Introduction*

The author of this text, Jawad b. Sa'd b. Jawad al-Baghdadi al-Kazimi (hereon Kazimi), was born in the last decades of the tenth/sixteenth century in the shrine city of al-Kazimiyya north of Baghdad.¹ He is popularly known as “al-Fadil al-Jawad” (the virtuous Jawad).

Kazimi was more than a seminarian: he was given administrative responsibilities. He assumed the post of Shaykh al-islam³ of Astarabad (present-day Gorgan) during the reign of Shah 'Abbas I (d. 1038/1629). It appears likely that he was promoted to this prestigious post due to his close ties with al-Shaykh al-Baha’i who himself held the office of Shaykh al-islam of Isfahan and other provinces for much of period between 1580 and his death in 1620-21.⁴ Kazimi, however, did not stay long in Astarabad; he found himself embroiled in a dispute on account of which he was ex­pelled from the town. This expulsion is believed to have been instigated by a local rival scholar and fellow student of al-Shaykh al-Baha’i, al-Sayyid Amir Muhammad Baqir al-Astarabadi (d. after 1031/1621, popularly known as Mir Muhammad Baqir Taliban). Kazimi reported this in­cident to Shah 'Abbas I who not only dismissed his plea but also expelled him from the region. The Shah, it is reported, had a close relationship with Taliban.

Kazimi returned to his hometown where he continued teaching and writing. He completed writing a commentary in 1029/1619 in al-Kazimiyya from which we can deduce that he proba­bly left Safavid Iran around 1025/1615.

The introduction of this chapter is written by Kumail Rajani. about his other whereabouts. The precise place of his death also remains unknown. Some biog­raphers record that Kazimi died in Isfahan, whilst others suggest that he died in al-Kazimiyya. Notwithstanding this ambiguity, the sources agree that he was buried in al-Kazimiyya which implies that, if he died in Isfahan, his remains would have been taken there. Similarly, his precise date of death is uncertain; it is estimated, though, that he died in 1065/1655.⁵

Al-Shaykh al-Baha’i is reportedly Kazimi’s only teacher during his stay in Safavid Iran. Nor are there many prominent figures among his very few students recorded in the biographical diction­aries. Among the students were: al-Sayyid Mir Mahmud b. Fathallah al-Husayni al-Kazimi al-Na- jafi, al-Shaykh Shahin, Muhammad al-Kashani al-'Amili, his nephew 'Ali b. Muhammad al-Hadi b. Sa'dallah and few others.

Kazimi’s major literary output primarily comprised of commentaries.

The text presented in this chapter is yet another commentary on his teacher’s popular usul work, Zubdat al-usul. In his study of al-Mazandarani’s commentary on the Zubda, Gleave (see Chapter 1 of the current volume) outlines the nature and style of postclassical Twelver works of usul, particularly that of the Zubda.

Unlike al-Mazandarani’s commentary (described in Chapter 1), Kazimi’s commentary is not blended (mazji), rather he picks passages from the Zubda and comments upon them phrase by phrase. He elucidates the obscure passages of the base text, elaborates its arguments and com­pares and contrasts the opinions of his teachers with his predecessors (al-Shaykh al-Tusi d. 460/1067, al-Muhaqqiq al-Hilli d. 676/1277, and al-'Allama al-Hilli d. 726/1325). In the pro­cess, he does not shy away from criticising his teacher’s views. On one occasion, for instance, he writes, “it is evident from the evidence presented earlier that the author’s [i.e. al-Shaykh al- Bahà’i’s] opinion is far from being correct” (wa-l haqq inna qawl al-musannif huna ba'id ba'd mulahazat ma aslafnahu). In another instance, Kazimi states, “the opinion of the teacher, the au­thor, that it is a fortiori argument is doubtful” (wa-qawl al-ustadh al-musannif annahu qiyas al-aw- lawiyya ghayr zahir). This critical approach, adopted by Kazimi, has put his commentary on a par with his teacher’s base text (al-sharh ka-l-asl mashhuran).¹²

The edition of the selected passages and its English commentary presented in this chapter is the result of three teams of researchers: Raha Rafii and Dale Correa produced the first draft from a manuscript housed at Houghton Library of Harvard University (Kitab Ghayat al-ma’mul ft sharh Zubdat al-usül MS #1651, MS Arab 231, 112v-116v - indicated as H); Robert Gleave and I then consulted two other manuscripts from Majlis-e Shüra-ye Islami Library (#14062 [pp.

The popularity of the Ghayat al-ma’mul can be gauged by the exceptionally large number of manuscripts in which it survives. Dirayati has enumerated upto 130 MSs.¹³ Sàzmàn-e Asnad wa- Ketàbkhàneh-ye Milli-ye Jumhuri-ye Islami holds eleven of these MSs (#5-2137/3, #5-1549, #5-1622, #5-20714, #5-26089, #5-2626, #5-22890, #5-1548, #5-2196, #5-3600, #5-367). Other MSs are also found in Tehran (Majlis-e Shüra-ye Islami Library), Qum (Ketàbkhàneh-ye Ästaneh-ye Muqaddas-e Hadrat-e Fatimeh-ye Ma'sümeh; Ketabkhaneh-ye Mar'ashi; Ketab- khaneh-ye Markaz-e Ihyà’-ye Mirath-i Islami; Mu’assasa-ye Imam Sadiq etc.), Isfahan (Ketab- khaneh-ye Ketàbkhànehhà-ye Isfahan), Mashhad (Ketabkhaneh-ye Madraseh-ye Nawwab) among few other libraries and private collections.

The selected text deals with the topic of solitary reports (al-akhbar al-ahad) and their role as legal sources; this topic is conventionally studied in the chapters of “probativity of solitary re­ports” (hujjiyyat al-akhbar al-ahad) and “methods of resolving contradictory and conflicting re­ports” (ta'adul and tarjth). The first section [a] of the edited passages concerns the conditions that are required for the reports of solitary transmitters in order to be considered legally binding proofs. Al-Shaykh al-Baha’i enumerates five such conditions: adulthood (bulugh), sanity ('aql), uprightness ('adl), accuracy (dabt) and belief (tman). Kazimi delves deeper into each of these conditions by rearranging his teacher’s order.

id="Picutre 41" class="lazyload" data-src="/files/uch_group31/uch_pgroup314/uch_uch7345/image/image040.jpg">