|
|
If we take a close look of the History of Shiism in the second
and third centuries, and the sympathy and response of the Shiites to
the various revolts that were led by leaders of the Ahl al-Bayt, like
the revolt of Imam Zayd and his son, Yahya and his son, Isa, as well
as the revolt of Muhammad bin Abdullah (Dhu al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah) and
his brother Ibrahim, so also the revolt of Hussain Shahid Fakh and
that of Muhammad bin Qasim and others, we will find that the general
Shiite populace gather around the members of the Ahl al-Bayt without
limiting the leadership (Imamate) to one particular lineage, or
believing in a divine text on anyone of them, talkless of confining it
to the children of Hassan or Hussain or to a vertical hereditary form
till the day of Resurrection. We would also find that the Shiites
generally do not subscribe to the theory of Divine Imamate, which was
believed by some theologians secretly, and attributed to the members
of the Ahl al-Bayt who were constantly dissociating themselves from it
in reality and in the open.
If we would also focus our attention on the Imamate heritage
during those two centuries (2nd –3rd) we will
find that the Imamate theory is open and extended to the day of
Resurrection, and that it was not limited to a particuar number of
Imams or limited to a certain period of time. Even though the Imamate
reached an impasse at the time of the death of Imam Hassan Askari, in
the year 260 A.H, with no issue to succeed him, and without pointing
to anyone to be the Imam after him, those who believe in the existence
of a hidden son for him in the beginning, believe that the Imamate
will continue in the children of that hidden son till the day of
Judgement. They did not believe in the beginning that he was the last
Imam, or that the Imams were only twelve (12).
We have cited in the previous chapter, various traditions that
pointed to the continuity of the Imamate in the children and
grandchildren, till the day of Resurrection. There are in the Shiite
heritage tens, nay hundreds of such narrations that emphasize and
confirm the continuity of the Imamate to the day of Resurrection. This
supports the fact that the theory of Imamate was never limited to
particular persons during the second and the third centuries of
Hijrah.
Anyone who observes those popular narrations that point to the
extension of the Imamate to the day of Judgment, will find that they
are absolute, general and intended to be so, i.e there is no
limitations to them. They express the divine Imamate theory, which is
parallel to the theory of Shura,that also extends to the day of
Resurrection. That was the situation in its first stages of inception,
before reaching an impasse.
Based on the fact that the theory of Imamate in its initial
days, extends the principle of the Imamate to the day of Resurrection,
and was not limited to a partcular number, the doctrine claims that:
‘ Text was given only in the right of
Imam Ali, and that the texts for subsequent Imams issue from the Imam
just preceeding the new Imam, till the day of Resurrection. (1)
The theory also admitted the non-existence of clear texts from
some of the Imams to those after them. It holds, in this regard, to
ordinary wills and considers it as evidences on the Imamate (of the
concerned). When there were not even ordinary wills for some of the
Imams from their fathers, like Imam Sajjad, or it was combined for a
number of brothers, it would be claimed that the evidence on the
Imamate (in those cases) were miracles, and the knowledge of the
Unseen; or being the elder or more knowledgeable; or the possession of
the sword of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him).
In fact several narrations point to the fact that the Imams
themselves do not know that they are Imams, or the persons to succeed
them, till just moments before their death, talkless of the Imamate
Shiites (the masses) , who used to be confused or perplexed or
differed among themselves after the death of each Imam. They used to
implore all the Imams to appoint those to succeed them, and to name
them clearly so that they will not die without knowing the new Imam.
They several times became confused and perplexed. (2)
There are many other traditions, mentioned by Al-Hur al-Amili,
Kulayni and Saffar, which discussed the issue of identifying the new
Imam, by means of a number of features, like being the elder, or
purity of birth, good upbringing, or not living a playful and wasteful
youth, or due to a clear will or virtue or knowledge of the Unseen, or
calmness, chastity and tranquility (3)
THE
BIRTH OF THE TWELVER- IMAM THEORY
In view of the Imamate theory reaching an impasse after the
death of Imam Hassan Askari without an apparent issue, and the claim
of his having a covert son in occultation, and his non-appearance for
a very long period of time…. the fourth century of Hijrah witnessed a
new development in the Imamate theory i.e. the emergence of
Twelver-Imam (Ithna Ashriyyah) theory It was a theory that emerged
especially among the Musawites and the extremist wing that believes
strongly in the law of vertical heredity, and strongly does not accept
anything apart from that. That wing believes in the existence of a
wing believes in the existence of a pre-determined list of names of
the Imams from the Prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) comprising of
(12) twelve names, being: Ali, Hassan Hussain, Ali bin Hussain ,
Muhammad bin Ali, Jafar bin Muhammad, Musa bin Ja’far, Ali bin
Muhammad and Hassan bin Ali and that the last of them, Muhammad bin
Hassan Askari. This was aimed at establishing the existence of the
twelfth Imam—Muhammad bin Hassan Askari whose existence is doubted by
and discussed seriously in the ranks of the Imamate Shiites.
The Twelver-Imam theory sought support from the Hadiths of the
Sunnis reported by Bukhari and Muslim on the occurrence of ‘Haraj’
(Killings) and mischief after the twelfth Caliph or Imam. And in order
that the number of the previous Imams be compatible with these
narrations, the Twelver-Imam Shiites also resorted to deleting the
names of Imam Zayd, Imam Abdullah Al-Aftah and Imam Ahmad bin Musa,
whose Imamates were believed by many Imamate Shiites (Fathites). As
they also denied the Imamate of Ja’far bin Ali Hadi, and they added
instead the name of Imam Muhammad bin Hassan Askari. They prepared a
new list of nine (9) names from the children of Hussain, one after the
other. They said: ‘ all these Imams were categorically mentioned by
the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the preceding Imams’.
Kulayni has reported in the beginning of the fourth century of
Hijrah in his work Al-Kafi, seventeen different traditions on the
Twelve Imams, while Sheikh Muhammad bin Ali Saduq, who came after half
a century, reported thirty-five traditions on the issue, in his book
‘Ikmal al-Din’. These were complemented by another scholar-Muhammad
bin Ali Al-Khazzaz at the end of the fourth century, in his work
‘Kifayat al-Athar fi al-Nass ala al-A’imah al-Ithna Ashar, by
narrating two hundred traditions.
The origin of this theory, according to the Shiite historian
Mas’udi in his ‘Al-Tanbih wa al-Ishraf’-was the book written by Salim
bin Qays al-Hilali, which appeared in the fourth (4th)
century, by an author said to be one of the companions of Imam Ali bin
Abi Talib (peace be upon him). There were a number of Hadiths in that
work ascribed to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and the
Imams from Ahl al-Bayt, that indicate the names of the twelve Imams.
This theory was forced to abandon the Shiite and Imamate
history , and the issue of ambiguity as regards the text, and the
will, so also the confusion and perplexity of the Imamate Shiites in
identifying the new Imam. It also has to bypass the case of ‘bada’
(change of opinion or will), which came up twice in the time of Imam
Sadiq and Imam Mahdi.The claim that this idea was existing from the
time of the Messenger of Allah(peace be upon him) , this was despite
the general admission regarding the birth of the Imamate theory in the
beginning of the second century of Hijrah on the hands of Hisham bin
Al-Hakam, Mumin al-Taq and Hisham bin Salim al-Jawaliqi.
Saduq reported the objection of the Zaydite Shiites on the
twelve Imams, and their statement that: The narration that shows that
the Imams are twelve only was a statement fabricated by the Imamate
Shiism recently, and they produced many false Hadiths in that regard.
They buttressed their position by pointing to the fact that the
Shiites used to be divided to several sects after the death of each
Imam and lack of knowledge of the next Imam. As they also point to the
Idea of 'bada' (change of opinion) as regards Isma’il and Muhammad
bin Ali, which contradicts the claim of a pre-determined list of names
of the Imams. The death of Zurarah without his knowing who will be the
Imam after Sadiq is another evidence. Saduq responded to Zaydites
saying: “ The Imamate Shiites did not say that the entire Shiites knew
the twelve Imams. He did not deny that Zurrah was not aware of the
Hadith. But he later took into consideration the status of Zurarah,
and the impossibility of his being ignorant of any Hadith of this
nature, being the greatest disciple of Imam Sadiq. He therefore
changed (his mind) and said: Zurarah might have concealed that, as a
form of taqiyyah (insinuation). He later on abandoned his views again
after little time, and said: ‘ Kadhim has required of him to give
himself to Allah, for his lack of knowledge of the Imam, because
anyone who doubts him has left the religion of Allah.” (5)
As a resolution of this problem they accepted the
Imams from the general import of the verse. Sheikh Mufid said: ‘ If
someone says: “ O you Imamate Shiites why do you say that you believe
in twelve Imams--- and you know that among them (the Imams) there was
one whom his father left, while he was a small child, who has not
reached the age of puberty, and is not even near that age, like Abu
Ja’far Muhammad bin Ali bin Musa, his father died while he was only
seven years old. So also your so-called Qaim, whose age at the time of
the death of his father, according to many, was only five years old.
We have known through the common practice of all times that anyone of
that age would not have reached puberty, nor comes near it. Allah, the
Exalted has said: “ and try orphans (as regards their intelligence)
until they reach the age of marriage; if then you find sound judgment
in them, release their property to them.” If Allah the most high has
made it compulsory to take care of the wealth of these two souls,
because of his injunctions on all orphans, it become invalid for them
to be Imams. This is because the Imam is responsible for the creation
in all affairs, this worldly and otherworldly. It is not valid that
the custodian of the wealth of Allah from charity Khums (one-fifths),
the one trusted on the Shariah and all injunctions, one who is the
Imam(leader) of fuqaha (jurists), judges, and rulers, one who takes
cares of a great number of intelligent people in different sectors,
will be the one who has no control even a single pence from his
personal wealth, one not trusted even to think for himself, one being
taken care of due to his tender age, one of lower intelligence, due to
the discrepancy, contradiction and possibility of that. This evidence
show the invalidity of especially the Imamate schools. As a response…
Allah, the Exalted has denied any excuse on the perfection of the one
on whom he has imposed the Imamate and has demonstrated the
infallibility of the one appointed as a leader. He has explained
through both analogical and revealed evidences, the Imamate of these
two Imams. That necessitates their being exempted from the general
orphans, to whom the statement was directed.
He also added,” The Imamate Shiism is not having
any remorse due to its doctrines, especially the verse on the control
(of orphans' wealth), due to rational evidence, to be accepted
unanimously as I will mention… that is, there is no difference in the
Ummah that the usage of this verse is restricted to those with lower
intelligence, with no perfection that necessitates solace. It is also
not to be applied to one who possesses of intelligence what those
attaining the age of puberty possess, so it is invalid to apply it to
the Imams.”
Mufid did attempt to deny the evidence of
generality, and the generality of the verse of controlling (the wealth
of a minor orphan), in order to free him from any blame so he
pioneered a new trend in Juristic research. He said: Restriction can
happen on a statement, but it cannot occur on common reasoning….
Reason necessitates perfection and infallibility on the generality of
the Imams. If evidence has indicated the imamate of these two souls
the verse will have to be restricted to other then them without doubt…
Even though generalization has no form in our view, so it becomes
necessary to encompass the genus with the same term. That will
necessitate evidence accompanied to it. So anytime it becomes devoid
of evidence, it becomes imperative to abstain (from any judgment)…
There is no evidence to show the generalization of this verse.” (6)
Despite the claim of Mufid that there is difference
(among scholars) as regards the attributes of small Imams as a demand
with importunity… and he transcends the serious differences on them,
among the Imamate Shiites, he attempted to bring something entirely
new, and not yet established… that is by attempting to establish
exception nature for the small Imams based on the issue of
infallibility and imamate, that are yet to be established (with regard
to them). This is nothing other than restricting the Qur'anic
injunction by means of conjecture… It is clear that Sheikh Mufid gave
his conjecture obtained from philosophy, the term of reason: He also
claimed the existence of a text on the Imamate of Jawwad based on
traditions from single narrators, as he also claim the existence of a
consensus, which has no effect neither with the Shiites, nor the
general Muslims on the Imamate of Jawwad, hadi and the rest of the
imams. He then restricted the generalization of the Qumran… As it that
is not sufficient, he denied the general import of the verse on
controlling the orphan’s wealth, to exclude the children Imams.
Though the philosophical conjectural evidences and
weak conflicting single narrator traditions, cannot disprove the
generalization in the Qur'an nor restrict it, or restrict the general
injunction, historical realities deny the existence of any special
case where the existence of any special case where the Imam was a
small child. The history of Shiism points that: Imam Jawwad for
example gave his will to his son Ali Hadi, through Abdullah bin
Musawir, and made an overseer on his inheritance, including gardens,
wealth expenditures, slaves e.t.c, till the time when Ali bin Muhammad
became matured. He wrote the will and made Ahmad bin Khalid a witness
to it, and that was on Sunday 3rd Dhul Hijjah, 220 A. H.
Mufid however, was eager to carry on the intellectual debate seriously
after more than 100 years of its inception, and without him witnessing
any Imam during his childhood, so that he establishes something on
their personal situation, and so as to know if they possess the
qualifications of unnatural exception? Sheikh Mufid will not refer to
history so as to establish his doctrine on the basis of reality… He
feels satisfied with late and abstract philosophical theorization,
after a period of 100 years … He follows by that an unscientific
method to reach the truth.
TRANSCENDING THE PROBLEM OF
BADA (CHANGE OF WILL)
If the process of fabricating narrations was not a
difficult or an impossible act, transcending the problem of ‘bada’
(change of will) was a very difficult task. The pivots of the Twelver-
Imam Shiites who were claiming that there was a predetermined list of
names of the twelve Imams, prepared long before that, tried to
interpret bade that it is ‘bada’ (change of will) from Allah, and the
claim of the loss of the command affair on the Imamate of Kadhim and
Askari and its reappearance after the death of Ismail and Sayyid
Muhammad Sheikh Saduq has however, vehemently refused to admit the
existence of the Hadith on ‘bada’ and said, while addressing Zaydism:
“Why do you say that Ja’far bin Muhammad has appointed (by text),
Ismail as the Imam? What was that narration? And who was behind it?
How was it received? This was merely a narration borne by some people
believing in the Imamate of Ismail. It has no basis in his statement:”
“Nothing makes Allah (to change His will) like the
case of my son Ismail. He says: Nothing has appeared to Allah as it
appears in Ismail my son, as He received him in my lifetime to
demonstrate that he was not the Imam after me. The Bada being
attributed to the Imamate Shiites means the appearance of His affair.
(8)
All of Saffar, Kulayni, Mufid and Tusi have however
reported from Abu Hisham Dawud bin Qasim Al-Jafari, a Hadith which
establishes the occurrence of ‘bada’ regarding Ismail and Sayyid
Muhammad. It came clearly in that: “ Sadiq pointed to Ismail and Hadi
pointed to Muhammad but later changed him with and Muhammad (Askari).”(9)
Saffar, Kulayni, Mufid and Tusi did narrate a
tradition from Imam Hadi who says to his son Hassan: “O my son
generate them gratitude to Allah as he has generated a new affair
regarding you.” (10)
Saduq has overlooked such traditions and has
relieved himself of the task of disputing and refuting them and has
completely neglected them, even though, they have been agreed upon by
the earlier and later scholars of Hadith.
Despite the frank nature of such traditions on the
issue of ‘bada’ as regards the Imamate, Sheikh Mufid tried to re-
interprete the meaning of ‘‘bada’’ on the basis of the change in the
knowledge of Allah or His will, which appears in the word generate to
another meaning of ‘appearance.’ He says: the meaning in the statement
of the Imamate Shiites: that Allah has changed His will in such and
such, it means: It appears to Him in such and such, and the meaning of
‘appears to Him’ is appears from Him. So what we believe in the
meaning of ‘bada’: is appearance, this is limited to what appears of
action whose occurrence is beyond human observation/sight. (11)
In the same way Sheikh Tusi tried to re-interprete
the word ‘bada’ by saying: ‘hat came in the tradition of his statement
‘Allah had another will in that’ means; ‘It appears from Allah that”,
people were thinking that Ismail bin Ja'far was the Imam after his
father, but when he died, they knew the invalidity of that, and they
became certain of the Imamate of Musa. In the same manner, they were
thinking of the Imamate of Muhammad bin Ali after his father, but when
he died in the lifetime of his father, they recognized the futility of
what they thought. He said: “ When Muhammad died, the affair of Allah
regarding him appeared, and that he was not appointed as the Imam, as
it appeared in (the case of) Ismail in a similar way. Not that there
was a text on him, and it appeared to him later for someone else, for
that is not permissible in Allah’s sight, who knows everything and all
consequences. (12).
Sheikh Tusi did emphasize for the second time on,
the issue of Imamate will not accept ‘bada’ since it will lead to
loosing confidence in anything from Allah. (13)
Sheikh Ali bin Babawaih Saduq has refused to accept
‘bada’ in naming the Imams and considered such like prayer, and
fasting, which can never be abrogated. He said: It will not be on
Allah to change (His will) in the Imam, in naming him or his
appearance. What is the difference, if I say: ‘the Imamate is one of
the five laws (Shariah)’ from one who accept ‘bada’ in prayer and
fasting and the remaining four laws since the authority for the four
is one, that is the Imamate. If it is possible that Allah abrogate the
source of the law, then it is possible to abrogate its branch. I seek
refuge in Allah from advocating the abrogation of Shariah and the
changing of religion, after Allah has made Muhammad (peace be upon
him) the last of the prophets and his Shariah the last of all laws,
and has made adhering to his religion and Shariah till the day of
Judgment and the Resurrection:( 14)
Ibn Babawaih also attempted to interpret the
narrated traditions on bada (insinuation) after noticing the
nonpossibility of a predetermined list of names of the Imams. He said:
“ Imamate cannot be changed …glorified is Allah that he places as
leaders of his servants, those who go contrary to his command and
change their ways; or that his wisdom will propose a man fro the
protection of Islam and that he will deviate be swayed away from it
will place it (Imamate) in the one that will be affected mentally due
to old age and long life, exalted is Allah high above all that they
say.” (15)
In reality, if the Imamate is from Allah it will be
impossible to notice ‘bada’(non-fulfillment) in it, and it will be
difficult to interprete ‘bada’ even with appearance, for that will
create a kind of confusion in the Shiite circles, and they will loose
confidence in the words of their Imams, as it happened in history.
But instead of the theologians studying the
traditions of Ahl al-Bayt and the historical facts that emphasize that
some Imams pointed to their sons being Imams, but then they died in
their lifetimes, and then they pointed to others.They concluded from
that,that the Imamate is not from Allah, as the leaders of the Ahl al-Bayt
have been saying. Instead of this the theologians (Mutakallimun) from
Twelver- Imam Shiites, attempted interpreting ‘bada’ in a straining
manner so as to conform to the Imamate theory. They were, however
forced to admit the ambiguity in the texts as regards some Imams, and
also the lack of knowledge of the Shiites and some of their leaders
(imams) of the pre-determined list of their names.
Sheikh Baqir Sharif Al-Qurashi says in his book 'Hayat
al-Imam Hassan al-Askari'…Anyhow these narrations were not related to
‘bada’, they only indicate that Allah has brought to the open the
Imamate of Hassan Askari which was hidden before to the Shiites.”
In addition to the issue of 'bada' which clearly
contradicts the existence of predetermined list of names of the twelve
Imams, there were also some traditions in the book of Salim bin Qays
al-Hilali and ‘al-Kafi’ of Kulayni, which mention that the number of
Imams is thirteen (13). On the basis of that a sect has emerged called
‘Thirteen-Imam’ Shiites under the leadership of the grand son of
Uthman bin Said Al-Umari, i.e Ahmad bin Hibat al-Lah al-Katib.
Due to this the doctrine of ‘twelve Imams’ was not
initially accepted without difficulty among the Imamate Shiites. Saduq
has bluntly said: “ We do not accept that (from the devotional point),
except by confessing the existence of twelve Imams, and believing what
the twelfth mentioned after him.”
Saduq also reported a number of traditions on the
likelihood of extending the Imamate after Mahdi, and its not being
confined or limited to him. He reported from Imam Ali a tradition on
the ambiguity of the situation after the leader (Qaim), and that the
Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) has taken a covenant from him,
not to tell anyone about that except Hassan and Hussain. He also said:
“Don’t ask of what will happen after that, because my beloved has
taken a covenant from me not to tell anyone save my family members.”
(17)
Anyhow the Twelver-Imam theory differed from the
Imamate doctrine in that the latter revolved around the Imams from Ahl
al-Bayt, those living in reality, and it claims that they are more
deserving of the rule and Caliphate than the Umayyad and Abbasid
rulers. It also believes that Allah appointed the Imams. The Twelver-Imam
doctrine on the other hand, revolves around the occult Imam without
any trace in life, i.e. the twelfth Imam Muhammad bin Hassan Askari,
whom it claims to have been born in mysterious circumstances, and gone
into hiding, and would re-appear in future.
The belief in the existence of the twelfth Imam,
his occultation and waiting for him, led to the loss of political
meaning for the Twelver-Imam doctrine, which in turn led to the
withdrawal of the Twelver-Imam Shiism from the political stage and
their extinction in the fourth century of Hijrah, giving way to the
other Shiite sects like Zaydites and Isma’ilites to occupy the scene.
REFERENCES
-
Al- Hur al-Amili: Ithbat al-Hudah, vol. 2 p.717
-
See: Kitab Basair al-Darajat, p.473 Kulayni: Al-Kafi,
Vol.1, p. 277 and 309, Irshad of Mufid, Qurb al-Isnad of Al-Himyari,
and Tafsir of Al-Iyashi.
-
Al-Amili:op,cit. vol.2 pp.714-715, Saffar, Basair
al-Darajat, p.489
-
Al-Masudi, Al-Tanbih wa al-Ishraf, p. 198
-
Saduq: Ikmal al-Din, pp. 75-76
-
Mufid: Al-Fusul al- Mukhtarah, pp.112-115
-
Kulayni: Al-Kafi, vol.1, p.235
-
Saduq: op.cit.p.69
-
Kulayni: Al-Kafi vol.1, p. 328, Tusi: Al-Ghaybah
p.55 and 130 Mufid: op. cit p. 317 Al-Majlisi: Al-Bihar, vol.50
p.241
-
Kulayni: op.cit vol. 1pp.326-328, Saffar:
op.cit.p.473, Mufid: opcit p.337, Tusi: op,.cit. p. 122
-
Mufid: Sharh Aqa’id al- Saduq, p, 24
-
Tusi: Al-Ghaybah, p.56 and 121
-
ibid: p, 264
-
Saduq: Al-Imamah wa al-Tabsirah min al-Hayrah,
p.148
-
ibid. pp.149-150
-
Al-Qurashi: Hayat al-Imam al Hassan; p.72
-
Saduq: Ikmal al-Din, pp.77-78.
|