0021-1818_islam_98-1-2-i-259

The The Lure of a Controversial Prayer 145
of great rewards orally 21 and in writing, using both learned arguments and nasty
personal insults. 22 Finally, one Damascene mufti, contrary to scholarly consensus
that labeled the prayer a ‘reprehensible innovation’ (bid^a munkara or makruha), 23
elevated it to the status of a ‘favorable innovation’ (bid^a hasana) „on account
of it being a prayer and a popular act of worship.“ 24 His daring move kept the
controversy alive: the public resumed, or perhaps simply continued to pray
it, and learned peers published their criticism in new treatises. Occasionally, the
scholarly opponents managed to co-opt rulers, but the bans issued against the
prayers performance in mosques were short-lived, if at all effective. 25 Several decades
later we find prominent Mamluk authors expressing their unequivocal disapproval
of the ongoing public celebrations of the eve of the first Friday of Rajab
in Egypt and Syria. 26
The lion’s-share of the scholars who took part in the debate were Shafi^\s,
namely, members of the dominant school of law in the Ayyubid domains. Most of
them resided in Damascus and Cairo, taught in important madrasas and composed
a variety of works on hadith, fiqh and theology, as well as devotional treatises. The
Andalusian al-Turtush\ and the Egyptian Ibn al-0ajj al-^Abdar\, both systematic
censors of innovations, represent the Malik\ school in this list, while Ibn al-Jawz\,
Ibn Taymiyya, al-^Attar and Ibn Rajab stand for the 0anbal\ school. ^Abd al-Qadir
al-J\lan\ was a 0anbal\ as well, but he may also be grouped with al-Ghazal\, sharing
a strong affiliation with Sufism. Affiliation with school of law hardly seems to have
been a factor that shaped a scholar’s attitude towards the prayer.
The longest and most comprehensive treatment of the reception of the prayer
and the controversy it had aroused is found in Abu Shama’s Kitab al-ba^ith
^ala inkar al-bida^ wa-l-hawadith, another work written in the genre of treatises
against innovations. 27 Here Abu Shama, better known as an historian of the Zan-
21 See text # 22.
22 See texts # 23–25.
23 See texts # 7, 8, 21, 23, 26, 28.
24 See text # 24.
25 See text # 8, 19, 22, 26. See also Ibn Taymiyya’s ban on salat al-ragha’ib on mid-Sha^ban
enforced in Damascus by the local hajib (Ibn Kath\r, al-Bidaya wa#l-nihaya fi l-ta#rikh, Beirut:
1993, 14: 47; H. Laoust, “La Bibliographie d’Ibn Taimiya d’après Ibn Kathir,” Bulletin d’Études
Orientales de l’Institut Français de Damas 9 (1942): 139 (cited in M. U. Memon, Ibn Taimiya’s
Struggle against Popular Religion, The Hague 1976, 334 n. 3, as the banning of salat al-ragha’ib
on Rajab).
26 See text # 22, 23, 25–28.
27 On this genre, see M. Fierro, “The treatises,” 204–246; V. Rispler, “Towards a New Understanding
of the Term bid^a,” Der Islam 68 (1991): 320–327; ibid, “The 20 th Century Treatment of
an Old Bid^a: Laylat al-Nisf min Sha^ban,” Der Islam 72 (1995): 82–97; J. Berkey, “Tradition,