A Beginner’s Companion

to Arabic Manuscripts

Adapted from an Intensive on Arabic

Manuscripts by Shaykh Ṣāliḥ al-Azharī

by
Muntasir Zaman
 C ontents
Preface3
Key Terms 5

Gathering Manuscripts 8

Styles of Writing 13

Scribal Terminology  17

Extra Components of a Manuscript 23

Audition Certificate (Ṭibāq al-Samāʿ) 26

Book Title 30

The Scribe 32

Dates34

Stages of a Manuscript 36

Arrangement of Manuscripts for Editing 40

Conclusion 42

Case Study 44

Bibliography 49
 P reface
While the invention of the typewriter in the 19th century
opened avenues to proliferate knowledge that were hith-
erto unfathomable, it also led to a host of negative conse-
quences. For one, it created a disconnect between modern
readers—who are accustomed to typed writing—and classi-
cal handwritten manuscripts, leaving in its wake a genera-
tion that struggles to tap into a rich resource of knowledge.
Dealing with manuscripts is a science in itself. Therefore,
one way to remedy the current situation is to increase ex-
posure to classical manuscripts and study the fundamentals
with experts in the field.
Shaykh Ṣāliḥ b. Muḥammad al-Azharī, a seasoned cura-
tor at the Egyptian National Library, conducted a ten-day
intensive on studying Arabic manuscripts. The intensive
was divided into fourteen lectures. It comprised a theoret-
ical exposé of the most important concepts that a student
should be aware of when dealing with Arabic manuscripts.
With over a decade of professional experience in handling
manuscripts, he seamlessly explained fundamental concepts
in the field and provided countless practical examples.
The following companion is based on notes that I
took during the intensive. By no means are these notes
exhaustive nor are they intended to make one an expert
on Arabic manuscripts. At most, it is hoped that they can
help students develop familiarity with some of the basics
of dealing with manuscripts and pave the road for further

3
 Preface

study. Works like Adam Gacek’s Arabic Manuscripts: A Va-

demecum for Readers should be consulted by those seek-
ing more detail in English. To make this companion more
comprehensive, I added personal notes, illustrations from
other manuscripts, and a few excerpts from other sources;
my own notes are in square brackets and the excerpts are
referenced. All shortcomings and errors are solely mine.

Muntasir Zaman

4
 K ey T erms
In terms of its composition, a manuscript consists of a cov-
er page, main text, marginal notes, and a concluding pas-
sage, each of which plays a crucial role in unlocking the
manuscript’s secrets. The following are some commonly
used terms when discussing the pages of manuscripts:
• Waraqa refers to a folio. Abbreviation: qāf.
• Wajh is the front of the folio (a-page recto). Abbrevia-
tion: wāw or alif.
• Ẓahr is the back of the folio (b-page verso). Abbrevia-
tion: ẓāʾ or bāʾ.
• e.g. )‫ظ‬/٥‫ )ق‬is a reference to the back of the fifth
folio of the manuscript.
• Lawḥ is a scan of two pages, comprising the ẓahr of one
waraqa and the wajh of another. Symbol: lām.
• Kurrāsa refers to every ten folios. Abbreviation: kāf on
the top left corner of the page.
• Mujallad is a codex comprising many kurāsas.
• Majmūʿ is a codex comprising multiple manuscripts.
• Nuskha Mulaffaqa is a manuscript written by multiple
scribes.

5
 Key Terms

• Taʿqība, or a catchword, is the practice of writing the

first word of a page in the bottom corner of the previous
page to alert readers to potential omissions. [fa-qultu]

Often the pagination found on manuscripts was a later

addition. This is important to note because a manuscript
may have missing pages, but the pagination continues un-
interrupted because it was written by a later scribe.
The cover page (ṣafḥat ʿunwān) usually contains in-
formation like the book title, author name, book’s chain
of transmission, ownership statement (tamalluk), endow-
ment notice (waqfiyya), study notes (muṭālaʿa), audition
certificate (ṭibāq al-samāʿ), and other miscellaneous notes.
This information can be vital when working on or consult-
ing any manuscript; it should not be dismissed as random
scribbling.

6
 Key Terms

The concluding passage (khitām) of a manuscript is

akin to an ID. It contains the name of the scribe, date and
place of transcription, authorizations, and other important
details.

Margins (ḥāshiya): scribes often used the margins to

add notes, make amendments, and so on. If the notes were
lengthy, they were written on a separate page and appended.

7
 Gathering Manuscripts
When a researcher sets out to work on a manuscript of a
book or simply wants to locate a passage in it, it is impera-
tive to gather as many manuscripts of the book as possible.
Common sources for locating manuscripts are the fahāris
(catalogs). It should be noted the information found in
manuscript catalogs often contain inaccuracies that stem
from a poor reading of the manuscripts and citation of
unverified information.
Among the most commonly used catalogs is the Ger-
man Orientalist Carl Brockelmann’s (d. 1956) Geschichte
der Arabischen Litteratur, translated into Arabic as Tārīkh
al-Adab al-ʿArabī. The Turkish scholar Fuat Sezgin (d.
2018) wrote Geschichte des Arabischen Schrifttums, trans-
lated into Arabic as Tārīkh al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, in which he
builds on and critiques Carl Brockelmann. These are two
of the most common books consulted for locating manu-
scripts. However, they are outdated, and the databases on
existing manuscripts have developed extensively.
Subsequent works include Muʿjam Tārīkh al-Turāth
al-Islāmī by ‘Alī Riḍā and Aḥmad Ṭawrān. Another exten-
sive, updated mega-catalog of manuscripts is al-Fahras al-
Shāmil li al-Turāth al-ʿArabī al-Islāmī al-Makhṭūṭ by Muʾas-
sisat Āl al-Bayt. None of the aforementioned works are
exhaustive; they are only starting points. To gain familiarity
with the libraries throughout the world and their respec-
tive catalogs and manuscripts, one may read World Survey

8
 Gathering Manuscripts

of Islamic Manuscripts by al-Furqan Islamic Heritage Foun-

dation, translated into Arabic as al-Makhṭūṭāṭ al-Islāmiyya
fi al-ʿĀlam. There are invaluable online resources to ob-
tain digital copies of manuscripts, such as al-furqan.com/
world_library/ and https://www.almajidcenter.org/search.
php.
[A researcher should always remember how potentially
misleading manuscript catalogs can be. The al-Fahras al-
Shāmil catalog details a manuscript of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim that
is dated to 368 AH, a century after Imām Muslim’s de-
mise, located in the Alexandria Municipal Library in Egypt.
However, the information provided in the catalog is incor-
rect. The manuscript held in the Alexandria Library (item
no. 836B) is correctly dated to 368 AH and is even titled
as the thirteenth codex of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim on the cover page,
but it is not a manuscript of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Rather, it is a
partial manuscript of Qāḍī Isḥāq al-Bustī’s (d. 307 AH)
Qurʾānic exegesis. It is possible that the curator who labeled
this manuscript confused the two books due to similarities
in their structure: al-Bustī’s work is a transmission-based
exegesis (maʾthūr) filled with chains of transmission that
resemble the structure of Muslim’s Ṣaḥīḥ. Then the catalog-
er recorded the available data without verification.]

9
 Gathering Manuscripts

When searching for a particular manuscript or giving

reference to one, take the following points into consider-
ation:
• Understand the numbering and storage system of a li-
brary. For instance, citing Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī item no. 300
in the Egyptian National Library can be misleading be-
cause there are two sections in the library: 1) the orig-
inal library and 2) subsequently added libraries, and
each has its own numbering system.

10
 Gathering Manuscripts

• Manuscripts are added to libraries daily, so the absence

of a manuscript in a catalog does not mean that it does
not exist in a given library.
• Larger libraries consist of smaller personal libraries. Af-
ter a scholar passes away, his personal library may be
endowed to or purchased for a larger library and kept
intact. The Egyptian historian Aḥmad Taymūr Pasha
(d. 1930) endowed his private library of over twenty
thousand books to the Egyptian National Library. Con-
sequently, the numbering will differ for the manuscripts
found in these smaller libraries.
• Be aware of the presence of multiple copies of the same
manuscript in different libraries. There may appear to
be two manuscripts, one in Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriyya
and the other in the Ẓāhiriyya library in Damascus. But
one may be a scan of the other.
• [Early catalogs like that of Brockelmann may refer-
ence libraries that have since been shut down or re-
located. For instance, the libraries of ʿĀrif Ḥikmat and
Maḥmūdiyya in Madīnah were destroyed, so their con-
tents were relocated to the Islamic University of Madi-
nah. Likewise, the books in the British Museum were
relocated to the British Library.]
General points to remember: When an expert has
worked on a particular scholar’s book (e.g. Ikmāl of Mugh-
laṭāy), one would be remiss not to consult that expert’s
introduction where the book’s manuscripts are studied. He

11
 Gathering Manuscripts

may have pointed out certain inaccuracies that he came

across in the process of editing that may provide insights
into the manuscript that one intends to study. Books ded-
icated to specific scholars are must-reads before beginning
work on a manuscript. If a researcher intends to study a
manuscript of one of al-Sakhāwī’s works, he should first
consult studies on the scholar himself, like Badr ʿAmmāsh’s
al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Sakhāwī wa Juhūduhu fi al-Ḥadīth wa ʿUlūmuhu.
These authors have exerted considerable effort in compil-
ing these books, so the information they share on a schol-
ar’s oeuvre may be difficult to learn on one’s own. Like-
wise, works on the field as a whole should be considered.
Someone who intends to work on a manuscript related to
Sīra is expected to consult Maṣādir al-Sīra al-Nabawiyya by
Muḥammad Yusrī Salāma.

12
 Styles of Writing
Scribes had different styles of writing based on their region,
time, and personal handwriting. The editor of a manuscript is
expected to type the text according to modern writing conven-
tions; differences based on writing style should not be pointed
out in the footnotes. It is important to familiarize oneself with
each scribe’s personal style of writing by reading several pages
of his manuscript. There were some general scribal habits that
are commonly found in manuscripts, and knowing them will
help students read the text more efficiently.
• The omission of a hamza. [innamā jāʾa min/fī-masḥ al-raʾs].

• The omission of an alif. [Abū Muʿāwiya/Muḥammad b.

ʿUthmān/yā Rasūl Allāh].

• The omssion of the oblique stroke on a kāf’s ascender.

[dhālik katabahu ʿAbd/min al-madrasa al-madhkūra/
bal adkhur kalām].

13
 Styles of Writing

• Writing yāʾ maqṣūra with two dots beneath it. [man

saʿā min].

• A fatḥa followed by a ḍamma was often adjoined. [qāl

Rasūl Allāh].

• A kasra was sometimes written in the form of a slanted

line. [rakḍa min].

• Ibn was often written as a slant to the previous name.

[Muḥammad b. ʿAbd Allāh/Yūsuf b. al-Zakī].

Certain words occurred frequently, so scribes used

symbols, such as ṣād for muṣannif; shīn for shāriḥ; or ḥāʾ for
ḥīnaʿidhin or taḥwīl. [For a list of common abbreviations,
see Gacek, pp. 313-317].
Scholars from the Islamic West (Maghreb) had a differ-
ent method of writing and arranging the alphabet. Major

14
 Styles of Writing

differences include: 1) the shadda is written like a qulāmat

ẓufr (see below); 2) fāʾ is written with a dot beneath it; and
3) qāf is written with one dot above it. Hereunder is the
Maghrebi arrangement of the alphabet, followed by a table
(Gacek, pp. 11, 150) that outlines the varying forms of the
alphabet per their method of writing.

15
 Styles of Writing

[There are numerous Arabic scripts, each with its own

history, style, and function. Ṭāhir al-Jazāʾirī (d. 1920)
lists the common usages of the canonical scripts as fol-
lows: muḥaqqaq and rayḥān for writing Qurʾānic codices
(maṣāḥif); naskh for literature on Hadith, Tafsir, and the
like; thuluth for educational purposes; tawqīʿ for official doc-
uments; riqāʿ for ordinary letters; and muʾannaq for poetry.
See al-Jazāʾirī, Tawjīh al-Naẓar, vol. 2, p. 801.]

16
 Scribal T erminology
The following maxim (qānūn al-nasākha) informed a
scribe’s decision to make amendments to a manuscript:
“ensure a passage’s (1) accuracy and (2) aesthetics; if one
of the two is to be compromised, then maintain accuracy.”
To prevent the reader from confusing words, scribes uti-
lized different symbols to ensure an accurate reading of the
text. Here are some of the most common symbols:
• Qulāmat ẓufr, a symbol that resembles a clipped nail
(v). Since dots were often omitted from letters, this
symbol was placed above some muhmal (unpointed)
letters to prevent confusion with their mu‘jam (point-
ed) counterparts, such as rāʾ and sīn. [ʿind nafsī/al-nās].

• The miniature form of certain muhmal letters (e.g. ʿayn

and ḥāʾ) was written as a subscript to prevent confu-
sion with their muʿjam counterparts, [ʿalā al-raḥl/ Baḥr
b. Naṣr].

17
 Scribal Terminology

• When a scribe accidently shuffled names or words, he

wrote two mīms or qāf and khāʾ (esp. the Maghrebis)
on the words to let the reader know that they should
be read in reverse order. These terms stand for muʾakh�-
khar and muqaddam. [al-hiba wa al-waṣiyya/Musā b.
Rizq Allāh].

• Ṣaḥḥ: written above a word to indicate that this word is

more accurate and should be added to the main text. Or
it is placed beside an added word to show that its ad-
dition was deliberate. [wa dhālik ann al-maqṣūd/Salmā
Suʿdā]

18
 Scribal Terminology

• Ḍabba: an elongated ṣād was written above ostensibly

inaccurate phrases to notify the reader that the word
is not a scribal error or that the scribe is aware of the
issue, but that is how the author wrote it—similar to
[sic]. In the following example, a reader may assume
that there is a name missing in the chain between Aṭāʾ,
a successor, and the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬. By writing a ḍabba
above [the hamza of] ʿAṭāʾ, the scribe indicated that he
is aware of this potential confusion, and that is how it
was meant to appear in the manuscript.

• Khaff: the letter is not to be read with a shadda. [ʿAbd

Allāh b. Salām].

• Maʿan: when there are two vowelizations of a word.

[mathal man faqiha or faquha].

19
 Scribal Terminology

• Variant readings from other manuscripts are noted in

the margins with the abbreviation khāʾ (some Maghre-
bis use the term umm). After revising the manuscript, if
a variation is noticed in the exemplar (al-aṣl al-manqūl
minh) it was noted in the margin followed by the word
aṣl. These marginal notes were often followed by the
word ṣaḥḥ. [bi al-maghānim * bi al-maghārim/al-Ḥafrī
* al-Jaʿdī; Gacek, p. 271, 273].

• Dāra: drawing a circle to sperate between sections or

ḥadiths. Originally, it was written as a textual divider,
then al-Khaṭīb (d. 463 AH) preferred that a scribe fill
the circle with a dot (manqūṭa) or a line (mashqūqa;
the form of a hāʾ) after checking that section or ḥadīth.
[fa-rujimā * qāl/ aw baʿdahu * akhbaranā].

20
 Scribal Terminology

• Laḥaq: to draw a curved line above a space where an

omitted word should be added; the line will point to the
margin where the given word is written and marked
with ṣaḥḥ. [wa ḥasuna an * yaʾtī].

• Kashṭ: to erase a word using a sharp object. [qawl Allāh].

• Ḍarb: to cross out a scribal error. [kalām al-nāqiḍ nāqiḍ]

• Lā ilā: when the passage is too long to cross over, as it

will ruin the aesthetics of the text, the passage that is to
be rendered null will begin with lā above it and close
with ilā. Some scribes used min instead of lā.

21
 Scribal Terminology

• Bayān: when an illegible word was rewritten in the

margin, the word bayān or nūn would be written above
it [not to be confused for the nūn that indicates man-
uscript-variations—commonly found in the subconti-
nent]. In some cases, it was written as badal or lām.

• When a word was illegible in the main text, its isolated

letterforms were rewritten in the margins. [bughayl]

22
 Extra C omponents of a Manuscript
A manuscript is a historical document that contains valu-
able information in addition to the main text. The follow-
ing are the most vital extra components [not from the au-
thor] of a manuscript.
Waqfiyya: endowment notice. It is a note or stamp that
indicates the endowment of the manuscript. This is typi-
cally found on the cover page or last page, but it can also
be found in the margins of a random page. This is usu-
ally opened with words like waqafa, ḥabbasa, sabbala, and
taṣaddaqa, and it concludes with the verse: fa-man baddala-
hu baʿda mā samiʿahu (al-Baqara: 181). A waqfiyya gener-
ally contains: 1) the book title and the author’s name; 2)
the name of the scribe; 3) the name of the caretaker; 4) the
conditions of endowment; 5) the names of the signatories/
witnesses; and 6) the date of endowment. A waqfiyya can
help a researcher figure out information about the manu-
script that may not be written elsewhere, like the book title.

23
 Extra Components of a Manuscript

Tamalluk: ownership statement. This indicates owner-

ship of the manuscript. Phrases like mālikuhu, min kutub, li,
min niʿam Allāh ʿalā, fī nawbat, etc. introduce the owner of
the manuscript. The first example from the right comprises
a handwritten ownership notice (tamalluk) from Ibn ʿIrāq
al-Kinānī (d. 963 AH), the author of Tanzīh al-Sharīʿa al-
Marfūʿa. This notice proves—from Ibn ʿIrāq himself—that
the name is vowelized as ʿIrāq, and not ʿArrāq, as is com-
monly assumed.

24
 Extra Components of a Manuscript

Muṭālaʿa: study note. After reading a manuscript, a

scholar may add a note on the cover or end page. This may
indicate the value of the book, as well as the fact that this
book forms part of the resources of the reader. [ṭālaʿahu wa
naqalahu al-ʿabd]

General notes: some scribes or later readers may add

couplets of poetry, interesting quotes, or passages from the
text itself.
Ṭibāq al-Samāʿ: audition certificate; see below.

25
 Audition C ertificate (Ṭ ibāq al -Samā ʿ)

Scholars held auditions (majālis al-samā’) to dictate books

to students and the general public. Apart from the teacher,
there were other key roles in these auditions, such as: 1)
the mustamlī, who was responsible for conveying the teach-
er’s words to the audience; 2) kātib al-samāʿ; the registrar,
whose duty was to take note of those who attended, the
state of the attendees, those who were absent, etc.; 3) the
qāriʾ, the lector who was appointed to recite the text. Once
a student finished listening to the text he would go to the
teacher and get his book signed to testify to his attendance.
At times, if the registrar was qualified, students would go to
him to get their books signed. The audition certificate that
was written upon successful completion of a text consisted
of several parts.
1. Opening words, such as samiʿa ʿalayy, qaraʾa ʿalayy
[from author], balagha samāʿan, samiʿtu [student].
a. The phrase wa-ṣaḥḥ was added as an attesta-
tion to the validity of the audition.
2. Title and author’s name: Book titles were often ab-
breviated in audition certificates, like al-Ṣaḥīḥ instead
of al-Jāmiʿ al-Musnad al-Ṣaḥīḥ or al-ʿIlm instead of Jāmiʿ
Bayān al-ʿIlm wa Faḍlihī.
3. Name of the teacher. This was prefaced with honorif-
ics and titles like al-ʿālim, al-wariʿ, and al-fāḍil.

26
 Audition Certificate (Ṭibāq al-Samāʿ

4. Chain of transmission to the book. If the teacher

was not the author of the audited text, he would cite his
chain by writing bi-ḥaqq ijāzatihi or bi-samāʿihi. If the
chain was not mentioned, it was indicated with words
like bi-sanadihi fi-awwalihi [cited in the beginning of the
text] or bi-sanadihi tarāhu [via his transmission that can
be found before or after].
a. The bāʾ in this phrase is sababiyya, i.e. due
to the right of transmission that he received
from so-and-so.
5. Name of attendees. Concision without confusion
(ikhtiṣār ghayr mulbis) was key. Titles were omitted or
kept to a minimum (e.g. amīr for a governor or wajīh
for a nobleman), and the names of relatives were re-
corded together. Mention was made of the number of
sessions from which a student was absent.
a. The phrase ḥaḍar or ḥuḍuran was used to
show the attendee was around five or young-
er; the age was spelled out or the number
was written.
6. Name of the lector. The duty of reciting the text was
consigned to someone with knowledge of vowelization
and pronunciation and one who had a loud voice. The
name of the lector was introduced in the certificate
with the words bi–qirāʾa.

27
 Audition Certificate (Ṭibāq al-Samāʿ

7. Kātib al-Samāʿ: the registrar who recorded informa-

tion about the attendees and wrote the audition certif-
icate. He is similar to an invigilator. He is often distin-
guished from ḍābiṭ al-asmāʾ.
a. The phrases wa dhā khaṭṭuhu and wa-lahū al-
khaṭṭ mean that it was written by the named
person.
8. Owner of the manuscript.
9. Signature of the teacher.
10. Date and place of completion.

28
 Audition Certificate (Ṭibāq al-Samāʿ

An audition certificate is a valuable document that es-

tablishes authorization for texts. Bearing in mind the scope
of potential fabrication, scribes would draw a line or box
around the certificate to prevent the insertion of other
names. In the case where a name was accidently omitted,
the scribe would amend and point out that a name was
added. Divergent handwriting generally indicates false in-
sertion; there may be exceptions. It was in this context that
scholars said that bringing a knife was suspicious because
someone may use it to alter the words on a certificate. In
biographical dictionaries, one will find people impugned
for tampering with an audition certificate.
Understanding these components of an audition cer-
tificate and the various phrases used to introduce them is
crucial as it equips the reader with the ability to navigate il-
legible passages. Due to a failure of recognizing these com-
ponents, many editors have misunderstood and incorrectly
edited passages; see case study. Moreover, a close study
of these components can paint a picture of a manuscript’s
journey (riḥla) over the centuries [see, for instance, Nūr
al-Dīn al-Ḥumaydī, al-Uṣūl al-Khaṭṭiyya al-Ḥadīthiyya, Ma-
jallat al-Turāth al-Nabawī, no. 3, pp. 125 ff.].

29
 B ook T itle
The title of a book constitutes its identity and explains its
contents. As such, a researcher should exert all possible
means to determine the accurate title. The title of a book
can be learned from external sources, such as the biogra-
phy of the author; it could be mentioned by the author
in another book; or other scholars could have quoted in
their own writings, especially in books on the same subject.
Fahāris and cover pages (that were not written by the au-
thor) are among the worst places to determine book titles.
Ziriklī (d. 1976) in al-Aʿlām and Ḥājjī Khalīfa (d. 1068
AH) in Kashf al-Ẓunūn utilized these methods frequently. A
researcher is, therefore, cautioned from relying too heavily
on these sources to establish book titles.
Alternatively, a book’s title can be gleaned internally
from the book itself. The author’s introduction is the most
authoritative place to determine the title; in the case of
conflict, this will be preferred. Titles added by scribes will
depend on their qualification. A title written on a manu-
script by a scholar, for instance, is more authoritative than
one written by an unlearned curator. Titles written by a
different pen are often inaccurate. Audition certificates are
useful resources for book titles, but one should be aware of
the constant abbreviations that occur in these certificates.
Historically, book titles were written along the tail of a
book; this was due to the positioning of books on shelves.

30
 Book Title

Writing titles across the spine of a book, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān

al-Jabartī (d. 1822) asserts, was introduced by Europeans.
Differences of opinion concerning the title of a book
often stem from the author not having mentioned any title.
Consequently, scribes often examined the contents and for-
mulated a title of their own. For instance, the manuscripts
of Ibn al-Labbān’s (d. 749 AH) Mutashābih al-Qurʾān wa
al-Ḥadīth contain different titles, like Radd Maʿānī al-Āyāt
al-Mutashābihāt and Izālat al-Shubuhāt ʿan al-Aḥādīth wa al-
Āyāt. This was due to the absence of a title given by the
author which led scribes to surmise a title based on the
contents of the book. In al-Aʿlām, Ziriklī incorrectly men-
tioned these as different books of Ibn al-Labbān.

31
 T he Scribe
Information about the scribe and the date of transcription
is often found on the last page. If there is no mention of
it on the last page, one should check if the manuscript is
part of a larger collection. The name of the scribe is often
found in another treatise in that collection; make sure the
handwriting is the same. It is useful to study the handwrit-
ing of famous scribes, like Yūsuf b. Shāhīn Sibṭ Ibn Ḥajar
(d. 899 AH), who have transcribed countless manuscripts
[see Muḥammad al-Sirayyiʿ’s Maʿrifat Khuṭūṭ al-Aʿlām fi al-
Makhṭūṭāt al-ʿArabiyya and Ziriklī’s al-Aʿlām]. It is possi-
ble that one scribe started transcribing the manuscript, but
it was completed by another scribe (mukammil); this is
known as a nuskha mulaffaqa.
While transcribing a manuscript, a scribe often copied
all the marginal notes and extra components from the orig-
inal to the new copy. [See Saʿīd al-Jūmānī, “Ṣūrat al-Ijāzāt
al-Manqūla fī al-Makhṭūṭāt al-ʿArabiyya,” Journal of Islamic
Manuscripts 9 (2018)] For instance, an editor mistook a
manuscript of ʿAlam al-Dīn al-Sakhāwī that was written in
the 12th century as one that was written in the 9th century
by Muḥammad b. Mūsā b. ʿImrān (d. 843 AH), due to the
presence of the name of the latter. However, he did not
realize that the information substantiating Muḥammad b.
Mūsā as the scribe was copied from an earlier manuscript.
Some indicators that the details are copied include
words like: naqaltu and mā mukhtaṣaruhu. Another method,

32
 The Scribe

which requires an advanced level of experience, is by de-

termining the style of writing. Someone had claimed that
there was a manuscript of Ibn Ḥibbān’s al-Majrūḥīn written
in the 4th century, but the style of writing demonstrates that
it could not have been written earlier than the 8th century,
if not at a much later date. In the following example, the
date of completion given by the author is 855 AH, but the
style of writing clearly suggests that the information was
copied from an earlier manuscript.

33
 Dates
The date that a manuscript was transcribed was often writ-
ten in the khitām. The date is either spelled out: e.g. sanat
thalāth wa thalāthīn wa thamān miʾa, or the numbers are
written: 833. Certain numbers were written differently
from the modern convention. Zero was written as a circle
[o]. Four has a unique form that resembles a joined ʿayn
and wāw. Five was written like a B or 8. Sometimes two
was written with a flat top similar to a reversed 7. Three
was written like a conventional two. [250/23/230/244].

34
 Dates

The usage of a chronogram (ḥisāb al-jummal) based on

the alpha-numerical system, known as the abjadiyya, was a
common method of writing the date. The following chart
lists the numerical value of each letter and its respective
grouping. By way of illustration, a scribe will write that
he finished the text in the year ‘Ḥasan’ [118 AH] (ḥ/s/n)
where ḥāʾ equals eight, sīn equals sixty, and nūn equals fifty:
118. The phrase bi-ism Allāh famously amounts to 786.

There was another less common dating method circu-

lated by Ibn Kamāl Pāshā (d. 940 AH) that gained traction
among Ottoman writers and scribes. This was known as
tārīkh bi al-kusūr, among other names.

35
 Stages of a Manuscript
An author first wrote an early draft, known as a musawwada.
In this stage, the manuscript was filled with ḍarb (crossed-
out passages), kashṭ (scratched-out words), and bayāḍāt
(blank spaces). The preponderance of these features indi-
cates that the manuscript was an early draft. There are a
number of reasons why a manuscript remained in the form
of a musawwada without moving on to the next stage, such
as the author’s death (e.g. al-Ḥākim and his Mustadrak)
and a lack of enthusiasm to rewrite an extremely lengthy
document.

In the next stage, the author would revise the draft and
produce a fair copy, known as a mubayyaḍa; he may have
appointed a student to complete the mubayyaḍa. This was
the first edition (ibrāza) of the text. The author may have
added material to the existing mubayyaḍa. [See Joel Blech-
er’s Revision in the Manuscript: New Evidence of Early Versions
of Ibn Ḥajar’s Fatḥ al-Bārī.] If the additions were few, they

36
 Stages of a Manuscript

would have been added in the margins. But oftentimes the

additions were so many that the current work became a
draft. [In the ending of Nuzhat al-Albāb fī al-Alqāb, Ibn Ḥa-
jar writes: “This is the second revision, which has now be-
come similar to a rough draft (musawwada).”] After its re-
vision, it was reproduced as a second edition (ibrāza). The
following is an example of a student-written mubayyaḍa of
Tāj al-Dīn al-Subkī’s (d. 771 AH) al-Ṭabaqāt al-Shafi‘iyya
al-Kubrā. [katabahu wa al-arbaʿa qablahu li-muṣannifihi].

Although a manuscript written by the author (holo-

graph: bi-khaṭṭ al-muʾallif) is extremely valuable, it may not
always be the best extant manuscript. A later revision by
a student that was approved by the author, for instance, is
more valuable than the author’s earlier handwritten draft.
There are indicators that the manuscript was written by
the author, such as the mention of it in the khitām. The
author usually writes words of humility (al-faqīr and al-
ʿabd) before his name and supplications like nafaʿallāhu bi-
hi after it. Again, one needs to take note of the handwriting
and ensure that the details were not copied from an earlier
manuscript. In the following example, it was determined

37
 Stages of a Manuscript

that this manuscript of al-Muqliq was written by the author

Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597 AH) himself given the lack of honor-
ifics and the supplication [nafaʿahu Allāh bi al-ʿilm āmīn],
and later confirmed through a comparison with his other
writings.

There is a difference between a riwāya (recension)

and a nuskha (manuscript). When the various manuscripts
trace back to one edition (ibrāz), it is a nuskha, in which
case when there is a conflict between them, only one man-
uscript is ultimately correct. A researcher should compare
different nuskhas to determine what the author actually
wrote. Differences between editions of a book constitute
riwāyāt, such as the recensions of Abū Dawūd’s Sunan [al-
Luʾluʾī vs. Ibn Dāsa] or Mālik’s Muwaṭṭaʾ [al-Shaybānī vs.
al-Laythī]. The differences between recensions cannot be
judged as right or wrong because they constitute different
editions. Therefore, it is incorrect for an editor to conflate
or combine different recensions.
A manuscript may be the result of a scholar’s dictation
(imlāʾ), like Ibn Ḥajar’s Natāʾij al-Afkār. In that scenario,
students will have many differences based on the level of
their proficiency, attendance, and so on. One way to de-

38
 Stages of a Manuscript

termine that a manuscript was based on dictation is by

studying its chain of transmission. For instance, the chain
of transmission in a manuscript of Hibat Allah b. Salāma’s
al-Nāsikh wa al-Mansūkh states: ḥaddathanā Hibat Allāh im-
lāʾan, and another manuscript states: amlā ʿalaynā. These
phrases demonstrate that the manuscripts were written
in a dictation session. Aḥmad Shākir gave preference to
a manuscript of Ibn Daqīq al-ʿĪd’s (d. 702 AH) Iḥkām al-
Aḥkām over another manuscript because the former was
read by Ibn Sayyid al-Nās (d. 734 AH) to the author while
the other was a result of a dictation to Qāḍī Ibn al-Athīr
(d. 699 AH).

39
 A rrangement of Manuscripts for
Editing
The purpose of editing a text is to arrive at the text as fi-
nally approved by the author. Simply because a manuscript
is older does not mean it is more valuable. Likewise, the
fact that a manuscript was transcribed or utilized during
a particular dictation does not necessitate that it is the
most valuable; it could have been a child’s manuscript. A
researcher should only compare manuscripts that add value
to the editing process. Even if one manuscript is taken as
the mother text, editors should not refrain from making
alterations based on other manuscripts when they believe
there is an error. They should only note substantive vari-
ants in the footnotes.
When editing a manuscript, following the cues of the
author (talbiyat raghbat al-muʾallif) is imperative. If the au-
thor writes that a particular passage should be rearranged,
his wishes should be carried out. The rule of thumb is that
the editor has no right to alter the author’s text. For in-
stance, if the author arranged the text in alphabetical order
according to the Maghrebi sequence, the editor has no right
to rearrange the contents whatever the justification may be,
as some editors have done with Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr’s books.
Some scribes would make amendments to the text based
on external sources. It is said that scribes of al-Bukhārī’s
al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr amended passages based on Ibn Abī Ḥā-
tim’s rejoinder. This is unacceptable. Likewise, the editor

40
 Arrangement of Manuscripts for Editing

should maintain the author’s mode of recitation; if the au-

thor wrote according to the reading of Warsh via Nāfiʿ, the
editor should not change it to Ḥafṣ via ʿĀṣim. Honorifics
(e.g. ṣalāh and taraḍḍī) and supplications are often later ad-
ditions by the scribes. Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ (d. 643 AH) writes that
these additions are acceptable since they are supplications.
The editor’s introduction should be based on the size of
the text. The main areas that should be mentioned are: 1)
the correct title of the book; 2) ascription of the book to
the author; and 3) description of the manuscripts. Unnec-
essary details should be avoided, like an detailed biography
of an author like Ibn Ḥajar. Footnotes detailing biographies,
grading ḥadīths, and further references should be written
based on the nature of the text and the intended audi-
ence. It is pointless to add a biography of Imām al-Shāfiʿī
in a book like al-Ghazālī’s al-Mustaṣfā or to write extensive
Hadith grading of a treatise like al-Khaṭīb’s al-Riḥla fi Ṭal-
ab al-Ḥadīth. Lastly, indices are meant to be efficient and
should be written based on the nature of the text. [For a
check-list for describing a manuscript, see Gacek, pp. 333-
338.]

41
 C onclusion
After studying the basics of dealing with Arabic manu-
scripts, the most effective way to improve one’s knowledge
in the field is to read and closely study the manuscripts
themselves. Alongside a constant exposure to manuscripts,
taking the following three points into consideration will
build a student’s reading ability.
First, the study of Arabic manuscripts, for the most
part, is a product of Ḥadīth studies. To understand these
concepts, one is required to read the relevant books (e.g.
Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ’s al-Ilmāʿ) and chapters in books of Hadith no-
menclature (e.g. chapter twenty-five in Tadrīb al-Rāwī: kitā-
bat al-ḥadīth wa ḍabṭuhu). Ṭāhir al-Jazāʾirī (d. 1920) was
exceptionally skilled with manuscripts. As such, reading the
relevant sections from Tawjīh al-Naẓar (vol. 2, pp. 775 ff.)
is indispensable. Second, books on the etiquettes of seeking
knowledge (ābāb al-ṭalab) should be consulted, like Abū
Saʿd al-Samʿānī’s Adab al-Imlāʾ wa al-Istimlāʾ (pp. 442 ff.).
Third, to develop practical skills one should study the in-
troductions to works by expert editors like Aḥmad Shākir
and ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Muʿallimī, taking note of how they
examined the manuscripts used for editing (e.g. Aḥmad
Shākir’s introduction to Iḥkām al-Aḥkām, pp. 6-11). More-
over, reading their critiques of other printed books can
bring to light common pitfalls in dealing with manuscripts.
[The monthly journal Majmūʿat al-Makhṭūṭāt al-Islāmiyyah
provides unique insights in the field of Arabic manuscript

42
 Conclusion

studies. It is a must-read for anyone interested in improv-

ing their knowledge of the field.]

43
 C ase Study
The following is an audition certificate (ṭibāq al-samāʿ) for
Abū Ṭāhir Ibn Fīl’s (d. 311 AH) Ḥadīth treatise. The edi-
tor of the text failed to read several passages and erred in
others. By bearing in mind the components of an audition
certificate mentioned above, students should be able to fill
in the gaps and correct the misread passages. The correct
reading of the passage is included in Arabic below for stu-
dents to compare with their own reading. While reading
the passage, make sure to take note of the laḥaq in the left
margin.

44
 ‫‪Case Study‬‬

‫الحمد لله وسلام على عباده الذين اصطفى سمع جميع هذا الجزء على الشيخ ال�إ مام القدوة الصالح‬
‫المعمر ال�أوحد ناصر الدين �أبي عبد الله محمد بن عبد الرحمن بن عيسى بن سلطان الغزي الشافعي‬
‫[خلا ال�إ ملاء الذي في �آخره و�آخر المسموع لا يخاف في الله لومة لائم قاله ابن القلقشندي] بسماعه‬
‫فيه نقلا من �أبي حفص عمر بن محمد الكومي بسنده بمقلوبها بقراءة مثبته الفقير �أبي الفضل عبد‬
‫الرحمن بن �أحمد �إسماعيل بن محمد القلقشندي ال�أثري وذا خطه عفا الله عنه الجماعة محب‬
‫الدين محمد ولد القارئ وابن �أخيه جمال الدين �إبراهيم بن شيخ ال�إ سلام علاء الدين علي بن �أحمد‬
‫القلقشندي والشيخ جمال الدين يوسف بن شاهين الكركي سبط شيخنا شيخ ال�إ سلام شهاب‬
‫الدين �أحمد بن حجر وشمس الدين محمد بن محمد بن محمد السنباطي وشرف الدين يحيى بن‬
‫محمد بن سعيد القباني التاجر وغيرهم وصح يوم الجمعة الثاني عشر من شهر الله المحرم الحرام‬
‫سنة ثلاث وخمسين وثمانمائة بمنزل المسمع تجاه الجامع ال�أزهر من القاهرة و�أجاز الحمد لله‬
‫�أولا و�آخرا صلى الله وسلم على سيدنا محمد وعلى جميع ال�أنبياء والمرسلين والصحابة والتابعين‪.‬‬

‫‪45‬‬
The Qalam Seminary strives to provide accessible
academic content for both students of sacred knowledge
and a wider readership. Works such as this treatise
are only possible through your kind support. If you
enjoyed and benefitted from what you have read,
consider contributing towards the growth of the
seminary by visiting www.qalamseminary.com/donate.
 B ibliography

Al-Ḥumaydī, Nūr al-Dīn. “al-Uṣūl al-Khaṭṭiyya al-Ḥadīthi-

yya bi al-Maghrib wa al-Andalus.” Majallat al-Turāth
al-Nabawī 3 (2018): 127-148.
Al-Amīr, Ibrāhīm. “Tanabbah Yā Muḥaqqiq al-Turāth.” al-
Nashra al-Shahriyya: Majmūʿat al-Makhṭūṭāṭ al-Is-
lāmiyya 17 (2018): 229-233.
Al-Azharī, Ṣāliḥ b. ʿAbd al-Fattāh. al-Taqyīdāt al-Shahiyya
min Ẓuhūr wa Ghawāshī wa Ḥawāshī al-Nusakh
al-Khaṭṭiyya. Beirut: Dār al-Bashāʾir al-Islāmiyya,
2016.
Al-Jūmānī, Saʿīd. “Ṣūrat al-Ijāzāt al-Manqūla fī al-Makhṭūṭāt
al-ʿArabiyya.” Journal of Islamic Manuscripts 9
(2018).
Al-Jazāʾirī, Ṭāhir. Tawjīh al-Naẓar ilā Uṣūl al-Athar. Ed. Abū
Ghudda. Vol. 2. Aleppo: Maktabat al-Maṭbūʿāt al-Is-
lāmiyya, 1995.
Al-Kattānī, ʿAbd al-Ḥayy. Tārīkh al-Maktabāt al-Islāmi-
yya wa man Allaf fī al-Kutub. Rabat: al-Maktaba
al-Ḥasaniyya, 2005.
Al-Maʿṣarānī, Muḥammad. “Tajalliyāt al-Jamāl fī Nuskhat
al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ li al-Bukhārī bi Khaṭṭ al-Nuwayrī:
Dirāsa wa Taḥqīq.” Majallat al-Turāth al-Nabawī 3
(2018): 72-11.
Al-Qāḍī, ʿIyāḍ b. Mūsā. al-Ilmāʿ ilā Maʿrifat Uṣūl al-Riwāya
wa Taqyīd al-Samāʿ. Cairo: Dār al-Turāth, 1970.

49
Al-Sirayyiʿ, Muḥammad. Maʿrifat Khuṭūṭ al-Aʿlām fī al-
Makhṭūṭāt al-ʿArabiyya. Beirut: Dār al-Muqtabas,
2018.
Al-Suyūṭī, Jalāl al-Dīn. Tadrīb al-Rāwī fī Sharḥ Taqrīb al-
Nawāwī. Ed. Muḥammad ʿAwwāma. Vol. 4. Jedda:
Dār al-Minhāj, 2016.
Al-Ziriklī, Khayr al-Dīn. al-Aʿlām. Beirut: Dār al-ʿIlm li al-
Malāyīn, 2002.
Catalogue. al-Fahras al-Shāmil li al-Turāth al-ʿArabī al-Is-
lāmī al-Makhṭūṭ. Jordan: Muʾassasat Āl al-Bayt,
1987.
Cornells, Lambertus. Among Digitized Manuscripts: Phi-
lology, Codicology, Paleography in a Digital World.
Leiden: Brill, 2019.
Déroche, François. The Abbasid Tradition: Qurʾans of the
8th to the 10th Centuries AD. London: The Nour
Foundation, 1992.
Gacek, Adam. Arabic Manuscripts: A Vademecum for
Readers. Leiden: Brill, 2009.
Hārūn, ʿAbd al-Salām. Taḥqīq al-Nuṣūṣ wa Nashrihā. Cairo:
Maktabat al-Khānijī, 1998.
Shākir, Aḥmad. Introduction to Iḥkām al-Aḥkām. Cairo:
Maktabat al-Sunna al-Muḥammadiyya, 1953.

50