A fragmentarily preserved commentary on the Thamara (B.1.1) by Abū l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad b. ʿAlī al-Iṣbahānī (or al-Iṣfahānī), about whom nothing is known. Judging from the surviving evidence, the commentary originally engaged with each verbum separately and was fairly extensive. It must postdate Abū Jaʿfar ibn al-Dāya’s commentary (composed after 913), as it is based on a version of the Thamara that originated in a particular manuscript of Abū Jaʿfar’s work (see below and C.3.1). Abū l-ʿAbbās’s commentary was circulating by 1036 at the latest, as it was quoted in the Maqāla fī sayr sahmay al-saʿāda wa-l-ghayb (see Haddad et al.), a treatise by al-Bīrūnī recorded in the catalogue of his works compiled in that year. In addition to this quote, Abū l-ʿAbbās’s text is known through Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī’s commentary on the Thamara (C.3.4), where it is referenced (ed. Zanjānī, pp. 3:1 and 75:17–18) as well as paraphrased and briefly discussed (ibid., pp. 4:16-20, 38:10–12, 42:14–16, and 52:11–14). Finally, a witness of al-Ṭūsī’s commentary, Istanbul, Nuruosmaniye, 2800, contains twenty-nine glosses ascribed to one Abū l-ʿAbbās; these were most likely excerpted from al-Iṣbahānī’s commentary (cf. Lemay). Alternative title: Sharḥ Kitāb al-Thamara.

Content: The text quoted by al-Bīrūnī was taken, as stated by al-Bīrūnī himself, from Abū l-ʿAbbās’s commentary on verbum 90, although the content of the passage relates to the Thamara’s verbum 88. Also, in his discussion of verbum 97, al-Ṭūsī states that it was designated as verbum 99 in the manuscripts of Abū Jaʿfar’s and Abū l-ʿAbbās’s commentaries available to him (ed. Zanjānī, p. 75). Hence, it seems that Abū l-ʿAbbās commented on the well-attested version of the Thamara with verbum numbers shifted by 2. This version with a total of 102 verba originated in a particular manuscript of Abū Jaʿfar’s commentary where the three parts of verbum 1 came to be considered as three independent verba; verbum 2 was consequently numbered as 4, and so on (see C.3.1).

Text: [Istanbul, Nuruosmaniye, 2800]

[Comm. on verbum 6] (f. 77r) قال أبو العبّاس علل جميعها أبخرة إمّا رطبة وإمّا يابسة فالرطبة هي الهالات والكرورات وقوس قزح وأشباهها المتحاملة الأبصار في أهوية غير كثيرة البعد عن الأرض واليابسة هي الصاعدة إلى مجاورة النار المحيط تحت فلك القمر بالهواء واشتعالها هناك على أشكال مختلفة سريعة التلاشئ والزوال وليست بشئ منها أدلّة الأكوان والحوادث لكنّها أيضًا حادثة من دلالات النجوم — فأمّا الكواكب اللذوات الذوائب وذوي الأذناب وذوي الحبّة التي يظهر (كذا) وتبقى زمانًا طويلًا وتدور بدوران الفلك وربّما سارت كسيران الكواكب السبعة. [Comm. on verbum 102] (f. 101r) قال أبو العبّاس النيازك فهي الشهب وإنّما سمّيت النيازك لطول شكلها عند سلوكها في الجوّ ولا خلاف بين الطبيعيّين والمنجّمين أنّ حدوثها من أبخرة يابسة صاعدة في الجوّ إلى مجاورة النار المحيطة تحت فلك القمر بالهواء — وشاهدناها ويدور بدوران بالفلك أدوار متساوية لأدوار الفلك على نظام وترتبيب ولمىه (؟) فليست طبيعته طبيعة الهشب (كذا) [[الى]] التي هي أبخرة مشتعلة مثلًا شبه في أسرع أزمنته.

Bibl.: GAS VIIFuat Sezgin, Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums. Vol. VII: Astrologie – Meteorologie und Verwandtes bis ca. 430 H., Leiden: Brill, 1979, p. 45 (no. 2b) and p. 167; Fuad I. Haddad, David Pingree and Edward S. Kennedy, ‘Al-Bīrūnī’s Treatise on Astrological Lots’, Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften 1 (1984), pp. 9–54, here pp. 30–33 and 48; Richard Lemay, Le Kitāb aṯ-Ṯamara (Liber fructus, Centiloquium) d’Abū Jaʿfar Aḥmad ibn Yūsuf [Ps.-Ptolémée], 1999 [unpublished], vol. I, p. 64 and vol. II, p. 20; Jalīl Akhawān Zanjānī, Šarḥ-e Samare-ye Baṭlamyus. Xwāje Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi (597-672 L.H.), Tehran: Āyene-ye Mirās, 1999, pp. 3:1, 4:16–20, 38:10–12, 42:14–16, 52:11–14, 75:17–18.

Ed.: The fragment quoted in al-Bīrūnī’s Maqāla fī sayr sahmay al-saʿāda wa-l-ghayb was edited and translated as part of this work by Haddad et al. The testimonia in al-Ṭūsī’s commentary on the Thamara were edited as part of this work by Zanjānī. The glosses in the Nuruosmaniye manuscript are unedited.