A Dictionary of Islam / Being a cyclopedia of the doctrines, rites, ceremonies, and customs, together with the technical and theological terms, of the Muhammadan religion.

by Thomas Patrick Hughes

L.

LĀĀDRĪYAH (لاادرية‎). A sect of heretics who say it is impossible for mortal man to be certain of any fact, even of man’s own identity.

LABBAIKA (لبيك‎). [[TALBIYAH].]

LABĪD (لبيد‎). The son of Rabīʿah ibn Jaʿfar al-ʿĀmirī, a celebrated poet in the time of Muḥammad who embraced Islām, and who is said to have died at al-Kūfah at the advanced age of 157 years. The Prophet is related to have said, “The truest words ever uttered by a poet are those of Labīd,—‘Know that everything is vanity but God.’ ” (Mishkāt, book xxxii. ch. x. pt. 1.) [[POETRY].]

LAḤD (لحد‎). The hollow made in a grave on the Qiblah side, in which the corpse is placed. It is made the same length as the grave, and is as high as would allow a person to sit up in it.

LĀHŪT (لاهوت‎). Lit. “Extinction” or “absorption.” (1) The last stage of the mystic journey. (2) Divinity. (3) Life penetrating all things. [[SUFIISM].]

LAḤYĀN (لحيان‎). A branch of the Huẕail tribe, which inhabited, in the days of Muḥammad, as they still do, the vicinity of Makkah. Muḥammad formed an expedition against them, A.H. 6, on account of their treacherous attack on a small party of Muslims at Rajī.

LAILATU ʾL-BARĀʾAH (ليلة البراءة‎). [[SHAB-I-BARAʾAH].]

AL-LAILATU ʾL-MUBĀRAKAH (الليلة المباركة‎). Lit. “The Blessed Night.” [[LAILATU ʾL-QADR].]

LAILATU ʾL-QADR (ليلة القدر‎). “The night of power.” A mysterious night, in the month of Ramaẓān, the precise date of which is said to have been known only to the Prophet and a few of the Companions. The following is the allusion to it in the Qurʾān. Sūratu ʾl-Qadr (xcvii.):—

“Verily we have caused it (the Qurʾān) to descend on the Lailatu ʾl-Qadr.

“Who shall teach thee what the Lailatu ʾl-Qadr is?

“The Lailatu ʾl-Qadr excelleth a thousand months:

“Therein descend the angels, and the spirit by permission

“Of their Lord in every matter;

“And all is peace until the breaking of the dawn.”

This night must not be confounded, as it often is, with the Shab-i-Barāʾah, which is generally called Shab-i-Qadr, or the night of power, but which occurs on the 15th of Shaʿbān. [[SHAB-I-BARAʾAH].]

The excellences of the Lailatu ʾl-Qadr are said to be innumerable, and it is believed that during its solemn hours the whole animal and vegetable creation bow down in humble adoration to the Almighty.

LAILATU ʾR-RAG͟HĀʾIB (ليلة الرغائب‎). The “night of supererogatory devotions.” A festival observed on the first Friday in the month Rajab, by certain mystic leaders who affirm that it was established by the Prophet; but it is generally rejected by orthodox Sunnīs. (See Raddu ʾl-Muḥtār, vol. i. p. 717.)

LAIS̤ (ليث‎). An Arabic tribe descended from Kinānah. Al-Baiẓāwī says they thought it unlawful for a man to eat alone, and were the cause of the verse in the Qurʾān, [Sūrah xxiv. 60]: “There is no crime in you, whether ye eat together or separately.”

LAMENTATION. [[BUKAʾ].]

LAʿNAH (لعنة‎). “Imprecation; curse; anathema.” A word used thirteen times in the Qurʾān, e.g. [Sūrah ii. 83]: “The curse of God is on the infidels.”

LAND. Arabic arẓ (ارض‎), balad (بلد‎), mulk (ملك‎).

The following are some of the principal rules of Muslim law relating to land:—

(1) Tithes or Zakāt on lands.—Upon every thing produced from the ground there is due a tenth, or ʿāshir, ʿushr (Heb. ‏מַעֲשֵׂר‎), whether the soil be watered by the annual overflow of great rivers, or by periodical rains; excepting upon articles of wood, bamboos, and grass, which are not subject to tithe. Land watered by means of buckets or machinery, such as Persian wheels, or by watering camels, are subject to only half tithes. (Hidāyah, vol. i. p. 44.)

(2) Conquered lands become the property of the state. Those of idolaters remain so. Those belonging to Jews, Christians, or Fire worshippers, are secured to the owners on payment of tribute. Those who afterwards embrace Islām recover their property, according to ash-Shāfiʿī, but not according to the Ḥanīfah school. Upon the Muslim army evacuating an enemy’s country, it becomes unlawful for the troops to feed their cattle on the land without due payment. (Hidāyah, vol. ii. p. 170.)

(3) Appropriation for religious uses.—Land may be so appropriated; but if a person appropriate land for such a purpose and it should afterwards be discovered that an indefinite portion of it was the property of another person, the appropriation is void with respect to the remainder also. The appropriation must also be of a perpetual and not of a temporary nature. (Hidāyah, vol. ii. p. 340.)

(4) The sale of land is lawful. In such sales the trees upon the land are included in the sale, whether specified or not; but neither the grain growing on the ground, nor the fruit growing on the trees, are included, unless specified. But in the case of the fruit or corn being purchased with the land, it must be gathered or cleared away at once. In the sale of ground, the seed sown in the ground is not included. Land may be resold previous to seizing or possession, by the first purchaser, according to Abū Ḥanīfah, but the Imām Muḥammad says it is unlawful. Wells and watercourses are not included in the sale of lands unless specified. (Hidāyah, vol. ii. pp. 372, 481, 503.)

(5) Claims against land must be made by the plaintiff, defining the four boundaries and specifying the names of each possessor, and the demand for the land must be made in explicit terms. And if the land has been resold, a decree must be given either for or against the last possessor, according to some doctors. (Hidāyah, vol. iii. p. 65.)

(6) Land can be lent, and the borrower can build upon it, but when the lender receives back his land, he can compel the borrower to remove his houses and trees. Land lent for tillage cannot be resumed by the lender until the crops sown have been reaped. Abū Ḥanīfah maintains that when land is lent to another, the contract should be in these words, “You have given me to eat of this land.” (Hidāyah, vol. iii. p. 284, 288.)

(7) A gift of land which is uncultivated cannot be retracted after houses have been built on it or trees planted. If the donee sell half of the granted land, the donor in that case may, if he wishes, resume the other half. If a person make a gift of land to his relative within the prohibited degrees it is not lawful for him to resume it. (Hidāyah, vol. iii. p. 302.)

(8) The Ijārah, or rental of land, is lawful, but the period must be specified, otherwise the rent may be demanded from day to day. But a lease of land is not lawful unless mention is made of the article to be raised upon it, and at the expiration of the lease the land must be restored in its original state. A hirer of land is not responsible for accidents; for example, if in burning off the stubble he happen to burn other property, he is not responsible for loss incurred. (Hidāyah, vol. iii. p. 314, &c.)

(9) The cultivation of waste and unclaimed lands is lawful, when it is done with the permission of the ruler of the country, and the act of cultivation invests the cultivator with a right of property in them. But if the land be not cultivated for three years after it has been allotted, it may again be claimed by the state. (Hidāyah, vol. iv. p. 128.)

(10) If a person be slain on lands belonging to anyone, and situated near a village, and the proprietor of the land be not an inhabitant of the village, he is responsible for the murder, as the regulation and protection of those lands rest upon him. (Hidāyah, vol. iv. p. 447.)

LAPIDATION. [[STONING].]

LAPWING. Arabic hudhud (هدهد‎). The name in the Qurʾān, [Sūrah xxvii. 20], for the bird which carried the letter from King Solomon to the Queen of Sheba. [[SOLOMON].] It is the ‏דּוּכִיפַת‎ of the Old Testament, [Lev. xi. 19], [Deut. xiv. 18]. Greek ἔποψ. The modern Hoopoe.

The commentators al-Jalālān and al-Baiẓāwī say that Solomon, having finished the temple of Jerusalem, went in pilgrimage to Makkah, whence, having stayed as long as he pleased, he proceeded towards al-Yaman; leaving Makkah in the morning, he arrived by noon at Ṣanʿāʾ, and being extremely delighted with the country, rested there. But wanting water to make the ablution, he looked among the birds for the lapwing, whose business it was to find it; for it is pretended she was sagacious or sharp-sighted to discover water underground, which the devils used to draw, after she had marked the place by digging with her bill. They add that this bird was then taking a tour in the air, whence, seeing one of her companions alighting, she descended also, and having had a description given her by the other of the city of Sabaʾ, whence she was just arrived, they both went together to take a view of the place, and returned soon after Solomon had made the inquiry given in the Qurʾān: “He reviewed the birds and said, ‘How is it I do not see al-Hudhud? Is he, then, amongst the absent?’ ”

LAQAB (لقب‎). A surname. Either a title of honour or a nickname; e.g. Al-Ḥusain ibn Masʿūd al-Farrā, “the tanner”; Abū Saʿīd Tāju ʾl-Mulūk, “the crown of kings”; Ibn Muḥammad at-Tag͟hlabī, “of the tribe of Tag͟hlab.” [[NAMES].]

LAQĪT̤ (لقيط‎), in its primitive sense, signifies anything lifted from the ground, but in the language of the law it signifies a child abandoned by those to whom it properly belongs. The person who finds the child is termed the multaqit̤, or the taker up. [[FOUNDLING].]

LARCENY. Arabic sariqah (سرقة‎). In the language of the law, sariqah signifies the taking away the property of another in a secret manner, at a time when such property is in custody. Custody is of two kinds: 1st, by place, for example, a house or a shop; and, 2nd, by personal guard, which is by means of a personal watch over the property. If an adult of sound understanding steal out of undoubted custody ten dirhams, or property to the value of ten dirhams, the Muḥammadan law awards the amputation of a hand, for it is said in the Qurʾān, [Sūrah v. 42]: “If a man or woman steal, cut off their hands.”

With regard to the amount of the value which constitutes a theft, there is some difference of opinion. According to Abū Ḥanīfah, it is ten dirhams; according to ash-Shāfiʿī, it is the fourth of a dīnār, or twelve dirhams; whilst Mālik holds that the sum is three dirhams.

The freeman and the slave are on equal footing with respect to punishment for theft, and the hand of the slave is to be struck off in the same manner as the hand of a free Muslim.

The theft must be established upon the testimony of two witnesses, but the magistrate must examine the witnesses as to the manner, time, and place of the theft. The thief must also be held in confinement, or suspicion, until the witnesses be fully examined.

If a party commit a theft, and each of the party receive ten dirhams, the hand of each is to be cut off; but if they receive less than ten dirhams each, they are not liable to amputation.

Amputation is not incurred by the theft of anything of a trifling nature, such as wood, bamboos, grass, fish, fowls, and garden stuff.

Amputation is not incurred by the theft of such things as quickly decay and spoil, such as milk or fruit, nor for stealing fruit whilst upon the tree, or grain which has not been reaped, these not being considered as in custody.

The hand of a thief is not struck off for stealing any fermented liquor, because he may explain his intention in taking it, by saying, “I took it with a view to spill it”; and also because some fermented liquors are not lawful property.

The hand is not to be cut off for stealing a guitar or tabor, these being of use merely as idle amusements.

Amputation is not incurred by stealing a Qurʾān, although ash-Shāfiʿī maintains that it is.

There is no amputation for stealing the door of a mosque. Nor is the hand struck off for stealing a crucifix or a chess board, as it is in the thief’s power to excuse himself by saying, “I took them with a view to break and destroy them, as things prohibited.” It is otherwise with a coin bearing the impression of an idol, by the theft of which amputation is incurred; because the money is not an object of worship.

The hand is not to be struck off for stealing a free-born infant, although there be ornaments upon it, because a free person is not property; but amputation is incurred by stealing an infant slave, although the stealing of an adult slave does not incur amputation, as such an act does not come under the description of theft, being an usurpation or a fraud.

Amputation is not incurred for stealing a book, because the object of the thief can only be its contents and not the property.

The hand is not cut off for stealing a cur-dog, because such an animal is common property; nor for stealing utensils made of wood.

There is no amputation for stealing from the public treasury, because everything there is the common property of all Muslims, and in which the thief, as a member of the community has a share. And if a person steal from property of which he is in part owner, amputation is not inflicted. Nor if a creditor steal from his debt is the hand cut off.

The right hand of the thief is to be cut off at the joint of the wrist and the stump afterwards cauterised, and for the second theft the left foot, and for any theft beyond that he must suffer imprisonment.

AL-LĀT (اللات‎). The name of an idol worshipped by the ancient Arabians, probably the Alilat of Herodotus. The idol Lāt is mentioned in the Qurʾān in conjunction with the two other idols, al-ʿUzzā and Manāt. See [Sūrah liii. 19]: “What think ye, then, of al-Lāt and al-ʿUzzā, and Manāt, the third idol besides?”

In connection with this verse there is an interesting discussion. (See Muir, new ed. p. 86.) Al-Wāqidī and at̤-T̤abarī both relate that, on a certain day, the chief men of Makkah assembled in a group beside the Kaʿbah, discussed, as was their wont, the affairs of the city, when the Prophet appeared, and seating himself by them in a friendly manner, began to recite the 53rd chapter of the Qurʾān; and when he had reached the verse “What think ye then of al-Lāt, and al-ʿUzzā, and Manāt, the third idol besides?” the Devil suggested words of reconciliation and compromise with idolatry, namely, “These are exalted females, and verily their intercession is to be hoped for.” These words, however, which were received by the idolaters with great delight, were afterwards disavowed by the Prophet, for Gabriel revealed to him the true reading, namely, “What think ye then of al-Lāt, and al-ʿUzzā, and Manāt, the third idol besides? Shall ye have male progeny and God female? This, then, were an unjust partition! Verily, these are mere names which ye and your fathers have given them.”

The narrative thus related by al-Wāqidī and at̤-T̤abarī is given as an explanation of [Sūrah xxii. 51]: “Nor have we sent any apostle or prophet before thee into whose readings Satan hath not injected some wrong desire.”

AL-LAT̤ĪF (اللطيف‎). “The Mysterious or the Subtle One.” One of the ninety-nine attributes of God. [Sūrah vi. 103]: “For He is the Subtle (al-Lat̤īf), the All-informed (al-K͟habīr).

LAT̤ĪFAH (لطيفة‎). A term used by Ṣūfī mystics for any sign or influence in the soul, derived from God, which has such a mysterious effect on the heart that mortal man cannot express it in language, just as a delicious taste in the mouth cannot be exactly expressed by the tongue. (Kitābu ʾt-Taʿrīfāt, in loco.)

LAUGHING. Arabic ẓaḥk, ẓiḥk (ضحك‎). Heb. ‏צָחַק‎. ([Gen. xviii. 13].) Immoderate laughing is generally condemned by Muḥammadan teachers, for ʿĀyishah relates that Muḥammad “never laughed a full laugh so that the inside of his mouth could be seen; he only smiled.” (Mishkāt, book xxii. ch. vii.)

AL-LAUḤU ʾL-MAḤFŪZ̤ (اللوح المحفوظ‎). “The preserved tablet.”

In the Ḥadīs̤ and in theological works it is used to denote the tablet on which the decrees of God were recorded with reference to mankind. In the Qurʾān it only occurs once, when it refers to the Qurʾān itself. [Sūrah lxxxv. 21, 22]: “It is a glorious Qurʾān written on the preserved table.” The plural alwāḥ occurs in [Sūrah vii. 142], for the tables of the law given to Moses.

LAW, The. The words used by Muslims to express “the law,” are ash-Sharīʿah (الشريعة‎) and ash-Sharʿ (الشرع‎), the meaning of which is “the way.” The compiler of the G͟hiyās̤u ʾl-Lug͟hah defines it as “the way or road in the religion of Muḥammad, which God has established for the guidance of His people, both for the worship of God and for the duties of life.” The term ash-Sharīʿah occurs once in the Qurʾān, [Sūrah xlv. 17]: “We (God) put thee (Muḥammad) in the right way concerning the affair.” The term ash-Shirʿah is almost obsolete in books on Muslim theology, but it occurs once in the Qurʾān, [Sūrah v. 52]: “To every one have we given a right way.”

In the Traditions and theological works, the word ash-Sharʿ is generally used to express the law of Muḥammad. The Hebrew ‏תּוֹרָה‎ occurs in the Qurʾān as Taurāt, and is always used for the law of Moses. [[TAURAT].]

According to Muslim doctors, ash-Sharʿ, or “the Law,” may be divided into five sections: Iʿtiqādāt, “belief”; Ādāb, “moralities”; ʿIbādāt, “devotions”; Muʿāmalāt, “transactions”; and ʿUqūbāt, “punishments.”

(1) Iʿtiqādāt, embraces all that is contained in the six articles of the Muslim faith, namely, Belief in (a) God; (b) His angels; (c) His Books; (d) His Prophets; (e) The Day of Judgment; (f) The Decrees of God. This section of Muslim law is termed ʿIlmu ʾl-ʿAqāʾid, or, “The Science of the Articles of Belief,” and includes all branches of scholastic theology. The books chiefly consulted on this subject in the present work are the Sharḥu ʾl-Muwāqif, by Saiyid Sharīf-al-Jurjānī, and the Sharḥu ʾl-ʿAqāʾid, by Masʿūd Saʿdu ʾd-dīn at-Taftāzānī.

(2) Ādāb embraces the consideration of all those moral excellences which are enjoined in the Qurʾān and Traditions, as Ik͟hlāṣ, “sincerity”; Tawwakkul, “confidence in God”; Tawāz̤uʿ, “humility”; Tafwīẓ, “resignation”; Qaṣru ʾl-ʿAmal, “keeping down one’s expectation”; Zuhd fī ʾd-dunyā, “renunciation of the world”; Naṣīḥah, “giving good counsel and advice”; Qanāʿah, “contentment”; Sak͟hāwah, “liberality”; Ḥubb, “love to God and man”; Ṣabr, “patience”; &c. (See Majmaʿu ʾl-Biḥār, vol. ii. p. 422.)

(3) ʿIbādāt, includes all acts of devotion to God, such as are included in the five pillars of practice: (a) Recital of the Creed; (b) Prayer; (c) Zakāt, or “legal alms”; (d) Ṣaum, or “fasting”; (e) The pilgrimage to Makkah. It will also embrace such religious acts as Jihād, or warfare for the propagation of the religion of Islām.

(4) Muʿāmalāt, includes such duties as are required between man and man, and is divided into Muk͟hāṣamāt, “altercations”; Munākaḥāt, “nuptials”; Amānāt, “securities.” Under these three heads are embraced all the various sections of civil jurisprudence such as barter, sale, agency, larceny, marriage, divorce, dower, partnership, claims, &c.

(5) ʿUqūbāt, denotes the punishments instituted in the Qurʾān and Traditions, namely, (a) Qiṣāṣ, “retaliation”; (b) Ḥaddu ʾs-sariqah, punishment for theft by the loss of a hand; (c) Ḥaddu ʾz-zināʾ, punishment for fornication and adultery, stoning for a married person and one hundred lashes for an unmarried person; (e) Ḥaddu ʾl-qazf, or punishment of eighty lashes for slander; Ḥaddu ʾr-riddah, or punishment by death for apostasy; Ḥaddu ʾsh-shurb, or punishment with eighty lashes for wine-drinking.

The two common divisions of Muḥammadan law are ʿIlmu ʾl-Kalām, or ʿAqāʾid, embracing all matters of faith; and ʿIlmu ʾl-Fiqh, which includes all matters of practice as distinguished from articles of faith.

Muslim law is also divided into two great distinctions of Mashrūʿ, “lawful,” and G͟hairu ʾl-mashrūʿ, “unlawful,” or, as it is expressed in Persian, Rawā and Nārawā.

That which is lawful is graded into five classes. (1) Farẓ, that which is proved beyond all doubt to have been enjoined either in the Qurʾān or in a tradition of undoubted authority, and the denial or disobedience of which is positive infidelity. (2) Wājib, that which is obligatory, but of which there is some doubt whether or not it was enjoined in the Qurʾān or in a tradition of undoubted authority. (3) Sunnah, that which was practised by Muḥammad; (4) Mustāḥabb, that which Muḥammad and his Companions sometimes did and sometimes omitted; (5) Mubāḥ, that which is desirable, but which may be omitted without fear of sin.

Things which are unlawful are graded into three classes: (1) Mufsid, that which is most vicious and corrupting, a mortal sin; (2) Ḥarām, that which is distinctly forbidden; (3) Makrūh, that which is generally held to be unclean.

These distinctions of lawful and unlawful, with their various subdivisions, apply to all branches of Muslim law, whether it relate to ordinary duties of life, or of devotion to God.

It will be seen how important a place the example, practices, and sayings of Muḥammad occupy in the moral law of Islām. This branch of Muslim law is called as-Sunnah, or the custom of Muḥammad, and is distinguished as—

(1) Sunnatu ʾl-ʿfilī, that which Muḥammad himself did.

(2) Sunnatu ʾl-qaulī, that which Muḥammad said should be practised.

(3) Sunnatu ʾt-taqrīrī, that which was done in the presence of Muḥammad, and which he appears to have sanctioned.

It is therefore a serious mistake to suppose that the Qurʾān contains all that is esteemed necessary for faith and practice in Islām; the example of Muḥammad is as binding upon the Muslim as any injunction contained in the Qurʾān itself, for neither that which is Farẓ nor that which is Sunnah can be omitted without sin.

The true origin and fountain of all law is the Qurʾān and the Traditions, and no Muslim school of theology has ever rejected the Traditions. They are binding upon Sunnī, and Shīʿah, and Wahhābī; the only difference between the Sunnī and Shīʿah being that they receive different collections of Traditions. The Wahhābīs receive those of the Sunnīs, and call themselves Muḥaddis̤in, or traditionists.

In addition to the Qurʾān and Ḥadīs̤ (or Traditions), both Sunnī and Shīʿah Muslims acknowledge the concurrence of the learned, called Ijmāʿ, the Shīʿahs believing that they still possess Mujtahids capable of giving an infallible interpretation of the law; the Sunnīs, on the other hand, confessing that, since the days of the four great doctors (Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālik, ash-Shāfiʿī, and Ibn Ḥanbal), Ijmāʿ has not been possible; whilst the Wahhābīs accept only the Ijmāʿ of those who conversed with the Prophet himself. The fourth foundation of orthodoxy in both Sunnī and Shīʿah schools is the system of interpretation called Qiyās, or ratiocination.

I. The Sunnīs all receive the same collections of traditions, especially those which are known as the “six correct books,” the Ṣaḥīḥu ʾl-Buk͟hārī, the Ṣaḥīḥu Muslim, the Sunanu ʾt-Tirmiẓī, Sunanu Abī Dāʾūd, Sunanu an-Nasafī, and Sunanu Ibn Mājah. The compilation by the Imām Mālik, which is first in order of date, is also a collection of traditions of very great authority. [[TRADITIONS].]

These different sects of Sunnīs do not differ in uṣūl, or fundamentals of religious belief, but in minor rules of practice, and in certain legal interpretations; but being of different opinions and broaching in some respects separate doctrines, four schools of jurisprudence have been established, known as Ḥanafī, Shāfiʿī, Ḥanbalī, and Mālikī.

The differences amongst these four Sunnī schools are based either upon different traditions or upon different interpretations of the same traditions, also upon the various ways in which the liberty of qiyās, or ratiocination, has been exercised. Consequently the number of works which have appeared on the subjects of scholastic science and jurisprudence, has been very great indeed.

We are indebted to Mr. Shama Churun Sircar, the learned and able Tagore Professor of Law in Calcutta, for the following résumé of the principal Sunnī writings on ash-Sharʿ.

“The chief works that treat generally of the doctrines of the four principal sects of the Sunnís, are mentioned by Hájí Khalífah to be the Jámi-ul-Mazáhib (Jāmiʿu ʾl-Maẕāhib), the Majmaa-ul-Khiláfíyat, the Yanábiya-ul-Ahkám (Yanābīʿu ʾl-Aḥkām), the Uyúm, and the Zubdat-ul-Ahkám. The Kanz-ud-Dakáïk (Kanzu ʾd-Daqāʾiq), by An-Nasafí, is a book of great reputation, principally derived from the Wáfí; and containing questions and decisions according to the doctrines of Abú-Hanífah, Abú-Yusuf, Imám Muhammad, Zufar, Sháfií, Málik, and others. Many commentaries have been written on the last mentioned work; the most famous of them is the Bahr-ur-Ráïk (al-Baḥru ʾr-Rāʾiq), which may, indeed, almost be said to have superseded its original, at least in India. The Bahr-ur-Ráïk is by Zainu-ul-Aábidín Bin Nujaim-ul Misrí (Ibn Najīm), A.H. 970. The Multaka-al-Abhár (Multaqa ʾl-Abḥār), by Shaikh Ibráhím Bin Muhammad al-Halabí, who died A.H. 956, is a universal code of Muhammadan law. It gives the different opinions or doctrines of Abú Hanífah, Málik, Sháfií, and Hanbal, the chief Mujtahid Imáms and the founders of the four great sects of Sunnís, and illustrates them by those of the principal jurisconsults of the school of Abú Hanífah. It is more frequently referred to as an authority throughout Turkey, than any other treatise on jurisprudence.

“The digests inculcating exclusively the doctrines of each of the said four great sects are, indeed, numerous, though a very few of them which maintain the doctrines of the Málikí, or Sháfií, or Hanbalí sects are used in India. Digests written by Málik or any of his followers are scarcely found in India.

“Of the digests maintaining the Málikí doctrines, two have lately appeared in France (by M. Vincent, 1842; M. Perron, 1843). The first work of Sháfií, entitled the Usúl (Uṣūl), or fundamentals, which contains the principles of the Muhammadan civil and canon law, may be classed as a digest. The Muk͟htasar, the Mansúr, the Rasáïl-ul-Muatabirah (ar-Rasāʾilu ʾl-Muʿtabarah), and the Kitáb-ul-Wasáïk, are amongst the other works written by Abú Ibráhím Bin Yahiyá-al-Muzani, a distinguished disciple of Sháfií, and a native of Egypt (A.H. 264), and are according to the doctrines of Sháfií. The works by Ibnu Hambal and his followers are few in number, and rare.

“The followers of the Hanífí sect, which obtains most commonly amongst the Muhammadans of India, have, like others, divided their law into two general branches or parts, respectively called the Fikah (law, religious and secular), and Faráïz (the succession to, and division of, inheritance).

“The works which are on Fikah (Fiqh), and which are considered as the chief authorities of the Hanífí sect, are the following:—Abú Hanífah’s own digest of law, entitled the Fikah-ul-Akbar (al-Fiqhu ʾl-Akbar). This is the first in rank, and has been commented upon by various writers, many of whom are mentioned by Hájí Khalífah. The doctrines of that great lawyer, however, are sometimes qualified or dissented from by his two famous pupils, Abú Yusuf and Imám Muhammad. The work entitled Adab-ul-Kází, which treats of the duties of a magistrate, is known to have been written by Abú Yusuf. Save and except this, no other work appears to have been composed by him. He, however, is said to have supplied his notes to his pupil Imám Muhammad, who made use of them in the composition of his own works. The works of Imám Muhammad are six in number, five of which are, in common, entitled the Záhir-ur-Rawáyát (Z̤āhiru ʾr-Rawāyāt, conspicuous traditions or reports). They are: 1. The Jámi-ul-Kabír (al-Jāmiʿu ʾl-Kabīr); 2. Jámi-us-Saghír (al-Jāmiʿu ʾṣ-Ṣag͟hīr); 3. Mabsút fí Farú-ul-Hanífiyát; 4. Ziyádát fí Farú-ul-Hanífiyát; and 5. Siyar al-Kabír wa Saghír. The Nawádir, the sixth and last of the known compositions of Imám Muhammad, though not so highly esteemed as the others, is still greatly respected as an authority.

“The next authorities among the Hanafís, after the founder of their sect and his two disciples, are the Imám Zufar Bin al-Hazíl who was chief judge at Basrah, where he died (A.H. 158), and Hasan Bin Ziyád. These lawyers are said to have been contemporaries, friends, and scholars of Abú-Hanífah, and their works are quoted here as authorities for Abú Hanífah’s doctrines, more especially when the two disciples are silent. The most celebrated of the several treatises known by the name of Adáb-ul Kází was written by Abú Bakr Ahmad Bin ʿUmar ul-Khassáf (A.H. 261). An abridgement of the Hanafí doctrines, called the Mukhtasar ut-Tahaví, was written by Abú Jaafar Ahmad Bin Muhammad at-Tahaví (A.H. 331), who wrote also a commentary on the Jámi us-Saghír of Imám Muhammad.

“The Mukhtasar lil-Kudúrí, by Abú ul-Husain Ahmad Bin Muhammad al-Kudúrí (A.H. 228) is among the most esteemed of the works which follow the doctrines of Abú Hanífah. There is a well-known commentary on the Mukhtasar lil-Kudúrí, entitled Al-Jauharat un-Nayyirah, which is sometimes called Al-Jauharat ul-Munírah. The digest, entitled the Mabsút (al-Mabsūt̤), was composed by Shams-ul-Aïmmah Abú Bakr Muhammad as-Sarakhsi whilst in prison at Uʾzjand. This is a work of great extent and authority. He was also the author of the most celebrated work entitled Al-Muhít (al-Muḥīt̤), which is derived in a great measure from the Mabsút, the Ziyádát, and the Nawádir of Imám Muhammad. The work entitled the Muhít, by Burhán-ud-dín Mahmúd Bin Ahmad, already spoken of, is not so greatly esteemed as the Muhít as-Sarakhsi (Muḥīt̤u ʾṣ-Ṣarak͟hsī). A compendium of Al-Kudúrí’s Mukhtasar, which he entitled the Tuhfat-ul-Fukahá (Tuḥfatu ʾl-Fuqahāʾ), was composed by Shaikh Alá-ud-dín Muhammad as-Samarkandí. The work of Alá-ud-dín was commented upon by his pupil Abú Bakr Bin Masuúd.

“There are several Arabic works on philosophical and theological subjects which bear the name of Al-Hidáyah (the guide). The work entitled Al-Hidáyah fí-al-Farú, or the guide in particular points, is a digest of law according to the doctrines of Abú Hanífah and his disciples Abú Yusuf and Imám Muhammad. The author of this work is Shaikh Burhán-ud-dín Alí (A.H. 593), whose reputation as a lawyer was beyond that of all his contemporaries. This Hidáyah is a commentary on the Badáya-ul-Mubtadá, an introduction to the study of law, written by the same author in a style exceedingly concise and close. In praise of the Hidáyah, Hájí Khalífah says, ‘It has been declared, like the Kurán, to have superseded all previous books on the law; that all persons should remember the rules prescribed in it, and that it should be followed as a guide through life.’ The Hidáyah has, besides the Kifáyah, many other commentaries, as a work of so great celebrity and authority is expected to have. The principal ones are the Ináyah (ʿInāyah), the Niháyah, and the Fath-ul-Kabír.

“The name Ináyah, however, is given to two commentaries on the Hidáyah. Of these, the one composed by Shaikh Kamál-ud-dín Muhammad Bin Mahmúd, who died A.H. 786, is highly esteemed and useful. Supplying by way of innuendoes what was omitted or left to implication, also expressing what was understood in the Hidáyah, and explaining the words and expounding the passages of the original by the insertion of explanatory phrases, the author of the Ináyah has rendered the work such as to be considered of itself one of his own principal works, with citations of passages from the Hidáyah.

“The Niháyah is composed by Husám-ud-dín Husain Bin Alí, who is said to have been a pupil of Burhán-ud-dín Alí. This is said to be the first commentary composed on the Hidáyah; and it is important for having added the law of inheritance to the Hidáyah, which treats only of the Fikah. The commentary, entitled the Kifáyah, is by Imám-ud-dín Amír Kátib Bin Amír Umar, who had previously written another explanatory gloss of the same work, and entitled it the Gháyat-ul-Bayán. The Kifáyah was finished A.H. 747, and, besides the author’s own observations, it gives concisely the substance of other commentaries.

“The Fath-ul-Kabír lil-Aájiz ul-Fakír, by Kamál-ud-dín Muhammad as-Siwásí, commonly called Ibnu Hammám, who died A.H. 861, is the most comprehensive of all the comments on the Hidáyah, and includes a collection of decisions which render it extremely useful. The short commentary entitled the Fawáid, written by Hamíd-ud-dín Alí, Al-Buk͟hárí, who died A.H. 667, is said to be the first of all the commentaries on the Hidáyah. The Wáfí, by Abú-ul-Barakát Abd ullah Bin Ahmad, commonly called Háfiz-ud-dín an-Nasafí, and its commentary the Káfí, by the same author, are works of authority. An-Nasafí died A.H. 710.

“The Vikáyah (al-Wiqāyah), which was written in the seventh century of the Hijrah by Burhán ash-Shariyat Mahmúd, is an elementary work to enable the student to study and understand the Hidáyah. The Vikáyah is printed, and invariably studied, with its celebrated commentary, the Sharh ul-Vikáyah, written by Ubaidullah Bin Masuúd, who died A.H. 745. The Sharh-ul-Vikáyah contains the text of the Vikáyah, with a gloss most perspicuously explanatory and illustrative; so much so, that those chapters of it which treat of marriage, dower, and divorce, are studied in the Madrassahs of India in preference to the Hidáyah itself. There are also other commentaries on the Vikáyah, but not so useful as the above. On the Sharh-ul-Vikáyah, again, there is an excellent commentary, entitled the Chalpí, written by Akhí Yusuf Bin Juníd, who was one of the then eight professors at Constantinople. This work was commenced to be written about A.H. 891, and completed A.H. 901; and the whole of it was published in Calcutta A.H. 1245, and extracts therefrom have been printed.

“The Nikáyah (an-Niqāyah), another elementary law book, is the work of the author of the Sharh-ul-Vikáyah. It is sometimes called the Mukhtasar ul-Vikáyah, being, in fact, an abridgment of that work. Three comments on the Nikáyah are much esteemed: they were written respectively by Abú ul-Makárim Bin Abd-ullah (A.H. 907), Abú Alí Bin Muhammad al-Birjindí (A.H. 935), and Shams ud-dín Muhammad al-Khurásání Al-Kohistání (A.H. 941). The last commentary is entitled the Jámi-ur-Rumúz (Jāmiʿu ʾr-Rumūz), which is the fullest and the clearest of the lot, as well as one of the most useful law books.

“The Ashbah wa an-Nazáïr (al-Ashbāh wa ʾn-Naz̤āʾir) is also an elementary work of great reputation. It was composed by Zain-al-Aábidín, the author of the Bahr-ur-Ráïk already mentioned. Hájí Khalífah speaks of this work in high terms, and enumerates several appendices to it that have been composed at different times. The treatise on exegesis entitled the Núr-ul-Anwár fí Sharah ul-Manár (Nūru ʾl-Anwār fī Sharḥi ʾl-Manār), by Shaikh Jún Bin Abú Sayyid Al-Makkí (Shaik͟h Jīwan ibn Abū Saʿīd), was printed in Calcutta (A.D. 1819), and is frequently referred to as a book of authority. A small tract on the sources of the Sharaa, entitled the Usúl-ush-Sháshí, together with an explanatory commentary, was printed in lithography, at Delhi, in the year A.D. 1847.

“The Tanvír-ul-Absár (Tanwīru ʾl-Abṣār), composed by Shaikh Shams-ud-dín Muhammad Bin Abd-ullah-al-Ghazzí (A.H. 995), is one of the most celebrated and useful books according to the Hanífí doctrines. This work has many commentaries. One of them, entitled the Manh-ul-Ghaffár (Manḥu ʾl-G͟haffār), which is written by the author himself, is a work of considerable extent.

“The Durr-ul-Mukhtár, which is another commentary on the Tanvír-ul-Absár, is a work of great celebrity. This work was written (A.H. 1071) by Muhammad Alá-ud-Dín Bin Shaikh Alí al-Hiskafí. Though a commentary, it is virtually a digest, which of itself has several commentaries, the most celebrated of them is the Tahtáví, a work used in India. Another commentary on the Durr-ul-Mukhtár is the Radd-ul-Muhtár. This is a very copious work, comprising an immense number of cases and decisions illustrative of the principles contained in the principal work. The Durr-ul-Mukhtár treats not only of the Fikah but also of the Faráïz. It is used by the followers of the Hanífí doctrines whereever they are, but it is most highly esteemed in Arabia, where it is studied and referred to in preference to other books of law.

“Many works have been written according to the doctrines of Abú Hanífah in the Turkish Empire, and are received there as authorities. The most celebrated of those is the Multaka-ul-Abhár, by Shaikh Ibráhím Bin Muhammad al-Halabí, the Durr-ul-Hukkám, by Mullah Khusrú, Kánún-námai-Jazá, a tract on penal laws, &c.

“The treatises on the laws of inheritance, according to the doctrines of Sháfií, are the Faráïz-ul-Mutawallí, by Abú Sayíd Abd-ur-Rahmán Bin Mamun-ul-Mutawalli (who died A.H. 478), the Faráïz-ul-Mukuddasí, by Abú-ul-Fazl Abd-ul-Malik Bin Ibráhím al-Hamadání Al-Mukuddasí, and Abú Munsúr Abd-ul-Kahír Al-Baghdádí (who died respectively A.H. 489 and 429); Al-Faráïz-ul-Fazárí, by Burhán-ud-dín Abú Isháq Al-Fazárí, commonly called Ibnu Firkáh (who died in A.H. 729), and Al-Faráïz ul-Farikiyah, by Shams-ud-dín Muhammad Bin Killáyí (who died A.H. 777).

“Of the books on the law of inheritance according to the Hanífí doctrines, the most celebrated, and the one invariably consulted in India, is the Sirájiyyah (as-Sirājīyah), which is also called the Faráïz-us-Sajáwandí, being, as it is, composed by Siráj-ud-Dín Muhammad bin Abd-ur-Rashíd as-Sajáwandí. This work has been commented upon by a vast number of writers, upwards of forty being enumerated in the Kashf-uz-Zunún by Hájí Khalífah. The most celebrated of these commentaries, and the most generally used to explain the text of the Sirájiyyah, is the Sharífiyyah (ash-Sharīfīyah), by Sayyid Sharif Ali Bin Muhammad Al-Jurjání (who died A.H. 814).

“There is another kind of digest which treats of the Ilm-ul-Fatáwá (the science of decisions). The works of this nature are also very numerous, and are, for the most part, called Fatáwá (decisions), with the names of their authors; and, though called Fatáwá, most of them contain also the rules of law as well as legal decisions. Of those again, some treat of the Fikah alone, others of the Faráïz (inheritance) also; some of them, moreover, treat of the decisions of particular lawyers, or those found in particular books; others treat of those which tend to illustrate the doctrines of the several sects; whilst the rest of them are devoted to recording the opinions of learned jurists.

“There are several collections of decisions, according to the doctrines of Sháfií. The one most esteemed seems to be the Fatáwá Ibn us-Saláh, by Abú Amru-Usmán Bin Abd-ur Rahmán ash-Sháhrazúrí, commonly called Ibn us-Saláh, who died in A.H. 642. Ibnu Firkáh, the author of the Faráïz-ul-Fazárí (a treatise on inheritance), also made a collection of decisions according to the same doctrines, which is called, after his name, the Fatáwá-i-Ibnu Firkáh.

“Of the Fatáwás of the Hanífí doctrines the following are generally known in India. The Khulásat ul-Fatáwá (K͟hulāṣatu ʾl-Fatāwā), by Imám Iftikhar-ud-Dín Tahir Bin Ahmad Al-Bukhárí, who died A.H. 542, is a select collection of decisions of great authority. The Zakhírat-ul-Fatáwá (Ẕak͟hīratu ʾl-Fatāwā), sometimes called the Zakhírat-ul-Burhániyah, by Burhán-ud-Dín Bin Mázah al-Bukhárí, the author of the Muhít-ul-Burhání, is also a celebrated, though not a large, collection of decisions, principally taken from the Muhít. The Fatáwá-i-Kází Khán, by Imám Fakhr-ud-Dín Hasan Bin Mansúr al-Uʾzjandí al-Farghání, commonly called Kází Khán, who died A.H. 592, is a work held in very high authority. It is replete with cases of common occurrence, and is, therefore, of great practical utility, more especially as many of the decisions are illustrated by proofs and reasoning on which they are founded. The two works entitled the Fusúl-ul-Isturúshí and Fusúl-ul-Imádíah, were incorporated in a collection entitled the Jámi-ul-Fusúlain, which is a work of some celebrity. It was compiled by Badr-ud-Dín Muhammad, known by the name of Ibn-ul-Kází Simáwanah (A.H. 823). The Fatáwá az-Zahíriyah, which contains decisions collected partly from the Khizánat-ul-Wákiyát, was written by Jahír-ud-Dín Abú Bakr Muhammad Bin Ahmad al-Bukhárí (A.H. 619). The Kuniyat-ul-Muniyat is a collection of decisions of considerable authority by Mukhtár Bin Mahmúd Bin Muhammad as-Záhidí Abú-ur-Rijá al-Ghazmíní, surnamed Najm-ud-Dín, who died A.H. 658. An-Navaví, the author of the biographical dictionary entitled the Tahzíb-ul-Asmá (Tahẕību ʾl-Asmāʾ), who died A.H. 677, made a collection of decisions of some note, which is called the Fatáwá an-Navaví. He also composed a smaller work of the same nature, entitled al-Masáïl-ul-Muhimmat (ʿUyūn al-Masāʾili ʾl-Muhimmah), arranged in the manner of question and answer. The Khizánat-ul-Muftiyín, by Imám Husain Bin Muhammad as-Samaání, who completed his work in A.H. 740, contains a large collection of decisions, and is a book of some authority in India. The Khizánat-ul-Fatáwá, by Ahmad Bin Muhammad Abú Bakr al-Hanafí, is a collection of decisions made towards the end of the eighth century of the Hijrah, and comprises questions of rare occurrence. The Fatáwá Tátár-Khániyah was originally a large collection of Fatáwás, in several volumes, by Imám Aálim Bin Alá al-Hanafí, taken from the Muhít-ul-Burhání, the Zakhírat, the Khániyah, and the Zahíriyah. Afterwards, however, a selection was made from these decisions by Imám Ibráhím Bin Muhammad al-Halabí, who died A.H. 956, and an epitome was thus formed, which is in one volume, and still retains the title of Tátár-Khániyah. The Fatáwá-i-Ahl-us-Samarkand, is a collection of the decisions of those learned men of the city of Samarkand who are omitted, or lightly passed over, in the Fatáwá-Tátár Khániyah and the Jámi-ul-Fusúlain, to both of which works it may be considered a supplement. The Fatáwá az-Zainíyah contains decisions by Zain ul-Aabidín Ibrahím Bin Nujaim al-Misrí, the author of the Bahr-ur-Ráïk and the Ashbah wa-an-Nazáïr. They were collected by his son Ahmad (about A.H. 970). The Fatáwá al-Ankiraví, a collection of decisions of al-Ankiraví by Shaikh-ul-Islám Muhammad Bin al-Husain, who died A.H. 1098, is a work of authority. The Fatáwá Hammádiyah, though it seems to be a modern compilation, is a work of considerable authority.

“Tipú Sultán ordered a collection of Fatáwás to be made in Persian by a society of the learned of Mysore. It comprises three hundred and thirteen chapters, and is entitled the Fatáwá-i-Muhummadí.

“Mr. Harrington, in his analysis (vol. i. 2nd ed.), mentions a few other books of Fatáwá, viz. the Fatáwá Bazázíah, the Fatáwá Nakshbandiyah, the Mukhtár-ul-Fatáwá, and the Fatáwá Karákhání. The last of these he describes to be a Persian compilation, the cases included in which were collected by Mullah Sadar-ud-Dín Bin Yákúb, and arranged some years after his death by Kará Khán, in the reign of Sultán Alá-ud-Dín.

“The following works of the present class, published at Constantinople, and containing decisions according to the doctrines of Abú Hanífah, may be noticed. A collection of Fatwás in the Turkish and Arabic languages, entitled the Kitáb fí al-Fikah al-Kadúsí, composed by Hafiz Muhammad Bin Ahmad al-Kadúsí A.H. 1226. The Fatáwá-i-Abd-ur-Rahím Effendí, is a collection of judgments pronounced at various times in Turkey, and collected by the Muftí Abd-ur-Rahím. It was printed in the year 1827. Dabagzadeh Nuamán Effendí is the author of a collection of six hundred and seventy decisions, which is entitled the Tuhfat us-Sukúk, and was published in the year 1832.

“The Jámi-ul-Ijáratín (Jāmiʿu ʾl-Ijārāt) is a collection of decisions relating to the law of farming and the tenure of land, by Muhammad Aarif. It was printed in the year 1836.

“A collection of Fatwás relating to leases was published at Constantinople by M. D’Adelbourg, in the year 1838. Prefixed to this collection are the principles of the law of lease, according to the Multaka; and it is followed by an analytical table, facilitating reference to the various decisions.

“Of the Fatwás which treat both of the Fikah and Faráïz, two are most generally used in India. These are the Fatáwá Sirájiyyah and Fatáwá Alamgírí. The Fatáwá Sirájiyyah, with some principles, contains a collection of decisions on cases which do not generally occur in other books. The Fatáwá Alamgírí, with opinions and precepts of law, contains an immense number of law cases. This work, from its comprehensive nature, is applicable to almost every case that arises involving points of the Hanífí doctrines. Although opinions of modern compilers are not esteemed as of equal authority with those of the older writers on jurisprudence, yet being composed by a great number of the most learned lawyers of the age, and by order of the then greatest person of the realm, the Emperor Aurungzeb Alamgír (by whose name the book is designated), the Fatáwá Alamgírí is esteemed as a very high authority in India; and containing, as it does, decisions on cases of any shape based upon unquestionable authorities, this book is here referred to more frequently than any other work of a similar nature, and has not up to this day been surpassed by any work, except perhaps, by the Radd-ul-Muhtár, already spoken of. During the long rule of the Muhammadans in India, the Fatáwá Alamgírí alone appears to have been translated into Persian, by order of Zéb-un-nisá, daughter of the Emperor Aurungzeb Alamgír. Since the establishment of the British Government in India, the books of Jináyah and Hudúd from the Fatáwá Alamgírí were translated into Persian, under the direction of the Council of the College of Fort William in Calcutta, by the then Kází-ul-Kuzzát, Muhammad Najm ud-Dín Khán, and were published in the year 1813, together with a Persian treatise on Tázírát, by the same author.

“In the same year the book on Tázírát from the Durr-ul-Mukhtár was translated, printed, and published, by Moulavi Muhammad Khalíl-ud-Dín, under the orders of Mr. Harrington, the then Chief Judge of the late Sudder Dewany Adawlut.

“The Hidáyah was translated into Persian by four of the most learned Moulavis of that time and of this country (India). Unfortunately, however, the learned translators have, in the body of the book, inserted many things by way of explanatory remarks and illustrative expositions, instead of subjoining them in the form of notes. Furthermore, they have, in a considerable degree, deviated from the original. For all these reasons, we are warranted to say, that the Persian version of the Hidáyah does not represent a true picture of the original.

“Macnaghten’s Principles of Muhammadan Law were translated into Urdu and lithographed, many years ago, in Delhi. Another translation of the same work was made and published in Calcutta a few years ago.

“The work entitled the Bighyat-i-Báhis, by Al-Mutakannah, which is a tract treating of Zaid’s system of Faráïz, was translated into English by Sir William Jones. A translation of the Sirájiyyah also was made by Sir William Jones, who at the same time made an abstract translation of its celebrated commentary (the Sharífiyyah), with the addition of illustrations and exemplifications from his own brain and pen. A translation of the selected portions from the two books of the Fatáwá-i-Alamgírí, which comprise the subject of sale, was published by Mr. Neil Baillie.

“The Persian version of the Hidáyah, already noticed, was, by order of Warren Hastings, commenced to be translated into English by Mr. James Anderson, but shortly after, he being engaged in an important foreign employment, the translation was finished, and revised by his colleague, Mr. Charles Hamilton. It is a matter of regret that the translation in question was not executed from the original Hidáyah itself, instead of from its Persian translation, which contains frequent explanatory remarks and illustrative expositions interpolated in the book itself, instead of being subjoined by way of notes. Added to this, the Persian translators have, in a considerable degree, deviated from the original.

“Of the digests of Muhammadan law in English, the first appears to be the chapter on criminal law of the Muhammadans as modified by regulations. This is incorporated in Harrington’s Analysis of Bengal Regulations. An abstract of Muhammadan law, which is from the pen of Lieutenant-Colonel Vans Kennedy, will be found in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. ‘This work,’ says Mr. Morley, ‘is well worthy the attention of the student.’ The work entitled the Principles and Precedents of Muhammadan Law, written by Mr. (afterwards Sir) William Hay Macnaghten, is the clearest or easiest, if not the amplest or sufficient, work on that law hitherto written in English. Mr. Neil Baillie’s Muhammadan Law of Inheritance, according to Abú Hanífah and his followers, with appendix containing authorities from the original Arabic, is an excellent work of the kind. The treatise on inheritance, gift, will, sale, and mortgage, compiled by Mr. F. E. Elberling, a Danish judge at Serampore, in the year 1844, contains principles of Muhammadan law, with those of the other laws, as used in India.

“In the year 1865, Mr. Neil Baillie, the author of the work already mentioned, completed and published a digest of Muhammadan law on all the subjects to which the Muhammadan law is usually applied by the British Courts of Justice in India. It gives translations of almost all the principles and some of the cases contained in the Fatáwá Alamgírí, the great digest of Muhammadan law in India, and quotes occasionally other available authorities. Being generally close to the original, and fully dealing with the subjects it treats of, this work must be said to be authentic, as well as the amplest of the digests of Muhammadan law hitherto written in English according to the doctrines of the Hanífí sect.” (See the Tagore Law Lectures, 1873, by Shama Churun Sircar; Thacker, Spink & Co., Calcutta.)

II.—The Shīʿahs, although they are divided amongst themselves into numerous sects which differ from each other in various points of religious belief, are unanimous in rejecting the collections of Traditions of the Sunnīs. The Sunnīs arrogate to themselves the title of Traditionists, but this does not imply that the Shīʿahs do not receive the Ḥadīs̤, but merely that they reject the “six correct books” of their opponents.

The works on Ḥadīs̤ compiled by the Shīʿahs are very numerous, and they maintain that they have earlier and more authentic collections than those of the Sunnīs. They say that in the time of al-Ḥasan and al-Ḥusain, a certain person who was grandfather to ʿAbdu ʾllāh ibn ʿAlī ibn Abī Shuʿbah al-Ḥalabī, collected traditions and gave them to his grandson for careful record. This record was verified and corrected by Imām Jaʿfar aṣ-Ṣadīq. The Sunnī doctor, Abū Ḥanīfah, was a pupil of this distinguished personage in his earlier days, but afterwards separated from him and established a school of his own.

There are four books of traditions, known as the Kutub-i-Arbaʿah, which seem to be held in the same estimation by the Shīʿahs, as the six Ṣaḥīḥs of the Sunnīs. They are entitled the Tahẕīb, the Istibṣār, the Kāfi, and Man lā Yastaḥẓirah al-Faqīh. [[TRADITIONS].]

Mr. Shama Churun Sircar, Tagore Professor of Law, has also reviewed the Shīʿah, or Imamīyah, law books, and we are indebted to him for the following résumé:—

“One of the earliest works on civil and criminal laws was written by Abdullah Bin Alí al Halabí. But it does not appear that any of his legal compositions are extant.

“A number of law-treatises of the present class was composed by Yunas Bin Abd ur-Rahmán (already spoken of as a writer on traditions). The most famous of these treatises is entitled the Jámi-ul-Kabír.

“Several works on law were written by Abú al-Hasan Alí Bin al-Hasan al-Kumí, commonly called Ibnu Bábavaih, one of which works is entitled the Kitábu ash-Sharáyah. The Maknaa fí al-Fikah (Maqnaʿ fī ʾl-Fiqh) is the best known of the law books of the present class composed by Abú Jaafar.

“Abú Abdullah Muhammad an-Nuamání, surnamed the Shaikh Mufíd, and Ibnu Muallim, a renowned Shíah lawyer, is stated to have written two hundred works, amongst which one called the Irshád is well known. When Shaikh Mufíd is quoted in conjunction with Abú Jaafar at-Túsí, they also are spoken of as ‘the two Shaikhs’ (Shaikhain).

“The chief works on law, written by Abú Jaafar Muhammad at-Túsí (Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad at̤-T̤ūsī), are the Mabsút, the Khiláf, the Niháyah, and the Muhít. These works are held in great estimation, and he is considered one of the highest authorities in law. The Risálat-i-Jaafariyah is likewise a legal treatise by at-Túsí, which is frequently quoted.

“The Sharáya ul-Islám, written by Shaikh Najm ud-dín Abú ul-Kásim Jaafar Bin Muayyid al-Hillí, commonly called Shaikh Muayyid, is a work of the highest authority, at least in India, and is more universally referred to than any other Shíah law book, and is the chief authority for the law of the Shíahs in India. A copious and valuable commentary upon the Sharáya ul-Islám, entitled the Masálik ul-Afhám, was written by Zayin-ud-dín Alí as-Sáilí, commonly called the ‘Shahíd-i-Sání’ (second martyr). There are two other commentaries on the Sharáya ul-Islám, respectively entitled the Madár ul-Ahkám and Jawáhir ul-Kalám, the latter of which was written by Shaikh Muhammad Hasan an-Najafí.

“Of the works on jurisprudence written by Yahiyah Bin Ahmad al-Hillí, who was celebrated for his knowledge of traditions, and is well known amongst the Imámiyah sects for his works, the Jámi ash-Sharáya and the Mudkhal dar Usúl-i-Fikah are held in the greatest repute.

“Of the numerous law books written by Shaikh Allámah Jamál-ud-dín Hasan Bin Yusuf Bin al-Mutahhir al-Hillí, who is called the chief of the lawyers of Hilliah, and whose works are frequently referred to as authorities of undisputed merit, the most famous are the Talkhís ul-Marám, the Gháyit ul-Ahkám, and the Tahrír ul-Ahkám, which last is a justly celebrated work. The Mukhtalaf-ush-Shíah is also a well-known composition of this great lawyer, and his Irshád ul-Azhán is constantly quoted as an authority under the name of the Irshád-i-Allámáh.

“The Jámi-ul-Abbási is a concise and comprehensive treatise on Shíah law, in twenty books or chapters. It is generally considered as the work of Bahá-ud-dín Muhammad Aámilí, who died A.H. 1031.

“The Mafátíh, by Muhammad Bin Murtazá, surnamed Muhsan, and the commentary on the book by his nephew, who was of the same name, but surnamed Hádí, are modern works deserving of notice.

“The Rouzat ul-Ahkám, written in Persian by the third Mujtahid of Oudh, consists of four chapters. The first of these is on Inheritance, which is treated of therein most fully and perspicuously. This work was lithographed at Lucknow, first in A.H. 1257, and again in A.H. 1264.

“A general digest of the Imámiyah law in temporal matters was compiled under the superintendence of Sir William Jones. This book is composed of extracts from the work called the Káfí, which is a commentary on the Mafátíh, as well as from the Sharáya ul-Islám. The manuscript of this digest still remains in the possession of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta.

“The earliest treatises on the Faráïz, or Inheritance, of the Shíahs appear to have been written by Abdul Azíz Bin Ahmad al-Azádí, and Abú Muhammad al-Kindí, the latter of whom is said to have lived in the reign of Hárún ur-Rashíd.

“A work on the law of inheritance, entitled the al-Ijáz fí al-Faráïz has been left by Abú Jaafar Muhammad at-Túsí in addition to his general works on the Kurán, the Hadís and jurisprudence.

“The best known and most esteemed works on the law of inheritance are the Ihtijáj ush-Shíah, by Saád Bin Abd-ullah al-Asharí, the Kitáb ul-Mawáris, by Abú al-Hasan Alí Bábavaih; the Hamal ul-Faráïz and the Faráïz ush-Shariyah, by Shaikh Mufíd. The Sharáya ul-Islám, which, as already stated, is one of the highest authorities on the Shíah law, contains also a chapter on Inheritance.

Of all the above-mentioned books on civil and criminal laws, those that are commonly referred to in India are the following: The Sharáya ul-Islám, Rouzat-ul-Ahkám, Sharah-i-Lumá, Mafátíh, Tahrír, and Irshád ul-Azhán.

“Of the books on this branch of Muhammadan law, only that part of the Sharáya ul-Islám which treats of the forensic law has been translated, though not fully, by Mr. Neil Baillie. A considerable part of the digest compiled under the superintendence of Sir William Jones (as already noticed) was translated by Colonel Baillie, out of which the chapter on Inheritance has been printed by Mr. Neil Baillie at the end of the second part of his digest of Muhammadan law. Although the chapter above alluded to is copious, yet it must be remarked that it is not so clear and useful as the Sharáya-ul-Islám and Rouzat ul-Ahkám.” (See Tagore Law Lectures, 1874, the Imámiyah Code, by Shama Churun Sircar; Thacker, Spink and Co., Calcutta.)

LAZ̤Ā (لظى‎). “Fire, flame.” A division, or stage in hell, mentioned in the Qurʾān, [Sūrah lxx. 15]. Al-Bag͟hawī, the commentator, says it is that portion of hell which is reserved for the Christians who have not believed in Muḥammad. [[HELL].]

LAZARUS. Arabic al-ʿĀzar (العازر‎). Not mentioned by name in the Qurʾān, but Jalālu ʾd-dīn, in remarking on [Sūrah iii. 43]: “I will bring the dead to life by God’s permission,” says, amongst those whom Jesus raised from the dead was al-ʿĀzar, who was his special friend and companion. The account given by the commentators al-Kamālān of the raising of Lazarus, is very similar to that given in the New Testament.

LEASE. Arabic ijārah (اجارة‎). [[HIRE].]

LEBANON. Arabic Lubnān (لبنان‎). Not mentioned in the Qurʾān, but tradition has it that Ishmael collected the stones for the Kaʿbah from five sacred mountains, one of which was Mount Libanus. The followers of Ismāʿīlu ʾd-Darāzī, known as the Druzes, a fanatical sect of Muslims, reside on the southern range of the Lebanon chain. [[DRUZES].]

LEGACY. [[WILLS].]

LEGITIMACY. Waladu ʾl-ḥalāl (ولد الحلال‎), “a legitimate child”; waladu ʾz-zināʾ (ولد الزناء‎), “an illegitimate child.”

The Muḥammadan law, unlike the law of England, makes legitimacy depend, not merely upon the fact of the child being born in “lawful wedlock,” but also conceived after lawful marriage.

According to the Sunnīs and Shīʿahs, and according to the teaching of the Qurʾān itself, the shortest period of gestation recognised by law is six months, and consequently a child born any time after six months from the date of marriage has a claim to legitimacy. Amongst the Sunnīs, a simple denial of the paternity of the child so born would not take away its status of legitimacy. But the Shīʿahs hold that if a man get a woman with child and then marry her, and she give birth to the child within six months after marriage, legitimacy is not established.

As to the longest period of pregnancy, there are some strange rulings in Muslim law. The Shīʿahs, upon the basis of a decision pronounced by ʿAlī, recognise ten lunar months as the longest period of gestation, and this is now regarded as the longest legal period by both Shīʿahs and Sunnīs. But Abū Ḥanīfah and his two disciples, upon the authority of a tradition reported by ʿĀyishah, regard two years as the longest period of gestation, and the Imām ash-Shāfiʿī extended it to four, and the Imām Mālik to five and even seven years! It is said these Sunnī doctors based their opinions on the legendary birth of Zuhak Tāzi and others, who were born, so it is related, in the fourth year of conception! But Muslim divines say that the old jurisconsults of the Sunnī school were actuated by a sentiment of humanity, and not by any indifference as to the laws of nature, their chief desire being to prevent an abuse of the provisions of the law regarding divorce and the disavowal of children. The general consensus of Muslim doctors points to ten months as the longest period of pregnancy which can be recognised by any court of justice.

[Under the old Roman law, it was ten months. In the Code Napoleon, article 312, it is three hundred days. Under the Jewish law, the husband had the absolute right of disavowal. See Code Rabbinique, vol. ii. p. 63.]

The Muḥammadan law, like the English law, does not recognise the legitimation of antenuptial children. Whereas, according to French and Scotch law, such children are legitimated by the subsequent marriage of the parents.

In Sunnī law, an invalid marriage does not affect the legitimacy of children born from it. Nor does it in Shīʿah law; but the Shīʿah law demands proof that such a marriage was a bona fide one, whilst the Ḥanafī code is not strict on this point.

In the case of a divorce by liʿān [[LIʿAN]], the waladu ʾl-mulāʿanah, or “child of imprecation,” is cut off from his right of inheritance from his father.

(See Syud Ameer Ali’s Personal Law of Muhammadans, p. 160; Fatāwā-i-ʿAlamgīrī, p. 210; Sharāʾiʿu ʾl-Islām, p. 301.) [[PARENTAGE].]

LETTERS. The letters of Muslims are distinguished by several peculiarities, dictated by the rule of politeness. “The paper is thick, white, and highly polished; sometimes it is ornamented with flowers of gold; and the edges are always cut straight with scissors. The upper half is generally left blank; and the writing never occupies any portion of the second side. The name of the person to whom the letter is addressed, when the writer is an inferior or an equal, and even in some other cases, commonly occurs in the first sentence, preceded by several titles of honour; and is often written a little above the line to which it appertains, the space beneath it in that line being left blank; sometimes it is written in letters of gold, or red ink. A king, writing to a subject, or a great man to a dependant, usually places his name and seal at the head of his letter. The seal is the impression of a signet (generally a ring, worn on the little finger of the right hand), upon which is engraved the name of the person, commonly accompanied by the word ‘His (i.e. God’s) servant,’ or some other words expressive of trust in God, &c. Its impression is considered more valid than the sign-manual, and is indispensable to give authority to the letter. It is made by dabbing some ink on the surface of the signet, and pressing this upon the paper: the place which is to be stamped being first moistened, by touching the tongue with a finger of the right hand, and then gently rubbing the part with that finger. A person writing to a superior, or to an equal, or even an inferior to whom he wishes to show respect, signs his name at the bottom of his letter, next the left side or corner, and places the seal immediately to the right of this; but if he particularly desire to testify his humility, he places it beneath his name, or even partly over the lower edge of the paper, which consequently does not receive the whole of the impression.” (Lane’s Arabian Nights, vol. i. p. 23.)

LIʿĀN (لعان‎). Lit. “Mutual cursing.” A form of divorce which takes place under the following circumstances. “If a man accuses his wife of adultery, and does not prove it by four witnesses, he must swear before God that he is the teller of truth four times, and then add: ‘If I am a liar, may God curse me.’ The wife then says four times, ‘I swear before God that my husband lies’; and then adds: ‘May God’s anger be upon me if this man be a teller of truth.’ After this a divorce takes place ipso facto.” (See Sūratu ʾn-Nūr, [xxiv. 6]; Mishkāt, book xiii. ch. xv.).

In the case of Liʿān, as in the other forms of divorce, the woman can claim her dower.

Liʿān is not allowed in four cases, viz. a Christian woman married to a Muslim, a Jewess married to a Muslim, a free woman married to a slave, and a slave girl married to a free man.

The children of a woman divorced by Liʿān are illegitimate.

LIBĀS (لباس‎). [[APPAREL].]

LIBERALITY. Arabic sak͟hāwah (سخاوة‎), “hospitality”; infāq (انفاق‎), “general liberality in everything.”

Liberality is specially commended by Muḥammad in the Traditions:—

“The liberal man is near to God, near to Paradise, near to men, and distant from hell. The miser is far from God, far from Paradise, far from man, and near the fire. Truly an ignorant but liberal man is more beloved by God, than a miser who is a worshipper of God.”

“Three people will not enter Paradise: a deceiver, a miser, and one who reproaches others with obligation after giving.”

“Every morning God sends two angels, and one of them says, ‘O God, give to the liberal man something in lieu of that which he has given away!’ and the other says, ‘O God, ruin the property of the miser!’ ”

“The miser and the liberal man are like two men dressed in coats of mail, their arms glued to their breasts and collar bones, on account of the tightness of the coats of mail. The liberal man stands up when giving alms, and the coat of mail expands for him. The miser stands up when intending alms; the coat of mail becomes tight, and every ring of it sticks fast to its place.”

LIḤYAH (لحية‎). [[BEARD].]

LISĀNU ʾL-ḤAQQ (لسان الحق‎). Lit. “The language of truth.” The Insānu ʾl-Kāmil, or “perfect man,” in which the secret influences of al-Mutakallim, “the Speaker” (i.e. God), are evident.

LITERATURE, MUSLIM. Arabic ʿIlmu ʾl-Adab (علم الادب‎). The oldest specimens of Arabic literature now extant were composed in the century which preceded the birth of Muḥammad. They consist of short extemporaneous elegies, afterwards committed to writing, or narratives of combats of hostile tribes written in rhythmical prose, similar to that which we find in the Qurʾān.

Baron De Slane says the Ḥamāsah, the Kitābu ʾl-Ag͟hānī, and the Amālī of Abū ʿAlīyu ʾl-Kālī, furnish a copious supply of examples, which prove that the art of composing in rhythmical prose not only existed before Muḥammad’s time, but was even then generally practised, and had been brought to a high degree of perfection. The variety of its inflections, the regularity of its syntax, and the harmony of its prosody, furnish in themselves a proof of the high degree of culture which the language of the pre-Islamic Arabians had attained. The annual meetings of the poets at the fair of ʿUkāz̤ encouraged literature, and tended to give regularity of formation and elegance of style to these early poetic effusions.

The appearance of the Qurʾān brought about a gradual, but remarkable change in tone and spirit of Arabic literature. An extraordinary admixture of falsehood and truth, it was given to the world by its author as the uncreated and Eternal Word, and as a standing miracle not only of sound doctrine, but of literary style and language. This strange assertion, of course, deterred nearly every attempt at imitation, although it is related that Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ, al-Mutanabbi, and a few others, of a sceptical turn of mind, essayed in some of their writings to surpass the style of the Qurʾān. But as the Muslims in all ages have drawn their principles of grammar and rhetoric from the Qurʾān itself, we need not be surprised that these and every other attempt to surpass its excellences have been considered failures.

One circumstance in the earliest history of Islām was of itself instrumental in giving rise to a most extensive literature of a special class. The Qurʾān (unlike the Pentateuch and New Testament) was not a narrative of the life of its author. And yet, at the same time, Muḥammad had left very special injunctions as to the transmission of his precepts and actions. [[TRADITION].] The study of these traditional sayings, together with that of the Qurʾān, gave rise to all the branches of Arabic learning.

The Aḥādīs̤, or “the sayings of Muḥammad,” were considered by his followers as the result of divine inspiration, and they were therefore treasured up in the memories of his followers with the same care which they had taken in learning by heart the chapters of the Qurʾān. They recorded not only what the Prophet said and did, but also what he refrained from saying and doing, his very silence (sunnatu ʾs-sukūt) on questions of doctrine or rule of life being also regarded as the result of divine guidance. It therefore became of paramount importance, to those who were sincere followers of Muḥammad, that they should be in possession of his precepts and practices, and even of the most trifling circumstances of his daily life. The mass of traditions increased rapidly, and became so great that it was quite impossible for any one single person to recollect them.

According to Jalālu ʾd-dīn as-Suyūt̤ī, the first who wrote down the traditional sayings of the Prophet was Ibn Shihāb az-Zuhrī, during the reign of the K͟halīfah ʿUmar II. ibn ʿAbdi ʾl-ʿAzīz (A.H. 99–101); but the Imām Mālik (A.H. 95–179), the compiler of the book known as al-Muwat̤t̤ā is generally held to be the author of the earliest collection of Traditions. (See Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn, in loco.)

So rapidly did this branch of Muslim learning increase, that when al-Buk͟hārī (A.H. 194–256) determined to make a careful collation of trustworthy traditions, he found not fewer than 300,000 extant, from which he selected 7,275.

The necessity of distinguishing the genuine traditions from the false gave rise to new branches of literature. A just appreciation of the credit to which each traditionist was entitled, could only be formed from a knowledge of the details of his history, and of the moral character of his life. Hence numerous biographical works, arranged in chronological order, containing short accounts of the principal persons connected with the early history of Islām, were compiled. The necessity for tracing the places of their birth and the race from which they sprang, led Muslim critics to the study of genealogy and geography.

The sense of the Qurʾān, with its casual references to contemporaneous as well as to past history, was felt to be difficult and obscure, in many places; and this led the learned Muslims to study not only the traditional sayings of Muḥammad already alluded to, but any historical or geographical works which would help them in understanding the text of “the Book.”

In the early days of Islām, general history was regarded with little favour as a subject for study, and many orthodox doctors of Muslim law were led by religious scruples to condemn the study of secular history; and the works of Grecian and Latin poets, philologists, grammarians, and historians, only received their approval in so far as they served to explain the text of the Qurʾān and the traditional records of Muḥammad’s followers.

The real attitude of the leaders of Islām was decidedly hostile towards all literature which was not in strict harmony with the teachings of their religion. If in succeeding ages the Saracens became, as they undoubtedly did, the liberal patrons of literature and science, there cannot be a doubt that in the earliest ages of Islām, in the days of the four “well-directed” K͟halīfahs, not merely the greatest indifference, but the most bigoted opposition was shown to all literary effort which had not emanated from the fountain of Islām itself. And consequently the wild uncivilized conquerors of Jerusalem, Cæsarea, Damascus, and Alexandria, viewed the destruction of the literary lore of ages which was stored up in those ancient cities with indifference, if not with unmitigated satisfaction. Everything, science, history, and religion, must be brought down to the level and standard of the teaching of the Qurʾān and the life of the Prophet of Arabia, and whatever differed therefrom was from the Devil himself, and deserved the pious condemnation of every true child of the faith.

But the possession of power and riches gave rise to new feelings, and the pious aversion to intellectual pursuits gradually relaxed in proportion as their empire extended itself. The possession of those countries, which had for so long been the seats of ancient literature and art, naturally introduced among the Muslims a spirit of refinement, and the love of learning. But it was not the outcome of their religious belief, it was the result of the peculiar circumstances which surrounded their unparalleled conquest of a civilized world. Their stern fanaticism yielded to the mild influence of letters, and, “by a singular anomaly,” says Andrew Crichton, “in the history of nations, Europe became indebted to the implacable enemies of her religion and her liberties for her most valuable lessons in science and arts.” In this they present a marked contrast to the Goths and Huns; and what is most remarkable is, not that successful conquerors should encourage literature, but that, within a single century, a race of religionists should pass from a period of the deepest barbarism to that of the universal diffusion of science. In A.D. 641, the K͟halīfah ʿUmar is said to have destroyed the Alexandrian library. In A.D. 750, the K͟halīfahs of Bag͟hdād, the munificent patrons of literature, mounted the throne. Eight centuries elapsed from the foundation of Rome to the age of Augustus, whilst one century alone marks the transition from the wild barbarism of the K͟halīfahs of Makkah to the intellectual refinement of the K͟halīfahs of al-Kūfah and Bag͟hdād. The Saracens, when they conquered the cities of the West, came into possession of the richest legacies of intellectual wealth, and they used these legacies in such a manner as to earn for themselves the most prominent place in the page of history as patrons of learning. But the truth is, the literature of the great Byzantine empire exercised a kind of patronage over Saracenic kings. If the Saracens produced not many original works on science, philosophy, or art, they had the energy and good sense to translate those of Greece and Rome. (See the list of Arabic works in the Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn.)

Under the Umaiyah K͟halīfahs, the genius of Greece began to obtain an influence over the minds of the Muslims.

ʿAbdu ʾl-Mālik, the fifth K͟halīfah of the Umaiyah dynasty (A.H. 65), was himself a poet, and assembled around him at his court the most distinguished poets of his time. Even the Christian poet, al-Ak͟ht̤al took his place in the front rank of the literary favorites of the Court.

But it was especially under al-Manṣūr, the Abbaside K͟halīfah (A.H. 136), that the golden age of Arabian literature in the East commenced. Accident brought him acquainted with a Greek physician named George, who was invited to court, and to whom the Saracens are indebted for the study of medicine.

The celebrated Hārūnu ʾr-Rashīd, the hero of the Arabian Nights, was specially the patron of learning. He was always surrounded by learned men, and whenever he erected a mosque he always established and endowed a school of learning in connection with it. It is related that amongst the presents he sent to the Emperor Charlemagne was an hydraulic clock. The head of his schools and the chief director of the education of his empire, was John ibn Massua, a Nestorian Christian of Damascus.

The reign of Maʾmūn (A.H. 198) has been called the Augustan period of Arabian literature. The K͟halīfah Maʾmūn himself was a scholar, and he selected for his companions the most eminent scholars from the East and West. Bag͟hdād became the resort of poets, philosophers, historians, and mathematicians from every country and every creed. Amongst the scholars of his court was al-Kindī, the Christian author of a remarkable treatise in defence of Christianity against Islām, side by side with al-Kindī, the philosopher, who translated numerous classical and philosophical works for his munificent and generous patron, and wrote a letter to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. [[KINDI].] It is said that in the time of Maʾmūn, “literary relics of conquered provinces, which his generals amassed with infinite care, were brought to the foot of the throne as the most precious tribute he could demand. Hundreds of camels might be seen entering the gates of Bag͟hdād, laden with no other freight than volumes of Greek, Hebrew, and Persian literature.” Masters, instructors, translators, and commentators, formed the court of Bag͟hdād, which appeared rather to be a learned academy than the capital of a great nation of conquerors. When a treaty of peace was concluded with the Grecian Emperor Michael III., it was stipulated that a large and valuable collection of books should be sent to Bag͟hdād from the libraries of Constantinople, which were translated by the savans of his court into the Arabic tongue; and it is stated that the original manuscripts were destroyed, in order that the learning of the world might be retained in the “divine language of the Prophet!”

The K͟halīfah al-Wās̤iq (A.H. 227), whose residence had been removed by his predecessor, al-Muʿtaṣim, from Bag͟hdād to Saumara, was also a patron of letters. He especially patronised poetry and music.

Under al-Muʿtamid (A.H. 256), Bag͟hdād again became the seat of learning.

Al-Mustanṣir (A.H. 623), the last but one of the Abbaside K͟halīfahs, adorned Bag͟hdād by erecting a mosque and college, which bore his name, and which historians tell us had no equal in the Muslim world. Whilst the city of Bag͟hdād, in the time of the Abbaside dynasty, was the great centre of learning, al-Baṣrah and al-Kūfah almost equalled the capital itself in reputation, and in the number of celebrated authors and treatises which they produced. Damascus, Aleppo, Balk͟h, Ispahan, and Samarcand, also became renowned as seats of learning. It is said that a certain doctor of science was once obliged to decline an invitation to settle in the city of Samarcand, because the transport of his books would have required 400 camels!

Under the Fāt̤imide K͟halīfahs (A.D. 910 to 1160), Egypt became for the second time the asylum of literature. Alexandria had more than twenty schools of learning, and Cairo, which was founded by al-Muʿizz (A.D. 955), soon possessed a royal library of 100,000 manuscripts. A Dāru ʾl-Ḥikmah, or school of science, was founded by the K͟halīfah al-Ḥākim (A.D. 996), in the city of Cairo, with an annual revenue of 2,570 dīnārs. The institution combined all the advantages of a free school and a free library.

But it was in Spain (Arabic Andalus) that Arabian literature continued to flourish to a later period than in the schools of Cairo and Bag͟hdād. The cities of Cordova, Seville, and Granada, which were under Muslim rule for several centuries (Cordova, from A.D. 755 to 1236; Granada, to A.D. 1484), rivalled each other in the magnificence of their academies, colleges, and libraries. Muslim historians say that Cordova alone has produced not fewer than 170 eminent men, and its library, founded by al-Ḥakam II. (A.D. 961), contained 400,000 volumes; and the K͟halīfah himself was so eminent a scholar, that he had carefully examined each of these books himself, and with his own hand had written in each book the genealogies, births and deaths of their respective authors.

Muḥammad, the first K͟halīfah of Granada, was a patron of literature, and the celebrated academy of that city was long under the direction of Shamsu ʾd-dīn of Murcia, so famous among the Arabs for his skill in polite literature. Kasīrī has recorded the names of 120 authors whose talents conferred dignity and fame on the Muslim University of Granada.

So universal was the patronage of literature in Spain, that in the cities of the Andalusian kingdom, there were as many as seventy free libraries open to the public, as well as seventeen distinguished colleges of learning.

(For an interesting account of the state of literature in Spain under the Moors, the English reader can refer to Pascual de Gayango’s translation of al-Makkari’s History of the Muhammadan Dynasties in Spain, London, 1840.)

History, which was so neglected amongst the ancient Arabs, was cultivated with assiduity by the Muslim. There is extant an immense number of works in this department of literature. The compiler of the Bibliographical Dictionary, the Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn, gives a list of the names and titles of 1,300 works of history, comprising annals, chronicles, and memoirs. As might be expected, the earliest Muslim histories were compiled with the special object of giving to the world the history of the Prophet of Arabia and his immediate successors. The earliest historian of whom we have any extensive remains is Ibn Isḥāq, who died A.H. 151, or fifteen years after the overthrow of the Umaiyah dynasty. He was succeeded by Ibn Hishām, who died A.H. 213, and who made the labours of Ibn Isḥāq the basis of his history. Another celebrated Muslim historian is Ibn Saʿd, who is generally known as Kātibu ʾl-Wāqidī, or al-Wāqidī’s secretary, and is supposed to have even surpassed his master in historical accuracy.

Abū Jaʿfar ibn Jarīr at̤-T̤abarī flourished in the latter part of the third century of the Muslim era, and has been styled by Gibbon, “the Livy of the Arabians.” He flourished in the city of Bag͟hdād, where he died A.H. 310. At̤-T̤abarī compiled not only annals of Muḥammad’s life, but he wrote a history of the progress of Islām under the earlier K͟halīfahs. Abū ʾl-Faraj, a Christian physician of Malatia in Armenia, Abū ʾl-Fidāʾ, Prince of Hamah, and Ibn Kātib of Granada, are amongst the celebrated historians of later times. The writings of Ibn Ḥusain of Cordova are said to contain 160,000 pages!

Biographical works, and memoirs of men specially distinguished for their achievements, were innumerable. The most notable work of the kind is Ibn K͟hallikān’s Bibliographical Dictionary, which has been translated into English by De Slane (Paris, 1843). The Dictionary of the Sciences by Muḥammad Abū ʿAbdi ʾllāh of Granada is an elaborate work. The Bibliographical Dictionary, entitled the Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn (often quoted in the present work), is a laborious compilation, giving the names of several thousands of well-known books and authors in every department of literature. ʿAbdu ʾl-Munẓar of Valencia wrote a genealogical history of celebrated horses, and another celebrity wrote one of camels. The encyclopedias, gazetteers, and other similar compilations, are very numerous.

Arabic lexicons have been compiled in regular succession from the first appearance of the work supposed to have been compiled by K͟halīl ibn Aḥmad, entitled Kitābu ʾl-ʿAyn, which must have been written about A.H. 170, to the most recent publications which have issued from the presses of Lucknow, Bombay, and Cairo. [[ARABIC LEXICONS].]

Poetry was, of old, a favourite occupation of the Arab people, and was, after the introduction of learning by the K͟halīfahs of Bag͟hdād, cultivated with enthusiasm. Al-Mutanabbī of al-Kūfah, K͟halīl ibn Aḥmad, and others, are poets of note in the time of the Abbaside K͟halīfahs. So great was the number of Arabic poets, that an abridgement, or dictionary, of the lives of the most celebrated of them, compiled by Abū ʾl-ʿAbbās, son of the K͟halīfah al-Muʿtaṣim, contains notices of 130. [[POETRY].]

With Numismatics the Saracens of Spain were well acquainted, and Maqrīzī and Namarī wrote histories of Arabian money. The study of geography was not neglected. The library of Cairo had two massive globes, and the Sharīf Idrīsī of Cordova made a silver globe for Roger II., King of Sicily. Ibn Rashīd, a distinguished geographer, journeyed through Africa, Egypt, and Syria, in the interests of geographical science. But to reconcile some of the statements of Muḥammadan tradition with geographical discoveries must have required a strong effort of the imagination. [[QAF].]

To the study of medicine the Arabs paid particular attention. Many of our modern pharmaceutical terms, such as camphor, jalap, and syrup, are of Arabian origin. The Christian physician, George, introduced the study of medicine at the court of K͟halīfah al-Manṣūr. [[MEDICINE].]

The superstitious feeling of the Muslim as to the polluted touch of the dead, debarred the orthodox from attempting the study of anatomy. The doctrine that even at death the soul does not depart from the body, and the popular belief that both soul and body must appear entire to undergo the examination by Munkar and Nakīr in the grave, were sufficient reasons why the dissection of the dead body should not be attempted.

Operation for cataract in the eye was an Arabian practice, and the celebrated philosopher, Avicenna (Abū ʿAlī ibn Sīnāʾ) wrote in defence of depression instead of extraction, which he considered a dangerous experiment.

Botany, as subsidiary to medicine, was studied by the Saracens; and it is said the Arabian botanists discovered several herbal remedies, which were not known to the Greeks. Ibn al-Bait̤ār, a native of Malaga, who died at Damascus A.D. 1248, was the most distinguished Arabian botanist. Al-Birūnī, who died A.D. 941, resided in India for nearly forty years in order to study botany and chemistry.

The first great Arabic chemist was Jābir, a native of Ḥarrān in Mesopotamia. He lived in the eighth century, and only some 150 years after the flight of Muḥammad. He is credited with the discovery of sulphuric acid, nitric acid, and aqua regia. D’Herbelot states that he wrote 500 works on chemistry. The nomenclature of science demonstrates how much it owes to the Arabs—alcohol, alembic, alkali, and other similar terms, being derived from the Saracens.

The science of astronomy, insomuch as it was necessary for the study of the occult science of astrology, was cultivated with great zeal. The K͟halīfah Maʾmūn was himself devoted to this study. Under his patronage, the astronomers of Bag͟hdād and al-Kūfah accurately measured a degree of the great circle of the earth, and determined at 24,000 miles the entire circumference of the globe. (See Abū ʾl-Fidāʾ and Ibn K͟hallikān.) The obliquity of the ecliptic was calculated at about twenty-three degrees and a half, “but,” as Andrew Crichton remarks, “not a single step was made towards the discovery of the solar system beyond the hypothesis of Ptolemy.” Modern astronomy is indebted to the Saracens for the introduction of observatories. The celebrated astronomer and mathematician Jābir (A.D. 1196), erected one at Seville, which may still be seen. Bailly, in his Hist. de l’Astronomie, affirms that Kepler drew the ideas that led to his discovery of the elliptical orbits of planets from the Saracen, Nūru ʾd-dīn, whose treatise on the sphere is preserved in the Escurial library.

Algebra, though not the invention of the Arabs, received valuable accessions from their talents, and Ibn Mūsā and Jābir composed original works on spherical trigonometry. Al-Kindī translated Autolycus’ De Sphæra Mota, and wrote a treatise of his own De Sex Quantitatibus.

Architecture was an art in which the Saracens excelled, but their buildings were erected on the wrecks of cities, castles, and fortresses, which they had destroyed, and the Saracenic style is merely a copy of the Byzantine. [[ARCHITECTURE].]

To the early Muslims, pictures and sculpture were considered impious and contrary to divine law, and it is to these strong religious feelings that we owe the introduction of that peculiar style of embellishment which is called the Arabesque, which rejects all representations of human and animal figures.

In calligraphy or ornamental writing, the Muslims excel even to the present day, although it is to the Chinese that they are indebted for the purity and elegance of their paper.

Music is generally understood to have been forbidden in the Muḥammadan religion, but both at Bag͟hdād and Cordova were established schools for the cultivation of this art. [[MUSIC].]

Much more might be written on the subject of Muslim or Saracenic literature, but it would exceed the limits of our present work. Enough has been said to show that, notwithstanding their barbarous origin, they in due time became the patrons of literature and science. They cannot, however, claim a high rank as inventors and discoverers, for many of their best and most useful works were but translations from the Greek. Too much has been made of the debt which the Western world owes, or is supposed to owe, to its Saracen conquerors for their patronage of literature. It would have been strange if a race of conquerors, who came suddenly and rapidly into possession of some of the most cultivated and refined regions of the earth, had not kindled new lights at those ancient beacons of literature and science which smouldered beneath their feet.

In the Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn, it is related that when Saʿd ibn Abū Waqqāṣ conquered Persia, he wrote to the K͟halīfah ʿUmar and asked him what he should do with the philosophical works which they had found in the libraries of the cities of Persia, whether he should keep them or send them to Makkah; then ʿUmar replied, “Cast them into the rivers, for if in these books there is a guidance (of life), then we have a still better guidance in the book of God (the Qurʾān), and if, on the contrary, there is in them that which will lead us astray, then God protect us from them”; so, according to these instructions, Saʿd cast some into the rivers and some into the fire. So was lost to us the Philosophy of Persia! (Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn, p. 341.)

Such was the spirit in which the early Muslims regarded the literature of the countries they conquered, and which gave rise to the frequently repeated story that ʿUmar ordered the destruction of the libraries of Alexandria, Cæsarea, and Ispahan, while even the enlightened Maʾmūn is said to have committed to the flames the Greek and Latin originals of the books he caused to be translated. It therefore seems probable that the world of literature lost quite as much as it gained by the Saracen conquest of the West. What the attitude of the Muslim world now is towards science and literature, the condition of the Muslim in North Africa, in Turkey, in Afghanistan, and in India, will declare. A condition of things arising from peculiarities of religious belief. If we study carefully the peculiar structure of Islām as a religious system, and become acquainted with the actual state of things amongst Muḥammadan nations now existing, we shall feel compelled to admit that the patronage of literature by the Muslim K͟halīfahs of Cordova, Cairo, and Bag͟hdād, must have been the outcome of impulses derived from other sources than the example and precept of the Arabian legislator or the teachings of the Qurʾān.

(See Ibn K͟hallikān’s Biographical Dict.; Crichton’s Arabia; D’Herbelot’s Bibl. Orient.; Al-Makkari’s Muhammadan Dynasties in Spain; Pocock; Muir’s Mahomet; Abū ʾl-Fidāʾ; Toderini’s Lit. des Turcs; Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn; Sir William Jones’s Asiatic Res.; Schnurrer’s Bibl. Arab.; Ibn al-Jazwī’s Talqīḥ; M. de Sacey; T̤abaqātu ʾsh-Shāfiʿīyīn.)

LITURGY. [[PRAYER].]

LIWĀʾ (لواء‎). A banner; a standard. [[STANDARDS].]

LOCUSTS (Arabic jarād, جراد‎) are lawful food for Muslims without being killed by ẕabḥ. [[FOOD].]

LOGIC. Arabic ʿIlmu ʾl-mant̤iq (علم المنطق‎), “the science of rational speech,” from nat̤aq, “to speak”; ʿIlmu ʾl-mīzān (علم الميزان‎), “the science of weighing” (evidence), from mīzān, “scales.”

The author of the Ak͟hlāq-i-Jalālī says “the ancient sages, whose wisdom had borrowed its lustre from the loop-hole of prophecy, always directed the seeker after excellence to cultivate first ʿIlmu ʾl-ak͟hlāq, ‘the science of moral culture,’ then ʿIlmu ʾl-mant̤iq, ‘the science of logic,’ then ʿIlmu ʾl-riyāẓīyāt, ‘mathematics,’ then ʿIlmu ʾl-ḥikmah, ‘physics,’ and, lastly, ʿIlmu ʾl-Ilāhī, ‘theology.’ But Ḥakīm Abū ʿAlī al-Mas̤qawī (A.D. 10), would place mathematics before logic, which seems the preferable course. This will explain the inscription placed by Plato over the door of his house, ‘He who knows not geometry, let him not enter here.’ ” (See Thompson’s ed. p. 31.)

The Arabs, being suddenly called from the desert of Arabia to all the duties and dignities of civilized life, were at first much pressed to reconcile the simplicity of the precepts of their Prophet with the surroundings of their new state of existence; and consequently the multitude of distinctions, both in morals and jurisprudence, they were obliged to adopt, gave the study of dialectics an importance in the religion of Islām which it never lost. The Imām Mālik said of the great teacher Abū Ḥanīfah, that he was such a master of logic, that if he were to assert that a pillar of wood was made of gold, he would prove it to you by the rules of logic.

The first Muslim of note who gave his attention to the study of logic was K͟hālid ibn Yazīd (A.H. 60), who is reported to have been a man of great learning, and who ordered certain Greek works on logic to be translated into Arabic. The K͟halīfah Maʾmūn (A.H. 198) gave great attention to this and to every other branch of learning, and ordered the translation of several Greek books of logic, brought from the library of Constantinople, into the Arabic tongue. Mulla Kātib Chalpi gives a long list of those who have translated works on logic. Stephen, named Istifānu ʾl-Qadīm, translated a book for K͟hālid ibn Yazīd. Batrīq did one for the K͟halīfah al-Manṣūr. Ibn Yaḥyā rendered a Persian book on logic into Arabic for the K͟halīfah al-Maʾmūn, also Ibn Naʿimah ʿAbdu ʾl-Masīḥ (a Christian), Ḥusain bin Bahrīq, Hilāl ibn Abī Hilāl of Ḥimṣ, and many others translated books on logic from the Persian. Mūsā and Yūsuf, two sons of K͟hālid, and Ḥasan ibn Sahl are mentioned as having translated from the language of Hind (India) into Arabic. Amongst the philosophers who rendered Greek books on logic into Arabic are mentioned Ḥunain, Abū ʾl-Faraj, Abū ʾl-Sulaiman as-Sanjari, Yaḥyā an-Naḥwī, Yaʿqūb ibn Isḥāq al-Kindī, Abū Zaid Aḥmad ibn Sahl al-Balk͟hī, Ibn Sīnāʾ (Avicenna), and very many others.

An Arabic treatise of logic has been translated into English by the Bengal Asiatic Society.

LORD’S SUPPER. [[EUCHARIST].]

LOT. Arabic Lūt̤ (لوط‎). Heb. ‏לוֹט‎. Held by Muḥammadans as “a righteous man,” specially sent as a prophet to the city of Sodom.

The commentator, al-Baiẓāwī, says that Lot was the son of Hārān, the son of Āzar, or Tarāḥ, and consequently Abraham’s nephew, who brought him with him from Chaldea into Palestine, where, they say, he was sent by God, to reclaim the inhabitants of Sodom and the other neighbouring cities, which were overthrown with it, from the unnatural vice to which they were addicted. And this Muḥammadan tradition seems to be countenanced by the words of the apostle, that this righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, “vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds,” whence it is probable that he omitted no opportunity of endeavouring their reformation. His name frequently occurs in the Qurʾān, as will be seen from the following selections:—

[Sūrah vii. 72–82]: “We also sent Lot, when he said to his people, Commit ye this filthy deed in which no creature hath gone before you? Come ye to men, instead of women, lustfully? Ye are indeed a people given up to excess. But the only answer of his people was to say, ‘Turn them out of your city, for they are men who vaunt them pure.’ And we delivered him and his family, except his wife; she was of those who lingered: and we rained a rain upon them: and see what was the end of the wicked!”

[Sūrah xxi. 74, 75]: “And unto Lot we gave wisdom and knowledge; and we rescued him from the city which wrought filthiness; for they were a people, evil, perverse: and we caused him to enter into our mercy, for he was of the righteous.”

[Sūrah xxix. 27–34]: “We sent also Lot: when he said to his people, ‘Proceed ye to a filthiness in which no people in the world hath ever gone before you? Proceed ye even to men? attack ye them on the highway? and proceed ye to the crime in your assemblies?’ But the only answer of his people was to say, ‘Bring God’s chastisement upon us, if thou art a man of truth.’ He cried: My Lord! help me against this polluted people. And when our messengers came to Abraham with the tidings of a son, they said, ‘Of a truth we will destroy the in-dwellers in this city, for its in-dwellers are evil doers.’ He said, ‘Lot is therein.’ They said, ‘We know full well who therein is. Him and his family will we save, except his wife; she will be of those who linger.’ And when our messengers came to Lot, he was troubled for them, and his arm was too weak to protect them; and they said, ‘Fear not, and distress not thyself, for thee and thy family will we save, except thy wife; she will be of those who linger. We will surely bring down upon the dwellers in this city vengeance from heaven for the excesses they have committed.’ And in what we have left of it is a clear sign to men of understanding.”

[Sūrah xxvi. 160–175]: “The people of Lot treated their apostles as liars, when their brother Lot said to them, ‘Will ye not fear God? I am your Apostle worthy of all credit: fear God, then, and obey me. For this I ask you no reward: my reward is of the Lord of the worlds alone. What! with men, of all creatures, will ye have commerce? And leave ye your wives whom your Lord hath created for you? Ah! ye are an erring people!’ They said, ‘O Lot, if thou desist not, one of the banished shalt thou surely be.’ He said, ‘I utterly abhor your doings: My Lord! deliver me and my family from what they do.’ So we delivered him and his whole family—save an aged one among those who tarried—then we destroyed the rest—and we rained a rain upon them, and fatal was the rain to those whom we had warned. In this truly was a sign; but most of them did not believe. But thy Lord! He is the Powerful, the Merciful!”

[Sūrah xxvii. 55–59]: “And Lot, when he said to his people, ‘What! proceed ye to such filthiness with your eyes open? What! come ye with lust unto men rather than to women? Surely ye are an ignorant people.’ And the answer of his people was but to say, ‘Cast out the family of Lot from your city: they, forsooth, are men of purity!’ So we rescued him and his family: but as for his wife, we decreed her to be of them that lingered: and we rained a rain upon them, and fatal was the rain to those who had had their warning.”

LOTS, Drawing of. There are two words used to express drawing of lots—maisir (ميسر‎) and (قرعة‎) qurʿah. The former is used for games of chance, which are condemned in the Qurʾān ([Sūrahs ii. 216]; [v. 92]); the latter the casting of lots in the division of land or property. (Hidāyah, vol. iv. p. 17.)

LOVE. The words used in the Qurʾān for love and its synonyms are wudd (ود‎), ḥubb (حب‎), maḥabbah (محبه‎), and mawaddah (مودة‎).

(1) Wudd. [Sūrah xix. 96]: “Verily those who believe and act aright, to them the Merciful One will give love.”

(2) Ḥubb. [Sūrah v. 59]: “God will bring a people whom He will love, and who will love him.”

[Sūrah ii. 160]: “They love them (idols) as they should love God, whilst those who believe love God more.”

[Sūrah lxxxix. 21]: “Ye love wealth with a complete love.”

[Sūrah xii. 30]: “He (Joseph) has infatuated her (Zulaik͟hah) with love.”

(3) Maḥabbah. [Sūrah xx. 39]: “For on thee (Moses) have I (God) cast my love.”

(4) Mawaddah. [Sūrah iv. 75]: “As though there were no friendship between you and him.”

[Sūrah v. 85]: “Thou will find the nearest in friendship to those who believe to be those who say We are Christians.”

[Sūrah xxix. 24]: “Verily, ye take idols beside God through mutual friendship in the affairs of this world.”

[Sūrah xxx. 20]: “He has caused between you affection and pity.”

[Sūrah xli. 22]: “Say! I do not ask for it hire, only the affection of my kinsfolk.”

[Sūrah lx. 1]: “O ye who believe! take not my enemy and your enemy for patrons encountering them with affection.”

[Sūrah lx. 7]: “Mayhap God will place affection between you.”

From the above quotations, it will be seen that in the Qurʾān, the word mawaddah is used for friendship and affection only, but that the other terms are synonymous, and are used for both divine and human love.

In the traditions, ḥubb is also used for both kinds of love (see Mishkāt, book xxii. ch. xvi.), and a section of the Ḥadīs̤ is devoted to the consideration of “Brotherly love for God’s pleasure.”

ʿĀyishah relates that the Prophet said, “Souls were at the first collected together (in the spirit-world) like assembled armies, and then they were dispersed and sent into bodies; and that consequently those who had been acquainted with each other in the spirit world, became so in this, and those who had been strangers there would be strangers here.”

The author of the Ak͟hlāq-i-Jalālī distinguishes between animal love and spiritual love. Animal love, he says, takes its rise from excess of appetite. But spiritual love, which arises from harmony of souls, is not to be reckoned a vice, but, on the contrary, a species of virtue:—

“Let love be thy master, all masters above,

For the good and the great are all prentice to love.”

The cause of love, he says, is excessive eagerness either for pleasure or for good; the first is animal love, and is culpable; the second is spiritual love, and is a praiseworthy virtue. (See Thompson’s ed., pp. 227–234.)

The term more generally used in Oriental writings for the passion of love is ʿIshq (عشق‎), a word which az-Zamak͟hsharī, in his work the Asās (quoted by Lane), says is derived from the word al-ʿashaqah, a species of ivy which twines upon trees and cleaves to them. But it seems not improbable that it is connected with the Hebrew ‏אִשָּׁה‎ “a woman,” or is derived from ‏חָשַׁק‎ “to desire.” (See [Deut. vii. 7]: “The Lord hath set his love upon thee”; and [Ps. xci. 14]: “Because he hath set his love upon me.”) The philosopher Ibn Sīnāʾ (Avicenna), in a treatise on al-ʿIshq (regarding it as the passion of the natural propensities), says it is a passion not merely peculiar to the human species, but that it pervades all existing things, both in heaven and earth, in the animal, the vegetable, and even in the mineral kingdom; and that its meaning is not perceived or known, and is rendered all the more obscure by the explanation thereof. (See Tāju ʾl-ʿArūs, by Saiyid Murtada.)

Mīr Abū ʾl-Baqā, in his work entitled the Kullīyāt, thus defines the various degrees of love, which are supposed to represent not only intensity of natural love between man and woman, but also the Sufiistic or divine love, which is the subject of so many mystic works:—First, hawā, the inclining of the soul or mind to the object of love; then, ʿIlāqah, love cleaving to the heart; then, kalaf, violent and intense love, accompanied by perplexity; then ʿishq, amorous desire, accompanied by melancholy; then, shag͟haf, ardour of love, accompanied by pleasure; then, jawā, inward love, accompanied by amorous desire, or grief and sorrow; then, tatāyum, a state of enslavement; then, tabl, love sickness; then, walah, distraction, accompanied with loss of reason; and, lastly, huyām, overpowering love, with a wandering about at random.

In Professor Palmer’s little work on Oriental mysticism, founded on a Persian MS. by ʿAzīz ibn Muḥammad an-Nafsānī, and entitled the Maksad i Aksā (Maqṣad-i-Aqṣā), or the “Remotest Aim,” we read, “Man sets his face towards this world, and is entangled in the love of wealth and dignity, until the grace of God steps in and turns his heart towards God. The tendency which proceeds from God is called Attraction; that which proceeds from man is called Inclination, Desire, and Love. As the inclination increases its name changes, and it causes the Traveller to renounce everything else but God (who becomes his Qibla), and thus setting his face God-wards, and forgetting everything but God, it is developed into Love.”

This is by no means the last and ultimate stage of the journey, but most men are said to be content to pass their lives therein and to leave the world without making any further progress therein [[SUFIISM]]. Such a person the Ṣūfīs call Majẕūb, or, Attracted. And it is in this state that ʿIshq, or spiritual love, becomes the subject of religious contemplation just as it is in the Song of Solomon. “Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth, for thy love is better than wine.” But whilst the lover in the Song of Solomon is supposed to represent the Almighty God, and the loved one the Church, in Eastern Ṣūfī poetry the ʿāshiq, or lover, is man, and the mashʿūq, or the Beloved One, is God.

The Ṣūfī poet Jāmī, in his Salaman and Absāl, thus writes of the joy of Divine love; and his prologue to the Deity, as rendered into English, will illustrate the mystic conception of love.

“Time it is

To unfold Thy perfect beauty. I would be

Thy lover, and Thine only—I, mine eyes

Sealed in the light of Thee, to all but Thee,

Yea, in the revelation of Thyself

Self-lost, and conscience-quit of good and evil,

Thou movest under all the forms of truth,

Under the forms of all created things;

Look whence I will, still nothing I discern

But Thee in all the universe, in which

Thyself Thou dost invest, and through the eyes

Of man, the subtle censor scrutinize.

To thy Harīm Dividuality,

No entrance finds—no word of this and that;

Do Thou my separate and derived self

Make one with Thy essential! Leave me room

On that divan (sofa) which leaves no room for two:

Lest, like the simple Kurd of whom they tell,

I grow perplext, O God, ’twixt ‘I’ and ‘Thou.’

If ‘I’—this dignity and wisdom whence?

If ‘Thou’—then what is this abject impotence?”

[The fable of the Kurd, which is also told in verse, is this. A Kurd left the solitude of the desert for the bustle of a busy city. Being tired of the commotion around him, he lay down to sleep. But fearing he might not know himself when he arose, in the midst of so much commotion, he tied a pumpkin round his foot. A knave, who heard him deliberating about the difficulty of knowing himself again, took the pumpkin off the Kurd’s foot, and tied it round his own. When the Kurd awoke, he was bewildered, and exclaimed—

“Whether I be I or no,

If I—the pumpkin why on you?

If you—then where am I, and who?”]

For further information on the subject of mystic love, see [SUFIISM].

LUBB (لب‎). The heart or soul of man. That faculty of the mind which is enlightened and purified by the Holy Light, i.e. Nūru ʾl-Quds (the Light of God). (Kitābu ʾt-Taʿrīfāt, in loco.)

LUDD (لد‎). A small town in Palestine, where it is said Jesus will find ad-Dajjālu ʾl-Masīḥ, and will kill him. (Mishkāt, book xxiii. ch. iv.) The ancient Lydda, nine miles from Joppa. (See [Acts ix. 32], [38].) It is the modern Diospolis, which in Jerome’s time was an episcopal see. The remains of the ancient church are still seen. It is said to be the native town of St. George.

LUNATIC. The Arabic majnūn (مجنون‎) includes all mad persons, whether born idiots, or persons who have become insane. According to Muḥammadan law, a lunatic is not liable to punishment for robbery, or to retaliation for murder. Zakāt (legal alms) is not to be taken from him, nor is he to be slain in war. The apostasy of a lunatic does not amount to a change of faith, as in all matters, both civil and religious, he is not to be held responsible to either God or man. An idiot or fool is generally regarded in the East by the common people, as an inspired being. Mr. Lane, in his Modern Egyptians, says, “Most of the reputed saints of Egypt are either lunatics, or idiots, or impostors.” A remark which will equally apply to India and Central Asia.

LUQMĀN (لقمان‎). A person of eminence, known as Luqmānu ʾl-Ḥakīm, or Luqmān the Philosopher, mentioned in the Qurʾān as one upon whom God had bestowed wisdom.

[Sūrah xxxi. 11–19]: “Of old we bestowed wisdom upon Luqmān, and taught him thus—‘Be thankful to God: for whoever is thankful, is thankful to his own behoof; and if any shall be thankless.… God truly is self-sufficient, worthy of all praise!’ And bear in mind when Luqmān said to his son by way of warning, ‘O my son! join not other gods with God, for the joining gods with God is the great impiety. O my son! observe prayer, and enjoin the right and forbid the wrong, and be patient under whatever shall betide thee: for this is a bounden duty. And distort not thy face at men; nor walk thou loftily on the earth; for God loveth no arrogant vain-glorious one. But let thy pace be middling; and lower thy voice: for the least pleasing of voices is surely the voice of asses.’ See ye not how that God hath put under you all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth, and hath been bounteous to you of his favours, both for soul and body. But some are there who dispute of God without knowledge, and have no guidance and no illuminating Book.”

Commentators are not agreed as to whether Luqmān is an inspired prophet or not. Ḥusain says most of the learned think he was a philosopher, and not a prophet. Some say he was the son of Bāʿūr, and a nephew of Job, being his sister’s son; others that he was a nephew of Abraham; others that he was born in the time of King David, and lived until the time of Jonah, being one thousand years of age. Others, that he was an African slave and a shepherd amongst the Israelites. Some say he was a tailor, others a carpenter. He is admitted by all Arabian historians to have been a fabulist and a writer of proverbs, and consequently European authors have concluded that he must be the same person whom the Greeks, not knowing his real name, have called Æsop, i.e. Æthiops.

Mr. Sale says: “The commentators mention several quick repartees of Luqmān, which (together with the circumstances above mentioned) agrees so well with what Maximus Planudes has written of Æsop, that from thence, and from the fables attributed to Luqmān by the Orientals, the latter has been generally thought to be no other than the Æsop of the Greeks. However that be (for I think the matter will bear a dispute), I am of opinion that Planudes borrowed a great part of his life of Æsop from the traditions he met with in the East concerning Luqmān, concluding them to have been the same person, because they were both slaves, and supposed to be the writers of those fables which go under their respective names, and bear a great resemblance to one another; for it has long since been observed by learned men, that the greater part of that monk’s performance is an absurd romance, and supported by no evidence of the ancient writers.”

Dr. Sprenger thinks Luqmān is identical with the Elxai of the Ebionites (Das Leben und die Lehre des Mohammad, vol. i. p. 34).

Luqmān is the title of the XXIst Sūrah of the Qurʾān.

LUQT̤AH (لقطة‎). “Troves.” Property which a person finds and takes away to preserve it in trust. In English law, trover (from the French trouver) is an action which a man has against another who has found or obtained possession of his goods, and refuses to deliver them on demand. (See Blackstone.) According to Muḥammadan law, the finder of lost property is obliged to advertise it for the space of a year before he can claim it as his own. If the finder be a wealthy person, he should give it to the poor. (Hidāyah, vol. ii. p. 277.) [[TROVES].]

LŪT̤ (لوط‎). [[LOT].]

LUXURY. Arabic tanaʿum (تنعم‎). In the training of children, the author of the Ak͟hlāq-i-Jalālī condemns luxury. He says, “Sleeping in the day and sleeping overmuch at night should be prohibited. Soft clothing and all uses of luxury, such as cool retreats in the hot weather, and fires and furs in the cold, they should be taught to abstain from. They should be inured to exercise, foot-walking, horse-riding, and all other appropriate accomplishments.” (Ak͟hlāq-i-Jalālī, p. 280.)

LYING. Arabic kiẕẕāb (كذاب‎). A pretty general infirmity of nature in the East, which still remains uncorrected by the modern influences of Islām. But Muḥammad is related to have said: “When a servant of God tells a lie, his guardian angels move away from him to the distance of a mile, because of the badness of its smell.” (Mishkāt, book xxii. ch. ii.)