Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:06:13.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Al-Dāraquṭnı̄'s (d. 385 ah) Faḍā’il al-Ṣaḥāba: Mild anger and the history of emotions in religious merits literature

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2020

Nancy Khalek
Nancy Khalek*
Affiliation:
Brown University
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This essay analyses the sole extant chapter of a fourth/tenth-century Faḍā'il al-Ṣaḥaba work by the ḥadı̄th critic and scholar Al-Ḥasan ʿAlı̄ ibn ʿUmar ibn Aḥmad Ibn Mahdı̄ ibn Masʿūd al-Dāraquṭnı̄ (d. 385/995). As scholars have noted, faḍā’il literature beyond the chapters on religious merits of the Companions in the Ṣaḥı̄ḥayn is among a number of sub-genres of tradition-based literature (alongside, for example, targhı̄b wa tarhı̄b), which tends largely to be comprised of weak, non-canonical ḥadı̄th. This has generally been interpreted as evidence of the acceptability of “lower standards” for the inclusion of ḥadı̄th in exhortatory or edifying literature (lower when compared to standards for the authentication of ḥadı̄th in relation to law). This conceptualization both centres law as the dominant lens through which to view the reception of ḥadı̄th in general, and contributes to the marginalization of faḍā’il literature as merely folkloric. Using a history of emotions perspective to elucidate the nature and mechanisms of edification and pious instruction in faḍā’il texts, this essay argues that far from being marginal, faḍā’il works were central to the formation of emotional communities and to the construction of pious subjects in the Būyid period. Al-Dāraquṭnı̄'s fragmentary text reflects how a well-known and highly respected fourth-century ḥadı̄th scholar capitalized on the emotional resonances and sectarian ambiguities made available by the abundance of non-legal and non-prophetic ḥadı̄th generated during the second and third centuries ah.

Keywords

EmotionReligious merits/Faḍā’ilḤadı̄thGenreSectarianism
Type
Article
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 83 , Issue 3 , October 2020 , pp. 415 - 436
Copyright
Copyright © SOAS University of London, 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il al-ṣaḥāba wa-manāqibuhum wa-qawl ba‘ḍihim fı̄ baʿḍ, ed. Muḥammad ibn Khalı̄fa al-Rabbāḥ (Medina: Maktabat al-Ghurabā’ al-Athariyya, 1998), hereafter referred to as the Faḍā’il.

2 Aside from a brief reference to the work in Osman, A., “ʿAdālat al-Ṣaḥāba: the construction of a religious doctrine”, Arabica 60, 3–4, 2013, 272–305Google Scholar.

3 See “Faḍı̄la”, and “Manākib”, Encyclopaedia of Islam 2.

4 Brown, J., Ḥadı̄th: Muhammad's Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World (Oxford: Oneworld, 2009), 36Google Scholar.

5 G.H.A. Juynboll, Muslim Tradition: Studies in Chronology, Provenance, and Authorship of Early Ḥadı̄th (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 12.

6 For a discussion of the organizational structure of Faḍā’il works, see S. Lucas, “Al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrı̄ and the Companions of the Prophet: an original Sunnı̄ voice in the Shı̄ʿı̄ century”, in Maurice Pomeranz and Aram Shahin (eds), The Heritage of Arabo-Islamic Learning: Studies Presented to Wadad Kadi (Boston: Brill, 2015), 240.

7 Al-Nasā’ı̄, Faḍā’il al-ṣaḥāba, ed. Fārūq Ḥamāda (Morocco: Dār al-Thaqāfa, 1984), 134–5. A similar report has been examined in a different but related context in A. Afsaruddin, “In praise of caliphs: re-creating history from the Manāqib literature”, International Journal of Middle East Studies 31/3, 1999, 339.

8 The transmission of ḥadı̄th praising ʿAlı̄ allegedly led to al-Nasā’ı̄'s death, since he was severely beaten by a group of anti-ʿAlids in Damascus. See al-Nasā’ı̄, Faḍā’il al-ṣaḥāba, 40. This position would be deemed tashayyuʿ ḥasan according to N. Husayn, “The memory of ʿAlı̄ ibn Abı̄ Ṭālib in early Sunnı̄ thought” (PhD dissertation, Princeton University, 2016), 48.

9 A. Afsaruddin, Excellence and Precedence: Medieval Islamic Discourse on Legitimate Leadership (Leiden: Brill, 2002).

10 Muḥammad ibn ʿUmar al-Kashshı̄, Rijāl al-Kashī (Beirut: Mu'assasat al-Aʿlamī lil-Maṭbūʿāt, 2009), 171. See also M. Dann, “Contested boundaries: the reception of Shı̄ʿite narrators in the Sunnı̄ Ḥadı̄th tradition” (PhD dissertation, Princeton University, 2015), 91.

11 Osman, “ʿAdālat al-Ṣaḥāba”, 283.

12 On the phenomenon of “sectaries” absorbed into Sunni tradition, C. Melchert, “Sectaries in the Six Books”, The Muslim World 82/3–4, 1992, 287–95. Melchert notes that of those sectaries whose transmissions were absorbed into Sunni ḥadı̄th compilations, most were “the sort usually identified as Zaydiyya” (291). See also Dann, “Contested boundaries”.

13 The Būyids were a Zaydı̄ Shii dynasty, though there is little evidence that al-Dāraquṭnı̄ was affected by a personal relationship with Būyid authorities.

14 E. Kohlberg, “The term ‘Rāfiḍa’ in Imāmı̄ Shı̄ʿı̄ usage”, Journal of the American Oriental Society 99/4, 1979, 677–9.

15 Kohlberg, “The term ‘Rāfiḍa’”, 677. Kohlberg affirms the pejorative sense of the term when used by Sunnis and provides a few examples of Shii attempts to bestow the term with more positive connotations.

16 J. Brown, “Criticism of the proto-ḥadı̄th canon: Al-Dāraquṭnı̄'s adjustment of the Ṣaḥı̄ḥayn”, Journal of Islamic Studies 15/1, 2004, 4 and n. 20 on p. 7.

17 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 12. My thanks to Andrew McLaren at Columbia University for his thoughts on the passage. The phrase is literally: “the first knot untied with respect to rafḍ” and my translation here is idiomatic.

18 For an overview see Brown, “Criticism”.

19 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄ also composed other minor works on “the minutiae of ḥadīth criticism”, including a list of impugned transmitters, entitled Kitāb al-ḍuʿafā’ wa-l-matrūkīn, a work on transmitters whose names were conflated, entitled al-Mukhtalif wa-l-mu'talif fī asmā’ al-rijāl, a book on the dyslexic errors of ḥadīth transmitters, entitled Taṣḥīf al-muḥaddithīn, and a book on ḥadīth scholars who transmitted from their classmates, entitled Kitāb al-mudabbaj. For the information in this paragraph see J. Brown, “al-Dāraquṭnı̄”, Encyclopaedia of Islam 3.

20 Brown, “Criticism”, 3.

21 J. Brown, “Critical rigor vs. juridical pragmatism: how legal theorists and ḥadīth scholars approached the backgrowth of “Isnāds” in the genre of ʿIlal al-ḥadīth”, Islamic Law and Society 14/1, 2007, 20.

22 Brown, “Criticism”, 36.

23 Muḥammad ibn Khalı̄fa al-Rabbāḥ, the editor of the 1998 edition of the Faḍā’il, documents details on the chains of transmission extensively in his footnotes.

24 Brown, “Critical rigor”, 20.

25 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 11–13. Al-Ḥākim also received some suspicion because of his inclusion of two pro-ʿAlı̄ ḥadı̄th in his Mustadrak, and because of the fact that he disparaged Muʿāwiya. On the latter claims see Lucas, “An original Sunnı̄ voice”, 237.

26 H. Motzki, The Origins of Islamic Jurisprudence: Meccan Fiqh before the Classical Schools (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 54–71, especially 68.

27 A.R. Lalani, Early Shı̄ʿı̄ Thought: The Teachings of Imām Muḥammad al-Bāqir (London: I.B. Tauris, 2003), 96–107 on the co-opting of the Imāms in Sunni tradition. See also T. Bernheimer, The ʿAlids: The First Family of Islam, 750–1200 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013).

28 Brown, Ḥadı̄th, 140–1.

29 On the “explosion of polemical exchange” in this period, Afsaruddin, “In praise”, 342 and R. Mottahedeh, Loyalty and Leadership in an Early Islamic Society (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980), 39.

30 Husayn, “The memory of ʿAlı̄”, 126–7 and 138 on Ibn Mardawayh's pro-ʿAlı̄ tendencies. Ibn ʿUqda was a Jārūdı̄ Zaydı̄, but was still considered trustworthy by some Sunnı̄ scholars. Husayn, “The memory of ʿAlı̄”, 123–4. Husayn posits that Sunni traditionalists may have passed on censored versions of reports on ʿAlı̄ from Ibn ʿUqda.

31 Husayn, “The memory of ʿAlı̄”, 92 ff and 122 ff. According to Scott Lucas, the three traditions most commonly narrated in the Ṣaḥı̄ḥayn and the Muṣannaf of Ibn Abı̄ Shayba regarding Ali were the manzila ḥadı̄th, the rāya ḥadı̄th, and an explanation of Ali's nickname, Abū Turāb. S. Lucas, Constructive Critics, Ḥadı̄th Literature, and the Articulation of Sunnı̄ Islam: The Legacy of the Generation of Ibn Saʿd, Ibn Maʿı̄n, and Ibn Ḥanbal (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 264. See also Husayn, “Memory of ʿAlı̄”, 265–71.

32 Lucas, “An original Sunnı̄ voice”, 237.

33 J. Brown, “Even if it's not true it's true: using unreliable Hadiths in Sunni Islam”, Islamic Law and Society 18, 2011, 7. Melchert, “Sectaries”, 29, quoting Yaḥyā ibn Saʿı̄d al-Qaṭṭān in a similar vein. C. Melchert, “The Musnad of Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal: How it was composed and what distinguishes it from the Six Books”, Der Islam 82/1, 2005, 32–51. S. Lucas, “Where are the legal Ḥadı̄th?”: a study of the Muṣannaf of Ibn Abı̄ Shayba”, Islamic Law and Society 15, 2008, 283–314.

34 Brown, “Even if it's not true”, 10, 13. Brown also cites evidence by Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463) and much later, al- Suyūṭı̄ (d. 911), for the endurance of this view. See also Brown, Ḥadı̄th, 102.

35 C. Melchert, “The Musnad of Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal”, 45–7.

36 For a convenient summary of Sunni views on the transmission and value of Companion āthār and of weak ḥadı̄th, see ʿAbd al-Majı̄d Maḥmūd ʿAbd al-Majı̄d, Al-Ittijāhāt al-fiqhiyya ʿinda aṣḥāb al-ḥadı̄th fı̄ l-qarn al-thālith al-hijrı̄ (Cairo: Dar al-ʿUlum, 1979), 185–231, 240, 255, 260, and 269–76. We find a similar discussion in al-Nawawı̄'s Irshād ṭulāb al-ḥaqā’iq ilā maʿrifat sunan khayr al-khalā’iq (Damascus: Dar al-Faruq, 2009), 107–8.

37 Brown, “Even if it's not true”, 18–19.

38 According to Jonathan Brown's calculations, in the Jāmiʿ of al-Tirmidhı̄, for example, over half (52%) the traditions on the virtues of the early Muslims lack corroboration, a higher percentage than those on legal subjects, for which the range of uncorroborated traditions ranges from 7–17%. Other subjects that have a higher percentage of less reliable ḥadı̄th (ranging from 27–50%) are similarly concerned with history, piety, or exhortation, including fitan, pious invocations (daʿwāt), or etiquette/manners. Brown, “Even if it's not true”, 8

39 John Renard, Seven Doors to Islam: Spirituality and the Religious Life of Muslims (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996), 76.

40 ʿAbdallāh ibn Ḍayf Al-Raḥı̄lı̄, Al-Imām al-Dāraquṭnı̄ wa-āthāruhu al-ʿilmiyya (Al-Aluka.net, 2000), 230.

41 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 35–42, nos 5–17. On Sunni depictions of ʿAlī as pro-Abū Bakr and ʿUmar, see Husayn, “Memory of ʿAlı̄”, 91 and 122, esp. n. 389, and 123–4, with most of the references being much later than al-Dāraquṭnı̄. Husayn does mention al-Dāraquṭnı̄ as being “invested in portraying ʿAlı̄ and his family as pious Sunnı̄s”, though on the basis of a report in Ibn ʿAsākir's Tārı̄kh madı̄nat Dimashq, vol. 42 (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr, 1995), 431.

42 See, for example, an incident reported in the Amālı̄ of al-Ṭūsı̄, in which Umar is seen as deferring to ʿAlı̄'s authority and spiritual superiority. Muḥammad Bāqir ibn Muḥammad Taqī Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 31 (Beirut: Mu'assasat al-’Aʿlamı̄ lil-Maṭbuʿāt, 2008), 51. In another incident, ʿAlı̄ informs ʿUmar about Prophetic sunna regarding tacit consent in the acceptance of a marriage proposal. Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār, 52.

43 Ibn ʿUqda al-Kūfı̄, Faḍā’il amı̄r al-mu'minı̄n, ed. ʿAbd al-Razzāq Muḥammad Ḩusayn Fayḍ al-Din (Beirut: Mu'assasat Āl al-Bayt li-iḥyā’ al-Turāth, 2000).

44 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 36–7, no. 6. There is a corroborating report in Ibn Abı̄ Shaybā's Muṣannaf.

45 In a later source, Al-Ṣawāʿiq al-muḥriqa by al-Haytamı̄ (d. 974), the incident occurs during the reign of Abū Bakr.

46 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 34–5, no. 4. The earliest version I have found of this report is in al-ʿIjlı̄'s (d. 261) Maʿrifat al-thiqāt (Medina: Maktabat al-Dār, 1985), 302–3. There is a longer and more elaborate narration of this tradition cited by several later scholars, including Ibn Ḥajar, in Al-Iṣāba fı̄ tamyı̄z al-Ṣaḥāba, where it features a kinder response from ʿUmar. See Husayn, “Memory of ʿAlı̄”, 265.

47 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 43–4, no. 19. Contrast the tone of this report with Shii sources that describe the day of Umar's death as a day of celebration, or ʿı̄d, in reports narrated by the eleventh Imām, Ḥasan ibn ʿAlı̄ al-ʿAskarı̄ (d. 260), in Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār 31: 46–7. This source also includes a discussion on discrepancies about the date of Umar's death. In other reports, the day of Umar's death (designated, after the aforementioned discussion, as the 9th of Rabı̄ʿ al-Awwal) is deemed an auspicious one during Muḥammad's lifetime in a report narrated by ʿAlı̄ himself. Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār 31: 49.

48 M. Momen, Introduction to Shiʿi Islam (Oxford: G. Ronald, 1985), 65. See also H. Modarressi, Crisis and Consolidation in the Formative Period of Shiʿite Islam: Abū Jaʿfar Ibn Qiba Al-Rāzı̄ and His Contribution to Imamite Shiʿite Thought (Princeton: Darwin Press, 1993), 98 and n. 243. See also N. Hurvitz, “Where have all the people gone? A critique of medieval Islamic historiography”, in Dror Ze'evi and Ehud R. Toledano (eds), Society, Law, and Culture in the Middle East: “Modernities” in the Making (Berlin: DeGruyter Open, 2015), 63. For examples of interrogation of the Imāms in anti-Umayyad reports, see Majlisī, Biḥār al-Anwār, 46: 509–10, citing Manāqib āl Abı̄ Ṭālib by Ibn Shahrāshūb describing an incident in which al-Bāqir is questioned about his knowledge of the Torah, Gospels, Psalms, and the Quran, among other issues.

49 Dann, “Contested boundaries”, 53.

50 Dann, “Contested boundaries”, 53.

51 Dann, “Contested boundaries”, 53.

52 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 79, no. 58. This report is also in al-Lālikā’ı̄'s (d. 418) Sharḥ uṣūl iʿtiqād ahl al-sunna, report no. 2468.

53 Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥanafiyya was considered the Imām and mahdı̄ by the Kaysan̄iyya.

54 Sālim Ibn Abı̄ Jaʿd al-Kūfı̄, a tābiʿı̄ who died between 97 and 101 ah was, according to Ibn Ḥajar, generally considered a trustworthy transmitter in spite of “occasional oversights and errors”. See Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī, Tahdhı̄b al-Tahdhı̄b, vol. 2 (Beirut: Dār Iḥyā’ al-Turāth al-ʿArabı̄, 1993), 253.

55 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 93–4, no. 81. A parallel report is found in the Muṣannaf of Ibn Abı̄ Shayba though the phrase “I had something in my heart” is missing from Ibn Abı̄ Shayba's version.

56 Afsaruddin, Excellence and Precedence.

57 A similar expression of misgiving is used in a different report from Yaḥyā b. Saʿı̄d al-Qaṭṭān in a description of a similar interaction with Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq, with the expression “fı̄ nafsı̄ minhu shay’” which Michael Dann has rendered as “I was uncomfortable”. See Dann, “Contested boundaries”, 53.

58 The translation of tawallā as “affiliation” may not fully capture all of the dimensions of the term, though I use it here as tawallā is often contrasted with barā’a or “dissociation”. See E. Kohlberg, “Barā’a in Shı̄ʿı̄ doctrine”, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 7, 1976, 139–75.

59 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 56, no. 32. A parallel for this report is in al-Lālikā’ı̄'s Sharḥ uṣūl iʿtiqād ahl al-sunna, #2466.

60 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 89, no. 72. Emphasis added.

61 Implicit is the suggestion of hiding one's identity out of caution or taqiyya/dissimulation, which is made explicit in other reports, e.g. nos 47 and 74. See E. Kohlberg, “Some Imāmı̄ views on Taqiyya”, Journal of the American Oriental Society 95/3, 1975, 395–402.

62 On this term as a designation for a leader within a legal or theological community that indicated “authority” or “coercive power” see Mottahedeh, Loyalty and Leadership, 135.

63 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 56–7, no. 33. This report is quoted in the Faḍā’il al-ṣaḥāba of Ibn Ḥanbal, no. 176, and by his son ʿAbdallāh in the Sunna, no. 1303. See Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 57, n. 2. The ancestral connection here refers to al-Ṣādiq's mother's lineage from Abū Bakr. See also Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 57–8, no. 34 for a reference to al-Ṣādiq saying Abū Bakr begat him twice, since Jaʿfar's mother Umm Farwa was the great-granddaughter of Abū Bakr on her father's side, while her mother Asmā’ was the granddaughter of Abū Bakr.

64 N. Haider, The Origins of the Shı̄ʿa: Identity, Ritual, and Sacred Space in Eighth-Century Kūfa (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 227. Other ambiguous figures, accepted by Sunnis despite their Shii views, include: al-Aʿmash, Ḥakam b. ʿUtayba, and al-Ḥasan b. Ṣāliḥ. Haider, Origins, 227.

65 Dann, “Contested boundaries”, 89 and 91. See also al-Kashshı̄, Rijāl al-Kashshī, 171.

66 Dann, “Contested boundaries”, 94.

67 H. Modarressi, Tradition and Survival: A Bibliographical Survey of Early Shı̄ʿite Literature (Oxford: Oneworld, 2003), 105–6.

68 Haider, Origins, 227. See also Dann, “Contested boundaries”, 92, n. 94.

69 Meaning al-Bāqir would quote the Prophet directly without any intermediary transmitters.

70 See Majlisī, Biḥār al-Anwār, 47: 21, citing the Amālı̄ of al-Mufı̄d. For an interesting discussion of this phenomenon and a creative solution to it, see E. Kohlberg, “An unusual Shı̄ʿı̄ Isnād”, Israel Oriental Studies 5, 1975, 142–9.

71 W. Madelung, “Batriyya or Butriyya”, Encyclopaedia of Islam 2.

72 Al-Kashshı̄, Rijāl al-Kashshı̄, 173, on the origins of the term “Butriyya”.

73 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 53–4, no. 31. This account is also found in Ibn Saʿd's Ṭabaqāt and al-Lālikā’ı̄'s Sharḥ – each with a different isnād. The reference here is to the Mughı̄riyya, who are “sometimes accounted among the ghulāt/extremists of the Imāmiyya and sometimes among the Zaydiyya” for their rejection of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar, and who were ultimately repudiated by Muḥammad al-Bāqir. See W. Madelung, “al-Mughı̄riyya”, Encyclopaedia of Islam 2.

74 Madelung, “Batriyya or Butriyya”.

75 Dann, “Contested boundaries”, 92.

76 While initially somewhat confusing in its inclusion of these nuanced intra-Shii disputes, al-Dāraquṭnı̄'s Faḍā’il was part and parcel of Sunnı̄ “orthodox” consolidation in which both “traditional hardline ʿUthmānı̄ and Rāfiḍı̄ positions that repudiated ʿAlı̄ and the first two caliphs, respectively, had to be excluded as too extreme from [a] newly evolving consensus that sought to subsume as many dissenting groups as possible”. Afsaruddin, “In praise of caliphs”, 342.

77 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 58–9, no. 36, and 80–81, no. 60.

78 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 51–2, nos. 28 and 29.

79 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 56, no. 33, see also 68, no. 46, where the vocative is employed in addressing Kathı̄r al-Nawwā’.

80 See, among others, Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 56, no. 32 and on heresy, 70, no. 48.

81 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 84–5, no. 66.

82 Hamid Algar, “Sunnı̄ claims to Imam Jaʿfar al-Sạ̄diq”, in Omar Ali-de-Unzaga (ed.), Fortresses of the Intellect: Ismāʿı̄lı̄ and Other Studies in Honour of Farhad Daftary (London: I.B. Tauris, 2011), 78 and Lalani, Early Shı̄ʿı̄ Thought. In a brief discussion of the Prophet's turban, for example, Sean Anthony cites al-Tabarı̄'s Al-Riyāḍ al-naḍira when he considers that later medieval Sunnı̄ faḍā’il and manāqib absorbed traditions about the turban that had been “popular among the Shı̄ʿa if not originating among them altogether” (S. Anthony, The Caliph and the Heretic: Ibn Sabaʿ and the Origins of Shı̄ʿism (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 230.

83 Algar, “Sunnı̄ claims”, 80, citing a number of reports in Ṭabarı̄'s Al-Riyāḍ al-naḍira which also appear in al-Dāraquṭnı̄'s Faḍ̣ā’il, without citing the latter since Ṭabarı̄ himself cites them on the authority of Ibn Sammān as they appear in al-Zamakhsharı̄'s Muwāfiqa.

84 On the use of tabarra'a in oaths, see Mottahedeh, Loyalty and Leadership, 62–72.

85 For example, al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 88–9, no. 71, and 95, no. 83 in which al-Ṣādiq refers to the “people of Iraq who claim that I disparage Abū Bakr and ʿUmar as khubathā’/evildoers”.

86 Wadad Al-Kadi, “The development of the term Ghulāt in Muslim literature with special reference to the Kaysāniyya”, in Albert Dietrich (ed.), Akten des VII. Kongresses für Arabistik und Islamwissenschaft, Göttingen, 15. bis. 22. August 1974 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976), 310–15. See also Afsaruddin, “In praise of caliphs”, 342 on the equation of ghuluww with rafḍ in Zaydı̄ and Sunni sources from the mid-ninth century onwards.

87 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 47, no. 3. See also M. Yazigi, “Ḥadı̄th al-ʿAshara, or the political uses of a tradition”, Studia Islamica 86, 1997, 159–67.

88 Al-Dāraquṭnı̄, Faḍā’il, 14 (Editor's introduction.)

89 Abū Saʿı̄d Ismāʿı̄l ibn ʿAlı̄ ibn Ḥasan al-Sammān, Kitāb al-Muwāfaqa bayna ahl al-bayt wa-l-ṣaḥāba, ed. Farı̄d b. Farı̄d al-Khāja (Bahrain: Jāmiʿat al-Āl wa-l-’Aṣḥāb, 2016).

90 Abū Ḥamı̄d al-Maqdisı̄, Al-Radd ʿalā al-rāfiḍa, Ma ruwiya ʿan ʿAlı̄ wa Ahl al-Bayt fı̄ faḍl Abū Bakr (Alexandria: Dār al-Baṣīra, 2001) 4, 114–28.

91 E. Kohlberg, “The attitude of the Imāmı̄ Shı̄ʿı̄s to the Companion of the Prophet” (PhD thesis, University of Oxford, 1971), 293–313. For a later iteration of this phenomenon, see Matthew Pierce, “Ibn Shahrashūb and Shı̄ʿa rhetorical strategies in the 6th/12th century”, Journal of Shı̄ʿa Islamic Studies 5/4, 2012, 441–54.

92 J. Brown, “Did the Prophet say it or not? The literal, historical, and effective truth of Ḥadīths in early Sunnism”, Journal of the American Oriental Society 129/2, 2009, 8.

93 Afsaruddin, Excellence and Precedence and also “In praise of caliphs”.

94 Other studies emphasize the representational aspects of particular figures and the use of those constructions in the service of theological or political claims, including the work on ʿĀ’isha by Denise Spellberg; the study of Salmān al-Fārisı̄ by Sarah Bowen Savant; and the recent book by David Powers on the Companion Zayd. D. Spellberg, Politics, Gender and the Islamic Past (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996); S. Savant, The New Muslims of Post-Conquest Iran: Tradition, Memory and Conversion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013); D. Powers, Zayd (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014). See also Sue Campbell, “Telling memories: the Zubayrids in Islamic historical memory” (PhD dissertation, UCLA, 2003) and D. Soufi, “The image of Fāṭima in classical Muslim thought” (PhD dissertation, Princeton University, 1997). For a comparative approach, see M. Thurlkill, Chosen among Women: Mary and Fāṭima in Medieval Christianity and Shı̄ʿite Islam (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2007).

95 Yazigi, “Ḥadı̄th al-ʿashara”.

96 The same is generally true for studies on the lives of saints and Sufi mystics. In-depth analyses of writings focused on or attributed to particular people occasionally explore the images of early or founding figures other than Companions or family members of the Prophet (e.g. Sufyān al-Thawrı̄, Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal, or al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrı̄) as they were constructed in later periods. See S. Judd, “Competitive hagiography in biographies of Al-Awzāʿī and Sufyān al-Thawrī”, Journal of the American Oriental Society 122, 2002, 25–37; M. Cooperson, Classical Arabic Biography: The Heirs of the Prophet in the Age of al-Ma'mūn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000); Suleiman Mourad, Early Islam between Myth And History: Al-Ḥasan Al-Baṣrı̄ and the Formation on His Legacy in Classical Islamic Scholarship (Leiden: Brill, 2005). It's worth noting that in this type of scholarship, the figures under consideration are almost always surveyed through biographies and chronicles, not faḍā’il, with the main exceptions of H. Keaney, Medieval Islamic Historiography: Remembering Rebellion (London: Routledge, 2013), and Thurlkill, Chosen among Women.

97 On adab and ḥadı̄th, see A. Ragab, Piety and Patienthood in Medieval Islam (London: Routledge, 2018), 245. On zuhd, Christopher Melchert, “Exaggerated fear in the early Islamic renunciant tradition”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 3, no. 21, 2011, 283–300.

98 Melchert, “Exaggerated fear”, 285–6.

99 B. Rosenwein, Emotional Communities in the Early Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2006), 24–5, emphasis added.

100 Karen Bauer, “Emotion in the Qur'ān: an overview”, Journal of Qur'ānic Studies, 19/2, 2017, 1–30.

101 Melchert, “Exaggerated fear”. Z. Ghazal, “From anger on behalf of God to ‘forbearance’ in Islamic medieval literature”, in Barbara H. Rosenwein (ed.), Anger's Past: The Social Uses of an Emotion in the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998), 202–30. See also Anna Gade's general essay “Islam”, in The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Emotion (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 35–50.

102 J. Elias, Alef is for Allah: Childhood, Emotion, and Visual Culture in Islamic Societies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2018), 28–60.

103 J. Bray, “Toward an Abbasid history of emotions: the case of slavery”, International Journal of Middle East Studies 49/1, 2017, 143–7, here 143.

104 S. Enderwitz, “Faḍā’il”, Encyclopaedia of Islam 3, citing A. Afsaruddin, “In praise of the word of God: reflections of early religious and social concerns in the Faḍā’il al-Qur’ān genre”, Journal of Qur'anic Studies 4, 2002, 27–48, here 38.