In recent years, a number of international conferences have been held on the history and doctrines of Twelver Shiism, which almost inevitably yielded anthologies of the respective papers. The book under review joins this kind of literature, although whether it is also based on such a conference remains unclear. In order to avoid too broad a range of topics, the editors have prudently decided to restrict the subject matter to intellectual developments after the decline of the Safavid Empire and well into the twentieth century, i.e. to debates and disputes in the fields of philosophy, mysticism, jurisprudence and political thought. The nine articles are accordingly divided into three parts: diversity and change in philosophy and mystic; Shiʿi jurisprudence; and doctrinal debates and political theories.
Without going into detail, the following notes aim to provide a short overview of each article, starting with the first part on philosophy and mysticism. Todd Lawson (“Shaykh Aḥmad al-Aḥsā’ī and the world of images”, pp. 19–31) gives a (sometimes slightly esoteric) interpretation of the Shaykhī concept of the ʿālam al-mithāl, which he compares to the ideas of the earlier theologian Mullā Muḥsin Fayḍ al-Kāshānī (d. 1680). Whether changing opinions about this world of images really constitute what might be termed “scientific progress” (p. 27), rests, however, largely in the eye of the beholder and strongly depends on one's own ideas of science and progress. Oliver Scharbrodt (“The quṭb as special representative of the hidden imam: the conflation of Shiʿi and Sufi Vilāyat in the Niʿmatullāhī order”, pp. 33–49) traces the revival of the Niʿmatullāhī Sufi order in Iran in the late eighteenth century. The fact that two of its foremost figures, Maʿṣūm ʿAlī Shāh and Nūr ʿAlī Shāh (d. 1796 and 1797 respectively), developed the idea that the spiritual leader (quṭb) of the order was at the same time considered to be the “special deputy” of the hidden imam, may, on the one hand, be interpreted as a form of “Shiitization” of Iranian mysticism. On the other hand, however, it posed a serious challenge to the Shiite uṣūlī clergy who claimed, in their entirety, collective deputyship of the Mahdī. The ʿulamā’ reacted accordingly, and by 1800 all Niʿmatullāhī leaders were killed; the order could survive only by resorting to taqiyya and refraining from openly challenging the authority of the Shiite clergy. Sajjad H. Rizvi (“Ḥikma Mutaʿāliya in Qajar Iran: Ḥājj Mullā Hādī Sabzavārī and the School of Mullā Ṣadrā”, pp. 51–70) deals with the jurist and mystic Sabzavārī (d. 1873) and his two main works Asrār al-ḥikam and Sharḥ-i manẓūma, by which he continued and transmitted the heritage of Mullā Ṣadrā to posterity. Moreover, he had a large number of disciples – among whom Murtaḍā al-Anṣārī and Akhūnd Khurāsānī are certainly the most important – who also left their mark in this regard. Robert Gleave's article (“Continuity and originality in Shiʿi thought: the relationship between the Akhbāriyya and the Maktab-i Tafkīk”, pp. 71–92) focuses on a hitherto largely neglected school of thought, the hermeneutical school of the Maktab-i Tafkīk established by Mīrzā Mahdī Iṣfahānī (d. 1946). They ascribe exclusive importance to Quran and ḥadīth in gaining knowledge, and insist that revelation and human concepts are separate (hence their name); this led them to be seen as the natural heirs to the akhbārī movement which was subdued by the uṣūlīs in the nineteenth century. Building on his immense knowledge of the akhbāriyya, Gleave examines the similarities and differences between the two schools with regard to two topics: the role of reason (ʿaql) as a source of religious knowledge and the respective conceptions of language and Quranic interpretation.
The second part of the book, on jurisprudence, opens with Sabrina Mervin's article on “La quête du savoir à Najaf. Les études religieuses chez les chiites imâmites de la fin du 19e siècle à 1960” (pp. 95–112), in which she describes the traditional system of studies at the religious seminary (ḥawza) in Najaf. This mode of learning and its sources survived well into modern times, occasional calls for reform notwithstanding. The article as such is not new; it is a revised version of an item that first appeared in Studia Islamica 81, 1995, 165–85. Shahram Pazouki (“Fiqh et soufisme à la période qajare: quelques notes sur l’œuvre juridique des maitres niʿmatullāhī gunābādī”, pp. 113–27) turns to another offshoot of the Niʿmatullāhī Sufi order, the Gunābādī branch. Their shaykhs combined their mysticism with jurisprudence of a decidedly uṣūlī type, which made them probably less prone to being persecuted by the clergy than other orders. The compatibility of Sufism and uṣūlī rationalism is demonstrated by several fatwas issued by their founding figures, Sulṭān ʿAlī Shāh (d. 1909) and his son and successor, Nūr ʿAlī Shāh (d. 1918), on the topics of prohibition of slavery, polygamy, divorce and the consumption of opium.
The final part, on polemics and politics, consists of three articles. The first, by Sajida Sultana Alvi (“Sunni Ulama's discourses on Shiʿism in northern India during the 18th and 19th centuries: an overview”, pp. 131–53) is devoted to a number of sectarian treatises composed by four north Indian Sunni scholars and triggered, according to the author, by the increasing power of Shiites in the area, especially by the establishment of the Shiite kingdom of Avadh. In particular, the article focuses on Aḥmad Sirhindī (d. 1623), Qāḍī Thanā’ Allāh Pānīpatī (d. 1810), Shāh Valī Allāh (d. 1762) and the latter's son Shāh ʿAbd al-ʾAzīz (d. 1824). The book of the last-mentioned, Tuḥfa-yi ithnā ʿashariyya, probably had the most lasting effect and even served as ammunition in sectarian struggles in the twentieth century. Finally, there are two contributions on theorists of the Constitutional Revolution in Iran. Denis Hermann (“Système parlementaire et consultation selon Thiqat al-Islām-i Tabrīzī: légitimation religieuse et justification historique”, pp. 155–70) deals with the views of the leader of the Tabriz branch of the Shaykhīs, Thiqat al-Islām-i Tabrīzī, executed by the Russians in 1911. He was one of the most ardent supporters of the constitutional movement, justifying the parliamentary system and the practice of consultation (shūrā) mainly on religious and historical grounds by invoking the role model of the prophet. Also ʿAbd al-Ḥusayn Lārī (d. 1923/24) came out in defence of constitutionalism and parliament against the monarchy which was, for him, tantamount to autocracy and suppression. He, however, makes an important qualification, as Mohammad Baqer Vosuqi (“Remarques sur la pensée politique de l'ayatollah Lārī durant le mouvement constitutionnel”, pp. 171–80) shows: any form of constitutional government is legitimate only under the final supervision of the Shiite clergy, among whom he accords a particular role to the “just religious judge”. Vosuqi waits until the very last lines of his article to drive his point home: this was one of the many roads that led to Khomeini's political theory of the “Guardianship of the Jurisconsult” (Vilāyat-i faqīh) and to the Iranian Revolution in 1979.
All in all, the book is carefully edited; the number of misprints and errors is negligable. Unfortunately, however, there are neither indexes nor any bibliography, so that making connections between the articles and finding references is sometimes a little cumbersome. Nevertheless, the present volume offers a number of fine articles that testify to a most vibrant and lively part of Shiite intellectual history.
