Some beneficial points from the cover page of a portion of “جزء في السنة السنونة ” of Ghulam Al-Khallal:
– Hearing the words are not the same as witnessing the moment. – If you see a scholar who is heedless in following the Sunnah in terms of his speech and actions, then know that he is a liar and an innovator. – The foremost people deserving of companionship are those who agree with you regarding the Sunnah. Do not befriend anyone who opposes you in the Sunnah, even if he’s a relative. Don’t you see that Nuh عليه السلام said: Surely, my son is from my family, and how was he answered? “Indeed, he is not from your family”
I testify that the promise of Allah is True and the Hell-Fire is [..]
I testify that the promise of Allah is True and the Hell-Fire is the abode of the disbelievers, and that the ‘Arsh (Throne) is above water that encircles it, and above the Throne is the Lord of All the creation.
And may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon our Sayyid, Muhammad and his family, and his companions.
The manuscript of the first part of Ma’aalim at-Tanzeel of Imaam Al-Baghawi that was endowed (Waqf) by King ‘Abdul-‘Aziz bin Sa’ud for the students of knowledge along with the other volumes with the witness of Fahd bin Nasir.
I came across these lines of poetry on the title page of a manuscript of Zubtadul Mukhtassaraat fi Sharh al-Waraqaat. I first heard these lines of poetry from a recording of Shaykh ‘Umar Fulaatah’s رحمه الله Sharh of Saheeh Muslim when speaking about the marriage of Fatimah bint Qays and Usaamah bin Zayd رضي الله عنهم and how discrimination based on lineage is baseless given that we are all children of Aadam and Hawaa.
I’m not translating the poem here, just alluding to the meaning. The poetry basically states that in terms of their creation, people are essentially the same: their father is Aadam and their mother is Hawaa. And if they have some notability in their lineage that they’re proud of, then they were all created from clay and truly pride is only for the people of knowledge because of their clear guidance. Those who have understanding have the light of knowledge in their ways. This is because knowledge enriches life
There are many people who ignorantly speak about Islam to lead you to believe that Islam encourages the suppression of education among Muslim women. There are those who proclaim Islam and will parrot these nonsensical lies spouted by those who have an agenda against Islam and the proper Sunnah.
The greatest honor in Islam, after sincere submission and worship of Allah alone and following the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم, is seeking Islamic knowledge and teaching it to others. If Islam as a religion, and historic practices of Muslim Scholars, suppressed women in education, then we would not find the many female narrators, scholars, and scribes in the Muslim world.
Many scholars have already spoken about this subject. These are some small examples from we’ve come across while conducting other research in Islamic manuscripts.
Kitab Al-Muskir of Ibn Abi ad-Dunya | كتاب المسكر لابن أبي الدنيا
To the best of our limited knowledge, there is only one remaining manuscript of this notable work of Ibn Abi ad-Dunya (d. 281H) that has been catalogued or used in the published edition (refer to the edition (Tahqeeq) of Yasin as-Sawiss, Dar al-Basha’ir, 1410H/1991.
Two female scholars are recorded to have learned and taught and transmitted this text. One is Fakhr-un-Nisaa Shuhdah bint Ahmad bin Al-Faraj bin ‘Umar al Ibri and the other is Faatimah bint Muhammad bin ‘Ali bin Muhammad bin Al-Bazzazah Al-Baghdadiyyah. Both women were transmitters of Hadeeth and books of knowledge. Both held a high status in Baghdad due to their knowledge and transmission of knowledge.
Fakhr-un-Nisaa Shuhdah bint Ahmad bin Al-Faraj bin ‘Umar al-Ibri Ad-Dinawari| فخر النساء شهدة بنت احمد بن الفرج بن عمر الإبري الدينوري (d. 574H) was famous in sittings of knowledge and transmission of Hadeeth in Baghdad. Al-Hamawi cited that she came from a family of scholars of Hadeeth, she was exceptional, and had a beautiful handwriting- and it was not known that anyone in Baghdad in her time could write like her [Mu’jam al-Udaba, 3/1422-1423]. The Khaleefah, Al-Muqtafi-li amrillah al-‘Abbasi gave precedence to her for her knowledge and transmission of Hadeeth. She transmitted Hadeeth and knowledge from many notable scholars, including her father, An-Naqeeb Abul Fawaris Tarad az-Zaynabi, Abul-Khattab Al-Qari, Abul Hasan Al-‘Allaaf, and others.
Faatimah bint Muhammad bin ‘Ali bin Muhammad bin Al-Bazzazah Al-Baghdadiyyah | فاطمة بنت محمد بن علي البزازة، البغدادية (d. 563H) was also known as Nafeesah | نفيسة and was a scholar in Hadeeth. She attended many of the Sama’aat (sessions where books are read and studied). Adh-Dhahabi mentioned that she learned and transmitted Hadeeth from Tarad az-Zaynabi, Ibn Talhah an-Ni’aali and others. Some of the most famous Hanbali scholars narrated and learned from her, such as ‘Abdul-Ghani al Maqdisi, Al-Muwaffaq al-Hanbali, Abu Is-haaq al-Kashighri (Siyar A’laam an-Nubala, 20/489).
Saheeh Al-Bukhari | صحيح البخاري
This is another example of a Shaykha that was prolific in Syria for transmission of Hadeeth and knowledge. She scribed Saheeh al-Bukhari with extensive annotations.
Manuscript of Saheeh al-Bukhari, Shapero Catalog of Rare Books, October, 2021
The scribe is the Syrian Hanbali scholar Zaynab bin ‘Abdul-Waahid bin Ahmad al-Maqdisiyyah ad-Dimashqiyyah as-Salihiyyah al-Hanbaliyyah | زينب بنت عبد الواحد بن احمد, المقدسيه الدمشقية الصالحية الحنبلية (d. 7th century Hijri). She was known to prolifically transmit hadeeth and was famous in the Salihiyyah district of Damascus. She has a unique work transmitting the ‘Awali ahadeeth of Abi Tahir as-Silafi, Abil Fat-h ibn Sha’ieel, and Ibn as-Sa’aadaat ibn Zurayq. There is a manuscript of this work in the Dhahiriyyah library. Her brother was also a famous scholar, Dhiyaa-ud-deen al-Maqdisi (d. after 617H) . Her handwriting, as can be seen in the manuscript of Saheeh Bukhari, was stunning.
This is another example of a female scholar who famously transmitted the ahadeeth transmitted by Ibn Surayj that her transmission is famously known by her name… Juz Bibi. She was Umm al-Fadl Bibi bint ‘Abdus-Samad bin ‘Ali al-Hathramiyyah.
Maktabah Fazil Ahmad Basha, Fazil Ahmet Pasa Köprülü Library, #428, Fol. 218
She was Bibi bint ‘Abdus-Samad bin ‘Ali bin Muhammad Al-Hathramiyyah, Al-Harawiyyah | بيبي بنت عبد الصمد بن علي بن محمد الهثرمية الهروية (d. 477 or 478H). She was from the area of Herat in modern day Afghanistan. She famously narrated the Hadeeth of Abu Muhammad ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Abi Shurayh, such that her narrations from him are nicknamed Juz Bibi. She was known as someone who was prolific in narrating Hadeeth (Siyar A’laam an-Nubalaa, 18/403).
Dhahiriyyah Library, Majmoo’ah #124, Fol. 173
Al-Muntakhab min Musnad ‘Abd bin Humayd| المنتخب من مسند عبد بن الحميد
Another example that I recently came across as part of some coursework in a Dawrah is this Samaa’ah written by Al-Qaasim bin Ahmad bin Al-Qaasim bin Dawood As-Sarini al-Meknasi who mentions that he read the entirety of Al-Muntakhab min Musnad ‘Abd bin Humayd to ash-Shaykha as-Saalihah, Al-Aseelah, Umm Muhammad Zaynab bint Ahmad bin ‘Umar bin Abi Bakr bin Shukr al-Maqdisiyyah and in attendance of these Majalis, which took place in the house of these two women in Al-Quds: Zahrah bint ‘Abdillah as-Saalihiyyah and Faatimah bint Ibraheem
The scholar here was the Mu’amirrah (one who lived a long life), Umm Muhammad Zaynab bint Ahmad bin ‘Umar bin Abi Bakr bin Shukr Al-Maqdisiyyah (d. 722H) | أم محمد زينب ابنة أحمد بن عمر بن أبي بكر بن شكر المقدسية. She lived to the age of 94 (Adh-Dhahabi stated in her 100s, Mu’jam ash-Shuyookh, 1/248). She narrated from Ibn al-Latti and Al-Hamadani a significant amount, which she was the only one in her time that preserved that knowledge. She moved from her birthplace of Qasiyyoon to Jerusalem. She had traveled a lot and narrated in Egypt and lived in Madeenah for sometime. She was famous for her worship. Ibn al-‘Attar had narrated from her. Among those who narrated from her was Imaam adh-Dhahabi as he stated that he read to her in Jerusalem.
This Sama’ah shows that the scholars and students had learned from women and narrated some of the most important books in Hadeeth and transmitted from them with Ijaazaat. In addition, this Samaa’ah also shows that some of these Majalis al ‘Ilm were hosted in the homes of the female students of knowledge (in accordance with the Sharee’ah, and obviously not freely mixed gatherings).
King ‘Abdul-‘Aziz Public Library in Riyadh has announced that it has obtained a very rare manuscript, “Rawdhatul Uns wa Nuzhat an-Nafs” of Abul Biqaa Salih bin Shareef ar-Rundi Al-Andalusi (d. 684H). This manuscript is a work on history and it is dated 675H, during the lifetime of the author.
This manuscript was gifted to the ruler of Ghurnata, Abu ‘Abdillah bin Nasr during his life time. The text recounts the Seerah of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, the Khulafa, and the Khilaafah of the Umayyads and the ‘Abbasids.
This manuscript is thought to be the only known remaining manuscript of this illustrious work.
The author is the Mamluk scholar, Abul ‘Abbaas Ahmad bin ‘Ali bin Ahmad Al-Fazaari Al-Qalqashandi (d.821H). His book is Subh Al-A’shaa Fi Sinaa’ah al Inshaa (1/366- 414). It was first published in 1910 CE in 14 volumes.
Note: This is not a complete translation as I did this during downtime at work some years ago. I added: “[..]” wherever I skipped large sections or other details.
The Text:
Know that the ‘Arab are of two (general) categories: 1) Al ‘Arab al Baai’dah: they are the ones that have departed, their history is recorded (as passed), and their narratives are cut off except for a few. Their famous tribes are:
‘Aad Al-Oula (the first): They are the children of ‘Aad bin ‘Aws bin Iram bin Sam bin Nuh عليه السلام and their dwelling was in Al-Ahqaaf between Yemen and ‘Oman, and from Bahrain to Hadhramawt and Shihr. They are the ones whom Allaah sent Hud عليه السلام and they did not believe in him so He destroyed them with a wind as is narrated in the Qur’an.
Thamud: They are the children of Thamud bin Jaathir [it’s also said Kaathir with a Kaaf instead of Jeem] ibn Iram bin Sam bin Nuh. Their dwelling was Al-Hijr and Wadi Al-Qura between Hijaaz and Shaam. They used to make their homes out of the mountains with large structures. Allaah sent Saalih عليه السلام to them and they did not believe in him so He destroyed them with a loud shout from the sky as is narrated in the Qur’an.
Al-’Amaaliqah: They are the children of ‘Imleeq [and it’s said ‘Imlaaq] bin Lawidh bin Iram bin Sam bin Nuh. They were a great (expansive) nation that are cited as having immense bodies and being tall. At-Tabari said: They spread into smaller nations in different regions. Those among them were the people of ‘Oman, Bahrain, Hijaaz, the kings of ‘Iraq and the peninsula, the Jabaabirah of Shaam and the Pharoahs of Egypt.
Thasm: They are the children of Thasm. Ibn al-Kalbi said: They are the children of Thasm bin Lawidh bin Iram bin Sam bin Nuh. Al-Jawhari mentioned that they are from ‘Aad and their dwelling was in Al-Ahqaaf in Yemen. It’s mentioned in Al-’Ibar that their residence was in Al-Yamaamah and their destruction was due to war with their brothers Jedees.
Jedees: They are the children of Jedees bin Iram bin Sam bin Nuh. At-Tabari said: Jedees bin Lawidh bin Iram bin Sam bin Nuh عليه السلام. Their dwelling was beside Thasm, previously mentioned, and their destruction was due to war with those previously mentioned.
‘Abd Dhakhm: They are the children of ‘Abd Dhakhm bin Iram bin sam bin Nuh. It’s said in Al-’Ibar: They used to live in Taa’if and those among them were destroyed. It’s said that they were the first to write in Arabic.
Jurhum Al-Oula (the first): Ibn Sa’eed said: They are a tribe of the ‘Arab who lived in the time of ‘Aad and were destroyed.
Madyan: They are the children of Madyan bin Ibraaheem عليه السلام. They were a large tribe and people. Their dwelling was in the homes of ‘Aad and in the land of Ma’aadh in the edges of Shaam next to Hijaaz and close to the lands of the people of Lut. Allaah sent them Shua’yb and they did not believe in him.
2) The ‘Arab al Baaqiyah (remaining ‘Arab) whose remnants exist in different eras and in different places in the lands untils today and they are three types:
The ‘Arab Al-’Aaribah: Al-Jawhari said: They are also called the ‘Arab al ‘Urabaa and they are the children of Qahtan bin ‘Aabir bin Shaalikh bin Arfakhshadh bin Sam bin Nuh and they are the ‘Arab of Yemen. There are two famous groups from them:
Jurhum: They are the children of Jurhum bin Qahtan. They are not the same as the first Jurhum that has been previously mentioned among the ‘Arab al Baa’idah. Their dwelling was first in Yemen, then they migrated to Hijaaz, settled, and remained there until Ismaa’eel عليه السلام came with his father to Makkah and settled and populated Makkah and this will be mentioned in the discussion of the ‘Arab al Musta’ribah with the Will of Allaah.
Ya’rab: They are the children of Ya’rab bin Qahtan, who was mentioned previously. It’s said that the ‘Arab are known as ‘Arab because of him and he is origin of all the ‘Arab of Yemen who are from there and are descendants of him. Yashjab was born to him, and Saba’ was born to Yashjab and all of their tribes branch off from him. The two most famous tribes that return back to him are two:
Himyar: They are from Himyar bin Saba’ and his name was Al-’Aznajaj. Ibn Al-Kalbi mentioned that Himyar had ten children and the most notable and outstanding of their tribes of Himyar was from his son: Al-Hamyasa’. He was the king of the kings of Yemen and his land was the most noble of Yemen and its surroundings. There are those today who are from Himyar, the most notable of them are the tribes of Qudhaa’ah and he was Qudhaa’ah bin Maalik bin ‘Amr bin Murrah bin Zayd bin Maalik bin Himyar and it’s said Qudhaa’ah bin Maalik bin Himyar. Some have stated that the lineage of Qudhaa’ah are from the ‘Adnaaniyyah who have been mentioned previously. As-Suhayli said: the correct view is that when the mother of Qudhaa’ah, and she was Jakrah, became widowed when Maalik bin Himyar died and she was pregnant, Ma’ad bin ‘Adnaan married her and then Qudhaa’ah was born on his bed, so he adopted him and was ascribed to him. Al-Mu’ayyid, the author of Hamaah, said: Qudhaa’ah was king of Shihr and his grave is in the mountain of Shihr and is present (to this day). There are those from Qudhaa’ah alive today who ascribed to them. Al-Qudhaa’ee al-Masri , the author of Ash-Shihaab fil Mawaa’idh wal Aadaab fil Hadeeth wa Hifdh Misr wa Ghayraha. The famously known subsets of Qudhaa’ah are seven:
Baliyy: They are the children of Baliyy bin ‘Amr bin Al-Haafi Ibn Qudhaa’ah. Some remain in the lands of Egypt in upper Sa’eedah. From them are Banu Naab and others. Some remain in the lands of Hijaaz and others. Their ascription is Balawi with the addition of the Waaw with a Kasra before the Yaa an-Nasab.
Juhaynah: They are the children of Juhaynah bin Zayd bin Layth bin Sood bin Aslam bin Al-Haafi bin Qudhaa’ah. They are a great tribe and some remain As-Sa’eed in the lands of Egypt and Hijaaz and others. Their ascription is Juhani removing the Yaa after the Haa.
Kalb: They are the children of Kalb bin Wabrah bin Tha’labah bin Halwaan ibn ‘Imraan bin Al-Haafi bin Qudhaa’ah. From them was Haaritha al-Kalbi, Abu Zayd bin Haaritha, the servant of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم. The author of Hamah wrote: In Jaahiliyyah, Banu Kalb settled in Dumat Al-Jandal, Tabuk, and the edges of Shaam. Ibn Sa’eed said: Currently, they have a great presence in the gulf of Constantinople. He said in Maalik al-Absaar: And Bashizar, Aleppo and its lands, Tadmur, and Al-Manaadhir all have people from them. Their ascription is Kalbi.
‘Udhrah: They are the children of ‘Udhrah bin Sa’eed bin Hudhaym bin Zayd bin Layth bin Sood bin Aslam bin Al-Haafi bin Qudhaa’ah. Al-Ushq and At-Tatayyum ascribe to ‘Udhrah. From them was ‘Urwah ibn Khuzaam, the companion of ‘Ufraa’, one of the Mutayyamin and Jameel the companion of Buthaynah. The best of what’s been narrated is that it was said to a man from them: Why do you think Al-’Ushq is fighting you, O Bani ‘Udhrah? He replied: It is because we have with us beauty and virtue. [..] Some of them remain in Daqhaliyyah, in Mutaraahiyah from the lands of Egypt, and some remain in Shaam as well.
Bahraa’: They are the children of Bahraa’ bin ‘Amr bin Al-Haafi bin Qudhaa’ah. From them are a group of the Sahaabah رضوان الله عليهم. From them is Miqdaad bin Al-Aswad, one of the companions of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم. It is said that Khaalid bin Barmak was from the family of Bahraa’. It is said in Al-’Ibar: Their dwelling was north of the dwellings of Baliyy in Yanbu’ until ‘Uqbah Aylah. A large group of them migrated to the Caspian sea and they spread in the lands between Habasha (Ethiopia & Eriteria) and Sa’eed in Egypt and they became numerous there. They conquered the lands of the Nubians and they in war with Habasha until now.
Nahd: (They are Nahd) bin Zayd bin Layth bin Sood bin Aslam bin Al-Haafi bin Qudhaa’ah. Their dwelling was in Yemen. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم wrote a famous letter to them. There was a group of them in Shaam as well as Abu ‘Ubayd mentioned. The well-known from Nahd are As-Saq’ab. The author of Hamah said: They were leaders in Islaam.
Jaram: They are the children of Jaram and his name was ‘Alaaf bin Zabbaan bin Halwaan bin ‘Imraan bin Al-Haafi bin Qudhaa’ah. Al-Hamadani said: From them are Banu Jashm, Banu Qudaamah, and Banu ‘Awf. It’s reported in Al-’Ibar: From them are a group of the Sahabah رضي الله عنهم. I say: and they are Al-Qaadhi Waliuddin bin Khaldoon. They considered that they are from those in the land of Gaza. It preceded that they are from Jaram Tayy and not Jaram Qudhaa’ah. The author of Hamah recounted in his Taarikh that Tanookh is from them. Al-Jawhari said not to make the Noon (in Tanookh) with a Shaddah. The correct view is what Abu ‘Ubayd said that they are three subgroups of the Qahtaaniyyah: Nizaar, Al-Ahlaaf. He said: They were known as that because they swore upon residing in a place in Shaam and established its place. Ibn Sa’eed said: Some of the people apply Tanookh on the Dhajaa’amah and Daws that were established in Bahrain. The author of Hamah said: There was war between them and the Lakhmiyyeen, the Kings of Al-Hiyrah. Some of Tanookh remained in Ma’rrah in the lands of Shaam according to what Al-Hamadani mentioned.
Kahlan: They are the children of Kahlan bin Saba’. Abu ‘Ubayd said: All of their people came from Zayd bin Kahlan and they were concurrent kings alongside the Himyaris. A group of Kahlan remained in a large number under their rule. It’s said in Al-’Ibar: Himyar’s dominion decreased and the remaining rule of the Arab in the desert was left to the children of Kahlan and they are many subsets and the famous of them are ten:
Al-Azd: Abu ‘Ubayd said: It’s also said with a س instead of ز (Al-Asd). Al-Jawhari said: With a ز is Afsah (closer to Fus-ha, eloquence). They are the children of Al-Azd bin Al-Ghawth bin Nabt bin Maalik bin Uddad bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. They are from the greatest subsets and the most numerous in subgroups. Al-Jawhari divided them into three groups:
Azd Shanou’ah: They are the children of Nasr bin Al-Azd. Shanou’ah is the nickname of Nasr who overpowered his kids.
Azd As-Sarraah: adding Azd to As-Sarrah, a place in the edges of Yemen, a group of them settled there and became known because of it.
Azd ‘Oman: adding Azd to Oman. It is a city in Bahrain a group of them settled there and became known because of it. Al-Azd remained in the lands of Shaam in Zar’ and in Basra as it’s mentioned in Masaalik al-Absaar.
Al-Azd has many subgroups: from them is Ghassan. Abu ‘Ubayd said: They are the children of Juffnah and Al-Haarith and he’s Muharriq, and Tha’labah and he was Al-’Anqaa, and Haarithah, Maalik, Ka’b, Khaarijah, ‘Awf ibn ‘Amr bin ‘Aamir Maa’ as-Sama’ bin Haaritha Al-Ghatreef bin Imru’al Qays Al-Bitreeq – and it’s said Al-Bahlool- bin Tha’labah bin Maazin bin Al-Azd. They are known as Ghassan because of water that descended upon them known as Ghassan and so they drank from it and became known by it. It’s said in Al-’Ibar: They are close to the land of Yemen. Abu ‘Ubayd said: Some of the Ansaar said about that: “Since you asked, for we are a great people *** Al-Azad is our ascription and the water of Ghassan” A part of Ghassan were those kings of the ‘Arab in Shaam after Saleeh, mentioned previously, until the last of them who was Jablah bin Al-Ayham who accepted Islam in the time of ‘Umar and then apostated and stayed in the lands of the disbelievers. It’s mentioned in Maalik al Absaar that there are some of them in Shaam in Balqaa, Yarmouk, and Homs. From them are Al-Aws wal Khazraj, the children of Haaritha bin Tha’labah bin ‘Amr Muzayqa bin ‘Aamir Maa’ as-Samaa’ bin Haaritha Al Ghatreef bin Imru’il Qays Al-Bitreeq ibn Tha’labah bin Maazin bin Al-Azd. Their residence was in Yathrib and the Ansaar of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم were from them. There are many of them remaining in the East and West. Al-Hamadani mentioned: There’s a group of them in Manfalooth in Sa’eed in Egypt from Hassaan bin Thaabit and Sa’ad bin Mu’aadh the leader of Al-Aws رضي الله عنهما.(2) Tayy’: It’s taken from At-Taa’a from the form of At-Taa’ah. They are the children of Tayy’ bin Uddad bin Zayd bin Yashjub bin ‘urayb bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. Their ascription is Taa’i. Haatim at-Taa’i is ascribed to them famously known for benevolence. Likewise, Abu Tammam at-Taa’i, the famous poet. And there are many of them. It’s said in Al-’Ibar: their dwelling was in Yemen and they left it when they were split because of the breaking of the Dam. So they settled Najd and Hijaaz close to Bani Asad. Then Bani Asad conquered the two mountains Aja’a and Salma from the lands of Najd so they settled there and it became known as the mountain of Tayy’ until now. Then they separated in the early part of Islaam in the start of the conquests in various lands. There are many groups among them, from them:
Thu’al- [..]
Jadilyah, [..]
Nabhaan- [..]
Bawlan- [..] From them are three people whom it is said that they placed the Arabic script, which will be mentioned when discussing the (Arabic) script.
Hanaa’- [..]
Sudoos- [..]
Salamaan- [..]
Buhtur – [..]
Zubayd- [..]
Sunbus – [..]
Jarm- [..]
Tha’labah: [..]
Ghaziyyah- [..][..]
Laam- [..]
Aal Rabee’ah: the Arab of Shaam, [..]
(3) Madh-hij: The children of Madh-hij, and his name was Maalik, bin Uddad bin Zayd bin Yashjab bin ‘Areeb bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. This is what Abu ‘Ubayd said. Al-Jawhari said: Madh-hij bin Yahaaber bin Maalik bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. Al-Hamadani mentioned: They were called Madh-hij because of a tree that they differed upon named Madh-hij, so they took on this name. There are many tribes of Madh-hij:
Khawlaan- [..]
Janab – [..]
An-Nakha’- [..]
‘Ans- [..]
Banu Haarith- [..]
(4) Hamdaan: They are the children from Hamdaan bin Maalik bin Zayd bin Awsalah bin Rabee’ah bin Al-Khayyaar bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. It’s said in Al-’Ibar: their dwelling was in the east of Yemen. When Islaam came, they separated, some remained in Yemen and others left. He said: Hamdaan were the people (Shee’ah) of the Ameeral-Mu’mineen ‘Ali كرم الله وجهه when there was the fitnah between the Sahaabah. He رضي الله عنه said of them: If I was a door of the doors of Jannah*** I’d say to Hamdaan, enter in peace. It’s mentioned in Masaalik al-Absaar: in the mountain in Shaam famously known as Tayyibeen, there is a group from Hamdaan. (5) Kindah- They are the children of Kindah, his name was Thawr, bin ‘Ufayr bin ‘Adiy bin Al-Haarith bin Murrah bin Uddad bin Yashjab bin ‘Areeb bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. The author of Hamah said: He was known as Kindah because he refused his father, meaning he rejected his grace. He said: Their lands are in Yemen close to Hadhramaut. They had a king in Hijaaz and Yemen. Al-Ash’ath bin Qays, the famous Sahaabi, was from them. Likewise, Al-Qaadhi Shurayh, the judge appointed by ‘Ali رضي الله عنه was from them. It’s mentioned in Masaalik Al-Absaar that in Al-Luway in the lands of Shaam are a people that ascribe to Kindah. There are subsets of them:
As-Sukun – [..]
As-Sakaasik – [..]
(6) Muraad- They are the children of Muraad bin Maalik bin Uddad bin Zayd bin Yashjab bin ‘Areeb bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. Al-Jawhari said: it is said that his name was Yahaaber and he had rebelled so he became known as Murad. In Al-’Ibar they are considered a tribe from Midh-haj, so it’s said Murah bin Midh-haj. They author of Hamah said: Their lands are in the direction of Zabeed from the lands of Yemen. He said: To Murad ascribe all the Muraadi from the ‘Arab of Yemen. (7) Anmaar- They are the children of Anmaar bin Araash bin Al-Ghawth bin Nabt bin Maalik bin Zayd bin Kahlan. They have two subgroups: (a) Bajeelah- They are Banu ‘Aqbar, Al-Ghawth, Suhaybah, and Khuzaymah bin Anmaar bin Araash [..], and (b) Kath’am – They are the children of Kath’am bin Anmaar bin Araash bin Hind bin Maalik bin Al-Ghaffaaq bin Ash-Shaahim bin ‘Ad. [..](8) Judhaam- They are the children of Judhaam bin ‘Adiy bin Al-Haarith bin Murrah bin Uddad bin Zayd bin Yashjub bin ‘Areeb bin Zayd bin Kahlan. This is what Abu ‘Ubayd mentioned. The author of Hama considered them in his Taarikh from the children of ‘Amr bin Saba’. [..](9) Lakhm- They are the children of Lakhm bin ‘Adiyy bin Al-Haarith bin Murrah bin Uddad bin Zayd bin Yashjub bin ‘Areeb bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. Lakhm is the brother of Judhaam, previously mentioned and both of them are uncles to Kindah, mentioned earlier as well. The author of Hamah considered Lakhm from the children of ‘Amr bin Saba’ just as Judhaam. A group of Lakhm had dominion over Al-Hirah in the lands of ‘Iraq. From Bani ‘Ubbaad from those who remained in Andalus had dominion over Ishbiliyah. Al-Qudha’i mentioned that they participated in the conquest of Egypt and mixed in the region. Some from them mixed with Judhaam. Al-Hamadani said: in Sa’eed in Egypt, there are some from them who live in the East. Al-Hamadani mentioned 7 tribes from them: [..].(10) Al-Ash’ariyyoon- They are the children of Al-Ash’ar bin Uddad bin Zayd bin Yashjub bin ‘Areeb bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. It’s said: He was known as Al-Ash’ar because his mother bore him and he was hairy. The author of Hamah considered them Bani Ash’ar bin Saba’. They are the tribe of Abi Moosa Al-Ash’ari, the companion of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم. (11) ‘Aamilah- They are the children of ‘Aamilah, and his name was Al-Haarith, bin ‘Ufayr bin ‘Adiyy bin Al-Haarith bin Wabrah bin Uddad bin Zayd bin Yashjub bin ‘Areeb bin Zayd bin Kahlaan. Abu ‘Ubayd mentioned that they are Banu Al-Haarith bin Maalik, meaning Ibn Al-Haarith bin Murrah bin Uddad and he was under ‘Aamilah bint Maalik bin Wadee’ah bin ‘Ufayr bin ‘Adiyy bin Al-Haarith bin Murrah bin Uddad. The author of Hamah mentioned that they are from the children of ‘Aamilah bin Saba’. Al-Hamadaani mentioned that there is a group of them in the ‘Aamilah mountain in Shaam. B) The ‘Arab al Musta’ribbah: Al-Jawhari said: they are known as the Muta’rribah as well. They are the children of Ismaa’eel bin Ibraaheem. They are referred to as that because the language of Ismaa’eel عليه السلام was Hebraic or Syriac. When Jurhum from the Qahtaaniyyah settled with him and his mother in blessed Makkah, he had married from among them and him and his sons learned Arabic from Jurhum and that is why they were named Musta’ribah. Know that those present among the Arab from the children of Ismaa’eel عليه السلام are from the children of ‘Adnaan bin Udad, previously mentioned. It’s said in Al-’Ibar that those other than ‘Adnaan from the children of Ismaa’eel no longer remain and that is why these ‘Arab are known as the ‘Adnaaniyyah. The ‘Adnaani ‘Arab are two types: (1) those before the Quraysh:
Nizaar bin Ma’ad bin ‘Adnaan: There are three tribes from them: (1) Iyyaad [..], (2) Anmaar [..], and (3) Rabee’ah [..]
Mudhar: [..]
Ilyaas: [..] There are two groups of them: (1) Taabikhah [..], (2) Qam’ah [..]
Mudrikah: [..]
Khuzaymah: [..]
Kinaanah: [..] There are 5 tribes: (1) Malkaan [..], (2) ‘Abd Manat [..], (3) ‘Amr bin Kinaanah [..], (4) ‘Aamir bin Kinaanah [..], (5) Maalik bin Kinaanah [..]
(2) Quraysh [..]C) The Berber: [..]” [The author discusses the differences of opinion on this issue in a very lengthy – but interesting – passage].
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم warned us about falling into affairs of Shirk (associating partners with Allah in matters of Lordship, Worship, and His Names and Attributes). There is no doubt regarding the importance of us learning and applying Tawheed (singling Allah alone for Worship) in all aspects of our lives. This article is a case-study on one such example of how this lack of focus on Tawheed has led some Muslims to easily fall into Shirk can be seen in the study of Islamic Manuscripts.
Mysterious terms and drawings often appear on the cover/title or end pages of Islamic manuscripts. Not much has been written about some of these terms and drawings. Some are the equivalent of doodles or artwork, while others have meanings of Shirk, such as the case of Kabikaj.
The term, “يا كبيكجYa Kabīkaj ” or “يا كيكتجYa Kaykataj” or “يا كيكجYa Kaykaj” , appears in various forms/spellings in manuscripts of different subjects in Arabic, Ottoman Turkish, and Farisi. It is often found written on the cover or final pages of a manuscript written a single time or three times. Sometimes it is written as a complete statement invoking aid in protecting the manuscript (Gacek 2009; 1986).
Example of Shirk spread on Islamic Manuscripts. This copy read يا كيكثج – now erased, والحمد الله. Source: Athaar Collection, Accession # Ms.012j.c
Some Muhaqqiqoon (verifiers) of Islamic texts have mentioned in their descriptions of the Manuscripts that the term is one used by the ‘Ajam (non-Arab) as a non-Arabic work referring to Allah in the language of the ‘Ajam. However, this is unsupported as there is no solid evidence that this statement is even a reference to Allah in other languages. At least one Muhaqqiq that I came across, Ahmad Haaj Muhammad Uthman, noted that the statement was followed by “Ya Allah Ya Allah Ya Allah”.
It is noted that the word originates in Persian “كبيبكج” or “كَبِيكَج ” and refers to a plant species known as Ranunculus Asiaticus- the Asiatic Crowfoot (Gacek, 2009). Shihab-ud-Deen Al-‘Omri (d. 749H) mentioned that it’s a Berber term and refers to a plant found on certain trees in Andalus, citing Ibn Al-Baytaar (d. 646H) in his Al-Jaami’ li Mufradaat al-Adwiyyah. Numerous medical works, such as that of Ibn Sina (d. 428H), and Abu Bakr Ar-Razi (d. 313H) and Al-Khawarizimi (d. 387H), have mentioned the medical properties and usage of the plant known as Kabikaj. Adam Gacek, a Canadian Orientalist, noted in his 1986 article on the term “Kabīkaj ” that it’s possible that the plant was used to repel insects, but mentions that the repellent properties of this poisonous plant is unconfirmed, and this doubt is corroborated by Pollock (1988). However, the letter يا Yaa (حرف النداء) negates the idea that this word is not used as invocation, regardless of its meaning. This is specifically the case where the invocation calls on Kabikaj to protect the manuscripts.
Gacek (2009) stated that in many manuscripts of Indian origin, the word refers to the King of the Cockroaches that is thought to protect the manuscript from insects upon invocation. Gacek (1986) also cited Al-Biruni (D. 440H) as stating that the word derives from the Sanskrit Kapi, meaning Monkey. He also mentioned that the understanding is that Kabikaj is the name of a Jinn called upon to protect the manuscript from damage.
Abu ‘Amr Bakr bin Ibrahim Al-Ishbili (d. 629H) said on Page 40 of his Kitab at-Tayseer fi Sina’ah at-Tasfeer:
وجدت مكتوبا ما نصه:
وذكر لي سيدي محمد السميري أنه وجد في بعض الكتب الصحاح أنه من كتب في أول ورقة من الكتاب وفي آخر ورقة هذه الأحرف فإن الأرضة لا تضره وهي هذه (ياكيكتج) وهي صحيحة مجربة.
“I found this written down: ‘Sidi Muhammad As-Sameeri that he found something written on some of the authentic books, on the first and last pages of the book, the following letters that prevent the harm of termites/worms: “O Kaykataj” and it works based on experience'”
This is an example of how the people who applied this practice believed such invocations and talismans would protect the books. However, the manuscripts that contain these invocations were not only damaged by worms, but worse yet the ones who believed and applied this practice fell into Shirk. May Allaah protect us from falling into Shirk.
Shaykh Bakr bin ‘Abdullah Abi Zayd رحمه الله cited Shaykh Muhammad Naasiruddeen Al-Albaanee رحمه الله in his Mu’jam al-Munahi al-Lafdhiyyah (pg. 563):
“عن ابن مسعود -رضي الله عنه- أن النبى – صلى الله عليه وسلم – قال: ((إن الرُّقى، والتمائم، والتولة: شرك)) . رواه أبو داود، وابن ماجه، وابن حبان، وأحمد، كما في السلسلة الصحيحة، وقال: (الرقى: هي هنا ما كان فيه الاستعاذة من الجن، أو لا يفهم معناها. مثل كتابة بعض المشايخ من العجم على كتبهم لفظ ((يا كبيكج)) لحفظ الكتب من الأرضة زعموا) اهـ.”
“Ibn Mas’ood رضي الله عنه reported that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “Surely ar-Ruqa’ (Incantations), at-Tama’im (Amulets) , and at-Tiwalah (Love spells) are Shirk (Polytheism)”. Reported by Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Ibn Hibban, and Ahmad- as it’s mentioned in As-Silsilah as-Saheehah (1/650, no. 331): He said: “Ar-Ruqa in this case is what comprises seeking refuge with the Jinn or what has an incomprehensible meaning- such as what some of the Mashayikh of the non-Arab would write on their books: “O Kabijak” in order to protect the books from (deterioration caused by) termites/worms (Silverfish, or any insects that eat the books) as they claimed.”
Shaykh ‘Umar Fulaatah رحمه الله described this same behavior in his explanation of Saheeh Muslim: Kitab al Fitan wa Ashraat As-Sa’ah (Class # 14, 29:20 -30:42)
هذا الله لا اله ال هو، من تعلق به كفاه ومن تعلق بغيره وكله الله تعالى اليه كما قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم : من تعلق شيئاً وكل به او وكل اليه. من تعلق بخرزة والذي تعلق بحبة البركة والذي يتعلق بالباتنجان الاسود والذي يتعلق بحجاب كتبه ساحر يريد ان يأكل أموال الناس يكتب كتاب الله منكوس او بدم الحيض او بدم النفاس او بدم دم محرم ميتة أو يأخذ ويكتب. أو يكتب أسماء جن، وكثيرا ما رأينا هذه الأسماء مكتوبة… كشكنككيائل ، شمهروس، جني ميمون، بدوح وما الى ذلك … يا كيكج يا كيكج يا كيكج احفظ الورق يا كشكنككيائل يا كشكنككيائل هذا نداء لغير الله ونداء لغير الله كفر وشرك وبعد عن الله تبارك وتعالى فيتعلق العبد بهذه الأمور ويدع الله فالله تعالى يكله الى هذه الأمور التي يتعلق بها
“This is Allah, there is nothing worthy of worship except Him; whoever attaches their affairs to Him are sufficed (by Him). Whoever hangs an object (seeking protection from it), Allah تعالى will leave him to depend on it; just as the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: Whoever hangs an object (seeking protection from it), he will be left to depend on it. Whoever entrusts himself to beads, or the one who entrusts himself to the ‘blessed seed’ or to the black eggplant, or a covering written by a magician who wants to steal the people’s money- he writes the Words of Allah backwards, or in with the blood of the period or menstruation, or in the impermissible bloods, like the blood of the dead animal; or he writes the name of the Jinn. Much of what we’ve seen are these names that have been written: “Kashkankkaya’il, Shamharoos, Jinni Maymoon, Badooh, and the likes of that… “O Kaykaj, O Kaykaj, O Kaykaj, protect these pages. Ya Kashkankkaya’il, Ya Kashkankkaya’il.” This is a supplication to other than Allah and supplicating to other than Allaah is disbelief, polytheism, and distancing from Allah تبارك وتعالى. When the servant entrusts his affairs to these things, then Allah will leave him to be entrusted by them.”
This type of Shirk crept into the Muslim world due to the ignorance of ‘Aqeedah (beliefs) and Tawheed to the point that one could find it written on manuscripts of Aqeedah that specifically identify this behavior as disbelief. Much of these phrases are assumed to have been written by book owners, scribes, or book sellers.
I asked Shaykh Muhammad bin Ramzan Al Hajiree and Shaykh ‘Abdul Qaadir Al-Junaid in 2015 what should one do if they find this statement written on a manuscript. Both responded that if it’s confirmed that such a statement of Shirk is found, that it should be erased.
اللهم إنا نعوذ بك أن نشرك بك شيئاً نعلمه ونستغفرك لما لا نعلمه
“O Allah, we seek refuge with you from knowingly associating partners with you in any affair, and we seek forgiveness from you in what we do not know.” (Musnad Imaam Ahmad 32/383, #19606)
English References:
Gacek, A. (1986). The Use of ‘Kabikaj’ in Arabic Manuscripts. Manuscripts of the Middle East I. Leiden, Netherlands.
Gacek, A. (2009). Arabic manuscripts: a vademecum for readers (Vol. 98). Brill.
Pollock, J. W. (1988). KABI: KAJ TO BOOK POUCHES: LIBRARY PRESERVATION MAGIC AND TECHNIQUE IN SYRIA OF THE 1880’S AND THE 1980’S WEST. MELA Notes, (44), 8-10.
Many people remain ignorant of the deeply rooted connections that Muslims and Islam has had with America. While many continue to believe that Islam is a recent immigration to the United States, the vast evidences points to the existence of Muslims in the fabric of American society back to the founding of America. One such example is the Fiqh Manuscript written in the Sapelo Island in the State of Georgia by a Muslim slave known as “Ben Ali”.
Where is it now?
Early Western researchers were baffled by the contents of this manuscript, writing that it has been largely undecipherable (Martin, 1994; Syed, 2004). This manuscript currently resides among the Francis R. Goulding collection in the Hargrett Manuscripts repository at the University of Georgia (Accession # ms2807). The manuscript was obtained by Francis R. Goulding who had befriended Bilali near the time of his death and then brought to the Georgia State Library (Greenberg, 1940). It was at this point that the idea that this manuscript was an account of Bilali Muhammad’s life came about from B.L. Goulding, Francis Goulding’s son.
Who was Bilali Muhammad or Ben Ali?
The manuscript was written by Bilali Muhammad (d. 1857 or 1859), also known as Ben ‘Ali, who was born around 1760 to 1779 (Martin, 1994) in Timbo, Futa Jallon (in what is now the Guinea Republic). He was taken as a slave, either sold or kidnapped, and brought to South America with some accounts noting he was in the Bahamas and others in the West Indies (Martin, 1994). In 1802, a plantation slave owner named Thomas Spalding purchased him and brought him from Charleston to Sapelo Island (Martin, 1994). Bilali Muhammad, due to his knowledge, was given more duties than the other slaves on the plantation and even trained the other slaves to resist the British in the war of 1812.
The Bilali Manuscript- Description & Contents
The Bilali Manuscript. Image Source: The National Museum of American History. Smithsonian Museum. Courtesy of Hargrett Rare Book and Manuscript Library, University of Georgia
Several Western researchers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries attempted to “decipher” the work, with some such as Joseph Greenberg (1940) traveling to Nigeria to ask the local religious scholars about the contents. Greenberg writes that they disputed the notion that it was a diary as it contained chapters, yet indicated that it may have been written by Jinn calling their credibility to question. It makes one wonder who Greenberg had gone to ask when the answer he received was “it’s written by jinn”.
Martin (1994) provides a more detailed description of the manuscript. It is 13 pages written on Italian laid paper with Trelune watermarks, measuring 6.25 X 3.5 inches with 14 lines per page. This type of paper was popularly used in Africa in the 19th century pointing to a possible origin of the manuscript. This does not conclusively state that the manuscript was written before he was taken to the Americas, it’s possible that he had the paper with him and wrote the manuscript after arriving in the West. Greenberg (1940) claimed that the text, whose authors name is mentioned, is a copy of the Risalah of Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani. Martin (1994) argued that the text states Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah bin Yusuf bin ‘Ubayd Al-Kiwawandhi. Progler (2014) renders the name as “Muhammad Abdullah Ibn Yusuf Ibn Abd al-Qarawanidu”.
Page 1 of the Bilali Manuscript. Image Source: 7 Sister Cottages. Hargrett Rare Book & Manuscript Library (University of Georgia Athens Campus).
Amir Syed (2009) corroborated this notion in his Master’s Thesis on the manuscript’s interpretation, arguing that the variations from Risalah are too many to consider the Bilali document a rendering of Ibn Abi Zayd’s Risalah. Yusuf Progler (2014) noted that the author’s spelling may have been based on the sounds of the words rather than literal accuracy. Progler preferred to consider these misspellings as “substitutions” or “innovations” rather than “mistakes” or “corruption”. He believes that rather than a “correct” usage of the language, it is a utilitarian application for the audience of the text. This strange view seems apologetic for the inaccuracies that call to question the scholarly nature of Bilali. These types of Alhaan (ألحان) were not common in Arabic manuscripts of West Africa.
Muhiddin (2017) noted that the more recent view is that the Bilali manuscript is an original work depicting the knowledge of Bilali. This claim brings up doubt as Martin (1994) cited another name written on the title page, which would indicate that this is not an original work of Bilali Muhammad. Syed (2009) and Muhiddin (2017) noted that Bilali’s clerical training in the West African intellectual hub would give credence to this claim. However, Martin (1994) argued that the scribe knew little Arabic, often making mistakes in spelling of words. This contradicts the highly educated nature of Bilali in Islamic sciences. Muhiddin (2017), citing Al-Ahari (2012), mentioned that it is likely that Bilali authored this manuscript as a guide for the Muslim slaves on Islamic Fiqh- as the phrase: “And remind, for indeed reminders benefit the believer”.
With this idea, it’s likely that Bilali could have been taken at a young age before progressing in his Islamic studies and likely worked off of memory of his Maliki studies. This would explain his poor rendering of the Arabic language and the similarities to the Risalah of Ibn Abi Zayd al Qayrawani. As I mentioned earlier, these types of mistakes were not common for scholars and students of knowledge in Africa- as is evidenced in the thousands of Manuscripts found in West Africa. The numerous Arabic errors in the Bilali manuscript support the idea that Bilali was a young when he was taken and worked off his memory of his early studies. As Progler (2014) identified, the mistakes are related to the Makharij and Sifat of the Huroof. For instance, ص is replaced with س. While Progler (2014) excuses these errors as substitutions based on difficulty of oral transmission for non-native speakers, it is not excusable for students of knowledge- especially those emerging from West Africa where Arabic scholarship is known through history. Progler (2014) also identified a mistake in the text where Bilali writes “‘Uthmaan was struck and replaced by ‘Umar”. This error highlights weakness in memory or knowledge. Much of these issues can be seen in Progler’s work (review the link in the references).
Conclusion
There are several assumptions and conclusions that have been derived by many researchers and writers related to the Bilali manuscript as seen by Syed’s (2009) doctoral study and Muhiddin’s (2017) Master’s. This is my own conclusion:
After researching the secondary sources and pictures of the manuscript, it’s apparent to me that Bilali Muhammad was not the scholar that many have made him seem. The mistakes are too numerous for a well-versed Maliki scholar- no matter the excuses supplied by Western and Muslim researchers and writers. Contemporary works of other West African scholars highlight the deficiencies in the Bilali Manuscript.
What makes the most sense based on the studies and theses that I’ve read as well as the few black and white pictures I’ve seen indicate that Bilali Muhammad attempted to write a reference for the Muslim slaves who were not as educated to practice their religion, or so that they do not forget- especially when forced by the viscous slave masters who so often tried to destroy the cultures and religions of their slaves. Bilali Muhammad clearly had a significant education in Islamic sciences and Maliki Fiqh. However, the manuscript is evidence that he used his memory to author the work. Therefore, it’s likely that he tried to construct a guide based on the Maliki Fiqh using his memory of Ibn Abi Zayd’s Risalah and his own knowledge and memory.
This would explain the similarities of Ibn Abi Zayd’s Risalah and perhaps the rendering of the name. I believe, based on this evidence, that the manuscript was authored in America and not in Africa, where it would have easily been cross-checked with other works. It’s also likely that it was written later in Bilali Muhammad’s life when he started to see the religion weaken among the Muslim slaves or for himself as his memory may have weakened.
It is safe to say that Bilali Muhammad sought to preserve the Islamic practices and knowledge by authoring this work in America based on his studies and rearing in West Africa. This is truly an Islamic manuscript that originated in early America and solidifies the notion that Islam is not a recent migration to the West, but one that has been a part of American history.
