D. Braham, 1913.
Marshall G. S. Hodgson, Hodgson. The Venture of Islam, Volume 2: The Expansion of Islam in the Middle
Periods. Vol. 56766. University of Chicago Press, 2009.
Mohamed Bilal-Achmal. “Textos Del Legado Aš a̔ ri Magrebí. Al-‘Aqīda al-Burhāniyya al-Aš a̔ riyya de
Abū A̔ mr al-Salālŷī al-Fāsī.” Al-Qantara (Madrid) 34, no. 1 (2013): 205–13.
Montgomery, Scott L. Science in Translation : Movements of Knowledge through Cultures and Time. Chicago
[etc.] : The University of Chicago Press, 2000.
Muhammad Dawilah al-Edrus, Syed. “Role of Kitab Jawi in the Development of Islamic Thought in the
Malay Archipelago with Special Reference to Umm Al-Barāhīn and the Writings on the Twenty
Attributes.” The University of Edinburgh, 1995.
Muqtaraḥ, Taqī al-Dīn Abū al-ʻIzz Muẓaffar ibn ʻAbd Allāh. Sharḥ Al-ʿAqīda al-Burhāniyya Wa Fuṣūl al-
Imān. Bayrūt: Dār Maktabat al-Maʻārif, 2010.
Nafrāwī, Aḥmad ibn Ghunaym. Al-Fawākih al-Dawānī ʻalá Risālat Ibn Abī Zayd al-Qayrawānī. Beirut: Dār al-
Fikr, 2000.
125
Navādī, Muḥammad. Al-Isʹhāmāt al-Fikriyah Lil-ʻAllāmah al-Ābilī al-Tilimsānī Bi-al-Ḥawāḍir al-
Maghāribīyah. Tilimsān, al-Jazāʼir: al-Nashr al-Jadīd al-Jāmiʻī, 2016.
Nsiri, Mohamed-Arbi. “Between Jerome and Augustine of Hippo: Some Intellectual Preoccupations of Late
Antiquity,” 1st ed., 98–114. Routledge, 2019.
Olson, Caitlyn. “Beyond the Avicennian Turn: The Creeds of Muḥammad b. Yūsuf al-Sanūsī (d. 895/1490).”
Studia Islamica 115, no. 1 (2020): 101–40.
Poncet, J. “Le Mythe de La ‘Catastrophe’ Hilalienne.” Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales 22, no. 5 (1967):
1099–1120.
Qābisī, ʻAlī ibn Muḥammad. Al-Risālah al-Mufaṣṣilah Li-Aḥwāl al-Mutaʻallimīn Wa-Aḥkām al-Muʻallimīn
Wa-al-Mutaʻallimīn. Al-Ṭabʻah 1. Epitre Détaillée Sur Les Situations Des Élèves, Leurs Règles de
Conduite et Celles Des Maîtres. Tūnis: al-Sharikah al-Tūnisīyah lil-Tawzīʻ, 1986.
Qādī ʻIyāḍ ibn Mūsá. Tartīb Al-Madārik Wa-Taqrīb al-Masālik Li-Maʻrifat Aʻlām Madhhab Mālik. Al-Fihris al-
ʻāmm Li-Kitāb al-Madārik. Bayrūt : Ṭarābulus, Lībīyā : Dār Maktabat al-Fikr: Dar Maktabat al-Ḥayāh,
19.
Qāsīmī, Murād. “Abū-l-‘Abbās Aḥmad Ibn Muḥammad al-Maqqarī al-Tilimsānī: Su Vida, Formación y
Obras.” Revista Argelina, no. 1 (2015).
Qayrawānī, ʿAbd Allāh Ibn Abī Zayd al-. al-Risāla. al-Qāhira, 1920.
Razi Jusoh. The Malay Exposition of Al-Sanūsī’s Umm al-Barahin. First edition. Batu Caves, Selangor,
Malaysia: Islamic and Strategic Studies Institute Berhad, 2016.
Romanelli, Pietro. Storia Delle Province Romane Dell’ Africa. Roma : “L’Erma” di Bretschneider, 1959.
126
Rouighi, Ramzi. “A Mediterranean of Relations for the Medieval Maghrib: Historiography in Question.” Al-
Masaq 29, no. 3 (2017): 201–20.
———. Inventing the Berbers: History and Ideology in the Maghrib. Inventing the Berbers. The Middle Ages
Series. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2019.
———. “The Mediterranean between Barbaria and the Medieval Maghrib: Questions for a Return to
History.” Al-Masaq 32, no. 3 (2020): 310–31.
Saktānī, ʻĪsá ibn ʻAbd al-Raḥmān, Aḥmad ʻĀrif Dhū al-Kifl, and Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf Sanūsī. Ḥāshiyat Al-
Saktānī ʻalá Sharḥ Umm al-Barāhīn Lil-Sanūsī. Al-Ṭabʻah al-Ūlá. al-Qāhirah: Dār al-Ṣāliḥ, 2021.
Samet, Moshe. “The Beginnings of Orthodoxy.” Modern Judaism 8, no. 3 (1988): 249–69.
al-Sanūsī, Muḥammad b. Yūsuf. ʿUmdat Ahl Al-Tawfīq Wa-l-Tasdīd Fī Sharḥ ʿAqīda Ahl al-Tawḥīd [=Sharḥ al-
Kubrā]. Damascus: Dār al-Taqwá lil-Ṭibāʻah wa-al-Nashr wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2019.
———, Muḥammad b. Yūsuf. Rasāʼil Al-Imām Abī ʻAbd Allāh Muḥammad Bin Yūsuf al-Sanūsī : Al-
Mutawaffá Sanat 895 fī ʻilm al-ʻAqīdah ʻalá Manhaj al-Ashāʻirah. Al-Ṭabʻah al-Ūlá. al-Dār al-Bayḍāʼ: Dār
al-Rashād al-Ḥadīthah, 2013.
———, Muḥammad b. Yūsuf. Maʿa Ibn Yūsuf Al-Sanūsī al-Imām: Tafsīr Sūra al-Fātiḥa Wa Risāla Fi al-Ṭibb
al-Nabawī. Edited by ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Kutubī. Algeria: Dār kardādah lil-nashr wa al-tawzīʿ, 2011.
———Sharḥ al-Muqaddimāt. Rabat: Wizārat al-Awqāf wa-l-Shuʾūn al-Islāmiyya, 1990.
———Sharḥ ʿalā Risālatihi Al-Mawsūma Bi-Ṣuġrā al-Ṣuġrā / Wa-Bi-Hāmišihi: Al-Mawāhib al-Rabbāniyya Fī
Sharḥ al-Muqaddimāt al-Sanūsiyya / Li-Ibrāhīm b. ʿAlī al-Saraqusṭī. Mawāhib Al-Rabbāniyya Fī Sharḥ
al-Muqaddimāt al-Sanūsiyya. al-Qāhira, 1906.
127
———. Sharḥ al-ʿaqīda al-Sughrā, Wa Huwa Sharḥ al-ʿaqīda al-Musammā Bi “Umm al-Barāhīn.” Edited by
ʿadnān Anas. Damascus: Dār al-Taqwá lil-Ṭibāʻah wa-al-Nashr wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2019.
———. Sharḥ Al-̵ʿAqīda al-Wusṭā. Edited by ʿAdnān Anas. Damascus: Dār al-Taqwá lil-Ṭibāʻah wa-al-Nashr
wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2019.
———. Sharḥ Sughrā Al-Sughrā. Edited by ʿAdnān Anas. Damascus: Dār al-Taqwá lil-Ṭibāʻah wa-al-Nashr
wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2019.
———. Sharḥ Wāsiṭat Al-Sulūk. Edited by Nizār Ḥammādī. Dimashq: Dār al-Taqwá lil-Ṭibāʻah wa-al-Nashr
wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2019.
———. ʿUmdat Ahl Al-Tawfīq Wa-al-Tasdīd / Hidāyat al-Murīd Li-ʿaqīdat Ahl al-Tawḥīd / Comm. van
Muḥammad ʿIllīš. Iḍāʾat al-Duǧunna Fī Iʿtiqād Ahl al-Sunna / al- Maqqarī. al-Futūḥāt al-Ilāhiyya al-
Wahbiyya / Comm. van Muḥammad ʿIllīš. Hidāyat Al-Murīd Li-ʿaqīdat Ahl al-Tawḥīd. al-Qāhira, 1888.
Schwarzfuchs, Simon. Tlemcen: mille ans d’histoire d’une communaute juive. Paris: La Fraternelle, Union
nationale des amis de Tlemcen, 1995.
Shihadeh, Ayman, and Jan Thiele. Philosophical Theology in Islam : Later Ashʻarism East and West. Leiden:
Brill, 2020.
Stock, Brian. Implications of Literacy: Written Language and Models of Interpretation in the 11th and 12th
Centuries. Princeton University Press, 2021.
Ṭanjī, Abu al-Ḥasan ʻAlī ibn ʻAbd al-Raḥmān al-Yafranī, and Jamāl ʻAllāl Bakhtī. Al-Mabāḥith al-ʻaqlīyah fī
Sharḥ Maʻānī al-ʻAqīdah al-Burhānīyah. Rabat: al-Rābiṭah al-Muḥammadīyah lil-ʻUlamāʼ, 2017.
Taqī al-dīn, al-Muqtaraḥ, ed. Nizār Ḥammādī, and ʻUthmān ibn ʻAlī Salālijī. Sharḥ al-ʻAqīdah al-Burhānīyah
Wa-al-Fuṣūl al-Īmānīyah.Beirut: Dār Maktabat al-Maʻārif, 2010.
128
Tarjamat al-Imām al-Sanūsī Ṣāḥib al-Aṣl wa-al-Sharḥ Mulakhkhaṣah Min al-Imām al-Sanūsīyah li-Sīdī
Aḥmad Bābā al-Timbuktī. Fes: Dār al-Maʿārif, 1891.
Touati, Houari. Entre Dieu et Les Hommes : Lettrés, Saints et Sorciers Au Maghreb (17e Siècle). Paris: Éditions
de l’École de hautes études en sciences sociales, 1994.
———. Islam & Travel in the Middle Ages. Islam and Travel in the Middle Ages. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 2010.
Turner, Bryan S. “Revisiting Weber and Islam: Revisiting Weber and Islam.” The British Journal of Sociology
61 (January 14, 2010): 161–66.
Vajda, Georges, ed. Les certificats de lecture et de transmission dans les manuscrits arabes de la Bibliothèque
nationale de Paris. Publications de l’Institut de Recherche et d’Histoire des Textes 6. Paris: Ed. du
Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1956.
Watt, William Montgomery. Islamic Philosophy and Theology : An Extended Survey. 2nd edition. Edinburgh :
Edinburgh University Press, 1984.
Watt, William Montgomery. Islamic Creeds. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1994.
Yāqūt b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥamawī. Kitāb Muʿjam al-Buldān. Jacut’s Geographisches Wörterbuch. Leipzig:
Brockhaus, 1866.
Zahrī, Khālid. al-Fiqh al-Mālikī Wa-al-Kalām al-Ashʻarī: Muḥāwalah Li-Ibrāz Baʻḍ Malāmiḥ al-Ibdāʻ al-
Kalāmī Wa-al-Ṣūfī ʻinda Fuqahāʼ al-Maghrib. Casablanca: Dār al-Rashād al-Ḥadīthah, 2011.
———. Al-Maṣādir al-Andalusīyah Li-ʻilm al-Kalām : Al-Masār Wa-al-Taḥawwulāt Wa-al-Khaṣāʼiṣ.
Andalucian References to Theology. Rabat: al-Rābiṭah al-Muḥammadīyah lil-ʻUlamāʼ, 2020.
129
———. Al-Maṣādir al-Maghribīyah lil-ʻAqīdah al-Ashʻarīyah: Bibliyūghrāfiyā Wa-Dirāsah Bibliyūmitrīyah.
Rabat: al-Rābiṭah al-Muḥammadīyah lil-ʻUlamāʼ, 2017.
———. Min ʿIlm al-Kalām ilā Fiqh al-Kalām: Muqāraba li-Ibrāz Maʿālim al-Tajdīd al-Kalāmī ʿind Fuqahāʾ
Wa-Ṣūfiyat al-Maghrib. Kuwait: Dār al-Ḍiyāʼ lil-Nashr wa-al-Tawzīʻ, 2017.
———. Thalath `Aqaid Ash`ariyah. Tetouan [Morocco]; al-Mamlakah al-Maghribiyah: Markaz Abi al-
Hassan al-Ashʿari lil-Dirasat wa-al-Buhuth al-ʿAqadiyah ; al-Rabitah al-Muhammadiyah lil-ʿUlama,
2012.
Zahrī, Khālid, and Muṣṭafá Bū ʻAnānī. Al-Taṣawwuf al-Maghribī Maṣdar Ishʻāʻ Wa-Tawāṣul: Aʻmāl Muhdāh
Lil-Ustādhah Nafīsah al-Dhahabī. al-Qunayṭirah [Morocco]: Kullīyat al-Adab wa-al-ʻUlūm al-
Insānīyah, Jāmiʻat Ibn Ṭufayl, 2015.
Zahrī, Khālid, and ʿAbd al-Majīd Bukārī. Fihris al-Kutub al-Makhṭūṭa fī l-ʿAqīda al-Ashʿariyya. 2 vols. Rabat,
2011.
Zarrūq, Aḥmad ibn Aḥmad. Al-Shaykh Aḥmad Zarrūq: Ārāʼuhu al-Iṣlāḥīyah, Taḥqīq Wa-Dirāsah Li-Kitābihi
ʻUddat al-Murīd al-Ṣādiq. Rabat: al-Mamlakah al-Maghribīyah, Wizārat al-Awqāf wa-al-Shuʼūn al-
Islāmīyah, 1998.
ʿArwī, ʿAbd Allāh. L’histoire Du Maghreb: Un Essai de Synthèse. Casablanca : Centre Culturel Arabe, 2011.
130
131