The early Imamate Shiite historians (Nukhbati, w-Ashari al- Qummi and al- Kashi) recorded the first development that appeared in the ranks of the Shiites in the time of Imam Amir al-Muminin Ali bin Abi Talib (peace be upon him) on the hands of the so-called Abdullah bin Saba, said to be a Jew, who later accepted Islam. Nukhbati said of him that he was the first to spread the claim that Ali is the right leader (Imam). He used to say in his Jewish religion that Yusha bin Nun was the Wasiy of Musa (one to lead after him, through his will). This same idea he propagated in Islam, as regards Ali in relation to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) He showed absolved himself his innocence from his enemies, and showed open enmity to his opponents. He scorned and attacked Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman and the rest of the companions. (1)
It does not matter whether Abdullah bin Saba was a real or mythical figure, for the Shiite historians record the initial appearance of the earlier development in the Shiite political thought, based on the idea of personal and spiritual “Will”(Wasiyyah), from the Noble Prophet to Imam Ali. So also the attribution of political meaning to that (Will), based on the analogy of the “Will” from Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) to Yusha’ bin Nun, and the hereditary nature of the priesthood in the progeny of Yusha.
Even though this statement is weak and was confined to few people among the Shiites at the time of Imam Ali and also that Imam Ali, himself has rejected it in very strong terms, and warned those making that statement, that trend found a fertile ground to spread its ideas, when Muawiyah appointed his son, Yazid to lead the Ummah after him. The main problem faced by the people of this trend was the lack of support or outright rejection of their claim by Imam Hassan, and Imam Hussain, and the political isolation chosen by Imam Ali bin Hussain, this led the advocates of this doctrine to gather around Imam Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah, and to consider him as Wasiy of Imam Ali, especially when he accepted the leadership of the Shiites after the murder of Imam Hassan. The Sabaiyyah infiltrated the ranks of the Kisanniyyah movement, which wanted to avenge the murder of Imam Hussain, under the leadership of Mukhtar bin Ubaidah al-Thaqafi.
Mukhtar, who was leading the Shiites for Kufah did claim that, Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah has ordered him to avenge the killing (of Imam Hussain), by killing Hussains murderers, and that he is the Imam after his father. Mukhtar did not consider the caliphs before Ali, such as Abu Baker, Umar and Uthman as unbelievers. But he considered those who fought Imam Ali at the battles of Siffin and the Camel as unbelievers. (2)
Ash’ari al-Qummi mentions that: The security guard of Mukhtar (Kisan), who influenced him towards the demand for the blood of Hussain, and who pointed to him his murderers, being his intelligence chief and executor of his plots, was more eager in words, actions and killing. He used to say that, Mukhtar is the choice of Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah (by his will) and his representative. He used to consider all those leaders before Ali as unbelievers, so also those who participated in the battles of Siffin and Camel. (3)
Despite the early falls of the kingdom rule by Mukhtar after just a short time the Kisaniyyah movement that assembled around its spiritual leader, Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah, started declaring that “ The Imam must be in Ibn Hanafiyyah and in his progeny”. (4)
On his deathbed, Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah, appointed his son Abdullah (Abu Hashim) as the leader after him. He directed to seek for the Caliphate, as far as he could. He informed the Shiites of making him their leader. So Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Ali became the Leader of the Shiites. (5)
At the end of the first century of Hijrah, Abu Hashim became the undisputable leader of the Shiites in the absence of any formidable contender. The kisaniyyah movement disintegrated after him into many several sects each one leader of a sect claiming that he chose him and gave him his will. The Abbasids also claimed that Abu Hashim chose Muhammad bin Ali bin Abdullah bin Abbas, and that he said to him the affairs and the seeking of the Caliphate are in your hands after me. So he appointed him and called as witness, leaders of the Shiites, then he dies. Muhammad bin Ali, by that became the leader of Shiites, and the advocator of the Caliphate till his death. When he was about to die, he appointed his son, Ibrahim as the leader. He lived as the leader of Shiites and the advocator of the Caliphate after his father. (6)
Janahiyyun (Janahites) claimed that he (Ibrahim) chose Abdullah bin Muawiyah bin Abdullah bin Ja’far bin Abi Talib, who appeared in Kufah in the year 128 A.H, as the leader. He established a kingdom that extended up to Persia in the last years of the Umayyad rule. Hassaniyyu also claim that he chose their leader Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Hassan bin Hassan (Dhu al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah) as the leader after him.
Anyway, the issue of will (Wasiyyah) has developed, from the normal and personal will of the Prophet (peace be upon him) to Imam Ali, to the issue of political will from (Ali) to his son Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah, and after him to his son Abu Hashim. This is what led to conflicts between the different Shiites factions, and the claim of each one of them that he was the only one legally chosen.
IMAM BAQIR’S POLITICAL
THEORY
While the different movements of the
Shiites were preparing for a showdown against the Umayyad rule and (were
calling for) retaliation for the murder of Hussain, and were engulfed in
internal stripe, Imam Muhammad bin Ali Baqir in the year 94 A.H., and after the
death of his father, Imam Sajjad, entered the political and intellectual
struggle. He fought a serious battle to wrestle the leadership of Shiites from
his cousin Abu Hashim and his followers, and to consolidate it in the lineage
of Fatimah and the house of Hussain. He considered any claim to Imam ship
without the legal right, as inventing lie against Allah, even if the claimant
is one of the son Ali bin Abi Talib. (7)
Imam Baqir did depend in his claim to Imam ship and in seeing himself as the most deserving of that position, on the call for retaliation against the murder of his grand father Imam Hussain, and the subsequent leadership of the Shiites in attaining that goal. He used to say: “ And whoever is killed wrongfully, We have given his heir the authority to demand Qisas” he also said that the verse: “The prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves and his wives are their mothers (as regards respect and marriage), and blood relations among each other have closer personal ties in the Decree of Allah” was revealed on the use of leadership, and that it revolves around the progeny of Hussain after his death. So we have more right in the affair and have more right as regards the Prophet (S.A.W) than the believers and the Muhajirin. The children of Ja’far and Abbas have no share of the affair, nor do any of the lineages of the progeny of Abd al-Mutallib, or even the progeny of Hassan bin Ali. No one of the followers of Muhammad has any share except us. (8)
He also says, in this regard: “May Allah bless my uncle Hassan! Hassan did shield 40,000 swords after the death of Amir al-Muminin, and handed them over to Mu'awiyah. Muhammad bin Ali shielded 70,000 fighting swords, if a calamity may befall them, they will all die. Hussain then emerged and put his life before Allah together with 70,000 men. Who has more right to demand for retaliation than us? By Allah, we are the rightful owners of the affair; among us are the Saffah and Mansur. Allah says “ And whoever is killed wrongfully we have given his heir the authority (to demand Qisas). We are the heirs of Hussain bin Ali and on his religion. (9)
Abdullah bin Hassan bin Hassan was however, rejecting the idea of confining the Imamate to the house of Hussain. He says disparagingly “How did Imamate become confined to the children of Hussain m and not of Hussain, while the two are the leaders of the youths in paradise? They are equal in virtue, only that Hassan has another virtue over Hussain, that of being the elder. It becomes mandatory then that leadership (Imamate) must be in the one with more virtues”. (10)
In an attempt from Imam Baqir to transcend this difference and to end it decisively, and to enhance the legality of his demand for leading the Shiites, he depended, in addition to the demand of blood relationship, on the issue of “possessing the weapon of the Prophet of Allah “ and his inheriting it from his grandparents: as he used to say: “The position of the weapon to us is similar to that of Ark of the children of Israel, Wherever it is found, that will be where leadership will be. So wherever the weapon is found, that is where knowledge is”. (11)
He asked while refuting the Kisaniyyah “Cant they say with whom is the weapon of Prophet of Allah? … The sign that was on his sword, was also on his two sides, if they but know.” (12)
Muhammad bin Hassan al-Saffar one of the pivots of Imamiyyah Shiites in the 3rd century of Hijrah –used to say: “Ali bin Hussain preferred his son Muhammad Baqir at the time of his death with the possessing of the shield that contain the weapon of the Messenger of Allah. His brother challenged him on it, and he said to them. “By Allah you have no right on it, if you have any right on it, he would not have given it to me.” (13)
Saffar used to say, Imam Baqir used to point to the right of Imam to the caliphate based on the evidence of his inheriting the weapon of the Messenger of Allah, and that he mentioned that as an evidence before the people of Shura (consultation). (14)
Imam Baqir depended on his inheritance of books from his father for seeking the Imamate. Kulayni said, He did use the evidence of knowledge against his brother Zayd bin Ali, who was preparing for a revolt, and was trying to assume the leadership of the Shiites. He asked him if he knows the lawful and the unlawful, and advised him not to assume or seek leadership before sufficient perusal of the lawful and the unlawful.
One day his (Baqir‘s) brother, Zayd came to
him, and with letters from the people of Kufah, calling him in those letters to
go to them, and telling him of their meeting, and instructing him to rebel. Abu
Jafar said to him:
“Are these letters their own initiative, or a reply of what you have written to them and what you called them to? “He said: No it is the peoples initiative, for their knowledge of our right and our close relation to the Messenger of Allah, and also due to what they find in the Book of Allah, the Exalted, and the obligation of our love and obedience; and due to the harshness and difficulty of our situation Abu Ja'far then said to him:
“Obedience is an obligation from Allah the Exalted and a Tradition he established in the earlier people, and in the same way He will maintain it in the later people. Obedience will be for one of us, while love will be for all. The command of Allah comes to His beloved friends (Awliya) through a transmitted injunction, clear destiny and confirmed judgment and in an appointed time, let not those who have no certainty of faith discourage you, they can avail you nothing against Allah don’t be in a haste. For surely Allah does not bring things before their appointed time due to the haste of people, you should not go before Allah, and calamity will incapacitate and overpower you.”
Zayd became infuriated at this juncture and then said:
“The Imam among us is not that who sits in his house and lower his curtains and who discourage Jihad, but he is that one who protects what is in his possession, and fight for the sake of Allah a true Jihad, and who defended his followers and safeguard his harem”, Abu Jafar then said, “Do you know my brother, any right for yourself, of what you attributed to it which you cam buttress with a verse from the Book of Allah or an evidence from the Messenger of Allah or you give a similitude of it? For definitely Allah has made some things lawful, while others he has made unlawful, and He has made certain things obligatory and gave similitudes and examples and established ways. He did not made the Imam, who is maintaining his affairs before, an ambiguity go before him in an affair before its time, or that he fights before the right time for Allah the exalted has said regarding hunting… He has set appointed time for every thing. For every matter there is a decree, If you are quite sure of your affair, and you are certain of your matter you can go on: otherwise you should not embark on an affair of which you are in doubt and is ambiguous. Don’t try to bring about the end of a rule, which fruits have not finished, and which has not come to an end and the decree has not been fulfilled. You have seen disintegration, and humiliation of the followed and the followers I seek refuge in Allah from the Imam who has lost his time and in which the follower is more knowledgeable than the followed. Do you want O my brother to revive the way of the people who disbelieved the signs of Allah and disobeyed his Messenger, I seek refuge in Allah, O my brother, that you may be crucified tomorrow, (then tears fell from his eyes and flowed). He then said, Allah is between us and those exposed our secret and deny us our right, secret and who attribute us to other than our grandfather, and those who said regarding us, what we did not say about ourselves. (15)
Kulayni is reporting this dialogue in al-Kafi in the fourth century of
Hijrah…. It is likely that the Imamate Shiites fabricated it in a later date
against the Zaydiyyah (Zaydite) Shiites, but it clearly reveals the evidences
of Imam Baqir against his brother based on knowledge, before the inception of
the theory of the text or ‘will’ as necessary requirements for the Imamate.
As for Zayd bin Ali, he used to say, “Imam among us is not that who sits
in his house and bring down his curtains (i.e. close his doors) and discourage
Jihad but the Imam among us is that who protects what is in his possession and
domain and fight for the sake of Allah a true Jihad, and who defended his
followers and safeguard his harem.” (16)
So Imam Baqir’s political theory rests essentially on the pillars of knowledge, and the possession of the weapon of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and the right of being the heir of the oppressed (Imam Hussain), more than its being based on a clear text, or a declared will, such that the theory of Imamate has not yet crystallized among the Shiites, in the beginning of the second century of Hijrah, up to the time and stage when the issue of the text and the will became central. The general population of Shiites at that time were ignorant of the right of Imam Baqir to the Imamate, and they could not distinguish him from the other pivots of the houses of Hassan, Hussain Ali and Hashim, who were advocating for the leadership of the Shiites, and were competing in that.
Imam Baqir has succeeded in forming a special group of Shiites loyal to him even though it soon became fictionalized, immediately after his death in the year 114 A.H. One of these factions followed his brother Imam Zayd bin Ali, who declared a revolt against the Umayyad Caliph Hisham bin Abd al-Malik in the year 122 A.H, drawing from the theory of “ relations” He said “ The relations of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) has more right to lead and rule. He called for supporting the people of the Prophet’s household (Ahl al-Bayt) in a general sense. He said, “ We call to the Book of Allah and the tradition of his Prophet (peace be upon him) fighting the tyrants, defending the downtrodden and giving those denied; and the distribution of this spoils (Fay) among its rightful owners equally, and returning what was taken wrongly to its owners. So also the closure of hearth, and our help for the members of the Prophets household against any one who pitched his tent against us, and deny us our right.” (17)
The other faction under the leadership of Mughirah bin Sa’id, declared the Imamate of Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Hassan (Dhu al-Nafs al- Zakiyyah), who was preparing to revolt against the Umayyad rule. The third faction however, followed Imam Ja'far bin Muhammad Al–Sadiq. (18)
IMAM SADIQ POLITICAL THEORY
Imam Sadiq (A.S) was able to assert and establish his
leadership of the Shiites and to prove his capabilities, vast knowledge and
good guidance. He was not in dire need of the will, or an indication of it, to
occupy that great position, which he occupied in the society and in history.
You do not find many traditions in the Shiite heritage on the topic of a text
or a will from his father on his Imamate, except a narration describing a very
common will reported by Imam Sadiq himself, when he said, “ My father has given
me the trust of what is there". When he was about to die, he said, “Call
for me witnesses.” I called four witnesses for including one Nafi, the freed
slave of Abdullah bin Umar. Then he said, “ Write; This is what Yaqub has
enjoined on his sons. O my sons, Allah has chosen for you that (true) religion,
then die not except in the faith of Islam (as Muslims). Muhammad bin Ali has
enjoined on Ja’far bin Muhammad, instructing him to shroud him in his garment,
in which he used to pray Friday Prayer; and that he should turbaned him with
his turban; and that he should make his grave a square; and should raise it by
four fingers; and that he should untie the knots while placing him in the
grave, then he said to the witnesses. “You can go may Allah have mercy on you.
Then I said to him, “O father, there is nothing in this that requires
witnesses. He than said, “O my son, I fear that you will be defeated, and that
it will be said, He did not leave any will for him, so I desire that you
possess the evidence. (19)
Some narrations transmitted by Al-Saffar, Kulayni and
Mufid from Imam Sadiq said that he was waging a war for the Imamate against his
contenders: his uncle Zayd and his cousin and Al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah, on the basis
of this will of his father, in addition to the issue of his possession of the
weapon of the Messenger of Allah, so also his ring, shield and flag. The problem
however, was that Muhammad bin Abdullah was also claiming to be in possession
of the weapon of the Messenger of Allah. This is what made Imam Sadiq to
disbelieve him vehemently and to state: “By Allah, definitely he is lying .By
Allah, he does not have it with him, he has never seen it, with one of his two
eyes. He did not see it with his father, except if he saw it with Ali bin
Hussain. (20)
Imam Sadiq confirmed in another narration reported by
Kulayni in Al-Kafi that: “I have the white and red sword covers sword covers in
which the weapon is kept, and it will be opened for blood. The rightful owner
of the sword will bring it out for war. The progeny of Hassan do know this as
they know that night is night and day is day.
It is only envy and seeking the life of this world
that make them to deny it. If they seek their right with truth, that would be
better for them. (21)
He also says in another narration, “They have lied by
Allah. The Messenger of Allah had two swords, with one of is a sign on the
right side. They should tell their two signs and their two names if they are
truthful. But I do not despise my cousin, the name of the first is Al-Rusum and
the other is Al-Mukhaddham. (22)
The problem that was facing Imam Sadiq was his
inability to bring the weapon before the general public due to the fear of the
rulers. Due to this he presented another evidence instead of it i.e. the will,
where he says to one of his companions Abd-al-A’la who asked him on this
problem. It will not be concealed unless he (Imam) has another evidence proof.
“He pointed to the above mentioned will as evidence complementing (other
evidences) for the Imam. (23)
It
appears from some of the narrations mentioned by Saffar and Mufid: Surely the
issue of weapon was at that time the most important deciding factor in the
tussle for the Imamate between Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Hassan bin Hassan and
Imam Sadiq. Imam Sadiq used to say the similitude of the weapon to us is like
the similitude of the Ark (Tabut) to the children of Israel To the children of
Israel, if they find the Ark on the door of any family, Prophecy will be given
to that family. To anyone the weapon goes among us, will be given the Imamate.
My father wore the shield of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and
the earth showed some signs on him. I wear it and it is (still with me). When
our leader (Qa'im) will wear it he will fill it i.e. the earth, (with justice)
by the will of Allah.” (24) Another narration points to, in addition to the
weapon, the role of knowledge in determining the personality of the Imam. Imam
Sadiq says on this, directing his statement to the Shiites “If you will only,
when they ask you (the progeny of Hassan), and you reply then when they present
an evidence on the issue (of the weapon), it is more preferable to say to them:
“We are not as has reached to you. But we seek this knowledge from the scholars
and the learned.
This weapon is with him who will possess it. If it is
with you, we will pay allegiance to you, and if it is with some other people, we
will seek for it, till we know (its whereabouts).” (24)
It can be understood from this narration that the
children of Hassan were claiming knowledge and the possession of the weapon, as
they also claim the possession of the Mushaf (copy of the glorious Quran) of
Fatimahh, all these as evidences of their being the legal and deserving persons
for the Imamate. With the ambiguity on the contents of the Mushaf of Fatimahh,
Imam Sadiq deny its existence with the children of Hassan, and he used to say “
In their mention of the weapon, lies what goes against them, because they are
not saying the truth… The truth is in it. Let them put before us the affairs of
Ali and his inheritance if they are truthful. Ask them about the maternal and
paternal aunts. Let them present the Mushaf of Fatimahh, for there is in it the
will of Fatimahh, and with it the weapon of Messenger of Allah, Surely Allah
has said “Bring a Book (revealed before this) or some trace of knowledge (in
support of your claims) if you are truthful.” (25)
Imam Sadiq while assessing the feature that qualifies
him for becoming the Imam said, “We surely have what will make us independent
of people, but the people will be in need of us. We possess the Sahifah
(Scroll) (its Length) 70 arm lengths, in the handwriting of Ali, based on the
dictation of the Messenger of Allah. In it all legal and illegal issues have
been explained. (26)
Imam Sadiq also explains the knowledge he has, saying.
“It is an inheritance from the Messenger of Allah, and from Ali bin Abi Talib,
knowledge not in need of people but people are in need of it.” (27)
Neither the issue of the will, nor that of the weapon
or the knowledge form a decisive evidence in the tussle between Imam Sadiq and
his uncle and cousin on the leadership of the Shiites, as they were also
claiming the possession of knowledge and weapon. He did not believe that that
constitute sufficient legal evidence (for his claim) but only as supporting
points for his claim to Imamate. This is true because Imam Sadiq was presenting
himself as an Imam whose obedience has been imposed by Allah, but as one of the
leaders of the household of the Prophet. Due to this he denied and rejected the
statement of some of the Shiites in Kufah:
“He is an
Imam whose obedience has been imposed by Allah. This is what the previous
narration on the tongue of Sa’id al-Samman and Sulaiman bin Khalid has
mentioned: Imam Sadiq was one day sitting under his Thaqifah (Shade), when some
people of Kufah sought permission to see him. He allowed them in. Having
entered they said to him, “O father of Abdullah, some people came to us,
claiming that among you the household of the Prophet is the Imam whose
obedience has been imposed as a duty by Allah.” He replied: “No, I don’t know
that in our household.” They then said, “O father of Abdullah, they are people
of hard work (in worship) seclusion and fear of God, and they are claiming that
you are the one. He replied, “They know what they say better (than me). I did
not command them to say so”. (28)
As a consequence of the lack of any special (divine)
feature on the part of Imam Sadiq, and the lack of any knowledge of a (divine)
text for the Imamate of Imam Sadiq, in the views of the Shiites of that time,
the movement of Zaydites, under the leadership of his uncle Zayd bin Ali, who
initiated a revolution in Kufah in year 122 A.H. The Shiites his death,
gathered around his son Yahya bin Zayd, who led another revolt against the
Umayyad regime in the year 125 A.H. After three years of the failure of these
two uprisings, another widespread Shiite uprising erupted in the year 128 A.H,
under the leadership of one to the Talibites, i.e. Abdullah bin Mu’awiyah bin
Abdullah bin Ja’far Tayyar. That was the revolt that really shook the masses of
the Shiites in various cities of Iraq, which also spread to Al-Mahin and
Hamadhan Qumas, Isfahan, Rayy and Faris. The slogan of the uprising was “ to
Rida of the family of Muhammad. It was the slogan of the general masses of the
Shiites at that time.
Abdullah bin Mu’awiyah made Isfahan the center of his
movement and call, and also his area of influence. He sent for the other
Hashimites, Alawites and Abbasids, to come to him and contribute in
administering the area under his control. A large number of them trooped to
him. (29)
After the subsequent failure of this revolt also, the
Shiites started claiming the Imamate of Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Hassan bin
Hassan (Dhu al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah), who was considering himself as the Awaited
Mahdi. The majority of Shiites paid allegiance to him including the Abbasids
Al-Saffah and Mansur. (30)
THE
ABBASIDS THEORY OF IMAMATE
The Abbasids who became victorious in the year 132 A.H
found themselves in great discomfiture. They dissociated themselves from the
old Shiite ideas, and altered their political theory, that is by redesigning
the source of the legality of their nascent regime, depending on the right of
their grandfather Abbas bin AbdulMutallib to inherit the Prophet (S.A.W) more
than his cousin, Ali bin Abi Talib.
In the sermon of Abu Abbas al-Saffah, who became the
first Abbasid Caliph reccve uath paid allegiance in Kufah on 12th
Rabi Awwal 132 A.H, he described the children of Abbas as the true protectors
and defenders of Islam and the Muslins, and Islam’s fortress those who maintain
it (Islam) and its real helpers. Then he pointed to their relationship with the
prophet; and that Allah has favored them with being the Prophets relations and
his kith and kin. He then recited several verses of the Quran, i.e. “ Allah
wishes only to remove evil deeds and sins from you, O members of the household
(of the Prophet), and to purify you with a thorough purification”. Say (O
Muhammad), “ No reward do I ask of you for this except to be kind to
relations”. “And warn your tribe (O Muhammad), of near kindred”. “What Allah
gave as booty (Fay) to His Messenger, from the people of the townships—it is
for Allah, His Messenger, the kindred of the Prophet (peace be upon him); “And
know that whatever of war-booty that you may gain, verily one –fifth of it is
assigned to Allah, and to the Messenger, and to the near relatives of the
Prophet (peace be upon him). He then criticized the views of the Saba'iyyah
(followers of Abdullah bin Saba') who were inclined to the views of Kisaniyyah,
saying, “Saba'iyyah claim wrongly that some people other than us have more
right to ruler ship and Caliphate than us, evil be their faces.”
Dawud bin Ali, the uncle of the Caliph Abu Abbas has
pointed out, in his speech of paying allegiance (bay’ah) to his nephew, to the
new source of legality for the Abbasid state, as the inheritance of Abbas. He
said, “ the Muslims are now in the covenant of Allah. His messenger and Abbas.”
Mas’udi mentioned in ‘Muruj al-Dhahab’ “The
Rawandites, who were the Shiites from
the
children of Abbas from Khurasan and elsewhere used to say: The Messenger of Allah (S.W.T) has died, the most deserving of people
for the Imamate after him was Abbas bin Abd al-Mutallib, for he was his uncle,
his heir, and the closest of his relatives. Allah has said: “And blood
relations among each other have closer personal ties in the Decree of Allah.
And people have usurped his right from him, and have done injustice to him,
till the time when Allah returned it to them, despite the fact that he has
never abandoned the Caliphate. They dissociated themselves from Abu Bakr and
Umar. They legalized the oath of allegiance to Ali bin Abi Talib, due to its
legitimization by Abbas, i.e., in his statement “ O my nephew! Come to me I
will pay my allegiance to you, so that none will oppose you. Likewise due to
the statement of Dawud bin Ali on the pulpit (minbar) of Kufah on the day allegiance was paid to Abu
Abbas, “ O people of Kufah, no Imam appeared among you after, the Messenger of
Allah, except Ali bin Abi Talib, and the leader among you now i.e. Abu Abbas
Al-Saffah.” (33)
The Abbasid Caliph Mahdi Muhammad bin Abi Ja’far
Mansur confirmed this theoretical shift, when he established the Imamate of
Abbas bin Abd al- Mutallib after the Messenger of Allah, and called the
Rawandites to it, and to pay allegiance to him. He said, “ Abbas was his uncle
his heir and the closest person to him. Definitely Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and
Ali, and all those who became Caliphs and claimed Imamate after the Messenger
of Allah, were usurpers who jumped to what they have no right on.” (34)
Mahdi established the Imamate and the Khilafah of
Abbas bin Abd al-Mutallib after the Prophet (peace be upon him), for his
companions and allies, as well as the Muslim community (Ummah). He then
established it for Abdullah bin Abbas, after the death of Abbas. After Abdullah
he established for Ali bin Abdullah known as Sajjad and after him, for Muhammad
bin Ali bin Abdullah, and then for Ibrahim bin Muhammad, known as the Imam, and
after him for his brother Abdullah bin Muhammad Al-Saffah, then for his brother
Abdullah Mansur, the father of Mahdi.
The Rawandites based on the above said, “ The Messenger
of Allah, the Exalted has been received (by Allah), the person most deserving
of the Imamate after him was Abbas bin Abd al-Mutallib, because he was his
uncle, heir and his closest relation, Allah has said, “And blood relations
among each other have closer personal ties.” People did usurp his right and
committed injustice to him till the time Allah returned it to them. There is no
Imamate among women. Fatimah has no inheritance as regards the Imamate. Cousins
and grandchildren cannot inherit anything with the existence of the uncle. So
Ali and the children of Fatimah cannot inherit the Imamate, in the presence of
Abbas. Due it this, Abbas and his children became, of all people, the most
deserving of it. (35)
In this way, the Rawandites developed a political
theory based on inheritance and the right of blood relationship, and discarded
the Shura, when they said, “the election of the Imam by the Ummah is invalid
and a mistake. It can only be valid through its establishment and a covenant in
the past by the one who accepts and appoints him to success him after him.”
Jahiz has authored, a book, on this issue and entitled it, “The Book of the
Imamate of Children of Abbas, arguing in favor of this opinion.
THE
OPPOSITION FROM THE HASSANITES
Naturally, Muhammad bin Abdullah (Dhu al-Nafs
al-Zakiyyah), who was the greatest leader of the Shiites at that time, did
reject the new Abbasid theory, as he rejected paying allegiance to Saffah and
Mansur. He wrote a long letter to the latter mentioning in it, “Definitely It
is our right, you claimed this affair using us, and fought for it with our
followers and supporters, and encouraged people (to fight) through our virtue.
Definitely our father, Ali was the owner of the will, and he was the Imam. How
did you inherit his right, when his children are alive? “Mansur wrote a long
reply to his letter, saying in it, “As for your statement that you are the
children of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), Allah, the Exalted has
said in His Book, “Muhammad (peace be upon him) is not the father of any of
your men,” but you were the children of his daughter, it is a very close
relationship, but it cannot inherit, it cannot inherit leadership. (37)
Dhu al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah then appeared in Madinah, in
the beginning of Rajab of the year 145 A.H and declared that he is the most
deserving of the Caliphate among the children of the Immigrants (Muhajirin). He
pointed that all the major centers of Islamic world have paid their allegiance
to him. He encouraged people to pay their allegiance to him due to the
allegiance of the nobles among the children of Hashim given to him. (38)
Isfahani in his “Maqatil al-Talibiyyin reported that
Sadiq allowed his two sons Musa and Abdullah to join the revolt of Muhammad bin
Abdullah in Madinah. Muhammad had wanted to exempt them from participating in
it, but Ja’far insisted on that, as an expression of his support for the
movement of Dhu al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah.
THE
GENERAL SHIITE THEORY
The issue of revolting against the Umayyads served as
a rallying force for all the different factions of Shiite movement in the
beginning of the second century of Hijrah. The general populace of Shiites did
not generally distinguish between the various Imams from the Prophet’s
household. Due to this, they used to join any movement led by anyone of them.
Salim bin Abi Hafs, who was the first to call people to the Imamate of Sadiq
after the death of his father, later joined the movement of Zayd, together with
some of his companions, namely, Kathir al–Nawa, Abu Isma'il or Kathir bin
Isma'il bin Nafi al-Nawa, Hakam bin Uyaynah, Salmah bin Kahil and Abu al
–Miqdam Thabit al-Haddad. (39)
Sulaiman bin Jarir used to say, “ Anyone who pulls out
his sword from among the children of Hassan and Hussain, and he is a scholar
ascetic and brave, he is the Imam, Ali was the best of men after the Prophet
and the most deserving of the Imamate, but he handed over to the first three
rightly- guided Caliphs the affairs willingly, and abandoned his right
wishfully, we accept what he accepted, we hand over what he handed over. He has
confirmed the Imamate (Leadership) of Abu Bakr and Umar, because of their being
chosen by the Ummah as a right through Ijtihad (analogy). He also used to say:
Imamate (leadership) is established through consultation in the entire Ummah.
Even though the Ummah has erred in paying allegiance to the two in the presence
of Ali, but that error has not reached the stage of disobedience (fisq), it is
an error in analogy (ijtihad). However, he blamed Uthman due to the new things
he instituted. He considered him an unbeliever due to that. Likewise he
considered ‘A’ishah, Zubair and Talhah as unbelievers for their waging war
against Ali… (40)
Abu al-Jarud Ziyad bin Abi Ziyad al-Hamadhani al-Kufi
was initially supporting Imam Baqir, and then he shifted to the party of his
brother Zayd bin Ali, together with a large member of his companions. Despite
the fact that he was an extremist as regards the companions, for he blamed them
for not recognizing Imam Ali and electing him, he denied the existence of any
clear text on the Imamate of Ali. He said it was by illustration, not by name.
Due to this, the Jarudites based their theory of Imamate on the basis of
challenge and revolt (revolution), and not on the basis of a text. They believed
in including the children of Hassan and Hussain in the Imamate, and rejected
confining this right to the children of Hussain alone, as well as the existence
of any kind of texts on this. (41)
As a result of that they said: “The Imamate of Ali bin
Abi Talib is established at the time he called the people, and made his affair
manifest” Hussain became the Imam later at the time he revolted; then Zayd bin
Ali … then anyone who called to the obedience of Allah from the family of
Muhammad, is the Imam. (42)
The Jarudites and the Zaydites generally rejected the
confinement of the Imamate to the children of Hussain, and considered anyone
saying that, as having gone out of the fold of Islam. They said “ It is to be
decided by consultation among the entire children of the two. And that the
Imamate after Hussain has become by the election and consensus of the Prophets
household on one person among them, and their acceptance of him, and his
subsequent taking up of arms. (43) They went to the extreme against the Imams
of the line of Hussain, and alleged that anyone of them who claim the Imamate,
while sitting in his house lowering down his curtains, is an unbeliever and a
Mushrik (one who associate any thing with Allah), so also anyone who follows
him on that or who accepts his Imamate.
(44)
Despite the Jarudites being the most extreme sect on
the issue of a text, in the beginning of the second century of Hijrah, they
never said that the Imamate would only be established through a text till the
Day of Resurrection. They however, confined the text to Imam Ali, Hassan and
Hussain, only saying: The Imamate after that is through Shura (consultation
action) within the progeny of Imam Ali to the Day of Resurrection. Any person
from among them who appeared and is qualified and deserving, he is the Imam. (45)
Another statement from a section of the Shiites at that time, saying that the
Imamate has ceased after Hussain, supports the above position. If added that the Imams
were only three, i.e. those named and
appointed by the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), through his will, and
he made them evidences on the people, and leaders after him, one after the
other, and including the rejection of the Imamate of anyone after them. (46)
REFERENCES
1.
1.
Nubakhti: Firaq al-Shi’ah Page-22,
Ash’ari al –Qummi:
Al-Maqalat wa al-Firaq, P-19, Al Kashi: Al Rijal, and Muhammad Hassan Al-Zayn:
Al Shi’ah Fi al –Tarikh, P.
172.
2.
2.
Ash’ari al –Qummi: Al Maqalat wa al-Firaq p.21-22
3.
3.
ibid.
4.
4.
Al –Mufid: Al-Fusul al-Mukhtarah, P. 240
5.
5.
IBM Qutaybah: Al-Imamah wa al-Siyasah,
Vol.2 P.130
6.
6.
ibid. vol, 2, P.131-132, Ash’ari:
Al-Maqalat wa al-Firaq. P.65, Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, Vol, P .40 .Al –Isfahani:
Muqatil Al-Talibiyyin, P.126, Al-Mas’udi, Al-Tanbih wa al-Ishraf, P.292. ,
Kulayni: Al-Kafi, vol. 1, P. 372
7.
7.
Ali bin Babawaih Al-Saduq: Al-Imamah wa
al-Tabsirah min al-Hayrah, P-18
8.
8.
Al-Iyashi: Al-Tafsir. Vol. 2, P. 291
9.
9.
Saduq: Ikmal al-Din, P. 291
10.
10. Saduq: Ikmal al-Din, P.210
11.
11. Saffar: Basair al-Darajat, P. 176
12.
12. ibid. P. 178
13.
13. ibid, P. 180
14.
14. ibid. P. 181
15.
15. Kulayni Al-Kafi, Vol.1, P.305, Vol.1 P. 257
16.
16. ibid, vol. 1. P. 257
17.
17. Tafsir Furat Ibn Ibrahim al-Kufi, P. 49, Tabari: Vol.
3, P 267
18.
18. Nubakhti, Firaq al-Shi’ah
19.
19. Kulayni: Al-Kafi, Vol-1, P.307, Mufid: Al-Irshad, P.
272
20.
20. Saffar: Basa'ir al-Darajat, P. 17
21.
21. Kulayni: Al-Kafi, Vol.1 P.240
22.
22. Saffar: Basa'ir al-Darajat, P. 148
23.
23. Kulayni, op. cit vol.1 P 278, 289
24.
24. Saffar, op.cit, P 174-176, Mufid, of cit, P. 274-275
25.
25. Saffar, op-cit, P. 158
26.
26. Kulayni, op.cit, Vol. 1, P-241
27.
27. Saffar, op.cit, P. 142
28.
28. ibid. p. 326
29.
29. Kulayni, op.cit, Vol. 1 P.241
30.
30. Nubakhti, op-cit, P.62, Mufid op-cit., P. 268,
Isfahani, op. cit, P. 167, Tabari, vol, 9, P.49
31.
31. Nubakhti, op. cit. P.62
32.
32. Tarikh al-Tabari, Vol. 6, p. 43 & 83, Ibn
Al-Athir: Al-Kamil, Vol. 5 P. 315.
33.
33. ibid.
34.
34. Mas’udi: Muruj al-Dhahab vol.3 P. 252
35.
35. Ash’ari: Al-Maqalat wa al-Firaq P.252
36
36
Ash’ari op.cit. P 67
37
37
Tabari Vol6, P. 198,Ibn al-Athir, op-cit
Vol.5 P 255
38
38
Tabari: Vol 6. P.188 –190, Ibn al-Athir,
op-cit. vol. 5 P.255
39
39
Al- Isfahani, op. cit. P. 277
40
40
Muhammad bin Ali al- Ardabili al- Ha’iri.
Jami’ al-Ruwat, Vol.2, p.544 Al-Shahristani: Al-Milal wa al-Nihal, Vol.1 p160.
41
41
Mufid: Al Masa’il al-Jarudiyyah fi Ta’yin
al-Khilafah wa al-Imamah fi Walad al- Hussain bin Ali, P.2, Mufid: Al-Thaqalan,
P.10
42
42
Nubakhti op, cit, P, 54
43
43
Ash’ari, op.cit, P. 19
44
44
Nubakhti, op, cit pp, 48 –49, Ash’ari al
Qummi: Al-Maqalat wa al-Firaq-, p. 19
45 ibid.
46 Nubakhti:op.cit.p.54