Download PDF | Amikam Elad - Medieval Jerusalem and Islamic Worship_ Holy Places, Ceremonies, Pilgrimage (Islamic History and Civilization _ Studies and Texts, Vol 8)-Brill Academic Publishers (1995).
226 Pages
PREFACE
Though this book is without any doubt the outcome of the politicalsocial reality in which I live, it is not a political piece of work. It deals with certain historical aspects of the history of Medieval Muslim Jerusalem, out of scholarly interest, in a purely scholarly manner, namely primarily through critical analysis of the vast Arabic literary sources, I gained this approach from my teachers at the Institute of Asian and African Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. I am especially indebted to Professors D. Ayalon, M.J. Kister, and M. Sharon of the Institute for introducing me to the world of Medieval Islamic History.
I want to thank Mrs. Bevie Katz for her technical assistance and for editing the English, and to Mrs. Tamar Soffer and Miss Noah Nachum of the Cartography Laboratory of the Department of Geography at The Hebrew University, for the preparation of the maps. Publication of this book was partially financed by the “Hebrew University Internal Funds.”
I owe special gratitude to my wife Einat, without whose constant support the book would not have been completed.
INTRODUCTION
A. THE NATURE OF THE SOURCES
1. Arabic Sources
The nature of the sources at the historian’s disposal provides the main difficulty of presenting a detailed and complete history of Jerusalem in the early Islamic period.
The politico-religious status of Jerusalem in the Muslim world was established at the beginning of the 2nd/8th century. However, from the middle of the 8th century, and even prior to it, Jerusalem lost its central political, though not its religious, status, and throughout most of the Middle Ages was an outlying city of diminished importance. Thus, little information on Jerusalem is found in the rich Arabic literature in all its variations, particularly respecting the early Muslim period (638-1099).
The information on Jerusalem in this literature is scattered and brief, and great patience is required to gather it. But even after such painstaking work, the results are disappointing because the bits of information cannot be crystallized into a comprehensive (certainly not exhaustive) study on the city. Only towards the end of the 10th century, for the first time, does the native Jerusalem geographer, al-Muqaddasi, give a little economic, social and cultural information about Jerusalem.' However, not even from his book, and certainly not from other geographical works of the 9th to the 12th centuries? can an inclusive picture of this or any other aspect of the history of the city be crystallized, i.e., certainly not a comprehensive and complete picture of its political, economic, social, cultural and religious aspects.
As opposed to other important cities throughout the Muslim Caliphate, there are no comprehensive historical books on Jerusalem in the early medieval period.’ The first work in which there is actual reference to topographic-historical aspects of the city are from the 14th and 15th centuries, i.e., the later “Literature in Praise of Jerusalem”. However, even in this literature the point of departure is not generally an historical one. For that Jerusalem had to wait until the end of the 15th century, and the time of the Jerusalem qgadi, Mujir al-Din (d. 1521), who wrote a comprehensive book on the city. In his introduction, Mujir relates to the problem, explaining:
What motivated me to write this [i.e., book] is that the majority of cities in the Islamic world gained the interest of the scholars, who wrote about matters related to their history, helpful things that are instructive of their true events in olden times. Though with respect to Jerusalem, I did not come across any writing of this kind about it, devoted only to it... I saw (therefore) that people yearn for something of this type, an example of which I turned to do; for a few [or one] of the scholars wrote something connected to praise [of Jerusalem] only; several of them deal with a description of ‘Umar’s conquest and the construction of the Umayyads; a few of them note Salah al-Din’s conquest, found it sufficient, and did not mention what occurred after it; and some of them wrote a history in which they discussed some distinguished Jerusalemites, which is not of much use,
And lo, I wish to gather all the notations on the construction, the praise, the conquests and the biographies of the esteemed persons and to mention some of the famous events in order to construct acomplete history.‘
From Mujir al-Din’s words it can be understood that his work does not enable reconstructing the history of the city for the period predating the Crusades either. For this period Mujir depends mainly on the “Literature in Praise of Jerusalem”. For the later Ayyibid and Mamlik periods, and especially for the period of his own lifetime, his sources increase and the information he presents is thus significant and of greatest importance. It enables one to satisfactorily reconstruct the face of the city (particularly its topographic aspect, but also its social aspect).°
The study of Mamuk Jerusalem received an important impetus in recent years due to the discovery in the Islamic Museum of hundreds of documents (most of them from the end of the 14th century), on the Haram al-Sharif.°
2. Non-Arabic Sources
Non-Arabic sources (Greek, Syriac, Armenian, Hebrew, etc.) from the early Muslim period are few. Most of them are not comprehensive historical writings and the information they give is much poorer than that provided by the Arabic sources.’
“There are effectively, only two ‘histories’ of the period compiled by Byzantines, both of which date from the early ninth century.
one, the brief history of Nicephorus [d. 829], and the other the Chronography of Theophanes” [d. 818].* Theophanes’ writings were highly regarded by the classical Near East scholars, particularly as he was thought to be cut off from the historiographic Muslim tradition of the Near East. They thus considered him to be an independent parallel source. This view was recently criticized by Conrad, who showed that in several cases Theophanes used Arabic sources.” However, research on this specific problem is still in its initial stages. Many other methodological problems (which, of course, also exist in the processing of the Arabic sources, see below) hamper the use and discussion of these sources.
A great part of them are still in manuscript form, some have been published, though not translated (from the original). Many of them are in need of modern translation and internal analysis. A large number of them (perhaps the majority) have a definite theological character, a matter which must be taken into consideration in the few cases in which Islam or Islamic history is referred to.'° The traditions respecting the holiness of places in and around Jerusalem were naturally transferred from the Jewish and Christian traditions to the Islamic tradition. Some of these places gained a holy status in Islam with no relation to or reliance on other heritages.
3. Previous Research On Jerusalem During the Early Muslim Period
The history of Jerusalem and its holy sites in the early Muslim period has received scant attention from scholars studying the history of medieval Islam. Over ninety years have passed since the publication of G. Le Strange’s important work,'’ much of which was devoted to this topic. In it he published translations of the most important accounts of the history of Jerusalem from the books of Mujir al-Din (d. 1521), Shams al-Din al-Suyiti (d. 1475), Shihab al-Din al-Maqdisi (d. 1364)? and other writers. Despite the great lapse of time since its publication, Le Strange’s book still constitutes the basic research work for the study of the historic topography of Jerusalem and of Palestine during the early Muslim period. Since its publication in 1890, only one other book with a similar focus has been published—Father Marmarji’s work'*—but it added very little to Le Strange’s study. Le Strange’s translations, notes and evaluations are not always exact, but are of considerable importance as the pioneer work in this field. Of specific importance are his translations of al-Muqaddasi,'* Nasir-i Khusraw'’ and many passages from Mujir al-Din’s work. Any historico-topographical research of Jerusalem in the Muslim period must start with Le Strange’s book.
There are very few comprehensive studies of the history of Jerusalem during the early Islamic period.'® Some scholars have limited themselves to specific topics in the history of Jerusalem, usually its holy aspects.’
A number of general works were written in the late 19th and early 20th centuries on Palestine in the Muslim period, but none of these placed any specific emphasis on Jerusalem.'* Vincent and Abel’s book discusses Jerusalem in the Muslim period, but their review is short and adds very little to Le Strange’s work on this period.'? Van Berchem, in his important and monumental work, indeed devotes two large volumes to Jerusalem.”” Although his study concentrates on inscriptions in general, his discussion of a particular inscription frequently leads him to the study of one site or another in Jerusalem. His research excels in that it concentrates on a large number of Arabic sources, some only in manuscript form,”! and also in that it refers to non-Arabic sources in other languages. Likewise, his ability to analyse precisely the many sources and to abstract far beyond the limited text of the inscription was keen.
Sufficient use of this work has not been made by scholars who have studied Jerusalem in the Muslim period.
A recent publication in this field is M. Gil’s also monumental work, A History of Palestine, 634-1099. This is the most comprehensive and most important study on the subject to date, and some of its sections are devoted to Jerusalem.”
B. THE “LITERATURE IN PRAISE OF JERUSALEM” AND ITS IMPORTANCE FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE HISTORY OF THE CITY DURING THE EARLY MUSLIM PERIOD
The “Literature in Praise of Jerusalem” upon which Mujir alDin based most of the first part of his book, which discusses the early period of the city, is mainly from the 12th to 15th centuries.”> This literature is predated by earlier writings which the later authors copied. Among these are the books by Abi Bakr al-Wasiti (beginning of the 11th century), Fada’il al-Bayt al-Mugaddas™ and by al-Musharraf b. al-Murajja (middle of the 11th century), Fada’il Bayt al-Maqdis wa-al-Sham wa-?|-Khalil, which is the largest and most important of the In-Praise-of-Jerusalem literature. A number of scholars used Ibn al-Murajja’s manuscript for their research.”°
There is an ongoing controversy among researchers regarding the value of the Arabic sources in studying the history of the early Islamic period. At one extreme are the scholars who think that these sources should be strictly regarded as literature, with no actual historic value.”° Against them, at the other extreme, are those who unequivocally accept what is given in these sources and along with it, the historical framework created and developed by the Muslim scholars of the medieval period.
Dealing with the Arabic sources becomes harder the closer one gets to the beginnings of Islam, especially the period of the Prophet, “The Four Guided Caliphs” and the early Umayyads (ca. A.D. 600— 700). Criticism of the early Arabic sources is still in its beginning stages. Very little has been written concerning the value of these sources for the reconstruction of the fundamental historical processes of early Islam. Noteworthy in this respect are the studies of A. Noth, especially regarding the historiographical problems of the Islamic conquests, emphasizing the topos phenomenon.”’
The period under discussion here is a later one, mainly the Umayyad and early ‘Abbasid periods ([640] 660-ca. 900), and also slightly later.
The early Islamic history was formulated by scholars, who, together with their personal backgrounds which influenced their manner of writing and description, also constituted a part of a collective, a society that had definite forms and concepts, that influenced and sometimes even decided the subjects and form of their writings. The early Muslim historical framework laid out by them has not changed to this very day. Some of the Western researchers have even based their works on it. However, today it is clear that a revision is called for in relation to the historical framework of the early Islamic period. The descriptions of the period of the four caliphs who ruled after the death of Muhammad (al-Khulafa’ alRashidin) as an “ideal Islamic theocracy”, the Umayyads that followed as a “secular Arab kingdom” and the ‘Abbasids as an “Islamic Caliphate” are schematic and negate a basic principle by which history is learned and tested, namely, the principle of development and change, i.e., not the fruit of “mutations”, one-time changes, that completely alter the existing order.”
Nevertheless, with respect to reconstructing early Islamic history, the situation is far from desperate. Despite all the reservations and caution required in dealing with the Arabic sources, they constitute a wealth that few civilizations have produced. The nonArabic sources, as noted, are scant, short, and often of a strong, clearly tendentious character, no less (and sometimes even more) so than the Muslim sources. However, some of the non-Arabic sources, especially the Syriac ones, are of importance to the study of the early history of Islam.”” The Arabic sources are, therefore, the best basis for studying early Islamic history. Information is to be found in the many and different kinds of Arabic literature. Examination of the Arabic sources, comparison between them and analysis of them (from internal and external aspects) can in many instances give as objective a picture as possible of the event—or of any historical process.*° This method is indispensable because without it the possibility of arriving at and exposing the historical core is small.
All the possible Arabic sources must be examined in order to check different versions and changes in the text. Parallel sources must sometimes be quoted even if they do not add or detract from the text, in order to show just where parallel texts are “concealed” or where to look for them. Many studies of early Islamic history do not apply this method; they mainly utilize the literary type termed “historical”, while neglecting other kinds of literature.
This book, as has already been noted, is based to a large extent, though certainly not completely, on the “Literature in Praise of Jerusalem”. The question is to what extent can one rely on this literary type in reconstructing different aspects of the history of Jerusalem. Though other kinds of Arabic literature are not discussed here, the conclusions reached also have implications bearing on their evaluation and consideration as well.
Le Strange was sometimes aware that the traditions in these compositions were copied or cited from earlier compositions. He also mentioned some from the works in this genre of Ibn al-Murajja and al-Wasiti from the mid-11th century. Generally, however, he saw these traditions as reflecting the post-Crusade era. He explicitly states this in the introduction to his translation from the work by Shams al-Din al-Suyiti (from the mid-15th century), large parts of which were copied from the book Muthir al-Gharam (mid-14th century). When referring to the copying, Le Strange says:
It is from this work that I have printed the extracts relating to Omar’s visit to the Noble Sanctuary ... also the chapter giving an account of the building of the Dome of the Rock by ‘Abd al-Malik... These accounts as they now stand date from 1350, fully six centuries from ‘Abd al-Malik’s days and over seven hundred years from those of Omar; also I must confess that they seem to me extremely apocryphal. The source from which they are derived is to me quite unknown. Possibly in the Muthir we have another specimen of the romantic history books which Islam produced during the age of the Crusade. ... (italics mine).*!
Grabar, in his important study on the Dome of the Rock, was also perplexed by some of the same questions as Le Strange (despite his different time perspective and greater orientalist’s experience). For example, in relation to the evaluation of the Literature of Praise (Fada’il) and its date, he notes:
If we consider the long tradition of Mount Moriah as a sacred place, what was its significance in the eyes of the Muslims? The Fada’il, or religious guidebooks for pilgrims of later times, provide us with an answer for the period which followed the Crusades, but it may be questioned whether all the complex traditions reported about the Haram at that time had already been formulated when the area was taken over by the Arabs [i.e., by Salah al-Din al-Ayyabi, in 1187].*?
The “Literature of Praise” (Fada’il) is considered a part of the hadith literature. This literature is usually regarded as reflecting trends and developments in the early Muslim state in the Ist/7th and 2nd/8th centuries. The classic approach of the important hadith scholars of the 19th and 20th centuries was to examine the hadith chiefly through the maztn, i.e., internal and external analysis and examination of the content of the hadith. This type of analysis provides historical, religious, social, economic, etc. data incorporated into the hadith. Sometimes it is possible to point precisely to trends of a specific hadith (though less possible to give an exact date of its creation) by comparing it with known historic processes or events.
As noted, with the exception of single instances, just on the basis of the criterion for examining the matn alone, it is very difficult to establish an exact chronology or to date the creation of the tradition before the end of the 1st/7th century. During the last twenty years extensive progress has been made in the study of early Muslim historiography, especially in the broad field of hadith literature. More and more emphasis is being given to the study of the isndd, i.e., to the chain of transmitters. Efforts are being made in these studies to develop a method and establish criteria that will aid in finding data, particularly chronological (though also others) about the hadith.**
*
The In-Praise-of-Jerusalem literature contains a wide spectrum of traditions. One set of traditions is of particular interest. This set yields very important historico-topographic information such as the long traditions on the building of the Dome of the Rock and alAqsa Mosque and their histories. These traditions, like the rest of the traditions, appear in early collections of the Fada’il, constructed according to the regular external frame of the hadith, i.e., isnad (chain of transmitters) and matn (content of the tradition), each, however, with a certain uniqueness (see below). These specific traditions help in constructing the early history of Jerusalem. Parallels to these historic traditions which appear in the “Praise Literature”, such as the long chapter on the conquest of Jerusalem and the building of the Haram by the Umayyads and the first ‘Abbasids, are found in relatively earlier compositions. Parallels to the tradition of the conquest can be found in the early history and Futih books. Yet earlier parallels to the traditions on the building of the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque are found in the historical literature. They constitute an important central axis in the discussion on the Dome of the Rock and particularly on the ritual ceremonies in Jerusalem during the Umayyad period (see Chapter 2).
This leads to the central question of the historical value of the “Literature in Praise of Jerusalem”. Many researchers considered this kind of literature with great reservation, viewing it rather as a later literary type and historically unreliable. The most important questions are when were these traditions composed and when were they written down. One way (Goldziher’s, Schacht’s and others) of checking this is by clarifying the historic circumstances and background giving rise to the tradition. Goldziher’s answer was that these traditions are a direct product of the political, religious and social circumstances prevailing in the Umayyad period, a period when Syria and Palestine were the focus of the caliphate, when Jerusalem was ascribed a central role. The literature is part of the unending efforts of the Umayyad caliphs and the scholars inspired by them to exalt Jerusalem.”
This method, which Goldziher based his writings on, is acceptable and can be slightly expanded. Already towards the close of the Umayyad rule there are signs indicating that the Umayyads transferred their political centre to northern Syria and Mesopotamia.» Apparently, at the same time, a process of decline of the southern provinces of al-Sham began, and along with it Jerusalem lost its important politico-administrative status. The decline in Jerusalem’s position began several decades earlier, with the establishment of Ramla as the capital of the Palestine district (Jund Filastin) in the first decade of the 8th century. With the rise of the ‘Abbasids to power (750), the political centre was switched to Iraq and the eastern provinces. From the beginning of their rule, the ‘Abbasids adopted a deliberate policy of discrimination and of distancing themselves from the Syrian provinces. They had little interest in developing or investing in Syria, as is evident from the low number of building projects there. In this connection, the ‘Abbasids had no interest whatsoever in encouraging In-Praise-of-Syria literature in general or In-Praise-of-Jerusalem in particular. The politico-religious, social and economic conditions that were the central factor in the development of the In-Praise-of-Jerusalem literature no longer existed. Most of the great scholars of the hadith and the great Muslim historians lived in Iraq, congregated around the court, or in other big centres (mainly) in the east of the empire. They had no interest in composing traditions in praise of Syria.
* * * * *
It seems that the Muslim scholars in the medieval period were aware of the sources and trends of the “Praise” traditions, and that is the reason why most of them were not included in the canonized hadith literature. Some are found in the relatively later hadith literature (from the 10th century on) or in the “forged” hadith literature (mawdi‘at). That they are found in the latter shows that they were unacceptable to the hadith scholars due to their content.*®
x* * * * *
Research on Jerusalem in the early Muslim period in general and on the In-Praise-of-Jerusalem literature in particular took a decisive turn following Kister’s studies. He further developed the method Goldziher used in studying the hadith and clearly showed that a great number of the traditions of the Praise literature are very old and were created in the Umayyad period, or in his own words:
We can say with certainty that they were well known and widely circulated as early as the beginning of the second century after the hijra. ... Jerusalem Praise Literature emerged in the second half of the first century of the hijra (the end of the seventh century C.E.) and was put into writing in the first half of the second century of
the hijra (eight century C.E.).*”
Recently, Juynboll has argued, basing his argument on other methods, that this literary type (the Fada’il) as a whole (not just the “Literature in Praise of Jerusalem”) is among the older types of hadith, if not the oldest, and was already circulated from the middle to the end of the 1st/7th century.** Other scholars reached identical conclusions through analysis and treatment of another type of hadith literature, al-Fitan wa-’]-Malahim (events and wars of the “End of Days”).*
* * * * *
I rely to a great extent in this book on Jerusalem Praise Literature and in particular on two compositions that Le Strange did not see, namely, that of al-Wasiti and of Ibn al-Murajja (beginning to the middle of the 11th century). The years these authors lived and when they died date their compositions to pre-Crusader times. The assumption of other scholars that a large part of the In-Praise-ofJerusalem literature was composed after the Crusader period is mistaken. Analysis of the historic background (the Umayyad petiod) which was conducive to the creation of the Praise literature and the conclusions of the studies quoted above lead to the conclusion that most of the traditions in the Jerusalem Praise compositions are from the Umayyad period. They can, therefore, be traced back to the end of the 1st/7th century or the beginning to middle of the 2nd/8th century. The collection of the old Praise-of-Jerusalem traditions that appear in the books of al-Wasiti and Ibn alMurajja served the later authors of the 12th to the 15th centuries; the latter copied what lay before them. If they added anything, they usually noted it; sometimes they deleted material. Comparison of tens of traditions in the books of al-Wasiti and Ibn-al-Murajja, that were accurately copied by later authors is proof of this. Evidently, the reason for the caution and relative preciseness in copying these traditions was because they were part of the hadith literature. This is one of the basic characteristics of the hadith literature and also of Muslim history: ancient compositions and traditions can “disappear” for hundreds of years and reappear in later compositions.”
The collections of Jerusalem Praise Literature composed in the Umayyad period found their way into the hands of Syrian and Palestinian scholars and also other scholars in Muslim cultural centres outside of Palestine. A small number, as noted above, were integrated in the hadith literature which was at the height of its development at the beginning of the ‘Abbasid regime. They appeared again (and were not composed!) in later periods, when new politico-religious conditions were created in Syria. The revival of this literature began at the beginning of the 11th century (the reasons for which are not clear),*! but it mainly flourished during the Crusader period, when Zengi, the sovereign of Mosul and Aleppo, and Nar al-Din after him, wanted to make use of the Fada’il al-Sham through the ‘ulamd’ for the jihdd against the Crusaders.** This literature again flourished after the Six-Day War with the conquest of East Jerusalem in 1967 and was studied by both Arab and Israeli scholars. Many analyses (a number of which can be classified as political pamphlets though some are serious scientific writings) contributed to the renewed study of Syria (and especially of Jerusalem) in the early Muslim period. This is not an unknown phenomenon. Subjects of historical studies are usually connected with the politico-cultural experience of the times.
* * * * *
Other arguments can lead to the attribution of an early date to the Praise-of-Jerusalem Traditions:
1. Many traditions with an identical isndd exist in early hadith collections or early exegesis of the Qur’an as well as in Fada’il works. (There is a large body of evidence of this type, hence it would be superfluous to discuss it here.)
2. A great number of traditions (sometimes many scores) were transmitted at a certain stage by one transmitter, one isndd chain going back from him to the alleged originator of the report. One of these transmitters, al-Walid b. Hammad al-Ramli, who wrote in the mid-9th century, has been discussed elsewhere.*? The fact that each different transmitter, some living in the 9th—10th centuries, had an accumulation of so many traditions makes it likely that they already possessed a book or big collection of “Traditions in Praise of Jerusalem”.“
3. Juynboll argues that during the last two decades of the Ist century of the hijra (700-720), interest was awakened in hadith literature in the different centres of the Caliphate, and he adds:
I have come to recognize that the vast majority of isndds, as far as their three oldest transmitters are concerned, can be considered as being particular to one centre. At a somewhat later stage, say, during the first few decades of the second century (the 720s—750s A.D.), contacts do seem to have been established between centres and witness the emergence of isndds that can be labelled as being particular
to more than one centre.*
An analysis of the isnad of a great many traditions in Praise-ofJerusalem shows that at least the first three scholars, beginning from the Successors onwards, lived in Palestine or in the towns of southern Syria. This is particularly evident in the traditions dealing with or providing information on the topography of Jerusalem (and not merely from a geographico-historical point of view). I shall insist and comment on this point many times during my discussion. It has important demographic and cultural implications, and a special study needs to be devoted to this in the future.*
4. The place the tradition was transmitted or heard is often given in the isndd itself, and sometimes even the date of transmission. There are many such testimonies in the “Traditions in Praise of Jerusalem” in Ibn al-Murajja’s work. The dates are generally from the 9th century onwards, although some are earlier.”
5. Many key traditions, often those with the greatest historical value for the history of Jerusalem during the Umayyad period and later, were transmitted by a chain of transmitters from one Jerusalem family. Such a family, the Salama b. Qaysar, with all its branches, has been discussed elsewhere.
Another very important family is that of “Abd al-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Mansir b. Thabit of Jerusalem. Eight traditions transmitted by members of this family are found in al-Wasiti’s work.”
a) ‘Abd al-Rahman lived in the mid-9th century. He transmitted all eight traditions mentioned above to al-Walid b. Hammad alRamli (mid-late 9th century).
b) His father, Muhammad b. Mansir, was active in the last quarter of the 8th century, and early 9th century. He was active at least during the reign of Caliph al-Mahdi (reigned 775-785), since he tells°° of the church which al-Mahdi ordered al-Fadl b. Salih (b. ‘Ali b. ‘Abdallah b. ‘Abbas) to renovate and construct. This renovation may have been carried out during al-Madhi’s visit to Jerusalem in the year 163/780.°' From another source it is learned that Salih b. ‘Ali was in al-Madhi’s retinue when he came to Jerusalem in the year already mentioned.” Another tradition tells that the Muhammad b. al-Mansir in question lived in the period of Mudgatil b. Sulayman (d. 150/767-8) and even heard [hadith] and transcribed from him on the Haram.
c) Mansir b. Thabit. Nothing more is known about him.
d) Thabit b. Istanibiyadh, al-Farisi al Khumsi lived during alMahdi’s reign. He reports on al-Mahdi’s visit to Jerusalem in 780 in an important tradition.“ In another® he reports from Raja’ b. Haywa (d. 112/730) on the building of the Dome of the Rock. And in yet another, he reports on the earthquake which occurred in 130/747.
The members of this family are discussed in detail since the information they provide in their traditions is of the greatest importance for the history of Jerusalem in the early Islamic period. At least in connection with the “Traditions in Praise of Jerusalem” which were examined, it is concluded that the family traditions are an extremely important source. This differs from Schacht, who almost totally negates such traditions in the field of legal hadith.*’
6. The isndd in many “Traditions in Praise of Jerusalem” does not “originate” with the Prophet or with one of the Companions of the Prophet (Sahdaba), but with a Successor or the Successor of a Successor, who generally lived in the first or second half of the 8th century. In this respect the words of Schacht should be noted, that “isndds have a tendency to grow backwards,” or that:
In the course of polemical discussions... traditions from Successors become traditions from Companions and traditions from Companions become traditions from the Prophet. ... We must as a rule... consider the opinions of the Successors as the starting point, and the traditions from the Companions and from the Prophet as secondary development, intended to provide a higher authority for the doctrine in question.
In another place he says:
“Generally speaking, we say that the most perfect and complete isndds are the latest.”
Juynboll develops this basic idea of Schacht’s as follows:
Where did a specific hadith originate? Probably in the region where the traditionist mentioned at the Successor’s level in its isnadd operated.” When did a specific hadith originate? . . . at the earliest sometime during the life of the Successor of the isndd...°' Who may be held responsible for bringing a tradition into circulation? ... It is again in most cases the Successor who can be held responsible as the earliest likely candidate... but the class of so-called Successors of Successors are even more likely candidates.
It can be said with certainty that traditions concluding with a Successor or Successor of a Successor were widespread during the Umayyad period, at least at the time when the last transmitter lived.
In many traditions of this kind, the earliest personality signing the isnad was a scholar living in one of the cities of Palestine or at least a Syrian scholar, with close ties to Palestine and its scholars. The information they transmitted was thus of great importance; it is often unique historical or historico-topographical information. Traditions of this kind were transmitted by mu’adhdhinin of Jerusalem,® but mainly by religious scholars, some who served in administrative posts during the Umayyad reign. Such men included Khalid b. Ma‘dan (d. 103 or 104/721 or 722), who was both a transmitter of traditions and chief of the “police” (sahib al-shurta) of Caliph Yazid b. Mu‘awiya (reigned 60/680-—63/683)™; or the famous scholar, Raja’ b. Haywa (d. 112/730), born in Beit Shean in Palestine, who was in charge of the construction of the Dome of the Rock, and served the Umayyad caliphs from ‘Abd al-Malik (reigned 65/685-86/705) to ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz (reigned 99/ 717-101/720); or Ibrahim b. Abi ‘Abla (d. 152/769-770 or 153/ 770), who lived in Ramla, and was in close contact with the Caliphs al-Walid b. ‘Abd al-Malik (reigned 86/705—96/715), Sulayman b. ‘Abd al-Malik (reigned 96/715-99/717), ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘ Aziz, Hisham b. ‘Abd al-Malik (reigned 99/724—-125/743), and Marwan b. Muhammad (reigned 125/744—-132/749). Al-Walid b. ‘Abd alMalik used to send him from Damascus to Jerusalem to distribute the pensions which the government gave to the Arabs there (‘ata’).
In another tradition, Ibrahim testifies that al-Walid b. ‘Abd al-Malik used to send gold bands with him to be distributed among the inhabitants of Jerusalem.” In another place his explanation of a verse of the Qur’dn is transmitted with an early, very important topographical identification.“ Ibrahim served as secretary to Hisham and was in charge of diwdn al-khatam during Marwan b. Muhammad’s reign.”
There are many other such examples.” One further unique ex-ample is the last tradition in al-Wasiti’s book.”! The isnad concludes with Damara b. Rabi‘a al-Ramli (d. 202/817), the pupil of Ibrahim b. Abi ‘Abla,” from Khalid b. Hazim, who recounts in the first person that Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, the famous scholar (d. 124/ 742), came to Jerusalem:
and I began to go around with him in these (holy places) so that he could pray there. He said: I said here is [a]shaykh, who recites from the holy books (inna hahuna shaykhan yuhaddithu ‘ani ’|-kutubi),” called ‘Uqba b. Abi Zaynab. What do you think of sitting in his company? ... He said: And we sat by him and he began to transmit traditions in praise of Jerusalem. And since he dwelt at length (on these), al-Zuhri said, oh shaykh, you will never reach the level reached by Allah. He said: “Glory to (Allah) who did take his Servant for a journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque, whose precincts we did bless.””* And he (the shaykh) was angered and said: The resurrection of the dead will not come to pass until the bones of Muhammad, may Allah pray for him and save him, are
transferred to Jerusalem.
From this tradition one learns of the early ziydra to holy places in Jerusalem during the Umayyad period; of the study of non-Muslim religious literature on the Haram by Muslims; of the identification of Jerusalem with the well known Qur’an verse of the Prophet’s Isr@; of the activity of al-Zuhri, the important scholar, and of two early Jerusalem scholars, mentioned by name. This is in fact an historical tradition, with isndd, of course. Many traditions of this kind are to be found in the collections of the Fada’il.
In light of all of the above, and based on my understanding of the traditions of the “Literature of Praise”, I attempt to trace the earliest historical and topograhical processes in the Muslim period in Jerusalem. This brings us back to the Umayyad period, in which great efforts were made by the rulers to exalt Syria (including Palestine: al-Sham), and in which Jerusalem received a special status within the framework of these efforts. I will, therefore, begin the account with an historical survey encompassing Umayyad construction works in Jerusalem, with special emphasis on construction at the holy places in the city.
Link
Press Here
0 التعليقات :
إرسال تعليق