Harvard:
Smyth, W. 1992, "Controversy in a Tradition of Commentary: The Academic Legacy of Al-Sakkaki's Miftah Al-Ulum", in Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 112, no. 4, pp. 589--597. American Oriental Society.
APA:
Smyth, W. (1992). Controversy in a Tradition of Commentary: The Academic Legacy of Al-Sakkaki's Miftah Al-Ulum. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 112 (4) , 589--597. American Oriental Society.
Chicago:
Smyth, William. 1992. "Controversy in a Tradition of Commentary: The Academic Legacy of Al-Sakkaki's Miftah Al-Ulum." In Journal of the American Oriental Society, 112 , no. 4: 589--597. American Oriental Society.
MLA:
Smyth, William. "Controversy in a Tradition of Commentary: The Academic Legacy of Al-Sakkaki's Miftah Al-Ulum." Journal of the American Oriental Society. 112.4 (1992): 589--597.
Citation within the text:
(Smyth 1992)
Zotero:
Save reference in Zotero
BibTeX:
@article{smyth1992controversy,
  source = {jstor},
  ISSN = {0003-0279},
  abstract = {The predominance of academic commentary (sharh) in the bibliography of the medieval Islamic world has suggested to many that the intellectual environment in which these commentators wrote was moribund. This paper attempts to show, however, that this environment was not quite so lifeless. Academic commentary was not necessarily an exercise in repeating old ideas, but rather an arena for debate and controversy. This "agonistic" quality was characteristic of traditional education in the Islamic world, which other scholars (e.g., G. Makdisi and J. van Ess) have described. The example for this argument is the tradition of commentaries based ultimately on Muhammad al-Sakkaki's (d. 626 A. H./1229 A. D.) Miftah al-Ulum (The Key to the Disciplines). The paper shows that later authors considered al-Sakkaki to argue, as it were, with Khatib Dimashq al-Qazwini (d. 724/1338), who summarized al-Sakkaki's arguments one hundred years later in his Talkhis al-Miftah (The Summary of the Miftah). Two later commentators, namely, Sad al-Din al-Taftazani (d. 792/1390) and al-Sayyid al-Sharif al-Jurjani (d. 816/1413), were also well known for the disputes they conducted in the super commentaries they based on both al-Sakkaki and al-Qazwini. This paper considers the distribution of commentaries, abridgements, and supercommentaries based ultimately on the Miftah in light of the evident antagonism between these four authors. It suggests that a commentary tradition did not discourage dispute and debate, but might actually have encouraged it.},
  author = {Smyth, William},
  copyright = {Copyright 1992 American Oriental Society},
  journal = {Journal of the American Oriental Society},
  jstor_articletype = {Full Length Article},
  jstor_date = {199210/199212},
  jstor_formatteddate = {Oct. - Dec., 1992},
  month = {oct},
  number = {4},
  pages = {589--597},
  publisher = {American Oriental Society},
  title = {Controversy in a Tradition of Commentary: The Academic Legacy of Al-Sakkaki's Miftah Al-Ulum},
  url = {http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-0279%28199210%2F12%29112%3A4%3C589%3ACIATOC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-4},
  volume = {112},
  year = {1992},
}