This An account of the work in connection with the cited anecdote. work of the great Mu‘tazilite commentator and philologist Abu’l Qásim Maḥmúd b. ‘Umar az-Zamakhsharí*, surnamed Járu’llah, (d. 1143 A. D.) is quoted in the Jawámi‘ only once in connection with the traditional account of the extinction of the fabulous bird ‘Anqá’, (D. f93a. IV. xxiv. 2067). In the words of az-Zamakhsharí as quoted by H. Khalfa*: “This work is designed to inflame the minds of the readers of the Kashsháf ‘an Ḥaqá’iqi’t-Tanzíl, and to direct the attention of the wearied minds towards the sources of its information and its secrets”. The complete work is called the Rabi‘u’l-Abrár wa Nuṣúṣu’l-Akhyár, of which various later selections are enumerated in Brockelmann. One of these selections is entitled the Rawdhu’l-Akhyár*, and quotations from this work are generally found in works on Tradition and the Qur’ánic sciences, e. g. the passage in question is found in ad-Damírí’s Ḥayátu’l-Ḥayawánu’l-Kubrá* also. This anecdote is found in the fourteenth Rawdha* dealing with the Angels, the Jinn, the Demons, and the Animals, where the account of the extinction of the ‘Anqá’ is recorded on the authority of the early commentator ‘Abdu’llah b. ‘Abbás. In this very anecdote al-‘Awfí cites another version from Muḥammad b. Sá’ib al-Kalbí’s Commentary as noticed above*, and both these quotations are faithfully translated.

This The Risála as a ground-work for a few anecdotes about the Súfís. famous tract on Ṣúfism by Abu’l-Qásim ‘Abdu’l-Karím b. Hawázin al-Qushayrí* (b. 376 d. 465 A. H. = 986-1073 A. D.) is one of the acknowledged sources of the Jawámi‘. It was composed in 437 A. H. = 1045-6 A. D., as Dr. Nicholson* observes, “with the avowed object of demonstrating that the history and traditions of Ṣúfism are bound up with strict observance of the Mohammedan religious law”, and Goldziher* characterises it as “eine Reaktion der positiven Gesetzlichkeit gegen den Nihilismus der Mystik”. Although al-‘Awfí had no intention of writing either a systematic account of the development of Ṣúfism or strictly chronological or class-wise biographies of the Ṣúfís, as the author of the original had in view, the choice of the Risála as a ground-work for his sketches of the lives of the saints in pt. I, ch. iii, reflects to a certain extent the moderate Ṣúfism to which our author was devoted. His main interest lying in anecdotal illustration and biographic details, he selected only those portions of the Risála, which is so valuable as a collection of sayings, anecdotes and definitions, that would enrich his own collection of anecdotes, and particularly, the first chapter of the first section “On the account of the chiefs of this path and that which accrues from their lives and sayings towards the observance of the religious law”, and based on it nearly thirteen short accounts of the lives of the Ṣúfís of the first order from Ibráhím b. Adham al-Balkhí (d. 161 A. H. = 777 A. D.) to Ḥátim al-Aṣamm (d. 237 A. H. = 851 A. D.). Besides these, there are other traces in the Jawámi‘* from which we can infer that al-‘Awfí has utilised other chapters of the Risála on ethical virtues from a similar point of view.

As al-‘Awfí uti­lised the Arabic original and not the Persian Translation of the Risála. regards the utilisation of the Risála, the manner of al-‘Awfí’s* alluding to it and other internal evidence from the cited passages indicate a direct use of the Arabic original rather than the Persian version represented by the Br. Mus. Codex [Or. 4118]*; even though the latter, owing to its priority and characteristic early features, might have been known to him. Unfortunately nothing is known either about the translator or the date of his work; we have only the name of the transcriber and the date of this transcript which is 601 A. H. = 1205 A. D.; but the archaic spelling, the construction of the sentences, the choice of words, the idiom and mode of expression, the simplicity and directness of style, the literal and exact rendering — excepting as regards the introduction and the poetical citations which are retained in Arabic and at times vocalised, the partial omission of the fuller links of narration, and the inversion of the order of a few chapters — definitely point to its having been translated at a much earlier epoch, probably in the beginning of the 6^th century of the Hijra, and entitle it to a place amongst the classical translations of the pre-Mongolian period. Thus, a com­parison of the style of the identical passages in it and in the Jawámi‘ with the original determines, on the one hand, the early nature of this version and a marked difference between the two; and on the other, the use of the Arabic original by al-‘Awfí.

The Comparison of the Persian Translation and the Jawámi‘ with the original. account of the Ṣúfí saint Dhu’n-Nún-i-Miṣrí (d. 245 A. H. = 860 A. D.) will perhaps serve as a typical example for such a comparative study, as it is partly common to all the three and even to the Tadhkiratu’l-Awliyá’. In the Arabic text of al-Qushayrí (p. 9) it begins with short biographical details and Dhu’n-Nún’s interview with the Caliph al-Mutawakkil and extends to his epigrammatic sayings and other doctrines, e. g. the signs of the lovers of God, and to his story of conversion and repentance. The Persian version (ff14) follows almost all the details closely and even retains in some places the Arabic construction of the sentences. In the Jawámi‘ (A. f39b. I. iii. 83) the earlier portion consisting of biographic details is given in a short form, and other particulars e. g. his interview and sayings, are omitted, but the central fact of his conversion to Ṣúfism is given prominence, i.e. the story of the miraculous provision of two dishes for a blind lark and the object-lesson drawn from it by Dhu’n-Nún, which is the immediate point of a comparison in this case. In the Arabic original all the links of transmission from Dhu’n-Nún to al-Qushayrí* are given; in the Persian version the two latest authorities are omitted and the story is connected with Yúsuf b. al-Ḥusayn, who was present when Dhu’n-Nún himself related the cause of his repentance to Sálim al-Maghribí; and in the Jawámi‘ all the intermediate links are dropped out except Sálim al-Maghribí, and the story is in al-‘Awfí’s own language, which is not so precise and faithful a translation as the Persian version, and appears to be quite independent of it, containing a few additional anecdotal embellishments; whereas in the Tadhkiratu’l-Awliyá’ (pt. I, p. 115, ll. 21-5) all the authorities are omitted, the story is abridged and the facts are altered; and it is welded with other stories of his awakening in order to produce an effect by the continuity of his experiences, regardless of any biographical truth or fidelity to the original.

Attention Comparison of al-‘Aṭṭárand al-‘Awfí’s methods of utilising the Risála has already been called (p. 40) to the inaccuracy of Farídu’d-Dín al-‘Aṭṭár* in the utilisation of the Asráru’t-Tawḥíd, and the same remark holds good in the case of the Risála; a comparison of al-‘Aṭṭár’s and al-‘Awfí’s texts of identical passages with the Arabic original will further illustrate this point clearly. al-‘Aṭṭár’s method of dealing with his sources, which he does not acknowledge, yet which becomes noticeable after a close examination, is precarious. At times he abridges and alters the original completely, as in the case of the last-mentioned anecdote of Dhu’n-Nún’s conversion, and in other cases he develops, augments the bulk of the story with details of his own invention, changes the order of the events irrespective of chronological sequence or historical accuracy, and narrates in such a form that the original is entirely neglected, e. g. the anecdote of the conversion to Ṣúfism of Ibráhím b. Adham al-Balkhí, connected with the hunt and the mysterious voice proclaiming, “O Ibráhím! is it for this that thou wast created or is it for this that thou wast commanded?”. In the Arabic original (p. 9) as well as in the Persian version [Or. 4118 Br. Mus.] f12b, this account is sketchy and brief, and couched in direct and simple language, and similarly in the Jawámi‘ (A. f39a. I. 82) there is a very close agreement between the text of this story and the Arabic original, whereas in the Tadhkiratu’l-Awliyá’ (pt. I, pp. 86-7) it is narrated at twice the original length, and details are furnished, firstly, to prepare the minds of the readers for some unexpected thing on account of which Ibráhím is disconcerted; secondly, to emphasise his reluctance to obey the mysterious voices, till at last the prey, the deer, converses with him and makes a prey of him; and lastly to enhance the effect of the sudden change that has come over him. For these reasons, the biographic information in the Tadhkira, however interesting it may be, is very untrustworthy. Most likely, the profuseness of material, the eclectic method, the welding of different versions, the attempt to impart a personal touch and to narrate the lives in a popular and interesting manner are responsible for its inconsistency and inaccuracy. On the other hand, al-‘Awfí’s sources were probably few; therefore, in this case also he concentrated his energy on the Risála and tried to be as faithful to the original as possible.