cussion frequently tends to revolve around the sense of a
given Arabic word or grammatical construction; Bayd:a ̄w ̄ı’s
Commentary on Surah 12 of the QurDa ̄n, edited by A. F. L.
Beeston (Oxford, 1963), is the most accessible of such texts.
Modern tafs ̄ır has not been served well by translation either,
although the following are available: The Meaning of the
QurDa ̄n, 8 vols., translated by A. A. Maududi (Lahore, 1967–
1979); Abu ̄ al-Kala ̄m A ̄za ̄d’s Tarjuma ̄n al-QurDa ̄n, 2 vols.,
translated and edited by Syed Abdul Latif (New York, 1962–
1967), and Sayyid Qut:b’s In the Shade of the QurDa ̄n, trans-
lated by M. A. Salahi and A. A. Shamis (London, 1979).Further bibliography on tafs ̄ır can be found in my article “The
Present Status of Tafs ̄ır Studies,” Muslim World 72 (July–
December 1982): 224–238.
ANDREW RIPPIN (1987)
TAFTA ̄ZA ̄N ̄I, AL- (AH 722–791? / 1322–1389 CE),
more fully SaEd al-D ̄ın MasEu ̄ d ibn EUmar al-Tafta ̄za ̄n ̄ı; mas-
ter of a range of intellectual disciplines including theology,
philosophy, metaphysics, logic, grammar, and rhetoric, as
well as fundamental principles of jurisprudence and
QurDanic exegesis. Born in Tafta ̄za ̄n, Khorasan, he is re-
nowned for the breadth and quality of his scholarship,
though little is known about his personal life. His writing ca-
reer started at the age of sixteen, and before his death his
works were known and studied from the eastern part of the
Muslim world to Egypt in the West. Al-Tafta ̄za ̄n ̄ı’s emi-
nence in scholarship was noticed and recognized in his life-
time by the Mongol rulers, especially the famous Timur
Lenk (Tamerlane), by whom he was personally honored.
Al-Tafta ̄za ̄n ̄ı’s best-known work is probably his com-
mentary on the creed of al-Nasaf ̄ı (d. 1142 CE), Sharh:
al-Eaqa ̄Did al-Nasaf ̄ıyah, still studied in major Muslim semi-
naries. His work on the fundamental principles of Islamic
law, Sharh: al-talw ̄ıh: Eala al-tawh: ̄ıd li-matn al-tanq ̄ıh: f ̄ı us:u ̄l
al-fiqh, was published in Beirut in 1983. Because he wrote
commentaries on H:anaf ̄ı as well as Sha ̄fiE ̄ı works of jurispru-
dence his biographers differed as to which school of law he
belonged to. The same was true in terms of his theological
position. His commentary on al-Nasaf ̄ı’s EAqa ̄Did (written in
1367) led some to consider him a Matu ̄r ̄ıd ̄ı in view of his
apparent espousal of their doctrines: for example, he viewed
creation (takw ̄ın) as eternal and an essential attribute of God,
accepted the doctrine of free will, viewed the QurDa ̄n as an
expression of God’s eternal self-speech (a position also adopt-
ed by the later AshEar ̄ıyah), and rejected the possibility of ac-
tually seeing God in the afterlife. Despite these apparent
Ma ̄tur ̄ıd ̄ı leanings, his Maqa ̄s:id and Sharh: al-Maqa ̄s:id (writ-
ten in 1383) reveal him to be an AshEar ̄ı. Clearly his was a
mediating position in which he demonstrated independence
of thought and a resistance to legal or doctrinal classification.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Brockelmann, Carl. Geschichte der arabischen Literatur, vol. 2. 2d
ed. Leiden, 1949. See also the supplement to volume 2 of the
first edition. Leiden, 1938.
Elder, Earl Edgar, trans. A Commentary on the Creed of Islam: SaEd
al-D ̄ın al-Tafta ̄za ̄n ̄ı on the Creed of Najm al-D ̄ın al-Nasaf ̄ı.
2 vols. Translated with introduction and notes. New York,
1950.
Ibn Khaldu ̄ n. Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History. 2d ed.
Translated by Franz Rosenthal. Princeton, 1967. See volume
3, pages 117, 315.
Storey, C. A. “Al-Tafta ̄za ̄n ̄ı.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam. Lei-
den, 1913–1934.
Tafta ̄za ̄n ̄ı, MasEu ̄ d ibn EUmar al-. Maqa ̄s:id al-t:a ̄lib ̄ın f ̄ı us:u ̄l
al-d ̄ın, and Sharh: al-Maqa ̄s:id. Istanbul, 1887.
Tafta ̄za ̄n ̄ı, MasEu ̄ d ibn EUmar al-. Sharh: al-Eaqa ̄Did al-Nasaf ̄ıyah
f ̄ı us:u ̄l al-d ̄ın wa-Eilm al-kala ̄m. Edited and introduced by
Claude Sala ̄ma. Damascus, 1974. For further bibliographical
references, see Sala ̄ma’s introduction.
WADI Z. HADDAD (1987)TAGORE, RABINDRANATH (1861–1941), poet,
novelist, playwright, composer, and spiritual leader, is best
known as the winner of the 1913 Nobel Prize for Literature
and one of India’s greatest modern poets. Yet he was also a
complex figure who embodied many of the deepest religious
and political tensions of late colonial India. As his friend
E. J. Thompson described him, Tagore had a kind of dual
soul, torn between his love of solitude, contemplation, and
art and his commitment to social action (Thompson, 1921).
Born in Kolkata to a wealthy Bengali Bra ̄hman: family,
Tagore was the son of Debendranath Tagore, a leader in the
influential Hindu reform movement known as the Bra ̄hmo
Sama ̄j and a key figure in the “Bengal Renaissance” of the
nineteenth century. Although he later became critical of
the movement, the universalistic and humanistic ideals of the
Bra ̄hmo Sama ̄j had a lasting impact on Rabindranath Ta-
gore’s thought.
Tagore was a poet from an early age, composing his first
piece at age eight. He was not, however, a spirit to be re-
strained by conventional educational institutions, and he left
school at fourteen to study at home. Though a lover of the
great Sanskrit poets like Kalidasa and the devotional lyrics
of the Bengal Vais:n:avas, Tagore was also deeply influenced
by nineteenth-century English poets, perhaps above all by
the English romantics like John Keats and Percy Bysshe Shel-
ley, whose reverence for nature and ideal of the creative artist
can be seen throughout Tagore’s work.
In 1890 Tagore took charge of the family estates in
Shelidah (modern Bangladesh), where he came to admire the
simple daily life, natural beauty, and folk culture of rural
Bengal. Here he also first came into contact with the Bau ̄ ls,
a group of wandering spiritual “madmen” who reject the out-
ward trappings of institutional religion and instead seek the
indwelling “man of the heart,” the elusive presence of the di-
vine that dwells within every human body. The Bau ̄ ls’ icono-
clastic “religion of man” (manusher dharma) had a lasting in-TAGORE, RABINDRANATH 8957