|
|
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 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
45
ibid.
46
Nubakhti:op.cit.p.54
|