Learning Etiquette History in an Age of Confessional Ambiguity: Two Islamic Learning Treatises?

Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 © Ali Moughania, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Columbia University in the City of New York, USA ISSN 0806-198X DOI 10.5617/jais.12442 Learning Etiquette History in an Age of Confessional Ambiguity: Two Islamic Learning Treatises? ALI MOUGHANIA (Columbia University, New York) Abstract The evident similarity between the learning etiquette treatises ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn by (pseudo) Naṣīr alDīn al-Ṭūsī (597-672 /1201-1274) and Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim by Burhān al-Islām al-Zarnūjī (fl. between 576/1180 and ca 640/1242) raises the questions of what distinguishes the two treatises and how divergences between them function. Close reading of the notable interventions that (Ps.) al-Ṭūsī’s ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn represents allows for modeling them as serving the formation of a Muslim learner who is not specifically Sunnī, even if not particularly Shīʿī either. The analysis sheds light on the role of intellectual borrowing and its place in the midst of confessional ambiguity. Key words: History of ethics • learning • ḥawzah • madrasah • philosophy of law Introduction Contemporary relevance of a medieval treatise Within the traditional circles of learning in the ḥawzah ʿilmiyyah of Najaf, Iraq, the descriptor ‘al-Ṭūsī’ refers most readily either to shaykh al-ṭāʾifah (the head of the religious community), Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Ṭūsī (d. 460/1067), who is buried in the vicinity of Imām ʿAlī’s shrine and is greatly responsible for establishing Najaf’s lasting legacy as a central hub of the ḥawzah (ḥawza / howzeh) community; or to Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī (597–672/1201–1274), the renowned polymath whose Tajrīd al-iʿtiqād continues to be a key text for philosophical and Ali Moughania • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 90 theological study and commentary in the ḥawzah curriculum. Many beginners in the ḥawzah, however, are introduced—in one way or another—to the latter al-Ṭūsī through a treatise famously attributed to him, summarizing the proper etiquette of learners, called ʾĀdāb almutaʿallimīn. The contemporary relevance of this treatise becomes apparent upon consideration of the context in which the treatise’s ideas continue to circulate—within the so-called al-ḥawzah al-ʿilmiyyah community. Linguistically, ḥawzah can refer to a ‘region/area/side’ (nāḥiyah) and is etymologically related to the notion of ‘collecting/acquiring/accumulating’ (ḥawz). The ḥawzah associated with knowledge/study/learning (ʿilm) is ‘al-ḥawzah al-ʿilmiyyah’. While this phrase has taken on a terminological coinage in the contemporary (albeit relatively traditional) Islamic learning circles and seminaries of Qom, Najaf, Karbala, and other Twelver Shīʿī Muslim hubs of study, the phrase ‘ḥawzah [of the Muslims]’ (the learned among them being the most obvious examples) appears in some of the earliest Muslim supplication literature. For instance, in a prayer for Muslim frontiersmen, attributed to the Imam ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn (d. 95/713), one asks God to, “guard their ḥawzah.” 1 In an earlier letter to Muʿāwiya (d. 60/680), his grandfather, the Imam ʿAlī b. ʾAbī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), reportedly wrote about fending for God’s religion/law and/or the person and standing of the Prophet Muḥammad (d. 11/632), using the phrase, “and so God willed it for us to defend his ḥawzah.” 2 When it comes to the contemporary coinage for Twelver Shīʿī centers of learning, although the discussions of recent technical definition attempts are informative, the following description (not a strict definition, but a description informed by this author’s ethnographic insight) 3 arguably better captures the range of references to the term ḥawzah among contemporary Twelver Shīʿī Muslims pursuing traditional religious learning: The ḥawzah is a center of knowledge in the traditional Islamic context, a hub for seeking sacred learning that is meant not only to engage the intellect but cultivate the character of its community members. Al-ḥawzah al-ʿilmiyyah is often translated as an Islamic ‘seminary’ of sorts, but it is perhaps more accurately described as a scholarly community of masters and seekers of knowledge, in which membership and rank depend on both scholarly merit as well as upright character, including the observance of traditional etiquette. When used to refer to such a collective network worldwide, the so-called al-ḥawzah al-ʿilmiyyah community has concentrated hubs of intellectual activity centered around historical holy sites, most notably the shrine of Imām ʿAlī in the holy city of Najaf, Iraq, and the shrine of Lady Fāṭimah Maʿṣūmah (d. 201/ 816) in the holy city of Qom, Iran. Membership within that broader community would depend more on observing its leading scholars’ widely accepted approaches and norms than on studying at a particular location. But the term ḥawzah ʿilmiyyah or plainly ḥawzah 1 ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn ZAYN al-ʿĀBIDĪN al-SAJJĀD, al-Ṣaḥīfah al-Sajjādiyyah al-kāmilah, ed. Muḥammad Bāqir al-ṢADR (d. 1980 CE), Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Aʿlamī lil-Maṭbūʿāt, n.d.: 127. 2 ʿAbd al-Zahrāʾ al-ḤUSAYNĪ al-KHAṬĪB, Maṣādir Nahj al-Balāghah wa-asānīduh, 4th ed., 4 vols., Beirut: Dār al-Zahrāʾ, 1988, iii: 204. 3 I presented the initial sketch of this working definition for the ḥawzah, as I experienced it, at a virtual roundtable discussion for Columbia University’s Sharīʿah Workshop in 2020. A primer with a more thorough treatment is forthcoming. Seyed Masoud NOORI et al., “Roundtable Discussion: The Ḥawzah and the Shariah” (Sharīʿah Workshop, Columbia University in the City of New York; Online, October 22, 2020). Learning Etiquette History • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 91 can also refer to specific locations of learning in particular (i.e. not just the city hubs, but specific institutions within the city), such that there exist a plural ḥawzāt throughout the world, typically wherever there are qualified masters from within the tradition who oversee learning circles, teach traditional texts according to the etiquette/norms of the broader ḥawzah community, and foster an atmosphere of intellectual rigor and spirituality. Members of the ḥawzah community are continuously evaluated by more senior scholars, peers and, potentially, qualified students, on their intellectual achievement and character, and so formal ‘degrees/certificates’ are not traditionally regarded as the final word on any given community member’s credentials as a ḥawzah scholar/student. To some extent, this even applies to written or oral license/authorization (ijāzah) of ijtihād. That is because an individual’s intellectual and ethical performance would continue to be monitored throughout life for any serious lapses of method or character, potentially disqualifying the person from the license/authorization or any other recommendation/endorsement affiliated with the ḥawzah. To sum up a key point here, the word ḥawzah is used to describe: • a specific local institution of traditional Twelver Shīʿī religious learning; • a community of such learning centered around a holy shrine, including but not limited to the former; • and/or the collective global community consisting of the former. 4 The circulation of the treatise which is the subject of this article among the ḥawzah alʿilmiyyah community, thus, makes it part of a global conversation as relevant to the history of ideas as it is to the ongoing (re)formation of Muslim community members. Moreover, learning etiquettes are, at once, the initiatory and sustaining elements of membership in this global community. The next section will also emphasize how this conversation is by no means limited to Shīʿī-specific relevance within Islamic intellectual history. ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn and Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn — attributed to the Shīʿī Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī—exhibits striking similarities relative to Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim by the Sunnī Burhān al-Islām al-Zarnūjī (fl. between 576/1180 and ca. 640/1242). The source-critical remarks below are, thus, merely 4 See Ismāʿīl b. Ḥammād al-JAWHARĪ (d. 393/1003), Tāj al-lughah wa-ṣiḥāḥ al-ʿarabiyyah, ed. Aḥmad ʿAbd al-Ghafūr ʿAṬṬĀR, 4th edn., 6 vols., Cairo: Dār al-ʿIlm li-l-Malāyīn, 1987, iii: 875–6. Also consider section ‘6.3.5. The ḥawzah’ of the EI³ article on ‘Education, General (up to 1500)’ (Sebastian GÜNTHER). For a discussion of technical definitions that have been proposed for al-ḥawzah al-ʿilmiyyah, or just ḥawzah for short, see: ʿAlī Aḥmad al-BAHĀDLĪ, al-Ḥawzah al-ʿilmiyyah fī l-Najaf: maʿālimuhā waḥarakātuhā al-ʾiṣlāḥiyyah, Beirut: Dār al-Zahrāʾ li-l-Ṭibāʿah wa-l-Nashr wa-l-Tawzīʿ, 1993: 86–94; ʿAdnān Farḥān ĀL QĀSIM, Tārīkh al-ḥawzāt al-ʿilmiyyah wa-l-madāris al-dīniyyah ʿinda l-Shīʿah alʾimāmiyyah, 1st edn., 6 vols., Beirut: Sharikat Dār al-Salām, 2016, i: 92–9. An additional four volumes are expected to be published. For more recent statements, consider, for instance: ʿAlī Riḍā al-ʾAʿRĀFĪ et al. (eds.), [Conference Proceedings], in Muʾtamar al-dhikrā al-miʾawiyyah li-iʿādat taʾsīs al-ḥawzah alʿilmiyyah fī Qom, Qom: Wikālat Anbāʾ al-Ḥawzah, May 7-8, 2025, https://ar.hawzahnews.com/photo/ 372945/ روصلاب-رمتؤم-ىركذلا-ةي وئملاةداعإل-سيسأت-ةزوحلا-ةيملعلا-يف-مق ; Muḥammad ʿAlī BAḤR al-ʿULŪM, Ṣafaḥāt min tārīkh al-Ḥawzah (Āl Baḥr al-ʿUlūm), Podcast bi-Tawqīt al-Najaf, interview by Akram alMURAWWIJ, accessed May 22, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVzMaQpe4FI. Ali Moughania • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 92 part of introducing the treatise attributed to al-Ṭūsī, opening up possibilities for further examination by interested researchers. Both texts have been influential in their respective Shīʿī and Sunnī circles of learners, and the latter text in particular has been recognized as a key contribution in the history of Islamic writings dealing with the etiquette of scholars and learners (ʾadab al-ʿālim wa-l-mutaʿallim). 5 The two treatises follow the same outline of about 12 sections, representing their shared content, and which can be approximately reconstructed as follows: Section 1: The Definition and Merit of Knowledge. Section 2: The Intention. Section 3: Choosing the Knowledge [to be studied], the Teacher, and the Study Partner; and Steadfastness. Section 4: Diligence, Persistence and Motivation. Section 5: Initiating [One’s] Studies, the [Course] Load, and the Sequence. Section 6: Relying [on God]. Section 7: The Time of Acquiring [Knowledge]. Section 8: Compassion and Advice. Section 9: Benefitting [in Terms of Knowledge]. Section 10: Piety in the Pursuit of Knowledge. Section 11: Factors Helping with Memorization and Others Leading to Forgetfulness. Section 12: Factors that Invite Sustenance; Prevent Sustenance; Increase Longevity; and Decrease It. Purpose of this study From civilizational demarcations taken for granted when discussing scientific advancements to sectarian boundaries that are assumed to develop in relative isolation, unacknowledged/ underacknowledged intellectual influences continue to have far-reaching consequences on narratives, worldviews, and futures. George Saliba’s work on the Islamic scientific tradition had highlighted problems to resolve, “not only in order to understand the extent to which Islamic science was integral to the science of the Renaissance, but also in order to understand the very nature of the Renaissance science itself.” 6 Devin Stewart had investigated the sources of Munyat al-murīd fī ʾādāb al-mufīd wa-l-mustafīd by the Twelver Shīʿī Zayn alDīn al-ʿĀmilī [al-Shahīd al-Thānī] (d. 965/1558) as one example of a larger phenomenon, “of intellectual borrowing and adaptation across what were often viewed and continue to be 5 For instance, consider Sebastian GÜNTHER, ‘“Your educational achievements shall not stop your efforts to seek beyond’: principles of teaching and learning in classical Arabic writings”, in Mujadad ZAMAN and Nadeem A. MEMON (eds.), Philosophies of Islamic Education, New York: Routledge, 2016: 72–93. 6 George SALIBA, Islamic Science and the Making of the European Renaissance, Cambridge/Massachusetts and London/England: MIT Press, 2007 (Transformations: Studies in the History of Science and Technology), 20-22, 193-196; George SALIBA, “Whose Science Was Arabic Science in Renaissance France?”, 1999, https://www.columbia.edu/~gas1/project/visions/case1/sci.1.html. Learning Etiquette History • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 93 viewed, as rigid sectarian boundaries.” 7 With a slightly different analytical purpose, the present study examines the function of interventions in another set of learning etiquette manuals––the treatise ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn relative to the work Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim. I highlight the subtle interventions that ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn represents and interpret them as serving the formation of a distinct type of learner (that is, different than the one likely envisioned by the author of Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim). Meaning of ‘ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn’ The title of the treatise, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, speaks to the content of the treatise as a collection of prescriptions for the conduct and comportment of learners. The singular form of ʾādāb, ʾadab, has been defined as ‘the good form that a valid action should take shape as— whether it be in matters of religion or in matters relevant to reasonable individuals [more broadly] in their collective […]’. 8 This is related to but to be distinguished from ʾakhlāq (sing. khuluq), which can be thought of as ‘steadfast, active conditions (malakāt) of the soul, in the garb of which one drapes oneself’. 9 In other words, while the ʾādāb characterize the prescriptible form actions take, and are typically driven into action by ʾakhlāq, ʾakhlāq describe the stable character traits according to which a person bears oneself well/badly toward feelings. With some reservation (as expected even when ‘translating’ within the same ‘language’), then, one might translate ʾādāb as ‘etiquette(s)’ and ʾakhlāq as ‘ethics’ or ‘virtues/vices’. Thus, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn is rendered The Etiquette of Learners. As the contemporary ḥawzah scholar Muḥammad Riḍā al-Jalālī, who published an annotated edition of the treatise, recounts, 7 Devin STEWART, “Notes on Zayn al-Dīn al-ʿĀmilī’s Munyat al-murīd fī ādāb al-mufīd wa-l-mustafīd”, Journal of Islamic Studies, 21.2 (2010): 235–70, 235. 8 Muḥammad Ḥusayn al-ṬABĀṬABĀʾĪ (d. 1402/1981), Sunan al-Nabī (ṣ), ed. Muḥammad Hādī al-FIQHĪ, 3rd ed., Qom: Muʾassasat al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1427 AH: 35-36: عورشملا لعفلا ]اـ[ـهيلع عقي نأ يغبني يتلا ةنسحلا ةئيهلا ف ءالقعلا دنع وأ نيدلا يف امإ ي مهعمتجم al-hayʾatu l-ḥasanatu llatī yanbaghī ʾan yaqaʿa ʿalayh[ā] l-fiʿlu l-mashrūʿu ʾimmā fī l-dīni ʾaw ʿinda l-ʿuqalāʾi fī mujtamaʿihim […] – I make reference to this definition by a notable inheritor of the Islamic tradition for the purpose of approximating a synthesized reception recognized as belonging to the tradition being studied, on the one hand, and, on the other, to specify the particular sense of the term understood in this context. That being said, relevant studies exploring the conception of ʾadab in the Islamic tradition include: Ira M. LAPIDUS, “Knowledge, virtue, and action: the classical Muslim conception of ʾadab and the nature of religious fulfillment in Islam,” in Barbara D. METCALF (ed.), Moral Conduct and Authority: The Place of Adab in South Asian Islam, London: University of California Press, 1984: 38-61; and more recently: Rüdiger SEESEMANN, “ʿIlm and Adab Revisited: Knowledge Transmission and Character Formation in Islamic Africa,” in Michael KEMPER and Ralf ELGER (eds.), The Piety of Learning: Islamic Studies in Honor of Stefan Reichmuth, Leiden: Brill, 2017: 15–37, https:// doi.org/10.1163/9789004349841_003; Luca PATRIZI, “The metaphor of the divine banquet and the origin of the notion of adab,” in Sebastian GÜNTHER (ed.), Knowledge and Education in Classical Islam: Religious Learning between Continuity and Change, 2 vols., Leiden: Brill, 2020, https://brill.com/ edcollbook/title/56045. A future study would compare the contemporary, tradition “inheritor,” reception of learner ʾadab works (the approach I have opted for in referencing al-Ṭabāṭabāʾī above) with a comprehensive historical survey of learner ʾadab reception in light of insights offered by the studies cited here. 9 al-ṬABĀṬABĀʾĪ, Sunan al-Nabī (ṣ), 36: سوفنلا اهب سبلتت يتلا ةيحورلا ةخسارلا تاكلملا يه قالخألا al-ʾakhlāqu hiya l-malakātu l-rāsikhatu l-rūḥiyyatu llatī tatalabbasu bihā l-nufūs. Ali Moughania • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 94 The scholars have extended extensive care to this book. For they emphasize [the importance of] studying it, reading it, and attempting to apply it and act on it. Moreover, in our days of seeking [knowledge], we used to hear the grand shaykhs repeat sentences from its phrases, citing its text as evidence. Perhaps the clearest reason for choosing it and emphasizing it [in particular] is the brevity of its main text and the clarity of its prose, making it easier to understand and memorize for the beginner, in addition to its comprehensive and exhaustive treatment of the most important givens and the necessities of proper education/discipline. 10 Background on the attribution of ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn Al-Jalālī further cites the preponderance of manuscripts and early print editions of the treatise, its inclusion in educational collections, and its translations and commentaries, as evidence for the influence and circulation of this treatise. 11 Why this treatise, specifically, gained so much traction is likely due in part to the very same reason it is believed to be authored by Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī—in all versions, it is attributed to none other than him. 12 Complicating the attribution to al-Ṭūsī, however, is the evident similarity between the text of ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn and the treatise Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim 13 attributed to Burhān alIslām al-Zarnūjī 14 (fl. between 576/1180 15 and ca. 640/1242 16 ). The basic outline of the two 10 Naṣīr al-Dīn al-ṬŪSĪ (d. 672/1274), ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, ed. Muḥammad Riḍā al-JALĀLĪ, Shīrāz: Intishārāt-i Kitābkhāna-i Madrasa-i ʿIlmiyyah-i Imām-i ʿAṣr, 1416AH: 17–18. (Translations from Arabic are my own throughout.) 11 Al-ṬŪSĪ, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, 18–19. 12 Ibid., 20. 13 Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim attracted the attention of Gustave Edmund VON GRUNEBAUM and Theodora Mead ABEL who introduced and published a translation of it into English in 1947. See Burhān al-Dīn ZARNŪJĪ, Instruction of the Student, transl. Gustave Edmund VON GRUNEBAUM, New York: King’s Crown Press, 1947. For a review of relevant literature on al-Zarnūjī’s treatise, see MOCHTAR AFANDI, The method of Muslim learning as illustrated in al-Zarnuji’s “Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim ṭarīq al-taʿallum”, thesis, Montreal: McGill University, 1993. 14 Apparently in association with ‘Zurnūj’, which YĀQŪT al-Ḥamawī (d. 626/1229) describes as ‘a famous town of Transoxiana […]’. In his abridged and edited version of Yāqūt’s Muʿjam al-buldān, however, ʿAbd al-Muʾmin al-Baghdādī (d. 739/ 1338) appears to list the pronunciation as, ‘Zarnūj’. See: YĀQŪT b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥamawī, Muʿjam al-buldān, Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, 5 vols., 1979), iii: 139; ʿAbd al-Muʾmin b. ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq al-BAGHDĀDĪ, Marāṣid al-iṭṭilāʿ ʿalā ʾasmāʾ al-ʾamkinah wa-l-biqāʿ, ed. ʿAlī Muḥammad al-BAJĀWĪ; Beirut: Dār al-Jīl, 3 vols., 1992, ii: 664. 15 Al-Zarnūjī indicates that he heard poetry recited by Ḥammād b. Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl al-Ṣaffārī al-Anṣārī (d. 576/1180), implying that al-Zarnūjī had likely begun his studies prior to Ḥammād’s death in 576 AH. See: Burhān al-Islām al-ZARNŪJĪ, Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim, ed. Ṣalāḥ Muḥammad al-KHAYMĪ and Nadhīr ḤAMDĀN; Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr, 3rd edn., 2014: 41–2; ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Qurashī al-ḤANAFĪ (d. 775/1373), al-Jawāhir al-muḍiyyah fī ṭabaqāt al-Ḥanafiyyah, Karachi: Mīr Muḥammad Kutub Khāna, 2 vols., n.d., i: 224. 16 ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Qurashī al-Ḥanafī mentions that this al-Zarnūjī is a contemporary of al-Nuʿmān b. Ibrāhīm al-Zarnūjī, who is said to have died in 640 AH. See: al-ḤANAFĪ, al-Jawāhir al-Muḍiyyah, ii: 312; Riyāḍ Zādeh al-ḤANAFĪ (d. 1078/1667), Asmāʾ al-kutub al-mutammim li-Kashf al-Ẓunūn, ed. Muḥammad al-TŪNJĪ, Damascus: Dār al-Fikr, 3rd edn., 1983: 301. Learning Etiquette History • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 95 treatises and many of their phrases throughout are notably similar. 17 Al-Jalālī argues, contrary to Muḥammad Taqī Dānish-Pazhūh (d. 1996), that ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn sufficiently differs in its examples and brevity to arguably warrant its reception as an independent text. 18 If one is to maintain the attribution of ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn to al-Ṭūsī then it would be reasonable to assume that al-Ṭūsī was referring to Taʾlīm al-mutaʿallim while writing ʾĀdāb almutaʿallimīn or that both treatises drew on an earlier work which did not survive in its original form. Conversely, the possibility that the briefer text was actually the original, which might have been elaborated on and then later attributed to al-Zarnūjī as Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim, is less likely given that one would seldom anticipate motivation to falsely attribute a text to a less prominent figure (assuming the purpose of false attribution is to increase circulation by association with the said figure). While al-Jalālī presents a convincing case attributing ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn to al-Ṭūsī, especially given that it has not been attributed to anyone besides al-Ṭūsī, it is difficult to dismiss how the celebrated scholar of the stars supposedly described ‘knowledge of the stars’ as analogous to disease in ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn. ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn appears merely to summarize Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim on this, stating, ‘Knowledge of the stars is analogous to illness—learning it is forbidden. [It is forbidden] because it causes harm and does not cause benefit. [That is] except the extent to [which such knowledge is needed] to identify the qibla [direction of ritual prayer], the times of prayer and other things—for, indeed, that is not forbidden.’ 19 It may be argued that al-Ṭūsī used such drastic language, followed by the exception, in order to keep beginners from being distracted away from their core curriculum with knowledge outside of their specialization or from having a spiritually harmful connection to astrology. While this is possible, it is far-fetched. For the fact that al-Ṭūsī was publicly associated with knowledge related to the stars, and his being sought after for it, is not readily reconcilable with such restrictive language about it. One would have expected alṬūsī to modify the statement or to qualify it by clarifying when, beyond strict necessity, a scholar would explore knowledge of the stars. If it were known for a fact that the treatise is the work of al-Ṭūsī, then there would be a reason to seek to justify the uncompromising statement. But since the attribution of the work to him is founded on the accumulation of clues and an assessment of likelihood, the said statement arguably serves to distance al-Ṭūsī from the treatise. Regardless of the author’s personal identity, the present concern pertains to examining the moves made in ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn relative to Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim and seeking insight into the type of learner-forming project al-Ṭūsī (or pseudo-al-Ṭūsī) invested in by making such interventions. 17 For a description of the ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn treatise’s contents, see: Maryam MOAZZEN, ‘Shīʿī higher learning in the pre-Safavid period: scholars, educational ideals, practices, and curricula’ in Sebastian GÜNTHER (ed.), Knowledge and Education in Classical Islam, ii: 829–35. 18 al-ṬŪSĪ, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, 21. 19 al-ṬŪSĪ, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, 61: دَق ّالإ ،ُعفني الو رضي هَنأل مارح هملعتف ،ضرملا ةلزنمب موجنلا ُملعَو َر ُي امع ُةل بِ قلا هب ُفَر مارحب سيل هّنإف ،كلذ ريغو ةالصلا ُتاقوأو wa-ʿilmu l-nujūmi bi-manzilati l-maraḍ, fa-taʿallumuhu ḥarāmun liʾannahu yaḍurru wa-lā yanfaʿu, ʾillā qadra mā yuʿrafu bihi l-qiblatu wa-ʾawqātu l-ṣalāti wa-ghayru dhālik, fa-ʾinnahu laysa bi-ḥarāmin. Ali Moughania • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 96 Analyzing notable differences between the two treatises Upon a systematic close reading of the two treatises, the following observations appear to be representative of the divergences present. While most of the observations I make note of can be better explained by the interpretive model I propose later here, there are expectedly some observations that can be explained by additional models. For the latter, I offer analytical remarks that, pending future studies, may warrant a complementing interpretive model. On brevity The most notable difference is the brevity of al-Ṭūsī’s treatise—a brevity he declares is intentional at the beginning of the document 20 and which is also an indication that he was likely referring to al-Zarnūjī’s slightly more elaborate treatise (if not some earlier shared reference) while writing his own. For example, after noting that the Prophet prescribed the pursuit of knowledge as an obligation for every Muslim, male or female, the two authors qualify this by explaining that only seeking knowledge required to address one’s (immediate) state (al-ḥāl) is an obligation, but al-Zarnūjī elaborates by providing examples while al-Ṭūsī does not. 21 This intervention may be interpreted in at least two ways: Firstly, by al-Ṭūsī’s day, the scope of obligatory learning had already been consolidated/clarified and the point could simply be summarily made without need for examples. Secondly, elaboration with examples would be left to the instructor’s discretion as s/he explained the brief statement for students. The latter consequence would fall in line with a pedagogical choice characteristic of mutūn (sing. matn), which were highly condensed educational texts often made the focus of metatexts that commented and elaborated on them. The instructor’s intervening role would thus be emphasized as that of a companion facilitating the learner’s education, as opposed to enabling the learner to focus on learning from books alone without reference to a living scholarly network. Moreover, examples often include reference to an instructor’s scholarly network or intellectual genealogy, features of which can be invoked iteratively to serve a sectarian learner-formation project. By omitting reference to specific examples citing Sunnī scholars, such as Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan [al-Shaybānī (d. 189/805)], 22 or referring to particular texts, 23 al-Ṭūsī allows the treatise to be appropriated for alternative or otherwise broader learner-formation aims. 20 al-ṬŪSĪ, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, 55: َو ِباّتُكلا يف ُت يأَ ر ام ىلع ،ِراصِت خالا ليبَس ىلع ،ملعتلا َقيرط َنيَبُا نأ ُتدرأف َسم ُتع يلوُا يذيتاسأ نمملعلا fa-ʾaradtu ʾan ʾubayyina ṭarīqa l-taʿallum, ʿalā sabīli l-ikhtiṣār, ʿalā mā raʾaytu fī lkuttābi wa-samiʿtu min ʾasātīdhī ʾūlī l-ʿilm. 21 Ibid., 58. 22 Al-ZARNŪJĪ, Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim, 32. 23 Al-Zarnūjī refers the reader to a book on ethics (al-ʾakhlāq) by ‘the martyr Nāṣir al-Dīn Abū l-Qāsim’, saying that, ‘it is obligatory for every Muslim to memorize it [or preserve it] (ḥifẓuhā)’, while al-Ṭūsī merely asserts the general principle that it is obligatory to seek knowledge required to fulfill one’s religious responsibilities. The ‘Nāṣir al-Dīn Abū l-Qāsim’ that al-Zarnūjī refers to is likely the Ḥanafī jurist Muḥammad b. Yūsuf al-ʿAlawī al-Samarqandī (d. 556/1161), who authored Bayān riyāḍat ʾakhlāq al-nafs (abbreviated to ‘Riyāḍat al-ʾakhlāq’ or ‘al-ʾAkhlāq’; perhaps misread ‘al-ʾaḥqāq’ or ‘al-ʾikhfāq’). Al-Zarnūjī also refers the reader to Abū Ḥanīfa’s (d. 150/767) al-Waṣiyyah, which he wrote to Yūsuf b. Khālid al-Samtī (d. 189/805). Al-ZARNŪJĪ, Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim, 35, 45; al-ṬŪSĪ, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, 60. Learning Etiquette History • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 97 On exceptions to omitting names of authority figures There are, nonetheless, two notable exceptions to this observation. First, both al-Zarnūjī and al-Ṭūsī refer to a ‘Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan’ who would stay up at night in study and when he figured out the answers to intellectual problems, he would exclaim, ‘Where are the children of kings when it comes to these pleasures[!]’. 24 Apparently, this is the same Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan referred to earlier in al-Zarnūjī’s treatise—Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Shaybānī. It is striking that al-Ṭūsī cites this example because al-Shaybānī is a Ḥanafī Sunnī authority, on the one hand, and there are no distinctly Shīʿī authorities referred to in the treatise. Then again, a Shīʿī reader would likely have no immediate reason to assume this ‘Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan’ is al-Shaybānī—he is not mentioned earlier in al-Ṭūsī’s treatise nor is it common to reference al-Shaybānī in such a text written by a Shīʿī author (unless in the context of indicating differences among Islamic legal schools). Moreover, some versions of al-Ṭūsī’s treatise add ‘al-Ṭūsī’ after the name ‘Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan’, implying that the scribe understood the individual being referenced to be shaykh al-ṭāʾifah, the leading Shīʿī authority who passed away in the year 460/1067, or perhaps even the author of the treatise himself, Naṣīr al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Ṭūsī. 25 Regardless of which possibility was intended by al-Ṭūsī, his move can be modeled as one including a reference exclusive to one school of thought only if it is sufficiently ambiguous and/or can be easily appropriated within his own framework for learner-formation. In other words, it is not too important—for al-Ṭūsī’s intervention to function according to this model—who Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan is, and, indeed, there could be more than one. What matters for al-Ṭūsī is that the learner reading this manual anticipates and experiences the enjoyment of intellectual delights available to those who stay up at night to resolve intellectual problems. The second notable exception to al-Ṭūsī’s omission of specific examples pertains to the citation of an influential text related to medicine. At the end of their treatises, both al-Zarnūjī and al-Ṭūsī urge the reader to engage in learning something about medicine and to be blessed ‘by the reports [attributed to the Prophet] about medicine, which have been compiled by Abū al-ʿAbbās al-Mustaghfirī [d. 432/1041] in his Ṭibb al-Nabī [The Prophet’s Medicine]’. 26 AlṬūsī citing a Ḥanafī scholar’s compilation of reports ascribed to the Prophet supports the argument that his treatise is meant to serve beyond sectarian boundaries, on the one hand, and that he is modeling for his readers the ideal of seeking useful knowledge wherever it may originate. Thus, al-Ṭūsī can be read as attempting to strike a balance between his stated purpose of describing a summary of learner etiquette, and his selectivity as it plays out in making his treatise less sectarian while modeling inclusivity toward useful knowledge beyond his own school affiliation. 24 al-ZARNŪJĪ, Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim, 106; al-ṬŪSĪ, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, 110: يلايللا رهس اذإ نسحلا نب دمحم ناك نم كولملا ءانبأ نيأ لوقي تالكشملا هل تلحناو تاذللا هذه kāna Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan ʾidhā sahira l-layālī wanḥallat lahū l-mushkilātu yaqūlu ʾayna ʾabnāʾu l-mulūki min hādhihi l-ladhdhāt. 25 Āghā Buzurg al-ṬIHRĀNĪ, al-Dharīʿa ʾilā taṣānīf al-Shīʿa, 3rd edn, 26 vols., Beirut: Dār al-ʾAḍwāʾ, 1983, i: 27. 26 al-ZARNŪJĪ, Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim, 137–8; al-ṬŪSĪ, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, 149–50: نم اًئيش ملعتي نأ دب الو يبنلا بط ىمسملا هباتك يف يرفغتسملا سابعلا وبأ مامإلا خيشلا اهعمج يتلا بطلا يف ةدراولا راثآلاب كربتي و بطلا wa-lā budda ʾan yataʿallama shayʾan min-a l-ṭibbi wa-yatabarraka bi-l-ʾāthāri l-wāridati fī l-ṭibbi llatī jamaʿahā lshaykhu l-ʾimāmu ʾAbū l-ʿAbbās al-Mustaghfirī fī kitābihi l-musammā Ṭibbu al-Nabī. Ali Moughania • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 104 preceding it: ‘[the learner should seek success and] guidance from God […], for indeed God Almighty guides the one who seeks [His] guidance’, 59 and does not add anything particularly Shīʿī. This indicates that pseudo-al-Ṭūsī was writing the treatise for wide circulation, to be suitable for the formation of learner subjects across sectarian boundaries. In this model for reading the treatise, the author of ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn might as well have been a Sunnī author whose aim was to shape learners into aiming for being among ‘the people of what is right’, but without wishing for those learners to take it as a preconceived notion that one sectarian affiliation or another necessarily entailed that one was or was not among them. The emphasis of this reading is, then, in how the treatise(s) would be anticipated to function in their respective circles of circulation, not so much the actual intent of the authors or their sectarian identity. Conclusion Analyzing the differences between the two treatises illustrates that [pseudo-] al-Ṭūsī’s ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn is invested in the formation of a specialized type of learner who is arguably less impacted by the sectarian identity of scholarly examples and is, rather, concerned with observing the etiquette and cultivating the underlying ethic. This anticipated function is often read in between the lines of omissions, rather than additions. Whether or not al-Ṭūsī consciously intended it (or even wrote the treatise himself) is of little significance once the interventions are convincingly interpreted to have (or likely have) such a function. Just as alZarnūjī’s Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim’s elaborations and examples can have formative functions allowing certain etiquettes to ‘hit home’ in ways that ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn’s brevity lacks, so ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn’s omissions and modifications allow other etiquettes to hit home without being associated with a particular sectarian identity. Among the conclusions to be drawn from this analysis, then, is that we have here an instance of post-Mongol invasion ‘confessional ambiguity,’ not through a display of ʿAlid loyalism (as is arguably prevalent during the Later Middle Period of Islamicate history), but in the apparently deliberate removal of Sunnī-specific references. 60 59 al-ZARNŪJĪ, Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim, 95; al-ṬŪSĪ, ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn, 100: ةيادهلاو قيفوتلا هللا نم بلطيو ، اه ىلاعت هللا نإفهادهتسا نمل د wa-yaṭluba min-a llāhi l-tawfīqa wa-l-hidāyah, fa-inna llāha taʿālā hādin liman-i stahdāh. 60 For a discussion of confessional ambiguity vs. polarization during this period, see: Judith PFEIFFER, ‘Confessional ambiguity vs. confessional polarization: politics and the negotiation of religious boundaries in the Ilkhanate’ in Judith PFEIFFER (ed.), Politics, Patronage and the Transmission of Knowledge in 13th–15th Century Tabriz, Leiden: Brill, 2014), 129–68. Pfeiffer follows John E. Woods in the use of the term ‘confessional ambiguity’ in this context. See John E. WOODS, The Aqquyunlu: Clan, Confederation, Empire, revised and expanded edition, Salt Lake City/UT: University of Utah Press, 1999: 4. – Evaluating the broader narratives of these studies would go beyond the scope of this article, but the present analysis of the ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn treatise can contribute to addressing them in future studies. Learning Etiquette History • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 105 Acknowledgements This article developed out of an independent study project translating and commenting on the ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn treatise, beginning in the Spring of 2016 at Columbia University. I thank Brinkley Messick for his comments during those initial discussions and subsequent engagement. Correspondence with Hossein Modarressi on an earlier draft of this paper also honed its analysis, particularly on the attribution to al-Ṭūsī, for which I am grateful. Sketches of the Ḥawzah description were first presented at Columbia’s Sharīʿa workshop in October 2020. Special gratitude to my professors and colleagues, as well as those unnamed or anonymous, to whom credit is due for these findings in ways that are underacknowledged or unrecognized. Bibliography AFANDI, Mochtar. 1993. “The Method of Muslim Learning as Illustrated in al-Zarnuji’s Ta’lim alMuta’allim Tariq al-Ta’allum.” M.A. thesis, McGill University. ĀL QĀSIM, ʿAdnān Farḥān. 2016. Tārīkh al-ḥawzāt al-ʿilmiyyah wa-l-madāris al-dīniyyah ʿind al-shīʿah al-ʾimāmiyyah. 1st ed., 6 vols. Vol. 1. Beirut: Sharikat Dār al-Salām. Al-ʾAʿRĀFĪ, ʿAlī Riḍā, ʿAlī al-KHĀMINAʾĪ, Jaʿfar al-SUBḤĀNĪ, Nāṣir MAKĀRIM al-SHĪRĀZĪ, ʿAbd Allāh JAWĀDĪ al-ĀMULĪ, et al. May 7-8, 2025. “[Conference Proceedings].” In Muʾtamar al-Dhikrá almiʾawīya li-iʿādat taʾsīs al-ḥawzah al-ʿilmiyyah fī Qom. Qom: Wikālat Anbāʾ al-Ḥawzah. https://ar.hawzahnews.com/photo/372945/ روصلاب-رمتؤم-ىركذلا-ةي وئملا-ةداعإل-سيسأتةزوحلا-ةيملعلا-يف-مق . al-BAHĀDLĪ, ʿAlī Aḥmad. 1993. Al-Ḥawzah al-ʿilmiyyah fī l-Najaf: maʿālimuhā wa-ḥarakatuhā alʾiṣlāḥiyyah. 1st ed. Beirut: Dār al-Zahrāʾ lil-ṭibāʿah wa-l-nashr wa-l-tawzīʿ. BAḤR al-ʿULŪM, Muḥammad ʿAlī. 2025. Ṣafaḥāt min tārīkh al-ḥawzah (Āl Baḥr al-ʿUlūm) | Podcast bitawqīt al-Najaf. Interview by Akram al-MURAWWIJ. Accessed May 22, 2025. https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=hVzMaQpe4FI. EI³ = Encyclopædia of Islam, THREE, edited by Kate FLEET, Gudrun KRÄMER, Denis MATRINGE, John NAWAS, and E. ROWSON. Leiden: Brill, 2017. GÜNTHER, Sebastian. 2016. “‘Your Educational Achievements Shall Not Stop Your Efforts to Seek Beyond’ Principles of Teaching and Learning in Classical Arabic Writings.” In ZAMAN & MEMON (eds.) 2016: 72–93. — . 2017. “Education, General (up to 1500).” In EI³. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/1573-3912_ei3_ COM_26134. — (ed.). 2020. Knowledge and Education in Classical Islam: Religious Learning between Continuity and Change. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill. al-ḤANAFĪ (d. 1078/1667), Riyāḍ Zādeh. Asmāʾ al-kutub al-mutammim li-Kashf al-Ẓunūn. Edited by Muḥammad al-Tūnjī. 3rd ed. Damascus: Dār al-Fikr, 1983. al-ḤUSAYNĪ al-KHAṬĪB, ʿAbd al-Zahrāʾ. Maṣādir Nahj al-Balāghah wa-ʾasānīduh. 4th ed., 4 vols. Beirut: Dār al-Zahrāʾ, 1988. IBN ʿABD AL-ḤAQQ al-Baghdādī (d. 739/1338), ʿAbd al-Muʾmin. Marāṣid al-iṭṭilāʿ ʿalā ʾasmāʾ alʾamkinah wa-l-biqāʿ. Edited by ʿAlī Muḥammad al-BAJĀWĪ. 3 vols. Vol. 2. Beirut: Dār al-Jīl, 1992. Ali Moughania • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 106 al-JAWHARĪ (d. 393/1003), Ismāʿīl b. Ḥammād. Tāj al-lughah wa-ṣiḥāḥ al-ʿarabiyyah. Edited by Aḥmad ʿAbd al-Ghafūr ʿAṬṬĀR. 4th ed., 6 vols. Vol. 3. Cairo: Dār al-ʿIlm lil-Malāyīn, 1987. KEMPER, Michael, and Ralf ELGER (eds.). 2017. The Piety of Learning: Islamic Studies in Honor of Stefan Reichmuth. Leiden: Brill. (Islamic History and Civilization). LAPIDUS, Ira M. 1984. “Knowledge, Virtue, and Action: The Classical Muslim Conception of Adab and the Nature of Religious Fulfillment in Islam.” In METCALF (ed.) 1984: 38–61. METCALF, Barbara Daly (ed.). 1984. Moral Conduct and Authority: The Place of Adab in South Asian Islam. London: University of California Press, Ltd. MOAZZEN, Maryam. 2020. “Shīʿī Higher Learning in the Pre-Safavid Period: Scholars, Educational Ideals, Practices, and Curricula.” In GÜNTHER (ed.) 2020, ii: 818–46. NOORI, Seyed Masoud, Aun H. ALI, Aria NAKISSA, and Ali MOUGHANIA. 2020. “Roundtable Discussion: The Ḥawzah and the Sharia.” Presented at the Sharīʿah Workshop, Columbia University in the City of New York; Online, October 22, 2020. PATRIZI, Luca. 2020. “The Metaphor of the Divine Banquet and the Origin of the Notion of Adab.” In GÜNTHER (ed.) 2020, i: 516–38. PFEIFFER, Judith. 2014. “Confessional Ambiguity vs. Confessional Polarization: Politics and the Negotiation of Religious Boundaries in the Ilkhanate.” In EAD. (ed.) 2014: 129–68. https://doi.org/ 10.1163/9789004262577_006. — (ed.). 2014. Politics, Patronage and the Transmission of Knowledge in 13th–15th Century Tabriz. (Iran Studies; vol. 8). Leiden: Brill. al-QURASHĪ al-Ḥanafī (d. 775/1373), ʿAbd al-Qādir. Al-Jawāhir al-muḍīyah fī ṭabaqāt al-ḥanafiyyah. 2 vols. Karachi: Mīr Muḥammad Kutub Khānah, n.d. SALIBA, George. 2007. Islamic Science and the Making of the European Renaissance. Transformations: Studies in the History of Science and Technology. Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England: MIT Press. — . 1999. “Whose Science Was Arabic Science in Renaissance France?” https://www.columbia.edu/ ~gas1/project/visions/case1/sci.1.html. SEESEMANN, Rüdiger. 2017. “ʿIlm and Adab Revisited: Knowledge Transmission and Character Formation in Islamic Africa.” In KEMPER & ELGER (eds.) 2017: 15–37. https://doi.org/10.1163/ 9789004349841_003. STEWART, Devin. 2010. “Notes on Zayn al-Dīn al-ʿĀmilī’s Munyat al-murīd fī ʾādāb al-mufīd wa-lmustafīd.” Journal of Islamic Studies, 21.2: 235–70. al-ṬABĀṬABĀʾĪ (d. 1402/1981), Muḥammad Ḥusayn. Sunan al-Nabī (Ṣ). Edited by Muḥammad Hādī al-FIQHĪ. 3rd ed. Qom: Muʾassasat al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1427 AH. al-ṬIHRĀNĪ, Āghā Buzurg. Al-Dharīʿah ʾilā taṣānīf al-shīʿah. 3rd ed., 26 vols. Vol. 1. Beirut: Dār alAḍwāʾ, 1983. al-ṬŪSĪ (d. 672/1274), Naṣīr al-Dīn. ʾĀdāb al-mutaʿallimīn. Edited by Muḥammad Riḍā al-JALĀLĪ. 1st ed. Shīrāz: Intishārāt-i Kitābkhāna-i Madrasa-i ʿIlmiyyah-i Imām-i ʿAṣr, 1416AH. VON GRUNEBAUM, Gustave Edmund (transl.) → ZARNŪJĪ, Burhān al-Dīn. WOODS, John E. 1999. The Aqquyunlu: Clan, Confederation, Empire. Revised and expanded ed. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. YĀQŪT Ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥamawī (d. 626/1229). Muʿjam al-buldān. 5 vols. Vol. 3. Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, 1979. Learning Etiquette History • 25.1 (2025): 89–107 Page | 107 ZAMAN, Mujadad, and Nadeem A. MEMON (eds.). 2016. Philosophies of Islamic Education. New York: Routledge. al-ZARNŪJĪ (d. ca 640/1242), Burhān al-Islām. Taʿlīm al-mutaʿallim. Edited by Ṣalāḥ Muḥammad alKHAYMĪ and Nadhīr ḤAMDĀN. 3rd ed. Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr, 2014. ZARNŪJĪ, Burhān al-Dīn. Instruction of the Student. Translated by Gustave Edmund VON GRUNEBAUM. New York: King’s Crown Press, 1947. ZAYN al-ʿĀBIDĪN al-SAJJĀD (d. 95/713), ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn. Al-Ṣaḥīfah al-Sajjādiyyah al-kāmilah. Edited by Muḥammad Bāqir al-ṢADR. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Aʿlamī lil-Maṭbūʿāt, n.d. © Ali Moughania, Ph.D. Columbia University in the City of New York, USA ◄ [email protected] ►