This article is from almost ten years ago, written by Dr. Hassan Ansari.¹

---

Among the manuscripts I have examined in one of the libraries affiliated with the Süleymaniye Library is a document containing a brief multi-page text (part of which is older than the rest), titled Risalat Fatawa al-‘Ulama fi al-Ta’ifa al-Nusayriyya (Treatise of Scholars’ Fatwas on the Nusayri Sect). This text includes an inquiry regarding the Nusayris and responses from several Sunni scholars during the Mamluk era, including Ibn Taymiyyah.

The significance of this text lies not only in its inclusion of fatwas declaring the Nusayris disbelievers (takfir) by Sunni scholars of that time and the understanding they had of Nusayri beliefs, but also in the fact that it contains a new fatwa by Ibn Taymiyyah on this subject, which adds extraordinary importance to the document. In this text, several Sunni scholars have responded to the inquiry or endorsed and attested to the issued fatwas.

As we know, multiple fatwas by Ibn Taymiyyah regarding the Nusayris are already available, and their texts, with varying wording, have been repeatedly published and even translated into French and English. However, what we encounter in this manuscript includes a different text of the inquiry and Ibn Taymiyyah’s response to it. Additionally, other scholars of the same period have also responded to this inquiry, with their responses or endorsements and names appearing in this manuscript.

The Text of the Inquiry (Istifta’)

The text of the inquiry is as follows:

“In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. To proceed: This is a copy that has arrived from the Futuhat al-Sahiliyya in the year 715 AH. It bears the endorsements of senior scholars and prominent religious leaders—may God support and fortify them—and has been sent to the Sultan’s court for review—may God protect and grant it victory.

The question is as follows:

What do the esteemed scholars, the leaders of religion (may God be pleased with them all), say about the Nusayris, who believe in the divinity of Ali ibn Abi Talib (may God be pleased with him) and that divinity continues to manifest in different persons, appearing first in Ali, then in Shim‘un, then in Yusuf, and others? They claim that Muhammad was a veil (hijab) over Ali, just as Jesus was a veil over Shim‘un, Moses a veil over Joshua, and Jacob a veil over Yusuf. They hold similar beliefs for each era in which divinity manifests, saying that it is currently manifest in some of their elders (shaykhs). They permit the consumption of wine and other forbidden things, do not believe in the obligation of the five daily prayers, the fasting of Ramadan, or the pilgrimage to the Ancient House (Ka‘ba).

They interpret the five prayers as representing five names, which they venerate, and claim that the days of Ramadan represent the names of thirty men and its nights the names of thirty women. They hold similar views about the rest of the purified Shari‘a, resembling the beliefs of the Qaramita and Isma‘ilis. They deny the resurrection of people from their graves and other matters revealed by the messengers (peace be upon them), such as the afterlife and the Day of Judgment. They believe in the transmigration of human souls into the bodies of animals and other beings.

Are these people disbelievers (kuffar) or not? Are they comparable to Jews and Christians, whose slaughtered animals are lawful to eat, and whose women are lawful to marry, or are they worse? Is it permissible to employ these people in Muslim villages while they adhere to this religion, or must they be compelled to follow the laws of Islam, such as establishing the five daily prayers, observing other obligations, announcing the call to prayer, and adhering to the prohibitions established by God and His Messenger?

If they have elders (shaykhs) who address them with such beliefs, should these elders be prevented from doing so or not? For those among them who do not repent, is it permissible to execute them or not? Is it obligatory for Muslim rulers to prevent them from this or not? Please provide us with your ruling, and may you be rewarded.”

Following this, the manuscript includes Ibn Taymiyyah’s response, which differs from the texts of his fatwas that are already known. The document also contains the names of other scholars and jurists whose endorsements or exact fatwas are included. These are as follows:

• Qadi Shams al-Din Muhammad ibn al-‘Iz al-Hanafi
• Shaykh Burhan al-Din Ibrahim ibn ‘Abd al-Haqq al-Hanafi
• Shaykh Shihab al-Din ibn ‘Abd al-Haqq
• Shaykh Kamal al-Din ibn al-Zamlakani al-Shafi‘i
• Shaykh Jalal al-Din al-Qazwini, the preacher at the Umayyad Mosque
• Shaykh Jamal al-Din ibn al-Shirishi al-Shafi‘i
• Shaykh Burhan al-Din ibn Shaykh Taj al-Din al-Fazari al-Shafi‘i
• Shaykh Sadr al-Din ibn Sulayman ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam al-Maliki
• Chief Judge Najm al-Din ibn Sasra al-Shafi‘i

At this point, the main section related to the response to the inquiry ends. However, the manuscript continues with several later endorsements from Ottoman-era jurists written in a newer script. These later responses and texts are more detailed.

The names of these scholars are as follows:

• Muhammad ibn al-Shaykh Dawud al-Bazli al-Shafi‘i
• Abu Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr ibn Abi Bakr (as recorded in the text) al-Balatunsi al-Shafi‘i
• Ahmad ibn Ahmad ibn Ibrahim al-Shafi‘i
• ‘Ali ibn Atiyyah ibn Hasan ibn Muhammad, nicknamed ‘Alwan, originally from Hit, born and raised in Hama, following the Shafi‘i school and the Muhammadi Sufi path

These texts provide significant historical information about the beliefs of the Nusayris and Sunni perspectives on them during the Mamluk and Ottoman periods in the Levant. Given the hadith-centric and anti-philosophical tendencies of these scholars and jurists, their understanding of the esoteric and philosophical beliefs of the Nusayris could not have been entirely accurate. Through these texts, one can clearly observe the political and sectarian motivations behind these declarations of takfir (excommunication) and the ways Mamluk and Ottoman rulers utilized jurists to leverage religion and sectarianism for political purposes.

Interestingly, in these inquiries, attempts were made to draw upon the fatwas of jurists from all four Sunni schools of thought.

The historical context, the variations in the texts of Ibn Taymiyyah’s fatwas on this topic, the precise date of his fatwa regarding the Nusayris, and the reception of these fatwas by Ottoman-era scholars have all been subjects of various studies. However, the current manuscript sheds new light on the topic and fundamentally alters some conclusions from prior research.

The text of these few pages is set to be published in an independent article along with an analysis of the material.

1. Source