Many classical Islamic sources argue that it is not permissible for non-Muslims to reside in the Ḥijāz, especially Mecca and Medina. Such arguments are usually based on a famous Prophetic saying, “Two religions should not join/remain in the peninsula/land of the Arabs”, and on the reported action taken by the second caliph ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb to remove non-Muslims from settlements in western Arabia. In this article, it is argued that the contradictory nature of the evidence for this expulsion casts serious doubt on whether such a widespread action actually took place, certainly not in the decades immediately following Muḥammad's death. It concludes that the widely attested classical prohibition on non-Muslims residing in the Ḥijāz rather had much more to do with the gradually evolving need to draw up firmer communal boundaries, which could help distinguish Muslims from others, and the role played by sacred spaces in doing so.

This article analyses the teaching of international law in the late Ottoman Empire. It argues that the Ottomans were interested in teaching European international law to equip Ottoman bureaucrats with the skills necessary for evaluating and regulating the complex interrelation between the Ottoman Empire and the European states, to defend the vital interests of the Empire against European legal penetration via extraterritoriality, and to understand the legal basis of the European system of which the Empire had officially been accepted as a part by the European Great Powers since the conclusion of the Treaty of Paris in 1856. The article focuses on the courses, scholars and textbooks in the field of international law in the Ottoman Empire during three periods. The preliminary period (1859–76), witnessed the emergence of the first courses, scholars and literature on international law; in the Hamidian period (1876–1908) these courses were stabilized and systematized in line with higher education reforms in the Ottoman Empire; and finally, in the post-Hamidian period, the opening of new schools of law in the countryside and the reformation of existing schools allowed the teaching and literature of international law to flourish.

The term aṣ̌a- stands in the centre of ancient Iranian thought. It is a pivotal concept in Zoroastrian religious lore, but is not, in its significance, coeval with Zoroastrianism. As an object of eschatological longing, aṣ̌a- has Indo-Iranian roots. It is, in Old and Middle Persian texts, primarily understood as a synecdoche for the divine sphere where the religiously dutiful expect to lead a blessed mental existence after death. Aṣ̌a- is also a deity of the Old Avestan pantheon, thus a deified concept. Finally, the term is regularly used in the Gāthās as both the authoritative instance of measuring human (religious) conduct, and the normative goal of therapeutic (eschatological) activity. In this latter usage, too, and in agreement with its form and etymology, aṣ̌a- signifies a concrete phenomenon. There are good reasons to think that this phenomenon is the world as it was “put together” by Ahura Mazdā, and only subsequently sickened by the forces of deception. Translations to date, such as “truth” and “order”, are examined, all of which are shown to have serious problems. In conclusion I propose to translate aṣ̌a- as “cosmos”.

This article examines philological problems relating to descriptions defining the tathāgatagarbha, or “buddha-nature”, in Sanskrit sūtras and exegetical literature, together with the variant Tibetan translations of these descriptions in the bKa’ ’gyur and bsTan ’gyur. Attention is called also to some possible philosophical implications of these variant descriptions.

Ban Gu's compilation of the Han shu may be seen in the context of a number of intellectual and religious developments. By his time the idea of the Tian ming and the theory of the Wu xing were being applied to imperial times. Officials were quoting the sayings of Kongzi to support their arguments, and the writings of distinguished scholars such as Jing Fang, Liu Xiang, Liu Xin and Yang Xiong were well known. The religious controversies that had begun in the reign of Chengdi had died down. The pursuit of scholarship had received a new impetus thanks partly to the discussions held in 79 ce. Ban Gu drew somewhat freely on existing literature, being prudent to select material that would not arouse enmity; his sister called on official documents to complete her part of the history. As an innovator Ban Gu introduced chapters on subjects that had not been treated in the Shi ji, such as bibliography and the laws. Ready to criticize the actions of officials or the character of an emperor openly, he also contrived to do so implicitly.

Berber in the Sahara and southern Morocco, and several West African languages including Soninké, Mandinka and Songhay, all refer to the five Islamic daily prayers using terms not derived from their usual Arabic names, and showing striking mutual similarities. The motivation behind these names has not hitherto been explained. An examination of Islamic sources reveals that many correspond to terms attested within Arabic from an early period but which have passed out of use elsewhere. Others, with a more limited distribution, reflect transfer from a time-keeping system widely attested among Berber-speaking oases of the northern Sahara. These results demonstrate that the variant prayer terminologies attested in the ḥadith reflect popular usages that were still commonplace at the time when North Africa was conquered, and underscore the conservatism of non-Arabic Islamic religious terminology in and around the Sahara.