Gleanings from al-Maqrizi XI: Last Mosque of Fatimids

MS

The vizier al-Salih Tala’i built this mosque that now carries his name in 1160 A.D. The Fatimid dynasty was formally brought to a close a decade later in 1171, when Salah al-Din took power. The other Fatimid era mosques bear a descriptive title of some kind. Best known is al-Azhar (“the Flourishing”) and lesser known, but beautiful, is al-Aqmar (“the Moonlit”). The Mosque of al-Hakim was once known as “al-Anwar” (“the Lighted”). These earlier mosques were institutional mosques meant to amplify Cairo as the city of Fatimid glory. After 1171 as the Ayyubids and then the Mamluks came to power their mosques and madrasas would bear their own names (i.e. the Mosque of Sultan al-Zahir Baybars). This Mosque of al-Salih Tala’i would thus be the last in the stylistic line of Fatimid mosques, but first in a line of mosques that are explicit monuments for a single powerful ruler.

By the time al-Maqrizi took up his work on Cairo, the Fatimids were several centuries in the past. Al-Maqrizi was a solid Sunni Muslim, but one who devoted much attention to understanding the Fatimids. Sections on the Fatimids in his Khitat are invaluable for historians since they preserve much that is otherwise lost. According to peer historians, al-Maqrizi knew himself to be related by blood to the first Fatimid caliph al-Mu’izz li-Din Allah.. the founder of Cairo in 969 A.D. However, he had to keep this to himself as the Fatimids—an Isma’ili Shi’i dynasty—were viewed as heretical.

It is said that in his final testament to family and friends, al-Salih Tala’i admitted three mistakes in his life, one of them being his construction of this mosque in its location just outside the main entrance to Cairo (Bab Zuwayla). Al-Maqrizi reports also an earlier story that this mosque was built to house the head of Husayn, brought to Cairo from Ascalon.. but the Fatimid Caliph insisted on having the head placed in the elaborate palace complex. So this mosque, far from basking in praise, emerges in al-Maqrizi’s account as something of a disappointment.. although looking at its details today it stands as a fine building:

MS

The man al-Salih Tala’i comes off much better than his mosque. He has his faults, to be sure: he’s a Shi’i, but apparently a twelver Shi’i and not an Isma’ili (he’s called an “Imami”). He learns of his destiny to rule Egypt during a pilgrimage to the shrine of ‘Ali in Najaf, Iraq. It’s a colorful story:

He went at the beginning of his career to make a pilgrimage to the shrine of Imam ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib—God be pleased with him—in the land of Najaf in Iraq. He travelled with a group of Sufi brethren. There was among the Shi’is the imam of the shrine… al-Sayyid ibn Ma‘sum… Ibn Ma‘sum that night saw in his sleep ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib—God be pleased with him—and ‘Ali told him: “There has arrived here this night forty Sufi brethren. Among that group is a man known as Tala‘i ibn Ruzzayk, among the important people beloved by us. Say to him: Go, for we have delivered Egypt to you!”

Of course that message is communicated to Tala’i and he returns to Cairo. Before long he restores the Fatimid dynasty after a coup attempt and for his labors he is made vizer. So the vision seen by the imam of the shrine of ‘Ali was correct.

Al-Salih Tala’i throughout his viziership interested himself in abstruse matters of theology. He debated scholars and composed books of his theological opinions. Some of this argument was in the form of poetry (Fatimid theology had a history of being cast into poetry.. such as the work of al-Muayyad al-Shirazi). Al-Maqrizi provides a few lines of this theological poetry:

Oh Umma, there was a clear error
when this settlement and disavowal became orthodox.
You slanted the answer until rebellion could not exist
except by God’s predestining of its existence.
If that’s correct, then God would by your assertion
forbid the shari‘a to guard sin’s limits.
Impossible! By no means would our God
Both ban what is vile and then bring it about!

Al-Salih Tala’i is taking on the doctrine of predestination as emphasized by Sunnis.. and pointing out its incompatibility with the moral striving implied in the existence of the shari’a.

Al-Maqrizi stays away from direct attacks on these doctrinal positions; it’s unnecessary and everyone in his audience would be convinced of the point against which al-Salih Tala’i is arguing in these lines. But what al-Maqrizi delivers is a kind of comeuppance at the end when the death of al-Salih Tala’i is connected to his disbelief and disrespect for predestination. Here’s the narrative of the run-up to his assasination:

On the night before the morning on which he was killed, he said: “On a night just like this the Prince of Believers ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib was struck down—God be pleased with him.” He ordered a reading of the account of his killing, then he performed ablution and prayed over the opinion of the imamate 120 prostrations, staying up the entire night to do that. He went to proceed in the procession, but he stumbled and his turban fell from his head—and he was disturbed. So he sat down in the entrance hall of the residence of the vizier. He called for ibn al-Dayf to be brought to him—who arranged turbans for the caliphs and viziers, and he was in charge of whatever pertained to that weighty matter. When ibn al-Dayf began to set aright the turban, a man said to the one setting it right: “We take refuge with God our Master.” This was sufficient for ibn al-Dayf to see an evil omen, so he expressed the opinion that al-Tala‘i put off the procession. But al-Tala‘i responded: “The omen is of Satan, and does not point to any delay in the procession onto the road.” He then rode out, and the one who struck him was waiting there. When he returned to the residence he was being carried. He died from that encounter, as previously mentioned.

The whole scene is freighted with signs: the night’s resemblance to the night on which ‘Ali was killed, the decision to spend the whole night praying, the fall and loss of turban, the ill-omened words of one standing nearby. It was all enough for ibn al-Dayf to see trouble ahead and recommend a delay for the procession. Al-Tala’i would hear nothing of it. You can almost hear him mutter “bah, humbug.” Omens, of course, imply necessity and determination.. and by refusing these omens we are meant to see Tala’i once again affirming his doctrinal position as stated in those lines against predestination.

A scene like this shows in a particularly strong light the artistry of al-Maqrizi: he has chosen certain details on the life of al-Salih Tala’i, praised him in many respects (for opposition to Crusaders), but nevertheless delivered a compelling example of how his doctrinal positions prove insufficient in the end.

MS