This article presents a description and analysis of a Persian translation and commentary of the Qurʾān, entitled Tafsīr-i munīr, by Abū Naṣr al-Ḥaddādī (d. after 400/1009), the earliest exegetical work in Persian whose author can be identified. A manuscript of this multivolume work housed in the Topkapı Palace Museum of Istanbul offers an important historical testament to the calligraphic development of Persian exegetical writing and the manners in which scholars and authorities sought creative ways to visually balance the sacred Arabic text of the Qurʾān with vernacular exegetic material. The manuscript also reveals a good deal about Qurʾānic book art, as well as the development of Persian commentaries and translations, thus offering further insight into the history of the Qurʾān across the frontiers of Central Asia and Khurasan.
KayaEyyup SaidBearmanPeriPetersRudolphVogelFrankContinuity and Change in Islamic Law: The Concept of Madhhab and the Dimensions of Legal Disagreement in Hanafī Scholarship of the Tenth CenturyThe Islamic School of Law: Evolution Devolution and Progress2005Cambridge, MAHarvard University Press2640
SefercioğluNejatİhsanoğluEkmeleddinWorld Bibliography of Translations of the Holy Qurʾan in Manuscript Form. Vol 1. Turkish Persian and Urdu Translations Excluded2000IstanbulResearch Center for Islamic History, Art and Culture
SezginFuatgas = Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums1967-2010LeidenE.J. Brill and Frankfurt am Main: Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften an der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität15 vols.
VersteeghCornelis Henricus Maria (Kees)Boekhoff-Van Der VoortNicoletThe Name of the Ant and the Call to Holy War: Al-Ḍaḥḥāk b. Muzāḥim’s Commentary on the QurʾānThe Transmission and Dynamics of Textual Sources of Islam Essays in Honour of Harald Motzki2011LeidenBrill279300
ZadehTravisKeshavarzFatemehKaramustafaAhmetPersian Translations and Commentaries on the QorʾanPersian Religious and Mystical Literature Vol. 6 of A History of Persian LiteratureforthcomingLondonI.B. TaurisEhsan Yarshater 16 vols.
See ToorawaIbn Abī Ṭāhir Ṭayfūr57. Pedersen references instances in which warrāqs hired slaves for copying books The Arabic Book 46; Déroche also mentions cases in which some copyists were slaves Copier des manuscrits 138; Déroche et al. Islamic Codicology 191.
See ḤaddādīMadkhal51 107. Dāwūdī edited the untitled and anonymous fragment that precedes the Madkhal in the Chester Beatty ms 3883 (fols. 228b-44a) and published it as the Muwaḍḍiḥ of Ḥaddādī. However this ascription has been convincingly rejected by Iṣlāḥī A-hādhā; see also Ḥāʾirī Yaftahā-yi digārī 117-8.
ḤaddādīTafsīr-i munīr193. For other transmissions of Abū Ṣaliḥ via Kalbī see ibid. 39 (Q 19:22) 381 (Q 24:47) the last citation giving the following form “Kalbī guft ka Bū Ṣāliḥ guft ka Ibn ʿAbbās guft . . . ” Compare this with the citation of Abū Ṣāliḥ’s transmission of Ibn ʿAbbās with no mention of Kalbī ibid. 219 (Q 21:100). On Abū Ṣāliḥ Bādhān (or Bādhām) see Ibn Saʿd (d. 230/845) Ṭabaqātviii 413 §3179 Ibn Abī Ḥātim (d. 327/938) Jarḥii 431-2 §1716; Mizzī (d. 742/1341) Tahdhībiv 6-8 §636.
BosworthGhaznavids129-30. Compare this to the famed comments by Bīrūnī (d. 440/1048) who notes that while Maḥmūd of Ghazna i (r. 388-421/998-1030) loathed Arabic he recognized its importance for science and learning Kitāb al-Ṣaydana 14.