É. Apor , I. Ormos (ed.): Goldziher Memorial Conference, June 21–22, 2000, Budapest.

ESS, Josef van: Goldziher as a Contemporary of Islamic Reform

JOSEF VAN ESS teacher had represented. The title of SibäTs book alludes rather openly to 'Abdalqädir's Historical Survey of Islamic Law

; both wrote about law, but where cAbdalqädir says ta'rtkh SibäT says sunna. It was all a question of Muslim identity. The uneasy marriage with Europe was over. 'Abdalqädir had still belonged to the generation which, like Tähä Husayn or ^bdarrahmän BadawT, had been formed in the liberal intellectual climate of the young Egyptian universities founded under King Fu'äd.

1

8 Now the entire discourse underwent considerable changes. When, in 1967, Goldziher's Muhammedanische Studien came out in an English translation, by S. Stern and C. R. Barber, it had got a new name: "Muslim Studies". Chr. Snouck Hurgronje and H. A. R. Gibb had still called their books "Mohammedanism"

, without any protestations being heard from the Muslim side

1

9; Schacht had written about "The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence".

21

1 Now, some years after SibäTs attack, it was a matter of courtesy to avoid the expression in order not to hurt Muslim feelings. As a matter of fact, it was from now onward Schacht's book which attracted a great deal of the furore.

2

1 He had derived from Goldziher's analysis rigid methodological conclusions and applied them to the churchfather of Sunni jurisprudence, al-Shäfi'T (whose Risäla had not yet been accessible to Goldziher when he wrote his Muhammedanische Studien

2

2). 1

8 Tähä Husayn (1889-1973), though still trained at al-Azhar, had become the first graduate of Cairo University (with a thesis on Ma'arri !, cf. EP X 95). 'Abdarrahmän BadawT was one generation younger. [He died in 2002 at the age of 85; cf. the obituary by R. Rashed in Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 13 (2003), 163 ff.] 1

9 London-New York 1916 and Oxford 1949 respectively. 2

0 Oxford 1950. 2

1 Though in this case there were no translations, and the polemics were quickly supplemented by serious criticism; the best example is the second book written by M. M. AVami/Azmi (who now transcribed his name as Azami): On Schacht's Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence, Riyadh 1985. The debate about Schacht is characterized by the fact that in the meantime English had become the main language medium. A'zamI translated his PhD thesis into Arabic (Diräsätfi l-hadith al-nabawi wa-ta'rikh tadwinihi. Riyadh 1976), but his impact on the Arab world could not compete with SibäTs. 2

2 Snouck Hurgronje had heard about the two old manuscripts of the Risäla preserved in Cairo (obviously the copies written by Rabf b. Sulaimän and by Ibn Jamä'a) and mentions them in one of his letters to Goldziher (9. Febr. 1886; cf. van Koningsveld, Scholarship and Friendship 56); he was still not sure about the authenticity of the text. The book was not printed until 1312/1895 (in Büläq, under the supervision of Yüsuf Sälih Muhammad al-Jazmäwi). Goldziher saw it during his stay in Cairo in 1896, but he did not have a chance to read it until the end of 1897 (

cf- his Briefwechsel with Martin Hartmann, ed. L. Hanisch, Wiesbaden 2000. 78 and 84 ff.). The first study about it was a thesis written at Leiden: L. J. Graf, Al-Shäß'is Verhandeling over de Wortelen van den Fiqh

, LeidenAmsterdam 1934. 40