164

Sean W. Anthony

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul and His Corruption of Ancient Christianity1
S e a n W. A n t h o n y (University of Chicago)

Abstract
The discovery and publication of the manuscript of the Kit a b al-ridda wal-fut uh of the 2nd/8th century historian Sayf b. Umar al-Tamimi brought with it the potential for profound new insights into the Sayfian historical corpus as well as into the origins of Islamic historiography more generally speaking. The present study examines a new, previously unknown Sayfian narrative brought to light by this manuscript concerning the origins of Christanity and its corruption by Paul the apostle. After demonstrating how Sayf employs this extended narrative as a prolegomena for his considerably more (in)famous narrative of the early heretic Ibn Saba#/Ibn al-Sawda# a scheming Jew whom he blames for the emergence of Muslim sectarianism in the caliphate of Uthman b. Affan this essay demonstrates that Sayf composed his narrative of early Christianity from a mlange of sources (qur#anic, exegetical, and even Jewish). Finally, the study concludes with a re-evaluation of Sayfs methods and corpus in light of his narrative of Christian origins.

The historical works of the Kufan abari Sayf b. Umar al-Tamimi (d. ca. 180/796)2 have until recently been known to modern scholars solely through the selective quotations of later historians such as al-Tabar i (d. 310/923). However, with the recent discovery by Qasim al-Samarrai of a manuscript containing significant portions of the Kit a b al-ridda
1) The author would like to express his deep gratitude to Prof. Wadad al-Q adi for her thorough critique, proofing and encouragement in completing the present work. Thanks must also be given to Profs. Fred M. Donner and Margaret Mitchell , who offered numerous helpful comments on the earliest draft of this essay. 2) Biographical information about Sayf b. Umar is extremely scarce, and even his death date, estimated to be sometime in the reign of Harun al-Rashid (r. 170/786193/809), seems to be based upon guesswork by al-ahabi; see F. M. Donner, Sayf b. Umar, EI2, IX, p. 102a.

Der Islam Bd. 85, S. 164202 Walter de Gruyter 2010 ISSN 0021-1818

DOI 10.1515/ISLAM.2010.003

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

165

wa-l-fut uh (The Book of the Wars of Apostasy and Conquest) and the Kit a b al-qamal wa-mas ir A#is a wa- Al i (The Book of [the Battle of] the Camel and the Campaigns of A#is a and Al i), we now have unprecedented access to relatively large, previously unavailable sections of Sayf s corpus. The publication of this once-lost work follows and meets an already large body of modern scholarship written on the Sayfian corpus, yet given the prior absence of any extant edition of his writings, this previous scholarship had been written employing the tenuous reconstruction of Sayf s writings as preserved through later sources, especially the Ta#ri of al-Tabar i but also the Ta#ri mad inat Dimas q of Ibn Asakir (d. 572/1176) and al-Tamh id wal-bayan fi maqtal al-shah id Um an of Ibn Abi Bakr al-As ar i (d. 740/1340). The conclusions of modern scholarship regarding the sources, trustworthiness and methodology of Sayf b. Umar have often been widely varied and vigorously debated, but with the recent discovery of this manuscript, the evaluations of this corpus of historical writing by modern scholarship and its conclusions can and ought to be revisited, inasmuch as a wealth of new material has come to light.3 This essay aims to contribute some preliminary suggestions concerning the potential insights promised by such an attempt. In order to do so, I have undertaken an examination of an account concerning the origins and corruption of Christianity found only in this newly discovered manuscript. This early account by Sayf b. Umar is, by virtue of its inclusion in K. alRidda wa-l-fut uh, one of the very earliest Muslim narratives of the corruption of Christianity. Sayf situates his narrative directly prior to one of his most famous (and infamous) accounts relating the origins and activ i i g ula t-sect ities of Abd Allah b. Saba#, the eponymous founder of the S 4 known as the Saba#iya. The account of Christian origins, although fanci3) The reviews of Samarrai s edition by M. Lecker ( JAOS 119, 1999, p. 535), G. R. Hawting ( BSOAS 60, 1997, pp. 5467) and P . Crone ( JRAS 6, 1996, pp. 23740) take note of this. Comparisons with the extant manuscript and the texts preserved through the quotations of other historians have proved highly favorable, as well. See also al-Samarrai s own treatment of this issue as well as in his essay, A Reappraisal of Sayf ibn Umar as a Historian in the Light of the Discovery of his work Kitab al-Ridda wa al-Futuh, in: Essays in Honour of Salah al-Din al-Munajjid (London, 2002), pp. 53157 as well as M. E. Cameron , Sayf at First: the Transmission of Sayf b. Umar in al-Tabar i and Ibn Asakir, in: J. E. Lindsay, ed., Ibn Asa kir and Early Islamic History (Princeton, 2001), pp. 6277. 4) A thoughtful and well-informed account of the importance of Sayfs account of Ibn Saba# and the Saba#iya in modern, arabophone histories of the early Islam can be found in Werner Ende, Arabische Nation und islamische Geschichte: Die Umayyaden im Urteil arabischer Autoren des 20. Jahrhunderts (Beirut, 1977),

166

Sean W. Anthony

ful, is a colorful narrative of the early Christian community and its fate following the earthly prophetic career of the messiah, Jesus. As this study will show, the narrative is a tapestry of diverse elements and sources Christian, Jewish, and Muslim woven together to fashion the fate of the early followers of Jesus into a moral drama with didactic implications for the Muslim umma. The narrative takes the form of what occidental scholarship has become accustomed to calling a combined report,5 i. e. an amalgam report drawn from a diverse array of pre-existing materials the earliest form of which is often obscured by the final product. Inasmuch as the narrative contained therein is simple, its purpose is also lucid. In it we read of a fledgling but thriving Christian community chased from their homeland by the belligerent machinations of King Paul and the unbelieving Jews who are his subjects. In a ruse intended to trick the Christians into their own damnation, Paul, the king of the Jews, abandons his kingdom, gains the trust of the Christian community by feigning repentance, and lures its leaders into believing a corrupt version of their previously pristine faith, the teachings of which had once closely resembled the tenants of Islam. One small group, the believers (Ar., al-mu#minun), rejects Pauls teachings and flees from their former co-religionists, who seek to do violence against them under the influence of Paul. In an ironic twist, these remaining, true Christians flee back to the Jews of Syria where they make a pact to live an ascetic lifestyle in the mountains and countryside. This they do until the appearance of Muhammad. In the end, the account portrays a meager, besieged remnant striving to keep the message of the prophet Jesus in the wake of the nefarious endeavors of King Paul and his conniving Jewish subjects. That Sayf b. Umar provides us with one of the earliest known Muslim narratives of the corruption of Christianity is at first glance highly unex-

pp. 199210. On Ibn Saba# and the Saba#iya in general, see I. Friedlnder, Ab i a, und sein jdischer Ursprung, ZA 23 (1909): dallah b. Saba, der Begrnder der S pp. 296327 and ZA 24 (1910): pp. 146; W. al-Qa di , The Development of the Term Ghulat in Muslim Literature with Special Reference to the Kaysaniyya, in: A. Dietrich , ed., Akten des VII. Kongresses fr Arabistik und Islamwissenschaft (Gttingen, 1976), pp. 295319; H. Halm, Die islamische Gnosis: die extreme Schia und die Alawiten (Zrich, 1982), pp. 3342 et passim. 5) E. Landau-Tasseron , Processes of Redaction: the Case of the Tamimite Delegation to the Prophet Muhammad, BSOAS 49 (1986): pp. 25370; M. Lecker, Waqidis Account of the Status of the Jews of Medina: a Study of a Combined Report, JNES 54 (1995): pp. 1532; F. M. Donner, Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing (Princeton, 1998), pp. 26466.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

167

pected, insofar as Sayf s principal aim is to assemble and organize various accounts narrating the early wars of apostasy and conquest following the death of Muhammad. However, one should note that the account is essentially still a Muslim narrative insofar as even when Christianity is being discussed, Islam remains the central subject. Hence, the corruption of Christianity and its division into sects turns out to be merely a prototype, an propos serving as an introduction to more immanent threats to the unity of the umma such as the sectarian innovations paradigmatically represented (for Sayf at least) by the likes of Ibn Saba# and the Saba#iya. That the schismatic account of Christianity is framed in such a moralizing context likely reflects, moreover, worries regarding the threats of assimilation and schism contemporary with Sayf and, therefore, the trepidation felt towards the vices that had imperiled previous religious communities. As U. Rubin has observed, schism in particular was marked in Islamic society as a sign of assimilation with others, and as a major threat to the superior status of the Islamic community in world history.6 Beyond such interpretive observation, Sayfs account of Christianity can, with the aid of source-critical analysis, provide us with a considerable amount of insight into the techniques and methods employed in the compilation of his early history. This is made possible by the fact that most of Sayf s sources, represented by a variety of Islamic and non-Islamic materials, are more or less discernable and even retrievable with a reasonable amount of certainty. We can, in the words of M. Lecker, look over the shoulder of the Islamic compiler/historian at the materials he used in his work.7

Sayf Ibn Umar in previous Scholarship That Sayf b. Umar has been the object of controversy in modern scholarship ought not to be a source of too much surprise since the same proved true for his reputation among the scholars of the medieval period as well.8 The responsibility for Sayfs notorious reputation among a large contingent of the first wave of occidental scholars lies to a great extent at the feet of
U. Rubin, Between Bible and Qur#an: the Children of Israel and the Islamic Self-Image (Princeton, 1999), p. 165 7) Lecker, Waqidis Account, p. 27. 8) For thorough discussion of both bodies of literature, see E. Landau-Tasseron , Sayf Ibn Umar in Medieval and Modern Scholarship, Der Islam 67 (1990): pp. 126.
6)

168

Sean W. Anthony

Julius Wellhausen and the Schulentheorie9 which he articulated in his Prolegomena zur ltesten Geschichte des Islams. Wellhausen penned his Prolegomena with the intention of categorizing early Islamic histories into distinct schools of thought an endeavor not at all dissimilar from his previous, monumental work on the Pentateuch, Prolegomena zur ltesten Geschichte Israels. Wellhausen arrived at many of his conclusions by way of a thorough perusal of al-Tabar is Ta#ri and al-Balaur is (d. ca. 279/892) Fut uh al-buldan and classifying the identifiable sources these two employed. The framework Wellhausen constructed proved vastly influential insofar as it created a simple paradigm through which one could categorize the vast array of often contradictory and unwieldy sources via the hypothetical existence of geographically centered schools of historiography. In essence, he provided a textual hierarchy of sources that promised, in effect, to simplify the process of critical scholarship. Among al-Tabar is sources, Ibn Ishaq (d. 151/773) and al-Waqidi (d. 207/823), he argued, formed what he considered the more reliable, sober-minded Medinan-Hijazi school as opposed to the more unreliable and fanciful Ir aqi/Kufan school, which was typified by Sayf b. Umar. Whenever possible, the sparse material of the former, then, ought to be preferred over the preponderant material of the latter. The principal, pressing historiographical question, as Wellhausen articulated it, often boiled down to whether to accept or to oppose Sayf s version and chronology of events vis--vis the rival scenarios of his abari peers, and usually the answer was not in Sayf s favor.10 Wellhausen s theories became widely influential, and thereafter Sayf s material became virtually in the words of Dennet anathema for historians of early Islam whenever there existed any alternative source.11
Schulentheorie, to my knowledge, is actually a term coined not by Wellhausen but rather by Albrecht Noth ; see his Quellenkritische Studien zu Themen, Formen und Tendenzen frhislamischer Geschichtsberlieferung (Bonn, 1973), p. 12. 10) J. Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, VI: Prolegomena zur ltesten Geschichte des Islams (Berlin, 1899), pp. 46; cf. A. Noth , Der Charakter der ersten groen Sammlungen von Nachrichten zur frhen Kalifenzeit, Der Islam 47 (1971): pp. 197 f. 11) Quoted in Landau-Tasseron , Sayf Ibn Umar, p. 1. L. Caetani, Annali dellIslam (Milan, 190526), II.1., pp. 553 ff speaks of Sayf as posseduto dall fervida immaginazione dun romanziere e privo dellingregno freddo e critico dell storico, disdeg con sistematica indiffereza i rigidi vincolli cronologici. C. Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Literatur (Leiden, 1937), SI, p. 214 characterizes his works im hchsten Grade unkritisch und phantastisch. Cited in Hinds, Sayf b. Umars Sources on Arabia, in: A. M. Abdalla et al., eds., Sources for the History of Arabia (Riyad, 1979), I.2, p. 4.
9)

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

169

More thorough and recent studies have overturned Wellhausen s approach. Most notable among these perhaps is the work of Albrecht Noth which effectively debunked the artifice of Wellhausen s Schulentheorie by undermining the very concept of early historiographical schools12 although many other studies followed soon thereafter having similar effect. Noth argued that when reading accounts within a collection such as that of al-Tabar i, the relationship of the various accounts were, pace Wellhausen , not necessarily vertical (i. e. conforming external factors such as the idiosyncratic views of a previous author: e. g. Sayf, Ibn Ishaq, etc.) but rather are to be seen as existing in horizontal relationship i. e. accounts of an event are to be compared vis- vis one another on the basis of internal features.13 Considering the considerable success of Wellhausen s methods for the source-criticism of the Pentateuch, his attempts to apply such techniques to Islamic literature do not seem blameworthy in the least. Nonetheless, in hindsight it seems that from the beginning, Wellhausen s project was doomed to failure due to the decidedly different character of the Jewish and Islamic tradition. As Crone has observed, the Islamic tradition was not, as was likely the case with the Pentateuch, the product of a process of slow crystallization but rather an explosion of historical materials which the earliest redactors seemed content to mostly compile and systematize.14 Donner s helpful survey of the vast geographic array of early historical works, albeit usually no longer extant, also demonstrated clearly the feeble basis of the binary, Medinesevs.-Iraqi structure attributed by Wellhausen to the supposedly rival schools. What rival roles the surviving materials play in later canonical histories is in fact only a verisimilitude arising from their compilation, arrangement, and the caprices of historical preservation and, thus, cannot be seen as necessarily intimated in the actual collected materials of the earlier historians such as Sayf, Ibn Ishaq, al-Waqidi, Abu Minaf, et al.15 Noth s arguments against the basic premises of Wellhausen s Schulentheorie proved so effective because his analysis was able to undermine perceptions of Sayf s so-called pro-Iraqi or Tamimite bias, arguing that
12)

Noth , Charakter, pp. 16899; idem, Quellenkritische Studien, pp. 11 ff; idem with L. I. Conrad, The Early Arabic Historical Tradition: a Source Critical Study, 2nd ed., trans. M. Bonner (Princeton, 1994), pp. 5 f; Hinds, Sayf b. Umars Sources on Arabia, pp. 3 f. 13) Noth , Charakter, p. 198. 14) Slaves on Horses: the Evolution of the Islamic Polity (Cambridge, 1980), p. 13. 15) Donner, Narratives of Islamic Origins, pp. 21428.

170

Sean W. Anthony

prior scholarly evaluations of Sayf were based on the erroneous view that the compilations of Sayf and other like figures constructed a singular, discernable view of history.16 Not only does the contradictory nature of their historical material deprive it of any geographically specific ideology (e. g. Ibn Ishaq including clearly pro-Iraqi material, Sayf including anti-Iraqi accounts, etc.), but, moreover, the contents of the so-called schools tended to agree and overlap in important sections of transmissions. Noth s conclusions, thus, have often been viewed as rescuing Sayf s reputation as a wholesale fabricator and then replacing it with a view of him as principally a compiler. As Noth writes, while these compilers did add their own changes to the material which they had assembled, they were nonetheless collectors of historical reports first and foremost.17 He basically contends that the differences and contradictions between competing traditions, thus, ought to be seen as arising in the material process of collection and organization itself. Falsification arises, therefore, not through the forgery of materials sui generis, but rather from the very ways in which they (i. e. early Islamic historians) handled their material.18 It is this very process of collecting and systematizing, I shall argue, that we can uncover in Sayf s account of Paul. Despite the re-evaluations of Sayf undertaken by scholars such as Noth and Landau-Tasseron , some modern scholars, even though leaving behind the entrappings of Wellhausen s now defunct Schulentheorie, have nevertheless reiterated his fundamental criticisms against the corpus of Sayfs materials.19 Madelung, for instance, has described the Sayfian corpus as, a late Kufan Umanid and anti-Shi ite concoction i i scholar without source value.20 Much in the same vein as the Iraqi, S
16) He was, of course, more than willing to admit that other historians offered unified views of a historical period in cases that address a single highly restricted theme in favor of one particular faction, such al-Azdi (fl. ca. 190/805), Nasr b. Muzahim (d. 212/827), and Abu Ishaq al-aqaf i (d. 283/896); See Noth/Conrad, Early Arabic Historical Tradition, p. 7. 17) Ibid. and cf. Noth ,, Charakter, p. 198. 18) Noth/Conrad, Early Arabic Historical Tradition, p. 6. 19) Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, VI, pp. 123 ff. 20) W. Madelung, The Succession to Muhammad (Cambridge, 1997), p. 374. I would like to thank Prof. Madelung for providing me with a copy of his yet unpublished typescript, Sayf ibn Umar: Akhbari and ideological fiction writer, where he fleshes out these ideas more completely. Unfortunately, I received the typescript too late to incorporate his material into this essay; however, I look forward to engaging his research in a forthcoming monograph in preparation on the Saba#iya.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

171

Murtada al- Askar i s works,21 Khalid Yahya Blankenship has argued that not only much of Sayfs narratives but also the authorities from whom he claims to transmit his information are entirely forged.22 Just how alSamarrai s publication of his edition of the manuscript of Sayf s works will affect the views of scholarship on Sayf as an historian still remains to be determined.23 Medieval authors as well, especially among the specialists of had i criticism and ilm al-riqal, tended towards a rather disparaging view of Sayf b. Umar. Al-ahabi (d. 748/1348) lists Sayf in his Mi za n al-i tidal where he provides a litany of entirely negative opinions concerning the reliability of his had i-transmission. The consensus is striking, various scholars aver Sayf to be unreliable/matr uk (Abu Hatim), declare that generally his had is are rejected/ a mma tan had iuhu munkar un (Ibn Adi), and claim that he was accused of heresy/uttuhima bi-l-zandaqa (Ibn Hibban).24
21) M. al- Askari, Abd Allah b. Saba#: bah wa-tahqiq f i m a katabahu al-mu#arriu n wa-l-mustas riq un an Ibn Saba# wa-qisas isla m iya ura (Cairo, 1361 a. h. ) and idem, amsu n wa-mi#a sahabi mutalaq (Baghdad, 1979). The work of al- Askar i , too often dismissed as partisan, has been often commented upon and debated in Arabic scholarship but somewhat neglected in Western scholarship. See the overview in Q. al-Samarrai , Sayf b. Umar and ibn Saba : A New Approach, in: T. Parfitt , ed., Israel and Ishmael: Studies in Muslim-Jewish Relations (New York, 2000), pp. 55 f. 22) See his introduction to his translation of al-Tabar i, The History of al-Tabar i, XI: the Challenge to the Empires (Albany, 1993), pp. xxiiixxix. 23) In her review, Crone asserted that, In light of al-Samarrai s publication, [Noth s view of the Sayfian corpus] must be abandoned, salutary though it was in its time, JRAS 6 (1996): p. 239. Lecker, in contrast, has spoken of the text as demonstrating, the meticulosity of Sayfs transmissions, JAOS 119 (1999): p. 535. 24) Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Uman al-ahabi, Mi za n al-i tidal fi naqd al-riqal, ed. A. M. al-Bi qawi (Cairo, 1963), II, pp. 255 f. Cf. Ibn Haqar al- Asqalani, Tahib al-tahib, 12 vols. (Hyderabad 19071909), IV , pp. 295 f. See also the list provided in al- Askar i , Abd Allah b. Saba#, pp. 28 f. As J. van Ess has noted, it must certainly be considered a great irony that Sayf b. Umar appears alongside Abd Allah b. Saba# as a zind iq; see his Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert Hidschra: Eine Geschichte des religisen Denkens im frhen Islam (Berlin, 1991), I, p. 417 (hereafter, TG). Since we are provided with no context for the reasons behind this accusation for the term zind iq had acquired a protean promiscuity in its usages by Sayfs time we are forced to assume that its significance derives from the general usage of the term among the had i-critics as exhibited in the ilm al-riqal genre. Namely, a zind iq was a flippantly pernicious, duplicitous (insofar as he only feigned conversion to Islam), or unrepentant forger of had i. A. Noth , Gemeinsamkeiten muslimischer und orientalischer Hadi-Kritik: Ibn al-Qawzis Kategorien der Hadi

172

Sean W. Anthony

The general consensus on the rejection of Sayf b. Umar by the muhaddiun, however, ought to be read within its proper context. Not only Sayf, but nearly all of the early, prominent abaris, including the likes of Muhammad b. Ishaq and al-Waqidi,25 suffer criticism at the hands of had ischolars throughout ilm al-riqal works although some fare better than others.26 Here, the observation of Martin Hinds and Ihsan Abb a s are helpful: insofar as these evaluations concern the rather specialized field of determining the probity of persons with regard to the transmission of had i, one could perhaps discard their judgments of Sayf if dealing exclusively with historical narratives.27 After all, most of these had i have been either lost or discarded with the exception of the choice citations of Sayf s forged had i found in the works of scholars such as al-ahabi28 and Ibn Adi (d. 360/976).29 With regard to historical events, such scruples seemed to be less important; Sayf remained a mainstay of Sunn i historical writing on the early period of Islam, featuring often in the likes of Ibn al-Qawzis al-Muntazam, al-ahabis Ta#ri al-isla m, Ibn Kairs al-Bida ya wa-l-niha ya, etc. This is typified in particular by Ibn Haqars pronouncement that Sayf ought to be viewed as weak in had i, but a pillar of history (da if fi l-had i, umda tun fi l-ta#ri).30 Yet, even if we take the widespread usage of the Sayfian corpus, especially by Sunn i historians, into account, the fundamental problems of

Flscher, in: U. Tworuschka , ed., Gottes ist der Orient, Gottes ist der Okzident: Festschrift fr Abdoldjavad Falaturi zum 65. Geburtstag (Vienna, 1991), p. 43. The paradigmatic case of this type of zind iq was, of course, the notorious Abd al-Kar im b. Abi al- Awqa# (d. 155/772), who purportedly claimed to have fabricated 4,000 prophetic traditions. In his confession, he reportedly declared, Indeed I fabricated 4,000 ha d i making licit in them what is illicit and making illicit in them what is licit, see Ibn Haqar, Lisa n al-m i zan (Beirut, 1987), IV , pp. 61 f. Cf. G. Vajda , Les zindqs en pays dIslam au dbut de la priode Abbaside, RSO 17 (1938): pp. 19 ff. 25) ahabi, for example, explicitly states that Sayf is like al-Waqidi (huwa kal-Waqid i), Mi za n al-i tidal, II, p. 255 and cf. ibid., III, pp. 66266, s. v. Muhammad b. Umar b. Waqid al-Aslami. 26) As Landau-Tasseron (Sayf, p. 7) notes, From the muhaddithuns point of view, the historians who were not versed in the specific discipline of had i th may have been not only worthless but also a menace, precisely because they gave their material the appearance of had i th. 27) Hinds, Sources on Arabia, p. 4 (citing Abb a s). 28) Mi za n al-i tidal, II, p. 256. 29) Ibn Adi al-Qurqani, al-Ka mil f i du afa# al-riqa l (Beirut, 1984), II, pp. 1271 f. 30) Tahrir taqr i b al-tahib, eds. S u ayb al-Arn a #ut and Bas s ad Ma ruf (Beirut, 1997), II, 100 f.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

173

transmission underlying his corpus still remain: perhaps the most salient problem plaguing the traditions of Sayf is the difficulty of identifying the rawis, or transmitters, found in his isna ds. As al-ahabi observes, Sayf relates from all manner of unknowns (alq kair min al-maqhulin).31 Although certainly Sayf was subjected to a great deal of criticism in medieval works and was not, as Landau-Tasseron phrases it, especially notorious,32 we can see that his work as seen through the eyes of medieval scholars failed to meet, at the very least, the rigorous requirements of isna d-criticism an issue we shall address more directly below.

The Account Below, I have translated Sayf s account of Christian origins in its entirety, and thereafter, I attempt to situate it in its larger narrative context and to establish some of its antecedent sources insomuch as this is possible. The account itself is framed in the typical literary unit of Islamic history, the abar (pl. abar).33 Abar are self-contained accounts transmitted through a line of transmitters with the purpose of adding authority and antiquity to their contents. Narrative arches form in Muslim historical works through the stringing of one abar after another. This abar relating the corruption of Christianity appears in Sayfs narrative as a prologue to such a narrative arch of abar concerning Ibn Saba# and the detrimental influence of his entourage, the Saba#iya, on the early umma, a context that, further on in this essay, will prove to be essential to interpreting the significance of this account with the context of the Sayfian corpus. I have organized the account into eight sections: 0. Isna d, or chain of transmitters 1. Ascension of Jesus, spread of Christianity persecution and flight of the Christians 2. Distress of the Jews on account of the Christians; scheming of King Paul 3. Conversion of Paul 4. Corruption of the Christians by Paul
Mi zan, II, p. 255. Landau-Tasseron , Sayf, p. 9. 33) On which, see S. Leder, The Literary Use of the Khabar: A Basic Form of Historical Writing, in: A. Cameron and L. I. Conrad , eds., The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, I: Problems in the Literary Source Material (Princeton, 1992), pp. 277315.
32) 31)

174

Sean W. Anthony

5. Origins of the four factions of Christianity 6. Faithfulness of the Believer 7. Fate of the Christians and the Believers faction 8. Qur#anic epilogue The account runs in its entirety as follow:34 u ayb f al-Sar i 0. Ibn Abbas f Yazid al-Faq asi f Atiya f Sayf f S said that:35 1. He (i. e. Ibn Abbas) said, Isa/Jesus upon him peace proclaimed the Gospel (da a) to the Israelites and whomsoever God willed36 believed in his message. So after God Most High had raised
Sayf b. Umar al-Tamimi, K. al-Ridda wa-l-fut uh, I, pp. 13235 and II, fols. 62a64b. I have been able to locate three instances of the narrative outside the K. alRidda. See Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Qur tubi (d. 671/1273), I la m bi-m a fi d in al-nasara min al-fasa d wa-l-awha m wa-i zha r mahasin d in al-isla m wa-iba t nub uwat nab iyina, ed. A. H. al-Saqq a (Cairo, 1980), pp. 24144, who states that the account is found in the books of history known to us and them (i. e., the Christians) (kutub ihab al-Din Ahmad b. Idr is al-Qar afi al-taw a ri indana wa- indahum). See also S (d. 684/1285), K. al-Aqwiba al-faira (Cairo, 1904), pp. 17376, who includes a similar account attributing it to a group of historians from among us and them (firqa min al-mu#arriin in dana wa-indahum). On al-Qar afi, see Brockelmann, GAL, I, p. 385. Another version of the account, and the only one to mention Sayf as the source of the account, appears reproduced in an unpublished manuscript of a 14thcentury Andalusian polemicist, Muhammad al-Qaysi, in a work entitled Mift ah ald in wa-l-muqa dala bayna l-nasara wa-l-muslim in min qawl al-anbiya# wa-l-mursal in wa-l- ulam a# al-rashid in. See P . S. van Koningsveld and G. A. Wiegers, The Polemical Works of Muhammad al-Qaysi (fl. 1309) and their Circulation in Arabic and Aljamiado among the Mudejars in the Fourteenth Century, AQ 15 (1994): pp. 168 f. These versions, however, contain many interpolations and corruptions and are of limited use for interpreting Sayfs version (e. g., see Q. Sammarai s comments in K. al-Ridda, p. 132 n. 706). Generally, these three conform much more closely to one another than to Sayfs account. In my translation therefore, I have noted only variants deemed helpful in elucidating the content of Sayfs version. 35) The isna ds of the MS of Sayfs K. al-Ridda reflect the same riw a ya, or line of u ayb b. Ibr ahim, transmission, as that found in al-Tabar is Ta#ri i. e., through S an unknown figure (cf. al-ahabi, Mi zan, II, p. 275), to al-Sar i b. Yahya (cf. ibid., II, p. 118). 36) In Arabic: da a ban i Isra#il fa-aqa bahu ila a lika man s a#a Allah. The phrase man s a#a Allah, used here to mean whoever, and its variants, m a/hayu s a#a Allah, are peculiar phrases recurrent often particularly in early Ibadi literature and the narratives of Sayf b. Umar as noted by P . Crone and F. Zimmermann , The Epistle of Sa lim ibn Dhakw an (Oxford, 2001), pp. 319.
34)

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

175

him, the people delighted in his speech. His companions reached seven hundred among the people of the temple (ahl al-bayt).37 Then a#ul)38 he continued, Paul (his tecnonym was [ka na yukna] Abu S being the king in those days killed the Christians, so they fled. Then he rode in their tracks until he reached the narrow passes (of the mountains).39 Thus, they had bested him (fa-rakiba f i aa rihim hatt a intaha ila l-dur ubi fa-a qazuhu). 2. Paul told them (i. e., the Jews): Indeed, their message is appealing, and they have gone to your enemy. They are still acting as the benefactors of the Christians. Soon, they will come riding against you with the aid of your enemies unless you pay heed to what I am about to say to you. They said, Yes, [we will]! He said, You are my partners in the good and the bad. I am as one of you. Yes! they said. 3. So, he left his kingdom (mulk) and wore their clothes.40 Then he pursued them with the intent to lead them astray (li-yud illahum) until he reached their army ( askarihim). They took him saying, Praise be to God who has humbled you and taken your power from you! Paul replied, Lead me to your leaders, for my folly has not be-

Qar afi, Aqwiba, p. 173, and Qur tubi, I la m, p. 241, replace the awkward sab a mi#at ahl bayt, which I have decided to render as people of the temple taking bayt in this account to refer to a temple (see explanation below), with sab a mi#at raq ul, or 700 men, adding these men waged jihad against the children of Israel. 38) A kunya is an agnomen usually (though not necessarily) given after father a#ul means father of S a#ul. While the changing of King Paul ing a son; thus, Abu S into common garb slightly resembles I Sam. 28:8, the correspondence of the two topoi is most likely a coincidence. It is unlikely that this account associates Paul with the figure King Saul who is counted in the qur#anic context among the a#ul for the first king of Israel does occur in Isprophets. The usage of the name S lamic literature but is irregular; e. g., see Ibn Qayyim al-Qawziya, Hida yat alhaya ra f i aqwibat al-yahud wa-l-nasara, ed. M. A. al-Ha qq (Beirut, 1996), p. 420 et passim. The qur#anic name for King Saul is Talut. He appears as a central figure in Q. 2:24651 in a brief narrative containing elements resembling I Sam. 518 and the story of Gideon in Judges 7. Although this qur#anic account is relatively brief, tafs irand qisas-material based on the Talut narrative expands richly the brief qur#anic material; see R. Firestone, Talut, EI2, X, pp. 168 f. 39) Qar afi, Aqwiba, p. 173, Qur tubi, I la m, p. 241, and Qaysi (trans., van Ko am). ningsveld/Wiegers, Polemical Works, p. 168) place these events in Syria (S 40) labisa libasahum: it is unclear if this specifically refers to clothes of the Christians or the Jews. Most likely the clothing of commoners (and probably more specifically Christian attire) and the casting off of kingly robes are intended.

37)

176

Sean W. Anthony

come [so great] that I come without a sign/proof (lam yablug min humqi an a t ikum illa wa-ma i burhan). Then they led him to their leaders, whereupon they said: What do you have [to say] (mah)? He answered, Jesus found me while I was departing from you and took from me my hearing, my sight, and my reason ( aql i). I neither heard nor saw nor reasoned. Soon after, he healed me (kas afa ann i), and, by God, I gave an oath to join your cause, to dedicate my life to you, and to teach you the Torah and its laws (al-tawra wa-ahka maha).41 And they believed that he spoke the truth. 4. Paul said: Build for me a hermitage/temple (bayt)42 and furnish it with ashes, and they furnished it with ashes.43 Paul dedicated himself to the worship of God therein and taught them whatsoever God willed. Afterwards, he locked himself away from them, and they circumambulated the hermitage/temple (fa-a tafu bihi). They said: We fear that he saw something displeasing and shunned it. After a day, he
41) After relating Pauls vision of Christ, Acts 9.8,9 states, Saul got up from the ground, and though his eyes were open, he could see nothing; so they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. For three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank (NRSV). Cf. al-Ya qubi, al-Ta#ri, (Beirut, n. d.), I, pp. 79 f. Although Ibn Asakir does not give Paul a biographical entry, he includes his conversion story, transmitted on the authority of the Yemeni abari Wahb b. Munabbih (34/655114/732), in the entry of Ananias, the man sent by a vision of Christ to heal Paul at the house of a man named Judas according to Acts 9.1019; see Ibn Asakir, Ta#ri mad inat Dimas q wa-ikr fa dliha wa-tasmiyat man hallaha min al-am ail aw iqt aza bi-naw ahiha min w a rid iha wa-ahliha, ed. U. G. al- Amraw i (Beirut, 1995), XV , pp. 333 f, s. v. Hunayna, ahad sadiqi l-Masih. Ibn Asakirs narrative transpires during the life of Jesus. In the story, Paul gathered armed-men in order to prevent Jesus entry into Damascus (fa-qama a l- asa kir wa-sa ra ila l-mas ih alayhi l-sala m li-yaqtulahu wa-yamna ahu an duul dimas q). However, once Paul encounters Christ in his journey, he is struck blind by an angels wing (fa-darabahu malak bi-qinah ihi fa-a m ahu). Thereafter, Christ sends him to Ananias/Hunayna to have his eyes healed. He prays, and Paul is healed, thereafter becoming a follower of Jesus. This passage is neglected by S. A. Mourad in his study, Jesus According to Ibn Asakir, in: Ibn Asa kir and Early Islamic History, pp. 2443. 42) One could translate the rather non-descript bayt of this passage in various ways. Temple (as in Q. 2:125, bayt al-maqdis, etc.) is the preferable translation if one interprets the passages to follow as a parody of the circumambulation (t aw af) of the Ka ba. Hermitage would be preferable if one interprets this act of Paul as the prelude to the introduction of the innovations of monasticism mentioned in 78, although there the more technical term for hermitages, saw a m i , is employed. 43) The significance of this passage is not entirely clear; see n. 120 below.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

177

opened it, and they said: Have you seen anything displeasing? No! he said, Rather I have an opinion (ra#aytu ra#yan) that I present to you. If it is correct (saw ab) then adopt it, but if it is erroneous (a t a#) then dissuade me from it. Let us hear it, they said. Paul said: Have you ever seen a flock grazing except it be with its shepherd ( inda rabbiha)? No! they said. He continued, I have seen the night and morning, the sun and moon and heavenly constellations44 coming from this direction, and that direction was none other than the direction most deserving to pray towards. You speak the truth, they said. Thus, he caused them to abandon their direction of prayer (fa-raddahum an qiblatihim). After that, he locked himself away for two days, and the Christians were fearful even more than the first time and circumambulated the hermitage/temple (wa-a tafu bihi). When he opened it, they spoke as they did the first time, and he said the same. Give us what you have, they said. Paul said: Do you not claim that a man, if he gives a present to a man and honors him only to have this man spurn him, that he will be hurt? God has subjected to you what is on the land and has created for your sake what is in the sky and has honored you with it. Indeed, none is more worthy than God so that one does not reject what he has honored. So how is it that some things are licit [to eat] and others illicit (fa-m a ba lu ba d i l-as ya# halalun waun ba d iha hara m )? Everything from the beetle to the elephant is licit (halal).45 They said, He speaks the truth. This is the second. Then after that, he locked himself away a third time, and they were even more fearful than the second time, and they circumambulated the hermitage/temple (wa-a tafu bihi). When it had been opened by him, they spoke as before and so he did likewise. They said, Give us what you have. Paul said, I think (ara) that no one ought to be harmed and no one recompensed, so whoever does evil to you, do not give him what he deserves. If one slaps his cheek, let him turn to him the other, and if he takes some of his clothing, let him give him the rest of it.46 They accepted this and abandoned warfare (qabilu a lika wa-taraku l-qiha d).

Literally: al-bur uq, i. e. the signs of the Zodiac. This loosely echoes Acts 10.915; however, there it is Peter, rather than Paul, that receives the vision. 46) A well-known passage from the double-tradition of the NT Gospels If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and from anyone who takes away your coat, do not withhold even your shirt (Lk. 6.29; cf. Mt. 5.39 f).
45)

44)

178

Sean W. Anthony

5. After this, he locked himself away longer than before. The Christians were more fearful than they had ever been before and circled the hermitage/temple (wa-a tafu bihi) until he opened it. They spoke to him as they had before, and he spoke to them as he had before. They said, Give us what you have. He said: Take the people of the temple away from me (ariqu ann i ahla l-bayti), so that no one remains save Ya qub (i. e., Jacob/James), Nastur, Malkun, and the Believer (almu#min).47 They did so, and he said, Have you ever known of any human being who has created from clay a creature and breathed into it causing it to become a breathing thing? No! they said. He said, Have you ever known of any human being who has healed the blind and the leprous and who has quickened the dead? No! they said. He said, Have you ever known of any human being who used to tell people what they ate and stored away in their houses?48 No! they said. He said, Indeed, I claim that God Most High appeared to us and then concealed himself! So, some of them said, You have spoken the truth. One said, He is Allah, and Jesus is His Son. Another said, No, rather he is the third of three (wa-la kinnahu a liu alaa tin):49 Jesus the Son, his Father, and his Mother!50

The names, here, ought not to be seen as reference to historical persons but as derivations from common Christian-Arabic nisbas such as al-Ya qubi, al-Nasturi and al-Malkani (or al-Maliki), referring to confessional affiliation with one of the prominent oriental churches i. e. the Jacobite, Nestorian, or Melikite/Eastern Orthodox. Of course, the namesakes for the Jacobite and Nestorian churches were actual historical figures namely Jacob Baradus (d. 578 A. D.) and Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople (d. ca. 451 A. D.). Although prominent personages during the burgeoning schisms centered on Christological controversies, they lived over five centuries after Paul of Tarsus; see W. H. C. Frend , The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia, 1984), pp. 752 ff, 847 f. The term Melkite has no individual namesake but rather refers to persons under the authority of the kings (i. e. malik al-r um) church based in Constantinople. 48) These are all the miracles of Christ mentioned in the Qur#an; the vocabulary and phrasing nearly identical, cf. Q. 3:49, 5:110. 49) The phrasing is again qur#anic; see Q. 5:73. 50) Although three sects are named, only two aberrant positions are provided neither of which are assigned to a particular sects founder save the subsequent third Islamic position of the Believer; cf. the much more extensive account of the beliefs of Ya qub, Nastur and Malkun in Qar afi, Aqwiba, p. 175; Qur tubi, I la m, p. 243; van Koningsveld/Wiegers, Polemical Works, p. 169.

47)

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

179

6. The Believer was horrified and said: May God curse you all! What a catastrophe! No, by God, he has attempted nothing other than your corruption! We are amazed at what we accepted from him when we are the companions of Jesus not him! We accepted Jesus, heeded him, and obeyed him! What a catastrophe! He attempted nothing other than leading you astray and corrupting you (m a ha wala illa dala latakum wa-fasa dakum)! And, he cursed Paul, repented, and sought Gods forgiveness. He turned away from what Paul had taught them. He turned to his companions (wa-aqbala ala asha bihi) warning them. He feared that they would follow Paul. So, the Believer said, Go out to [blank in MS]51 and manage your affairs among them (q umu fihim bi-amrikum), for I see them only splitting into factions as you have done. 7. They went out and managed their affairs as they believed (bimili m a ra#aw). A group of people followed each person from among them (atba a kulla insan in minhum qawmun). The Believer had the smallest following, so the three returned to Paul and informed him. He told them, Overtake the Believer and his companions, then kill them lest they prove to be your undoing. They went out to their companions and headed after the Believer. So said the Believer, How miserable you are! Hasnt his wretchedness and mendacity been clear to you? Did he not forbid you to harm anyone or to ride against them? Has he not changed his message to all of you? Thus, they warred against them and overtook them. The Believer and his companions a m). Soon the Jews cap(asha buhu) headed out towards Syria (al-S tured them, whereupon they informed them of the news. The Christians said, We have fled to you in order to find security in your country. We have no need for anything in this world. We shall live in caves, on mountain peaks, and hermitages (al-saw a mi ) roaming about the countryside. The Jews left them alone, and these Christians comprised the remnant (al-baqiya). 8. The Christians took to living in hermitages (al-saw a mi ) and caves and wandered about. They were forced into innovation (wa-udt ur u ila l-bid a). And this is the Word of the Most High: but the monasticism which they invented for themselves (wa-rahbaniya tun ibtaThe damaged text probably previously read Go out to your people (uruqu ila qawmikum) (cf. the first two lines of 7) or mentioned a place name. Here, the missing text cannot be reconstructed from the parallel accounts inasmuch as these alternative versions provide us only with a truncated version of 7 8.
51)

180

Sean W. Anthony

da uha), We did not prescribe it for them rather only to seek to please God and that they guard that with which they were entrusted (Q. 57.27) namely, monotheism (al-taw hid). They also disagreed over it except one faction among them and We supported those who believed among them and they are over their enemies. Among those from the Believers faction and others, they became the ones that prevailed (Q. 61.14) by the revelation and the appearance of Muhammad (bi-l-huqqa wa-ur uq Muhammad), blessing and peace upon him. Some of those fleeing believers (al-mu#min in) fled to the Hiqaz, and the Prophet converted from them 30 monks who believed his message.52 And the like of Paul in this community (umma) is Ibn Saba#.53

Textual Analysis The isna d accompanying this text is strikingly irregular and becomes more problematic under investigation. Although Sayf narrates from two persons named Atiya,54 the Atiya here should almost certainly be identified as Abu Rawq Atiya b. al-Hari al-Hamdani al-Kufi, who himself was known as a mufassir possessing a decent reputation in the transmission of had i (viz. sa lih, saduq, etc.).55 After Atiya, however, comes the rather suspicious figure Yazid al-Faq asi. Virtually nothing is known about this transmitter save the fact that he is almost exclusively associated with narrations about Ibn Saba#. The appearance of Yazid al-Faq asi in this isna d is also symptomatic of al-ahabis observation that Sayfs isna ds tend to include a great number of unknown figures whose reputations cannot be verified.56 Thus, Ibn Haqar seems to reject altogether any of Sayf s
52) Likely a reference to the likes of Ba hira, on whom see U. Rubin, Eye of the Beholder: the Life of Muhammad as Viewed by the Early Muslims (Princeton, 1995), pp. 4952 53) Cf. Qar afi, Aqwiba, pp. 175 f; Qur tubi, I la m, pp. 244; van Koningsveld/ Wiegers, Polemical Works, p. 169 where the three other versions introduce the notion that some of the unbelievers entered into the midst of the Believers faction and invented monasticism rather than the Believers followers themselves. These texts have also dropped any mention of Ibn Saba#. 54) Yusuf b. Zaki al-Mizzi, Tahi b al-kam al fi asm a# al-riqal, ed. B. A. Ma r uf (Beirut, 1996), XII, p. 325 s. v. Sayf b. Umar al-Tamimi. 55) His death date is apparently unknown, see al-Mizzi, Tahi b al-kam al, XX, p. 144, s. v. Atiya b. Hari. Ibn Sa d places him in the fifth t abaqa (ca. 140150/ 757767), see Ibn Haqar, Tahib, VII, p. 224. 56) Blankenship, Challenge, xxiiixxv.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

181

narrations transmitted from al-Faq asi likely due to the difficulty of identifying or obtaining information about him.57 Hinds encountered similar difficulties in his quest for Sayf s sources on Arabia; however, he concluded that this was a matter of minor importance due to the fact that the standards of qarh wa-ta d il works, in which these unknown sources would be found, count only for the transmission of prophetic had i, and not historical abar.58 The problem as seen by the Muslim traditionist would be simply that there are no means by which one can establish a direct link between Yazid al-Faq asi and the Companion Abd Allah b. Abbas (d. 69/688), inasmuch as the probity of the former is entirely unknown and even unknowable. In this respect, Yazid is dubious not only due to his anonymity, but also because he lacks the authoritative gravity of a known transmitter from Ibn Abbas. Thus, if Atiya were to transmit from Ibn Abbas, one would expect it to be through the mufassir al-Dahhak b. Muzahim (d. 105/723),59 not Yazid al-Faq asi. Yet, the problem posed to us by this isna d is indicative not merely of the epistemological and/or methodological gap separating the traditionists from the abaris, but also of other literary factors casting further suspicion onto the veracity of the transmission. Namely, Yazid al-Faq asi always appears as Sayf s exclusive informant for the most detailed and expository narrations regarding Abd Allah b. Saba# and the origins of the Saba#iya.60 Yazid al-Faq asis name appears as an indication of the narratives relation to the stories regarding Ibn Saba# for which the Paul story must be regarded as a narrative supplement. Hence, it is abundantly clear that Ibn Abbas has been attached onto an isna d almost entirely used by Sayf when narrating details concerning Ibn Saba#
Ibn Haqar, Lisa n al-m i zan, III, p. 358 s. v. Abd Allah b. Saba#. Hinds writes that the unidentifiable nature of Sayfs sources creates difficulties, but, since these biographical works were primarily concerned with jarh wa-ta d il of had i from the Prophet, it cannot be regarded as signifying any more than that these rawis of Sayf b. Umar did not transmit had i from the Prophet, (Sources, p. 156). This statement, however, can be misleading. For instance, in his qarh wa-ta d il work, Lisa n al-m i zan, Ibn Haqar includes large numbers of persons who never transmitted had i or who were not even known as being muhaddiun; thus, for instance, the famed poet Abu l-Tayyib al-Mutanabbi appears (ibid., I, pp. 167169). Abd Allah b. Saba# himself receives an entry as well, wherein Ibn Haqar states (ibid., III, p. 360), No one narrates from him, thanks be to God [wa-laysat lahu riw a yatun wa-li-llahi al-hamdu]. 59) See al-Mizzi, Tahi b al-kam al, XX, p. 144 and Sezgin, GAS, I, pp. 2930. 60) Sayf, K. al-Ridda, I, pp. 55 f (new abar), 91 f, 1024, 11517, 13537; al- Tabar i, Ta#ri al-rusul wa-l-muluk, ed. M. J. de Goeje et al. (Leiden, 18791901), II, pp. 2858, 2922, 2941 f; Ibn Asakir, Dimas q, XXIX, p. 4.
57) 58)

182

Sean W. Anthony

and his followers. The isna d of this abar, I believe, is not an arbitrary or haphazard addition, but rather provides a clue whereby the careful reader can surreptitiously gain insight into its composition. Ibn Abbas appearance in the isna d matches well the qur#anic and tafs ir derivations of much of the matn; this can be gleaned as well from the presence of Atiya b. Hari, a known mufassir. The net effect of Sayfs account is that it narrates Islam into the story of ancient Christianity, and this is done particularly through employing qur#anic discourse. Indicative of this are, ironically, the teachings of his nefarious Paul. Hence, Pauls misleading machinations in 4 categorically progress through the touchstone differences between Christian and Muslim pietistic praxis. We see that Christians 1) abandon the proper direction, qibla, of their prayer, 2) forsake the law, and 3) disavow their right to wage jihad. Sayf does exhibit some second-hand knowledge of the Lukan tradition in the hodge-podge of verses alluded to in 3 and 4;61 however, the account thereafter moves on to weave qur#anic speech about Christians into a narrative of ancient Christianity. This feature becomes apparent especially in 5, where, although ostensibly coming from Pauls mouth, the miraculous feats of Christ are lifted directly from qur#anic narratives of Jesus perceptible even in the minute detail of recalling the narrative using Jesus qur#anic rather than Arabic Christian name ( Isa/Yasu ).62 Many of the topoi of the story, moreover, are gathered from the glosses lifted from tafs ir-literature associated with these very verses. This is, of course, a natural supplement and would likely strike the medieval reader as a seamless addition. The main point, however, is that Sayf posits the message of the Qur#an as the universal message of the prophets and, therefore, of Jesus and his true follower i. e., the Believer, or Mu#min. Pauls message also becomes, therefore, not merely a perversion of Jesus teaching but rather a perversion of the perennial message of the Qur#an. As a result, post-mortem corrupted Christianity having been slain by Sayfs Paul becomes transmogrified into a counter-factual pseudo-Islam. Inasmuch as Sayf both situates this narrative prior to the story of Ibn Saba# and attributes to it virtually the same isna d reaching back to Yazid al-Faq asi, although with the addition of Ibn Abbas, the Ibn Saba# narrative is vital in understanding the Paul story and vice-versa. This observation ought to lead us to consider the Pauline corruption narrative as integral to Sayfs own historical conception of the Saba#iya proffering a
61)

I say so because all New Testament allusions in the account appear in Luke-

Acts. For an example of the opposite of such practice, see al-Ya qubi, Ta#ri, I, p. 69 et passim.
62)

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

183

parable of how one intrusive, flagitious Jew (Paul) corrupted the Christians and how another ( Abd Allah b. Saba#) threatened to do likewise to the Muslim umma. It is only by taking into account this other narrative that one can see how, through juxtaposing Pauls corruption of ancient Christianity to the controversy surrounding the Saba#iya, Sayf fashions a didactic message of the peril facing the Muslim umma.63 The actual events, person(s), and beliefs that inspired the stories of Abd Allah b. Saba# are mired in a swamp of contradictions and inconsistencies despite the valiant efforts of numerous scholars. al- Askar i has attempted to demonstrate that Ibn Saba# was a mere figment of Sayf s fabricated history; however, his work fails to account for the broader array of traditions which mention either Ibn Saba# or the Saba#iya, and this limits the utility of his conclusions.64 Sayf, although certainly the most important writer in this regard, is not the only abari to relate traditions about this mysterious figure.65 In basic terms, Sayfs account states that Ibn Saba#, also known as Ibn al-Sawda# because of his black mother, was a Jew from San a# who had converted to Islam in the reign of the third caliph, Uman b. Affan.66 One day Ibn Saba# inexplicably took to roaming around Muslim lands aiming to lead people astray. Beginning in the Hiqaz, he traveled eventually to Basra and Kufa, apparently meeting some success, until he finally reached Syria. The Syrians, however, thwarted his efforts and expelled him from their midst. His repudiation by the Syrians caused him to settle in Egypt where he began to enjoy real success in achieving his aims. According to Sayfs account, it is in Egypt that Ibn Saba#, after some experimentation, begins to articulate the schismatic doctrines that will
Sayf, K. al-Ridda, I, 135 ff; al-Tabar i, Ta#ri, I, pp. 294 ff. al- Askar i, Abd Allah b. Saba#, p. 25; one of the better critiques of al- Askar i s work can be found in Muhammad Ali Mu allim, Abd Allah b. Saba#: al-haqiqa al-maqhula (Beirut, 1999). 65) E. g., see Ibn Abi l-Dunya, K. Maqtal am ir al-mu#min in Al i b. Ab i Ta lib, ed. Ibr ahim Sa li h (Damascus, 2001), pp. 83 f and Ahmad b. Yahya al-Balaui, Ansa b al-as raf, II, ed. W. Madelung (Wiesbaden, 2003), pp. 420 f, 445; Ibn Abi ayama, al-Ta#ri al-kab ir, ed. S. F. Halal (Cairo, 2004), III, p. 177. 66) The claim that he was a Jew has inspired a number of studies into the possible historicity of this claim. See generally Friedlnder, Abd Allah b. Saba, p. 327 who sees his movement more in terms of judeo-muslim messianism and docetic denial of Alis death (die Anschauung des Doketismus und die messianische Vorstellung); M. G. S. Hodgson , Abd Allah b. Saba#, EI2, I, p. 51a; and Halm, Gnosis, 42. On the theme of Jewish origins of Islamic heresies, see S. M. Wasserstrom , Between Muslim and Jew: The Problem of Symbiosis under Early Islam (Princeton, 1995), pp. 156159.
63) 64)

184

Sean W. Anthony

eventually lead to the ruin of Umans caliphate. Among his innovations were the doctrines that Muhammad was more worthy to return at the end of time than Jesus (fa-Muhammadun ahaqqu bi-l-ruqu i min Isa) and that each prophet (nab i) had a divinely ordained legatee (wasi). Therefore, he continues, just as Muhammad was the Seal of the Prophets (a tam al-anbiya#), so Ali was the seal of the legatees (a tam al-aws iya#). That these doctrines are parodies of the more standard Imami viewpoints is immediately obvious,67 but their historical consequences for the umma that Sayf continues to depict are not. Sayf s account claims that the situation culminated in a crisis when Ibn Saba# began to convince the Egyptians that only the wasi possessed the prerogative of ruling the community. Uman, he claimed, has gathered money and usurped it without right, while this one [i. e. Ali] is the wasi of the Messenger of God! So lift up this cause, and get it moving! Start by reproaching your commanders, and openly command the good and forbid the wrong so that you win over the people! Summon them to this cause!68 Thereafter, Ibn Saba#/al-Sawda# and the Saba#iya reappear in Sayf s accounts as meddlers and instigators who bear much of the responsibility for the division and bloodshed arising from within the community. These events include, but are not limited to, the instigation of the discontents of Ammar b. Yasir, the murder of Uman b. Affan, and the escalation of the conflict between Ali and Talha and al-Zubayr culminating in the Battle of the Camel.69 Despite the tendentious scapegoating of the Saba iya for every major, early crisis of the Muslim umma, one ought to note that absent from Sayfs writings on Ibn Saba# and the Saba#iya are any of the further embellishments characteristic of later heresiographical accounts, such as his alleged ignominious death (burned alive by Ali b. Abi Talib) and some of the more extreme beliefs of his followers, most infamously the belief in divinity of Ali. Sayfs account is unique in another respect as well: Sayf is the only abari or traditionist from whom we receive any in-

67) See Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Farru al-Saffar, Basa#ir al-daraqa t f i fa da#il Al Muhammad, ed. Muhsin Kuc abagi al-Tabr i z i (Tabriz, 1983), p. 310; Ibn Abi Zaynab al-Nu mani, K. al-Gayba (Beirut, 1983), p. 172.ult. Cf. E. Kohlberg, Wasi, EI2, XI, pp. 161 ff. 68) Sayf, K. al-Ridda, I, 135 ff; Tabar i, Ta#ri, I, 2941 ff; Ibn Asakir, Dimas q, XXIX, pp. 3 ff. 69) For some of these activities of Ibn Saba# and the Saba#iya, Halm has suggested the possible existence of a Vorlage used by Sayf ultimately derived from a community of Kufan g ula t (though rather unconvincingly in my view); see his Gnosis, 41.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

185

formation concerning the activities of Ibn Saba# and his followers in the reign of Uman.70 The heresiographical literature, by contrast, presents us with essentially either one of two reports upon which subsequent details aggregate. Both reports are mutually contradictory and, thus, represent a later development of what must have been, in their earliest forms, two independent traditions one placing Ibn Saba# in Mada#in receiving the news of Alis death,71 and the other near Kufa handed over to his own death at the hands of Ali.72 In the former version, once confronted with the death of Ali (i. e., rather than suffering a death by immolation at Alis hands), Ibn Saba# declares, Even if you brought to us ( Alis) brains in 70 bags, we would not be convinced of his death. He will surely not die until he has filled the earth with justice as it is filled with iniquity.73 As these traditions converge, they were, as one would expect, dutifully harmonized. Most commonly, this harmonization was achieved by positing an amnesty granted by Ali to Ibn Saba#, which (unfortunately for them) did not extend to a large numer of his ill-fated acolytes.74 The origins of these extra details, as W. al-Q adi has argued, likely emerged predominantely from the early firaq-works i i circles towards the end of the second century A. H.75 produced in S With both the accounts of King Paul and Ibn Saba# in mind, one can ascertain how Sayf struggled with several concerns specific to the Islamic narrative one emerging from encounters with a Christianity reticent to recognize the continuity between itself and Islam, another reflecting conFriedlnder ( Abd Allah b. Saba, p. 915) argues for the harmonization of these materials by claiming that the materials of Sayf and the materials of the later heresiographers are concerned with two different moments in the development of the beliefs of Ibn Saba# and his followers and, therefore, minimalizes their fundamental disharmony. 71) Ibn Abi l-Dunya, Maqtal, pp. 83 f. 72) Ibn Haqar, Lisan, III, pp. 369 f and cf. J. van Ess, Das Kit a b an-Nak des Nazza m und seine Rezeption im Kit a b al-Futya des Qah i z: eine Sammlung der Fragmente mit bersetzung und Kommentar (Gttingen, 1972), pp. 5057. 73) E. g., see al-Hasan b. Musa al-Nawbati, Firaq al-s i a, ed. H. Ritter (Istanbul, 1931), p. 20; Sa d b. Abd Allah b. Abi alaf al-Qummi, K. al-Maqala t wa-l-firaq, k ur (Tehran, 1963), pp. 20 f.; Abu l-Hasan al-As ed. M. J. Mas ar i, Maqala t al-islam iy in wa-itilaf al-mu sall in, ed. H. Ritter (Beirut, 20054), p. 15. 74) E. g. see Ibn Abi l-Hadid, S arh Nahq al-balag a, ed. M. A. F. Ibrahim (Cairo, 195964), V , pp. 6 f where, conveniently, Ibn Abbas intervenes on behalf of Ibn Saba# to have him exiled whereafter, having escaped his execution, he later utters his famous pronouncement denying Alis death in al-Mada#in. 75) Development of the Term Ghulat, pp. 306307.
70)

186

Sean W. Anthony

cerns of assimilation and the integrity of Muslim identity, and yet another responding to the rapid and violent disintegration of the unity of Muhammads umma following his death. Historians, like nature, abhor a vacuum. Sayf merely stepped forward to fill in the gaps with a novel narrative befitting both lacunae. Although al-Tabar i often depends heavily upon Sayf b. Umar, he excludes the account of King Paul altogether this in spite of his readiness to employ his story of Ibn Saba# as well as other vast swaths of his historical narratives. This requires some explanation. As Humphreys has observed, Sayf s narrations often possess, from al-Tabar is perspective, a moralizing quality that permits him to act as the narrator of Sunday School versions of Islamic conflicts. Sayf always manages to construct pathologies of Islamic history wherein all problems can be attributed to outsiders, riff-raff and inglorious meddlers (e. g., communal division, or fitna, is the product of an outsider, a Jew such as Ibn Saba#). These irenic, apologetic accounts of Sayf thereby provide room for al-Tabar i himself to include less idyllic accounts.76 In the instance of the exclusion of the story of King Paul, however, one must assume an abeyance in Sayfs value as a source of historical narrative for al-Tabar i. This will become clearer in light of al-Tabar is use of Muhammad b. Ishaq (d. 151/768). In al-Tabar is writings, one can perceive at least two reasons, neither of which are mutually exclusive, for the exclusion of the account of Paul: 1) Sayfs account of Paul runs directly contrary to alTabar is narrative of Christian origins, and 2) al-Tabar i valued those sources utilized in relating the history of ancient Christianity more than Sayf. Such an observation can be gleaned from the following account in his Ta#ri of the disciples fate after Jesus ascension:
Among the Disciples and the Followers (min al-haw ariy in wa-l-atba ) who came after them were the apostle Peter (Fu tru s al-haw ari) and with him Paul he was from the Followers not the Disciples77 who went to Rome. Andrew

76) S. Humphreys, The History of al-Tabar i, XV: The Crisis of the Early Caliphate (Albany, 1990), pp. xvixvii. 77) This passage more or less takes the Islamic classification of the early generations of the umma and projects it onto the ancient Christianity community. The first generation of Muslims are divided into the al-saha ba (= al-haw ariyun), i. e., those companions who knew and met Muhammad during his lifetime, and alt a bi un (= al-atba ), i. e., the followers being the first generation of Muslims after the Companions. Counting Paul among the Followers rather than as a disciple/haw ari may amount to an attempt at diminishing his authority, or it could merely be a technical distinction of passing note.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

187

and Matthew went to the land where its inhabitants eat people, to the Blacks as far as we can tell. Thomas went to Babel in the lands of the East. Philip went to Qayrawan and Carthage, which is in Africa. John went to Ephesus, the city of the boys of the cave (qaryat al-fitya asha b al-kahf),78 and James to Jerusalem, or Aelia, Bayt al-Maqdis. Bartholomew went to Arabia, specifically al-Hiqaz, and Simon went to the land of the Berbers in Africa. Judas was not among the Disciples, so Ariobus went in his stead after Judas Iscariot had committed his deed.79

Though there are slight variances between the transmissions of the texts in the Ta#r i and Ibn His ams recension of the Sira, al-Tabar is source for the above material is undoubtedly from Ibn Ishaq.80 Importantly, what one immediately observes is the marked difference between Sayfs and Ibn Ishaqs depictions of Paul. Though denied the status of a full haw ari, Paul is nonetheless associated closely with Peter. So closely in fact, that in alTabar is continued account, both of them seem to be killed together: [Nero] killed Peter and Paul, crucifying him upside down (qatala Fu tru s wa-Bulus wa-sallabahu munakkasan).81 Another of Ibn Ishaqs accounts included in the Ta#ri of al-Tabar i although suffering an absence of the figure of King Paul seemingly shares elements with Sayfs narrative, but by the end, it nearly amounts to a complete inversion of the latter. As in Sayfs narrative, the abar begins with Jewish persecution of Christians as in 1; however, it ends with the intervention of the Roman king and the eventual vindication of the Christian community. By the end, a scenario similar to that with which King Paul threatens his subject in 2 befalls the Jews:
Ibn Humayd Salama Ibn Ishaq: After that they (i. e., the Jews?) assaulted the remaining disciples, exposed them to the Sun (yus ammisu nahum), tortured them, and paraded them around. The king of Rome under whose authority they were and who was an idolater heard of this. He was told, A man
78) The reference here is to the Sleepers of Ephesus, a Christian legend appearing in Q. 18; see H. Kandler, Die Bedeutung der Siebenschlfer (Asha b al-kahf) im Islam (Bochum, 1994). 79) Tabar i, Ta#ri, I, pp. 73738. 80) Cf. Abd al-Malik b. His ud am, al-Sira al-nabaw iya, eds. A. A. Abd al-Maw g and A. M. Mu awwa d (Riyadh, 1998), IV , p. 221. 81) Tabar i, Ta#ri, I, p. 741. Traditional accounts, of course, relate that it was Peter, not Paul, who was crucified upside-down; Paul was beheaded. The text itself is actually vague as to who was crucified. For speculation on the possible origins of this discrepancy, see S. Pines, Studies in Christianity and Judeo-Christianity Based on Arabic Sources, JSAI 6 (1985): pp. 132 ff. The traditional version was also current in the Islamic tradition; cf. Ibn al-Qayyim, Hida yat al-haya ra, p. 542.

188

Sean W. Anthony from among these people under your authority from the Tribe of Israel attacked and killed him. He used to proclaim to them that he was a Messenger of God. Indeed, he showed them wonders, quickened the dead before them, and healed their sick. He also fashioned them clay in the form of a bird, and having breathed into it, it flew (wa-ka na ta#iran)82 all with Gods permission and he spoke of divine secrets. The king declared, What prevented you from mentioning this to me concerning his and their affair? By God, had I known, I would not have allowed them to have their way with him (law alimtu m a allaytu baynahum wa-baynahu)! Then he sent for the disciples and snatched them from their hands. He asked them about the religion of Jesus and his fate, and they told him of Jesus whereupon he followed them in their religion and released Sergius and hid him.83 He also took the wooden cross upon which Jesus was crucified and honored and preserved it because he had touched it. The king attacked the tribe of Israel and killed a great number of them. Thus was the origin of Christianity in Rome.84

One should not, however, be led to assume that al-Tabar i excluded the story of King Paul because he necessarily found it beyond either credulity or the limitations of his views of Islamic orthodoxy. After all, he does not neglect to include a heterodox story of the Arabian grave of Jesus.85 The issue at hand for Tabar i must, then, be one of weighing the authority of sources on respective topics; therefore, it may be concluded that when writing his universal history, Tabar i valued Ibn Ishaqs authority far more highly than that of Sayf b. Umar when collecting materials on Christian origins. In such matters of Christian origins, al-Tabar i simply laid Sayf s material to the side.

82) Some manuscripts read and it became a bird reading wa-ka na t ayran; this alternative reading conforms most closely to the qur#anic wording, cf. Q. 3.49. 83) That is, St. Sergius, one of two Roman soldiers martyred under Diocletian ca. 305 A. D; the cult of St. Sergius centered on his shrine in Rusafa, located 25 miles South of the Northern Euphrates town of Sura in Syria, apparently spread quite rapidly gaining popularity particularly among the Christian tribe of Banu Taglib. See J. S. Trimingham, Christianity among the Arabs in Pre-Islamic Times (New York, 1979), pp. 236 ff and more recently, E. K. Fowden, The Barbarian Plain: Saint Sergius between Rome and Iran (Berkeley, 1999). For a similar account without any mention of Sergius, see Ibn Asakir, Dimas q, XLVII, pp. 476 f, s. v. Isa b. Maryam. 84) Tabar i, Ta#ri, I, pp. 739 f. 85) Ibid., I, pp. 738 f.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

189

Sources and Composition As mentioned above, the presence of Ibn Abbas in Sayf s isna d probably reflects the origins of much of the materials used in compiling his narrative as deriving from the tafs ir-literature. It will become clearer below that the origins of the story are diverse and not reflected in the isna d as such. Rather, the diverse sources of the Sayfian narrative of Christianity are only hinted at by the conspicuous presence of Ibn Abbas as the ultimate authority to whom the narrative has been attributed. One can only speculate as to whether or not this is due to Sayf s carelessness or was his original intention. Directing our attention towards the exegetical literature, one can discover that all the elements in Sayfs account are not absent from the writings of al-Tabar i. However, to find these elements one must turn from al-Tabar is Ta#ri to his tafs ir. Commenting on Surat al-Saff 61:14 the same verse quoted in 8 in Sayfs account Tabar i relates the following tradition:
Abu l-Sa#ib Abu Mu awiya al-A mas al-Minhal Sa id b. Qubayr Ibn Abbas: [After the ascension of Jesus, the Christians] split into three factions (firaq). One faction (firqa) said: God was among us as long as he willed, then he ascended to heaven. These are the Jacobites. Another faction said: The Son of God was among us as God willed, and then he raised his Son to himself. These are the Nestorians. Another faction said: Gods servant and Messenger was among us as long as God willed, then God raised him to himself. These are the Muslims. The two unbelieving factions aided one another against the Muslim faction and killed them. Thus, Islam remained effaced (fa-lam yazal al-isla m ta misan) until God sent the Prophet Muhammad, upon him peace.86

The topoi of this tradition are typical of the firaq-traditions applying to both Jews and Christians and enjoy widespread attestations.87 Commenting on a similar account found in Ibn Asakir, Mourad comments that, It is rather obvious that this represents a Muslim version of Pentecost (Acts 2: 113).88 Perhaps this judgment is too hasty. Any attempt to place these narratives which arise from and evolve according to the necessities and needs they seek to fulfill rather than from some quest for historical facts in a specific historical context can only be tenuous. As much can be gleaned from the similar accounts relating the corruption of
Tabar i, Qa mi al-bayan an ta#wil a y al-Qur#an (Beirut, 1972), XXVI, p. 92. E. g., see the numerous versions in Ibn Asakir, Dimas q, XLVII, p. 475, 47879; cited in Mourad , Jesus according to Ibn Asakir, pp. 30 f. See also Rubin, Between Bible and Qur#an, pp. 11767 and below. 88) Mourad , Jesus according to Ibn Asakir, p. 30.
86) 87)

190

Sean W. Anthony

the religion of the Jews, which repeat the same themes but instead mention seventy rabbis entrusted with preserving the Torah.89 Furthermore, if one insists on grounding this and similar stories in a particular historical moment, then the debate over the admission of Gentiles into the ranks of the early Christians in Jerusalem, where the apostles and elders met together [and] there had been much debate (Acts 15.6a,7a), would be an equally if not better candidate than Pentecost. In his study of the Islamic image of Paul, P . S. van Koningsveld notes that Ibn al-Qawzi (d. 597/1200) preserves in his Muntazam two variant versions of the Ibn Abbas tradition quoted above.90 What each version in the Muntazam offers is an illuminating example of how the permutations of the story as transmitted independently of the Pauline elements fused together in Sayfs account. The first tradition, again, omits any mention or reference to Paul but, rather, portrays the corruption of Christianity as resulting from a scholarly colloquium of Jews on the nature of Jesus and his message. This first account, being related on the authority of Abu Ma s ar al-Madan i (d. 170/786)91 from Muhammad b. Ka b al-Qurazi (ca. 119/737),92 speaks of 100 Jewish scholars ( ulam a# ban i Isra#il) gathered together after the ascension of Christ. They begin to leave by the tens for fear of factional disputes until only ten remain, after which six exit leaving only four. First among them is a scholar who argues that the miracles of Jesus prove that he is God. Another objects, saying that since they know his mother, he cannot possibly be God; he suggests instead that he is Gods Son. A third denies that Jesus was from a virgin and asserts that he was born from an immoral union (min amal in g ayri sa lih in).93 Employing
These traditions probably do not have an historical event in mind although perhaps the number seventy could have its origins in the creation of Septuagint, see U. Rubin, Between Bible and Qur#an, pp. 122 f. 90) See P . S. van Koningsveld , Islamic Image of Paul, and the Origin of the Gospel of Barnabas, JSAI 20 (1996): pp. 204205; Ibn al-Qawzi, al-Muntazam f i ta#ri al-muluk wa-l-umam, eds. Muhammad A.-Q. A ta # and Mustafa A-Q, A ta # (Beirut, 1992), II, p. 40. 91) Considered to be a weak transmitter, Ibn Haqar, Tahib, X, pp. 41922, s. v. Naqih b. Abd al-Rahman. 92) He first lived in Kufa and then moved to Medina. Known to be an exegete (mufassir) and a story-teller (qass), according to one account, he died while telling a story in a mosque that collapsed on him and his audience, Ibn Haqar, Tahib, IX, pp. 42022. 93) An allusion to the Talmudic legend that Mary had been impregnated by a Roman soldier named Pandera, for which Jesus is occasionally referred to in Jewish polemic as Ben Pandera. For one version of the story, see S. Krauss, Das Leben
89)

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

191

qur#anic epithets of Jesus, the fourth states, Jesus teaches you that he is the Servant of God and the Spirit of God and his Word which he has placed into Mary. The story ends with each scholar gaining his own following. Conspicuous omissions other than that of Paul are also the names of Christian sects and their founders. The schematic presentation of Christian error also differs from Sayfs. Also, the scope of this tradition carries a broader polemical aim including not only the two Christian perspectives but also the perceived Jewish (i. e., the rejection of Jesus prophethood and miraculous conception) and the Islamic one. Ibn al-Qawzis second version again has a different isna d transmitting ayban (d. 164/780)94 from the blind Basran scholar on the authority of S Qatada b. Di ama (d. 117/735). The four scholars (fuqaha#) of the previous account appear again, but this time the Jewish component is almost entirely absent and each position is assigned a specific Christian sect. The Jacobite scholar claims that Jesus is God, and the Nestorian claims rather that Jesus is the Son of God. The third, being arcanely named one of the Israelite Christians and said to believe in the religion of the king (faka nat al-Isra#iliya min al-Nasa ra allai yuqa lu [lahu]d inu l-maliki), i. e., the Melkites (not mentioned in the Tabar i version above), claimed that Jesus is a god, Mary a god, and Allah a god.95 The Muslim, like the Believer in Sayfs account, calls them all liars and presents the qur#anic view of Jesus.96 While not perfect, the parallel between these versions of the Ibn Abbas tradition and parts 5, 6 and 8 of Sayfs account are striking although the most conspicuous absence is again the lack of any mention of Paul. Nonetheless, these traditions and the tradition of Sayf share roughly the same narrative structure of topoi even though Sayfs is far more protracted than some of the more truncated versions encountered above. In its quest for the continuity of Islam with and its legacy vis--vis its Christian pre-

Jesu nach jdischen Quellen (Berlin, 1902), p. 64 (trans. p. 88). In general, see P . Schfer, Jesus in the Talmud (Princeton, 2007). 94) Originally from Basra, he is said to have also settled in Kufa sometime during his life. He is generally well-regarded as a traditionist, see Ibn Haqar, Tahib, IV , pp. 373 f. 95) Cf. Ibn Asakir, Dimas q, XLVII, p. 478 where the Isr a#iliya also appear with the gloss, they are the kings of the Christians (muluk al-Nasara). Mourad s suggestion that such was likely a confusion between the qur#anic statement that Jesus was sent to Israel and the fact that Byzantium itself had become Christian seems plausible; see his Jesus According to Ibn Asakir, p. 31 n. 21. 96) Ibn al-Qawzi, al-Muntazam, II, p. 41.

192

Sean W. Anthony

decessors, the tafs ir-literature, as would be expected, provides a number of different aetiologies beyond the traditions discussed above. Hence, elsewhere in the tafs ir of al-Tabar i, in his comments on Q. 57:27, we find another account although Paul remains absent shifting the culpability from an ill-fated colloquium of Christians scholars to a number of anonymous kings whose persecutions force the Christians into monasticism. Al-Tabar i cites a prophetic had i transmitted on the authority of Abd Allah b. Mas ud (d. 32/652):97
Yahya b. Abi Talib Dawud b. al-Muhabbir Sa q b. Hazn Uqayl al-Ja di Abu Ishaq al- Hamdani Suwayd b. Gafala Abd Allah b. Mas ud said that the Messenger of God said: Those who were before us deviated into 71 factions; three survived and the rest of them perished (italafa man ka na qablana ala ihda wa-sab#in firqa, naqa minhum alaun wa-halaka sa#iruhum).98 One faction (firqa) of the three matched the kings (w azat al-muluk), and the faction battled them for the sake of the religion of God and the religion of Isa b. Maryam, so the kings killed them. Another faction lacked the ability to oppose the kings (firqa lam takun lahum taqa tun bi-muw aza t al-muluk), so they preached the religion quietly among their people (bayna zahra nay qawmihim), and the kings killed them. This faction spread through leaflets (nas arathum bi-l-manas ir). The last party lacked the ability to either match the kings or spread the religion quietly among the people. So they went to the deserts and mountains and became monks there (fa-tarahhab u f iha). And, this is the word of God Most High, Monasticism they innovated; we did not proscribe it to them. They became those who believed in me and attested to me.

The correspondence between the contents of this tradition and sections 7 8 of Sayf s account are remarkable, even if imperfect. In part, this can be attributed to the fact that both amount to a partial historicization of a similar qur#anic pericope; however, a significant addition comes from the discussion of the belligerent king whose unmatchable power eventually compels the Christians to adopt the monastic lifestyle. The isna ds of the above traditions always contain within them even if not consistently present in the more recent sections thereof a Kufan connection linking them to the very milieu from which Sayf is writing. Hence,

Qa mi al-bayan, XXVI, pp. 239 f; cf. S. Sviri , Wa-rahbaniyyatan ibtada uha: an Analysis of Traditions Concerning the Origins and Evaluation of Christian Monasticism, JSAI 13 (1990): pp. 195208; J. D. McAuliffe, Qur#a nic Christians: an Analysis of Classical and Modern Exegesis (New York, 1991), pp. 26084; O. Livne-Kafri , Early Muslim Ascetics and the World of Christian Monasticism, JSAI 20 (1996): pp. 105129. 98) On this number see Rubin, Between Bible and Qur#an, pp. 12131.

97)

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

193

it does not seem unreasonable to postulate that iterations of these traditions (or similar versions thereof) circulated both independently of and also contemporaneous with Sayfs compilation. In reality, each version available in our written sources represents merely one of many different configurations of topoi that each contains. Sayf s inclusion and/or assimilation of a version of these traditions into the Paul narrative helped to form its content and broad outlines. In this way, the addition of Ibn Abbas to the isna d of Sayf s King Paul account could amount to a type of debris marking the addition of similar permutations of these firaq traditions. These firaq traditions and the various permutations they encapsulate appear not only in tafs ir s under the ostensible authority of numerous authoritative mufassir un, but also appear in later histories as well, indicating that they constituted collectively part of the basic materials informing the Muslim imagery of the Christian past. The peripatetic character of these traditions throughout the literature points strongly to their existence independent of and contemporary to the compilation of Sayfs narrative. Yet, the absence in these traditions of the story of Paul, let alone his titular moniker of king, remains salient. Assuming that somewhere along the line the ulam a# and the muluk of these two traditions merged into one person as appears to be the case in Sayfs narrative (inasmuch as Paul teaches the Torah and reigns as king over the Jews in his account), there still remains the puzzle of determining how Paul became the king of Jews in Sayf s account. The kings tradition above gives us a clue but fails to provide us with the desideratum of a direct connection to Paul. Again, in sharp distinction to the vast material his accounts of the Saba#iya produced, one can hardly find any reference whatsoever to the account of King Paul. One could speculate that this is largely due to the role early assigned to Paul along with Peter and John (or Thomas) by the early mufassir un as one of the three asha b al-qarya in an early haggadic expansion of a vague pericope in Q. 36:13 f.99 Thus, the origins of anti-Pauline sentiment appear to be external to at least one stream in the development of tafs ir. Ibn Hazm (d. 456/1064) provides us with a clue into the origins of this anti-Pauline sentiment when he makes an allusion to an account with strong affinities with Sayfs. He writes about Rabbis who agreed to bribe
E. g., al-Mas udi, Mur uq al-ahab wa-ma a din al-qawhar, ed. Ch. Pellat (Beirut, 1965), I, pp. 72 ff and the references cited in P . Khoury, Matriaux pour servir ltude de la controverse thologique islamo-chrtienne de langue arabe du VIIIe au XIIe sicle, V: Exgse chrtienne du Coran (Wrzburg, 1999), pp. 21821; cf. M. van Esbroeck , La lgend des aptres Pierre, Jean et Paul Antioche, OrChr 78 (1994): pp. 6485.
99)

194

Sean W. Anthony

Paul the Benjamite and commanded him to feign belief in Jesus (wa-amar uhu bi-i zha r d in Isa) and to mislead his followers by introducing to them the doctrine of Jesus divinity. In Ibn Hazms account, the Jewish elders said to Paul, We shall bear you sin (imaka) in this [matter], writing that, and so Paul did and achieved that which has occurred. Soon thereafter, Ibn Hazm adds,
We dont consider this deed to be beyond them (i. e., the Jews), because they desired this for us and our religion but this exceeds the reach of their ability. This was the case in Islam with Abd Allah b. Saba#, known as Ibn al-Sawda# al-Yahudi al-Himyar i may God curse him! He converted to Islam in order to lead as many Muslims as he could astray. He produced a despicable sect i a preferring Ali may God be pleased (nahaqa li-ta#ifa tin rala tin) who where S with him that spoke of the divinity of Ali just as Paul produced followers of Christ upon him peace that speak of his divinity.100

Van Koningsveld sought to mark this passage as a reference to the Paul tradition in Sayfs K. al-Ridda;101 however, there are considerations that strongly suggest that such was probably not the case. Ibn Hazm seems to have heard his story directly from a Jewish rather than Muslim source;102 moreover, although Ibn Hazm mentions Ibn Saba# as figure parallel to Paul, the version of Ibn Saba# he derides differs from Sayf s insofar as he introduces the doctrine of Alis divinity not his political rights as Muhammads wasi and the imminent parousia of Muhammad. It is not farfetched to conjecture that, as Ibn Hazm suggests, the appearance of Paul as the corrupter of ancient Christianity in Sayf s account and Islamic writing in general probably has either pre-Islamic or non-Muslim antecedents and/or sources. Sayf s account, as we have already seen, shows dependence on non-Muslim sources for textual units that indicate a familiarity with New Testament accounts, albeit dimly and almost certainly secondhand.103 Inasmuch as ancient Christianity abided only in the periphery of
100) Ibn Hazm, al-Fisal fi-l-milal wa-l-ahw a# wa-l-nihal (Beirut, 1996), I, pp. 246 f. 101) Islamic Image, p. 211; and echoed by A. Ljamai, Ibn Hazm et la polmique islamo-chrtienne dans lhistoire de lislam (Leiden, 2003), pp. 102 f. Ljamai (ibid., p. 103) erroneously states that Tabar i cites Sayfs Paul story in his Ta#ri. 102) Thus, he writes just prior, We heard their scholars relating [the story] and they do not deny it (sami na ulam a#ahum yakur u nahu wa-la yatanakkir unahu) (Fisal, I, p. 246). 103) Such knowledge can be seen not only in the Paul narrative, but also throughout Sayfs corpus more generally. For example, Sa d b. Abi l-Waqqas, in refusing the bay a for the caliphate following Umans murder admonishes the crowd,

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

195

Sayf b. Umars historical concerns, he is an unlikely candidate for the invention of the tradition sui generis. Van Koningsveld also suggests that Paul the Apostle might have been confused with the 3rd-century patriarch of Antioch, Paul of Samosta, ims known in Arabic as Bulus al-S ati/al-Simsati, who was later widely denounced for his heretical ideas. To support this, he cites a passage from the church history of the Melkite patriarch of Alexandria, Sa id b. al-Bitriq (d. 328/940), wherein he describes Paul of Samosta as the first one who corrupted the religion of the Christians (huwa awwal man afsada d in alnasara).104 The suggestion is a novel one, but in my view ultimately unconvincing for several reasons. In the first instance, Sayf b. Umar had died long prior to al-Bitriq, who himself died a century and a half later and would have to have been utilizing a source common to both historians. We really have virtually no antecedent narrative materials to draw upon aside from a conjectural one. Secondly, one does not find that there otherwise existed among Muslims a total ignorance of the historical persona of Paul of Samosta independent of Paul of Tarsus. For instance, Abu #Isa al-Warr aq (d. 247/861) shows not only knowledge of the opinions of Paul of Samosta but also a cognizance of the potential affinity existing between some of his doctrines and Muslim beliefs about Jesus.105 Ibn Hazm demonstrates an acute awareness of the difference between the Paul the Apostle and Paul of Samosta as well.106 Also, Ibn al-Qayyim, who depends directly upon Sa id b. al-Bitriq for his information, shows no difficulty in distinguishing between the apostle and the former patriarch of Antioch.107 While one cannot assume that Sayf possessed the same acuity as these
Do not mix bad things with good things, remove your cloak from them and be saved naked (la tali t anna ab ia tan bi-t ayyiba tin wa-ila iya baka wa-anqa urya na). A comment clearly related to Mk. 14.15 f; see Sayf, K. al-Qamal, I, 233. Also, see Sayfs account of the Byzantine commander Georgius and his exchange with alid b. al-Walid in Tabar i, I, pp. 2097 f, which clearly draws from elements of John 20.29; cf. L. I. Conrad, The Mawali and Early Arabic Historiography, in: M. Bernards and J. Nawas, eds., Patronate and Patronage in Early and Classical Islam (Leiden, 2005), pp. 379 f. 104) Islamic Image of Paul, p. 207 n. 15; cf. Eutychius (= Sa id b. al-Bitri q), Eutychii patriarchae Alexandrini Annales, ed. L. Cheikho ( CSCO 5051, scr. arabici 67; Beirut 19061909), I, p. 114. On whom in general, see F. Micheau , Sa id b. al-Bitr ik, EI2, VIII, 853b; Graf, GCAL, II, 32 ff. 105) D. Thomas (ed. and trans.), Early Muslim Polemic against Christianity: Ab u Isa al-Warraq Against the Incarnation (Cambridge, 2002), pp. 194 f. 106) Fisal, I, p. 64 et passim. 107) Hida yat al-haya ra, pp. 547 f.

196

Sean W. Anthony

later scholars, there are further considerations that I believe give us a more probable scenario for the origins of the anti-Pauline elements present in Sayf s account than that tentatively suggested by van Koningsveld . Where the classical writings of the Islamic tradition do malign Paul, such texts are often polemical and/or theological and rather late, reflecting a certain degree of cosmopolitanism; for this to occur in a history such as Sayfs K. al-Ridda is exceptional.108 The case of the Mu tazilite scholar al-Qadi Abd al-Qabbar (d. 415/1025) who concerned himself intensely with Christian affairs109 conforms more closely to the norm. Abd al-Qabbar wrote perhaps the most thoroughly studied example of such anti-Pauline accounts in his Tabi t dala#il al-nub uwa, particularly in the works of Stern and Pines as well as, more recently, Reynolds who provides the most extensive treatment. The heated debates between Stern and Pines regarding the sources of this text need not be reviewed here, although it ought to be stated that the findings of this essay, in agreement with Reynold s recent work, seem to only confirm the correctness of the views of the former.110 However, even in a text such as Abd al-Qabbars Tabi t, in which an extensive account of the corruption of Christianity by both Paul and Constantine are present, Sayfs portrayal of Paul is again entirely absent. Stern s helpful examination of the sources of the anti-Pauline elements in Abd al-Qabbars Tabi t also posits a more convincing origin of the Paul story narrated by Sayf. Paul also appears, as Stern observes, in the Jewish polemical work Tole d o th Yeshu , which essentially amounts to a
As G. S. Reynolds has also observed with regard to the historical accounts of Paul, The writings of these authors [of histories], among them Ya qubi, Mas udi and al-Mutahhar b. Tahir al-Maqdisi (d. late 4th/10th), are marked not by theologumena, but by an investigative and scientific spirit, A Muslim Theologian in the Sectarian Milieu: Abd al-Jabba r and the Critique of Christian Origins (Leiden, 2004), p. 170. 109) G. S. Reynolds, A New Source for Christian History? Eastern Christianity in Abd al-Jabbars /415/1025) Confirmation, OrChr 86 (2002): pp. 4668. 110) The main debate can be found in S. Pines, The Jewish Christians of the Early Centuries of Christianity According to a New Source (Jerusalem, 1966) and S. M. Stern , Quotations from Apocryphal Gospels in Abd al-Jabbar, JTS 18 (1967): pp. 3457; idem, Abd al-Jabbars Account of How Christs Religion was Falsified by the Adoption of Roman Customs, JTS 19 (1968): pp. 108:185. Stern s refutation of Pines thesis of the judeo-christian origins of the account of Abd alQabbar was, in my view, definitive; however, for a study in which Pines theories are . Crone, Islam, Judeo-Christianity and Byzantine Iconorecapitulated, see P clasm, JSAI 2 (1980): pp. 5995, esp. pp. 83 ff. A definitive account of the debate can be found in Reynolds, Muslim Theologian, pp. 1 ff.
108)

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

197

polemical, Jewish life of Jesus.111 This source, or a form thereof, is likely the account to which Ibn Hazm refers as having heard from Jewish scholars. That not only Abd al-Qabbar but also Sayf and Ibn Hazm seem to be familiar with some version of this story demonstrates that it had both an early and broad circulation in Muslim circles as well. According to this Jewish account, a scholar named Elijah was sent by his fellow scholars to remove the followers of Jesus from their community by causing them to fall into perdition. Thus, Elijah/Paul persuades the Christians with guileful quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures in order to convince them to exchange Sunday for the Sabbath, the feasts of the Resurrection for Passover, Ascension for Pentecost, Calendae for Hanukkah, etc.112 Some parallels are quite striking. Both Pauls come to the Christians, for instance, with a sign although in Sayfs version it is Pauls conversion story and in Jewish account Paul heals a leper and an inviolate. Also, Elijahs command in the Tole d o th to consider licit all food from the smallest beetle to the biggest elephant is indicative of a remarkably close textual relation between the texts (though, of course, likely through some form of translation) inasmuch as these very words appear in the mouth of Sayf s Paul, too.113 The migration of the story from Jewish to Muslim circles is not difficult to imagine; the transmission likely occurred along the same Judeo-Muslim channels as the ubiquitous isra#iliya t of early Arabic literature.114 The argument for the circulation of a version of the Tole d o th Yeshu can be strengthened by a short examination of a similar Paul story, appearing mostly in either tafs ir literature or polemical tracts that have survived and demonstrate a strong dependence on the Jewish polemical account. Of all its attestations, only al-Damiris (d. 808/1405) work of animal lore attributes the story to the Kufan historian, genealogist and exegete, Muhammad b. Sa#ib al-Kalbi (d. 146/763). Al-Kalbi, it should be noted, had a i ite leanings and has usually been numbered reputation for extremist S among the Saba#iya in prosopographical works.115 The attribution of the

111) Stern , How Christs Religion was Falsified, p. 179; cf. S. Krauss, Das Leben Jesu, 4748 (trans. pp. 6061). Establishing the early date of this text is difficult inasmuch as its earliest fragment appears in a Latin work of Christian provenance, penned by Agobard bishop of Lyon; see Krauss introduction in ibid., pp. 1 ff. On the influence of the Jewish account upon Abd al-Qabbars Tabi t, see Reynolds, Muslim Theologian, pp. 23336. 112) Cf. Stern , How Christs Religion was Falsified, p. 179 n. 2. 113) Krauss, Das Leben Jesu, p. 48 (trans. 61). 114) See Wasserstrom, Between Muslim and Jew , pp. 167205. 115) On whom, see Ibn allikan, Wafaya t al-a ya n wa-anba# abna# al-zam an, ed.

198

Sean W. Anthony

story to al-Kalbi is exceedingly late and, thus, extremely difficult to establish with redoubtable certainty; however, there are some indications that make the attribution at the very least plausible. For instance, two of the other three instances of the story that I have been able to locate occur in the tafs ir literature one appearing in the Kas f of al-a labi (d. 426/ 1035)116 and the other in the Qa mi li-ahka m al-Qur#a n of al-Qur tubi (d. 671/1272).117 The third instance, found in the polemical tract al-Tabsir fi l-d in of al-Isfar a#ini (d. 471/1079), notes that the source of the story comes from exegetes and Historians (al-mufassir u n wa-asha b al-taw ari).118 Such descriptions certainly fit what the sources inform us about al-Kalbi, who was known primarily as a mufassir and an abari.119 Below is the account provided by al-Damiri:
The Christians followed the religion of Islam for 81 years120 after the assumption of Jesus, praying towards the qibla and fasting in Ramadan. Then a war occurred between them and the Jews. Among the Jews was a brave man (raq ulun s uqa un) called Paul, who killed many (qatala q umla tan) of the Companions of Jesus. One day Paul said to the Jews: If the truth is with Jesus, then we have disbelieved in it and hell is our destiny. We are duped (fa-nahnu ma gdubun) if they enter heaven and we enter hell! I will try to lead them astray so that they enter hell! He had a horse called al- Uqab (i. e., the Eagle) on which he battled. He hamstrung his horse, feigned regret and covered his head with ashes.121 The Christians said to him, Who are you? Paul said, Your enemy. I have been called to from heaven, There is no repentance for you except that you become a Christian. Indeed, I have repented. They took him I. Abb a s (Beirut, 1968), IV , pp. 309 ff; W. Atall a h , al-Kalbi, EI2, IV , p. 495a; van Ess, TG, I, pp. 298 ff. 116) al-a labi, al-Kas , p. 33, f wa-l-bayan an tafs ir al-Qur#an (Beirut, 2000), V ad Q. 9:31; cf. the corrections and translation of Reynolds, Muslim Theologian, pp. 163 ff. 117) Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Qur tubi, al-Qa mi li-ahka m al-Qur#an (Cairo, 1967), VI, pp. 24 f, ad Q. 4:171. 118) al-Isfar a#ini, al-Tabsir fi l-d in, ed. M. al-Kaw ar i (Cairo, 1940), pp. 90 f. 119) The tafs ir of al-Kalbi, probably no longer extant, is not to be confused with the highly problematic text often erroneously ascribed to him (thus, it is not surprising to discover that the following account is absent from that text); cf. H. Motzki, Dating the So-Called Tafs ir Ibn Abbas: Some Additional Remarks, JSAI 31 (2006): 14763. 120) 31 years according to al-Isfar a#ini, Tabsir, p. 90. 121) Perhaps this passage where Paul uses ash in the more familiar, biblically fashion as a sign of repentance appears in Sayfs as well, but had been corrupted due to oral transmission into the mystifying form of his order to have the bayt, which is also present in this account, furnished with ash in 4.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

199

into the church (kan isa), so he entered a cell in it (fa-daala bayt an fiha).122 A year passed, and he had not exited from it, neither by night nor by day, until he had learned the Gospel.123 Then he came out. I was called to (from heaven), God has accepted your repentance. They believed him and loved him. Afterwards, he went to Jerusalem, he made his deputy over them Nastur (wa-istalafa alayhim Nas tur) and taught him that Jesus, Mary, and God (al-ilah) were three [gods]. Then he headed off to Rome (al-Rum) and taught them [the doctrines of] the divinity and humanity (al-lahu t wa-l-nasu t). He said, Christ was neither human nor jinn, but he is the Son of God.124 He taught this to a man named Ya qub. Then he evangelized (da a) a man named Malkan and said to him, God (al-ilah) was and is Jesus. When Paul had gained power of them, he called these three one by one. He said to each one of them, Your are my chosen (a lisat i).125 I saw Jesus while sleeping, and he is pleased with me. He said to each of them, Tomorrow, I will sacrifice myself and leave the people to your teachings (nihlataka).126 Then he entered the place of sacrifice and sacrificed himself (abaha nafsahu). He said, I only do this to please Jesus. On the third day each of them called the people to their teachings. Each of them followed a sect (ta#ifa tan) of the people. The Christians split into three factions (firaq): Nestorians, Jacobites, and Melkites. They devided and battled [each other].127

The divergence between the preceding text and Sayf s account are substantial despite their similarities. Additional details such as the horse named Eagle, Paul and the Jews fear of hell rather than of a foreign king, the presence of a church, and Pauls more itinerant activities immediately stand out. On a more subtle level, there exists evidence of literary tropes lifted from the Pauline epistles and not merely the Lukan material as was the case with Sayf. These extra details indicate that Sayfs Paul story was not dependent upon al-Kalbis version but rather amounted to a second adaptation of the Jewish polemical work Tole d o th Yeshu . Yet, it is uncertain if Sayf himself would have known about this version due to the
Cf. the usage of bayt in Sayfs account. Cf. Gal. 1.1324 124) He was not human ( nasan), then became human; he was not flesh (qism an), but became flesh, al-Isfar a#ini, Tabsir, p. 91; Jesus was not human (bi-inas in) but became human (ta#annasa), nor flesh (bi-qism in) but became flesh (taqassama), Qur tubi, Qa mi , VI, p. 24 and a labi, Kas , p. 33. f, V 125) My successor (al ifat i), in a labi, Kas , p. 33. f, V 126) Cf. the following line from the pseudo-Pauline epistle, II Timothy 4.6: As for me, I am already being poured out as a libation, and the time of my departure has come. 127) Muhammad b. Musa al-Damiri, Haya t al- hayaw a n al-kubra (Cairo, 1956), II, p. 143, s. v. al-fars.
123) 122)

200

Sean W. Anthony

problems surrounding its attestation. Sayf s version, in fact, belies a rather profound influence from an alternative, Jewish Vorlage in its subtle a#ul for Paul. The very same name appears in other usage of the name Abu S polemical versions of Jewish anti-Pauline account, too.128 Even as early as the 3rd/9th-century, the Karaite scholar Dawud b. Marwan al-Muqammis, a#ul.129 for example, refers to Paul in his K. al-dara#a as Abba S Being that both Sayf and al-Kalbi are representative of the Kufan abari tradition, the dependence of the former upon the latter has been usually assumed to involve a rather straightforward process in both medieval and modern literature.130 This is nowhere more reiterated than in the generalization of Wellhausen s Schulentheorie, which can be summarized in his statement that Sayf and his generation of historians, are not compilers of disparate and contradictory traditions, but are rather representative of a unified historical outlook, to which all the data collected by them corresponds, with certain explicitly stated exceptions.131 However, as seen above, the sources employed in compiling any given narrative can be quite diverse even in terms of sectarian origin. The craft of the compiler/historian, hence, is the creation of a seamless, coherent narrative that is commensurate with his view of history. Returning to Sayf s Kufan milieu, the relationship of Sayf to al-Kalbi becomes especially problematic given the antipathies towards individuals harboring pro- Alid views in Sayfs historical works, exemplified particularly in the perfidious activities of the Saba#iya. Such is the case whether or not the account attributed to al-Kalbi above is to be considered authentic. However, if it is considered authentic, this problem becomes particularly pronounced. There has been no attempt, to my knowledge, to reconcile the idea of a seamless Kufan historical tradition with the fact that al-Kalbi
128) Gnter Schlichting, Ein jdisches Leben Jesu: Die verschollene ToledotJeschu-Fassung Tam u mu a d, WUNT 24 (Tbingen, 1982), pp. 1727. 129) As quoted in Ya qub al-Qirqisanis al-Anw a r wa-l-maraqib, ed. L. Nemoy (New York, 193943), I, pp. 44.18, 45.16. See also the reference to Paul as Abba Sha#ul by the 5th/1111-century Karaite scholar Tuvia b. Moses as cited in M. Gil, Jews in Islamic Countries in the Middle Ages, trans. D. Strassler (Leiden, 2004), p. 250 and n. 154 thereto. 130) Cf. Ibn Haqar, Tahib, IV , p. 295 and E. L. Petersen, Al i and Mu a wiya in Early Arabic Tradition, trans. P . L. Christensen (Copenhagen, 1974), pp. 73 ff. 131) Trotzdem aber sind sie nicht Compilatoren von disparaten und widerspruchsvollen Traditionen, sondern Vertreter einer einheitlichen historischen Anschauung, in die alle von ihnen gesammelten Data passen, bis auf gewisse ausdrcklich erwhnte Ausnahmen, Prolegumena, p. 4; trans. R. S. Humphreys, Islamic History: A Framework for Inquiry, rev. ed. (Princeton, 1991), p. 83.

The Composition of Sayf b. Umars Account of King Paul

201

was perhaps, historically speaking, considered one of the most well-known iite beliefs attributed adherents of the Saba#iya.132 Among the extreme S to him are, that Ali had special knowledge of segments of the Qur#an that were not preserved in the Umanic recension, though this could be explained away as the product of later Sunn i polemic. Despite the affinities with the g ula t-sects that are associated with al-Kalbi, he has, as van Ess has observed, nevertheless maintained an uncanny circulation in circles i ism and the corpus of materials attributed to him beyond the fray of S rarely, if ever, exhibits Alawi tendencies.133 Perhaps, therefore, these accu i ite views can be attributed to the efforts of his rivals sations of extremist S to purge his influence from the tradition. Nevertheless, it strikes me as being highly plausible that Sayf intended part of his narrative to be a polemic against the heirs of the Ersatz-Saba#iya of his day and not only to pro i ism in general. vide an imaginary aetiology for S

Summary and Conclusions With the major sources of Sayf s account established, its composition is laid bare. Sayf constructed his own narrative by mixing four elements: second-hand knowledge of New Testament materials, an ancient version of the anti-Pauline account in Tole d o th Yeshu , a version or versions of the tafs ir accounts discussed above (viz., of the scholars corruption and division of the faith into three Christian sects, and of three sects struggles with the kings), and the subsequent qur#anic glosses present in 45, and 8. The
Except, perhaps, for the suggestion of Halm mentioned above (op. cit., i ite Vorlage for his tradip. 41) that Sayf may have utilized some sort of extremist-S tions about the Saba#iya, originating in their Kufan circles. That such a tradition could have existed is not so farfetched. A tradition recorded by al-Buari and ihab al-Zuhr i (d. 127/742), claims Ibn Asakir, but related on the authority of Ibn S that Abu Has im b. Muhammad b. al-Hanaf iya (d. 98/7167) followed the Saba#iya (ka na yattabi u al-Saba#iya); see al-Buari, al-Ta#ri al-kab ir (Hyderabad, 1958), III, 187 and Ibn Asakir, Dimas q, XXXII, 271. However, Ibn Asakir includes two other similar reports, also attributed to al-Zuhr i with additional details. The first states that Abu Hashim studied (ka na yattabi u) the had i of the Saba#iya; whereas the second states somewhat similarly that he collected (ka na yaqma u) the aha d i of the Saba#iya, see ibid., 273. If such a corpus did exist, then Sayf could have reasonably drawn upon it for his materials, although he undoubtedly would have shaped them extensively to serve his own ends as we have observed in the present case. 133) van Ess, TG, I, p. 299.
132)

202

Sean W. Anthony

emergent picture of Sayf b. Umar as an historian is, therefore, one that reflects a complex relationship to the traditions he both compiles and shapes. While this may say little for the veracity of his accounts, it illuminates the process supporting his narrative. Sayf in this particular account can be seen compiling diverse sources and fusing them into one narrative. The irregularity of Ibn Abbas presence in the isna d strikes me as an artifact of this process pointing subtly to the inclusion of the independent tafs irtraditions within the account. Further study is still required in order to determine to what extent this applies to the rest of the historical materials from Sayf. Clearly, however, one can see that the Pauline account is an integral element to his presentation of Abd Allah b. Saba# and his followers. The composite layers of Sayf b. Umars account reveal that Sayf compiled history from a multifarious array of sources while integrating them into a single, fabricated narrative. The fabrication here, though, as Noth has argued, refers to the results of the work of the transmitters, not to their motives.134 The early compiler/historians final product, therefore, is not necessarily mendacious although he can still project upon these events his own view of them.135 Thus, what Sayf actually provides is a rather novel fusion of the disparate, conflicting sources that were available for him to systematize into one coherent account. Regardless of how sound the results of this methodology ultimately proved to be, Sayf harmonized rather than unscrupulously inventing materials and falsifying his accounts. In his harmonization, Sayf provides through the Paul account a picture parallel to the peril Ibn Saba# and the Saba#iya posed to the early umma. Beyond this, Sayf as an historian also augments the episodic, anecdotal qur#anic discourse on the followers of Christ and their tragic fate. Insofar as the qur#anic discourse does not employ a linear plot but rather orients believers achronically vis--vis the imminent, didactic meaning of sacred events, these discourses must be fashioned into a continuous narrative in order to be historicized. Sayf takes these events and clothes them in an historicized, annalistic body tracing the message of prophets from Christs ascension to the advent of Muhammads prophecy. In the end, therefore, his account of Paul amounts to a hybrid of both theology and history.

Noth/Conrad, Early Arabic Historical Tradition, p. 6. I am skeptical, however, as to whether or not one may go as far as to presume any type of moral evaluation of the intentions behind the redactionary process itself; unlike Landau-Tasseron (Tamimite Delegation, p. 70), for instance, who asserts that the redactionary process was in the most part carried out in good faith.
135)

134)