The Formation of the Classical Tafsir Tradition: The Qur’an Commentary of al-Tha`labi (d. 427/1035) Walid Saleh Leiden: Brill, 2004. 267 pages. While one may question the title of the book under review, there is little doubt that Walid Saleh’s revised Yale doctoral dissertation is a major devel- opment in Qur’anic studies and, in particular, of the exegetical traditions in Islam. Al-Tha`labi was important, but remains neglected in the field. A Sunni author widely cited by Shi`i exegetes and polemicists, a traditionist who 130 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 24:3 drew upon Sufi commentaries, and a Muslim thinker interested in pre-Islamic religious lore, he had a major influence on the development of the Islamic East’s exegetical traditions. This is signalled by citations from his famous exegesis Al-Kashf wa al-Bayan, a monumental work that still awaits a criti- cal edition, and by the disputes during the medieval period over his probity and reliability. After a useful introduction to the problematic of exegesis, the book comprises seven chapters. The introduction is not, however, free from con- tention. Saleh would like to argue that al-Tha`labi represents the “intellec- tual victory” of Sunnism during a period when it was “weak but most cul- turally open”; Sufi exegesis was co-opted some time before al-Ghazzali, Shi`ism through the incorporation of philo-`Alid material, and rationalism “dethroned by proclaiming the salvific power of belonging to the Muslim community.” I am not so sure. While Al-Kashf was influential, al-Tha`labi was widely derided in the medieval Sunni tradition, not least by every Islamicist’s favourite bête noire Ibn Taymiyya. His supposed “inclusive” Sunnism was clearly not favored in a time when Sunni political power dom- inated and was institutionally perpetuated in the madrasah. The gradual development of the nature of Sunni consensus and hegemony probably explains the process of al-Tha`labi’s work and its reception. Chapter 1 presents a concise account of al-Tha`labi’s life, showing his importance in the transmission of exegetical material and Prophetic narra- tions and reminding readers of medieval Nishapur’s intellectual signifi- cance. Chapter 2 briefly considers his relationship with Sufism. Saleh is critical of Nagel’s depiction of al-Tha`labi as a Sufi, thereby explaining his unpopularity in Hanbali traditionist circles, and argues (I think correctly) that while al-Tha`labi was strongly influenced by mystical writings and individuals, he was not a Sufi. But the dispute raises the question of what the label sufi meant in the tenth century before the advent of the formal institution of the tariqah. Chapter 3 focuses on the exegesis and its struc- ture and examines some of the sources. Chapter 4 broaches the question of hermeneutics and al-Tha`labi’s almost contextualist understanding of ta’wil as being rooted in one’s reli- gious experience. As such, it already represents a development from the tra- ditionism of al-Tabari. Chapters 5 and 6 shift from theory to the practice of exegesis, beginning with such themes as fada’il al-Qur’an, the Revelation’s salvific nature, the Qur’anic text’s anthological nature to such tendencies as using mystical interpretation to demonstrate its polyvalent nature, and the use of seemingly pro-Shi`i material to make anti-Shi`i polemical points. These two chapters constitute the book’s heart and main argument. Book Reviews 131 132 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 24:3 The final chapter examines al-Tha`labi’s legacy in the Sunni exegetical tradition, which is equivocal not least because of the enthusiastic Shi`i embrace of his exegesis. Saleh presents al-Tha`labi as a Sunni exegete par excellence drawing upon the wide range of scripturalist expertise of his time and expresses surprise at the Shi`i adoption of him and the Sunni rejection based on misunderstanding. The conclusion reiterates his central point about al-Tha`labi redoing al-Tabari’s work in a more comprehensive, composite, and inclusive manner. It also repeats his main contribution to the study of exegesis; he is no doubt correct that much scholarship on medieval exegesis is wrong-headed because it does not deal with a close reading of the texts, which would yield the multiplicity of meanings offered by the medieval exegete. A brief postscript mentions a recent uncritical edition of the exege- sis undertaken by a Shi`i shaykh in Lebanon. The book’s title reflects Saleh’s ambition to reorient our study of exege- sis in Islam, and for that it should be applauded and receive serious engage- ment. The book forces one to reassess and reexamine perhaps long-held prejudices about the nature of medieval Sunni exegesis and its formation. For some time, scholars have studied al-Tha`labi’s exegesis for the richness of its traditionist material and for its role in Sunni-Shi`i polemical exchanges. This book’s real achievement is to ask readers to recenter al-Tha`labi within the mainstream of Sunni exegesis and recognize that medieval exe- gesis was neither closed or exclusivist. This latter point is especially impor- tant now, and there can be little doubt that Saleh’s method is at least partly present-minded in its approach. Muslims and non-Muslims, scholars and laypeople, need to rediscover the rich polyvalence of medieval Muslim exegetical traditions. Saleh’s book is a step, therefore, in the right direction. Sajjad H. Rizvi Lecturer in Islamic Studies Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies University of Exeter, United Kingdom