Nusayrism and Imamism are sister schisms – the Nusayrites being the sole historical non-Imamite Twelver tradition spanning from the Imamic era. Considering the recent publicization of Nusayrite texts, I wondered if hawza historians would be interested in analyzing said manuscripts in order to better understand Shi’ite history as well as to someday examine the Imamite corpus in light of this new data. To what extent, if any, did Nusayrite-Ghulati notions enter the Imamite intellectual sphere?
Muhammad b. Sinān Zāhirī is a mass-transmitter of questionable authenticity. His Ghulati tendencies have been highlighted by Imamite rijalists. Although Ghulati tendencies are absent from his surviving hadiths in Imamite literature, they are prevalent in the extant Ghulati corpus. The conclusion, ergo, is that he was a Ghulat whose overdoing narrations were expunged by early Imamite muhadiths.
Ghulati Shi’ites differ creedally from Moderate Shi’ites. Although the many Ghulati groups differed amongst one another, they shared the belief in apotheosizing and/or elevating to prophethood the Imams and/or their so-called associates, the spearheaders of those currents. Other heresies include incarnation (h̯ulūl), metempsychosis (tanāsuk̊), anthropomorphism (tašbīh), and delegation (tafwīd̯).
The honchos of these schisms were successful as a consequence of mass-fabrication and hadith-tampering in their favor. It was to such a degree that Imam Sadiq (a) laments:
To one of them I narrate a single hadith. Before leaving my sight, he maliciously disinterprets what I had informed him. Such men desire the dunya, not God’s pleasure.2
An embodiment of such an person is Mug̊īra b. Sa’īd, head of the Mughirites. About this inauspicious heathen, Sadiq (a) bewails:
Mughīra b. Sa’īd, may God’s curse be upon him, has interpolated statements into the books of my father. Accounts never uttered by him.
Mughira and his henchmen would [slyly] borrow the Companions’ manuscripts in order to insert his [Ghulati] concoctions. Concerning this, Imam Sadiq (a) warns:
Mughira used to borrow Hazrat Baqir’s (a) Companions’ manuscripts and bring them home under the pretext of “reading them.” He would then interpolate his pseudo-hadiths, falsely ascribed to Baqir (a), before returning them.
He continues, bringing attention to said heretical beliefs:
Whatever Ghulatism detected in the books of my father’s Companions was inserted by Mughira.3
In order to ostensibly improve the reliability of their pseudo-hadiths, the Ghulats maliciously disattributed them to well-known, reputable persons, such as Mufad̯d̯al b. ‘Umar Ju’fī and Jābir b. Yazīd Ju’fī.4 According to one opinion, this includes Muhammad b. Sinān. [However], at least some of the Ghulati narrations ascribed to him are not limited to heresay, but based on famous written Nusayrite accounts. The extant reports of Ibn Sinan in the Nusayrite tradition open the door to his actual views. This investigation will focus on the Nusayrite texts divulged in recent years.
Refinement in the Shi’ite Hadith Literature
It is incontestible that the adverse effects of the Ghulat sects ruined the image of the Imams and Companions, crippling the revolts of the Ahlulbayt and their followers and an excuse for the foes to accuse the Shia.5
The Imams (a) opposed the Ghulats by publicly cursing them,6 warning the Companions of their infiltrating heresies, and ordering the Companions to shun the Ghulat.7 The Imams (a) instructed that the criterion for sifting out Ghulati pseudo-hadiths be to compare the reports alongside the Quran and established sunnah, the sunnah well-known to the people.8
The Companions were especially cautious when narrating from Ghulats or persons accused of Ghulatism. Refutations were authored to expose their conspiracies and misbeliefs, such as al-Rad ‘Alā al-G̊ulāh by Yūnus b. ‘Abd al-Rah̯mān, al-Rad ‘Alā al-G̊ālīyah by Hassan b. ‘Ali b. Fad̯d̯āl (d. 224 l), and al-Rad ‘Alā al-G̊ulāh by Abu al-Hassan Ali b. Mahziyār Ahwāzī.9
This sifting of Ghulati pseudo-hadiths was continued by later generations of Imamite muhadiths in order to prevent the spread of Ghulati beliefs.
The Nusayrites are a Ghulati Shi’ite schism which formed during the later Imamate.26 There is disagreement regarding its formational date. Some say they emerged during the Imamship of Hazrat Hadi (a), others say Hazrat Askari (a), the reason for the formational date disagreement. In any case, all sources agree that the founder was Muhammad b. Nus̯ayr Fahrī Numayrī, the reason the sect is labeled “Nusayrite” and occasionally “Numayrite.”10
Muhammad b. Nusayr propogated Ghulati heresies, such as metempsychosis, antinomianism, – the godhood, Creator-ness, and Sustainer-ness of Imam Ali (a), – the incarnation of God in the Imams (a), and the muwakkal-ness of Imam Ali’s (a) Companions (muwakkal being a species of angel). The belief of the management of the universe’s affairs [by the Imams] was added by his followers.11 Worthy of mention is that the belief in incarnation of God in material and corporeal things is a pillar of the Ghulat, some Sufis, and some Islamic philosophers.12
Writers oft-mention the Nusayrite belief of Ali’s (s) godliness.13 This is due to their belief in incarnation, i.e. God’s divine manifestation in humans. This explains why they believe a part of God was inside Haydar (a).14
This blasphemy is why Imams Hadi and Askari (a) cursed Ibn Nusayr and Hassan b. Muhammad b. Bābā Qumi, stating that the two were “profiteering off the good name of the Ahlulbayt.”15 On the authority of Tusi, Ibn Nusayr self-declared deputyship (niyābat) and bābhood (bābiyat) during the minor occultation. Once his heresy became well-known, Abu Ja’far b. Muhammad b. Ut̊mān b. Sa’īd ‘Umarī (d. 304/305), the second of the Four Deputies, denounced him as a persona non grata.16 Ibn Nusayr continued his claim of deputyship during the deputyship of Abu al-Qāsim b. Husayn b. Rūh̯ Nawbak̊tī (d. 326), the reason the third deputy received a signed letter from the Imam (a) cursing Ibn Nusayr and other Ghulats,17 exposing the fraud that those overdoing conmen enjoy a so-called secret, esoteric relationship with the occulted Imam.18
The Nusayrites splintered following the death of their founder due to successorship controversies, like many Ghulati sects. On his deathbed, Ibn Nusayr was inquired, “Who is your successor?” To which he responded, “Ahmed.” Though which ‘Ahmed’ was debatable. Hence, they split into three. One schism followed his son Ahmed, others Ahmed b. Muhammad b. Musa b. Furāt, and another group Ahmed b. Abī al-Husayn b. Bašr.19
Muhammad b. Jundub, for a short period, led the sect as Imam Zaman’s (a) bāb. After him, authority was handed to Abu Muhammad Abdullah b. Muhammad Jinān Janbalānī (d. 287), originally from the city of Janbalā, between modern-day Kufa and Wasit. Some consider him the founder of a Nusayrite schism known as the Janbalanites, whose activities, not limited to the Shias, misguided many a Sunnite. Janbalani traveled to Egypt where he met Abu Abdullah Hussain b. H̯amdān K̊as̥ībī (c. 346-360 or 357) and answered his concerns. Following which, Khasibi accompanied Janbalani to his homeland.20
Postmortem, Khasibi became the leader. During which he won the favor and patronization of the Hamdanid ruler Sayf al-Dawla (r. 333-356), allowing Khasibi to proselytize. Significantly, in this period, he moved to Aleppo to continue preaching.21 [It is around this area where] the world’s Nusayrites, recently renamed to Alawites [for political reasons] are still clustered,22 indebted Khasibi’s systematic evangelization. It is for this reason that he was and still is revered by the Nusayrite community, such that the modern Nusayrite, Muhammad Amīn G̊ālib al-T̯awīl, hailed him as the “Great Alawite.”23
Muhammad b. Ali Jillī succeeded him in Aleppo. He was imprisoned in a Christian jail for a time and died c. 386.24 With the Fatimid dominion over Sham, Ismailism and Nusayrism competed. Although being in a highly Shi’ite environment helped spread the message, Maymūn b. Qāsim Tabarānī, Jalī’s successor in Aleppo, abandoned the city in 423 AH for Jabal and Latakia as a result of consecutive wars, Byzantium attacks, and sectarian conflicts.25 Following this decision, the Nusayrites self-isolated from the activities of Islamdom until [modernity] during the [late] Ottoman period.
The Nusayrites and the Iraqi Ghulati Heritage
Although Nusayrism sprouted in Iraq, it blossomed in Sham. The second century was the heyday of Ghulati sects, publicly lambasting their opponents. In the following century, au contraire, anti-Ghulat hostility increased, forcing the Nusayrites and other Ghulats to abandon Iraq for Sham.
In the second and third centuries, the Ghulats authored many a book which the proto-Imamites excoriated.27 The reason few pseudo-hadiths entered the main Imamite corpus.
The Nusayrites transferred and, thus, safeguarded this ancient Ghulati tradition. Many oft-cited early texts survive from the fourth and fifth centuries. Nusayrism, being a covert sect, forbade outsiders from learning their secrets. Only the little obtained by orientalists escaped their clutches. Thanks to the formation of a modern Nusayrite selfhood, the book Silsilah al-Turāt̊ al-‘Alawī, a collection of many Nusayrite hadiths, was recently disclosed. This text, invaluable to researchers, demonstrates patently the transfer of an Iraqi, chiefly Kufan, Ghulati corpus.
Nusayrite Textual Analysis
Nusayrite textual analysis includes: 1) An investigation of extant works, and 2) An analysis of textual citations.
Extant Ghulati books include:
The first work is Um al-Kitāb from the late third and early fourth century in Persian.28
Two works attributed to Mufad̯d̯al b. Umar Ju’fī. Kitāb al-S̯irāt̯ ,written circa the latter third and early fourth century,29 discusses the Seven Rankings of Mu`mins and how to rise within the ranks, nearer to God. Kitāb al-Haft al-Uz̯ilah, a.k.a Kitāb al-Haft al-Šarīf, is a relatively short piece penned between the second to fifth century in Iraq and Sham.30 It adds upon the previous text and explores the topics of shadows and souls (uz̯ilah and ašbāh̯).
The fourth work is Kitab al-Usūs which was likely authored during the lifetime of Imam Reda (d. 203).31 It includes topics such as the manifestation of God upon earth and the Seven Spiritual Rankings of Mu`mins.
The citational analysis of numerous early Ghulati excerpts, still commonly found in Nusayrite texts, can be divided into three: 1) Citations of extant manuscripts 2) Citations of works known only by title 3) Citations of previously unknown texts.
The Nusayrites and the written legacy of Muhammad b. Sinan
Ibn Sinan is a mass-transmitter in the Shi’ite tradition.32 His father died whilst young, in lieu he was raised by his grandfather Sinān, hence the name.33 Barqi and Sheikh Tusi consider him a Companion of Imams Kazim, Reda, and Jawad (a).34 He lived in Kufa and died in 220 AH.35
Abu Umar Kashi has the most information about him. Kashi, from Abu al-Hasan Ali b. Muhammad b. Qutaybah Nishapuri, narrates, ‘Abu Muhammad Fad̯l b. Shād̊ān forbade his students from transmitting from Ibn Sinan.’36 In another report, Fadl classified Ibn Sinan on par with Abu al-K̊at̯t̯āb, Yūnus b. Z̯ibyān, Yazīd S̯ā`ig̊, Abu Samīnah, and the other notorious falsifiers.37 Ayūb b. Nūh̯ also prohibited the recording of his (pseudo)hadiths.38 S̯afwān b. Yah̯yā and Abdullah b. Muhammad b. Isa Asadī affirm Ibn Sinan’s Ghulatism.39 In contrast to these weakening reports, Kashi includes reports of praise for Ibn Sinan.40 Noteable when reading Kashi is that transmitional grandees narrate from Ibn Sinan, such as Fadl b. Shadhan and his father, Yunus b. Abd al-Rahmān, Muhammad b. ‘Isa ‘Ubaydi, Muhammad b. Husayn b. Abi al-Khattab, Hasan and Hussain the sons of Sa’īd Ahwāzi.41
Ibn G̊ad̯d̯āyiri palpably weakens him and labels him a Ghulat.42 Najāshī harshly weakens him and renders him totally unreliable in a way unseen for anyone else.43 In his review of Mayāh̯ Madāyinī, he writes that Mayah authored an extremely weak treatise titled Risāla Mayāh̯. In the biography he adds, ‘The book’s transmitter, (i.e. Ibn Sinan), is weaker than the book itself.’44
According to Sheikh Tusi, ‘Mixing and Ghulatism is present in all of Ibn Sinan’s reports.’ He adds, ‘The reason his hadiths are present at all is because they were filtered and amended by the grandees Muhammad b. Husayn b. Abi al-Khattab and Ahmed b. Muhammad b. Isa,’45 on the authority of two chains.46 Ibn Sinan’s authorship, as stated by Najashi, includes al-T̯araā`if, al-Uz̯ilah, al-Makāsib, al-H̯aj, al-S̯īd wa al-D̊abāi`h̯, al-Šarā` wa al-Bi’, al-Was̯īyah, al-Nawādir.47
Therefore, evidence supports his Ghulatism. That, nonetheless, insinuates not that the extant hadiths in the Imamite corpus via Ibn Sinan are Ghulati.48 His Nusayrite legacy, contrarily, such as the books of al-Ašbāh̯ wa al-Uz̯ila (Ghosts and Shadows), al-Tawh̯īd (Monotheism), al-Nawādir (Lights), and Ma’rifah al-Bārī, reveal Ghulati tendencies.49
The Book of Shadows and Phantoms (al-Ašbāh̯ wa al-Uz̯ila)
Jillī and Ibn Šu’ba al-H̯arānī, two Nusayrite grandees, cited this book, rendering it contrived pre-third century. Sheikh Mufid (d. 413) in his Masā`il al-Sarwīyah states, “The Ghulats possess a book of Phantoms and Shadows ascribed to Ibn Sinan.”50 More evidence propounds Ibn Sinan being the actual author.51 Mushegh Asatryan recently amended and published a book with the same title.
The quotation of Phantoms and Souls by Ibn Shu’ba in the section pertaining to metamorphosis can be seen in Mushegh Asatryan’s amendment.52 Jilli quoted much from the text regarding Barriers (h̯ijābs) and the levels of creation.53 Noteworthy is that Ibn Shu’ba, when quoting the passage, cited the original text as simply the “Book of Phantoms,” shortening its title.54
Ibn Shu’ba referenced five things from the Book of Shadows. 1) The levels of the creation of divine knowledge, power, providence, and judgement.55 2) The four pillars of divine knowledge, power, mercy, and providence which, respectively, are the Holy Spirit, Rūh̯ al-Amr, Rūh̯ D̊ī al-Ma’ārij, and Rūh̯ al-Amr.56 Another section is a catechization between Imam Sadiq (a) and Yunus b. Zibyan apropos of creation,57 which Jilli quotes.58 Another topic is the disconnected hadith via Yunus b. Zibyan from Sadiq (a), “God inspired Shayth (Seth) b. Adam to quarrel not with Cain and to secretly worship him for so long as dissimulation is in order.”59 The final citation is of another disconnected chain to Yunus b. Zibyan wherein Gabriel instructs Adam of the Stoning of the Devil [for Haj].60 Noteworthy is that none of these six quotations can be found in the the Book of Phantoms and Shadows edited by Mushegh Asatryan, rendering the twain different.
The Book of Monotheism (al-Tawh̯īd)
Harani cited the book five times, the longest quotation being four pages.61, 62 He cites two chains:
And narrated from Ahmed b. Ali, from Muhammad b. Ibrahim, from Ishaq b. Muhammad Yarfa’a, until Muhammad b. Sinan in the Book of Monotheism63
Another similar chain
And narrated from Ahmed b. Ali b. Abi al-Hasan b. Muhammad b. Ibrahim al-Hashimi, from Ishaq al-Ah̯mar Yarfa’a, until Muhammad b. Sinan in the Book of Monotheism64
The assembly of the Book of Monotheism was from Muhammad b. Sinan. I heard al-Hussein b. Ahmed, who said he heard from Muhammad b. Muhammad and Umar b. Ahmed al-Hamadānī,65 who said that they heard from Ja’far b. Muhammad al-Kūfī, he said that he heard from Ja’far b. Muhamad al-Rasī, he said that he heard from Muhammad b. Sinān.66
In two other places, Harani forgoes the chain, merely stating “According to Ibn Sinan in his Book of Monotheism“67 – further evidence supporting its authorship by Ibn Sinan. This may explain why Friedman also believed that this was Ibn Sinan’s work.68
The Book of Monotheism is oft-cited in Nusayrite texts. The oldest at our disposal is in Kitāb al-Mit̊āl wa al-S̯ūrah.69 Though it seems that the author mis-cited, the quotation likely stemming from another source.
The text was also cited in Muhammad b. Ali Jilli’s H̯āwī al-Asrār.70 It is presumed he enjoyed access to a manuscript of the Book of Monotheism via his mentor Hussain b. H̯amdān K̊us̯aybī.71 It is probable that the name Hussain b. Ahmed in the chain of transmission for the book H̯aqā`iq is Hussain b. H̯amdān.72
The citations from the Book of Monotheism, reports from Imam Sadiq (a), cover multiple topics, such as the creation of the universe with divine providence and particles/letters (h̯urūf), the luminescent world and the creation of the luminescent beings.
Muhammad b. Shu’bah in the book al-Us̯ayfar, concerning the Book of Monotheism, mentions the existence of texts upon which the Nusayrites disaccorded. Ibn Shu’ba, therein, ascribes the text to Ibn Sinan.73
The Book of Lights (al-Anwār)
Harani once in his H̯aqā`iq Asrār al-Dīn cites the Book of Lights. It is an esoteric eisegesis, aligning the Kaaba’s four corners with the four chief personages in Ghulati eyes: Salman, Miqdad, Abu Dhar, and ‘Amar, of whom the Black Stone is Miqdad and the Yemeni Corner is Abu Dhar.74
The only other indication of the book is in volume six of Sililah al-Turāt̊ al-‘Alawī under the title al-Majmū’ah al-Mufad̯d̯aliyah, containing the legacy of Mufaddal b. Umar Ju’fī. Two works, attributed to Ibn Sinan, – the great student [and successor] of Mufaddal, and claimant of guidance at the hands of Imam Reda (d. 203 AH) – are excerpted, Kitab al-H̯ujub wa al-Anwār,75 and Kitāb al-Anwār wa al-H̯ujub.76
These books, mainly in catechizational form, are Mufaddal’s teachings . They discuss the topic of h̯ujub (Barriers) which came into being as a consequence of the creation’s sins. Little difference can be found in these mysterious, esoteric texts. According to Friedman,77 al-H̯ujub wa al-Anwār (Barriers and Lights) is a combination of two subdocuments. The older subdocument being the original transmission by Ibn Sinān, who narrates from the infamous Ghulat Abu al-Khattāb Muhammad b. Abī Zaynab Kāhilī as well as Imam Sadiq (a). The more recent subdocument was the addition of an unknown Nusayrite, likely Junān Junbalātī, who adds explanations from the Great Orphan (his teacher, i.e. Muhammad b. Jundub) and the Bab (the “gatekeeper,” i.e. Ibn Nusayr).78
Ibn Sinan’s subdocument discusses the concepts of spiritual Barriers, cyclical time, eisegeses regarding the mysterious-esoteric explanations for the durood and Haj, in addition to mentioning prophetic [pseudo]hadiths via Jabir b. Abdullah Ansari. Compared to the short introduction of Barriers and Lights, that introduction is more relaxed. In this introduction, it says that Ibn Sinan explicitly wrote that this piece is a collection of reports for better understanding of the Lord’s intellect. In contrast to the previous subdocument, this writing discusses the creation of the universe and the beginning of creation with [spiritual] Barriers and Lights.
Quotations from Harani’s Haqa`iq are absent except for the naming of four chief sahabas, i.e. Salman, Miqdad, Abu Dhar, and ‘Amar.79 In addition, the book of Barriers and Lights aligns the Black Stone to Miqdad.80
Kitāb Ma’rifah al-Bārī
Ibn Shu’ba cites this book twice. In one place, he narrates a hadith by Imam Baqir (a) apropos of the Holy Ghost. The chain starts with Ali b. Ahmed ‘Aqīqī,81 likely explaining Friedman’s attribution of the book to Aqiqi.82
Tusi considers ‘Aqiqi a mixer (muk̊allit̯).83 In his Fihrist, Aqiqi’s works include: al-Madīnah, al-Masjid, Bayn al-Masjidayn, al-Nasb, al-Rijāl. According to Ahmed b. ‘Abdūn, much unacceptability (manākīr) is present in his hadiths.84 The above hadith describing the Prophet (p) spiritually and physically as the Holy Spirit are examples of mixing (tak̊līt̯) and unacceptability (munkar). Noteworthy are the views of Ghadairi and especially Abu Muhammad Hassan b. Muhammad b. Yahya ‘Alawī Husayni, a.k.a Ibn Abi Tahir. Ghadairi labeled Aqiqi a lying fabricator, except for that which he and others transmit from his grandfather, whose books are unreliable.85
Kitab al-Ma’rifah is attributed to Aqiqi’s father.86 Aqiqi, a transmitter of his father’s works, narrates the above hadith through him.87 Further evidence that they are the same book.
Worth mentioning is that the passage from Ma’rifah al-Bari is present in H̯aqā`iq Asrąr al-Dīn and H̯āwī al-Asrār by Muhammad b. Ali Jilli with only two differences. In first version, the hadith to Baqir (a) is disconnected. The second version, through Ibn Shu’ba’s, has more information than Jali’s.88 [To see the difference, see pg. 19]
The other seeming citation from Ma’rifah al-Bari is about the Barriers that God elected for Himself. For each Barrier, Gates are appointed. Through said Gates, God’s manifestation and appearance can be found. Ibn Shu’ba commences the quotation as, “Fas̯l min kitāb Ma’rifah al-Bārī fī d̊ikr al-h̯ujub,” and ends on the following page as, “Fas̯l min kitāb al-dastūr.” Between these two phrases are four hadiths, two from Imam Sadiq (a) and two from Imam Reda (a), apropos of Barriers.89 It can be said with great confidence that these are lengthy quotations from Ma’rifah al-Bari.
The rijalists differ pertaining to Ibn Sinan. On the one hand, his hadiths within Imamite literature paint him [more so] as a non-Ghulat. On the other hand, his legacy within fourth and fifth century Nusayrite literature paints him as an explicit Ghulat. In addition, Ibn Sinan’s direct transmission from infamous Ghulats, such as Abu al-Khattab, demonstrate relations between him and leading Ghulat thinkers. Ibn Sinan was an active narrator of Kufa, and, although Ghulatism began in Iraq, their heads eventually emigrated to Syria, transferring the Ghulati tradition, including those of Ibn Sinan. Hence the reason the fourth and fifth century Nusayrite manuscripts formed in Syria.
1. Assistant professor of Sciences of Quran and Hadith at the University of Tehran.
4. Pažūhiš Payrāmūn-e Jābir b. Yazīd-e Ju’fī, p. 60, 90-94, 149-150 (esp. 92-94)
5. For more information about Ghulati works, see G̊āliyān, p. 309-365. The positions of some Sunnis, e.g. Abu Hanifa, may be adverse consequences of Ghulatism. The fact that Abu Hanifa advised his students to not transmit the famous Hadith of Ghadeer due to ghulu (al-Amālī, p. 26-7), is a prime example of the harm this group caused, to the level that people became anxious to narrate one of the most authentic praises of the Commander of the Faithful (a).
10. Rijal b. Dawud, p. 511; al-Jamā’āt al-Islāmiya, p.118-123; Some attribute Nusayrism to a person named Nusayr from the reign of Imam Ali (a) [who seems to be a Saba`ite]. Since those Ghulats heeded not the Commander of the Faithful’s (a) order to cease their overdoing of his (a) status, he (a) elected to punish them via execution. Nusayr, however, managed to escape, propagating his heresy wherever he traveled (al-Ansāb, v. 5, p. 498). Sheikh Ali ‘Aziz Ibrahim, the Alawite author about the origins of the sect, writes, “The Alawites are an offshoot of Imamite Shi’ism, as opposed to what the author of Tārīk̊ al-‘Alawiyūn states. In fact, the truth of the matter is that the name ‘Nusayri’ stems from the name of the location where the Nusayris hid at the hands of Ottoman oppression” (al-‘Alawiyūn Bayn, p. 52).
27. The incontestible position of the Imams (a) and head Companions was that the Ghulati heritage was unreliable. For more, see Ghaliyan, p. 333-9
28. Um al-Kitāb was translated for the first time by Vladimir Ivanov with four manuscripts in 1936. It was publicized in the Journal of Islam with the introduction in English. Ummu’l-kitāb p. 1-132. For more information about Um al-Kitāb, see “The Legend of ʻAbdallah ibn Saba”, p. 18; Die Islamische Gnosis, pp. 113-98.
29. See Silsilah al-Turāt̊ al-‘Alawī, v. 6. Regarding the attribution of the text to Mufaddal, see Mufad̥d̥al bin ‘Umar-e Ju’fī wa Kitāb al-S̥irāt mansūb ba ū, p. 29-30
30. This book was first published by ‘Ārif Tāmir and Īgnās K̊alīfa in 1960 in Beirut titled al-Haft al-Az̯ilah. Tāmir, using more manuscripts, republished the book in 1981 Beiriut. It was again republished in 2007. In 2006, it was included in al-Majmu’ah al-Mufad̯aliyah in Silsilah al-Turāt̊ al-‘Alawī, v. 6, p. 289-423.
39 & 40. [More articles weakening and authenticating Ibn Sinan]
48. For an analysis of Ghulati elements Ibn Sinan’s narrations in the Imamite heritage, see Bāzkāwī A’tibār Rijālī Muh̯ammad bin Sinān, p. 161-6.
49. Although an in-depth ascriptional investigation of Nusayrite texts to their authors is necessary, based on the data, we [tentatively] concur with the Nusayrite authorial ascriptions.
51. See Pažūhišī dar Tārik̊gud̊ārī wa Šanāsāyī Mawlif-e Kitāb al-Az̯ilah.
87. In addition, he transmitted hadith books by others, including Abu Muhammad Isma’il b. Muhammad Makhzumi.