|
Здравейте,
ето извадките от Фихриста на ал-Надим, където се говори за писмото на абасидския халиф ал-Мамун, син на Харун ал-Рашид, до владетеля на българите:
***************************
стр. 254 (III глава):
Al-Ma’mun
He was ‘Abd Allah ibn Harun ibn al-Mahdi ibn al-Manṣur ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn al-‘Abbas ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib, the greatest authority among the caliphs [5] for the law and theology. He [also] was as good as [6] his brother Muhammad ibn Zubaydah [al-Amin] in eloquence of literary style. We are too rich in famed traditions concerning him to go into detail when mentioning him. Among his books there were:
Answers to the Questions of the King of the Burghar [7] Addressed to Him [al-Ma’mun] about Islam and the Unity (Theology); his epistle, Proofs of the Virtues of the Caliphs, since the Time of the Prophet, May Allah Bless Him and Give Him Peace; his epistle, Signs of Prophethood. [8]
7. The Burghar were probably the Bulgarians; see Mas‘udi, II, 14; Yaqut, Geog., I, 568.
***************************
стр. 400 (V глава)
Al-Jahiz said:
When al-Ma’mun read my books about the imamate, he found them to be in accordance with what I had been ordered to undertake. When I went to him, after he had instructed al-Yazidi [106] to inspect them and to tell him about them, al-Ma’mun said to me, “A man whose intelligence we respect and who gives information accurately has submitted a report
400
to us about these books, with precise details about the workmanship and abundance of useful material. He said to us, [107] ‘The evaluation [of the books] might have been more favorable than what [actually] appears, but when I looked into them, I saw that what I found was even better than the evaluation. Then when I examined them carefully, the investigation disclosed even more than what had appeared [at first reading], just as what [actually] appeared amounted to more than the [preliminary] evaluation. For these books, moreover, there is no need for the author or for anyone else to be present in order to explain them, for the author has combined a study of the significant implications with a study of all of the rights [of the caliphate, expressed] in eloquent phraseology, with the easy manners of speech of the market place, of the kings, the populace, and special classes.’ ” [108]
Thus saith Muhammad ibn Ishaq [al-Nadim]: I suppose al-Jahiz elaborated this statement, glorifying himself and honoring his composition, for how could al-Ma’mun have spoken these words, praising the composition and commending the authorship?
He [al-Ma’mun] wrote to the king of the Burghar [109] a letter over one hundred pages in length, but although he did not seek anyone’s aid or quote any verse from the Book of Allah, may His name be exalted, or any word from any wise man preceding him, al-Jahiz cajoled his tongue into saying, “This letter we have regarded as being taken in a favorable way from a discourse of al-Jahiz.” In his [al-Jahiz’s] epistle to Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Malik he said: [110] ...
109. Almost certainly al-Ma’mun wrote this statement, which al-Jahiz, according to a satirical anecdote, claimed was taken from one of his own compositions. For the Burghar, see Yaqut, Geog., I, 568.
***************************
Има още едно споменаване на българите, в I глава за писмеността на различните народи, между секциите Remarks about the Negroes и Russia (стр. 36-37):
***************************
Remarks about the Turks and Those Related to Them
The Turks, the Bulgar, the Blagha’, the Burghaz, the Khazar, the Llan, and the types with small eyes and extreme blondness have
37
no script, except that the Bulgarians and the Tibetans write with Chinese and Manichaean, whereas the Khazar write Hebrew. [82]
My information about the Turks is what Abu al-Hasan Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ibn Ashnas related to me. He said:
Hamud Harar, the Turk, al-Makli from al-Turuniyah, [83] who was one of those who left his country because of haughtiness and rage, told me that the great Turkish king, if he desired to write to a lesser king, summoned his vizier and ordered the splitting of an arrow. Then the vizier traced on it characters understood by the Turkish nobility and indicating the meaning intended by the king and comprehended by the person to whom it was sent.
He supposed that this scant design represented many ideas and that it was used for truces and peace treaties, as well as at the times of their wars. He mentioned that they carefully guard an arrow inscribed in this way and fulfill their engagements for its sake. It is Allah who knows.
82. The Bulgar are Bulgarians. The Blagha’ were the Vlachs or Blakia, the Walachia of Rumania. Burghaz is a part of Bulgaria, and probably an old tribal name. The Khazar were on both sides of the Itil, or Volga. The Llan or ‘Allan were situated next to Armenia, near the Khazar. See “Vlachs,” Enc. Brit., XXVIII, 166-68; “Bulgaria” (Burghaz), IV, 768; “Khazars,” XV, 774. See also Yaqut, Geog., II, 436, for Khazar; IV, 343, for Llan; I, 817, for Tibet. See also Mas‘udi, Vol. II, Chap. 17, beginning p. 1.
***************************
За да не висят тези извадки така на сухо, без връзка с останалата част на Фихриста, сложих онлайн четири секции от него. Около 200 страници, една четвърт от целия al-Fihrist. -
|
Фихристът на ал-Надим
