Ibn Barrajan and Ibn Arabi

Arabica
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286
BRILL brilLcom/arab
Ibn Barragan and Ibn 'Arabi on tbe Prediction of

the Capture of Jerusalem in 583/1187 by Saladin
Jose Beltver
University of Barcelona
Abstract
During the celebration of the capture of Aleppo by Saladin on safar i8th, 579/June nth,
1183, the qädl Muhyî 1-Dîn b. Zakî 1-Dïn al-Dimasqî recited a poem in which he ven-
tured the possibility of conquering Jerusalem in the month of ragab, as this was the
case four years later in 583/1187. MuhyT l-DIn b. al-Zakï was asked about the source of
his prediction and he answered that he found it in Ibn Barracan's Commentary of the
Koran in the beginning of sura al-Rum (Kor 30,1-4), where the predicted year of the
capture was also right. Even though the prediction became well-known, there is no
account of the particular way it was obtained, except for the text in Ibn Barragän's
Koranic commentary. Instead, we only have later authors stating that Ibn Barragán
based his analysis upon astrology. Some time later, in his al-Futühät al-makkiyya, Ibn
'Arab! considered twice Ibn Barragán's prediction and drew the same result by apply-
ing the science of letters to the same Koranic verses. However, Ibn 'Arabï pointed out
that Ibn Barragán had committed an error and that his prediction was right by chance.
This paper is devoted to the study of Ibn Barragán and Ibn 'Arabî's methods applied to
draw the prediction of the Muslim capture of Jerusalem in 583/1187. It supplies the
translations of Ibn Barragán's text in his Commentary of the Koran and those of Ibn
'Arabi in al-Futühät al-Makkiyya.
Keywords
Sufism, Ibn Barragán, Ibn 'Arab!, Koran, Koranic Commentary, Jerusalem, Aleppo,
Crusades, Saladin, prediction, divination, cycles, Science of letters
I KONINKLIJKE BRILL NV, LEIDEN, 2014 | DOI 10.1163/15700585-12341294

THE PREDICTION OF THE CAPTURE OF JERUSALEM 253
Résumé
Lors de la commémoration de la prise d'Alep par Saladin le 18 safar 579/11 juin 1183,
le qadî MuhyT 1-Dîn b. Zakî 1-Dîn al-Dimasql récita un poème dans lequel il émit la
possibilité de conquérir Jérusalem au mois de ragab, comme ce fut le cas quatre ans
plus tard en 583/1187. Muhyi 1-Dïn b. al-ZakI fut interrogé sur la source de sa prédiction
et il répondit qu'il l'avait trouvée dans le commentaire coranique d'Ibn Barragán sur
le début de la sourate al-Rûm (Cor 30,1-4), où l'année prévue de la capture était éga-
lement juste. Même si la prédiction devint célèbre, il n'y a aucun récit sur la méthode
spécifique par laquelle elle fut obtenue, excepté pour le texte du commentaire cora-
nique d'Ibn Barragan. Au lieu de cela, nous n'avons que des auteurs plus tardifs qui
affirment qu'Ibn Barragan reposa son analyse sur l'astrologie. Quelque temps plus tard,
dans al-Futühät al-Makkiyya, Ibn 'Arabi se penche à deux reprises sur la prédiction
d'Ibn Barragan et tire le même résultat en appliquant les préceptes de la science des
lettres aux mêmes versets coraniques. Cependant, Ibn 'Arabî mit en évidence qu'Ibn
Barragan avait commis une erreur et que sa prédiction était juste un hasard. Cet article
est consacré à l'étude d'Ibn Barragan et des méthodes d'Ibn 'Arabi employées pour
déduire la prédiction de la capture de Jémsalem par les musulmans en 583/1187. Il four-
nit les traductions du texte d'Ibn Barragán dans son commentaire du Coran et celles
d'al-Futühät al-Makkiyya d'Ibn 'Arabi.
Mots-clés
Soufisme, Ibn Barragan, Ibn 'ArabT, Coran, exégèse coranique, Jérusalem, Alep,
croisades, Saladin, prédiction, divination, cycles, science des lettres
Introduction
Tbe prediction of the Muslim capture of Jerusalem credited to Ibn Barragan

was fulfilled by Saladin (d. 589/1193) on ragab 583/October 1187. The prediction
was found by Muhyl 1-Dîn b. al-ZakI (d. 598/1202)' in Ibn Barracan's Koranic
commentary on tbe beginning verses of sura al-Rüm, although the actual pre-
diction for ragab AH 583, as described by Ibn al-ZakI, is not extant in tbe edition
1 Al-Dahabi, Siyar a'lam al-nubalä', eds Baäsär 'Awwäd Ma'ruf and Muhyl Hilal al-Sirhan,
Beirut, Mu'assasat al-risala, 1984-1988, XXI, p. 358-360.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

254 BELLVER
of Ibn Barracan's Koranic commentary.^ Nevertheless, Ibn Barragan provides

the theoretical basis and enough information to draw it. Some time later, the
Andalusian Sufi master Ibn 'ArabI (d. 638/1240) discussed the prediction cre-
dited to Ibn Barragán and criticized some points in his al-Futühät al-Makkiyya.
This paper deals with Ibn Barragän's foundations and Ibn 'Arabl's discussion of
the prediction of the Muslim capture of Jerusalem.^
Abu 1-Hakam 'Abd al-Saläm b. Barragan (c. 450-536/1058-1141) was one of the
foremost Sufi masters of al-Andalus. According to his nisba, he lived most of
his life in Seville although the origins of his family were in Ifrîqiya. He became
famous for the accurate prediction of the Muslim capture of Jerusalem in
583/1187, for being the master of the other foremost Andalusian Sufi master of
his time, Ibn al-'ArIf (d. 536/1141), and for his rather obscure death after being
summoned by the Almoravid sultan 'All b. Yüsuf b. TäSufin (d. 537/1143) in the
context of Mahdist uprisings in the Maghrib, like Ibn Qasl's (d. 546/1151) revolt
of the Murïdûn which took place short after Ibn Barragän's death. All these ele-
ments have fostered an image of Ibn Barragan as the leader or the inspirer of
Mahdist rebellious popular Sufi movements. Nevertheless, this view on Ibn
Barragan has been qualified over time.'*
Ibn Barragan is the author of three extant works, two Koranic commentaries—
the aforementioned Taßlr Ibn Barragan and his ldäh al-hikma^—-, and a
2 Ibn Barrag¡an, Tanbih al-afham ita tadabbur al-kitâb at-hakim wa-t-ta'arruf 'ala t-ayat wa-t-
naba' at-'azim, ed. Muhammad al-'Adlùni, Casablanca, Dar al-taqâfa, 2011, I, p, 394-397.
Al-'Adlüni's partial edition is based on MS Bayerische Staatsbibliothek BSB-Hss Cod. Arab. 83
containing the second half of Tafalr Ibn Barragan from sura al-Isra' to the end. On this taßlr,
see Denis Gril, "La lecture supérieure du Coran", Arabica, 47I3-4 (2000), p. 510-522; and his
"L'interprétation par transposition symbolique (i'tibär), selon Ibn Barragan et Ibn 'Arabi", in
Bakri Aladdin (ed. ), Symbotisme et herméneutique dans ta pensée d'Ibn 'Arabl, Damascus, Ifpo,
2007, p. 147-161, See also Hassan al-Qärl, "Ibn Barragan al-Andalusi wa-guhüduhu fi tafsir
al-süfi wa-'ilm al-kaläm", Magallat öämi'at Dimasq U-t-'utüm at-iqtisädiyya wa-l-qänüniyya,
23/1 (2007), p. 363-424. Gril ("La lecture", p. 513) lists a number of complete MSS in Istanbul.
3 Translations of Ibn Barrapn and Ibn 'Arabl's texts considering this prediction are appended
at the end,
4 For Ibn Barragán from a historical perspective and the events that surrounded his death, see
my "The 'al-Ghazâlî of al-Andalus': Ibn Barrajan, Mahdism and the emergence of learned
Sufism on the Iberian Peninsutí',Joumat of the American Orientât Society, forthcoming,
5 On this second commentary, see Amina González-Costa, "Un ejemplo de hermenéutica sufi
del Corán en al-Andalus, El comentario coránico Idäti al-hikma de Ibn Barragan (m, 536/1141)
de Sevilla", in Historia det Sufismo en al-Andalus, ed. Amina González-Costa and Gracia
López-Anguita, Cordoba, Almuzara, 2009, p, 41-65,
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

Commentary on the most beautiful Names of God edited by Purificación de la

Torre;^ while his Kitäb al-Irsäd seems now lost.^
In his commentary to the beginning verses of sura al-Rùm^ found in his
Tafslrlbn Barragan,^ the author criticizes the accepted interpretation of these
verses which regards the victory of the Byzantines or Rum (Kor 30, 3) over the
Persians in the area of Jerusalem as the reason for the joy of the believers
(Kor 30, 4). According to the common accepted interpretation, the joy of the
believers is justified because of the fact that the Rum were Christians and
belonged to the People of the Book and, therefore, were seen to be akin to the
Muslims. Ibn Barragan understands that the reason for the joy of the believers
can only be a Muslim victory over the Christians, so he comments the whole
section in this view. In order to support his interpretation, he analyzes the pro-
cess of Christian versus Muslim victories and defeats in the area of Jerusalem
by fitting those events in cyclical patterns. Since Ibn Barragán wrote his com-
mentary in 522/1128 while Jerusalem was under the dominion of the crusaders
after their capture of the city in 492/1099, there was a need of a future Muslim
capture of Jerusalem from Christian hands in order to fiilfill the joy of the
believers as claimed in Koran 30, 4 and interpreted by Ibn Barragan. Based on
his previous cyclical speculations, Ibn Barragan provides a cycle of 583 lunar
years and four months on which the prediction of the Muslim capture of
Jerusalem on ragab 583/October 1187, referred in later bibliography, was based.
In addition, Ibn Barragán, while interpreting these verses, links the foretold
appearance of the Mahdï—who in his view will bring the future and final vic-
tory of the Muslims over the Christians—to these events or similar ones fulfil-
ling similar cyclical patterns. Hence, although not explicitly stated, 583/1187
might be a most suitable date for the appearance of the Mahdî in the view of
Ibn Barragan.
6 Ibn Barragán, èarh asma' Allah al-husnä. Edición crlticay estudio realizados por Purificación
de la Torre, Madrid, Consejo Superior de Investigationes Científicas, 2000.
7 His Taßlrlbn Barragan is usually catalogued as al-Irsäd, what is probably a miscatalogation
following Hággí Hallfa. See Gril, "La lecture", p. 513-514.
8 "Alifläm mlm. The Rum have been defeated, in the nearer land, and they, after the victory
[over] them, will be victorious in some years. To God belongs the command before and after
and that day the believers will rejoice in God's victorious help. He helps to victory whom He
wills—and He is the Glorious, the Most Merciful. This is God's promise. God does not fail to
His promise, but most people know not" (Kor 30,1-6).
9 In his Idäh al-hikma, no reference to this prediction in his commentary to the beginning
verses of sura al-Rüm is made.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

256 BELLVER
Saladín and the Fulfillment of Ibn Barracan's Prediction
The sultan Saladin (d. 589/1193), founder of the Ayyubid dynasty, fulfilled the
prediction by capturingjerusalem to the Crusaders on ragab 27th, 583/October
2nd, 1187 after the battle of Hattin (rabr al-tänl 25th, 583/July 4th, 1187) and the
siege of the city during some two weeks. Saladin was allusively informed about
the prediction of the capture of Jerusalem present in Ibn Barragän's commen-
tary some time before it happened. During the celebration of the capture of
Aleppo (safar 18th, 579/June 11th, 1183), which took place four years before the
conquest of Jerusalem, the (7âçii"Muhyî l-Dîn b. al-ZakI (d. 598/1202) eulogized
Saladin venturing the conquest of Jerusalem on ragab. The historian Abu §äma
1-Muqaddasi (d. 665/1267-1268) describes the scene in which Saladin was
informed about Ibn Barragän's prediction,'"
The author—may God have mercy upon him—says, the faqlh Magd
al-DIn b. Gahbal al-áafi'í 1-HaIabï" got to the Commentary ofthe Koran of
Abu 1-Hakam [b. Barracan] al-MagribI and found in the commentary of
His word,'^ "Alifläm mlm. The Rum have been defeated" (Kor 30,1-2) that
the Rum will be defeated in the month of ragab of 583 [early September
to early October of 1187], Jerusalem will be conquered and will remain
under Muslim control forever. He based his conclusions on some points
mentioned in his book. When God let the Sultan conque r Aleppo, Magd
al-DIn b. óahbal wrote a paper where he let the Sultan know about him
conquering Jerusalem and the particular time ofthat. He gave this paper
to theßtqlh 'Isä'^ to show it to the Sultan. When theßiqlh 'Isa knew of it,
he did not dare to show it to him, but told Muhyï 1-DIn b. Zaki 1-Din
al-Dimasql about it. Muhyî 1-DIn trusted Ibn Gahbal's intellectual capac-
ity, but he did not venture to speak of it until verifying and trusting it.
Then he wrote a poem {qaslda) to eulogize the Sultan which included the
following verse.
10 See Abu Sama 1-Muqaddasi, 'Uyun ai-rawdataynß ahbar at-dawtatayn at-nüriyya wa-l-
satähiyya, ed. Ahmad Baysüml, Damascus, Mansurât Wizärat al-taqäfa, 1991, II, p. 106.
11 On Ibn öahbal (d. 596/1199-1200), see al-Safadî, at-Wäft bi-l-wafayät, Beirut, Dar ihyä'
al-turät al-'arabi, 2000, XVI, p. 236 (no. 5683).
12 It is worth pointing out that Ibn Barragän's main Koranic commentary, his Taßlr Ibn
Barragán, was available in the Middle East at least some forty years after his death, what
was pretty far reaching for a Western Sufi Koranic commentary prior to Ibn Arabi.
13 Diyä' al-DIn 'Isa 1-HakkârI (d. 585/1189). On him, see Ibn Hallikän, Wafayät at-a'yän wa-an-
bä'abnä'at-zamän, ed. I. 'Abbäs, Beirut, Dar Sâdir, 1986, III, p. 497-498 (no. 516).
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

Your capture of Aleppo in safar

announces your capture of Jerusalem in ragab
In addition to tbe previous account, Ibn Hallikän states tbat Mubyî l-Dîn b.
al-Zakï found tbe prediction written in tbe margin of tbe text in a band tbat
was not tbat of tbe main body text and bence be doubted if it belonged to tbe
original text or was a later addition.'"*
[Mubyï 1-Dïn b. al-Zakî] enjoyed a bigb status and a solid position to

tbe eyes of sultan Saläb ai-Din, may God bave mercy upon bim. Wben tbe
Sultan captured tbe city of Aleppo on Saturday, safar i8tb of [AH] 579, tbe
aforementioned qädl Mubyî 1-DIn recited a poem rbymed in letter bä'
{qaslda bd'iyya) wbicb be composed all excellently. One of its verses,
wbicb became famous among tbe people by word of moutb, was,
Your capture of Aleppo in safar

announces your capture of Jerusalem in ragab
And it was as be said, since Jerusalem was conquered tbree days before
tbe end of ragab of AH 583. Mubyl 1-Dîn was tben asked,
—^Wbere did you get tbis?
And bis answer,
—I got it from Ibn Barragän's Commentary of the Koran in tbe section
devoted to His Word, may He be exalted, "Alifläm mîm. Tbe Rum bave
been defeated in tbe nearer land, and tbey, after tbeir victory, will be
victorious in some years [bid' sinln)" (Kor 30, 1-4). Wben I knew of tbis
verse and tbis account, I kept on looking for Ibn Barragän's commentary
until I found it in tbis form. However tbis section was written in tbe mar-
gin of tbe text in a band tbat was not tbat of tbe main body and bence I
knew not if it belonged to tbe original text or was a later addition. He
mentioned tbere a long computation and metbod to obtain tbis result
until be finally deduced it from His Word "some years {bid' sinln)"
(Kor 30, 4).
Tbe prediction of tbe capture of Jerusalem credited to Ibn Barragan was, to my

knowledge, tbe first of few otbers. For instance, after tbe battle of Hattin, Ibn
AblTayy remembered a story about tbe master 'Umar al-Mullä' wbo in tbe year
555/1160 in Mosul foretold tbat somebody named Yüsuf would kill tbe
14 See Ibn Hallikän, Wafayät al-a'yän, fV, p. 229-230 (no. 594).
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

258 BELLVER
Christians. Ibn Abî Tayy then realized that tbe foretold Yüsuf was Saladin bim-
self. In addition, a Christian Arabic doctor who was proficient in astrology, Abu
Sulaymän Dä'üd, predicted in 580/1184 by using astrology tbe capture of
Jerusalem by Saladin. There are some other accounts of premonitory dreams
about Saladin's capture of Jerusalem.'^
Tbe prediction present in Ibn Barracan's commentary was perceived with
mixed opinions after it was fulfilled. On the one band, it was tbe main element
calling attention to Ibn Barragän's commentary. However it was later criticized
for being allegedly based on astrology and historical data even by Sufi autbors.
Ibn Arab! pointed out tbat Ibn Barracan's prediction, although correct, was
erroneously obtained, as we will see later; while Abu 1-Hasan al-Sahawî, quoted
by his disciple Abu §äma 1-Muqaddasî, considered it unworthy since it was not
obtained by divine means as "tbis is astrology {nigäma) that bits tbe nail on the
bead. Although it is correct to state that he foretold tbis before it happened and
it was in bis book before it took place, tbis is not derived from the letters, nei-
tber from any kind of divine gift {karäma), since divine gifts are not acquired
tbrougb bistory and do not need it."'^ In order to clarify tbis topic, let us con-
sider the rational bebind the prediction credited to Ibn Barragan.
The Rational Behind the Prediction Credited to Ibn Barragan
Ibn Barragan set out tbe rational bebind the prediction credited to him in bis
commentary on the beginning verses of sura al-Rüm:
Alifläm mim. Tbe Rüm have been defeated {gulibat), in tbe nearer land,
and tbey, after the victory [over] them {ba'da galabihim), will be victori-
ous {sa-yaglibüna) in some years (fibid'i sinln). To God belongs the com-
mand before and after and tbat day the believers will rejoice in God's
victorious help. He helps to victory whom He wills—and He is the
Glorious {al-'AzHz), the Most Merciful {al-Rahlm). This is God's promise.
God does not fail to His promise, but most people know not (Kor 30,1-6).
The canonical interpretation of these verses understands that the words "the
Rüm have been defeated" refer to the Persian victory over the Byzantines in
Greater Syria that led the Persians to conquering Jerusalem in the year -8/614.
15 For these predictions, see Anne-Marie Eddé, Saladin, Paris, Flammarion, 2008, p. 208-209.
16 Abu Sama 1-Muqaddasi, 'Uyün al-rawdatayn, II, p. 108.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

It also understands that the verse "and they [...] will be victorious in some
years" entails a prediction of a Byzantine victory over the Persians as was actu-
ally the case in l/late fall 622 when Heraclius first defeated the Persian army.
And it concludes that the believers—i.e. the Muslims—were to rejoice for this
Byzantine victory since both Christians and Muslims have a revealed Book.
Ibn Barragan does not share this interpretation. As in the common accepted
interpretation, Ibn Barragan identifies the believers with the Muslims.
However, in his view, once the Christians refused the Prophet's call to Islam,
there is no reason for the believers—i.e. the Muslims—to rejoice for a Christian
victory, nor would God send news or good tidings regarding the Christians
since no lesson to the believers would be entailed, nor would the Christians be
associated in this verse with the name 'the Most Merciful' (al-Rahim), the one
bestowing guidance and particular mercy upon the believers, i.e. the Muslims.''^
On the contrary, Ibn Barragan understands that these verses refer to future
events not yet fulfilled at the time of their revelation, even in regards of the
first Christian defeat which is mentioned in the beginning verses as a yet com-
pleted action. In his view, even though the Christian defeat was a fully deter-
mined event at the time of the revelation of this verse, it was yet to be actualized
in the realm of manifestation. This is so, because of the effect of the dawä'ir
al-taqdîr, the cyclical spheres causing the determination of events. In Ibn
Barragän's view, the dawä'ir al-taqdir are spheres above the realm of manifesta-
tion and below the realm of the divine in which events are commanded
in a virtual state before being actualized in the realm of manifestation. As
these spheres revolve, the commanded events are actualized in the realm of
manifestation in a cyclical basis depending on the period of revolution of each
of these spheres. So, for Ibn Barragan, events are cyclical.
Ibn Barragan sees the dawä'ir al-taqdîr at play in a hadtt in which the Prophet
saw in a dream that, in his very same time, a breach was being opened in Gog
and Magog's containment wall bringing harm to the Arabs.'^ Ibn Barragan
17 It is usually accepted that the name 'the All-Merciful' (at-Rahmän) bestows God's mercy
upon all beings, while the name 'the Most-Merciful' (al-Rahim) bestows God's particular
mercy upon the believers, I.e. the Muslims.
18 The translation of this hadlt, as quoted by Ibn Barragan, is as follows, "When the
Messenger of God—may God's blessings and peace be upon him—after waking up one
night said: 'There is no god but God, Woe to the Arabs for the evil harm that is approa-
ching. Today, a breach like this in Gog and Magog's containment wall has been opened,'
And he showed a measurement with his thumb and his forefinger". See al-Buhäri,
at-öämi' ii-Sahih al-muhtasar, ed, Mustafa D!b al-Bugä', Beirut, Dar Ibn Katir, 1987
(no, 6631),
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

26o BELLVER
linked this breach to the Koranic warning by which the Arabs may be replaced
by other people if they give up striving in the path of God,'^ what, in his view,
came to effect at the beginning of the Abbasid caliphate when the Arabs were
replaced by other ethnic groups in the leading roles of the Islamic Worid. The
time in which the Prophet saw the breaking of Gog and Magog's wall was that
in which that event took place in the dawä'ir al-taqdlr, while this event was
actualized in the domain of manifestation some two hundred years later.
Ibn Barragán envisages the effect of the dawä'ir al-taqdlr, the cyclical spheres
causing the determination of events, in the series of alternative victories and
defeats experienced by the Christians (Rum) in Greater Syria and referred to in
the beginning verses of sura al-Rüm. Since the alternative process of victories
and defeats is related to the dawä'ir al-taqdlr, a historical pattern can be estab-
lished and, therefore, a prediction can be made once the period of revolution
of these spheres is known. However, Ibn Barragán does not actually infer a
period in the pattern of victories and defeats from the observation of historical
data in order to predict new events. On the contrary, Ibn Barragán applies prior
periods, which are numerically or Koranically significant, to the historical data
in order to support the validity of his interpretation and the importance of the
number seven.
In addition to the victories and defeats between Persians and Christians
which are significant to the mainstream traditional interpretation of these
verses—that is, (i) the Persian victory over the Byzantines and the Persian con-
quest of Jerusalem which took place in the year -8/614; and (ii) the first
Byzantine victory over the Persians led by Heraclius which took place in the
fall of year 1/622^°—, Ibn Barragán pointed out in 522/1128 some different
victories and defeats between Christians and Muslims which, in his view, fit
the beginning verses of sura al-Rùm,
19 Kor 47,38.
20 See N. Oikomidès, "A Chronological Note on the First Persian Campaign of Heraclius
(622)", Byzantine and Modem Greek Studies, I (1975), p. 1-9, and particularly, p. 6-7 and
Walter E. Kaegi, Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium, New York, Cambridge University Press,
2003, p. 115. In taßir literature, there are also accounts which regard that the Byzantine
victory over the Persians happened at the same time as the Battle of Badr held on ramadan
17, 2/March 13, 624. Cf. al-Tabari, Taßir 6ämi'al-bayän 'an ta'wlläy al-Qur'än, ed. al-Turkî,
Cairo, Dar Higr, 2001, XVIII, p. 448 and 458. It has also been reported that the Byzantine
victory over the Persians was known during the Muslim way back from Hudaybiyya.
Hence this news may refer to the Battle of Nineveh on ragab 28, 6/Decemher 12, 627,
although the treaty of Hudaybiyya took place on dû 1-qa'da 6,6/March 18,628 some three
months after the Battle of Nineveh. Cf. al-Tabari, Tafslr, XVIII, p. 454-455.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

The Rum have been defeated {gulibat), in the nearer land, and they, after
their victory {ba'da galabihim), will be victorious {sa-yaglibüna) in some
years {ßbid'isinln).
These verses call attention to three different significant situations in Ibn

Barragän's view, (i) a first Christian defeat alluded to in 'the Rum have been
defeated' {gulibat); (ii) a first Christian victory alluded to in 'after their victory'
{ba'da galabihim); and (iii) a second Christian victory alluded to in 'will be
victorious' {sa-yaglibüna). Contrary to Ibn Barragän's reading, the first Christian
victory in 'after their victory' {ba'dagalabihim) is usually understood in canon-
ical commentaries as 'after the victory over them', that is the Persian victory
over the Byzantines. However Ibn Barragan reading it as the Byzantines' vic-
tory over the Persians is scrupulously literal.
In addition to the canonical vocalization of these verses, Ibn Barragan takes
also into account the alternative vocalization based on 'All b. Abl Tälib and Ibn
'Umar's reading. In this second possibility, the passive voice in 'have been
defeated' {gulibat) is vocalized in active voice and hence it is read as 'were vic-
torious' {galabat); while the active voice in 'will be victorious' {sa-yaglibüna) is
vocalized in passive voice and hence it is read as 'wiU be defeated {sa-yuglabüna).
This second version results In,
The Rum were victorious {galabat), in the nearer land, and they, after
their victory {ba'da galabihim), will be defeated {sa-yuglabüna) in some
years {ßbid'isinln).
Hence this second reading calls attention to three significant situations, two
prior Christian victories and a final Christian defeat. In short, Ibn Barragan
links these significant situations in hoth readings to five battles between
Christians and Muslims. These are:
• the first Byzantine victory over the Muslims ever, which is drawn from
the expression "the Rum were victorious" {galabat) according to the non-
canonical reading;
• a subsequent Muslim victory over the Byzantines some forty nine weeks
after their first defeat in which the Muslims only reached the Byzantine bor-
der, which although not explicitly stated by Ibn Barragan, may be entailed in
the expression "[the Rum] will be defeated" {sa-yuglabüna) according to the
non-canonical reading;
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

262 BELLVER
• tbe Muslim conquest of Greater Syria during tbe calipbate of 'Umar, wbicb
is drawn from tbe expression "tbe Rum bave been defeated" (gulibat)
according to tbe canonical reading;
• tbe crusaders' capture of Jerusalem in 492/1099, wbicb is drawn from tbe
expression "after tbeir victory" {ba'da galabihim) and may be entailed in
tbe expression "[tbe Rum] will be victorious" (sa-yaglibüna) according to
tbe canonical reading;
• and tbe predicted Muslim victory over tbe Cbristians, wbicb seemingly was
to take place in 583/1187 and is drawn by Ibn Barragan from tbe expression
"[tbe Rum] will be defeated" {sa-yuglabüna) according to tbe non-canonical
reading.
Overall, all tbese events make up two Cbristian victories versus tbree Muslim
ones. To tbe previous list, Ibn Barragan adds a 'sixtb state' linked to tbe situa-
tion of tbe Cbristians in Greater Syria wben tbe Propbet received tbe revela-
tion of tbe Koran (nuzül al-Qur'än) in Mecca. If tbis expression intends
tbe beginning of tbe revelation of tbe Koran, tben tbis sixtb state may refer to
tbe Byzantine rule over Greater Syria prior to tbe tbeir defeat in front of tbe
Persians in -8/614, wbile if it intends tbe revelation of tbese particular verses, it
may refer to tbeir defeat. Tbe first option would make more sense since tbe
number of Cbristian victories and defeats would be balanced. He numbers it as
a sixtb state probably in view of tbe cyclical nature of tbe dawä'ir al-taqdlr.
Ibn Barragan signals out victories and defeats witbin periods of 'some years'
{bid ' sinln). In Arabic, tbe word 'some' {bid') can range from tbree to nine. In
addition, for Ibn Barragan 'year' stands for different cyclical times. Ibn Barragan
pays particular attention to tbe number seven, tbat is to periods made up of
seven cycles or 7 x 7 cycles wbere a cycle may stand for a week, a year or more
complex ones. He Justifies bis approacb on bis belief tbat "tbe great majority of
beings in tbe universe" follow patterns ordered according to tbe number seven,
to 7 X 7 or to 7 X 7 X 7.21 In bis commentary on tbe beginning verses of sura
al-Duhän wbicb deal witb tbe descent of tbe Koran in tbe Nigbt of
Determination {laylatal-qadr), Ibn Barragan adds also patterns of repetition in
fives, nines, forty nines (7 x 7) and one tbousand montbs, a period referred to
in sura al-Qadr.22 Ibn Barragan places tbe five aforementioned victories and
defeats witbin tbese cyclical patterns.
Tbe first Byzantine victory over tbe Muslims may be identified witb tbe
Battle of Mu'ta wbicb took place on gumädä 1-ülä 8/late August to late
21 Ibn Barragán, Tanbth al-afhäm, II, p. 996.

22 ft/ci.p. 668.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

September 629.^^ These were tbe very first hostilities between Muslim forces
and Arab tribes allied to tbe Byzantines. It can be identified witb the Battle of
Mu'ta, since Ibn Barragan points out that it took place a year before the first
Muslim victory over the Byzantines and that tbe Muslims did not reach the
Syrian border in their first victory. Hence, the first Muslim defeat can be identi-
fied with the battle of Mu'ta and the first Muslim victory can be identified with
the Battle of Tabük between Muslim forces and Arab tribes allied to the
Byzantines, wbich took place on ragab 9/October-November 630.^^* Even
though there is a time difference of some 14 lunar months between both bat-
tles, Ibn Barragan does not seem to be aware of that fact and takes this diffe-
rence to be of roughly one lunar year. Then he approximates it by 49 or 50
weeks, since a lunar year is equal to 50 weeks and four days. Hence, for Ibn
Barragan, the time difference between both battles is close to 7 cycles, each
made up of 7 weeks, or 7 x 7 weeks.
After the Battle of Tabûk, the next Muslim victory signaled out by Ibn
Barragan took place during the time of the second caliph 'Umarb. al-Hattäb (d.
23/644). Ibn Barragán associates this Muslim victory—and hence Christian
defeat—to tbe words "the Rüm have been defeated {gulibat)", that is to the very
first clash alluded to in these verses according to the canonical reading. Even
though it is expressed as a yet fulfilled action by tbe time tbis verse was
revealed, Ibn Barragan adduces the effect of the dawä'ir al-taqdlr to state that
it was actually an event yet to be fulfilled in the realm of manifestation.
The conquest of Greater Syria began roughly after the ridda wars during the
caliphate of Abu Bakr with the expedition northwards of Amr b. al-'As (13/634)
23 For the dating of historical events, I henceforth mostly rely upon Moshe Gil, A History of
Palestine, 634-/099, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1992. For the battle of Mu'ta,
see Gil, A History of Palestine, p. 22-24; al-Wâqidî, Kitàb al-Magäzi, London, Oxford
University Press, 1966, p. 755-769; Ibn Hisäm, al-Slra, ed. F. Wustenfeld, Göttingen, Druck
von G. Kreysing in Leipzig, 1858-1860, p. 791-802; al-Tabarl, Ta'rlh al-rusul wa-l-mulùk, ed.
M.J. de Goeje, Leiden, E.J. Brill, 1879-1901,1, p. 1610-1618; Ibn Sa'd, Kitâbal-Tabaqât al-kubrä,
ed. E. Sachau, Leiden, EJ. Brill, 1905, II/i, p. 92; al-Mas'üdi, al-Tanblh wa-1-isräf, ed. M.J. de
Goeje, Leiden, E.J. Brill, 1894, p. 265; Ibn Sayyid al-Nàs, 'Uyûn al-atarfifunûn al-magäzi
wa-t-samä'il wa-í-siyar, Cairo, Maktabat al-Qudsï, 1356, II, p. 153; al-Suyüti, al-Hasä'is
al-kubrä, ed. M.H. Harräs, Cairo, Dar al-kutub al-hadlta, 1967, II, p. 70-72; Ibn Katlr,
al-Bidäya wa-l-nihäya, Beirut, Maktabat al-ma'ärif, 1966, IV, p. 244; Theophanes,
Chronographia, ed. C. De Boor, Teubner, Leipzig, 1883, p. 335; and Caetani, Annati Dell'
Istäm, Milan, Editore Ulrico Hoepli, 1905-1926, II, p. 80-90.
24 For the battle of Tabük, see Gil, A History ofPatestine, p. 26-27; al-Waqidl, Magäzl, p. 989-
1022; Ibn Hisäm, Slra, p. 893-906; al-Tabari, Ta'rlh, 1, p. 1692-1705; and Caetani, AnnaU, II,
p. 238-253 and 257 sqq.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

264 BELLVER
and longed until the conquests of Cesárea (19/640), Ascalon (23/644) and
Tripoli (24/645). The central episode was the battle of Yarmük which see-
mingly took place on ragab 15/August 636 during the rule of the second caliph,
'Umar b. al-Hattäb. According to Ibn al-Kalbl the date was ragab 5,15/August
12, 636, while according to Theophanes it was July 26. In this battle, Armenian
contingents took part and after their defeat withdrew to Armenia opening all
Greater Syria to Muslim forces and leaving Cesárea and Jerusalem as the main
isolated strongholds.^^ Jerusalem surrendered after a siege which longed from
few months to two years depending on sources. According to al-Tabarî the
capitulation was in 15/636 or 16/637, while according to al-Balädurl it was in
17/637.26
Ibn Barragan considers that, in this case, the expression "in some years"
[ft bid'i sinln) must be understood as "in some years from now", that is from the
time these verses were revealed. Therefore the yet to be fulfilled Muslim con-
quest of Greater Syria associated to "the Rum have been defeated {gulibat)"
must be reckoned from the time these verses were reveled—Le. -7/615—and
not from any previous victory or defeat. He also considers that in this occasion
the Koranic word 'years' refers to cycles made up of seven lunar years. So now
"some years" can range from three to nine cycles made up each of seven years,
although Ibn Barragan, in order to fit the historical events, limits this period to
a time span of three to four cycles made up of seven years beginning with the
revelation of these verses; that is a time span of 21 to 28 years reckoned from
-7/615. So he considers the conquest to long from 14/635 to 21/642 which is
pretty much the time the major conquest of Greater Syria took place.
The last couple of victories and defeats signaled out by Ibn Barragan are the
Christian capture of Jerusalem by the Crusaders, which took place during his
lifetime in 492/1099, and the predicted Muslim victory over the Christians,
which seemingly was to take place in 583/1187, although this prediction is not
explicitly stated.
As for the Christian capture of Jerusalem, Ibn Barragan states that it took
place in the year 489/1096, although it actually happened on âa'bân 23, 492/
July 15,1099. Therefore he is seemingly committing a mistake, as there are no
major military clashes in the year 489/1096 since, regarding the First Crusade,
25 On Yarmük, see Gil, A History of Palestine, p. 45-48; Caetani, Annall, III, p. 549-613;
Theophanes, Chronographia, p. 332 and 338; al-Ya'qübí, Ta'rth, ed. M.Th. Houtsma, Leiden,
E.J. Brill, 1883, II, p. 160; al-Baläduri, Futüh al-butdän, ed. M.J. de Goeje, Leiden, E.J. Brill,
1866, p. 135; al-Tabarî, Ta'rth, I, p, 2347 sqq.
26 Gil, A History of Palestine, p. 51-56; Caetani, Annali, III, p. 920-959; al-Tabari, 7ixV/jfi, I,
p. 2360,2406; al-Baläduri, Futùh, p, 139; Theophanes, Chronographia, p. 339.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

these began in the year 490/1097. Ibn Barragán understands this victory to be
linked to the Koranic expression "they will be victorious [sa-yaglibüna) in
some years (fi hid '' sinln)" following the traditional canonical vocalization
of these verses. In regards of the Christian victory in the First Crusade, Ibn
Barragán considers that the Koranic word 'years' in the expression 'some years'
{bid'i sinln) refers to cycles made up of one thousand lunar months, a period of
time Koranically significant since "the Night of Determination {laylat al-qadr)
is better than one thousand months" (Kor 97, 3). In addition, he believes that
the word 'some' now means six. So let us consider a cycle made up of 1000 lunar
months what amounts to 83 lunar years and 4 lunar months. If we consider six
of such cycles each made up of 1000 lunar months, the total time will amount
to 500 lunar years, since 6 x 83y3 years = 500 years. Ibn Barragán holds that the
Christian victory over the Muslims happened at the end of the sixth year—
that is at the end of a period of 500 years—in 489/1096, although it actually
happened in 492/1099.
Next, he points out that seven of such cycles made up of 1000 lunar months
will amount to 583 lunar years and 4 lunar months, since 7 x 83 Va years =
583 V3 years. Then he explicitly states that he is v^riting this in 522/1128. And this is
it. At least, as from the extant version, there is no reference to a predicted date
for the capture of Jerusalem, nor does he state that the predicted Muslim vic-
tory will happen when the seventh cycle would be fulfilled. He only highlights
a time interval of seven cycles, which amounts to 583 lunar years and
4 lunar months, without linking its fulfillment to the capture of Jerusalem and
without providing an initial date from which reckoning this time interval.
Later in the text, when he considers the expression "[the Rum] will be
defeated" (sa-yugtabüna), as from the non-canonical reading, Ibn Barragán
asserts that this expression refers to the foretold appearance of the awaited
Mahdï leading the final Muslim victory over the Christians with no subsequent
Christian victory. In addition, he quotes prophetic traditions stating that the
Mahdl will lead the community for seven or nine years, depending on the
source.
In short, as from the extant version, Ibn Barragán does not openly state that
the awaited Mahdl will appear after fulfilling a time interval of 583 Va years.
Nonetheless, he provides the computation of seven cycles with no apparent
reason or application, while he praises the number seven repeatedly. In addi-
tion, he provides the year when he wrote the commentary of these verses, what
may intend that the time interval of 583 V3 years is involved in a prediction of
the future capture of Jerusalem, although this is not openly stated. Hence, Ibn
Barragán provides the grounds upon which the computation of seven cycles
would be understood as a prediction of the future capture of Jerusalem by the
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

266 BELLVER
awaited Mahdi at any point around AH 583, although the actual prediction for
ragab AH 583 is not present in the extant version.
However, according to Abu Sama 1-Muqaddasî, the faqlh Magd al-DIn
al-Halabî found the prediction of the capture of Jerusalem for ragab 583/
October 1187 written in the text, while, according to Ibn Hallikän, Muhyl 1-Dîn
b. al-ZakI found the prediction written in the margin of the text in a hand dif-
ferent to that of the main body and doubted if it belonged to the original text
or was a later addition.^^ Therefore, the prediction for ragab AH 583, although
not actually extant in the text, seems well-established from Abu Kama's report
of Ibn al-Zaki's verse predicting it for the month of ragab. Hence, the actual
prediction for ragab AH 583 may have been dropped from the extant version of
Ibn Barragän's commentary or, what seems more likely, may be a later addition
to Ibn Barragän's text based on his surmises. If it were a later addition by an
unknown author, it would help explain some inconsistencies arising from con-
sidering a time interval as a date.
The extant version does not provide a predicted date. Instead, it provides
a computation of seven cycles each made up of 1000 lunar months, what
amounts to 583 lunar years and four months. If it were to be reckoned from
the beginning of the Hijri calendar, these 583 years and four months would
refer to the month of rabí' al-tänl (the fourth month of the year) rather than
ragab (the seventh). Bearing in mind that ragab is the seventh month of the
Islamic lunar calendar, the prediction for ragab must have been reckoned from
the third month of the Islamic calendar, that is from rabi* al-av^wal. In rabr al-
awwal 8th, l/September 20th, 622, the Prophet arrived to Qubä', near Medina,
after his emigration {higra) from Mecca. This date is taken as the beginning
ofthe new Islamic era, although, since it happened in the mid ofthe year, the
beginning of the Islamic calendar is reckoned from the first day of the lunar
year in which the Prophet's emigration {higra) took place, and not from the
actual date of his emigration. Therefore, the Islamic calendar begins some
three months before the Prophet's emigration. In any case, it would make
sense to choose the Prophet's emigration as the beginning time to reckon the
time interval of 583 years and four months, since approximately at the same
time Heraclius inflicted hisfirstdefeat to the Persians.^^ That happened in fall
AD 622 at approximately the same time the Prophet's emigration on rabí' al-
27 See n. 10 and 14 supra.

28 See N. Oikomidès, "A Chronological Note on the First Persian Campaign of Heraclius
(622)", Byzantine andModem Greet;Studies I (1975), p. 1-9, and particularly 6-7 and Walter
E. Kaegi, Heracttus, Emperor of Byzantium, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2003,
p. 115.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

awwal l/mid-September to mid-October 622 took place. Nevertbeless, since

Ibn Barragan provides a time interval, ratber tban a date, and since tbe Islamic
calendar begins in tbe year 1, a time interval of 583 years and four montbs reck-
oned from rabr al-awwal AH 1 is fulfilled on ragab AH 584 ratber tban on ragab
AH 583. Anotber option is to reckon tbis time span from rabí' al-awwal AH
-1 in order for tbe 583 years and four montbs to be fulfilled on ragab AH 583,
altbougb tbere is no clear bistorical reason for tbat, as tbere are no reports
of Byzantine victories over tbe Persians in AD 621. Tberefore, Ibn Barragan, or
most likely a later autbor, simply considered a time interval of 583 lunar years
and 4 lunar montbs to be a date reckoned from tbe Propbet's emigration, tbat
is from tbe beginning of tbe Islamic era.
It is interesting to notice tbat tbe Crusaders' capture of Jerusalem from tbe
Muslims on sa'bän 23tb, 492/July i5tb, 1099 bappened some 499 lunar years
after tbe Persian conquest of Jerusalem from tbe Byzantines in tbe year -8/614.
Since tbere is no Annus Hegirae 0, tbis time difference is of six cycles of 1000
lunar montbs minus one year. Tbis pattern is equivalent to tbat of tbe Muslim
capture of Jerusalem by Saladin since tbe time interval reckoned from tbe
Propbet's emigration is of seven cycles of 1000 lunar montbs minus one year.
Overall, tbe actual prediction for ragab AH 583 is unclear from tbe extant
text. Since tbe prediction itself is bistorically well-establisbed, tbe actual pre-
diction may bave been dropped from Ibn Barragän's version or may be a later
addition based on bis surmises. Wbatever tbe case, later Muslim scbolars cre-
dited tbe prediction of tbe Muslim capture of Jerusalem by Saladin to Ibn
Barragan.
Ibn 'ArabI and tbe Prediction of tbe Capture of Jerusalem

by Saladin
Ibn 'Arab! considers twice in bis al-Futühät al-Makkiyya tbe prediction of tbe
Muslim capture of Jerusalem.^^ In botb discussions, be briefly refers to Ibn
Barragan and tben provides an additional computation based on tbe science
of letters {'ilm al-hurüf). Tbere are differences, bowever, between botb refe-
rences to Ibn Barragan regarding tbe prediction.
In tbe first discussion, Ibn 'Arab! bolds tbat Ibn Barragan got tbe prediction
tbrougb an unveiling and concealed it by resorting to astronomy {'ilm al-falak)
29 Translations of both texts are appended at the end.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

268 BELLVER
in a likely reference to Ibn Barragän's doctrine of the dawä'ir al-taqdlr, the

cyclical spheres causing the determination of events.^"
The second discussion is found in the chapter devoted to the Presence of
the Opening {hadrat al-fath) linked to the name of God 'the Opener' {al-Fattäh),
which may be understood as the Opener of the inner realm or the Conquerer:
However, Abd al-Saläm Abu 1-Hakam b. Barragan did not draw it from
this [Presence] since a mistake {galat) befell him, which went unnoticed
by the people. We have clarified that to some of our companions when
we arrived with his book. It was clear to him that he committed a mis-
take, although he got close to the [correct] issue. The reason of [his mis-
take] was that he introduced another science distorting [the procedure].^'
The unnoticed mistake pointed out by Ibn Arabi may be the one noted above
by which a time interval of 583 years and four months reckoned from the
Prophet's higra—a date agreeing with the Byzantines' victory over the
Persians—is fulfilled on ragab AH 584 rather than in AH 583. The science dis-
torting the correct procedure, therefore, may be Ibn Barragän's resort to time
intervals and historical cycles. In addition, Ibn Arabl's presumption of Ibn
Barragan being conscious of committing a mistake may be based on the fact
that Ibn Barragan did not provide an initial date for reckoning the time interval
and thus would have consciously presented a time interval in a way that would
be understood as a date. This small gap between time interval and date may
help explain why Ibn 'Arabi, in the first discussion, holds that Ibn Barragan
obtained his alleged prediction through an unveiling and concealed it with the
resort to astronomy, i.e. celestial cycles. Whatever the case, Ibn Arabi provides
an additional way of computing the prediction of the capture of Jerusalem in
AH 583 from the initial verses of sura al-Rüm based on the value of the word
'some' {bid') and the numerical value of the letters 'Alifläm mlm'.
Ibn Arabl's terminology throughout his computation—Le. gazm kablr,
gazm saglraná uss—is the one commonly used in procedures involving zôÏAgia
and gafr. However, Ibn Arabî's method is not that of the zä'irga, since the sci-
ence of zä'irga involves a question and takes into account the celestial disposi-
tion of the heavenly bodies at the time of computation and the Arabic letters
making up the question. Whatever the case, as pointed out by Ibn Arabi's most
outstanding disciple, Sadr al-Din al-QünawI (d. 673/1274), the procedures of
30 Ibn 'Arabî, al-Futühät at-Makkiyya, Cairo, Dâr al-kitäb al-'arabiyya l-kubrâ, 1329/1911, I,
p. 60.
31 Ibid., IV, p. 220.
ARABICA 61 2014 252-286

secret sciences {'ulüm sirriyya), such as zä'irga and gafr, must be veiled, since
an open exposition will introduce imbalance and a cleft (halal) in the other-
wise orderly disposition of wisdom {hikma).^^ Accordingly, Ibn 'Arab! does not
explain the rational behind his method and thus this exposition will only
be tentative.
Ibn 'Arab! first holds that the value of the word 'some' {bid') in Koran 30, 4,
which can range from three to nine, must be set to eight. Then he takes into
account the small {gazm saglr) and great value {gazm kabir) of the letters 'Alif
lam mim', which are shown in the following table.
Small value Great value

{gazm saglr) (gazm kablr)
alif 1 1
lam 3 30
mim 4 40 t
Total 8 71
The great value of a letter or gazm kabtr is its usual abgadvaXxie, while its small
value or gazm saglr is the normalized significand of its abgad value. For
instance, the abgad value or gazm kablr of letter rä' is 200, while its normalized
significand or gazm saglr is two.
Let us consider bid' as eight, gazm sagir as the total small value of 'Alif lam
mim' which is eight, and gazm kabir as the total great value of 'Alif lam mim'
which is 71. Ibn 'Arabl, in order to obtain the predicted year, undertakes the
following steps,
bid' + gazm saglr-i = 8 + 8 -1 = 15

bid' * gazm kablr = 8 * 71 = 568
15 + 568 = 583
where 583 is the year of the Muslim capture of Jerusalem by Saladin in the higrl
calendar.
The first time that Ibn 'Arabl considers this computation in Futühät is when
he tries to demonstrate that the inner reality {haqlqa) of the word 'some' {bid')
is eight, although in Arabic it can stand for any value ranging from three to
32 Sadr al-Din al-Qûnawî, at-Sagara l-nu'mäniyya, Beirut, Dar al-kutub al-'ilmiyya, 2004,
p. 29.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

270 BELLVER
nine. Ibn 'ArabI states so in order to equate the number of the isolated letters
in the Koran—seventy eight—to the number of the secrets of faith {asrär
al-lmän), since faith has seventy some [bid') parts or branches (su'ab).^^ And to
support his statement, Ibn 'ArabI provides the computation of the capture of
Jerusalem in 583 using the value of'some' {bid') as eight. In the second discus-
sion in Futühät, while considering the Presence of the Opening {hadrat al-fath)
linked to the name of God 'the Opener' {al-Fattäh), Ibn 'Arab! holds that the
value of 'some' {bid') is eight since the conquest of Mecca {fath Makka) took
place in the year AH 8.
The gazm kablr of a word is the sum of the usual abgad value of its letters,
28 in number. According to Ibn 'Arab!, the gazm kablr is linked to the celestial
sphere of the ecliptic {falak al-burüg) since it is divided in 28 lunar mansions
in agreement with the 28 different possible abgad values of the letters of the
Arabic alphabet {Le. nine units, nine tens, nine hundreds and one thousand).^**
According to Ibn 'Arabî, the division of the celestial sphere of the ecliptic in
28 mansions follows the pattern of the 28 Arabic letters, rather than the
contra ry.35
The gazm saglr of a word is the sum of the normalized significand of the
abgad value of its letters, which can range from one to nine. Ibn 'ArabI points
out that the gazm saglr is linked to the spheres of the shining heavenly bodies
{al-afläk al-daräri) since they were considered to be nine in number, although
Ibn 'Arab! holds them to be seven—Le. the seven planets of Ptolemaic
cosmology—throughout his book. According to 'Abd al-Báqí Miftáh, the gazm
saglr refers to the human being in that he is a synthesis in the Presence of the
Essence, while the gazm kablr refers to the universe in that it is an analytic
disclosure in the Presences of the Attributes, Names and Actions.^^
Ibn 'Arabi relates the 1 subtracted from the sum of the value of bid' and the
gazm saglr oï Alifläm mlm to the concept of base {uss). This term is frequently
used in the sciences of zä'irga and gafr related to celestial bodies^^ and
and with different values.
33 See Muslim b. al-Hag¡gag, Sahlh Muslim, ed. al-Karmî, Riyadh, Bayt al-afkâr al-dawliyya,
1998, p. 48 (no. 57).
34 Ibn 'ArabI, al-Futühät al-Makkiyya, I, p. 80.
35 /6iíí,II,p.44O.
36 Ibn 'Arab!, al-Futühät al-Makkiyya, I, p. 80 and 'Abd al-Bäqi Miftäh, al-Mafätlh al-wugü-
diyya wa-l-qur'äniyya li-kitäb Fusüs al-hikam U-Bn 'ArabI, Beirut, Dar al-Buräq, 2004, p. 36.
37 See Hasan al-Ah\äti, RisälaßQawä'idat-gaßwa-'ilmat-falakwa-l-zayärigwa-'ilmal-hurüf
edited after 'Utmàn al-'Umri 1-Hanafi, al-Kawäkib al-durrtyyaß l-usül al-§aßiyya, Beirut,
Dar al-mahagga 1-baydâ', 2002, p. 116-118.
38 Ahmad al-Bünl, ¿ams aL-ma'ärif al-kubrä, Beirut, Dar al-mahagga l-baydä', 2001, p. 441.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

THE PREDICTION OF THE CAPTURE OF JERUSALEM 27I
From a symbolic point of view, Sadr al-DIn al-Qünawí identifies the base
{al-uss al-'azlm), that is the major or immense base, with the dot {nuqta),
which he describes as the center of the sphere moving all existents, including
the spheres of the seven celestial bodies, the twelve houses and the twenty
eight mansions.39
Ibn 'Arab!, in his second account, states that the reason behind subtracting
one is that "the base {uss) demands it in order to grant the correctness of the
[resulting] number in the rule {asl) of multiplication [using] the Rümi [method
of] computation, since the conquest was over the Rum in Jerusalem".'^" This is
seemingly a reference to computations made with Rüml ciphers,'*' which were
in use in al-Andalus and the Maghrib between the 12th and 19th centuries, with
administrative, commercial and notarial purposes, and particularly in the
Sultan's chancellery. Rumï ciphers, later called zimäml or Fäsl ciphers, make up
a decimal non-positional system of 27 symbols sharing an ultimate Greek
origin. Andalusi and Maghribi mathematicians, such as Ibn al-Bannä' and
al-Qalassädi, dedicated chapters in their treaties to computations with Rümi
figures which were explained by means of the ûéân ciphers,*^ a decimal posi-
tional system similar to the one currently in use. One of such methods is the
multiplication with bases {darb bi-l-usus), to which Ibn 'Arab! is most probably
referring.'^^
The method of multiplication with bases is the one currently taught in
schools throughout the world in which the term base {uss) indicates the place-
value in the operation. For instance, base 1 refers to the place-value of units;
base 2 refers to tens; base 3 refers to hundreds; and so forth. In order to illus-
trate this method of computation, let us consider numbers A and B where A is
An..A¡..A2A, and B is Bp,.. B¡.. B^B, and the index indicates the cipher in the place
value of 10'-'—that is A = Z¡A,o'-' and B = E¡B|ioJ-'. For Instance, for the num-
ber A.ÂÂ, = 321, A.^ = 3, A^ = 2 and A, = ,. For easiness, I will limit m and n to 3.
Graphically, the method described by al-Qalasädi is as follows:
39 Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi, at-Saâra t-nu'mäniyya, p. 23.

40 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futuhät at-McJ(kiyya, IV, p. 220.
41 On Rûmi ciphers, see Rosa Comes, "Arabic, Rümi, Coptic, or merely Greek Alphanumerical
Notation? The Case of a Mozarabic 10th Century Andalusi Manuscript", Suhayt, 3 (2002-
2003), p. 157-185.
42 Ibid, p. 167.
43 On this method, see al-Qalasâdï, Kitäb at-Qatasädlß 'ibn at-hisäb, ed. Muhammad b. §älil)
al-Yasganl, Algeria, 1908, p. 10-11.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

272 BELLVER
Uss 5 4 3 2 1
Number A A, A. A,
X
Number B B:, B. B,
A,xB A.xB,, AiXB^ A,xB,
A,xB A2XB3 A,xB, A^xB,
A.,xB A3XB3 AjxB^ A.^xB,
AxB ICol, IC0I4 SCol.^ ICol, ICol,
Al-QalasadI points out tbat tbe base {uss) or place value of every partial
product—for instance Aj x Aj—is tbe sum of tbe bases of tbe cipbers in tbe
partial product minus one. Tbat is, i +j - 1. For instance, tbe partial product
A.j X B., must be placed under uss 3 + 3 - 1 = 5. Tberefore, in order to calculate
tbe new base for every partial product, one must be subtracted from tbe sum
of tbe initial bases. And tbis is, I believe, wbat Ibn 'Arab! is referring to wben be
subtracts one "since tbe base demands it in order to grant tbe correctness of
tbe [resulting] number".
Ibn 'Arabï provides anotber reference to tbis subtraction in multiplications
in a poem found in tbe cbapter devoted to tbe state of illness {häl al-'illa) in
Futühät, wbicb I translate next. Tbe poem, wbicb meditates botb meanings of
'ilia, i.e. 'illness' and 'cause', is as follows,'*'*
Jt-
Li
My tumor*^ is tbe incurable disease {da'),

since it calls my attention to my soul in every state
44 Ibn "Arabi, al-Futühät al-Makkiyya, II, p. 490.

45 Here, Ibn 'Arab! is making a pun betweenyûrfô', tumor, andada', ransom, sacrifice, both
written in the same way, since a tumor exemplifies the concept of illness {'ilia), while a
ransom or sacrifice is the cause {'ilia) of awakening the soul to God. Prior to this poem,
Ibn 'Arab! discusses illness ( 'ilia) as a major cause ( 'ilia) of awakening to God.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

So my cause-illness {'ilia) is not different from me, nor is it me

and I do not have a specific difference, nor genus'*^
I am neither in knowledge ( 'ilm) [of my essence?], although I know {a'rißi)
who I am nor I am ignorant of my essence {dät) nor in uncertainty
I am neither the one who grasps the spiritual meanings, nor I am different
from him, but I am like tbe base {uss) in the subtraction {tarh) of
the product {darb).
Thus, the base {uss) is equivalent and shares the attributes of the 'Third thing'
{al-say' al-tälit), according to Ibn 'Arabl's ontology described in Insä' al-
dawä'ir.'*'' The Third thing is not existent, nor non-existent; it is not eternal, nor
non-eternal;'*^ it shares the attributes of tbe divine {haqq) with the divine, and
of the universe {'älam) with the universe, and thus it is botb divine and cre-
ated. It is the reality of realities {haqlqat al-haqä'iq), the truth by means of
which the creation is created {al-haqq al-mahlüq bi-hi l-halq) or the universal
reality {al-haqlqat al-kulliyya).'*^
This is, in short, Ibn Arabî's description of bis metbod for predicting
Saladin's capture of Jerusalem based on the science of letters.
Conclusion
The accurate prediction of the Muslim capture of Jerusalem in 583/1187, found

in Ibn Barragän's Koranic commentary by Ibn al-ZakI, came to be well-known
after it was fulfilled. However, it is doubtful tbat tbe actual prediction for ragab
583/October 1187 as described by Ibn al-Zaki may be credited to Ibn Barragan,
as tbere is no reference to the month of ragab in the extant text and it is well-
attested that Ibn al-ZakI found it as such in the margin of the text written in a
hand different to that of the body-text. Nevertheless, Ibn Barragan laid the
theoretical foundation and made some computations from which such predic-
tion could be easily drawn. Therefore, the actual prediction for ragab may be a
46 Not having a genus, nor a differentia means that the one speaking has no definition
{hadd) and no essence {mähiyya), and thus is identified with infinite existence {wugüd )
or God.
47 The first degree {martaba) or thing is existence {wugüd) in itself or God, while the second
one is the created existent {mawgüd) by God.
48 See Ibn 'Arab!, La production des cercles, tr. Paul Fenton and Maurice Glotón, Paris, L'Éclat,
1996, p. 16-18.
49 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futühät al-Makkiyya, I, p. 119.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

274 BELLVER
later addition by an unknown author or may be authored by Ibn Barragan and

dropped from the extant text, but since Ibn Barragan laid the foundations on
which it is based, later bibliography justly credited it to him.
Be it as it may, Ibn Barragän's approach is not based on astrology, or at least
on our current view of what astrology is. Instead, Ibn Barragan based his specu-
lations on celestial cycles the period of which is drawn from the Koran. Thus,
this prediction is based on Ibn Barragän's hermeneutical approach to the
Sacred Text within a cosmology which he considers to be consistent with the
Koran and hadlt, when not directly drawn from these sources.
As to Ibn 'Arabl, he points out that there is an error in the prediction cre-
dited to Ibn Barragan. Such error may be taking a time interval for a date.
Therefore, the time interval should begin with the Prophet's emigration, but
since the higra begins in year l, the time interval of 583 years and four months
would be fulfilled on ragab AH 584. Accordingly, this may help explain why Ibn
'Arab! in one instance states that Ibn Barragan resorted to the science of
spheres {'Um at-falak)—what should be understood as the science of cycles—
in order to conceal his actual procedure; while in the second instance he
pointed out that Ibn Barragan committed a mistake, although he also stated
that the issue was close to the correct one. In turn, Ibn 'Arabl provides his own
method based on the Science of letters. In any case, both methods are ulti-
mately based on their hermeneutics of the Sacred Text.
Translation of Ibn Barragän's commentary on the initial verses
In the Name of God, the All-Merciful, the Most-Merciful,

[Commentary on] His Word, "The Romans have been defeated {gulibat), in
the nearer land, and they, after the victory [over] them {ba'da galabihim), will
be victorious {sa-yaglibüna) in some years {ßbid'i sinln)" (Kor 30, 2-4).
On the meaning of these verses:
50 This translation is based on al-'Adlùnï's edition of the second half of Tafsir Ibn Barragán
in Ibn Barracan, Tanbih at-afhäm itä tadabbur at-kitäb al-haklm wa-t-ta'arruf 'ata l-äyät
wa-t-naba'at-'azlm, ed, Muhammad al-'Adlûnl, Casablanca, Dar al-taqäfa, 2011,1, p. 394-7
based on MS Bayerische Staatsbibliothek BSB-Hss Cod. Arab. 83, 86b-87b (henceforth
referred to as MS B.), which has been collated with MSS Reisulkuttab 31, 95b-97b (hence-
forth referred to as MS R.) and Sehid Ali Pasa 73, 32ob-322a (henceforth referred to as
MS S.).
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

The reading according to [the consensus of] the community considers that
[in g_Lbat] a vowel damma (u) follows the letter gayn and a vowel kasra
(i) follows the letter lam [resulting in the passive voice 'have been defeated'
{gulibat)]. However 'Ah and Ibn 'Umar—may God be satisfied with them—
read it with a vowel fatha (a) following the letters gayn and lam [resulting in
the active voice 'were victorious' {galabat)]. In addition Ibn 'Umar read 'the
victory [over] them' {galabihim) with a quiescent vowel {iskän) following the
letter lam [resulting in galbihim instead of galabihim],^^ although it has been
reported as well that he vocalized it with/ai/za (a) in agreement with the rea-
ding of the community [and hence galabihim. In any case,] whoever reads
"have been defeated {gulibat)", reads "and they, after the victory [over] them,
will be victorious {sa-yaglibüna)" with a vowelfatha (a) following the letteryä'
[in sa-yaglibüna]. And whoever reads "were victorious" {galabat) [instead of
gulibat] with a vowel fatha (a) following the letter gayn, reads as well "will be
defeated" {sa-yuglabüna) [instead of sa-yaglibüna] with a vowel damma (u)
following the letteryä' [in sa-yuglabüna and hence obtaining "and they, after
their victory, will be defeated"].
The wisdom {hikmat) of God—honored be His remembrance—regarding
the cyclical spheres causing the determination of events {dawä'ir al-taqdlr) is
that the last wisdoms {hikam)^^ match back the first ones and^^ that, from the
cyclical spheres, they be determined and extended in accordance with His will
[sent down] in them and through them.
When God—honored may He be—let us know that the Rum were defeated
in the nearer land—Le. in Greater Syria {balad al-Säm)—, He gave us news of
what was to happen—but God knows best. This is so according to the reading
'were defeated' {gulibat) with a vowel damma (u) following the letter gayn and
51 Galab means 'victory' while galb is the infinitive form of galaba meaning 'defeating', 'over-
coming'. See Lane, An Arabic-English Lexicon, London, Williams and Norgate, 1877, VI,
p. 2279. Al-'Adlünl reads gulbihim instead of galbihim following the vocalization found in
the base manuscript (see MS B. 86b). Gulb is a plural form of gälib meaning thick-necked.
In tafslr literature, the alternative vocalization of galab is galb rather than gutb. See,
for instance, al-öawz!, Zäd al-maslrß 'dm al-tafslr, Beirut, al-Maktab al-islämi, 1984, VI,
p. 288.
52 Vocalized as such in MS B. and edition. The word 'wisdoms' {hikam) here and throughout
the text refers to Koranic verses and Prophetic dicta providing data about present or
future events.
53 I follow MSS R. 95b and S. 320b. The conjunction wa- is dropped from MS B. and edition.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

276 BELLVER
a vowel kasra (i) following the letter läm.^ In addition. He was also addressing
to the Messenger of God—peace be upon him—and the believers good tidings
{biSära) about what will happen.
This is akin to [his saying,] 'When the Messenger of God—God's hlessings
and peace be upon him—after waking up one night said, "There is no god but
God. Woe to the Arabs for the evil harm that is approaching. Today, a hreach
like this has been opened in Gog and Magog's containment waU {radm)." And
he showed a measurement with his thumb and his forefinger.'^^ These were
tidings from God—exalted may He be—to him about what was to happen,
and it became manifested after the year AH 200, at the beginning of the
Abbasid Empire, when they employed Khorasani, Turkish and Daylaml peo-
ples and the nations {agnäs)^^ settled {qätina)^'' therein. As to the barrier
{sadd)^^ itself, [the breakage] is not completed {yatimmu)^^ until the coming
of the promise. This is the reason why he did not actually mention the mea-
surement of the opening in this containment wall {radm),^° albeit he referred
to it in an open [undetermined] way, since the employment [of peoples other
than the Arabs] was open to some extend depending on whether the Arabs
will turn away [in the fight for God's sake] or not. God mentioned them when
He said—may His Word he honored—,^' "And if you turn away. He will replace
you for some other people, and they will not be the likes of you" (Kor 47,38). So
the Messenger of God—peace be upon him—said, "Woe to the Arahs for the
evil harm that is approaching" in order to warn them about turning away [from
the path of God] and the transfer {tasylr)^^ [thereof] of ruling authority and of
striving in the path of God {gihäd) to peoples other than them. He also said
that in order to let us know the time that such determination took place, since
it precedes its coming into being in creation. It was determined that night as [it
54 In this paragraph, Ibn Barracan tries to support that the Koranic statement, despite being
in past tense {mädl, Le. perfective), was not yet fulfilled during the Prophet's lifetime.
He provides an example drawn from hadlt literature in which the Prophet refers in past
tense to events not yet fully actualized during his lifetime. This is so, since events may
have taken place in the cyclical spheres, and thus may be referred to in past tense,
although they may have not been ftilfilled in the realm of manifestation.
55 Al-Buhärl, Sahïh, no. 6631.
56 I follow MS R. Al-'Adlûnî gives ahbäs 'Abyssinians', 'black tribes', although MS B. is
undotted.
57 MSS R. and S. give qätlba 'without exception'.
58 I follow MSS S. and R. Edition gives slrr.
59 I follow MS R.
60 I follow MS S. Both MSS B. and R. give Rum 'Byzantines' or rawm 'desire'.
61 Doxology according to MSS R. and S.
62 I follow MS R. 96a.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

is clear] from bis words "bas been opened tonigbt".''^ But God knows best wbat
He sends down.
In like manner, God's words—bonored be His remembrance—"tbe Rum
bave been defeated" are news {ihbär) and good tidings {bisara) from Him
regarding tbe determination tbat took place prior {al-mutaqaddim)^ to its
manifestation in tbe realm of creation. Tbis bappened during tbe time of
'Umar b. al-Hattab—may God be satisfied witb bim—wben be defeated tbem
in Greater Syria and captured Jerusalem from tbeir bands. [God also] said, "in
some {bid') years". Tbe [possible values] of tbe word 'some' can range from
tbree to nine. Tbis sura was sent down in Mecca,''^ so [tbe capture ofJerusalem]
took place in tbe meanwbile of some {bid') [Le. tbree to nine] seven-year peri-
ods {asäbr, sg. usbü'); tbat is from tbe end {ra's) of tbe twentietb year to tbe
twenty eigbtb year [counting from tbe time of its revelation in Mecca and,
bence, in tbe meanwbile of tbree to four seven-year periods].''^ After tbat, tbe
conquest continued to expand and to extend [to tbe neigbboring reigns] until
a limit immediately before [tbe time] of tbe determination {taqdir). Tben
[God]—exalted be tbe One wbo speaks—said, "and tbey"—Le. tbe Rum—
"after tbeir victory {galabihim),^'' will be defeated {sa-yuglabüna)''^"—tbat is.
63 In fact, the word appearing in the aforementioned hadtt is 'today' and not 'tonight',
although the opening takes place during the night.
64 I follow MSS S. and R. Edition gives al-muqaddir.
65 The revelation of this verse is usually dated in the year AH -7.
66 Ibn Barragan understands that "in some years" complements "the Rum have been
defeated", so it can be rendered as "the Rum have been defeated—and they, after the vic-
tory [over] them, will be victorious—in some years". So, despite the fact that 'have been
defeated' is in past tense—actually perfective—its fulfillment will take place "in some
years". Thus the time interval is defined by the time elapsed between the revelation of
these verses and the victory over the Rum during 'Umar's (d. 23/644) caliphate. Since the
revelation of these verses was some seven years before the higra, while the conquest of
the Sam began roughly after the ridda wars during the caliphate of Abu Bakr with the
expedition northwards of'Amrb. al-'Äs (13/634) and longed until the conquests of Cesárea
(19/640), Ascalon (23/644) and Tripoli (24/645), Ibn Barragán gives a time span of three to
four seven-year periods; ie. 21 to 28 years beginning with the revelation of these verses. So
he considers the conquest to take place from 14/635 to 21/642.
67 The literal translation of galabihim is 'their victory', that is 'the victory of the Rum'.
However common interpretations and translations understand it to be 'the victory over
them', that is 'the victory over the Rum' or 'their defeat', which is usually understood to be
the one previously referred to in "The Rum have been defeated {gulibat)". Ibn Barragan
understands it literally, and hence not referring to their previous defeat involved in guti-
bat. I draw this conclusion from Ibn Barragän's further clarifications on this point.
68 This is not the accepted standard vocalization of this word as it appears in the Koran. The
standard vocalization is 'will be victorious' {sa-yaglibüna). I consider that to be Ibn
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

278 BELLVER
they were initially defeated {gulibü); then they are victorious

and, after their victory {galabihim), they will be defeated {sa-yuglabüna)""^
once more. In other words, when they were defeated {gulibü), they [later] were
victorious {yaglibünay^ and then are to be defeated (yuglabüna).''^
So through the wisdoms [giving information] about the cyclical spheres
causing the determination of events {hikam dawä'ir al-taqdlr),''^ He let us know
{ahbaraf* that they have two victories and we have two victories,^^ with the
exception of the first victory [which was ours by means of the Companions—
may God be satisfied with them and with us.™ So the first victory]''^ from them
over us''^ was in that land. And in return, there is the victory''^ of the
Barracan's vocalization of this word based on what Ibn Barragan points out next, albeit in
all three MSS this word is not vocalized.
69 Ibn Barragan draws this conclusion from the literal interpretation of galabihim, that is
'their victory'.
70 According to the vocalization in MS S.
71 According to the vocalization in MS S.
72 According to the vocalization in MS §.
73 I follow MSS §. and R. The edition, following B. gives, hikam dawä'ir hikam al-taqdlr.
74 I follow MSS S. and R. Edition, ahhara.
75 Both Muslim victories can be clearly drawn from what Ibn Barragán stated previously, but
only one Christian victory can be. Nonetheless, later in his discussion he addresses ano-
ther vocalization of these Koranic verses, from which two Christian victories can be
drawn.
76 Here, first—as in 'first victory'—, may not be taken in the temporal sense. He is probably
referring to that mentioned infirstplace at the beginning of the verse, which Ibn Barragan
considers to be linked with the victory over the Byzantines during the caliphate of 'Umar.
This first victory stands in a group apart as derived from guUbat. This may be so as,
otherwise, it may contradict the first Muslim victory in the temporal sense mentioned
later and which seems to be linked to the battle of Tabük.
77 The text in brackets is missing in MS B. and thus in the edition. MSS S. and R. add after
78 The author is most probably referring to the battle of Mu'ta—the first important battle
between Muslim forces and the Arab tribes allied to the Byzantines—which took place
during the month of gumädä l-ülä, 8/late August to late September 629 and ended up in
the defeat of the Muslim forces. He may be referring to that battle since between this
defeat and their later victory—seemingly that of Tabük—elapses only one year, and it is
said that they did not reach the Syrian—that is the Byzantine—border.
79 I follow MSS S. and R. and read, wa-fi t-muqdbala la-galabat al-sahäba instead of li-ga-
labat al-sahäba. MS B. and edition, /icyo t-muqäbala U-galabat al-sahäba.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

Companions^° in forty nine or fifty weeks [after the former defeat];^' that is
seven sevens by themselves;^^ and within the range of seven by nine.
However this first victory did not reach the Syrian border. After that, the
Muslims carried out an attack and they seized from [Rum's] hands what [the
Rum] had taken, so [the Rum] turned away to positions in the land of
Armenia.^^ Later on, the [Rum] regained the supremacy by means of a second
victory in the year AH 489. So they completely conquered the land of Syria and
Jerusalem.*"* This happened by the end of the sixth year, considering a year to
be made up of one thousand months—that is Arab's [lunar] months—in con-
firmation of His word "in some years" where the sixth day [¿e. the sixth cycle
where each cycle is made up of one thousand lunar months] ends up after 500
years.*^ Then the seventh year longs until the completion of 583 years^^ plus a
third of a year;^'' and so forth.**^ We are now in the year AH 522.
Since the alternative reading provides additional indications—as for all the
learned {'ulamä') [this second reading] is tantamount to another Koranic
80 Ibn Barragan seems to be considering the battle of Tabuk as he mentions that the Syrian
border was not reached and was shortly after what seems to be a reference to Mu'ta, This
battle took place during the month of ragab 9/October-November 630 and ended up in a
victory of the Muslim forces,
81 Even though the difference between these two battles is of 14 lunar months, Ibn Barragán
is roughly considering it to be of one lunar year as he is most likely taking into account
only the years in which both battles took place,
82 Ibn Barragan is approximating the time difference between both battles, which he consi-
ders initially to be of one lunar year, to 49 or 50 weeks. One lunar year—that is 354 days—
is made up of 50 weeks and 4 days. Therefore, he is approximating the one year difference
to the somehow crystalline time span of 7 x 7 weeks, or 7 x 7 x 7 days. So in order tofitthe
Koranic wording of 'some years' (bid'sinln), he is considering 7 to be the value of 'some'
[bid'), while the word 'year' (sana, pi, oh. sinln) stands for the period of revolution (hawt)
of one celestial sphere causing the determination of events (dâ'irat al-taqdlr). In this
sense, he is considering that the year period of this sphere is of seven weeks or 49 days,
83 The author is probably making reference to the battle of Yarmük which took place some
time around ragab 15 / August 636 during the rule of the second caliph, 'Umar b. al-Hattäb,
84 In fact, the crusaders captured Jerusalem on sa'bàn 23, 492/July 15, 1099 and not in
489/1096, There are no major military clashes in 489/1096 since, as to the First Crusade,
these began in 490/1097, So Ibn Barragán seems to be committing a mistake,
85 A cycle of 1000 lunar months amounts to 83 lunar years and 4 lunar months. Six of such
cycles made up of 1000 months amount to 500 lunar years,
86 I follow MSS S, and R, while MSB, and edition give, fiams mi'a wa-talat wa-mi'atayn sana.
87 Seven cycles made up of 1000 lunar months amount to 583 lunar years and 4 lunar mon-
ths, Jerusalem capitulated to Saladin's forces on ragab 27,583/October 2,1187,
88 'And so forth' in MSS §. and R.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

28o BELLVER
verse, for both readings are equal regarding the obligation to obtain from them
indications, recite them^^ and confirm them both—, His word "The Rum have
been victorious {galabat)^° in the nearer land, and they, after their victory
{galabihim), will be defeated {sa-yuglabüna)"^^—vocalizing it with a vowel
fatha (a) following the letters gayn and lam [in 'have been victorious'
{galabat)]—gives us [additional] information from Him regarding their
victory over the Muslims which happened in [the beginning of] the forty nine
weeks [elapsed between their first victory and later defeat]. After that. He over-
looked mentioning [the Muslims'] superiority over them immediately after
that [first victory over the Muslims]^^—although it has been previously men-
tioned—as this is known by the incumbent wisdoms {hikam) [giving informa-
tion] about the cyclical spheres causing the determination of events. Then he
said, "And they, after their victory {galabihim)",—that is their victory over the
Muslims—"will be defeated {sa-yuglabüna)". In other words, the cyclical
sphere brings them back to a point similar to the point they were [previously].
So they were victorious (galabü)^^ a second time which corresponds to that of
year [four hundred and] eighty nine (AH [4]89) [linked to galabihim].^'* And
remains the generous promise that they [Le. the Rum] "will be defeated
{sa-yuglabüna)". This victory over them will be the third of three victories, the
first of which was the Companions' victory over them. [In return,] their present
day victory [Le. the Rum's present day victory over the Muslims] was second
to their victory which did not reach like this one. In addition, they were in
the sixth state {häl) when the Koran was sent down while the Messenger of
God—peace be upon him—was in Mecca. So the One who makes evolve
(yudabbiru)^^ the cyclical spheres causing the determination of the succession
of night and day, the succession of times and^^ the reception in creation of
89 Addition in MSS S. and R.

90 Vocalized as such in MS B. and edition.
91 The vocalization of this non-standard reading is derived from what the author states next
92 That is the first Muslm victory between two different Muslim defeats referred to by "the
Rum have been victorious {gaiabat)" and by "after their victory {galabihim)".
93 I read galabü, while MS B. and edition vocalize it as guíibü 'were defeated'. Since the
author points out next that this victory took place in the year AH 89, while there is no
victory or defeat in AH 89,1 infer that the author is referring to the year AH 489 in which
he erroneously placed the Christian capture of Jerusalem during the First Crusade. So Ibn
Barragan is probably pointing out a Christian victory, and therefore it must be vocalized
as galabü.
94 This second victory is seemingly linked to galabihim in "and they, after their victory...".
95 I follow MSS S. and R., while MS B. and edition give tadabbur.
96 Wa- dropped in edition.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

changes in the states such as the transference of power, increase and decrease
can bestow to a few knowledge of that. What is obtained thereof is one of the
most useful benefits [to attain] certainty in the accomplishment of the time
limits,^^ the fulfiflment ofthe appointed times, the unavoidable manifestation
of tbe last day, the verification ofthe knowledge regarding the resurrection, the
promised rewards and menaces, and so forth.
So it is possible that His Word be read with a vowel kasra (i) following the
letter/am and a vowelfatha (a) following the letterjâ'^^ [what ends up in 'they
will be victorious' {sa-yaglibüna)] and therefore they wifl attain a
victory^^ in some years, as previously, considering some periods made up of
seven years; it is also possible to be read with a vowel damma (u) following the
letterja^'oo and a vowelfatha (a) following the letter lam—that is that they
will be defeated {sa-yuglabüna)—in some years. The Messenger of God—
God's blessings and peace be upon him—said, mentioning the Mahdi,
"He will overfill the earth with Justice and equity as it was [previously]
overfilled with oppression and injustice. He will live with you seven years"; or
yet in another version, "[He will live with you] nine years.""" This is an infor-
mation regarding our [final] victory over them that day, as it will be an atta-
cking time {karra) from us {minnäy°^ over them, while only a time {marray^^
without a returning attack {karra) from them [over us]'°'* throughout this
period, God willing. What has been mentioned previously is correct (sa/z¿A),'°^
praise be to God, the Lord of the worlds. Therefore, the determination involved
in the Word "The Rum have been victorious {galabat) in the nearer land, and
they, after their victory,"—that is the second'"^ [victory]—"will be defeated
97 MSS §. and R., iydd.

98 Bä' is found in MSS S. and R.
99 MS B. and edition, ¿ataba. MSS S. and R., 'atayhi.
100 Bä' is found in MSS S. and R.
101 Ibn Hanbal, Musnad at-Imäm Ahmad b. Hanbal, ed. Su'ayb al-Arna'üt and 'Adil Mursid,
Beirut, Mu'assasat al-risäla, 1995, XVII, p. 426, no. 11326.
102 I follow MSS S. and R., while edition gives naba' and MS B. is undotted.
103 I follow MSS S. and R., while MS B. and edition giveßirra 'misfortune'.
104 Here Ibn Barragán is making a pun by ascribing l<arra to the Muslims and marra to the
Rum. Both tiarra and marra mean 'a time' as in 'once', 'twice', 'three times', etc. However
tiarra means as well 'a returning attack', a meaning that is not to be found in marra. Hence
he is ascribing a final victory to the Muslims with no ultimate reaction from the Rum.
105 This statement can refer to the aforementioned hadit as being trustful, or to the overall
discussion.
106 1 follow MSS §. and R., while MS B. and edition give al-tälita 'third'. Ibn Barragan is probably
referring to gatabihim as a second Christian victory different to that of gatabat at-Rüm.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

282 BELLVER
{sa-yuglabün) in some years" gives us news of tbe Muslims' victory over

tbem [led] by tbe Imam of Justice—God be satisfied witb us and witb bim—.
So tbe news was given tbereby and God is tbe One wbo grants belp.
Next, follows His true Word—bonored and exalted may He be—•"'' "To God
belongs tbe command before and after; and tbat day tbe believers will rejoice
in God's victorious belp" (Kor 30, 4-5). He—bonored be His remembrance—
let us know of wbat is to befall tbis Community {umma) and tbe events tbat
it will face [witb tbe Rum. Tben He pointed out tbe proximity of tbe expira-
tion {inqiräd) because of tbe last events],'°^ tbat is tbe Muslims' victory over
tbem witb tbe Imam announced as good tidings; [sucb victory] is tbe fierce
battle referred to in His Word, "To God belongs tbe command before and after;
and tbat day tbe believers will rejoice in God's victorious belp". So [tbe last
events include] let alone al-Daggäl—may God curse bim—; tben tbe [sec-
ond coming of tbe] Word of God, His servant and His Messenger, Jesus son
of Mary—God's blessings and peace be upon bim—; tben tbe departure of
tbe virtuous; and tben tbe Hour. So to Him belong tbe command before prior
to tbe Koran's descent and tbe command after tbe fulfillment of tbese time
limits. To Him belonged tbe command before tbe creation was given existence
and to Him belongs tbe command after [its] expiration as [it is sbown] in His
Word, "Tbe command tbat day will belong to God" (Kor 82,19) and also "Tbe
sovereignty tbat day will be tbe tmtb/tbe rigbt {haqq) of tbe All-Merciful"
(Kor 25,26).
Tben follows His Word, "And tbat day tbe believers will rejoice in God's vic-
torious belp". Tbis verse indicates tbat tbe aforementioned [interpretation] is
tbe actual intention of tbe [Koranic] discourse and not wbat is suggested by
some commentators wbo consider it to refer to tbe Persians' victory over tbe
Rum or tbe Rum's victory over tbe Persians, even if it bappened tbis way. Tbe
intention [of tbese verses] was not to give news about tbem, nor would God—
bonored be His remembrance—give good tidings to tbe believers regarding
tbe Persians' victory over tbe Rum or tbe Rum's victory over tbe Persians, nor
would He send down His Glorious Book witb it, nor would He devote His
immense and migbty Speecb to evince sucb tbings since [in tbis interpreta-
tion] tbere are in no place admonitions, lessons and good tidings addressed to
tbe believers. In tbeir pretension to prove tbis interpretation—according to
wbat tbey affirm—, tbey bave argued tbat tbe believers sided tbe Rum [against
tbe Persians] since tbe Rum bad a revealed Book. However tbis argument dis-
107 Doxology dropped from MS B. and edition.

108 Text in brackets dropped from MSS S. and R. The expiration {inqiräd ) intends the expira-
tion of the Christian rule over Jerusalem because of the foretold Muslim victory.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

regards that God addressed His promise to His servants in His Word, "[And that
day the believers will rejoice in God's victorious help. He helps to victory whom
He wills—and He is the Glorious, the Most Merciful. This is] God's promise.
God does not fail to His promise, but most people know not" (Kor 30, 5-6)—
while the whole verse must be considered—. But the Rüm, after refusing
Muhammad's call [to Islam] {da'wa)—God's blessings and peace be upon
him—, cannot receive the particular mercy [addressed to the believers through
the name al-Rahlm] contained in His Word "And He is the Mighty Glorious
{al-'Azlz), the Most Merciful {al-Rahlm)", even if they gain power over others or
others gain power over them, since God's wisdom—honored be His remem-
brance—on tbis point is far-reaching and [He] entrusts power to "some wrong-
doers upon others for what they have acquired" (Kor 6, 129). The name of
Mighty Glory {'izza) always expresses the meaning of revenge, while the name
of Mercy {rahma) expresses His decree of mercy upon tbe believers. All these
arguments deny their aforementioned proof. Good tidings and mercy are only
addressed to believers, while menace, censure and rebuke in tbe [Koranic] dis-
course are addressed to non-believers. So do understand!
Ibn 'Arabi on Ibn Barragän's prediction of the muslim capture

of Jerusalem in 583/1187
Section in chapter II,

And I summed up all the [isolated] letters [appearing in the beginning of some
Koranic suras] and resulted in seventy eight letters in number. So eight is tbe
inner reality {haqlqa) of'some' {bid'). [Tbe Propbet]—peace be upon him—
said, "The faith {Imän) is seventy some[thing] {bid')"^^*^ and these letters are
seventy eight. So a servant does not complete the secrets of faith until he
knows the realities of these letters in their suras. If you say, "the value of'some'
is ignored as it can range from one to nine; so why do you restrict it to eight?"
If you wish, I can say that I got to it through the path of unveiling {kasj) which
is the path I travel and the pillar on which I base all my sciences; and if you
wish I can show you a glimpse of the field {bäb) of numbers.
Abu 1-Hakam 'Abd al-Saläm b. Barragan did not account [for bis prediction]
in his book in the way we are mentioning it here, since he referred it, God have
mercy upon him, using the science of astronomy {'ilm al-falak) as a covering
protection to his unveiling when he predicted the capture of Jerusalem to take
109 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futühät al-Makkiyya, 1, p. 59-60.

110 See Muslim b. al-Haggag, Saliih Muslim, p. 48 (no. 57).
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

284 BELLVER
place in AH 583. In the same way, if we want, we unveil, and if we want, we lay
the number as a veil.
So we say, the value of the word 'some' {bid') appearing at [the beginning of]
sura al-Rum is eight. Take the small value {al-gazm al-saglr) of letters 'Alif lam
mim' which is eight and add it to the numerical value of the word 'some' which
is eight as well, what results in sixteen. Then we drop off the one which corres-
ponds to the alif because of the base {uss) remaining fifteen which you must
hold [in memory] with you. Then go back to the operation by applying to
[these letters] the great sum—that is the great value {al-gazm al-kablr)—and
multiply the numerical value of 'some' which is eight by seventy one [which is
the great value {al-gazm al-kablr) oi'Allfläm mim']. Do consider all these to be
years, while the result of this product is 568. You must add to it fifteen which is
the number I ordered you to hold [in memory]. Then the result becomes 583
years which was the time when Jerusalem was captured as deduced from the
[Koranic] reading by which [the first verb is in active voice—that is] 'were
victorious' {galaba) with vowe\ fatha (a) following letters gayn and lam—and
[the second verb is in passive voice—that is] 'will be defeated' {sa-yuglabüna)
with vowel damma (u) following letter_y(z'and vowelfatha (a) following letter
lam [and hence reading the Koranic verses as "The Rum were victorious
{galaba) in the nearer land, and they, after their victory, will be defeated
{sa-yuglabüna) in some years"]. So the capture of the infidels' pilgrimage
places, that is the conquest of Jerusalem, took place in the year AH 583. We
have amazing secrets through unveiling regarding the science of numbers as to
what involves their nature and as to the divine realities concealed in them. If I
live long enough, I will devote a book to the knowledge {ma'rifa) of numbers,
God willing.
On the presence of the opening (fath) related to the name the Opener
(al-Fattäh)"i
The one who participates in this Presence is called servant of the Opener {'abd
al-Fattäh). This Presence has a corporeal form (sura), a spiritual meaning
{ma'nä) and an intermediary world {barzah). It has been only perfectly
acquired by Adam—peace be upon him—as he was given the knowledge of
the Names, and by Muhammad—God's blessings and peace be upon him—as
he was given the all-comprehensive words {gawämi' al-kallm). Beyond them
both, it has not been referred to us [whether there has been anybody else who
has perfectly acquired this Presence].
Ill Ibn 'Arabl, al-Futühät al-Mcd(kiyya, IV, p, 220,
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

From this Presence, [the Koranic verses] "When God's victorious help and
the opening victory {fath) come" (Kor no, l) and "We have opened to you a
clear opening victory" (Kor 48,1) were sent down. I was in the city of Fes the
year 59i[/ii95] while the Almohads' armies were crossing to al-Andalus to
combat the enemy in a time of difficulty for Islam, when I found one of the
men of God—no one purer than him to the eyes of God—who belonged to my
closer circle of intimates."^ He asked my opinion about this army whether it
will achieve an opening victory {fath) and obtain [God's] victorious help in
that year or not. So I asked him,—What do you have about that?—He
answered,—God mentioned and promised to His Prophet—God's blessings
and peace be upon him—this victory {fath) in this year as He gave good tidings
to His Prophet—God's blessings and peace be upon him—about that in His
Book, that which He revealed to him, in His Word—exalted may He be—,
"We have opened to you a clear opening victory" (Kor 48,1). The good tidings
are found in [the numerical value of the letters of] "a clear opening victory
{fathan mublnan)", yet the repeated alif^^^ must not be taken into account, as
it is an unbinding a/t/found when a pause of completion occurs at the end of
a Koranic verse."* So consider the additive value of the letters. I considered
this issue and found the victory {fath) to take place in the year AH 591."^ Then
I passed to al-Andalus until'"' God bestowed upon the Muslim army His victo-
rious help and God, through the Muslim army, conquered the Fortress of
112 This meeting happened during the prelude to the battle of Alarcos which took place on
July 18th, 1195 between the Almohads led by Abu Yüsuf Ya'qùb al-Mansûr and Castilian
forces led by King Alfonso VIII of Castile and ended up with the victory of the Muslim
forces. The Almohad army crossed to the Peninsula on June ist, 1195.
113 The letter alifoccurs twice indicating the nunnation of fath and mubln resulting infathan
mublnan. Only thefirstone is taken into account.
114 In the Koranic recitation, the pause of completion {wuqüf al-tamäm) occurs when the
end of a sentence takes place at the end of a Koranic verse. In this case, the recitation is
not bound to the following verse. If the last word of a Koranic verse is nunnated and
occurs in a pause of completion {wuqüf al-tamäm), the last alif is to be considered an alif
of unbinding {alifal-itläq) since it prevents the binding and the possibility of assimilation
{idgäm) with the following verse. In this situation, the vocal is uttered non-nunnated.
Hence, the alif of unbinding has no phonetic realization and its numerical value is
disregarded.
115 The numerical value of "a clear victory {fathan mublnan)" disregarding the last alif—and
hence fathan mubln—is 80 + 400 + 8 + 1 + 40 + 2 + 10 + 50 = 591 where^' (80), tä' (400),
hd' (8), alif{\), mlm (40), bd' {2),yä' (10) and nun (50).
116 I read ító an according to MS Türk-Íslam Eserleri Müzesi 1876, f. 49b, and not ilia an accor-
ding to Ibn 'ArabI, al-Futühät al-Makkiyya, IV, p. 220.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

286 BELLVER
Calatrava (Qal'at Rabäh), Alarcos, Caracuel (Karkawä)"'' and all the provinces
under the protection of these fortresses. I examined it thanks to the opening
{fath) of whom this is his attribute. We took 80 for letterâ', 400 for letter tä', 8
for letter hä', 1 for letter alif, 40 for letter mlm, 2 for letter bä', 10 for letterya' and
50 for letter nun, in addition to the letter alif, and the sum was 591 which are
the years elapsed from the [Prophet's] Emigration {higra) to this year. This
[knowledge] is drawn from divine openings {futüh) to this person.
The same can be said of the computation we indicated regarding the con-
quest of Jerusalem; that is the addition of the multiplication of "Alifläm mlm.
The Rum have been defeated" by the [value of] 'some' {bid') complementing
'years' {sinln) which is mentioned using the small and great additive values.
This operation results in the [year of the] conquest of Jerusalem. We men-
tioned that previously in this book in the chapter on letters. We considered
the value of 'some' {bid') to be eight as the conquest of Mecca was in the
year [AH] 8. After that we took the additive small value of 'Alifläm man'—
which is eight—and we subtracted one because the base {uss) demands it in
order to grant the correctness of the [resulting] number in the rule {asl) of
multiplication [using] the Rümi [method of] computation, since the conquest
was over the Rum in Jerusalem. So we added eightfrom'some' {bid') to the sum
of 'Alifläm mlm' after subtracting one because of the basis. This amounted to
fifteen. After that, we went back to the great addition so we multiplied seventy
one hy eight and considered the total amount as years, since He said, "in some
years". The amount was 568. So we added to it fifteen drawn from the small
addition and the sum amounted to 583; that is the year in which Jerusalem
was conquered. This knowledge comes out from this Presence. However, 'Abd
al-Saläm Abu 1-Hakam b. Barragan did not draw it from this [Presence] since
a mistake (galat) befell him, which went unnoticed by the people. We have
clarified that to some of our companions when we arrived with his book. It was
clear to him that he committed a mistake, although he got close to the [cor-
rect] issue. The reason of [his mistake] was that he introduced another science
distorting [the procedure]. All of this is drawn from the corporeal form (sura)
of the Opening [Presence], not from its spiritual meaning {ma'nä), nor from
the middle {wasat) whichjoins both sides.
117 See al-Idrïsî, Description de t'Afrique et de l'Espagne, eds R. Dozy and M.J. de Goeje, Leiden,
Brill, 1866, p. 226.
ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

Copyright of Arabica is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

Ibn Barrajan and Ibn Arabi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ibn Barrajan and Ibn Arabi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arabica

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

Ibn Barragan and Ibn 'Arabi on tbe Prediction of

I KONINKLIJKE BRILL NV, LEIDEN, 2014 | DOI 10.1163/15700585-12341294

Tbe prediction of the Muslim capture of Jerusalem credited to Ibn Barragan

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

of Ibn Barracan's Koranic commentary.^ Nevertheless, Ibn Barragan provides

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

Commentary on the most beautiful Names of God edited by Purificación de la

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

Saladín and the Fulfillment of Ibn Barracan's Prediction

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

Your capture of Aleppo in safar

[Mubyï 1-Dïn b. al-Zakî] enjoyed a bigb status and a solid position to

Your capture of Aleppo in safar

Tbe prediction of tbe capture of Jerusalem credited to Ibn Barragan was, to my

14 See Ibn Hallikän, Wafayät al-a'yän, fV, p. 229-230 (no. 594).

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

The Rational Behind the Prediction Credited to Ibn Barragan

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

These verses call attention to three different significant situations in Ibn

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

21 Ibn Barragán, Tanbth al-afhäm, II, p. 996.

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

27 See n. 10 and 14 supra.

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

awwal l/mid-September to mid-October 622 took place. Nevertbeless, since

Ibn 'ArabI and tbe Prediction of tbe Capture of Jerusalem

29 Translations of both texts are appended at the end.

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

in a likely reference to Ibn Barragän's doctrine of the dawä'ir al-taqdlr, the

ARABICA 61 2014 252-286

Small value Great value

bid' + gazm saglr-i = 8 + 8 -1 = 15

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

39 Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi, at-Sa^ara t-nu'mäniyya, p. 23.

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

A,xB A.xB,, AiXB^ A,xB,

A,xB A2XB3 A,xB, A^xB,

A.,xB A3XB3 AjxB^ A.^xB,

AxB ICol, IC0I4 SCol.^ ICol, ICol,

My tumor*^ is tbe incurable disease {da'),

44 Ibn "Arabi, al-Futühät al-Makkiyya, II, p. 490.

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

So my cause-illness {'ilia) is not different from me, nor is it me

The accurate prediction of the Muslim capture of Jerusalem in 583/1187, found

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

later addition by an unknown author or may be authored by Ibn Barragan and

Translation of Ibn Barragän's commentary on the initial verses

In the Name of God, the All-Merciful, the Most-Merciful,

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

they were initially defeated {gulibü); then they are victorious

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286

ARABICA 61 (2014) 252-286