The last of the Nishapuri school of tafsir: al-Wahidi (d. 468/1076) and his significance in the history of Qur'anic exegesis.

• Author: Saleh, Walid A.
• Position: Ahmad al-Wahidi al-Naysaburi

When asked why he would not write a Qur'an commentary, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (d. 505/1111) is said to have replied, "What our teacher al-Wahidi wrote suffices." This story was first reported by al-Yafi'i (d. 768/1367), who did not divulge the identity of his source. (1) Yet there is no reason not to accept this statement as historical. We have supporting evidence from al-Ghazali's works which clearly shows that he admired the works of al-Wahidi. (2) Medieval biographers were certain that al-Ghazali borrowed the titles for three of his fiqh works from those of al-Wahidi's three Qur'an commentaries. (3) But a historian is nevertheless bound to ask if such praise was warranted and not occasioned by mere decorum: the writers were contemporary, both Shafi'ites from the same region, and both patronized by the same regime, the Saljuqs (and specifically by the vizier Nizam al-Mulk and his brother). (4) Even so, al-Wahidi's is a surprising name for al-Ghazali to choose, at least in light of what we know of the history of Qur'anic exegesis. Al-Wahidi does not come to mind when one conjures up names of illustrious medieval Qur'an commentators; his Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an (The Occasions of Revelations), the work that secured his reputation in the modern era, is not a book the author himself was proud of, nor could one entertain the notion that it was at the root of al-Ghazali's admiration. It is, however, reasonable to consider al-Ghazali's statement as his own judgment on the field of Qur'anic studies. Such an assessment by a figure like al-Ghazali forces us to look more carefully at al-Wahidi, to try to find what al-Ghazali found impressive. But can we assess al-Wahidi's legacy? This article will offer an intellectual biography of al-Wahidi, a survey of his surviving works, and an initial analysis of his hermeneutical method. It will also show that he was a towering intellectual figure of his time: both an exegete of pervasive influence and surprising originality, and a critic whose commentary on al-Mutanabbi's poetry is still a standard work.

1. INTRODUCTION

   A major problem facing any scholar studying the history of tafsir is that many commentaries are still unedited. In the absence of any systematic attempt at publishing what survives of this massive literature, one has to rely on a close inspection of what is available in various manuscript collections as well as in printed texts. (5) It is best to concentrate on a certain historical period and attempt a full description and analysis of the works produced therein. Scholars working on the early history of tafsir (the pre-Tabari phase) have recognized the significance of unpublished material for the history of this period. (6) Here we will call attention to other periods in the history of this genre. (7)

   'Ali b. Ahmad al-Wahidi al-Naysaburi (d. 486/1076) was an important author of tafsir who has been neglected by western scholars and, to a lesser extent, in the Muslim world. My interest in al-Wahidi grew out of my work on his teacher al-Tha'labi (d. 427/1035) and my investigation of the reasons behind Ibn Taymiyah's (d. 728/1328) attacks on both writers. (He faulted both al-Tha'labi and, less so, al-Wahidi, for transmitting "weak" traditions.) (8) Having read extensive parts of al-Wahidi's as yet unpublished major work, al-Basit (The Large Commentary), I am convinced that it is one of the masterpieces of medieval Qur'an commentaries. Not only was it of crucial significance for the history of the genre, being widely influential--for example, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 606/1210) used al-Basit as a major source for his Mafatih al-ghayb--but it promises to advance our knowledge of the language of the Qur'an itself, since it is one of the earliest exhaustive philological Qur'an commentaries to survive. (9)

   But al-Wahidi's achievements do not end here. He produced two other commentaries, al-Wasit (The Middle Commentary) and al-Wajiz (The Short Commentary). Al-Wajiz held sway for more than six centuries as the most accessible short commentary on the Qur'an, until the appearance of Tafsir al-Jalalayn in the 10th/16th century, which was itself based on al-Wajiz. (10) It continues to be popular and has been published repeatedly. (11) Al-Wasit was famously popular in the medieval period and has recently witnessed a comeback after being edited. (12) It has been wrongly assumed that al-Wasit is an abridgement of al-Basit, a notion first opined in the medieval biographical dictionaries. (13) This is not the case. Each commentary is an independent composition governed by different hermeneutical rules and assumptions. The relationship among the three is itself a fascinating story that documents the tortured response of a medieval mind to the problem of the meaning of the Qur'an. Fortunately all three commentaries are accessible, and together with their introductions they offer us a unique opportunity to examine al-Wahidi's varying hermeneutical approaches. Later, I will give an example from each commentary and show how they differ in their approach. If we add the introduction to Asbab nuzul al-Qur'an we have four explicit statements by al-Wahidi as to methods of Qur'anic interpretation. (14) That he saw the need to keep producing commentaries, each with a different approach, distinguishes al-Wahidi from most other classical exegetes. I know of no other scholar who wrote three independent commentaries that have survived. The other extant examples are by scholars who wrote epitomes of their own major works.

   What is perhaps most compelling about al-Wahidi is that he was at the center of the intellectual life of his age. He was an outstanding critic who produced what was considered the best commentary on one of the most important Arabic poets, al-Mutanabbi (d. 354/955). Thus his significance must be seen in the light of his total literary production. He was well aware of the intellectual concerns of the elite and responded to the two fundamental texts of the culture in which he lived: the Qur'an and the poetry of al-Mutanabbi. (15) In his works we witness a critical moment in the hermeneutical history of medieval Islam, where the compromises worked out in the first four centuries have become unraveled and must be reconstructed. Al-Wahidi's three Qur'an commentaries, with their different attitudes and conflicting methods of interpretation, foreshadow the agonized intellectual life of his younger contemporary al-Ghazali. His time was one of unsettled certainties, profound anxieties, and widespread intellectual alienation, all of which were at the root of the creativity of the period. In this sense, the study of tafsir must be conducted within the wider realm of Islamic intellectual history; and any serious study of intellectual trends in Sunni Islam must take into account the contributions and articulations of the exegetes, who were central to the formation of Islamic identity.

2. AL-WAHIDI, THE NISHAPURI SCHOOL, AND THE HISTORY OF QUR'ANIC EXEGESIS

   I have argued elsewhere that the three Nishapuri exegetes Ibn Habib (d. 406/1015), al-Tha'labi (d. 427/1035) and al-Wahidi (d. 468/1076) constitute one of the more influential schools in the history of medieval Qur'anic exegesis, which I have termed the Nishapuri school. (16) By calling it a "school" I do not mean to suggest that this group maintained a uniform approach to the Qur'an, but rather to characterize a concerted effort on the part of these scholars to come to grips with the problem of the Qur'an's meaning in the face of the conflict among traditional exegesis, philology, and kalam theology. I have argued that the influence of this school was so pervasive that the medieval exegetical tradition does not make sense unless we take into account the contribution of these scholars. In the introduction to his al-Burhan fi 'ulum al-Qur'an, arguably the most important Sunni assessment of the genre, al-Zarkashi (d. 794/1392) mentions the names of both al-Tha'labi and al-Wahidi as well as of the scholars who were influenced by their methods (al-Zamakhshari, al-Razi) when giving examples of different modes of interpretation. (17) There is rarely a classical assessment that fails to mention al-Tha'labi or al-Wahidi, even when the tone is hostile and intended to undermine their contributions. In his attempt to redirect the course of the medieval exegetical tradition, Ibn Taymiyah targeted al-Tha'labi and al-Wahidi above all for what he considered an unsound approach to the Qur'an. (18)

   Al-Tha'labi and al-Wahidi attempted to answer the perennial question facing classical exegesis: what place does philology have in this enterprise? I believe that the pressing issue in the history of classical Qur'an commentary was the challenge posed by the Arabic philological disciplines (the sum total of grammar, lexicography and rhetorical studies) to the integrity of the theological understanding of the Qur'an. The philological tools perfected by Arabic grammarians were used freely in analyzing poetry, especially pre-Islamic poetry, since no religious constraints were at work. (19) Pre-Islamic poetry was by definition a heathen corpus in which one expected to come across impieties, and religious scruples were hardly an issue in interpreting this body of literature. Philology was thus the sole and undisputed method for interpreting poetry. Using philology to interpret the Qur'an, and the pretence by Sunni exegetes that Qur'anic exegesis was primarily a philological enterprise, brought new problems for the exegetical tradition. Philology, though its initial impetus lay in the attempt to understand the Qur'an, grew to become an independent discipline that would pose grave danger to Sunni hermeneutics. (20) There could not be two philological methods, one for poetry and one for the Qur'an, and scholars trained in philology were keenly aware of this problem. (21)

   Muslim exegetes reacted to the rise of philology as an independent discipline by positing two...