Lesson 23: Factors behind the Rifts within Shi‘ism

The blessed names of the twelve Imams (‘a) have been recorded in the Prophetic traditions and Shi‘ah had learned of their names before personally seeing them. As Jabir ibn ‘Abd Allah, a devoted companion of the Prophet (S) narrates: When the verse,

“O you who have faith! Obey Allah and obey the Apostle and those vested with authority among you,”1

was revealed, I asked: “O Messenger of Allah! We know Allah and His Apostle and we do obey them, but who are ‘those vested with authority’ {uli’l-amr} obedience to whom has been mentioned by God alongside the obedience to Himself and obedience to you?”

He said: “‘Those vested with authority’ are my successors and the leaders after me. The first of whom is ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib; after him, Hasan and then Husayn; after him, ‘Ali ibn al-Husayn; and after him is Muhammad ibn ‘Ali who is known in the Torah {tawrat} as “Baqir” {he who cleaves something asunder} and you shall see him. Once you meet him, extend my salutations to him.

After him is as-Sadiq, Ja‘far ibn Muhammad, and then Musa ibn Ja‘far followed by ‘Ali ibn Musa; after him is Muhammad ibn ‘Ali; after him is ‘Ali ibn Muhammad and then Hasan ibn ‘Ali, and after him is his son who shall have the same name and epithet as mine. It is he who shall conquer the east and west of the world. He shall be hidden from the visible ones—a long occultation on account of which the people will doubt his Imamate except those whose hearts shall be endowed with untainted faith by God…2

The same Jabir used to sit at the Masjid an-Nabi and say: “O Baqir al-‘Ilm {he who cleaves knowledge asunder}! Where are you?” People who heard him would say: “Jabir, you are talking nonsense.” He would reply, “I am not talking nonsense. Rather, the Holy Prophet (S) has informed me that “You shall meet a man from my descendants whose name and physical appearance is like that of mine who will cleave knowledge asunder.”3

The infallible Imams (‘a) also used to prove their rightfulness by showing manifest miracles and wonders. In spite of this, a series of reasons and factors caused some Shi‘ah to commit error concerning the matter (of Imamate) and a number of them deviated from the straight path. These factors can be stated as follows:

1. Repression

After 40 AH intense persecution and repression of the descendants of the Prophet (‘a) and their followers prevailed. This suppression hindered some Shi‘ah from establishing a link with their Imams to have enough acquaintanceship with them.

During the second half of the first century, in particular after 72 AH and the defeat of ‘Abd Allah ibn Zubayr who was anti-Shi‘ah, Hajjaj ibn Yusuf ruled over Iraq and Hijaz for twenty years, brutally suppressed, killed and imprisoned the Shi‘ah, expelling them from Iraq and Hijaz.4

Imam as-Sajjad (‘a) was exercising dissimulation {taqiyyah} and he could express the Shi‘ah teachings only within the framework of supplication {du‘a}. The Kaysaniyyah sect emerged during that time.

Although Imam al-Baqir and Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) enjoyed relative freedom and were able to propagate the Shi‘ah fundamentals and teachings, when the ‘Abbasid caliph assumed power, he focused his attention on the Shi‘ah. And when he heard the news of the martyrdom of Imam as-Sadiq (‘a), he wrote a letter to his governor in Medina instructing him to identify and behead the successor of Imam as-Sadiq (‘a).

Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) designated five persons as his “successors”—Abu Ja‘far al-Mansur, Muhammad ibn Sulayman, ‘Abd Allah, Musa, and Hamidah.5 Imam al-Kazim (‘a) languished in prison for a long time.

Initially, the ‘Abbasid caliph Musa al-Hadi imprisoned the Imam and released him after sometime. Harun arrested the Imam four times and prevented the Shi‘ah from visiting him.6 The Shi‘ah remained in limbo and without a guardian paving the way for Isma‘iliyyah and Fathiyyah preachers. At the time, the Shi‘ah had nobody to clarify their doubts. The ‘Abbasid rule’s control and surveillance over Imam al-Kazim’s (‘a) activities were such that even ‘Ali ibn Isma‘il, the Imam’s nephew, was relaying information regarding him.7

Yes, most of the Shi‘ah at the time were not sure whether Imam al-Kazim (‘a) was alive or not. As Yahya ibn Khalid Barmaki used to say,
I uprooted the religion of the rafidhis {dissidents} (pejoratively referring to the Shi‘ah) because they were thinking that religion without the Imam will not survive and remain alive, while today they do not know whether their Imam is alive or not.”8

During the moment of Imam al-Kazim’s (‘a) martyrdom, none of the Shi‘ah were present on the scene. This matter seems to be the reason why the Waqifiyyah would deny the death of the Imam though financial issues contributed more to the emergence of this sect.

Yes, the infallible Imams (‘a) were under constant ‘Abbasid surveillance. They even coerced Imam al-Hadi and Imam al-‘Askari (‘a) to live in the military city of Samarra so as to keep them under constant surveillance. After the martyrdom of Imam al-‘Askari (‘a), the ‘Abbasids imprisoned his spouses and bondwomen with the aim of identifying the Imam’s successor (the Master of the Age, Imam al-Mahdi (‘a)). Even Ja‘far ibn ‘Ali, known as Ja‘far al-Kadhdhab (Ja‘far the Liar) used to act against his brother Imam al-‘Askari (‘a). As such, the Ghulat doctrines were spread through Nasiriyyah founded by Muhammad ibn Nasir Fihri. A number of them gathered around Ja‘far and then he started claiming for the Imamate.9

2. Taqiyyah {Dissimulation}

Taqiyyah {dissimulation} means expression of what is contrary to the truth when there is fear for the life of a Muslim. It is adopted in following previous laws and the law of Islam as dictated by both the text and reason.

For example, ‘the believer among the family of Pharaoh’ {mu’min al fir‘awn} kept his faith in secret out of fear of Pharaoh and his men. Among the companions of the Messenger of Allah (S), ‘Ammar also exercised taqiyyah on account of torture and persecution perpetuated against him by the polytheists {mushrikun} (of Mecca). When he was crying (for repentance) beside the Prophet (S) for doing so, the Prophet (S) said to him: “You have to do the same if they torture you again.”10

Since the Shi‘ah have always been few in numbers, they practiced taqiyyah in a bid to survive and save their lives. This method was responsible for the preservation of the school of Shi‘ism. As Dr. Samirah Mukhtar al-Laythi writes,
Among the contributory factors for the perpetuation of the Shi‘ah movement are taqiyyah and the clandestine propagation, which gave opportunity to the nascent Shi‘ah movement to advance away from the attention of the ‘Abbasid caliphs and their governors.11

But on the other hand, taqiyyah has been one of the causes of rifts within Shi‘ism because the Shi‘ah used to conceal their beliefs out of fear of the tyrants of the day. Even the Imams (‘a) used to do so. On account of the atmosphere of strangulation, the infallible Imams (‘a) somehow refrained from explicitly declaring their Imamate. This matter is indicated clearly in a dialogue between Imam ar-Ridha (‘a) and some followers of Waqifiyyah:

‘Ali ibn Abi Hamzah who was a Waqifi asked Imam ar-Ridha (‘a): “What happened to your father?” The Imam replied: “He passed away.” Ibn Abi Hamzah said: “Whom did he appoint as the successor after him?” The Imam answered: “It is me.” He said: “So, are you the Imam ought to be obeyed?”

The Imam responded: “Yes.” Ibn Siraj and Ibn Makari (two other Waqifis) inquired: “Has your father determined it for you?” Imam ar-Ridha (‘a): “Woe to you! There is no need for me to say, ‘He has designated me.’ Do you like me to go to Baghdad and say to Harun, ‘I am the Imam ought to be obeyed’? By God! I do not have such a duty.”

Ibn Abi Hamzah said: “You expressed something which had never been expressed by any of your forefathers.” The Imam said: “By God! My best grandfather, namely, the Prophet, expressed it when the verse was revealed and God commanded him to convey the message to his nearest of kin.”12

During the time of Imam al-Baqir (‘a), a number of the Shi‘ah abandoned their belief in his Imamate, on account of his exercise of taqiyyah in dealing with some issues, and embraced Zaydiyyah Batriyyah.13

Meanwhile, some people who could not grasp the expediency of taqiyyah accused the pure Imams (‘a) of error for not explicitly expressing their Imamate. They were in a sense radical and extremist. This motive had far-reaching contribution in the emergence of Zaydiyyah.

As such, when the pressure and repression were lessened and there were some opportunity for the pure Imams (‘a) to prove their Imamate, sprouting of Shi‘ah groups were minimal. During the time of Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) when there was good opportunity and the Imam had freedom of action due to the conflicts between the Umayyads and the ‘Abbasids, we witnessed the least number of rifts that take place, but after his martyrdom when the pressure and persecution of the ‘Abbasid caliph Mansur prevailed, the Nawusiyyah, Isma‘iliyyah, Khatabiyyah, Qaramatah, Samtiyyah, and Fathiyyah sects emerged.14

During the time of Imam ar-Rida (‘a), the condition was again favorable and even during the caliphate of Harun, the Imam enjoyed relative freedom of action. At the time, a number of the leading figures of Waqifiyyah such as ‘Abd ar-Rahman ibn Hajjaj, Rafa‘ah ibn Musa, Yunus ibn Ya‘qub, Jamil ibn Dibaj, Hamad ibn ‘Isa, and others abandoned their faith and believed in the Imamate of Imam ar-Ridha (‘a).

Similarly, after the martyrdom of the Imam, notwithstanding the young age of Imam al-Jawad (‘a), less rifts within Shi‘ism took place due to the efforts of Imam ar-Ridha (‘a) in introducing his son as his successor.

3. Ambition for Leadership

Whenever repression was prevalent and the pure Imams (‘a) were practicing taqiyyah for the preservation of the foundation of Shi‘ism and protecting the lives of the Shi‘ah, opportunist and power-greedy individuals within the ranks of the Shi‘ah, though without much belief in religion, used to take advantage of this condition. For example, in reply to one of his companions who asked about the contradiction of hadiths, Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) said: “There are those who want to possess the world and acquire leadership by means of personally interpreting {ta’wil} our hadiths.”15

For this reason, during the second century AH and after the spread of Shi‘ism as well as after the martyrdom of Imam as-Sadiq, Imam al-Kazim and Imam al-‘Askari (‘a), such opportunist and leadership-greedy individuals multiplied in the midst of the Shi‘ah and founded different sects for financial and political motives. After Imam al-Baqir (‘a) Mughayrah ibn Sa‘id claimed that he is the Imam and he has been designated by Imam as-Sajjad and Imam al-Baqir (‘a). Hence, his supporters were called followers of Mughayriyyah.

After the martyrdom of Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) the Nawusiyyah and Khatabiyyah sects came into existence whose founders used to utilize the names of Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) and his son Isma‘il in a bid to draw the people’s attention toward themselves. Ibn Nawus was the founder of Nawusiyyah; his followers denied Imam as-Sadiq’s (‘a) death and pointed to him as the Mahdi. The followers of Khatabiyyah rejected the death of Isma‘il, Imam as-Sadiq’s (‘a) son, and introduced their leader as the Imam after these two personages.16

The peak of financial motives in founding a certain sect was after the martyrdom of Imam al-Kazim (‘a). Yunus who was one of the companions of Imam al-Kazim (‘a) narrated that when Abu’l-Hasan Imam al-Kazim (‘a) passed away, each of his deputies acquired abundant possessions and wealth. As such, they suspended their judgment concerning the Imam and denied his death. For example, Ziyad Qanadi had a deposit of seventy thousand dinars while ‘Ali ibn Hamzah had three thousand dinars. Yunus thus wrote:

When I saw that condition and the truth became clear to me and also, I learned of the issue of Imamate of Hadhrat Ridha (‘a), I started relaying the truths and inviting the people toward the Imam. Those two persons pursued me, asking: “Why are you are calling on the people toward the Imamate of Ridha? If your motive is to acquire money, we shall make you rich” and they offered ten thousand dinars to me but I refused. They became angry with me and expressed enmity and hostility toward me.17

Sa‘d ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Ash‘ari also says:
After the martyrdom of Imam al-Kazim (‘a), the followers of Hasmawiyyah sect believed that Imam al-Kazim (‘a) did not die and was never imprisoned rather he was in occultation and he is the Mahdi. Their leader was Muhammad ibn Bashir who claimed that the seventh Imam appointed him as the successor; that rings and all things that the people need in the affairs of the religion and the world had been granted to him; that all prerogatives had been given to him; and that he assumed the position of the Imam.

Then, he was allegedly the Imam after Imam al-Kazim (‘a) and at the time that this Muhammad ibn Bashir was about to die he designated his son, Sami‘ ibn Muhammad, as his successor, alleging that obedience to him is obligatory till the appearance of al-Kazim (‘a). He also urged people to give to Sami‘ ibn Muhammad whatever they want to offer in the way of God. These people were labeled as “mamturah”.18

4. The Existence of Mentally Weak Individuals

There were coward individuals among the Shi‘ah who, when they would see a miracle from the Imam of their time, their intellect could not digest it and they would start expressing extreme beliefs notwithstanding the fact that the pure Imams (‘a) themselves used to strongly combat such beliefs. As narrated in Rijal Kashi, seventy black-skinned persons residing in Basrah expressed extreme beliefs about ‘Ali (‘a) after the Battle of Jamal.19

Opportunist and leadership-greedy elements also exploited the spirit of these people, misguiding them and letting them do things for their own benefit. For example, Abi’l-Khattab founded the Khattabiyyah sect, introduced Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) in the position of prophethood, allegedly bestowed on him by God, and claimed himself to be the Imam and successor of Imam as-Sadiq (‘a).20

Also, during the minor occultation {ghaybah as-sughrah} of the Imam of the Time (‘a), Ibn Nasir initially introduced himself as the ‘door’ (medium) {bab} and deputy {wakil} of the Imam in explaining the religions laws and collecting the religious funds. Later on, he started claiming prophethood and finally went to the extent of claiming divinity.21 His followers also accepted him as such. As a matter of fact, it was on account of such a mentality of his followers that he made such claims. In essence, extremist sects were founded under such grounds.

The Infallible Imams’ (‘a) Campaign against Extreme Views

One of the potent dangers that threatened the Shi‘ah throughout history is the issue of the extremists {ghalis} and the attribution of their views to the Shi‘ah. The state of affairs is such that the adversaries and enemies of the Shi‘ah have always accused them of committing extremism and fanaticism with respect to their Imams.

At this juncture, we shall not engage in talking about the different extremist {ghullah} sects, discussing their views and beliefs. Of course, it must be noted that the most salient feature and point of convergence of all the extremist sects is their extremism with respect to the right of the Imams by blasphemously elevating their station to the station of divinity.

The existence of the extremists {ghullat} among the Muslims is caused more by external factors than internal ones. Through direct and face-to-face confrontations and encounters, the enemies of Islam were not able to strike a blow to Islam while Islam enlightened their lands and defeated its enemies. As such, they decided to strike a blow to Islam from within. So, they targeted the principal principles of Islam.

The political establishments were also not disinterested in encouraging, or at least tolerating, such individuals to emerge from among the Shi‘ah and followers of the Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet (S) so as to attribute these individuals’ views to the Shi‘ah, and in so doing, the followers of the Ahl al-Bayt could be presented as extremists and outside the community of Muslims.

Although this trend had started since the caliphate of the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) and a number of mentally weak elements held extreme views regarding him (who were executed for not recanting their deviant views),22 ‘Abd Allah ibn Saba’ is a fictitious and imaginary figure. The first person to have mentioned him is Tabari the historian. He, in turn, has taken the account of this Ibn Saba’ from Sayf ibn ‘Umar, whose being known as a liar has been unanimously agreed upon by the scholars of rijal.23

The pure Imams (‘a) had always faced this problem and strongly combated it, constantly cursing the extremists and informing the people of the danger posed by these extremists. The Imams (‘a) used to order the Shi‘ah not to socialize with them nor establish relationship with them.24 Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) had mentioned the names of a number of chief extremists {ghalis} such as Mughayrah ibn Sa‘id, Bayan, Sa’id Nahdi, Harith Shami, ‘Abd Allah ibn Harith, Hamzah ibn ‘Ammar Barbari, and Abu’l-Khattab, and cursed them.25

As the effect of the pure Imams’ (‘a) curse, they suffered from pain and torment and were killed under terrible conditions. As Imam ar-Ridha (‘a) says,
Banan used to tell lies about Imam as-Sajjad (‘a); God made him taste the sharpness of the sword. Mughayrah ibn Sa‘id used to tell lies about Imam al-Baqir (‘a) and he also tasted the sharpness of the sword. Muhammad ibn Bashir used to lie about Abu’l-Hasan al-Kazim (‘a) and God, the Exalted, also made him perish via the sword. Abu’l-Khattab used to lie about Abu ‘Abd Allah Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) and he was also killed via the sword. And the one telling lies about me is Muhammad ibn Furat.26

The period of Imam Hasan al-‘Askari had been one of the periods when the trend of extremism {ghullah} gained optimal momentum. It is for this reason that the Imam had cursed individuals such as Qasim Yaqtini, ‘Ali ibn Haskah Qummi, Ibn Baba Qummi Fihri, Muhammad ibn Nasir Numayri, and Fars ibn Hatam Qazwini who were considered among the chiefs and leaders of extremism.27

Therefore, in Shi‘ah-populated regions such as Qum there had always been an anti-extremism {ghullah} atmosphere and the extremists were not permitted to reside there. For this reason, in describing the personal characters of Husayn ibn ‘Abd Allah Muharrar, Ibn Dawud has said: “It is reported that he always expelled from the city of Qum those who were accused of extremism.”28

As narrated by Ibn Hajm, Abu’l-Hasan Muhammad ibn Ahmad, a son of Imam al-Kazim (‘a) who, during the third century AH, lived in Azerbaijan where he was held in high esteem, was so strict against the preachers of extremist sects that they provided the means for his murder and they persuaded Mufallah Ghulam ibn Abi’s-Saj, the governor of Azerbaijan, to kill him.29

Lesson 23: Summary

Although the blessed names of the twelve Imams (‘a) are recorded in the Prophetic traditions and the Shi‘ah were familiar with their names prior to meeting them, a series of reasons and factors caused some Shi‘ah to commit error with respect to the matter (Imamate) and to deviate from the straight path. Among these factors are the following:

1. Repression: After 40 AH when the Umayyads assumed power, repression of the Shi‘ah community was the order of the day. The same state of affairs prevailed during the ‘Abbasid period, and this condition caused the Shi‘ah not to be able to acquire the necessary knowledge about their Imams.

2. Taqiyyah {dissimulation}: Taqiyyah contributed to the preservation of the Shi‘ah school. Yet, it has also been one of the factors for the emergence of rifts within Shi‘ism because the pure Imams (‘a) used to avoid explicitly declaring their Imamate.

3. Ambition for leadership and love of the world: There were always opportunist individuals in the ranks of the Shi‘ah who used to take advantage of the atmosphere of strangulation prevalent in the Shi‘ah community and create sects to advance their personal interests.

4. The existence of mentally weak individuals: There were mentally weak individuals among the Shi‘ah whose minds could not properly grasp the miracles that they witnessed from the Imams and would start to hold extreme views.

The issue of extremism {ghullah} was one of the most serious dangers that had threatened the Shi‘ah. The pure Imams (‘a) always confronted this matter, intensely informing the people of its peril.

Lesson 23: Questions

1. What were the reasons behind the rifts within Shi‘ism?

2. How did the Imams (‘a) combat extremist trends?

  • 1. Surah an-Nisa’ 4:59.
  • 2. Mahdi Pishva’i, Shakhsiyyat-ha-ye Islami-ye Shi‘eh, 1st edition (Qum: Intisharat-e Tawhid, 1359 AHS), p. 63 as quoted from Tafsir Safi, vol. 1, p. 366; Kamal ad-Din wa Tamam an-Ni‘mah with Persian translation (Tehran), vol. 1, p. 365.
  • 3. Shaykh at-Tusi, Ikhtiyar Ma‘rifah ar-Rijal (Rijal Kashi), researched by Sayyid Mahdi Raja’i (Qum: Mu’assasah Al al-Bayt at-Turath, 1404 AH), vol. 1, p. 218.
  • 4. Muhammad Husayn Zayn ‘Amili, Ash-Shi‘ah fi’t-Tarikh, trans. Muhammad-Rida ‘Ata’i, 2nd edition (Mashhad: Bunyad-e Pazhuhesh-ha-ye Islami-ye Astan-e Quds-e Radhawi, 1375 AHS), p 120.
  • 5. Abi ‘Ali al-Fadhl ibn al-Hasan Tabarsi, I‘lam al-Wara bi A‘lam al-Huda (Qum: Mu’assasah Al al-Bayt Li Ihya’ at-Turath, 1417 AH), vol. 2, p. 13.
  • 6. Muhammad Husayn Muzaffar, Tarikh ash-Shi‘ah (Qum: Manshurat Maktabah Basirati, n.d.), p. 47.
  • 7. ‘Ali ibn al-Husayn Abu’l-Faraj al-Isfahani, Maqatil at-Talibiyyin (Qum: Manshurat ash-Sharif ar-Radi, 1416 AH), p. 414.
  • 8. Ash-Shi‘ah fi’t-Tarikh, p. 123.
  • 9. Shaykh at-Tusi, Ikhtiyar Ma‘rifah ar-Rijal (Rijal Kashi), researched by Sayyid Mahdi Raja’i (Qum: Mu’assasah Al al-Bayt at-Turath, 1404 AH), vol. 1, p. 325.
  • 10. Sayyid Muhsin Amin, A‘yan ash-Shi‘ah (Beirut: Dar at-Ta‘aruf Li’l-Matbu‘at, n.d.), p. 199.
  • 11. Dr. Samirah Mukhtar al-Laythi, Jihad ash-Shi‘ah (Beirut: Dar al-Jayl, 1396 AH), p. 394.
  • 12. Ibid., p. 763.
  • 13. Sa‘d ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Qummi Ash‘ari, Al-Maqalat wa’l-Firaq, 2nd edition (Tehran: Markaz-e Intisharat-e ‘Ilmi va Farhangi, 1360 AHS), p. 75.
  • 14. Ibid., p. 79.
  • 15. Ikhtiyar Ma‘rifah ar-Rijal (Rijal Kashi), vol. 1, p. 374.
  • 16. Ibid., p. 80.
  • 17. Ash-Shi‘ah fi’t-Tarikh, p. 123 as quoted from Shaykh at-Tusi, Al-Ghaybah, p. 46.
  • 18. Al-Maqalat wa’l-Firaq, p. 91.
  • 19. When the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) was relieved of the Battle of the Jamal, seventy black-skinned persons residing in Basrah came to the Imam and talked to him in their vernacular. ‘Ali (‘a) talked to them in their vernacular, too. Hence, they started expressing extreme views about the Imam. ‘Ali (‘a) told them, “I am a servant of God and His creature.”
    They did not believe and even insisted that the Imam is equal to God. So, the Imam asked them to repent to God for holding such a deviant view, but they violently refused to repent. As such, they had been executed. Ikhtiyar Ma‘rifah ar-Rijal (Rijal Kashi), vol. 1, p. 325.
  • 20. Shahristani, Kitab al-Milal wa’n-Nihal (Qum: Manshurat ash-Sharif ar-Radi, 1364 AHS), vol. 1, p. 160.
  • 21. Ikhtiyar Ma‘rifah ar-Rijal (Rijal Kashi), vol. 2, p. 805.
  • 22. Ikhtiyar Ma‘rifah ar-Rijal (Rijal Kashi), vol. 1, p. 325.
  • 23. See Sayyid Murtadha al-‘Askari, ‘Abd Allah ibn Saba’ wa Asatir Ukhra, 6th edition (1413 AH/1993), vol. 2, pp. 328-375.
    Its abridged English version is Sayyid Murtadha al-‘Askari, ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ and Other Myths, trans. M.J. Muqaddas (Tehran: World Organization for Islamic Services, 1984). {Trans.}
  • 24. Ikhtiyar Ma‘rifah ar-Rijal (Rijal Kashi), vol. 2, p. 586.
  • 25. Ibid., p. 577.
  • 26. Ibid., p. 591.
  • 27. Ibid., p. 805.
  • 28. Rijal ibn Dawud (Qum: Manshurat ar-Radhi, n.d.), p. 240.
  • 29. Abu Muhammad ‘Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Sa‘id ibn Hazm al-Andalusi, Jumhazah Insab al-‘Arab, 1st edition (Beirut: n.p., 1403 AH), p. 63.