Academia.eduAcademia.edu
Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ Quarterly Journal of Shi‘a History Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019 Concessionaire: Editorial Board: Managing Director & Editor in Chief: A. Ahmadvand Associate professor of History and Civilization of Islamic Nations at Shahid Beheshti University M. Alviri Associate Professor of History at Baqir al-Olum University A. Badkoube Hazaveh Associate Professor of History and Civilization of Islamic Nations at University of Tehran M. R. Barani Assisstant professor of History at al-Zahra University S. Bakhtiary Associate Professor of History at al-Zahra University R. Bahrami Associate Professor of History at Razi University A. A. Jafari Associate Professor of History at IsfahanUniversity H. Hosseinian Moghaddam Associate Professor of History at Research Institute of Hawzah and University S. A. R. Khezri Professor of History and Civilization of Islamic Nations at University of Tehran N. Safari Foroushani Professor of History at al-Mustafa International University S. A. R. Vasei Associate Professor of Islamic Art and Civilization at Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy Seyyed AhmadReza Khezri Administration Manager: Mehran Esmaeili Guest Editor: Tara Woolnough Layout: Mahdi Esmaeili Cover Designer: Ebrahim Zangi Printed by Payam Moalef Press Publisher: The Iranian Society of Islamic History Address: Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies at University of Tehran, Shahid Motahari St., Tehran, Iran Post code: 1576613111 Phone: +98‐ 21‐ 88742477 On the occasion of the 80th birthday of Prof. Dr. Farhad Daftari Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ Quarterly Journal of Shi‘a History Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019 ■ Contents Editor’s Note 5 Tara Woolnough 9 A Short Biography of Farhad Daftary Mohammad Ali Amir‐Moezzi Concealment of Secrets in Early Imāmī Shīʿism: The Case of khatm al‐nubuwwa 15 Abbas Ahmadvand and Sayyed Kamal Keshik Nevis Razavi A Comparative Analysis of T. Nöldeke and I. Goldziher: Towards a Shi‘ite Interpretation 35 Carmela Baffioni The Language of Adam and his Fall in an Unpublished Arabic Medieval Text 47 Seyed Ahmad Reza Khezri, Kauomars Azimi and Shams Alsadat Hosseini The Spread of Shi‘ism in Kurdistan 65 Wilferd Madelung 91 Government in the Caspian Zaydī States between Theory and Practice Reza Rezazadeh Langroudi La structure de l’état Qarmaṭe de Baḥrayn 101 Liyakat Takim The Early History of the American Shi‘a Community 127 Bibliography of the Works of Farhad Daftary 145 Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ Quarterly Journal of Shi‘a History Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019, 5‐8 Editor’s Note The emergence of Islam opened a new chapter in the history of humanity, whereby believers and non‐believers alike felt the impact of this religion. The truth of this is evident in the fact that different religions have played a vital role in the transformation, development, and diversification of human cultures and civilizations. This important issue – the impact of Islam – has attracted many authors and researchers across the world, resulting in many thousands of books and articles. Most of these have acknowledged the role of Islam in advancing intellectual activities among Muslims, high‐ lighting in particular a significant and far‐reaching influence on the devel‐ opment of various sciences. History and historiography are among those disciplines that progressed on account of the special attention Muslims paid to Islamic stories, on the one hand, and their interest in recording the Prophet’s (pbuh) sunna, on the other. The documentation that began with imparting the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) to the migrants and newly converted Muslims of Medina, and which flourished with accounts of the battles and ghazavat (wars against infidels) during his life and the story of Islamic victories under the early caliphs, very soon developed into different genres and branches of scholarship. Like a vast cradle, history fostered other branches of knowledge, in which the history of religions and religious groups played a great part. This branch of history has been studied from the middle of the first cen‐ tury of the Hijri era (seventh century Common Era). Theological dialogues and religious discussions took place amongst scholars, theologians and 6 Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ (Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019) masters of creeds and faiths, and the leaders of different religions and schools of thought sought to propagate their distinctive doctrines. The par‐ ticular emergence and historical primacy of each of them were matters of great importance. In this way, history entered into the scope of religion and a serious and unbreakable bond emerged between them, a link that has lasted until now. In fact, because of the increasing need of theologians to further understand how a religion or creed emerges, this bond will become tighter still. Each of the Muslim communities took action to defend their historical legitimacy, and by writing scholarly works ranging from treatis‐ es, rebuttals, polemics, critiques, and analyses, they established what may be regarded as a scientific movement, such that providing a list of works written in this field would require a book in itself. The pioneers of this scientific movement were individuals such as Ibn al‐Kabi, Abu Yusuf Yaqub b. Ishaq al‐Sabbah al‐Kindi, Abu Zayd al‐Balkhi, Abu Mansur al‐Baghdadi, Saʿd b. Abdullah al‐Qumi and Hasan b. Musa al‐ Nawbakhti; subsequently, a large number of Shi‘i scholars such as Sheikh Sadduq, Sheikh Mufid, Sheikh Tusi and Khawaja Nasir al‐Din Tusi have made efforts to explain the creedal bases of their religion. Finally, in the contemporary period, Islamic scholars and orientalists have also turned their attention to research in this field, producing a variety of works. The present author, who has been teaching and researching for many years in the fields of the history of Islam and the Shi‘a, first became inter‐ ested in this branch of Islamic studies upon entering the University of Teh‐ ran as a student in the Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies. I remember well that in the summer of 1984, when I was a second‐year student at the university, I took a few courses, among which was one titled Sects and Is‐ lamic Religion. So one Saturday, at 10 in the morning, I hurried to attend a class in Room 1. The room was a relatively large one, in the basement of Building 1 in the Faculty of Theology. Unlike other rooms, the door was at the rear of the class, with professors entering the room from behind the students, with the result that students were not always aware of a profes‐ sor’s presence and would sometimes not behave appropriately. This was precisely the case when some classmates and I were talking in a dissatis‐ fied way about holding the class in that unsuitable location, particularly in Editor’s Note 7 the hot days of the holy month of Ramadan, which fell in the summer at that time. While we were busily conversing, an elegantly dressed Sheikh (clergyman) slowly split our circle and walked slowly to the front of the class podium, lighting up the conversation to begin with, saying, “I am Ab‐ dullah Nourani, and I am very happy that fortune is my companion in sit‐ ting on the seats of great professors like Frouzanfar, Homaei and Motahhari, walking the path they have trod, and speaking to you”. Then, the Sheikh issued his advice with a sweet Khorasani accent which was simple and unaffected, opening his lecture with emphasizing the importance of knowledge and scholarship, adding that students of theology should learn Arabic and English languages. He repeatedly warned us to exert great effort to equip ourselves with these languages, because they would be required in apprehending the essence of this discipline, and without them all work would be in vain. In short, Professor Nourani who, in addition to mastering knowledge of the Quran and hadith, was an expert bibliographer and a prominent scholar of rijal in Islam, mixed his delicate speech with mention of various stories and rich parables, and based on the title of the course, he pointed to promi‐ nent researchers of various sects. Among them, he admired Dr Farhad Daftary, who was doing research on the history of the Ismailis. It was so fascinating to me to hear of Dr Daftary’s name that I immediately went to the library of the faculty to gather some of his works and glean some of his knowledge. Since then I have always followed news relating to him and his publications. Of particular note was the appearance of his The Isma‘ilis: Their History and Doctrines, published in 1990 by Cambridge University Press, which aroused a wave of acclaim among scholars. Farhad Daftary has since devoted himself to studying the history of Is‐ lamic thought and culture from a Shi‘i perspective, especially the Ismaili branch, and there are tens of books and numerous articles resulting from his multi‐decade efforts in the field, as shown in his bibliography printed below. The Iranian Society of Islamic History, as the only professional associa‐ tion in the field of the history of Islam in Iran, has decided to honour Dr Farhad Daftary, in recognition of his years of indefatigable academic ef‐ 8 Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ (Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019) forts. Therefore, we invited prominent scholars in the fields of Islamic and Shi‘i studies to submit contributions for the third issue of the Journal of Shi‘i History, which is a special issue for this purpose. Among a number of pa‐ pers, seven were selected for publication by a committee of referees. Hope‐ fully, Dr Daftary will live a long life and the academic community will bene‐ fit from his scientific works in Iran and elsewhere in the world. Dr Seyed Ahmad Reza Khezri Professor of University of Tehran and Head of the Iranian Society of Islamic History Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ Quarterly Journal of Shi‘a History Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019, 35‐45 A Comparative Analysis of T. Nöldeke and I. Goldziher: Towards a Shi‘ite Interpretation Abbas Ahmadvand* and Sayyed Kamal Keshik Nevis Razavi** Abstract: In historical Islamic studies, specifically in the field of Quranic re‐ search in the West, the names of two scholars stand out: Ignác (or Ignáz) Goldziher and Theodor Nöldeke. Although the subjects which these two re‐ searchers investigated have undergone changes, nonetheless, their view‐ points are still noteworthy and various current approaches can be seen to be rooted in their theories. Shi‘ite commentary on the Quran is one of the topics which both Goldziher and Nöldeke considered. But although they addressed the same subject, differences in their methods of analysis are discernible. Evaluating a subject of study by using different approaches is a prominent characteristic of Goldziher’s studies. Keywords: Nöldeke, Goldziher, Quranic Commentary, Quranic studies in the West, the Quran and Orientalists Introduction The non‐normative study of the subject of this article, which is usually con‐ ducted in university settings, has become less controversial. This study turns the research, leaving aside any influences as a result of socio‐cultural environment, into an answer to its own questions. The thematic diversity of Quranic studies in the West, particularly in the twentieth century, has contributed to diverse approaches which assist each other in modifying * Associate Professor in History and Civilization of Muslim World Dept., Shahi Beheshti University, Tehran (Iran). ** PhD candidate, Firdawsi University of Mashhad (Iran). 36 Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ (Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019) methods and perspectives. Furthermore, the proper collaboration of Mus‐ lims with Western scholars in these endeavors, despite certain rather speculative views, has made Quranic studies an environment for dialogue rather than controversial debate.1 Examining the background of such stud‐ ies and realizing their foundational and original approaches would improve our rationale for understanding and evaluating them more justly. Therefore, we have conducted a comparative study of the interpreta‐ tion in Nöldeke’s The History of the Qur’an (originally published in German as Geschichte des Qorâns) and that found in Schools of Koranic Commenta‐ tors (similarly published first in German as Die Richtungen der islamischen Koranauslegung) by Goldziher, so that in addition to becoming familiar with the basic sources of Quranic studies in the West, we can focus on the Western approach to ‘Shi‘ite interpretation’ by reviewing the impact of the‐ se two scholars on subsequent research. Foundational Sources in Western Quranic Studies in the Twen‐ tieth Century Orientalists have expended considerable amounts of time and energy stud‐ ying various aspects of the Quran. But this attention to the Quran and its related sciences did not truly develop and flourish until the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.2 Due to the developments in these two areas of study and the critique of religious texts in the West during these centuries, espe‐ cially the twentieth century, a new way to openly explore the sacred texts of other religions was discovered and Western scholars began to study the Quran and its related fields with greater ease.3 Among the resources which were produced as a result of Western studies on the Quran, two works stand out: The History of the Qur’an by Theodor Nöldeke, and Schools of Ko‐ ranic Commentators by Ignác Goldziher. These can be declared to be the ‘fundamental resources for Quranic studies in the twentieth century in the West’.4 Since the time of their composition, many evaluations of these two works have taken place; these evaluations have focused on the texts them‐ selves, and at times on their role in the formulation of other studies. How‐ ever, the evaluation of these two works in the present study is more con‐ cerned with specifically identifying and revising their position on Shi‘ite A Comparative Analysis of T. Nöldeke and I. Goldziher 37 interpretation by applying a comparative perspective, although their influ‐ ence on major lines in Western studies, especially in the field of Western interpretation, has not been overlooked by the authors. The History of the Qur’an (Nöldeke and Interpretation) The History of the Qur’an by Theodor Nöldeke is one of the most important works in Quranic research. A number of Quranic scholars from the West contributed to the preparation and publication of this book. It was first published in Latin as the PhD thesis of the author (1856). The German translation was published in 1860 in Gottingen. The publisher asked the author to rewrite the book using knowledge and research that had since come to light. This was carried out by Nöldeke’s student, Friedrich Shelley, who edited the book during the years between 1898 and 1938. He re‐ viewed two volumes of the work under the supervision of Nöldeke, which were published in 1909 and 1919. But Shelley died shortly before the pub‐ lication of the second volume and so its publication was finalized by Hein‐ rich Tessimran. Revision and publication of the third volume was complet‐ ed in 1938 with the joint collaboration of Gotthold Bergstraßer and Otto Patterel. The titles of the three volumes of the History of the Qur’an are re‐ spectively: Part 1: On the Origin of the Qur’an; Part 2: Compilation of the Qur’an; and Part 3: The History of the Text of the Quran. Nöldeke’s book developed around one hundred and fifty years ago when research resources were very scarce and were mostly in manuscript form. Perhaps this is one of the fundamental limitations in his study of the Quran, especially in the context of the sources of interpretation, and in par‐ ticular Shi‘ite interpretation. Such shortcomings must be considered when criticizing the text. However, since Nöldeke’s influence and precedence on Islamic and Quranic studies in the West have been so great, the importance of recognizing and critically assessing this background is of particular im‐ portance to us. The Shi‘ite Interpretation of Quranic History In the annexes to the second volume on the history of the Quran, Nöldeke 38 Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ (Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019) discusses interpretation and Shi‘ite interpretation in particular. He consid‐ ers the oldest Shi‘ite interpretation of the Quran to be that of Imam Mu‐ hammad Baqir (pbuh) and also refers to interpretations such as those of Ali ibn Ibrahim Qumı̄ and of Sa i Fayḍ ‐i Kā s̲ h̲ā nı̄, as well as leading a discussion about paraphrasing a number of Quranic verses about the Ahl al‐Bayt. Nöldeke's view of the Quran is not against the Revelation5 but he studied the analytical, rational, and linguistic context of the text and demonstrated the linguistic features of the body of the Quran. He notes some of the lin‐ guistic phenomena that, in his opinion, conflict with the definitive rules of language, according to his acquaintance with other Semitic languages (He‐ brew, Syriac, Amharic and South Arabian dialects). Most of Nöldeke’s ef‐ forts regarding the nature of Islamic interpretation revolve around the po‐ sition of the causes of Revelation in the interpretations and constructive work of Muslim scholars. Nöldeke noted a number of basic problems in Islamic interpretation of the Quran: 1) Mistakes regarding the causes of Revelation; 2) Disregarding the reason for the use of vocabulary based on the text and what it necessi‐ tates; 3) Mistakes in identifying the common reason has made it ineffective to refer each verse to an event in the present time.6 Nöldeke considered Western efforts to understand the true interpreta‐ tion of the Quran inadequate, since some of these interpretative studies came under prophetic biography and the rest could be grouped as interpre‐ tations of the Quran for the general purpose of providing an introduction and context. The introduction and commentaries at the beginning of the translation of the Quran resulted in an historical awareness and impartiali‐ ty of judgment that academics at the present time still make use of. Over time, however, even this brief commentary has come to be removed from the introduction to translations. He found flaws in independent works that affected the understanding of subsequent scholars. For instance, the work of Friedrich Ruckert, although an independent work in understanding the Quran, is considered inade‐ quate, due to its reliance on tradition for arriving at the lexical meaning of the text, a failing which other scholars succumbed to in the course of their work. A Comparative Analysis of T. Nöldeke and I. Goldziher 39 Nöldeke’s discussions of Shi‘ite interpretations can be divided into two broad categories: first, the issues that somehow concern the question of the Imamate and the Shi‘ite conception of it. These issues have led to specific views about its presentation in the Quran or its removal from it. Nöldeke also referred to the issue of the ‘Muṣḥaf Ali’ in Shi‘i commentaries and be‐ liefs. Among the changes in the Quran, he mentioned the removal of Imam Ali’s (pbuh) name from some verses of the Quran which pointed to the su‐ periority of the personality of Ali (pbuh) and his children in society.7 Nöldeke then added in criticism of Shi‘ite interpretation: ‘Verses, in which the anṣār, Muhammad’s old Medinan followers, and the muhājirūn, i.e. the Companions who emigrated with the Prophet to Yathrib, were accused of disgraceful treatment, were allegedly deleted. But since the crime of these men consisted of refusing to vote for Ali in the election of the first caliph, the Prophet would have reproved his most trusted followers for an action that did not occur until after his death, and could not possibly have entered the ken of the parties concerned. … The notion of Ali’s and his descendants’ sole title to the caliphate … crystallized only quite some time after Ali’s death. Furthermore, the Shi‘ite deification of Ali sprung up on Iranian soil.’.8 Nöldeke mentions the claim that the compilation of the Quran was car‐ ried out by Ali during the lifetime of the Prophet, and the alternative belief that it was done after the Prophet’s passing away in order to withdraw this honor from others.9 Therefore, Ali decided to write the Quran from memory and he did this in three days. Nöldeke refers this last statement to Kitāb al‐Fihrist, Flügel, p. 28, and adds, ‘The content of these reports con‐ tradicts all sound facts of history’. He says that it is probable that there ex‐ isted some unpublished versions of the Quran apart from the one written and compiled by Abū Bakr, but to say that Ali compiled the Quran seems unlikely or impossible, and the narrations which state that he did so after the Prophet are misrepresentations by the Shi‘ites.10 Schools of Quranic Commentators (Goldziher and Interpretation) The late nineteenth century saw the arrival of Ignác Goldziher, the scholar who is generally considered to be the founder of the field of Islamic studies. 40 Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ (Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019) Earlier, as a young man in his twenties, he published a few papers on the issue of Shi‘ite Islam. The unavailability of Shi‘ite texts had made this task difficult. In his Introduction to Islamic Theology and Law, Goldziher talked about various aspects of Shi‘ism, intrinsically and in relation to Sunni Islam. His insights in his articles on the different Islamic communities have passed the test of time and even today these are regarded as standard reference articles. The field of Shi‘ite studies was generally disregarded until the twentieth‐century, when it began to gain ground with Shi‘ite apologetics on the one hand and more specialized studies of Shi‘ite groups such as Zaydis on the other. The significant figures in this regard are Louis Massignon, who saw a similarity between Catholicism and the Shi‘ite tradition, and Ru‐ dolf Strothmann, who was fascinated by Shi‘ite literature and texts. Apart from these and the famous work of Donaldson, Shi‘ite Religion, there was no comprehensive study of Shi‘ism available until the mid‐1950s. Goldziher is renowned for his several studies on the Islamic sciences. Many of his works in various fields are available, including the following: Vorlesungen über den Islam (Heidelberg, 1910), Abhandlungen zur arabischen Philologie (Leiden, 1896), a German translation of Tawd̲ j̲īh al‐ Nadar al‐ʿIlm al‐athar by al‐Shaykh Tahir al‐Djzari (1898), Streitschrift des Gazali gegen die Batinijja‐Sekte (excerpts from Kitāb Faḍāʾih al‐Bāṭiniyya by al‐Ghazali) (Leiden, 1916), Die Zahiriten (1884), Muhammedischen Studien (1889), an introduction to al‐Tawhid Muhammad ibn Tumart (Algeria, 1903). One of his most notable works is Schools of Koranic Commentators.11 The Arabic translation of the title is not entirely accurate as Goldziher did not study methods of interpretation, but rather analyzed intellectual ap‐ proaches. For the first time in the history of Oriental studies various ap‐ proaches based on the intellectual and political trends current during the lives of the commentators were highlighted.12 His analysis of the Quran and his research methodology were different from those of Nöldeke. Nöldeke examined the text in linguistic terms, whereas Goldziher, in his research on Quran and hadith, relied on the transcribed thoughts of the successors. When discussing Tabarī’s method of interpretation, which is an interpre‐ tive narrative, in which the narration of each verse was compiled out of several narratives (hadith), he declared that Ṭabarī’s Tafsīr was the most A Comparative Analysis of T. Nöldeke and I. Goldziher 41 important interpretative work in the heritage of Islam. By studying the in‐ terpretative methods of the Quran commentators and through writing Die richtungen der islamischen koranauslegung, Goldziher secured a position teaching Quranic sciences and established new levels of knowledge of the Quranic sciences.13 Goldziher considered interpretation to be driven by the needs of the Is‐ lamic communities and in line with their intentions and goals.14 He endeav‐ ored to present and clarify this issue. For example, referring to the differ‐ ence in readings and the dissatisfaction with the Ḳurra, along with the con‐ flict between the scholars of religion and the reception of the Quranic read‐ ings among language scholars, he arrives at the issue of the emergence of interpretation.15 The difference in readings results in differences of inter‐ pretation and in jurisprudence, which is dependent upon the Quranic text and this is bound to raise questions. It is for this reason that Goldziher re‐ garded the onset of interpretation with fear and unease.16 Goldziher used the issue of differences in readings to introduce a sub‐ ject that remains live in Quranic research in the West: the absence of a well‐documented and critical text on the subject of the Quran.17 He speaks of two influential realities in the course of the interpretation of speech: firstly, the absence of a unified text of the Quran and secondly, the presence of different texts with a difference in reading which are influenced by the Arabic language and script.18 Goldziher’s discussion on the differences in readings aims to conclude that these differences have provided a framework for different interpreta‐ tions and the establishment of legal understandings and consequent en‐ forcement of law. By emphasizing the main readings – the revelation, and what has been quoted (i.e. the hadith) – he seeks a canonical text which is to be the basis for interpretation. The first stage in the interpretation of the Quran involves fixing the readings or the original text.19 Here, Goldziher advocates a single meaning, that is, the final meaning of the text which is derived from the authentic text. He does not regard the present text as an accurate representation of the authentic text and considers the belief of the Muslims in the unity of the Quran to be mistaken.20 Furthermore, the inter‐ pretative additions which Goldziher brings up, and which are true with re‐ 42 Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ (Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019) gard to Ibn Mas’ud, discard the text and call attention to the need for its reformation. Although Goldziher sees the interpretative additions or the differences of readings as signs of freedom in reading the Quran, he consid‐ ered them problems which invalidate the text and which need to be ad‐ dressed. Goldziher insists on relating the variety of readings more to the freedom of religion, such as the emergence of jurisprudence schools, and limits the effect of free‐thinking in the early Islamic community in consider‐ ing the evolution of interpretative methods21 – that is, the creation of vari‐ ous jurisprudence schools in Islamic society, while interpretive methods are limited. One of the main themes of Goldziher’s book is the use of Islamic narra‐ tives in interpretation; he regularly pointed to them and their role in the interpretation, provided a detailed discussion about disputes and believed that Muslims required knowledge of the words of the Prophet (pbuh) for interpretation, while he considers this knowledge, without the application of Islamic sciences, thinking and reflection, to be insufficient. In addition, he introduced a criticism to the science of narrations. His criticism centers on the fact that these narrations, like the text itself, have been manipulated by different factions based on various objectives and aspirations.22 Goldziher studied various aspects of interpretation of the Quran and their particular formation,23 analyzing them minutely and from different perspectives. He also took into consideration the age and other affective elements in the formation of orientations for interpretation of the Quran and its continuity. He did not disregard the application of past practices in the present era and gave examples of them. He paid much attention to the details of disagreements in these studies, although it would have been more beneficial if he had provided an overview of the method in question and explained the essentials. He also focused on the fundamentals of differ‐ ent perspectives in interpretive attitudes and analyzed the roots of inter‐ pretive conflicts within single or different variations, and their impact on Muslim lives as well.24 Among the features of Goldziher’s work, it should be pointed out that he does not advocate a certain theory or method in interpretation, but evaluates the characteristics of each approach, and criticizes each method A Comparative Analysis of T. Nöldeke and I. Goldziher 43 through various interpretive trends, rather than passing any personal judgment on them. Since Goldziher was Jewish, many of his examples regard common is‐ sues between Islam and Judaism, and his references to the common inter‐ pretational traditions between religions are more concerned with Jewish traditions.25 For example, Goldziher arrived at the polysemy of the Quran from a discussion of narrative interpretation and presented these topics in a way similar to the interpretation of the Torah. What is more, his focus on the first class of commentators and the quan‐ tity of their number has become an appropriate topic in Quranic studies, especially as regards interpretation, among Western academics. And the role of other religions, especially Judaism, in the formulation of the inter‐ pretation of the Quran, attention to the role of poetry in interpretation, along with research on the critique of the text26 are among the paths which Goldziher laid out for Quranic studies in the West. Conclusion In spite of their shared historical and cultural backgrounds, the study of a common topic and the apparent similarity of their views on it, Nöldeke and Goldziher pointed out different aspects of interpretation and its place in Shi‘ite thought. In the tradition of Islamic studies in the West, both of them can be considered founders of the dynasty of scholars who pay attention to the different communities and religions and their texts. However, certain differences between them mean that Goldziher ranks above Nöldeke. In his review of the composition of interpretation in Shi‘ism, Nöldeke remained firmly within the framework which the sources available to him imposed, and there is no sign of any attempt on his part to go beyond those frameworks by resorting a minimum amount of specula‐ tion. Goldziher’s adaptation of different approaches to understanding the sources enabled him to focus on the diversity of views in Shi‘ite Islam through the classification of Shi‘ite interpretations of the verses of the Quran and by laying out and emphasizing their chronological order. This 44 Pajoohesh-Nameh-ye Tarikh-e Tashayyu‘ (Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2019) different methodology helped Goldziher to achieve greater results from his studies of Shi‘ite interpretation despite the fact that he utilized the same sources as Nöldeke. Works Cited [1] Ahmadvand, Abbas, and Sayyed Kamal Keshik Nevis Razavi, ‘Quranic Studies in the Twentieth Century West; Approaches, Methods and Subjects’, Proceedings of the Inter‐ national Conference on the Quran and Orientalists. International Center for Translation and al‐Mostafa Publications, Qum: 1391, pp. 17‐37. [2] al‐Ansari, Jalal, ‘Waqfāt mā Kitāb al‐ʿadad: Mad̲ h̲ āhib al‐Tafsīr al‐islami’, Resalat al‐ Quran, 15 Dec. 1993, pp. 160‐186. [3] al‐Aqiqi, Najib, al‐Mostashraqoun. Cairo, 1365, vol. 3. [4] Badawi, Abdel Rahman, Mawsūʿa al‐mustashriqīn. Dar al‐‘Ilm li’l‐malain: Beirut, 1993. [5] Goldziher, Ignác, Die Richtungen der Islamischen Koranauslegung. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1920. [6] Hermas, Abd al‐Razzaq b. Esmail, ‘ʿIlm al‐Tafsīr fi Kitābāt al‐Mustashraqīn’, Jame’at Om‐ alqura lel‐Olum al‐Sharia va al‐Loqat al‐Arabia va Adaboha Magazine, V.15.25, October, 2002, pp. 19‐77. [7] Keshik Nevis, Razavi Sayyed Kamal, ‘Methodological Criticism of the Leiden Quran En‐ cyclopedia, with Reliance on Allameh Ṭabāṭabāʾī and Sheikh Shanqiti’s Interpretation’, Masters of Arts Dissertation, Zanjan University, 2012. [8] Nöldeke, Theodor, The History of the Qur’an, Edited and translated by Wolfgang H. Behn. Leiden–Boston: E. J. Brill, 2013. [9] al‐Refaei, Abd al‐Jabbar, ‘Malamih min ruyat al‐mustashriqin li’l‐quran’, Resalat al‐ Quran, 11 Jan. 1993, pp. 181‐192. [10] Al‐Saqir, Mohammad Ali, al‐Mustashriqun wa‐dirasat al‐qurania. Al‐Moassesah al‐ Jamei’ah le‐darsat va al‐nashr, 1986. [11] Ṭabāṭabāʾī, Mohammad Hossein, Criticism of Orientalists’ Works. Chapakhsh, Tehran, 1996. [12] Zamani, Mohammad Hasan, ‘Criticism on the Quran Encyclopedia, Leiden’, Philosophi‐ cal Studies, autumn and winter 2004. A Comparative Analysis of T. Nöldeke and I. Goldziher Notes 1 . Ahmadvand and Razavi, 1/37. 2 . Al‐Saqir, 27; Abbas, 181. 3 . Keshik Nevis, 55. 4 . al‐Ansari, 175; Ṭabāṭabāʾī, 61; Badawi, 197; Hermas, 84. 5 . Nöldeke, 358. 6 . see Nöldeke, 471‐ 505. 7 . Nöldeke, 288. 8 . Nöldeke, 288‐289. 9 . Nöldeke, 327‐331. 10 . Nöldeke, 234. 11 . al‐Aqiqi, 3/907; Badawi, 201. 12 . Badawi, 198. 13 . Zamani, 75. 14 . Goldziher, 149. 15 . ibid., 48. 16 . ibid., 280. 17 . ibid., 91. 18 . ibid., 32. 19 . ibid., 56. 20 . ibid., 73. 21 . ibid., 112. 22 . ibid., 81. 23 . ibid., 88. 24 . ibid., 115. 25 . ibid., 135. 26 . al‐Refaei, 190. 45