Mukhtar al-Kunti, al-
Mukhtar al-Kunti, al- (Sidi al-Mukhtar ibn Ahmad ibn Abi Bakr al-Kunti) (1729-1811). Uniter of the Berbers of the middle Niger region. He was a Kunta Islamic scholar who through skillful diplomacy brought together the factionalized Kunta and allied them with their Berber neighbors. He was able to do so because of his enormous prestige as a theologian and leader of the Qadiriyya brotherhood, which he also reunited. Perhaps the most difficult part of the task was to check the aggression of the bellicose Tuareg, whom he brought under his religious authority. His preaching and prolific writing renewed waning Islamic scholarship, and probably influenced the militant Islamic revolutionaries such as ‘Uthman dan Fodio, in the 19th century.
Sidi al-Mukhtar ibn Ahmad ibn Abi Bakr al-Kunti see Mukhtar al-Kunti, al-
Mukhtar al-Kunti, al- (Sidi al-Mukhtar ibn Ahmad ibn Abi Bakr al-Kunti) (1729-1811). Uniter of the Berbers of the middle Niger region. He was a Kunta Islamic scholar who through skillful diplomacy brought together the factionalized Kunta and allied them with their Berber neighbors. He was able to do so because of his enormous prestige as a theologian and leader of the Qadiriyya brotherhood, which he also reunited. Perhaps the most difficult part of the task was to check the aggression of the bellicose Tuareg, whom he brought under his religious authority. His preaching and prolific writing renewed waning Islamic scholarship, and probably influenced the militant Islamic revolutionaries such as ‘Uthman dan Fodio, in the 19th century.
Sidi al-Mukhtar ibn Ahmad ibn Abi Bakr al-Kunti see Mukhtar al-Kunti, al-
Mukhtar ibn Abi ‘Ubayd al-Thaqafi, al-
Mukhtar ibn Abi ‘Ubayd al-Thaqafi, al- (Mukhtar bin Abu Ubaid) (622-687). Leader of a pro-‘Alid movement which controlled Kufa (685-687). He played a role in the development of Muslim sectarianism.
Al-Mukhtār ibn Abī ‘Ubayd al-Thaqafī was an early Islamic revolutionary who led an abortive rebellion against the Umayyad Caliphs who ruled the Muslim world after the murder of Husayn ibn Ali at the Battle of Karbala.
Al-Mukhtar was born in Ta’if, Makkah Province, Saudi Arabia in 622, 1 AH, the year the Islamic prophet Muhammad began the Migration to Medina. He went to Medina along with his father during Umar's Caliphate. He was the son of a martyr in the Battle of Yamul Hajr, and grew up in Medina while it was under the rule of Muhammad.
When Yazid I, the third Umayyad Caliph, took power in 683, an increasing number of Muslims were dissatisfied with their government, and the hereditary succession of men they saw as usurpers of rights and oppressive rulers.
The rebellion which broke out in 686 was supported by a faction of Muslims. Al-Mukhtar led the rebellion, which was launched from Kufa, in present-day Iraq. It is rumored that he was rebelling on behalf of Ali's son Husayn ibn Ali, after he was martyred in Karbala by the army of Yazid. Al-Mukhtar was in prison whilst the tragedy of Karbala was taking place. After he was out of prison, he found out about what happened in Karbala and set out to avenge the death of the grand son of Muhammad.
Al-Mukhtar caught many of the men that killed Husayn ibn Ali and his companions in the tragedy of Karbala but was later killed by the forces under the command of Mus'ab ibn al-Zubayr outside of Kufa in April 687. Many of his followers were killed in the subsequent repression as well.
According to the records, al-Mukhtar's struggle was not a revolution for power rather it was to avenge the oppression and killing of the Household of Muhammad. He found and killed the men that had killed or helped in the killing of the Household of Muhammad. At the moment he was about to be sentenced and killed by a governor of Yazid, he said that he had not finished the task which Ali had said he would be doing so no one can kill him. In an interesting sequence he was saved.
The grave of al-Mukhtar can be found within Masjid al-Kūfa in Kūfa, Iraq.
Some of al-Mukhtar's remaining followers constituted a distinct sect, known as the Kaysanites Shi'a, which continued to exist-awaiting al-Hanifiya's return-for the next two hundred years.
A large scale television series about al-Mukhtar is being produced in Iran. Filming began in 2003 and was finished in 2009. The series was named Mokhtarnameh.
Mukhtar bin Abu Ubaid see Mukhtar ibn Abi ‘Ubayd al-Thaqafi, al-
Mukhtar ibn Abi ‘Ubayd al-Thaqafi, al- (Mukhtar bin Abu Ubaid) (622-687). Leader of a pro-‘Alid movement which controlled Kufa (685-687). He played a role in the development of Muslim sectarianism.
Al-Mukhtār ibn Abī ‘Ubayd al-Thaqafī was an early Islamic revolutionary who led an abortive rebellion against the Umayyad Caliphs who ruled the Muslim world after the murder of Husayn ibn Ali at the Battle of Karbala.
Al-Mukhtar was born in Ta’if, Makkah Province, Saudi Arabia in 622, 1 AH, the year the Islamic prophet Muhammad began the Migration to Medina. He went to Medina along with his father during Umar's Caliphate. He was the son of a martyr in the Battle of Yamul Hajr, and grew up in Medina while it was under the rule of Muhammad.
When Yazid I, the third Umayyad Caliph, took power in 683, an increasing number of Muslims were dissatisfied with their government, and the hereditary succession of men they saw as usurpers of rights and oppressive rulers.
The rebellion which broke out in 686 was supported by a faction of Muslims. Al-Mukhtar led the rebellion, which was launched from Kufa, in present-day Iraq. It is rumored that he was rebelling on behalf of Ali's son Husayn ibn Ali, after he was martyred in Karbala by the army of Yazid. Al-Mukhtar was in prison whilst the tragedy of Karbala was taking place. After he was out of prison, he found out about what happened in Karbala and set out to avenge the death of the grand son of Muhammad.
Al-Mukhtar caught many of the men that killed Husayn ibn Ali and his companions in the tragedy of Karbala but was later killed by the forces under the command of Mus'ab ibn al-Zubayr outside of Kufa in April 687. Many of his followers were killed in the subsequent repression as well.
According to the records, al-Mukhtar's struggle was not a revolution for power rather it was to avenge the oppression and killing of the Household of Muhammad. He found and killed the men that had killed or helped in the killing of the Household of Muhammad. At the moment he was about to be sentenced and killed by a governor of Yazid, he said that he had not finished the task which Ali had said he would be doing so no one can kill him. In an interesting sequence he was saved.
The grave of al-Mukhtar can be found within Masjid al-Kūfa in Kūfa, Iraq.
Some of al-Mukhtar's remaining followers constituted a distinct sect, known as the Kaysanites Shi'a, which continued to exist-awaiting al-Hanifiya's return-for the next two hundred years.
A large scale television series about al-Mukhtar is being produced in Iran. Filming began in 2003 and was finished in 2009. The series was named Mokhtarnameh.
Mukhtar bin Abu Ubaid see Mukhtar ibn Abi ‘Ubayd al-Thaqafi, al-
Mukhtar Pasha
Mukhtar Pasha (1839-1919). Ottoman Turkish general and statesman. He became Grand Vizier in July 1912 but had to resign in the following October.
Mukhtar Pasha (1839-1919). Ottoman Turkish general and statesman. He became Grand Vizier in July 1912 but had to resign in the following October.
Mukhtar, ‘Umar al-
Mukhtar, ‘Umar al- ('Umar al-Mukhtar) ('Umar al-Mukhtar ibn 'Umar al-Minifi) (Omar Mukhtar) (1858/1862 - September 16, 1931). Libyan resistance leader. ‘Umar al-Mukhtar ibn ‘Umar al-Minifi grew up in a religious family connected to the Sanusiyah Sufi order in Cyrenaica (eastern Libya). He came from the ‘A’ilat Farhat branch of the Minifiyah, an independent client tribe. ‘Umar studied at the lodge of Zanzur, moving on to the Sanusi capital and university of Jaghbub in 1887, then moving with the leadership to Kufra in the Libyan desert in 1895.
Two years later he was appointed shaykh of the al-Qasur lodge in western Cyrenaica, in the territory of the unruly ‘Abid tribe. ‘Umar was successful in solidifying the authority of the order in the region. His success noted, he was again called south in 1899, when the order was expanding into Borku (northern Chad). He was appointed shaykh of the ‘Ayn Qalakkah lodge. Here he had his military experiences fighting the French forces. In 1903, he moved back to al-Qasur as shaykh of the lodge.
When the Italians invaded Libya in 1911, ‘Umar led the ‘Abid in the ensuing jihad. By the time the first war ended in a truce in 1917, ‘Umar had gained great influence with the new leader of the Sanusiyah, Muhammad Idris. In 1923, the Italians reopened hostilities. Idris went into exile in Egypt and appointed ‘Umar as one of the leaders for the campaign in Cyrenaica. Already more than sixty years old, as na’ib al-‘amm (general representative) he became a charismatic figure who inspired the tribes to join and maintain the struggle.
‘Umar displayed considerable tactical skill and was able to lead themostly tribal units in a campaign that for more than six years confounded the Italians in spite of their great numerical and material superiority. Eventually the guerrilla forces started to be worn down, and in 1929, after a series of defeats, ‘Umar asked for truce negotiations. They led nowhere, and after three months he resumed fighting. But Italian superiority was now evident, in particular after they in 1930 began rounding up the bedouin population into concentration camps and cut off supply lines by closing the Egyptian border with barbed wire. ‘Umar’s fighters became hunted groups, and on September 11, 1931, ‘Umar himself was captured in a chance encounter.
Mukhtar’s struggle of nearly twenty years came to an end on September 11, 1931, when he was wounded in battle, then captured by the Italian army. The Italians treated the native leader hero as a prize catch. His resilience had an impact on his jailers, who later remarked upon his steadfastness. His interrogators stated that Mukhtar recited verses of peace from the Qur'an.
In three days, Mukhtar was tried, convicted, and, on September 14, 1931, sentenced to be hanged publicly. When asked if he wished to say any last words, Mukhtar replied with a Qur'anic phrase: "We are Allah's -properties-, and to Allah we will return." On September 16, 1931, on the orders of the Italian court and with Italian hopes that Libyan resistance would die with him, Mukhtar was hanged before his followers in the concentration camp of Solluqon at the age of 70 years.
Mukhtar's final years were depicted in the movie The Lion of the Desert (1981), starring Anthony Quinn, Oliver Reed, and Irene Papas. On June 10, 2009, Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi arrived in Rome, on his first visit to Italy, wearing the famous picture of Mukhtar's arrest on his lapel when meeting with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.
What made ‘Umar al-Mukhtar such a charismatic leader was a combination of religious authority and personal skill. While the forces he led were largely tribal, he himself came from a relatively minor, client tribe. His first military power was based on the ‘Abid tribe, among whom he was the leader of the Sanusi Sufi lodge. With this basis he could use his political and military skill, which combined with a personal reputation for uprightness to stand up to the Italian forces for almost a decade.
'Umar al-Mukhtar see Mukhtar, ‘Umar al-
'Umar al-Mukhtar ibn 'Umar al-Minifi see Mukhtar, ‘Umar al-
Omar Mukhtar see Mukhtar, ‘Umar al-
Mukhtar, ‘Umar al- ('Umar al-Mukhtar) ('Umar al-Mukhtar ibn 'Umar al-Minifi) (Omar Mukhtar) (1858/1862 - September 16, 1931). Libyan resistance leader. ‘Umar al-Mukhtar ibn ‘Umar al-Minifi grew up in a religious family connected to the Sanusiyah Sufi order in Cyrenaica (eastern Libya). He came from the ‘A’ilat Farhat branch of the Minifiyah, an independent client tribe. ‘Umar studied at the lodge of Zanzur, moving on to the Sanusi capital and university of Jaghbub in 1887, then moving with the leadership to Kufra in the Libyan desert in 1895.
Two years later he was appointed shaykh of the al-Qasur lodge in western Cyrenaica, in the territory of the unruly ‘Abid tribe. ‘Umar was successful in solidifying the authority of the order in the region. His success noted, he was again called south in 1899, when the order was expanding into Borku (northern Chad). He was appointed shaykh of the ‘Ayn Qalakkah lodge. Here he had his military experiences fighting the French forces. In 1903, he moved back to al-Qasur as shaykh of the lodge.
When the Italians invaded Libya in 1911, ‘Umar led the ‘Abid in the ensuing jihad. By the time the first war ended in a truce in 1917, ‘Umar had gained great influence with the new leader of the Sanusiyah, Muhammad Idris. In 1923, the Italians reopened hostilities. Idris went into exile in Egypt and appointed ‘Umar as one of the leaders for the campaign in Cyrenaica. Already more than sixty years old, as na’ib al-‘amm (general representative) he became a charismatic figure who inspired the tribes to join and maintain the struggle.
‘Umar displayed considerable tactical skill and was able to lead themostly tribal units in a campaign that for more than six years confounded the Italians in spite of their great numerical and material superiority. Eventually the guerrilla forces started to be worn down, and in 1929, after a series of defeats, ‘Umar asked for truce negotiations. They led nowhere, and after three months he resumed fighting. But Italian superiority was now evident, in particular after they in 1930 began rounding up the bedouin population into concentration camps and cut off supply lines by closing the Egyptian border with barbed wire. ‘Umar’s fighters became hunted groups, and on September 11, 1931, ‘Umar himself was captured in a chance encounter.
Mukhtar’s struggle of nearly twenty years came to an end on September 11, 1931, when he was wounded in battle, then captured by the Italian army. The Italians treated the native leader hero as a prize catch. His resilience had an impact on his jailers, who later remarked upon his steadfastness. His interrogators stated that Mukhtar recited verses of peace from the Qur'an.
In three days, Mukhtar was tried, convicted, and, on September 14, 1931, sentenced to be hanged publicly. When asked if he wished to say any last words, Mukhtar replied with a Qur'anic phrase: "We are Allah's -properties-, and to Allah we will return." On September 16, 1931, on the orders of the Italian court and with Italian hopes that Libyan resistance would die with him, Mukhtar was hanged before his followers in the concentration camp of Solluqon at the age of 70 years.
Mukhtar's final years were depicted in the movie The Lion of the Desert (1981), starring Anthony Quinn, Oliver Reed, and Irene Papas. On June 10, 2009, Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi arrived in Rome, on his first visit to Italy, wearing the famous picture of Mukhtar's arrest on his lapel when meeting with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.
What made ‘Umar al-Mukhtar such a charismatic leader was a combination of religious authority and personal skill. While the forces he led were largely tribal, he himself came from a relatively minor, client tribe. His first military power was based on the ‘Abid tribe, among whom he was the leader of the Sanusi Sufi lodge. With this basis he could use his political and military skill, which combined with a personal reputation for uprightness to stand up to the Italian forces for almost a decade.
'Umar al-Mukhtar see Mukhtar, ‘Umar al-
'Umar al-Mukhtar ibn 'Umar al-Minifi see Mukhtar, ‘Umar al-
Omar Mukhtar see Mukhtar, ‘Umar al-
Muktafi bi-‘llah, al-
Muktafi bi-‘llah, al-. ‘Abbasid caliph (r.902-908). He fought the Carmathians in Syria, put an end to the rule of the Tulunids in Egypt and vigorously pursued the war with the Byzantines.
Muktafi bi-‘llah, al-. ‘Abbasid caliph (r.902-908). He fought the Carmathians in Syria, put an end to the rule of the Tulunids in Egypt and vigorously pursued the war with the Byzantines.
mulla
mulla (molla) (mollah) (mullah). Persian title, derived from Arabic, indicating in the first instance any Muslim scholar who has acquired a certain degree of religious education and the aptitude to communicate it. In current usage, the title is most often applied to the ‘ulama’, the religious scholars. Having completed their elementary classes, the students, between the ages of eleven and fifteen years, are admitted to the madrasa, where they pursue a traditional education. Few among them succeed in completing the full cursus of fifteen to eighteen years which will lead them to the superior rank (among the Shi‘is) of mujtahid. They wear the turban (black for the Sayyids, white for others), a long and ample cloak, sandals, a relatively long beard and a trimmed mustache. Exercising the basic prerogatives in matters of education, ritual functions (prayers, marriages, funerals, etc.) and judicial functions, the mullahs constitute the basis of what has been called, erroneously in the view of some, a veritable clergy.
The term mullah is often used on the Indian subcontinent. The term mullah is the equivalent of the term ‘alim.
Among the Shi‘ites, a mullah is a scholar of the religious law -- sharia. The mullah performs minor religious functions, such as leading prayer in the smaller mosques, teaching the Qur’an, preaching the faith, and recounting the ta’ziya (stories of the imams).
The Persian construction of mullah probably comes from the Arabic mawla (“master,” “leader,” “lord”), mullah is the title used to identify a religious functionary, a cleric, a learned man, or someone with religious education. The title is very much similar to akhund in the range of meanings it invokes.
From the Safavid period (1501-1722) onward, the term mullah began to be used for various clerical functionaries. During the Qajar period (1342-1925), the term was institutionalized as a designation of lower-ranking clerics. Beginning with the Constitutional Revolution in Iran (1906-1911), the term assumed an additional derogatory connotation, used by secular individuals to designate anti-modern and reactionary tendencies.
The term mullah invariably refers to a male cleric, but in such constructions as mullabaji (“sister-mullah”) it has been extended to female clerics, particularly to female teachers at girls’ schools. The term mullakhanah, which has been used for traditional schools, indicates that at least since the Qajar period the word mullah has had an exclusive application to elementary teachers at traditional schools. The term mullanuqati also refers to a person who is very particular about details (of punctualities). Probably because some high-ranking mullahs owned land, there are quite a number of small villages in Iran with the term attached to a proper name, such as Mulla-Baqir in Arak, or Mulla-Budaq and Mulla-Piri in Zanjan.
In the Safavid administrative apparatus, the term mullabashi referred to a high-ranking religious official in charge of a number of functions, including the religious education of the court. The office of mullabashi was subsequently developed into the most prestigious religious position at the Safavid court.
Among the clerics themselves, the term mullah is the highest expression of reverence for religious learning. Perhaps the most distinguished philosopher of the Safavid period, Mulla Sadra Shirazi (d. 1640) received his name from the combination of mullah, here meaning “the most learned,” and Sadr al-Din, his honorific title. Even in popular culture, the term mullah has strong connotations of learning and erudition. The verb mullashudan (literally, “to become a mullah”) in Persian means “to become learned.”
During the Qajar period the term mullah was applied as an honorific title to a number of teachers at the court. Mullah ‘Ali Asghar Hazarjaribi, known as “Mullahbashi” (d. 1798), was a teacher of the celebrated Qajar prince ‘Abbas Mirza and a number of other princes. The most distinguished philosopher of the Qajar period, Hajj Mullah Hadi Sabzawari (d. 1872) also carried the honorific title of mullah.
After the Constitutional Revolution in Iran the derogatory implications of the term in secular contexts increased. To call someone a mullah is to accuse him of reactionary ideas. Opposition to the establishment of new schools during the constitutional period in Iran, for example, is identified with “the mullahs.” The expression mullakhur (“embezzled by the mullahs” or “edible by the mullahs”) refers either to financial embezzlement or to fruits and vegetables that have become rotten and can be purchased for a cheap price. In Persian folklore, the term mullah appears most familiarly in the name of Mullah Nasr al-Din, a legendary figure at the center of innumerable tales of either naive simplicity, or sometimes wit and wisdom.
As a self-conscious social group, the mullahs have performed a major role in the social history of Iran at least since the Qajar period. Their active participation during the Constitutional Revolution, both for and against it, continued well into the twentieth century. The Islamic Revolution of Iran in 1979 was largely led by Iranian mullahs. Beyond the crucial realm of politics, the mullahs are principally in charge of the religious functions and ceremonies in Iran. They are particularly visible in public places during the months of Muharram, Safar, and Ramadan when their religious functions lead them into the mosques, markets, and other public places. As a class, also known as the akhunds, the ruhaniyun, or the ‘ulama’, they are the principal interpreters of the Islamic law of the Shi‘as. They preside over such crucial events in the life of a Muslim as circumcision, wedding, hajj pilgrimage, and burial. Their religious and juridical training is institutionalized in madrasahs (seminaries). The curriculum of a mullah’s training includes the study of the Qur’an, the prophetic traditions, and the lives and sayings of the Shi‘a imams.
molla see mulla
mollah see mulla
mullah see mulla
mulla (molla) (mollah) (mullah). Persian title, derived from Arabic, indicating in the first instance any Muslim scholar who has acquired a certain degree of religious education and the aptitude to communicate it. In current usage, the title is most often applied to the ‘ulama’, the religious scholars. Having completed their elementary classes, the students, between the ages of eleven and fifteen years, are admitted to the madrasa, where they pursue a traditional education. Few among them succeed in completing the full cursus of fifteen to eighteen years which will lead them to the superior rank (among the Shi‘is) of mujtahid. They wear the turban (black for the Sayyids, white for others), a long and ample cloak, sandals, a relatively long beard and a trimmed mustache. Exercising the basic prerogatives in matters of education, ritual functions (prayers, marriages, funerals, etc.) and judicial functions, the mullahs constitute the basis of what has been called, erroneously in the view of some, a veritable clergy.
The term mullah is often used on the Indian subcontinent. The term mullah is the equivalent of the term ‘alim.
Among the Shi‘ites, a mullah is a scholar of the religious law -- sharia. The mullah performs minor religious functions, such as leading prayer in the smaller mosques, teaching the Qur’an, preaching the faith, and recounting the ta’ziya (stories of the imams).
The Persian construction of mullah probably comes from the Arabic mawla (“master,” “leader,” “lord”), mullah is the title used to identify a religious functionary, a cleric, a learned man, or someone with religious education. The title is very much similar to akhund in the range of meanings it invokes.
From the Safavid period (1501-1722) onward, the term mullah began to be used for various clerical functionaries. During the Qajar period (1342-1925), the term was institutionalized as a designation of lower-ranking clerics. Beginning with the Constitutional Revolution in Iran (1906-1911), the term assumed an additional derogatory connotation, used by secular individuals to designate anti-modern and reactionary tendencies.
The term mullah invariably refers to a male cleric, but in such constructions as mullabaji (“sister-mullah”) it has been extended to female clerics, particularly to female teachers at girls’ schools. The term mullakhanah, which has been used for traditional schools, indicates that at least since the Qajar period the word mullah has had an exclusive application to elementary teachers at traditional schools. The term mullanuqati also refers to a person who is very particular about details (of punctualities). Probably because some high-ranking mullahs owned land, there are quite a number of small villages in Iran with the term attached to a proper name, such as Mulla-Baqir in Arak, or Mulla-Budaq and Mulla-Piri in Zanjan.
In the Safavid administrative apparatus, the term mullabashi referred to a high-ranking religious official in charge of a number of functions, including the religious education of the court. The office of mullabashi was subsequently developed into the most prestigious religious position at the Safavid court.
Among the clerics themselves, the term mullah is the highest expression of reverence for religious learning. Perhaps the most distinguished philosopher of the Safavid period, Mulla Sadra Shirazi (d. 1640) received his name from the combination of mullah, here meaning “the most learned,” and Sadr al-Din, his honorific title. Even in popular culture, the term mullah has strong connotations of learning and erudition. The verb mullashudan (literally, “to become a mullah”) in Persian means “to become learned.”
During the Qajar period the term mullah was applied as an honorific title to a number of teachers at the court. Mullah ‘Ali Asghar Hazarjaribi, known as “Mullahbashi” (d. 1798), was a teacher of the celebrated Qajar prince ‘Abbas Mirza and a number of other princes. The most distinguished philosopher of the Qajar period, Hajj Mullah Hadi Sabzawari (d. 1872) also carried the honorific title of mullah.
After the Constitutional Revolution in Iran the derogatory implications of the term in secular contexts increased. To call someone a mullah is to accuse him of reactionary ideas. Opposition to the establishment of new schools during the constitutional period in Iran, for example, is identified with “the mullahs.” The expression mullakhur (“embezzled by the mullahs” or “edible by the mullahs”) refers either to financial embezzlement or to fruits and vegetables that have become rotten and can be purchased for a cheap price. In Persian folklore, the term mullah appears most familiarly in the name of Mullah Nasr al-Din, a legendary figure at the center of innumerable tales of either naive simplicity, or sometimes wit and wisdom.
As a self-conscious social group, the mullahs have performed a major role in the social history of Iran at least since the Qajar period. Their active participation during the Constitutional Revolution, both for and against it, continued well into the twentieth century. The Islamic Revolution of Iran in 1979 was largely led by Iranian mullahs. Beyond the crucial realm of politics, the mullahs are principally in charge of the religious functions and ceremonies in Iran. They are particularly visible in public places during the months of Muharram, Safar, and Ramadan when their religious functions lead them into the mosques, markets, and other public places. As a class, also known as the akhunds, the ruhaniyun, or the ‘ulama’, they are the principal interpreters of the Islamic law of the Shi‘as. They preside over such crucial events in the life of a Muslim as circumcision, wedding, hajj pilgrimage, and burial. Their religious and juridical training is institutionalized in madrasahs (seminaries). The curriculum of a mullah’s training includes the study of the Qur’an, the prophetic traditions, and the lives and sayings of the Shi‘a imams.
molla see mulla
mollah see mulla
mullah see mulla
Mullabashi
Mullabashi. Institution designating a high religious functionary in Shi‘a Islam, which seems to have come into usage toward the very end of the Safavid period (1501-1722), and slowly disappeared in the nineteenth century, mullabashi was intended to replace the more established term Shaykh al-Islam, but it did not succeed in doing so. A passing reference to it is encountered as late as 1906. The term itself comes from a Perso-Arabic word, mulla (“mullah” -- a Muslim clergyman) and a Turkish word, bash (or bas – “head or chief”), thus having the general meaning of “head of the clergy.” In point of fact, however, the mullabashi did not possess such an important function.
One of the earliest references to the term occurs in Tadhkirat al-muluk, completed about 1726. The anonymous author states that the mullabashi was the chief mullah, foremost religious scholar, and had a privileged seat next to the shah on formal occasions. The duties of the mullabashi included soliciting pensions for students and men of merit, generally upholding virtuous conduct, and giving advice on legal matters. Thus, the mullabashi was more an adviser rather than an executive. The contemporary Zubdat al-tavarikh makes the mullabashi sound more like the shah’s boon companion, joining him in discussing literary problems and poetry and the preparation of dishes and medicines.
Some scholars believe that the office of mullabashi was formally instituted for Mir Muhammad Baqir Khatun-abadi in 1712, disproving Minorsky’s conjecture that the first occupant of the office was Mullah Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi (d. 1699 or 1700), the most powerful Shaykh al-Islam of Isfahan toward the end of the Safavid period. Other scholars claim that (Madjlisi’s title was changed to Mullabashi on Sultan Husayn’s accession to the throne in 1694.
The mullabashi had his rivals in the “mujtahid of the age,” the Sadr, and the Shaykh al-Islam. There is some indication, however, that the mullabashi was the most powerful of them all. This is shown by the Dastur al-muluk, a work on the Safavid administration from the same period as Tadhkirat al-muluk, whose author refers to the mullabashi as the leader and most learned of the ‘ulama’ (community of religious scholars).
The position of mullabashi became more of a public relations office during the reign of Nadir Shah Afshar (d. 1747). The shah, anxious to reach some kind of reconciliation between the Shi‘a Iranians and the Sunni Ottomans, sent his mullabashi, Mulla ‘Ali Akbar, as his chief representative to the conference at Najar in 1743 where he defended the Shi‘a views in lively conversations with Shaykh ‘Abd Allah al-Suwaydi, an Iraqi Sunni scholar, whowas accepted by both sides as an impartial mediator. This reconciliation attempt ended in failure. In any case, it was essentially a political ploy by Nadir Shah, who at the same time was actually at war with the Ottomans.
The office of mullabashi kept an attenuated existence throughout the Zand and Qajar periods. The incumbent often became tutor of the royal princes.
Mullabashi. Institution designating a high religious functionary in Shi‘a Islam, which seems to have come into usage toward the very end of the Safavid period (1501-1722), and slowly disappeared in the nineteenth century, mullabashi was intended to replace the more established term Shaykh al-Islam, but it did not succeed in doing so. A passing reference to it is encountered as late as 1906. The term itself comes from a Perso-Arabic word, mulla (“mullah” -- a Muslim clergyman) and a Turkish word, bash (or bas – “head or chief”), thus having the general meaning of “head of the clergy.” In point of fact, however, the mullabashi did not possess such an important function.
One of the earliest references to the term occurs in Tadhkirat al-muluk, completed about 1726. The anonymous author states that the mullabashi was the chief mullah, foremost religious scholar, and had a privileged seat next to the shah on formal occasions. The duties of the mullabashi included soliciting pensions for students and men of merit, generally upholding virtuous conduct, and giving advice on legal matters. Thus, the mullabashi was more an adviser rather than an executive. The contemporary Zubdat al-tavarikh makes the mullabashi sound more like the shah’s boon companion, joining him in discussing literary problems and poetry and the preparation of dishes and medicines.
Some scholars believe that the office of mullabashi was formally instituted for Mir Muhammad Baqir Khatun-abadi in 1712, disproving Minorsky’s conjecture that the first occupant of the office was Mullah Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi (d. 1699 or 1700), the most powerful Shaykh al-Islam of Isfahan toward the end of the Safavid period. Other scholars claim that (Madjlisi’s title was changed to Mullabashi on Sultan Husayn’s accession to the throne in 1694.
The mullabashi had his rivals in the “mujtahid of the age,” the Sadr, and the Shaykh al-Islam. There is some indication, however, that the mullabashi was the most powerful of them all. This is shown by the Dastur al-muluk, a work on the Safavid administration from the same period as Tadhkirat al-muluk, whose author refers to the mullabashi as the leader and most learned of the ‘ulama’ (community of religious scholars).
The position of mullabashi became more of a public relations office during the reign of Nadir Shah Afshar (d. 1747). The shah, anxious to reach some kind of reconciliation between the Shi‘a Iranians and the Sunni Ottomans, sent his mullabashi, Mulla ‘Ali Akbar, as his chief representative to the conference at Najar in 1743 where he defended the Shi‘a views in lively conversations with Shaykh ‘Abd Allah al-Suwaydi, an Iraqi Sunni scholar, whowas accepted by both sides as an impartial mediator. This reconciliation attempt ended in failure. In any case, it was essentially a political ploy by Nadir Shah, who at the same time was actually at war with the Ottomans.
The office of mullabashi kept an attenuated existence throughout the Zand and Qajar periods. The incumbent often became tutor of the royal princes.
Mulla Sadra
Mulla Sadra (Sadr al-Din Shirazi) (Ṣadr ad-Dīn Muḥammad Shīrāzī) (Molla Sadra) (Mollasadra) (Sadrol Mote'allehin) (1571-1640/1641). Persian philosopher. His Secrets is widely regarded in Iran as the most advanced text in the field of mystical philosophy.
Mulla Sadra was born into a noble Persian family. His life coincided with the reign of Shah Abbas the First, during whose rule Shi‘ism and the propagation of Islamic law, philosophy, and theology reached its climax in Iran. He devoted himself to the study of the intellectual sciences -- in particular, the philosophies of Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Suhrawardi, and the Neoplatonists, especially Ibn ‘Arabi. His intense studies of philosophy intimidated some of the orthodox jurists who held much political power and who regarded philosophy as a heretical activity. Due to the hostility of the orthodoxy to his serious pursuit of philosophy by the studying and teaching of it, Mulla Sadra was forced to leave Isfahan, where he had been studying, and move to a small village outside of the city of Qum. In exile, Mulla Sadra spent twelve years in contemplation and ascetic practices, which led to the strengthening of his intellectual intuition (dhawq).
Mulla Sadra is important in the history of Islamic philosophy for several reasons. First, his work, in particular his magnum opus, the al-Afsar al-arba ‘ah (The Four Journeys of the Soul), is a compendium of the history of Islamic philosophy. Having presented the ideas of his predecessors in great detail, Mulla Sadra goes on to offer a thorough examination and critique of their philosophical ideas. Second, Mulla Sadra consolidated the School of Isfahan, which his teacher Mir Damad had established. This philosophical school was a turning point in the history of Islamic philosophy in Iran and produced some of the greatest masters of Islamic philosophy. The philosophical tradition of the School of Isfahan that was perfected by such masters as Mulla Sadra came to be known as “transcendental wisdom” (al-hikmat al-muti‘aliya), a rapprochement of discursive reasoning, intellectual intuition and practical wisdom.
Mulla Sadra wrote three distinct types of works: commentaries on the Qur’an and hadith, polemical works, and philosophical treatises. His commentaries on various verses of the Qur’an, such as the verses on light, is an indication of his esoteric reading of the scripture. He also wrote a monumental commentary upon the sayings of the Shi‘ite Imams, bringing out their more esoteric aspects. His polemics are directed towards the anti-nomian Sufis and their violations of the religious law. Finally, there are the philosophical writings of Mulla Sadra, most of which were written for the intellectual elite and the learned scholars who had sufficient training in traditional Islamic philosophy.
Mulla Sadra synthesized the theological (kalam) discussions, Ibn Sinan (Avicennian) metaphysics, and the mystical thoughts of Ibn ‘Arabi. The result is a tradition of wisdom that relates to the traditional concerns of the theologians, the discursive reasoning of the philosophers, and the direct experience of the Sufis. Mulla Sadra in particular was influenced by two figures, Ibn Sina, the philosopher of Being, and Suhrawardi, the philosopher of light and the founder of the School of Illumination (Ishraq) in Islamic philosophy. Mulla Sadra interprets Ibn Sinan philosophy from a Suhrawardian point of view while making some fundamental revisions in Suhrawardi’s ontology.
Theology, which by the time of Mulla Sadra was well developed, relied on the same vocabulary as that of the philosophers. Mulla Sadra takes note of the similarity in the use of technical terms by philosophers and theologians and of their methodologies. The second point Mulla Sadra alludes to is that Islamic theology is developed, not as an independent branch of intellectual sciences, but as a discipline that is primarily concerned with Islamic law.
Mulla Sadra, in his treatment of kalam, adopts a two-pronged approach, arguing against the theological methodology on one hand while affirming the truth of the objectives of the theologians on the other. Mulla Sadra demonstrates how and why it is that theological arguments fail to prove their purported conclusions while at the same time he is careful not to question the validity of the theological beliefs. In his work on the problem of eternity versus creation in time and the problem of bodily resurrection, Mulla Sadra brings some of the controversial positions of philosophers closer to the views of the theologians.
Mulla Sadra retains the general structure of the Ibn Sinan philosophy that asserts the existence of the Necessary Being and the gradations of Being that emanate from the Necessary Being. However, he departs from Ibn Sina by putting more emphasis on the centrality of a personal insight leading to the discoveries of the immutable principles of philosophy. It is precisely these experiences that serve as the foundation upon which Sadrian philosophy is established. Whereas Ibn Sinan principles are derived from discursive philosophy and his logic is based on rationalization of philosophical categories, Mulla Sadra’s “logic of transcendence” is derived from his mots inward and noetic insight. Mulla Sadra refers to these principles as the “Principles of Oriental Philosophy” (Qa‘ida Mashraqiyah) and “Transcendental Principles” (Qa‘ida Laduniya).
Mulla Sadra was profoundly influenced by the mystics of Islam, both by theoretical and practical dimensions of Sufism. With regard to theoretical Sufism, Mulla Sadra was highly influenced by Ibn ‘Arabi, the great Andalusian mystic. In fact, a great number of the technical terminologies that Mulla Sadra uses are borrowed from Ibn ‘Arabi and his massive commentary upon Islamic gnosticism. In particular, Mulla Sadra finds Ibn ‘Arabi’s treatment of such issues as human understanding of the experience of the divine and various problems associated with that understanding to be quite illuminating.
As to the practical aspects of the Sufi path, Mulla Sadra endorses asceticism as part of the path of knowledge whle he rejects the excesses and the antinomian practices of the Sufis.
Mulla Sadra divides knowledge into two types -- that which is learned by sense perception or instruction and that which is learned through intellectual intuition, a mode of knowledge marked by directness and the absence of mediation. The knowledge that is learned through the senses or instruction itself is divided into the traditional divisions of knowledge most commonly held by the Peripatetics, namely, theoretical and practical. The theoretical sciences consist of logic, mathematics, natural philosophy, and metaphysics; practical wisdom includes ethics, politics, and economics.
Mulla Sadra goes on to subdivide the sciences, leading to a unified theory of knowledge, which despite the multiplicity of different branches of knowledge leads the intellect to that knowledge of unity that lies at the heart of Sadrian philosophy. This view of knowledge (hikmah) integrates various modes of knowing, including that of practical wisdom, since knowledge for Mulla Sadra is not only informative but also transformative.
Mulla Sadra, whose encyclopedic knowledge of Islamic philosophy provided him with the basis for illuminating analyses of the philosophical ideas of his predecessors, makes three major contributions to the field of Islamic philosophy. They include (1) his commentary on Being, leading to the Doctrine of the Unity of Being, (2) his account of the occurrence of change in motion, known as “Substantial Motion,” and (3) his theory of the unity of the knower, the known, and knowledge itself.
Mulla Sadra takes issue with Suhrawardi, the founder of the School of Illumination, and his own teacher Mir Damad, reversing their scheme based on the principality of essence (mahiyyah) over existence (wujud). He argues that existence is the primary and principal aspect of an existent being and that essences are accidents of Being. Furthermore, Existence or Being (which for most of the Islamic philosophers, including Mulla Sadra, are the same) has an independent existence, whereas essences are contingent upon Being and therefore without a reality of their own.
Regarding the classical divisions of Being, Mulla Sadra accepts Ibn Sina’s division of Being into necessary, contingent, and impossible. Mulla Sadra also elaborates on copulative and non-copulative Being. Copulative Being is that which connects the subject to the predicate such as in “Socrates is a philosopher.” The term “is” here has a twofold function -- a copulative one, which connects the adjective of being a philosopher to Socrates, and a second one, namely, the existential function, which alludes to the existence of an existent being, in this case Socrates. Mulla Sadra, who is interested in the latter use of “is,” argues that “is” in the corporeal world is always copulative except for the Being of God, who is pure and without essences.
Mulla Sadra accepts Plato’s concept of archetypes as the “master of species” (arbab al-anwa’). According to Mulla Sadra, the corporeal world as a level of Being derives its characteristics from the archetypal world. The separation of the corporeal world from its archetypal world leads to the principle of “the possibility of that which is superior” (Qa‘ida imkan al-ashraf), a principle for which Mulla Sadra is known. This principle entails that for everything that journeys from the imperfect to perfect in the material world, there is its cosmic counterpart in the incorporeal world.
Mulla Sadra’s criticism of the Illuminationists goes beyond the priority and principality of existence over essence and includes the theory of hylomorphism. Accordingly, matter manifests itself in various domains of existence according to the ontological status of each level. Whereas the world of objects is immersed in the lowest level of matter, the soul belongs to a higher level of matter suitable for it. This process continues until it culminates in the intelligible world, where realities are completely free from matter.
Mulla Sadra is unique in the history of Islamic philosophy in that he allows for motion to exist in substance (al-harakat al-jawhariyyah). This is a deviation from Ibn Sina (Avicenna), who considered motion in substance to lead to a continuous change and the loss of that which constitutes the identity of a thing.
Mulla Sadra uses a number of arguments in support of his theory of the existence of motion in substance. When an apple has become ripe, it is not only the accidents that have changed, but the substance of the apple must have changed as well. In fact, when a potentiality becomes actualized, Mulla Sadra argues, it signifies a change both in accidents and in substance. Mulla Sadra states that for every change that occurs in accident, there has to be a corresponding change in substance, for accidents depend on their substance for their properties. Therefore, change in an apple is an example of the created order and signifies several points: first, that the world is like a river that is constantly in a state of flux; second, change occurs out of necessity and nothing remains the same except God; third, this change is not an accident in the universe, but is part of its very nature. This change, according to Mulla Sadra, acts as a force that moves the universe towards becoming; becoming is fundamentally a spiritual journey that all beings yearn for and accounts for both the ripening of an apple as well as for the yearning of the human being for transcendence.
Mulla Sadra uses the notion of Substantial Motion to shed light on the concept of time. For Mulla Sadra, as for Aristotle, time is the quantity of motion, except that for Mulla Sadra the change in quantity is the quantity of change in substance. Time is not to be viewed only quantitatively but has an ontological aspect as well. Motion in substance is also the measurement of the perfection and therefore has a purpose and direction, and carries a sense of necessity with it.
The fact that all things are in motion and that motion goes from less perfect to more perfect is an indication for Mulla Sadra that the entire universe is yearing for the ultimate perfection, God. This view also entails tha in some sense the universe is conscious of its own state of being and yearns for an eventual unity with its origin. Since Substantial Motion also entails that the identity of the object in question is always changing, Mulla Sadra concludes that this type of motion brings about a type of creation at every given moment. In other words, God through Substantial Motion creates the universe instantaneously at every moment. The Reality of God manifests itself through creation, which then goes through successive creations.
What Mulla Sadra was trying to achieve was to bring about a rapprochement between the Peripatetic who argued for the eternity of the world and the theologian view who insisted on creation ex nihilo. According to Mulla Sadra, the world as an extension of God has always existed, but yet it was created in time that ceases to exist, and is then recreated.
The unity of the knower, the known, and knowledge is deeply embedded in the Sadrian philosophy. Since God’s essence and Being are the same and all things emanate from God, God is at once the knower, the known, and the knowledge.
From the above it follows that in order for any person to achieve a similar status, one has to achieve unity with God. The reverse is also true: anyone who attains the knowledge of unity is in his or her very being the knower, the known, and the knowledge; in knowing unity, one has become unified. It is for this reason that Mulla Sadra’s al-Asfar al-arba ‘ah (the Four Journeys of the Soul) alludes to the spiritual journey of the soul from the time that it departs from God until it achieves unity once again.
Mulla Sadra not only offers complex philosophical arguments but also uses gnostic imagery as a mirror representing Divine Essence within which God witnesses the essence of all things. Although Mulla Sadra never explicitly states that unity with God is the necessary condition of knowledge, the thrust of his philosophy is such that this notion is implied.
Mulla Sadra and his teachings were a turning point in the history of Islamic philosophy. One of the greatest achievements of Mulla Sadra was the training of several students who themselves became masters of Islamic philosophy and propagators of Sadrian philosophy. Among them we can name ‘Abd al-Razzaq Lahiji, Mulla Muhsin Fayd Kashani, and Qadi Sa‘id Qummi.
Sadrian philosophy, which had gone through a period of decline, was once again revived in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in Iran by such notable figures as Sabziwari, Ali Nuri, Ahsa’i, and the Zunuzi family. The teaching of Mulla Sadra and his students was well received by the Islamic philosophers of the subcontinent of India, and some of his books became the official texts of traditional schools. Islamic philosophy today in Iran and the eastern parts of the Islamic world is still under the influence of Mulla Sadra and his teachings.
Sadra, Mulla see Mulla Sadra
Sadr al-Din Shirazi see Mulla Sadra
Shirazi, Sadr al-Din see Mulla Sadra
Sadr ad-Din Muhammad Shirazi see Mulla Sadra
Molla Sadra see Mulla Sadra
Sadrol Mote'allehin see Mulla Sadra
Mulla Sadra (Sadr al-Din Shirazi) (Ṣadr ad-Dīn Muḥammad Shīrāzī) (Molla Sadra) (Mollasadra) (Sadrol Mote'allehin) (1571-1640/1641). Persian philosopher. His Secrets is widely regarded in Iran as the most advanced text in the field of mystical philosophy.
Mulla Sadra was born into a noble Persian family. His life coincided with the reign of Shah Abbas the First, during whose rule Shi‘ism and the propagation of Islamic law, philosophy, and theology reached its climax in Iran. He devoted himself to the study of the intellectual sciences -- in particular, the philosophies of Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Suhrawardi, and the Neoplatonists, especially Ibn ‘Arabi. His intense studies of philosophy intimidated some of the orthodox jurists who held much political power and who regarded philosophy as a heretical activity. Due to the hostility of the orthodoxy to his serious pursuit of philosophy by the studying and teaching of it, Mulla Sadra was forced to leave Isfahan, where he had been studying, and move to a small village outside of the city of Qum. In exile, Mulla Sadra spent twelve years in contemplation and ascetic practices, which led to the strengthening of his intellectual intuition (dhawq).
Mulla Sadra is important in the history of Islamic philosophy for several reasons. First, his work, in particular his magnum opus, the al-Afsar al-arba ‘ah (The Four Journeys of the Soul), is a compendium of the history of Islamic philosophy. Having presented the ideas of his predecessors in great detail, Mulla Sadra goes on to offer a thorough examination and critique of their philosophical ideas. Second, Mulla Sadra consolidated the School of Isfahan, which his teacher Mir Damad had established. This philosophical school was a turning point in the history of Islamic philosophy in Iran and produced some of the greatest masters of Islamic philosophy. The philosophical tradition of the School of Isfahan that was perfected by such masters as Mulla Sadra came to be known as “transcendental wisdom” (al-hikmat al-muti‘aliya), a rapprochement of discursive reasoning, intellectual intuition and practical wisdom.
Mulla Sadra wrote three distinct types of works: commentaries on the Qur’an and hadith, polemical works, and philosophical treatises. His commentaries on various verses of the Qur’an, such as the verses on light, is an indication of his esoteric reading of the scripture. He also wrote a monumental commentary upon the sayings of the Shi‘ite Imams, bringing out their more esoteric aspects. His polemics are directed towards the anti-nomian Sufis and their violations of the religious law. Finally, there are the philosophical writings of Mulla Sadra, most of which were written for the intellectual elite and the learned scholars who had sufficient training in traditional Islamic philosophy.
Mulla Sadra synthesized the theological (kalam) discussions, Ibn Sinan (Avicennian) metaphysics, and the mystical thoughts of Ibn ‘Arabi. The result is a tradition of wisdom that relates to the traditional concerns of the theologians, the discursive reasoning of the philosophers, and the direct experience of the Sufis. Mulla Sadra in particular was influenced by two figures, Ibn Sina, the philosopher of Being, and Suhrawardi, the philosopher of light and the founder of the School of Illumination (Ishraq) in Islamic philosophy. Mulla Sadra interprets Ibn Sinan philosophy from a Suhrawardian point of view while making some fundamental revisions in Suhrawardi’s ontology.
Theology, which by the time of Mulla Sadra was well developed, relied on the same vocabulary as that of the philosophers. Mulla Sadra takes note of the similarity in the use of technical terms by philosophers and theologians and of their methodologies. The second point Mulla Sadra alludes to is that Islamic theology is developed, not as an independent branch of intellectual sciences, but as a discipline that is primarily concerned with Islamic law.
Mulla Sadra, in his treatment of kalam, adopts a two-pronged approach, arguing against the theological methodology on one hand while affirming the truth of the objectives of the theologians on the other. Mulla Sadra demonstrates how and why it is that theological arguments fail to prove their purported conclusions while at the same time he is careful not to question the validity of the theological beliefs. In his work on the problem of eternity versus creation in time and the problem of bodily resurrection, Mulla Sadra brings some of the controversial positions of philosophers closer to the views of the theologians.
Mulla Sadra retains the general structure of the Ibn Sinan philosophy that asserts the existence of the Necessary Being and the gradations of Being that emanate from the Necessary Being. However, he departs from Ibn Sina by putting more emphasis on the centrality of a personal insight leading to the discoveries of the immutable principles of philosophy. It is precisely these experiences that serve as the foundation upon which Sadrian philosophy is established. Whereas Ibn Sinan principles are derived from discursive philosophy and his logic is based on rationalization of philosophical categories, Mulla Sadra’s “logic of transcendence” is derived from his mots inward and noetic insight. Mulla Sadra refers to these principles as the “Principles of Oriental Philosophy” (Qa‘ida Mashraqiyah) and “Transcendental Principles” (Qa‘ida Laduniya).
Mulla Sadra was profoundly influenced by the mystics of Islam, both by theoretical and practical dimensions of Sufism. With regard to theoretical Sufism, Mulla Sadra was highly influenced by Ibn ‘Arabi, the great Andalusian mystic. In fact, a great number of the technical terminologies that Mulla Sadra uses are borrowed from Ibn ‘Arabi and his massive commentary upon Islamic gnosticism. In particular, Mulla Sadra finds Ibn ‘Arabi’s treatment of such issues as human understanding of the experience of the divine and various problems associated with that understanding to be quite illuminating.
As to the practical aspects of the Sufi path, Mulla Sadra endorses asceticism as part of the path of knowledge whle he rejects the excesses and the antinomian practices of the Sufis.
Mulla Sadra divides knowledge into two types -- that which is learned by sense perception or instruction and that which is learned through intellectual intuition, a mode of knowledge marked by directness and the absence of mediation. The knowledge that is learned through the senses or instruction itself is divided into the traditional divisions of knowledge most commonly held by the Peripatetics, namely, theoretical and practical. The theoretical sciences consist of logic, mathematics, natural philosophy, and metaphysics; practical wisdom includes ethics, politics, and economics.
Mulla Sadra goes on to subdivide the sciences, leading to a unified theory of knowledge, which despite the multiplicity of different branches of knowledge leads the intellect to that knowledge of unity that lies at the heart of Sadrian philosophy. This view of knowledge (hikmah) integrates various modes of knowing, including that of practical wisdom, since knowledge for Mulla Sadra is not only informative but also transformative.
Mulla Sadra, whose encyclopedic knowledge of Islamic philosophy provided him with the basis for illuminating analyses of the philosophical ideas of his predecessors, makes three major contributions to the field of Islamic philosophy. They include (1) his commentary on Being, leading to the Doctrine of the Unity of Being, (2) his account of the occurrence of change in motion, known as “Substantial Motion,” and (3) his theory of the unity of the knower, the known, and knowledge itself.
Mulla Sadra takes issue with Suhrawardi, the founder of the School of Illumination, and his own teacher Mir Damad, reversing their scheme based on the principality of essence (mahiyyah) over existence (wujud). He argues that existence is the primary and principal aspect of an existent being and that essences are accidents of Being. Furthermore, Existence or Being (which for most of the Islamic philosophers, including Mulla Sadra, are the same) has an independent existence, whereas essences are contingent upon Being and therefore without a reality of their own.
Regarding the classical divisions of Being, Mulla Sadra accepts Ibn Sina’s division of Being into necessary, contingent, and impossible. Mulla Sadra also elaborates on copulative and non-copulative Being. Copulative Being is that which connects the subject to the predicate such as in “Socrates is a philosopher.” The term “is” here has a twofold function -- a copulative one, which connects the adjective of being a philosopher to Socrates, and a second one, namely, the existential function, which alludes to the existence of an existent being, in this case Socrates. Mulla Sadra, who is interested in the latter use of “is,” argues that “is” in the corporeal world is always copulative except for the Being of God, who is pure and without essences.
Mulla Sadra accepts Plato’s concept of archetypes as the “master of species” (arbab al-anwa’). According to Mulla Sadra, the corporeal world as a level of Being derives its characteristics from the archetypal world. The separation of the corporeal world from its archetypal world leads to the principle of “the possibility of that which is superior” (Qa‘ida imkan al-ashraf), a principle for which Mulla Sadra is known. This principle entails that for everything that journeys from the imperfect to perfect in the material world, there is its cosmic counterpart in the incorporeal world.
Mulla Sadra’s criticism of the Illuminationists goes beyond the priority and principality of existence over essence and includes the theory of hylomorphism. Accordingly, matter manifests itself in various domains of existence according to the ontological status of each level. Whereas the world of objects is immersed in the lowest level of matter, the soul belongs to a higher level of matter suitable for it. This process continues until it culminates in the intelligible world, where realities are completely free from matter.
Mulla Sadra is unique in the history of Islamic philosophy in that he allows for motion to exist in substance (al-harakat al-jawhariyyah). This is a deviation from Ibn Sina (Avicenna), who considered motion in substance to lead to a continuous change and the loss of that which constitutes the identity of a thing.
Mulla Sadra uses a number of arguments in support of his theory of the existence of motion in substance. When an apple has become ripe, it is not only the accidents that have changed, but the substance of the apple must have changed as well. In fact, when a potentiality becomes actualized, Mulla Sadra argues, it signifies a change both in accidents and in substance. Mulla Sadra states that for every change that occurs in accident, there has to be a corresponding change in substance, for accidents depend on their substance for their properties. Therefore, change in an apple is an example of the created order and signifies several points: first, that the world is like a river that is constantly in a state of flux; second, change occurs out of necessity and nothing remains the same except God; third, this change is not an accident in the universe, but is part of its very nature. This change, according to Mulla Sadra, acts as a force that moves the universe towards becoming; becoming is fundamentally a spiritual journey that all beings yearn for and accounts for both the ripening of an apple as well as for the yearning of the human being for transcendence.
Mulla Sadra uses the notion of Substantial Motion to shed light on the concept of time. For Mulla Sadra, as for Aristotle, time is the quantity of motion, except that for Mulla Sadra the change in quantity is the quantity of change in substance. Time is not to be viewed only quantitatively but has an ontological aspect as well. Motion in substance is also the measurement of the perfection and therefore has a purpose and direction, and carries a sense of necessity with it.
The fact that all things are in motion and that motion goes from less perfect to more perfect is an indication for Mulla Sadra that the entire universe is yearing for the ultimate perfection, God. This view also entails tha in some sense the universe is conscious of its own state of being and yearns for an eventual unity with its origin. Since Substantial Motion also entails that the identity of the object in question is always changing, Mulla Sadra concludes that this type of motion brings about a type of creation at every given moment. In other words, God through Substantial Motion creates the universe instantaneously at every moment. The Reality of God manifests itself through creation, which then goes through successive creations.
What Mulla Sadra was trying to achieve was to bring about a rapprochement between the Peripatetic who argued for the eternity of the world and the theologian view who insisted on creation ex nihilo. According to Mulla Sadra, the world as an extension of God has always existed, but yet it was created in time that ceases to exist, and is then recreated.
The unity of the knower, the known, and knowledge is deeply embedded in the Sadrian philosophy. Since God’s essence and Being are the same and all things emanate from God, God is at once the knower, the known, and the knowledge.
From the above it follows that in order for any person to achieve a similar status, one has to achieve unity with God. The reverse is also true: anyone who attains the knowledge of unity is in his or her very being the knower, the known, and the knowledge; in knowing unity, one has become unified. It is for this reason that Mulla Sadra’s al-Asfar al-arba ‘ah (the Four Journeys of the Soul) alludes to the spiritual journey of the soul from the time that it departs from God until it achieves unity once again.
Mulla Sadra not only offers complex philosophical arguments but also uses gnostic imagery as a mirror representing Divine Essence within which God witnesses the essence of all things. Although Mulla Sadra never explicitly states that unity with God is the necessary condition of knowledge, the thrust of his philosophy is such that this notion is implied.
Mulla Sadra and his teachings were a turning point in the history of Islamic philosophy. One of the greatest achievements of Mulla Sadra was the training of several students who themselves became masters of Islamic philosophy and propagators of Sadrian philosophy. Among them we can name ‘Abd al-Razzaq Lahiji, Mulla Muhsin Fayd Kashani, and Qadi Sa‘id Qummi.
Sadrian philosophy, which had gone through a period of decline, was once again revived in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in Iran by such notable figures as Sabziwari, Ali Nuri, Ahsa’i, and the Zunuzi family. The teaching of Mulla Sadra and his students was well received by the Islamic philosophers of the subcontinent of India, and some of his books became the official texts of traditional schools. Islamic philosophy today in Iran and the eastern parts of the Islamic world is still under the influence of Mulla Sadra and his teachings.
Sadra, Mulla see Mulla Sadra
Sadr al-Din Shirazi see Mulla Sadra
Shirazi, Sadr al-Din see Mulla Sadra
Sadr ad-Din Muhammad Shirazi see Mulla Sadra
Molla Sadra see Mulla Sadra
Sadrol Mote'allehin see Mulla Sadra
Multezim
Multezim. Ottoman tax-collector allowed by the government to keep a share of what he collected.
Multezim. Ottoman tax-collector allowed by the government to keep a share of what he collected.
Muluk al-Tawa’if
Muluk al-Tawa’if (in Spanish, Reyes de Taifas). Name means “rulers of the factions”, or “Party Kings”, and is used for a number of local Muslim dynasties, which ruled in the various parts of al-Andalus between the final collapse of the Spanish Umayyads in the early part of the eleventh century and the coming of the Almoravid Yusuf ibn Tashfin in 1086.
Reyes de Taifas see Muluk al-Tawa’if
Rulers of the Factions see Muluk al-Tawa’if
Party Kings see Muluk al-Tawa’if
Muluk al-Tawa’if (in Spanish, Reyes de Taifas). Name means “rulers of the factions”, or “Party Kings”, and is used for a number of local Muslim dynasties, which ruled in the various parts of al-Andalus between the final collapse of the Spanish Umayyads in the early part of the eleventh century and the coming of the Almoravid Yusuf ibn Tashfin in 1086.
Reyes de Taifas see Muluk al-Tawa’if
Rulers of the Factions see Muluk al-Tawa’if
Party Kings see Muluk al-Tawa’if
mu’minin, al-
mu’minin, al-. Term means “true believers.”
mu’minin, al-. Term means “true believers.”
Mumtaz Mahal
Mumtaz Mahal (Arjumand Banu Bob) (Arjumand Banu Begum) (April, 1593 - June 17, 1631). Wife of the Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan. It was for her that the Taj Mahal was builtMumtāz Mahal; meaning "beloved ornament of the palace", is the common nickname of Arjumand Banu Bob, an Empress of India during the Mughal Dynasty. She was born in Agra, India. Her father was the Persian noble Abdul Hasan Asaf Khan, the brother of Empress Nur Jehan (who subsequently became the wife of the emperor Jahangir). She was religiously a Shi'a Muslim. She was married at the age of 19, on May 10, 1612, to Prince Khurram, who would later ascend the Peacock Throne as the Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan I. She was his third wife, and became his favorite. She died in Burhanpur in the Deccan (now in Madhya Pradesh) during the birth of their fourteenth child, a daughter named Gauhara Begum. Her body remained at Burhanpur for 23 years until the Taj was completed. Only then was her coffin shifted to Agra. Her body was then buried in the Taj Mahal in Agra.
In 1607, Prince Khurram was betrothed to Arjumand Banu Begum, who was just 14 years old at the time. She would become the unquestioned love of his life. They would however, have to wait five years before they were married in 1612, on a date selected by the court astrologers as most conducive to ensuring a happy marriage. After their wedding celebrations, Khurram "finding her in appearance and character elect among all the women of the time", gave her the title 'Mumtaz Mahal' Begum (Chosen One of the Palace). The intervening years had seen Khurram take two other wives. By all accounts however, Khurram was so taken with Mumtaz, that he showed little interest in exercising his polygamous rights with the two earlier wives, other than dutifully siring a child with each. According to the official court chronicler, Qazwini, the relationship with his other wives "had nothing more than the status of marriage. The intimacy, deep affection, attention and favor which His Majesty had for the Cradle of Excellence (Mumtaz) exceeded by a thousand times what he felt for any other."
Mumtaz Mahal had a very deep and loving marriage with Shah Jahan. Even during her lifetime, poets would extol her beauty, gracefulness and compassion. Mumtaz Mahal was Shah Jahan's trusted companion, travelling with him all over the Mughal Empire. His trust in her was so great that he even gave her his imperial seal, the Muhr Uzah. Mumtaz was portrayed as the perfect wife with no aspirations to political power in contrast to Nur Jehan, the wife of Jahangir who had wielded considerable influence in the previous reign. Mumtaz Mahal was a great influence on Shah Jahan, apparently often intervening on behalf of the poor and destitute. However, she also enjoyed watching elephant and combat fights performed for the court. It was quite common for women of noble birth to commission architecture in the Mughal Empire. Mumtaz devoted some time to a riverside garden in Agra.
Despite her frequent pregnancies, Mumtaz traveled with Shah Jahan's entourage throughout his earlier military campaigns and the subsequent rebellion against his father. She was his constant companion and trusted confidant and their relationship was intense. Indeed, the court historians go to unheard lengths to document the intimate and erotic relationship the couple enjoyed. In their nineteen years of marriage, they had fourteen children together, seven of whom died at birth or at a very young age.
Mumtaz died in Burhanpur in 1631, while giving birth to their fourteenth child. She had been accompanying her husband whilst he was fighting a campaign in the Deccan Plateau. Her body was temporarily buried at Burhanpur in a walled pleasure garden known as Zainabad originally constructed by Shah Jahan's uncle Daniyal on the bank of the Tapti River. The contemporary court chroniclers paid an unusual amount of attention to Mumtaz Mahal's death and Shah Jahan's grief at her demise. In the immediate aftermath of his bereavement, the emperor was reportedly inconsolable. Apparently after her death, Shah Jahan went into secluded mourning for a year. When he appeared again, his hair had turned white, his back was bent, and his face worn. Jahan's eldest daughter, the devoted Jahanara Begum, gradually brought him out of grief and took the place of Mumtaz at court.
Mumtaz's personal fortune valued at 10,000,000 rupees was divided by Shah Jahan between Jahanara Begum, who received half and the rest of her surviving children. Burhanpur was never intended by her husband as his wife's final resting spot. As a result her body was disinterred in December 1631 and transported in a golden casket escorted by her son Shah Shuja and the head lady in waiting of the deceased Empress back to Agra. There it was interred in a small building on the banks of the Yamuna River. Shah Jahan stayed behind in Burhanpur to conclude the military campaign that had originally bought him to the region. While there he began planning the design and construction of a suitable mausoleum and funerary garden in Agra for his wife, a task that would take more than 22 years to complete, the Taj Mahal.
Today, the Taj Mahal stands as the ultimate monument to love, and a homage to Mumtaz's beauty and life.
The children of Mumtaz were:
1. Shahzadi (Imperial Princess) Huralnissa Begum (1613–1616)
2. Shahzadi (Imperial Princess) Jahanara Begum (1614–1681)
3. Shahzada (Imperial Prince) Dara Shikoh (1615–1659)
4. Shahzada Mohammed Sultan Shah Shuja Bahadur (1616–1660)
5. Shahzadi Roshanara Begum (1617–1671)
6. Badshah Mohinnudin Mohammed Aurangzeb (1618–1707)
7. Shahzada Sultan Ummid Baksh (1619–1622)
8. Shahzadi Surayya Banu Begum (1621–1628)
9. Shahzada Sultan Murad Baksh (1624–1661)
10. Shahzada Sultan Luftallah (1626–1628)
11. Shahzada Sultan Daulat Afza (1628 - ?)
12. Shahzadi Husnara Begum (1630 - ?)
13. Shahzadi Gauhara Begum (1631–1707)
14. Samedia (Imperial Princess) (? - ?)
Mahal, Mumtaz see Mumtaz Mahal
Beloved Ornament of the Palace see Mumtaz Mahal
Arjumand Banu Bob see Mumtaz Mahal
Bob, Arjumand Banu see Mumtaz Mahal
Arjumand Banu Begum see Mumtaz Mahal
Begum, Arjumand Banu see Mumtaz Mahal
Mahal, Mumtaz see Mumtaz Mahal
Beloved Ornament of the Palace see Mumtaz Mahal
Arjumand Banu Bob see Mumtaz Mahal
Bob, Arjumand Banu see Mumtaz Mahal
Arjumand Banu Begum see Mumtaz Mahal
Begum, Arjumand Banu see Mumtaz Mahal
No comments:
Post a Comment