Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 399 AL-QANTARA XXXVII 2, julio-diciembre 2016 pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589 doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013 The Transmission of Secret Knowledge: Three Arabic Dialogues on Alchemy La transferencia del conocimiento secreto: tres diálogos árabes de alquimia Regula Forster Freie Universität Berlin and University of Zürich Arabo-Islamic alchemy enjoyed considerable La alquimia arabo-islámica gozó de conside- popularity until well into the 19thand 20thcen- rable popularidad hasta los siglos XIX y XX. turies. It can be considered both as a predeces- Puede ser considerada como una precursora sor of modern chemistry and as a natural de la química moderna y como una filosofía philosophy whose purpose is to explain the natural cuyo objetivo es explicar el mundo. world. Yet one of the unresolved questions Sin embargo una de las cuestiones no resueltas concerning alchemy is how one was supposed acerca de la alquimia es cómo se supone que to learn it, since it was an art that was meant debía aprenderse, puesto que se trataba de un to be kept secret and only revealed to a few arte que debía mantenerse en secreto y sólo select individuals. While the practicalities of podía ser relevada a unos cuantos elegidos. the learning experience remain obscure, it is Mientras que los aspectos prácticos de la ex- noteworthy that Arabic alchemical literature periencia de aprendizaje siguen siendo oscu- often makes use of the literary form of the di- ros, cabe destacar que, a menudo, la literatura alogue, a genre strongly associated with teach- alquímica árabe hace uso del diálogo, género ing and learning. This paper focuses on three literario íntimamente ligado a la enseñanza y Arabic dialogues on alchemy; namely, al aprendizaje. Este trabajo se basa en tres diá- Masāʼil Khālid li-Maryānus al-rāhib logos árabes de alquimia: Masāʼil Jālid li- (“Khālid’s questions to the monk Maryānus”), Maryānus al-rāhib (Preguntas de Jālid al Kitāb Mihrārīs al-ḥakīm (“The book of the monje Maryānus), Kitāb Mihrārīs al-ḥakīm wise Mihrārīs”) and Risālat al-ḥakīm Qay- (El libro de Mihrārīs, el sabio) y Risālat al- darūs(“The epistle of the wise Qaydarūs”), ḥakīm Qaydarūs(La epístola del sabio Qay- and discusses how the transfer of secret darūs). Por otro lado, y centrándonos en el knowledge is represented. I will focus on the marco literario de estos textos, se discutirá literary frames of these texts, their mise-en- cómo se representa la transferencia del cono- scène, the master-disciple relation as repre- cimiento secreto, su puesta en escena, la rela- sented within them, and the question of ción maestro-discípulo, y la cuestión de la interaction between unequal partners. interacción entre estas partes desiguales. Key words: Alchemy, Arabic prose literature, Palabras clave: Alquimia, prosa literaria Dialogue (literary form), Khālid ibn Yazīd, árabe, diálogo (forma literaria), Jālid ibn Copyright: © 2016 CSIC. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution(CC-by) España 3.0. Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 400 400 REGULAFORSTER Kitāb al-Dhahab, Kitāb Mihrārīs al-ḥakīm, Yazīd, Kitāb al-Ḏahab, Kitāb Mihrārīs al- Knowledge transfer, Literary frame, Masā’il ḥakīm, transferencia de conocimiento, marco Khālid li-Maryānus al-rāhib, Master and dis- literario,Masā’il Jālid li-Maryānus al-rāhib, ciple, Risālat al-ḥakīm Qaydarūs,Robert of maestro y discípulo, Risālat al-ḥakīm Qay- Chester, Testamentum Morieni,Tractatus Mi- darūs, Robert of Chester,Testamentum Mo- creris. rieni, Tractatus Micreris. As noted in the introduction to this monographic section, alchemy was an important art and science in the medieval (and early modern) Arabo-Islamic world; this can be deduced not only from travelogues1 but also from the large number of extant manuscripts containing texts dealing with the subject. There remains, however, an important ques- tion: how did one become an alchemist? How could one learn the “di- vine art”? Sources on this topic are scarce. We can assume that learning from books was extremely difficult as alchemists used a language full of metaphors, allegories and symbols. Furthermore, most works ex- plicitly state that alchemical knowledge should be kept secret and that only a few well-chosen people should have access to it. While the practicalities of the learning experience remain obscure, it is noteworthy that Arabic alchemical literature often employs the literary form of the dialogue, a genre frequently connected with teach- ing and learning2and previously used in Greek alchemical writings.3 Although there is an impressive number of Arabic dialogues on alchemy, these texts and their literary forms remain largely unstud- 1See for example Polak, Persien, vol. 1, p. 286 and Salmon, “Note”. 2The dialogue form has been most thoroughly studied by scholars of philosophy, as for example by Sedley, Dancy, Heal and Smiley (eds.), Philosophical dialogues; Jacobi (ed.), Gespräche lesen; Hösle, Der philosophische Dialog; Meyer (ed.), Zur Geschichte des Dialogs; Forster, “Inszenierung und Grenzen”. For didactic dialogues in general see for example Buck, “Das Lehrgespräch”; Hilsenbeck, Lehrdialog; Cardelle de Hartmann, Lateinische Dialoge 1200-1400, pp. 58-103. For dialogues in Arabic literature see for ex- ample Wagner, Die arabische Rangstreitdichtung; van Ess, “Disputationspraxis”; Daiber, “Masā’il wa-adjwiba”; Holmberg, “The Public Debate”; Heinrichs, “Rose versus Narcis- sus”; Leemhuis, “A Koranic Contest Poem”; Wagner, “Munāẓara”; Holes, “The Dispute”; Hämeen-Anttila, “The essay and debate”; Belhaj, Argumentation et dialectique; and Forster, “Transmission of Knowledge through Literature”. – I am dealing with the form of dialogue in Arabic literature more extensively in my Habilitationsschrift entitled Wis- sensvermittlung im Gespräch. Eine Studie zu klassisch-arabischen Dialogen, submitted at Freie Universität Berlin in 2014, which will hopefully be published soon. 3See Berthelot, Collection, vol. 2, pp. 56-69 and vol. 3, pp. 289-299; Hallum, Zosimus Arabus, p. 242, esp. note 1. Al-Qantara XXXVII 2, 2016, pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589  doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013 Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 401 THETRANSMISSIONOFSECRETKNOWLEDGE 401 ied.4 This article focuses on three Arabic dialogues on alchemy and discusses how the transfer of ‘secret’ knowledge is represented, fo- cusing on the literary frames of these texts, their mise-en-scène, the master-disciple relation as represented within them, and the question of interaction between unequal partners. It should be recalled that these are literary texts, and I do not intend to suggest that alchemical instruction did in fact function in the way it is presented in these texts, but I will try to demonstrate through a close reading of these works that they share a common idea of how alchemical education should ideally be achieved. The texts under discussion are Masāʼil Khālid li-Maryānus al-rāhib (“Khālid’s questions to the monk Maryānus”), Kitāb Mihrārīs al-ḥakīm (“The book of the wise Mihrārīs”) and Risālat al-ḥakīm Qaydarūs (“The epistle of the wise Qaydarūs”). They all share a connection with the Umayyad prince Khālid ibn Yazīd (d. c. 85/704), the alleged founder of Arabic alchemy.5It seems probable that all three texts date from the ninth or tenth centuries CE. They present dialogues between one (or two) master(s) of alchemy and their adept. Masāʼil Khālid li-Maryānus al-rāhib Masāʼil Khālid li-Maryānus al-rāhib depicts a conversation be- tween the Byzantine monk Maryānus and the Umayyad prince Khālid b. Yazīd. Therefore the Arabic text must be later than Khālid, and as it is cited as a classical text by later Arabic writers on alchemy6, I tend to date it to the ninth or tenth century CE.7The work was translated into Latin under the title Testamentum Morieni as the very first text on alchemy to be known in the Latin West, probably in 1144 by Robert of 4An exception is Hallum, Zosimus Arabus, pp. 242-274. 5Ullmann has demonstrated that the historical Khālid probably had nothing to do with alchemy, see Ullmann, “Ḫālid”. On Khālid see also Martelli and Bacchi, “Il principe”. 6E.g. al-Ḥalabī (fl. after the twelfth century CE), al-Sīmāwī (fl. mid-thirteenth century CE), and al-Jildakī (d. 743/1342), see Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften, p. 193 and Al-Hassan, “The Arabic Original”, p. 231. 7In the MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 65v we find a citation from the Muṣḥaf al-ḥayāt(see MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Fatih 3435, fol. 111r). Should this citation belong to the original text of the Masāʼil, it could be dated to the (late) tenth century CE with some certainty. I wish to thank Juliane Müller, Berlin, for the hint. Al-Qantara XXXVII 2, 2016, pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589  doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013 Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 402 402 REGULAFORSTER Chester, who is more famous for his translation of the Qurʼān by order of Peter the Venerable.8 Approximately ten relatively complete manuscripts of the Arabic text are currently known,9but only the introduction has been edited (in 2004).10 I therefore refer here to a manuscript kept in Istanbul for the whole text.11 The literary frame Masāʼil Khālid represents a dialogue between two people: the Umayyad prince Khālid and the Greek monk Maryānus. In the lengthy introduction,12the narrator, a client (mawlā) of Khālid, reports that one day a man comes to see the prince and says that he knows a monk who possesses the secrets of alchemy that Khālid greatly covets. Khālid sends for the famous monk, who lives as a hermit and is old and weak but still handsome and who wears a cilice, the cloth typically worn by ascetics of all faiths – a description that suggests great trustworthiness. The monk is brought to Khālid, who gives him comfortable lodgings and visits him twice daily. Khālid at first talks about the behaviour of kings and Greek tales and only mentions alchemy after some days have passed, adding that he would not harm Maryānus in any way. But he has misjudged the monk; as a hermit, Maryānus has left the world be- hind and is therefore unafraid of any king or prince. The monk explains that if he reveals his knowledge it would not be out of fear but rather because he thinks that Khālid would prove an able and worthy disciple. Khālid’s client is subsequently ordered to write down their conversation – which is how it came to be in the form of the present book. 8The Latin text of the Testamentum Morieniis extant in different redactions, of which the oldest one, edited by Stavenhagen, A Testament, is closest to the Arabic text known today. Robert added a preface of his own; however, his author-/translatorship have been disputed, see for example Kahn, “Note”; Lemay, “L’authenticité”; Cardelle de Hartmann, Lateinische Dialoge 1200-1400, p. 79. 9Al-Hassan, “The Arabic Original”, p. 231. 10Al-Hassan, “The Arabic Original”, pp. 218-230. 11MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fols. 61-74. For a discussion of this MS., see Ritter, “Philologika XIII”, p. 100. 12MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fols. 61v-63v = ed. Al-Hassan, “The Arabic Original”, pp. 218-228. See also Dolgusheva, Zwei arabische Dialoge, esp. pp. 45-47. Al-Qantara XXXVII 2, 2016, pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589  doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013 Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 403 THETRANSMISSIONOFSECRETKNOWLEDGE 403 After this introduction the narrator disappears almost completely; only at two points does he mention an action by the protagonists other than to indicate who is speaking (“he said” [qāla]). The reader is told that at the beginning the prince smiles because Maryānus promises to reveal his secrets to him.13 And after about two thirds of the text14 Maryānus hangs his head because Khālid wants to know where he can find the philosophers’ stone. These two bodily reactions mark important passages in the text: the promise of the secrets of alchemy and the ex- planation of where to find the stone. While the introduction is rather long, we are not told how the col- loquy ended as the dialogue closes with Maryānus’ statement that he has not concealed anything followed by a colophon obviously added by the scribe: I have not concealed from you any difficulty, may God give you success in that of which He approves. And praise may be to His supporter and blessings on His prophet Muḥammad and all his family.15 Master-disciple-relation In this dialogue one encounters a setting typical of Arabic dialogues on the natural and occult sciences; namely, that of a disciple asking questions and a master answering. However, the situation becomes somewhat more complicated as the student here is a prince. Even if the monk is unafraid of the prince, as he states in the introduction, the rules of conduct and politeness must still be observed. At the very beginning, both interlocutors use their first names – Khālid and Maryānus – to address one another. This is, in Classical Arabic, not very polite; one would expect the use of the kunya. This usage might therefore signal that this is not an exchange between un- equal partners, but between equals. Later on, however, Maryānus more frequently uses Khālid’s title and calls him “prince” (amīr).16 Khālid 13MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 63r = ed. Al-Hassan, “The Arabic Original”, p. 227. 14MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 70r. 15MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 74v. 16 See for example MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fols. 68v, 70r, 73r. Al-Qantara XXXVII 2, 2016, pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589  doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013 Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 404 404 REGULAFORSTER himself uses the title “sage” (ḥakīm) only twice: first when he asks about the alchemical procedure (tadbīr)17 – here the title is obviously used to flatter Maryānus and render him more willing to answer. Khālid uses the title a second time when he is unhappy with an answer and wants a more appropriate explanation.18 The use of the title therefore marks the speaker’s discontent. This is not the only moment when Khālid is unhappy with the an- swer he is given. He often insists that Maryānus should answer him; he refers to God and his help and then renews his question,19or he flat- ters Maryānus by saying that he has spoken well merely in order to ask more pointedly about what he really wants to know.20Once he simply interrupts Maryānus by calling him by his name.21 Maryānus usually answers all his questions eventually; there is only one instance in which he does not: when Khālid wants further explanations about the location of the philosophers’ stone and how the stone can be part of every human being, Maryānus states that he has said everything already.22 Representation of knowledge transfer In Masāʼil Khālid, Khālid asks questions and Maryānus answers. These answers can be very long and sometimes touch on subjects other than those asked about. This is quite typical for dialogues of the masāʼil wa-ajwiba type, i.e., questions and answers,23 but it is intriguing that here the disciple insists on having his questions answered. Unlike most disciples in this kind of literature, Khālid is not content with whatever answer he is given. It is significantly he who sets the topics – the Umayyad prince is not someone who allows others to take the lead, not even in a field where he requires a teacher. 17MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 70v. 18MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 65r. 19MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fols. 68v, 70v, 74v. 20MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 64r (= ed. Al-Hassan, “The Arabic Original”, p. 230) and 68v. 21MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 68r. 22MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 70r. 23For the genre of masāʼil wa-ajwiba, see Daiber, “Masāʾil wa-adjwiba”. Al-Qantara XXXVII 2, 2016, pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589  doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013 Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 405 THETRANSMISSIONOFSECRETKNOWLEDGE 405 Maryānus does not make use of any logical arguments, but he does use rhetorical strategies, especially comparisons and citations of ancient authorities,24 such as Zosimus,25 Hermes Trismegistus26 or Mary the Copt.27By adducing these authorities Maryānus presents himself as the legitimate heir of a much older scientific tradition, which obviates the need to argue in terms of Aristotelian logic. Most of his comparisons are conventionally used in alchemical writings, such as, for example, the comparison of the alchemical process with the genesis of the em- bryo.28But some of his comparisons seem to be more original; for ex- ample, when Khālid complains that the sages used many terms to depict the prima materiaand doubts that it can be one thing only when it has so many names, Maryānus compares the alchemical process to the work of a tailor.29The tailor takes one piece of cloth, cuts it into several pieces and then sews a single shirt out of it. This is the way the alchem- ical art commences with a single matter that is dis- and re-assembled to become the real ‘philosophical’ gold. The multitude of names is merely a measure of protection against the ignorant masses. Here the dialogue touches on the problem of the alchemists’ allegorical lan- guage: a problem central to the transmission of alchemical knowledge. While Maryānus defends allegorical language as indispensable for pro- tecting secret knowledge that is not intended for the general public, his pupil insists on clear explications without the use of codes or symbols. Khālid is ultimately successful in this critique as the Masāʼil adopt a language more easily comprehensible than that used in many other al- chemical works. Kitāb Mihrārīs al-ḥakīm Kitāb Mihrārīs al-ḥakīm is also known as Kitāb al-Dhahab (“The Book of the Gold”).30 It is a dialogue between Mihrārīs and his pupil 24For these citations of authorities see also Dolgusheva, Zwei arabische Dialoge, esp. pp. 71-77. 25See for example MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fols. 66r, 68r, 69v. 26MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fols. 64v, 65r, 69v. 27See for example MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 66v, 67r, 68v. 28MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 71r. 29MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Şehit Ali Paşa 1749, fol. 65v. 30See Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften, pp. 177-178. Al-Qantara XXXVII 2, 2016, pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589  doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013 Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 406 406 REGULAFORSTER Marwārīd. Sezgin suggests that it might derive from a Greek original, but this remains unproven. Dolgusheva assumes that it was written in the first half of the tenth century CE.31I think that it may well be early as Mihrārīs is mentioned in the (late) tenth century CE in al-Nadīm’s Fihrist.32The dialogue was translated into Latin as Tractatus Micreris, probably in the fourteenth century, by an anonymous translator.33The Arabic manuscript I have used is incomplete at the beginning but a comparison with the Latin shows that only two of the pupil’s questions and one answer by Mihrārīs are missing.34 The literary frame In comparison with Masāʼil Khālid, the introduction of Kitāb Mihrārīsis relatively short. The only information regarding its contents is contained in the title and – slightly varied – in the colophon. The title reads as follows: The book of Mihrārīs, the Indian sage, the keeper of the treasure house (ṣāḥib khizāna) of Solomon, David’s son; and this is the end of the questions that Mar- wārīd asked, from what was translated (nuqilat) for Khālid b. Yazīd b. Muʻāwiya.35 31Dolgusheva, Zwei arabische Dialoge, esp. p. 12. 32In Flügel’s classic edition (Ibn al-Nadīm, Kitāb al-Fihrist, vol. 2, p. 353) as well as in the new edition by Sayyid (Ibn an-Nadīm, Kitāb al-Fihrist, vol. 4, p. 447), his name is presented in a corrupt form (Mihdāris), but see Dodge’s translation (Ibn al-Nadīm, The Fihrist, p. 850). 33See Cardelle de Hartmann, Lateinische Dialoge 1200-1400, pp. 78-79 and p. 710 (nr. A5). The Latin text was printed by Heilmann, Theatrum Chemicum, pp. 90-101. 34MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Nuruosmaniye 3633, fols. 250v-256v; a few more man- uscripts are known to be extant in Istanbul (Üniversite Kütüphanesi, A 6079), Cairo (Dār al-kutub, 58m), Teheran (Kitābkhāna-yi Malik, 1569/1; private collection of Muḥammad Ḥusayn Asadī), and Dublin (Chester Beatty Library, 5002, fol. 110 and 137-138 [ex- cerpts]), see Sezgin, Geschichte, p. 106; Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften, p. 177; Ullmann, Katalog, pp. 183, 196-198. 35MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Nuruosmaniye 3633, fol. 250v. This information is slightly varied in the colophon (fol. 256v), where Mihrārīs is called ṣāḥib bayt al-ḥikma (“keeper of the house of wisdom”) instead of ṣāḥib khizāna (“keeper of the treasure house”), implying that Solomon had a “house of wisdom” (i.e. a private library) just like the ʻAbbāsid caliphs (for the ʻAbbāsid bayt al-ḥikma, which was sometimes also called khizānat al-ḥikma, see Gutas and van Bladel, “Bayt al-Ḥikma”). – The Latin version leaves out any reference to India or Solomon, only giving the names of teacher and student: Incipit tractatus Micreris suo discipulo Mirnefindo(“Here begins the treatise of Micreris for his disciple Mirnefindus”), ed. Heilmann, Theatrum Chemicum, p. 90. Al-Qantara XXXVII 2, 2016, pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589  doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013 Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 407 THETRANSMISSIONOFSECRETKNOWLEDGE 407 Mihrārīs here is presented as an Indian sage in charge of Solomon’s treasure. As Solomon had a reputation not only for being wise but – in the Islamic Middle Ages – also for his magical powers,36 being his treasure keeper immediately makes Mihrārīs an authority in the field of occult sciences. Additionally, his connection with India – which in Classical Arabic literature was famous for its wisdom37 – adds to his reputation as a sage. Khālid b. Yazīd on the other hand, the Umayyad prince playing an active part in Masāʼil Khālid, gives this text if not more authority then at least more importance; this is not just any text but one considered significant by the famous Khālid himself. Throughout the dialogue itself we hear the narrator’s voice only when there is a change in interlocutor – ‘the student said’, ‘Mihrārīs said’. Only once does the narrator explain that the student finished thanking his master and then continued with his questioning.38This di- alogue therefore nearly approaches the form of a drama,39 but it has one serious shortcoming: it is divided into chapters, and Mihrārīs him- self states at the end of every chapter what topic he will continue with in the next chapter. Orality is betrayed here, probably due to a process of reshaping and redaction that was unsatisfactorily done.40 Master-disciple relation Like Masāʼil Khālid, Kitāb Mihrārīspresents an asymmetric rela- tionship between two interlocutors: on one side is the Indian sage, who is often called by name, and on the other side is his pupil, whose name, Marwārīd, is only mentioned in the title. In addition, the master usually addresses his pupil in the second person singular, while the student 36For Solomon and his magical powers which are especially prominent in tafsīrliter- ature and in the stories of the prophets (qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʼ), see for example Walker and Fen- ton, “Sulaymān”; Soucek, “Solomon”. 37The most prominent and perhaps most important example for India as the origin of wisdom obviously is Ibn al-Muqaffaʻ’s Kalīla wa-Dimna (ed. Cheikho, esp. pp. 19-44), see for examplede Blois, Burzoy’s Voyage, esp. pp. 40-60. 38MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Nuruosmaniye 3633, fol. 254v. 39For the problem of the form of literary dialogues (dramatic, narrated or indirect, and mixed) see Hösle, Der philosophische Dialog, pp. 166-186. 40Steinschneider mentions an even more advanced (and orally inacceptable) division (see Steinschneider, Die arabischen Übersetzungen, § 109), but he might be talking about a different text (see Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften, p. 178). Al-Qantara XXXVII 2, 2016, pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589  doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013 Alcantara Vol XXXVII-2 (segundas)_Maquetación 1 17/02/17 14:06 Página 408 408 REGULAFORSTER sometimes uses the title “honoured master” (al-muʻallim al-ṣāliḥ).41 Though the relationship is asymmetrical the disciple is not particularly polite and is allowed to express his doubts.42 Julius Ruska has described the dialogue of the Latin version of this text as monotonous, since it is always the student who asks questions and the teacher who replies.43This analysis is certainly correct for the Arabic version as well. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that the disciple only proposes a topic of his own in his very first question. Throughout the rest of the dialogue he restricts himself to asking questions that re- late to the answer he has just received from his teacher, but he never starts a completely new topic of his own. By this technique the text stresses the asymmetric relationship even more, but at the same time the text becomes rather coherent: a feature that is not at all typical of Arabic alchemical literature. This aspect is further accentuated by the fact that Mihrārīs’ answers are usually clear and he never tries to evade the questions. Unlike Khālid in Masāʼil Khālid, Marwārīd therefore never needs to flatter his master in order to obtain answers to his ques- tions.44 Finally, it is noteworthy that the student sometimes speaks at length, while Mihrārīs at times offers very short answers. All these points taken together make it clear that Kitāb Mihrārīsis not a typical question-answer dialogue. In fact, this work is far more pleasing to read than many similar texts. Representation of knowledge transfer As was likewise the case with Maryānus, Mihrārīs’ authority is never questioned in the dialogue. He therefore never needs to use logical ar- guments but instead relies on comparisons and references to alchemical authorities, whom he cites by name – like Ostanes, Hippocrates, Hermes 41See for example MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Nuruosmaniye 3633, fols. 251r, 254v, 255v. – The title “teacher” (muʻallim) is quite commonly used in Arabic alchemical liter- ature, see Forster, “Auf der Suche”, pp. 217-218. 42MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Nuruosmaniye 3633, fol. 253v. 43Ruska, Turba Philosophorum, p. 323. 44See for example MS. Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Nuruosmaniye 3633, fols. 251r, 253r, 254r. Al-Qantara XXXVII 2, 2016, pp. 399-422 ISSN 0211-3589  doi: 10.3989/alqantara.2016.013