No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Did Sulamī Plagiarize Sarrāj ?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
Extract
Sulamī's tractate on the Malāmatīs (Risālat al-Malāmatīya), as preserved in the Berlin manuscript, has been fully and scientifically analysed and described by Professor E. Hartmann in Der Islam, vol. viii, pp. 157–203. There remains nothing to be added to the conclusions reached there. It is, however, to be remarked that Hartmann's article takes no account of the Cairo manuscript of the tract: this, indeed, could hardly have been available at the time the article was written. The Cairo manuscript has been noted and utilized by Massignon: a striking feature of this copy, however, which distinguishes it from that preserved at Berlin, appears to have escaped attention, and the purpose of the present note is to call attention to this peculiarity.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1937
References
Page 461 note 1 Ahlwardt 3388.
Page 461 note 2 Brockelmann, (Erster Supplementband, p. 362)Google Scholar is, of course, mistaken in describing this article as a translation of Kitāb 'Uyūb al-nafs, an entirely different work.
Page 461 note 3 Old catalogue, vii, p. 228.
Page 461 note 4 Bibliographie Hallagienne (suppl. to Passion), p. 12.
Page 462 note 1 See, for example, Gibb's, H. A. R. remarks in BSOS., vii, p. 11Google Scholar (n. 3), 20 (n. 2).
Page 462 note 2 Qushairī in his Risāla (437/1045) is otherwise the earliest authority for the text, see Nicholson's edition of Sarrāj, introd., p. xl. The relevant section in Kitāb al-Luma' is based on a single MS., though the Bankipore copy, as Maulavi Abdul Hamid remarks, is the oldest known to exist (Bankipore 825); and this contains that section.