The Origins and Early Development of Shia Islam
Chapter 11: The Doctrine of the Imamate
It has been explained in detail in the preceding chapter how the
activist claimants of the House of 'Ali were crushed, their apparently
popular movements collapsed one after the other, and the 'Abbasids
finally managed to firmly establish themselves as the sole authority of
both the state and religion. A process of assimilation was set into
motion and most of the cross-currents represented by a number of
politic-religious or religio-political groups were gradually being
absorbed, under the patronage of the state authority, into a synthesis
to be known as the Jama'a, which was supposed to support and in turn was
supported by the 'Abbasid caliphate.
In this setting the strategic task of the Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq was to
save the basic ideal of Shi'ism from absorption by the emerging
synthesis on the one hand, and to purify it from extremist and activist
tendencies within itself on the other. Thus the circumstances in which
the Imamate of Ja'far happened to fall afforded him a unique
opportunity, denied to his father and grandfather, to firmly establish
and explain the principles of legitimacy. The rudiments of the concept
and function of the Imam had already been introduced by 'Ali in his
speeches, by Hasan in his letters to Mu'awiya and by Husayn in his
correspondence with the Shi'ism of Kufa and Basra, which we have
discussed in the preceding chapters. After the death of Husayn, the
concept of legitimacy within the family of Muhammad and of the function
of the Imam restricted to religious and spiritual guidance of the
community were laid down by Zayn al-'Abidin and Muhammad al-Baqir. Now,
after the removal of other contenders from the scene Ja'far enjoyed a
strategically advantageous position, and it was his task to elucidate
the doctrine of the Imamate and elaborate it in a definitive form.
In this attempt Ja'far put the utmost emphasis on two fundamental
principles. The first was that of the Nass that is, the Imamate is a
prerogative bestowed by God upon a chosen person, from the family of the
Prophet, who before his death and with the guidance of God, transfers
the Imamate to another by an explicit designation (Nass). On the
authority of Nass, therefore, the Imamate is restricted, through all
political circumstances, to a definite individual among all the
descendants of 'Ali and Fatima, whether he claims the temporal rule for
himself or not. Naturally, the transfer of the Imamate through Nass
would be both incomplete and meaningless unless it could be traced back
to the person of 'Ali, who should have been entrusted with the office of
the Imamate by the Prophet himself.
The Nass thus initiated by the Prophet came down from 'Ali to Hasan, from Hasan to Husayn, and then remained strictly in the line of Husayn until through successive Nass it reached Ja'far. This theory, as we shall see presently, distinguished Ja'far's Imamate from all other claimants, who did not claim a Nass from any preceding Imam. Zayd clearly denied that there was an explicit Nass or designation of 'Ali by Muhammad,[^1] or that there was any designation of the next Imam by the preceding one. Nor did Muhammad an-Nafs az-Zakiya or his brother Ibrahim ever resort to the principle of Nass from any preceding authority. On the contrary, as Ash'ari points out,[^2] the idea of Nass was the key trait of the Rawafid[^3] as opposed to the supporters of Zayd and later on An-Nafs az-Zakiya. Ash'ari's statement is in accordance with the unanimous reports given by the Twelver writers themselves, such as Nawbakhti; Sa'd al- Ash'ari, and Kashshi, of Muhammad al-Baqir's followers, who upheld him against Zayd as the only legitimist 'Alid authority on the principle of Nass though the doctrine of Nass was not yet fully elaborated in his time. A comparison between the traditions related from Al-Baqir and those from Ja'far would demonstrate that Ja'far became increasingly clear and emphatic in his expositions on the doctrine of the Nass Imamate. As a result, a further comparison between the attitudes of the followers of these two respective Imams discloses a trend towards a clear acceptance of Ja'far as the Imam largely on the principle of Nass This is evident from the action of a group of the Kufan Shi'is who, after the death of Al-Baqir, adhered for some time to Zayd, but soon abandoned him and went over to Ja'far, whom they regarded as the representative of Al-Baqir's claims.[^4]
Hodgson quotes Strothmann's suggestion, “that the story of the Kufan
Shi'is abandoning Zayd for Ja'far shows that they already accepted the
idea of a line of Imams by inheritance.”[^5] The idea of the Nass
Imamate, however, became such a common instrument that not only Ja'far,
but a number of ghulat (extremist Shi'is of Kufa, who will be discussed
later), such as Bayan, Abu Mansur, and Mughira,[^6] claimed inheritance
from Al-Baqir and achieved some short-lived success. There are numerous
references in our sources to the effect that Ja'far repeatedly condemned
those fanatics and warned his followers not to accept their
traditions.
The second fundamental principle embodied in the doctrine of the
Imamate as elaborated and emphasized by Ja'far was that of 'Ilm. This
means that an Imam is a divinely inspired possessor of a special sum of
knowledge of religion, which can only be passed on before his death to
the following Imam. In this way the Imam of the time becomes the
exclusively authoritative source of knowledge in religious matters, and
thus without his guidance no one can keep to the right path.[^7]
This special knowledge includes both the external (zahir) and the
esoteric (batin) meanings of the Qur'an.[^8] A close scrutiny of the
traditions related from Al-Baqir and then mostly from Ja'far on the
subject of the Imamate will show that they rotate around these two
principles of Nass and 'Ilm, which are not merely conjoined or added to
one another, but are so thoroughly fused into a unitary vision of
religious leadership that it is impossible to separate the one from the
other. Hence Nass in fact means transmission of that special knowledge
of religion which had been exclusively and legitimately restricted to
the divinely favoured Imams of the House of the Prophet through 'Ali,
and which can only be transferred from one Imam to his successor as the
legacy of the chosen family. Thus, for the adherents of Ja'far, his
claim was not just that he was an Imam who ought to be a member of the
'Alid family, but that he was the particular individual, from the
descent of the Prophet, designated by his father and therefore
inherently possessed of all the authority to guide believers in all
religious matters.
As we shall see presently in the traditions of Al-Baqir and Ja'far
as-Sadiq, this emphasis on the aspect of “special knowledge” having been
possessed by the Imams of the House of the Prophet was a natural
corollary of and a necessary response to the situation and tendencies of
the epoch. This was the time when there was a wide search for Hadith and
a vigorous attempt was being made to construct total systems of the
pious life in Islam.
These efforts eventually issued in the formulation of a complete system
of Shari'a law. It was the time of Malik b. Anas and Abu Hanifa, the
Imams of Fiqh who were busy working out their legal systems in their
respective centres of Medina and Kufa. Ja'far as-Sadiq, being the
descendant of the Prophet and known for his and his family's learning in
religious matters, was evidently looked upon by the community in general
at least as an Imam of Fiqh, like that of Malik and Abu Hanifa,
concerned with working out the proper details of how the pious should
solve the various cases of conscience that might arise. So he appears in
Sunni traditions to a degree, and even, as has been pointed out earlier,
Abu Hanifa is reported to have been his pupil. But, unlike Malik and Abu
Hanifa to the Sunni Muslims, to the followers of the House of the
Prophet Ja'far had a unique authority in these matters by virtue of his
position as Imam by Nass; that is, to the Shi'a his was the final
decision on earth in these matters, whereas the others, as was indeed
admitted, had no more legal authority in principle than any of their
followers.[^9]
“This claim was perhaps initially less a matter of the knowledge he had
(from his father) than of the authoritative use he could make of it, or
in other words, his hereditary authority to decide cases. Any sovereign
must be empowered to make the final decisions in any legal matter; hence
the Imam's very claim that sovereignty was justly his could readily
entail a claim to final authority in legal, and in this case all
religious, matters. Such a claim would be readily transmuted to one of
supernatural knowledge in many minds. But in an Imam where the authority
was not in actual fact the sovereign, and his 'Ilm remained on a
theoretical level, that discernment, that 'Ilm which should guide his
decisions, took on a special sacredness and became a unique gift
inherited from Imam to Imam. Accordingly, as the exclusively authorized
source of the knowledge of how to lead a pious life, the Imam had an
all-important function whether he was a ruler or not.”^10
With the Imamate thus based on Nass and 'Ilm, as explained by Ja'far,
it should no longer be difficult for us to understand why Ja'far himself
remained absolutely indifferent in all those struggles for power which
took place in his lifetime. In his doctrine of the Imamate it was not at
all necessary for a divinely appointed Imam to rise in rebellion and try
to become a ruler. To him his place was above that of a ruler, who
should only carry out what an Imam decides as a supreme authority of
religion. It was on this basis that when Zayd came out with his claims,
Ja'far raised no protest and even exalted Zayd's virtues before a
delegation of Kufan Shi'is. But at the same time he said to Fudayl b.
Rassan that had Zayd become a king, he would not have known how to act
and fulfil his duties.[^11] In this way he implied that Zayd had the
right to political authority only. He made similar remarks when Muhammad
an-Nafs az-Zakiya rose to claim the Imamate. Ja'far emphatically denied
any share in the religious leadership of the community for the
descendants of Hasan,[^12] from whom Husayn inherited the Imamate, which
then remained in the latter's progeny.
According to the traditions related in this connection, Al-Baqir
designated Ja'far as his successor in many ways. He called him “the best
of all mankind in his time”, and “the one in charge of the family of
Muhammad” (Qa'im Al Muhammad), and also trusted him with the books and
scrolls and the weapons of the Prophet, which were in his
possession.[^13] These scriptures containing special knowledge of
religion and the weapons of the Prophet must only come into the
possession of the true Imam, who is designated by Nass by the previous
Imam.
Thus by declaring that they were in his trust, Ja'far denied the rights
of An-Nafs az-Zakiya, who asserted that he had the sword of the
Prophet.[^14] Whether these family treasures were in the custody of
Ja'far or were in the possession of the Hasanid claimants, the fact
remains that Ja'far himself claimed the spiritual leadership of the
community which he based on the same principles as Al-Baqir, namely on
Nass. Ja'far explained that the Imamate is bequeathed from father to
son, but not necessarily to the eldest son, for “as Daniel selected
Solomon from among his progeny,” so an Imam designates as his successor
the son he considers really worthy of the office. Thus Ja'far could
annul the appointment of his eldest son Isma'il, who died before him,
pass over the candidature of his next son, Abd Allah, and nominate the
third, Musa al-Kazim.[^15]
In explaining the position of the Imam, Ja'far made repeated
declarations in unequivocal terms and proclaimed that the Imamate is a
covenant between God and mankind, and recognition of the Imam is the
absolute duty of every believer.[^16] “Whoever dies without having known
and acknowledged the Imam of his time dies as an infideL”[^17] The Imams
are the proofs (Hujja) of God on earth, their words are the words of
God, and their commands are the commands of God. Obedience to them is
obedience to God, and disobedience to them is disobedience to God. In
all their decisions they are inspired by God, and they are in absolute
authority. It is to them, therefore, that “God has ordained
obedience”[^18] (Qur'an Iv, 59).
Ja'far goes on to declare that the Imam of the time is the witness for
the people and he is the gate to God (Bab Allah) and the road (Sabil) to
Him, and the guide thereto (Dalil), and the repository of His knowledge,
and the interpreter of His revelations. The Imam of his time is a pillar
of God's unity (tawhid). The Imam is immune from sin (khata) and error
(dalal). The Imams are those from whom “God has removed all impurity and
made them absolutely pure” (Qur'an, XXXIII, 33); they are possessed of
the power of miracles and of irrefutable arguments (dalil); and they are
for the protection of the people of this earth just as the stars are for
the inhabitants of the heavens. They may be likened, in this community,
to the Ark of Noah: he who boards itobtains salvation and reaches the
gate of repentance.[^19]
In another tradition, “God delegated to the Imams spiritual rulership
over the whole world, which must always have such a leader and guide.
Even if only two men were left upon the face of the earth, one of them
would be an Imam, so much would his guidance be needed.”[^20] In fact,
according to the Imam Ja'far's explanation, there are always two Imams,
the actual or “speaking” Imam (Natiq) and his son-successor, who during
the lifetime of his father is “silent” (samit).[^21] The silent Imam
does not know of his exalted position until his father's death, for only
then is he entrusted with the scriptures and the secrets of religion.
When the father expires, his son immediately steps into his place and
becomes the “proof” (al-Hujja) for mankind.^22
As has been pointed out earlier, in order to prove his rights to the
Imamate on the principle of Nass it was only logical that the utmost
emphasis should be put first of all on 'Ali rights to the spiritual
leadership of the community as the divinely favoured legatee of the
Prophet. It was not a new thing, however. 'Ali himself had put forward
his claim time and again after the death of the Prophet until his own
assassination ;and thereafter Hasan, Husayn, Zayn al-'Abidin, and
Muhammad al-Baqir never missed an opportunity to pronounce 'Ali's rights
and superiority to the heritage of the Prophet. Ja'far, enjoying better
circumstances than his predecessors, only elucidated and systematized
concepts and ideals they had already introduced in rudimentary form.
Thus he, as indeed did his father before him, quoted many verses of the
Qur'an which in his interpretation proved the appointment of 'Ali to the
Imamate. The numerous verses quoted in this connection by the Shi'i
sources[^23] are among those which are accepted by all Muslims as the
'Ayn al Mutashabihat: unclear verses which require interpretation
(ta'wil), as opposed to the Ayat al-Muhkamat: clear or firm verses in
which there is no room for any interpretation. In the Qur'an we read:
“God, it is He Who has sent down to you the Book. Some of its verses
are perspicuous (muhkamat), these are the basis of the Book: others are
unclear (Mutashabihat)… No one knows their interpretation except God,
and those who are firm in their knowledge say, 'We believe therein, it
is all from our Lord.”[^24]
It was at the time of Ja'far that such verses were being interpreted by
the religious leaders of the community. Ja'far, by virtue of his birth
and family background, perhaps had better claims to explain the Qur'an
than the other Muslims;
and it was, therefore, quite natural for a section of the community
adhering to the family of the Prophet to give more weight to Ja'far's
interpretations than to those who only acquired knowledge through
scholarship.
Like Nass, the “special knowledge” of religion ('Ilm) which Ja'far
declared for himself should also be traced back to 'Ali, from whom it
passed from Imam to Imam until it came into Ja'far's possession. Thus
Ja'far said that the Prophet entrusted 'Ali with the greatest name of
God and the traditions pertaining to the knowledge of prophethood (Athar
an-Nubuwwa).[^25] This is only one of numerous traditions recorded by
the Shi'i sources regarding the extraordinary knowledge with which 'Ali
distinguished himself among all those around the Prophet. There must,
however, have been some substance to the fame and widespread reputation
of the unparalleled knowledge of 'Ali; not only the Shi'i sources and
Ja'far's traditions, but most of the Sunni sources and their standard
collections of Hadith, have recorded a number of traditions in regard to
'Ali's superior knowledge.[^26]
As has been pointed out earlier, the Caliph 'Umar is frequently quoted
as saying that ”'Ali is the best of all the judges of the people of
Medina and the chief of the readers of the Qur'an.”[^27] Perhaps the
most representative tradition of 'Ali's erudite knowledge, recorded even
by most of the Sunni sources, is one which has the Prophet saying: “I am
the city of knowledge ('Ilm), and 'Ali is its door.”^28 With the
overwhelming testimony coming down to us from both Sunni and Shi'I
sources, there seems to be little doubt that 'Ali was acknowledged as
having extraordinary knowledge in religious matters. Inheritance of this
knowledge thus became a source of the claim of special rights for the
legitimist Imams of the House.
Another very relevant and rather difficult problem connected with
Ja'far's claims to the Nass and inheritance of “special knowledge” was
the question of the scope and applicability of the term Ahl al-Bayt. On
the one hand, all the descendants of 'Ali, whether through Fatima or
not, were claiming membership of the “Sacred House”. On the other hand,
the 'Abbasids, being the descendants of Hashim, also claimed the
prerogative of the Ahl al-Bayt and were revered by their followers as
God's inspired Imams and as the Mahdi.
Ja'far thus put his utmost emphasis on a tradition from the Prophet
which would limit the inclusive meaning of the Qur'anic verse referring
to the people of the House “from whom [all kinds of] uncleanliness were
removed” to 'Ali, Fatima, and their progeny. This tradition is known as
the Hadith al-Kisa or as the Hadith Ashab al-Kisa. The Hadith runs:
“Muhammad made 'Ali, Fatima, Hasan, and Husayn enter under his mantle
(kisa) in the house of Umm Salima and then said: 'Every Prophet has his
family (ahl) and his charge (thaql); these, O God, are my family and my
charge.' Hearing this, Umm Salima asked: 'Am I not from the people of
your House?' The Prophet replied: 'No, may you be well; only these under
the mantle are the people of my House and my charge.”'[^29]
The tradition is a long one. But perhaps the most important part of it
is when the archangel Gabriel came down to announce the “Verse of the
Purification”[^30] for the “Five of the Mantle”,[^31] and Muhammad
introduced them to the angel saying: “There are, under the mantle,
Fatima, her husband 'Ali, and her two children Hasan and Husayn.”
One can see clearly that the point of gravity is laid here not on 'Ali,
but on Fatima, with reference to whom 'Ali, Hasan, and Husayn are
introduced. Pre-Islamic literature is not devoid of examples where
people are introduced through their mothers or wives. In the case of
Fatima, we have seen in the previous chapter that An-Nafs az-Zakiya in
his letter to Mansur made special reference to his relationship to
Fatima. The reference to her was also made essential even by the Zaydis,
who restricted the Imamate to only those 'Alids who were Fatimids. But
it was Ja'far who in his elaborations put extreme emphasis on this
point. It had indeed an immense potential appeal for the claims of the
legitimist Imams. Eventually Fatima came to be regarded, especially
among the Twelver Shi'is, as one of the most respected figures.
Through such traditions, Ja'far in his own lifetime established for his
line of Imams the sanctity of the Ahl al- Bayt as an inherited quality
confined only to those of the children of Fatima who were ordained to be
the Imams, and in this way rejected the claims of all other Hashimites,
whether 'Alids or 'Abbasids.
Such an hereditary claim to the Imamate based on Nass and “special
knowledge”, as elaborated by Ja'far and his father Al-Baqir, however,
greatly exposed the claimants to the danger of persecution by the
'Abbasids, who also claimed spiritual leadership of the community. Thus
arose the famous doctrine of Taqiya (dissimulation) on which Ja'far put
the utmost emphasis, raising it almost to the status of a condition for
Faith. It is interesting to note that there is not a single tradition on
Taqiya from any Imam prior to Al-Baqir, which is a sufficient proof that
the doctrine of Taqiya was first introduced by him and was further
elaborated by Ja'far, and that it was, in fact, a need of the time and
the circumstances in which they were living and working out the tenets
for their followers. One may see that the theory of Taqiya suits very
well the theory of extraordinary knowledge embodied in the Imams, which
should be limited to a few selected persons who inherited that knowledge
through Nass. Thus Ja'far said:
“This affair (amr) [the Imamate and the esoteric meaning of religion]
is occult (mastur) and veiled (muqanna) by a covenant (mithaq), and
whoever unveils it will be disgraced by God.”[^32]
In a conversation with Mu'alla b. Khunays, one of the extremists of
Kufa whom Ja'far discredited, the Imam said:
“Keep our affair secret, and do not divulge it publicly, for whoever
keeps it secret and does not reveal it, God will exalt him in this world
and put light between his eyes in the next, leading him to Paradise. O
Mu'alla, whoever divulges our affair publicly, and does not keep it
secret, God will disgrace him in this world and will take away light
from between his eyes in the next, and will decree for him darkness that
will lead him to the Fire. O Mu'alla, verily the Taqiya is of my
religion and of the religion of my father, and one who does not keep the
Taqiya has no religion. O Mu'alla, it is necessary to worship in secret
as it is necessary to worship openly. O Mu'alla, the one who reveals our
affairs is the one who denies them.”^33
The esoteric mysteries of religion were Wilayat Allah, which God
entrusted to Gabriel, who brought them to Muhammad. The Prophet, in
turn, handed them over to 'Ali, and they became the inheritance of the
Imams, who are bound to keep them secret.[^34] The duty, therefore,
incumbent on the Faithful is that they should not impart their faith to
those who do not share the same beliefs. Ja'far thus accused the
Kaysanites of betraying religion when they spread its secrets among the
common people: “Our secret continued to be preserved until it came into
the hands of the sons of Kaysan (wuld Kaysan) [his followers] and they
spoke of it on the roads and in the villages of the Sawad.”[^35]
A careful examination of the development of the concept and doctrine of
the Taqiya would clearly reveal the fact that it was a natural corollary
of the prevalent circumstances of the time and an inevitable necessity
imposed by the danger of following certain religious or political views.
To announce publicly that certain persons were divinely inspired Imams
and therefore the sole object of obedience was a direct challenge to the
authority of the 'Abbasid caliphs, who claimed to have combined in
themselves both the temporal and religious sovereignty. Shi'ism thus had
to find its own means to preserve itself in that difficult situation.
This was accomplished through the introduction of the doctrine of
dissimulation, but this, according to the pattern of the epoch, where
the entire pattern of life was considered from a religious standpoint,
must be supported by certain passages from the Qur'an or a Hadith
indicating a precedent. According to Ja'far, both Joseph and Abraham
practised Taqiya when they resorted to concealment of the truth: the
first when he accused his brother of theft, and the second when he
asserted that he was ill.[^36] Muhammad himself, accordingly, is
reported to have practised Taqiya until the verse in which he was
ordered to preach publicly was revealed. It reads: “O you Apostle,
reveal the whole that has been revealed to you from your Lord; if you do
it not, you have not preached His message and God will not defend you
from wicked men.”[^37] Another verse which was used to support the
doctrine of Taqiya reads:
“And who disbelieves in God after believing in Him, except under
compulsion, and whose heart is confident in faith ”[^38]
In Al-Baqir's period the doctrine of Taqiya was established in Shi'ism,
and we may attribute the rudiments of its theory to him. But it was left
to Ja'far to give it final form and make it an absolute condition of
true faith: “Fear for your religion and protect it [lit. veil it] with
the Taqiya, for there is no faith (Iman) in whom there is no
Taqiya.”[^39] Goldhizer traces the history of the doctrine of Taqiya and
finds it practised without being announced as a principle even by
Muhammad b. al- Hanafiya, though in his findings, too, it was Ja'far who
so elaborated Taqiya as one of the doctrines of Shi'i faith out of the
political needs of his time.[^40]
It is, however, hardly disputable that the doctrine of Taqiya, thus
made a necessary part of faith by Ja'far, ultimately served the Shi'is
as a very useful instrument in the preservation of their doctrinal
discipline during all unfavourable and rather hostile political
circumstances. This is also evident from another tradition from Ja'far
quoted by Saduq in his Creed, where the Imam says: “Mix with the people
[i.e., enemies] outwardly, but oppose them inwardly so long as the
Amirate is a matter of opinion.”[^41] On another occasion, when Zakariya
b. Sabiq enumerated the Imams in the presence of Ja'far and reached
Muhammad al-Baqir, he was interrupted by Ja'far's exclamation: “That is
enough for you. God has affirmed your tongue and has guided your
heart.”[^42] We may conclude from all these traditions that the real
meaning of Taqiya is not telling a lie or falsehood, as it is often
understood, but the protection of the true religion and its followers
from enemies through concealment in circumstances where there is fear of
being killed or captured or insulted.
There is another important point which must be discussed here briefly.
A considerable number of traditions are to be found, especially in the
earliest Shi'i collection of hadith, Al- Kafi, which describe the Imams
as supernatural human beings. What was the origin of these traditions,
and to what extent are the Imams themselves responsible for them? These
traditions are reported, as indeed are all Shi'i traditions, on the
authority of one of the Imams, in this case mainly from Al-Baqir and
Ja'far. But were these Imams really the authors of such traditions,
which describe their supernatural character?
The first thing which must be noted in this connection is that while
Al-Baqir and Ja'far themselves lived in Medina, most of their followers
lived in Kufa. This fact brings us to a crucial problem. Kufa had long
been a centre of ghulat speculations and activities. Whether 'Abd Allah
b. Saba',[^43] to whom the history of the ghulat is traced, was a real
personality or not, the name As-Saba'iya[^44] is often used to describe
the ghulat in Kufa who believed in the supernatural character of 'Ali.
According to the heresiographers, Ibn Saba was the first to preach the
doctrine of waqf (refusal to recognize the death of 'Ali) and the first
to condemn the first two caliphs in addition to 'Uthmin.[^45] Baghdadi
says that As-Saba'iya mostly consisted of the old Saba'iyans of South
Arabia, who survived all vicissitudes until the time of Mukhtar and
formed the nucleus of his “chair-worshippers”.[^46]
This early group of ghulat seems to have been absorbed by the
Kaysaniya, who believed in Muhammad b. al-Hanafiya's Mahdism and
followed his son Abu Hashim 'Abd Allah. The death of Abu Hashim was the
turning point in the history of the ghulat, for it caused the split in
consequence of which they separated into two distinct groups. One upheld
the various successors of Abu Hashim and believed in his concealment and
return and eventually transplanted themselves into Iran, where they grew
into the Kharramite revolutionary movement towards the end of the
Umayyad period. The other group overlapped the Kaysanite stage, remained
in Kufa, and somehow connected itself with the Husaynid Imams.
The most conspicuous names in this second group, who became the followers of Al-Baqir and then of Ja'far as-Sadiq, are Hamza b. 'Umara al-Buraydi, Bayan b. Sim'an, Sa'd an-Nahdi, Mughira b. Sa'id al-'Ijli, his Co-tribesman Abu Mansur al-'Ijli, and Muhammad b. Abi Zaynab Miqlas b. Abi'l-Khattab. It would be too lengthy to even briefly describe their extremist teachings here; suffice it to say that they preached that the Imams were the incarnations of God, that the divine particle incarnate in 'All b. Abi Talib enabled him to know the unseen, foretell the future, and to fight against the infidels, that the power of the invisible angelic world was in 'Ali like a lamp within a niche in a wall, and that God's light was in 'Ali as the flame in a lamp.[^47] In connection with these ghulat and their teachings, here we will only point out that from Al-Baqir onwards, all the subsequent Imams always cursed them and repeatedly warned their followers not to accept traditions from them.[^48]
Kashshi quotes Ja'far, who complains of Mughira, for example, as
misrepresenting Al-Baqir, and adds that all the ghuluw ascribed to Al-
Baqir was from Mughira.[^49] In fact Ja'far and all the Imams who
followed him were always unequivocal in violently cursing the ghulat and
condemning their teachings.
There was, however, another very active group in Kufa, busy in
advancing the cause of Al-Baqir and Ja'far. The most important among
them were people such as Jabir b. Yazid al-Ju'fi,[^50] Abu Hamza
ath-Thumali;[^51] and Mu'adh b. Farra an-Nahwi.[^52] Paying only
occasional visits to the Imams In Medina and enjoying their confidence,
they severed their relations with the ghulat of Kufa. On behalf of the
Imams they had doctrinal quarrels with the ghulat and preached against
the latter's excessive claims regarding the nature and function of the
Imams. They did remain faithful to a certain doctrinal discipline,
imposed by the Imams, while this was aggressively violated by the
ghulat. Yet, when we see the traditions related by Jabir and his
associates in this group, it seems that they must have been influenced
by some of the ideas propagated by the ghulat, especially those of Bayan
b. Sim'an and Mughira b. Sa'id.
Perhaps no follower of Al-Baqir and Ja'far dared to go so far in his
assertions as Jabir. It will suffice to quote here only one from a great
number of traditions related by Jabir, which indicates his semi-ghulat
tendencies. Jabir related that Al- Baqir said:
”'O Jabir, the first beings that God created were Muhammad and his
family, the rightly guided ones and the guides; they were the phantoms
of light before God.' I asked, 'And what were the phantoms?' Al-Baqir
said, 'Shadows of light, luminous bodies without spirits; they were
strengthened by the Holy Spirit (Ruh al-Quds), through which Muhammad
and his family worshipped God. For that reason He created them
forbearing, learned, endowed with filial piety, and pure; they worship
God through prayer, fasting, prostrating themselves, enumerating His
names, and ejaculating: God is great.”'[^53]
If we compare the ideas of the ghulat concerning God's light in 'Ali,
pointed out above, with Jabir's description of the Imams as the “shadows
of light” and “luminous bodies”, there seems to be a common trend of
thinking between the two.
It is perhaps for this reason that later ghulat groups accepted Jabir
as their forerunner. This is indicated by the assertions of
Abu'l-Khattab and his successors, who claimed Jabir as their
predecessor. Thus Umm at-Kitab is said to contain the teachings of
Al-Baqir, Jabir b. 'Abd Allah al-Ansari, and Jabir al-Ju'fl.[^54]
Another religious writing, Risalat al-Ju'fi, containing Isma'ili
doctrines, is based mainly on the expositions of Jabir on the authority
of Al- Baqir.[^55] Apparently neither the doctrine of Umm al-Kitab nor
that of Risalat al-Ju'fi represent the views of Al-Baqir, and probably
only little of what Jabir himself taught. It is nevertheless an
important point that he was regarded as the spiritual forefather of the
post-Khattabite ghulat.
However, in spite of the fact that ghuluw was repeatedly condemned by
Al-Baqir, Jafar, and the successive Imams of the Husaynid line, a number
of traditions containing some ghulat ideas found their way into Shi'i
collections of hadith. Most of these traditions are related from Jabir
al-Ju'fi But it is now by no means possible to ascertain whether Jabir
himself was the author of these traditions or whether these were
attached to his name by the later ghulat and were circulated in the
Imamate circles. In both the Sunni and the Shi'i science of hadith,
little attention was paid to the substance of a tradition: usually a
hadith was either accepted or rejected according to the credibility and
trustworthiness of its transmitters. In the Shi'i science of hadith, the
main criterion was that if a person was proven to have been a devoted
and sincere adherent of the Imam of his time, his traditions were
acceptable. Jabir, in spite of his semi-ghulat tendencies and
exaggerations, whether authentic or forged, nevertheless remained,
throughout his life, faithful to Al-Baqir and Ja'far. When Muhammad b.
Ya'qub al-Kulayni (died 328/939) compiled the first collection of the
Shi'I traditions, Al-Kafi fi'l-'Ilm ad-Din, his purpose was to collect
whatever came to him on the authority of those who were known as the
adherents of any one of the Imams. In this way a great many traditions
ascribing supernatural and super human characteristics to the Imams,
propounded by the semi-ghulat circles in Ku fa, crept into the Shi'i
literature.
There are, however, numerous traditions in Kafi in which both Al-Baqir
and Ja'far clearly denied that they possessed supernatural powers and
discounted the miracles attributed to them.[^56] It is thus most
unlikely that Ja'far was personally responsible for all those fantastic
descriptions of the super-natural character of the Imams which were
circulated in his name by his semi-ghulat followers in Kufa. Indeed,
Ja'far did not excommunicate them as he did, for example, in the case of
Abu'l-Khattab, and as Al-Baqir did in the cases of Bayan, Abu Mansur,
and Mughira. In Kafi itself, there are many traditions from both
Al-Baqir and Ja'far as-Sadiq in which they declared that they were
simply God-fearing men, distinguished from others only because they were
the Prophet's nearest relatives and thus became the custodians and
trustees of his message. And by virtue of their devotion to God and
because of the fact that perfect knowledge of God had come to them
through Nass and 'Ilm, they were able to live their lives in complete
obedience to the will of God.[^57] Regarding the traditions pertaining
to the supernatural character of the Imams, perhaps the most decisive
and revealing is the statement of Ja'far himself in which he said:
“Whatever is in agreement with the Book of God, accept it; and whatever
is contrary to it, reject it.”[^58] When we recall that Ja'far as-Sadiq
was at least a century before the time of Bukhari and Muslim, it is
significant to find that it is the Imam Ja'far who is credited with
establishing this criterion for testing hadith, one which came to be
regarded as the most important principle to observe in judging
traditions.[^59]
Moreover, the fact that the ghulat or semi-ghulat were attributing
their own thoughts to the Imams and that the Imams were not responsible
for these statements is further illustrated by a report given by
Kashshi. A follower of the Imam 'Ali ar-Rida once read before him
certain Hadith which he had copied from the notebooks of those in Iraq
who had taken down sayings of Al-Baqir and Ja'far. The Imam strongly
rejected the authenticity of those traditions and declared that
Abu'l-Khattab and his followers had contrived to have their lies
accepted in those notebooks.[^60] Similar traditions have been noted
earlier wherein Ja'far complained of Mughira misrepresenting Al-Baqir.
We have so far been discussing the extremists and semi-extremists of
Ja'far's circle and their excessive claims for the persons of the Imams.
Not all of Ja'far's followers were fanatics, however. A considerable
number of them were simply Shi'ism distinguished from the other Muslims
only by the higher degree of their devotion to the memory of 'Ali and by
their conviction that he was the best person after the Prophet for the
combined office of the spiritual and temporal leadership of the
community. Thus they considered the Imamate as the right of 'Ali and his
descendants, ordained to them by God. The beat example of these
forerunners of the Shi'is, later to become the Twelvers, is 'Abd Allah
b. Abi Ya'fur, a resident of Kufa. He opposed his fellow Kufans, such as
Mu'alla b. Khunays, who asserted that the Imams were prophets. Ibn Abi
Ya'fur objected to this and said that they were only pure, God-fearing,
learned theologians entrusted with guiding the community on the path of
God.[^61] Very strict in his religious practices, he was highly favoured
and respected by Ja'far.^62 He enjoyed the respect of the moderate
traditionists' circles, and when he died during the lifetime of Ja'far,
many of the Ahl al-Hadith and pro-Shi'I Murijtes accompanied his
bier.^63
There was still another group among the followers of Ja'far, busy in
the intellectual or dialectical questions of the day, along the lines of
the Mu'tazila. It is indicative of Ja'far's leadership that he gathered
around himself the men who could stand with remarkable vigour among
those of the Muslim scholars who were speculating on the philosophical
problems of the time. This group of the first Shi'i speculative
theologians, to be discussed presently, who provided the intellectual
element in the Imamate of Ja'far, stand out from the Shi'i extremists
even in the hostile presentations of some of the heresiographers.
Ash'ari takes much interest in them and clearly distinguishes them from
the extremists or semi-extremists among the Shi'is of Ja'far's
following. It may also be noted here in passing that a close study of
the heresiographical works, such as those of Ash'ari and Baghdadi,
enable us to discern the cross-currents and intermingling of ideas
between the Shi'i and Sunni schools of thought at their evolutionary
stages. However, the attachment of this group to the Imam marked a great
advance in the development of Shi'ism in its own right. These
speculative theologians of Ja'far's circle were later regarded as the
elite of the Shi'i mutakallimun, though before the science of kalam
became a definite branch of learning the early Shi'i mutakallimun, who
formed the backbone of the future Twelver Shi'a, were speculative
theologians, traditionists, and jurists all at the same time.
In this group, mention should first be made of Abu'l-Hasan b. A'yan b.
Susan, better known by his kunya, Az-Zurara. He was a mawla of the Banu
Shayban of Kufa, and the grandson of an enslaved Greek monk who adopted
Islam.[^64] Zurara originally belonged to the supporters of Zayd b.
'Ali, for together with his brother Humran b. A'yan and At-Tayyar, great
Mu'tazilite leader. This itself suggests that under Mu'tazilite
influence Zurara developed his interest in speculative theology. Zurara
and his two brothers later changed their allegiance and attached
themselves to Al-Baqir, Humran being the first to take this step.[^65]
After the death of Al-Baqir, Zurara belonged to the circle of the
closest adherents of Ja'far as-Sadiq, who spoke Of him with great
appreciation: “Four men are the best beloved by me, whether alive or
dead: Burayd b. Mu'awiya al-'Ijli, Zurara, Muhammad b. Muslim, and
Al-Ahwal”.[^66] Ibn Abi 'Umayr[^67] said that he and his contemporaries
were beside Zurara “like children around their teacher”.[^68] It seems
that because of his vehement activities in the cause of Ja'far, Zurara
met with some difficulties and even dangers. Thus, to spare him
hardships, Ja'far, resorting to the principle of Taqiya, apparently
disavowed him and even cursed him. Justifying this, he said that in
order to save Zurara, he had acted in the same way as the Prophet Khidr,
when he sank a ship to save it from being taken from its owners by a
tyrannous king.[^69]
Zurara, who only occasionally paid visits to Ja'far in Medina or met
him in Mecca, lived in Kufa and there had a large circle of disciples.
Though Zurara was also regarded as a traditionist, a lawyer, and a
theologian, he attained his great renown in the fields of the science of
tradition and in kalam. In fact, he was the founder of the Shi'i school
of speculative theology in the proper sense, and the first teacher of
kalam[^70] from within the circle of Ja'far.
Among Zurara's pupils, who were all devoted followers of Ja'far, were
his own sons Hasan,[^71] Husayn,[^72] and 'Ubayd Allah ;[^73] his
brother Hurman, the grammarian and one of the foremost companions of
Al-Baqir ;[^74] Hamza, the son of Hurman;[^75] Bukayr b. A'yun[^76] and
his son 'Abd Allah;[^77] Muhammad b. al-Hakam ;[^78] Humayd b.
Rabbah;[^79] Muhammad b. an-Nu'man al-Ahwal, and Hisham b. Salim al-
Jawaliqi.[^80] The circle of Zurara was usually known as Az-Zurariya or
At- Tamimiya,[^81] and its intellectual activities in the field of
scholastic theology greatly strengthened the cause of Ja'far and later
that of Musa al-Kazim.[^82]
Together with other theological and scholastic problems, Zurara and his
disciples evolved the theory that the knowledge of God is an obligation
on every believer and cannot be attained without an Imam designated by
God, and thus complete obedience to the Imam is a religious duty. The
Imams by necessity are endowed with special knowledge. Therefore, what
other men can attain by discursive reason (nazar), an Imam always knows
owing to his special knowledge and his superior and unequalled power of
reasoning. Zurara and his circle promulgated their views on almost every
question of what we now call scholastic philosophy, such as the
attributes of God, His Essence and His Actions, His Intention or Will,
and the human capacity.[^83] The impression we get of Zurara from the
sources, especially from Kashshi, is that he played a very important
role in the development of legitimist Shi'i thought and contributed a
great deal to the formation of the Imamate creed. He is one of the most
frequently quoted authorities in all the major books of the Shi'is.
Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. Nu'man al-Ahwal was another striking personality
among the speculative theologians of Kufa who linked the question of the
Imamate with other fundamental scholastic problems. His circle is
described by the heresiographers as An-Nu'maniya, and he distinguished
himself among all the adherents of Ja'far for his excellence in
dialectics and learning in theology, as well as for the piquancy of his
answers in disputes with his adversaries. An extremely committed Shi'i,
Al-Ahwal was at first one of the most devoted adherents of Al-Baqir,
whose claims he defended against Zayd. He later became an equally ardent
supporter of Ja'far as-Sadiq and finally of Musa al-Kazim.
The greater part of his intellectual activities in promoting the Shi'i
cause was perhaps spent during the Imamate of Ja'far. He is counted
among the most prominent companions of Ja'far, and was one of those who
accepted Musa al-Kazim as their Imam immediately after the former's
death, and without considering the candidature of any other son of
Ja'far.[^84] He is frequently reported to have held heated debates with
the great jurist Abu Hanifa, whom he despised for being a Murjite. Abu
Hanifa, on his part, treated him with scorn and contempt.[^85] Al-Ahwal
is described as the most courageous and vociferous in his convictions
regarding the rights of the legitimist Imams on rational grounds.[^86]
As a zealous supporter of the legitimist line, he upheld the dogma of
the God-imposed duty of complete obedience to the Imams, and of the
supreme knowledge possessed by them, necessary for the guidance of
men.
He is said to have been a prolific writer, and a number of his works
are mentioned by various authorities. His writings include his Kitab
al-Imama, his Kitab ar-Radd 'ala'l-Mu'tazila fi Imamat al-Mafdul, and a
number of other treatises, probably of a polemical nature.[^87] The
titles of the books ascribed to him suggest that the question of the
Imamate was one of the main issues between the Mu'tazila and the Shi'i
thinkers of that time. Kashshi records a number of controversial debates
held by him in support of Ja'far's rights to the Imamate, and also
quotes Ja'far as saying: “Al-Ahwal is most beloved by me, whether alive
or dead.”[^88]
Another foremost supporter of Ja'far in this circle was Hisham b. Salim
al-Jawaliqi, who was brought up in his childhood as a slave from Jurjan,
and became a mawla of Bishr b. Marwan. He also lived in Kufa, earning
his living as a seller of fodder ('allaf). Like his close friend
Al-Ahwal, he led a large circle of disciples and propounded his theories
on all questions of the nature and attributes of God.[^89]
Perhaps the greatest of all the Shi'i thinkers of Ja'far's following
were Abu Muhammad Hisham b. al-H akam[^90] and 'Ali b. Isma'il
al-Maythami.[^91] The former was originally a disciple of Jahm b.
Safwan, the Jubrite, but converted to the Shi'i doctrine and became a
most devoted follower of Ja'far As-Sadiq. He must have been quite young
at that time, for he lived until the Imamate of 'Ali ar-Rida and was one
of his closest companions.[^92]
The theories regarding God and other scholastic questions propounded by
these five most important thinkers of Ja'far's period are too lengthy to
be examined here. What mainly concerns us at present is their
contribution to the doctrine of the Imamate, which they linked up with
fundamental principles of a scholastic nature. A remarkable fact is that
although these five thinkers often differ from each other on many
questions, their teachings and ideas concerning the Imamate are almost
the same. The essence of their doctrine of the Imamate is that the
Prophet appointed 'Ali to the Imamate by an explicit designation (nass),
and after him, his sons Hasan and Husayn acceded to the Imamate in the
same way. This appointment was based on the principle that mankind needs
an Imam to lead it on the right path as much as an individual needs
intelligence to co-ordinate the activities of his body and to guide him.
To guide mankind and preserve it from straying, an Imam must be
infallible. This is because the Imam, who is below the status of a
Prophet, can receive no revelation from God. Therefore, since he is the
infallible guide appointed through the Grace of God, obedience to him is
synonymous with obedience to God, while disobedience is the same as
infidelity.[^93]
While so many speculative theologians from among the followers of
Ja'far were busy working out the scholastic problems of the time, there
were a good many in his circle who concentrated their efforts mainly on
legal questions. It has been pointed out earlier that the distinction
between jurists and traditionists at this stage, especially among the
Shi'is, was not very clear. Nevertheless, there was a difference in
their respective interests. Some were more interested in the traditions
of a dogmatic and doctrinal nature, others in the traditions concerning
practical problems. Thus most of the traditions dealing with legal
matters are reported on the authority of Jamil b. Darraj, 'Abd Allah b.
Miskan, 'Abd Allah b. Bukayr, Hammad b. 'Uthman, Hammad b. 'Isa, and
Aban b. 'Uthman.[^94]
All of them belonged to the close circle of Ja'far and are unanimously
accepted by all the Twelver Shi'i writers as the most authoritative
transmitters of legal traditions and as the eminent jurists from among
the disciples of Ja'far. Kashshi describes them as “the six most
reliable authorities among all the followers of Ja'far on legal
traditions; on their trustworthiness and profound knowledge of law there
has been a complete consensus among the Shi'I scholars.”[^95] Kashshi's
statement is confirmed by examining Kulayni's al-Kafi, Saduq's Man La
Yahduruhu'l Faqih, and Tusi's Istibsar and Tahdhib al-Ahkam. These “Four
Standard Books” (Al-Kutub al-Arba') have the same importance for the
Shi'ism as the six canonical collections of Sunni Hadith (Sihah
as-Sitta) have for the Sunnis.
To this list of the frequently quoted jurists of Ja'far's period must
be added the name of Aban b. Taghlib b. Riyah,[^96] an important and
outstanding jurist-traditionist, and formerly an associate of Zayn
al-'Abidin and Al-Baqir. When he died in 140/757, Ja'far is reported to
have said, “I would love to have my Shi'a like Aban b. Taghlib,” and
“his death grieved my heart.”[^97] Aban's name appears in a good number
of traditions, mostly of a practical nature.
It is important to note that almost all these jurist traditionists of
Ja'far's circle were in continuous attachment to three or at least two
generations of the legitimist Imams, either Zayn al-'Abidin, Al-Baqir,
and Ja'far, or Al-Baqir, Ja'far, and Musa, while some others who joined
Ja'far served the line of the legitimist Imams till 'Ali ar-Rida.
From this brief summary of the activities of individuals and groups
working under the leadership of the Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq in all the
fundamental branches of religious learning, we may deduce two
conclusions. First, at that formative stage of Islamic thought and
institutions, the contributions made by these people, based on the
teachings of Ja'far and his predecessors, provided a solid foundation
for the elaboration of the dogma and legal system of Imamate Shi'ism by
the later Twelver theologians and jurists. Second, the fact that so many
persons, working in various aspects of religious life, chose to gather
around Ja'far with the acceptance of his Imamate on the Principle of
Nass, set the Imamate stream of Shi'ism well on the way to its own
distinct character within Islam.
There are many Shi'i creeds preserved for us by the earliest Shi'i
sources, such as Kashshi, which explain the beliefs of the Imamate
Shi'is during the lifetime of Ja'far as-Sadiq. One of these creeds,
pronounced by 'Amr b. Hurayth before Ja'far, reads:
“I would like to describe my religion (dini) and what I believe, so
that you may confirm me in my faith. My religion is that I testify that
there is no God but God, and Muhammad is His Apostle and Servant. I
testify that the coming of the Day of Judgement is not subject to doubt,
and that God will resurrect those who are in their graves. I testify to
the obligations of prayer, the paying of the zakat, fasting in the month
of Ramadan, and the duty of pilgrimage to the House (Ka'ba) for those
who have the means for it.
I testify to the wilaya of 'Ali b. Abi Talib, the commander of the
faithful (Amir al-Mu'minin) after the Prophet of God, may the Blessings
of God be upon them both, and the wilaya of Al-Hasan and Al-Husayn, the
wilaya of 'Ali b. al- Husayn and that of Muhammad al-Baqir, and after
his, yours. I testify that you are the Imams. In this religion I live,
and in this religion I shall die, and this is the religion by which I
worship God.”
Having heard this, Ja'far declared:
“This, by God, is indeed my religion and the religion of my fathers,
who worshipped God openly and in secret; so fear God and hold your
tongue from saying anything except that which is good.”[^98]
Similar statements are recorded by Kashshi from Dawud b. Yunus and
Khalid b. Bajali.[^99] A detailed account of the Twelver Shi'i beliefs
dealing with all articles of faith, whether fundamental (usul) or
non-fundamental (furu'), are given by Shaykh Ibn Babawayh al-Qummi,
better known as Shaykh as-Saduq (died 381/991-2), in his creed entitled
Risalat al- 'Itiqadat. Shaykh Saduq is universally acknowledged by the
Twelver Shi'a as one of their greatest authorities, and his Risala, one
of the earliest extant Shi'i creeds, is accepted as the most
authoritative statement of their beliefs. Comparing this Shi'i creed
with the standard Sunni creeds, such as Fiqh Akbar I, Fiqh Akbar II, and
the Wasiyat Abi Hanafa, one finds that except on the question of the
Imamate the differences between the Sunnis and the Shi'is are of the
same nature as, say, the differences between the Asha'ira and the
Mu'tazila. The Shi'i views are in most cases the same as those of the
Mu'tazila, who certainly remained part of Sunni Islam, though their
rationalistic views were ultimately rejected by the Jama'a.
The question of the Qur'an may serve as the best illustration of this
fundamental unity. The Shi'i belief, as stated by Shaykh as-Saduq,
reads:
“Our belief concerning the Qur'an is that it is the Word of God, His
revelation sent down by Him, His speech and His Book … 'Falsehood cannot
come at it from before it or behind it. It is a revelation from the
Wise, the Praiseworthy' (Qur'an, XLI, 42)… And our belief is that God,
the Blessed and Exalted, is its Creator and Revealer and Master and
Protector and Utterer. Our belief is that the Qur'an, which God revealed
to His Prophet Muhammad, is [the same as] the one between the boards
(daffatayn). And it is that which is in the hands of the people, and is
not greater in extent than that. The number of Suras as generally
accepted is one hundred and fourteen.”[^100]
In this statement of Saduq on the Qur'an, two points are worth
noticing. First, the Shi'a, like the Mu'tazila, believe that the Qur'an
is the created word of God, and not uncreated and eternal as taught by
the Asha'ira and officially accepted by Sunni Islam. The second and more
important point is that the text of the Qur'an as it is to be found in
the textus receptus, which is in the hands of everyone in the shape of a
book, is accepted wholly by the Shi'is, just as it is by the Sunnis.
Thus the assertion that the Shi'is believe that a part of the Qur'an is
not included in the textus receptus is erroneous.
We are not, however, concerned here with the details of the Shi'i creed
or the development of the Shi'i legal and theological systems, which
took place in progressive stages, as indeed was also the case in Sunni
Islam. Nor is this work meant to discuss the contributions of the last
six Imams after Ja'far as-Sadiq, after which the Imamate Shi'a came to
be known as the Ithna 'Ashariya, or the Twelvers. Our purpose has only
been to trace the origins and early development of those religious
inclinations through which the Shi'is eventually came to distinguish
themselves from the rest of the Muslim community.
Keeping in view what has been discussed throughout this work, and
looking at the activities of those who gathered around. Ja'far as-Sadiq,
we may conclude that the Imamate Shi'is, by the time of Ja'far's death
in 148/765, had acquired a distinct character of their own. The actual
disagreements between the Shi'is and the Sunnis in certain details of
theology and legal practices were not as important as the “Spirit”
working behind these rather minor divergences. This “Spirit”, arising
from the differences in the fundamental approach and interpretation of
Islam, as discussed in Chapter I, issued forth in the Shi'i concept of
leadership of the community after the Prophet. It is this concept of
divinely ordained leadership which distinguishes Shi'i from Sunni within
Islam; and thus it has been on the emergence of this concept that our
attention has been focused in these pages.
[^1]: See Ibn Hazm's discussion in Friedlander, “The Heterodoxies of the Shi'ites in the Presentation of Ibn Hazm”, JAOS, XXVI II ('907), p.74
[^2]: Ash'ari, Maqalat al-Islamiyin, ed. Helmut Ritter (Istanbul, 1929), pp.16-17
[^3]: A title with which the Sunni heresiographers describe the Twelver Shi'a. For the meaning and use of the term, see Watt, “The Rafidites: A Preliminary Study”, Oriens, XVI (1963)
[^4]: Tabari, II, p. 1700
[^5]: Hodgson, “How Did the Early Shi'a Become Sectarian ?”, JAOS ('955), p.10
[^6]: For such claims made by these ghulat, see Nawbakhti, Firaq, pp. 25, 30, 39, 52-55; Sa'd al-Ash'ari, Maqalat:, pp. 33, 35, 37; Shahrastani, Milal, 1, pp.178, 176. Sa'd al-Ash'ari (Maqalat, p.37) writes that Bayan claimed the Imamate as the legatee of Aba Hashim, and not as that of Al-Baqir.
[^7]: Kulayni, Kafi, I, p. 208
[^8]: ibid., I, p.261
[^9]: Hodgson, op. cit., p.11
[^11]: Kashshi, Rijal, p.285
[^12]: Kulayni, Kafi, I, p.274
[^13]: Kulayni, Kafi, I, p.356
[^14]: ibid., pp.265 f.; Kashshi, Rijal p.427
[^15]: Kulayni, Kafi, I, p.318
[^16]: Kulayni, Kafi
[^17]: ibid., p.462
[^18]: ibid., Pp.214-220
[^19]: See Kulayni, Kafi, I, pp.207 ff.; Saduq, Risalat al-Itiqadat, trans. A. A. A. Fyzee, A Shi'ite Creed (London 1942), p.96
[^20]: Kulayni, Kafi, I, pp.205, 207, 304 f.
[^21]: ibid,, p.205
[^23]: See Kulayni, Kafi; “Kitab al-Hujja”, passim; Mufid, Irshad, I, Pp.304-13
[^24]: Qur'an, 111, 6
[^25]: Kulayni, Kafi, I, p.262
[^26]: See Wensinck, Handbook of Early Muhammadan Tradition (Leiden 1960), under the heading ”'Ali”
[^27]: Ibn Sa'd, II, p. lox
[^29]: Kulayni, Kafi, I, pp.330 f.
[^30]: “And God only wishes to remove from you [all kinds of] uncleanliness, O Ahl al-Bay: [of Muhammad], and thoroughly purify you.”
[^31]: See Tha'labi, Tafsir, p.402
[^32]: Kulayni; Kafi, II, p.488
[^34]: ibid., p.487
[^35]: ibid., p. 486
[^36]: Kulayni, Kafi, I, p.483
[^37]: Qur'an, V, 67
[^38]: Qur'an, XVI, 106
[^39]: Kulayni, Kafi; I, p. 483
[^40]: “Das Prinzip der Takija im Islam” , ZDMG, LX (1996), pp.213-20
[^41]: Saduq, Creed, p.110
[^42]: Kashshi; Rijal p.419
[^43]: See E12 article ”'Abd Allah b. Saba”'
[^44]: Sa'd al-Ash'ari; Maqalat, p.20; Nawbakhti, Firaq, p.22
[^45]: Sa'd al-Ash'ari, loc. cit.; Nawbakhti; loc. cit.
[^46]: Farq, p.32
[^47]: Kashshi, Rijal, p. 296; Shahrastani, Milal, I, p. 152; Ash'ari, Maqalat, pp. 6-9
[^48]: See Kashshi, Rijal 44 p. 148, passim; Nawbakhti, Firaq, p.34
[^49]: Kashshi; Rijal, p.223
[^50]: See Sam'ani, Ansab, p. 113b; Kashshi, Rijal, pp. 191 ff.; Najashi, Rijal pp.93 f.
[^51]: See Chapter 9
[^52]: Ha'iri; Muntaha, pp.202 f.; Ibn Nadim, Fihrist, p.66
[^53]: Kafi, I, p.279
[^54]: See Ivanow, “Notes sur Umm al-Kitab”, REI, 1932
[^55]: See E. E. Salisbury, “Translation of an Unpublished Arabic Risala”, YAOS, 1853, pp. 167-3
[^56]: e.g., Kafi, pp. 365 ff.; Kashshi, Rijal pp. 324 f.
[^57]: e.g., Kafi, I, p.308, passim
[^58]: Ya'qubi, II, p.381; Kashshi, Rijal, p.224
[^59]: See Donaldson, The Shi'ite Religion, p.135
[^60]: Kashshi, Rijal, p. 224 See Hodgson, op. cit., p.13
[^61]: Kashshi, Rijal, p.247
[^64]: Tusi; Fihrist, pp.141 ff.; Ha'iri, Muntaha, pp. 135; Hill'; Rijal p.76
[^65]: Ha'iri; Muntaha, p.120
[^66]: Kashshi, Rijal, p.135; Tusi, Fihrist, p.146; Ha'iri, Muntaha, p.136
[^67]: Abu Ahmad Muhammad b. Abi 'Umayr Ziyad b. 'Isa, a traditionist and companion of Musa al-Kazim and 'Ali ar-Rida, who is said to have written four books. See Najashi, p.228; Ha'iri, Muntaha, p.254
[^68]: Kashshi, Rija1, p.135
[^69]: Kashshi; Rijal, p.138. For the reference to Khidr, see Qur'an, XVIII, 71
[^70]: Ibn Nadim, Fihrist, p. 220; Ha'iri, Muntaha, p.136
[^71]: Ha'iri, Muntaha, p.93; Ibn Nadim, Ioc. cit.
[^72]: Ha'iri, Muntaha, p.110; Ibn Nadim, loc. cit.
[^73]: Ha'iri, Muntah4, p.99; Ibn Nadim, loc. cit.; Tusi; Fihrist, p.202, referring to him as 'Ubayd b. Zurara
[^74]: Ibn Nadim, loc. cit.; Kashshi, Rijal, p.176
[^75]: Ha'iri, Muntaha, p.131; Tusi, Fihrist, p. “7
[^76]: Kashshi, Rijal, p. 18 I; Ha'iri, Muntah4, p.68; Ibn Nadim, loc. cit.
[^77]: Tusi, Fihrist, p. 188; Ha'iri, Muntaha, p. 182; Ibn Nadim, loc. cit.
[^78]: A brother of Hisham b. al-Hakam; see Ha'iri, Muntaha, p.271
[^79]: Ash'ari, Maqalat, I, p. 43
[^80]: For the last two, see below, pp.307-8
[^81]: Ash'ari, Maqalat, I, p.28, referring to At-Tamimiya
[^82]: See a detailed account of the activities of Zurara and his circle in Kashshi, Rijal pp. 133-61
[^83]: Detailed accounts can be found in Ash'ari, Maqalat, II, pp.36 f.; Baghdadi, Farq, p.43; Shahrastani; Milal, I, p. 186
[^84]: Kashshi, Rijal, pp. 185 ff; Najashi, Rijal, p.228; Sa'd al- Ash'ari, Maqalat, p.88; Tusi, Fihrist, p.223; Ibn Nadim, Fihrist, p.176; Ha'iri, Muntaha, p.295; Huh, Rijal p.138
[^85]: Najashi, Rijal p.228; Kashshi, Rijal p.187
[^86]: See Kashshi, Rija1, pp. '35 ff; Ibn 'Abd Rabbih, 'Iqd, II, p.465
[^87]: See Ibn Nadim, Fihrist, p. 176; Najashi, Rijal p. 228; Shahrastani, Milal, I, p.187
[^88]: Kashshi, Rijal p. 185
[^89]: Kashshi, Rijal pp.280 ff; Najashi, Rijal, p.305; Tusi, Fihrist, p.354; Ha'iri; Muntaha, PP.323-4. For his ideas, also see Ash'ari, Maqalat, I, p. 34; Baghdadi, Farq, p.139; Shahrastani, Milal pp. 184. Fakhr ad-Din ar-Razi, I'tiqadat, p.64; Nawbakhti; Firaq, p.66; Ibn Nadim, Fihrist, p.177
[^90]: A mawla of Kinda, but often described as the client of the Banu Shayban, because he attached himself to that tribe. See Kashshi, Rijal pp. 475 ff.; Tusi, Fihrist, p.353; Najashi, Rijal, p.304; Ibn Nadim, Fihrist, p.175; Ha'iri Muntaha, pp.322 ff.
[^91]: A mawla of the Banu Asad, he lived in Basra, where he frequented the circles of the local Mu'tazilite mutakallimun. See Najashi, p. 176; Ha'iri Muntaha, pp. 207; Tusi, Fihrist, p.212; Kashshi, Rijal, p.213
[^92]: Kashshi, Rijal p.214
[^93]: See Ash'ari, Maqalat, I, p.48, and index; Shahrastani, Milal, I, pp. 184 ff., and index
[^94]: Kashshi, Rijal, p.375. For the biographical data and detailed information on them, see Kashshi, Rijal, index; Najashi, Rijal index; Ha'iri, Muntaha, passim
[^95]: Kashshi, Rijal, p.375
[^96]: See Kashshi, Rijal p.330; Ha'iri, Muntaha, p.17; Najashi,Rijal pp.7-10; Dhahabi, Mizan, I, pp.4-s
[^97]: See Kashshi, Rijal p.330
[^98]: Kashshi, Rijal, p. 418
[^99]: See Kashshi, Rijal, pp. 419 f.
[^100]: Saduq, Creed, pp.84 f.