No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Greatest Name of God: ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib as a cosmic image in Rajab al-Bursī's Mashāriq al-anwār
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 September 2024
Abstract
ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661)—a revered figure in Islamic history as both the first Shiʿi imam and the fourth caliph—serves as a significant image of sacral power in the Persianate world and beyond. ʿAlī's authority underwent a profound reimagining in the early modern era as he emerged as a captivating imperial emblem from the Timurid renaissance to the Safavid revolution, rivalling other prominent figures of political authority such as Chinggis Khan (d. 1227), and becoming a symbol of human perfection for both Sunni and Shiʿi intellectuals alike. ʿAlī transcended his role as a Shiʿi imam to assume the status of a cosmic figure, gradually becoming an ideal symbol for imperial branding. However, there is little scholarly knowledge and appreciation of his changing role in this period. This article examines how al-Ḥāfiẓ Rajab al-Bursī's (d. circa 814/1411) Mashāriq al-anwār, which has remained highly popular throughout the Persianate and Shiʿi world, contributed to the reshaping of ʿAlī's image, portraying him as the quintessential archetype of sacral power and unmatched authoritative feats.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Royal Asiatic Society
References
1 Shukrī, Yad Allāh (ed.), ʿĀlam ārā-yi Ṣafavī (Tehran, 1350/1970), p. 489Google Scholar.
2 See Melvin-Koushki, M., ‘World as (Arabic) text: Mīr Dāmād and the neopythagoreanization of philosophy in Safavid Iran’, Studia Islamica 114 (2019), pp. 385Google Scholar, 401–402, 410, 415.
3 See Woods, J. E., ‘Timur's genealogy’, in Intellectual Studies on Islam: Essays Written in Honor of Martin B. Dickson, (eds.) M. M. Mazzaoui and V. B. Moreen (Salt Lake City, 1990), pp. 87–88Google Scholar.
4 Manz, B. Forbes, ‘The empire of Tamerlane as an adaptation of the Mongol empire: an answer to David Morgan, “The empire of Tamerlane: an unsuccessful re-run of the Mongol state?”’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 26.1–2 (2016), pp. 283–286Google Scholar.
5 Woods, ‘Timur's genealogy’, pp. 87–88.
6 Biran, M., Chinggis Khan (Oxford, 2007), p. 117Google Scholar; also see D. Aigle, ‘Les transformations d'un mythe d'origine: L'example de Gengis Khan et de Tamerlan’, Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée (2000), pp. 151–168; Manz, B. Forbes, Power, Politics and Religion in Timurid Iran (Cambridge, 2007), pp. 209–210Google Scholar. On the topic of the light of Muḥammad, see Andani, K., ‘Metaphysics of Muhammad: the Nur Muhammad from Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq (d. 148/765) to Nasir al-Din al-Tusi (d. 672/1274)’, Journal of Sufi Studies, 8.2 (2020), pp. 99–175Google Scholar.
7 Subtelny, M. E., Timurids in Transition: Turko-Persian Politics and Acculturation in Medieval Iran (Leiden, 2007), pp. 208–212Google Scholar. As Robert D. McChesney notes, the Timurids treated the shrine discovery seriously in light of political motives and due to the prevalent Sunni Ahl Baytism presence in Balkh during that era, which transcended the Shiʿi–Sunni sectarian divisions. While the shrine experienced relative neglect during internal tensions among the Shaybānids in the sixteenth century, ‘this discovery set a pattern for future state-shrine relations. Especially in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the sources indicate a close identification of the shrine and its administration with the policies of the authorities in Balkh’. McChesney, R. D., Waqf in Central Asia: Four Hundred Years in the History of a Muslim Shrine, 1480–1889 (Princeton, 1991), p. 33Google Scholar.
8 Subtelny, Timurids in Transition, p. 213.
9 For discussion of these avatars of ʿAlī, see Moin, A. A., The Millennial Sovereign: Sacred Kingship and Sainthood in Islam (New York, 2012), pp. 60–63Google Scholar.
10 ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Jāmī, Dīwān-i kāmil-i Jāmī, (ed.) Hāshim Raḍī (Tehran, 1356/1976), p. 55.
11 It is worth mentioning that Hamid Algar counters the view that Sufi orders, particularly the Naqshbandis, promoted hybrid proto-Shiʿi religiosity and argues that the Naqshbandis strategically used Shiʿi imams to support Sunni causes and were not doctrinally inclined towards Shiʿism. See Algar, H., ‘Naqshbandis and Safavids: a contribution to the religious history of Iran and her neighbors’, in Safavid Iran and Her Neighbors, (ed.) M. Mazzaoui (Salt Lake City, 2003), pp. 7–48Google Scholar.
12 The term walāya is difficult to translate, as it acquires different meanings in various Shiʿi and Sufi contexts. Terms such as friendship and sainthood have been commonly offered to render walāya in English. See Chodkiewicz, M., Le Sceau des saints, prophetie et saintete dans Ia doctrine d'Ibn Arabf (Paris, 1986)Google Scholar; Chittick, W. C., The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn al-ʿArabī's Metaphysics of Knowledge (Albany, 1989)Google Scholar. In the context of Shiʿism, this term is also more often translated as initiation, love, and guardianship, among other things. See Amir-Moezzi, M. A., ‘Notes à propos de la walaya imamite (aspects de l'imamologie duodécimaine, X)’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 122.4 (2002), pp. 722–741Google Scholar; Amir-Moezzi, M. A., La preuve de Dieu: la mystique shi'ite à travers l'oeuvre de Kulaynî(Paris, 2018)Google Scholar; Alexandrin, E. R., Walāyah in the Fāṭimid Ismāʻīlī Tradition (Albany, 2017), pp. 1–19Google Scholar; H. Corbin, En Islam iranien: aspects spirituels et philosophiques, four vols (Paris, 1972), vol. 4, pp. 81–82; Dakake, M. M., The Charismatic Community: Shiʿite Identity in Early Islam (Albany, 2007), pp. 15–31Google Scholar. More recently, walāya has also been translated into sacral power. See M. Melvin-Koushki, ‘Of Islamic grammatology: Ibn Turka's lettrist metaphysics of light’, Al-ʿUṣūr al- Wusṭā 24.1 (2016), pp. 57, 65, 69, 71, 85; Melvin-Koushki, ‘World as (Arabic) text’, pp. 385, 401, 402, 410, 416; Melvin-Koushki, M., ‘Powers of one: the mathematicalization of the occult sciences in the high Persianate tradition’, Intellectual History of the Islamicate World 5 (2017), pp. 130Google Scholar, 137, 155, 168. This translation allows us to think about the connection of walāya to premodern and early modern imperial projects and sacral kingship and empire. Al-Bursī frequently treats both walāya and maḥabba (love/friendship) as interchangeable terms, which poses a significant challenge in translation. In this article, I opt for the Arabic originals walāya and awliyāʾ, and employ the term ‘sacral power’ to convey the cosmic authority of ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib in al-Bursī's works. That is because the sacral power is certainly conveyed by walāya, but this sacral power indeed permeates throughout the book.
13 As Azfar Moin writes: ‘before Timur could become a Lord of Conjunction in his own right, his charisma had depended on how he ritually and symbolically engaged with the memory of Chinggis Khan and Ali. On the plane of Islamic history, as we understand it, it is difficult to see the equivalence between these two men. Indeed, they could not be farther apart. Chinggis was a cruel “pagan” conqueror who uprooted Islam and imposed his own law in its place. Ali, on the other hand, was a foundational figure of Islam… However, the differences between Ali and Chinggis Khan fade away when we realize that both figures were Lords of Conjunction of the highest order, men destined to inaugurate new epochs and dispensations.’ Moin, The Millennial Sovereign, pp. 59–60.
14 Ibid., pp. 63–67.
15 For a detailed analysis of this work, see Muḥammad Riḍā Shafīʿī Kadkanī, ‘Ḥamāsaʾ-ī Shīʿī az qarn-i panjum’, in ʿAlī-nāma, (ed.) Muḥammad Riḍā Shafīʿī Kadkanī (Tehran, 2009), pp. 11–75.
16 For an overall analysis of this work, see J. Rubanovich, ‘Khāvarān-nāma i: the epic poem’, Encyclopædia Iranica, http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/khavaran-nama-1 (accessed 15 February 2024).
17 See Khalīl Kahrīzī, ‘Ḥāshiya-yi Ẓafar-nāma, dastnivīsī muʿtabar az Shāh-nāma’, Pazhūhish-hā-yi Naẓm va Nathr-i Fārsī 4.10 (1399/2021), pp. 11–40.
18 Aḥmad Tabrīzī, Shahanshāh-nāma: tārīkh-i manẓūm-i Mughulān va Īlkhānān az gharn-i hashtum-i hijrī, (ed.) Mahshīd Guharī Kākhakī and Javād Rāshkī ʿAlī-Ābād (Tehran, 1397/2019); Ḥakīm Zujājī, Humāyūn-nāma, (ed.) ʿAlī Pīrniyā (Tehran, 1383/2005); Nūrī Azhdarī, Ghāzān-nāma-yi manẓūm, (ed.) Maḥmūd Mudabbirī (Tehran, 1380/2002).
19 Manz, B. Forbes, ‘Unacceptable violence as legitimation in Mongol and Timurid Iran’, in Violence in Islamic Thought from the Mongols to European Imperialism, (eds.) R. Gleave and I. Kristó-Nagy (Edinburgh, 2018), p. 103Google Scholar.
20 For an analysis of the Bukhāra speech, see T. May, ‘The Mongols as the scourge of God in the Islamic world’, in Gleave and Kristó-Nagy (eds.), Violence in Islamic Thought, pp. 32–57.
21 See Brack, J., ‘Theologies of auspicious kingship: the Islamization of Chinggisid sacral kingship in the Islamic world’, Comparative Studies in Society and History 60.4 (2018), pp. 1143–1171Google Scholar.
22 For some research on ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib in early Shiʿi literature, see M. A. Amir-Moezzi, ‘ʿAlī and the Quran: aspects of the Twelver Imamology XIV’, Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 98.4 (2014), pp. 669–704; M. A. Amir-Moezzi, ‘Muḥammad the Paraclete and ʿAlī the Messiah: new remarks on the origins of Islam and of Shiʿite Imamology’, Der Islam 95.1 (2018), pp. 30–64; Amir-Moezzi, M. A., Ali, le secret bien gardé: figures du premier maître en spiritualité shi'ite (Paris, 2020)Google Scholar, (trans.) F. J. Luis and A. Gledhill, Ali: The Well-Guarded Secret: Figures of the First Master in Shi‘i Spirituality (Leiden, 2023); S. W. Anthony, The Caliph and the Heretic: Ibn Sabaʾ and the Origins of Shīʿism (Leiden, 2012), pp. 195–239; N. A. Husayn, ‘Treatises on the salvation of Abū Ṭālib’, Shii Studies Review 1.1–2 (2017), pp. 3–41; S. Kara, ‘The suppression of ʿAlī Ibn Abī Ṭālib's codex: study of the traditions on the earliest copy of the Qurʾān’, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 75.2 (2016), pp. 267–289.
23 Fankhā lists 115 manuscripts of Mashāriq al-anwār found only in Iran. See Muṣṭafā Dirāyatī, Fihristigān-i nuskha-hā-yi khatti-yi Īrān (Fankhā), 35 vols (Tehran, 1392/2013), vol. 29, pp. 505–512.
24 Ḥasan Khaṭīb Qārī Sabzawārī, Maṭāliʿ al-asrār fī sharḥ mashāriq al-anwār, MS Kitābkhāna-yi Majlis 10682, Tehran. There were several other Persian translations of this work. Mentions need to be made of Muḥammad Saʿīd ibn Muḥammad Nāʾīnī's translation, followed by two other translations during the Qajar era by Muḥammad Ṣādiq ibn ʿAli-Riḍā Yazdī as well as Mohammad ibn Yahyā. See Dirāyatī, Fihristigān, vol. 29, p. 505.
25 For research on al-Bursī, see M. A. Amir-Moezzi, ‘Al-Durr al-Thamīn attribué à Rajab al-Bursī: un exemple des ‘commentaires coraniques personnalisés’ shiʿites (aspects de l'imamologie duodécimaine XVI)’, Le Muséon 130 (2017), pp. 207–240. For its English translation, see Amir-Moezzi, Ali, pp. 203–229. Also see T. Lawson, ‘The dawning places of the lights of certainty in the divine secrets of the commander of the faithful by Rajab Bursī (d. 1411)’, in The Heritage of Sufism volume II: The Legacy of Medieval Persian Sufism (1150–1500), (ed.) L. Lewisohn (Oxford, 1999), pp. 261–276; P. Lory, ‘Souffrir pour le vérité selon l’ésotérisme chiite de Rajab Borsī’, in Le Shīʿisme imamate quarante ans après: hommage à Etan Kohlberg, (eds.) M. A. Amir-Moezzi et al. (Turnhout, 2009), pp. 315–323; M. Melvin-Koushki, ‘Safavid Twelver lettrism between Sunnism and Shiʿism, mysticism and science: Rajab al-Bursī vs. Maḥmūd Dihdār’, Global Intellectual History 8.4 (2023), pp. 1–38; S. Rizvi, ‘Esoteric Shiʿi Islam in the later school of al-Ḥilla: Walāya and Apocalypticism in al-Ḥasan b. Sulaymān al-Ḥillī (d. after 1399) and Rajab al-Bursī (d. c. 1411)’, in Reason, Esotericism, and Authority in Shiʿi Islam, (eds.) R. Adem and E. Hayes (Leiden, 2021), pp. 190–241. For the French translation of al-Bursī's Mashāriq al-anwār, see Rajab Borsi, Les Orients des Lumières, (trans.) H. Corbin, (ed.) P. Lory (Paris, 1996).
26 For a useful and popular example that showcases ʿAlī as a symbol of piety, spirituality, and social justice in the modern era, see ʿAlī Sharīʿatī, ʿAlī ḥaqīqatī bar gūna-yi asāṭīṝ (Tehran, 1389/2000). For a broad survey on ʿAlī, which also includes chapters dedicated to the Ottoman context, see Ahmet Yaşar Ocak (ed.), From History to Theology: Ali in Islamic Belief (Ankara, 2005).
27 al-Ḥāfiẓ Rajab al-Bursī, Mashāriq anwār al-yaqīn fī asrār Amīr al-Muʾminīn, (ed.) ʿAlī ʿĀshūr (Beirut, 1422/2001), p. 287. Despite multiple publications of Mashāriq al-anwār, a proper critical edition of this work is still lacking. In this article, I use ʿAlī ʿĀshūr's edition for its insightful comments and notes, yet it does not excel compared with other printed versions. It also needs to be mentioned that two versions of Mashāriq al-anwār exist and, despite their core similarities, notable differences remain between them. It seems that al-Bursī composed the second version as a response to critiques of the initial version. Printed versions of Mashāriq al-anwār rely on this second version. For details, see Masʿūd Bīdābādī, ‘Muʿarrifī-yi Mashāriq awnār al-yaqīn’, ʿŪlūm-i Ḥadīth 22 (1380/2002), pp. 137–138, 164–165. It appears that the late Muḥsin Bīdarfard had initiated the project of a critical edition of Mashāriq al-anwār but, unfortunately, he passed away before its completion. Currently, Iranian scholar Muḥammad Riḍā Lāyiqī is working on a critical edition using one of the oldest manuscripts of Mashāriq al-anwār, completed in around 969/1562. My thanks to Muḥammad Riḍā Lāyiqī for bringing attention to this development.
28 al-Bursī, Mashāriq anwār, pp. 105, 112, 130, 251, 301.
29 Ibid., pp. 304, 237.
30 Ibid., pp. 76, 92, 130, 171, 238, 285.
31 Ibid., pp. 71, 141.
32 Ibid., pp. 72, 104.
33 See Melvin-Koushki, ‘Safavid Twelver lettrism’.
34 Lawson, ‘Dawning places’, pp. 270–273.
35 Ḥabīb Allāh Dānish Shahrakī, Niʿmat Allāh Ṣafarī Furūshānī, and Muḥammad Riḍā Lāyiqī, ‘Arzyābī-yi ibhāmāt darbāra-yi vujūd-i tārīkhī-yi mutakkallim va ʿārif-i Shiʿī-yi gharn-i hashtum va nuhum’, Justār-hā-ʾī dar Falsafa va Kalām 53.1 (1400/2020), pp. 195–215.
36 Taqī al-Dīn Ibrāhīm al-Kafʿamī, Miṣbāḥ al-Kafʿamī, two vols (Beirut, 1992/1412), vol. 1, pp. 195–215.
37 Taqī al-Dīn al-Kafʿamī, Majmūʿ al-gharāʾib wa-mawḍūʿ al-raghāʾib, (ed.) al-Sayyid Mahdī al-Rajāʾī (Qom, 1412/1991), p. 249.
38 Muḥammad Bāqir Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār, 110 vols (Beirut, 1403/1983), pp. 54: 349; 42: 301.
39 Muḥammad ibn Ḥasan al-Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī, Amal al-Āmil, (ed.) al-Sayyid Aḥmad al-Ḥusaynī, two vols (Baghdad, 1362/1982), vol. 2, p. 117.
40 Fakhr al-Dīn al-Ṭurayḥī, al-Muntakhab, (ed.) Niḍāl ʿAlī (Beirut, 1424/2003), pp. 210–211.
41 For example, see Walī ibn Niʿmat Allāh Raḍawī Ḥāʾirī, Kanz al-Maṭālib wa-baḥr al-manāqib fī faḍāʾil ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, (ed.) ʿAlī ʿAbd al-KāẓimʿAwfī, three vols (Karbala, 1436/2015), pp. 1:350, 2: 199, 260, 265, 274, 312, 3:10.
42 Sayyid Hāshim ibn Sulaymān Baḥrānī, al-Burhān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān (Qom, 1415/1994), pp. 3:499, 500, 821, 4:76, 84, 265, 266, 375, 570, 658, 847, 5:189, 689, 813, 908.
43 Sayyid Niʿmat Allāh Jazāʾirī, al-Anwār al-nuʿmāniyya, (ed.) Muḥammad ʿAlī al-Qāḍī al-Ṭabāṭabāʾī, four vols (Beirut, 1431/2010), vol. 1, pp. 63–64.
44 ʿAbd Allāh Afandī, Riyāḍ al-ʿulamāʾ wa-ḥiyāḍ al-fuḍalāʾ, (ed.) Aḥmad Ashkivarī, seven vols (Beirut, 1431/2010), vol. 2, pp. 304–310.
45 See Melvin-Koushki, ‘Safavid Twelver lettrism’, pp. 6–8, 10–11. For this network, also see I. E. Binbaş, Intellectual Networks in Timurid Iran: Sharaf al-Dīn ʿAlī Yazdī and the Islamicate Republic of Letters (Cambridge, 2016).
46 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 66.
47 Ibid., pp. 79–80.
48 Ibid., pp. 83–84.
49 Ibid., p. 218.
50 Kamāl al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn Ṭalḥa (d. 652/1254), a crucial figure in Islamic occult sciences, is one example of such narratives in the Sunni context. See Kamāl al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Ṭalḥa al-Shāfiʿī, al-Durr al-muntaẓam fī al-sirr al-aʿẓam, (ed.) Mājid ibn Aḥmad al-ʿAṭiyya (Beirut, 1425/2004), pp. 32–33.
51 See Melvin-Koushki, ‘Safavid Twelver lettrism’, pp. 11–15.
52 For a similar analysis of the work of Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī (d. circa 787/1385), see Mansouri, M. A., ‘Walāya between lettrism and astrology: the occult mysticism of Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī (d. ca. 787/1385)’, Journal of Sufi Studies 9 (2021), pp. 182–191Google Scholar.
53 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 31.
54 Ibid., p. 35.
55 Ḥaydar Āmulī offers a similar narrative. See Mansouri, ‘Walāya between lettrism and astrology’, pp. 181–191.
56 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 190.
57 Ibid., pp. 124–125.
58 Ibid., p. 53.
59 Ibid., pp. 126–127.
60 Ibid., p. 271.
61 Ibid., pp. 129–130.
62 For example, see Q. 85:22.
63 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 208.
64 Ibid., p. 211.
65 Ibid., p. 107.
66 This is why al-Bursī asserts that ʿAlī is, in fact, the preserving tablet (al-lawḥ al-ḥafīẓ), representing the earthly embodiment of the preserved tablet, which ‘contains lines that pertain to the hidden realm of God, akin to the preserving tablet on Earth, wherein the concealed world of God finds its repository’; Al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 223.
67 Ibid., pp. 191–192.
68 Ibid., p. 342.
69 Ibid., p. 121.
70 Ibid., p. 132.
71 Ibid., p. 172.
72 Ibid., pp. 170–171.
73 Ibid., p. 122.
74 Ibid., p. 222.
75 Ibid., p. 223.
76 Ibid., p. 120.
77 Ibid., p. 120. On the imams’ knowledge of previous scriptures, see Kohlberg, E., ‘Authoritative scriptures in early Imami Shi'ism’, in In Praise of the Few: Studies in Shiʿi Thought and History, (ed.) A. Ehteshámi (Leiden, 2020), pp. 349–364Google Scholar.
78 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, pp. 126–127.
79 Ibid., p. 71.
80 Ibid., pp. 64–65.
81 For a comprehensive study of the divine names in Islamic thought, see Gimaret, D., Les noms divins en Islam (Paris, 1988)Google Scholar.
82 Q. 7:180. I rely on the following translation throughout the article, incorporating necessary changes and modifications: M. A. S. Abdel Haleem (trans.), The Qurʾan (Oxford, 2005).
83 As an example, see Aḥmad Samʿānī, rūḥ al-arwāḥ fī sharḥ asmāʾ al-malik al-fattāḥ, (ed.) Najīb Māyil Hiravī (Tehran, 1384/2005). For its English translation, see Aḥmad Samʿānī, The Repose of the Spirits: A Sufi Commentary on the Divine Names, (trans.) W. C. Chittick (Albany, 2019). Also see al-Ghazālī, The Ninety-Nine Beautiful Names of God, (trans.) D. Burrell and N. Daher (Cambridge, 1999); Ibn ʿArabī, Secrets des noms de Dieu, (trans.) P. Beneito (Paris, 2019); Fakhr ad-Dîn Ar-Râzî, Traité sur les noms divins, (trans.) M. Gloton (Paris, 1999).
84 See Ebstein, M., ‘“In truth you are the polytheist!”: mythic elements in Ibn Al-ʿArabī's teachings on the divine names’, Intellectual History of the Islamicate World 6.3 (2018), pp. 359–387Google Scholar; Elmore, G., ‘Four texts of Ibn al-ʿArabi on the creative self-manifestation of the divine names’, Journal of the Muhyiddin Ibn ʿArabi Society 29 (2001), pp. 1–43Google Scholar.
85 For this, see Melvin-Koushki, ‘Safavid Twelver lettrism’, pp. 13–15.
86 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 48.
87 ‘Until he was two bow-lengths away or even closer’, Q. 53:9.
88 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, pp. 48–49.
89 See Abū ʿAbdallāh Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī Ibn al-ʿArabī, ‘Inshāʾ al-dawāʾir’, in Kleinere Schriften des Ibn al-ʿArabī, (ed.) H. S. Nyberg (Leiden, 1919), p. 33.
90 It is noteworthy that the treatise al-Lumʿa al-Nūrāniyya, which is attributed to Aḥmad al-Būnī (d. circa 622/1225), is sometimes known as Sharḥ al-ism al-aʿẓam, due to its focus on this topic. For this and also issues surrounding the attribution of this treatise to al-Būnī, see Gardiner, N., ‘Forbidden knowledge? Notes on the production, transmission, and reception of the major works of Aḥmad al-Būnī’, Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 12 (2012), pp. 81–143Google Scholar.
91 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, pp. 39–40. Al-Bursī's explanation of the equation is notably intricate. He asserts that the Greatest Name of God is mentioned in Surat al-Ḥamd, the first Sura, comprising seven verses—a number he deems to be the most complete. Al-Bursī then explains the numerical details of this Sura, ultimately identifying the luminous letters (al-ḥurūf al-nūrāniyya) from which the Greatest Name of God and all other names can be extracted. These letters are alif, rāʾ, ḥāʾ, yāʾ, mīm, nūn, kāf, sīn, hāʾ, ṣād, qāf, and ṭāʾ, with their respective numerical values totalling 699. However, al-Bursī acknowledges the complexities of this matter, recognising that the Greatest Name of God may manifest in a single letter, number, or combination thereof, as per God's will. He provides examples of letter and number combinations equating to 110, 99, 112, and finally 72. The latter corresponds to the letters alif, lām, rā, ʿayn, ḥāʾ, yāʾ, mīm, nūn, kāf, sīn, hāʾ, ṣād, qāf, and ṭāʾ. The narrative of al-Bursī is notably unclear, as he asserts that three letters and three numbers from all the combinations distinctly point to the Greatest Name of God. He leaves aside 11 letters (alif, rāʾ, hāʾ, mīm, nūn, kāf, sīn, hāʾ, ṣād, qāf, and ṭāʾ) that do not distinctly refer to the Greatest Name of God. By comparing the various lettrist combinations that he offers, it appears to me that the three letters that al-Bursī considers as explicit references to the Greatest Name of God are yaʾ (2), lām (3), ʿayn (7). These letters clearly refer to the name ʿAlī (علی). Al-Bursī further explains that, if we count some letters several times, then the letters of the Greatest Name of God add up to 72, with a numerical value of 264. He states: ‘These are the letters and numbers of the Greatest Name, and the Prophet or imam can compose it at will and pray with it.’ Al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, pp. 40. The printed editions provide the names of only 66 letters, making it challenging to compile the full list of these 72 letters. I examined MS Kitābkhāna-yi Majlis 9419, MS Kitābkhāna-yi Majlis 7615, and MS Masjid-i Aʿẓam, but they offer different variants. Until a proper critical edition is available, certainty about these 72 letters remains elusive. Based on al-Bursī's numerical model, my calculation suggests that the 66 identified letters collectively yield a numerical value of 245. Consequently, it appears that the missing six letters are likely to possess a cumulative numerical value of 19.
92 For some of the instances, see Q. 1:1, 2:1, 3:1, 7:1, 10:1, 13:1, 14:1, 15:1, 19:1.
93 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 188.
94 Abu Jaʿfar Muḥammad ibn Yaʿqūb al-Kulaynī al-Rāzī, al-Kāfī, (ed.) Muḥammad Ḥusayn al-Dirāyatī, 15 vols (Qom, 1387/2009), vol. 1, p. 571.
95 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 158.
96 Ibid., p. 104.
97 For a survey of this notion in the Akbarian tradition and its reception in Shiʿism, see Mansouri, ‘Walāya between lettrism and astrology’; M. Rustom, ‘Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī's seal of absolute walāya: a Shīʿī response to Ibn ʿArabī’, Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 31.4 (2020), pp. 407–423.
98 See Mansouri, M. A., ‘The sea and the wave: a preliminary inquiry into Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī's criticism of Ibn al-ʿArabī's ontology’, Journal of Muhiddin Ibn ʿArabi Society 68 (2020), pp. 75–101Google Scholar.
99 For Ḥaydar Āmulī's position on this matter, see Mansouri, ‘Walāya between lettrism and astrology’, pp. 178–179.
100 I use ‘Sunni-Shiʿi cosmopolis’ to describe the diverse intellectual milieu of the Persianate world before the Safavid era, in which the lines between Shiʿas and Sunnis are, in many instances, blurred, making it challenging to discern confessional gaps and doctrinal bridges. For a brief but useful survey of different scholarly perspectives on sectarian and non-sectarian relationships between Sunnism and Shiʿism during this period, see Rizvi, S. H., ‘Before the Safavid-Ottoman conflict Jāmī and sectarianism in Timurid Iran and Iraq’, in Jāmī in Regional Contexts, (eds.) T. d'Hubert and A. Papas (Leiden, 2018), pp. 227–229Google Scholar. For the fusion of Sunni and Shiʿi ideas and practices in this era, also see J. Pfeiffer, ‘Confessional ambiguity vs. confessional polarization: politics and the negotiation of religious boundaries in the Ilkhanate’, Politics, Patronage, and the Transmission of Knowledge in 13th-15th Century Tabriz, (ed.) J. Pfeiffer (Leiden, 2014), pp. 129–168; J. E. Woods, The Aqquyunlu: Clan, Confederation, Empire (Salt Lake City, 1999), pp. 3–4.
101 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, pp. 194–195. The distinction between Ḥaydar Āmulī's and al-Bursī's stances on walāya showcases the diverse Shiʿi conceptualisations of this doctrine in this period. It is also important to note that one encounters ideas similar to al-Bursī's narrative of the Greatest Name of God in early ghulāt literature. See M. Asatryan, Controversies in Formative Shiʾi Islam: The Ghulat Muslims and their Beliefs (London, 2017), pp. 102–103; B. Tendler Krieger, ‘“Abd Allāh b. Saba” and the role of the Nuṣayrī Bāb: rehabilitating the heresiarchs of the Islamic tradition’, in L’ésotérisme shi'ite: ses racines et ses prolongements, (eds.) M. A. Amir-Moezzi et al. (Turnhout, 2016), pp. 470–471. Hence, al-Bursī's portrayal of ʿAlī as the Greatest Name of God can be seen as a synthesis that blends the Akbarian and ghulāt elements. However, without a comprehensive study of the concept of walāya in premodern and early modern Shiʿi thought, it remains difficult to ascertain whether other Shiʿi writers adopted al-Bursī's position or it stands as a relatively isolated perspective.
102 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 86.
103 Ibid., p. 230.
104 Ibid., p. 91.
105 Ibid., p. 79.
106 Q. 7:172.
107 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, 27. On the notion of Shiʿas as a select few, see E. Kohlberg, ‘In praise of the few’, in Ehteshámi (ed.), In Praise of the Few, pp. 250–265.
108 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 285; also see ibid., p. 289.
109 Ibid., p. 36.
110 Q. 21:47.
111 Q. 55:7.
112 Q. 55:9.
113 Q. 42:17
114 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 96.
115 Ibid., p. 100.
116 Ibid., p. 101.
117 Ibid., p. 82.
118 See Mansouri, M. A., ‘Casket of light, padlocked with light: Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī, Ahl al-Bayt, and Shiʿi philosophical esotericism’, Shii Studies Review 7 (2023), pp. 3–9Google Scholar.
119 For studies on ghuluww, see M. A. Amir-Moezzi, ‘Les imams et les ghulāt: nouvelles réflexions sur les relations entre Imamisme “modéré” et Shiʿisme “extrémiste”’, Shii Studies Review 4.1–2 (2020), pp. 5–38; Anthony, Caliph and the Heretic; Asatryan, Controversies; Tucker, W. F., Mahdis and Millenarians: Shi'ite Extremists in Early Muslim Iraq (Cambridge, 2008)Google Scholar; Niʿmatullāh Ṣafarī Furūshānī, Ghāliyān: Kāvushī dar jarayān-hā va barāyand-hā (Mashhad, 1378/2000).
120 For example, see al-Bursī, Mashāriq anwār, pp. 23–24.
121 These Hadith were frequent in early Shiʿi Hadith canon. See U. Rubin, ‘More light on Muḥammad's pre-existence: Qurʾānic and post-Qurʾānic perspectives’, in Books and Written Culture of the Islamic World: Studies Presented to Claude Gilliot on the Occasion of his 75th Birthday, (eds.) A. Rippin and R. Tottoli (Leiden, 2015), pp. 288–311.
122 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, pp. 60–61.
123 Ibid., pp. 61–62; E. Kohlberg, ‘Some Shi'i views of the Antediluvian world’, in Ehteshámi (ed.), In Praise of the Few, pp. 327–348.
124 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 76.
125 Ibid., p. 81.
126 Ibid., p. 218.
127 Q. 24:35.
128 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 44.
129 Ibid., pp. 234–235.
130 While this sermon is not found in early Shiʿi Hadith collections, many similar passages exist in these works. Before al-Bursī's era, writers from the Twelver Shiʿi tradition, including Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī, as well as Ismaili works such as Rawḍa-yi taslīm, attributed to Khwāja Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī (d. 672/1274), and even some Sunni writers such as Kamāl al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn Ṭalḥa (d. 652/254), incorporated various versions of this sermon. It seems that Sayyid Ḥaydar Āmulī and Rajab al-Bursī played pivotal roles in popularising this sermon within the Twelver Shiʿi tradition in the Persianate world. For details about this sermon, see M. A. Amir-Moezzi, ‘Aspects de l'imāmologie duodécimaine I: Remarques sur la divinité de l'Imām’, Studia Iranica 25.2 (1996), pp. 193–216; Riḍā Asadpūr, ‘Khuṭbat al-bayān va shaṭḥiyyāt-i ʿārifīn’, Pazhūhish-nāma-yi Adyān 2.3 (1378/1999), pp. 1–40; H. Corbin, History of Islamic Philosophy, (trans.) L. Sherrard and P. Sherrard (London, 2006), pp. 49–51; Lawson, T., Gnostic Apocalypse and Islam: Qur'an, Exegesis, Messianism, and the Literary Origins of the Babi Religion (Abingdon, 2012), pp. 86–87Google Scholar; Moosa, M., Extremist Shiites: The Ghulat Sects (Syracuse, 1987), pp. 179–180Google Scholar. Riḍā Asadpūr has recently studied various commentaries written on this sermon: Riḍā Asadpūr, Khuṭbat al-bayān (Qaem Shahr, 1399/2021).
131 These verses are passages of the following verse: Q. 98:5.
132 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 255.
133 Q. 40:15.
134 al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, pp. 256–257; for the full version of this conversation, see ibid., pp. 255–258; also see Rizvi, ‘Esoteric Shiʿi Islam’, pp. 229–230.
135 It is also important to note that al-Bursī aligns with the prevailing Shiʿi tradition, emphasising imamate as a foundational tenet of religion (uṣūl al-dīn). That is why he perceives imamate or walāya as the crucial element that sets Islam apart from disbelief. See al-Bursī, Mashāriq al-anwār, p. 202. For the doctrine of imamate as a pillar of religion in Shiʿi Islam, see Ibn al-Muṭahhar al-Ḥillī, al-Bāb al-ḥādī ʿashar li-l-ʿAllāma al-Ḥillī maʿa sharḥayh al-nāfiʿ yawm al-ḥashar li-Miqdād ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Suyūrī wa-miftāḥ al-bāb li-Abī al-Fatḥ ibn Makhdūm al-Ḥusaynī, (ed.) Mahdī Muḥaqqiq (Tehran, 1365/1986), pp. 40–52.
136 Muḥammad Bāqir Majlisī cites this Hadith without providing his source. He simply notes that he encountered it in an ancient text (ʿatīq). See Muḥammad Bāqir Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār, 110 vols (Beirut, 1403/1983), vol. 26, pp. 25–28. Later on, Mullā Hādī Sabzawārī, drawing upon the authority of Majlisī, composed a commentary on the same Hadith; see Mullā Hādī Sabzawārī, Sharḥ-i ḥadīth-i ʿAlawī-yi Maʿrifatī bi-l-nūrāniyya, MS Kitābkhāna-yi Majlis, 12657, Tehran. Earlier sources also cited this Hadith: see ʿAlī Naqī ibn Aḥmad Aḥsāʾī, Nahj al-maḥajja fī ithbāt imāmat al-ʿathnā ʿashar ʿalayhim al-salām, two vols (Najaf, 1370/1951), vol. 1, pp. 270–271; Qāḍī Saʿīd Muḥammad ibn al-Mufīd al-Qummī, Sharḥ tawḥīd Shaykh Ṣaddūq, (ed.) Najaf-Ghulī Ḥabībī, three vols (Tehran, 1373/1994), vol. 1, pp. 621–625. Shaykh Aḥmad Aḥsāʾī, however, informs us that this Hadith is documented in al-Bursī's work. Likewise, Muḥsin Fayḍ Kāshānī states that he drew on Rajab al-Bursī's work in incorporating this Hadith; see Muḥsin Fayḍ Kāshānī, al-Kalimāt al-maknūna, (ed.) ʿAlī-Riḍā Aṣgharī (Tehran), pp. 233–235. Therefore, it seems that al-Bursī's Mashāriq al-anwār was a major source for many subsequent works that included this Hadith. The Ismaili author Idrīs ʿImād al-Dīn al-Qurashī (d. 872/1468) also documented this Hadith; see Idrīs ʿImād al-Dīn al-Qurashī, Zahr al-maʿānī, (ed.) Muṣṭafā Ghālib (Beirut, 1411/1991), pp. 223–226. There are also several Persian poetic adaptations of this Hadith; see Muḥammad Khvājavī (ed.), Sharḥ va tarjuma-yi manẓūm-i ḥadīth-i ghamāma va nūrāniyyat (Tehran, 1374/1995), pp. 101–192; Quṭb al-Dīn Muḥammad Nayrīzī, Manẓūma-yi ḥadīth-i nūrāniyyat, MS Kitābkhāna-yi Majlis, 162901, folios 96r.–110v. For a brief analysis of this Hadith during the Qajar era, see S. H. Rizvi, ‘Mullā ʿAlī Nūrī’, in Philosophy in Qajar Iran, (ed.) Reza Pourjavady (Leiden, 2019), pp. 151–152.
137 See Moin, The Millennial Sovereign, pp. 54–55, 63–67.
138 With regard to the reception of al-Bursī, Matthew Melvin-Koushki maintains that Rajab al-Bursī ‘draw freely on the early Shiʿi “esoteric nonrational” Hadith corpus, in some cases rescuing otherwise unattested traditions for Twelver posterity. Indeed, his lettrism aside, this was a primary reason for his eager reception by Safavid scholars, given the ardent ad fontes ethos so definitive of Safavid intellectual history generally’; see Melvin-Koushki, ‘Safavid Twelver lettrism’, p. 10.
139 For examples, see Muḥsin al-Amīn, Aʿyān al-Shīʿa, (ed.) Ḥasan al-Amīn, 12 vols (Beirut, 1403/1983), vol. 6, p. 466; C. Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur, two vols (Leipzig, 1901), vol. 2, p. 204; Rasūl Jaʿfariyān, Tārīkh-i tashayyuʿ dar Īrān: az āghāz tā ṭulūʿ-i dawlat-i Ṣafavī (Tehran, 1387/2008), p. 766; Muḥammad Bāqir Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 1, p. 10; Niʿmat Allāh Ṣāliḥī Najafābādī, Ghuluww: darāmadī bar afkār va ʿaqāʾid-i ghāliyān dar dīn (Tehran, 1384/2005), p. 89; Kāmil Muṣṭafā al-Shaybī, ‘al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Bursī wa-l-ʿanāṣur al-Ṣūfiyya fī afkārihi al-ghāliyya’, Kulliyyat al-Ādāb Jāmiʿa Baghdād 9 (1966), pp. 273–311.
140 See Melvin-Koushki, M., ‘Is (Islamic) occult science science?’ Theology and Science 18.2 (2020), pp. 303–324Google Scholar.
141 See Moin, The Millennial Sovereign; Melvin-Koushki, M., ‘Early modern Islamicate empire’, in The Wiley Blackwell History of Islam, (eds.) Salvatore, A., Tottoli, R., Rahimi, Babak, Attar, M. Fariduddin, and Patel, Naznin (Chichester, 2018), pp. 351–375Google Scholar.