Available via license: CC BY-NC 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
2<<26>5*=28727$>772<5*6*7-8;2<,8!!
La disimulación en el islam sunní y la F3C;KK3 morisca
Devin Stewart
Emory University, Atlanta, EEUU
... car la dissimulation est des plus notables qualitez de ce siècle.
Montaigne, 15801
Zagorin’s fascinating study of dissimulation in sixteenth-century
Europe exhibits a curious lacuna. During this period widespread reli-
gious, ideological conflicts and increasingly intense efforts on the part
AL-QANTARA
XXXIV 2, julio-diciembre 2013
pp. 439-490
ISSN 0211-3589
doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
*Parts of this study were presented at the Middle East Studies Association, Phoenix,
Arizona, November, 1994; Islamic Law Conference at Hebrew University, January, 2000;
the European Studies Colloquium at Emory University, March, 2006; and the Conference
on Hybridity in al-Andalus, University of Wisconsin, Madison, October 2007. I would like
to thank Maribel Fierro, Mercedes García-Arenal, Yohanan Friedmann and Etan Kohlberg
in particular for their valuable comments and suggestions.
1Montaigne, “Du dementir”, vol. 2, p. 70.
Este trabajo ofrece un resumen de la doctrina
religiosa de F3C;KK3 o disimulación en el islam
sunní, recurriendo a comentarios del Qurn,
compendios de h36t, obras de ley islámica y
tratados de principios éticos. En las fuentes
andalusíes antes de la conquista cristiana apa-
recen discusiones acerca del concepto de F3
C;KK3 y del de coerción (;=D:, ambos
exenciones legales, y algunas de ellas conti-
nuaron estando a disposición de los moriscos
y de los juristas norteafricanos que les acon-
sejaban. El análisis de estos materiales facilita
la interpretación de la 83FIque Ibn Ab
um,a al-Wahrnenvió a los moriscos en el
año 1504 y particularmente la comprensión de
su tratamiento de la blasfemia bajo coacción.
&3>34D3E5>3H7 moriscos; disimulo; F3C;KK3;
coacción; ;=D:; blasfemia; paronomasia.
This study provides an outline of the religious
doctrine of F3C;KK3 or dissimulation in Sunni
Islam, drawing on Qurnic commentaries, h3
6F: compilations, legal manuals, and ethical
treatises. Moriscos and the North African ju-
rists who advised them had access to discus-
sions of F3C;KK3 and the closely connected
legal dispensation of coercion (;=D:) through
these sources, many of which were well-
known in al-Andalus before the Reconquista,
and some of which continued to be popular af-
terwards. Attention to this material helps one
to interpret the 1504 83FIof Ibn AbJum,a
al-Wahrnto the Moriscos and in particular
his discussion of blasphemy under coercion.
!7KIAD6E Moriscos; Dissimulation; *3C;KK3;
Coercion; =D:; Blasphemy; Paronomasia.
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 439
of political and religious authorities to enforce doctrinal conformity
led to heightened and increasingly sophisticated uses of dissimulation,
drawing on disciplines of dissimulation formulated in theoretical terms
and sometimes recorded in manuals for neophyte dissimulators. With
the theoretical attention drawn to these matters also came a heightened
focus on language and its capacity to provide reliable evidence or, al-
ternatively, to conceal inner thoughts and convictions.2The documen-
tary net of Zagorin’s research was cast quite widely, catching nearly
all the examples one might expect: the crypto-Judaism of conversos in
Spain and Portugal, the Nicodemism of Protestants in Catholic Italy,
the Catholicism of recusants in England, the mental reservation of the
Catholic doctors, and even the dissimulation of occultists and liberal
philosophers. Absent in this litany of notorious dissimulators, however,
are the Moriscos, the Muslims of Spain who underwent forced conver-
sions to Catholicism in 1501-02 in Castile and 1526 in Valencia, many
of whom continued to hold fast to their faith in secret until the final
expulsions of 1609-14. The oversight is odd, given that the predicament
of the Moriscos was quite similar, if not exactly parallel, to that of the
conversos, to whom Zagorin devotes an entire chapter. The omission
is all the more surprising when one notes that Zagorin in fact draws at-
tention to the existence of an Islamic discipline of dissimulation, termed
F3C;KK3, mysteriously claiming that it is instructive for his study but
not relevant to the European context: “An interesting case of dissimu-
lation for religious reasons is provided by a historical instance lying
far afield from Europe that nevertheless serves well to illustrate its char-
acter”.3He alludes here to the tradition of dissimulation in the Sh,ite
sect of Islam.4In a footnote, he half-heartedly justifies the omission of
Moriscos, attempting to distinguish them, on the grounds that they
often lived apart in separate villages and quarters and so did not need
to conceal their practices, from the conversos, who held higher posi-
tions in society and were more learned and better integrated into Chris-
tian society.5The argument falls flat; although many Moriscos were
2Maclean, #73@;@93@6@F7DBD7F3F;A@;@F:7(7@3;EE3@57*:73E7A8"3I.
3Zagorin, -3KEA8"K;@9;EE;?G>3F;A@&7DE75GF;A@3@6A@8AD?;FK;@3D>K#A6
7D@GDAB7, p. 3.
4Zagorin, -3KEA8"K;@9, pp. 3-5; Donaldson, *:7):;l;F7(7>;9;A@;EFADKA8E>3?
;@&7DE;33@6D3k; Tabataba’i, ):;;F7E>3?.
5Zagorin, -3KEA8"K;@9, p. 41 n. 5.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
440
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 440
simple peasants, in Granada and elsewhere they included people from
all walks of life, including the privileged, the powerful, and the learned.
Many were highly integrated into Christian society, and even more
were under regular scrutiny and surveillance by neighbors as well as
the authorities. The main reasons for Zagorin’s omission are two: mod-
ern scholars’ conviction that the Moriscos, as Sunni Muslims, did not
have available to them the doctrinal option of F3C;KK3 and the dearth
of published studies on F3C;KK3in Sunni Islam.
Many discussions of the Moriscos of Spain have suggested that they
consciously dissimulated with recourse to the Islamic legal concept of
F3C;KK3.6 While it has always been recognized that large numbers of
Moriscos practiced dissimulation after their forced conversions in the
early sixteenth century, the ideas that this behavior was justified in Is-
lamic doctrinal terms and that the Moriscos who were dissimulating
knew of the Islamic legal dispensation to do so remain unevenly ac-
cepted and inadequately supported. This study investigates the theoret-
ical background of Morisco dissimulation through examination of the
well-known legal D7EBA@EG?issued by Ibn AbJum,a al-Maghrwal-
Wahrnfor the Moriscos of Granada in 910/1504 as well as other Is-
lamic texts that would have been accessible in Spain and North Africa,
arguing that F3C;KK3 forms part of standard Sunni doctrine, overlapping
to a large extent with the related legal dispensation of ;=D:“coercion,
duress, compulsion”. Sunni authors sometimes avoid use of the term
F3C;KK3itself, perhaps because of its association with Sh,ism in partic-
ular, but their detailed discussions of ;=D:closely resemble discussions
6Harvey, “Crypto-Islam in Sixteenth-Century Spain”; Harvey, “The Political, Social
and Cultural History of the Moriscos”; Harvey, #GE>;?E;@)B3;@, pp. 60-64;
Harvey, “Una referencia explícita a la legalidad de la práctica de la F3CK3 por los moris-
cos”; Cardaillac, #AD;ECG7E7F:DUF;7@EG@388DA@F7?7@FBA>U?;CG7; Car-
daillac, “Un aspecto de las relaciones entre moriscos y cristianos: polémica y taqiyya”;
García-Arenal, @CG;E;5;\@K#AD;E5AE"AEBDA57EAE67>*D;4G@3>67G7@53, pp. 101-02;
Vernet, “La exégesis musulmana tradicional en los coranes aljamiados”, p. 125; Chejne,
E>3?3@6F:7 -7EF*:7#AD;E5AE G>FGD3>3@6)A5;3> ;EFADK, p. 24; Galmés de
Fuentes, "AE?AD;E5AE67E67EG?;E?3AD;>>3, pp. 108-13; Tueller, AA63@63;F:8G>
:D;EF;3@E#AD;E5AE3@63F:A>;5;E?;@3D>K#A67D@)B3;@, pp. 62-63; Barletta, AH7DF
7EFGD7EDKBFAE>3?;5";F7D3FGD73EG>FGD3> &D35F;57;@ 3D>K#A67D@ )B3;@, pp.
xxviii-xxix; Perry, *:73@6>7EE#3;67@#AD;E5AE3@6F:7&A>;F;5EA8(7>;9;A@;@3D>K
#A67D@)B3;@, pp. 34-35; Miller, G3D6;3@EA8E>3?(7>;9;AGEGF:AD;FK3@6#GE>;?
A??G@;F;7EA8"3F7#76;7H3>)B3;@, pp. 114, 181; Ibrahim, “Literature of the Converts
in Early Modern Spain: Nationalism and Religious Dissimulation of Minorities”, pp. 210,
220.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 441
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 441
of F3C;KK3. Both concepts appear in standard Sunni texts of law, h36F:,
and Qurnic exegesis that would have been available to North African
and Andalusian jurists of the Mliklegal tradition who advised the
Moriscos regarding their religious obligations. Therefore, Moriscos
would have known of the Islamic legal justification for dissimulation,
and some of them, at least, consciously applied an Islamic discipline
of dissimulation to their interactions with Church authorities, the In-
quisition, state officials, and the surrounding Christian society at large.
In 1964, L.P. Harvey called attention to F3C;KK3in sixteenth century
Spain, labelling the Moriscos’ faith “crypto-Islam”. His analysis sug-
gests, however, that the use of the dispensation of F3C;KK3on the part
of the Moriscos was surprising. Glossing F3C;KK3as “circumspect denial
of one’s true beliefs when in danger”, he notes that the concept devel-
oped early in Islamic history and has been used primarily by heterodox
Muslims, especially Sh,ites threatened by a Sunni majority. He adds
that the practice of F3C;KK3has been thought of as an exception applying
to individuals and not to an entire community.7Dressendörfer similarly
portrays F3C;KK3as a major facet of Morisco belief and practice in his
work on the Inquisition’s trials of Moriscos in Toledo in the late six-
teenth and early seventeeth centuries.8In his 1977 work on polemic be-
tween Moriscos and Christians, Louis Cardaillac identifies F3C;KK3as
the Moriscos’ main defense against the Inquisition and a fundamental
facet of their beliefs and practice. Reference to the Islamic concept of
F3C;KK3has been described as an almost ritual obligation in studies de-
voted to the Moriscos since Cardaillac’s work.9In contrast, Mercedes
García-Arenal suggests that the behavior of the Moriscos of Cuenca
may have had more to do with the force of circumstances than with
knowledge of religious doctrine.10 Cardaillac notes that the term F3C;KK3
does not occur even once with the technical meaning “dissimulation”
in the many polemic documents that he examined for his work.11 To
7Harvey, #GE>;?E;@)B3;@, p. 60.
8Dressendörfer, E>3?G@F7D67D@CG;E;F;A@;7#AD;E5A&DAL7EE7;@*A>76A
, pp. 131-52.
9Harvey, “Una referencia explícita”, p. 561.
10 García-Arenal, @CG;E;5;\@K#AD;E5AE, pp. 101-02.
11 He asks, “(...) le peuple morisque, dans sa vie quotidienne, et les polémistes, dans
leur écrits, avaient-ils conscience d’appliquer ce principe islamique, ou agissaient-ils et
écrivaient-ils en réagissant spontanément aux circonstances que se présentaient à eux?”,
Cardaillac, #AD;ECG7E7F:DUF;7@E, p. 99.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
442
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 442
what extent were educated or uneducated Moriscos aware of Islamic
doctrinal justifications for the practice of dissimulation, and to what ex-
tent was the Morisco’s behavior guided by theoretical injunctions con-
tained in Islamic legal or other literature?12 Harvey remarks that the
need for a discussion of F3C;KK3has been felt for some time.13
Widely cited as endorsing the Moriscos’ resort to F3C;KK3is a 83FI
issued in 910/1504 by the North African jurist Abl-,Abbs Ahmad b.
AbJum,a al-Maghrwal-Wahrn(d. 917/1511). This legal D7EBA@EG?
provides comprehensive dispensation to Moriscos to feign adherence to
Christianity, allowing them to perform acts that are ordinarily forbidden
or omit acts that are ordinarily obligatory as long as they internally reject
their outward acts and understand that the underlying prohibitions and
obligations still hold. Many ordinary Islamic legal stipulations are sus-
pended: the Moriscos may drink wine or eat pork if forced; they may
pray with the Christians, utter blasphemous Christian creeds, or insult
the Prophet Muhammad if they are compelled to do so; they may dis-
pense with the ordinary obligations connected with ritual ablutions and
prayer if circumstances require; they may even marry their daughters to
Christians if coerced, as long as they retain the conviction that this is or-
dinarily forbidden. Harvey calls this 83FI“the key theological document
for the study of Spanish Islam” in the period following the Reconquista
and leading up to the expulsions.14 Particularly since Harvey’s 1964 ar-
ticle, this 83FIhas been addressed in many studies on the history of the
Moriscos and the status of Muslim minorities under non-Muslim rule.15
12 Cardaillac, “Un aspecto de las relaciones,” pp. 107-22.
13 Harvey, “Una referencia explícita”, p. 562; also Harvey, #GE>;?E;@)B3;@, pp.
184-85.
14 Harvey, #GE>;?E;@)B3;@, p. 60.
15 Harvey, “Crypto-Islam”; Cardaillac, #AD;ECG7E7F:DUF;7@E, pp. 88-90; Cardaillac,
“Un aspecto de las relaciones,” pp. 108-10; Vernet, “La Exégesis Musulmana”, p. 125;
Sabbagh, “La religion des Moriscos entre deux fatwas”, pp. 49-55; Chejne, E>3?3@6F:7
-7EF, p. 24; Epalza, “L’identité onomastique et linguistique des Morisques”; Bouzineb,
“Respuestas de jurisconsultos magrebíes en torno de la inmigración de musulmanes his-
pánicos”, pp. 53-54, 59-60; Razq, 3>@63>GE;KK@I3:;<DFG:G?;>3>#39:D;4=:;>>
3>C3D@3K@ , pp. 150-51; Fierro, “La emigración en el Islam: conceptos antiguos,
nuevos problemas”, pp. 21-22; Harvey, “The Political, Social and Cultural History”, pp.
209-10; Abou El Fadl, “Islamic Law and Muslim Minorities: The Juristic Discourse on
Muslim Minorities from the Second/Eighth to the Eleventh/Seventeenth Centuries”, esp.
pp. 156-57, 179-80; Epalza, “La voz oficial de los musulmanes hispanos, mudéjares y mo-
riscos, a sus autoridades cristianas: cuatro textos, en árabe, en castellano y en catalán-va-
lenciano”, pp. 290-95; Molénat, “Le problème de la permanence des musulmans dans les
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 443
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 443
While many have viewed al-Wahrn’s 83FIas legitimating the use
of F3C;KK3by Moriscos, others have disagreed. Sabbagh notes that
F3C;KK3is most important for Islamic sectarian groups, including the
Sh,ites and the Khrijis, particularly the IbdKhriji sect. Sunnis do
not favor the concept, she claims, since it is a dangerous principle for
the moral life of the community and weakens notions of <;:6and mar-
tyrdom.16 Molénat notes that although the 83FIprovides all the means
for practicing “crypto-Islam”, Ibn AbJum,a does not present theoretical
justification and does not use the term F3C;KK3itself.17 Rubiera Mata
concurs, adding that al-Wahrn’s 83FIis an anomaly among other 83F
Is from Iberia and North Africa addressing the status of Muslims living
under Christian political domination; F3C;KK3in her view is a Sh,ite con-
cept that the Sunni Moriscos would have neither recognized nor used.18
A number of statements from Spanish authors in the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries refer to the Islamic legal dispensation more or
less directly, though without using the term F3C;KK3, suggesting that at
least some of the Moriscos and their interlocutors must have been fa-
miliar with the concept. The inhabitants of the Muslim town of María,
near Zaragoza, rose in rebellion following the forcible conversion of
the Muslims of Aragon in 1526. The besieged rebels agreed to surren-
der only after a Christian noble informed them that they were permitted
by their own religion to dissimulate:
Sad and unfortunate people, who in this manner will deliver yourselves into the
hands of your enemies! If you refuse to be baptised in order not to go against your
Qur’n, then learn something that is permitted to you therein: show yourselves to
be Christians and get baptised, while keeping your heart for Muhammad. You will
thereby be delivered from the present danger, if you are forced to surrender by
arms, and from future dangers as you roam as fugitives the world.19
territoires conquis par les Chrétiens, du point de vue de la loi islamique”, pp. 399-400;
Pormann, “Das Fatwa ;77DD>;5:EF7@-3D7@ (E@>?3F;D67E3>-3@n3DE)”, pp.
311-12; Rubiera Mata, “Los moriscos como criptomusulmanes y la Taqiyya”; Harvey,
#GE>;?E;@)B3;@, pp. 60-64.
16 Sabbagh, “La Religion des Morisques”, pp. 53-55.
17 Molénat, “Le Problème de la permanence”, pp. 399-400.
18 “La F3C;KK3es un concepto de los chiíes, la más importante secta del Islam, para
disfrazar su pertenencia a ella, es decir, que son chiíes en el ámbito sunní, pero jamás para
simular que no son musulmanes. Es decir, que el escrito de Al-Magrawi va mucho más
allá de la F3C;KK3, doctrina que además, seguramente como sunní no conocía”, Rubiera
Mata, “Los moriscos como criptomusulmanes”, p. 547.
19 Guadalajara y Xavier, #7?AD34>77JBG>E;\@K<GEFXE;?A67EF;7DDA67>AE#AD;E5AE
67EB3[3, fol. 51v; Harvey, “Crypto-Islam”, pp. 170-71.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
444
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 444
Here, the Christian noble alludes to a specific dispensation recorded
in the text of the Qur’n; the text reads: CG7AE7EB7D?;F;6A7@U>,
“... that is permitted to you in ;F”, referring to Islam’s holy book.20 This
may be a reference to Q 16:106, which is discussed below. Guadalajara
y Xavier refers to the Islamic doctrinal support for dissimulation when
he writes of the difficulty of converting Moriscos into true Catholics:
I only wish to state, by the way, that, with the permission and licence that their ac-
cursed sect accorded them, they could feign any religion outwardly and without
sinning, as long as they kept their hearts nevertheless devoted to their false imposter
of a prophet. We saw so many of them who died while worshipping the Cross and
speaking well of our Catholic Religion yet who were inwardly excellent Muslims.21
The juxtaposition of the terms B7D?;EA“permission” and >;57@5;3
“license” with A53E;A@7E8ADTAE3E“coercive circumstances” suggests
a direct reference to the Islamic legal dispensation of ;=D:, “coercion,
duress”, which resembles F3C;KK3 in many aspects and may be con-
nected as well with Q 16:106.
At least one indication that the Moriscos themselves were aware of
the specific term F3C;KK3has been presented in scholarship to date: Har-
vey has identified a passage of a sixteenth-century 3><3?;36Atext by
Mancebo de Arévalo that provides an explicit reference to F3C;KK3, ren-
dered in Spanish vernacular as 3?A@7EF3@T3.22 Additional evidence re-
garding F3C;KK3from Sunni legal and other sources that would have
been available in Spain and North Africa during the time of the
Moriscos and in the preceding centuries will be presented below.
The situation of the Moriscos was not entirely unprecedented in Is-
lamic history, and Sunni Muslims had invoked F3C;KK3to justify dis-
simulation under Christian domination in other periods and regions,
including Sicily after the Norman conquest in 1061-91 and the Byzan-
tine Marches in eastern Anatolia, northern Syria, and northern Iraq dur-
ing the early Islamic centuries. Border wars with Byzantium began
very soon after the initial expansion of the Islamic Empire in the sev-
enth century and remained a constant aspect of the political and military
20 Harvey’s translation elides the text here: “... you should be informed that you are
permitted to put on a show of being Christians ...”, Harvey, “Crypto-Islam”, p. 170.
21 Guadalajara, #7?AD34>77JBG>E;\@, fol. 159; Cardaillac, #AD;ECG7E7F:DUF;7@E,
p. 99.
22 Harvey, “Una referencia explícita”, p. 562; also Harvey, #GE>;?E;@)B3;@, pp.
184-85.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 445
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 445
history of Islamdom until the Crusader conquests and the establishment
of the Frankish states of Outremer changed the parameters of that con-
flict at the close of the eleventh century. The Byzantine Crusade, led
in the mid-tenth century by the general-emperors Nicephorus II Phocas
(963-69) and John Tzimisces (969-76), resulted in the annexation of
large territories that had been under Muslim rule in Crete, Cilicia, and
northern Syria, including the major cities of Tarsus, Missisa, and
Adana, conquered in 964-66, and Antioch, conquered in 969. As a con-
sequence, large Muslim populations came under Christian rule and
faced difficult questions regarding religious status, religious and cul-
tural identity, discrimination, and conversion.
Sources reveal that some Sunni Muslim captives in the hands of the
Byzantines dissimulated in conscious accordance with the Islamic legal
dispensation of F3C;KK3In the late tenth century, Mu,taziltheologian
al-Qd,Abd al-Jabbr (d. 415/1025) criticized the morals of Byzantine
Christians, suggesting, among other things, that they did not consider
marital infidelity on the part of their wives a serious infraction. In order
to prove this, he relates an account of a Muslim warrior who had fallen
captive, feigned conversion to Christianity, and married a well-to-do
Christian woman. Later, when he was sent by the Emperor on a military
mission, he heard that his wife had taken a lover, but when he con-
fronted her relatives about this, they assured him that it was quite or-
dinary for a woman in her position to do this, adding that it was
advantageous for him, as the lover assumed responsibility for the ex-
penses of the family and property in his absence. Even if this is not an
accurate portrayal of the mores of Byzantine matrons, the account
proves that the Muslim warrior dissimulated, feigning conversion to
Christianity. In addition, he was not alone in his dissimulation:
... Musbihal-T, Ab,Abd Allh al-Husayn b. al-Saqr, ,Abd al-Rahmn the war-
rior under Ibn al-Zayyt, and other border warriors and those who resided many
years in Constantinople, both as captives and as free men, (...) because of the long
hardship they suffered and because the Muslims did not send anyone to ransom
them or to fight the enemy, feigned conversion to Christianity out of dissimulation
and spread out among the Christians and mixed with them.23
23 Al-Qd,Abd al-Jabbr, *3F:4F 63>;> 3>@G4GII3, pp. 171-72; AbJa,far
Muhammad b. ,Abd al-Malik al-Zayyt served as vizier from 836 A.D. on, under al-
Mu,tasim (r. 833-42), al-Wthiq (842-47), and al-Mutawakkil (r. 847-51).
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
446
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 446
Al-Qdal-Jabbr’s description of their conversion, “they outwardly
adopted Christianity out of dissimulation” (3z:3D>@3sD@;K3F3
F3C;KK3F3@), uses the explicit term F3C;KK3to denote their outward con-
formance to Christianity. It also assumes that they were aware of the
concept of F3C;KK3as an Islamic legal dispensation available to them
on account of their circumstances.
SS%1.a8/h6*-+7+i>6,*
Abl-,Abbs Ahmad Ibn AbJum,a al-Maghrwal-Wahrn(d.
917/1511), a Mlikjurist who completed his studies in Tlemcen and
spent his later career as a professor in Fez, wrote his D7EBA@EG? for the
Moriscos in 910/1504, probably in Fez.24 The 83FIdoes not mention
earlier 83FIs, court cases, or legal discussions of the particular topic
addressed, so it is difficult to determine the exact provenance of its
ideas and its place in historical legal debates. Nevertheless, attention
to Islamic legal literature allows a better understanding of the reasoning
behind the 83FI. Although the term F3C;KK3does not appear, the 83FI
includes several related technical legal and theological terms, including
@;KK3“intention”, ;=D:“coercion, duress”, and =3>;?3F3>=G8D“blas-
phemy”, and alludes as well to Qur’nic verses and h36F: reports that
belong to the standard repertory of scriptural proof-texts used to legit-
imate F3C;KK3.
24 On this scholar, see Stewart, “The identity of ‘the Mufti of Oran’: Abal uAbbas
Ahmad b. AbJumua al-Maghrwal-Wahrn(d. 917/1511)”. L.P. Harvey published pho-
tographic plates of the vatican ms. of the 83FIand discussed the text in his 1958 doctoral
dissertation on aljamiado literature, and his complete transcription of that manuscript ap-
peared in the proceedings of a conference on Arabic and Islamic studies held in Cordoba
in 1962, together with photographic plates of the manuscript folios and a summary of its
provisions in English;Harvey, *:7";F7D3DKG>FGD7A8F:7#AD;E5AE)FG6K
3E76A@F:7JF3@F#3@GE5D;BFE;@D34;53@6><3?X3. The discussion is given at vol. I,
175, pp. 293-300 and the plates of the manuscript in Appendix C: vol. 2, pp. 184-88; Har-
vey, “Crypto-Islam.” In 1971, Dressendörfer provided a nearly complete German transla-
tion in E>3?G@F7D67D@CG;E;F;A@, pp. 137-41; Leila Sabbagh commented on the available
translations in 1983, making some valuable points, but did not translate the 83FI; Sabbagh,
“La religion des Moriscos”, pp. 49-55. Rubiera Mata provided a near-complete Spanish
translation of V in 2004, Rubiera, “Los Moriscos como criptomusulmanes”, pp. 541-44.
Harvey’s 2005 book on the Moriscos includes an English translation of the text, also nearly
complete: Harvey, #GE>;?E;@)B3;@, pp. 24, 61-63.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 447
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 447
!!27$>772<5*6
*3C;KK3, literally “fear, caution” is an Islamic legal dispensation
(DG=:s3) allowing dissimulation in cases of danger. It permits a legally
responsible believer to perform certain acts under duress that would
ordinarily be forbidden or to omit certain acts that would ordinarily be
obligatory. *3C;KK3is emblematic for the posture of a persecuted and
necessarily secretive minority. Investigators of the history and religion
of the Moriscos have shown little awareness that a small but growing
corpus of secondary literature on F3C;KK3exists, much less plumbed Is-
lamic sources for discussions of F3C;KK3.25
A major hindrance to the investigation of F3C;KK3in the context of
Moriscos or Muslims in Spain has been the widespread and erroneous
belief that the concept and practice of F3C;KK3are the exclusive domain
of Twelver Sh,ites and other Muslim sectarian minorities and are not
relevant to Sunni Islam. Sh,ites have practiced F3C;KK3more widely
than Sunnis and cite the concept more frequently in their literature and
daily lives for the obvious historical reason that, throughout most of
Islamic history and in most regions, they have lived as a minority under
Sunni rule, surrounded by a potentially hostile majority. Yet while his-
torical realities have conspired to make F3C;KK3appear to be an exclu-
sively Sh,ite principle, the option of F3C;KK3was doctrinally available
to Sunnis, and Goldziher pointed out long ago that F3C;KK3is an ac-
cepted principle in Sunni as well as Sh,ite Islam. Even so, alleged over-
use of F3C;KK3became a standard part of Sunni polemics against the
Sh,ites. Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328), for example, denounces the
D8;d3“rejectors”–the common term of opprobrium for Sh,ites among
medieval Sunnis– as through-and-through hypocrites because of their
25 On F3C;KK3 see Goldziher, “Das Prinzip der takijja im Islam”; Strothmann,
“Takiyya”; Meyer, “Anlass und Anwendungsbereich der taqiyya”; Kohlberg, “Some
Imm-Sh,Views on Taqiyya”; Kohlberg, “*3C;KK3 in Sh,Theology and Religion”; Gor-
don, “The Substratum of *3C;KK3 in Iran”; Dupree, “Further Notes on *3C;KK3:
Afghanistan”; Fawz,#38:?3>F3C;KK38>E>?; Layish, “Taqiyya among the Druzes”;
Stewart, “*3C;KK3:as Performance: The Travels of Bah al-Dn al-,milin the Ottoman
Empire (991-93/1583-85)”; Stewart, “Husayn b. ,Abd al-Samad al-,mil’s Treatise for
Sultan Suleiman and the Sh,-Shfi,Legal Tradition”; Stewart, E>3?;5"793>%DF:A6AJK
*I7>H7D):;;F7(735F;A@EFAF:7)G@@;"793>)KEF7?; Stewart, “Documents and Dissimula-
tion: Notes on the Performance of *3C;KK3”; Makrim, 3>*3C;KK38>E>?; Clarke, “The
Rise and Decline of *3C;KK3 in Twelver Shi,ism”; Dakake, “Hiding in Plain Sight: The
Practical and Doctrinal Significance of Secrecy in Shi,ite Islam”.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
448
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 448
constant practice of F3C;KK3.26 A sixteenth century Iranian Sunni scholar
identifies the acceptance of F3C;KK3as one of the Sh,ites’ gravest sins
and blames them for applying it to a shocking extent, so that it affects
nearly all Islamic legal injunctions.27 Sunni Muslims have often likened
Sh,ites, on account of their resort to F3C;KK3, to the #G@8;C@“Hyp-
ocrites”, a group decried in the Qurn as outward Muslims who are
secretly unsympathetic to the cause of Muslims and actively seek to
undermine the Muslim community.28
Because of these polemic connotations, the term F3C;KK3is often
avoided in Sunni discussions of doctrine, despite the fact that it occurs
explicitly in fundamental texts in the Sunni tradition, including canon-
ical h36F: collections, well-known commentaries on the Qur’n, and
other works. The relative infrequency of the term, however, does not
indicate a lack of attention to the topic or a rejection of the concept.
Sunni legal discussions of ;=D:“coercion, duress” regularly cover the
same topics that Sh,ites discuss under the rubric of F3C;KK3, using sim-
ilar terms and examples and many of the same scriptural prooftexts, in
works that would have been well known to Andalusian and North
African Mlikjurists. Khaled Abou El-Fadl recognizes that Ibn Ab
Jum,a’s 83FIis based on the concept of duress or coercion (;=D:).29
Some Islamic legal works devote a separate chapter to the topic, as is
the case with al-Marghnn’s (d. 593/1197) ;6K3, one of the most
popular texts of Hanaflaw.30 Others discuss duress in various contexts,
such as the chapter on judgeship. In addition, many Sunni texts discuss
F3C;KK3explicitly and in some detail.
The principle of F3C;KK3is based on the idea prevalent in Sunni as
well as Sh,ite law and theology that inner convictions potentially differ
from manifest statements and actions and that one ought to be judged
26 Ibn Taymiyya, #;@:<3>EG@@3, vol. 2, pp. 29-32.
27 Makhdm al-Shrz, 3>$3IC;d8>D366,3>3>D3I8;d, fols. 67-68.
28 Adang, “Hypocrites and Hypocrisy.”
29 Abou El-Fadl, “Islamic Law”, p. 179. For an overview of duress in Islamic law,
see Abou El-Fadl, “The Common and Islamic Law of Duress”; AbSafiya, 3>=D:8>
E:3D,33>E>?;KK3; al-Husayn,3>=D:I33F:3DG:8>3h=?3>E:3D,;KK36;DE3
?GCD3@3C;?3,3>3>;EF;Cs >;>8GD,3>,3C;6;KK3I3>8;C:;KK3; Abdur Rahim, *:7
&D;@5;B>7EA8#G:3??363@ GD;EBDG67@57355AD6;@9FAF:73@38;#3>;=;):38;,;3@6
3@43>;)5:AA>E.
30 Burhn al-Dn Abl-Hasan ,Alb. AbBakr al-Farghnal-Marghnn, 3>;6K3
E:3Dh;6K3F3>?G4F36; English translation, section on “compulsion”, in *:7763K3
ADG;67A??7@F3DKA@F:7#GEEG>?3@"3IE.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 449
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 449
on the basis of the former. Intention (@;KK3) is a fundamental concept
in Sunni Islamic law.31 Without it, the performance (36) of legal ob-
ligations is invalid; the mere completion of an act does not suffice. All
practicing believers should know the concept, since daily prayer is in-
valid if performed without forming one’s intention to direct the prayer
to God alone. Perhaps the best known of all Prophetic h36F: reports
is ;@@3?>3u?>G4;>@;KKF“works are (judged) according to inten-
tions”, which appears as the very first h36F: in the S3hhof al-Bukhr
(d. 256/870) and in al-Nawaw’s (d. 676/1277) popular collection of
forty h36F:s. As al-Tf(d. 716/1316), one of the many commentators
on al-Nawaw’s work, explains, this dictum has profound legal impli-
cations. For example, a man who has sexual intercourse with a woman
whom he believes to be his wife is not subject to the penalty for adul-
tery. Similarly, a Muslim who drinks alcohol without realizing or in-
tending to do so is not subject to any penalty.32 In Islamic theology
generally, one’s conviction (;uF;C6), located in the heart (C3>4), is often
contrasted with one’s word (C3I>), made by the tongue (>;E@), and
deed (8;u>), performed by the hand (K36) or limbs (<3ID;h). The dis-
tinction between an external, obvious, or BD;?3835;7 meaning (z:;D)
that can differ quite radically from an internal or hidden meaning
(4t;@) is also ubiquitous in Islamic literature and thought. Ibn Ab
Jum,a’s 83FIstresses that it is not one’s outer actions that make one
a Muslim, but one’s inner state or intention. God is more concerned
with believers’ intentions than their outward acts. Paraphrasing another
well-known h36F: report, he states, >>:G>K3@zGDG;>sGI3D;=G?
>=;@;>CG>4;=G?“God does not look at your external forms but
rather at your hearts”. One’s beliefs or opinions about the law make
one a Muslim and not one’s success in applying its specific dictates.
The essence of belief is therefore not adherence to the law B7DE7, but
in holding the correct opinions about it. Al-Ghazl(d. 505/1111) dis-
cusses intention at some length in his famous work hK uG>?3>6@,
citing a number of h36F: reports, including ;@@3?>3u?>G4;>
@;KKF>;=G>>;?D;;@?@3I... “Actions are judged only according
to intentions. For each man is what he intends...” and also ;@@3>>:3
F3u>>K3@zGDG;>sGI3D;=G?I33?I>;=G?I3;@@3?K3@zGDG
31 Sabbagh, “La religion des Morisques”, pp. 54-55.
32 Sulaymn b. ,Abd al-Qawal-Tf, !;F43>F3uK@8E:3Dh3>D43u@, pp. 36-37.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
450
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 450
;>CG>4;=G?I33u?>;=G?“Exalted God does not look at your ex-
ternal forms and your belongings but rather looks exclusively at your
hearts and your works”.33
The concept of F3C;KK3 is discussed in many Sunni sources that
would have been available, either directly or indirectly, to religious
scholars and literate Muslims of al-Andalus and North Africa before,
during, and after the Reconquista. The main categories of such texts
are Qurnic commentaries, h36F: collections and associated compen-
dia and commentaries, legal manuals, and works on Islamic theology
and ethics such as al-Ghazl’s hK uG>?3>6@. The Qurnic verses
at which commentaries regularly discuss F3C;KK3 or closely related mat-
ters are three: Q 3:28, which uses the cognate terms ;FF3Cand FGC:
or F3C;KK3 and refers to dissimulation; Q 16:106, which assesses the
status of a believer who blasphemes under coercion; and Q 40:28,
which depicts a relative of Pharaoh who was a true believer but con-
cealed the fact. In her investigation of 3><3?;36Atranslations of the
Qur’n, Consuelo López-Morillas provides a picture of the tradition of
F38EDthat provided the background for the Moriscos’ interpretation of
the text. She identifies four Eastern and four Western commentaries as
fundamental: from the East, ?;u 3>43K@by al-Tabar(d. 310/923),
3>!3E:E:8by al-Zamakhshar(d. 528/1135), #38Fh3>:3K4by
Fakhr al-Dn al-Rz(d. 606/1209), and @ID 3>F3@L>by al-Baydw
(d. 685/1286), and from the West, *38ED3>'GD@by Ibn AbZamann
(d. 399/1008), 3>#Gh3DD3D3>I3<L8F38ED3>!;F43>,LLby Ibn
,Atiyya al-Gharnt(d. 546/1151), 3> ?;u >;3h=?3>'GD@by al-
Qurtub(d. 671/1273), and 3>3hD3>?Ght8F38ED3>'GD@by Ab
Hayyn al-Gharnt(d. 745/1344). Of these, she notes that Ibn AbZa-
mann’s *38EDis preserved in truncated form in an 3><3?;36AMS. Es-
pecially influential for the Moriscos were the commentaries of
al-Zamakhsharand Ibn ,Atiyya al-Gharnt. ><3?;36Atranslations of
the Qur’n also incorporated material from F38EDsources without ac-
knowledgement. López-Morillas suspects that the 3><3?;36Awriter ,s
b. Jbir (Ice de Gebir) consulted a wide variety of F38EDworks and in-
corporated material from them in his influential but now-lost 3><3?;36A
translation of the Qurn, which he completed in 1456. Later 3><3?;36A
translators or copyists of Qur’n translations may have drawn exten-
33 Al-Ghazl, hK uG>?3>6@, vol. 5, pp. 1741-57.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 451
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 451
sively on ,sb. Jbir’s work and thus passed on commentary and in-
terpretation of the text without independent access to works of F38ED.34
Several h36F:s that appear in the standard Sunni collections such as
al-Bukhr’s S3hhdiscuss the use of verbal ambiguities as a means to
escape harm or persecution. Legal manuals discuss matters related to
F3C;KK3 under the topics of coercion, the duty to enjoin good and de-
nounce wrong in public, legal stratagems, and affidavits of pre-emption
(;EF;Du). Since many Qurnic commentaries and h36F: works discuss
legal matters, and since Qurnic commentaries and legal manuals often
cite h36F: reports as evidence, the categories overlap.
The term F3C;KK3likely derives from Q 3:28, which is widely held
to justify dissimulation in front of potential enemies. The verse reads,
“Let not the believers take unbelievers for their allies in preference to
believers. Whoever does this has no connection with God, G@>7EEKAG
4GF9G3D6KAGDE7>H7E393;@EFF:7?3E3BD753GF;A@ (;>>3@ F3FF3C?;@
:G?FGCF3@F3C;KK3F3@). God bids you beware only of Himself…” Al-
Tabar, al-Zamakhshar, al-Baydw, and others report the recognized
variant reading F3C;KK3F3@, a verbal noun construed as a cognate accu-
sative (“the act of being cautious”), rather than FGCF3@, a plural adjec-
tive construed as an accusative of condition (“while you are exercising
caution”). Whether the actual term F3C;KK3 or its cognate FGC:occurs
in this verse, there is little doubt that the cognate verb ;FF3Crefers to
dissimulation, so that, one may claim, both the term and the concept
of F3C;KK3are based on an explicit Qurnic text. Most Sunni F38EDs
use the term F3C;KK3 in explicating the verse.35
Nonetheless, the scriptural text by which F3C;KK3is most often jus-
tified is Q 16:106: “Whoever expresses disbelief in God after having
accepted belief [will suffer greatly]–except him who is forced while
his heart is still at peace in belief”. This verse is also the >A5GE5>3EE;5GE
for the legal topic of coercion (;=D:), particularly since the cognate
34 López-Morillas, *:7'GD@;@);JF77@F:7@FGDK)B3;@);J#AD;E5A,7DE;A@EA8
)D3. Vincent Cornell has called attention to the exegeses of Ibn ,Atiyya and al-Qurtub
in particular as prominent representatives of the Andalusian tradition of Qur’n commen-
tary. Cornell, “,>?3>'GD@in al-Andalus: The *38ED#Gh3DD3Din the Works of Three
Authors”.
35 Al-Tabar, ?;u3>43K@u3@IG<:F3I>K3>'GD@, vol. 3, pp. 227-30; al-Za-
makhshar, 3>!3E:E:8u3@h3C;C3>F3@L>, vol. 1, p. 183; al-Rz, #38Fh3>9:3K413>
*38ED3>=34D2, vol. 8, pp. 10-14; al-Baydw, @ID3>F3@L>, pp. 70-71; al-Jasss,h=?
3>'GD@, vol. 2, pp. 289-90; al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u >;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 4, p. 57.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
452
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 452
G=D;:3 “was forced, coerced” occurs in it. It is said to refer to the case
of the Companion ,Ammr b. Ysir, who was compelled by polytheists
in Mecca to worship pagan idols and deny the Prophet Muhammad.
His parents, Ysir and Sumayya, were brutally killed for refusing, but
,Ammr succumbed to their demands and thus survived. Afterwards,
when he confessed to the Prophet what had happened, the Prophet
asked him how he felt in his heart, and ,Ammr responded that his heart
“was at ease in belief”. The Prophet informed him that this was all that
was necessary, and if the polytheists were to attack him in a similar
fashion in the future, he should repeat his actions. A second account
that frequently occurs in commentaries on this verse relates that
Musaylima, the false prophet of the BanHrith who was contempo-
rary with the Prophet Muhammad, demanded that two Muslim captives
recognize him as a legitimate messenger of God along with Muham-
mad. One prisoner acquiesced, but the other did not answer, feigning
deafness, and was killed as a result. When informed about the incident,
the Prophet Muhammad legitimated the actions of both prisoners, stat-
ing that one was allowed to dissimulate if one’s life was in danger, but
that one was also free to choose the path of martyrdom. These accounts
occur in nearly all the well-known Sunnexegeses, including popular
Mlikcommentaries such as al-Qurtub’s (d. 671/1272-73) 3> ?;u
>;3h=?3>'GD@.36 The key phrase I3C3>4G:G?Gt?3;@@4;>?@
“while his heart is still at peace in belief” appears in many Sunni legal
discussions of both F3C;KK3and coercion and, noticeably, in Ibn Ab
Jum,a’s 83FI.
Srat al-Mumin depicts an actual performance of religious dissimu -
lation in the course of a confrontation between Moses and Pharaoh
(Q 40:22-54). When Pharaoh threatens to kill Moses (v. 26), an Egyp -
tian described as a member of Pharaoh’s family who concealed his faith
(D3<G>G@?G?;@G@?;@>;;Du3I@3K3=FG?G?@3:G) (v. 28) speaks
up in Moses’ defense. Some commentators claim he was a Hebrew,
assigning him the name Sam,n, Sham,n, Habb, Hizql, Hizbl, or
36 Al-Tabar, ?;u 3>43K@, vol. 14, pp. 180-82; al-Zamakhshar, 3>!3E:E:8, vol.
2, p. 345; al-Rz, #38Fh3>9:3K4, vol. 20, p. 121; al-Jasss, h=?3>'GD@, vol. 5,
pp. 13-17; al-Baydw, @ID3>F3@L>, p. 367; al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u >;3h=?3>'GD@,
vol. 10, pp. 180-81; Ibn Kathr, *38ED3>'GD@3>u3z?, vol. 2, p. 609; al-Kalb,!;F4
3>F3E:>>;uG>?3>F3@L>, vol. 2, pp. 162-63. See also Friedmann, *A>7D3@573@6A7D5;A@
;@E>3?@F7D83;F:(7>3F;A@E;@F:7#GE>;?*D36;F;A@, pp. 153-56.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 453
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 453
Khirbl, but most consider him Egyptian, for several reasons: the He-
brew interpretation assumes inverted word order without sufficient
grounds; the preposition ?;@ is not usually used with the verb K3=FG?G,
which would ordinarily take two direct objects; a Hebrew would not
likely have confronted Pharaoh in this manner; and Pharaoh would
have reacted more harshly to a Hebrew. In addition, some commenta-
tors identify him as Pharaoh’s paternal cousin, heir apparent, or trusted
advisor.37 This believing member of Pharaoh’s family is thus a coun-
terpart to Nicodemus in the New Testament, a highly placed individual
who hid his belief out of prudence. Given the salience of this passage
in the Qur’n, it is difficult to claim that Sunni Muslims would be un-
aware of the concept of dissimulation; it is presumably because of this
passage that the term =;F?@“concealment” comes to be used as an oc-
casional synonym of F3C;KK3 in Islamic legal literature.
SS*41;*5i7*5#aCi87!!
One Sunni commentator who provides a substantial discussion of
dissimulation is Fakhr al-Dn al-Rz(d. 606/1209) in his voluminous
exegesis #38Fh3>9:3K4. This analysis forms one section of his com-
mentary on Q 3:28.
Know that F3C;KK3has many rulings associated with it; we will mention some of
them.
The first ruling: F3C;KK3occurs when a man is among a large group of unbelievers,
fears for his life or property from them, and beguiles or cajoles them with his
tongue. He does this by avoiding disclosure of enmity with his tongue. It is also
permissible to produce speech that gives the impression of friendship and alliance
but on condition that he internally maintain (KGd?;D) the opposite and use allusive
language (KGu3DD;d) in all of what he says, for F3C;KK3affects what is externally
apparent and not what is in people’s hearts.
The second ruling regarding F3C;KK3is that if the believer declares his faith and
the truth outright in a case where he is allowed to perform F3C;KK3, then that is
more meritorious. The proof of this is what we have stated above regarding the
story of Musaylima.
The third ruling: F3C;KK3is only permissible regarding that which is related to dis-
37 Al-Tha,lab, 3>!3E:8I3>43K@, vol. 8, pp. 272-73; al-Zamakhshar, 3>!3E:E:8,
vol. 3, p. 367; Ibn ,Atiyya al-Andalus, 3>#Gh3DD3D3>I3<L8F38ED3>!;F43>u3LL,
vol. 4, p. 552.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
454
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 454
playing alliance and enmity, and perhaps also regarding that which is related to
disclosing one’s religion. However, acts which result in harm to others, such as
murder, adultery, usurpation of property, taking false witness, accusing married
women of adultery, and revealing vulnerabilities of the Muslims’ defenses to the
unbelievers, are not at all permissible.
The fourth ruling: The obvious sense of the Qurnic verse indicates that F3C;KK3
is allowed before unbelievers who are dominant. However, the opinion of al-Shfi,
(may God be pleased with him) is that when the situation among Muslims resem-
bles that which obtains between Muslims and polytheists, then F3C;KK3becomes
legal as a means to protect life.
The fifth ruling: F3C;KK3is permissible for the purpose of preservation of life. Is it
also permissible for the preservation of property? One should probably rule in
favor of permissibility in this case, because of the statements of the Prophet (may
God bless him and grant him peace), “The inviolability of a Muslim’s property is
like the inviolability of his life” and “He who is killed protecting his property is a
martyr”. [It should also be permissible] because man has a compelling need of
property. For example, when water is sold for an exorbitant price, the obligation
to perform ablution no longer holds, and one is permitted to make do with F3K3?
?G?in order to avoid decreasing one’s wealth by that amount. How, then, could
it not be permissible here?
The sixth ruling: Mujhid [b. Jabr, d. 104/722] said, “This ruling held sway in the
beginning of Islam because of the weakness of the believers. However, since Is-
lamic rule has grown strong, it no longer holds”. But ,Awf [b. AbJamla, d.
146/763] related on the authority of al-Hasan [al-Basr, d. 110/728], “*3C;KK3is
permissible for the believers until the Day of Resurrection”. This last view is more
reasonable, because it is obligatory to prevent harm to one’s person as far as pos-
sible.38
Al-Rzaccepts F3C;KK3as a general principle of dissimulation in
Sunni Islamic law. He rejects Mujhid’s opinion that F3C;KK3has been
suspended because the Islamic state is no longer weak, and he endorses
the statement attributed to al-Hasan al-Basraccording to which F3C;KK3
will be permissible until the Day of Resurrection. In his view, dissim-
ulation may be applied to both word and deed. One may resort to it in
order to protect both life and property. A Muslim may dissimulate not
only among unbelievers but also among other Muslims. It has limits,
and one may not resort to it when it would cause harm to others or their
property.
38 Al-Rz, #38Fh3>9:3K4, vol. 8, p. 13.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 455
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 455
SS+7+i)*6*7i7O<i
One of the exegeses most frequently cited in al-Andalus was the
*38EDof Ibn AbZamann, which he abridged from the work of Yahy
b. Sallm al-Tammal-Basr(d. 200/815) and completed in Sha,bn
395/May-June 1005 in Cordoba.39 As part of the commentary on Q
3:28, he includes the following account of the dissimulation of ,Ammr
b. Ysir, the Companion of the Prophet who was forced to worship the
pagan gods in Mecca.
…Muhammad b. ,Ammr b. Ysir … stated: The polytheists took my father, and
they did not leave off from him until he insulted the Messenger of God (may God
bless him and grant him peace) and spoke well of their gods, and then they let him
go. When he came to the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace), the
Prophet asked him, “What befell you?” ,Ammar replied, “Evil, O Messenger of
God. By God, I was not let go until I insulted you and spoke well of their gods.”
The Prophet asked, “How did you find your heart?” He answered, “I find it at
peace in faith”. He said, “If they do it again, then you do it again”.40
In another passage, Ibn AbZamann again cites the phrase “except for
him who is forced while his heart is at peace in faith” in connection
with the dissimulation of ,Ammr b. Ysir before a pagan audience:
“Whoever denies God after accepting faith, except for him who is forced while
his heart is at peace in faith”–that is, accepts it. This was revealed concerning
,Ammr b. Ysir and his Companions. The polytheists had seized them and forced
them to denounce God and His Messenger. Because of their fear of them, they
gave them that with their mouths [alone].41
Ibn AbZamann does not use the technical term F3C;KK3 but describes
the concept and cites the historical anecdote most commonly held to
legitimate the practice.
SS+7,t2BB**51*;7ati-,*87!!*7-a
The Andalusian jurist Ibn ,Atiyya (d. ca. 541/1147) discusses F3C;KK3
in his popular exegesis 3>#Gh3DD3D3>I3<L, one of the most widely
39 Ibn AbZamann, *38ED, vol. 1, p. 9.
40 Ibn AbZamann, *38ED, vol. 1, p. 108.
41 Ibn AbZamann, *38ED, vol. 1, p. 446.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
456
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 456
renowned in the Mliktradition.42 His commentary on Q 3:28 reports
that scholars’ opinions have differed regarding three relevant legal ques-
tions: before whom may one perform F3C;KK3, under what circumstances
is F3C;KK3permissible, and what acts are permitted under the dispensa-
tion of F3C;KK3? The interlocutor before whom one may perform F3C;KK3
is defined as: “Any powerful person who exercises hegemony, who
causes duress, and whom one fears. This includes unbelievers when
they hold the reins of power, tyrannical leaders and usurpers, and people
of high station in the great cities”. According to Mlik (d. 179/795),
even a woman’s husband might place her under duress, such that it
would be lawful for her to exercise F3C;KK3before him. The circum-
stances under which F3C;KK3is allowed are the following:
... fear of death, fear of loss of limb, flogging and other types of torture. If a person
is subjected to any of these or harbors a deep-seated fear that he will be subjected
to them, then he is under duress, and the status of F3C;KK3applies to him. Impris-
onment constitutes duress, as do shackling, threatening, and menacing. Enmity
on the part of tyrannical people of high station permits F3C;KK3. All these vary ac-
cording to the condition of the person placed under duress and the act forced upon
him. For many, imprisonment does not constitute duress. Similarly, in the case of
a great man who is forced by imprisonment and non-lethal beating to commit
apostasy, one cannot imagine that he would perform F3C;KK3, given the tremen-
dous nature of what is demanded of him. Matters of duress belong to that category
of legal question to which one must apply the law of particular circumstances
(8;C:3>h>).
With regard to the third question, Ibn ,Atiyya states, “The scholars
have agreed that F3C;KK3makes permissible statements of the tongue,
from blasphemy on down, also sales, bequests, and divorce, freely
making statements to that effect, as well as ingratiation and flattery”.
One justification for this position is the statement of the Companion
Ibn Mas,d [,Abd Allh, d. 33/653], “There is no speech I would not
speak if it spared me two stripes from a man in power”. Ibn ,Atiyya
then explains that the lawfulness of performing deeds under the dis-
pensation of F3C;KK3, as opposed to making statements, is disputed. The
view that one may not perform deeds out of F3C;KK3was supported by
the early Mlikjurist Sahnn [b. Sa,d, d. 240/854], but al-Hasan [al-
Basr], Makhl [d. 112/730], and Masrq [b. al-Ajda,, d. 63/682], and
42 Ibn Farhn, 3>4<3>?G6::348?3,D;83F3,K@,G>3? 3>?36::34, pp. 275-76.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 457
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 457
others held that acts are permissible. Masrq viewed it as obligatory
to perform F3C;KK3under life-threatening circumstances; if one died
when one could have dissimulated but chose not to, one would go to
Hell. Sahnn argued, to the contrary, that one would be rewarded for
bravery: martyrdom was preferable to dissimulation. Al-Hasan [al-
Basr] is supposed to have said that if a man is told to prostrate himself
to an idol or else be killed, he should do so only if the idol is in the di-
rection of the C;4>3, forming his intention to pray to God. If it is not in
the direction of the C;4>3, then he should refuse even at risk of death.
Ibn ,Atiyya rejects this opinion, remonstrating, “What prevents him
from directing his intention toward God even if the idol is not in the
direction of the C;4>3, when it is stated in the Book of God that ‘No
matter where you turn, there is the face of God’ (Q 2:115) and when
Islamic law allows the traveller to pray extra prayers in a direction other
than the C;4>3?!” Ibn ,Atiyya ends his discussion with the statement
that these are merely the main topics under the rubric of F3C;KK3and
that its subsidiary questions are many.43
Ibn ,Atiyya’s discussion shows that dissimulation was a well-known
topic in Sunni, MlikF38EDand legal texts. Since 3>#Gh3DD3D3>I3<L
was one of the most popular commentaries with Morisco writers, there
is little doubt that they would have been exposed to the concept of
F3C;KK3.44 Ibn ,Atiyya’s discussion also shows that the topic of F3C;KK3
overlaps, to a large extent, with that of duress or coercion. He discusses
;=D:in some detail in his commentary on Q 16:106, and his remarks
there recapitulate his earlier discussion.45 Ibn ,Atiyya presents but then
dismisses the argument that only statements, and not acts, should be
permitted under the dispensation of coercion.
Sales, oaths,4 6 divorce, manumission of slaves, breaking the fast in Ramadn,
drinking wine, and other such sins performed under coercion are matters between
the worshipper and Almighty and Exalted God and are not binding on the one who
performs them. This is the opinion of Mutarrif [al-Madan, d. ca. 214/828], who
43 Ibn ,Atiyya al-Andalus, 3>#Gh3DD3D, vol. 1, p. 420.
44 Vernet, “La exégesis musulmana,” p. 143 n. 26, states that this work was 83?AEXE;?A
in the Western half of the Arab world and used by all later authors. Ibn ,Atiyya’s exegesis
and al-Zamakhshar’s !3E:E:8were among those most widely used by the Morisco au-
thors of Qur’n translations and commentaries.
45 Ibn ,Atiyya al-Andalus, 3>#Gh3DD3D, vol. 3, pp. 423-24.
46 Reading 3K?@for ?@in the text.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
458
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 458
transmitted it on the authority of Mlik, and it is the opinion of Ibn ,Abd al-Hakam
[d. 214/829] and Asbagh [b. al-Faraj, d. 225/839], who transmitted it from Ibn al-
Qsim [,Abd al-Rahmn al-,Utaq, d. 191/806], from Mlik. Ibn ,Abbs [,Abd
Allh, d. 68/687] distinguished between what is47 a statement, like manumission
and divorce, allowing dissimulation in them, and [deeds]. He said, “There is no
F3C;KK3in what is an action, like drinking wine and breaking the fast in Ramadan.
For a person under duress to do such things is not permissible”.48
Again, Ibn ,Atiyya argues that one must take into account the spe-
cific circumstances and also the status of legal agent himself in judging
cases of coercion.
In my view, duress should be considered according to the resolve of the one co-
erced, his status in the religion, and the enormity of the thing to which he is co-
erced. Beating might constitute duress for one thing but not another. To these cases
there applies the law of particular circumstances (8;C:3>h>). The oath of one co-
erced, as we have said, does not bind him. Ibn al-Mjishn [,Abd al-Malik b. ,Abd
al-,Azz, d. 213-14/828-29] said, “Whether he swore to do something that is an act
of obedience to God, to do something that is an act of disobedience to God, or re-
garding something that is neither, the oath has no effect on him”.49
The early Cordoban Mlikjurist Mutarrif (d. 220/835) reports that one
may take a false oath out of F3C;KK3 in order to protect one’s person
but not one’s property.50
SS5">;t>+i-878.;,287
An extensive discussion of ;=D:occurs in the commentary on Q
16:106 in al-Qurtubs 3> ?;,>;3h=?3>'GD@.51 Ab,Abd Allh
Muhammad b. Ahmad b. AbBakr b. Faraj al-Ansral-Qurtubwas a
native of Cordoba who became a renowned Arabic philologist and
scholar of the religious sciences in the thirteenth century. He died in
671/1272-73 in Upper Egypt, presumably on the way to perform the
47 Reading ?:GI3 for ?:G@in the text.
48 Ibn ,Atiyya al-Andalus, 3>#Gh3DD3D, vol. 3, p. 423.
49 Ibn ,Atiyya al-Andalus, 3>#Gh3DD3D, vol. 3, p. 423.
50 Ibn ,Atiyya al-Andalus, 3>#Gh3DD3D, vol. 3, p. 423.
51 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, pp. 180-91; Friedmann, *A>7D3@57
3@6A7D5;A@;@E>3?, p. 156. A similar but shorter discussion occurs in al-Rz, #38Fh
3>9:3K4, vol. 20, pp. 120-23.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 459
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 459
pilgrimage.52 Since this is one of the best-known MlikF38EDworks,
Ibn AbJum,a was presumably familiar with it. It treats the following
acts, many of which also occur in Ibn AbJum,a’s 83FI: praying to an
idol or prostrating to another god, praying in the wrong direction, drink-
ing wine, eating pork, adultery or fornication, usury (3=>3>D;4),
breaking the Ramadn fast, divorce, manumission of a slave, forced
sales, marriage, and blasphemy, including insulting the Prophet. The
collection of topics, the order in which they appear, and the language
in which they are couched suggest that al-Qurtub’s discussion of ;=D:
is part of the textual, legal tradition that informed Ibn AbJum,a’s
83FI.
Al-Qurtub’s discussion uses the term ;=D:frequently throughout,
and the terms ?G=D3:, ?G=D3:3for the man or woman who is subjected
to coercion. However, he uses the term F3C;KK3 twice in reference to
dissimulation without expressing disapproval of the concept. In one
passage, Mlik holds that a man who fears his property will be taken
by customs officers, other tyrannical officials, or attackers may not take
a false oath out of F3C;KK3(>F3C;KK3F3>3:G86:>;=3) on the grounds
that the legal dispensation is supposed to protect one’s person, not one’s
property.53 Another passage relates the h36F: report from al-Hasan al-
Basr: “Dissimulation (F3C;KK3) is permissible for the believer until the
Day of Resurrection. However, God–blessed and exalted be He–allows
no room for dissimulation in killing”.54
Al-Qurtubfirst relates the martyrdom of ,Ammr b. Ysir’s par-
ents, Ysir and Sumayya, and ,Ammr’s outward compliance with his
tormentors in Mecca.55 According to al-Qurtub, the general principle
of a dispensation for coercion is subject to consensus among Muslim
jurists: “The scholars have agreed unanimously that whoever was com-
pelled to unbelief to such an extent that he feared for his life, has not
sinned if he expressed unbelief ‘while his heart was at ease in belief’,
nor should his wife be irrevocably divorced from him, nor should he
be legally recognized as an unbeliever. This is the opinion of Mlik,
the Hanafs, and al-Shfi,, with the exception of Muhammad b. al-
52 Arnaldez, “al-Kurtub”; Ibn Farhn, 3>4<, pp. 406-07.
53 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 187.
54 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 190.
55 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u >;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, pp. 179-80.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
460
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 460
Hasan [al-Shaybn] (d. 189/804)”.56 This dispensation for coercion
with regard to blasphemy may be extended to other areas of the law.
Since Almighty and Exalted God permitted that one reject Him (3>=G8D4;:;) under
duress–when He is the source of the sacred law–and did not hold one to account
on that score, the scholars interpreted all of the branches of the sacred law on this
principle. If an act was coerced, then the actor should not be held accountable, and
no legal ruling ensues as a consequence. This is expressed in the well-known report
on the authority of the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace): “My
Community has been absolved for error, forgetfulness, and that to which they are
coerced”.57
A minority of jurists, including the Mlikjurist Sahnn, argued that
under coercion one was allowed to dissimulate in word alone, but not
in deed. Al-Qurtubinsists that this view is wrong and that Mlik him-
self gave dispensation for coercion in both word and deed: “Ibn al-
Qsim [d. 191/806-07] related from Mlik that no sin can be ascribed
to whoever is compelled to drink wine, to abandon prayer, or to break
the fast in Ramadn”.58 According to al-Qurtub, one may under coer-
cion drink wine, eat pork, eat meat that has not been slaughtered prop-
erly, break the fast in Ramadn, pray in a direction other than the C;4>3,
pray to an idol or other god, or receive interest.59 One who performs
adultery or fornication under coercion is innocent.60 A coercedmarriage,
divorce, or manumission of a slave is invalid.61 A forced sale is invalid
unless it is executed in order for a creditor to collect a debt.62 A forced
admission of debt (;CDD) is invalid.63 There are, however, limits to what
one may do under the dispensation of coercion. One may not, for ex-
ample, kill anyone, beat or flog a Muslim, or take a Muslim’s property.64
What constitutes coercion is a matter of some discussion. The
prevalent opinion is that circumstances under which one faces the threat
of death, amputation of a limb, or severe beating, or when one is thrown
into chains, imprisoned, or threatened in a frightening manner all con-
56 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 182.
57 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, pp. 181-82.
58 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, pp. 182-83.
59 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 185.
60 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, pp. 183-84, p. 185.
61 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, pp. 184-185.
62 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 184.
63 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 190.
64 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 183.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 461
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 461
stitute coercion.65 Others add that coercion is established not only by a
threat to one’s life but also by a threat to one’s property (?>) or the
honor that derives from protection of one’s dependents (u;Dd), on the
strength of the h36F: reports, ;@@36;?3=G?I33?I>3=G?I3
3uDd3=G?u3>3K=G?h3D?“Your lives, property, and dependent-
honor are inviolate among you” and =G>>G?GE>;?;@,3>3>?GE>;?;
h3D?G@63?G:GI3?>G:GI3u;DdG:“The life, property, and de-
pendent-honor of every Muslim are inviolate and may not be taken by
another Muslim.”66 Some Hanafs limit the performer of true coercion
to the ruler (EG>t@), but Mlik does not.67
SS+7*5,;*+i-8787,.*56.7=8/*2=1
The jurist AbBakr Ibn al-,Arabwas born in Seville in 468/1076
and travelled to the East as a youth, studying with al-Ghazl, among
others, in Baghdad. He returned to Seville and served as judge there
before migrating to Fez in Morocco, where he died in 543/1148. With
regard to the Qur’nic passage that depicts the believing member of
Pharaoh’s family, he discusses the legality of concealing one’s faith.
Some think that if the legally responsible Muslim conceals his faith and does not
express it openly with his tongue, he is not a believer by his internal conviction
alone. But Mlik said, “If a man intends in his heart to divorce his wife, it compels
him, just as through his heart he becomes a believer or unbeliever”, making faith
depend on the heart. … If a man forms the intention of belief in his heart, he does
not become a believer until he expresses it with his tongue, but if he forms the in-
tention of belief in his heart and caution (F3C;KK3) or fear prevent him from ex-
pressing it with his tongue, then that is between him and God the Exalted. Caution
(F3C;KK3) causes him to avoid being heard by others, but it is not a condition for
the legal obligation of belief to be properly fulfilled that one be heard by others.
That is only required for Muslims to safeguard his life and property.68
Al-QdIbn al-,Arabstresses that it is one’s internal conviction that
determines one’s faith, and he uses the term F3C;KK3 explicitly in this
context.
65 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 190.
66 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 187.
67 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, p. 190.
68 Ibn al-,Arab, h=?3>'GD@, p. 1647.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
462
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 462
SS+7*5*55a+*5*s;i-878.;,.-98<=*<B
Abl-Qsim ,Ubayd Allh b. al-Husayn b. al-Hasan, known as Ibn
al-Jallb, was an Iraqi Mlikjurist of the tenth century. Born in Basra,
he studied in Baghdad and became one of the most prominent disciples
of the Mlikauthority AbBakr al-Abhar(d. 375/985). He authored
a number of legal works, including a large commentary on the #G
63II3@3extant in manuscript, but his most popular work was 3>
*38Du, which became a standard Mliklegal manual. One of the few
legal texts to be translated into 3><3?;36A, it was well known among
Iberian Muslims. It includes a short statement on ;=D:in the section
on the punishments prescribed by Islamic penal law: “Whoever apos-
tasizes from Islam should be asked to repent. If he repents, his repen-
tance will be accepted, but if he refuses, then he is to be beheaded. His
property becomes spoils for the Muslim community, and no heir may
inherit from him, whether a Muslim or an unbeliever. Whoever is co-
erced (G=D;:3) to unbelief is not subject to penalty when ‘his heart is at
ease in faith’”.69 Like some other authors, Ibn al-Jallb refers to coer-
cion (;=D:) and not to dissimulation (F3C;KK3) explicitly, but neverthe-
less alludes to Q 16:106 as a justification.
SS5*@@a:-878.;,287
Ab,Abd Allh Muhammad b. Ysuf b. Abl-Qsim al-,Abdar,
known as al-Mawwq, is held to be the last major Muslim jurist of the
Iberian peninsula. A native of Granada, he was the leading legal au-
thority there during the final phase of Muslim rule, and he remained
there for a short time after the conquest. He wrote a number of works
on law, h36F:, and other topics, including a substantial commentary
on a standard Mliklegal text, the B;FA?7of Khall b. Ishq al-Jund
al-Misr(d. 767/1365), entitled 3>*<I3>;=>>>;#G=:F3s3D!:3>>
(The Crown and Tiara for the Epitome of Khall). In the chapter de-
voted to drinking alcohol, he addresses coercion in general.
Regarding the permissibility that [a legally responsible Muslim] drink alcohol
when he is compelled to do so, Ibn ,Arabstated that the question has been dis-
69 Ibn al-Jallb, 3>*38Du, vol. 2, p. 231.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 463
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 463
puted whether a threat constitutes compulsion. The correct position is that it does
constitute compulsion. If a tyrant says to [a Muslim], “If you do not do such-and-
such, I will imprison you or take your property”, and [the Muslim] does not have
any means to protect himself from this except God, then he may commit any act
requested of him except killing someone else, for he must not save his own life
by killing another. [The ruling regarding] commission of adultery [under coercion]
has [also] been disputed. The correct opinion is that it is permissible to commit it
and that [the coerced adulterer] should not suffer the prescribed penalty for it, con-
trary to the opinion of Ibn Mjishn, for he required [the coerced adulterer] to un-
dergo the prescribed penalty (...) Regarding [the commission] of unbelief [under
coercion], that is undisputedly permissible for him, but on condition that he utter
[unbelief] with his tongue while his heart is content in faith (I3C3>4G:G?G@
E:3D;h4;>?@). Since God permitted [the Muslim] to reject Himself under co-
ercion, the scholars have subsumed all of the branches of the sacred law under
this ruling...70
This text demonstrates that the concept of ;=D:was widely recognized
in the Mliklegal tradition right up until the last generation of jurists
operating under Muslim rule in the Iberian peninsula and was held to
apply to nearly all areas of the sacred law.
These are some of the sources to which Moriscos and their prede-
cessors had at least partial access and which include extensive discus-
sions of ;=D:. Others that deserve mention are the S3hhof al-Bukhr,
the most famous work of “the six books”, the standard collections of
h36F: accepted by Sunnis as canonical, which includes a short chapter
on ;=D:. Ibn Hajar al-,Asqaln’s (d. 852/1449) 3Fh3>4D, a famous
commentary on al-Bukhr’s work, provides a detailed account of
;=D:, in many points quite similar to al-Qurtub’s discussion in 3>
?;u >;3h=?3>'GD@.71
SS!;..69=287#a,27a524i.0*5%.A=<
Mlikjurists allow someone who divorces, marries away a daugh-
ter, gives away property, places property into an endowment, or under-
takes some other legal act under duress to make a prior affidavit,
attested to by legal witnesses, stating that if he undertakes the specific
legal act in question at a later time he will be doing so against his will.
70 Al-Mawwq, 3>*<I3>;=>>>;#G=:F3s3D!:3>>, vol. 6, pp. 317-18.
71 Ibn Hajar al-,asqaln, 3Fh3>4D4;E:3DhS3hh3>G=:D, vol. 1, pp. 311-26.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
464
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 464
This document provides proof that the legal transaction was coerced,
and when the signatory party is free from fear for his life or property,
he may have the transaction voided on the strength of the prior affi-
davit. This type of legal preemption is termed ;EF;Du, and Mlikman-
uals of legal documents (E:GDtor I3F:;C) discussed such affidavits
beginning in the fourth/tenth century. In an answer to a petitioner’s
question, the Cordovan AbIbrhm Ishq b. Ibrhm al-Tujb(d.
354/965) explains that one may undertake ;EF;D, “in every instance
involving dissimulation and fear of injustice and oppression” (8=G>>;
?3Id;,F3C;KK3I3=:3I8?;@zG>?I39:3>343).72 Ibn Farhn’s (d.
799/1397) *34s;D3F3>hG==?gives examples of such affidavits.73
Many of these discussions use the explicit term F3C;KK3 to describe the
dissimulation of the coerced party; Ibn Farhn refers to the production
of this document to annul the subsequent legal action “after F3C;KK3
has been lifted” (43,6;DF;8u3>F3C;KK3; 43u6L3I>3>F3C;KK3; ;6:
6:3:343F3>F3C;KK3).74 Al-Wanshars(d. 914/1508) also discusses this
type of affidavit in his manual 3>#3@:3<3>8;C, calling it “a contract
of F3C;KK3” (,3C63>F3C;KK3).75 In 3>#;uKD3>?GuD;4, al-Wanshars
cites al-Tujb’s discussion, also using the term F3C;KK3 explicitly.
SS5*<91.6BB270*7-:>2?8,*=287
Under the general dispensation of F3C;KK3, the Muslim is allowed,
if forced, to utter a blasphemy against Islam, whether it be a Christian
creed such as the statement that Jesus is the son of God or rejection of
the Prophet Muhammad. Islamic legal literature includes extensive treat-
ments of blasphemy, termed =3>;?3F3>=G8D or 3>8z3>=G8D, literally
“utterance of unbelief”, and the subsidiary topics of invective against
the Prophet (E3443>D3E>, E:3F?3>D3E>) and deprecation of the Com-
panions D38dE3443>s3hq43E3443>E:3K=:3K@).76 The term =3>;?3F
72 Al-Wanshars, 3>#;uKD3>?GuD;4, vol. 6, pp. 527-28.
73 Ibn Farhn, *34s;D3F3>hG==?8Gs>3>3Cd;K3I3?3@:;<3>3h=?, vol. 2, pp.
3-6, citing the Andalusian judge Abl-Asbagh ,sb. Sahl (d. 486/1093) from his work
3>,>?4;@3IL;>3>3h=?
74 Ibn Farhn, *34s;D3F3>hG==?, vol. 2 p. 4.
75 Al-Wanshars, 3>#3@:3<3>8;CI3>?3@:3>3>D;C, p. 118.
76 For example, Badr al-Dn Muhammad b. Ism,l al-Rashd (d. 767/1366) wrote a
work entitled (;E>38>3>8z3>?G=388;D3, and al-Qrial-Haraw,Alb. Sultn Muham-
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 465
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 465
3>=G8Dwhich occurs in Ibn AbJum,a’s 83FI, derives from Q 9:74:
K3h>;8@34;>>:;3@@3:G??C>I3>3C36C>=3>;?3F3>=G8D;I3
=383D43,63;E>?;:;?“They swear by God that they did not say such
a thing, yet they did utter the statement of unbelief and became disbe-
lievers after adopting Islam ...” Ibn AbJum,a also advises the Moriscos
that while they are permitted to lie under duress, it is preferable for them
to use equivocation (F3ID;K3) and hidden meanings (3>9:L).
Ambiguous or enigmatic speech is an important category both in
Arabic rhetoric and in Islamic legal thought. There are many terms for
such speech, including F3uDd, ?3uDd, ?3uD;d, 3uDd, F3ID;K3, 3>9:L,
>3h@and ?3>h;@. Perhaps the most general term is F3uDd, “to say in-
directly” –a synonym is F3>Ih– as opposed to F3sDh, “to state explic-
itly”. This term features in a chapter of the law termed 3>F3,Dd
4;>=:;t43“hinting at a marriage proposal”. While one may not address
an explicit proposal of marriage to divorced woman or widow until her
waiting period (u;663) is over, one is allowed to hint at an offer to marry
her. This view is based on the Qur’nic verse 2:235, which uses the
verb ,3DD3d3, cognate with F3uDd: I3><G@h3u3>3K=G?8?u3DD3d
FG?4;:;?;@=:;t43F;>@;E;3I3=@3@FG?83@8GE;=G?“You commit
no sin in your desires to marry women that you have hinted at or con-
cealed in yourselves”.77
*3ID;K3means literally to disguise or conceal, but as a rhetorical
term double-entendre, equivocation, or amphibology. It is discussed in
most rhetorical manuals of the late medieval period, and al-Safad(d.
764/1363) devoted an independent work to the topic, entitled 3dd 3>
=:;F?u3@3>F3ID;K3I3>;EF;=:6?(Breaking Open the Seal, on
Double-Entendre).78 Poetry that employed this rhetorical figure became
extremely popular in the eighth/fourteenth century, and both Ibn Nu-
bta (d. 768/1366) and al-Safadwere acknowledged experts. *3ID;K3
refers to cases where a literal expression may be interpreted in two dis-
tinct fashions. Al-Sharf al-Jurjn(d. 816/1413) defines it thus: “That
mad (d. 1014/1605-6) wrote a commentary on that work, now published as ):3Dh3>??
u>3>'D;u3>=;F4>8z3>=G8D>;>u>>?336D3>(3E:6, ed. al-Tayyib ibn ,Umar
al-Husayn al-Shinqt, Riyad, Dr al-Fadla, 2002.
77 Al-Shfi,, !;F43>+??, vol. 5, pp. 36-37.
78 Bonebakker, )A?73D>K78;@;F;A@E A8F:7*3ID;K33@6S3836lE3dd 3>.;F?
w3@3>F3ID;K3I3>EF;J6?; Bonebakker, “Tawriya”; al-Safad, 3dd 3>=:;F?u3@3>
F3ID;K3I3>;EF;=:6?; Ibn Hijja al-Hamaw, !;F4=3E:83>>;F:?u3@I3<:3>F3ID;K3
I3>;EF;=:6?.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
466
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 466
the speaker intend by his speech something contrary to its obvious
sense, as when one says in a battle, ‘Your commander (;??) has died’,
intending thereby one of the men in the front lines”, for ;??may be
interpreted as meaning “the man in front” (3??).79 Jall al-Dn al-
Suyt(d. 909/1505), who considers F3ID;K3similar to :?“instilling
a delusion” or F3=:K>“causing to imagine”, defines it as follows:
… that one utter an expression with two meanings, (...) one of which is near, ;7,
the self-evident meaning according to custom, and the other of which is far, and
that one intend the far meaning but conceal it behind the near meaning, so that the
auditor imagines the apparent meaning in the first instance. For this reason, it has
also been called :?“instilling a delusion”.80
This of course fits Ibn AbJum,a’s examples in the 83FI: the audience
is intended to understand the near or surface meaning, while the
speaker understands the far or less obvious meaning.
"G9:L, pl. 3>9:Lwhich also means concealment but as a technical
term enigma, puzzle, riddle, is also well known in the Arabic rhetorical
tradition.81 The phrase 3>9:3L38=3>?;:;means to conceal one’s in-
tended meaning, and the term refers most often to riddles or allegorical
language, in which the speaker gives clues or hints about an intended
word, statement, or topic, speaking around it without actually saying
it. Allegory was of course an important part of Arabic literary tradition;
Ibn Tufayl’s (d. 581/1185) famous allegory H3KK;4@/3Cz@(Alive,
Son of Awake) is one among many such works.82 Riddle poems based
on the use of allusion were current throughout the history of post-clas-
sical Arabic literature.83 In a general sense, a >G9:Lis any text that is
expressed in allusive or allegorical language or includes a hidden mean-
79 Al-Jurjn, !;F43>*3,D8F, p. 71.
80 Al-Suyt, ):3Dh,GC63><G?@8u;>?3>?3u@I3>43K@, p. 112.
81 HjjKhalfa, !3E:83>zG@@u3@3E?>kGtG4I3>8G@@, pp. 149-50; Ben cheneb,
“Lughz”. "G9:L means “enigma”; it is generally in verse and characteristically in inter-
rogative form. Related terms are ?Gu3??“word puzzle” Gh<;KK3 “riddle”. Salim, >9:L
3>H3DDI33h<:;8#3C?F;:3>9:L8;C:;KK3I3@3hI;KK3I3>G9:3I;KK3I3363
4;KK3; al-Ghazz, HE:;K3F 3>u>;? 3>?G63CC;C 3>):3K=: h?36 )3K8 3>:3LL
3>H3@38u3>3>9:L 3?>3>@u46>>:/EG84;E:?3>@sD; Ibn al-Shihna,
3>:3=:;D3>3E:D38;KK38>3>9:L3>8;C:;KK3; al-Jazir, *3E:>3>?3<L;>83@@3>
?Gu3??I3>3>9:L.
82 Goodman, 4@TG83K>lEH3KK4@/3Cz@&:;>AEAB:;53>*3>7; Heath, >>79ADK
3@6&:;>AEAB:K;@H;57@@34@)@.
83 Al-Isfahn, (;Kd3>uG>3? I3h;Kd3>8Gd3>, vol. 2, pp. 109, 116.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 467
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 467
ing. The intent in this context, however, is not to challenge the inter-
locutor to discover the missing information, but to conceal it success-
fully, as a mental reservation of the speaker.
Islamic doctrine permits lying under duress. In theology, Ibn Ab
Jum,a’s formative influence was undoubtedly that of his teacher
Muhammad b. Ysuf al-Sans(d. 895/1490), the leading scholar of
Tlemcen in his day and author of three popular creeds, short, medium,
and long, and a prolegomenon to the study of theology, 3>#GC366;
?F.84 In his #GC366;?F, al-Sansmakes the following statement re-
garding lying:
The example of a lie that contradicts conviction (;uF;C6) is this very same state-
ment [that animals produce voluntary actions through the power that God created
in them] when a Sunni utters it in the presence of Mu,tazils in order to conceal
his condition out of fear of them. Even if it is false because it contradicts what ac-
tually obtains, it also contradicts the conviction of the Sunni who stated it, since
he committed this permissible lie (=36:;4?G4h) on the grounds that circum-
stances compelled him to it. Similar to this is the case of someone who is compelled
to utter blasphemy (3>@GtC4;=3>;?3F3>=G8D) while his heart is at peace in faith
(I3C3>4G:G?Gt?3;@@4;>?@).85
This statement shows that Ibn AbJum,a’s most prominent teacher in
the Islamic sciences addressed dissimulation and the utterance of blas-
phemy under coercion. A Sunni –here meaning a scholar who endorses
Ash,artheology– is allowed to lie for fear of bodily harm while dis-
simulating in front of opponents who espouse Mu,tazildoctrines.
A discussion of lying that throws additional light on Ibn AbJum,a’s
reasoning occurs in 6343>6G@KI3>6@, an ethical treatise by the
eleventh-century Shfi,scholar al-Mward(d. 450/1058). Islamic tra-
dition rejects lying in strong terms, but not categorically.86 Al-Mward
cites the traditional aphorism, “Lying comprises every evil and is the
root of every reprehensible quality”.87 The Prophet is reported to have
84 Bencheneb, “al-Sans;” al-Saraqust, 3>;43 I3>u3t8):3Dh3>uC63
3>IGEt; al-Sans, u+?63F3:>3>F36CCI3>F3s6C; ,Abd al-Latf Fda, *3:6:4):3Dh
3>)3@E;KK3 +?? 3>43D:@; BqalHasan, 3>?? ;4@ /EG8 3>)3@EI3u;>?
3>F3Ih6; BqalHasan, 3>#GC366;?F"7EBDA>U9A?V@7EF:UA>A9;CG7E67)7@AGEE;;
,Abd al-Fatth,Abd Allh Baraka (ed.), ):3Dh3>)3@E;KK33>=G4D3>?GE3??u+?63F
3:>3>F3I8CI3>F3E66.
85 Luciani, "7E&DA>U9A?V@7E67)7@AGEE;, p. 225.
86 Al-Mward,6343>6G@KI3>6@, pp. 233-38.
87 Al-Mward, 6343>6G@KI3>6@, p. 234.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
468
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 468
stated that a believer could be a coward or a miser, but not a liar.88 Nev-
ertheless, al-Mwardexplains that one is allowed to lie under certain
circumstances but should use equivocation if forced to lie.
The Sunna has transmitted permission to lie in war and in mediating disputes (;s>h
6:F3>43K@) using equivocation (F3ID;K3) and figurative meanings (F3I>), but
not explicit speech (F3sDh), for the Sunna does not permit lying on account of the
aversion it involves. Rather, this is [to be done] through equivocation (F3ID;K3)
and allusive speech (F3uDd). For example, when the Messenger of God (may God
bless him and grant him peace) had wrapped himself in a cape, stood apart from
his companions, and was asked by a man, “From whom are you?”, he answered
“From water (?;@?)”, concealing the revelation of his genealogy behind a matter
that was a likely interpretation (of his speech). The questioner thought that he
meant the tribe so designated [;7, the M al-Sam, tribe], but the Messenger of
God intended that he came from the fluid of which man was created. So he ac-
complished what he desired, that is, to conceal himself, but was truthful in his
speech. Similar is what is told of AbBakr al-Siddq (may God be pleased with
him): that he was walking behind the Messenger of God (may God bless him and
grant him peace) when he fled Mecca along with him, and was accosted by Arabs
who recognized AbBakr but not the Messenger of God (may God bless him and
grant him peace). They asked, “AbBakr, who is this?” and he replied, “He is a
guide who is guiding me on the way.” They thought that he meant showing him
the way on his journey, but he meant guiding him along the path of good. Thus, he
was truthful in his speech but disguised his intended meaning.89
Al-Mwardthus deems equivocations preferable to outright lying, and
the methods of doing so here involve puns, depending on two distinct
meanings of the words ? –water and the name of a tribe –and :6–
a guide for travel in the desert and a spiritual guide.
To Ibn Srn (d. 110/728) is attributed the statement, 3>=3>?G
3IE3uG?;@3@KGs3DD3h38:;4;>=36:;4“Speech is so extensive that
one need not lie explicitly”.90 One sub-chapter in al-Bukhr’s famous
collection of h36F:, 3>S3hh, bears the heading 3>?3uDd?3@
6h3FG@u3@3>=36:;4“Equivocal speech is a way out of lying”.91
Among the h36F: reports included in this sub-chapter is the following,
transmitted on the authority of Anas: “A son of AbTalha died, and he
asked, ‘How is the boy?’ Umm Sulaym replied, ‘His breathing has qui-
eted, and I hope that he is relieved now.’ He believed that she was
88 Al-Mward, 6343>6G@KI3>6@, p. 234.
89 Al-Mward, 6343>6G@KI3>6@, p. 237.
90 Al-Mward, 6343>6G@KI3>6@, p. 234.
91 Al-Mward, 6343>6G@KI3>6@, p. 116.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 469
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 469
speaking the truth”. As the commentator Ibn Hajar explains, AbTalha
was led to believe that his son had recovered, but Umm Sulaym actu-
ally meant that he had died.92 Similar statements are attributed to a
number of authorities. A Prophetic h36F: gives the statement ;@@38>
?3uD;d>3?3@6h3FG@u3@3>=36:;4“Equivocal speech provides a
way out of lying”.93 ,Umar b. al-Khattb is supposed to have stated,
;@@38>?3uDd?K3=83@K3u;8833>D3<G>G,3@3>=36:;4“Equivocal
speech gives a man sufficient leeway that he may abstain from lying”.94
Ibn Hajar defines F3uDdas speech that has two senses, one of which is
announced directly, while the intended meaning is the concomitant but
concealed sense (=3>?>3:GI3<:@;KGt>3CG3h36G:G?I3>?GD6G
>L;?G:G).95
Al-Ghazlincludes a similar discussion of lying in his ethical work
!;F43>3D43u@8Gs>3>6@, which was well known in al-Andalus.
Know that lying is forbidden in every circumstance except compelling need
(d3DD3). It even happened that a woman once said to her little son, “Come here,
that I might give you something”, and the Prophet (may God bless him and grant
him peace) asked, “What were you intending to give him if he came?” She an-
swered, “A date”. [The Prophet] said, “If you were not to do that, a lie would be
recorded against you”. So let the person be wary of lying, even in his imagination
and mental conversation, for that might fix in the mind a crooked image, so that
the mind would give the lie to correct vision and the mysteries of the kingdom
would not be revealed in sleep. Experience indicates that this is so. Certainly, lying
is permitted out of dispensation when telling the truth would lead to another for-
bidden thing graver than lying itself, so that it becomes licit, just as carrion is per-
mitted when not partaking in it would lead to a forbidden matter graver than eating
it, which is loss of life. Umm Kulthm (may God be pleased with her) said, “The
Messenger of God only gave dispensation for lying in three cases: a man who says
something in order to reconcile others, a man who says something in war, and a
man speaking to his wife”. This is because were the enemy to be apprised of the
secrets of war, he would become bold, and were a wife to be apprised of the secrets
of her husband, there might arise from her harm greater than the harm of lying.
Similarly, sinning and enmity might continue indefinitely between two parties to
a dispute, so if it is possible to achieve a reconciliation through lying, that is prefer-
able. This is what has come down to us on the topic in hadth. Of equivalent status
is the lie of an individual to conceal the property of someone else from a tyrant, or
his denial of the secret of someone else, or his denial of his own sin against some-
92 Ibn Hajar al-,Asqaln, 3Fh3>4D4;E:3DhS3hh3>G=:D, vol. 10, p. 594.
93 Al-Mward, 6343>6G@KI3>6@, p. 234.
94 Al-Mward, 6343>6G@KI3>6@, p. 234.
95 Ibn Hajar, 3Fh3>4D, vol. 10, p. 594.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
470
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 470
one else, for the open statement of sin or its revelation is forbidden, and his denial
of his own crime against someone else serves to mollify him, and so does his denial
to his wife that her co-wife is dearer to him. All this goes back to fending off that
which is harmful. Lying is not permitted for the sake of attracting increased wealth
or honor, and this is where most of people’s lies occur.
Then, when one is driven to lie by compulsion (;dt;DD), let him resort to equiv-
ocal speech as far as possible, so that his mind not become accustomed to lying.
When Ibrhm b. Adham was sought at his home, he said to his maid, “Tell him
to look for me in the mosque”. Al-Sha,bused to draw a circle [on the ground]
and say to his maid, “Put your finger inside it, and say, ‘He’s not here’”. A certain
person used to beg out of meeting the prince, saying, “Ever since I parted with
you, I have not raised my side from the ground except as Exalted God has de-
sired”. A certain person used to deny what he had said, saying, “God indeed
knows I did not say anything of that” giving the impression of negation with the
particle ?[?CG>FG= “I did @AF say”] though he intended something else [?
CG>FG= “(God knows) I:3F I said”]. Equivocal speech is permitted for lesser
(=:388) purposes, because it is justified by statements of the Prophet (may God
bless him and grant him peace): “An old woman does not enter paradise”; “We
will carry you on the offspring of camels”; “There is whiteness in your spouse’s
eyes” because these statements implied something other than what he meant.
Such things are permitted with women and children to placate them through jest-
ing. In addition, someone who refrains from eating should not lie and say, “I’m
not hungry” when he is in fact hungry, but rather resort to equivocal speech. The
Prophet (peace be upon him) told a woman who had said this, “Do not combine
a lie and hunger”.96
Al-Ghazl’s larger work, hK uG>?3>6@, includes a similar
discussion of lying in which he first presents statements from h36F:
and other sources stressing the moral perils of lying but then addresses
the types of lying for which a dispensation exists.97 This section over-
laps to a great extent with the discussion of al-Mwardpresented
above. Interestingly, another version of the report attributed to Umm
Kulthm is cited as adding a wife’s lying to her husband to the three
other categories of permissible lies–lying in order to reconcile two
people involved in a quarrel, lying in war, and lying to one’s wife in
order to appease her.98 Al-Ghazlthen discusses the use of equivocal
language to avoid explicit lies, cautioning about the possible abuses
of this practice.99
96 Al-Ghazl, !;F43>3D43u@8Gs>3>6@, pp. 85-86.
97 Al-Ghazl, hK uG>?3>6@, vol. 3, pp. 1020-27.
98 Al-Ghazl, hK uG>?3>6@, vol. 3, pp. 1020-27.
99 Al-Ghazl, hK uG>?3>6@, vol. 3, pp. 1027-29.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 471
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 471
Al-Qurtub’s discussion of blasphemy under coercion shows im-
portant similarities to that of Ibn AbJum,a’s 83FI, particularly in the
injunction to use ambiguous language:
Exacting scholars have said: When the coerced person utters blasphemy, then he
is not permitted to let his tongue speak the words except by way of ambiguous
statements (?3<D3>?3uDd), “For in ambiguous speech there is a way out of
lying” (83;@@38>?3uDd>3?3@6h3FG@u3@3>=36:;4). When he does not do
thus, he is an unbeliever, because no one has the power to control ambiguous
speech (>;3@@3>?3uDd3>EG>t@3>;>;=D:; u3>3K:;). An example is that they
say to him, “Deny God” (G=8GD4;>>:) and that he say, “[I deny] the inattentive
one (3>>:)”, adding a long . Similarly, if he is told, “Deny the Prophet”, (G=8GD
4;>@34), he should say that he denies the @34;KK, with geminate KK, meaning “a
patch of high ground”, a word also used to refer to a sort of table made out of palm
fronds, intending one of them in his heart while internally declaring himself inno-
cent of unbelief and the sin of this declaration. If he is told, “Deny the Prophet”
(G=8GD4;>@34), then he should say that he denies the @34, meaning thereby the
one who brings reports, that is, any reporter whatsoever, such as [the false prophets]
Tulayha and Musaylima the Liar, or he should intend thereby the @34 of which
the poet said: “[Mount al-Sqib] would be crushed into fine pebbles * like the high
sands (3>@34) around Mount al-Kthib”.100
In another passage, al-Qurtubreturns to the topic of ambiguous
speech in oaths, explaining the statement, “Ambigious speech provides
a way out of lying” (;@@8101 3>?3uDd>3?3@6h3FG@u3@3>=36:;4).
Al-A,mash [d. 148/765] relates from Ibrhm al-Nakha,[d. 96/715] that he said,
“There is no harm for you to say, when something you said about a man has
reached him: ‘By God, God knows, I did not say (?CG>FG) anything of the sort
about you’ (I3>>:;;@@3>>:3K3u>3?G?CG>FG8=3?;@6:>;=3?;@ E:3K)”.
,Abd al-Malik b. Habb [d. 238/852] explains: “This means that God knows I:3F
E3;6(?CG>FG) (...), when in its apparent meaning it negates having said it. One
who says this commits neither perjury in his oath nor a lie in ordinary speech”. Al-
Nakha,said, “They [the early Arabs] would use enigmatic oaths (3>9:L3>3K?@)
in their speech in order protect themselves. They did not see this as lying and did
not fear breaking their oaths thereby. ,Abd al-Malik said: “They would call this
‘equivocal speech’ (3>?3uDd?;@3>=3>?) if it was not done to thwart a right
through cunning and deception”. Al-A,mash said, “When someone whom Ibrhm
al-Nakha,did not want to meet came to see him, he would sit in the prayer corner
of his room (?3E<;643KF;:;), and then tell his servant-girl, “Tell him, ‘He, by God,
is in the mosque (?3E<;6)’”. Mughra related from Ibrhm that he used to permit
100 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, pp. 187-88. On this verse by
Aws b. Hajar, see Lane, D34;5@9>;E:"7J;5A@, vol. 1, p. 1.029.
101 For ?;@ in the text.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
472
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 472
a man from the army, when they presented themselves to their commander, to
swear, “By God, I will only follow the path that someone other than me (9:3KD)
sets for me, I will only ride that on which someone other than me mounts me”,
and statements of this sort. ,Abd al-Malik comments, “He intends God, the Exalted,
by his statement, “someone other than me” (9:3KD), for God is the one who set
him on a path, and God is the one who has given him a mount. They did not see
that the man had broken his oath in this manner, or that he had lied in his speech,
but they disapproved of saying such things in cases of trickery, oppression, or de-
nial of a right. He who has the audacity to do the latter has sinned in his trickery,
but is not obliged to atone for his oath.102
Islamic legal tradition condones the use of ambiguous language as
a means to protect oneself from the effects of a forced oath or of one’s
refusal to take such an oath. The main scriptural texts cited in support
of this practice are the h36F: reports mentioned above that present
equivocal speech (?3uDd3>=3>?) as an alternative to lying. In gen-
eral, when a man is unjustly forced to swear, his oath should be inter-
preted according to his own intention, but when he is forced to swear
after committing some injustice, his oath should be interpreted accord-
ing to the intention of the one enforcing the oath.103
The famous philologian Ibn Durayd al-Azd(d. 321/933) penned
!;F43>?3>h;@in order to serve the needs of people who faced
mandatory oaths. In it he presents 183 oaths that are double-entendres
or amphibologies, the obvious meaning intended for the tyrannical ruler
or his agents who are administering the oath, and the other, not-so-ob-
vious meaning understood internally by the oath-taker. The title of the
work, 3>?3>h;@, derives from >3h@, meaning to intend one thing but
to disguise or conceal it behind another statement (3@FGD633>E:3K3
83FGI3DD;K3u3@:G4;C3I>;@=:3D).104 He explains, “This is a book
that we have composed as a resort for an oppressed person who is con-
strained and compelled to take an oath. He should say openly (KG,D;d)
what we have recorded and hold internally (KGd?;D) the opposite of
102 Al-Qurtub, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, vol. 10, pp. 190-91. Here, al-Qurtub
seems to be quoting extensively from a work by the prominent early Mlikjurist and na-
tive of Cordoba, ,Abd al-Malik b. Habb, perhaps !;F43>-d;h38>EG@@3I3>8;C:.
See Ossendorf-Conrad, 3Ee!;F43>-d;h3f67Eu463>#3>;=4H3446;F;A@G@6
!A??7@F3DLG?E'3D3I;KK@34I43>t3:D3; Arcas Campoy, !;F43>-d;h3
FD3F36A<GDX6;5AD39?7@FAE7JFD3X6AE67>Muntajab al-ahkm674@403?3@@?
.
103 Schacht, “Hiyal”, esp. 512.
104 Ibn Durayd al-Azd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 56.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 473
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 473
that which he puts forth externally, so that he might be safe from the
misdeed of the oppressor and escape the wrath of the tyrant”.105 For
example, one might swear I3>>:;?E33>FG8G>@3@h<3F3@C3ttG
“By God, I have not asked So-and-so for anything at all”. The inter-
locutor will understand h<3in its ordinary meaning “need, thing, any-
thing”, but the oath-taker will intend by h<3 a specific type of
thorn-bearing tree.106 The oath I3>>:;?D33KFG8G>@3@C3ttGI3
>=3>>3?FG:Gwould seem to mean “By God, I have neither seen So-
and-so at all, nor have I spoken to him”, but the oath-taker will mean
by ?D33KFG:G“I haven’t struck him in the lung (D;3)” and by ?
=3>>3?FG:G“I haven’t wounded him”.107 The oath I3>>:;?3=:36:
FG>;8G>@;@43LL3@I3?>3:Gu;@6?;@43LLwould seem to mean,
“By God, I have not taken any cloth from So-and-So, and I do not have
any cloth that belongs to him”, but the oath-taker will intend by 43LL
“weapons” instead.108 Ibn Durayd’s work was not the only one of its
kind: the medieval sources mention several similar works that are no
longer extant. Ab,Abd Allh Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Basral-Mu-
fajja,(d. 320/932) wrote a work with the title !;F43>#G@C;6:?;@
3>3K?@(The Book that Rescues One from Oaths).109 The Sh,ite
scholar Abl-Nadr Muhammad b. Mas,d al-,Ayysh(fl. 4th/10th c.),
a native of Samarqand, wrote !;F4#3uDd3>E:3DD(The Book of
Equivocations [in the Face] of Evil), and Yahyb. AbMansr al-
Mawsil(fl. 4th/10th c.) wrote !;F43>#3uDd(The Book of Equiv-
ocations).110
Such verbal amphibologies are also discussed in works on legal
stratagems (h;K3>). Islamic jurists devoted much thought to methods of
escaping legal difficulties, and in some cases they arrived at ingenious
stratagems. For example, Islamic law requires that one offer a neighbor
the first option to buy one’s plot of land when one would like to sell it,
105 Ibn Durayd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 55.
106 Ibn Durayd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 58.
107 Ibn Durayd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 59.
108 Ibn Durayd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 66.
109 Ibn al-Nadm, 3>;:D;EF, p. 133 [reading 3>#G@C;6:?;@3>3K?@for 3>#G@C;6:
8>?@in the text]; Yqt al-Hamaw,DE:63>3D4;>?3uD;83F3>364, vol. 3, p. 444;
al-Rghib al-Isfahn, #Ghd3DF3>G634 I3?GhI3DF3>E:Gu3D I3>4G>39:,
vol. 1, p. 300.
110 Ibn al-Nadm, 3>;:D;EF, pp. 241, 333.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
474
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 474
but it often happens that one could get a better price by selling it to
someone else, or one prefers for some other reason not to sell to one’s
neighbor. In order to avoid this, the jurists advise the owner to give
away a narrow strip of his land adjacent to the neighbor’s property.
Since the original neighbor will no longer be a direct neighbor, the
landowner may then dispose of the property as he wishes.111 Works on
h;K3> include explicit instructions regarding the production of verbal
amphibologies, many of which involve oaths that turn on puns. If a
married man wishes to travel and intends to purchase a concubine, his
wife may try to forestall his return home with said concubine by mak-
ing him swear that he will free any concubine he purchases before re-
turning. He may obviate his wife’s wishes without breaking the oath
by swearing that he will free the concubine (<D;K3) but intending in-
stead “a boat” (<D;K3). Or he may swear, “By God, I will divorce every
woman that I marry and with whom I have intercourse (833t3G:)”
but intend instead “whom I trample” (3t3G:).112 The extensive pres-
entation of verbal amphibologies in prominent Hanaflegal works
show that knowledge of such verbal ambiguity was an important facet
of Islamic literature and culture, but Mlikjurists, along with the Han-
balīs, generally condemned h;K3> and considered them invalid.113
!27+7+i>6,*O< a
The section of Ibn AbJum,a’s 83FIconcerning the utterance of
blasphemies under duress has puzzled investigators. The 3><3?;36A
translations both omit several clauses from this section altogether, ap-
parently because they did not understand the argument or had trouble
rendering the rhetorical and grammatical terms. Harvey remarks that
the text is obscure and engages in a grammatical quibble. He was least
successful in paraphrasing this part of the 83FIand admits that he may
111 On h;K3> in general, see Horii, “Reconsideration of Legal Devices (H;K3>) in Is-
lamic Jurisprudence: The Hanafs and Their ‘Exits’ (Makhrij)”; Horii, ;797E7FL>;5:7@
+?97:G@97@ ;? ;E>3?;E5:7@ (75:F h;K3> G@F7D 47EA@67D7D 7Da5=E;5:F;9G@9 67E
H3@38;F7@)3u64u>3>)3?3DC3@697EF :6F.
112 Al-Shaybn, 3>#3=:D;<8>h;K3>, pp. 137-38.
113 See Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, u>?3>?GI3CC;u@,3@D3443>u>3?@, vol. 3, pp.
91-299.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 475
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 475
not have grasped the intended sense of the passage exactly. Rubiera
Mata remarks somewhat hyperbolically that the section is impossible
to translate.114 Dressendörfer’s translation, the best to date, still misses
certain points. For example, none of the translators has realized that
the phrase 43KF>>:, literally “the house of God”, refers to the Ka,ba
in Mecca. Dressendörfer even complains that this example is particu-
larly ill-chosen, because the sense of the term escaped him: “Ibn B
Jum,a hat den Trick mit dem Genitiv des Besitztums sicher irgendwo
abgeschrieben, aber nicht richtig verstanden und dann das nicht richtig
passende Beispiel ‘das Haus Gottes’ dazu erfunden”.115 The following
is my translation of this section of the text.
If they force you to utter blasphemy, you should resort to equivocation (F3ID;K3)
and allusions (3>9:L)116 if you are able. Otherwise, “Be at peace in your hearts in
faith”117 when you pronounce such things, and reject them [inwardly]. If they tell
you to insult Muhammad, they call him Mamad–so you should insult Mamad, in-
tending thereby the devil, or Mamad of the Jews, for this name is common among
them. If they tell you to say “Jesus is the son of God”, then say it, if they force
you, and intend the ellipsis of a term in construct, ;7, “Jesus is the son A8#3DK
F:74A@6E?3;6 of God, Who is rightly adored”.118 If they tell you to say, “Christ is
the son of God”, then repeat it, if you are forced, and intend thereby the genitive
of possession [that is, meaning “Christ is the son I:A47>A@9EFAGod”], as in [the
expression] “the House of God” [that is, the Ka,ba at Mecca], which does not imply
that God lives there, or occupies it. If they tell you to say, “Mary is His [i.e. God’s]
wife”, then [say it] and intend the [possessive] pronoun [“his”] to refer to her pa-
ternal cousin from among the Sons of Israel, who married her then left her before
consummating the marriage–according to the opinion of al-Suhaylin his J797E;E
114 Rubiera Mata, “Los moriscos como criptomusulmanes”, p. 544.
115 Dressendörfer, E>3?G@F7D67D@CG;E;F;A@, p. 140 n. 33.
116 Or perhaps ;>9:L“using allusion”, a verbal noun in parallel with F3ID;K3.
117 A reference to Q 16:108.
118 This is an approximate rendering of the original text, which may be corrupt: u346
;>:#3DK3??3u464;h3CC “the worshipper of the god of Mary, rightly venerated”. Jesus
in Islamic doctrine is the son of Mary (Joseph is not identified as Jesus’ father in the
Qurn), so one would expect him to be described as her son and not the son of a worship-
per. The term “son” should also appear in the statement presented. Because Ibn AbJum,a
mentioned the ellipsis of a term in construct, one expects a statement of the form “Jesus is
the son A8. of God”, where A8. is the term suppressed by mental reservation. The phrase
?3u464;h3CC occurs frequently in commentaries on the creed >;>:3;>>>>:“There
is no god but God”, which is paraphrased as >?3u464;h3CC;>>>>:“There is no entity
that may be correctly worshipped but God”. The original must have been similar to the
following in form and sense: uE;4@#3DK3?3?3F3>>:3>?3u464;h3CC “Jesus is the
son A8#3DKF:74A@6EIA?3@ of God, Who is rightly adored”.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
476
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 476
on the unspecified characters in the Qurn119–or intend “whom God married [i.e.,
to Joseph] by His decree”. If they say, “Jesus died (FGIG88;K3) on the Cross (u3>
3>s3>4)”, then [say it] and intend thereby that God “made him complete” (I38
8:G), that is, perfected and honored him; or, on account of his trustworthiness and
steadfastness (sG>4), perpetuated his memory and made praise of him known
among mankind; or that God “gave him his full due” (;EF3I8:G) by raising him
up to the heavens.
Rubiera Mata notes that Ibn AbJum,a’s discussion draws on the
multiple meanings of Arabic root combinations, and it is this aspect of
the passage that has proved most difficult for translators to convey. The
reference to Jesus’ dying on the cross is particularly interesting in that
it is based on an elaborate pun. The common interpretation of the
Qur’nic account of the crucifixion is that Jesus did not die on the cross
but was saved by being taken up at the last moment by God and re-
placed with a substitute who looked like Jesus to the onlookers, but
was not in fact he. The relevant passage in the Qur’n reads:
They (the Jews) say in boast, ‘We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messen-
ger of God’–They killed him not nor crucified him (s3>34:G), but so it was made
to appear to them, and those who differ herein are full of doubts, with no certain
knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not.
$3K God raised him up unto Himself (43>D383u3:G>>:G;>3K:;); and God is Pow-
erful, Wise. (Q 4: 157-58).
The alternative interpretations of this credal statement which Ibn
AbJum,a suggests are in fact puns or paronomastic double-entendres
based on the consonantal roots I8Kin the verbs FGIG88;K3, I388,
;EF3I8and s>4in s3>4and sG>4s3>34that work only in Arabic, and
not in Spanish. The jurist seems to assume that the conversation will
occur in Arabic, that the puns should translate into Spanish as well, that
119 This is a reference to the work of al-Suhayl, 3>*3uD8I3>;,>?8?G4:;?3?;@
3>3E? I3>3u>?8>'GD@3>=3D?, p. 110. The passage in question reads as follows:
“The name of the man to whom Mary suggested that he marry her is Joseph, son of Jacob,
son of Mthn. He was her paternal cousin, and the first to notice her pregnancy. Some
say that this was because he was with her in Jerusalem when her pregnancy became ap-
parent to him, and others say that he married her and when he entered upon her, found that
she was pregnant, so he turned away from her and released her, but was too chaste to men-
tion anything but good about her, because of what he recognized in her of the intensity of
her worship and her tremendous merit. The latter is the opinion of al-Qutab(= Ibn
Qutayba, d. 276/889), and the former was stated by al-Tabarin a discussion that would
take too long to present”.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 477
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 477
all languages, when translated into inner thoughts, have a formal and
semantic structure identical with that of Arabic, or that the inner
thoughts of all Muslims naturally occur in Arabic.
Although Ibn Durayd does not make any specific statements about
the verbal strategies on which his amphibologies are based, numerous
examples in his !;F43>?3>h;@employ strategies similar to those
evident in Ibn AbJum,a’s amphibologies. For example, he reports the
oath, I3>>:;?63=:3>FG>;8G>@;@43KF3@I3>D33KFG>3:G43KF3@,
the ostensible meaning of which is “By God, I have never entered any
house of So-and-So, nor have I ever seen any house of his”. According
to Ibn Durayd, however, by the word 43KF“house” he will intend the
alternative meaning “tomb” instead, or he will intend internally the
completion of a genitive construct: 43KF3>u3@=34F“spider-web” or
43KF3>@3h>“bee-hive”.120 Ibn Durayd also draws frequently on the
various senses of Arabic verbal cognates. He interprets the oath I3
>>:;?D33KFG8G>@3@“By God, I have never seen So-and-So” as
meaning “I have never struck him in the lung” (?d3D34FGD;3F3:G).121
He interprets the oath ?3,>3?FG8G>@3@I3>3u>3?3@“By God, I
have never informed So-and-So, nor has he ever informed me” as
meaning “I have never split his upper lip”, that is, made him 3,>3?
(“hare-lipped”).122 In the oath I3>>:;?@3s3h38G>@G@8G>@3@I3
>KGhE;@G3@K3@s3h3“By God, So-and-So never advised So-and-So,
nor is he proficient at advising”, the verb “to advise” (@3s3h3) should
be interpreted as meaning “to sew”.123 In he oath I3>>:?3=:43DFG
8G>@3@ (...) “By God, I have never told So-and-So ...”, the verb
3=:43D3“to tell, inform” should be interpreted as meaning “to slaugh-
ter a =:G4D3”, that is, a sheep bought in common by a group of people
to share its meat.124 Ibn AbJum,a is certainly aware of these strategies
from works in the tradition, but it is difficult to identify the specific
works on which he drew for this discussion.
120 Ibn Durayd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 65.
121 Ibn Durayd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 59.
122 Ibn Durayd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 60.
123 Ibn Durayd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 66.
124 Ibn Durayd, !;F43>?3>h;@, p. 67.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
478
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 478
SS87,5><287
Ibn AbJum,a’s 83FImay be interpreted as endorsing F3C;KK3 despite
the fact that the term itself does not appear in the text. *3C;KK3is an ac-
cepted principle in Sunni Islam that is discussed in fundamental sources
in the fields of h36F:, Qur’nic exegesis, law, and theology with which
Ibn AbJum,a and other North African and Andalusian scholars would
have been familiar. Some of these Sunni sources use the term F3C;KK3in-
frequently, treating the concept under the rubric of coercion (;=D:), and
Ibn AbJum,a’s 83FIdoes this as well, but many other sources refer to
F3C;KK3directly and explictly. In addition, the concepts overlap, and what
the ?G8Fin this case envisaged was actually a performance of F3C;KK3
on the part of Muslims in a hostile environment, under oppressive Chris-
tian rule. Nearly all the specific examples of the 83FI, including the dis-
cussion of equivocation in cases where Muslims are forced to blaspheme,
are closely related to material found in well-known Sunni discussions of
coercion. Further investigation of Islamic literature that was available in
al-Andalus and North Africa will undoubtedly turn up additional refer-
ences to F3C;KK3and ;=D:. Of the texts examined here, al-Qurtub’s dis-
cussion of coercion in 3> ?;u >;3h=?3>'GD@seems most closely
related to the content of Ibn AbJum,a’s 83FI.
What is the significance of F3ID;K3as a means to avoid blasphemy?
If one is allowed to lie in the face of danger, then why is it preferable
to use F3ID;K3instead? Competitive spirit and communal pride dictate
that one defend one’s religious identity. Although allowed, simple lying
is nevertheless stigmatized as a cowardly act signalling a capitulation
to the interlocutor and to the majority community. The value assigned
to courage in the face of danger is clear from h36F: reports that allow
believers to deny their faith, if necessary, but reward them if they refuse
to do so and choose the path of martyrdom. *3ID;K3allows the per-
former to view himself as having bested his opponents in a clever man-
ner rather than simply giving in. He has actively appropriated the
language of his oppressors and twisted its meaning so as to thwart their
intentions. In a number of cases in Ibn AbJum,a’s 83FI, the meaning
intended through F3ID;K3not only confounds the oppressor’s intention
but also asserts a contrary intention, countering the oppressor’s ex-
pressed ideology. This grants the performer the satisfaction of using
his opponent’s words against him, similar to the satisfaction derived
from the common retort, but here in a possibly quite grave situation. If
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 479
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 479
F3C;KK3is the shield of the believer, then F3ID;K3is his weapon, albeit
the surreptitious weapon of the weak. It is also the weapon of the clever,
which serves to avoid coerced assimilation while at the same time
mocking the enemy.
Sources examined to date present one concrete case in which a dis-
simulator consciously had recourse to the Islamic learned tradition in
order to justify and guide his performance. The Morisco Ahmad b.
Qsim al-Hajar(d. after 1050/1640) describes a difficult situation that
faced him when he was asked by the ecclesiastical authorities of
Granada to help decipher and interpret the Lead Books. He was not
only literate but also accomplished in Arabic language and grammar,
and even though the Christian authorities were seeking his assistance,
he was wary about revealing how he had learned to read and write Ara-
bic, for learning the language had been outlawed. He writes, “I asked
myself, ‘How do I get out of this quandary, when the Christians kill
and burn everyone with whom they find a book in Arabic, or who they
know reads in Arabic?’”125 He was not an old man who could claim to
have learned Arabic before the prohibition, nor was he one of the few
licensed translators. He therefore told ‘the great priest’ who interviewed
him that he had learned Arabic in Madrid from a Valencian doctor who
had –conveniently– died two or three years earlier and that it had been
easy for him to learn because he grew up speaking Arabic dialect in
his hometown. He then comments, in his account of this episode,
Everything that I told him regarding what he asked me about the doctor, i.e., that
he was from Valencia, was a lie, because126 reading in Arabic was permitted to the
inhabitants of Valencia on topics other than the religion of Islam, and forbidden to
the remaining inhabitants of the Andalus. I thus sought protection from their evil
by lying, for al-Ghazl–may God cause others to benefit from him!– stated in the
book *:7(7H;H;8;53F;A@: ‘If a good person passes by you, and then an oppressor
comes chasing him, asking about him in order to harm him, then tell him, “He
went in that direction!”–opposite the path he actually took, so that the man being
pursued might escape the tyranny of his pursuer. Lying in such situations is per-
missible, or rather even recommended, despite the fact that giving correct direc-
tions is a religious obligation. It appeared to me that when someone who is
customarily truthful tells a lie that is permitted to him out of compulsion, his state-
ment is accepted, and what he says is taken to be the truth.127
125 Al-Hajar, $s;D3>6@u3>3>C3I?3>=8;D@, pp. 18-19.
126 Reading 83>;3@@3 for I3>=;@ in the text.
127 Al-Hajar, $s;D3>6@, pp. 19-20.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
480
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 480
Al-Hajarhere provides a rare insight into the mental activity behind
a concrete act of dissimulation. He was not queried directly about his
beliefs, but many of the edicts of Church and State throughout the six-
teenth century closely associated other cultural practices, including the
ability to read Arabic, with religion and took them as evidence of
heresy. Al-Hajarjustified his lies by referring to al-Ghazl’s famous
work *:7(7H;H;8;53F;A@A8F:7(7>;9;AGE)5;7@57E(hK uG>?3>6@).
We have mentioned al-Ghazl’s discussion of lying in this work above;
the passage to which al-Hajarrefers reads as follows, citing a statement
by the early Iraqi scholar and Qur’nic commentator Maymn b.
Mihrn (d. 117/735-36):
Maymn b. Mihrn stated: Under some circumstances, lying is better than telling the
truth. What do you think you would say if a man with a sword were chasing another
man in order to kill him, and [the man being pursued] entered a house, then the [pur-
suer] accosted you, asking, ‘Have you seen So-and-So?’ Would you not answer, ‘I
have not seen him’ and omit telling him the truth? Such a lie would be obligatory.128
In this case, at least, it is clear that the Morisco al-Hajarnot only
practiced a form of dissimulation but also did so in the full knowledge
that it was permitted by principles set forth in Islamic learned tradition.
He does not use the term F3C;KK3, but he does refer to being compelled
(?Gdt3DD). Al-Ghazl’s hK uG>?3>6@was one among a number
of Islamic texts devoted to law, h36F:, and exegesis of the Qur’n to
which al-Hajarand others like him could have had recourse in order
to justify and guide their performances of dissimulation.
Investigation of the legal literature, however, will not suffice to il-
luminate the social history of Islamic dissimulation. *3C;KK3is not
merely an abstract principle to be exercised only by those who have
extensive familiarity with the law. It is an important part of daily life,
a method that must be performed not only in a legally correct manner,
to avoid sinful acts, but also in an effective and convincing manner, to
avoid bodily harm and promote the economic success and social wel-
fare of the sectarian community. While it is important to understand
the theory behind the principle, it is clear that the theoretical texts leave
a great deal unsaid. Consideration of the social problems minorities
generally face suggests that a different approach may provide a more
128 Al-Ghazl, !;F43>3D43u@8Gs>3>6@, vol. 3, p. 1.024.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 481
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 481
extensive understanding of F3C;KK3as a dynamic principle.129 Drawing
on Erving Goffman’s analyses of social interaction using the concepts
and terminology of the theater, one may define F3C;KK3as a dramatur-
gical discipline enabling members of a stigmatized minority to partic-
ipate more fully in a society dominated by a potentially hostile majority
and to promote the welfare of the minority community. Even a thor-
ough examination of extant theoretical texts focused on the issue may
leave many important questions unanswered.130 For a Morisco to pass
as a good Christian took more than a simple statement to that effect. It
required a sustained performance involving hundreds of individual
statements and actions of different types, many of which might have
had little to do with expressions of belief or ritual practice B7DE7.
Dissimulation was an institutionalized practice in Morisco commu-
nities that involved regular patterns of behaviour passed on from one
generation to the next. Many of the performers were not literate in Ara-
bic and so would not have had access to discussions of F3C;KK3 as a
legal principle. Moreover, many of the particular dissimulatory prac-
tices they adopted were not discussed in such literature at all. For ex-
ample, the Moriscos performed a ceremony immediately after Christian
baptism termed 8363 or 8363E, by which they erased or removed the ef-
fects of baptism by washing the baby and performing ritual ablutions,
after which they would give the child a Muslim name.131 In his analysis
of the use of F3C;KK3by Sh,ites in Afghanistan, Louis Dupree suggests
that it is important to recognize F3C;KK3as both a theory and a practice:
“... it may be prudent to define the meaning of F3C;KK3 in two distinct
ways: the way local religious leaders ;@F7DBD7Fit, and the way it 8G@5
F;A@Ein the day-to-day lives of the peoples involved. Neither definition,
however, precludes the validity of the other”.132 There is reason to be-
lieve that Morisco dissimulation resembled that of other historical
groups, including Sh,ites living under oppressive Sunni rule, and
showed similar patterns regarding the relationship between theory and
129 See, for example, Goffman, )F;9?3$AF7EA@F:7#3@397?7@FA8)BA;>7667@F;FK;
Jones 7F3>, )A5;3>)F;9?3*:7&EK5:A>A9KA8#3D=76(7>3F;A@E:;BE; Richards, )7J;E
E;67@573@63?@3F;A@#;@AD;FKDAGBE;@F:7#;66>797E; Schaefer, (35;3>3@6F:@;5
DAGBE.
130 See Stewart, “*3C;KK3:as Performance;” Stewart, “Documents and Dissimulation.”
131 García-Arenal, @CG;E;5;\@K ?AD;E5AE, pp. 56-59; Boronat y Barrachina, "AE
#AD;E5AE7EB3[A>7EKEG7JBG>E;\@, p. 225.
132 Dupree, “Further Notes on *3C;KK3”, p. 681.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
482
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 482
practice. Morisco peasants would not have been able to cite treatments
of F3C;KK3 in legal manuals, even though they were actively dissimu-
lating in various ways in the course of their daily lives. In Sh,ite con-
texts scholars complain that lay Sh,ites are not sufficiently schooled
in the ramifications and extent of F3C;KK3 as a legal dispensation and
do not know how to use it properly, confirming a communication gap
between the two groups.133 Nevertheless, even illiterate Sh,ites in
Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia are not cut off from the
learned doctrinal tradition entirely and are aware of the general concept
of F3C;KK3 and the permissibility of using it in their daily lives. It is rea-
sonable to assume that a similar situation held for less educated
Moriscos. However, in a city like Granada, home to highly literate and
educated Muslims with a local tradition of Islamic legal scholarship, a
considerable number of inhabitants must have been aware of the finer
points of Islamic law regarding dissimulation and duress.
SS2+5280;*91B
,Abd al-Fatth,Abd Allh Baraka (ed.), ):3Dh3>)3@E;KK3 3>=G4D3>
?GE3??u+?63F3:>3>F3I8CI3>F3E66, Kuwait, Dr al-Qalam, 1982.
,Abd al-Latf Fda, Sa,d, *3:6:4):3Dh3>)3@E;KK3+??3>43D:@, Amman,
Dr al-Bayriq, 1998.
Abdur Rahim, *:7&D;@5;B>7EA8#G:3??363@ GD;EBDG67@57355AD6;@9FAF:7
3@38;#3>;=;):38;u;3@63@43>;)5:AA>E, London, Luzac, 1911.
Abou El Fadl, Khaled, “Islamic Law and Muslim Minorities: The Juristic Dis-
course on Muslim Minorities from the Second/Eighth to the Eleventh/Seven-
teenth Centuries”, E>3?;5"3I3@6)A5;7FK, 1 (1994), pp. 141-87.
Abou El-Fadl, Khaled, “The Common and Islamic Law of Duress”, D34"3I
'G3DF7D>K, 6 (1991), pp. 121-59.
AbSafiya, Fakhr,3>=D:8>E:3Du33>;E>?;KK3, Algiers, Sharikat al-Shihb,
1982.
Adang, Camilla P., “Hypocrites and Hypocrisy”, @5K5>AB376;3A8F:7'GDl@
Leiden, Brill, 2002, vol. 2, pp. 468-72.
Arcas Campoy, María, !;F43>-d;h3FD3F36A<GDX6;5AD39?7@FAE7JFD3X6AE
67>#G@F3<343>3h=?674@403?3@@?, Madrid, CSIC,
2003.
133 Stewart, “Taqiyyah as Performance”, pp. 28-29.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 483
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 483
Arnaldez, R., “3>KGDtG4”, in P.J. Bearman 7F3>(eds.), @5K5>ABd6;3A8E>3?,
2nd edition, Leiden, Brill, 1960-2005.
Barletta, Vincent, AH7DF7EFGD7EDKBFAE>3?;5";F7D3FGD73EG>FGD3>&D35
F;57;@3D>K#A67D@)B3;@, Minneapolis, Minnesota Press, 2005.
Al-Baydw, @ID3>F3@L>, Hyderabad, al-Matba,a al-,Uthmniyya, 1911.
Bencheneb, M., “al-Sans”, in P.J. Bearman 7F3>, @5K5>ABd6;3A8E>3?, 2nd
edition, Leiden, Brill, 1960-2005.
Bencheneb, M., “Lughz”, in P.J. Bearman 7F3>, @5K5>ABd6;3A8E>3?, 2nd edi-
tion, Leiden, Brill, 1960-2005.
Bonebakker, Seeger Adrianus,)A?73D>K78;@;F;A@EA8F:7*3ID;K33@6S3836lE
3dd 3>.;F?w3@3>*3ID;K3I3>EF;J6?, The Hague, Mouton & Co.,
1967.
Bonebakker, Seeger Adrianus, “Tawriya”, in P.J. Bearman 7F3>, @5K5>ABd6;3
A8E>3?, 2nd edition, Leiden, Brill, 1960-2005.
Boronat y Barrachina, Pascual, "AE?AD;E5AE7EB3[A>7EKEG7JBG>E;\@, Granada,
Universidad, 1992.
Bouzineb, Hossain, “Respuestas de jurisconsultos magrebíes en torno de la in-
migración de musulmanes hispánicos”, 7EBUD;E*3?G63, 26-27 (1988-89),
pp. 53-66.
Bqal, Hasan Jaml al-Dn, 3>??;4@/EG83>)3@EI3u;>?3>F3Ih6, Al-
giers, al-Muassasa al-Wataniyya li-l-Kitb, 1985.
BqalHasan, Jaml al-Dn, 3>#GC366;?F"7EBDA>U9A?V@7EF:UA>A9;CG7E67
)7@AGEE;F7JF73D3477FFD36G5F;A@8D3@T3;E7B3D "G5;3@;, Algiers, Im-
primerie P. Fontana, 1908.
Burhn al-Dn Abl-Hasan ,Alb. AbBakr al-Farghnal-Marghnn, 3>;6K3
E:3Dh;6K3F3>?G4F36, Muhammad ,Adnn Darwsh (ed.), Beirut, Dr al-
Arqam b. Abl-Arqam, n.d., 2 vols., English translation, in Charles Hamilton
(transl.), *:7763K3ADG;67A??7@F3DKA@F:7#GEEG>?3@"3IE,
London, W.H. Allen, 1870, 2nd ed.
Cardaillac, Louis, #AD;ECG7E7F:DUF;7@EG@388DA@F7?7@FBA>U?;CG7
, Paris, Librairie Klincksieck, 1977.
Cardaillac, Louis, “Un aspecto de las relaciones entre moriscos y cristianos: po-
lémica y F3C;KK3”, in A. Galmés (coord.), 5F3E67>5A>ACG;A;@F7D@35;A@3>
EA4D7>;F7D3FGD33><3?;363K?AD;E53, Madrid, Gredos, 1978, pp. 107-22.
Chejne, Anwar G., E>3?3@6F:7-7EF*:7#AD;E5AEG>FGD3>3@6)A5;3>;E
FADK, Albany, State University New York Press, 1983.
Cheneb, M., “al-Sans”, in M.Th. Houtsma, T.W. Arnold, R. Basset, A.J.
Wensinck, E. Lévi-Provençal y H.A.R. Gibb (eds.), *:7@5K5>ABd6;3A8
E>3?, Leiden, Brill, 1913-38.
Clarke, Lynda, “The Rise and Decline of *3C;KK3 in Twelver Shi,ism”, in Todd
Lawson (ed.), (73EA@3@6@EB;D3F;A@;@E>3?*:7A>A9K&:;>AEAB:K3@6
#KEF;5;E?;@#GE>;?*:AG9:F, London, I.B. Tauris, 2005, pp. 46-63.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
484
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 484
Cornell, Vincent J., “,>?3>'GD@in al-Andalus: The *38ED#Gh3DD3Din the
Works of Three Authors”, +)(, 2 (1986), pp. 63-81.
Dakake, Maria, “Hiding in Plain Sight: The Practical and Doctrinal Significance
of Secrecy in Shi,ite Islam”, AGD@3>A8F:7?7D;53@5367?KA8(7>;9;A@,
74 (2006), pp. 324-55.
Donaldson, Dwight M., *:7):;l;F7(7>;9;A@;EFADKA8E>3?;@&7DE;33@6
D3k, London, Luzac, 1933.
Dressendörfer, Peter, E>3?G@F7D67D@CG;E;F;A@;7#AD;E5A&DAL7EE7;@*A>76A
, Wiesbaden, Franz Steiner, 1971.
Dupree, Louis, “Further Notes on *3C;KK3: Afghanistan”, AGD@3>A8F:7?7D;53@
%D;7@F3>)A5;7FK, 99, 4 (1979), pp. 680-82.
Epalza, Míkel de, “La voz oficial de los musulmanes hispanos, mudéjares y mo-
riscos, a sus autoridades cristianas: cuatro textos, en árabe, en castellano y en
catalán-valenciano”, ):3DC3>@63>GE, 12 (1995), pp. 279-98.
Epalza, Míkel de, “L’identité onomastique et linguistique des Morisques”, in (7
>;9;A@67@F;FU7F)AGD57EA5G?7@F3;D7EEGD>7E#AD;ECG7E@63>AGE, Tunis,
Institut Supérieur de Documentation, 1984, pp. 269-79.
Fawz, Muhammad, #38:?3>F3C;KK38>E>?, Beirut, Muassasat al-Waf, 1985.
Fierro, Maribel, “La emigración en el Islam: conceptos antiguos, nuevos proble-
mas”, IDC, 12 (1991), pp. 11-41.
Friedmann, Yohanan, *A>7D3@573@6A7D5;A@;@E>3?@F7D83;F:(7>3F;A@E;@
F:7#GE>;?*D36;F;A@, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Galmés de Fuentes, Álvaro, "AE?AD;E5AE67E67EG?;E?3AD;>>3, Madrid, Ins-
tituto Egipcio de Estudios Islámicos, 1993.
García-Arenal, Mercedes, @CG;E;5;\@K#AD;E5AE>AEBDA57EAE67>*D;4G@3>67
G7@53, Madrid, Siglo Veintiuno, 1978.
Al-Ghazl, AbHmid, hK uG>?3>6@, Cairo, Dr al-Wathiq, 2000.
Al-Ghazl, AbHmid, !;F43>3D43,@8Gs>3>6@, Beirut, Dr al-fq al-
Jadda, 1982.
Al-Ghazz, Ahmad Sayf, HE:;K3F3>,>;?3>?G63CC;C3>):3K=:h?36)3K8
3>:3LL3>H3@38u3>>9:L 3?>3>@,46>>:/EG84;E:?
3>@sD, published with Khlid al-Azhar, 3>>9:L3>?36:=D3, Cairo,
al-Matba,a al-I,lmiyya, 1886-87.
Goffman, Erving, )F;9?3$AF7EA@F:7#3@397?7@FA8)BA;>7667@F;FK, New
York, Simon and Schuster, 1986.
Goldziher, Ignaz, “Das Prinzip der takijja im Islam”, 07;FE5:D;8F67D67GFE5:7@
?AD97@>S@6;E5:7@7E7>>E5:38F, 59 (1906), pp. 213-26.
Goodman, Lenn E., 4@TG83K>lEH3KK4@/3Cz@&:;>AEAB:;53>*3>7, Chicago,
University of Chicago Press, 2009.
Gordon, Cyrus, “The Substratum of *3C;KK3 in Iran”, AGD@3>A8F:7?7D;53@
%D;7@F3>)A5;7FK, 97 (1977), p. 192.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 485
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 485
Guadalajara y Xavier, Fray Marcos de, #7?AD34>77JBG>E;\@K<GEFXE;?A67EF;7DDA
67>AE#AD;E5AE67EB3[3, Pamplona, Nicolás de Assiayn, 1613.
Al-Hajar, Ahmad b. Qsim, $s;D3>6@u3>3>C3I?3>=8;D@, P.S. Van Ko-
ningsveld, Qsim al-Smarr and Gerard Wiegers (eds.), Madrid, CSIC, 1997.
HjjKhalfa, Katip Çelebi, !3E:83>zG@@ u3@ 3E?>=GFG4I3>8G@@, Istan-
bul, Maarif Matbaası, 1941-55, 6 vols.
Harvey, Leonard Patrick, “Crypto-Islam in Sixteenth-Century Spain”, in 5F3E
67>&D;?7DA@9D7EA67EFG6;AEmD347E7E>P?;5AE\D6A43, Ma-
drid, Comité Permanente del Congreso de Estudios Árabes e Islámicos, 1964,
pp. 163-179.
Harvey, Leonard Patrick, #GE>;?E;@)B3;@, Chicago, Chicago Uni-
versity Press, 2005.
Harvey, Leonard Patrick, *:7";F7D3DKG>FGD7A8F:7#AD;E5AE
)FG6K3E76A@F:7JF3@F#3@GE5D;BFE;@D34;53@6><3?X3, Oxford, D.
Phil. diss., 1958, 2 vols.
Harvey, Leonard Patrick, “The Political, Social and Cultural History of the
Moriscos”, in Salma Khadra Jayyusi (ed.), *:7"7935KA8#GE>;?)B3;@, Lei-
den, Brill, 1994, pp. 201-234, 2 vols.
Harvey, Leonard Patrick, “Una referencia explícita a la legalidad de la práctica
de la F3CK3 por los moriscos”, ):3DC3>@63>GE, 12 (1995), pp. 561-63.
Heath, Peter, >>79ADK3@6&:;>AEAB:K;@H;57@@34@)@, Philadelphia, Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania Press, 1992.
Horii, Satoe, ;797E7FL>;5:7@+?97:G@97@;?;E>3?;E5:7@(75:Fh;K3>G@F7D
47EA@67D7D7Da5=E;5:F;9G@967EH3@38;F7@)3u64u>3>E3?3DC3@697EF
:6F, Berlin, Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2001.
Horii, Satoe, “Reconsideration of Legal Devices (H;K3>) in Islamic Jurisprudence:
The Hanafs and Their ‘Exits’ (#3=:D;<)”, E>3?;5"3I3@6)A5;7FK, 9, 3
(2002), pp. 312-57.
Al-Husayn, ,Abd al-Fatth, 3>=D:I33F:3DG:8>3h=?3>E:3Du;KK36;DE3
?GCD3@3C;?3u3>3>;EF;Cs >;>8GDu3>u3C;6;KK3I3>8;C:;KK3, Cairo,
Dr al-Ittihd al-,Arab, 1979.
Ibn AbZamann, *38ED, Beirut, Dr al-Kutub al-,Ilmiyya, 2003, 2 vols.
Ibn al-,Arab, al-Qd, h=?3>'GD@, ,AlMuhammad al-Bijw(ed.), Cairo,
,sal-Bbal-Halab, 1968, 1 vol. in 4.
Ibn ,Atiyya al-Andalus, AbMuhammad ,Abd al-Haqq b. Ghlib, 3>#Gh3DD3D
3>I3<L8F38ED3>!;F43>u3LL, ,Abd al-Salm ,Abd al-ShfMuhammad
(ed.), Beirut, Dr al-Kutub al-,Ilmiyya, 1993, 6 vols.
Ibn Durayd al-Azd, AbBakr Muhammad b. al-Hasan, !;F43>?3>h;@, ,Abd
al-Ilh Nabhn (ed.), Beirut, Maktabat Lubnn Nshirn, 1996.
Ibn Farhn, 3>4<3>?G6::348?3,D;83F3uK@uG>3? 3>?36::34, Mamn
b. Muhyal-Dn al-Jannn (ed.), Beirut, Dr al-Kutub al-,Ilmiyya, 1996.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
486
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 486
Ibn Farhn, *34s;D3F3>hG==?8Gs>3>3Cd;K3I3?3@:;<3>3h=?, Riyad,
Dr ,lam al-Kutub, 2003, 2 vols.
Ibn Hajar al-,Asqaln,3Fh3>4D4;E:3DhS3hh3>G=:D, Cairo, Mustaf
al-Bbal-Halab, 1959-78, 13 vols.
Ibn Hijja al-Hamaw, Taqal-Dn AbBakr b. ,Al, !;F4=3E:83>>;F:?,3@I3<:
3>F3ID;K3I3>;EF;=:6?, Beirut, al-Matba,a al-Unsiyya, 1894.
Ibn al-Jallb, 3>*38D,, Husayn b. Slim al-Dahmn(ed.), Beirut, Dr al-Gharb
al-Islm, 1987, 2 vols.
Ibn Kathr, *38ED3>'GD@3>,3z?, Beirut, Dr al-Ma,rifa, 1986, 4 vols.
Ibn al-Nadm, 3>;:D;EF, ,Alal-Tawl (ed.), Beirut, Dr al-Kutub al-,Ilmiyya, 1996.
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, ,>?3>?GI3CC;,@,3@D3443>,>3?@, Muhammad
,Abd al-Salm Ibrhm (ed.), Beirut, Dr al-Kutub al-,Ilmiyya, 1991, 4 vols.
Ibn al-Shihna, ,Abd al-Barr b. Muhammad, 3>:3=:;D3>3E:D38;KK38>3>9:L
3>8;C:;KK3, Muhammad ,Adnn Darwsh (ed.), M.A. Darwish, Damascus,
Dar al-Majd, 1994.
Ibn Taymiyya, #;@:<3>EG@@3, Beirut, Dr Sdir, 1973, 4 vols.
Ibrahim, Areeg, “Literature of the Converts in Early Modern Spain: Nationalism
and Religious Dissimulation of Minorities”, A?B3D3F;H7";F7D3FGD7)FG6;7E,
45, 2 (2008), pp. 210-27.
Al-Jasss, AbBakr, Ahkm3>'GD@, Beirut, Dr Ihy al-Turth al-,Arab,
1992, 5 vols.
Al-Jazir, Thir b. Slih, *3E:>3>?3<L;>83@@3>?G,3??I3>3>9:L, Da-
mascus, Matba,at Wilyat Sriya, 1886.
Jones, Edward E. 7F3>, )A5;3>)F;9?3*:7&EK5:A>A9KA8#3D=76(7>3F;A@E:;BE,
New York, W.H. Freeman and Co., 1984.
Al-Jurjn, Alb. Muhammad al-Sharf, !;F43>*3,D8F, Beirut, Dr al-Kutub
al-,Ilmiyya, 1995.
Al-Kalb, Muhammad al-Qsim b. Ahmad b. Juzayy, !;F43>F3E:>>;,G>?3>
F3@L>, Beirut, Dr al-Kitb al-,Arab, 1973, 4 vols.
Kohlberg, Etan, “Some Imm-Sh,Views on *3C;KK3”, AGD@3>A8F:7?7D;53@
%D;7@F3>)A5;7FK, 95 (1975), pp. 395-402.
Kohlberg, Etan, “*3C;KK3 in Sh,Theology and Religion”, in Hans G. Kippenberg
and Guy G. Stroumsa (eds.), )75D75K3@6A@573>?7@F)FG6;7E;@F:7;EFADK
A8#76;F7DD3@73@3@6$73D3EF7D@(7>;9;A@E, Leiden, Brill, 1995, pp. 345-80.
Lane, Edward William, D34;5@9>;E:"7J;5A@, Cambridge, Islamic Texts Soci-
ety, 1984, 2 vols.
Layish, Aharon, “*3C;KK3 among the Druzes”, E;3@3@68D;53@)FG6;7E, 19
(1985), pp. 245-81.
López-Morillas, Consuelo, *:7'GD@;@);JF77@F:7@FGDK)B3;@);J#AD;E5A
,7DE;A@EA8)D3, London, Tamesis Books, 1982.
Luciani, J.D., "7E&DA>U9A?V@7E67)7@AGEE;, Algiers, Imprimerie Orientale Pierre
Fontana, 1908.
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'// 487
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 487
488 DEVIN STEWART
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
Maclean, Ian, #73@;@93@6@F7DBD7F3F;A@;@F:7(7@3;EE3@57*:73E7A8"3I,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Makrim, Sm,3>*3C;KK38>E>?, London, Druze Heritage Foundation, 2004.
Al-Mward,6343>6G@KI3>6@, Beirut, Dr al-Kutub al-,Ilmiyya, 1987.
Al-Mawwq, 3>*<I3>;=>>>;#G=:F3s3D!:3>>, printed on the margin of Ab
,Abd Allh Muhammad b. Muhammad b. ,Abd al-Rahmn al-Hattb al-Magh-
rib(d. 954/1547), #3I:;4 3><3>> >;E:3Dh#G=:F3s3D !:3>>, Cairo,
Matba,at al-Sa,da, 1911, 6 vols.
Meyer, Egbert, “Anlass und Anwendungs bereichder taqiyya”, 7DE>3?, 57
(1980), pp. 246-80.
Miller, Kathryn A., G3D6;3@EA8E>3?(7>;9;AGEGF:AD;FK3@6#GE>;?A??G
@;F;7EA8"3F7#76;7H3>)B3;@, New York, Columbia University Press, 2008.
Mrz,Abd Allh al-Isfahn, (;Kd3>uG>3? I3h;Kd3>8Gd3>, Sayyid
Ahmad al-Husayn(ed.), Qum, Matba,at al-Khayym, 1980, 6 vols.
Molénat, Jean-Pierre, “Le problème de la permanence des musulmans dans les
territoires conquis par les chrétiens, du point de vue de la loi islamique”, D3
4;53, 48 (2001), pp. 394-400.
Montaigne, Michel de, “Du dementir”, EE3;E, M. Rat (ed.), Paris, Garnier, 1962,
2 vols.
Ossendorf-Conrad, Beatrix, 3Ee!;F43>-d;h3f67Eu463>#3>;=4H344
6;F;A@G@6!A??7@F3DLG?E'3D3I;KK@34I43>t3:D3, Stutt-
gart, F. Steiner, 1994.
Perry, Mary Elizabeth, *:73@6>7EE#3;67@#AD;E5AE3@6F:7&A>;F;5EA8(7>;
9;A@;@3D>K#A67D@)B3;@, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2005.
Pormann, Peter E., “Das Fatwa ;77DD>;5:EF7@-3D7@ (E@>?3F;D67E3>
-3@n3DE)”, 7DE>3?, 80 (2003), pp. 301-28.
Al-Qd,Abd al-Jabbr, *3F:4F63>;>3>@G4GII3, ,Abd al-Karm ,Uthmn
(ed.), Beirut, Dr al-,Arabiyya, 1966.
Al-Qrial-Haraw,Alb. Sultn Muhammad, ):3Dh3>??u>3>'D;u3>
=;F4>8z3>=G8D>;>,>>?336D3>(3E:6, al-Tayyib ibn ,Umar al-Hu-
sayn al-Shinqt(ed.), Riyad, Dr al-Fadla, 2002.
Al-Qurtub, Muhammad b. Ahmad, 3> ?;u>;3h=?3>'GD@, Ahmad ,Abd
al-,Alm al-Bardn7F3> (eds.), Beirut, Dr Ihy al-Turth al-,Arab, 1985,
20 vols.
Al-Rghib al-Isfahn, #Ghd3DF3>G634 I3?GhI3DF3>E:Gu3D I3>4G
>39:, Cairo, al-Matba,a al-,mira al-Sharafiyya, 1908.
Al-Rz, Fakhr al-Dn, #38Fh3>9:3K413>*38ED3>=34D2, Cairo, al-Matba,a
al-Bahiyya al-Misriyya, 1938, 32 vols.
Razq, Muhammad, 3>@63>GE;KK@I3:;<DFG:G?;>3>#39:D;4=:;>>3>
C3D@3K@, Casablanca, Ifrqiya al-Sharq, 1989.
Richards, Jeffrey, )7J;EE;67@573@63?@3F;A@#;@AD;FKDAGBE;@F:7#;66>7
97E, London, Routledge, 1990.
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 488
489
DISSIMULATION IN SUNNI ISLAM AND MORISCO *'//
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
Rubiera Mata, María Jesús, “Los moriscos como criptomusulmanes y la Taqiyya”,
in 5F3E67>);?BAE;A@F7D@35;A@3>67#G67<3D;E?A(IX), Teruel, Instituto
de Estudios Turolenses, 2004, pp. 537-47.
Sabbagh, Leila, “La religion des Moriscos entre deux fatwas”, in "7E#AD;ECG7E
7F>7GDF7?BE*34>7(A@67@F7D@3F;A@3>7 G;>>7F#A@FB7>>;7D, Paris,
Éditions du Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, 1983, pp. 45-56.
Al-Safad, Khall b. Aybak, 3dd 3>=:;F?u3@3>F3ID;K3I3>;EF;=:6?, al-
Muhammad,Abd al-,Azz al-Hinnw(ed.), Cairo, Dr al-Tib,a al-Muham-
madiyya, 1979.
Salm, Muhammad Ibrhm (ed.), >9:L3>H3DDI33h<:;8#3C?F;:3>
9:L8;C:;KK3I3@3hI;KK3I3>G9:3I;KK3I33634;KK3, Cairo, Maktabat
Ibn Sn, 1988.
Al-Sans, Muhammad b. Ysuf, u+?63F3:>3>F36CCI3>F3s6C, Cairo, Dr
Ihy al-Kutub al-,Arabiyya, n.d.
Al-Saraqust, AbIshq al-Andalus, 3>;43I3>u3t8):3Dh3>uC633>
IGEt, Tunis, al-Maktaba al-,Ilmiyya, 1926-27.
Schacht, J., “Hiyal”, in P.J. Bearman 7F3>(eds.), @5K5>ABd6;3A8E>3?, 2nd
edition, Leiden, Brill, 1960-2005.
Schaefer, Richard T., (35;3>3@6F:@;5DAGBE, New York, Harper Collins, 1993.
Al-Shfi,, !;F43>+??, Beirut, Dr al-Fikr, 1973, 8 vols.
Al-Shaybn, Muhammad b. al-Hasan, 3>#3=:D;<8>h;K3>, Cairo, Dr al-Tha-
qfa al-Dniyya, 1999.
Stewart, Devin J., “Documents and Dissimulation: Notes on the Performance of
*3C;KK3”, in Cristina de la Puente (ed.), 67@F;6367E?3D9;@3>7E, Madrid,
CSIC, 2003, Estudios onomástico-biográficos de al-Andalus (EOBA) XIII,
pp. 569-98.
Stewart, Devin J., “Husayn b. ,Abd al-Samad al-,mil’s Treatise for Sultan
Suleiman and the Sh,-Shfi,Legal Tradition”, E>3?;5"3I3@6)A5;7FK, 4
(1997), pp. 156-99.
Stewart, Devin J., E>3?;5"793>%DF:A6AJK*I7>H7D):;;F7(735F;A@EFAF:7)G@@;
"793>)KEF7?, Salt Lake City, Utah University Press, 1998.
Stewart, Devin J., “*3C;KK3:as Performance: The Travels of Bah al-Dn al-
,milin the Ottoman Empire (991-93/1583-85)”, &D;@57FA@&3B7DE;@$73D
3EF7D@)FG6;7E, 4 (1996), pp. 1-70.
Stewart, Devin J., “The Identity of ‘the Mufti of Oran’: Abal-,Abbs Ahmad b.
AbJum,a al-Maghrwal-Wahrn(d. 917/1511)”, >'3@t3D3, 27, 2 (2006),
pp. 265-301.
Strothmann, Rudolf, “Takiyya”, @5K5>AB376;3A8E>3?, 1st ed., Leiden, Brill,
1913-36, vol. 8, pp. 628-29.
Al-Suhayl, Abl-Qsim ,Abd al-Rahmn b. ,Abd Allh, 3>*3,D8I3>;u>?8?
G4:;?3?;@3>3E? I3>3u>?8>'GD@3>=3D?, Beirut, Dr al-Kutub
al-,Ilmiyya, 1987.
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 489
Sulaymn b. ,Abd al-Qawal-Tf, !;F43>F3uK@8E:3Dh3>D43u@, Ahmad
Hjj Muhammad ,Uthmn (ed.), Beirut, Muassasat al-Rayyn, 1998.
Al-Suyt, Jall al-Dn, ):3DhuGC63><G?@8u;>?3>?3u@I3>43K@, Cairo,
Matba,at al-Bbal-Halab, 1939.
Al-Tabar, Muhammad b. Jarr, ?;u 3>43K@u3@IG<:F3I>K3>'GD@,
Cairo, Mustafal-Bbal-Halab, 1954, 30 vols.
Tabataba’i, Allama, ):;;F7E>3?, London, Allen and Unwin, 1975.
Al-Tha,lab, 3>!3E:8I3>43K@, AbMuhammad b. ,shr (ed.), Beirut, Dr
Ihy al-Turth al-,Arab, 2002, 10 vols.
Tueller, James B., AA63@63;F:8G>:D;EF;3@E#AD;E5AE3@63F:A>;5;E?;@
3D>K#A67D@)B3;@, New Orleans, University Press of the South, 2002.
Vernet, Juan, “La exégesis musulmana tradicional en los coranes aljamiados”, in
5F3E67>5A>ACG;A;@F7D@35;A@3>EA4D7>;F7D3FGD33><3?;363K?AD;E53, Ma-
drid, Gredos, 1978, pp. 123-45.
Al-Wanshars, 3>#3@:3<3>8;CI3>?3@:3>3>D;C, Rabat, Wizrat al-Awqf
wa-l-Shun al-Islmiyya, 1997.
Al-Wanshars, 3>#;uKD3>?GuD;4 I3><3?;u 3>?G9:D;4, Beirut, Dr al-Gharb
al-Islam, 1981-83, 13 vols.
Yqt al-Hamaw, DE:63>3D4;>?3,D;83F3>364, D.S. Margoliouth (ed.),
London, Luzac, 1907-27, 7 vols.
Zagorin, Perez, -3KEA8"K;@9;EE;?G>3F;A@&7DE75GF;A@3@6A@8AD?;FK;@
3D>K#A67D@GDAB7, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1990.
Al-Zamakhshar, 3>!3E:E:8u3@h3C;C3>F3@L>, Dr al-Ma,rifa, Beirut, n.d.,
4 vols.
(75;4;6A 06/03/2013
57BF36A 26/04/2013
>'3@t3D3XXXIV 2, 2013, pp.
439-490
ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2013.016
DEVIN STEWART
490
Alcantara 2 Vol XXXIV (3)_Maquetación 1 09/12/13 17:43 Página 490
