|
|
CRITIQUE OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF INFALLIBILITY
Immediately the theory of divine
Imamate was born it faced a series of challenges, which put it to the
litmus test. Those challenges establish its impossibility. On the one
hand, the doctrine of infallibility (‘Ismah), upon which it is based,
was a new theory, rejected by the members of the Prophets family and
the generality of the Shiites.
That was because the philosophy of
infallibility was based on the principle of absolute obedience of
those in authority, with little or no room for relativity in this
regard, like refuting a statement of the Imam or disobeying him in
vices and in what is not permissible, as long as he commands so, or
withholding him when his disobedience (fisq) is evident.
This was the same principle that was
championed by the impious rulers of the Umayyads, who pressed the
Muslims on the basis of that, to obey them in absolute terms in good
and evil. This was what led the Imamate Shiite philosophers to
inconsistency and contradiction, between the necessity of obeying
Allah, the exalted, who commands us to obey also those in authority in
the glorious verse “O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the
Messenger and those in authority among you…” and the necessity of
obeying the rulers in absolute terms even in vices and the
impermissible. (1)
It has been established that the verse
should be conceived in absolute terms, which can also be understood in
relative terms. In fact, this latter opinion is what can be grasped
and established on the basis of customs, reason and other Quranic
verses, which emphasizes the principle of “ there is no obedience to
the created in what involves the disobedience of the creator.”
Even though the verse of ‘those in
authority’ applies to the rulers being appointed by the Prophet (peace
be upon him) in his life, the early Muslims, did not believe that it
is in absolute terms, including their obedience even in what involves
evil and disobedience. A group of Muslims did refuse to obey a man
appointed to head an expedition by the Prophet (peace be upon him),
when he ordered the group to enter the fire he has kindled, and
demanded from them to obey him. And they said to him, ‘we have escaped
from fire, how can we enter it again? They understood obedience to be
within the limits of custom, common sense and the law, and not outside
them. They returned and narrated what happened to the Prophet (peace
be upon him) and he confirmed them on their rational stand. He warned
them also saying: “If you had entered it, you would have remained in
it (forever).”
This further supports the possibility
of understanding Quranic verses in relative terms, within the limits
of reason, what is known, the life history of the Prophet (peace be
upon him) and the law, and the impermissibility of understanding them
always in absolute terms, even in cases where that contradicts other
injunctions, rational or legal.
If absoluteness is lacking and
relativity is established in obeying those in authority’, then there
will be no need for making the infallibility (Ismah) of the Imam a
condition. It will be possible for the Muslims to choose their leader,
on the basis of apparent justice, piety and the ability to implement
for them the religion, and to command the right and prohibit the
wrong. If and when this leader will deviate, they have the right to
disobey him, and reject his commands, and even outing him from the
post of Imamate. Allah will not impose his obedience on them.
However, the Imamate Shiite theologians
have totally rejected the theory of relativity, and they insist on the
idea of absoluteness in the verse mentioned above. Due to this, they
build their idea of ismah (infallibility) on this foundation. They
later established all their other doctrines on the basis of
infallibility. (2)
THE POSITION OF MEMBERS OF
THE AHL AL BAYT ON INFALLIBILITY
The greatest problem faced by the
Imamate philosophers in the process of constructing the doctrine of
divine Imamate, of the Imams of the ‘Ahl al-Bayt’ lies in the position
of the members of the Prophet’s family themselves on the doctrine of
infallibility, as they were vehemently rejecting it. And they used to
declare before the public that they are common and ordinary people,
who can do wrong as they can to do right. They demanded of people to
criticize them and guide them, and take the stand of opposition, when
they commit any error or command evil- Allah forbids.
This is the position of the Commander
of the Faithful Ali bin Abi Talib when he stood in the mosque of
Kufah, and addressed the crowd in these words: “ It is surely the
right of anyone who witnesses greatness of Allah in his heart, and
exalts his position in his mind, to belittle and look down all other
things and beings. The best of those who are as such, is the one on
whom Allah’s bounties have been magnificent, as well as His
benevolence. For the favors of Allah have never been bountiful on a
person, except the right of Allah on him becomes great. One of the
most despising condition of leaders in the sight of good people, is
when it is thought of them as lovers of pride, and that their affairs
are based on haughtiness. I loathe that it might come to your mind
that I love eulogy and the airing of praise. I am not like that. Even
if I had love it, I would have left it in submission to Allah, the
Exalted, rather than enjoying what is most deserving to Allah, of
greatness and exaltation. People may see praise as sweet after trial,
but praise me in light terms, for I have given myself claiming rights
I have not yet given to (its owners) and for duties that I have to
perform. Do not talk to me on what the oppressors discuss, and you
don’t need to be more careful regarding me, just as need the harbinger
dives. Do not interact with me hypocritically, and do not think that I
will be lethargic for a right that is said to be mine, as I do not
arrogate to myself something that is not a right for me, for anyone
who took the truth as a heavy burden, or justice that has been placed
before him, he will find it very difficult to act upon that. You
should never stop saying the truth and counseling on justice, because
I am not above committing mistakes, and I do not feel secured from
that in my acts, except if Allah suffice me in what He has power on
which I do not have power on. You and I are slaves owned by the Lord
beside whom there is no Lord. He has power regarding ourselves on what
we have no power. He is the one who brought us to what we are now to
what will be good for us. He substituted misguidance, with guidance
and endowed us with insight after blindness.” (3)
In another sermon the commander of the
Faithful, Imam Ali mentioned the Kharijite, Al-Kharit bin Najiyah and
his earlier attempts to instigate the Imam to kill and arrest a number
of the leading opposition figures, and the statement of the Imam to
him, and to the general populace, that their duty is to stand by his
side, and prevent, him, even he wanted to do that himself, and his
saying to him “Fear Allah!”
Imam Ali would not have said that to
him, if there were any tradition on infallibility among the Imams and
Shiites and (other) Muslims. That is because, the glory of
infallibility makes it necessary for the Imam to be above all kind of
criticisms, and that he will beyond any kind of opposition, or any
attempt by anyone to advise and counsel him. Imam Ali has never done
that, he depicted best example of humility and equality… He would not
have demand of his companions to perform their political role in
checking and correcting the Imam (if infallibility was the norm).
He (Ali) said in his du’ah
(supplication): “ O Allah forgive me what you know of me, if I go back
to it again, forgive me again. O Allah! Forgive me what I kept in my
mind, but You did not accomplish for me! O Allah! Forgive me what I
said with my tongue in devotion to You, but my heart was inconsistent
with it! O Allah forgive me the glimpses of the eyes, errors in
speech, the desire of the heart and slippery of the tongue.” (4)
In another place Imam Ali mentioned the
qualities of the ruler and the basic requirements that must be
available in him, without mentioning infallibility as one of them. He
says: “… It is not befitting for the leader of people in their
privacy, blood, booty, and Imam of Muslims to be: a miser so that he
will find his lust in their wealth; nor an ignorant person, lest he
lead them astray with his ignorance. Nor discourteous, lest he turns
into different groups through his discourteousness; nor an unjust
person towards people that accepts some and rejects others, nor one to
takes bribes in judgment, that he deny people their rights; nor the
one who abandons the tradition (sunnah), lest the Ummah be destroyed.”
(5)
He also says in another sermon: “ O you
people, surely the most deserving and suitable person for this matter
is the most powerful of them in it, and the most knowledgeable of
Allah’s instructions regarding it.” (6)
Saduq narrates in his Amali the story
of Fatimah al-Zahra (peace be upon her), which is in conflict with the
theory of infallibility, professed by the theologians. He reported
that: Once Imam Ali bin Abi Talib spent the wealth from a field (farm)
that he sold, to the extent that he did not leave even a penny.
Fatimah protested and held onto his clothes. Jibril descended and
informed the Prophet (peace be upon him), who then went to her and
said: “It is not permissible for you to held onto his clothes, or to
beat his hands.” She said: “I seek the forgiveness of Allah and I will
not repeat it again.” (7)
As Sharif al-Rida also mentioned in
‘Khasa’is al-A’imah’, that Imam Hussain once borrowed a velvet from
the public treasury that infuriated Imam Ali who said to him: “O
father of Muhammad (beware of) the fire!… O father of Muhammad (beware
of) the fire…. Till he went out with it.” (8)
Likewise Imam Hussain (peace be upon
him) did not point to the subject of infallibility in his letter to
the people of Kufah, sent through his envoy Muslim bin Aqeel, he only
allude to the necessity of the existence of certain qualities in the
ruler, like Taqwa (fear of Allah), and sticking to the dictates of the
Quran and religion. He said: “By (the One who holds) my lifespan…The
Imam is none other than the one who acts upon the teachings of the
Book, who confines himself to the will of Allah who is just and
follows the religion of Allah.” (9)
Imam Baqir reports a Hadith from the
Messenger of Allah on the qualities of the ruler, but he did not
include infallibility. He said: “The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon
him) said: “ The leadership of my Ummah will be right only for the man
who possesses three qualities, namely, God fearing that deter him from
disobeying Allah, and forbearance, by which he controls his anger and
good leadership of those he leads, till he becomes to them like a
merciful father.” In another narration- “Till he becomes for the
subjects like a merciful father.” This indicates that the Imamate can
be among the common people with the above qualities. (10)
Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) has
said: “ By Allah we are no other than servants… we cannot inflict harm
or benefit (anyone). If we find mercy; it is due to Him, and if we are
punished, it is due to our sins. By Allah, we have no excuse before
Allah, nor do we claim any innocence before him. Definitely we are
going to die, and will be put in the graves, and will be resurrected
and questioned. I testify before you that I am a man born by the
Messenger of Allah without any claim of innocence from Allah. If I
obey Him He will shower mercy on me, and if I disobey Him, He will
punish me severely.” (11)
There are two other narrations
mentioned by Saduq in his book, ‘Uyun Akhbar al-Rida’ on the
infallibility of the Prophets He said: “ Imam Rida discussed them (the
two narrations) with Ali bin Muhammad bin al-Jahm, the servant of
Mamun and he interpreted the clear Quranic verses on the mistakes
(sins) of the Prophets and clear them of those sins. The narrator did
not mention any Hadith from Imam Rida in this regard on the
infallibility of the Imams, which shows the lack of adoption of the
members of the Prophets family of the doctrine of infallibility, and
the non- existence or appearance of such Hadiths in those days, except
with the Imamate and extreme Shiites, and that also was secretly. If
the Hadith of infallibility had any ground in the sight of the members
of Ahl al-Bayt, Imam Rida must discuss them. For he as is being said,
used to discuss the Imamate openly and boldly, because he was not
afraid of the Abbasid Caliph, Mamun, for whom he became the Crown
prince… Then why did Imam Rida only mention the infallibility of the
Prophets (peace be upon them), but did not talk on the infallibility
of the Imams.” (12)
Despite the clear stance of the Ahl
al-Bayt’ on the claim of infallibility, and their stressing that they
have ordinary human nature, and their seeking of Allah’s forgiveness
on what they may commit, the Imamate Shiism had tried to stick onto
that, interpreting the authentic narrations that deny infallibility,
saying that they came from the Imams in the time of public teaching,
or they were issued by means of Taqiyyah (insinuation). They narrated
side by side with these reports, a group of other narrations which
claim infallibility in clear terms, and which made it a condition in
the Imam or the Imams from Ahl al- Bayt. They were weak, ambiguous and
unspecific narrations.
There was a Mursal Hadith (in which a
companion is missing) from Imam Zayn Al- Abidin, where he says: “ The
Imam from among us must be infallible. Infallibility is not a bodily
feature that can be seen and recognized by the common people, but it
is holding fast to the rope of Allah. And the rope of Allah is the
Quran. The Quran guides to the Imam.” (13)
Even if we overlook the scrutinization
of this tradition that has no chain of narration, which was just
attributed to Imam Zayn al- Abidin, it is evident that it interprets
infallibility with holding unto the rope of Allah, which is the Quran.
He did not mention any kind of ring imposed by Allah around the Imam,
which prevents him from committing sins, as the theologians say.
There is another tradition from Imam
Sadiq (peace be upon him) in which he interpretes the infallible
(Ma’sum), to be the one who abstains, for Allah’s sake, from all what
He has prohibited. Allah the Most High has said. “…. And whoever holds
firmly to Allah, then he is indeed guided to the Right Path.’ This
also points to the same meaning as given by Imam Sajjad. (14)
This being so Saduq has also reported
in Ikmal al-Din from Salim bin Qays from the Commander of the Faithful
(Ali) that he said: “Allah has indeed purified us and protected us and
has made us to be in the company of the Quran, and made the Quran to
be with us, we will never separate from it, as it will never separate
from us.”
He has also reported in ‘Uyun Akhbar
al-Rida’, from Abdullah bin Abbas who said “ I heard the Messenger of
Allah (peace be upon him) saying: “ Myself and Ali and Hassan and
Hussain and nine of the children of Hussain are purified and
infallible. Al- Majlisi reported in ‘Bihar al- Anwar’ a number of
traditions which he said are attributed to Salim bin Qays al- Hilali,
but they are not found in his book. He mentioned as part of them, a
tradition that says: “ Obedience is indeed for Allah, the Exalted and
for His Messenger and for those in authority. Allah has commanded
obedience of those in authority because they are infallible and
purified, and they do not command what is vice.”(15)
These traditions have no intellectual
value, because they neither have chains of narrations, nor are they
authentic.
There is another long narration found
only with Saduq, from Imam Rida, speaking openly and in front of the
Abbasid Caliph, Mamun, of the infallibility of Ahl al-Bayt, their
virtues and characteristic features. (16)
But that report has a weak chain of
transmission, that was because Saduq reported it from Ali bin Hussain
bin Shadhiwaih Al- Mu’addab (an abandoned reporter) and Jafar bin
Muhammad bin Masrur (also abandoned), and Al- Rayyan bin al-Salt (a
weak reporter), who was one of the supporters of Fadl bin Sahl,
without attributing his statement to anyone, nor claiming to have
attended and heard the tradition himself. That was why no one reported
it before Saduq, who lived in the middle of the fourth century of
Hijrah. In addition to that it included a statement on the
interpolation of the Quran, where it added ‘ Wa rahtuka, al-
Mukhlisin’ to “And admonish your close relations, claiming that it was
deleted from the Quran. This is what the extremist sects used to say
and attribute to the Imams. The Imams have always disowned such
statements and denied them. The narration depends also a hermeneutical
approach and arbitrary interpretations at some other times. Even
though the narration tries to establish infallibility and purity of
the members of the Prophet’s family (Ahl al-Bayt), and the
impossibility of their apostasy and ever reverting to misguidance, it
did not give time to explain who are the ‘ Ahl al- Bayt; after
confining them to the children of the Prophet and Imam Ali bin Abi
Talib, without any strong and clear evidence…. Despite the difference
among them on this issue, the children of the different Imams were in
constant conflict among themselves, and each one of them claims that
he is the Imam and the most deserving after his father. He will accuse
others of lying and hypocrisy, and straying away from the truth. The
narration also uncover the attempts of philosophers to interprete the
Quran with what is in line with their new theory on the infallibility
of the Imams.
THE STANCE OF IMAM SADIQ ON THE IMAMATE
Part of what confirmed the negative
stance of Imam Sadiq on the Imamate theologians, and their secret
doctrine which they developed independently and away from Ahl al-
Bayt, were the many Hadiths of the Imam. The Imamate heritage is
replete with them, through they interprete in the name of Taqiyyah
(insinuation). Once a delegation of Shiites from Kufah, came to him
and asked him: “ O father of Abdullah, some people came to us claiming
that among you- Ahl al- Bayt’ there is the Imam whose obedience is
obligatory?” He said to them: “No, 1 do not know that in the members
of our family.” They said: “O father of Abdullah, they are people of
hard work, seclusion and piety, and they claim that you are the one.”
He then said: they know better what they have said, I did not command
them to do so.” (17)
Al- Kashi transmits from Hisham bin
Salim Al- Jawaliqi that he talked to a man in Madinah, from Bani
Makhzoum on the Imamate, the man, said to him: “Who is the Imam
today?” He said to him. “ Jafar bin Muhammad.’ The man was astonished
and said: “ By Allah I will tell him that.” That aggrieved Hisham
seriously fearing that Imam Jafar Sadiq will blame or disown him. (18)
Mufid stated in ‘Al- Irshad’ that: Imam
Sadiq said to Hisham bin Salim al- Tawaliqi: “ You want to narrate
traditions but you don’t know (it).” He also said to Qays al-Masir:
“You speak what is farthest away from the truth and from the
statements of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), you are from
it. You mix truth with falsehood, little truth is enough (and
better).” (19)
Al- Kashi says: Imam Sadiq prevented
Mumin al-Taq from speaking, and he said to him after a debate between
him and a man from ‘Al-Sharah’: “You did corner him, by Allah, you did
not say even a word of the truth.” He said: “How was that? He replied:
“ Because you were speaking on Qiyas (analogical deduction) and Qiyas
is not part of my religion.” (20)
Imam Sadiq did send to him Mufaddal bin
Umar to stop him from speaking. When he came close to his house he
said to him: “Abu Abdullah is telling you not to speak.” He replied: “
I fear that I may not be able to persevere.” (21)
Imam Sadiq also asked Fudail bin Uthman
about him (Mumin al-Taq): What happen to the owner of Taq (arch), it
has come to me that he is controversial and that he speaks on ‘Taym
Badr.” “ He replied, “Yes, he is controversial.” The Imam then said:
“Definitely if one of his smart opponents wants to overcome him, he
can do it. He will say! Tell me this your doctrine, from the sayings
of your Imam.” If he will say, “Yes, he will lie against us. And if he
says, no, he will say to him: “How do you talk on things that are not
being said by your Imam?” Then Imam Sadiq said: You say things if I
affirm and accept them, I stand in error, and if I disown them, you
separate from me… “ Fudail bin Uthman then said: “ Should I convey
your message to him?” He replied: “By Allah they have gone into a
matter, nothing will prevent them from abandoning it, except
zealotry.” Fudail then said, “ I informed Abu Ja’far Al- Ahwal on
that, and he said: “ He has surely spoken the truth, may my father and
mother be ransom for him, nothing prevent us from abandoning that,
except zealotry.” (22)
Al- Kashi also says: Imam Sadiq refused
to receive Abu Basir and he said to him: “ People of Kalam (theology)
will perish and the Muslims will be saved.” The Muslims are the
chosen.” He also said: “I used to narrate Hadith to a person, and stop
him from disputation and argumentation in the religion of Allah, and I
prevent him from using ‘Qiyas’ (analogy), then when he leaves me he
will distort my statements in a manner not said by me. I have
commanded some people to explain the doctrine and have prevented
others. Anyone who distorts my message, he does it against himself, he
falls into disobedience of Allah and His Messenger.” (23)
THE CRISIS OF AL- BADA’ (CHANGEOF WILL)
On the other side, the nascent doctrine
of Imamate suffered a serious setback with the death of Ismail bin
Ja’far Sadiq. The Imamate Shiites in Kufah have gathered around him,
and claimed that they transmitted (a tradition) from his father, that
Ismail is his Khalifah (successor) after him. When he died in the
lifetime of his father, it became clear that his appointment was not
from Allah, otherwise he will not die before his father, or that the
Imam used to appoint whom he knows (from Allah) that he will live
after him.
Due to this, Sulaiman bin Jarir and a
group of Shiites abandoned the doctrine of Imamate after they have
believed in it for a long time. They reverted to considering Imam
Sadiq as an ordinary scholarly figure, or considered the Imamate as a
common human affair, with no any link to Allah. (24)
But a faction of the imamate Shiites
influenced by the Khattabiyyah esoteric movement, refused believing
Imam Sadiq, and admitting the evident truth, but insisted on denying
the death of Ismail, claiming that it was a drama staged by the Imam,
and that what really happened was that he was smuggled out of Madinah,
to protect him from dangers surrounding him, “because it is not
possible for the Imam to appoint another person, who will die in his
lifetime.” This was despite the presentation of Imam Sadiq of the dead
body of his son Ismail several times and his demanding those attending
the funeral to look at his face to confirm his death. The Khattabiyyah
maintained the Imams in the line of the children of Ismail, forming
the Ismailite sect, which established the Fatimid Kingdom. (25)
As for those who admitted the death of
Ismail, they concealed this problem that establishes the non-existence
of a text from Allah, by resorting to believing in ‘bada’ or the
belief that Allah changed His will regarding Ismail after Imam Sadiq
(or that the Imamate of Ismail was not achieved due to death), who
according to their statement has pointed to him and made him the Imam
after him.
Yet another section of the Imamate
Shiites found it difficult to accept the doctrine of ‘bada’ and say
that it was impossible for Allah to change His will. They interpreted
‘bada’ as manifesting from Allah, or they denied that Imam Sadiq did
indicate that his son Ismail or any other person would be the Imam
after him. They say that he refused to appoint anyone in person. And
that he linked the issue of recognizing the Imam after his death, to a
number of signs like being elderly, the claim of Imamate, a will, and
taking the seat of the father.
Some reports transmitted by Saffar and
Saduq do indicate that Muhammad bin Muslim, Yaqub bin Shu'aib and Abd
al-A’ala were not aware of the Imam after Sadiq, and that he refused
to reply to their question in specifying the name of the Imam to
succeed him. He however, sought from them to go to Madinah, after his
death, so as to inquire there about the new Imam. (26)
As a result of this ambiguity that
surrounds the identity of the new Imam, the followers of Imam Sadiq,
among the Imamate Shiites became divided into several sects. A group
of them said that Imam Sadiq did not die, and that he was the awaited
Mahdi. These are the Nawussites. A group of them believe in the
Imamate of Isma'il, or his son Muhammad, and transferred the Imamate
to his progeny—These are the Ismailites. (27)
The remaining followers acted on the
instructions of Imam Sadiq, which called on them to move after his
death. They went to Madinah where they found his elder son, Abdullah
al-Aftah, occupying the seat of his father. He claimed possession of
the will from his father, and being the Imam after him. The scholars
and elders among the Shiites agreed on his Imamate, excluding those
who claimed the Imamate of Ismail. Some of the Imamate Shiites
reported from Imam Sadiq that he requested from his son, Musa to
submit to his brother Abdullah, and not to dispute him in the matter.
(28)
In this period, Zurarah bin A’yun,
being one of the leading companions of both Imams Baqir and Sadiq
died, without knowing the identity of the new Imam. He did send his
son, Ubaidullah from Kufah to Madinah, to inquire about the new Imam,
but was overtaken by death. At the time of his death, he placed the
Quran on his chest and said: “ O Allah I testify to follow anyone
whose Imamate was established by this Book.” (29)
All of Saffar, Kulayni, Mufid and Kashi
confirmed that the pillars of the Imamate doctrine like Hisham bin
Salim al- Jawaliqi and Muhammad bin Nu’man al- Ahwal initially went to
Abdullah al-Aftah “upon whom people have agreed, that the affairs have
returned to him after his father.” That was due to what the people
narrated from Abu Abdullah (Sadiq): “The affair will be in the eldest,
so long as he has no defect” and the insistence of Ammar al-Sabati
(one of the companions of the two Imams Baqir and Sadiq) on his
Imamate till his death. (30)
In this way, Abdullah al-Aftah occupied
the position of Imamate through the will and being the eldest, and
occupation the seat of his father. He almost enjoyed the consensus of
the Shiites on his Imamate, without the existence of any clear text on
him from his father Imam Sadiq. (31)
Hisham bin Salim al-Jawaliqi said that
he once went to Abdullah al-Aftah together with a group of Shiites,
who asked him questions on issues of fiqh, but he did not answer them
correctly, and that made them doubt his Imamate and they left him “
confused and strayed … so we sat in a corner of Kufah weeping and
perplexed not knowing where to turn or go. We said: To the Murji’ites?
To the Zaydites? To the Mutazilites? To the Kharijites? We were in
that condition when I saw an old man whom I did not know, making a
gesture with his hand. He said to me: “Enter may Allah have mercy on
you. So I entered, there I found Abu al-Hassan Musa. He first said to
me. “ Not to the Murjiites, nor to the Qadarites, nor to the Zaydites,
nor to the Mutazilites, nor to the Kharijites…. But to me to me! I
said to him: “May I be your ransom has your father gone?” He replied:
“ If Allah wishes to guide you, He will guide you.” I said: May I be
your ransom, are you the one? He said: “ No, I am not saying that.” I
then said to myself: I did not ask correctly. I then said: “ Is there
any Imam above you.” He said: “ No” Then something of his respect and
awe only Allah knows, entered me. Then I said: “ Shall I will ask you
as I used to ask your father?” He said: “ Ask…. And you will be
informed. And do not spread (this fact), and if you will do it , you
will be slaughtered.” He said: “Then I asked him and found him, as a
sea (of knowledge) that cannot be exhausted. I said: May I be your
ransom…the supporters (Shiites) of your father have gone astray. Put
this to them and call them to yourself? You have imposed on me secrecy
and concealment.” He said: “Anyone you found to be guided, you can put
it before him, and impose secrecy on him, if he will spread it, he
will be slaughtered”—and he demonstrated by putting his hand on his
throat. He said: Then I went out from his place and met Abu Ja’far
al-Ahwal, and he said to me: “ What happened to you? “ I said:
Guidance’ and I explained to him the story. We then met Fudail and Abu
Basir, they went to him, listen to his statements, asked him and then
agreed to follow him.”(32)
Hisham says in this narration: People
have agreed—at least initially—on the Imamate of Abdullah al-Aftah,
and the leaders of the Imamate Shiites did not know of any text on
Kadhim, who refused to claim Imamate for himself. The establishment of
his Imamate, according to Hisham, was due to his vast knowledge, and
the unprepared ness of Imam Kadhim to declare his Imamate before the
public.
Whether it is true that Hisham and his
companions have rescinded their position as regards the Imamate of
Abdullah al-Aftah in his life time or not, Al-Aftah died after about
70 days of the death of his father, without leaving behind an issue,
in whose line the Imamate may continue. This has created a new crisis
in the ranks of the Imamate Shiites, who believed that the Imamate is
from Allah, and that it must continue in the progenies, and the
progenies of progenies till the day of Resurrection. They became
divided, forming three sects. One of them-the Musawites rescinded the
doctrine of Imamate and deleted his name from the list of Imams. Some
of those who lived after him (Abdullah) accused him of disobedience
(fisq), ignorance, and deviation, and that for the purpose of
explaining the illegality of his Imamate from the beginning. (33)
Some of them shifted to the idea of the
Imamate of his brother, Musa after him like Abdullah bin Bukair and
Ammar bin Musa al-Sabati. These people were known as the Fathites
(Al-Fathiyyah), being some of the great companions of Imam Sadiq and
other previous Imams. (34)
Fathites transcended the issue of
vertical heredity (as regards the Imamate), and believed that it is
allowed that two brothers can be Imams, if the earlier one has no
issue. The third group insisted however, on the claim of the existence
of a son for Abdullah al-Aftah, in secret, and that he has hidden him
as a form of Taqiyyah: They said his name was Muhammad bin Abdullah:
and that he is the Awaited Mahdi, who is in occultation in Yemen.
This crisis has uncovered the fragility
and ambiguity of the doctrine of a text on Imamate, as well the
difficulty of the Imamate Shiites in specifying and recognizing the
Imam (mentioned through text from Allah), and their consensus on him,
and the impossibility of believing in an Imam who has not fulfilled
the requirements of Imamate, and then withdrawing from that position
later on.
THE IMAMATE OF MUSA KADHIM
Imam Musa Kadhim became the supreme
leader of the Shiites after the death of his brother Abdullah, due to
his knowledge, piety, devotion and good character. These great
qualities were enough to raise its owner to the rank of Imamate
(leadership) in the Muslim society. He was not in need of these
qualities, ir of establishing his infallibility, or a text on him, as
the Imamate Shiites, who could not establish anything other than this,
were saying: Sheikh Saduq while presenting evidences on the Imamate of
Kadhim, said: “ If the Imam is manifest, and his followers differed
concerning him, his knowledge appears, and his virtues in himself
which are clear to both the common and closest people, become
manifest. These are the signs of Imamate. When we found them in Musa
and in no other person, we knew that he is the Imam after his father
not his brother”. (35)
But despite that ambiguity that
surrounds the issue of succession after Imam Sadiq, and the death of
Zurarah without knowing the new Imam, and the acceptance of the pivots
of the Imamate theory of the Imamate of Abdullah al-Aftah, the Imamate
Shiites, especially Mufaddal bin Umar Abu Basir and Yaqub al-Siraj,
have tried to bring texts that establish the will of Imam Sadiq to his
son Kadhim. Kulayni has mentioned in ‘al-Kafi,’ so also Saffar in
‘Basa’ir al-Darajat’ and Saduq in ‘Uyun Akhabar al-Rida’, as well as
Mufid in ‘Al-Irshad’—about (16) sixteen texts, ranging from a vague
pointer to a clear confirmation in this regard. (36)
It is only that, those texts did not
prove to be decisive in the tussle for the Imamate, or rather they did
not exist in the beginning. Saduq has admitted that Imam Kadhim
isolated himself from politics, and was keeping secret his affairs.
The Shiites were not taking disputed to him. A strange tradition was
reported from him, where he instructed the Shiites to obey the rulers
in any case. If the rulers were just, they should pray to Allah to
maintain their rule. If they were unjust, they should pray to Allah to
guide and make them better.” (37)
Hence the general masses of the Shiites
at the time of Imam Kadhim have turned to Isa bin Zayd bin Ali
(123-168 A.H), and paid him allegiance secretly as the Imam in the
year 156 A.H. while he was in Iraq. People from Ahwaz, Wasit, Makkah,
Madinah and Tihamah came to pay him allegiance (bay’ah). He appointed
people to call to him and they reached Egypt and Syria. He agreed
together with his followers to declare a rebellion after the death of
Mansur al-Dawaniqi. He died from poison in the suburbs of Kufah on the
side of Basrah in the year 168 A.H. (38)
The Shiites also responded to the call
of Hussain ‘Shahid fakh’ and they came paying allegiance to him on the
basis of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be
upon him), for the accepted (Rida) from the family of Muhammad (peace
be upon him). Hussain declared: “ I take your oath of allegiance on
the basis of the book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of
Allah, and on the basis of obeying Allah and He would not be
disobeyed, and I call you to accept Rida from the family of Muhammad
(peace be upon him). That we will implement in you the Book of Allah
and the Sunnah of His prophet, we will also maintain justice among the
subjects, as well as fair distribution (of wealth), on the basis that
you obey us, and fight our enemy. If we fulfill these for you, you
fulfill what is on you for us, but if we did not fulfill our promises
there is no any allegiance for us on you.” (39)
THE EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES
When Imam Musa Kadhim was not calling
the people to accept him (as the Imam), and there was no any special
text on him from Allah or from his father, the Imamate Shiites
resorted to the weapon of miracles and the knowledge of the Unseen, in
order to establish the existence of a special divine link between Imam
Kadhim and Allah. And that he alone was the only legal heir of Imam
Sadiq.
Abu Basir says that he went once to
Imam Kadhim and asked him: “May I be your ransom, how can we know the
Imam? He answered: “ By some qualities: The first of them is something
(documents) he presents from his father and his pointing to it as
evidence, and that when he will be asked questions, he will tell of
what will happen in future and he will talk to people in different
languages. “Then he said: O father of Muhammad, for the Imam the
speech of no one not even the speech of birds, nor the speech of any
being with soul can be hidden from him. Any one who has no such
qualities, he is not the Imam.” (40)
Kulayni stated that: “ Imam Kadhim knew
when a person will die, and he used to tell his companions about that,
as he used to tell them of their destinies in the future.” (41)
In this way, the scholars of Hadith
narrate the process of establishing the Imamate of Kadhim, as a great
collection of miracles, like his coming out of detention in Baghdad,
and his breaking the shackles and his passing through the walls, and
his going to Madinah, and his coming back in the same night. So also
putting his stamp on a small stone; and his speaking foreign languages
without learning them; and that fire does not burn him and his raising
a dead cow to life. (42).
Only that this ‘evidence’ cannot be
establishing without serious difficulties, especially that Imam Kadhim
himself denies it, as he denies possessing the knowledge of the Unseen
(al-Ghayb).
WAQIFIYYAH
As the doctrine of Imamate was gasping
for breath after the crisis of the will to Isma'il and ‘bada’ (change
of will), and the crisis of Abdullah al- Aftah and his death without
an issue, then the crisis of establishing the Imamate of Kadhim… the
doctrine faced another crisis of the death of Imam Musa Kadhim in the
prison of Harun Rashid in Baghdad in the year 183 A.H. in a mysterious
circumstances. The masses of the Shiites (Musawites) claim that he
fled from the prison and went to occultation, and denied his death.
The death of Kadhim was a real mystery,
to the extent that most of his children, students and companions were
confused, so also some authorities and reliable reporters like Ali bin
Abi Hamzah, Ali bin Al-Khattab, Ghalib bin Uthman, Muhammad bin Ishaq
bin Ammar al-Taghlibi al-Sirafi, Ishaq bin Jarir, Musa bin Bakr,
Wuhaib bin Hafs al-Jariri, Yahya bin Hussain bin Zayd bin Ali bin
Hussain, Yahya bin al-Qasim al-Hadha Abu Basir, Abdul Rahman bin
Hajjaj, Rifa’ah bin Musa, Yunus bin Ya’qub, Jamil bin Daraj, Hammad
bin Isa, Ahmed bin Muhammad bin Abi Nasr, and the family of Mahran and
other reliable companions. (43)
The main reason for the doctrine of
halting the Imamate with Imam Kadhim believed by the Musawites, and
their non-acceptance of the Imamate of his son Rida, was the various
narrations on the Mahdism of Kadhim and the inevitability of his
coming back to life after his death. (44)
Hassan bin Qiyama al-Sirafi has
performed the Hajj in the year 193 A.H. i.e. after 10 years of the
death of Kadhim, and he asked Rida about his father.” He replied, “He
has gone like his forefathers.” He then said: “But what can I do with
the tradition, which Yaqub bin Shuaib has narrated to me from Abu
Basir, that the father of Abdullah said: “ If anyone comes to you
telling you that this my son has died and was put in the shroud and
then in the grave, and that they dusted their hands from the ground of
his grave, you should not believe him.” He (Rida) said: Abu Basir is
telling lie, he did not tell him so, he only said: “If it comes to you
from the owner of this affair.” (45)
Kulayni has also reported from Ali bin
Asbat who said: I said to Rida: A man came to your brother Ibrahim and
told him that your father is alive and that you know that as himself.”
He replied: “Glory be to Allah! The Messenger of Allah died and Musa
will not die?” He then stressed that saying “ By Allah he has gone as
the Messenger of Allah has gone.” (46)
A famous tradition among the Musawite
Imamate Shiites “that only the Imam will wash the dead body of the
Imam,” has increased their doubt, as regards Imam Rida, when they say:
“How then did Ali Rida washed in his father who died in Baghdad while
he was in Madinah?” (47)
Many of them continued to question how
Imam Rida came to know of the death of his father and when he knew
it. And when did he know that he has become the Imam succeeding his
father? Were there any interval between the death of Kadhim and the
knowledge of his son Rida, and his subsequent becoming the Imam, after
him? (48)
Part of what raise doubts in the minds
of the Waqifite Shiites as regards the Imamate of Rida, was his not
leaving behind an offspring till late in his life; and the doubt of
the household of Imam Rida in attributing his son Muhammad Jawwad, who
was attributed to other than him, due to the blackness of his
complexion, and their eventual resort to experts for the final
determination of the issue. (49)
In addition to the ambiguity of the
text on Imam Ali bin Musa Rida, who was not recognized as the Imam by
the majority of the Shiites, and even by the children of Imam Kadhim,
and even by the revered wife of the Imam, Umm Ahmad? (50)
A report is saying that the Shiites in
Madinah, upon their learning of the death of Imam Kadhim, gathered at
the door of Umm Ahmad, and paid their allegiance to Ahmad son of Imam
Kadhim as the Imam, and he took oath of allegiance from them. (51)
The Imamate Shiites did hold on to the
will of Imam Kadhim for his son, in establishing the Imamate of Rida.
Muhammad bin Zayd bin Ali considered the will as taking the place of
confirming his Imamate, even though the will was ambiguous, and not
explicitly on the Imamate. More so that Kadhim included his other
children with his son Ali in it. The will was on wealth, awqafs
(evdowments), charity, small children and women, due to that it was
made confidential and Imam Kadhim refused revealing it to anyone a
member of his family ERA of. (52)
THE POSITION OF SHIITES ON THE IMAMATE OF RIDA
As a result of the ambiguity associated
with the text on Imam Rida, and the lack of spread of the doctrine of
divine Imamate among the Shiites of that time, a number of other
Alawite leaders appeared on the scene as leaders of the opposition
Shiite movements, like Ali bin Ubaidullah bin Hassan bin Ali bin
Hussain bin Ali bin Abi Talib, Abdullah bin Musa, Muhammad bin Ibrahim
(Ibn Tabataba) bin Hassan bin Hassan bin Ali bin Abi Talib.
Isfahani stated that: A man among the
Shiites from the Peninsula (Jazirah) called, Nasr bin Shabib came to
Hijaz in the beginning of the era of Ma’mun in the year 198 A.H. He
went to Madinah and asked of the remaining members of the Prophet’s
family (Ah al-Bayt) and any well-known figure among them. The three
names of those Alawites were mentioned to him. He met one of them,
namely Muhammad bin Ibrahim and he reminded him of what happened to
family of Ali, of persecution and incarceration, due to the snatching
of the right of the Alawites to the Caliphate by the Abbasids. Then he
said to him: “How long will you be trampled upon, and your supporters
allow that, and you keep silent on your right? He called him to the
peninsula to declare a rebellion against the weak Abbasid rule. But
Nasr was not able to fulfill his pledge due to conflict among his clan
and the lack of means. So he apologized to Muhammad who returned
disappointed- to Hijaz. On his way back he met Abu al-Suraya (Al-Sirri
bin mansur), who has revolted against the Abbasid authorities. He
offered to Muhammad bin Ibrahim to give him what Nasr was unable to
provide. He pledged to him to help and support him. And he demanded
from him not to go back to Madinah, but to turn instead to Kufah. (53)
In this way, Ibn Tabataba with the
support of Abu Suraya declared a revolt in Kufah in the year 199 A.H.
He called them in his sermon, to give their oath of allegiance to Rida
of the members of the family of Muhammad (peace be upon him), and
commanding what is right and forbidding what is wrong. The people of
Kufah paid him their allegiance based on that. (54)
Not long after that Ibn Tabataba fell
ill and died, he offered his will to Abu Suraya (telling him): To fear
Allah and to stand as a custodian of religion, and to support the ‘
Ahl al-Bayt’, and appointing from the people one who will take his
position from among the Alawites. If they differ, then the affair
should go to Ali bin Ubaidullah. (55)
Ibn Tabataba did not specify any
particular person from the family of Abu Talib, neither in his sermon
at the time of pledging allegiance nor in the will. He only called to
‘ Rida (the accepted) from the family of Muhammad (peace be upon him).
The Shiites in Kufah were not having any particular picture of a man
in person from the ‘Ahl al-Bayt’, nor do they believe in any specific
doctrine like that of divine Imamate. nor any inclination in them
towards the Imamate of Ali bin Musa Rida, whom they revere as one of
the leaders of the Alawite household. On the second day of the death
of Ibn Tabataba, Abu Suraya gathered the Shiites to condole them on
the death of Muhammad bin Ibrahim. He told them of his will, and that
he has given it to Ali bin Ubaidullah. Then he said: If you agree and
accept him, he is the accepted (Rida), if not, then you choose for
yourself. “But Ali abdicated that pledge, and recommended an Alawite
beardless youth, namely Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Zayd, so that the
Shiites give their bay’ah (pledge) to him. Abu Suraya agreed on that,
and the Shiites pledged allegiance to him. Muhammad bin Muhammad
appointed as his representatives: Ibrahim bin Musa bin Ja’far in
Yemen: Zahid bin Musa bin Jafar in Ahwaz: Abbas bin Muhammad bin Isa
bin Muhammad bin Ali bin Abdullah bin Jafar bin Abi Talib in Basrah;
Muhammad bin Sulaiman bin Dawud bin Hassan bin Hassan bin Ali in
Madina; Hussain bin Ibrahim bin Hassan bin Ali in Wasit and finally,
Hussain bin Hassan in Makkah. (56)
The influence of the young Alawite
leader Muhammad bin Muhammad and was able within a short time, to
control many of the cities of Iraq, Hijaz and Yemen. Letters were
coming from all sides, so also news of conquests of many areas. The
people of Syria and the peninsula wrote to him, saying that they were
waiting for a Messenger so as to obey and follow suit. (57)
But with the inception of the new year
200 A.H. in its first month, this Shiite movement collapsed. The army
of Abbasid caliph Ma’mun regained control on the different cities, and
was chasing the forces of the movement. They also killed the leader of
that movement Abu Suraya and arrested Muhammad bin Muhammad, after
just a period of 10 months since its inception. (58)
No sooner had the revolt of Abu Suraya
been subdued and crushed, that Muhammad al-Dibaj son of Imam Sadiq
declared himself as the Commander of the faithful (Amir al-Muminin) in
Hijaz. He took the pledge of allegiance after the Friday prayer, on
the 6th of Rabi al-Akhir 200 A.H, and hoped to be the
Mahdi, the owner of the affair. But he very soon failed and abdicated
the Caliphate, paying his allegiance to Ma’mun. Despite that the
Abbasid sources escorted him under tight security to Khurasan. (59)
What is more important to us in the
case of Muhammad al-Dibaj was the stance of the Talibites and the
Shiites in general on his movement, and the flocking of the people to
pledge their allegiance to him. This indicates the amount of support
he enjoyed as compared to the his nephew Rida, as well as the
ignorance of the general masses of Shiites as regards the divine
Imamate based on infallibility and text, which was being advocated by
a group of theologians in Kufah.
THE STANCE OF MA’MUN ON RIDA
At the time the Abbasid Caliph offered
the Caliphate to Imam Ali bin Musa Rida in the year 201 A.H, He did
not offer it to him in his capacity as the eight Imam in the series of
12 Imams, but he did that based on his virtue and exalted position.
Mamun has pledged to Allah during his power tussle with his brother
Amin, to transfer the caliphate to the best of the members of the Abu
Talib’s family. He then announced: “Ali Rida is the best of the
Alawites.” (60)
Ma’mun had caused a serious twist in
the political ideology of the Abbasids, which was built by the Abbasid
Mahdi, and he confirmed on its basis the right of Abbas to the
Caliphate, and based, in turn, on the right of their grandfather Abbas
to inherit the Prophet (peace be upon him). He issued a political
edict to that effect, contrary to what the Abbasid held of the old
Shiite thought (Kisanite), before they overpowered and put an end to
the Umayyad rule in the year 132 A.H that was due to their belief in
the legality of the Imamate of Imam Ali bin Abi Talib. They depended
as for their legality on the Abu Hashim Abdullah bin Muhammad bin
Hanafiyyah, who was reported to have given his will to their
grandfather on the Imamate, at the time of his untimely death in
Al-Hamimah.
Mamun did revert the Abbasid political
thought to its Alawite-Fatimid wing, and he declared that the
fundamental right to rule is for the Alawites, based on the right of
Imam Ali to succeed the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). That
was why he called on Rida to take the Caliphate from him. But when
Imam Rida refused that, he offered him the position of the crown
prince, which he accepted. On the day of the bay’ah (pledge of
allegiance) Imam Rida gave a sermon in which he said: “ The commander
of the Faithful (Amir al-Muminin) may Allah strengthen and guide him
to what is right has recognized our right, which was not recognized by
others. He maintained by that the relations that were severed, and
brought peace to people who are scared. Nay, he quickens then after
they have been devastated, and brought contentment to them after they
have lost it, seeking by that the pleasure of the Lord of the worlds,
seeking for reward from none other than Him. He gave me his pledge (of
being the Crown Prince) if I live after him. Anyone who loosens and
breaches what Allah has ordered to maintain, and severs the rope which
Allah loves to remain uncut, has sold his harem and has made legal
what Allah has made illegal. He has by that despised the Imam and
sacrilege the inviolability of Islam. This was the way of the
predecessors (Salaf). It is an opportunity that you should seize and a
surprise that should not be lost. I do not know what will happen to
you and me. Judgment rests with Allah alone. He decrees the truth; He
is the best of Judges. (61)
Whatever the differences among
Historians in analyzing the position of Ma’mun the pledge of Imam Rida
to him and his acceptance of his being crown prince, point to a clear
ideological stand on the legality of the Caliphate of Ma’mun, and the
reality of the Imamate of Rida, away from the doctrine of divine
Imamate, which was exclusive to the children of Ali and Hussain. The
alliance formed between the two Hashimite households: the Abbasids and
the Alawites were the main feature of the second stage and the
official doctrine of the Abbasid state for few decades. This took the
shape of positive stance of the Abbasid Caliph towards the children of
Rida, like Muhammad Jawwad, Ali Hadi and Hassan Askari by recognizing
them as symbols of constitutional legality. They were revered and
respected as was due……….
THE REVOLUTION OF IBRAHIM BIN MUSA KADHIM IN YEMEN
At the time Imam Rida was on his way
towards Khurasan, in response to the invitation of the Abbasid Caliph
Ma’mun, for a truce and reconciliation, which led to his accepting
being the Crown Prince and his giving him his pledge of allegiance in
Ramadan of the year 201 A.H , at that time, his brother, Ibrahim bin
Musa who participated in the rebellion of Ibn Tabataba in Kufah, had
gone to Yemen as governor. He refused to accept the crushing of the
rebellion in the year 200 A.H. and insisted on controlling Yemen in
his name. Ibrahim had ruled over it for sometime after which Caliph
Ma’mun was forced to recognize him and to remove his governor,
Muhammad bin Ali bin Isa bin Mahan. (62)
THE REVOLUTION OF ALI BIN MUHAMMAD BIN SADIQ AND
ABDULLAH, THE BROTHER OF ABU SURAYA IN KUFAH
This revolution took place in Kufah,
the base of Shiites, in the year 202 A.H i.e. after less than two
years of the failure of the revolution of the father of Ali bin
Muhammad and that of the brother of Abdullah. This new and combined
rebellion took place, in a new circumstance, i.e the reconciliation
between Ma’mun and one the greatest pillars of Alawite household: and
it being against the Alawite governor: Abbas bin Musa, the brother of
Imam Rida, who was calling them to give their pledge of allegiance to
the Abbasid Caliph Ma’mun, and his Crown Prince Rida.
The rebellion was aimed at the Abbasid
Caliph specifically, and against giving the oath of allegiance to him.
As it was a Shiite revolution their stance towards Imam Rida was not
negative. The people of Kufah expressed their position in what they
said to Abbas bin Musa: “ If you call us to Ma’mun then after him to
your brother, we are not in need of your call, but if you call to your
brother, or some people among the ‘Ahl al-Bayt’ or to yourself, we
will accept and follow you.” (63)
This position reveals to us the
non-existence in the people of Kufah,of belief in the doctrine of
divine Imamate, so also their lack of distinguishing between Imam Rida
or his brother, Abbas or anyone from the ‘Ahl al-Bayt’, when it comes
to who should lead them, and be their Imam…. This means that the word
‘Ahl al-Bayt’ in the sight of the people of Kufah at that time was
comprehensive and inclusive of all the children of the Alawite
household. It was not limited to particular persons, as it was in the
days of the Umayyads: the entire Hashimite household including the
children of Abbas, those who were working under the slogan of to the
accepted (Rida) of the family of Muhammad (peace be upon him).
THE QAT’IYYITES (AL-QAT’IYYAH)
In juxtaposition of these open-minded
Shiites, as well as the Waqifiyyah (Waqifites), who put a halt to the
Imamate, in the person of Kadhim, there were naturally those who
believe in the Imamate of Ali bin Musa Rida, and ended it with him.
This later group was called the Qat’iyyah (Qatiyyites). They have
reported a number of texts from Kadhim, on his appointing his son Rida
as his successor (Imam) after him.
The following Hadith may be one of the
salient narrations on this: Yazid bin Salit says: “ I met Abu Ibrahim
(Kadhim)- on our way to perform Umrah. On the way, and he said to me:
“ I have left my house and left my will with my son, so –and –so. I
mentioned my other children with him in the apparent but have given
him my will implicitly. I mentioned him exclusively. If the matter
were to be decided by me, I would have given it to my son Qasim, for
my love and sympathy towards him, but it is with Allah, He places it
where He wills. The Prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) has come to
me on his affair, and has showed him to me as well as those who will
be with him. In the same way, no one among us gives the will to
another person, until the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and
my grandfather Ali confirm their affairs. Then he said to me: “The
affair has left you to some one other than you”. I said: “ O Messenger
of Allah, show him to me, who among them? The Messenger of Allah said:
I have not seen anyone of the Imams more worried on losing this
matter, than you. If the Imamate was based on love, Isma’il was dearer
to your father than you, but it is from Allah, the Exalted….” And I
saw all my children, the dead and the living. The Commander of the
Faithful said to me: “This is their leader” and he pointed to my son
Ali-He is from me and I am from him, and Allah is with those who do
good.
Abu Ibrahim then said: O Yazid it is a
trust with you, and do not tell any one of it, except the intelligent,
or a servant (of Allah) you knew to be truthful. If you were required
to serve as a witness, you can testify, with it..” Abu Ibrahim also
said: “ I turned to the Messenger of Allah, and said: “ You have
gathered them for me, may my father and mother be sacrificed for you,
who is he among them? “ He said: “ He is the one who sees through the
light of Allah, the exalted, and who hears with His understanding, and
who speaks with His injunctions.” He then took the land of my son Ali
and said: “ Your staying with him will not be long so when you return
from your journey, write your will and organize your affair. And
finish what you wished, as you will soon leave them and be in company
of others. If you wish, I will call Ali to wash and shroud you, that
is purification for you, and nothing other than that will make it
right and straight. That was the way that has passed away. Command
him and he will recite nine takbir on you (funeral prayer), as his
will is upright, so also your successor while you are still alive.”
Then Abu Ibrahim said: “My soul will be
taken this year, and the affairs will be with my son Ali. He should
not talk till after four years of the death of Harun.” (64)
This last narration is the most quoted
of the narrations on the matter of the Imamate of Rida, in clear and
explicit terms. It says: ‘Imam Kadhim was unaware of the Imam to
succeed him, and he preferred Qasim, upto the time of the revelation
(dream) and the designation of the subsequent Imam through the medium
of dream. The apparent will was general, as it did not establish
special evidence on the Imamate. This narration also claims the
existence of another secret will. And that Imam Kadhim gave the will
to his son Ali secretly, the thing that led the children of Imam
Kadhim and his brothers to claim lack of knowledge and ignorance of
it.
It is likely that Yazid bin Salit or
another man lad fabricated it later on, in order to support the
Imamate of Imam Rida. That is because the reporter claims that Imam
Kadhim has demanded from him to keep the matter in the secret and
concealed, and not to reveal it, except to the intelligent and true
servants (of Allah), and that the Imam did not announce that
explicitly even to his children. This is what makes one doubt this
(esoteric) narration.
MIRACLES AND THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE UNSEEN
In the absence of clear and unambiguous
texts, which were also both general and direct on the Imamate of Rida,
it because inevitable for the Imamate Shiites to seek the help of, or
depend on the weapon of miracles and the claim that Imam Rida has the
knowledge of the Unseen (al-Ghayb).
Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Amr bin Abi Nasr
al-Bizanti al-Sukuni al-Kufi, considered as one of those supporting
‘Ijma’ (consensus), was initially a ‘Waqifite’. He refused to accept
in the Imamate of Rida, because –as he said-he responded on some fiqhi
(juristic) issues contrary to what came from his fore-fathers and his
relations (from Ahl al-Bayt). But later Al-Bizanti accepted his
Imamate after his invitation by Ma’mun. He said he felt that Imam Rida
has the knowledge of the Unseen, and the knowledge of what is in his
soul. He took that as miraculous evidence on the Imamate of Rida. He
became one of his closest companions, and of great position with the
Imam. He narrated a book from him. (65).
Dawud bin Kathir al-Ruqi (considered)
by Al-Kashi as one of the reliable reporters and who reported from
Imam Sadiq that he said of him: That he was to him like the position
of Miqdad to the Messenger of Allah, and that he was one of the
companions of the Owner of affairs had doubted the Imamate of Rida,
and stopped counting him as one of the Imams. That was due to what he
reported from Kadhim, that he was the Qa’im. He reverted later to
accepting the Imamate of Rida. (66)
Just as Abdullah bin Mughirah believed
in ceasing Imamate with Kadhim (Waqifite), but later shifted to the
acceptance of the Imamate of Rida, not based on a tradition he found
subsequently, rather that was based on the evidence of the Unseen, a
miracle and knowledge of al-Ghayb, he found in Imam Rida… He says: I
was confronted, Waqifite and debated with him on that position, but
when I went to Makkah, I felt something in my heart, so I took hold of
Multazam (part of the Ka’bah) then said: “ O Allah! You knew my
request and wish, guide me to the best of religion. I felt in my mind,
to go to Rida. I went to Madinah and stood by his door. I said to the
servant: “Tell your master that a man from Iraq is waiting for him.”
He said: I then heard him calling me saying come in O Abdullah bin
Mughirah… Come in O Abdullah bin Mughirah. I then entered. When he
looked at me he said to me: “Allah has granted your du’a and has
guided you to His religion.” I said: I testified that you are Allah’s
evidence and the trusted one on His creation.” (67)
There was another narration, which is
more explicit, and which based the Imamate of Rida on the knowledge of
the Unseen. It came from a different reporter who was also a ‘
Waqifite’ for about 10 years, till the time of the journey of the Imam
to Khurasan. The reporter was Al-Wassha, who claimed that he came to
Khurasan, and Imam Rida sent his servant to him, to buy some clothes
for him.The reporter could not remember where he placed them, but the
Imam knew their place. He also told him of the issues he wanted to ask
him about. (68)
Al- Wassha then decided on the basis of
these miracles, to change his mind and to accept the Imamate of Rida,
whereas for a period of more than 10 years, he did not accept it.
Tusi in ‘Al-Ghaybah’ reported several
traditions on the knowledge of Imam Rida regarding the Unseen, as
evidences for his Imamate. Among these were the following: His
informing Ma’mun of the place of death of Rida as well as his own
(Ma’mun’s): his telling Ma’mun of a child to be born for him with
extra limbs, similarly Kulayni reported many miraculous stories like:
Imam Rida informed a man on the amount of his debt, as well as giving
him wealth according to his needs. Saduq also reported a big number of
evidences that confirm the Imamate of Rida. All of these were on his
knowledge of the Unseen (al-Ghayb), and the knowledge of death and
other calamities. He mentions in Uyun Akhbar al-Rida,’ the miracle of
the death of Rida on the hands of Ma’mun’s men and his coming back to
life again. Saffar also mentions the Imam’s knowledge of the speech of
brirds as evidence on the validity of his Imamate. In a report
mentioned by Al Har al-Amili from Imam Rida: “The evidence of Imamate
is in the acceptance of Du’a, the knowledge of the unseen, and what is
in peoples hearts. (69)
But all these stories cannot be
established, and they do contradict the glorious Quran, and the life
history of the members of the Prophet’s family.
The extremists fabricated these
traditions, and hence, they do not constitute convincing evidence on
the Imamate of Imam Rida.
On abandoning them and abandoning these
narrations mentioned by the Imamate Shiites on the necessity of a
text, we should observe what Imam Rida (peace be upon him) said while
discussing the doctrine of Shura in explicit terms. He reported a
Hadith from his pure fore fathers, from the Messenger of Allah (peace
be upon him) that he said: “ Anyone who wants to divide the community,
and to usurp the right of the Ummah, and to make someone a leader not
through consultation, kill him, for Allah has permitted that”. (70)
This reveals Imam Rida’s true political
theory, which is in line with the general trend in the Ahl al-Bayt’.
It emphasizes the right of the Ummah in consultation (Shura), and of
choosing their leaders. It also calls for the killing of anyone who
usurps its right and who controls it without its consent
THE CRISIS OF CHILDHOOD
As the Imamate Shiites were attempting
to establish the Imamate of Rida through texts and miracles, Imam Rida
died in Khurasan, in the year 203 A.H., while his son Jawwad was only
seven (7) years old. This led to another serious crisis in the ranks
of the Imamate Shiites, and challenged the nascent theory of the
Imamate. As it will never be reasonable, that Allah appoint for the
leadership of the Muslims, a small child catered for, one who cannot
use his personal wealth as he wills, who is not yet religiously
responsible according to the Islamic law, one who did not even have
the chance to learn anything from his father, who left him in Madinah,
while he was only four (4) years old. (71)
This led to division in the ranks of
Imamate Shiites into several sects:
A-
A group reverted to Waqf
(stoppage) of the Imamate with Musa Kadhim, and abandoned its belief
in the Imamate of Rida, and rejected as well, the Imamate of Jawwad.
They said:As for anyone whose age is as we mentioned, who has not yet
reached the age of puberty, and is not even near it, Allah says: “ And
try orphans (as regards their intelligence) until they reach the age
of marriage, if then you find sound judgement in them release their
property to them…” If Allah the Most High, has made it compulsory not
to give such his wealth, as he made that incumbent on all orphans,
that invalidates him being the Imam, because the Imam is the leader of
the creation in all religious or mundane issues. It is not right for
him to control all the wealth of Allah the Exalted, including
charities, Khums…… As he cannot be relied upon in the matters of law
and its injunctions, and to be the leader of the jurists, judges,
rulers,etc. and one who controls the wealth of many intelligent people
in many sectors --- one who has no right on even a penny from his
personal wealth, one not trusted in what he may choose for himself;
one whose wealth is controlled by another due to his young age, and
the smallness of his reason, due to the contradiction and
impossibility of that.” (72)
B- Another
group went to the brother of Imam Rida—Ahmad bin Musa, who accepted
the views of the Zaydites, and joined Abu al-Suraya in Kufah, and was
loved and respected by his brother Rida. He was knowledgeable and
pious as described by Mufid in al-Irshad: (73)
These people claimed that Rida gave his
will to him and stated that he will be the Imam (after him. (74) This
group has taken the same way as the Fathites who believed in the
Imamate of Musa Kadhim after the death of Abdullah bin Ja’far without
an issue. And so they did not stick to the law of vertical inheritance
strictly. They considered Jawwad, who was a small child as if he did
not exist.
Yet another group of the Shiites
gathered around Imam Muhammad bin Qasim bin Umar bin Ali bin Hussain
bin Ali bin Abi Talib, who was living in Kufah. He was well known for
his devotion, ascetic piety, knowledge and fiqh. He led a revolt
against caliph Mu’tasim in Talqan in the year 218 A.H. (75)
C-
Another group yet accepted the
Imamate of Jawwad, but it became very uncomfortable in responding to
the problem of his age and his knowledge. Some of them said’ “ It is
not possible that his knowledge was from his father, because his
father left for Khurasan, while Abu Ja'far was only four years and a
few months old. Anyone in that age cannot pursue the knowledge of
difficult and delicate issues of religion. Rather, he was bestowed
knowledge by Allah after reaching the age of puberty through various
means. That expounds the various ways of achieving knowledge by the
Imam, like inspiration, ideas put in the heart, whispering in the ear,
true divine (vision) while asleep, and the angel talking to him, the
various ways of raising the minaret, the pillars and the lamp, and
exhibition of deeds. (76)
As the Imamate Shiites considered the
Imamate similar to Prophethood, and that it comes from Allah, it was
not strange for them to mention some Qur’anic verses like the one
saying ‘And we bestowed him wisdom while a child… They said: Just as
Allah has given prophethood to Yahya, while a small child, and as He
also gave it to Isa, while a little kid, in the same we may ask, why
should it not be permissible that He gives the Imamate to Muhammad
Jawwad while he was seven (7) years old? They narrated a statement
from Jawwad on the doubts raised on his age: “Allah has sent
revelation to Dawud to appoint as his successor Sulaiman, who was a
small child then, rearing sheep.” (77)
Others who also believe in the Imamate
of Jawwad without accepting the above view, said: “ Jawwad before
reaching the age of puberty was the Imam, meaning that the affairs are
in his hands alone till the time of his maturity. After maturity, he
gains knowledge neither through inspiration, nor through indications
or any other means mentioned by the earlier sects, because revelation
has ceased after the Prophet (peace be upon him) according to the
consensus of the Ummah.” They rejected the idea of giving knowledge
through inspiration and said (in that regard): “ It is not reasonable
that he will know that except through personal efforts or the seeking
of knowledge, not through Divine intervention of endowment of
knowledge. We rather believe that he gained that knowledge at the time
of maturity, from the books of his father and from what knowledge he
inherited therein, and what he designed for him in them in terms of
the fundamentals and non-fundamentals. A group of these people
accepted the permissibility of Qiyas (analogical deductions) as well
as Ijtihad’ (juristic analogy) in the injunctions and precepts, but
only for the Imam. That will be based on his fundamentals or
principles, as he is infallible from mistakes and errors. He will not
commit error or mistake in qiyas.’(78)
This opinion necessitates a review of
the theory of Imamate, and a question that immediately arises is: Who
then was the Imam at the time when Jawwad was small? Who was given the
will (wasiyyah)?
Despite the fact that there is no clear
text on the Imamate of Jawwad from Rida, or any will, and despite the
lack of any claim to Imamate from Jawwad himself, the Imamate Shiites
were compelled to believe in his Imamate, to save their doctrine from
imminent collapse. They had to build their doctrine on narrations of
miracles, (extraordinary) knowledge of the Unseen, like Jawwad’s
knowledge of the death of his father in Khurasan while he was in
Madinah, at the same moment. So also going there in a twinkle of an
eye to wash him and put his shroud on him, and his subsequent return
to Madinah in the same night. The speech of the stick, that was in his
hand, testifying on his Imamate, and his reply on 30,000 questions
from a group of Shiites at one sitting. (79)
The same problem of tender age
experienced on the Imamate of Jawwad was repeated in the case of his
son, Ali Hadi as Jawwad died while he was a child, and he was 25 years
old. His only two sons Ali and Musa were very small kids; the eldest
of the two was not up to 7 years old.
As Hadi was very small when Jawwad died
he left his wealth, garden and other expenditures in the hands of
Abdullah bin al-Musawir, and ordered him to hand it over to Hadi when
he is matured. Ahmad bin Abi Khalid the servant of Abu Ja'far was made
a witness to that. (80) This is what made some Shiites to ask: If Hadi
was not able to manage his wealth, garden and expenditures due to his
tender age, according to the view of his father then who was the Imam
at that time? How can a small child be the Imam? It was the same
question raised by some at the time of the death of Rida earlier on,
when Jawwad was a small child. The ambiguity as regards Ali and Musa
increased the perplexity of the Shiites on who among the two is Imam?
Kulayni and Mufid narrate the ambiguity
and perplexity of the Imamate Shiites on the Imamate after Jawwad and
on the great Shiites’ lack of knowledge of the identity of then new
Imam. They met in the house of Muhammad bin Al-Faraj to discuss this
issue. A man came to them later to inform them that Imam Jawwad had
told him secretly that the Imamate would be with his son Ali. (81)
That perplexity and ambiguity on the
issue of who will be the Imam, has led to division among the followers
of Jawwad into two groups: One group believes in the Imamate of Hadi
and the other believes in Musa Mubarqa’ being the Imam. (82)
Sheikh Mufid however, did not mention
this division but neglected it. He rather claimed that the Shiite have
all agreed on the Imamate of Hadi. He said that that consensus
constitutes an evidence, as regards his Imamate, rather that citing
texts in detail. (83)
However that does not really constitute
enough evidence on confirming the Imamate of Hadi. This led the
Imamate Shiites as usual to the attempt of confirming his Imamate by
means of miracles, and claims of the knowledge of the Unseen
(al-Ghayb). They went ahead claiming: his knowledge of the illness of
one of his cousins miraculously; his knowledge of the murder of the
Abbasid Caliph Wathiq and Mutawakkil's take over; the murder of Ibn
al-Zayyat while he was in Madinah, and before six days of the first
traveler from Iraq; the transportation (by the Imam) of one of his of
disciples from ‘Surra man Raa' to Baghdad in a twinkle of an eye; his
turning a shop of a poor man to beautiful and pleasing gardens, and in
them all the blessings of beautiful damsels and youth like preserved
pearls, and birds, beers and gushing rivers. (84)
THE PROBLEM OF ‘AL-BADA’ (CHANGE OF WILL) REVISITED:
The doctrine of Imamate as believed by
the members of the Prophet’s household (Ahl al-Bayt) and the general
Shiite populace is different from that of the Imamate Shiites. As for
the first group they believe it is ordinary Imamate (leadership),
while for the latter group they conceive it as a divine Imamate. Due
to this, each of the Imams from the Ahl al-Bayt expect one of their
children to succeed him in guiding the people. If that son dies in
their lifetime, they will point to another one. They do not see any
problem in that. But the death of one of the children of the Imams
nominated for the Imamate, used to create a serious crisis in the
ranks of the Imamate Shiites, who believe that the appointment of the
Imam comes from Allah, the Exalted. It was very strange in their eyes,
to witness the death of the appointed and nominated Imam in the
lifetime of his father. They viewed that as a change, in the will of
Allah, which they call ‘bada’, even though they found it difficult for
Allah to change His will in such an important matter like the Imamate.
This is due to the discomfort and doubt that might be created on the
credibility of the Imams, and which might lead to abandoning the claim
of a divine text on it. The Imamate Shiites have interpreted the
death of Isma’il bin Ja’far Sadiq, whom they have nominated to succeed
his father as 'bada'. Some of them rejected the idea of his nomination
from the beginning. While yet another group rejected the fact that he
died, and insisted that Isma’il hid himself from the people. The death
of Isma’il has caused a serious upheaval in the Imamate thought, which
led to the rejection of many of the Imamate Shiites of the belief that
Allah appoints the Imam.
The same story was repeated again after
about 100 years, when Imam Hadi announced the nomination of his son
Sayyid Muhammad as his successor, but he died in his lifetime. He then
gave the will (of Imamate) to his brother Hassan Askari (232-260 A.H).
He said to him: “ O my son thank Allah as He has (chosen) you for an
affair.”(85)
All of Kulayni, Mufid, Tusi have
reported from Abu Hashim Dawud bin Qasim Al-Ja’fri who said: “ I was
with Abu al-Hassan Askari at the time of the death of his father, Abu
Ja’far, who pointed to him and indicated him.” I do not think of
myself, and I say that this is similar to the story of Ibrahim and
Isma’il.” Abu al-Hassan then turned to me and said:’ Yes O Abu Hashim,
Allah changed His will (Bada) as regards Abu Ja’far, and He put in his
place, Abu Muhammad, as he changed His will regarding Isma’il after he
has been nominated (for the Imamate) by Abu Abdullah. It was as your
self whispered onto you, but the misled rejected him…Abu Muhammad is
my successor after me. He possesses all that you need. He has with him
also the instrument and symbol of the Imamate. All praise is due to
Allah.” (86)
As it happened to the Isma'ilites, who
rejected the death of Ismail bin Ja’far, some followers of Imam Hadi
also rejected the death of his son Muhammad, and insisted on the claim
of the non-cessation of his life and his occultation. They interpreted
the announcement of his death by Hadi as a kind of (insinuation)
Taqiyyah and concealment of the fact.
These people believed in the Imamate of
Muhammad after his father and declared on that: that his father has
nominated him for the Imamate, and informed them that he will succeed
him. It is not permissible for the Imam to tell lie, nor the change in
Divine will. Even though it appeared that he died. He did not die in
reality. The only thing was that his father feared that something
might happen to him so he hid him. He is the one with the affairs, the
Mahdi. They believed in him similar to what the companions of Isma'il
bin Ja’far claimed in respect of their master. (87)
After the death of Imam Hadi, a power
tussle ensued between Ja’far bin Ali and his brother Hassan, to the
extent that Askari said: “ None of my fore fathers faced anything
similar to what I am facing in terms of the doubt of this group, as
regards (my Imamate). (88)
|