Shajara al-numaniyya | Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi Society https://ibnarabisociety.

org/enigma-of-the-shajara-al-numaniyya-denis-gril/

© Muḥyīddīn Ibn ‘Arabī Society / the Author, 2019

The Enigma of the Shajara al-nu’māniyya fī’l-

T he text entitled Shajara al-nu’māniyya fī al-dawla al-‘Uthmāniyya presents us

with a twofold enigma: it is written in coded language where the key is often elusive,
and its author remains so far unknown. The prevailing view in the Ottoman era, as well
as the evidence of often quite recent manuscripts, attributes the authorship to Ibn
‘Arabī but, as we shall see later, this attribution is inadmissible. Even more
astonishingly, the two main commentaries on the work are also clearly apocryphal, one
of which is attributed to Sadr al-Dīn al-Qūnawī, the son-in-law and disciple of Ibn
‘Arabī, and the other to the fourteenth-century historian al-Safadī.

As the title shows, “The Tree of Nu’mān concerning the Ottoman dynasty” and its
commentaries focus on the dynasty, not in terms of its advent as is generally supposed,
but with regard to future events, principally in Egypt, in the eleventh and twelfth
centuries (sixteenth to seventeenth centuries AD). With its predictions, this curious and
spurious work places the Ottomans in the eschatological tradition of Islam, more
particularly that of jafr.[2]

After summarising the contents of the Shajara and its two commentaries, we will
discuss their probable authors, background and date of composition, and attempt to
2
reach some provisional conclusions as to their historical significance.

Analysis of the Shajara[3]

1 of 16 5/25/23, 10:18 PM
Shajara al-numaniyya | Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi Society https://ibnarabisociety.org/enigma-of-the-shajara-al-numaniyya-denis-gril/

under the influence of astrological conjunctions and planetary movements, all the
while reminding us that these remain subject to the divine omnipotence. Each region of
the world in the cycle of Adamic history is under the influence of a star. He says he has
written about each region and makes clear that here he will only deal with Egypt, which
is assigned the name of the Quiver (kināna), according to a tradition attributed to the
Prophet.[4] He will limit himself, he says, to the principal events (kulliyyāt) and the
secondary events (juz’iyyāt) which flow from these, like the branches of a tree from its
main limbs, which is one way of explaining the first term of the title.

In these two centuries the most important events occur. The first date is given by the
numerical value of the letters B K Z (2 + 20 + 900), i.e. 922/1516, the year that Sultan
Selim took Damascus. All the dates are indicated by this same method. Most individuals
are indicated by the first or last letter of their name, as in the sentence: “when the Qāf
of the Jīm arrives at its end, the sīn of Selim will rise up.” The Qāf of the Jīm refers to the
penultimate Mamluk sultan, Qānsūh al-Ghūri al-Jarkas'(the Circassian), who was
defeated in Syria by Selim I on 25 Rajab 922/24 August 1516.

Thus, the appearance and triumph of the sīn, the first letter of Selim. His link to
Nu’mān, that is to say Abū hanīfa, who founded the school of jurisprudence generally
followed by the Turks, explains the second term of the title. This sovereign “will rise up
and take the land of the Arabs up to the frontiers of the Maghrib, the Hijaz, the borders
of the Yemen, Iraq, the borders of Morocco, Algeria and the largest part of our quarter
of the inhabited world.” His dynasty will last until the Mīm, the Seal, who according to
the tradition will manifest at the end of time. This initial clearly indicates the Mahdī,
who is to be found in Konya. The Ottoman dynasty and the country of Rūm (Rome) are
thus joined together in an eschatological narrative, which ends with the conquest of the
“Greater Rome” (al-Rūmiyya al-kubrā) and the destruction of its church. In all
probability, Rūmiyya here means Rome rather than Constantinople.

And the Holy War continues until the rebuilding of the Temple of Jerusalem, an episode
rarely mentioned in Muslim eschatology. After this there is a new meeting in Konya
between the Supreme Mīm and the Mīm al-sadr, the lieutenant (qā’im maqām) of the
Sīn, “master of the throne of the end of days” (sāhib kursī al-nihāya). No doubt we
should view these two mīms as two aspects of the function of the Mahdī, who is
succeeded by Jesus (‘Īsā, the sīn who is implicitly connected to Selim).

This brings us back in fact to a much closer history, that of events following the year
Ghayn, which equals 1000. After this kind of introduction the author recalls that he will
focus on different lands, but primarily Egypt, since that is the seat of the throne of
kings (mahall kursī al-mulūk). This Egypt-centredness has to be taken into account in
dating the text and identifying the author.

From the very beginning a sibylline phrase, in rhyming prose, taken up by the
commentators, sets the tone: “Egypt will remain prosperous (?), being cunning with its
governors, avoiding heavy tasks, until Mercury is in opposition to Saturn, in the final
degree of Libra. It will then be freed from the control of the family of ‘Uthmān’.
However, it is also stated that this will be a discharge of justice (khurūj ‘adl) and not a
discharge of disappearance (khurūj zawāl). The Mīm who is to seal the cycle (mīm al-
khitām), or the Mahdī, actually has a mission to re-establish justice on earth, which
suggests that the Ottoman dynasty will be immediately replaced by those who will fight
2
for truth and justice until the end of time.

We then pass to quite a different matter: the famous prediction of Ibn ‘Arabī or the
pseudo-Ibn ‘Arabī, supposedly in his own words: “And among the allusions (rumūz)
which we have given on the matter of the branching of the tree: ‘when the Sīn enters
the Shīn,[5] there will appear the tomb of Muhyī al-dīn’. The reason for this is that God

2 of 16 5/25/23, 10:18 PM
Shajara al-numaniyya | Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi Society https://ibnarabisociety.org/enigma-of-the-shajara-al-numaniyya-denis-gril/

unveiled to us directly that our death would take place in Damascus, also called
Jilliq.”[6] He states that his tomb will at first be ruined, buried under rubbish and
debris, which was the case during the Mamluk epoch. The Sīn is then identified: “until
the time when a qā’im[7] arises, coming from Constantinople, the letter Sīn of the
family of ‘Uthmān. He will be the cause of our tomb’s reappearance and the
construction of our mausoleum.” He adds that this leader will act on the orders of God,
and by permission of the Prophet and the agreement of “the men of the time, masters
of the hierarchical degrees, men of the Unseen (rijāl al-ghayb)”. The success of Selim,
inspired and sustained by the triple authority of God, the Prophet and the hierarchy of
saints, is thus closely associated in the mind of the author with his attachment to the
memory of Ibn ‘Arabī, which may give some indication as to the milieu which produced
this text. Furthermore, as Constantinople is no longer viewed as a city to be conquered,
the composition of the text must at least post-date its conquest by the Ottomans (i.e.
post-1453).

After this fairly clear passage, there follows a series of predictions introduced with the
same formula: “and among the allusions from the tree, our word…”. The first concerns
Aswān: “when Aswān is built at the end of that time by the Yā’ and the ‘Ayn (?), women
will reign over the threshold[8] of the family of ‘Uthmān, eunuchs will be numerous,
crows[9] will appear and the family of the Sultan will be weakened.”

Other indications are rather more obscure and they often announce revolts, dismissals
and nominations. Amongst others there is mention of Murād II:[10] “A group of the
Banū ‘Abdallāh will revolt and kill their king, and God will aid Murād II.” What is one to
make of this mention of the ruler prior to Selim? Whatever the case may be, most of the
dates, indicated by letters, are subsequent to this. Certain events are also dated by
astrological conjunctions. After Egypt Baghdad is mentioned, under its ancient name of
the round town (al-Zawrā’), Mecca and Yemen. People are always designated by letters.

Curiously constructed, the text pauses momentarily. As if making a new start, it alludes
to a circular design (dā’ira), which is only to be found in the commentaries. The author
also warns his reader of the esoteric character of this science of forthcoming events.
Although in literary style, it is primarily founded on intuitive unveiling (kashf) and
esoteric disciplines.[11] This explains why the predictions do not always occur in
chronological order. There is now a clear reference to the tradition of jafr, knowledge of
events which shake the community until the end of the world, which were transmitted
by the Prophet to ‘Alī. This gives rise to an explanation of the theory of the Caliphate,
its history and its cosmic and astrological implications. Despite the often Shi’ite
terminology, the discourse is firmly situated on the right wing of Sunnism, which is
hardly surprising.

As mentioned, the author then seems to make a fresh beginning. He states that he has
composed a treatise for each century to come, including this one on the eleventh and
twelfth centuries, or more precisely the date of Alif Yā’ Qāf Ghayn = AH 1111, which will
see the end of the dynasty. A new explanation of the tree is given: shajara in its root
contains the idea of reciprocal opposition (tashājur) between opposed and
complementary principles, whose action brings about the events of the world.

3 of 16 5/25/23, 10:18 PM