1 Ashʿarī Theology

One of the most prominent works featured in the Jazzār collection is a creed composed by the North African theologian Muḥammad b. Yūsuf al-Sanūsī (d. 895/1490), from the city of Tlemcen in present-day Algeria.⁷ Sanūsī wrote extensively on theology and logic, specifically from an Ashʿarī perspective.⁸ The inventory features five copies of his short creed al-ʿAqīda al-ṣughra, also known as Umm al-barāhīn (The Mother of Proofs) and al-Sanūsiyya (Sanūsī’s Creed) (#605, #607, #608, #734 and #737). Sanūsī’s succinct creed served as an essential primer on Islamic theology, thus establishing itself as a ‘cornerstone in educational institutions across both the east and west’.⁹ Not only does the Jazzār library feature five copies of the base text, but it also boasts four commentaries on the work (#606, #616, #641 and #738) and one epitome (#735), making it one of the most heavily represented works in the collection. While Sanūsī famously composed versions of his creed in different lengths and levels of difficulty,¹⁰ only his short creed appears in the Jazzār library. Sanūsī’s creed was widely read in Egypt and North Africa, but the inventory signals that its popularity also extended to the Levant, where options for theological study were more abundant. The Damascene scholar ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī (1050–1143/1641–1731) notes in his account of his travels to Jerusalem that a fellow intellectual luminary by the name of Badrān al-Khalīlī, presumably from Hebron, put Sanūsī’s short creed to verse and asked him to comment on it.¹¹ The same Khalīlī asked Nābulusī, known for his mystical monism and adherence to the controversial doctrine of waḥdat al-wujūd, to comment on key theological problems, such as the faith of Pharaoh, found within such works. Sanūsī’s creed was one entryway into these discussions. As Katip Çelebi notes, the work was popular because it contained all creedal doctrines (jamīʿ ʿaqāʾid al-tawḥīd) that a practicing Muslim was expected to believe in order to rationally verify his faith.¹² Dozens of commentaries were written on the base text,¹³ the inventory listing four such commentaries, without specifying their author. Notably, Sanūsī’s project was to distil his creed into smaller and smaller units, while also elaborating on the creed through commentaries that would serve more advanced students. It is therefore not unlikely, given how predominant his name is on the inventory list,¹⁴ that these entries refer to his own commentaries.

Another entryway into the study of theology was the Egyptian scholar Ibrāhīm al-Laqānī’s (d. 1041/1631) Jawharat al-tawḥīd, a didactic poem which similarly elucidates the main theological doctrines that a believing Muslim was expected to uphold. Like Sanūsī, Laqānī wrote a commentary on his work which was commonly read alongside it, titled Hidāyat al-murīd (#603).¹⁵ His son ʿAbd al-Salām al-Laqānī (d. 1078/1668) also wrote a commentary on his father’s work, titled Itḥāf al-murīd bi-sharḥ jawharat al-tawḥīd (#601). The work was perhaps even more popular than the creed composed by his father, and it was commonly read alongside Laqānī’s Jawhara once a student had put the poem to memory. The inventory features five copies of the Jawharat al-tawḥīd and its commentaries (#600–603 and #640).¹⁶ The importance of these works as mnemonic guides cannot be overstated. Once a student had memorised the base text of the creed—in this case, the didactic poem of the Jawhara—they would be in a better position to understand the full composition by studying explications of its principles found in the commentary tradition. As a further testament to Ashʿarī influence, the library also contains two copies of a commentary on the Egyptian scholar Abū al-Irshād ʿAlī b. Muḥammad al-Ajhūrī’s (d. 1066/1655) Ashʿarī creed (listed as Sharḥ ʿaqīdat al-ajhūrī, #613 and #615).

While the North African theological tradition reigns supreme in the library’s holdings, certain ‘universal’ works also permeate the collection. One author who was almost universally popular in the Islamic world and who makes several appearances on the library’s inventory is the well-known mystic and Ashʿarī theologian ‘the Proof of Islam’, Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111). Ghazālī was known not only as a mutakallim but also a mystic who eventually abandoned rational theology in pursuit of a higher experiential mysticism which he discusses in his autobiography al-Munqidh min al-ḍalāl. The Munqidh appears twice on the inventory list (#620 and #629), although instead of ḍalāl, the cataloguer transcribes ḍalāla, a minute change which nevertheless indicates that the work may have been known by a slightly different title.¹⁷ A ‘Treatise on Theology’ (Risāla fī al-tawḥīd) is also listed thrice and attributed to Ghazālī (#625, #626 and #660), which likely alludes to a short creed Ghazālī composed as part of his voluminous Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn (The Revivification of the Religious Sciences). The creed came to be known by the twin names Qawāʿid al-ʿaqāʾid (The Principles of the Creed) and al-Risāla al-qudsiyya (The Jerusalem Treatise), the latter in reference to the fact that it was reportedly composed while Ghazālī was in Jerusalem.¹⁸ In one entry, the cataloguer explicitly transcribes al-Risāla al-qudsiyya (#660). Interestingly, the fact that the treatise appears in three singular manuscripts detached from the broader context of the Ihyāʾ signals that the treatise was read and circulated as an independent creedal work rather than as part of the Iḥyāʾ. Perhaps the fact that the treatise was written, according to the biographer Murtaḍā al-Zabīdī (d. 1205/1790), for the sake of the people of Jerusalem, accounts for its popularity in centres of Palestinian learning such as Acre.¹⁹ In connection, one also finds a commentary on Ghazālī’s creed by the prominent Moroccan mystic of the Shādhilī order and committed Ashʿarī, Aḥmad Zarrūq al-Fāsī (d. 899/1493), titled Ightinām al-fawāʾid bi-sharḥ qawāʿid al-ʿaqāʾid (#676).²⁰

2 Theological Works from the East

As the above titles show, the theology section of the Jazzār library contains works that were part of a general ‘western’ milieu: works that were popular in North Africa, Egypt and the Levant. Up to this point, all listed works have been Ashʿarī creeds, suggesting a centripetal influence from Egypt and North Africa, where Ashʿarism was predominant. But the library also contains works stemming from the eastern Islamic realm, extending from Iraq to Iran and Central Asia. The inventory features one copy of the summa of philosophy and theology al-Ṣaḥāʾif al-ilāhiyya (#619) by the Central Asian scholar Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī (d. 722/1322), whose works on philosophy, theology, and logic were popular among the Ottoman scholarly class. In particular, Samarqandī’s Ṣaḥāʾif and its commentary al-Maʿārif fī sharḥ al-ṣaḥāʾif are attested in dozens of library collections throughout the region. One also finds a copy of the summa of theology and philosophy, the Tajrīd al-ʿaqāʾid (#612), by the Mongol-era Shīʿī philosopher Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī (d. 672/1274), which is one of the more advanced works of philosophical theology in the collection. Notably, these are the only two works in the collection that may be regarded as touching upon falsafa. Another popular theological manual arising out of the Central Asian tradition and featured in the library’s holdings is the commentary on Nasafī’s creed by the major Timurid theologian Saʿd al-Dīn al-Taftāzānī (d. 793/1390) (#611 and #614). Taftāzānī’s works were a core part of the madrasa curriculum in the Ottoman empire.²¹ And despite first circulating in far-flung Central Asia, his works on philosophy, theology, rhetoric, jurisprudence and logic were known and studied as far as Egypt possibly within his own lifetime.²² The Jazzār library features a supercommentary on Taftāzānī’s commentary on Nasafī’s creed by the Kurdish scholar Ilyās al-Kūrānī (d. 1138/1725) (#638, and possibly also #639), who had travelled to Jerusalem from Damascus after studying in the Kurdish areas of southeastern Anatolia, where he was originally from. A Shāfiʿī scholar with mystical leanings, Kūrānī wrote commentaries on works of logic and theology, illustrating that scholars who were practicing Sufis during this period were also reading and thinking about theology and the rational sciences.²³ Kūrānī’s supercommentary was not particularly influential, and its inclusion in the library’s inventory suggests that it may have been procured on the heels of Kūrānī’s stay in Palestine, reflecting a local economy of works on theology.

Yet, the inclusion of works by eastern authors does not detract from the fact that the Jazzār collection was mainly a representation of the North African theological tradition. Madrasa students in Palestine would often travel to Egypt to continue their studies, where they undoubtedly procured works from the Egyptian book market. Some of these students were trained by Maghrebi scholars, and many of them were initiated into Sufi orders popular in various parts of North Africa, such as the Shādhiliyya. Although the collection predominantly features works of Sufism written with the priorities of the Naqshbandiyya and Khalwatiyya in mind, it also contains a distinct subset of writings by North African Shādhilī mystics who fused aspects of Islamic theology with Sufism. A notable figure in this category is the Moroccan mystic Aḥmad Zarrūq al-Fāsī (d. 899/1493). However, it is undoubtedly the ‘Greatest Shaykh’ (al-shaykh al-akbar) Muḥyī al-Dīn Ibn al-ʿArabī who features most prominently on Jazzār’s list. The latter’s interest in Ibn al-ʿArabī is echoed in the account of the Ottoman chronicler Cābī (d. after 1229/1814), who relates that Jazzār’s rise was prophesied by Ibn al-ʿArabī, Jazzār being ‘the Jim Jim that the Greatest Shaykh wrote and alluded to [in his al-Shajara al-nuʿmāniyya]’.²⁴

3 The Works of the ‘Greatest Shaykh’ (al-shaykh al-akbar) Muḥyī al-Dīn Ibn al-ʿArabī (d. 638/1240)

As the ideal of verification permeates the library’s holdings on theology, exemplified in creedal works like Sanūsī’s Umm al-barāhīn, it similarly permeates the library’s holdings on mysticism. The Jazzār library features at least seventy-two distinct works of taṣawwuf, encompassing a wide range that includes classical Sufi literature, devotional ethics and prayer manuals, and works rooted in the tradition of ontological monism associated with the school of Muḥyī al-Dīn Ibn al-ʿArabī. Eight of the seventy-two taṣawwuf works housed in the Jazzār library were penned by Ibn al-ʿArabī himself, constituting eleven per cent of the library’s holdings on mysticism. A substantial portion of the remaining works belong to Ibn al-ʿArabī’s school, penned by authors who self-identify as Sufi proponents of ideas stemming from the tradition of commentary on his works.

Ibn al-ʿArabī was a prolific writer with an estimated output exceeding three hundred works.²⁵ Among the eight works featured in the Jazzār library, one finds three copies of his voluminous al-Futūḥāt al-makkiyya (#651–653),²⁶ a vast philosophical compendium and mystical encyclopaedia whose pages number in the thousands, being Ibn al-ʿArabī’s longest work. Alongside his shorter compendium Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, the Futūḥāt stands out as possibly Ibn al-ʿArabī’s most popular work. The complexity of the Futūḥāt defies simple classification: It is not simply a Sufi manual or a philosophical compendium, but addresses a wide range of topics, including metaphysics, cosmology, spiritual psychology and anthropology. Its popularity endured well into the Ottoman period. According to the Mamluk historian Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn al-Ṣafadī (d. 764/1363), the work contains ‘precise, strange, and wonderous things not present in anyone else’s idiom’.²⁷ Importantly, Ṣafadī observed that the work aligns with the creed of al-Ashʿarī, noting that ‘Ibn al-ʿArabī presents his theology in the first volume of the Futūḥāt, and I saw that from its beginning to its end, it is identical to the creed of the Shaykh Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī. There is nothing in it that diverges from his thought’.²⁸ Such interpretations about the coherence between Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought as presented in the Futūḥāt, and Ashʿarī theology were widespread. Orthodox Ashʿarīs were inclined to embrace the Futūḥāt as a theologically compelling compendium while rejecting the views of the waḥdat al-wujūd monists who increasingly pushed for interpretations incompatible with orthodox theological dogma. The Futūḥāt served as a gateway into Ibn al-ʿArabī’s mystical philosophy among students who, by the late Ottoman period, were simultaneously studying introductory creedal handbooks such as the Umm al-barāhīn and the Jawḥarat al-tawḥīd.

While the Jazzār library contains three copies of the Futūḥāt, there are no copies of the base text of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, a short but extremely influential compendium that delves into the particular divine wisdom revealed to each of the prophets.²⁹ However, the library contains three commentaries on the work (#642c, #648 and #649). Both the Futūḥāt and the Fuṣūṣ were highly sought after, with over one hundred commentaries documented on the Fuṣūṣ alone.³⁰ The work was often a medium through which the philosophy of waḥdat al-wujūd was propagated. The absence of copies of the base text of the Fuṣūṣ may suggest that the library’s holdings on taṣawwuf were primarily curated to align with Ashʿarī theology. Another possibility is that the Fuṣūṣ was typically studied in conjunction with a commentary, seldom in isolation, and therefore Ibn al-ʿArabī’s ideas were accessed through commentaries on his work. As noted, the Jazzār library includes three copies of a ‘commentary on the Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam’. In all three cases, the author is not mentioned. Given that the library contains many local productions—works by scholars traveling to or living in the area of Ottoman Palestine—one might be inclined to presume that these entries refer to the commentary of ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī (d. 1143/1731), a mystic who travelled widely and who wrote the first major commentary on the Fuṣūṣ by an Arab scholar. But in all but one case, Nābulusī is explicitly mentioned by Jazzār’s cataloguer as the author of the work in question. One must therefore look elsewhere for the authors of these commentaries on the Fuṣūṣ. The most renowned commentaries were by scholars linked directly to Ibn al-ʿArabī through a master-disciple relationship. They include Ṣadr al-Dīn al-Qūnāwī (d. 673/1274) (his son-in-law and main vehicle for the interpretation of his ideas), Muʾayyad al-Dīn al-Jandī (d. 700/1300), ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Qāshānī (d. 730–736/1329–1335) and Dāwūd al-Qayṣarī (d. 751/1350). The inventory may be pointing in the direction of one of these commentaries. Importantly, the library contains one copy of a commentary on the divine names by Qūnawī, whose works were the most important vehicle for the invigoration and elaboration of the doctrine of waḥdat al-wujūd (#674).³¹

As noted, the reception of the Fuṣūṣ was much more contentious compared to the Futūḥāt. Many scholars associated the work with the more elaborate ontological monism that the school of Ibn al-ʿArabī became famous for. According to Ṣafadī, ‘the Fuṣūṣ displays many things that do not reflect reality nor accord with God’s revelation’, which he explained away by reasoning that perhaps Ibn al-ʿArabī was in an ecstatic state when writing the work and could not find the right language to communicate what he was experiencing. Later scholars associated the Fuṣūṣ with the ontological monism famously encapsulated by the formula ‘the unity of existence’ (waḥdat al-wujūd), which in its most basic sense connotes the idea that existence belongs solely to God, that God is existence, and therefore, that existence is one and divine.³² Many thought that this idea descended into pantheism: insofar as existence is one, everything could be worshipped as part of God’s efflorescence. While the Fuṣūṣ does not make a solo appearance in the Jazzār library, in other libraries contemporaneously established in Ottoman Palestine, both the matn of the work, as well as commentaries on the work, abound. We find the base text of the Fuṣūṣ, for example, in the endowment document of the books of Ḥasan ʿAbd al-Laṭīf al-Ḥusaynī (dated 1201/1787), along with two copies of the Futūḥāt, demonstrating that these works were widely read and studied by scholars interested in Sufism in this region.³³ Moreover, the extensive presence of these works not only in al-Jazzār’s collection but also in other libraries suggests their pivotal role as primary sources for the dissemination of mystical philosophy. As a case in point, the Jazzār library boasts an extremely influential work by ʿAbd al-Karīm al-Jīlī (d. 826/1422), titled al-Insān al-kāmil fī maʿrifat al-awākhir wa-al-awāʾil (#655), a compendium of Sufi metaphysics which centrally engages with Ibn al-ʿArabī’s idea of the perfect man.³⁴

Ibn al-ʿArabī’s widespread readership can also be gleaned from several other works he composed which are featured in the library’s inventory. These include his al-Tadbīrāt al-ilāhiyya fī iṣlāḥ al-mamlaka al-insāniyya (#682), a short piece that allegorically represents the human being as a kingdom; his Mashāhid al-asrār al-qudsiyya wa-maṭāliʿ al-anwār al-ilāhiyya (#687), which takes the form of dialogues with God manifest in fourteen visions or contemplations; his Kitāb al-waṣāya (#688), a work which features an alternate edition of the last chapter of the Futūḥāt; a compilation of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s letters appropriately titled Rasāʾil Ibn al-ʿArabī (#650); and his ʿAnqāʾ mughrib fī maʿrifat khatm al-awliyāʾ wa-shams al-maghrib (#740), a work on Islamic sainthood. In total, eight works in the collection belong to Ibn al-ʿArabī, making him one of the most prominently featured mystical authors in the inventory list. But the existence of these works is not the only attestation of the popularity of his thought. The library contains dozens of works by proponents of his mystical philosophy, to which we now turn.

4 Proponents of the Akbarī³⁵ Way in the Jazzār Library

The true significance of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Futūḥāt emerges through the commentaries, abridgments and studies authored by scholars who relied on its content. As previously noted, the Futūḥāt was often understood as aligning with, rather than conflicting with, orthodox Ashʿarī theology. In the context of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, there was a tradition of Sufi commentary, particularly robust in Egypt and the Levant, which venerated Ibn al-ʿArabī as a saint—specifically on the basis of readings of the Futūḥāt—while expressing reservations about the later ontological monism expounded by commentators on the Fuṣūṣ. Khaled El-Rouayheb, for example, has demonstrated that the reimagining of Ibn al-ʿArabī as a Sufi saint was intimately tied to the interpretation of the Futūḥāt.³⁶

One author whose works reflect this trend is the Egyptian scholar ʿAbd al-Wahhāb al-Shaʿrānī (d. 973/1565), the second most represented figure in the section on Sufism after Ibn al-ʿArabī himself. Shaʿrānī negotiated the difficult and often frayed relationship between acceptable Sufism and ontological monism. As Leila Hudson has shown with respect to late Ottoman Syria, Shaʿrānī was one of the most widely read scholars from this period whose works were regarded as adeptly treading the fine line between orthodoxy and heterodoxy.³⁷ The library features seven works by Shaʿrānī, one of which is an abridgment of the Futūḥāt titled Lawāqiḥ al-anwār al-qudsiyya al-muntaqāt min al-futūḥāt al-makkiyya (#717).

What explains Shaʿrānī’s popularity during this period, as evinced on the inventory list? The argument so far has been that the Jazzār collection attests to an increasing trend among scholars to selectively embrace aspects of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s thought, while discarding elements deemed theologically problematic, particularly those inherited from the commentary tradition. Shaʿrānī played a pivotal role in reinterpreting Ibn al-ʿArabī to accord with prevailing theological sentiment. His works reconceptualized Ibn al-ʿArabī as a revered Sufi saint, a transformation facilitated primarily through the lens of the Futūḥāt.

In the Lawāqiḥ (#717), Shaʿrānī presents a case for understanding the Futūḥāt in a manner consistent with orthodox theology, thereby painting Ibn al-ʿArabī as a figure unburdened by the later interpretations of the proponents of waḥdat al-wujūd. In an even more condensed abridgement of the Futūḥāt titled al-Kibrīt al-aḥmar fī bayān ʿulūm al-shaykh al-akbar, also featured on the inventory list (#672), Shaʿrānī explores Ibn al-ʿArabī’s programmatic for the spiritual life, once again trying to detach his mystical philosophy from the interpretations of the proponents of waḥdat al-wujūd. These works in the Jazzār collection demonstrate the centrality of the person of Shaʿrānī to the reimagining of Ibn al-ʿArabī as a Sufi saint during this period.

The library also houses two copies of Shaʿrānī’s largest theological work, which contains his most elaborate defence of Ibn al-ʿArabī (#634 and #635), titled al-Yawāqīt wa-al-jawāhir fī bayān ʿaqāʾid al-akābir. In this work, Shaʿrānī explicitly notes that his aim is to ‘reconcile the creed of the people of Unveiling (i.e. the Sufis) and the people of ratiocination (i.e. the rational theologians)’,³⁸ demonstrating the compatibility of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s ideas with Ashʿarī theology. Further works by Shaʿrānī include two copies of his Kashf al-ḥijāb wa-al-rān ʿan wajh asʾilat al-jān (#663 and #664), a book that provides answers to eighty questions, mostly of a theological nature, directed at Shaʿrānī by a group of believing jinn (al-jān).³⁹ In another work featured in the library’s inventory list titled Laṭāʾif al-minan wa-al-akhlāq fī wujūb al-taḥadduth bi-niʿmat Allāh ʿalā al-iṭlāq (otherwise known as al-Minan al-kubrā) (#656), Shaʿrānī presents his autobiography, detailing the stages of his initiation into Sufism and the manifold ethical qualities he cultivated along the way, which aims to communicate to his followers the ethics that are demanded of Sufi initiates. In a further work titled al-Jawāhir wa-al-durar (#720), Shaʿrānī outlines the main teachings and axioms he learned from his eminent shaykh, a certain ʿAlī al-Khawwāṣṣ al-Burulsī (d. 949/1542). And finally, in a work titled Mawāzīn al-rijāl al-qāṣirīn (#662), Shaʿrānī rebukes the Sufis of his era, highlighting the inadequacies of their behavior and explaining what steps they need to take to improve their condition. A theme during this period, Shaʿrāni is one of several prominent mystical scholars who wrote works bemoaning the state of Sufism and the Sufis.⁴⁰

But not all works were explicitly trying to explain away the more problematic aspects of waḥdat al-wujūd. Many scholars writing in the Levant during this period in fact embraced the interpretations of the commentators (specifically on the Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam). These include prominent mystics like ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī (d. 1143/1731), Muṣṭafā al-Bakrī (d. 1172/1749) and Qāsim al-Khānī (d. 1109/1697)—all of whom lived in Syria but spent substantial time in Palestine.

The Jazzār library features five (or possibly six) works by the Damascene mystic and scholar ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī (d. 1143/1731), previously mentioned as the first Arab scholar to write a major commentary on Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Fuṣūṣ. A prolific author with over two hundred works to his name, Nābulusī was heavily influenced by Ibn al-ʿArabī and a prominent advocate of his views. Unlike Shaʿrānī, he explicitly endorsed the more ecstatic elements deriving from the commentary tradition, most importantly the profession of the ‘unity of existence’ (waḥdat al-wujūd). Despite the often-frayed relationship between individuals identifying as orthodox theologians and ontological monists promoting such doctrines, Nābulusī walked a tightrope, garnering considerable praise for his expertise in the traditional Islamic sciences (including law, ḥadīth and Qurʾanic exegesis) and eventually earning the esteemed position of Ḥanafī Mufti of Damascus. In addition to his scholarly oeuvre, Nābulusī was well-travelled, and through his own travel accounts, we know that he visited parts of Ottoman Palestine, spending considerable time in Jerusalem and other important locales.⁴¹ The library features five (possibly six) works by Nābulusī, including two commentaries on self-styled creedal works (or Rasāʾil fī al-tawḥīd). While described as being on tawḥīd, typically associated with theology, both of his commentaries evince a Sufi frame of mind, demonstrating that tawḥīd was a flexible term that did not necessarily singularly apply to orthodox Ashʿarī or Māturīdī theology. The first of these works (#684) is a commentary on a creed titled al-Risāla al-raslāniyya by Arsalān al-Dimashqī, a highly regarded thirteenth century mystic from Damascus.⁴² Nābulusī would often visit Arsalān’s grave in the suburbs of Damascus,⁴³ and also documented teaching his creed at al-Madrasa al-Sulṭāniyya.⁴⁴ He notes, in particular, that he was asked by a group of elite students to relay Arsalān’s creed, described as being ‘on the science of gnostic theology (fī ʿilm al-tawḥīd al-ʿirfānī) and the taste of spiritual existence (dhawq al-wijdān al-rawḥānī)’.⁴⁵ The second of these works (#686) is a commentary on the creed of Aḥmad b. ʿAlī al-Shinnāwī (d. 1028/1619), titled Taḥrīk al-iqlīd fī fatḥ bāb al-tawḥīd. The work addresses the topics of existence, annihilation, sainthood and the Sufi path, all as circumscribed within an explicitly Sufi metaphysics. Nābulusī also deals with more ‘theological’ questions, such as God’s names and attributes, His essence and actions, and other related topics. While a seemingly arbitrary choice to write a commentary on, Shinnāwī was in fact the shaykh of Nābulusī’s own shaykh, Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad b. Aḥmad al-Ḥanafī al-Miṣrī, otherwise known as al-Khaṭīb al-Shawbarī (d. 1066/1656), or even more grandly, ‘Abū Ḥanīfa al-Ṣaghīr’. In connection to another figure on the inventory list, Nābulusī notes in his introduction that he composed the work at the request of Ilyās al-Kūrānī (d. 1138/1726)—a prominent Kurdish scholar whose supercommentary on Taftāzānī’s commentary on Nasafī’s creed is also featured in the Jazzār library (#638). The inventory further mentions a work titled al-Fatḥ al-rabbānī wa-al-fayḍ al-raḥmānī (#683), but without attribution. Nābulusī authored a work bearing the same title, drawing inspiration from his distant shaykh, ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Jīlānī (d. 561/1165), eponym of the Qādirī order into which Nābulusī was initiated, and the first to introduce this title.⁴⁶ The proximity of this entry to another entry for a work by Nābulusī where his name is specified (al-Risāla al-raslāniyya li-sayyidī al-shaykh ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī, #684) suggests that this entry also refers to Nābulusī’s Fatḥ. This would raise his count in the Jazzār repository to six. Regardless of whose work this entry specifies, Nābulusī would indeed be honoured to be confused with the great Jīlānī, eponym of the Sufi order to which he belonged, and saint of giant proportions.⁴⁷

It is worth noting that Nābulusī stands out as one of the few authors explicitly mentioned by name in the catalogue. In all but one of five entries, the cataloguer specifies that the work belongs to ‘Sayyidī ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī’ (#643, #684 and #686), accompanied by the prayer ‘may his spirit be sanctified’ (quddisa sirruhu) and to the ‘Shaykh ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī’ (#723), once again followed by the prayer ‘may his spirit be sanctified’—an indication that the cataloguer was both familiar with and had a high regard for Nābulūsī’s person.⁴⁸

Another prominent advocate of Ibn al-ʿArabī’s views listed in the Jazzār inventory is the scholar Qāsim al-Khānī (d. 1109/1697), originally from Aleppo.⁴⁹ With Khānī, we get a more explicit invocation and explication of the practice of Sufism. Khanī’s manual of Sufi practice was a classic of the period.⁵⁰ The Jazzār library features two copies of the work, titled al-Sayr wa-al-sulūk ilā malik al-mulūk (#708 and #739). The work explores the seven stages of the mystical path from the perspective of the Khalwatiyya, which was making headway during this period and eventually became the most widespread Sufi brotherhood in the Ottoman world.⁵¹

In addition to Khanī’s manual, the library features three works on more ‘practical’ dimensions of Sufi thought by the mystic and prominent Khalwatī shaykh Muṣṭafā b. Kamāl al-Dīn al-Bakrī (d. 1172/1749). Bakrī was also from greater Syria, specifically Damascus. Like Nābulusī and Khānī, he embraced the doctrine of waḥdat al-wujūd, eventually forcing himself into self-exile in Jerusalem due to the unsavoury reception of his views in his native Damascus. Bakrī studied under ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī and Ilyās al-Kūrānī, both featured in the Jazzār library. Like Bakrī, Nābulusī and Kūrānī spent significant time in Palestine, and the fact that their works are well-represented in the library’s inventory points to a local economy of books.⁵² The library’s holdings on Sufism show the process by which Ottoman Palestine was pulled into the network of greater Syria by virtue of its geographical proximity and importance of its religious sites, being a gateway to the holy sites of Jerusalem, Hebron, Mecca and Medina, and to the intellectual and cultural capital that was Cairo.

5 Devotional Ethics: The Awrād, Adʿiyya, Aḥzāb and Adhkār

One notable emphasis in Muṣṭafā al-Bakrī’s teachings was his focus on the recitation of ritual litanies, called wird (pl. awrād). Wird is a term referring to a litany that is designed to complement the five obligatory daily prayers. It is specifically intended to be repeated at designated times throughout the day or week, often at specific locations.⁵³ In contrast to a ḥizb, which is also a prayer focused on the recitation of a duʿāʾ, the awrād encompass a diverse range of material. They may include prayers of supplication, invocations of the Divine Names, and excerpts from the Qurʾan. For example, the collection contains an awrād compilation which is described as being attached to seven verses of the Qurʾan. When recited, these verses would bring salvation to the supplicant (al-Munjiyyāt al-sabʿ maʿ awrād, #698).

The awrād were often linked to specific Sufi orders and composed by important personalities within those orders. They often included various invocations for God’s blessings and pleas for forgiveness, each wird having its own unique content. Some awrād were particularly celebrated.⁵⁴ Bakrī, being the founder of a branch of the Khalwatī order, authored a celebrated wird which was, in view of its name, to be recited ‘before the sight of dawn’.⁵⁵ The Jazzār library contains both the base text of his litany—known as Wird al-saḥar (#727)—along with one of the several commentaries he composed on the prayer (Sharḥ wird al-saḥar, #728).⁵⁶ The library also contains Bakrī’s commentary on another reputed wird composed by the seventh/thirteenth century scholar Muḥyī al-Dīn al-Nawawī (d. 676/1277) (#730), primarily recognised for his contributions to Shāfiʿī jurisprudence and ḥadīth, but who is featured on the inventory list as author of a number of works on ethics.

One of the notable features of this section is the plethora of works on devotional ethics, containing not only awrād prayers but varieties on awrād, including aḥzāb (sing. ḥizb), adʿiyya (sing. duʿāʾ) and adhkār (sing. dhikr).⁵⁷ While the awrād are prayers composed by a shaykh to be repeated by his disciples or followers at designated times and places, the aḥzāb pertained specifically to the repetition of particular sacrosanct statements,⁵⁸ called duʾaʿ (pl. adʿiyya), understood to be the actual text of the prayer. The Sufi brotherhoods, in particular, pioneered the recitation of prayers on the Prophet. Many of the aḥzāb thus became known as ṣalāt, the act of sending prayers upon the Prophet.⁵⁹ Unlike the awrād and aḥzāb, a duʾāʿ is not conditioned on repetition. There are seventeen works in total on these various aspects of Islamic devotion and prayer in the Jazzār collection, making it the largest subcategory of works within this section. Of note is that these works are not only catalogued in the section on tawḥīd and taṣawwuf here examined, but are also found in the section on ḥadīth, where adhkār works and other prayer manuals are listed (such as the popular Dalāʾil al-khayrāt), distinct insofar as they contain supplications taken specifically from the ḥadīth corpus.⁶⁰

These prayers were believed to possess protective qualities akin to talismans; when recited, they were thought to repel evil from the one invoking them. Much like the practice of visiting holy gravesites, reciting prayers crafted by revered individuals was understood to invite grace and blessings (baraka) upon the supplicant. The plethora of prayer manuals and guides in the collection alludes to the influence of the Sufi brotherhoods, which typically adopted a specific wird composed by a respected shaykh of the order, requiring initiates to invoke the prayer at specific times of the day. Examples include not only the previously mentioned Khalwatī shaykh Muṣṭafā al-Bakrī, who authored a widely read wird called Wird al-saḥar, but also the awrād of Jalāl al-Dīn al-Rūmī, eponym of the Mevlevī order (#724), the wird of ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī, esteemed Naqshbandī shaykh (#723), and the awrād of ʿAlī al-Qārī, a renowned Ḥanafī scholar (#726). That some of these entries invoke the plural of the term (that is, awrād) rather than the singular indicates that the respective author composed more than one wird, and that the manuscript in question contains the collation of the various awrād composed by the scholar. Many of these awrād works are listed anonymously (for example, #698, #710, #721, #729 and #733). But the inventory also mentions specific personalities. Given the prominence of Ibn al-ʿArabī in the collection, it is no wonder that his al-Dawr al-aʿlā, a prayer composition also known as Ḥizb al-wiqāya or ‘The Prayer of Protection’, is well-represented: three copies of a commentary on the prayer are listed (#725, #731 and #732), by the scholar Muḥammad b. Maḥmūd al-Dāmūnī (fl. 1208/1794).⁶¹ Importantly, the prayer is invoked as a ḥizb rather than a wird, indicating that it was not necessarily meant to be regularly repeated as part of a daily spiritual regimen. The Jazzār collection also contains a further work that testifies to the Turkification of the Ottoman empire, and the increasing use of vernacular: a prayer in Turkish (Duʿāʾ bi-al-turkī, #733).

Another prayer that was predominantly prized in Shīʿī circles also appears in the collection: the Duʿāʾ al-jawshan (#722). This prayer began to show up in Shīʿī works beginning in the fifteenth century.⁶² It was believed to have two manifestations: a smaller jawshan attributed to the seventh Imām Abū al-Ḥasan Mūsā ibn Jaʿfar al-Kāẓim (d. 183/799), and a greater jawshan attributed to the Prophet. Although highly regarded in Shīʿī circles, the prayer also held significance in non-Shīʿī contexts. This may explain why, despite Jazzār’s anti-Shīʿī sentiment and his reported destruction of the intellectual heritage of Jabal ʿĀmil—including the confiscation of thousands of books—the work found its way into the collection, possibly as part of Jazzār’s campaign, or independently. Jazzār famously conquered Jābil ʿĀmil, historically a stronghold of the Imāmī Shīʿīs, subjecting the area to Ottoman rule and confiscating thousands of books in the process.⁶³ While several sources relay that whole libraries were transferred to Acre and summarily burned,⁶⁴ further evidence supporting these claims can be found in this section of the inventory: apart from the Duʾāʿ al-jawshan, there are no works of a Shīʿī nature present in the collection. This either confirms the destruction of scholarly books from Jabal ʿĀmil or, more cautiously, casts doubt on these testimonies. Put differently, had Jazzār merely confiscated these books without burning them, they would likely be present, especially in this section on tawḥīd, considering the Shīʿī tradition’s extensive history of commentary on theological matters.

6 Kalām-compliant Mysticism

Many of the works listed in the previous section were not palatable to theological audiences. This includes, in particular, works by proponents of the controversial doctrine of waḥdat al-wujūd. Nevertheless, not all Sufi works faced criticism from orthodox theological circles. In fact, there are several works in the collection that enjoyed almost universal admiration, being regarded as classics of the genre. These works predominantly originated from the pre-Ottoman period. Their authors did not explicitly subscribe to the Akbarī lens, but instead fostered a more ‘moderate’ form of mystical practice that resonated with some Ashʿarī theologians. Representative figures of this trend include the Moroccan mystic and staunch Ashʿarī Aḥmad Zarrūq al-Fāsī (d. 899/1493), and the Egyptian mystic, author of famous axioms, Ibn ʿAṭāʾ Allāh al-Iskandarī (d. 709/1309).

Among the earliest universally celebrated Sufi authors that appear on the inventory list is Abū al-Qāsim ʿAbd al-Karīm al-Qushayrī (d. 465/1072), often referred to as ‘author of the treatise’ (ṣāḥib al-risāla)⁶⁵ or ‘author of the treatise to the Sufis’ (ṣāḥib al-risāla ilā al-ṣūfiyya).⁶⁶ Qushayrī wrote a work which came to be known simply as al-Risāla al-qushariyya, or Qushayrī’s Epistle, which one author has described as ‘the most popular Sufi manual ever’.⁶⁷ The work was absorbed as a classic of Islamic culture early on, being notorious for ‘circulating in all regions of the world’ (sāʾira fī aqṭār al-arḍ).⁶⁸ The eminent Ottoman bibliographer Ṭāşköprīzāde transmits the same praise lauded on Qushayrī by an early biographer: that ‘Qushayrī is the author of the Epistle that was notorious in both west and east, through which his person became like a star, illuminated’.⁶⁹ His treatise was so well-known that no further specification was necessary: he was simply the author of the Epistle. One factor that contributed to its widespread circulation and acceptance as a standard of Sufi practice was that Qushayrī adhered to Ashʿarī principles. His work sought not only to reconcile but also to unite the Sufi path with Ashʿarī theology. Two copies of the work exist in the Jazzār library (#658 and #659), testifying to its continued popularity well into the Ottoman period.

A scholar with a similar project as Qushayrī in his endeavor to reconcile Ashʿarism with Sufism was the eminent figure, the ‘Proof of Islam’ Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111), already mentioned as author of several works on theology housed in Jazzār’s repository in Acre. Ghazālī became a household name as far as Spain and into Christian Europe, known for different facets of his scholarship in different places. In Spain, he was known as the author of a work on the doctrines of the philosophers (Maqāṣid al-falāsifa), which students of philosophy would initiate the study of philosophy with. He was also embroiled in various controversies in North Africa, and there were pockets of opposition to his writings. But generally speaking, Ghazālī achieved almost universal repute for his confrontation with the Islamic philosophers, his work on Islamic law (al-Muṣṭaṣfā fī ʿilm al-uṣūl), his intellectual and personal biography documenting his transition and journey into Sufism at the end of his life (catalogued in the Jazzār library as al-Munqidh min al-ḍalāla, #620 and #629), and his major work on all aspects of Islamic spirituality, the Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn. The Jazzār library boasts an epitome of the Iḥyāʾ (#654), likely by Shams al-Dīn al-ʿAjlūnī al-Bilālī (d. 820/1417), who wrote the most important epitome of the work and who lived in nearby Egypt. This manuscript is appended to a further work of ethics by the Sicilian scholar Ibn Ẓafar al-Ṣiqillī (d. 565/1169), titled Sulwān al-mutāʿ fī ʿudwān al-atbāʿ (#654). Siqillī’s work is not the only work in the collection that reached Acre from the Mediterranean: the library contains a work of polemics, responding specifically to Christian claims, by the Christian convert to Islam ʿAbdallāh al-Tarjumān al-Māyūrqī (d. 832/1428) (#705). A manual of Sufi practice titled Minhāj al-ʿābidīn ilā jannat rabb al-ʿālimīn is also featured in the Jazzār library (#677), a work that has been widely attributed to Ghazālī.⁷⁰

The Jazzār repository further houses several works by the renowned ḥadīth specialist and Shāfiʿī jurisprudent, Muḥyī al-Dīn Abū Zakariyyā Yaḥyā b. Sharaf al-Nawawī (631–676/1233–1277).⁷¹ Nawawī was primarily known for his contributions to Shāfiʿī jurisprudence and the science of ḥadīth, and his works in this section address ethical questions using the framework of ḥadīth. Many of his most popular compilations condensed the ḥadīth corpus in an effort to make it more accessible to a wider audience. This partly accounts for the fact that his compilation of forty ḥadīth (al-Arbaʿūn al-nawawiyya) became one of the most widely read works in Islamic history.⁷² While seemingly miscatalogued, Nawawī’s works in this section employ the ḥadīth as a means to explore broader topics within the field of Islamic ethics. One work, titled Riyāḍ al-ṣāliḥīn min kalām sayyid al-mursalīn (#665), comprises a collection of prophetic statements about piety. Another work, titled Bustān al-ʿārifīn wa-sabīl al-zāhidīn (#669 and #670), presents an anthology of statements taken not only from the ḥadīth corpus, but from the Qurʾan and other sources, endeavouring to explain asceticism, abstinence and the rejection of worldly materialism, all aspects of what is broadly known as Sufism. We thus get a sense of the logic behind the inclusion of these works in this section on tawḥīd and taṣawwuf: insofar as the latter represents the mystical dimension of Islam, which is understood to be intrinsically concerned with ethical comport and cultivation, these works were thought to cohere with that telos more fully, being primarily on ethics, and only secondarily on ḥadīth as a vehicle for the cultivation of the human person.

As the writings of Qushayrī, Ghazālī and Nawawī demonstrate, many works in the field of Sufism were believed to align with Ashʿarī theology. In fact, all three authors embraced the Ashʿarī creed, indicating that Sufism found acceptance among a distinct subset of orthodox theologians. These authors were early pre-Ottoman proponents of the potential confluence between Sufism and theology. In later periods, particularly in North Africa, other figures also contributed to the demand for Sufi literature that would be compliant with the precepts of Ashʿarī theology. Such figures include the renowned Egyptian mystic Ibn ʿAṭāʾ Allāh al-Iskandarī (d. 709/1309), acclaimed for his Ḥikam and early contributions to Shādhilī doctrine.⁷³ The library boasts four copies of Iskandarī’s al-Tanwīr fī isqāṭ al-tadbīr (#666–668 and #711), a work that probes the question of reliance on God through the lens of the concept of tadbīr.⁷⁴ The fact that the library houses four copies of this work points to a wide readership and underscores its significance among readers in the Levant. The collection also features what appears to be a commentary on Iskandarī’s highly reputed axioms (#675), as well as a third work titled Miftāḥ al-falāḥ (#623). Another figure is the Moroccan mystic Aḥmad Zarrūq al-Fāsī (d. 899/1493), a Sufi who was staunchly committed to Ashʿarī theology, seeing mysticism as legitimate only insofar as it coheres with the injunctions of the law. Zarrūq penned two favourable commentaries on Ghazali’s Qawāʾid al-ʿaqāʾid (#625, #626 and #660), one of which is preserved in the Jazzār collection (Ightinām al-fawāʾid fī sharḥ qawāʾid al-ʿaqāʾid, #676). Zarrūq also penned a manual of Sufi practice titled Qawāʾid al-taṣawwuf wa-shawāhid al-taʿarruf (#636),⁷⁵ which is directed at all categories of wayfarers, including theologians and jurisprudents, serving as a guide towards a greater understanding of the three pillars of faith: islām, iḥsān and īmān.

As a further testament to the interlinking between Sufi doctrine and theological exploration, the library houses Qawānīn ḥikam al-ishrāq ilā kāfat al-ṣūfiyya bi-jamīʿ al-āfāq (#681), a work by the Shādhilī mystic Abū al-Mawāhib (d. 882/1478), on Sufi notions of illumination, particularly as sieved through Shādhilī doctrine.⁷⁶ Although affiliated with the Shādhilī order, Abū al-Mawāhib was profoundly influenced by Ibn al-ʿArabī, suggesting the presence of diverse manifestations of mystical thought and practice rather than a singular, uniform model of Sufism.

7 Neither Tawḥīd nor Taṣawwuf: Misplaced Works

Several works catalogued in this section fall outside the scope of theology and mysticism. Ironically, one of these works is the only manuscript in this section which is extant today: Taftāzānī’s gloss on Ījī’s commentary on Ibn Ḥājib’s Mukhtaṣar muntaḥā al-uṣūlī (#637), a work on Islamic legal theory and dialectics.⁷⁷ The misplacement of this work likely stems from the perception of Taftāzānī as a theologian, possibly due to his commentary on Nasafī’s creed, which had a large audience throughout the Islamic world. This is not the only legal manual catalogued under tawḥīd and taṣawwuf: we further have another legal work by Yūsuf b. Ḥusayn al-Kirmāstī (d. 906/1500), titled Zubdat al-wuṣūl ilā ʿumdat al-uṣūl (#671). Given the play on words in this title and the explicit use of uṣūl (typically in reference to uṣūl al-fiqh), there is little justification for the misplacement of this work in this section. Another prominent theologian whose work is miscatalogued is Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Karīm al-Shahrastānī (d. 548/1153), author of the well-known theological manual Nihāyat al-aqdām fī ʿilm al-kalām. Even more famously, Shahrastānī penned a doxography considered one of the earliest systematic studies of religion and widely used as a source for the reconstruction of religious doctrine in Islam. The Jazzār library boasts two copies of the work (al-Milal wa-al-nihal, #631 and #632) and one copy of another doxography titled al-Firaq al-ḍāla wa-al-nājiyya (#703) by the scholar Muḥammad Amīn b. Ṣadr al-Dīn al-Shirwānī (d. 1036/1626). In the field of Qurʾanic exegesis, the library features a work titled Khulāṣat baḥr al-ḥaqāʾiq, a commentary on the Qurʾan by Ibn al-Sāwajī (active 732/1332). The work is an epitome of the exegesis Bahr al-ḥaqāʾiq by the influential mystic Najm al-Dīn Kubrā (d. 618/1221), under whom Ibn al-Sāwajī likely studied. Despite being an exegesis (tafsīr) of the Qurʾan, it appears that the work is listed in this section because it is specifically a mystical exegesis of the Qurʾan (tafsīr ʿirfānī) and therefore was thought to accord more fully with taṣawwuf. We are also presented with the thabat of the Syrian ḥadīth specialist ʿImād al-Dīn al-ʿAjlūnī (d. 1162/1749), titled Ḥilyat ahl al-faḍl wa-al-kamāl bi-ittiṣāl al-asānīd bi-kamāl al-rijāl (#679). Given that the title does not mention ḥadīth, and in fact appears to be a work on mysticism citing perfection and connection, it is perhaps understandable that the library’s curator placed the work in the section on Sufism. We further find a work by the premier litterateur of the Islamic East: al-Qāsim b. ʿAlī al-Ḥarīrī (d. 516/1122), widely praised for his Maqāmāt. The collection features Ḥarīrī’s compilation of common mistakes in language construction, titled Durrat al-ghawwāṣ fī awhām al-khawāṣṣ (#715).

8 Concluding Remarks

The Jazzār library features an eclectic mix of books on tawḥīd and taṣawwuf. The library’s inclusion of various Sufi works which claim to be on tawḥīd illustrates that tawḥīd was a flexible term that encompassed a wide range of works addressing theological matters. In connection, taṣawwuf was also a complicated term with multilevel meanings. The unifying thread of all mystical writings held in the collection is the orientation towards inner cultivation, but much of the underlying theology of such works differed. Some Sufi authors were prominent advocates of Akbarī mystical philosophy and the doctrine of waḥdat al-wujūd. Others wholly rejected that orientation, instead accepting mysticism only insofar as it cohered with orthodox theology. While a significant portion of the collection stemmed from the tradition of commentary on Ibn al-ʿArabī, another substantial segment was rooted in the North African tradition of Ashʿarī theology. Both in works of theology and mysticism, there is a clear orientation towards and acceptance of Sufi practice. The library illustrates the complicated discourses at play in the late Ottoman world of Palestine, showing its nexus on the map between Syria and North Africa. While established by an ascending overlord of the Ottoman state and governor of Damascus and Sidon, the library remains on the whole provincial, featuring works accessible to a wide range of readers, and not necessarily of immense interest to more specialised audiences.⁷⁸